HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/18/1981Wednesday, November 18, 1931
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, met in Regular Session at the City Hall Council Chambers,
1053 20th Place, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, November 18,
1981, at 8:30 o'clock A.M. Present were William C. Wodtke, Jr.,
Vice Chairman; Dick Bird;and Don C. Scurlock, Jr.; Alfred Grover
Fletcher was expected to arrive shortly as he was experiencing
car trouble. Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman, was out of town. Also
present were Neil A. Nelson, County Administrator; L. S. "Tommy"
Thomas, Intergovernmental- Coordinator; George G. Collins, Jr.,
Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; Jeffrey K. -Barton,
Finance Director; Dan Fleischman, Bailiff; and Janice Caldwell
and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerks.
Vice Chairman Wodtke called the meeting to order.
Commissioner Bird led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag,
and Reverend Fred McClellan, First Presbyterian Church, gave the
invocation.
Vice Chairman Wodtke deferred the addition to the agenda
and approval of the Minutes until Commissioner Fletcher was present.
CLERK TO THE BOARD
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis-
sioner Bird, Commissioner Fletcher being temporarily absent, the
Board approved the Budget Amendment for Unemployment Compensation,
as follows:
NOV 181981
600K 43 PA.�7 132
NOV 181981 BOOK 48 PAI -,F-133
ACCOiJIW TITLE
Unemployment Comp.
Unempla�miesnt Camp.
Unemplayment Camp.
Unemployment Comp.
Unemployment Comp.
Unemployment Ccmp.
Reserve for Cont.
Reserve for Cont.
Reserve for Cont.
Reserve for Cont.
ACCCUN17 NUMBER
IBER
001-300-512-12.15
004-209-534-12.15
001-210-572-12.15
004-214-541-12.15
108-222-534-12.15
411-217-534-12.15
001-199-513-99.91
004-199-513-99.91
411-199-534-99.91
108-222-564-99.91
INCREASE
$ 315
77
820
365
77
735
-DECREASE
$1,135
442
735
77
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis-
sioner Bird, Commissioner Fletcher being temporarily absent, the
Board approved the.State Witness Payroll, County Court, Term ending
October 26, 1981, in the amount of $128.97.
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner
Bird, Commissioner Fletcher being temporarily absent, the Board
approved the Vice Chairman's signature for the following deputies
appointed by Sheriff Dobeck:
Jimmy C. Fielding -Laurence A. Cline
Frank Puckett Alvis D. Liford
Kenneth J. Grogan Freddie C. Morton
Ben Eugene Hope
The following reports were received and placed on file in
the Office of the Clerk:
Traffic Violation Fines by Name - October 31, 1981
Traffic Violation Bureau - Special Trust Fund,
October, 1981 - $33,441.78
Report of Juveniles in Jail - September, 1981
CONSENT AGENDA
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis-
sioner Bird, Commissioner Fletcher being temporarily absent, the
Board accepted the Preliminary Engineering Drainage Study, Phase III,
Final Report for the City of Vero Beach and Indian River County,
Florida, prepared by Reynolds, Smith and Hills - October, 1981.
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner
._
Bird, Commissioner Fletcher being temporarily absent, the Board
approved the following applications to carry a concealed weapon for:
Frank T. Richardson.
Sylvester S. Strang'
Pierce R. Ennessy
Harold A. Whitaker
_-Vernon Heino Luhr
On motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis-
sioner Bird, Commissioner Fletcher being temporarily absent, the
Board approved the renewal application to carry a concealed weapon
for Myron J. Madsen, Jr.
RESIGNATION OF WILLIAM G. GRIZZELL
NOV 181981
L_
The Board next discussed the following letter:
book 43. uu 1.14
NOV 181981
WILLIAM G GRIZZELL
735 BROADWAY
VERO BEACH, FLA.
32960
:ter. Pat Lyons, Chairman
Indian River County Commissioners
2145 - 14th Avenue,
Vero Beach, Fla. 32960
Dear r. Lyons
Bali( 48 PAc 35
Nov. 3rd, 1981
I hereby submit my resignation as a member of the
Indian 1liver County Beard of coning -djustment, effect-
tive Jan. lst, 1982. I will have served five years on
this Board and' -I am grateful to have had the privilege
to serve with the fine and dedicated members of this
Board during my terms.
I plan to do some traveling in the next year and
probably would not be available to at -',end many meetings.
Therefore I feel it would be unfair to the Board and
its members to continue under such conditions.
Thanks again for the Drivilege to do something
to help Incian "fiver '�cunty government serve its people.
JS;incerely,
- Motion was made -by Commissioner Bird, seconded by
Commissioner Scurlock, that the Board accept Mr. Grizzell's re-
signation, with regrets, and instruct the County Attorney to prepare
a resolution effective January 1, 1982.
The Vice Chairman called for the question. It was voted
on and carried 3 to 0, with Commissioner Fletcher being absent.
Commissioner Fletcher arrived at the meeting at 9:05 A.M.
WAVE HEIGHT ANALYSIS - FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS
The Board reviewed the following memorandum from the
County Administrator:
TO: Honorable Board of County DATE: November 10, 1981 FILE:
Comm, issioners
;.�0tf 1n8i �J1 SUBJECT: WAVE HEIGHT ANALYSIS & NEW FIRMS
Nclk��9qeZ tVI
FROM. Neil Nelson RE;: ERENCES:
County Administrator
It is recor-mended that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the County Commission..
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS: --
The purpose of the titirave Height Analysis is to revise the Flood Insurance
Rate Maps (FIK1) in the -unincorporated -areas of Indian River County to
include the effects of wave action associated with flooding from the
Atlantic Ocean at the open coast and at Indian River and Sebastian
Creek.
Previously, FIRI•Is were produced showing only the stillwater storm -
surge elevations due to the lack of a suitable and generally applicable
methodology for estimating the wave crest elevations associated with
storm surges. These stillwater elevations were subsequently stipulated
in community flood plain management ordinances as the minimum elevation
of the first floor of new construction. Co-"munities and individuals
had to consider the additional hazards of velocity waters and wave
action on an ad hoc basis. Because there has been a pronounced
tendency for buildings .to be constructed only to meet minimum standards,
without consideration of the additional hazard due to wave height,
increasing numbers of people could unknowingly be accepting a high
degree of flood -related personal and property risk in coastal areas
subject to wave action. Therefore, the Federal Emergency Management
Agency has pursued the development of a suitable methodology for esti-
mating the wave crest elevations associated with storm surges. The
recent development of such a methodology by the National Academy of
Sciences has led to the adoption of wave crest elevations for use as
the base flood elevations in coastal communities.
The stillwater elevations developed
used as the starting elevations for
herein.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
for these previous studies were
the wave height analysis presented
The data in the Wave Height Analysis report is authoritative for the
purposes of the National Flood Insurance Program and data presented
in that report supersede all previous flood elevation determinations.
Wave heights were computed along transects which were located along
the coastline as shown in Figure l on the report. Each transect was
taken perpendicular to the shoreline and extended to the inland limit
of tidal flooding. Along each transect, wave heights and elevation=
were computed considering the combined effects of charges in g-
1 -cu -elevation, vegetation, and physical features. The stillwater ele-
for the 100 -year flood were used as the starting elevations for t.
computations. Wave heights were calculated to the nearest 0.1 fooar,
and wave elevations were determined at whole -foot increments along
the transects. The location of wave heights of approximately 6 fee=,
NOV 181981
5
t'�GK 3 F;, r7136
NOV 181981
BOOK 43 PAPE 13-7,
with wave crest elevations of 12 feet, will be encountered at the
Atlantic Ocean open coast shoreline during a 100 -year storm tide.
These waves are completely dissipated, and the 100 -year storm surge
is stopped at the seaward end of the primary coastal dune by rising
ground elevations. No shore protection structures are located within
the 100 -year Atlantic coastal flood plain in Indian River County.
Wave heights in the Indian River vary in relation to the extent of
open water and the stillwater elevations calculated in the various
areas. These waves are dissipated primarily on the western shore of
Indian River by a combination of rising ground elevations and ob-
structions in the flood plain such as buildings and vegetation. In
some cases, islands in Indian River with sufficient ground elevation
and obstruction characteristics can dissipate wave energy. Areas
along the western shore of Indian River which have been bulk -headed
are provided protection from waves by depth -limitation when the bulk-
heads are built to sufficient elevations. These structures are ex-
pected to remain intact during a 100 -year storm tide.
After flood insurance zones were established for the study area, the
FIRM for Indian River County was revised to incorpora-te the new zone
information. This.map contains the official delineation of flood
insurance zones and base flood elevations.
In preparing the revised FIRM, updated topographic information was
used to revise the Atlantic coastline and some zone boundaries in
areas not affected by the wave height analysis. Corporate limits and
cultural features were revised using current county and co:.,nunity
maps.
The assignment of proper actuarial insurances rates requires that
frequency and depth of flooding be estimated as accurately as possible.
Because waves can add considerably to expected flood depths, it is
important that insurance rates consider this additional hazard.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency has developed a process to
transform the data from this study into flood insurance criteria.
This process includes the determination of Flood Hazard Factors
and the designation of flood insurance zones and rates.
RECO?247-Z"DATIONS :
It is recommended that Ind--i-an River -County Ordinance 78-25 refer_J.-_,
to building construction under the Federal Flood Insurance Program
be amended by:
1) Adopting the revised flood
Emergency Management Agency
tions for purposes of flood
maps, provided by Federal
, as the base flood eleva-
plain management.
2) Adjusting the ordinance content where applicable so
that it is consistent Faith wave height criteria in
the revised FIRM.
It is further recommended that the Board of County Commissioners
hold a public hearing on December 16th , 1981, to adopt a flood pro-
tection ordinance amending Ordinance 78-25.
Planning Director Rever reviewed the fact that new
boundaries have been defined. He stated he would like to present
a new ordinance at the December 16th meeting as the present one
was too general. Mr. Rever felt the standards should be modified
to make the ordinance more specific.
Lengthy discussion followed about the flood maps. It
was determined that this matter should have further in-depth study
before the maps could be accepted by the Board.
Motion was made by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by
Commissioner Bird, that the Planning Director be authorized to
contact the appropriate agency, move ahead with revising the flood
map and drafting the proposed ordinance, :and advertise for a public
hearing.
Discussion ensued about a time limitation for the adoption
of the ordinance - this will be checked by the Planning Director.
Commissioner Fletcher inquired if the position of persons
seeking insurance would be changed, under this federal program, if
the County authorities did not adopt the flood maps.
Attorney Collins responded affirmatively. He felt this
was a very important matter and hoped the Board would soon be able
to make its decision.
Commissioner Scurlock added to his Motion that the
Chairman be authorized to make contact with the proper authorities
informing them that the County is moving ahead with the flood
insurance matter.
Commissioner Bird seconded the addition.
The Vice Chairman called for the question. It was voted
on and carried unanimously.
ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
Attorney Collins requested adding an item regarding the
Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds (Junior) for the Administration
Building, as there is to be a closing in Orlando on November 24th, and
various certificates must be signed.
Discussion followed.
NOV 181981 3 Pt. E1,38
7
NOV 181981
Book 48 PAPF- 139
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved having a Special Meeting
on November 19, 1981 at 7:30 o'clock A.M. in the County Courtroom
regarding the Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds (Junior) for the
Administration Building.
