HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/21/1983December 21, 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, December 21, 1983, at 8:30 o'clock A.M.
- Present were Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Vice Chairman; Margaret
C. Bowman, William C. Wodtke, Jr. and Patrick B. Lyons.
Absent was Richard N. Bird, Chairman, who was out of state
on County business. Also present were L. S. "Tommy" Thomas,
Community Services Director; Michael J. Wright, County,
Administrator; Chris Paull, Assistant Attorney to the Board
of County Commissioners; Jeffrey K. Barton, OMB Director;
and Barbara Bonnah and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerks.
Vice Chairman -Scurlock called the meeting to order.
Reverend David C. Lord, Trinity Epi.scopal Church, gave
the invocation and Assistant County Attorney Paull led the
Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Administrator Wright requested the addition to today's
Consent Agenda of approval of recommendations from the
workshop of December 15, 1983 re County water and wastewater
facilities.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously added the above matter
to today's Consent Agenda as. Item H.
n E C 211983
#K 55 FAQ 649
MINUTES
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked if there were any
additions or corrections to the Minutes of the Regular
Meeting of November 16, 1983. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously approved the Minutes
of the Regular Meeting of 11/16/83, as
written.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked if there were any
additions or corrections to the Minutes of the Special
Meeting of November 21, 1983. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously approved the Minutes
of the Special Meeting of 11/21/83, as
written.
CLERK TO THE BOARD
A. Approval of Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate No. 28 -
Sadie Gunder
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously approved the issuance of
Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate No. 28, in the
amount of.$11.80 for Sadie Gunder, Surviving
Spouse of John Gunder.
2
B. Approval of Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate No. 35 -
Sadie Gunder
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
1
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the.
Board unanimously approved the issuance of
Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate No. 35, in the
amount of $10.15 for Sadie Gunder, Surviving
Spouse of John Gunder.
C. Approval of Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate No. 35 -
Sadie Gunder
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously approved the issuance of
Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate No. 35, in the
amount of $11.07 for. Sadie Gunder, Surviving
Spouse of John Gunder.
D. Approv&l of New Application for a Permit to Carry a
Concealed Firearm
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/12/83:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: December 12, 1983 FILE:
.the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: PISTOL PERMIT - NEW
FROM: Michael Wright REFERENCES:
County Administrator
The following individual has applied for a new pistol
permit through the Clerk's office:
Jonathan Washington
All requirements of Ordinance 82-27 have been met and
are in order.
3
DE C 21 1983 huts5ou.
�.3
D -E C 2 11983
WK 5- PAU F51
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously approved the issuance of
a permit to carry a concealed firearm to
Jonathan Washington.
E. Inspection Report - Indian River County Jail
Indian River County Jail Report received and placed on
file in the Clerk's Office.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Wodtke requested that Items C, D, and E be
removed from the Consent Agenda at this time.
A. Report
Received and placed on file in the Clerk's Office:
Traffic Violation Bureau,
Special Trust Fund - $32,808.68 - November, 1983
B. Report
Received and placed on file in the Clerk's Office:
Traffic Fines by Name - November, 1983
4
F. Extension of Preliminary Plat Approval for Plantation
Ridge Subdivision
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/1/83:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: December 1, 1983 - FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT:
Robert M. Keat ng CP
Planning & Development Director
EXTENSION OF PRELIMINARY
PLAT APPROVAL FOR PLANTA-
TION RIDGE SUBDIVISION
FROM: Staff Plannerard C REFERENCES: Plant. Ridge. S/D
z. DIS : CLARE
DEC 21
L11---_ I ___
Plantation
,11 -
It is requested that the following information be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting on December 21, 1-983...
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Plantation Ridge Subdivision has a proposed 31 lots on a 21
acre site. _The subject property is located on the west side of
Old Dixie Highway, just north of 20th Lane., _§.W. - The site is
zoned R-1, Single -Family Residential (6.2 dwelling units/acre).
The land use designation of the site is MXD for a distance of
300 feet west of Old Dixie Highway; the remainder of the
property is designated LD -2 (up to 6 dwelling units/acre). The
proposed building density is 1.48 dwelling units/acre.
The development received preliminary plat approval on June 16,
1.982. Therefore, plat approval is scheduled to expire on
December 16, 1983. The applicants are requesting a 6 month
extension of plat approval.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS. -
The applicants have completed construction of the subdivision's
interior streets, including construction of drainage improve-
ments. The work which is currently being completed includes
fine grading of the swales and road shoulders on site. The
project will then be ready for final site inspection and a
request for final plat approval.
According to the County's Subdivision Ordinance 75-31 "The
approval of the Board shall have full force and effect for a
period of 18 months from the date of approval. An extension
may be granted by the Board." Historically, the Board has
granted one extension for a period of up to 18 months. The
applicants are aware of this and have requested an extension
for a period of 6 months. They. feel that 6 months will be
sufficient -time to complete all required work.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant a
6 month extension of plat approval to Plantation Ridge -Subdivi-
sion.
5
1983 a'K3 PAC:
DEC 211983
-,
glOK 55 FACE 653
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner.Lyons,
the Board unanimously granted a six-month
extension of preliminary plat approval to
Plantation Ridge Subdivision.
G. Approval of Time Extension for Relocation of House
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/12/83:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: December 12, 1983 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: EXTENSION OF 1 YEAR TIME
LIMIT FOR DEL
SUBJECT: HOUSE RELOCATIONS SAMSON
' 8095 130TH STREET
ROSELAND, FLORIDA
Robert M. Keati-Ang, CP
Planning & Develop ent Director
/C�ttw
FROM: -Betty Davis : Req -/Samson
REFERENCES
Code Enforcement Officer DIS:CDENF
It is requested that the following information be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting on December 21, 1983.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On November 22, 1982, the County Zoning Department approved the
house relocation site _plan and bond, submitted by Deloris
Samson, to relocate and bring into compliance with the Standard
Building Code and all applicable zoning 'regulations an 868
square foot residential building at 8095 130th Street. A one
year time limit for completion of the project was a condition
of the approval, with forfeiture of the bond possible if the
project was not completed in the required time frame.
On May 25, 1983, Ms. Samson sold the -subject property, Lots 1
and 2, Block 21, Townsites of Roseland, to Mr. Frank L. Martin
and Lola. V. Martin. The present owners were not aware that the
house relocation had to be completed by November 22, 1983, the
expiration of the 1 year time limit, and they are now request-
ing a 4 month extension to the required 1 year time limit, as
referenced in Section 25(nj(2), which reads as follows:
The purpose of the bond or other security is to guarantee
compliance in full. within one year with the applicable
requirements of the Southern Standard Building Code and of
these Zoning Ordinances and to restore. any public or
private property damaged while the building or structure
is being moved. Failure to fully comply within one year
as above stated, will result in forfeiture of the bond to
the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida.
ANALYSIS:
On November 18, 1983 the County Planning and Development
Department received a renewal of the $8,000 Samson house
relocation bond. After discussion with Mrs. Martin, the staff
was advised that the applicants had intended to have the
6
project completed by the required date. However, due to theft
of material from the site and illness in the family, the
project was delayed. Prior to the expiration of the one year
time limit to complete the project, the applicants applied for
the extension and renewed their bond
The residence is presently 75% complete, and the applicants
feel that the job can be completed by March 22, 1984, if a 4
month extension of time is allowed.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant
to the applicants an extension of 4 months to the required 1
year time period for completion of all work associated with
moving of a structure as stated in Section 25(n)(2).
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously granted Frank L. and Lola V,
Martin a 4 -month extension of the one-year time
limit for moving house located at 8095 130th
Street, Roseland.
H. Authorization re Various Recommendations Resulting from
Utilities Workshop of 12/15/83
The Board reviewed the fol
TO: THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THROUGH: Michael Wright
County Administrator
79TiV M1
r memo -dated 12/20/R3-
20, 1983 FILE:
SUBJECT: REC"ENDATIONS FROM THE WORKSHOP
/ DECEMBER 15 , 1983
FROM: 'rREFERENCES:
errance G. Pinto
Utility Services Director
The following recommendations from the workshop of December 15, 1983, need to be
acted upon by the Board:
1) Authorize staff to meet with the City of Vero Beach representatives to
discuss our concerns on the economic feasibility of the County furnishing
water to the South Beach area.
2) Authorize staff to select an engineer to do a preliminary design to
determine the preliminary costs and assessment fees for running County
water into Oslo Park subdivision. Funding for this study is to be
decided by the Board.
3) Authorize staff to develop a scope of work to be advertised for engineering
firms to perform an initial analyses and study to utilitize Farmers Home
Administration funds to provide wastewater services in the County.
3a)Authorize Chairman to sign the attached letter to the Farmers Home Administration
concerning these wastewater funds.
4) Authorize the County Administrator to form a Selection Committee for the
purpose of making a recommendation to the Board for selection of the engineers
for above projects and State Road 60 project.
We request this item be placed on the consent agenda for the December 21, 1983
meeting.
7
DEC 21 1983 55 P' Au
6
._ _.
DEC 211983
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board
unanimously authorized action on the items
listed above, as recommended by Utilities
Director Terry Pinto.
C. Approval of Holiday Schedule - 1984
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/14/83:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: December 14, 19,83 FILE: Agenda
the Board of County Commissioners Dec. 21, 1983
SUBJECT: Holiday Schedule - 1984
FROM: C, B Hardin, r., Ph.D. REFERENCES:
Assistant to Administrator/
General Services Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITION
Each year staff prepares a proposed list of holidays for
the coming year. This list is sent to each of the Consti-
tutional Officers and Judges within the County and they in
turn concur either verbally or in writing. When a national
holiday falls on a Tuesday it has been policy to observe
the previous Monday.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
A. Accept and approve the proposed holiday schedule
as listed:
PROPOSED HOLIDAY SCHEDULE FOR 1984
HOLIDAY DATES DATES OFFICES CLOSED
New Year's Day
1. Good Friday
2. Memorial Day
3. Independence Day
4. Labor Day
5. Veterans Day
6. Thanksgiving Day
7. Friday After
Thanksgiving
8. Christmas Eve
Day
9. Christmas Day
10. New Year's
Eve Day
11. New Year's Day
January 1, 1984
April 20th
May 28th
July 4th
September 3rd
November 11th
November 22nd
November'23rd
December 24th
December 25th
December 31st
January 1, 1985
8
Monday, January 2, 1984
Friday, April 20th
Monday, May 28th
Wednesday, July 4th
Monday, September 3rd
Monday, November 12th
Thursday, November 22nd
Friday, November 23rd
Monday, December 24th
Tuesday, December 25th
Monday, December 31st
Tuesday, January 1, 1985
� � r
When a holiday falls on a Saturday, the previous Friday shall be
designated as the holiday and when a holiday falls on a Sunday, the
following Monday shall be designated as the holiday.
B. Return to staff to revise the schedule
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
It is recommended that the Board adopt the holiday schedule
as proposed. All Consititutional Officers have agreed with
the proposed schedule. No funding is necessarv.
Commissioner Wodtke noticed that there are two extra
holidays in the 1984 holiday schedule and remembered that
the last time this happened, it was a strain.on the Clerk's
Office. He felt that the County offices should not be open
just for three days during an 11 -day period, and that the
offices should be open on Monday, December 24th and Monday,
December 31st.
Commissioner Scurlock agreed that the Courthouse should
not be closed Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday.
Administrator Wright pointed out that this only happens
once every seven years, and that if the employees are called
in on Monday, half of that day will be spent in Christmas
parties. Commissioner Wodtke pointed out that this same
situation occurs when Christmas and New Years Day falls on
Thursday.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board
unanimously approved the 1984 Holiday Schedule,
of nine holidays, deleting #8, Christmas Eve Day,
and #10, New Year's Eve Day.
D. Bid #191 - New 1984 Standard 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/12/83:
9
DEC 211983 BOOK rA�
DEC 211983
sr� 55 wr
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: Dec. 12, 1983 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright
County Administrator
.G --RAL SERVICESION
FROM: , �
waroly oodrich, Manager
1. Description and Conditions•
SUBJECT: IRC Bid #191- New 1984 Standard
1/2 Ton Pickup Truck
REFERENCES:
Bids were -received December 6, 1983 at 11:00 A.M. for IRC #191- New
1984 Standard 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck for the Animal Control Officer.
The Board approved the purchase of a vehicle not to exceed $10,000.00
for the Animal Control Officer; to be funded from the Sheriff's seizure fund.
(See attached minutes of 11/2/83 mtg.)
20 Bid Proposals were sent out. Of the 4 Bid Proposals received, 1 was
a "No Bid."
2. Alternatives and Analysis:
The low bid was submitted by Ft. Pierce Dodge in the amount of $7458.80
for a 1/2 Ton 2 WD truck and $9160.40 for a 1/2 Ton 4 WD truck. Both are
equipped with a 6 cylinder engine as required in the bid specifications.
A 1/2 Ton 2 WD truck with the same options can be purchased from the
Florida State Contract for $6325.88. The vendor holding this portion of the
state contract is Regency Dodge, Jacksonville, F1.
A 1/2 Ton 4 WD truck with the same options can be purchased from the_
Florida State_ Contract for $8396.00 with a 6 cylinder engine and $8642.00
with an 8 cylinder engine. The vendor holding this portion of the.state
contract is Roger Whitley Chevrolet, Tampa, F1.
The total cost for a mobile radio and antenna purchased from the Florida
State Contract is $1042.00.
3. Recommendation and Funding:
Because this vehicle will be used off road and will be pulling a trailer
on occasion, it is recommended an 8 cylinder, 4 WD truck and mobile radio be
purchased from the Florida State Contract, thru Roger lVhitley Chev., Tampa, Fla.
_Total cost of truck and radio is $9684.00.
9a
Commissioners Wodtke and Scurlock questioned the need
for an 8 -cylinder, four wheel drive vehicle.
Community Development Director Tommy Thomas explained
that the vehicle must have the capability to haul the
trailer used by the Animal Control --Dept. for the handling of
large animals such as horses and cows. The trailer can hold
up to three or four large animals at a time. He pointed out
that just this past week they had need of the trailer for a
rabid horse. Director Thomas also felt that with a 4 -wheel
drive vehicle they would be able to get into more areas,
such as the grounds next to the airport where they are
trying to round up packs of wild dogs.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner -Bowman, the
Board unanimously approved the purchase
from the Florida.State Contract of a 1/2 Ton,
6 cylinder, 4 -wheel drive truck, for the amount
of $8396; and approved the purchase from the
Florida State Contract of a mobile radio and
antenna for the truck in the amount of $1042.
E. Approval of Comprehensive Agreement Between Indian River
County and Martin County School Board under the Florida JTPA
Program
Commissioner Scurlock expressed his dislike.of the Job
Training Partnership Act (JTPA) program because of the
inequities in the program and stated that he intended to
vote against the proposed agreement.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if there was any way the
County can be sure that the participants do not work
overtime or draw unemployment compensation.
Assistant County Attorney Chris Paull, explained that
if a temporary employee loses his job through no fault of
10
d E C 211983 :. a-iK _ 55
DEC 211983 tax - 5
his own, he is eligible for unemployment compensation. The
question is, who pays for the unemployment compensation.
