Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/20/1983Wednesday, July 20, 1983 The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida met in Regular Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, July 20, 1983, at 8:30 o'clock A.M. Present were. Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Vice Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman, Patrick B. Lyons, and William C. Wodtke, Jr. Chairman Richard N. Bird was delayed and not in attendance for the first forty-five minutes of the meeting. Also present were Michael J. Wright, County Administrator; L.S. "Tommy" Thomas, Community Services Director; Gary Brandenburg, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; Jeffrey K. Barton, Budget Director; Barbara Bonnah and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerks. Vice Chairman Scurlock asked that we observe a moment of silent meditation in memory of County Civil Defense employee, Robert Cushman, whose funeral was being held this afternoon. Vice Chairman Scurlock led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA Budget Director Jeffrey Barton requested the deletion from the Agenda of Item 7-A, Resolution Authorizing Budget Officer to Place Excess Funds in Investments. Administrator Michael Wright requested the deletion from the Agenda of Item 18-A, Beatty Minor Site Plan Appeal. He explained that he had received a wire from Mr. Beatty asking that the Public Hearing be postponed to a later date with a time certain set. Attorney Brandenburg advised that t�o� Box �DAI PSG€ 3 , ' JUL 2 0 1983 JUL 20 1983 9 the Public Hearing be opened at 2 o'clock P.M., as scheduled, and a Motion be passed to continue it on another day. Administrator Wright requested the deletion from the Agenda of Item 23-A, Approval of Change Order No. 1, Electrical Contract for County Garage Fuel Dispensing System. He explained that it is going out for rebid. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA Administrator Wright requested the addition to today's Agenda of a brief discussion of the acquisition of land for the new jail. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously added the above item to today's Agenda. Commissioner Wodtke requested the addition to today's Agenda of consideration of a Resolution to approve a railroad crossing at Stratton Blvd. in Sebastian. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously added the above item to today's Agenda. MINUTES The Minutes of Special Meeting of 6/29/83 and the Regular Meeting of 7/6/83 were not approved at this time as the Commissioners did not have sufficient time to read them over due to the hours spent on budget meetings this past week. These Minutes will be presented for approval at the next Regular Meeting, 8/3/83. 2 APPROVAL OF RAILROAD CROSSING AT STRATTON BLVD. IN SEBASTIAN Sebastian Mayor Pat Flood addressed the Board and explained that a couple of years ago, they had brought this matter before the Board and the Board had requested they come back when they were ready to go. Mayor Flood reported they have a public hearing scheduled for August 22 & 23 with the Florida East Coast Railroad Administrative Board and what is needed now is a Resolution supporting the railroad crossing at Stratton Boulevard and U.S. #1. He pointed out that the extension is part of the County thoroughfare plan and that the new elementary school is located at the end of the area. The School Board has given them a Resolution for the extension. He felt that if this crossing was not approved, traffic would be increased on S.R. 510, and the County would have to enlarge that road sooner than they had planned. He also pointed out that the DOT is willing to give them the permit. Mayor Flood explained that Stratton Blvd. comes out on U.S. #1 right on Duck Pointe, about 50-100 yards north of Durrance Road. Commissioner Lyons questioned what the Transportation Committee was going to say about this, and Commissioner Scurlock explained that Mayor Flood and the city engineers had appeared before the Transportation Committee a number of times on this particular issue and the Committee determined that it made sense to place the crossing at this particular location. Mayor Flood assured the Board that the railroad crossing would not cost the County one dime, not even for maintenance. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously approved Resolution 83-51 supporting the rail- road crossing at Stratton Blvd. and U.S. #1 in 54 rare. 25 Sebastian. JUL 2 0 1983 3 JUL 2 o 1983 RESOLUTION NO. 83-51 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that they support the efforts of the City of Sebastian to extend Stratton Boulevard across the Florida East Coast Railroad line and request the Administrative Hearing Board to favorably consider the request in that the railroad crossing will be an essential link in the transportation network of Indian River County and the City of Sebastian in the future. The foregoing Resolution is offered by Commissioner Lyons who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Wodtke and unpon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: RICHARD N. BIRD ABSENT DON C. SCURLOCK, JR. AYE MARGARET C. BOWMAN AYE PATRICK B. LYONS AYE WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR. AYE The Vice Chairman thereupon declared the Resolution duly passed and adopted this 20th day of July, 1983. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY Richard N. Bird, Chairman APPROVED A9 --,TO ORM D LEGAL SUS' CI CY�!% BY 4 ATTEST. An a r y/Bran ddrb urg Fre a Wright, ClQrk PU V. 4a4jCounty Attorney b.Co. . CLERK TO THE BOARD A. Approval of Renewal Applications for a Permit to Carry a Concealed Firearm The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/12/83: TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: July 12, 1983 F1l_F: the Board of County Commissioners SUBJECT: PISTOL PERMIT RENEWALS FROM: Michael Wright REFERENCES: County Administrator In a memorandum dated July 6, 1983 from Freda Wright, Clerk of Circuit Court, the following names were sub- mitted for renewal of pistol permits: Sharon D. Mays Calvin Baker Holland All requirements of Ordinance #82-27 have been met and are in order. It is therefore recommended the pistol permits be renewed for the above individuals. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously approved renewal pistol permits for the following persons: Sharon D. Mays Calvin Baker Holland B. Approval of New Applications for a Permit to Carry a Concealed Firearm The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/12/83: 5 JUL 2 0 1983 JUL 2 0 1993 a ac 5. �a TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: July 12, 1983 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners SUBJECT: : PISTOL PERMITS - NEW FROM: Michael Wright REFERENCES: County Administrator In a memorandum dated July 6, 1983 from Freda Wright, Clerk of Circuit Court, the following names were sub- mitted for pistol permits: John David Rogers Ritter Van Cyphers,'Jr. Maurice Leigh Simmons All requirements of Ordinance #82-27 have been met and are in order. It is therefore recommended the pistol permits be issued to the above individuals. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously approved the issuance of pistol permits for the following persons: John David Rogers Ritter Van Cyphers, Jr. Maurice Leigh Simmons BUDGET OFFICE B. Approval of Budget Amendment to Purchase 16 Channel Radio from Sheriff's Confiscated Property Account The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/13/83: C1 Telephone: (305) 567-M Juiv 13, 1983 To: Board of County Commissioners FrortV effrey K. Barton, Budget Director Subject: Sheriff R. T. "Tiny" Dobeck - Confiscated Property . Suncom Telephone: (305) 424-1012 The following budget amendment is to correctly record the expenses to purchase the 16 Channel Radio per the attached letter from the Sheriff. Account Title Account No. Increase Decrease Confiscated Property 112-000-351-20.00 1,541 Expense -Budget Office 112-600-521-99.93 1,541 MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, that the Board approve the above budget amendment as recommended by Budget Director Barton. In discussion, Commissioner Wodtke expressed his displeasure that once again, the approval of a budget amendment for the Sheriff's Department is after the fact, that the order has been placed and the invoice paid. Commissioner Scurlock felt that in some cases the timing was such that prior authorization becomes difficult. Commissioner Lyons stated he will write a letter to the Sheriff on behalf of the Commission requesting that the Sheriff's Department go through the Purchasing Dept. The Chairman CALLED FOR THE QUESTffN. It was voted on and carried unanimously. ®54 �df JUL 1993 r JUL 20 1983 CONSENT AGENDA Boni 54 sauC A. Request for Release of Easement - Leo Jablonski - Oslo Park Subdivision No. 2, Block N, Lots 17 and 18 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/29/83: TO: The Honorable Members DATE: June 29, 1983 FILE: ER -83-07-20 of the Board of County Commissioners FROM: DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: /SUBJECT: Patrick Bruce King, ICP THROUGH: Bob Keating, AICP40Z dA Plaot°& Zoning Dept. Manager V. 14 a4g%dVaLul- Charles Kindig, RELEASE OF EASEMENT REQUEST BY LEO JABLONSKI SUBJECT PROPERTY: LOTS 17 & 18, BLOCK N, OSLO PARK SUBDIVISION, #2 Zoning Inspector REFERENCES: JABLONSKI DW:MAYG01 It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of July 20, 1983. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The County has been petitioned by Leo F. Jablonski, owiker of the subject property, for release of the ten (10) foot utility and drainage easement, being the north 5 feet of Lot 17, Block N and the south 5 feet of Lot 18, Block N, Oslo Park Subdivision, #2. Lot 17 is 50 feet in width and 100 feet in depth. Lot 18 is 50 feet in width and 100 feet in depth. It is Mr. Jablonski's intention to consolidate the two lots and construct a residence on the site. The current zoning classification is R-1, Single -Family Res- idential. The land use designation is LD -2, Low Density_, six units/acre. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The request has been reviewed by Southern Bell, Florida Power and Light Company, Florida Cablevision, Inc. and the Utility and Right -of -Way Departments. Based upon their reviews, there were no objections to release of the easement. The zoning staff analysis, which included a site visit, showed that drainage would be adequately handled by the existing front and side swales. It is the Zoning Department's opinion that to release the common side lot 5 foot easements of Lots 17 and 18, Block N, Oslo Park Subdivision, #2, would have no adverse effect. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends to the Board, through adoption of a resolu- tion, the release of the common side lot 5 foot easements of Lots 17 and 18, Block N, Oslo Park Subdivision, #2. L� ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved Resolution 83-52, granting release of easement to Leo Jablonski, Oslo Park subdivision No. 2, Block N, Lots 17 and 18. 9 54 31 JUL20 1983 JUL 20 1983, d�oa 4 �ac� RESOLUTION NO. 83-52 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, have been requested to release the common side lot 5 foot easements of lots 17 and 18, Block N, Oslo Park Subdivision, according to the Plat of same recorded in Plat Book 4, Page 13, of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. WHEREAS, said lot line easements were dedicated on the Plat of Oslo Park Subdivision, #2, for public utility purposes, and WHEREAS, the request for such release of easements have been submitted in proper form; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following lot line easements in Oslo Park Subdivision; #2, shall be released, abandoned and vacated as follows: Those common side lot 5 foot easements of Lots 17 and 18, Block N, Oslo Park Subdivision, #2, according to the Plat of the same filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida, in Plat Book 4, Page 13 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners and the Clerk of the Circuit Court be and they hereby are authorized and directed to execute a release of said lot line easements hereinabove referred to in form proper for recording and placing in the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. This 20th day of July , 1983. ATTEST: Freda Wright, Clef .��r �:� �lu �Or►i� c: V, e BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Richard N. Bird, Chairman i 355988 \' a� RELEASE OF EASEMENT This Release of Easement, executed this 20th day of July , 1983, by the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political sub- division of the State of Florida, first party Leo F. Jablonski, whose mailing address is 1210 17th Avenue, S.W., Vero Beach, Florida, 32960, second party: WITNESSETH That the said party of the first part for and in considera- tion of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration in hand paid by the said second party, does hereby remise, release, abandon and quit claim unto -the said second R party forever, all the right, title, interest, claim and demand which the said first party has in and to the following described easements, lying on land situated in the County of Indian River, State of Florida, to -wit: The common side lot S foot easements of Lots 17 and 18, Block N, Oslo Park Subdivision, #2, as recorded in Plat Book 4, Page 13, public records of Indian River County, Florida. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same with all and singular the appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining and all estate, right, title, interest, equity to the only proper use, benefit and behoof of the said second party forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said first party has signed and sealed these presents by the parties so authorized by the law and the day and year first above written. CUC. St. AMT. S . '/S FREDA WRIGRT, Clerk of Coen / Indian River County - by ut t : X Signed, sealed and delivered/-Vn the presence of: V BOARD OF COUNTY'COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER_%60VNTY'h. FLORIDA BY: Richard N.•.Bird, Cha rman GtLG ATTEST: Freda Wrigh , ler r. box 4 wr JUL :-- _ s8PsEos j?, LJ. JUL 2 0 1983 STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me an officer duly authorized in the State and County aforesaid to take acknowledge- ments personally appeared, Richard N. Bird, as Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, a political R subdivision of the State of Florida, and Freda Wright, as Clerk of the Circuit Court, to me known to be the persons duly authorized by said County to execute the foregoing instrument and they acknowledged before me that they executed the same for. and on behalf of the said political subdivision. WITNESS by hand and seal in the County and S aforesaid this CRO V4 day of GL to last , 1983. y pdblic, State of 1Plori4a a My Commission Expirpt: F'= r40TAW PUBUC STATE OF FLORIDA AT LAIGI My COMMISSION MIRES AUG 13 19 8 5 gM pW GENERAL INS, UNDEIIWRITEM e 0668PA6� "'gyp.-t1� G4sC;. I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me an officer duly authorized in the State and County aforesaid to take acknowledge- ments personally appeared, Richard N. Bird, as Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, a political R subdivision of the State of Florida, and Freda Wright, as Clerk of the Circuit Court, to me known to be the persons duly authorized by said County to execute the foregoing instrument and they acknowledged before me that they executed the same for. and on behalf of the said political subdivision. WITNESS by hand and seal in the County and S aforesaid this CRO V4 day of GL to last , 1983. y pdblic, State of 1Plori4a a My Commission Expirpt: F'= r40TAW PUBUC STATE OF FLORIDA AT LAIGI My COMMISSION MIRES AUG 13 19 8 5 gM pW GENERAL INS, UNDEIIWRITEM e 0668PA6� NORTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT The Board of County Commissioners recessed at 8:50 o'clock A.M. in order that the District Board of Fire Commissioners of the North Indian River County Fire District might convene. Those Minutes are being prepared separately. The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 9:10 o'clock A.M. with the same members present. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING APPEAL - WALTER BOBO'S SUBDIVISION FROM R-2 to LM -1 The hour of 9:00 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to wit: VER© BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily NOTICE — PUBLtC 1iFARiN4 -- ---' Notice of hearing to consider the following poral to rezone land from: prc Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida A-2, "Multiple -Family Residential DisWcy- to LM -1, "Light Manufacturing Distryct„ Thomas rre Tobi" presently owned by . Barnes is locatad COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA at tie southwest Intersection of 48h Stmt ant the F.E.C. RY. Before the undersi ned authority g y personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published The "so property Is described am Lot 1, WALTER BOBO-S SUBDIVISION a subdivision as recorded in plat Book 1, at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being Page 89 Florida Saaid Records w lying Lucia , yam, G TheBoardBBoard ofng In aCou ty County, Florida: a -' "/� AH 11 duct a public hearingding the pe PlPianninn the applicant of the decision by /TJfLo�^ C. J j in the matter of Q�� the hen re oning I fpuer The publiccommend ; s �� which parties in Interest and citizens shall an opportunity to be heard, will be held bI Board of County Commissioners in the Commission Chambers of the County Admi tion Building, located at 1840 25th in the Court, was pub- P Stmt Beach, Florida. on Wednesday. July 20, 19 tl:00 A.M. If any person decides to appal ecision made on the above fished in said newspaper in the issues of �/ U�V / �� � ���' matter, he wil a record of the proceedings, and for such pur D°�, he may need to ensure that a verbatig rP'J`* i.-ef -the proceadirrgs ts` made, which in- wi`�es simony and evidence upon which thel appeal is based. Indian River County , ` -` Board of County Commissioners Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at July 1. 1B3,1s83 and N. Bird, Chairman Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; 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 advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this X-5 day of U t A. D. tg 4� ( usigess:Manager) f (Cle`rf, 0f;the'Cir=it-Court;--fndian Riieer, u ty, Florida) (SEAL) J , 11 U L 0 79 54. rAc15 83 r JUL 2 0 1983 R 54 F"AUE `sl The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/10/83: TO: DATE: FILE: The Honorable Members of the Board of County Commissioners June 10, 1983 DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE _ • SUBJECT: Patrick Bruce King, I THROUGH: Bob Keating, Planning Zoning Dept. FROM: Art Challacombe, Environmental Planner AICP ,2�' Manager RICHARD P. BOGOSIAN, TRUSTEE, REQUEST TO REZONE 4.7 ACRES LOCATED ON LOT #1, WALTER BOBO'S SUB- DIVISION FROM R-2, MULTI- PLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO LM -1, LIGHT MANUFACTURING DISTRICT REFERENCES: It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting on July 20, 1983. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 4.7 acres located on Lot #1 of the Walter Bobo's Subdivision from R-2, Multiple -Family Residential District, to LM -1, Light Manufacturing District. The applicant proposes to construct a roof truss fabrication facility. On May 26, 1983, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied the applicant's request for the following reasons: 1. The existing R-2, Multiple -Family Residential District, is a reasonable and appropriate use of the land and sLrves to buffer the existing single-family housing from non-residential uses; 2. The proposed rezoning to a more intensive land use would adversely impact upon the existing residents' health, welfare, and moral well being. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS in this section, an analysis of the existing land use pittern will be presented as well as a discussion of ilie fi?turr.'land use as established in the Land Use Element of the C:omprchensive Plan. Existing Land Use Pattern: The subject property is cuzrently vacant and cleared. To the east of the property is the Florida East Coast Railway and the following uses: (1) Riverfront Groves Packing Co. {2) Sturgis Lumber Company (3) Leroy Smith & Sons Packing House (4) Indian River Packing Co. (5) Three older, single-family dwellings (6) Mini -storage facility (7) Warehouse and office complex (8) Manufacturing.facilities a) Pan American Aluminum Corp. b) Harcar Windows c) Booth Manufacturing Co. d) Interior Construction Supply Immediately to the west of the subject property lies vacant land to 28th Avenue. Further to the west is the Lateral H Canal and the -following residential uses: (1) Smith Plaza Subdivision (2p Hargrove Subdivision (3) Lord Calvert Estates Subdivision (4) Pineview Park Subdivision (5) Gifford Gardens Apartments (6.) Treasure Coast Village Subdivision (Z). Crystal Sands Subdivision (8Y, High Ridge Mobile Home Park .On 28th Avenue and to the south of the property..lies Hilliard Subdivision:, •'Gifford School Park Subdivision,. ,;-3xnd :Garden of Eden Subdivision. This area is in residential use. Some of -the houses are in deteriorating condition.t... _ Also.south,-:adjacent to the subject property,; -is a sin- gle -.family house in deteriorating conditiorl._,:Further to the south iso another single-family house, Midd1p.Six School, and Middle -Seven School, and the Blue Goose Packing House: To the north,of the subject property is an -older single --family -:. house with, -storage on the property. Further.to the north is vacant land. Future Land Use Pattern: The subject property is located ,in the Gifford. Mixed Use District. Immediately .to the east of tho _property,..the Comprehensive Plan designation -.is the U.S. Highway #1 Mixed Use District. To the north -,of -the subject' .....property is. a, designation for a 100 acre Indi;s trial Node. The.-''..... existing he ' - existing uses -within that node are: -(•1')•, Global Paving Systems Inc. (2)` Troglen Paving Co. While the Plan generally recognizes residential use as the predominate land use in the Gifford area, the,.subject property-_• is.located on the northeast corner of this.Wxed Use District and is adjacent to the U.S. #1 Mixed Use Di­stxict.. The -plan states that commercial and industrial uses ore: -anticipated to utilize the majority of the land area within tho:U.S. #1. corridor. .Given the existing industrial use east of the subject property, and the industrial use designation to the. north, the LM -1, Light Manufacturing District would servo"as an intermediate..buffer between the heavier industiriai,to the north and east and the residential and institutional uses.to the -west and south. . ; Roads/Traffic: Based upon current requirements:in the LM -1, Light Manufacturing District, the proposed rezoning would generate 450 Average Daily Trips (ADTs) and 9.0 Peak -Hour Trips. The majority, -.of traffic would enter and exit -from -U.S. #1 to 49th Street;: although some traffic may be expected to travel from 28th_Avenue to gain access to North Gifford Road. The proposed:use.:of a truss fabrication facility:will require heavy truck traffrit entering and exiting the site. This.,type of .traffic should not be allowed to travel 28th Avenue since this street serves local residential and school needs. Utilities::The subject property is presently served by County •water. Sewer -service is presently not available. Environment: The subject property is not designated as en- vironmentally sensitive on the Comprehensive -Plan nor is it located in a:flood prone area as designated on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). RECOMMENDATION During the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held on May 26, 1983, the Commission denied the applicant's request for those reasons identified within the description and conditions section of this agenda item. It is the staff's opinion that these reasons are valid concerns. It is the staff recommenda- tion that the Board of County Commissioners give due consid- eration to the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation as well as the information provided by this memorandum. JUL 0 198 12A 54 ma r JUL 2 0 1983 c 54 ma 38 Richard P. Bogosian, attorney, addressed the Board, and stated he was representing the owner of the property, Mr. Jack Dritenbas, as trustee and attorney. He explained that Jack Dritenbas has been a builder in this County over the past 25 years and became disenchanted with the supplies that he had been receiving in the course of his building and decided that he could build a better product. He, therefore, began to look around for a parcel of industrial zoned land and located 5 acres up in Gifford that is presently owned by Marshall Barnes, on which he signed a contract to purchase the land contingent on it being rezoned from residential to industrial. On May 26, 1983, the Planning & Zoning Commission denied their request for rezoning. Prior to the Public Hearing, they felt that it was an ideal location and had received favorable opinion from the Planning & Zoning Commission. However, they had met considerable opposition to the rezoning at the public hearing. He explained that Mr. Dritenbas is presently on vacation, and had given him instructions that to withdraw the rezoning appeal if any opposition was raised at this meeting. ki Chairman Bird arrived at 9:15 o'clock A.M. and took over the meeting. Chairman Bird opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. Mr. Clyde Morgan, 4950 23rd Court, came forward and addressed the Board. He stated he has been a County resident for about 39 years and that his home adjoins the property belonging to Mr. Barnes that is being considered for rezoning. He confirmed that Mr. Dritenbas explained that he is going to build a truss plant and intended to employ some people from the community and he thought that would be a good idea. However, he felt that once you start rezoning the property, it will keep on going. He would prefer his property to remain residential, but could only speak for himself. Chairman Bird asked Mr. Morgan if he was opposed to the rezoning and Mr. Morgan answered yes. Mrs. Minnie Sweeting, 2716 48th Street, addressed the Board and stated that the people whom she has talked with are opposed to this rezoning, and felt that once this can of beans is opened, there would be businesses and commercial establishments built right on down that street. She pointed out that she was familiar with truss plants and felt there would be a serious noise problem with the constant hammering, sawing, etc. Mrs. Sweeting explained that one of the reasons they bought their home in that area was the protection coming from the close location of the school and stressed that the land was zoned residential. She pointed out that the developer knows that this is the black area and that the residents are stuck there because of their financial position and the attitude of the people. She continued that this is something she and her neighbors have learned to live with, and they have accepted it. They are not hostile about this, but appeal to the Commission to appreciate and respect their desire not to have business establishments dotting the area where they have their homes. Mrs. Sweeting noted that most of the homes in Gifford are modest homes, but they are homes that are owned by people who never thought they would own a home. She felt sure Mr. Dritenbas will be able to find another location for his truss plant and asked the Commission once again to respect their homes and deny this rezoning request. Mr.•Bogosian explained that it is almost impossible in this county to buy a parcel of five acres of industrial land for much less than $25,000 an acre, or even higher if it is close to a populous area. He suggested that if the 14 54 PAGE 39 JUL 2 0 1983 .4 muco 4 Commission is interested in small businessmen going into business in this community, that they investigate the availability of industrially zoned land that can be purchased at a reasonable price. Commissioner Lyons felt he had made a very good point and agreed that the Board should take a very long look at the issue, but felt that the home owners in the area had made an eloquent appeal to deny the rezoning and he had to agree. Mr. Bogosian formally withdrew his appeal for rezoning due to the opposition expressed at this meeting. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously accepted the withdrawal of the rezoning appeal. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/5/83: To: The Honorable Members DATE: July 5, 1983 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: � PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL SUBJECT: OF WINTER GROVE SUB- atrick Bruce King, CP DIVISION Clare Z. Poupard C� WINTER GROVE S/D FROM: Planner I v REFERENCES: DW:APR It is requested that the information presented herein be given formal consideration by the Board of.County Commissioners at their regular meeting on July 20, 1983. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Winter Grove is a 28 lot subdivision located on the north side of N. Winter Beach Road, east of U.S. Highway 1. The subject property is ± 20 acres in size. It is zoned R-3, Single -Family Residential, (6.2 dwelling units/acre allowable building density). The land use designation is LD -1, Low -Density - Residential (3 dwelling units/acre allowable building density). The proposed building density is 1.4 dwelling units/acre. 15 ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The applicants have complied with all applicable County Ordi- nances. They have received a Type A Stormwater Permit. The layout has been approved for individual wells and septic tanks by the Environmental Health Department. Also, the applicants have agreed to pave the unpaved half of N. Winter Beach road to the limits of their development, as specified by the County Engineer. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board grant preliminary plat approval to Winter Grove Subdivision. Clare Z. Poupard, Planner, gave a brief summary of the description, conditions, alternatives and analysis, and recommended that the Board grant preliminary plat approval to Winter Grove Subdivision. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously granted preliminary plat approval of Winter Grove Subdivision. APPROVAL OF GRANT APPLICATION FOR COMP'IUNITY SERVICES TRUST FUND AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 83-53 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/28/83: ' 16 JUL 20 1983 K � ,PAGE 44 JUL 2 O 1983 54 at , w I) ; co if ® John�ecre t+Grove KeT FROM: STATE OF FLORIDA DEPA.RTMENT 91STR[BUTION LIST _ CO �r r 1TY AFFAM trator s -- ION OF LOCAL RESOURCE MAlNNGLnMFNT — o�T�ast.> Personnel— w`'-' s e Public Works Community Dev. Utilities Finance Other E','r All Local Governments Richard F. Barrett, Acting Division Director, RE: Notice of Funds Available to Local Governments through the Florida Financial Assistance for Community Service Act of 1974 (Commonly Referred to as the Community Services Trust Fund) DATE: June 28, 1983 The 1983 Legislature appropriated funds to the Community Services Trust Fund (CSTF) to be made available to local governments (See attached allocations list). Any local government, county or municipal, can apply for any portion of the appropriate county allocation. The attached page lists the amounts allocated for distribution within each county: The CSTF is appxopriat-ed from state general revenue funds, and both the state funds and local.match can be used to match -federal grants. Florida Statutes 409.501-506 and Chapter 9C-2 of the Florida Administrative Code are the governing authorities for the CSTF. The legis- lation requires that activities address an unmet human service need by providing services to recipients or potential recipients of public assistance. The determination of need and manner of addressing the need are to be established by the local government. The program year for the CSTF is from October 1, 1983 to September 30, 1984. The statutory filing date to submit an application is August 1, 1983. No extensions can be granted, and all applications must be postmarked not later than August 1, 1983. Please address your applications and any inquiries to: Department of Community Affairs Block Grant Assistance Section 2571 Executive Center Circle, Fast Tallahassee, Florida 32301 ( 904) 488-7541 Attention: Danna Vaught Lia Forlani, Secretary to the Board of County Commissioners, explained that this application for a grant from the Florida Department of Community Affairs must be filed by August 1, 1983, and that funds in the amount of 17 $5,041 will be received by the Vocational and Sheltered Workshop and the Council on Aging. