HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/20/1991BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AGENDA
SPECIAL MEETING
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 1991
7:00 P.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
1840 25TH STREET
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Richard N. Bird, Chairman
Gary C. Wheeler, Vice Chairman
Margaret C. Bowman
Carolyn. K. Eggert
Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
****************
James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board
*****************************
"THIRD ROUND" AMENDMENTS TO THE LDRS: CHANGES
INITIATED BY STAFF AND THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ANYONE WHO MAY WISH TO APPEAL ANY DECISION WHICH MAY BE MADE
AT THIS MEETING WILL NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF
THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND
EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL WILL BE BASED.
/NOV 20 1991 •
(AM JO2
***
SPECIAL MEETING
Wednesday, November 20, 1991
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, November 20,
1991, at 7:00 o'clock P.M. Present were Richard N. Bird, Chairman;
Gary C. Wheeler, Vice Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman; Carolyn K.
Eggert; and Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Also present were James E.
Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, Attorney to
the Board of County Commissioners; and Barbara Bonnah, Deputy
Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order.
PUBLIC HEARING - "THIRD ROUND" AMENDMENTS TO THE LDRS: CHANGES
INITIATED BY STAFF AND THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
The hour of 7:00 o'clock P.M. being passed, the County
Attorney announced that this public hearing has been properly
advertised, as follows:
NOV 20 199
P.O. Box 1268 Vero Beach, Florida 32961 562-2315
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
STATE OF FLORIDA
13res. Journal
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared T.J.
Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the
Vero Beach Press -Journal, a newspaper published at Vero Beach in
Indian River County, Florida; that
112 r)ig y a.4...1)2v_XLc[ '1133'i
lL 810.3t RA. neratmit t/1611.,
billed to gl et .- d COI.c n�L(. C.ontinI ssionfe-YS
was published in said newspaper in the((issue(s)
of -- douexnl10.,- 1r , r99 1 (fin, 7A
Sworn to and subscribed before me this
zoib-
(SEAL)
day of A m/m(62 r
A.D 19% )
Sa&824144K0m4z
Business Manager
• ww., Public, $mm of Flow°
*Commission E Ire a 29, 1
Esp. ee June Z9, 1993
BOOK 84 PALE JD3
391
POOK
«)h4 .1
F�,�t SIJ
NOTICE OF ESTABLISHMENT OR CHANGE
OF A REGULATION(S)
AFFECTING THE USE OF LAND
The Indian River County Board of County Commissioners proposes to
adopt or change a regulation(s) affecting the use of land for the area
shown In the map In this advertisement.
Two public hearings on the regulation(s) affecting the use of land will
be held, one on Wednesday, November 20, 1991, at 7 p.m. and one on
• Wednesday, December 4, .1991, at 5:01 p.m. in the County Commission
Chambers in the County Administration Building located at 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida.
Proposd changes to the land development regulations (LDRs) effec-
tive in the unicorporated area of the county include changes to the follow-
' Ing LDR chapters:
J. • • Chapter 901, Definitions;
• Chapter 910, Concurrency Management Systems;
• Chapter 911, Zoning;
• ' • Chapter 912, Single Family Development;
• Chapter 913, Subdivisions and Plats; '
• Chapter 914, Site Plan Review and Approval Procedures; ,J
' • Chapter 926, Landscape and Buffer Regulations;
}i '1
317. J..I
•r
• Chapter 927, Tree Protection and Land Clearing;
• Chapter 929, Upland Habitat Protection;
1 • Chapter 930, Stormwater Management and Floodplain•
Protection;
• Chapter 931, Wellfield and Aquifer Protection;
• Chapter 932, Coastal Management;
• Chapter 934, Excavation and Mining; • , •
• Chapter 952, Traffic;
• Chapter 954, Off -Street Parking; '
• Chapter 971, Regulations for Specific Land Use Criteria.
tr,
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY- UNINCORPORATED AREA
.A copy of the proposed Ordinance will be available at the Planning DM-
sion Office on the second floor of the County Administration Building
beginning November 12, 1991.
Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made
at this meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed-
: Ings is made, which includes testimony and evidence upon which the
appeal is based. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BY -s- RICHARD BIRD, CHAIRMAN
2
Planning Director Stan Boling presented the following staff
recommendation dated 11/6/91:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
obe-of
rt M Ka:
Community Develo
FROM: Stan Boling AICP
Planning Director
DATE: November 6, 1991
irector
SUBJECT: "THIRD ROUND" AMENDMENTS TO THE LDRS: CHANGES INITIATED
BY STAFF AND THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
(PSAC)
It is requested that the data herein. presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its special
meetings of November 20, 1991.
BACKGROUND AND CONDITIONS:
Over the last several months, the Professional Services Advisory
Committee (P.S.A.C.) and staff have worked together on several
development issues. The result is a slate of P.S.A.C. recommended
changes to the land development regulations (LDRs) as well as
proposed changes initiated by staff. At its regular meeting of
October 10, 1991, the P.S.A.C. voted to recommend approval of the
proposed changes with members reserving the right to give
additional input to staff on any proposed LDR change. The Planning
and Zoning Commission, at its regular meeting of October 24, 1991,
voted unanimously to recommend that the Board of County
Commissioners adopt the proposed LDR amendments with some changes
to be made by staff as discussed at the meeting. Staff has made
the changes discussed and recommended at the October 24th Planning
and Zoning Commission meeting.
The Board of County Commissioners is now to consider the proposed
LDR changes, which are embodied in a single ordinance, and is to
take final action on the adoption of the ordinance at the special
December 4th meeting.
