Indian River County 2020 Comprehensive Plan21 21 21 22 Indian River County .. i . Comprehensive··PI.all Coastal M!lnagew@t Element ... • Hurricane Vulnerability Zone Comprehensive

Indian River County 2020 Comprehensive Plan

" . .. . Coastal Management Element Indian nty Community Development Departntent Adopted: March 17, 1998 Amended Supplement 7; September 13,2005 Ordinance 2005·040

···:.:._ .

" I

'·· .•

Comprehensi~e Plan·

INTRODUCTION

Purpose Description of the Coastal Zone Overview of Element Sections

TABLE OF CONTENTS·

EXISTING CONDITIONS SECTION

NATURAL RESOURCES

Barrier Island Nearshore Atlantic Beaches

• Beach Erosion Dunes

• .Coastal Strand and Hammock Con::ununities Indian River Lagoon Aquatic Preserves High Salt Marshes Mangrove Swamp Mosquito Impoundments Open Water Exposed Sand-Shell Bottom Drift Algae Communities Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Spoil Islands Bird Rookeries Water Quality Conditions Coastal Mainland Coastal Hammocks

.~ Tropical Hammock • Oak Hammock

Flatwo.ods . ~. South Florida Flatw()ods • Cabbage Palm Flatwoods • Shrub Bogs/Bay Swamps

Sand Pine Shrub/Xeric Scrub Freshwater Wetlands Endangered, Threatened or Species of Sgecial Concern

Community Development Department Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

· Coastal Management Element ·

Page 1

1 1 1

3

3

3 3 4 4 5 6 7 7 8

.8 9 10 10 12 12 13 15 15 1.? 19 20. 20 20 20 20 21 21 21 22

Indian River County .. i

Comprehensive··PI.all Coastal M!lnagew@t Element

LAND USE Land Use in the Coastal Zone Incorporated Municipalities

• City ofV ero Beach • City of Sebastian

. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

• Town of Indian River Shores · • City of Fellsmere • Town of Orchid

Unincorporated Indian River County • Orchid Island • Indian River Lagoon • Coastal Mainland

Parks and Open·Space • Mainland Parks • Oceanfront Parks and Facilities • Public Access • Riverfront Parks

.• Open Space

ECONOMY Water-Dependent and Water-Related Uses Comrti~rcial Fishing Aquaculture Recreational Boating Marina Facilities

• Temporary Docking Facilities INF'R.ASTRUCTURE IN THE COASTAL ZONE Transportation Wastewater Treatment Facilities

· Water Treatment Facilities · ~Regional Treatment Facilities • Private Wells

Stormwater Management • Basins and Sub-basins in the Coastal Zone

Shoreline Stabilization • Private Property • Public Projects

StructUres or Areas Exhibiting Potential or Repeated Storm Damage Archaeological and Historic Resources .of the CoastaiZone ·

Commumty Development Department Supplement 7: Ordinan~e 2005-04l, adopted 9/13/05

~ 22 22 23 23

. 23 24 24 24 24 24 25 ~5 26 28 28 31 33 35

35 35 36 36 36 37

. 39

39 39 39 40 40 41 41 41 43 43 44 44 44

Indian River County . ii

I

(__ ...... .

. ..; i

'\.

Conmrebensive·Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS

Historic and Scenic Roadways • Jungle Trail • Old Winter Beach Road • Quay Dock Road • Fellsmere Grade • Gifford Dock Road

NATURAL DISASTER PLANNING Hurricanes

• Coastal HighHazard Area • Hurricane Vulnerability Zone

Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan • Evacuation • Shelter Capacity • Special Needs Population

Post-Disa,ster Recovery and Redevelopment Hurricane Evacuation Study

• Evacuation Network • Clearance Time • Natural Hazard Constraints on Evacuation Procedures

Areas Subject to Coastal Flooding · •Mainland • Orchid Island • National Flood Insurance Program

INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGENCY COORDINATION . Regulatory Programs

• Federal • State •Regional • Local • Special Districts

ANALYSIS

DEVELOPMENT PRESSURES ON NATURAL RESOURCES Barrier Island Shoreline Erosion Public Shoreline Stabilization Projects Coastal Armoring

Community Development Dep.artment Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005·042, adopted 9/13/05

Coastal ManawnAAt :Element

Page 45 45 45 45 45 46 ..

46 46 47 47 48 49 49 50 51.

. 51 52 52 53 54 54 55 55

56 56 56 57 58 58 58

59

59 . 59.

59 60 60

Indian River County ij,i

Comprehensive PJan

Indian River Lagoon Water Quality Conditions Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Coastal Mainland

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Archaeologic and Historic Resources Endangered, Threatened, or Species of Special Concern

LAND USE Parks and Open Space

. • Public Access Areas in Niled of Redevelopment

ECONOMY Water-Dependent and Water-Related Uses Marina Siting

. • Criteria for Siting Marinas •.Zone 1 • Zone2 • Zone 3 •Zone4 • Zone 5 ~ Zone6 • Zone 7

·•ZoneS • Zone9

Aquaciilture

INFRASTRUCTURE Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element Potable Water Sub-Element· Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element Solid Waste Sub-Element Stormwater Management Sub-Element Transportation Element NATURAL DISASTER PLANNING Coastal ~ligh Hazard Area

Commu!)ity D.evelopment Department Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Coastal Manaz:oment Element

61 61 65 65 66 66

67 68 70 70

71 71 71 72

. 73

73 73 74 74 75 75 75 75

76

76 77 77 77 7.8 78 79 80 80

lndlan :River County iv : .:.; '

C.:

Comprehenswe Plan

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan • Evacuation • Shelter Capacity • Marine Evacuation • Hazard Mitigation • Mutual Aid Agreements

Post-Disaster Recovery and Redevelopment •Recovery • Redevelopment and Relocation

GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES

PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

EVALUATION AND MONITORING PROCEDURES

Community Development Department Supplement 7; Ordinanee ZOOS-042, adopted 9/13/05

Coastal Management El~ment

81 81 83 83 84 85 85 85 85

87

110

110

Indian River Coullty v

ComprcltensW Plan Coastal Management Element

: Figure

9.1 . 9.2

9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9

9.10 9.11 9.12

'9.13 9.14 9.15 9.16 9.17 9.i8 9.19 9.20 9.21 9.22 9.23 9.24 9.25 9.26 9.27 9.28 9.29 9.30

LIST OF FIGURES

Designated Coastal Zone of IndianRiver County Orchid Island, Indian River County Offshore Reef Structure Areas of Critical Beach Erosion South Florida Coastal Strand (Generalized Location) Tropical/Coastal Hammocks (Generalized Location) Aquatic Preserves in Indian River County Indian River Lagoon System Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Beds Location of Spoil Islands Surface Water Classifications and Shell fishing Areas General Ecological Co=unities of Indian River County Existing Land Use in the Coastal Zone Parks and Recreation Facilities in the Coastal Zone Public Beach Access Location Map Public Boat Ramps in Indian River County Marinas in Indian River County Traffic Circulation Map Wastewater Service Areas Potable Water Service Areas Indian River County Drainage Basins Existing and Potential Archaeologically-Significant Sites Scenic and Historic Roads of Indian River County Coastal High Hazard Area Hurricane Vulnerability Zone Shelter Facilities and Evacuation Zones Potentially Hazardous Evacuation Roadway Links Flood Prone Areas in Indian River County Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CoBRA) Designated Zones Marina Siting Zones

Cl)llUIInnity Devell)pment Department Supplement 7: Ordinanee 2005-042, adopted 9/13/0S

1.1 3.1 3.2 5.1 6.1 7.1 7.2

10.1 13.1 13.8 16.1 20.1 22.1 26.1 28.1 34.1 37.1 39.1 39.2 41.1 41.2 45.1 46.1 47.1 48.1 49.1 52.1 54.1 55.1 72.1

Indian· River County vi

... -·.

)

Comprehensive Plan Coastal Management Element

9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9

9.10 9;11 9;12 9.13 9.14 9.15 9.16 9.17 9.18 9.19 9.20 9.21 9.22 9.23 9.24

LIST OF TABLES

Wetlands in Indian River County 11 Spoil Islands of Indian River County 14 Permitted Point Source Discharges to the Indian River Lagoon 17 Total Annual Pollutant Loadings for Segment 3 18 Area-Based Pollutant Loading Rates by Basin to Segment 3 19 Recreational Parks in Indian River County 27 Oceanfront Parks and Facilities in Indian River County 29 Public Oceanfront Access Points 31 Publicly-Owned Shoreiine 32 Boat Ramps in Indian River County 34 Public, Private and Commercial Marinas 38 Public and Private Wastewater Treatment Facilities in the Coastal Zone . 40 Areas Experiencing Drainage Problems 42. Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale 46 Emergency Support Functions and Associate Primary Agencies 48 Auxiliary Shelter Facilities 50 Insured Value of Residential Properties in Indian River County (1996) 51 Critical Intersection in the Evacuation Network 52 Estimated Clearance Times for Indian River County . 53 Roadway Links. with Evacuation Hazards 53 Comparison of Existing and Future Nonpoint Source Pollutant Loadings 63 Non-Residential Future Land Use Needs 68 Coastal Management Element Implementation Matrix 111 Coastal Management Element Evaluation Matrix 116

Community Development Department Indian River County vii Sup~lement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

, .. ····. ) .

,.. I

) .

(_ __


INTRODUCTION

Purpose

Coastal resources offer unique amenities, making them highly desirable; however, they are fmite and highly susceptible to degradation. Due to these characteristics, coastal resources are given special consideration. Recognizing the importance of preserving these resources the purpose of the Coastal Management Element is twofold: to plan for and, where appropriate, restrict development activities which would damage or destroy coastal resources, and to protect human life and limit public expenditures in areas subject to destruction by natural forces.

Description of the Coastal Zone

The coastal zone of Indian River County is the area influenced, affected and directly related to neighboring estuarine and oceanic waters, the Indian River Lagoon (IRL) and the Atlantic Ocean.

As designated, the coastal zone boundaries are coterminous with those of the IRL watershed. The western boundary of the watershed was originally delineated by the Ten Mile Ridge. However, the construction of several major drainage canals beginning in the 1920's artificially enlarged the coastal zone to its present area. The western boundary of the coastal zone, as described in the Indian River Lagoon joint Reconnaissance Report (1987), consists of the western boundary of the Fellsmere Farms Water Control District (FFWCD), the western boundary of the Indian River Farms Water Control District (IRFWCD) Basin, and an extended western boundary of the Sebastian River Water Control District (SRWCD). The coastal zone includes all areas east of these boundaries, extending to the Atlantic Ocean. Bordered on the north by Brevard County, the coastal zone of Indian River County extends south to St. Lucie County. Included in this expanse are both the incorporated and unincorporated areas ofthe County. The coastal zone is depicted in Figure 9.1.

The coastal zone can be divided into three (3) principal ecological systems: the barrier island, the Indian River Lagoon (IRL) system, and the coastal mainland. Coastal areas are unique in both an ecological and economic sense. This is especially true oflndian River County's coastal zone, since over 99 percent of the county's population resides within the coastal zone.

Overview of Element Sections

The Coastal Management Element (CME) is noteworthy, since it basically is a comprehensive plan in itself. Since coastal resources arc highly affected by man's activities, the CME is significantly related to current and future land use, infrastructure (including, stormwater management, transportation, and utilities), recreation and open space, conservation, economic considerations (including capital improvements and public expenditures) and intergovernmental coordination. The CME also addresses coastal issues relating to water-dependent and water-related uses, marina/boat facilities siting, the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) and contingency planning for hurricane evacuation and post-disaster redevelopment. Through an analysis of existing conditions and a

Community Development Department Indian River County 1

>-' ,_.

I ,-'---[ ---- ---------i\' _, :- ----- ----- - ------. ' -'.-~-~ I I ' I ! I

' I 1', - I

t l' v '·;L ... _ - _,!- I . ! ;vy- ::_ I ' ! 'f. - ,_,,-,.J ..,, I ; Y}--~ I I . I I ._ _____ _

~-

BDLJ/e E'r w;:)l ,._...._..,.. ,.., cnoo-r~<'lUon

I

III!:J'AIMED 8'f Pt:AU~ C1 fOOT FlkAHOicl. U."';ST!V.!Cf fQIII Y.AJ> PFif"'loJ'b\nOill !>JIO\'r)£D-8Y fl(ll'!<,l<\ U: 1'1 -0T COioiU'-'M!V <VfAIII!

... -o 1 2 3- 4 S 111L£S T SC-At.-e ••on IH

F;gure 9.1

DESIGNATED COASTAL ZONE OF

INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

--- -Weeteon E:t::tenalo"' of Coaatal Zo-ne- b-oun-dary

lillJ -lrtdlc&ted lncor-porat&d Area a

,. .. ,. ,. % .. "

0 ... .. ,. 7.

INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA


prediction of future circumstances, issues and concerns of the coastal zone can be identified, and goals, objectives and policies can be established.

The Existing Conditions section of the Coastal Management Element indicates the present conditions of Indian River County's Coastal Zone. The topics discussed in the Existing Conditions section include: Natural Resources, Land Use, Economy, Infrastructure, Natural Disaster Planning and Intergovernmental Coordination.

The Natural Resources section describes the ecological communities associated with the Coastal Zone. Included is a discussion of Endangered, Threatened or Species of Special Concern and water quality conditions.

The Land Use section of the Coastal Management Element references the Future Land Use Element of the Indian River Comprehensive Plan and contains a basic description ofthe present land use in the coastal area. This section is followed by the Economy section which addresses water-dependent and water-related uses, commercial fishing, aquaculture, and recreational boating.

The Infrastructure section provides an overview of the transportation network, potable water and wastewater treatment systems, stormwatcr management. Also included is a discussion of shoreline stabilization projects.

The Natural Disaster Planning section references the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan of Indian River County and the Hurricane Evacuation Study oflndian River County. Also included is a description of the Coastal High Hazard Area and Hurricane Vulnerability Zone, and discussion of post-disaster recovery and redevelopment issues.

The Coastal Management Element concludes with the Intergovernmental Agency Coordination section, which introduces the roles and responsibilities of the federal, state, regional and local agencies which are involved with t11e coastal issues of Indian River County.

The Existing Conditions section is followed by the Analysis section which, in part, is an evaluation of the present conditions of the coastal zone. The Analysis section also addresses future concerns, impacts on the natural resources, and problems in the coastal zone.

From the Existing Conditions and Analysis sections of the Coastal Management Element, the Goal, Objectives, and Policies are developed to address the concerns and problems identified with the Coastal Zone of Indian River County. This section of the Plan serves as the county's management strategy for the Coastal Zone.



EXISTING CONDITIONS

NATURAL RESOURCES

Barrier Island

The portion of the barrier island located in Indian River County is named Orchid Island. Orchid

Island is ±22.4 miles in length and varies in width from a few hundred yards to over 1.5 miles.

These dimensions, however, arc not permanent since the barrier island's shoreline is constantly

changing in response to the effects of wind, waves, tidal action and sediment supply. In a natural

state, the shoreline of a barrier island "migrates" oceanward or "retreats" landward as the forces of

erosion and accretion occur. The nearshore Atlantic and beach/dune systems dissipate wave and

wind energy, thus forming the first line of defense against coastal storms. The ecological

communities provide food and habitat for several coastal communities of birds, fish, shellfish,

reptiles and manu:nals. In addition, the barrier island environment provides a variety of recreation

opportunities and aesthetic qualities for the enjoyment of county residents and visitors. Orchid

Island is depicted in Figure 9.2.

Nearshore Atlantic

The nearshore Atlantic zone is one part of the barrier island system; it consists of the relatively

shallow waters adjoining the beach area, extending from the mean low water line (ML WL) to

approximately 25 feet below the ML WL. The nearshore zone is subdivided into two divisions: the

surf zone and the subtidal zone. The surf zone extends from the MLWL to the lowest low tide line;

whereas, the subtidal zone extends down from the lowest low tide line. The subtidal zone is

important to the stability of the barrier island in that it provides a natural breakwater. The subtidal

zone also serves as habitat for marine life by providing spawning, nursery and feeding grounds.

An offshore reef parallels the shoreline for the length of the island. This offshore reef/rock system

is depicted in Figures 9.3. The offshore reef system forms a broad banding network which is created

by sabellarid worms cementing sand grains, shell fragments and plankton between existing rock

ledges. The reef system functions as a natural breakwater for the nearshore Atlantic zone, and

contributes to the stabilization of the barrier island by dissipating wave energy.

Beside moderating wave action, the offshore reef provides a hard bottom for the growth ofphyto and

zooplankton. These plankton form the foundation of the food web and provide habitat for marine

organisms, such as algae, invertebrates, molluscs, crustaceans and echnoderms. In addition, more

than 255 species of fish have been documented along the nearshore reefs of Indian River County.

Other organisms that feed on the reefs include reptiles, such as sea turtles.

The aforementioned species and their habitats are sensitive to physical alteration and chemical

contamination. Physical alterations include activities, such as storm damage, beach renourishment

projects, shoreline stabilization projects and recreation/fishing activities, that disturb the natural

habitat.


3.1

FIGURE 9.2

The Barrier Island (Orchid Island)

Indian River County

0 ('\ \\\ .,

'2.

• • ri ,t ~ i§ > !ql •

~11 11 • '·I I I, I •

•

I ~m' ! I I !

FIGURE 9.3

OFFSHORt; REEF STRUCTURE SOUTHERN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

3.2


Beaches

The eastern shoreline oflndian River CoWlty consists of 22.4 miles of sandy beaches and dunes. Beaches are the unvegetated sections of shoreline formed by sand and shell materials. They extend from the MLWL to the ridges of the backshore beach. Beaches can be divided into two zones: the foreshore and the backshorc. The foreshore extends from the ML WL to the crest of the first beach, which is usually associated with the mean high water line (MHWL). The backshorc extends from the MHWL to the base of the dune system.

The beach is inextricably linked to the nearshore zone, and its primary functional value is to dissipate the constant and cumulative forces of wind, tides, and currents. Littoral drift of sediments plays a codominant role with nearshore/offshore sand transport in shaping the beach zone. Consequently, as littoral drift occurs, sand naturally moves in a net southerly migration along the shoreline. During the summer months, sand gradually migrates inshore (accretes) to form relatively wide, gentlysloping beaches. Notwithstanding, the ever-present threat of a tropical storm or hurricane can induce rapid beach erosion. During the winter months, offshore sand transport or erosion is often associated with rougher waters and storms, referred to as "noreasters". Although usually not as severe as a hurricane, these stonns may persist for several days and cause extensive shoreline erosion. These natural sand movement patterns can be altered by the location of rigid structures.

• Beach Erosion

As estimated by the Cubit Engineering Beach Preservation Plan (1988) for lndian River County, the annual southerly net transport of sediment along the Indian River County coast is approximately 135,000 cubic yards. According to the Cubit study, littoral transport can be attributed to the following physical features: the Sebastian Inlet, the offshore shoal area and the offshore reef system.

Sebastian Inlet interferes with the net southerly transport of sand along the county shoreline. Of the estimated 135,000 cubic yards of sand moving southward, approximately 59,000 cubic yards are estimated to deposit within Sebastian Inlet and the IRL. The Cubit Report also hypothesized that strong ebb !low currents through the Sebastian Inlet result in approximately 24,700 cubic yards of sand being carried to the offshore waters and approximately 22,000 cubic yards by-passing the Inlet and continuing their southern migration. While the littoral process continues to remove sand from this area, the physical boundary of the inlet prohibits new deposits, resulting in net erosion (Cubit Report, 1988).

A large shoal area exists off the central and southern shorelines oflndian River County. Although the shoal may extend up to four ( 4) miles offshore, it is generally defined by the limits of a 35 foot depth contour. This natural shoal may influence the shoreline by dissipating offshore wave energy and reducing damage to landward beaches and private properties. However, the Cubit report states that the shoal has a refraction effect on wave energy past its northern and southern boundaries. This effect "bends" wavefronts at angles to the beach and may increase erosion. This is exhibited by increased storm damage ncar Vera Beach and at the southernmost part of the County, the north and south boundaries of the shoal, respectively.



To partially offset erosion caused by the Inlet, the Sebastian Inlet Tax District Commission has

periodically placed sand dredged from the inlet on the area located immediately south of Sebastian

Inlet. In 1997, the district attempted to create a "feeder" beach by depositing sand mined from the

Atlantic Coastal Sand Ridge on the beach south of the Inlet. Theoretically, sand from the "feeder"

beach should gradually renourish properties located south of the inlet; however, the actual results

of this project will not be known for several years.

Ambersand Beach, a ±2.9 mile section of the unincorporated County extending from permanent

reference monument (PRM) R-1 to PRM R-16, has been designated an "area of critical beach

erosion" by the FDEP. Two other areas of the County have also been designated by the FDEP as

"areas of critical beach erosion." These are Wabasso Beach and the beachside central business

district (CBD) Wabasso Beach is a ±0.6 mile segment in the unincorporated County that extends

from PRM R-37 to R-40. The bcachside CBD is a ±3.1 mile segment that extends from PRM R-70

to R-86. The beachside CBD is regarded as the most threatened section of beach in the County.

Nearly every building within this segment is supported by a rigid armored structure. Additionally,

two (2) public access areas maintained by the City ofVero Beach without seawalls, Humiston Park

and the boardwalk at Conn Beach, experience repeated damage due to beach erosion.

The "Areas of Critical Beach Erosion" in Indian River County are depicted in Figure 9.4. Coastal

armoring within Segment 4 of the Archie Carr National Wildlife Refuge and issues regarding

emergency permits are discussed under the "Natural Resources" heading in the Analysis section of

this element. Also, a comprehensive list of the species which inhabit the beach is contained in the

Conservation Element.

Dunes

Dunes lie directly behind the landward berm of the beach. In a natural state, they are influenced by

wind direction and intensity. Dunes are waves of drifting sand and serve as sand storage areas. The

dune sand replaces sand eroded away by waves and provides long-term stability to the shoreline.

The stabilized position of the coastal dune line is controlled in great part by the seaward limit of the

permanent vegetation line.

Light breezes are not effective for building stabilized dunes, but on-shore winds blowing across a

beach at a velocity of 12 miles per hour will create turbulence capable of moving average-sized, sand

grains. Sand particles migrate until they are trapped and subsequently deposited by native dune

vegetation. In a natural state, dune vegetation gradually extends oceanward, trapping additional sand

and causing the dune to grow laterally, as well as vertically.

On the north end ofthe barrier island, north of Ambersand Beach, dune height ranges from 10 to 12

feet. South of Ambersand Beach, the dunes lower to their minimal point of eight (8) feet. Then,

dune heights gradually rise to their highest point of22 feet, just north of Wabasso Beach. Between

Wabasso Beach and the Town ofindian River Shores, the dunes maintain a 16 to 20 foot height

level. In the Town oflndian River Shores, the dune height drops to approximately 14 feet. South

oflndian River Shores to Riomar, the dunes average bctween16 and 18 feet in height, with a few

Comnmnity Development Department Jndian River County 5 ,....,........

·~·

FIGURE 9.4

AREAS OF CRITICAL BEACH EROSION

Sebastian Inlet Brevard u'l: . -·- .. -~··· ndlan ··:::;.

River c·o. :::;:,

Sebasllan Inlet

N

Ambers and.

through Ambersand Beach (2.9 miles; A·1 to R·16)

Beach .. :::

Critical Erosion

Indian River County

St. lucia County

ATLANTIC OCEAN

Wabnao Beach (0.6 mile; R-37 to R·40)

Vero Beach (3. 1 mll~ts; R-70 to R·86)

INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

5.1


locations ranging from 12 to 13 feet in height. South ofRiomar to the south county line, the dune height averages between I 0 to 14 feet.

Dunes are divided into two zones, the primary dune (foredune) and the secondary dune (backdune). The primary dune extends landward of the backshore. It varies in height and may be only slightly higher than the backshore. Secondary dunes follow the primary dune and represent stabilized deposits of sand and shell materials.

The primary (foredune) dune, commonly referred to as the coastal dune line, extends landward of the backshore dune and is the seaward limit of the permanent vegetation. Primary dune vegetation is sparse to moderately dense and is dominated by native species, such as sea oats and sea grapes, which are tolerant of wind, salt spray, xeric (dry) conditions, saline soils, and shifting formations, such as, sea oats and sea grapes. The permanent vegetation line of the primary dune is susceptible to damage from pedestrian traffic, vehicles, or other domestic disturbances. Once the mantle of vegetation is broken, dune movement may be accelerated to a point where plant growth cannot keep pace with the shifting sand. The result can be a chain reaction which leads to erosion and loss of the shifting frontal dune. The historically poor land management practices that have negatively impacted the primary dune system ofindian River County are discussed in the Analysis section.

The secondary or backdune is landward of the primary dune, and is characterized by heavier vegetation, including perennial shrubs, trees and vines. When prolonged drought, storms or hurricanes periodically erode the shifting primary dunes, the stable secondary dunes absorb the brunt of the physical forces. Throughout the county, secondary dunes are not well established and in some cases have been replaced by coastal strand or hammock communities. The flora and fauna associated with the secondary dune is discussed in the Conservation Element.

• Coastal Strand and Hammock Communities

Coastal strand and hammock communities develop landward of the beach/dune system. Characteristics of coastal strand and coastal (maritime) hammock communities include: greater soil stability, gradual accumulation of organic soil components, leaching of soil salts and partial protection from salt spray. These characteristics influence the succession of communities. Invasion by nuisance exotic species and disturbances caused by man obscure natural boundaries. Coastal strand vegetation is usually dominated by saw palmetto. Figure 9.5 depicts the predominant areas of coastal strand and hammock communities located in Indian River County.

The coastal strand habitat succeeds through a scrub stage and into a hammock community. Coastal hammocks generally consist of a mature canopy of live oaks and cabbage palms. The hammock's understory can consist of a sparse population of wild coffee and stoppers, or a dense ground cover of ferns and vines. As progression continues, the hammock transcends into a jungle-like community of tropical hardwoods, vines and shrubs, with a fairly open canopy of oaks and cabbage palms. Nuisance exotic vegetation, such as Australian pine and Brazilian pepper, are also present. A complete list of the flora and fauna associated with Coastal Strand and Coastal Hammock


Cl z < 0:: len ....1 z < g t; < < 0 0 g (.) c

~ ~ ..J 0: <

0 a: ....1 w u. ~ :c 8 1-:::'J 0 en

_j ' . L.~~-::_ ____ _

6.1

"' "' "'

.. ~ .....

"

• : :!> .. ..

"'

"' "' "" "' ()

"'

' I ' I , ' I I

<!) ' I ' I ' I I ' ' i ' '

0

c: ·;: 0 ~ ·;;

0. ·;; ~

0 E

"' :; c: ·;; ~

c ~ ..

0: ~ c

:: w

"' c = ""! 0 <.l ~

•J

- "' " > • a; Q

c ., ., " ~ , "' c .0


communities is contained in the Conservation Element. The predominant coastal hammock areas

of the county are depicted in Figure 9.6.

Indian River Lagoon

The Indian River Lagoon (IRL) is an estuarine system that extends from Ponce DeLeon Inlet in

Volusia County to Jupiter Inlet in Palm Beach County. An estuary is defined as a partially enclosed

body of water c01mected to the ocean, but measurably diluted by freshwater. Within Indian River

County, the ±16,300 acre IRL separates the barrier island from the mainland. Segment 3 ofthe IRL

(the portion of the IRL lying within Indian River County as designated in the Indian River Lagoon

Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan) derives its estuarine character as saltwater

from the Atlantic Ocean passes through the Sebastian and Ft. Pierce inlets and combines with fresh

water from the St. Sebastian River, drainage canals and overland sheet flow.

The Indian River Lagoon system has the distinction of being the most diversified estuary in North

America. The IRL supports over 4,300 species, including 36 rare, threatened and endangered

species. Also, the IRL provides invaluable aesthetic, scenic and historic value to the area. The IRL

system, one of principal components ofthe coastal zone, supports approximately one seventh (1/7)

of the regional economy via tourism, recreation and commercial fishing activities.

Overall, the IRL system functions as wildlife habitat, nutrient recycler, energy storage unit, water

purifier, sediment trap, and stonn barrier. Also, the lRL offers an accessible locale for on-water

recreation and aesthetic beauty. Due to these amenities, land fronting the IRL is desirable for

residential development. However, the characteristics that make the IRL a unique and productive

ecosystem; shallow depth, high nutrient content, and limited flushing also make it susceptible to

damage since estuaries efficiently trap and concentrate pollutants.

The natural ecological communities that comprise the IRL system are: high salt marshes, mangrove

swamps, the open water component, exposed sand-shell bottoms, drift alage, submerged aquatic

vegetation. Mosquito impoundments and spoil islands are the anthropogenic features present in the

IRL. Each of these communities has separate characteristics and functions, however, the boundaries

of these communities overlap and arc not clearly defined. Combined, these ecological communities

fonn the basis for the most diverse estuary in North America.

• Aquatic Preserves

Indian River County shares two (2) Aquatic Preserves with neighboring counties. Aquatic Preserve

#7 extends from Malabar in Brevard County, to the northern City limits ofVero Beach. Aquatic

Preserve A-9 extends from the southern City limits ofVero Beach, to the Ft. Pierce Inlet in St. Lucie

County. The location of these Aquatic Preserves is depicted in Figure 9.7.

In 1969, six (6) Aquatic Preserves, covering about 60 percent of the IRL, were established by

resolution of the Governor and Cabinet. In 1975, the Florida Aquatic Preserve Act coordinated

management of these Aquatic Preserves under the Florida Department of Natural Resources (now

Community Development Department Indian River County 7 ·..-··"1".

'-J

.....

SCAlE

' )I ' i( l ' I

'i , ' : l

-[

0 1 2 3 4

FIGURE 9.6

TROPICAL I COASTAL HAMMOCKS (GENERALIZED lOCATION)

--

MJrea

" .. <"

" "" ...

"

f N

Date: 1989

0

" .. " ...

"' ~.1 ----+-+-----~-\-'--~ ~-1 • -: r ----------------'--

Sour-ee~ Indian River County Planning Division

based on S.C.S, general soil map untts-

' I

BOLJ/e IIIU'I'IlN'TEO tv PEAMIS$ICiti ~ FOOT. ''"'"""CIAI. M51:!1TAH~ F~ MN" JOR~Jr~TJON J'O.c;)vl!;ieD ll't' F~OIII(M. DEPT. t:1 C:QI!AMUNfTY AF~ARJ.

F 7

AQUATIC PRESERVES

IN

INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

AQUe.th::: Preserve W~U•ra

0 3

MILeS

AQU~TIO PRUERVE No, 7

(SOUTH HALF)

Malabar to VerQ Beach

4

AQUA TIC PRESERVI: A•S

Ven> Beach to Fort Pierce


April'· 1t117

7.2

~··


FDEP) Bureau of Land and Aquatic Resource Management (Woodward-Clyde, 1994). According to State law, an Aquatic Preserve is defined as: "An exceptional area of submerged lands and its associated waters set aside for being maintained essentially in its natural or existing condition (S.S. 258.35)".

• High Salt Marshes

High salt marsh areas consists of salt tolerant wetland vegetation, which is largely dominated by Batis and Salicorna bordering the IRL proximate to the MHWL. During the fall season when the sea level is higher than the usual peak lunar tide, the high salt marsh areas are tidally flooded for several weeks. Also, storm tides frequently inundate the high salt marsh. High salt marshes generally arc important pollution filters and serve as nursery and spawning grounds for coastal fish and other marine organisms. High salt marshes also act as accelerators or depositories for sediments. ln addition, salt marshes exhibit resilience during severe storms and act as buffers for contiguous shorelines.

The species living in the high salt marsh are inOuenced by the frequency and range of tides, salinity, nutrients, soils, oxygen, microrelief, substrate, storms, fires, cuttings, dikings, grazings and ditchings. The typical ground cover species include: smooth cordgrass, saltwort, glasswort, salt grass, sea daisy and other salt tolerant vegetation, with isolated to dense mangrove tree growth. According to the Florida Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan (SWIM Plan), Indian River County is estimated to contain between 380 acres (154 hectares) to 910 acres (368 hectares) of salt marsh (SWIM Plan). Much oflhis high salt marsh vegetation and associated algal flats serve as food resource for a variety of fish and invertebrate species.

• Mangrove Swamp

The high salt marsh transcends into intertidal mangrove swamps. This mixture of habitat consists of smooth cordgrass and red mangroves. Typical mangrove swamps consist of red, white and black mangrove stands that dominate the coastal fringes above the Mean High Water Line (MHWL), down to the IRL. Indian River County is estimated to contain between 2,690 acres (1 089 hectares) to 4,133 acres (1,673 hectares) of mangrove swamps (SJRWMD SWIM Plan).

Mangroves are natural protective forces. They help stabilize the shoreline and reduce erosion by absorbing most of the storm-driven wave energy. Even though mangroves are susceptible to hurricane damage and freez:es, they provide considerable protection to areas on the IRL's landward side. The degree of protection is roughly proportional to the width of the mangrove zone. Very narrow fringing forests offer minimal protection, while extensive stands prevent wave damage and reduce flood destruction by damming, retaining and filtering flood water.

Mangroves appear to reach their optimum productivity levels on accreting, low-energy estuarine shorelines. Mangrove fringes are found along most undeveloped shorelines of the IRL in Indian River County, but less so in areas near the lCW where wave energy from boat wakes impedes mangrove regeneration. Rarely do mangroves extend more than I 00 feet landward of the MHWL.


Comprehen~ive Plan Coastal Management Element

Within Indian River County, the red is by far the most abundant mangrove species and is usually located closer to the shore than are black and white mangroves. White mangroves are usually located landward of the red and black and berwecn the mean high tide line and the upland transition zone.

Mangroves are of critical importance to the intertidal community. Many commercial sport finfish and shellfish arc, to some degree, dependent upon the mangroves's nutrient base - mangrove detritus and leaf litter. Like all wetland communities which occupy the land-water transition, intertidal mangroves are extremely valuable fish and wildlife habitat. They provide nutrients to the plant community, serve as a nursery ground and afford juveniles protection from predation. In fact, over 100 species of crustaceans and fish have been found to be dependent on the high marsh and mangrove swamp habitats ofindian River County.

• Mosquito Impoundments

In the coastal zone, salt-marsh mosquitoes are mostly comprised of the genus Aedes and essentially share the same basic life history and ecology. They require low and high salt marsh areas and periodically frequent the submergent and emergent marsh profile. Mosquitoes lay their eggs on damp, organic soil, where the marsh is generally lacking vegetative cover, but never on fresh water. Over a period of several days, the larva can fully develop within the and can hatch following a flood by tidewater or rainwater; unflooded, the larva can survive unhatched for months.

Mosquito can hatch when the area where they are deposited is periodically flooded, or when flooding occurs within a rwo (2) to three (3) week period from when the eggs were first laid. After the larva emerge, it is critical that water does not flood or cover the larva over the next four (4) to ten (1 0) days; otherwise, the mosquito larva cam1ot develop through the resting stage and into the adult stage.

Mosquito eggs cannot properly develop or hatch if the area is flooded by daily tides. Optimal conditions for producing mosquitoes are when tidal floodings of the high salt marsh occur periodically and when the water is retained within natural depressions for several days. Prevention of mosquito production in the high salt marshes is made possible by altering the water level of a marsh so that water never stands on it. Tfthere is surface water standing in the marsh, then the water must be prevented from settling for more than two (2) or three (3) days. This can be accomplished by ditching or flooding. If flooding is the n1ethod used, the flood water must cover the ground completely during the entire mosquito breeding season (from May to October). Also, the water must be continuously circulated to prevent creation of stagnant water pockets.

