Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/27/1982Wednesday, January 27, 1982 The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, met in Special Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, January 27, 1982, at 8:30 o'clock A.M. Present were Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Dick Bird; Patrick B. Lyons; and William C. Wodtke, Jr. Vice Chairman Alfred Grover Fletcher was temporarily delayed. Also present were Neil A. Nelson, County Administrator; Gary Brandenburg, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order. Chairman Scurlock led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of November 25, 1981. On Motion by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commissioner Lyons, Commissioner Fletcher being temporarily absent, the Board approved the Minutes of the Special Meeting of November 25, 1981, as written. The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of November 30, 1981. On Motion by Commissioner Lyons, seconded by Commissioner Bird, Commissioner Fletcher being temporarily absent, the Board approved the Minutes of the Special Meeting of November 30, 1981, as written. JAN 2 7 1992 eoo� FAcE 649 JAN 271982 e9ox 48 Pmu-1650 DISCUSSION RE PURCHASE OF FILL FOR CONSTRUCTION OF OSLO FIRE STATION Chairman Scurlock reported that he had discussed this matter with Mr. Nason, Financial Administrator of the South County Fire District, who is recommending the fill be purchased since it seems that the County does not have the ability to supply an adequate amount. Administrator Nelson reported that the County would have the ability to supply the fill, but it would adversely impact the operations of the Road & Bridge Department. If the fill can be purchased within the budget from outside sources, he recommended that this be done. Questions arose as to the price for the fill, the funding, etc., and it was felt this matter should be delayed until Mr. Nason can be present. On Motion by Commissioner Lyons, seconded by Commissioner Wodtke, Commissioner Fletcher being temporarily absent, the Board agreed to table this matter until 11:30 A.M. when Mr. Nason can supply further information. SELECTION OF ARCHITECTURAL FIRM FOR FOURTH COURTROOM Administrator Nelson reviewed the following memo and attached letter from Judge Smith: 2 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Hcnorable Mam,1)ers of the DATE: -January 11, 1982 FI LE: ard of County Comtiissioners Selection of Architectural Fizz*: SUBJECT: for Fourth Courtroom at Court - 4 house Annex Building t �'` Judge Charles E. Sm;. th' s FROM: „e2. A. NelsonREFERENCES: Letter to the County Col.^ tv Adnini.strator Administrator Dated Decenber 31, 1981 On Octcb-er 22, 1981 running through Novemger 4, 1981, notice was published that I,,�Han River County [•7ould accept letters of interest from qualified indivi- duals ane; fiz�s interested in providing professional architectural services for t e -prep «ration of working drawings and specifications for certain renovation :,ror!- to the Indian River County Courthouse Annex Courtroom area at 2145 14th Avenue. In response to this notice the county received four (4) letters of interest. letters and firm qualifications were provided to a cor nittee col -M ised of the local Circait Judges and the Indian River County Bar Association. This co;=-'ittee :tet and considered the selection of the four (4) architectural. fi_ruts. `l'heir letter of reco:m-endation is attached. It is recorm-ended that in accordance with the Consultant C'r��titi.ve Neciotiaticn Act 287.055 that the Board accept the coinllittee's selection and that •.4e begin to negotiate with the fir,u in the order listed by the co,:I-ardt-tee. r1AN/,-�j attac:mant (1) APPPO TD AGENDA ITEM FOR Januay 27, 1982 B JAN 271991 3 poop48 PAvF65: JAN 27198L o` fate of 37furic a CHARLES E. SMITH�'�,...,, r� CIRCUIT JUDGE &'Ni i81`E.�. ifil D.ub Inial Tir .,Sit December 31, 1981 Mr. Neil A. Nelson, County Administrator Lawyers Title Building 2345 14th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Mr. Nelson: �{ COUNTY COURTHOUSE VERO BEACH, FLA. 32960 PHONE: (305) 562.7871 In re: Fourth courtroom at Courthouse Annex Building . The local Circuit Judges and Indian Fiver Countv Bar Association Committee for Courtrooms have met and considered the selection of the four architectural firms. •A We would recommend to the County Commissioners the following firms: lst - C. E. Block Architect, Inc. 2nd - John W. Calmes, Architect 3rd - Master Design Group, Inc. 4th - Peabody & Childs Mr. Block is a unanimous first choice of our committee. As soon as the architectural firm is selected, the committee would litre to meet with the architect to review in detail the proposed plans for the Indian River County Annex Courtroom. As I previously mentioned to you and the County Commissioners, parking around the courthouse is a critical need and with the addition of a fourth courtroom, the County Commissioners are going to have to provide additional off-street parking to accomodate prospective jurors, witnesses and parties, and attorneys. In the new courtroom, the committee also feels that accomodations must be provided for television cameras and video cameras for depositions. d Your uay� Charles E. Smith CES/pgc cc: Annex Courtroom Conmiittee Enclosure: Four Architectural Proposals and correspondence (return) P.S. We would also again recommend that Courtroom A be extended ten or fifteen feet north into the hall so that additional seating can be possible for additional prospective jurors and spectators. 4 652 �{ COUNTY COURTHOUSE VERO BEACH, FLA. 32960 PHONE: (305) 562.7871 In re: Fourth courtroom at Courthouse Annex Building . The local Circuit Judges and Indian Fiver Countv Bar Association Committee for Courtrooms have met and considered the selection of the four architectural firms. •A We would recommend to the County Commissioners the following firms: lst - C. E. Block Architect, Inc. 2nd - John W. Calmes, Architect 3rd - Master Design Group, Inc. 4th - Peabody & Childs Mr. Block is a unanimous first choice of our committee. As soon as the architectural firm is selected, the committee would litre to meet with the architect to review in detail the proposed plans for the Indian River County Annex Courtroom. As I previously mentioned to you and the County Commissioners, parking around the courthouse is a critical need and with the addition of a fourth courtroom, the County Commissioners are going to have to provide additional off-street parking to accomodate prospective jurors, witnesses and parties, and attorneys. In the new courtroom, the committee also feels that accomodations must be provided for television cameras and video cameras for depositions. d Your uay� Charles E. Smith CES/pgc cc: Annex Courtroom Conmiittee Enclosure: Four Architectural Proposals and correspondence (return) P.S. We would also again recommend that Courtroom A be extended ten or fifteen feet north into the hall so that additional seating can be possible for additional prospective jurors and spectators. 4 Chairman Scurlock had a question in regard to establishing an appropriate provision to determine that architects and other professionals have the proper Errors and Omissions insurance to protect the county, and the Administrator stated that this all would be part of the negotiation procedure. Commissioner Fletcher arrived at the meeting at 8:50 o'clock A.M. Commissioner Lyons noted that the Bar Association Committee had met with the architect to review the proposed plans, which he believed was wise, but he felt it should be made clear that the County Commission has the overall control of this construction project. The Board agreed. Commissioner Fletcher commented, in regard to the unanimous recommendation of the architectural firm of Charles Block as first choice, that Mr. Block presently is very busy working on three fire stations for the county. He, therefore, felt the Board should consider spreading this work out a little, and he would prefer to go to the second recommendation. n- - Chairman Scurlock explained the negotiation process and noted that determining workloads is a part of it. On Motion by Commissioner Lyons, seconded by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously accepted the recommendation made by the Judges and Bar Association on the order of preference for negotiation with architectural firms in regard to the fourth courtroom and authorized the Chairman, Administrator and Attorney to negotiate with same. Commissioner Lyons stated that he would like to run a study to see if it is feasible to add 15' to Courtroom "A" by taking it out of the lobby, and he suggested that a count of daily foot traffic in the lobby be conducted over a month or so to aid in making this determination. JAN 271992 5 eon 48 Pa,r 653 JAN 27198 roux -48 Face654 Discussion followed on the parking problem at the Courthouse. Commissioner Bird suggested that the staff look into this situation and come up with a list of parking spaces available in the vicinity of the Courthouse. The possibility of making this part of the Architect's job came up, but it was felt that would increase the cost and that staff can handle this problem. ADDITIONS TO AGENDA Attorney Brandenburg wished to add two items - one dealing with an ambiguity re one of the appointments in the Resolution setting up the Emergency Medical. Services Advisory Committee and the second in regard to an updated Letter of Commitment from First State Bank of Miami on the Rampmaster Industrial Development Bond Issue. On Motion by Commissioner Bird, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously added the two emergency items to today's Agenda as requested by Attorney Brandenburg. BENT PINES REPLAT Attorney Brandenburg confirmed that notice of this replat has been properly advertised, as follows: N 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 the matter of /Ft &4'f -'i Rill ilivd.✓ / in the Court, was pub - lished in said newspaper in the issues of 1"i . / r 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 e this / b day of A.D. / 19yn • (Business Manager) (SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Cort, Indian River County, Florida) NOTICE Notice is given that on January 27, 1982, the undersigned will apply to the Indian River County Board of Commissioners for: (a) Vacation of a Portion of the Plat of Bent Pine Units 3 and 4; and (b) Approval of the Repfat of a Portion of Bent Pines Units 3 and 4. This Notice is given pursuant to the provisions of Florida Statute Sec. 177.101 (4). Florida Land Company Jones, Foster & Moss By: Steve L. Henderson Post Office Box 3406 Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Jan. 9, 16, 1982. " Planner Dennis Ragsdale reviewed the following memo: JAN 27198?- 7 COOK 48 Pair 655 JAN 271992 TO: The Honorable Board of County Commissioners FRO : Neil Nelson County Administrator DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS 48 tl� 56 DATE: January 19, 1982 FILE: SUBJECT: Vacation and replat of a portion of Unit 3 and Unit 4 of Bent Pine Sub- division REFERENCES: Letter from James L. Beindorf to Neil Nelson, County Administrator, dated December 7, 1981 In the County Commission meeting of January 6, 1982, the Board concurred with reasons for replatting and approved vacation procedures to vacate a portion of Unit 3 and 4 of Bent Pine Subdivision. As discussed in the meeting, a notice of the proposed vacation was published by the applicant (as per Florida Statutes 177.101). -- The purpose of this replat is to increase lot sizes and preserve trees which are located in the proposed right-of-ways. The applicant is also requesting abandon- ment of certain rear lot easements that exist on Units 3 and 4 of Bent Pine, and creating new easements which would take the place of the ones being abandoned. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS A) Approve the request to replat a portion of Units 3 and 4 of Bent Pine Sub- division, and adopt a resolution vacating the existing plat and easements. No significant change in the plat is proposed. Larger lots and preservation of several trees will be accomplished. B) Deny the request to replat a portion of Units 3 and 4 of Bent Pine Subdivision. This alternative would maintain the existing situation. The subdivision would have to be developed as platted which would result in smaller lots and destruction of several trees. RECOMMENDATION A) That the Board of County Commissioners adopt a resolution vacating the existing plat and abandoning the existing utility easements. B) That the Board of County Commissioners grant Finz:l Plat Approval to the submitted replat of a portion of Bent Pine Subdivision, Units 3 and 4. Chairman Scurlock asked if this is a formal public hearing, and Attorney Brandenberg noted that it was advertised and he would suggest it be opened to the public, although it is not required. _ M Engineer James Beindorf came before the Board representing Florida Land Company and passed out a reduced size master plan of Bent Pine to the Commissioner members, noting that the subdivision was approved in 1979, and Golf Village Units 1 and 2 are under construction. Unit 4, on which they are requesting a replat, was approved a little over a year ago, but no lots have been sold and no construction has taken place. The water and sewer plants located in the lower righthand corner are constructed, approved, and in operation, and the densities in this subdivision are extremely low. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. There were none. On Motion by Commissioner Wodtke, seconded by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously closed the public hearing. On Motion by Commissioner Lyons, seconded by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 82-29 vacating a portion of the Plat of Bent Pine Subdivision, Units 3 and 4. On Motion by Commissioner Lyons, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously granted Final Plat Approval of Bent Pine Subdivision, Units 3 and 4. JAN 27 1987, 9 PooK 48 PAGE 57 r wK. 48, Fa r-,658 1 JAN 21 1SB?- RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, VACATING A PORTION OF THE PLAT OF BENT PINE SUBDIVISION, UNITS 3 AND 4. RESOLUTION N0. 82-29 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, have been requested to vacate the existing plat of Lots 4 through 14 of Bent Pine Subdivision, Unit 3, as recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 80A, and Lots 6 through 21 of Bent Pine Subdivision, Unit 4, as recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 80B, Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. And also parcels 14, 15, 17, and 18 as recorded in official Record Book 633, Pages 367, 368, 369, 370, 371, and 372, Public Records of Indian River County, Florida, and; WHEREAS, this Board determines that the petitioners have com- 4 plied with Florida Statute Chapter 177 by publishing a public notice of their intent to apply for a vacation of said portion of said plat of Bent Pine Subdivision. The Board further determines that the persons making the application for said vacation are the owners in fee simple to the above described property and that of convenient access of persons owning other parcels within the boundaries of Bent Pine plat. This Board further determines that the above described property is not located within the limits of any incorporated municipality; and WHEREAS, the request for such vacation of plat has been sub- mitted in proper form; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COM- MISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following described portions of the plat of Bent Pine Subdivision, Unit -3 and Unit 4 are vacated: Lots 4 through 14 of Bent Pine Subdivision, Unit 3, as recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 80A, and Lots 6 through 21 of Bent Pine Subdivision, Unit 4, as recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 80B, Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. And also parcels 14, 15, 17, and 18 as recorded in official Record Book 633, Pages 367, 368, 369, 370, 371, and 372, Public Records of Indain River County, Florida. The foregoing Resolution was offered by Commissioner Lyons , who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Wodtke and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: FAVOR OPPOSE Commissioner Bird Aye Commissioner Lyons Aye Commissioner Wodtke Aye Vice -Chairman Fletcher Aye Chairman Scurlock y�e - The Chairman thereupon declared the Resolution duly passed and adopted this 27th Attest: Clerk of Board Freda Wright' Approved as to Form and legal sufficiency Garr Br n en urg, pbunt7Attorne day of January , 1982. Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida by: Doug C. Scurlock, Chairman DISCUSSION RE DRAWBRIDGE AND CHANNEL CUT ON JUNGLE TRAIL Senior Planner Art Challacombe read the following memo: TO: The Honorable Board of County Commissioners FR0M. Nei 1 Nel son County Administrator DATE: January 21, 1982 FILE: SUBJECT: Placement of drawbridge and channel cut on Jungle Trail by Florida Land Company It is recommended that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the County Commission. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS On December 17, 1981, the Planning and Zoning Commission, by a 3 to 2 vote, con- ditionally approved an application by Florida Land Company to construct a private 96 slip yacht basin. The facility is to be developed in conjunction with the pro- posed River Bend project. JAN 27 198 11 0,90K 48 PAUF_ 659 � J JAN 27 i98 �sD� F:-pr660 The site.plan includes provision for a 40' drawbridge to be constructed over a dredged channel through Jungle Trail. The channel would connect the Intracoastal __Waterway with the 5.46 acre basin to be dredged on the east side of Jungle Trail. The plan also includes a 36 car parking area and a private boat ramp into the basin. Due to the proposed drawbridge, provisions have been made for a "loop road" whereby the developer would grant to the County a limited easement allowing use of the road by the public if access to Jungle Trail was disrupted due to the bridge becoming non-operable. This 8.1 acre site is located on the east side of the Indian River, approximately 1/2 mile south of Wabasso Beach Road, and is part of the 84 acre parcel comprising the entire River Bend Development. The majority of the property designated as the yacht club site is undeveloped, with abandoned citrus groves along the fringe of the project area to the east. A portion of the property which would be dredged to form the basin has been desig- nated by the U.S. Geological Survey as an area containing marsh or swamp. Jungle Trail, which has been maintained by the County for the past 30 years'and therefore owned by prescriptive right and the filing of a maintenance map, travels the length of the subject property. This is an unpaved road, which does not meet the standard 50' right-of-way width. The road bed averages 20' in width, -with certain areas eroded due to tidal action and automobile use. The river frontage is occupied by a thin strip of red and black mangroves in various stages of develop- ment. The Intracoast9al Waterway lies approximately 175 feet off shore in Class II waters as designated by the Department of Environmental Regulation. Class II waters are those coastal waters which have the capacity of supporting shellfish propagation and harvesting. This is the state's most stringent water classification. On December 28, 1971, Jeanette and George Lier and Joe and Anne Michael of the Town of Orchid requested the County Commission to declare Jungle Trail a scenic trail. On January 5, 1972, by a 5 to 0 vote, the Commission instructed the County Administrator to proceed with surveys and title searches in order that it be designated as a County scenic drive. At the April 7, 1976 County Commission meeting, the County Attorney suggested that the County take action to file a "Maintenance Map" on Jungle Trail in order to more readily establish.the County's ownership of the road. On June 23, 1976, the County Administrator informed the Board that the County had tried to establish Jungle Trail as a scenic drive by the State, but it did not meet all the required criteria. . On August 4, 1976, the County recorded the Maintenance Map on Jungle Trail. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Alternative A: Take no action. This alternative would allow Jungle Trail to remain in its present state. Without the open water access that would necessitate a cut in the road, the proposed River Bend Yacht Basin would not be constructed. Advantages: The historic use by Indian River County has been to utilize Jungle Trail as a scenic route. Selection of this alternative would reflect this use, and would alleviate the issue of bridge ownership and maintenance as well as the issue of an alternative access route. Disadvantages: The River Bend Yacht Club site plan, conditionally approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission, depicts the construction of stabilization improve- ments to the presently eroding east bank along Jungle Trail. Selection of this alternative would promote continued erosion along the bank unless the County initiates steps to solve the problem. Alternative B: Allow placement and accept dedication of a bridge across a cut in Jungle Trail. This alternative would allow open water access to the proposed yacht basin. Selection of this alternative would place the County with the possible responsibility of operating and maintaining the bridge. 12 L-1 Advantages: If this alternative is selected, Florida Land Company will dedicate 5 1 acres west of Jungle Trail to be used for conservation purposes. The bridge will be dedicated to the County, thus allowing total County ownership and maintenance control. Funds for operation and maintenance of the bridge will come from special assessments to Florida Land Company and/or future residents. This point is still in issue. Selection of this alternative will result in erosion control to be provided by Florida Land Company. .Disadvantages: The County, by assuming complete ownership control, could have complete responsibility for operation, maintenance, and any liability which may occur in the future. The County would possibly need personnel to operate and repair a bascule type bridge facility. The County must also insure that an alternate loop road is provided for through traffic should the bridge be inoperable for an extended period of time. The placement of a bridge on Jungle Trail may detract from the intent to designate the road a scenic drive, to be left in its natural state as recommended by the Transportation Planning Committee on January 13, 1982. Alternate C: Allow a cut in the present Jungle Trail roadway, and reroute Jungle Trail around the proposed yacht basin. Advantages: Selection of this alternative will provide the County with the following opportunities: 1) Alleviate the potential concerns resulting from placing a bridge along the existing route; 2) Keeping the rerouted Jungle Trail section in a "natural" state by requiring Florida Land Company to landscape and buffer the section from development. The County could also require that the section be -unpaved, thereby blending in with the existing route. 3) Utilize the remaining road portion adjacent to the channel cut as passive park area. The County, as a condition for allowing the cut, could require Florida Land Company to dedicate and provide improvements to this park area. 4)"'- Require that Florida Land Company dedicate the 5 ± acre parcel west of Jungle Trail to either the County or private organization to be utilized as a nature preserve; 5) Provide Florida Land Company with the responsibility with the east bank erosion control as shown on the site plan. RECOMMENDATIO If the Board of County Commissioners choose to permit Florida Land Company to cut a channel into Jungle Trail for the purpose of building a marina, staff recommends that: 1) No drawbridge be placed on that cut. Florida Land Company should realign the roadway around the basin site and dedicate the realigned section to the County. 