ANALYSIS:
The exact language of each of the eighty-eight (88) proposed
amendments is contained within the proposed ordinance. The
ordinance sections are generally arranged by chapter, in the
general sequence of chapters as they appear in the LDRs.
Sections 85-88 have been recommended by the Professional_Services
Advisory Committee but were not available to be included in the
ordinance versions considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission
at its October 24, 1991 meeting. However, these sections contain
non -controversial changes desired by staff and the Planning
Services Advisory Committee.
3
NOV 2 01991
BOOK S4 PAGE ' 0 '
1
OV 2e og BOOK 64
The following are summaries of the changes proposed within each
section.
NOTE: an asterisk (*) denotes a change that is primarily PSAC
initiated; a double asterisk (**) denotes a change prompted by
either recent Comprehensive Plan amendments or LDR additions
mandated by the Comprehensive Plan.
Chapter 901: Definitions
1. Section 1: [amends 901.03] establishes a definition for
"essential services", such as utility plants and electrical
substations, which are allowed to locate throughout the
county.
*2. Section 2: [amends 901.03] deletes an acreage reference within
the definition of "Farm or Farmland".
**3. Section 3: [amends 901.03] establishes within the LDRs the
definition of "Live -aboard vessels". A major portion of the
proposed definition is already contained in the Comprehensive
Plan, as well as language defining what constitutes inhabiting
a vessel.
4. Section 4: [amends 901.03] deletes the definition of
"Public/Private Utility, Heavy" which is already covered by
the existing definition of "Utilities, Public or Private -
Heavy".
5. Section 5: [amends 901.03] deletes the definition of "Utility,
Limited" which is already covered by the existing definition
of "Utilities, Public or Private - Limited."
6. Section 6: [amends 901.03] corrects a terminology error.
*7. Section 7: [amends 901.03] clarifies the definition of
"Tailwater conditions" to conform to existing county policy
and engineering practice, and to parallel the water management
district definition.
Chapter 910: Concurrency Management System
8. Section 8: [amends 910.07(1)(b)] ensures that a project
developer obtains an initial concurrency certificate prior to
obtaining a land development permit waiver, just as required
prior to obtaining a land development permit.
Chapter 911: Zoning
**9. Section 9: [amends 911.03 table] clarifies two headings and
adds the new Con -3 district to a use table.
10. Section 10: [amends 911.04(2)(q)] implements the specifics of
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Policy 6.3. This change
specifically allows the continuation and substitution
(interchangeability) of certain agricultural uses,
characteristically involving a large percentage of open space,
in the A-1 [Agriculture -1] zoning district within the L-1 and
L-2 residentially designated areas.
11. Section 11: [amends 911.04(3)(b)1] exempts essential services
uses, such as utility plants and electrical substations, from
minimum lot size requirements.
**12.Section 12: [amends 911.05(3)] inserts specific requirements
for the Con -3 zoning district.
13. Section 13: [amends 911.06(4) table] makes several terminology
corrections to the agricultural/rural zoning districts use
table.
4
**14.Section 14: [amends 911.06(6)] changes a footnote date to
reference a Comprehensive Plan change adoption date.
15. Section 15: [amends 911.07(4) table] corrects some terminology
errors in the single family zoning district use table.
**16 Section 16: [amends 911.07(7) table] changes a footnote date
to reference a Comprehensive Plan change adoption date.
17. Section 17: [amends 911.08(4) table] corrects two terminology
errors in the multiple family zoning district use table.
18. Section 18: [amends 911.09(4) table] corrects two terminology
errors in the mobile home park zoning district use table.
19. Section 19 [amends 911.09(8) table] adds minimum district size
of 20 acres back into a mobile home park district table.
20. Section 20: [amends 911.10(4) table] corrects several errors
in the commercial zoning district use table and adds the use
of "machine shops" as a permitted use in the CH (Heavy
Commercial) zoning district.
21. Section 21: [amends 911.11(4) table] corrects some errors in
the industrial zoning district use table.
22. Section 22: [amends 911.10(6)] corrects a typographical
(printer's) error.
23. Section 23: [amends 911.10(7) table] corrects an omission in
the commercial zoning district size and dimension table.
**24 Section 24: [amends 911.12(2)] clarifies and adds to the
establishment language of the three conservation zoning
districts - Con -1, Con -2, and Con -3.
**25 Section 25: [amends 911.12(3)] adds a necessary reference to
the C-3 conservation land use designation.
**26 Section 26: [amends 911.12(4)] establishes within the LDRs the
specific development regulations already contained in the
Comprehensive Plan which pertain to the C-2 and C-3 areas.
**27 Section 27: [amends 911.12(6) table] adds the Con -3 size and
dimension criteria to the LDRs.
28. Section 28: [amends 911.13(1)(c) table] corrects terminology
and deletes a redundant item.
29. Section 29: [amends 911.13(1)(f)] corrects typographical
errors.
30. Section 30: [amends 911.13(3)(c) table] deletes an unnecessary
use sub -category.
31. Section 31: [amends 911.13(4)(g) table] corrects a
typographical (printer's) error.
32. Section 32: [amends 911.15(2)(f) 1. and 2.] deletes an
existing requirement to provide a setback between swimming
pools and easements. This separation requirement was
originally enacted to separate pools from electrical lines
(presumably, such lines would be located within easements).
However, the separation of pools from electrical lines is
addressed in the electrical code which is already applied to
pool construction. Therefore, no special setback is required
since the electrical code already addresses the concern.
