Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02092005 HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND SEBASTIAN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY g, 2005 - 7:00 P.M. GITY GOUNGIL CHAMBERS '1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 2. 3. 4. The Mayor called the Regular Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor McCollum. A moment of silence was held. ROLL CALL City Council Present: Mayor Nathan McCollum Vice-Mayor Joe Barczyk Councilmember Ray Coniglio Councilmember Lisanne Monier Staff Present: Interim City Manager, Jim Davis City Attorney, Rich Stdnger City Clerk, Sally Maio Deputy City Clerk, Jeanette Williams MIS Technician, Barbara Brooke Building Director, Wayne Ese[tine City Engineer, David Fisher Growth Management Director, Tracy Hass Public Works Director, Terry Hilt Lieutenant, Bob Lockhart Regular City Council Meeting February 9, 2005 Page Two AGENDA MODIFICATIONS (ADDITIONS AND/OR DELETIONS) Items not on the wditen agenda may be added only upon a unanimous vote of City Council members (R-04-26) The Mayor requested item 6C regarding Ashbury Subdivision be moved to "Old Business" 1 lB. On MOTION by Mr. Coniglio, and SECOND by Ms. Monier, the item was moved as requested on a voice vote of 4-0. 6. PROCLAMATIONS~ ANNOUNCEMENTS~ PRESENTATIONS 05.050 A. North County Relay for Life Purple Wednesdays Proclamation Nancy Madsen, American Cancer Society accepted the proclamation read by Mayor McCollum for the event scheduled for April 30-May 1, 2005 at Sebastian River High School, and introduced Jamie Lunsford, North County Committee member and team captain, and students from Sebastian River High School who have taken on Relay for Life as a marketing program. Students were Luke Ihen, Jennifer Rodriguez, and Bdtney Brackett. 05.051B. Presentation by Lisa Waters, MEA Group. Findin.qs Re,qardin.q Treasure Coast Re.qional Airport Noise and Fli.qht TraininR Workin.q Group Study Lisa Waters, President, MEA Group gave a PowerPoint presentation and detailed the twenty-nine member working group's findings (see presentation printout attached to these minutes;) and responded to questions from Council. The item was placed on the next agenda for staff input. 05.032 C. (Moved to Old Business) 2 Regular City Council Meeting February 9, 2005 Page Throe 1-12 05.052 B. 13-15 05.006 17-20 05.053 21-22 05.054 23-24 05.055 25 CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes - 1/26/05 Regular Meeting Approval of 2005 Pelican Island Wildlife Festival at Riverview Park on Saturday, March 12, 2005 from 6:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Approve Closing Indian River Drive from Harrison Street North to Northern City Limits from 6:00 a.m. until 8:00 a.m. on March 12, 2005 for 5K Run Approve Closing Indian River Drive from Sebastian Blvd. South to Harrison Street frorn 6:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. on March 12, 2005 (Public Works Transmittal 2/1/05) Authorize the Mayor to Execute a Contract Modification with the Department of Community Affairs for the Louisiana Avenue Neighborhood Revitalization Project (City Manager 2/3/05, Transmittal, Forms, Plan) Approve the Expenditure and Appropriate the Necessary Funds to Complete the Sign Installations Damaged by the Hurricanes in the Amount of $94,820 (Engineering Transmittal 2/1/05, Spreadsheet) Approve the Expenditure of $16,102.50 for the Purchase of Six Radios from Communications International, Inc. for the Police Departrnent (PD Transmittal 1/26/05, Quote) Authorize the City Attorney to Retain an Appraiser for the KozJowski Property at the South End of Laconia Street for a Maximum Cost of $10,000 (City Attorney Transmittal 213105) Item D was removed by Mr. Coniglio for discussion, and item B was removed by Ms. Monier at the request of the applicant. On MOTION by Mr. Barczyk, and SECOND by Mr. Coniglio, items A, C, E, and F were approved on a roll call of 4-0. Item B - Pelican Island Wildlife Festival David Cox, President, Pelican Island Preservation Society, requested the closing of the Yacht Club boat ramp and additional road closing due to the fact that a tour boat is available for the festival, and that proceeds are donated to the Pelican Island Preservation Society. He had provided an amended request dated 2/9/05 (see attached) Regular City Council Meeting February 9, 2005 Page Four Damien Gilliams, 713 Layport Ddve, objected to dosing Indian River Drive and the boat ramp. He suggested placing officers and posting 15 mph speed limit signs instead. Michael Hughes, parking coordinator for the festival for several years, urged support for the requested closures. David Cox said he did not know the City process and apologized for not including Mr. Gilliams in the process and would do so in the future. He said it is planned that kayaks would be provided for use at the festival by Kayaks, Etc. Mr. Coniglio suggested treating this as was done for the 4~ of July and leave it in the hands of the police to decide whether or not to close the road based on attendance. Chief Davis said the decision was left to the officer in charge at the 4t~ of July, however he felt that there might be a larger crowd, and people will be crossing Indian River Drive to the kayaks and boat ramp. He said if Council wanted to leave that decision to police he would direct them accordingly. Mr. Cox clarified that the approval for closure would be given but left to the discretion of the police to open if they deemed it appropriate. Chief Davis noted signs were posted last year on the weekend before to notify the public about the closings. The City Attorney advised that it is legal for the City to dose the boat ramp. On MOTION by Ms. Monier, and SECOND by Mr. Coniglio, item B was approved with additions as requested in Mr. Cox's memo dated 2/9/05 and Council discussions regarding leaving closings to the discretion of the police department on a roll call vote of 4-0. Item D- SignaRe Mr. Coniglio asked if there was a time certain for FEMA reimbursement of this expenditure. The City Attorney stated that it had been reported prior to the due date so it would be eligible for reimbursement. The Mayor confirmed this reimbursement process. On MOTION by Mr. Coniglio, and SECOND by Ms. Monier, item D was approved on a roll call vote of 4-0. 8. COMMITTEE REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS - none. 9. PUBLIC HEARING - none 4 Regular City Council Meeting February 9, 2005 Page Five 10. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC Item that has occurred or was discovered within the previous six months which is not otherwise on the agenda - sign-up required- limit of five minutes each speaker Dorothy Young discussed the last meeting at which the alcohol prohibition was discussed; asked what happened to the 1991 Riverfront Study; expressed concern about a proposed nine-story building; and asked what happened to the Yacht Club. Tape I, Side II, 8:02 pm It was noted that there are no nine-story buildings allowed in Sebastian, and suggested that she make a recommendation on use of the Yacht Club. Mrs. Young said the Council needs seven members due to the City's growth. Damien Gilliams apologized to Mr. Coniglio about his outburst at the last meeting, Robert Ruszala, Whispering Palms, said he is disappointed with what he sees happening in Sebastian. Bill Morehouse, discussed his objections to the permit process for hurricane repairs which requires engineering drawings. The Building Director said the statute requires engineering drawings for all structures that are subject to the 140 mph wind load. He said the law referenced by the gentleman is a Department of Motor Vehicle rule for mobile homes. Andrea Coy, Sebastian, said there are many people in mobile home parks who are snowbirds who cannot repair their homes. She cited several people who are waiting weeks for permits and variances. Mayor McCollum explained state law requirements for mobile homes. Michael Hughes, discussed Operation Blue Streak, and an April 30 County-wide cleanup in cooperation with KIRB. Mr. Gilliams said he sent a letter requesting an audit of the City complex and was hoping for a response. Mayor McCollum called recess at 8:17 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:33 p.m. All members were present. 