11 2) The realigned section be constructed in a manner that conforms with the remainder of Jungle Trail, receives appropriate landscaping and buffer setbacks, and is designed in accordance with the design standards approved by the County Department of Public Works; and 3) Florida dedicate two park areas to the County: * A 5 ± acre site to be dedicated for conservation purposes * A site where the existing road section lies 13 JAN 27 19'8 2 noK 8 PAu- 661 JAN 27 1981 agoK 48 Fai r 662 Chairman Scurlock commented that it is difficult to separate the two agenda items relating to the request for a channel cut on Jungle Trail and the appeal of the River Bend site plan, but he felt that the critical issue which needs to be settled first is whether we do or do not allow the cut. Motion was made by Commissioner Lyons, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to deny the request to cut a channel in Jungle Trail. The Chairman believed we should allow public input and let the developer make a presentation. Steve Henderson, Attorney for Florida Land Company, the developer of River Bend, noted that they are not here at this time in regard to`the appeal of their site plan by the Audubon Society, although he realized it is hard to separate the two matters. The marina obviously cannot be developed without either a drawbridge or a cut, and, consequently, they do have technical testimony to present to help the Commission reach a decision. Chairman Scurlock believed the crucial question is the cut regardless of any plans, and he questioned why the Board should allow a cut in a public road for a private use, especially a road with the historic significance of Jungle Trail. Attorney Henderson felt for the Board to be able to make the decision on the proposed cut, they have to weigh what the county is going to give up against what the county has to gain and this is the information they want to provide. Engineer Dale Crosby came before the Board to review Alternate Plan "A" and Alternate Plan "B." 14 2 RIVERMEND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA GLATTING LOPEZ SELLEIM PLANNING AND DESIGN CONSULTANTS 957 E. NEW ENGLAND AVE. • SUITE 3S4 WINTER PARK, FLORIDA 32780•(306)644-8662 - JAN 2 71992 15 Em 48 PAcF 663 m RIVERMEND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA GLATTING LOPEZ SELLEIM PLANNING AND DESIGN CONSULTANTS 957 E. NEW ENGLAND AVE. • SUITE 3S4 WINTER PARK, FLORIDA 32780•(306)644-8662 - JAN 2 71992 15 Em 48 PAcF 663 I I00 Lt_ 4-I Ca. GO a" CQ PARIQu6 FM MATUM PARK NATURE PARK ,Aft,A/y Aix,,tR YAGNT al* YAGHT CLUB YACW BASIN ClDwOMIMIUMG, LINEAR PARK _ 6/TE YACHT l 6ASI N Ll&MrME PEATUME.._7 \ a JUNGLE IRAIL SHALL k '_,_ _w "' PAVED OR UNPAVED FKG 0 so '�?co 4Wf '(H(S POINT AT 7HE r� PrscRE-rtou of VE �H 'k rlwp�7T rw Z W 1. J e g a.1y� N9t.:� Wmma=- 0uli o Jo 14 Lm20 J 70Ja FPZ `2la a1 wo Jjr-z E9a°3: g f u wff d iJ 1 1 Mr. Crosby noted that Plan "A" shows a drawbridge which would provide continuity of Jungle Trail and informed the Board that the firm they have engaged to design the bridge is a leading designer of bridges and eminently qualified. Mr. Crosby noted that the bridge design criteria as stipulated by the County Engineer and the DOT would support a 3 axle semi -tractor trailer fully loaded, and Florida Land Company would work with the County in curing right-of-way deficiencies as well as employ methods to regain parts of the roadway presently being eroded. He emphasized that with a drawbridge, there would be a minimum disruption of traffic, and provisions would be made for a loop road for emergency access as a safety provision. - James Beindorf, Engineer for the River Bend Project, next came before the Board to discuss the proposed yacht club, emphasizing that it will be a yacht club and not a marina, which is a much more commercially oriented operation. He reported that the yacht club is designed to accommodate boats from 20' to 40' or 50' in length with drafts up to 101, which will necessitate the excavation of approximately 133,000 cubic yards within the boundaries of the land owned by Florida Land and an additional 1,800 cubic yards for connection to the waterway. Mr. Beindorf believed there is a need for this type of river and ocean -oriented project and that their sheltered site located on a bend of the Indian River and close to the Intracoastal Waterway is well suited for a yacht club. He confirmed their plans to stabilize the shoreline, both along the river and within the yacht club itself by planting mangroves. Mr. Beindorf pointed out that permits must be obtained from the Department of Environmental Regulation, and the County would be appraised of everything as permitting procedures went forward since written approval of the proposed activity must be obtained from the County Commission and submitted to the JAN 27199 17 V1 48 FA�r665 JAN 27 1982 800K 48 PAGF666 DER. He believed they can overcome or meet the requirements of all the different agencies involved, as well as any county requirements. Commissioner Fletcher wished further information about the proposed cut in Jungle Trail and the excavation of the channel out to the waterway west of Jungle Trail, and Mr. Beindorf stated the cut would be 40' wide, and they would have to excavate a channel to wherever they could reach a depth of 101, which would be about 100' from shore. Commissioner Wodtke had questions about the discharge from the reverse osmosis plant, and Engineer Beindorf noted that is dealt with under the site plan for the project itself, and he did not anticipate any difficulties. He pointed out that also involves another permitting process, and they would like to make everyone aware of the tremendous amount of time and permits that would be required for this project even with County approval. Attorney Henderson next introduced Dr. Christensen of the Department of Engineering of the University of.Florida, an expert through Florida and the nation in the area of studies of environmental problems involved with canals, basins and enclosed waterways. Dr. Christensen made a presentation re the feasibility and impact of the proposed marina. He noted that Florida's problems with artificial water bodies originated many years ago when developers ware taking fill indiscriminately from water zones and putting in canals and marinas which were not designed properly. In 1974, therefore, the Florida Cabinet instructed the University of Florida to look into the problems related to canals, water quality, and impact on the coastal zone. Now, seven years later, we have the results of this program, which was funded by the state, and can with great confidence design a marina or a canal so that it will not be detrimental to the environment. Dr. Christensen then 18 M went into a technical discussion of the velocity profiles done on the energy sources and other factors affecting the flushing of this marina - tidal action, wind action, the shape of the marina, the "shelter" affect of the proposed structures, etc., and explained how a catastrophic spill could be prevented from entering the river by a screen of air bubbles. He stated that all the methods being considered have been verified in actuality. Chairman Scurlock wished to know if Dr. Christensen was working for the University of Florida or for Florida Land Co., and Dr. Christensen answered that he is a Professor for the University which has a contract with Florida Land to do this research for them. Florida Land pays the expenses on this project. Commissioner Fletcher noted that the Doctor now had indicated it would be possible to design a marina without any adverse impact while in his previous analysis, he had said a minimal impact. Dr. Christensen stated that sometimes there are no impacts at all and there are even cases where the marina r. actually helps purify the other waters. Commissioner Fletcher asked about the impact of buidings located close to the water's edge, and Dr. Christensen stated that to get the full effect of the wind, the setback should be figured at about 25 times the height of the building. He noted these are 15' buildings; they have space between them; and they are not in the path of the dominant wind. Jim Thomas, Biologist, next appeared and explained about the permitting process, noting that they must obtain a dredge and fill permit from the DER, as well as a federal permit from the Corps of Engineers. The Corps requires a large amount of data and sends it to a number of federal agencies - the Coast Guard, EPA, U.S.Fish & Wildlife, •1A 19 e'UUi� TS P�,F 667 �2719�� JAN 271992 ���x 48 P;i^r 668 National Marine Fisheries, etc., each of these agencies having their own technical staff which reviews the application. After all this, the DER makes their own review, which must come back to the County Commission and be read into the Minutes. Mr. Thomas then talked about stabilization of the bank in the area of the marina. He noted that the road is being eaten away now because of the high energy situation caused by the wake of passing boats. To solve this problem, he is proposing planting mangroves in terraced boxes which would provide a wooden breakwater to protect them until they get established. In regard to dredging, Mr. Thomas noted that the river bottom in this location is not covered with marine grasses, but is only shd1l and sand because of the high energy situation. Commissioner Bird inquired about the 5 acre nature park, and Mr. Thomas felt it would offer an excellent environmental education area. Chairman Scurlock asked Dr. Christensen if he could make the statement that there will be no degradation to the Indian River from this marina, and Dr. Christensen believed this could be done. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. Ruth Stanbridge, chairman of the Nature Trails Committee for the Pelican Audubon Society, submitted a letter dated January 14, 1982, supporting a unanimous vote of the Transportation Planning Committee to recommend that Jungle Trail be left untouched and preserved as a scenic trail. She wished this letter made a part of the record, as follows: 20 PEMIC N ISLAND AUDUBON SOCIETY P. 0. Box 1833 VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960 Mr. Don C. Scurlocl: Cha i ria: r r: Board o' County Commissioners -nd an River County 1840 --'5t ',i Street Vero 13,.,,i( -h, Florida 32960 Re: Dear Mr. Scurlock: .tanu,:iry 14, 1982 Un:i.q;:e, Historic and Scenic Jun le. Trail At our monthly meeting on 4 January 1982, the Board of Directors of Pelican Island Audubon Society unanimously adopted a resolution requesting the Board of County Commissioners to officially designate Jungle Trail as a County scenic and historic trail. The origin of Jungle Trail as a foot path in the 19th century; its history as a horse path, buggy trail, .and now as a picturesque drive along the Indian River; and the continuing problem of shoreline erosion warrant official recognition and immediate action. 1.1e would like to see the County coordinate a positive approach to protcction and preservation of Indian River County's unique, historic and scenic trail. Part attempts at such a program received widespread support. For example, in late 1971, --feannette and George Lier, and Joe and Anne Michael of the Tovii of Orchid requestf-d the County Commission to declare this trail a scenic trrti-1 (see att::ich(.,1, dated 28 December 1971). On 5 January 1972, by a 5 to 0 vote, th:� Ccnmi.ssion recd; nized this unique, historic and scenic trail and ins.t-ructed the county administrator, Mr. Jack Jennings, to proceed Kith the legal. aspects. Unfortunately, this plan was never implemented. Last Tuesday, 12 ,January 1982, the Trans,pertation Planning Committee for Indian River County agreed that Jungle Trail should be left untouched. We most heartily agree. Our Nature Center Committee has contacted Mr. Ney Landrum's staff at the Department of Natural Resources in. Tallahassee, and was very encouraged with the possibility of having; the State _iLso recognize Jungle Trail as a scenic: and historic trail. We E.ssure you that Pelican Island Audubon,Society is looking forward to working with you to preserve this unique, 'Historic and ;scenic grail , treasur•?d by natives and visitors alike as a segment of unspoiled "Old Flor Lda. " • S inr_erely yours, ,rte° i � _ ���•� Raymond Fernald President NOK 4� PAGE 6fi9 F.uth St inh,' icl€;e Chairma:1, aat:ure Trails and Center JAN 271992 Earrincy Pint Groves, Inc. Route 2, Box 56B VERO BEACH, FLORIDA December 28, 1971 JOE W. MICHAEL PRESIDENT JAMES J. DENBY VICE-PRESIDENT ANNE DENBY MICHAEL SECRETARY -TREASURER Mr. Jack Jennings Inqian River County Road & Bridge Department Room 115 Indian River County Court Hose Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Jack:; 2' 0, 1 In the early days of Indian River County, a. foot trail became a horse path, then a narrow trail gide enough for a 48 buggy. This was the origin of Jungle Trail in the early 1900's. N'a�tural beauty in tranquil surroundings at an unhurried pace is balm for the soul of any man. Keeping this in mind, we, the undersigned, would like to see the trail called"Jungle Trail"_ (paralleling the Indian giver, and running basically north and south between State Road 510 or Wabasso Beach Road on the north andold Tinter Beach Bond on the south) designated by Indian River County, as a SCENIC TRAIL. .0 Sincerely# _f Jeannette M. Lier George 0, Lier Joe W. Michael Innes Denby Michael 22 k r Mrs. Stanbridge talked about a community effort to restore this shoreline, noting that, in the past, attempts to control the erosion have received countywide support. She reported that the Department of Natural Resources in Tallahassee was very encouraging about having the State recognize these historical trails. Mrs. Stanbridge emphasized that to disrupt this road for a developer and a very small segment of population is not in the best interests of Iridian River County, and she urged that the Board make a policy decision so the people of the county can be assured Jungle Trail is safe and secure. Ann Robinson, chairman of the Conservation Committee of Pelican Audubon Society, came before the Board speaking as a member of the public. She expressed her dismay about how this site plan has proceeded, claiming that this morning's meeting was the first time the general public has had an opportunity to address either the issue of a cut in Jungle Trail or the River Bend site plan although the proposal was made months ago. Mrs. Robinson then gave a history of the Planning and Zoning meetings re this subject and quoted former Assistant County Attorney Stephen Houlihan as saying that "the developer is asking for something extraordinary in asking the county to vacate a road for a private purpose." She stated that when she questioned Attorney Brandenburg as to how a marina could be allowed in R-2 zoning, he stated it could be allowed as an accessory use because of a precedent set. Mrs. Robinson wished to know what precedent was set to allow a developer to cut through 40' of a county road; she felt the procedure followed made it almost impossible for members of the public to give any input on this matter; and she hoped the Commission would vote to leave Jungle Trail intact. 23 ��K 4wE6`�� I JAN 27 198 2 Box 4B PA,,,, 672 Chairman Scurlock reminded the public that there will be two hearings today, and we are not talking about site plans now, just the cut. Brian Barnett of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission referred to his letter of December 14, 1981, written to former Planning Director David Rever, disputing the efficacy of the design for the marina, as follows: FLC)RIDA GANIF. Awi F"F.�r II WA FA; Fl!:3II COMMISSION C, .n -a". 1 .unl)_t VILr ChAit,n If,. _. .,t t ROBERT �1 BRAN rLY Lxemutiv,) ntr(=,I:)t F.G. BAN I.S. Asststanl L .,!cuhve t t,ectt 1 Air. David Rever Director Indian River Countv Planning Department 2121 14th Avenue Vero Beach, F1orhl;i 3296,) Dear Mr. Rever: I tet Snm.t ' I' I.M. N11.11 I.V.It;.1101,1l(:✓, Ili, P. O. Box 1.840 Vero ),each, Florida 32960 f)c'c etcher 1.4 , 1981 F:I l'r )Itu •+ �'. mal ina for i r BvIld !'ro j ve t Intli, kIvet County In response` to your S December 1981.rt!(III-ert , the Office of Ln irorinlental Services c,f the Florida Came and ;'resh Water 1. Lsh Commission has reviewed the site plan application and supporting information on the referenced .project, and offors Ll:e toll.owing connnents. Florida Land Con:l„hn; pl*k)pose.s to consi.rutst a 12 foot deep, 5. ,r. acre, 96 slip yacht ba:7ir, on the east side of the Indian River approximatel.-, 1/2 mile south of the t;'aha<;:;.0 Bridt,e.. A 40 foot—wide opening %uuld connect the marina to rhe Indi,hn 1ci.vL17 (requiring at least 40 fMet of dredging within the river to CeaL'I'. t 1,e Intrac, nstal Waterw.iy j , and a 42 inch diameter culvert wotlid be installed at. Lhe ether end of the basin to enhance circulation. Fuc'Lin; ar,d sewaltc' hl,mp-ohlt facilities would be provided near the river t)p1'n11ig pith huhhl.c• re,!ns to contain spills. Three sides of the marint:t a Luld he plrulCod wit It .1 fi inl),e of SEn2-Lina and a mangrove fringe would he pLallt.%2d n.long th+, bank of the. Indian River. SilicL:! the nlarinl wt)uld hc• vxc•1v.a1.e(1 from uplands with a relaLively shes et rlccc:schannel t. -c) tl:e fCUTW, the primary concern is its impact en la;ht=.!r +Iuality. Water ou,ll itv pro!,lems within poorly flushed marina 17.1sins have been well ,iuc•unlented in Florida, fregtlently causing fi,01 kills rind water qual its' clogradatirn within connected natural waters. With the River Bend pr:.Jc'cL, water gnalit-v is an especially important consideration ht.rausc the .hd jacent. Lid ian Rivc'r is Class li L=ater, defined as co:iFLai wnLCrc wilLch have either actually or potentially the capability ofsi'O! 1 f i sh propagation or harvesting. Approved 24 — M M harvest big ground!. art, on l v a I it t 1.• over l rr. i I c no, t li o f the pro} <�.tic•d marina s it.c, Iriv in, lu c n c •;tciitIvd < evvraI rii I.es gout Iiward 3 or 44 years ago. We hope the 3pprovei area cou1:1 event n,111 y he -:.xtendvd further soot Ii. The opening of sh�-I If i sh harvest Jnr; hr•tt,oun Round Island and Fish House Cove in Indian River ar.d St. i.ucie Counti^s this fall illustrates Lhat evaluation of Class II caters is an ons;o ing process. The 23 November 1991 lett.e.r from Dr. Ii. A. Christensen of the University of Florida to th•! apr?l.i.cant, .inr t Inc Iet ter of 4 December 1.981. from the appl icant to .-ori, al lu•it? to i lac. idk,a that, with inclusion of certain mitigative mearurc�;, this inarini, ufl he ronstrurted to avo id pollution of the Indian River. hnforttltiatOINI, several serious design problems with the marina and the hydrological characteristics of the Indian River at the proposed location would combine to produce a system where water quality degradation is highly pr.obahle. The Wahasso Bridge vicinity has the lowest tidal amplitude of any point in the Indian River south of Sebastian Inlet. Both lunar and wind -driven tides produr-e a mean amplitude of only 0.4 feet in this area. Studies by Harbor Branch Foundation have shown no net. current, only a slight southerly drift of sediments, and negligible net exchange with ocean water at. the project site. The low tidal amplitude and lack of net flow preclude an effective tidal exchange between the river and the proposed marina. The other projects sited by Dr. Christensen have greater tidal amplitudes, and sonic have freshwater inflow to enhance flushing. Banyan Bay and the three Dade marina desi,ns have not been accepted to date because of concerns including water duality impacts. Locally induced wiiul circulation would also be negligible. In order to meet Dr. Chri::tenscit's requirem,�tnt that structures be removed a minimum of 25 times their htAght frcin the shore of Lhe basin to avoid a "shelter effect", all .l i foot -high bui.Ldings (or tre —) standing o^ +5 foot elevation ground rm►rt he over 1.,()00 feet. from the basun. Obviously, buildin-s, mangroves aloe. the rLver, other trees and shrubs on the uplands, and the 5 foot droi� from thr.. basin edge to the water would greatly reduce the eff:(-t ivcri •tis o, locsl wind r-irculation. When ,,oil add 95 large boats, 1-'s) nr�� ren,; pi:.c:;:, and d,--)cks with approxiiratety 300 dock piles to this syste111, the erfCCt: of lova.( wind circulation is eliminated. The very po.?r wind and t Lde c Lrculation of forded by the River Bond site exaggerates Lhe dos! ni problems of the proposed marina. A 40 Foot opening and 42 inch culvert would never` providr• ndequate exchange for a 5 1/2 acre marina, especially since h(ith have• the sane orientation to wind and tide. Th;: 12 foot depth would eventually lead to chemical stratification due to poor flushing, an,)xic ;sediments accumulating Oil L112 bottom. The proposed11il ti.na fiint;e would only contribute to this problem, for most of its vegetative production would end up on the marina bottom. Thc• fueling and sewage pump -out facilities are inappropriate for Class 11 waters. The use of iutrctofore experimental hobble screens, proposed for L.his pr.0j0Ct, provi.cfeti a poor ans:aer to spill protection because of its relianct! on ±"•�:;sil-�uel. energv abed because dissolved pollutants would ;«•t h< :ri f tcrd. In summary, a marina in the• proposed lociltioll with the propos(.d design would hr in ot•r a prol-,al)l o c:ource of pollution to the CLiss II water,; ol• t5e Indinn Rtver. Tt may be possible to design a marina with adequate c• ircitlat ion iind;•r the exist trig tidal eonditioi'- But it would require a iii-li r;mallor acreage, Iaryer openings to the• Indian River, a shallor.• c!epili, and no fueling or sewage purrlp--ou.: fncil ft.i,,s. The mangrove planting proposal for the hank of the Indian fiver follows state-of-the-art. techniques, artd i_t FiiouLd be scccessiul. Please call me if we can be of further Sincerely, Brian S. 1:nrr.?tt South 'rlorfda Section Leader 25 JAN 2 7198��o� F, F73 X . JAN 2'71982 nox 48 Pr cf 674 Attorney Michael O'Haire appeared on behalf of the Vero Beach Civic Association. He felt a great deal of time had been wasted so far since the only issue before the Board is whether to make a cut in Jungle Trail, and he believed that only someone with either a tremendous amount of ignorance or gall would make such a proposition in the first place since we are talking about a significant historic site of this county; in fact, the only remaining area in the county that he can say to his children this is the same way it was back in grandfather's time. He stated there is no question about title - it goes back before the 20th century. Attorney O'Haire then submitted a copy of the Vero Beach Civic Association's letter to the Commission and requested it be made part of the record. -$ 0 26 M VERO BEACH CIVIC ASSOCIATION Indian River County Commission 2121 14th Avenue Vero Beach, - Florida 32960 December 31, 1981 3 Attention: Mr. Pat Lyons,. Chairman Gentlemen: With reference to the Vero Beach Civic Association's letter of November 11, 1981, directed to the Indian River County Planning and Zoning Commission, which letter recites our position with regard to the proposed cut through and drawbridging at Jungle Trail, we note that this letter was not accepted into the Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission as part of the record. We, therefore, submit it as quart of the proceedi in your current deliberation. We further call your attention to the letter of December 14, 1981 from the Florida Game and Fresh dater Fish Commission in op- position to proposed marina. We also call your attention to a letter of December 23, 1981 from the Pelican. Island Audubon Society protesting the yacht club. We recite these various documents to complete the record of our position to this contemplated drawbridge -and marina both of which would be highly deleterious to the environment and the orderly movement of traffic on the Barrier -.,Island. We feel the contemplated drawbridge and marina clearly and emphatically are not in the public interest. Sincerely, VERO BEACH CIVIC ASSOCIATION LG:jce - Lomax Gwathmey, President enc. (2) JAN 27 198 , 27 Boos 1 8 PAGE 675 JAN 27 1982 Boos 8 FAur:676 VVRO HEACIi ` C1VIc ASSN. P 0. Box 3381 Vero Beach, A. 32960 "The objectives rind purposes shall be to preserve, foster and promnto the beauty, natural resources and good government ut tno City of Vero l3each and Indian River County." ATTACHMENT #2 November 11, 1981 Indian River County Planning & Zoning Commission 2121 14th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Attention: Mrs. Carolyn Eggert, Chairman RE: Proposed Cut -Through and Draw -Bridging of Jungle Trail Ladies and Gentlemen: Relative to subject Cut -Through & Bridge, the Vero Beach Civic Association opposes such action for the reasons indicated below: 1. Jungle Trail is an historic and scenic drive that has been used in public domain for several decades and is indeed one of the most scenic riverside drives in the State of Florida. 2. As we all observe, the Florida„Department of Transportation no longer installs draw -bridges for the reasons of high maintenance costs, and high personnel costs and most certainly we cannot assume that these proposers or their successors will provide trust funds to assure repairs, maintenance and proper operation of a draw bridge for an indefinite period of time. 3. A body of water bottlenecked into the Indian River and without adequate flushing capability (internal/ external water circulation) would result in a gradual process of deterioration known as eutrophication. We strongly recommend against any approval of such a proposal. For the Board of Directors VERO BEACH CIVIC ASSOCIATION i romax Gwat mey- / LG:jce President 4:l Robert Reider of 1150 Reef Road wished to read into the record an editorial from the PRESS JOURNAL dated January 25, 1982, entitled " Preserve Jungle Trail as Historic, Scenic Road." Said Editorial is as follows: Editorials 1% r s �Jungle I I U11 v e MON I Wsw A QM0R N ,y yN. :b(c. g n i %-w Jungle Trail is a narrow dirt road that meanders along the eastern edge of the Indian River for several miles south of County Road 510. Tall, ageless trees drape over the roadway. It is a unique spot in the county because its beauty and tranquility are unaffected by man- made improvements. - Jungle Trail was a foot path in the early 1900s. It became a horse path, and then a buggy trail, according to long-time Indian River County residents and local history buffs. To this day, it remains a narrow, dirt road traveled mostly by people who fish along the banks, a few homeowners and workers servicing the citrus groves in the area. This pastoral spot has in- congruously become the center of attention Tecently. A large Florida development company has proposed to install a drawbridge _in the road. It will span a channel the developers want to cut through the trail to the river from a 96 -slip marina. With the news of the proposed marina and drawbridge, many local residents ,have called for the county and state to formally designate it a scenic and historic road. This is not a new effort, conjured up to thwart the Jungle Trail development. For at least 10 years, the formal designation has been requested. In 1972, four residents of the town of Orchid, just north of the trail, requested the Indian River County Commission to declare it a scenic road. An application at the state level for special designation a few years ago was turned down Because the road did not carry a more -than -local historical import. Last week the county's Tran- sportation Planning Committee voted to request the County Com- mission proceed with a scenic designation. The committee members, comprised of representatives from the county and its municipalities, intended for the roadway to retain its natural state. Jungle Trail occupies an im-' portant historic and sentimental place in the minds and hearts of many people newcomers and old- timers, young and old — and not just the conservationists. We join with those who believe its natural beauty should be preserved. We urge the County Commission to officially designate Jungle Trail an historic and scenic trail. Ray Fernald, president of Pelican Island Audubon Society, encouraged the Board to remember that much of this morning's testimony had been geared toward proving a marina would not be degrading to the environment; the Society, however, has experts who will testify otherwise, and he felt it might be necessary to look at other alternatives such as dry storage of boats which would not disrupt the trail. Lomax Gwathmey, of 23 Sea Horse Lane, president of the Vero Beach Civic Association, felt the erosion problem on Jungle Trail can be solved without any help from Florida 29 you 8 PAGF �� d JAN 2 71982 JAN 271992 ©oh43PAF 678 Land Company simply by contacting the Department of Natural Resources and obtaining a "Slow Down" order for the boats. He did not believe the proposed perimeter road would be the same as Jungle Trail since the boat owners soon would pressure to have it paved; he did not agree that the location of the yacht club is ideal because Sebastian Inlet is well known as a very dangerous inlet and it is 20 miles to the Fort Pierce Inlet; he did not believe the need for this facility has been established; and he recommended denial of the request to cut through Jungle Trail. Walter Cunningham of Orchid Island opposed a yacht club, especially since the wakes of the boats would be destructive to the island on which he lives. He asked that the Board maintain Jungle Trail as it is and not allow special concessions for those who can afford yachts. William Koolage, county resident for ten years, was strongly opposed to allowing -any cut in Jungle Trail or any public road for private use. He felt the proposal made by Florida Land Company is not in the public interest of the citizens of the county and urged the Board to vote against it. Richard Jones, resident of Jungle Trail for 63 years, believed this is the prettiest piece of Florida left and urged the Commission to preserve the trail. George Bachman, of 501 Camelia, and Maxine Mallion of 1345 46th Avenue, both felt it is important for people to have a place like Jungle Trail and that it should be left as it is. Richard Timberlake of Summerplace made the following statement on behalf of 300 home owners in Summerplace and Orchid, about thirty of whom were present in the audience. 