Dear Members:
The following letter was presented to our County
Commissioners on Feb. 3, 2004 by PIAS and Riomar Neighborhood Association. Result: “It’s under study” by the Commissioners. Our voices need to be heard! Contact the Commissioners now by phone 567-8000,
ext. 1490, mail 1840 25th St., VB 32960, fax 770-5334, or
email www.ircgov.com.
“We come before you to applaud your decision to
reexamine our county’s impact fees and comprehensive land use plan and your
recognition that such action must be done promptly. Most of the current residents of this county do not want the
level of growth that is occurring and definitely do not want to pay for
additional taxes to support this expansion and growth. There is deep concern in
our community for our environment and quality of life.
We believe that an examination of impact fees can be
meaningful only if done in conjunction with a complete review and modification
of the comprehensive plan in light of our experience with the current plan
since its inception. Any decisions on
impact fees should be made in the context of a determination of the extent of
growth that is desired, its preferred location, its pace, and how to pay for
the necessary municipal infrastructure required by the growth. The significant acceleration of growth
during the past year, and in some instances the lack of quality of that growth,
make a review essential if the quality of life in this county is to be preserved.
We urge you to enact promptly interim development controls
(a selective moratorium) to be effective on February 3, 2003 on any new
rezoning, subdivision approvals or site plan approvals for both single- and
multi-family residential developments.
Construction on lots held by individual homeowners should be
exempt. These temporary development
controls should be enforced while there is a complete re-examination and
modification of the county’s comprehensive land use plan and of the county’s
impact fee structure.
Now that you have announced that impact fees will be
examined, it is only reasonable to assume based on past history that the rapid
pace of growth in the county will likely accelerate as developers act to avoid
what they presume will be higher impact fees and possibly enhanced development
and zoning controls. Without the above
mentioned rezoning, subdivision or site plan approval controls, the situation
could become chaotic. Irreparable harm
could be done to our community. The
daily comments in the local media exhibit the depth and quantity of concern
among residents that the quality of life in our community is already being
threatened. The public at large will
applaud your acting now to impose temporary development controls to prevent
further degradation of the unique quality of life in Indian River County.
In order to proceed, we believe there needs to be a
broader understanding of the amount of growth that can occur under the present
zoning envelope (given the effect of rezoning agricultural lands), and the cost
of the infrastructure that will be required to support such growth. The County’s visioning process must address
at least the following:
·
Quantify
how much growth over a specific time frame?
·
What
should the level of impact fees be?
·
What
safeguards and incentives are required to assure orderly and environmentally
sound growth?
·
How
can we save our existing native tree canopy and plan for open space?
·
Where
and how should growth occur?
·
What
is the effect of this growth on the availability and quality of our water?
·
Will
our drainage ditches built for agriculture handle urbanization?
·
What
should the school and traffic standards be?
·
What
density of growth can our natural resources sustain comfortably?
·
How
should new business be encouraged?
Under the guidance of an experienced consultant and
with significant public input, these and other related questions could be addressed
through the visioning process.
Undoubtedly, some will protest, claiming our
recommended action is rash and ill advised.
It is not. As the Supreme Court
of the United States said in 2002 in upholding a 32-month moratorium in the
Lake Tahoe case (535 U.S. 302,337):
“Moratoria…are used widely
among land-use planners to preserve the status quo while formulating a more
permanent development strategy. In
fact, the consensus of the planning community appears to be that moratoria, or
‘interim development controls’ as they are often called, are an ESSENTIAL tool
of successful development.”
Finally, to prevent unbridled growth during this
process, we again urge that interim development controls as described above be
put in place IMMEDIATELY until the comprehensive plan accurately reflects the
sentiments of the people and their elected officials. We thank you for your time, and look forward to your action.
Richard H. Baker, President, Pelican Island Audubon
Society
George L. Christopher, President, Riomar
Neighborhood Association, Inc.