The goal of habitat manipulation is to open marsh habitats by channeling mosquito-breeding depressions to tidewaters or ponds. Therefore, traditional marsh management techniques incorporate the use of impoundments to maintain the water level above the MHWL. Another popular method of mosquito control uses an open-marsh water system where the marsh is connected to a system of ponds and open chrumels, which provide habitats for mosquito-eating fish, such as mosquito fish and killifish.



The Indian River Mosquito Control District (IRMCD) is responsible for managing over 31 mosquito impoundments, totaling over 3,240 acres throughout the County. This figure accounts for nearly 18 percent of the total acreage of mosquito impoundments throughout the IRL system. Five (5) methods are used to manage mosquito impoundments: rotational impoundment management (RIM), seasonal flooding, pem1anent flooding, breached, and open marsh water management (OMWM). An inclusive list of the impounded wetlands in Indian River County is contained in Table 9.1.

RIM occurs when the impoundment is connected to the IRL by culverts and is pumped during the breeding season. Otherwise, levels vary with the level of the IRL. The RIM technique is utilized at II impoundment sites. Seasonal flooding occurs when water is pumped into the impoundment during the mosquito breeding season (May through October) to prevent larva from hatching. During the rest of the year, water levels vary with rainfall patterns. The IRCMD utilizes seasonal flooding to manage seven (7) impoundments. Breached management occurs when the impoundment dike is breached and water levels vary with natural tidal fluctuation. Seven (7) mosquito impoundments have breached dikes. Pemmnent flooding occurs when water levels are completely dependent upon rainfall patterns. This management technique is employed at four (4) mosquito impoundment sites. OMWM is a va:tiation of the breached management technique. OMWM is utilized to manage two (2) sites.

• Open Water

Ocean exchange, rainfall, storm water runoff and evaporation all contribute to the fluctuating salinity regimes of the open water component of the IRL. Salinity levels range from 4.0 to 40.0 parts per thousand (ppt) and average 26.5 ppt throughout !he County. The shallow waters of the IRL respond quickly to ambient air temperature and fluctuate nearly to the same degree, with water temperatures ranging from 55 oF to 88oF.

The average water depth of the lRL is approximately three (3) to five (5) feet. However, the depth of the ICW Channel ranges from ten (10) to twelve (12) feet throughout the County. The depth of the IRL is illustrated in Figures 9.8-A and 9.8-B. The open water component ofiRL system consists of four (4) communities: exposed sand shell bottoms, drift algae, seagrass meadows and spoil islands.

• Exposed Sand-Shell Bottom

The exposed sand shell bottom forms the most extensive area in the IRL. Within this system, substrate firmness, stability and the percentages of silt, sand and shell material are extremely variable. Although lacking rooted plants, exposed sand-shell bottoms often support an algal community a\!ached to shell, rock or other firm surfaces. Eighty (80) species of attached algae have been identified in the IRL. Exposed sand-shell bottoms in depths less than five (5) feet provide potential sites for seagrass colonization as the unconsolidated sediments stabilize.


FIGURE 9.8a

SEBASTIAN

Sl:II.UC•: lfttdl•n lllvu IIIOtQIIII\0 C:OfttfOI ~l.lrlllt l.ft,c;, Pl•flnlnQ Dtv,

INDIAN RIVER LAGOON SYSTEM (NORTHERN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY)

1 0- 1

Impounded Estuaril'!e

Wetlands

Uni.mpoun.d.ed Estuarine

Wetlands

Spoil Islands

............. lntraooaotal Waterway (12 Foot ProJect Depth)

_.... 3 ............ Contour Interval 3 feet

i I

INDIAN Rl'iiEFI

C:OUNrY

• >. 1. U C: I l C(IUNfY

'~',uc:a~ Initial\ Flhar uo,qwlto Conlrol l;)lstrlct t.A.C. P1unl1>9 Olv.

FIGURE 9.8b

INDIAN RIVER LAGOON SYSTEM (SOUTHERN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY)

ImPounded Estuarine

Wetlands

Unlmpounded Estuarine

Wetlands

Spoil l$lends

n•nrnnr1 ·lntraooastal Waterway (12 Foot Project Depth)

~3-· Contour Interval 3 feet

M II•

:SC:ALE

!

10.2


The wildlife in the IRL varies in species composition and abundance, depending on bottom contours and substrate characteristics. Because of the lack of protective cover and scarcity of firm surfaces for attachment, burrowing forms of life predominate in exposed sand-shell bottom areas.

Oyster beds are essentially exposed sand-shell habitats where the shell component is dominant. Attaching to dead shells or stony outcroppings, oyster communities are self perpetuating once established. New broods settle on shell casings and continually renew the community. Oyster dominated bottoms provide attachment sites and protective cover for a large number of invertebrates and small cryptic fish, such as gobies and blennies. This secondary invertebrate community primarily provides a forage base for a variety of fish.

MAP NO.

I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

TABLE 9.1 WETLANDS IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

IMPOUNDMENT NAME

Impounded Wetland Areas

Inlet Bird's Pete's North Deerfield South Deerfield Pine Island Hole in the wall Is. Water Tower Sand Point The Moorings Oyster Bar County Line Vero Shores South Bill's Middle Bill's North Bill's Lowenstein South Vista Royale North Vista Royale Jungle Gardens Schlitt's Golf Course South John Knights North John Knights

Community Development Department

APPROXIMATE ACREAGE

1 156 150

51 30

380 130 168 149 42

164 52 58 30 46 40 65

133 52 87 35

!07 44 57

Indian River County 11 ...... ......

·-


TABLE 9.1 WETLANDS IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44.

SOURCE:

Gifford Plots Triangle South Winter Beach North Winter Beach Morgan's Vicker's

I!nimpounded Wetlands.

Pelican Island Roosevelt Island North Horseshoe Island Horseshoe Island Paul's Island Middle Island Nelson Island Preacher Island Pete's Island South end of Pine Island Barker Island Barker Island Chain Wabasso Island Winter Beach Marsh

Indian River County Planning Department Indian River Mosquito Control District

• Drift Algae Communities

76 16 30 72 71 61

3 15 46 173 27

2 23 97 56

107 76 48 45

100

Between the exposed bottoms and the rooted seagrass meadows are the drift algae communities. These are ephemeral communities formed of unattached, free drifting algae, aggregating in response to prevailing winds, water currents and bottom topography. These algae aggregations can be associated with exposed sand-shell bottoms or with scagrass bottoms, because of their ability to drift freely. Drift algae communities occur throughout the IRL, but particularly large and persistent aggregations occur south of Sehastian Inlet and north ofVero Beach.

• Submerged Aquatic Vegetation

Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAY), consists ofsubmergent flowering plants (seagrasses) and algae that live underwater, produce oxygen and recycle nutrients. Seagrasses require sunlight to grow; therefore, the depth at which seagrasses are found is limited by water clarity. Within


Comprehensive Piau Coastal Management Element

Indian River County, it is estimated that approximately 2,930 acres, or approximately 18 percent of the total ::1:16,300 acre IRL, is covered by SA V. Sea grasses are an important component of the IRL. SA V improves water clarity by trapping fine sediments and particles with its leaves. SAV also stabilizes the bottom ofthe IRL with its roots, and it provides a habitat for a diverse community of200 species offish, crustaceans and shellfish. Furthermore, it provides a nursery, habitat, and food source for many marine animals, including the Florida manatee.

Moderate SAV coverage extends south of Sebastian Inlet to John's Island. Due to reduced water quality, SAV communities are sparse north of the 17th Street Bridge and within the City limits of Vero Beach. The most extensive and lush beds of seagrasscs in Indian River County are found just north of the Indian River- St. Lucie County line. Figures 9.9 (A-G) identify the location and relative abundance of SA V within the IRL.

Within the IRL, seven (7) species of seagrasses have been identified. In relative order of abundance, these grasses include: manatee grass (Syringodium Filiforme), shoal grass, (Halodule wrightii), Johnson's grass (Ha/ophilajohnsonii), turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum), paddle grass (Halophi/a decipiens), star grass, (Halophila englemanni) and widgeon grass, (Ruppia maritima).

• Spoil Islands

The spoil islands in the IRL were created as a result of dredging and maintenance of the Intracoastal Waterway (ICW). Although the islands were artificially created, they serve as a beneficial component of the IRL system by providing rookeries for migratory and shorebird species to nest and colonize. In addition, the spoil islands have increased the surface area of the land-water interface (the intertidal zone). This increased interface has a direct effect on the organisms associated with the intertidal zone or the shallow subtidal nearshore bottoms. Because of this increased interface, many species of aquatic animals, such as oysters, clams, shrimp, anchovies, sardines, morjarras, submerged aquatic plants, emergent plants and shoreline plants, are presented with a far greater area for settlement and habitation.

In addition to providing natural habitat, the spoil islands offer educational and recreational opportunities. Of the 49 spoil islands located in the County, recreational access is allowed on 21 of the islands. Listed below is a complete inventory of the spoil islands and their designated usage. The location of spoil islands is depicted in Figures 9.10-A and 9.10-B and listed in Table 9.2.


D 0%

···-·'

""' ~

.:.,.

"+ -so,.

"<$' -so

<_, "'o

0"'

SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION BEDS IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

>· -1

r-> z -1

C')

0 C')

m

> z

I I~

Less than 10'l!> 10-40% 40-70% Greater than 70% Land

...... c=:==='~'~· .... ~:===3o ........................ 1 ue~e SCALE 1:24,000

May 21. 1 VV7

1 3 • 1

D 0%

FIGURE 9.98

a

~ 'i ':. ...

:z: , ~ "' "' ':!) .. ... , ...

c:> 0 0 :z:

~

•

..


>· -l

r-

> z -l

(')

0 t:')

m > z

I I

Leu than 10% 10-40% 40-70% Greater than 70% Land

...... c===='='··--.. .c=====i0 ........................ 1 MILl

SCAlE 1:24,000

1 3. 2

·...,..··

D 0'11\

,~.

FIGURE9.9C


0

C'l

m > z

I I

Less than 10% 10-40% 40-70% Greater than 70% Land

...... -====='='··--.... ======0;. ......................... 1 MIL! SCALE 1:24,000

01U (It Study: Aprii•AU!iJllll 1QBU May 21 0 Hl87

13.3

0%

FIGURE 9.90

ll 'V

~


CJ . .

> ~ ,... > z ~

(')

0 (')

m > z

j I


...... ~==='=/~·--.. ~=====30 ........................ 1 MILE

SCALE 1:24,000

M•y .11, 1CII7

1 3. 4

"......-:-··.,..·

D 0%


D l~i1'<:;~r;:i':J Less than 10% 10-40% 40-70% Greater than 70%

...... .c======1~/·2--.... ~======0J. ............................ i1 MILE SCALE 1 ;24 ,000

13.5

Land

D 0'10

\V ~

0 ~ .., .,..

tJI t "

~ ~

... .,. • " 0 0 .,..


0 (')

m ,. -:.

I

/

Less than 10'l6 10-40% 40-70'10 Greater than 70'l6 Land

· ...... ====~13/.2 .... ~====·-. ..................... 1 MIL£

SCALf:. 1:24,000

13.6

D 0%

1., ti • " d " >

" " < , "' " • ~

..

" ~ ' '


> ..j

r

> z ..j

(.")

0 (.")

m > z


...... ~==='='··--.. .c====="~ ....................... 1 MILE

SCA~E 1:24,000

Doh of Study: Aprii ... AUQUtt 1 118~ Mey 21, 1987

13.7

SoSASTIAN

C.R. 510

DATE; SEPT. 1997

FIGURE 9.10a

LOCATION OF SPOIL ISLANDS IN INDIAN RIVER ISLAND

13.8

(NORTHERN COUNTY)

•un1111nnn Jotrac:oastal Waterway (12 Fool Projoo1 Oep1h)

I

$1". LI.ICIE COUNTY

FIGURE 9.10b

LOCATION OF SPOIL ISLANDS IN INDIAN RIVER ISLAND

(SOUTHERN COUNTY)

\,_1~-37 • • • •

tiR-38 • 'i. • eiR-39

13.9

nmnUU\ ·lntrac:::Qa$181 Wa1erwey (12 Foot Project Depth)

SCALI!

DATE: SEPT. 1997


TABLE9.2 SPOIL ISLANDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

N.a.m.e I ,ocatiou Designated Usage

IR·l 330 yards SW of Marker 62 Recreation IR-2 605 yards NW of Marker 65 Recreation IR-3 200 yards W of Marker 66 Conservation IR-4 330 yards E of Marker 66 Recreation IR-5 275 yards E of Marker 66 Recreation IR-6 100 yards E of Marker 67 Education/Recreation IR-8 500 yards S of Marker 68 Conservation IR-9A 275 yards NW of Marker 69 Recreation IR-9B 270 yards W of Marker 69 Recreation IR-10 500 yards SE of Marker 69 Recreation IR-11 600 yards NW of Marker 70 Recreation IR-12 200 yards SW of Marker 70 Recreation lR-13 100 yards S of Marker 70 Recreation IR-14 600 yards S of Marker 70 Recreation IR-15 400 yards SW of Marker 73 Conservation IR-16 700 yards S of Marker 73 Conservation IR-17 300 yards W of Marker 74 Conservation IR-18 200 yards SW of Marker 74 Conservation IR-19 500 yards S of Marker 7 4 Conservation IR-21 50 yards W of Marker 85 Conservation IR-22 165 yards S of Marker 1 00 Conservation IR-23C 100 yards SW ofMarker 110 Conservation IR-24A 360 yards W of Marker 116 Conservation IR-24B 275 yards NW of Marker 118 Conservation/Education IR-25A 70 yards SW of Marker 118 Recreation IR-25B 86 yards SW of Marker 118 Conservation IR-25 110 yards NW ofMarker 120 Recreation IR-26A 69 yards SW of Marker 120 Conservation TR-26B 155 yards NW ofMarker 121 Conservation IR-26 140 yards W of Marker 121 Conservation IR-27A 60 yards E of Marker 126 Conservation IR-27B 70 yards SE of Marker 125 Conservation IR-27C 75 yards E of Marker 125 Conservation IR-28 69 yards E ofMarker 130 Recreation* IR-29 50 yards E of Marker 133 Recreation**

· .. ,.


··...,...··


TABLE9.2 SPOIL ISLANDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

l'S..am.e J.ocatjon

IR-32 137 yards E of Marker 143 IR-33 64 yards SE of Marker !45A IR-34 165 yards NW of Marker !46A IR-34A 64 yards W of Marker 146A IR-35 385 yards SE of Marker 149 IR-36 385 yards NE of Marker 153 TR-37A 144 yards SW ofMarker 152 IR-37 220 yards W of Marker 154 IR-38 605 yards SE of Marker !55 IR-39 275 yards SW of Marker !58 IR-40 330 yards SW of Marker 160 IR-41 550 yards SW of Marker 161 IR-42 275 yards W of Marker 166 IR-43 200 yards W of Marker 168A

* Southern 2/3 ofiR-28 is privately owned ** Northern 1/2 ofiR-29 is privately owned

• Bird Rookeries

Designated Usage

Conservation Conservation Recreation Conservation Conservation Education/Recreation Recreation Conservation Conservation Conservation Conservation/Education Conservation Recreation Recreation

The four (4) major bird rookeries in Indian River County are located on the following islands: Riomar Island (IR-32), Johns Island, Duck Point Island, and Pelican Island. Riomar Island is located just north of the 17th Street bridge in Vero Beach. The Johns Island Spoil islands include two (2) dredged spoil islands west of Johns Island. The Duck Point Spoil Islands are located north ofC.R. 510 and just west of the ICW. Pelican Island, the County's premier bird rookery, is a natural feature.

• Water Quality Conditions

The !994 Section305(b) Water Quality Report (FDEP, 1994) classifies the overall water quality of Segment 3 of the IRL as "fair", or partially meeting its designated use. The surface waters of the IRL are rated by the FDEP as either Class II - Shellfish Propagation or Harvesting, or Class III- Recreation! Propagation and Management ofFish and Wildlife. Whereas Class III water quality standards arc intended to maintain suitability for sports and recreation and production of diverse fish and wildlife communities, Class II water standards are more restrictive and place more stringent limitations on bacteriological and chemical pollution.



Water quality is classified by the FDEP as being "good" near the Sebastian Inlet. Although water quality in the St. Sebastian River is only rated as "fair", the interface of saltwater from the Sebastian Inlet offsets most of the effects of the inflow of degraded water. Due to the positive flushing action of the inlet and limited development on the western shore of the barrier island, Class II (shellfish propagation or harvesting) waters extend south from the inlet to Wabasso Causeway, east of the Intracoastal Waterway (ICW) or within the boundaries of the Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge. Class II waters within the refuge arc conditionally approved for shellfish harvesting.

South of Wabasso Causeway, water quality conditions continue to decrease, and decline to their worst levels (in Segment 3) within the City limits ofVcro Beach. Salinity levels also decline to their lowest levels within the city limits. South of the city limits, water quality improves to "good" until reaching the confines of the City of Fort Pierce. Furthennore, the waters of the IRL within the unincorporated County, excluding artificial canals, have an FDEP-designated status of "Outstanding Florida Waters" (OFW). Figure 9.11 depicts the location ofthc areas of the IRL with a Class II, Class Ill and/or OFW designation.

The Indian River Farms Water Control District (IRFWCD) is the largest F.S. 298 Special Drainage District in the County, and currently manages over two-thirds (2/3) of the County's urban canal network. The IRFWCD effectively removes a considerable amount of non-point source pollutants prior to discharging runoff to the IRL. Nevertheless, the combined discharge from the North, South and Main Relief Canals, which averages nearly 100 million gallons per day (MGD), conveys the overall highest non-point source pollutant loadings to the IRL. A comparison of total and per acre non-point source pollutant loadings, as referenced in the Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program's (IRLNEP) Final Technical Report, is contained in Tables 9.4 and 9.5

Total non-point source pollutant loadings from the South Prong of the St. Sebastian River Basin to the IRL are nearly as high as the IRFWCD. In fact, the South Prong of the St. Sebastian River has the worst documented water quality in Indian River County (FDEP, 1994). Urbanized areas, particularly those developed prior to stormwater quality regulations, including the City ofVero Beach and areas of the unincorporated County located on Orchid Island and proximate the IRL, contribute the highest per acre loadings to the IRL. The IRLNEP Final Technical Report also contains area-based pollutant loadings based on future land use (20 I 0) conditions contained in the 1990 Indian River County Comprehensive Plan. These data are contained in the Stormwater Management Sub-element and the Conservation Element.

ln addition to non-point source loadings, discharge from on-site (septic) disposal systems (OSDS) also presents a serious threat the water quality of the IRL. Areas of the county classified as "high" and "medium priority" for reducing OSDS discharge are generally centered around the Cities of Sebastian, Fellsmere and Vera Beach and the southern portion ofthc unincorporated county. An inclusive list of the 154 subdivisions with undersized lots and utilizing OSDS is contained in Table 3.A.3 of the Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element.

Community Development Department Indian River County 16 ·-·

Rli:P'RIN'TED 8'1 "ff\\.oo~ON OF ~OOT. 'lf'.l,&.'ll(;lo'J,. ~lol'lc;E. f~ MN' F'I'II;PNI,.o,'I'ION F'l'lQ\IIJEI;I II'Yfl~IO.'.IJePT.C# ~ Mt~.

FIGURE 9.11

SURFACE WATER CLASSIFICATION

&

SHELLFISHING AREAS

C 0 1,1 N 'I'

COUNTY

• ' Class II Waters .

!I! Class Ill Waters

~Conditionally Approved ~Shellfish Harvesting Area

t.tiLES

1 .,. ... ... ..

-:1''

...


16.1


Point source loadings from wastewater treatment plants have been virtually eliminated since the Indian River Lagoon Act (Chapter 90-262, F.S.) was passed in 1990. The Act, however, docs not address industrial discharge to the IRL. At the present time, nine (9) industrial facilities in Indian River County are permitted to discharge wastewater to the IRL under an FDEP permit, or by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) pennit. Industrial discharge includes brine water by-product discharged to the IRL from reverse osmosis water treatment plants (ROWTPs). These facilities are listed below in Table 9.3.

TABLE9.3 PERMITTED POINT SOURCE DISCHARGES TO THE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON

Facility Name

Hobart Park ROWTP North Beach ROWTP South County ROWTP

Marsh Island Condominiums

Piper Aircraft Corporation

Rinker Material

Tarmac Vera Beach Power Plant

Vera Beach ROWTP Indian River County Landfill


Dcscdption of Discharge

0.75 MGD brine concentrate 0.06 MGD brine concentrate 0.88 MGD brine concentrate (discharged to South Relief Canal) 0.02 MGD brine reject water discharged to mangrove wetlands Groundwater for remediation is discharged from this superfund site to the IRL under an EPA- issued NPDES permit. Only "weak" wastewater (i.e. stom1water that comes in contact with aggregate piles) is discharged to the IRL. Only "weak" wastewater discharged to the IRL. Units 1,2,3 use a total ofl81 MGD for cooling. Unit 4 uses treated effluent from WWTP with blowdown effluent going back to WWTP. 0.5 MGD brine concentrate EPA-issued NPDES permit (All limits are "Report")

Indian River County 17


TABLE9.4 TOTAL ANNUAL POLLUTANT LOADINGS

TO SEGMENT 3 OF THE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON WATERSHED FOR EXISTING LAND USE CONDITIONS

(Kilograms per Year)

BASIN Total Total Total Biological Nitrogen Phosphorous Suspended Oxygen Zinc (TN) (TP) Solids Demand

(TSS) (BOO)

SRWCO 26,090 3,752 599,424 45,174 314

St. Sebastian River 93,793 11,067 1,779,246 253,417 1,935

TRFWCD 132,550 18,131 3,036,953 393,796 3,! 16

Banicr Island & 52,094 7,312 1,306,829 216,851 1,770 Mainland !RL

FWCD 23,952 2,862 443,784 49,674 349

Mary 10 Au Fanm; * 20,825 2.917 4S4,880 37,685 273

Sottile Farms "" !4,285 I ,638 286,277 25,794 182

TOTAL 363,$89 47,679 7,937,393 \,022,391 7,939 LOADING

Lead

301

2,809

4,188

2,485

496

280

247

10,806

* Located in southern Brevard County- loadings are discharged to the North Program of the St. Sebastian River and impact Segment 3 (Indian River County) of the Indian River Lagoon system.

Source: IRLNEP Loadings Assessment Table 3-4 (1994)



TABLE9.5 AREA-BASED POLLUTANT LOADING RATES BY BASIN TO SEGMENT 3 FOR EXISTING LAND USE CONDITIONS

(kilograms/hectare)

BASIN TN TP TSS .BOD Zinc Lead

SRWCD 6.215 0.894 142.799 10.762 0.075 0.072

St. Sebastian River 3.698 0.436 70J46 9.991 0.076 0.111

IRFWCD 6.370 0.871 145.943 18.924 0.150 0.201

Barrie,. Island & 7.226 1.014 181.268 30.079 0.245 0.345

Mainland 1RL

FWCD 4.012 0.479 74.325 8.319 0.058 0.083

Mary 11A11 3.679 0.515 85.664 6.658 0.048 0.049

Farms*

Sottile 4.415 0.056 88.471 7.971 0.056 0.076

Farms*

* Located in Brevard County· loadings are discharged to the North Program of the St. Sebastian

River and impact Segment 3 (Indian River County) of the Indian River Lagoon system.

Source: IRLNEP Loadings Assessment Table (1994)

Coastal Mainland

As previously stated, the mainland portion of the Coastal Zone oflndian River County includes

the upland areas west of the IRL, extending north and south to a boundary formed by the limits

of detectable drainage areas which outfall into the IRL This boundary can be identified by the

western jurisdictional confines of the FFWCD, an extended western boundary of the SRWCD

and the western boundary of the IRFWCD as identified in Figure 9.1.

Coastal Hammocks

A coastal hammock is a climax stand of trees containing a mixture of tropical and temperate

hardwood species with an understory of jungle-like vegetation. Generally, live oaks and cabbage

palms are the dominant species of a coastal hammock. These hammocks are usually found on

undeveloped areas of the barrier island where the following are present: stable soils containing

organic material, leaching of soil salts, and partial protection from salt spray. Coastal hammocks

are also present on some of the natural and spoil islands ofthe IRL, and on the mainland proximate to the IRL. These communities provide habitat for the following species: raccoons,

opossums, armadillos, rats, shrews, moles, snakes, toads, skinks, frogs, hawks, woodpeckers,


·-


warblers, vireos, and many others. A more detailed list of species is provided in the Conservation Element.

• Tropical Hammock

A tropical (maritime) hammock can consist of the following species: trees· Bahama lysiloma, Jamaica dogwood, mastic, poisontree, strangler fig, live oak and cabbage palm; shrubsmarlberry, snowbeny and wild coffee; herbaceous plants - golden serpent fern, resurrection fern and stiff· leaved wild pine; and grasses - low panicum and sour paspalum.

• Oak Hammock

A temperate oak hammock may contain the following species: trees • Laurel and live oak; shrubs - American beautyberry and sawpalmetto; herbaceous plants and vines -poison ivy, resurrection fern, Spanish moss and stiff-leafed wild pine; and grasses and grasslike plants • yellow Indiangrass, purple nutsedge, longleaf uniola and low panicum.

Flatwoods

The flatwood ecological community consists of two (2) subcommunities, South Florida (pine) flatwoods and cabbage palm flatwoods. Both communities are found in areas with a relatively flat topography and are usually intermixed with other communities, such as freshwater wetlands. The general areas of Florida flatwoods in Indian River County are shown in Figure 9.12. Typical animal species of the flatwoods community include: raccoons, rabbits, frogs, snakes, turtles, and numerous birds, such as hawks and blackbirds.

• South Florida Flatwoods

South Florida (pine) flatwoods are generally found with a mixture of scattered pines and an understory of palmetto vegetation and grasses. These flatwoods can consist ofthe following species: trees -live oak, slash pine and South Florida slash pine; shrubs -dwarf huckleberry, gallberry, sawpalmetto, tar-flower, shining sumac and waxmyrtle; and herbaceous plants and vines - chalky bluestem, creeping blucstem, lopsided Indiangrass, fall panicum, low panicum and pineland threeawn.

• Cabbage Palm Flatwoods

Cabbage (saba!) palm flatwoods, on the other hand, consist typically of scattered pines and cabbage palms with an understory of palmetto vegetation and grasses. Cabbage palm communities can include: trees. cabbage palm and slash pine; shrubs- saw palmetto, tarflower and waxmyrtle; herbaceous plants and vines - caesar weed, creeping beggarweed, deer tongue, gay feather and greenbriar, and grasses and grasslike plants - creeping bluestem, lopsided Indiangrass, saltmarsh windmill grass, stuffleafwindmillgrass and pineland threeawn.


FIGURE 9.12

GENERAL ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITY SETTING

OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

,I\

......... \~\ ........ ~~ ......

.......... ~ u

. \r~, .... U~··. South ~rl,.

Florida Coastal Strand

'* \~••••••M''"' vt ...... .... ...... 1'.·\l

!.";··~ _j :(

'-----.,-----:,::-, c:,.:::,:-:,_= .. --- • .. ~-

Sand Pines/Xeric Scrub

Al•o commonly fou!"ld Inland frQm coaat •• u;ollatlvely o.m.all communities

Coastal I Tropical Hammocks

Coattai/UQplcol , . .,,mmoekt con be found In tracta on the barrier lalai'ICI, c:ot.otel malnlt.nd, •nd on notul'al lalanda In the Indian River La"QOJ'I

~ u

South Florida Flatwoods

............... ,~.

~ "''"" .. ~ ....... Soure(t· Soil Conserva1tOfl Sefvice ''26 ECOIOOIC3.1 Communities of Florida"

20.1

~

1

Ju06' 16187

· ..........


• Shrub Bogs/Bay Swamps

Shrub bogs/bay swamps are also associated with Florida flatwood areas. These communities are usually sustained by seepage from surrounding, slightly elevated land. Evergreen trees and shrubs dominate these constantly wet areas, and often provide important fire buffers to adjoining swamps.

Sand Pine Shrub/Xeric Scrub

This ecological community is most often recognized by an even-aged, sand pine tree canopy, with a dense understory of oaks, sawpalmetto and other shrubs. Sand pines require intense heat, such as periodic fires, to open tl1eir cones and release seeds, explaining the occurrence of evenage trees. Sand Pine shrub/xeric scrub communities typically consist of Sand pine, with Bluejack, Myrtle, Chapman and Sand oaks, in addition to gopher apple, dwarf huckleberry, saw palmetto and prickly pear cactus. Some animal species found in this community include: deer, Florida mouse, Florida scrub jay, lizards, gopher tortoise and sparrows.

In Indian River County, this community is often associated with the South Prong area of the St. Sebastian River. Sand pine/xeric scrub communities are also located along the Atlantic Coastal Sand Ridge and the Ten Mile Ridge. These areas are depicted in Figure 9.12. Both ridges are recognized as being important natural groundwater aquifer recharge areas for the surficial "shallow" aquifer, and arc discussed in detail in the Aquifer Recharge Sub-element.

Freshwater Wetlands

Wetlands are areas where water is the primary factor controlling the micro-envirolllllent and the associated plant and animal life. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) defines a wetlands as transitional lands between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the earth's surface, or the land is covered by shallow water.

In order to be considered a wetlands, one or more of the following attributes must be present:

• At least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydrophytes; • the substrate is predominantly undrained hydropic soil; • the substrate is non-soil and is saturated with water or covered by water at some time

during each yearly growing season.

Hydrophytes are generally described as plants which can tolerate various degrees of flooding. Emergent species include: cattail, torpedo grass, bulrush, spike rush, sedges, primrose willows, umbrella grass, water pennywort, water hyssop and wax myrtle. Submerged vegetation includes: widgeon grass, stonewort and southern maid.

Community Development Department Indian River Coullty 21

Comprehensive Plan Coastal Mattagemcnt Element

The following palustrine (freshwater) wetland communities are present within the Coastal Zone

oflndian River County: wet prairies, marshes, ponds, sloughs, shrub bogs/bay swamps and

forested wetlands. Typical animal species of freshwater wetlands include: raccoons, rabbits,

frogs, snakes, turtles, alligators, herons, egrets, hawks, blackbirds, and many others. Wetlands

are discussed in detail in the Conservation Element.

Endangered, Threatened Or Species Of Special Concern

The coastal zone ofindian River County contains a rich variety of ecological communities.

Many of these communities function as habitats and support animal species, some of which are

designated as endangered, threatened or of special concern. These designations are for wildlife

species which have unique habitat requirements and have been declining in population over time.

The USFWS and the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (FGFWFC) maintain lists

of species classified as endangered threatened, or of special concern.

A species classified as endangered is rare and threatened with extinction. A threatened species is

less rare than an endangered species, but may show signs or warnings of extinction. A species of

special concern has the potential of being threatened with extinction if adverse conditions

affecting the species, such as loss of habitat, continue. Many species classified as endangered,

threatened, oro C special concern are found in habitats associated with the unique ecological

communities of the barrier island or the Indian River Lagoon. A complete list of Endangered

and Potentially Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna in Indian River County is contained in

Table 8.4 of the Conservation Element

LAND USE

The land use section of the Coastal Management Element references the Future Land Use

Element of the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan and contains a basic description of the

present land use in the designated Coastal Zone. This section is followed by a more specific land

usc section that addresses water-dependent and water-related uses, and marina facilities siting

L.and Use in the Coastal Zon.e

Since the coastal zone oflndian River County incorporates over one-half (1'2) of the County's

area, including all major population centers, a detailed analysis of existing land use can be

referenced in the Future Land Use Element. Generally, the land use of unincorporated Indian

River County varies according to location, but with an overall decrease in population and density

moving west from Orchid Island and the shore ofthe Indian River Lagoon (IRL). The map of

existing land use in Indian River County is depicted in Figure 9.13.

Community Development Department Indian River County 22 ··-·

" f..:J

f-'

~·

Preparation of tbia map w~B aided throuqh financial aaalatan~~ received from the State of Florida under the Local Government E~aluaticn and Appraisal Report assistance Program authorl~ed by Chapter 93-206~ Laws of Florida. and administered be the Tlorida Department of COmmunity Affairs.

SCALE o 1 2 3 4 Mll&a L 1. I I I

FIGURE 9.13

.. ............

INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

1995 EXISTING LAND USE

~ - AGRICULTURAL

12}e-·!ml-121-

RESIDEWI'IAL

CO}'U>'IERCIAL

INDUSTRIAL

INSTITUTIONAL/ R8CRRATIONAL

RANGELAND/VACANT

~ - WET.IJI.NDS

> :. r > ... ..

0

0

" .. ,.. z

I

Source:- I.R.C.- Plannin-g Dept, Date: 1995


Incorporated Municipalities

The five (5) incorporated municipalities in Indian River County (listed in order of population size) include: the City ofVero Beach, the City of Sebastian, the Town of Indian River Shores, the City of Fellsmere, and the Town of Orchid.

• City ofVcro Beach

At the northern limits of the city, east of U.S. Highway #1, low density residential development is predominant. Most of the land east oflndian River Boulevard along the IRL consists of undeveloped estuarine wetlands. West of U.S. Highway #I, the Vero Beach Municipal Airport occupies the northern limits of the city, west to 43rd Avenue. Medium density residential uses dominate 43rd Avenue from 16th Street to 14th Street. The southern limits ofthe city, along 14th Street, are dominated by single-family residential development east to Old Dixie Highway. Land uses in the city north and east along the U.S. Highway# I corridor to 6th Avenue are dominated by commercial uses. Medium density residential uses dominate east of 6th A venue to Indian River Boulevard. The City Power Plant and Wastewater Treatment plant are located on the IRL at the 17th Street Bridge. Commercial land use is present at the intersection of S.R. 60 and S.R. AlA, extending north-south along Ocean Drive. Mixed single and multi-family land uses dominate the remainder of the area.

A portion of the City ofVero Beach is located on Orchid Island. The island portion of the City has a common boundary with the County on its south side, and borders the Town ofindian River Shores to the north. Much different than the mainland portion of the city, this area contains ocean front condominiums as well as a tourist commercial area containing small shops, hotels and restaurants as well as single-family homes.

• City of Sebastian

The City of Sebastian, the second largest municipality in the county, is located in the northern area of the mainland, along the IRL. The most significant land use feature of Sebastian is the large number of vacant platted residential lots. It is for this reason that Sebastian is expected to become the most populous municipality in the county. This suburban land pattern dominates the southern and western limits of the city. The municipal airport is located in the northwest portion of the city.

Industrial and commercial uses are concentrated along the U.S. Highway# I corridor in the northern portion of the city. The eastern boundary of Sebastian is an irregular shape and consists primarily of residential uses except that commercial and industrial uses arc present where the city limits extend to the U.S. Highway# I Corridor. In 1997, the County purchased two (2) tracts of land totaling 388 acres near Sebastian Municipal Airport for conservation purposes. Commercial marinas dominate the east side of Indian River Drive along the IRL. Marina/boat facilities arc discussed in detail under the Marina/Boat Facilities section of this Element.


,~.


• Town ofindian River Shores

The Town ofindian River Shores is located north of the City ofVero Beach on Orchid Island, and has the distinction of being the wealthiest municipality in the County. The town consists primarily of exclusive planned single-family subdivisions and private condominium developments. Some scattered single-family residences and commercial development are also present. Additional information regarding the town is contained in the Town ofindian River Shores Comprehensive Plan.