30 Sddaaaam, t7 SUMMERPLACE o VERO BEACH, FLORIDA ::; axhuary 2'j, 1982 :.�V17L'Y_:,1 IJJ.:IrJ J.i�i.'�lU V.J+.I.•Jl�� .:l�A: L•. �.. J• ff mr. ;nair.­ian; :._e oers of tyle _oard of „ov�t;,r „ormissione:�s of _ndian .,iver aouii-uy, lo.rici a . _ a: -.i :.ticihard _i maerla ,e, a ooard :: amber of -ane ilom,3oa7lQrs :a.ssocia-tiorl called _''ur._:ier.)lace .,m-praver:ent asso., lne. :._y comic -1 -i's are mc-.Ue oil be'i zl.f of so:ie 300 residents Et --Id y)ro-)erty o rlors o- .,u- pier a� ce and adjoinin-7; ,)rv,)er ui s --e u_� olisned res-; cde_ivial wrvas aajacenu -Go t:1e _.1ver _ end prod -act t_iti co ?rra,zi �i:s JI ,u:12: ar—olace Euid '„lr cilid .._Sle as .Tell as `G he3 ,:ovra of vrChid. ,.t is tine vrish of hese t1 ._1j ci uizens -�1lat tlhe vou_ht t' vo., fission Ge ade !.',7.-r0 of their s-Gronr,- o -p -position t0 the' coils truc tio-.,, of a dr".'.70:."1`3.`;'0 in Gihe road i".no nn as,,ma-,le rail �md tneir oppos1.-t,'ioi as ,roll, do z pro;:oso' sal_L boa u caa--n-nal mid _carina. „e join vi_i -Ch 'i.'he mar,aanJen u O.T. � 10 , resS-,: ourn€Ll wao se edi :,o ^ial a_hu.:_ y 25, 19o2, syoo'-e a:-ainst the ,?r. ojec G i -Ind pointed wa t tna U a request had gone to tike %joi .'uy „o:maission as early :zs 19*c2 r egUostin•; •4hat „un: le _rail be declared a scenic road. .,he editorial pointued out t11 '-Z "Gilt _rr^nsport _--tion l wlyZl ; vorl:li ti;ee last weel,, vo-ued io I'eques t V e vOt111t.1 -omission t0 ,'.,?roc-._.eu. a see_lic desi: lma-G,ioa ,pith tihe i_ teni, til :t the ro�.d� ay ret��in its natural sta Ie. _he edito:t•ial urged t_la.t the „ounty %00T-111ission officially desir late the „un -le _rail an historic and scanic tro.il. _t must be ;)ointed out that essentially all residents adjacent to .iver end now obtain their residential 7ota.ble and s-_..nitary mater su D_1ies from shallow erlls. _hey look rri Gh :reat concarn oil,* and must protest, tie proioosed, introduction of massive quanties of salt Nater into the shailOW agUifOr.. �he _.card of Directors of wurimer�pl:ce mprovemeil-t {sso. on belhalf o1: its mambers and 'aany otiher conce-J ned i1eijjlb0";3-respect- fully and ur;_;ently requests than t the _oard of county �omissioner s deny Gi13 Applican S request for dtt �:lOr1 LY t0 COns'tl-uct the dr awbr id; -e and Marina.. �hank you, P�010K 48 PA E 6 A 9 /6� JAN 27199;. 11.ichard _imberlaks, I,irec-tor _m rovene-n t :Isso. , enc . JAN 271981, 800K 48 June Craig of 46th Avenue, Ken Pangburn of North U.S.1, Wabasso, and William Hamilton, lifetime County resident, all strongly opposed any cut in Jungle Trail. Richard Childers of Whippoorwill Lane also spoke in opposition to the proposed cut and pointed out that Florida Land Company apparently was willing to develop without a marina because they went ahead and bought the land although they were fully aware of what was involved. William Patterson of 150 Ocean Road spoke in favor of the development proposed by Florida Land Company. He felt the county desperately needs yachting facilities and that they should vote to have this project controlled by a quality developer. •w Ralph Caddell, vice president of Pelican Island Audubon Society, opposed cutting through the trail, which he felt would interfere with traffic on the river and serve neither the users of the trail nor the people in the development. James Haeger, 28 year resident, a biologist and botanist, spoke of the beauty of the Jungle Trail area and opposed a cut through the road. On Motion by Commissioner Lyons, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously closed the public hearing. Commissioner Bird believed there were arguments for both sides, but felt in spite of the trade-offs offered ( a 5 acre nature park, stabilization of the shoreline, and the fact that we are dealing with a reputable developer), unfortunately the developer has chosen an area that is one of our most unique and historic. He, therefore, opposed this request as well as any future alterations that might be proposed for Jungle Trail. Commissioner Bird noted that prohibiting a cut in Jungle Trail is not necessarily the total answer to preserving it and it may be necessary to take even further steps. 32 Commissioner Lyons agreed that the proposal that came to the Board re Jungle Trail was not all good nor all bad, and one thing it has accomplished is to give us some impetus to get started on the preservation of Jungle Trail. Commissioner Wodtke expressed concern about the legal status of the procedure followed today, noting that in seven years on the Commission this is the first time he has ever seen a public hearing conducted with a Motion on the floor 1 and seconded before anyone even spoke. He hoped this is not a practice we are going to continue. Commissioner Wodtke noted that one of former Commissioner Ed Massey's main concerns was the preservation of Jungle Trail, and an effort was made some years ago to get a Special Act passed, but there were some problems. As to the comment that a need has not been shown, Commissioner Wodtke stated that while he did believe there is a need for a yacht club and marina somewhere in the county and he could not argue the technical presentations made, and although he had hoped the plan set out in Alternate "B" for rerouting of Jungle Trail and granting of additional parkland might be acceptable, he would never support a drawbridge in Jungle Trail. Chairman Scurlock asked the Attorney if there should be another Motion and second because of the irregular procedure. Attorney Brandenburg felt the procedure was good the way it stands since debate followed the Motion. The Chairman called for the question on the Motion to deny the request to cut a channel in Jungle Trail. It was voted on and carried by a unanimous vote. Motion was made by Commissioner Lyons, seconded by Commissioner Bird, to get proposals from various organizations as to what might be done to help with the erosion problem along Jungle Trail and to appoint Ruth Stanbridge chairman of an ad hoc committee to come back with proposals for ways of improving Jungle Trail. JAN 27199. 33 ��Oi( 48 PAGF.UO "JAN 2719804 A POCK 4$ PAU. Commissioner Fletcher expressed a desire for a Motion to instruct the Attorney to draw Ftp a Resolution to officially designate Jungle Trail a historic trail, and it was pointed out that first we need a legal description of exactly what portion of Jungle Trail is to be included in such a designation. The Chairman called for the question. It was voted on and carried unanimously. Mrs. Standbridge accepted the chairmanship of the proposed ad hoc committee and stated she would come back with a report. On Motion made by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by COmmissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously instructed the Attorney to draw up a Resolution and work in conjunction with the ad hoc committee just appointed re designating Jungle Trail a historic and scenic trail, both on the local level and the state level; the formal approach to the State to be made after receiving a report back from the committee and the Attorney. APPEAL OF RIVER BEND SITE PLAN BY PELICAN ISLAND AUDUBON SOCIETY The hour of 10:00 A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: 34 I 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 BeachinIndian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a , the matter of �11� CG1 iL ,t1 &«w�� in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of 1�/ , 1P IF -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- 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 day of D.kit_rrVy%_ l' L( Wsiness M� nag!2T) � ' (SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida) NOTICE Notice is hereby given that the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County will conduct a public hearing regarding the appeal of the Pelican Island Audubon Society, contesting the approval by the Indian River County Planning & Zoning Commission of the site plan for the River Bend Yacht Basin at its regular meeting on December 17, 1981. The public hearing will be held by the Board i of County Commissioners, in the County i Commission Chambers of the County Ad- ministration Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, January 27, 1982, at 10:00 A.M. All interested parties will be given the opportunity to be heard. If any person decides to appeal any decision J 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 ' record, includes the testimony in evidence on " which the appeal is based. - Board of County Commissioners Of Indian River County, Florida By: -s -Don C. Scurlock Jr., Chairman Jan. 14, 21, 1982. Memo of the Administrator re said appeal is as follows: JAN 271992 35 1POOK 41 P F. � ,JAN 27 198 TO: The Honorable Board of County Commissioners FROM: Neil Nelson County Administrator DATE: January 22, 1982 • !. FILE: SUBJECT: Appeal of January 27, 1982 to the County Commission - River Bend Yacht Club Site Plan REFERENCES: It is recommended that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the County Commission. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS On September 8, 1982, Florida Land Company submitted a site plan application to construct a private 96 slip yacht basin with a club house. The facility is to be developed in conjunction with the proposed River Bend project. The site plan includes provision for a 40' drawbridge to be constructed over a dredged channel through Jungle Trail. The channel would connect the Intracoastal Waterway with the 5..46 acre basin to be dredged on the east side of Jungle Trail. The plan also includes a 36 car parking area and a private boat ramp into the basin. Due to the proposed drawbridge, provisions have been made for a "loop road" whereby the developer would grant to the County a limited easement allowing use of the road by the public if access to Jungle Trail was disrupted due to the bridge becoming non-operable. This 8.1 acre site is located on the east side of the Indian River, approximately 1/2 mile south of Wabasso Beach Road, and is part of the 84 acre parcel comprising the entire River Bend development. The majority of the property designated as .the yacht club site is undeveloped, with abandoned citrus groves along the fringe of the project area to the east. A portion of the property which would be dredged to form the basin has been desig- nated by the U.S. Geological Survey as an area containing marsh or swamp. Jungle Trail, which has been maintained by the County for the past 30 years and therefore owned by prescriptive right and the filing of a maintenance map, travels the length of the subject property. This is an unpaved road, which averages 20' in width, with certain areas eroded due to tidal action and automobile use. The river frontage is occupied by a thin strip of red -and black mangroves in various stages of development. On December 17, 1981, the County Planning and Zoning Commiss.ion conditionally approved, by a 3 to 2 vote, the site plan. On December 23, 1981, the Pelican Island Audubon Society filed an appeal regarding the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision of site plan approval. The appeal procedure for this action is established in Section 23 (i) Code of Ordinances, Indian River County, Florida. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Environmental analysis applicable to all design alternatives: The proposed project is located adjacent to Class II waters of the Indian River. Class II water is defined as coastal waters which have either actually or potentially the capability of supporting shellfish propagation or harvesting. Approved harvesting grounds are approximately one mile north of the proposed site. Florida Land Company, as a condition for site plan approval, is required to obtain dredge and fill permits from the State Department of Environmental Regulation and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. W At issue are the impacts of excavation on the water quality of the Indian River. Planning staff has elicited and received preliminary information from both the developer and the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. In reviewing this information, it is the opinion of staff that the following concerns must be further addressed and incorporated into the basin design: 1) The tidal exchange between the Indian River and the proposed basin - this must be effective enough to allow proper flushing. 2) Wind circulation - this must be sufficient to create upwelling between surface and bottom waters within the basin to provide proper circulation oxygenation. 3) Culvert size - this must be sufficient to allow adequate water exchange from the basin and the river. 4) Basin depth - this must be adequate to provide adequate exchange and avoid chemical stratification. 5) Spill protection - an effective system must be incorporated into the design to avoid accidental spills from entering open waters. Alternative A: Disapprove the site plan as indicated on the design drawings. The design drawings as shown, depict a drawbridge spanning a cut in Jungle Trail. This alternative would allow open water access to the proposed yacht basin and would place the County with the possible responsibility of operating and maintaining the bridge. The County, by assuming complete ownership control, could have complete responsibility for operation, maintenance, and any liability which may occur in the future. The County would need personnel to operate and repair a bascule type bridge facility. The County must also insure that an alternate loop road is provided for through traffic should the bridge be inoperable for an extended period of time. Staff ois of the opinion that the drawbridge concept be abandoned. In lieu of this, it is recommended that the applicant realign the roadway around the site and dedicate the realigned section to the County. The realigned section would be dedicated as an unimproved road to conform with the remainder of Jungle Trail. The applicant should also designate landscaping along the realigned section and designate an appropriate buffer between that section and the River Bend develop- ment. Staff also recommends that Florida Land Company dedicate, to the public, two park areas: * A 5 ± acre site west of Jungle Trail for conservation purposes * A site where the existing road section lies. Dedication should include that Florida Land Company provide passive recreation improvements to the site. If Florida Land Company modifies the site plan as proposed by staff, the plan must seek a new site plan approval as indicated in Section 23 (g) Indian River County Code of Ordinances. Alternative B: Approve the site plan as submitted. Approval of this alternative would allow the developer to build the yacht club as shown on the design drawings and would place the County with the possible responsi- bility of owning, operating, and maintaining the drawbridge. 37 JAN 27198 �3 685 J AN 2 198 �dK 8 pAu 686 RECOMMENDATION Alternative A: Disapprove the site plan as indicated on the design drawings and request Florida Land Company to resubmit the site plan with the modifications recommended by staff. Environmental design recommendation: Staff recommends that the environmental design concerns listed in the "Alternatives and Analysis" section be further addressed by the Department of Environmental Regulation and the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission through the State permitting process. Staff further recommends the Board of County Commissioners submit written approval of the proposed dredge/fill activity after consideration, in a public meeting, of the permit application as described in Chapter 17-A, Florida Administrative Codes. Discussion ensued as to the procedure to be followed on the advertised public hearing since it was felt that with the denial of the channel cut,this had become more or less a moot question. Attorney Brandenburg recommended that the Board allow the Audubon Society to present their appeal, Florida Land to present its rebuttal, and the floor to make comment. He pointed out that although site plan approval was conditioned upon the cut being approved, the site plan still exists on the records, the Audubon Society has presented an appropriate appeal, and he felt the Board should act on it. Commissioner Bird asked if the Audubon Society wished to withdraw its appeal in light of the previous Board action. Ray Fernald, president of the Pelican Island Audubon Society, stated that they do not wish to drop the appeal. He noted that their appeal was based mainly on procedural issues, and he did not see at this point the need to go through several more hours of discussion as to environmental and other impacts; although, they do have the information and expertise available. Attorney O'Haire reaffirmed that the Audubon Society does not want their appeal tabled, but wants it settled for once and all, and they do not propose to present any further testimony. M s � r Discussion arose as to the legal standing of the Audubon Society in regard to filing an appeal. Attorney Brandenburg believed they have standing to bring forth the procedural defects they perceive, and as to the question of whether they have standing to discuss the merits of the decision, he commented that the Commission has the authority to lower standards for in-house administrative appeals, and, in fact, the Commission did recently change the standing requirements for people bringing appeals to them from those with a legal interest to any other person having any aggrieved interest therein. Attorney Brandenburg noted that former County Attorney Collins expressed the feeling that this would allow just about any taxpayer in the county to present an appeal to the Commission. Attorney Henderson believed the matter is moot, and. felt it would be totally appropriate either for the Board to deny the appeal or the Audubon Society to withdraw. If they do not withdraw, however, he stated that Florida Land Company has objections to present. Attorney O'Haire, acting as legal counsel for the Audubon Society on the issue of standing stated that they will stand on their appeal letter to the Commission dated January 27, 1982, and asked that it be made a part of the record. JAN 2 7 198 2, 39 BOOT( 48 PM 687 r- I JAN 271982 pOc� 48 F-AGF.688 �41LCMAIFG& 09HAUR119 A=®RA-m--Y .vr LA --w January 27, 1982 Chairman and Members of the Indian River County Commission Vero Beach, FL 32960 Re: Appeal of River Bend Site Plan Approval/ Pelican Island Audobon Society Gentlemen: I am writing you in connection with the appeal taken by our client, the Pelican Island Audobon Society, from what appears to be a contingent approval of site plan granted a projL-ct known as "River Bend", which includes provision for a marina and draw span over the historic Jungle Trail, with substantial dredge and fill operations, and applied for by Robert Cairns, Trustee. As you are no doubt aware, ownership of the property and the true party in interest are uncertain, Florida Land Company and General Development Corporation having taken the posture of the developer. The Pelican Island Audobon Society includes within its membership many persons who live on Jungle Trail or in the vicinity of the proposed development. These members of the Society, as well as the Society itself, have a substantial interest in these proceedings and the proposed development. The aims and goals of the Audobon Society are familiar to everyone, centering on protection, conservation and preservation. The proposed -project, affecting, as it does, substantial wild- life and estaurine habitats is of concern to the Society, especially inasmuch as the proposed project abutts the Inter- coastal Waterway and Class 2 waters, including dredge and fill operations and a potential pollutant source of the Indian River. Additionally, residents of the area, members of the Society, have for many years enjoyed and needed Jungle Trail for access to one of the most historic and scenic areas of the county and to their homes and properties. This access will be impeded, even denied, by the impact of traffic over, and consequent erosion of, the Trail itself. A reading of the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission discloses any number of procedural defects in the proceedings affecting the Society and its members, including the following: `IiOMII771F"N'T IIPr1.I IT11TER • 1. 1.A.X II OPP°ICIE SMIISITII. 