Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/5/1979A THURSDAY, JULY 5, 1979 THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, MET IN REGULAR SESSION AT THE COURTHOUSE, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, ON THURSDAY, .JULY 5; 1979, AT 8:30 O'CLOCK A.M. PRESENT WERE WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., CHAIRMAN; ALMA LEE LOY, VICE CHAIRMAN; WILLARD W. SIEBERT, JR.; AND PATRICK B. LYONS, COMMISSIONER R. DON DEESON WAS ABSENT ON VACATION. ALSO PRESENT WERE JACK G. JENNINGS, COUNTY ADMINIS- TRATOR; L. S. "TOMMY" THOMAS, INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR; GEORGE G. COLLINS, JR., ATTORNEY TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; JEFFREY K. BARTON, FINANCE OFFICER; BAILIFF DAN FLEISCHMAN; AND VIRGINIA HARGREAVES, DEPUTY CLERK. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER, ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS LED THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, AND REVEREND FRED MCCLELLAN, FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, GAVE THE INVOCATION. THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 20, 1979. COMMISSIONER LOY DISCUSSED THE FIRST MOTION ON PAGE 16, PARA- GRAPH 6, AND STATED THAT SHE FELT IT HAD BEEN VOTED DOWN AND THEN THE SECOND MOTION HAD BEEN PASSED DENYING THE REQUEST FOR ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF LOTH STREET. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, AND IT WAS AGREED THAT THERE HAD BEEN ONLY ONE AFFIRMATIVE VOTE ON THAT MOTION, WHICH WAS THAT OF COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD INSTRUCTED THAT PARAGRAPH S, PAGE 16, -BE CORRECTED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: "THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND DENIED WITH COMMISSIONERS SIEBERT, LOY, DEESON, AND CHAIR- MAN WODTKE VOTING IN OPPOSITION." COMMISSIONER LOY REQUESTED THAT ON PAGE 22, 4TH PARAGRAPH, "LLY" BE CORRECTED TO "LOY." COMMISSIONER LOY THEN QUESTIONED WHETHER THE MOTION ON PAGE 27, FIRST PARAGRAPH, ACTUALLY WAS INTENDED TO AUTHORIZE THE ATTORNEY TO REPRESENT THE COUNTY AND HAROLD WHITAKER. J U L 51979 ` lam U8 ATTORNEY COLLINS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE WOULD LIKE THE MOTION TO READ THAT THE ATTORNEY IS AUTHORIZED TO REPRESENT THE COUNTY AND HAROLD WHITAKER AS AN AGENT FOR THE COUNTY. HE SUGGESTED THAT A FURTHER SENTENCE BE ADDED SAYING THAT IN THE EVENT A CONFLICT OCCURS BETWEEN THE ATTORNEY'S REPRESENTATION OF THE COUNTY AND THAT OF MR. WHITAKER, THE ATTORNEY WOULD BE AUTHORIZED TO SECURE OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR MR. WHITAKER. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT THIS ADDED SOMETHING TO THE MOTION THAT WASN'T THERE ORIGINALLY AND THAT THERE SHOULD BE A FURTHER MOTION RATHER THAN AMENDING THE PREVIOUS MINUTES. IN FURTHER DISCUSSION, IT WAS AGREED THAT ON PAGE 27, PARAGRAPH 1, THE WORDS "AS AN AGENT FOR THE COUNTY" BE ADDED AFTER "HAROLD WHITAKER." AN ADDITIONAL MOTION WILL BE DISCUSSED LATER IN THE,MEETING. THESE CORRECTIONS HAVING BEEN MADE, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 20, 1979, AS WRITTEN. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO CARRY A CONCEALED FIREARM FOR LORNE G. GLEN AND EDDIE JOHN NELSON. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED ISSUANCE OF DUPLICATE TAX SALE CERTIFICATE N0. 413 TO J. J. BROTMAN. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR JUDITH A. WAKEFIELD, COUNTY EXTENSION DIRECTOR, AND PETE SPYKE, AGRICULTURAL SPECIALIST, AS FOLLOWS: JUDITH WAKEFIELD: `JULY 16-20 LAKE PLACID 4-H CAMP JULY 20-21 TAMPA STATE 4-H HORSE SHOW JULY 23-27 GAINESVILLE FLORIDA 4-H CONGRESS PETE SPYKE; JULY 16 SEBRING TRANSPORT 4-H CLUB MEMBERS OR SCHOOL BUS DRIVER TO CAMP CLOVERLEAF. JULY 20 SEBRING TRANSPORT 4-H CLUB MEMBERS OR SCHOOL BUS DRIVER FROM CAMP CLOVERLEAF. 2 J U L 5'1979 oac41 m ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO ALLOCATE ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO THE DUES AND MEMBERSHIP ACCOUNT TO PAY THE COUNTY MEMBERSHIP SERVICE FEE TO THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES, AS FOLLOWS: ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT No. INCREASE DECREASE DUES & MEMBERSHIP 01-2101-329.00 $ 50.00 AUTO & TRAVEL 01-2101-328.00 $ 50.00 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO ALLOCATE FUNDS FOR CIRCUIT .JUDGE SHARP'S OFFICE EXPENSES,WHICH SUPPLIES ARE PURCHASED THROUGH THE COUNTY'S PURCHASING SYSTEM, AS FOLLOWS: ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT No, INCREASE DECREASE Misc. EXPENSE 03-2322-204.00 $200.00 COMMUNICATIONS 03-2322-335.00 $200.00 RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCIES 03-9990-701.00 $400.00 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO MAKE NECESSARY ADJUSTMENTS TO. THE EXTENSION SERVICE`S BUDGET FOR 1978-79, AS FOLLOWS: ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT N0. INCREASE DECREASE Misc. EXPENSE 01-6302-204.00 $200.00 OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-6302-205.00 $200.00 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BUDGET ACCOUNT AMENDMENT No. 1 FOR FISCAL YEAR 1978-79 FROM THE SHERIFF`S DEPARTMENT, AS FOLLOWS: ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT NO, INCREASES DgPREASE EXPENSE - BUDGET OFFICE 03-3101-302.00 $40,000 SALARIES & IMAGES - OTHER 03-3101-102.00 $40,000 FINANCE OFFICER BARTON INTRODUCED ED FRY, WHO HAS JOINED HIS DEPARTMENT AS ONE OF HIS TWO ASSISTANTS. MR. FRY WAS FORMERLY WITH THE AUDITOR GENERAL`S STAFF. 3 J U L 51979 ROOK 41 PAcE rtm% INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS DISCUSSED FINANCING FOR THE GIFFORD WATER SYSTEM, NOTING THAT WE HAD TO USE INTERIM FINANCING OF $402,500 BEFORE WE COULD USE THE GRANT. THE ATTORNEY PREPARED BONDS IN THAT AMOUNT; WE HAVE NOW USED UP THE $402,500 AND THE ATTORNEY IS IN THE PROCESS OF CLOSING OUT THE BOND ISSUE. MR. THOMAS CONTINUED THAT, IN THE MEANTIME, WE EMPLOYED CHAPMAN CONSTRUCTION TO EXPAND THE GIFFORD WATER SYSTEM AND HAVE A PROBLEM IN THAT WE WILL NOT RECEIVE GRANT MONEY UNTIL THE BONDS ARE CLOSED. MR. THOMAS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT WE HAVE A COMMITMENT FOR $235,000 FOR A SECOND EXPANSION, AND IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT MONEY IS NEEDED TO PAY CHAPMAN CONSTRUCTION, HE IS RECOM- MENDING THAT THE BOARD GIVE THE CHAIRMAN AND ATTORNEY COLLINS APPROVAL TO BORROW THE $235,000 IN INTERIM FINANCING FOR WHICH WE WILL BE PAID BACK FROM THE GRANT MONEY. BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE IN INTEREST RATES, HE STATED THAT HE WOULD RECOMMEND CONSIDERING BORROWING THE MONEY FROM OUR FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUNDS. HE DID NOT EXPECT IT TO BE MORE THAN A 30-60 DAY LOAN. ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKED HOW MUCH HE WISHED TO BORROW AT THIS TIME, AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS -STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AUTHORIZATION TO BORROW $50,000 AND APPROVAL TO BORROW $235,000, IF WE NEED IT. THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR WAS CALLED FROM THE MEETING TO TALK WITH FMHA ON THE PHONE, AND THE CHAIRMAN STATED THAT ACTION ON HIS RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE DELAYED UNTIL MR. THOMAS RETURNED TO THE MEETING. ATTORNEY JOSEPH CIANFRONE CAME BEFORE THE BOARD REPRESENTING B. F. CHAMBERLAIN, WHO IS APPLYING FOR RELEASE OF EASEMENTS IN PARADISE PARK, KNIT 2. ATTORNEY CIANFRONE NOTED THAT AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING THE BOARD HAD DISCUSSED THE PROBLEM OF DRAINAGE, AND A PLAN NOW HAS BEEN DRAWN BY ENGINEER DANA HOWARD, WHICH CALLS FOR A RELEASE OF EASEMENTS TO PUT A COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE IN THE CENTER OF THE PROPERTY AND A 5' EASEMENT ALONG THE BACK LINE. ATTORNEY CIANFRONE NOTED THAT THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO A CONTRACT OF SALE, AND AS PART OF THE DEAL, THE SELLER IS SUPPOSED TO SECURE THE RELEASE OF EASEMENT SO THE BUYER CAN 4 J U L 51979 'BOOK 41 PAGE 71 CJ DEVELOP THE PROPERTY. ATTORNEY CIANFRONE STATED THAT HE BELIEVED THE ZONING DEPARTMENT HAS REVIEWED THE DRAINAGE PLAN AND HAS ACCEPTED IT. HE EXPLAINED THEY ARE ONLY GIVING A 5' EASEMENT BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER FEELS HE NEEDS THE FOOTAGE FOR A PARKING AND LOADING AREA. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT ZONING -DIRECTOR WALKER IS ON VACATION. HE NOTED THE 5' EASEMENT IS ON THE NORTH AND INQUIRED ABOUT SIDE LOT LINE EASEMENTS. ATTORNEY CIANFRONE DID NOT KNOW ABOUT SUCH EASEMENTS AND STATED THERE WILL BE JUST THE 5' EASEMENT. THE ADMINISTRATOR ASKED THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR TO CHECK THE PLAT OF PARADISE PARK, BLOCK J, UNIT 2, AND DETERMINE IF THERE ARE ANY SIDE LOT LINE EASEMENTS. HE POINTED OUT THAT 5' IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE COUNTY TO MAINTAIN. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT FELT THIS MATTER IS NOT READY FOR CONSID- ERATION UNTIL THE BOARD GETS THIS INFORMATION. THE CHAIRMAN INSTRUCTED THAT WE WILL RETURN TO THIS MATTER SHORTLY WHEN THE SIDE LOT LINE INFORMATION IS BROUGHT BACK. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS RETURNED TO THE MEETING AND INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAD A TELEPHONE CALL FROM MR. HUDNELL OF FMHA AND HE NOW BELIEVES IT WILL BE POSSIBLE FOR US TO GET SOME MONEY FROM THE GRANT*BEFORE THE BONDS ARE SETTLED. HE DOES NOT KNOW, HOWEVER, WHAT THE TIME ELEMENT WOULD BE SO HE STILL WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AUTHORI- ZATION TO BORROW UP TO $235,000 AND $50,000 AT THIS TIME. MR. THOMAS NOTED THAT THERE IS A PAYMENT DUE ON THE 15TH, AND STATED HE WOULD LIKE TO BORROW THIS FROM FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUNDS IF THE FINANCE OFFICER FEELS THIS CAN BE DONE. ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THERE SHOULD BE SPECIFIC AUTHORIZATION FOR A SPECIFIC AMOUNT AND NOT AN "UP TO" AMOUNT, SINCE IT IS NECESSARY TO GET APPROVAL ON EACH INCREMENTAL LOAN IN ANY EVENT. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0. 79-57 AUTHORIZING THE BORROWING OF $50,000 BY EXECUTION OF A BOND ANTICIPATION NOTE THROUGH SUCH SOURCES AS THE FINANCE OFFICER SHALL DETERMINE THE MOST COMPARABLE TO RATES PREVAILING AT THE TIME, INCLUDING BORROWING FROM THE COUNTY FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUNDS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING FOR EXPANSION OF THE GIFFORD WATER SYSTEM. 5 BOOK 41 PAGE 72 RESOLUTION NO. 79 - 57 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that in order to facilitate the financing of the Gifford Phase II Water and Sewer Program, the County Finance Officer is authorized to borrow Fifty Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($50,000.00) from Indian River County's existing revenue sharing for a period of not extend- ing beyond September 30, 1979, on or before such date the internal loan shall be repaid. Interest shall be accrued according to law, if so required. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, RIDA 9 By Vice Chairman � d: July 5, 1979 JUL 5 1979 BOOK 41 FACE 73 THE CHAIRMAN RETURNED THE DISCUSSION TO ITEM 4 ON THE AGENDA IN REGARD TO THE RELEASE OF EASEMENTS REQUESTED BY B. F. CHAMBERLAIN IN PARADISE PARK. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE NOW HAS DETERMINED THERE ARE NO SIDE LOT LINE EASEMENTS ON THIS PROPERTY. HIS ONLY COMMENT IS THAT THAT DRAINAGE IN PARADISE PARK COMES FROM A QUARTER MILE NORTH DOWN TO ROUTE 60 AND SHOULD DEVELOP IN THE FUTURE IN THE REAR LOT SWALE; IT WILL COME DOWN AND GO INTO THE 5' EASEMENT AND OUT TO THE ROAD, THE ADMINISTRATOR STATED THAT HIS ONLY OBJECTION IS THAT A 5' EASEMENT HAS TO BE CLEANED OUT BY HAND; IT IS HARD TO GET IN EVEN WITH A WHEELBARROW, AND HE FELT THIS COULD BE A PROBLEM. HE HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE DRAINAGE OTHER THAN THAT. HE COMMENTED THAT THE PROPOSED CULVERTS MUST HAVE HEADWALLS AS PER THE NEW DOT STANDARDS. ATTORN8Y CIANFRONE NOTED THAT THE BACK OF THE STRUCTURE WOULD BE A PARKING LOT AND THE COUNTY COULD GO IN OVER THE PARKING LOT FOR MAINTENANCE. THE ADMINISTRATOR FELT IN THAT CASE THE MINUTES SHOULD REFLECT THAT THE PARKING LOT COULD BE USED FOR MAINTENANCE PURPOSES, BUT ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT WOULD NOT SUFFICE, AND IF IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE DRAINAGE BACK THERE, IT WILL BE NECESSARY TO HAVE SUFFICIENT ROOM WITHIN THE EASEMENT. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT THAT EVEN BY GIVING A 10' EASEMENT, THE APPLICANT STILL WOULD BE GAINING PROPERTY. ATTORNEY CIANFRONE STATED THAT THERE IS A ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND THEY ARE GOING TO PUT IN A ROAD WITH DRAINAGE. ADMINISTRATOR .JENNINGS FELT THAT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT. HE COMMENTED THAT DANA HOWARD SPECIFICALLY DREW THIS DRAINAGE PLAN IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S SUGGESTIONS. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT NOTED THAT THE BOARD SHOULD HAVE SOME RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF AND FELT THE DISCUSSION JUST HELD ON THIS MATTER IS ALL WORK THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE BEFORE IT CAME BEFORE THE BOARD. COMMISSIONER LYONS AGREED THAT MATTERS SHOULD NOT COME BEFORE THE BOARD WITHOUT PROPER BACK-UP MATERIAL. HE FELT THE PLAN SHOULD HAVE 7 J U L 5 1979 Boa 41 PAGE 74 BEEN REDUCED AND PRESENTED IN ADVANCE WITH A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SO THE BOARD HAS A CHANCE TO LOOK THIS MATERIAL OVER BEFORE THE MEETING. THE ADMINISTRATOR STATED THAT'RIGHT NOW THE ZONING DIRECTOR IS ON VACATION, BUT CONTINUED THAT HE DOES CONCUR WITH THE BOARD AND IS TRYING TO PUT A PRINTED FORM TOGETHER FOR ALL THE OFFICES SO THIS MATERIAL CAN BE EXAMINED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF BEFORE IT COMES TO THE BOARD.. ATTORNEY CIANFRONE STATED THAT HE HAD UNDERSTOOD THIS WORK WAS DONE AND THAT THIS PLAN WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED ATTORNEY CIANFRONE WHEN THE PROPOSED DRAINAGE PLANS WERE SUBMITTED, AND HE STATED TWO WEEKS AGO, BOARD SECRETARY ELIZABETH FORLANI CONFIRMED THAT THE PLANS WERE SUBMITTED JUNE 21ST AND GIVEN TO MR, WALKER'S OFFICE AND MR. JENNINGS' OFFICE AT THAT TIME. THE CHAIRMAN STATED THE BOARD OWES MR, CIANFRONE AN APOLOGY AND FELT THE BEST WE CAN DO IS PUT THIS ON OUR NEXT AGENDA BECAUSE THE BOARD IS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE 5' EASEMENT, ATTDRNEY*COLLINS SUGGESTED THAT IF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT COULD REVIEW THIS PLAN AND COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION THIS AFTER- NOON, POSSIBLY THE BOARD WOULD WANT TO CONSIDER IT THEN. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, AND IT WAS AGREED THAT THE BOARD WOULD CONSIDER THIS PATTER FURTHER AT 1:30 THIS AFTERNOON, PROVIDED ATTORNEY CIANFRONE CAN SPEAK FOR THE OWNER IN REGARD TO RELEASING MORE OF THE EASEMENT, SINCE THEY DID NOT FEEL THEY COULD APPROVE 5'. ATTORNEY CIANFRONE AGREED TO GET IN TOUCH WITH THE PURCHASER AND RETURN AT 1:30 P.M. ATTORNEY DARRELL FENNELL APPEARED REPRESENTING GIFFORD FIRE PROTECTION, INC., WHICH IS REQUESTING THAT THE COUNTY CONSIDER ACQUISI- TION OF THEIR SYSTEM, AS PER THE FOLLOWING LETTER: JUL 5 ig79 BOOK 41 PAGE 75 J LAW OFFIC E5 OF COULD. COOKSEY. FENNELL & APPLEBY PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION • 979 BEACHLAND BOULEVARD VERO' BEACH. FLORIDA 32960 .JOHN R. GOULD BYRON T. COOKSEY DARRELL FENNELL TELEPHONE 231-1100 FRANK M. APPLEBY AREA CODE 30S LAWRENCE A. BARKETT EUBENE J. O'NE1LL June 26, 1979 Dun FILE NO. Mr. William C. Wodke, Jr. Chairman of the Board Board of County Commissioners_�d!i f. of Indian River County Indian River County Courthouse Vero Beach, FL 32960 1 Dear Mr. Chairman: I represent Gifford Fire Protection, Inc., a Florida cor- poration. The principals of the corporation are Leroy E. Smith & Sons, Haffield Citrus, Riverfront Groves, Indian River Pack- ing,.and Sturgis Lumber & Plywood. In 1976 my client constructed and installed a fire pro- tection system consisting of a 100,000 -gallon water storage tank and approximately 3,000 feet of 8 -inch main line. The main line is adjacent to Old U.S. Highway #1 and extends from just south of Lindsey Road to just south of North Gifford Road. The purpose of this letter is to request a place on the agenda of the Board of County Commissioners at its next regu- lar meeting in order to discuss the possible acquisition of the above-described system by the County. At such meeting we will be prepared to review with you the plans and specifica- tions for the fire protection system owned by my client. -Sincerely yours, arrell Fennell ATTORNEY FENNELL STATED THAT THIS ASSOCIATION WAS FORMED FOR THE PURPOSE OF FORMING A FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM FOR THE BUSINESSES REPRESENTED IN THAT AREA, WHICH IS LOCATED IN THE STRIP OF LAND BETWEEN NEW AND OLD U.S. I AND LINDSEY ROAD AND NORTH GIFFORD ROAD. HE CONTINUED THAT THEY ARE AWARE THAT THE GIFFORD WATER SYSTEM IS BEING INSTALLED AT THE PRESENT TIME AND FELT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO SEE IF THE BOARD. IS INTERESTED IN ACQUISITION OF THE SYSTEM OWNED BY HIS CLIENTS. ATTORNEY FENNELL FELT*THERE WOULD BE SUBSTANTIAL BENEFITS TO THE COUNTY 9 J U L 51979 ROOK 41 PAGE ' 76 f AS THIS COULD SERVE AS A BACK-UP SYSTEM IF THE EXISTING STORAGE TANK WERE DOWN WITH REPAIRS, AND ALSO WOULD PROVIDE ADDITIONAL ON -THE -LINE PRESSURE AS THE COUNTY SYSTEM EXPANDS BOTH TO THE EAST AND NORTH, HE FELT THERE ARE READILY AVAILABLE TIE-IN POINTS, AND NOTED THAT.THE TWO SYSTEMS ARE NEAR EACH OTHER, ATTORNEY FENNELL FURTHER NOTED THIS SYSTEM COULD BE ACQUIRED AT CONSIDERABLY LESS COST THAN SUCH A SYSTEM WOULD COST THE COUNTY, HE STATED THEY ARE WILLING TO WORK WITH THE ENGINEERS OR ANY COMMITTEE APPOINTED BY THE BOARD, THE ATTORNEY CONTINUED THAT HE HAS ALL THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS OF THE SYSTEM AND