HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/11/1984Wednesday, July 11, 1984
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, met in Regular Session at the County
Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida,
on Wednesday, July 11, 1984, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present
were Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Richard N. Bird; and
Margaret C. Bowman. William C. Wodtke, Jr. was delayed for
approximately twenty minutes and Patrick B. Lyons, Vice
Chairman, was on vacation out of state. Also present were
Michael J. Wright, County Administrator; Gary Brandenburg,
Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; "Tommy"
Thomas, Intergovernmental Relations Director; Jeffrey K.
Barton, OMB Director; Barbara Bonnah and Virginia
Hargreaves, Deputy Clerks.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Chairman Scurlock requested an addition to today's
Agenda re the resignation of Fred Rouse from the Beach
Preservation and Restoration Committee.
Administrator Wright requested the deletion of Item
13-B, Overall Economic Development Plan Committee
Appointments, and advised that the matter would be placed on
next week's Agenda.
Administrator Wright requested the addition to today's
Agenda of a change order for the 16th Street Improvements
Project.
Administrator Wright requested the addition to today's
Agenda of a discussion re campaign signs in right-of-ways.
JUL 111984 - B30K `5.7 usE ��
JUL 111984 aooK 57 EacE 581
ON MOTION by Commission Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously (3-0,.Commissioner Wodtke
being delayed and Commissioner Lyons being
on vacation) added the above items to today's
Agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Sheriff's Deputy Appointment
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously (3-0) approved the
Sheriff's appointment of Deputy
Michael W. Hill.
B. Budget Amendment - Youth Guidance
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/2/84:
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: JULY 2, 1984
SUBJECT: YOUTH GUIDANCE
FROM: JEFFREY K BARTON, OMB DIRECTOREFERENCES:
FILE:
Due to an increase in requests for the brochure that explains the Youth Guidance
program they have depleted thier supply which was purchased 3 years ago. funds to have
these brochures printed were not budgeted as Youth Guidance felt they had an ample supply
on hand. The following budget amendment is to cover the cost of having new brochures
printed.
ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT # INCREASE DECREASE
Outside Printing 001-213- 23-34.72 200
Reserve for Contingency 001-199-513-99.99 200
2
i � r
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously (3-0) approved the
above budget amendment as recommended by
OMB Director Jeff Barton.
C. Approval of Bond - Hospital Board of Directors
CHARLES R. MCKINNON
WILLIAM J. STEWART
ROBERT C. NALL
The Board reviewed the following letter dated 6/18/84:
LAW OFFICES
MCKINNON & STEWAR
CHARTERED
POST OFFICE BOX 3345
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32964-3345
June 18, .1984
Mr. Warren T. Zeuch
Warren Zeuch Insurance Agency,.Inc.
Post Office Box 878
Vero Beach, FL 32960
-In Re: Margaret A. Ingram
Dear Warren:
.:'UCH INSURANCE
AGENCY
3355 OCEAN DRIVE
TELEPHONE (305) 231-3500
Enclosed please find the bond form for Margaret A. Ingram,
duly appointed Trustee of the Indian River County Hospital
District. I would appreciate it if you would present this
bond to the Board of County Commissioners for approval at
its next meeting. Once the bond is properly executed, it
should be given to the Clerk of the'Court who should then
advise Dorothy W. Glisson, Deputy Secretary for Elections,
that the bond is complete and on file in the Clerk's office.
At that point, the State of Florida will issue Mrs. Ingram's
commission.
Thank you for your assistance in this regard.
Sincerely yours,
1
William J. Stewart
3
OWL 11 194
BOOK r'. 7 FA;E 50?
JUL 111984
a
Booz 57 FacE 583
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously (3-0) approved the bond
form for Margaret A. Ingram, duly appointed
Trustee of the Indian River County Hospital
District and authorized the signature of all
Board members.
(Said Bond is on file in the Office of the Clerk)
D. Release of Easement Request by Mr. & Mrs. Camillo
Stefanacci
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/18/84:
TO: The Honorable Members -- DATE: June 18, 1984 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: RELEASE OF EASEMENT
REQUEST BY MR. & MRS.
Robert M. Keatling, AICP SUBJECT: SUBJECT PROPERTY: THE
Planning & Development Director NORTH 5 FEET OF LOT 23,
BLOCK C, PINECREST SUBDI-
GH: Larry W. Burkhart VISION, UNIT 2.
fCode
Code Enforcement Department
FROREFERENCES:
al er C. Stefanacci
nforcement Officer DIS:CDENF
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of July 11, 1984.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The County has been petitioned by Mr. and Mrs. Camillo
Stefanacci, owners of the subject property to release the
side lot 5 foot utility and drainage easement of Lot 23, Block
C, Pinecrest Subdivision, Unit 2. This easement is the north 5 -
feet of Lot 23, Block C, Pinecrest Subdivision, Unit 2 and is
shown in plat book 11, page 2. This lot is 110 feet in width x
131.6 feet in depth. -
The applicants presently have a fence which was constructed
within the subject easement. It is Mr. and Mrs. Stefanacci's
intention to leave the fence in its present location on the
side property line. The current zoning classification of the
subject property is R-1, Single-family Residential District{,
and the land use designation is LD -2, Low Density Residential,
up to six units per acre.
4
0
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
This request has been reviewed by Southern Bell, City of Vero
Beach Utilities Department, Florida Cablevision, Inc., and the
County Utility and Right-of-way Departments. Based upon their
reviews, there were no objections to release of the easement.
The Zoning Staff analysis, which included a site visit, showed
that the release of the drainage easement on Lot 23, Block C,
Pinecrest Subdivision, Unit 2, Plat Book 11, Page 2 would have
no adverse effect.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends to the Board, through adoption'of a resolu-
tion, the release of the 5 foot utility and drainage easement,
being the north 5 feet of Lot 23, Block C, Pinecrest
Subdivision, Unit 2.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously (3-0) adopted Resolution
84-46 granting a Release of the 5' side lot
utility and drainage easement of Lot 23,
Block C, Pinecrest Subdivision, Unit 2, to
Mr. & Mrs. Camillo Stefanacci.
5
JUL 111984
57 FrE584
JUL 111984
gOnx 57 uc�_585
RESOLUTION NO. 84-46
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, have been requested to release the common side
lot 5 foot easement of lot 23, Block C, Pinecrest Subdivision,
being the north 5 feet of Lot 23 according to the Plat of same
recorded in Plat Book 11, Page 2, of the Public Records of
Indian River County, Florida.
WHEREAS, said lot line easements were dedicated on the
Plat of Pinecrest Subdivision for public utility purposes,
and
WHEREAS, the request for such release of easements have
been submitted in proper form;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the follow-
ing lot line easements in Pinecrest Subdivision, shall be
released, abandoned and vacated as follows:
The common side lot- 5 foot easement of lot 23, Block C,
Pinecrest Subdivision, being the north 5 feet of Lot 23,
according to the Plat of the same filed in the Office of the
Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida, in
Plat Book 11, Page 2.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman of the Board of
County Commissioners and the Clerk of the Circuit Court be and
they hereby are authorized and directed to execute a release of
said lot line easements hereinabove referred to in form proper
for recording and placing in the Public Records of Indian River
County, Florida.
11th July
This day of
1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Don C. Scifrilock, Jr., Chairman
ATTEST:
Freda _Wright, � k Approved a orm
and leg s 'enc
Gym
By
ry 1. Brande bur
Cou ty Attorney
1.1
RELEASE OF EASEMENT
This Release of Easement, executed this
July
11th day of
1984, by the BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political sub-
division of the State of Florida, first party; Mr. & Mrs.
Camillo Stefanacci, whose mailing address is 569 10th Court,
Vero Beach, Florida, 32962, second party:
WITNESSETH
That the said party of the first part for and in consi-
deration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and
valuable consideration in hand paid by the said second party,
does hereby remise, release, abandon and quit claim unto the
said second party forever, all the right, title, interest,
claim and demand which the said first party has in and to the
following described easements, lying on land situated in the
County of Indian River, State of Florida, to -wit:
The common side lot 5 foot easement of lot 23, Block C,
Pinecrest Subdivision, being the north 5 feet of Lot 23,
as recorded in Plat Book 11, Page 2, Public Records of
Indian River County.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same with all and singular the
appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining
and all estate, right, title, interest, equity to the only
proper use, benefit and behoof of the said second party
forever.
IN�WITNESS WHEREOF, the said first party has signed and
sealed these presents by the parties so authorized by the law
and the day and year first above written.
Signed, -sealed and
delivered in the presence of:
JUL 111984 _
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY: / C -L
Don C. curlock, Jr.., Ch 6Aan
�Aewk'
ATTEST: _
J,redA Wright, jerk
Approved form
acid leg: -'a
s 11:ci ncy
N
Unty Attorne
00 . C'r
57 'r"'GE586
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
BooK 57 PnU-5 7
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me an officer
duly authorized in the State and County aforesaid to take
acknowledgements personally appeared, Don C. Scurlock, Jr., as
Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, and
i' red` da�Wright, as Clerk of the Circ it Court, to me known to be
the persons duly authorized by said County to execute the
foregoing instrument and they acknowledged before me that they
executed the same for and on behalf of the said political
subdivision.
WITNESS by hand and seal in the County and State last
aforesaid this day of
1984.
A 4%4 aa,e�
Notary Pu ic, Stfite f F �ridia at
Large: My Commission Expires
NOTARY PUBUc ft b : C4 b .
BONDED THRU GENERAL INSURANCE . Y
My COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY, 8 198W
E. Extension of Preliminary Plat Approval - Plantation
Ridge Subdivision
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/15/84:
TO: The Honorable Members
DINE: June
15,
1984 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
EXTENSION
OF PRELIMINARY
SUBJECT:
PLAT
APPROVAL FOR PLANTA-
TION
RIDGE SUBDIVISION
Robert M. Kea ing AICP
Planning & Development
Director
FROM: Clare Z. Poupard �
REFERENCES:
Plant. Ridge
Staff Planner
DIS:CLARE
It is requested that the following information be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting on July 11, 1984.
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., S.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,
1982. A six month extension of plat approval was granted on
December 16, 1983. Thus, plat approval would have expired on
June 16, 1984, if the applicant had not submitted an extension:
request prior to this time. The applicant is requesting a
twelve month extension of preliminary plat approval.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
The applicants were unable to -complete the subdivision within
the allotted time period and thus are requesting an additional
twelve months.
According to the County's Subdivision Ordinance 75-3, "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. With
the 6 months already granted by the Board of County Commission=
ers)if an additional twelve month extension of plat approval is
granted, the applicant will have received. the eighteen month
extension of plat approval normally approved by the Board.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board grant a twelve month extension
of plat approval to Plantation Ridge Subdivision.
7
JUL 111984 BooK 57 588
JUL 111984
Boa 57 PACE589,
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously (3-0) granted a 12 -month extension
of plat approval to Plantation Ridge Subdivision.
F. Extension of Site Plan Approval - Eugene P. O'Neill
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/28/84:
TO: The Honorable Members
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DATE: June 28, 1984 FILE:
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT:
,:�Ur,p -w -=a .
Robert M. Keatinij,
Planning & Development Director
EUGENE P. O'NEILL'S
REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN
APPROVAL EXTENSION
FROM: Mary Jane V. Goetzfried REFERENCES: E. O'Neill
??,i`� Chief, Current Development Section DIS:MARYJ
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at
their regular meeting of July 11, 1984.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
In -July of 1983, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved
the site plan application submitted by Eugene P. O'Neill to
construct a 32,308 square foot industrial complex at 5625 U.S.
Highway 1.
r
During the course of the past year it has not been possible for
Mr. O'Neill to start construction of the proposed development.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 23(h)(1)(a) Appendix A of
the County -Code, the applicant is requesting an extension of
site plan approval, which would allow construction to commence
within the next 6 months.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Eugene P. O'Neill's request for a
6 month extension of the site plan approval to construct an
industrial complex at 5625 U.S.-Highway.l. r
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (3-0)
granted a 6 -month extension of site plan approval
to construct an industrial complex at 5625 U.S.
#1, as requested by Eugene P. O'Neill.
3
G. Section 8 Existing Housing Rental Assistance Program
Annual Contributions FY 85 Revision 1
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/2/84:
TO: Board of County
Commissioners
THRU: Michael Wright
County Administrator
DATE: 7/2/84
FILE:
SUBJECT: section 8 Existing Housing
Rental Assistance Program
Annual Contributions FY 85
Revision 1
FROM: Edward s. ' egan REFERENCES:
Executive irector
IRC Housing Authority
The Section 8 Program has been invited by HUD to apply for
additional certificates and funding in an amount not to exceed
$106,800.00.
The application requires that we submit HUD Form 52672 (Estimate
of Required Annual Contributions) and HUD.Form 52673 (Estimate of
total Required Annual Contributions), requisitioning funds to cover
our Section 8 Housing Assistance Program, which includes the addi-
tional allocation.
I respectfully request the Board of County Commissioners' con-
currence in the execution of Forms 52672, Revision 1 and 52673, Re-
vision 1, by the Chairman.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously (3-0) approved Forms 52672,
Revision 1, and 52673, Revision 1, of the
application for additional certificates and
funding of Section 8 Existing Housing Rental
Assistance Program Annual Contributions FY 85,
and authorized the Chairman's signature.
J U L 111984 _ BOOKS 7 F�. PE 590
r JUL
111984
ATTACHMENT "E" BOOK 5 L' F,�-1;E.591
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
PRQJLCT NUMBER 13-111
SECTION 8–HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS PROGRAM
—3 0 3 001 &
002
ESTIMATE OF TOTAL REQUIRED ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS
TYPE OF LEASING; METHOD f(:h,,ch onrl !12)
1. ] New Construcr:on
2. U Rehabilitation
NAME AND ADDRESS OF PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCY
Indian River County Board of County Commissioners
1840 25th St., Suite S-319
3. Existing
Vero Beach, Fla. 32960
FY ENDING 19%_85 113,
(14) 1. [-] March 31
2. F_
I June 30
3. � September 30
4. [:_] December 31
HUD FIELD OFFICE:
U. S. Dept. of HUD
NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS (15-181
325 W. Adams St.,
214
Jacksonville, Fla. 32202
NUMBER OF UNIT MONTHS (19-24)
2497
SUBMISSION 125)
[� Original GJ Revision
HUD REGIONAL OFFICE:
U.S. Dept. of HUD
Richard B. Russell Federal Bldg.
Revision Number l
75 Spring St., S.W.
AC CONTRACT NUMBER
Atlanta, Ga. 30303
(26)
APPROVED
REQUESTED AMOUNT
ESTIMATE OF
LINE
REQUIRED
ANNUAL
PER PHA
HUD
UMBER
ITEM DESCRIPTION
CONTRIBUTIONS
MODIFICATIONS
(Column 1)
(Column 2)
(Column.?)
(27-28)
(29-38)
(39-48)
(49-58)
MAXIMUM ANNUAL CONTRIBUTION
'": ':•:%%'�%
01- Maximum Annual Contribution Authorized
'%:%:.;� .:
................,�-
•::� : +xe ' '
545,112
02.
Fraftia Maximum Annual Contributions Applicable to a Period of Less than 12�-
Months
0
03.
Maximum Annual Contributions for Fiscal Year (Line 01 plus 02)
:+X-:
r
Project Account–Balance at End of Current Fiscal Year–Estimated or Actual
04.
(Balance Previous Fiscal Year S 536,733 )
:%:
:.%:;: X.
646,423
05. j Total Annual Contributions Available–Estimated or Actual (Line 03 plus Line 04)
"•�"%•%•'•1,191,535
�............
ESTIMATE OF REQUIRED ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS
(Housing Assistance and Administration)
543,137
543,137
06. Housing Assistance Payments–Form HUD -52672, Part I, Line 10
07. Administrative Fee–Form HUD -52672, Part 2,Line 03
75,559
75,559
08. Independent Public Accountant Audit Costs
2,500
2 500
INITIAL ESTIMATE OF REQUIRED ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS
(Preliminary Costs)
0
0
09. Preliminary Administrative Expense–Prior to ACC–Form HUD -52671, Part IA,
Line 060 _
10. Preliminary Administrative Expense–After ACC–Form HUD -52671, Part IB,
Line 280 .
11. Nonexpendable Equipment–Form HUD -52671, Part II, Line 350
0
12. Total Annual Contributions Required–Requested Year
621,196
13. Deficit at End of Current Year–Estimated or Actual
14. Total Annual Contributions Required
621.196
15. Excess Project Account Balance at End of Requested Fiscal Year (Line 0.5.
•
:;;•;•;%� %'�;' �:•'•:•
570 339
Column 2 minus Line 14 Column 2)
'{•; :• �:%' :• ; I:•:
,
16. Provision for Project Account–Requested Fiscal Y ear–I ncrea s e (Decrease) (Line 15
minus Line 04)(76,084)
•��:'•:;%:%;'�
ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS%
17.
Total Annual Contributions Approved–Requested Fiscal Year (Line 14, Column 2
plus Increas Line 16)
621,196
Source of Total Annual Contributions Approved–Requested Fiscal Year:
18•545
(a) Requested Fiscal Year Maximum Annual Contribi•fions Authorized (Line 03 or
V.
112
Line 17. whichever is lesser)
76,084
(b) Project Account (Line 17 minus Line 18(a))
NAME AND TITLE OF PHA APPROVING OFFICIAL
SIGNATURE
DATE
NAME AND TITLE OF HUD FIELD OFFICE
SIGNATURE
DATE
APPROVING OFFICIAL
• •�.•vu. LYI IMI is VO6oleT/ "U"_UAU14
.b
PROJECT NUMBER (3- 001 &-
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
F L 9 - 13 - g=002 '
SECTION 8 HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS PROGRAM
TYPE OF LEASING METHOD 12
eSTIMATE OF
(Check one)
New Construction I E]
REQUIRED ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS
Rehabilitation 2[�
Existing 3 F-M I
I
NAME AND ADDRESS OF PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCY
FY ENDING (13) 197 85
Indian River County Board of County Commissioner
(14) (Check one)
1840
25th St., Suite S-319
Mar 31 1[__-] Sep 30 3M
Vero
Beach, F1a.32960
Jun 30 2C Dec 31 4[D
NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS (15-18)
,-
214
HUD FIELD
OFFICE
HUD REGIONAL OFFICE
U.S.
Dept. of HUD
J.S. Dept. of HUD
325 W. Adams St.,
Richard B. Russell Fed.