• City of Fellsmere

The City of Fellsmere is the only incorporated municipality in the County located west of Interstate 95. Within the municipal limits, a mix ofland uses is present, including commercial, single and multi-family residential development, and mobile home parks. Surrounding land use in the unincorporated area is predominately low to very low density single-family residential and agricultural uses, and undeveloped land.

• Town of Orchid

The Town of Orchid is located on Orchid Island north of C.R. 510. At the present time land uses in the town consist of a golf course, exclusive single-family homes, and undeveloped (natural) land. The Town is to be developed as a low-density planned residential community, including recreation and commercial facilities.

Unincorporated Indian River County

• Orchid Island

The unincorporated portion of Orchid Island can be divided into three (3) sections. The northern one-third (I/3) of the island is the least developed. Most land use is limited to single-family residences. Included in this section is the Windsor Development, an exclusive, old town type of planned residential development. The Sebastian Inlet State Recreation Area is located at the northernmost point. Also, the Pelican Island and Archie Carr National Wildlife Refuges are located west and east ofS.R. AlA. These refuges are discussed in detail in the Conservation Element

The area near the intersection of S.R. AlA and C.R. 510 contains some limited commercial development, including Disney's Vero Beach Resort. As previously mentioned, the Town of Orchid is located north ofthe S.R. A!A/C.R. 510 intersection. Planned developments in the unincorporated County include: Sea Oaks, Coralstone, and the Island Club subdivision. The Town oflndian River Shores and the City ofVero Beach arc located on the central area of Orchid Island. These two municipalities were discussed in the preceding section entitled "Incorporated Municipalities."



On the southern portion of the barrier island, south of 17th Street, the existing land usc is

primarily single-family residential subdivisions, with some multi-family developments. South of

the Moorings subdivision to the St. Lucie County line, several parcels on both sides of S.R. AlA

remain undeveloped. Round Island Park, an ocean to river park, is located just north of the St.

Lucie County line.

• Indian River Lagoon

Most of the land use along the shorelines of the Indian River Lagoon consists of single-family

homes and multi-family developments. Several canalfront subdivisions arc located in the City of

Vera Beach. Canalfront subdivisions in the unincorporated County include: Vera Shores,

Riverpoint, and Hobart Landing. The only commercial marina in the unincorporated County is

located within Grand Harbor, a planned residential development. The spoil islands of the IRL

were discussed in a previous section. Marinas and boat facilities and other water-dependent and

water-related uses are discussed in detail in the Water-Related and Water-Related Uses sub

section of this clement,

• Coastal Mainland

The predominant land use ofthc western portion of the coastal zone is agricultural. This use

spans the area from just outside the Sebastian and V ero Beach border west to the drainage

boundaries of the coastal zone. One noted exception to this is the municipality of Fellsmere,

located in the northern portion of the county, west ofinterstate 95. Nearly all other land west of

Interstate 95 within the Coastal Zone is agriculturaL

North of Sebastian, land use is primarily urbanized. There are several subdivisions, condos and

apartments in this area, as well as a commercial corridor stretching along U.S. Highway #1. In

the area between Sebastian and V ero Beach, development is less established. While intermittent

commercial uses are located along the U.S. Highway #I corridor, in that area, much oflhe land is

still in agricultural use or undeveloped. However, development is increasing, and the an1ount of

undeveloped and agricultural land is expected to decrease in the near future.

The area south ofV ero Beach consists primarily of single-family residential homes. Several

large subdivisions and planned residential communities are located in this area, with several

recent developments established between U.S. Highway #1 and the Indian River Lagoon. The

U.S. Highway #!/Old Dixie Highway/Florida East Coast Railroad (FECRR) corridor in the

southern portion of the county is heavily commercialized with offices, shopping centers,

restaurants, car dealerships and other commercial uses, in addition to some light manufacturing

present along Old Dixie Highway. West of the commercial strip are subdivisions and single

family homes, with some commercial nodes at major intersections. The Future Land Use

Element contains a more detailed description of current land use within the coastal zone, as well

as a discussion of future trends and objectives, Conservation land uses are summarized in the

following section of this Element, and discussed in detail in the Conservation Element.



Parks and Open Space

Within Indian River County, 55 public parks and recreation areas are located in the Coastal Zone. Of these, twenty-two (22) are County-owned and maintained. Thirty (30) parks are owned by the Cities ofVero Beach, Sebastian and Fellsmere .. Two (2) recreational areas, the Sebastian Inlet State Recreational Area and the St. Sebastian River Buffer Preserve, are owned by the State of Florida. The Pelican Island/Archie Carr National Wildlife Refuge, is jointly owned and managed by the U.S. Government, the State of Florida, and Indian River County. All of the parks and recreation areas in the Coastal Zone are listed in Table 9.6 and shown in Figure 9.14.


'" '" .~

FIGURE 9.14

PARKS & RECREATION FACILITIES IN THE COASTAl ZONE

I r·l.------- ~

II . .-' . r 1 1

1! )'-_. ·-~ 'r~ J~ .;-_ \. ~.--"-.- , ... '. ( ~. ·, i ·' - i/ "2\ /

\ ./

i I

'"~'\

I _..-. ~:_; ' ·--.... I .__ - .. - ... ·r --· ------------------

' I

-& cuu: •: :rutllllll Jth•f C-11!un'tJ l'l•1n1111g D•p1.

BDLJie El'"lll(]lr"11tii'""'IO CDo'rxv.~•or•

II£PAINT'E0 llo¥ P'ER"'ISSKJH fY SOOT FINAHCIA.I. A!I.SlST .u.ICE:

HJIIIIIoAAJ> Pl'!fP'J.IIJITIO'>I PIIIOVIOfD 8-Y ~l(iii:IJA DI!:FT {)f" COUMU!.!ITY NfA!II:!

Aa- I 2 , 4 $

T SCA.LE

Jllt..ES

t+ORfU

Map N"o. Park Ownauhlp

1- 23 c ourtty Perk a

2-4-38 ver-o aaach' Pa.rka

39-48 Sebe a Ua n .Parks

49-53 Fellsmere Parka

54 Sebi!Latlan lnl'&t Sta1a Rec.reatfO;n Area

55 Pelican U-land N.aUonal Wlfdllfe Refuge

"'2 -not located W1 Coastal Zone

----·l'--\->--{,'(,\\--

Dale-: Sepl1997

INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA 28.1


TABLE 9.6 RECREA TJONAL PARKS IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

Counl y Parks I. Ambersand Beach Park 2. Dale Winbrow Park 3. Donald McDonald Park 4. Gifford Park 5. Kiwanis- Hobart Park 6. Roseland Community Center 7. Round Island Park 8. U.S.#! Roadside Park 9. Wabasso Beach Park 10. Wabasso Island River Park II. West Wabasso Park 12. Tracking Station Beach Park 13. C.R. 510 Wayside Park 14. Hoisc • Schumann Park 15. Treasure Shores Park 16. Joe S. Earman Park 17. Golden Sands Park 18. Helen Hanson Park 19. Boat Island Park 20. South County Regional Park 21. Old Dixie Highway/1st Street Park 22. Oslo Riverfront Park

Yer.o Beach City Parks 23. Groveland Park 24. Jacoby Park 25. Troy Moody Park 26. Memorial/Riverside Park 27. Pocahontas Park 28. Michael Field 29. Bob Summers Field 30. MacWilliams Park 31. Charles Parks 32. Humiston Beach Park 33. Jaycee Beach Park 34. South Beach Park 35. Conn Strip Park 36. Boat Basin Park 37. Ballfield Complex

Sebastian City Parks 38. Main Street Riverfront Park 39. Sebastian Yacht Club 40. Schumann Drive Park 41. Barber Street Sports Complex 42. Riverview Park 43. Ashford T. Jordan Park 44. Easy Street Park 45. Lake Hardee Park 46. Fellsmere Road Riverfront Park 47. Community Center

48. Central Park 49. Empty Lot 50. Practice Field 51. City Hall

Senior Softball Field

Other Parks 53. Sebastian Inlet S.R.A. 54. Pelican Island! Archie Carr National Wildlife Refuge 55. Sebastian River Buffer Preserve

Source: Indian River County Parks and Recreation Department, City ofVero Beach .. City of Sebastian



• Mainland Parks

A summary of the mainland parks and recreational facilities within Indian River County is contained in the Recreation and Open Space Element. A detailed discussion and analysis of land tracts acquired under the County's Enviromnental Lands Program is presented in the Conservation Element.

• Oceanfront Parks and Facilities

The most utilized of the ten ( 1 0) oceanfront parks in the County is the Sebastian Inlet State Recreational Area (S.R.A.) Owned by the State and operated by the FDEP, the park is divided between Brevard County to the north of Sebastian Inlet and Indian River County to the south. Approximately 457 acres of the park lie within Indian River County; this are of the park has more than 8,000 linear feet of shoreline. Sebastian Inlet S.R.A. is also considered part of the Archie Carr National Wildlife Refuge.

The five (5) parks existing in the north county, Sebastian Inlet S.R.A., Ambersand Beach Park, Treasure Shores Park, Golden Sands Park, and the Wabasso Beach Park, have a total of 416 parking spaces. Tracking Station Park, located within the Town oflndian River Shores, has 88 parking spaces. Combined, Seagrape Trail and Turtle Trail have 55 parking spaces. This brings the estimated total number of public park parking spaces in the northern portion of the unincorporated barrier island to 4 71. Round Island Park is located near the south County line.

The City ofVero Beach owns and maintains four (4) public oceanfront parks. These include: Jaycee Park, Coru1 Beach, Humiston Beach Park, and South Beach Park. All of the oceanfront parks located in Indian River County are listed on Table 9.7 and shown in Figure 9.15. There are no public access facilities within the Town of Orchid.

The number of parking spaces within the City ofVero Beach's oceanfront parks and public access right-of-ways totals 922. Collectively, the estimated total number of available beach front spaces within Indian River County is 1,393. Public access is discussed in detail in the Recreation and Open Space Element.

Community Deveh•pment Department Indian River Connty 28

1. SebUti~~ Inlet S!a!Q R~~rution Area

'WI--- 2. Amhm~nd !hach

SOLlie ...... -.... ~

3. TfUMe Shares Par~

4. Golden Sand~ Park

5. Wab~5~0 Buell Par~ 6. Seaarape Trait 7. Tvrtlo Tr~il

INDIJI.N RIVER SHORES

ATLANTIC

8. Bu~htombet La~e 9. Yreckinq Station Par~

lQ, S~hi~ M~t Ro~d 11. Jiyeee Park 12. Conn B~"h 13. Sttton Pial~

14. Hwnisran B~adl P~rk 15. faster Uly Lane 1 G. fl;rr~~~vin8 lane 17. G~vr~~rhcr La~u 18. H1~tam Lane 19, Riamar tlr 20. Ladybug LDn~ 21. Soulh Beach Park zz. Si1ndpil)9r lanli 23. Jailmina Lane 24. Caqulna Lane 2~- Piut• CQw~ L;n~ 26. Turlle Cun L1n~

27. St~ny A~~~u 28. R~und l~land P~rk

~ tT P9M.DoN Cl I'D(IT. fWriAHeW. .uot!STM<I 'OfiMN'ptiEtMATJOI\I~ ~~OI!Jil'l'.r;;t~ .,._

0 C I! A N

FIGURE 9.15

INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PUBLIC BEACH ACCESS

LOCATION MAP

0 3 4

I

Soure&: Cubl! EnQineering I.R.C. Public Works OePI. City Of V"Q Bn~h

DaiD! April 1967 Up~ilv~: M~v iSS7


28.1

N

"'

Comprehensive Plan

Outdoor Parking Res.troorns. Showers

Stale Parks

Sebastian Inlet State Recreation Area 150 4 I

County Parks

Amb<:rsand Beach 15 0 0

Wabasso Beach 70 I 4

Tracking Stati<ln Bea<:b 88 2 2

Round lstand 50 0 0

Gdden S.ands lfl3 I 4

Treasur(: Shores iJ 0 0

Municipal Parks

Ja)·cee Park 120 I 4

OmnBeach n fi 0 ·- - --


TABLE 9.7 OCEANFRONT PARK & FACILITIES

IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

Boardwalk Picnic Lifeguard Linea[ Feet Dune Pofabte Tables Tov.~ {+I-) Crosso ... ·er Water

40 0 0 I Yes.

0 II 0 0 No

lO I 400' 3 Yes

2 I 0 3 Yes

10 0 0 I No

1 I () 2 Yes

(l () () 0 No

16 I 419' 3 Yes

0 0 1486' 5 No --- --- ----

Coastal Management Element

Shore1ine Elecrric Park Lineal feet Ser'\'ke Acreage {+/-) Activities

Swimming, Surfing, Fishing. Inland water,

Yes 457 IO,SOIY Camping

Swimming, Surfing,

No .3 100' Fishing

Swimming. Surfing. Yes I 330' Fishing

Swimmtng, Surfing. No 5.5 &90' Fishing

Sv,imming, Surfing,

No 94 771' Fishing

Swimming. Surfing. Yes 14 1040' Fishing, Playground

No 71 4483' No f~Hil.ies, undevdoped

Swimming, Surftng, Yes 9.3 501Y Fishing. Playground

S\\;mming. Surfing, No 1.1 1,501Y Fishing. Playground

Indian Rlver County

w 0

f

Comprehensive Plan

Outdoor Picnic Parking Restrooms Showers Tab[es

Humiston Beacll 118 I 8 1

South Bea-eh 264 I 5 6

Source: Indian River County Community De,·elnpm-ent Department


Lifeguard Towers

I

2

Coasml Management Element

Boardwalk Shordine Uneal Feet Dune Patable Electric I'M!: Linea1 Feet

(+/-) Crossover \Vater SerYi« Acreage (+f-) Aclivilies

Sw[mming. Surfing. 440' 4 Yes Yes 4.4 390' Hshing, Playground

Swimmin~ Surfing. 0 3 Yes Yes 5.4 861' Fishing. Playground

--

Indian River Conoly


• Public Access

In addition to the aforementioned oceanfront parks and lands acquired under the ELP, 15 public

access points are located throughout the County. As previously mentioned, Seagrape Trail and

Turtle Trail arc county-owned public access sites located on the northem portion of the barrier

island. Thirteen (13) ocea:nfont public access areas are located within the City ofVero Beach and

are associated with street ends, and! or public right-of-ways. Of these, four (4) have a total of342

parking spaces. The remaining oceanfront access points do not have parking spaces, and are

designed to serve the population within walking distance. Combined, the City's beach accesses

account for 520 feet of shoreline under public ownership.

Beach access points in the southern portion of the unincorporated County are privately-owned by

neighborhood and property owners associations. These accesses are not accessible to the general

public; therefore, they are not considered "public access".

I. Sca!,'Tapc Trail 2. Turtle Trail

CITY OF YF.RO BEACII

Walkways

3. Bahia Mar Road 4. Sandpiper Lane 5. Jasmine Lane 6. Coquina Lane 7. Pirate Cove Lane 8. Turtle Cove Lane 9. Lady Bug Lane

\~ i ght-of. Ways

I 0. Easter Lily Lane 1 L Hibiscus Lane 12. Sexton Plaza 13. flamevine Lane 14. Gayfcather Lane 15. Riomar Drive

TABLE 9.8 PUBLIC OCEANFRONT ACCESS POINTS

Size (feet)

80 80

15 10 10 10 10 10 10

20 50 150 50 25 50

Parking Spaces

23 32

243 74 20 5

SOURCE: City ofVero Beach Comprehensive Plan: Indian River County Public Works Department



The County, through its Environmental Lands Program, and in partnership with the State Conservation and Recreational Lands (CARL) Program, acquired the "Cairns Tract" in September 1996. The Cairns Tract, titled to the State, is located south ofC.R. 510 and just north of the Town of Indian River Shores. This property has approximately 1,550 linear feet of oceanfront. Presently, the county is developing a management plan for the Cairns Tract. Passive recreation will be allowed once minor improvements, including limited parking and nature trails, have been completed.

The Archie Carr National Wildlife Refuge (ACNWR) was established in 1989 as joint venture between the USFWS, the State of Florida, and local government agencies. Segment 4 of the refuge extends from Golden Sands Park north to the Sebastian Inlet S.R.A., and contains nearly 2.9 miles of the most prolific beaches for turtle nesting in the world. Approximately 1.2 miles, or 41 percent, are currently under public ownership. Passive recreation is allowed within the refuge.

Overall, approximately 22,794 linear feet, or 19.2 percent of the County's oceanfront property, is under public ownership. A comprehensive listing of properties under public ownership is contained in Table 9.9.

TABLE 9.9 OCEANFRONT PARKS IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

OCEANFRONT PARKS PUBLICLY-OWNED SHORELINE (linear feet)

Sebastian Inlet S.R.A Indian River County City ofVero Beach Public Accesses SUB-TOTAL

UNIMPROVED

Archie Carr N.W.R. Cairns tract SUB-TOTAL

TOTAL

• Land in addition to County Parks and the Sebastian Jnlet S.R.A

8,000 (portion in IRC) 7,620 3,251 ...52.Q 19,391

1,853* .l,.llQ 3,403

22,874 feet (4.33 miles)

The Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge (PINWR) includes 4,359 acres of !he IRL and mangrove islands between C.R. 510 and the Sebastian Inlet and east of the ICW; it is managed by the USFWS to protect nesting colonies of brown pelicans and other water birds.



The Oslo Riverfront Conservation Area is located at the east terminus of Oslo Road, east of U.S.

Highway #1. This property is jointly owned and managed by the SJRWMD and Indian River

County. Recently, parking spaces and interpretive nature trails were completed. However, the

original plans to improve this boat access have since been abandoned due to resource constraints,

including dense seagrass beds and shallow water. As previously mentioned, recreational access is

allowed on 21 of the spoil islands in the IRL.

• Riverfront Parks

Donald McDonald Park and Dale Wimbrow Park are located adjacent to each other on the east side

of the St. Sebastian River. These parks have a combined size of74 acres.

Round Island Park is a ±95 acre county-owned park located near the South County line on both the

west and east sides of State Road AlA. Recent improvements made to the riverside portion of the

park include: replacement of a pre-existing boa! ramp with a two-lane ramp, construction of fishing

piers, installation of manatee awareness graphics, and removal of military ordnance from the beach.

A walkway to Round Island and an observation tower were completed in 1997.

Wabasso Island River Park consists of 51 acres of!and located on the IRL, south of the C.R. 510

causeway. This park, including the surrounding waters, is one of the most popular sites for on-water

recreational activities. Scheduled improvements include: stabilization of the parking area and

restroom facilities.

Boat Island Park is located northeast of Grand Harbor marina on South Sister Island (spoil island#

IR-25). The park contains two (2) docks, a picnic pavilion, and a nature trail. This park is owned

by the State and managed by the County Parks Division.

Joe S. Earman Park is a four ( 4) acre park located on the northern one-third (1/3) of spoil island# IR-

28. This park contains picnic facilities and a temporary docking facility.

Two (2) parks with access to inland waters arc located within the City limits of Vero Beach.

Riverside-Memorial Island Park is located on the barrier island east of S.R. AlA. The city ofVero

Beach manages the 52 acre park extensively for recreational use. MacWilliams-Boat Basin Park is

located on Orchid Island, north of the Merrill-Barber Bridge.

Within the City of Sebastian, Riverview Park and Main Street Riverfront Park have access to the

IRL. Each park has a boat ramp with two (2) lanes. As previously mentioned, the TRL is also

accessible from the Sebastian Inlet S.R.A.

The Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) includes 4,359 acres of the IRL and mangrove

islands between C.R. 510 and the Sebastian Inlet, east of the ICW. The PINWR is managed by the

USFWS for the purpose of protecting nesting colonies of brown pelicans and other wading birds.



The island is off-limits to visitors, and boats are required to maintain a minimum distance of 75 feet due to the extensive year-round use by wading birds and pelicans.

Within Indian River County, there are a total of 18 boat ramps scattered throughout municipal and County parks. However, the distribution of boat ramps is biased towards the northern and central portions of the County. An inventory of boat ramps located throughout the County is contained in Table 9.1 0. A location map of public boats in Indian River County is depicted in Figure 9.16.

TABLE 9.10 BOAT RAMPS IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

FACILITY NAME RAMPS LANES LOCATION

I. Sebastian Inlet 2 3 unincorporated (barrier island) 2. Dale Wimbrow I I unincorporated (St. Sebastian River) 3. Donald MacDonald I I unincorporated (St. Sebastian River) 4. Inlet Marina* 1 1 City or Sebastian (mainland) 5. Mays Marina* I 1 City of Sebastian (mainland) 6. Sebastian River Marina* I 1 City of Sebastian (St. Sebastian River) 7. Sebastian City Dock I 2 City of Sebastian (mainland) 8. Main Street Boat Ramp 1 2 City of Sebastian (mainland) NORTH SECTION TOTAL 9 12 9. Wabasso Island Park 1 3 nnineorporatcd (Wabasso Causeway) 10. Mac Williams-Boat Basin Park 4 4 City ofVero Beach (barrier island) 11. Riverside Park I 3 City oCVero Beach (barrier island) CENTRAL SECTION TOTAL 6 10 12. Oslo Riverfront I I unincorporated (Oslo Road) 13. Round Island Park 2 2 unincorporated (barrier island) SOUTH SECTION TOTAL 3 3 TOTAL 18 25

• Private facility -- charges user fee

Sources: ~c.tiyj;t{ St.u.dy....for lndjan Rjyer and St I pcjc Conntj!-s· A Supplement to the 1990

l.ull:.tiul.e:LSJJJ-d:Y.; Indian River County Public Works Department; City ofYero Beach/Indian River County Parks Department

The following parks and recreation areas offer also offer the aesthetic amenities of the IRL without watercraft access: Bethel Creek House (Jaycee Park), A.W. Young Park, Ambersand Beach Park, US-! Roadside Park.

Community Development Department lndian River County 34

34.1

FIGURE 9.16

PUBLIC BOAT RAMPS

IN.. INDIAN RIVER

COUNTY

. ····'

·~·


• Open Space

In addition to improved park facilities, Indian River County contains three (3) different categories of open space. These arc corridor open space, utilitarian open space and pastoral open space. Some open space may be comprised of a combination of these and be difficult to categorize.

Corridor open space consists mainly of rights-of-way and easements associated with traffic or utility facilities. It is usually linear in nature and difficult to quantify. Open lands used for productive purposes are generally classified as utilitarian open space. Included in this category are agricultural lands, pasture lands, forestry lands, and mining areas. Most utilitarian open space is under private ownership.

Pastoral open space gener-<~.lly consists of areas set aside for conservation, natural resource protection or passive use purposes. Resource-based parks fall under this category, as do conservation areas and environmentally-importan!lenvironmentally-sensitive areas.

As indicated in Table 9.2, 28 of the 49 spoil islands of the IRL have a designated use of conservation. Privately-owned lands such as submerged bottom lands, mosquito impoundments, andJor native upland and wetland areas subject to conservation easements, are also considered pastoral open space. The Future Land Usc Element, the Recreation and Open Space Element, and the Conservation Element provide greater detail regarding open space.

ECONOMY

Water-Dep.en.deutA.w:l Water-Related lJses

The terms "water·dependent" and "water-related" are used to describe different types of activities associated with waterbodies. Water-dependent uses are activities which can be carried out only on, in, or adjacent to aquatic areas because the use requires access to a waterbody. Such uses may include, but are not limited to, aquaculture, commercial1narinas, on-water recreation, and electrical generation. Water-related uses include those activities which are not directly dependent upon access to a waterbody, but which provide goods and services that are directly associated with water dependent uses. Water-related uses may include boat sales and rentals, scuba, surfing and fishing retailers, accessories to ocean and river parks (e.g. parking facilities), and manufacturers or services such as seafood processing plants which have identifiable links to water access and! or use. Waterdependent and water-related uses in and adjacent to the IRL are regulated by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), and to a lesser extent by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Additional information regarding the water-related uses and the economic impact of tourism to Indian River County is discussed in the Economic Development Element.

There are several ocean front and river front parks located in the County. These are described in detail in the Recreation and Open Space Element, and referenced within the previous section of this element. In addition to these ocean front and river front parks, the IRL is traversed by the


Comprehensive Piau Coastal Management Element

Intracoastal Waterway (ICW). The JCW is maintained by the Florida lnland Navigation District (FIND) and patrolled by the Florida Marine Patrol (FMP).

Commercial Fishing

In 1995, over I 0,500 commercial fishing trips landed 2,508,976 pounds of fish and 143,580 pounds

of shellfish in Indian River County (University ofF!orida). However, commercial fish landings have

declined significantly since the State imposed a fishing net ban in 1995. As a result of the net ban, about 184 part-time and full-time fishermen in Indian River County became unemployed. Also,

several fish processing operations and support services were negatively affected. Overall, the estimated impact to the local economy is an a:tmualloss of $4.6 million.

In response to the net ban, Indian River County participated with the state and other groups to address the net ban's impact on commercial fishem1en. The result was a report entitled Revitalization Guide for the Enhancement of Economic Conditions for Counties Affected by ilie Net

Ban Amendment. As a result of this effort, the County is promoting aquacul!ure as a means of alternative employment for those displaced by the net ban. A detailed discussion is contained in the

referenced report.

Aquaculture

In the County, recreational and co111111ercial harvesting of shellfish is regulated by the FDEP. Harvesting of Shellfish is permitted in Class II designated waters. Class II waters are approved or conditionally approved by the FDEP, with the latter areas temporarily closed following major

rainfall events. Shellfish harvesting is strictly prohibited in waters located outside the designated areas.

There are no areas within Indian River County that are "approved" for shellfishing harvesting.

However, two (2) sections of the County are conditionally approved for shellfish harvesting. The

two areas conditionally approved for shellfish harvesting are ilie waters north of the Wabasso Bridge (C.R. 510) to the Sebastian Inlet, east of the ICW, and a small area proximate to Round Island extending to the Indian River-St. Lucie County line.

Recreational Boating

The largest portion of on-water traffic in Indian River County is generated by boat ramps, followed by single-family docks and then co111111ercial marinas. Weekend days account for over 70 percent

of boating activity, with the highest on-water traffic occurring around holidays. High boating use is recorded during the months of April through October with ilie peak season for boating activity

occurring between May and July. In contrast, the lowest boating use was recorded during ilie months from November to January. According to the FDEP, nearly 8,900 watercraft vessels are registered in Indian River County. Recently, personal watercraft (PWC) and Class A vessels have become increasingly popular and now comprise the fastest growing segment of watercraft In Indian

Community Development Department Indian River County 36 ,,....,....·


River County, powerboats are considerably more popular than sailboats. There are two main reasons for this. First, there are few areas in the IRL outside the ICW that have adequate water depths for sailboats. Second, it is difficult to negotiate the Sebastian Inlet with a sailboat. Thus, most sailboats are moored in marinas located near the Ft. Pierce Inlet. Most sailboat operators utilize the ICW to gain access to the Atlantic Ocean. In contrast, PWC operators prefer the areas near Wabasso Causeway Park. A more detailed discussion of watercraft vessels, on-water traffic observations, and related issues is contained in the Indian River County Comprehensive Manatee Protection and Boat Facilities Siting Plan.

Marina Facilities

At the present time, there are 24 marinas in Indian River County. Of these, ten connnercial and recreational marinas are located within the City of Sebastian, and seven connnercial and recreational marinas are located within the City of Vera Beach. Eight residential marinas are located within the unincorporated county. The unincorporated areas of Indian River County contain no port or commercial marina facilities, with the exception of Grand Harbor Marina. There are, however, several public/private multi-slip dock facilities, such as the Sea Oaks marina on south Jungle Trail and the Moorings in the South County. An inventory of boat slips within commercial and private marinas/multi-slip facilities in Indian River County is sunnnarized in Table 9.11. Between 60 and 75 percent of the 1,234 wet slips in the County arc in use at any time. However, marina capacity varies considerably by season. In addition to wet slips, there arc approximately 353 dry slips in the County. Notwithstanding, the number of dry slips is considerably more variable, since storage capacity depends upon the size of the boats being stored at the facility. For example, a site could hold 100 small boats but only 75 large boats. Criteria for marina facilities siting is contained in the Analysis section of this Element. A more detailed discussion of existing marina and boat facility capacity is contained in the Indiru1 River County Mru1atee Protection and Boating Safety Comprehensive Management Plan. A location map of marinas in Indian River County is depicted in Figure 9.17.


r L.. .. l

37.1

FIGURE 9.17

MARINAS JN

INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

KEX e -COMMERCIAL • ·RECREATIONAL A-RESIDENTIAL

·........,.....·


Table 9.11 PUBLIC, PRJV ATE AND COMMERCIAL MARIN AS

NAME 1. Sebastian Off Shore Marina 2. Sembler Marina 3. Floodtide (May's) Marina 4. Oyster Pointe Resort 5. Captain Hiram's 6. Sand Pointe Marina* 7. Indian River Marina 8. River Run Condomiums 9. Sportsman's Marina 10. Channel (Marker) 68 Marina 11. Pelican Pointe Condominiums 12. Wauregan Boat Club* 13. Good Guys Marina NORTH SECTION TOTAL 14. Marsh Island 15. Complete Yacht Center 16. Riomar Bay Yacht Club 17. Vero Beach Yacht Club 18. Captain Jack's Marina 19. Vero Marine Center 20. Grand Harbor Marina 21. Sea Oaks Yacht Club 22. Vero Beach Municipal Marina 23. Marbrisa Development 24. Copeland's Landing 25. Bridgeside Marina CENTRAL SECTION TOTAL 26. Moorings Club Marina SOUTH SECTION TOTAL

COUNTY TOTALS

• Located on the St. Sebastian River •• Moorings in IRL included in total

WET SLIPS DRY SLIPS 16 18 113 N/A 60 48 24 N/A 99 110 57 N/A 22 64 44 N/A 12 N/A 68 N/A 14 (temporary) 25 32 N/A 32 N/A 593 ** 265 ** 36 N/A 20 75 41 N/A 22 N/A 33 13 49 N/A 144 N/A 48 N/A 75 (+42 moorings) NIA 28 NIA 16 NIA 30 N/A 584 ** 88 57 N/A 57 N/A

1,234 ** 353

Source: Indian River County Conununity Development Department; City of Sebastian Conununity Development Department



• Temporary Docking Facilities

Temporary boat docks available for public access to recreational and educational facilities are located at: the Environmental Learning Center (ELC), Joe S. Eanuan Park, and Boat Island Park. During ELC visitor hours, boaters may dock their vessels at the ELC dock to access the center's educational displays and nature trails. Joe S. Barman Park is located on the north tip of the "Lost Tree Islands" group just north or the Merrill Barber Bridge. This park has a boat dock located on the east side of a spoil island, near the popular water skiing area known as "Gifford Cut". Two (2) docks are located at Boat Island Park on South Sister Island (Spoil Island# IR-25).

INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE COASTAL ZO.NE

Infrastructure consists of transportation networks, water and wastewater treatment plants, stormwater facilities, shorehne stabilization projects, and other man-made activities or facilities which serve the public need.

Transportation

The principal north-south arterial roadways within Indian River County include: Indian River Boulevard (C.R. 603), U.S. Highway #I, Interstate 95, C.R. 607 (27th Avenue), C.R. 611 (43rd Avenue), 58th Avenue and 66th Avenue. The principal east-west routes in the County include: S.R. 60, C.R. 606, (Oslo Road/9th Street SW), C.R.510 (Wabasso Road), C.R. 512 (Fellsmere Road)

Included in the Transportation Element is a detailed description and analysis of roadways within the entire county, including the coastal zone. Since the coastal zone oflndian River County comprises over 80 percent of the entire county's road network, the Transportation Element can be referenced accordingly, including roadway locations, designations and "levels of service". The principal arterials in the County are depicted in Figure 9.18.

The barrier island contains only one north-south principal arterial roadway, S.R. AlA. The only east-west route linking the barrier island to the mainland in the northern section of the County is a two (2) lane causeway, C.R. 510 (Wabasso Road).

In the southern part ofthe county, two four (4) lane fixed-span bridges, the 17th Street bridge (S.R. 656) and the Merrill-Barber bridge (S.R. 60), com1ect Orchid Island to the mainland. Both bridges are located within the City limits of Vera Beach.

Wastewater Treatment Facilities

The service area of the regional wastewater treatment system, as depicted in Figure 9.19, includes a substantial portion of the County's urbanized area. However, 162 subdivisions with undersized lots scattered throughout the Coastal Zone are still dependent upon on-site disposal (septic) system treatment.

Community Development Department Indian River County 39 '.,... ......

w w ,_,.

FIGURE 9.18

----- --- -·----~- ----- - ~-. --- (

f I

INDIAN RIVER COUNTY EXISTING TRAFFIC CIRCULATION MAP

SERIES

I, I I

~ • L._ I I

I (LA.F.}

l"-nzu '''ll'' .J•'aM:I&a l a

Seale~ 0 1 .t S 111J11e

gate: Dec. 1518'9 tlpdat~d; July 19-4.17

.... ·'tl I I I i

..... ~~f=!l I I t=t-w ••• t T ,,.L_______l.l

'" ... tl ...

.:r .......... ..

JH•t S-T t•

.U!h IT •• .. ----:-- - - --- : c

; ·: i

ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICAnDII

ml_ Uunlelpat W Boundaries

f N

i

- ll'rba11 P'r00ciP'&1 Arterialj!J.p Aj - UrN:n ltinOI" Arter!al!li·M.ll - - Urbart Colletfar(U-CQLl]

lOUii: lllllra; P'rinti~ Artfflafl:lt-PAP .,_......, ftud1 Minor i.rter!at;R·Ml' - !lund MaJOf talletloi1R·M.U~ Sa11ru: F1arida Oept. .t Ttan:spoorCJiiol•

IU..F J limited lccns F.atl!ifl'

Source: I.R.C. Utilities Dept.

Be Brown and Caldwell ConslJitonts

E"!:::: 39.2

6500 0 6500 13000

-" GRAF'HIC SCALE IN F"EET

LEGEND ~ UNINCO~POh 11:0 COUNTY •

$£~V£C SlY TH( CITY OF vtRO EIIEACM

INCORPORATED A~E:A -JM~~~~; NOT INCLUDED IN

SERVICE AREA

'?777777': URBAN SERVICE ' 9CUNDAR'r'

FIGURE 9.19

WASTEWATER SERVICE AREAS FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY


The City ofVero Beach provides wastewater treatment to the residents of the unincorporated section of south Orchid Island. Also, the City's WWTP serves the Town oflndian River Shores. The North Beach (Sea Oaks) WWTP is the only wastewater treatment plant located on Orchid Island. This plant is scheduled to be eliminated, at which time customers will be served by the North County WWTP.

TABLE 9.12 Public and Private Wastewater Treatment Facilities

in the Coastal Zone

1, 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

NAME

Sun Ag Fellsmere Elementary School Fellsmere Packing Company Central Regional (Gifford) West Regional North County (Hobart Park) North Beach (Sea Oaks) Snug Harbor South County Regional City ofVero Beach Vista Royale Vista Gardens

Source: IRC Utilities Department

PUBLIC/PRIVATE

Private Public Private Public Public Public Public Private Public Public Public Public

The following wastewater treatment facilities are located in the Hurricane Vulnerability Zone (HVZ) and are in danger of flooding from a Category III hurricane: Vista Gardens, Vista Royale, City of Vero Beach WWTP, and North Beach/Sea Oaks. Additional inforlllation regarding wastewater treatment in the Coastal Zone is contained in the Sanitary Sewer Sub-element.