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 83-53 approving the grant application for Community Services Trust Fund. (APPLI.CATION IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK). EK pox 5:4 mu 43 I JUL 2 0 1983 54 RESOLUTION NO.83-53 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS UNDER THE FLORIDA FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR COMMUNITY SERVICES ACT. IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER, FLORIDA AS FOLLOWS: Section I. That the Chairman is hereby authorized and directed to sign in the name and on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners an Agreement between the Florida Department of Community Affairs and Indian River County, under the Florida Financial Assistance for Community Services Act, as per copy attached hereto and made part hereof. Section II. That all funds necessary to meet the contract obligations of the County and its delegate agencies (if applicable) with the Department have been appropriated, and said funds are unexpended and unencumbered and are available for payment as prescribed in the contract. The County shall be responsible for the funds for the local share notwithstanding the fact that all or part of the local share is to be met or contributed by other source, i.e., contributions, other agencies or organization funds. PASSED AND ADOPTED THE 20th DAY OF July , 1983. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By Richard N. Bird Chairman ATTEST: IJ Freda Wrig Clerk AAA V %N ua 40-1 .0 Approved as to form and legal sufficiencv B] 7 EXECUTION OF QUIT -CLAIM DEED TO CITY OF VERO BEACH ON FIRE STATION LAND AT VILLAGE GREEN LOCATION ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously approved the execution of the Quit -Claim Deed to the City of Vero Beach on the Fire Station land at the Village Green location. 144 20 JUL 2 0 W3 11661 54 PAS€ .45 QUIT -CLAIM DEED 54. i.J THIS QUIT -CLAIM DEED, executed this 20th day of July , A.D., 1983, by INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose mailing address is 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, hereinafter "Grantor," to SOUTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT, a special district existing under the laws of the State of Florida, whose mailing address is 1053 20th Place, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, hereinafter "Grantee." (Wherever used herein the terms "Grantor" and "Grantee" shall include singular and plural, heirs and assigns of individuals and the successors and assigns of corporations, wherever the context so admits or requires.) WITNESSETH, that Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN ($10.00) DOLLARS in hand paid by Grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does hereby remise, release,.and quit claim unto Grantee, all the right, title, interest, claim and demand which Grantor has in and to the following described parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the County of Indian River, State of Florida, to -wit: Commence at the Southeast corner of Tract 8, Section 11, Township 33 South, Range 38 East, Indian River County, Florida; thence run North 00°12'13" West along the East line of Section 11, Township 33 South, Range 38 East, Indian River County, Florida, a distance of 100.00 feet; thence run South 89°24101" West and parallel with the South line of aforesaid Tract 8 a distance of 30.00 feet to the West right-of-way line of State Road 609 and the Point of Beginning. From the Point of Beginning continue South 89°24101" West and parallel with the South line of Tract 8 a distance 217.80 feet; thence run North 00°12113" West and parallel to the East line of Section 11 a distance of 100.00 feet; thence run North 89°24101" East and parallel to the South line of. Tract 8 a distance of 217.80 feet to the West right-of-way line of State Road 609 (known as Ranch Road) thence run South 00°12'13" East along the West right -o£ -way line of State Road 609 and parallel to the East line of Section 11 a distance of l0b.00 feet to the Point of Beginning containing 0.50 acres, more or less and all lying and being in Tract 8, Section 11, Township 33 South, Range 38 East, Indian River County, Florida. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same together with all and singular the appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, and all the estate, right, title, interest, lien, equity and claim whatsoever of the Grantor, either in law or equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behoof of the said Grantee forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has caused these presents to be signed and sealed the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: Wfthess r Wit Mae 21 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY by its BOARD OF COUNT/Y7� COMMISSIONERS By: .� ICHARD N. BIRD,, Chairman Attest:'L'�L' FREDA WRIGHT, C erk ACQUISITION OF THE LAND FOR THE NEW COUNTY JAIL Administrator Wright explained that he had met with the Cita of Vero Beach last night regarding the leasing of 10 acres adjacent to the property we are considering for the jail site. He reported that the City has conceptually agreed, but there are some hurdles we have to go over and also that we are dealing with the FAA. However, he recommended that Attorney Brandenburg be authorized to proceed with the acquisition of the land for the County Jail. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, that the Board authorize Attorney Brandenburg to proceed with the acquisition of the land for the County Jail and to bring the matter back before the Board. In discussion, it was pointed out that it would be a 50 -year lease with an option to renew. Attorney Brandenburg advised that there might be some difficulty with the Motion as the City Council has now approved a lease arrangement, rather than agreeing to a sale of the property. We have to formalize the arrangement with the City within the next couple of weeks in order to execute the -contract with Mr. Graves to acquire the 20 acres, and the City Council is not going to meet again until September. Chairman Bird requested that we pursue a lease with an option to purchase, and Commissioners Scurlock and Lyons agreed to add this to their Motion. JUL 2 ® 1983 The Chairman CALLED FOR THE QUESTION with the addition of the request to pursue a lease with an option to purchase. The Motion was carried unanimously. 22 54 ;F J r r JUL 2 0 19830 54 REQUEST FOR FINAL PAYMENT - CITY/COUNTY DRAINAGE STUDY - REYNOLDS, SMITH AND HILLS The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/12/83: TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: July 12, 1983 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Michael Wright, County Administrator SUBJECT: Request for Final Payment -- City/County Drainage Study -- Reynolds, Smith and Hills FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. REFERENCES: Alfred B.' Pennell, P.E., Assoc. Public Works Director Vice Presidem., R.S.&.H. to James W --Davis dated "ly 6, 19-83_ DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Reynolds, Smith, and Hills, Inc. has submitted a request to proceed with final billing for the City/County Drainage Study. In accordance with the City/County agreement with R.S.& H. dated October 8, 1980, established total compensation was $97,000, with the County's share being $54,800 (base on area being 56.5% in County). To date, the County has paid $52,607.95, leaving a contract amount of $2,192.05 outstanding. R.S.& H. is now requesting consideration of final payment. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS During the September 27, 1982 meeting of the Drainage Technical Advisory committee, the committee approved 1) Accepting the R.S.& H. study as a "Tentative" official Master Plan until the Indian River Farms Drainage District completes their own study. 2) Adoption of drainage management policies for future development. 3) The City/County/IRFDD enter into a 3 party agreement for replacement of existing culverts and installation.of new culverts. 4) Requiring R.S.&.H. to submit the report to the Florida DER and the SJR*D for Conceptual approval. The County has implemented number two above by adoption of the new Stormwater Ordinance. R.S.& H has sent the report to the DER and SJRWMD for conceptual approval. The agencies have responded but no "conceptual approval" process have been adopted by either (see attached letters). 23 The City/County, and IRFDD have not entered into a formal three - party agreement, however, the City and County are basically using the study in replacement and new development conditions. The alternatives presented are: Alternative 1) Approve final payment in the amount of $2,192.50 and consider R.S.$ H.'s work satisfactory as per the October, 1980 agreement. Alternative 2) Withhold final payment until further comment from DER, but transmit a partial payment in the amount of $822.52 for Invoice #9 revised. RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING It is recommended that Alternative No. 2 be approved whereby partial payment be made in the amount of $822.52 and that Final Payment in the amount of $1,369.98 be made at the time that final comment is received from DER. It is recommended that the City/County Drainage Study be approved as a '"Tentative Master Plan" for the study area in questions. Funding to be from Account No. 001-101-511-33.19. Balance as of July 8, 1983 is $4,695.00. Public Works Director Davis brought the Board up to date on the status of the City/County Drainage Study. He explained that Reynolds, Smith & Hills is requesting final payment and that staff recommendation is that of Alternative #2 that we go ahead and pay Reynolds, Smith & Hills another partial payment of $822.52 leaving a balance of $1,369.98 to be paid at the time that final comment is received from the DER and that the City/County Drainage Study be approved as "Tentative Master Plan" for the study area in question. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, that the Board accept staff recommendation and approve Alternate #2, as outlined in the memo dated 7/12/83. Under discussion, Commissioner Scurlock indicated that he is not particularly happy with the whole progress of this study from 1980 to the present and thought that there was some significant problems with this study. 24 JUL 0 X93i�a5.4 PAS n JUL 201983 an 5 Chairman Bird asked if the City of Vero Beach had taken any action on their part of the final payment. Director Davis thought they have adopted the study, but was not sure if they had made final payment, but would find out. Chairman Bird asked if there was any attempt to correlate this plan with the Indian River Farms Drainage District plan so they will not conflict. Commissioner Scurlock felt that there will be areas of definite conflict between the agricultural purpose of their plan and the urban purposes of this plan and we should realize that from day one. He thought that in fairness to Reynolds, Smith & Hill, they had met some problems created out of their realm. Commissioner Bowman believed that some sort of agreement would be reached. She explained that the whole problem is that with agricultural drainage, they only want to carry off the first inch, and that inundates everybody else. The County has very wide right-of-ways to a lot of these drainage ditches, 100-150 ft. easements, so it is possible to create and hold a lot of water that the agricultural people want to get rid of in a hurry. Commissioner Scurlock felt that there has been better communication and cooperation recently, especially in regard to the 32nd Avenue gates, and the Drainage District has indicated they want to cooperate. However, there are some natural differences and they have their interests to protect and we have ours. Commissioner Bowman thought that we have to recognize that it will cost a great deal of money to solve this problem, and we may have to realize that there are areas in the County that will never be dried up -- like Rockridge. Commissioner Lyons felt that we were trying to obtain more understanding in this area -- that just because it 25 happens to be dry land today, it doesn't mean you can build on it. Director Davis advised that the City and the County have been using the study, especially on the 16th Street project. He felt we would get our money's.worth out of the document and that it is not something the Indian River Drainage system is going to be able to ignore, as we are already implementing certain phases of the study. The Chairman CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion carried unanimously. CHANGE ORDER NO. #1 - TRACKING STATION PARK - DIV. II - DUNE STRUCTURES TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: July 13, 1983 FILE: a Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Michael Wright, County Administrator SUBJECT: Tracking Station Park - Division II - Dune Structures Change Order No. 1 - Project 8102 FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. � REFERENCES: Public Works Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Due to seasonal variations in the beach dune profile at the Tracking Station, a minor "no cost" change order is necessary to the Division II Contract with John Hamilton and Sons, Inc. RECOMMIDATION AND FUNDING It is recommended that the attached "no cost" change order be approved. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously approved the no cost Change Order #1 of the revised drawings on Project #8102. 26 h JUL 0193 4 Face5 JUL 2 0 1933 hux 5 4 ..,Etik' DESIGNATION OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AS CIVIL DEFENSE SHELTER The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/13/83: TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: July 13, 1983 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners THRU: Michael Wright County Administrator SUBJECT: Designation of Civil Defense Shelter GENERAL SERVICES DIVISION FROM: C. B. Hardin, JrY Jr.PYi. D! REFERENCES: Asst. to County Administrator It is requested that the information presented herein be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting on July 20, 1983. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: A review of the total number of shelters available for sheltering Indian River County residents during a major storm does present a major concern. During the past two months a team of eight (8) architects and engineers from Federal Government surveyed our County to arrive at our needs. This survey shows us to be far- short of our established goals. There are a number of prerequi- sites that are required for a building -to meet acceptable standards as a shelter. These prerequisites are: (1) Withstand winds of 120 miles per hour (2) House at least 75 people (36 sq. feet per person). (3) Not in flood plain area. (4) Kitchen facilities. (5) Emergency generator (6) Restroom facilities. (7) Phone available. (8) Good ingress and egress. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS: The County Administration Building meets all these prerequisites. The only spaces to be employed would be hallways, conference rooms and the County Commission Chambers. Restroom and cafeteria facili- ties lend to the qualification as an acceptable shelter. Shelter management teams will be appointed by the County Administrator. The Indian River County Red Cross Chapter and Civil Defense Depart- ment concur in this use. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING: It is recommended the County Administration Building be designated a Civil Defense shelter for the purpose of sheltering approximately two hundred fifty (250) individuals during a major storm. 27 ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously approved the designation of the County Administration Building as a Civil Defense Shelter, as outlined in the memo of July 12, 1983. PUBLIC HEARING - RIGHT-OF-WAY ABANDON14ENT REQUEST - OSLO SQUARE ASSOCIATES The hour of 10:30 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publi- cation attached, to wit: • NOTICE — PMM HEARINo I .: 'lorce of hearing to eollader a patipp. for that t t wide I a> pkime 678 100 feet east of U.S. Highway No. 1, on tho rxfr>:,I side of Sth Street, S.W. (Oclo FLO44 going MpJel �Tha Taub VERO 13EACH PRESS -JOUR `9j0 Iwg desnbad reau �� JUL t2% feet on each Published Dail 19 Y fJ3 ewe of each blunder of iotas Northeast 't. of the Soubn7est 'A pp Vero Beach, Indian River Count Tori EIVED X of Saxon 19, Township 33Solute, entl Range 40 East ay 72'h re . each= m nam bo unary a tta .a,th. miry east 1 of the southwest '4 of Section I(L ' r+ Devvapment ch ship 33 South, Range 40 Eon COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FL0510A Com) Department �� d Ilift and Whig In the fduloadnq e;�9 Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. l.* �A rj" oath that he is Bu3in89g Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal; a m �rpubhshed A , of the southwest w msays at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of ore Isement, being Townshlft 33 SamsRang* 40 East Count', Florid IYw9 easterly oe ore say, right-of-way of S. Hrgltway No. 11 being // PartiarW+ly it bad as follows a —lJ-. /7 Commencing at a oWnt of mterseceon t/ - south Una of tel Paul t:oodr "s oropaty r in the matter of /�/z/ scribed In Official Record Book (0 R S.) 24 383. Public,Records of Indurn River County ids. -in the mw East r."tc6wey of U S - • way No. 1: thence South 12. 05. 58" E; sumea datum) along said nghlOf- Aft reef them South 89. 47 46- East stunt parallel with and 10ta.8 IZO South a 14 in the Court, was putt- cured at right angles 1*) the Nam Lr,r Sauthwset 'A a Section 19, Townahib 31 � Range 40 East tirdian Fiver County• 187 ve,.Z4 '.-21 me East ., of Me *room lished in said newspaper in the issues of e . l ve; rd to Waldo E. Saud, ra10 Eleereei• ton, his wife, try We.ranry Geed date* - 1951, and records* m Deo* Book 67• Pa. NM Fu6ke Records of Indian River Cow _ - Ida• and the POINT OF BEGINNING. thr limiting South 89. 42- 46" East 395.72 fee Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press-Joumal is a newspaper published. at 57001 eastenly rmwsurr res Vero Beach, in Said Indian River County, Florida. and that the said newspaper has heretofore aria fast oaff((asa angles to) said r,yhtof•way 1616.65 to - been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been NorthRoad. u4 eft -of w ct entered as second class mail matter at the Post Office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coon• h feu me f ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of weal manor South e9. 57' St' West a nght�of•way 582.88 feet to Me East figm- advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm U.S. Highway No. 1. thence Nath 121 or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this. wart along sae ptOf-way tots e7 fea ° advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. p North na SW East ppendduiai 02' right-ot-way 183.50 fear: menu Nonn 1. West 100.00 feet; imams South 77. 54' �? Sworn to and subscri d tae re me s day of A.D. 112 . 183.50 feet to the East nghto)-way of U .� NOM 12* 05 58"nci ora:. way rig 1: themeright-of-way Sao nght4t-way 319.73 fret: Noose Sot 57' 40" East along tel North lois of aro SeQ,. - �(Bt�l(1e99 Managed / teal as measure* a" me E4W nghtof-w a\ of U.S. Highway No. 1 of tel tractor lane, - 55 - t , 1, rt' r -eat scribed in Official Record Book 106. #'4i Public Records. of Indian River Cady, 1£.69 .. (Clerk of he OIfCUIt COdit, Inq"la River Florida) test 10 the East Isel e of tproperly descr,beu on, County, (SEAL) Official Official Record Book 67 Page 93. Public Records, 1 t R o mouth her County: thence NOM 12 05 W-. West along a" line 185.79 reel to tel POINT OF GI BENNING. Contaning 20.o aces orae oriaM A. public hearing at which parties in interest aro citizens shad have an Opportumry, to be heard. aha be held try me Boand of County Com. m,istoners of Indian River County, Florida, in the Commission ChamOers of the County Adm ,metre- . hon Budding, located at 1840 25th Sheet. Vero Beam, Florida. on Wednesday. July 20, flied, a: 10:30 A.M. If any Person decides to appeal any decision made On the above Matter. he -0 mead a record Of the proceedings, and for such purposes, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. whim includes teahmony and evidence upon which the appeal w based. Indian River County Board of County Commiestoners By.•s-R,mard N. Bird. Charms. July 1, 1983. 28 r JUL 2 0 1983 �x 54 race 54 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/11/83: TO: DATE: FILE: The Honorable Members July 11, 1983 of the Board of County R/W-83-06-18 Commissioners SUBJECT: DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: atrick Bruce Kin , ICP Community Developmaht Div. Director RIGHT-OF-WAY ABANDONMENT REQUEST SUBMITTED BY OSLO SQUARE ASSOCIATES, A FLORIDA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP FROM: REFERENCES: Karen M. Craver ROW Oslo Sq. Planning Techni is WORKB It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting on July 20, 1983. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS On April 22, 1983, Mr. Robert I. MacLaren, II, representing Oslo Square Associates, A Florida General Partnership, submitted a petition requesting the County to abandon its rights to a 25 foot wide easement of roadway. The right-of-way is located - within a 20 acre parcel at the northeast intersection of U.S. Highway #1 and Oslo Road (see Attachment 2). The petition was reviewed by all County departments and utility providers having jurisdiction within the right-of-way, as per guidelines established by the Board of County Commissioners for processing right-of-way abandonment applications. All reviewing agencies, which included the Department of Public Works, Utilities, Florida Power and Light, and Southern Bell, recommended approval of the petition for abandonment. ANALYSIS The 25 foot wide right-of-way was created in a warranty deed executed in 1911 and has not been utilized to this date. The right-of-way is not part of the roadway system as designaved by the County Thoroughfare Plan and its need as such is not anticipated. It is the opinion of the petitioners that the right-of-way hinders the reasonable development of the 20 acre parcel and therefore, its abandonment is being requested. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the County abandon its rights to the 25 foot wide easement of roadway located within a 20 acre parcel at the northeast intersection of U.S. Highway #1 and Oslo Road and authorize the Chairman of the County Commission to execute the Resolution in Attachment #3. Karen Craver, Planning Technician, gave a brief summary of the request submitted by Oslo Square Associates and recommended the right-of-way abandonment of the 25 -foot wide easement of roadway located within a 20 -acre parcel at the r 29 northeast intersection of U.S. Highway #1 and Oslo Road. Chairman Bird opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard. Robert MacLaren, II, representative of the petitioner, said he would be happy to answer any questions about the application or petition. Commissioner Lyons asked him if this was the area where the lovely, 300 -year old oak tree was bulldozed down, and Mr. MacLaren advised it was the same area but it was done by the previous owner. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously closed the Public Hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously accepted staff recommendation as outlined in the above memo, adopted Resolution 83-54 and authorized the Chairman's signature. 30 J U L 2 0 198'3 Box 5,4'm -,x--55, r - J U L 20 1983 RESOLUTION NO. 83-54 x4 Face5-6 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE CLOSING, ABANDONMENT AND VACATION OF A 25 FOOT WIDE EASEMENT OF ROADWAY LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 100 FEET EAST OF U.S. HIGHWAY NO. 1, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 9TH STREET, SW (OSLO ROAD). WHEREAS, on April 22, 1983, the County received a duly executed and documented petition from Oslo Square Associates, a Florida General Partnership, of 4740 North State Road 7, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, requesting the County to close, vacate and abandon and disclaim any right, title and interest of the County and the public in and to a 25 foot wide easement of roadway located approximately 100 feet east of U.S. Highway No. 1, on the north side of 9th Street, SW (Oslo Road). WHEREAS, in accordance WITH Florida Statutes S 336.10, notice of a public hearing to consider said petition has been duly published; and WHEREAS, after consideration of the petition, supporting documents, staff investigation and report, and testimony of all those interested and present, the Board finds that said right-of-way is not a state or federal highway, nor located within any municipality, nor is said right-of-way necessary for continuity of the County's street and thoroughfare network, nor access to any given private property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: 1. All right, title and interest of the County and the public in and to that certain right-of-way described as lying: 12 1/2 feet on each side of each boundary -of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 19, Township 33 South, and Range 40 East and 12 1/2 feet on each side of each boundary of the southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 19, Township 33 South, Range 40 East, lying and being in the following described real property: A portion of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 19, Township 33 South, Range 40 East, Indian River County, Florida, lying easterly of the easterly right-of-way of U.S. Highway No. 1, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a point of intersection of the South line of the Paul Goodridge property as described in Official Record Book (O.R.B.) 24, Page 363, Public Records of Indian River County, Florida, with the new East right-of-way of U.S. Highway No. 1; thence South 120 05' 58" East (assumed datum) along said right-of-way 115.73 feet; thence South 890 42' 46" East along a line parallel with and 1018.8 feet South of (as measured at right angles to) the North line of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 19, Township 33 South, Range 40 East, Indian River County, Florida, 187.87 feet to the East line of the property conveyed to Waldo E. Sexton and Elsebeth M. Sexton, his wife, by Warranty Deed dated May 2, 1951, and recorded in Deed Book 67, Page 93, of the Public Records of Indian River 31 s M M County, Florida, and the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 89° 42' 46" East 395.72 feet; thence South 12' 05' 58" West along a line parallel with and 570.01 feet easterly of (as measured at right angles to) said right-of-way 1618.85 feet to the North right-of-way of Oslo Road, said line being 50.00 feet North of the South line of said Southwest 1/4; thence South 89° 57' 51" West along said right-of-way 582.88 feet to the East right-of-way of U.S. Highway No. 1; thence North 120 05' 58" West along said right-of-way 1015.87 feet; thence North 770 54' 02" East perpendicular to said right-of-way 183.50 feet; thence North 12° 05' 58" West 100.00 feet, - thence South 770 54' 02" West 183.50 feet to the East right-of-way of U.S. Highway No. 1; thence North 12° 05' 58" West along said right-of-way 319.73 feet; thence South 890 57' 40" East along the North line of the South 300 feet as measured along the East right-of-way line of U.S. Highway. No. 1 of that tract of land described in Official Record Book 106, Page 360, Public Records of Indian River County, 187.69 feet to the East line of the property described in Official Record Book 67, Page 93, Public Records of Indian River County; thence North 120 05' 58" West along said line 185.79 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING containing 20.0 acres more or less, is hereby forever closed, abandoned, vacated, surrendered, discontinued, remised and released. 2. Notice of the adoption of this resolution shall be forthwith published once within thirty (30) days from the date of adoption hereof; and 3. The Clerk is hereby directed to record this resolution together withthe proofs of publication required by Florida Statutes §336.10 in the Official Record Books of Indian River County without undue delay. The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner Scurlock who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Lyons and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye Vice -Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye Commissioner Maggy Bowman Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 20th day of July 1983. Attest: �9 FREDA MIGHT, Clem, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: ICHARD N. BIRD, Chairman 31a BOOK 54 PAGE PROPOSED ROUTE OF CITY OF VERO BEACH POWERLINE RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUEST TO DONATE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD NORTH The Board reviewed the following.memo dated 7/12/83: TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: July 12, 1983 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Michael Wright, County Administrator SUBJECT: Proposed Route of City of Vero Beach Powerline Right -of -Way -Request to Donate Right -of -Way for Indian River Boulevard North James W. Davis, P. . REFERENCES: Robert F. Lloyd. dated June 10, 1983 Public Works Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The City of Vero Beach is in the process of acquiring a utility easement for the placement of a 69,000 volt electrical transmission line beginning at the City's Substation south of South Gifford'Road (on the airport property), running eastward along the south of South Gifford Road to the quarter section line of Sections 24 and 25, Township 37 South, Pange 39 East, thence north along said a section line to a point approximately .800 feet north of Lindsey Road extended(see attached map). In communicating with Lloyd and Associates, certain landowners along the proposed route have indicated a willingness to donate right-ef-way for a future extension. of Indian River Boulevard. The donated right-of-way would parallel the powerline easement, and is proposed to contain the land lying 70 feet East and fifty feet West of the 4 section line.. The powerline would be placed on the West side of the proposed 120' wids right-of-way, and any future road would be along the East. The City of 'V:,ro Beacom would require first rights as to the use of the Western corridor for the powerline location. The County, if receptive to the donation, would be obli.gated to proceed with right-of-way acquisition by donation of the portion -if future Indian River Boulevard extended between Barber Avenue and South Gifford Road. The majority of this right-of-way lies in land owned by the Knight family. The County would also pay for appraisals, grant the owners a receipt for tax purposes, allow the owners to lease back the property at $1.00 a year until needed, and pay for surveys, etc. The majority of the property owners along the route have expressed a willingness to donate. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS In considering the above proposal, it is the Public Works Division staff opinion that as the right-of-way projects northward, the proposed alignment is too close to the Indian River. It would be preferable to have the future Indian River Boulevard right-of-way parallel U.S. 1 in a Northwesterly direction. The proposed alignment does lie on the fringe of existing grove land and does not intersect environmentally sensitive .and north of South Gifford Road. Wetlands may exist just east of the a section line. It appears that abandonments and other action precludes the future construction of a bridge crossing the Indian River to connect with Fred Tuerk Drive in Indian River Shores. RECOMN MATIONS AND FUNDING It is recommended that the County suggest consideration of a more westerly route of future Indian River Boulevard north as it extends north of South Gifford Road. The suggested route would be approximately parallel to U.S. 1. If the proposed route and donation is accepted, Indian River Boulevard may result in a series of north/south roads, not continuous in alignment but offset as it moves northwesterly. It's main function, therefore, would be for primary access to abutting property and short distance travel, thereby utilizing U.S. as the through arterial route. Regardless of the ultimate situation, if the land lying east of U.S.1 developes, an alternative route between U.S. 1 and the Indian River would be desirable for the transportation and utility needs of the County. Funding of appraisals, survey, etc. could be accomplished by the Secondary Gas Tax proceeds. Public Works Director explained that the City of Vero Beach is in the process of acquiring a utility easement for the placement of a 69,000 volt electrical transmission system so that it can alert their high voltage distribution system in the north part of the County. At a meeting the City representatives had with some of the property owners along the proposed route, many property owners indicated a willingness to consider donation of some right-of-way for the purpose of Indian River Boulevard extending north parallel to the transmission easement. He explained that it is staff's position that the route gets too close to Indian River as it projects north and that amore desirable route would be one that almost parallels U.S. #1. Director Davis referred to the map displayed on the back wall and pointed out where the route begins in the City and projects north to Lindsay Road and runs easterly across Indian River and into Indian River Shores. It is on the fringe of the grove property and the lowlands to the east. The road would be to the east; the powerline would be to the west. Commissioner Scurlock questioned if there would be any commitment or requirement for the County to do anything other than to accept the property. Mr. Robert F. Lloyd addressed the Board on behalf of the. City of Vero Beach, and various property owners. He pointed out the proposed route of the powerline on a map displayed on the wall behind the Commissioners and reported that the property owners feel that it would be very 33 AUL o 1983 twx 54 59 J U L 2 0 1983 5. PAGE: shortsighted to acquire the right-of-way easement for a powerline without considering the eventuality of having a road built parallel to it. The property owners have suggested that they donate the additional right-of-way from the point that the route turns and goes north to Barber Ave., south of the Medical Center. The property owners have requested that the consideration given include: 1) an appraisal that they could use as a tax deduction, and 2) that in cases where the route crosses citrus groves, they be permitted to lease the right-of-way back for $1.00 a year so that they could continue to cultivate the land until such time as the County actually needed the right-of-way for road purposes. The City would have to build a temporary route along this route for a servicing line, as well as providing ingress and egress to their property. However, each property owner would have a barricade erected so that the general public would operate over the construction road. The only other thing the City would want from the County would be some sort of arrangement in which they would have the primary rights to the area where the powerline is constructed. In ether words, they do not want to be there under sufferance. Commissioner Scurlock thought that trying to move the route away from the river and the mangroves was desirable, but felt that the County should not be committed into doing anything in the near future, indeed, if ever. Mr. Lloyd stated they would be glad to assist in anyway they can; however, theydo have to move forward rather rapidly on the acquisition of the rights-of-way on the northern section of the route. Chairman Bird stated that he found it very difficult to decide this morning what ultimate route Indian River Boulevard should take someday in the future, if ever. He 34 felt this was a transportation problem that someone with long-range transportation expertise should study and come back with a recommendation. Mr. Lloyd stated that he had no objection to that as long as there was some sort of timeframe set. Commissioner Lyons also thought we should give this a lot of thought because there is a great deal of money involved, and it would be good if we could work together and get the route moved away from the wetlands. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, that the Board request the Transportation Committee to study the above problem and come back to the Board with a recom- mendation at the second meeting in August. Director Davis felt the County should acquire the additional right-of-way along South Gifford Road, as the proposed location of the transmission line is going to conflict with the future widening of South Gifford Road. He pointed out that if the new jail is built in that area, it is going.to increase traffic. Director Davis explained that staff could take a good look at the South Gifford Road situation, but suggested a consultant be hired to do the Indian River Boulevard corridor study. Mr. Lloyd felt that the southern part of the route of Indian River Boulevard could be an on going process, but they needed to acquire the right-of-way along the northern section as soon as possible. 35 JUL �� eac. JUL 2 0 1983 The Chairman CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion was voted on and carried unanimously. 5,4 ace V PUBLIC HEARING SUBDIVISION AND PLATTING ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY The hour of 11:00 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publi- cation attached, to wit: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily 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 daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a in the matter of /Gf i//C,,/?C (f in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of jC Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; 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 advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed beforq me thiday of A. D. 19 , _ ) '(.0%Usinest' Manager) (SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian Ri'Ver County, Florida) NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER COUNTY ORDINANCE REPLACING COUNTY ORDINANCE 75-3. KNOWN AS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE The Board of County Commissioners of Indian Alver County, Florida, will conduct a public hear- ing on July 20,1983, at 11:00 A.M, in the Commis - Chambers at the County Administration sd1840 Vero naeUlanerthe adoption of n ordinance Beach, Florida, OF THE BOARD OF COUNTMMISSIONERS Y OF INDIAN REGULATING THE PLATINGAND SUBDIVISION ,OF LAND IN THE UNINCORPO- RATED PORTIONS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; REQUIRING PLATS TO BE. FILED IN CERTAIN ;CASES; PROVIDING FOR: TITLE: ENACTMENT AND AUTHORITY; APPLICABILITY; PURPOSE AND INTENT;.DEFINITION OF TERMS; UNLAW- FUL ACTIVITY; EXEMPTIONS: PROCEDURE AND iREQUIREMENTS FOR SUBMITTING AND PRO- iCESSING SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS; . SE- CURITY FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTE- 'NANCE OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS; IM- PROVEMENTS REQUIRED IN ALL AND SOME . SUBDIVISIONS; DESIGN STANDARDS; VARI- ANCES,- PENALTY; INCORPORATION IN CODE; SEVERABILITY; REPEAL OF CONFLICTING OR- DINANCES; AND EFFECTIVE DATE. If any person decides to appeal any decision made on the above matters, he/she will need a record of the proceedings, and for such Pur - Poses, he/she may need to ensure that a verba- tim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony in evidence on which the appeal is based; Indian River County Board of County Commissioners By: -s -Richard N. Bird, Chairman. luly 1, 14, 1983. Attorney Brandenburg explained the County staff has been in the process of developing this ordinance for a considerable amount of time. Earlier this year they advised the way to proceed would be to ask the Legislature to repeal the old Special Acts relating to platting of lands. He informed the Board that the Governor has allowed this to 36 pass into law, but advised that the County still has on the books an old subdivision ordinance which this ordinance would replace. As a result of this action, all the require- ments for subdivisions would be in one location. Attorney Brandenburg continued that when the Zoning Code is completed, they hope to compile one volume that contains the Comprehensive Land Plan, the Zoning Code, and the Subdivision Code, along with other related land develop- ment ordinances, so that any individual coming into the County will be able to acquire all the things relating to his project in one document. This ordinance has gone through two public workshops where we have asked the help of the local engineers, architects, and residents, and they have given many good suggestions. He explained that they have included all the suggestions that they felt improved the ordinance. He reported that the ordinance has gone to the Planning & Zoning Commission where it was determined that it is in conformity with the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan. The Planning & Zoning Commission then recommended that the Ordinance be adopted by the Board of County Commissioners. Attorney Brandenburg proceeded to explain the Ordinance modifications page by page. Page 2 Under "TITLE" - Delete "Regulations" and insert "Ordinance" in the title "Subdivision and Platting Ordinance" of Indian River County, Florida. Page 3 Under SECTION 4 - PURPOSE AND INTENT lst Paragraph, last sentence: Delete "ensure" and insert "require". It is the intent of this ordinance to require within each new subdivision; d) Add "adequate" - the establishment of safe, adequate and convenient patterns for the circulation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic; 37 JUL 2 0 1983 J Dn 54 FACS 64 g Add "solar rights" - adequate open space, light, solar rights, air privacy, and recreational area, and to prevent overcrowding of the land and undue congestion of the population; Page 5 10) - BUILDING PERMIT Delete "edition of the Standard Building Code" and insert "building code" Page 6 25) - DWELLING Add "intended to be" - A structure intended to be occupied primarily for residential purposes. Page 6 & 7 29) FLOOD PLAIN, ONE HUNDRED YEAR Changed to read, "A land area which would be inundated by a tidal flood or stormwater runoff after a 100 -year flood, i.e., the flood that has a one percent probability of being equaled or exceeded in any given year as delineated on the official County flood hazard map. Page 7 34) LAND CONDOMINIUM Add at the end of the sentence "excluding parking areas, boat docks, and other similar use areas." Page 10 59) WATERBODY Add "swamp, marsh" - Any natural or artificial pond, lake, reservoir, swamp, marsh, or other area which ordinarily or intermittently contains water and which has a discernible shoreline. Page 11 61) WATER SYSTEM Should read "The complete related series of elements that supplies water for a proposed subdivision." Page 16 3) (a) Add "and a list of all of the owners of the property." Page 25 12) Transfer of Approval - Add sentence, "A summary of this provision will be set.forth on the face of all preliminary plats." Page 49 Delete last sentence of first paragraph,"No credit shall be given for density calculation for any area within the required right-of-way prescribed by this ordinance." W, After considerable input from the Commissioners, it was decided on page 61, R. Access to Water to add, "The County may waive the dedication of the easement in return for the dedication of the fair market value of such easement, to be used for capital improvements to the park system." Attorney Brandenburg explained in some detail the provisions of the ordinance relating to sidewalks and bike paths. Attorney Brandenburg advised there were two other items in the ordinance that he would like to explain. One of these is that they have tried to cut down on the time necessary in processing a subdivision and.have made the decision that the approval of the preliminary plan occur at the Planning & Zoning Commission level. Once the preliminary plat is approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission, it is final, unless someone appeals to the County Commission. The framework for the appeal is liberal in that it allows the applicant, staff, or other interested groups or individuals to request an appeal before the County Commission. He felt the most important point is that once the preliminary plat is approved, the applicant can go out and obtain a land development permit and actually put the improvements in the ground before the County Commission even sees the final plan. When the Board does see it, it will be only to determine if it is in substantial compliance with the preliminary plat approval and that all the improvements have been placed in the ground correctly or that the applicant has submitted the necessary security at that time. This procedure will eliminate at least 1-1/2 months in the processing time. Attorney Brandenburg explained that other communities have successfully implemented the shorter process and recommended the Board give it a try, as the Ordinance can always be amended if problems arise. 39 UL 2 0 193 -PAu ri JUL 20 1983 BOOK 5A ?Aa 6 6 U. Attorney Brandenburg explained that the Ordinance is quite a lengthy one - over 60 pages - and realizes that they have not anticipated every problem and that amendments will probably be made in the future. Attorney Brandenburg stated the other major item is in regard to "flag lots". The ordinance currently provides when platting cul-de-sac lots, all that is required is that you need a 30 -foot frontage along that cul-de-sac as opposed to normal frontage as required by the Zoning Code. It also requires essentially straight lot lines and he thought there would be arguments today from individuals who feel this is too restrictive. He felt, however, that the standard should be straight lot lines and the exception should be curved or non -straight lot lines. An individual under this ordinance has the opportunity to come in and request an exception if the case warrants it. They have taken into account that in designing certain subdivisions there is no way to avoid curved or non -straight lot lines. There is flexibility under the ordinance right now to allow it in specific cases. However, if the standard is changed to curved lot lines, there would be no control whatsoever. Chairman Bird opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard. Dorothy Hudson, attorney for the Moorings, addressed the Board re Item 34 on Page 7 - LAND CONDOMINIUM. She stated that she had been asked by their architects and engineers whether or not "condominium" was included in this definition of subdivision. In reading it, she felt relatively confident that it was not. She explained that in condominiums what is conveyed is not a piece of the land but the use of the land, and she was concerned with the particular makeup of the units -- the parking spaces, the boat docks and other similar use areas. Attorney Brandenburg assured her the wording and intent adequately 40 s � removes the regular condominium from the scope of this Ordinance. Lengthy debate took place on the pros and cons of allowing flag lots to be created in new subdivisions. Mr. Robert Lloyd argued that the wording on page'56 of the ordinance definitely prohibits flag lots. He felt very strongly that the straight lot line requirement would restrict creativity and stifle imagination. Community Development Director Bruce King argued that the flag lots would lead to possible land -locked lots, loss of privacy with front yards overlooking backyards of adjacent lots, etc. An unidentified man came forth with two suggestions to compromise the,situation: 1) When the definition of a subdivision reads 3 or more parcels, you are excluding the division of land in the 2 parcels when you could control all the subdivision by having the ordinance read, "any division of land." 2) There is a flat out statement that flag lots are prohibitive. His suggestion was that the Ordinance state that a flag lot is a conditional situation and could be approved.by the Planning Commission on an individual basis and brought before the County Commission only if there was a conflict between the Planning Commission and the owner. Attorney Brandenburg suggested the following changes: On page Page 56 2) Shape of Lots (a) Delete "existing streets to the property prevents such a design." The last phrase of that sentence shall read, "unless the relationship of existing or planned streets combined with the size of the property in question would allow a superior design not utilizing straight lot lines." On Page 56, G. Lots, (2c) shall read, "Flag lots will be avoided whenever possible." Chairman Bird announced that this Public Hearing would be postponed until 1:30 o'clock this afternoon, as the lunch 41 BOOK 54 Fri JUL 20 1983 Mx 54 we , 9-8- 8.hour hour is upon us and two time certain items still have not been taken up. PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING July 25-31 AS ITALIAN AMERICAN WEEK Chairman Bird read aloud the proclamation designating July 25-31 as Italian -American Week and presented it to representatives of the Italian -American Civic Association, Michael Riggio and Sal Straniero. He congratulated them for being the initial chapter of their association in the state and wished them the very best. Mr. Riggio expressed his thanks for the support and recognition the Italian -American Civic Association has received from the County. 42 PROCLAMATION PROCLAMATION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RECOGNIZING THE WEEK OF JULY 25 - 31, 1983 AS ITALIAN AMERICAN WEEK IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY WHEREAS, the Italian American Civic Association of Vero Beach is the charter member of the Florida Federation of Italian American Clubs; and WHEREAS, from its infancy many years ago, the organiza- tion has grown to a membership of nearly 50 club chapters from around the State of Florida; and WHEREAS, over 250 delegates and guests from throughout the state will be gathering in Indian River'County for their quarterly convention, beginning on July 29, 1983; and WHEREAS, the festivities planned include a formal dinner party at the Sheraton on Saturday, July 30th, to which local dignitaries and officials have been invited; and WHEREAS, it is fitting and proper for the County Commission on behalf of the citizens of Indian River County to welcome the presence of this fine group in our community and to extend good will for a successful, productive, and memorable convention, together with many happy returns. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS that the week of July 25 through July 31, 1.9€3, is hereby designated as Italian American Week in Indian River County in honor of the upcoming Federation of Italian American Clubs convention. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: RICHARD N. BIRD Chairman Attest: /,- FREDA WRIGHT, Cler1 43 JL 2 0 1983 goat �4 PROCLAPIATION HONORING DR. C. CROSBIE FLOOD'S CAREER AS COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR Chairman Bird thanked everyone for coming by today to pay tribute to Dr. Flood and expressed his pleasure in honoring Dr. Flood. After Chairman Bird read the proclamation aloud, Dr. Flood came forward to accept it, receiving a standing ovation from the many friends and associates present. He expressed his appreciation of this recognition and felt he could not have served so well or so long without the support and cooperation of his wife of fifty years, Marian. Bill Koolage came forward to welcome Dr. Flood to the retirement community of Vero Beach and in recognition gave him a humorous homemade retirement card. Commissioner Wodtke, speaking in behalf of the Commissioners, felt that the community is greatly indebted to Dr. Flood, not only for his dedication and involvement in his work, but his involvement in all aspects of the community. Chairman Bird again congratulated Dr. Flood on his retirement and invited him to come back and visit often. 44 PROCLAMATION PROCLAMATION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, IN HONOR OF THE CAREER OF DR. C. CROSBIE FLOOD, PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR. WHEREAS, July 22, 1983, will mark the passing of an era during which the County's public and environmental health needs received the personal care and attention of DR. C. CROSBIE FLOOD, County Public Health Director; and WHEREAS, DR. C. C. FLOOD's career in public health began in February, 1957 with the State Board of Health in Jacksonville, Florida and evolved to his present position as the County's Public Health Director, an appointment which he has dutifully served since 1959; and WHEREAS, DR. FLOOD has been instrumental in promoting a philosophy of prevention rather than cure as the key to a better quality of life in this County; and WHEREAS, this philosophy is evident in the accomplish- ments of DR. FLOOD's tenure which include establishment of long- standing and successful programs in immunization, family planning, sanitation, diabetes control, safe drinking water and education of the public; and WHEREAS, DR. C. C. FLOOD will be retiring from an illus- trious career of service to the public this July 22, 1983. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Board on behalf of itself and the citizens of Indian River County does con- gratulate DR. C. CROSBIE FLOOD for his more than 26 years of dedi- cated service to the public and extends to DR. FLOOD a most sincere appreciation for his lasting.contributions to the quality of life in Indian River County; and BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED that the Board wishes DR. C. CROSBIE FLOOD the best of success and happiness in his next chosen endeavor. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By:��' RICHARD N. BIRD, Chairman R l Attest: FREDA WRIGHT, Cle k 45 fibt1K 54 PAGE Fr__ : - I , JUL 2 0 1983 - x 54 U_ -e The Board of County Commissioners thereupon recessed for lunch at 12:20 o'clock P.M. and reconvened at 1:30 o'clock P.M. with all members present except Commissioner Wodtke who returned later in the meeting. Chairman Bird announced that Commissioner Wodtke is attending the funeral of Robert Cushman on behalf of the Commission. (CONTINUATION) PUBLIC HEARING ON PLATTING ORDINANCE The Chairman informed those present that the public hearing in regard to a proposed Ordinance regulating platting and subdivision of land would be resumed. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. Micheal Carpenter of the Ed Schlitt Agency felt the proposed ordinance is a good one, but stated they have an area of concern with the flag lots and with public access to water and the potential parking problem which could result. Attorney Brandenburg explained that this concept was not intended to provide for major beach accesses for the public,but was meant to be more of a walkway type of neighborhood community local access, and he did not believe there is any intention on the part of the County to put up a big sign and advertise this type beach access. Peter Robinson, developer of Laurel Homes, had objections to the requirements re sidewalks and bicycle paths. He felt if it is required to put sidewalks in at the development stage, problems could arise when septic tank fill requirements go to a different grade than the sidewalks, possibly resulting in sidewalks at varying heights. He further noted that maintenance would be a problem over the years and cited the possibility of people tripping over broken sidewalks. If sidewalks are to be only on one side of the street, Mr. Robinson felt there should be a note on the plat specifying this. As far as flag lots are 46 concerned, Mr. Robinson noted that whenever these are put in one of his subdivisions, they are the first lots to sell. He then went on to object to the requirement to post construction security at 125% of cost in lieu of construction of either bikeways or sidewalks. Public Works Director Davis pointed out that the Ordinance states that sidewalks are to be constructed in accordance with the Indian River County standard specifications. These standards are being compiled right now, and they will include typical sections which will control the elevation, i.e., 4" above the crown of the road. Mr. Robinson continued to argue about the different elevations resulting from the required fill for septic tanks, and Chairman Bird noted that in some cases, it is possible you will have a steep slope . Mr. Robinson felt this would need retention walls. As to the 125% requirement, he believed that is the highest requirement in the state and that it is definitely excessive, especially when someone is building for moderate income people. He stressed that this cost will just be passed on to the purchaser. Attorney Brandenburg did not feel this is too much of a safety factor for the County's security, but noted that the Board could decrease it if they desired. He pointed out that the difference in cost between a 100% bond and a 125% bond is not that considerable. Mr. Robinson continued to emphasize that when you are building low cost housing, every dollar counts, and he believed this would end up forcing them to build on dirt roads and then coming back to the County for pavement. After some further debate, the Board settled on a security figure of 115% rather than 125%. Lengthy discussion ensued regarding requiring sidewalks, with Commissioner Scurlock contending that many subdivisions are attractive without sidewalks, and he felt this should be more of 47 JUL 2 0 198, ��au 54ea .7� JUL 2 0 198 soy 5;4 fAG an individual choice. He questioned the need for requiring sidewalks in a rural area. Attorney Brandenburg agreed that while you may want sidewalks in a higher density subdivision, you may not in rural ones, but if sidewalks are left the responsibility of the builder and some lots never develop, you may end up with sidewalks that just cross in front of one person's yard. He felt if you have sidewalks, they should be throughout the subdivision, but since he did not think it was feasible to say the sidewalks shouldn't be built until everything is sold, they tried to tie it to a two year period. In further discussion, it was noted that Section 9 does not list sidewalks as required, and, in fact, they are only required if they are required in the zoning district applicable to the particular subdivision. Mr. Davis believed we still will want pedestrian corridors on certain thoroughfares which transverse different zoning districts as we hope in the future to implement sidewalk pedestrian routes on thoroughfares in close proximity to schools. Thomas Culler, Architect, addressed the statement on Page 47 that improvements shall be required as "deemed necessary by the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Board ........to protect the public health, safety or general welfare," which he regarded as a "catch-all" paragraph. He stated that he would prefer to have everything spelled out so different requirements are not put on every project by the Planning Department and addressed as staff policy. Administrator Wright felt that some common sense has to be involved as we cannot spell out everything. He noted that our goal is to be reasonable, and in the event a point is reached where something cannot be worked out satisfactorily, then the builder can appeal to the Commission. He believed most of Mr. Culler's concerns will be worked out and felt we should keep the ordinance as general as we can. 48 Mr. Culler commented that the appeal process takes time, and he was trying to save as much of everyone's time as possible. Commissioner Lyons noted that Mr. Culler has made his point, and if this should continue to prove a problem, he believed it will be readdressed. James Lawhon of 7805 19th Place, next wished to speak, and Attorney Brandenburg reported that he has a recommendation which may solve this gentlemen's concern. He explained that Mr. Lawhon's concern is that he submitted a subdivision and expended money processing it under the old ordinance. Attorney Brandenburg, therefore, recommended that in the section regarding repeal of conflicting provisions (Sec. 13, Page 64), a sentence could be added saying "all applications for subdivisions submitted as of the date of adoption of this ordinance may be approved if compatible with former Ordinance 75-3." Mr. Lawhon noted that when you put in a subdivision, you are required to leave right-of-way for adjacent properties, and he wished to know if you have to give that property plus pave that street. Mr. King believed Mr. Lawhon is talking in terms of a stub street where we are talking about future access to property that has not been subdivided. Mr. Lawhon felt it may be 20 years before the adjacent property is developed and wished to know if he has to donate that property. Mr. Davis stated there is no requirement to give any property- just to design the road so it can connect in the future. Chairman Bird believed that, consistent with our existing regulations, it is required to pave'the stub. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously closed the public hearing. 49 LOOK 4 75 JUL 2 0 1983 ON MOTION BY Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED BOOK 5-4 FAct by Commissioner Lyons, Commissioner Wodtke still being absent from the meeting, the Board by a unanimous 4-0 vote adopted Ordinance 83-24, as modified at today's meeting. _ 50 = SUBDIVISION AND PLATTING ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 83-24 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, REGULATING THE PLATTING AND SUBDIVISION OF LAND IN THE UNINCORPORATED PORTIONS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; REQUIRING PLATS TO BE FILED IN CERTAIN CASES; PROVIDING FOR; TITLE; ENACTMENT AND AUTHORITY; APPLICABILITY; PURPOSE AND INTENT; DEFINITION OF TERMS; UNLAWFUL ACTIVITY; EXEMPTIONS; PROCEDURE AND REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBMITTING AND PROCESSING SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS; SECURITY FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS; IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED IN ALL AND SOME SUBDIVISIONS; DESIGN STANDARDS; VARIANCES; PENALTY; INCORPORATION IN CODE; SEVERABILITY; AND EFFECTIVE DATE. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that; TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE Section 1 Title Section 2 Enactment and Authority Section 3 Applicability Section 4 Purpose and Intent Section 5 Definition of Terms Section 6 A. Unlawful Activity B. Exemptions C. Af f idavit of Exemption D. Clerk to Transmit Copies of Deeds Section 7 Procedure and Requirements for Submitting and Processing Subdivision Applications A. Procedure B. Validity of Subdivision not Meeting the Requirements of this Ordinance C. Pre -Application Conference D. Preliminary Plat Application and Review E. Land Development Permit F. Final Plat Section 8 Security for Construction and Maintenance of Required Improvements A. Construction Security B. Maintenance Security C. Failure to Perform D. Release or Reduction of Security E. Security for Municipalities Section 9 Required Improvements -1- PAGE 2 2 - 3 3 3 - 4 4 - 11 11 - 12 12 - 13 13 - 14 15 15 - 44 15 15 - 16 16 - 18 18 - 25 25 - 32 32 - 44 44 - 46 44 - 45 45. 