11. OLD BUSINESS 05.041 A. 27-30 Reconsideration of Non-Profit Leases for Old Schoolhouse; Casualty Insurance Requirements (City Attorney Transmittal 2/3/05, Letters) The City Attorney explained KIRB's request for either a waiver of the casualty insurance provision in its lease or to have the City pass its policy premium for the building onto Regular City Council Meeting February 9, 2005 Page Six KIRB to maintain the City's lower rate. He said he brought back all three leases to be even handed with all lessees. Cheryl Cummins, program negotiator for the lease for KIRB, said KIRB has a very tight budget and does not have funds to pay casualty insurance. The City Attorney said it was the Finance Director's plan not to insure the satellite building once it was leased out but would continue insurance on the old school building. Mr. Coniglio said all non-profits should be treated equally, and that these are our buildings and we might need them someday. Mr. Barczyk suggested that the City maintain the insurance and pass the premium on to the lessees. The City Attorney cited options A and B as set out in the agenda packet; and C which is to stay as it is. Mr. Coniglio said he would be abstaining from the vote. On MOTION by Ms. Monier, and SECOND by Barczyk, it was approved that the city maintain its insurance and if there is any increase in the premium it be passed on to the lessee on a roll call vote of 3-0 (Mr. Coniglio abstained - see form attached) 05.032 Clarification Regarding Ashbury Subdivision Development, Site Plannin.q and Permitting Requirements via Presentations by Staff from the Buildin.q and Growth Mana,qement Departments, as well as by Representatives from the Coy Clark Development Company The Growth Management Director began staff presentation on Ashbury Subdivision alleged allegations. He cited the City Attorney's paper entitled "^shbury Subdivision Alleged Violations" submitted at this meeting. (see attached to these minutes). He presented an aedal depicting the site on January 24, 2005 showing the clearing for the silt barrier which is 25 feet in from the property line, said all cleadng was done in accordance with the tree clearing plan, that each individual site would be required to provide a tree clearing survey, that gopher tortoises were not required to be relocated, the tree survey would be addressed on a lot by lot basis, that the tub gdnder that was being utilized on the site had been removed and a machine that satisfies the code brought in. He responded to code violations that are not correctable, noting that they did exceed ten feet for the perimeter road because of the equipment that was used, however the Developer did a very good job of saving trees, the silt fence installed pdor to cleadng could have been addressed differently, removal of vegetation area from the buffer area cannot be determined by staff, access from roads not designated in construction areas had been corrected and all subs have been notified to use only Powerline Road. Regular City Council Meeting February 9, 2005 Page Seven The City Attorney said access from roads not designated could be included under 'code violations corrected after notice' on his submitted memo. The Building Director said his department would do tree surveys on a lot by lot basis and approved land clearing for the subdivision and when notified, his department did address the concerns. He presented a video exhibiting what his Chief Building Inspector witnessed on December 27th' 2004 and again on February 4th' 2005. He noted that in some areas the machine had to turn around or place debds where the palmetto was crushed and exceeded 10 feet but many trees were saved. He also pointed out places for lakes that were cleared. Tape II, Side I, 9:11 pm He noted that the permit for land clearing was issued to the developer in accordance with code, and when it was discovered that another contractor was doing the clearing they were notified and did come in and comply immediately. He said the subcontractor was state licensed and insured and was brought into compliance with city registration provisions. He said he advised that the tub grinder issue be addressed and was stopped until staff could meet and the proper equipment was brought in after review. He said a weekly meeting process has been implemented so this does not happen again and for future land clearing permits there will be a form with specific city regulations spelled out. Robert Robb, Land Development Director for Clark Development, addressed tree clearing concerns, noting the developer is sensitive to tree preservation and citing methods used to preserve trees; described how the perimeter road was cut to try to preserve trees, exhibited the property line and silt fence on an overhead display which showed previous clearing done on Clark property by Mrs. Coy. He cited inspections of silt fences every seven days and the developer's efforts not to damage her belongings that are actually on Mr. Clark's property. He further added that the tree survey is yet to come because all of the tree preservation is to be on individual lots, the tub grinder was an oversight based on his knowledge of all other areas of Indian River County which allow them, and that US Fish and Wildlife went out and checked for gopher tortoises themselves which led to the incidental take permit due to the incidence of upper respiratory disease instead of relocation. Sal Neglia expressed concern that contractors came to Sebastian to get permits to help people rebuild after the hurricanes and could not get the permits. The City Attorney said a lot of contractors came here were from out of state and not state certified. Mary Ann Krueger, read a letter from Jean Case into the record regarding gopher tortoises and the developers' improper access into Ashbury from Orange Heights, and then read portions of a letter of response from the Building Director. She said she resents City staff defending wrongdoers. Ann Putman, said she contacted Tallahassee regarding gopher tortoises and was told the process of take permits, and she objected to driving them into extinction without testing the tortoises for the virus. 7 Regular City Council Meeting February 9, 2005 Page Eight Andrea Coy said Mr. Clark's contractor could have chosen to relocate the tortoises on the property, said the videos did more to argue her case than the developers, showed a cleared area in the buffer which she alleges previously had four live pine trees, and said Officer Grimmich was present when this occurred. She said the same code enforcement applied to local residents should apply to developers. Dale Dettmer, attorney for the developer, said Ashbury has all of the required permits. Mrs. Coy is before this Council asking for enforcement of the law and asking the City to investigate using time and money. He further stated that Mrs. Coy has trespassed by clearing the developer's property for gardens and placing her FEMA trailer on Mr. Clark's property which she has been asked to remove. Mr. Dettmer asked the Council to decline further investigation to satisfy the grievances of one person and allow Ashbury to proceed. Carolyn Corum said perhaps this happened to Mrs. Coy so she could run for City Council. Bill Morehouse said Andrea Coy's garden was there tong before the developer purchased the land. Mayor McCollum took exception to the comments made by the developer's attomey insinuating the concerns of one person over many is not something that Council should be concerned was wrong. He advised the attorney to look back on his schooling regarding the rights of the minority vs. the dghts of the majority. The Mayor stated the attomey was out of line and he would cite him for contempt if he was a judge. The Mayor said this Council approved the annexation with certain stipulations such as a tree survey and asked why the tree survey was not done. The Growth Management Director said the tree preservation plan and pollution plan clearly indicated the areas to be cleared as well as the preliminary development plan indicating streets, drainage and perimeter and the understanding that tree protection would be also be addressed on individual lots. Mayor McCollum expressed concern about the code violations that are not cerrectable, such as installation of the silt fence, the plus or minus ten foot definition, and said he bases his vote on what is presented dudng quasi-judicial hearings. He asked where the gopher tortoises are. Mr. Robb said gopher tortoises in areas not cleared are still there, and stated that one third tortoises can unbury