Water Treatment Facilities

• Regional Treatment Facilities

Three (3) public regional water treatment facilities serve potable water to residents in the Urban Service Area (USA). Two (2) facilities, the North Beach Reverse Osmosis Water Treatment Plant (ROWTP) and the South County ROWTP, are owned and operated by Indian River County. The City ofVero Beach owns and operates the other water treatment facility in the USA.

Community Development Department lndian River County 40

Comerchcnsivc Plan Coastal Management Element

The North Beach ROWTP serves most of the residents of the northernmost section of unincorporated Orchid Island. The North Beach ROWTP is located in the Hurricane Vulnerability Zone (HVZ). However, this plant is scheduled to be decommissioned in the near future.

The City ofVero Beach's water treatment plant serves the residents ofthe City ofVero Beach. The southern portion of the unincorporated barrier island also receives potable water from the City's water treatment plant.

Generally, the service areas of the South County ROWTP include: the City of Sebastian, the southeastern portion of the County east of 43rd Avenue, the S.R. 60 corridor, and Oslo Road to I-95. Potable water service areas are depicted in Figure 9.20. As listed in Table 9.3, all four (4) of the public ROWTPs in Indian River County discharge concentrated brine, a by-product of reverse osmosis water treatment, to the IRL. Also, the Marsh Island Condominiums ROWTP discharges brine to the IRL. The Potable Water Sub-Element contains additional data and analysis pertaining to current and future potable water level of service standards. Also, this sub-element discusses the proposed North County ROWTP.

• Private Wells

According to the Environmental Health Department, an estimated 20,000 private wells exist in the unincorporated areas ofindian River County. Nearly all of these wells utilize the surficial"shallow" aquifer as their source of water. The maximum chloride concentration allowed by the FDEP is 250 milligrams per liter (mg/1). The water quality of the surficial aquifer varies with location. Generally, chloride concentrations east of U.S. Highway #I on the coastal mainland average less than 250 milligrams per liter (mg/1). However, chloride concentrations exceed the 250 mg/1 maximum on the Orchid Island. The Natural Ground Water Aquifer Recharge Sub-element provides a more detailed discussion of water use, private wells and salt water intrusion.

Stormwater Management,

Included in the Storrnwater Management Sub-Element is a description of existing conditions and an analysis of storrnwaler management facilities, basin and sub-basin boundaries, flood hazard areas, and water quality. Following is a summary of the basins located within the coastal zone (IRL watershed).

• Basins and Sub-basins in the Coastal Zone

The six (6) major basins that discharge storrnwater runoff to the Indian River Lagoon include: the Barrier Island ("B") Basin, the Mainland IRL ("R") Basin, the St. Sebastian River Basin, and three (3) independent F.S. Special Drainage Districts. The three (3) water control districts located within the IRL watershed include: the Sebastian River Water Control District (SRWCD), the Indian River Fa:nns Water Control District (IRFWCD), and the Fellsmere Water Control District (FWCD). These basins are depicted in Figure 9.21.


Source: IRC. Utilities Dept.

Be Brown and l:aldwell Consultants

~

7

41.1

6500 0 6500 DOOO

GRAPHIC SCALE: IN FEET

LEGEND ~ UNINCORPORATED COUNiY -~ $£~VEO BY THE CJiY OF

V!:RO BEACH

INCORPOFMT£:0 APU:;A -®Wm[@&l NOT INCI.U0£0 IN

SEAVlC£ AREA

~ UF!:!U.N SERVICE ' eOUNOARY

FIGURE 9.20

WATER SERVICE AREAS FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

-~ UJ a: :::l (') iL

>-1- Cf) 2 2 ::> -0 Cf)

(..) <t co a: UJ UJ

> (!) <t -a: 2

2-<t<t _a: 00 2 -

w ... 1l "' g

~

41.2

"" '-' < = = ~ 1-

0 = "' .... ... ;;: < 1- = m a

0 .... 2: !5 !3 Q ra "' cc < ;g .... 2

"' < .. ::;; "' ~ Ill

= Q '-' ... ;!:: ;;: ..... = 55 en

~ 1m

··-

···-


The Barrier Island basin includes the entire barrier island. Generally, most of the Mainland IRL basin lies east ofU.S. Highway #1. The unincorporated areas lying within the Mainland IRL basin include: the Roseland area; the Wabasso area; the Winter Beach area; and, South Vera Beach/Oslo area.

Within the St. Sebastian River Basin, three (3) sub-basins have been identified. All ofthe following sub-basins drain to the IRL via the South Prong of the S!. Sebastian River: the City of Sebastian, including the Sebastian Highlands subdivision; the unincorporated Roseland area, located in the northern portion of the basin; and a portion of the St. Sebastian River Buffer Preserve.

The SRWCD is located north of Walker Avenue (26th Street), east of 90th Avenue, and south of 85th Street (Wabasso Road). The SRWCD includes the Canal "C" (which runs north/south along 82nd Avenue) and Ditch "D" (which runs north/south along 90th Avenue) sub-basins. Combined, both sub-basins drain approximately 11,017 acres.

The Indian River Farms Water Control District (IRFWCD) has the largest service area of any water control district in the county and manages stormwater runoff for over two-thirds (2/3) orthe county's urbanized areas. Approximately 320 miles oflateral and sub-lateral canals drain the 50,211 acres contained within the IRFWCD service area. Over 100 MGD is discharged to the IRL from the District's North, Main and South Relief Canals.

The Fellsmere Water Control District (FWCD) is located in northern Indian River County, west of Interstate 95, and forms the western boundary of the Coastal Zone. The C-54 (Fellsmere) Canal has an extensive network of "feeder" canals which combine to give the C-54 Canal the single largest average surface water discharge (88 MGD) of any natural or manmade feature within the County.

The Technical Appendix of the Stormwater Management Sub-element contains a detailed explanation of water quality parameters. A Jist of problem drainage areas is contained in Table 9.13.

TABLE9.13 Areas Experiencing Drainage Problems


Whitfield's subdivision Roseland area 19th Avenue, north of 37th Street Midway Estates Mabile Home Park Vero Shores subdivision River Shores subdivision Rockridgc subdivision Country Club Pointe subdivision Gifford area (41st, 45th, and 53rd Streets) Indian River Boulevard Ponderosa Estates subdivision King's Lakes Estates subdivision King's Musicland subdivision



TABLE 9.13 Areas Experiencing Drainage Problems

Source: IRC Engineering Department

Shoreline Stabilization

Intersection of U.S. Highway I and 42nd Place Lam·elwood subdivision Pinetree Park subdivision Sixty Oaks Indian River Estates subdivision Kenilworth Estates subdivision Oslo Park (south of Oslo Road) Grovenor Estates subdivision Indian River Heights subdivision Steven's Park subdivision Vero Beach Highlands subdivision Intersection of Old Dixie Highway and 5th Street SW Vero Lake Estates subdivision Vista Gardens South of 12th Street between Old Dixie Highway/FECRR Moorings development FDOT outfalls along U.S. Highway #I Rockridge subdivision 4th Street corridor 8th Street corridor Indian River Drive/U.S. Highway #I Durrance Development River Shores subdivision

The dynamic nature and low-lying configuration oflndian River County's barrier island creates a constantly changing environment. While some net accumulation of sediment occurs in certain areas of the shoreline, the historical trend has generally been one of net erosion.

• Private Property

Most of the structural stabilization (coastal armoring) in the County has historically been limited to the beachsidc business district (within the City Limits ofVero Beach). Until recently, shoreline stabilization within the unincorporated portions of the County had been mostly limited to non-structural means, such as sand renourishrnent, re-establishment of dune vegetation, and sand bagging. However, since March !996, the County issued six emergency shoreline stabilization permits. During 1996 nearly 2,000 feet of the county's coastline were stabilized with "hard" structures. As a result, there are approximately 3,800 feet of armored shoreline in the county at the present time. The environmental affects of seawalls to the beach and dune system of!ndian River County is discussed in the analysis section of this element.

Community Development Department Indian River County 43 . '"··'


• Public Projects

The County installed an experimental Prefabricated Erosion Protection ("PEP") reef during the summer of 1996. The PEP reef extends 3,000 feet, from Humiston Park at the south end to the Village Spires condominiums a! the northernmost end. The PEP is designed to increase protection of structures during storms and reduce or prevent further erosion from occurring in the beachside CBD area. Moreover, the PEP reef may generate a net accretion of sand over time. Monitoring, in accordance with FDEP requirements, is being performed in order to evaluate the performance of the PEP reef; environmental impacts caused by the PEP reef; and the effects of the PEP reef on sea turtle hatchlings. These monitoring efforts are expected to cost the county nearly $1 million over a two (2) year period.

Structures or Areas Exhibiting Potential or Repeated Storm Damage

Indian River County has significantly less structures threatened by potential stom1 damage than many comparable coastal counties. The most threatened areas are: single-family residences in the Ambersand Beach area, single-family residences in older subdivisions built prior to state permitting requirements, and structures within the City of Vera Beach. Most of these structures were built prior to the adoption of more stringent setbacks. Consequently, beach erosion is now threatening their existence. The heaviest damaged public areas within the City are located east of Ocean Drive, and include Conn Beach, Humiston Park and Sexton Plaza. The Comprehensive Plan for the City ofVero Beach provides greater detail as to the nature of these structures and the measures being undertaken to protect them.

Within the unincorporated county, only a few structures other than dune walkover structures have experienced repeated storm damage or exhibited the potential for damage. To further decrease potential storm damage and protect upland property, in 1990, the County adopted the 1981 FDNR "Coastal Construction Control Line" (C.C.C.L.) as a line of construction prohibition. This line is designated as the "County Dune Stabilization Setback Line" (D.S.S.L.) in LDR Chapter 932. Construction other than approved dune walkovers, minor structures or erosion control projects are not allowed seaward (east) of this regulatory line.

In addition, the Coastal Barrier Resource Act (CoBRA) recognizes and discourages development in two areas: an area south of Ambersand Beach on the northern portion of the barrier island; and the southern 4 miles of the barrier island near the Indian River- St. Lucie County line. These relatively undeveloped areas are recognized as having the greatest potential for storm damage, and federal flood insurance is unavailable. Should a Category V storm event occur, much of the barrier island and particularly the areas identified by CoBRA could be completely destroyed.

8 tcbaen!ogjca! Hjstorjc Re~mu:ces of the Coastal ZQne

According to a 1989 Historic Properties Survey, 284 historically and/or architecturally significant buildings were constructed between !900 and 1940, in areas located in present-day



unincorporated Indian River County. These buildings and structures represent a tangible and

visual link to the "Old Florida" legacy of the Indian River County's past. The large majority,

over 262 of the buildings, are being used as residential buildings, and are in good condition.

Besides structures, Ais Indian shell middens are also prevalent in Indian River County. The

1992 Archeological Survey ofindian River County identified 55 areas in the Coastal Zone as

known or potential sites of archeological significance. The majority of these sites arc located on

the barrier island or proximate to the IRL on the mainland. A number of archaeologically

significant sites are presently under public ownership. The general location of known and

potential sites of archeological significance in Indian River County is depicted in Figure 9.22.

Shipwrecks are considered historically significant, and there are approximately twelve (12)

wrecks off the coast of Indian River County. These wrecks are of Spanish, French and British

origin, and some of these sites provide good scuba or snorkeling access. Also, there are 14 sites

in Indian River County that have been placed on the National Register of Historic Sites.

Historic and Scenic Roadways

• Jungle Trail

Jungle Trail, is an unpaved road located on the northwestern portion of the barrier island that

generally follows the Indian River Lagoon shoreline. The road is believed to be a prehistoric

Indian footpath, and a remnant of the original route of State Road AlA. Jungle Trail has been

designated by the County as one of five (5) scenic and historic roads and a management plan was

adopted in 1989. Also, the road is listed on the National Register of Historic Sites, and is

recognized by the State as a Greenway.

• Old Winter Beach Road

Old Winter Beach Road is a continuation of North Winter Beach Road east of U.S. Highway #1,

and at the extreme south end of Jungle Trail on the Barrier Island. This unpaved road originally

traversed the Indian River Lagoon by bridge until the structure burned in the 1940's. This road is

mostly unpaved.

• Quay Dock Road

Quay Dock Road runs at a NW to SE orientation from U.S. #I in Winter Beach, to a former dock

site on the lndian River Lagoon. Originally utilized by island residents to unload fruits and

vegetables, this dirt road is now used by residents and citrus grove workers.

• F el!smere Grade

The historic Fellsmere Grade/Fellsmere-Kenansville Road runs east-west along the north county

line, paralleled and adjacent to the C-54 Canal. This unpaved road is now used most often for

recreational boating access to the canal and St. Johns Marsh, and also is an important


""' Ul

,_,

..

• .I.JIIC1i.I.E1JLOGI£AL S.!Tt:S

FIGURE 9.22 EXISTING AND POTENTIAL ARCHAEOLOGICALLY-SIGNIFICANT SITES


maintenance access for St. John's River Water Management District water control structures within the Upper St. John's River Basin.

• Gifford Dock Road

Gifford Dock Road is the portion of North Gifford Road (45th Street) located east of U.S. Highway #I. A map of the historic and scenic roads in depicted in Figure 9.23.

NATURAL DISASTER PLANNING

Hurricanes

Hurricanes are severe weather conditions associated with warm-core tropical cyclones. These counterclockwise-rotating, extreme low pressure centers can reach ten (10) miles in height, can spread over several hundred miles in diameter, and generate winds in excess of 74 miles per hour (MPH), the minimum wind speed necessary to be classified as a hurricane. The official hurricane season extends from June I st to November 30th, with 62 percent of all Florida hurricanes occurring during September and October. Hurricanes present a triple threat of high winds, heavy rainfall, and stonn surge. The greatest tlrreat from hurricane wind is flying debris. Also, tomadoes may be spawned by a hurricane's winds. Extensive rainfall associated with the storm may cause widespread inland flooding. Nevertheless, the greatest danger associated with a hurricane is the storm surge. Storm surge can be described as the rise in wave and tidal heights associated with a hurricane. The vulnerability of an area to storm surge is dependent upon the potential height that a storm surge can achieve along a particular coast and the distance to which the surge can penetrate inland upon making landfall. A severe hurricane could produce a storm surge of 17 feet. Thus, low-lying coastal topography, such as, inlets, beaches and estuaries, are especially susceptible to the destructive forces ofthe storm surge (Hurricane Manual for Marine Interests in Indian River County). Listed below in Table 9.14 arc the categories of the SaffirSimpson hurricane scale based on stom1 intensity.

Tropical Storm:

Category I:

Category II

TABLE9.14 SAFFIR-SIMPSON HURRICANE SCALE

Distinct circulation pattern and Gale force winds (39 - 73 MPH)

Winds of74 to 95 MPH. Low lying coastal roads inundated, minor damage to piers, trees and unanchored structures

Winds of96 to 110 MPH. Coastal roads and low lying evacuation routes cut off by rising water two (2) to four (4) hours before landfall. Marinas flooded; damage to windows, doors and roofing materiaL Major damage to mobile homes.


FiGURE 923

HfSTORlC ROADS AND SITES

Fi"l... .................. ~ ................................. =.·=-...-------~----------tll ' I ' I ' j

i I ' l

... SIJlJJWE: FIAllUDA llEPI'. OF S'l AT!I

SCALE

DI\IIS!OII OF HISI'ORJE I!ESO!Jl!CIIS INDIAN 1!1\'ER COifflTl' PWINIWG DBI"J.

o 1 2 3 4 Miles I I J I I INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

1. JUNGLE lRAIL Z. OLD WINTER BEACH

BRIDGE ROAD J. DUAY DOCK ROAD 4. GIFFORD DOCK ROAD 5. FRLSMEHE GRADE 6. VERO RAILROAD

STATION 1. SPANISH FLEET SURVIVORS

AND SALVORS CAMPSITE 8. PELICAN ISlAND NATIONAL

WILDLIFE REFUGE

••••••- ROAD * . SITE

ffi-AitEol

DATE: FI!B. 1998

Comprehensive Plan

Category III

Category IV

Category V


TABLE 9.14 SAFFIR-SIMPSON HURRICANE SCALE

Winds of 111 to 130 MPH. Evacuation routes cut off by rising water three (3) to four (4) hours before landfall. Mobile homes destroyed; some structural damage to small buildings (inland); severe damage on the coast.

Windsof131 to 155 MPH. Evacuation routes cut off by rising water three (3) to five (5) hours before landfall. Major damage to lower floors of buildings near shore. Extensive damage to windows, doors and roofing material.

Winds in excess of 155 MPH. Evacuation routes cut off by rising water three (3) to live (5) hours before landfall. Small strucmres destroyed; extensive damage to windows and doors; and, collapse of roofs on most residential and industrial buildings.

• Coastal High Hazard Area

As defined by F.S. Chapter !63 Part II, the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) consists of the entire evacuation zone for a Category I hurricane. The CHHA, as depicted in Figure 9.24, includes the entire banier island as well as land lying along the west bank of the IRL.

Within the CHHA, there are several large tracts ofland in the unincorporated County that consist of enviromnentally-sensitive estuarine wetlands. ln the unincorporated area, those lands, located along both sides of the IRL, are designated "C-2" on the future land use map. "C-2" designated lands may be developed at one (I) unit per 40 acres or used for a density transfer of one(!) unit per acre to an upland site.

Most of the land in the unincorporated County within the CHHA consists of residential land with development potential and permitted densities ranging from three (3) to ten (10) units per acre. A substantial portion of this land is currently developed. Much of that development took place at a time when the CHHA was more narrowly defined as land on the banier island, east of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL).

In the unincorporated area, the CHHA also contains a small portion of the commercially designated land in three (3) areas. Those areas within the CHHA are: the Medical Node (37th Street and U.S. Highway#!, near Indian River Memorial Hospital), the Grand Harbor Node, and the Wabasso Corridor (CR 510 and U.S. Highway #1, in the Wabasso area).

• Hurricane Vulnerability Zone

Although many areas are subject to coastal flooding, ollen associated with the severe weather of hurricanes, other areas face imminent danger from the storms. Those areas which face severe erosion, flooding, storm surge, or other direct storm related damages from a Category III


~ --J

,_,.

. . . I r_L_ ____ - - --~-----

!\-c -' I \ ' I . I

. --. ,1· u l ,' ' : l --; -1j1 ,P\ .,_ \ l / Lji,..>XJ \

L L ./,-./ ..... 1

,, -I I ~

.,~~____..., __ '";--~<

' I ' I ' I r--

bt( i -.-

FIGURE 924

COASTAl HIGH HAZARD AREA

---

~ Florida Turnpfk.e ........ -----------------------'\-----· --- - - - r ' I

SCAlE a 1 2 3 4 Mnes . ' ' INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

1'!,1 -COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA

Source: Treasure Coast R e _ginnal l!urricane Evacuation Study

l

i Date: July 1996


hurricane are located within the Hurricane Vulnerability Zone (HVZ), as depicted in Figure 9.25. This zone has been identified for special plmming and evacuation purposes.

Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan

In accordance with Chapter 252, F.S., the Indian River County Department of Emergency Services, Emergency Management Division, prepared a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP). This CEMP was subsequently adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on August 12, 1997 by Resolution# 97-79. The purpose of the CEMP is to establish a fran1ework through which the County may prepare for, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the impacts of a natural disaster event, particularly a hurricane. The CEMP is also integrated and coordinated with state and federal emergency management plans.

The CEMP is an operations-oriented plan that outlines the responsibilities of county departments, municipalities and volunteers through an Emergency Support Function (ESF) approach. The primary agencies responsible for conducting each ESF is contained in Table 9.15. The CEMP also addresses coordinated local and regional evacuation, shelter capacity, post-disaster response and recovery, pre-deployment ofresources, communications and warning systems, and training exercises.

ESF-1: ESF-2: ESF-3: ESF-4: ESF-5: ESF-6: ESF-7: ESF-8: ESF-9: ESF-10: ESF-11: ESF-12: ESF-13: ESF-14: ESF-15: ESF-16: ESF-17: ESF-18: ESF-19:

TABLE9.15 EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTIONS AND

ASSOCIATED PRIMARY AGENCIES

Transportation Communications Public Works Fire Fighting Information/Planning Mass Care Resource Management Public Health Search and Rescue Hazardous Materials Food and Water Energy and Utilities Military Support Public Information Volunteers/Donations Law Enforcement Medical Emergencies Special Needs Care Animal Care

IRC School Board Transportation Dept. • Emergency Management Division -Public Works Dept. - Fire Services Division - Emergency Management Division - American Red Cross • Emergency Management Division -Public Health Unit - Fire Services Division I Sheriff's Office - Environmental Health I Emergency Management - American Red Cross I Emergency Management -Utilities Department - Florida National Guard - Emergency Management Division - Emergency Management Division • Sheriff's Office - Emergency Medical Services - Emergency Medical Services -Animal Control I Humane Society

Community Dcvclopn•ent Department Indian River County 48

Jo> 00

~'

1

FIGURE 9.25

HURRICANE VULNERABILITY ZONE

-~----·-· ------------------·-·-· -----·-·--'\,----~

,•

~-~.

,,/ \~) ~'< -~\,

--""'" - ---'"\.....-.... -......

~-

. . .

r .

K r ---• f

I

SCALE ? ! ~ ~ 1 MUea INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

Hurricane m..(c oastal) Vulnerability Zone W based on a

Category 3 Hurricane

Source-: Trees11re Coaal Region Hurricane Evacuation Study, 19 88

..

t .. ,. ..

... .. N " I

0

n .. .. z

Date: June 19 8 9 49.1


• Evacuation

The Governor of the State of Florida has the authority to declare an area as an emergency disaster site, and therefore to issue the order for residents of that region to evacuate. As per Chapter 252, F.S. and County Ordinance #91-18, the Indian River County Board of County Collllllissioners (BCC) also has the authority to declare a "State of Local Emergency." Once an emergency has been declared, control of emergency management operations is delegated to the Director of the Department of Emergency Services. Subsequently, the Director of Emergency Services would direct the evacuation by opening shelters, notifying primary ESF agencies, and coordinating with local, state and federal government agencies (IRC CEMP, 1997).

The Regional Plan requires the evacuation of the entire barrier island and all mobile homes in the event of a Category I hurricane. Data contained in the 1994 Hurricane Evacuation Study (HES) indicate that approximately 57,000 people reside in an area of the County that is vulnerable to a major hurricane, and would evacuate their homes. Of this total, approximately 1 0,000 evacuees would be expected to seek public shelters.

• Shelter Capacity

Three (3) types of shelters are identified in the Indian River County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP): primary, secondary and special needs facilities. Primary shelters consist mainly of school facilities, whereas secondary shelters generally consist of privatelyowned buildings, such as churches, fraternal organizations and businesses. Special needs facilities provide for citizens in need of medical assistance.

The shelter plan outlined in the CEMP is based on opening shelters by geographic region. The initial opening of primary shelters includes: Fellsmere Elementary School in the western portion .ofthe county; Oslo Middle School in the southern portion of the county; Sebastian Elementary School in the northern portion of the county; and, the Freshman Leaning Center in the central section of the County. The Special Needs shelter located at Sebastian River High School would also be included in the initial opening (IRC Emergency Management Division). This facility is discussed in the succeeding section.

Additional shelter facilities will be opened on an as-needed basis when the shelter for a particular geographic region exceeds two-thirds (2/3) capacity. Secondary openings of primary shelter facilities include: West County- Sebastian Middle School; South County- Highland Elementary; North County - Gifford Middle School; and Central County - Glendale Elementary School. Following is a list of tertiary openings of primary facilities by geographic region: South County - Thompson Elementary School; North County -Pelican Island Elementary School; and, Central County- Vero Beach High School (IRC Emergency Management Division).

Primary shelter facilities in Indian River County are depicted in Figure 9.26. A list of the secondary shelters located throughout the County is contained in Table 9.16. A comprehensive


llOUTES TO MAINLAND ." fOR BARRIER ISLAND

• ._,,, · RESIDENTS ._,,, '>

~AREA 1 RESIDENTS P.oplerMi;li!"~Q inAtu 1, from north <X~Vffl)' liM to aot.llh lrtdlln FUvar ShorN. city limit" r;.ht• UM tht, Wab.uao Bridge 11t Coonty Rotd S10to ruch lha I'I'WIInlal"'d. e AREA 2 RESIDENTS Pll'l<'lple rM.idi~ in Are• 2, lrQfl'! 11110\.llh IndiAn FUv•r Shotn c::rty lim~• 19 PliQm.il.r Oliw1\, aMI ut.e the Merrill Barber

on State P.011d 60 to the m&inlf.nd.

AREA 3 RESIDENTS ,.ldli'IQ In AtN 3. from

Rlom1r Drive to the IOUlh lndiln Ri\lvf Couriy HM, $n..ll ~ln. 17th StrtMt Bridwv to rM¢h tilt

FIGURE 9.26

SHELTER FACILITIES AND EVACUATION ZONES Source: IHC. Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan

49.1


list of critical facilities is contained Annex VII of the Comprehensive Emergency Management

Plan.

Presently, the County could accommodate 5,846 evacuees for a Category I hurricane. However,

in the event of a Category II or greater hurricane, the County's safe shelter capacity would be

reduced to 2,630 evacuees. Based on a estimated evacuee population of 10,000 seeking shelter

in a public facility, the County has a shelter capacity deficit of3,216 for a Category I hurricane

and a deficit of 6, 784 for a Category II or greater hurricane (IRC Emergency Management

Division). Further discussion of the County's shelter capacity deficit is contained in the Analysis

section of this element.

TABLE 9.16 SECONDARY SHELTER FACILITIES

• First Church of God (1590 27th Avenue) • Klngs Baptist Church (3235 58th Avenue) • First Presbyterian Church of Sebastian (1405 Louisiana Avenue) • St. Helen Parish Center (2050 Vero Beach Avenue) • First United Methodist Church (1750 20th Street) • St. Sebastian Catholic Church (13075 U.S. Highway #1) • Gifford Community Center (4855 43rd Avenue) • Tabernacle Baptist Church (51 Old Dixie Highway) • Glendale Baptist Church (740 27tll Avenue) • Truth Tabernacle Church (25 27th Avenue)

Source: lRC Department of Emergency Services

• Special Needs Population

Regular public shelters accept self-sufficient evacuees that do not require assistance in performing activities of daily living. Adult living facilities (ALFs) and nursing homes are

mandated by the State to have emergency evacuation plans in place for their residents. Created

in July 1989, the purpose of the Special Needs Shelter Program is to provide safe shelter for

those citizens requiring medical assistance. At the present time, there are an estimated 700

citizens in the County that are considered the Special Needs population. Pre-registration is

required for admittance into the Special Needs shelter. Additional eligibility requirements for

admittance to the Special Needs shelter are listed in the CEMP.

The Department of Emergency Services maintains an up-to-date comprehensive inventory of the

county's Special Needs population. Special Needs registrants have been separated and categorized to the level of assistance required. lf requested, the county provides transportation to

the Special Needs Shelter. Also, the shelter provides back-up oxygen equipment, first aid



supplies and advanced life support medications. Due to the level of assistance required, the evacuation of this segment may occur as much as 20 hours in advance of an approaching storm. In the event of a hurricane evacuation, the Special Needs Population would be accommodated at Sebastian River High School located at 9001 90th Avenue in Sebastian.

Post-Disaster Recovery and Redevelopment

This section presents an overview of the Recovery and Mitigation section of the CEMP. Following a storm event, County officials assess the aftermath and prioritize recovery efforts for a period of time extending from several days up to two (2) weeks. This Evaluation period also entails mobilization of search and rescue and damage assessment into impacted areas. The Immediate Emergency phase of the recovery lasts from two (2) weeks to several months following a storm event. During this period, primary agencies respond to prioritized assignments. Next, County officials coordinate repair of infrastructure and focus on social and economic activities to return the community to pre-stonn levels during the Restoration period. This period may last from several months to two (2) years. The final and longest phase of the recovery is the Reconstruction period. During this phase, County officials focus on activities to mitigate future damage.

There are nearly 7,000 mobile home units scattered throughout the County. This number represents approximately IS percent of the total housing units in Indian River County. All mobile home units are expected to be destroyed in the event of a Class III or greater hurricane. Also, following a major hurricane, a substantial portion of structures located east of U.S. Highway #I, including those on the barrier island would be temporarily (if not permanently) uninhabitable. Listed in Table 9.17 arc the insured values of residential properties in Indian River County.

TABLE 9.17 Insured Value of Residential Properties in Indian River County (1996)

Single-family Multi-family Mobile homes TOTAL

$6,741,343,977 $1 '114,605,032 $ 333,067,633 $8,189,016,672

Source: Department of Community Affairs "National Hurricane Program, State of Florida"

Hurricane Evacuation Study

Begi1ming in 1983, and subsequently updated in 1988 and 1994, a Hurricane Evacuation Study (HES) was prepared by the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC) for Indian River County and other neighboring counties. This study is summarized and referenced here. An evaluation of the hurricane evacuation plan, and an estimate of the impacts of future development



and increased population on hurricane evacuation in the CHHA is included in the Analysis section of this element.

For planning purposes, the TCRPC study classifies Category I and II storms as weak hurricanes, and Category III to V stom1s as severe hurricanes. In the HES, the TCRPC identifies the barrier island as a high risk area. The area from the western shore of the IRL to U.S. Highway #I is a moderate risk area, and the area west of U.S. Highway #I is considered a low risk area.

• Evacuation Network

According to the 1994 Hurricane Evacuation Study (HES), the clearance time for Indian River County for a Category 3-5 (worst case) hurricane during late fall season is len and one·half (lOY>) hours.

When traveling to a shelter site, specific traffic evacuation routes must be designated to quickly, but safely, move the traffic from a location of risk to a location of relative safety. In Indian River County, the evacuation network for the barrier island is subdivided into (3) evacuation zones. These zones are illustrated in Figure 9.27. The intersections most critical to the evacuation network are listed below in Table 9.18.

TABLE 9.18 CRITICAL INTERSECTIONS IN THE EVACUATION NETWORK

• S.R. AlA and C.R. 510 • S.R. AlA and S.R. 60 • S.R. AlA and 17th Street • Indian River Boulevard and Beachland Boulevard • Indian River Boulevard and S.R. 60 • U.S. Highway #1 and C.R. 512 • U.S. Highway #1 and C.R. 510 • U.S. Highway# 1 and Indian River Boulevard • U.S. Highway #1 and S.R. 60 • Interstate 95 and C.R. 512 • Interstate 95 and S.R. 60

Source: IRC Department of Emergency Services

• Clearance Time

One of the critical components of the evacuation process is clearance time. Clearance time, as defined in the CEMP, is "the time required to clear the roadway of all vehicles evacuating in response to a hurricane or other severe weather events." The components of clearance time include: mobilization time (time required to secure homes and spent preparing to evacuate),

Community DeveiQpment Department Indian River CQunty 52

U1 N

f..>

SCALE

FIGURE 9.27

EVACUATION ROADWAY LINKS IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY WITH POTENIAL HAZARDS FROM FLOODING OR TREES

I ,-'-----------------------------------~-----~-----] ' !~, ,• I \ ' I ' I -

l i J:, J- '"-'\ •' ./.- -) • Ll ,_I /jY'- \) ":.-:"

I T .· .. ,_j'"

H;--T I

~'

" ~

I "-i€( . "--"

..,1~....,.,~~~~ ................ ---------------------'------++-----Y

!

0 1 2 3 4 Miles ~ ' I I INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

>

"' .. > "-.. "

> -z

I


travel time (actual travel time on the roadway network) and delay time (time delays incurred due to traffic congestion).

Clearance time is generally considered a fixed time, although with better education and coordination, reducing mobilization time and traffic congestion possible. Transportation time, however, is unlikely to change without significant improvements to the roadway network. The estimated clearance times for various storm scenarios is contained in Table 9.19.

TABLE 9.19 ESTIMATED CLEARANCE TIMES FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

STORM EVENT

Category 1-2 Hurricane: Rapid Response Medium Response Long Response

Category 3-5 Hurricane: Rapid Response Medium Response Long Response

SUMMER SEASON

5Yz hours 6Yz hours· 9Yz hours

8Y. hours 9 hours 10 hours

LATE FALL SEASON

6 hours 7 hours

9Yz hours

:1:9 hours 9Yz hours lOY:. hours

• Natural Hazard Constraints on Evacuation Procedures

The flood dangers of most roadways in Indian River County are derived from potential storm rainfall. However, portions ofS.R. AlA located within the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CoBRA) Zones arc low-lying and especially vulnerable to the potential storm surge of an approaching hurricane. Figure 9.25 shows these roadway links. Table 9.20 describes these roadway links and identifies those links located within the Hurricane Vulnerability Zone (HVZ).

TABLE 9.20 Roadway Links with Evacuation Hazards

Location

North South portion of S.R. 510 66th AV between 45th STand S.R. 60 58th AV between 66th STand 45th ST 58th AV between 41st STand S.R. 60 58th AV between 8th STand 9th ST S.W. 43rd AV between 8th STand 9th ST S.W. 43rd A V from 9th ST SW to S. County Line


Evacuation Hazard(s)

flood hazard tree hazard tree hazard flood hazard tree hazard tree hazard tree hazard

Indian River County 53 ·~·

\


TABLE9.20 Roadway Links with Evacuation Hazards

Location

Aviation Blvd North ofS.R. 60 27th A V between 16th STand 8th ST Old Dixie Highway between Wabasso and 65th ST Old Dixie Highway between 8th STand 9th ST S.W. Old Dixie Highway from 9th ST S.W. to County Line U.S. Highway #I between C.R. 512 and Roseland Road U.S. Highway #I between 20th STand 17th ST U.S. Highway #I between 17th STand 8th ST U.S. Highway #I from 9th ST S.W. to County Line S.R. A I A fronJ Sebastian Inlet to Beachland Blvd. S.R. AlA from Beachland Blvd. to 17th ST S.R. AlA from 17th ST to South County Line C.R. 512 south ofFellsmere C.R. 512 between Fellsmere and Sebastian C.R. 512 through Sebastian S.R. 60 west ofC.R. 512 S.R. 60 between C.R. 512 and Interstate 95 S.R. 60 between 43rd AV and 27th AV S.R. 60 between 27th AV and U.S. Highway #I Merrill Barber Bridge 9th ST S.W. between 27th AV and U.S. Highway #I

SOURCE: TCRPC Hurricane Evacuation Study

Areas Subject to Coastal Flooding

Evacuation Hazard(s)

flood hazard flood hazard tree hazard/within HVZ tree hazard tree hazard tree hazard/within HVZ flood hazard/within HVZ flood hazard/within HVZ flood hazard/within HVZ flood hazard/tree hazard/within HVZ flood hazard/within HVZ tree hazard/within HVZ flood hazard flood hazard flood hazard flood hazard flood hazard flood hazard/within HVZ flood hazard/within HVZ flood hazard/within HVZ tree hazard

The U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) completed a Flood Insurance Rate Study for Indian River County in 1988. The study included analysis to determine the limits of Coastal Flood Zones, the I 00-Year Flood Plain and the 500-Year Flood Plain. The generalized flood prone areas of the county, depicted on Figure 9.28.

• Mainland

Flood prone areas east oflnterstate 95 to the IRL are confined to four (4) general areas. The first area extends along the east side oflnterstate 95 from the Brevard County line to approximately two (2) miles north ofS.R. 60 and east to 90th Avenue and the St. Sebastian River. The second flood prone area is located in the central county at the western terminus of the North Relief Canal. This area is generally confined to agricultural areas west of 66th Avenue. A large area of


FIGURE 9.28

Flood Prone Areas in Indian River County (Resource: Flood Insurance Rate Map #12061 COOOO, dated May 4, 1989)

- FlOOD 1'1'10Nf AfiEA.S

·..,... .. ,.