45 46 46 46 47 00 r JUL 2 0 1983 '# 54 pn-,r 78 Section 10 Design Standards 47 - 61 A. Introduction 47 - 48 B. Preservation of Features 48 C. Streets 48 - 53 D.Bikeways 53 - 54 E. Sidewalks 54 - 55 F. Blocks 55 - 56 G. Lots 56 - 57 H. Utilities 57 - 58 I. Alleys 58 - 59 J. Walls,and Fences 59 R. Waterways 59 L. Erosion Control 59 - 60 M. Bridges 60 N. Storm and Floodwater Systems 60 0. Signs 60 P. Planned Developments 60 Q. Fire Hydrants 60 - 61 R. Access to Water 61 S. Canals and Waterways 62 T. Bulkheads 62 Section 11 Variances 62 - 63 Section 12 Penalty 64 Section 13 Repeal of Conflicting Provisions 64 Section 14 Addendum and Standards 64 Section 15 Incorporation in Code 64 Section 16 Severability 64 - 65 Section 17 Effective Date 65 avrlmrnw l TITLE This ordinance, the terms and provisions contained herein, shall be known as the "Subdivision and Platting Ordinance" of Indian River County, Florida. SECTION 2 ENACTMENT AND AUTHORITY By virtue of the home rule powers vested in counties pursuant to Article 8 Section 1 (f) of the State of Florida Constitution, Florida Statutes 5125.01 (1), (g), (h), (i), (w), Florida Statutes §336.02 et seq., Florida Statutes §177.011 et. seq. and Florida Statutes §163.3161 et. seq., Indian River County hereby exercises its authority to implement the Land Use Element of the Indian. River County Comprehensive Plan by the adoption of this ordinance regulating the subdivision and platting of land and providing requirements in addition to those already existing by virtue of Florida Statutes 5177.011 et. seq. SECTION 3 APPLICABILITY The requirements set forth in this ordinance shall be applicable to all portions of the unincorporated area of Indian River County. SECTION 4 PURPOSE AND INTENT The public health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Indian River County require the harmonious and orderly development of land within the unincorporated area of the County. It is the intent of this ordinance to require within each new subdivision; a) conformity with minimum standards of subdivision design, established by this ordinance, which will result in the development of safe, stable communities, and the prevention of unhealthy living environments; b) the installation of necessary improvements to avoid such improvements being a burden upon the taxpayers of the community; services; c) the efficient, adequate supply of utilities and d) the establishment of safe, adequate and convenient patterns for the circulation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic; drainage; e) adequate provisions for protective flood control and f) the control of pollution and erosion, safeguarding the natural resources of the County; g) adequate open space, light, solar rights, air, privacy, and recreational area, and to prevent overcrowding of the land and undue congestion of the population; dangers; h) safety from fire, flood, natural disasters and other i) the reasonable, fair, and uniform application of standards of design and procedures for the subdivision and JUL 0 1983 —3— ecox c ;4 PAGE fU M JUL 2 0 1983 54 Pace 90 platting of land; to ensure proper legal descriptions and monumenting of subdivided land; and j) the preservation of the natural beauty and topog- raphy of the County; and k) provisions for safe and sanitary sewage disposal, adequate potable water supplies and the protection of the ground- water system. DEFINITION OF TERMS Except where specific definitions are used, the follow- ing terms, phrases, words and their derivations have the meaning given herein. Words used in the present tense include the future, words in the plural number include the singular number and words in the singular number include the plural number. The words "used for" shall mean "designed for". The words "shall" and "will" are mandatory and the word "may" is permissive. 1) ABUTTING PROPERTY. Any property that is immediately adjoining or contiguous to property that is subject to review under this ordinance. 2) ADJACENT PROPERTY. Any property that is near but not necessarily sharing a common point of intersection with property under review. It may be separated from the property under review by streets, alleys or other public improvements. 3) ADJOINING PROPERTY. Any property that shares a common point of intersection with the property under considera- tion. 4) ALLEY. Any right-of-way primarily designed to serve as a secondary access to the property abutting the alley. 5) APPLICANT. The owner of land subject to review under this ordinance or his authorized representative. 6) BIKEPATH. A bikeway that is physically separated from other travelways and is intended for the exclusive use of bicycles. 7) BIKEWAY. Any road, path or other means which is specifically designed for bicycle travel whether shared with other means of travel or exclusively for bike use. 8) BLOCK. A tract of land or group of lots bounded by streets or other well-defined and fixed boundaries. 9) BOARD. The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County. 10) BUILDING PERMIT. The document issued by the Building Department authorizing the applicant to initiate con- struction activity in accordance with the most recently adopted Building Code. 11) BUILDING SETBACK LINE. A line located a prescribed distance inside the boundary line of a lot or parcel of land, the purpose of which is to establish a yard onto which no structure may encroach under the Zoning Regulations. 12) CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION. That certificate issued by the Community Development Division after final inspection of a subdivision acknowledging that improvements have been completed in conformity with the requirements of this ordinance and the approved land development plans and specifications. 13) CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP. An opinion of title pre- pared by an attorney-at-law licensed in Florida or a certification by an abstractor or a title company showing that apparent record title to the land described and shown on the plat is in the name of the person, persons, or business entity executing the dedica- tion, if any, as it is shown on the plat and, if the plat does not contain a dedication, that the developer has apparent record title to the land. The title opinion or certification shall also show all mortgages or other encumbrances not satisfied or released of record and shall be in the form set forth in the appendix to this ordinance. 14) CLERK. The Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida or the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida. 15) CONSTRUCTION. The application of machinery, building equipment, or techniques to a parcel of land including grubbing or clearing. 16) CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. The engi- neering drawings, plans, specifications,. tests and data necessary -5- L 4"0 1983 5,4 PAGE JUL 2 0 1983 box 5:4- uv 8112o. to show the construction of the proposed improvements in a subdi- vision. 17) COUNTY. The unincorporated area of Indian River County, Florida. 18) COUNTY ENGINEER. The individual employed by Indian River County as County Engineer or his duly authorized representa- tive. 19) COUNTY LAND USE PLAN. An element of the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County. 20) COUNTY STANDARDS. The minimum specifications, design standards and construction details as compiled by the Office of the County Engineer and adopted by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners as the "Indian River County Engineering Standards". 21) CUL-DE-SAC. A minor street intersecting another street at one end and terminating at the other end by a vehicular turnaround. 22) DEVELOPER. Includes subdivider, owner, builder, any individual, partnership, corporation or other legal entity or agent thereof, which undertakes any activity covered by this ordi- nance. 23) DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. All technical codes adopted by Indian River County including this ordinance and all ordinances adopted in implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. 24) D.O.T. The Florida Department of Transportation. 25) DWELLING. A structure intended to be occupied primarily for residential purposes. 26) DWELLING UNIT. A single unit providing complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation. 27) EASEMENT. An interest in land allowing specified uses and subject to all reservations of the servitude. 28) ENGINEER. A person registered and currently licensed to practice civil engineering in the State of Florida. 29) FLOOD PLAIN, ONE HUNDRED YEAR. A land area which would be inundated by a tidal flood or stormwater runoff after a one hundred year flood i.e. the flood that has a one percent probability of.being equalled or exceeded in any given year as delineated on the official County flood hazard maps. 30) FRONTAGE. The length of the front property line of a lot or tract of land abutting a street. 31) GRADE. The inclination with respect to the horizon- tal of any land such being generally expressed by stating the vertical rise or fall a -s a percentage of the horizontal distance. 32) IMPROVEMENTS. Any construction or change in land including the installation of PRM's and PCP's. 33) INUNDATION. Temporarily or periodically, but not normally flooded or covered by water. 34) LAND CONDOMINIUM. The result of the application of the condominium laws of the State of Florida, the ownership of which grants the owner the exclusive right to use and enjoy a particular area of land to the exclusion of all others including but not limited to townhouses, zero lot line development, etc., excluding, parking areas, boat docks and other similar use areas. 35) LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT. The permit to begin construction of improvements according to the land development plans and specifications approved under the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Indian River County, issued under Section 7 (E) of this ordinance. 35) LAND SURVEYOR. An individual who surveys land and is duly registered and licensed in the State of Florida under Florida Statutes $472 et seq. as a land surveyor. 37) LIMITED ACCESS. Access only at authorized and con- trolled points or for restricted uses or at restricted times. 38) LOT. The least fractional part of subdivided lands having limited fixed boundaries that have been clearly designated upon a plat or development plan. 39) LOT DEPTH. The mean horizontal distance between the front and rear lines of a lot. 40) LOT WIDTH. The horizontal distance between the side lines of two lots measured at the front building setback line or the front lot line when no setback is required. 41) P.C.P. As defined in Chapter 177 Florida Statutes JUL 2 0 1983 -7-x 5:4 FAG; JUL 2 0 1993 Bao 5$ , PAGE 84 means permanent control point, which shall be a secondary horizon- tal control monument and shall be a metal marker with the point of reference marked thereon or a 4 -inch by 4 -inch concrete monument .a minimum of 24 inches long with the point of reference marked thereon. Each "P.C.P." shall bear the registration number of the surveyor filing the plat of record. 42) P.R.M. As defined in Chapter 177 Florida Statutes means a permanent reference monument, which consists of a metal rod a minimum of 24 inches long or a 1 -1/2 -inch minimum diameter metal pipe a minimum of 20 inches long, either of which shall be encased in a solid block of concrete or set in natural bedrock, a minimum of 6 inches in diameter, and extending a minimum of 18 inches below the top of the monument, or a concrete monument 4 by 4 inches, a minimum of 24 inches long, with the point of reference marked thereon. A metal cap marker, with the point of reference marked thereon, shall bear the registration number of the surveyor certifying the plat of record, and the letters "PRM" shall be placed in the top of the monument. 43) PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. The Planning and Zoning Commission of Indian River County. 44) PLAT, FINAL. A finished map being a complete, exact representation of a subdivision accurately showing all legal requirements of applicable Florida Statutes and the requirements of this ordinance, which may include "replat," "amended plat," or "revised plat." 45) PLAT, PRELIMINARY. A tentative plan of a proposed subdivision in sufficient detail to gauge compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance and other development regula- tions of Indian River County. 46) PLAT OF RECORD. A plat which conforms to the requirements of the laws of the State of Florida and ordinances of Indian River County at the time of approval by the County Commission which is recorded in the Official Records of Indian River County by the Clerk pursuant to law. 47) PRIVATE STREET. A privately owned access to abut- ting property, which serves more than one property, is not dedicated to the general public and is maintained by a Property Owner's Association or other entity. 48) REVIEW REPORT. An analysis of the effect the project will have on various aspects of the community infrastruc- ture. The extent of the report shall vary with the type, extent and intensity of development. 49) RIGHT-OF-WAY. Land dedicated, deeded, used, or to be used for a street, alley, walkway, boulevard, utility installations, drainage facility, access for ingress or egress, or other purpose by the public, certain designated individuals, or governing bodies. 50) ROADWAY. The portion of the street right-of-way which contains the street pavement, curb and gutter, and is used primarily for vehicular movement. 51) STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN. An engineering plan and written report outlining the drainage and stormwater treatment facilities required for the proper development of the tract under consideration pursuant to the Stormwater Management and Flood Protection Ordinance, No. 82-28 as amended. 52) STREET. A right-of-way which provides vehicular traffic access between certain points and which may also provide space for the location of utilities. Streets are classified by function as follows: (a) Arterial: Those routes intended to carry heavy volumes of traffic for major distances within or through the County, as delineated on the Indian River County Thoroughfare Plan. (b) Primary Collector: Those routes intended to carry heavy volumes of traffic for short distances within the County, as delineated on the Indian River County Thoroughfare Plan. (c) Secondary Collector: A street which carries traffic from minor streets to arterial streets, as indicated on the Indian River County Thoroughfare Plan. (d) Subdivision Feeder Road: A street which serves -9- JUL 2 0 1983 _ B0a - 54 FACE` 5 JUL 20 1983 K 54 as the principal entrance street of a residen- tial subdivision, or provides for traffic circu- lation within a subdivision. (e) Minor or local streets: A street of limited continuity used primarily for access to abutting property, including cul-de-sac and non -through streets. (f) Marginal access streets: A street that is parallel and adjacent to a major arterial street or highway and which provides access to abutting property. 53) TO SUBDIVIDE. To create a subdivision. 54) SUBDIVISION. The division of land, by any means into three or more lots, tracts, parcels or land condominiums or fee simple townhomes for the purpose of sale or lease, or any division of land creating or changing -any public easement or any public or private street; includes additions and re -subdivisions. 55) TRACT. A parcel of land that is being subdivided into smaller segments or, if the context is proper, a designated area or parcel on a plat. 56) THOROUGHFARE PLAN MAP. A component of the transpor- tation element of the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan comprised of the official map of present and future streets as planned by the Board of County Commissioners. 57) TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE. Any contrivance used to regulate traffic. 58) UTILITIES. Services provided for members of the public by public or private agencies including, but not limited to, water, gas, electric, sewer, cablevision, telephone. 59) WATERBODY. Any natural or artificial pond, lake, swamp, marsh, reservoir, or other area which ordinarily or inter- mittently contains water and which has a discernible shoreline. 60) WATER COURSE. Any natural or artificial channel, ditch, canal,, stream, river, creek, waterway or wetland through which water flows in a definite direction, either continuously or intermittently and which has a definite channel, bed, bank or s o � other discernible boundary. 61) WATER SYSTEM. The complete related series of elements that supplies water for the proposed use of the land under consideration. 62) WORK. All construction as shown on approved plans and specifications for all facilities and features of any kind which are required as part of the process of subdivision of land. 63) ZONING CODE. The Zoning Ordinance and Atlas of Indian River County as adopted and amended from time to time by the Board of County Commissioners. SECTION 6 A. Unlawful Activity. It shall be unlawful and subject to the penalties provided herein for any person to; 1) Create a subdivision without first complying with the provisions of this ordinance and filing a plat approved by the Board of County Commissioners unless exempt under Section 6 (B), or 6 (C). The dividing of land into two parcels without filing a plat under the provisions of this ordinance, where the land divided was the result of a previous division of land into two parcels which occurred after the date of adoption of this ordi- nance, is prohibited. 2) Divide property by any means for the purpose of sale or transfer of title unless each of the resulting parcels has at least the minimum area, width and depth requirements prescribed by the Zoning Regulations and Land Use Plan of Indian River County as applied to the lots created, unless exempt under Section 6 (B). 3) Divide property by any means where the resulting lots have frontage on a dedicated public or private right-of-way (street) less than the minimum lot width of the Zoning District applicable to the lots created, unless exempted under Section 6 (B) or the lot fronts upon a cul-de-sac and meets the requirements of Section 10 (G) (3) (e). 4) Commence the construction of any.improvements required under this ordinance or commence land clearing or grub- bing, without first having obtained a land development permit from Indian River County or fail to construct or maintain improvements in accordance -with the land development permit, plat,approvals or -11- �IUL 2 0 19 r a�� 4 f I this ordinance. 5:4 ?Aq FS 5) Create a public or private street without complying with the provisions of this ordinance. 6) Divide any lot in a platted subdivision, that was approved by the Board of County Commissioners, in a manner which results in construction sites smaller than or inconsistent with the surrounding lots in the subdivision unless approved by the County Commission after a public hearing. Written notice of the hearing shall be mailed to the owner of each lot in the subdivi- sion at least fifteen (15) days in advance. B. Exemptions. The following activities shall be exempt from the provisions of this ordinance; 1) Exemption for Creation of Equal or Larger Building Sites from Lots of Record. The combination or re -combination of all or a portion of previously platted lots of record where none of the newly created or residual lots contain less.area, width or depth than the smallest of the original lots of record being combined and no streets of any kind or public easements are created, changed or extinguished. 2) Boundary Settlements. Any conveyance between adjoining landowners if (a) the purpose of the conveyance is to adjust or settle the common boundary line between adjoining landowners and (b) the deed of conveyance or other legal instru- ment states such purpose and is recorded in the Official Records of Indian River County. 3) Exemption for Conveyance to Government. Any divi- sion of land for the purpose of conveying land to any federal, state or local government entity or agency or public utility, pro- vided such conveyance is accepted by the grantee by an instrument recorded in the Public Records of Indian River County. 4) By Order of Court. Any division of land by order of a court of competent jurisdiction. 5) Corrective Instrument. Any conveyance for the pur- pose of correcting an error made in the language used in an origi- nal conveyance. M M 6) Twenty (20) Acre Tracts. Any division of land where all parcels resulting from the division contain twenty (20) acres of land or more and no public easements or streets are created. When the tract prior to dividing is a size which is not an even multiple of twenty (20) acres, a fractional breakdown resulting in lots of equal size which are larger :than 19.5 acres also qualifies for the exemption. C. Affidavit of Exemption (Subdivisions resulting in all lots containing more than 5 acres). 1. All projects meeting the following requirements shall be exempt from Section 9 (required public improvements) and the platting requirements of this ordinance. (a) Each parcel resulting from the proposed divi- sion of land contains more than five (5) acres. When the tract prior to dividing is a size which is not an even multiple of five (5) acres and does not lend itself to division into lots.each con- taining more than five (5) acres, a fractional breakdown resulting in lots of equal size larger than 4-7/8 acres also qualifies for this provision. (b) If the developer elects to divide the land by filing a plat, all requirements of this ordinance except Section 9 (required improvements) shall be complied with. (c) The applicant deeds to the County all rights- of-way necessary to comply with the Indian River County Thoroughfare Plan, and all streets created are at least the mini- mum street width required by Section 10 (C).(2). (d) The owner establishes a landowner's association and simultaneously files a Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions, acceptable in form to the County Attorney, in the Public Records providing that all streets, easements and drainage improvements (except that dedicated to the public) are dedicated to the landowner's association and provisions are made for their perpetual maintenance. The Declaration of Restrictions and plat (if applicable) shall contain the following language in bold type: "The streets, easements and drainage improvements are not dedicated to the public and will not be maintained, repaired or ` �� -13- JUL 20 198 6D�,K 4 PAGE` JUL 2 0 WJ aa�R improved by the County." 5;4 PA�� ar�Q (e) The owner files a Declaration of Restrictions prohibiting the voluntary division of land encompassed within the project into lots that are less than 4-7/8 acres in size unless such division is accomplished by filing a plat approved by the County and meets all standards required of subdivisions under this ordinance. (f) The owner files an "Affidavit of Exemption" in the Public Records prior to dividing the land which shall contain; (1) a legal description of the land encompassed within the project and a certified survey depicting all parcels created by the division, all private and public streets and ease- ments, (2) the book and page number of the Official Records of Indian River County where the items required in Paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) may be found, and (3) the approval of the Public Works and Community Development Directors and the County Attorney's Office. 2. Application process for affidavit. All applicants for affidavits of exemption shall comply with the application pro- cess of Section 7 if the property is to be divided by the filing of a plat provided the applicant shall not have to submit informa- tion relating to required improvements. The applicant and the Community Development Director shall discuss what information is required at the pre -application conference. If the applicant is not filing a plat to divide the property, he shall schedule a pre -application conference and provide information as required by Section 7 (C). Subsequent to the meeting, the Community Development Director shall in writing request such additional information as necessary to evaluate the affidavit of exemption. After receipt of the requested information, the County shall have twenty (20) days to approve and sign the affidavit or notify the applicant in writing citing the provision of this ordinance that constitutes the reasons why the application has not been approved. D. Clerk to Transmit Copies of Deeds. To aid in the enforcement of this ordinance, the Clerk to the Circuit Court of Indian River County is requested to transfer to the Community Development Division copies of all deeds conveying land in unincorporated Indian River County, that have been filed in the Official Records of the County. The Clerk shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of the copies. SECTION 7 PROCEDURE AND REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBMITTING AND PROCESSING SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS A. Procedure. All plats for new subdivisions must be submitted and processed through the following five (5) proce- dures: (1) Pre -application conference between applicant and the County Community Development Staff. permit. (2) Submission and approval of a preliminary plat. (3) Application for and issuance of a land development (4) Submission and approval of final plat. (5) Issuance of Certificate of Completion. B. Validity of Subdivision Not Meeting the Requirements of this Ordinance. No plat of any subdivision shall have any validity until it.shall have been approved in the manner pre- scribed by this ordinance. In the event an unapproved plat is recorded, it shall be considered invalid. No person shall trans- fer, sell, agree to sell or negotiate for the sale of.any land by reference to, exhibition of or by the use of a plan or plat of a subdivision before such plan or plat has been finally approved and officially recorded according to the terms of this ordinance. The description of any lot by metes and bounds shall not exempt the transaction from the provisions of this ordinance if the trans- action would be subject hereto otherwise. The building official shall not issue any permits for new construction on a lot in any subdivision created after the effective date of this ordinance which has not been approved pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance. -15- JUL 2 01983 x 5.4 FAQ r 5:4 Put .. JUL 20 198 The County shall not make any public improvements and shall have no responsibility for the maintenance of streets, drainage facilities or other facilities in subdivisions whose dedications have not been accepted by the County under the terms of this ordinance. No changes, erasures, modifications or revisions shall be made on any final plat after approval thereof unless said plat is first resubmitted under this ordinance. Plats shall not contain any reference to any possible reversion of any interest in real property that has been the subject of public or private dedication on a plat. C. Pre -Application Conference. 1) Purpose. Before making application for preliminary plat approval, the applicant and his professional staff are re- quired to discuss, informally, his preliminary studies and sketches for a subdivision with the Public Works Director, Community Development Director, Utilities Director, and other government agency representatives deemed necessary by the Community Development Director. This step is an opportunity for the applicant to avail himself of the advice and assistance of the governmental agencies in order to facilitate the preparation and review of preliminary and final plats or construction drawings. 2) Scheduling. Arrangements for this conference are to be made through the Community Development office at least five (5) working days in advance of the conference date. No application fee is required at this time. 3) Information reguired for the pre -application confer- ence. The applicant will submit at least four (4) copies of the preliminary sketch plan of the proposed subdivision, to the Community Development Division, at least five (5) working days before the scheduled date of the pre -application conference. The applicant shall supply and discuss with the County the following information, if available; (a) name, address and telephone number of the applicant and a list of all the owners of the property (b) location sketch M M (c) existing Zoning and Comprehensive Plan classi- fication of the subject site and adjacent properties (d) the location of all known right-of-ways and easements on the subject site and adjacent properties and the purposes for which they were established, existing pavement markings, road geometries, curb cuts and curb cuts on bordering, collector or arterial roads (e) the existing topography including all water courses, bodies of water and environmentally sensitive lands (f) the existing site conditions including soil conditions, groundwater table, drainage pattern, flood plain data and vegetation of the subject site and immediately adjacent proper- ties; use U. S. Soil Conservation Service data when available (g) existing facilities including water management and utilities (h) a subdivision sketch showing the proposed lots, right-of-ways, easements, water management facilities and utility sources and canals or waterways (if any) (i) a general description of the proposed subdivi- sion including the number of lots, the approxi- mate size, width and depth of lots, approximate building size, type and use and proposed phases of development (j) a description of the project's boundary. 4) Opinion of staff. Written acknowledgement of the pre -application conference and any opinion set forth by staff shall not be construed as approval of the project by the County Commission or any County division or as a waiver of any of the requirements of this ordinance that were not set forth at the con- ference, but shall only be considered an expression of each -17- JUL 2 0 1983 --54 IfAct 93 I JUL 2 0 1983 TOOK 54 PAGE 9 4 division's concerns with the general design concepts set forth in the preliminary sketches of the proposed development. D. Preliminary Plat Application and Review. 1) Purpose. Approval of the preliminary plat by the Planning and Zoning Commission is a pre -requisite to the applica- tion for the issuance of a land development permit. Developer shall clear a path in a sufficient manner to allow staff to walk the dimensions of the property for the purpose of seeing the general topography. The path shall be no wider than necessary and can be the surveyor's path. Land clearing or the construction of improvements is prohibited prior to the issuance of a land development permit, with the exception of that activity essential for survey or preparation of development plans that is consistent with the Indian River County Tree Protection Ordinance as it exists now or as adopted and amended in the future. 2) Submission of Application. Upon completion of the pre -application conference, the applicant may apply for fonnal plat review by furnishing to the Community Development Director, ten (10) copies of the preliminary plat of the proposed subdivi- sion and required information. The copies of the plat must be accompanied by a filing fee (See Section 7 D (9)), and an application requesting the County to review the plat under the provisions of these regulations. 3) Size of Drawings. The preliminary plat shall be: (a) prepared by a professional engineer or surveyor registered in the State of Florida (b) on sheet(s) twenty-four (24) inches by thirty- six (36) inches (c) to a scale not smaller than one (1) inch equals one hundred (100) feet; for subdivisions exceeding one hundred (100) acres, the scale may be as small as one (1) inch equals two hundred (200) feet or as approved by the Community Development Director M M (d) full and complete and be certified by the surveyor in charge as meeting the minimum tech- nical standards set forth by the Florida Board of Land Surveyors, pursuant to Florida Statutes 5472.07 and Chapter 21HH-6.01 et seq Florida Administrative Code. 4) Information Required on Preliminary Plat. The preliminary plat shall contain the following: (a) title block; (b) name of the proposed subdivision; (c) county and state; (d) date of preparation of the preliminary plat and of any revisions; (e) name, address and telephone number of the applicant; M name and address of all owners (g) north point and scale; (h) location sketch; (i) legal description and total acreage being subdivided; (j) existing zoning and Comprehensive Plan classi- fication of the subject site and adjacent property; (k) name, address, signature, seal and registration number of the professional engineer and surveyor responsible for all or part of the plat; (1) location and dimensions of all known existing and proposed right-of-ways and easements and the purposes for which they were established on (1) the subject site (2) the adjacent property (within 100 feet of the site); (m) a drawing of the subdivision showing proposed: (1) lot lines (with dimensions) (2) right-of-ways (3) easements (4) lot and block identification JUL `i900 —19- Bo 54 ? 