Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/24/1980'APR 2 31980 Boo, 43 PA-cE390 APRIL 24, 1980 THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ACTING AS THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE LAURELWOOD SUBDIVISION STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT MET AT THE COURTHOUSE, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, AT 3:45 O'CLOCK P.M. PRESENT WERE WILLARD W. SIEBERT, JR., CHAIRMAN; ALMA LEE Loy, VICE CHAIRMAN; WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR.; R. DON DEESON; AND PATRICK B. LYONS. ALSO PRESENT WERE JACK G. JENNINGS, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR; GEORGE G. COLLINS, JR., ATTORNEY TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; .JEFFREY BARTON, FINANCE OFFICER; AND VIRGINIA HARGREAVES, DEPUTY CLERK. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER. THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF APRIL 9, 1980. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF APRIL 9, 19801 AS WRITTEN. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, ON MOTION MADE, SECONDED AND CARRIED, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE LAURELWOOD SUBDIVISION STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT ADJOURNED AT 3:46 O'CLOCK P.M. ATTEST: CLERK 136 CHAIRMAN PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER NEXT CAME BEFORE THE POARD TO REVIEW THE RECENT ANNEXATIONS MADE BY THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN AND PRESENTED A MAP SHOWING THE ANNEXATIONS AND THE FOLLOWING MEMO: April 1, 1930 h1LM0 TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: David M. Rever, Planning and Zoning Director SUBJECT: Sebastian Voluntary Annexations - March 10, 1980 As requested, this memo represents a swimary of the Planning Department staff analysis of the two recent annexations undertaken by the City of Sebastian. Please note that consideration was given to Chapter 171, Florida Statutes, which deals with "Municipal Annexation or Contraction"; however, the staff did not delve into all the legal issues. Suffice it to say that there is substantial evidence which would indicate that "reasdM- ableness" of the boundary extensions are marginal based on the following statutory language: 1) Procedural guidelines - Prerequisites 171.042 A. Plan of services - Paragraph (1) C subparagraphs 1 - 4 B. Notification to Board of County Commissioners - 171.042 Paragraph (3) 2) Character of area to be annexed - 171.043 Urban in character (all or part)- Paragraph 1, 2, and/or 3 3) Voluntary annexation - 171.044 Creation of enclaves -Paragraph 5 Additionally, there is a question as to the procedural requirements on ening consistency. It is the staff's understanding that the zoning of a parcel of property when annexed must be maintained in a like classifi- cation for a period of at least two years unless the "increase or decrease in density" is approved by the governing body of the County. Of course Seba�-*ian does not have an Agricultural zone which is consistent with the County zoning on the southerly (Myatt property) annexation. This inter- pretation is based on the wording in Chapter 171.062, Paragraph (2) entitled "Effects of Annexations or Contractions". 4 In terms of the viability of.the actions, and the practicality from a planning standpoint, the issue takes on a broader perspective. In actu- ality the two annexations -should be analyzed on the individual rirerits and circumstances of each case, thus a summary review of both actions are provided below: 137 Q001t .�, r 4�`, iadGf 1, k" APR 2 31990 Boot- 43 P+cE 392 - North "Gibson Road" Annexation - A portion of this area is proposed to be annexed into the City of Sebastian in both the old "Adley Summary Report" and in the upcoming Sebastian Comprehensive Plan. The staff generally agrees that the unincorporated areas between the Sebastian Airport and the Sebastian "Old Town" area could logically and practically be annexe:, into the City. The question arises, however, as to what extent is it desirable` to extend past the "Old Town" area or encroach on the Roseland community. Ultimately the issue will center on two major factors which relate first to the desires of the Roseland community (and a delineation of where the com- munity actually extends to), and secondly the City of Sebastian's overall capacity to provide services in existing and expanded incorporated areas. Without going into all of the "debatable issues" surrounding those two factors, it should be stated that the staff does basically agree with the general precept of eliminating "enclaves, islands, pockets, fingers", etc. within municipalities or on their immediate fringes. We are opposed, how- ever, to