09MAE. QTLT11 X V? GARIRI i 3111 T'ARD12 AIL IDIIRIIVA • 'VINIR® BMACIII 3®d5- gal -69DO 40 IIi'&OIIBIIIDA 3S2960 o Chairman and Members of the Indian River County Commission Page Two January 27, 1982 (a) As previously stated, the true identity of the applicant has never been made clear, despite the requirements of the site plan approval ordinance; (b) The site plan being considered was not before and had not been presented to the Commission in final or approved form; (c) The Planning Staff were acknowledgedly unprepared for site plan consideration at the meeting; (d) The public and members of the Society were advised by staff prior to the meeting that this matter would not be considered and then were neither invited nor permitted to be heard. In view of the above and the County's long-standing policy permitting appeals from site plan approval by parties other than the owners and by concerned groups such as the Audobon Society, it is clear that the Society and its members have standing to take this appeal. MO'H/pkm i M Attorney Brandenburg noted that since it appears the I - Board is going to hear the appeal, he would suggest that by Motion the Commission make a part of this appeal and their consideration of it, the Minutes of the meeting of December 17th of the Planning & Zoning Commission and also incorporate into this record by reference those evidentiary matters heard earlier today regarding the Trail cut. Commissioner Lyons inquired about the letter written to him on December 23rd by Ray Fernald, president of the Audubon Society, and it was agreed that also should be part of the record. On Motion by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously admitted into the record as testimony the Minutes of the December 17, 1981 meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission, the letter from 41 JAN 27 19�198Z48 FAGF 689 �oo� JAN 2'7198'k e06K = 48 FAiGE 9 . Ray Fernald, president of the Audubon Society, and incorporated by reference those comments made by the public and professionals earlier today as related to the marina and the proposed cut through Jungle Trail. PELICAN ISLAND AUDUBON SOCIETY P. 0. Box 1833 VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960 t December 23, 1981 Mr. Patrick Lyons Chairman Indian River County Board of County Commissioners Indian River County Courthouse Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Re: An Appeal regarding the County Planning and Zoning, Commission's decision of site plan approval for the River Bend Yacht Club, as. rendered 17 December 1981. Dear Chairman Lyons and Members of the Commission: Whereas, the Planning Department, in determining that tllg Count" Commission should review aspects of this site plan proposal and render a decision prior to project consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission, was not prepared to present its findings and rebuttal rt-gardirb the yacht club site plan. In effect, the Planning and Zoning Commission rendered its opinion without hearing and considering the Planning Department's recommendations. And, whereas, the biological assessment prepared by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission at the personal request of the Planning Department's Director was not circulated to the Placnii.g and Zoning Commission before the meeting of December 17. As a resu-t, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted on an issue they admittedly: dial not understand, without seeking -further pertinent information and technical advice which were readily available from local, State and Federal agencies i and organizations. And, whereas, Pelican Island Audubon Society and the Florida Grime and Fresh Water Fish Commission were advised by the Planning Department Director that, at the December 17 meeting of the Planning an•l Zoning Commission, the yacht club site plan was not going to be discussed, but simply referred to the County Commission for review. Pelican Island Audubon Society was 'further advised that, since there would be no decision reached, the Society should reserve its comments for presentation to the County Commission. And, whereas, Mrs. Ann Robinson, Conservation Chairman for Pelican Island Audubon Society, was not permitted to pres.nit the Society's view regarding the yacht club site plan during discussion of the motion to approve the site plan. And, where: s, thn applicant.';; represcnt:ative at the December 17 meeting of the Planning and Z.onlnf; G)mmissfrin implied that the Florida Game andrFresh Water. Fish Commission was not qualified to assess the marina plan, and stated that their comments were inappropriate at that time. In fact, the letter from Mr. Barnett which was read into the minutes was specifically solicited by the County Planning Department Director for use in preparation of their recommendation. The present office staff of the South Florida Section, Office of Envirottmental Services, of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission has over 45 years cumulative experience in assessing ecological impacts of dredge and fill activities, including water quality impacts of marina basins. And, whereas, other. pertinent information including resolutions of objection, and personal letters from concerned citizens were not presented at the December 17 neeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Therefore, the Board of. Directors of Pelican Island Audubon Society hereby appeals to the 'Indian River G)unty Board of Commissioners to review the actic•n of the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the River. Bend Yacht Club Site Plan, as taken on 17 December 1981. We further petition the Board 'of (ouuty Commissioners to hold a public hoarinp on this site plan, or to remand the site plan to the Planning --nd Zorin;; Commission for reconsideration. I Filed with the Indian River County Building Department on 23 December ' ugl. Sincerely fours, _ Pelienn 1r0i:nld. ProsidW I'elicnn L;land Audubon RD FT OF DECEMBER 17, 198WNNING & ZONING C0:1ZISSPN44■, ETIING Mrs. Goetzfried said a ccmplete site plan application had been submitted, adequate provisions had been made for drainage, parking landscaping, and staff recommended approval. Mr. Parent moved to approve the JAMES McKEEVER site plan; Mrs. Bowman seconded and the Board unanimously approved. ITEM #9, RIVER BEND YACHT CLUB, was presented to the Board by Mrs. Goetzfried. She said this original application was submitted in September of 1981. Mr. Robert Cairns, Trustee,.and Mr. James Newlon, Agent, propose to construct a private 96 slip yacht basin on approximately 8.1 acres of property located 1/2 mile south of Wabasso Beach Road on the east side o -f_ Jungle Trail. She said they proposed to dredge a 5.46 acre basin, along with a 40 foot channel through Jungle Trail (which would connect the Intra -coastal waterway_ with this basin). This also includes a drawbridge, an offshoot park-, ing area, and provisions for 96 boats. Mrs. Goetzfried said at this time, the Planning staff recommends the decision on this site plan be deferred as far as policy' goes on the drawbridge and provisions for an alternate road (beings this is a road that has not been dedicated to Indian River County by the applicant, but through prescriptive rights and maintenance, this road is Indian River County's which the applicants do not agree with. They have made provisions for a limited -easement -access road that when the bridge was up or being repaired, the route -road would be opened. She went on to say the road would be Florida Land's ownership and they would have control over the use of 'this road. Mrs. Goetzfried said the Planning staff recommended the Commissioner's decision be postponed at this time; simply because policy has not been established on the use of a drawbridge on public road and is it appropriate for the County to abandon its rights to a portion of this road and to the title of:what type of easement or full dedication would be granted for the route road, and until these pol cies.are set, the Planning Department felt it would premature for the staff to make a recommendation at this time. Mr. Brandenburg said one possible point of correction with the statement given by staff was he was not sure the representa- tives, of the applicant have denied rights and ownership of that road at this point. The Chairman stated the County Commission had made it JAN 2 7 1982-11- EOOK S PAGE 691 JAN 27 199 ���� 8 muc 692 very clear in the past that the Planning and Zoning Cormnissio not pass anything contingent on action on their n could .�to be t m�-rendation of the attorney that we havepart, and settled b this matter also,it is the reco y the County Commission,due to policy matters, prior to our looking at the site plan. Mr. Brandenburg stated his opinion was they may Postpone this if they desired to; g p in order to et an opinion by the Board of County Commissioners on the other items first; but he di mend to do that, d not recom- mend of the criteria for judging a site plan is all means of ingress and egress, indicating widths and certainly access to the public right-of-way, this through the marina, isn`t settled at this point; and if the :. Y felt it should they could defer it to the County Commissioners. The Chairman stated it was her personal opinion that this matter should be settled before they review the site she had given her views to Florida Land before.e Plan and that her opinion was their a She went on to say application was not complete at this point, with the problem of Jungle Trail and ingress and egress. Mr. Jones said he understood the Board had less latitud for site plan a e pproval, or denial then under, say for example, rezoning, and was told by the attorney that he was correct . from the issue of the drawbridge,was the application felt' aside pplication complete in terms of all information regarding the site plans for other could determine was correct, things that they Mr. Brandenburg said he was there to offer legal advise the Board had information in their packets from the planners and if they felt that packet was not complete, - the c , Y oLld use their discre- tion to hear this tonight if they wanted to, The Chairman stated the final site plan had not bee submitted to them-due to the Planning Department fee n Problems had to be Ling that these resolved. Mr. Parent questioned if the packet the had several weeks ag °whi� Y d received ch stated the different problems needing to be corrected, had been done. Mr. Rever commented some of them had been taken car during a meeting e of Of their company and the County staff, One problem the road solution kept getting bigger and bigger and th County commission should the resolve ey felt - IiiWd let it come back to, -12- Planning and Zoning Commission at a presentation He added if they wished to hear it tonight;thev could deal with that. Mr. Parent stated he was tired of seeing Florida Land coming in and not being heard. He felt for their sake, he would like to be informed what their status was. The Chairman said they would have to decide if it should go before the County Commission first; and then they should decide if they wanted to hear it. Mr. Tippin felt the legal matters would involve an extended time, but on the other hand, were they allowing everything else to run along concurrently. He said it may take two years before the legal matters are settled, but the Chairman stated it would be more like a month or two. Mr. Tippin said if.there were technical deficiences that still existed and could be dealt with by the staff, while the legal was being decided,they should go on and hear it. The Chairman said if this went before the County Commission and they approved it; it would come back to them immediately to go through site plan approval. She stated she could appreciate all Florida Land had gone through but felt it best not to pass anything contingent on action to be taken on the County Commission`s part, as per their past instructions had been.-- Mr. een.= Mr. Rever said it was staff's recommendation that this application was incomplete until the road issue was agreed to and would have to be answered one -way -or -the -other. Mr. Tippin brought up the Lunka Brothers, in The Moorings, had to go through permitting processes for three years before being able to start construction, and the time phase was such they would have to get started someplace on this,project in order to get it moving. Mrs. Ann Robinson, Chairman of the Conservation Committee, addressed the Board. She stated, according to the R-2, Multi -Family District wording; a yacht basin is not listed as a permitted use in a R-2, Multi -Family District, and wanted to raise this before any further discussion got started. • The Chairman stated they would deal with that point later, Mr. Steve Henderson, Attorney representing Florida Landc1'� '48 UU 9�� -13- JAN 271982 aooK 48. P11 F.694 informed the Board that eight persons representing Florida Land were present for this meeting and had driven from Orlando to at least make a formai presentation to the Board. He stated it was true they had been cautioned by the Planning Department that their department was recommending to the Board.to defer their decision, but they had,!under- stood that would not foreclose a presentation for the project itself; and they would like to lay out the plans, and site plans before this Board for their consideration and that the issue regarding the draw- bridge and loop road, while they did concern this Board in regards to traffic flow and access, they were basically questions that would be answered by the County Commission. Mr. Henderson commented there had"been some really rash mis- statements of what their plans were in respect to the drawbridge and loop road. He said they had never questioned the ownership of Jungle Trail being vested to the County; what they did question was possible errosion and how extensive the easement of the constriction is; but they had never challanged it; yet it was stated in the paper and the Attorney's staff, that they had contested the ownership of that road. Secondly, the drawbridge - they were not requesting abandonment of the right-of-way, but were prepared to dedicate it; and thirdly, the loop road - they were willing to dedicate or with an'.easement; and that the Planning staff seemed to be pressing the dedication and he a felt that matter was best left up to the County Attorney's office. He stated there were a lot of reasons why there should not be a dedica- tion; reasons in favor of the County; but they were prepared to go either way on that. He didn't want to make it sound like the applicant was taking a position on that, but would appreciate being heard now. Ile said they would like a decision now because this matter has been in the Planning Department for three months, as to the specific Yacht Club Plan. The plan itself was partfof another plan which had been in the Planning Department for almost a year. Mr. Henderson said a wealth of information had been presented to the Planning Department; they had hired some of the most renowned experts in Florida in the environmental area; they had tech- nical information to submit to the Board in support of this project; and they would like the opportunity to do so. The Chairman reiterated the main point was they had not heard a policy statement from the County Commission as to whether -- =4- they would permit a bridge on Jungle Trail and allow a marina to go through. They had no clearly defined, voted upon, policy of the County Commision, they just hadn't received it, even though they had tried. She said personally she felt if this went before the County Commission and got things resolved (whether they would allow a bridge there) on'ce.this was solved, no matter what they heard tonight would have to be rehear it in to -.to. She commented she --had letters at home that she hadn't brought and hadn't received the final information from the Planning Department. She said they had distributed the letters that had been sent; the copy of the ease- ment and things like that; but what concerned her the most would be to hear it would be in essence saying, "We know what the decision of the County Commission will be, therefore,we will go ahead and hear it," She stated it was aomewhat similar to the Commissions`.reaction,to our doing something contingent on a decision, earlier. She said they simply needed to wait to see what they said; to hear it now would be a waste of everyone's time that was here tonight; if they heard it,and nothing positive would happen. Mr. Henderson was concerned about the Planning Department not including a site plan package in the Board's packets that evening; in essence, the Director of the Planning Department was making their decision for them. Mr. Jones said that was his point to the Attorney, Mrs. Goetzfried stated the staff was, hopeful the Board had retained their original site plan package and the Chairman said they had but they would need a more recent site plan with all the added corrections on it. Mr. Henderson addressed the Board again and said their concern was having been to four or five meetings before this Board, his clients still had not been given the opportunity to be heard and this could drag on to May. He said he had submitted drafts of an agreement to the County Attorney's office weeks ago; and asked why this Board could not make recommendations to the County Commission as to whether they thought a drawbridge should be installed on Jungle Trail. He asked what this Board thought about access being dedicated or an easement created. Mr. Henderson commented everytime the Board heard a zoning matter, it went before the County Commission with their JAN 2 71 Roou 9�1�. -15- 8 PA,E 695 J soonFir ��s JAN.27 19�� recommendation, therefore, this Board's decision was contingent upon the County Commission's approval. Mr. Brandenburg corrected him saying site plans were approve( and final at this Board, but that rezoning requests were recommended for approval by the Commissioners, so there was a distinction between the two. Mr. Henderson stated the various approvals and permitting procedures they would have to go through with different departments in the government for this proposed site plan; and said this Board's approval of their site plan contingent, in effect, on approval of a dozen different agencies. 1� Chairman Eggert corrected him by stating these other agencies were outside our county. She said they must live under the directions given to them by the County Commission. She asked for Mr. Neal Nelson, County Administrator, who was sitting in the audience, if he would comment on the length of time he felt it would take for this site plan to come before the County Commissioners and he said they had no meetings before January 6th, and perhaps would be able to have this ready to be heard by the Commissioners at that time. The Chairman added it was quite possible this would appear before them in January. Mr. Rieder, of the Vero Beach Civic Association, addressed the Board and questioned the need to go any further, if R-2 does not allow, as a permitted use, this marina. Mr. Brandenburg gave his analysis of the R-2 District, as it related to this proposed use, he would be happy to do that, but he felt it would be more appropriate for the Board to decide whether or not they would hear this site plan or not. The Board asked him to continue with his analysis. Mr. Brandenburg said if they would look into the R-2 District, they would find there are Accessory Uses; if they would then go and look at the wording, as to what constitutes an A.ccessory Use, they would find the definition to be very broad. The only way to determine the allowable uses would be to look at the historical pattern of what had been allowed as uses in the past. He commented on the amount of time he and the Planning; Department staff had spent, looking at past Accessory Uses that were allowed in the County in that district,and that this would clearly fall into that category of existing uses that had been established by this historical pattern. Mr.. Brandenburg stated he did not feel the wording of the Ordinance itself was basis enough for denial, or prevention for this petition to go forward, on that basis. The Chairman suggested having two votes; the first would be whether or not to defer this to such time the County Commission could establish policy on Jungle Trail, the bridge, etc.; and the second one would be whatever their decision was, did they want to hear further site plan information at this point? Mr. Parent stated he would like to hear what the problems, were. His reasons were having heard the recommendation from staff the first time this was brought before them, he would now like to know how they had been corrected and what needed to be done. The Chairman called for a vote of each individual member of the Board as to whether or not they wished to hear -the site plan request, after Mr. Parent stated he wanted to hear them tonight instead of waiting for the County Commission to decide on policy. Mr. Brandenburg said there were three alternatives for them to --look at: 1. To consider the entire presentation tonight; 2. Defer the entire matter and not hear any presentation at all; 3. To hear the presentation tonight, because the representatives had traveled from Orlando, and defer action on the matter (table decision) until such time the Commissioners decides the issue on the road and bridge. Mr. Jones questioned the issue concerning the resolution of the road and bridge, as it relates to the site plan, traffic patterns, ingress and egress, etc. Mr. Brandenburg answered there was more to it than that. He stated it was a decision by the County Board of Commissioners whether or not they wanted to allow a break in a publicly owned road, to access a private marina for the use of a residential development. He said it was a policy decision that had to be made by the Board of County Commis- sioners, and not a legal decision as was eluded to earlier. If the Board decides to allow the breech in the road for that purpose, then he would sit down with the appropriate attorneys from the developers and reach JAN 27 NAV aou 8 PAGE69 6�ry L_ -17- JAN 271991 ��F68 an agreement that would be satisfactory to the Board of County Commissioner; from a legal standpoint. Mr. Jones moved to hear the presentation of the developers on the River Bend Yacht Club, proposed site plan, which Mr. Parent seconded and unanimously approved by the Board. A letter from Dr. Christenson, dealing with the environ- mental impact of the water basin itself, its effect upon the surrounding environment; the agreement that Mr. Henderson had previously prepared concerning the bridge and loop road were passed out to.the Board members by Mr. Henderson. Mr. Henderson told the Board Dr. Christenson couldn't be at this meeting the file he was presenting contained computer models and the___ determination of pollution factors within any part of that basin. The letter is attached to these minutes. Mr. Henderson stated his clients felt the site selected for this marina was the best site available in Indian River County due to the elevations involved and the depths out in the Indian River. He commented if the Board ultimately disapproved of this project he thought it really meant they would be disapproving any yacht club or marina facility within Indian River County. He again stated the number of months this.site plan had been in the Planning Department since it was submitted and that all the information they had been requested to furnish had been given. Mr. Henderson asked for'a statement from the Planning Staff before the presentation of their site plan was given, saying that they had complied with everything that had been requested..of,-.them so far. He mentioned the meeting held earlier in the month where they reviewed the application, in light of the recommendations that were made at the previous meeting were thete were several questions, and where several things were filed. What they wanted to know, before moving any further, is, do they feel that the packet is now complete, but for the County Commission's decision on policy? Chairman Eggert stated all members of the Board would like to know that answer.and asked Mr. Rever if he could give them that'informa- tion. Mr. Rever addressed the Board and told them his department did have a statement to make. He stated he thought the motion of the Board was that the developer would give his presentation and if they wished -18- his department to give their presentation_, they were willing to do so. In answering all the questions, Mr. Rever stated they would have to deal with .all the issues before them. Mr. Challacombe then addressed the Board and said they had requested the package, especially with the environmental information re- lated to this site plan. He stated they were forwarded a letter explain- ing, quote, "What they will do," in terms of addressing this at a later date. The letter was forwarded to the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission for their analysis and opinion about the proposals that Florida Land wished to establish concerning environmental issues.and asked to read their letter into the minutes. The letter is attached to these minutes. Mr. Challacombe wished to point out they had requested specific environmental information of this nature, of Florida Land,and , had not been given that type of information. He went on to say, the only information they had received was in the packets the Board had been given and his department did not feel this was sufficient information as such, to provide answers to the c6mments and recommendations of their first recommendation the Board had received from his department, concern- ing the environmental impact. The Chairman requested Mr. Challacombe to specifically state what information they would like to receive from Florida Land that had not been received. Mr. Challacombe said he would have to go back to the original recommendation that had been postponed. After a brief delay to obtain the original recommendation from his file, Mr. Challacombe stated their original questions were: There had been no definitive answers to the issues made by the Director of Public Works at the Technical Review Com- mittee meeting held on October 261 1981. Item A. How would the east side of Indian,River be stabilized? Florida Land did answer that question to our satisfaction. Item B. 'The analysis by an independent firm to determinethe effect of flooding in the proposed basin will have on water resources within the area. Mr. Challacombe stated they had not received a response to that question. Item C. Can flushing circulation be pro- vided to prevent stagnation conditions? They had not yet received an answer to that question.that was satisfactory to the Planning Department. Mr. Challacombe then listed the environmental concerns, The Department of Environmental Regulation had designated the Indian River JAN 27 198, _19- Em 48 FAGE �?�99 i�Ut{ Fri �I 70 0 JAN � 7 ,gg � in the area of the proposed development, is Class II Waters. He said the Administrative Code of Florida, Chapter 17-3, stated that, "These rivers either actively or potentially have the capability of supporting recreational or commercial shellfish propagation and harvesting." The Indian River, from the North Relief Canal, North, past the Brevard County Line, was designated as Class II Waters, Mr. Challacombe informed the Board, and his department, along with Mr. Barnett's letter from the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission,expressed.concerns for this designated area, and they had not received adequate information from Florida Land about these concerns. Mr. Challacombe also listed the concerns__over the heavy metals that the proper paint found on the bottom'of boats would have on a lot of grasses on the river bottom; this too had not been answered to their satisfaction. Mr. Parent questioned Mr. Challacombe as to these four technicalities being the only "hang ups" other than the drawbridge and loop road; and Mr. Challacombe answered that they were. Mr. Henderson stood up and said the basic response was, "Nice.of you to let us.know." lie said the information they had submitted had been earlier in the month and they never heard "one -iota" of a complaint out of the Planning staff, regarding inadequacy. The Chairman asked if this hadn't been discussed at the joint meeting held earlier in the month; and Mr. Henderson responded saying after that meeting; the requests that were made, were responded to, and they were not advised at all that the Planning Department was still considering their response, inadequate, till now. Mr. Henderson said,however, they did have a response to the letter in the form of the environmentalist who was present with them now; a real live person, instead of a letter; and felt this would be a good time to present him to the Board. Mr. Jones injected he had one question he would first like to ask the Planning Department; if a marina basin was a source of pollut- ant in Class II Waters, he wondered if the apparent implications of the contradiction between not having enough flushing action, and therefore creating a polluted pond; versus having enough flushing action could there- fore be rated as Class II Waters existing outside of the marina? -20- Mr. Henderson asked the Board to please note the salt fish were indicated as south, whereas, the shellfish beds were not. Mr. Jim Thomas, Biologist for addressed the Board. He stated as a biologist it was his role in this development process to look for environmental problems and try to address them in various stages of development. He said he had not had a chance to see, or hear about the letter Mr. Challacombe mentioned he had re- ceived from the Fish & Game Commission, till now. He felt this was not the place to get into technical discussion of this sort. He said he could certainly contest chemical stratification and other things mentioned in the letter to the Board but asked that he be allowed to remind the Board of the process they must follow after this stage of receiving County approv- al was made. Mr. Thomas noted the DER, Corp of Engineers and by that time, at least eight (8) state and federal agencies would review the technical aspects of this process; the proper place for the Fish & Game Commission letter, would be at that point. He also noted that one of the departments answering to the DER was the Game & Fish. Mr. Thomas explained how the DER had a technical staff capable of evaluating that type of thing (data) and most Counties did not have qualified staff capable of evaluating the technical data required. He stated without DER approval, this project could really not be built. He wanted to submit to the Board, the proper place for that letter to be submitted would be in the permitting 1. process that comes after County approval. Mr. Thomas offered to take the letter, piece by piece, and contest the technical things there, for the Board; but again he submitted this was not the proper time. Mr. Jones asked Mr. Brandenburg to what extent in the site plan approval, do these technical questions intrude or influence the Board's decission in this matter? He also asked if the point Mr. Thomas was making was'a good one? Mr. Brandenburg thought even though the project has to go through subsequent processing to other governmental agencies, this Board should judge this project on its own; as if it did not, under County standards, by itself; and take a look at all the aspects of it and review it carefully. He thought Mr. Thomas was correcting in stating this was not..