Vice Chairman Wodtke requested adding a report regarding
the Council on Aging.
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously agreed to add the emergency item
on the agenda regarding Council on Aging.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Vice Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 30,
1981.
On Motion by Commissioner Bird, seconded by Commissioner
Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved the Minutes of the Regular
Meeting of September 30, 1981, as written.
The Vice Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of October 1, 1981.
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner
Fletcher, the Board unanimously approved the Minutes of the Special
Meeting of October 1, 1981; as written...
The Vice Chairman asked i.f.there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Special "Meeting of October 5, 1981.
On Motion by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Commissioner
Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved the Minutes of the Special
Meeting of October 5, 1981, as written.
The Vice Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 7, 1981.
Commissioner Scurlock referred to page 29, line 30, and
requested that $47.00 be changed to $147.00.
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner
Bird, the Board unanimously approved the Minutes of the Regular 'Meeting
of October 7, 1981, as amended.
L�
The Vice Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of October 15,
1981.
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis-
sioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously approved the Minutes of
the Special Meeting of October 15, 1981, as written.
ST. FRANCIS MANOR LEASE
Frank Zorc approached the Board to discuss the lease
that St. Francis Manor has %.i.th the County, which is for $1,000 a
year, for 99 years. Mr.. . Zorc then gave the background of the Manor.
The County advertised to lease the subject property for non-profit
usage, and St. Francis Manor submitted their bid, which was the
only one received. St. Francis Manor is the only such project in
existence in the area and has been for the past ten years. The
Manor serves 110 people, of 15 different denominations, and the
average age factor is 80 years old. Mr. Zorc continued that the
concept was to build the Manor without any federal funds, using
only local means. He then asked the Board to consider the record
of St. Francis Manor and requested that their lease be lowered to
$1 a year. Mr. Zorc then spoke of the meal program where their
residents can get one hot meal a day for $1.25, which the Manor
has to subsidize out of their general fund. There are 40 to 45
people a day participating in the meal program, and they could
allocate the savings on the lease to subsidize this meal program.
Commissioner Bird inquired what the total operating
expense was for the past year.
Mr. Zorc responded that it was about 98% of the income
factor. He added that they have a residue of about 20 for major
repairs; they are on a break-even basis.
N O V 181991
ar,;� P4CF140`
NOV 181981 FAc,44
Vice Chairman Wodtke noted that they had not paid their
$1,000 on the lease, which was due on September 1, 1981. He stated
that he was proud of what they have been able to accomplish at
St. Francis Manor.
Air. Zorc reported that they were cooperating in the
County's Section 8 rent subsidy program, with approximately 10 or 12
people participating. He reiterated that the Manor was providing
apartments to help the County's program work.
Lengthy discussion ensued regarding the lease. It was
determined that insurance coverage should be checked on this lease,
as well as others the County may have, and to request an operating
statement from St. Francis Manor.
Motion was made by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by
Commissioner Scurlock, that the lease.with St. Francis Manor be
reduced to $1.00 a year contingent upon the meal program remaining
in effect; if it is not in effect, then 60 days thereafter, the lease
would return to $1,000 annually.
Vice Chairman Wodtke stated that he would vote against the
Motion as originally it was drawn up by their attorney*.-- He added
that he was in no way opposed to what St. Francis Manor was doing
for housing the elderly. -Vice Chairman Wodtke stated that the $1,000
a year was not intended to reimburse -the County for the land, over a
period of 99 years; the fact is that -St. Francis :Manor chose to pay
$1,000 for 99 years.
Vice Chairman Wodtke called for the question. It was voted
on with a vote of 2 to 2, with Commissioner Bird and Vice Chairman
WIodtke voting in opposition. The Motion failed for lack of a majority.
SENIOR CITIZEN CENTER
The Board next reviewed the following correspondence
from Frank Zorc:
n
I
NOV 181981
F-1ZA YK L. Z 0R
REAL ESTATE CENTER
November 2, 1981
Indian Ri er Co y Commission
Mr, Patr ck ns Chairman and Commission
Vero Beach,Florida
Gentlemen: RE: Senior Citizen Center
Please consider my feelings on the above matter:
wK 48 PAGE.14 .
140016th Street at 14th Avenue
Vero Beach, Florida 3960
Telephone: (305)X52-4646
1305) 567-3122
I think the county should explore being of assistance in helping
the Council on Aging to acquire a Center.
A government grant may be the desirable means of financing, and
should be explored.
If a grant, or any other type of financing is obtained, bidding
to furnish such a facility whether new or existing should be
offered to any interested party.
I suggest that the commission consider the possibility of using
a portion of the existing county jail property and buildings, in
connection with the requests of St. Francis Manor for the jail
properties considerations when phased out. The combination of a
Senior Citizen Center adjacent to the Manor project, just could be
an ideal situation. Worth considering anyway, particularily now
that the new jail project will be getting more priority action,
NOTE: The Manor has requested discussion on,this.on.--Nov. 18, 1981.
REALTOR"
cc Commissioners
Council on Aging Director
Media
St. Francis Manor Directors
"We will appreciate the npportunity to help you in any real estate need!",
Developer of "Citrus Bowl Plaza" — Exclusive Agents for New Homes
M- im s
tomX.-
0
o„
M
() �%,! / '1a ; ifZV,� , % -Si�if�����✓✓ {�/ _ � gra•
'R/VA [E N _T
}
Of Vero Beach, Inc.
February 3, 1981
Indian River Countv Commission
Mr. Pat Lyons, Chairman
2145 14th Ave.
Vero Beach, Florida
Dear Mr. Lyons:
1750 20TH AVENUE
P.O. BOX 6250
VERO BEACH. FLOP'_
(305) 562-8575
In recent weeks there has been publicity about the feelings
of nersons.regarding consideration of building a new county
jail at a new site and "leaving the rundown 18 -year old jail
behind"'.
Of course I realize you will not laterally just leave the pre-
sent facility behind, but a use or disposition will also come
into the picture.
.Fully realizing that there is no time table to these consider-
ations, and it may not happen in years, I would like to be on
record of expressing the following.
On behalf of the board of directors of St. Francis Manor,
we request consideration of obtaining the site, if, and when-
ever, it is phased out of use as a jail and or sheriff depart-
ment location.
The Manor site is immediately adjacent, connected to the west,
directly in line. We are now in process of an expansion program
adding all the additional apartments our site can accommodate.
Although we have no specific plans, one of our hopes or dreams
has been to someday include a close by facility to care for
elderly residents who gradually, become unable to care for them-
selves -(a requirement for residency at the Manor),.and are of
course forced into nursing care facilities. We feel it would be
a tremendous psvcological advantage, with many benefits, if some
of these persons "in-between" good health and total convales-
cence could move "next door" into a semi -nursing care facility,
and continue living at their home, St. Francis Manor, for
several more years in most cases.
Thanking you in advance for any considerations you are able
to -give us.
Respectfully,
F.rank� L . " Zorc
President
FLZ:lh
BOOK 43 PArF x.42
NOV 181981 11
I
� � r
Mr. Zorc commented that they now have 98 apartments at
St. Francis Manor, and their site plan is complete. In thinking
of possibilities for the future, Mr. Zorc stated that they have an
interest in the old jail property whenever the County decides to
phase it out. He suggested that the County might think of using
grant money as a means of financing a facility for senior citizens.
Mr. Zorc felt this location would be ideal for a senior citizen
i -
center, and the remainder of land could be purchased or leased to
the Manor for more apartments. Mr. Zorc discussed the possibility
of renovating the old jail to make it into a convalescent home,
instead of their residents having to go -into a nursing home when
they are no longer ambulatory.
Lengthy discussion followed about the time frame - the
final application must be completed in 30 days with the Council on
Aging, and grant funds must be used by December 31st of this year.
It was determined that there was little time to consider using
those funds.
Vice Chairman Wodtke suggested that since Mr. Zorc's letter
of February 3, 1981 is part of the record, when the jail property
becomes available, St. Francis Manor then would be under consideration
as a prime prospect for utilization of the old jail building.
Commissioner Bird commented that he would like to see a
senior citizens center, but the timing now is bad, with the 30 day
deadline. He did not think the County could meet it.
Mr. Zorc suggested the Board explore the possibility
of contacting the proper agencies to determine if they would consider
a contract for a building that would not be phased out for possibly
three years.
Vice Chairman Wodtke commented that he would talk to the
Council on Aging regarding this matter.
NOV 181981
13
BOOK 43 PAv144
N 0 V 181981
x 48 e
1
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT - PROPOSED AGREEMENT RE STREET LIGHTS
The Board then reviewed the following material:
October 29, 1981
Mr. Neil Nelson
Indian River County Administrator
2345 14th Avenue
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Dear Mr. Nelson:
BOX 460. FT. PIERCE, FLORIDA 3;454
FLORI-_-4 PO'i.:4i
& UGHT COV,:. :%Y
Y
J
Mr. Neil Nelson
Indian River County Administrator
2345 14th Avenue
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Dear Mr. Nelson:
BOX 460. FT. PIERCE, FLORIDA 3;454
During phone conversations with Messrs. Hamilton and Davis, we understood
that the Commission has requested separate street lighting agreements
for Lighting Districts, specifically Laurelwood Subdivision.
The intent of these agreements is to form a contract binding FPL to a
governmental body such as a city or county. We are not permitted to
form these contracts with sub -groups or individuals on the same basis as
with a city or county because of differing financial requirements. Other
than with a governmental body, we are required to collect the entire cost
of material and construction up front and then refund the payment over a
ten-year period. As you can see, counties and cities have special
privileges for free installation of fighting facilities that should not
be disrupted in Indian River County.
Would you please ask the Commission to reconsider their request? I can
meet with you to discuss the problem, if you wish. We're not quite sure
why the Commission requested the change, but we certainly _�.ould like to
satisfy their requirements, if possible.
HRR: slt
EW4
Sincerely yours,
d ,
H. R. Reiner
FLORI-_-4 PO'i.:4i
& UGHT COV,:. :%Y
During phone conversations with Messrs. Hamilton and Davis, we understood
that the Commission has requested separate street lighting agreements
for Lighting Districts, specifically Laurelwood Subdivision.
The intent of these agreements is to form a contract binding FPL to a
governmental body such as a city or county. We are not permitted to
form these contracts with sub -groups or individuals on the same basis as
with a city or county because of differing financial requirements. Other
than with a governmental body, we are required to collect the entire cost
of material and construction up front and then refund the payment over a
ten-year period. As you can see, counties and cities have special
privileges for free installation of fighting facilities that should not
be disrupted in Indian River County.
Would you please ask the Commission to reconsider their request? I can
meet with you to discuss the problem, if you wish. We're not quite sure
why the Commission requested the change, but we certainly _�.ould like to
satisfy their requirements, if possible.
HRR: slt
EW4
Sincerely yours,
d ,
H. R. Reiner
BOX 460, FT. PI ERCE, F LORIDA 33454
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
November 6, 1981
Mr. J. Davis �� ;r•
Indian River County Engineer
2145 14th Avenue
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Re: Conservation Lighting Conversion Agreement
Dear Mr. Davis:
Regarding our phone conversation on November 5th, we are proposing
a revision to the lighting agreement which will be advantegeous to
the County. Please note that the revision consists of striking the
word "cut-off" from the Exhibit "D" copies. This change to the
contract will allow the County to select between the cut-off type
and other type fixtures recently intoduced.