33. Section 33: [establishes 911.15(2)] allows dumpsters to
encroach within required yards to an extent equal to the
5
NOV 20 Tali
BOOK
84 PA,1II C[. �
GE J a
PP-
NOV 2ki 1q91
BOOK 4 FALSE 908
encroachment allowed for parking spaces. Staff has found that
most project designers incorporate dumpsters into parking lot
layouts. Since some parking lot areas are allowed to encroach
into normal required setback areas, it is reasonable to allow
dumpsters with appropriate landscaping to be located in the
same areas as a parking lot. Note: all dumpsters will
continue to be required to be visually screened.
Chapter 912: Single Family Development
**34.Section 34: [amends 912.05(1)] updates the single family
chapter by referencing the new C-3, AG -3, and Con -3 zoning
districts.
35. Section 35: [amends 912.07(3)] updates the single family
chapter in relation to the outcome of the Jackson right-of-way
case. Since the county is no longer requiring dedication of
road right-of-way in relation to the construction of single
family homes, all chapter 912 references to such requirements
are being deleted. Instead, language is being inserted that
strongly encourages single family residence applicants to
think ahead and set back from major roadways to accommodate
future right-of-way expansion.
36. Section 36: [amends 912.08(1)(c)] adds a reference to the
single family driveway culvert requirements set forth in the
stormwater chapter (930) [see section 46 of the proposed
ordinance].
37. Section 37: [amends 912.07(1)(b)6.f(I) and (II)] parallels
section 32 of the proposed ordinance which eliminates required
setbacks between pools and easements.
Chapter 913: Subdivisions and Plats
38. Section 38: [amends 913.06(5)] updates affidavit of exemption
requirements to conform with A-1 zoning district requirements.
39. Section 39: [amends 913.07(5)(A)] clarifies that a land
development permit waiver carries the same concurrency
requirement as a land development permit (parallels section
8).
40. Section 40: [amends 913.09(6)(c)] references the driveway
location standards applied to lots in non -single family
subdivisions (found in chapter 952, Traffic).
41. Section 41: [amends 913.06(1)(c)] limits the unplatted parcel
60' road right-of-way frontage provision to the large parcel,
rural, zoning districts such as the A-1, A-2, A-3, Con -2, Con -
3, RFD, and RS -1 districts. Parcels within other districts
would be required to have an amount of road right-of-way
frontage greater than or equal to the minimum lot width of the
zoning district.
Chapter 914: Site Plan Review and Approval Procedures
*42. Section 42: [amends 914.06(4)(a)] allows the submittal of a
concurrency certificate for a site plan project after
submittal of the site plan application. The concurrency
certificate would still need to be issued prior to any site
plan approval. However, the proposed amendment would allow
the developer the option to choose to apply for a concurrency
certificate and pay applicable impact fees at a later time in
the site plan review process.
6
Chapter 926: Landscape and Buffer Regulations
43. Section 43: [amends 926.07(2)(b)4.] corrects a typographical
error.
Chapter 927: Tree Protection and Land Clearing
44. Section 44: [amends 927.08] amends the county's mangrove
trimming regulations to parallel, conform to, and reference
state requirements. With this amendment, no conflicts should
exist between county and state mangrove trimming regulations.
Chapter 930: Stormwater Management and Flood Protection
*45. Section 45: [amends 930.07(1)(f)] provides for the use of
flap -gate riser stormwater devices, as currently allowed by
county policy, in determining the appropriate elevation of an
outlet device in relation to a receiving channel or water
body.
46. Section 46: [amends 930.07(1)(i)1.] sets a minimum diameter of
12" for single family driveway culverts.
*47 Section 47: [amends 930.07(1)(m)] revises and relaxes some
stormwater tract and swale sloping requirements as well as
making some clarification changes in that subsection.
48. Section 48: [amends 930.05(3)] makes it illegal, unless
otherwise permitted by the county, to discharge fluid from a
swimming pool, washing machine, water circulation heat pump,
or other mechanical device into a stormwater management
system. This change was initiated by Public Works staff to
address drainage problems associated with the discharge of
water, other than stormwater run-off, into drainage systems
that are not designed to handle the extra water/fluid. The
proposed regulation would be retroactive, applying to existing
homes. Public Works staff have indicated that this regulation
would be enforced through code enforcement action, initiated
via drainage complaints.
49. Section 49: [amends 930.07(2)(d)] restructures a section of
the stormwater chapter to clarify floodplain cut and fill
requirements. The changes also relax the cut and fill lot
size exemption threshold from to 1 acre. Finally, a cut and
fill balance exemption is added for the large Blue Cypress
Lake floodplain area due to the unique characteristics of that
floodplain. In the opinion of the County engineer, the result
of this additional exemption will not adversely impact
stormwater management within the Blue Cypress Lake floodplain
area.
Note: at its November 5, 1991 regular meeting, the Board
discussed an emergency item related to this section which
requires cut and fill balancing on certain sized single family
lots in flood plains. As of the date of this report, no
additional staff or Professional Services Advisory Committee
input can be provided. However, by the time of the November
20th meeting, staff will present additional information, and
input from the Planning Services Advisory Committee.
Chapter 931: Wellfield and Aquifer Protection
50. Section 50: [amends 931 introductory table of contents]
expands a subsection topic heading to better reflect the
contents of the subsection.
**51.Section 51: [amends 931.09] adds language from the
Comprehensive Plan, which parallels water management district
regulations, restricting the use of Floridan aquifer artesian
wells.