the continued or gradual progression of annexation actions which would eventually lead to the absorption of a distinct community such as Roseland, or the over extension of a municipality when substantial areas within the existing City are potentially penalized in terms of being delayed in receiving future urban services. This particular annexation does involve property which directly abuts the existing City although it leaves a 19 acre enclave directly to the south. Approximately 1600 feet or roughly 50% of the area does join the existing City limits. Ultimately the general area to the west of the East Coast Railroad to the Airport can reasonably be incorporated. The staff is, how- ever, concerned that the City of Sebastian is initiating an annexation policy to the north which will evolve into including all properties that can be absorbed without the benefit of a plan of services or feasibility study, and more importantly without analyzing the future impact on existing City residents. South (Hyatt)Annexation - This annexation encompassing approximately 157 acres does not involve properties which are cited for incorporation in the Adley Report or in the upcoming Comprehensive Plan. The area'does abut the existing eastern City limits line and extends approximately 1/4 mile to the south towards the Wabasso community. The area is zoned Agricultural under the County's classification system and is being mined for sand. This incorporation could not be considered an effort to reduce or eliminate pockets or enclaves around the City's fringes. It is the staff's opinion that the annexation in effect creates more pronounced enclaves particularly to the north and west up to the'Twin Lakes section of the Highlands. The remaining unincorporated area is an extremely large pocket of land including several mobile home parks and other scattered residential aid conrrercial developments. In sum,the City's action will likely encourage further expansions in the future. The primary question is again whether the City is exceeding future service capabilities or -perhaps even diluting the capacity to provide basic services to existing residents. Based on those considerations, it is the Feeling of staff that this annex- ation is not consistent with good planning or management practices. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED WHAT CAN WE DO LEGALLY IF WE ARE OPPOSED TO SUCH ANNEXATIONS. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THERE IS A 30 DAY APPEAL PERIOD. HE EXPLAINED THAT THERE ARE BASICALLY TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF ANNEXATIONS — ONE REQUIRES A VOTE AND THE OTHER IS VOLUNTARY. THE TYPE WHICH REQUIRES A REFERENDUM HAS ALL KINDS OF SAFEGUARDS 138 77 BUILT IN IT IN REGARD TO SUPPLYING UTILITIES, ETC. VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION HAS NO SUCH CRITERIA - ONLY THAT YOU SHALL NOT CREATE ENCLAVES. HE COMMENTED THAT THE VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION REQUESTED BY MR. HYATT WAS DONE FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE AS THE BOARD IS AWARE. THE ATTORNEY FELT THAT ANY FUTURE ANNEXATION WHICH IS NOT IN THE COUNTY'S INTEREST SHOULD BE ATTACKED AT THE POINT WHEN THE ORDINANCE IS BEING ENACTED, AND THE COUNTY SHOULD TAKE PART IN THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND DESCRIBE THE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH SUCH AN ANNEXATION. ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT IT IS VERY DEBATABLE WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE ANY VIOLATIONS OF THE STATUTES BY THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN IN THIS CASE. HE CONTINUED THAT HE DOES FEEL THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE MUNICIPALITIES AND THE COUNTY IN REGARD TO ANNEXATION,AND THERE SHOULD BE SOME UNDERSTANDING AND INPUT INTO THEIR THINKING PROCESS SO THEY AT LEAST UNDERSTAND ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT, BASED ON THE RECENT ANNEXATIONS, WE SHOULD INDICATE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO BE A PART OF THE PROCESS IN THE FUTURE AND EXPLAIN THE REASONS WHY. ATTORNEY COLLINS AGREED THAT IF IT APPEARS ENCLAVES ARE BEING CREATED, THE COUNTY SHOULD HAVE SOME INPUT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING STAGE.. HE STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE CITY ON OUR MINING ORDINANCE AND HELP THEM UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE GETTING INTO. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER LOY, DIRECTING THE ATTORNEY TO DRAFT A LETTER FOR THE CHAIRMAN'S SIGNATURE EXPRESSING THE COUNTY'S CONCERN ABOUT ANNEXATION, EXPLAINING SOME OF THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE INVOLVED WITH ENCLAVES, AND REQUESTING THAT WE BE NOTIFIED IN THE FUTURE. 