HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/16/1985Wednesday, January 16, 1985
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, met in Regular Session at the County Commission
Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday,
January 16; 1985, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Patrick B.
Lyons, Chairman; Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Vice Chairman; Richard N.
Bird; Margaret C. Bowman; and William C. Wodtke, Jr. Also
present were Michael J. Wright, County Administrator; Gary
Brandenburg, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; L. S.
"Tommy" Thomas, Intergovernmental Relations Director; Jeffrey K.
Barton, OMB Director; and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order.
Reverend John Simon, First United Methodist Church, gave the
invocation, and County Attorney Brandenburg led the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA - EMERGENCY ITEMS
Commissioner Bird wished to add an item under the
Intergovernmental Coordinator's matters in regard to rejecting
bids on the tennis courts at Gifford Park and rebidding.
Secondly, he wished to add an item in regard to appointing an
additional member to the Countywide Recreation Study Committee.
Commissioner Scurlock reported that he would like to be
replaced on the Economic Development Committee by Commissioner
Wodtke, who has agreed; this will enable him to spend more time
on the Transportation Committee. He, therefore, requested that
this item be added under his matters.
Chairman Lyons wished to add a Proclamation re Arbor Day.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
added the above items to today's agenda.
BOOK v o ;':.1, o1;
JAS 16 1985 . boa 5� 4,56
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc-
tions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 12, 1984.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
December 12, 1984, as written.
CONSENT AGENDA
OMB Director Barton wished to remove Item C - a budget
amendment for the North County Fire District - and put it on next
week's agenda as there are Minutes that need to be approved.
Commissioner Wodtke believed that this item should be dealt with
separately rather than on the Consent Agenda in any event.
Commissioner Scurlock wished to remove Item E from the
Consent Agenda for discussion.
Report
Received and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk:
General Development Utilities, Inc., Statement of
Earnings, Eleven Months ended 11/30/84.
t,B. Refund from Tax Collector
The Board reviewed letter from Tax Collector Morris to the
Intergovernmental Relations Director, as follows:
2
GENE E. MORRIS
TAX COLLECTOR
January 4, 1985
Mr. L. S. Thomas
Director
Intergovernmental Relations
Indian River County
Dear Tommy:
TELEPHONE: (30S) 887-8180
P. O. BOx 1508
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA - 32961
Enclosed, please find receipt for $990.00, representing
Payment of twenty-two search fees at $45.00 each.
Also enclosed is Refund Notice #14603 and Refund Check
#13732 in the amount of $45.00.
Our office had originally requested funds to cover
twenty-three search fees in the amount of $1,035.00,
however, one of the parcels had the tax certificate
redeemed, therefore, will not be included.
Sincerely yours,
Gene E. Morris
County Tax Collector
RECEIPT FOR AMOUNT PAID FOR REDEMPTION OF LAND SOLD TO PURCHASER OTHER THAN COUNTY
(SECTION 197.156 FS)
RECEIVED OF Indian River County Board of County COrMi5SiOn DOLLARS S 99n. nn
Which is accepted in (Full payment) (Part, payment) as the amount now due upon certificate no.
in the amount of S dated the day of AD 19
for the ear 19
A" REFUND NOTICE
Fmo
y.. GIENE E MORRIS. Tax Copedor
REFUNDTO Board of County Conmissioners
Indian River County
Vero Beach, Florida
Delq. Tr. Acct. CHECK NO. 13732
REASONFORREFUND Remittance was for 23 tax search
fees @45.00 ea. Due to redemption of
_one parcel only 22 fees were required.
O PLEASE CASH CHECK PROMPTLY
__....- VOID AFTER 90 DAYS
Dew Jan. 4. 1985'
N2 14603 -
Amount Remitted $— 1.035.00
Amount of Taxes 9mn,n0
Balance m
m
Less: Cashiers Check
03 Z
Refund Due $ 4-; nn I� �7
O
rN
rs
TAX COLLECTOR, INDIAN RMM COUNTY. VERO BEACH, FLA.
3
JAN 16 1925 BOOK 59 F'P,!45 9►°y
y
For the redemption of the following land in Indian River Co., State of Florida, which was assessed and sold as the
m I
rn I
S
proPe„Tdescribed
asp
% n
Sparrh FPLC for
22 Wirrel c (x.$45 00 ea
Rim - 19R2 Tax rrtfc
ae follos..c- 04, 5, 25, 26, 2R, 60, 63. ]6n 917 Zan
p 3
5
246, 266 277-
281- 287, 294- 41n� j14, 1k j72_ 783 36
,
a ill
I
_
t
W
$
CERTIFICATE HUMBER
This receipt becomes RECEIPT ONLY when
-•
o
os
a
CERrmCATE HOLDER
validated by o receipting machine showing
transaction number, date, and amount paid
-F-D I
FACE E
X toEn I
473
FEE f
OFFICE OF TAX COLLECTOR
990.00 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BM
INTERESTf
TOTAL PAID S EN
OI L MORRIS, by
A" REFUND NOTICE
Fmo
y.. GIENE E MORRIS. Tax Copedor
REFUNDTO Board of County Conmissioners
Indian River County
Vero Beach, Florida
Delq. Tr. Acct. CHECK NO. 13732
REASONFORREFUND Remittance was for 23 tax search
fees @45.00 ea. Due to redemption of
_one parcel only 22 fees were required.
O PLEASE CASH CHECK PROMPTLY
__....- VOID AFTER 90 DAYS
Dew Jan. 4. 1985'
N2 14603 -
Amount Remitted $— 1.035.00
Amount of Taxes 9mn,n0
Balance m
m
Less: Cashiers Check
03 Z
Refund Due $ 4-; nn I� �7
O
rN
rs
TAX COLLECTOR, INDIAN RMM COUNTY. VERO BEACH, FLA.
3
JAN 16 1925 BOOK 59 F'P,!45 9►°y
JAN 16 1985
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
accepted the refund as described above.
C. Budget Amendment - North County Fire District
BOOK 9 `'n, 458
Carried over to the Regular Meeting of 1/23/85.
AD. Budget Amendment - Mental Health Center
The Board reviewed memo of the OMB Director, as follows:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: January 4, 1985 FILE:
FROM: Jeffrey K. Barton,
OMB Director
SUBJECT: Mental Health Center
REFERENCES:
Due to the change in the Mental Health structural organization, the County match for
July through September was not invoiced and the funds were carried forward at the end
of the fiscal year.
At the November 14, 1984 meeting, a budget amendment for $8,526.00 was approved, which
we assumed was for the 3 months, per our request to them for a letter for the total due.
In reviewing the letter and talking to the Mental Health personnel, we have discovered
that the $8,526.00 was only for one months' appropriation.
The following budget amendment is to re -allocate the additional 2 months of County match.
Account Title
Account No. Increase Decrease
Cash Fwd- Oct 1 001-000-389-40.00 17,051
Mental Health Center 001-106-563-88.16 17,051
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
approved the above budget amendment for the
Mental Health Center.
E. Resolution - Consent to Use Submerged State Land for Wabasso
Causeway Boat Ram
The Board reviewed memo of Assistant County Attorney Paull:
4
TO. DATE: Board of County DATE:January 8, 1985 FILE:
Commissioners
SUBJECT:
Resolution for Consent to Use
Submerged State Land for Wabasso
Causeway Boat Ramp Construction
P/
FROM:Christ pher J. Paull REFERENCES:
Assistant County Attorney
As part of the D.E.R. permitting process, the State has request-
ed that the County Commission formally request by resolution
authorization from the State to make use of submerged sovereign
lands for construction of the new Wabasso Causeway boat ramp. -The
attached resolution is self-explanatory and also makes a request for
waiver of State dredge fees for spoil removed from the river bottom,
at the recommendation of the Department of Natural Resources.
Requested Action:
It is requested that the Board approve this resolution so that
the Public Works Department may supplement its application to the
State in a timely manner.
Commissioner Scurlock noted that he has had questions raised
as to the time being taken to proceed with the construction of
the boat ramp. He now understood, however, that this is an added
process with which we did not have to comply in the past, but he
would like some idea of a time schedule for completion.
Intergovernmental Relations Director Thomas believed that
everything required by the DER has been completed with the
exception of this new requirement of which we were not previously
aware. He noted that the ramp is being constructed by the
developers of Marsh Island.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 85-11, requesting authorization to use
submerged state lands for construction of the
Wabasso Causeway Boat Ramp and requesting waiver
of applicable dredge fees.
5
JAN 16 1985 BOOK 59 F,* 459
F_
,SAN 16 1935
BOOK 59, ;',�c : 460
RESOLUTION NO. 85- 11
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, REQUESTING AUTHOR-
IZATION TO USE SUBMERGED STATE LANDS FOR CONSTRUCTION
OF THE WABASSO CAUSEWAY BOAT RAMP AND REQUESTING WAIVER
OF APPLICABLE DREDGE FEES.
WHEREAS, the County has applied for D.E.R. Permits
authorizing the construction of a new public boat ramp to be
located on the southern shore of the Wabasso Bridge Causeway; and
WHEREAS, construction of such ramp necessarily makes use
of submerged lands of the State of Florida which are under control
of the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund; and
WHEREAS, a formal resolution from the County for
approval of the proposed use of such lands is required by the
Statet and
WHEREAS, any spoil material dredged during the course of
constructing the boat ramp will be deposited by the County on pub-
lic uplands, thereby warranting a waiver of required State dredge
fees.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that, as a part of
its application for D.E.R. approval, file number 310940164:
1. The County formally requests approval from the Trus-
tees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of
Florida for construction upon, and use of, submerged lands of the
State for a public boat ramp, as more fully described in said
application; and
2. The County requests a waiver of all applicable State
dredge fees based upon the County's status as a public entity and
its representation that all dredged material will be deposited on
public uplands.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Scurlock who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Bird and, upon being put to a vote, the
vote was as follows:
Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Vice -Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 16th day Of January , 1985.
J /J
Attest: c�i .ti,i�r
FREDA WRIGHT
Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDI IVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By /�G�d
4/-�
P RICK B. LYONS
C airman
771
PROCLAMATION - JAYCEE WEEK
V
Chairman Lyons read aloud the following Proclamation desig-
nating the week of January 13 - 19, 1985, as JAYCEE WEEK, and
presented it to Greg Holton, representing the JAYCEES.
P R O C L A M A T I O N
WHEREAS, the civic bodies and service organizations of
our community and the departments of County government recognize
the great service rendered to Indian River County and the State
of Florida by the FLORIDA JAYCEES; and
WHEREAS, the United States JAYCEES and its affiliated
state and local organizations have set aside the week of
"January 13-19, 1985, to observe the founding of the JAYCEES 65
.,years ago; and
WHEREAS, this organization of young men hasycontributed
materially to the betterment of Indian River County and'the.State-
of Florida through its participation and involvement in many
civic programs during the past year.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED by the BOARD OF.,COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the week of
JANUARY 13 - 19, 1985 be observed as
JAYCEE WEEK r
r
BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED that the County `wholeheartedly
.supports the FLORIDA JAYCEES, and urges the citizens 'of this
County to give full consideration and support to ;the past and
future services of the JAYCEES. ,
f.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN VER COUNTY,,.-
.FLORIDA
Attest:
Freda Wright, erk
7
JAN 16 BOOK 59 rv' .461
_I
JAN 16 1985 BOOK
PROCLAMATION - ARBOR DAY
Chairman Lyons read aloud the following Proclamation,
designating the third week in January of each and every year as
NATIVE TREE AND SHRUB PRESERVATION WEEK for Indian River County
and gave the Proclamation to Commissioner Bowman as
representative of the Audubon Society. He informed the Board
that there will be a tree planting Friday, January 18th, at
Kiwanis Park Fairgrounds in commemoration of Arbor Day.
P R O C L A M A T I O N
WHEREAS, the 1945 Florida Legislature on recommendation by
the Florida Department of Agriculture, Division of Forestry
declared that the third .Friday in January should be FLORIDA'S
ARBOR DAY: and
WHEREAS, native trees and shrubs, especially the Oaks and
Palm varieties which are prevalent in Indian -River County
preserve the health of our population by reducing the ever
increasing amounts of carbon' dioxide in the air and creating
oxygen essential to the survival of man; and, -
WHEREAS, native trees and -shrubs filter the airborne
pollutants and dust which are inimical. to the -.health and well
being of the citizens; and
WHEREAS, the native trees and shrubs especially when left in
their naturally formed clumps retain moisture in the soil and are
drought resistant thereby alleviating excessive and unnecessary
drain on our seasonal hard pressed water supply; and
WHEREAS, native trees and shrubs have an important role in
purifying water passing through the ground from the surface to
the ground water tables and lower aquifers; and
WHEREAS, the native trees and shrubs of Indian River County -
are a public resource of all its citizens, present and future;
8
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA That the third week
in January of each and every year be declared NATIVE TREE AND
SHRUB PRESERVATION WEEK for Indian River County and during this
week the citizens of Indian River County are urged to either
preserve and protect or plant native trees and shrubs in the
neighborhoods in which they live.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INI
BY:
ATTEST:
wk-
FREDA WgIGHT
D ✓=6&404
' i •� .
t/PARK DUNE RESTORATION
Director Thomas reviewed the following memo:
TO: Board of County DATE: January 9, 1985 FILE:
Commissioners
THROUGH: Michael Wright
County Administra�Q-QOBJECT:
Park Dune Restoration
Richard N. Bird, Chairman
Parks & Recreation Committee
FROM: L. S. "Tommy"` Thomas REFERENCES:
Director
Parks and Recreation Department
i
I have been advised by the Department of Natural Resources, State
of Florida, that there will be no funds made available to Indian.
River County for dune restoration or dune crossover
reconstruction as a result of the Thanksgiving, 1984 storm.
We have made temporary repairs at eight of our nine dune
crossovers at an estimated cost to the County of about $12,000.
In-house labor and equipment was furnished by the public works
department, buildings and grounds department, as well as the
parks department. We had excellent cooperation from all
concerned, and in my opinion, they did an excellent job.
9 BOOK "`'r `�
JAN 16 1985 Q..: � , _13
JAN 16 1935
BOOK 59, F,1j1= 4_64
To protect the work that we have done, we now need to do
considerable dune restoration to protect our existing structures.
Should we have another storm similar to the one we had within the
next twelve months, I believe we would lose the eight structures
we have repaired. If this occurred, it would be necessary to
close Wabasso Park, Tracking Station Park, and the two Beach
Crossover Parks.
Currently some sand has begun to rebuild on the beach, but not at
the scarp of the dune. I have had considerable conversation with
Barry Manson -Hing, Clinton Taylor, and Lonnie Ryder of the
Beaches and Shores Section of the Department of Natural Resources
with respect to this matter. Mr. Manson -Hing, the Chief Coastal
Engineer, has made the following recommendation for our four park
locations.
We are not allowed to scrape (bulldoze) sand from the beach as it
is their opinion that this method is self-defeating in the long
run. Because of this, we will need to transport sand from
off-site. I have been in contact with the Sebastian Inlet Taxing
District (Rene Van de Voorde, Attorney) and I am hopeful that
they will furnish us with the necessary sand from their Inlet
dredging project. Because of the nature of our beach accesses,
it will be necessary to transfer the sand from the trucks to the
dunes by dragline. I have obtained an emergency permit to do
this from the Department of Natural Resources, as well as to put
a front-end loader on the beach to put the sand in the proper
places.
We would try to extend our dunes on a 450 angle so that we could
then revegetate the foredunes with appropriate plant material.
It is my opinion that, because our dunes were well vegetated when
we had the last storm, that is why we did not lose our dune
crossovers.
The best estimate of cost that I can make at this time is between
$50,000 to $65,000, depending on whether or not we are able to
obtain the sand from the Sebastian Inlet District. Much of the
work can be done in-house if so authorized by the Board.
Should we lose these eight crossovers, I would estimate the
contract cost of replacing them at today's cost would be $80,000.
This figure would not include any in-house engineering or dune
restoration.
I have gone over this matter with Art Challacombe, Planning
Department, and Don Finney, Engineering Department. They have
endorsed this solution; therefore, I recommend that the Board of
County Commissioners approve this project.
Director Thomas reported that Don Finney, of the County
Engineering Department, has given him a figure of approximately
4,000 cubic yards of sand, and he emphasized that this sand is
for dune restoration, not beach renourishment. Director Thomas
stated that if the Board approves, proceeding in this manner,
they would obtain more exact figures and come back regarding
funding.
10
M
_I
AN 1 6 1985
BooK
5 F,Acr6
Director
Thomas explained that he used those figures
to try
to give the Board his best judgment as to what it would cost us
if we had to replace the construction part of the cross -overs as
compared to what we can do in-house over the months to prevent a
complete loss of the cross -overs. He noted that so far we have
had no indication of receiving any help from the DNR.
Chairman Lyons felt that this points up that we are facing a
continuing and increasing expense.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
TENNIS COURTS AT GIFFORD PARK
Commissioner Bird reported that part of the money for these
courts was budgeted last year and some this year, and it amounts
to approximately $23,000. This was put out to bid and two bids
were received, both in excess of the budgeted amount. Both
bidders are quite a distance from the Indian River County area.
It is recommended by the Parks & Recreation Committee that these
bidsbe rejected and rebid, with more of an attempt made to get
local bids in hopes of reducing cost.
Director Thomas reported that the low bid was from Vista
Courts, Inc., of Longwood, Fla., for $28,885 and the high bid was
from Needy Construction, Winter Park, Fla., for $32,255.80.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, to reject the bids received
on the Gifford tennis courts, which are over budget,
and rebid.
Chairman Lyons inquired if there was anything in the specs
that might be changed that might influence the bids without
changing the quality of the job, and Director Thomas reported
12
Commissioner Scurlock stated that his one question is where
the money would come from. He further noted that there are
people with a lot of expertise on this subject on Commissioner
Wodtke's Beach Preservation and Restoration Committee, and
possibly this should be reviewed by them.
Director Thomas explained that what he wants to get to work
on immediately is an extension of the permit we have, which
expires in February. He felt the job can be done more
economically if it can be done over a seven month period.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if the funding for this would be
taken out of contingencies, and Mr. Thomas hoped to be able to do
most of it in-house.
Administrator Wright pointed out that there you get in a
conflict with the MSTU.
Commissioner Wodtke commented that his Committee is going to
be expanded, and he is hopeful that he will have an oceanographic
engineer who deals in sand and sediments as well as a biological
engineer. Apparently there are some types of sand that are more
compatible with the beach environment than others.
Director Thomas stressed that his main purpose is to try to
protect the dune cross -overs we now have against the possibility
of another storm,, and noted that when we did the Wabasso Beach
dune revegetation, which was successful, we used sand from the
Hobart Park area.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke to proceed with the above
described project with the concurrence of the Beach
Preservation & Restoration Committee for the final
recommendation.
Commissioner Wodtke clarified that the Motion is not saying
that we are spending $50,000 out of any contingency fund, but
that we are going to try to do this work in-house.
11
_ - BOOK � �.{ �r 46
JAS �� �
that Public works Director Davis and his department spent a good
deal of time on this, but he would ask them to look at it again.
Commissioner Bird believed staff has the feeling that if we
rebid and adhere to the specs, we can come up with a price closer
to our budget.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING CODE (PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL ZONING
DISTRICTS)
The hour of 9:15 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
t
tCHEAFAW
r
y �ej'+ooiiC�ovO
TONSIWRADOPTIOAI
e_ ? OF�COUNTr
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
A''' ORDINANC9
1VonCe Is GIVEN tterth
=� I> �hemhre et Cornell
Published Daily
and re + «
f
n J
be Heard on �,T �, y,.
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
Commission Chambers McMd br ttx
Aemb�tramn ; 18C0 2Nr Sm
_:: JleaurFtorWe, at tits am «ae soon t
a6 may be hearA,tc e«mtdm adopttng
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
=
`.- 'AN ORDINANCE OF�THE ' BOARI
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF IN
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press-Joumal, a daily newspaper published
APPENDIX A OF THE CODE
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
AND ORDINANCES, KNOWN AS
- y
,ZONING CODE, ENACTING A COM
HENSNE AMENDMENT TO THE I
DENTIAL ZONING AND
DZONINNG
a
ERAL RELATED REG
TIONS 1) REPEALING SECTI1
T
"DISTRICTS AND : BOUNDA
In the matter of �'
THEREOF', AND SUBSTITUTING
T
TABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS
BOUNDARIES THEREOF": CP
ING SECTION 3.1, -APPUTICI
DISTRICT AND REGULATIONS'; 3
PEALING SECTION 4, -A:' AGRI
In the Court, was pub-
lished In said newspaper in the issues of
�iL
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, fora period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporaion any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
StJom to and subscribed before me this dayo .D. 19
t
A,
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River Coun , Florida)
(SEAL), t
13
AN 16 1965
- HOME PARK DISTRICT, SECTION 16.
11AME, MOBILE HOME ESTATE DIS
TRicr- AND $ECTION 17,-R-1RM4,
- RESIDENCE -MOBILE HOME DISTRICT.
AND EFFECTIVE DATE.:.
R any person dacWas to appeal arty deeidon
made on the above matterhe/she wig reed a
recoM oceedings, " for Such INN -1
p e/she MtheMayy need U) elM" cwt a verbs'
hm record of the proceedinp is made, which In -
dud" testimony and "Wer" upon which the
appeal
W W
When hen River COLMV '
Board of courav Comm111810rMs . _.
Des;1, Jm 0.1
BOOK9 F, - �l�
JAN 16 1985 �ooK t 468
Staff memo and recommendation is as follows:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: January 7, 1985 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED
SUBJECT: RESIDENTIAL ZONING
DISTRICTS
FROM:
Robert M. Keating, AIc M REFERENCES:
Planning & Development Director
It is requested that the following item be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting on January 16, 1985.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The draft Residential Zoning Districts represent a substan-
tial part of the County's new zoning code. By establishing
density limitations for various residential zoning dis-
tricts, this section of the new code will produce zoning
districts which conform to the County's Comprehensive Plan
land use densities. Specifically, this ordinance repeals
the County's existing residential categories, including the
agricultural, mobile home and transient mobile home dis-
tricts, and it creates the following districts:
A-1 Agricultural
RFD Rural Fringe Development District
RS -1, RS -3, RS -6, Single -Family Residential Districts
RT -6 Two Family Residential District
RM -3, RM -4, RM -6, RM -8, RM -10, RM -14 Multiple -Family
Residential Districts
RMH-6, RMH-8, Mobile Home Residential Districts
CRVP Commercial Recreational Vehicle Park District
In addition to establishing these new districts and specify-
ing size and dimension criteria for each district, the
ordinance lists permitted uses, uses requiring an adminis-
trative permit and special exception uses within each
district. It establishes a procedure for approving both
administrative permit and special exception uses, and it
identifies specific criteria which administrative approval
and special exception uses must meet prior to approval.
Three public workshop meetings have been held on the draft
residential zoning districts. At these meetings, members of
the public were invited to comment upon the proposed ordi-
nance. Where appropriate, recommendations made at these
workshops have been incorporated into the draft ordinance.
On December 13, 1984, a public hearing was held by the
Planning & Zoning Commission, and at that time the Commis-
sion, on a unanimous 5-0 vote recommended that the Board of
County Commissioners adopt the proposed residential zoning
districts.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners
adopt the proposed Residential Zoning Districts.
14
Attorney Brandenburg confirmed that the Ordinance has been
properly advertised, but wished to advise the Board of a couple
of alternatives we have with respect to it prior to general
discussion. He explained that the Ordinance as now laid out
provides for the repealing of the existing residential districts
and the substitution of the new districts for them, but we cannot
accomplish all this today since it affects property amounting to
more than 5% of the land in the county, which requires the
holding of two public hearings after 5:00 P.M. The Attorney
continued that in order to enable the Board to take some action
today, the language both in the title of this Ordinance and
throughout the body of the Ordinance in regard to repealing the
current residential districts would have to be stricken and the
language creating the new districts would have to be amended to
say that new districts are created, such as district section 3-A,
4-A, etc., as opposed to 3,4 and 5. Under this alternative, we
would then set up the required evening hearings, do a conversion
table spelling out the changes in the districts, i.e., R-1 in
the LD -2 Comprehensive Plan district will now become RS -3, etc.,
publish this with large ads; and then repeal the old districts.
The other alternative is to leave the districts as written now
and have the public hearing, but postpone adoption of the
ordinance until we have the night public hearings. Attorney
Brandenburg recommended the first alternative as he felt we want
to get these new districts on the books and start using them.
Commissioner Wodtke felt it would be informative at the time
of the public hearings to have the original language that is to
be changed underlined so that it can be compared with the new
language and people can identify the differences easily.
Attorney Brandenburg noted that staff has done this before
on shorter ordinances, but in this instance, we are dealing with
a 100 page ordinance, and it would constitute practically an
entire rewrite.
15
JAN 16 1985 BOOK 59 69 J
JAN 1
1985
BOOK
59- Fir;470
Planning
Director Keating reported that we do have
a table
showing the permitted uses in each District and staff will
develop a comparison table.
Chairman Lyons asked if the Attorney is suggesting we hold
back on considering this today, and Attorney Brandenburg
clarified that the Board could adopt these as new zoning
districts today, but could not reclassify any land to those new
districts until the two night public hearings were held. Until
this is accomplished, we actually would have two sets of
residential zoning districts, and the old would apply until the
land is reclassified.
Attorney Brandenburg then read to the Board a paragraph
which he would like to add to the end of this ordinance to show
how this works. He suggested that Section 15. Repeal of
Conflicting Provisions be eliminated and in its place the
following stated: "Until further action has been taken by the
Board of County Commissioners by the adoption of appropriate
ordinance, the zoning districts created by this ordinance shall
be considered additional districts. The administrative sections
of this ordinance requiring general and specific use criteria
shall only apply to the districts created by this ordinance and
subsequent ordinances of the Board. All further rezonings shall
where applicable utilize the newly created districts.
Commissioner Wodtke questioned the advantage of proceeding
this way, and Attorney Brandenburg pointed out that as soon as
the Board adopts these new districts, anyone applying for
rezoning will have to use the new districts.
Commissioner Wodtke expressed concern about former uses that
are no longer allowed in the new districts, the possibility of
people doing things in the period before the old districts can be
repealed that are no longer permitted in the new districts, etc.,
Attorney Brandenburg confirmed that if someone was allowed a
use in R-1 that would no longer be allowed in RS -3, he would be
grandfathered in and become a non -conforming use in the new
16
M
M
district. He believed, however, that it will be found that in
almost all cases additional uses will be allowed in the new
districts as opposed to their being more restrictive.
Chairman Lyons announced that the Board will hear what
Director Keating has to say first, then go through the ordinance
generally to see if there are any specific changes, and then open
the hearing to the public.
Planning Director Keating reported that the drafted zoning
ordinance was prepared by a consultant and was substantially
modified in a series of three workshop meetings which were widely
advertised and well attended. Director Keating explained that
the proposed ordinance establishes a new set of residential
zoning districts, which complement the Land Use Plan densities.
In addition, the new ordinance simplifies the terminology in the
Zoning Code, with RS -1, RS -2, etc., being Residential single
family and the RM districts signifying Residential multiple
family, the number following being the number of units per acre
allowed in that district.
Director Keating next explained that the major differences
between this ordinance and the current ordinance are the estab-
lishment of administrative permit uses and the manner in which
special exception uses are handled. Administrative permit uses
are those that normally correspond to a zoning district, and they
are approved at the same time the Planning & Zoning Commission
considers a site plan. Once the Planning & Zoning Commission
makes a decision, that is final unless it is appealed to the
County Commission. Special exceptions are a little different in
that they are not generally compatible with the zoning district
but may be so considered if certain criteria are met. The
procedure for approving special exception uses is exactly the
same as it is now for a rezoning, requiring a public hearing both
before the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Board of County
Commissioners. The philosophy here is that special exception
uses are such unusual uses for that particular zoning district,
17
JAN 1 '1985 BOOK 471
r JAN 16 1985 � 1
BOOK 5th 472
that it constitutes a legislative decision. Director Keating
noted that the Planning & Zoning Commission did vote unanimously
to recommend the adoption of the new residential districts.
Attorney Brandenburg wished to clarify further that a
special exception use involves a situation where it is felt you
cannot anticipate in advance each and every condition you might
want to impose on that project; therefore, the special exception
process is set up to allow the flexibility of taking that into
account by adding special conditions to the project and making
them part of the approval that project must conform with when it
is built.
Commissioner Bird asked if there can be a preapplication
conference where the applicant can be made aware of just what is
required, and Director Keating assured him there would be such a
conference.
Commissioner Bird had a question pertaining to all
districts. He noted that recreational uses are listed under the
permitted uses, and this includes parks and playgrounds open to
the public. He wondered if boat ramps would be considered parks
and playgrounds.
Attorney Brandenburg felt a boat ramp would be an accessory
use to a park. He believed what is set up would give the Board
discretion to decide what the area is like and what type of park
should go in that neighborhood.
Chairman Lyons announced that the Board would now review the
proposed ordinance five pages at a time.
Page 2 - no changes.
On Page 3 - 3.1B. - Permitted Uses, Paragraph 1 - Attorney
Brandenburg felt this should be reworded to read that "It is the
intent of this ordinance to permit certain uses not otherwise
illegal..." rather than "any uses not otherwise illegal."
Commissioner Wodtke asked if we have definitions anywhere,
and Attorney Brandenburg stated that when this ordinance is
adopted, we will be using the same definitions which are in the
18
current ordinance until that is changed.
There is a draft of a
new definition section that will be presented at a later date.
Attorney Brandenburg continued with the following changes on
Page 3 in 3.1B. 2.a., and stated that the first sentence should
read "In the event there is not a particular use listed anywhere
in the Ordinance that describes a land use activity in question
and such use is not determined to be an accessory use, then it
shall be considered the use having the most similar character-
istics." The last sentence should read, "Where uncertainties
continue to exist, the question shall be determined by the
Planning and Development Director."
Page 4 - Paragraph 3., Permitted Uses, Specifically,
Attorney Brandenburg stated that the following wording should be
added at the end of this paragraph; "accessory uses, administra-
tive uses, and special exception uses."
Attorney Michael O'Haire noted that both Pages 3 and 4
refer to uses not specifically listed, and he asked that the
Board consider making the appeal of the decision regarding such
uses to a Board that is politically responsible rather than
appointed, i.e., to the County Commission rather than the Board
of Zoning Adjustment.
County Attorney Brandenburg suggested that the Commission
not make such an amendment. He noted that you are never going to
be able to list every single use possible; we have taken the uses
in the old code and noted problems and tried to make changes
accordingly, but it is always a matter of interpretation, and
that is what the Board of Adjustments is set up for by Statute.
Attorney Brandenburg believed the Board of Adjustments is
politically responsible also and noted that if someone disagrees
with their decision, they still can come to the County Commission
and say the law is wrong and ask that it be amended.
The Chairman asked how the Board wished to handle this, and
Commissioner Scurlock felt we should leave this as suggested and
19
800K 5 9 ; �. r 4X i 3
I
JAIL 1 19T5
BOOK
59
�s�� d j 4
monitor to
see how it functions as we can always tighten
it
up
later. The Board agreed.
Page 5 - Commissioner Wodtke had a general question on lot
size requirements in areas where we have 10 to 20 acre parcels of
land, but because of Drainage District right-of-ways, road
right-of-ways, etc., a ten acre piece may actually only be 9.71
acres. He noted that you can't get four 2h acre parcels out of
9.71 acres, so how can you utilize your land?
Director Keating explained that they made an adjustment in
RFD to allow for this by making the minimum lot size 85,000 sq.
ft. instead of 100,000 sq. ft., which is what.22 acres actually
figures out to, and included the limitation that it cannot exceed
the one unit per 2h acre requirement.
Page 5 - Chairman Lyons questioned the statement about
structures "moved on a lot." He noted that you can move a house
that is on a lot or you can move a house onto a lot. Attorney
Brandenburg suggested that be changed to read "structures........
constructed or relocated on a lot."
Page 6 - Chairman Lyons then questioned the statement in
Paragraph e - "no accessory structure on a corner lot shall
project into the front lot line on either street."
Director Keating noted that in our current code wherever the
lot abuts a street or right-of-way, that is considered a front
yard and subject to those requirements.
Chairman Lyons felt the front lot line puts you clear out to
the street, and Director Keating noted that this actually should
read "the required front yard."
The Chairman next asked what we are trying to take into
account on Page 6, Paragraph 7, where it says "that extend more
than 3 feet above the surface ground level."
Director Keating explained this is to allow other type of
impervious areas such as parking lots and sidewalks, not to be
considered in maximum lot coverages.
20
_ M M
Page 7 - Commissioner Bowman pointed out that under 4B.,
Paragraph 1, the listed uses do not include Fish Farms.
Director Keating stated he personally would consider them
included under General Farming Activities, but this could be
added as a specific item. It was agreed Fish Farms should be
specifically mentioned.
Question arose about exotic animals, and it was felt this is
regulated by the state.
Page 8, 9, and 10 - no changes, and Commissioner Wodtke
ascertained that nothing on the table on Page 10 has been changed
from the current ordinance.
Page 11 - Commissioner Wodtke discussed 4.1C. Uses Requiring
Administrative Permits. He noted that the RFD District allows
only non-commercial stables, and, therefore, if you have horses
and are involved in doing anything other than keeping your own
horses, i.e., breeding or leasing out a stall, for instance, you
would have to have Agricultural zoning. He believed RFD is
actually a transitional area between Agricultural and Residential
and noted that he knows of several instances where people carry
on this type of activity on less than five acre parcels.
Commissioner Bird asked how this would affect such cases,
and whether it would make them non -conforming, and Attorney
Brandenburg stated they would be grandfathered in. He noted that
a non -conforming use can be sold, but it cannot be expanded.
Page 12 - Commissioner Bowman wished to know why Paragraph
2. Community Service Uses under Educational Facilities, excludes
Business, Secretarial & Vocational, and Director Keating stated
that it has been determined those are commercial uses as they are
typically facilities that are run on a profit-making basis as
opposed to general education facilities, which usually are
located in proximity to the residential areas they are serving.