Administrator Wright felt that the County would be
responsible for a share of the unemployment compensation,
but C. B. Hardin, Personnel Directoz and Assistant to the
County Administrator, advised that the County would not.
Dr. Hardin explained that this agreement will be on a
contract basis. JTPA will be paying the salaries.
Administrator Wright explained that.he has no intention
of hiring anyone if it is not in the best interests of the
County, and it is possible the County may not even use this
program. If the County doer use the progra::, it :aill be -on
a very limited basis.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, that the Board
approve the Comprehensive Agreement between the
Worksite Employer, Indian River County, and the
Operator, Martin County School Board, under the
Florida Job Training Partnership Act.
Under discussion, Commissioner Lyons fully agreed with
Commissioner Scurlock, but felt that if Administrator Wright
can find a way to use this in a constructive way, this gives
him the vehicle; he did hope, -however, that the County would
not get trapped into using it to excess. _
Dr. Hardin emphasized that the County is under no y
obligation to hire anyone and that according to JTPA, the
reason for this contract is so that we would not be involved
with either the participants or the Martin County School
Board, which is the director of the program. This is a
contract to fulfill a contract by training the people. He
noted that in Paragraph 10 of the proposed agreement, the
County does not have to hire the participants at the end of
__ 11
the training period. The County will try to place them, but
has no responsibility to hire them.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion carried by a--3-1 vote, with
Commissioner Scurlock voting in opposition.
COMPREHENSIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WORKSITE
EMPLOYER AND JOB TRAINING OPERATOR
UNDER THE FLORIDA JTPA PROGRAM
Work experience is a short term work assignment with a public
employer or a private non-profit employing agency and is designed
to enhance the employability of individuals who have never worked
or who recently have not been working in the competitive labor
force.
This work experience activity is designed to increase the employ-
ability of individuals by providing them with experience on a job,
an opportunity to develop occupational skills and good work
habits, and an occupational goal through exposure to various occu-
pational opportunities.
The Worksite Employer, Indian River County, hereby enters into an
agreement with the Operator, Martin County School Board, to meet
the following conditions for participation in the JTPA Program.
THE WORKSITE EMPLOYER AGREES TO:
1. Allow access by authorized program respresentative to premises
of the Worksite Employer at all reasonable hours for monitor-
ing of the worksite,.counseling with the participants, and
coordinating other work activities.
2. Maintain adequate accountability for participant's time and
attendance and submit signed time sheets every other Friday
for payroll purposes.
3. Affirm that the policies of the Worksite Employer are free of
discrimination because of race, sex, age, creed, color,
religion, or political affiliation and that participants in
the program will not be employed on the construction, opera-
tion, or maintenance of any facility as is used for sectarian
instruction, as a place for religious worship, or for partisan
political purposes.
4. Furnish meaningful work for the participants within the pur-
pose and scope of the training program and furnish equipment,
tools, materials, and supplies as required on the job.
Participants must be continuously occupied with useful produc-
tive work experience.
5. Recognize that participants will be provided with workman's
compensation insurance by the Job Training Operator.
6. Provide continuous worksite employer supervision to the parti-
cipants without compensation for the program.
7. Maintain the right to release a larticipant from the worksite
with good cause.
12
DEC211983 BOOK 55 PACE
DEC 21 193
55 MUSK
8. Affirm that no participant should be required to work more
than 40 hours per week or 500 hours total training time.
9. Provide a job description of each position that.will be
filled by a work experience participant and list the entry
level wage for this position under your organization's pay
scale.
10. Use reasonable efforts with available resources to help the
participant locate full-time unsubsidized employment in the
worksite employer's organization or elsewhere after train-
ing.
This Agreement will be effective from the date of execution until
the 500 hour training period has ended or until termination by
either party through advance notice to the other party.
Entered into this day of , 1983.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Worksite Employer
Representative Signature
RICHARD N. BIRD
Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
(305) 567-8000
Adopted: 12/21/83
APPROVEO FORM
AND 7G�L!64,�.ACI.,E
By: x7,/
G Y1M." BRANDEN f r
URG
1,6o}:i ty Attor
MARTIN COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD
Operator
Representative Signature
Telephone Number
PROCLAMATION- JOSEPH B. EGAN, III., CHAIRMAN OF THE INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY
Chairman Bird read aloud the following proclamation and
presented it to Joseph B. Egan, III.
-- 13
PROCLAMATION
PROCLAMATION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA COMMENDING JOSEPH
B. EGAN, III, CHAIRMAN OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
HOUSING AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, JOSEPH B. EGAN, III, upon appointment as Chairman
by the Governor, did organize and implement the Indian River
County Housing Authority; and
WHEREAS, in operation of that Authority, numerous low
income families, elderly, disabled and handicapped individuals
have been assisted; and
WHEREAS, innovative solutions to the needs of low and
moderate income families have been sought and implemented; and
WHEREAS, a pilot rehabilitation service for the County has
been implemented; and
WHEREAS, he has encouraged community development; and
WHEREAS, he assisted in the development of Treasure Coast
Village so that some low and moderate income families might own
their own homes; and
WHEREAS, he initiated surveys of resources, planning and
funding for the start of a new multi -family project; and
WHEREAS, when the choice of special interest or that of the
general good needed to be made, it was made in the interest of
all of the people in Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, during the last four years he has contributed
substantial time and effort and provided unusual leadership for
the Housing Authority:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAI14ED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COM-
MISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT JOSEPH B.
EGAN,III, is hereby extended the County's sincere congratulations
and appreciation for a job well done.
ATTEST:
BY ja�
FREDA WRIGHT, CL K
D E C 211983
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY
ICHARD N. BIRD
CHAIRMAN
6EK .5 5 PACE 6
DEC 21.1983
55
PROCLAMATION -.CHARLES E. BLOCK, COMMISSION OF THE INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY
Chairman Bird read aloud the following proclamation and
presented it to Charles E. Block.
15
PROCLAMATION
PROCLAMATION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA COMMENDING CHARLES
E. BLOCK, A COMMISSIONER OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
HOUSING AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, CHARLES E. BLOCK, upon appointment by the
Governor as a Commissioner to the Indian River, County Housing
Authority did assist in the organization and implementation of
the Authority; and
WHEREAS, in operation of that Authority, numerous low
income families, elderly, disabled and handicapped individuals
have been assisted; and
WHEREAS, innovative solutions to the needs of low and
moderate income families have been sought and implemented; and
WHEREAS, a pilot rehabilitation service for the County has
been implemented; and
WHEREAS, he has encouraged community development; and
WHEREAS, he assisted in the development of Treasure Coast
Village so that some low and moderate income families might own
their own homes; and
WHEREAS, he assisted in initiating surveys of resources,
planning and funding for the start of a new multi -family project;
and
WHEREAS, when the choice of special interest or that of the
general good needed to be made, it was made in the interest of
all of the people in Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, during the last four years he has contributed
substantial time and effort for the Housing Authority:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE.BOARD OF COUNTY COM-
MISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT CHARLES E.
BLOCK, is hereby extended the County's sincere congratulations
and appreciation for a job well done.
ATTEST:
BY4
FREDA WRIGHT, C1#RK
DEC 211983
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY c��r- e�/7
RICHARD N. BIRD
CHAIRMAN
BtK 55 PA6 F
DEC 211983
ADDITIONAL COURT FILING FEES
s PACE'
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/14/83:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: December 14, 1983 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: ADDITIONAL COURT FILING FEES
Circuit Court FS 28.241(1)
County Court FS 34.041(1)
FROM: Jeffrey Barton" REFERENCES:
Office of Management & Budget
The Board of County Commissioners has the ability to pass,by
ordinance,additional court filing fees to be used for specific pur-
poses, such as court facilities, law library, or legal aid program.
An analyzation of the three (3) prior fiscal years revealed
the following numbers of cases could have collected the additional
fee if an ordinance had been passed.
1982-83
Circuit Court 1,992
County Court 1,125
Total 3,117
1981-82 1980-81
2,136
1,397
3,533
1,924
1,446
3,370
The Fla. Statute doesn't address a specific fee to be charged
(local policy should dictate a reasonable fee). Each $1 of fee
charged per case would generate $3,100 to $3,500 per year based on
past history. These fundswouldthen be placed into a specific
escrow account as outlined in the ordinance for the specific court
purpose.
We recommend the Board of County Commissioners authorize the
County Attorney to draw an ordinance using a step fee system similar
to the Brevard County ordinance.
1C..
J—udgd Chtiild�s E. Smith Jef Ba t , Director
Judge of Circuit Court Office of YlanAgement $ Budget
OMB Director .Jeff Barton explained that this matter had
been before the Board previously and the Board had requested
some additional research. Staff did not come up with a r�
specific dollar recommendation, but determined that a $1.00
filing fee would generate $3100-$3500 which could be used
for court facilities. Included in the backup material is a
17
copy of a 1976 ordinance from Brevard County that uses a
sliding scale for court facilities fees. Because of the
size of the damages that people are seeking, Circuit Judge
}
Charles E. Smith felt that the fee schedule in Circuit Court
should should be on a sliding scale. Judge Smith
recommended that the County Attorney be authorized to come
up with a system using the step fee and he hoped that the
local -county bar association would become involved. Judge
Smith preferred a minimum fee of $20.00 in the Circuit Court
cases and a $10 or $15 in the County Court cases.
DEC 211983
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, that the
Board instruct the County Attorney to proceed
with a draft of an ordinance as outlined above
by OMB Director Barton.
Under discussion, Administrator Wright suggested that a
provision be included in the ordinance stating that no
expenditures can be made from this fund without specific
approval of this Board.
Commissioner Lyons reminded the Board that we are
running out of space in the law library and are going to
install sliding shelves in the very near future.
Commissioner Wodtke requested Director Barton to work
out more exact figures as to what these fees will generate
based on last year's cases and present the figures when the
ordinance comes before the Board for approval.
Director Barton explained all fees are waived for
indigents, except in Small Claims Court.
Attorney Paull stated it would be helpful to have some
idea of an upper cap to enable the Legal Dept. to determine
how many dollars to include in the ordinance. Director
18
BffQK
55- r�+EE
DEC 21 1983
! t
Barton explained that based on the last three years'
5 .FkE
average, a $10 fee would generate $31,000 to $35,000 a year.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC .HEARING - ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE RELATING TO
ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS
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:
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—�C
111
in the matter of 66-
55
6
F
in the 1 Court, was pub-
/ ;j
fished in said newspaper in the issues of A&P 3
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. Li
Sworn to and subscribed be o this day ofA D. 19�
j (B, sindds Manager)
(t" 6f"tiie••0ircawcourt,`Irldianii ybr County, Florida)
(SEAL)
NOTICE OF INTENT TO
CONSIDER COUNTY ORDINANCE
(The Board of County Commissioners, of In- ,
dian River County will conduct a public hear-,
ling on December 21. 1983, at 9:00 A.M.- in the
Commission Chambers at the County Admin-.
istration Building, 1840 25th Street, Vero
Beach, Florida, to consider•adoption at an or-
dinance entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF IN-
DIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RE-
LATING TO THE ACQUISITION AND.. , :,
CONSTRUCTION OF - CERTAIN
LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS IN INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AUTHOR-
IZING THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE
BONDS BY INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA; TO FINANCE THE COST
THEREOF PAYABLE FROM SPECIAL
ASSESSMENTS LEVIED AGAINST
PROPERTY SPECIFICALLY $ENE-` '
FITED BY SUCH IMPROVEMENTS;
AND, AT THE OPTION OF THE COUN-
TY, FROM OTHER LEGALLY AVAIL
ABLE NON -AD. VALOREM FUNDS;
AND* PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE-.''
DATE. -'
If any person decide to alipeal any deci-
sion made on the above rnatter.• he/she will
need a record of the proceedings, and for
such -purposes, he/she may read to ensure
that a verbatim record of the proceedings is..
made, which record includes the testimony in
evidence on which the appeal fs based:
Richard N. Bird
Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
Dec. 2, 1983.
Attorney Paull explained that the Home Rule Ordinance
__ 19
mon
Cn)
4
(CCE(Ilav
3c C
�
CA
NOTICE OF INTENT TO
CONSIDER COUNTY ORDINANCE
(The Board of County Commissioners, of In- ,
dian River County will conduct a public hear-,
ling on December 21. 1983, at 9:00 A.M.- in the
Commission Chambers at the County Admin-.
istration Building, 1840 25th Street, Vero
Beach, Florida, to consider•adoption at an or-
dinance entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF IN-
DIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RE-
LATING TO THE ACQUISITION AND.. , :,
CONSTRUCTION OF - CERTAIN
LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS IN INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AUTHOR-
IZING THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE
BONDS BY INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA; TO FINANCE THE COST
THEREOF PAYABLE FROM SPECIAL
ASSESSMENTS LEVIED AGAINST
PROPERTY SPECIFICALLY $ENE-` '
FITED BY SUCH IMPROVEMENTS;
AND, AT THE OPTION OF THE COUN-
TY, FROM OTHER LEGALLY AVAIL
ABLE NON -AD. VALOREM FUNDS;
AND* PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE-.''
DATE. -'
If any person decide to alipeal any deci-
sion made on the above rnatter.• he/she will
need a record of the proceedings, and for
such -purposes, he/she may read to ensure
that a verbatim record of the proceedings is..
made, which record includes the testimony in
evidence on which the appeal fs based:
Richard N. Bird
Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
Dec. 2, 1983.
Attorney Paull explained that the Home Rule Ordinance
__ 19
DEC 21 1983
gives the County the authority to set up special assessments
and issue bonds on them. It specifically provides for the
issue of bonds to be repaid solely from the special assess-
ment funds generated or from other non ad valorem funds,
which the County might pledge. The ordinance also provides
I
for a means of bonding off the special assessment liens so
that the property can then be conveyed free of that lien
The ordinance can be used by the Commission without the
necessity of a referendum or a petition having been first
filed. It is more or less a voluntary type special
assessment ordinance.
Vice Chairman Scurlock felt that the proposed ordinance
was an excellent one which would provide the County with a
vehicle to fund future development and needed improvements
in cooperation with the business community.
Commissioner Lyons wished to know if this ordinance
could be used to provide street lighting in isolated areas,
and Attorney Paull confirmed that it could, noting that the
first two "whereas" clauses cover just about any conceivable
improvement the Board would like to construct in a given
neighborhood.
Commissioner Wodtke suggested the the Ordinance include
street lighting and that off-street parking, parking garages
and mass transportation be deleted.
Vice Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and
asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Samuel Block, Attorney, considered this an excellent
ordinance which will allow developers to work hand in hand
with the County to provide services that are needed in this
County and urged the Board to adopt the ordinance.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously closed the Public Hearing.
20
WK 55 PA USS
i
DEC 21 -1983 55 rAC. 9
Commissioner Wodtke asked if this applies only to real
property, and Attorney Paull explained that the nature of
the improvements limits it to the use of real property; he
could not conceive of any situation that would affect
intangible property.
Commissioner Lyons compared this program to the
petition paving program where we simply set up an assessment
roll based on the criteria of the situation, and Attorney
Paul advised that it would come to the Board for specific
findings as to whether it is the best way to do it.