NUMBER OF UNIT MONTHS Is-2a
Jacksonville, Fla. 32202
ldg., 75 Spring St..,
.W., Atlanta, Ga.30303
2497
AC CONTRACT NUMBER
SUBMISSION (251
[� Original Revision
A-3409
Revision No. 1
PART I — ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS REQUIRED (25)
(27-28)
(29)
(30-33)
(34-381
(39-43)
(44-48)
(49-54)
(55-64)
LINE
SIZE OF
DWELLING
NO. OF
DWELLING
MONTHLY
GROSS
IBY
AMOUNT
PAYABLE
MONTHLY
HOUSING
UNIT
MONTHS
ANNUAL
HOUSING
NO.
UNITS
UNITS
RENT
TOWARD IY
ASSISTANCE
LEASE
ASSISTANCE
(2)
(3)
GROSSRENT
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
01
+
0
22
221
82
'139
264
36,696
02
1
63
03
2
91
331
94
� )37
-799
04
3
33'
05
-
06
4.
5
369_
7760
20
07
-_
08
09
10
TOTAL
. x.
PART 2 — CALCULATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE FEE (as)
(27-28)
(29-34)
(3S-39
(40.44)
(45-54)
LINE
NO.
UNITMONTHS
HUD-APPROVED 2-®R
ALLOWABLE
ADMINISTRATIVE
BASIS
FAIR MARKET RENT
PERCENT
FEE
{t1
(21
(31
(n)
01
PER-
CENT 2497 356 _ .085
. ti�c'@4. \ K•v1.•;.'v� •t-':moi y..•' . • .- • ... ',
;:fcti:>i, •• y.a:r u•eri;::::•.:•;:; '^�::<f:•.: i ez'...>y.yY:Sf,::iv:^R:$%f,'.C,v:•�.+:+ftc}.
15.D0 �::..un • <Y v.:. ' • .n.> .,.�•;>; , �?'ri's>` •: "? ri: z.. �'!:;•! ' ; i ::a;:.:<:� :> :a: <1 ::;::•: <.r:3;,e:
:: r., , : t:
75,559
37,455
02
.
75,559 4-': !�
revious Edition is Obsolete
J U L 111984
HUD -52672 (12-
BOCKL97 FP �E 592
J
JUL
111984
Boox
5 7
FADE 59
H. Award of Bid
- 8" Water Main Extension along
43rd
Ave.
to South Gifford Road and West on South Gifford Road to 47th
Ave. - Utilities Dept.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/28/84:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: June 28, 1984 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Michael Wright,
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Recommendation for Award of Bid -
8" Water Main Extension Along
43rd Avenue to South Gifford Road
and West on South Gifford Road to
47th Avenue for Utilities Dept.
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. REFERENCES:
Public Works Directo
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Sealed bids were received on June 27, 1984 for the construction
of an 8" Water Main along 43rd Avenue and South Gifford Road
to provide water to all consumers along the routb. The project
was bid in April, 1984 and bids were rejected due to the bids
being over budget.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Two bidders responded as follows
Owl and Associates, Inc. $43,182.00
Vicon Construction Corp. $95,941.00
Both bidders have supplied a 5% bid bond and both bids are
in order. The Public Works Division Engineering estimate is
$49,245. Bids received April 11, 1984 were $72,363:15 from
Dickerson, Inc. and $67,149.15 from Ft. Pierce Contracting Corp.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
It is recommended that the bid be awarded to Owl and Associates,
Inc. in the low bid amount of $43,182. Funding to be from the
Utilities Dept. Impact Fee Fund. Balance as bf June 28, 1984
is $1,085,000.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously (3-0) awarded the bid for the
extension of an 8" water main along 43rd
Ave. to South Gifford Rd. and West on South
Gifford Rd. to 47th Ave. to Owl and Associates,
Inc., in the amount of $43,182.
12
I. Final Assessment Roll, 1st Place - 15th Ave. to
20th Ave.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/28/84:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: June 28, 1984 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Michael Wright,
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Final Assessment Roll
1st Place - 15th Avenue to
20th Avenue
FROM:James W. Davis, P.E. REFERENCES:
o_
Public Works Director
4.
z '" DESCRIPTION AND CONDITION
The paving of 1st Place is complete. The final cost and preliminary
t rv4 kff v _
�r 'estimate for the work was (N.I.C. recording fees) : - -
//2dc ,
-Final Cost/FF Prelim.Cost/FF Final Cost Prelim. Estimate-
1st Place $6.1683 a $7.88 $23,443.~66 $30,569.70
`All construction costs are under the original estimates. The
Final Assessment Rolls have been prepared and are ready.to be
delivered to the Clerk'to the Board. Assessments are tobe paid
within 90 days or in two equal installments, the first -to be .
`'s made .twelve months from the due date and the second to be made
twenty-four months from the due date at the rate of interest'3 i;
'established by.the Board of County Commissioners. The dud .date
Is 90 days after the final determination of the special assessment.
The interest rate shall be 12% per annum. i^
ALTERNATIVE AND ANALYSIS
Since the final assessments to the benefited owners will be less
S,< than computed on the preliminary assessment rolls, the only
;'.alternative presented is to approve the final assessment rolls.
it RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
It is recommended that the Final Assessment Rolls for the paving
of 1st Place be approved by the Board of County Commissioners
and that they be transmitted to the Office of the Clerk to the
Board for collection.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously (3-0) approved the Final Assessment
13
JUL 111984 Booz 57
L
J
r .
JUL 111994 7 r,,Jc 9
Roll for the paving of 1st Place between 15th Ave.
and 20th Ave., at 12% interest rate per annum, as
recommended by Public Works Director Jim Davis.
SAID FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
THE CLERK
DISCUSSION RE CAMPAIGN SIGNS ON RIGHT-OF-WAYS
Administrator Wright wanted to remind candidates that
it is illegal to place campaign signs in the County road
right-of-ways, and, they must be removed.
Chairman Scurlock felt that the County should not have
to spend money to take signs down at any time and thought
that candidates should have to post a bond to assure removal
of signs after the election. He pointed out that it
actually is illegal for candidates to post signs before they
have qualified.
Administrator Wright informed the Board that Supervisor
of Elections Rosemary Richey will be given a list of
campaign regulations for distribution to candidates.
In regard to the existing campaign signs around town,
the Commissioners agreed to wait until next week before
authorizing the removal of any signs on County road
right-of-ways.
Commissioner Bowman noted that there are still some
signs standing from the spring election.
PUBLIC HEARING - COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST TO REZONE 16.33
ACRES FROM RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT
The hour of 9:15 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to wit:
14
I
.5-/ '
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 PressJoumal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
In the Court, was pub-
lished
ubfished In said newspaper in the Issues o O1�1 L i1r?
/9Q� Nonce o
r�1 nonce raze
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Is located west of U.S. Highway No. 1, north of 41 at Street, east, of,Otd Dixie Hfghway, south .
Vero Beach, In said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore of 45th Sheet.
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been I The subject property is described a$:'
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- I ALL THAT LAND LYING IN THE Erh of the NWIAOF SECTION 26,. TOWNSHIP 32S, RANGE 39E
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of I INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LYING SOUTH OF THE .SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE O:
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm; NORTH GIFFORD ROAD (45TH STREET) LYING WEST OF: THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE:O
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this; U.S. HIGHWAY #1 (STATE ROAD #5), LYING NORTH OF THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE O
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. SOUTH GIFFORD ROAD (41ST STREET) AND LYING EAST OF THE,EAST RIGHT -05 -WAY LIN,
I OF OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY. :.+ .. - .. ,.._- ;• .., - ,
Swom to and subscri ed rem i day of A.D.19 Or,L LESS AND EXCEPT HOWEVER THE FOLLOWING DESCRI9lkD PARCELS OF LAND:
BEGINNING AT THE NW CORNER OF LANDS BELONGING TO THE ESTATE OF JULIA LIE
I MORE (DECEASED) IN THE SE'% OF NW'/. OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 32S, RANGE 39 E. THh
(Business Manager) BEING THE PLACE OF BEGINNING, FROM THENCE RUNNING SOUTH -TO THE NE CORNER O
THE STREET WEST OF THE TOWN OF GIFFORD AND THE STREET NORTH OF LOT ONE (1) O
THE .TOWN OF GIFFORD, FROM THENCE RUNNING ON THE NORTH LINE ON THE STREE'
(Clerk of the Ci cu int , NORTH OF SAID LOT ONE (1) IN SOUTHWESTERLY DIRECTION TO THE EAST -LINE •OF, THI
(SEAL) FIFTY
Florida)1 DIXIE HIGHWAY; THENCE RUNNING NORTHERLY ALONG SAID DIXIE H1GHWi1Y, A•DISTANCE O;
FIFTY (50) FEET, THENCE RUNNING NORTHEASTERLY TO POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID POIN-
OF BEGINNING BEING THE NORTH LINE OF THE SE% OF THE NW% OF SAID SECTION 21 AN[
BEING PART OF LAND DEEDED BY J.T. GRAY AND ANNIE GRAY, HIS WIFE TO MARY J. DeSTEU
BEN ON THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, A.U. 1912, AND RECORDED IN BOOK -OF DEED?
PAGE 274 OF THE RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY; STATE OF FLORIDA. 1. f'
BEGINNING AT THE STAKE AT THE SE CORNER OF THE NEIN OF THE NWIA OF SECTIO •2E
TOWNSHIP 32S, RANGE 39 E. THENCE WEST 700 FEET TO STAKE, THENCE NORTH 145 FEET
THENCE WEST 300 FEET TO RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY, THENCI
SOUTH ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY 145 FEET TO LINE, THENCE EAST 296 FEET TO STAKI
AND CONTAINING ONE ACRE MORE OR LESS, AND TO BE USED FOR CHURCH PURPOSEf
ONLY. 1, . y r
THAT PART OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NWIA OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 32S, RANGE 39i
SCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:. t
COMMENCING AT THE BE CORNER OF THE EAST 1h OF THE NWIA OF THE NEIK OF SECTIOt
27, TOWNSHIP 32S, RANGE 39 EAST; THENCE RUN WEST 210 FEET; THENCE RUN NORTH 29,
FEET TO POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN NORTH 50 FEET; THENCE RUN WEST 100 FEET
THENCE RUN SOUTH 50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID LAND SITUATE, LYING ANI
BEING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AND ALSO, FROM THE BE CORNER.OF THE NES
OF THE NW'/. OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 32S, RANGE 39E, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
RUN WEST 700 FEET TO THE BE CORNER OF CHURCH PROPERTY; THENCE RUN NORTH i
DISTANCE OF 145 FEET TO THE NE CORNER OF CHURCH PROPERTY FOR POINT OF BEGIN
NTNG: THENCE RUN NORTH A DISTANCE OF 177.55 FEET; THENCE RUN WEST A DISTANCE OI
281.25 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF A 66 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR OLD U.S. NO. 1; THENC(
RUN SOUTHERLY TO THE NORTH L INE OF THE CHURCH PROPERTY; THENCE RUN EAST i
DISTANCE OF 233.10 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; ALL OF THE ABOVE LAND LYING It
THE NE'/. OF THE NWIA OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 32S, RANGE 39E, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
FLORIDA.
THAT PORTION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 42ND STREET LYING BETWEEN SAID WES-
RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 1 AND EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF OLD DIXIE HIGH
WAY. _ . .
AND THAT PORTION OF LOTS 1-10 OF J.T. GREYS TOWN OF GIFFORD SUBDIVISION AS RE
CORDED IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 89 OF THE. PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE:COUNTY, FLOP
IDA.
ALL OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED LANDS NOW LYING AND BEING WITHIN INDIAN RIVEI
COUNTY, FLORIDA.
A public hearing at which parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard, wi
be held by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, in the County Com
mission Chambers of the County Administration Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beact
Florida, on Wednesday. July 11, 1984, at 9:15 a.m.
It any person decides to appeal any decision made on the above matter, he/she will need a recon
of the proceedings, and for such purposes, he/she may need to ensure that a verbatim record c
the proceedings is made; which includes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By: -s-Don C. Scurlock, Chairman
June 120. July 2. 1 g84.
15
JUL 111984 _ BOOK 57 FACE59f
I
_I
JUL 111984 BOOK 57 FnF597
A.M.
Commissioner Wodtke entered the meeting at 9:15 o'clock
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/14/84:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: May 14, 1984 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners_ COUNTY INITIATED
REQUEST TO REZONE 16.33
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:ACRES FROM C-lA, RE-
STRICTED COMMERCIAL
��� SUBJECT: DISTRICT, TO C-1, COM -
Robert M. KeatiAg, 6&CP MERCIAL DISTRICT
Planning & Development Director
Richard Shearer AICP Co.Int. 16.33 Ac.
FROM:
Chief, Long -Range PlannAEFERENCES: FORMS
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting -of July 11, 1984.
DESCRIPTION-& CONDITIONS
Indian River County is initiating a request to rezone
approximately 16.33 acres located west of U.S. 1, east of Old
Dixie Highway, south -of North Gifford Road (45th Street), and
north of South Gifford Road (41st Street), from C-lA,
Restricted Commercial District, to C-1, Commercial District.
On March 21; 1984, the Board of County Commissioners rezoned .6
acres of land on the east side of Old Dixie Highway and the
north side of 42nd Street from R-2, Multiple -Family District,
to C-1. In order to avoid spot zoning, the Planning Department
recommended that additional land in this area be rezoned to
C-1.
On May 10, 1984, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
4 -to -0 to recommend approval of this request.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of -the reasonahleness of the
application will be presented. The analysis will include a
description of the current and future land uses of the site and
surrounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and
utility systems, and any.significant adverse impacts on
environmental quality.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property currently contains approximately 25
residential dwellings, a vacant commercial building, a clothing
store, a beautician's shop, a supermarket, a vacant service
station, several fruit packing houses, and vacant land. West
of the subject property, in an R-2 zoning district, are
approximately 20 residential buildings, a vacant building, and
16
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and the
land north, south, and west of it as part of the U.S. 1 MXD,
Mixed -Use Corridor (up to 6 units/acre). Further west, 300
feet west of the F.E.C. Railroad, is the boundary of the
Gifford MXD, Mixed -Use District (up to 14 units/acre). The
land east of the subject property, across U.S.1, is generally
designated as MD -1, Medium-Density"Residential 1 (up to 8
units/acre). However, the plan also designates a fifty -acre
commercial/industrial node on the east side of U.S. I between
North Gifford Road and South Gifford Road.
Many of the.existing land uses on the subject property are
non -conforming uses under the existing C-lA zoning. Fruit
packing houses are not allowed in the C-lA district but are
allowed in the C-1 district. Rezoning the subject property to
C-1 would eliminate many non -conforming uses but would not
create any new non -conforming uses. Based on the existing land
use pattern, the C-1 district appears to be the most
appropriate zoning for the subject property.
Transportation System
The subject property has direct access to U.S. 1 (classified as
an arterial on the County's Thoroughfare Plan), North Gifford
Road.and Old Dixie Highway (both classified as secondary
collectors), and to South Gifford Road (classified as a primary
collector). Rezoning the subject'property from the C-lA zoning
district to the C-1 zoning district should have little effect
on the amount of traffic on these roads.
Environment
The subject property is not designated as environmentally
sensitive nor is it in a flood -prone area.
Utilities
r
County water is available for the subject property, but County
wastewater facilities are -not available.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning
Commission's recommendation, staff recommends approval.
Richard Shearer, Chief of Long -Range Planning,
presented staff's recommendation for approval of the
County -initiated request to rezone 16.33 acres from C-lA to
C-1.
17
J U L 111984 BOOK 57 PACE 598
JUL 111984
BOOK 57 Fm,),E 599
Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked
if anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Leon Foster, resident in the area, asked how far the
C-1 District extends as he was concerned about several
people who have homes in that area which has been zoned
residential for many years.
After pointing out the perimeters of the area being
proposed for rezoning, Mr. Shearer explained that this
proposal does not include any property that is presently
zoned residential, only that which is presently zoned
restricted commercial, and staff is recommending that the
zoning be changed to C-1, which will not create any new
non -conforming uses. Most of the residences are to the
south end of the area, and the north end is occupied by
packing houses and associated uses.
Chairman Scurlock noted that if these homes were built
just recently, they would have had to be in a residential
district or they would not have received a building permit.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if this rezoning request
could be approved with the understanding that it would not
affect residential uses in that particular area, and Mr.
Shearer felt that would be very difficult because the
residential uses are so scattered. He asked, however, if
the Commissioners would like to exclude the parcel that is
next to the R-2 and then have staff come back with a request
to rezone it to R-2.
Commissioner Bird thought it might be difficult to
exclude only the property of the people represented here
when there might be some other residential uses in that area
that also qualify.
Mr. Shearer confirmed that there are approximately 20
non -conforming residential uses scattered throughout the
area, but stressed that the issue here is that only
presently zoned C-lA property would be affected.
18
Commissioner Bird did not believe there has been a
great deal of commercial activity in that area in the last
few years and felt we may find a trend for having more
residential in there and less commercial.
Mr. Shearer stated that C-lA has discouraged builders
and C-1 allows a much broader range of uses. He again
emphasized that this change will not affect the residences
there now.
Chairman Scurlock noted that if a house that is built
on commercially zoned property burned down or was destroyed,
it could not be replaced as residential.
Luke Knight spoke from the audience in favor of the
rezoning.
Dan Richey, 75 Royal Palm Blvd., agreed that there has
not been much demand for commercial in that area for the
last three or four years, but he and his father-in-law,
Victor Knight, have noticed a significant increase in
development in the last few months.
Martha Adderly, 4481 U.S. #1, owner of a residence in
the area being discussed, asked how this would affect the
evaluation of her property, and Chairman Scurlock thought
that the evaluation would remain pretty much the same.
Commissioner Wodtke suggested that Mrs. Adderly ask Tax
Appraiser David Nolte for an appraised amount.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board
unanimously (4-0) closed the Public Hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously (4-0) adopted Ordinance 84-38,
rezoning 16.33 acres from Restricted Commercial
to Commercial District.