Commissioner Bowman felt this then would exclude, for
example, Florida Institute of Technology, which is a private
21
JAN 16 1985 BOOK 59
JAN 16 1935 aooK 59 !--n 476
profit-making college; Commissioner Bird asked if we want to
exclude such private facilities.
Attorney Brandenburg pointed out that there are many kinds
of vocational schools., including automotive schools where they
work on semi -trucks, etc., and you wouldn't want these in
residential districts; although some of these uses may be
allowed, he felt you want more control over them.
Page 13 - Commissioner Wodtke inquired if there were any
changes in the table for size and dimension criteria for RFD, and
Chief Planner Shearer explained that we do not have the RFD
District at the present time, but he felt probably this is
similar to R-lE and these would be the same setbacks as in RS -1.
Page 14 - 5C., Paragraph 2., - Commissioner Bowman
questioned why Recreation Uses should require an Administrative
Permit.
Director Keating confirmed that recreation uses are allowed
in all residential districts, but Attorney Brandenburg explained
that requiring of an administrative permit enables us to be sure
the use is compatible with the neighborhood.
Page 15 - no changes, and it was noted that on Page 16,
Table 5, RS -1 is comparable to R-lE, but they have lowered the
minimum floor area to 1,200 sq. ft.
Pages 17, 18, and 19 - no changes, and it was noted that on
Page 20, Table 6, the RS -6 District is similar to the current R-1
size and dimension requirements, and the RS -3 District is between
R -1A and R-lAA.
Page 21 - Sec. 9. - RT -6 Two -Family Residential District.
Planner Shearer explained that this is a residential district
that allows duplex development in single family. If you have two
distinct structures that share a wall, that is considered single
family attached. A duplex is one building that is divided in
two, and the common wall would be an interior wall.
Commissioner Wodtke asked where single family attached
dwellings are allowed, and Director Keating stated that would be
22
M M M
under PRD. He noted they did not want to create too many
districts but felt the RT -6 would be a good one to have.
Pages 22 and 23 - no changes.
Page 24 - Director Keating noted that currently we don't
have any multi family zoning districts less than 4 units per acre
and the RM -3 would provide for multi family at 3 units per acre
to be consistent with the LD -1 Comprehensive Plan designation.
Commissioner Wodtke asked about having single family
attached in this district and Director Keating noted that these
are multi family districts and single family attached can be
built; they would not have to go to PRD.
Page 25 and 26 - no changes.
Page 27 - Table 10 - Developer Peter Robinson noted that the
Minimum Floor Area Section under MF refers to Section 10(K), and
he cannot find any Section 10(K). It was felt that was incorrect
and from the old ordinance.
Director Keating believed these numbers are reflected on the. -
next to last page of the new Ordinance, under Attachment #2 -
Summary Table, Minimum Floor Area. He stated what we will have
to do is put in under RM -3, RM -4 and RM -6 the numbers that are
reflected in Minimum Floor Area Other, which is 550 sq. ft. We
will eliminate the reference to 10K and insert 550 all across
where it says 10K.
Mr. Robinson pointed out that there were two references to
MF on Table 10, one being Duplex and MF. Director Keating
believed what we should do is eliminate the entire MF row that
refers to Sec. 10K, and in the row entitled Duplex and MF change
the 750 to 550 all across.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that then you can have a duplex
with a minimum floor area of 550 sq. ft., and this was confirmed.
Pages 28 and 29 - no changes.
Page 30 - Director Keating wished to point out that these
Required Improvements relate to the Subdivision Ordinance and
23
s�.
JAN 16 1985 1 Boor 59c",UC.pr 478
�
what staff has done is specify which of those Districts these
improvements would have to be incorporated in.
Page 31 - Table 11. Commissioner Bird pointed out that in
this table we jump back to a minimum floor area of Duplex at 750
and MF at 550 which is inconsistent.
Planner Shearer felt both Duplex and MF should be 550', and
this was agreed on.
Commissioner Wodtke stated that he would like to be sure
there is enough leeway to build something that is affordable.
Planner Shearer recommended on RM -14 that this might be
lowered to 5001; we currently allow this in R-2. It was agreed
to go to 500' in RM -14 in both Duplex and MF.
Pages 32, 33, 34, and 35 - no changes. Commissioner Bird
noted that this is the Mobile Home Residential District category
in case anyone present was interested. Commissioner Scurlock
wished we could do away with the entire district, and
Commissioner Bird asked if there is a legal requirement to have a
Mobile Home District.
Attorney Brandenburg felt if we did not have one, there
would be a question of exclusionary zoning.
Pages 36, 37, 38 and 39 - no changes.
Page 40 - 2.C.ii - Agricultural Industries Criteria -
Commissioner Wodtke asked if the requirement that all buildings
are to be located at least 100 feet from all property lines
applies only to agricultural industries or to Agricultural
in general.
Director Keating confirmed that it applied only to
agricultural industries, and the setback in Agricultural is the
same as it was - 30'.
Page 42 - 6.c.i. - Criteria for Animal Boarding Place or
Kennels - Commissioner Wodtke discussed the setback requirement
of 150' for animal boarding places or kennels. He stated that he
was thinking of a kennel called Noah's Ark located on Old Dixie,
24
and noted that in order to setback 150' from all lines, you would
need a lot of property.
Director Keating clarified that this setback applies only
to commercial kennels in an Agricultural District; there will be
different regulations for those in Commercial Districts.
Page 44 - 10.d. Criteria for Noncommercial Stables.
Commissioner Wodtke felt if we require such uses to be on lots of
no less than 2 acres, this would preclude having a stable in RS -1
or RS -3 or RM -3 to a certain extent.
Director Keating noted that conceivably you could have a
large tract zoned RS -3 or RM -3, and this would allow a non-
commercial stable as an accessory use.
Commissioner Wodtke confirmed that the 100' setback pertains
only to the structure, but felt this limits the use of the
property. He then discussed the requirement for a fence 4' high
totally enclosing the area, and wished to know what determines
the kind of fence, i.e., barbed wire, electric, etc.
Director Keating noted that while we do not have a specific
definition for fence, we do have a specific fence ordinance, and
in any zoning district other than Agricultural, a barbed wire
fence would require special approval.
Commissioner Bird inquired what the minimum is that an
individual would need in order to have a lot and house one horse,
and Director Keating stated that it would require two acres and
proper zoning. He further noted that accessory uses are only
allowed on a lot after construction and use of the principal use.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that an 100' setback is too much
and that 50' or 75' would be more reasonable, and Commissioner
Wodtke agreed, noting that most existing barns would not be legal
because of the 100' setback as people generally do not put a barn
in the center of their property.
Commissioner Bird suggested the setback requirement be
reduced to 50', and this was agreed upon.
25
JAN 16 1935
BOOK 5- F-nUF 479
I
-I
JAN 16 1985 59 F,; -UF 480
Page 45 - Commissioner Wodtke questioned the criteria for
Guest Cottages which states that they shall not contain kitchen
facilities.
Commissioner Bird asked about a separate facility for
servant quarters, and Director Keating stated that we don't have
such a provision at this time.
Commissioner Scurlock believed there is the problem of these
quarters being converted into rental units.
Commissioner Wodtke did not feel a second kitchen is that
objectionable as long as it isn't a permanent situation, and
Commissioner Bird noted the criteria sets out that the cottage
shall be used only for intermittent or temporary occupancy by a
non-paying guest.
Director Keating agreed the ordinance sets this out plainly,
but it is the enforcement they have a problem with.
Chairman Lyons felt the issue here is whether there should
be a kitchen or not, and Director Keating stated that he
personally didn't have a problem with deleting this requirement.
Commissioner Scurlock noted that from a practical aspect,
people will build without a kitchen, but later on kitchen
equipment will be added.
It was agreed to delete the requirement that a guest cottage
shall not contain kitchen facilities.
Commissioner Wodtke had a general question in regard to golf
courses and accessory facilities and that is whether we have a
park zoning.
Planner Shearer stated that we have a Marine Park Zone, but
not a Park zoning district. Hobart Park is part R-1 and part
Agricultural.
Pages 46 through 55 - no changes.
Pages 56 and 57 - Commissioner Wodtke asked if Veterinary
Clinics will be permitted in commercial areas, and this was
confirmed. He then asked about airports, noting that Aerodrome
Subdivision is zoned Agricultural, but they have beautiful
26
homesites and don't conform to the agricultural requirement for
five acres. He wished to know if the present intent is to avoid
creating another Aerodrome situation, and this also was
confirmed.
Attorney Brandenburg believed there is a distinction between
someone who just lands on their own property and bypasses the
F.A.A. as opposed to someone who sets up an airport.
Chairman Lyons felt someone who wished to have just an
airstrip certainly doesn't need to comply with all this criteria.
Director Keating reported that Planning recently had someone
come in who has been using an airstrip on his property, but
believed he did have to get F.A.A. approval.
Chairman Lyons noted there are some groves with airstrips,
and he doubted they are subject to all these requirements; he
felt this section takes in more than we had in mind.
Attorney Brandenburg felt a distinction could be handled in
the definition section by defining airport and airstrips as not
including the person who flies into his grove or his thirty acre
backyard. The Board agreed it should be handled in this manner.
Commissioner Bird had a question about fruit and vegetable
stands. He wished to know if we are saying we can only put these
in Agricultural Districts and eliminate those in Commercial
areas.
Planner Shearer noted that we are not dealing with Commer-
cial Districts today, and such stands will be provided for in
some of the new Commercial Districts.
Page 58 - Paragraph c.i. - Chairman Lyons wished to know
what constitutes a major sewage treat plant and major water
purification plant, and Director Keating reported that this is
set out in the definition section.
Pages 59 and 60 - no changes.
Page 61 - 25.3D. - Conditions and Safeguards. Attorney
Brandenburg suggested that the first sentence be changed to read
- "In granting any special exception, the Board of County
27
JAN 1 ��� BOOK F�,E 481
JAN 1 BOCK. 4V
Commissioners may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards
to assure the use is compatible with other uses in the District."
Page 62 - no changes.
Page 63 - 25.3F. Required Finding by the Reviewing Body.
The County Attorney suggested the last sentence of the first
paragraph be changed to read: "The reviewing body shall also make
findings certifying that both the general and specific criteria
for the review of special exceptions have been satisfied and that
certain special conditions have been imposed to assure
compatibility with surrounding land uses, considering:....."
Page 64 - no changes.
Page 65 - It was noted that Section 15 will be amended to
reflect that conflicting ordinances will be repealed upon the
holding of the required public hearings, etc., as explained
earlier by Attorney Brandenburg.
Commissioner Scurlock noted that the only changes in the
Attachments were in Attachment #2, the summary table, and these
were reflected in the body of the ordinance.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
Bill Priestly, owner of the Jungle Recreational Club, stated
that he had no problems with the proposed ordinance as discussed,
but simply wished to clarify whether the section on the existing
special expection use as originally proposed had been deleted so
that he now would be able to rebuild or expand the present Jungle
Club.
Director Keating confirmed that the draft section referred
to had been deleted and Mr. Priestly would be able to rebuild or
expand the Jungle Club.
Dick Baker of Fairlane Harbour and member of the Mobile Home
Advisory Board had a question of jurisdiction, which he was not
sure applied here today. He informed the Board that where he
lives in Fairlane Harbour, his mobile home is in the City, but
there is a County right-of-way immediately behind him and that
will comprise the extension of Indian River Boulevard. If that
28
is to be an arterial street, the Zoning Ordinance provides that
there be buffering by fences, berms or walls, etc., 6' in height,
and those who live in this vicinity are very interested in this
requirement. The property in question is not on the property of
the owner of Fairlane Harbour; it is County property, and the
City/County line is right there. Mr. Baker stated that his
question is where to they go to find out about this buffer and
whose responsibility it is to construct it.
Administrator Wright commented that Fairlane Harbour is
unique and there is a right-of-way dispute right now. He stated
that we had planned on putting some buffering in and have had
some discussions with Mr. Stawara, owner of Fairlane Harbour. He
noted that it is possible that Mr. Baker's mobile home is on
county right-of-way and he felt Mr. Baker should discuss this
either with him or the County Engineer.
Attorney Brandenburg felt that the more specific answer to
Mr. Baker's question is that this requirement would not be
applicable to Mr. Baker; it only applies to new mobile home
parks. The county would be responsible for building the road and
making arrangements with the land owners for appropriate
buffering, if it is needed. He advised Mr. Baker to talk to the
Public Works Director.
Commissioner Scurlock believed those homes are on county
right-of-way, but he did not believe it is the county's intent to
displace a lot of people and felt that we will try to work with
the owners to work this out.
Peter Robinson, developer of Laurel Homes, had a problem
with the minimum square footage requirements in RS -6 and RT -6 of
750 sq. ft. while mobile homes only require a minimum of 550 sq.
ft. He felt this would prevent builders from competing against
mobile homes on an equal basis and would result in pricing a lot
of people out of the market and giving them only the choice of
mobile homes.
29
JAN 16 1985 noK. 591 „i,ef 483
I
JAN 1 Boor 59 r,,I74SM
Commissioner Scurlock inquired if he wished to increase the
standards for mobile homes, and Mr. Robinson stated that the
builders should be allowed to build smaller units. He felt
people should be allowed to live in a smaller unit if they wish,
and he believed there is a greater demand for smaller units.
Mr. Robinson also had a problem with the front footage
requirement where the county requires one unit per 2h acres; he
noted that many people have bought five acre tracts that have a
330' frontage, and they want to split this into 2h acre units.
Requiring 150' frontage on a public road results in ending up
with two very skinny lots. He noted that you could have one
person with a flag lot and a 60' road going to the back, but he
felt smaller front footage should be allowed. Mr. Robinson
stated that his basic problem is that there are certain things
that are controlled by the economy, but the government is trying
to control them. He felt both the front footage and square
footage requirements reflect this. He noted that although this
was how it was done in the old ordinance, things change and he
felt this should be addressed.
Chairman Lyons felt Mr. Robinson makes a good point.
Director Keating presented staff's rationale, particularly
with regard to minimum floor area. He referred to the table and
noted that the higher minimum floor area relates to single family
units in the lower density zoning districts. This was meant to
protect property values of adjacent residents who have made a
major investment in the lower density area. He stated that staff
was more amenable to reducing the footage for multi family
structures.
Attorney Brandenburg noted that one of the biggest reasons
for the subdivision law was to control flag lots because of the
difficulties they have caused.
Discussion continued in regard to creating subdivisions with
three lots, possibly exempting certain acreages, etc., and
30
Chairman Lyons pointed out that this concerns the Subdivision
Ordinance which is not before the Board for consideration today.
Commissioner Scurlock believed that Mr. Robinson raised a
good point re minimum floor area and possibly we ought to make a
provision for that affordable house of 5501, but require that it
be consistent with the neighborhood.
Commissioner Wodtke concurred that we do need to be able to
provide more affordable housing and asked about having a special
exception for smaller floor space.
Commissioner Scurlock noted such a special exception might
give the Housing Authority an option to apply for certain funds..
Commissioner Lyons did agree that this is a problem, but did
not feel the Board can solve it this morning. He preferred to
treat this as a separate problem and refer it back to the
Planning Department for a recommendation because we always can
add a district without a major rewrite.
It was determined that no one else wished to be heard.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
closed the public hearing.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
U'by Commissioner Bird, to adopt Ordinance 85-4.
creating new residential districts, with the
amendments discussed above.
Attorney Brandenburg emphasized that it is necessary to
change the opening language in the title of the Ordinance in
regard to repealing districts as discussed earlier in the meeting
changing the district numbers and section heads accordingly and
carrying this out throughout the ordinance, and also amending
Section 15 in regard to Repeal of Conflicting Provisions with the
languages dictated into the record earlier.
31
OGS 59 ic— A85
JAN 16 1985
-I
BOOK 59 F,'.pp
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 85 -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING APPENDIX A OF THE CODE OF
LAWS AND ORDINANCES, KNOWN AS THE ZONING CODE, ENACTING A
COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
AND SEVERAL RELATED ZONING REGULATIONS BY: 1) CREATING
SECTION 3(A) "ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS AND BOUNDARIES
THEREOF"; 2) CREATING SECTION 3(A).19 "APPLICATION OF
DISTRICT REGULATIONS"; 3) CREATING SECTION 4(A) "A-1:
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT"; 4) CREATING SECTION 4(A).1,
"RFD:RURAL FRINGE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT"; 5) CREATING SECTION
5(A) "RS-1:SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT"; 6) CREATING SECTION
6(A), "RS -3 AND RS-6:SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS";
7) CREATING SECTION 9(A) "RT-6:TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT"; 8) CREATING SECTION 10(A), "RM -3, RM -4 AND
RM-6:MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS"; 9) CREATING
SECTION '11(A), "RM -8, RM -10 AND RM-14:MULTIPLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS"; 10) CREATING SECTION 13(A), "RMH-6
AND RMH-8:MOBILE HOME RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS"; 11) CREATING
SECTION 20.2, "CRVP:COMMERCIAL RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARK
DISTRICT"; 12) CREATING SECTION 25.1, REGULATIONS FOR
SPECIFIC LAND USES"; 13) CREATING SECTION 25.29 "REVIEW OF
USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS"; 14) CREATING SECTION
25.3, REGULATION OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES"; AND PROVIDING
FOR ALTERNATE SECTIONS AS WELL AS CODIFICATION,SEVERABILITY,
AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that;
3=
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Titleof Ordinance .......................................... i
SECTION 1 ... ..... .... 1
Section 3(A). Establishment of Districts and Official
Zoning Atlas
SECTION 2... ... �
.... �
... .......... 3
Section 3(A).1 Application of District Regulations
SECTION 3 ... ..... .. .... ................... 7
Section 4(A).A-1:AgriculturalDistrict
SECTION 4 ... ........... ... ... 11
Section 4(A).1. RFD: Rural Fringe Development District
SECTION 5 ..................................................
... 14
Section 5(A). RS -I: Single Family Residential District
SECTION 6.... ...... ... 17
Section 6(A). RS -3 and RS -6: Single Family Residential
Districts
SECTION 7 ..................................................
...... 20
Section 9(A). RT -6: Two -Family Residential District
SECTION 8 .. .... .... 23
Section 10(A). RM -3, RM -4 and RM-6:�Mu1tipleFamily
Residential District
SECTION 9......... .... ...... ............ 27
Section 11(A). RM -8, RM -10 and RM -14: Multiple Family
Residential Districts
SECTION 10..... ........ 31
Section 13(A). RMH-6 and RMH-8: Mobile Home Residential
Districts
SECTION 11 ................................................. 35
Section 20.2. CRVP: Commercial Recreational Vehicle
Park District
SECTION 12. .. �
...... .... ...... ............ 39
Section-25.1.Regulationsfor Specific Land Uses
SECTION 13.�
... ..... ......... ...... 59
Section 25.2. Review ofUsesRequiring Administrative
Permits
SECTION 14.... .... ... .�
............... .......... 60
Section 25.3. Regulation of Special Exception Uses
SECTION 15.�
.. ........................ 64
Repeal of Conflicting Provisions
SECTION 16 ................................................. 64
Incorporation in Code
SECTION17 ................................................. 64
Severability
SECTION 18 .................................................. 64
Effective Date
ATTACHMENT #1 .... .... ... .... ..... A-1
Table of Permitted Uses: Agricultural and Residential
Zoning Districts
ATTACHMENT #2.. .................... B-1
Summary Table of Size and Dimension Criteria: New
Zoning Districts
L
JAN 16 1995 59 F,{,F 487
r JAN 16 1985 �
BOOK 9- `';c `mss
SECTION 1
A new Section 3(A), entitled "Establishment of Districts and Official Zoning
Atlas", is hereby adopted and shall read as follows:
SECTION 3(A). ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS AND OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS
A. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS.
In order to classify, regulate and restrict the use of land, water, build-
ings, and structures; to regulate and restrict the height and bulk of
buildings;to regulate the area of yards and other open spaces about build-
ings; to regulate the intensity of land use, the unincorporated area of
Indian River County, Florida, is divided into districts as follows:
I. Agricultural Districts.
a. A-1: Agricultural
2. Rural Transition Area Districts.
a. RFD: Rural Fringe Development
b. RS -1: Single Family
3. Residential Districts.
a. RS -3 and RS -6: Single Family
b. RT -6: Two Family
c. RM -3, RM -4 and RM -6: Multiple Family
d. RM -8, RM -10 and RM -14: Multiple Family
e. RMH-6 and RMH-8: Mobile Home Residences
4. Commercial Districts.
a. B-1: Planned Business
b. C -IA: Restricted Commercial
C. C-1: Commercial
d. C-2: Heavy Commercial
e. CRVP: Commercial Recreational
f. MED: Medical District
5. Industrial Districts.
a. LM -1: Light Manufacturing
b. M-1: Restricted Industrial
6. Special Purpose Districts.
a. MP: Marine Park
B. OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS.
Vehicle Park
1. Establishment of Official Zoning Atlas. The boundaries of such
districts are hereby fixed and established as shown in the accompany-
ing Zoning Atlas, consisting of Sectional maps which are identified by
sheet number and an index map. This Zoning Atlas is on file in the
office of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida. Each sectional map and the index map are hereby adopted and
made a part of this ordinance as if the matters and information set
forth by said maps were fully described herein.
2. Interpretation of District Boundaries. The boundaries of the various
districts as shown in the Zoning Atlas and the sectional map sheets
shall be determined by the boundaries as shown and outlined thereon
and when not clearly so determined, by use of the scale shown on said.
maps unless actual dimensions are noted. Scale and field measurements
and map dimensions shall be figured from the center line of streets,
highways, alleys and railroad rights-of-way or public waters, as the
case may be. Where uncertainty exists as to the exact location of
said boundaries, the following rule shall apply:
oil
a. Center Line as Boundaries. Where district boundaries lie on or
within streets, highways, road rights-of-way or public water, the
district boundaries shall be the center line of the same.
b. District Boundaries Which Bisect Blocks. Where district bounda-
ry lines approximately bisect blocks, the boundaries are the
median lines of such blocks between the center line of boundary
streets.
C. District Boundaries Parallel to Rights -of -Way or Bodies of Water.
Where district boundaries are approximately parallel to a street,
highway, road, alley, railroad right-of-way or public water, the
distance of such boundaries from the center line thereof shall
be, unless otherwise shown by dimension, the median block line.
d. District Boundaries Dividinq Parcels of Land. In subdivided
property or where a district boundary divides a subdivided lot,
the location of such boundary, unless the same is indicated by
dimensions shall, be determined by the use of a scale appearing
on a district map. Where a district boundary divides a platted
lot, the zone classification of the greater portion shall prevail
throughout the lot.
e. Action in Case of Uncertainty. In case any further uncertainty
exists, the Board of Adjustment shall interpret the intent of the
district map as to location of such boundaries.
f. Street and Rights -of -Way Abandonments. Where a public road,
street, all or other right-of-way—is officially vacated or
abandoned, the regulations applicable to the property to which it
reverted shall apply.
g. Excluded Areas. Unless areas are classified on or by the Offi-
cial Zoning Atlas of Indian River County, or the appropriate
classification can be established by the rules above, such areas
shall be considered to be classified as Agriculture (A-1) until
such time as the land is rezoned by the Board of County Commis-
sioners.
h. Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas. No changes or amendments
to the Official Zoning Atlas shall be initiated, except in
compliance and conformity with all procedures and requirements of
this Code. If in accordance with procedures of this code changes
are made in district boundaries or other such information por-
.'trayed on the Official Zoning Atlas, such changes shall be made
promptly after adoption of the amendment. It shall be unlawful
for any person to make any unauthorized change in the Official
Zoning Atlas.
-2- BOOK _: F', G489
JAN 16 1995
JAN 16 1985 RooK t' U- 490
SECTION 2
Section 3(A).1, entitled
created to read as follows:
"Application of District Regulations", is hereby
SECTION 3(A).1 APPLICATION OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS
A. ESTABLISHMENT OF USE CLASSES.
1. Use Classes, Generally. In order to implement the purpose and intent
and provisions of the Indian River County Zoning Ordinance, the
following use classes are hereby established:
a.
Agricultural Uses
b.
Residential Uses
C.
Institutional Uses
d.
Community Service Uses
e.
Recreation Uses
f.
Commercial Uses
g.
Industrial Uses
h.
Transportation Uses
i.
Utility Uses
j.
Earthmoving Uses
2. Designation of Specific Uses by Use Class and Sub -Class The use
classes established above may be divided into various use sub -classes
and shall comprise the various specific uses as set forth in the
zoning districts, as established in Section 3A.
3. Interpretation of Use Classes and Sub -Classes. Where the terms listed
in paragraph "l.", above, are used in this Ordinance in reference to
specific land use activities, they shall refer to the use sub -classes
which comprise those terms, unless the context of the ordinance
otherwise requires.
B. PERMITTED USES.
1. Permitted Uses, Generally. It is the intent of this Ordinance to
permit certain uses, not otherwise illegal, to locate in specified
zoning districts, either as a permitted use, use requiring administra-
tive permit, or special exception use.
2. Unlisted Uses.
a. Uses Not Specifically Listed. In the event there is not a
particular use listed anywhere in the Ordinance that describes a
land use activity in question and such use is not determined to
be an accessory use, then it shall be considered the same as the
use having the most similar characteristics shall apply. Not-
withstanding, when a particular use might be construed to qualify
as a permitted use, use requiring an administrative permit or
special exception use in a district, if such use has characteris-
tics more similar to a particular use listed or defined elsewhere
in the Ordinance then it shall be interpreted that the latter
listing or definition shall govern. Where uncertainties continue
to exist, the question shall be determined by the Planning and
Development Director.
b. Criteria for Reviewing Uses Not Listed. Upon application to the
Planning and Development Director, he or she shall consider among
other relevant matters, traffic generation, density of popula-
tion, and hours of operation of the proposed use in comparison to
specifically named uses within the Ordinance and the criteria set
forth in the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning and Development
Director may after review of the criteria herein set forth
determine that certain uses are prohibited uses and shall not be
allowed in any zoning district. In the event that any use is
determined to be a prohibited use, record of the reasons given
for that decision shall be kept on file and shall be used as
guidelines for subsequent use determinations.
c. Appeals of Decisions on Unlisted Uses Such decisions may be
appealed to the Board of Zoning Adjustment in conformance with
the provisions of Section 26(A).
3. Permitted Uses, Specifically. No structure shall be erected, con-
structed, reconstructed or structurally altered, nor shall any struc-
ture or land or combination thereof, be used unless the use to which
the structure and/or land is to be put is listed in the Permitted Use
section of the applicable zoning district and the use fully complies
with all of the applicable district regulations, except for nonconfor-
mities as provided in Section 25(J). Accessory uses, administrative
permit uses and special exception uses.
4. Accessory Uses. No accessory use or structure, as defined in Section
2, shall hereafter be constructed, remodeled, established, altered or
enlarged unless such accessory use or structure complies with the
provisions of Section 25(G) "Accessory Buildings".
C. USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT.
1. New Uses Requiring Administrative Permits. It is the intent of this
Ordinance to allow any use requiring an administrative permit in the
appropriate zoning district, provided the criteria established for
such uses in Section 25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses", are
satisfied and such uses are reviewed pursuant to the procedures of
Section 25.2, "Review of Uses Requiring Administrative Permits".
D. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
1. New Special Exception Uses. No special exception use, as designated
within this Ordinance, shall hereafter be established unless such use
has been approved pursuant to the provisions of Section 25.3, Regu-
lation of Special Exception Uses.
E. ESTABLISHMENT OF SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA.
In order to carry out the purpose and intent and provisions of this Ordi-
nance, size and dimension criteria for particular zoning districts are
hereby established. Such size and dimension criteria shall be applied in
accordance with this section and other applicable provisions of this
Ordinance. The minimum area, yards and other open spaces, including the
intensity of use provisions contained in this Ordinance for each and every
building hereafter erected, constructed or structurally altered, shall not
be encroached upon or considered as area, yard or open space requirements
or intensity of use requirements for any other building. Variances from
these provisions, excluding the maximum density limitations, may be granted
by the Board of Adjustment pursuant to the procedures and criteria of this
Ordinance.
1. Maximum Density. In no instance shall the maximum density specified
for a given zoning district be exceeded in the approval of any site
plan. Maximum density shall be expressed in number of dwelling units
per gross residential acre. In the determination of the maximum
number of units to be allowed on a lot, the permitted number shall be
made proportional to any fraction of an acre(s) that is a part of the
lot. Gross residential area shall mean the area of a lot devoted to
residential uses and related open space, yards, parking and circu-
lation, drainage, recreation, and other related or accessory facil-
ities, exclusive of commercial, industrial, and other non-residential
uses.
2. Lot Size Requirements.
a. Generally. Except as may be qualified by the provisions of the
Ordinance, including Section 25(1), Nonconforming Lots, Uses and
Structures, no structure or part thereof shall hereafter be
constructed or relocated onto a lot which does not meet all of
the minimum lot size requirements established for the zoning
district in which the structure is or is to be located. Further-
more, no structure or land shall hereafter be used, occupied or
arranged for use on a lot which does not meet all of the minimum
-4-
JAN 16 1985 PooK . �' F 91
I
JAN 1 BOOK 59 F -T 492
lot size requirements presented for the district in which such
structure or land is located.
b. Reduction of Lot Size or Yards; Subdivision. No lot or yard
existing at the effective date of this Ordinance shall thereafter
be reduced in size, dimension, or area below the minimum require-
ments set out herein, except by reason of a portion being
acquired for public use in any manner, including dedication,
condemnation, purchase, and the like. Lots or yards created
after the effective date of this Ordinance shall meet the minimum
requirements established herein.
C. Applicability to All Uses. Unless otherwise specified in this
Ordinance, all permitted uses and all special exception uses
shall be subject to the lot size requirements specified for a
given district, unless other minimum requirements are specified
for such uses elsewhere in this Ordinance.
d. Structure Built on Two Lots. A building constructed on a site
consisting of two 2 lots must be located either within the
required setback from the common or center lot line, or the
building must be constructed on both lots. Any person wishing to
build a structure on two (2) lots must provide legal assurance,
approved by the County Attorney, which demonstrates unity of
title for both lots.
e. Lots of Record Less than Minimum Size. Any lot of record at the
time of the adoption of this Ordinance which contains less lot
area or a width than required in the district in which it is
located may be used for a use in such district. This provision
shall not be construed to permit more than one (1) dwelling unit
on a lot with less lot area per family than required for the
district in which such. lot is located.
f. Use of Lots in Single Family Districts. In single family dis-
tricts, every building hereafter erected or structurally altered
shall be located on a lot as herein defined, and in no case shall
there be more than the principal building and the customary
accessory buildings on one lot or parcel of land.
3. Minimum Yard Requirements.
a. Generally. Minimum yard requirements shall be as specified for a
given zoning district. The yard requirements shall apply to all
buildings and structures, as they relate to the respective lot
lines, except as otherwise specifically provided in this Ordi-
nance or as exempted in paragraph "b., Exemptions", below.
b. Exemptions. The following structures shall be exempt from the
minimum yard requirements set forth in this Ordinance: under-
ground utility equipment, clothes lines, flag poles, mail boxes,
police call boxes, traffic signals, fire hydrants, light poles or
any similar structure or device as determined by the Planning and
Development Director.
C. Accessory Uses and Structures. Special yard requirements related
to accessory uses and/or structures are provided in Section
25(G).
d. Yard Encroachments. See Section 25(B), "Encroachments into
Required Yards".
e. Required Yards for Corner Lots. Corner lots shall be provided a
front yard on each street frontage provided, however, that the
buildable width of such lot shall not be reduced to less than
thirty (30) feet and provided further that no accessory structure
on a corner lot shall project into the required front yard on
either street.
f. Yards Adjacent to Agricultural Operations Notwithstanding any
other provisions of this Ordinance, on all lots created after the
effective date of this Ordinance which are adjacent to active
agricultural operations involving citrus groves, orchards, field
crops, or truck farming, all yards for non-agricultural activ-
ities shall provide a minimum fifty (50) foot setback or a
heavily landscaped twenty-five (25) foot bufferyard in order to
adequately protect residents from aerial spraying.
g. Residential Setbacks, Generally. No dwelling shall be erected
closer to another dwelling than double the minimum setback
restrictions, except where two (2) dwellings are erected on a
single tract of land.
h. Yard Requirements for Residential Uses in Non -Residential Zonin
Districts. Whenever a dwelling is to be erected in a district
other than an agricultural or residential district, it shall
conform to the minimum setback requirements of the RM -14 dis-
trict.
4. Minimum Floor Area. Minimum floor area, where specified, shall mean
the minimum gross floor area permitted for a dwelling unit, exclusive
of garages, open and screened porches, carports, terraces and patios.
5. Maximum Floor Area Ratio. (RESERVED)
6. Maximum Building Height. Maximum building height, where specified,
shall apply to all structures located in the zoning district except
those structures and appurtances excluded in Section 25(A), Height
Exceptions. Further, no structure shall exceed any height limitations
prescribed in Section 25(P), Airport Height Limitations.
7. Maximum Lot Coverage. Maximum lot coverage, where specified, shall
mean that portion of a lot, expressed as a percentage, occupied by all
buildings or structures which are roofed or otherwise not open to the
sky and that extend more than three (3) feet above the surface ground
level.
8. Minimum Open Space. The open space requirements presented for a given
zoning district shall be considered as a minimum, and such open space
shall be located on the same lot as the primary use or structure,
except as specifically provided .otherwise in this Ordinance. Open
space shall be expressed as a percentage and shall be generally
defined as the required exterior open area clear from the ground
upward, devoid of residential, commercial and industrial buildings,
accessory structures and impervious area, except those approved
buildings and structures used exclusively for recreational purposes.