T
NOV 2 0 1991
poor. 84 PAGE JUtej
®V20Mi
BOOK S4 F4LE
Chapter 932: Coastal Management
**52.Section 52: [amends 932.07(1)] coordinates with and references
the definition of live -aboard vessels (see section 3) and the
specific land use criteria applicable to commercial marinas
where live -aboard vessels are allowed (see section 80). .
53. Section 53:
against the
of the dune
parking or
activities
vegetation.
[amends 932.06(4)] narrows down the prohibition
parking or storage of vehicles and boats seaward
stabilization line. With this amendment, such
storage would be prohibited only where such
would damage or disturb the dune or dune
Chapter 934: Excavation and Mining
*54. Section 54: [amends 934.05] clarifies that littoral zone
slopes are only required where planted littoral zones are to
be created. Also, the change would increase the minimum
waterbody littoral zone(s) exemption threshold size from to
} acre. The change would replace the 15 sq. ft. of planted
littoral zone per 1' of shoreline formula with the formula
used by the water management district. The water management
district requirement is that planted littoral zone coverage
shall equal or exceed 30% of the waterbody area. Finally, the
change allows projects that are required to provide mitigation
for wetlands filling or alteration to use required littoral
zone areas to meet mitigation requirements.
Chapter 952: Traffic
55. Section 55: [amends 952.08(1)] parallels section 35 and
updates the Traffic chapter to reflect the fact that the
county does not now require road right-of-way dedications in
conjunction with permitting construction of a single family
residence.
56. Section 56: [amends 952 traffic impact study table] corrects
a terminology error and two numerical errors.
57. Section 57: [amends 952 trip rate table] corrects some
terminology errors.
58. Section 58: [amends 952 thoroughfare right-of-way table]
corrects some terminology errors and a numerical error, and
adds three previously omitted roadway segments.
Chapter 954: Off -Street Parking
59. Section 59: [amends 954.07(1)] adds a reference to the minimum
width of a one-way drive (12').
60. Section 60: [amends 954.07(3)] adds into the chapter the
previously omitted minimum dimensional standard for a parallel
parking space (8' X 23').
61. Section 61: [amends 954.06(35)] amends the parking standard
for boatslips by adding a specific parking requirement for
live -aboard slips: 1 space per slip.
Chapter 971: Specific Land Use Criteria
62. Section 62: [amends 971.06 table of contents] updates the
chapter table of contents to reflect new table format and adds
some additional use references and new specific use
categories.
63. Sections 63 - 66: [amends 971.08(8)(a); 971.12(1)(a);
971.14(4)(a); 971.14(6)(a) and (b)] corrects typographical
errors in these chapter subsections.
8
1
64. Section 67: [establishes 971.14(7)] establishes specific
criteria for colleges and universities. These criteria
parallel the existing criteria applied to secondary schools,
and include special setbacks, buffers, traffic studies, and
a prohibition of dormitories on campuses located in single
family districts.
65. Sections 68 - 72: [amends 971.21(3)(a); 971.40(3)(b);
971.42(3); 971.43(2); 971.44(1)] corrects typographical and
terminology errors and inconsistencies.
66. Section 73: [amends 971.44(2)(c)] applies to heavy utilities
uses and deletes a building and loading area setback from
property boundary criteria. In staff's opinion, this
criterion should be eliminated since a more specific buffering
requirement [reference 971.44(2)(c)5.] is already contained
within the subject subsection. The buffer criterion, which
will remain, better addresses buffering between utility
facilities and property boundaries.
67. Section 74: [amends 971.44(3)(a)] corrects some zoning
district reference omissions.
68. Section 75: [amends 971.44(3)(d)] applies to limited utilities
uses and exactly corresponds to the change described above in
section 73.
69. Section 76: [establishes 971.45(6)] establishes specific
criteria for recreational vehicle (RV) sales uses. These
criteria closely correspond to existing criteria applied to
mobile home sales, with some differences in parking and
display area requirements due to the general difference in
size between a mobile home and an RV.
70. Section 77: [establishes 971.14(8)] establishes specific
criteria for libraries which correspond to criteria applied to
cultural or civic facilities (eg. the Gifford Community
Center). Setback and buffer requirements are somewhat reduced
for libraries in comparison to cultural or civic facilities.
71. Section 78: [establishes 971.28(8)] establishes specific
criteria for "stand alone" cemeteries. [Note: these criteria
do not apply to cemeteries that, are accessory to places of
worship.] The criteria proposed include setbacks and buffers
between burial areas and adjacent property boundaries.
72. Section 79: [amends 971.40(11)] establishes specific criteria
for camps and retreats, such as the Boy Scout camp. The
criteria establish a minimum site size (10 acres) , setbacks or
buffers between camping areas and adjacent property
boundaries, drop-off areas, and a "density" limitation for
cabins or other permanent structures that house sleeping
facilities. The criteria allow for unpaved and stabilized
parking surfaces and allow the county to restrict or limit
outdoor lighting, location and hours of operation of outdoor
activities. Lastly, the criteria allow the county to require
other measures to mitigate adverse noise and/or lighting
impacts.
73. Section 80: [amends 971.35(3)] specifically references live -
aboard vessels in the commercial marina specific criteria, and
also requires that such vessels be connected to approved pump -
out facilities.
**74.Sections 81 - 84: [amends 971.08(4); 971.08(12); 971.41(4)(a)
and (b); 971.41(7)(b) and (c)] inserts necessary references to
the newly established Con -3 zoning district.
75. Section 85: [amends a portion of 971.05(7)] corrects a
typographical error.