4 CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF THERE WERE TO BE A SERIOUS VIOLATION OF OUR MINING ORDINANCE WHERE IT COULD AFFECT NOT ONLY THAT AREA BUT ALSO PART OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA, WHETHER WE WOULD HAVE SOME BASIS TO GET A CEASE AND DESIST ORDER? ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT IF THERE ARE ANY DENSITY CHANGES, THEN THE COUNTY HAS SOME VESTED RIGHTS, BUT HE FELT THE CITY'S MINING ORDINANCE, WHICH THEY HAD ADOPTED AS AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE, TAKES PRECEDENCE. APR 2 31980 139 800 43 PAGE193, APR 9 31980e' x 43 PACE 394 CHAIRMAN SIEBERT FELT IF THEY SHOULD BREAK THE HARDPAN AND POISON THE AQUIFER, WE SHOULD HAVE SOME RECOURSE, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT THERE ARE STATE REGULATIONS, BUT THE COUNTY WOULD NOT HAVE ENFORCEMENT POWERS. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED THAT PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER MAKE IV A PRESENTATION ON THE PROGRESS BEING MADE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN. MR. REVER REPORTED THAT THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION IS GOING TO HOLD WORKSHOPS TO GO THROUGH THE ELEMENTS OF THE PLAN AND HOW THE PLANNING STAFF IS APPROACHING IT. HE REPORTED THAT THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE DOCUMENT IS APPROXIMATELY 60-65% COMPLETE; THERE ARE SOME HOLES IN IT NOW BECAUSE OF THEIR INABILITY TO COLLECT SOME OF THE NECESSARY DATA. MR. REVER REPORTED THAT THEY HAVE COMPLETED FOR THE MOST PART A HOUSING ELEMENT; A SUBSTANTIAL PART OF THE RECREATIONAL ELEMENT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED;. THEY ARE GETTING QUITE HEAVILY INTO TRANSPORTATION; THE COASTAL ZONE CONSERVATION IS MOVING AHEAD; AND THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT COMES AT THE END IN CON- JUNCTION WITH HOW WE PROPOSE TO MOVE AHEAD IN THE OTHER AREAS. MR. REVER SUGGESTED THAT THE COMMISSIONERS SIT IN ON THE PLANNING & ZONING WORKSHOPS BECAUSE HE FELT IT WOULD BE BETTER IF MEMBERS OF BOTH BOARDS COULD MEET AND HEAR THE SAME PRESENTATION AT THE SAME TIME. MR. REVER NOTED THAT THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION, AS THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY, IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PUTTING TOGETHER THE DOCUMENT, HOLDING A PUBLIC HEARING)AND MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AT WHICH TIME THE PROCESS MOVES ON TO THE BOARD, WHICH WILL BE REQUIRED TO HAVE AT LEAST TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS - ONE ON THE LAND USE AND ONE ON THE REMAINING ELEMENTS OF THE DOCUMENTS. MR. REVER NOTED THAT THE LAND USE ELEMENT IS THE PREMIER ELEMENT, AND STATED THEY HAVE ACCUMULATED ALL THE DATA THEY NEED TO FINALIZE THIS, EXCEPT FOR THE TECHNICAL INFORMATION ON THE DIFFERENT LAND USES IN THE COUNTY TODAY. THIS IS AVAILABLE IN THE PROPERTY 140 APPRAISER'S OFFICE ON THE COMPUTER, MR. REVER INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THEY HAVE MADE NUMEROUS EFFORTS TO GET THIS DATA FROM MR. LAW, BUT VARIOUS EXCUSES HAVE BEEN GIVEN, AND THEY HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO OBTAIN IT. MR. REVER STATED THAT HE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY HELP THE BOARD MIGHT BE ABLE TO GIVE HIM IN OBTAINING THE NEEDED INFORMATION. HE EXPLAINED THAT TO HAVE ONE OF HIS PEOPLE SIT DOWN AND MEASURE ACREAGES OFF A MAP IS NOT ONLY TIME CONSUMING, BUT IT IS NOT AS ACCURATE AS THE INFORMATION POSSESSED BY MR. LAW. HE NOTED THAT THIS IS THEIR MAJOR HURDLE AT THIS POINT AND IT AFFECTS NOT ONLY THE LAND USE ELEMENT, BUT OTHER ELEMENTS SUCH AS RECREATION, DRAINAGE, ETC. MR. REVER CONTINUED THAT AS TO THE OVERALL PROCESS, HE INTENDS TO SUBMIT FOR AN EXTENSION FOR ANOTHER YEAR, ALTHOUGH HE DID NOT ANTICIPATE IT WILL TAKE THAT LONG. HE COMMENTED THAT 80% OF THE COUNTIES IN THE STATE HAVE NOT COMPLETED THEIR PLANS AND WILL ASK FOR EXTENSIONS. CHAIRMAN SIEB.ERT STATED THAT EVEN IF WE HAVE TO HIRE CONSULTANTS, HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE PLAN COMPLETED BEFORE HIS TERM EXPIRES. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER AGREED THAT HE DID NOT WISH TO HAVE A PLAN JUST TO MEET REQUIREMENTS, BUT FELT WE SHOULD HAVE ONE THAT IS EFFECTIVE AND MEANINGFUL. HE FELT THAT HIS STAFF WITH THE INFORMATION FROM MR. LAW'S OFFICE CAN COMPLETE 99% OF THE DOCUMENT BY THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER, POSSIBLY JULY 1ST, AND THAT THEY CAN MAKE ALL THE TECHNICAL INPUT AND ASSEMBLE THE BASIC ELEMENTS. HE WOULD, HOWEVER, LIKE TO HAVE A CONSULTANT TO FINISH THE PACKAGING OF THE DOCUMENT BECAUSE WITH ALL THE VARIOUS PLANNERS WHO HAVE MADE INPUT INTO THE PLAN, HE WISHED TO BE SURE THAT ALL THE IDEAS INCOR- PORATED ARE WORKABLE AND COMPATIBLE. HE STATED THEY COULD DO IT 4 WITHOUT A CONSULTANT, BUT IT WOULD TAKE A LOT LONGER. SECONDLY, MR. REVER EXPRESSED GREAT CONCERN THAT WE BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT HAVING THE BASIC IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS TO MAKE THIS PLAN OPERATIVE AS SOON AS WE CAN,IF IT IS OFFICIALLY ADOPTED. IN ORDER TO DO THAT AND BECAUSE THE PLAN IS PROPOSING A NEW APPROACH, HE WOULD LIKE A CONSULTANT TO GIVE US MAJOR ASSISTANCE IN PREPARING THE "PERFORMANCE STANDARDS." 141 . 'Bob, 43-. RAGE 396 'APR 2 3 1980 4i y door 396 MR. REVER STATED THAT HE WISHED TO UPGRADE OUR SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AND SITE PLAN ELEMENT SO THAT WE HAVE THE BASIC TOOLS WHICH BRING ABOUT A GOOD LAND USE PLAN AND THEN USE THE PLAN AS THE LAW INTENDS IT TO BE USED, OR AS THE ZONING GUIDELINE. MR. REVER STATED THAT AS HE -UNDERSTANDS IT, IT WILL BE LAW, AND WE ARE FACED WITH THE FACT THAT WE MUST USE WHAT WE ADOPT AS OUR LAND USE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. HE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAS CONTACTED SOME CONSULTANTS,AND ALL IV ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO RECEIVING A GENERAL SCOPE OF SERVICES AND SUBMITTING THEIR PROPOSALS. HE NOTED THAT FOR PLANNING PURPOSES, WE ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENT FOR COMPETITIVE BIDDING, AND HE WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED AND PREPARE THE SCOPE OF SERVICES. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT FELT WE SHOULD HAVE ONE WORKSHOP MEETING TO GO OVER THIS VERY BROADLY BEFORE WE AUTHORIZE GETTING CONSULTANTS AND BEFORE MR. REVER WRITES THE SCOPE OF SERVVCE,AND COMMISSIONER LOY AGREED THAT WE SHOULD GET TOGETHER WITH THE ZONING BOARD AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND SEE WHAT DIRECTION WE ARE GOING. MR. REVER STATED THAT THEIR NEXT REGULAR MEETING,, WHICH IS THE SECOND THURSDAY IN MAY, HAS A VERY LIGHT AGENDA, AND HE WOULD RECOMMEND, THEREFORE, THAT MOST OF THAT MEETING BE UTILIZED FOR A MAJOR WORKSHOP MEETING. POSSIBLY BOTH BODIES COULD MEET AT THAT TIME AND AT LEAST BE MADE AWARE OF THE BROAD BRUSH CONCEPT BEING PROPOSED. MR. REVER REPORTED THAT HE HAS DISCUSSED THE APPROACH BEING TAKEN WITH THE BOARD OF REALTORS, THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION, AND SOME CIVIC GROUPS, AND IN GENERAL, GOT A FAVORABLE RESPONSE. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AGREED THAT THE BOARD SHOULD ATTEND THE PLANNING & ZONING MEETING SCHEDULED FOR MAY 8TH IN ORDER TO OBTAIN AN OVERVIEW OF THE WHOLE APPROACH, AND STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOME WRITTEN INFORMATION IN ADVANCE. ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THAT REGARDLESS OF HOW THE BOARD DIRECTS THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO APPROACH THE LAND USE PLAN, THAT IT -WOULD NOT AFFECT THE GENERAL SCOPE OF SERVICES REQUIRED OF THE CONSULTANTS, AND HE WOULD HOPE MR. REVER COULD MOVE AHEAD WITH THIS IN THE MEANTIME. MR. REVER AGREED THAT THE SCOPE OF SERVICES WILL SERVE US NO MATTER WHAT DIRECTION WE TAKE, AND AFTER FURTHER DISCUSSION, THE CHAIRMAN DIRECTED MR. REVER TO PREPARE A SCOPE OF SERVICES AND SEND IT OUT. MR. REVER STATED THAT HE WILL PREPARE THE SCOPE OF SERVICES AND SEND IT TO ADLEY & ASSOCIATES; BEAR & ABERNATHY; REYNOLDS, SMITH & HILLS; AND RMBR CORPORATION, COMMISSIONER LOY REPORTED THAT WE ARE IN RECEIPT OF THE APPLICATION FOR THE SURPLUS TRACKING STATION PROPERTY AND INQUIRED IF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT CAN HANDLE THIS. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER STATED THAT THE ONLY PART HE HAS ANY QUESTION ON IS THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, WHICH HE IS NOT CERTAIN THAT HIS STAFF CAN HANDLE BECAUSE IT REQUIRES SOME VERY SPECIFIC DATA IN REGARD TO HABITATS, ETC. HE FELT SURE THEY COULD TAKE CARE OF THE REST OF IT, AND NOTED THAT IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE DONE BY JUNE 1ST. COMMISSIONER LYONS NOTED THAT DR. HERBERT KALE COULD UN- DOUBTEDLY HELP WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO NEGOTIATE OR CONTRACT WHATEVER IS NEEDED TO GET THE APPLICATION FOR THE SURPLUS TRACKING STATION PROPERTY PROPERLY COMPLETED AND SUBMITTED PRIOR TO JUNE 1, 1980. ATTORNEY COLLINS DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF GETTING OUT THE SCOPE OF WORK AND HAVING THE MOST LIKELY CANDIDATE PRESENT AT THE WORKSHOP MEETING ON MAY STH. MR. REVER DID NOT BELIEVE WE COULD PREPARE A CONTRACT BY THAT TIME, BUT THE ATTORNEY DID NOT FEEL IT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO GO TO CONTRACT TO HAVE THEM ATTEND THE MEETING. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE WILL WRITE A LETTER TO PROPERTY APPRAISER LAW IN REGARD TO THE IMPORTANCE OF OBTAINING THE INFORMATION NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN. 143 APR 2 31990 ao K 43 PACE3 7 r APR 2 31980 coax 43 F%Cf.398 J. B. EGAN, III, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY, INFORMED THE COMMISSION THAT THE HOUSING AUTHORITY HAS FILED AN APPLICATION WITH HUD FOR 116 PUBLIC HOUSING UNITS AS PER THE FOLLOWING LETTER: Reply to 800, 20th Place, Suite 3, Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Mr. Everett It. Rothschild Area Kinager Department of Housing and Urban Development Jacksonville Area Office Peninsular Plaza 661 Riverside Avenue Jacksonville, Florida 32204 April 15, 1980 Re: Circular Letter JAX 80-17 Application for 116 New Construction Public Housing Units Indian River County Housing Authority Dear Mr. Rothschild: We are a new Housing Authority charged with filling housing needs that have been increasing over a substantial period of time. 56! of our families are below the poverty level. Over 66-2/3% of our labor force are seasonal workers. Our employment is citrus, agriculture and tourist based. We have a chronic unemployment problem that annually rages from 5.9Z to 13:4X. 0ne stable non -seasonal employer laid off the equivalent of 10*% of the total county labor force this year. The State Employment Office forecast unemployment may reach 20% this :;uiraner. We will keep you informed. With the sense of urgency the situation demands, our staff and our Board have worked long; and hard on the enclosed applicatiun for its timely submission. We are experienced but we seek the guidance of you and your staff in developing Indian River County's first 116 public housing units. Sincerely, Egan III Chai nnan of the Board Indian River County Housing Authority PAIR.- EGAN CONTINUED THAT THE FIRST STEP IS TO APPLY FOR A LOAN TO PROVIDE THE FUNDS.TO GO ON WITH PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENTAL WORK, AND IN CONNECTION WITH THAT, THERE WERE TWO DOCUMENTS THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO SUBMIT, ONE BEING A RESOLUTION WHERE THE COUNTY COMMISSION � 1� CONCURS WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION AND A COOPERATION AGREEMENT IN REGARD TO LEVYING TAXES. COMMISSIONER LYONS QUESTIONED PARAGRAPH (C) OF SECTION 6, WHICH CALLS FOR PROVIDING WATER AND SEWER MAINS TO THE PROJECTS, AND ASKED IF THE COUNTY IS COMMITTED TO THIS NO MATTER WHERE THE PROJECT IS LOCATED. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT HE HAD INTERPRETED THAT PARAGRAPH TO MEAN THE HOUSING AUTHORITY WOULD HAVE TO PAY THE SAME AMOUNT TO THE COUNTY AS WOULD HAVE BEEN ASSESSED AGAINST A PRIVATE ENTERPRISE FOR THEIR PROJECT;SO THEY, THEREFORE, WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER THIS IN THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT. HE NOTED THAT HE HAD BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT THE TAX EFFECTS; BASICALLY THE HOUSING AUTHORITY IS A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION AND THE PROPERTY WILL BE TAKEN OFF THE TAX ROLLS. HUD, THEREFORE, IS STATING THAT THE HOUSING AUTHORITY WILL PAY THE COUNTY 10% OF THE RENTS RECEIVED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS OF TAX REVENUE. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT COMMENTED THAT WE THEN WILL RECEIVE 10% IN LIEU OF TAXES, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED THAT THE AGREEMENT STATES IF THEY DO GENERATE INCOME, THEN A PORTION OF IT WILL BE PAID TO THE COUNTY, AND IN TURN, THE COUNTY WILL HAVE TO APPORTION THE AMOUNT RECEIVED AMONG ALL THE VARIOUS TAXING BODIES - THE SCHOOLS, THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT, ETC. ON LOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER 4 ..Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-41 CONCURRING WITH AN APPLICATION BY THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR 116 DWELLING UNITS OF LOW -RENT PUBLIC HOUSING. 145 soov .. 43, APR 2 S080 BOO RESOLUTION NO. 80-41 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND CONCURRING WITH AN APPLICATION BY THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR LOW -RENT HOUSING PROGRAM 43 pA' 43 - WHEREAS, the United States Housing Act of 1937 provides that there shall be local determination of the need for low -rent housing to meet needs not being adequately met by private enterprise; and WHEREAS, under the provisions of the United States Housing Act of 1937, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development is authorized to provide financial assistance to public housing agencies for low -rent housing; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE Indian River County Board of County Commissioners AS FOLLOWS: 1. That Indian River Count hereby determines that within its area of operation there is a need for low -rent housing to meet needs not being adequately met by private enterprise. 