-. -6- BOCiK � Fr�SE 493�A�11 � 195
SECTION 3
BOOK 5 4., 494
A new Section 4(A), entitled "A-1: Agricultural District", is hereby adopted and
shall read as follows:
SECTION 4(A). A-1: AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
A. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
The A-1 district is established to implement the Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan policies for managing land designated for agricultural
development on the Comprehensive Plan Land use Map. The purpose of the A-1
district is to carry out the goals and objectives of the Indian River
County Comprehensive Plan which recognizes that agricultural production is
an essential industry and a major contributor to Indian River County's
economy. The A-1 district is intended to protect agricultural lands,
recognizing that they are valuable due to the unique soil characteristics
and local climatic conditions which render the designated land especially
productive for agriculture and silviculture.
The Agricultural District is also intended to protect both existing and
potential agricultural land from the encroachment of urban development.
Furthermore, the Agricultural District is intended to promote conservation
of open space, vegetative cover, natural systems, aquifer recharge areas,
wildlife habitats, and scenic areas. Finally, the purpose of this district
is to permit a variety,of activities which require non -urban locations but
which do not detrimentally impact lands devoted to rural and agricultural
purposes.
B. PERMITTED USES.
In the A-1 Agricultural District no building or structure shall be erected,
altered or used, nor shall any land or water use be permitted, except for
one or more of the following. Site plan review shall be required for all
uses except single family dwellings and Agricultural Uses, as established,
herein, pursuant to the provisions of Section 23.
1. Agricultural Uses.
- General Farming Activities
- Kennels and Animal Boarding Places, Noncommercial
- Livestock and Poultry Raising
- Nurseries and Greenhouses, Noncommercial
- Plant Nurseries
- Stables, Commercial
- Stables, Noncommercial
- Tree Farms
2. Residential Uses.
- Single Family Dwelling
3. Institutional Uses.
- Cemeteries
- Foster Care Facilities
- Places of Worship
4. Community Service Uses.
- Emergency Services
5. Recreational Uses.
- Parks and Playgrounds Open to the Public
6. Utility Uses.
- Public and Private Utilities, Limited
C.
D.
USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS.
The following uses shall be permitted in the A-1 Agricultural District,
subject to the specific use criteria established in Section 25.1, "Regu-
lations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures established in
Section 25.2 "Review of Uses Requiring Administrative Permits".
1. Agricultural Uses. (Section 25.1(A))
- Agricultural Research Facilities
- Dairy Farming
- Fruit and Vegetable Packing Houses
- Kennels and Animal Boarding Places, Commercial
- Small Animal Specialty Farms
- Tenant Dwellings
2. Residential Uses.
- Mobile Homes
3. Institutional Uses.
(Section 25.1(B))
(Section 25.1(C))
- Child Care or Adult Care Facilities
4. Recreational Uses. (Section 25.1(E))
- Country Clubs
- Golf Courses
5. Commercial Uses. (Section 25.1(F))
- Fruit and Vegetable Stands
- Veterinary Clinic or Animal Hospital
6. Earthmoving. (Section 25.1(J))
- Mining Activities
SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
The following uses may be permitted within the A-1 Agricultural District,
subject to the specific use criteria established in Section 25.1, "Regu-
lations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures established in
Section 25.3 "Regulation of Special Exception Uses".
1. Agricultural Uses. (Section 25.1(A))
- Agricultural Businesses, excluding wholesaling and processing
- Agricultural Industries
2. Residential Uses.
- Guest Cottages (Section 25.1(B))
- P.lanned Residential Developments (Section 25.4)
3. Community Service Uses. (Section 25.1(D))
- Correctional Institutions
- Cultural and Civic Facilities
- Educational Facilities, Excluding Business, Secretarial &
Vocational
- Governmental Administration Buildings
4. Recreation Uses. (Section 25.1(E))
- Major Sports and Recreation Areas and Facilities
5. Transportation Uses. (Section 25.1(H))
- Airports and Airstrips
6. Utility Uses. (Section 25.1(I))
10
BOOK 59, F' F.495
BOOK 496
- Public and Private Utilities, Heavy
- Transmission Towers: Microwave, Radio, T.V., etc.
E. ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES.
As provided in Section 25(G), "Accessory Uses and Structures".
F. DIMENSIONAL REGULATIONS.
As provided in Table 4(A)-1, herein, and Section 3(A).1, "Application of
District Regulations".
G. PERMITTED SIGNAGE.
As provided in Section 25(0), "Signs".
H. WALLS AND FENCES.
As provided in Section 25(I), "Walls and Fences".
I. MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
As established in Section 24, "Off -Street Parking and Loading Regulations".
TABLE 4(A): SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA
A-1 ZONING DISTRICT
ZONING DISTRICT A-1
REGULATION UNIT OF MEASURE
MIN. LOT WIDTH 150 feet
MIN. YARD
- Front
30
- Side
301 feet
MAX.
DENSITY
0.2
d.u. per gross acre
MIN.
LOT SIZE
5.0
acres
MIN. LOT WIDTH 150 feet
MIN. YARD
- Front
30
- Side
301 feet
- Rear
301
MIN. FLOOR AREA
- SF 750
square feet per
- Tenant 400 dwelling unit
MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 35 feet
MAX. LOT COVERAGE 30 % of lot
MIN. OPEN SPACE 50 % of lot
Notes:
1: As established in Section 3(A).1(E)(3)(f), for all lots created after the
effective date of this ordinance which are adjacent to active agricultural
operations, all yards for non-agricultural activities shall provide a minimum
fifty (50) foot setback or a heavily landscaped twenty-five (25) foot bufferyard.
BOOK 5_'JAN 16 1985 _10- � 1(,']-IE9 7
I
SECTION 4
BOOK. 9 r{ �c 4.,9
Section 4(A).1, entitled "RFD:Rural Fringe Development District", is hereby
created to read as follows:
SECTION 4(A).1: RFD: RURAL FRINGE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
A. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
The RFD district is established to implement the Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan policies for managing land designated RR -1 on the
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map for rural -residential at a density of one
(1) unit per two and one-half (2.5) acres. The RFD Rural Fringe Develop-
ment District is generally located between lands designated for urban
development and land designated on the Comprehensive Plan for agricultural
use.
The RFD Rural Fringe Development District is intended to provide oppor-
tunities for very low density residential living in rural areas on the
outside fringe of suburban development. In addition to rural residential
uses, the RFD district is intended to accommodate limited types of
non-commercial agricultural uses with characteristics compatible with
suburban land in the immediate vicinity. Finally, the RFD Rural Fringe
Development District is intended to include development options with
characteristics which do. not adversely impact the sensitive nature of
adjacent agricultural lands.
B. PERMITTED USES.
In the RFD, Rural Fringe Development District, no building or structure
shall be erected, altered or used, nor shall any land or water use by
permitted, except for one or more of the following. Site plan review shall
be required for all uses except single family dwellings, pursuant to the
provisions of Section 23.
1. Residential Uses.
- Single Family Dwelling
2. Institutional Uses.
- Foster Care Facilities
- Places of Worship
3. Community Service Uses.
- Emergency Services
4. Recreation Uses.
- Parks and Playgrounds Open to the Public
C. USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS.
The following uses shall be permitted in the RFD, Rural Fringe Development
District, subject to the'specific use criteria established in Section 25.1,
"Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures established in
Section 25.2, "Review of Uses Requiring Administrative Permits".
1. Agricultural Uses. (Section 25.1(A))
- Kennels and Animal Boarding Places, Noncommercial
- Nurseries and Greenhouses, Noncommercial
- Stables, Noncommercial
2. Institutional Uses. (Section 25.1(C))
- Child Care or Adult Care Facilities
D. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
The following uses may be permitted within the RFD, Rural Fringe Develop-
ment District, subject to the specific use criteria established in Section
25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures estab-
lished in Section 25.3, "Regulation of Special Exception Uses".
1. Residential Uses.
- Guest Cottages (Section 25.1(B))
- Planned Residential Developments (Section 25.4)
2. Community Service Uses. (Section 25.1(D))
- Educational Facilities, Excluding Business, Secretarial &
Vocational
- Governmental Administration Buildings
3. Recreation Uses. (Section 25.1(E))
- Country Clubs
- Golf Courses
4. Utility Uses (Section 25.1(I))
- Public and Private Utilities, Limited
E. ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES.
As provided in Section 25(G), "Accessory Uses and Structures".
F. DIMENSIONAL REGULATIONS.
As provided in Table 4(A).1, herein, and Section 3(A).1, "Application of
District Regulations".
G. PERMITTED SIGNAGE.
As provided in Section 25(0), "Signs".
H. WALLS AND FENCES.
As provided in Section 25(I), "Walls and Fences".
I. MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
As established in Section 24, "Off -Street Parking and Loading Regulations".
-12-
EQOK FACE �I
-I
JAN 16 1995
TABLE 4(A).1: SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA
RFD ZONING DISTRICT
BOOK 59 F°.�= 590
ZONING DISTRICT RFD
REGULATION UNIT OF MEASURE
MAX. DENSITY 0.4 d.u. per gross acre
MIN. LOT SIZE 85,0001 square feet
MIN. LOT WIDTH 150 feet
MIN. YARD
- Front
50
- Side
302 feet
- Rear
302
MIN. FLOOR AREA 1,200 square feet per
- SF dwelling unit
.,MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 35 feet
MAX. LOT COVERAGE 30 % of lot
MIN. OPEN SPACE 50 % of lot
Notes:
1: In no case shall the density exceed 0.4 dwelling units per acre.
2: As established in Section 3(A).1(E)(3)(f), for all lots created after the
effective date of this ordinance which are adjacent to active agricultural
operations, all yards for non-agricultural activities shall provide a minimum
fifty (50) foot setback or a heavily landscaped twenty-five (25) foot buffer -
yard.
_ M13- -
� � r
SECTION 5
A new Section 5(A), entitled "RS-1:Single Family Residential District", is
adopted and shall read as follows:
SECTION 5(A). RS -1: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
A. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
The RS -1 district is established to implement the Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan policies for managing land designated RR -2 rural res-
idential on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map at a density of one (1)
unit per acre.
The RS -1 Single Family Residential District is intended to provide oppor-
tunities for very low density residential living in transitional rural
areas. In addition to very low density residential development, the RS -1
district may accommodate a very restricted number of exclusively noncommer-
cial agricultural uses which satisfy conditions of this Code. Finally, the
RS -1 Single Family Residential District is intended to include development
options with characteristics which do not adversely impact the sensitive
nature of adjacent agricultural or environmentally sensitive lands.
B. PERMITTED USES.
In the RS -1 Single Family Residential District no building or structure
shall be erected, altered or used, except for one or more of the following.
Site plan review shall be required for all uses except single family
dwellings, pursuant to the provisions of Section 23.
1. Residential Uses.
- Single Family Dwelling
2. Institutional Uses.
- Foster Care Facilities
3. Community Service Uses.
- Emergency Services
C. USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS.
The following uses shall be permitted in the RS -1 Single Family Residential
District subject to the specific use criteria established in Section 25.1;'
"Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures established in
Section 25.2, "Review of Uses Requiring Administrative Permits".
1. Agricultural Uses. (Section 25.1(A))
- Kennels, Noncommercial
2. Recreation Uses. (Section 25.1(E))
- Parks and Playgrounds, Open to the Public
D. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
The following uses may be permitted within the RS -1 Single Family Residen-
tial District subject to the specific use criteria established in Section
25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures estab-
lished in Section 25.3, "Regulation of Special Exception Uses".
1. Agricultural Uses. (Section 25.1(A))
- Nurseries and Greenhouses, Noncommercial
- Stables, Noncommercial
2. Residential Uses.
-14-
JAN
14-
JAN 16 1985 BOOK 59 591
- Guest Cottages (Section
Planned Residential Developments (Section 25.4)
3. Institutional Uses. (Section 25.1(C))
- Child Care or Adult Care Facilities
- Places of Worship
Bou F,U 502
4. Community Service Uses. (Section 25.1(D))
- Educational Facilities, Excluding Business, Secretarial &
Vocational
- Governmental Administration Buildings
5. Recreation Uses. (Section 25.1(E))
- Country Clubs
- Golf Courses
6. Utility Uses. (Section 25.1(I))
- Public and Private Utilities, Limited
E. ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES.
As provided in Section 25(G), "Accessory Uses and Structures".
F. DIMENSIONAL REGULATIONS.
As provided in Table 5(A)., herein, and Section 3(A).1, "Application of
District Regulations".
G. PERMITTED SIGNAGE.
As provided in Section 25(0), "Signs".
H. WALLS AND FENCES.
As provided in Section 25(I), "Walls and Fences".
I. MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
As established in Section 24, "Off -Street Parking and Loading Regulations".
TABLE 5(A).: SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA
RS -1 ZONING DISTRICT
ZONING DISTRICT RS -1
REGULATION UNIT OF MEASURE
MAX. DENSITY 1.0 d.u. per gross acre
MIN. LOT SIZE 35,0001 square feet
MIN. LOT WIDTH 150 feet
MIN. YARD
- Front
50
- Side
302 feet
- Rear
302
MIN. FLOOR AREA
- SF 1,200 square feet per
dwelling unit
MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 35 feet
MAX. LOT COVERAGE 30 % of lot
MIN. OPEN SPACE 50 % of lot
Notes:
1: In no case shall the density exceed one (1) dwelling units per acre.
2: As established in Section 3(A).1(E)(3)(f), for all lots created after the
effective date of this ordinance which are adjacent to active agricultural
operations, all yards for non-agricultural activities shall provide a minimum
fifty (50) foot setback or a heavily landscaped twenty-five (25) foot bufferyard.
JAN 16 1995 BooK �„.1�
-16-
503
SECTION 6
BOOK 5 F','.^r 5U4
A new Section 6(A), entitled "RS -3 and RS -6: Single Family Residential Dis-
tricts" is hereby adopted and shall read as follows (Sections 7 and 8 are
reserved):
SECTION 6(A). RS -3 and RS -6: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
A. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
The RS -3 and RS -6 Single Family Residential Districts are established to
implement the land use policies of the Indian River County Comprehensive
Plan which manage lands designated for low density residential development,
LD -1 and LD -2, respectively., Residential development within these zoning
districts is intended to be restricted to single family residential devel-
opment. However, a mixture of structure types, including cluster develop-
ment consisting of attached single family dwellings may be approved as a
special exception Planned Residential Development (PRD). The RS -3 and RS -6
Single Family Residential Districts are intended to accommodate an adequate
range of housing opportunities and requisite community facilities consis-
tent with provisions of the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan.
The maximum residential density intended to be permitted in the RS -3
district is up to three (3) units per acre consistent with the LD -1 Compre-
hensive Plan designation described in the Land Use Element. The maximum
residential density intended to be permitted in the RS -6 district is up to
six (6) units per acre consistent with the LD -2 Comprehensive Plan desig-
nation described in the Land Use Element.
B. PERMITTED USES.
In the RS -3 and RS -6, Single Family Residential Districts, no building or
structure shall be erected, altered or used, except for one or more of the
following. Site plan review shall be required for all uses except single
family dwellings, pursuant to the provisions of Section 23.
1. Residential Uses.
- Single Family Dwellings
2. Institutional Uses.
- Foster Care Facilities
3. Community Service Uses.
- Emergency Services
C. USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS.
The following uses shall be permitted in the RS -3 and RS -6, Single Family
Residential Districts, subject to the specific use criteria established in.
Section 25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures
established in Section 25.2, "Review of Uses Requiring Administrative
Permits".
I. Agricultural Uses. (Section 25.1(A))
- Noncommercial Kennels and Animal Boarding Places (RS -3 district
only)
2. Institutional Uses. (Section 25.1(C))
- Group Home, Level I (RS -6 District Only)
3. Recreation Uses. (Section 25.1(E))
- Parks and Playgrounds, Open to the Public
_I
D. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
L�
The following uses may be permitted within the RS -3 and RS -6, Single Family
Residential Districts, subject to the specific use criteria established in
Section 25.1 "Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures
established in Section 25.3, "Regulation of Special Exception Uses".
1. Agricultural Uses. (Section 25.1(A))
- Nurseries and Greenhouses, Noncommercial
- Stables, Noncommercial
2. Residential Uses.
- Guest Cottages (Section 25.1(B))
- Planned Residential Developments (Section 25.4)
- Zero Lot Line, Detached (RS -6 District only) (Section 25.1(8))
3. Institutional Uses. (Section 25.1(C))
- Child Care or Adult Care Facilities
- Places of Worship
4. Community Service Uses. (Section 25.1(D))
- Educational Facilities, Excluding Business, Secretarial
Vocational
- Governmental Administration Buildings
5. Recreation Uses. (Section 25.1(E))
- Country Clubs
- Golf Courses
6. Utility Uses. (Section 25.1(I))
- Public and Private Utilities, Limited
E. ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES.
As provided in Section 25(G), "Accessory Uses and Structures".
F. DIMENSIONAL REGULATIONS.
As provided in Table 6(A), herein, and Section 3(A).1, "Application of
District Regulations".
G.
PERMITTED SIGNAGE.
As provided in Section 25(0), "Signs".
H.
WALLS AND FENCES.
As provided in Section 25(I), "Walls and
Fences".
I.
MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
As established in Section 24, "Off -Street
Parking and Loading Regulations".
J.
REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS; RS -6 DISTRICT.
All future subdivisions and site plans
for developments within the RS -6
zoning district shall provide the following
improvements, designed and
constructed to the requirements and specifications in the Code of Laws and
Ordinances of Indian River County and the
State of Florida:
1. Bikeways (as specified in the County
Bikeway Plan, as currently exists
or may hereafter be adopted).
2. Sidewalks.
3. Street lights.
1 � -18- ROOK 5SAGE 5.05JAIL �. 9 �
r
JAN 16 1985
TABLE 6(A): SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA
RS -3 AND RS -6 DISTRICTS
BOOK 59,
ZONING DISTRICT RS -3 RS -6
REGULATION UNIT OF MEASURE
MAX. DENSITY 3.0 6.0 d.u. per gross acre
MIN. LOT SIZE 12,0001 7,0002 square feet
MIN. LOT WIDTH 80 70 feet
MIN. YARD
- Front 25 20
- Side 15 10 feet
- Rear 25 20
MIN. FLOOR AREA
- SF 1,200 750 square feet
MAX.
BLDG. HEIGHT
35
35
feet
MAX.
LOT COVERAGE
30
30
% of lot
MIN.
OPEN SPACE
40
40
% of lot
Notes:
1. In no case shall the density exceed three (3) dwelling units per acre.
2: In no case shall the density exceed six (6) dwelling units per acre.
-19-
SECTION 7
A new Section 9(A), entitled "RT -6: Two Family Residential District", is hereby
adopted and shall read as follows:
SECTION 9(A). RT -6: TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
A. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
The RT -6 Two -Family Residential District is established to implement the
Indian River County Comprehensive Plan policies for managing land desig-
nated for low density residential development, LD -2. Residential develop-
ment within the RT -6 zoning district is intended to be restricted to single
family and duplex residential development. However, a mixture of attached
and detached structure types, may be approved as a special exception
Planned Residential Development (PRD). The RT Two -Family Residential
District is intended to accommodate an adequate range of housing oppor-
tunities and requisite community facilities consistent with provisions of
the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan.
The maximum residential density intended to be permitted in the RT -6
district is six (6) units per acre consistent with the LD -2 Comprehensive
Plan designation described in the Land Use Element.
B. PERMITTED USES.
In the RT -6 Two -Family Residential District no building or structure shall
be erected, altered or used except for one or more of the following. Site
plan review shall be required for all uses except single family dwellings,
pursuant to the provisions of Section 23.
1. Residential Uses.
- Duplex
- Single Family Dwellings
2. Institutional Uses.
- Foster Care Facilities
3. Community Services.
- Emergency Services
C. USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS.
The following uses shall be permitted in the RT -6 Two -Family Residential
District subject to the specific use criteria established in Section 25.1
"Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures established in
Section 25.2, "Review of Uses Requiring Administrative Permits".
1. Institutional Uses. (Section 25.1(C))
- Group Home, Level I
2. Recreation Uses. (Section 25.1(E))
- Parks and Playgrounds, Open to the Public
D. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
The following uses may be permitted within the RT -6 Two -Family Residential
District subject to the specific use criteria established in Section 25.1,
"Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures established in
Section 25.3, "Regulation of Special Exception Uses".
1. Agricultural Uses. (Section 25.1(A))
- Nurseries and Greenhouses, Noncommercial
- Stables, Noncommercial
JA � � � -20- B00K 5 F, ,r.507
L
r JAN 16 1985
2. Residential Uses.
- Planned Residential Developments
3. Institutional Uses. (Section 25.1(C))
- Child Care or Adult Care Facilities
- Group Home, Level II and III
- Places of Worship
4. Community Services Uses. (Section 25.1(D))
- Educational Facilities, Excluding Business, Secretarial &
Vocational
- Governmental Administration Buildings
5. Recreation Uses. (Section 25.1(E))
- Country Clubs
- Golf Courses
6. Utility Uses. (Section 25.1(I))
- Public and Private Utilities, Limited
E. ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES.
As provided in Section 25(G), "Accessory Uses and Structures".
F. DIMENSIONAL REGULATIONS.
As provided in Table 9(A), herein, and Section 3(A).1, "Application of
District Regulations".
G. PERMITTED SIGNAGE.
As provided in Section 25(0), "Signs".
H. WALLS AND FENCES.
As provided in Section 25(I), "Walls and Fences".
I. MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
As established in Section 24, "Off -Street Parking and Loading Regulations".
J. REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS.
All future subdivisions and site plans for developments within the RT -6
zoning district shall provide the following improvements, designed and
constructed to the requirements and specifications in the Code of Laws and
Ordinances of Indian River County and the State of Florida:
1. Bikeways (as specified in the County Bikeway Plan, as currently exists
or may hereafter be adopted).
2. Sidewalks.
3. Street lights.
TABLE 9(A): SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA
RT -6 ZONING DISTRICT
ZONING DISTRICT RT -6
REGULATION UNIT OF MEASURE
MAX. DENSITY 6.0 d -u. per gross acre
MIN. LOT SIZE
-- SF 7,0001
-- Duplex 12,0001 square feet
MIN. LOT WIDTH
-- SF 70
feet
-- Duplex 100
MIN. YARD
- Front 25
- Side
feet
-- SF 10
-- Duplex 15
- Rear 25
MIN. FLOOR AREA
- SF/Duplex 750 square feet per
dwelling unit
MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 35 feet
MAX. LOT COVERAGE 25 % of lot
MIN. OPEN SPACE 40 % of lot
Notes:
1: In no case shall the density exceed six (6) dwelling units per acre.
EPx1A
BOOK
5 ( k ,L 599
JAN 16 1985
SECTION 8
poor
A new Section 10(A), entitled "RM -3, RM -4 and RM -6: Multiple Family Residential
Districts", is hereby adopted and shall read as follows:
SECTION 10(A). RM -3, RM -4 and RM -6• MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
A. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
The RM -3, RM -4 and RM -6 Multiple Family Residential Districts are estab-
lished to implement the Comprehensive Plan policies for managing land
designated for low density residential development, LD -1 and LD -2, respec-
tively. These districts are intended to accommodate low density residen-
tial development, including single family and multiple family structure
types. The RM -3, RM -4 and RM -6 Multiple Family Residential Districts are
intended to accommodate an adequate range of housing opportunities and
requisite community facilities consistent with provisions of the Indian
River County Comprehensive Plan.
The maximum residential density intended to be permitted in the RM -3
district is up to three (3) units per acre consistent with the LD -1 Compre-
hensive Plan designation described in the Land Use Element. The maximum
residential density intended to be permitted in the RM -4 district is four
(4) units per acre and the RM -6 district permits up to six (6)_ units per
acre. The RM -4 and RM -6 districts are both consistent with the LD -2
Comprehensive Plan designation described in the Land Use Element.
B. PERMITTED USES.
In the RM -3, RM -4 and RM -6 Multiple Family Residential Districts no build-
ing or structure shall be erected, altered or used , except for one or more
of the following. Site plan review shall be required for all uses except
single family dwellings, pursuant to the provisions of Section 23.
1. Residential Uses.
- Duplex
- Multiple Family Dwellings
_ - Single Family Dwellings
2. Institutional Uses.
- Foster Care Facilities
3. Community Service Uses.
- Emergency Services
4. Recreation Uses.
- Parks and Playgrounds Open to the Public
C. USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS.
The following uses shall be permitted in the RM -3, RM -4 and RM -6 Multiple
Family Residential Districts subject to the specific use criteria estab-
lished in Section 25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review
procedures established in Section 25.2, "Review of Uses Requiring Adminis-
trative Permits".
1. Institutional Uses. (Section 25.1(C))
- Group Home, Level I
D. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
The following uses may be permitted within the RM -3, RM -4 and RM -6 Multiple
Family Residential Districts subject to the specific use criteria estab-
lished in Section 25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review
procedures established in Section 25.3, "Regulation of Special Exception
Uses".
1. Agricultural Uses. (Section 25.1(A))
- Nurseries and Greenhouses, Noncommercial
- Stables, Noncommercial
2. Residential Uses.
- Planned Residential Developments
3. Institutional Uses. (Section 25.1(C))
- Child Care or Adult Care Facilities
- Group Home, Level II and III
- Places of Worship
- Residential Centers (RM -6 District Only)
4. Community Services Uses. (Section 28D))
- Educational Facilities, Excluding Business, Secretarial &
Vocational
- Governmental Administration Building
5. Recreation Uses. (Section 25.1(E))
- Country Clubs
- Golf Courses
- Tennis Facilities and Beach Clubs
- Yacht Clubs
6. Utility Uses. (Section 25.1(I))
- Public and Private Utilities, Limited
E. ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES.
As provided in Section 25(G), "Accessory Uses and Structures".
F. DIMENSIONAL REGULATIONS.
1. As provided in Table 10(A), herein, and Section 3(A).1, "Application of
District Regulations".
2. Separation Between Buildings on the Same Lot. Detached principal
buildings on the same lot shall be located no closer together than _
twenty (20) -feet plus one (1) foot additional for each two (2) feet
in height over twenty-five (25) feet in height.
G. PERMITTED SIGNAGE.
As provided in Section 25(0), "Signs".
H. WALLS AND FENCES.
As provided in Section 25(I), "Walls and Fences".
I. MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
As established in Section 24, "Off -Street Parking and Loading Regulations".
J. REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS.
All future subdivisions and site plans for developments within the RM -6
zoning district shall provide the following improvements, designed and
constructed to the requirements and specifications in the Code of Laws and
Ordinances of Indian River County and the State of Florida:
1.
2.
Bikeways (as specified in the County Bikeway Plan, as currently exists
or may hereafter be adopted).
Sidewalks.
-24-
BOOK,
i Ft r �1
1 6 198
AN 16 1985
3.
Street lights.
BOOK 5 `,,, 512.
TABLE 100): SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA
RM -3, RM -4 AND RM -6 ZONING DISTRICTS
ZONING DISTRICT
RM -3
RM -4
RM -6
-
SF
REGULATION
1,200
750
UNIT OF MEASURE
MAX. DENSITY
3.0
4.0
6.0 d.u. per gross acre
MIN. LOT SIZE
550
550
dwelling unit
- SF
12,0001
10,0002
7,0003
- Duplex and MF
24,0001
20,0002
12,0003 square feet
MIN. LOT WIDTH
- SF 80 80 70
feet
- Duplex and MF 100 100 100
MIN. YARD
- Front 253 254 254
- Side
feet
-- SF 10 10 10
-- Duplex and MF 153 154 154
- Rear 253 254 254
MIN.
FLOOR AREA
-
SF
1,200
1,200
750
square feet per
-
Duplex and MF
550
550
550
dwelling unit
MAX.
BLDG. HEIGHT
35
35
35
feet
MAX.
LOT COVERAGE
-
SF
30
30
30
Of lot
-
Duplex and MF
25
25
25
MIN.
OPEN SPACE
50
50
50
% of lot
Notes:
1: In no case shall the density exceed three (3) dwelling units per acre.
2: In no case shall the density exceed four (4) dwelling units per acre.
3: In no case shall the density exceed six (6) dwelling units per acre.
4: One 1 foot additional
( ) yard for each two (2) feet in height over
twenty-five (25) feet in height.
JAN 16 1985
-26-
SECTION 9
BOOK 59 F."ur. 51
A new Section 11(A), entitled "RM -8, RM -10 and RM -14: Multiple Family Residen-
tial Districts" is hereby adopted and shall read as follows:
SECTION 11(A). RM -8, RM -10 and RM -14• MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
A. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
The RM -8 and RM -10 Multiple Family Residential Districts are established to
implement the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan policies for managing
land designated for medium density residential development, MD -1 and MD -2,
respectively. The RM -14 Multiple Family Residential District is estab-
lished to implement the Comprehensive Plan designation described in the
land use policy for managing land designated for residential development
within the Gifford mixed use (MXD) area. Residential development within
these multiple family districts is intended to accommodate a broad range of
structure types and requisite community facilities.
The density of residential development intended to be permitted within the
RM -8 district is up to a maximum of eight (8) units per acre, consistent
with the MD -1 Comprehensive Plan designation described in the Land Use
Element. The RM -10 district is intended to accommodate a density up to a
maximum of ten (10) units per acre consistent with the MD -2 Comprehensive
Plan designation described in the Land Use Element. Finally, the RM -14
district is intended to accommodate a density up to a maximum of fourteen
(14) units per acre, consistent with the Gifford Mixed Uses District (MXD)
designation described in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
B. PERMITTED USES.
In the RM -8, RM -10 and RM -14 Multiple Family Residential Districts, no
building 'or structure shall be erected, altered or used, except for one or
more of the following. Site plan review shall be required for all uses
except single family dwellings, pursuant to the provisions of Section 23.
1. Residential Uses.
- Duplex
- Multiple Family Dwellings
- Single Family Dwellings
2. Institutional Uses.
- Foster Care Facilities
- Group Home, Level I
3. Community Service Uses.
- Emergency Services
4. Recreation Uses.
- Parks and Playgrounds Open to the Public '
C. USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS.
The following uses shall be permitted in the RM -8, RM -10 and RM -14 Multiple
Family Residential Districts, subject to the specific use criteria estab-
lished in Section 25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review
procedures established in Section 25.2, "Review of Uses Requiring Admin-
istrative Permits".
1. Institutional Uses. (Section 25.1(C))
- Child Care or Adult Care Facilities
- Group Homes: Level II and Level III
- Places of Worship
D. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
The following uses may be permitted within the RM -8, RM -10 and RM -14,
Multiple Family Residential Districts, subject to the specific use criteria
established in Section 25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and
review procedures established in Section 25.3, "Regulation of Special
Exception Uses".
1. Agricultural Uses. (Section 25.1(A))
- Nurseries and Greenhouses, Noncommercial
- Stables, Noncommercial
2. Residential Uses. (Section 25.1(6))
- Planned Residential Developments
3. Institutional Uses. (Section 25.1(C))
- Total Care Facilities
Residential Centers
4. Community Service Uses. (Section 25.1(D))
- Cultural and Civic Facilities
- Educational Facilities, Excluding Business, Secretarial &
Vocational
- Governmental Administration Buildings
5. Recreation Uses. (Section 25.1(E))
- Country Clubs
- Golf Courses
- Tennis Facilities and Beach Clubs
- Yacht Clubs
6. Utility Uses. (Section 25.1(I))
- Public and Private Utilities, Limited
E. ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES.
As provided in Section 25(G), "Accessory Uses and Structures".
F. DIMENSIONAL REGULATIONS.
a. As provided in Table 11(A), herein, and Section 3(A).1, "Application of
District Regulations".
b. Separation Between Principal Buildings on the Same Lot. Detached
principal buildings on the same lot shall be located no closer than
twenty (20) feet plus one (1) foot additional for each two (2) feet
in height over twenty-five (25) feet in height.
G. PERMITTED SIGNAGE.
As provided in -Section 25(0), "Signs".
H. WALLS AND FENCES.
As provided in Section 25(I), "Walls and Fences".
I. MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
As established in Section 24, "Off -Street Parking and Loading Regulations".
JAN 16 1985 -28- a00K
i,3-)-0515
JAN 16 1995
mo 59 FnIrT
- 516
J. REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS.
All future subdivisions and site plans for developments within the RM -8,
RM -10 and RM -14 zoning districts shall provide the following improvements,
designed and constructed to the requirements and specifications in the Code
of Laws and Ordinances of Indian River County and the State of Florida:
1. Bikeways (as specified in the County Bikeway Plan, as currently exists
or may hereafter be adopted).
2. Sidewalks.
3. Street lights.
TABLE 11(A): SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA
RM -8, RM -10 AND RM -14 ZONING DISTRICTS
ZONING DISTRICT RM -8 RM -10 RM -14
REGULATION UNIT OF MEASURE
MAX. DENSITY 8.0 10.0 14.0 d.u. per gross acre
MIN. LOT SIZE
- SF 7,000 7,000 7,000
- Duplex and MF 10,0001 10,0002 10,0003 square feet
MIN. LOT WIDTH
- SF 70 70 70
feet
- Duplex and MF 100 100 100
MIN. YARD
- Front
254
254
254
- Side
-
-- SF
10
10
10 feet
-- Duplex and
154
154
154
MF
- Rear
254
254
254
MIN. FLOOR AREA
- SF 750 750 750
square feet per
- Duplex and MF 550 550 500 dwelling unit
MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 35 35 35 feet
MAX. LOT COVERAGE 25 25 30 % of lot
MIN. OPEN SPACE 30 30 30 % of lot
Notes:
1: In no case shall the density exceed eight (8) dwelling units per acre.
2: In no case shall the density exceed ten (10) dwelling units per acre.
3: In no case shall the density exceed fourteen (14) dwelling units per acre.
4: One 1 foot additional
( ) yard for each two (2) feet in height over
twenty-five (25) feet in height.
JAN 16 1985 -30- �ooa: v r?'nC.C9 tl
AN i 6 1985
SECTION 10
A new Section 13(A), entitled "RMH-3 and RMH-6: Mobile Home Residential Dis-
tricts", is hereby substituted in place thereof and shall read as follows:
SECTION 13(A). RMH-6 and RMH-8: MOBILE HOME RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
A. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
The RMH-6 and RMH-8 mobile home residential districts are established to
implement the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan policies for allo-
cating mobile/manufactured home parks and subdivisions within areas des-
ignated either MD -1 or MXD, as designated on the Comprehensive Plan Land
Use Map.