ON MOTION MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously adopted Ordinance 83-46 providing
for the acquisition and construction of certain
local improvements in Indian River County;
and authorizing the issuance of revenue bonds
by Indian River County to, finance the cost
thereof, payable from special assessments levied
against property specifically benefited by such
improvements, and, at the option of the County,
from other legally available non ad valorem funds;
and providing an effective date; with the
following changes: that street lighting be
included, and off-street parking, parking garages,
and mass transportation be deleted.
21
ORDINANCE NO. 83-46
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA RELATING TO THE
ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN LOCAL
IMPROVEMENTS IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA;
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS BY
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO FINANCE THE COST
THEREOF, PAYABLE FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED
AGAINST PROPERTY SPECIFICALLY BENEFITED BY SUCH
IMPROVEMENTS, AND, AT THE OPTION OF THE COUNTY,
FROM OTHER LEGALLY AVAILABLt`NON AD VALOREM FUNDS;
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article VIII, Section 1, Florida
Constitution (1968), and Chapter 125, Florida Statutes (1981), as
amended, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, has all powers of local self-government to perform county
functions and to render county services in a manner not
inconsistent with general or special law, and such power may be
exercised by the enactment of county ordinances; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary for the public health, safety
and general welfare of Indian River County, Florida and its
citizens that provision be made for the acquisition, construction,
: repair, paving, hard surfacing, widening, guttering and drainage
r
of streets, boulevards and alleys; for the grading, leveling,
paving and hard surfacing of sidewalks; for the construction of
sanitary sewers, storm sewers and drains, including the necessary
appurtenances thereto; for the construction of water mains, water
laterals and other water distribution facilities, including the
necessary appurtenances thereto; for the drainage and reclamation
of wet, low or overflowed lands; the provision of street lighting;
(all of such improvements being hereinafter collectively called
"Improvements"); and that provision be made for -the -payment of all
or any part of the costs of any of the Improvements by levying and
collecting special assessments on the abutting, adjoining,
contiguous or other specially benefited property; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary and desirable to provide for
the issuance of revenue bonds to finance the cost of such
DEC 211983, -1- BOOK 55 PA.EE 70
D E'G. 2 1 1983 55 mu P71
Improvements, payable from special assessments levied against the
property to be specially benefited by the acquisition and/or
construction of the Improvements and, at the option of the
County, from other funds of the County derived from sources other
than ad valorem taxation and legally available for -such purpose;
now, therefore,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF IMPROVEMENTS. The Board'of
County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida (hereinafter
called "Board" and "County," respectively) is hereby authorized
to acquire and construct any of the Improvements, from time to
time, in the unincorporated areas of the County.
SECTION 2. AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE BONDS. To pay the
cost of the Improvements, the Board is authorized to provide by
resolution for the issuance of revenue bonds (hereinafter called
"Bonds") from time to time. The Bonds may be issued in fully
registered form, without coupons, in such denomination or
denominations, bearing interest at such rate or rates and
maturing at such time or times not exceeding 2 years after the
maturity of the last installment of the special assessments, all
as may be determined by the Board. The Board may, at its option,
prior to the date of issuance of any series of Bonds, elect to
use an immobilization system or book -entry system with respect to
issuance of such Bonds, provided adequate records will be kept
with respect to the ownership of Bonds issued in book -entry form
or the beneficial ownership of Bonds issued in the name of a
nominee. The details of any alternative system of Bond issuance
shall be set forth in a resolution of the Board duly adopted
prior to the issuance of -the applicable series of Bonds. The
Bonds may be made redeemable before maturity, at the option of
the Board, at such price or prices and under such terms and con-
ditions as may be fixed by the Board prior to their issuance.
The Board shall determine the place or places of payment of the
principal of the Bonds, which may be at any bank or trust company
within or without the State of Florida. Interest on the Bonds
shall be payable by checks or drafts mailed to the registered
owners thereof. The Bonds shall be signed by the manual or fac-
ts
a simile signatures of the Chairman and Clerk of the Board, and the
Bond registrar, provided that the Bonds -shall bear at least one
signature which is manually executed thereon. The Bnndq c1,a11
have the seal of the Board affixed, imprinted, reproduced or
lithographed thereon, -all as may be prescribed in the resolution
or resolutions authorizing the issuance thereof. The Bonds may
be delivered to any contractor for payment for his work in
constructing Improvements hereunder or may be sold at public or
private sale at such price as the Board shall determine to be in
its best interest, provided that the price shall not be less than
95% of the par value of the Bonds sold.
SECTION 3. SECURITY FOR BONDS. The principal of,
interest on and redemption premiums,, if any, for the Bonds shall
be payable from the proceeds of the special assessments to be
levied against the property specially benefited by the acquisi-
tion and/or construction of the Improvements, and, at the option
of the Board, may be additionally payable from any other funds
derived by the County from sources other than ad valorem taxation
and legally available for such purpose. The provisions of this
section, however, shall not be construed so as to impair or
authorize the impairment of the security of the holders of any
obligations previously issued by the County which are payable
a from such non ad valorem funds.
SECTION 4. INCORPORATION OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF
CHAPTER 170. The provisions of Chapter 170,`Florida Statutes
(1981), as amended, to the extent not inconsistent with the pro-
visions of this ordinance, are hereby incorporated herein by
reference and made applicable to the County the same as if it
were a "municipality" as defined therein. Appropriate changes to
the provisions of Chapter 170, Florida Statutes (1981), as
DEC 211983
-37 679
DEC 2119835-5 rAcE 673
amended, as incorporated herein, are hereby made to reflect the
differences between municipal and county government. The Board,
however, shall not be required to let contracts for any
Improvements before adoption of any resolution authorizing the
issuance of Bonds. All assessment plats, plans and
specifications, cost estimates and records of the names and
addresses of the owners of`property to be assessed shall be kept
and maintained by the public works or other similar department of
the County, or such other office or officer of the County as may
be specified by the Board from time to time. Any special
assessment liens upon real property, resulting from special
assessments levied pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance,
shall be extinguished upon the recording by the Board in the
Official Records of the County, an affidavit or affidavits exe-
cuted by the Chairman of the Board to the effect that sufficient
security has been deposited with the County in order to insure
timely payment of the amounts of such special assessments or the
installments thereof, as the case may be. If notes are issued in
anticipation of the issuance of Bonds, the special assessments
shall bear interest at s rate not to exceed l% above the rate of
interest on the notes, as long as the notes are outstanding. Any
special assessments that are prepaid shall bear interest at the
rate borne by the Bonds or the notes issued in anticipation of
the issuance of the Bonds, whichever are outstanding, and, if
necessary to pay additional expenses of redemption, shall include
a prepayment fee not to exceed the applicable redemption premium,
if any, for such notes or Bonds, if they were to be redeemed on
the next available redemption date.
SECTION S. NO REFERENDUM REQUIRED. No referendum or
election in the County shall be required for the exercise of any
of the provisions of this ordinance, unless such referendum or
election is required by the Constitution of the State of Florida.
SECTION 6. NO IMPAIRMENT OF CONTRACT. The County will
not enact any ordinance or adopt any resolution which will
repeal, impair or amend in any manner the rights of the holders
-4-
of the Bonds issued from time to time, or the security of the
funds which may be pledged to the payment of principal of,
interest on and redemption premiums, if any, for the Bonds.
SECTION 7. REFUNDING BONDS. The County may, by
resolution of the Board, issue bonds to refund any Bonds issued
pursuant to this -ordinance and provide for the rights of the
holders hereof. Such refunding bonds may be issued in an amount
sufficient to pay the principal of the outstanding Bonds; the
interest due..and payable on the outstanding Bonds to and
including the first date upon which the outstanding Bonds shall
be callable prior to maturity or the dates upon which the prin-
cipal thereof shall mature, or any dates in between, whichever is
applicable; the redemption premiums, if any, for the Bonds; and
any expenses of the issuance and sale of such refunding bonds.
SECTION 8. THIS ORDINANCE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY. This
ordinance shall not be deemed to repeal or supersede any general
or special law but shall be considered as supplemental and addi-
tional authority to the Board and the County to carry out and
perform the powers authorized herein.
SECTION 9. EFFECTIVE DATE. A certified copy of this
ordinance, as enacted, shall be filed in the office of the
Department of State of the State of Florida by the clerk of the
Board within 10 days after its enactment, and this ordinance
shall take effect upon receipt of official acknowledgment from
that office that such ordinance has been filed.
SECTION 10. POWER OF BOARD. All power and authority
granted to the County by the provisions of this ordinance shall
be exercised by the Board, or its successors, as the governing
body of the County.
SECTION 11. SEVERABILITY.
nance are intended to be severable.
The provisions of this ordi-
If any one or more sections,
paragraphs, sentences, clauses or provisions shall be held to be
illegal or invalid, the remaining sections, sentences, clauses
and provisions of this ordinance shall nevertheless stand and be
DEC 211983
-5-
WK 55 PACE 74
!C 211983
55, 675
construed as if the illegal or invalid sections, sentences,
clauses or provisions had not been included herein.
SECTION 12. REPEALER. All other ordinances, resolu-
tions or parts thereof in conflict with the provisions of this
ordinance are, to the extent of such conflict, hereby repealed.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 21 day of
December , 1983.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDI RIVER COUNTY
By_
RICHARD N. BIRD
Chairman
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida
this 3rd day of January . 1984•
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State
received on this 9th day of January P-1984, atll:00
A.M./P.M, and filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Board of
�Ounty Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPR
LEGA
County Attorney
L
AGREEMENT REGARDING STATE ROAD 60 WATER LINE
Commissioner Bowman asked how the.Utilities Department
arrived at the percentages on the cost of the water line as
shown in Item #1 of the proposed Water Service Agreement
between the County and West County --Utility, Inc. Utilities
Director Terry Pinto explained how these figures were
computed, but didn't feel it was necessary that they be
included in the agreement because Item #2 sets up the number
of taps and the amount of doll,a;rs.
Commissioner Scurlock explained that 'staff looked at
the service in the area and the availability, and decided to
oversize the system to a 20 -inch line. The County's portipn
will be paid by the County and Farmers Home Administration
money, and the rest will be paid totally by the developer.
Everybody will pay their fair share. The utility, i.e., the.
County, is paying for the oversizing, which will be
collected in future impact fees, tap -in charges, etc.
Director Pinto suggested that the description of the
water line route that appears in the third "whereas" clause
should not be so definitive because the County is going to
be retaining an engineering consultant to review the
proposed route. He suggested that language be included to
reflect that that this is a proposed route and may be
changed from "12th Street to Kings Highway" to "8th Street
to Kings Highway."
Commissioner Wodtke asked if the water line would serve
those property owners east of Kings Highway and SR #60 and
Administrator Wright stated that they were not including
that area at this time.
Vice Chairman Scurlock explained that because Farmers
Home Administration money is involved, the County is trying
to select a route which will satisfy some of their
requirements in re to low income and necessity in certain
areas.
DEC 2 1 1983 _
28
BEAK
Ti -
J
fl E-C ix993
Commissioner Lyons felt the water route, as stated in
the third "whereas" and again in Item #1, could be better
described and pointed out that the plant is not actually
located on Oslo Road. Director Pinto stated that the
connection will be made at 20th Street and Oslo Road, but
thought it best that this description not be refined just
yet because the engineering consultant is going to advise
exactly where the connection is going to be made and exactly
where it is going to end up.
Administrator Wright suggested that a line be added
stating, "from the existing distribution system,as
recommended by the consulting engineers."
Attorney Block, who prepared the proposed Water Service
Agreement, explained that the whereas clauses are the window
dressing and define why we are doing these things.
Obviously, the land owners who want to develop out SR #60 do
have some needs and want to be sure that the line at least
comes down from King's Highway.
Attorney Paull agreed that Director Pinto's suggested
language, "as the final version of the route is going to be
subject to review by the consulting engineer," should be
worked into the agreement, but felt that the agreement could
specify that the route will be running out State Road #60
from Kings Highway. He explained that the main reason this
matter was placed.on the agenda today was to get the Board's
input and then bring it back in final form for.approval at
the next Board meeting.
Commissioner Wodtke questioned if this requires that we
really do an assessment and delineate an area that we are
going to assess; Vice Chairman Scurlock explained that this
was based on 2,050 taps for which people have voluntarily
come in and put their monies up front.
Director Pinto stated that the agreement was really the
assessment, and Attorney Block agreed that this is a
__ 29
s � �
voluntary assessment and that when the assessment roll is
prepared, they will agree to it and provide legal
descriptions. He continued that there are 17 land owners
involved at this point, and they still have a few taps that
have not gone out, and those will -be included. They will
also place a covenant on each of the properties stating that
the taps must run with the land to successor owners, and
that all of this will be spelled out in the agreements.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if it is required that all of
these lands be contiguous and Attorney Paull advised that
all that is required is that the area being assessed -be
benefited by the improvement.
Commissioner Lyons noted that Item #2 sets a deadline
of January 1, 1985, for installation of the water lines, and
he wished to know what would happen if the County, through
its best efforts, did not meet that deadline. Attorney
Paull felt if the County had done its best to meet the
deadline, it would meet the terms in Item #2 of the
agreement. Attorney Block confirmed that the times periods
mentioned in Item #2 and Item #8 should be consistent.
Vice Chairman Scurlock noted that the Board was as
anxious as West County Utility to get this done as quickly
as possible, but we just do not want to get into a penalty
situation.
Administrator Wright understood that the irrevocable
letter of credit mentioned in Item #3 is in place and would
not be used until such time as the financing is in place.
Attorney Block explained that the reason they proposed
this as a corporation is because the individual property
owners did not have $650,000, and, basically, it is a
standby letter of credit that will never be drawn on. It
simply demonstrates their good faith that they will meet
County requirements and that they have.put up the $650,000.
John. Turnbull, President of Florida National Bank, will
30
DEC 211983 a rK 55. mf 678
DEC 211983 eK55 rh
cF679
verify that the Letter of Credit, which is good until August
1st, is presently in their attorney's office and it will be
delivered to the County. Once the County receives the
proceeds from the bonds, the letter of credit will be
extinguished. Attorney Block advised that the individuals
who have guaranteed the letter of credit have also
guaranteed the cost of the engineering drawings in the event
this project doesn't go through.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the
Board unanimously authorized the County
Attorney to make the necessary changes
that have been outlined in this meeting in the
Water Service Agreement between the County and
West County Utility, Inc., and to bring it back
to the Board for approval at the next
Commission meeting.
Commissioner Lyons asked if nearby property owners are
going to be made to hook up whenever the County has a water
line going in, and Director Pinto 'felt very definitely that
the Board should take that position because if hookups are
done at a later date, it is going to cost the property
owners three times as much.
Vice Chairman Scurlock reported that this matter will
be addressed and formalized in an upcoming workshop.
Director Pinto explained that when the Utility Dept.
reviews the site plans for new construction, they require
hookups. For the most part, they have had cooperation, but
there are some people who have objected.
31
ACCEPTANCE OF IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT FOR RESERVATION
OF WATER PLANT CAPACITY - WEST COUNTY UTILITY, INC.
The Commissioners agreed this matter had been
thoroughly covered during the above discussion on the Water
Service Agreement and did not call for any action today, as
it will,be contingent on the next action of the Board re the
Water. Service Agreement.
PUBLIC HEARING - RIGHT-OF-WAY ABANDONMENT - 9th STREET, EAST
OF 17th AVENUE, WITHIN BEL-PORTE PARK SUBDIVISION
The hour of 9:30 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to wit:
VERO REACH 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 _i_�� OJ
in the matter of
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues ofd-�-�
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..