9
NOV 201991
MOF PALM_
Pr -
WV 20 1991
POOK
rf U
*76. Sections 86-88 [amends introductory table of contents for 930,
amends 930.07(1)(a), and establishes 930.071] establish
specific procedural requirements for the county to follow
prior to adoption of any discharge rate standards set for
drainage basins and sub -basins in the county. Procedures are
to include public workshops and adoption of discharge rates.by
ordinance.
Sections 89-92 are included at the end of the ordinance to fulfill
legal requirements regarding repeal of conflicting provisions,
codification, severability, effective date, and signatures.
As of the date of this report, no additional comments that
suggested or required any changes to the proposed ordinance have
been received from PSAC members.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners:
1. Provide staff with direction(s) for any changes to the
proposed ordinance; and
2. Announce its intention to take final action on the
proposed ordinance on Wednesday, December 4, 1991 at 5:01
p.m. in the Commission Chambers.
Director Boling stated that this is the first hearing on the
changes to the LDRs and an ordinance adopting these changes will
be adopted at the final public hearing on December 4, 1991 at
5:01 o'clock P.M. After giving a brief overall summary of how
the County got to this point in the LDRs, he wished to highlight
a few sections before going into general discussion.
Chairman Bird understood any changes proposed tonight to the
changes that are being presented will be incorporated in the
presentation at the next meeting on December 4, 1991, and Director
Boling confirmed that to be the process.
Chapter 910 - Section 11: [amends 911.04(3)(b)11 exempts essential
services uses, such as utility plants and electrical substations,
from minimum lot size requirements.
Director Boling explained that this change was due to the
County being cited and having to buy 20 acres for the utility
facility at Blue Cypress Lake. He confirmed that it would apply
to all public and private utilities.
Chapter 914 - Section 42: [amends 914.06(4)(a) allows the submittal
of a concurrency certificate for a site plan project
after submittal of the site plan application. The concurrency
certificate still would need to be issued prior to any site plan
10
approval. However, the proposed amendment would allow the
developer the option to choose to apply for a concurrency certificate
and pay applicable impact fees at a later time in the site plan
review process.
Chapter 930 - Section 48 [amends 930.05(3)] makes it illegal,
unless otherwise permitted by the county, to discharge fluid from
a swimming pool, washing machine, water circulation heat pump, or
other mechanical device into a stormwater management system.
This change was initiated by Public Works staff to address
drainage problems associated with the discharge of water, other
than stormwater run-off, into drainage systems that are not
designed to handle the extra water/fluid. The proposed regulation
would be retroactive, applying to existing homes. Public Works
staff have indicated that this regulation would be enforced
through code enforcement action, initiated via drainage complaints.
Director Boling advised that the St. Johns River Water
Management District is addressing this issue also, but on a
regional basis. We are talking about direct discharge into a
swale system or into a tract that wasn't designed to handle that.
Commissioner Wheeler wondered how we would know how the
thousands of swimming pools in this county are designed to drain,
because if you have a lot of rain and people's swimming pools are
running over, -he could guarantee they will discharge it somewhere.
Chairman Bird wondered what harm that would do, and Roger
Cain of Engineering advised that we have some cases where there
is continual discharge into designed stormwater management
systems. The concern with the draining of swimming pools is
because that water is chemically treated. We need some kind of
control over that to the point where if we start having problems
with that kind of discharge, we could prevent it. The ordinance
provides provisions for permitting it under certain conditions,
but they would have to be such that they would not defeat the
purpose of the stormwater management system.
Commissioner Wheeler asked if pool owners would need a
permit if they have a sand filter system on their pools that
backwashes and discharges every two weeks or so.
Mr. Cain explained that they would if it was discharged into
a designed stormwater management system. There are a lot of
places where they discharge that is not a stormwater management
system. A swale would be a stormwater management system, and if
they are continually causing a problem with neighbors complaining
11
140 9 20 1991
ROOK PAGE 91 3
r �
NOV 2 0 1991
LOOK t': f-41
about wet swales and chemicals being discharged into the Swale,
there must be some provisions made that they are either going to
quit discharging the entire amount or have it pumped out.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if the concern is with loading
the system or with the quality of the water, because it seemed to
him that the quality of swimming pool water would not be such
that there would be a problem.
Mr. Cain advised that water circulation heat pumps are the
main problem we have had because they have essentially flooded
the stormwater management system. Those pumps are capable of
putting out about 900 gallons per hour. There is an option for
permitting, which is why the permitting language was inserted.
However, we presently have a right-of-way permit under our
ordinances so we could permit heat pumps under conditions.
Heat pumps have been a serious problem, and he felt they are
going to become more and more of a problem, as new subdivisions
develop, unless some curtailment of that activity is put in
place. The correct procedure for heat pumps is to drill a return
well.
Commissioner Wheeler felt we should control the heat pumps
but not the swimming pools, and Commissioner Scurlock suggested
that the wording be such that if there is a problem, we could
require them to mitigate.
Mr. Cain anticipated it would be very difficult to figure
out a way to maintain some control.
Commissioner Eggert asked if neighbor's complaints would be
the main way of finding out about such situations, and Mr. Cain
advised that we have not received any complaints on anything
other than heat pumps. He emphasized that this is not just our
idea on this. It is a SJRWMD rule that you are not supposed to
put any chemically treated water into surface water.
Mr. Cain suggested deleting swimming pools from Section 48
until such time as we can get a better handle on this and figure
out another way to control it that is not as arduous as what is
in there now. Quite frankly, the main problem is with heat
pumps.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously directed
staff to delete the mention of swimming pools from
Section 48, Chapter 930.