BELIEVED IT COMPLIES IN EVERY RESPECT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS SET BY THE COUNTY, MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, THAT ATTORNEY FENNELL'S LETTER OF .JUNE 26, 1979 BE REFERRED TO ENGINEER BEINDORF FOR HIS COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER SIEBERT POINTED OUT THAT WE FIRST MUST DETERMINE IF THE COUNTY HAS A NEED AND THEN DETERMINE IF THE NEED IS WORTH THE ASKING PRICE. COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT MOST SYSTEMS IN THE COUNTY HAVE BEEN ACQUIRED AT NO COST TO THE COUNTY. CHAIRMAN WODTKE STATED THAT HE WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTION TO REFERING THIS MATTER TO MR. BEINDORF. HE NOTED THAT SOME TIME AGO WHEN WE WERE GETTING READY TO GO INTO THE GIFFORD SYSTEM EXPANSION, THIS MATTER WAS DISCUSSED WITH THE PRINCIPALS BUT AT THAT TIME WE WERE NOT SURE IF WE WERE GOING INTO PHASE 2, AND POSSIBLY NOW IS THE TIME TO TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THE SITUATION. THE CHAIRMAN FELT IT SHOULD BE MADE CLEAR THAT WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT TREATED WATER FACILITIES, BUT A 100,000 GALLON WATER TANK WITH A WELL THAT SUPPLIES RAW WATER THAT IS USED FOR FIRE PROTECTION ONLY, THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CHAIRMAN WODTKE CALLED ALLISON DEGENERO FORWARD AND PRESENTED TO HIM•A PROCLAMATION IN REGARD.TO THE "NEIGHBORS HELPING NEIGHBORS` PROGRAM WHICH WAS ORIGINATED BY MR. DEGENERO. HE THANKED MR. DEGENERO ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD AND THE COUNTY FOR HIS EFFORTS, AND MR. DEGENERO EXPLAINED THE PROGRAM AND PRAISED PEOPLE FOR THEIR COOPERATION. THE PROCLAMATION IS AS FOLLOWS: 10 J U L 51979 . BOOK 41 ,PAGE 17 P R 0 C L A 11 A T I O N WHEREAS, NEIGHBORS HELPING NEIGHBORS program is a total volunteer program initially organized by Allison DeGenero, and WHEREAS, NEIGHBORS HELPING NEIGHBORS program provides meals to the genuinely needy and transportation for the handi- capped and disabled persons in Indian River Coiinty, and WHEREAS, the meals are prepared by local residents in our community, and WHEREAS, the bus used for transportation of the handicapped and disabled persons was donated to the NEIGHBORS HELPI-N',' rEIGHBORS program by the local business community, and WHEREAS, NEIGHBORS HELPING NEIGHBORS program is strictly voluntary and receives no county, state or federal funding, and 01EREAS, the NEIGHBORS HELPING NEIGHBORS program is sponsoring a contest and awarding prizes for the best sub- missions of essays beginning: "I BELIEVE THAT NEIGHBORS HELPING NEIGHBORS is better than federal handouts because..." NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that the Board of County Commissioners on behalf of Indian River County appreciates the fine work and successes being achieved through NEIGHBORS HELPING NEIGHBORS program, and BE TT FURTHER PROCLAIMED the Board of County Commissioners encourages your continued volunteer efforts and community 'support. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Bv Al 'Willi. -Tiodtke, Chairman a J U L 51979 Boa 41 PAGE 78 ATTORNEY COLLINS DISCUSSED THE PROPOSED DRAFTS OF THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY WORKING AGREEMENTS AND TRUST INDENTURE TO BE ENTERED INTO WITH THE TRUSTEE, ETC. HE STATED THAT TO KEEP THIS PROGRAM MOVING ALONG SEVERAL THINGS SHOULD BE DONE. FIRST THE COUNTY COMMISSION,. WHO AT THIS POINT IS ACTING AS THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY, SHOULD APPOINT BOND COUNSEL AND SHOULD THINK IN TERMS OF WHO SHOULD BE THE TRUSTEE FOR THE PROGRAM. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT HE HAS NO PREFERENCE AS FAR AS THE BOND COUNSEL IS CONCERNED, BUT HE IS VERY SATISFIED WITH THE SERVICES WE HAVE RECEIVED FROM FREEMAN, RICHARDSON, WATSON, SLADE, MCCARTHY & KELLEY OF JACKSONVILLE, AND WOULD HAVE NO REASON NOT TO RECOMMEND WE CONTINUE WITH THEIR SERVICES. AS TO THE TRUSTEE, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT IT BE A LOCAL BANK WITH TRUST POWERS. THERE ARE TWO AVAILABLE BANKS WHICH DON T CREATE ANY CONFLICTS, AND THEY ARE FLORIDA FIRST NATIONAL AND FIRST CITRUS BANK. CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED IF THESE ACTIONS.CAN BE TAKEN BY THIS BOARD PRIOR TO APPOINTING THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY, AND THE ATTORNEY INFORMED HIM THAT THEY CAN, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPOINTED FREEMAN, RICHARDSON, WATSON, SLADE, MCCARTHY & KELLEY, OF JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA, BOND COUNSEL FOR THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY. ,DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AS TO RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPOINTMENTS TO THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY. THIS WILL BE BROUGHT UP LATER. COMKISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED IF THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN THE CHARGES FOR SERVICES OF THE BANKS WE ARE CONSIDERING AS TRUSTEE FOR THE HOUSING FI CE AUTHORITY. IT WAS FELT THAT INTEREST RATES AND CHARGES SHOULD BE CHECKED ON. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED -BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY INSTRUCTED INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS TO RESEARCH THE CHARGES THAT WOULD BE MADE BY THE BANKS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR ACTING AS TRUSTEE FOR THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT HE UNDERSTOOD SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE BEEN RECEIVING PHONE CALLS FROM TRAVIS SALTER, OWNER OF TREASURE COAST UTILITIES, INC., AND INFORMED THE BOARD THAT AT THIS 12 JUL 51979 BOOK 41 PAGE 79 I POINT, THE COUNTY HAS NO LEGAL OBLIGATIONS TO MR. SALTER. HE FELT THAT MR. SALTER WILL TRY TO BACK THE BOARD MEMBERS INTO A CORNER, AND REQUESTED THAT IF HE IS PERSISTENT, THEY BE CAREFUL NOT TO MAKE ANY SORT OF'COMMITMENT TO HIM. ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT IT IS NOW TIME TO MAKE APPOINT- MENTS TO THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD, CONSIDER THE TIMING OF THE MEETINGS AND THE ATTITUDE IN REGARD TO COMPENSATION FOR MEMBERS OF THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD. IT WAS NOTED THAT THE SCHOOL BOARD ALREADY HAS MADE THEIR APPOINTMENTS. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT STATED THAT WITH THE RE-EVALUATION OF ALL THE CITRUS, HE WOULD PREFER NOT TO BE ON THE BOARD THIS YEAR. COMMISSIONER LOY DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF MEMBERS OF THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL- ADJUSTMENT BOARD BEING REPLACED AFTER SERVING SOME TIME ON THE BOARD. SHE NOTED THAT SHE CAN SERVE ONE WEEK, BUT IS CONCERNED IF IT SHOULD MOVE INTO THE SECOND WEEK WITH BUDGETS SESSION AT APPROXIMATELY THE SAME TIME. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT FELT HE COULD TAKE OVER FOR SOMEONE IF THEY COULD GET ALL THE CITRUS OUT OF THE WAY. COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT HE WOULD BE WILLING TO ACCEPT THE APPOINTMENT. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LOY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ELECTED COMMISSIONERS LYONS AND DEESON AND CHAIRMAN WODTKE TO SERVE AS MEMBERS OF THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUST- MENT BOARD FOR THE COMING YEAR. COMMISSIONER LOY THEN BROUGHT UP THE MATTER OF COMPENSATION FOR MEMBERS OF THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD, NOTING THAT IT WAS A DIRECT REQUEST FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE SCHOOL BOARD AND IT IS PRETTY MUCH OF A HARDSHIP ON THEM WHEN THE MEETINGS TAKE UP SO MUCH TIME. SHE FELT WE HAD INDICATED THAT WE WERE TOO FAR DOWN.THE LINE LAST YEAR TO DO ANYTHING RETROACTIVE, BUT THAT WE WOULD DO SOMETHING THIS YEAR, SHE NOTED THAT THE EXPENSES OF THIS BOARD ARE BORNE 3/5 BY THE COUNTY AND 2/5 BY THE SCHOOL BOARD, COMMISSIONER LOY CONTINUED THAT SHE FELT IT HAD BEEN INTENDED TO RECOMMEND THAT PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEMBERS'BE PAID ACCORDING TO STATE STATUTES, I.E., $35.00 PER DAY. 13 JUL 51979 Bou 41 PAGE 80 LOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COM- MISSIONER LYONS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION No. 79-63 AUTHORIZING COMPENSATION FOR MEMBERS OF THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE STATUTES. CHAIRMAN WODTKE QUESTIONED WHETHER IT IS MANDATORY TO ACCEPT THESE FEES, NOTING THAT HE UNDERSTANDS THE SITUATION WITH SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS WHOSE COMPENSATION IS NOT AS MUCH AS THE COMMISSIONERS', BUT FELT THAT HIS COMPENSATION AS A COMMISSIONER SHOULD NOT REQUIRE ADDITIONAL PAYMENT FOR HIM TO SERVE AS A MEMBER OF THE PROPERTY !APPRAISAL ADJUST- MENT BOARD. ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT EACH MEMBER ON THAT BOARD EARNS THE COMPENSATION; EVERYONE SHOULD BE COMPENSATED ALIKE; AND IT SHOULD BE ACCEPTED. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT IT COULD BE ACCEPTED AND DONATED BACK IF DESIRED. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, RESOLUTION NO. 79-63 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY"COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,'FLORIDA, that for the year 1979, the members of the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board or their replacements shall receive such per diem compensation as is. allowed by law for state employees. This provision shall be effective only upon the School Board for Indian River County, Florida, passing a similar resolution providing for compensation of the school board members. Upon the School Board passing a similar resolution, the two resolutions combined shall have the effect of an election by the two bodies to allow for com- pensation as provided by law. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By Chairman i ATTEST: Clerk Adopted July 5, 1979 JUL 51979 14 BOOK 41 PAGE 81 ATTORNEY COLLINS NEXT BROUGHT UP THE POSSIBILITY OF APPOINTING A MASTER FOR THESE HEARINGS AND ASKED IF THE BOARD WERE INTERESTED'IN PURSUING THIS. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT FELT THIS SHOULD BE AN AVENUE LEFT OPEN IF THE BOARD FEELS THEY HAVE TO HAVE ONE, BUT IT WAS NOTED THAT THIS WOULD HAVE TO BE LOOKED INTO NOW TO DETERMINE AVAILABILITY. IN GENERAL DISCUSSION, IT WAS DECIDED TO WAIT ANOTHER YEAR AND CHECK TO SEE HOW OTHERS HANDLE THIS. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED HIRING A COURT REPORTER FOR THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD. ATTORNEY COLLINS BROUGHT UP THE MATTER OF THE PLAT OF ENOS SUBDIVISION AND ASKED IF THE BOARD WISHED TO TAKE ANY ACTION AS PER HIS MEMO OF .JUNE 22ND AS FOLLOWS: 15 J U L 51979 Box 1 PACE 82 June 22, 1979 MEMO TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: GEORGE G. COLLINS, JR. RE:' ENOS SUBDIVISION Dear Commissioners: My research into the Platting Law indicates that a dedication can be withdrawn if such a withdrawal is prior to the acceptance by Indian River County. As you are aware, Mr. Henderson, on behalf of property owners that own part of the land encumbered by the old Enos Subivision has filed a Withdrawal. It would seem to me that if we are to - protect the County's interest or claim to interest in the -Sub- division, the following two things should be done: 1. The County should pass a Resolution accepting the Dedication, and - 2. The Commissioners should instruct the Property Appraiser to delete the streets as shown on the Plat from taxation, taxing on a lot basis rather than a bare acreage basis. If the above two things are done, then at the time a future developer comes in to vacate the Plat the County should have some leverage to negotiate rights-of-way to the Ocean. Sincer y, GEORGE G. COLLINS, JR.- GGC,Jr/ph HE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THEY HAD VACATED ONLY THE ONE ACRE IN THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE PLAT, AND SUBSTANTIAL PROPERTY IS LEFT. COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF THE PLAT WAS.EVER FILED, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT IT WAS FILED OF RECORD IN BREVARD COUNTY AT THE TIME WHEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY WAS A PART OF BREVARD. COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED WHY ITEM 2 ISN'T IN EXISTENCE NOW, AND THE ATTORNEY STATED THAT HE COULD NOT ANSWER THAT, BUT IT ISN'T. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT THERE EITHER HAS BEEN AN ERROR OR AN OVERSIGHT FOR'A NUMBER OF YEARS. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AS TO LOSS OF REVENUES,•BUT IT WAS FELT IT WOULD NOT BE TOO GREAT. THE ATTORNEY NOTED THAT ACCEPTANCE OF THE DEDICATION COULD INVOLVE A POTENTIAL LITIGATION. 16 JUL 519 BOOK 41 ?AGE 83 I CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED IF WE ACCEPT THE DEDICATION, WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IT WILL BE TO BUILD THE ROADS. ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT WE CAN STILL PASS THAT OFF, BUT IT IS A PROBLEM. NIS FEELING IS THAT WE WILL NEVER GET TO THAT POINT BECAUSE THE PLAT IS SUCH THAT WHOEVER WANTS TO DEVELOP IT WILL HAVE TO VACATE AND REPLAT. HE NOTED THERE IS CONSIDERABLE INTEREST IN THIS PROPERTY RIGHT NOW. COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF THE ATTORNEY IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE BOARD FOLLOW UP ON THE TWO ITEMS SUGGESTED IN HIS MEMO, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THEY SHOULD BECAUSE DOING SO WOULD PUT THE COUNTY IN THE BEST POSTURE POSSIBLE. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 79-62 ACCEPTING OR RE- AFF'IRMING A PRIOR ACCEPTANCE OF DEDICATION OF ENOS SUBDIVISION. RESOLUTION No. 79-62 AND RESOLUTION No. 79-55, VACATING A PORTION OF ENOS SUBDIVISION, AS APPROVED AT THE MEETING OF .JUNE 6, 1979, ARE HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES, 17 JUL 51979 p BOOK 41 PACE 84 RESOLUTION NO. 79-62 WHEREAS, JAMES ENOS filed a Dedication of Enos Sub- division on the 27th day of June, 1889, in Brevard County, Florida, and WHEREAS,_the plat for the Subdivision dedicated certain streets and roadways as evidenced on the plat to the public, and WHEREAS, there has been question as to whether or not the dedications were accepted at the time of the filing of the plat or have been accepted by the appropriate governmental agencies since the filing of the plat, and WHEREAS, said property is now lying in Indian River County, Florida, and the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, desire to clear any ambiguities as to the dedications, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD.OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, That: 1. The Board hereby accepts or reaffirms a prior accept- ance of those roads and streets as were dedicated to the public by James Enos upon the filing of Enos Plat Subdivision on the 27th day of June, 1889. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BY : 6//�ti C �! William C. Wodtke, Jap•. , Chairman Attest : _ Clerk Adopted: July j, 1979 0 J U L 51979 BOOK 41 PAGE 85 �m:* RESOLUTION NO. 79-58 a� 77�� u� 't'a�x. e.Board of County Commissioners.of Indian River County, Florida, resolve: 1. That a petition has been filed by G. FRANKLIN DALES, D. PADDOCK and THE FLORIDA FIRST NATIONAL BANK AT VERO BEACH, as Ancillary Administrator, C.T.A., of the Estate of Gerald L. Dales, deceased, with this Board requesting this Board to vacate a portion of the Plat of Enos, which Plat was recorded in the Public Records of Brevard County, Florida, on June 27, 1889, and recorded in the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, in Plat Book 2, Page 11, on June 16, 1913, and to renounce and disclaim any interest of the County and the Public in and to the streets, roads, and highways shown on said Plat within the boundaries of the following described property: Strip of land 15 feet wide off the North side of Government Lots 1 and 2 of Section 35 and Govern- ment Lots 1 and 2 of Section 36, all in Township 31 South, Range 39 East, Indian River County, Florida, being a strip of land running from the Indian River to the Atlantic Ocean. One Acre in the Northeast corner of Government Lot 1, Section 36, Township 31 South, Range 39 East, Indian River County, Florida, described as: Begin on the bank or bluff of the Atlantic Ocean on the North line of said Government Lot 1; thence run West 209 feet; thence South 209 feet; thence East 209 feet to the bank or bluff on the Atlantic Ocean; thence run northerly along said bank or bluff to the Point of Beginning. And all that property lying East of the above de- scribed property running to the High Water Line of the Atlantic Ocean. 2. That at a hearing held on June 6, 1979, this Board deter- mined that the Petitioners had complied with Florida Statute Chapter 177 by publishing notice of their intent to apply for a vacation of said portion of said Plat of Enos as will more fully appear by Proof of Publication filed in the minutes of said meeting. The Board further determined that the persons making application for said vaca- tion are the owners in fee simple to the above described property and that the vacation of said portion of said Plat will -not affect ownership or right of convenient access of persons owning other parce located within the boundaries of the Enos Plat. 'This Board has furthe i J U L 51979 BOOK . 41 PAGE 86 determined that the above described property is not located within the limits of any incorporated municipality. 3. The Board of County Commissioners does herewith vacate that portion of the Plat of Enos as lies within the boundaries of the following described property: Strip of land 15 feet wide off the North side of Government Lots 1 and 2 of Section 35 and Govern- ment Lots 1 and 2 of Section 36, all in Township 31 South, Range 39 East, Indian River County, Florida, being a strip of land running from the Indian River to the Atlantic Ocean. One Acre in the Northeast corner of Government Lot 1, Section 36, Township 31 South , Range 39 East, Indian River County, Florida, described as: Begin on the bank or bluff of the Atlantic Ocean on the North line of said Government Lot'l; thence run West 209 feet; thence South 209 feet; thence East 209 feet to the bank or bluff on the Atlantic Ocean; thence run northerly along said bank or bluff to the Point of Beginning. And all that property lying East of the above de- scribed property running to the High Water Line of the Atlantic Ocean, and does further denounce and disclaim any right of the County and the Public in and to any of the streets, roads or highways shown on the Plat of Enos located within the boundaries of the above described! property. 