The density of mobile/manufactured homes located within an area designated
mixed use (MXD) on the Comprehensive Plan Land use Map shall not exceed six
(6) units per acre pursuant to provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. The
density of mobile home residential development intended to be permitted
within the RMH-6 district is up to a maximum of six (6) units per acre.
The RMH-6 district is appropriate for mobile home development proposed for
areas designated MXD on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The RMH-8
district is intended to accommodate a density up to maximum of eight (8)
units per acre, consistent with the MD -1 Comprehensive Plan designation.
B. PERMITTED USES.
In the RMH-6 and RMH-8, Mobile Home Residential Districts, no building or
structure shall be erected, altered or used, except for one or more of the
following. Site plan review shall be required for all uses pursuant to the
provisions of Section 23.
1. Residential Uses.
Mobile Homes
2. Institutional Uses.
- Foster Care Facilities
3. Community Services Uses.
- Emergency Services
C. USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS.
The following uses shall be permitted in the RMH-6 and RMH-8, Mobile Home
Residential Districts, subject to the specific use criteria established in
Section 25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures
established in Section 25.2, "Review of Uses Requiring Administrative
Permits".
1. Institutional Uses. (Section 25.1(C))
- Child Care or Adult Care Facilities
2. Recreational Uses. (Section 25.1(E))
- Parks and Playgrounds Open to the Public
D. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
The following uses may be permitted within the RMH-6 and RMH-8, Mobile Home
Residential Districts, subject to the specific use criteria established in
Section 25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures
established in Section 25.3, "Regulation of Special Exception Uses".
1. Residential Uses.
- Planned Residential Developments
7 1
2. Institutional Uses. (Section 25.1(C))
- Places of Worship
3. Community Services. (Section 25.1(D))
- Educational Facilities, Excluding Business, Secretarial &
Vocational
- Governmental Administrative Buildings
4. Recreation Uses. (Section 25.1(E))
- Country Clubs
- Golf Courses
- Tennis Facilities
5. Utility Uses. (Section 25.1(I))
- Public and Private Utilities, Limited
E. ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES.
As provided in Section 25(G), "Accessory Uses and Structures".
F. DIMENSIONAL REGULATIONS.
As provided in Table 13(A), herein, and Section 3(A).1, "Application of
District Regulations".
G. PERMITTED SIGNAGE.
As provided in Section 25(0), "Signs".
H. WALLS AND FENCES.
As provided in Section 25(I), "Walls and Fences".
I. MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
As established in Section 24, "Off -Street Parking and Loading Regulations".
J. ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS.
1. Compliance with Subdivision Regulations. All developments within the
RMH-6 and RMH-8 districts shall be subdivided and platted pursuant to
the provisions of the Indian River County Subdivision and Platting
Regulations.
2. Construction Standards. All mobile homes shall be constructed in
compliance with specifications set forth by the National Fire Pro-
tection Association (NFPA) under the Associations' Code of Specifica-
tions for Mobile Homes and Travel Trailers and applicable State and
Federal Regulations.
Each mobile home, trailer, or other portable living unit shall be
anchored in a manner prescribed by the Building Code consistent with
the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development standards.
The minimum first floor elevation shall be at least eighteen (18)
inches above the crown of the street.
All awnings, carports, principal patios and accessories to the build-
ing or accessory buildings shall be constructed in compliance with the
Building Code of Indian River County.
3. Mobile Home Undercarriage Skirting. The frame, axles, wheels, crawl
space storage area and utility connection of all mobile homes shall be
concealed from view through the use of durable all-weather materials _
manufactured specifically for the purpose of covering the undercar-
riage area. Such skirting shall be fastened in accordance with
manufacturers instructions and provide for adequate ventilation.
JAN 16 1985 -32-
BOOK �� I
� I
JAIL 16 1995
4. Common Vehicular Storage Areas. All mobile
the RMH-6 and RMH-8 zoning districts shall
for the storage of recreational equipment
ational vehicles.
a . Screen_ i K. A11
feet from any
security fence,
residences.
storage areas shall be
adjacent mobile home
and shall be properly
BOOK 5 9 F'':,' 520
home developments within
provide for a common area
including boats and recre-
a minimum of thirty (30)
lot line, enclosed by a
screened from neighboring
b. Minimum Area. All storage areas shall provide a minimum of one
1 space for every ten (10) mobile homes. All stalls shall have
a minimum width of twelve (12) feet and a minimum depth of thirty
(30) feet, and all drives shall be a minimum of twenty- five (25)
feet wide.
5. Buffering Along Development Boundaries. The distance from the line or
corner of any mobile home lot to a boundary line of the development
shall be adequate to protect the residential use in the development
and in any case shall not be less than the following:
a. Where the adjoining land use (existing or permitted) is other
similar or higher density residential use, or is a local or
collector street, a distance of thirty (30) feet containing a 90%
visually solid year round landscape buffer six (6) feet in
height.
b. Where the adjoining land use is an arterial street, a residential
use of lower density or a nonresidential use, protection shall be
provided by providing a distance of forty (40) feet containing
berms, walls, solid or louvered fencing, open fencing with
appropriate planting, or visually solid year round landscape
buffer, six (6) feet in height.
C. The areas outlined in Subsections "a" and "b" above may be
included as parts of the respective adjacent lots, but shall not
be included as part of the required minimum lot area.
K. REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS.
All future subdivisions and site plans for developments within the RMH-6,
RMH-8 zoning districts shall provide the following improvements, designed
and constructed to the requirements and specifications in the Code of Laws
and Ordinances of Indian River County and the State of Florida:
1. Bikeways (as specified in the County Bikeway Plan, as currently exists
or may hereafter be adopted).
2. Sidewalks.,
3. Street lights.
TABLE 13(A): SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA
RMH-6 AND RMH-8
ZONING DISTRICT RMH-6 RMH-8
REGULATION UNIT OF MEASURE
MAX. DENSITY 6.0 8.0 d -u. per gross acre
MIN. LOT SIZE 7,000 5,000 square feet
MIN. LOT WIDTH 70 50 feet
MIN. YARD
- Front 20 20
- Side 10 10
feet
- Rear 20 20
MIN. FLOOR AREA 550 550 square feet per
dwelling unit
MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 35 35 feet
MAX. LOT COVERAGE
- Mobile Home 40 40
- Other 30 30 of lot
MIN. OPEN SPACE 35 35 % of gross area ~
MIN. DISTRICT SIZE 20 20 gross acres
MIN. COMMUNITY 10 10 % of gross area
REC. FACILITIES
JAN 16 1985 —34— BOOK 5m9 F s, 5
SECTION 11
BOOK �.9 :1-11 E 522
A new Section 2O(A).2, entitled "CRVP: Commercial Recreational Vehicle Park
District", is hereby created to read as follows:
SECTION 20.2. CRVP: COMMERCIAL RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARK DISTRICT
A. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
The CRVP Commercial Recreational Vehicle Park District is established to
implement the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan policies for allocat-
ing commercial land uses. CRVP districts shall only be established within
designated commercial corridors and nodes or within MXD areas. The purpose
of the CRVP district is to provide areas where transient mobile homes,
travel trailers, truck campers, pickup coaches, motor homes, and similar
vehicles used for temporary habitation during travel, vacation and recre-
ation purposes can be accommodated for short periods of time. The CRVP
district is intended to accommodate recreational vehicles up to a density
of fourteen (14) spaces per gross acre.
B. PERMITTED USE.
In the CRVP Commercial Recreational Vehicle Park District no building or
structure shall be erected, altered or used, except for one or more of the
following. Site plan review shall be required for all uses, pursuant to
the provisions of Section 23.
I. Residential Uses.
- Mobile Homes
2. Community Service Uses.
- Emergency Services
3. Recreational Uses.
- Country Clubs
- Golf Courses
- Parks and Playgrounds Open to the Public
- Tennis Facilities
4. Commercial Uses.
- Recreational Vehicle Parks
C. USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS.
The following uses shall be permitted in the CRVP, Commercial Recreational
Vehicle Park District, subject to the specific use criteria established in
Section 25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures
established in Section 25.2 "Review of Uses Requiring Administrative
Permits".
1. Institutional Uses. (Section 25.1(C))
- Places of Worship
D. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
The following uses may be permitted within the CRVP Commercial Recreational
Vehicle Park District subject to the specific use criteria established in
Section 25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review procedures estab-
lished in Section 25.3 "Regulation of Special Exception Uses".
1. Community Service Uses. (Section 25.1(D))
- Governmental Administration Buildings
2. Utility Uses. (Section 25.1(I))
I
- Public and Private Utilities, Limited
E. ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES.
In addition to the limitations established in 25(G) "Accessory Uses and
Structures", the following shall be used in evaluating accessory uses
within the CRVP district.
1. Allowable Accessory Uses. - Management headquarters, recreational
facilities, sanitary facilities, dumping stations, showers,
coin-operated laundry facilities , child care facilities, and other
uses customarily incidental to the operation of a recreational vehicle
park and campground are permitted as accessory uses to the park.
2. Restricted Accessory Uses. In addition to the allowable accessory
uses listed above, the following commercial uses shall be permitted as
accessory uses, subject to the criteria established herein: retail
sales establishments, personal service establishments, and restau-
rants. These restricted accessory uses shall be subject to all
applicable regulations within this code, and shall further satisfy the
following:
a. Such uses and the parking areas primarily related to their
operations shall not occupy more than five (5) percent of the
gross area of the parks.
b. Such uses shall be restricted in their use to occupants of the
park.
C. Such uses shall present no visible evidence from any street
outside the park of their commercial character which would
attract customers other than occupants of the park.
d. The structures housing such facilities shall not be located
closer than one hundred (100) feet to any public street, shall
not be accessible from any public street, and shall be accessible -
only from a street within the park.
F. DIMENSIONAL REGULATIONS.
As provided in Table 20.2, herein, and Section 3(A).1 "Application of
District Regulations".
G. PERMITTED SIGNAGE.
a
As provided in Section 25(0), "Signs".
H. WALLS AND FENCES.
As provided in Section 25(I), "Walls and Fences".
I. MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
As established in Section 24, "Off -Street Parking and Loading Regulations".
J. ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS.
1. Compliance With Subdivision Regulations; Streets and Paving. All
recreational vehicle parks shall comply with the Indian River County
Subdivision and Platting Regulations, except as specifically stated
otherwise herein, and shall record the individual recreational vehicle
spaces in compliance with the standards of this Code. Streets and
road may be private, however streets shall not be less than twenty
(20) feet in width and contain a pavement not less than eighteen (18)
feet in width and a base of at least four (4) inches.
2. Required Common Recreation Area.
a. Minimum Area Required. A minimum of ten percent (10%) of the
gross site area of any recreational vehicle park within the RVP
district shall be devoted to open or enclosed common recreational
areas and facilities, such as playgrounds, swimming pools,
JAN 16 1965 -36- BOOK 59 Pl:G 523
JAN 16 1995
3.
BOOK 59 `'"Jr 52.04
community buildings, ways for pedestrians and cyclists away from
streets, and play areas for small children or other similar
recreational areas.
b. Design Criteria for Common Recreation Areas.
i. Areas contained in a continuous pedestrian or cyclist
circulation system which consist of permanently maintained
walks and trails not less than twelve (12) feet in width
leading to principal destinations on the site shall be
countable as common recreation areas.
ii. Areas designated as play areas or mini -parks which contain
at least one (1) acre and have a minimum dimension of one
hundred (100) feet and which are furnished with appropriate
recreational equipment including but not limited to play-
ground equipment, picnic tables, barbeque pits, and ball
playing equipment and/or facilities shall be countable as
common recreation areas.
iii. If natural habitats of unique and significant value are
determined to exist on the site and such areas are left
undisturbed or are adequately protected from environmental
degradation, the total land and water area of such habitats
shall be countable as common recreation areas.
iv. The entire area occupied by a multiple -use recreation
building or facility, including attendant outdoor recreation
facilities shall be countable as common recreation areas.
V. Common recreational area shall not include streets, buffer
areas, recreational vehicle spaces, buffer strips, storage
areas, utility s.ites or parking areas, shall be closed to
automotive traffic except for maintenance and service
vehicles, and shall be improved and maintained for the uses
intended.
Use Limitations. No permanent structures such as carports, cabanas,
screen rooms, or similar structures may be erected or constructed at
any recreational vehicle site, and the removal of wheels or hitch and
the placement of the unit on a foundation or piers is prohibited.
Notwithstanding, pop -out units and similar equipment integral to the
recreational vehicle as manufactured shall be permitted.
4. Permanent Occupancy Prohibited. No recreational vehicle shall be used
as a permanent place of abode, dwelling, or business or for indefinite
periods of time. Continuous occupancy extending beyond three (3)
months in -any twelve (12) month period shall be presumed to be perm'-
anent
erm=anent occupancy.
Any action toward removal of wheels of a recreational vehicle except
for temporary purposes of repair or to attach the trailer to the
grounds for stabilizing purposes is hereby prohibited.
5. Stabilization of Space. Each recreational vehicle space shall contain
a stabilized vehicular parking pad composed of shell, marl, paving or
other material approved by the County Engineer.
6. Required Buffers. There shall
than fifty 50 feet in depth
recreational vehicle park, and a
fifty (50) feet in depth along
ational vehicle park.
be landscaped buffer strip not less
along all major streets abutting a
landscaped buffer strip not less than
the other boundaries of the recre-
_I
TABLE 20.2: SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA
CRVP ZONING DISTRICT
ZONING DISTRICT CRVP
REGULATION UNIT OF MEASURE
MAX. DENSITY 14 spaces per gross acre
MIN. SPACE SIZE 2,000 square feet
MIN. SPACE WIDTH 32 feet
MIN. YARD
- Front 20
feet
- Side 10
- Rear 10
MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT 35 feet
MAX. LOT COVERAGE 40 % of'space
MIN.
OPEN SPACE
25
% of space
MIN.
DISTRICT SIZE
8
gross acres
BOOK 5 9 i'UC5 �
SECTION 12
BOOK 59 cr, �E �
Section 25(A).1, entitled "Regulations for Specific Land Uses", is hereby
created to read as follows:
SECTION 25.1 REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC LAND USES
A.. AGRICULTURAL USES
1. Agricultural Businesses (excl
(Special Exception
wholesaling and processing).
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Agricultural business may
be allowed in the A-1 district upon receiving approval as a special
exception as provided in Section 25.3 and after meeting the require-
ments defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. A site plan meeting all of the requirements of Section 23.
ii. A statement describing the nature of the business and the
rationale for its location within an agricultural district.
C. Criteria for Agricultural Businesses.
i. Agricultural businesses may be allowed to locate in the A-1
district only upon a finding by the reviewing body that such
businesses are directly related to or provide services for
active agricultural operations and that such uses would not
be more appropriately located in a commercial or industrial
zoning district.
ii. Agricultural businesses shall include, but not be limited
to: agricultural business offices; fish hatcheries; and
sales of agricultural equipment, products and supplies.
iii. Agricultural businesses shall not be interpreted to permit
wholesaling or processing operations.
2. Agricultural Industries. (Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Agricultural industries
may be allowed in the A-1 district upon receiving approval as a
special exception as provided in Section 25.3 and after meeting the
requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. A site plan meeting all of the requirements of Section 23.
ii. A statement describing the nature of the industry and the
rationale for its location within an agricultural district.
iii. A statement identifying any toxic or hazardous wastes and/or
substances which may be generated or utilized on the prem-
ises.
c. Criteria for Aqricultural Industries:
i. Agricultural industries may be allowed to locate in the A-1
district only upon a finding by the reviewing body that such
industries are directly related to active agricultural
operations and that such industries, due to the characteris-
tics of the operation, would not be more suitably located in
an industrial zoning district.
ii. All buildings and structures shall be located at least one
hundred (100) feet from all property lines.
-39-
iii. The site shall be a minimum of thirty (30) acres in size.
3. Agricultural Research Facilities. (Administrative Permit)
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permits: Agricultural research
facilities shall be allowed in the A-1 district upon receiving ap-
proval for an administrative permit as provided in Section 25.2 and
after meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. A site plan meeting all of the requirements of Section 23.
ii. A statement identifying any toxic or hazardous wastes and/or
substances which may be generated or utilized on the prem-
ises.
C. Criteria for Agricultural Research Facilities:
i. All buildings and structures shall be located at least one
hundred (100) feet from all property lines.
ii. The site shall be a minimum of thirty (30) acres in size.
iii. The facility shall provide either a minimum fifty (50) foot
setback or a heavily landscaped twenty-five _(25) foot
bufferyard adjacent to non-agricultural activities in order
to protect residents from aerial spraying.
4. Dairy Farming. (Administrative Permit)
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: Dairy farming shall
be allowed in the A-1 district upon receiving approval for an adminis-
trative permit as provided in Section 25.2 and after meeting the
requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements: A site plan meeting all of
the requirements of Section 23.
C. Criteria for Dairy Farming:
i. Any confinement feeding operations and/or dairy processing
facilities shall be located at least one hundred (100) feet
from all property'lines.
ii. Adequate water supply shall be available to maintain the
premises in a sanitary condition.
iii. Containment areas, including pasture lands shall be fully
enclosed by a fence.
5. Fruit and Vegetable Packing House (Administrative Permit)
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: Fruit and vegetable
packing houses shall be allowed in the A -1 --district upon receiving
approval for an administrative permit as provided in Section 25.2 and
after meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements: A site plan meeting all of
the requirements of Section 23.
C. Criteria for Fruit and Vegetable Packing Houses:
i. The facility shall satisfy all requirements of Section 24,
off-street parking and loading.
ii. The internal circulation pattern of the facility will be .
designed in a manner which will not require trucks to back
into the facility from any public street.
iii. The facility will not include any retail sales of fruit and
vegetables.
-40- B00K 5r' P�,,F 5 �
� JA 19 5 J
JAN 16 1985 BooK 59 `:'Gr.528
6.
Kennel or Animal Boarding Place, Commercial. (Administrative Permit)
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: Animal boarding place
or kennel and related uses shall be allowed in the A-1 district upon
approval for an administrative permit as provided in Section 25.2 and
after meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. Plans for all kennels, barns, exercise yards, animal pens,
and related improvements shall be provided.
ii. A site plan showing the improvements listed in "(a)." above,
as well as structures on adjacent properties, and all other
requirements of Section 23.
iii. A statement by the applicant explaining the types of animals
to be treated and/or sheltered.
C. Criteria for Animal Boarding Place or Kennels:
i. No part of any facility in which animals are housed shall be
closer than one hundred fifty (150) feet to any property
line.
ii. The site shall be of adequate size to protect adjacent
properties from adverse effects of the kennel or related
facility.
iii. All animal boarding facilities shall be enclosed by a
security fence at least six (6) feet in height.
iv. The site shall not abut any residentially zoned property.
7. Kennels and Animal Boarding Places, Noncommercial. (Administrative
Permit
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit. Noncommercial kennels
and animal boarding places shall be allowed in the RFD, RS -1 and RS -3
Districts upon receiving approval for an administrative permit as
provided in Section 25.2 and after meeting the requirements defined
below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. The applicant shall submit a signed affidavit stating that
no remuneration or other valuable consideration is or will
be received for the raising, boarding, transfer, or sale of
the animals to be kept on the premises, or their
by-products.
ii. A statement from the applicant describing the number and
types of animals which will be kept on the premises, whether
such animals are subject to federal, state or local licens-
ing or registration requirements, and if so, whether such
licensing or registration has occurred, together with
license or registration numbers.
iii. A site plan, pursuant to the requirements of Section 23.
C. Criteria for Noncommercial Kennels and Animal Boarding Places:
i. A noncommercial kennel or animal boarding place shall be
considered any building or buildings, including a residence
or residential accessory structure, other structure, or land
used, designated, or arranged for the boarding, breeding, or
care of -five (5) or more dogs, cats, rabbits, poultry or
other domestic animals belonging to the owner or occupant
thereof. This shall not be interpreted to include stables,
as used elsewhere in this ordinance.
M
ii. Noncommercial kennels and animal boarding places shall be
allowed in the above described districts only as an accesso-
ry use, pursuant to the standards of Section 25(G).
iii. Any structure, pen, cage, pet shelter, or fence, which is
intended, or used, for the confinement, care, or breeding of
such animals shall meet the same setbacks required for other
principal structures in the given zoning district.
iv. Exception. An owner or occupant of a developed sin-
gle -family -detached parcel or lot shall not be considered to
be maintaining or using said property as a noncommercial
kennel or animal boarding place, notwithstanding other
limitations stated in this section, where each of the
following conditions is satisfied:
-- Such use does not or will not involve the primary
harboring or keeping of such animals other than within
the principal residential dwelling; and
-- Such use does not or will not involve the placement or
construction of an outside animal boarding structure or
cage of any kind; and
-- The owner or occupant demonstrates by proof satisfac-
tory to the Planning and Development Division that he
or she has complied with any applicable animal control
statute or ordinance with respect to the vaccination,
licensing, registration, and restraint of the animals
intended to be, or being, kept on such property; and
-- Such use does not or will not involve the keeping of
more than six (6) such animals, not counting litters of
young less than the age of four (4) months.
8. Nurseries and Greenhouses, Noncommercial. (Administrative Permit and -
Special Exception
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: Noncommercial nur-
series and greenhouses shall be allowed in the RFD district upon
receiving approval for an administrative permit as provided in Section
25.2 and after meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Noncommercial nurseries
and -greenhouses may be permitted in the RS -1, RS -3, RS -6, RT -6, RM -3,
RM -4, RM -6, RM -B, RM -10 and RM -14 districts upon receiving approval as
a special exception as provided in Section 25.3 and after meeting the
requirements defined below.
C. Additional Information Requirements: The site plan shall show
the location of the principal use on the site and all screening
materials, pursuant to the standards of Section 23.
d. Criteria for Noncommercial Nurseries and Greenhouses:
i. Such uses shall be deemed accessory to the principal use on
site.
ii. All storage areas be screened by a fence or fully enclosed
within a structure.
iii. Such uses shall comply with all provisions of Section 25(G),
Accessory Buildings.
iv. Such uses shall satisfy all of the maximum lot coverage and
minimum space provisions of the applicable zoning district.
V. No retail or wholesaling sales and/or leasing activities
shall be permitted.
9. Small Animal Specialty Farms. (Administrative Permit)
A 7
BOOK J U Fr ;r 529
J A N 16 1985
10.
11.
BOOK 5 �a,� 530
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: Small animal specialty
farms shall be permitted in the A-1 district upon approval of an
administrative permit as provided in Section 25.2 and after meeting
the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements: The site plan shall show
the location and nature of all structures and fenced areas containing
any animals, and all other information required in Section 23.
C. Criteria for Small Animal Specialty Farms:
i. The minimum lot area for such uses shall be five (5) acres.
ii. No structure of fenced area containing any animals being
raised, bred, or kept.in connection with such use shall be
closer than seventy-five (75) feet to any property line,
unless such structures are sound proofed.
Stables, Noncommercial: (Administrative Permit and Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: Noncommercial stables
shall be allowed in the RFD district upon receiving approval for an
administrative permit as provided in Section 25.2 and after meeting
the requirements defined below.
b. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Noncommercial stables may
be allowed in the R5-1, R5-39 RS -69 RT -6, RM -3, RM -4, RM -6, RM -8,
RM -10 and RM -14 zoning districts upon receiving approval as a special
exception as provided in Section 25.3 and after meeting the require-
ments defined below.
c. Additional Information Requi-rements: The site plan shall show
the location of all existing and proposed structures and the location
of any fences, and all other information required in Section 23.
d. Criteria for Noncommercial Stables:
i. Noncommercial stables shall be allowed in non-agricultural
districts only as an accessory use.
ii. Such uses shall be located on lots having an area of no less
than two (2) acres.
iii. The number of horses shall not exceed one (1) per acre.
iv. There shall be a minimum setback of fifty (50) feet from any
property lines.
V. The applicant shall provide a fence which has a minimum
height of four (4) feet and totally encloses the area.
Tenant Dwellings: (Administrative Permit)
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: Tenant dwellings
shall be allowed in the A-1 district upon receiving approval for an
administrative permit as provided in Section 25.2 and after meeting
the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. A floor plan showing the size and dimension of all rooms.
ii. Proof that the facilities are being inhabited solely by the
individuals or families who work on the farm.
iii. Proof that the land upon which the tenant dwellings shall be
located is classified as agricultural land for purposes of
ad valorem tax assessment.
iv. A site plan meeting all of the requirements of Section 23.
C. Criteria for Tenant Dwellings:
i. Such use shall be accessory to productive agricultural
operations, having a minimum of forty (40) acres of land.
ii. The number of tenant dwelling units shall not exceed the
density limitations, open space and lot coverage require-
ments of the zoning district.
iii. To protect adjacent land uses, all tenant dwellings shall be
located at least two hundred (200) feet from all property
lines.
iv. Housing shall be inhabited solely by persons who work on the
farm and the facilities shall satisfy all provisions of the
Housing Code and Building Code of Indian River county.
V. Such facilities shall provide a minimum of four hundred
(400) square feet of living area per family unit.
B. RESIDENTIAL USES
1. Guest Cottages. (Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Guest cottages may be
allowed in the A-1, RFD, RS -1, RS -3, and RS -6 zoning districts upon
receiving approval for a special exception as provided in Section 25.3
and after meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements: A floor plan showing the
dimensions of all rooms and the location of all facilities.
C. Criteria for Guest Cottages:
i. Shall be an accessory structure or portion of a principal
single family dwelling.
ii. Shall not be located closer than fifteen (15) feet to the
principal dwelling on the lot.
iii. No guest cottage may be utilized for commercial purposes.
iv. The guest cottage shall only be used for the intermittent or
temporary occupancy by a non-paying guest.
2. Mobile Homes. (Administrative Permit)
JAN 16 1985
L_
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: Mobile homes shall be
allowed in the A-1 district upon receiving approval for an administra-
tive permit as provided in Section 25.2 and after meeting the require=-
ments defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. Proof that the land upon which the mobile home shall be
located is classified as agricultural land for purposes of
ad valorem tax assessment.
ii. A site plan showing the location of all principal and
accessory structures and all other information required in
Section 23.
C. Criteria for Mobile Homes:
i. The mobile home shall be owned by the owner or lessee of the
land.
ii. The reviewing body shall deem the mobile home necessary for
the agricultural use of the land.
iii. The mobile home shall be placed on at least five (5) acres
of land.
iv. The reviewing body shall determine that the mobile home is
-44-
BooK „�� 5P3�
JAS 16 1985Boar 59
an accessory use, pursuant to Section 25(G) of this Code.
V. Such use shall be accessory to productive agricultural op-
erations, having a minimum of forty (40) acres.
3. Zero Lot Line, Detached. (Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception. Detached zero lot line
developments may be allowed -in the RS -6 district upon approval of a
special exception as provided in Section 25.3 and after meeting the
requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements. A developer wishing to
undertake Zero Lot Line Development shall specifically request such
approval in connection with application for Preliminary Subdivision
Plat approval, and shall submit the following additional information,
which may include use of typical drawings.
i. Designation on the Preliminary Plat of all zero lot line
side yards.
ii. Designation of all maintenance and access easements on lots
adjoining the zero lot line yards.
iii. Terms and conditions of all such maintenance and access
easements.
C. Criteria for Detached Zero Lot Line Developments. In review of a
zero lot line proposal the following standards shall apply:
i. The dwellings shall not be attached.
ii. The side yard setback requirement may be waived for one (1)
of the dwelling's side yards, however, the other side yard
shall be at least two (2) times the minimum specified in the
zoning district regulations.
iii. All dwellings within the detached zero lot line development
shall be separated by a distance no less than two times the
minimum side yard requirement for the zoning district.
iv. All front and rear setback requirements shall be satisfied.
V. To permit access for maintenance, construction, and other
purposes, drainage, and any permitted eave or similar
encroachment, appropriate easements, restricted for hours of
use as necessary, shall be provided.
vi. All detached zero lot line developments shall be a minimum
of five (5) acres in size.
vii. All other district regulations shall be applicable.
C. INSTITUTIONAL USES
1. Child Care or Adult Care Facilities. (Administrative Permit and
Special Exception
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: Child care or adult
care facilities shall be allowed in the A-1, RFD, RM -8, RM -10, RM -14,
RMH-6 and RMH-8 districts upon approval for an administrative permit
as provided in Section 25.2 and after meeting the requirements defined
below.
b. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Child care or adult care
facilities may be allowed in the RS -1, RS -3, RS -6, RT -6, RM -3, RM -4,
and RM -6 districts upon approval as a special exception as provided in _
Section 25.3 and after meeting the requirements defined below.
C. Additional Information Requirements:
MW- M
I
i. The site plan shall show all adjacent paved public roads as
well as the nearest major thoroughfare, all off-street
parking facilities, and the location and size of all
proposed buildings, structures and signs on the site and
adjacent properties, pursuant to the requirements of Section
23.
ii. Evidence shall be provided that minimum requirements to
qualify for a State of Florida license have been satisfied.
iii. Child care facilities shall describe the type of playground
equipment, if any, which is to be utilized.
d. Criteria for Child Care or Adult Care Facilities:
i. The site shall be located on a paved public road with
sufficient width to accommodate pedestrian and vehicular
traffic generated by the use. The facility should be
located near a major thoroughfare, as designated in the
County's Major Thoroughfare Plan, so as to discourage
traffic along residential streets in the immediate area.
ii. Special passenger loading and unloading facilities shall be
provided on the same lot for vehicles to pick-up or deliver
clientele. Such facilities shall include driveways that do
not require any back-up movements by vehicles to enter or
exit the premises.
iii. All regulations of the State of Florida that pertain to the
use as presently exists or may hereafter be amended shall be
satisfied.
iv. Child care facilities shall provide a fenced area of not
less than two thousand (2,000) square feet of usable outdoor
recreation area for the first twenty (20) children. One
hundred fifty (150) square feet of usable outdoor recreation.
area shall be required for each additional child greater in
number than twenty (20); such area shall be delineated on
the Site Plan submitted at the time the application is
filed. For the purposes of this provision, usable outdoor
recreation area shall be limited to:
-- That area not covered by building or required
off-street parking spaces.
-- That area outside the limits of the required front
yard.
-- Only that area which is developable for active outdoor
recreational purposes.
-- An area which occupies no more than eighty (80%)
percent of the combined total areas of the rear and
side yards.
v. A solid fence or wall five (5) feet in height shall be
constructed along any rear and side property line adjoining
any residentially zoned lot not used for a similar purpose.
2. Group Homes: Level II, III and Residential Centers. (Special Excep-
tion
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: The following shall
be allowed within the districts established below, upon receiving
approval for an administrative permit as provided in Section 25.2 and
after meeting the requirements defined below.
i. Level I Group Home: RS -6, RT -6, RM -3, RM -4, and RM -6.
ii. Level II and III Group Homes: RM -8, RM -10 and RM -14.
JAN 16 1985 —46— BOOK Fr,c 533
LooK 59,Ft �C 534
b. Districts Requiring Special Exception: The following may be
allowed within the districts established below, upon approval as a
special exception as provided in Section 25.3 and after meeting the
requirements defined below.
i. Level II and III Group Homes: RT -6, RM -3, RM -4, and RM -6.
ii. Residential Centers. RM -6, RM -8, RM -10, and RM -14.
c. Additional Information Requirements:
i. The site plan shall denote the location of all structures,
and parking facilities the circulation plan for all adjacent
sites, pursuant to the requirements of Section 23.
ii. A floor plan showing the location, size, and space uti-
lization of each room shall be submitted.
iii. The applicant shall submit a signed affidavit stating that
all applicable regulations of the State of Florida and
Indian River County as exist or may hereafter be amended.
d. Criteria for Group Homes: Level I, II, III and Residential
Centers.
i. Level I, II and III group homes and residential centers
shall be defined as facilities licensed by HRS which provide
a family living environment including supervision and care
necessary to meet physical, emotional, and social life needs
of clients. The facility may also provide education and
training for resident clients. These group homes shall be
distinguished by their resident capacity as follows:
-- Level I group home, up to eight (8) residents;
-- Level II group home, up to twelve (12) residents;
-- Level III group home, up to twenty (20) residents; and
-- Residential centers, twenty-one (21) or more residents.
ii. The use shall satisfy all applicable regulations of the
State of Florida and Indian River County as currently exist
or may hereafter be amended.
iii. The approving body shall determine that the proposed use is
compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in terms of
intensity of land use. As a measure of land use intensity;
the expected number of persons per acre of the proposed use
may be compared to the equivalent number of persons per acre
allowed within the respective zoning district. The number
of persons per acre within the zoning district can be
derived by multiplying the density (d.u./acre) by household
size estimates for that structure type. For the purposes of
this section, the following household size estimates shall
apply: single family homes, 2.5 persons/d.u.; multiple
family, 2.0 persons/d.u. The intensity of the group home
shall not exceed one and one-half (1.5) times the intensity
of adjacent residential zoning.
iv. To avoid unsafe or unhealthy conditions that may be produced
by the overcrowding of persons living in these facilities, a
minimum floor area per person shall be required. Floor area
requirements shall be measured from interior walls of all
rooms including closet space.
-- Total Interior Living Space. A minimum of two hundred
200 square feet of interior living space shall be
provided per facility resident. Interior living space
shall include sleeping space and all other interior
space accessible on a regular basis to all facility
residents.
-- Minimum Sleeping Areas. A minimum of eighty (80)
square feet shall be provided in each sleeping space
for single occupancy. A minimum of sixty (60) square
feet of sleeping space shall be provided for each bed
in a sleeping space for multiple occupancy.
-- Bathroom Facilities. A full bathroom with toilet, sink
and tub or shower shall be provided for each five (5)
residents. An additional toilet and sink shall be
provided for each additional group of four (4) persons
or less.