19
JUL 111984 BOOK 57 FACE 600
I
JUL 111984
BOOK 57 F`GE 601
ORDINANCE NO. 8 4 - 3 8
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:
ALL THAT LAND LYING IN THE E2 OF THE NW -1,4 OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP
32S, RANGE 39E, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LYING SOUTH OF THE
SOUTH RIGHT -0F -WAY LINE OF NORTH GIFFORD ROAD (45TH STREET) LYING
WEST OF THE WEST RIG19-0F-WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY #1 (STATE ROAD
#5), LYING NORTH OF THE NORTH RIGHT -OF --WAY LINE OF SOUTH GIFFORD
ROAD (41ST. STREET) AND LYING EAST OF THE EAST RIGHT -OF --WAY LINE
OF OLD DIXIE HIG MY
I 5o 55151 w • 91• 1 Mal M FVTJI ej 5551 . t-.15 DV-3 •ZM51 • It
BEGINNING AT THE NW CORNER OF LANDS BELONGING TO THE ESTATE OF
JULIA LISMORE (DECEASED) IN THE SF4- OF NW4 OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP
32S, RANGE 39 E. THIS BEING THE PLACE OF BEGINNING, FROM THENCE
RUNNING SOUTH TO THE NE CORNER OF THE STREET WEST OF THE TOWN OF
GIFFORD AND THE STREET NORTH OF LOT ONE (1) OF THE TOWN OF GIFFORD,
FROM THENCE RUINING ON THE NORTH LINE ON THE STREET NORTH OF SAID
IAT ONE (1) IN SOUTHWESTERLY DIRECTION TO THE EAST LINE OF THE
DIXIE HIGHWAY; 'THENCE RUNNING NOMMY ALONG SAID DIXIE HIGHWAY, A
DISTANCE OF FIFTY (50) FEET, TM CE RUNNING NORTHEASTERLY TO
POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING THE NORTH LINE
OF THE SE4 OF THE NM -4 OF SAID SECTION 26, AND BEING PART OF LAND
DEEDED BY J. T. GRAY AND ANNIE GRAY, HIS WIFE TO MARY J. DeSTEUBEN
ON THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMM, A.D. 1912, AND RECORDED IN BOOK OF
DEEDS 14, PAGE 274 OF THE RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, STATE OF
FLORIDA.
BEGINNING AT THE STAKE AT THE SE CORNER OF THE NE4 OF THE N04 OF
SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 32S, RANGE 39 E, THENCE WEST 700 FEET TO
STAN, THENCE NORTH 145 FEET, THENCE WEST 300 FEET TO RIGHT-OF-WAY
OF THE FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY, THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID RIGHT-
OF—,Y 145 FEET TO LINE, THENCE EAST 296 FEET TO STAKE AND CONTAIN-
ING ONE ACRE MORE OR LESS, AND TO BE USED FOR CHURCH PURPOSES ONLY.
THAT PART OF THE EAST , OF THE NW4 OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 32S,
RANGE 39E, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE SE CORNER OF THE EAST 4 OF THE NW4 OF THE NE4 OF
SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 32S, RANGE 39 EAST; THENCE RUN WEST 210 FEET;
THENCE RUN NORTH 295 FEET TO POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN NORTH
50 FEET; THENCE RUN WEST 100 FEEL'; THENCE RUN SOUTH 50 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID LAND SITUATE, LYING AND BEING IN INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AND ALSO, FROM THE SE CORNER OF THE NE4 OF
THE NW -14- OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 32S, RANGE 39E, INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, RUN WEST 700 FEET TO THE SE CORNER OF CHURCH
PROPERTY; THENCE RUN NORTH A DISTANCE OF 145 FEET TO THE NE CORNER
20
— M M
0
OF CHURCH PROPERTY FOR POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN NORTH A
DISTANCE OF 177.55 FEET; THENCE RUN WEST A DISTANCE OF 281.25 FEET
TO THE EAST LINE OF A 66 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR OLD U.S. NO. 1;
THENCE RUN SOUTHERLY TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE CHURCH PROPERTY;
THENCE RUN EAST A DISTANCE OF 233.10 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING; ALL OF THE ABOVE LAND LYING IN THE NF% OF THE NGV4- OF
SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 32S, RANGE 39E, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
THAT PORTION OF THE RIGHT -0F -WAY OF 42ND STREET LYING BETWEEN SAID
WEST RIGHT-OF-TAMY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 1 AND EAST RIGHT -OF --WAY LINE
OF OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY.
AND THAT PORTION OF LOTS 1-10 OF J. T. GREYS TOWN OF GIFFORD
SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 89 OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
ALL OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED LANDS NOW LYING AND BEING WITHIN INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FL3:ERLDA.
Be chc-Tged from C-lA, Restricted Commercial District, to C-1,
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 Catmissioners of Indian
River County, Florida on this 11th day of July , 1984.
Board of County Commissioners
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY c
Chairman
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida this
19th day of July , 1984.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment fran the Department of State received on
this 23rd day of July , 1984, at 11 A.M./P.M. and filed in the
office of the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida.
21
JUL 111984 eoo i 6cc 602
JUL
111984
BOOK 57
PUBLIC HEARING
- COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST TO REDESIGNATE
84.47 ACRES FROM LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 2 to MEDIUM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 1
The hour of 9:15 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
at2
in the matter of�-
in the
Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of�
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, 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
(SEAL)
me 1 T day of A.D_ 19
Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indgn Aiver County, Florida)
6.
NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING
TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A COUNTY
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAND.USE
ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
Notice of .hearing initiated by Indian River
County to consider the adoption of a County Or-
dinance amending the Land Use Element of the
Comprehensive Plan by redesignating land from:
LD -P, "Low -Density Residential 2" (up to
6 units/acre) to MD -1, Medium Density,
Residential 1" (up.to 8 units/acre). The
subject property is Iocated'west of the .
F.E.C.R.R. and—east and north 'of the
Sebastian City Limits. -1.I . `
The subject propery is described as
being a part, of Section 20, Township 31
South, Range 39, East, Indian River
County, Florida, and is more specifically
described as:
The NE% of" NWIA of said Section
20- the North''h. of the SE% of the NW'/.
of Section 20• and that part of the NW'/,
of the NEIA lying more: than 300 feet
West, of the F.E.C. Railroad right-of-way.,
an in Section 20; Township 31 S, Range
39E, " publig.. ;records of � Indian River
County, Florida. Said land now lying and
being In Indian River County; Florida.
together with:.. . 1
Breezy Village Mobile Home Subdivi-
sion, - Unit
ubdivision,-Unit 1, as recorded in Plat Book 9,
Page 34. filed and of. record In the office
of the Clerkofthe Circuit Court of Indian
River County, Florida..
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.Commission-
ers of Indian River County, Florida; in the County
Commission Chambers of,theCounty Adminis-
tration Building, located of 1840 25th Street,
Vero Beach, Florida, ;on Wednesday, July 11,
1984, at 9:15 A.M:
If any person decides to appeal' any decision
made on the above matter, he/she. will need -a
record: of the proceedings, and. for such pur-
poses, he/she may need to ensure that a verba-
tim record of the proceedings is made, which In-
cludes testimony; and evidence upon, which the
appeal isbased..
Indian River County"
Board of County ComMI ' loners
,By: s -Don C Scurlock Jr
, Chairman'
June 20. JulY.Z.1 W,
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/26/84:
22
TO: The Honorable Members DATE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
June 26, 1984
SUBJECT:
Robert M. Keatirlg,. WP
Planning & Development Director
FROM:
Richard shearer,
Chief, Long -Rang
eAICP REFERENCES:
Planning
FILE:
COUNTY -INITIATED RE-
QUEST TO AMEND THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY
REDESIGNATING 84.47
ACRES FROM LD -2, TO
MD -1
CPA 84.47 Ac.
RICH2
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of July 11, 1984.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Indian River County is initiating•a request to amend the
Comprehensive Plan by redesignating 84.47 acres located west of
the F.E.C. Railroad.in Section 20, Township 31 South, Range 39
East, from LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6
units/acre), to MD -1, Medium -Density Residential 1 (up to 8
units/acre).
On May 23, 1984, the Board of County Commissioners approved a
request to'redesignate 20 acres of land located contiguous to
the subject property from LD -2 to MD -1.
This request was initiated to establish a consistent land use
designation for all of the County land in Section 20 which is
west of the-F.E.C. Railroad.
On May 24, 1984, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
4 -to -0 to recommend approval of this request=.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the
application will be presented. The analysis will include a
description of the current and future land uses of the site and
surrounding•areas, potential impacts on the transportation and
utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on en-
vironmental -quality.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property currently contains Breezy Village Mobile
Home Subdivision, zoned R-1PM, Permanent Mobile Home Subdivi-
sion District; Lamplighter Mobile Home Park, zoned R-1MP,
Mobile Home Park District; a warehouse zoned M-1, Restricted
Industrial District; and undeveloped land zoned A, Agricultural
District. North of the subject property are citrus groves and
undeveloped land. East of the subject property, across the
F.E.C. railroad tracks, are mobile homes and undeveloped land.
South of the subject property is a sand mining operation and
undeveloped land in the City of Sebastian. West of the subject
property is a platted single-family subdivision in the City of
Sebastian.
23
JUL 111984
BOCK 5 7 Fna:605
J U L 111984
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and
the land north of it -as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to
6 units/acre.). The land east of the subject property is
designated as part of the U.S.1 MXD, Mixed Use Corridor (up to
6 units/acre). The land west and south of the subject property
is in the City of Sebastian, except for the 20 acre parcel west
of Breezy Village that has already been redesignated MD -1.
The LD -2 land use designation does not allow mobile home
developments. Based on the existing land use pattern and
zoning of the subject property and immediate area, it seems
more reasonable to assign a land use designation to this area
that permits mobile homes to bring the existing mobile home
developments and zoning into conformance with the Comprehensive
Plan and to allow new development consistent with the existing
land use pattern. Therefore, the MD -1 land use designation
appears to be more logical than the LD -2 designation.
Transportation Svstem
The subject property has access to Vickers Road (classified as
a Secondary Collector street on the Thoroughfare Plan). The
maximum development of the subject property under the MD -1 land
use designation would generate 2,534 additional average annual
daily trips (AADT).
Environment
The subject property is not specifically designated as environ-
mentally sensitive on the Comprehensive Plan. However, there
are some wetland areas and a small portion of the western part
of the subject property is in a flood -prone area. The flood -
prone -area is in an "A zone" which means it is within the 100
year flood plain. Flood elevations have not been determined.
These environmental considerations should be addressed at the
site plan or 'subdivision plat review stage.
Utilities
County water and wastewater facilities are not available for
the subject property.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the above analysis, including the existing land use
pattern and the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommenda-
tion,.the staff -recommends that the subject property be redes-
ignated MD -1, Medium -Density Residential 1.
Planner Richard Shearer made the staff presentation for
approval of this redesignation and pointed out the subject
property on the land use map.
Chairman Scurlock opened the public hearing and asked
if anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Dave Rogers explained that his situation was unique and
asked Mr. Shearer to explain it to the Board.
24
� s �
_I
Mr. Shearer pointed out that Mr. Rogers property, which
is within the area being proposed for redesignation, is
currently zoned M-1, restricted industrial district, and has
a warehouse on it. This is a conforming use under M-1
zoning, but the M-1 zoning is not allowed under either the
MD -1 or the present LD -2 land use designation. Mr. Rogers
is grandfathered in, as far as the Comp Plan is concerned,
because he had a lawful, conforming use when the plan was
adopted.
Mr. Rogers was concerned that if the land use
designation was changed, it might mean that the County would
eventually come back and rezone his property to residential.
Mr. Shearer assured Mr. Rogers that the County had no
intentions in the near future of rezoning his property from
M-1 and that he could maintain his business on that
property. He also stated that Mr. Rogers can expand or
change his type of business, and even sell his property as
industrial if he wished; he could not add any property to
what he currently has, but he can further develop what he
now owns.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board
unanimously (3-0) closed the Public Hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board
unanimously (4-0) adopted Ordinance 84-39
amending the Comprehensive Land Use Plan by
redesignating 84.47 acres from Low -Density
Residential 2 to Medium -Density Residential 1.
25
JUL 11 1984 - B G 0 K 157 F,.606
J
r �
JUL 111984 BOOK 57 rnF 607
ORDINANCE NO. 84-39
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
amend the Comprehensive Plan by redesignating 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 Land Use Element of the
Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County, Florida, and the
accompanying Land Use Map, be amended as follows:
1. That the Land Use Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in
Indian River County, Florida, to -wit:
The NEh of the NWh of said Section 20; the North h of
the SE4 of the NWk of Section 20; and that part of the
NW4 of the NEa lying more than 300 feet West of the
F.E.C. Railroad right-of-way; all in Section 20,
Township 31S, Range 39E, public records of Indian River
County, Florida. Said land now lying and being in
Indian River County, Florida.
together with:
Breezy Village Mobile Home Subdivision, Unit 1, as
recorded in Plat Book 9, Page 34, filed and of record in
the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian
River County, Florida.
Be changed from LD -2, Low Density Residential 2 to MD -1,
Medium Density Residential 1.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Land Use Element.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida on this 11thday of July 01
1984.
Board of County Commissioners
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY: / L alz�_
DON C. SCURL CK, JR. C Fman
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of
Florida this 19 day of July , 1984.
26
PUBLIC HEARING — WHITESTONE REQUEST TO INCLUDE 28.91 ACRES
IN WABASSO ROAD COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL NODE
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:
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 ofl�
in the
Court, was pub -
S -C
'NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CONCERNING INTERPRETATION OF !,
' COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Notice of hearing to'consider the following in
dusttial node designation request for the subjec
property to be included in the Wabasso Roac
dustrial C.R. 51node as designated othe future Tan
ons
use map in the Land Use Element of theCom.
prehensive Pian of Indian River County,
The subject property is described as Florida.
Parcel 1; That. part of fifteen (15yacres
ofr land taken by parallel lines off to the 1:'
North side. of. the SW1A of the NWS/. of
Section 28, Township 31 South, Range,
3s East,. lying West of the right-of-way of
the Florida -East Coast Railroad, `which
same dompHseS' 8.95 acres, more or
less, in Indian River CountyFlorida The
' NOrth-Shuth dimoncc.... -6 a.w ---
being .. 455
Boundary'Lin
Parcel 2: '
SW% of the
and citizens
lished in said newspaper in the issues of C/U C]heard, will be
missioners of
County Comr
Administration Building, located at 1340251
Street, Vero Beach; Florida; on Wednesday, Juil
11, 1984, at 9:30
If any person decides to appeal any deofslor
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at made on the above matter, he/she win need's
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore record of the proceedings, and for such pur•
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been tim rreecorrd of th -may
Is madeewhich Ian,
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- cludes testimon"and evidence upon which the
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of appeal is based , r,+ z
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither aid nor promised an Indian River County'; -',';i.
y P P Y Person, firm ::Board of County C6inmissloners�
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this i3y s Oon C. Scurlock Jrk 7
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Chairman
June 20, Julv 2. 1984
T''r ,ti Sapp tr ;;
a South 21 acres 'of the
W'/., lying West of the
In Section 28, Township
le. 39 East Indian, River:
a€ which partes in interBS-q
helve an OOOorturiity fe hd
Sworn to and subscribe efo met day of A.D. 19
(Busine M ger)
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River nty, Florida)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/26/84:
27
'JUL 111984
rcr 57 Fk.tj 608
JUL 111984
BOOK 57 PAGE 609
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: June 26, 1984 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
WHITESTONE REQUEST TO
INCLUDE 28.91 ACRES IN
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE- THE 150 ACRE U.S.#1
8UBJECT: AND WABASSO ROAD
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL
NODE
Robert M. Keati , WP
Planning & Development Director
FROM. Richard Shearer AICP REFERENCES: Whitestone/P&Z
Chief, Long -Range Planning CHIEF
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of July 11, 1984.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The applicant, Domenic Mirabile, an agent for Kenneth
Whitestone, Trustee; is requesting to include 28.91 acres
located one-half mile north of Wabasso Road and on the west
side of the F.E.C. Railroad in the 150 acre U.S.#1 and Wabasso
Road commercial/industrial node.
The subject.property is currently zoned M-1, Restricted
Industrial District, and A. Agricultural District. The
applicants originally intended to establish a septage
processing facility. 'Currently, the applicants are intending
to use the subject property for industrial uses.
On May 24, 198.4, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
4 -to -0 to recommend that the subject property not be included
in the node. The Commission felt that the County has spent
considerable time developing the node concept,and they did not
feel that the subject property could logically be included in
the node. _•
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the
application -will be presented. The analysis will include a
description.of the current and future land uses of the site and
surrounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and
utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on
environmental quality.
Existina Land Use Pattern
The subject property and all of the land. immediately around it
is undeveloped. East of -the subject property, across the
F.E.C. railroad, are citrus groves, cultivated land, and vacant
land. Further east, fronting on U.S.#1, is the Hale Groves
office and gift shop, and a motel.
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan designates approximately 19 acres of the
subject property as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6
units/acre), and the remaining portion (the east 300 feet of the
property) is designated MXD, Mixed -Use District (up to 6
units/acre).
W
� s �
M M r
The land north and east of the subject property is also
designated as MXD. The land south and west of the subject
property is -designated as LD -2. Further south is the U.S.#1
and Wabasso Road commercial/industrial node.
Presently, the only area.around the Wabasso Road and U.S.#1
intersection that is zoned for industrial uses is the area west
of the F.E.C. railroad and north of Wabasso. Because this land
has frontage on the railroad right-of-way and there are few
residential uses in the area, this generally seems to be an
appropriate location for industrial activity.
A map of the U.S.#land Wabasso Road node has been prepared to
show the proposed outer limit boundaries of the node (including
300 acres) and the flexible boundaries of the node (including
150 acres). This map is included as Attachment #3.
The center of the node is the U.S.#1/Wabasso Road intersection.
Using the center of the node, the size constraint of this
particular node, and the existing commercial and industrial
development,.a perimeter was established. The flexible
boundaries were drawn based on the existing commercial and
industrial land uses around the center of the node, the infill
property which can naturally be expected to develop in
commercial or industrial uses in the near future, and the
current pattern of residential development in this area. The
proposed flexible boundaries include approximately 150 acres.
Based upon the recommended flexible and outer limits boundaries
of the node, the subject property is located too far north to
logically be included -in the node. The flexible boundary
includes approximately 65 acres of land located west of the MXD
area and north of Wabasso Road.. Stretching the node to include
the subject property could lead to problems in allocating land
to other quadrants of the node in the near future.
After the public hearing before the Planning and Zoning
Commission, the applicants contacted the Planning Department
about the possibility of rearranging the outer limit boundary
to include the subject property. The Planning Department feels
that -the proposed outer limit boundary is logical and that
altering it could lead to spreading the node too far. Rearrang-
ing the outer limit boundary would still not include the
subject property within the flexible boundary.
Transportation System
The subject property does.not have access to a public road and
is one-half mile north of Wabasso Road. However, Kings Highway
(58th Avenue) is planned to continue northward from Wabasso
Road as a secondary collector road. If Kings Highway were
extended, it would run along the western boundary of the
subject property.- The property owner would be required to
provide access to the site prior to development.
Environment
The subject property is not designated as environmentally
sensitive nor is it in a flood -prone area. 'However, the
subject property is located on the sand ridge, an important
aquifer recharge area.
Utilities -
County water and wastewater facilities are not available for
the subject property.
29
JUL 111984 8OOK 57 FAIE 6�®
Fr-
JUL 111984 57
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the facts that the
subject property is not within the proposed flexible boundary
of the node, that:the subject property does not have access to
a public road and the Planning and Zoning Commission's
recommendation, staff recommends that this request to include
the subject property in the U.S.#1 and Wabasso Road
commercial/industrial node be denied.