We now have a new high pressure sodium vapor fixture that resembles
the open bottom mercury vapor unit that has been very successful over
the years and also a new refractorized cut-off type. Each type has
its own lighting characteristics, and the change to Exhibit "D" will
allow the selection of the proper type for the application at hand.
In the larger sizes of 22,000 and 50,000 lumens, we've also retained
the standard cobra head model converted to high pressure sodium vapor.
These newer lights will have the characteristic "glow" effect associated
with older street lights, whereas the cut-off fixture focuses all light
directly downward (no "glow" effect).
The rates for different fixtures of the same lumen size are identical.
We expect the rates to stay the same, but, of course, can't guarantee
that they will. With the variety of fixtures now available, we though
it would be a good idea to invite two or three County officials who
are responsible for street light selection to our Miami office for a
first-hand night demonstration of the types available. We feel that
this knowledge is necessary for our lighting customers in order for
them to select the proper units.
Our apologies for not having this information earlier, but the new
styles were just released for our use last week.
Please strike the words "cut-off" on Exhibit "D", initial the changes,
and return the copies. We will then return your copy with our initials.
Let us know if there are any questions.
Sincerely yours,
H. R. Reiner, P.E.
Novi 8 1981 A00K 4P;icF 146
15
N O V 181981
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: November 6, 1981
Board of County Commissioners
am 48 enr-147
FILE:
SUBJECT: Agreement proposed by Florida Power
and Light to Convert Existing Mercury
Vapor Street Lights to Energy Efficient
High Pressure Sodium
FROM: Neil A. Nelson, REFERENCES: 1) H.R. Reiner to Neil Nelson,
County Administrator County Administrator dated Oct.29,198
2) Neil Nelson to Board of County
gate d—.ept . 1, 1981
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
During the September 30, 1981 meeting of the Board of County Commissioners,
the above subject agreement was discussed. At that time, the following questions
were presented:
1) Commissioner Fletcher had questions about the cost and efficiency of
the new lights.
2) Attorney Collins questioned the applicability of the agreement to
cover the Laureli•,-ood and Rockridge Street Lighting District.
ALTEP ATIVES AND ANALYSIS
In discussing these items with Dir. H.R. Reiner of FPL, he states that the
intent of the agreement is to form one contract with the County binding FPL to a
governmental body such as a County or City. Mr. Reiner claims that FPL is not
permitted to form these contracts with street lighting districts. At the advice
of the County Attorney and as agreed by Mr. Reiner of FPL, if the agreement is
executed between "Indian River County on behalf of itself and the effected
Municipal Service Street Light Districts" and FPL, this matter -can be resolved.
The Direct Cost savings. to the County and Laurelwood Street Lighting
District is:
North Countv
Savings
South County
Savings
Laurelwood
Savings
Total
Savings
_ $912.00 per year
.363.448 per year
266.40 Per year
$15.11.88 per year
One agreement will serve all areas as proposed. The Rockridge District
is serviced by the.City of Vero -Beach and does not apply.
Mr. Reiner also requests that-"F-Yhibit D" (Replacement Proposal) be
revised to delete the word "cut-off" beneath the Proposed Replacement (lumens -
type) column to allow the flexibility of using new products now on the market
that are superior to the "cut-off" lunimaire.
The alternatives considered are as follows:
Alternative # 1
Approve the Chairman executing the agreement between "Indian River
County -on behalf of itself and the effected Municipal Service Street LiRt
Districts". The impact approvin, this alternative would have includes a�
savings of $1,215.48 per Near for the County and $266.40 per year for
the Laurelwood Street Lighting District. The Rockridge Street Lighting
District is serviced by the City of Fero Beach, not FPL.
11
Alternative # 2
Deny approval of the agreement. FPL has indicated that they can
proceed to change the luminaires regardless of the County denying the
agreement. The PSC has mandated this conversion.
RECONMENDATIO\NS AND FUNDING
Based upon correspondence with County staff and FPL, it is recommended
that "Indian River County on behalf of itself and the effected Municipal Service
Street Light Districts" approve and execute,_the Street Light Conversion Agreement
with the mord "cut-off" being deleted prom "Exhibit D" (Replacement Proposal)
for each fixture type.
Funding considerations only apply to a savings being realized by the County.
Discussion followed.
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis-
sioner Pletcher, the Board unanimously authorized the Administrator
and Attorney to review the Agreement proposed by Florida Power &
Light to Convert Existing Mercury Vapor Street Lights to Energy
Efficient High Pressure Sodium, as recommended,by the Administrator
in his memorandum of November 6, 1981, and authorized the signature
of the Chairman.
The Agreement will be made a part of the Minutes when
received.
17
BOOK , 8PE- US
I
N 0 V 181981 booK 48 pArr U
ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - CASH FLOW PROGRAM
The Board reviewed the following material from the
County Administrator:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: November 6, 1981 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Indian River County Road Improvement
Program - Cash Flow Program as
funded by the Transportation Trust
Fund.
FROM: Neil A. Nelson REFERENCES:
County Administrator
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The Department of Public Works has prepared a preliminary flow diagram for
the Transportation Trust Fund (80`' of 5th and 6th cent Gas Tax). Only 2
projects have been proposed for funding at this time. These projects are:
1. 8th Street, from U.S. 1, to 6th Avenue. Signalization has been previously
approved by the Board for this intersection, however, the original approval
did not include the Eastern portion of 8th Street. Once signalization
design is updated, it will be added to the 8th Street construction cost.
Design is currently proceeding and the right-of-way appraisal is almost
complete.
2. Storm Grove Road right-of-way. This project was considered by the Board
during the October 21, 1981, meeting and right-of-way aquisition has been
in the works for 2 years or so. It is anticipated that no further funds
will be expended on this project at this time.
The engineering fees for Indian River Boulevard are not included as project
costs. On December 12, 1980, the Board established the Indian River Boulevard
project fund, No. 303-214-541-33.13, and deposited $300,000 into the account.
Various withdrawals since that time have been made against the account and the
current balance is $174,451.42. Therefore, S125,548.58 has been expended. Also,
the design engineers have been authorized to complete engineering at a cost of
$11,620. Thus, $137,168.58 has'been obligated to date.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The projects included on the cash flow sheet have been approved by the Board.
Also, the engineering and related costs for the Indian River Boulevard Extension may
be reimbursed to the County from the Transportation Trust Fund. The alternatives
presented to the Board are as follows:
Alternative1:
Approve the present Road Imaroven;ent Program cash flow chart as presented at
this time. Once all costs for Indian River Boulevard are accounted for as
previously approved by the Board, the costs will be applied to the Transportation
Trust Fund and added to this chart, thus reimbursement to the County's fund
will be programmed in. Also, once signalization.costs are defined, they will
be added to, the 8th Street project. Periodically, this program will be revised
and presented to the Board for approval. The Transportation Planning Committee
recommendations will be included in future ammendments, as directed by the
Board of County Commissioners.
Alternative #'2:
Approve the program without past Indian River Boulevard funding cost to be
added in the future and the previously approved costs for Indian River Boulevard
remain from account No. 303-214-541-33.13.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING -
It is recommended that alternative No. 1 be. approved and that action be taken to
have the Transportation Trust Fund money applied to the projects as stated.
trrc: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -CASH FLOW ,
, .,••+-+ ..• >..e •w
��. a Biu W. •. • —...r ......a.w.
CASH BALANCE --- - ---
- -
_ F15CAL YEAR ASI -1982
OCI' NBvTOEt:' JA.4 ftB ! 1fAR j -0AN M Y j
3254.3352345',3553.3;56.'.68936043707..&2
's3: _1 I_:1. Vii-
Jtl'1 j JIAAUG+$ V
I3903,.986407C
-a�1�-I-'
_ FISCAL YEAR
OC• TTS! BEC, JIW iE9 �N.:� AGA t41Y JJ.Y ._ll AU6 $EP
165.4276.436945034619 473748.564977*d00 52Z4,WU354
FISCA. YEAF.
OL?�1.CN S1EG YYI FEB ' NM ' At
5809y— rt-
- - - - -
N0TOR_ 0EL_C0UCMTIVN3; 80_(a 0 h aid 6th. CENT r=AS TAXA_
^;TErZEST EhFiNIN3S .Of_4_PER-M.ONTHI-_- __—__ _-___--_--4s
_ 3 s 5.1-53 S3 W
47, 48 SD 52' 53 52111t
-- I -
4-1
33 53 63
53 53 56, 5
53 5b 63 53 at 555 53r _63 _53 6 a3
_8_60 64 63 65 66 63 70 7 7 77
- -- -• I--{--- - - -
_
Lim
1
_Ftv'URES_1N TtiOUSANDS_SlF_DOLLARS -
- —
+
-�— —_
_�- STORM GROvE ROAp-
•
__ -- — 81A STREET - US t—i'0 61h AVE_
A."T CF w•Y— -
-�--
-1f —�
-�
if
-- — _ - -- ----_ - - - :-�
---
--1 T-
N O V 181981
19
L48 X50
F.. r.
A
BOOK PArl5l
Engineer Jim Davis explained the road improvement program.
Commissioner Scurlock felt the proper approach for the
Engineering Department would be to identify all roads on a list that
would qualify for funding and have the dollar figures inserted - the
Board needs to have the total picture.
County Administrator Nelson advised that they are now in
the process of compiling this information.
Intergovernmental Coordinator Thomas advised the Board
that they did authorize the issuance.of a tax anticipation note, and
that note is due on December 17, 1981. He added that the Board could
authorize withdrawal of the amount needed from the trust fund in
Tallahassee; or the note could be paid out of surplus funds, and
reauthorize the immediate reborrowing on an additional tax anticipa-
tion note. This is called "rolling it over."
Lengthy discussion ensued.
Mr. Thomas felt the Board should give an indication of
which route they want to use. He continued that if the Board does
not want to make a decision for using the trust funds to liquidate
their obligation of $300,000 plus interest, then they could authorize
the Finance Department to make arrangements with the bank to "roll
over" -for a period of one year.
Discussion then followed regarding the final bills that
will be coming in for Indian River Boulevard.
On Motion made by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized funds of
approximately $310,000, from the 5th and 6th Cent Gas Tax Trust
Fund in Tallahassee, be allocated to the 8th Street project, as
recommended by the Administrator's memorandum of November 6, 1981.
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized the Finance Department
and the County Attorney to proceed with negotiating the Tax Anticipa-
tion Roll -ever Note.
- _20 -
Discussion followed regarding the projects in the road
improvement program.
Motion was made by Commissioner Bird; seconded by Com-
missioner Scurlock, that the Board approve the concept of the
road improvement cash flow program, with the Board having final
approval of the projects.
Mr. Davis noted that since we do have more flexibility
for using the funds held in trust, it could be used for any
transportation advantaged project which might include the purchase
of equipment and maintenance.
Vice Chairman Wodtke felt a policy should be established
regarding utilization of these funds for road construction.
Vice Chairman Wodtke called -for the question.
on and carried unanimously.
CONSTRUCTION DETAIL FOR UNIMPROVED ROADS
The Board reviewed the following memorandum:
It was voted
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: October 30, 1981 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Neil A. Nelson,
County Administrator
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
SUBJECT: Construction Detail for Unimproved
Roads
REFERENCES:
At the October 21, 1981 meeting of the Board of County Commissioners, the
Public Works Department was asked to prepare a construction detail/specification
for an unimproved road with proper drainage. This detail has been prepared
and is attached for your approval.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
In analyzing the cost to construct this unimproved road section, it was
determined that an estimated cost of $7. to $10. per lineal foot is applicable.