V. To avoid an undue concentration of group care facilities in
one area, all such facilities shall be located at least
1,200 feet apart, measured from property line to property
line.
vi. If located in a single family area, the home shall have the
appearance of a single family home. Structural alterations
shall be of such a nature as to preserve the residential
character of the building.
viii.The facility shall satisfy all applicable off-street parking
requirements of Section 24. The facility shall meet or
exceed all open space requirements for the respective zoning
district.
vii. The maximum capacity of such facilities shall not exceed the
applicable number permitted by the Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services.
3. Places of Worship. (Administrative Permit and Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: Places of worship
shall be allowed in the RM -8, RM -10 and RM -14 districts upon approval
for an administrative permit as provided in Section 25.2 and after.
meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Places of worship may be
allowed in the RS -1, RS -3, RS -6, RT -6, RM -3, RM -4, RM -6, RMH-6 and
RMH-8 districts upon approval as a special exception as provided in
Section 25.3 and after meeting the requirements defined below.
c. Additional Information Requirements: The site plan shall denote
the location of all existing structures, parking facilities, and the
circulation plan for all adjacent sites, pursuant to the requirements
of Section 23.
d. Criteria for Places of Worship:
i. No building or structure shall be located closer than thirty
(30) feet to any property line abutting a residential use or
district.
ii. Access shall be from a major thoroughfare or as otherwise
approved by the County Engineer.
iii. Any accessory residential use or school upon the premises
shall provide such additional lot area as required for such
use by this Section and shall further be subject to all
conditions set forth by the reviewing body. Accessory
residential uses may include convents, monasteries,
rectories or parsonages.
iv. Provisions shall be made to mitigate excessive noise when
the facility is located within or adjacent to a residential
district.
4. Total Care Facilities. (Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Total care facilities may
be allowed in the RM -8, RM -10 and RM -14 districts upon approval as a
JAN 16 1995 -48- BOOK 59, �' ,F 5035
I
BOOK 59 HI�UE 536
special exception as provided in Section 25.3 and after meeting the
requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. A site plan, pursuant to the requirements of Section 23.
ii. Any license(s) required by the State of Florida shall be
provided.
C. Criteria for Total Care Facilities:
i. The density of development within the total care facility
shall not exceed the density limitations of the zoning
district within which the project is proposed. Living Units
with cooking facilities shall count as one (1) dwelling
unit, and living units without cooking facilities shall
count as two-thirds(2/3) of a dwelling unit for the purposes
of calculating the density of development.
ii. The total care facility shall be primarily residential in
character; however, convalescent and nursing homes, cen-
tralized eating facilities for residents of the facility,
medical facilities (excluding freestanding medical offices),
and similar uses associated with the long or short term care
of patients may be included as part of the project.
iii. Nonresidential and non -recreational land uses included as
part of the total care facility shall not exceed twenty
percent (20%) of the gross residential floor area contained
therein. .
iv. The total care facility shall maintain a minimum of fifty
percent (50%) open space.
V. No building or structure shall be located closer than thirty
(30) feet to any lot line which abuts a residential dis-
trict.
vi. No off-street parking shall be located closer than fifteen
(15) feet to any lot line which abuts a residential dis-
trict.
vii. Adequate provisions shall be made for service vehicles with
access to the building at a side or rear entrance.
D. COMMUNITY SERVICE USES
I. Correctional Institutions.
(Reserved)
2. Cultural or Civic Facility. (Administrative Permit and Special
Exception
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Cultural or civic facil-
ities may be allowed in the A-1, RM -8, R 1 and RM -14 districts upon
receiving approval for a special exception as provided in Section 25.3
and after meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements: The site plan shall denote
the location of all existing structures, parking facilities, and the
circulation plan for all adjacent sites, pursuant to the requirements
of Section 23.
C. Criteria for Cultural or Civic Facility:
i. No building shall be located closer than fifty (50) feet to
any lot line which abuts a residential district.
M M M
ii. No off-street parking or loading space shall be located
closer than twenty-five (25) feet to any property line
abutting a residential district.
iii. Any accessory restaurant or ticket sales activities which
may be included as part of the cultural or civic facility
shall conduct all sales activities within the building.
iv. Access to the facility shall be from a major thoroughfare.
V. Screening (reserved).
3. Educational Facilities, Excluding Business, Secretarial and Vocational
Schools. Special Exception
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Educational facilities,
excluding business, secretarial and vocational institutions may be
allowed in the A-1, RFD, RS -1, RS -3, RS -6, RT -6, RM -3, RM -4, RM -6,
RM -8, RM -10, RM -14, RMH-6 and RMH-8 zoning districts upon receiving
approval as a special exception as provided in Section 25.3 and after
meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. The site plan shall denote the' location of all existing
structures, parking facilities, and the circulation plan for
all adjacent sites, pursuant to the requirements of Section
23.
ii. A description of the anticipated service area and projected
enrollment shall be provided.
iii. A copy of all requisite licenses from the State of Florida.
C. Criteria for Educational Facilities:
i. Sites shall be located near major thoroughfares so as to ~
discourage traffic along local residential streets in
residential subdivisions. Elementary schools should be
discouraged from locating adjacent to arterial roadways.
ii. Depending on the type of facility proposed, the minimum
spatial requirements for the site shall be similar to
standards utilized by the Indian River County School -`Board
and the State of Florida.
iii. No main or accessory building shall be located within one
hundred (100) feet of any property line not adjacent to the
street or roadway.
iv. The applicant shall submit a description of anticipated
service area and projected enrollment, by stages if appro-
priate, and relate the same to a development plan explain-
ing:
-- Area to be developed by construction phase.
-- Adequacy of site to accommodate anticipated facilities
enrollment, recreation area, off-street parking and
pedestrian and vehicular circulation on site including
loading, unloading and queuing of school bus traffic. .
-- Safety features of the development plan.
V. No rooms within the school shall be regularly used for the
housing of students when located in a Single Family Residen-
tial District.
4. Governmental Administration Building. (Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Governmental adminis-
tration buildings may be allowed in the A-1, RFD, RS -1, RS -3, RS -6,
JAN 16 19 -50-
85 MOO F•rF53
JAN 16 1985 . BooK 59 r GF 538
RT -6, RM -3, RM -4, RM -6, RM -8, RMH-8 and CRVP districts upon receiving
approval as a special exception as provided in Section 25.3 and after
meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements: The site plan shall denote
the location 0—Ta-11 existing structures, parking facilities, and the
circulation plan for all adjacent sites, pursuant to the requirements
of Section 23.
C. Criteria for Governmental Administration Building:
i. No building shall be located closer than fifty (50) feet to
any lot line which abuts a residential district.
ii. No off-street parking or loading space shall be located
closer than twenty-five (25) feet to any property line
abutting a residential district.
iii. Screening (reserved).
E. RECREATION USES
1. Country Clubs. (Administrative Permit and Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permits. Country clubs shall
be allowed in the A-1 district upon receiving approval for an adminis-
trative permit as provided in Section 25.2 and after meeting the
requirements defined below.
b. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Country clubs may be
allowed in the RFD, RS -1, RS -3, RS -6, RT -6, RM -3, RM -4, RM -6, RM -8,
RM -10 and RM -14 districts upon receiving approval as a special excep-
tion as provided in Section 25.3 and after meeting the requirements
defined below.
C. Additional Information Requirements: A site plan meeting the
requirements of Section 23.
d. Criteria for Country Clubs:
i. The term "Country Club", as used in this section, shall be
defined as a land area and buildings containing recreational
facilities, clubhouse and the usual uses accessory thereto,
open only to members and their guests for a membership fee.
Country clubs shall be interpreted to include multi-purpose
recreational clubs as well as golf courses, tennis clubs and
similar membership recreational facilities.
ii. No principal or accessory building shall be located closer
than forty-five (45) feet to any street line or closer than
one hundred (100) feet to any lot line which abuts a single
family zoning district.
iii. No off-street parking or loading area shall be located
closer than twenty-five (25) feet to any residential zoning
district.
iv. Where such uses involve golf courses, tennis courts, marinas
or any other recreational use for which standards are set
forth in Section 25.1 (E)), they shall also be subject to
such standards and procedures, unless a waiver is granted by
the decisionmaking body because the standards are not
applicable to the type or intensity of use proposed.
V. All multi-purpose recreational clubs authorized herein shall
be located adjacent to a major thoroughfare.
vi. All outdoor lighting shall be adequately shielded in order
to prevent reflection onto adjacent properties.
— no M
vii. A landscaped bufferyard utilizing screening, as established
in Section 23, shall be required adjacent to all residen-
tially zoned land.
2. Golf Courses and Accessory Facilities. (Administrative Permit and
Special Exception
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: Golf courses and
accessory facilities shall be allowed in the A-1 district upon receiv-
ing approval for an administrative permit as provided in Section 25.2
and after meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Golf courses and accesso-
ry facilities may be allowed in the RFD, RS -1, RS -3, RS -6, RT -6, RM -3,
RM -4, RM -6, RM -8, RM -10, RM -14, RMH-6, and RMH-8 districts upon
receiving approval as a special exception as provided in Section 25.3
and after meeting the requirements defined below.
C. Additional Information Requirements:
i. The location and designation of all zoning districts abut-
ting the site.
ii. A site plan meeting the requirements of Section 23.
d. Criteria for Golf Courses and Accessory Facilities:
i. Golf courses and accessory facilities shall not be inter-
preted to include freestanding commercial miniature golf
courses and/or driving ranges.
ii. No major accessory use or principal building or structure
shall be located closer than one hundred (100) feet to any
lot line which abuts a residential district.
iii. Golf courses shall, to the most reasonable extent, retain•
and preserve native vegetation over at least thirty (30)
percent of the total upland area of the course due to their
characteristically high water demand and heavy nutrient
loads.
iv. The golf courses shall be designed so that any lighting is
shielded and directed away from residential areas.
V. Screening: (RESERVED)
3. Major Sports and Recreation Areas and Facilities. (Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Major sports and recre-
ation areas and facilities may be allowed in the A-1 district upon
receiving approval as a special exception as provided and after
meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements: The site plan shall denote
the location of all existing structures, parking facilities, and the
circulation plan for the proposed facility and all adjacent sites,
pursuant to the requirements of Section 23.
C. Criteria for Major Sports Areas and Facilities:
i. All buildings and structures shall be at least thirty (30)
feet from all property lines.
ii. Off-street parking shall be provided in the ratio of a
minimum of one (1) space to every four (4) seats.
iii. All facilities shall be located on a collector or arterial _
street, as established in the County Thoroughfare Plan.
iv. The facility shall be designed so that any outdoor lighting
,is shielded and directed away from any residential areas.
JAN 16 1995
-52- BOOK
I
JAN 16 1985
BOOK
59
4. Parks and Playgrounds
Open to the Public. (Administrative
Permit)
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: Public parks and
playgrounds shall be allowed within the RS -1, RS -3, RS -6, RT -6, RMH-6
and RMH-8 zoning districts upon receiving approval for an administra-
tive permit as provided in Section 25.2 and after meeting the require-
ments defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. The location and size of all buildings, structures, and all
off-street parking and loading facilities of adjacent sites,
pursuant to the requirements of Section 23.
ii. A statement by the applicant identifying the specific types
of activities and programs which are to be associated with
the use shall be submitted.
C. Criteria for Public Parks and Playgrounds:
i. No off-street parking or loading areas or buildings and
structures shall be located closer than twenty (25) feet to
any property line abutting a residential district.
ii. Any recreational use equipped with lighting to allow the use
of the facility after sunset or any facility _such as a
stadium which may attract large groups of users for specific
events shall be allowed only as a special exception.
5. Tennis Facilities and Beach Clubs: (Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Beach clubs may be
allowed in the RM -3, -1114-4,,1114-6, RM -8, RM -10 and RM -14 districts upon
approval as a special exception as provided in Section 25.3 and after
meeting the requirements defined below. Tennis facilities may be
allowed in the RM -3, RM -6, RM -8, RM -10, RM -14, RMH-6 and RMH-8 dis-
tricts upon receiving approval as a special exception as provided in
Section 25.3 and after meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements: The site plan shall denote
the location for all existing structures, parking facilities, and the
circulation plan for the proposed facility and all adjacent sites,
pursuant to the requirements of 23.
c. - Criteria for Tennis Facilities and Beach Clubs:
i. No off-street parking or loading areas or buildings and
structures shall be located closer than twenty-five (25J
feet to any property line abutting a residential district.
ii. All outdoor lighting shall be adequately shielded in order
to prevent reflection onto adjacent properties.
iii. Screening (Reserved).
6. Yacht Clubs. (Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Yacht clubs may be
allowed in the RM -3, RM -4, RM -6, RM -8, RM -10, and RM -14 districts upon
receiving approval as a special exception as provided in Section 25.3
and after meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements: A site plan which indicates
the structures and facilities located on both land and water, includ-
ing boat slips, and all other requirements of Section 23.
C. Criteria for Yacht Clubs:
i. There shall be no dry docking facilities.
ii. All docks and structures erected over the water shall be on
pilings permitting the free flow of water; no bulkhead shall
be permitted to extend beyond the established bulkhead line;
no such dock shall be allowed to extend into public water
such a distance as to interfere with navigation and com-
merce.
iii. No portion of the site may be used for outside storage or
boat repair.
iv. If approval is granted for a marine filling station as an
accessory use, the following shall apply:
-- The facility shall provide for the safe and efficient
movement of watercraft.
-- The facility shall be no closer than thirty (30) feet
to any permanent docking facility, or fifty (50) feet
to any residential use or district.
-- All receptacles, tanks or facilities for the storage of
combustible products in excess of two hundred (200)
gallon quantities shall be located underground in a
fiberglass container and within all required setbacks.
Flammable materials shall be stored in a manner satis-
factory to the Planning and Development Division.
V. No off-street parking or loading areas or buildings and
structures shall be located closer than twenty-five (25)
feet to any property line abutting a residential district.
vi. Screening (Reserved).
F. COMMERCIAL USES
1. Fruit and Vegetable Stands. (Administrative Permit)
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit. Fruit and vegetable•
stands shall be allowed in the A-1 district upon receiving approval
for an administrative permit as provided in Section 25.2 and after
meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. A site plan meeting all of the requirements of Section 23.
ii. The hours during which the stand will be operated.
C. Criteria for Fruit and Vegetable Stands:
i. No storage, sale or display of merchandise shall be permit-
ted within required front yards.
ii. No vehicle shall be used as a place of business for selling
merchandise.
iii. Such uses shall comply with the entry and exit ways,
off-street parking, yard and other applicable zoning regu-
lations of this Code.
2. Veterinary Clinic or Animal Hospital. (Administrative Permit) -
a. Districts Requirin2 Administrative Permit: Veterinary clinic or
anima hospitals shall be permitted in 7a A -1, OCR, MED, CL and CG
districts upon approval of an administrative permit as provided in
Section 25.2 and after meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. A statement from the applicant indicating the types of
animals to be cared for and the nature of all on-site
facilities shall be submitted.
WIE
BOOK 59,CA'GC.
� JAN 16 1985 �
F'
JAN 16 1985
L
BOOK 542
ii. The applicant shall submit a signed affidavit that no
permanent or commercial boarding of animals is taken place
on site.
iii. A site plan, pursuant to the requirements of Section 23.
C. Criteria for Veterinary Clinic or Animal Hospital:
i. All facilities shall be located in an enclosed structure.
ii. No part of the premises shall be used for permanent or
commercial boarding of animals.
iii. All buildings shall be at least thirty (30) feet from any
property line and shall be soundproofed in such a manner
that adjacent occupants will not be disturbed.
iv. All parking areas shall be surfaced with a hard and durable
material and properly drained.
G. INDUSTRIAL USES
-- RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE --
H. TRANSPORTATION USES
I. Airports and Airstrips. (Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Airports and airstrips
may be allowed in the A-1 district upon receiving approval as a
special exception as provided in Section 25.3 and after meeting the
requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. A configuration diagram showing the layout of runways,
taxiways, approach zones, and overrun areas.
ii. Isosonic contours showing the effects of aircraft operations
upon land within one (1) mile of the boundary of the
proposed site.
iii. The number and type of aircraft proposed to be stored
including storage areas for aircraft, fuel and motor vehi-
cles and service areas for aircraft.
iv. Proposed methods for the provision of fire and rescue
services shall be provided, and a letter from the appropri
ate agencies stating that services are available and ade-
quate to protect the proposed facility shall be submitted.
v. All land uses within the final approach zones of the facili-
ty shall be identified.
vi. Certification that all Federal Aviation Administration and
State standards and requirements have been met shall be
provided.
vii. A site plan, pursuant to the requirements of Section 23.
C. Criteria for Airports and Airstrips:
i. Evidence shall be furnished of the acquisition of property
or air rights over all land at the ends of all runways where
the required glide path of aircraft, for the class of the
airport, is thirty-five (35) feet or less elevation from the
ground.
ii. All buildings and structures shall be at least thirty (30)
feet from the property line.
iii. All drives and parking areas shall be surfaced with a hard
and durable material and properly drained.
iv. All applicable FAA and state regulations shall be met.
V. Letters from appropriate fire and rescue agencies shall be
submitted ensuring that protective services can be provided
at an adequate level.
vi. Screening: (RESERVED)
I. UTILITY USES
1. Public and Private Utilities, Heavy. (Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception. Heavy public and private
utilities may be allowed in the A-1 district upon receiving approval
for a special exception as provided in Section 25.3 and after meeting
the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. A site plan showing the proposed utility site, pursuant to
the requirements of Section 23.
ii. A plan of the utility system, showing how the proposed
facility will connect with any existing utility systems.
iii. A statement shall be submitted which explains the function
of the proposed utility and its consistency with the goals,
objectives and policies of the Indian River County Compre-
hensive Plan.
iv. A statement identifying any radioactive, toxic or other
hazardous wastes which may be generated or utilized on the
premises.
C. Criteria for Public and Private Utilities, Heavy:
i. Heavy utility uses shall include all electrical generation
plants, major sewage treatment and disposal facilities, and
major water purification plants.
ii. Any power generation facility shall be consistent with the
provisions of the Florida "Electrical Power Plant Siting
Act", Chapter 23, Section 23.09191 F.S., as well as the
Utility Element of the Indian River County Comprehensive
Plan.
iii. The disposal of all wastes, gaseous, liquid or solid, shall
comply with all Federal, State and local laws.
iv. All above ground facilities shall be located no closer than
one hundred (100) feet from all premises.
V. In all zoning districts except the industrial districts, all
equipment, machinery, and facilities which cannot, by their
size or nature, be located within an enclosed building shall
be completely screened from the view of surrounding prop-
erties.
vi. All buildings and parking and loading areas shall be located
a minimum of one hundred (100) feet from any lot line
adjacent to a residential zoning district. This one hundred
(100) foot yard shall be heavily landscaped.
2. Public and Private Utilities, Limited. (Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Administrative Permit: Limited public and
private utilities may be allowed within the RFD, RS -1, RS -3, RS -6,
RT -6, RM -3, RM -4, RM -6, RM -8, RM -10, RM -14, RMH-6, RMH-8 and CRVP
JAN 16 1985 -56- BOOK S P"�E543
JAN 16 1995 �oo� 5 C5 x.544
districts upon receiving approval as a special exception as provided
in Section 25.3 and after meeting the requirements defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. Site plan proposed by a Florida registered engineer shall
show the proposed utility system together with the existing
utility system, of which the proposed system will be an
integral part, pursuant to the requirements of Section 23.
ii. A statement shall be submitted which explains the function
of the proposed improvement and its consistency with an
overall utility system plan, as well as the Comprehensive
Plan.
C. Criteria for Public and Private Utilities, Limited:
i. Limited public and private utilities shall include the
following when they are the principal use on a lot: elec-
trical substations, package treatment plants, water puri-
fication, storage and pumping facilities, sewage pumping
facilities, and similar utility uses.
ii. All above ground facilities shall be contained by a six (6)
foot fence or wall. Proper signs shall be posted every
three (3) feet upon the walls and/or fence when the facility
is deemed as being a potential hazard to the public.
iii. All below ground cables within a utility right-of-way shall
be made known to the public through the use of signs posted
therein. .
iv. All above ground- facilities shall be no closer than fifty
(50) feet to any residential property line.
«
V. In all zoning districts except the industrial districts, all
equipment, machinery and facilities which cannot by their
size or nature be located within an enclosed building shall
be completely screened from the view of surrounding prop-
erties.
vi. All buildings and parking and loading areas shall be located
a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet from any lot line adja-
cent to a residential zoning district. This twenty-five
(25) foot yard shall be heavily landscaped.
3. Transmission Towers (Radio, T.V. and Microwave). (Special Exception)
a. Districts Requiring Special Exception: Transmission towers may
be allowed in the A-1 district upon receiving approval as a special
exception as provided in Section 25.3 and after meeting the require-
ments defined below.
b. Additional Information Requirements:
i. Applicant shall present documentation of the possession of
any required license by and federal, state or local agency.
ii. A site plan, pursuant to the requirements of Section 23.
C. Criteria for Transmission Towers:
i. All towers shall have setbacks from all property lines equal
to one hundred ten (110%) percent of the height of the
proposed structure. This provision may be waived or mod-
ified upon a recommendation by the Director of Public Works.
ii. Distance of any guy anchorage or similar device shall be at
least ten (10) feet from any property line.
M
iii. Suitable protective anti -climb fencing and a landscape
planting screening shall be provided and maintained around
the structure and accessory attachments.
iv. All structures shall be subject to the height restrictions
provided in Section 25(A), "Height Exceptions".
V. If more than two hundred twenty (220) voltage is necessary
for the operation of the facility and is present in a ground
grid or in the tower, signs located every twenty (20) feet
and attached to the fence or wall shall display in large
bold letters the following: "HIGH VOLTAGE - DANGER".
vi. No equipment, mobile or immobile, which is not used in
direct support of the transmission or relay facility shall
be stored or parked on the site unless repairs to the
facility are being made.
vii. No tower shall be permitted to encroach into or through any
established public or private airport approach plan as
provided in the "Airport Height Limitations", of Section
25(P).
J. EARTHMOVING USES
-- RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE --
Ma
BOOK PAGE��
SECTION 13
POOP( 5 FA 1.JF 546
Section 25(A).2, entitled "Review of Uses Requiring Administrative Permits", is
hereby created to read as follows:
SECTION 25.2 REVIEW OF USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS
A. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
This section is established to provide for the granting of administrative
permits by the Planning and Zoning Commission for certain activities, which
because of their scale, duration or nature, would not generally have an adverse
impact on their surroundings when regulated in accord with the standards set
forth in this Ordinance.
B. ESTABLISHMENT OF USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS.
The district regulations of this Ordinance specify those uses which require an
administrative permit. Such uses shall be permitted only after being approved
pursuant to the procedures established in this section and only after satisfying
the specific use criteria established in Section 25.1, "Regulations for Specific
Land Uses".
C. AUTHORIZATION.
The Planning and Zoning Commission is hereby authorized to decide all applica-
tions for administrative permits, as set forth in these provisions, subsequent
to a recommendation by the Planning and Development Director.
D. CONDITIONS AND SAFEGUARDS.
The Planning and Zoning Commission may attach to its approval of an administra-
tive permit any reasonable conditions, limitations or requirements which are
.found necessary in its judgment to effectuate the purposes of this section and
carry out the spirit and purpose of the Ordinance.
E. PROCEDURES FOR REVIEW OF USES REQUIRING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS.
Uses requiring an administrative permit shall be reviewed pursuant to the
procedures and notice requirements established in Section 23, "Site Plan Ap-
proval".
F. STANDARDS. -
No administrative permit shall be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission
unless: -
1. Specific Requirements. The proposal is in compliance with all appli-
cable district regulations, the applicable specific land use regu-
lations of Section 25.1 and all other applicable regulations.
2. Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is determined to be consistent with
the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan.
G. STATUS OF DECISIONS.
Actions taken by the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding administrative
permits shall be deemed final unless appealed to the Board of County Commission-
ers, pursuant to the procedure of this Ordinance.
® 0 W_ i
M M
SECTION 14
Section 25(A).3, entitled "Regulation of Special Exception Uses", is hereby
created to read as follows:
SECTION 25.3 REGULATION OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES
A. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
This section is intended to stipulate procedures and reference specific criteria
for considering the approval of special exception uses. The procedures estab-
lished herein are intended to assure careful examination and findings of fact by
appropriate County entities during the review of special exception uses. Such
review shall consider the nature, extent and potential external impacts associ-
ated with special exception uses.
B. ESTABLISHMENT OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
1. Special Exception Uses, Generally. Special exception uses are those
types of uses that would not generally be appropriate throughout a
particular zoning district. However, when special exception uses are
carefully controlled as to number, area, location, and/or relationship
to the vicinity, such uses would not adversely impact the public
health, safety, comfort, good order, appearance, convenience, morals
and general welfare and as such would be compatible with permitted
uses within the particular zoning district.
2. Special Exception Uses, Specifically. The zoning districts which are
established in this Ordinance designate those uses and activities
which shall be regulated as special exception uses. Those uses which
are designated as special exception shall be permitted only after
being approved pursuant to the procedures established in this section
and further satisfying the specific use criteria established in
Section 25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses".
C. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES: APPROVAL AUTHORITY.
The Indian River County Board of County Commissioners is hereby authorized to
decide all applications for Special Exception Uses, subsequent to a recommenda-
tion by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
D. CONDITIONS AND SAFEGUARDS.
In granting any special exception, the Board of County Commissioners may pre-
scribe appropriate special conditions and safeguards to assure the use is'-
compatible
scompatible with surrounding uses in the district. Violation of such conditions
and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the special exception
is granted, shall be deemed a violation of these zoning regulations. Such
conditions and safeguards may include, but are not limited to:
1. Time Limitations. Reasonable time limits within which the action for
which the special exception is required shall be begun or completed or
maintained, as well as provisions for extensions or renewals.
2. Guarantees. The posting by the applicant of a guarantee or bond in an
appropriate form and reasonable amount.
E. PROCEDURES FOR REVIEW OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
1. Pre -Application Conference. Prior to filing an application for a
special exception, the developer shall confer with the Planning and
Development Division staff to discuss informally the requirements of
this section and the nature of his proposal. For the purposes of this
conference the applicant shall provide a sketch plan of the proposal
drawn to scale, showing the general layout, the relationship to the
surrounding area, and the general development proposal.
2. Filing of Application. Following the pre -application conference, the
applicant may file an application for a special exception use,
-60- B00r. jg� [►rF
F,
JAN I A 1985BOOK t59,
prepared in compliance with the forms on file at the Planning and
Development Division. The appropriate number of applications shall be
filed with the Planning and Development Division.
a. Site Plan Required; Optional Conceptual Special_ Exception Ap-
proval.
i. Concurrent Site Plan and Special Exception Approval.
Applications for special exception uses shall include a site
plan, prepared in accordance with the provisions of Section
23, "Site Plan Approval", and shall include all additional
information required in Section 25.1, "Regulation for
Specific Land Uses".
ii. Conceptual Special Exception Approval.
An applicant for special exception approval may elect to
submit a conceptual site plan, rather than a complete site
plan pursuant to the requirements of Section 23. Applicants
wishing to obtain special exception approval based on a
conceptual site plan shall submit details of the project, as
required by the Director of Planning and Development, and a
statement approved by the County Attorney that he or she
will comply with all standards for the use as required by
the zoning ordinance and any conditions which may be at-
tached by the Board of County Commissioners. If the appli-
cant is granted conceptual special exception approval, the
approval shall not be considered final until a complete site
plan satisfying all conditions of special exception approval
has been reviewed and approved pursuant to Section 23, "Site
Plan Approval".
b. Request for Waivers or Modifications. Any requirements of this
Ordinance which the applicant is requesting be waived or modified
as may be allowed under this Section, shall be clearly indicated
by section and paragraph numbers in the application, together
with the rationale for the request.
C. Staff Review. Upon receipt of the application, the Planning and
Development Director shall forward it to all appropriate County
reviewing agencies, and shall initiate his review of the applica-
tion for conformance with the standards of this section. The
Planning and Development Director or his appointed staff member
may require the submission of additional information, as needed,
in order to adequately review a complete application.
4. Planning and Zoning Commission Review.
a. Notice and Hearing. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall
hold a public hearing on the application within a reasonable
period of time following its receipt from the Director. Notice
shall be provided in accordance with the notification require-
ments for a rezoning.
b. Decision. Within a reasonable period of time following the close
of the public hearing on the application, the Planning and Zoning
Commission shall make its report and recommendation to the Board
of County Commissioners for approval, approval with conditions or
denial of the application, stating in writing its reasons for any
recommendation of denial.
5. Board of County Commissioners Review.
a. Notice and Hearing. The Board of County Commissioners shall hold
a public hearing on the application, report, and recommendation
of the Planning and Zoning Commission within a reasonable period
of time following receipt from the Planning and Zoning Commis-
sion. Notice shall be provided in accordance with the notifica-
tion requirements for a rezoning.
-I
_ M M
b. Decision. Within a reasonable period of time following the close
of the public hearing, the Board of County Commissioners shall
approve, approve with conditions or deny the application, fur-
nishing the applicant a written statement of the reasons for any
denial. A special exception use shall be granted upon an affir-
mative vote of at least a simple majority of the Board of County
Commissioners present.
F. REQUIRED FINDING BY THE REVIEWING BODY.
Before any application regarding a special exception shall be approved, the
reviewing body shall make a finding that it is empowered under -the provisions of
this Ordinance to review the specific use applied for, and that the granting of
the special exception will not adversely affect the public interest. The
reviewing body shall also make findings certifying that both the general and
specific criteria for the review of special exceptions have been satisfied and
that adequate special conditions have been imposed to assure compatibility with
surrounding land uses considering but not limited to:
1. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with
particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and conve-
nience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or
catastrophe;
2. Off-street parking and loading areas, where required, with particular
attention to the items in "1." above and the economic, noise, glare,
or odor effects of the special exception on adjoining properties and
properties generally in the district;
3. Refuse and service areas with particular reference to the items in
"1." and "2." above;
4. Utilities, with reference to locations, availability and compatibil-
i ty;
5. Screening and buffering with reference to type, dimensions and charac-
ter;
6. Signs, if any, and proposed exterior lighting with reference to glare,
traffic safety, economic effects, and compatibility and harmony with
properties in the district;
7. Required yards and other open space;
8. Any special requirements set forth in the zoning district regulations
for the particular use involved.
G. STATUS OF DECISIONS.
Actions taken by the Board of County Commissioners regarding the granting of
special exceptions along with any appropriate conditions and safeguards shall be
deemed final unless an appeal is filed pursuant to the procedures of this
Ordinance.
H. GENERAL CRITERIA FOR REVIEW OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
Prior to approval by the Board of County Commissioners a special exception must
comply with the below cited general criteria as well as specific criteria for
the respective special exception use cited herein in Section 25.1, "Regulations
for Specific Land Uses". The applicant shall have the burden of establishing,
by competent material and substantial evidence, the existence of the facts and
conditions which this Ordinance requires for approval. The applicant shall have
the responsibility to present evidence in the form of testimony, exhibits,
documents, models, plans and the like to support the application for approval of
a special exception use.
1. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan and zoning Code. The proposed use
shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and with the stated
purpose and intent of the appropriate district regulations and all
applicable regulations within this Ordinance.
JAN 16 1995 -62- Boor Face
JAN ) 6 1995
2. Compatibility with Surrounding Land uses. The proposed use and its
location shall be compatible with surrounding land uses and the
general character of the area, based on consideration of such poten-
tial impacts as traffic generation, drainage, nuisance impacts,
lighting, appearance, effect on property values, and other factors
potentially impacting the character and stability of the surrounding
area.
3. No Adverse Impacts on Public Health, Safety, and General Welfare. The
proposed use and its location and method of operation shall promote
the public health, safety, and general welfare. The proposal shall
include landscape and structural improvements, public facilities,
methods and operational procedures, required to effectively mitigate
against potential negative impacts.
4. Promote Orderly Development. The use and proposed location shall
promote orderly and efficient development considering such factors as
impact on public facilities, preserving integrity of the neighborhood,
avoidance of excessive proliferation of a special exception use within
a part of a zoning district and similar factors impacting orderly
development of the area.
I. SPECIFIC CRITERIA FOR REVIEW OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES.
In addition to satisfying the general criteria for reviewing special exception
uses as established herein, a special exception use must also be found to
satisfy the specific criteria for the particular land use, as established in
Section 25.1, "Regulations for Specific Land Uses".
f rrTTAM 7G
APPLICABILITY OF NEW SECTIONS
Until further action has been taken by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County by the adoption- of appropriate ordinances, the zoning
districts created by this ordinance shall be considered additional districts.
The administrative sections, sections pertaining to general or specific use
criteria, shall only apply to the new districts created by this ordinance and
.subsequent ordinances of the County. All further re -zonings, where applicable,
shall utilize the newly created districts.
SECTION 16
INCORPORATION IN CODE
The provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated into the County Code and
the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or other appropri-
ate word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered, reserved or
relettered to accomplish such.intentions.
SECTION 17
SEVERABILITY
If any section, part of a sentence, paragraph, phrase or word of this ordinance
is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such hold-
ings shall not affect the remaining portions hereof and it shall be construed to
have been'the legislative intent to pass this ordinance without such unconstitu-
tional, invalid or inoperative part.
SECTION 18
EFFECTIVE DATE
The provisions of this ordinance shall become effective upon receipt from the
Florida Secretary of State of Official Acknowledgement that this ordinance has
been filed with the Department of State.