Planner Richard Shearer presented staff's recommenda-
tion for denial of this request and showed the subject
property on the land use map. He noted that the Planning &
Zoning Commission also recommended denial of the request.
Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked
if anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Steve Henderson, Attorney, representing the applicant,
pointed out that for the most part this property has been
zoned M-1 and Agricultural for many years, and the applicant
purchased this property in light of the present zoning. He
noted that while it is true that the property is one half
mile north of the intersection of Wabasso Road, it is
adjacent to the FEC railroad, and within a fairly short
distance of the city limits of Sebastian.
Attorney Henderson then discussed the boundaries of
nodes and stated that he could easily understand why staff
would find it convenient to draw in some form of flexible
boundaries; he felt, however, that the boundaries could be
regarded as somewhat inconsistent with the master Land Use
Plan which states in several places that the uses within a
node will be determined by zoning and not by drawing limits
around the node. He understood that the Planning & Zoning
Commission has not adopted any form of flexible outer
boundaries, which defines the limits of uses within nodes.
Mr. Shearer advised that this issue has been discussed
during several workshops, but no formal action has been
taken.
Attorney Henderson noted that the Planning & Zoning
Commission turned down the request specifically because it
30
was outside the outer limits of the node.
In effect, they
acted upon this request in light of proposed regulations
which have not been adopted yet.
Attorney Brandenburg explained that the Comprehensive
Land Use Plan defines nodes as having a certain flexibility
to which they can expand, and he felt that the Planning &
Zoning Commission considered this property to be outside of
even the most outer limits which could be conceived.
Attorney Henderson submitted that the criteria that
should be applied to commercial activities, i.e., concentra-
tion around intersections, may not necessarily be appro-
priate with respect to industrial areas. There are some
strictly industrial nodes further south which are not
concentrated around nodes. Attorney Henderson believed that
the Commission will run into some problems if it is going to
apply the concept of noding around intersections for both
commercial and industrial, and he felt this request is one
of those problems.
Planning Director Robert Keating explained that the MXD
reaches to 300 feet of either the railroad or Old Dixie,
whichever is further, and pointed out that a 9 -acre portion
of the subject property is included in the MXD.
Mr. Shearer noted that at present there is no access to
the subject property except for the FEC railroad.
Attorney Henderson thought that his client might be
willing to build the extension of Kings Highway in order to
gain an access. He did not think that access means that the
road has to be in place at the time, and believed that site
plan would never be approved without it and the node
inclusion.
Attorney Henderson reminded the Commission that they
had determined two years ago that the shape of a node may
deviate in any direction around on intersection. The
Commission also decided that nodes would be designed to
31
®
JUL 11 1984 oaK 7F�,��U12
JUL 111984
B0CK
57
allow for
flexibility when determining what uses
are
permitted and that appropriate zoning would be established
for nodal areas based upon demand for industrial/commercial
uses. He explained that the subject property is under
contract conditional upon this node inclusion, and there is
a demand being shown here for an industrial use. However,
because of the boundary limits, they are being precluded
from obtaining the nodal inclusion. He emphasized that the
Comp Plan recognizes that while node inclusion may not be
appropriate in a particular instance because of a lack of
proximity to an intersection, it also states that certain
parcels of land which do not conform to policies for nodal
development, but which can be demonstrated to be suitable
for commercial or industrial uses, may receive consideration
by the Board of County Commissioners for commercial or
industrial zoning classification. He, therefore believed
the Board has the ability to allow this use outside of the
node.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board
unanimously (4-0) closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bowman,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, that the Board
deny the Whitestone request to have 28.91 acres
included in the 150 -acre Wabasso Road commercial/
industrial node, for the reasons given by staff
and the Planning & Zoning Commission.
In further discussion, Commissioner Wodtke felt there
is a lot of confusion re our nodal system (especially as
related to the MXD District) and that we need to work even
harder on establishing additional policies.
32
Director Keating reported that there is a Comp Plan
amendment in the works which will give staff the authority
to bring these specific node boundaries to the Commission on
an individual basis for their determination.
Commissioner Wodtke felt that we have to consider this
particular request under the laws that are currently in
effect under the Comp Plan.
Director Keating confirmed that there is a provision
whereby an applicant can request that consideration be given
for designation of land as industrial/commercial use even
though it does not meet the nodal criteria, but staff would
have the philosophy that the applicant would have to
delineate specific reasons why the land should be redesig-
nated.
Commissioner Wodtke suggested that the applicant be
given the opportunity to present this matter again before
the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Commissioners Bowman and Wodtke added to their Motion
that it is the Board's recommendation that this matter be
referred back to the Planning & Zoning Commission for
further analysis based on the approach suggested by Director
Keating.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION, with
the addition as noted above. The Motion was
voted on and carried unanimously (4-0).
PUBLIC HEARING - EQUALIZATION, SR -60 WATERLINE ASSESSMENT
ROLL
The hour of 9:45 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to wit:
33
JUL 111984 BOOK 57 F -AGE 614
JUL 111984
BOOK 5, 7 pnc: 615 7,
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
�n the matter of 4ma��.i
in the _.._ Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, 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 su
(SEAL)
A.D. 19�
NOTICE OF MC1AL ASSESSMENT
EQUALIZATION HEARING
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA
TO: ALL INTERESTED PARTIES
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of
County Commmisaloners of Indian River County,
Florida (hereinafter called "Board" and "Coun-
" respectively) will meet on July 11 th, 1984, at
45 o'clock a.m. in the County Commission
Chambers at Vero Beach. Florida, to hear objec-
gone of an owners of property to be assessed
and all Interested persons to the following as-
sessable Improvements In the County, the cost of
such Improvements, the mann of payment for
such Improvements and the amount thereof to
be assessed against each parcel of property
specialty benefited. Such assessable water distri-
bution Improvements consist of the construction
of an extension of a 20 Inch water line from the
existing combined water and sewer system of
the County, and the const wition of a water
tower, a portion of which will be financed
through the Issuance of revenue bonds by the
County(hereinafter caged "Project').
me project will be constructed in the follow -
Ing unincorporated area of the County: Water
line from Oslo Road to 43rd Avenue north to 8th
or 12th Street, then west to Kings Highway, then
north to St. Road 80 water tower to be con-
structed along route of waterline.
The Board has examined the assessment roll
and has determined that a porton of the entire
cast of the Project In the amount of $2,050,000
shall be assessed against the properties spe-
cially benefited thereby. The Board has ap-
proved the preliminary assessment roll as re-
quired by law. The description of each property
to be assessed and the amount to be assessed
to each parcel of pprroperty may be ascertained of
the office of the Clatc of the Board.
The special assessments to be levied against
the properties specially benefited from the Proj-
ect may be paid In caste In not exceeding 10
equal yearly instenmenfs with Interest at a rate
not to exceed 1% above the Interest rate on the
bonds of notes, as the case may be, to be issued
to finance the cost of the project. If the special
aesesemente arenot paid when due, there shall
be added a penalty at the rate of 1 % per month
until paid; provided, however. that such assess-
ments may be prarld at any time within 30 days
after the Project Is completed and a resolution
accepting the same has been adopted by the
Board. but such prepaid asseamrhents shall bear
Interest at the rate Dome by the bonds or the
notes, as the case may be, described above, and
shall Include, If deemed necessary by the Board,
a prepayment fee not to exceed the applicable
redemption premium, ff any, for such notes or
bonds, as the case may be, If they were to be re-
deemed on the next available redemption date.
The special assessments shag be Ievled against
such benefited properties on an available tap
basis to the properties receiving benefit by virtue
of the availability of potable water. Any special
assessment Ilene upon benefited properties, re-
sulting from special assessments levied in ac-
cordance with the provisions of this resolution,
shall be extinguished upon the recording by the
Board In the Official Records of the County, an
affidavit or affidavits executed by the Chairman
of the Board to bre affect that sufficient security
has been deposited with the County In order to
ensure timely payment of the amounts of such
special assessments or ft Installments thereof,
as the case may be.
At the above-named time and place, the
Board will receive any objections of Interested
persons. After receiving and considering all ob-
jections of Interested persons, the Board shall at
such hearing or thereafter either annul or sus-
tain or modify In whole or In part the preliminary
assessments as Indicated on such roll, either by
confirming the preliminary assessments against
any or all lots or parcels described therein or by
canceling. Increasing or reducing the same ac-
cording to the special benefits which the Board
decided each such lot or parcel hes.recelved or
will receive an account of the Project.
Dated this — day of June, 1984.'
Board of CotCommisslahero
of Indian Riva County, Florlda .
By: -a-Don C. Shu► Jr.
Chairman ' '
Attest -a- Freda Wright Clark
per V. Hargreaves, D.C.C
June 20. 27.1984.
Attorney Brandenburg explained that the purpose of this
public hearing today is to hear from those who are objecting
either to the amount or the manner in which they are being
assessed for the SR -60 waterline.
34
Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked
if anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Attorney Sam Block, representing West County Utilities,
Inc., and all the property owners who have voluntarily
agreed to place their property under assessment, stated that
he has reviewed the preliminary assessment roll and agrees
with the assessment of $970.45 per unit and the way in which
it has been calculated. He noted a couple of changes that
needed to be made: Under A-1, it should read Kings Highway
Plaza Partnership rather than Bill Bailey III and under Item
N, there is a discrepancy in the legal description.
Attorney Brandenburg advised that those corrections
have been made.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board
unanimously (4-0) closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Bird asked Attorney Brandenburg to walk
the Commission through this project once more.
Attorney Brandenburg summarized that the County has
undertaken to build a waterline to serve this entire area at
this time because these developers have cooperated to obtain
service now. The County decided to apportion that part of
the cost to be assessed against those developers desiring
immediate service versus that portion of the cost to be
borne by the County's entire utilities system. As a result
of that analysis, it was decided that these developers would
each pay $970.45 for each tap associated with their
projects. That amount includes a $315.45 plant capacity
charge which is normally charged to any customer being
hooked into our system. Anything above that is directly
associated with the line cost.
35
JUL 11 1984 57 FAG U�
JUL 111984 aooK 57 Fell 617
Attorney Brandenburg explained that there are two bond
issues that are involved here, and it becomes very
complicated as to how the funds must flow to satisfy all the
legal requirements. The County has a combined master water
and sewer system and has outstanding obligations with
Farmers Home Administration in respect to that system,
including outstanding notes on the open market. The gross
revenues of the County utility have been pledged to those
notes, which includes the impact fee. In conjunction, we
are doing this assessment, which is part of the gross
revenues. Those two combined issues will yield up to $2.8
million for the purpose of funding this project. The
contracts have been awarded for the project and they are in
the area of $2.4 million and $2.5 million. It is antici-
pated that there will be some changes; but they are fairly
confident that the total price will not exceed $2.8 million.
Our arrangement with FHA is that we cannot draw down on the
$871,000 of their funds until we exhaust other available
funds from the project, i.e., the funds associated with the
assessment of this project. As of the date the Board adopts
the equalization resolution, the County establishes a lien
on all the properties involved in this assessment. That
lien would have the same status as a municipal tax lien and
can be extinguished in several ways. The bond issue can
just run its full course and over the course of that period
installment payments are made on the bonds and eventually
paid off. Another alternative is that they can pay the lien
off all in one shot within 30 days of the County selling the
bonds, or they can pro -rate the bonds with respect to the
property.
Attorney Brandenburg explained that the money needed to
pay off the bonds is paid by the developers at the time they
need the taps released to develop their properties. The
arrangement with the bank is that the County must amortize
M
M
$190,000 of the principal per year. Excess monies in the
construction fund at the end of the project will go back
into the improvement fund and that fund is what is used to
pay off the bonds. As the project now stands, there will be
$400,000 excess going into the improvement fund, which would
pay for the first two years principal on the bonds. Since
projects go to obtain construction lending, etc., the
developers will remove this lien from the project and will
pay those amounts into the improvement fund.
Commissioner Bird noted that this project will not only
accommodate the needs of those being assessed but will also
provide capacity for future customers in that area which is
expected to experience significant growth in the near
future.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board
unanimously (4-0) adopted Resolution 84-47,
accepting the final assessment roll and approving
the equalizing and levying of certain special
assessments against benefited property in
connection with certain water distribution
improvements on the SR -60 waterline.
Chairman Scurlock pointed out that we were very
successful with FHA in that the monies the County has as
their portion were committed to this project, but were
originally intended for plant capacity. Our present
situation is that we have excess plant capacity and really
not enough customers. This project will achieve a larger -
customer base, which will tend to stabilize the rate
structure. He noted that with the great cooperation of the
developers this project has been able to progress in a very
positive way.
NOTE: (The remainder of this Resolution will be on file in
the Clerk's Office)
37
JUL 111984 BOOK 57 ;° U�
JUL 111984 Boos 57 PACE6��
_ 4-oAft- -.
RESOLUTION NO. 84-47
A RESOLUTION APPROVING CERTAIN WATER DISTRI-
BUTION IMPROVEMENTS IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA; EQUALIZING CERTAIN SPECIAL ASSESS-
MENTS AND LEVYING THE SAME AS SPECIAL
ASSESSMENTS AGAINST BENEFITED PROPERTY IN
SUCH COUNTY; DIRECTING THE CLERIC OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO RECORD
SUCH SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IN THE IMPROVE-
MENT LIEN BOOK; ESTABLISHING PRIORITY OF
LIEN AND PAYMENT OF PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST
ON SUCH SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS; AND PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA (hereinafter called "Board" and
"County," respectively) that:
SECTION 1. AUTHORITY FOR RESOLUTION. This resolution
is adopted pursuant to the provisions of Ordinance No. 83-46 of
the County, applicable provisions of Chapter 170, Florida
Statutes (1983), and other applicable provisions of law.
,SECTION 2. FINDINGS. It is hereby found and determined
as follows that:
A. In Mav 19A4. tra Rnarri
approving the assessment roll prepared by the consulting engi-
neers for the County and directing notice to be given by publica-
tion and by mail to the owners of the property described in such
Resolution No. 84-39 to be assessed,' or any other persons
interested therein, and advising that the Board would meet as an
equalizing board on July 11, 1984, at 9:45 A.M. to consider
complaints as to the assessments appearing on the assessment
roll, subject to incidental changes, additions, substitutions and
modifications as shall be deemed advisable by the Board.
B. Such such notice both by publication and by mail was
duly had and
given
as required
by law.
C.
Such
hearing was
duly and regularly held on July 11,
1984, at 9:45 A.M.
D. The County and every owner of property listed on
such assessment roll, subject to such assessments, have entered
into an agreement whereby such assessments will, at the option of
the County, become due and payable in full on October 12, 1984,
38
W,
if the Improvement Bonds, Series No One, of the County, to be
secured by such assessments (hereinafter called "Bonds") are not
awarded and sold to the purchasers thereof by September 30,.1984.
SECTION 3. APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENTS. The Board, having
heard property owners and other interested persons appearing
before the Board as to the propriety and advisability of making
the improvements described in Resolution No. 84-39 of the Board,
as to the cost thereof, as to the manner of payment of such cost,
as to the amount to be assessed against each parcel of property
to be benefited by such, improvements, as to equalization of such
assessments on a basis of justice and right; hereby determines
and resolves to proceed with the improvements according to the
plans, specifications, assessment plats and estimates of costs on
file.
SECTION 4. PAYMENT OF COST OF IMPROVEMENTS. The cost
of such improvements shall be paid as provided in Resolution No.
84-26 of the Board, which resolution is incorporated herein by
reference as though copied in full herein.
SECTION 5. CONFIRMATION OF ASSESSMENTS. The amount of
assessments as equalized and adjusted and as now apearing on.such
assessments roll, are hereby confirmed as legal, valid and
binding first liens, until paid, upon property against which such
assessments are made; provided, however, that upon completion of
the improvements, each assessment shall be credited prorata with
the difference between the amount hereby confirmed and the actual
cost of the improvements' to be paid by assessments; provided
further, however, in no event shall the final assessments, as
hereby confirmed, exceed the amount of benefits originally deter-
mined to result from the construction of such improvements. The
assessments shall be co -equal with the lien of other taxes,
superior to all other liens, titles and claims, until paid. Such
assessments are found and determined to be levied in direct pro-
portion to the special and positive benefits to be received by
each parcel of property listed in such assessment roll, from the
39
JUL 111984
BOOK 57 PAGE 6?0
BOOK r,-;,7 D1,E611
JUL 111984
acquisition and construction of the improvements.
SECTION G. PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENTS UNDER CERTAIN
CONDITIONS. If the Bonds are not awarded and sold to the purcha-
sers thereof by September 30, 1984, such assessments shall, at
the option of the County, become due and payable, as a whole, on
October 12, 1984.
SECTION 7. RECORDATION OF ASSESSMENTS. The Clerk of
the Board is hereby directed to record such assessments in a spe-
cial book to be known as the "Improvement Lien Book."
SECTION S. EFFECTIVE DATE. This resolution shall
become effective immediately upon its adoption.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Wodtke who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Bird and, upon being put to a vote,
the vote was as follows: 4-0
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice Chairman Patrick B. Lyons absent
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 11th day of July, 1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
DON C. SC LOCK, JR.
Chairman
Attest:
JFIDSk' VC rk
W Y - Ib
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFI,IENCY
M. BRANDENB
y Attorney
40
EXIIIBIT "A"
FINAL A WMENT ROLL
Assessment/Distribution Schedule and Identifying Letters as they correspond to
the Assessment Plat on file in the office of the Indian River County Board
of County Commissioners.
PRELIMINARY
ITEM
OWNER
ERU'S
ASSESSMENT
A-1
Dings Highway Plaza Partnership
65
$ 63,079.25
A-2
Ben Bailey, III, an individual
60
58,227.00
B
Vista Properties of Vero Beach, Inc.
585
567,713.25
C-1
John H. Sutherland, as Trustee
107
1037838.15
C-2
John H. Sutherland, as Trustee
108
104,808.60
C-3
Sixty Oaks, Inc.
60
581227.00
C-4
Kingswood West, Inc.
50
48, 522.50
D-1
George Childers -L nn Lee
52
46 .40
507463.40
D-2
George Childers -Westgate Colony
28
27,172.60
(Individual owners and property
Descriptions listed on attached sheets)
Property assessment to George Childers
E-1
E. Clifford Norris, as Trustee
96
937163.20
E-2
Charles D. M. Gibbons and Marie L.
79
76,665.55
Gibbons
E-3
Rag No. 1 Partnership
385
373,623.25
F
Central Assembly of God, Inc., of Vero
20
191409.00
Beach, Florida
G
Paul E. Austin
59
57,256.55
H
Temple Beth Shalom of Vero Beach, Inc.