54.1

-=-··


the county, south ofS.R. 60 to St. Lucie County line between 43rd Avenue and 74th Avenue, is also prone to flooding. The fourth area of the mainland prone to flooding extends along the shoreline of the IRL. This flood zone includes the low-lying areas along the length of the river. Although much of the flood zone is confined to wetlands, some development has occurred within the flood zone.

• Orchid Island

Portions of the barrier island are also included within the flood plains identified by FEMA. Flood prone areas include the beach, lying oceanward of the dune line, and west of S.R. AlA along the IRL. North of C.R. 5 I 0, the flood plain follows the same general pattern, except that the northernmost three (3) miles of the island, the Ambersand Beach area, are entirely within the flood plain. Specific locations of floodprone areas within the Coastal Zone is contained in the Stormwater Management Sub-element.

Two (2) areas ofindian River County are located within Federal Coastal Barrier Resources Act of 1982 (CoBRA) flood zones. The purposes of the Act are to "minimize the loss of human life, reduce the wasteful expenditure of federal revenue, and damages to fish and wildlife and other natural resources that occur when coastal barriers are developed." (U.S. Department oflnterior, 1985).

The CoBRA zones within Indian River County arc identified as P-1 0 and P-1 OA. Zone P-1 0 begins at the southern boundary of the Ambersand Beach subdivision and extends south 3,000 feet. Within zone P-1 0, flood insurance is not available for structures that have been newly constructed or substantially improved since October!, 1983. Seaview subdivision is included within the Zone P-1 0. Zone P-1 OA (Blue Hole), is located on the southern portion of the barrier island, south of Genese Road, and extends approximately one (I) mile south to the Indian RiverSt. Lucie County line. Within Zone P-1 OA on the barrier island, flood insurance is not available for structures that were newly constructed or substantially improved since October 1, 1983. This zone includes Oyster Bay subdivision and Ocean Oaks subdivision. Both areas are depicted in Figure 9.29.

• National Flood Insurance Program

The federally funded National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) offers incentives to communities that have an adopted Flood Protection ordinance. Currently, the County is certified as a "Class 7" community under the FEMA's Community Rating System (CRS). As a result, residents (other than those residing in the previously mentioned CoBRA zones) are eligible to purchase flood insurance at a fifteen (15) percent discount. At the present time, over 19,200 homes in the county, representing an insured coverage value of approximately $2.3 billion, arc underwritten by the NFIP.


FIGURE 9.29

COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES ACT (CoBRA)

AREAS IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

!;);,;;j- Areas included •"! in CoBRA

c 3 4

MILE$

P-10A

Source: CoBRA Draft Report to Congress U.S. Dept. of the Interior, April 1985

BOL..Jle Date: Jan.1990

55.1



INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGENCY COORDINATION

Following is brief description of federal, state, regional, and local government agencies which routinely interact within the coastal zone. More detailed information is contained in the Intergovernmental Coordination Element.

Regulatory Programs

• Federal

Agency: Authority:

Responsibilities:

Agency: Authority:

Rcsponsibili ties:

Agency: Authority: Responsibilities:


Agency: Authority:

Responsibilities:

Agency: Authority:

Responsibilities:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972; Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 Issues permits for wetlands, docks, and dredge and fill

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (as amended in 1987), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), Surface Water Improvement Management Act (SWIM) Develops effluent limitations for point and nonpoint source discharges, reviews ACOE dredge and fill permits, water quality grants

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Insurance Act Administers National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), develops Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), provides post-disaster recovery

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Fishery Conservation and Management Act ( 1976) Manages offshore fishing areas

U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899; General Bridge Act of 1946; Bridge Administration Program Manages construction of bridges/causeways

U.S. Department oflnterior Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CoBRA), Coastal Barrier Improvement Act of 1990 Administers CoBRA


Comprehensive Plan

Agency: Authority:

Responsibilities:

• State

Agency: Authority:

Responsibilities:

Agency: Authority:

Responsibilities:


Agency: Responsibilities:



U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMP A) of 1972, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958 Enforces provisions of ESA and MMP A, Manages Archie Carr/Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuges

Department of Community Affairs (DCA) Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act (1985), Florida Coastal Management Act of 1978 Reviews comprehensive plans for consistency, reviews Developments of Regional Impact (DRTs), conducts coastal zone management consistency reviews

Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Florida Air and Water Pollution Control Act, Water Resources Restoration and Protection Act, Wetlands Protection Act of 1984, Indian River Lagoon Zero Discharge Act, Marine Turtle Protection Act, Florida Manatee Sanctuary Act, Marine Fisheries Commission, Coastal Zone Protection Act of 1985, Florida Aquatic Preserve Act of 1975, Florida Preservation 2000 Act, Florida Endangered and Threatened Species Act of 1977 land acquisition grants, manages aquatic preserves and state lands, enforcement, wetland regulations, reviews developments seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line, Florida Marine Patrol (FMP) enforces boating regulations

Game & Fresh Water Fish Commission (FGFWFC) Wildlife Code of the State of Florida Protection and management of wildlife, nongame wildlife program

Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (DHRS) Issues pennits and regulates on-site disposal systems

Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) long range dredge material management program, maintains Intracoastal Waterway (ICW), manages spoil islands, local government assistance grants, manatee regulatory signage program

Community Development Department Indian ruvcr County 57 ·-

Comprehensive Plan

• Regional



• Local

Agency: Authority:

Responsibilities:


St. Johns River Water Management District (S.JRMWD) Section 40-C, F.A.C, District Water Management Plan Consumptive Use pennits, Wetlands pennits, Stom1water management land acquisition and management, management and storage of surface waters, local govemment assistance

Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC) Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan Reviews Developments of Regional Impact (DRis), including marinas, hurricane evacuation, local government assistance

Indian River County Land Development Regulations (LDRs): -Chapter 928 Wetlands and Deepwater Habitat Protection -Chapter 929 Upland Habitat Protection - Chapter 930 Stonnwater Management and Flood Protection

Chapter 932 Coastal Management Chapter 933 Historic and Archaeological Resource Protection Chapter 402 Coastal Construction Code

Development of Comprehensive Plan, stonnwater management, floodplain preservation, Manatee Protection Plan, coastal engineering, land acquisition and management, dune vegetation

The following incorporated municipalities are located within the coastal zone and have ordinances governing their jurisdiction: City of Vero Beach, City of Sebastian, Town oflndian River Shores, City of Fellsmere, Town of Orchid

Agency: Responsibi I i ties:

Indian River Soil and Water Conservation District (IRSWCD) Soil maps, soil conservation plans, agricultural water conservation

• Special Districts

F.S. 298 Special Drainage Districts

The following F.S. 298 own and operate drainage canals within the coastal zone: Indian River Farms Water Control District, Fellsmere Water Control District, Sebastian River Water Control District


Comprehensive Plan



ANAJ,YSIS


Indian River Mosquito Control District (IRMCD) control of mosquito population and management of mosquito impoundments

Sebastian Inlet Taxing District Sebastian Inlet, beach rcnourishment

DEVELOPMENT PRESSURES ON NATURAL RESOURCES

lt is anticipated that ongoing population growth over the next several decades within the

designated Coastal Zone oflndian River County will have significant impact on the natural

resources of the county. Particularly, single-family home developments are expected to have a

collective impact on existing natural wildlife and habitats within the county.

B.arrier Island

The 22.4 mile long stretch of barrier island in Indian River County is experiencing development

pressure from a continually expanding population. Generally, the incorporated areas of the

barrier island are already developed, and there is little opportunity for preservation in these areas.

Although n1uch of the present incorporated barrier island is at or near build-out, substantial areas

of unincorporated barrier island to the north and south are undeveloped. The large majority of

future development will be single-family residences, projected to reach build out at rates less

dense than present zoning allocations. Although the southernmost one (1) mile of Orchid Island

is located within a FEMA-designated CoBRA zone (P-1 OA), incremental development has

continued to occur. As long as this land remains in private ownership, development will continue to pose a threat to the remaining tropical ham1nocks and coastal strand communities

that exist there.

In contrast to the southern portion of the barrier island, the unincorporated section of the northern

barrier island provides a greater opportunity for public acquisition. Arguably, focusing public

acquisition efforts in the :northern section of the barrier island will provide greater enviro:nmental

benefits due to the increased frequency of sea turtle nesting along the beaches of the Archie Carr

NWR. Also, the presence of the Pelican Island NWR and surrounding Class II waters east of the

ICW warrants public acquisition to afford a buffer to those resources.

Shoreline Erosion

The Sebastian Jnlet has a major influence on nearshore dynamics, which ultimately affects

beaches and the Indian River Lagoon (IRL) in the norther portion of the County. While it is

generally agreed that the Sebastian Jnlet is a major interceptor of the downdrift (southerly)

Community Development Department Indian River County 59 ..... "'' ~·


migration of nearshore sediment, solutions to the problem have thus far proven elusive. Present mitigation teclmiques involve periodically depositing sand on the downdrift shoreline to continue its net southerly mitigation.

Public Shoreline Stabilization Projects

Another alternative that has been discussed to address the problems associated with the Sebastian Inlet is the installation of a permanent sand-bypassing system. Past attempts of sand by-passing at Sebastian Inlet have involved passive-type dredging projects. Prior to 1962, these projects consisted of dredging the spoil material from the flood plain of the inlet, and depositing the material offshore. After 1962, when the need for erosion mitigation was realized, the material was deposited directly on the southern shore as a "feeder"beach. This practice remains controversial due to concerns about the nearshore reef/rock community. Fine sediments are considered detrimental to sabilleriid worrns and other organisms of the reef/rock community. Additionally, the compactness of the dredged material has potential to adversely affect sea turtle nesting, and must be evaluated.

The County must continue to support the efforts of the Sebastianlnlet Tax District to decrease the erosional effects of the inlet through projects that do not threaten the ecology of the near shore area, or the recreational activities associates with the Sebastian Inlet State Recreation Area. However, the County could encourage the District to seck alternatives and/or technological advancements which reduce cost and adverse impacts while increasing efficiency.

As previously mentioned, the County installed a 3,000 foot long experimental Prefabricated Erosion Protection ("PEP") reef, extending from Humiston Park to the Village Spires condominiums, during the summer of 1996. Depending on the indications of PEP reef monitoring data that is presently being collected, the county should consider actions in coordination with the City ofVero Beach to ensure the long-term viability of that erosion control project, including sand renourishment if warranted.

Coastal Armoring

In 1995, Chapter 161.085, F.S. was revised to allow local governments to issue emergency pennits to construct seawalls. As previously mentioned, Indian River County has issued six emergency permits for seawall construction since March 1996, more than any other county in the State of Florida. Seawall construction in 1996 more than doubled the overall amount of armored coastline to approximately 3,800 feet. At the present time, stabilization permits are pending for an additional 1,500 of shoreline. Since the proliferation of seawalls in the unincorporated County has been relatively recent, en1pirical data are currently unavailable to measure and analyze the localized effects of coastal arrnoring. Nevertheless, the scientific community supports the notion that coastal armoring has irreversible detrimental effects on the nearshore and beach and dune systems of coastal areas.



The county needs to coordinate with the FDEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems and other appropriate agencies to develop specific criteria concerning the allowance and design of coastal armoring. If possible, these criteria should be developed with consideration of an extended beach profile beyond the limits of any particular residence that is threatened at a given time.

Indian River Lagoon

Of all the ecosystems located in the Indian River County, the Indian River Lagoon (IRL) is the most diverse and complex. While years of careless activities have forced the waterbody into a decline, recent concern for this "estuary of national significance" has produced efforts to better manage the IRL as a critical resource.

Segment 3 of the IRL, as delineated in the IRLNEP CCMP, begins at Sebastian Inlet and continues to Ft. Pierce Inlet. For discussion purposes, the IRL in Indian River County is divided into two (2) sections. The northern section extends from Sebastian Inlet to the northern boundary of the City ofVero Beach (southern half of Aquatic Preserve# 7). Included in the northern section is the City ofVero Beach. The southern section extends from the southernmost limits of the City of Vero Beach lo lhe Indian River/St. Lucie County line and encompasses the majority of Aquatic Preserve A-9.

Water Quality Conditions

Water quality problems associated with the IRL can be largely attributed to non-point source pollutant loadings caused by agricultural and urban stormwater runoff. Much of this stormwater runoffis conveyed by the IRL by lhe North, Main, and South Relief Canals, and the South Prong of the St. Sebastian River. Within the IRL system, total phosphorous (TP) values around the canals are highest. Values of total nitrogen (TN) arc elevated south of the Wabasso area and within the City ofVcro Beach. Other problems observed in Segment 3 of the IRL include salinity values as low 26.0 parts per thousand (ppt) and increased color values due to the discharge of tannin-laden freshwater. Conversely, values for turbidity and total suspended solids (TSS) arc lower in the canals compared to most areas of the IRL.

Urbanization negatively affects water quality in the IRL by replacing natural vegetative coverage with impervious surface areas. Impervious surface areas reduce the natural ability of vegetation and soils to absorb pollutants. Also, impervious surfaces increase the flow of freshwater and transport of nutrients and pollutants to the IRL. Although these problems are somewhat alleviated by on-site storm water management systems associated with new development, these combined effects are exacerbated by the limited flushing characteristics of "the narrows" located just north of the City of Vero Beach.

In the 1990 Comprehensive Plan, Objective 2 of the Coastal Management Element, stated: "By 1995, Indian River County will improve overall estuarine water quality to the Florida


Comprehensive Plan Coa~tal Management ll:lement

Department of Environmental Regulations guidelines of Class II waters- shellfish propagation and harvesting." However, as previously mentioned in the Existing Conditions section, the only portion of the county presently designated as FDEP Class IT is located east of the Intracoastal Waterway (ICW) extending from Sebastian Inlet to just north of the Wabasso Causeway (C.R. 510). All remaining waters in Segment 3 ofthe IRL are designated as Class III (recreation! propagation and management offish and wildlife). Although Objective 2 was not achieved, Indian River County and other government agencies did initiate measures that have helped enhance or preserve the water quality in the IRL.

Provisions contained in the County's Land Development Regulations (LDRs) relating to the quality of stom1water runoff include:

• All zoning districts have provisions regulating the minimum amount of open space and the maximum amount of impervious surface area for all parcels.

• All new developments arc required to provide on-site stormwater retention/detention. Retention/detention and filtration must be provided for the first one (1) inch of rainfall (one and one-half (1 Yz) inches for surface waters with a FDEP Outstanding Florida Waters (OFW) designation).

• All stonnwater ponds greater than one-half (!12) acre in size are required to provide a minimum 30 percent littoral zone coverage.

• The county has an adopted Wetlands and Deepwater Habitat Protection Ordinance (LDR Chapter 928). The purpose of this ordinance is to preserve the functional aspects of wetlands located throughout the county.

• The county has buffer setback requirements for properties adjacent to the Indian River Lagoon and the St. Sebastian River.

• The Envirom11ental Planning section requires an erosion control plan, incorporating Best Management Practices (BMPs ), to be submitted prior to the issuance of a land clearing permit.

In 1992, the citizens oflndian River County voted to establish an Enviromnental Lands Program (ELP) to be funded by a $26 million ad valorem tax bond. Funds from the County's ELF, in conjunction with funding from the SJRWMD, the Stale's Conservation and Recreation Land (CARL) program, and the Florida Communities Trust (FCT) program has facilitated the acquisition of approximately 1,800 acres of estuarine wetlands and coastal upland communities over a five (5) year period.

Recognizing the importance of the St. Sebastian River, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) in cooperation with the SJRWMD, recently purchased natural lands bordering



the river to serve as a buffer. Wetlands and native vegetation adjacent to the St. Sebastian River protect water quality by filtering pollutants and by reducing soil erosion. Also, preserving nearly eight (8) miles of riverfront lands will provide safe habitat for an endangered manatee population. Once the purchase of additional lands proximate to the river are finalized, the St. Sebastian River Buffer Preserve will contain approximately 22,850 acres, straddling the Indian River/Brevard County line.

Agricultural operations are exempt from most requirements contained in the County's Land Development Regulations. Through the use of federal incentives, the Indian River Soil and Water Conservation District (IRSWCD) has assisted many agricultural operations throughout the County to voluntarily initiate soil conservation plans and best management practices (BMPs).

Estuarine we!lands, including mosquito impoundments, lilter pollutants that would otherwise empty directly into the IRL. The Indian River Mosquito Control District (IRMCD) has been instrumental in preserving estuarine water quality by minimizing the usc of pesticides and through utilizing beneficial impoundment management teclmiques.

Listed in Table 9.21 is comparison of existing and projected pollutant loadings. An analysis of projected pol!utant loadings for each individual basin in !he Indian River Lagoon watershed is contained in the Stom1water Management Sub-Element.

TABLE 9.21 COMPARISON OF EXISTING AND FUTURE LOADINGS

FROM INDIAN RIVER COUNTY

POLLUTANT EXISTING LOAD FUTURE LOAD PERCENT (kilograms/year) (kilograms/year) CHANGE

Total Nitrogen 363,589 537,656 +47.9

Total Phosphorous 46,679 62,571 + 31.2

Total Suspended Solids 7,937,393 9,059,948 + 14.1

Biological 1,022,391 2,342,390 + 129.1 Oxygen Demand

Zinc 7,939 7,617 -4.1

Lead 10,806 10,824 0.0

Source: IRLNEP Loadings Assessment pages 3-42 thru 3-46



Until recently, most attempts to protect or enhance the IRL were undertaken in a piecemeal manner. Previously mentioned efforts have helped to preserve water quality in the IRL. However, future development will offset these improvements and continue to degrade water quality unless a cooperative and interdisciplinary effort is undertaken. Speci fie actions are contained in the lndian River Lagoon National Estuary Program's (IRLNEP) 1996 management plan entitled The Indian River Lagoon Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan.

A concentrated effort among the various municipalities within the IRL watershed, the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), and the St. Jolms River Water Management District (SJR WMD) is needed to increase lobbying power in pursuing state and federal funds. Once recent example of a successful joint effort was the IRL-wide "Blueway" CARL grant application. Similar in concept to the state's "Greenways" program, the "Blucway" project is an effort to preserve and restore the remaining environmentally-important lands adjacent to the IRL.

As previously mentioned in the Existing Conditions section of this Element, the Indian River Lagoon Act was passed in 1990. The Act eliminated most point source discharges, excluding industrial facilities, to IRL. Continued development pressures, and the high cost of treating wastewater, may result in requests for exemptions, conditional permits, or amendments to the Act to allow wastewater discharges to the IRL. Also, exempting industrial facilities from the requirements of the Act may encourage additional industrial discharge to the IRL (Indian River Lagoon Comprehensive Conservation & Management Plan, 1996).

Within the next few years, the EPA is expected to complete Phase II rules for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for medium-sized municipalities (population 100,000 to 250,000). Once the Phase II rules become finalized, Indian River County will be required to obtain a NPDES pem1it to discharge stormwater. Furthermore, new Chapter 9J-5 Rules require the County to adopt level-of-service standards for water quality. In response, the County will adopt Pollutant Load Reduction Goals (PLRGs) currently being developed by the SJRWMD as its water quality level-of-service standard (WQLOS). These PLRGs are expected to be completed over the next several years.

Due to the previously mentioned federal and state requirements, it is imperative that the County adopt a stormwater master plan. Prior to adopting a storwmater master plan, however, a consensus on several important local issues must be reached. These issues include: reducing nonpoint source pollution and freshwater inflow from drainage canals; retrofitting inadequate stormwater management facilities; adopting water quality level-of-service (WQLOS) standards; and establishing a stom1watcr utility to allocate costs for funding improvements and maintenance. A more detailed analysis of stom1watcr master planning is provided in the Stormwatcr Management Sub-Element.



Submerged Aquatic Vegetation

Seagrass beds are the most fundamental component of the TRL system. They are a source of

food and protection, and serve as spawning grounds for most aquatic species. Also, the beds

function as a natural filter system by trapping pollutants and sediments. Due to these attributes,

efforts to preserve and enhance the IRL system must incorporate measures to protect existing

sea grass beds, and promote the future expansion of these beds.

As previously mentioned, approximately 2,900 acres, or nearly 18 percent of the total acreage of

the IRL are covered with submerged aquatic vegetation (SA V). However, current data support

the continued decline of these beds and suggest the need for further studies and increased

mitigation efforts.

The most significant impact to seagrass beds is turbidity. Turbidity is caused by storm water

runoff and decreases the depth to which sunlight can penetrate the water column, thereby

reducing photosynthesis. Other impacts include: inadequate circulation, construction and

dredging activities, and buildings and docks (which block sufficient light), in addition to prop

cuts and raking activities.

Development and recreational boating continue to threaten the viability of these ecological

communities. The effects of construction activities are partially offset by state and local

regulation. Local regulations require buffer setbacks for riverfront properties. FDEP regulations

require docks to be extended to allow for a minimum vessel draft clearance. Also, docks must be

constmctcd in a manner that minimizes turbidity, allows for adequate circulation, and penetration

of sunlight. Boating activities, however, are difficult to regulate. Therefore, educational efforts

are needed that focus on promoting responsible behavior of boat operators and enhancement of

boater awareness regarding locations of seagrass beds in the JRL. Additional information

regarding sea grass beds is provided in the Conservation Element. A detailed analysis of seagrass

beds is contained in the Indian River County Manatee Protection and Boating Safety

Comprehensive Plan.

Coastal Mainland

Estuarine wetlands along the IRI. and the St. Sebastian River are easily identifiable, and are

considered environmentally-significant. However, areas of environmental concern on the coastal

mainland are generally more interspersed and not as recognizable.

The mitigation technique most commonly used to reduce the loss of native vegetative

communities is the County's Upland Habitat Protection ordinance (LDR Chapter 929). This

ordinance requires developments on parcels larger than five (5) acres set aside 15 percent of the

native upland area existing on site, or ten (10) percent ofthe site, if preserved as a contiguous

area. Also, the Tree Protection ordinance (LDR Chapter 927) prohibits removal of protected

trees not within the net buildable portion of the development site. Nevertheless, as development


Comorehensive Plan Coastal Management Element intensifies, the resulting stands of protected trees become intermittent and isolated. The wiidi.ife habitat value of these isolated pockets of native areas is questionable.

The County is actively pursuing the preservation and/or mitigation ofisolated wetlands as they become threatened by development. The Conservation Element, addresses this concern and details methods designed to afford protection to these areas.

As previously mentioned, agricultural operations are presently exempt from most environmental . permitting and review procedures. However, the agricultUral industry, with assistance from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has been conducive towards initiating incentive-based voluntary conservation measures. Conservation measures; such as, soil. conservation plans, best management practices (BMPs), and·low-flow irrigation, are discussed in detail in the Conservation Element. Nevertheless, continued expansion of agricultural operations and additionaLcommercial.and residential development into the western portions of the coastal zone will lead to an overall net loss of pine flat'wood, sand pine scrub, mixed hardwood and isolated wetlands communities. Analysis of the coastal mainland ecological.communities is. discussed in detail in the Conservation Element.

Archaeological and Historic Resources

To ensure protection of archaeological sites, historically significant propel;!ies, and historic and scenic roads, the County has an adopted Historic and Archaeological Resource Protection ordinance (LDR Chapter 933). This ordinance has several incentives for historic preservation, including: transferring development rights from an archaeologically significant area to another area ofthe development sjte; tax relief for recording a conservation easement; mitigation; and public acquisition. Additionally,. the county hail an appointed Hjstoric Resource Advisory Committee and also a County Historian.' Jungle T~ail, the County's premier historic and scenic road, has an adopted management plan, and is undergoing enhancement funded by an Intermodal Surface :rranspor;ation Enhancement Act (ISTEA) grant.

In the event an archaeologically significant site is located within an area of proposed development, the County may require an archaeological survey to be performed .. However, there have been few instances wher!'l a development has threatened an area o( archaeological or historic significance; in most cases, such sites have been successfully prese:rved in desigpated open space areas associated with development.

Endangered, Threatened, or Sl!ecies of Sl!ecial Concern

Loss of habitat caused by encroaching development is the most significant impact to the survival needs of species designated as being endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. If a threatened or endangered species is potentialiy affected by a proposed development, the County · may require that an environmental assessment of the site b~;" conducted in coordination with the USFWS and I or the FWC. Conservation easements have been successfully employed to·

CommUnity Development Department ln.dlan River County 66 Supplement 7: Ordlttanee :2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

ComprehelUive Plan Coastal Management Element

protect some species. For example, on the northern barrier island, a population of Florida beach mice was protected under a conservation easement in the Seaview subdivision. Other incentives, such as cluster development and transfer of development rights (TDRs) have proven a somewhat effective means ofprotecting ecological habitats, without prohibiting development.

The most effective and efficient method of protecting threatened or endangered species of flora or fa\.ma is fee simple acquisition of lands with habitat value. The County, through its Enviro:timental Lands Program and in conjunction with state and federal agencies, has. acquired several large expanses of conservation lands within: the Coastal Zone. These include: the St. Sebastian River Buffer Preserve, the Cairns Tract, the Oslo Riverfront CoDBervation Area, the North Sebastian Cqnservation Area, and the Wabasso Scrub site~

There are certain situations when fee simple acquisition to protect habitat is either not practical due to high costs, or not feasible (e.g .. existing development). These special circumstances may require an ordinance designed to protect a particular species and/or a habitat conservation pla:t;t (HCP). For example, the West Indian manatee and sea turtles are two well-known endangered! threatened species that are being adversely affected by a conflict of use that cannot be resolved via fee simple acquisition of habitat. Manatees ar!l susceptible to j:p.jury and death froli). impacts with boats and propeller wounds: From 1974 through 2003, 28 watercraft·related manatee mortalities wete recorded in Indian River County. Areas of the IRL and the St. Sebastian River are known to be i:inportant cavorting locations for manatees.

Manatee protection speed zones were established in the IRL and St. Sebastian River in 1992 as a means of reducing manatee injuries and mortality and promoting• boating safety. ";No entry'' manatee protection zones that prohibit all boat traffic as a means of providing a secure sanctuary for manatees are in' place certai1;1 parts of the state. Howe~er, there:are no plans to prohibit boating in any section of the IRL or St. Sebastian River in Indian River Count)'. In August 2000, Indian River County adopted a Manatee. Protection and Bqat Safety Comprehensive Plan (MCP). That plan addresses boat/marina facility siting, habitat conservation, and educational awareness.

Lighting from ocean:ft:ont development can disorient sea turtle hatchlings and thus contribute to sea turtle mortality. Indian River County's Sea:Turtle Protection ordinance (WR Section 932.09) restricts illuminating beach areas during the sea turtie nesting- from March 1st through October 3ist of each year. Vehicular access onto the beach is also prohibited in the unincorporated county, to reduce potential human impaets to turtle nesting areas.

LAND USE \

The coastal mainland will most likely continue to experience a westward development . expansion. However, most of the land located outside the current boundaries of the Urban Service Aiea (USA), especially west of Interstate 95, is expected to remain largely undeveloped C\lmmunity Developmel!fDepartment lndian River County 67 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

(. \':""""""" .,..;


as agricultural land. Thus, the majority (over 90 percent) of future development in Indian River County will be located within the designated Coastal Zone.

According to projections contained in the Housing Element, by the year 2020 the amount of single-family land needed is expected to increase from 13,289 acres to 19,522 acres. The amount ofland needed for multiple-family residential development is expected to increase from 1,374 acres to 2,018 during the 20 year planning horizon. By the year 2020, acreage for mobile homes is anticipated to increase from 1, 750 acres to 2,571 acres. Combined, there will be a need for 24,100 acres of residential land. That represents nearly a 47 percent increase in residentially developed land by 2020.

According to the Introductory Element, the effective population of unincorporated Indian River County will increase will increase 63 percent to 123,850 by the year 2020. Based on this projection, residential and non-residential land use needs within the coastal zone were extrapolated for the 20 year pla111ling horizon. Table 9.22 from the Future Land Use Element lists non-residential land usc needs for 2020 by category.

TABLE9.22 NON-RESIDENTIAL FUTURE LAND USE NEEDS

LAND USE CATEGORY 1995 ACREAGE NEEDS 2020 ACREAGE NEEDS

COMMERCIAL 1,304 2,074

INDUSTRIAL 749 1,191

RECREATION 3,084 5,027

PUBLIC FACILITIES 4,946 8,062

SOURCE; Indian River County Planning

A more detailed land use analysis of the coastal zone, is presented in the Future Land Use Element.

Parks and Open Space

Based on the Level of Service (LOS) standards contained in the Recreation and Open Space Element, in 2020 the County will have 1,088 acres of parkland, or a net surplus of592 acres above the 496 acres of parkland required to meet the LOS standard for the unincorporated parts of the county. The County will continue to exceed the establish LOS standard for parkland for the 20 year planning horizon. However, the uneven distribution of parkland throughout the County must be addressed. Also, the LOS standard for oceanfront and riverfront (specialty) parks is expected to experience an ongoing decline.



Two (2) areas within the unincorporated mainland portion of the coastal zone have experienced

faster than anticipated growth. As a result, both areas are located outside the service areas of

existing community parks. These areas include the Vero Lake Estates subdivision, located in the

northern part of the county ncar Interstate 95, and an area located proximate to the SR 60

corridor between 43rd Avenue and Interstate 95.

A possible solution to the parkland need in the area of Vero Lakes Estates involves coordination

with the state. Recently, the state, through its Conservation and Recreational Lands (CARL)

Program, purchased approximately 7, I 00 known as the Coraci tract. The majority of the Coraci

Tract, approximately 5,000 acres, is located in the northern part oflndian River County. Most of

this acquisition consists of environmentally-important land. However, a portion of this area

located north ofC.R. 5!2 across ftom Vero Lake Estates, is pasture and is not considered

environmentally-important. The size and location ofthat site meet the requirements for a north

county park, and the county is in the process of negotiating a lease with the state to develop

approximately:± 100 acres a north county regional park.

According to data contained in the Recreation and Open Space Element, by 2020 the county will

need 340 acres, or 106 more than the existing 234 acres, for the unincorporated parts of the south

district. To address this need, the county should acquire and develop additional parkland in the

south district, particularly along the S.R. 60 corridor.

Although the LOS standard for oceanfront and riverfront parks is currently being exceeded, the

county's LOS standard for ocean and riverfront (specialty) parks will continue to decline.

This anticipated decline can be attributed to the following factors: 1) the projected population

growth of the County; 2) the amount of land adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean and the IRL are

finite; and 3) properties located along the shorelines of the Atlantic Ocean and the IRL are highly

desirable for development and generally require a considerable expenditure of public funds to

acquire.

State law requires local governments to adopt level of service (LOS) standards for park acreage.

However, the types of parks for which LOS standards are set are left to the discretion of the local

government. Therefore, Indian River County is considering exercising the option of

consolidating ocean and riverfront park acreage with other park categories, rather than adopting a

separate LOS standard for ocean and riverfront parks.

As the County continues to develop and densities increase, open space will be reduced. With the

conversion of vacant land to developed uses, however, the need for open space becomes

increasingly important. To some extent, open space is provided by the corridors associated with

road rights-of-way and also by required on-site open space or "green" areas. However, it is

necessary to ensure that sufficient corridor open space is provided along roadways, and that the

County continues to enforce land development regulations relating to on-site open space.

Community Dcvelnpment Department Indian River County 69 '1"7.:..,.

COnmrJ!h'eJislye Plan • · · ·' ' Coastal Managm~nt Element

Within the Coastal Zone, large areas of pastoral open space; such·as the St. Sebastian River Buffer Preserve, the Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge, .and the Oslo Riverfront Conservation Area, are under public ownership. As publicly owned lands; these areas will remain undeveloped and serve open space functions in perpetuity. Similarly, county owned river parks and environmental lands that are classified as pastoral open space have equal protection by virttfe of their public ownership. ·

Other pastoral open space areas are privately owned and threatened by development. Inclu!ied in this category are estuaritie and freshwater wetlands scattered throughout the. county. While. various regulatory measures at the federal, state, and local level inhibit development of these areas, pressure for development will continue.

Parks and LOS standards are addressed in the Recreation and Open Space Element. Archeolbgical resources, environmentally sensitive (pastoral open space) areas, agricultural (utilitarian open space) areas, and historic roads are discussed in detail in the Conservation Element. · ·

• '" Public Access

A list of public access sites located throughout the county is contained in Table 9.7. Most public access points within the City ofV ero Beach are located at street ends with limited or no parking, and are designed to accommodate the surrounding residential communities;.they do not gener!lliy allow for access by the general public. ·

Overa.ll, p]!fblic access to the IRL and the beach is sufficient throughout the County. However, along the southern portion of the barrier island (proximate to Kansas City Colony subdivision) there are few public access points. Round Island Park, located just north of th~ Indian River/St. Lucie County line, is the only public access point with parking facilities on the southern portion of the barrier island. Most of the remaining parcels have been or are anticipated to be developed in the near future for single-family residences. Due to the configuration of the parcels 31'\d.bigh

cost of the land, there are few opportunities to increase public access ill this part of the comity. Additiona.l information is contained in the Recreation and Open Space Element.

Areas in Need of Redevelopment

Three (:;1) areas within the Coa8tal Zone of the .l,liiincorporated county currentlY contail). incompatible uses and experience varying degrees ofbliih:t ,These include the Oslo area in the . south county; the Gifford area in the central county and Wabasso in the north county. Each area has unique constraints and opportunities for redevelopment. Following is a summary from the · Futul:e Lab.d Use Element. ·

The Wabasso area is likely to undergo changes in the future as a result of its strategic access location to the barrie;r island. Future growth on the barrier island ~din th~, Sepa_s~an area to the Community Development Department lnj).lanRiver County 70

Comprehensive Plan· Coastal Management Element

north will act as a catalyst ofland use changes in this area. Also, the County developed the Wabasso Corridor Plan to ensure well managed growth in the area. One obstacle to. redevelopmenfin Wabasso will be the difficulty in assembling parcels large enough for commercial development from the large number of existing platted lots.

The Gifford area, located in the central portion of the county, is the largest of the .three (3) areas as well as the area with the most public investment. The Gifford area also contains a variety of uses ranging from industrial uses to single-family subdivisions and subsidized housing. Grand Harbor, a 2,000 unit planned development, and recent development actiVity in the Medical node (371h Street) have occurred. Nevertheless, the majority of the Gifford area located west ofU.S. Highway #1/FECRR corridor remains blighted.

The Oslo area is located west of U.S. Highway #1 along Oslo Road in the southern portion of the county. Oslo Road (9th Street S. W.) is a principal east/west arterial road in the south county. from U.S. Highway#! to Interstate 95. Itis expected thatthe county's third interchange to

. Interstate 9 5 will benefit the area.

The Housing Element and Economic Development Element contain additional information regarding the areas in need of redevelopment.

ECONOMY

The Indian River Lagoon accounts for an estimated 15 percent of the regional economy through recreation and commercial fishing activities. Due to the expansion of development, some agricultural operations are expected to relocate west of the designated Coastal Zone. However, the agricultural industry is expected to remain relatively stable for the foreseeable future .

. Impacts, to the local economy caused by permanent loss of commercial fishing operations, or seasonal unemployment will be offset by the expansion of service industries and light industry. A more detailed analysis is contained in the Economic Development J:<:lement.