JAN 16 1985 -64- BOOK U f''GF 551
I
JAN 1 6 1985
BOOK
59j
C., o r
Approved and
adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian
River
County, Florida, on this 16th day of January 1985.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAU-K VER COUNTY
Nat Lyons
Chairman
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of
Florida this 4th day of _February , 1985.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State
received on this 8th day of February, 1985, at 11:00
A.M./P.M. and filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LI
J
ATTACHMENT # 1
TABLE OF PERMITTED USES
AGRICULTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS
JAN 1 I Boo�K 5,91E4;c ���;�
1
1
OAC
10
F�
RM -3
RM -8
RS -3
RM -4
RM -10 RMH-6
ZONING DISTRICT
A-1
RFD
RS -1
RS -6
RT -6 RM -6
RM -14 RMH-8 CRVP
1. AGRICULTURAL USES
Agricultural Business
S
,
Agricultural Industries
S
Agricultural Research
A
Facilities
Dairy Farming
A
Fruit and Vegetable Packing
House
A
General Farming Activites
P
Kennels and Animal Boarding
A
Places, Commercial
Kennels and Animal Boarding
P
A
A
A*
Places, Noncommercial
Livestock and Poultry Raising
P
Nurseries and Greenhouses,
P
A
S
S
S S
S
Noncommercial
Plant Nurseries
P
Small Animal Specialty Farms
A
Stables, Commerical
P
Stables, Noncommercial
P
A
S
S
S S
S
Tenant Dwellings
A
Tree Farms
s
P
P = Permitted Use
A = Use Requiring Administrative Permit
S = Special Exception Use
OAC
10
F�
CJI
RM -3
RM -8
RS -3
RM -4
RM -10 RMH-6
ZONING DISTRICT A-1 RFD
RS -1
RS -6
RT -6
RM -6
RM -14 RMH-8 CRVP
2. RESIDENTIAL USES
Duplex
P
P
P
Guest Cottages S S
S
S
Mobile Homes A
p P
Multiple Family Dwellings
P
P
Planned Residential S S
S
S
S
S
S
Development
Single Family Dwelling P P
P
P
P
P
P
Zero Lot Line, Detached
S*
P
P
P
P = Permitted Use
A = Use Requiring Administrative Permit
S = Special Exception Use
*RS -6 District Only
a
P = Permitted Use
A = Use Requiring Adminstrative Permit
S = Special Exception Use
* = RS -6 District Only
**= RM -6 District Only o
0
CO
VD
RS -3
RM -3
RM -4
RM -8
RM -10
RMH-6 --�
ZONING DISTRICT
A-1
RFD
RS -1
RS -6
RT -6
RM -6
RM -14
RMH-8 CRVP co
c�
3. INSTITUTIONAL USES
Cemeteries
P
Child Care Facilities
A
A
S
S
S
S
A
A
Foster Care Facilities
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Group Homes
A*
A
A
- Level I
P
- Level II, III
S
S
A
- Residential Center
S**
S
Hospitals
a
Places of Worship
P
P
S
S
S
S
A
S A
Total Care Facilities
S
P = Permitted Use
A = Use Requiring Adminstrative Permit
S = Special Exception Use
* = RS -6 District Only
**= RM -6 District Only o
0
CO
VD
91
1
P = Permitted Use
A = Uses Requiring Administrative Permit
S = Special Exception Use
1
RM -3
RM -8
RS -3
RM -4
RM -10
RMH-6
ZONING DISTRICT
A-1
RFD
RS -1
RS -6
RT -6
RM -6
RM -14
RMH-8 CRVP
4. COMMUNITY SERVICE USES
Correctional Institutions
S
Cultural and Civic Facilities
S
S
Educational Facilities
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
(excluding Business, Sec.
& Vocational)
Emergency Services
P
P
P.
P
P
P
P
P P
Governmental Administration
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S S
Buildings
P = Permitted Use
A = Uses Requiring Administrative Permit
S = Special Exception Use
1
P = Permitted Use
A = Use Requiring Administrative Permit
S = Special Exception Use
1
C -TI
QD
47
'Tl
C --TT
"--;I�
0
RM -3
RM -8
ZONING DISTRICT
A-1
RFD
RS -1
RS -3
RS -6
RT -6
RM -4
RM -6
RM -10
RM -14
RMH-6
RMH-8
-�
CRVP co
5.
5. RECREATIONAL USES
Beach Clubs
S
S
Country Clubs
A
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
P
Golf Courses
A
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
P
Parks and Playgrounds
P
P
A
A
A
P
P
A
P
Open to the Public
Major Sports and
Recreation Areas
and Facilities
S
Areas and Facilities
v'
Tennis Facilities
S
S
S
P
Yacht Clubs
S
S
P = Permitted Use
A = Use Requiring Administrative Permit
S = Special Exception Use
1
C -TI
QD
47
'Tl
C --TT
"--;I�
0
C-
RM -3 RM -8
RS -3 RM -4 RM -10 RMH-6
co ZONING DISTRICT A-1 RFD RS -1 RS -6 RT -6 RM -6 RM -14 RMH-8 CRVP
cra
6. COMMERCIAL USES
Fruit and Vegetable Stands A
Recreational Vehicle Park P
Veterinary Clinic or A
Animal Hospital
P = Permitted Use
A = Uses Requiring Administrative Permit
S = Special Exception Use
P P
rn
rc 1
C
1
RM -3 RM -8
RS -3 RM -4 RM -10 RMH-6
ZONING DISTRICT A-1 RFD RS -1 RS -6 RT -6 RM -6 RM -14 RMH-8 CRVP
7. INDUSTRIAL USES (none listed for Agricultural and Residential districts, reserved for future use.)
P = Permitted Use
A = Use Requiring Administrative Permit
S = Special Exception Uses
0
Cj'1
Doi
C
RM -3 RM -8
RS -3 RM -4 RM -10 RMH-6
Co Co ZONING DISTRICT A-1 RFD RS -1 RS -6 RT -6 RM -6 RM -14 RMH-8 CRVP
c�
8. TRANSPORTATION USES
Airports and Airstrips S
P = Permitted Use
A = Use Requiring Administrative Permit
S = Special Exception Use
w
0
0
T
Cil
Co
I
1
1
RM -3 RM -8
RS -3 RM -4 RM -10 RMH-6
ZONING DISTRICT A-1 RFD RS -1 RS -6 RT -6 RM -6 RM -14 RMH-8 CRVP
9. UTILITY USES
Public and Private Utilites, S
Heavy
Public and Private Utilities, P S S S S S S S S
Limited
Transmission Towers: S
Microwave, Radio, T.V.
P = Permitted
A = Use Requiring Administrative Permit
S = Special Exception Use
n
.o
1
cj�
c')
C-
RM -3 RM -8
RS -3 RM -4 RM -10 RMH-6
g,CO-a CRVP
ZONING DISTRICT A-1 RFD RS -1 RS -6 RT -6 RM -6 RM -14 RMH-8
10. EARTHMOVING USES
Mining Activities A (consultants note: the criteria for mining activities must be coordinated
with the provisions of the sand mining ordinance.)
P = Permitted Use
A = Use Requiring Administrative Permit
S = Special Exception Use
�p
C
O
Cj"I
C�D
C7
T
Cil
C
1
11
1
JAN 16195 BOOK v F,�.,r 584
ATTACHMENT # 2
SUMMARY TABLE OF SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA:
NEW ZONING DISTRICTS ,
ATTACHMENT # 2
SUMMARY TABLE OF SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA:
NEW ZONING DISTRICTS
JAN 16 1985
L-
MIN.
FLOOR AREA
ti i+
(SF)
750
1,200
1,200
1,200
750
750
1,200
1,200
750
750
750
750
-
-
- square feet
(OTHER)
400
pp
`m
-
-
-
750
550
550
550
550
550
500
550
550
- per dwelling
unit
MAX.
BLDG. HEIGHT
35
35
35
35
35
35
REGULATION
A-1
RFD
RS -1
RS -3
RS -6
RT -6
RM -3
RM -4
RM -6
RM -8
RM -10
RM -14
RMH-6
RMH-8
CRVP
UNIT OF MEASURE
25
25
25
25
25
30
40/302
40/302
40 % of lot
.
DENSITY
0.2
0.4
1.0
3.0
6.0
6.0
3.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
14.0
6.0
8.0
14.0
d.u. per gross
30
30
35
35
25 % of lot
spaces
acre
co
MIN.
LOT SIZE (SF)
5.0 ac.
85,OOA
35,000
12,000
7,000
7,000
12,000
10,000
7,000
7,000
7,000
7,000
-
-
-
acres or
(OTHER)
-
-
-
-
-
12,000
24,000
20,000
12,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
7,000
5,000
2,000
square feet
MIN.
LOT WIDTH (SF)
150
150
150
80
70
70
80
80
70
70
70
70
-
-
-
feet
(OTHER)
-
-
-
-
-
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
70
50
32
MIN.
-
YARD
Front
30
50
50
25
20
25
251
254
251
251
251
251
20
20
20
-
Side (SF)
30
30
30
15
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
-
-
-
feet
(OTHER)
-
-
-
-
-
15
151
154
151
151
151
151
10
10
10
-
Rear
30
30
30
25
20
25
251
253
251
251
251
251
20
20
10
MIN.
FLOOR AREA
(SF)
750
1,200
1,200
1,200
750
750
1,200
1,200
750
750
750
750
-
-
- square feet
(OTHER)
400
-
-
-
-
750
550
550
550
550
550
500
550
550
- per dwelling
unit
MAX.
BLDG. HEIGHT
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35 feet
MAX.
LOT COVER.
30
30
30
30
30
25
25
25
25
25
25
30
40/302
40/302
40 % of lot
MIN.
OPEN SPACE
50
50
50
40
40
40
50
50
50
30
30
30
35
35
25 % of lot
. DISTRICT SIZE - - - - - - - - - - - - 20 20 8 gross acres
MIN. COMMUNITY REC. - - - - r - - - - - - - 10 10 - % of gross
FACILITIES area
0
0
C ?�
Q0
� (NOTES) 1: one (1) foot additional yard for each two (2) feet in height over twenty-five (25) feet in height.
Ln 2: 40% for mobile homes, 30% for other uses.
3: One (1) foot additional yard for each two (2) feet in height over twenty-five (25) feet in height.
VAR: Varies by dwelling unit type.
ZZ
11
1
1
1
JAW 16 1985
ROOK
,VERO LAKE ESTATES VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT. - REQUEST RE FILL
The Board reviewed the following letter:
Vero Lake Estates
Volunteer Fire Department
9448 82nd Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960
(305) 589-1387
116, I -Ile -
/;F:5 S Iv '�' U
Sg
/*
_
DfJ 12/zO
� dol j ,o meq 1
f i
is 0,0 V fes% j� "/.x
e
Commissioner Scurlock noted that we have three separate fire
districts which are totally supported by the millages levied each
year, and he felt we get into a dangerous situation if we start
subsidizing any particular district.
33
I
7-
Commissioner Bowman referred to the history of the
situation, noting that the Cody Report originally recommended a
millage of 7 for the North County Fire District. She believed
the Board originally set the North County District up in a
strange manner since all the high assessment property is the
south district.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that is an incorrect history. He
did not believe there was ever any design to create the district
boundaries in relation to assessments; the North County was
reluctant to participate, preferring to remain with their
volunteer effort, and it was just agreed that if any district was
to be created, it would be with those boundaries. He further
noted that last year he had implored North County to go for a
more appropriate millage rate.
Question arose as to how much fill is involved in this
request, and Administrator Wright believed several thousand
yards.
Chairman Lyons stated that he also has a difficulty in
taking the taxes from one part of the county and using them for a
tax supported operation some place else.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that this station is being
constructed by the people in the area who have raised their own
funds. The North County Taxing District is assisting, but, in
essence, they are trying to do this themselves. He did believe
there is some distinction between this and the District and did
not feel we would be criticized.for assisting a little.
Motion was made by Commissioner Wodtke to authorize the
request from Vero Lake Estates for assistance with hauling of
fill and direct the Administrator to cooperate.
this.
The Board members felt there should be some limitations on
Commissioner Scurlock agreed that Vero Lake Estates has made
a tremendous effort, but he wished to send a message to the North
County Fire District that it some time in the not too far distant
34
��� �I 6 1985 BOOK 9 P'A"i � 9
JAN 16 1985
BOOK 59c., ""r-570
future we will have to readdress the fire setup in the North
County and give consideration to some transition between
volunteers and paid firemen. He also felt we need a vehicle to
tell them that while we support the North County, we are
concerned and believe additional fire protection is needed as the
area is growing very rapidly, and, therefore, we feel they need
to readdress their millage rate and possibly also look at
boundaries.
Commissioner Wodtke believed there is more awareness of
these problems in the North County. He continued that possibly
the Motion should be restated just to provide enough fill to make
the building functional as he had not realized we were going to
be asked to do a two acre site.
Frances Betz came before the Board representing the Vero
Lake Estates Fire Department. She reported that the lot is 150'
by 130'. The lake that is there is part of the property, but
they intend to use the lake to fill the fire truck with water.
This piece of property was donated by Mr. Ansin with the
provision that they at least get a building started within a
year, and the deed was recorded the latter part of last April.
Mrs. Betz noted that they have already had approval of their site
plan, and she believed the County has supplied them with about 15
small loads of fill. These were deposited on the west side, and
the east side is where more fill is needed. She believed about
100 loads would be needed.
Commissioner Wodtke felt 100 loads would cover the entire
lot; he wished to know just what amount is necessary to get them
through the construction.
Administrator Wright pointed out that they will have to have
the proper elevation for the septic tanks, parking, etc.
Commissioner Scurlock asked about the possibility of
considering this as a loan.
Administrator Wright reported that OMB Director Barton just
informed him that this land is not being deeded to the North
35
M M M
County Fire District but to the Vero Lake Department.
OMB Director Barton informed the Board that we have taken
the position with all the volunteers in the North County Fire
District that we would not pay out of the District any repairs,
expansion, etc., to the station buildings unless they were deeded
over to the District. He noted that there could be a reverter
clause.
Attorney Brandenburg felt the Board could make Vero Lakes a
loan on the condition that they deed the property over to the
North County District, but OMB Director Barton reported that
there is strong opposition in the North County to this idea.
In further discussion, it was noted that there have been
problems between the Fire District and Vero Lake Estates
Department. The Board continued to suggest possible alternatives
in order to be able to assist Vero Lakes in some way.
Commissioner Bird commented that, with respect to protocol,
Vero Lake Estates is a member of the North County Fire District,
and whenever they have a problem, they really should go to the
Advisory Board first and then let it come to the Commission as a
recommendation of the Advisory Board.
Commissioner Scurlock felt there is a definite need for a
workshop meeting between the full Commission and the North County
Fire Advisory Committee to try to resolve some of these problems.
He suggested tabling this matter until next week.
Commissioner Wodtke withdrew his Motion.
Mrs. Betz requested that Vero Lakes be advised whenever the
North County matters are on the Commission agenda, and Board
Administrative Aide, Mrs. Forlani stated she would supply them
with a copy of the agenda.
After further discussion, the Board agreed it was time to
set up a joint workshop meeting.
In the interim, the Board directed staff to do further
research as to the amount of fill actually needed and report
back.
36 $UGK. 59, F,{CFS71
JAN 16 1985
r
BOOK
h_'ECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE STATUS REPORT
The Board reviewed the following staff memo:
TO:- The Honorable Members DATE: January 3, 1985 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
'�_A)
FROM:
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
&._ ,A SUBJECT:
Robert M. KeatiLng,UAICP
Planning & Development Director
THROUGH: Mary Jane V. Goetzfried
Chief, Current Development Section
Karen M. Craver
Staff Planner
-
�
ed!5)p
TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
STATUS REPORT
REFERENCES:
Tech.Rev.Com.Rept
DIS:KAREN
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of January 16, 1985.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS.:
At its June 6, 1984 meeting, the Board of County Commissioners
unanimously voted to reinstitute the Technical Review Committee
(TRC) form of site plan review. The committee, comprised of
staff representatives from various County divisions, was rees-
tablished in an effort to address the development community's
concerns regarding excessive site plan review time. To date,
the process has been in effect for approximately six months, at
which time the Planning Department was requested to present an
update/evaluation of the TRC system.
At the weekly Technical Reviei
representatives present comments
distributed one week prior to the
transmitted to the applicant in
letter. The letter also includes
and Zoning Commission meetings an(
must be submitted for inclusion of
ANALYSIS:
Committee meetings, staff
on the subject site plans,
meeting, and all comments are
the form of a discrepancy
the dates of future Planning
dates by which revised plans
the meeting agendas.
Prior to the reorganization of the Technical Review Committee,
the site plan process averaged eight weeks from the time of
submittal of a complete application to Planning and Zoning
Commission approval of the project. The most time consuming
portion of the process was staff review. Under the current TRC
procedures, staff review time is approximately 2 weeks, and the
overall approval process is generally completed in 4 weeks.
Since the first TRC meeting on July 10th, 62 applications have
been reviewed.
In addition to increasing the efficiency of the review process,
the reimplementation of the Technical Review Committee system
has allowed each division to become more knowledgeable of the
37
`I
site plan aspects examined by the others. In being allowed to
attend the TRC meeting, the applicant is also made aware of the
reasoning behind the comments on the plan.
In its initial 6 months of functioning, the Technical Review
Committee system has proven beneficial to both applicant and
reviewer, and it has served to assuage the concerns of the
development community.
Matthew Gore, local architect, wished to commend the
Commission for having set up this committee, which he believed
has been a great help in moving things forward in a timely
fashion.
AGREEMENT WITH TOWN OF ORCHID RE TRAFFIC ON BARRIER ISLAND
Attorney Brandenburg reported that the Town of Orchid has
agreed to the proposed agreement with one change on Page 2,
Section 5. Instead of stating that they "will cooperate to plan
and assure that sufficient funding will be available.....," they
prefer to state that they will cooperate and leave out "assure."
He further noted that there is one typo in Section 2 - 19,000
trips should be corrected to 19,100.
The Chairman had some questions regarding the trip and
percentage figures and did not believe that all the area in the
78% is in the County area. It was noted that this is based on
the Hutchinson Island Study, which some have found objectionable.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
approved the Agreement with the Town of Orchid
re allocation of traffic capacity on the barrier
island and authorized the signature of the
Chairman.
Chairman Lyons expressed his thanks to the Town of Orchid
for working together with us on this matter.
38
JA 16 1985 R,,�,� � =A 51
JAN 16 1985 . aooK 5 r
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF ORCHID
AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
RE: THE ALLOCATION OF TRAFFIC CAPACITY ON ORCHID ISLAND
WHEREAS, on October 8, 1982, Governor Bob Graham, as
Chief Planning Officer of the State of Florida, and in recognition
of the unique characteristics of Hutchinson Island and the growth
pattern prevalent along the Treasure Coast, appointed the
Hutchinson Island Resource Planning and Management Committee (the
Committee), pursuant to Florida Statutes §380.45, and
WHEREAS, the Committee developed the Hutchinson Island
Resource Management Plan (Management Plan) and formally adopted
the Plan on October 6, 1983, and
WHEREAS, subsequently .the Governor and Cabinet of the
State of
Florida began the process
of
designating
Orchid
Island,
excluding
the unincorporated area
of
Indian River
County,
as an
area of critical State concern, and
WHEREAS, Indian River County by virtue of Resolution No.
84-105 publicly stated and documented its intent to work with the
. Town of Orchid to prepare a traffic allocation plan in accordance
with the Hutchinson Island Resource Planning and Management
Committee's recommendations and to submit such plan to the
Department of Community Affairs for its review and comment, and
WHEREAS, the Town of Orchid desires to supply the
Department of Community Affairs with an allocation plan by January
23, 1985, in an attempt to be removed from the area of critical
State concern designation.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Town of Orchid (Town) and Indian
River County ( County) now set forth their understandings and
agreement with respect to the allocation of traffic on Orchid
Island:
1. Of the total vacant buildable acreage within the
traffic zone #1 in the Management Plan, 78% of the acreage lies
within the unincorporated County and 22% of the buildable acreage
lies within the Town. The Town and County agree to use this
percentage as a base for the allocation until such time as both
agree to more accurate figures.
-1-
2. The traffic analysis within the Management Plan
designates Wabasso Bridge as having 19,100 average daily trips
(ADT) at Level of Service "D." The Town and County agree to use
this figure as their basis for the allocation until such time as
both agree to different figures.
3.
Based
on the
foregoing premises, the unincorporated
County shall
have
a share
of the Wabassso traffic allocation of
14,898 ADT's and the Town shall have an allocation of 4,202 ADT's.
The County and Town agree to these figures until such time that
more accurate figures are available from the County's ongoing
traffic study.
4. The Town and County both agree to participate in the
traffic study now underway and commissioned by the County with
Barton Aschman, Associates, Inc. and to participate and consider
imposing reasonable fair -share traffic impact fees on future
construction, as determined by the study, to help fund traffic
improvements on the barrier island.
5.
The County
and
Town agree
to
the principle that
development
densities will
be
coordinated
with
road capacity to
assure that development will not create traffic that will exceed
the efficient and safe use of the barrier island's transportation
system, and that Town and County will cooperate to plan that
sufficient funding will be available to construct road
improvements needed to meet additional growth. The transportation
study now underway will be used as the basis to determine the
available capacity, road improvements, necessary funding
requirements, and development density's limitations.
6. That until such time as the transportation study is
completed and implemented by both the Town and County, both
governments will take the necessary action to assure that
development approvals are not granted in the interim which would
frustrate or impede the intent of the study and this agreement.
-2-
JAN
2-J N
16 1995 �ooK 5 9 Fn,F575
r �
JAN 16 1985 BOOK ,�9F'd- (6
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have authorized
their representatives to sign this document on their behalf the
date set forth beneath their signatures. ��,�' `•,, ,
Signed and sealed in the
presence of:
eAwess '
&1G.4 fo
Witness
Attest:
reds. Wright, Cork
,zeApp*oed as ,jio o
rm
ang
an legal S f' cy:
Sr tea. ts>Fana� nurg,
Cou ty Attor
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
TOWN OF ORCHID
By
>'
Anne Michael, ayor
Date /— 1!v - 8$
tlr 21: �tll 11 `
BOARD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIA VER COUNTY FLORIDA
By S - - /. I - e__ !4�
atr c B . yo ,
Chairman
Date January 16, 1985
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this �6- day of,
1985, before me personally appeared ANNE MICHAEL, as yor-of the
TOWN OF ORCHID, to me known to be the person described in and who
executed the foregoing Agreement.
WITNESS my signature and official seal in the County and
State last aforesaid on this 16'9� day of Q 1985.
NOTARY PUBLIC
Notary PuNic, State of Finrift at Large
My Ciomryllsslan LiFere:. Deli;y i^ 7`}iiii
STATE OF FLORIDA rx::rcc,::;:_•..::.,, .... w..:.;+._�
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER 1,
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this/P qdayof�Fr
,
1985, before me personally appeared Patrick B. Lyo anda
Wright, to me known to be the Chairman and Clerk of the BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
respectively, and they acknowledged before me that they executed
the foregoing instrument on behalf of said corporation.
WITNESS my signature and officia seal in the Count iy and
State last aforesaid on this -y` j day of T$85:
.. v
�(OTARY PUBLIC 5TATE &FLORID
BONDED THRU GENERAL INSURANCE UND .
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 8 1986
-3-
m
,)DISCUSSION RE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM
V A
Attorney Brandenburg referred to Chapter 84-110, Florida
Statutes, and explained that the Legislature has adopted a new
enforcement mechanism for alimony and child support payments; has
required the Clerk's office to set up the procedures to enforce
it; and has required the County Commission to fund the legal and
secretarial help necessary to enforce it. The difference is that
all the new orders for alimony and child support will contain
language requiring the obligor to notify the Clerk's office of
his place of employment at all times, and then if he is late with
a payment, the Clerk must notify him, and then send an order to
his employer, whereupon the employer automatically will deduct
the due amount from his pay.
Commissioner Wodtke asked what happens if the individual
isn't employed, and Attorney Brandenburg noted there are a lot of
problems involved with this since some of these people have a
different job every week. He explained that this is an alternate.
means to enforce child support and alimony payments, and all the
other alternatives still are available.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if this provides an additional fee
structure, and Attorney Brandenburg stated that 3% of the
obligation is required as a fee to the Clerk's Office, and if
there is a delinquency, there are additional fees. This applies
from this point forward and to any past orders that are brought
in to be modified. It is an additional workload for the Clerk's
Office, and the Clerk has asked his office to help them set up
procedures. He noted, however, that he does not want his office
to get involved in the day to day child support enforcement
procedures; who will do that and how much it is going to take
will have to be addressed probably through the Clerk's office and
the Clerk's budget.
Commissioner Bird inquired if the Clerk has any idea of the
possible financial impact of these new procedures.
39
SAN 16 1985 EOOK 5R
FP_ 1
JAS 16 1985 BooK 59 c-,-578
Clerk Freda Wright stated that she does not at this time;
11
her office will have to get involved with it first, but she just
wanted the Board to be aware of what is taking place and to be
aware she may have to come back to them later in this regard.
Attorney Brandenburg asked the Board to indicate if they
agree with the concept that his office should not be involved in
the alimony or child support enforcement proceedings.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, to indicate that the County Attorney's
Office is not to be involved in the alimony or child
support enforcement procedures to be set up by the Clerk.
Clerk Wright felt this will mean that she will have to hire
an attorney, but Attorney Brandenburg clarified that he will
advise the Clerk of what to do, how to do it, what forms to use,
and that type of thing, but he does not want his office to be
involved in taking these non -payers to court'or having to deal
with this every day.
Chairman Lyons agreed we should start out this way and see
what happens, and Clerk Wright assured the Board her office will
work with this and see just what it entails.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION OF CONDEMNATION - CR 512 RIGHT-OF-WAY (R. MILLER)
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
adopted Resolution 85-12 declaring the acquisi-
tion of certain parcels of property for right-
of-way purposes for the development of CR 512
corridor a public necessity.
40
RESOLUTION 85-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, DECLARING THE
ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN PARCELS OF PROPERTY FOR
RIGHT OF WAY PURPOSES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
COUNTY ROAD 512 CORRIDOR IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, TO BE A PUBLIC NECESSITY AND AUTHORIZING
THE PREPARATION AND PROSECUTION OF EMINENT DOMAIN
PROCEEDINGS.
WHEREAS, the County is authorized by Florida Statutes
5127.01(2) and 5337.27(2) and (3) to acquire by eminent domain
those right of ways identified as necessary for future development
of transportation corridors designated by the County's Comprehen-
sive Land Use Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Land Use Plan identifies the
County Road 512 corridor as a major east -west arterial in the
North County area, the development of which will require acquisi-
tion of substantial road right of way, including specifically a
link between the existing Florida East Coast Railway tracks and
U. S. Highway #1, across those parcels more fully described in the
attached Exhibit "A;" and
WHEREAS, the parcels across which this link of future
County Road 512 development will extend are presently held in
private fee simple ownership, and in order to acquire subject
right of way, and to place the owners thereof on record notice
that condemnation is forthcoming, it is necessary for the County
Public Works Director and County Attorney to take legal action,
employ real estate appraisers, and do all such further acts as may
be reasonably required to carry out such condemnation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
1. The foregoing recitals are adopted and ratified in
their entirety.
2. The acquisition of fee simple ownership for right of
way purposes to support the development of the County Road 512
arterial corridor between the eastern boundaries of the Florida
East Coast Railway right of way and U.S. Highway #1 (State Road
#5), across those parcels more fully described in Exhibit "A"
41
JAN 16 1985 BOOK
L
J
FF_
Boor 5 Pd' -JF 580
attached hereto, is declared to be in the interest of the citizens
of Indian River County and an absolute public necessity.
3. The County Attorney is hereby authorized and directed
to take all steps necessary for the County to acquire by donation,
purchase or eminent domain proceedings, the subject parcels, or so
much thereof as may be specifically delineated after further sur-
veying and planning, and to have prepared in the name of Indian
River County all papers, pleadings and other instruments required
for said purposes and to see that all eminent domain proceedings
are prosecuted to Final Judgment.
4. The County Attorney and County Public Works Director
are hereby further authorized and directed to take such other
action as may be reasonably required to fully accomplish the pur-
poses hereinabove stated.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Scurlock who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Wodtke and, upon being put to a vote, the vote
was as follows:
Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Vice -Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 16th
Aprroved as `O iur:T,
and legal sctticie,xy
BAV9a__ft_9
Gar y f' . B: 0rj)u
Ccanty Atto:-ltey
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
day of January , 1985.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF Z
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
X-00
By
TRICK B. YONS
Chairman
Acknowledged before me, the undersigned authority, this
day of, 1985, A. D.
No aryblic
My Commission Expires:
NbiA-k PUBLIC STATE
:ONDED THRU GENERAL INSURANCE UNDI
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 8 1986
42
EXHIBIT "A"
Beginning at the intersection of the Southerly line of
Block 3, EDGEWATER PARK SUBDIVISION according to Plat Book 1, Page
23, Public Records of St. Lucie County, (now Indian River County,
Florida) and Westerly right-of-way line of U.S. #1 as same now
exists, run Northwest on the Westerly right-of-way line of said
highway a distance of 350 feet;
1. thence, run Southwest 14.5.30 feet parallel to
the Southerly line of said Block 3, also known
as the North line of that certain property
conveyed to Henry Storch as recorded in
Official Record Book 131, page 43, Public
Records of Indian River County, Florida, to the
Easterly right-of-way line of the Florida East
Coast Railway;
2, thence, run Northwesterly on the Easterly
right-of-way of Florida East .Coast Railway, a
distance of 142.76 feet to the True Point of
Beginning;
3. thence, continue on the Easterly right-of-way
of the Florida East Coast Railway, a distance of
163.94 feet;
4. thence, run Easterly 174.068 feet parallel to
the Southerly line of Government Lot 6 to the
Westerly right-of-way line of U.S. 1 (State
Road 5 )
5. thence, run Southeasterly 100.00 feet on the
Westerly right-of-way line of U.S. 1 (State
Road 5);
6. thence, run Southwesterly 154.73 feet parallel
to the Southerly line of said Block 3 to the
True Point of Beginning.
Said land lying and being in the City of Sebastian,
Government Lot 6, Section 6, Township 31 South, Range 39 East,
Indian River County, Florida; and together with 1 tract of land in
the town of Sebastian, Florida, beginning at the Northwest corner
on the line between Kirk Brothers and J. Bruce Martin, and running
South for a distance of 150 feet along the line of the Florida
East Coast Railway Right of Way, thence running East to the
present line of Dixie Highway; thence North binding on the present
line of the Dixie Highway to a point at the Northeast corner of
the line between said Kirk Brothers and J. Bruce Martin; thence
running West with the line between said Kirk Brothers and J. Bruce
Martin to the beginning and right of way line of the Florida East
Coast Railway. LESS the right-of-way of State Road 5 as set forth
in Official Record Book 4, Page 337, Public Records of Indian
River County, Florida. Said land lying in Section 6, Township 31
South, Range 39 East, lying and being in Indian River County,
Florida.
43
BOOK 9 F'A-F 5:S
I
JA Nil 6 1985
BOOK 5 �,A 5 -
REPLACEMENT ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Commissioner Scurlock informed the Board that he would like
to removed from the Chairmanship of the Economic Development
Committee and have Commissioner Wodtke take over in his place,
which will enable him to get back as Chairman of the
Transportation Committee.
Commissioner Wodtke confirmed that he has agreed to this.
ON MOTION BY Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
appointed Commissioner Wodtke Chairman of
the Economic Development Committee replacing
Commissioner Scurlock.
JiEPLACEMENT ON COUNTYWIDE RECREATION STUDY COMMITTEE
Commissioner Bird reported that Robert Scurfield has
submitted his resignation from the Countywide Recreation Study
Committee, and he would like to recommend that Shirley Fitzgerald
of the YMCA be appointed in his place. He noted that the YMCA
wishes to be represented on this committee, and he believed it
would be beneficial.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
appointed Shirley Fitzgerald to the Countywide
Recreation Study Committee to replace Robert
Scurfield.
The Board of County Commissioners thereupon recessed at
12:05 o'clock P.M. for lunch and reconvened at 1:45 o'clock P.M.
with all members present except Chairman Lyons who did not
return. Vice Chairman Scurlock took over the meeting in the
Chairman's absence.
44
ADOPTION OF PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (PRD) ORDINANCE
The hour of 9:45 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
11-1 4 VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
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 daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of Ac
In the
lished in said newspaper in the issues
i i. r,;;:-I_
07%CE OF PUBLIC HEARING
- .. f.1'.TO CONSIDER ADOPTION
,, ,OF COUNTIrORDINANCE
' NOMCE;, IS, HEREBY, GIVEN . that die If
River County Board. 4 County Commissic
shall hold, a public hearing at Which parties
ter"' 4nd citizens shall have an opportune
be heard onJanuary 18; 1045, In the G
Commission"Chambers located in. the G
Administration Building, 1840'. 25th Street,
Beach, Florida, at 9:45 a.m, or as soon then
as.may-beheard, tq oonsider pdopMq an
napceIn
,entitled:
R-
i",OliON1Y .COMMIS$IONERa O OF
'
:�pNER,L''OUNTY, FLORIDA, ESTABUSt
z' t"ING NEW 'ZONING ,REGULATIONS Ti
SE KNOWN AS PLANNED RESIDENTIA
DEVELOPMENT (PRD),- SPECIAL E)
CEPTION STANDARDS.AM.. PROCI
DURES; CREATING SECTION 25.4 0
r ;.APPENDIX A TO THE CODE OF LAW
'!'kWD ORDINANCES OP'INDIAN RIVE
_ /Court, was pub-
Y�
..c
9, /y t5'
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; 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
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this ay of D. 19
v T j it
t (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River Cou
(SEALy
made
Planning Director Keating reviewed staff memo and
recommendation, as follows:
45
AND RE -
ORDINANCES, AS WELL AS
TION, -SEVERABILITY, AND _ Y
�E DATE.
on decides to appeal' any decieton
above matter,: he/she wilt need a
i proceedings, and for such -Pur-
a may need to sneure.that a verba -
the proceedings Is made, which In-
o
and evidence upon which- thead.
River County u: r�
Of Couhty Commi�tohare i a
)on C. Scurlock, Chairman
Jan. 8,1985- s i':'I,r3 i ?i"aix':
v FYI i 583
JAN 16 1985.