1
970.45
I
Strazzulla Bros. Co., Inc.
40
38,818.00
J
Tamara Gardens Development, Co., Inc.
52
505463.40
K
Beach Bank at Vero Beach
28
277172.60
L
Florida National Bank
1
970.45
M-1
Ralph Evans, as Trustee
20
19,409.00
M-2
Ralph Evans, as Trustee
26
25,231,70
M-3
Ralph Evans, as Trustee
10
9,704.50
M-4
Ralph Evans, as Trustee
1
970.45
M-5
Ralph Evans, as Trustee
20
19,409.00
N
Elsebeth M. Sexton, Ralph Waldo Sexton
70
677931.50
and Charles Randolph Sexton as Trustees
of Trust "b" under the Will of Waldo E.
Sexton, deceased
0
Samuel E. Moon, Sr. a/k/a Sam E. Moon,
15
141556.71
a 1/2 interest; and Nancy Thomas Moon,
a 1/2 interest; each 1/2 interest as
joint tenants in common, not with right
of survivorship
P
Bailey and Bailey, a Florida Partnership
12
119645.40
and J. Pat Corrigan
$1,989,422-50
JUL
111984
BDOK 57 NE6?2
JUL 111984
BOND RESOLUTION - SR -60 WATERLINE
�q
BOOK ! PA, -F-
t, 693
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, that the
Board adopt Resolution 84-48, authorizing the
issuance of improvement bonds not to exceed
$2,050,000 to finance the cost of the SR -60
waterline.
Attorney Brandenburg noted the following changes need
to be made:
On Page 19, in the last sentence of paragraph D, DELINQUENT
ASSESSMENTS, it reads "that together with an annual audit of
an improvement fund by a Certified Public Accountant." The
County does not want to be required to do that, so that
language will be changed to read, "The --County further
covenants, at its expense, to furnish to any Registered
Owner requesting the same, 60 days after the due date of
each annual installment, a list all delinquent installments,
together with a copy of the County annual audit."
On Page 21, under paragraph K, REMOVAL OF ASSESSMENT LIENS,
we want to make sure that a property owner is able to
release a portion of the lien with respect to a portion of
his property. That language will be changed to read: "Any
owners of property subject to the Assessments may, at their
option, require the County to release and extinguish the
liens upon their property, or portions thereof, by virtue of
the levy of the Assessments, by depositing with the Clerk of
the Board, Federal Securities, the principal of and interest
on which shall be sufficient to pay the Assessments or the
installments thereof, as the case may be, attributable to
such property owners and the property to be released from
such liens."
41
On Page 22, on the fifth line down should read, "to insure
timely payment of the applicable amounts of the Assessments
or the installments thereof,".
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion to adopt Resolution 84-48 with
the changes recommended by Attorney Brandenburg
was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0).
Resolution 84-48 will be made a part of the Official
Record, as follows:
42
JUL 111984
01 F DIM
I
JUL -111994 Boox ,7 HCE6?
RESOLUTION NO. 84-48
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT
EXCEEDING $2,050,000 IMPROVEMENT BONDS,
SERIES NO. ONE, OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, TO FINANCE THE COST OF THE ACQUI-
SITION AND CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN WATER
DISTRIBUTION IMPROVEMENTS TO THE COMBINED
WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM OF THE COUNTY;
PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS OF THE HOLDERS
THEREOF AND PLEDGING FOR THE PAYMENT
THEREOF THE PROCEEDS FROM SPECIAL ASSESS-
MENTS LEVIED AGAINST PROPERTY SPECIALLY
BENEFITED BY SUCH IMPROVEMENTS; AND PRO-
VIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION 1. AUTHORITY FOR THIS RESOLUTION. This resolu-
tion is adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 83-46 of the County,
applicable provisions of Chapter 170, Florida Statutes (1983),
and other applicable provisions of law.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. The following terms shall have
the following meanings in this resolution unless the text other-
wise expressly requires:
A. "Act" shall mean, collectively, Ordinance No. 83-46
of the County, applicable provisions of Chapter 170, Florida
Statutes (1983), and other applicable provisions of law.
B. ""Assessments" shall mean, collectively, the proceeds
derived from the levy and collection of special assessments
against the property specially benefited by the acquisition and
construction of the Project, including the interest and penalties
on such special assessments.
C. "Board" shall mean the Board of County Commissioners
of the County.
D. "Bonds" shall mean the $2,050,000 Improvement Bonds,
Series No. One, authorized and issued pursuant to this
resolution, whether in certificate or book -entry form.
E. "Bond Registrar" shall mean Florida National Bank,
Jacksonville, Florida.
F.
"County"
shall mean Indian River County,
Florida.
G.
"Federal
Securities" shall mean direct
obligations
-1-
of the United States of America or obligations the principal of
and interest on which are fully guaranteed by the United States
of America, none of which permit redemption prior to maturity at
the option of the obligor.
H. "Fiscal Year" shall mean the period beginning with
and including October lst of each year and ending with and
including the next September 30th.
I. "Project" shall mean the improvements to the com-
bined water and sewer system of the County consisting of the
assessable portion of the water transmission line abutting State
Road 60 in the unincorporated area of the County, to be acquired
and constructed with the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds.
J. "Record Date" shall mean the 15th day of the month
immediately preceding an interest payment date for the Bonds.
K. "Registered Owner" shall mean any person who shall
be the owner of any outstanding Bond or Bonds as shown on the
books of the County maintained by the Bond Registrar.
L. Words importing the singular number shall include
the plural number in each case and vice versa, and words
importing persons shall include firms and corporations.
SECTION 3. FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS. It is hereby
found and determined as follows:
A. It has heretofore been determined that it is
necessary and desirable to acquire and construct the Project.
B. The cost of the acquisition and construction of the
Project will be paid by the issuance and delivery of the Bonds
herein authorized. Such cost shall include the amount required
to capitalize interest on the Bonds from their date of delivery
to May 1, 1986, and such other costs as are specified in Section
170.03, Florida Statutes (1983). The remaining portion of the
cost of the acquisition and construction of such water
transmission line described in Section 2J above, will be financed
by $871,200 of the proceeds derived by the County from the sale
of its $2,750,000 Water *and Sewer Revenue Bonds, Series 1982,
—2—
JUL 111984
Boox 57 FauL 696
J
F,
-I
JUL 111984 Booz 57 P'UE 697
Anticipation Notes, dated December 1, 1982 (hereinafter called
"Note Proceeds").
C. The Bonds shall be payable from and secured by a
prior lien upon and pledge of the Assessments. The Assessments
_ have been 'levied against the benefited property in proportion to
the special and positive benefits to be received from the
acquisition and construction of the Project.
D. The assessment roll heretofore prepared by the
consulting engineers of the County, and the amount thereof as to
each parcel assessed, does not exceed the amount by which such
parcel is determined to be benefited. The Board has heretofore
equalized, adjusted and confirmed the Assessments pursuant to the
applicable provisions of Chapter 170, Florida Statutes (1983),
and each Assessment shall be credited pro rata with the dif-
ference between the amount originally confirmed and the actual
cost of the Project which shall be financed through the issuance
of the Bonds herein authorized.
E. It is deemed necessary and desirable to pledge the
Assessments to the payment of the principal of and interest on
the Bonds.
F. The amount of the Assessments, as estimated, will be
sufficient in the aggregate to pay the principal of and interest
on the Bonds herein authorized.
G. The principal of and interest on the Bonds to be
issued pursuant to this resolution and all other payments herein
will be paid solely from the proceeds of the Assessments to the
extent that the same shall be lawfully levied and collected. The
County will not be authorized to levy ad valorem taxes on any
real property in the County to pay the principal of and interest
on the Bonds herein authorized or to make any other payments
specified by this resolution.
SECTION 4. RESOLUTION TO CONSTITUTE CONTRACT. In con-
sideration of the acceptance of the Bonds authorized to be issued
hereunder by the Registered Owners who shall hold the same from
� r �
time to time, this resolution shall be deemed to be and shall
constitute a contract between the County and such :Registered
Owners. The covenants and agreements herein set forth to be er-
g p
formed by the County shall be for the equal benefit, protection
and security of the Registered Owners of the Bonds, all of which
shall be of equal rank and without preference, priority or
distinction of any of the Bonds over any other thereof, except as
expressly provided therein and herein.
SECTION 5. AUTHORIZATION AND DESCRIPTION OF BONDS.
Subject and pursuant to the provisions of this resolution, obli-
gations of the County to be known as Improvement Bonds, Series
No. One," are hereby authorized to be issued in the aggregate
principal amount of not exceeding $2,050,000 for the purpose of
financing the cost of the Project. The Bonds shall be dated as
of their date of delivery and may be numbered consecutively from
one upward or in such other manner as agreed between the County
and the Bond Registrar. The Bonds shall mature on May 1, 1997,
shall be in the denomination of $1,000 each or integral multiples
thereof and shall bear interest at the rate of 10.00% per annum,
payable on May 1, 1986, and on May 1 of each year thereafter
until maturity. Amortization installments are hereby established
for the Bonds, and such Bonds, as will be selected by lot, shall
be deemed to be due on May 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
YEARS AMOUNTS
1987 $190,000
1988 190,000
1989 190,000
1990 190,000
1991 190,000
1992 190,000
1993 190,000
1994 190,000
1995 190,000
1996 170,000
1997 170,000
Each of the Bonds shall bear a certificate, signed by
the manual or facsimile signature of the Clerk of the Board, cer-
tifying that the aggregate amount of Assessment liens levied
against the benefited property is at least equal to the aggregate
-4-
JUL 111984 _ aooK 57 P,. U, Er28
� JUL 111984 -
4 BOOK 57 Pr10E 629
principal amount of Bonds issued hereunder.
The Bonds shall be issued in fully registered form
without coupons; shall be payable with respect to principal at
the office of the Bond Registrar as paying agent, or such other
paying agent as may be hereafter duly appointed; shall be payable
in lawful money of the United States of America; and shall bear
interest from their date, payable by mail to the Registered
Owners at their addresses as they appear on the registration
books.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section,
the Board may, subject to the approval of the purchasers of the
Bonds prior to their delivery, elect to use an immobilization
system or pure book -entry system with respect to issuance of the
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. As long as
any Bonds are outstanding in book -entry form, the provisions of
Sections 6, 9, 10 and 12 of this resolution shall not be appli-
cable to such book -entry Bonds. The details of any alternative
system of Bond issuance, as described in this paragraph, shall be
set forth in a resolution of the Board duly adopted at or prior
to the delivery of any of the Bonds.
SECTION 6. EXECUTION AND AUTHENTICATION OF BONDS. The
Bonds shall be executed in the name of the County by the Chairman
of the Board and attested and countersigned by its Clerk, and
the corporate seal of the Board or a facsimile thereof shall be
affixed thereto or reproduced thereon. The facsimile signatures
of the Chairman and Clerk of the Board may be imprinted or repro-
duced on the Bonds. The certificate of authentication of the
Bond Registrar shall appear on the Bonds, and no Bond shall be
valid or obligatory for any purpose or be enti_t1PA fn An -
security or benefit under this resolution unless such certificate
shall have been duly executed on such Bond. The authorized
signature for the Bond Registrar shall be either manual or in
-5-
facsimile; provided, however, that at least one of the
signatures, including that of the authorized signature for the
Bond Registrar, appearing on the Bonds, shall at all times be a
manual signature. In case any one or more of the officers of the
Board who shall have signed or sealed any of the Bonds shall
cease to be such officer or officers of the Board before the
Bonds so signed and sealed shall have been actually sold and
delivered, such Bonds may nevertheless be sold and delivered as
if the persons who signed or sealed such Bonds had not ceased to
hold such offices. Any Bonds may be signed and sealed on behalf
of the Board by such person who at the actual time of the execu-
tion of such Bonds shall hold the proper office, although at the
date of such Bonds such person may not have held such office or
may not have been so authorized.
The validation certificate on the Bonds shall be exe-
cuted with the manual or facsimile signature of the Chairman of
the Board.
SECTION 7. NEGOTIABILITY. The Bonds issued hereunder
shall be and shall have all of the qualities and incidents of
negotiable instruments under the laws of the State of Florida,
and each successive holder, in accepting any of the Bonds, shall
be conclusively deemed to have agreed that such Bonds shall be
and have all of the qualities and incidents of negotiable instru-
ments under the laws of the State of Florida.
SECTION 8. REGISTRATION. The Bond Registrar shall be
responsible for maintaining books for the registration of the
transfer and exchange of the Bonds.
All Bonds presented for transfer, exchange, redemption
or payment (if so required by the Board or the Bond Registrar)
shall be accompanied by a written instrument or instruments of
transfer or authorization for exchange, in form and with guaranty
of signature satisfactory to the Board or the Bond Registrar,
duly executed by the Registered Owner or by his duly authorized
attorney. In the case of partial redemption of a Bond, and in
-6-
JUL 1.11984 - BOOK `7 uIJE630
r JUL 111984
BOOK 5 7 PAGE 6031
lieu of issuing a new Bond or Bonds in the aggregate principal
amount then outstanding on the Bond after such redemption, the
County may, at its option, instruct the Bond Registrar to note on
the Bond the principal amount of such redemption, the date of
redemption and the outstanding principal amount of such Bond
after such redemption, and return the Bond to the Registered
Owner.
Upon surrender to the Bond Registrar for transfer or
exchange of any Bond accompanied by an assignment or written
authorization for exchange, whichever is applicable, duly exe-
cuted by the Registered Owner or his attorney duly authorized in
writing, the Bond Registrar shall deliver in the name of the
Registered Owner or the transferee or transferees, as the case
may be, a new fully registered Bond or Bonds of authorized deno-
minations and of the same maturity and interest rate for the
aggregate principal amount which the Registered Owner is entitled
to receive.
The Board and the Bond Registrar may charge the
Registered Owner a sum sufficient to reimburse them for any
expenses incurred in making any exchange or transfer after the
first such exchange or transfer following the delivery of the
Bonds. The Bond Registrar or the Board may also require payment
from the Registered Owner or his transferee, as the case may be,
of a sum sufficient to cover any tax, fee or other governmental
charge that may be imposed in relation thereto. Such charges and
expenses shall be paid before any such new Bond shall be
delivered.
Interest on the Bonds shall be paid to the Registered
Owner whose name appears on the books of the Bond Registrar on
the Record Date.
New Bonds delivered upon any transfer or exchange shall
be valid obligations of the County, evidencing the same debt as
the Bonds surrendered, shall be secured by this Resolution, and
shall be entitled to all of the security and benefits hereof to
-7-
r
the same extent as the Bonds surrendered.
The County and the Bond Registrar may treat the
Registered Owner of any Bond as the absolute owner thereof for
all purposes, whether or not such Bond shall be overdue, and
shall not 'be bound by any notice to the contrary. The person in
whose name any Bond is registered may be deemed the Registered
Owner thereof by the County and the Bond Registrar, and any
notice to the contrary shall not be binding upon the County or
the Bond Registrar.
SECTION 9. DISPOSITION OF BONDS PAID OR REPLACED.
Whenever any Bond shall be delivered to the Bond Registrar for
cancellation, upon payment of the principal amount thereof, or
for replacement, transfer or exchange, such Bond shall be can-
celled and destroyed by the Bond Registrar, and counterparts of a
certificate of destruction evidencing such destruction shall be
furnished to the County.
SECTION 10. BONDS MUTILATED, DESTROYED, STOLEN OR LOST.
In case any Bond shall become mutilated, or be destroyed, stolen
or lost, the County may, in its discretion, issue and deliver a
new Bond of like tenor as the Bond so mutilated, destroyed, sto-
len or lost, in exchange and cancellation of such mutilated Bond
or in lieu of and substitution for the Bond destroyed, stolen or
lost, and upon the Registered Owner furnishing the County and the
Bond Registrar proof of his ownership thereof and satisfactory
indemnity and complying with such other reasonable regulations
and conditions as the Board may prescribe and paying such expen-
ses as the Board and the Bond Registrar may incur. All Bonds so
surrendered shall be cancelled by the Bond Registrar. If any
such Bonds shall have matured or be about to mature, instead of
issuing a substitute Bond, the County may pay the same, upon
being indemnified as aforesaid, and if such Bond be lost, stolen
or destroyed, without surrender thereof.
Any such duplicate Bonds issued pursuant to this section
shall constitute original additional, contractual obligations on
JUL 111984 -
Boa 5 7 f ,cE 6:3
I
_I
JUL 111984 57 FnE6,633
the part of the County whether or not the lost, stolen or
destroyed Bonds be at any time found by anyone, and such dupli-
cate Bonds shall be entitled to equal and proportionate benefits
and rights as to lien on and source and security for payment from
_ the funds, as hereinafter pledged, to the same extent as all
other Bonds issued hereunder.
SECTION 11. PROVISIONS FOR REDEMPTION. Except as,pro-
vided below, the Bonds are not subject to redemption prior to
their first interest payment date. On the first interest payment
date for the Bonds, and on each November 1 and May 1 thereafter,
after providing for the payment of interest on the Bonds on the
next annual interest payment date and the amortization
installments specified below, the County shall, from money on
deposit in the Improvement Fund, redeem Bonds or portions thereof
as are selected by lot, at a price of par and accrued interest to
the redemption date, to the extent necessary to exhaust the
Improvement Fund as nearly as may be practicable.
Principal amounts of the Bonds or portions thereof, to
be selected by lot, which shall be equal to the following man-
datory amortization installments:
YEARS AMOUNTS
1987 $190,000
1988 190,000
1989 190,000
1990 190,000
1991 190,000
1992 190,000
1993 190,000
1994 190,000
1995 190,000
1996 170,000
1997 170,000
shall be redeemed on May 1 prior to their maturity (except the
installment maturing in the year 1997 ) at the price of the prin-
cipal amount thereof, plus accrued interest, or be purchased in
the open market at a price not to exceed such redemption price.
In addition, *the Bonds or portions thereof, shall be
redeemable at any time, at the option of the County, in whole or
in part, by lot if less than all, at the price of the principal
amount thereof, plus accrued interest to the date of redemption.
At least 10 days prior to the redemption date, notice of
such redemption shall be filed with the paying agent and shall be
mailed, postage prepaid, to all Registered Owners of Bonds to be
redeemed at their respective addresses as they appear on the
registration books. Interest shall cease to accrue on any Bonds
duly called for prior redemption, after the redemption date, if
payment thereof has been duly provided. The privilege of
transfer or exchange of any of the Bonds is suspended for a 15
day period preceding the mailing of the notice of redemption.