5 JUL 2 0 1983 5.4 9- 6 (5) canals and waterways (existing and proposed) (6) chord distances (7) environmentally sensitive land. (n) location of permanent reference monuments (o) point of beginning (p) street names, proposed, on site and existing within one hundred (100) feet of the site proposed) tive land (q) parks and public recreation areas (existing and (r) "not included" parcels, if any (s) a legal description of the site boundary (t) a legal description of environmentally sensi- (u) such additional information as may be necessary to assure the subdivision complies with the requirements of this ordinance. 5) Additional Information Required (Preliminary Plat). In addition to the information required to appear on the prelimi- nary plat, the applicant shall supply the County with the follow- ing; A. Survey of the existing site by a registered surveyor with contour lines at one foot intervals showing the following information and superimposed on an aerial photograph showing at least the adjoining two hundred (200) feet. (1) water courses and all free flowing wells, if any (2) all water bodies showing the approximate mean high waterline (3) all environmentally sensitive land as defined by the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan (4) all trees identified as required by the Indian River County Tree Protection Ordinance (5) coastal construction control line B. A description of existing site conditions including; -20- _ M M (1) soil conditions and analysis (2) the groundwater table (3) drainage pattern on site and within two hundred (200) feet of the site boundary (4) vegetation (5) flood plain data on site and within two hundred (200) feet of the subject site. C. A sketch showing; (1) any existing water management or utility facilities (2) proposed Stormwater Management Plan and control facilities and general grading plan (3) utility sources, distribution and collection lines, if available, including but not limited to water, sewer, electricity, cable television and telephone (4) the proposed locations of street lights, side- walks and bike paths, if any (5) the proposed finished grade elevations of all lots. D. A general description of the subdivision including; (1) number of lots (2) approximate area of the lots (3) approximate building size and type (4) projected use of building(s) (5) proposed phases of the subdivision (6) proposed open space, public and private (7) drafts of proposed deed restrictions, protec- tive covenants, intended dedications, proposed property owner association documents, or a written description of proposed content of such documents if they are not available (8) for projects of more than forty (40) gross acres, a review report considering the effect the project will have on existing JUL 20198 -21- BOOK54 Pa ' JUL 2 0 1983 (a) streets (traffic impact) (b) utilities (c) schools (d) hospital services (e) recreation (f) prime.aquifer recharge areas (g) area wide drainage 6) Reviews (a) Development Review Meeting. The Community Development Division will forward one (1) copy of the proposed preliminary plat to each of the County divisions or other inter- ested agencies within three (3) working days, for their review and written comments or approval. Within ten (10) working days after the receipt of the plat, they shall submit to the Community Development Division written staff approvals or the identification of any discrepancies. The Community Development Division shall within five (5) working days transmit a letter to the applicant and his engineer identifying all of the discrepancies pertaining to the preliminary plat. The applicant shall respond, in writing, to each comment following receipt of the discrepancy letter, and submit five (5) copies of a revised preliminary plat if deemed necessary by the Community Development staff with a written request to be placed on the Planning & Zoning Commission's agenda for approval. If the applicant wishes to discuss any of the review comments made by the County staff, a meeting shall be arranged through the Community Development Division, which may include the applicant, Community Development staff and representa- tives from all other reviewing divisions and agencies with whom the applicant wishes to confer about the review comments. After this meeting, the applicant shall submit five (5) copies of a revised plat to the Community Development Division with a request to be placed on the Planning & Zoning Commission's agenda for approval. (b) Planning and Zoning Commission. Upon comple- tion of the County staff review, the preliminary plat plans and application, along with any recommendations will be forwarded to � ® r the Indian River County Planning and Zoning Commission for review and consideration for approval. The decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be final unless the application is appealed to the County Commission. Any approval shall be noted on the preliminary plat in the following form: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL BY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THIS IS TO CERTIFY, That on the Indian River County Planning and Zoning Commission approved this preliminary plat. (Chairperson) 7) County Commission Consideration (appeals). An appeal may be filed by: M the applicant (ii) County administration (iii) any aggrieved person or group with an interest that will be affected by the project. An appeal of a decision on a preliminary plat must be filed with the Community Development Division within ten (10) working days of the meeting wherein the decision appealed was rendered. Upon receipt from the applicant of an appeal, the County Administrator will place the preliminary plat application and all recommendations on the agenda of a regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of County Commissioners for consideration within thirty (30') days. The County Commission will conduct a de novo hearing on the application and receive input from all interested parties. The applicant must receive a majority vote of the members present at the meeting to prevail in the appeal. 8) Criteria for Review of Preliminary Plat by County Staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners, if Appealed. (a) No preliminary plat shall be approved if it; (1) fails to comply with all ordinances of Indian River County including but not limited to, the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Regulations, this ordinance, the Stormwater Management and Flood Protection ordinance and the Indian River JUL-23- 0 1983-23 60% :4 PAS JUL 2 LfMX e4 FAGS oo County Standard Design Specifications (2) adversely affects the community or neighborhood in which the project is located; (3) fails to provide adequate street connectors with the existing street network to insure free access and circulation or creates a traffic impact that lowers the level of service on any existing street below level of Service "C"; (See Section 10 A) (4) fails to comply with State law or regulation or rules established by other governmental agencies with jurisdiction over any aspect of the project. (b) Approval. The Planning Commission, or in the case of an appeal, the Board of County Commissioners, may approve the application, disapprove the application if the project fails to meet County requirements, or approve the application subject to specific conditions which relate to Indian River County ordinances and the effect the project will have on the community and are necessary to protect the health, safety or welfare of Indian River County residents or continue the hearing to receive further input on the merits of the proposal. (c) Approval of the preliminary plat shall consti- tute tentative approval as to the character, intensity, general layout and dimensions of streets and other features. The approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission, or if appealed to the County Commission, shall be shown on the face of the preliminary plat by signature of the Chairman of the Commission or Board. All special conditions shall be noted on the face of the plat. 9) Filing Fee. The Board reserves the right to estab- lish, by resolution, a fee in an amount deemed necessary to reimburse Indian River County for the cost incurred in reviewing and approving plats, and requests for extension of approval. 10) Time Limit. The preliminary plat approval shall be valid for a period of eighteen (16) months from the date it is approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission or, if appealed, when approved by the County Commission. If the applicant has not -24- II L i M obtained a development permit and initiated construction, been granted an extension of time by the Board on a demonstration of good cause shown or have received final plat approval within eighteen (18) months, the preliminary plat approval shall lapse and be considered void and the applicant must re -apply under the provisions of this ordinance. 11) Extensions. A request for an extension may be sub- mitted to the Community Development Division any time prior to expiration of the preliminary plat. No request for extension of preliminary plat approval will be accepted after the preliminary plat approval has been allowed to lapse. The applicant may, however, re -apply for preliminary plat approval under the then existing provisions of this ordinance and other land development regulations at which time a new filing fee will be required, as well as review and approval by County staff to the extent deemed necessary by the Community Development Director. 12) Transfer of Approval. Notice of transfer of prop- erty and preliminary plat approval must be filed with the Community Development Division prior to transfer in bulk of the proposed subdivision. Prior to transfer, the transferee must assume in writing on a form acceptable to the County Attorney all commitments, responsibilities, and obligations of the prior developer. Failure to give timely notice or to provide the assumption of prior commitments voids the preliminary approval. A summary of this section shall be placed on the face of all approved preliminary plats. 13) Land Development Prior to Ap royal Prohibited. No construction, land clearing or grubbing, with the exception of test facilities and minor underbrushing, may begin until a Land Development Permit has been issued by Indian River County. E. Land Development Permit 1) Purpose. The Land Development Permit is the instru- ment authorizing the developer to proceed with land improvements as specified in the approved plans and specifications set forth in the application and as shown on the approved preliminary plat. 2) Procedure. After approval of the preliminary plat, an applicant may apply for a land development permit and follow -25- 'JUL 2 0 1983 box `5:4 pa4 01 54 ?AbdO2 either of the following procedures. No construction may commence until the applicant obtains a land development permit, see Section 7 (D) 1. (a) Construction before Final Plat Approval. The applicant shall submit construction plans and specifications as required in Section 7 E. (3) of this ordinance together with a request for land development permit. A certificate of ownership shall accompany the request. The improvements required by this ordinance and the preliminary plat approval shall be completed prior to final plat approval, or (b) Construction after Final Plat Approval. The applicant shall submit construction plans and specifications as required in Section 7 E. (3) of this ordinance for subdivision improvements and obtain a Land Development Permit. The Land Development Permit shall be submitted with a final plat drawing for approval. Security will be required for the performance and maintenance of all improvements which are to be constructed after final plat approval (See Section 9 A.). 3) Plans and Specifications Required for a Land Development Permit. The applicant shall furnish to the Public Works Director the construction plans and specifications designed in accordance with the approved preliminary plat and the require- ments of this ordinance for the construction of all improvements. The applicant must have obtained and shall submit all utility per- mits and franchises required by the Indian River County Utility Division and ordinances prior to the issuance of a land develop- ment permit. All construction plans and specifications must be prepared, signed and sealed by a professional engineer who is registered in the State of Florida. Engineering calculations and tests in support of any of the proposed plans and specifications may be required. The drawings and required information shall be so complete that review and analysis can be made from them without research of any outside data. Three (3) copies of the plans shall be submitted on twenty-four (24) inch by thirty-six (36) inch sheets unless another size is approved by the County Public Works Director, and shall contain, but shall not be limited to: (a) a cover sheet, including a location map. -26- - M (b) complete details including water, sewer, and storm drainage systems. The proposed general location of wells and septic tanks shall be in conformity with the requirements of the Indian River County Health Department and all, State and local ordinances [See 10 H (3)]. (c) a master stormwater management and flood pro- tection plan and complete calculations and exhibits as required by ordinance No. 82-28, as amended from time to time. (d) typical sections and summary of quantities. (e) construction details showing compliance with County standards, or alternate design as approved by the County Public Works Director. (f) special profile sheets, if necessary, showing special or unique situations. (g) bench mark location, based on National Geodetic Vertical Data (N.G.V.D.); (h) soil analysis, showing the locations and results of test borings of the subsurface condition of the tract to be developed, when required by the Public Works Director. Soil Conservation Service information may be used when available. Where impervious soils or muck are encountered, the plans shall reflect a satisfactory design to cope with such conditions. (i) the plans shall contain the special conditions and specifications pertaining to the subdivision in note form on the plans, such as: (1) required compliance to this ordinance. (2) where applicable, required compliance with State Standards as currently adopted and in use. (3) minimum standards for materials. (4) test requirements for stabilization, base and backf ill. (5) source of water and sewer service. (6) required installation of subsurface construc- tion such as water lines, sewer lines, public utilities, traffic control devices and storm drainage prior to compaction of subgrade and -27- JUL 20 1983 Boy54 PAG: r JUL 2 0 1983 BOOK .4 44(1 04 road construction. (7) traffic control devices and pavement markings. (j) the plan and profile of each proposed street and improvements to existing streets such as deceleration or turn lanes (indicating the existing ground surfaces and proposed street grade surface including extensions for a distance of fifty (50) feet beyond the tract boundary) with tentative finished grades indicated, and lot grading plan and including easement work, clearing and grubbing, and structural details of facilities in right-of-way. (k) a typical cross-section of each type proposed street or bikeway, showing the width of pavement, the location and width of sidewalks, where required, and rights-of-way. (1) proposed erosion control facilities (seeding and sod limits, etc.) and the limits of earthwork construction. (m) plans for street lighting (having the approval of the local power authority); landscaping, parks, recreational areas and parking area. The plans shall have applicable approvals of all governmental agencies having jurisdiction and which are affected by the construction. (n) projects engineered by more than one firm shall be coordinated by a single engineering firm or an engineer of record appointed by the developer. (o) a certificate from a surveyor registered in the State of Florida that a concrete permanent reference marker has been located in the public right-of-way at a corner point of the subdivision near the entrance way of the proposed subdivision. The permanent reference marker shall be identified on the plat of the subdivision as the master survey point for the subdivision and shall be used to establish the grade level for all improvements in the subdivision. (p) where the design of the subdivision includes man-made canals or waterways, plans of the proposed construction will be included and shall indicate: (1) all bulkhead lines (2) detailed cross sections showing existing and -28- M M M proposed depths (3) location of hard pan, muck or other unique soil conditions (4) details of bulkhead construction. (q) developer shall submit to County copies of the applications on permits from all other permitting agencies that are applicable to the project. 4) Review. Upon receipt of said plans and specifica- tions, the Department of Public Works shall forward one set each of the plans and specifications to the Indian River County Utilities and Community Development Divisions. If a subdivision is to be furnished water by a public or private utility company, the applicant shall provide the Public Works Director with written confirmation that the municipal utilities department or the County Utilities Division has approved the plans and specifications for the water system in the subdivision. Within ten (10) working days after receipt of such plans and specifications, the Utilities and Community Development Divisions shall submit their recommendations to the Public Works Director. The Public Works Director and the Utilities Director and the Community Development Director shall review plans and specifications for conformity with the design of the preliminary plat, construction specification requirements of this ordinance and any other applicable laws or regulations. The applicant will be advised of the departmental comments by the Public Works Division within fifteen (15) working days from date of submittal. Upon receipt of documents revised in accordance with comments, the permit shall be issued. 5) Approval of Plans and Specifications. After the review of the Utilities, the Community Development and the Public Works Divisions, the Public Works Director shall, within ten (10) working days, approve, disapprove, or approve subject to specified conditions, the construction plans and specifications and issue a land development permit upon payment of such fees as the Board of County Commissioners may establish by resolution from time to time. 6) Inspections. The Public Works Director, County 21 -29- 'JUL 2 ® 1983 ,54 PA4106 Engineer, Community Development Director, County Administrator, and County Utilities Director, or their representatives, shall have the right to inspect the project for the purpose of ensuring that all improvements are being constructed in conformity with the provisions of this ordinance, the approved preliminary plat, and land development permit. The Public Works Director shall have the right at any time, on or before the issuance of a land development permit, to require the submission to him of the required data, tests and reports specified in this ordinance. 7) Notification. The respective County divisions shall be notified, in writing, with copies to the Community Development Division, of the commencement and completion of the following items of construction so that an immediate inspection can be per- formed to assure construction in conformity with said approved construction plans and specifications and the requirements of this ordinance. If the County indicates that an inspector is not available, and to wait would otherwise delay the project, then this requirement may be met by submission of a certificate from the engineer of record that all construction was completed in accordance with the Land Development Permit. (a) waterlines and sanitary sewer lines prior to backfilling (Utilities Division). (b) stabilized subgrade (Public Works Division). (c) curb and concrete work (Public Works Division). (d) roadway base (Public Works Division). (e) surface course (Public Works Division). (f) permanent reference monuments and permanent control points (Public Works Division). (g) storm sewer (Public Works Division) The failure to notify the respective divisions of the commencement and completion of the construction of such items shall be good cause to refuse to issue a certificate of comple- tion until such further investigation is conducted to verify compliance with the land development permit. All water and sewer improvements must be inspected by the Indian River County Utilities Director or his representative or the appropriate go- M M M municipal or private utility representative prior to backfilling. 8) Final Inspection - Certificate of Completion. Upon completion of construction of the improvements, the applicant shall provide the Public works Director with the following: (a) a letter stipulating that construction of the improvements has been completed and requesting final inspection and approval. (b) the testing reports and certificates of compli- ance from material suppliers. (c) two (2) sets of as -built construction plans. (d) a document from a registered engineer with his seal affixed certifying that the improvements have been con - strutted in conformity with the Land Development Permit and the provisions of this ordinance. (e) a document from the County Utilities Division approving all utility installations. If a municipality or other utility is serving the development with water or sewer, there must be a document indicating acceptance of the construction of the water system by the utility. (f) release of liens, and affidavit that all liens are released on all improvements required by this ordinance. Upon receipt of the above items, the Public Works Division and the Community Development Division shall review said data and make a final inspection of the constructed improvements and shall notify the applicant of any items of noncompliance with the approved construction plans and specifications. A certification of completion shall be issued by the Community Development Director when all improvements are completed in conformity with the approved design. This certificate shall release the construction surety. 9) Term of Permit. A land development permit issued under this section shall be void if construction does not commence within one hundred eighty (180) days and shall expire eighteen (18) months from the date of its issuance, regardless of whether or not the work is complete, unless the Board of County Commissioners grants an extension of time, in response to the -31- JUL 2 0 1983 BoK 54 PAG£ 107 JUL 2 0 1983 54 applicant's written request for such an extension. F. Final Plat 1) Purpose. The approved final plat is the official record of the subdivision to be filed with the County Clerk. It is verification that the subdivided land has been developed sub- stantially in accordance with the approved preliminary plat (or that a bond has been posted which will secure the development as specified in the final plat). The final plat must be approved by the Board of County Commissioners and recorded by the Clerk of the Circuit Court before the developer may sell any lot or parcel. 2) Development Phases. The applicant may schedule proposed development phases within any proposed subdivision. The scheduled development phases shall have been specified on the approved preliminary plat and shall be of such a size and design and be scheduled so that all portions completed at any time can exist independently as a subdivision in complete conformity with the requirements of this ordinance. Any change in the schedule of phases must receive prior approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. If phased, the applicant shall have the option of requesting either final plat approval or the issuance of a certificate of completion on one or more of the development phases in conformity with all the procedures and requirements of this ordinance. The applicant may not apply for final plat approval on any portion of the approved preliminary plat which he does not propose to record and develop within the following twelve (12) months. Failure to make application for final plat approval of a development phase or for the issuance of a certificate of comple- tion for a development phase on an approved preliminary plat within a period of eighteen (18) months from the date of approval of the preliminary plat shall result in automatic revocation of said preliminary plat unless the applicant applies for an exten- sion from the Board prior to the lapse. The request for extension must be made in writing to the Board and the applicant must demon- strate good cause for the extension. only one extension may be granted and shall not be for a period exceeding eighteen (18) months. 3) Procedure. The final plat shall be submitted to the Community Development Division at least thirty (30) days prior to the regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of County Commissioners during which the final plat is to be considered. The plat shall be accompanied by: (a) a letter from the owner or owner's agent requesting the Board to consider Final Plat approval for the project (b) the appropriate filing fee and application (c) a certified cost estimate shall be prepared by the developer's engineer and shall include the cost of surveying, engineering and construction of all required improvements in substantially the following form: e CERTIFICATE OF COST ESTIMATE I, I a Florida registered engineer, License No. , do hereby certify to Indian River County that a cost —estimate has been pre- pared under my responsible direction for those improvements item- ized in this exhibit and that the total cost estimated for said improvements is $ This estimate has been pre- pared, in part, to induce approval by the County of a final plat for the Subdivision, and for the purpose of establishing proper surety amounts associated there with. (Signature) (Name, Florida Registered Engineer License No. (AFFIX SEAL) or the actual contract price(s) may be substituted for the engi- neer's cost estimate. (d) appropriate security for required improvements as specified in Section 8 of this ordinance unless a certificate of completion has been issued by the Community Development Division. (e) five (5) copies of the Final Plat drawing show- ing required information and certifications (f) security for maintenance meeting the require- ments of Section 8 of this ordinance if a certificate of comple- tion has been issued. (g) a copy of the property owners' association documents which accept the responsibility for maintenance of all private streets, right-of-ways, easements, recreation area, -33- JUL 20 1903 BooK ; .4 JUL 20 1983 p 0. stormwater management facilities or other improvements. (h) a copy of final protective covenants and deed restrictions. 4) Size of Drawings. The final plat shall be: (a) prepared by a land surveyor registered and licensed in the State of Florida (b) on sheets twenty-four (24) inches by thirty- six (36) inches, with a one-half (1/2) inch margin on three sides and a three (3) inch margin on the left side for binding (c) to a scale not smaller than one (1) inch repre- sents one hundred (100) feet. For subdivisions exceeding one hundred (100) acres the scale may be as small as one (1) inch represents two hundred (200) feet or as approved by the Community Development Director. drawing ink (d) clearly drawn or printed with permanent black (e) on linen tracing cloth or stable base film a minimum of 0.003 inches thick coated upon completion with plastic material or a non -adhered scaled print on a stable base film made by photographic processes to assure permanency. (f) acceptable under the minimum standards Florida Statutes §472.027 and Florida Administrative Code Chapter 21 HH -6.03 as amended from time to time. 5) Information Required. The final plat shall contain: (a) a title block (b) the name of the proposed subdivision which shall not duplicate nor closely approximate the name of any other existing subdivision in the County. If the plat is an addition to an existing subdivision, it shall bear the same name as the exist- ing subdivision. All plats for Planned Unit Developments shall contain "PUD" within the title. (c) the name of the county and state. (d) the legal description (e) the date of preparation of the final plat .and of any revisions (f) a prominent "North Point" on each sheet showing any portion of the subdivided lands also the reference bearing or azimuth in the notes or legend (g) the scale, stated and graphically illustrated on each sheet (h) an index sheet on page one showing the entire subdivision and indexing the area shown on succeeding sheets. Each sheet must show the particular number of the sheet and the total number of sheets as well as clearly labeled match lines. (i) the point of beginning shown together with the letters P.O.B. in bold letters (j) the initial point in the description shall be accurately tied to the nearest corner 1/4 section or government lot corner (k) a location sketch showing the existing zoning of the subject site and of the adjacent property (1) all adjacent property identified by the sub- division name, plat book and page number, if not platted, so state (m) boundary lines of the subdivided tract shown as a heavy line (n) County and City limit lines within or abutting the tract (o) permanent reference monuments and permanent control point locations as prescribed in Chapter 177, Florida Statutes and installed prior to submission of final plat (p) survey data including all pertinent dimensions (q) lot and block identification. Each lot and each block shall be identified. (r) street names (s) the location and width of all existing or recorded streets intersecting or contiguous to the boundary of the plat shall be accurately tied to the boundary of the plat by bear- ings and distances this plat" (t) not included parcels to be marked "Not part of (u) the intended use of all reserved areas shown on L 2 0 1983 -35-©� 54 Pace il � JUL H 1903 BOOK 54,' F.AcA the plat easements (v) all easements including limited access (w) the statement that no construction, trees or shrubs will be placed in easements without County approval (x) a three (3) inch by five (5) inch space in the upper right-hand corner of each sheet to be used by the Clerk of the Circuit Court for recording information (y) no strip or parcel of land shall be reserved by the owner unless it is of sufficient size to be of some particular use or service or is environmentally sensitive, (See Section 6 (A) 6) Covenants, Restrictions, Reservations. All covenants, restrictions, or reservations placed by the developer or required by this ordinance shall appear on the final plat or be established by separate recorded document, which documents shall be submitted to the County with the final plat. If done by separate document, the public record location of such documents shall be indicated beneath the subdivision name as follows: °Covenants, restrictions, or reservations affecting the ownership or use of the property shown in this plat are filed in Official Record Book No. Page " 7) Certifications. The final plat shall contain on the face or first page the following certifications, dedications and approvals, all executed and acknowledged as required by law, in the forms set forth below. (a) Dedications. The purpose of all reserved areas shown or referred to on the plat and of the improvements shall be defined in the dedication. All areas reserved for use by the residents of the subdivision and all areas or facilities intended for public use, shall be specifically dedicated by the owner of the land at the time the plat is recorded. All streets, right-of- ways, easements, recreation facilities, stormwater management tracts and their related facilities designed to serve more than one property owner shall be dedicated to the public use, on to a property owners' association for private use. Where private dedications are involved, ownership and maintenance association documents shall be submitted with the final plat. The dedication shall clearly dedicate the private facilities to the association without recourse to the County or any other public agency. All dedicated areas shall be identified as tracts unless all such areas are dedicated to one entity and clearly identifiable. All dedications shall be in the following form or as approved by the County Attorney: CERTIFICATE OF DEDICATION (Corporate) KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that (exact corporate name _ , a (state) corporation, fee simple owner of the land described and platted herein, being in Indian River County, Florida, have caused said lands to be surveyed and platted as shown hereon and does hereby dedicate as follows: (Individual) KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that , fee simple owner of the lanT descr bs ed and platted herein, being in Indian River County, has caused said lands to be surveyed and platted as shown hereon and does hereby dedicate as follows: (SELECT AS APPROPRIATE): 1. Streets and right-of-ways (For public streets) All streets and right-of-ways shown on this plat (name specifically if less than all) are hereby dedicated in perpetuity to Indian River County, Florida for the use and benefit of the public for proper purposes. (For private streets) All streets and right-of-ways shown on this plat (name specifically if less than all) are hereby declared to be and shall remain private. They are dedicated for the use and benefit of the owners and residents of this subdivi- sion, and shall be the perpetual maintenance obligation of the (state exact legal name of maintenance entitv) All public authorities, including but not limited to police, fire and ambulance, shall have the right to use the streets in the course of performing their respective duties. The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida shall have no responsibility, duty or liability whatsoever regarding such streets. 