Water-De:gendent and Water~Related U~es

Marina Siting

Due to natural resource constraints and federal, state, and local regulations; there are few areas in Indian River County conducive' to siting new marinas~ Based on an analysis of marina facility demand contained in the MPP, there is no need to. develop new marina facilities in Indian River County at this time. Expansion of existing facilities arid the removal ofwetslip distribution restrictions from marinas will be more than adequate to accommodate market demand for the foreseeable futUte. Nevertheless, consistent with DCA Rule 9J-5.012(15)(4) and. Chapter 380, F.S., the county has established criteria for the siting of new marinas based on the FDEP' s list .of general siting constraints.

CommunitY Developm.int Department' . Indian l'Uver County 71 Supplement 7: Ordinlince 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

( \ ;

c ; ···-:..;

Comprehen!dye Plan Coastal Management Element

Following is the Jist of factors considered by FDEP relating to i:narina siting:

)> proximity to popular boating destinations, such as an inlet or recreational area; )> proximity to the ICW; · > proximity to manatee aggregation· areas and manatee habitat; )> extent of manatee use; )> water depth and circulation; )> amount of overlap in patterns of use by manatees and boats; )> number of manatee mortalities; )> natural resource constraints; . )> boat facility demand/recreational needs; and )> ·upland site requirements

• Criteria for Siting Marin!ls

Site specific criteria which affect the siting of marinas and water-dependent uses in the unincorporated portion of Indian Riyer C0Ul1ty are contained in the coutii)i's land development regulations (LDRs). These existlhg,re~ations restrict the siting of co:rrumireial and recreational marinas in the unincorporated county to' areas zoned for commercial or industrial development. Furthermore, the county's WRs prohibit the siting of marinas in approved shellfish harvesting areas and areas having existing seagrass beds.

Based on an analysis of;FDEP manatee data, additional marina siting criteria were developed for the Indian River CoUnty Manatee Protection and Boating Safety Comprehensive Plan. 'These criteria are

1,used to determine which sections of the inland waters of the county are conducive to

marina siting. An area considered not conducive to the siting or expansion of marinas exhibits one or more of the folloWing constraints: 1) a historically high level ofwatercraft~related manatee mortality; 2) a. designated "high use" area, or similar r(d'ugia; 3) .dense{greater than 10 percent) seagrass cover~ge; 4) dense shoreline vegetation and/or. estuarine wetlands; or 5) inadequate water depths and/or poor circulation. Arei;JS considered the most desirable for marina siting or expansion exhibit few of the above listed·naturat resource constraints, and are located proximate to the ICW 'and/ or within five ( 5) miles of Sebastian rnlet~

T)le inland waters of Indian River CountY were screened with the above !jsted criteria in order to determine which areas of the county are the most conduciv~to marina siting. More detailed data and analysis regarding marina siting and expansion ar¢ contained in the Indian River County Manatee Protection and Boating Safety (;omptehensive Plat):. Following is a summary of the results of the screening process contained in the plan. These zones correspond to the map depicted in Figure 9.30. ·

Community Development Department Indian River County 72 S~tpplement 7; Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

72.1

FIGURE 9.30

MARINA SITING ZONES

Jl

) ~, __ .... -.:.Y,

I'

.·,, _....:...,

Comprehensive Pla11: Coastal Management Element

, • Zone 1

Located in Brevard County and lndia.n River County, ·the, St. Sebastian River hosts one of the largest, aggregations of manatees, and also maintains one of the highest tnanat!3e mortality locations within the IRL system. Between 1974 and 2003, seven (7) watercraft-related manatee mortalities (Sin Brevard County, 2 in Indian River CountY)have occurred within the St. Sebastian River. S~agrass is

, not abundant within the St. Sebastian River; however, there are shoreline vegetation resources that serve as a food source for the manatee. In addition, there are important freshwater attractant areas (e.g., the river itself, C-54 canal). Taking all these conditions together, the St. Sebastian River provides significant. loafing, feeding, and breeding habitat. Due to the remote locations of Dale Wimbrow Park and Donald MacDonald Park, these boat ramps are the least used l<~unch sites in the county .. Due to low on-water traffic, high manai,ee mortality and high manatee abundance, Zone 1 is not a conducive area for future boat facility development or additional boat ramps/lanes.

• Zone2

Based on historic manatee mortality data and telemetry data, the probability of manatee mortality for .Zone 2 is 10w. Within Zone 2, there are ext;;lnsive dense seagrass beds, approved shellfish harvesting areas, and the Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge and the Refuge's associated wildlife., Based on the useofthis zone for habitat, the siting of new boat facilities should be prohibited. In order to control growth in existing boat facilities, additional restrictions shquld be placed on the expansion, rearrangement, or conversion of existing boat facilities. ·

• Zone3

Compared to other areas of the county, there is relatively little mangrove funge along the shoreline ofthe lRL in theCityofSebastian/northern Iudian.River Colll+ty area:. There are, however, extensive seagrass beds that must be taken into consid\)ration during any review or authorizatiqn of any proposed project in this Zone.Jn addition, there have been 7 watercraft-relate4 deaths inZo:q.e 3, wit!) 4 of these occurring since 1998 (1998, 1999, 2000, and 2002). Existing marina channels within this zone are several feet deeper than the average adjacent water depth of one (i) to two (2} feet. Approximately 500 yards from the City of Sebastian shoreline, the water depth increases to four ( 4) to fiv:e (5) feet. Existing marinas located within Zone 3 are proximate to the ICW and Sebastian Inlet. The commercial; recreational and residential marinas in Zone 3 generate the highest level of on-water traffic attributed to marinas in: the county ..

It should be noted that there is little potential for dry slip expansion ili the City of Sebastian due to the closeness of Indian River Drive to the shoreline ofthe IRL. However, existing commercial and recreational marinas, could increase their number of Wet slips, and utilize adjacent parcels along the . lRL or west of Indian ~ver Drive to expand upland facilities,

Community Development Department Indian River Connty 73 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Comprehensive Plan Coaml Management Element · Boat facility and boat ramp usage in this zone has been established over time and does notappear to have had a significant impact on manatees. Sublllerged aquatic vegetation is extensive in this zone, resulting in a limiting factor in how built-out the submerged bottom and shoreline can become. While boat facility and boat ramp development should be encouraged in this zone, it .is recognized that there.still exists the potential for manatee impacts based on recentwatercraft-related d~aths; therefore, all boat facility and boat ramp'development within this zone should be required to meet site-specific criteriarelating to manatee protection and boating safety.

• Zone4

Zone 4 is not favorable for siting or expanding boatfacilities. Although seagrass coverage is sparse in the Jungle Trail Narrows 'section of the IRL, manatee abundance is significant. Large numbers of manatees have also been observed in the seagtass-covered coves· ofJolms Island, west ofPople Point. and within McCullery Cove. SiX ( 6) watercraft-related manatee mortalities were documented in or near the Indian River Narrows since 1996. The Jungle Trail Narrows has been identified by the FWC as one of eight "hot spots" in the state where manatee abundance, geophysical characteristics, and huma:p. activities create an area ofhigh probability of negative effects on manatees. Other issues related to boat facility or boat ramp development include the presence of archeological and historic resources, including Jungle Trail, and shoreline erosion.

Thefe arei no properties in Zone 4 with a commercial land use designation, thus recreational and commercial rn:.arinas are prohibited in Zone4. The existing ma:Xirn:um 1::100 powerboat to shoreline density ratio should be retained and applied to any proposed siting of a new residential marina in Zone 4, outside of the Jungle Trail Narrows and the town of Indian River Shores.

· Because of the sensitive nature of the Jungle Trails Narrows,. future boat facility and boat ramp development should be prohibited. Outside of the Jungle: Trails Narrows, there is limited opportunity for boat faeility and boilt ramp development dueto the upland zoning; however, there are limiting factors related to geophysical and natural resources, Much of the IRL west oftheiCW is vezy shallow, arid there are significantareas of submerged aquatic ~egetation (SA V). Therefore, some level of restriction should be placed on the areas of this zone outside of the Jungle Trails Narrows.

• ZoneS

The area along the western shoreline of Zone 5 exhibits moderate seagrass ·coverage, shallow water, and low manatee use. Zo.ne 5 does not contain the ICW and as a travel-way is· unsheltered from the wind. That, combined with the shallow water within this zone, results fu a low volume of watercraft use and low impacts to manatees in the zone. .

Due to a lack of natural resource constraints, a maximum powerboat to shoreline density ratio should not be applied to Zone 5.

Community Development .Department Indian River County 74 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

), ,.· I

"";··''•., ..

Camprehensi'lle Plan .. ·. Const;a.l Management Element

• Zone6

Three (3) watercraft-related manatee mortalities have occurred in. this zone: in the vicinity ofJohn's Island. in the vicinity of the Gifford Cut; and near the Vero BeachMunicipal Marina. Seagrasses are very sparse in this zone, being generally limited to a narrow band in the shallow waters around the islands in the lRL and in the shallow waters of McCuller's Cove; Water depths are generally much greater than in other areas of the lRL. The average water depth in much of this zone is significantly greater than the four (4) foot average water depth for the lRL as a whole. The probability of watercraft impact to manatees· is low since manatee use in this area is low,

The existing 1:100 powerboat-to shoreline density ratio should be retained for the portion·ofZone 6 lying within the Towu of Indian River Shores.

The portion of Zone 6lying withixrthe City ofVero Beach is conducive. to th(il expansion Of existing boat facilities. Furthermore, natural resource constraints, including fue presence of seagrass and shoreline vegetation, are 1ninimal. Due to a lack ofnatural resource constraints. and proposed expansion plans, a maximum shoreline/ density ratio should not be applied to fue portion of Zone 6 lying within the City ofVero Beach.

• Zone7

There appears to be little manatee use of the IRL west of the ICW, south ofHole in the Wall Island to the Lost Tree Islands, with the only exception being ma.tiatee use in the upland cut basin associated with the Grand Harbor Marina. Therefore, the overall probability of watercraft impacts to manatees north ofthe Merrill-Barber Bridge within Zone 7 is low. Due to· an overall lack of natural resource constraints and proposed expansion plans, a maximum shoreline/ density ratio should not be applied to Zone 7; ·

• Zone 8

Although no. manatee mortalities attributed to watercraft have been recorded· in Zone 8, the probability ofwatercraft impacts to manatees is high, since Zone 8 is a dense manatee abundance area. Large manatee aggregations have been documented in various areas ofthis zone including the Moorings Subdivision and Round Island Park. Part of the reason for the manatee. abundance may be fue warm water refuge at the City ofVero Beach Power Plant located across tile IRL west oftlieiCW in Zone 9. The existing maximurri 1: 100 powerboat to shoreline density ratio should be retained for Zone 8.

• Zone9

Within this zone, most of the land adjacent to fue IR.:b has been'~eemed environmentally sensitive due to the presence of estuarine wetlands. Five watercraft-related manatee mortalities have been recorded in Zone 9, including 2 i1l 2000 and 1 in 2001. The City ofVero Beach Power Plant is a significant manatee aggregation area resulting from the warm water discharge.

Community Development Department Indian River County 75 . Supplement 7: Ordinance_ 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Comorehenslve Pl1111 Coastal Mnaagement Element Portions of the residential canal system associated with the Power Plant have been identified by ), the FWC as one of eight "safe havens" in the state. The purpose of these "safe havens" is to provide areas for feeding, shelter, and birthing associated with warm water refi\ge site.s. Seagrass · d~nsity and manatee abundance increase just south of the South Relief Canal outfall; and combined with the abundance associated with the Power Plant increll$e,. the probability of manatee impacts with watercraft in Zone 9, Therefore, the existing maximum 1; 100 powerboatto shoreline d~sityratio Should be retained forZone.9.

In addition to applicable municipal.or County regulations, .a proposed ma,rina facility would al.so have to comply with the regulations set forth in the Aquatic Preserve Chapter 18-20 of the Florida Statues. This would include any proposed development or expansion directly fronting the IRL, excluding the portion of the lRL within the City ofVero Beach, which is not included in. an Aquatic Preserve. Furthermore, a proposed marina facility would be subject to a· Development of Regional Impact (DRI) review by the TCRPC and USACOE permitting requirements.

In contrast to low potential for new commercial marinas, private and public/private multi-slip facilities associated with multi"family developments are likely to increase in the coming years, as amenities to new riverfront residential developments. The location of these future residential marinas can be reasonably predicted by the existence of multi-family zoning along the shoreline ofthe IRL, which is the zoning in which these types offacilities are allowed

Aquaculture

As aquaculture becomes more established, the need to develop policies to encourage a safe and viable industry becomes more apparent At the present time, aquaculture in Indian River County is limited to approximately 75 acres of privately owned submerged lands near the Sebastian Inlet.

Aside from water quality and water circulation problems, one of the major oqstacles to this industry has been the ability to acql,lire leases for appropriate bottom lands from the state. To address this issue;. the Board of County Commissioners recently supported the concept of creating.an aquaculture use zone within the bqundaries of the Pelical'llsland NWR. This proposed zone would double the amount acreage available .. for aquaculture by 125 acres. A more detailed review of aquaculture is contained in the Conservation Element.

INFRASTRUCTURE

An analysis of the individual Sub-Elements of the Infrastructure Element is briefly described in the following text. The Sub-Elements include; the Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element; the Potable Water Sub" Element; the Solid Waste Sub-Element; the Natural Groundwater .1\quifer Recharge Sub-Element; and the Stotmwater Management Sub-Element. Also; included is a brj.ef overview of the Transportation Element. A detailed analysis of each subject is provided in the aforementioned element and sub~elements .. , Community Development Department Indian River County 76 Supplement 7: Ordinanee :1005-042, adopted !J/13/05

I I

Comprehenslv!! l'Jan .. · Coutal Management Element

Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element

The County is focused on increasing the availability of. centralized service. As a result,. the .. number of wastewater treatment plants serving Indian River County in the coastal zone has been reduced from 76 to 12. Nevertheless, the cUn:ent widespread utilization ofOSDS (septic) systems continues to degrade the water quality of the surficial "shallow" aquifer, as well as the Indian River Lagoon (IRL ). ..

Continued expansion of sewer service in the Urban Service Area (USA), along with an active program of retrofitting established development,. should provide adequate facilities as. the population increases; .In addition to being more economically efficient, expansion of regional wastewater treatment facilities will reduce the detrimental effects of ground and surface water pollution. ..

Potable .. Water Sub-Element

The major sources of potable water in Indian River County are the. shallow water aquifer and the Floridan ~qui fer. While the County utilizes the Floridan aquifer for its water supply, the City of Vero Beach and nearly 20,0QO .. private wells throughout the County draw potable water from the surficial "shallow" aquifer. ..

An environmental concern involves Reverse Osmosis (RO), which is the treatment process utilized by the County. The use ofRO treatment a,llows the County to utilize the Floridan aquifer. Gounty RO plants discharge small quantities of extremely saline water into fresh water canals. These discharges have potential to upset the ecological balance of the receiving waterbody, the Indian River Lagoon. Therefore, to prevc;:nt degradation oflRL surface waters, Oltgoing monitoring of discharges from RO plants is necessary. . .

Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element

The Floridan aquifer is largely protected from contamination by an overlying impermeable rock layer. Unlike the deeper Floridan aquifer, the surficial !lquifer is highly susceptible to contamination from a variety of sources. These include, but are not limited to:· industrial waste, agricultural pesticides, fuel leaks, and sept,ic tanks. However, intrusion ofsaltwater caused by · overdrawing water from both the Floridan aquifer and surficial aquifer is the primary concern.

Saltwater intrusion into the Floridan aquifer has the potential to increase the salinity of soils. This in turn can irtl:pact native vegetation and reduce agricultural yields. Also, saltwater intrusion may increase the cost of treating- water for public supply. On the barrier island and in the vici!lity of Wabasso on the mainland, saltwatedntrusion has jhe potential to damage the Scebastian · freshwater Lens, a .confined pocketofpotable water within the Floridan aquifer ... Once contaminated by a saltwater intrusion, it is unlikely that the Sebastian Fresh Water Lens could be

Community Development Department Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-04Z; adopted 9/13/05 ·

, . , Indian River County 77

Comprehensive Plan Coastal Man!ll!ement Element restored. Regarding the surficial aqui(er, evidence of saltwater intrusion is present from one-half ) (Yo) to one and one-half (1 V.) mil\)s west of the IRL. -- ;

The County has taken measures to delay the effects of saltwater intrusion by expanding the use of treated wastewater for irrigation. Also, the County's land development regulations promote the use of water-conserving landscape plant materials (xeriscape).

Solid Waste Sub-Element

The County operates one (1) landfill and five {5) transfer stations within the Coastal. Zone. Issues regarding disposal of solid Waste include: increasing the percentage ofthe·Wastestrearn that is recycled; establishing a recycling~based industrial park; ensuring adequate landfill capacity; and eliminating.illegal dumping at transfer stations .

. Stormwater Management Sub-Element

Indian River County revised its Storm water Management and Flood Protection Ordinance (LDR Chapter 930) in 1990. The purpose of those revisions was to ensure protection of the County's development and natural resources through stormwater and floodplain management ,and to reduce stomiwater pollutant loadjngs to the IRL. The County's Level~of-Service (LOS) standards established, in 1990, afford an adequate measure of flood protection for life and property.

LDR Chapter 930 requires all new development, including single-family dwellings, to have an on-site drainage pla:J) cap~itble of mitigating the impact of a ~5 year/24 hour storm event. The county also has a requirement that; as redevelopment or expansions of existing buildings occur, .storm water d.eficiencies in terms of quality and quantity must be corrected .. The current LOS standard for drainage .basins is the 2 year/24 hour storm event. LOS standards, however, have not yet been implemented for all of the drainage sub-basins within the county.

The City ofV ero Beach, City of Sebastian, and the Town of Indian River Shores have stormwater regulations that contain stormwater quantity and quality performance criteria requirements. Furthermore, the City pf Sebastian is in the process of developing a stormwater master plan and irilplementi:ng a user-fee based stormwater utility. Recently, the City of Fellsmerl;l has expressed interest in upgrading;its stormwater management facilities. The . IRFWCD, SRWCD; FFWCD and SJWCD have regulations for permitting collhections to district, canals. I{owever, the IRFWCD is currently the only water control district in the County that has adopted level-of-service standards for pipe and culvert sizing.

Altl:iough the County has adopted Flood Protection Level-of-Service standards (FPLOS) standards, tl:te County does uothave adopted Water Quality Level-of•Service {WQLOS) standards for stormwater. The Local Goverl1lnent Comprebensive Planning and Land Deve~opment Regulation Act and Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C. require the County to adopt Level-of• . Service (LOS) standards for stotmwater management facilities. These stormwater LOS standards CommunitY Development Department · Xndla.n River County 78 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005·042, adopted 9/13/05

c ··~.

Comprehensive Plan. Coa:rtal Manaeement Element

must address both stormwater quality and quantity and should be expressed as an attribute of a watershed, rather than an attribute of a facility.

In response to new Rule 9J-5.011(2)(c)(5), a new policy has been added to Objective 7 of the Stormwater Management Sub-Element to address the establishment ofWQLOS. ·The County will develop WQLOS standards based upon the Pollutant Load Reduction Goals (PLR.Gs)

·currently being developed by the St. Jolms River Water Management District (SJRWMD). Once established, the WQLOS will be used to target nee!ied retrofits to existing stormwater management facilities, and to ensure that future developments remain in compliance with SJRWMD and Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) regulatiqns.

As mentioned in the Stormwater Management Sub-element, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) rules are expected to be finalized within the next few years. Once adopted, the EPA will require medium-sized municipalities (population 100,000 to.250,000) to obtain a NPDES permit to discharge municipal storrilwater: Overall, state and federal regulations are expected to becoming more stringent in the near future. To meei the challenge of these new regulations, Indian River County will develop a stormwater master p!'W, The County's stormwater master plan will focus on the following issues:

)-... Conducting a comprehensive inventory documenting the location, capacity and condition of all stormwater facilities throughout the County;

Identification of existing and potential problems, needs; opportunities and constraints;

)-. Implementing a 20 year drainage improvement program;

)- Establishing a stormwater utility; )> Securing dedicated cost-share funding sources, such as EPA Section 319 Grants

and Surface Water Improvement Management (SWIM) funds from the SJRWMD to retrofit .existing stormwater facilities; and,

initiating a pro-active approach to maintenance of sto'rmwater management facilities. ·

Issues regarding the effects ofnon~point source pollution on the Indi;!n River Lagoon were discussed under the previous sub-section entitled "Water Quality Conditions." ·

Transportation Element

The county, in accordance with state law, has an established Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) which covers the majority of the transportation network in tb:e Coastal Zone. At the present time, most of the· County's roadway capacity meets its designated level-of-service. Also, through the Community Coach system, the Coulity provides limited public transportation within the Coastal Zone.

Community Development Departm~ilt Indian River County 79 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Comprehensive Plan Coastal ManMeroent Element

Two (2) regional airports, located In the City ofV ero Beach and the City of Sebastian, respectively, are located in the Coastal Zone. There are no existing or proposed rail yards, rail

. tennimils, or deepwater port facilities within Indian River County.

NATURAL DISASTER PLANNING

Of all the ·potential threats to the population and economy of Indian River County; the impact of a hurricane is the most ominous and significant ·Two factors, continued expansion of the population and development hi the Coastal Zone, coupled with a Jack of ~perience of the inhabitants of this region in coping with a major hurricane, necessitates greater planning and awareness.

Until an a:rea experiences a major hurricane, the use of theory, probability and behavioral studies must be substituted for actual data analysis. The hurricane <?Vacuation analysis section is based on the TCRPC Hurricane Evacuation Study. Additionally, a post-storm evaluation of the . evacuation procedure utilized for Hurricane Erin (1995) was made by the County Department of Emergency Services (EMS). This report indicated that the County .was prepared for the stonn .and successfully conducted an orderly evacuation of the Coastal High Hazard Area. However, the report revealed several areas of emergency preparedness, especially shelter capacity, need to be improved. Moreover, Hurricane Erin was classified only as a minimal (Category I) hurricane.

Coastal High Hazard Area

When determining the appropriate land use designations for land within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), the county must consider the following facts:

)> The appropriateness ofland use designatiorts; including land use designations' impact on hurricane evacuation, was considered prior to plan adoption in 1990;

)> Since plan adoption in 1990, the CHHA has been expanded. The expansion of the CHHA, however, is based on a rule. change. Other than hurricane evacuation conditions, actual conditions and ci:fcumstances affecting the land have not changed; and

Undeveloped estuarine wetlands adjacent to the Indian River Lagoon have a future land use desigll.ation ofC·2 (Conservation, up to 1 unitper 40 acres)

For these reasons, the comprehensive plan's land use densities and intensities within the CHI:IA are appropriate.

Even ifit were warranted, a reduction inland use densities and intensities would not be · financially feasible for the county. That is due to the passage of state property rights legislation . limiting the ability oflocal governments to. impose regulations that would devalue private property without compensation.

Community Development Department Indian River County 80 Supplement 7: Ordlna.nce 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

),

·~ .. ~ ... ''

Corom:Giumslye Plan Coastal Manaee~~W~t:Elwcut

The county, however, must ensure that land use map densities within the CEllA are not " increased" By limiting future development in the CHHA to existing allowable densities, the county will ensure that changes to the land use plan will not increase risks associated with development in the CHHA. Additionally, the county should limit capital'expenditures for infrastructure within the CHHA to what is necessary to maintairi the. adopted levels-of-service for the existing allowable land use density and intensity ..

····' Finally, .the county recognizes the difficulty.of, in the event of a natural disaster, evacuating adult congregate living facilities, nursing homes, homes for the aged, total care facilities, and similar developments. For that reason, the county has adopted a policy prohibiting new development of such uses within the CHHA.

Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan

• Evacuation

According to recent estimates, only ten (10) percent of the inhabitants of this region have experience coping with a major hurricane. Furlhennore, due to the catastrophic affects associated.with HUrricane Andrew; a behavioral analysis conducted by the TCRPC in the Hurricane Evacuation Study indicates that more residents will evacuate and seek shelter. Greater planning and preparedness are needed to counteract the relative inexperience 0fresidents, and to . ensure an orderly evacuation is conducted. .

Certain components of the hurricane evacuation process are variable, such as, population and the number of vehicles requiring evacuation (which varies due to storm intensity), and the intensity of the storm. Other components in the hurricane evacuation process offer potential for improvements to reduce evacuation .times. These include: the vehicular capacity of evacuation routes, notification and warning, behavioral patterns, hun:icane preparedness, and planning.

The actual number of people that evacuate their location is g~erally dependent upon the size and .. intensity Qf the approaching hurricane; the location of the individual in relationship to 1;he coast, and whether itis perceived that the residence being occupied can withstand the estimated destructive forces of the approaching storm. Notwithstanding, the largest concentrations of evacuees are located on Orchid Island, and in mobile home parks along the S.R.60 and u.s,· Highway #1 corridors. According to TCRPC studies and the Indian River County Emergency Management Dtvision, residents in the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) are more likely to · evacuate earlier than those residents located closer to public shelters.

Both heavy rainfall and high winds usually precede landfall of a hurricane. Both of these factors may create a reduction in evacuation times, as traveling conditions worsen. Heavy rainfall iruiy reduce roadway capacity by 15 to 30 percent. Also, winds in excess .of 4Q.MPH create extremely difficult and dangerous travel c.onditions, especially for bridge and other open area crossings.

Community Develojlinent Department Indian Rive.r County 81 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Comprehenslro l'lan Co•stal Mnnagem~nt Element High winds were calculated to reduce capacity by an additiona115 percent. Collectively, in a 1 \ worse case scenario, this could reduce roadway capacities up to 60 percent, thereby, increasing clearance times. (Clearance time is discussed in the Existing Conditions section.)

The position ofthe two CoBRA zones is iniportant to hurricane evacuation procedures, S.R. · AlA, a two lane thoroughfare, is the only north-south evacuation route for the entire pqpulation of the barrier island. This also includes most of the "South-south" beaches. of Brevard County and the northern (contiguous) portion qfNorth Hutchinson Island· in St. Lucie County. It becomes critical to the evaeuation process to ensure that these areas are cleared prior to· any threats of storm dc;struction. Usually,. significant storm surge height is not encountered ear:lier . than four (4) to five (5) hours prior to.!andfall. However, storm surge varies greatly with storm intensity, duration, direction and location, and natural coastal and off-shore features.

Generally, the detennination of a high probability of a direct strike of a hurricane cannot be made earlier than 12 hours in advance. The high degree of variability of hurricane strength, direction and speed, would considerably alter the actual, necessar:y required evacuation order. However, the need for early warnings, prompt evacuation orders and expedient evacuation procedures to ensure public safety, cannot be over emphasized.

During a hurricane evacuation, there are four possible destinations. available for an evacuee. These include: public shelters, homes of friends and relatives, hotels and motels, and an out-of· county destination. The site destination to which .an evacuee goes is deter,mined by severf!]. factors, such as the time available before landfall of the storm; evacuee's inco!lle; evacuee's dependents; and evacuee's location in relation to the hl)rricane's predicted landfall.

·A category ill or greater storm with a:J:dgh to moderate probability of impacting the Indian River County coast would sub$tantiate a mandatory .evacuation notice of all residents located within the Hurricane Vulnerability Zone (HVZ). This area includes all of the coastal barrier island, lands lyitJg proximate to the St. Sebastian River; and most ofthe areaseast of U.S. Highway #1.

The addition of a. four· lane fixed span bridge, the new Men-ill·Barber bridge, has helped maintain evaclllltion times.· However, a significant reduction in clearance time. is unlikely to be realized withoute:Xpansion of the County'srqad.network.<The addition of a new interchange located at 9th Street SW (Oslo Road) and Interstate 95 would help mitigate the impact of future development in southern portion of the County. However, federal funding will be necessary to complete that roadway improvement. .

Recent developments on the north barrier island, however, indicate that future population increases in that area will be le.ss than expected. Both the Town of Orchid and the Windsor Polo Club developments on the. northern barrier island are being built out at densities less than originally projected •. In addition,- it is anticipated that many of. the· units· in these developments wili be occupied during the peak( non• hurricane) season only, thereby further reducll:tg the at-risk population. Moreover, an ongoing cooperative effort with state andfederal governmental . agencies to acquire enviromnentally-sensitive and enviromnentally-important lands in the Archie (-·· · - .)

Community Development Department lndian Rl:ver County 82 Supplement 7: Ordinanee l005-04l, ad~pted 9/13/05

'·'"'""'

ComprO!t~nslve Plan·· Coastlll Mana!!e!!l!!!lt ljlement

Carr NWR (on the northern barrier island) will further reduce the density of development and number of potential evacuees from that area.

• Shelter Capacity

As previously mentioned in the. Existing Conditions section, the. County has a safe shelter capacity deficit of3;216 spaces for a Category I hurricane, and a deficit qf6,784 spaces for a Category II or greater hurricane (IR.C Emergency Management Division).

There are limited resources available to meet the ever~increasing demand for expanded shelter . capacity. Presently,' all of the County's shelters are located at public. schools. As. a result, most public shelters were located, designed and constructed to serve population demands, with public shelter being a secondary concern.. Also, most ofthe designated public shelters are not sufficient to withstand the force of a storm in excess of a Category II hurricane.

In order to address the current deficit of safe shelter capacity, the County should seek funding · through the State's Emergency Management and Assistant Trust Fund Gr.ant program to retrofit and upgrade existing public shelter facilities. Furthermore, the County must cooperate with the Indian River County School Board concerning the siting of new public shelters. The '!Refuge of Last Resort" concept urges evacuees to seek shelter in the nearest "substantial buildi:ng"·imce sustained gale force winds (above 39 MPH) become present. Guidance on selecting shelters and taking precautionary measures is provided in pubic information materials. According to the. Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP), this concept is not approved or condoned for the resid.ents of Indian River County. Therefore, an evacuation order must be given: early enough to allow sufficient evacuation time prior to the arrival of gale force winds (gr~!:lter than 39 MPH). Overall, if subjected to a major. huxricane, the county could.be successfully evacuated. However; as indicated in the CE.MP, shelter strategies must be based on citiz~, cooperation, staggered evacuation, and best available shelter options until·the shelter deficit can be reduced.

• Marine Evacuation ·

Presently, approximately 8,900 vessels are. registered in Indian River County. Furthermore, the majority of the popuhition; nearly 90 perc.en:t, have not experienced a major hurric.ane.. The number of vessels coupled with an overall lack of hurricane experience creates a dangerous situation for the. marine community. ·In fact, nearly 25 percent of all fatlil.ities associated with hurricanes can be attributed to people trying to save their vessels in deteriorating storm conditions (source: Hurricane Manual for Marine Interests in Indian River County).

Development haneduced mangrove swamps, inlets and canals which boaters used to moor · vessels during hurricanes. Consequently, there are insufficient safe refuges for vessels in Indian River County. The County Dep~ent of Emergency Services, in cooperation with the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) has distributed educational materials to boat owners and marina operators, including an informational brochure entitled "Hw:Pcane Ma!lual for Marine

Community Development Department Indian River County 83 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Comprehensive Plan Coastal Management Element · Interests in Indian River County." Nevertheless, it is the responsibility of individual boat arid/or ). marina owners to take precautionary measures to protect property when disaster threatens.

• Hazard Mitigation

Hazard mitigation. is an ongoing process whlch may proceed and/or follow a -storm event. The long-term objectives of hazard mitigation include the preservation and enhancement of the· benefiCial uses o:t'haza:rd prone areas, the protection of life and propertY through the reduction or avoidance ofunnecessary·and uneconomical uses of hazard-prone areas, and the preservation of natural systems that reduce impacts. . Most of the development on Orchid Island has occurred over the past several decades arid has consisted pri.marily of single-family residences. The minimal amount of historic .storm damage within the Unincorporated County can generally be attributed' to several pre-hazard mitigation· factors. County policies contained in this element and the Future Land Use Elementllinit development densities on the island. Also, to further discourage development and reduce the potential for damage in these areas, the county limits infrastructure expansion on an as-needed basis. Furthermore, structures must be built seaward of the County Dune Stabilization Setback Line (D;S.S.L.), which serves to mitigate potential storm impacts· somewhat by preserving the dune system.

The county must continue to coordinate with the FDEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems regarding constructiqn seaward of the Coastal Construction CoQ.trol Line (CCCL). Stringent State construction requirements pertaihing to structures s.eaward of the CCCL help to reduce some of the potential storm damage these building may experience. ·

Inll.ian Rivet County has an aclopted Coastal Construction Code. Contained in LDR Chapter 402, the Coastal Construction Code applies to. the "coastal.building zone." This zone of regulation is defined as being the land area from the seasonal high-water line of the Atlantic Ocean to a line five thousand (5,000) feet landward of the CCCL or the entire barrier island, which ever is less. The Coastal Construction Code requires minimum standards for the design and construqtion of buildings·and structures (other than coastal protective structures), thereby reducing the detrimental effects of hurricanes on the coastal areas of the county.

r •• ,

Additional pre-hazard mitigation strategies have include<! the purchase of envirom:p.entallysensitive lands'located within the CHHA. As of 1997, the County has purchased or jointly-· purchased, and effectively removed from development, approximately 619 acres· of floodplains, and over 3,400 linear feet of oceanfront property. The CEMP identifies the following actions as possible post-disaster strategies: updating FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs); adoption/enforcement of more stringent building codes; and relocation of infrastructure vulneraple to hlll'ricanes. · · ·


t'

-~

Comprehenilve Plan . · C•ast!!l Monagement Element

• Mutual Aid Agreements

Mutual aid agreements can increase resources available to a Co:unty following a disaster, thereby

improving response and recovery efforts. Indian River County has mutual aid agreements with

four adjoining. counties: St. Lucie, Brevard, Okeechobee and Osceola Counti~s. The County is

also a participant in the Statewide Mutul!l Aid Agreement for Catastrophic Response and

Recovery. Under this agreement, the Florida Department of Emergency Management (FDEM) is authorized to make available any equipment; services and/or facilities owned or organized by the ·

State or other counties, upon request by the Emergency Management Director (CEMP, 1997).

Post-Disa~ter Recovery and Redevelopment According to the CEMP, economic impi!Ctswhich would affect tb,e County in the event of a

hurricane include:. interruption ofbusiness and financial transactions; cost ofreplaeement of damaged/de~troyed buildings; continuance of fixed charges during shutdown; loss of rent; and

income.

• Recovery

Short-term recovery issues that remain to be formally addressed include: issuance of emergency

building permits, contractor licensing req\.rirements, accreditation of building inspectors, issuance

of permits for temporary. housing, and the enactment of a short-term moratorium on zoning

following a natural disaster. To address these and other recovery and redevelopment issues, the

county will appoint a task force to devise of Post-Disaster Recovery and Redevelopment Plan.

• Redevelopment and Reloo.ation ·

All public structures and/or facilities which exhibit repeated stopn damage must be periodically

evaluated for relocation and/or redesign to alleviate future destrUction. "Notwithstanding, the.

County will maintain public access to beaches by reconstructing dune crossover structures

damaged from a storm event.

The areas of the County most likelY to experience damage inflicted by a hurricane ate loc.ated

oceanwa.,rd of the County's Dune Stabilization Setback Line (DSSL). Many of these residences

were built prior to updated coastal building and zoning regulations, a.Qd were constructed on slab

(poured) foundations, making them especially susceptible to structural failure caused by storm

erosion.

The relatively small number of structures exhibiting potential storm damage within the

unincorporated County does not justify an extended relocation program. To limit future losses in

the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), the County requires structures exhibiting total storm

damages exceeding 50 percent of their assessed value to be located landward of the DSSL.