SECTION 12. FORM OF BONDS. The text of the Bonds, the
validation certificate and the certificate of authentication
thereon shall be in substantially the following form, with such
omissions, insertions and variations as may be necessary and
desirable and authorized or permitted by this resolution or any
subsequent resolution adopted prior to the issuance thereof, or
as may be necessary to comply with applicable laws, rules and
regulations of the United States and the State of Florida in
effect upon the issuance thereof:
JUL 11 194 -lo- aooK 57FA,,F 63
JUL 117984 BOOK
SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR ADDITIONAL
PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS CUSIP:
No.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF FLORIDA
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
IMPROVEMENT BOND, SERIES NO. ONE
10.00% PER ANNUM DUE 14AY 1, 1997
57 mIJE63S
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that Indian River
County, Florida (hereinafter called "County"), for value
received, hereby promises to pay to the order of
IT or registered assignees, on the date spe-
cified above, solely from the special funds hereinafter
mentioned, the principal sum of
DOLLARS
upon the presentation and surrender hereof at the office of
Florida National Bank, Jacksonville, Florida, paying agent and
bond registrar (hereinafter called "Bond Registrar"), and to pay
interest thereon from the date of this bond or from the most
recent interest payment date to which interest has been paid,
whichever is applicable, until payment of such sum, at the rate
per annum set forth above, payable on May 1, 1986, and annually
thereafter on the first day of May of each year, by check or
draft mailed to the registered owner at his address as it appears
on the registration books on the fifteenth day of the month pre-
ceding the applicable interest payment date. Both principal of
and interest on this bond are payable in lawful money of the
United States of America.
This bond is one of an authorized issue of bonds, in the
aggregate principal amount of not exceeding $2,050,000, issued to
finance the cost of the acquisition and construction of certain
water distribution improvements to the combined water and sewer
system of the County (hereinafter called "Project"), under the
authority of and in full compliance with the Constitution and
-1-
Statutes of the State of Florida, including particularly
Ordinance No. 83-46 of the County, the applicable provisions of
Chapter 170, Florida Statutes (1983), and other applicable provi-
sions of law, and a resolution duly adopted by the Board of
County Commissioners of the County on July 11, 1984 (hereinafter
called "Resolution"), and is subject to all the terms and con-
ditions of such Resolution.
This bond is payable solely from and secured by a prior
lien upon and a pledge of the proceeds of special assessments
levied against benefited property to finance the cost of the
acquisition and construction of the Project, and the interest and
penalties on such special assessments (hereinafter collectively
called "Assessments"). The Assessment liens upon benefited pro-
perty may be released upon deposit with the County of other ade-
quate security, all as more particularly described and provided
in the Resolution.
It is expressly agreed by the registered owner of this
bond that such registered owner shall never have the right to
require or compel the exercise of the ad valorem taxing power of
the County for the payment of the principal of and interest on
this bond or the making of any other payments specified by the
Resolution. It is further agreed between the County and the
registered owner of this bond that this bond and the obligation
evidenced !thereby shall not constitute a lien upon any other pro-
perty of or in the County, but shall constitute a lien only upon
the Assessments in the manner provided in the Resolution.
(To be inserted where appropriate on face of bond:
"Reference is hereby made to the further provisions of this bond
set forth on the reverse side hereof, and such further provisions
shall for all purposes have the same effect as if set forth on
this side.")
This bond may be transferred only upon the books of the
County kept by the Bond Registrar upon surrender thereof at the
principal office of the Bond Registrar with an assignment duly
executed by the registered owner or his duly authorized attorney,
-12-
� JUL 111984
BOOK 57 PACE 6036
JUL 111984
Boa
57 'Fe -UE
6.37 `
but
only in the manner,
subject to the limitations
and
upon
payment of the charges, if any, provided in the Resolution, and
upon surrender and cancellation of this bond. Upon any such
transfer, there shall be executed and the Bond Registrar shall
deliver, a new fully registered bond or bonds, payable to the
transferee, in authorized denominations and in the same aggregate
principal amount, series, maturity and interest rate as this
bond.
In like manner, subject to and upon the payment of such
charges, if any, the registered owner of this bond may surrender
the same (together with a written authorization for exchange
satisfactory to the Bond Registrar duly executed by the regis-
tered owner or his duly authorized attorney) in exchange for an
equal aggregate principal amount of fully registered bonds in
authorized denominations and of the same series, maturity and
interest rate as this bond.
It is hereby certified and recited that all acts,* con-
ditions and things required to exist, to happen and to be per-
formed precedent to and in the issuance of this bond exist, have
happened and have been performed in regular and due form and time
as required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Florida
applicable thereto.
This bond is and has all the qualities and incidents of
a negotiable instrument under the laws of the State of Florida.
(Insert redemption provisions)
Notice of such redemption shall be given in the manner
provided in the Resolution.
This bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for
any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the
Resolution until the certificate of authentication hereon shall
have been executed by the Bond Registrar.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Indian River County, Florida, has
issued this bond and has caused the same to be executed by the
Chairman of its Board of County Commissioners and attested and
-13-
countersigned by the Clerk of the Board, either manually or with
their facsimile signatures, and the corporate seal of the Board,
or a facsimile thereof, to be impressed, imprinted or otherwise
reproduced hereon, all as of
(SEAL)
ATTESTED AND COUNTERSIGNED:
Clerk, Board of County
Commissioners
1984.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Chairman, Board of County
Commissioners
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION OF BOND REGISTRAR
This bond is one of the bonds of the issue described in
the Resolution.
FLORIDA NATIONAL BANK
Jacksonville, Florida
As Bond Registrar
By
Authorized Signature
Date of Authentication
VALIDATION CERTIFICATE
This bond is one of a series of bonds which were vali-
dated and confirmed by judgment of the Circuit Court for Indian
River County, Florida, rendered on , 1984.
Chairman, Board of County
Commissioners
-14-
JUL 111984
BOOK 57
� JUL 111984
BGOK 5, F',G� 603
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
I, the undersigned, Clerk of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, hereby certify
that the aggregate amount of special assessment liens levied, the
proceeds of which are pledged to the payment of the Improvement
Bonds, Series No. One, of the County, of which this bond is one,
are at least equal to the aggregate principal amount of such
Improvement Bonds, Series No. One, issued by the County.
Clerk, Board of County Commissioners
The following abbreviations, when used in the inscrip-
tion on the face of the within bond, shall be construed as though
they were written out in full according to applicable laws or
regulations:
TEN COM - as tenants in
common
TEN ENT - as tenants by the
entireties
JT TEN - as joint tenants with
right of survivor-
ship and not as
tenants in common
UNIF GIF MIN ACT -
Cust.
Custodian for
Minor
under Uniform Gifts to Minors
Act of
State
Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in
list above.
ASSIGNMENT
FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned sells, assigns and
transfers to
PLEASE IN SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF
ASSIGNEE
the within bond and does hereby irrevocably constitute and
appoint as his agent to transfer the bond on
the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of
substitution in the premises.
-15-
Dated:
Signature guaranteed:
Bank, Trust Company or Firm
Authorized Officer
NOTICE: The signature to this
assignment must correspond with
the name of the registered owner
as it appears upon the face of
the within bond in every parti-
cular, without alteration or
enlargement or any change
whatever.
PARTIAL REDEMPTION PAYMENTS
Authorized
Officer of
Principal Balance of Bond
Payment Date Amount Paid Principal Unpaid Registrar
-16-
JILL 11 1984
BOO!( 7 Pn1 640
JUL 11 1994
BOOK 57 u„=641
SECTION 13. BONDS NOT GENERAL OBLIGATIONS. The Bonds
shall not be or constitute general obligations or an indebtedness
of the County as "bonds” within the meaning of the Constitution
of Florida, but shall be payable solely from and secured by a
lien upon and a pledge of the Assessments. No Registered Owner
shall ever have the right to compel the exercise of the ad
valorem taxing power of the County, or taxation in any form of
any real property therein, to pay the Bonds or the interest
thereon, or be entitled to payment of such principal and interest
from any other funds of the County.
SECTION 14. SECURITY FOR BONDS. The payment of the
principal of and interest on all the Bonds issued hereunder shall
be secured forthwith equally and ratably by a pledge of and a
prior lien upon the proceeds of the Assessments. The County does
hereby irrevocably pledge such Assessments to the payment of -the
principal of and interest on the Bonds and to the payment into
the Improvement Fund, Series No. One, hereinafter created, at the
times provided, the sums required to secure to the Registered
Owners payment, when due, of the principal of and interest on the
Bonds so held by them.
SECTION 15. FLOW OF FUNDS; GENERAL COVENANTS. For so
long as any of the principal of and interest on any of the Bonds
shall be outstanding and unpaid, or until there shall have been
set apart,, in the Improvement Fund, Series No. One, hereinafter
created, a sum sufficient to pay when due, the entire principal
amount of the Bonds remaining unpaid, together with interest
accrued or to accrue thereon, the County covenants with the
holders of any and all of the Bonds issued pursuant to this reso-
lution as follows, that:
A. IMPROVEMENT FUND, SERIES NO. ONE. The County shall
establish 'with Florida National Bank, Vero Beach, Florida, and
maintain so long as any of the Bonds are outstanding, a special
fund which is hereby created and designated "Improvement Fund,
Series No. One" (hereinafter called "Improvement Fund"). All
-
money received from the collection of Assessment installments
shall constitute trust funds and shall be deposited into the
Improvement Fund. Such money on deposit from time to time in the
Improvement Fund shall be applied in the following manner and
order of priority:
1. First, for the payment of interest becoming due
and payable on the Bonds on the next interest payment date and
for the payment of all principal maturing on the Bonds on the
next principal maturity date and/or applicable redemption date
(to the extent.Bonds have been called for prior redemption). All
such payments, as provided above, shall include an amount suf-
ficient to pay the fees and charges of the paying agent. Such
payments shall be adjusted to the extent required to pay such
interest and principal becoming due, after making allowance for
the amount of money which will be deposited into the Improvement
Fund from the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds immediately
following their delivery.
2. After the principal of and interest on all the
Bonds shall have been paid, or there shall have been set apart in
the Improvement Fund a sum sufficient to pay when due the entire
principal of the Bonds remaining unpaid and interest accrued or
to accrue thereon, any money remaining on deposit to the credit
of the Improvement Fund shall be withdrawn by the County and
deposited.,to the credit of its general fund or used by the County
for any lawful purpose.
All money on deposit from time to time in the
Improvement Fund shall be continuously secured in the manner by
which the deposit of public funds are authorized to be secured by
the laws of the State of Florida and may be invested and rein-
vested only in those investments specified in Section 125.31,
Florida Statutes (1983), maturing or subject to redemption at the
option of the holder, at par and accrued interest, not later than
the date on which the money therein will be needed. Anv and all
income received by the County from such investments shall be
-13-
JUL 111984 BOOK �7 PnUE642
JUL 111984 BOOK
1
7 F;eUE 643
deposited into the Improvement Fund.
B. DISTRIBUTION OF WATER TAPS. The County may, at its
option, authorize redistribution or consolidation of water tans
among property owners subject to the Assessments, as long as such
action does not result in a reduction in the amount of the
Assessments as originally equalized and confirmed by the County.
C. ENFORCEMENT OF PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENTS. The County
will receive, collect and enforce the payment of the Assessments
in the manner prescribed by this resolution and all other
resolutions, ordinances or laws thereunto appertaining; and pay
and deposit the proceeds of Assessments as received into the
Improvement Fund.
D. DELINQUENT ASSESSMENTS. If the owner of any lot or
parcel of land assessed for the Project shall be delinquent in
the payment of any Assessment for a period of 30 days, then the
County shall declare the entire unpaid balance of such Assessment
to be in default and, at its own expense, shall cause such
delinquent property to be foreclosed in the same method now or
hereafter provided by law for the foreclosure of mortgages on
real estate, or otherwise as provided by law. If such fore-
closure be not filed and prosecuted within 10 months of the due
date of the delinquent Assessment, then any Registered Owner may
file and prosecute such foreclosure action in the name of the
County for the benefit of the Registered Owners of all
outstanding or unpaid Bonds and interest thereon. All money
realized thereby, except attorneys fees and costs which shall be
paid directly to the Registered Owners that have incurred the
same, shall be deposited into the Improvement Fund and distri-
buted as above provided. The County further covenants, at its
expense, to furnish to any Registered Owner requesting the same,
60 days after the due date of each annual installment, a list of
all delinquent installments, together with an annual audit of the
Improvement Fund by a certified public accountant.
E. FORECLOSURE OF ASSESSMENT LIENS. If any property
-1_
shall be offered for sale for the non-payment of any Assessment,
and no person or persons shall purchase the same for an amount
equal to the full amount due on the Assessment (principal,
interest, penalties and costs), the property shall then be
purchased ,in the name of the County for an amount equal to the
balance due on the Assessment (principal, interest, penalties and
costs), and the County shall receive in its corporate name the
title to the property for the benefit of the Registered Owners.
The County shall have the power and shall lease or sell such
property, and deposit all of the net proceeds of any such lease
or sale into the Improvement Fund. Not less than 10 days prior
to the filing of any foreclosure action as herein provided, the
County shall cause written notice thereof to be mailed to any
designated agents of the Registered Owners. Not less than 30
days prior to the proposed sale of any lot or tract of land
acquired by foreclosure by the County, it shall give written
notice thereof to such representatives. The County agrees that
it shall be required to take the measures provided by law for
sale of property acquired by it as trustee for the Registered
Owners within 30 days after the receipt of the request therefor
signed by the Registered Owners of 15% of the aggregate principal
amount of the outstanding Bonds.
F. OTHER OBLIGATIONS PAYABLE FROM ASSESSMENTS. The
County will not issue any other obligations payable from the pro-
ceeds of the Assessments nor voluntarily create or cause to be
created any debt, lien, pledge, assignment, encumbrance or other
charge upon the Assessments.
G. BOOKS AND RECORDS. The County shall keep books and
records of the collection of the Assessments, which such books,
records and accounts shall be kept separate and apart from all
other books, records and accounts of the County. The Clerk of
the Board shall, at the end of each Fiscal Year, prepare a writ-
ten report setting forth the collections received, the number and
amount of delinquencies, the proceedings taken to enforce collec-
-20- BOOK 57 P':uE 644
JUL 11 1984
JUL 111984
socK� .0
tions and cure delinquencies and an estimate of time for the
conclusion of such legal proceedings. Such report shall be
audited by the certified public accountants of the County as part
of the annual County audit. Copies of such reports shall upon
written request be mailed to the Registered Owners.
H. GOVERNMENT APPROVALS. The County shall obtain all
necessary federal, state and local government approvals necessary
for the acquisition and construction of the Project and the
issuance of the Bonds.
I. ARBITRAGE. No use will be made of the proceeds of
the Bonds or the funds on deposit, from time to time, in the
Improvement Fund which, if reasonably expected on the date of
issuance of the Bonds, would cause the Bonds to be "arbitrage
bonds" within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code. The
County at all times while the Bonds and the interest thereon are
outstanding will comply with the requirements of Section 103(c)
of the Internal Revenue Code and any valid and applicable rules
and regulations of the Internal Revenue Service.
J. FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS. The designation and establish-
ment of the various funds and accounts created herein does not
require the establishment of any completely independent, self -
balancing funds as such term is commonly defined and used in
governmental accounting, but rather is intended solely to consti-
tute an earmarking of certain revenues and assets of the County
for certain purposes and to establish certain priorities for
application of such revenues and assets as provided herein.
K. REMOVAL OF ASSESSMENT LIENS. Any owners of property
subject to the Assessments may, at their option, require the
County to release and extinguish the liens upon their property,
or portions thereof, by virtue of the levy of the Assessments, by
depositing. with the Clerk of the Board, Federal Securities, the
principal of and interest on which shall be sufficient to pay the
Assessments or the installments thereof, as the case may be,
attributable to such property owners and the property to be
released from such liens. Upon receipt of such Federal
-21-
Securities, the Clerk of the Board shall forthwith record in the
Official Records of the County an affidavit or affidavits, as the
case may be, executed 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 applicable amounts of the
Assessments or the installments thereof, as the case may be, and
that such Assessment liens are thereby released and extinguished.
All principal and interest received from such Federal Securities
on deposit with the Clerk of the Board shall be deposited, as
received, into the Improvement Fund.
SECTION 16. SALE OF BONDS. The Bonds may be sold at
public or private sale pursuant to the Act, all at one time or
from time to time as shall be provided by subsequent resolution
of the Board.
SECTION 17. APPLICATION OF BOND PROCEEDS. The money
received from the sale of any or all of the Bonds authorized and
issued pursuant to this resolution shall be deposited and applied
as follows:
A. All interest to accrue on the Bonds until May 1,
1986, shall be deposited in the Improvement Fund and used to pay
the next maturing interest due on the Bonds.
B. The County.hereby covenants that it will establish
with Florida National Bank, Vero Beach, Florida, a separate fund
or funds (hereinafter collectively called "Construction Fund")
into which shall be deposited the remaining proceeds from the
sale of the Bonds. As long as the unspent proceeds from the sale
of the Bonds on deposit in the Construction Fund, along with the
unspent Note Proceeds, together with any expected investment
income to be derived therefrom, are sufficient to pay, when due,
the cost of the Project and the remaining cost of the acquisi-
tion and construction of the water transmission line described
in Section 21 of this resolution, money in the Construction Fund
shall be expended to pay the cost of the Project. If such funds
are ever expected to be insufficient for such purposes, then the
--22--
JUL 111984 -BOOK 57 pmE646
JUL 111984 BOOK 57 FADE 647
County shall not further expend any money on deposit in the
Construction Fund to pay Project costs until the County shall
deposit into the Construction Fund, from funds derived from sour-
ces other than ad valorem taxation and legally available for such
purpose (hereinafter called "Non Ad Valorem Funds"), an amount,
together with any expected investment income to be derived
therefrom, necessary to cure such deficiency. However, this pro-
vision shall not be construed in a manner to create a lien upon
or pledge of any of such Non Ad Valorem Funds or prevent the
County from hereafter pledging any portion of such Non Ad Valorem
Funds.
Money in the Construction Fund shall be secured by the
depository bank in the manner prescribed by law relating to the
securing of public funds. The money on deposit in the
Construction Fund may be invested and reinvested in those invest-
ments specified in Section 125.31, Florida Statutes (1983), which
shall mature or be subject to redemption on or prior to the date
on which money shall be needed therefrom, at par and accrued
interest, at any time by the holder thereof. The earnings from
any such investments shall be deposited into the Construction
Fund.
Any money remaining in the Construction Fund after all
costs of the Project have been paid shall be deposited into the
Improvement Fund for the payment of the principal of and interest
on the Bonds.
All money deposited in the Construction Fund shall be
and constitute a trust fund created for the purposes stated
herein, and there is hereby created a lien upon such Fund in
favor of the Registered Owners until the money therein has been
applied in accordance with this resolution.