C!i 2
Sworn to and subscribpi bef#e me As n / day of «— A.D. 19 e_J
(IWAiness Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, [Van River County, Florida)
(SEAL)
32
DEC 211983
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE OF HEARING TO CONSIDER A PETI-
TION FOR THE CLOSING, ABANDONMENT
AND VACATION OF THAT PORTION OF 9TH
STREET LYING EAST OF THE EAST RIGHT-
OF -WAY OF 17TH AVENUE LOCATED IN,
BEL-PORTE PARK SUBDIVISION.
A public hearing at which parties in interesti
and citizens shall have an opportunity to bel
heard, will be held by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Flor-'
ida, in the county Commission Chambers of
the County Administration Building, located at
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on
Wednesday, December 21, 1983, at 9:30 A.M.
if any person decides to appeal any deci-
sion made on the above matter, he will need a
record of the proceedings, and for such pur-
poses, he may need to ensure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings is made, which in-
cludes testimony and evidence upon which
the appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By: -s -Richard N. Bird
Chairman
Dec. 2, 1983.
PACEvlffl
.
F1__
-
DEC 211983
a 5
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/12/83:
TO: The. Honorable Members DATE: December 12, 1983 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: RIGHT-OF-WAY ABANDONMENT
REQUEST SUBMITTED BY
SUBJECT: MICHAEL O' HAIRE
Robert M. Keati g, =P
Planning.& Development Director
FROM;Karen M. Craver. / E .. ROW Aban. M. 0' Haire
Staff Planner ' �' ( REFERENCES: DIS:KAREN
{
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting on December 21, 1983.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On September 27, 1983, Attorney Michael O'Haire submitted a
right-of-way abandonment petition on behalf of Diane and Gerald
Pesch and Barbara and Karl Hollers, Jr. The application
requests that the County abandon its rights to.that portion of
9th Street lying east of 17th Avenue within Bel -Porte Park
Subdivision (see Attachment 2).
In accordance with the administrative guidelines approved by
the Board of County Commissioners for the processing of right-
of-way abandonment applications, the request was reviewed by
all County departments and utility providers having jurisdic-
tion within the roadway. The application was disapproved by
the Traffic Engineering Department and conditionally approved
by the Right-of-way Department. All other reviewing agencies
approved the request.
ANALYSIS
The 70 foot wide right-of-way was dedicated to the County on a
plat recorded in 1957 and has not been utilized to this date.
It was the concern of the Traffic Engineer that this "stub -out"
was created for future interconnection with the adjacent land
parcel and its abandonment would prohibit_ that. However, the
adjacent property is zoned Multi -Family and if developed as
such would presumably incorporate an internal traffic circu-
lation system with a point of ingress/egress on 8th Street.
The Right-of-way Department approved the petition on the
condition that the County retain a 10 foot drainage easement on
either side,of the.centerline of 9th Street. The eastern edge
of the property for which abandonment has been requested
borders on a 60 foot wide drainage ditch right-of-way (see
Attachment 2). The Planning Department concurs with the
conditional approval of the Right-of-way Department.
33
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the County abandon it road rights to that
portion of 9th Street lying east of 17th Avenue within
Bel -Porte Park Subdivision with the following condition:
1. The document reserving a 20 foot drainage easement be
executed and recorded (see Attachment 3).
Attorney Michael O'Haire, representing the applicants,
was in attendance.
Vice Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing, and
asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
From the rear of the chambers a lady inquired why the
County wanted the 20 feet, and Vice Chairman Scurlock
explained the County's policy of retaining 20 -foot easements
for drainage purposes.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously closed the Public Hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commission Bowman, the Board
unanimously approved Resolution 83-124,
providing for the closing, abandonment and
vacation of 9th Street lying east of the east
right-of-way line of 17th Avenue located in
Bel -Porte Park Subdivision, and reserving unto
the County an easement for drainage purposes.
34
DEC 21 1983 �� E
I
-
DEC 211933
BOOK 55 r4CE
RESOLUTION N„ 81 124
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE CLOSING, ABANDONMENT AND
VACATION OF 9TH STREET LYING EAST OF THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
OF 17TH AVENUE LOCATED IN BEL-PORTE PARK SUBDIVISION, AND
RESERVING UNTO THE COUNTY AN EASEMENT FOR DRAINAGE PURPOSES.
WHEREAS, on.September 2.7, 1983, the County received a
duly executed and documented petition from Diane and Gerald
Resch of 916 17th Avenue, Vero Beach, Florida; Barbara and Karl
Hollers, Jr. of 866 17th Avenue, Vero Beach, Florida,
requesting the County to close, vacate, abandon, and disclaim
any right, title, and interest of the County and the public in
and to all that portion of 9th Street lying east of the east
right-of-way line of 17th Avenue as recorded in Plat Book 5,
Page 22.
WHEREAS, in accordance with Florida Statutes §
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, not is said right-of-way
necessary for continuity of the County's street and
thoroughfare network, nor access to any given private property;
with the sole exception that said right-of-way is deemed
necessary for drainage purposes as reserved below.
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 known as 9th
Street, which lies east of the east right-of-way line of 17th
Avenue as recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 22, of the Public
Records of Indian River County, Florida, is hereby forever
closed, abandoned, vacated, surrendered, discontinued, remised
and released with the exception that the following described
drainage easement is hereby reserved in perpetuity unto the
County and the public and shall not be deemed to have been
closed or abandoned in any way by this resolution:
An easement being 20' in width being 10' on
either side of the centerline of 9th Street,
as recorded on the Plat of Bel -Porte Park
Subdivision in Plat Book 5, Page 22, Public
Records of Indian River County, Florida.
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 with the 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
Lyons who moved its adoption. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Bowman and, upon being put
to a vote, the vote was as follows:
41
Chairman Richard N. Bird Absent
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 day of , 1983.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
l;
RICHARD N. BIRD, Chairman
At
FREDA WRIGHT, ,glerk
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an
officer duly authorized in this State and County to take
acknowledgments, personally appeared RICHARD N. BIRD and FREDA
WRIGHT, as Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners and
Clerk, respectively, to me known to be the persons described in
and who executed the foregoing instrument and they acknowledged
before me that they executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and official qtrjal in he County and
State
last aforesaid this
day of A D
1983. --
Notary ublic lftw -A
61
APPROVED AST FORM AND LEGAL
SUFFICIE
BY:
PRY M. BRAN EN
"PR
AttorneyBURG,
Bel -Porte Aband.
WORKB
DEC 211983
NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA
uONDED THRU GENERAL INSURANCE UNDO I
MY COMMISSION EXPI.RES JULY .8. 1986
BOK 55 68 4_
DEC 2 11983
06% 55,
pw
PETITION FOR EXTENSION OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL
- COTTON
PROPERTIES, INC.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/12/83:
TO: The. Honorable Members DATE: December 12, 1983FILE:
of the Board of County #112C -81 -SP -98-659
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: COTTON PROPERTIES, INC.
PETITION FOR EXTENSION OF
SUBJECT: SITE PLAN APPROVAL
Robert M. Keati g, CP
Planning & Development Director
Mary Jane V. Goetzfried Cotton. Prop.
FROM: Staff Planner REFERENCES: DIS : MARYJ
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at
their regular meeting on December 21, 1983.
DESCRIPTION. AND CONDITIONS
In August of 1981, Architect Daniel Moul, submitted a major
site plan application on behalf of Cotton Properties, Inc.,
owner of lot 125 Unit Two, The Moorings. The site plan appli-
cation, which proposes the construction of twelve multi -family
units on the one acre subject property was approved in February
of 1982.
Subsequently, the Board of County Commissioners granted a one
year extension to the owner, providing for an approval expira-
tion date of February 25, 1984.
At this time, the owner's attorney, Charles E. Garris, is
requesting a further extension of 1 year, pursuant to Section
23(h) of the Zoning Code.
ANALYSIS
Traditionally, a 1 year extension of site plan approval has
been granted by the Board at the request of the arplicant.
This additional time usually allows for.finalarrangements to
be made prior to the commencement of construction. Once
construction has begun, there are no applicable provisions of
the ordinance providing a time limit to complete construction.
However, in February'.of 1983, the Board granted an additional
18 month extension of site plan approval to the Moorings
Development Company, for 3 individual projects. The approval
of that request was based on the limited available capacity of
Hutchinson Utilities, the franchised company which provides
wastewater treatment for the Moorings Subdivision. At that
time, the Moorings had approval to construct 160 multi --family
units, in addition to a 62,000 square foot retail sales and
office complex, while the capacity of the sewage treatment
plant was limited to 18,625 gallons per day or 96 hook-ups.
37
The restricted availability of_ wastewater -treatment precluded
the issuance of a zoning permit to the Moorings Development
Company within the alloted time period.
Thd Cotton property is not faced with this same problem, in
that, as of December 8, 1983)the existing plant has the capaci-
ty to serve 64 residential units, including the 12 units
proposed for lot 125.
This request for an additional extension is based in part on
financial constraints. However, in the past, it has been the
County's position that 2 years is adequate time to allow for
finalization of financial arrangements._
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial of the request to grant an additional
one year extension of site -plan approval to Cotton Properties,
Inc. for the development of lot 125, The Moorings.
Planning & Development Director Robert Keating
explained staff's position of not recommending an extension,
noting that County policy in the past has been not to grant
an additional extension. There has been one exception to
that rule. This was also for property in the Moorings, and
a second extension was given for three projects, and the
second extension of 18 months was allowed for three
projects, specifically because there was not sufficient
capacity available in the sewage treatment plant. This case
is different because there is sufficient capacity in the
Hutchinson Utilities plant for the 12 units. The applicant
contends that he needs a second extension because of the
financial aspects that are involved. Staff's feeling is
that we should not establish a precedent since the intent of
the expiration policy is to insure that developments that
have been approved under one set of regulations do not go on
forever, because regulations change and new developments are
subject to the new standards and regulations. In in this
particular case, the Comprehensive Land Plan has
significantly changed the densities in that area from 12
units per acre, for which this site plan is approved, down
to the existing three units per acre.
Vice Chairman Scurlock noted that.there is not
sufficient capacity in the wastewater treatment plant, nor
38
DEC 21 1983 55 rAcE
-DEC 211983 BwK 55 PnE-
the proposed new plant, to handle all the developed land in
that area, and, therefore, the County is going to be faced
with how to provide service for 12 units an acre when, in
fact, we do not have capacity for 3 units per acre. He felt
the bottom line is that the Moorings and a few other
individuals down there are going to have to expand that
plant as needed in order to continue to develop.
Director Keating explained that construction has not
begun on the 12 units and if the extension is denied, the
developer will either have to bring in a new site plan or
start to build during the two months remaining on the
one-year extension.
Charles Garris, Attorney representing Cotton
Properties, Inc., felt that a further extension in this
particular project would not seta precedent. He went into
considerable detail about the problems they encountered
because of a 35' height limitation which resulted in them
having to ask for a one-year extension at the end of 1982,
And how, after receiving the extension, they moved forward
on the project-, but then ran into problems with the
financial institutions which, because of the state of the
economy, required that they have 6 pre -sold units before
commencing construction. They have sold only three units to
date and would like this 90-120 day extension in order to
attract prospective buyers from the winter visitors.
Attorney Garris realized that if the extension is
denied today, they still have the right to initiate
construction, but pointed out that it will be difficult to
do that before the -.site plan expiration date of February
25th because of the length of time it would take to obtain a
building permit for a project of this size, to put the
pilings down, to put in the footers, etc. In addition, if
they cannot meet the January 25th deadline, they will have a
problem with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and will have
39
to come back in with a new site plan for 3 units an acre.
Attorney Garris pointed out that other condos in that area
are built at 12 units per acre and if their one acre
development has a density of 3 units an acre, it is going to
be rather conspicuous. He further --stressed that his client
has put a considerable amount of money and effort into this
project, even if nothing shows on the ground, i.e.,
architectural, engineering, and legal fees, etc. Attorney
Garris further pointed out that the project will create over
$3 -million in assessed value that will be added to the
County tax rolls.
Vice Chairman Scurlock felt that we have a much larger
problem than just this acre of property, because what is
going to happen at build out is that there will be 1500
units requiring service. If the existing plant doesn't have.
the capacity, he felt that the County should consider a
moratorium on all development in the Moorings until this
problem is resolved. He continued that he would like to
find some way for the developer to save the money he has
invested in this project, but, on the other hand he could
not approve the 12 units per acre, when we cannot provide
for 3.
Director Keating reported that staff is presently
reviewing a water plant site plan and they are having
trouble with the setbacks.
Commissioner Lyons suggested that we bring the
wastewater treatment plant capacity to a head by putting the
matter on the agenda for the first or second meeting in
January.
Administrator Wright advised that Hutchinson Island
Utilities rate hearing is on the agenda for January and that
hearing will decide whether or not they expand, remain where
they are, or relocate, and they will take a long range view
of capacity.
40
.''DEC 21 1983
DEC 211983
. Bux 55 rAcE 689
Commissioner Wodtke felt that the Board should get back
to the Cotton Properties situation, and asked staff if they
had any problem in granting a short extension to enable them
to begin construction.
Director Keating believed that an extension of 90 days
would be much more acceptable to staff than a term of one
year, but advised that staff still feels this would be
setting a precedent in County policy.
Vice Chairman Scurlock understood staff's aversion to
establishing a precedent in allowing an additional
extension, but felt on the other hand, there is some
uniqueness in this situation that needs to be resolved.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, that the
Board grant Cotton Properties, Inc. a final
90 -day site plan extension from February 25, 1984.
Under discussion,.Commissioner Lyons expressed his
reluctance to get involved with Hutchinson Utilities
capacity and wanted to serve notice that the County is
considering a moratorium on all development in the Moorings.
THE VICE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously:
__ 41
REQUEST FROM STATE ATTORNEY TO PURCHASE EQUIPMENT THROUGH
SHERIFF'S CONFISCATED FUNDS
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/2.0/83:
ROBERTE.STONE
STATE ATTORNEY
BRUCE COLTON
CHIEF ASST. STATE ATTORNEY
OFFICE OF
STATE ATTORNEY
NINETEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF FLORIDA
SERVING
INDIAN RIVER, MARTIN, OKEECHOBEE
AND ST. LUCIE
AUTOMOBILES FOR STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
PLEASE REPLY TO:
P. 0. Drawer 4401
Ft. Pierce, FL 33448
305-465-3000
12/20/83
1984 DODGE RAM WAGON $11,917.00
TWO - 1983 FORD FAIRMONTS 12,000.00
1979 OLDSMOBILE - LIEN 2,063.48
$25,980.48
CAR PHONE - INDIAN RIVER COUNTY S.O. 4,000.00
TOTAL: $29,980.00
State Attorney Robert Stone reported that some $100,000
in drug forfeiture funds were received as a result of the
State Attorney's Task Force, which covers four counties.