4. A certified copy of this Resolution shall be filed in the offices of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida, and duly recorded in the Public Records. BOARD OF COUNTY COHMISSIONERS INDIAN FIVER COUNTY, FLO IDA ByWilliam o ::...: = Chairman ATTES` -. Freda Bright Adop,t.ed:. July 5, 1979 This instrument is being re' -recorded to correct the date of adoption from July 5, 1979 to June 6, 1979. otic�0 5 `I FACE ME 11, 4 3 J U L 51979 1 BOOK 41 PAGE 87 MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COM— MISSIONER LYONS, TO ACCEPT THE ATTORNEYS RECOMMENDATION AS OUTLINED IN ITEM 2 OF HIS MEMO OF JUNE 22, 1979. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AS TO WHETHER IT WOULD BE ADVISABLE TO NOTIFY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER TO DELETE THESE STREETS OR JUST LET HIS DEPARTMENT FOLLOW THEIR NORMAL PROCEDURES, AND THE ATTORNEY AGREED IT WOULD BE BETTER JUST TO LET THIS FOLLOW NORMAL PROCEDURE. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT WITHDREW HIS MOTION AND COMMISSIONER LYONS WITHDREW HIS SECOND. CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED IF THE BOARD SHOULD DISCUSS THE LETTER RECEIVED FROM THE HOSPITAL ABOUT RELINQUISHING PART OF THEIR WATER ALLOCATION, AND THE ATTORNEY NOTED THAT IT WILL BE NECESSARY TO HAVE DISCUSSION IN REGARD TO THE TRIPARTITE AGREEMENT, ETC, THE CHAIRMAN REPORTED THAT ATTORNEY COLLINS HAS SUGGESTED THAT SEVERAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COUNTY, THE CITY AND THE HOSPITAL HAVE A JOINT GET—TOGETHER TO CLEAR UP EVERYONE'S FEELING ABOUT WHAT THE ALLOCATION IS, WHO IT BELONGS TO, AND WHETHER IT CAN OR CANNOT BE RETURNED. HE NOTED THE CITY OF SERO BEACH HAS SOME STRONG FEELINGS THAT THERE REALLY ISN `T AN ALLOCATION, ALTHOUGH THERE WAS 500,000 GALLONS. RELINQUISHEDoSINCE IT WAS A "HEREAFTER AND FOREVER MORE" AGREEMENT FOR THE CITY TO SERVE THAT PARTICULAR AREA WITH WATER AND SEWER, ETC. HE NOTED THAT THE REQUEST MADE TO THE HOSPITAL CAME FORTH WHEN ATTORNEY JACKSON CAME TO THE BOARD REPRESENTING INDIVIDUALS WHO WISH TO DEVELOP ABOUND THE HOSPITAL. THE CHAIRMAN STATED THAT IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION, WE WILL ATTEMPT TO SET UP A MEETING AS SUGGESTED. THERE WAS NO OBJEC— TION, AND THE CHAIRMAN REQUESTED THAT COMMISSIONER LYONS REPRESENT THE COUNTY AT THE PROPOSED MEETING. CHAIRMAN WODTKE QUESTIONED PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER ABOUT THE SHORT COURSE HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A PLANNING STAFF MEMBER ATTEND AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA IN TAMPA. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER EXPLAINED THAT THERE ARE SOME TWO WEEK COURSES; THIS ONE IS ONLY FIVE DAYS, THE COURSE DEALS WITH LAND USE PLANNING, REVIEW 'PROCEDURES, WRITING ORDINANCES, ETC., AND HE WOULD 21 J U L 51979 • 800x 41- PAGE 88 LIKE TO SEND WENDY LANCASTER. HE ESTIMATED THAT IT WOULD COST ABOUT $375.00 WHICH WOULD INCLUDE TRANSPORTATION, TUITION, LODGING, ETC., AND INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THEY DO HAVE FUNDS IN THE BUDGET. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR PLANNING STAFF MEMBER, WENDY LANCASTER, TO ATTEND A COURSE IN URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA IN TAMPA JULY 23 - 27, 1979. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT INFORMED THE BOARD THAT IT HAS COME TO HIS ATTENTION THAT WE HAVE NO ORDINANCE FORBIDDING CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL IN COUNTY PARKS. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS NOTED THAT PARKS ACQUIRED THROUGH STATE FUNDS WILL BE GOVERNED BY STATE STATUTES, BUT COMMISSIONER SIEBERT FELT IF WE DON'T HAVE SUCH AN ORDINANCE, WE SHOULD HAVE, THE ATTORNEY AGREED. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT TO AUTHORIZE THE ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON COUNTY-OWNED*LAND. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AS TO WHETHER THIS SHOULD BE AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE, AND THE ATTORNEY NOTED THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONER MUST DETERMINE THAT AN EMERGENCY DOES EXIST. COMMISSIONER LOY FELT THAT IT IS AN EMERGENCY, AND THE ADMIN- ISTRATOR NOTED THAT WE DID HAVE PROBLEMS AT HOBART-KIWANIS PARK ABOUT A YEAR AGO AND HAD TO CLOSE THE PARK DOWN TEMPORARILY. THE CHAIRMAN FELT WE SHOULD CHECK WITH THE PARK SUPERINTENDENT OR THE SHERIFF BEFORE WE PASS AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE, AND COMMISSIONER SIEBERT STATED THAT HE WILL WITHDRAW HIS MOTION TEMPORARILY. DISCUSSION ENSUED AS TO APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY WHO WILL COVER THE AREAS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. THE FOLLOWING SUGGESTIONS WERE MADE: RON ARENDAS - PIPER, REPRESENTING INDUSTRY PAUL BUBENDEY - REPRESENTING BANKING CLARK BENNETT - IMERRILL, LYNCH - BONDS AND FINANCE GENE HARRIS - REPRESENTING LABOR 22 JUL 51979 BOOK 41 PACE 89 I P IT WAS FELT WE SHOULD HAVE SOMEONE REPRESENTING THE CONSUMER WHO UNDERSTANDS THE COUNTY'S -PROBLEMS., THE BOARD ASKED WILLIAM KOOLAGE TO CONSIDER BEING ON THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY, AND HE ASKED TO BE ALLOWED TO GIVE THEM HIS ANSWER LATER TODAY. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAD A REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF A CULVERT IN D-4 CANAL AT THE INTERSECTION OF CITRUS ROAD AND 90TH AVENUE. HE STATED THAT THE REASON FOR THE REQUEST IS LIMITED ACCESS AND A TIGHT TURN. THE BIG TRUCKS THAT ARE HAULING FRUIT OUT OF THE MARSH CAN'T MAKE THE TURN ONTO THE BRIDGE AND HAVE TO GO A VERY ROUND -ABOUT ROUTE TO GET TO THE PACKING HOUSE. THE ADMINISTRATOR STATED THAT HE HAD TRIED TO GET THIS IN AN OFF SYSTEMS ROAD PROGRAM SOMETIME AGOIBUT WAS UNABLE TO DO S0, HE ESTIMATED THE TOTAL COST TO EXTEND THE ARC OF THE TURN WOULD AMOUNT TO AROUND $10,000. THE ADMINIS- TRATOR INFORMED THE BOARD THAT DAN RICHARDSON THOUGHT HE COULD GET AN EASEMENT FROM THE OWNER ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION SO WE COULD BEND THE ROAD AND MAKE A GOOD RADIUS FOR A TURN. HE FELT THIS IS SOMETHING.THAT SHOULD BE DONE WITH THE TRUCKS GOING ONTO CITRUS ROAD. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT QUESTIONED WHETHER THIS IS A COUNTY RESPONSIBILITY OR A DRAINAGE DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITY. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT ALTHOUGH THIS IS LOCATED IN THE DRAINAGE DISTRICT, THE CULVERT AND THE BRIDGE BOTH COME UNDER COUNTY ROADS. THE ADMINISTRATOR CONTINUED THAT HE WILL GET SKETCHES OF'THE SITUATION IF THE BOARD WISHES. THE BOARD AGREED THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE SKETCHES AND HAVE A SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION. THE ADMINISTRATOR STATED THAT HE WILL DISCUSS THIS MATTER WITH THE DRAINAGE DISTRICT AND THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION AND BRING BACK A RECOMMENDATION AT THE NEXT MEETING. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATOR IN REGARD TO THE PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT FOR THE ROAD & BRIDGE DEPARTMENT AS SET OUT IN HIS MEMO OF.JUNE 28, 1979,.AND AUTHORIZED ADVERTISING FOR BIDS ON SAME. 23 JUL 51979 . BOOK 41 PA,UE 9® s P BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., Chairman ALMA LEE LOY, Vice Chairman WILLIARD W. SIEBERT. JR. R. DON DEESON PATRICK B. LYONS JACK G. JENNINGS. Administrator 2145 14th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960 June 28, 1979 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: County Administrator SUBJECT: Road & Bridge Department Equipment Purchase $46,941.02 The Road & Bridge Department has requested permission to purchase the following items of equipment: 1. Dragline boom with double'shive:. This boom attachment will give the Road & Bridge Department the capability to utilize a clam shell bucket. The present boom has only a scoop capability. Cost: $4,500.00 2. Wheel balancing machine: This machine would give the Road & Bridge Department the capability of -spin balancing wheels on all pickup trucks and sedans owned by the county. Cost: $1,500.00 3. Band Saw - 10�. This item is required to replace a saw that has become worn out in service. We will trade in the old saw. Cost: $2,049.00 4.� One 1411 Flat Bed Truck - 2 Ton: This truck. is required to replace one that has become worn out in service and will be traded in. Cost: $13,000.00 5. Welder (Heli Arc): This item is required to replace a'welder that has become worn out in service. The'old welder will be traded in. Cost: $3,800.00 6. Street Broom Model 600 Little Giant: This item will give the Road & Bridge Department the capability to sweep sand and debris accumulated on paved streets and intersections in the county. Cost: $3,000.00 J U L 51979 41 Face Ia P 7. Side Bar Mounted Bush Hog: This item will be mounted on one of our tractors and will give the Road & Bridge Department the capability to cut small pepper trees and other fast growing trees that create such a problem in our ditches. Cost- $li,200.00 The total cost of these items is $39,049.00. There is a*balance of $46,941.02 remaining in the Road & Bridge Department capital equip- ment account. it is recommended that we advertise for bids for the above items and that they be purchased for the Road & Bridge Department. Vck G. Sennn County Administrator JGJ/ss ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAS DISCUSSED THE PROBLEM OF ENFORCING THE NO DRINKING RULE IN COUNTY PARKS WITH THE SHERIFF, WHO AGREES THAT IT WOULD BE EASIER FOR THEM TO ENFORCE IF THERE WERE AN -ORDINANCE. IF PERSONS WERE VIOLATING THE ORDINANCE, THE PARK SUPERINTENDENT COULD CALL THE SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT TO ARREST THEM., CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED IF THE PARK SUPERINTENDENT IS HAVING A PROBLEM ENFORCING THIS RULE, AND MR. NELSON STATED THAT THE SUPERINTEN- DENT DOES NOT ENFORCE THE RULE UNTIL A PERSON IS CAUSING A DISTURBANCE OR OTHER PROBLEMS. MR. NELSON FELT SUCH AN ORDINANCE WOULD GIVE THE SUPERINTENDENT A LITTLE MORE STRENGTH IN CARRYING OUT PARK RULES, AND FURTHER NOTED THAT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF VIABASSO BEACH -PARK THAT IS PLANNED, IT IS IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER THIS. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT STATED THAT HE DOES NOT FEEL THIS IS AN EMERGENCY'AND WILL AT THIS TIME RESTATE HIS ORIGINAL MOTION. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, COMMISSIONER LYONS VOTED IN OPPOSITION, THE BOARD AUTHORIZED THE ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AND ADVERTISE AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS. 25 J U L 51979 BOOR FdGf 09+b, COMMISSIONER LYONS EXPLAINED THAT HE ONLY VOTED IN OPPOSITION' BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT, AND THERE IS NO WAY TO .ENFORCE THIS ON THE SPOIL ISLANDS. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON THEN REVIEWED THE PROPOSED GUIDELINES FOR SPECIAL ACTIVITIES TO BE HELD AT COUNTY PARKS AND INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THESE GUIDELINES HAVE BEEN STAFFED THROUGH THE APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENTS AND ARE RECOMMENDED. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE EXTENT OF THE LIABILITY INSURANCE AND DID NOT FEEL $100,000 - $300,000 IS SUFFICIENT. IN DISCUSSION, IT WAS GENERALLY AGREED THAT ONE MILLION DOLLARS LIABILITY COVERAGE WOULD BE SAFER AND PROBABLY WOULD NOT COST CONSIDER- ABLY MORE. COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED ON THE FIRST PAGE UNDER SITE PREPARATION AND MAINTENANCE, IT REQUIRES THE SITE TO BE RETURNED TO "AT LEAST AS GOOD A CONDITION It AND FELT THIS SHOULD BE CHANGED TO "AS GOOD AS OR BETTER THAN. $1 COMMISSIONER Loy CONTINUED THAT ON THE.NEXT PAGE UNDER TEMPORARY UTILITIES, SOMETHING SHOULD BE ADDED REQUIRING THAT THE UTILITY ARRANGE- MENTS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE PARK SUPERVISOR. SHE FELT THE PARK SUPERVISOR SHOULD HAVE A GOOD DEAL OF AUTHORITY OVER ALL THE ARRANGEMENTS AND SUGGESTED THAT A PHRASE BE INSERTED AT THE BEGINNING STATING THAT THE PARK SUPERVISOR HAS THIS AUTHORITY AND THAT ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE DONE MUST BE REPORTED BACK TO THE SUPERINTENDENT AND COORDINATED WITH HIM. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS QUESTIONED THE PROVISION FOR ONE POLICE OFFICER PER 100 PERSONS. HE NOTED THAT IN A LOT OF CASES, CHURCH GROUPS, ETC., ONE POLICEMAN COULD HANDLE 100 OR 200 PEOPLE, BUT IF YOU GOT. UP TO 1,000 IN ATTENDANCE, HE DID NOT KNOW THAT 10 POLICEMEN COULD HANDLE IT. CHAIRMAN WODTKE BROUGHT UP THE POSSIBILITY OF A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE USING THE SWIMMING FACILITIES AND ASKED ABOUT A LICENSED LIFE- GUARD. HE NOTED THAT POSSIBLY THE PARK SUPERVISOR COULD HANDLE THIS UNDER THE PROVISION WHERE HE HAS THE RIGHT TO INCREASE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAFFIC AND SECURITY AS HE DEEMS APPROPRIATE. 26 JUL 1979Boos 41 FA'bE 93 L -.A r COMMISSIONER SIEBERT FELT WE SHOULD HAVE A SPECIFIC PARA- GRAPH ABOUT THE NEED FOR LIFEGUARDS IF WATER RELATED ACTIVITIES ARE -ANTICIPATED. CHAIRMAN WODTKE REQUESTED THAT THE BOND REQUIREMENT STATE "CASH" BOND. COMMISSIONER LOY FELT THERE SHOULD BE SOME KIND OF ADMINIS- TRATIVE INSPECTION WHEN THE ACTIVITY IS OVER IN REGARD TO CHECKING ON CLEAN-UP, DESTRUCTION, ETC. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON STATED THAT THE PARK SUPERVISOR WILL INSPECT THE AREA WITHIN 24 HOURS TO SEE IF EVERYTHING IS IN COMPLIANCE SO THE BOND CAN BE RETURNED, DISCUSSION FOLLOWED IN REGARD TO INSPECTION OF THE PREMISES PRIOR TO THE ACTIVITY. MR. NELSON FELT IF THE GROUP WISHED IT, THIS COULD BE DONE,*BUT DID NOT FEEL IT SHOULD BE MADE MANDATORY, DISCUSSION RETURNED TO ADDING A SPECIFIC PARAGRAPH REFERRING TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND THE AUTHORITY OF THE PARK SUPER- VISOR AND PUTTING.THIS IN A "CATCH-ALL" PHRASE RATHER THAN REFERRING TO IT UNDER THE VARIOUS ITEMS. COMMISSIONER LYONS SUGGESTED THAT IT STATE THAT ALL ARRANGE- MENTS MADE BY THE APPLICANT, IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY, ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE PARK SUPERVISOR. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ON A FORM TO BE SIGNED IN REGARD TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR LARGE GROUPS AND/OR SPECIAL ACTIVITIES TO BE HELD IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PARKS, WITH THE ADDITIONS AND CHANGES SUGGESTED BY THE BOARD, SUBJECT TO THE ATTORNEY'S APPROVAL OF THE REDRAFTED GUIDELINES. SAID GUIDELINES WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES WHEN COMPLETED. THE HOUR OF 11:00 O'CLOCK A.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING N6TICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO -WIT: 27 JUL 51979 BOOK FAuE 94 VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Weekly Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE'OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; thai the attached copy of advertisement, being . /"l ..L. a in the matter ofa JY1al ,-a_SS/- - A' In the r7 Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of e Affiant further says that .the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continu>usly published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post gffice in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tiserrent; and affiant further says thai he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. -Jp � —C.It Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of A.D. (SEAL) /g f VV(B iness Manager) (Clerk, of the Circuit Court, incl' n iver County, Florida) NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN thatthe Board of county Commissioners of Indian ,River County, Florida, will hold a public hearing on July S, 1979, at 11:00 o'clock A.M. in the County Commission Chambers in the Indian River County Courthouse to consider the adoption of: An Ordinance Amending Indian River County Zoning Ordinance No. 71.3, as Amended, Section 19 C -IA, Restricted Com- mercial District, Subparagraph (a) by amending the above Subparagraph as follows: (a) Changing the present No. 24 to read (a) (25) and creating a new (a) (24) being Nursing homes. Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida By:•s-William C. WodtkeJr., Chairman June 6,1979. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE DID NOT HAVE A PRESENTATION AS THIS MATTER ONLY CAME TO HIM ABOUT A WEEK AGO, BUT HE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS. HE FELT THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS IN ACCORD WITH THE PROPOSAL, BUT NOTED THAT THE EXISTING ORDINANCE REQUIRES IQ ACRES OF GROUND FOR A NURSING HOME,.AND HE DID NOT FEEL THIS TYPE OF ACREAGE IS NEEDED FOR THAT KIND OF SERVICE. SECONDLY, HE STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE•FLEXIBLE WORDING WHICH COULD INCLUDE NOT ONLY NURSING HOMES, BUT CONVALESCENT HOMES, AND POSSIBLY EVEN HOMES FOR AGED WHICH PROVIDED NURSING SERVICES. CHAIRMAN Ir4ODTKE INQUIRED IF MR..REVER WAS SAYING THE IO ACRE REQUIREMENT WOULD CARRY OVER WHEN NURSING HOMES WERE A PERMITTED USE UNDER C -1A. MR. REVER FELT IF THIS IS PERMITTED UNDER C -1A, IT WILL ONLY REQUIRE THE NORMAL SETBACKS, BUT EXPLAINED HE JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THE SITUATION. JUL 51979 BOOK 41 PAGE 95 I ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THE WORD "CONVALESCENT" CAN BE ADDED TO THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE THE COUNTY HAS INCLUDED NURSING HOMES AND CONVALESCENT HOMES WITHIN THE SAME DEFINITION. COMMISSIONER LYONS NOTED THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WAS INTENDED FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND WHAT IS SUGGESTED WOULD INVOLVE A BROADER SCOPE. HE DID NOT BELIEVE A NURSING HOME IS NECESSARILY A CONVALESCENT HOME, WHICH HE FELT WOULD INCLUDE MORE AMBULATORY PATIENTS. COMMISSIONER LYONS POINTED OUT THAT IF THE WORDING WERE TOO FLEXIBLE, IT WOULD ALLOW CONVALESCENT HOMES AND OTHER TYPE ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING SENIOR CITIZENS LIFE CARE FACILITIES, IN A C-lA ZONE, WHICH HE DID NOT FEEL WOULD BE SUITABLE. HE RECOMMENDED THAT A STUDY BE MADE BEFORE MAKING SUCH A CHANGE. MR. REVER STATED THAT HIS PARTICULAR CONCERN WAS NURSING AND CONVALESCENT. ATTORNEY COLLINS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT WE HAVE A PROBLEM IN THAT OUR ZONING ORDINANCE DOES DEFINE NURSING AND CONVALESCENT HOMES AS THE SAME AND THEY DO INCLUDE THE AGED, CONVALESCING PERSONS, ETC. DISCUSSION CONTINUED ABOUT THE INTENT AND DEFINITIONS AND WHETHER THE DEFINITION IN THE ORDINANCE NEEDS REWORKING. CHAIRMAN WODTKE FELT WE SHOULD STICK WITH THE WORDING IN THE ADVERTISEMENT. HE ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO BE HEARD. ATTORNEY BYRON COOKSEY CAME BEFORE THE BOARD REPRESENTING FL®RIDA LIVING CARE. HE STATED THAT IT IS A NURSING HOME ACTIVITY AND HE HlAb FELT THAT NURSING AND CONVALESCENT HOMES WERE INTERCHANGEABLE. BE STATED THAT FLORIDA LIVING CARE BUILDS NURSING HOMES, AND THESE ARE NOT LIFE CARE FACILITIES. THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF ANYONE ELSE WISHED TO SPEAK. THERE WERE NONE. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 79-18 ADDING NURSING HOMES AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION UNDER C-lA. 29 .JUL 51979 41 FaUE 96 ATTORNEY COLLINS POINTED OUT THAT THE DEFINITION OF NURSING HOMES IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE INCLUDES RETIREMENT CENTERS AND IF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS ADOPTED, SOMEONE COULD COME IN AND REQUEST A RETIREMENT CENTER IN C -IA AND WE COULD NOT REFUSE IT. CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED IF WE COULD EXCLUDE RETIREMENT CENTERS IN OUR MOTION, AND THE ATTORNEY STATED THE ONLY WAY TO EXCLUDE THEM WOULD BE TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE. HE SUGGESTED THAT THE BOARD INSTRUCT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO COME UP WITH A NEW DEFINITION FOR NURSING HOMES WHICH WILL EXCLUDE RETIREMENT CENTERS. DISCUSSION CONTINUED AND COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT WE ARE IN A PERFECTLY SAFE POSITION TO GIVE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TIME TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION SINCE "TO GET ANOTHER CERTIFICATE OF DEED FOR THIS COUNTY IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE WOULD BE DIFFICULT OR IMPOSSIBLE. ATTORNEY COLLINS DISAGREED BECAUSE SOMEONE COULD COME IN WITH A RETIREMENT PROJECT THAT WOULD COME UNDER THE DEFINITION OF NURSING HOME THAT IS BEING'ALLOWED IN THE C -IA AREA, BUT HE DID AGREE THAT CHANCES ARE THAT THERE IS LITTLE OR NO RISK INVOLVED UNTIL WE CAN REDEFINE. DISCUSSION ENSUED AS TO SETTING ASIDE THE ACTUAL ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE UNTIL WE CAN ADOPT THE NEW DEFINYTIDN*." COMMISSIONER Loy INQUIRED ABOUT THE TIME SCHEDULE DESIRED BY ATTORNEY COOKSEY, AND HE STATED THEIR CERTIFICATE OF MEED IS GOOD UNTIL NEXT .DUNE BUT THEY NEED AS MUCH LEEWAY AS POSSIBLE. IN FURTHER DISCUSSION, IT WAS FELT A PUBLIC HEARING ON RE- WORDING THE DEFINITION IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE COULD BE HELD ON AUGUST 8TH AND THE SUBSEQUENT ORDINANCE COULD BEC"OME EFFECTIVE AUGUST 9TH, COMMISSIONER LYONS WITHDREW HIS PREVIOUS MOTION TO REWORD SAME, AND COMMISSIONER SIEBERT {^WITHDREW HIS SECOND. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE 79-I8 ADDING NURSING HOMES AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION UNDER C -IA, SAID ORDINANCE TO BECOME EFFECTIVE AUGUST 9, 1979. 30 J U L 51979 BOOK 41PAGE gT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 79-18 AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 19 C -1A, RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 71-3, AS AMENDED: PROVIDING FOR THE ADDITION OF NURSING HOMES and PRO- VIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,FLORIDA, that Section 19, Indian River County Ordinance No. 71-3, as Amended, is hereby amended as follows: SECTION 19 C-lA COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (a) Special Exceptions is hereby amended by adding a new sub- paragraph 24 and the existing sub -paragraph 24 shall become 25 as follows: (24) Nursing homes (25) Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with and subordinate to the above uses, subject to conditions expressed in section 25, subparagraph (g). The above Ordinance shall become effective August 9, 1979. J U L 51979 sQo 1 P -AU 98 ON POTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED ADVERTISING A PUBLIC HEARING IN REGARD TO AMENDING THE DEFINITION SECTION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO NURSING HOMES, ETC., TO BE SURE RETIREMENT CENTERS ARE NOT INCLUDED. CHAIRMAN WODTKE ANNOUNCED THAT THE BOARD WILL, AT THIS TIME, REVIEW THE SITE PLAN OF TROPIC GROVE VILLAS, AS REPUESTED BY ROBERT BELL, PRESIDENT. ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED THAT THIS IS AN APPEAL OF A SITE PLAN THAT HAS BEEN FILED BY FRANK ZORC, AND THIS BOARD IS SITTING AS AN APPEAL BOARD TO REVIEW THE APPEAL AND TAKE ACTION ON THE SITE PLAN AS IT SEES FIT. ATTORNEY DAN KILBRIDE CAME BEFORE THE BOARD REPRESENTING FRANK ZORC AND STATED THAT TROPIC GROVE VILLAS HAS SUBMITTED A REVISED SITE PLAN WHICH INCORPORATES MOST OF THE CHANGES HE AND MR. ZORC FELT WERE IMPORTANT, I.E., A 35' RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR 12TH STREET, A 25' SETBACK FROM THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE BUILDINGS, AND ACCESS TO 12TH STREET FROM THE SITE. APPARENTLY THE ONLY IMPORTANT POINT NOT INCLUDED IN THE REVISED SITE PLAN IS THE GRANTING OF A RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR 3RD COURT, AND ATTORNEY KILBRIDE FELT THIS IS A PROBLEM THE COMMISSION SHOULD DEAL WITH SO THAT IT DOES NOT RECUR IN THE FUTURE, ATTORNEY KILBRIDE CON- TINUED THAT AN EFFECTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IS NEEDED SO THERE WILL BE A .SETTER WAY OF DETERMINING WHAT RIGHTS-OF-WAY ARE NEEDED AND WHAT ARE NOT. 'HE ALSO FELT THE BOARD SHOULD CHANGE THE SITE PLAN PROCEDURE AND REVISE PART OF THE ORDINANCE TO TIGHTEN UP CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING SITE 'PLANS AND TO PROVIDE UNIFORM STANDARDS FOR RIGHTS-OF-WAY, WHICH WOULD BE HELPFUL BOTH TO THE DEVELOPER AND THE COMMUNITY. ATTORNEY GORDON .JOHNSTON NEXT CAME BEFORE THE BOARD REPRE- SENTING THE DEVELOPER OF TROPIC GROVE VILLAS, ROBERT BELL, AND STATED THAT HE WAS PLEASED THAT MR. ZORC HAS AGREED THAT THEY HAVE AMENDED THE PLAN -TO RELATE TO MOST OF HIS SUGGESTED CHANGES. ATTORNEY JOHNSTON CONTINUED THAT IF THE BOARD SAYS MR. BELL HAS TO PROVIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR 3RD COURT, IT WOULD CAUSE THE LOSS OF THREE BUILDINGS WHICH WOULD BE A TREMENDOUS HARDSHIP. HE STATED THERE IS NO WAY TO EXTEND 3RD COURT FURTHER THAN 30' TO 50' BECAUSE THERE ARE EXISTING STRUCTURES ON 32 J U L 51979 BOOK 41 F,,GE 99 t IT. ALSO THERE IS A DRAINAGE EASEMENT EXTENDING ALONG THE REAR OF LOT 11, THE PRIESTLEY PROPERTY, AND THIS WOULD DISTURB THAT DRAINAGE EASE- MENT. ATTORNEY .JOHNSTON FURTHER NOTED THAT IF THIS WERE DONE OVER LOT 10, IT WOULD, IN EFFECT, BE LEGISLATING ILLEGAL SETBACKS ON ALREADY EXISTING STRUCTURES. HE THEN WENT ON DISCUSS INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD AS A NORTH -SOUTH ARTERY AND DID NOT FEEL 3RD COURT IS OF ANY CONSEQUENCE. HE NOTED THERE IS ACCESS OFF OF 12TH STREET, AND HE FELT MR. BELL HAS DONE EVERYTHING HUMANLY POSSIBLE TO CONFORM TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENTS SUGGESTIONS AND 99% TO THE WISHES OF MR. ZORC. CHAIRMAN WODTKE STATED THAT WE NEED TO SEE THE REVISED SITE PLAN AND HEAR WHAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS TO SAY. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER REVIEWED THE REVISIONS MADE AND REPORTED THAT THEY HAVE DECREASED THE TOTAL ACREAGE AVAILABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT BY APPROXIMATELY ONE ACRE AND INCREASED THE DENSITY FROM 12.7 TO 12.9. THEY ALSO. HAVE DECREASED THE GROSS OPEN SPACE BY ABOUT 1/2 ACRE BECAUSE THE BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN MOVED CLOSER TOGETHER. THE RECREATIONAL OPEN SPACE HAS DECREASED SLIGHTLY AS WELL AS THE VEHICULAR OPEN SPACE, AND THERE ARE GRASS AREAS INDICATED AS PARKING AREAS. MR. REVER NEXT COMMENTED THAT THE REVISED PLAN INDICATES AN EMERGENCY EXIT ON THE EAST, AND THIS IS NOT PROPERLY WORDED. HE EXPLAINED THAT THE INTENT IS THAT THIS IS TO BE NOT ONLY FOR EMERGENCIES, BUT TO BEA FUTURE PERMANENT ACCESS - NOT AN EXIT. WHEN 12TH STREET IS DEVELOPED, IT WILL BECOME A PERMANENT ACCESS. HE FELT THAT ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT DENSE SHOULD HAVE MORE THAN ONE ACCESS, OR IT COULD BE A POTENTIAL HAZARD, COMMISSIONER SIEBERT NOTED THAT THEY WANTED THE ONE ACCESS FOR SECURITY REASONS, MR. REVER WAS OF THE OPINION.THAT MORE THAN ONE ACCESS WILL BE TO THEIR BENEFIT IN THE LONG RUN AND DID NOT BELIEVE IT WILL CAUSE A SECURITY PROBLEM. HE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE OTHER THINGS THAT WILL BE NEEDED WITH THIS PARTICULAR LAYOUT ARE A NEW LANDSCAPING PLAN AND A NEW PLAN FOR DRAINAGE, AND HE ASSUMED THEY WOULD BE FORTHCOMING. IN REGARD TO THE 3RD.000RT PROBLEM, MR. REVER STATED THAT -THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS AT A LOSS TO ANSWER BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE A TRANSPORTATION PLAN AS SUCH. HE NOTED THERE IS A FEELING THAT INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD 33 J U L 51979 BOOK 41 PACE 100 COULD BE EXTENDED TO SOME DEGREE, BUT THIS IS DOUBTFUL. HE FELT THERE ARE RIGHT-OF-WAY PROBLEMS THAT NEGATE EXTENSION OF 3RD COURT, AND CONTINUED TO DISCUSS A POSSIBLE REALIGNMENT OF INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD, AND A TRANSPORTATION PATTERN. HE NOTED, HOWEVER, THAT THIS IS ALL SPECULATION, AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS NOT PREPARED TO GIVE ANY DEFINITIVE ANSWER AS TO WHETHER THE BOARD SHOULD REQUIRE THE RIGHTS-OF- WAY DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY IN THAT AREA. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED IF WE HAVE ANY IDEA ABOUT THE DRAINAGE. MR. REVER STATED THAT PART OF IT WILL GO DOWN TO 1OTH STREET WHERE THE DOT HAS AN OUTFALL, WHICH IS UTILIZED NOW. HE STATED THAT WE WILL PROBABLY HAVE TO GET INTO A MAJOR DRAINAGE STUDY TO DETERMINE WHAT THE FUTURE WILL BE FOR THAT ENTIRE AREA. MR. REVER NOTED THAT THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN FOR THIS AREA MAY CHANGE CONSIDERABLY ACCORDING TO WHAT WE DETERMINE ABOUT THE DRAINAGE AND TRANSPORTATION NEEDS. HE STATED THAT OTHER THAN THE 3RD COURT QUESTION, HE FELT THE SITE PLAN COULD BE ACCEPTED AS NOW PRESENTED, WITH A FEW MINOR WORDING CHANGES. ENGINEER BEINDORF.INFORMED THE BOARD THAT SOMETIME AGO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS GRANTED APPROVAL BY THE DOT TO TIE INTO THEIR LOTH STREET CANAL, WHICH DRAINS THE AREA ADJACENT TO ZOTH STREET FROM THE RAILROAD TRACKS TO THE RIVER. TROPIC GROVE WAS TO WIDEN AND DEEPEN THE CANAL, BUT THIS WAS NEVER DONE, AND TROPIC GROVE IS NOW IN THE PROCESS OF MAKING APPLICATION TO DER THROUGH THE DOT TO IMPROVE THIS OUTFALL DITCH. THEY, THEREFORE, WILL BE TYING INTO THE DOT FACILITIES AND NOT MAKING USE OF ANY COUNTY FACILITIES. COMMISSIONER LYONS DISCUSSED THE MATTER OF THE ALIGNMENT OF INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD, WHICH HE FELT WILL BE MUCH FURTHER WEST THAN SHOWN ON THE MAP SO THAT IT WILL, UNDOUBTEDLY, HAVE AN AFFECT ON SOME OF THE PROPERTY IN THIS AREA THAT IS CONSIDERED DEVELOPABLE. HE FELT WE SHOULD PROCEED WITH ALL HASTE TO GET THAT ALIGNMENT SETTLED. HE .ASKED IF THERE IS STILL DEVELOPABLE PROPERTY EAST OF THE TROPIC GROVE PROPERTY. MR, BEINDORF-STATED THAT THERE IS 600' TO 1,000' TO THE EAST OF TROPIC GROVE, BUT IT GETS TO BE VERY MARGINAL THERE WHERE THE MARSH STARTS. 34 J U L 51979 BOOK . 41 FAGS 101 r DISCUSSION CONTINUED IN REGARD TO THE POSSIBILITIES CONCERNING INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD AND DRAINAGE. - FRANK ZORC CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND STATED THAT HIS APPEAL NEVER WAS AIMED DIRECTLY AGAINST ANY ONE DEVELOPER PER SE, BUT.WAS INTENDED TO DEVELOP UNIFORM STANDARDS FOR ALL. HE POINTED OUT THAT HE HAS HAD MANY OCCASIONS WHERE HE HAS BEEN REQUIRED TO GIVE RIGHTS-OF- WAY AT THE DEAD ENDS OF STREETS THAT HAD NO IMMEDIATE NEED BUT MIGHT POSSIBLY BE USED IN THE FUTURE. MR. ZORC INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE IS SATISFIED WITH THE REVISED SITE PLAN AND WILL NOT PURSUE ANY FURTHER THE 3RD COURT RIGHT-OF-WAY, THOUGH HE FELT THE COMMISSION SHOULD TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT THE NEED FOR SOME ACCESS NORTH AND SOUTH. HE FELT THERE ARE PROPERTY OWNERS IN THAT AREA THAT ARE BOTTLENECKED. MR. WEGENER, A PROPERTY OWNER OF THE AREA, STATED THAT HE FULLY APPROVES OF HAVING 3RD COURT EXTENDED AS FAR AS 12TH STREET. HE FELT IT IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT IS THE ONLY STREET THEY HAVE GOING THROUGH THERE, AND IF ANYTHING HAPPENS ON 5TH AVENUE, THERE IS NO THROUGHWAY. HE ALSO FELT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT THE DRAINAGE BE LOOKED INTO. ANN ROBINSON SPOKE AS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, STATING THAT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE DISCUSSION TODAY, SHE FELT THE ENTIRE SITE PLAN PROCEDURE WITH TROPIC GROVE VILLAS HAS BEEN HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE, IT APPEARS THE DEFECTS IN THE SITE PLAN FINALLY HAVE BEEN REMEDIED, BUT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN IN ORDER THE FIRST TIME. SHE CONTINUED THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSION HAS BEEN PLACED IN A BAD POSITION BY VAGUE AND UNSATISFACTORY WORDING AND BY THE ACTIONS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IN APPROVING A DEFECTIVE SITE PLAN, NOT ONCE BUT TWICE. MRS. ROBINSON SUGGESTED THAT THE BOARD ASK THE ATTORNEY AND PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER TO•REVIEW THE SITE PLAN PROCEDURES TO PREVENT A RECURRENCE OF SUCH AN INEXCUSABLE SITUATION. MAGGIE BOWMAN OF THE PELICAN ISLAND AUDUBON SOCIETY THANKED THE BOARD AND TROPIC GROVE FOR MAKING THIS DISCUSSION POSSIBLE. SHE STATED THAT SHE SEES TWO MAJOR PROBLEMS - DRAINAGE AND TRAFFIC - AND DOES NOT FEEL THEY HAVE BEEN SATISFACTORILY ADDRESSED. MRS. BOWMAN 35 J U L 51979 BOOK 1 PAVE 10Z WAS OF THE OPINION THAT A SECOND NORTH -SOUTH ARTERY IS NEEDED IN THIS AREA AND THAT THE LOGICAL SOLUTION WOULD BE TO EXTEND 3RD COURT SOUTH SINCE THE LIKELIHOOD OF INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD BEING EXTENDED IS REMOTE. AS TO ATTORNEY .JOHNSTON'S REMARKS ABOUT PERMANENT STRUCTURES ON.LOT 10, MRS. BOWMAN BELIEVED THIS RELATES TO A SEWER PLANT WHICH WILL BE PHASED OUT ANYWAY, SO SHE FELT THAT NOW IS THE TIME FOR THE COUNTY TO ANTICIPATE THE NEED AND ACQUIRE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. MRS. BOWMAN SUGGESTED THAT UNDER A REVISION OF SITE PLAN PROCEDURES, A PERSON SHOULD HAVE 10 DAYS TO FILE AN APPEAL AND NO ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN BY THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION UNTIL THE APPEAL PERIOD HAS ELAPSED. SHE FURTHER STATED THAT NO LAND CLEARING SHOULD BE PERMITTED PRIOR TO SITE PLAN APPROVAL, MRS. BOWMAN EMPHASIZED THAT MANY OF THESE PROBLEMS WOULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED IF THERE HAD BEEN A PLANNER IN THE PLANNING OFFICE, AND HOPED THE LESSON HAS BEEN LEARNED THAT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY CANNOT GET ALONG WITHOUT A PLANNER. CHAIRMAN WODTKE REMINDED THOSE PRESENT THAT WE ARE HEARING AN APPEAL AND NEED. TO ADDRESS THAT APPEAL AND MAKE A DECISION ON THE REVISED SITE PLAN. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER Loy, TO APPROVE THE REVISED SITE PLAN SUBMITTED BY TROPIC GROVE VILLAS, AS AMENDED JUNE 20, 1979, SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL ACCESS ON 12TH STREET AND THE SUBMISSION OF ACCEPTABLE DRAINAGE AND LANDSCAPING PLANS. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT WE MUST GIVE MORE THOUGHT TO THE MATTER OF 3RD COURT. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT STATED THAT THE REASON HE MADE THE MOTION IS THAT HE HAS LOOKED AT 3RD COURT OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND JUST DOES NOT SEE THE NEED TO EXTEND IT BEYOND 12TH STREET, WHICH HE FELT WOULD CAUSE ADDITIONAL DRAINAGE PROBLEMS. COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT HE CERTAINLY DOES AGREE THAT 3RD COURT SHOULD GO TO 12TH STREET, AND THE OTHER MAIN QUESTION HE HAS THAT WOULD AFFECT HIS VOTE IS THE STATUS OF THE DRAINAGE STUDY. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS REPORTED THAT SINCE THE RECENTLY HELD MEETING ON THE DRAINAGE IN THIS AREA, HE HAS SENT MINUTES TO THE DIFFERENT GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES AND HAS RECEIVED SOME INFORMATION FROM THE U. S. 0 .J U L 51979 . BooK 41 rp,EF 103 CORPS OF ENGINEERS; HAS RECEIVED -A LETTER FROM THE DER; AND HAS TALKED TO MR. SCHINDLER OF THE DOT FROM WHOM.A REPORT WILL BE FORTHCOMING. IN ADDITION, HE HAS ATTENDED SOME MEETINGS WITH THE CITY OF VERO BEACH PUBLIC*WORKS DIRECTOR AND THE CITY ENGINEER TO DISCUSS THE CITY AND COUNTY PROBLEMS IN THE.AREA. HE CONTINUED THAT HIS STAFF HAS PREPARED CERTAIN INFORMATION ON A LARGE MAP AND THE CITY ENGINEERS ARE CONSOLI- DATING THIS WITH A MAP SHOWING SOME OF THEIR DRAINAGE PROBLEMS. THE ADMINISTRATOR HOPED TO GET THIS ALL TOGETHER AND HOLD A WORKSHOP MEETING WITH THE COUNTY AND CITY PEOPLE INVOLVED TO LOOK AT THE OVERALL PROBLEM AND GIVE REPORTS ON THE RESULTS BOTH TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE COUNTY COMMISSION. HE STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THIS WORKSHOP PRIOR TO THE PLANNING & CONING COMMISSION MEETING ON JULY 12TH,AND HE FURTHER NOTED THAT'HE PLANS TO MEET WITH OFFICIALS IN TALLAHASSEE IN REGARD TO INDIAN RIVER.BOULEVARD AND WANTS TO TIE THIS ALL IN. THE ADMINISTRATOR STATED THAT HE FEELS THE DRAINAGE IN THAT PART OF THE CITY AND COUNTY IS OF PRIME IMPORTANCE AND EVERYTHING POSSIBLE IS BEING DONE TO BRING THIS TO THE EARLIEST POINT WHERE A DECISION CAN BE MADE. COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF THE APPROVAL OF THIS SITE PLAN WOULD HAVE A BIG AFFECT ON WHAT THE ADMINISTRATOR THINKS THE TOTAL DRAINAGE SITUATION WILL BE. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT IN HIS OPINION, UNTIL WE KNOW WHAT.WE ARE GOING TO DO, THE APPROVAL OF ANY SITE PLAN IN THAT AREA WILL HAVE SOME AFFECT ON THE DRAINAGE. HE NOTED THAT, PER MR. BEINDORF'S STATEMENT ABOUT TROPIC GROVE HAVING TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE 10TH STREET CANAL, IT WAS RECOGNIZED MANY YEARS AGO THAT IMPROVEMENTS HAD TO BE MADE TO THE DRAINAGE IN THE AREA. THIS BOARD IS NOW LOOKING AT A NUMBER OF DEVELOPMENTS GOING IN THIS AREA AND THE QUESTION IS WHETHER TO HOLD THIS UP NOW AND TRY TO WORK SOMETHING OUT THAT WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM FOR EVERYBODY OR TO TRY TO DO IT PIECE MEAL, COMMISSIONER SIEBERT NOTED THAT, AS HE UNDERSTANDS IT, THIS DEVELOPER IS GOING TO IMPROVE THE 10TH STREET OUTFALL DITCH AT LEAST TO THE EXTENT THAT IT WILL TAKE CARE OF THE DRAINAGE OF THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY, AND -HE DOES NOT FEEL IT IS FAIR TO TELL THIS DEVELOPER 37 J u L 51979 'BOOK 41 c.A� F 104 77 HE HAS TO ASSUME THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE DRAINAGE IN THE WHOLE 6TH AVENUE AREA. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT DID NOT FEEL MR. BELL WILL INCREASE THE DRAINAGE PROBLEMS, BUT MAY IMPROVE THEM. ENGINEER BEINDORF EXPLAINED THAT TROPIC GROVE IS GOING TO ACT AS AGENT FOR THE DOT TO GET PERMITS TO IMPROVE THEIR OUTFALL. THEY WILL GO THROUGH DER, ST. .JOHN'S WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, ETC., AND WILL BE EMPTYING INTO THE DOT's DITCH, NOT THE COUNTY'S, OR ANY OTHER. ADMINISTRATOR .JENNINGS REITERATED THAT HIS REPLY IS THAT THE APPROVAL OF ANY PLAN IN THIS AREA AFFECTS THE DRAINAGE OF THE AREA. COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR FELT THAT 6TH AVENUE WILL BE SUFFICIENTLY LARGE TO HANDLE THE TRAFFIC GENERATED BY A GREAT DEAL OF MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, MR. REVER STATED THAT OVER THE LONG HAUL, HE DID NOT FEEL IT WILL BE SUFFICIENT, BUT NOTED WE HAVE TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS ALONG THE WAY. HIS PERSONAL OPINION WAS THAT 3RD COURT IS NOT NECESSARILY THE BEST ROUTE, BUT IF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM 12TH STREET NORTH IS AVAILABLE, THE COUNTY SHOULD ACQUIRE IT. HE FELT THE WHOLE ROAD QUESTION IS ONE THAT MUST BE ADDRESSED ALONG WITH THE DRAINAGE AND AGREED THAT EACH ONE OF -THESE THINGS'DOES AFFECT THE DRAINAGE. CHAIRMAN WODTKE NOTED WE ALL SEEM TO THINK SO MUCH OF NORTH - SOUTH TRAFFIC AND ARE TRYING TO MAKE A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE OUT OF 6TH AVENUE. HE FELT WE MUST THINK ABOUT EAST -WEST ARTERIES, AND NOT SEND TOO LARGE AN AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC NORTH AND SOUTH THROUGH THAT RESIDENTIAL AREA, WHICH HE FELT WILL CREATE MANY PROBLEMS. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER AGREED THAT YOU MUST HAVE EAST -WEST RELIEF ROADS, BUT BELIEVED 6TH AVENUE IS GOING TO BE MORE THAN JUST A RESIDENTIAL STREET. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE THE MINUTES TO SHOW THAT WHETHER INDIAN RIVER•BOULEVARD IS EXTENDED OR 3RD COURT IS EXTENDED, 6TH AVENUE WITH ITS PRESENT RIGHTS-OF-WAY WILL• IN NO WAY HANDLE THE FUTURE TRAFFIC IF ANY OF THE DEVELOPMENTS ARE APPROVED THAT ARE BEFORE THE BOARD TODAY. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. COMMISSIONER LYONS VOTED I•N OPPOSITION, AND THE MOTION CARRIED. W: BOOK 4 1 PA'uf 105 P THE BOARD THEREUPON RECESSED FOR LUNCH AT 12:30 O'CLOCK P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 1:45 O'CLOCK P.M. THE HOUR OF 2:00 O'CLOCK P.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO—WIT: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Weekly Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: NOTICE STATE OF FLORIDA NOTICE IS HER EBYGIVEN that iheBoard of County Commissioners of Indian River Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath County, Florida, will hold a public hearing on says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published the following changes and additions to the at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being Zoning goFlorida,wh ch rdinance of Indianes add tions ver na , substantially as follows: 1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order a that the following described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: That portion lying East of State Highway in the matter of i�-i �� AIA of Lot 5, of the subdivision known of Kansas City Colony, according to the plat of said subdivision recorded in Plat Book 4, page 23, records of St. Lucie County, Florida, said subdivision being a $ubdivision of Government Lot 2 of Section 33, and Government Lots 2, 3 and 4, of Section 34, Township 33 South, Range In the Court, was pub- 40 East, now lying and being in Indian River County, Florida. Be cha nged from R-1 A to R-1 Residential. lished in said newspaper in the issues of A public hearing in relation thereto at which - parties in interest and citizens shall have an Opportunity! to be heard, will be held by said Board of County Commissioners in the County Commission Room, Indian River County Courthouse, Vero Beach, Florida, Thursday, July S, 1979, at 2:00 P.M. Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Board of County Commissioners Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore Indian River County been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered By: William C.WodtkeJr.,Chairmatt as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida May 2730,1979. fora period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tiserrent; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. Swom to and subscribed before m2 this day of A.D..1-92ZI Z I Business Manager) At ` i (Cleric of the Circuit Court, n ian River County, Florida) ( AL) THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WAS SENT TO EDITH M. SCHMUCKER BY THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AS REQUIRED BY FLORIDA STATUTE 125.66. 39 JUL, 5 19T9 k% 41 Paces 106 Edith M. Schmucker Box 1D, Route 2 { Vero Beach, Florida 32960 ' Dear Ms. Schmu.cker: i In compliance with Florida Statute 125.66, the following is a Notice of Public Hearing for rezoning, as requested by you and your Agent, Edwin S. Schmucker. NOTICE The Zoning Map will be changed in order that the following described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: That portion lying East of State Highway AlA of Lot 5 (five) of the subdivision known as Kansas City Colony, according to the plat of said subdivision recorded in Plat Book 4, page 23, records of St. Lucie County, Florida, said subdivision being a subdivision of Government Lot 2 of Section 33, and Government Lots 2, 3 and 4 of Section 34, Township 33 South, Range 40 East, now lying and being in Indian River County,*Florida. Be changed from R -1A Residential to R-1 Residential. A public hearing in relation thereto will be held by the Board of County Commissioners of -Indian River County, Florida in the County Commission Room in the County Courthouse, Vero Beach, Florida, on Thursday, July 5, 1979, at 2:00 o'clock P.M. Sincerely, Freda Wright Clerk i. f jwc COMMISSIONER SIEBERT NOTED THAT THIS IS AN APPEAL OF A DENIAL BY THE PLANNING $ ZONING COMMISSION. WENDY LANCASTER OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LIES ABOUT 1300' NORTH OF ROUND ISLAND PARK. THERE IS AN EXISTING RESIDENCE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, AND THE APPLICANT, WHO OWNS THE ENTIRE LOT TO THE RIVER, WISHES TO. 'CONSTRUCT 40 JU L 51979 � o o K 41 .F}q Y 107 I AN ADDITIONAL RESIDENCE ON HER PROPERTY. THE AREA IS DESIGNATED LOW DENSITY, AND THERE ARE SCATTERED SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN THE VICINITY. MS. LANCASTER CONTINUED THAT TWO PARCELS SOUTH OF ROUND ISLAND PARK HAVE BEEN REZONED TO R-1, BUT THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION -DENIED THE REQUEST AS CONSTITUTING SPOT ZONING AND RECOMMENDED THAT A STUDY BE MADE IN REGARD TO REZONING THE ENTIRE SUBDIVISION. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER REPORTED THAT THE PLANNING STAFF DID GO DOWN AND INVESTIGATE THIS ENTIRE AREA TO DETERMINE ITS NATURE AND CHARACTER AND MAKE SOME DETERMINATION OF WHAT SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT TAKE PLACE IN THE WAY OF ZONING. THEIR INVESTIGATION SHOWED THERE IS VERY LITTLE DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA AND THAT THERE IS A VERY SERIOUS QUESTION OF WATER AVAILABILITY. THERE ALSO IS A NATURAL SENSITIVITY IN THE WHOLE AREA TO EROSION BECAUSE OF THE PROXIMITY TO THE OCEAN. MR. REVER FELT AN INCREASE IN'DENSITY AND THE RESULTANT INCREASE OF ACTIVITY WOULD NOT BE IN KEEPING WITH WHAT THE AREA NOW IS OR SHOULD COME TO BE. THE PLANNING STAFFS RECOMMENDATIONS WERE THAT REZONING PROBABLY SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED, PARTICULARLY NORTH OF ROUND ISLAND PARK, AND THE FACT THAT SOME REZONING TO R-1 HAS BEEN GRANTED SOUTH OF ROUND ISLAND PARK DOES NOT MEAN THE BOARD SHOULD CONTINUE TO DO S0. THE PLANNING DIRECTOR POINTED OUT THAT ALL THE PARCELS IN KANSAS CITY COLONY, EXCEPT.FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND ONE OTHER PARCEL, HAVE SUFFICIENT FOOTAGE SO THAT TETE OWNERS, IF THEY WISHED, COULD SUBDIVIDE THEIR LAND INTO TWO LOTS. TETE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO BE HEARD. EDWIN SCHMUCKER CAME BEFORE THE BOARD REPRESENTING THE OWNER, AND STATED THE WHOLE PREMISE AND REASON FOR THE REQUEST FOR REZONING WAS BECAUSE THE BOARD ALREADY HAS REZONED TWO LOTS IN KANSAS CITY COLONY TO R-1., AND THERE WAS AN ASSUMPTION THAT IT WAS A GENERAL POLICY TO SO REZONE THESE .LOTS. HE THOROUGHLY DISAGREED WITH MR. REVER THAT THERE IS ANY REASON FOR REZONING THE LOTS SOUTH OF THE PARK AS OPPOSED TO THOSE NORTH OF THE PARK. HE NOTED THAT THERE ARE 126 LOTS IN KANSAS CITY COLONY; THEY ARE ALL 50` LOTS; AND HE DID NOT SEE WHY THOSE TO THE SOUTH ARE OF ANY DIFFERENT CHARACTER. MR. SCHMUCKER QUOTED FROM THE -MINUTES OF MAY 11TH WHERE ASSISTANT PLANNER BOB BERG SPOKE OF THE 41 JUL 5 1979 soon . 41 PAGE IN8 PROBLEM OF A MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY IN THIS AREA NEXT TO THE RIVER BEING ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AND•UNDEVELOPABLE. IT WAS PSR. BERG'S OPINION THAT BY REZONING TO R-1, THEY WERE GIVING THE APPLICANTS REASONABLE USE OF THEIR LAND AND THAT SINCE THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IN R-ZA AND R-1 IS WIDTH OF THE LOTS, IT WOULD NOT BE SPOT ZONING. MR. SCHMUCKER CONTINUED THAT THERE ARE ONLY TWO LOTS IN KANSAS CITY COLONY NORTH OF THE PARK WHICH ARE 150' OR LESS, AND HE FELT IT IS A SPECIFIC HARDSHIP TO THE OWNER TO REQUIRE ZOO' FRONTAGE OUT OF A 150' LOT TO BUILD ONE HOUSE, PARTICULARLY ON LAND THIS VALUABLE. HE NOTED THAT ONE OWNER WAS ALLOWED TO BUILD ON 60' UNDER A VARIANCE. MR. $CHMUCKER REITERATED THAT THE REASONS HE FEELS THIS REQUEST SHOULD BE GRANTED ARE BECAUSE SIMILAR REZONING HAS BEEN ALLOWED IN THIS AREA AND ALSO BECAUSE OF THE HARDSHIP CAUSED THE OWNER BY THE FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS. PETER PECK APPEARED REPRESENTING PROPERTY OWNERS EDWIN AND THELMA PECK, WHO OWN THE PROPERTY SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, WHICH PROPERTY HAPPENS TO HAVE 200' FRONTAGE. FOR THAT OBVIOUS REASON, THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN THIS REZONING; THEY AGREE WITH THE PLANNING DIRECTOR ABOUT THE DENSITY REQUIREMENTS; AND THEY WISH THE PROPERTY TO STAY AS PRESENTLY ZONED. HEPBURN WALKER, PROPERTY OWNER OF THE AREA, STATED THAT THEY ARE HAVING A SERIOUS PROBLEM TRYING TO GET WATER DOWN TO THE SOUTH BEACH, AND ONE`OF THE BIG REASONS CITY COUNCIL IS WORRIED ABOUT THIS IS BECAUSE THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT HIGHER DENSITY COMING IN THERE. HE EMPHASIZED THAT WATER IS A MAJOR CONCERN AND THAT HE DID NOT WANT THE BOARD TO TAKE ANY ACTION THAT MIGHT JEOPARDIZE GETTING WATER TO THE EXISTING RESIDENCES SOUTH OF THE MOORINGS. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOY, TO DENY THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING TO R-1 ON THE BASIS THAT IT WOULD•BE SPOT ZONING AND ALSO WOULD BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE KIND OF DEVELOPMENT TO BE PLACED ON THE OTHER LOTS. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT STATED THAT HE SYMPATHIZES WITH MR. $CHMUCKER, BUT DID NOT FEEL WE CAN -SUPPORT A HIGHER DENSITY THAT FAR 42 J U L 51979 Sao . 1� log SOUTH IN THE COUNTY, AND PERHAPS IT HAD BEEN A MISTAKE TO GRANT THE REZONING ON THE TWO PARCELS SOUTH OF ROUND ISLAND PARK. POSSIBLY WHEN PUBLIC SERVICES BECOME AVAILABLE, THIS CAN BE MADE A HIGHER DENSITY, BUT NOT AT THE PRESENT TIME. CHAIRMAN WODTKE STATED THAT HE HAD NO OBJECTION TO THE ON-SITE SURVEY MADE BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, BUT BELIEVED THIS IS GOING TO BE A RECURRING REQUEST AND STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE A FURTHER AND MORE COMPLETE STUDY MADE OF THIS PARTICULAR AREA TAKING INTO CON- SIDERATION THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LAND, IF THE BOARD IS SO INCLINED. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT FELT IT WOULD BE A WASTE OF TIME TO STUDY A HIGHER DENSITY IN AN AREA WITH NO MUNICIPAL SERVICES, THOUGH HE DID HOPE TO HAVE INCLUDED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE STUDY, THE PROBLEMS OF LAND THAT IS SO MUCH TAKEN UP WITH ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ATTORNEY CIANFRONE CAME BEFORE THE BOARD ONCE AGAIN IN REGARD TO THE RELEASE OF EASEMENTS IN PARADISE PARK REQUESTED BY B. F, CHAMBERLAIN AND INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THEY WOULD AGREE TO A 10' EASE- MENT ON THE NORTH. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER STATED THAT HE HAD NO PROBLEM WITH A 10' EASEMENT,AND THE ADMINISTRATOR AGREED. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 79-59 APPROVING RELEASE -OF EASEMENTS IN PARADISE PARK, BLOCK J, UNIT 2, TO B. F. CHAMBERLAIN AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN; THE DOCUMENTS TO BE PRE- PARED AT THE EXPENSE OF THE APPLICANT, THE EASEMENTS TO BE RELEASED AND CONDITIONS OF RELEASE ARE AS FOLLOWS: THE EAST 5' OF LOTS 2, 3 AND 4; AND THE WEST 5' OF LOTS 23, 24 AND 25; UP TO THE PRESENT NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY OF S. R. 60; THE APPLICANT TO DEDICATE THE NORTH 10' OF LOTS 4 AND 23 TO THE COUNTY. 43 J U L 51979 Box 41 FA- u A ATTORNEY COLLINS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT BUILDING DIRECTOR RYMER AND HOWARD PAUTZKE OF THE ZONING DEPARTMENT ARE HERE TO REVIEW A LIST OF FIVE STRUCTURES PROCESSED UNDER THE COUNTY PROGRAM TO TRY TO FREE THE COUNTY OF NUISANCE STRUCTURES. THE FIRST STRUCTURE TO BE DISCUSSED WAS THAT OWNED BY ELSON R. SMITH, SR., LOCATED ON 45TH AVENUE, AND BUILDING DIRECTOR RYMER INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THIS STRUCTURE HAS BEEN TORN DOWN, BUT THE DEBRIS HAS NOT BEEN REMOVED FROM THE PROPERTY, JHE PRESENILD ViUlUXtb rum Imt BOARD TO REVIEW. COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED WHEN MR. SMITH WAS LAST NOTIFIED TO CLEAN THIS UP, AND MRS. RYMER STATED THAT HE WAS NOTIFIED ON .JANUARY 2ND THAT THE BUILDING HAD TO BE TAKEN DOWN AND THE DEBRIS REMOVED FROM THE PROPERTY. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THE OWNER WILL HAVE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM HIM WITHIN THE LAST 60 DAYS. SOME DISCUSSION WAS HELD IN REGARD TO STORING MATERIALS ON SITE. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ATTORNEY TO NOTIFY ELSON R. SMITH, SR., THAT THE COUNTY WILL REMOVE THE DEBRIS FROM.THE RESIDENCE OWNED BY MR. SMITH ON 45TH AVENUE - FORTH STATE ROAD #510 (28-31-39-00-5000- 027-0) WITHIN TWO WEEKS AND BILL MR, SMITH OR FILE A LIEN FOR THE COSTS INVOLVED, UNLESS'THIS DEBRIS IS REMOVED IN THE MEANTIME. BUILDING DIRECTOR RYMER INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE HAZARDOUS STRUCTURE OWNED BY C. B. GRIMSELY IN HILLCREST SUBDIVISION HAS BEEN REMOVED AND THE PROPERTY CLEANED UP, AND SHE WILL WRITE A LETTER THANKING HIM, MRS. RYMER NEXT DISCUSSED THE HAZARDOUS STRUCTURE OWNED BY A. J. HARRIS ON . E. GEOFFREY SUBDIVISION AND STATED THAT THIS HAS BEEN IN BAD CONDITION FOR A LONG TIME. SHE STARTED WRITING HIM ABOUT IT IN 1971,AND HE HAS NEVER DONE ANYTHING ABOUT IT. . ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ATTORNEY TO GIVE A. J. HARRIS 10 DAYS NOTICE TO ABATE THE NUISANCE AND REMOVE THE HAZARDOUS STRUCTURE LOCATED ON LOT 77, BLOCK 5, W. E. GEOFFREY SUBDIVISION; AND -AUTHORIZED 44 J U L . 51979 BOOKF�1GF..1l l I THE ADMINISTRATOR IN THE EVENT THIS NOTICE IS NOT COMPLIED WITH WITHIN 10 DAYS, TO PROCEED TO ABATE THE NUISANCE AND REMOVE SAID HAZARDOUS STRUCTURE AND FILE A LIEN AGAINST THE PROPERTY FOR THE COST OF REMOVAL. BUILDING DIRECTOR RYMER INFORMED THE BOARD THAT SHE BELIEVED THE PROPERTY OWNED BY VIRGIL MURPHY WAS FOR SALE. SHE CONTINUED THAT HE PLACED SOME MONEY IN ESCROW WITH THE COUNTY AND SHE BELIEVED EVERY- THING IS REMOVED EXCEPT THE DEBRIS. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT,' SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ATTORNEY TO GIVE VIRGIL MURPHY 20 DAYS NOTICE TO ABATE THE NUISANCE AND REMOVE THE HAZARDOUS STRUCTURE OR DEBRIS THEREFROM, LOCATED ON HIS PROPERTY ON OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY SOUTH OF 81ST STREET; AND AUTHORIZED THE ADMINISTRATOR IN THE EVENT THIS NOTICE IS NOT COMPLIED WITH WITHIN 20 DAYS, TO PROCEED TO ABATE.THE NUISANCE AND .REMOVE SAID HAZARDOUS STRUCTURE, OR DEBRIS THERE- FROM, A FILE A LIEN AGAINST THE PROPERTY FOR THE COST OF REMOVAL, CHAIRMAN WODTKE STATED THAT HE DID NOT FEEL HE SHOULD TAKE PART IN THE FOLLOWING MATTER TO BE DISCUSSED CONCERNING THE PROPERTY OF LOUIS WODTKE AND LEFT THE MEETING AT 2;50 O'CLOCK P.M. VICE CHAIRMAN LOY TOOK OVER THE MEETING. BUILI}ING DIRECTOR RYMER REPORTED THAT MR. WODTKE`S HOUSE WAS BURNED BACK IN 1978, HE RECEIVED BURNS LN THE FIRE, AND IT HAS TAKEN HIM A WHILE TO RECOVER, BUT HE HAS BEEN WORKING ON THE PROPERTY AND HAS GOT IT PRETTY WELL CLEANED UP. THE BUILDING HAS BEEN DEMOLISHED, BUT HE HAS SOME LUMBER WHICH HE HAS STACKED ON THE PROPERTY AND WANTS TO USE, AS WELL AS SOME CONCRETE PIERS. COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED IF THE COMPLAINT ORIGINATED FROM NEIGHBORS. MRS. RYMER EXPLAINED THAT THE HOUSE WAS ALMOST DESTROYED BY FIRE AND REALLY LOOKED BADLY. THERE WAS A NEIGHBOR INVOLVED WHO WAS QUITE UPSET BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH OF TIME INVOLVED IN REMEDYING THE SITUATION. •HOWARD PAUTZKE OF THE ZONING DEPARTMENT STATED THAT THEY CANNOT FIND ANYTHING UNDER ZONING WHERE MR, WODTKE IS IN A GREAT DEAL OF VIOLATION. HE DOES HAVE AN AERATOR WHICH IS LEAKING, WHICH HE WILL 45 U U L 5197 BOOK pa;F I1 9 L _ J FIX, BUT HE IS OLD AND NOT WELL AND CAN T WORK VERY FAST. MR. PAUTZKE FELT THERE IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN NEIGHBORS INVOLVED. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT HE HAS HAD SOME CALLS IN REGARD TO THIS ABOUT PUTTING CONCRETE BLOCK IN THE RIVER THERE, BUT HE DID NOT BELIEVE THE COUNTY HAS ANY CONTROL OVER SEA WALLS OR ANYTHING THAT IS PLACED IN THE RIVER. MRS. RYMER NOTED THAT THE MAIN OBJECTION OR CONCERN THE NEIGHBOR EXPRESSED TO HER WAS THAT HE THOUGHT'MR. 140DTKE WAS GOING TO REBUILD THE OLD, BURNED STRUCTURE, AND THIS DOES NOT WORRY HIM ANY MORE BECAUSE MR. WODTKE IS NOT GOING TO USE THE BUILDING AND IT HAS BEEN TORN DOWN. ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT THERE WAS BASIS FOR A COMPLAINT, AND THE BOARD CAN DECIDE TO WHAT DEGREE IT HAS BEEN CURED. COMMISSIONER Loy STATED IT SEEMS THE MAJOR COMPLAINT HAS BEEN TAKEN CARE OF AND THERE APPARENTLY ARE CONTINUING EFFORTS TO CLEAN UP THE PROPERTY. SHE DID NOT BELIEVE THERE IS ANY VIOLATION EXISTING AND ASKED IF WE CAN JUST WITHDRAW THIS MATTER. COMMISSIONER LYONS SUGGESTED TABLING IT FOR SIX MONTHS. ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKED IF THE ZONING OR BUILDING DEPARTMENTS FEEL THERE IS A VIOLATION AT THIS TIME. ZONING INSPECTOR PAUTZKE STATED•THAT THE PLACE IS NOT THE NEATEST, BUT HE BELIEVES THE MAN IS DOING THE BEST HE CAN. BUILDING DIRECTOR RYMER COMMENTED THAT IF THE COUNTY HAS AN ORDINANCE STATING THAT A MAN CANNOT STORE LUMBER OR UNUSED MATERIALS, THEN THERE IS A ZONING VIOLATION; SHE, HOWEVER, HAD MR. WODTKE IN VIOLATION FOR REMOVAL -OF THE BUILDING. THIS HAS BEEN DONE AND HER OBJECTION HAS BEEN CLEARED. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT.STATED THAT HE FEELS TOTALLY CONSISTENT IN SAYING WE ARE NOT OUT TO PENALIZE PEOPLE WHEN THEY ARE MAKING AN EFFORT, AND ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE IN ILL HEALTH. HE PERSONALLY DID NOT FEEL THE PROPERTY LOOKS ALL THAT BAD. •ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, CHAIRMAN WODTKE BEING TEMPORARILY ABSENT FROM THE MEETING AND ABSTAINING FROM VOTING, THE BOARD AGREED TO TAKE NO ACTION IN REGARD 46 J U L 51979 BOOK 41 PAU,F 113 M. TO THE PROPERTY OF LOUIS H. WODTKE AND INSTRUCTED THE BUILDING DIRECTOR, TO GIVE THEM A FURTHER REPORT ON THIS SITUATION WHEN THE NEXT GROUP OF HAZARDOUS STRUCTURES IS TAKEN UNDER CONSIDERATION. VICE CHAIRMAN Loy INFORMED THOSE PRESENT THAT CHAIRMAN WODTKE DID NOT FILE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST BECAUSE HE DOES NOT HAVE A FINANCIAL INTEREST, BUT HE LEFT THE MEETING BECAUSE THE GENTLEMAN INVOLVED IS HIS UNCLE. THE CHAIRMAN RETURNED TO THE MEETING AT 3:05 O'CLOCK P.M. WILLIAM KOOLAGE BROUGHT UP THE PUBLIC HEARING IN REGARD TO CREATING A HOUSING AUTHORITY THAT IS TO BE HELD ON .JULY 17TH. HE NOTED THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PLACES IN GIFFORD IN VERY BAD SHAPE, AND HE HAS BEEN ASKED IF SOMETHING CAN T BE DONE WHEN SOMEONE MOVES OUT SO THAT THE RESIDENCE CAN T BE RENTED AGAIN UNTIL IT IS BROUGHT UP TO CODE, IN GENERAL DISCUSSION IT WAS NOTED THAT WHEN SOMEONE MOVES OUT, THE PROBLEM IS HOW TO KEEP THE STRUCTURE FROM BEING REOCCUPIED BEFORE IT IS FIXED AND ALSO HOW TO DETERMINE WHEN THEY DO MOVE OUT. BUILDING DIRECTOR RYMER STATED THAT IF HER DEPARTMENT IS NOTIFIED WHEN PEOPLE MOVE OUT, THEN THEY CAN DO SOMETHING, POSSIBLY HAVE THE ELECTRIC DISCONNECTED, BUT THE PROBLEM IS HOW TO GET NOTIFICATION. SHE DID NOT BELIEVE FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT WOULD CALL HER EVERY TIME THEY GET A DISCONNECT NOTICE. IT WAS FURTHER NOTED THAT THERE ISN'T ALWAYS A DISCONNECT WHEN THE PEOPLE DO MOVE OUT AND OTHERS MOVE IN. DISCUSSION CONTINUED ON HOW TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT MR. KOOLAGE SUGGESTED. MR, KOOLAGE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE IS WILLING TO ACCEPT APPOINTMENT TO THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY. THE CHAIRMAN FELT WE ARE NOW READY TO MAKE THESE APPOINTMENTS. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ON STAGGERED TERMS, AND IT WAS AGREED TO DO THIS ALPHABETICALLY. ' ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 79-60, APPOINTING RON ARENDAS, CLARK BENNETT, PAUL F. BUBENDEY, L. GENE HARRIS, AND WILLIAM W. KOOLAGE TO SERVE ON THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY, THE STAGGERED TERMS TO BE DETERMINED ALPHABETICALLY. 47 J U L 51979 BOOK} r, RESOLUTION 79 - 60 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following persons are hereby appointed to serve on.the Housing Finance Authority of Indian River County, Florida, each with their designated.term shown to the right of their name: Ron Arendas 1 year Clark Bennett 1 year Paul F. Bubendey 2 years L. Gene Harris 3 years William W. Koolage 4 years BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, for the purposes of satisfying Chapter 159.605, Florida Statutes, this Resolution shall serve as the Certificate of Appointment to the Housing Finance Authority of Indian River County, Florida, and shall be filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of said county. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAI4 RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA ATTEST. 1t �lE By_i�f2��"t�L .i Yea Brig t' Chairman Adopted: July 5, 1979 J U L 51979 Boos 4i gin,' II COMMISSIONER SIEBERT FELT THE BOARD AT THIS TIME SHOULD GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN PROBLEM BECAUSE, ALTHOUGH WE ADDRESSED A PARTICULAR SITE PLAN, SOME OF THE OTHER PROBLEMS WERE NOT ADDRESSED. HE NOTED THERE WERE SOME GOOD SUGGESTIONS MADE BY ANN ROBINSON AND MAGGIE BOWMAN. COMMISSIONER $IEBERT NOTED THAT SITE PLANS NOW DO NOT CALL FOR ANY EVALUATION OF ROAD AND STREET SYSTEMS NOR THE DRAINAGE IN THE AREA,'AND HE FELT THESE SHOULD BE ADDED CRITERIA FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL. HE FURTHER FELT THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE -TOTAL DRAINAGE PROBLEM EITHER IN THE FORM OF A MORATORIUM OR BY TAKING SOME EMERGENCY ACTION. COMMISSIONER LYONS AGREED THAT WE MUST LOOK AT THE TOTAL PICTURE FOR THE COUNTY AND ASKED IF COMMISSIONER $IEBERT IS SUGGESTING AMENDING THE $ITE PLAN ORDINANCE ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS. COMMISSIONER $IEBERT WAS OF THE OPINION WE SHOULD EITHER AMEND THE ORDINANCE OR GO INTO A MORATORIUM ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER STATED THAT PERSONALLY HE DOESN'T LIKE A MORATORIUM, BUT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO WORK WITH TO MAKE ANY JUDGMENT IN THE MATTER OF DRAINAGE IN THIS AREA, AND HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE TIME TO DEVELOP SOME KIND OF FRAMEWORK WITHIN WITH GOOD DECISIONS CAN BE MADE IN REGARD TO HANDLING TRAFFIC AND DRAINAGE. HE ALSO FELT THAT IT IS IMPERATIVE TO INCLUDE A PROVISION PROHIBITING CLEARING OF THE LAND 'PRIOR TO SITE PLAN APPROVAL AS THIS ALL AFFECTS DRAINAGE. ATTORNEY COLLINS BELIEVED THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TWO ALTERNA- TIVES -_ONE WOULD BE TO PROVIDE FOR ALL DRAINAGE ON SITE OR PROVIDE A LOGICAL METHOD OF DRAINING THE PROPERTY THROUGH EXISTING FACILITIES. MR. REVER INFORMED THE BOARD THAT ALACHUA COUNTY NOW REQUIRES THAT ANY DRAINAGE GENERATED MUST BE RETAINED ON SITE. HE NOTED THAT ON SITE SYSTEMS DO NOT NECESSARILY LAST VERY LONG, BUT THEY MIGHT BE THE "BAND AID" PROCEDURE WE COULD USE TO BUY SOME TIME. HE NOTED THAT THE CITY OF VERO BEACH IS CONSIDERING THIS. CHAIRMAN WODTKE POINTED OUT THAT "ON SITE" RETENTION ONLY DEALS WITH NORMAL SITUATIONS, NOT UNUSUAL ONES SUCH AS 5" OF RAIN. HE CONTINUED.THAT WE HAVE A LIST OF PROJECTS WAITING TO BE -ADDRESSED ON 49 JUL 51979 BOOK 4 1 ,DACE 116 SITE PLAN APPROVAL. THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION HAS TAKEN THE REQUESTS SCHEDULED FOR THEIR LAST MEETING AND DEFERRED THEM TO THE MEETING OF .JULY 12TH WAITING FOR THE DRAINAGE STUDY ON WHICH THE -ADMINISTRATOR IS PRESENTLY WORKING. THE CHAIRMAN FELT THE MAJOR INFORMA- TION IN THIS STUDY WILL HAVE TO COME.FROM THE DOT BECAUSE THE MAJOR OUTFALLS ARE DOT OUTFALLS HE CONTINUED THAT HE PERSONALLY DOES NOT LIKE MORATORIUMS, BUT IF THESE SITE PLANS ARE NOT GOING TO BE DISCUSSED, THE PEOPLE SHOULD BE NOTIFIED AHEAD OF TIME. MR. REVER AGREED AND SUGGESTED IF THERE SHOULD BE A MORATORIUM, THAT IT BE SET FOR A SPECIFIC TIME PERIOD. CHAIRMAN WODTKE NOTED THAT FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT, IF THE SITE PLAN HAS BEEN REQUESTED AND IS IN PROPER FORM, THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE A RIGHT FOR IT TO BE ADDRESSED, HE ASKED THE ATTORNEY IF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION IS IN A POSITION NOT TO ADDRESS THEM, ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THERE IS A PROBLEM, BUT BELIEVED THAT LEGALLY, EITHER BY AMENDING THE ORDINANCE OR THROUGH A MORATORIUM, THE TIME THAT IS NEEDED TO MAKE THE PROPER STUDY CAN BE PROVIDED. HE CONTINUED THAT IF THE BOARD WERE TO PASS AN ORDINANCE TO EXPAND THE REQUIREMENTS SET OUT UNDER THE SITE PLAN AND REQUIRED AN ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE AS TO DRAINAGE, ETC., THAT ORDINANCE WOULD BE IN EFFECT AND WOULD BE BINDING ON THE PARTIES. IT COULD,INCLUDE TRAFFIC, AND THEN PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE THE ZONING BOARD WITH THE NECESSARY PERMITS RE DRAINAGE AND STREET PLANS PRIOR TO BEING APPROVED. CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED IF THIS WOULD BE AN ECONOMIC HARDSHIP FOR A SMALL BUSINESS OR AN EXPANSION SITUATION, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED IF.THERE IS A DRAINAGE PROBLEM IN THE AREA, IT IS A PROBLEM COMMON TO ALL. CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED THAT SUPPOSE IT ISN'T, AND THE ATTORNEY FELT IN THAT CASE THE ENGINEER I•S IN A POSITION TO MAKE CERTIFICATION WITHOUT DELAY. ANN ROBINSON POINTED OUT THAT EVEN IF AN ENGINEER CAN GO IN AND SOLVE THE DRAINAGE PROBLEM FOR A PARTICULAR SITE, THERE MAY BE OTHER RAMIFICATIONS FOR THE SURROUNDING AREA. SHE NOTED THAT MR. JENNINGS 50 BOOK a 14 J U L 51979 d STATED THAT THE APPROVAL OF ANY SITE PLAN WOULD HAVE AN AFFECT ON THE WHOLE AREA, AND THEREFORE, SHE FELT -THAT IT WOULD BE IN THE INTERESTS OF ALL TO HAVE A MORATORIUM AND.DO LONG TERM PLANNING. IN FURTHER DISCUSSION, THE BOARD AGREED. ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED THAT WE MUST DEFINE THE AREA WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, AND ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT IT WOULD BE BOUNDED BY THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY ON THE WEST, THE SOUTH RELIEF CANAL ON THE SOUTH, THE INDIAN RIVER ON THE EAST AND 18TH STREET AND 14TH STREET AOR THE CITY LIMITS) ON THE NORTH. HE AGREED THAT A CONSULTING ENGINEERING FIRM SHOULD BE EMPLOYED TO DO A STUDY BASED ON WHAT WE COME UP WITH. HE FELT THERE IS NO WAY THAT YOU COULD RETAIN WATER ON SOME OF THE PROPERTY IN THAT AREA. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER AGREED, PARTICULARLY IN VIEW OF ALL THE DEVELOPMENT THAT IS BEING PROCESSED. COMMISSIONER Loy COMMENTED THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR IS SUGGESTING GOING SOUTH TO THE VISTA ROYALE PROPERTY, AND IT WAS GENERALLY FELT IT IS BEST TO CONSIDER THE BROADER AREA SINCE IT CAN.ALWAYS BE SCALED DOWN, CHAIRMAN WODTKE-STATED THAT HE DOES NOT LIKE TO HAVE A MORA- TORIUM AND FELT POSSIBLY WE CAN ADDRESS THIS THROUGH ADDING TO SITE PLAN PROCEDURE THE REQUIREMENT FOR A SATISFACTORY DRAINAGE PLAN, BUT PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER POINTED OUT THAT HIS DEPARTMENT HAS NO WAY TO DETERMINE WHAT A SATISFACTORY DRAINAGE PLAN WOULD BE AT THIS POINT. DISCUSSION CONTINUED IN REGARD TO HOW LONG A MORATORIUM SHOULD BE - PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER SUGGESTED 6 MONTHS, AND COMMISSIONER SIEBERT WAS IN FAVOR OF 60 DAYS. ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKED IF YOU TIE THE SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS INTO THE ACTUAL ISSUANCE OF THE NECESSARY GOVERNMENTAL PERMITS AND MAKE THE APPLICANT COME FORTH WITH THESE PERMITS BEFORE THE SITE PLAN IS APPROVED, DO YOU NOT ACCOMPLISH THE SAME THING. THE BOARD DID NOT FEEL YOU DO, AND COMMISSIONER LYONS NOTED THAT TROPIC GROVE HAS MADE A DEAL WITH THE DOT TO DUMP INTO THEIR 10TH STREET CANAL WHICH WILL SIMPLY END UP BY DEPRIVING SOMEONE ELSE OF A PLACE TO DRAIN, AND THIS WILL JUST MUSHROOM. HE FELT WE HAVE TO HAVE A MORATORIUM AND SUGGESTED 90 DAYS. 51 J U l 51979 BOOK FAA- .�. MRS. BOWMAN FELT THE BOARD MUST FACE THE FACT THAT THEY MADE A SERIOUS MISTAKE IN OPENING UP THE 6TH AVENUE SEWER ALLOCATIONS, AND THAT THEY MUST NOW TAKE REMEDIAL ACTION SINCE THE ENTIRE AREA IS INVOLVED AND YOU CANNOT PIECE MEAL THIS THING. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS NOTED THAT RELEASING THE SEWER -ALLOCA- TION SIMPLY BROUGHT ALL THIS OUT INTO THE OPEN, AND POINTED OUT THAT THE BOARD WAS UNDER TREMENDOUS PRESSURE TO RELEASE THESE ALLOCATIONS. COMMISSIONER LYONS NOTED THAT AT THE END OF 60 DAYS IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO FIND AN AREA THAT COULD BE ELIMINATED FROM THE MORATORIUM OR DECIDE ON SOME TIME FRAME TO RELEASE THE REST OF THE AREA. COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED WHO WE ARE GOING TO EMPLOY IN THE NEXT FEW MINUTES TO DO THIS STUDY AND WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM? ADMINISTRATOR .JENNINGS STATED THAT FIRST OF ALL WE NEED TO DO EVERYTHING WE ARE DOING AS FAST AS WE CAN TO HAVE THE MEETINGS WE DIS- CUSSED EARLIER. AFTER THESE MEETINGS, HE FELT WE CAN COME UP WITH A SUGGESTION AND BELIEVED IT WILL BE TO EMPLOY SOMEONE TO DO A DRAINAGE STUDY. HE FELT IT IS BETTER TO PROCEED WITH THE LARGER AREA IN MIND AND THEN CHOP OFF AS YOU GO. WHO EMPLOYS THE ENGINEER DOES HAVE TO BE WORKED OUT. IT HAS BEEN SUGGESTED THE DOT DO THE WHOLE THING, BUT THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE VERY TIME CONSUMING. MR. REVER AGREED WE WILL HAVE TO BRING SOMEONE IN WITH'A LOT OF EXPERTISE AND WITH AN OBJECTIVE VIEW OF THE MATTER. HE FELT THE MEETINGS WE ARE HAVING WILL GENERATE THE BASIC INFORMATION THAT ANYONE CAN USE. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER LYONS IN VIEW OF THE PAST, PRESENT AND ANTICIPATED FUTURE DRAINAGE PROBLEMS THAT ARE UNIQUE TO WHAT WE REFER TO AS THE 6TH AVENUE AREA, TO WAIVE NORMAL NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR ORDINANCES AND ADOPT ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS EMERGENCY ORDINANCE 79-I9 DECLARING A MORATORIUM ON THE ISSUANCE OF SITE PLANS WITHIN THAT AREA WHICH IS DEFINED AS BOUNDED ON THE SOUTH BY THE SOUTH RELIEF CANAL, ON THE WEST BY THE FEC RIGHT-OF-WAY, ON THE NORTH BY THE VERO BEACH CITY LIMITS, AND ON THE EAST BY THE INDIAN RIVER, IN ORDER THAT THE STAFF CAN ACCURATELY DETERMINE THE DRAINAGE REQUIRE- MENTS BOTH PRESENT AND FUTURE SO AS TO MINIMIZE FLOODING AND OTHER 52 r r $, �1 U L 51979 BOOK Ft�t ,�,,,�� DRAINAGE PROBLEMS; THIS MORATORIUM TO HAVE A LIFE OF 60 DAYS, AND THE PURPOSE OF THIS EMERGENCY ORDINANCE BEING FOR THE PROTECTION OF LAND OWNERS AND FUTURE RESIDENTS OF THE SUBJECT AREA. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE FOUR COMMISSIONERS PRESENT AT THE MEETING - COMMISSIONER Loy - COMMISSIONER SIEBERT - COMMISSIONER. LYONS - AND CHAIRMAN WODTKE. 