SECTION 18. REMEDIES. Any Registered Owners or any
trustee acting for such Registered Owners, may by suit, action,
mandamus or other proceedings in any court of competent
jurisdiction, protect and enforce any and all rights, including
the right to the appointment of a receiver, existing under the
laws of the State of Florida, or granted and contained herein,
and may enforce and compel the performance of all duties herein
required or by any applicable statutes to be performed by the
County or by any officer thereof, including the collection of the
Assessments.
SECTION 19. DEFEASANCE. If at any time the County
shall have paid, or shall have made provision for payment of, the
principal, interest and redemption premiums, if any, with respect
to the Bonds, then, and in that event, the pledge of and lien on
the Assessments in favor of the Registered Owners shall be no
longer in effect. For purposes of the preceding sentence, depo-
sit of Federal Securities or bank certificates of deposit fully
secured as to principal and interest by Federal Securities (or
deposit of any other securities or investments which may be
authorized by law from time to time and sufficient under such law
to effect such a defeasance) in irrevocable trust with a banking
institution or trust company, for the sole benefit of the
Registered Owners, the principal of and interest on which will be
sufficient to pay, when due the principal, interest, and redemp-
tion premiums, if any, on the outstanding Bonds, shall be con-
sidered "provision for payment." Nothing in this section shall be
deemed to require the County to call any of the outstanding Bonds
for redemption prior to maturity pursuant to any applicable
optional redemption provisions, or to impair the discretion of
the County in determining whether to exercise any such option for
early redemption.
SECTION 20. MODIFICATION OF RESOLUTION. No material
modification or amendment of this resolution or of any resolution
amendatory hereof or supplemental hereto, may be made without the
consent in writing of the Registered Owners of 51% or more in
aggregate principal amount of the Bonds then outstanding affected
by such material modification or amendment; provided, however,
that no modification or amendment shall permit a change in the
-24-
JUL 111984 gao 57 FF,c 648
JUL 111984 Bo�� 57 FA- Q
maturity of such Bonds or a reduction in the rate of interest
thereon or in the amount of the principal obligation, or affect
the unconditional promise of the County to levy, impose and/or
collect the Assessments, as herein provided, or to pay the prin-
cipal of and interest on the Bonds as the same shall become due
from the Assessments, or reduce such percentage of holders of
such Bonds, required above, for such modifications or amendments,
without the consent of the holders of all of the Bonds.
SECTION 21. SEVERABILITY. If any one or more of the
covenants, agreements or provisions of this resolution should be
held contrary to any express provision of law or contrary to the
policy of express law, though not expressly prohibited, or
against public policy, or shall for any reason whatsoever be held
invalid, then such covenants, agreements or provisions shall be
null and void and shall be deemed separate from the remaining
covenants, agreements or provisions, and in no way affect the
validity of all the other provisions of this resolution or of the
Bonds issued hereunder.
SECTION 22. VALIDATION. The County Attorney is hereby
authorized and directed to institute appropriate proceedings in
the Circuit Court for Indian River County, Florida, for the vali-
dation of the Bonds.
SECTION 23. REPEALER. All resolutions or parts of
resolutions in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
SECTION 24. EFFECTIVE DATE. This resolution shall take
effect immediately upon its adoption.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Wodtke who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Bird and, upon being put to a vote,
the vote was as follows: 4-0
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice Chairman Patrick B. Lyons absent
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke,
Jr. Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the
passed and adopted this 11th day of July, 1984.
resolution duly
Attest:
FRDA 'WRIGHT, Cl
APPROVED _A �fp FORM AND
LEGAL SU I ENCY.
7w""W7,4
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
4
By-`lry.GG
DON C. SC RLOCK, JR.
Chairman
-26- �oox- 5� Ft���650
J U L 111984
L
JUL 111984 BOOK 57 F'GE 651
Attorney Block recalled that West Utilities had put up
an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of $650,000
which will expire on August 1, 1984. They are asking that
it be allowed to die a natural death as they have come up
with a contractual agreement between the utility and the
property owners that if the bonds are not funded, they would
put all the assessment monies up by October 12, 1984.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board
unanimously agreed to allow the $650,000
irrevocable letter of credit to expire on
August 1, 1984.
Administrator Wright noted that letters of notice to
proceed on the construction of the waterline were issued
yesterday and Utilities Director Pinto anticipated that they
will be moving dirt in about two weeks.
Local realtor, Ray Scent, commended the County
Administration and the Commission on the cooperation they
have given to the developers in carrying out this project.
DISCUSSION RE PETITION PAVING - REQUESTED BY .LOUIS BIAMON
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/2/84:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: July 2, 1984
the Board of County Commissioners
FILE:
THROUGH: Michael Wright, County Administrator
SUBJECT: Request by Residents of 19th AvenuE
S.W. between 13th Street S.W. and
14th Street S.W. for County to
Waive requirement for 66.6% of
Benefited Owners Signing Petition
for Street Paving
FROM: ,Tames W. Davis, P.E. REFERENCES: Letter dated June 4, 1984 from
Public Works Director Louis A. Biamon to Michael Wright
43
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Mr. Louis Biamon, resident of 19th Avenue S.W. has submitted
a petition for the paving of 19th Avenue S.W. from 13th Street
S.W. to 14th Street S.W. The petition contains signatures of
6 of 12 property owners along the 700 L.F. road. Mr. Biamon
has obtained the consent of 1 other property owner, thus obtaining
consent from 58.3% of the owners. The applicable front footage
along the road is 52.8%.
All property owners who have not signed the petition are from
out of town, 3 are from out of state, 1 is from Miami, and 1
from Sebring, Florida.
The location of this portion of 18th Avenue S.W. is such that
it is between two paved roads. The only culvert located along
13th Street S.W. canal is at 19th Street S.W. such that much
traffic from the Oslo Park Subdivision that travels to the new
Thompson Elementary School and Oslo Road use this road. The
Traffic count on the road is between 300 and 400 vehicles per
day. There are 6 residences on the road. This road serves as
a subdivision feeder road.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Due to the location, use and function of the road, paving
by the petition paving program is reconnhended, however, the
residents are one signature shy of obtaining a valid petition
since 5 property owners are not residents of the County. The
following alternatives are presented.
Alternative No. 1
Section 11-25 (page 575) of Article 3, Chapter 11, Indian
River County Code of Laws and Ordinances, states that the Ba,ard
of County Commissioners "may initiate services and/or make
improvements in its discretion and without petition". This
provision can be applied, and staff authorized to proceed with
design, schedule public hearing, and prepare a preliminary
assessment roll and resolution. for approval.
Alternative No. 2
Amend Section 11-22 and Section 11-23, Article 3, Chapter 11,
of the County's Code to revise the 66.7% consent to 51% consent
to achieve a valid petition. This would result in more valid
petitions being submitted. The City of Vero Beach only required
51% of the benefitted owners consenting.
Alternative No. 3
Deny the Petition as not meeting the 66,7% signature -threshold
and require the residents to obtain another signature.
44
fiU L 11 �9�4 �oo� 57 PnE 652
,'I
JUL 111984 Box 5 7 FACE 653
Public Works Director Jim Davis explained that Mr.
Biamon and residents of Oslo Park Subdivision have submitted
a petition for paving 19th Avenue S.W. between 13th St. S.W.
and 14th St. S.W. The petition contains the signatures of 7
of the 12 property owners along the 700 L.F. road, which
equates to 58%. The petition paving program, however,
requires 66.7%.
Public Works Director Jim Davis explained the three
alternatives to allow the paving of 19th Ave. S.W. between
13th St. S.W., and 14th St. S.W.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, that the
Board accept Alternative No. 1 in order'to
allow the paving of 19th Ave. S.W. between
13th St. S.W. and 14th St. S.W.
Under discussion, Administrator Wright thought that
this is a situation that is going to appear before the
Commission time and time again and he would like to ask the
Commission to consider lowering the threshold for petition
paving.
Chairman Scurlock agreed this will continue to occur
because of the large absentee ownership in Florida. He
personally felt that 50% plus 1 is a majority, and in most
elections that is what wins. He also thought that while it
might put pressure on the Commission to commit additional
funds each year to the road petition paving program, it
would decrease road maintenance costs in the long run.
Administrator Wright noted that our petition paving
program has been very successful and he believed they have
sufficient funds to go another year.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that any roads approved now
will not be paved for 1-1X2- years, and Administrator Wright
45
advised that they are thinking about putting in another
crew; he pointed out that every road we build is a road we
never have to grade again.
Commissioner Wodtke suggested that some way be found to
tie our interest rate into the prime rate in order to
encourage people to pay their petition paving in one payment
rather than installments.
Chairman Scurlock agreed and requested that staff
adjust this accordingly; Administrator Wright stated they
would come back with an adjustable rate.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion was voted on and carried
unanimously (4-0).
Administrator Wright explained to Mr. Biamon that their
petition was valid and it will be processed with the other
petition pavings. The Commission made a special exception.
Mr. Biamon expressed his appreciation and that of all the
other residents involved.
PISTOL AND SHOTGUN PRACTICE RANGE
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/28/84 and
attached letter:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: June 28, 1984 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: PISTOL AND SHOTGUN
PRACTICE RANGE
FROM: Tommy l Tho s REFERENCES:
Intergovernmental Coordinator
46
JUL 111984 57 P,aGF654
JUL 111984
Bou 57
Attached is a letter from Capt. William Baird, Indian
River County Sheriff's Department on behalf of the Depart-
ment and the Fraternal Order of Police requesting the use
of certain county property for a pistol and shotgun range.
A map of the property is also attached. Also enclosed is
a letter from Mr. Richard Shearer of the County Planning
Department stating that this site would bet -acceptable.
No funding would be required by the Board of County
Commission.
Staff recommends the proposal as presented.
P. O. BOX 608
PHONE 562.7911
R.T. A4 TI M , DO B E C K - INDIAN RI1'ER COUNTY
MEMBER FLORIDA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
MEMBER OF NATIONAL SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
Vr..IiO BEACIi, rLOI?IDA 3'21960
May 23, 1984
Mr. Tommy Thomas
Indian River County Intergovernmental Coordinator
County Administration Building
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Re: Pistol Range
Dear Tommy:
The Indian River County Sheriff's Department and the Fraternal Order of
Police would like to request permission of the Indian River County Commissioners
to provide enough land to construct a pistol and shotgun practice range.
The land that would appear to be
4th Street and east of Ranchline Road
"stump dump". Mr, Richard Shearer of
suitability of this County owned land
and one business on the north side of
Atlantic Grove Service was consulted
to the firing range being placed on tl
tions from Florida Atlantic or the ti
but felt there was no problem so long
day,
best suited for thils purpose is south of
in the area that is commonly known as the
the Long -Range Planning concurs as to the
for a pistol range. There are two houses
Citrus Road. Mr. Lindsey of.Florida
o ascertain if there were any objections
e County property. There were no objec-
o residences. One Resident is a day sleeper
as there was not constant shooting every
Since the pistol range would be for the benefit of County employees,
Fraternal Order of Police and the Sheriff's Department it is suggested that
a member of each agency be appointed to a board of directors. The duties of
this board would consist of developing the immediate construction of the pistol
range to meet the guidelines of the National Rifle Association. The duties
would also consist of solving the various organization problems concerning
safety, range control and supervision.
Mr. Arthur Sheeren, President of the local Fraternal Order of Police, has
secured information from the National Rifle Association on building and maintain-
ing a firing range. The project being proposed is not nearly as comprehensive
as a complete NRA sanctioned range. The information supplied by the NRA provides
47
P. O. BOX 608
PHONE 562.7911
Mr. Tommy Thomas
May 23, 1984
Re: Pistol Range
Page Two
R.T."TW DOBECK • LVDIAN
MEMBER FLORIDA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
MEMBER OF NATIONAL SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
V1 -1Y10 BEACII, 11LORIDA 33060
RIVER COUNTY
the criteria for building the scaled down pistol range in the areas of construc-
tion, maintenance, control and safety. All of the applicable standards will
be maintained to make the range safe, environmentally acceptable and aesthetically
acceptable to the surrounding area.
The firing range project will be built with in-house labor and minimal
financial assistance from the Fraternal Order of Police. Sheriff Tim Dobeck
and Arthur Sheeren are in agreement as to the needs of the pistol range. The
Oslo Prison range is currently used for firearms qualifications.
There is no location available for use of practice firing for deputies,
the Fraternal Order of Police or other County employees. Upon the Indian River
County Commissioners approval of this project, Sheriff Dobeck and Arthur Sheeren
will appoint members to the board of directors. When you appoint the third
member, the project development will commence immediately. I have enclosed
parts of the National Rifle Association's information that pertains to pistol
range development and range rules and regulations.
Respectful bmitted,
Captain William Baird
Indian River County Sheriff's Department
M
L_ JUL 111984
BOOK 57 mE 656
JUL 111984 Bou 57 fAlE 657
Capt. William Baird of the Sheriff's Department
presented the request for a pistol and shotgun practice
range to be located at what is called the "stump dump" on
Oslo Road, which is County -owned property. He noted that
currently the Sheriff's Department uses the County range to
qualify individuals for gun permits, but felt there is a
definite need for a facility where officers could practice.
He thought it could be established with in-house labor and
the minimal cost could be absorbed by the Fraternal Order of
Police.
Arthur Scheeren, President of the Fraternal Order of
Police, explained that this course could be used by the FOP,
the Sheriff's Department and certain people employed by the
County who have expressed a need for a practice range.
Lengthy discussion ensued regarding other practice
ranges in the County and whether they could be utilized more
fully.
Chairman Scurlock felt it does not make sense to have
five or six ranges all over the County, and he was reluctant
to build another range just because we cannot cooperate and
coordinate on the existing ranges.
Chairman Bird agreed, but felt that a safe place to
take our children to learn to shoot and to sight in our
rifles is needed. He asked if the proposed range could be
utilized by the public at certain times.
Capt. Baird explained that their present plans include
only pistols and shotguns, and he did not feel the "stump
dump" location was safe for rifle practice. _
Chairman Scurlock felt that if it is open to the general
public, there should be some supervision because of the
liability issue. He suggested that it be open to the public
at certain times, such as Saturday morning, and on a limited
supervised basis.
49
Capt. Baird explained that several people would be
given the National Rifle Association instructor's course and
one of these people would have to be present.
Capt. Baird stated they were not really concerned over
where the range would be located -- they just want a place
to practice firing because of the new qualifying require-
ments for law officers which states they must qualify three
times a year.
Chairman Scurlock pointed out that every time he has
used the police range, he was the only one around and he
thought that we don't really need another range if we just
cooperate.
Capt. Baird advised that the NRA will come in to assist
in the planning of the range which can proceed in steps. In
the absence of financing, he thought that might be the
appropriate way to go.
Commissioner Wodtke suggested that this matter go back
to staff for further analysis and a master plan be brought
back to the Board in regard to the needs of our law enforce-
ment officers and those of the public.
PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO C-2, HEAVY COMMERCIAL
ZONING DISTRICT
The hour of 11:00 o'clock A.M. having passed, the
Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publi-
cation attached, to wit:
50
JUL 111984 _
BOOK 57 FAGS 658
JUL 111984
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-Joumal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
In the matter
In the
Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper In the issues of , rix . aa4 24 l%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, fora period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed byre m?jis day ofof'� A.D. 19
Manager)
(Clerk of the Cirguit Coax �ndiliv®r County, Florida)
(SEAQ) I✓✓
BOOK 57 FACE 659
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO CONSIDER ADOPTION
OF COUNTY ORDINANCE.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Indian
Iver County Board of County Commissioners
hall hold a public hearing at which parties in in-
terest and citizens shall have an opportunity to
be heard on Wednesday, July 11, 1984, in the
County Commission Chambers locted in the
County Administration Building, 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Rorlda, at 11:00 a.m. or as
soon thereafter as may be heard, to consider
adoption of an ordinance entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING
PARAGRAPHS (a),((d),.(e), (f), and (g) of
,SECTION 20.1 OF ORDINANCE 71-3 AS
AMENDED, KNOWN AS APPENDIX A--
ZONING — OF THE CODE OF LAWS
AND ORDINANCES OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY; PERTAINING TO THE HEAVY
COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT;'.
PROVIDING FOR SPECIAL, EXCEP-
TIONS; LOT COVERAGE; FRONT, SIDE ..
AND REAR YARD AREA DIMENSIONS;
CODIFICATION; SEVERABILITY; RE-
PEAL- OR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;-
AND
ROVISIONS;„AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
f any person decides to'appeal any decision
node on the above matters, he/she will need a
'ecord of the proceedings, and for such pur-
)oses, he/she may need to ensure that a verba-
Im record of the proceedings is made, which
ecord Includes the Aestimony in evidence on
which the appeal is based,. t.1
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
ti ey:.-s- Don C. Scurlock,
Chairman `
Tune 20. JUIg 2,,,1984
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/26/84:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: June 26, 1984 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners '
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE5UBJECT:
Robert M. Keafing-1 AIC
Planning & Development Director
FROM: RS hard Shearer, AICP REFERENCES:
Chief, Long -Range Planning
It is requested that the data herein
consideration by the Board of County
regular meeting of July 11, 1984.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The County
Commercial
clarifying
Buildings
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO
C-2 ZONING DISTRICT
C-2 P&Z
RICH2
presented be given formal
Commissioners at their
is initiating a request to amend the C-2, Heavy
District, by reducing the yard requirements,
the lot coverage, and adding Trade Contractors
as a Special Exception Use.
51
� � r
Many individuals have declined from requesting a rezoning to
the C-2 zoning district because the yard requirements are more
restrictive than the yard requirements'in the other commercial
and industrial districts.
On June 14, 1984, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
4 -to -0 to recommend approval of this proposed amendment.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
The various yards -required for all of the County's commercial
and industrial zoning districts are listed below.
• r
The C-2 district currently requires side and rear yards of 20
feet and a front yard of 25 feet. The C-lA, Restricted
Commercial District, the C-1, Commercial District, and the M-1,
Restricted Industrial District, all require a front yard of 10
feet, a rear yard of 10 feet, and no side yard requirement
unless the property abuts a residential zoning district.
Because the uses allowed in the C-2 district are also allowed
in either the C-1 or the M-1 district, it seems reasonable to
have yard requirements for the C-2 district which are
similar to those required in the C-1 and M-1 districts.
The rear yard requirement of the C-2 district could be reduced
from 20 feet to 10 feet. If parking was allowed in all but 10
'feet of the required front yard, the building would still be
set back at least 25 feet from the right-of-way�but parking
facilities would only be required to set back 10 feet.
Reducing the required side yard -from 20 feet to 10 feet would
allow greater flexibility in site design but would ensure that
buildings were not built on the property line (which is
permitted in the C-lA, C-1, and M-1 districts).