Out of that amount $30,000 has been appropriated to the
State Attorney's Office. He explained his request to
purchase.four automobiles and a car phone at a total cost of
$29,980, to be taken from the drug seizure funds. Some
discussion took place regarding the unencumbered balance in
the Sheriff's seizure funds account and Sheriff Dobeck
advised that they had recently deposited $60,000 in that
account.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
42
DEC 211983 BOOK 5 ?AcED,519, 9
II
DEC 21 1993 Boa 55 PACE �9
Board unanimously approved the State
Attorney's request to purchase four
automobiles and car phone, as listed in the
memo above, for a total cost of $29,980 to
come out of the $30,000 appropriation to the
State Attorney's Office, as recommended by
State Attorney Robert Stone.
Commissioner Wodtke left the meeting at 10:30 o'clock
A.M. due to an illness in his family.
PROPERTY EXCHANGE - COUNTY "BRIDGEHEAD" PROPERTY FOR CITY OF
VERO BEACH PARKING LOT
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/12/83:
TO: The Honorable Members of - DATE: December 12, 1983 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: PROPERTY EXCHANGE
Fn`om. Michael Wright''
right- REFERENCES:
County Administrator
A tentative agreement has been negotiated with the City
of'Vero Beach staff to exchange the "Bridge Head" property
for the city owned parking lot at the County Administration
Building.
Attached are sketches that outline the respective par-
cels. Liz Forlani has copies of the Armfield-Houck apprai-
sals that value the "Bridge Head" property at $105,000 and
the parking lot at $2303,000 less $65,000 in County purchased
improvements.
The parking lot was leased from the City for a nominal
cost. The lease expired on September 30, 1983.. Ms. Forlani
has a copy of the lease.-
The
ease.-
The City staff wants to add the "Bridge Head" property
to McWilliams Park and has agreed to dedicate the property
for public use. However, the staff wants the right to trade
part of the property with the adjoining property owner to
square off boundary lines.
Since the land swap appears to be in the best interest
of both parties, I recommend the County Commission entertain
the proposal of evenly swaping ownership of the parcels with
the City of Vero Beach.
If there awe any questi-ons, please advise.
DEC 211983 BCOK 55 PEEP794-1 ! f
_J
-
- > iyi ir• 'fit}Yv. p..> .,,yr}��.��1
-.
t:14r
'�lS. Y 4�
_ .~ .rr 4�'P•�.- ..� _ �' T T� tiA'K� ; i. t 5_.aa Ai �L....
/Yi1
,"".f ..• .ia5.s-t `i. .1:,•
.
�'N
... •I 2 ''3 +.. �{�'e 'c k`T`fiA ♦S+s! 9aX•�1.�r�.��j'Sy✓ �i•S��f"yr4'lt�:Z4�
� "S
s.. . • - t. . x,.,,xF,�71��"'S. -r s...an � r ,.5. .... .a
10
DEC 211983 BCOK 55 PEEP794-1 ! f
_J
-DEC l 1983,.
10
4/7
Administrator Wright reported that the City of Vero
Beach has agreed to the proposal with no conditions on the
exchange of the property. In other words, they want it to
go free and clear. They also want to reserve the option to
square off some property lines.
Commissioner Bowman was concerned that the City might
start to lease that property out and that the County might
need that land in order to maintain Fritz Island sometime in
the future, but Commissioner Lyons explained that Fritz
Island is private property within the City of Vero Beach and
we don't have to worry about it.
Administrator Wright could not see any value in
retaining 100 square feet in the middle of that park when
the land exchange would be to the benefit of both
governments and the County really needs that parking lot.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously (3-0) approved the
property exchange as outlined in the above
memo.
50 -FOOT LOTS ON•THE BARRIER ISLAND
TO: The Honorable Members of ®ATE: December 12, 1983 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: 50 -FOOT LOTS ON
BARRIER ISLAND
FROM: Michael Wright -t, 1 REFERENCES:
County Administr w
Back in the early 19401s, the County and City of Vero
Beach achieved ownership of a number of 50 -foot lots located
on either side of Beachland Boulevard. The original owners
failed to pay taxes on the property and the ownership re-
verted to the local governments.
44
DEC 211983 BKX 55 FACE -69*
0 E C 211983 BOOK PACE
An aerial map has been prepared to clearly depict the
location of the lots and the current ownership and use of
the property. The lots lie primarily in the path of Flamingo
Drive and Eagle Drive.
The nine lots colored in yellow with blue diagonal
stripes are currently owned by the City of Vero Beach. The
ten lots colored in yellow with red diagonal stripes are
owned by the County, but are currently being used or will be
needed by Vero Beach for road and/or utility purposes.
The ten yellow lots that have a single green stripe down
the center are owned by the County. There are underground
utilities on these lots, but they could be sold to adjacent
property owners subject to the retention of proper easements.
The County sold one such lot'in 1979 to Anthony J. Bianco.
A copy of the transaction is available from Ms. Forlani.
The six lots colored in orange are owned by the County
-and could be sold to the public as buildable lots.
County Attorney Brandenburg suggests the proper proce-
dure for disposal of the 35 lots is for the County to assign
its interest in nineteen lots to the City. The City, in turn,
would assign its interest in sixteen lots to the County. Mr.
Brandenburg can explain the precise legal requirements of the
proposed transactions.
Many of the lots that would be owned by the City of Vero
Beach are being used as road rights of way. The remaining
lots will become road rights of way and all lots have utility
easements. The City will undoubtedly retain ownership of all
the lots.
The County, on the other hand, can dispose of all sixteen
of its lots, place the property on the tax rolls and the sale
proceeds into its land acquisition and improvement account.
It the Commission concurs with this proposal, I recommend
the staff be authorized to prepare the necessary documents for
Commission action.
If you require additional information, please contact
Tommy Thomas or me at your convenience. .
Administrator Wright referred to a map on the wall
showing approximately 30 lots on the beach, and explained
that the City of Vero Beach and the County wound up owning
some of these as a result of tax foreclosures back in the
1940s. In order to dispose of them, we have to assign our
interest to the ones that the City will retain, and the City
will do likewise with the ones the County will retain. He
noted that the.majority of the City properties all have
either utility easements or roads down the middle of them.
The County might end up with 8 or 10 lots that could be sold
to adjacent
� property owners,. and there are possibly 5 or 6
= 45
lots that would be clear 50 -foot buildable lots. The
Administrator could not see any advantage to the County in
retaining ownership of these lots and recommended that the
County dispose of them. He asked that the Board authorize
him to do everything that needs to --be done, i.e. appraisals,
agreements with the City, and bring it back before the Board
_. with the idea of disposing of the properties and placing any
monies received in the County's acquisition and development
funds.
Director Thomas pointed out that these lots could
become a maintenance problem, and this is an opportunity to
get them back on the tax rolls even with the easements.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously (3-0) approved the
recommendation of Administrator Wright
as outlined in his memo and authorized him
to prepare the necessary papers to dispose of
the properties and that any monies be placed in
the County's acquisition and development funds.
ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION AWARDING INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
REVENUE BONDS TO FLORIDA HEALTH FACILITIES PROJECT
Administrator Wright explained that Florida Health
Facilities have not yet resolved the wastewater issue with
the City. If they are unable to resolve it, they are
prepared to move forward with the installation of a package
sewer plant.
Assistant County Attorney Paull reported that
yesterday's bond validation meeting was successful in that
the bonds have been validated by the Circuit Court. This
resolution simply awards the sale of the bonds to Barnett
Bank.
46
DEC 211983
DEC 211983 too rAd9'
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously (3-0) adopted Resolution
83-125, awarding $2,400,000 Industrial
Development Revenue Bonds, Series 1983,
(Florida Health Facilities Project), of
Indian River County, at negotiated sale to
the purchaser; and providing an effective
date.
(BOND PURCHASE AGREEMENT IS'ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERX)
47
RESOLUTION NO. 83-125
A RESOLUTION AWARDING $2,4001,000 INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1983
(FLORIDA HEALTH FACILITIES PROJECT'), OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDAr AT NEGOTIATED
SALE TO THE PURCHASER; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, a resolution (hereinafter called "Resolution")
of the Board of County Commissioners (hereinafter called
"Governing Body") of Indian River County, Florida (hereinafter
called "Issuer"), duly adopted on October.19, 1983, authorized
the issuance of not exceeding $2,400,000 Industrial Development
Revenue Bonds, Series 1983 (Florida -Health Facilities Project),
hereinafter called "Bonds," to provide for the acquisition and
construction of a capital project in the area of the Issuer, and
WHEREAS, the Bonds were validated and confirmed by final
judgment of the Circuit Court, Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, in
and for Indian River County, Florida; and
WHEREAS, Barnett Bank of Central Florida, N.A., Orlando,
Florida (hereinafter called "Purchaser"), has offered to purchase
$2,400,000 aggregate principal amount of the Bonds at the price
of par, pursuant to the remaining terms of the Bond Purchase
Agreement attached hereto (hereinafter called "Bond Purchase
Agreement"); and
WHEREAS, the Resolution contains specific findings as to
the reasons requiring a negotiated sale of the Bonds; and
WHEREAS, the Governing Body deems it necessary and
desirable at this time to award the Bonds at negotiated sale to
the Purchaser; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1. AWARD OF BONDS. The Bonds, in the aggregate
principal amount of $2,400,000, are hereby awarded and sold to
the Purchaser at the price of par and upon the remaining terms
and conditions of the Bond Purchase Agreement. The Governing
Body hereby authorizes and directs its Chairman to execute and
its Clerk to attest under the official seal of the Issuer, the
Bond Purchase Agreement in substantially the form attached hereto.
48
8 X
DEC 211983
-J
DEC 211983 eK 5: rE�9�
S ••
SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This resolution shall take
effect immediately upon its adoption.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Lyons who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Bowman and, upon being put to a vote,
the vote was as follows;
Chairman Richard N. Bird Absent
Vice Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr._ Absent
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 21st day of December, 1983.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By �-
RICHARD N. BIRD
Chairman
Attest
FREDA WRIGHT, Clerk
APPROVED 0 FORM AND
LEGAL SU IEN
By _ � 4�,
�y url�Ey�.AttofrDENBU G
-2-
49
- r
APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT AND
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY re SOUTH BEACH FIRE STATION
Assistant County Attorney Paull explained that this
agreement was prepared by Charles Vitunac, who is sitting as
the attorney for the Fire District -and it is before the
Board of County Commissioners for approval today. However,
it must also be approved by the District Board of Fire
Commissioners of the South Indian River County Fire
District.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board
unanimously (3-0) approved the agreement between
the South Indian River County Fire District and
Indian River County, -South Beach Fire Station.
AGREEMENT WAS MADE A PART MINUTES OF THE SOUTH COUNTY FIRE
DISTRICT MEETING OF 12/21/83
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman,,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board
unanimously (3-0) agreed to add a meeting
of the South County Fire District to today's
Agenda.
SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
The Board of County Commissioners recessed at 10:45
o'clock A.M. in order that the District Board of the South
County Fire District might convene. Those Minutes are being
prepared separately.
The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 10:47
o'clock A.M. with the same members present, Chairman Bird
and Commissioner Wodtke being absent.
50
DEC 21 1983
B�}K55 tnpl/9
-DEC 21 1993
609K 55 PAf E701
WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT SEMINAR
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously (3-0) approved the,
attendance of Vice Chairman Scurlock and
a Utilities Dept. staff member at
the Wastewater Management Seminar to be
held in Tallahassee on Jan. 10-11, 1984.
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT
Vice Chairman Scurlock reported that no formal action
was taken at the last meeting of the Transportation Planning
Committee.
The representatives from the Gifford community, Victor
Hart and Ralph Lundy, did attend the meeting and got an
update on the federal revenue money spent on improvements in
the Gifford area over the last ten years.
An invitation was extended to review staff's procedures
in setting priorities within the technical staff, as well as
within the community itself.
There was some discussion and a recommendation made
that flashing beacons be installed at all schools in the
County. It was the consensus'of the committee that this was
important enough and general enough to be paid for out of
general sources of revenue. The total cost is.approximately
$24,000 to install a flashing signal at every school zone in
the County.
JAIL COMMITTEE REPORT
Commissioner Lyons expressed his frustration in regard
to the last meeting of the Jail Committee at which the
architects presented the plans, etc., as there seems to be a
continuing escalation of charges.
He felt that he has
51
� � r
reached the limit of his elasticity in the matter, and he is
about ready to go back and have an agonizing reappraisal.
Knowing what we all know about jails and looking at the
constraints that the County has and the spirit of
cooperation that exists with the Sheriff's Department
Commissioner Lyons stated that he is ready to tell the
architects that we are not going to exceed $8 -million in the
building of the jail; whatever we do will have to be
accomplished within that amount. He felt that we can set up
some alternatives that will get us through the first phase
and then look at it again in another 5 years. -
Commissioner Lyons wished to accomplish two things:
1) Provide sufficient jail cell capacity in one location,
and:, 2) Set up efficient intake and administrative space as
far as the jail is concerned. -He continued that his
recommended $8 -million figure would include contingencies,
and reported that he will be meeting with the architects in
the first week of January. In the meantime, Capt. Bill
Baird and Jim Davis areconsidering revisions to the plans.
Commissioner Lyons reported that there is a possibility
of using prefabricated portions for part of the jail, and
noted that juvenile and women's quarters have different
requirements than the men's quarters. He felt confident
that the Sheriff is pretty much in agreement and will do
everything necessary to make this work.
Administrator Wright suggested the financial
alternative of using a sales tax, but cautioned that it has
to be moved on during the next 10 days. Commissioner Lyons
said that whatever financial alternative they come up with
would be fine with him, as he will be out of state during
the next meeting.
Administrator Wright stressed that we must determine
the cost of the jail before we can determine the financing.
52
DEC 211983 Fnr 5,5E702.1
DEr ,2 3.1983
aNK 51 PACE 740 .
The Board of County Commissioners thereupon recessed at
12:00 Noon and reconvened at 1:30 P.M. with the same members
present, Chairman Bird and Attorney Brandenburg being in New
York City at a bond closing, and Commissioner Wodtke having
been called out of the meeting due to illness in his family.
Vice Chairman Scurlock reconvened the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING TO C-2 (SCHAAF)
The hour of 1:30 o'clock P.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published 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
in the Court, was pub -
fished in said newspaper in the issues of &e., • c �� / �d
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 before me this -n day of • A.D. 19 0
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, I
(SEAL)
;7 (Bt,Yjtyess Manager)
River County, Florida)
53
NOTICE — PUBUC HEARING
Notice of hearing to consider the adoption
of a County ordinance rezoning land from:
C-1, Commercial District" to C -2,' -
"Heavy Commercial Dlirldct." The sub-
ject property presently owned by
1 Ralph and Pearl Schaaf is located on' _
'the north side of 9th Street, S.W.; ap-.
proximately 660 feet west of 32nd Ave- '
nue, S.W.
The subject property Is described as:
The South 600 feet of the West 10
acres of Tract -15, Section 22, Town-
ship 33 South, Range 39 Fast. Indian.
River County, Florida. ' `
Apublic hearing at which parties in interest
and citizens shalt have an opportunity to be
Comheard, will be held by the Board of County
missioners of Indian River County Flor-
id' in the County Common' Chambers of
the County Administration Building, located at
840 25th Street, Vera Beach, Florida, on
ednesday, December 21, 1983. at 1:30 P.M -
If any person decides to appeal any deci-
ion made on the above matter, he will need a
ecord of the proceedings, and for such pur.
ossa; he may need to ensure that a verbatim
ecord of the proceedings is made, which in-
ludes testimony and evidence upon which
he appeal Is based.-
Indian
ased Indian River County
Board of Countyry Com=* toners
By: -s -Richard N.'Bfrd
Chairman
Dec. 2,14, 1983:
Attorney George Collins was present representing the
applicants, Ralph and Pearl Schaaf, and stated that he would
defer any comments until after the staff presentation.