Severe beach erosion caused by a tropical storm or hurricane to some lots, especially in the

Community Development Department Indian River c;:ounty 85 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005.042, adopted 9/13/05

Comprehe~slve Plait,, Coastl!l Management Element

Ambersand Beach area, might render them unbuildable. Following a severe storm event, the county should discourage redevelopment in these areas by not supporthtg any effort to mitigate these losses, and by not permitting the reconstruction of beach front lots which suffer erosional loss to the extent that they b,ecome' unbuildable under county and/or state regulations.

Recent developments throughout the County have been incorporating drainage systems which meet the stoimwater management requirements ,of the County and the S.)Rw:MD. Also, to reduce potential flood damage, the Cotinty also requires all new cofistruction elevations ~ be at least 6 fuches above tlie base flood elevations depicted on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood maps

As identified above, little development has occurred which Would require redevelopment. , However; if necessary, redevelopment in these areas could occur in two ways. First, retrofitting or expansion of storm water management fucilities. to improve, the capacity of the system would lessen the likelihood of flood:i:ttg without extensive property renovation. The second approach , would require the renovation or removal of individual structures. It is likely that the second method would occur only in those areas with severe flooding problems or where the economic, value of the structure does not warrant the maintenance expense. The first method, the improvement of the drainage sy~tem itself, is the preferred method in Indian River County.

The County Utilities Department has identified several water or sanitary sewer lines Which span , existing drainage canals. These include: an 8 inch water main spanning the South, Relief Canal at 20th Avenue, a 6 inch force main spanning the Main ReliefCanal af58th, Avenue and a20 i.D.ch water main spanning the North Relief Canal at 58th A venue The exposure of these lines creates the potential for loss or damage should flood waters undermine the structures. At the present time, the County does not plan to relocate or redesign these lines; however, if damage does occur, their design and relocation would be evaluated at that time. · ·

The only County owned arid operated regional facility within the Hurricane Vulnerability Zone (HVZ) is the North Beach RIO (rev!;}I'se osmosis) water plant, and associated Sea Oaks WTP (wastewater treatment plant). · Both of these facilities are scheduled to be decommissioned by the . end of 1998, once the North County Reverse Osmosis Water Treatment Plant and the expansion of the North County Waste Water Treatment Plant ate completed, Gurrently, no other county owned infrastrUcture is located Within theCHHA, With the exception6f dune walkover structures,. a feW street terminations, and some county park facilities.

Commu:rllty ))everopment Department Indian Rive,r county 86 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

/ ),

(

..

'.,.. ....... ~

Colnprehensiye Plan. ·

GOAL. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES

GOAL

Coastal Maoilgement Element.

To protect, maintain and enhance coastal resources and provid(l for the enjoyment of the social, economic and natural benefits of these resources, while reducing the p.otentialloss of life, and public and private expenditures in the coastal zone.

OBJECTIVE! Natural Resource Protection

Using 1990 data as a baseline, through 2020, th(lre will be no signific1111treductions in the overall amount of terrestrial and marine resources within the coastal zone of Indian River County •.

Policy J .1: The county shall not permit development ih areas c:leeilled environmentallysensitive and environmentally-important unless the criteria established in the following sections of the Comprehensive Plan are met:

Comprehensive Wetlands Management Program (CWMP), as outlined in the Conservation Element; Policies 1.6 and 1.7ofthe Future Land Use Element; and, Policies of Objectives 5 and 60fthe Conservation Element.

Policy 1.2: As set forth in the CWMP and Policy 1.6 of the Future Land Use Element, all estuarine wetlands and deepwater habitats in Indian River County shall be deemed environmentally-sensitive and designated as C-2 on the future land use map. The extent of estuarine wetlands on C-2 designated lands shall be b~sed on a jurisdictional wetlands boundary determination, as verified by the Environmental Planning Section, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida Depa:rtmmt .ofEnvirqnmental Protection or the St. Jolms River Water Management DiStrict. Land de~ignated C-2 shall be afforded the following protective measures:

)> · Development on C-2 designated wetlands shall be limited to one (1) unit per 40 acres, subject to approval of jurisdictional agency wetlands alteration permits;

For development projects, having C-2 designated lands and coittiguoll!l uplands, the county shall allow J'l.density transfer of one (1) unit per acre from the .wetlands · portion to the upland portion of the subject property, provided tb:at the undl)r!ying zoning density of the receiving upland portion is not increased by more than 50 percent. Such density transfers shall be limited to planned residential · developments (PDs);

Community Development Department · Indian River County S7 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Comprehensive Plan Coastal Mami2ernent Element . )> · No density transfers from off-site lands, and rief density bonuses shall be permitted / . .. '1,

within PD projects on C-2 designated lands; a!ld, r .

)> The county shall allow a density transfer of one (1) unit per acre from C-2 estuarine wetlands to non-contiguous uplands, provided that the receiving uplands are developed as a residential PD, and the underlying zoning density of the receiving uplands is not increased by more than 20 percent.

· Policy 1.3: All significant tracts of xeric scrub and coastal/tropical hammock communities, larger than five (5) acres, shall be dii'!'IDed environmentally-important; and shall be afforded protective measures, including transfer of density rights (TDRs), cluster

·.development requirements, and native upland set-aside requirements, as set forth in Policy 6.12 of the Conservation Element.

Policy 1.4: Environmental surveys shall be required for developments proposed in environmentally-sensitive and environmentally-important areas. The focus of these surveys shall be: jurisdictional wetland boundaries, natural vegetative communities, the presence of existing or potential wildlife habitat and/or the presence of threatened or endangered species of flora or fauna.

Policy 1.5: As set forth in Policy 7.2 of the Conservation Element, the county shall coordinate field inspections, enVironmental survey reviews, and habitat preservation measures on a site development basis with federal and state agencies concerning the protection of endangered species, .threatened species, and species of special concern. Where appropriate, the county will require a habitat conservation plan.

Policy 1.6: The county shall protect sea turtles and their nesting habitats by implementing · the protection measures listed under Policy 7, 7 ofthe Conservation Element.

l'olicy 1.7: By 199~,. the county shall complete a Man<~tee Protection and Boating Safety Comprehensive Plan; and iinplement the policies listed under Objective 3 of this element.

Policy 1.8: By June 1998, the county will coordinate with the FDEP and the Florida Marine Pajrol (F:MP). to evaluate, and make recol1)Illendations concerning existing Manatee Protection SJ)eed zottes.in the IRL. ·

Policy 1.9: As set forth in the policies and objectives of the Conservation Element, the county shall protect and preserve significant coastalvegetative communities, such as coastal (maritime) hammocks and coastal"strand, through cons~ation easements and fee simple acquisition. ·

l'olicy 1.10: Consistent with Policy 6.1 of the Conservation Elemt;:nt, the county shall continue to assist the USFWS and the FDEP in acquiring undeveloped tracts of

Community ;Development Department Indian River County.88 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05 c -

i Collierehelisive Pla!l · Coastal M•nagement Elemelit . ·

( tropical/coastal hammock and coastal strand by identifying lands eligible for acquisition, · evaluating local cost"share funding, and by providing "in-kind" services, such as land management

Policy 1. 11: Indian River County shall.support the SJR WMD' s efforts to establish update-to-date and accurate maps of: submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) communities by providing in-kind mapping a:n:d surveying services. ·

Policy 1.12: Until the county adopts and the state approves the County Manatee Protection and Boating Safety Comprehensive Management Plan, the following interim requirements shall apply to minimize adverse impacts to SAV col:\llllunities:

> · Covered boat slips, covered terminal platforms, and unwalled boat shelters shall be prohibited in areas of the IRL exhibiting greater than ten (1 0) percent SA V coverage, unless covered areas are constructed of a translucent material;

· > A maximum den$ity threshold of one (1) powerboat slip per 100 feet of shoreline shall be• applicable within areas ofthelRL exhibiting greater than ten (10) percent SA V coverage. These areas, as described in the Marina Facility Siting portion of

·this element, include: .Zone 1, Zone 2; Zone 4, the portion of Zone 6 lying within . the Town of Indian River Shores, Zone 8, and Zone 9; and

> Any marina facility siting or expansion that impacts SAV beds shall be required to perform on-site mitigation to SA V beds. In the event on-site mitigation is not practical, off-site restoration mitigation, and/or increased manatee protection may be considered .. However no fee--in-lieu payments will be accepted as mitigation.

Policy 1.13: Indian River County shall continue to promote both commercial and private fishing actiVities within the county through management of marine habitats and permitting of fishing resources.

Policy 1.14: The county shall adopt a resolution in support of the StaWs efforts to expand the amount of submerged lands available for aquaeulture leases within the Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge. By 1999, the county will design~te the expanded lease area as

· an aquaculture use zone~

Policy 1.15: All non-water-related and non-water-dependent uses shall be subject to ·setbacks from the St. Sebastian River and the Indian River Lagoon Aquatic !;'reserves in order to afford a shoreline protection bUffer as set fortjt in LDR Chapter 929;• The shoreline protection buffer ·Setbacks are a.S follows:

Community· Development Department Indian River County 89

S.upplement 7: Ordinan~e lOOS-042, adopted 9/13/05 . ·'''

Comprchenotye Plan coastal Mana~emcot Element > For parcels created afj:er June 18,1991, along the St. Sebastian River, a, 100 foot

shoreline buffer .rneaSimid from.~e mean high water line (MHWL), or SO feet from the landward boundary of wetlands, shall be required; and,

> For parcels of record which existed prior to June 18, 1991, a SO foot shoreline buffer fcir unplatted parcels, and .a 25 shoreline buffer measured from the MHWL ofthe St. Sebastian River or the IRL shall be required·. However, the sh0reline buffer shall not exce.ed more than 20 percent of the parcel depth perpendicular to the St. Sebastian River or IRL.

OBJECTIVE2 Estuarine Water Qualitv

Through 2020, there wiil be no significant ~eduction in the water qu~tlityofthe Indian River l.agoon or the St. Sebastian River. . .

Policy 2.1: The county hereby adopts the State designation of Class IT- "shellfish propagation or harvesting," as defined in the 1996 Water Quality Assessment for the State of Florida (30S(b) Report), as the water quality standard for the following portions of the IRL located within the u.Wncorporated county: Sebastian Inlet extending south to C.R. 510, east of the Intracoastal Wa,terway (ICW); South ofC,R. 510 extending to the northern City Limits ofVero Beach (both sides of the ICW); southern City Limits ofVero Beach extending south to the Indian River-St. Lucie County line, east of the ICW. (Ref. Figure 9.11)

· ·Policy 2.2: The. county hereby adopts .the State designation of Class ill suitable for ''Recreation, propagation, and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and Wildlife," as defined in the 1996 Water Quality Assessment for the State of Florida (305(b) Report)~ as the minimum water quality standard for the following portions of the lRL located within Indian·River County: Sebastian Inlet extending south to C.R, 510, west of the ICW; southern City Limits ofVero Beach extending south to the Indian River-St. Lucie County line, west of the ICW (Ref. Figure Q.U). The county will strive to improve the surface water quality within the aforementioned sections ,of the IRL to

.·State Class II water quality standards.

Policy 2.3: In accordance with the Indian River Lagoon Act, the county shall prohibit all new point-source discharges into the Indian River Lagoon.

·Policy 2.4:· The county shall implement recommendations contained in ·the Indian River Lagoon NationalEstuaryPrograin's (!RLNE:P) Indian River Lagoon Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP) and the SRIWMD's Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan to reduce the amount of non-point source pollution entering the Indian River Lagoon.

Community Development Department Indian River County· 90 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

( -- ,j

Comprehenslye Pl:in· · · . · Coastai Management Element

Policy 2.5: By 2000; the eounty will establish Water Quality Level of S¢rVice (WQLOS) standards for each drainage basin within the county. The county's WQLOS standards will be based on the Pollutant Load Reduction Goals (PLRGs) being developed by the SJRWMD.

Policy 2.6: Indian River County shall irp.prove th.e qual~ty of and reduce the overall amount of freshwater in.fl.ow to the Indian River Lagoon by:

•''/,

} requiring all new development in the coastal Zol).e to utilize on-site r~tention or detention methods consistent with the, provisions ofthe Stormwater Management Sub-Element prior to being discharged to the lRL ;

} req'l).i.ring new development to utilize natural drainage features, such as impounded and unimpounded wetlands and swall!ls, to the m!iiXimum extent possible for storniwater management;

> requirihg all new development to retaiiJ. at minimum, the fttst orie (1) inch of stormwater runoff. In addition, the county will require retrofitting to achieve

,, compliance with existing stormwater requirements where renovations or a4ditions of greater than 50% to existing structures occur; ··

} initiating a program to regularly inspect stormwater management facili,ties to ensure proper operation and maintenance, and invoke penalties for. malfunctioning, altered,. abused or neglected systems; and

} · · ·requiring any new stormwater retention pond greater than one-half (1/2) acre in size to have a native littoral vegetation, unless deemed unnecessary from a water quality standpoint by the St.· J obns River vv at~ Management District.

Policy 2.7: All marina facilities, single-family docks, bulkheads, anQ. other similar structures constructed in, adjacent to, or ~ireetly affecting the surface waters of Indian River County, shall be located and designed in ord!lr to allow for maximum water circulation; and to minimize impacts .to submerged.aquatic vegetation and other marine resources.

Policy 2.8: The cow;tty shall require all dredge and fill.operations to utilize proper mitigation techniques and devices, in addition to obtaining all applicable federal, state and local permits. · ·

Policy 2.9: The county shall prohibit the ~scharge of any waste and/or po!Mant material into s).llface waters, by any c.ommercial, public. or private vessel, when such activity is w;tqer county jurisdiction. ·

Community: Development Department Jndian River Cpunty 91 Supplement 7: Ordinance 1005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Cpmprehegs!ye Plan Coastal Management Element

· J:olicy2.10: :The county shall implement the policies under Objective 2 of the · . Corisetvatl.on Element and Objective 7 of the Stormwater Management Sub-Element to improve water quality within the Indian River Lagoon and the other surface waters of . .

· Indian River County.

OBJECTIVE3 Boat Facility and Boat Ramp Siting alid Construction .··

Through '201 0, there shall be no increased Impact to manatee habitat, or the natural resources of the Indian River Lagoon, including seagrass beds, water quality, estuarine wetlands, and mangrove fringe, attributed to the development or expansion ofbQat facilities or boat ramps in Indian River County.

Policy3.1: The siting of new or expansion, rearrangement, or slip conversion of all boat . facilities and boat ramps in Indian River County, and in each municipal government with jurisdiction over a portion of the ib.land:waters of Indian River County, shall be consistent

· . with the assessment criteria and policies established in the Indian River County Manatee Protection and Boating Safety Comprehensive Management Plan (MPP).

· Policy 3.2: Boat Facility Sitirlg Zones (1-9), as described in the Analysis section of the MPP, are hereby established. The purpose of these Zones is to provide the public with some guidance as to the potential for the siting of new boat facilities or for the expansion,

/

rearrangement, or conversion of an. existing boat facility, . The regulatory criteria to be · \ applied to each zone represent the baseline criteria that all proposed projects must meet. In addition to these Zones, specific criteria will be applied to. each request for a new boat facility or the expansion, rearrangement, or conversion of an existing boat facility. These criteria are as follows:

1. · The siting of new boat facilities, or the expansion or slip .conversion of existing boating facilities shall be prohibited in the following areas of Indian River Couinty·:

• All of the St. SebastianRiverwest·ofthe US: 1 Bridge; and • All of the Pelican IslandNationalWildlife Refuge.

2. The siting of new boat facilities, or the expansion, slip conversion or rearrangement of existing boating facilities, shall be prohibited in the following areas:

• Within the Town of Orchid; • WiUrin the Town ofindi:jn River Shores;

. • Withfu the areaknowii'as the Jungle Trail Narrows; and • · Within any area designated as both a High Manatee Use area and a High

Watercraft-related Manatee Mortality area, as defined in the MPP. Community "Development Department Indian River County 92 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05 . . . , .

C. . ._J

·-.-:... .. '· .

Comprehensive Plan · Coastal. Management E1ement

'

''··' '

. Exceptions: The siting of new residential marinas, or the expansion, rearrangement or slip conve111ion of existing residential marinas, may be allowed in the prohibited · areas identified in this PolicySubsection 3.2.2 und.er the following conditions:

a. The proposed new or expanded residential marina ~s in lieu of single-famj.ly · docks that could otherv.;ise be built tqrough riparian rights at riverfront lots Within

the development served.bythe residential marina, and the residential marina will . result in less environmental impact than the alternative single-family docks, provided the resiqential marina -.yill not bre!J.Ch the 1:100 powerboat slip to linearfoot shoreline ratio set forth in Policy 3.14 .. Under this section, an applicant for a new or expanded residenti£)1 marina in lieu. (.lf single-family docks shall be · required to record a conservation easement, in favor of the County or fue State, along the shoreline of fue riverfront lots fuat would otherwise be eligible for single--family docks.

b. Slip conversions of existing boat facilities may be allowed on a one-time basis at a density of 1.5 total powerboat slips per 100 feet of shoreline if the facility is not

· .. located in an area of high manatee use and. high manatee mortality based on the definitions and criteria in the MPP, and if the powerboat to shoreline restriction has been in place prior to July 1993, when the countyWide speed zone rule was posted. ·

c. The physical rearrangement of boat facilities may be aufuorized in the above noted a,eas of prohibition provided the following criteria are met:

i. ii. iii. iv. v.

The number of slips at the boat facility is notincreased (i.e., expansion); The number of boats that can moor at the. boat facility is not increased; The si:~~e of the rearranged slips or mooring area is not increased; . The reffQ.lting footprint ofthe .. structure.is not increased; and The rearrangement will res.ult i,n the removal or cessation of any nonwater dependent.squcture or activity associated with the existing boat facility, as appljcable.

In every case, the rea.:rangement shall result in a net benefit to manatee and manatee habit;l.t protection.

3. The siting of new or the expansion, reij]Tange:ment, or slip conversion, of existi.Qg boating facilities shall be prohibited when one or more of the following conditiolis are met: ·

Community D~velopme))t Department Indian River County Q~ Supplement 7: Ordinance lOQS-042, adopted 9/13/05

Comprehensive Plan a.

coastal Management Element The footprint of the boating facility (including all docks, access walkways, finger piers, mooring areas, tli:rningbasins, andin,gress and egress pathways)

·has submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) coverage often (10) percent or greater using a scientifically acceptable method <if coverage determination and such determination is made between the months ofMaythrough October;

.. ,.'," · .. ··,

b. The water depth.within mooring areas, tllnling basins, and ingress and egress · ·pathways is less than ·4 feet at MLW unless the following criterion is met:

• One-foot clearance at MLW betweer). the lowest portion of the vessel (with the engine in: the down position) and submerged aquatic vegetative resources (or submerged bottom, in areas devoid of vegetative resources)

. within the mooring areas, turning basins, and· ingress and egress pathways.

c. There is less than a 150' distance between the waterward most projection of the boat facility (Including mooring pilings and boats) and the ICW channel.

4. The siting of new or the expansion, rearrangement, or slip conversion, of existing boating facilities shall b.e evaluated using all the following criteria:

') ''

a. No more than 100 linear feet ofnative shoreline vegetation shall be altered \ (trimmed, cut, removed, killed, or destroyed);

b. A site located within a High Manatee Use area, or a High Watercraft-related Manatee Mortality area, as defined in the MPP, shall be subject to site-specific design restrictions to minimize potential adverse manatee impacts, including (but not limited to): restrictions on the total number of boat slips allowed; use of more upland storage instead ofwet storage; restrictions on the maximum size of boatS that use· the facility (powerboat: sailboat ratio); re-design of the facility/miufua; establjsbment of a powerboat to length of shoreline ration (e.g.,

· one powerboat per'100 feet of shoreline); and/or reduction in the size of th~ facility/marina; and , · · ·

'c. The following sections of the MPP Action Plan: Objective 1, Boat Facility and Marina Siting and Construction, Sections 1.2, 1.4; 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.14, and 1.15.

·Using the evaluation criteria in Section 4 above may result in additional restrictions · on the design, size, shape, and use of the boating facility/marina. These restrictions may include, but are not limited to: the total number of boat slips allowed, use of more upland storage instead of wet storage, restricting the maximum size of boats that use the facility/marina, restricting the number of powerboats that use the facility

Community Development Department ·Indian River County 94 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Comprehensive Plan' ·· Coastal Manaecmcnt E!emcnl· ,

(powerboat to sailboat ratio), re-designing the facility/marina, establishing a powerboat to length ofshoreline ratio (e.g., one powerboat per 100 feet of shoreline), or reducing the size of the facility/maril:ta.

5. In addition, any new or the expansion, or rearrangement, or slip conversion, · of existfug boating facilities will be required to comply with all applicable state and federal permitting and authorization processes. ·

.6. Notwithstanding the other criteria. of tms Policy 3.2, slip conversions of · existing boat fac;:ilities in Ind~an River County may be allowed on a one-time basis at . a density of LS total powerbo11t slips per 100 feet of shoreline if the facility is not located in an area of high manatee use and high manatee mortality based on the definitions and criteria in the MPP, and if the powerboat to shoreline restriction on the existing facility has been in place prior to July 1993, when the countywide speed zone rule was posted .

. Policy: 3.3: The following boat ramp siting criteria shall be used to evaluate any new boat ra.t\lp or the rearrangement or expansion of an existing boat ramp. These criteria shall be

. applied to allboat ramps (e.g., new, existing, private, publi9, commercial, recreational, multifamily, or individual single-family).

' .•.

1. The.rearrangement of existing boat ramps Shall not be subject to the boat ramp siting criteria unless any one of the following are true: .

a. The rearrangement will result in more lanes than currently exist (i.e., expansion);

b, The r<~arrap.gement w:ill result in the poat ramp being able to increase the volume oftrlitffic (e.g., increase the number ofparkingsp;l,Ces, make the boat ramp more acces.sible, deepe~;~ or widen the access channel);

c. The rearrangement wi.ll result in the boat ramp being able to be used by larger · . . ,vessels (e. g., increase the size .of the parking spaces, deepen or widen the access

channel); or · ·

· d. · The rearrangement, or the associated construction, will destroy, alter, or disturb any native upland, sl).oreline vegetation, or SA V.

2. Th,e siting ofnew t;>+ jhe rearra,ngement or expansion of existing boat ramps shall be prohibited in the following areas of Indian River County:

• All of the St. 'sebastian River west of the U.S. 1 Bridge; • All of the Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge;

· • The area known as Jungle Trail Narrows; .. Community Development Department . Indian River County 95 . Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/0S

Comm:el!ensttc Elan · CoutoJ M:tnagement Elemenl ·· ' • ToWl1 Limits ofOrchid;.

• Town Limits of Indian River Shores; • If the proposed site is within a High Manatee Use area AND a High Watercraft

related Manatee Mortality area, as defined in this MPP.

3. The siting of new or the rel!rrangementor expansion of existing boat ramps shall be prohibited when one or more of the following conditions are met:

a. The footprint of the new boat ral:np or the rearrangement or expansion of the existing boat tamp (including all proposed lanes, docks, access walkways, finger piers, mooring areas, turning basins, and ingress and egress pathways) has a SA V coverage often (1 0) percent or greater using a scientifically acceptable method of coverage d,etermination and S11Ch determination is made between the months of May throui:h October;

b. The site, whether new or existing, is located within a High Manatee Use area, AND a High Watercraft-related Manatee Mortality area as defined in the MPP; or

c. The site, whether new or existing, is located such that new dredging will be required or necessary to provide access to the ICW or to deeper water AND the site is located within or on land adjacent to a FDEP designated Aquatic Preserve. This does not include m1mmade waterbodies such as canals or basins, or privately owned submerged bottom.

In the event that all the required or necessary dredging is detemrined by the FDEP 'or the SJR WMD to be maintenance dredging then this subsection [3( c)] does not apply. The deterinipation of maintenance dredging shall be made in writing by 'ilie FDEP··or SJRWMD and submitted t0 County Planning staff. It is the responsibility of the applicant, the property OWner, or developer to secure this Written doclll'lientation. If any of the required or necessary dredging is deterrnirled to not be maintenance dredging (i.e., new dredging) then that part of the proposed project involving the propqsed new dredging and any other activity or structl!res associated with the proposed new dredging, is prohibited.

· 4. The siting of new or fue rearrangement or expansion of existing boat ramps shall be evaluated using all the following criteria: · ·

(a) No more than 100 linear feet of native shoreline vegetation shall be altered (trl:mmed, cut; removed, killed, or destroyed);

(b) A site located within a High Manatee Use area, OR a High Watercraft-related Manatee Mortality area, as defined iii this MPP shall be subject to site-specific design re.strictions to minimize potential adverse·

Community Development Department Indian River County 96 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05 '•'.'

,.-.

).

).

-~,

Com!lrcltegstvc Pion" Coastal Mana@ment Element

manatee impacts, including (but not limited to): restrictions on the total number ofboat !aries allowed; restrictions on the maximum size ofboats that use the boat ramp; limitations on the size of boat trailer parking spaces; limitations on the depthofthe boat ramp and/or the ingress- egress channel; posting of informational signs; installation of navigational aids; re-design of the boat ramp; and/or reduction in the size. of the boat ramp.

(c) Maintenance dredging, as determined in writing by the FDEP or the SJRWMD, shall be restricted to those areas where maintenance dredging has been determined and shall conform to one of the following situations using the order in which the·situations are presented:

i. The dredging shall conform with the original dredging permit specifications, if one was issued; .

iL The dredging shall c~nform with the original design" specifications, if the existing projectwas done prior to the issuance of permits required by federal, state, or local government entities;

iii. The dredging shall b.e no deeper than to a maximum water depth of five (5) feet at mean low water, and no wider, at the top of the submerged bottom, than to safely allow the passage of two boats sideby-side, the size · of which the boat ramp was/is designed to .accommodate.

,, (d) If there is no existing access channel thatp:rovides for adeq11ate water depth from the boat ramp to the ICW or to deeper water (i.e., not maintenance dredging) AND the site is not within or adjacent to a FDEP designated Aquatic Preserve, then the proposed. project may b.e authorized if the following are compliedwith: ·

a. . The area of new dredging shall not have a SA V coverage of greater than ten (1 O) percent as determined using a: scie:Qtifically acceptable

· . method of coverage determination and such determination· is made between the months of May through October; ·

b. ·The total length of new 9r'edging shall not exceed 500 feet.

c. The boat ramp facility shall have informational signs in .clear view of boaters launching and landing vessels. Signs used to comply wiih this section shall be in addition to any signs required by the regulatory agency. Signs shall also be installed that warn boaters of the need to stay in the channel. ·

Community Development Department Supplement 7: O~dlna.Dce 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Indian River. County 97 ', •·. (

Comprehensive Plan Coastal Managemeot Element

d. The access charui.el shall be marked in accordance with U.S. Coast Guard and FWC standards.

Policy 3.4: Within the unincorporated portion oflndian River County, private residential marinas shall be permitted with administrative permit approval in the following Residential Single~ family (RS), and Residential Multi-family (RM) zoning districts: RS-1, RS-2, RS-3, RS-6, RT-6, RM-3, RM-4, RM-6, RM-8, !\lld RM-10. .

Policy 3.5: Within the unincorporated portion of Indian River County, public/private residential marinas shall be permitted with special exception approval in the following Residential Single-family (RS), and Residential Multi-family (RM) zoning districts: RS-1, RS·2, RS-3, RS-6, RT•6, RM-3, RM-4, RM-6 •. RM~8, arid RM-10.

Policy 3.6: Within the unincorporated portion of Indian River County, recreational marinas shall be permitted in general commercial (CG) and heavy commercial (CH) zoning districts. Recreational marinas shall be permitted with specia!.exception approval in the following zoning districts: office·comniercial·residential (OCR), neighborhood commercial (CN), and limited commercial (CL).

f.Q!~c.t:L;. Within the unincorporated portion of Indian River County, commercial marinas shall be permitted in the following zoning districts: heavy commercial (CH), light industrial (IL), and general industri!!l (IG). Commercial marinas shall be permitted in the general commercial (CG) zoning district with administrative permit approval.

Policy 3.8; The county shall require an on-site mitigation plan to be submitted as part of any propo'sal to site qr expand a boat facility within an area of the IRL exhibiting environmental co\1straints, such as manatee use, the presence ofseagri!.ss beds and/or shoreline vegetation.

· Off-site restoration. and/or mitigation to seagrass beds or estuarine wetlands are alternative techniques that may be considered in the eventthat on-site mitigation is not practical. No fee-in-lieu payments will be accepte(j. as mitigation.

Policy 3.9: :ijy July 2005, the Coutlty shall coordinate with the Town ofindian River Shores, the ToWn of Orchid, the City of Sebastian and the City ofVero Beach concerning siting of marina/boat facilities and the overall implementation of this J\.:fPP by conducting public workshops and by soliciting comments from the staff and elected officials of these municipal governments.

Policy 3.10: In the event that an existing marina is destroyed by a natural disaster, the marina ··may be re-built within,the same fqotprint of the dainaged structure provided that the marina . was in compliance with regulations at the time of its construction;· Existing Marinas that are re-built shall be consistent with the policies listed under Objective 1 of the :MPP.

Community Derelopment Department Indian .River County 98 Supplement 7: Ordinance Z005;042, adopted 9/13/05

). .... J

....... \ \ ~- ....

Comprehensive Pianr ···· ·.·· Coastal Management Element

Policy 3.11: ·Covered boat slips;covered tenninal platforms, and unwalled boat shelters shall not be permitted in areas where SA V coverage is ten (1 0) percent or greater.

Policy 3.12: Floating docks and dock designs that have the potential to entrap manatees or prevent them from accessing foraging areas shall be prohibited ..

Policy 3.13: By 2005, the County Environmental Planning Section, in cooperation with the FWC's Bureau of Protected SpeCies Management, will produce a map titled Constraints to Boat Facility Siting in the IRL. This map will display the areas of high, medium and low· constraints throughout the county. Density thresholds and limitations for development shall apply to sites within these locations. This map wili be kept on file in the Community Development Department, and will be used to conduct site-specific reviews of boat facility siting and expansion proposals.

Policy 3.14: A maximum density threshold of one (1) powerboat slip per 100 feet of shoreline along the IRL shall apply in Zone 1, Zone 2, Zone 4, the portion of Zone 6 lying within the Town ofi:ndian River Shores, Zo!le 8, and Zone 9.

Policy 3.15: The County· shall encourage the expansion and upgrading of existing boat facilities as an alternative to constructing new boat facilities by considering the removal ofthe 1:100 powerboat shoreline density ratio on a case-by-case basis from the following Marina Siting Zones: Zone 3, Zone 5, the portion of Zone 6 lying within the City ofVero .Beach, and Zone 7. As a minimum a 1:100 powerboat: shoreline density ratio may be applied, if warranted, using the criteria in Section 1.2.

OBJECTIVE4 Beaches and Dunes

By 1998, all natural functions of the beach and dune system in Indian River County shall be protected and no unmitigated human-related disturbance of the primary dune system shall occur. ·

Policy 4.1: The county shall continue to recognize the 1981 Florida Department of Natural Resources (FDNR) Coastal Construction Coritro1 Line (CCCL), as established by Chapter 161.053, F.S., and recorded on June 10, 1981 in Plat Book 10, Pages 93-93H, as being the county's line of regulatory prohibition, or Dune Stabilization Setback Line (DSSL). Construction encroachment, except for the following, shall be prohibited oceanward of the DSSL:

.:> federal, state and locally permitted erosion control stabilization and beach renourishment.projects; ·

the construction of dune cross-over structures and other minor structures;

Conimuuity Development Department ludiap River County 99 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Cnmorehenstve PIA1'1l Couta.l Mann·gement Element

)> · public navigational projects, markers or other control structures;

)> maintenance and/or restoration ofleg31 nonconforming structures not requiring greater than 50 percent construction, per Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) regulations;

use. of emergency equipment and/or activities; such as removal of ordnance and debris, to protect life and/or loss of upland property;

)> · structural and non-structural stabilization techniques to protect coastal buildings from a 15 year or less storm .event.

Community ))evelopmen~ Department Supplement7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05


,/ )

\- .:.) , ...

{, ·:. CoiUilrehepslye Pion. •.;: . · · · Coastal Management lil!ement .

Policy 4.2: To ensure appropriate protection of the beach and .dune system, the county

shall review all proposed beach and dune projects in the unincorporated area of the

county and within the City Limits ofVero Beach, and shall review and submit comments

regarding permit applications of all appropriate federal, state and local agencies governing beach and dune management.

Policy 4.3: The county shall solicit cost-share funding for beach renourishment and

shoreline stabilization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida Department ofEnviromnental Protection. ·

Policy 4.4: The county shall require dune cross-over structures for all new public and

private development desiring beach access. The county shall not approve plans which do

not include FDEP approved dune cros$-over structures at beach access points.

Policy 4·.5: By 2000, Indian River County sha!Ldevise a dune cross-over construction and

:maintenance plan to be implemented through the Parks and Recreation Division of the county. Criteria shall include:

» elevated .structures at all designated public access points designed td minimize enviromnental impacts and withstand adverse cli:matic conditions;

» public structures a minimum of six (6) feet wide which utilize approach ramp

facilities for the handicapped; and

the planting of:aative plant species in conjunction with the .construction of new dune oross~over structures to discourage encroachment onto the neighboring sensitive dune area.

Policy 4,6: Indian River County shall protect and preserve natural beach and dune

systems by adopting the ·Specific criteria for shoreline stabilization within the

unincorporated portion of Indian River CountY and within th~ municipal limits of the City

ofV ero Beach, as outlined in Policy 10.5 of the Conservation Element.

Policl: 4.7: The county shall continue to prohibit motorized vehicles on the beach/dune

area,. except for vehicles engaged in emergency activities, permitted gove=ent vehicles

and permitted vehicles associated with approved construction, restoration and/or

. scientific projects.

Policl:4.8: The county shall enforce its beach and dune protection land development

regulations by requiring mitigation or restoration of dune \listurbances; and imposing

fines as warranted in association with code violations.Policy4.9: County staff will attend

Community D~velopment Department Supplement 7: OrdinaMe 2005-04:1., adopted 9/13/05

. JndianRiver County 101 . . .

C6mpr¢beJ!SIVe :Plan Coastal Manogement Element

meetings held by the Sebastian Inlet Tax District, and will partiCipate in evaluating technical studies prepared by the District.

Policy 4.10: By 1999, the county W:ill.complete the three (3) year monitoring report for the experimental Pre-fabricated Erosion Protection ("PEP") reefto.determine its overall effectiveness of reducing shoreline erosion wjthin the City ofVero Beach, and to determine the need for supplemental beach renourishment.

Policy 4.11: By 1999, the county shall study alternatives to funding. shoreline stabilization activities, including establishment of a Beach Taxing District to fund shoreline stabilization for the areas of critical erosion identified in the 1998 update of the Cubit Beach Preservation Plan.

OBJECTIVES Limiting Public Expenditures in the Coastal High-Hazard Area ·

Through 2004, there will be no expansion of infrastructure within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) other than that which is deemed necessary to maintain existing levels-ofservice.

"-"'""'-'--"-L"-'- In accordance with rule 9J-5;003(17), F.A.C., the coWlty hereby designates the "Coastal High-Hazard Area" (CHHA) as identified in the Treasure Coastal ;Regional Planning Council Hurricane Evacuation Study (1994). Figure 9.22 ofthis element is

\ j}

hereby adopted as the coutity's CHHA desiguation map. \ ... )

Policy 5.2: The coW!ty shall not subsidize public facilities within the CHliA, other than ··.those which are deemed necessary to maintain existing level-of-service standards, and those which are directly related to public access and/or resource management. Furthermore, the coW!ty shall adopt Objective 2 and its as.sociated policies of the Capital Improvements Element.