themselves. He further stated aerial photo showing tree cleadng is adequate for large sites and trees were only removed for read right-of-ways, lakes and stormwater pipe connections. Regular City Council Meeting February 9, 2005 Page Nine The Growth Management Director said this same process using aerial photo and pollution plan was used on the River Oaks Preserve, Sebastian River Landings, Sebastian Crossings. He further stated this site had trees but the others were citrus groves. The Mayor asked Mrs. Coy why she did not show properly cleared area. She stated that she only had access to the Orange Heights side of the development. He further asked the Building Director why he did not show cleadng past ten feet. He replied that he did show clearing past ten feet where grubbing occurred and explained the amount of land that would come up with an uprooted tree. Tape II, Side II, 10:11 pm In response to the Mayor, the City Attorney said options are staff can send to Code Enforcement for investigation; or as civil infractions the City can take the violations to county court, which judges do not appreciate. Mr. Barczyk said his first concern was the tub gdnder, and said it looks like there is fault on everybody's part here, said perhaps codes should be tightened so there are no more reoccurrences, Mr. Coniglio thanked staff and the City ^ttomey for answering the alleged allegations, he said he understood what plus or minus means, that it appeared that they were trying to preserve trees, said his understanding was that the tree survey was to be done on individual lots, and that no one should be trespassing on anyone else's property. Ms. Monier said it is time for this to end and that too much time has been spent on the issue which she believes is political, and expressed hope that the City has learned from this. Mayor McCollum said he would like to send this to Code Enforcement and see what they have to say about the remaining three code violations that are not correctable. The City Attorney said City Council can advise the City Manager that it would like to see this go to Code Enforcement but cannot direct him to do so. On MOTION by Mr. Coniglio, and SECOND by Mr. Barcyzk the meeting was extended to 11 pm on a voice vote of 4-0. Mr. Coniglio said he would like the Code Enforcement officers to inspect it and see if it needs to go to the Code Enforcement Board. Ms, Monier said as far as she was concerned all of this has been resolved and did not see the need for it to go to Code Enforcement, Chief Davis said only violations not correctable should go to the Board. The City Attorney said typically allegations go to the officers who ask for correction of the problem with continuing offenses going to the Board. Regular City Council Meeting February 9, 2005 Page Ten Mayor McCollum said he was seeing a two/two vote on this issue and therefore advised the Chief not to take action. t2. NEW BUSINESS 13. CITY ATTORNEY MATTERS Reported on the Planning and Zoning meeting regarding the triangle which is to be continued. Stated he will be coming forth with a yard sale sign ordinance. Reported the gentleman from last meeting did pay his impact fee and it was refunded. t4. CITY MANAGER MATTERS Chief Davis asked if the Ashbury concerns were done because staff has gotten beat up pretty bad over this issue. The Mayor stated no action is to be taken but projects will be monitored. 15.CITY CLERK MATTERS None. 16. CITY COUNCIL MATTERS A. Mr. Coni.qlio Distributed Joseph Pallidin's Growth Awareness Committee's report containing good ideas from local developer's for Council review. B. Ms. Monier Ms. Monier requested consensus of Council to give direction to the Finance Director to provide information regarding tax revenues received from commercial development. Reported on the successful Art and Music festival. Mr. Coniglio reported on the concert in the park tomorrow night in Riverview Park. C. Mr. Barczyk Reported on dog attendance at the Art and Music festival. Asked the temporary sign in front of City Hall be moved to allow visibility. Requested an 80% audit instead of the standard 20% at a cost of approximately $2,000. Regular City Council Meeting February 9, 2005 Page Eleven Mayor McCollum said it was probably a good idea and this is a perfect opportunity before the new City manager comes onboard. On MOTION by Mr. Barczyk, and SECOND by Mayor McCollum, the item was added to the agenda on a voice vote of 4-0. On MOTION by Mr. Barczyk, and SECOND by Mr. Coniglio, an 80% audit was approved not to exceed an additional amount of $5,000 on a roll call vote of 4-0. D. Mayor McCollum Workshop at 6:30 pm tomorrow night Stated there will be a televised Sebastian Property Owners candidates forum on February 16th. Stated that since it is taking a long time to get permits that ideas be bought to the next meeting to expedite the process. 17. Being no further business, the Regular Meeting adjourned at 10:55 p.m. Approved at the 2/23/05 N~th~n B McCblld~m, Mayor Sa--~-~ A. MaioJMM~, City Clerk Regular City Council Meeting. ]] INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC SIGN-UP SHEET February 9, 2005 REGULAR MEETING "New Business" as used heroin, is defined as an item that has occur, ed or was discovered within the previous six months USE THIS FORM ONLY FOR INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS NOT OTHERWISE ON THE PREPARED AGENDA*- LIMIT OF 5 MINUTES PER SPEAKER If the item on which you wish to speak is on the pdnted agenda, do not sign this form, The Mayor wffi call for public input prier to Council deliberation on each agenda item. Please raise your hand when he calls for input. New Subject: :/~, ,~ ' _ New Subject: New Subject: --'~--~ ~-~/~ ~ _Ch Name: New Subject: New Subject: Submitted by City Attorney at 2/9/05 Regular Council Meeting ASHBURY SUBDIVISION ALLEGED VIOLATIONS No determination has been made as to the accuracy of the allegations or the factual circumstances at issue. This analysis merely addresses the legal status of each alleged violation if indeed it were determined that it occurred as claimed. Variances from Preferred Administrative Procedures, But Not Violations: Contractor not registered with building department - the legal requirement is that contractor either hold city certification or else be state certified {Code section 26-171(a)}; the City registration system is an administrative means of tracking compliance. Permit in owner name rather than contractor - only illegal to hire an unlicensed subcontractor to do work under an owner/builder permit per Code section 26-172 (2). Conflicts with Representations at Hearing, But Not Violations: Gopher tortoises not relocated to buffer area - while permit allowed relocation of any tortoises to the buffer, it was not a requirement. Noncompliance With Code, But Not Violations: No tree survey - although not required for regular site plan approval, one of the required document submittals under LDC54-4-20.3(b)(1)(c) for preliminary development plan approval in a PUD is an updated environmental impact statement and environmental survey including "trees and vegetative cover shown in a tree survey". However, this would merely be grounds to reject an application, not the basis for a code enforcement action. Code Violations, But Corrected After Notice: Early construction hours - per Code section 26-6 construction activities shall only be allowed during the hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8 a~m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. Oversized open mulch machine - Per Sec. 50-4, it shall be unlawful to operate any tub grinder, or any other mulching machine, having a mb or otherwise exposed chopping area with a diameter in excess of four feet. Code Violations, Not Correctable: Not developing in accordance with approved plans - per Code section 54-4-18.2(e) all uses must be in accordance with approved site plans. Site plan items alleged to have been violated are: Exceeding the +10' clearing for stormwater berm Silt Fence installed prior to clearing Removal of vegetation fi.om buffer zone Access from roads not designated in construction plans Removal of specimen trees beyond permitted area - removal of specimen trees must be by permk only per Code section 54-3-14.3 PRESERVATION SOCIETY H4ldlife Festival P.O. Box 1903 Sebastian, Florida 32978 TO: The Honorable Members of the City Council, City of Sebastian FROM: Dr. David Cox, President, Pelican