Planner Richard Shearer reviewed staff memo and
recommendation as follows:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: November 15, 1983FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVIISSIOON HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT:
Robert M. Keati g, P
Planning & Deve opment
Director
jz s
FROM: h
Principal PlannAlCP
Planner
REFERENCES:
SCHAAF REQUEST TO REZONE
APPROX. 4.6 ACRES FROM
C-1, COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
TO C-2, HEAVY COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County"Commissioners at their
regular meeting of December 21, 1983.
- DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The applicants, Ralph and Pearl Schaaf, are requesting to rezone
approximately 4.6 acres located on the north side of Oslo Road
and approximately 660.feet west of 32nd Avenue from C-1,
Commercial District, to C-2, Heavy Commercial District.
The applicants propose to expand the mini -warehouses located on
this site.. Since mini -warehouses are not a permitted use in C-1
districts, the existing warehouses are currently a
nonconforming use and cannot be expanded. The C-2 district
allows mini -warehouses and would permit -expansion of the
existing facility.
On November 10, 1983, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
3 -to -0 (with one member abstaining) to recommend approval of
this rezoning request. _
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the existing land use pattern
will be presented as well as a discussion of the future land use
as established in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive
Plan.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property currently contains mini -warehouses. East
of the subject property is Tippin's Landscaping Service. To the
south, across Oslo Road is Grovenor Estates, a single-family
subdivision which is partially developed.. West of the subject
property is Dennis L. Smith, Inc., pavement maintenance service,
and vacant land. The land north of the subject property is
vacant.
DEC 211983
CA
t D�i1 .55 14i4..-7.u.';9yr
a
-. >., ._... _.
DEC 211983 aeoIK 55 PA100-5
Future Land Use Pattern
The subject property, and the land immediately east, west, and
south of it, are designated as MXD, Mixed -Use District (up to 3
units/acre). The land north and southeast of the subject
property is designated as LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (up to
3 units/acre). The MXD designation allows residential,
commercial, and industrial uses where such development will be
conducive to the dominant land uses of the area, and appropriate
transition areas and buffers can be provided. The land east of
the subject property is zoned C-1. The land west of the subject
property is also zoned C-1 and is also being considered for
rezoning to C-2. Sufficient transition areas and buffers are
available to provide buffers for surrounding lands.
Roads/Traffic
This property has direct access to Oslo Road which is classified
as an arterial street on the Thoroughfare Plan. It is estimated
that a small amount of additional traffic would be generated as
a result of rezoning this property. Oslo Road currently
provides level -of -service "A" for traffic in this area.
Environment
The subject property is not designated as environmentally
sensitive nor is it in a flood prone area.
Utilities
The subject property is not currently served by County water nor
wastewater facilities. However, the County does have plans to
extend water service to this area in the near future.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the existing land use.of
the subject property and the surrounding area, and the Planning
and Zoning Commission's recommendation,`'staff recommends
approval.
Mr. Shearer reported that a letter had been received
from adjacent property owners, Stanley and Lisa Tippin, in
support of the rezoning request, and the Planning and Zoning
Commission voted 3 to 0 in favor of granting the rezoning,
with John Tippin abstaining.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked if anyone present wished
to be heard. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (3-0)
adopted Ordinance 83-47 rezoning the subject
property to C-2 as requested by Ralph Schaaf.
5
® � s
ORDINANCE N0.83-47
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of
Intent to rezone the hereinafter described property and
pursuant thereto held a public hearing in relation thereto, at
which parties in interest and citizens were heard; NOW,
THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board'of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning Ordinance of
Indian River County, Florida, and the accompanying Zoning Map,
be amended as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that
the following described property situated in
Indian River County, Florida, to -wit:
The South 600 feet of the West 10 acres of Tract 15,
Section 22, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, Indian
River County, Florida.
Be changed from C-1, Commercial District to C-2, Heavy
Commercial District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Zoning Regulations.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida on this21st day of December ,
1983.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY:
Ric and N. Bird
Chairman
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of
Florida this 29th day of December ,1983.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State
received on this 3rd day of January , 1984, atll:OOA.M.JP.M.
and filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUF IENCY
BY: Z
/G1 RY/M_ BRATdDENBURq, County Attorney
DEC 211983
B00K5 FACE
-DEC 21 1983 ' K race 707
PUBLIC HEARING - COUNTY INITIATED REZONING TO C-2 (OSLO
ROAD AREA)
The hour of 1:30 o'clock P.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
VER® 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�� ,` 9,
in the Court, was pub -
Al
lished in said newspaper in the issues ofL1 Q' AP -3
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 behore me,,this day of �� A.D. 19 OJO
Manager)
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, IrVn River County, Florida)
NOTICE PUBLIC HEARING
Notice of hearing. Initiated by Indian River
County, to consider the adoption of a County
ordinance rezoning land from:
C-.1, "Commercial District" to C-2,
"Meavy Commercial District." The sub-
ject property is Dated on the north
and south sides of 9th Street, S.W., . .
lying between 35th and 43rd Avenin,
S.W.
-The subject property is described as:
The South 800 feet of Tracts 13 and
.14, Section 22, Township 33 South,
Range 39 East, Indian River County,
lying North of the Nocthfight-of-way .
line of Oslo Road
i AND ALSD�
The North':800 feet of the North $
acres of the East 5 acres of Tract 4, .
and the North 600 feet of .the West 20 - :. =
acres of Tract -3, both Tracts In Sec
tion 27, Township 33 South, Range 39 `
East, Indian River Coupty; lying South
of the right-of-way line of Indian River
Farms Water Management DisWJ4
canal South of the South right-otway:.
line of Oslo Road.
A public hearing 'at which parties In Interest
and Citizens shall have an opportunity to be
heard, will be held by the Board:of County
Commissioners of Indian. River County, Flor-'
Ida, in the County Commission Chambers of- .
the County Administration Building,. located at
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on
Wednesday, December 21,4983, at 1:30 P.M.
If any person decides to appeal any decision,
made on the above matter, he will need a
record of the proceedings, and for such pur-
poses, he may need to ensure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings to made; which In-
cludes testimony and .evidence upon which
the appeal is based.
Indian River County -
Board of County Commissioners
By: -s -Richard N. Bird -
Chairman
Dec. 2.14. 1 9W.
Planner Shearer reviewed staff memo as follows, noting
that the subject property is adjacent to the Schaaf
property, which was just rezoned to C-2:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE:. November 17, 1983 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE: COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST
TO REONETELY
SUBJECT: 46.77ZACRESPFROM IC -1"
• COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, TO
C-2, HEAVY COMMERCIAL
Robert M. Keati`g, CP DISTRICT
Planning & Development Director
)z 5> )
FROM: Richard. Shearer, AICD REFERENCES: Co. Initiated Req.
Principal Planner DIS•RUTH
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of December 21, 1983.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The applicant, Indian River County, is requesting to rezone
approximately 46.77 acres located on both sides of Oslo Road
and approximately one-half mile west of 27th_ Avenue from C-1,
Commercial District, to C-2, Heavy Commercial District.
This rezoning request was initiated because of another rezoning
request contiguous to this property -(a request to rezone from
C-1 to C-2) and to alleviate the nonconforming use status of
several properties in this area..
On November 10, 1983, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
4 -to -0 to recommend approval of this rezoning request.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis
will be presented as well as
use as established in the Land
Plan.
EXISTING LAND USE PATTERN
of the existing land use pattern
a discussion of the future land
Use Element of the Comprehensive
The subject property currently contains the Dennis L. Smith,
Inc., Paving Maintenance facility, the Rountree Groves mainte-
nance shop, a citrus grove, a vacant commercial building, two
mobile homes, a single-family residence, two properties which
are being used for heavy equipment storage, the Ven -Mar Irriga-
tion Specialist facility (including outdoor storage), and
vacant land. Almost all of the individual parcels of land
which are part of the subject property contain nonconforming
land uses. The subject property is surrounded primarily by
vacant land. East of the subject property is Vero Mini Stor-
age, a parcel for which C-2 zoning has been requested, and
Tippin's Landscaping Service. Southeast of the easternmost
part of the subject property is Grovenor Estates, a single-
family subdivision which is partially developed.
FUTURE LAND USE PATTERN
The Comprehensive Plan designates- the subject property as MXD,
Mixed -Use District (up to 3 dwelling units/acre). Most of the
land surrounding the subject property is designated as LD -1,
Low -Density Residential 1 (up to 3 dwelling units/acre). The
MXD land use designation allows commercial, industrial, or
DEC 211983
IN
W
$K 55 PACE 7,8
r -
DEC 211983
B -5 5 ?Ac E709
residential uses where such uses are compatible with surround-
ing land uses. However, the MXD land use designation also
identifies areas which have traditionally had a broad mixture
of land uses which makes it very difficult to provide appropri-
ate transition areas between different types of land uses.
Most of the land uses on the subject property do not conform to
the existing C-1 zoning regulations. These nonconforming uses
should be located in the Heavy Commercial District or an
industrial zoning district to be in conformance with the
County's zoning Ordinance. However, industrial zoning dis-
tricts would allow intensive land uses which would not be
compatible with the existing land uses in this area. In order
to bring -.these nonconforming uses into conformance with
the zoning ordinance and to encourage redevelopment in this MXD
area which is compatible with these existing uses, a rezoning
to C-2 seems appropriate.
ROADS/TRAFFIC
The subject property has direct access to Oslo Road which is
classified as an arterial street on the Thoroughfare Plan. The
types of commercial activities allowed in the C-2 zoning
district would generate an amount of traffic similar to or less
than the amount generated by the commercial activities allowed
in a C-1 district. Oslo Road currently carries traffic at
level -of -service "A"'in this area, and no capacity problems are
anticipated as a result of this proposed rezoning.
ENVIRONMENT
The subject property is not designated as environmentally
sensitive nor is it in a flood prone area.
UTILITIES
The subject property is not currently served by County water
nor wastewater facilities. The County does have plans to
extend water to this area in the near future.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the nonconforming use
status of most of the land uses in the subject property and the
Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recom-
mends the subject property be rezoned to C-2, Heavy_ Commercial
District.
The Vice Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be
heard. There were -none.
Some discussion ensued regarding calling C-2 Heavy
Commercial which Commissioner Bowman felt gives a bad
connotation, and Commissioner Lyons suggested that possibly
outside storage should be a special exception instead of an
accessory use.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unani-
mously (3-0) adopted Ordinance 83-48 re-
zoning 46.77 acres located on both sides
of Oslo Road west of 27th Avenue.
ORDINANCE NO. 83-48
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of
Intent'to rezone the hereinafter described property and
pursuant thereto held a public hearing in relation thereto, at
which parties in interest and citizens were heard; NOW,
THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning Ordinance of
Indian River County, Florida, and the accompanying Zoning Map,
be amended as follows:
1.- That the'Zoning Map be changed in order that
the following described property situated in
Indian River County, Florida, to -wit:
The South 600 feet of Tracts 13 and 14, Section 22,
Township 33 South, Range 39 East, Indian River County,
lying North of the North right-of-way line of Oslo Road;
AND ALSO
The North 600 feet of the North 3 acres of the East 5
acres of Tract 4, and the North 600 feet of the West 20
acres of Tract 3, both Tracts in Section 27, Township 33
South, Range 39 East, Indian River County, lying South of
the right-of-way line of Indian River Farms Water
Management District canal South of the South right-of-way
line of.Oslo Road.
Be changed from C-1, Commercial District to C-2,'Heavy
Commercial District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Zoning Regulations.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida on this 21stday of December ,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY:
Richard N. Bird
Chairman 5 1
60
DEC 211983
JAIL COMMITTEE REPORT
BOK �A� 711
Commissioner Lyons informed the Board that the Jail
Committee is reviewing the proposal for the Jail Complex to
see just how small a package can be worked out to get us out
of trouble with the Department of Corrections and out of the
old jail. This might open up some alternate means of
financing until we have to make the next step which would be
in the next three to five years, and hopefully by then we
could have an impact ordinance in place to aid with funding.
PUBLIC HEARING - WILLHOITE REZONING REQUEST
The hour of 2:00 o'clock P.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Puhlished 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
in the matter of4l_,,� di
in the
Court, was pub -
lished in said newspaper in the issues of &'� - a .� / �. A�IP3
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 subscri ed b ore m� hi day of ��G - A.D. 19 <_
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, I
(SEAL)
Manager)
River County, Florida)
61
NOTICE — PUBLIC HEARING
Notice, of hearing to consider the adoption _
of a County Ordinance rezoning land from: I
R-1, •Single -Family Residential to A,
Agricultural District The subject prop
Orly presently owned by Henry Will-
is _
holte is located on the north side of
3rd Street, S.W., west of 6th Drive,
S.W.
The subject property is described as:
All that part Of the Northwest +/4 of the
Northeast % of Section 24, Township
33 South, Range 39 East, lying West of
Sixth' Avenue and Old Dixie Highway;
EXCEPT all of the Subdivision of. Whis-
pering Palms, Unit No. 1, as recorded
In Plat Book 4, page 58,, of the Public,
Records of Indian River County, Flor-
Ida;.LESS AND EXCEPT rights-of-way
for public.roads. ^ r> ,
The Board of County dommissioners will
conduct a public hearing regarding the ap-
peal by the applicant of.the decision by the
Planning and Zoning Commission to recom-
mend disapproval of the rezoning request
The public hearing, at which patties in Inter-
est and citizens shall have an opportunihf.to
be heard, will be hold by said Board of County.
Commissioners In the CoUnly Commission
Chambers of the County Administration Build -
Ing, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach,
Florida, on Wednesday. December 21, at 2:00
P.M.
If any person decides to appeal any deci-
sion made On the above matter, he/she will
i need a record of the proceedings and for
such purposes, he/she May nosa to ensure
that a verbatimrecord of the proceedings is
made, which includesioonrryy and evidence
upon which the appealased..,w,
Indian River COunr- "
�1Board ofCounty `Boners a; f
By: -s -Richard N. Bird
Chairman
Dec. 2,14, 11963
The Board reviewed staff memo and recommendation as
follows:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: November 29, 1983 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: HENRY AND LILLIE WILLHOITE
REQUEST TO REZONE APPROXI -
SUBJECT: MATELY 18.33 ACRES FROM
R-1, SINGLE-FAMILY RESI-
DENTIAL, TO A, AGRICULTURAL
Robert M. Kea ing j;7AICP DISTRICT
Planning & Development Director
FROM; Richard Shearer•, AICPReq%Willhoite
Principal Planner REFERENCES: DIS:MISC1
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of December 21, 1983.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The J.R. Charles Corporation, acting as agent for the owners
Henry and Lillie Willhoite, is requesting to rezone approxi-
mately 18.33 acres located north of 3rd Street SW and west of
6th Drive from R-1, Single -Family Residential District, to A,
Agricultural District.
The applicants propose to establish a sand mining operation on
this site and then develop it as a single-family subdivision
around a lake. Mining operations are only allowed in the
Agricultural zoning district. _.