_I
BOOK 59 r.,1,r 584
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: January 7, 1985 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners
PROPOSED PLANNED
RESIDENTIAL
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT (PRD)
ORDINANCE
FROM:Robert M. Heating, AI PNEFERENCES:
Planning & Development Director
It is requested that the data herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at
their regular meeting of January 16, 1985.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The.first section of the new zoning code to be completed is
the PRD ordinance. Structured as a PUD (Planned Unit
Development) ordinance, the PRD provides flexibility to land
developers in the design of residential projects. Specif-
ically, the draft ordinance allows the various size and
dimension requirements of a zoning district to be modified
within a PRD. The PRD will also allow innovative develop-
ment types, transfers of density from environmentally
sensitive areas to upland areas, and the inclusion of
accessory commercial uses within PRD's.
As proposed, the PRD will be a special exception use in all
of the residential districts of the new zoning code. In the
new code, special exception uses will require action by both
the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Board of County
Commissioners. As such, the approval process for a special
exception use in the new code will be similar to the Coun-
ty's current rezoning procedure. With a PRD, however, a
concept plan for the proposed development must be submitted
with and approved concurrently with the special exception
use.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
Through a series of thre
by interested citizens
community, the draft PP
alyzed. At these meetii
tified, and a number of
result is an ordinance
design flexibility in
requiring adherence to
trade-off.
e public workshop meetings attended
and members of the development
D ordinance was discussed and an-
�gs various alternatives were iden-
:hanges to the draft were made. The
which provides a certain amount of
residential developments while
certain additional standards as a
It is the staff's position that the proposed PRD ordinance
will be beneficial to the County. While providing design
flexibility and the opportunity to include accessory commer-
cial within planned residential projects, the PRD ordinance
46
s � �
requires that projects provide minimum levels of recreation
and open space areas, develop an adequate system of internal
pedestrian and vehicular circulation, and adequately buffer
adjacent properties. All PRD's must also comply with both
the County's site plan and subdivision requirements.
It is anticipated that the PRD ordinance will be used for
various types of projects. These will include: land
condominiums; zero lot line projects; projects where the
zoning code's size and dimension criteria are to be mod-
ified; projects involving a transfer of density from en-
vironmentally sensitive to uplands areas; projects having a
variety of housing types; projects clustering units to
preserve trees or other natural site features; and projects
incorporating accessory commercial within a residential
development.
On November 15, 1984, the Planning & Zoning Commission held
a public hearing on the PRD ordinance and at that time voted
3-2 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners
adopt the PRD ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners
adopt the proposed Planned Residential District (PRD)
ordinance.
Planning Director Keating noted that this ordinance was
prepared by a consultant and then substantially modified through
a series of workshop meetings, all of which were well advertised
and well attended with a great deal of input being made. He
explained that generally PRD is comparable to PUD (Planned Unit
Development), and basically what it does is allow an applicant to
develop one project as an entire project and put different types
of structure and uses within that one project. Staff looks at it
from the perspective that it adds some flexibility to the design
process of a project. Director Keating then referred to a
graphic which delineates several of the specific advantages of a
PRD as follows:
1) It allows people to develop land condominiums; we presently do
not have a process allowed for this.
2) It provides a specific mechanism for the transfer of density
from environmentally sensitive areas to upland areas. Although
that is currently in the Comprehensive Plan, there is no specific
implementing ordinance now on the books.
47
JAN 16 1985 �oaK � 9 F -Au 58
JAN 16 19951
BOOK 59 F�A ,F 586
3) It provides for the clustering of units and preservation of
the unique features of a site, i.e., it allows an applicant to
come up with a variation on the size and dimension requirements
of the zoning district in designing his project.
4) It provides for the inclusion of a certain amount of limited
accessory commercial use. This is very strictly regulated and
must be accessory; must be located within the PRD itself; and
must serve only that project.
5) It allows developments having a variety of house types to be
developed as one single project.
Director Keating further explained that procedurally the PRD
will be implemented as a Special Exception use, and it is a
Special Exception use in almost all of the residential districts
discussed this morning. There is no specific size requirement
for a PRD, but the PRD must adhere to site plan and subdivision
regulations; it must provide more recreation space; and there are
specific requirements re open space. He emphasized that there
are no density bonuses available with this ordinance.
Commissioner Scurlock believed the big fear is that the open
space eventually will be converted into units.
Director Keating noted that to make sure open space stays
that way, there is a requirement that it conform to the subdivi-
sion regulations and it must be platted.
Commissioner Bird asked Attorney Brandenburg if he felt
comfortable with this, and the Attorney confirmed that he did.
He noted, however, that there is nothing you put of record that
cannot eventually be changed, but the point is that it is set up
this way on the record so if these things were to occur, it would
be a very long and onerous process, and everyone would have
plenty of opportunity to voice their objections.
Director Keating stated that staff looks at this as a
beneficial ordinance because it allows staff to work closer with
the applicant and achieve some of the county's objectives in the
process. He noted that the Planning & Zoning Commission
recommended approval by a 3 to 2 vote.
Commissioner Scurlock commented that one voted against it
because of it being too liberal and the other too conservative.
M
M
Commissioner Wodtke had a question as to what we do to make
sure the required open space is maintained.
Attorney Brandenburg explained that the Subdivision
regulations apply, and they require mandatory homeowners
associations, which associations have maintenance requirements
and the ability to assess the homeowners for maintenance.
Director Keating stated this is required when there are any
common areas.
Vice Chairman Scurlock opened the floor to the public,
commenting that during the workshop sessions we got into specific
projects, and he did not feel this would serve any purpose at
this time.
Attorney Michael O'Haire came before the Board on behalf of
the Civic Association. He stated that the Civic Association
feels staff has done a good job in putting the proposed ordinance
together and feels it is desirable, but because it has been
controversial in the past and since it is new to the county, they -
urge the Board to take a very conservative approach. Specifi-
cally, they feel there should be a minimum size for a PRD, and
that it should consist of no less than 25 contiguous acres. This
can always be changed in the future, if necessary. Mr. O'Haire
continued that where a PRD crosses zoning districts - multiple
family and single family - the way the ordinance is now drafted,
the density can be concentrated in the single family aspect and
the multiple family aspect could be left in open area. What the
Civic Association would like the Board to consider is a
requirement that the density be no greater in the basic land area
than it would have been were there no PRD. If people are
adjacent to a single family zoned area, they are entitled to
protection.
Commissioner Bird noted that if the area were all single
family, there is, of course, the possibility under the PRD that
by clustering you might end up with a higher density of
49
V,.
BUCK c U FGA 58 ~7
JAN 16 1985
BOOK
FA F
�
residential next to your other single family even
if it
were
all
single family. He asked if they would object to that.
Attorney O'Haire did not feel they would, but stressed they
do not want the overall gross area any denser.
Vice Chairman Scurlock felt what they are looking for
apparently is an orderly transition.
Attorney Brandenburg did not feel we object to that and
believed we have language to accomplish it on Page 3, 3 b., More
Than One Zoning District; Interpretation of Allowable Uses. -
which says: "Whenever a PRD is proposed which includes land
having more than one zoning district or Comprehensive Plan Use
map designation, the applicant shall have the opportunity to
develop the PRD as a unified project. Each portion of a PRD with
different underlying zoning must comply with the density and use
requirements of the underlying zoning district, and can distrib-
ute the density and use throughout that portion of the PRD with
such zoning subject to approval of the site plan."
The Board felt that was reasonable.
Vice Chairman Scurlock inquired what staff felt about a
minimum of 25 acres for PRD.
Director Keating informed the Board that staff does not feel
there should be a minimum size for a PRD because some of the
things we want to accomplish would be inhibited by a size
limitation. He noted that we have land condos that want to come
in less than 25 acres, and transfers to,upland area will only be
allowed in PRDs.
Attorney Brandenburg pointed out that going through PRD is a
more expensive process, and, therefore, if a person with a small
piece of property could develop any other way, he certainly
would. If, however, he has a situation where he is near an
arterial, he might want to cluster. There are some unique little
situations, we would hope could be dealt with through PRD.
Robert McKnight, 49 Royal Palm Boulevard, appreciated Mr.
O'Haire's remarks, but wished to point out that the intent of the
50
ordinance, as set out in the draft with which he has been
supplied, is that a PRD would offer applicants greater
flexibility in designing and developing residential areas to
accommodate a more efficient and innovative residential
development. For the record, he wished to note that his company
has a 10 acre piece of property which is unique; it is laden with
large beautiful oak trees, and the only way they can develop, not
even to their allowable density, is to move around the trees
without taking them out. He realized Mr. O'Haire is saying let's
go cautiously, but reminded him there are seven stops before you
can even pull a permit on this, and it is an expensive process.
Vice Chairman Scurlock believed, from the staff's
standpoint, that some of the things we want to be able to
accomplish are on these smaller sites.
Attorney O'Haire emphasized that basically the Civic
Association just wishes the Board to be conservative and go
cautiously. The next specific item he wished to cover was in
Paragraph 4. c.ii. Transitional Area Density Credit. This states
that the maximum density permitted on the upland area receiving
the density transfer shall not increase by more than 50%. The
Association would like to limit this to 250.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked where we got the 50% figure,
and Attorney Brandenburg reported that it is a compromise
figure. He noted that the objectives of the transfer are to
encourage people not to build on environmentally sensitive lands,
which they can do at one unit per acre. It is recognized that
some parcels will have a small upland area; so, there has to be a
cap, but if you set an unreasonable cap, you won't give them the
benefit of the transfer and will end up with them building on the
environmentally sensitive lands. He felt 50o is a reasonable
compromise and that a lower cap would defeat the purpose of
saving the environmentally sensitive lands.
Attorney O'Haire felt the cost of developing environmentally
sensitive land is such that it is quite restrictive in itself.
�$ `� 51 y
JA _[ 1 1 985 BOOK 5 Fr�L;C 589
A
JAN 16 1995
BOOK 5 F 590
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked if these figures have been
worked out in relation to specific parcels, and Director Keating
stated that there are so many variables in the development of a
site that they have not done this.
Attorney Brandenburg commented that, at one point, the
thought was to allow them to transfer the entire amount.
Vice Chairman Scurlock noted that on 6th Avenue we looked at
such transfers and wanted to have compatibility with the
neighborhood. He asked if there is any vehicle that assures
that, when such a transfer takes place, we don't end up with 20
units density next to 5 units.
Director Keating answered that there is a compatibility zone
built into.the PRD concept requiring a 150' buffer in the project
where you have a similar type of land use as its adjacent use.
He noted that you can't build multi family next to single family,
-but-would have to have a transition.
Attorney Brandenburg further noted that we have the ability
to impose conditions because it is a special exception; he
believed there are ample safeguards and suggested this percentage
be left as it is.
Attorney O'Haire next referred to Paragraph 6. b.vii. -
Credit for Impervious Private Exterior Open Areas. He stated
that the Civic Association would urge that this allowance of
credit towards open space requirements be eliminated altogether.
Attorney O'Haire noted that it excepts parking, which, of course,
is the largest impervious area to be dealt with, but what
concerns the Civic Association are items such as balconies,
terraces, porches, patios, atriums, etc., which eventually are
part of the dwelling units using them and should not be credited
towards an open space requirement because they don't really
accomplish what open space is designed to do.
Director Keating stated that this is another issue which was
discussed quite a bit; staff's philosophy was that in a project
where you have a patio, either screened in or open, and it is an
52
M M M
impervious surface, it does constitute an open space and the
residents of that particular unit will use it as open space. If
people have recreation space and have a private pool or tennis
court, for instance, it is comparable to the required recreation
open space and will be credited as open space.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked about the visual impact and
brought up The Mews which has interior courtyards, but these are
not visible to people passing by.
Attorney Brandenburg pointed out that this is private
exterior open space we are talking about and an interior atrium
would not qualify for this. He felt the important point is that
you want to encourage people to put in swimming pools, patios,
gazebos, etc., and if they don't get credit for this and have to
have other property for open space, they are not as likely to put
these in.
Discussion continued as to whether atriums, such as at the
Hidden Harbor project and The Mews are considered interior or
exterior areas, and Attorney Brandenburg believed if something is
between units, it is exterior and if it is within a unit, it is
interior.
Commissioner Wodtke agreed if you have a swimming pool or
tennis court, that should qualify as exterior open space, but
Attorney O'Haire argued that when you have a swimming pool which
is enclosed by four walls and used only by one family, it does
not really accomplish anything in terms of the open space
requirement.
Director Keating noted that staff considers that it does
serve some of the functions of open space and should be credited
to a certain extent, and that is why it was set at 10%.
Attorney Brandenburg clarified that the loo should refer to
100 of the open space requirement of the development, not gross
area.
Vice Chairman Scurlock continued to express concern about
the visual impact of having open space, and Attorney Brandenburg
53
BOOK
� JAN 16 1985 J
r
6 1985
BOOK
felt if we took out the word "enclosed" and substituted
59
2
"partially enclosed," this would help. This was agreed on.
Attorney O'Haire next brought up Paragraph 7.a. Minimum
Recreation Areas Required. He understood from staff that the
figures used were taken from a Broward County standard of five
acres for 1,000 residents'. He did not feel this was sufficient
or appropriate for our county and suggested at a very minimum ten
acres per 1,000 residents.
Attorney Brandenburg noted that the open space requirement
should not be confused with the recreation space requirement,
which is much greater.
Attorney O'Haire still felt 1,000 residents should have more
than five acres of recreation space, preferably ten acres.
Director Keating stated that this was another item discussed
extensively. Staff looked at it from the standpoint that there
will be advantages both to the county and the applicant to go
through the PRD, and they felt if the requirements are made too
burdensome, it will serve as a deterrent and keep people from
using this.
Commissioner Bird felt you can put a -lot of recreation
facilities on five acres.
Vice Chairman Scurlock noted that this relates to residents
per acre, and if you figure two residents per acre, in a
situation such as Grand Harbor, for instance, where you are
talking about 3,000 units, you would be talking about 60 acres of
recreation area, not open space.
Mr. McKnight urged the Board not to adjust the threshold of
ten acres for those PBDs which are required to provide a certain
amount of recreation space, which he felt was very properly set
in the proposed ordinance.
Attorney Brandenburg noted the five acre per 1,000 resident
requirement standard was set up in a Broward County impact fee
ordinance and was backed up by a very large recreation impact fee
54
study they did to uphold that ordinance, and it was upheld. That
is one of the basic reasons for our starting out with that
criteria.
Discussion continued as to the amount of acreage this would
require in various size projects, and the Board generally agreed
they would stay with the way it is now written.
Attorney O'Haire then referred to Paragraph 9.c.ii. -
Minimum Residential Floor Area Requirements. He noted that Solin
& Associates did a survey of ten jurisdictions, and what they are
proposing for our PRD is smaller square footage requirements than
the City of Sebastian, for instance. We are coming out lower
than any of the other jurisdictions surveyed, and he did not see
why a PRD should permit smaller per unit sizes than the
underlying zoning would permit. Attorney O'Haire suggested there
is no rationale for that and asked that the Board keep the
minimum sizes to what they adopted this morning in the underlying
zoning categories.
Commissioner Bird and Vice Chairman Scurlock agreed.
Director Keating explained that the only thing different
here from what we did this morning was put in provisions for an
efficiency unit. Otherwise, it is more restrictive because we
have square footage related to the number of bedrooms. Staff
feels strongly that single family units that are free standing
affect the property value of those next to them, but when you
talk about smaller apartments in a large building, it allows more
housing choice; it will not increase density; and it will not
affect anyone looking at it from outside.
Vice Chairman Scurlock noted that, in other words, all we
are talking about is eliminating efficiences.
Mr. McKnight stated that he personally does not disagree
with Mr. O'Haire on this, but noted that Mr. Robinson made the
suggestion this morning that the Board leave some latitude for
changing economy and affordable housing.
55
JAN 1 1995
goo '.9
JAN 16 1985
Boos 5 -a.�C.5
Vice Chairman Scurlock believed we need a specific approach
to low cost housing, and suggested we just make it 550' and be
consistent with the underlying zoning.
Commissioner Wodtke stated that he would like somewhere
where efficiencies are allowed, because he felt there is a
definite need, such as at St. Francis Manor, for instance. He
suggested we make efficiencies 450' or 500' and then revisit this
when we get into the matter of low cost housing.
Attorney O'Haire noted that 400 sq. ft. is the size of a
hotel room, 20 x 20, and he felt this could snowball in relation
to traffic problems, etc.,
It was again pointed out that this is not changing density.
Discussion continued in regard to low cost housing, and it
was felt that actually density is more of a factor in low cost
housing then square footage.
Attorney O'Haire noted the Civic Association is not opposed
to low cost housing, but does not feel it should be addressed in
the PRD.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if the Board has any disagreement
about allowing an efficiency in a PRD, and they did not, but felt
it should be left at a minimum of 550'
Commissioner Wodtke believed in RM -14 we went to 5001, and
Vice Chairman Scurlock agreed. It was agreed to set the minimum
square footage for an efficiency at 500'.
Vice Chairman Scurlock inquired if there were any other
recommended changes, and Commissioner Wodtke noted that on Page 3
it states that all PRDs should be located within the boundaries
of the Urban Service Areas established in the Comprehensive Plan.
He wished to know if we have that mapped out.
Director Keating confirmed that we do, but pointed out that
it says "should." This is not a requirement.
The Vice Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard.
Nancy Offutt, liaison for the Board of Realtors, noted that
they participated in the workshop process and they offer no
56
objections to the document as presented by staff, but she felt
she would be remiss if she did not rebut the Civic Association's
suggestion that the minimum size of a PRD should be at least 25
acres. She would suggest, with that little faith in what we feel
is a good concept of clustering, which would be the least
intrusive development vehicle on the environment, that to make a
mistake on 25 acres would be worse than to make a mistake on
something smaller, and she would offer that the site plan
criteria and the special exception criteria will in itself take
care of whatever size is economical and to the best interests of
the county.
Mr. McKnight commented that although a developer will never
find an instrument such as this perfect, he would commend staff
and felt that it is very workable and very realistic as it is now
proposed.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (4-0)
adopted Ordinance 85-5, Planned Residential
Development, as amended.
Ordinance 85-5 is hereby made a part of the Official Record.
JAN 16 1985 57 BOOK 59 Fr c
JAN 111985
BOOK
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 85-5
AN OR INANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ESTABLISHING NEW ZONING REGULATIONS
TO BE KNOWN AS PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (PRD) SPECIAL
EXCEPTION STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES; CREATING SECTION 25.4 OF
APPENDIX A TO THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, KNOWN AS THE COUNTY'S ZONING CODE,
INCLUDING GENERAL REGULATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS, REVIEW
STANDARDS, AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES; AND PROVIDING FOR THE
REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, AS WELL AS CODIFICATION,
SEVERABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION 1
Section 25.4, entitled "Planned Residential Development (PRD) Special.Exception
Standards and Procedures", of Appendix A to the Code of Laws and Ordinances of
Indian River County, Florida, known as the Zoning Code is hereby created to read
as follows:
SECTION 25.4: PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (PRD)
SPECIAL EXCEPTION STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES
25.4 A. Purpose and Intent.
The purpose of this section is to establish an alternate scheme of
land use controls which promote the public health, safety, comfort,
order, appearance, convenience, and general welfare of Indian River
County; to protect the environment and retain natural landscaping; to
meet the growing demand for housing of all types and design; to
encourage innovations in residential development, with greater variety
in type, design and layout of lots and buildings than generally possi-
ble under conventional zoning regulations; to conserve and efficiently
use open space; to provide greater opportunities for better housing
and recreation; to encourage more efficient use of land and public
services; and to conserve land values.
25.4 B. Coordination With Other Regulations.
Final Planned Residential Development (PRD) Plan approval, as provided
herein, shall constitute full compliance with the subdivision regu-
lations of the County. Final PRD Plan approval shall entitle the
applicant to all the privileges of recording a final plat afforded
under the subdivision regulations.
In the event of conflict between this section and other zoning and
subdivision regulations of the County, the provision of this article
shall prevail to the extent of such conflict.
In the event of conflict between this section and the building and
safety codes of the County, the provisions of the building and safety
codes shall prevail to the extent of such conflict.
25.4 C. Special Definitions.
All definitions appearing in Section 2 of the
be applicable to this Section, except to the
with any special definitions contained herein.
-1-
Zoning Ordinance shall
extent of inconsistency
1. Ad'acent. A lot or parcel of land that is nearby and not neces-
sari y adjoining. The lots or parcels may be separated by
streets, rights-of-way, power lines, or similar open areas.
2. Direct Visual Access. Unobstructed line -of -sight from within a
dwelling unit to all or portion of an open space area.
3. Major Recreational Facility. A facility designed for the active
recreational use and enjoyment of residents of a Planned Residen-
tial Development which is fifteen (15) acres or more in size.
4. Planned Residential Development (PRD). A land area under unified
control which is designed and planned to be developed in a single
operation by a series of prescheduled development phases accord-
ing to an officially approved PRD Plan which does not necessarily
correspond to the property development and use regulations of the
zoning district in which the development is located.
5. Private Street. A privately owned access to abutting property,
which serves more than one property, is not dedicated to the
general public and is maintained by a Property Owner's Asso-
ciation or other entity.
25.4 D. Applicable Zoning Districts.
Planned Residential Developments may be approved as a special excep-
tion pursuant to the standards and procedures established herein
within the following zoning districts:
1. Agricultural Zoning Districts.
a. A-1: Agricultural District
2. Rural Transition Area Zoning Districts.
a. RFD: Rural Fringe Development District
b. RS -1: Single Family District
3. Residential Zoning Districts..
a. RS -3 and RS -6: Single Family Districts
b. RT -6: Two -Family District
C. RM -3, RM -4 and RM -6: Multiple Family Districts
d. RM -8, RM -10 and RM -14: Multiple Family Districts
4. Commercial and Industrial Zoning Districts.
All commercial and industrial districts.
25.4 E. General Regulations and Requirements.
The following general regulations and requirements shall apply to all
applications for approval of Planned Residential Developments as
special exceptions.
1. Ownership, Unified Control. All PRD special exception applica-
tions shall be filed in the name of the record owner of the
property included in the PRD. However, the application may be
filed by an applicant with an equitable interest in the property,
or by an attorney or agent for the owner, provided the record
owner joins in and executes the application. All applications
shall include a verified statement showing each and every indi-
vidual person having a legal equitable and/or beneficial owner-
ship interest in the property upon which the application for PRD
approval is sought, except corporations, in which case the name
and address of the corporation, the names and addresses of each
stock holder owning more than ten (1O%) per cent of the value of
outstanding shares of the corporation, the principal executive
officers, and the registered agent of the corporation.
-2-
JAN 16 1985 BOOK 59 Fr,,F _97
a1AN 1 1985 BOOK 51�'J `,,�-_C 5,9 8
All land included for the purpose of development within a Planned
Residential Development shall be owned or under the control of
the Petitioner. The Petitioner shall document the unified
control of the entire area within the proposed Planned Residen-
tial Development and shall agree to:
a. Develop in accordance with the officially approved Final PRD
Plat and site plan for the development, and such other
conditions or modifications as may be attached to the
special exception;
b. Provide at the time of final development review, agreements,
covenants, contracts, deed restrictions, or sureties accept-
able in form to the County Attorney to assure completion of
the undertaking in accordance with the adopted final PRD
plan (final plat and site plan), as well as for the continu-
ing operation and maintenance of such areas, functions, and
facilities as are not accepted by the County for operation
and maintenance; and
c. Bind his or her development successors in title to any
commitments made under a. and b. preceding.
2. Location and Size. In order to implement the objectives and
policies of the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan and to
encourage orderly development, all Planned Residential Develop-
ments should be located within the boundaries of the Urban
Service Areas, as established in the Comprehensive Plan. No
minimum size for a Planned Residential Development is estab-
lished.
3. Authorized Land Uses.
a. Uses Allowed Within Zoning District. All land uses listed
under the zoning district in effect for the land included
within the PRD, as either a permitted use, use requiring
administrative permit or special exception use for those
districts provided in subsection D, "Applicable Zoning
Districts", preceding, may be allowed within the Planned
Residential Development upon approval by the Board of County
Commissioners. In addition to all standards included
herein, all uses requiring administrative permit or special
exception uses shall be subject to the specific use criteria
established in Section 25.1 "Regulations for Specific Land
Uses".
b. More Than One Zoning District; Interpretation of Allowable
Uses. Whenever a Planned Res identia Deve opment is
proposed which includes lands having more than one (1)
zoning district and/or Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
designation, the applicant shall have the opportunity to
develop the PRD as a unified project subject to approval of
the site plan. Each part of a PRD with different underlying
zoning must comply with the density and use requirements of
the underlying district and may distribute the density and
use throughout that portion of the PRD with such zoning. If
a portion of the site is designated for nonresidential
development on the Comprehensive Plan, and it is also zoned
for nonresidential development, such land uses may be
included as part of the PRD, but will be limited to the
specific boundaries of the underlying zoning district.
Non-residential uses which have the appropriate underlying
zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation, shall be subject
to the open space requirements of the .underlying zoning
district and shall not be subject to the recreational
standards established herein. Commercial uses which have
underlying commercial zoning and an appropriate Comprehen-
sive Plan designation shall not be subject to the re-
strictions
estrictions of para. c, following.
-3-
c. Authorized Accessory Commercial Land Uses. In addition to
those uses specifically allowed within the respective zoning
district(s) of the Planned Residential Development, accesso-
ry commercial establishments which meet the following
criteria and standards may be permitted upon approval by the
Board of County Commissioners at the time of special excep-
tion approval. The following regulations are not intended
to be applicable to home occupations.
i. Minimum Number of Dwelling Units Required for Accessor
Commercial Development; Maximum Size of Commercial
Areas. No accessory commercial establishment shall be
permitted within any Planned Residential Development
which is to contain less than two hundred (200) dwell-
ing units. Accessory commercial land areas may be
approved up to a maximum size of 125 square feet of
land area (including areas for parking and open space)
per dwelling unit within the PRD. The total land area
of accessory commercial areas with any PRD shall not
exceed three (3%) percent of the gross area of the PRD.
ii. Allowable as Accessory Commercial. Only uses allowable
within the neighborhood commercial zoning district
shall be allowed as accessory commercial uses within a
PRD.
iii. Minimum Open S ace Requirements for Accessory Commer-
cial Areas. Ali accessory commercial areas within PRD
shall maintain a minimum of thirty (30%) percent of the
land area allowed in paragraph "i", above, as permanent
open.space.
iv. Location of Accessory Commercial Areas. Such accessory
commercial areas shall be located no closer than two
hundred (200) feet to any boundary of the PRD. Where
more than one type of accessory commercial establish-
ment is proposed, such uses shall be grouped, arranged
and designed for pedestrian convenience and vehicular
access. Parking areas shall be combined where such
combination will result in substantial improvement in
public convenience and vehicular circulation.
v. Accessory Commercial Uses Contained Within a Residen-
tial Structure. Accessory commercial activities may be
permitted to locate within multi -family residential
structures provided that the total floor area contained
therein does not exceed fifty (50%) percent of the
gross residential floor area of the structure, and that
such activities are conducted on the ground floor only.
vi. Enclosure. All authorized accessory commercial activ-
ities shall be conducted entirely within an enclosed
building with no outside display or storage. No public
address system or other devices for making announce-
ments or playing music shall have speakers mounted
outside of such buildings or be audible beyond any lot
line of the building site on which the facility is
located.
vii. Limitations on Signs. Signs shall be permitted for
purposes of identification only, and shall be limited
to one (1), not exceeding ten (10) square feet in
surface area. Where more than one (1) such establish-
ment is located in the same building or on the same
premises, a single sign shall be permitted for each
use. All signs shall be mounted flat against the
principal building.
viii.Applicability of Other Zoning Regulations. All other
-4-
BOOK D 9 FAG- 599
,JAN 16 1985
BOOK v [' p F 690
regulations and standards for commercial establishments
including, but not limited to parking and loading,
landscaping, and lighting requirements shall be appli-
cable.
ix. Occupancy of Accessory Commercial Structures. No
certificates of occupancy for any accessory commercial
establishment shall be issued nor may any building be
used for a accessory commercial establishment before
certificates of occupancy for at least two hundred
(200) dwelling units in the PRD project have been
issued.
4. Density Limitations; Transfer of Densit
a. Maximum Density, Generally. The gross residential density
of a Planned Residential Development shall not exceed the
maximum density permitted in the underlying zoning district
or the maximum density established in the Comprehensive
Plan.: The gross density for a PRD shall not exceed the
maximums permitted as prescribed by the following:
i. Agricultural Zoning Districts.
-- A-1: 0.20 dwelling units/gross acre
ii. Rural Transition Area Zoning Districts.
-- RFD: 0.40 dwelling units/gross acre
-- RS -1: 1.00 dwelling units/gross acre
iii. Residential Zoning Districts.
-- RS -3: 3.00 dwelling units/gross acre
-- RS -6: 6.00 dwelling units/gross acre
-- RT -6: 6.00 dwelling units/gross acre
-- RM -3:_3.00 dwelling units/gross acre
-- RM -4: 4.00 dwelling units/gross acre
-- RM -6: 6:00 dwelling units/gross acre
-- RM -8: 8.00 dwelling units/gross acre
-- RM -10: 10.00 dwelling units/gross acre
-- RM -14: 14.00 dwelling units/gross acre
b. Density Limitations for Environmentally Sensitive Land. As
established in the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan,
environmentally sensitive lands shall be limited to the
following maximum gross density levels. "
i. Environmentally Sensitive Lands East of I-95. Those
land areas which are located east of I-95, and which
are determined to be environmentally sensitive at the
time of PRD special exception approval, based on the
Site Plan Review Standards contained in Section 23.3,
shall be limited to a maximum density of one (1)
dwelling unit per acre.
ii. Environmentally Sensitive Lands West of I-95. Land
areas which are located west of I-95, and which are
determined to be environmentally sensitive at the time
of PRD special exception approval, based on the Site
Plan Review Standards contained in Section 23.3, shall
be limited to a maximum density of 0.20 dwelling units
per acre.
C. Density Transfers to Preserve Environmentally Sensitive
Lands. It is the intent of both the Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance to encourage the
preservation of environmentally sensitive lands within the
County. In order to achieve this objective, it shall be
51!
._
allowable, upon approval by the Board of County Commission-
ers, to transfer a portion or all of the maximum residential
density permitted in environmentally sensitive lands to
approved upland areas within the boundaries of the Planned
Residential Development. Density transfers shall be specif-
ically limited to those requests for PRD special exception
approval.
i. Areas Eligible to Receive Transfer of Densit . Density
transfers may only be applied to areas within the same
PRD site. Any area receiving the transfer of density
shall have been determined not to be environmentally
sensitive and further shall have been deemed suitable
for residential development.
ii. Limitations on Density Transfers; Transitional Area
Density Credit. The maximum density permitted on the
upland area receiving the density transfer shall not
increase by more than fifty (50%) percent. Transition-
al areas which are not designated environmentally
sensitive shall not be developed, however, they shall
be considered upland for the purpose of computing
maximum dwelling unit computation under paragraph 5
below.
iii. Limitations on Open Space Credit. Whenever a PRD
specia exception has been approved for a density
transfer, the environmentally sensitive area shall
count for no more than twenty (20%) percent of the open
space required for the upland area.
iv. Recording of Transfer; Deed Restrictions Required. The
Final PRD plat and site plan shall clearly designate
those areas which have received density transfers and
those environmentally sensitive lands which have had
density transferred, together with such restrictions on
the development of the transitional areas necessary to
assure protection of the environmentally sensitive
resource. All such documents shall be in a form
satisfactory to the County Attorney.
v. Additional Requirements and Safeguards. In approving
the transfer of density from environmentally sensitive
lands to upland areas. the Board of County Commission-
ers may require land use limitations and restrictions
beyond those specifically included herein in order to
adequately preserve and protect the unique natural
resources of Indian River County. Any such require-
ments shall be documented in writing and become part of
the special exception approval.
5. Maximum Dwelling Unit Computation. For the purpose of this
provision, the maximum number of dwelling units allowable within
the PRD shall be computed as follows:
a. Gross area of the PRD in acres
b. Minus areas designated for non-
residential land uses
c. Minus the total area of environ-
mentally sensitive lands from
which density is to be transferred
d. Equals the effective base resi-
dential area
e. Multiplied by the approved density
for the upland portion of the
acres
acres
acres
= acres
BOOK 5 NA 60
JAS! 16 1995, BOOK lit 69
site x d.u./acre
f. Plus density transferred from
environmentally sensitive portion
of the project + d.u./acre
g. Equals the maximum number of
residential dwelling units
permitted = dwellings
6. PRD Open Space Requirements. All Planned Residential Develop-
ments shall provide open space areas pursuant to the following
provisions.
a. Minimum Open Space Requirements. All PRD's shall provide
open space areas as specified within the size and dimension
regulations of the underlying zoning district, however, open
space shall be calculated for the PRD as a whole (or by
phase if a phased development is proposed) rather than by
individual lot.
b. Calculation of Open Space Areas. In calculating open space
areas, the following shall qua ify, subject to the limita-
tions provided herein.
i. Credit for Golf Courses and Similar Major_ Recreational
Facilities. It is the intent of this provision to
encourage the accessibility of all open space areas to
individual dwelling units within Planned Residential
Developments. The following standards shall be
utilized in calculating creditable open space areas for
major recreational facilities:
-- If more than sixty (60%) percent of the total
residential dwelling units within the abut are
adjacent to and have direct visual access to the
golf course or major recreational facility, one
hundred (100%) percent of the area contained
therein shall be credited towards open space;
-- If between thirty (30%) percent and sixty (60%)
percent of the total residential dwelling units
within the PRD are adjacent to and have direct
visual access to the golf course or major recre-
ational facility, seventy-five (75%) percent of
the area contained therein shall be credited
towards open space; and
-- If less than thirty (30%) percent of the total
residential dwelling units within the PRD are
adjacent to and have direct visual access to the
golf course or major recreational facility, fifty
(50%) percent of the area contained therein shall
be credited towards open space.
All golf courses and other major recreation facilities
included as open space for the PRD shall be permanently
reserved and maintained as common open space through
deed restrictions or other legal instruments, approved
by the County Attorney.
ii. Credit for Natural and Manmade Water Bodies; Limita-
tions.
-- Natural water bodies
and which will not
shall be credited as
-7-
included within the PRD site
be disturbed by development
open space.