2. Utility Easements The utility easements as shown are dedicated in perpetuity for the construction and maintenance of utilities by any utility provider in compliance with such ordinances and regulations as may be adopted from time to time by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. 3. Drainage and Stormwater Management Easements -37- Je� UL 0 �� 60% 54 PAGE 113, J J JUL 2 0 lffi3 The drainage easements and stormwater management tracts or easements as shown are dedicated in perpetuity for construction and maintenance of drainage facilities and shall be the perpetual maintenance obligation of the (give exact name of maintenance entity) 4. Park and Recreation Areas The park and recreation areas as shown are dedicated in perpetuity for the (exclusive use and enjoyment of the -owners of lots in this subdivision) (use and enjoyment of the public) and shall be the perpetual maintenance obligation of (dive exact name of maintenance entity, if private) (Indian River County, Florida.) 5. Limited Access Easements The limited access easements as shown are dedicated in perpetuity to the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida for the purposes of control and jurisdiction over access rights. (ADD APPROPRIATE CONCLUSION): (Corporate) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the above named corporation has caused these presents to be signed by its and attested by its and its corporate seal to be affixed hereto by and with the authority of its Board of Directors this day of , 19 (FULL CORPORATE NAME), a corporation of the State of By: (signature of president) Type Name and Title of officer Attest:(signature of attesting corporate officer) Type Name and Title of Officer (AFFIX CORPORATE SEAL) (Individual) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, (I) (we), (name(s)) , have hereunto set (my) (our) hand(s) and seal(s) this day of 19 WITNESSES: (signature) (Typed name) (ADD ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THOSE EXECUTING THE DEDICATION) (b) Joinder and consent to Dedication by mortgagee or other party in interest. MORTGAGEE'S CONSENT STATE OF COUNTY OF The undersigned hereby certifies that it is the holder of (a) mortgage(s), lien(s), or other encumbrance(s) upon the property described hereon and does hereby join in and consent to the dedication of the land described in said dedication by the owner thereof.and agrees that its mortgage(s), lien(s), or other encumbrance(s) which (is) (are) recorded in Official Record Book at page (s) of the public records of Indian River County, Florida, shall be subordinated to the dedication shown hereon. (CORPORATE) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said corporation has caused these presents to be signed by its and attested to by its and its corporate seal to be affixed hereon by and with the authority of its Board of Directors this day of , 19 (Corporate Name) , a corporation of the State of By , (signature of president) (Typed name) ATTEST: (signature of. other corporate officer) (Typed name<and title of officer) (AFFIX CORPORATE SEAL) (INDIVIDUAL) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, (I) (we), do hereunto set (my) (our) hand(s) and seal(s) this day of , 19 WITNESSES: (signature) (Typed name) (ADD ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THOSE EXECUTING MORTGAGEE'S CONSENT) NOTE: In accordance with Florida Statutes 5177.081, this joinder may be executed by a separate instrument joining in and ratifying the plat and all dedications and reservations thereon. If this means of joinder is used, such fact must be stated on the plat together with a reference to the location in the public records of such separate instrument. (c) Certificate of Title. A title certification shall appear on the face or first page of each plat and shall state: (1) That the lands as described and shown on the plat are in the name of, and apparent record title is held by, the person, persons, or organizations executing the dedication; and (2) That all taxes have been paid on said property as required by §197.051 Florida Statutes, as amended; and (3) The Official Record Book and page number of all mortgages, liens, or other encumbrances against the land, and the names of all persons holding an interest in such mortgage, lien or JUL 2 0 1983 -39- a00K 54 PAra1 1:5 JU L 2 0 198 DOfi PAGE encumbrance. The title certification shall be an opinion of a Florida attorney-at-law, or the certification of an abstract or title insurance company licensed to do business in Florida. The County reserves the right to require that the title certification be brought current at the time of final plat approval. (d) Certificate of Surveyor. The plat shall contain: (1) the signature, registration number and official seal of the land surveyor, certifying the survey data compiled and shown on the plat complies with all of the requirements of Chapter 177, Florida Statutes, as amended, and this ordinance in the following form: CERTIFICATE OF SURVEYOR KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That the undersigned, being a licensed and registered land surveyor, does hereby certify that on he. completed the survey of the lands as shown in the foregoing plat; that said plat is a correct presentation of the lands therein described and platted or subdivided; that permanent reference monuments have been placed as shown thereon as required by Chapter 177, Florida Statutes and the Indian River County Subdivision and Platting Ordinance; and that said land is located in Indian River County, Florida. Dated Registration No. (2) a statement that permanent reference monuments, "P.R.M.," have been set in compliance with Chapter 177, Florida Statutes, as amended (3) each P.C.P. will be set under the direction and supervision of the surveyor within one (1) year from the date the plat was recorded. When required improvements have been completed prior to the recording of a plat, the certification shall state that each P.C.P. has been set in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and ordinances of Indian River County. When plats are recorded and improvements are to be accomplished under surety posted as provided for by this ordinance, the required improve- ments and surety shall include each P.C.P.. In this case the certification will state that each P.C.P. will be set and the surveyor will file an affidavit of record when set in place. (e) Certificate of Approval by the Board of County Commissioners. The plat shall contain the approval and signature block for the Board of County Commissioners and the acknowledge- ment and signature block of the Clerk of the Circuit Court and the County Attorney. In the event the plat contains dedications to the County, this certificate shall also indicate whether the County accepts in whole or in part the dedications made. The following form is acceptable: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL . BY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THIS IS TO CERTIFY, That on the foregoing plat was approved by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. (Address acceptance of dedications in whole or in part, as appropriate.) Chairman of the Board Attest: Clerk of the Board APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY County Attorney (f) Certificate of Approval by County Administrator. The plat shall contain the approval and signature block of the County Administrator in the following form: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL BY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Examined and Approved Date (g) Clerk's certification. State of Florida County of Indian River I, Clerk of Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida, do hereby certify that I have examined this plat of subdivision and that it complies withallthe requirements of Chapter 177 of the Laws of Florida. This plat filed for record this day of , 19 , and recorded on Page of Plat Book in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida. By: Deputy Clerk Clerk of Circuit Court Indian River County, Fl -41- JUL 2 0 1983 Boor 54 17. r JUL 20 1993 � ► 4 %A18 (h) Instrument Prepared By. The name and address of the natural person who prepared the plat shall be contained on the plat. The name and address shall be in statement form consisting of the words, "This instrument was prepared by (name) , (address) " (i) All signatures required shall be originals on the final plat and shall be made in permanent dark ink acceptable to the Public Works Director 8) Review of Final Plat Documents. The County staff shall review the final plat and documents as to their compliance with the applicable laws. Within fifteen (15) working days after submittal by the applicant, the Community Development Division will report their findings, recommendations and comments to the developer in writing. Reference shall be made to the specific sections and paragraphs with which the final plat documents do not comply. When the final plat documents meet the provisions of all applicable laws, the Community Development Director shall recommend to the County Administrator that the request for Final Plat approval be placed on the agenda of the Board of County Commissioners. If the recommendation is received at least seven (7) working days prior to the next regularly scheduled meeting, the request shall be placed on the agenda for that meeting. 9) Approval by the Board. Upon presentation of infor- mation presented by County staff, the Board shall determine whether the final plat is in substantial conformity with the pre- liminary plat and meets all the requirements of the laws, rules and regulations of Indian River County and after consideration shall approve, postpone for future consideration, approve subject to specified conditions or disapprove for stated reasons. In rejecting any final plat, the Board shall provide reasons for such action making reference to specific sections in these regulations or applicable County policy established by the Board. The Community Development Division shall send a copy of such reasons to the developer within ten (10) working days follow- ing the Commission meeting. The subdivider may comply with the Board's recommendations and re -submit the Final Plat to the Community Development Division for processing as prescribed above. The Commission shall indicate its approval on the Final Plat by signature of the Chairman. 10) The final plat shall then be accepted by the County Clerk for recording in the Circuit Court of Indian River County. After recording, the developer may sell lots. 11) Acceptance of Public Improvements. Approval of said final plat shall constitute acceptance by the County of all public areas or improvements dedicated to Indian River County according to the terms set out in the acceptance block. The owner, however, shall be required to maintain the accepted improvements in good condition for a period of one (1) year from the date of Final Plat approval or one (1) year from the date that a Certificate of Completion is issued by the Community Development Director which- ever is later. At the end of the one (1) year period, the improvements shall be in such condition that they meet the requirements of this ordinance as it existed at the time of approval of the final plat. The County accepts no obligation to perform any act of construction or maintenance except when the obligation is voluntarily and expressly assumed by the County. The County shall withhold all public improvements, including the maintenance of streets, from all subdivisions which have not been accepted in the manner herein provided. No changes, erasures, modifications or revisions shall be made in any final plat after approval unless the plat is first resubmitted for approval. There shall be no reference to any possible reversion of any property in the dedication of a plat. The developer shall pay all of the costs of public improvements and certify that they have been paid at the time of dedication or at the time of issuance of a Certificate of Completion. All mortgagees or others having a lien on the land shall join in or ratify the plat and all dedications thereon executed in the same manner in which deeds are required to be executed and shall certify that all dedicated lands are free from such mortgages or other liens. The County will accept no obligation to repair or maintain navigable canals, waterways or bulkheads. Waterways and canals must be dedicated to and accepted JUL 2 0 1983 -43- �oax 54 119 JUL 2 0 1983 Boa 5.4?'g-40 by a property owner's association. Bulkheads that abut private or public streets must also be accepted for maintenance and repair by the property owners' association. SECTION 8 SECURITY FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS A. Construction Security 1) When construction of required improvements is to be completed following final plat approval, the developer shall, at or prior to final plat approval, execute a contract for construc- tion of the required improvements and post security in an amount equal to one hundred fifteen (115) percent of the estimated total cost of improvements remaining to be constructed. 2) The contract shall be on a form provided by the County and shall obligate the developer to complete all required improvements in accordance with the land development permit, the approved plans and specifications, and County development regula- tions and standards, within a period of one year from the date of final plat approval. 3) The estimated total cost of improvements remaining to be constructed shall include survey, engineering and construc- tion costs and shall be approved by the Public Works Director after review of an itemized cost estimate prepared and certified by the developer's engineer, or an actual contract price or portion thereof for the work remaining, if available. 4) The surety posted to guarantee performance of the contract shall expire, if at all, no less than ninety (90) days beyond the last date for performance established by the contract, or any extension thereof. The surety shall run in favor of the Board of County Commissioners, must be in a form acceptable to the County Attorney, and may be either: (a) a Performance Bond underwritten by a surety insurer authorized to transact such business in this state, or (b) a cash deposit and escrow agreement governing control and use thereof, if approved by the Board M M of County Commissioners, or (c) an.irrevocable letter of credit, if approved by the Board of County Commissioners. 5) For good cause shown, the Board of County Commissioners may in its discretion grant one or more extensions of time for performance of any contract for required improvements, provided the surety supporting such contract remains valid for the required ninety (90) day period following the newly extended time for performance. B. Maintenance Security 1) At such time as the County determines to accept the dedication of any of the public improvements in a subdivision, the developer shall execute an agreement guaranteeing the required improvements against all defects in workmanship or materials, including failure to construct in accordance with approved plans and specifications, for the period of one year from the date of acceptance. 2) The agreement shall be on a form provided by the County and shall be secured by the posting of surety in an amount equal to twenty-five (25) percent of the total actual cost of the improvements covered. The surety shall be in one of the forms specified above for construction security. Surety other than performance bonds shall expire, if at all, no earlier than ninety (90) days following the end of the guarantee period. Performance bonds shall guarantee performance without any time limitation other than the statute of limitation. C. Failure to Perform In the event a developer fails to perform the obliga- tions for construction or maintenance required under the above referenced agreements, the Board may call upon the surety pro- vided, or any portion thereof, to be used for completion of the necessary remaining work. If the surety is exhausted prior to completion of the work necessary to complete the required improve- ments, the developer shall remain liable to the County for any resulting deficiency. The County is not responsible to complete any subdivision with County funds. -45- JUL 2 0 1983 nox 154P . JUL 20 1983 BOOK 5:4. ?Au ?2 D. Release or Reduction of Security 1. No construction security shall be released until a Certificate of Completion has been received, reviewed, and approved by the Community Development Director, and security for maintenance has been established as required above. 2. Reduction in the amount of surety required, other than a final draw or reduction, may be authorized by the Board upon the recommendation of the Public Works Director after completion of any distinct and separable phase or portion of the required improvements. The amount of any given reduction shall not exceed eighty (80) percent of the cost of the completed work, as determined by the Public Works Director following review of a cost estimate for said work prepared and certified by the developer's engineer. A reduction in construction security shall not be construed as acceptance of the improvements, unless expressly stated otherwise by the Board at the time of the reduction. Formal acceptance shall occur as provided elsewhere in this ordinance, and only upon establishment of proper maintenance security. E. Security for Municipalities If the applicant is required to construct a public system which will be accepted by a municipality, the applicant shall furnish the municipality such security as the municipality may require, including security for both performance and maintenance of the system. SECTION 9 A. Improvements Required in all Subdivisions Each subdivision shall contain the following improvements designed and constructed to conform to the requirements and specifications in the applicable laws of Indian River County and the State of Florida: 1) streets 2) easements 3) utilities systems 4) drainage 5) erosion control provisions -46- M 6) stormwater and flood water management system according to Indian River County Ordinance #82-28 7) street signs 8) permanent control points 9) water management facilities 10) tree protection 11) bridges and culverts when necessary 12) filling and drainage as necessary 13) traffic control devices as necessary 14) other improvements deemed necessary by the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Board to comply with the requirements and intent of this ordinance and to protect the public health, safety or general welfare. B. Improvements Required in some Subdivisions Each subdivision shall contain the following improve- ments designed and constructed to conform to the requirements and specifications in the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Indian River County and the State of Florida if required.in the zoning district applicable to the subdivision. 1) bikeways 2) sidewalks 3) alleys 4 ) buffer areas 5) fire hydrants 6) parks and recreational areas 7) beach access areas 8) curbing 9) street lights 10) other improvements deemed necessary by the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Board to comply with the requirements and intent of this ordinance and to protect the public health, safety or general welfare. SECTION 10 DESIGN STANDARDS A. All subdivisions shall be designed in conformity -4 7 - BOflK 54 PAGE 194.113 JUL 2 0 1983- BOO JUL 2 0 1333 54 PAGEr�, . with the requirements of this section. The following Department of Transportation manuals (latest editions) shall serve as reference guidelines only to complement this ordinance and Indian River County Standard Specifications. Subject Drainage Design Construction Techniques Road Design Standards Traffic Generation Department of Transportation Manuals (Latest Editions) Drainage Manual Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction, and Maintenance for Streets and Highways 1965 Highway Capacity Manual Transportation Circular 212, Highway Reserve Board B. Preservation of Natural or Historic Features In all subdivisions, the applicant shall take reasonable measures to preserve all natural, archaeological, and historic features which will add attractiveness.and value to the remainder of the property being subdivided. Some of these features are large trees, water resources, archaeological and historic areas and structures and similar community assets. C. Streets 1) Applicable Standards. All streets, highways and lighting shall be in compliance with the standards in the "Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction, and Maintenance for Streets and Highways," published by the Florida Department of Transportation unless a variance is granted by the Board of County Commissioners. 2) Minimum Street Widths Street Types Right -of -Way Pavement Arterial 120' 48' Primary Collector Streets 100' 48' Secondary Collector Streets 80' 36' Subdivision Feeder Roads 60' 24' Minor or Residential Streets 60' 20' (with swale drainage) Minor or Residential Streets 50' 20' (closed drainage, curb and gutter) I The Board may require the increase of right-of-way and pavement widths if it finds that the modification in width is con- sistent with the projected traffic needs and good engineering practice. No variances will be granted on minimum right-of-way widths for public streets. 3) Relation to Existing Streets (a) Adjoining Areas. The pattern of streets in new subdivisions shall provide for the continuation of existing streets from adjoining areas, or for their proper projection where adjoining land is not subdivided. (b) Adjacent Areas. Where street extensions into adjacent undeveloped land are necessary to insure a coordinated street system, provisions for such future street or streets shall be made. (c) Abutting Arterials. Where a subdivision abuts or contains an existing or proposed arterial street, special pro- visions shall be made to minimize vehicular traffic noise to resi- dential sites. The special provisions shall include one or more of the following: (1) marginal access streets (2) Buffer Zones. Additional lot depth of twenty-four (24) feet plus a berm and plant screening where lots are to be backed to the arterial. The berm shall be constructed with a.slope not greater than 33%, and the plant screening must be of a type approved in the landscape ordinance and must be at least twenty-four (24) inches in height when planted and, including the height of the berm, reach six (6) feet in three years. Screening foliage must produce a solid screen and be of the type that will fill in at ground level at maturity. Plantings shall be on -49- JUL 01983 BOOK 54 PAGE r•. Bw� 51, PAGE S t no more than four (4) foot centers. Adequate irrigation shall be provided together with maintenance provisions by a homeowner's association. (3) solid masonry wall, at least six (6) feet in height, above the mean average eleva- tion levation of the sites. (4) the Planning and Zoning Commission may require additional or alternative provi- sions as warranted by special circum- stances. (d) Half -streets. The creation of half -streets is prohibited except where a previously platted half -street abuts the subject tract in which case the unplatted one-half street shall be created. (e) Intersections. (1) All streets shall be arranged, if possible, to intersect at right angles. (2) Curved streets shall have.an essentially straight tangent, at intersections, of at least one hundred (100) feet. (3) Intersections on arterial or collector routes shall have acceleration, deceleration and turning lanes if found to be necessary by the County Public Works Director. (4) Intersections of more than two streets at one point are prohibited. (5) Street jogs with centerline off -sets of less than two hundred and fifty (250) feet shall not be allowed unless approved by the Public Works Director. (6) Local street intersections along collector streets as identified on the County Thoroughfare Plan shall be no closer together than three hundred thirty (330) feet or as approved by the Public Works Division. (7) The first point of access to a marginal access road from a primary collector or arterial street shall be at least three hundred and thirty (330) feet from the intersecting right-of-way lines of arterials as shown on.the Indian River County Thoroughfare Plan with subsequent intervening access points being at least six hundred and sixty (660) feet from the intersecting right-of-way lines, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director and the Community Development Director. (8) Median access points on arterial roads shall be allowed only at intersections of other arterial roads or of collector roads. Deceleration lanes may be required. Additional access points may be permitted if deemed necessary by the Public Works Division. (9) On any arterial or primary collector road, the required road right-of-way width may be increased by twelve (12) feet, if deemed necessary by the Public Works Director, within one hundred fifty (150) feet of the intersection with another arterial or primary collector to permit proper intersection design or improvements. (f) Dedication to Public Required. All streets shall be either dedicated to the public or dedicated to and maintained by a private homeowner's association. If a street proposed for dedication to the County in a new subdivision will -51- „6Glflf( 5 FAGS I c 9 JUL 0 1993 J 54 PAuJUL 20 1983 d c ` S be a continuation of an existing dedicated and accepted street, the entire street right-of-way for the proposed street shall be dedicated to the public and platted with the subdivision. 4) Dead-end Streets and Cul-de-sacs (a) Dead-end streets or cul-de-sacs with one end permanently closed, shall not exceed five hundred (500) feet in length unless the lots are more than one acre in size or as approved by the Community Development Director. They shall be measured from the center of the cul-de-sac to the centerline of the intersecting street. (b) All cul-de-sacs shall terminate with a circular right-of-way having a minimum outside diameter of one hundred (100) feet and a pavement radius of no less than seventy-five (75) feet in diameter. If closed drainage is constructed, the right-of-way may be reduced to eighty-eight (88) feet. (c) Where a street is to be temporarily dead -ended at a property line and is to be continued when adjoining property is subdivided, a temporary "T" type turn -around shall be pro- vided. 5) Intersection Radii (a) At intersections, rights-of-way shall be joined by arcs tangent to the right-of-way lines and having a radius of at least twenty-five (25) feet. (b) At the end of a cul-de-sac, the right-of-way line on the outside of the turning circle shall be joined to the right-of-way line along the street by arcs having a radius of at least twenty-five (25) feet. 6) (a) Street Side Swales. All swales in street right-of-way shall: (1) comply with standard County specifications; (2) leave at least eight (8) feet of shoulder width on each side of pavement; and (3) be designed to accumulate and carry water pursuant to a stormwater and flood protection plan in a manner that will not flood street pavement. (b) Easements to Access Retention and Detention Basins. When the Flood Protection and Stormwater Management Plan calls for retention or detention areas, easements shall be dedi- cated around the perimeter for ingress and egress for maintenance in accordance with the Indian River County Stormwater and Flood Protection Ordinance No. 82-28. 7) Median Divider Strips. Median divider strips shall only be allowed on subdivision feeder roads, provided the right- of-way is expanded in an amount corresponding to the width of the median. If mountable curbs are to be used, the median shall not contain plantings, ornaments or decorations that create a solid obstacle. 8) Street Names. New streets which are extensions of existing streets shall bear the name of the existing street. All others shall be named with the approval of the Indian River County Planning and Zoning Department in conformance with County policy. In no case shall a name for a proposed street duplicate or closely approximate an existing street name. The Community Development Division shall notify all interested agencies of street name changes or new streets including the postal service, the Sheriff's Department and 911 Emergency System. 9) Traffic Control Devices. The design of traffic con- trol devices shall be in conformance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and shall be provided as required by the Public Works Division. D. Bikeways 1) Locations. Bikeways shall be installed on all arterial and primary collector routes and along all streets desig- nated by the Community Development Division as school access corridors and as specified in the zoning regulation district applicable to the parcel: With the approval of the County Commission, a sufficient amount may be escrowed with the County to complete the required bikeway. 2) Specifications. Wherever possible, bikeways shall: (a) be bikepaths (b) be eight (8) -feet wide (minimum) L 1983 53 60QK 4 PAGE JUL 2 0 1983 ac (c) be located on one side of the street (d) be separated from the street pavement by a ten (10) foot wide safety strip (minimum); if protected by curb and gutter, they shall be separated by at least six (6) feet (e) have a curb cut and ramp at least six (6) feet wide at all intersections (f) be constructed in accordance with the "Bicycle Facilities Planning and Design Manual) (1982 Revision) prepared by the Florida Department of Transportation. 3) Alternative Specifications. Where any of the above specifications are impractical or impossible to implement, the applicant, with the approval of the Board, may substitute suitable alternative specifications described in the referenced Design Manual. 4) Identification. Bikeways shall be posted or identified by permanent markings as follows: Area Characteristics Commercial Sign Placement, Pavement Marking Criteria At each intersecting street and thereafter every 500 feet Residential At each street intersection and thereafter every 1000 feet Rural At each street intersection and thereafter every 2000 feet 5) Construction Prior to Final Inspection. Bikeways shall be installed prior to final inspection of the subdivision improvements. The Board shall have the discretion to grant the applicant a two (2) year period after final inspection of subdivi- sion improvements to construct bikeways if the applicant posts construction security in the amount of one hundred fifteen (115) percent of the construction costs. E. Sidewalks 1) Locations. Sidewalks shall be provided on one side of all arterial and collector streets and school access routes, and both sides of minor and marginal access streets located within -54- a subdivision as set forth in the zoning regulation district applicable to the property. 