Island Preservation Society DATE: February 9, 2005 RE: Approval of Special Event and Closures for 2005 Pelican Island Wildlife Festival REVISED SUMMARY Move to approve the 2005 Pelican Island Wildlife Festival at Riverview Park on Saturday, March 12, 2005 from 6 am to 5 pro_ Move to approve closing Indian River Drive from Harrison Drive north to northern City limits from 6 am until 8 am on March 12, 2005 for the 5K nm. Move to approve closing the boat ramp at the Yacht Club from 9 am until 4 pm on March 12, 2005 for boat tours of Pelican Island. Move to approve closing Indian River Drive from Coolidge St. south to Harrison St. from 6 am until 5 pm on March 12, 2005. Move to approve closing Sebastian Blvd. from the west entrance of the CavCor parking lot east to Indian River Drive from 6 am until 5 pm on March 12, 2005. TREASURE COAST AIRPORTS NOISE ABATEMENT AND FLIGHT TRAINING ASSESSMENT Sebastian City Council February 9, 2005 Presentation by Lisa Waters, President MEA Groupl I nc,, 2001 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 West Patm Beach, FL 33409 -;561) 616-5779  Treasure Coast Regional Airport Noise & Fii ght. Training Assessment (TCA) A/Mntic Ocsan ~ Treasure Coast Regional Airport Noise ~& Flight Training Assessment (TCA) measures to consider that will improve land uae compatibility; and > Outline for FDOT future needs or actions toprotect the~bility of Treasure Coast Rngion!s aviation system to support anticipated levels of aviation growth in a way that is consistont with the areas high quality of life standards~ Study Goals and Objecfiv,~, No. 10bjec~ve: To identify actions the collective group of airports and sponsors may take to reduce noise impacts and land use incompatibilities. ~ Document existing & forecast levels of aviation activity and resulting economic and environmental(noise)impacts; ~ Document kand use conditions in the airpor[environs and identify specific ~Scope of Work Element'~ Develop:and Impleme~ On,going Community ParUcipation~rprogmm Element 6 2 TCA Project Organization I I I OTCA Working Group Recommendations Land Use Planning Strategies Uniform Reqional implementation of certain strate~lles: · School Construction Zones - Include provisions of F.S. Chapter 333 In all local zoning codes. · Noise Impact Zones, including contoum if applicable - Prevent nsw homes in areas of known aircraft noise annoyance, - Airporte/Communitisedetermine approp~ate size & dimensions · Disclosure - AdoptanAIrport Notification Zone - Airports/Communitise determins appropriatesizo & dimensions - Advor~se 3X per yserfor public notice in local paper (enhanced notice is appropriate) 3 ~ ~ TCA Working :Group Recommendations vs. ~ Ci~ of Sebastian Land DeVelopment Code prOvisions Element Treasure Coest Study Y.26 Noise Comp. Program (NCP) Corml~tent ? School Cor-mistant with F.S. Cbepte£ No schools wilflin areas identified in Yes, Zones Existing code by providing illustrative Zones 333 Standards - estabash contiguous to We airport % the length ~mprove geomebical bourKla~es of tt~e longest runway on either side Existing Cod~ where residential of andat the end of each runway by providing constmctJ~ sho[lld be end. No residential constru~on illustrative limita~regulntde, unless an avigation easement maps granted to the City. Public Notice Adopt notification zone with No Notification Area is defined in dime~'~ons detardened by current land development local conditions. Advertise regulations, availal~e Jrlfol/naflon 3X psf NO Existing City of Sebastian Land Development Code Provisions - Noise Impact Zones Sd)aslJa~ M~icips~ Aizixxt Nois~ I~zpa~ Zc~ 4 TCA Working Group Recommendations vs. City of Sebastian Land Development Code ProVisions · Need to identify and implement Airpoff Notification Area p~ovisioee. · i.e, Vero Beach ANA established evaluation: notice of available information 3X year. ~ Noise Abatement Measures TCA Working Group Recommendations Primary Categories... 1. Measures to'reduce airspace constraints and improve positive control. 2. Measures to reduce impacts of touch and go training operations. 3. Measure to increaseflight treining use of underutilized airports. ~ Consider new remote flight training airport. TCA Working ( Noise Abatement Measures TCA Working Group Recommendations Meseures*to reduce airsoace constraints and imnrove oo~ltive control: `/Install VRB ASR-11, supply appropriate workforca and includeOBE in regional eirapace~design. ~ Enhance ragional air traffic centrol usrvices, Measures to reduce Jmeacte of touch and ao.tminlno onsration~: ~ Uniform regional touCh & gopOlicies (voluntary} - No Touch& (So operafionsbefore 8:00 AM and 2 hours:after sunset Monday through Sunday (Sunday at local discretion) - Ne Touch& Go operations on major hoJidays (Thanksgiving, Chris,nas and New Years Day) TCA Worl Noise Abatement Measures TCA Working Group Recommendations Meesures to incresse~e nee of undamtllized aline ,~ · · /Support installation of new Navaid~ at alrpo~te with no/limited instrument capabilities - Okeechobee County and~Sebasttan Airports `/Develop flight training "Tango"instrument approaches - Designed at higher altitudes with same characteristics as non-training instrument approacftes. -Implementable at airports with instrument capabilities. - Enhances Safe~ does not dagraoe runway capacity. ,/Develop Stereo routes -Standard, predetermined training mu[es. - Uniform and benelicisl for student and air traffic. ,/Implement airport Irnprovements to enhance training cepebillties at New Hibiscus,.Okeschohae and: Sebastian Airports, consistent with  TCA Working Group Recommendations vs. ~ Sebastian Municipal Airport Noise Abatement Policies consletent Element Treasure C~ant Study CityF/~26 Policies ? Measures to reduce VRB ASR-11 inslella~0~ Ci~ suppo~s through airspace co~traints TCCOLG Yes ' & improve positive ~ Additional Considerations TCA Working Group Recommendations · Future consideration of a new remote training airport. TC~ ImPlementation TCA Working Group RecOmmendations Land Use Compatibility Strategies 1. ~1 incorporation in IBnd development~zoning code 2. Znterlocal agreement~ where overlapping land use jurisdictions exist 3. Coordination w/school boords, planning & zoning boards~ eK.,. 4. St2itawide coJmiderstJon of alternative disdosuKe language (CFASPfl) Noise Abatement Measures 1. MOA's with airpor~s/flight schOOls 2. Pilot edison programs 3. Local monitoring and reporting 4. Coordination withFAA on required measureS(HOA's) Treasure Coast Regional Airport Noise & Flight Training A~sessment (TCA) Final Steps: ~ Final clocumentaUon / Zncoq)m-dte Io~1 input on Working Group recommendations -~ Continue Presentations to Sponsors/Communities -~ Document implementatJonpians / MOA'sand Interlocal Agreements / Pilot nducation program updates 8 Submitted by Council Member Coniglio at 2/9/05 Regular Council Meeting Growth Awareness Committee The 3 legged stool Pace and Density of Growth Quality of Growth Supporting Infrastructure Reduce the pace of growth and ultimately the county's overall density. Expecting developers to build fewer homes may be futil~ Economic and capitalistic principals govern any business decision regardless of theproduct. However, there are several "indirect methods" to slow the pace of growth that shouM be implemented Require all impact fees to be paid upon the initial sale of the lot (the first sale following the Final Plat recording), or upon the application for a building permit, whichever happens first. This would insure that a lot purchased from a developer would be vested (buildable), thereby protecting the future home owner. This would also insure trips are accounted for on the IRC Road Network earlier than previous requirements. This will result in accelerating the construction of traffic related capital improvements. This accelerated payment schedule would essentially raise the sales price or-all lots. This increase in price would result in a slower sales pace. Requiring payment any earlier in the process would put an unnecessary financial burden on the small (local) developers, resulting in an advantageous position the large (out-of-town) developer/builders. Eliminate Performance Bonds as a method of providing surety to the county with regards to early Final Plat recording. Restrict surety instruments to either an Irrevocable Letter of Credit or cash. Performance bonds are difficult to "call", and do not provide developers enough incentive to perform