53 JUL 51979 Booz Pz,U I ORDINANCE NO. 79 - 19 AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A SIXTY DAY MORATORIUM ON THE REVIEW AND ISSUANCE OF ALL SITE PLANS AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 23 OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ZONING ORDI- NANCE, PROVIDING FOR APPLICATION TO A LIMITED AREA, PROVIDING FOR APPROPRIATE DRAINAGE STUDIES TO BE MADE FOR THE PRO- TECTION OF CURRENT AND FUTURE LAND 014NERS WITHIN THE SUBJECT AREA WHEREAS, the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; FLORIDA, has received recommendations from.the staff, residents and other drainage experts that a critical drainage problem exists within an area defined as follows: That property lying within the area bounded on the South by the South Relief Canal, on the West by the Florida East Coast Railway East right-of-way line, on the North by the South city limits of the City of Vero Beach, and on the East by the West shoreline of Indian River, and WHEREAS, the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER,COUNTY, FLORIDA, in regular session deemed that an emergency existed and that the normal notice requirement for an ordinance should be waived in order to properly plan the drainage requirements within the above defined area prior to additional construction commencing, and WHEREAS, this emergency ordinance shall apply only to those pending and future projects which require site plan approval by the Indian River County Planning and Zoning Commission within the area defined, and WHEREAS, the purpose of this moratorium is to provide time to determine ways of minimizing flooding and define methods of drainage which will best meet the health and welfare needs of the citizens of Indian River County, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that a moratorium of sixty days' duration, terminating sixty days after enactment, is hereby established on the issuance of all J U L 51979 Box • 41 FA1,)f site plan approvals, pursuant to Section 23 of the Indian River County Zoning Ordinance for projects lying within the following described area: Bounded on the South by the South Relief Canal, on the West by the Florida East Coast Railway East right-of-way line, on the North by the South city limits of the City of Vero Beach, and on the East by the West shoreline of Indian River The moratorium of limited duration is declared and imposed for the purpose of allowing appropriate governmental officials and other consultants to study and provide Indian River County with a plan of drainage within the described area that will meet the health and safety needs of present and future residents who are or will reside within the described area. It is the intent of this ordinance to provide a method to minimize flooding and other problems that presently exist within the described area or may be created by additional development. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that this ordinance is passed with waiver of notice requirement by the unanimous vote of the four attending County Commissioners declaring that an emergency exists and that the immediate enactment of this ordinance is necessary. This Ordinance shall take effect July 5, 1979. J U L '5 1979 BOOK 41 FAQ x.22 P COMMISSIONER SIEBERT BROUGHT UP THE MATTER OF THE BOARD'S POLICY FOR PUTTING MATTERS ON THE AGENDA,AND STATED THAT HE FELT THERE WERE AT LEAST FOUR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TODAY THAT EITHER SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ON THE AGENDA OR THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN BACKGROUND INFORMATION SUPPLIED AND MADE AVAILABLE TO THE BOARD MEMBERS BEFORE THE MEETING. HE FELT WE ARE GETTING VERY LAX IN THIS AREA AND MUST DO SOMETHING TO BRING THIS PRACTICE TO A HALT. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT CONTINUED THAT ITEM 3, IN REGARD TO THE GIFFORD WATER SYSTEM FINANCING, DID NOT HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS, AND ITEM 4, ON THE REQUESTED RELEASE OF EASEMENTS, WAS NOT IN SATISFACTORY CONDITION AT ALL TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE BOARD. HE NOTED THAT ITEM 7 WAS ANOTHER ONE WHERE SOMEONE CAME UP WITH A REQUEST FOR US TO PURCHASE A FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM AND WE HAD NO RECOMMENDATIONS OF ANY TYPE. HE FELT AS IF THE BOARD IS DOING MORE AND MORE STAFF WORK ALL THE TIME. COMMISSIONER LAY POINTED OUT THAT WHEN THIS BOARD RECEIVES A LETTER SUCH AS ITEM 7, WHICH SPECIFICALLY REQUESTS BEING PUT ON THE AGENDA, THERE IS ALWAYS THE POSSIBILITY THE COMMISSION WILL SAY WE ARE NOT INTERESTED, SO HOW DOES THE STAFF DECIDE WHETHER TO GO AHEAD AND REQUEST INFORMATION FROM CONSULTING ENGINEERS BEFORE THE MATTER GOES ON THE AGENDA. DISCUSSION CONTINUED IN THIS VEIN,,AND COMMISSIONER SIEBERT AGREED THAT POSSIBLY ITEM 7 IS NOT A GOOD EXAMPLE, BUT FELT THERE ARE MANY THINGS THAT COME UP ON THE AGENDA THAT HAVE NO BUSINESS COMING UP THE WAY THEY DID, AND WITH NO RECOMMENDATION. CHAIRMAN WODTKE BELIEVED THE STAFF IS RELUCTANT TO ASSUME TOO MUCH FOR THE COMMISSION, ESPECIALLY SINCE THINGS ARE GETTING SO MUCH MORE COMPLICATED AND THERE IS SO MUCH MORE GOING ON. THE CHAIRMAN FELT THIS IS A VERY GOOD DISCUSSION -AND THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO CONSIDER THIS PROBLEM AT BUDGET TIME AND POSSIBLY MAKE SOME PERSQNNEL AVAILABLE FOR THIS TYPE OF THING. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT FELT WE MAY HAVE TO GET SOME RESIDENT ENGINEERS ON BOARD, AND COMMISSIONER LYONS AGREED THAT UNLESS WE DO, THE VOLUME OF WORK WILL SOON BE MORE THAN WE CAN HANDLE. 56 J U L 5 1979 Boos 41 'pAsf 123 INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS FELT PERHAPS POLICY HAS NOT BEEN CLEARLY DEFINED AS TO HOW FAR THE STAFF CAN GO AND SHOUL) GO IN THIS WAY. CHAIRMAN WODTKE AGREED THAT WE DO NEED TO TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AND DO A LITTLE MORE STUDY ON OUR COMMISSION AGENDA AND GUIDELINES SINCE THINGS ARE HAPPENING FASTER. POSSIBLY WE WILL HAVE TO LOOK AT WEEKLY MEETINGS AND MORE WORKSHOPS SUCH AS THEY HAVE IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT NOTED THAT TH5RE IS A STANDING POLICY IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY THAT IF EVERYTHING IS NOT COMPLETELY DONE AND SET UP, IT DOES NOT GET ON THE AGENDA, HE COMMENTED THAT HE LIKES THE WAY OUR REZONINGS ARE PRESENTLY SET UP WHERE THE BOARD GETS THE COMPLETE BACK- GROUND INFORMATION. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS FELT WE SHOULD TAKE A LOOK AT BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE AND TRY TO WORK MORE CLOSELY. COMMISSIONER LOY REMINDED THE BOARD THAT WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED FOR 7:30 P.M. .JULY 17TH IN REGARD TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY AND WE NEED TO SET UP A NIGHT IN .JULY BEFORE THE 30TH FOR A BUDGET,HEARING FOR THE SHERIFF. SHE WENT ON TO DISCUSS THE PROPERTY APPRAISERS BUDGET AND CONFERRING WITH HIM ABOUT MAKING THE INCREASES FOR HIS EMPLOYEES THE SAME AS WE ARE PROPOSING,WHICH IS 5.57, SHE ALSO DISCUSSED THE QUESTION OF THE VEHICLES JUST PURCHASED BY THE APPRAISER BEING CLASSIFIED AS OFFICE -OWNED AND NOT COUNTY -OWNED, AND BEING CARRIED IN A COLUMN THAT INDICATED THEY WERE FURNITURE. SHE REPORTED THAT MR. LAW HAS REQUESTED THAT WE NOTIFY HIM AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE OF ANY NEW TAXING DISTRICT BECAUSE IT IS A VERY TIME-CONSUMING PROCEDURE FOR HIS DEPARTMENT TO PULL OUT THIS INFORMATION, AND SHE INDICATED WE WOULD TRY TO HANDLE THE TAXING DISTRICTS IN THE EARLIEST PART OF THE BUDGET SESSIONS TO GIVE HIM AS -MUCH TIME AS POSSIBLE. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED IN REGARD TO SETTING UP DATES FOR THE VARIOUS MEETINGS AND IT WAS DECIDED TO TAKE UP THE SHERIFFS BUDGET AT 3:00 P.M.,THURSDAY, .JULY 19TH,.AND HOLD THE WORKSHOP FOR THE SOUTH COUNTY WATER DISTRICT AT 7:30 P.M. JULY 19TH, COMMISSIONER Loy INFORMED THE BOARD THAT DR. FLOOD HAS RECEIVED A -LETTER FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES 57 J U L 519?9 saoK 41A;F GIVING AN OPINION IN REGARD TO THE NUMBER OF WELLS AND NUMBER OF UNITS THAT WILL BE PERMITTED ON LOTS. SHE FELT WE MAY NEED TO TAKE SOME ACTION ON THIS AS IT RELATES TO THE 6TH AVENUE SEWER ALLOCATIONS AND REQUESTED ATTORNEY COLLINS TO EXPLAIN FURTHER. ATTORNEY COLLINS REPORTED THAT WHAT THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT'S ATTORNEY HAS SAID IS THAT YOU CAN HAVE ONE WELL FOR FOUR UNITS, WHICH WOULD GENERALLY BE INTERPRETED AS FOUR UNITS PER LOT, BUT THEY HAVE SAID WHEN YOU HAVE S UNITS ON ONE LOT, YOU CAN HAVE TWO WELLS, EACH SERVING ONLY FOUR UNITS. ATTORNEY COLLINS POINTED OUT THAT A UNIT COULD CONTAIN MORE THAN ONE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, AND DR. FLOODS OPINION IS THAT IT COULD BE 4 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS IN ONE. HE CONTINUED THAT YOU COULD END UP WITH A SITUATION WHERE YOU COULD TAKE A SMALL LOT, AND IF ZONING AND DENSITY ALLOWED, YOU COULD DRILL TWO WELLS AND SERVE S UNITS. IF YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF LOTS, YOU HAVE TWICE AS MANY WELLS, AND IT LOOKS AS IF YOU ARE ASKING FOR TROUBLE. .ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT A COUPLE OF MEETINGS AGO THE BOARD DISCUSSED THE PROBLEMS OF PROVIDING SEWER WITHOUT ALSO PROVIDING WATER. IF A FRANCHISE IS GRANTED TO A PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY, THEN YOU CAN MUCH MORE EASILY MONITOR THE WATER AND TIE IN YOUR SEWER CHARGES, THE SMALL OWNER WHO WISHES TO PUT FOUR UNITS ON ONE WELL ON HIS LOT CAN STILL OBTAIN THE SEWAGE ON 6TH AVENUE, BUT YOU COULD HAVE CONTROL OVER THE LARGER UNITS BY RESTRICTING THE REQUIREMENTS THAT A PERSON MUST COMPLY WITH IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR SEWAGE ALLOCATION. ATTORNEY COLLINS CONTINUED THAT WHEN THE BOARD ADDRESSED THE QUESTION THE LAST TIME AND PASSED RESOLUTION 79-45 ON THE SEWER ALLOCA- TION GUIDELINES, HE FELT EVERYONE WAS ASSUMING THERE WOULD BE ONE WELL PER LOT. HE SUGGESTED THAT THE RESOLUTION COULD BE AMENDED TO SAY THAT YOU WILL ALLOCATE SEWAGE TO A SINGLE LOT THAT HAS NO MORE THAN FOUR SINGLE FAMILY UNITS ON IT SO A MAN CAN STILL PUT UP FOUR UNITS AND HAVE HIS PRIVATE WATER SUPPLY, BUT HE CAN'T GET AROUND THE RULE BY PUTTING UP 8 UNITS WITH TWO WELLS BECAUSE IF HE DOES THAT, HE WON'T QUALIFY FOR SEWER. 'COMMISSIONER LYONS NOTED THAT WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO IS AVOID'EXTRA WELLS, AND THE ATTORNEY FELT THAT IS THE INTENT. COMMISSIONER JUL 5197 soap 41 �,m I � I I LYONS NOTED THAT HE WENT ALONG WITH THE PREVIOUS RESOLUTION BECAUSE HE SAW FOUR AS THE END, BUT NOW IT SEEMS THEY HAVE FOUND LOOPHOLES. CHAIRMAN WODTKE COMMENTED THAT THE PROBLEM IS IN THE INTER- PRETATION OF UNITS WHICH COULD MEAN DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES, ETC. COMMISSIONER LOY FELT ANYONE FURNISHING WATER TO THAT MANY PEOPLE NEEDS TO GO BY THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF A PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM. THE BOARD EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE WHOLE QUESTION OF ISSUING SEWER TO SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT HAVE AN APPROVED WATER SUPPLY, AND CHAIRMAN WODTKE COMMENTED THAT HERE IS ANOTHER RESULT OF BEING, FORCED INTO MAKING THAT SEWER ALLOCATION. COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT HE DID NOT SEE MUCH OF A PROBLEM WITH FOUR ON ONE WELL, BUT AS YOU BEGIN TO MUSHROOM, IT IS A PROBLEM. HE FELT WE SHOULD TIGHTEN UP ON THIS AND LIMIT IT TO FOUR. ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT WITH THE MORATORIUM, THE BOARD COULD AGENDA THE ITEM AND ACT ON IT LATER, BUT COMMISSIONER Loy STATED THAT SHE WOULD RATHER HAVE A POTION NOW. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0. 79761 AMENDING RESOLUTION No, 79-48 BY STRIKING PARAGRAPH 3 (B) (III) AND SUBSTITUTING THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH IN ITS PLACE: "WHERE A COUNTY FRANCHISE IS NOT REQUIRED, A PRIVATE WELL SYSTEM PROPERLY PERMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES WILL BE ALLOWED. NO PRIVATE WELLS SHALL SERVE MORE THAN FOUR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS AND THERE SHALL BE NO MORE THAN ONE PRIVATE WELL PER SUBDIVIDAL LOT.n 59 JUL 51979 BOOK 41 PAGE 126 RESOLUTION NO. 79 - 61 WHEREAS, effective the 23rd day of May 1979, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, adopted a Resolution No. 79 - 48, and WHEREAS, the Board, after receiving information from the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council and being aware that numerous wells located along Sixth Avenue rear the Indian River are not in the best interest of the residents of Indian River County because of salt water intrusion and other possible types of pollution that may occur, and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, deems it appropriate and in the best interest of the health and welfare of the county to amend Indian River County Resolution No. 79 - 48, Paragraph 3 (B) (iii) , NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that Resolution No. 79 - 48 is hereby amended by deleting Paragraph 3 (B) (iii) totally and substituting the following paragraph in its place: "There a County Franchise is not required, a private well system properly permitted by the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services will be allowed. No private wells shall serve more than four single family dwelling units and there shall be no more than one private well per subdividal lot. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, except for the amendment to Paragraph 3 (B) (iii), as herein stated, Resolution No. 79 - 48, as to all other respects of the Resolution, shall remain in full force and effect. BOARD OF COUNTY C0121ISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, -FLORIDA By w► C 1.rC Chairman �. ATTEST:- , Fre a Wright, , CTerk Adopted: July 5, 1979 J U L 51979 -BOOK 41 P?GF 127 CJ ATTORNEY COLLINS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT NO DATE WAS APPROVED - FOR STARTING THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEETINGS, AND -THERE IS A 30 DAY NOTICE REQUIREMENT. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE THE FIRST PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEETING FOR MONDAY, AUGUST 13, 1979, AT 9:00 A.M. ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKED IF THE BOARD WISHED HIM TO WORK WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO REDRAFT THE SITE PLAN ORDINANCE AS TO THE MATTERS DISCUSSED TODAY, I.E., TRAFFIC FLOW, CLEARING, OF LAND, DRAINAGE, ETC., AND THE BOARD AGREED THAT THEY DID. ATTORNEY COLLINS REPORTED THAT COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED HIM FOR A RECOMMENDATION ON THE APPEAL SITUATION. HE STATED THAT HE DID NOT FEEL THE BOARD*SHALL CALL FOR AN APPEAL ON SOMETHING THAT WILL COME BEFORE THEM, BUT THAT THE CALL FOR THE APPEAL SHOULD COME FROM.A THIRD PARTY. HE NOTED THAT THE APPEAL LANGUAGE HE HAS FOUND IN RESEARCH REFERS TO AN "AGGRIEVED PARTY. If HE DID NOT FEEL THAT WOULD CAUSE MUCH. OF A PROBLEM AND RECOMMENDED USING THIS TERMINOLOGY, WHICH WOULD PRETTY MUCH LET ANY TAXPAYER COME IN WITH AN APPEAL. HE STATED THAT IF IT GETS ABUSED, THEN IT CAN BE CHANGED. COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE BOARD CALLING FOR AN APPEAL, AND THE ATTORNEY FELT IT WOULD INDICATE THAT THE BOARD HAS A PRECONCEIVED ATTITUDE, AND FURTHER NOTED THAT HE WOULD NOT LIKE TO HAVE THE GOVERNING BOARD DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THERE WILL BE AN APPEAL. COMMISSIONER LYONS AGREED WITH THE LANGUAGE PROPOSED BY THE ATTORNEY AND DOUBTED WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER APPEAL IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS, -DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, AND CHAIRMAN WODTKE STATED THAT HE DOES NOT WANT THE STAFF OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO BE BURDENED WITH PEOPLE REQUESTING TO HAVE SITE PLANS EXPLAINED TO THEM. ANN ROBINSON NOTED THAT THE CITY OF VERO BEACH ALLOWS ANY INTERESTED PERSON TO MAKE AN APPEAL AND SHE DID NOT BELIEVE THEY HAVE 14AD BUT ONE IN THE LAST SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS. 61 JUL 51979 R00 PA -F8 I AFTER FURTHER DISCUSSION, IT WAS GENERALLY AGREED TO GO ALONG WITH THE ATTORNEY'S RECOMMENDATION. - ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE A PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDING THE SECTION OF THE SITE PLAN ORDINANCE IN REGARD TO APPEALS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE ATTORNEY. COMMISSIONER LYONS REPORTED THAT HE HAS RECEIVED REPORTS FROM THE PEOPLE HE QUIZZED ABOUT RELEASE OF EASEMENT PROCEDURES AND HE WILL SUBMIT A WRITTEN SUMMARY TO THE BOARD WITHIN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS, COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AN UP- DATED REPORT ON THE 201 STUDY AT THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING. CHAIRMAN WODTKE COMMENTED THAT AT THE MEETING OF .JUNE 20, 1979, THE BOARD INSTRUCTED THE ATTORNEY TO PROCEED WITH THE CONTRACT WITH HOSPITAL ARCHITECTS AND CONSULTANTS, CONNELL, METCALF & EDDY, INC., BASED UPON THE WORKSHOP MEETING HELD .JUNE 10, 1979, BUT THE CHAIRMAN INADVERTENTLY HAD'NOT BEEN AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE CONTRACT. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE CONTRACT WITH CONNELL, METCALF & EDDY, INC., IN REGARD TO DESIGN OF MODIFICATIONS, COMPLETION OF PLANS, PERIODIC INSPECTIONS AND SITE WORK FOR THE OLD INDIAN RIVER MEMORIAL HOSPITAL BUILDING, THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COURT- HOUSE BUILDING, AND THE COURTHOUSE ANNEX BUILDING. DISCUSSION ENSUED ON SETTING A TIME TO START BUDGET SESSIONS AND IT WAS TENTATIVELY SET FOR THE WEEK OF .JULY 30TH. ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT WHEN THE BOARD ADDRESSED THE MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING THIS MORNING, THEY AUTHORIZED HIM TO REPRESENT HAROLD WHITAKER AS AN AGENT FOR THE COUNTY AND THEN DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR MR. WHITAKER IN THE EVENT A CONFLICT AROSE. THE ATTORNEY FELT SUCH A MOTION WOULD BE IN ORDER. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ATTORNEY TO SECURE OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR HAROLD WHITAKER IN THE EVENT A CONFLICT OCCURS BETWEEN THE ATTORNEY'S REPRESENTATION OF THE COUNTY AND THAT OF MR. WHITAKER, 62 JUL 51979 BOOK 41 FAGF.129 i PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAD AN EMERGENCY ITEM HE WISHED THE BOARD TO CONSIDER. COMMISSIONER Loy INFORMED MR. REVER THAT WE HAVE A SET PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED IN REGARD TO PLACING MATTERS ON THE AGENDA, AND MR. REVER STATED THAT HE HAD BEEN UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT IT WAS TO BE BROUGHT UP UNDER THE ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS, BUT IT HAD NOT BEEN. THE ADMINISTRATOR STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO BRING THIS MATTER BEFORE THE BOARD AT THIS TIME, IF THEY•WERE AGREEABLE TO HEARING IT. IT HAS TO DO WITH A REQUEST MADE BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR FOR CHANGES IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHICH WOULD INVOLVE SALARY INCREASES. THE PROPOSED INCREASES DO NOT FALL WITHIN THE GUIDELINES SET UP IN THE RECENTLY ADOPTED CODY REPORT, AND THE ADMINISTRATOR DID NOT FEEL THAT HE HAD THE AUTHORITY TO GO AGAINST ESTABLISHED POLICY, AT LEAST WITHOUT MAKING THE BOARD AWARE OF WHAT WAS TAKING PLACE. IN FURTHER DISCUSSION, THE BOARD AGREED THAT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO STABILIZE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, BUT FELT THAT THIS WAS NOT A MATTER THAT SHOULD BE ADDED TO THE AGENDA AS AN EMERGENCY ITEM BUT THAT IT SHOULD BE PUT ON THE AGENDA ACCORDING TO NORMAL POLICY AND PRESENTED TO THE BOARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION. THE CHAIRMAN REQUESTED THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR HAVE SOMETHING READY ON THIS MATTER WITHIN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS AND BRING IT BACK TO THE NEXT MEETING WITH A RECOMMENDATION. FULLY EXECUTED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND SVERDRUP & PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. AND BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (A JOINT VENTURE) IN REGARD TO BRIDGE INSPECTION IS HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES AS APPROVED AT THE MEETING OF JUNE 20, 1979. 63 JUL 51979 Boa 41 F* 130 THIS AGREEMENT MADE THIS 20th DAY OF June A.D., 1979, BY AND BETWEEN THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, FLORIDA, HEREINAFTER CALLED THE OWNER, AND SVERDRUP & PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. AND BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (A JOINT VENTURE), HEREINAFTER CALLED THE ENGINEER. WITNESSETH, THAT WHEREAS, the Owner has reviewed the qualifications of professional engineering firms as required by Chapter 73-10, Florida Statutes, and WHEREAS, the Owner desires to obtain certain professional engineering and planning services for A County Bridge Inspection and Report Program, and WHEREAS, The Owner has determined the firm of Sverdrup & Parcel and Associates, Inc. and Beindorf & Associates, Inc. (A Joint Venture) to be the -most qualified firm for professional services required by the Owner, and WHEREAS, the Engineer warrants that he has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the Engineer, to solicit or secure this Agreement, and that he has not paid or agreed to pay any person, company, corporation, individual, or firm, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the Engineer, any fee, commission, percentage, gift, or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the Owner and the Engineer for the consideration herein- after set forth agree as follows: SECTION 1. BASIC SERVICES OF THE ENGINEER A. General 1. The Engineer agrees to perform professional services in connection with the project as hereinafter stated. 2. The Engineer shall serve as the Owners professional representative as related to the project, and shall give consultation and advice to the Q.mer during performance of his services. 3. Preliminary investigation and comprehensive field investi- gation will be performed and a bridge report shall be prepared for each bridge at the location shown on Attachment "A". The total number of bridges shown on Attachment "A" is 89 which includes the high-level Wabasso bridge on SR 510 over the Indian River. The Owner may add or delete -to the number of bridges as shown on Attachment "An. Adjustment to the Engineer's compensation shall be as defined in Section 4. J U L 51979 Boa 41 FAG E 131 1 . r, J U L 51979 Boa 41 FAG E 131 B. 'Preliminary Investigation 1. An inventory of background data available from the State of Florida Department of Transportation and Indian River County will be per- formed to determine bridges requiring inspection. 2: A Preliminary field investigation will be performed which includes the following: a) Identification and location of bridges; classification of bridge type; measurement of bridge length; identification photographs; and designation of bridge number in accordance with Florida Department of Trans- portation requirements. b) A preliminary inspection of bridges to determine critical deficiencies. All critical deficiencies noted will be reported to the Owner. 3. All preliminary field investigation data will be compiled: a) To determine if each bridge requires a comprehensive inspection under the Florida Department of Transportation's criteria. b) To prepare necessary location maps of all bridges requiring inspection including those bridges less than 20 feet in length requiring monitoring. Map shall also include pertinent bridge data. c) Review with the Owner all preliminary investigation data to establish the bridges requiring a comprehensive inspection and determine with the Owner, priorities for inspection of.the bridges. 4. A method of route selection for the comprehensive inspec- tion of bridges will be established. C. Comprehensive Field Inspection 1. Comprehensive field inspections will be performed on the bridges established in item B.3.c, above, in accordance with the guidelines of the Florida Department of Transportation Recording and Coding Guide for Maintenance Inspection of Public Bridges, latest edition. 2. A Comprehensive field inspection will be performed which includes the following: a) structure location by name and coordinates b) physical characteristics of all oomponents c) current condition of bridge d) determine watercourse condition when applicable e) additional photographs for documentation of bridge condition 2 J U L 51979 BOOK 41 Fncc ��� f) determine condition of bridge approaches g) perform underwater inspection as required D. "Preparation of Bridge Report 1. A report will be prepared for each bridge inspected utilizing the format of the Florida Department of Transportation Type II Bridge Inspection Report. 2. Each bridge report will include the following elements: a) location map with structure designation number b) general bridge condition c) current condition of bridge d) structure deficiencies e) load capacities of bridge f) recommendations for improvements if required g)• estimated cost of required improvements p h) summary i) photographs will be included as necessary for pictorial documentation. j) copy of the completed Florida Department of Transportation's Structure Inventory and Appraisal Form 3. One copy of each bridge report will be submitted to the Owner for the Owner's record. One copy of each Structure Inventory and Appraisal form (in addition to the Structure Inventory and Appraisal form included in the report) will be submitted to the Owner. Copies of the bridge reports and supporting data will be submitted to the Owner on a monthly basis. 4. The Engineer shall complete the work as outlined under Section 1. Basic Services of the Engineer, within five (5) months of the date of execution of this Agreement. SECTION 2. RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OWNER , .The Owner will: A. Provide full information as to the Owner's requirements for the work. 3 J U L 5 1979 BOOK 41 £AvE 133 0 B. Assist the Engineer by placing at his disposal all available information pertinent to the work including previous reports, maps and any other data relative to the work. C. Guarantee access to and make all provisions for the Engineer to enter upon public and private lands as required for the Engineer to perform his work under this Agreement. D. Examine all studies, reports, sketches, estimates, drawings, specifications, proposals, and other documents presented by the Engineer and render in writing decisions pertaining thereto within a reasonable time as not to delay the work of the Engineer. E. Designate in writing a person to act as Owner's representative with respect to the work to be performed under this Agreement; and such person shall have complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information, interpret and define Owner's policies and decisions with respect to materials, equipment elements, and systems pertinent to the work covered by this Agreement. SECTION 3. ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES In addition to the foregoing services, the Engineer may furnish additional services upon written authorization by the Owner as follows: A. Services for preparation of final design documents for any C proposed improvements to designated bridges including -detailed construction drawings, specifications and contract documents, and services for construc- tion inspection. B. Services resulting from significant changes in general scope of.the project or its planning, including substantial changes in size , complexity or Owner's schedule. C. Property surveys; descriptions of needed land and easement rights and maps, plans or estimates related thereto; assistance in negotiating for land and easement rights. D. Appear before courts or boards on matters of litigation related to the project. E. Revise previously approved studies, reports, design documents, drawings or specifications. F. Other related services to be defined in conjunction with the Owner. SECTION 4. AUTHORIZATION AND PAYMENT Upon execution of the Agreement by the two parties thereto, the Engineer will proceed with the basic services provided for under Section 1. As compensation for these basic services, the Engineer shall be paid in accordance with the following schedule. 4 BOOK 41 PACE 134 V Payment Schedule Payment to the Engineer shall be the total payroll cost of salaries and wages for personnel assigned to the Project, times a factor of 2.1 to provide for general overhead and profit, plus the actual cost of reimbursable expenses as defined hereinafter. The payroll cost of salaries and wages used.as a basis for payment shall mean the cost of salaries and wages paid to principals and employees engaged directly on the Project, including, but not limited to, engineers, architects, surveymen, designers, draftsmen, specification writers, estimators, stenographers and clerks, plus cost of fringe benefits including, but not limited to, social security contributions, unemployment, excise and payroll taxes, workmen's com- pensation, health and retirement benefits, pensions, sick leave, vacation, and holiday pay applicable thereto. Reimbursable expenses shall mean the actual expense of transporta- tion and subsistence of principals and employees when traveling in connection with the Project, field office expenses, resident Project representative's subsistence and transportation, toll telephone calls and telegrams, reproduction of reports, drawings and specifications, and similar Project related items. 1. For the bridges located as shown on Attachment "A" (up to 88 bridges), an amount not to exceed $77,920.00 without Owner's authorization. 2. For the high-level Wabasso bridge, an amount not to exceed $11,000.00 without Owner's authorization. E Compensation for services provided for Under Section 3, Additional Engineering Services, -as required, will be equitably negotiated between the Owner and Engineer prior to the issuances of written authorization by the Owner. SECTION 5_ GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS A. Ownership of Documents All original tracings, plans, specifications, and maps pre- pared under this Agreement shall become the property of the Owner. Also, basic surveys, notes and sketches, charts, computations and other data will be made -available, upon request, to the Owner without restriction or limitation on their use. In the event of such use, however, the name plates will be removed and the Engineer is.released and held harmless of subsequent liabilities. B. Estimates Since the Engineer has no control over the cost of labor and materials, or over competitive bidding and market conditions, the estimates on construction cost provided for the work are to be made on the basis of his ex- perience and qualifications but the Engineer does not guarantee the accuracy of such estimates as compared to the Contractor's bids or the work construction costs. A J U L 51979 Bou 41 ?Acf 135 a C. Insurance O The Engineer shall secure and maintain such insurance as will protect him from claims under the Workmen's Compensation Acts and from claims for bodily injury, death, or property damage, which may arise from the per- formance of his services under this Agreement. D. Successors and Assigns The Owner and the Engineer each binds himself and his partners, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns to the other party of this Agreement, and to the partners, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns of such other party, in respect to all covenants of this Agreement; except as above neither the Owner nor the Engineer shall assign, sublet, or transfer his interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other. Nothing herein contained shall be construed as creating any personal liability on the part of any officer or agent of any public body which may be a party hereto. E. Sdbcontractors The Engineer shall not subcontract any work under this Agree- ment without prior approval of the Owner. F. Wage and Price Control The Engineer'shall comply with applicable regulations and standards of the Costs of Living Council in establishing wages and prices. G. don -Discrimination The Engineer will comply with Executive Order No. 11246, entitled, 'Eal Employment Opportunity", as supplemented in Department of Labor Regulations l CFR, Part 60). The Engineer shall have an affirmative action* plan which declares that it does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, national origin, sex and age, and which specified goals and target dates to assure the implementation of that plan. INMITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have made and executed this Agreement the day and year first above written.. OWNER: ENGINEER: Joint Venture) By:2/ ;ti �� 1 . By: C�­- WilliamC. Wodtke Jr. Jame C. Jones Jr. Title: Chairman Title: Assistant Vice President C �� J Attest: Uz`� - 4 V Witness: ` Fre a Wright C Title:. Clerk Circuit Court By: /'James L. Beindorf Title: Witness: 6 JUL President BOOK Pj�UE6 Sverdrup & Parcel ffi and Associates, Inc. AND EEINDORF ASSOCIATES, INC. INDIAN RIVER COON Y (A JOINT VENTURE) FLORIDA - --- - - r ' T, t `ter q.77 _ T Lw - r, r a t o.cec»once Cour 9 ' ATTACHMENT "A" BRIDGE SCHEDULE LEGEND 0 -- CONCRETE (66) — CREOSOTE (5) ® - Ncoo (6) �E JEL WABASSC 0 A COPY OF THE FULLY EXECUTED AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AND KUNDE, DRIVER, SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES, INC., IN REGARD TO THE ENGINEERING BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION OF BARBER AVENUE IS HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES AS APPROVED AT THE MEETING OF MARCH.7, 1979, 71 JUL 51979 BOOK 41 PAGE 133 011 A G R E E M E N T THIS AGREEMENT, Made and entered into this day of �C� , 1979, by and between INDIAN, RIVER COUNTY, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY", and KUNDE, DRIVER, SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES, INC., hereinafter referred to as "ENGINEER", their heirs, successors and assigns. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, on March 7, 1979 ENGINEERS submitted an Engineering Fee Proposal to COUNTY regarding the engineering bidding and construction of Barber Avenue from U. S. 1 to the new Indian River Memorial Hospital; and WHEREAS, COUNTY has decided to accept the Proposal as submitted by ENGINEER; NOW,.THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual promises and the lump sum fees as outlined in the Engineering Fee Proposal, the parties agree as follows: 1. That Engineering Fee Proposal for Barber Avenue as submitted'by ENGINEER to COUNTY and marked as Exhibit "A" is incorporated within this Agreement. 2. COUNTY and ENGINEER hereby agree to the terms as outlined in Exhibit "A". Specifically COUNTY agrees to pay $7,116.00 to ENGINEER for the Design Phase and $32,500.00 for the Construction Phase. The Design Phase shall be - completed within approximately three (3) months and the construction time for the Construction Phase shall take approximately 304 calendar days. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY u , By William C. :�octkc, Jr., airman (/ Board df County Cgmmiss oners z�LLiG Attest:l As o County Freda Wright, Clerk KU NDE, DRIVER, SIHPSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. L - By Attest: As to 1; yinr_er JUL, 51979 Boa . 41 F-A;,F x.39 0 JUL 51979 BOOK 41 PAGE140 Kunde•Driver•Simpson G Associates. Inc. Paqe 5 ; FEE 11ItKAAKDOWN Drsign Ph.lse: Item Manhours• 1. Review of plans G project site 32 2. Preparation of Contract Documents 80 3. Permit sketches and data 60 4. Permit coordination and meetings 32 5. Final cost estimate 12 6. -Advertising for bids a 7. Miscellaneous Conferences G Meetings 16 240 240 Manhours m $9.00/Hr. x 2.6 = $ 5,616 Out-of-('ocket Expenses: Printinq: $1,400 Materials: 10_0 $1,500 1,5() Total Ocsign Phase $ 7,116 • Cut1sLrUCt1Qn Ph,lsc: lnspectiull, rUcotlllejs, ct.C. 1,000 m.lnhours ;a $13.64^/Hr• x 2.2 = $30,000 ` Out-of-PULket Expenses: l Automobile 0 $250/mth. x 10 = 2,500 I Total Construction Phase $32,500 i Total Fee $39,616 Say $39,600 _Note: Testing will be performed by a qualified testing laboratory and paid for by the County. The estimated cost for testing is approximately $2,500. JUL 51979 BOOK 41 PAGE140 THE SEVERAL BILLS AND ACCOUNTS AGAINST THE COUNTY, HAVING BEEN AUDITED, WERE EXAMINED AND FOUND TO BE CORRECT, WERE APPROVED AND WARRANTS ISSUED IN SETTLEMENT OF SAME AS FOLLOWS: TREASURY FUND Nos. 62391 - 62539 INCLUSIVE. SUCH BILLS AND ACCOUNTS BEING ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE.CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, THE WARRANTS SO ISSUED FROM THE RESPECTIVE FUNDS BEING LISTED IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL MINUTE BOOK AS PROVIDED BY THE RULES OF THE LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR, REFERENCE TO SUCH RECORD AND LIST SO RECORDED BEING MADE A PART OF THESE MINUTES. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, ON MOTION MADE, SECONDED AND CARRIED, THE BOARD ADJOURNED AT 5:45 O'CLOCK P.M. ATTEST: CLERK CHAIRMAN 74 J U L 51979 Boos . 41 PAGE 141