The detail has been labeled as a "Maintenance Detail Only', as the County does
not have a formal standard for unimproved roads within its Standard Specifications.
RECO),NENDATIONS AND FUNDING
It is recommended that the Board approve this Unimproved Roadway Typical
Section for use on existing County roads and to apply as a standard in areas
such as Vero Lake Estates where roads are to be brought up to the standard.
of existing surrounding roads.
BOOK 48 my 59
NOV 181901
21
c.
CL
C:
4 MIN.
I X.
127 K' I A
7.5
7.5' "--lo'--
--,- "."/FT. ----
c
z)o, r,/w
0
8"MARL COM�C-TLED TO
9590 MAX. DENSITY
(AAS HTO T- 180)
FLORIDA Brz-Art,RUG VALUE
75 P I
EXISTING UNIMI—i"'ROVED -,cR.0,8,DWP-,Y
TYPICAL SECTION
MIAHNITENANCE DFTAIL ON! --Y
PlC�TE:
rrHER=
DRAINAGE DITCH EX15ITS IN R/W MAINTAIN
,i 8
ml�" WIC'E' STABILIZED GRASS FHOULDER-
C<
8"MARL COM�C-TLED TO
9590 MAX. DENSITY
(AAS HTO T- 180)
FLORIDA Brz-Art,RUG VALUE
75 P I
EXISTING UNIMI—i"'ROVED -,cR.0,8,DWP-,Y
TYPICAL SECTION
MIAHNITENANCE DFTAIL ON! --Y
PlC�TE:
rrHER=
DRAINAGE DITCH EX15ITS IN R/W MAINTAIN
,i 8
ml�" WIC'E' STABILIZED GRASS FHOULDER-
6' m 1.'a
COV E
12" C U LVER T
M I IN.
I
11
C<
;El
6' m 1.'a
COV E
12" C U LVER T
M I IN.
I
11
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved the recommendation
of the Administrator as noted in his memorandum of October 30, 1981.
PETITION PAVING PROGRAM REQUEST - LONE PALM PARK
The Board referred to the following paving requests.
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: November 3, 1981 FILE:
Board of Count}, Commissioners
1.
SUBJECT: Petition Paving Program
Request to Pave 13th Place
Lone Palm Park Unit 1 Subdivision
FROM: Neil A. Nelson, REFERENCES:
County Administrator
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Mr. Joseph A. Fedele, official representative of the residents of 13th
Place, has submitted a Petition to pave 13th Place in Lone Palm Park Unit 1
Subdivision. The road is approximately 520 lineal feet. The County Engineering -
Department has verified the signatures on the petition as the true oi�ners, and
the seven petitioners own 90% of the total front footage. Since this percentage
is greater than the 66.7% required by Ordinance 81-27,0a valid petition has been
received. The road is a dedicated road, maintained by the Count-. The right-
of-way width is 501.
ALTEMATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Since a valid petition has been verified, the paving of 13th Place via
the Petition Paving Program is justified. The proper procedure to follow is
as follows:
1) Approve the Engineering Department to assign a project number
to the project.
2) Proceed with the design and preparation of a preliminary assess-
ment roll.
3) Approve the scheduling of a public hearing as required by the
Special Assessment Ordinance.
REMMMENDATIONS k\D FUNDING
It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the
assignment of a project number to the 13th Place Petition Paving Project, that
the Engineering Division proceed with the design of paving and drainage improve-
ments, preparation of a prelimi.nar�, assessment roll, and authorize the scheduling
of a public hearing as required by the Special Assessment Ordinance.
Funding shall be approved at the Public Hearing once the Preliminary
Assessment Roll is prepared.
BOOK 48 PAGF 1 54
NOV 181981 23
I
NOV 181981
U09 PAv 155
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis-
sioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously approved the recommendation
of the Administrator, as noted in his memorandum of November 3, 1981.
PETITION PAVING PROGRAM REQUEST - GLENDALE LAKES
The Board referred to the following paving request:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: October 30, 1981 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Petition Paving Program
Request to Pave 48th avenue in
Glendale Lakes Subdivision
FROM: Neil A. Nelson, REFERENCES:
County Administrator
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS -
hIr. Warren J. Richard, official representative of the residents of 48th
Avenue, has submitted a Petition to pave 48th Avenue in Glendale Lakes Sub-
division. The road is approximately 1150 lineal feet. The County Engineering
Department has verified the signatures on the petition as the true owners,
and the 13 petitioners oi�m 71.25% of the total front footage. Since this
percentage is greater than the 66.7% required by Ordinance 81-27, a valid
petition has been received. The road is a dedicated road, maintained by
the County. The right-of-way .-1-idth varies from 65' to 351.
ALTEPUN0XIVES ANTI) ANALYSIS
Since a valid petition has been verified-, the paving of 48th Avenue via
the Petition Paving Program is justified. The proper procedure to follow is
as follows:
1) Approve the Engineering Department to assign a project number
to the project.
2) Proceed with the design and preparation of a preliminary assess-
ment roll
3) Approve'_the-scheduling'.of a public hearing as required by the Special
Assessment Ordinance.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
It is recommended that the Board of County- Commissioners authorize the
assignment of a project number to the 48th Avenue Petition Paving Project,
that the Engineering Division proceed with the design of paving and drainage
improvements, preparation of a preliminary assessment roll, and authorize the
scheduling of a public hearing as required by the Special Assessment Ordinance.
Funding shall be approved at the Public Hearing once the Preliminary
Assessment Roll is prepared.
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis -
sioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously approved the recommendation
of the Administrator, as noted in his memorandum of October 30, 1931.
BID #102 - SPRAY PAINT BOOTH - COMBINATION, TRUCK/AUTO
The hour of 11:00 A. M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk
read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit:
VEILO 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'C.ounty, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of _�Zzfl C.... . /,?,—)
in the
Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of - �' ( /' _� J 3 ` '-y1
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 continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office 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-
tisement; 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.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this a of t ^A. D.
(SEAL)
f
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, I
ess Manager)
River County, Florida)
25
NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the
Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida will receive bids to the
hour of 11:00 A.M., October 27, 1981, for the
following:
IRC No. 102
Spray Paint Booth,
Combination, Truck -Auto
Bids received after this time will be returned
unopened.
Specifications, instructions to bidders and
bidding proposals are available from the office
of the Director of Material Management or by
calling 569-3316.
Indian River County, Florida
Board of County Commissioners
By: Patrick B. Lyons,
Chairman
Oct. 1, 2, 3,1981.
NOV 181981
The Board reviewed the following memorandum:
m®x 48 ?x,457,
TO: Chairman, Board of DATE: November 10, 1981 � FILE:
County Commissioners
SUBJECT: IRC Bid #102 -Spray Paint Booth,
Combination, Truck/Auto
FROM: Chairman REFERENCES:
Bid Committee
1. A public meeting was held at 11:00 A.M., October 27, 1981 in the County
Administrator's Office, 2345 14th Avenue, Vero Beach, F1. This meeting
was advertised on October 1,2,3,1981.
2. The purpose of this meeting was to open and record TRC Bid ;#102. This bid
was for (1) Spray Paint Booth, Combination, Truck/Auto, Complete for the
Vehicle Maintenance Department.
2 Bid Proposals sent out, 1 received
Coast Auto Paint & Supply $9,900.12 plus freight
3. The Mosquito Control has a used Spray Paint Booth which they will sell to the
county for $5000.00, to be dismantled and moved by the county. Jack McCorkle,
Supervisor of the Vehicle Maintenance Dept. has inspected the Spray Paint Booth
and found it to be adequate to the county's needs.
4. The Bid Committee recommends this bid be rejected and'that the County purchase
the Spray Paint Booth from the Mosquito Control.
Fund Account ;102-242-519-66-29
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously accepted the Bid of the Mosquito
Control for a Spray Paint Booth, as being the lowest and best bid
meeting specifications, in the amount of $5,000.00.
The Board of County Commissioners recessed at 12:00 Noon
for lunch and reconvened at 1:30 o'clock P.M. with the same members
present.
CONTINUANCE OF APPEAL OF P&Z RECOMMENDATION NOT TO REZONE
10.1 ACRES OWNED BY ARTHUR WILSON FROM C-lA TO R -2B
The hour of 1:30 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: '-
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 7Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of r'. /''!�P �. %! :%. S /
in the // �/ e ,,-f Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of . 2
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 continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office 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 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.
1.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 1- day AyC- � A.D. /
(SEAL)
memo:
NOV 181981
NOTICE -
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, is reviewing the feasibility of
making the following changes and additions to
the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River County,
Florida, which changes and additions are
substantially ag follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order
that the following described property, lying
SOUTH OF 79th STREET AND FRONTING
ON THE EAST SIDE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 1, in
Indian River County, Florida, to -wit:
That part of the North 715.91 feet of
Government Lot 5, Section 34, Township 31
South, Range 39 East, lying east of U.S. No. 1,
being more particularly described as begin-
ning at a point on the North Line of Govern-
ment Lot 5 and 473.18 feet west of the Northeast
corner to said Government Lot 5: Thence ryn
North 89 degrees 59' 57" West along said North
line a distance of 510.46 feet; Thence run South
00 degrees 1611611 West a distance of 322.9S feet .
to the Easterly right-of-way of U.S. No. 1;
Thence run South 24 degrees 37' 55" east along
said right-of-way a distance of 432.29 feet;
Thence run East and parallel to the said North
line of Government Lot 5 a distance of 660.08
feet; thence run North 24 degrees 37' 55" West
and parallel to said Easterly right-of-way a
distance of 797.59 feet to the point of beginning.
Said parcel containing 10.10 acres more or
less.
Less the North 25 feet of that part of the East
half of the West half of Government Lot 5,
Section 34, Township 31 South, Range 39 East.
Be changed from C -IA Restricted Com-
mercial District to R-28 Multiple Family
District.
A public hearing in relation thereto at which
parties in interest and citizens shall have an
opportunity t0 be heard, will be held by said i
Board of County Commissioners in the Council
Chamber of the City Hall, Vero Beach,
Florida, on Wednesday, Nov. 18, 1981, at 1:30
P.M.
If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above matter, he will need a
record of the. proceedings, and for such pur-
poses, he may need to insure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings is made, which in-
cludes testimony and evidence upon which the
appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners i
By: -s-Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman
Oct. 13,15, 1981.
Senior Planner Art Challacombe reviewed the following
27
WK 48 FAPF158
NOV 181981
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: November 9, 1981 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Neil A.
County
Ne1so e
Administrator
SUBJECT: Arthur K. Wilson continuance of an
appeal of the Planning and Zoning
Commission's recommendation not to
rezone 10.1 acres from C -1A to R -2B
REFERENCES:
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given formal consideration
by the County Commissioners in the form of a public hearing on November 18, 1981,
to appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's denial of rezoning request.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
This is a request to rezone approximately 10.1 acres from C -1A, Restricted Commercial
District to R -2B, Multi -Family District at 8 units per acre. The original request,
as advertised, was to rezone the property to R-3, Multi -Family at 15 units per acre.