in a timely and appropriate manner. Increase the level of the surety instrument from 115% to 125% of the cost of required improvements. This will provide the county- with additional safeguards to possible inefficiencies if required to "call" a surety instrument and complete the construction portion of a project. This increase in the surety amount will add to the developer's incentive to perform. Development capital is a finite number. By substantially increasing the amount and duration that the developers capitol is committed to a project you are reducing the number of projects a developer can participate in. This will have a slowing affect on growth. Allow only one surety reduction request. This would reduce the staff time required to review reduction requests. Surety instrument (Irrevocable Letter of Credit or Cash) should not be reduced to less than 50% of the cost of the required improvements. The 25% "cushion" should not be reduced at all. At the end stages ora project a significant amount of the developer's capital would be pledged to the county. Return of these funds would provide considerable incentive for developers to perform. Removing completely the ability to record the Final Plat prior to issuance of the Certificate of Completion puts small (local) developers at a disadvantage. Create a new buffer requirement for all projects adjacent to the Urban Service Area boundary. This buffer should measure not less than 50' in width; include a six foot opaque feature, and "Type B" buffer planting requirement. Development and agricultural areas should have separation. Doubling the width of the required buffer addresses this need. It is appropriate to have a reduction of density as you move closer to the Urban Service Boundmy. This buffer would provide additional separation and ultimately reduce density by placing land that would be Used for building lots into buffers. Reduce the maximum number of lots allowed in projects using an affidavit of exemption to four (4). This would discourage development in rural areas of the county, yet would still allow for a family to divide their agricultural land for the purpose of creating homesteads for family members. Require a developer using an Affidavit of Exemption to escrow the fair share cost of paving the frontage portion of the subdivided area. Provide an exemption to the escrow requirement for roads that are not on the ten year road improvement plan. Return any escrowed funds not used for road construction within five years. Require subdivisions to have not less than 7.5% of the total project site as dedicated recreation space and/or green space. Wetland and upland set asides would be allowed to count toward the 7.5% dedication requirement. Required buffers would not count toward this requirement. Projects with a density equal to or less than 50% of the allowable units would be exempt from this set-aside requirement. Req?re s,,to .r~. water to be maintained in a lake area. Do not allow s~s~de swmes, t~e.smct the use of dry retention areas unless this require~nt ~)~l~l- cause a proj. ect to be in conflict with the "aquifer "Creatin edi ~ ..... g ~edicated lake areas to maintain storm water reduces the land available for lots. t A swale drainage system can be placed on the lots and therefore results in increased densities. Improve the quality of new growth in the County. Create a new buffer requirement for all projects that are both inside of and adjacent to the Urban Service Area boundary. This buffer should measure not less than 50' in width; include a six foot opaque feature, and "Type B" buffer planting requirement. Development and agricultural areas should have separation. Doubling the width of the required buffer addresses this need. It is appropriate to have a reduction of density as you move closer to the Urban Service Boundary. This buffer would provide additional separation and ultimately reduce density by placing land that would be used for building lots into buffers. Reduce the maximum number of lots allowed in projects using an affidavit of exemption to four (4). This would discourage development in rural areas of the county, yet would still allow for a family to divide their agricultural land for the purpose of creating homesteads for family members. Require a developer using an Affidavit of Exemption to escrow the fair share cost of paving the fi'ontage portion of the subdivided area. Provide an exemption to the escrow requirement for roads that are not on the ten year road improvement plan. Require all maintenance bonds to be for a period of three (3) years, as opposed to the current one (1) year requirement. This additional time would provide a longer window to discover faulty workmanship. Continue to allow the use of Maintenance Bonds as opposed to requiring an · Irrevocable Letter of Credit. Continue the county's control over the Maintenance Bonds. Property Owner's Associations are generally not qualified to make determinations as to quality of work issues on water distribution systems, sewer systems and/or road building. Additionally, P.O.A. Directors may be influenced by emotional arguments over engineering and/or construction practices. Require developers to provide a Maintenance Bond(s) for all required improvements, including roads that would remain private. This is a substantial 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. increase over current Maintenance Bond requirements which only address water lines, sewer lines and public roads. Private roads and other required improvements are currently exempt from the maintenance bond requirement. Restrict use of the "Small Lot Subdivision" ordinance to affordable housing projects only. Affordable housing would be defined by Chapter 420 of the Florida Statutes. Increase the buffer standards for Subdivisions. Subdivisions should be subject to the same buffer requirements as indicated in the Planned Development buffer matrix. Require curbing for all projects with lots four acres or smaller. Require sidewalks for all residential projects, including Subdivisions regardless of density. Sidewalks should be required on one side of the street. Subdivisions with lots larger than four acres would be exempt. Require storm water to be maintained in a lake area. Do not allow street side swales. Restrict the use of d~y retention areas unless this requirement would cause a project to be in conflict with the "aquifer ..... " Require subdivisions to have not less than 7.5% of the total project site as dedicated recreation space and/or green space. Wetland and upland set asides would be allowed to count toward the 7.5% dedication requirement. Required buffers would not count toward this requirement. Projects with a density equal to or less than 1.5 units per acre would be exempt from this set-aside requirement. Subdivisions are currently exempt from recreation and green space requirements. Require all utilities internal to a project to be underground. Additionally we encourage Indian River County to participate in placing and requiring the placement of utilities underground when feasible. One concession routinely requested of developers during the P.D. negotiations is dedication (at no cost to the taxpayers) of all right-of-way to the "ultimate" right- of-way line. This should be required of subdivisions as well. This policy change would save the taxpayers a substantial sum each year. It would also reduce the right-of-way acquisition period of a county road construction project. Design changes are less costly and therefore more acceptable to a developer when requested early in the planning process. Therefore it would be beneficial to the process to require one County Commissioner (on a rotating basis) to attend each Pre-Ap and TRC meeting. These required meetings are good planning tools and provide an opportunity for comments and suggestions very early in the design process. 15. 