(he injected this was not his job to feel one way or the other, whether this was a technical form for that type of scienctific analysis of strat- ification, etc,), JAN 27 1 :Z -21- E-m 4 �S" PAGE I U � JAN 271982 POOK '8 Fa 702 Mr. Thomas told the Board once the DER receives comments like those from the Game and Fish Commission, and once Federal Agencies like the EPA and National Marine Fisheries, submitted their comments to the Corp, all this put together; the DER technical staff reviews all comments from these agencies and then they make their own biological and technical report. He went on to say, under the law, that report must be made to the County Commission and read into their minutes and approval of the County Commission; so the County certainly does approve those technical aspects in that way, after the DER has evaluated the property. Mr. Jones questioned to what extent, the local government agencies, through oral or written presentation, participate in this additional, Federal and State review? Mr. Thomas answered that some would comment on the environ- mental aspects, and some would not. He noted they would be given the opportunity to do so if they desired. Mr. Jones then asked the Chairman if it would be her pleasure for the Board to proceed questions relating to these technical matters, or if the Board should pursue the matter in a more general sense. The Chairman stated it would be up the the members of the Commission and.she felt they shouldn't ignore anything; if it was his wish to get technical; technical he would get. She further added if it was the Board's wish, under these circumstances, to go ahead to general things; she thought that had always been the question;, "Should the County take some responsibility for what is going on in the procedures, or shall we depend entirely on the State and their permitting procedures." Mr. Jones said he based his question on anticipation of the technical matter being on-going, continuous and extensive; he'd be less inclined to want more information; but if it wasn't, he would; but didn't want to ask questions till 11 P.M. and everyone was asleep. He suggested perhaps the Board should be told as to how they should persue this matter. The Chairman then called for an answer from the Planning Department as to how extensive and continuous the technical matter would be. ° The question was raised by Mr. Jones as to how involved the Planning Department would be in the other permitting process of.zhe other State and Federal Agencies and was told by Mr. Rever they would -22- � � r not be strongly involved but he wished to reiterate that it has been an on-going question that the County should become more aware of its own powers and its own ability to make decisions about these issues, and not rely on other agencies to do so. Mr. Rever further mentioned they were making an attempt to do just what he had stated, and become more involved. He noted the information that was read tonight was available and stated once more that his office had just received that letter. Mr. Rever again mentioned it was his departments intention to defer this site plan and had not planned to discuss it at this time. He. -said his department had no problem with hearing Mr. Henderson's clients presentation. Mr. Rever felt the developer had brought along their experts and due to his staff being limited and had no available experts immediately on staff; they chose to seek other opinions (he clarified, not theirs, not ours, but others). Mr. Rever also mentioned to the Board they had access to other experts and opinions, but they were not available that evening. Mr. Rever stated as the Director of the department there were still questions and he wasn't sure they would be answered•by his department or by the developers. He concurred the questions may have to be answered at a higher level and have the opportunity to come back to the County. He stated he did think there were questions asked that had not been fully addressed; and said he knew of questions brought up since the last meeting with Florida Land and didn't think either of them had time to address them for this particular meeting; and felt there would be on-going questions with this. Mr. Tippin said in the interest of fairness, he felt there were a few communications problems here. He said Mr. Henderson asked a question which Mr. Challacombe answered by his letter from the Fish and Game Commission and in all fairness, if,there was a rebuttal to that statement they would have to listen to it. The Chairman commented it seemed everything was dangling and she would be quite willing to hear anything Florida Land wished to say. Mr. Thomas said he certainly wanted to respond to the technical questions raised, as much as the Board wished to hear about it. He felt it would be best to pursue the general information first and then come back to his more technical portion after that. Mr. Thomas then 'AN 27 1982 -23- Enol( 8 RUM ®J JAN 2'71992 BooK 48 Face 704 requested a copy of the letter the Fish and Game Commission had sent to the Planning Department for his records and noted this was the first he had heard of it too. The Chairman noted this was the only available copy and allowed Mr. Thomas to read it. Mr. Henderson stated Mr. Jim Beindorf of Beindorf Associ- ates had a few words about the layout of the project and while he was computing his figures, Mr. Henderson commented that the local Planning Staff was putting them through a mini -DER approval and noted though it wasn't anyone's fault; the Planning Department had no one on its staff with the expertise to deal with these highly"technical problems and questions and needed the Fish and Game Commission's help. He noted the DER would required data from the Fish and Game as well. He noted they were prepared to deal with the technical data but he questioned whether this.Board or staff is prepared for any of it, and admitted he didn't understand some of the termonology. The Chairman assured Mr..Henderson that the Board had varying degrees of expertise but has tried very hard .to pick up back- ground when it is needed. Mr. Jones agreed to the limit of their ability, but if .the citizens, through the Planning and Zoning Board, Planning Department and County Commission are going to be part of the additional process with the DER and all the other agencies that are going to be involved; we at least have got to have (call it if you will) a superficial technical argument over the thing in order to at least make a "superficial recom- mendation", that will be a part of the additional body of information that is going to be reviewed. He said even if someone in Tallahassee thought it was just Mr. Jones' opinion on that Board, he could at least say he listened to the information and felt he must listen to some of it in order to be able to form an opinion. The Chairman injected "good, bad, or indifferant, but your own opinion." Mr. Henderson stated he wasn't suggesting they pass it over, but pointed out the complexity of the information and stated that is why the DER issues permits and that was the process they put a developer through and this vas the 1:ind of information they demanded; the only difference,he pointed out, they were getting these demands from the CountlWng Board. He then turrMe floor over to Mr. Be JW. 1) The Chairman first pointed out the letters received from Mr. Christenson and Mr. Crosby's letter were quite clear. Mr. Beindorf thanked the Board for letting them be heard. He stated they wanted to make it as simple as possible. Mr. Beindorf informed the Board they had been trying to present this project for over a year. He emphasized "yacht club" and not marina and noted the distinction between the two; the marina has a more commercial aspect in servicing the public, in general; either in refueling, servicing of boats, etc.. Mr. Beindorf emphasized their project was a private yacht club. He reiterated the numerous meetings held between staff, his office, the developers, soforth; trying to work out a program to get the site plan before the Board. He stated the many permitting pro- cedures they must go through because the very nature of their project is, on navicable waters or public waters. He said it just happened that this particular one in the county was in the "Class II Waters". He noted the difficulty Mrs. Goetzfried had at one point and said his office tried to help them understand what could go into Class II Waters, what was allowed in Class II Waters, and things of that nature. Mr. Beindorf stated they tried to be as objective as possible. Mr. Beindorf then introduced the officers of General Development to the Board who had traveled from Winter Park to attent the meeting, along with the staff engineers from Putnam and Depeau. He then told the Board of the many meetings where these gentlemen and Dr. Christensen had meet with the staff to try and iron out these diffi- culties, any questions that existed in their minds.' Mr. Beindorf stated Dr. Christensen had answered these questions, to the best of his ability, what things he had discussed with all parties and would be available to follow up on any matters. Mr. Beindorf noted somewhere along the line, you had to get started, somewhere, in this permitting process; you can't go to the State Agencies without local approval. They were aware they had to come to the County for their approval and expected to spend another 18 months obtaining the rest of the necessary permits from the DER, Corp of Engineers, Florida Engineers, Game and Fish, Coast Guard (probably will issue permit on the bridge) and all the County staff. Ile commented again on their willingness to give all information to the staff;.he realized the contro- versy stirred up .over this project and made. a trip to the dredge and fill AR N 2 7 1N2 48 PVT. 705 -25- JAN 27 192 people, which are under the DER and the St. John's Water Management District (is another agency we will need to go through for the permitting process) and discussed the possibilities of getting something mentioned at this point that would be of benefit to all of us in a project of this nature. They indicated they had "chatted a little bit" with staff, as well as the Fish and Game have "chatted a little bit" and at this point they have nothing to comment on, because nothing has been presented to them. They can't deny it, they can't give approval. He pointed out in Chapter 17-3 and 17-4, of the Permitting Ordinance of the DER, that as long as you show you are not going to degrade the water or interfere with existing shell fish beds, a permit is in order, providing you don't have any adverse objections from local agencies for;this.and if you do; you have to go into Administrative hearings. It was apparent to Mr. Beindorf that the Fish and Game, along with the Dredge and Fill people had a concern of the flushing of the yacht basin (this is where Dr. Christensen would come in). He went into the many qualifications of Dr. Christensen at this point before continuing. He noted the River Bend project was going to be a very fine residential type development that went from ocean to river, and that consequently the river portion of it blends itself well, to having a yacht basin to service the type of person that would be living in this area. He said this portion was located on the southwest corner of the property. Mr. Beindorf stated the Intra -Coastal Waterway was within 85-90 feet of the shoreline (existing shoreline) of the area for the yacht basin. The soundings that were took of that.area were displayed to the Board. The digging and dredging of a channel, contemplated if proper permitting was approved, from the Intra -Coastal Waterway, through the Jungle Road and into the Yacht Basin, was shown to the Board on the charts Mr. Beindorf had available for them. Mr. Jones had a question on the river bottom and elevation. He aked what the nature of the river bottom was and asked if it was sterile Mr. Beindorf answered him by saying they had taken a sound- ing rod and didn't do anything more; but he thought it would be pretty hard and shallow. Mr. Clark, owner of Florida Land Company and developers answered he had been out there with his boat 14 months before and noted there were no grasses on the bottom, only heavy, coarse shell, nearly the entire length leading to the Intra -Coastal Waterway. As far south (approximately 300 yards) he noted no appreciable amount of grasses, but found some clumps of grasses south of their property (approximately 200- 300 yards). North to the section of mangroves that sticks out east of Jungle Trail, he found no grasses.of any kind; he said it was a sterile bottom, heavily scorned, with a lot of wind action in there. Mr. Beindorf then pointed out the advantages of the location to the Board. He said the fact that he had read in the paper, or heard that a long channel had to be dredged and that just wasn't true. The Intra -Coastal Waterway was close at this point. He stated he had serious doubts they would find much of a shell fish bed there due to the boat traffic and all, and the deep water that exists along this shoreline. Going back to the first site plan and talking a little about what they proposed to do, Mr. Beindorf said the plan was a little over 8_ acres in size (from the outside property line, all the way to the Indian River shoreline), Within this site, they proposed to accom- modate boats from 30 feet in length, to 40-45 feet in length. The depth., was proposed for the sail boats anticipated in this area. They devised the plan that had good protection. They felt the existing shoreline would be very protected and that came about through meetings with the Planning staff. Mr. Beindorf said the County Engineer needed more infor- mation on shoreline protection (types) and noted the only thingspresent there now were mangroves. N-. Mr. Beindorf said the interior shoreline, within the marina itself, would Ve sloping banks and not vertical banks, with shore -- line protection. The dock (fuel) would have a vertical wall right next to it. He said the ability to construct a marina, because of.the limited access and a 42" culvert (which, by the way is being proposed by Dr. Chris- tensen from the original 24") allows that area to be completely excavated, material fall off and be deposited, and the plug would be the last thing that would be constructed before the bridge would be built. Mr. Beindorf stated they tried to design a system where they did shade long dock tra- dition to the shoreline to destruct any future grasses which might grow along the river bank. OAfter the DER frowned upon that, we know it, and tried to eliminate that': Mr. Beindorf again stated the design was a good one. The layout would accommodate the private type of yacht basin and should be an easy one to service. If there would be a any spills, such as fuel, you must have an emergency fuel -spill program in order to obtain rmi BON PACE JAN 2 71992 r too 48 PAF 708 JAN 27 1982 Mr. Beindorf answered auestion Mr. Jones had asked about t how much fuel spill would there have to be; with the statement if a boat was being fueled completely over ran, or a pump misfunctioned, the DER had no particular program, the developer would have to have his own program set up for fires. A floating tank with a curtain you could spread out quickly to isolate a spill or fire. The air bubble Dr. Christiansen had come up with was mentioned. Mr. Beindorf said he was pointing all this out to the Board; along with the 4-5 meetings held with the staff; engineer. They had indicated much of the information they were asking for was beyond the site plan approval scope; due to it taking a great deal of detail going into model studies and such. He again reiterated the DER would not approve their permit without local satisfication. Mr. Jones asked the nature of the site to be dredged. Mr. Beindorf stated the area to be excavated would be less than the 8 acres, approximately 150-200,000 cubic yards. In all probability it would be done with pans and draglines because it can be done without the connection being connected to the river. There would be no damage of silting to the river. The fill would go on the other part of River Bend. He said he wasn't aware of having to get permits to take fill from one area of your property, over to the other. Mr. Jim Thomas wanted to bring out several points that he was concerned with at the very beginning. Erosion Control - on Jungle Trail (western side) there is a real erosion problem there now, its actually eating into the road itself. They propose a fringe of mangroves, a minimum of 20 feet. They realized they would have a high energy problem there with waste from boats crashing into the shore and what he proposed was a series of wooden boxes, terraced, that the man- groves would be planted in. The wood would be untreated, and would give the mangroves a couple of years to get established and would eventually decay and the mangroves would be established and hold that bank. In front of that, 8 feet out, we propose a wooden backhold that would absorb the energy from that waste, giving the mangroves a chance to establish. Inside the marina, Mr. Thomas said along the whole edge there would be a sloping bank (shallow) and he proposed to plant a 12 foot edge of Spartana, a very productive grass that grows quickly, and holds firmly, and is used for marine purposes and gives a very ecological value to the equisetum for'.years to come. Looking at the actual design of the basin itself, fir. Thomas again plauded Dr. Christensen and his accomplishments and back- ground. fie briefly pointed out what Dr. Christensen would have to prove to them and all the other agencies that they were not going to cause the degradation of water. He briefed the Board on the things they wanted to happen to keep the ecology as it should be and prevent the export of any pollution was to have a good mixture of all the elements that should be there. Oxygen was listed as the primary element; formed by the many little plants but mostly from the surface, absorbtion from the surface. At the lower level there will not be a great deal of oxygen unless there is something that is going to cause a mixing. In tropical waters, the primary turn -over factor is wind, crossing the surface, creating this convection and mixing these things. One of the things they were trying to prevent, which was, mentioned in the letter Mr. Challacombe read, was chemical stratification. Thi§ is some toxic substance that doesn't get mixed and accumulates and will kill fish. As you design a basin, these are some of the factors that are going to be involved in mitring this. The technique -designed by Dr. Christensen and his staff, and the past seven years research, has shown you can put together a computer model that will show you, as you plug in all the factors here, what will happen. This isn't something that is just on paper, it can then be tested in a model situation to see the -mixing will occur like the computer says it will. The tidal fluctuation was then discussed by Mr. Thomas. He said all they could say was they knew about that, he would plug into that tidal situation, just as it is, into the computer model. The question raised in that letter becomes a part of the methodology and at the end of that, the answers that come out show just how much of the mixing they will get. He felt Dr. Christensen's letter answered that concern; he stated what they were saying was, "Yes,, the methods are now available to determine that and to plug all those factors into the design." Mr. Jones said that was fine, but the Board was concerned with those factors and thought the Planning staff has raised some questions about assumptions concerning those factors and how they might fit into those models. He again stated he was concerned with the factors and not the models. Mr. Thomas stated the final design had not been completed. JAN 271982 600K PA(GE709 L -2.9- JAN 27 1982 48 F%V7 710 There will be negotiations and changes made, perhaps if necessary, in depths and other configurations. The thing he wanted to'point out to the Board was they knew how to do that, they had those factors and they had to consider the source of this kind of statement, coming from some- one like Dr. Christensen is going to approved at finally, over not going any further than him. Mr. Jones asked if a factor is fed into this model and ends - in a_ --result the DER does not find meaningful, then the model has to be changed, therefore something on the site has to be changed; then what happens? Do they have to come back and get another site plan approval? Mr. Brandenburg answered they would have to come back for a modification of the site plan; if it was a significant change ..... he was interrupted by Mr. Jones who commented,'"presumably, nothing would have been done at this stage on the site;" and Mr. Brandenburg said that was correct. Mr. Thomas stated he didn't think they ever submf't a complete and final construction drawings at this stage of the process; one of the most important factors in this mixing process was the move- ment of the boats themselves and with that depth, and that many boats moving in and out, that only would provide most of the mixing they would need and wouldn't be plugged into the factor at all. Mr. Jones asked Mr.. Brandenburg if the beginning develop- ment on the site was contingent upon approval of every single, blooming, permit and piece of paper required; or'can it be done in stages? Mr. Brandenburg stated it could be done in stages, but no stage can occur until permit requirements of that stage had been met. He used the dredge and fill as an example; stating they could not dredge and fill until they had received a dredge and fill permit. Mr. Jones then questioned if the dredge and fill permit had anything to do with the DER approval of the results of the model, for example, in terms of flushing the basin and was told it would. Mr. Thomas again assured the Board and those present the DER, the Corp -or Engineers and all other agencies would require.complete final construction drawings before they would give them the final permit and that normally takes a year and one-half, or more of that type of technical processing of the application. Going back to the design of the basin, Mr. Thomas touched on the concern for heavy -metals. He stated there were very few people in this state who are capable of measuring -some of the heavy metals. The DER and EPA have those capabilities. Rigid State and Federal Laws that pertain to these paints and the bonding of heavy metals to prevent leeching into the water, is available. He said the safeguards they had built, then to palm -off requirements like that, without having the capability of evaluating it, is a problem they could see here tonight; and he would just have to assure them those questions have been looked into and will have to be answered before final permitting approval. Mr. Thomas stated at the University of Florida Laboratories they have methods for testing the models. In a marina designed like this, they simply inject a chemical substance they .can trace and see what happens to it. Salt water entrusion was then discussed. Mr. Thomas told how Dr. Christensen had found through soil borings, they have an aquifer that would not be penetrated by the -marina itself; -so there was a barrier between the marina waters and the aquifer, quite a way below that. The ' borings were taken just east of the yacht club... Mr. Jones asked if they would be eight feet below the maxium depth of the basin and was told it was more like 20-25 feet below by Mr. Beindorf. Mr. Thomas referred back to the letter stating the -refuel- ing facilities were inadequate and he didn't know how to determine that since they haven't given the final details of what kinds of pumps are going to be there and those would be specified by DER. and the Corp. He closed by saying they were well aware of the problems and had the best know expert with the best know research available to design that marina and if the Board thought he had answered their questions relevent at this stage of the game, very well, and they could stay as long as they wanted to go over the information, but he thought this would be taken care of by the other eight agencies they would have to go before. Mrs. Bowman read an excerpt from Dr. Christensen's letter and asked what the term " " meant and was told it meant "not dissolved", by Mr. Thomas, who