2) Specifications. All sidewalks shall: (a) be at least four (4) feet wide (b) be located outside of the roadside recovery area unless protective devices are provided (i.e. non -mountable curbs) (c) have a curb cut and ramp for wheelchairs at all intersections as specified in Indian River County Standard Specifications. (d) be constructed in accordance with Indian River County Standard Specifications. The Board may require additional right-of-way and pavement at schools, shopping centers, parks and the like to be provided and dedicated to the County as may be necessary to promote safety, convenience and the general welfare. 3) Construction Prior to Final Inspection. Sidewalks shall be installed prior to final inspection of the subdivision improvements. The Board shall have the discretion to grant the applicant a two (2) year period, after final inspection of subdivision improvements, to construct sidewalks if the applicant posts construction security in the amount of one hundred and fifteen (115) percent of the construction costs. F. Blocks 1) Considerations. In the determination of block size and shape, consideration should be given to: (a) the special needs of the use contemplated (b) the Zoning and Comprehensive Plan requirements (c) the need for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of vehicular and pedestrian traff is 2) Size (a) Length. Not less than five hundred (500) feet nor more than fifteen hundred (1500) feet between adjacent right-of-ways (b) Width. Sufficient to allow two (2) tiers of -55- JUL 42 0 1983 PAGF19 T BGiOK 54 PAGE l- JUL 2 0 1983 lots on each block. Single tier blocks may be permitted only where they are used to separate residential development from non-residential uses or from arterials, waterways, parks and the like and proper buffering is installed in accordance with Section 10 (C) (3) (c) (2). G. Lots 1) Size (a) The area and dimensions of all lots will con- form to the requirements of the Indian River County Zoning Ordinance and to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. (b) Corner lots shall have a width equal to the width required by the Zoning Ordinance for internal lots, plus the difference between the required front yard width and required side yard width. (c) Substandard lots or remnants of land are pro- hibited unless dedicated and accepted as parks, environmentally sensitive areas, buffer zones, or other use specifically approved by the Board. 2) Shape of Lots (a) Side lot lines shall be straight and essen- tially perpendicular to straight street lines and radial to curved street lines, unless the relationship of existing or planned streets combined with the size of the property in question would allow a superior design not utilizing straight lot lines. (b) All lots must be of sufficient area and dimen- sions to permit its use in full conformance with the existing Zoning Regulations and Land Use Plan. (c) Flag lots will be avoided whenever possible. 3) Access to Lots (a) Every lot in a subdivision shall have direct vehicular access to a dedicated local or M M marginal access street which has been accepted and maintained by Indian River County or by a property owner's association. (b) Access points to all lots shall be: (1) at least thirty (30) feet from the right-of-way line of the nearest inter- secting street. (2) at least one hundred seventy -.five (175) feet from the nearest right-of-way line of the intersection of a collector or higher classification street with another collector or higher classification street. (c) Access to any lot in a subdivision from an arterial or primary or secondary collector street is prohibited and limited access easements shall be provided along such streets. Subdivisions will be designed to provide access to lots by use of local streets. (d) Double frontage lots may only be created where they front on and access a local street and the rear of the lot shall be buffered as required in Section 10 (C) (3) (C) (2) of this ordinance and limited access easements shall be provided along such streets. (e) The cord distance of lots that abut a cul-de-sac shall be no less than thirty (30) feet. H. Utilities 1) Easements shall be: (a) located on interior side of the front property line, centered on rear or side lot lines, or as otherwise approved by the Utilities Director; (b) if adjoining the boundary, located completely within the proposed subdivision and have the -57- 54 PAGF133 ao 5, PAGE I full width required. 2) Utilities shall be: (a) installed underground except for the usual "on ground" appurtenances used as part of the underground systems, provided the "on ground" appurtenances are so located as not to constitute any type of hazard (b) utilities other than water and sewer are exempt from underground installation requirements in rural areas or where such installation is not practical (c) constructed in the easements or right-of-ways provided for the particular utility (d) Work is to be scheduled so that all underground work is completed or provisions made that no finished construction will be disturbed to install underground services. All underground improvements installed for the purpose of future service connections shall be properly capped and backfilled. (e) Utility location shall not conflict with the operation or maintenance of the drainage system. 3) Subdivisions without public water or sewer systems. Subdivisions that do not have public water or sewer systems shall have a uniform plan for the location of septic tanks and wells, which shall be established by deed restriction and submitted in accordance with Section 7 F (6). I. Alleys 1) Dimensions (a) Width of right-of-way shall be twenty (20) feet. (b) Width of pavement shall be eighteen (18) feet. (c) Crowns may be either raised or inverted as required by the relationship to the drainage plan with a transverse slope of three-eighths M Ow 8- M (3/8) inch per one foot. (d) Grades shall be between three -tenths (.3) and five (5) percent unless otherwise approved by the County Engineer. 2) Intersecting alleys and sharp changes in alignment of alleys are prohibited. 3) Dead-end alleys are prohibited. 4) Construction and materials. All construction shall meet the requirements of the manual of the Indian River County Standard Specifications. J. Walls and Fences 1) General. All walls or fences contructed along any perimeter boundary abutting any right-of-way shall; (a) be located on private property (b) extend the entire length of the property line unless a landscaped berm is installed pursuant to Section 10 (C) (3) (C) (2). (c) be of one architectural design (d) not exceed the height specified in the Zoning District Regulations (e) be constructed of essentially maintenance free materials (f) be constructed in accordance with County con- struction codes. 2) At street intersections walls, fences, plants or sight obstructions of any kind over two (2) feet in height, are prohibited within the sight distance as provided by the Department of Transportation Green Book. K. Waterways. All waterways and waterbodies shall be designed and constructed as specified in the Indian River County Stormwater Management and Flood Control Ordinance unless otherwise approved by the Board of County Commissioners. L. Erosion Control. All easements, unpaved right-of- way areas, and dedicated tracts on the plat shall be grassed in accordance with the Standard Specification of Indian River County. Erosion control facilities such as headwalls, retaining walls, —59— JUL 2 0 199 Psc 8QIIK �� ry JUL 20 1983 I 60% 5:4 PAU 6 . etc. shall be installed where necessary. Slopes steeper than three (3) horizontal to one (1) vertical shall be solid sod and pegged. Dedicated County road right-of-way shall be restored with solid sod if disturbed during construction. M. Bridges. All bridges shall.: 1) be designed in general accordance with the current standards and practices of the Department of Transportation 2) be designed for Department of Transportation's H -20-S16-44 loading standard 3) be constructed of reinforced concrete. Other low maintenance materials may be used if approved by the Public Works Director and the Board of County Commissioners. 4) include provisions for utility installation 5) have a clear road width, between curbs, of two (2) feet on each side in excess of the pavement width 6) include a continuation of the sidewalk -bikeway plan established for the right-of-way 7) include adequate erosion protection. N. Storm and Floodwater Systems. A stormwater manage- ment system or, if applicable, a floodwater protection-stormwater management system shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Indian River County Stormwater Management and Floodwater Protection Ordinance. 0. Signs. All street signs erected on the subdivision site shall conform to the requirements of the Indian River County Sign Ordinance. . P. Planned Developments. Planned Developments, if approved by the Board, shall be in conformance with the require- ments of the Indian River County Zoning Regulations and the Land Use Element of the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan. Q. Fire Hydrants. Fire hydrant systems shall be pro- vided in all subdivisions served by a water system. The hydrants. and water supply systems shall be located, designed and installed in conformance with the rules of all applicable regulatory M M M agencies and the fire district in which the property exists and shall be spaced to have a five hundred (500) foot radius of cover- age. R. Access to Water. Every subdivision that fronts upon the Atlantic Ocean, the intracoastal waterway, the Indian River or other natural water body or course for a distance of six hundred .(600) lineal feet shall dedicate to the public forever a minimum of one fifteen (15) foot access easement for each one-quarter (1/4) mile or portion thereof to the water for use by the general public and shall construct thereon a walkway from the nearest publicly dedicated street to the water. The County may waive the dedication of the easement in return for the dedication of the fair market value of such easement, to be used for capital improvements to the park system. (1) Where any portion of a proposed subdivision abuts a coastal beach and where the subdivision street pattern is an essentially rectilinear grid system, the fifteen (15) foot beach access points shall be a continuation of the streets in the subdivision and shall extend to the mean high water line. (2) In all cases, the developer may elect, with the approval of the Community Development Director, or the Planning and Zoning Commission may require that all or part of the required access points be combined into one or more beachfront access points or parks of a design approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. (3) All access points will be paved and land- scaped with adequate irrigation. (4) All access points and beachfront parks will be provided with dune crossover walks approved by the Public Works Division. (5) The developer shall receive a credit against any park and recreation fee imposed by the County against the project for the provision of JUL 2 0 11983 Box ! . ;4 PAGE: JUL 2 0 1993 PAGE I "s these access points. 3) Construction Beyond Coastal Construction Control Line Prohibited. No improvements, other than dune crossovers, may be constructed eastward of the coastal construction control line. S. Canals. and Waterways Width and Depth: The excavation of navigable canals or waterways from submerged lands in Class II waters, aquatic pre- serves or the boundaries of the Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge is prohibited. When permitted, canals and waterways shall be the minimum width necessary to accomplish the purpose for which they are constructed. An applicant desiring to construct a canal or waterway must affirmatively show a design that will prevent stagnation and eutrophication of the system, provide sufficient flushing and maintain the ambient water quality. The excavation of any such canal or waterway shall not be for the purpose of obtaining fill. T. Bulkheads Bulkheading is not permitted unless the applicant can affirmatively show to the satisfaction of the Board of County Commissioners that the project will not damage the environment or adjoining properties. The applicant shall follow the variance procedure of Section 11. SECTION 11 VARIANCES A. General. Where the Board finds that undue hardship or unreasonable practical difficulty may result from strict com- pliance with this ordinance, the Board may approve a waiver to the requirements of this ordinance if the waiver does not compromise the public interest. B. Conditions. The Board shall not approve a waiver unless it finds all of the following: (1) The particular physical conditions, shape, or topography of the specific property involved would cause an undue hardship to the applicant if the strict letter of the ordinance is carried out; do2- M (2) The granting of the waiver will not cause injury to adjacent property or any natural resource; (3) The conditions, upon which a request for waiver are based, are unique to the property for which the waiver is sought and are not generally applicable to other property in the adjacent areas and do not result from actions of the applicant; and, (4) The waiver is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Indian River County Zoning Ordinance, the Indian River County Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and this ordinance. If the Board approves a waiver, it may attach any such conditions to the waiver as will assure that the waiver will not result in non-compliance with the intent and purpose of this ordinance. Violation of any such condition shall be deemed a violation of this ordinance. C. Application for Variance. (1) An applicant seeking a variance from this ordinance shall submit a written request together with such fee as the County Commission shall establish by resolution, to the Community Development Division. The request shall address the conditions stated in Section 11 B (1) - (4) and shall state the reasons and facts supporting the variance. Upon receipt of the request the Commission will be notified and shall schedule a public hearing to consider the request. (2) Courtesy -Notice. The public hearing shall be adver- tised fifteen (15) days in advance. All property owners listed on the latest tax .roll within three hundred (300) feet of the prop- erty on which a variance is requested shall be notified in writing by the Community Development Division by U. S. Mail. Lack of a property owner's receipt of such notice shall not be grounds to postpone or set aside any variance granted. JUL 2 019083 -63- BOOK FnE139 JU L 2 0 9983 5.4PAGE_ SECTION 12 PENALTY Violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed FIVE HUNDRED ($500.00) Dollars or by imprisonment in County jail not to exceed sixty (60) days or by both such fine and imprisonment. SECTION 13 REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS All previous ordinances, resolutions, or motions of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida which conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. All Special Acts of the legislature applying only to the unincorporated portion of Indian River County and which conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. Indian River County Ordinance No. 75-3 as amended from time to time is hereby repealed in its entirety. All subdivisions submitted to and accepted by Indian River County as of the date of adoption of this ordinance may be reviewed under the provisions of former Ordinance No. 75-3. SECTION 14 ADDENDUM AND STANDARDS The addenda attached hereto are illustrations of the substantive requirements contained An this ordinance. The Indian River County Standard Specifications shall be adopted and amended from time to time by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners. SECTION 15 INCORPORATION IN CODE The provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated into the County Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or other appropriate word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such intentions. SECTION 16 SEVERABILITY If any section, part of a sentence, paragraph, phrase or " 4- M word of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitu- tional, inoperative or void, such holdings shall not affect the remaining.portions hereof and it shall be construed to have been the legislative intent to pass this ordinance without such uncon- stitutional, invalid or inoperative part. SECTION 17 EFFECTIVE DATE The provisions of this ordinance shall become effective upon receipt from the Florida Secretary of State of official acknowledgment that this ordinance has been filed with the Department of State. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 20th day of July , 1983. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY By 4 RICHARD N. BIRD Chairman Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida this 4th day of August , 1983. Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State received on this 9th day of August , 1983, at 2;00 A.M./P.M. and filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. APPROVED r TO LEGAL S F CI,E By ARMY BRAN .(County Attorney -65- JUL 2 0 19A. 3- to 54 PAGE141 SIDEWALK & CURB TRANSITION SIDEWALK W I DTH IN FEET WIDTH MINUS SIDEWALK & CUR TRANSITION 54 FAC 14 SIDEWALK WIDTH IN FEET W a 0 ca— N_ d ' WIDTH MINUS CURB CUT RAMPS SIDEWALK B BIKEPATH WIDTH VARIES logo 0,4000ko I FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WIDTH VARIES TEMPORARILY DEAD -ENDED "T TYPE TURN AROUND . 'JUL 20 1983 54 PAu 143 i BODES 4 PAG€ 144 rLAN 1 INV our ren SUFFER ZONES REAR PROPERTY LINE TAKU t% S1 Ut YARD WIDTH. CORNIER UOTS REQUIRED SIDE YARD JU.L 2:0 :1983 aao 5� Pac .�. y REAR PROPERTY LINE TAKU t% S1 Ut YARD WIDTH. CORNIER UOTS REQUIRED SIDE YARD JU.L 2:0 :1983 aao 5� Pac .�. r JUL 2 0 gaSJ 13 Jim 5.4 PAGE ��z CUL—DE—SACS 88' R/W WITH CLOSED DRAINAGE" REQUEST FOR RELOCATION OF WABASSO POST OFFICE The Board reviewed staff memo as follows; TO: ©ATE: FILE:- - The honorable Members of July 14, 1983 the Board of County Commissioners SUBJECT: RELOCATION OF WABASSO POST OFFICE FROM:Patrick. Bruce Ring, AI EFERENCES: Wabasso PO Community Development iv. Director WORKB It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting on July 20, 1983. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS Indian River County has received a request from the United States Postal Service to evaluate the feasibility of relocating the Wabasso Post Office within the general area of the unincorporated town. (See Attachment #1.) The specific site - =area is bordered on the north by Durrance Road and the south by 79th Street, lying between the railroad tracks and the Indian River. (See Attachment #2.) The preferred site area is comprised of over 900 acres of property situated on either side of a two mile section of U. S. Highway #1. This represents eight (8) zoning districts and three (3) Land Use.Designations. The proposed use is compatible with the applicable Land Use designations; however, three (3) of the eight (8) zoning districts do not cite public buildings as an allowable use. Selection of property within the mobile home or industrial zoning districts would require the approval of a rezoning request. Construction of a post office facility does require site plan approval as per Indian River County Zoning Code. As des:1.gnated by the Comprehensive Plan, a development proposal for this type of project should provide for convenient access to the transportation system while generating minimal environmental impact. Taking into consideration the proposed general location, these performance standards should be attainable. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends concurrence with the proposal to relocate the Wabasso Post Office within the aforementioned preferred site area. 51 Boa 54 Pace 14,7 JUL 2 0 1983 600x.. 54 PAu 148. Commissioner Scurlock questioned Postmaster Charles Coker as to the attitude of the Wabasso community towards the proposed change, and Mr. Coker believed everyone is in favor of it, particularly because of the parking. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, to concur with the proposed relocation of the Wabasso Post Office as described. Some discussion ensued in regard to zoning, and Community Development Director King informed Mr. Coker if a site were to be selected with either mobile home or industrial zoning, it would necessitate applying for a rezoning. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously 4-0. REQUEST BY HIGHWAY PATROL FOR -RADAR EQUIPMENT The Board reviewed the following letter from Trooper R. W. Blumenthal: 52 DIVISION OF FLORIDA HIGHWAY PATROL Troop K - Orlando DIS, FIBUTM L18T Commissioners ?r� July 5, 1983 Administrator �--� Attorney Personnel _ Public Works _ Board of County Commissioners Community Dev.Utilities _ Indian River County 1840 25th Street, Suite N-158 Finance Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Other Gentlemen: This will serve as our request for placement on the agenda for your meeting on July, 20, 1983. We wish to ask the County Commission to purchase two moving radar units for the use of our troopers assigned to Indian River County on the Florida Turnpike. Currently, there is only one state-owned radar unit for the use of five troopers. It is estimated two units would cost approximately $3,000. Even with this shortage of equipment,'our troopers have written over 400 traffic citations in Indian River County on the Turnpike this year to date. With two more radar units, our troopers would be able to be even more effective in reducing the accident rate on the Turnpike. Assuming an average fine of $25.00 per citation, it is pro- jected that the Turnpike Troopers woulay for the tt radar units within two months. �� jj > 1 Si �> . W. B Trooper i I ' JI/,,'9 oo Florida Highway Patrol -Troop K co Post Office Box 13527, Pinecastle. Station co,, ^� Orlando Florida 32859 Trooper Blumenthal came before the Board to make a presentation, noting that they are requesting the County to assist them in enforcing the law within the confines of the Turnpike. He reported that there are six troopers who work in the Indian River/Okeechobee area and only one radar unit. He then cited figures relating to accidents and fines in the nine mile area of the Turnpike within Indian River County over the last six month period, which he believed represented about $9,200 in revenue to the county. Trooper Blumenthal pointed out that with only one radar unit, they lose two hours a day transferring 53 U U L 2 0 1983 -Bax 54 PAu 14,9 J U L c B` 600K 4 PACE 150 it, and he estimated that this adds up to over $8,000 in lost revenue over a year's time. Commissioner Lyons felt there had been a problem with the courts accepting the radar evidence, and Trooper Blumenthal explained how training standards have developed and that the new radars are constructed to state specifications. All troopers on the Turnpike have been certified in the use of radar equipment. Discussion continued as to whether two units would be a fair share in relation to the miles of patrol in other countries, and Trooper Blumenthal stated they are asking Okeechobee County for one unit. Budget Officer Barton informed that Board that out of a $25.00 fine the County receives about $11.00. Commissioner Scurlock wished to know why the Turnpike Authority cannot generate some of these revenues. He did not feel the State Highway Patrol is being adequately funded by the State. Trooper Blumenthal commented that the State has had its own budget problems, and they redlined the radars. He noted that the Turnpike is controlled by the DOT. Discussion ensued about the various county land areas covered by the troopers and the fact that our ambulance squad goes out to the Turnpike; also the problem caused by the fact that the Turnpike winds in and out of Okeechobee and Indian River Counties. Mr. Barton informed the Board that St. Lucie County bought 4 units with the provision that they only be used in St. Lucie County. Osceola County purchased five. After further discussion, it was generally agreed to approve one unit. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the purchase of one radar unit 54 for the use of troopers assigned to Indian River County for the Florida Turnpike, the funds to come from federal revenue sharing; directed the Chairman to write the appropriate state agencies in regard to our concern about our needs being met; and approved the following budget amendment: Budget amendmcrt Fede at Revenue Sharing jon punchaze of one radar unit Aon Ftonida Highway PatAot - jund6com.ing jnom the jottow.cng accounts: 102-114-513-66.49 (Other Equipment) Inu ea a 1,395. 102-000-332-10.00 ( Fed. Revenue Shaming) Inenease 1,395. BEATTY MINOR SITE PLAN APPEAL Administrator Wright requested that this item be continued over to the next regular meeting of the Board. The hour of 2:00 P.M. having passed the Deputy. Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: 55 EMU 4 Pp 151 JUL 20 1983 VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily 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 daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a in the matter of P,,yiC in the lished in said newspaper in the issues of 7'' x\4 Court, was pub- Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; 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 advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. 22 Sworn to and subscribed befo met g4i in -day of ��� A.D. 19 0J r tsi Manager) (SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian aver County„Florida) 600K 54 PAS 52 - NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING APPEAL OF SITE , PLAN DISAPPROVAL On June 23, 1983, the Planning and Zoning Commission of Indian River County, Florida, denied the request of Thomas Beatty for site plan approval of a 8 -toot fence. The Board of County Commissioners will con- duct a public hearing, regarding the appeal by i the applicant of the decision by the Planning and Zoning Commission to recommend disapproval of the site plan request. The publich hearing, at which parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be.heard, will be held by said. Board of County Commissioners in the. County Commission Chambers of the County Administra-: tion Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, .fitly 20, 1883. at. 2.00 P.M. If any person decides to appeal any decision made on the above matter, he will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purposes, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which includes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. Indian River County Board of County Commissioners By-.-s-Richard N. Bird, Chairman July 7, 14, 1983. Chairman Bird opened the hearing to the public. wished to be heard. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unani- mously (4-0) continued the Beatty Minor Site Plan Appeal until August 3, 1983, at 10:00 A.M. APPEAL OF BOISJOLIE MINOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL No one The hour of 2:00 P.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: 56 VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published 'Daily NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINQ REGAttDINGi APPEAL OF SITE Vero Reach, Indian River County, Florida On June 9, 983 � an^ Commission of Indian River County, and Zoning. da, Proved the requesi of Re •Florifor site Ian a t Bolen fe ce site' Plan COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Of County Commissioners noj ers will con-. duct a public hearing, regarding the appeal Before the undersigned authority g y personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath the Forest Park 11 Property pwr,arg Association by, I the decision by the Planning and Zoning says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published Commis -1 cion to recommend approval of the site plan re -i at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being q°� andel at- shall have which partiesin In -i heard, will be hold by said Board of County Com- a ofi the County the mCommission a Building, located da at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on weds nesday, July 20, 1983, at 2:00 P.M. in the matter of,c' d 2�gC7/'pj/Ll /� If any person derides to appeal any d®gaionl made on the above matter, he will need a record Of the proceedings, and for such Purposes, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of th proceedings is made, which includes testimor>y� and evidence upon which the appeal is based Indian River County in the Court, was pub- Board of County Commissioners J ..— By: s -Richard N. Bird, Chairman July 7.14. 1M. lished in said newspaper in the issues ofd 7, jJ Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published. in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, fora period of .one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; 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 I advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Al Sworn to and subscribed- aefor ane thi day of ,r 6_ A.D. 19 usiness Mer) (SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River Oodinty, Florida)',' Planning & Zoning Manager Bob Keating reviewed his memo and staff recommendation, as well as letter of protest from the Forest Park II Property Owners Association, as follows: 57 i Do . 54 FAu' 53 JUL 2 0 663 am 5:4 pace 154 TO: The Honorable Members DATE: July 1,1983 FELE: of the Board of SP -83-04-007 County Commissioners FROM: DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:SUBJECT: CT: APPEAL OF BOISJOLIE 4�1 MINOR SITE PLAN `L7 APPROVAL Patrick Bruce King, ICP Community Developm4ht Director REFERENCES:. Bob Keating, AICP.Boisjolie Planning & Zoning Mgr. WORKS It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting on July 20, 1983. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS Mr. & Mrs. Raymond Boisjolie, 160 East Forest Drive, obtained a zoning permit on December 3, 1982 from Marianne Smith, Zoning Department Secretary. Acting as a zoning technician, Mrs. Smith issued a permit to the Boisjolie's which allowed for a six foot fence in the rear and the side yards of the property. Since Section 25(i) of the Zoning Code allows side yard fences of five feet or less and requires Planning and Zoning Commission approval of fences exceeding that height, the permit in question was issued incorrectly. On December 9, 1982, the Zoning Department received a complaint regarding the Boisjolie fence. According to this complaint, the fence was seven feet high and erected without a zoning permit. Upon inspection by the zoning staff, the fence was found to be in compliance with the permit. Subsequent to that inspection, the Zoning Department received a letter from residents of the Forest Park II Subdivision requesting that the fence permit be reconsidered since the fence exceeds the height limitations of the County zoning ordinance and lacks visual compatibility with the rest of the community. An inspection of the site by Howard Pautzke, Zoning Inspector, found that the fence was constructed in a designated easement. On December 20, 1982, Mr. Pautzke sent a letter to Mr. Boisjolie, requesting that the fence be removed from the easement. That matter, however, was resolved when Mr. Boisjolie executed an Easement Preservation Removal Agreement, stating that the fence will be removed at his expense if it becomes necessary. Since the Zoning Department found that Mr. Boisjolie had complied with the provisions of his permit, the staff determined that he was entitled to retain his fence, as constructed. On February 16, 1983, a petition from the residents of the Forest Park II Subdivision, stating that procedural requirements of the County's Zoning Code were not followed in the Boisjolie case, was received by the Community Development Division. Subsequently, Mr. Edward Struxness, 580 East Forest Park Trail, submitted an appeal of the Zoning Department's decision to allow Mr. Boisjolie to maintain his fence. This appeal was scheduled for hearing by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals at its meeting of April 11, 1983. 