16. Eliminate Type D buffers for all development. Eliminate Type C buffers for residential development. Increasing the buffer standards will provide more attractive streetscapes. Increasing the buffer requirements also transfers land from lots to buffer therefore reducing density. Require all residential (subdivision, P.D., single and multi-family) and all commercial development projects to provide irrigation and floratam sod throughout the fight-of-way adjacent to the project. Require the property owner or property owners association to maintain the improved right-of-way. Any repairs to, or relocation of the irrigation system or sod, for any reason, would be the obligation of the property owner or P.O.A. This would increase the appearance of our roadways as well as reduce the maintenance costs to the taxpayers. Improve the coordination and construction of the supporting infrastructure with the development project(s) that made it necessary. Remove all impact fee discounts and step increases. Road planning and construction is expensive and traffic impact fees are necessary to accomplish this important task. However, collecting impact fees is only half the battle. As taxpayers and citizens we expect Indian River County officials to schedule and complete road improvement projects in a responsible, timely manner, and in accordance with the traffic component of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Furthermore, a fast track process is necessary to address certain roads that have fallen behind their scheduled implementation. Road construction projects have failed to keep pace with development. Timely acquisition of the necessary right-of-way has been identified as a major factor in the delay of these projects. Therefore, we recommend a policy change when addressing fight-of-way acquisition. Delays in fight-of-way acquisition only serve to delay the inevitable. The planned roadway will still be constructed. The delays only serve to increase the overall project cost and subject the community to increased traffic congestion for longer than is necessary. To insure fiscal responsibility and timely road construction projects, timely right-of-way acquisition is an essential 1st step. Therefore, we recommend the following right-of-way acquisition policy. Notification (30 days). Upon BCC approval a road construction improvement project, the owners of all parcel designated for acquisition must be contacted in writing within thirty (30) days. b. Open Negotiation (120 days). The county should participate in open negotiations for up to ninety (90) days, beginning not more than thirty (30) days after written contact. c. Report to the Board (10 days). Within ten (10) days of closing the Open Negotiation Period, a status report should be provided to the Board of County Commissioners, including notification of imminent filing for condemnation. d. File for condemnation (7 months). Condemnation filing must take place within 10 days of Reporting to the Board. Acquisition of Right-of-way a must to be added to list to be constructed. Require a developer using an Affidavit of Exemption to escrow the fair share cost of paving the frontage portion ofthe subdivided area. Provide an exemption to the escrow requirement for roads that are not on the ten year road improvement plan. Return any escrowed funds not used for road construction within five years. One concession routinely requested of developers during the P.D. negotiations is dedication (at no cost to the taxpayers) of all right-of-way to the "ultimate" right- of-way line. This should be required of subdivisions as well. This policy change would safe the taxpayers a substantial sum each year. It would also reduce the right-of-way acquiskion period of a county road construction project. Slow the pace of growth. Require paFment of impact fees and vesting of concurrencF at time of proiect approval rather than at time of buiidin~ t~ermi~ Suggestion 1. Require all impact fees to be paid upon the initial sale of the lot (the first sale following the Final Plat recording), or upon the application for a building permit, whichever happens first. This would insure that a lot purchased from a developer would be vested (buildable), there by protecting the future home owner. This would also ensure trips are accounted for onthe IRC Network earlier than previous requirements. This will result in accelerating the construction of traffic related capital improvements. Requiring payment any earlier in the process would put an unnecessary financial burden on the small (local) developers, resulting in an advantageous position for the large (out-of-town) developer/builders. Eliminate subdivision bonding-out for required improvements. Suggestions 1. Eliminate Performance Bonds as a method of providing surety to the county with regards to early Final Plat recording. Restrict surety instruments to either an Irrevocable Letter of Credit or cash. Performance bonds are difficult to "call", and do not provide developers enough incentive to perform in a timely and appropriate manner. 2. Increase the level of the surety instrument from 115% to 125% of the cost of required improvements. This will provide the county with additional safeguards to possible inefficiencies if required to "call" a surety instrument and complete the construction portion ora project. This increase in the surety amount will add to the developer's incentive to perform. 3. Allow only one surety reduction request. This would reduce the staff time required to review reduction requests. 4. Surety instrument (Irrevocable Letter of Credit or Cash) should not be reduced to less than 50% of the cost of the required improvements. The 25% "cushion" should not be reduced at all. At the end stages ora project a significant amount of the developer's capital would be pledged to the county. Return of these funds would provide considerable incentive for developers to perform. Removing completely the ability to record the Final Plat prior to issuance of the Certificate of Completion puts small (local) developers at a disadvantage. Reduce the number o[proposed proiects and residential units eurrentlv itt the "pipeline". Acknowledge that we have too much growth all at one tim~ Have developers agree to build fewer units~ slow down pace of pro[ect approvals. Expecting developers to build fewer homes may be futile. Economic and capitalistic principals govern any business decision regardless of the product. However, there are several "indirect methods" to slow the pace of growth that should be implemented. An objective review of the county's growth rate reveals that although growth, when compared to recent years, is occurring at an increased rate, growth is not out of control. The current growth being experienced in the county is consistent with the directives spelled out in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Although growth is not out of control, the pace of growth has caused some concern. Since the quantity of growth is consistent with the Comp plan, we should focus on improving the quality of growth. Increase the design standards for residential development. Increasing the design standards will result in a higher quality product, and subsequently a higher selling price. Basic economic principals dictate that increasing the price of a product will result in a slower pace of sales. Increase buffer widths, required open space/recreation space and change other land planning requirements that will effectively reduce the net developable area, and therefore reduce the density. If the number of homes in the "pipeline" needs to be identified then there should be a consistent definkion of what constitutes the "pipeline". Homes should only be included in the pipeline when it is reasonable to believe that these homes will be built. Construction of the home needs to be probable to be counted. The availability of affordable housing is an important issue and is addressed in other areas of our report. Reduce densities allowed under current comprehensive plan, especially inside and at edges of Urban Service Aret~ Consider 3 units per acre max~ inside USA except for I unit per acre max. at edg~ Sugg~tion Create a new buffer requirement for all projects adjacent to the Urban Service Area boundary. This buffer should measure not less than 50' in width; include a six foot opaque feature, and "Type B" buffer planting requirement. Development and agricultural areas should have separation. Doubling the width of the required buffer satisfies tiffs need. It is appropriate to have a reduction of density as you move closer to the Urban Service Boundary. This buffer would provide additional separation and ultimately reduce density by placing land that would be used for building lots into buffers. Consider and ~et-to-be-thought-of strategies to slow down pace of development proposals and new construction. Handle the impact of growth Revisit traffic impact fee discount and "step increases" Suggestions Remove all impact fee