On November 10, 1983, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
3 -to -1 to deny this rezoning request. The Commission felt that
a rezoning would result in "spot zoning", that agricultural
uses require more than 18 _acres of land, and that the existing
R-1 zoning is appropriate based on -the surrounding land uses.
This decision has been formally appealed by the applicants:
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the existing land use pattern
will be presented as well as a discussion of the future land
use as established in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive
Plan.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property is currently vacant. The land north and
west of the subject property is also vacant. Whispering Palms
Subdivision is located east and south of the subject property.
Whispering Palms is a single-family subdivision which is almost
completely developed. The subject property and all of the land
around it zoned R-1, Single -Family Residential District.
DEC 211983
71
62
DEC 211983
Future Land Use Pattern
BOOK 713,
The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and all
of the land immediately adjacent to it as LD -2, Low -Density
Residential 2 (up to six dwelling units per acre). East of the
subject property, along Old Dixie Highway, is the U.S. Highway
#1 MXD, Mixed -Use District, corridor (up to six dwelling units
per acre). The R-1 zoning of the subject property and the
surrounding property is in conformance with the LD -2 land use
designation and seems to be the most appropriate zoning for
this area.
Roads/Traffic
The subject property has access to 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Streets SW
(all classified as local streets on the Thoroughfare Plan).
However, the'.applicanthas arranged to haul the mined sand
north from the site over a haul road that would cross some
property -owned by the Tabernacle Baptist Church and connect
with 1st Place. The church has given written consent to this,
so the sand would not have to be hauled through the residential
subdivision.
Environment
The subject property is not designated as environmentally
sensitive.- However, this site is on the sand ridge, an impor-
tant aquifer recharge area for the County. If mining is
allowed on this site, safeguards will be necessary to ensure
that the creation of the lake will not harm the aquifer.
TT4-i 1 i ti cc
The subject property is not currently served by County water
nor wastewater facilities. However, this area of the County
does have County water, and arrangements could be made to tap
onto these facilities. This area also has County wastewater
facilities, but there -is not-- sufficient capacity for new
customers at the present time.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, particularly the surrounding land
uses and the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation,
staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners deny
the applicant's request.
Edwin Schmucker of Total -Development came before the
Board acting as agent for the applicant, Mr. Wi-llhoite. He
believed there is a lot of misunderstanding all the way
around, not only with the people in the area but also with
the County Plannng.Department, which seems.to be concerned
that when this is rezoned, it will never be changed back
into residential. Mr. Schmucker stressed that the developer
actually has no desire to change the present residential
zoning, but since the definition of mining under the Code is
interpreted to mean that any removal of fill material off
the site constitutes mining, it is necessary to rezone to
Agricultural in order to be able to dig the lake; if the
definition could be interpreted that digging the lake is not
mining, they would not want any zoning change. He further
noted that the people in the area -also are concerned about
other uses allowed under Agricultural zoning, and even the
County Attorney says if this property is rezoned, -there is
no guaranty it will be zoned back from Agricultural. Mr.
Schmucker disagreed, because he felt the Commission can
rezone any piece of property they want. He continued to
emphasize that they want to have the lake as part of a
residential development. As to why they want to dig a lake,
he agreed that, of course, there would be some monetary
benefits, as the sand can be used for concrete blocks, but,
in exchange, the developer will agree to put in half acre
lots instead of the 1/4 acre lots which are allowed, so
there will be half the density, half as many septic tanks,
less traffic etc. In addition, the developers have made
arrangements to move all their material and equipment via
another road to the north so that it doesn't bother the
adjacent residents, and they are willing to commit that they
will not pump while the operation is going on so there is no
effect on the environment, i.e., no loss of head on the
water table.
Vice Chairman Scurlock stated that what he is hearing
is that we have no vehicle to approve a subdivision that
would limit the amount of excavation and the lot size, etc.,
and allow this to happen as the normal development of a
single family residential area.
Assistant County Attorney Paull stated that the Zoning
Code does provide that you can remove a certain amount of
fill from the site incidental to construction activities if
it is not needed for backgrading and filling. What it says
is that mining shall not include digging for foundations,
D E C 211983 6 4 eeeK r��
\¢ J
55 715
DEc 91 1983
fences, drainage ditches, or for structures incidental to
construction work where no materials are removed except
surplus not required.
In discussion re lakes being considered on-site
retention, Attorney Paull pointed out that while the above
itemization does mention drainage structures, it does not
include lakes. He further noted that the Stormwater
Management Ordinance contains certain limitations on the
depths of retainage areas and discourages the creation of
lakes. The Zoning Code, however, does provide a vehicle for
digging a lake and that is through rezoning to Agricultural
where it is appropriate and then proceeding to mine the
property and reclaim it so it would be suitable for
residential development.
Planning Director Keating confirmed that is staff's
position. He reported that recently in looking over the
current Mining Ordinance staff has received additional input
which indicates that digging down to a depth that would
breach the water table is not advantageous from either a
water quality or a water quantity standpoint, and he
believed that in the future, staff will recommend lakes not
be created, particularly on the sand ridge where you have
good recharge. Mr. Keating continued that even if this were
approved for mining, he felt staff would recommend mining
not occur down to that level.' Staff also felt Agricultural
does provide for some uses that might not be compatible, and
there is.no guaranty that the zoning would revert. Staff's
major concerns, however, were that the adjacent area is low
density single family and the use proposed is not
compatible.
Planner Richard Shearer reported that several letters
have been received from surrounding property owners opposing
the requested rezoning, and phone calls opposing the
rezoning have been received from Mrs. Chaffee and Russell
a
� � a
Myers. He informed the Board that we have 10,000 acres of
land zoned R-1 in the South County area, and this is a
request to rezone 28 acres within that to Agricultural,
which would constitute spot zoning. He further noted that
although County water is available -in this area there is not
adequate capacity for further customers to tap on for sewer.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be
heard.
Dina Ford of 180 6th Dr. S.W., informed the Board that
since she and her neighbor spoke against this proposed
rezoning at the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting, it has
come to light that a five year old boy died in a waterhole
in this vicinity in 1982. Mrs. Ford continued that, if this
rezoning is granted, the present residents of the area will
have to put up with noise and dust.for a long period of
time, plus the hazardous conditions that would result, and
the only way she would agree to the proposed development
would be if a bond in a determined amount were held by the
Commission in case the full realization of the residential
development did not come about; also, the area would have
to be fenced in to safeguard the children of the area. In
the event the developer did not abide by his development
proposal as specified, she felt the bond could be used to
develop a recreational facility or playground for the
children in the area.
Planning Director Keating informed Mrs. Ford that the
mining site plan provisions require the placing of a bond.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked if anyone else wished to
be heard, and there were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unani-
mously (3-0) closed the public hearing.
DEC 211983 66 BOOK 5 PAC -i-. 719
I
r
DEC 211983
980K 55 PAE€ 71.7
Mr. Schmucker again emphasized the positive aspects of
the proposed development and the benefits to the adjacent
owners. He stressed that this would not be spot zoning, but
only interim zoning to allow them to mine, and assured the
a
Board that fences would be erected to safeguard the children
in the area; he believed the owners had agreed to this
previously. Mr. Schmucker pointed out that under the County
Code, they are required to develop the lake to specific flat
side slopes so that no one would be endangered by a sudden
drop off. As to whether the lake itself could cause damage
to the aquifer, Mr. Schmucker informed the Board that a
report written by a member of the County Agricultural
Department stated that if they just dug to +5, everything
would be fine, or, in other words, if they only dug 15'
deep. Their own consultant stated that the lake would not
cause any danger to the substrata water as long as the head
of water remains and they don't pump it,down. Mr. Schmucker
felt the main issue is whether the proposed lake would be
more of a detriment to_ the environment than 25-50 septic
tanks, and he certainly believed it would be preferable to
have a lake with less homes, traffic and septic tanks.
Vice Chairman Scurlock felt it seems cumbersome to have
to rezone for a mining operation and then change back to the
residential zoning.
Planning Director Keating explained that staff does
recognize that mining is an activity that has to be
undertaken for development to proceed, and they are working
on a new Mining Ordinance. He noted that although site plan
considerations usually are not taken into consideration at
the time of rezoning, this is an unusual case in that the
only reason for the rezoning is to allow this particular
use; therefore, Mr. Keating believed site plan considera-
tions are a major point of discussion today. He emphasized
that digging below the level of the water table, which is
about 12' or 13' in this particular area, would very
probably degrade the water quality unless sufficient
overburden were left, and this would be especially true if
the lake was meant to be used as part of their drainage
system. Mr. Keating informed the.Board that the County
recently had a problem with a mining operation on the sand
ridge affecting adjacent wells, and, in addition, there is
the problem of lateral leaching. He continued to stress
that staff has recommended against this rezoning for many
reasons, not only site plan reasons, and pointed out that
even though an agricultural classification is generally in
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan's LD -2 designa-
tion, staff would not recommend that an area which is zoned
for a higher use and is currently compatible be rezoned to a
lower use.
Discussion continued re concern that the mining
operation could go on forever, and Attorney Paull reviewed
the characteristics associated with mining, i.e., digging,
noise, heavy trucks, etc., and believed that is why the
Zoning Code only allows mining in an Agricultural area. He
further pointed out that the operator may continue to renew
his mining permit as long as it is determined that is the
highest and best use of the property from an economic
standpoint; so, there actually is no guaranty as to just
when this would revert to residential.
Commissioner Bowman went into considerable detail as to
the elevation of this land above sea level and how much sand
would be removed, and Mr. Schmucker assured her that they
have committed to back up to +5. Commissioner Bowman
reported that Dr. Weller, an authority on viruses, states
there should be no less than 10' of overburden on the sand
ridge or in any high percolation area. She then discussed
the depth at which they would have to start dewatering, and
DEC 211983 68
Boa 55 rAFE 718
DEC 2119'83 5 5 mu 719
Mr. Schmucker pointed out that they have agreed not to
dewater. He explained that you can dig in water with a
dragline even though it is not as efficient and pointed out
that the lake is at a slope and the lowest point would be
only at the very bottom triangle.
Commissioner Bowman believed the lake would be 18' deep
in the middle, and noted that if they are creating a lake in
the sand ridge, the bottom of the lake will be in direct
contact with the shallow aquifer which the people in that
area are using for drinking water. She, therefore, believed
it very possible this could pollute all the wells in the
area.
Vice Chairman Scurlock felt the issue here is not
whether or not the land is usable for residential uses, but
whether or not we will allow the economic benefit•of being
able to dig the lake, and also there is some question as to
whether a lake in a subdivision is a plus or a minus. The
owner can use the property for residential; the question is
whether he can mine for a profit.
-Commissioner Lyons felt we also must consider the
attitude of the surrounding property owners who have a stake
in this. He believed the requirement in the mining
ordinance for putting the land back in shape just involves
grading the slope; so, even if they abandoned the mining and
did not develop a subdivision, there could still be a lake
of some kind.
Mr. Keating stated that as part of the required mining
site plan, a reclamation plan has to be submitted. This may
just include reclamation with 3-1 slopes, but most have been
made showing a subdivision.
Vice Chairman Scurlock stated that he personally was
opposed to the rezoning, but he always has felt it should be
the responsibility of a full Commission to make these
decisions.
Commissioner Bowman felt that a lovely subdivision can
be developed.there without a lake. She and Commissioner
Lyons both indicated their opposition to the requested
rezoning, but indicated they would be willing to wait for a
full Board before making a decision if the applicant wished
}
to come back again.
Henry Willhoite, owner of the subject property,
reconfirmed his plans to lower the density and put in
approximately 27 homes around a lake on 1/2 acre lots. He
spoke at length of his desire to build a nice home on a lake
- and the money he has expended in attorney's fees -since 1978
to accomplish this end. Mr. Willhoite informed the Board
that there is a 20' lake just about one block south of his
location, and he did not know of any child ever having
drowned in the area. He then spoke of the high quality of
`the sand in this particular area and pointed out that
removal and sale of this sand would help pay for roads and
enable them to build a higher class of homes on the
property. In regard to disturbing the shallow aquifer, he
noted the drainage canal ditch is about 10' deeper than the
lake would be.
Discussion ensued regarding access to Old Dixie, and
Mr. Willhoite informed the Board that he has written
permission to go through the church property to the north.
Administrator Wright had a problem with this as this
property is adjacent to the transfer site. We just paved
that road, but he did not believe it would stand up under
the traffic from a sand mining operation.
Commissioner Bowman believed that Mr. Willhoite's
motives are fine and that he is a fine, upstanding citizen,
but she did not believe that he understood that an 80' well
in Florida is considered a shallow well; the Floridan
aquifer is much deeper.
BOOK 55, FAQ 720
70
DEC 211983 wK 55 z9,,
Commissioner Lyons stated that he did not have a
problem with Mr. Willhoite trying to find a way to remove
whatever sand was needed to level out the property and get
down to some reasonable overburden, but he did have a large
problem with having a lake for several reasons. It is too
close to an area that is already developed, and he had
serious reservations about the damage to the aquifer and as
to safety in the long run. He felt even without digging the
lake, Mr. Willhoite still would have a good many feet of
sand.
Vice Chairman Scurlock inquired whether there is a
vehicle under the present zoning categories whereby a
developer can remove a certain amount of fill without
actually creating a lake.
Attorney Paull replied that some excess fill certainly
could be removed without objection, but the Ordinance does
not specify what that amount would be. It does itemize
certain improvements that are recognized for creating excess
fill - drainage ditches, etc., but lakes are not included.
Attorney Paull noted that the developer could submit a
subdivision application, and.Public Works Director Davis
would have some idea as to whether his plans would be in
violation of the Stormwater Management Ordinance.
Discussion continued at length wherein the Commission
explained to Mr. Willhoite that we are trying to find some
vehicle whereby he could excavate to a certain -depth and
sell some of his sand, but he could not go down to the water
table and end up with a lake.
Mr. Willhoite-stated that if they could go down to 5'
or 6' above the water table, that would be just fine, and it
would give them plenty of depth for the lake.
Vice Chairman Scurlock emphasized that he did not feel
any action the Board might take would allow the digging of a
lake, but he did feel staff would work with the applicant on
removing sand incidental to the development. He believed
this is the best the Board can come up with today, unless
Mr. Willhoite wishes to postpone action until a full
Commission can be present.
Mr. Schmucker stated that they did not wish to pursue
this matter any further.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unani-
mously (3-0) denied the request of the
Willhoites to rezone 18.33 acres from
R-1 to Agricultural.
DOCUMENTS TO BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES
A. Contract with District Medical Examiner
Contract between Indian River County, the Medical
Examiners' Commission, and the District Medical Examiner for
Medical Examiner Funds is hereby made a part of the record
as approved at the Regular Meeting of November 16,-1983.
DEC 21 BOOK 55 rAEka
1983 �a
D E C 211983 goa5 wp& 723
C O N T R A C T
Between
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
MEDICAL EXAMINERS' COMMISSION
AND
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
for
MEDICAL EXAMINER FUNDS
This Contract is entered into between the State of Florida, Department of
Law Enforcement, Medical Examiners Commission, hereinafter referred to as
"COMMISSION", and Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of
Florida, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY", through its Board of County Com-
missioners, and the DISTRICT MEDICAL EXAMINER.