again confirmed all this would be taken care of before permitting through the other agencies. In closing, Mr. Thomas said they were aware of the damage done in the past; they could see the poor water quality in some of the canals and marinas, constructed in the past. This led to a "stereo -type" thing, that all marinas were bad and during the environmental,movement JAn 8 PAGE 71I Fr - JAIL 27 1992 P0<<r 9 F,�F. 712 in the early '70 's this was taken care of through legislation passed. Innovative designs are now available due to the scienctific advancements they now have, and lets them meet these problems head on and solve them; so they didn't want to be bound to past experiences. He thought their marina was very functional and was needed in Indian River County. Mrs. Bowman asked that Mr. Clark, owner of Florida Land, what his plans were for this project, further down the road; did he plan to develop this and get out? Who would own this marina or yacht club 20-25 years from now? Mr. Clark approached the Board to answer Mrs. Bowman's questions. He stated it was their hope to sell the land and he believed the residents of River Bend, who would be Yacht Club Members, would own the yacht basin and the facilities in a property owner's association type thing. The maintenance on the bridge was touched on by Mr. Clark. He said they proposed a deed restriciton on the bridge itself and should the owner not maintain it; the County would have the right to come in •a lien the marina for the purpose of the cost of repair or maintenance. Mrs. Bowman mentioned'a similar situation on the north end of the County and the property owners got tired of it after about 20 years and claimed they couldn't take it over,.the developer, which happened to.be General Development said they couldn't take it over until it got is such bad shape the city had to take it over. She could see this occurring again on a greater scale and felt some type of per- formance bond would b"e required. Mr. Clark used the marina in New Smyrna Beach, as in example of a properly designed marina, and stated the site they had selected in Indian River County was an even better site with an absolute minimum amount of impact to the environment. He stated after completion of the entire excavation of their project and construction of all the piers and facilities connected with their marina, the construction of the access would be done and assured the Board there would be less problems with the building of this marina than the one in New Smyrna Beach, which he offered to show the Board at their convenience. Mr. Challacombe brought up the depth of the 42" culvert and said it should be low enough to take flushing at low tide and this was not indicated on the site plan. He stressed low tide, at any time of the year. The filling of fuel tanks on Jungle Trail also was a concern with the width of Jungle Trail not being wide enough for two vehicles. The situation of the thoroughfare not meeting County specification and limited width for regular vehicles, let alone tank trucks; also the violation of the policy set forth in the Comprehensive Plan on the con- servation of the Coastal Zone stating this road would be used for a sceenic road rather than part of a thoroughfare system in the Comprehensive Plan were questions he submitted. He doubted residents of River Bend would allow tank trucks to ingress or egress in front of their homes from AlA even if we were given promises that tank trucks would only be going through AlA, we could not deny alternate access to Jungle Trail. Mr. Henderscn saLd tank trucks would go through the property (River Bend) just like service trucks do to go to John'.s Island. The Chairman requested Mr. Brandenburg to state what their options were at this moment. Mr. Brandenburg said their first option would be to table this matter and postpone it until the Board of County Commissioners de- cide the bridge issue; the other alternative would be to decide and consider the entire matter today. He warned if they did that however, they should recognise that the projecte and the feasibility of the marina would be contingent upon the Board's later approval. One other factor is, this is an accessory use and an accessory use is subordinate to a primary use. An accessory use cannot be commenced for construction until the primary use has already commenced construction; so they would be assured the residential area associated with this project would have to proceed prior to this project proceeding. The other aspect of this would be, the Planning Department has already indicated to you they do not feel that they that they were totally prepared and gave their complete presenta- tion tonight. He then asked Mr. Rever if his last remarks were correct. Mr. Rever answered it was correct in conjunction with their recommendation that was prepared before but they were prepared under that , recommendation to have addressed as it has been, but not go on to a decision situation this evening. Mr. Tippen stated it was his understanding they could act upon this contingent to the County's decision. Mr. Parent commented he would move to approve the River Bend Yacht Club site plan, contingent upon the County Commission's approval of the decision on the policies concerning bridge and the loop road; then he asked if that was a proper motion and was told it was. JAN 27 1982 Mr. Tippin then seconded the motion. PINK 8 PASF_ 713 JJAN � `71982.�� Fr��F �'� Mrs. Robinson stood and asked to speak and was told by the Chairman the public had already been given an opportunity to spQak, and said she still had a big problem with this being contingent upon the County Commission's decision and that was her sole problem at this point. Mr. Parent said they had heard some qualified people and he felt the Board could only go so far into a lot of the technicalities, which seemed the biggest concern of the Planning Department. The.Chairman stated another problem to her were the letters from persons on Jungle Trail contesting this; the Planning Department say- ing they have not given their side of the presentation;because of this - the County Commissions status on policy of us.not wanting to send them anything contingent upon their decision; to her, if this would be possible to table this to the Planning and Zoning meeting immediately following the County Commissions' meeting, in which a policy decision was made; she could live with it a lot better. Mrs. Bowman felt she didn't have enough information by not having a member of the Game and Fish Commission; she hadn't seen 1A the drawings on the Florida Land's plan on planting mangroves; and felt she would need that information before voting or making a decision. The Chairman then called for a vote of those in favor of approving the Florida Land site plan, contingent on the approval of the County Commission on road policy and the loop road, say, Faye'. The motion passed 3-2 to approve the site plan submitted , for River Bend, with the Chairman and Mrs. Bowman,.voting against it, contingent on the County Commission approving policies on the road and bridge. ITEM #10 VINCENT HAWKINS, OWNER was not heard, but moved till further notice to enable the owner to appear. Due to an accident and injuries sustained from it, he was unable to appear before the Board. ITEM #11 LLOYD J. CLARK, OWNER, to construct a 1600 square foot addition to an existing building located on 13th Lane behind Velde Ford was unanimously approved by the Board after the motion to approve was made by Mrs. Parent. and seconded * by P1r's : Bowman. ITEM #12 ATTORNEY'S ITEMS - None. ITEM #13 PLANNER'S ITEMS - Marsh Island was approved con- tingent upon an agreement on a covenant restricting building to 4 units/acr, First Bankers was -also approved rezoning from the County Commission on the parcel out on Route 60 just east of 82nd Ave, to C-lA from R-3 on the front 5 acre parcel and asked the Planning and Zoning staff to investigate and encourage the owner of the parcel of land between the two commercial parcels now segrated to see the feasi- bility of another rezoning of that parcel. ITEM #14 CHAIRMAN'S ITEMS was then discussed. The election of the Chairman and Vice -Chairman of the Board was held for the coming year. Mr. Parent nominated Mrs. Carolyn Eggert, the presiding Chairman. Mrs. Bowman seconded the nomination and the Board unanimously approved Mrs. Carolyn Eggert to remain as Chairman. Mr. Parent nominated Mr. John Tippin as Vice -Chairman. Mr. Jones seconded and the Board unanimously approved. Mrs. Ann Robinson congratulated Mrs. Eggert on the election but wished to register an objection to the fact that the public was not allowed to participate after the motion was -made on the River Bend Yacht Club to approve their site plan. She claimed this was a most unusual site plan approval in that even the opposition said things were not decided upon; and many things were extremely vague. She thought it was very unfortunate that the Chairman did not let the public, who managed to get to the meeting tonight, despite the fact that the in- formation was given that no decision would be made tonight. She felt P several facts Mr. Jones had brought out, should be looked into, es- pecially about the permitting process and Class II Waters. For some- one to stand up and tell the Board that this would be thoroughly eval- uated and analyzed by the permitting agencies, that is partially true and partially false. As an example she st'id a permit application was sent in for a road in the county. One of the agencies granted them a permit. The application was incomplete; the road did not connect to anything; there was a marsh, but still they got a permit for it. This was an indication to her, how analytical, and how thorough their eval- uations can sometimes be. Mrs. Robinson reminded the Board they had heard a letter read to them tonight, unfortunately Mr. Barnett did not,appear,.tonight; she was sure he would have been present, but he too thought a decision would not be made at this meeting. She listed his credentials and the objections he had raised in his letter to this site plan. She asked that the Board, in the future, please give some consideration to changing the policy, if there is a written polic , so 66- �tlr�g 8 PAr,E JAN 2719�Z -35- J 6®6k 48 F'AaF 7 . 1s JAN 27 1982 that the public may be allowed to participate; at least to present facts to the Board, not necessarily their opinions, but to be allowed to bring to their attention some of the things the Board couldn't possibly know all information on. The Chairman apologized to Mrs. Robinson and offered her extreme, stunned expression that this went through tonight, considering everything they had been told by the County. She emphasized she did intend to let the public speak more. Mr. Robert 0. Reider of the Vero Beach Civic Association, wished to voice his appreciation of the public sector to the Chairman for her many contributions in the past and to congratulate her. Before adjourning the Chairman asked the secretary to add the two lettersin her possession to the minutes of this meeting that were referred to; the first from Mr. Harry H. Hauth, Jungle Trail; the second from Lomax Gwathmey, President of the Vero Beach Civic Association. Meeting adjourned. Attorney Henderson believed that by accepting all this into the record, the Commission skipped over the standing issue, which is that Florida Land Company maintains that the Audubon Society lacks standing to be heard before this Commission on the basis of an administrative appeal. He requested that his letter of January 4, 1982, which was sent to Attorney Brandenburg and later to each of the Commissioners, be placed in the record. On Motion by Commissioner Lyons, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously made Attorney Henderson's letter of January 4, 1982, to Attorney Brandenburg a part of the record, as follows: WEST PALM BEACH OFFICE JONES b FOSTER. P. A. 601 FLAGLER DRIVE COURT P. O. DRAWER E WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33-02 (305) 659-3000 C H. JOHN BLAIR McCRACKCN PAUL C. WOLFE (] L. MARTIN FLANAGAN S. CAROL M^LEAN January 4, 19 8 2 WILLIAM A. FOSTER GEORGE R MOSS MARJORIE D GADARIAN (((,,,���qqq,,, s/y. THADOEUS D. HARTMAN By Hand L ' JAN' 19'f Gary Brandenburg, Esquire County Attorney A ;,3, Vero Beach, Florida c' Vlyl ,;�y RE: Audubon Society Appeal Dear Gary: Although we haven't been officially notified, we have been advised by the Planning Department that the Audubon Society has filed an Appeal'of the decision of the Zoning Board re approval of the Site Plan of the River Bend Yacht Club. As I understand it, the County Commission has placed this matter on the -agenda of their January 6, 1982 meeting with a view to scheduling a public hearing on the Appeal pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Ordinance. It is Florida Land Company's position that the Audubon Society totally lacks standing to appeal this matter and I would call your attention to the following authorities: 43 JAR 2 _7 1982 PACE 717 Joxr,, s, F®S T3`<I> & MOSS MEMBERS OF JONES 6 FOSTER, R A. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS 817 BEACHLAND BOULEVARD P. O. BOX 3406 VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960 a8a.. (305) 231-1900 LARRY B. ALEXANDER HAYWARD D. GAY PATRICK M. O'HARA GEORGE H. BAILEY STEVE L. HENDERSON RICHARD J. OLACK ROBIN A. BLANTON THORNTON M. HENRY ARTHUR P. PUMPIAN W. CHESTER BREWER. JR. THEODORE W. HERZOG C. BROOKS RICCA, JR. DAVID A. CAIRNS PETER S. HOLTON CHRISTOPHER J. SCHILLING JAMES R. COLE R. BRUCE JONES ROBERT L. SELLARS MARGARET L. COOPER THOMAS A. KOVAL SIDNEY A. STUBBS, JR. B. JEANE CRIPPEN CLINTON W. LANIER GEORGE P. SUPRAN CHARLES H. DAMSEL. JR. ROSIN A. LLOYD ALLEN R.TOMLINSON BRUCE A. EPPLE JEFFREY FISHER S" STEVEN A. LONG EVERETT J. VAN GAAr BCCK WEST PALM BEACH OFFICE JONES b FOSTER. P. A. 601 FLAGLER DRIVE COURT P. O. DRAWER E WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33-02 (305) 659-3000 C H. JOHN BLAIR McCRACKCN PAUL C. WOLFE (] L. MARTIN FLANAGAN S. CAROL M^LEAN January 4, 19 8 2 WILLIAM A. FOSTER GEORGE R MOSS MARJORIE D GADARIAN (((,,,���qqq,,, s/y. THADOEUS D. HARTMAN By Hand L ' JAN' 19'f Gary Brandenburg, Esquire County Attorney A ;,3, Vero Beach, Florida c' Vlyl ,;�y RE: Audubon Society Appeal Dear Gary: Although we haven't been officially notified, we have been advised by the Planning Department that the Audubon Society has filed an Appeal'of the decision of the Zoning Board re approval of the Site Plan of the River Bend Yacht Club. As I understand it, the County Commission has placed this matter on the -agenda of their January 6, 1982 meeting with a view to scheduling a public hearing on the Appeal pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Ordinance. It is Florida Land Company's position that the Audubon Society totally lacks standing to appeal this matter and I would call your attention to the following authorities: 43 JAR 2 _7 1982 PACE 717 JAN 27 1982 BOOK 48 FArE 718 (A.) See Boucher v Novotny, 102 So. 2d 132 (Sup. Ct. 1958) for a basic statement of the standing requirements in Florida, i.e. to be an "aggrieved party" (or a "party with an aggrieved interest") there must be a showing of special damages peculiar to the appellant differing in kind, as distinguished from damages differing in degree, suffered by the community as a whole (a copy of case enclosed). (B.) See Chabeau v Dade Count and Key Biscayne Property Taxpayer's Association 85 So. 2d 129 3DCA, 1980) for the proposition that the standards required under the case law with respect to standing to sue are not relaxed with respect to appea:,ls: to higher administrative agencies. That was a case involving an Appeal from the Zoning Board to the Dade County Commission where the appellant contended even if it were not "aggrieved" sufficiently to have State Court standing it nevertheless is "aggrieved" for purposes of review by the Board of County Commissioners (case enclosed). (C.) See also United States Steel Corporation v Save Sand Key, Inc. 303 So. 26 9. (Sup. Ct. 1974). , (D.) Renard v Dade County 269 So. 2d 832 (Sup. Ct. 1972) for an example of a.case where "standing" was found. In that case the appealing party was an adjoining property owner. (case enclosed) If you read over the cases on standing, you will reach the conclusion that about the only person who has standing to appeal a zoning change or site plan decision is the owner bf the property affected or an adjoining property owner. In the Chabau case, some of the members of the Association did own property adjacent to the property involved but the Court still held that the Association, being the appealing party, did not have standing. I'd appreciate your calling me upon reviewing this letter and the enclosed cases and letting me know what your position will be. I feel that the proper place for this to be raised is at the meeting on January 6th, since, if the appellant has no standing the County Commission should properly refuse to set a public hearing. Kindest regards, JONES, FOSTER & MOSS By _ Steve L. Henderson SLH:pm Enclosures JONES, FOSTER & MOSS 44 M M M Attorney Henderson agreed that an ordinary citizen can attack action taken by the Commission or a lower agency on the grounds that procedural defects render the action invalid, but stated that the law requires special standing criteria for parties who want to challenge action taken by the Board in the nature of discretionary action and decisions. He further stated that although the Audubon Society has raised procedural questions, Florida Land Company would maintain that none of those procedures would lead to the conclusion that the action taken by the Zoning Commission was invalid. Attorney Henderson contended that the cases cited in his memo make it clear that the standing requirements to bring an appeal before this Board are the -same as they are before the Court, and a party with an "aggrieved interest" means a party must have special injury and interest in the subject matter of the decision. He pointed out that site plan approval is one of the only areas where the Planning & Zoning Commission has the right to take final action without review by the County Commission, and he felt if the Board wants to open the door and allow everyone within the county, to appeal site plan approvals, they would be opening a Pandora's box. Attorney Henderson then discussed scope of review and stated that, if the Commission should hold that the Audubon Society has standing to question the substance of the action taken, then he felt they must restrict their review as to whether substantial and competent evidence was presented before that Board. Attorney Henderson informed the Board that he has a verbatim transcript of the presentations made by Engineer James Beindorf and Biologist, Jim Thomas, at the December 17th meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission, and he wished this transcript to be made a part of the record. JAN 271992 45 a&OK. 8 PAGF 719 sA N 1982 nee 48 FAGF72 0 On Motion by Commissioner Lyons, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously agreed to make the verbatim transcript described by Attorney Henderson a part of the record. . I 46 I M 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 I- 1 3 -.13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JAN 27 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING THURSDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1981 COUNCIL CHAMBER CITY HALL, VERO BEACH FLORIDA THOSE PRESENT: ALSO PRESENT: Carolyn Eggert, Chairman Richard Parent, Member Tom ones, Member Maggie Bowman, Member John Tippin, Member David Rever, Director of Planning & Zoning Arthur Challacombe, Planning Manaaer Janis Johnson, Planner Mary Jane Goetzfried, Planner Dennis Ragsdale, Planner Dewey Welker, Zoning Administrator Gary Brandenburg, Attorney Barbara Scheihing, Secretary EXCERPT OF ITEM #9 RIVER BEND YACHT CLUB PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT 2`00K 48 PA r [ 21— JAN 2719§2 wK 2` 22 2 EXCERPT OF PROCEEDINGS: 3 Mit. BEINDORF: Mr. Chairman, my name is 4 Jim Beindorf, and Mr. Henderson has indicated, I 5 am one of the professionals that have been connected 6 with this specific site plan. 7 I would like to kindly thank you for 8 making this presentation. TFe are going to start, 9 and then we weren't, and then we got into technical 10 aspects. I.t almost blew our whole presentation. 11 We did have a plan before you essentially 12 in such a way that we wanted to make as simple as 13 possible. You can't imagine the confusion we had, 14 we being the professionals involved, along with Florida 15 Land Company for the last four or five months in 16 trying to get to the place where we are now. As Mr. Henderson indicated, the River 17 18 Bend project is not new. V?e have been trying to 19 get the overall site plan before this body for over a year. Part of the site plan was the yacht club. 20 You keep saying marina, but there is a 21 distinction between a marina and a yacht club. 22 A marina denotes more commercial aspects 23 in servicing the public, in general, either through 24 heavy fueling, or servicing of boats, and things of 25 .. D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 this nature, but this is a private yacht club, and evidently, possibly a.marina, now. But it is a private yacht club, and that's what we want to distinguish this evening. As Steve indicated, and as some of your staff has indicated, we have had numerous meetings in trying to work out a program to get the site plan before you.. A yacht club, such as this requires a great deal of (blank) because of the veru nature of it. It's on navigable waters or public waters.. In connection with this particular one, this particular one in Indian River County,'it's within what's called Class II waters, Mary Jane has some difficulty with one point, in what constituted Class II waters. We have been trying to help the staff in determining what could ao into Glass II waters, what was allowed in Class II waters, and things of this nature. We are trying - to be as objective as we'can. When I say, "we," I am talking about the consultants and the men that I would like to introduce as consultants. You have met one of them, and at this point, I think it would be good to let you know the group of people who are here tonight, some of them, anyway. From Florida Land JAN 7 192 EODh P„F23 JAN 271982 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .R 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 am 48 � rF 724 Company, Mr. Clark, he spoke a few minutes acro. He is President of Florida Land Company, from Winter Park. Andy.._Pugh is one of the Vice Presidents of Florida Land Company. He came in from Winter Park. From Staff Engineers is Richard Votapka, and like Andy Pugh, he came from Pinter Park. Steve (blank), one of the local people from Florida Land Company, with the glasses and yellow shirt. Ile is in the corner. Tim Sellen, he is one of the consultants in planning, right next to Steve and John Lynch. He is in the white sport shirt. He is the local man located on site. .Tim Thomas, you have met him awhile ago. He is a biologist. Ile will be called upon in a few minutes. The only unfortunate thing is that Dr. Christiansen was unable to make it, due to a previous engagement. For those who may not know, we did have Dr. Christiansen along with other staff members at a special meeting to sit down with the staff. This is the first time we sat down with the staff, and have sat down with them to find out any of the diff.iculties,.any of the questions that existed in their minds. (Blank,) and Dr. Christiansen after that meeting did write a letter to the best of his ability on what things he talked about with Y 5 1 your people, and our people, and as all, of you know 2 ' he will be on board to follow up the permitting 3 procedures which will go forward after your approval. 4 Somebody's got to start the project, Ole 5 can't very well go to the state agencies without 6 local approval. The state agencies will start a permitting procedure without P g p approval. They will 8 not issue a permit without approval,, So we knew 9 that we had to start with.you.. We knew we had to 10 do this because we are looking at probably twelve 11 to eighteen months ver likely, � , y y, in obtaining all 12. the other approvals which is the Department of Environ - 13 mental Regulation, Department of ('game and Fish, 14 the Corps of Engineers, your Coast Guard, which is 15 the agencies, believe it or not, which in all 16 pbobability that will issue the permit on the bridcre 17 and all the county's staff. 18 We told the planning department as we 19 'were meeting with them and at various meetings 20 that we would be delighted to Rive all the 21 information, all the pertinent information to the 22 staff or other parties that mi.r.,ht be interested in 23 it. 24 This past week since I felt this was very 25 controversial, I made a trip to the dredge and fill qR ROOK PAGE 1i5 J AN 27 1982 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 wK 48 Far,4 726 people, which is under the DER, one of the agencies or departments which you will be asking and reviewing our permits, they are under the DER, in general, and by the way, one of the other agencies, the State Water Conservation District. So I talked to the DER to see if possibly there were something we were missing at this point that would be of benefit to all of us in a project of this nature, being where it's located as a private yacht club. We had a very nice meeting with the dredge and fill people. They indicated that some, I think the staff had chatted with them a little bit, the Game and Fish people were chatting with them a little bit, and at this point they had nothing to comment about because nothing had been submitted to them. They can't deny it. They can't grant approval, but they did indicate that in this Chapter 17-3 and Chapter 17-4, which is the permitting ordinance of the DER, that as long as you show you are not going to degrade the water, the Came and Fish.people indicated, as long as you are not going to interfere with any existing or potential shellfish bed, but if you meet those requirements, a permit 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 7 is in order providing you don't have any adverse obj-ctions from the local agencies or others, and at that time if you do, you ao into an administrative hearing.. And, I would like to clear that oint up. The Came and Fish people, apparently, in order to, and dredge and fill, had indicated a concern of the flushing of the yacht basin. This is where Dr. Christiansen comes in. His qualifications go back to some years ago when he did some work for the city. In fact, he conducted, if you read your little report form, some seminars, and he was retained by the state to research and study the canal systems and other systems along the Indian River. lie conducted a seminar in Indian River County (blank).. He was connected with the Corps of Engineers Laboratory for the State of Florida, which goes quite in depth in the study of inlets and channels, and marinas. In this instance, in the Dade County, Broward areas, so he is very well qualified to get involved with the studies to be done as the permitting procedures go forward. So with that little bit of backaro.und RwK 8 PA,E727 M 8 a.