discounts and step increases. Road planning and construction is expensive and traffic impact fees are necessary to accomplish this important task. However, collecting impact fees is only half the battle. As taxpayers and citizens we expect Indian River County officials to schedule and complete road improvement projects in a responsible, timely manner, and in accordance with the traffic component of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Furthermore, a fast track process is necessary to address certain roads that have fallen behind their scheduled implementation. Bring forward new impact fees (correctional, fire/EMS, law enforcement, public buildings, library, and parks and recreation. New residential development should pay for its impacts to all public facilities. Impact fees for facilities should be adopted, if after a thorough and comprehensive study, it is established that these fees are justified. Speed-up road projects in high growth areas and compress $ Fear road improvement plan into 2 or 3 years of construction. Road construction projects have failed to keep pace with development. Timely acquisition of the necessary right-of-way has been identified as a major factor in the delay of these projects. Therefore, we recommend a policy change when addressing right-of-way acquisition. Delays in right-of-way acquisition only serve to delay the inevitable. The planned roadway will still be constructed. The delays only serve to increase the overall project cost and subject the community to increased traffic congestion for longer than is necessary. To insure fiscal responsibility and timely road construction projects, timely right-of-way acquisition is an essential 1x step. Therefore, we recommend the following right-of-way acquisition policy. a. Notification (30 days). Upon BCC approval a road construction improvement project, the owners of all parcel designated for acquisition must be contacted in writing within thirty (30) days. b. Open Negotiation (120 days). The county should participate in open negotiations for up to ninety (90) days, beginning not more than thirty (30) days after written contact. c. Report to the Board (10 days). Within ten (10) days of closing the Open Negotiation Period, a status report should be provided to the Board of County Commissioners, including notification of imminent filing for condemnation. d. File for condemnation (7 months). Condemnation filing must take place within 10 days of Repoffmg to the Board. New development projects often border future collector and thoroughfare roads. The county should adopt regulation~s that require the dedication by the developer of the full width of the ultimate right-of-way without compensation fi'om the county. Currently, IRC must pay the developer for any right-of-way width exceeding 60 feet. Timely right- of-way acquisition is essential to a successful road improvement project. Do not 6 lane Indian River Boulevard Road improvement decisions should be made in accordance to the directives of the Traffic Component of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Accordingly, we are in favor of increasing Indian River Boulevard to six lanes. Any roadway improvement project, including the Indian River Boulevard project, should focus on quality of design and impact to the area. Adequate green areas, landscape design, and pedestrian accessibility and safety should never be sacrificed. IRC should retain a consultant to prepare typical design specifications that integrate traditional engineering design with land planning and landscape architecture. These design specifications should provide for attractive, safe and inviting thoroughfares. Apply these standards to all road way projects whether publicly or privately funded. No reductions in these requirements should be permitted. Do not move Urban Service Area boundarv. The county should take a firm stance and refuse any efforts to move the Urban Service Boundary from its current location. Eliminate affidavit of exemption process or require affidavit of exemption proiects have to paved roads and paved access like subdivision proiects. Suggestions 1. Reduce the maximum number of lots allowed in projects using an affidavit of exemption to four (4). This would discourage development in rural areas of the county, yet would still allow for a fan~ly to divide their agricultural land for the purpose of creating homesteads for family members. 2. Require a developer using an Affidavit of Exemption to escrow the fair share cost of paving the frontage portion of the subdivided area and dedicate, without compensation, any future right-of-way identified in the IRC thoroughfare plan. Provide an exemption to the escrow requirement for roads that are not on the ten year road improvement plan. Return any escrowed funds not used for road construction within five years. Require performance (maintenance) bonds for private subdivisions; extend the time period for performance (maintenance) bonds in general Suggestions 1. Require all maintenance bonds to be for a period of three (3) years, as opposed to the current one (1) year requirement. This additional time would provide a longer window to discover faulty workmanship. 2. Continue to allow the use of Maintenance Bonds as opposed to requiring an Irrevocable Letter of Credit. 3. Continue the county's control over the Maintenance Bonds. Property Owner's Associations are generally not qualified to make determinations as to quality of work issues on water distribution systems, sewer systems and/or road building. Additionally, P.O.A. Directors may be influenced by emotional arguments over engineering and/or construction practices. 4. Require developers to provide a Maintenance Bond(s) for all required improvements, including roads that would remain private. This is a substantial increase over current Maintenance Bond requirements. Provide for affordable and workforce housing. Restrict the use of the "Small Lot Subdivision" ordinance to affordable housing projects only. Affordable housing would be defined by Chapter 420 of the Florida Statutes. Additionally, the Board of County Commissioners should form a committee of qualified people to suggest incentive based programs that would encourage developers to provide "affordable housing" opportunities. This is an important issue that needs to be addressed by individuals knowledgeable about the affordable housing market. Focus on paving more dirt roads (paving the grid) vs. making existing roads bigger and wider. "Paving The Grid" in many cases is objectionable to the existing neighborhood residents who see their dirt road(s) as a sense of security, ensuring traffic speeds and volume remain at an acceptable level. A sensible approach to widening roads and "paving the grid" is needed. Inevitably, both will be required to some degree. 1. Identify the road projects in an updated and revised capitol improvement program. This could also identify local grid roads where paving would be beneficial to the public. 2. Prepare and adopt minimum acceptable design standards for IRC road projects (corridor plans) that include previously non standard specifications: a. Pedestrian circulations and interconnectivity b. Landscape/Lighting/Buffers/Aesthetic Design IRC should retain a consultant to prepare typical design specifications that integrate traditional engineering design with land planning and landscape architecture. These design specifications should provide for attractive, safe and inviting thoroughfares. Apply these standards to all road way projects whether publicly or privately funded. No reductions in these requirements should be permitted. 