Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-0495/2/87(b4)LEGAL(BBnm) . RESOLUTION NO. 87-49 A RESOLUTION OF TI4E BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO SUBMIT COMMENTS TO COASTAL BARRIER STUDY GROUP, NATIONAL PARIK SERVICE , UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, REGARDING PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE EXISTING COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCE SYSTEM AND ENDORSING SAID COMMENTS. WHEREAS, pursuant to the 1982 Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) two Coastal Barrier Resources System Units have been designated partially or fully within Indian River County; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CBRA, the Department of Interior Is proposing to submit a report to Congress to Include recormendations for additions or deletions to the Coastal Barrier Resources System; and WHEREAS, the Department of Interior's report recommends substantial increases to the existing P-10 Unit, which Coastal Barrier Resources Unit is within Indian River County; and WHEREAS, the recommended increases in the P-10 Unit would conflict with existing Indian River County plans for low density, controlled residential development on the North Barrier Island; and WHEREAS, Indian River County has recently embarked upon a program to ensure that low density, controlled residential growth on the North Barrier Island would meet the County's environmental protection objectives, and said program has included adoption of a tree protection ordinance which also protects mangroves and dunes; adoption of stringent stormwater criteria for systems discharging to outstanding Florida waters; preparation for adoption of a natural vegetation protection ordinance for the North Barrier Island; and initiation of utility infrastructure planning for the North Barrier Island; and 1 RESOLUTION NO, 87-49 WHEREAS, in addition, the proposed increases to the P-10 Unit could have substantial adverse impacts on the extensive agricultural use in the area, including adverse impacts on world famous Orchid Island citrus; NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida hereby resolves that the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian • • River County is authorized to submit to Mr. Frank B. McGilvrey, Coastal Barriers Coordinator, the attached letter which contains the concerns and comments of, and which is hereby fully endorsed by, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County. The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner Eggert and seconded by Commissioner Wheeler, and, being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. aye Vice Chairman Margaret C. Bowman nay Commissioner Richard N. Bird aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert aye Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 2nd day of June, 1987. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BycG oA r. Chairman ATTEST: Oa� r g� - Clerk of Court ' APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: )� Bruce 6arkeit---------------- Assistant County Attorney 2 C-1 • .BOARD OF COUNTY Y COMMISSIONERS 1890 25th Street, Vero (leach, Florida 32960 TeleWwM: (305) 567-M June 2, 1987 Mr. Frank B. McGilvrey, Coastal Barriers Coordinator Coastal Barriers Study Group National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior P.O. Box 37127 Washington, D.C. 20013-7127 Dear Mr. McGilvrey: SunCom Telephone: 424-1011 Please be advised that the Board of County Commissioners of X11dian River County, Florida wishes to comment on the Department of Interior's proposed modifications to the existing Coastal Barriers Resource System. The primary concern of the Commission is Unit P-10, located on the barrier island in north Indian River County, For the reasons listed below, it is the Com- mission's feeling that the cNisting P-10 Unit was incorrectly designated as an undeveloped coastal barrier and that the Proposed vdditionw to P-10 are inappropriate and inconsistent With the intent of the Act. When designated in 1982, the existing P-10 Unit comprised a 1.7 mile long portion of the barrier island. The northern point of the existing P-10 Unit is located approximately two miles south Of tile Sebastian Inlet. The Department of the Interior in Report To Congress: Coastal Harrier Resources System, Volume 14, Florida (East Coast), describea this unit as follows, "The only apparent alteration of the habitat other than the highwa that: of mosquito control ditches throughout the southy is ern half is the mangrove swamp".of That statement, however, is not an accurate description of the existing P-10 Unit now nor its condition in 1982. More than half of the existing P-10 Unit consists of an 84 unit subdivi- sion of river to ocean 'lots which was platted in 1924. In 1983, there were 28 dwelling units on these lots within the area designated as Unit p-10. Since 1983, at least eight more houses have been constructed or are presently being constructed on lots in this subdivision within P-10. Not only did the 1983 develop- ment pattern conflict with the Department of Interior'sdescrip- tion of the P-10 Unitt but when applying the Department's 1 unit per 5 upland acres, completed infrastructure, or one quarter mile of undeveloped shoreline criteria to determine whether the area is considered developed, the P-10 Unit would be considered developed. Therefore, it is the County's position that the existing P-10 Unit was incorrectly designated and should now be deleted from the CBRS. Regarding the proposed additions to the P-10 Unit, please be advised that the Board of County Commissioners feels that the new areas proposed for part of the CBRS. inclusion should not be designated as Although most of the area proposed to be added to the P-10 Unit is not characterized by urban develop- ment, much of it is developed as agriculture and is presently 50 40 supporting citrus groves. Other areas proposed for addition to P-10, particularly those areas south of C.R. 510, are charac- terized by urban development, much of which has occu_red in the last three years. Indian River County has an adopted land use plan which provides for low density residential development of the north barrier island, including the area proposed to be added to P-10. To accommodate the planned land use for this area, the County has programmed improvements for this part of the barrier island. In addition, the County has enacted and is developing specific environmental safeguards to protect sensitive natural resources in this area. For the following reasons, the Board of County Colmnissioners feels that the areas proposed for addition to the P-10 Unit be removed from consideration: °Extensive recent development in the area between C.R. 510 and the proposed southern limits of P--10, including: °320 room hotel under'construction 9720 unit condominium project 202 complete 1221 unit condominium project 10t complete; proposed second phase of additional 221 units 068 unit subdivision on Pine Island with infrastructure complete 'several other developments under construction *central water system in place developed with private capital ®central wastewater -system developed with private capital serving 1,000 existing or planned units *Extensive agricultural development and two recently approved subdivisions in the area proposed to be added north of 510. °Adopted land use plan proposing low density residential development *Recent (March, 1987) resetting by the state of the County's Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL); line was relocated substantially landward. °County & state acquisition of several beachfront parcels (comprising more than 4,000 linear feet) in proposed P-10 Unit for recreation purposes. °County adoption of tree protection and dune protection ordinances. *County plans for now mainland - island bridge and for extension of existing central water system to barrier island north of C.R. 510; traffic impact fees for new bridge currently being collected. °Native vegetation protection ordinance for north barrier island in draft form. The County has several specific concerns regarding any expansion of the P-10 unit. First, the County is concerned that the prohibition of providing federal funds or federal assistance to areas in the CBRS would adversely affect the extensive agricul- tural use in the area. Second, the County is concerned that the long-range planning and infrastructure programming for the north barrier island will be adversely affected by the unavailability of flood insurance for the area. Third, the County is concerned that the proposed additions to P-10 are not consistent with the three major purposes of the Act, and that the existing P-10 and the proposed additions to it are part of a developed barrier island as defined by the criteria established by the Department 51 • • Of Interior. Finally, the County is concerned that extending the P-10 Unit will have the opposite effect from that intended, Putting increased pressure on the existing agricultural land to be converted to urban development. In conclusion, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida would strongly'recommend that the existing P--10 unit be deleted from the CDRS and that the proposed additions to V-10 be withdrawn. If any gi.jestions arise regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Bob Keating, Planning Director. for. Indian River County. Sincerely, Don C. Scurlock, Jr. VChairman Indian River County Board of Commissioners /rj ccs Senator Lawton Chiles Representative Bill Nelson Secretary of the Interior Donald Hodel Florida Department of Community Affairs Governor Bob Martinez Representative Tom Lewis Representative Dale Patchett