However, the applicant presented a letter to the Planning and Zoning Commission in
the public hearing of August 13, 1981, requesting rezoning to R -2B. The subject
property is located east of U.S. #1 with 432.29 feet of road frontage, and south of
79th Street. To the west of the parcel proposed to be rezoned lies a 16.44 acre
parcel under the same ownership. This other parcel is currently zoned R-3 and has
" received site plan approval of 198 units with a density of 11.2 units/acre. Most
of the subject property is located in the 100 year flood zone.
Existing uses in the vicinity of the parcel proposed to be rezoned consist of groves,
a single family residential development (Hobart Landing) and a commercial building
along U.S. #1.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
A. With the owner's consent, rezone the subject property to R -2D, Multi -Family
Residential. This action would allow a maximum number of 61 units.
B. Approve the rezoning to R -2B as requested.._ This alternative would allow a
��tulti-Family development -With a maximum number of 81 units._
C. Deny the rezoning. This alternative would keep the subject property in C -1A
District which allows a number of commercial uses and limited residential uses
in conjunction with those commercial uses.
RECOMMENDATIONS
While staff supports the concept of providing residential use to the subject
property, staff recommends against rezoning the subject property to R -2B (8 units
per acre). R -2D Multi -Family District is more compatible with the existing uses
in the vicinity. The lower density provided by the R -2D District is also a more
appropriate classification within flood -prone lands.
Staff recommends, the owner's consent, to rezone the subject property to R -2D
(6 units per acre).
Discussion arose about staff's recommendation to rezone
to R -2D, and Attorney Collins stated that he had a real
problem with this Commission considering an application for
R -2D when the advertisement was for R -2B.
Attorney Byron Cooksey appeared representing Arthur
Wilson and informed the Board that his client will withdraw
the appeal and leave the property zoned C-lA.
Fred Briggs asked for an opportunity to be heard and
complained at length about lack of proper notification to
affected property owners.
Bros. were not notified.
He wished to know why Hobart
Mr. Briggs was informed that we have a copy of a
receipt of notice to Hobart -Bros. which was sent to Troy,
Ohio and signed by Artemus Johnson. It was explained that
there is a legal requirement that the notice be sent to the
address of the owners where they receive their tax bills.
Mr. Briggs understood what had happened to the
notification to Hobart Bros. but wished to know why people
who own property adjacent to the subject property were not
notified.
Bernard Paz , property owner at Hobart Landing,
confirmed that he was never notified on the initial
rezoning, and that there are three additional adjacent
property owners he knows of who also received no
notification.
Commissioner Scurlock felt we need to clarify our
procedures, and Attorney Collins stated that on a
withdrawal, you start all over again. On a continuance, you
announce to the public the date to which the hearing will be
continued. He felt if the adjacent property owners did not
receive a notice of today's meeting, there is a breakdown in
procedures.
Commissioner Wodtke requested that Senior Planner
Challacombe look into this matter and see whether there was
a breakdown in the notification.
Commissioner Scurlock questioned now this matter has
been withdrawn, whether it can be resubmitted without going
back to the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Attorney Collins stated that the applicant can come
back
for the R -2B zoning which
has been reviewed,
but
NOV 181991
29
"CON
48
PAA X64
N 0 V 18 1991 �.
believed that for R -2D, he would have to go back to Planning
& Zoning.
Administrator Nelson stated he had understood that if
you go to a less restrictive zoning, the advertising would
cover that situation.
Attorney Collins commented that he took the position in
this particular situation that the Board would be better off
readvertising; although in the past, he has given the
opinion when the district involved was R -2A or R -2B, that it
could drop down to the lesser, those ordinances were
consistent with one another while the R -2D District has some
distinctions.
Considerable discussion continued in regard to the
notification process, and Mr. Paz wished to know whether the
adjacent property owners could rezone this property back to
R-1.
Attorney Collins stated there is no reason why
surrounding property owners cannot make an application for
rezoning if they feel there is an inconsistency in their
area.
Fred Briggs urged the Board to consider the 10 -acres,
the number of people that would result the rezoning, the
traffic, etc. He felt the area cannot take.such development
and noted the land was sold for Commercial.
Attorney Collins felt if there is any further
discussion, the applicant should be present.
Mr. Briggs again wished to know if it is the
responsibility of the County to notify people within 300'
because he believed this is being neglected, and he was
assured that this will be checked into to assure there is no
breakdown in the notification process.
Commissioner Fletcher wished the record to reflect that
the public notice for the rezoning of the 10.10 acres held
in May was advertised to be held on Thursday in the month of
May, but did not state the date of the specific Thursday.
F
PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING IN THE MOORINGS FROM C-lA to R -2C
AS REQUESTED BY DOYLE COTTON
The hour of 1:30 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:
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; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
J '
a •>•a L
t
in the matter of J__ r
&11 t `ti 71
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of 13 r 4L, 4 1)
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 continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office 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-
tisement; 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. %
Sworn to and subscribed before me this o A.D.
(Business Manager)
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian &Oer County, Florida)
NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, is reviewing the,feasibility of
making the following changes and additions to
the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River County,
Florida, which changes and additions are
substantially as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order
that the following described property situated
in Indian River County, to -wit:
Land located on Lot 125, Unit Two, THE
MOORINGS SUBDIVISION and described as
f011oWs: _
Lot 125, Unit Two, THE MOORINGS SUB-
DIVISION, according to the plat thereof filed ,I
in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of •'
Indian River County, Florida, in Plat Book 8,
pages 28 through 28-C, inclusive.
Be rezoned from C -1A Restricted Com-
mercial District to R -2C, Multiple Family
District.
I
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 Council
Chamber of the City Hall, Vero Beach,
Florida, on Wednesday, November 18, 1981, at
1:30 P.M.
If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above matter, he will need a
record of the proceedings, and for such pur-
poses, he may need to insure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings is made, which in-
cludes testimony and.evidence upon which the
appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By: Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman
Oct. 13,15, 1981.
Notice of the public hearing was sent to the affected
property owners by Freda Wright, Clerk of Circuit Court, as
required by Florida Statute 125.66, and copies of same are
on file in the Office of the Clerk.
Senior Planner Challacombe reviewed the following memo:
31
N 0 V 181981 Book Pw 162
t
_I
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: November 9, 1981 FILE: IRC-8I-ZC-19
Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Doyle W. Cotton, Jr. Rezoning
FROM: Neil A. Nelson, REFERENCES:
County Administr for
Itis recommended that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by
the County Commission in the form of a public hearing as advertised by Pubic Notice
for November 18, 1981.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The applicant is requesting that the C-lA Restricted Commercial zoning on 1.04
acres of land be changed to R -2C Multi -Family Residential. The site is located on
Lot 125 in The Moorings, Unit Two. Other than an approximately Z acre Indian River
County owned lot directly north of the subject property, multi -family dwelling units
surround the site. These developments include: North Passage, which has 21 units
at 12.19 units/acre, to the north; West Passage, which has 31 units at 11.75 units/
acre, to the south; and Harbour Side, which has 112 units at 14.9 units per acre,
to the east.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
A) Approve the rezoning of the 1.04 acres from C-lA to R -2C Multi -Family (12.1 units/
acre). This would allow for the development of a maximum of 12 units on the site.
While lower densities are desired throughout the county, it should be recognized
that the subject property is surrounded by higher density developments. It also
should be pointed out that the overall development scheme within The Moorings is
approximately 2.19 units/acre (see attachment). The current C -1A Restricted Com-
mercial zoning is not appropriate for the site for several reasons: location,
surrounding land uses and potential adverse impact on surrounding property values.
B) Deny the request for rezoning, leaving the property as C-lA Restricted Commercial.
This zoning allows for various types of commercial uses, many of which could be im-
compatible with the surrounding area. •
Recommendation
A. That the 1.04 acre parcel be rezo.ned.from C -1A to R -2C Multi -Family Residential
(12:1 units per acre). The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously approved the
recommendation at the public hearing of September 24, 1981.
B. That the ordinance effecting the rezoning be adopted.
Charles Pierce spoke on behalf of the applicant Doyle
Cotton and informed the Board that the architects for this
project are ones who have worked for The Moorings in the
past, and it is planned to have a similar type architectural
project.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be
heard.
Vic Lanka, developer of the nearby Harbour Side
project, had a complaint evolving from past history when he
had to scrap his plans to build' -six stories high because of
a change in County Code and now what has been put around
them has completely blocked the view. Mr. Lanka further
felt that 12 units per acre on this particular site is a
fairly dense configuration, but he did not feel too
justified in complaining since his project has a similar
density. He did suggest, however, that the Board should
consider that a lesser density would be better for the
County.
Commissioner Fletcher asked if the Planning & Zoning
Commission had given consideration to the loss of commercial
property in the area.
Mr. Challacombe reported that they looked at The
Moorings as a total unit and also looked at the C -1A further
east along AlA. The Moorings has a site plan that was
approved for a commercial type use - a shopping center, and
the Board also has designated that same area as a major '
commercial node in the Comprehensive Plan.
On Motion by Commissioner Bird, seconded by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously closed the
public hearing.
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously adopted Ordinance
81-40 rezoning the subject property to R -2C as advertised
and as requested by Doyle Cotton.
N O V 18 1991 33 BOOK 48 PAGE 164
\ J
NOV 18 1981
ORDINANCE NO. 81-40
booK AsP, �F
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property and pursuant thereto
held a public hearing in relation thereto, at which parties in
interest and citizens were heard; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County,.Florida, that the Zoning Ordinance of Indian
River County, Florida, and the accompanying Zoning Map, be amended
as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in Indian
River County, Florida, to -wit:
Lot 125, Unit Two, THE MOORINGS SUBDIVISION,
according to the plat thereof filed in the
office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of
Indian River County, Florida, in Plat Book
8, pages 28 through 28-C, inclusive.
Be changed from C -IA -Restricted Commercial District to
R-2C,Multiple Family District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Zoning Regulations.
This Ordinance shall take effect November 23, 1981.
34
PUBLIC HEARING REZONING PROPERTY ON S.R.60 TO LM -1
The hour of 1:30 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:
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; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a��
in the matter of 11bB"14 y l f% T) L% 14 -
in the Court, was pub -
fished in said newspaper in the issues of
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 continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office 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-
tisement; 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.
p
Sworn to and subscribed before rr^ this daft of ® i7 ,.D_ // OCl/
(SEAL)
(Business Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit Yurt, Indian River County, Florida)
NOTIcenr ; �nfr {ry
NOTICE IS HE�EBY GIVEN thattlie Board'
of County CommisSioners of Indian River
County, Florida, is re�Vigwing-the feasibility of
making the following changes,and additions to
the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River County,
Florida, which changes and additions are
substantially as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order
that the following described property situated
In Indian River County, to -wit:
Land located on the WEST SIDE OF 90th li
AVENUE, t/a MILE SOUTH OF STATE ROAD
60 and described as follows:
That part of the South 200 feet of Tract 9,
Section 3, Township 33 South, Range 38 East,
according to the last General Plat of Lands of
the Indian River Farms Company, as recorded
In Plat Book 2, Page 25, Public Records of St.
Lucie County, Florida, lying East of Interstate
95 Highway and also, the North 9.03 acres of
Tract 16 lying East of 1-95 in Section 3,
Township 33 South, Range 38 East, according
to the last General Plat of Lands of Indian
River Farms Company,'filed in the Office of
the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie
County, Florida, in Plat Book 2, Page 25, said
land now lying and being in Indian River
County, Florida.