Policy 5.3: Following a storm event, the Public Works Department shall assess all COWlty facilities damaged from storm activity in thc;l CHHA; and sh:dl make recommendations to reduce future expenditures alid potential damage risks. In: addition; the Public Works Department shaU conduct a cost/benefit analysis to evaluate the relocation of storm dalhaged infrastructure or infrastructure which is repeatedly threatened by potential storm damage.·· ·

Policy 5.4: The coW!ty shall maintain, at a minimum, a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Community Rating System (CRS) classification. of "7" by continuing to enforce LDR Chaptet .9.30 - Stormwater Management and Flood Protection, and by

.. evaluating stnictures for compliance with the FEMA's 50% :Rule, as described .in Policies 7.4 and 7.5 of this Element. · ·

Community Development· Department Indian Riter County 1 OZ Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05 ,·.;

G· -·

;, ., \ '

r·: .. ··· .. ~~·- ..

Comnrehens!ve Plan

OBJECTIVE6 Coastal Magwm~nt Element

Reduction .of Hurricane Evacuatiiin Times of Reduce Public Risk

Through 2020, Indian River County will maintain an estimate.d evacuatio!l time of 1Z hours or less for a Category m'burricane,

,,

Policy 6.1: The county hereby designates the "Hurricane Vulnerability Zone" (HVZ) as the area described in the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council's Hurricane Evacuation Study (1988 update) as tlte areaofthe.county subject to being inundated by a Category ill or greater hurricane. (Ref. Figure 9 .23)

Policy 6.2: Consistent with Chapter 252, F.S., by 1998, the county wili conduCt a survey of existing schools, municipally,owned, and county-owned buildings to identify those building that are appropriately desigried and located to serve as hurricane eva.cuation shelters. Once this survey is completed, the county will solicit state funding from the Florida Division of Emergency Management to decrease the deficit of"safe" shelter capacity by retrofitting existing primary shelter facilities.

Policy 6.3: By August 1999, The utilities department and public works department shall

assist the Department of Emergency Services in assessing the vulnerability of public infrastructure within the CHHA. The Community Development Department shall assist the Department of Emergency Services in assessing the vulnerability of private residences and businesses within the CHHA, and by ensuring that all new developments incorporate hazard mitigation techniques,. such as dedicating emergency accesses, as required by the Department of Emergency Servic:.es. ·

Pcrlicy 6.4: Indian River County shall continue to coordinl\te with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC), Brevard County and St. Lucie Coi.mty concerning evacuation routes and populations involved to assess the impact ofregional growth on

local.evacuation times.

Policy 6.5: To m.aintafu current evacuation times, the county shall adopt Objective 11 of the Coastal Management Element and Objective 17 of the Future Lan4 Use Element and their associated policies relating to no increase in the density of land use within.the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA).

Policy 6.6: The county shall coordinate with the Florida East Coas.tRailroad (FEQRR)

and other concerned agencies to ensure that train movements will be stopped during hurricane evacuations. · · ·

'

· Policy 6. 7: The county shall prohibit the location of new adult congregate living facilities,

.nursing homes, and other similar medical facilities thatser:ve tlie ccnmty~s special needs

population within the CHHA.

Conunuuity Development Department .. •. . Indian J~~ver .countr 103

Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Comurehensiye Pla.n · Co&stal Management Element

OBJECTIVE 7 · Post"Disaster Recoverv lllid·Redevelopment

Consistent with the. requirements of Chapter 163; F.S. and DCA Rule 9J~s, F.AC., the county .shall have a Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS), ·as lln ·annex to the Indian River County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP). The LMS shall list and prioritize disaster mitigation projectS.

Policy 7.1: Consistent with the CEMP, the county will perform an initial damage assessment, immediately following a natural disaster event, in order to determine the extent of damage and prioritize allo,cation of recovery resources. If the scope of damage exceeds the county's ability to recover, the coUnty shall declare a local state of emergency, pursuant to Chapter 252, F.S. and County Ordinance# 91·i8. Once a local state of emergency has been declared, the county will request assistance from the Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM).

Policy 7.2: The County shall continue to maintain its IMS, and to implement the shortterm and long-term recommendations contained in the LMS.

Policy 7.3: Following a natural disaster; principal structures and uses located eastward of the County Dune Stabilization Setback Line (DSSL) which sustain greater than 50

·percent ofMAI (Member of Appraisal Institute) 1!-SSessed current market value damage ·from a naturally occurring storm shall be required to relocate upland of their location and, when possible, westward ofthe DSSL. Prior to reconstruction; principal structures east of the 1987 State Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) exhibiting damage from a naturally occurring storm event, greater than 50 percent of MAl assessed market value, shall be required to obtain all applicable permits and comply with all applicable building

· codes concierning coastal constr\lction.

Policy 7.4: Consistent with National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) requirements; any structure predating 1989 FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and located within ·a flood hazard area that s'ustains "substantial damage" due to a natural disaster (i.e. repair costs that exceed 50% or more of the building's value) shall be required to be elevated a minimum of six (6) inches above the base flood elevation (BFE), as depicted on current FIRMs.

Policy 7.5: Consistent with NFIP requirements, any proposed "substantial improvement" (i.e. additions, renovations, or modifications that exceed 50% or more of the building's value) to a pre-FIRM str\lcture lo.cated within a within a flood hazard area shall be required to be elevated a minimum ofsix (6)inches above the BFE, as d-epicted on currertt FIRMs. The list contained in Annex IV of the CEMP will be used to determine the tot!i:l value of "substantial impro~ement."

Community Development Department Indian River County 104 Supplement 7: Ordina)l•• 2005-042, adopted !1/13/05

.•' )

~:;:· J i ····~. :"· -:"

............ : \

7'

ComnrehiiJ!sW¢ Plan. · ·· · · Coastal Management Element. Policy 7.6: The county sluill continue to. regulate development and manage natural resources within the Coastal Zone by:

> Continuing to enforce LOR Chapter 932 • Coastal Management, and LOR Chapter 402 - Coastal Construction Code;

> Preserving flood storage capacity in the 100 year floodplain; in accordance with the policies listed under Objective 5 of the Stormwater Milllli.gement SubElement;

Maintaining or reducing land use density allowances in the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) in accordance with the policies under Objective 17 of the Future Land Use Element and Objective 11 of this element;

.. Minimizing beach and dune disturbance in. accordance with Coastal Management Element Policy 4.8 and County Code Chapter 932; and

Reviewing, in· coordination· with the FOEP Bureau ofBeaches and Coastal Systems, all emergency seawall permit applications within the unincorporated area of Indian River County and within the City Limits ofVero Beach.

OBJECTiVES Public Access

By 2010, the number of public access· points to natural resources within the coastal zone of Indian River County, including beaches, the St. Sebastian River, and the shoreline of the Indian River Lagoon, will be increased by a minimum of five public access points.

Policy 8.1: Indian River County will participate in the Indian River I,agoon "Blmiways" Conservation and Recreation Lands (CARL) project to acquire the remaining undeveloped estuarine wetlands bordering the IRL by providing local funding assistance, and by providing "in-kind~' services, such as identifying enviromnentally-sensitive parcels.

Policy 8.2: Indtan River County shall accept -donations of shoreline lands suitabie to increase public coastal access, provided this acceptance is in the best interest of the county.

Policy 8.3: By 1998, the County will explore the feasibility of improving boat access to ·the Indian River Lagoon from the mainland in the southern section of the County.··

Policy 8.4: The county shall prohibit the net loss of public access and facilities by:

Community DeVelopment Department In:diani:Uver County.105 · Supplement 7: Ordbtallee 1~05-041, adQpted 9/13/05 ' . -~ ·, "

' comprebenstve Plan . Coastal Management Element )> requiring any displaced or.removed public access to be.replaced at a minimum of

a one-to-one (1:1) ratio; ·

)> requiring. private property owners to provide public access to beaches which are renoUrlshed or enhanced with public funds.. This requirement may include provisions for the establishment, relocation or enhancement of public accesses

· provided that such established, relocated or enhanced acces.ses will not adversely impact existing residential neighborhoods or adversely impact existing natural resources; and

)> providing public vehicular parking at more than 50 percent of all new public beach accesses.

Policy 8.5: The county shall complete improvements to the ocean side of Round Island Park by 1999.

Policy 8.6: The county will complete a management plan for the Cairns tract by 1999. Public access and passive recreation will be addressed in the management plan.

Policy 8.7: The county, in cooperation with the USFWS, will provide public access to the Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge by 2000. ·

Policy 8.8: The county will increase passive recreational opportunities on lands acquired · through the county's Environmental Lands Program as set forth in Objective 12 of the ... Conservation Element and. the objectives and policies contained in the Recreation and

Open Space Element. · · · ,,

OBJECTIVE9 Historic Resources .

Through 2020, there will' be no significant impact to roads, sites .or structures deemed · historically or archaeologically significant in Indian River County.

' Policy 9 .I: Consistent with Policy 8.2 o;f the Future Land Use Element, the county shall continue to use incentives such as tran~fer ofdev.elopment rights; tax relief, mitigation, and public acqui$ition to protect and preserve historic and archaeological resources in the Coastal Zone. ·

Policy 9.2: The county sh!ill pursue state and federal funding to acquire and/or to preserve r;mlt;ural and historic sites recognized as important and/or significant.

Policy 9.3: The county shall provide developers with incentives, such as transfer of development rights, tax u.lcentives and others,. in return for preserving historic resources.

Collll1'lunlty Development Department .Indian lUver County.106 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

..• -. \.

(_ :.)

, ....

Comoreh~slye }!Jan, · Coas!RIMauarremevt l!Jemont · Policy 9 .4! Developments which include historical resource sites shall be required to submit archaeological surveys prior to commencing construction activities. Developers shall be required to preserve these resources while maintaining a reasonable use of the

· land. ; ..

Policy 9:5:. The county shall recognize and properly manage its historical resources by implementing Objective 8 of the Future Land Use Element.

Policy 9.6: By 2005, the county will develop management plans for the following scenic/ historic roads: Fellsmere Grade;. Quay Dock Road, Old Winter Beach Road, and Gifford . Dock Road. (Ref. Policies 7.2 and 7.3 Recreation and Open Space Element)

OBJECTIVE 10 Infrastructure 'in the Coastal Zone

Through 2020, the level ofscrvicc (LOS) for traffic circulation, recreational facilities, storniwater management, and potable water and sewer service in the coastal zone of Indian River County will be consistent with the LOS standards set forth in the concurrency section ofthe Capital Improvements Element.

Policy 10.1: By 2003, the county shall decommission all remaining wastewater treatment package plants in the Hurricane Vut:D.erability Zone.

P~licy 10.2: Consistent with DCA Rule 9J-5.0l2(3)(c)(8), the county shall identizy.and assess all infrastructure located within the CHHA to determine its vulnerapility .. This vulnerability assessment will based on data from FIRMs, The Arbiter of Storms (TAOS) computer model, and the Sea, Lake,' and Overland Surges from.Hurricanes (SLOSH) map; Any decision to abandon or relocate infrastructure outside the CH:H.A following a natural disaster will be based on a benefit-cost analysis of vulnerable infrastructure. This benefit-cost analysis will be included in the Local Mitigation Strategy; o:nce completed.

Policy 10.3: The .county shall coordinate with all state and federal agencies in the funding and implementation ofbeachstabilization projects,

Policy 10.4: Indian River County shall permit the utilization of local funds for shoreline stabilization and beach renourishment projects. Priority shall be given to those projects which demonstrate the best benefit-cost ratio while having the least impact to the offshore reef, .and the nearshore beach and dune ecological communities

Policy 10.5: The county shall not allow new underground storage tanks or septic facilities to be located oceanward of the county's Dooe Stabili.zation Setback Line (DSSL).

Policy 10.6: The county s!}.all maintain the standards, phasing and funding of infrastructure in the coastal zone, as set forl;h in the Transportation Element, and the

· Community Development Department Indian River County I 07 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-04:2, adopted 9/13/05

Comprehensive Pia!! Coa.W Management Element Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge, Sanitary Sewer, Potable Water and Stormwater ) Management Sub• Elements of the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan.

OBJECTIVE 11 Limit Densities in the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA)

Through 2020, there will be no. increase in the density of land use within the Coastal High Hazard Area.

Policy 11.1: Lands acquired by the county under its Environmental Lands Prograrp. shall ·.'inClude property located within the Hurricane Vulnerability Zone (HVZ). This land shall

be used for either natural resource conservation, passive recreation or both.

Policy 11.2: Within the CHHA, the county will not make jn:frastructure improvements to acco=odate deveiopment more intense than allowed by the comprehensive plan.

. . .

Policy 11.3: The coimty shall utilize all applicable state and.federal regulations, and the · appropriate objectives and policies of the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan, to limit public and private development in the CHHA. ·

OBJECTIVE 12 Boating Safetv and Law Enforcement

Through 2010, the annual accident rate in Indian River County will be at or below the 1995 baseline rate of 131 accidents per 100,000 registered boaters. Furthermore, there will be no incidence of watercraft-related human fatalities.

Policy12.1: By the end of2005, the county shall request.that the FWC adopt the following speed zone amendments. for Indian River County:

Gifford Cut: Extend the ''unregulated" speed zone north toward Channel Marker 127;

Wabasso Causeway: Establish a year-round slow speed zone vvithin 300 feet of the western shoreline ofWabasso Island, continuing 300 feet north and south ofWabasso Causeway(C.R. 510); and· ·

Create a 400-foot."Idle Speed" zone, within the ICW, centered under each bridge over the Indian River Lagoon; and

. Eliminate the "Slow Speed" zone in the ICW north of the Barber Bridge (SR 60).

Policy 12.2: By the end of 2005, the County; in cooperation with the FWC, local law enforcement agencies, and local boaters' interest organizations, will establish a Citizen's Marine Patrol.

Community Development Department Indian River County I 08 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

) ,..'

Comprehensiye Plan, Coastal Manaeeroent Elerrlent

OBJECTIVE 13 Education/Public Awareness

. By 2005,. informational kiosks displaying manatee protection practices, safe boating practices, and the designated speed zones of the inland waters of the county will be installed at all public . boat ramps in Indian River County. ·

Policy 13.1: By 2005, the County shall obtain funding from the FIND and the FWCto

construct informational kiosks at boat rllJllps and other strategic locations, such as fishing piers. · ·

Policy 13.2: The County; in cooperation with the FWC, USFWS, FIND, and the ELC, will

distribute manatee awareness and boating safety materials to local boaters at the time of

yearly boat registration and other l\ppropriate locations such as marinas, bait and tackle shops, and public parks.

Policy 13.3: By 2005, the Cqunty shallinitiate a monofilament line recycling program by

placing marked collection receptacles at boat ramps, marinas, bridges, and strategic

locations.

Policy 13.4: All existing and new boat facilities (public and private) shall be required to post

manatee. awareness signs.

Policy 13.5: By 2005, all rental vessels, including personal watercraft, in Indian River

County shall be required to display stickers or plasticized cards with boating safety and manatee protection information. ·

OBJECTIVE 14 Manatee Protection Measures

Through 2005, the annual number of manatee mortalities in indian River County shall be no .more tban five (5) excluding unusual events such as red tide or disease outbreaks. Of these annual mortalities, no more than one (1) mortajjty shall be watercraft-related.

Policy 14.1: The coUD.ty, in cooperation with the City ofVero Beach Utilities Department

and the· FWC Bureau of Protected Species Management wi!l ensure that disruptions to

outflow, and/or inadequate temperatures to sustain manatees during winter are minimized,

and that all necessary precautions to minimize hazards at the power plant are initiated.

Policy 14.2: By 2005, the county shall obtain funding to retrofit stormwater outfalls in

tidal waters to reduce the risk of entrapment and drowning of manatees. Any submerged

or partially submerged pipes or culverts accessible to manatees during any tid~ phase,

larger than 8 inches in diameter but less than eight (8) feet in diameter, shall be grated

· With bars no more than eight (8) inches apart installed across the mouth of th~;~ outfall.

Community Development Department Indian lUver County 109 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Com"itrebensive Plan coastal Manaeement l!ilernent

PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

An important part ofany plan is its implementation. hnplementation involves. execution of the plan's policies by ta.kirig actions and achieving results.

For the Coastal Management Element, implementation involves various activities. While some of these actions will be ongoili.g; others: are activities that will be taken by certain points in time. For· each policy in this element; Table 9.23 identifies the tYPe of action required, the enti.ty or entities responsible for taking the action, the timing, and whether or not the policy necessitates a capital expenditure.

To implement the CoastalManageme11t Element, several types of action must be taken. These include, b'!lt are not limited to: coordination with jurisdictional and reviewing agencies, establishing marina facilities siting criteria, and protecting/preserving estuarine resources.

Overall plan implementation responfoibility will rest with the Community Development Dep,utment. Besides its responsibilities as identified in Table 9.23, .the Community Development Department has the additional responsibility of ensuring that other entities discharge their responsibilities. This will entail notifYing other applicable departments of capital expenditures to. be mcluded in their budgets, notifying other departments arid groups of actions that must be taken, and assisting other departments and agencies in their plan implementation responsibilities.

EVALUATION & MONITORING PROCEDURES

To be effective, a plan must not only provide a means for implementation; it must also provide a mechanism for assessing the plan's effectiveness. Generally, a plan's effectiveness can be evaluated by the degree to which the plan's objectives have' bee!l a0).:rieved; . Since objectives are structured; to be measurable and to have specific tinieframes, the plan's objectives are the benchinarks used as a basis tq evaluate the plan.·

Table 9.24 identifies each of the objectives ofthe·Coastal Management Element and the measures used to evaluate progress in achieving these objectives. Most of these measures are quantitative, such ·as estuarine water qmility, level-of-service standards within the .Coastal Zone, and issues relating hurricane evacuation. Table 9.24 also identifies an anticipated timeframe associated with meeting the objectives.

The Community Development Department staff will be responsible for the overall monitoring and evaluating the Coastal Management Element

While monitoring will·occur on a continual basi~. formal evaluation of the Coastal Management Element will occur every five (5) yeats in conjunction: with the Evaluation an,d Appraisal of the Comprehensive Plan. Be!lides assessing progress, the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) will also be used to determine if the Coastal Management Element's obJectives and pol~cies


(- . ~j ·- --~

. r. \

'. ~

Coimitehensh•@ Pial!!'·' Coastal Mana!!emenU<Iement .

should be maintained, revised or deleted. Jn this way, the monitoring and. evaluation of the . Cciasta) Management Element will provide a means of determining the degree of success of the plan's implementation, as well as, providing a mechanism for evaluating needed changes to this Element.

TABLE9.23 · COASTAL.MANAGEMENT ELEMENT ·

IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX·

.Policr '!YPe of Action Responsibility

1.1 Reitrlct development in envirorunen.tally..geruitivc/ · Planning Dept. enviro~entti~Y-impQ~t areaS: ,.

1.2 Protect enviro~entally-scnsitive wetlands; adapt CWMP SlRWMDIFDBP/ ACOFJP!allning Dept

1.3 Protect c:rtviri.>ttritMt.1lly .. important upland V'e~etative communitieS Planning Dept. overS acres

1.4 Require environmental s.UIVey for proPosed dcv(.';lopments in areas Applicable federal, d~~~d cnvironmentally~sensitivc ;md ~vironmentally-important. state, regional and loco.I

govc:mn1ent agencies

u· ··.co6tdinat~ field inspectionsj rcq~irc HCPs wher~ appropriate P1aiminS Dept.

1.6 Pl:Otect sea turtle nesting h3.bitat FDBPIOSFWS/ Planning Dept.

1.7 Complete Manatee Protection and aoating Safety Comprehensive Planning DeptJFDEP Mauagel'nent Plan

1.8 evaluate manatee prote~on spCCd :r..ones PIOl1Jling Dept.IFDEP ·

1.9 PrOtt:ct and prcs(:fVe t:oWltal vegetative communities FDEPIOSFWS/'

". . Pl•nning Dept:

!.!Q · Assist USFWS and I'DEP in ru:ljUiring uru!eveloped tracts of Planning Dept coastal vegetativQ.S~I!Imu~ities .

!.II S~pport efforts of SJRWMD ~ update map~ of submerged aquatic SJRWMDI vegetation in IRL Plallning Dept.

1.12 Mb1imU:e impacts. to submersed aquatic vegetation columunitics Plarining Dept.IFDEP

u; Promote co~mQT"dal ~d private fiShing actiVities FGFWFC!NMFSI FDBP

1.14 '·Designate submerged lahd lae"·;!~a in the.Pelici~'JSland Nationat FDBPIOSFWSIBCC' Wildlife Rofuse as an aquacultur<·uso """•

· LIS Shor~;:line protection buff~;T $etback requirements Planning Dept '

2.1 A-dopt Stato Cl~• U water quality stan<lar<ls for !Rl. . Plannins Dept.

2.2 Adopt State Class m wot<t quality standards for lRL and St Planning Dept. Sebastian R:iver

2.3' ... Prohibit new. point-s""""' discltorges to· the 1RL Utilities Dopt.IFDBP

2.4 linplement CCMP end SWIM policy rocominondations FDBPIJRCJ SiRwMolll\LNlil'

. 2.5· .. Es.;blish w~ Quality Level-of.:Sorvi~c Stand"d• SiRWMDIJRC

Commlii:iity Development Department · Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adl)pted 9/13/05

'

Timing Capital B><peJ~diture

On~olng· NO

Ongoing YES

Ongoing YES

Ongoing YES

Ongoing NO

Ongoing ... YES

1998 NO

1998 NO

" Ong1>ing YES

Ongeing YES

Onsoing· NO

Ong1>ing · NO

Ongoing NO

1999 NO

Ongoinli · NO.

.. Ongoin,g l'!O

Ong1>i~s :Nq

Ont¢ln~ NO

Ongoing YES

2000 . . NO ..

llidianlUver County.ll+

Comorehensiv~ Pl~li. Coastall\1 ~na2ement Element

2.6 Reduce freshwater inflow and improve watet qualilf in tho IRL SJRWMDIFOEPIIRC/ Ongoing YES ' FS 298 Districts/

Municipalities

2.7 Require marinas to be designed to minimi7..e impacts to SA V and FDEP/Pianning Dept. Ongoing NO l'l'larirle resollrces

2.8 Enforce dredge and fill permit regulations ACOEJFINDIFDEP/ Ongoing NO SJRWMDIIRC

2.9 Prohibit discharge from vessels IRCIPMP Ongoing NO

2.10 ·Jmplemont Objective 2 of the Con.<ef'lation Element and Objective rlanning Dept. 199.8 NO 7 of the Stormwa!or Man"llOn'lettt Sub .. lement

3.1 Require new boat facilitos &: rm1ps be consistent with MPP . Planning Dept. Ongoi~g NO

3.2 · Require boat facUitics meet specified siting criteria l'hmnin_g Dept. Ongoing NO

3.3 Require boat tam.p meet speci.ficd.siting criteria Planning Dept. Ongoing NO

3.4 Allow. private residet1~al marinas only in certain zoning districts Plonnins Dept. Ongoing NO

3.5 Allow publi~privato residential marinas only in certain ~oning Planning l;lept, Ongoing NO districts

"3.6 Allow recreational marinas only in ccl"blin zoriing districts . Planning Dept. On ,going NO

3.1 Allow commercial marinas only in certain zoning districts Planning Dept. Ongoing NO

3.8 Require mitigation of boat !hcility impacts to rcsourcCs Planning DeptJFDEP Ongoing NO

3.9 Require County coordination with '"unlcipalities on MPP Planning Dept,/l'Dll~ 2005 NO requirements

3.10 Allow reconstruction of nonconforming marina if destroyed by Planning Dept.IFDEP OngoiN-G NO natural disaster

3.11 Restrict covered slips and platformS in 10% SAY are.a:s Planning Dept/l'DEP Oogoios NO

3.12 Prohibit. floating docks & d.c:sisn' that eninlp manatees Pmnning Dept.IFD~~- , Ongoinil; NO

' 3.13 Map resource constraints to boat:faCilitiQs siting Planning Dept./FOEP 200$ NO

3.14 Requite 1 ~100 power boat slip to sh:or~Uno rl4ti.o requirem~t in Planning Dept/FDEP Ongoing NO . Qcrtain zones

3.1S · .Encourage: upgrading: of existing rp.arinas in certain zones Plannins Dept./I'DEP Qngoing NO

4.1 Prohibit construction oecan w,.-d ofDSSL Planning Dept Ongoins NO

4.2 Protect b.;..,h and d"no ')'litem; n:vi""!. b""\lh and dune projects Ph•lJlio~ Peptll'DEP Ongoing NO within the City·Limito o£Voro Beach · ·

4.$ Pu'!ll.ue: funding for shoreline .stabUiza~o~ projQcb Public Work>/ Ongoing YllS FDEP/ACOll .

4.4 Requiro dun~ ~s~.-o-m" stt'tletures f~r:Oceal:i.tont propcrtic:s Piann1ng DeptJFDEP Ongoing NO

4.S Dev~lop dw~ cr~;~ss:-over ~~.s1rue;~O!l.~.~:rDaintcna!J~e. plan Plannins'J'ublio 2000 NO Work.!iPaiki ili'vision -··~ ..

CommunitY Develop_nienl Department Indian liUver countY .112 Supplement 7: ·ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

' ~··

( Colill>reli~nsive Platt ". ;,, C•astal Manal!:.ement F.lement ·

4.6 Adopt spec:ifie eriteria for shoreline stabilization ~ outlined in . Planning Dcp~ ' 199& ., NO' ...

Policy IO.S of tho Conservation Element

4.7 Prohi~it motori,;ed 'Vehicles on beaches- !RCIUSFWS Ongoing NO

4.8 ·.·1m pose· fines fot beach and dune v!oliltiQns Pla!llling Dept!FDEP Ongoing NO

4.9 AHend meetings and ovaluoto tcohnieal stlldies prepared by the Public Works Ons:oing NO Sebostian lnletTax District ·

4.10 j:'.omplct.'c 3 Yt:J$t' monitorliig report fOr PEP reef; delem1ine need Public Works 1999 NO for supplcmcn~t b~ renourishmcnt

4.!1 · Study alternatives to funding shoreline stabilization, inoludin,g Public Works 1999 NO estlblishment of a Beach Taxing District

• 5.1 Adopt a,,.tai Higb Hazard Area (CHHA) map Planning ~ept. 1998 NO

S.2 · Maintain existing levctw<>f~seiviee within CHHA Public Worksll!tiliti"' Ongoing YES

5.3 AilsesS county facilities damaged in CHHA Public Works/ contln- NO Emergency Services gent

5:4 Maintain FEMA cRs of"?":'cnfotce l.DR Chapter 930;, evaluate Planning Dept./ Public · Ongoins NO structures for compliance with FEMA~s 50% Rule Works/

6:! · Oc·~i~at~ HUrricane Vulnerability Zone (HVZ) Planning Dept. 199$ NO

6.2 Condt.tct a ~>.urvey of existing hurricane shell~:s; solicit funding to Emergency Services/ Ongoing: NO· reduce "safe" shelter cap:icity deficit FBMAIDCAITCRPC I·

6.3 Assess·~tnerabHity of public inftastn.ic~re ~n CHHA Emergency Services/ Ougoing NO l?ublic Works/ PlonningDoptl -municipalities

6.4 Coordinate emer:gency ev~cuation procedo~es with TCRPC, Bmergcney Seryices/ Ongoin&. NO BrCvard Co, and St. Lucie· Co. TCRPC/

Planning Dcp< ....... ,

6.S Adopt CME Objective ll and FLUE·Objective 17 to maintain Planning ·Dept. 1998 NO , current evacuation time$

M Coordinate with Florida. Bast Coast Railroad Emergency Services o'n!;win& NO

6.7 ,.Prohibit loc•tiqn of ACI.Fs and facilitic:s sCITins special needs Planning DeptJ Ongoing NO population in the .CHHA . BmQTgen~y Servjces

7.1 Perform initial damage asscssrnCnt bnmediately following a na'Nnl· Emergency Soryiocs/ cont(n'"' NO dliiiQI:Cf";. declare local emergency; requ~t assistance from FDB~ BC.C S""t ..

7.2 Develop local Mitigation Stratoi!Y EmorgQTlcy Setviees/ 1999 NO ·PI.,ning/ Public

Works

1:3 Appoint Local Mittgadon Stra!ci!Y working group BOO Emorgorioy t99ii NO Services

7.4 . Make reoommendatiQil:~ short:"tenn directives ~c:llon.s:-tertn Emcrgr;ncy Servi~ 1999 NO strategies to be initirAtcd i:n the event of a natural dis~ter Planning/ Publlc

Wol'ks/Boilding

7.5 . Requirements for recOnstruction oceanward of tho DSSL Pl1llining/Buildingl · FDEP

Ongoing NO

,...,... ...... .,

•·· .7.6 Require . .s:tr\lctures exhibiting greater th:w. 50% damage to~ Planninlif Building contin- NO elevated 6 inoh<S above the baso flood ol.,.,.tion Dept/Public w'or!ci gent

,, ... '. " "•'.

Community Development Department Indian River County .11;:1

Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-0ill, adopted 9/13/05

l"omnreh~n•iv• Plan Coastal Mana~ement Element 1.1 Require "substantially improved" struot\lres to be elevated 6 . Plallnlntflluildlng · Ongoing ~ .. 'NG

inches above the base flood elevation Dept./ Public Worka

7.8 Regulate devetoptnent and inan~gc natural ri:souree; in ·the Coastal Pl ... ing!FDEPI Ongoing NO• . Zone · · · Building Dop~

8.1 Piuticipate in CARL ''Blueway'' program Pb>nning/FDEP/ 2000 YES SJRWMD

8.2 Accept donations of shoreline lands Planning Dept. Ongoing NO

8.3 Explore fe.~ibility of imP!ovh'lg' boat aeoess in south CCIUnty Planning Dept. 19.98 NO

8.4 Prohibit net loss of public access Planning.IFDEP/ Ongoing NO S!RWMD/lJSFWS/ .. Public Worka

8.5 Cotn~Iete improvements.to oceait side of:Round Island Park Public Worka 1999 YES

8.6 C?mpletc management plan for thC. a.urm Tract ·Planning Dept. 1999 NO

8.7 Provide publi~ a~cess to the Pelican lshu1d National Wildlife Refilgc

Plannllig /USFWS 2000 NO

. 8.8 . P~ovide passive recre~tion on acquired b.nds Pl>Ming Dept . 1999 YES

9.1 Protect Md preser'\le histol'ic and al'Cheologi~ resources in the PISilning Dept. Ortgoirtg•, NO Coastal Zcine

9.2 .Pursu~ fundi:ng to pr~erve historic Sit~~ Planning Dept. Ongoing NO

9.3 Provide incentives to preserve histof1c .resources ~Ianning Dept. Ongoing NO '/'

.9.4 Require a.rehacological sutveys )?Ianning Dept. Ongoing NO

9S Implement Qbjoct:ive S of the Future Land Use Element Pl!lflning.Dopt.IBCC 1998 NO

9.6 Development mao.;!.gcment plans f~r historic/scenic roads Plarming Dept 2005 NO .,

10.1 D~commlssion WWrPs in HVZ Utilities Dept. 2003 YES

10.2 E.valu!J.te d,amas;ed: infrasttuctute)n QUIA;. include Public Work.W ooritin- NO n::cqmm(:ndatioil$ in 1he Local Mitigation Strotegy Utititi..t Pl=in!!i gent

. Bme~getlCy .Services ·

10.3 Coordinate with :state and feder3l agencies regarding beach Publlo Worlo!/ ACOJ!/ Ongoing NO . stnbilixati,on :proj~ets FDEP/FlND

10.4 Pc:rmit qtiti~tion oflooal funds for' shoreline stabilization and PilblicWotk.;IBCC Ontoing . YES b~h ~owishment projects

10.5 Prohibit sopiic tariks ocean ward ofDSSL Planning Dopt.IDHRS Ongoing NO

IM Maintain ~d!l:fdll, P,haSinu.~~ funditl·g,o{infrastructul'e in Planning Dept./ Public Ons:oins YES coRStal zone com.dstcnt with the In:tmst:ruet).U'e Element . WorkB/Uulnies

11.1 Support land. acqui•iUon in the 1{\':Z: Plannins Dopt!BCC Ongoing YES

11.2 Limit land use density in dlffi.A ' Planning Dept. Ongoing NO

11.3 Limit publlo and private dovelo!llll~l in CllHA Planni"l!. DeptJBCC Ongoi~g NO

12.1 Request nianatee Pro:tcct:ion sp~ ·~e {O'Qdiflcations Planning Dept 2005 NO (

12.2 Establi~h a.citi2ens~ marine patrol ., Plannin• D~J. 2005 NO

Cominunity Development Department . Indian Ri~er County 114 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005-042, adopted 9/13/05

Comnrehenslve l'lan Coastal Mana~ement Element FWCIShetifl' s Ofe

13.1 Con11truet i:nfottnationat displays a.t public boat raffips Planning/Public. Works 2005 YES

13.2 Distt:ibute ml!m.tCe: awraeness and boating materials Planning Dept/ Ongoing NO FWCIFINDIELC

.

13.3 Initiate a monofilament line recycling program, reeept.a.cles at- l'lo~ning Dept/Public 2005 YES pqblic fishing locations Wortw Parks Division

. . , . ,, ,. '

13.4 Require postiitg of'manri.teo aW.;eness signs at boat facilities Planning Dept Ongoing NO

.

13.S Require rental vessels to display sticker$, cards with boating safety P10Ming Dept./ 2005 NO

and ~:matee pmtectiott infonnation FWC/Shcrlff's Ofe

14.1 · Coordinate with VB Utilities to prevent disruption of temperature Planning DepV VB Ongoing NO

flows ·at Power pl'ant in v:intet. Utiliti~s/ FWC

14.:1 Retrofit stonnwater outfalls in tidal waters to prevent manatee. f'lanning'Dept/ Public 200S NO entrapment Works/ IRFWCD

i..-'"" ~ ..

Community Development· Department Indian River County liS

Supplement 7: Ordinance 21105..042, adopted 9/13/05

Comprehensive PlaD'

TABLE9.24 COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT

.. EVALUATION MATRIX

Coast!l Management Elemt;nt

OBJECTIVE MEASURE TIME FRAME

1 Amount of terrestrial and aquatic resources 2020

2 Surface water quality 2020

3 Amount of impact to manatee habitat attributed to boat facilities 2010

4 Protection ofthe beach and dune system 1998

5 Infrastructure within CHHA 2004

6 Estimated evacuation time for a Category ill hurricane 2020

7 . Adoption of a Local Mitigation Strategy 1999

. 8 Number of public access points 2010

9 No significant im:pactto archaeological/historic resources 2020

10 Level-of-Service of infrastructure within the coastal zone 2020

11 Density of land use in the CHHA 2020

12 Annual boater accident rate and watercraft-related human fatalities 2010

13

14

Amount of informational kiosk displays at public boat ramps

Annual number of manatee mortalities

2005

2005

Community Development Department Indian River County 116 Supplement 7: Ordinance 2005..042, adopted 9/13/05

c·····~

Documents

Indian River County 2020 Comprehensive Plan21 21 21 22 Indian River County .. i . Comprehensive··PI.all Coastal M!lnagew@t Element ... • Hurricane Vulnerability Zone Comprehensive