Chapter 934 - Section 54: [amends 934.05] clarifies that littoral
zone slopes are only required where planted littoral zones are to
be created. Also, the change would increase the minimum
12
waterbody littoral zone(s) exemption threshold size from * to 1
acre. The change would replace the 15 sq. ft. of planted
littoral zone per 1' of shoreline formula with the formula used
by the water management district. The water management district
requirement is that planted littoral zone coverage shall equal or
exceed 30% of the waterbody area. Finally, the change allows
projects that are required to provide mitigation for wetlands
filling or alteration to use required littoral zone areas to meet
mitigation requirements.
Commissioner Eggert inquired if this change tracked with the
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, and Roland DeBlois,
Chief of Environmental Planning, advised that we did check it
against the TCRPC with some samples, and even though it is not
the same formula, it is fairly compatible. We didn't see that
there was a problem.
Director Keating pointed out that this was recommended by
the Professional Services Advisory Commission.
Chapter 934 - Section 49:
Director Boling noted that there are some proposed changes
to requirements for cut and fill balancing on single-family lots
in the floodplains. In addition to that, the Public Works Department
has proposed a fourth exemption as follows:
4. Development located within the Vero Lake Estates Municipal
Services Taxing Unit as referenced in ordinance No. 84-81, for
which a cut and fill waiver has been granted by the Board of
County Commissioners. The Board of County Commissioners may,
in its discretion, grant a waiver from the provisions of this
subsection upon the affirmative showing of the applicant, by
means of a competent engineering study, that the development
project, as designed, will meet all other requirements of the
Stormwater Management and Flood Protection Chapter and will
not create a material adverse impact on flood protection.
"REFERENCE P. 45 OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE"
13 BUO( FAl t itJ
AOV 20/'9
ov 20 1991
EOOK. 84 P,i,6E [J16
Director Boling understood that special drainage studies
have been done for that particular area and that special improve-
ments have been done for the area as a whole, which would mitigate
and basically not require the need to have cut and fill balancing
met on a lot by lot basis. In other words, it already has been
taken care of on an area -wide basis through a Municipal Services
Taxing District (M.S.T.U.) Mrs. Melodie Manning spoke to the
Board recently on this matter, and Engineering has confirmed that
her lot falls into the M.S.T.0 area and the exemption would
include her lot and other similar Tots in the area.
Melodie Manning wished to express her appreciation of
staff's recommendation for the inclusion of the fourth exemption.
She advised that she has looked into the drainage study that had
been initiated and paid for by the residents in the area, and she
feels the new retention areas will help handle any overflow that
might result from extra fill being brought in for new construction.
Continuing, Director Boling explained that Section 53 in
Chapter 932 deals with the ability/inability to store items such
as a boat on a dune or in a dune system area and allows storage
in a dune area if it is done in such a manner that it doesn't
disturb, damage or destroy the existing dune or the associated
dune vegetation. This is covered in Section 53 on page 46 of the
proposed ordinance.
Mr. DeBlois explained that this came up in a Code Enforcement
situation. Previously, the ordinance was worded to prohibit the
storage of a boat oceanward of the county dune stabilization
setback line. This change allows for some discretion on storage,
provided it is confirmed that it is not detrimental to the dune.
Referring to the definition in Section 3 on Page 1 of the
Ordinance, Commissioner Eggert questioned the two-hour period in
the restrictions for "live -aboard vessels" -- A person shall be
deemed to be inhabiting or living upon a vessel if he or she is
present aboard said vessel for a continuous period of more than
two (2) hours between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m."
Mr. DeBlois clarified that occupancy would have to occur in
those hours for 7 consecutive days. Code Enforcement felt that
it would be nearly impossible to confirm whether a motorized
vehicle is occupied for 7 consecutive days, and this was worded
that if a site was monitored for 7 consecutive days and that on
each of those 7 consecutive days it was observed that it was
occupied for at least 2 hours each night, staff could presume
that it is a "live aboard" case for Code Enforcement action.
Director Keating advised that this is one of the amendments
that is precipitated by one of the policies in our Comprehensive
14
Plan which says that we will adopt "live aboard" requirements by
this year. Essentially, we don't want additional dwelling units
created on single-family docks by having people living on their
boats there. He pointed out that these "live aboard" requirements
are pretty liberal when you consider that someone can live aboard
their boat for 7 consecutive days and not be a "live aboard".
Section 12 (c) of Chapter 11 - A sentence is added clarifying
that in the Con -3 area, which is essentially the xeric scrub area
between the St. Sebastian River and Roseland Road, the specific
boundaries of that district are confirmed on a site -by -site basis
as they are in the wetland areas:
zoning atlas. The eastern general boundary of the Con -2 Con -3
District shall be the west right-of-way line of Roseland Road. The
western boundary of the district shall be .enerally depicted in the
official zoning atlas. The specific western boundary of the Cc>n
Con -3 District shall be determined on a site -by -site basis by a
boundary survey, based on soil types and the existence of
envaronmenLally .impor,ta nL xeric scrub ve•etation
Or 'ens ii_oninenLal lv sensiti,e ,reLlands as verified by county
environmental planning staff, in consultation with the Florida Game
and Fresh Water Fish Commission (GFC) and other appropriate
agencies. Orsino fine sand or Electra sand, in combination with
xeric scrub vegetation, shall be indicative of the Con -3 District.