Be rezoned from C-1 Commercial District to
LM -1 Light Manufacturing District.
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 Council
Chamber of the City Hall, Vero Beach,
Florida, on Wednesday, November 18, 1981, at
1:30 P.M.
If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above matter, he will need a
record of the proceedings, and for such pur-
poses, he may need to insure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings is made, which in-
cludes testimony and evidence upon which the
appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By: Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman
Oct. 20, 27, 1981.
Notice of the public hearing was sent to the affected
property owners by Freda Wright, Clerk of Circuit Court, as
required by Florida Statute 125.66, and copies of same are
on file in the Office of the Clerk.
Attorney Collins announced that the applicant, Ralph
Evans, Trustee, was previously a member of his firm, and for
this reason, he has hired Attorney Joseph Cianfrone to
represent the County in this matter to avoid any possible
conflict of interest.
Senior Planner Challacombe reviewed the following memo:
35 800K 48 P.Au ff
t
NOTIcenr ; �nfr {ry
NOTICE IS HE�EBY GIVEN thattlie Board'
of County CommisSioners of Indian River
County, Florida, is re�Vigwing-the feasibility of
making the following changes,and additions to
the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River County,
Florida, which changes and additions are
substantially as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order
that the following described property situated
In Indian River County, to -wit:
Land located on the WEST SIDE OF 90th li
AVENUE, t/a MILE SOUTH OF STATE ROAD
60 and described as follows:
That part of the South 200 feet of Tract 9,
Section 3, Township 33 South, Range 38 East,
according to the last General Plat of Lands of
the Indian River Farms Company, as recorded
In Plat Book 2, Page 25, Public Records of St.
Lucie County, Florida, lying East of Interstate
95 Highway and also, the North 9.03 acres of
Tract 16 lying East of 1-95 in Section 3,
Township 33 South, Range 38 East, according
to the last General Plat of Lands of Indian
River Farms Company,'filed in the Office of
the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie
County, Florida, in Plat Book 2, Page 25, said
land now lying and being in Indian River
County, Florida.
Be rezoned from C-1 Commercial District to
LM -1 Light Manufacturing District.
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 Council
Chamber of the City Hall, Vero Beach,
Florida, on Wednesday, November 18, 1981, at
1:30 P.M.
If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above matter, he will need a
record of the proceedings, and for such pur-
poses, he may need to insure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings is made, which in-
cludes testimony and evidence upon which the
appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By: Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman
Oct. 20, 27, 1981.
Notice of the public hearing was sent to the affected
property owners by Freda Wright, Clerk of Circuit Court, as
required by Florida Statute 125.66, and copies of same are
on file in the Office of the Clerk.
Attorney Collins announced that the applicant, Ralph
Evans, Trustee, was previously a member of his firm, and for
this reason, he has hired Attorney Joseph Cianfrone to
represent the County in this matter to avoid any possible
conflict of interest.
Senior Planner Challacombe reviewed the following memo:
35 800K 48 P.Au ff
NOV 18 1991
TO: The Honorable Members of the
Board of County Comunissioners
FROM: Neil A. Nelsot,
9
County Administrator
DATE: October 9, 1981
an, 48 PAU
FILE:
SUBJECT: Ralph L. Evans, Trustee
Rezoning
REFERENCES:
It -is recommended that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by
the Board of County Commissioners in the form of a public hearing on November 18,
1981.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The applicant is requesting that 13.98 acres of land currently zoned C-1, Commercial
be rezoned to LM -1, Light Manufacturing. The site is located on the west side of
90th Avenue, approximately .3 mile south of State Road 60. Adjacent property to the
north, south and east of the site is vacant, wooded and is zoned C-1, Commercial,
and Interstate 95 right-of-way abuts the western property line. Nearby land uses
include Lakewood Village Mobile Home Park to the south, and the Gracewood Fruit
Company packing house and offices to the southeast. A Union 76 Truck -Stop is cur-
rently in operation on the southeast corner of State Road 60 and 90th Avenue, and
several gasoline service stations which front State Road 60 lie to the west of 90th
Avenue.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
A) Approve the rezoning of the 13.98 acre site from C-1 Commercial to LM -1 Light
Manufacturing.
The Indian River County zoning provisions for LM -1, Light Manufacturing Districts
allow clean and generally non-offensive uses including: the manufacture of products
from metals, plastic, cloth,- ood and other similar materials; printing;pattern
making; and electroplating. All such operations must be conducted within the
buildings located on the site. No visible -smoke from the burning of fuels is per-
mitted and noise, odor and dust are not allowed beyond the plant site. Due to
these provisions, the currently existing packing house and other future commercial
uses which may occur in the area should not experience negative impacts from this
Light Manufacturing District. The proximity of the site to two major transportation
corridors and a truck stop, and the compatibility of light manufacturing with the
heavier commercial uses which currently exist in the area, make it an appropriate
location for light manufacturing.
B) Deny the rezoning request, leaving the site zoned C-1, Commercial.
The site is surrounded by a large commercial zoning district �ghich appears to be
adequate for future commercial uses that may locate in the area. The nature of
the LM -1, Light Manufacturing zone is not likely to inhibit this future commercial
development.
Recommendation
The Planning staff recognizes that LM -1, Light Manufacturing is an appropriate use
for the site and recommends approval of the rezoning request. The Planning and
Zoning Commission unanimously approved this recommendation in the Public Hearing of
October 8, 1981.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if this is in the area we are
looking at for a node on the Comprehensive Land Use Plan,
and Mr. Challacombe stated that it is. There are two
properties west of Interstate 95 that are currently zoned
LM -1, or about 111 acres. Due to the provisions and
strictness of the LM -1, this could be a much less intensive
use than some of the heavier commercial uses, i.e., like the
Vero Beach industrial park along the Airport as compared to
4reas with truckstops, packing houses, etc.
Commissioner Scurlock inquired about policy in the past
in regard to use of the term, Trustee, and Mr. Challacombe
commented that the beneficial owners must be revealed, and
they do have a list of all the beneficial owners.
The Chairman asked .if anyone. present wished to be
heard. There were none.
On Motion by Commissioner Bird, seconded by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously closed the
public hearing.
Commmissioner Fletcher noted that the application
states the reason for the request for rezoning is the
expected purchase by light industrial users, and he wished
to know if the request was based on an anticipated sale of
the property.
Attorney Cianfrone noted that the application was made
by the current owners.
Attorney Ralph Evan, Trustee, explained that he, as,
Trustee, and the people listed own a great deal of property
in this area. They were approached by people with some
light industrial uses, and to be in keeping with the
Comprehensive Plan, they felt it would be wise to go to the
LM -1. The proposed contract would be for only a very small
portion of the property.
Commissioner Fletcher brought up electroplating, which
he felt could cause pollution.
It was noted that this use has been allowed in the
ordinance for years.
37 BODS 43 PAv1
NOV 181981 Ulu
Fp,-- 1
N O V 181981 800K � ,�
Mr. Evans informed the Board that they were talking
about selling two acres to a company that makes Allen screws
and set screws.
On Motion by Commissioner Bird, seconded by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously closed the public
hearing.
On Motion by Commissioner Bird, seconded by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously adopted
Ordinance 81-41 rezoning the subject property to LM -1 as
advertised.
ORDINANCE NO. 81-41
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone
the hereinafter described property and pursuant thereto held a public
hearing in relation thereto, at which parties in interest and citizens
were heard; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning Ordinance of Indian
River County, Florida, and the accompanying Zoning Map, be amended
: as follows: 1*1
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in Indian River
County, Florida, to -wit:
That part of the South 200 feet of Tract 9, Section 3,
Township 33 Suuth, Range 38 East, according to the last
General Plat of Lands of the Indian River Farms Company,
as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 25, Public Records of
St. Lucie County, Florida, lying East of Interstate 95
Highway and also, the North 9.03 acres of Tract 16 lying
East of I--95 in Section 3, Township 33 South, Range 38
East, according to the last General Plat of Lands of
Indian River Farms Company, filed in the Office of the
Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County, Florida,
in Plat Book 2, Page 25 said land now lying and being
in Indian River County, Florida.
Be changed from C-1 Commercial District to LM -1 Light
Manufacturing District.
All with the meaning 4nd intent and as set forth and
described in said Zoning Regulations..
This Ordinance shall bake effect December 2, 1981.
-
=38
REQUEST FOR REZONING OF 66 ACRES ANNEXED TO CITY OF
SEBASTTAN
The Board reviewed the following memo:
TO: The Honorable Xembers of the
Board of County-ComiAssioners
FROM: Neil Nelson
County Administrator
DATE: PIovember 9, 1981 FILE:
SUBJECT: Sebastian Annexation of 66 acres
0
REFERENCES:
This is a response to a request from Mr. Rene',G, Van DeVorde to have Indian
River County relinquish its zoning authority on 66 acres of property annexed
by the City of Sebastian. It is recommended that the data herein presented
be given formal consideration by the County Commission.
Description & Conditions
On June 17, 1981, the City of Sebastian annexed approximately 66 acres of land
currently used as a fish farm and zoned under the county as Agriculture (1 unit/
5 acres). The applicant will be requesting that the City establish a R-1, Sin
Family Residential zoning district and is petitioning the County to relinqui=
its zoning authority on this annexed property.
The subject parcel is located within the Sebastian Highlands $ubdi0sion and
fronts 3,460 feet of State Road 512. Sebastian Highlands is zoned R-1, Single
Family District by the City of Sebastian.
Alternatives & Analysis
A) Relinquish zoning authority on the annexed property. This alte'lnative would
allow the applicant to proceed with his rezoning request with the City of
Sebastian. The County would, under this alternative, relinquish the agricul-
tural zoning that is currently existing.
The proposed County Comprehensive Plan had designated this property LD -1
(maximum density of 3 units/acre). This annexation is a "squaring off" of
the Sebastian City limits.
The area is presently located such that it is surrounded on three sides by
extensive R-1 zoned land in an established subdivision.
B. Maintain zoning authority on the subject property. This alternative would
keep the 66 acre parcel in agricultural use for up to two years, The County,
under Florida Annexation Laws, can maintain the present zoning for a period
of up to two years before the applicant or the City can rezone the parcel to
another use.
Recommendation
Relinquish zoning authority on the 66 acre annexed parcel.
39
NOV 181981
WK � PAGE 70
NOV 191991
wK A 8 PAPP 171
Attorney Collins read from the Statutes, noting that it
is the intent of the Legislature that people not try and get
in or out of particular governmental jurisdictions just for
their on benefit or to avoid governmental rules and
regulations. The theory behind annexation is that you allow
annexations into an area where that area is in a position to
afford improved services to that property. The Statutes
specify that if the area annexed is subject to a County Land
Use Plan or Zoning Regulations, a municipal governing body
shall not be authorized to increase the density allowed
under the County regulations for a period of two years from
the date of annexation unless approval of such increase is
allowed by the County, The applicant is requesting that the
County waive their two year prohibition.
Mike Kenney spoke for Hugh Smith, owner of the property
in question, and stated that the intent was to build at a
density of 2 units per acre.
Commissioner Fletcher believed the request should be
made in a form that would indicate what density is going to
be used.
Mr. Challacombe pointed out that the maximum allowable
• density in that area, assuming Sebastian approved R-1, would
be 2 units per acre because of the public health law
regarding wells and -septic tanks.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that Sebastian's R-1 zoning
allows 4 units per acre, and if we do accede to the request,
we will be agreeing to their R-1.