-- Manmade water bodies shall be credited as open
space provided that all design and maintenance
requirements of the Indian River County Stormwater
Management and Flood Water Protection Ordinance
are satisfied.
Notwithstanding, the total area of natural plus manmade
water bodies shall not be credited for more than thirty
(30%) percent -of the total required open space for the
development.
iii. Credit for Continuous Pedestrian Circulation System.
The entire area contained in -a—continuous pedestrian
circulation system, consisting of permanently main-
tained walks and trails may be counted as open space.
iv. Credit for Multi -Use Recreation Center. The entire
area occupied by a multiple -use recreation building and
its attendant outdoor recreation facilities, excluding
a golf course, may be counted as open space.
V. Credit for Designated Parks and Recreational Areas.
All designated parks and recreation areas within the
PRD shall be counted as open space, provided that such
areas are a minimum of one (1) acre in size and have a
minimum width of one hundred (100) feet.
vi. Credit for Environmentally Sensitive Lands; Limita-
tions. Environmentally sensitive lands from which
density has been transferred shall be countable as open
space, provided that environmentally sensitive areas
shall not be credited for more than twenty (20%) of the
total required open space for the development.
vii. Credit for Impervious Private Exterior Open Areas. Any
privately maintained or owned exterior open areas,
composed of impervious surfaces, which are adjacent to
and for the exclusive use of the residents of an
individual dwelling unit, partially enclosed by walls,
hedges, buildings or structures, including swimming
pools, tennis courts, balconies, terraces, porches,
decks, patios and atriums may be counted toward the
open space requirement provided the total area credited
therein does not exceed ten (10%) percent of the open
space of the Development. All other landscaped areas
between the property or lot lines and the building or
buildings thereon shall count as open space, except as'
otherwise provided herein.
viii.Areas Specifically Excluded From Open Space Calcu-
lations. The following areas are specifically excluded
from calculation as open space areas:
-- public and private street rights-of-way;
-- parking areas; and
-- non-residential and non -recreational buildings and
structures.
C. Maintenance of Common Open S ace Areas. All open space
required by this Section shall a designated as either
private, reserved for common use, or dedicated to the
public. All required open space shall be reserved as
such through appropriate deed restrictions which cannot
be removed without the consent of the Board of County
Commissioners.
Private yards and open space areas shall be owned in
fee simple title as part of a lot or parcel in private
-8-
JAN 16 1995
R�(Jk. td
I
JAN 1'6 1995 BOOK t59
ownership. The use of private open space shall be
reserved and limited through appropriate deed re-
strictions. The deed restriction shall require the
property owner to maintain the private open space in
perpetuity.
All open space reserved for common use shall ultimately
be owned in fee simple by one or more organization(s)
of property owners within the PRD plat. The orga-
nization shall be established by the applicant, and all
organizational documents, including, but not limited
to, articles of incorporation, bylaws and restrictive
deed covenants, shall be submitted to the County
Attorney for approval prior to recording in the public
records of the County and filing with the Secretary of
State. The organization shall be responsible for the
maintenance of all common open spaces. The orga-
nization shall be empowered to assess reasonable
maintenance fees upon the owners of real property
within the PRD plat for the maintenance of common open
space.
7. Recreation Requirements. -To accommodate the recreational needs
of future residents, all Planned Residential Development which
are greater than ten (10) acres in size shall provide recreation-
al areas in accordance with the following minimum requirements.
The recreational requirements shall be waived for all PRD's which
are ten (10) acres or less in size.
a. Minimum Recreational Area Required. Based upon a standard
of five 5 acres of recreational area per one thousand
(1,000) residents, and an average household size of 2.4
persons per household; all PRD projects greater than ten
(10) acres in size shall provide a minimum of 522.72 square
feet of recreational area per dwelling unit. For example, a
PRD with 620 dwelling units will be required to provide
324,086.4 square feet.or 7.44 acres iof recreational area.
b. Provision of Recreational Im rovements. Recreational areas
as required in paragraph a , a ove, may be comprised of
either recreational space or recreational facilities, as
provided below.
i. Recreational Space. Recreational space shall include
open space areas which are intended for either active
or passive recreation. Recreation areas may include:
-- golf courses;
-- multi-purpose fields;
-- picnic areas;
-- park lands;
-- beach access areas; and
-- pedestrian and bike paths.
ii. Recreational Facilities. Recreational facilities shall
include those areas within a PRD which are specifically
designed for the leisure and recreational requirements
of PRD residents and their guests. Recreational
facilities may include:
-- playground facilities;
-- swimming facilities;
-- court facilities; and
-- multi-purpose buildings.
iii. Areas not Countable as Recreational Areas. The follow-
ing are specifically excluded from .calculations as
recreational areas:
-9-
-I
-- public and private street rights-of-way;
-- parking areas;
-- non -recreational buildings and structures; and
-- environmentally sensitive lands from which density
has been transferred.
C. Location of Recreational Areas. Recreational areas shall be
located within the boundaries of the development or on
adjoining land. A11 lands designated for recreational areas
shall be suitable for their intended purpose, considering
their topography, vegetation, drainage, size, access and
relationship to surrounding uses.
d. Maintenance of Recreational Areas. All recreational areas
shall be reserved and maintained in perpetuity as provided
in paragraph E(6)(c) of this Section, "Maintenance of Common
Open Space Areas".
8. Perimeter Transition Area.
a. Required Perimeter Building Setback. No building or parking
area shall be located closer than twenty-five (25) feet to
any right-of-way or to the perimeter property line of a PRD.
The perimeter building setback shall be maintained as
permanent open space. In addition, one (1) foot of perime-
ter setback shall be added -for each two (2) feet or fraction
thereof of building height over twenty-five feet for build-
ings located on the perimeter of the development.
b. Compatibility With Adjacent Single Family Zoning Districts
Development. As part of the special exception approval, the
Board of County Commissioners may require a compatibility
zone of not more than one hundred fifty (150) feet in depth
when the PRD directly abuts an RFD, RS -1, RS -3 or RS -6
zoning district, within which the setbacks, height, and lot
coverage requirements will be in conformance with the
adjacent zoning classification and development. The appli-
cant may be allowed to develop multiple family dwellings
closer than one hundred fifty (150) feet to adjacent single
family development provided the project includes an in-
creased perimeter building setback and utilizes increased
landscaping within the perimeter setback.
9. Applicability of Zoning Size and Dimension Regulations. It is
the intent of the Planned Residential Development regulations to
offer applicants greater flexibility in designing and developing
residential areas in order to accommodate more efficient and
innovative residential environments.
a. General Criteria for Reviewing Modified Lot and Buildin
Configurations. The size and dimension standards for the
respective zoning districts which allow PRD's as special
exceptions may be modified as provided in this section, upon
approval by the Board of County Commissioners. Modifica-
tions may be approved only in accordance with the following
criteria:
i. Privacy: The modified building setback shall maintain
privacy within individual dwellings. The modified
building setback shall take into consideration the
location and size of windows and their relation to
public and semi-public areas, streets and other windows
and screening.
ii. Light and Air: The modified building setback shall
provide adequate light and air, taking into consid-
eration the relationship between window size and
adequate light and air.
-10-
JAN 16 1985
eoo� F'�r 605
JAN 16 1985 BOOK v 0 F'AGF CU
iii. Compatibility of Land Use: Adjoining modified building
setbacks may be used for similar and compatible uses.
Modified building setbacks may be grouped such that
their utility is increased. The use of a modified
setback shall be a factor in granting approval of
setback modifications.
iv. Building Configuration: Building configuration and the
relationship between the arrangement of structures and
privacy, light, air and the compatibility of modified
building setback uses shall be factors in granting
approval of setback modifications.
V. Fire Exposure: Fire exposure of proposed PRD build-
ings, ground floor area of buildings, height of build-
ings, occupancy usage, type of construction, availabil-
ity of water for fire flow, and spacing of fire
hydrants shall be factors in granting approval of
setback modifications.
b. Size and Dimension Regulations Which May Not Be Modified.
Applicants for PRD approval shall not be granted modifica-
tions or waivers of the following size and dimension regu-
lations:
egu-
1ations:
i. Maximum density shall not be exceeded;
ii. Minimum open space and recreational standards shall not
be reduced; and
iii. Maximum height shall not be exceeded.
However, the size and dimension regulations specifically
included in paragraph "c", below, may be modified pursuant
to the provisions -herein.
c. Allowable Modifications to Zoning District Size and Dimen-
sion Regulations. The following size and dimension regu-
lations may be modified upon approval by the Board of County
Commissioners, and subject to the general criteria in
paragraph "a", above.
i. Minimum Lot Area, Frontage and Setbacks.
-- Minimum Lot Size. No individual minimum lot size
shall be required within a Planned Residential
Development.
-- Frontage Requirements; Accessibility. Each dwell-
ing unit or other authorized use shall have access
to a public street either directly or indirectly
via a private approach road, pedestrian way, court
or other area dedicated to public or private use
or by common easement guaranteeing access.
Authorized land uses are not required to front on
a dedicated road right-of-way. The County shall
be allowed access on any privately owned roads,
easements and common open space to ensure adequate
police and fire protection within the area, to
meet emergency needs, to conduct services, and to
generally promote the health and safety of all
residents of the Planned Residential Development.
-- Setback and Yard Requirements. There are no
required setbacks or yards within the Planned
Residential Development except the following:
There shall be an exterior setback or yard of not
less than twenty-five (25) feet in depth from a
structure to any abutting public street
right-of-way.
see
No structure shall be located closer than twen-
ty-five (25) feet to any exterior boundary or
property line of the Planned Residential Develop-
ment.
The perimeter transition area, as established in
paragraph 25.4(E)(8) shall be provided.
Parking shall not be permitted within any perime-
ter building setback required herein.
ii. Minimum Residential Floor Area Requirements. The
minimum floor area requirements for dwelling units
within Planned Residential Developments, regardless of
structure type, shall be established as follows:
-- Efficiency 500 square feet
-- One Bedroom 550 square feet
-- Two Bedrooms 650 square feet
-- Three Bedrooms 750.square feet
-- More Than Three
Bedrooms 750 square feet plus an
additional one hundred (100)
square feet for each
additional bedroom over three.
iii. Maximum Lot Coverage. There shall be no maximum lot
coverage requirements for residential uses within a
Planned Residential Development, provided all open
space requirements are satisfied.
10. Compliance With Other Regulations.
a. Subdivision Regulations. All Planned Residential Develop-
ments shall be platted in compliance with the Indian River
County Subdivision and Platting Regulations, except as
specifically stated otherwise herein. All tracts within the
PRD are to be in conformance with the approved Final PRD
plat and site plan rather than with the provisions of the
zoning district regulations which would otherwise apply. In
connection with the approval of any plats involved in a
Planned Residential Development, the requirements of the
subdivision regulations may be waived or modified where such
action would be consistent with the purpose and standards of
this section.
b. Site Plan Requirements; Review Standards. All PRD applica-
tions shall be reviewed pursuant to the criteria established
in Section 23.3.
C. Off -Street Parking and Loading. All parking and loading
spaces required pursuant to Section 24, "Off -Street Parking
and Loading Regulations", shall be provided within the PRD.
The Board of County Commissioners may permit a reduction in
parking when it can reasonably be evidenced that dual use of
parking can be accommodated by two (2) or more permitted
uses without causing a shortage of parking spaces to result
at any one time for any one use. No permitted reduction of
parking area shall be used for other than open space pur-
poses. Such reduced parking areas shall not be used to meet
the minimum amount of required open space.
11. Underground Utilities. Within the Planned Residential Develop-
ment all utilities including, but not limited to telephone,
television cable, and electrical systems shall be installed
underground. Primary facilities providing service to the site
may be exempted from this requirement. Large transformers may be
placed on the ground and contained within pad mounts, enclosures
-12-
JAN 16 1985 HoK 59 `' r- 67
rJAN � 1995
BOOK 50 F "' F 6 f)
or vaults. The developer shall provide adequate landscaping with
shrubs and plants to screen all utility facilities from view if
permitted above ground.
12. Homeowners' Association. All Planned Residential Developments
shall establish one or more homeowners' or property owners'
association(s) to ensure the continual maintenance of all common
facilities within the development. All owners' association
documents shall be submitted with the Final PRD Plan and approved
by the County Attorney.
25.4 F. General Review Standards
No application for a Planned Residential Development shall be approved
under the provisions of this section unless the project satisfies the
following general review standards:
1. Consistency with the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan
2. Conservation of natural resources
3. Consistency with the Thoroughfare Plan and relationship to the
overall transportation system.
4. Provision of open space and recreational areas.
5. Characteristics of the proposed use(s) and the relationship to
adjacent properties and uses.
6. Physical character of the site.
7. Adequacy of public facilities, including but not limited to
police, fire, water, sewer, schools, drainage and other essential
services.
8. Pedestrian and vehicular circulation design.
9. Energy efficiency building and site design.
10. Impact of the project on the region, as a whole.
25.4 G. General Procedures for PRD Review and Approval.
The following is an overview of the general procedure for approving
Planned Residential Development proposals:
1. Pre -Application Conference
2. Approval of Special Exception Application and Conceptual PRD Plan
3. Approval of Preliminary PRD Plan
4. Issuance of Land Development Permit
5. Issuance of Building Permits
6. Approval and Recording of Final PRD Plan
7. Occupancy and Use of Premises
Applicants are encouraged to submit all necessary information to
facilitate the concurrent review and approval of the various stages of
the development review process. The following subsections will
Provide details regarding the information and procedures necessary for
the PRD review and approval process.
25.4 H. Planned Residential Development Special Exception Approval Procedure;
Conceptual PRD Review.
-13-
M M
All petitions for Planned Residential Development special exception
approval shall be governed by and adhere to the procedural require-
ments of this section.
I. Pre -Application Conference. Prior to submitting a formal appli-
cation for PRD special exception approval, the petitioner is
encouraged to confer with the County staff and other agencies and
officials involved in the review and processing of such applica-
tions and related materials. The petitioner is further en-
couraged to submit a tentative land use sketch plan for review at
the conference, and to obtain information on any projected plans,
programs or other matters that may affect the proposed planned
community. This pre -application conference should address, but
not be limited to, such matters as:
a. The proposed relationship between the anticipated project
and surrounding uses, and the effect of the proposed devel-
opment on the Comprehensive Plan and/or stated planning and
development objectives of the County or adjacent municipal-
ities;
b. The adequacy of existing and proposed streets, utilities,
and other public facilities to serve the development;
C. The nature, design and appropriateness of the proposed land
use arrangement for the size and configuration of property
involved;
d. The extent and approximate location of any environmentally
sensitive lands or unique natural habitats; and
e. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas
to accommodate future expansion if needed.
2. Filing of Application; Conceptual PRD Plan.
a. Initial Filing. All applications for PRD special exception
approval shall be filed as provided in Section 25.3(E)
"Procedures for Review of Special Exception Uses". The
application shall include all information requested herein,
including a Conceptual PRD Plan. Said application shall
become null and void if approval is not obtained within
twelve (12) months of filing.
b. Conceptual PRD Plan, Form and Content. An official applica-
tion for PRD special exception approval shall be accompanied
by a Conceptual PRD Plan which includes as a minimum the
following information. The Director of Planning and Deve1=
opment may waive certain requirements for smaller PRD's when
it is determined that such information is not necessary for
a comprehensive analysis of the PRD.
i. Vicinity Map. A vicinity map drawn to scale which
clearly shows the site in relationship to its surround-
ings. Where the project exceeds one hundred (100)
acres in area, an aerial photograph taken within the
last two (2) years at a scale of at least one (1) inch
equals 500 feet, and showing all property within 1,000
feet of the project boundaries.
ii. Property Boundaries. A certified survey delineating
the location and dimensions of all boundary lines of
the development, and of any contiguous lands, including
those separated only by a street, canal, or similar
feature, in which the developer or property owner
presently has any legal interest.
iii. Existing Site Conditions. The location, nature, and
extent of all existing easements, streets, buildings,
-14-
JAN 16 1985 na 50 F-h.H6109
J A N
Bou 5 F,Au, 610
land uses, historic sites, zoning, tree groupings,
wetlands and other environmentally sensitive areas,
watercourses and general U.S. Coast and Geodetic sheet
topographic contours on the site, the names of the
property owners of record and existing zoning and land
uses for all contiguous property; the location and
width of all existing or platted streets, drainage
ways, utilities and similar features contiguous to the
site.
iv. Statement of Environmental Conditions. A statement
identifying specific environmental conditions on the
site including, but not limited to:
-- specific boundaries of wetlands and other environ-
mentally sensitive areas;
-- one hundred year flood plain and V -zone ele-
vations, as applicable;
-- types of natural vegetation, including mangroves,
and approximate tree removal estimates; and
-- other unique or significant natural habitats or
features of the site.
V. Conceptual Development Plan.
-- Land Use. The total -project acreage, approximate
location of each land use and proposed intensity,
acreage by proposed land use dwelling unit types,
general types . of non-residential uses, open
spaces,. recreational facilities, and other
proposed uses.
-- Circulation. A general vehicular and pedestrian
circulation plan showing approximate locations and
types of all access points and major roadways.' -
Conceptual Drainage Plan. A conceptual drainage
plan approved by the County Engineer.
-- Densities. Proposed densities for each dwelling
unit type and approximate number of dwelling units
by type.
-- Proposed Density Transfer Areas. The- size and
boundaries of all environmentally sensitive lands
from which a density transfer is proposed.
-- Non -Residential Square Footage. Approximate
square footage of all non-residential land uses
including recreational, institutional and neigh-
borhood commercial facilities.
-- Traffic Impact Analysis. A traffic impact analy-
sis, pursuant to the requirements of Section
23.3(D)(2).
vi. Statement of Projected Public Facilities Impact. A
statement identifying the projected impact of the
proposed PRD on public facilities including:
-- quantity of wastewater generated;
-- quantity of potable water required;
-- number of school age children expected to reside;
-15-
-I
-- property tax revenue generated by the project; and
-- other significant public facilities impacts.
vii. Development Schedule. A proposed development schedule
indicating the approximate starting and completion
dates for the entire project and any phase thereof,
together with appropriate identification and conceptual
description of such phases.
3. Conceptual PRD Plan and Special Exception Review Process. As
established in Section 25.3, "Review of Special Exception Uses",
all petitions for special exception approval shall be reviewed
pursuant to the procedures established for rezoning petitions.
In addition to such procedures, applications for Conceptual PRD
Plan and special exception approval shall be reviewed in accor-
dance with the following.
a. Pre -Hearing Conference With Technical Review Committee.
Prior to a public hearing by the Planning and Zoning Commis-
sion, the applicant or his designate is encouraged to attend
the pre -hearing conference of the Technical Review Commit-
tee. The purpose of such pre -hearing conference is to
assist the applicant in bringing the PRD special exception
application and Conceptual PRD Plan as nearly as possible
into conformity with these and all other applicable County
regulations. If the applicant does not desire to partici-
pate in the conference, the Technical Review Committee shall
base its report to the Planning and Zoning Commission on the
application as received.
In the course of such pre -hearing conferences, any recommen-
dations for changes shall be recorded in writing, with
reasons therefor, and shall become part of the record of the
application. Applicants shall indicate, in writing, their
agreement to such recommendations, or their disagreement and
reasons therefor; and the response shall also be included in
the record.
b. Concurrent Review of Applications Encouraged. In order to
expedite the review and approval process, applicants are
encouraged to submit applications for rezoning requests at
the same time as those requests for PRD special exception
approval.
In addition those applicants who wish to obtain Preliminary
PRD Plan approval and Conceptual PRD Plan approval concur-
rently, are encouraged to submit all information and appli=
cation requirements necessary to do so.
C. Standards for Review. In the review and approval of PRD
special exception applications and the Conceptual PRD Plan,
the standards and requirements of this Section shall govern,
in addition to any standards or requirements otherwise
applicable, including site plan review standards.
d. Conditions. In approving a Conceptual PRD Plan, the Board
of County Commissioners may establish such conditions and
may require any such modifications which assure compliance
with the Planned Residential Development standards and
regulations and further, the Board of County Commissioners
may waive or modify subdivision, site plan, or other zoning
requirements otherwise applicable to the development when
such waiver or modification is not in conflict with said
Planned Residential Development standards and regulations.
e. Additional Information. Prior to, or in addition to,
approval of a Conceptual PRD Plan, and upon a determination
that additional information is necessary for proper review
-16-
.fAN 16 1985 BOOK
F_
rQ �� 1985
BOOK 5� F�,Ur. ��
of the proposed Planned Residential Development project the
Board of County Commissioners may require the submission of
additional information by the applicant.
f. Amendment of Approved Conceptual PRD Plan. Once a Conceptu-
al PRD Plan has been approved, and there is cause for
amendment of same or any portion thereof, such amendment
shall be processed in like manner as the original sub-
mission. However, there shall be no requirement to file an
amended special exception application unless the proposed
amendment would so dictate.
g. Prescribed Time for Submission of Preliminary PRD Plan; Ex-
tensions. The Board of County Commissioners may approve a
Planned Residential Development application subject to a
prescribed time limit of no less than one (1) year for the
submission and approval of a Preliminary PRD Plan. The
failure on the part of the applicant to meet this require=
ment shall terminate the approval of the Conceptual PRD Plan
and the special exception approval shall lapse. The pre-
scribed time limit for the submission and approval of a
Preliminary PRD Plan may be extended once for a one (1) year
period by the Board of County Commissioners, for good cause.
25.4 I. Preliminary PRD Plan Approval.
M
I. Submission of Preliminary PRD Plan. No Preliminary PRD Plan
shall be submitted unless it has been prepared on the basis of a
duly approved Conceptual PRD Plan, or unless the Conceptual and
Preliminary Plans are submitted for concurrent review and ap-
proval. The applicant shall submit a Preliminary PRD within the
time limit established at the _time of Conceptual PRD Plan ap-
proval. -
2. Authorization to Submit. The granting of a special exception
approval for a Planned Residential Development and the approval
of its_ accompanying Conceptual PRD Plan by the Board of County
Commissioners shall constitute authority for the applicant to
submit a Preliminary PRD Plan.
3. Requirements for Preliminary PRD Plan Submission.
a. General Requirements. All Preliminary PRD Plans shall
include all information required for the submission of
Preliminary Plats, as provided in the Indian River County
Subdivision and Platting Regulations, as well as a Site
Plan, as provided in Section 23 of this Code. -
b. Additional Requirements. In addition to the requirements of
Para. 3(ay 3(aabove, the Preliminary PRD Plan shall show:
i. Updated Conceptual PRD Information. The Preliminary
PRD Plan shall include all information required for the
submission of the Conceptual Plan, including any
additional information required pursuant to approval
and updated information regarding:
-- the development schedule;
-- the number, size, location and density of land
uses;
-- open space and recreation areas;
-- vehicular and pedestrian circulation;
-- environmental conditions;
-- transportation and other public facility
-17-
s
M
impacts; and
-- transfer of density from environmentally sensitive
areas.
ii. Development Design. The Preliminary PRD Plan shall
include architectural sketches of typical proposed
residential and non-residential structures, including
lighting fixtures and signs.
iii. DRI Information; Binding Letter of Interpretation. If
any PRD qualifies as a Development of Regional Impact
(DRI), as defined in Chapter 380, Florida Statutes,
such projects shall include all data submitted —as -part
of the required Application for Development Approval
(ADA). All proposed developments of five hundred (500)
dwelling units or more must submit all necessary
information and request, from the state, a binding
letter of interpretation as to whether or not the
project is a DRI.
4. Standards for Review. In addition to the standards specifically
provided herein, Preliminary PRD Plans shall be reviewed pursuant
to the standards established for Preliminary Plats, as estab-
lished in the Indian River County Subdivision and Platting
Regulations, and the Site Plan Review Standards, established in
Section 23.3 of this Code.
5. Review Procedures. The review and approval procedures for a
Preliminary PRD Plan shall be as for Preliminary Subdivision
Plats, in addition to the procedures and requirements of this
Section.
6. Land Development Prior to Preliminar PRD Approval Prohibited.
No construction, land clearing or grubbing, with the exception of
test facilities and minor underbrushing, may begin until a Land
Development Permit has been issued by Indian River County.
25.4 J. Application for Land Development Permit.
1. Construction Prior to Final PRD Approval. Upon approval of the
Preliminary PRD Plan, an applicant may choose to apply for a Land
Development Permit in order to commence construction of require
improvements for the entire PRD or for approved phases. If the
applicant chooses to obtain a Land Development Permit, he or she
shall submit all construction plans and specifications required
pursuant to Section 7(E)(3) of the Indian River County Subdivi-
sion and Platting Ordinance. All required improvements shall be
completed by the applicant prior to Final PRD Plan approval.
2. Construction After Final PRD Approval. Upon approval of the
Preliminary PRD Plan, if an applicant does not choose to commence
construction prior to obtaining Final PRD approval, he or she
shall submit all construction plans and specifications required
for a, Land Development Permit pursuant to Section 7(E)(3) of the
Indian River County Subdivision and Platting Ordinance at the
time of Final PRD Plan approval. Security will be required for
the performance and maintenance of all improvements, for the
entire PRD or by approved phase, which are to be constructed
subsequent to Final PRD Plan approval.
25.4 K. Commencement of Construction
1. Authorization to Apply for Building Permits. Upon issuance of
the Land Development Permit, the applicant shall be authorized to
apply for building permits for all structures, within the area
which the Land Development Permit is applicable, whether it be
for the entire development or approved phase(s).
BGGK�, ,r 613
25.4 L.
BOOK `',^r 614
2. Fee Simple Land Sales Prohibited. The applicant shall not be
authorized to transfer ownership of any lands within the PRD by
fee simple title to any parties until after the Final PRD Plan
has been approved and the final plat recorded.
Final PRD Plan Approval
I. Authorization to Submit. Approval of the Preliminary Development
Plan by the Board of- County Commissioners shall constitute
authority for the applicant to submit a Final PRD Plan prepared
in accordance with the approved Preliminary Development Plan and
all conditions as may have been required by the Board of County
Commissioners.
Furthermore, the applicant shall also furnish all such supplemen-
tary information as may have been required by the Board of County
Commissioners upon conditional approval of the Preliminary PRD
Plan.
2. Staged Development. A Final PRD Plan may be prepared and submit-
ted for the entire planned development at one time or for the
approved development stages.
3. Time Limit for Submission. The Final PRD Plan for either the
entire Planned Development or the first-stage(s) thereof shall be
submitted within twelve (12) months from -the date of approval of
the Preliminary PRD Plan or with such extended periods as the
Board of County Commissioners may authorize.
4. Submission Requirements for Final Development Plans. All Final
PRD Plans shall be submitted in accordance with the following
requirements.
a. General Requirements. Final Development Plans shall include
a- Site Plan prepared in accordance with Section 23 of this
Code and a Final Subdivision Plat prepared in accordance
with the Indian River -County Subdivision and Platting
Regulations.
b. Preparation. All required data on the ..Final PRD Plan must
by accurately measured and engineered and represented in its
true and exact form.
C. Review Procedures. The review and approval procedures for
Final PRD Plans shall be as for Final Subdivision Plats, in
addition to the requirements and procedures of this Article.
5. Effect of Approval of Final Development Plan. Following the
approval of the Final Development Plan by the Board of County
Commissioners, the final plat of the Final PRD Plan shall be
filed with the Indian River County Court Clerk,
6. Failure to Comply with Approved Final Development Plans. Failure
to comply with the requirements of the approved Final PRD Plan
and any conditions imposed in its final approval, including time
conditions, shall constitute a violation of this Ordinance. Upon
finding by the Board of County Commissioners that the developer
has failed to comply with the conditions or any provisions
imposed in its approval, including staging plans or prescribed
time limits, the approval of the Final PRD Plan shall automat-
ically be terminated. Prior to continuing with the Planned
Residential Development, the developer shall reapply to the Board
of County Commissioners for approval to continue. The Board of
County Commissioners may authorize the petitioner to continue
under the terms of the Final PRD Plan approval or may require
that the developer re -submit the application in conformance with
any step outlined in the procedure for Preliminary or Final PRD
Plan approval. No subsequent plan shall effect an increase in
-19-
-I
_ M M
the overall project density as set by the original Conceptual PRD
Plan approval.
25.4 M. 0_ccupancy and Use of Premises; Director's Certification.
Prior to the use or occupancy of any portion of the Planned Develop-
ment project, the Planning and Development Director shall determine
that all of the requirements of the Final PRD Plan have been complied
with for that portion of the Planned Residential Development project
for which approval of use or occupancy is being required.
25.4 N. Modifications
1. Generally. The Planning and Development Director may approve any
modification of an approved Final PRD Plan which is of a minor
nature and not contrary to the intent and purpose of the Final
Development Plan. Any modification which, in the opinion of the
Planning and Development Director is of a major nature, shall be
reviewed and approved by the Board of County Commissioners.
2. Limitations. The Planning and Development Director shall not
have the authority to approve any modifications which increase
the overall project density, the types and numbers of uses
permitted, project phasing schedules, or which reduces assurances
for the provision of required improvements, but may approve minor
modifications including but not limited to the alignment, lo-
cation, and design of required improvements, accessory struc-
tures, open space configurations, and buildings and landscaping.
25.4 0. Deviations From Approved Plans
Deviations from the approved plans or failure to comply with any
requirements, condition, or safeguard imposed by the Board of County
Commissioners during the approval procedure shall constitute a vio-
lation of this Ordinance.
25.4 P. Transfer of PRD Approval
1. Approval Runs With the Land. PRD approval shall run with the
land and shall transfer to a successor in interest to the origi-
nal applicant upon written disclosure of such transfer of the
Planning and Development Division as to the identity of the
successor. The disclosure shall provide the full legal name of
the person or business entity acquiring the interest in the
property, the nature of the interest, the address of the princi-
pal place of business of the successor, telephone number, name
and address of registered agent if corporation, name, address and
title -of officers or agents authorized to transact business with
the County, together with proof of authorization if other than
president or vice-president or general partner, and the name and
address of any new design professional for the project. A
transferee developer must also assume in writing on a form
acceptable to the County Attorney all commitments, responsibil-
ities, and obligations of the prior developer, including all
special conditions of site plan approval.
2. Disclosure of Requisite Information. Failure to make the
required disclosure and assumption shall suspend all PRD special
exception and pian approvals until such time as proper disclosure
and assumption is made.
3. Time Limits. Transfer of PRD approval shall not toll or modify
the calculation of time limits set forth with respect to com-
mencement or abandonment of construction and following any
transfer, such time limits shall be calculated as if the transfer
had not occurred.
4. Transferability Limitations. This provision does not relate to
any transfer of space, units, buildings, or property, to a
-20-
JAN 1 1985 aooK �� Al'
L_
I
J A 1985
SECTION 2
BOOK e1 F', r 618
transferee which intends to occupy the property only after
issuance of a certificate of occupancy, unless the transferee is
the successor developer, nor to the creation or transfer of a
nonpossessory lien or encumbrance.
REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS
All previous ordinances, resolutions, or motions of the Board of County Commis-
sioners of Indian River County, Florida, which conflict with the provisions of
this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. All Special
Acts of the legislature applying only to the un -incorporated portion of Indian
River County and which conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby
repealed to the extent of such conflict.
SECTION 3
INCORPORATION IN CODE - The provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated into the County Code and
the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or other appropri-
ate word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered, reserved or
relettered to accomplish such intenti-ons.
SECTION 4
,SEVERABILITY -
If any section, part of a sentence, paragraph, -phrase or word of this ordinance
is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such hold-
ings shall not affect the remaining portions hereof and it shall be construed to
have been the legislative intent to pass this ordinance without such unconstitu-
tional, invalid or inoperative part.'
SECTION 5
EFFECTIVE DATE
The provisions of this ordinance shall become effective upon receipt from the
Florida Secretary of State of Official Acknowledgement that this ordinance has
been filed with the Department of State.
-21-
M M M
r
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, on this 16th day of January 1985.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIANJIVER COUNTY
BY
Chairman
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State
of Florida this 4th day of February , 1985.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of
State received on this 8th day of February ,
1985, at 11:00 A.M./P.M. and filed in the Office of
the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFI Y.
1
By
CWy Bratdenburg
COUNTY ATTORNEY
-21.1-
BOOK 5 FA,F 61 7
rJAN 1.6 1985
BOOK "'; 9 F' G r 61
XPANSION OF BEACH PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION COMMITTEE
Commissioner Wodtke informed the Board that while he does
not yet have confirmation so he can announce the names, there are
two individuals with Harbor Branch who wish to serve on the Beach
Committee. Both are oceanographic engineers; one specialized in
physical oceanographics which deals with waves and currents and
the other deals with sediments, etc. He continued that it is
proposed to expand the committee into two other areas of the
community, and a letter evidencing interest has been received
from 'Gene Waddell, a local insurance man. Another area is
someone from the agricultural segment with economic background,
and John Morrison has agreed`that he would serve if appointed.
Commissioner Wodtke then suggested that we might establish a
technical advisory sub -committee working under the Beach
Preservation and Restoration Committee. For such an advisory
committee, he envisioned someone such as Environmental Planner
Art Challacombe and Engineer Don Finney, plus the environmental
planner of the City of Vero Beach, whom he felt could function as
technical non-voting members.
Commissioner Wodtke was called to the phone. He returned
and advised the Board that the gentlemen from Harbor Branch have
received permission to serve on his committee. They will not be
representing Harbor Branch, but we can use their expertise. They
are Dr. Charles Hoskins and Dr. Ned Smith.
I
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) appointed the
following to the Beach Preservation & Restoration Comm.
and to the technical advisory sub -committee as discussed.
Beach Committee - Gene Waddell
John Morrison
Dr. Charles Hoskins
Dr. Ned Smith
Sub -Committee - Art Challacombe, County Env. Planner
Don Finney, County Engineer
Dennis Ragsdale, City Env. Planner
There being no further business, on Motion made, seconded
and carried, the Board adjourned at 2:55 o'clock P.M.
Attest:
y
j�_"o 1_,A
Clerk
JAN 16 199581 Booa 59 F,� c 619