3. Identify the estimated increase in cost caused by the new design specifications, and increase the impact fees accordingly, or create new impact fees if necessary. Modify the Development Project Approval Process Make everFthing a PD (as tnuch as possible) The current perception is that a project constructed using the Planned Development ordinance results in a better quality project than a project constructed using the subdivision ordinance. In fact quality projects are the result of quality developers. Focus should be on increasing the subdivision standards resulting in better residential development regardless of the permitting path chosen. "Raise the Bar" on subdivision standards/strengthen subdivision standards Increased buffer standards for Subdivisions. Subdivisions should be subject to the same buffer requirements as indicated in the Planned Development buffer matrix. Require valley (Miami) curbing for all projects with lots four acres or smaller. Require sidewalks for all residential projects, including Subdivisions regardless of density. Sidewalks should be required on one side of the street. Subdivisions with lots larger than four acres would be exempt. Require storm water to be maintained in a lake area. Do not allow street side swales. Restrict the use of dry retention areas unless this requirement would cause a project to be in conflict with the aquifer recharge criteria specified in Require subdivisions to have not less than 7.5% of the total project site as dedicated recreation space and/or green space. Wetland and upland set asides would be allowed to count toward the 7.5% dedication requirement. Required buffers would not count toward this requirement. Projects with a density equal to or less than 1.5 units per acre would be exempt from this set-aside requirement. Require all utilities internal to a project to be underground. Additionally we encourage Indian River County to participate in placing and requiring the placement of utilities underground when feasible. One concession routinely requested of developers during the P.D. negotiations is dedication (at no cost to the taxpayers) of all right-of-way to the "ultimate" right-of-way line. This should be required of subdivisions as well. This policy change would save the taxpayers a substantial sum each year. It would also reduce the right-of-way acquisition period of a county road construction project. Revisit small lot subdivision& more BCC discretion and guaranteed a[fordabilit~. Restrict the use of the "Small Lot Subdivision" ordinance to affordable housing projects only. Affordable housing would be defined by Chapter 420 of the Florida Statutes. Additionally, the Board of County Commissioners should form a committee of qualified people to suggest incentive based programs that would encourage developers to provide "affordable housing" opportunities. This is an important issue that needs to be addressed by individuals knowledgeable about the affordable housing market. Require "initiative plans" like the South CountF Initiative in other areas; central count~ ail o[ C.R. 510~ 9gh Avenue. Use initiative plans or other wm's to get BCC input on overall designs upfronL Initiative plans can affect good project design. The success of any initiative plan relies in large part to two components, the number of projects in the initiative, and the level of cooperation offered by the developers. There have been two recent initiatives organized by the planning staff, the North County and the South County Initiative. Both of these initiatives received overwhelming developer cooperation which resulted in better planned projects. Muki project initiatives should be used whenever appropriate. II~C staff should be encouraged to be proactive in this endeavor. Kemaining undeveloped areas should be identified and conceptual land planning initiated prior to applications being made. 1. Ansin/CR512/CR51 O/Sebastian Middle School 2. FellsmereflRC Vicinky West ofi-95 Commercial neighborhood areas, potential subdivision collector roads, school sites, emergency services sites, etc. are proven to alleviate traffic impacts, and should be considered in a proactive approach to land planning by IRC staff Design changes are less costly and therefore more acceptable to a developer when requested early in the planning process. Therefore it would be beneficial to the process to require one County Commissioner (on a rotating basis) to attend each Pre-Ap and TRC meeting. These required meetings are good planning tools and provide an opportunity for comments and suggestions very early in the design process. Immediately get voluntar~ or enforced compliance with pending design standard changes (avoid a rush of applications to beat upgrade design requirements). Upon receiving a positive response from the Board of County Commissioners indicating likely passage of these suggestions, a considerable number of developers representing a substantial portion of the Indian River County residential development market have agreed to voluntarily adhere to the suggestions contained in this report, effective immediately. Reconsider moratorium if no quick progress is made on issues of concern. The resolute and steadfast work of this committee coupled with the voluntary acceptance of these suggestions by a number of developers active in Indian River County should dismiss concerns about "quick progress". Enhance the Development Project Design Standards Increase Buffers Increase buffer standards. Subdivisions should be subject to the same buffer requirements as indicated in lhe Planned Development buffer standards. ModitSj the buffer standards when using existing native upiand vegetation as buffer material. Provide incentive to developers to use existing vegetation as a buffer. Eliminate Type D buffers for all development. Eliminate Type C buffers for residential development. Increasing the buffer standards will provide more attractive streetscapes. Eliminate bare walls; use landscaped berms or heavilF landscaped and well constructed walls. Eliminate the currently allowable plant reduction when using a wall as the required six foot opaque feature. Require that all "required" shrub and under story plant material be located outside the wall. Require a developer using a wall as the required opaque feature to accent the wall with a Type "B' buffer. Require some variation in the wall design: 1. Two color paint schemes as apposed to single color. Stagger the location of the wall. 3. Accent the wall with decorative fencing, 4. Reduce long walls by alternating wall sections with a landscape berm. Require street and sidewalk interconnectivity and new public local roads for better circulation and access. Require sidewalks in all subdivisions~ regardless o[ density. Require sidewalks for all residential projects regardless of density. Require sidewalks on only one side of the street. Subdivisions with lots larger than four acres would be exempt. Eliminate swell drainage and require centralized storm wtttt, r sFstetn~. Require storm water to be maintained in a lake area. Do not allow street side swales. Restrict the use of dry retention areas unless this requirement would cause a project to be in conflict with the aquifer recharge criteria specified in Require common green areas in standard subdivisions. Require subdivisions to have not less than 7.5% of the total project site as dedicated recreation space end/or green space. Wetland and upland set asides would be allowed to count toward the 7.5% dedication requirement. Required buffers would not count toward this requirement. Projects with a density equal to or less than 50% of the allowable units would be exempt fi.om this set-aside requirement. Eliminate "cookie cutter" housing~ monotonF and sameness [or laFout of residences. Each primary house structure shall have significant differentiation from any other primary house structure located within 500 feet (via roadway connections) on the same or adjoining blocks. There may be a common building style, but all buildings will have significant variation in facade, design, and elevation. Changing only one of the following would not constitute a significant differentiation. Multiple changes would be required. 1. Paint color 2. Roof design 3. Elevation (shutters, window treatments, etc.) 4. Roofing material 5. "Reversing" or "Flipping" the plans. 6. Landscape design Require underground utilities. Suggestion Require all utilities imemal to a project to be underground. Additionally we encourage Indian River County to participate in placing and requiring the placement of utilities underground when feasible. Require private landscaping and maintenance down to edge of pavement of new roads. Suggestion Require all residential (subdivision, P.D., single and multi-family) and all commercial development projects to provide irrigation and floratam sod throughout the right-of-way adjacent to the project. Furthermore require the property owner or property owners association to maintain the improved right-of-way. Any repairs to, or relocation of the irrigation system, for any reason, would be the obligation of the property owner or P.O.A. This would increase the appearance of our roadways as well as reduce the maintenance costs to the taxpayers.