Attorney Collins stated that the Board can talk in
terms of what density increase they are inclined to allow,
but Commissioner Wodtke did not think it is right for the
Commission to designate 2 units an acre if Sebastian does
not have such a category.
Pat Flood, Mayor of Sebastian, commented that they are
in the same position as the County with a new Comprehensive
Land Use Plan. They are asking for a change of density
which really does not have anything to do with zoning, and
`I
he felt it was quite clear that they were asking for 2 units
per acre. He pointed out that although the County can
postpone this for two years, after that period of time, they
would have no control over it.
Discussion continued re the requested change in
density, and it was asked if the applicant would be
satisfied with a Motion to allow a maximum density of 2
units per acre. Mr. Kenny stated that he would.
Motion was made by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by
Commissioner Fletcher, to allowta maximum density of 2 units
per acre on the property of Hugh Smith recently annexed to
the City of Sebastian.
Attorney Collins suggested that the applicant prepare
an appropriate document describing the property and stating
that he would be satisfied with 2 units per acre; the
document to be signed by Sebastian, Indian River County and
the property owner.
Mayor Flood then proceeded to make an impassioned
speech about the County staff, the Administrator, and
certain Commission members, going behind Sebastian's back
and making statements to the press about the annexations
made by Sebastian.
Commissioner Wodtke commented that the greatest concern
we have been getting about the numerous annexations made by
Sebastian has been voiced by representatives of Sebastian,
and the Commission did direct that some research be done 'on
this matter.
Mayor Flood suggested that the County and Sebastian
should sit down and discuss this matter jointly, and
Commissioner Fletcher asked if the Mayor would have any
problem about informing the County Commission prior to an
anticipated annexation.
Mayor Flood stated that -he would instruct Sebastian's
City Attorney to send the County Commission a copy of any
application
for annexation, and
that he also would
instruct
N O V 181981
41
BOOK
48 PAcF 172
I
NOV 181991
nok
PAPF 17
the Chairman of the
Sebastian Zoning Board to have the
City
Attorney contact Administrator Nelson.
Commissioner Fletcher felt that would help the overall
view since in the past we have generally only known about an
annexation after the fact.
The Vice Chairman called for the question. It was
voted on and carried unanimously to allow a density of 2
units per acre on the Hugh Smith property.
PROPOSED TRANSIENT MERCHANT AND FLEA MARKET ORDINANCE
The Administrator recommended that the Board authorize
advertisement of the proposed ordinance, as set out in the
following memo:
TO: The Honorable Board of DATE: November 10, 1981 FILE:
County Commissioners
FROM: NeiNelson
County Administrator
SUBJECT: PROPOSED TRANSIENT MERCHANT
AND FLEA MARKET ORDINANCE
REFERENCES:
6 8 910
' `�
NOV 1981
f A� ja1 rs
" �G 4'G 6v -
It is recommended that the data herein presented be gi rural
consideration by th'e County Commission.
DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS:
The Board of County Commissioners 'at their meeting of October 7, lye_,
recommended that the Administrative Staff prepare an ordinance for
their review on a proposed Transient Merchant and Flea Market
Ordinance.
A meeting was held on October 19, 1981, with Messers. Lawrence A.
Barkett, J. B. Norton, of the Chamber of Commerce, David Greene, C. B.
Hardin, and David Rever of the -County Staff to discuss an all-encom-
passing, Transient Merchant and Flea Market Ordinance for Indian
River County. The input and suggestions to the County Staff and
Planning and Zoning Department from those in attendance, along with
other available data was used in preparing this ordinance.
This ordinance has been reviewed by the Assistant County Attorney,
Steve Houlihan, and is to be presented to the Board of County Com-
missioners for their approval.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
The Board of County Commissioners agreed there was a'need for such an
ordinance and recommended that such an ordinance be created for their
consideration. This document has been written and is presented for
their approval.
RECO12-IENDATION:
The ordinance submitted at this time should be properly advertised
4 nsidered for adoption ublic hearing before t my
W'sion.. MW
42
Attorney Larry Barkett came before the Board
representing the Chamber of Commerce and reported that the
proposed ordinance was drafted by him and submitted to the
Administrator's staff for review and revision.
Considerable discussion followed, and it was generally
agreed that an ordinance of this type is very much needed,
but the Board had problems with restricting transients to
operate only at licensed flea markets and, in addition,
restricting flea markets to operate only in M-1 and
Agricultural zones. Question also arose as to the $150
yearly license fee for conducting business as a flea market
operator and a $15 zoning permit fee for each booth.
Commissioner Fletcher did not feel that individuals who
grow produce should be limited -to selling it only on their
own property, but Attorney Collins -did not feel the wording
of the proposed ordinance prevented individual stands.
Further discussion was held in regard to setting up
transient merchants in a specific location, and argument
ensued as to definitions and whether the ordinance actually
says what we intend.
Commissioner Fletcher emphasized that he did not want
to stifle competition, and it was his belief that the local
merchants do not want to compete.
Attorney Barkett and Vice Chairman Wodtke disagreed,
and pointed out that the objection is that it is unfair
competition to the local merchants since everyone should be
required to obtain a license.
Commissioner Fletcher was of the opinion that no one
should have to have a license.
It was emphasized that the intent is not to eliminate
these merchants, but just control them.
William Koolage, speaking as an interested citizen, saw
the need for protection of the public, but believed the
proposed ordinance is getting away from that main intent.
NOV 181981
43
BOOK 48 PACE 174
N 0 V 181981 e00K •4 8 PAF , 1
Vice Chairman Wodtke felt this may arise from trying to
address the transient merchant and flea markets at the same
time.
Pat Flood, Mayor of Sebastian, informed the Board that
his municipality has the same problem with transients that
the County does. He agreed there must be controls, but felt
that saying they can go only to designated areas is
restricting their rights. Mayor Flood reported that the
method used in Sebastian has worked well, i;e., if a vendor
wants to set up on U.S.1, whoever owns the property must get
a letter from them, and the vendor must obtain an
occupational license, which gives the City some recourse.
If they have problems.with a certain vendor, that vendor is
not issued a license in the future.
Discussion continued further in regard to the
advisability of separating flea markets and transient
merchants. Vice Chairman Wodtke had no problem with any
legitimate transient merchants conducting business, but
believed they should be required to have proper licenses.
He felt there are three separate issues involved - flea
markets, transient merchants, and all occupational licenses.
He believed these issues need to be addressed and updated
and asked if the Board wished to review this matter further,
possibly separating -the flea markets from the transient
merchants and addressing the transient merchants by a
method similar to that used by the City of Sebastian.
Attorney Barkett reported that it had not been the
Chamber's intent to have the transients operate out of flea
markets, and the Chamber would be happy with the transient
merchants just being required to obtain a license similar to
that required by the City of Sebastian.
In further discussion, suggestions were made re holding
land owners liable for allowing people to sell on their
property, or possibly restricting transients to selling in
commercial or industrial districts.
_ _ 44 -
Planning Director Rever pointed out that Tax Collector
Gene Morris issues the occupational licenses, and reported
that he has had little luck with convincing the Tax
Collector that he should require certain information from
the applicant.
Attorney Collins felt the license could be issued
through any designated county official, possibly the Zoning
Department, and any information required by ordinance would
have to be supplied.
On Motion by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously agreed to separate
flea markets from the transient merchants; to require a
transient merchant to obtain an occupational license and
before issuance of such license to provide a written
statement of occupation, mailing address, etc.; said
merchants to be allowed in commercial, industrial and
agricultural districts; the ordinance to be rewritten
accordingly and advertised for a public hearing.
It was agreed that the subject of flea markets will be
readdressed at a future date.
REPORT RE INDIAN RIVER SHORES ANNEXATION - 99 YEAR LEASE
Vice Chairman Wodtke reported on meeting with
representatives of the Town of Indian River Shores and
reviewed the following suggested changes to be made in the
proposed agreement with the Town in regard to.annexation of
a portion of the County Tracking Station Park property.
(1) Page 2 - The Town of Indian River Shores wished to
delete any reference to a specific number of years from the
lease altogether. It was agreed to change 99 years to 50
and add the words "or so long as the County owns the land,
whichever period is longer."
(2) Page 2 - the original wording was that the Town would
waive its rights to pursue annexation of that part of Parcel
I lying East of Section 19, Parcel II and Paxcel IV during
the term of this agreement; this was changed to say that the
NOV 181991
45 MOK 8 PACT176
NOV 181991 w .48 PACE 177
Town agrees it will not pursue annexation of that property
without the approval of the Board of County Commissioners.
(3) The .original draft of the agreement specified that
Parcel I lying west of Section 19, etc., would be annexed
subject to being developed for entrance parking and
recreational purposes. The Town felt there should not be
any restriction on this area since it is going to be park
area, and this was deleted.
(4) Paragraph 3 allows the County the right to make
modifications to the Plan, and four lines were added stating
that modifications to increase parking, restroom and shower
facilities, shelters, picnic tables and cooking or barbeque
grills beyond that proposed in Exhibit "C" should be
submitted to the liaison committee prior to implementation.
(5) Items L and M in re parking and prohibiting sales other
than in designated concession areas were eliminated as the
Town felt this was covered elsewhere in the agreement.
(6) Item O - the typo "distrubing" is to be corrected to
read "disturbing."
(7) Item R in re providing lifeguards at County expense on
an "as -need" basis now becomes Item P.
(8) Item Q, which calls for minimum hours from sunrise to
9:00 P.M., should be -changed to read "maximum" hours.
(9) Paragraph 6 relates to buffer -strips and foliage; we
had said we would retain a 20' strip on the north and south
property lines of Parcel I, and the Town preferred 501; a
compromise of 351 was agreed upon with a provision to retain
the present foliage. On the west line of Parcel II, we had
agreed to plant a 10' strip, but now have agreed to a 20'
vegetation strip to be planted in the Pebble Beach Villas
area, which Vice Chairman Wodtke felt will take cooperation
between Pebble Beach Villas and the county as he did not
believe they would want high vegetation there which would
cut off their breeze.
Mr. Latta, manager of Pebble Beach Villas expressed his
appreciation of this consideration.
Vice Chairman Wodtke informed the Board that this
basically covers all the changes.
Commissioner Scurlock wished to know if there was a
provision in regard to being able to take advantage of any
funding if it were available, and Attorney Collins did not
see any prohibition of this. The Attorney made note of the
fact that Exhibit "C" did not have any concessions indicated
on it.
Commissioner Bird hoped that this would not preclude
the possibility of them being added at a later date, and
Attorney Collins assured him there is a modification
provision and there is no direct prohibition regarding
concessions.
Vice Chairman Wodtke felt strongly that when we do
approve this agreement, we should have a good understanding
of what Exhibit "C" is. He noted that Indian River Shores
presented a suggested plan prepared by Robert "Flip" Lloyd,
which moved some of the structures around to new locations,
and Attorney Houlihan met with Commissioner Bird to see if
the Recreation Committee could get involved because we do
not want to submit something in Exhibit "C" which is too far
from what we have planned.
Commissioner Bird then reviewed in detail the two plans
- one for the five acres and one for the Tracking Station
site, both of which will constitute Exhibit "C." He noted
that the plan for the Tracking Station area was modified -in
conjunction with suggestions made by the Pebble Beach Villa
residents, and we did agree to leave an existing wooden
walkway that they use for their beach access. This plan has
the blessing of the Pebble Beach Villas people and the
Recreation Committee and has been sent to the state.