2. Having seen the application of the Indian River County Housing Authority to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development dated April 14, 1980, the Board of County Commissioners concurs with the Board of the Indian River County Housing Authority in that its Chairman shall sign and send to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development an application for financial -assistance for (1) 116 dwelling units of low -rent public housing to be provided by new construction, or by acquisition, or by acquisition and rehabilitation of existing housing and for a preliminary loan. 3. In connection with the development and operation of any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance under the United States Housing Act of 1937, regardless of when such program or activity or any portion thereof was or is initially covered by any contract, the Indian River County Housing Authority shall comply with all requirements imposed by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Public Law 88-352, 78 Stat. 241; the regulations of the Department of Housing and Urban Development issued thereunder, 24 CFR, Subtitle A, Part 1; and the requirements of said Department thereunder. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: kF Chairman ATTEST: , �_ �s — (� C 1 e-rk HUD -52481 COOPERATION AGREEMENT This Agreement entered into this 24th day of April 1980, by and between Indian River CountX Housing Authority (herein called the "Local Authority" and Indian River County (herein called the "County", witnesseth: In consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto do agree as follows: 1. Whenever used in this Agreement: (a) The term "Project" shall mean any low -rent housing hereafter developed or acquired by the Local Authority with financial assistance of the United States of America acting through the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (herein called the "Government"); excluding, however, any low -rent housing project covered by any contract for loans and annual contributions entered into between the Local Authority and the Government, or its predecessor agencies, prior to the date of this Agreement. (b) The term "Taxing Body" shall mean the State or any political subdivision or taxing unit thereof in which a Project is situated and which would have authority to assess or levy real or personal property taxes or to certify such taxes to a taxing body or public officer to be levied for its use and benefit with respect to a Project if it were not exempt from taxation. (c) The term "Shelter Rent" shall mean the total of all charges to all tenants of a Project for dwelling rents and nondwelling rents (excluding all other income of such Project), less the cost to the Local Authority of all dwelling and nondwelling utilities. (d) The term "Slum" shall mean any area where dwellings predominate which, by reason of dilapidation, overcrowding, faulty arrangement or design, lack of ventilation, light or sanitation facilities, or any combination of these factors, are detrimental to safety, health, or morals. 2. The Local Authority shall endeavor (a) to secure a contract or contracts with the Government for loans and annual contributions covering one or more Projects comprising approximately 116 units of low -rent housing and (b) to develop or acquire and administer such Project or Projects, each of which shall be located within the corporate limits of the County. The obligations of the parties hereto shall apply to each such Project. 3. (a) Under the constitution and statutes of the State of Florida , all Projects are exempt from all real and personal property taxes and special assessments levied or impos-ed by any -Taxing Body. With respect to any Project, so long as either (i) such Project is owned by a public body or governmental agency and is used for low -rent housing purposes, or (ii) any contract between the Local Authority and the Government for loans or annual contributions, or both, in connection with such Project remains in force and effect, or (iii) any bonds issued in connection with such Project or any monies due to the Government in connection with such Project remain unpaid, whichever period is the longest, the County agrees that it will not levy or impose any real or personal property taxes or special assessments upon such Project