Upland areas east of the St. Sebastian River - within the
generalized Con -3 boundaries - that are determined by site specific
survey not to have the xeric scrub characteristics described
herein, shall have an RS -1 District designation.
IlanL `-c omn an,i Li
•
NOV 20199'
REFERENCE PAGE 6 OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE
15
BOOK 84 [LEJ17
i40V 2 0 1991
c)
BOOK BOOK 0 1 FACE 010
Director Boling concluded the highlighting of certain
sections.
Chairman Bird opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in these matters.
Jane Robinson, 1990 Ocean Ridge Circle, stated that she and
her husband live on the oceanfront and have 5 boats which they
store in rental facilities. She understood that Section 53 on
page 46 of the proposed ordinance is going to amend the prohibition
of storing various vehicles on the beach.
v
Section 53: Section 932.06(4) of the Coastal Management Chapter is
hereby amended to read as follows:
Vehicles prohibited seaward of dune stabilization line; exception.
Except as expressly provided in subsection (5), it shall be:
unlawful for any person to operate, drive or propel any truck,
tractor, bulldozer, grader, crane, automobile, motorcycle, dune
buggy, moped, minibike, all -terrain cycle, or any other vehicle
seaward of the county dune stabilization setback line excluding,
however, any of the aforementioned vehicles when operated by an
officer of any agency of the state or in the furtherance of
official duties, or those operations which have received the
express authorization of the board of county commissioners. The
parking or storage of automobiles, boats, trailers, motor homes,
recreation and like vehicles in a manner that disturbs, damages or
destroys the existing dune or associated dune vegetation, or in a
manner that interferes with the natural reestablishment of the dune
or associated dune vegetation, is prohibited seaward of the dune
stabilization setback line.
16
Mrs. Robinson commented that if this ordinance was changed,
they would benefit by being able to store 4 of their 5 boats on
the beach in front of their home. However, having lived on the
beach and having seen the results of just one boat being kept
there, she has quite a bit of hesitation as to whether this is
the way the people of Indian River County want their beach to go.
She wondered if this ordinance would allow anybody to sail their
boat onto the beach, park it, go off and come back in a week, a
month or longer. Mrs. Robinson asked if there would be any limit
to the number of boats, vehicles, or items that people could
leave on the beach and also whether there would be a requirement
that you would have to be a resident of the county or state to
take advantage of the free parking lot. She pointed out that
Castaway Cove probably has more than 100 lots, many of these are
located back from the ocean, and she felt sure that many of the
people would love to have a boat on the beach and have it there
for whenever they wished to use it. She really wondered whether
it would be a good thing. She understood that this ordinance
permits mobile homes, etc., and all kinds of vehicles as long as
they do not disturb the beach. She is really concerned about the
effect this would have on the beach, because she has observed the
storage of just one boat by her house, where the owner of the
boat, his family and friends did not use the dune cross-over
which is required by county ordinance. A dune crossing is only
one block away, but they simply made themselves a path across the
grass and over the dune to drag their
When bad weather threatened, the boat
bluff line because there was no place
the winds and the water are up, there
-- it would be too dangerous. When a
boat was taken up to the crest of the
boat down to the beach.
was dragged up onto the
on the beach for it. When
is no suitable place for it
real bad storm came up, the
bluff line and left there
at the owner's convenience until it suited him to go back and
drag the trailer and the boat back down to the beach again. This
particular owner paid no attention to the ordinance which forbids
crossing the dune wherever you choose, and she really didn't know
that we could hope that many people would pay attention to this
ordinance. She expected they would take advantage of the closest
route to the beach.
Mrs. Robinson felt that enforcement of the old ordinance was
quite simple because the ordinance was very straight forward,
stating that you cannot store anything eastward of the dune
vegetation line. Mrs. Robinson urged the Board tokeep the old
wording.
1�1
17
POOK FA(6E �1�
M 0 V 2 0 199
BOOR
PAGE v
Attorney Vitunac pointed out that first of all, this change
doesn't allow you to park a boat on anyone else's property
without their permission. Under this law, you could not park a
boat on_the public beach or in a county or city park or on your
neighbor's property. The only ones who would get a change in the
present boat policy are those people who own a beachfront lot
down past the area that is now restricted.
Roland DeBlois explained that the County also has specific
regulations relating to the limitations on the number of boats
stored in an unenclosed area on lots, limiting it to one boat.
He advised that this change would serve to allow the storage of
catamarans near the beach as long as it doesn't disturb the
beach, which is probably what this change was intended to do.
Again, the RV homes are not going to happen because of what
Attorney Vitunac just stated.
Commissioner Bowman pointed out that private property starts
at the mean high watermark, which is way up by the vegetation
line, and wondered where there is space to store anything between
there and the water. It seemed to her that all this storage has
been illegal.
Mr. DeBlois, in looking at the way that last line As worded,
felt that staff would agree that the intention was for reference
to boats and could support the elimination of other vehicles
from this particular allowance.
Director Keating noted that they were all specifically
prohibited from being stored on the beach with the addition of
the wording "as long as they are not adversely affecting dune
vegetation." However, that made it seem like they could be
stored under certain conditions.
Commissioner Scurlock understood then that staff would agree
to eliminate all those other items and allow just one boat to be
stored on the beach in front of each oceanfront lot, and Roland
confirmed that would be staff's intent.
With regard to the confusion over the definition of the high
waterline, he noted that there are some lots in the county where
the owners actually own right down to the high waterline.