58 The Board of Adjustment and Appeals upheld the appeal of Mr. Struxness and referred the matter to the Planning and Zoning Commission for resolution. In compliance with the Board of Adjustment and Appeal's decision, Mr. Boisjolie submitted a minor site plan application requesting approval of the existing six foot side yard fence and also requesting approval of an additional 66 feet of side yard fence to be constructed at six feet. A letter to the Community Development Division from the Forest Park II Property Owners Association recommended that the Planning and Zoning Commission deny the Boisjolie minor site plan request for approval of a six foot side yard fence. At its regular meeting on June 9, 1983, the Planning and Zoning Commission considered the Boisjolie minor site plan request. By a 4-1 vote, the Commission approved Mr. Boisjolie's request to retain the existing six foot side yard fence, but it denied his request to construct an additional 66 feet of side yard -fence at a six foot height. The Planning and Zoning Commission required that this additional section of fence not exceed the five foot side yard height limitation specified in Section.25(i) of the Zoning Code. In approving the existing six foot side yard fence, the Commission cited visual compatibility, the legal ramifications of estoppel, the administrative error of the Zoning Department, and the execution of an easement preservation ,agreement as reasons for approval. On June 13, 1983, the Forest Park II -Property Owners Association submitted an appeal of the June 9, 1983, decision of the .Planning and Zoning Commission approving Mr. Boisjolie's request for approval of an existing six foot side yard fence. The basis of this appeal is the property owners' contention that the fence is unattractive and visually incompatible with the rest of the community. It is the position of the Property Owners Association that, since the residents of the community have found the fence to be visually incompatible, the Planning and Zoning Commission should not have approved Mr. Boisjolie's after -the -fact request for construction of a six foot side yard fence. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS As required by Section 25(i) of the Zoning Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission established that the fence was visually compatible with the community. Other considerations involved. with approving the Boisjolie fence request included the administrative error involved with the issuance of the original permit and the possibility that the County would be estopped from enforcing any order to reduce the height of the fence. Besides approving Mr. Boisjolie's request for the six foot side yard fence, the only other alternative available to the Planning and Zoning Commission was to deny the request. Even if the Commission had taken that action and required Mr. Boisjolie to remove the six foot fence erected in accordance with an incorrectly issued permit, Mr. Boisjolie would have been permitted, by right, to erect a five foot fence, Iconstructed with any material other than barb wire, in his side yard. Since the effect of denying the request would have been to require Mr. Boisjolie to reduce the height of his.side yard fence by only one foot and because the Commission determined that such action would not grant the property owners the relief that they wanted, the Commission approved the fence request. RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners deny the appeal and uphold the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision on the Boisjolie minor site plan request. W JUL 2 0 193 6001( 4 PAGE M JUL 2 0 1983 L aox 54 pAu 1,56 sj►snfe IV '"/ � FOREST PARK II PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION v Post Office Boz 650073 Z1 8m a n z .� Vero Bead}, 1 &5.0073 Mt T77TUT'0'`i LlS� N p ACTIC:j. UG o o.e;s?a J Administrator ;io wune 13 83 A.Tinistmtor Attorney Attorney y2�tiPersonnel 9Zc7,ti l — •arsennel public Works Mr. Richard Bird�:� Works Chair:mn Indian River Boar$•u&?%' Community Dev.-�.-- Lc t ;;unity Dev, County Commissioners Utilities 1840 25th Street UtiiaiCis • - _ FinancY.C%j --�-`, Vero Beach, Florida�32960 Finance QttserRes Raymond Boisjolie - Minor Site Plan Approval^w:" QED 160 East Forest Park Drive, Forest Park Subdivis� cosy as>onq', � O:Stm Dear Mr. Birds �6+_ At the regular meeting of the Indian River County Planning and Zoning Commission, June 9, 1983, the Commission approved for Raymond Boisjolie, 160 East Forest Park Drive, a six-foot high wooden fence on one side and the rear of his property and a five-foot high wooden fepcd Our association is aggrieved by this approval and hereby requests an opportunity to appeal the decision to your Commission. This matter has been a fiasco from the beginning. Mr. Boisjolie was apparently granted a "permit" to build a six-foot fence around his property in violation of the County Ordinance which restricts height for some sections of the fence to no more than five feet. This "permit" was granted by some person "at the secretarial level" in the Community Devel- opment Department and the matter was not referred to the Planning and Zoning Commission until after the fence was two-thirds built and cries of outrage were heard from Mr. Boisjolie's neighbors. It should be understood that this is not an attractive fence. It is six feet high,.a stockade fence of the industrial type. It is weather - stained and unpainted. It does not remotely resemble any other structure erected in our community. The overwhelming consensus of the community is that the fence is an eyesore. Their reason was apparently that n s discusses visual compatibility only in the sense of height above five feet. Therefore, any fence of five feet or less in height cannot be considered as visually incompatible no matter what may be the materials, design or finished appearance. From this, it was only a step for them to conclude that one extra foot added to a fence that was visually compatible could not possibly make it visually incompatible. If all this sounds like nonsense to you, you have plenty of company. He feel the same way. Our position is that we are being victimized by a very ugly fence which is totally out of character with the community which is being developed. Because the County officials mishandled the original approval application, we had no opportunity to protest the fence prior to is partial erection -- as was our right. We, therefore, request that you reverse the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission and dissapprove Mr. Boisjolie's application for a minor site plan approval. Very truly yours, Richard H. Shea, Chairman Forest Park II Property Owners Association RHS/ gh cc: Mr. Bruce King Dept. of Community Development Ms. Caroline Eggert, Chairman Indian River Planning and Zoning Commission ZI i /L•'•. Fs j{"" •;off iill.(it Mr, Keating went over the history of the situation in detail and presented pictures of the fence for the Board to review. Chairman Bird expressed surprise that no one was present today to express their opposition, and Mr. Keating informed the Board that notice was sent to Mr. Shea of the Forest Park II Property Owners Association by regular mail and notice was also published. Discussion ensued regarding the fact that the fence is only 1' over the allowed height and there are vacant lots on either side which makes it look worse. The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard. Ms. Cheryl Boisjolie appeared representing her parents who are out of state. She explained they have a pool in their backyard and the fence is necessary to allow them some privacy, especially with vacant lots on both sides of the residence. She noted that they have requested that the empty lots at least be mowed, and she has bought paint for the fence. Ms. Boisjolie emphasized that although the fence is 6' high, the permit was issued by the County, and at worst, only 1' would have to be cut off. She continued that she did receive the letter of notice sent out by the Planning Department and the neighbors are at home so she would believe they also were aware of the meeting. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unani- mously closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unani- mously (4-0) denied the appeal of the Boisjolie Minor Site Plan Approval and upheld the decision of the Planning & Zoning Commission. 61 J U L 2 0 193 BOOK 54 PrcE JUL 2 0 1933 exon 54 PAGE 18 Chairman Bird did not believe that we would be on proper legal ground to reverse the decision of the Planning & Zoning Commission regardless of whether any further opposition had been expressed today. DISCUSSION RE WABASSO BOAT RAMP The Board reviewed staff memo as follows: TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: June 14, 1983 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH:Parks & Recreation Committee Richard N. Bird, Chairman VIA: James W. Davis, P.E.`V Public Works Director FROM: Donald G. Finne 7' Engineering Technician DESCRIPTION AND CONDITION SUBJECT: Proposed Boat Ramp and Dock at Wabasso Bridge Causeway REFERENCES: The Planning and Zoning Commission on April 22, 1983 approved the Marsh Island Development site plan. Mr. Darrell McQueen, representing Lloyd and Associates proposed to build a boat ramp at their expense (cost to run between $10,000 - $15,000) on County property. The County is to propose the location and obtain the necessary permits. Lloyd and Associates will provide the site plan, design the improvements, send out for bids, and have it constructed. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Alternative No. 1 Locate concrete ramp and permanent wood dock on north side of Wabasso Road. See Location No. 1 on map attached. Location No. 1 is on a larger body of open water and would not be as well protected from wind and waves. There is an existing boat ramp and dock just south of Proposed Location No. 1. An unpaved road leads to the site and ample parking area exists. This location is visible from the CR510 causeway. One foot of water at proposed ramp with 3 feet of water 200 feet from shore, at mean low water. Alternative No. 2 Locate concrete ramp and permanent wood dock, on Wabasso Island at the.water- way. See Location No. 2 on map attached on north side of Wabasso Road, west of the high rise bridge. Alternative and Location No. 2 is the better location because it is closer to the Intracoastal Waterway and deeper water thereto than Location No. 1 or No. 3. The County owns a contiguous 51 acres ± at Location No. 2 which can be used for future improvements and additional boat trailer parking. The road is paved to the site and ample parking area exists. Three feet of water at proposed ramp with 8 feet of water 50 feet from shore, at mean low wader. 62 � i Alternative No. 3 Locate the ramp and dock on the south side of Wabasso Road just east of the existing ramp. See Location No. 3 on map. A paved road leads to the ramp. This location is visible from the CR510 causeway. Two feet of water at proposed ramp with 3 to 4 feet of water 100 feet from shore at mean low water. I have contacted Mr. McQueen who represents the Marsh Island developer (Zaremba Communities) and also contacted Dr. Holt, and Colonel Cooper, Orchid Island property owners. They are opposed to Location No. 2 because of the extra traffic and con- gested parking which would occur on the County road leading to Orchid Island and next to the Marsh Island property. They feel the ramp at this location would also disrupt fishing from the bulkhead, and there are wakes from.large boats on the Intracoastal Waterway. Their comments were that most of the neighborhood prefers Location No. l.or No. 3.. - The Marsh Island Developer or property owners are not opposed to Location No. 1 or No. 3. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING It is requested that the Board of County Commissioners approve the boat ramp project and approve one of the three proposed locations, and approve the expenditure of $100 for the DER/DNR joint permit, application to be applied for. -Based on all of the above information, staff recommends location No. 3. _. No other funding has to be considered except for the $100 permit fee which shall come from Road and Bridge budgeted funds. e e�ED SITES FDR BoAr RAMP f bacK —_ D' iN lk—F&wT Ar mn^m Low WATa16 63 bcox 54 PAGE 159 JUL 2 0 1903-1 BOX 54 PAGE 1 Jn ', Community Services Director Thomas informed the Board that he and Engineering Technician Don Finney have worked with the property owners association as well as the developer and thoroughly investigated, even to diving the area, and they recommend the boat ramp be located 100' east of the existing ramp. They do not wish to increase the size of the existing ramp because they do not feel this is effective in accommodating more boat traffic. Chairman Bird reported that the Parks & Recreation Committee agreed with Alternate 3. Colonel Roger Cooper, Orchid Island property owner, confirmed their opposition to Alternate 2 as they feel the wake caused by boats in the Intracoastal Waterway would pose a problem as well as the lack of sufficient parking space. He further noted that just south of the bridge is a common place for overnight boats to stay, which he believed would create a further problem. He agreed that Alternate 3 is.the best option, and thanked the Commission for being allowed to give input. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved Alternate 3 as the location for the Wabasso boat ramp and also approved the expenditure of $100 for the DER/DNR joint permit from Road and Bridge budgeted funds. Darrell McQueen of Lloyd & Associates, representing the Marsh Island developer (Zaremba Communities) commented that the developer is to work with Administrator Wright and Mr. Thomas on this ramp. He believed the ramp will cost in the neighborhood of $12,000 and he requested that the Commission keep an open mind about expanding the present ramp and extending the walkway so more boats could unload at one time. 64 Mr. Thomas noted that neither he nor Sebastian Mayor Pat Flood necessarily agree with Mr. McQueen on this expansion. PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE REPORT 1. Agreement with North County Recreation Chairman Bird reported that the committee has determined that there never has been a formal agreement between the Board of County Commissioners and North County Recreation, and it is felt that since we are continuing to fund them, it is necessary to have something in writing. Attorney Brandenburg and Attorney Van de Voorde have prepared an agreement which was reviewed and approved by the Parks & Recreation Committee, which will be coming to the Board for approval at the next meeting. 2. Ramps for Handicapped Chairman Bird continued that it was brought to the Committee's attention that we need to be more.cognizant of the fact that people in wheelchairs need to use our elevated walkways and view the ocean and even get down to the beach area. At Wabasso Beach we have a ramp which is fairly steep, but it can be used to get a wheelchair up to the boardwalk. It is not possible, however, for a wheelchair to get from the boardwalk down to the beach area, and this would necessitate an additional structure that we do not have funds to build right now. The Chairman stated that he would like staff to look for any grants that might be available to do this for the handicapped. 3. Possible DonationsatKiwanis-Hobart Park The Chairman noted that there are two enclaves at Kiwanis-Hobart Park that the County does not own - the Dale property, which consists of about 10 acres at the corner of Hobart, Road and Kings Highway. He reported that they have been pursuing the possibility of getting this donated to the county and have been in contact with the estate. Mr. Thomas feels the next step should be for our attorney to discuss with the attorney handling the estate, the tax advantages of a donation. The other so-called enclave is a 40 -acre piece in the southern portion of 65 JUL 2 0 1983 Booz 54 PAGE 161 I JUL 20 10"03 the park fronting on Kings Highway owned by CIBA-Geigy Corporation. 54 -PAC. 1 Mr. Thomas explained that investigation has determined that this is an international conglomerate, and the local representative is James Counselman. He felt Al MacAdam of Indian River Shores may have some contact with the corporate level and will pursue the possibility of a donation. 4. Extension of Dock at Sebastian Yacht Club Chairman Bird informed the Board that we have had a request to extend the dock located at the Sebastian Yacht Club, which dock is used by all County residents. Mr. Thomas reported that they have a double ramp. Over the years the original has become in very bad shape and the base is going to have to be replaced. The City of Sebastian has been working on this through Lloyd & Associates, who is recommending extension of two docks, but there seems to be a difference of opinion. Mr. Thomas believed the Parks & Recreation Committee came up with recommendation to approve funds on this project not to exceed $18,000, subject to funds being available from the Boating Trust Fund. Chairman Bird stated that Mr. Thomas and Mr. Finney will get additional cost estimates and come back to the Board with a recommendation. Mr. Thomas asked for an indication that the Board has no objection to their proceeding on that basis. He noted this is a heavily used boat ramp. The Board had no objections. AGREE14ENT WITH INDIAN RIVER SHORES RE AMBULANCE SQUAD Commissioner Lyons commented that the Ambulance Squad has a verbal agreement with Indian River shores in which Indian River Shores has agreed to cover the area from north of the City limits to the Sebastian Inlet on the Barrier Island as primary responder for ambulance cases. They also have a mutual aid arrangement; however, Commissioner Lyons felt the written agreement is 66 actually quite vague. He believed it expires in October and felt it should be spelled out with a little more certainty. It was noted that this comes under the jurisdiction of the South County Fire District and Attorney Vitunac is actually the Attorney for the District. Attorney Brandenburg stated that he would be glad to assist with this. SAVE OUR COAST PROGRAM Mr. Thomas reported meeting with various representatives of the Department of Natural Resources and investigating the properties we wish to enter under the Save Our Coast program. He stated that they actually hiked over the parcels, and the DNR people were very impressed with the hammocks, etc., on the western pieces. They had no adverse comments at all. Chairman Bird noted that this is the group who will make recommendations to the Governor and Cabinet. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION - PARKS & RECREATIONAL AREA DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Mr. Thomas reported that this has been a most unusual hurry -up arrangement; the SBA contract itself came in, and it has to be back by July 25th. It does not specify any particular project but just says what you can or can't do with the grant money. Mr. Thomas noted that he had no problem with the Commission signing such a contract since the requirements are the same as for any basic federal grant - individuals employed either directly or by the sub -grantees can only be individuals who do not presently have full time employment and are not drawing unemployment compensation. Basically, it is the same as a CETA grant - 80t labor, 20% materials. Commissioner Scurlock inquired how you encourage people to give up unemployment benefits for approximately 3-4 weeks of work to get a project completed. Mr. Thomas believed in this type of work they frequently use people on a part time basis - they do not have to be unemployed; they just cannot be fully employed. This was the same situation 67 JUL 2 0 1983 -ate 54 -Pnf 163 JUL 20 1983 Box 54 PnE M4 with the EDA grant on the water tower at Gifford. He pointed out that if we should run into insurmountable circumstances, all we have to do is say we can't do it, and we don't get the money; it is an outright grant. Commissioner Wodtke returned to the meeting at 3:30 P.M. Discussion followed as to prioritizing projects, and Commissioner Bowman spoke in favor of giving Jungle Trail top priority since she believed we already have permits for an erosion control plan which would include some riprap and some planting of native vegetation materials to hold the bank. She did not believe this would use up the whole amount and felt we should also consider doing some landscaping in the Gifford Park area, which probably would fit under the regulations. Paul Palmiottto, Urban Forester, gave a presentation about possible projects, opting for beautifying 17th Street as a first priority. He noted that the DOT permits are ready to go for that project, and the cost breakdown would be about $9,400, which would leave about $12,000 for Gifford Park and other areas. His third priority was the Kiwanis-Hobart Park restroom area. Mr. Palmiotto commented that he is not saying Jungle Trail is not a worthwhile project, but he felt we could spend $200,000 to restore Jungle Trail. Discussion arose as to the fact that the 17th Street project would require maintenance, which was what the Board previously had objected to, and water would be an on-going expense. Question also arose as to whether oleanders and sod would qualify as native vegetation. Mr. Palmiotto verified that sodding is allowed under the grant, and while the grant requires that every effort should be made to use native materials, it does not say "shall." Park Superintendent Cook concurred with plans drawn up by Mr. Palmiotto for the Kiwanis-Hobart Park restroom area. 68 Commissioner Bowman continued to emphasize that it is very important to stop erosion on Jungle Trail, and Commissioner Lyons also wished to see stabilization of Jungle Trail which he felt is a continuing problem, and felt the Gifford Park area should be the second priority. Mr. Thomas did not feel there is any problem in working out what can be done on each project, but noted that the problem is to be sure the contract is signed and in Tallahassee by Monday. He pointed out that if the Commission will sign the contract, then staff can proceed with designs, plans, etc., for the various projects. Motion was made by Commissioner Lyons to authorize the Chairman to sign the Small Business Administration Contract for the Parks and Recreational Area Development Program. Discussion continued at length regarding which projects deserved top priority. Commissioner Bowman argued in favor of Jungle Trail, but Chairman Bird agreed with Mr. Palmiotto that Jungle Trail is a pretty major undertaking., which he doubted could be accomplished between now and September 30th. After further debate, Commissioner Lyons suggested amending his Motion to set priorities, i.e., Jungle Trail 1st, Gifford 2nd, Hobart Park 3rd, and 17th St. 4th. Administrator Wright concurred that it would be wise to prioritize; let Mr. Thomas work out the details; and then see what we can get out of the grant. Board members continued to opt for different combinations of priorities, and Commissioner Lyons withdrew his Motion. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously authorized the Chairman to sign the SBA Contract for the grant funds and to provide the necessary correspondence applying for the funds. 69 JUL 201983 Boox 54 pAr. 95- AUL 2 0 37 800X 5416 ei 16 The Board members then reviewed their personal preferences as to priorities with Commissioner Lyons favoring $12,000 to Jungle Trail, $10,000 to Gifford Park, and if Jungle Trail is not ready, then go to Kiwanis Park for $2,000 and the rest to 17th St. Commissioner Wodtke did not agree with Jungle Trail as a first priority, but preferred Hobart Park, 17th St. or Gifford where more people use the area. Commissioner Scurlock stated that his top priority would be Gifford Park, then Hobart-Kiwanis Park, and set aside some monies for a replanting effort on Jungle Trail with a letter to developers in that area encouraging them to match that for designated areas of replanting. Commissioner Scurlock felt -we have a tremendous responsibility to the unincorporated area, and he was not in favor of spending money on 17th Street when the City will get the credit for it. Attorney Brandenburg reported that there is a dispute brewing over Jungle Trail again, and Florida Land Company may object to the permitting and request an administrative hearing. Administrator Wright stated that will definitely kill the Jungle Trail project unless the permits are in hand; he checked with staff and determined that we do not as yet have the permits. Mr. Thomas noted that the priorities must be addressed in the letter submitting the contracts, but pointed out that these then have to come back to the Board for final approval. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unani- mously agreed on the following priorities for the SBA Contracts: 1. Gifford Park 2. Hobart-Kiwanis Park 3. Jungle Trail 4. 17th Street Medians. 70 DOCUMENT TO BE MADE PART OF THE MINUTES Road Dedication of 6th Avenue S.W. by General Development Corporation is hereby made a part of the Minutes as approved at the meeting of June 1 1983. ROAD DEDICATION KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation authorized to do business in the State of Florida and having its office at 1111 So. Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida 33131, does hereby dedicate, grunt and convey the hereinafter described property for street and road purposes to the County of Indian River, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, for the use and benefit of the public. The property hereby dedicated, granted and conveyed is legally de- scribed on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated hereto by reference Whenever said property shall be discontinued or cease to be used for street or road purposes, title thereto shall ipso facto revert to General Development Corporation, its successors and assigns. IN:WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed these presents this 8th day of April, 1983. Executed in the presence of: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BY: �- C. .CRUMP, or Vice President ATTEST: J.S C s t. Secret y As to both signatures ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF DADE )ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 8th day of April, 1983 by C.C.CRUMP and.SAUL J. SACK, Senior Vice President and Assis- tant Secretary respectively of GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, on behalf of the corporation. My Commission Expires: VOT#PY PUBLIC NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA Stake of Florida at Larg BONDED THRU GENERAL INSURANCE LIND I MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 24 1986 71 JUL 20 1983 m 5 pid 167 OFENER DF-VF-LOPM�NT ENGINE RIN �� PAU168 -'f 2 O 1933 MIAMI FLORIDA �UL II11 S. BAYS.HORE DR.. , • 25 \ 36 go � ME } t— z 0 cr Q lo o Lt1CLN U (E OU 4 ELI U z to -J Q �E N s, Q m i - Z t", to M� o. M ti VERO BEACH HIGHLANDS UNIT FIVE P.B. 8 PG. 56 o � ti a� b w CC] ' 0 0 U) 0 �� 0 0' ki O r v z v S89--42 13" E__,,_ 1 wadiol P.O.B. 0 1623rd I 6 PLACE M}V� VERO BEACH HIGHLANDS UNIT FIVE P.B. 8 PG. 56 o � ti a� b w CC] ' 0 0 U) 0 �� 0 0' ki O r v z v S89--42 13" E__,,_ 1 wadiol P.O.B. DATE BY CK. cY15tON P.EMARKS PA L F. ROSSKAIAP REG. LAND SURVEYOR NO. 1940 STATE OF FLORIDA D W. Y.. cK! `S BY: I DATE: i.? i � DWG. NO Exhib'rf "Ar l ROAD DEDICATION 61h AVENUE S.W. VERO BEACH HIGHLANDS SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 391 SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH,RANGE 401 INDIAN RIVER COIMFLORIDA Sher f 1 a� 2 36 31 I 6 DATE BY CK. cY15tON P.EMARKS PA L F. ROSSKAIAP REG. LAND SURVEYOR NO. 1940 STATE OF FLORIDA D W. Y.. cK! `S BY: I DATE: i.? i � DWG. NO Exhib'rf "Ar l ROAD DEDICATION 61h AVENUE S.W. VERO BEACH HIGHLANDS SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 391 SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH,RANGE 401 INDIAN RIVER COIMFLORIDA Sher f 1 a� 2 GENER, DEVE�_NT 1111 S. BAYSNORE DR.9 ENGINES -.ING COM MIAMI, FLORIDA Exhibit "A" - 2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A portion of 6th Avenue S.W. A portion of the plat of INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY, lying in Section 36., Township 33 South, Range 39 East, as recorded in Plat "Book 2 at Page 25 of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, -Florida, and a portion of Section 31, Township 33 South, Range 40 East, Indian River County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the intersection of the North Right -of -Way of 23rd Place S.W. and the East Right -of -Way line of 6th Avenue S.W. as shown on the Plat of VERO BEACH HIGHLANDS UNIT -FIVE •as recorded in Plat Book 8 at Page 56 of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida., said point being on the -arc of a circular curve to the right whose radius point bears S.89' -42'.-13"E-. from said point; thence Northerly and Northeasterly along the arc of said curve having a radius of 260.00 feet and a central"angle of 31'-13'-25" for an are distance of 141.69 feet to a POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE of a circular curve to the left; thence Northeasterly and Northerly along the arc of said curve having a radius of 640.00 feet and a central angle of 31'-31'-12" for an arc distance of 352.08 feet to a POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE of a circular curve continuing to the left; thence Northerly and Northwesterly along the arc of said curve having a radius of 526.01 feet and a central angle of 29°-20'-00" for an arc distance of 269.30 feet to a POINT OF TANGENCY; thence N.29' -20'-00"W. for 180.88 feet; thence S.60*-40'-00"W.,.a1ong a portion of the Southeasterly Right-of-Way*line of 23rd Street S.W. as shown on the said plat of VERO BEACH HIGHLANDS UNIT FIVE, for 80.00 feet, thence S.29° -20'-00"E. for.180.88 feet to a POINT OF CURVATURE of a circular curve to the right; thence Southeasterly and Southerly along the arc of said curve having a radius of 446.01 feet and a central. angle of 29'-20'-00" for an arc distance of 228.34 feet to a POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE of a circular curve continuing to the right; thence Southerly and Southwesterly along the arc of said curve having a radius of 560.00 feet and a central angle of 31'-311-12" for an arc distance of 308.07 feet to a POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE of a circular curve to the left; thence Southwesterly and Southerly along the arc of said curve having a radius of 340.00 feet and a central angle of 27'-17'-52" for an arc.distance of 161.99 feet to a POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE of a circular curve to the right; thence Southerly, Southwesterly and Westerly along the arc of said curve having a radius of 25.00 feet and a central angle of W-00-06" for an -arc distance of 37.55 feet; thence S.890 -42-34"E., along a portion of the North Right -of -Way line of 23rd PLACE S.W. as shown on the said plat of VERO BEACH HIGHLANDS UNIT FIVE, for 104.14 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said.lands sicuate, lying and being in Indian River County, Florida, and containing 1.70 Acres, more or less. BOOL( 5 4 PAP.F 199 . Sheet 2 of 2 JUL 2 0 1983 ACCEPTANCE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, by the execution of this instrument, does hereby accept the aforesaid dedication and agrees to maintain the same.' Such acceptance is limited to the interests herein conveyed and is not intended to extend to any other property or interest. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY has caused this Accept- ance to be executed by its duly authorized officers hereinafter named and the corporate seal of the County to be affixed hereto this day of , 1983. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision Qf the State of Florida 1 BY: �&4 �04A �Kz-. (77::) Chairman, Board of County Commissioners J.F ATTEST: 4/ Clerk o Circuit Court Ex Officio Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners The several bills and accounts against the County having been audited were examined and found.to be correct were approved and warrants issued in settlement of same as follows: Treasury Fund Nos. 86812 - 87160 inclusive. Such bills and accounts being on file in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, the warrants so issued from the respective bonds being listed in the Supplemental Minute Book as provided by the rules of the Legislative Auditor, reference to such record and list so recorded being made a part of these Minutes. 74 There being no further business, on Motion made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 4:00 o'clock P.M. Attest: Jhzee, Clerk 75 JUL 20 1983 Chairman Boos 54 FAGF'- 71