or upon the Local Authority with respect thereto. During such period, the Local Authority shall make annual payments (herein called "Payments in Lieu of Taxes") in lieu of such taxes and special assessments and IPPR 2 3 0 ea c 41, �PA� 01 s 3j R11 BOOK . , 43. PARE 402 Cooperation Agreement Page 2 in payment for the Public services and facilities furnished from time to time without other cost or charge for or with respect to such Project. (b) Each such annual Payment in Lieu of Taxes shall be made at the time when real property taxes on such Project would be paid if it were subject to taxation, and shall be in an amount equal to either (i) ten percent (10%) of the Shelter Rent actually collected but in no event to exceed ten percent (10%) of the Shelter Rent charged by the Local Authority in respect to such Project during the 12 months' period ending September 30 before such payment is made or (ii) the amount permitted to be paid by applicable State law in effect on the date such payment is made, whichever amount is the lower. fc) The County shall distribute the Payments in Lieu of Taxes among the Taxing Bodies in the proportion which the real property taxes which would have been paid to each Taxing Body for such year if the Project were not exempt from taxation bears to the total real property taxes which would have been paid to all of the Taxing Bodies for such year if the Project were not exempt from taxation; Provided, however, That no payment for any year shall be made to any Tax nBody in excess of the amount of the real property taxes which would have been paid to such Taxing Body for such year if the Project were not exempt from taxation. (d) Upon failure of the Local Authority to make any Payment in Lieu of Taxes, no lien against any Project or assets of the Local Authority shall attach, nor shall any interest or penalties accrue or attach on account thereof. 4. The County agrees that, subsequent to the date of initiation (as defined in the United States Housing Act of 1937) of each Project and within five years after the completion thereof, or such further period as may be approved by the Government there has been or will be elimination, as certified by the County, by demolition, condemnation, effective closing, or compulsory repair or improvement, of unsafe or insantiary dwelling units situated in the locality or metropolitan area in which such Project is located, substantially equal in number to the number of -newly constructed dwelling units provided by such Project; Provided, That, where more than one family is living in an unsafe or insantiary dwelling unit, the elimination of such unit shall count as the elimination of units equal to the number of families accommodated therein; and Provided, further, That this paragraph 4 shall not apply in the case of (i) any Project developed on the site of a Slum cleared subsequent to July 15, 1949, and that the dwelling units eliminated by the clearance of the site of such Project shall not be counted as elimination for any other Project or any other low -rent housing project, or (ii) any Project located in a rural nonfarm or Indian area. 5. During the period commencing with the date of the acquisition of any part of the site or sites of any Project and continuing so long as either (i) such Project is owned by a public body or governmental agency and is used for low -rent housing purposes, or (ii) any contract between the Local Authority and the Government for loans or annual contributions, or both, in connection with such Project remains in force and effect, or (iii) any bonds issued in connection with such Project or any monies due to the Government in connection with such Project remain unpaid, whichever period is the longest, the County without cost or charge to the Local Authority or.the tenants of such Project (other than the Payments in Lieu of Taxes) shall: (a) Furnish or cause to be furnished to the Local Authority and the tenants of such Project public services and facilities of the same character and to the same extent as are furnished from time to time without cost or charge to other dwellings and inhabitants in the County; _ M M ration Agreement MP3 (b) Vacate such streets, roads, and alleys within the area of such Project as may be necessary in the development thereof, and convey without charge to the Local Authority such interest as the County may have in such vacated areas; and, in so far as it is lawfully able to do so without cost or expense to the Local Authority or to the County, cause to be removed from such vacated areas, in so far as it may be necessary, all public or private utility lines and equipment; (c) Accept grants of easements necessary for the development of such Project; and (d) Cooperate with the Local Authority by such other lawful action or ways as the County and the Local Authority may find necessary in connection with the development and administration of such Project. 