Chairman Bird felt that it depends on the area of beach you
are talking about. He lives in Castaway Cove and under normal
conditions, he would say that the high watermark is 50 to 100
feet from where the dune vegetation starts. There is quite a bit
of white sand there that you could store a boat on without
harming any vegetation.
Director Keating commented that staff found that out when
they did a survey on just a small part of the south beach and
cited 5 or 6 catamarans, which were removed.
18
Cathy Cigala, 2035 Ocean Ridge, felt there is enough space
between the high water level and the water to store a boat. She
and her husband are very environmentally conscious, but they do
feel the beach is for the public's enjoyment and they would like
to have a boat on the beach if possible, in a limited area, of
course.
Tom Collins, owner of a oceanfront residence in Sanderling
Subdivision in the north county, noted that he keeps a 6 -ft.
rubber raft mounted with a small motor on the beach, and strongly
favors this rewritten section of the ordinance. He felt the
ordinance would save the dunes by not having people bringing
their boats to and fro across the dunes. He and his family have
been there for a few years now and have not disturbed the dune
system. With regard to the protection of nesting sea turtles, he
believed they are fully protected by other county ordinances. He
pointed out that if Mrs. Robinson doesn't want to have a boat in
front of her home, she doesn't have to.
Dick Smith, resident in the north part of Vero Beach,
explained that he doesn't live right on the beach but does have a
catamaran. He certainly would enjoy being able to park his boat
in front of someone's house with their permission. It would be
great to be able to just leave it there and not have to take it
back and forth whenever he wished to take his boat out.
Bob Cigala of Ocean Ridge Circle supported the amendment as
rewritten, and appreciated staff's efforts in this, having been
the one cited for having a catamaran on the beach. He is a avid
beach goer; in fact, -the beach at Ocean Ridge seldom is used by
anyone but himself. He keeps his boat up on cat tracks to help
propel it up onto the beach. He believes catamarans offer a
pollution -free form of recreation because they don't have motors
or propellers that dig up the beach. He would like his children
to be able to enjoy boating as he has known it. Currently he
uses a worn walkway/path in the dune to bring his boat to the
water and doesn't destroy the dune.
Peter Ford, resident of Seagrove, explained that he has just
a little dinghy which he carries down to the beach using a dune
cross-over. Occasionally he keeps it down there for a weekend or
perhaps a week or two during the summer. He didn't believe his
activity harms anything; in fact, he believed it helps to see
some activity down there. He fully supported this amendment.
Chairman Bird understood that people would have to get
permission from a property owner on the beach to keep their boat
on the beach and that it would be limited to one boat per residence.
Clint Lanier, resident of Ocean Ridge, agreed with Bob
Cigala about sand building up around a boat on the beach. He
19
NOV 20 1991
BOOK 64 FLE ddi
NOV 20 199
BOOK PAGE
also uses the worn walkway/path through the dune at Ocean Ridge
Circle and wished to point out that the path has been there for a
long, long time. He didn't feel it does any harm. He expected
someone will build a house on that lot soon, but until such time
he felt that Bob Cigala should have the enjoyment of keeping his
cat on beach.
Harry Robinson of 1990 Ocean Ridge Circle felt the amendment
isn't clear about how many boats can be kept on the beach.
Director Keating advised that each oceanfront lot can have
one boat in an unenclosed area on the beach, and the boat doesn't
have to be owned by the property owner. The property owner can
give permission for someone else to store their boat on the beach
in front of his home or lot.
Mr. DeBlois explained that this is covered under the general
provisions of the Zoning Code, Chapter 911, relating to single-
family lots and accessory uses.
Mr. Robinson felt certain that #4 in this section of the
ordinance, as presently written, would serve as well as the
rewritten clause with perhaps an addition for better enforcement
by using the wording "parking or storage". He felt that by
adding these few sentences someone is going to have to go out and
see what kind of facility it is, which will result in making it
more difficult to enforce. He distributed pictures of the bluff
line, showing Mr. Cigala's boat pulled up on the dune during a
big blow. He emphasized how important it is to maintain the
accretion of the sand and give the seagrasses an opportunity to
grow back. Ocean Ridge does have a walkway that cost thousands
of dollars to build, but some people do not use it.
Bob Cigala distributed pictures he took of his boat, pointing
out the condition of sea grasses where no boat has been stored
and areas where his boat has been stored. His boat is not
stopping seagrasses from growing, because his boat is not stored
on the dune or on the vegetation on the beach.
Chairman Bird asked if the Board wished to make a decision
on this issue tonight, and Commissioner Scurlock suggested that
we allow one boat to be stored on the beach in front of each
oceanfront lot and try to monitor the impact. If it becomes a
problem, then it would be something that would come back to the
Board in a public hearing where we would readdress the issue.
Right now, however, he felt that the beach is something to
protect and enjoy, and he believed we could do both of them
together.
Chairman Bird felt that the consensus of the Commission is
to prohibit the storage of everything but one boat per each
oceanfront lot and eliminate the storage of all the other vehicles.
20
Director Keating felt staff has the Board's intent and can
rework it and bring it back at the next public hearing in
December.
Warren Dill advised that he has some technical questions
that he would like to discuss further with staff before the next
public hearing in early December.
There being no others who wished to be heard, the Chairman
closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously directed
staff to incorporate the changes as suggested tonight
into the amendments to be presented for final
adoption at the next public hearing on December 4, 1991
at 5:01 o'clock P.M. in these Chambers.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 8:10 o'clock P.M.
ATTEST:
`KrEarton, Clerk
Nth! 20 4991
21
Richard N. Bird, Chairman
BOOK 84 FAL dela