+. ;F 728 JANin mind, let me now touch on the site 2 plan itself, because I want to be able to discuss 3 as much as I can with you and let you ask me any 4 questions of why do we want it here; what kind of 5 boats are being contemplated. 6 River Bend is going to be a very fine 7 residential -type development. It Groes from ocean 8 to fiver. Consequently,the river rportion of it 9 lends itself well to having a yacht basin to support 10 the type of yp people who would like to be in this area. 11 This is located in the southwest corner 12 of the property. 13 The air coastal waterway is within 85 to 14 90 feet of the shore line, existing shore line of 15 • .a the areas shown for the yacht basin. 16 We have some soundings, and, Dennis, I 17 was haping he was going to reduce some of our 18 drawings, but they weren't reduced. It was no fault 19 of his. 20 We do have some soundings that we took 21 right in this area doing from the shore line out 22 to the intercoastal waterway. 23 1,7ithin about 85 feet you are at almost a 24 minus 12 elevation., So we contemplated digging and 25 dredging the channel under the proper permitting 0 f 0 10 1 from the intercoastal waterway through the Jungle 2 Road and into the. -yacht club. z 3 .. MR. JONES: I have a question. You mentioned 4 the river bottoms, the elevations. What is the 5 nature of the river bottom there? Is it sterile, 6 sediment with no -- MR. BEINDORF: To be very frank with you, 8 we took a sounding rod, and we didn't do anything 9 more than just sound the bottom. I have an idea in 10 watching the rod, I was on the shore line, probably 11 was pretty hard, pretty Shelly. 12 MR. CLARK: I would like to answer that. 13 Jim Clark from Florida Land Company. I can tell 14 you what the bottom is, because I took soundings 15 of it with my boat, and dove out there several 16 months aao, fourteen months ago. Thre is no grasses 17 on the bottom. There is a rather heavy, coarse 18 shell, nearly the entire length to the 19 intercoastal center, out there, the intercoastal 20 waterway, as far south as I was able to dive, which 21 I think is about 300 yards, there were no appreciable 22 � - grasses. There were some clumps of grasses south of r 23 our property, about 200 to 300 yards. 24 North to the section of mangroves, which 25 stick_ out east of Jungle Trail, there were no grasses -JAN 27 198 1 48 PAGE 29 JAN 2 7 'Ibbi 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of any kind, a very sterile bottom, It had been very heavily scoured by the actions of that (blank). There is quite a bit of wind action going on. I am not a scientific expert.. Those are my personal observations. MR.. TONES: Okay, that's what I am getting at. Is this sterile river bottom, or is it (blank)? Mr. BEINDORF: Tim Thomas in a few minutes will give you more of an overview of some of these things. My point is to let you know the advantages of the location, and the fact that I think I read in the paper or heard the rumor that there is a long channel that has to be dredged, and that's not true, that the intercoastal waterway is close at this point, and I would have serious doubts that you would have any shellfish.here, because of the traffic, boat traffic and all, in the deep water as it exists along the shore line. It's interesting, we can go back to the first site plan and talk about what we propose to do. The plan is a little over eight acres in size, starting on the outside property line all the way to the Indian River Shore line, and within this site we propose to construct 96 boat slips, which could accommodate boats some thirty feet in length to forty, I 12 1 6 to forty-five feet in length. The depth that was 2 proposed -- because we will have quite a few sailboats 3 in this area, because of the type of people that 4 will probably live in the overall River Band 5 project, we devised a plan that would have good 6 protection. We feel the shore line that's existing 7 and we are going to protect that very well. 8 As Jim Thomas will say, and that came 9 about as a result of some of the meetings with the 10 Planning staff, and I believe that Art mentioned 11 awhile ago that some things haven't been answered by 12 the developer, and one of the things that your 13 r. engineers, county engineering came up with is that 14 you needed more information relating to shore pro - 15 tection.. 16 There isn't anything there now, in particular, 17 except scattered mangroves, and we first said, "Well, 18 we would like to give (blank) protection," but that 19 didn't seem to do too well, so Jim Thomas, he's had 20 a lot of experience in southern Florida with a type 21 of system that plants mangroves with baffles. Well, 22 I checked with the DER to see what their feelings were 23 on it, and they liked it, only again an opinion, 24 because they couldn't give me any type of a permit. 25 It appears that the shore line within JAN 27 198' 8 P.hGE 731 r JAN 27 1981 n 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 •F 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 -" 24 25 eooK 48 Pz8732 the marina itself will be sloping banks and not vertical banks (blank) for shore line protection, and the dock, the fueling dock, you have to do everything upside down on this thing here. It will be right through here. There will be a vertical wall richt next to where the fueling docks would be contemplated at that place. The ability to construct the marina because of the limited access here, a 42 -inch culvert which, by the way, was being proposed by Dr._ Christiansen. It was increased originally from 24 -inch to 42 -inch, allows this area to be completely escavated, drawn off, and deposited, and then the plus here, will be the last thin.a that will be constructed, as far as we are concerned, where the bridge goes, We have tried to design a system where (blank)., We feel that the layout is a good one to accommodate a private -type of a yacht basin, and it should be an easy one which to service if there were any spills, such as fuel. You just have the DER in its permitting procedures require an emergency fuel spill program as part of the permit. MR, JONES. how much fuel would you have to spill? MR. BEINDORF: Very little, but if you had I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 14 A little over spill from the tank, you are goina tp have tQ deal with that,,and you aze looking at some- thing that, if the fueling: of a boat completely peer ran, and you had a pump in your (.blanks operation that had a big spill, they you must have a program set up if you have any fires. There are several systems for doing that. Thre is a floating -type of curtain that you can spread out there quickly to isolate not only the spills but the fires. Dr. Christiansen has come up with additional ones. One of the ideas was the air bubbles, which I am not familiar with. I can't really allude to it here this evening, but that will be part of the permit. Now, I'm pointing it out to you in hopes that you can see the picture. We have had at least four or five meetings with the staff, the engi- neer, the staffs themselves. We have indicated to them that we felt much of the information they were asking for is beyond the site plan approval scope because it takes a great deal of detail to go into model studies and all these studies that would have to be performed -- with those questions -- (blank), and the answer is sent to your staff. As I said awhile ago, our client has agreed peon 48 PAGE 733 I JAN 2719�� 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ,d to do it. The DER will not issue a permit until they know at a local level whether you are satisfied.. Now, I said a few minutes ago that Jim Thomas, which is the biologist, will, probably agree with some of the things the staff had asked pertaining t0 the shore line protection, the native grasses, the types of vecetation that he had observed, and if you have any questions of him, I. am going to let him allude a little bit to it, In. the meantime, if you have any of me, I will be glad to answer any questions I can, MR. JONES. What's the nature of the site to be dredged? MR, BEINDORF: The area to be excavated will be somewhat less than eight acres, eight acres includes the Jungle Trail area, We are looking, I think Mary Jane and I worked it out very roughly one time somewhere in the neighborhood of 150,000 to 200,0.00 cubic yards, MR., JONES. Is this going to be dug, or hydraulically dredged? MR. BEINDORF: In all probability, that will probably be done, and I am giving you my opinion.here with (blank) and drag lines, because it can be done without the connection being 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 y 25 JAN 2719 0 ET connected to the river. So it will be in such a nature that we won't do any damage as far as silt into the river, MR. JQNES, Is that relevant to the (.blank)? What are you going to do with the fill in terms of the rest of the project? MR.- BEINDORF: The fill will ao on the other part of River Bend. MR, JONES: I didn't hear anything from the_ Planning staff about that. Is there a auestion? MR. BEINDORF: I don't think there would be a (blank) on.the particular planning staff. I don't think we have reached a point where we can't take materials for proper permits from one part of the.prgperty onto another part of the property, and I don't think, Maggie, your mining ordinance, precludes that from being the case, as long as you follow permitting procedure., It's part of the permitting procedure, and at least you are not in a (blank) mining operation where you pick up material and move it somewhere else and sell it,, VThen you leave it on site, you don't have that difficulty. (blank) There is a place to dispose of the spoil as far as the tree protection ordinance, this is a new one on me 2'90K. AlS P F735 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 P'C1CIK ' PA.! 1736 tonight, and I don't want to get into that now; Whatever -is required, we are aoina to do (blank), MR. BEINDORF: I would like to introduce ..Tim Thomas to handle the next portion of our presenta- tion, and we will both be available for any questions you may have., MR. THOMAS: Let me just bring out several points that I am concerned with in the very beginning here. First of all, erosion control, as you you, on the Jungle Frail side, the western side of Jungle Trail, we have a real erosion problem right now. In fact, it's actually eating into the road a itself. We propose. a fring of mangroves, a minimum of twenty feet. We realize we have a high energy problem there as the wake from, boats crashes into shore, and what I have proposed -- I don't know if you have seen any of the drawings yet, is simply a series of (blank) wooden boxes that the mangroves are planted in. They are made of untreated wood. They give.the mangroves a couple of years to get established, and eventually decay, and if the mangroves are established (blank). We are proposing in front of that eight feet out a,wodden baffle which you will 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 s• 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 see on this drawing that would simply absorb the energy from their wake, (Adving the mangroves a chance to get established. It will work very well (blank)-, It shows how that works. On the side of the marina we pointed out that along the (blank) --edge we have a shallow sloping bank, getting away from the bulkhead idea, and I propose in planning a twelve -foot (blank)., which is a marine grass, which is a very productive grass, a very important grass to estuarian ecology, and it is now available to be planted just like a lawn, It grows very quickly. It holds very e• . firmly, and it then provides (blank). to the estuary. So I think we have established this point very well, looking at the actual design of the basin itself, I am sorry Dr. Christiansen couldn'•t be, here, but first of all, Dr, Christiansen is the foremost authority in.constructing waterways of 'all types. He has taught at the University of Florida for a number of years. He is a recognized authority in this country, not just in this city. He has done seven vears of research in this kind of thing, and I don't want to stet too involved in it, but I think the circumstances require that I go into some of these. Exactly what he has to prove to you, JAN 2719. Em 48 PA)E737 J4N27198�• 19 1 and, of course, all of the other agencies is that 2 we are not going to cause a degradation of. water., 3 May I use the blackboard? I don't want 4 to have any counter production, but I do think that 5 you have.to understand the problems, and maybe you do g already, but I'd like to show vou,very quickly 7 what the real, problems are, and what we have to prove,.* 8 we are doing to present, 9 If you look at a cross section of water 10 volume, our basin, for example, the things. you want 11 to happen in there to keep the ecology as it should 12 be, and to prevent any (bla.nk) or pollution, 13 is to have, for example, a good misture of•all the 14 elements that should be there. 15 Oxygen is one of the primary ones. You 16 have oxygen being released into the water from s f o 17 little plants and microorganisms, where the sun a 0 s 18 starts them, but most of the oxygen comes from the Z 19 surface, the (blank), from the surface. ti m 20 Obviously, you will not have a great deal 21 of oxygen at the lower level unless you have something Z 22 that's doing to cause a mixing. In.nature, that occurs 23 in various ways. 24 In cold climates the upper level gets 25 cold, and it sinks to the bottom, and (blank). In 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 N- 13 t 14 15 1 16 e a 17 g 18 0 0 Z 19 W _ 20 m a 21 _ W 22 23 24 25 JAI, 271( 20 subtropical waters, the primary turnover factor is wind. The water -processing surface creates the convection and mixing of these things. This is most important,•but there are other things as important.. One of the things you want to prevent is the chemical stratafication mentioned in that letter, where you have some deposits where it doesn't get mixed, and accumulates in the lower level and kills fish down there. Well, this is very elementary. One of the things you have to address is when you design a basin of this sort is the factors that are going to be involve( in mixing this, not necessarily complete flushing of everything out with every tide, which would be ideal, of course, but convincing factors. So the technique designed by Dr. Christiansen and the staff in the past seven years of research, and this was heard by the way if you read in that letter lay the Federal funds and state funds, and it's very impor tant., It has shown that you can put together a computer model that will show you as you plug in all the factors here, what's going to happen, and that computer model is not just something on paper. It can then be tested in a model situation to see if that mixing occurs as the computer PooK 8 PAGE 739 I eov 4 8 F"2F 740 JAN 26 IO syas it will do, and he can give you the technicality 2 there, and he will. But essentially what the 3 computer model does, it showed all the factors that 4 are. involved in the mixing of the water. 5 The letter raises questions about the tidal fluctuation, and that sort of thing, and we can 6 7 only say to the Came and Fish Commission that we 8 know about all of that. Dr. Christiansen, again, foremost authority, he plugs in that tidal situation 9 just as it is into the computer model.. He takes 10 all the other things, the questions that are raised 11 in this letter, and that becomes a part of the 12 methodology, and at the end of that, the answers 13 that come out show how much of that mixing 14 you get. 15 Now, again, I, don't want to get involved 16 in the fine details there. What we are saying in Dr. 17 Christiansen's letter, I fell, are an answer to the 18 questions that are raised., 19 We are saying, "Yes, the methods are now 20 available to determine that, and to plug all those 21 factors into that design." 22 MR.*JONES: That's fine, but I think 23 we are considering those factors, and I think the 24 Planning staff has raised some questions about it, 25 , e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7- 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 22 assumptions concerning those factors, and how they might fit into your model. 'Fell, I assume, the Jblank)--model, the raw information has not been fed into this thing pertaining to this site, right, it's only being demonstrated to us that there is a computer model available,- that once you plug the factors in, it will give you some kind of an answer. What we are really concerned about are the factors. - We are not concerned whether the model exists.. MR., THOMAS: Certainly, the final design hasn't been completed. There will be neaotiations. There will be changes made, perhaps, if necessary in depth, in configuration, but the thing I am going to point out to you is that we know how to do that. We have those factors, and we have to consider the source of this kind of statement. Someone like Dr. Chirstiansen certainly is going to approve that finally, or we are not going to get any further than county. So I think that's the best we can tell you at the moment. MR. JONES. If for example, a factor is fed into the model, which DER -- and results in a result, or ends in a result that is not amenable to DEF,, JAN27 8 PAGE 741" JAt1.27 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 23 Bou 48 P,�cF742 and then the model ahs to be changed{ and, therefore, something on the site has to be changed, then what happens, in respect for example to the planning staff concern that due to the vegetation and the wind factors, and everything that the wind factor that we are talking about is not as significant as they think it is, and, therefore, what happens then? Do they have to come back and get another site plan approval, or agenda? MR. BRANDENBURG: They would have to come back for some kind of a modification of the site .plan, if it was a significant change in the plans, as completed, MR. JONES: Presumably, nothing would have been done at this stage on the site. Mr, BRANDENBURG; That's correct. MR. THOMAS: I don't think we ever submit complete and final construction drawings at this stage of the process. (Blank.) One thing I did not mention, and did not bother Game and Fish Commission with, one of the most important things in this process is the movement of the boats themselves, With that many boats moving in and out, t that provides most of the mixing we need. 24 1 That is being plugged into a factor overall. 2 MR. JONES: I,would_like to ask the 3 attorney another question. Is beginning development 4 on the site contingent on approval of every single, 5 bloomin` permit and piece of paper required, or can 6 this thing be done in stages? 7 MR. BRANDENBURG: It can be done in stages, 8 but no stange can occur until the permit requirements 9 of that stage have been met, obviously. 10 For instance, they cannot start dredging 11 until they have their dredging fill permit. 12 MR. JONES: Does the dredging fill permit 13 have anything to do with the DER approval of the 14 results of the model, for example, in terms of 15 flushing the basin? e 16 MR. BRANDENBURG: Yes. 0 17 MR. THOMAS: I assure you in that process 0 s 18 DER, the Corps, and all the agencies, that comment, Z 19 will leave no stone unturned, and would require W Z 20 complete, final construction drawings before they 0 21 give their final permit. Z i 22 It normally takes a eyar and a half or 23 more for that kind of technical processing of the 24 application. Going back to design of this entire 25 basin, again, in the letter from Game and Fish, we t 2� lab noK 48 PAGE 743 a ?V0A -9 D^F 744 1 1� mention chemical stratafication. I think in our JAN 8 2 process 1 am concerned about the design answer that 3 there will be no chemical stratafication, or they 4 won't be allowed to do it.. 5 It's as simple as that, Going back.to a i i 6 auestion in the letter concerning heavy -metals, for i z example, there are very few people in this state who s 8 are capable of measuring some of the heavy metals, 9 but we have DER and EPA that have that capability.. 10 We have rigid state and Federal law that 11 pertain to these paints and the bonding of heavy f 12 metal that prevent leaching into the water. 13 We have built-in safeguards, this kind -of 1 14 thing, to •(blank) off a requirement like that would not have the capability for evaluating, as you can 15 i probably see already here, and I think we have to 16 r assure you that these kinds of questions have been 17 looked into, and will have to be answered before 18 final drawings are permitted, and before final 19 plans are made. 20 In the letter, Dr. Christiansen has 21 addressed a number of problems that relate to 22 design of that basin. Obviously, the flushing 23 and mixing is one, and I will repeat, again, just 24 because it works like a computer model, it is not a �- 25 k 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 s 14 15 16 v x 17 18 z 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2� 192 SAN 26 final thing, but in the Unversity:'of:.Florida'-lab; there Arc methods -for testing the model. For -xample, in a marina designed like this, they simply, in a model, they inject a chemical substance they can trace, and see what happens to it, and he can describe that in detail to you, and show us how they test the model. It's not all on paper. He, also, addresses the question of salt water intrusion. Again, obviously, this is, also, a problem on that coastal barrier island. He has found from our soil bores, we do have aquifer that will not be penetrated by the marina itself. So there is a barrier between the marina waters and the aquifer, which is quite a.ways below that, and, again, the essential material is available here. We can provide those things, if you need .them, at any point. MR. JONES: How far below is it? MR. THOMAS: I don't recall. I recall seeing the borings. that Dr. Christiansen had, and he determined from that that is not going to be a problem. MR. BEINDORF: The boroinas were taken out P -00K A00 PAGE 745 J 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 27. at just east of the yacht club site, . DIR. JONES: So that would be eight feet below the maximum depth of the basin. MR. BEINDORF: Those borings were in the neighborhood of twenty to twenty feet in depth, and they were getting into the (blank). MR. THOMAS: Getting back to the letter from Game.and Fish'Commission regarding the bubbles, it is not merely experimental. It's been used in a number of places, and, again, it's still being tested against all kinds of things at the University of Florida, in a very large hydraulic •laboratory, and, again, Dr. Christiansen can prove all the research you require and studies show as to how that works.. Again, DER requires us to have additional safeguards beyond that to protect that (blank). In the letter it stated that the fuel and the pump -out facilities are inadequate, and I don't know how to determine that since we haven't really began the final details as to what kinds of pumps are going to be there, and, aaain, those will be specified by DER and the Corps as part of the process. Going back to heavy metals situation, a contingent of the permit will be a monitoring program after the thing is constructed, so that any heavy 1 :.a. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 metals that are leached out if they were to be detected and teh marina will be sealed off if that will be a problem. So, again, these questions that haven't been answered will be answered in greater and greater detail as the process goes along.' The river bottom you mentioned is in that area scoured almost completely by the water currents. It has occurred, and it is shell, primarily shell, no grasses, and no sediment, just the current situation at that point. I -Tell, I can summarize by saying we are well aware of all the problems. lie have the best known experts with the best known research available to who designed that marina, and we think we have answered the questions that are relevant at this stage of the game very well, and we can stay longer, as lona as you want in taking any minute details out of that, but, again, I will submit to you that we are going to have a much more thorough review by technical committees from at least eight agencies, as I said before. All of them have technical people paid by our taxpayers who are capable of taking this data and evaluating it, and that would give us a thorough going over before we get any kind of permit to dredge am 48 PAGE 47 J A N 27 1982 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 BOOK � � 2�! F or fill, and, therefore, we can start any kind of construction. If you have not been exposed to the permitting process, you can imagine the amount of detail required and the real, thorough evaluation of that data before anything occurs. I will be glad to answer any questions you might have concerning any of these particular questions. MS. BOWMAN: You talk about -- Dr. Christianse talks about bubble screens in his letter, and he says they will definitely stop any hydrocarbons (blank) to oil and gas, and will reduce passage of suspended materials and material transported as bed load (blank) load, substantially. What is "bed load "? .:s MR. THOMAS: Not.dissolved, for example, I don't want the bubble screen there all the time because I want the (blank) that I am planting in there to get in the river. That's the value of spartina. We are addinci spartina beds for that purpose, so we would want the bubble screen to be there and available, and we would simply have to let DEF, prescribe how much it should be run, or when it whould be run. Normally, DER requires, also, a silt screen curtain that can be pulled across the opening, if you have gota real, heavy load. They will I -I O f 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 30 write in those safeguards, I am sure. MS, EGGERT: Any questions? j MR. JONES: A question I asked, and that is, are you familiar with Francis Langford's? A VOICE: Yes. MR. JONES: If you go in there and stay overnight in a boat, and run the air conditioning, you are probably going to burn your air conditioning unit out, because nothing flushes out of that place. It clogs up your lines and burns up your air conditioner, because it needs water. You have got this basin. We have a question about the flows between the basin and the river. It pertains to the boat owners, and the ability of them to maintain their boats. It relates to another question. You don't anticipate the live -aboard here, do you? Do we control that? Yes or no, you don't? You don't. Okay.. Now, when the boat owner starts readi about this Martina, (blank), and stuff that's in the water, that's clogging up their lines, and every- thing, and then you want to get this stuff out of the river, then what happens then in terms of the quality of the Class II waters and netting all these (blanks) out of the basin? JAN 27 1982 BOOR S PAF 749 JAN 27 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UOK « 48 j l r'`150 MR. THOMAS: Okay, there won't be (blanks). First of -all, the (blanks) will not be massive material. It will be microscopic, alot of microscopic sediment from the decayed grass, and that is a normal process, and that is the value of spartina, it is extremely valuable to the estuarian (blank) I would think you would think of Francis Langford's being sterile,'but there is a lot of junk floating around in the water there. MR. JONES: The problem there is they have one of -- and that is the reason we described it, too. The movement of boats and the movement of wind gives us some movement in and out of the river and should clear that. They have a fairly narrow opening for the size of the marina,'and they have a deep marina, and what is in there is blown in out of the river, and they have a hard time getting it back out, but they don't have two openings, and that's the reason I am describing it to you. If they were doing that now, they would probably be:required to have a pump out. I mean, you know, with the bridge behind that marina -and prevailing wind, they would probably be required to have some kind of a pump -out (blank.) t O :.r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 s�- 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 32 MR. THOMAS: If they were doing that now, they would never get a permit for that. I can assure you (blank.) Let me point out what Dr. Christiansen points out in the beginning., We certainly are aware that there have been problems in the past. We can certainly see aro.und Florida the damage done, and the very poor water quality in some of the canals and marinas that have been constructed in the past. And this did lead to a very stereotype thing, all marinas are bad.. And during the environmental movement of the early 70's, that was a standard thing. They are bad, and we had to let the question. pass, and there were lots.of groups formed to fight them. Dr, Christiansen points out, though, they are not necessarily bad. The state of the art, the signs that are available to us now have enabled us to come up with some innovative designs that will meet ghe problem head on, and solve it. So we shouldn't be bound by the experience of the past, thinking about marinas or any other constructed waterways. We should be able to evaluate the data that we can generate. VTe should be able to evaluate the research that's been done at the government expense, much of it, and we should be able to use that to JAN 271992 II eBD P„GE'151 JAN�2,19921 " 2 `G 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 r 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 nw 48 Fjni- 752 produce a very functional amenity that I think we need in Indian River County. 0 -I Attorney Brandenburg commented that one of the points he found to be significant in the Commission's wording when they opened the door for other people to bring appeals was that they did not go with the language that many of the court decisions refer to and that is "an aggrieved party;" instead they specifically said that "any other person having any aggrieved interest therein" may file an appeal. He then went on to note that when you review a zoning decision in Circuit Court, you go up for what is called a petition for a writ of certiorari, which means you are limited strictly to reviewing what has happened before, and the court does not receive any other evidence. Mr. Henderson is suggesting that is the way the Board should review. the Planning & Zoning Commission decision, and Attorney Brandenburg did not agree. He pointed out that when the Board adopted their. Code, they included criteria that when an appeal is heard, they would hear from all interested parties. Commissioner Lyons noted that the Audubon Society has made certain allegations that they were denied the opportunity to present their evidence at the Zoning Board hearing and since the Minutes seem to demonstrate that fact, what more is needed. Attorney Brandenburg believed that Florida Land Company should indicate what their position is. He noted that although Attorney Henderson has presented some legal arguments, he has not addressed the substance of the appeal. Attorney Henderson felt that it would not be appropriate for Florida Land to go into this before the Commission makes a ruling as to whether the Audubon Society has standing to question the validity of the action taken because of some procedural defects or the substance of the action. Attorney Brandenburg referred to the letter from the Audubon Society citing reasons for the appeal. He informed JAN 2 71982 47 BOOK .48 PAGE (J3 48 PAGE 75A JAN 27 1982 the Board that they are appealing on both procedural and merits, and it is his opinion that they have standing on both those counts to come before the Board. He further felt the hearing should be what is called "de novo" and the Board should listen to other than what was previously presented. Motion was made by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Commissioner Lyons, to indicate that the Commissions feels the Audubon Society has standing to initiate an appeal in re the River Bend Site Plan, in both areas - procedural and merit. Commissioner Bird expressed concern that in the Board's zeal to change the rules on who may make an appeal, it might have been made a little too broad, and possibly we should take another look at this when the Zoning Code is rewritten. Commissioner Lyons agreed this might need some clarification, but he was not for further restricting appeals. He pointed out that in the three years he has been on the Commission, there have been only two or three. The Chairman called for the question. It was voted on and carried unanimously. Attorney Henderson then indicated that there should be a ruling of the Board as to whether they were going to expand the scope of review to include new testimony with regard to the substance and merits of the action taken by the Zoning Board or whether they were going to restrict the scope of their review to hearing only the argument on the procedural aspects. Attorney Brandenburg was of the opinion that the County Code is very clear in regard to allowing the Board to take additional testimony in that it specifically says "at which time all interested parties will have a right to appear before the County Commission in regard to the appeal." He continued that the Commission also has to consider all 48 matters and exhibits that were presented at the Planning & Zoning meeting, and he felt the scope of the review should be judged by the same criteria used by the Planning & Zoning Commission in approving a site plan, which criteria is laid out in the Site Plan Ordinance. Attorney Henderson asked if Mr. Brandenburg were saying the Board is taking the position that the floor is wide open to all exhibits, testimony and evidence that they may care to consider, and Mr. Brandenburg stated that was his opinion; the Board has not as yet indicated their position one way or the other. Several Board members indicated that Mr. Brandenburg's position was fine with them. Attorney Henderson asked for the sake of the record that the action be taken in terms of the Board ruling to. that effect. Chairman Scurlock stated that he personally was in agreement with the County Attorney's opinion, and he felt he had just heard others on the Commission indicate they were also. No Board member expressed an objection to the Chairman's statement. Attorney Henderson asked the Board to understand that these are technical arguments, and he needs to get an expression of the Board to later be able to say they acted improperly. Attorney Henderson then proceeded to cite Court cases, i.e. The School Board of Pinellas County vs. Noble on scope of review, etc., and informed the Board that Florida Land's position on whether competent evidence was submitted is supported by the verbatim transcripts. He stated that he has not heard the argument on the procedural aspects, and he would just reserve their right to respond. Attorney Henderson commented on the letter submitted by Attorney O'Haire, which he felt was irregular, and noted JAN 27 1982 4 9 EOUR 8 Fd;E 755 -I JAN 2� 1982 aw 48 f ^F 756 that none of these objections were raised at the Zoning Board level. In regard to the Audubon Society's complaint about being advised by Planning staff that argument would not be heard, Attorney Henderson noted that was also one of the arguments Florida Land had with the Planning staff; Florida Land did not feel they should be precluded from making a presentation because the Planning Department was not prepared. Attorney Henderson again emphasized that procedural objections, even if true, would have nothing to do with the validity of the presentation. Attorney O'Haire requested that the Board accept all the testimony heard earlier this morning on this appeal and incorporate it as part of the record. He stated the public was not afforded an opportunity to be heard on this matter at any meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Attorney Henderson stated that he did not notice one instance of any denial of an opportunity to speak at the Planning & Zoning meeting and pointed out that the Audubon society was represented by Ann Robinson, who spoke -more than once. Carolyn Eggert, Chairman of the Planning & Zoning Commission, believed it was indicated throughout the Planning & Zoning Minutes that she was having trouble with the procedure of that meeting all along. For some reason it was firmly set in her mind that she had to get a vote on the County Commission policy regarding the proposed cut in Jungle Trail before the Planning & Zoning Commission could proceed with the site plan, and this was also presented to them by the Planning Department who had told a number of organizations not to come and speak before this decision was made. She felt, whatever caused the problem, the public was not called upon to speak. Robert Reider stated vehemently that the public was precluded from giving any input in the hearing before the 50 7- L Planning & Zoning Commission; he tried to be recognized, but was not, and he was not even allowed to read a letter the Vero Beach Civic Association had addressed to Mrs. Eggert. Mr. Reider noted that, on the other hand, there were nine members of the Florida Land group present to make a "power play;" their presentation went far beyond what normally would be included in a site plan approval; and it was a real "stacked deck." j Attorney Henderson found it incredible for the Chairman of the Planning & Zoning Commission to come before the Board and contend that she ran an unfair hearing. He stated that as an applicant, Florida Land Company had a right to be heard and the opportunity for public participation was there. Commissioner Bird asked if it was Mrs. Eggert's feeling that it was an unusual meeting, and Mrs. Eggert believed it was an unfortunate situation due to lack of information, which she would not want to happen again. Considerable discussion followed as to the basis on which the Board could deny approval of the site plan, and Attorney Brandenburg stated that the Board must look at it from the view of all the County laws and ordinances, and based on what was presented at the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting, as well as at this meeting, determine if the review of the site plan met all county criteria or whether it created a situation detrimental to the health, welfare and safety of the community. Motion was made by Commissioner Lyons, seconded by Commissioner Fletcher, to grant the appeal and deny the Site Plan of River Bend on the basis that evidence presented at the Zoning Commission meeting and the evidence presented today show it to be detrimental to the health, welfare and safety of the community. • 51 P -,m 48 PACE757 JAN 27'992 e®oK 4S us 758 Commissioner Wodtke stated that he would have a difficult time saying evidence had been presented showing that this site plan would affect the health, welfare and safety of the public. He did believe the site plan will be void because of the Board decision not to allow the cut and asked if there could be a Motion stating that because of this decision, the site plan should be resubmitted or possibly voided. Attorney Brandenburg pointed out that the Board does not have the authority under the Code to send back site plans or ask that they be modified. There is an appeal process. Discussion followed as to denial based on improper procedures, and Commissioner Lyons stated that he was willing to include in his Motion a reference to the procedures followed as a reason for denial of the site plan. Commissioner Fletcher concurred. Commissioner Bird stated that he had a problem with the Motion based on either the affect on the health, welfare and safety of the public or on the procedural question. He pointed out that a site plan review is not like a rezoning where public hearings are held and public notices sent, etc. It is an on-going process, and he felt if our staff was not prepared that night to have a full discussion, the developer should have been notified so they would not have brought in people from all around the state at considerable expense. Commissioner Bird felt any problem here is an in-house problem and not the fault of the applicant. He believed Mrs. Eggert ran the meeting as best she could and did not believe any information was supressed deliberately. Chairman Scurlock stated that his problem is that people specifically wanted to participate and because of information given out by the Planning Department, they did not attend. 52 -1 The Chairman called for the question to grant the appeal and deny the site plan based on the question of the health, welfare and safety of the community as well as procedural problems. It was voted on and carried with a 3 to 2 vote, Commissioners Bird and. Wodtke voting in opposition. SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT The Board of County Commissioners recessed at 12:45 o'clock P.M. in order that the District Board of Fire Commissioners of the South Indian River County Fire District might convene. Commissioner Wodtke left the meeting at 12:45 o'clock P.M. and was not present for the Meeting of the South County Fire District. Minutes of that meeting are being prepared separately. The Board of County Commioners reconvened at 1:02 o'clock P.M. with Commissioner Wodtke being absent from the meeting. APPROVAL OF SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT NOMINEE TO EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE «- r On Motion by Commissioner Bird, seconded by Commissioner Lyons, Commissioner Wodtke being absent, the Board by a 4 to 0 vote, appointed Chief Forrest Smith to the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Committee as the representative of the South County Fire District. The Board of County Commissioners thereupon recessed at 1:03 o'clock P.M. for lunch and reconvened at 1:30 o'clock P.M. with all members present. RAMPMASTER INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONDS The Board considered the following memo submitted by Attorney Brandenburg: 53 JAN 27 1982 E®OK 48 FAGE 59 TO: Chairman and Menbers of the Board of County an-missioners of Indian River County Gary M. Brandenburg FROM: County Attorney I BOOK 48 F; ^F 760 DATE: January 25, 1982 FILE: SUBJECT. ADD ON IT04 - Industrial Develotanent Bonds - Robert H. Davis & William A.'Davis Rampmaster Inc. REFERENCES: The First State Bank of Miami has submitted a revised commitment letter for Rampmaster Industrial Development Bond Issue. This revised commit - trent letter must be executed by the County prior to.February 1, 19821 or the bank will withdraw the ccmnitment. The revised cormitment complies with all the requests made by the County Attorney and Bond Counsel and provides; 1. The bank commits to purchase from Indian River County $850,000 of Limited Revenue Bonds (face value at 1000). 2. Bonds will bear interest at 12-1/2% for the first five years and thereafter to be adjusted at the bank's option to a maxhnum of 70% of the bank's prime rate. 3. The bonds are to be secured by a first mortgage on the property Upon which the improvements will be placed together with security liens on equipment and furnishings, etc. Payment of the bonds are to be guaranteed by the Davis' as individuals and Rampmaster, Inc. The County Attorney respectfully requests your consideration of this ratter. Sine -ely, A.. <. " y randenur On Motion by Commissioner Lyons, seconded by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved the revised letter of commitment from The First State Bank of Miami and authorized the signature of the Chairman. 54 The First Stdte 1 Bank of Miami MIAMI BRANCH 7900 N.E. 2nd Avenue Miami, FL 33138 Phone: 305/756.3210 September 9, 1981 Revised October 26, 1981 Revised January 15, 1982 Indian River County c/o George G. Collins, Jr., EsQ. Collins, Brovrn, Caldwell, and Evans P. 0. Box 3686 Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Re: INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONDS ROBERT H. DAVIS AND WILLIAM A. DAVIS $850,000.00 Gentlemen: This letter is to serve as the Bank's commitment to pur- chase from Indian River County limited Revenue Bonds for the total amount of $850,000.00 (face value Bonds at 1000). The purpose is to provide funds for land acquisition and construction of approximately 24,000 square feet of factory and office space and term financing. The site is located in Indian River County. This commitment is subject to the following terms and conditions: a. Said Bonds shall earn interest at the rate of 12-1/2o for the first five years. The rate thereafter may, at the Bank's option, be increased to a maximum of 70o'of the Bank's prime lending rate. b. Said Bonds shall be secured by: 1. A first mortgage upon the Real Property and all improvements.to be built thereon, owned in fee simple by Robert H. Davis and William A. Davis. The legal description of which is to be determined by a current survey. The mortgage shall be in a form acceptable to the Bank. 2. A security lien upon all equipment, furnishings, and fixtures, owned by Rampmaster Incorporated. C. Payment:of the Bonds shall be guaranteed individually by Robert H. Davis, William A. Davis, and by Rampmaster Incorporated. -1- MEMBER FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 55 G\ BOOK 48 fA6F 1 JAN 271992 ^. �} .1 • 71 r1-1,1,. i The First Stdte i •� d. BA of Miami MIAMI BRANCH 7900 N.E. 2nd Avenue Miami, FL 33138 Phone: 305/756-3210 noK 48 w,,762 I LA. The Bonds may be prepaid in multiples of $50,000.00 at any time, without penalty or bonus, all interest being paid to date of redemption. Any prepayments shall not interfere with the reauirement to -make regular monthly payments of both principal and interest. e. The Bonds shall provide for a construction period of one year, during which time in- terest only shall be paid on a monthly basis. The Bonds shall Drovide that in the event of an act of God, riot, civil insurrection, or for other reasons beyond the control of the owners of the project, the term may be extended for an additional six months for the construction of the improvements. At the end of the contruc- tion period, determined by the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, and the architect's and owners' certification that such improvements are complete and are satisfactorily in compliance with the approved plans and specifications, whereupon the Bonds shall then provide for repayment with equal monthly payments of interest and principal in an amount to fully amortize over fifteen (15) years, with the full payment to be made at the end of the 10th vear. Provided, however, that payment shall accelerate and become due immediately, in the event that interest shall be determined taxable as income to the holder of said Bonds, or at the option of the Bank the.interest may then be in- creased to an amount equal to 20 above the Bank's prime rate, but will not violate the 25% criminal usuary statute. f. The county shall assign all of its rights in the project to the Bank, if anv it ac- quires. The owners shall assign their right to collect rent to be paid by those in actual possession as additional security for payment of the Bonds. Any lease of the project shall require as rental payments in an amount sufficient .to make all payments to retire the Bonds. g. The Bonds shall be validated by appro- priate judicial proceedings, and the appeal period shall have passed before funding. -2- MEMBER FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 92 SLCC 1.,� ,n Z-2 70 T�e First Stdte ._ h. Bond Counsel shall render an opinion pinion that BAof MldMil;� the interest income from the Bonds will be excludable from gross income under federal income taxation laws, but not MIAMI BRANCH 7900 N.E. 2nd Avenue exempt from Florida corporate income tax. Miami, FL 33138 Phone: 305/756-3210 1- A fixed price contract shall be obtained for the construction of the improvements to be built in compliance with all regu- latory agencies having jurisdiction over the property. Construction shall be i completed by a reputable licensed general building contractor, who shall provide a' payment and performance bond, with a bond- ing company satisfactory to the Bank, f naming both the owners and the Bank as obligees. 'The said construction contract i shall provide for draws to be made with 1 the approval of the owners and architect or engineer in accordance with an agree- ment to be entered into between the Bank, the Contractor, and the owners to dis- burse the proceeds on a schedule to be approved by the Bank. The Bank shall act as depository for the construction funds. j. The Bank shall be provided with a copy of a Builders' Risk Policy in a company acceptable to Bond holder insuring the improvements against fire, windstorm, theft, and vandalism in the full amount of the Bond. k. This Bank's expenses and other charges shall include our attorneys' fees, mortgagee's title policy, recordings, abstracting, and shall be paid by the owners or withheld from the Bond pro- ceeds, all of which shall not exceed 2% of the face amount of the Bonds. The fee to be charged by the Title Company selected by this Bank to act as construction escrow agent, shall be separately and additionally billed and paid for by the owners. Intangible tax and documentary stamps are not re- quired to be paid by the County. 1. The form and substance of all documents shall be subject to review and approval of our attorneys. -3- MEMBER FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM JAN 2't 57 am 48 PACE ��� e®oK 48. F* rf 764 JAN 27 1982 1 r., n 1 ," t t f'� 1. �-� 1 •' i� qq -J::�.v%::t::•v: i •'a' lig'—'..1 :'i:�i"a �'d,� � � a� The Rrst Stdte 1_ Bdnk of MiamiPlease inform us of your acceptance and agreement of the foregoing by signing and returning the enclosed MIAMI BRANCH 7900 N.E. 2nd Avenue Miami, FL 33138 Phone: 3051756.3210 copy herein prior to February 1, 1982, otherwise this commitment shall become null and void. Yours ve IN'-iH and E. Leon Vice President WEL:jho Terms and conditions of the above written commitment letter are here- with acknowledged and accepted by the undersigned. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY By: Don C. Scurlock, Jriz Chairman cc: Lynn H. Simpson, Esq. Robert A. Koppen, Esq. Rampmaster, Inc. AMENDMENTOF RESOLUTION 81-107 ROBERT H. DAVIS WILLIAM A. DAVIS Attorney Brandenburg suggested an amendment to the above Resolution to clarify an ambiguity relating to one of the appointments to the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Committee. Motion was made by Commissioner Fletcher to amend Resolution 81-107, which was adopted on December 16, 1981, establishing the Indian River County Emergency Medical Services Advisory Committee, to change the wording in Paragraph 4, Line 15, from "INTERIM EMERGENCY MEDICAL CENTER DIRECTOR, who shall be a physician" to "INDIAN RIVER MEDICAL MR SOCIETY MEMBER, who shall be a local physician." Motion was seconded and carried with no opposition. There being no further business, on Motion made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 2:15 o'clock P.M. Attest: J s Gni Clerk Chairman JAN 27 1982 p . 59 800K 48 PAGE "165