Any reference in this Contract to "DISTRICTS" shall mean Medical Examiner
District 19 as established by the Medical Examiners Commission under Chapter 406,
Florida Statutes.
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, Chapter 406, Florida Statutes, and Rule 11G-4, Florida Admini-
strative Code, authorize the COMMISSION to disburse to the COUNTY State funds
for medical examiner services and to oversee the distribution of State funds for
said purpose.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual understanding and the pro-
visions, terms, and conditions hereafter set forth, the COMMISSION and the
COUNTY mutually agree as follows:
1. COUNTY Agrees:
A. To comply and act in accordance with all provisions of Chapter 406,
Florida Statutes, and implementing rules of the Medical Examiners
Commission, where applicable.
B. The funds provided to the COUNTY under this Agreement shall be used
only for medical examiner related expenses, said uses to include,
but not be limited to, the following:
(1) Salaries and/or fees for service
(2) Transportation
(3) Facilities and equipment
(4) Laboratory services
(5) Administrative costs
(6) Other related expenses
C. The COUNTY and the DISTRICT MEDICAL EXAMINER shall provide the
COMMISSION with:
(1) A County Annual Expenditure Report on forms to be provided
by the COMMISSION identifying total funds expended or encum-
bered for medical examiner services during the 1982-83 County
Fiscal Year.
(2) A copy of the budget adopted for medical examiner services for
the current County Fiscal Year.
(3) The second installment of funds disbursed by the COMMISSION
shall be paid as outlined in Paragraph 23. below on page 4.
D. The COUNTY and the DISTRICT MEDICAL EXAMINER will comply with re-
quests from the COMMISSION for information regarding expenditures
for support of medical examiner activities in their county, pursuant
to Chapter 406, Fla. Stat.
-2-
DEC 211988 74
BOOK 55) tn-E 72
I
.D EC 21 198372
E. The COUNTY and the MEDICAL EXAMINER further agree:
(1) .To comply with Title VI and VII, Civil Rights Act of 1964
(42 USC 2000d), Executive Order No. 11246, entitled "Equal
Employment Opportunity", as supplemented in Department of
Labor Regulations (41 CFR Part 60), and Federal Regulations
concerning nondiscrimination because of mental and physical
handicaps.
(2) To meet the standards of accountability of Rule 11G-4.06,
Florida Administrative Code, which include the following:
(a) Each county shall use an accounting system which
meets generally accepted accounting principles.
(b) Each county and each district medical examiner shall main-
tain such records and accounts as are necessary to properly
account for state funds disbursed by the Commission.
(c) All records relevant to this rule shall be retained for
a period of not less than three years, unless otherwise
provided by law.
(d) Records and accounts necessary to justify the use of
state funds for medical examiner services shall be open
to inspection for audit purposes to the COMMISSION, the
Department, and the Auditor General.
(e) Funds received from the COMMISSION shall only be -used
for the provision of medical examiner services.
F. In the event of COUNTY's noncompliance with any provision of this
Contract, the Contract may be terminated or suspended in whole or
part by the COMMISSION upon thirty (30) days written notice to
the COUNTY.
-3-
2. The COMMISSION Agrees:
A. To pay the COUNTY a total sum of $9,560.00 to be paid -in semi-annual
payments,of $4,780.00.
r
B. Payment shall be made on a semi-annual basis. Payment for the
first two quarters shall be made upon execution of this Contract.
The second payment shall be made when the documents outlined in
Item 1(c) above are provided to the COMMISSION and after the COM-
MISSION has received its 4th quarter allotment of General Revenue
Funds, approximately April 1, 1984.
3. This Contract is effective for the State Fiscal Year July 1, 1983 through
June 30, 1984.
4. The Contract is subject to the availability of funds, and the determin-
ation as to such availability rests solely with the COMMISSION. If
funds become unavailable, the COMMISSION may terminate this Contract
on twenty-four (24) hour notice.
5. Any alterations, variations, modifications or waivers of provisions of
this Contract shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing,
duly signed and attached to the original of this Contract. The parties
agree to renegotiate this Contract if State revision of any applicable
laws or regulations make changes in this Contract necessary.
6. The COUNTY and the DISTRICT MEDICAL EXAMINER shall be independent con-
tractors, and not the agent or servant of the Department and shall not
be entitled, as a result of this contract, to any benefits granted
employees of the State of Florida. The COUNTY and the DISTRICT MEDICAL
EXAMINER shall have complete supervision and control over their own
agents, servants and employees.
7. The Department shall not be deemed to assume any liability for the acts,
omissions to act or negligence of the COUNTY or the DISTRICT MEDICAL
B58
DEC 211983
-4-
7
BQflK
5*3 PACS' 72,61
r
DEC 211983
MOK 5rg� '
EXAMINER, their agents, servants, and employees; nor shall the COUNTY
or DISTRICT MEDICAL EXAMINER exclude its own negligence to the Depart-
ment or any third party.
8. This Contract contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the
parties. Any items incorporated by references are physically -attached.
No other agreements, oral or otherwise, regarding the.subject matter of
this Contract, shall be deemed to exist or to bind any of the parties
hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have made and executed this
Agreement on the respective dates under each signature: Indian River COUNTY
through its BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, signing by and through its Chairman,
authorized to execute same by Board action on the 16th day of November ,
19_&3, the DISTRICT MEDICAL EXAMINER, and STATE OF FLORIDA, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, MEDICAL EXAMINERS COMMISSION, signing by and through its
Staff Director, duly authorized to executive same, and by the COMMISSIONER OF
THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.
Date StaZriOal Ex in.ers Commission
St f or
Date tate of Florida, Department of Law Enforcement
ommissioner
4
rtevem-tagx 16, 1983
Date Chairman, Board of Coun Commissioners
ty, Florida
Date Distric edical Examiner
District ts�rm
Approved
MEC3/C
-5- ,ry t . rand enbb
Co 7 tv� AttoriIti►*J"
i
B. Contract with Ford Concepts re Waverly Place Subdv.
Contract between Indian River County and Ford Concepts,
Inc., re construction of required improvements in Waverly
Place Subdivision is hereby made a part of the record as
approved at the Regular Meeting of -December 7, 1983.
DEC 211983 BOOK 55 PA78
Em 7�
-I
1 19� 6QflK FLEE 729
CONTRACT FQR CONSTRUCTION OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS
N0.
THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into this day of
December , by and between F rd
., a corporation existing
under the laws of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as
"Developer," and INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of
the State of Florida, by and through its Board of County
Commissioners, hereinafter referred to as "County."
W I T N E S S E T H
WHEREAS, Developer is commencing proceedings to effect a
subdivision of land within Indian River County, Florida; and
WHEREAS, a final plat of the subdivision within the
unincorporated area of Indian River County shall not be recorded
until the Developer has installed the required improvements or has
guaranteed to the satisfaction of the County that such improve-
ments will be installed= and
~ WHEREAS, peveloper requests the approval and recordation
of a certain plat to be known as Waverly Place Subdivision
= and
WHEREAS, the required improvements are to be installed
after recordation of this plat under guarantees posted with the
County's
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS
AND PROMISES HEREIN CONTAINED; the parties agree as follows:
1. Developer agrees to construct on or before
March 30 1984 'in a good and workmanlike manner,
those Improvements -Fe -scribed as follows:
See Attachment Exhibit A
or otherwise required by the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Indian
River County in connection with the approval of said plat. A copy
of the plat shall be recorded in the Public Records of Indian
River County, Florida upon the final approval of the Board of
County Commissioners and made a part hereof for all purposes.
2. Developer agrees to construct said improvements
strictly -in accordance with the land development permit, the most
recent set of plans and specifications for this subdivision
approved by the County and on file in the Planning and Development
Division, and all County development regulations and standards,
all of which are hereby incorporated by reference and made a part
hereof.
3. In order to guarantee performance of this contract,
Developer shall simultaneously herewith furnish ,an irrevocable
letter -of. credit by a bank authorized to transact such
business in this state, in a form to be app�roved b th County,
with Developer as principal and First FideTi ty Savi n�s an? Loan
Association as the bank in the amount of
_ 19O743_S2 , which amount is not less than one hundred
and fifteen (115$) percent of the estimated total cost of improve-
ments remaining to be constructed, as determined in accordance
with the County's Subdivision and Platting ordinance. It is
understood that the full amount of the guarantee -shall remain
available to the County and shall not be reduced during the course
of construction without an express written modification thereof
executed by all parties. Requested reductions shall not be
unreasonably withheld by the County. Developer may at.any time
substitute guarantees, subject to the approval as to form and
amount by the County.
- -
79
M
M
4. The County agrees to approve the plat for
recordation in the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida
upon 'a finding as to compliance with all applicable provisions of
the County's Subdivision and Platting Ordinance and upon execution
hereof. The County shall accept those areas specifically
dedicated to the County for the purposes indicated on the plat at
such time -as the improvements are satisfactorily completed.
Satisfactory completion in accordance with the land development
permit, plans, specifications, and ordinance requirements of
Indian River County shall be determined by the County and shall be
indicated by specific written approval of the Public Works
Director or his designated represenative.
5. , In the event the Developer shall fail or neglect to
' fulfill its obligations under this contract and as required by the
Code of Laws and Ordinances of Indian River County, Florida, the
Developer, as principal, and the guarantee or surety shall be
jointly and severally liable to pay for the cost of construction
and installment of the required improvements to the final total
cost, including but not limited to engineering, construction,
legal and contingent costs, including reasonable attorney's fees
incurred by the County, together with any damages, either direct
or consequential, which the County may sustain as a result of the
failure of Developer_to carry out and execute all provisions of
this contract and applicable ordinances of the County.
6. The parties agree that the County at its option
shall have the right to construct and install or, pursuant to
receipt of competitive bids, cause to be constructed and installed
the required improvements in the event Developer shall fail or
refuse to do so in accordance with the terms of this contract.
Developer expressly agrees that the County may demand and draw
upon said surety for the final total cost thereof, to the limits
of the surety. Developer shall remain wholly liable for any
resulting deficiency, should the surety be exhausted prior to
completion of the required improvements.
-7. Any guarantee or surety provided tothe County by
Developer with respect to this contract shall exist solely for the
use and benefit of the County and shall not be construed or
intended in any way, expressly or impliedly, to benefit or secure
payment to any subcontractor, laborer, materialman or other party
providing labor, material, supplies, or services for construction
of the required improvements, or to benefit any lot.purchaser(s),
unless the County shall agree otherwise in writing.
8. Agreement is the full and complete understanding of
the parties and shall not be construed or amplified by reference
to any other agreement, discussion, or understanding# whether
written or oral, except as specifically mentioned herein. This
agreement shall not be assigned without the express written
approval of the County. Any amendment, deletion, modification,
extension, or revision hereof or hereto shall be in writing,
executed by authorized representatives of both parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their
hands and seals on the day and vear first above writ}pr,_
Ford Concepts, Inr_
Developer
Attest., -
Secretary Tltle) President Title
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LEGA I
By=
CountyAttorney
DEC 211983
(affix corporate seal)
INDIAN RIVER COUNTYr FLORIDA
By •
RICHARD N. BIRD] Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
Attest:
FREDA WRIGHT,_
BOOK 56 rAcE17a 9
II
DEC 211983 9QOn 55 FACE 7,31
WAVERLY PLACE
EXHIBIT A
Schedule of Work to be done under Phase 1 Contract
SANITARY SEWER
1.
Construct MH No. 10
$ 1,600.00
2.
Construct MH No. 15
1,400.00
3.
Construct 230' — 8" from MH No. 10
$ 1,750.00
2.
to MH No. 15
3,220.00
4.
Extend existing sanitary service to
serve Bldgs. 105-136
1,200.00
5.
Construct new sanitary service to
serve Bldgs. 101, 140
500.00
6.
Plug existing services at Station
1 + 15
50.00
7.
Adjust tops of MH Nos. 7 and 8
100.00
WATER
1.
Relocate/Construct hydrant and valve
assembly by Bldg. 140 (1 F.H., 2 — 6"
valves reuse, 2 — 6" valves new)
$ 1,750.00
2.
Replace/Construct 6" x 3" tee and
2 — 3" valves (1 — 3" valve reuse,
1 — 3" valve new)
400.00
3.
Construct fire hydrant and valve assembly
by Bldg. 301 (1 F.H., 4 — 6" valves new)
2,625.00
4.
Construct 6" valve and plug by CB No.
13 (1 — 6" valve new)
400.00
5.
Construct 460' — 6" water main
3,910.00
6.
Extend existing 1�" water services
to serve Bldgs. 105-140
2,500.00
7.
Construct new 2" services to serve
B1dgs.,101, 232
600.00
8.
Remove 2 existing services by Bldg. 232
100.00
$ 8,070.00
12,285.00
PAVING
1. Construct concrete parking lot -
Phase 1 $55,080.00
2. Construct temporary entrance at
west end of parking lot 1,622.40
3. Construct 24, wide asphalt road
north to 10th Street 7,321.60
$ 56,899.50
M
Bao55 PA 739
DEC 2,1 1983_ 192
WAVERLY PLACE
EXHIBIT A (Cont.)
Schedule
of Work to be done under Phase 1 Contract
DRAINAGE
1.
Construct CB No. 20
$ 2,200.00
2.
Construct CB No. 21
1,600.00
3.
Construct 150' 29 x 45 H.E.R.C.P.
drainfield from CB No. 21 to CB
-
No. 20
11,250.00
4.
Construct 440' Dbl. 24" x CAP
drainfield from CB No. 20 to CB
CB No. 21
26,400.00
5.
Remove existing CB beside Bldg. 102
200.00
6.
Construct CB No. 18
1,600.00
7.
Construct CB No, 17 -
1,000.00
8.
Construct CB No. 16
1,000.00
9.
Construct 6' - 18" RCP to CB No. 16
108.00
10.
Construct,25' - 18" RCP to CB No. 17
450.00
11.
Extend/Construct 92' - 29 x 45 H.E.R.C.P.
drainfield from Station l + 46 to CB
No. 18
6,500.00
12.
Construct retention area along North
property line
4,441.50
13.
Construct temporary weir structure
in existing catch basin at end of
line by Bldg. 214
150.00
PAVING
1. Construct concrete parking lot -
Phase 1 $55,080.00
2. Construct temporary entrance at
west end of parking lot 1,622.40
3. Construct 24, wide asphalt road
north to 10th Street 7,321.60
$ 56,899.50
M
Bao55 PA 739
DEC 2,1 1983_ 192
DEC 211983 wE73,3:
WAVERLY PLACE
EXHIBIT A (Cont.)
Schedule of Work to be done under Phase 1 Contract
PAVING (Cont.)
4. Construct 20' wide asphalt road on
10th Street from west crossing to
6th Avenue $13,975.00
5. Install wheel stops and parking lot
striping 1,056.00
6. Construct traffic signs and markers 800.00
$157,109.50
10% Contingency (Includes Engineering,
Inspection and Surveying)' 15,710.95
$172,820.45
The several bills and accounts against the County
1
having been audited were examined and found to be correct
were approved and warrants issued in settlement of same as
follows: Treasury Fund.Nos. 89351 - 89651 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.
There being no further business, on Motion made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 2:55 o'clock
P.M.
Attest:
. A-4
Clerk
83
Chairman