Commissioner Bird continued to review the County's
conceptual plan for the other site, which worked the parking
in around the natural vegetation and scattered picnic areas,
noting that Mr. Lloyd, who felt the restroom facilities were
too close to his residence, came up with a different plan
BOOK PAU V8
NOV 18 191 47
NOV 181981
WK 48 PAt,,E 17
which moved the restroom facilities over, centered most of
the parking in a different area, and moved the gazebo back
from the dune line. Commissioner Bird commented that
actually neither of these plans have been approved by the
Parks and Recreation Committee in regard to attaching them
as Exhibit "C", but as long as we have the flexibility to
make some modifications, he would be fairly comfortable with
including one of them.
Discussion continued in regard to the plans presented,
and Attorney Collins suggested that we could just write
"changes to be made" on the plan because he was hopeful that
the Board could approve the agreement and get it to the Town
in time for their meeting tomorrow.
Discussion continued in regard to having the child's
play area (tot lot) in a more central location;
straightening the walkway from the showers to the beach; and
redistributing the picnic pavilions.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that would redesign the
parking and stated he would like to use Mr. Lloyd's drawing.
Motion was made by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by
Commissioner Fletcher, to approve the Agreement between the
Town of Indian River Shores and the County as circulated
using for the first part of Exhibit "C" (the Tracking
Station), the drawing which was approved by the Recreation
Committee, and for the second part, the drawing submitted by.
Mr. Lloyd, and if there are to be some modifications,
include them on this drawing.
Further discussion ensued in regard to the various
drawings, and Commissioner Bird stated that while he did not
mind centralizing the parking, his objection to Mr. Lloyd's
plan was that he is spreading a lot of the parking way down
in the corner adjacent to S.R. AlA, and this property is
almost 1,000' in depth, which would put the parking a long
distance from the beach.
Argument continued as to where to locate the parking
lot, and Vice Chairman Wodtke stated that he would prefer to
- 48-
s � �
include as Exhibit "C" something that has basically gone
through County work rather than using Mr. Lloyd's plan.
Further conversation was had about trying to use the plan
previously worked on and making some adjustments, and this
was generally agreed upon.
Commissioner Scurlock stated that he would withdraw his
Motion and Commissioner Fletcher withdrew his second.
On Motion made by Commissioner Bird, seconded by
Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously approved the
agreement between the Town of Indian River Shores and Indian
River County re the park, as amended, including as Exhibit
"C", Part 1 and Part 2, the two maps prepared by the County
with the four adjustments noted as discussed.
Said Agreement will.be made*.a part of the Minutes when
completely executed and received.
SET DATE FOR SPECIAL MEETING RE SEWER IMPACT FEE PEBBLE BAY
AND PARK AREA
Administrator Nelson informed the Board that he would
like to set up a Special Meeting to review impact fees for
sewer improvements in the Pebble Bay area on either Monday
or Wednesday so a decision can be reached before December
1st, and he would prefer Wednesday when he also could have a
representative of Florida Institute of Technology present to
discuss problems in their area.
The Board agreed to set a Special Meeting for
Wednesday, November 25th.
BEACH RESTORATION PROJECT
Vice Chairman Wodtke reported that a letter has been
received from the Department of Environmental Regulation in
regard to the status of the County Beach Restoration Project
submitted at the Water Resources Development Conference held
last February. The DER has recommended that this project be
included in the State's Preliminary Public Works Program,
and they will attempt to secure inclusion of the project in
the President's budget for Fiscal Year 1983. This, however,
is based on one
condition relating to
an assurance
that
N U V 181991
49
B00K
PAU
180
N O V 181981 BOOK PArjF
would minimize any harm to sea turtles during construction.
It was the Vice Chairman's recommendation, if we wish to
continue to move this project forward, that we give the DER
the assurance they wish as per the following suggested
wording:
"6.02 Sea turtles utilize area beaches for nesting from
May through November. All reasonable precautions will be
taken to insure minimum disturbance of nesting activities.
If the work cannot be scheduled so as to avoid the critical
nesting period of May to October, a private contractor,
registered with and approved by the Florida Department of
Natural Resources, will be hired to patrol the beaches and
relocate eggs for hatching."
Commissioner Fletcher did not agree with obtaining
federal funds for beach restoration, and felt the people in
that particular area should have a special taxing district.
He stated he would not vote for any more beach restoration
and did not feel we should spend funds just to save some
buildings.
Commissioner Scurlock commented that he had somewhat
the same feeling, but he would support a Motion at this time
to avoid a 2 to 2 vote; although, he was not satisfied with
just pumping sand on -the beaches.
Vice Chairman Wodtke pointed out that there is an awful
lot of work entailed for such -a -project to be funded
locally, and although there is a possibility of some
legislation which might cut off all federal assistance, if
you want to have any opportunity to get these funds, you
have to keep moving along in the process.
On Motion by commissioner Bird, seconded by
Commissioner Scurlock, Commissioner Fletcher voted in
opposition, the Board by a 3 to 1 vote, agreed to send a
letter to the Department of Environmental Regulation
assuring them of our cooperation regarding sea turtles and
incorporating the suggested wording.
REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE
Vice Chairman Wodtke reported on the meeting of the
Transportation Planning Committee, stating that while they
had a good showing of the technical people, unfortunately
he, Mr. Lindsey, and Mr. Barton were the only voting members
present so they could take no action. He noted that Mr.
Lindsey expressed great concern about how we would be
approaching 16th Street since his primary concern was the
protection of the students -and not the moving of intercounty
traffic. The Vice Chairman reported that they did set up a
regular meeting for the second Tuesday of each month to be
held at 10:00 A.M. at the County Garage, and they will
always have an agenda item for public input.
Commissioner Fletcher inquired about the Fellsmere
appointee, and Vice Chairman Wodtke-stated that he had
received a letter from the Town of Orchid which basically
said George Lier has been appointed representative, but he
believed Mrs. Lier has agreed to be the representative. He
continued that he had received a letter from the City of
Fellsmere appointing Richard Romans as their representative,
even though Mr. Romans is not an elected or appointed
official as required by the Resolution.
Discussion ensued as to the necessity for the
representative from Fellsmere to be a member of the
Fellsmere Council, and Attorney Collins commented that when
you interpret documents, the more specific controls, but,he
felt the practical controls, too, and he asked if the Board
wished to be strict in their interpretation of the
Resolution or just accept the designee from Fellsmere.
Vice Chairman Wodtke commented that it had been the
intention that the representatives would be elected
officials who would be able to go back and answer to their
people and be in a decision making position. He stated that
he understood Fellsmere's problem, but wished to know in the
event we do allow this appointment whether Mr. Romans will
be able to vote.
51
�GOK 8 Pn, 81?
NOV 191991 UOK 48 PAV183
Attorney Collins suggested that a Resolution be passed
amending the previous resolution creating the County
Transportation Planning Committee which would authorize the
voting member from Fellsmere to be either a member of the
Fellsmere City Council or a representative designated by the
City Council.
On Motion by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 81-102 amending Resolution 81-81 as suggested by
the Attorney and including the wording "until such time as
they are able to find a Councilman to serve."
RESOLUTION NO. 81-102
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 81-81 created a County Transporta-
tion Planning Committee; and
WHEREAS, one nontechnical voting member was specified to be
a member of the City of Fellsmere City Council; and
WHEREAS, no members of the City of Fellsmere City Council
are available to serve on said Committee; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to have a member of the Fellsmere
community serving on said Committee, NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY -THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that -the nontechnical voting member
of the Transportation Planning Committee from the City of Fells -
mere may be a member of the Fellsmere City Council or a repre-
sentative designated by th'e City Council until such time as they
are able to find a Councilman to serve.
Attest:
tires.'.
Freda Wright, Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDT RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
PArick B. LVUns a Cha
_ 52
Commissioner Scurlock brought up the possibility of
having a referendum on the final outcome of information
gathered on the need for Indian River Boulevard. When
sufficient information has been received on this matter, he
inquired if the proper place to submit it for review would
be to the Transportation Planning Committee. Vice Chairman
Wodtke believed it would be a good place to get some input
and stated he had no problem with it.
REPORT ON COUNCIL ON AGING
Vice Chairman Wodtke reported that he and
Intergovernmental Coordinator Thomas met with the Council on
Aging after their chairman had brought a request to the
Commission from the Gulfstream Council, asking that the
County perhaps get involved and be the entity which would
make the application for funds fora senior center. This
arose from the fact that there were some irregularities in
the manner in which the Council on Aging's preliminary
application was handled, which made it likely that the
Gulfstream Council would not be in a position to be
receptive of.a final application from the Council on Aging.
Vice Chairman Wodtke continued that at the meeting he and
Mr. Thomas attended, Mr. Cragg resigned from the Council, a
committee was formed that has been working with the
Gulfstream Council, and when a final application is made,
the Council on Aging will be the agency making it since they
now have received an indication that the Gulfstream Council
would be receptive to their making the application.
REPORT PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING
Commissioner Bird reported that the Parks and
Recreation Committee were directed to look into the
feasibility of a boat ramp at Round Island Park and they
were also to look into the possibility of the C-34 canal
area as a location for an air boat launching site. He
stated that he visited both sites with Dennis Gentile of the
Administrator's staff, and this was discussed at the
Recreation meeting. Commissioner Bird noted that
NOV 181981 53 BOOK 48 PAU184
I
-I
N O V 181981 gooK B PAP, F 185
Coordinator Thomas indicated that there was about $55,000 to
$60,000 in the Boating Improvement Fund, and it was being
replenished at the rate of around $17,000 per year. The
Parks and Recreation Committee has recommended that the
County at this time not go into the expenditure of building
a boat ramp at Round Island because of the great potential
of this area, and he would like to put this on the agenda of
the next meeting for more in-depth discussion.
In regard to an airboat ramp at C-34 canal, the
Committee did feel we should go ahead and construct a ramp
out there, and Commissioner Bird wished to put that on the
agenda for the next meeting also and have the staff go ahead
with a sketch for a simple inexpensive boat ramp which the
County crew could build with marl. The Board had no
objections.
Commissioner Bird next reported that he has contacted
Herrick Smith of the University of Florida; they are very
interested in helping develop a Master Recreation Plan for
the County and would like to get this scheduled in their
next semester. Some graduate students in architecture and
landscaping may be interested in this as a project or might
take it on as a class project. He did not believe we are
talking about any money to fund this. °
Commissioner Bird informed the Board that he attended
the opening ceremonies at Gifford Park; there were 200-300
people present, and it was heavily in use. Pat Callhan and
the recreation staff went out to assist Larry Staley in
promoting activities. Larry Staley has an activity calendar
made up for every day of the month; he donates his time on
Sundays. Commissioner Bird believed there is a great deal
of enthusiasm in the community about this park and so far
everything has been going smoothly.
REPORT ON ISLAND SQUATTERS
Commissioner Fletcher reported that in regard to
clearing off squatters on the north end of the island across
from Charlie Sembler's fish house, he had instructed the
_ _ 54
Administrator to check with the Department of Natural
Resources to see what our authority is in this regard.
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. 77867 - 78163 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 bonds being listed -in the Supplemental Minute
Book as provided by the rules og_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:
� 0.
�,
Clerk
NOV 1 8 1981 55 moK 48 PAu 186