6. In respect to any Project the County further agrees that within a reasonable time after receipt of a written request therefor from the Local Authority: (a) It will accept the dedication of all interior streets, roads, alleys, and adjacent sidewalks within the area of such Project, together with all storm and sanitary sewer mains in such dedicated areas, after the Local Authority, at its own expense, has completed the grading, improvement, paving, and installation thereof in accordance with specifications acceptable to the County; (b) It will accept necessary dedications of land for, and will grade, improve, pave, and provide -sidewalks for, all streets bounding such Project or necessary to provide adequate access thereto (in consideration whereof the Local Authority shall pay to the County such amount as would be assessed against the Project site for such work if such site were privately owned); and (c) It will provide, or cause to be provided, water mains, and storm and sanitary sewer mains, leading to such Project and serving the bounding streets thereof (in consideration whereof the Local Authority shall pay to the County such amount as would be assessed against the Project site for such work if such site were privately owned). 7. If by reason of the County's failure or refusal to furnish or cause to be furnished any public services or facilities which it has agreed hereunder to furnish or to cause to be furnished to the Local Authority or to the tenants of any Project, the Local Authority incurs any expense to obtain such services or facilities then the Local Authority may deduct the amount of such expense from any Payments in Lieu of Taxes due or to become due to the County in respect to any Project or any other low -rent housing projects owned or operated by the Local Authority. 8. No Cooperation Agreement heretofore entered into between -the County and the Local Authority shall be construed to apply to any Project covered by this Agreement. 9. No member of the governing body of the County or any other public official of the County who exercises any responsibilities or functions with respect to any Project during his tenure or*for one year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in any Project or any property included or planned to be included in any Project, or any contracts in connection with such Projects or property. If any such governing body member or such other public official of the County involuntarily acquires or had acquired prior to the beginning of his tenure any such interest, he shall immediately disclose such interest to the Local Authority. APR 2 31980 Boas 43 pA 403' Cooperation Agreement Page 4 8008 43 PAA04 10. So long as any contract between the Local Authority and the Government for loans (including preliminary loans) or,annual contributions, or both, in connection with any Project remains in force and effect, or so long as any bonds issued in connection with any Project or any monies due to the Government in connection with any Project remain unpaid, this Agreement shall not be abrogated, changed, modified without the consent of the Government. The privileges and obligations of the County hereunder shall remain in full force and effect with respect to each Project so long as the beneficial title to such Project is held by the Local Authority or by any other public body or governmental agency, including the Government, authorized by law to engage in the development or administration of low -rent housing projects. If at any time the beneficial title to, or possession of, any Project is held by such other public body or governmental agency, including~the Government, the provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of and may be enforced by, such other public body or governmental agency, including the Government. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the County and the Local Authority have respectively signed this Agreement and caused their seals to be affixed and attested as fo the day and year first above written. (SEAL) INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 7 BY: r ATTEST: Chairman/ Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida Clerk ATTEST: J7, SE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY BY: ChalrloAn �zy-1,�� _ M M THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THEREUPON RECESSED AND RECONVENED AS THE DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS OF THE FORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT. 151 Sam 4