The maximum lot coverage allowed in the C-2 district is listed
as 40 percent. However, this provision should not include parking
facilities. A statement should be -added to exempt parking
facilities from the 40 percent lot coverage limit.
Recently, there has been considerable interest in developing
trade contractors buildings in the County. Trade Contractors
Buildings are not specifically listed as a permitted or special
exception use in any of the County's zoning districts. The C-1
district allows "professional, business and utilities offices
and services" and the M-1 district allows, "Building storage
yards, contractor's plants or storage yards." However, trade
contractors buildings -tend to combine office, retail, service,
_and warehousing uses in one building. In some cases, this
bombination of uses can -be accommodated in the C-1 district if
the building is not being used primarily as a warehouse.
Because warehouses are allowed in the C-2 district, it seems
appropriate to allow trade contractor buildings in the C-2
district.
L_ J U L 111984
52
Box 57 Ft rjE 6s®
REQUIRED YARDS
DISTRICT
FRONT
REAR SIDES
B-1, Planned Business
75' *
15'
15'
MED, Medical District
25'
20'
20'
C-lA, Restricted Commercial
10'
10'
0
C-1, Commercial District
10'
10'
•0
C-2, Heavy Commercial
25'
20'
20'
LM -1, Light Manufacturing
25'
20'
10'
M-1, Restricted Industrial
10'
10'
0
* The B-1 District was designed
to be
located on
High-
way 60, and the front yard setback was to allow
room
for a frontage road.
The C-2 district currently requires side and rear yards of 20
feet and a front yard of 25 feet. The C-lA, Restricted
Commercial District, the C-1, Commercial District, and the M-1,
Restricted Industrial District, all require a front yard of 10
feet, a rear yard of 10 feet, and no side yard requirement
unless the property abuts a residential zoning district.
Because the uses allowed in the C-2 district are also allowed
in either the C-1 or the M-1 district, it seems reasonable to
have yard requirements for the C-2 district which are
similar to those required in the C-1 and M-1 districts.
The rear yard requirement of the C-2 district could be reduced
from 20 feet to 10 feet. If parking was allowed in all but 10
'feet of the required front yard, the building would still be
set back at least 25 feet from the right-of-way�but parking
facilities would only be required to set back 10 feet.
Reducing the required side yard -from 20 feet to 10 feet would
allow greater flexibility in site design but would ensure that
buildings were not built on the property line (which is
permitted in the C-lA, C-1, and M-1 districts).
The maximum lot coverage allowed in the C-2 district is listed
as 40 percent. However, this provision should not include parking
facilities. A statement should be -added to exempt parking
facilities from the 40 percent lot coverage limit.
Recently, there has been considerable interest in developing
trade contractors buildings in the County. Trade Contractors
Buildings are not specifically listed as a permitted or special
exception use in any of the County's zoning districts. The C-1
district allows "professional, business and utilities offices
and services" and the M-1 district allows, "Building storage
yards, contractor's plants or storage yards." However, trade
contractors buildings -tend to combine office, retail, service,
_and warehousing uses in one building. In some cases, this
bombination of uses can -be accommodated in the C-1 district if
the building is not being used primarily as a warehouse.
Because warehouses are allowed in the C-2 district, it seems
appropriate to allow trade contractor buildings in the C-2
district.
L_ J U L 111984
52
Box 57 Ft rjE 6s®
r
J U L 111984BOOK
RECOMMENDATION
57 PAGE 661
Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the
following changes to the C-2, Heavy Commercial District, be
approved:
1) Reducing the required rear yard and side yards from
20 feet to l0 feet;
2) Allowing parking in all but 10 feet of the required front
yard;
3)- Clarifying lot coverage.;
4) Adding Trade Contractors Buildings as a special exception
use.
Planner Richard Shearer presented staff's
recommendation for the proposed amendment to the C-2 zoning
district and explained the major changes.
Commissioner Wodtke asked why the front yard is 25 feet
and not 10 feet, and Mr. Shearer explained that the reason
for this is that most of the C-2 zoning currently exists on
arterial roads and he thought that more footage might be
needed in the future to widen those streets.
Robert Keating, Planning & Development Director,
thought that the provision that parking can be allowed in
all but the first 10 feet of that setback gives the
developer additional flexibility and is less stringent.
Mr. Shearer reported that staff has done some checking
and we would be hard pressed to find very many buildings
that only set back 10 feet from the right-of-way in our
existing commercial/industrial zoning districts. Staff did
not feel it was unreasonable to allow parking in there, but
did feel parking should be set back a little bit further.
Mr. Shearer further noted that people are going to M-2
rather than conform to C-2, mostly because of the setback
requirements.
53
Commissioner Wodtke noted there are some inconsis-
tencies in the zoning districts, and he felt they all should
have either 25 -foot or 10 -foot front yard setback require-
ments.
Commissioner Bird felt the compromise of allowing the
parking in the front yard was as far as he wanted to go.
Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked
if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There were
none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the
Board unanimously (4-0) closed the Public Hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board
unanimously (4-0) approved the four changes
recommended by staff and adopted Ordinance 84-40,
amending Section 20.2 of Ordinance 71-3 as
amended, known as Appendix A -- Zoning -- of
the Code of Laws and Ordinances, pertaining to
the Heavy Commercial Zoning District; providing
for special exceptions; lot coverage; front, side
and rear yard area dimensions.
54
JUL 111984 FooK 57 F`. F 669
JUL 111984 �oo� ' 5 � � Pm 3
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 84-40
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF . -
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING PARAGRAPHS (a),(d),
(e),(f), AND(g) OF SECTION 20.1 OF ORDINANCE 71-3 AS
AMENDED, KNOWN AS APPENDIX A -- ZONING --OF THE.CODE OF
LAWS AND ORDINANCES OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; PERTAINING TO
THE HEAVY COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS; LOT COVERAGE; FRONT, SIDE AND REAR
YARD AREA DIMENSIONS; CODIFICATION; SEVERABILITY; REPEAL
OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
Cv(�TTnm 9
PARAGRAPHS (a) , (d) , (e) , (f) , AND (g) of Section 20.1 of
Ordinance 71-3, as amended, are hereby amended to read as
follows:
SECTION 20.1 C-2 HEAVY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
(a) SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS. The following uses may be
permitted by the County Planning and Zoning Commission after
site plan approval according to Section 23 and any other
applicable provisions of the Code of Laws and Ordinances.
(23) Trade Contractors Buildings
433} (24)' -Or other similar uses
(d) LOT COVERAGE. No principal building or structure,
except for parking lots, shall occupy more than forty (40%)
percent of the lot.
(e) FRONT YARD. Every lot shall have a front yard or
street yard of set-less-*_haa at least twenty-five (25) feet.
Notwithstanding other provisions of the Code of Laws and
Ordinances, parking lots, drives, maneuvering areas and other
structures serving a similar purpose may be constructed to
within ten (10) feet of the front lot line.
(f) REAR YARD. Every lot shall have a rear yard of set
fess-tbas-twest+--(39� at least ten (10) feet.
(g) SIDE YARD. A side yard shall be provided on each
side of every lot of at least ten
(10) feet in width.
CODING: Words in struck -through type are deletions from
existing law; words underlined are additions.
55
SECTION 2
REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS
All previous ordinances, resolutions, or motions of the
Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida
which conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby
repealed to the extent of such conflict. All Special Acts of
the legislature applying only to the unincorporated portion of
Indian River County and which conflict with the provisions of
this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such
conflict.
OVI' TTnM I
INCORPORATION IN CODE
The provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated
into the County Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to
"section", "article", or other appropriate word, and the
sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to
accomplish such intentions.
CZ+nmTnM A
SEVERABILITY
If any section, part of a sentence, paragraph, phrase or
word of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitu-
tional, inoperative or void, such holdings shall not affect the
remaining portions hereof and it shall be construed to have
been the legislative intent to pass this ordinance without such
unconstitutional, invalid or inoperative part.
CVOMTnM q
EFFECTIVE DATE
The provisions of this ordinance shall become effective
upon receipt from the Florida Secretary of State of official
acknowledgment that this ordinance has been filed with the
Department of State.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida on this 11tbday of July 1984.
56
JUL 111984 BocK 57 FacE 664
At 111984
BOOK 5 7 Ftp 'F 665
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By:
DO . SCURLOCK, JR.
Chairman
Acknowledgment of the Department of State of the State of
Florida this l9th day of July , 1984.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State
..received on this23� day of July , 1984, at 11:00
A..M./P.M. and filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Board of
minty Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY.
. BRANDENBURG[, County Attorney
PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION VARIANCE, KINGSWOOD
ESTATES
Robert Keating, Planning & Development Director,
informed the Board that the applicant has requested that his
request be withdrawn. A public hearing was advertised,
however, and letters sent to surrounding property owners,
some of whom are in attendance today and would like to speak
on the variance.
Attorney Brandenburg advised that it was not necessary
to open up the public hearing if no action was to be taken
-- simply withdraw the item from the Agenda.
Chairman Scurlock asked if anyone wished to be heard in
this matter. There were none.
REPORT FROM GOLF COURSE FEASIBILITY STUDY COMMITTEE
Commissioner Bird introduced several members of the
Golf Course Feasibility Study Committee: Remsen Walker,
Ruth Mead, Gerald Ashcraft and Harold Djorup.
57
® � r
Gerald Ashcraft read the following letter of recommen-
dation and presented a check in the amount of $4850, which
will fully cover the cost of the study.
RECOMMENDATION
On the basis of this Committee's research and the conclusions
reached from the information available and summarized
subsequently herein, we wish to unanimously recommend that the
County Commission enter into a contract with the National Golf
Foundation for the first phase of a professionally prepared
Feasibility Study to determine the need for, and potential of, an
Indian River County public golf course, and to establish
reasonable income projections which could be expected from such a
facility.
We recommend this Study for the following reasons:
1. Our Committee has prepared estimates (within) of
project expense items, but does not feel qualified to
evaluate the need or income potential of a golf course
as contemplated.
2. We have found it likely that an objective,
professionally prepared study of market and income
feasibility will be required by any financial
organization before considering the advancement of
capital financing.
3. We believe the National Golf Foundation is ideally.
suited to undertake this study. They are nationally
known, highly regarded, conveniently located, and
heavily experienced. Their objective is unquestioned
and their attitude most cooperative. They are also
extremely reasonable.
4. So that the County Commission will not have to expend
any substantial sum for this study, our Committee has
undertaken a modest fund-raising campaign, and local
firms and individuals have contributed $ SY(pir to
date. We are happy to attach herewith our check in
this amount, which we believe will substantially meet
the costs of the study which we recommend.
��{���
GOLF COURSE FEASIBILITY STUDY COMMITTEE
Richard N. Bird, Chairman
Harold Djorup Clyde "Bud" Morrison
Gerald Ashcraft Charles Block
Ruth Mead Victor Lunka
Richard Schuler Remsen Walker
Ron Fanaro
JUL 111984
BOOK 5 7 FAGS 666
JUL 111984
BOOK 57 F".GF 667
Commissioner Bird advised that the Committee will be
prepared to make a final recommendation to the Board re the
feasibility of the County building and operating a public
golf course by the end of this year.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously (4-0) authorized the County
Attorney to draw up a formal scope of work
with the National Golf Foundation, as outlined
in the recommendation by the Golf Course
Feasibility Study Committee.
Commissioner Bird explained that the National Golf
Foundation is a non-profit organization, which is primarily
supported by various golf manufacturers and distributors
throughout the country. Their primary purpose is to
promote, improve, and enchance the game of golf throughout
the United States.
Commissioner Bird thanked those committee members
present for coming to the meeting this morning.
NATIONAL
GOLF
FOUNDATION
June 20, 1984
( JUt:19U4 iL
RECEIVED �
BOARD COUNTY
-A� CONAMISSIONERS
Mr. Dick -Bird
Commissioner
County Administration Building
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Dear Mr. Bird:
Attorney _
Perscnncl --
Public Works -
Community Dav,
Utilities w,....�.
Finance=
Other
Pursuant to our telephone conversation this week, I am pleased to make
the following proposal for a study which would address the potential
of the Vero Beach golf market as related to the development of a
new golf facility.
W
The study, as prepared by the Foundation, would include the follow-
ing information:
1) Population - A study of the existing and projected resident
and visitor populations as they relate to the total number
of potential users of the proposed facility.
2) Population Characteristics - A study of the resident and
visitor population's general demographics as they relate
to their propensity to participate in golf.
3) Economic Characteristics - A study of the local economic
conditions as they relate to the probability of local
patronage of the proposed facility.
4) Climatic Characteristics - A study of weather trends in
the Vero Beach area and their effect on seasonal popula-
tion levels and the total number of rounds that might be
generated at the proposed facility.
5) Competitive Facilities - A study of existing golf facilities
in the market area and their probable influence on the market
share potential and fee structures of the proposed facility.
6) Revenue Projections - Projections of potential revenues,
based on a Foundation recommended fee structure, for the
proposed facility.
7) Conclusions and Recommendations - Suggestions concerning the
type of golf course that would best serve the projected golf
market. Suggestions concerning the overall scope of the
facilities. Recommendations concerning the overall finan-
cial feasibility of the projected based on the existing and
projected potential of the area's available golf market.
Under normal circumstances, the Foundation would spend three or four
days in the area gathering information for the study, and delivery
of the completed study would follow site work within 90 days. As
I mentioned during our conversation, the first available dates to
conduct the initial site work would be in September. The cost for
the preparation of the study, as outlined above, would be $4,500,
plus actual expenses, which would not exceed $350.
I thoroughly enjoyed having the opportunity to discuss the project
with you, and will look forward to hearing from you.
ere Y',
Bob Slauson
Director of Special Projects
200 CASTLEWOOD DRIVE, NORTH PALM BEACH FLORIDA 33408 (305) 844-2500
APPOINTMENTS TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
The Board reviewed the following list of individuals
selected to serve on the Economic Development Committee:
.o
JUL 111984 BOOK 57 FADE 668
r JUL J.11984
Telephone: (305) 567-8000
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Charles Lavin (Chamber of Commerce)
2240 54th Avenue
Vero Beach, F1. 32960
Edgar Schlitt (Board of Realtors)
321 21st Street
Vero Beach, F1. 32960
George Gross (Civic Association)
855 Dahlia Lane
Vero Beach, Fl. 32963
Ben F. Bailey III (Agriculture -Business)
Central Groves
P. O. Box 2069
Vero Beach, F1. 32961
Frank Weed, President (Developer)
Zaremba Communities Corp.
Vero Beach, Inc.
582 Beachland Blvd.
Vero Beach, Fl. 32963
Joy Bell (Finance)
Merrill, Lynch, Pierce
Fenner & Smith, Inc.
3365 Ocean Drive
Vero Beach, F1. 32963
Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, F1. 32960
Pat Bowen (Ex -officio member)
Economic Development Coordinator
Treasure Coast Job Training Center
3552 Okeechobee Road
Ft. Pierce, F1. 33450
BOOK 57 PnE 6s9
Suncom Telephone: 424-1011
Chairman Scurlock asked for the Board's authorization
to appoint the members listed above and authorize the County
Al
Attorney to draw up a resolution establishing the scope of
work and terms of the members.
Chairman Scurlock explained the difficulty he had in
selecting those individuals he is recommending, as the
response was tremendous from individuals willing to serve on
this committee. There would be one and two-year terms and
representatives of the various organizations such as the
Chamber of Commerce, the Board of Realtors and the Civic
Association would serve one year terms. As far as the scope
of the committee itself, it would be advisory in nature only
and would serve at the discretion of the Board until such
time as it was no longer necessary to have such a committee.
The committee would be involved in industrial development,
recommendation of bond issues, research of grants and other
funds that may be available for economic development.
Chairman Scurlock reported that they have had one
workshop meeting and at the next meeting the Chamber of
Commerce will give their report on expansion and economic
development.
Chairman Scurlock advised that Pat Bowen of the Job
Partnership Training Act would be an ex -officio member, and
hoped that someone from the Planning & Zoning staff would be
available to the committee. The Chairman noted that the
Transportation Planning Committee would also be instrumental
in giving recommendations and assistance. He thought that
perhaps the committee would be expanded sometime in the
future, but this would be the number to start.
Commissioner Wodtke suggested that a representative of
industry be appointed to the committee, such as a vice
president of Piper Aircraft.
Chairman Scurlock asked that input or suggestions be
given to Attorney Brandenburg for his preparation of the
resolution establishing the Economic Development Committee
and its scope of work and terms of members.
62
JUL 111984
BOOK 57 FAGE 67®
J U L 1.1. 1994
8001( 57 FADE 671
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously (4-0) appointed the
members as recommended by Chairman Scurlock
to the Economic Development Committee, with the
terms of each to be decided at a later date.
REQUEST FOR PAVING OF 10th COURT SOUTH OF OSLO ROAD
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/2/84:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE:
the Board of County Commissioners July 2, 1984 FILE:
THROUGH: Michael Wright,
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Request for Paving - 10th Court
South of Oslo Road by Oslo
Concerned City�ens League
FROM: James W. Davis, P . E. REFERENCES:
Public Works Direct0
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
In the past 4 years, the Public Works Division has received
Road Maintenance/Paving requests from the Gifford area, the Oslo
area, and similar areas where subdivisions were created over
a long period of time by metes and bounds description. In such
areas, a proper road right-of-way does not exist, and the residents
do not have the financial capability of bearing the cost of funding
750 of the cost of road improvements as required by the petition
paving program, under a 2 -year assessment plan.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
In considering a policy to address this problem staff recognizes
the following unique circumstances.
1) the existing road is not in an established right-of-way.
2) there are a substantial number of homes fronting the road
most of which were not recently constructed (prior to
-1973).
3) the area is a low income area where residents are not
financially capable of meeting the financial obligations
of the petition paving program, as it now exists.
For three years, staff has been working with the residents
of two residential streets to solve this problem. These streets
are
10th Court S.W. from Oslo Road South to 11th Court S.W.
34th Avenue North Gifford Road to 47th Street.
63
M M M
The County does grade 34th Avenue, however, a legal right-
of-way does not exist and there are numerous residences on the
road.
A neighborhood committee for both roads has solicited consent
from all property owners that they can contact. In both cases,
the majority of property owners.consent to donation of right-
of-way and paying for some improvement. There are one or two
residents on each street that are not willing to participate.
This situation makes it difficult for the neighborhood to achieve
results.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
The Public Works Division recommends the following program
1) Establishment of proper right-of-way be undertaken by the
County Attorney's office and Public Works Division. This
will be done by title search, preparing deeds for each
parcel, and by possible condemnation of any parcels where
a few property owners do not consent.
2) The paving be designed and implemented under the existing
Petition Paving Program but the assessment established
over a 3 year period instead of a two year period.
For a typical 100 ft. lot, the total assessment would be approx-
imately $400 and each yearly payment would be approximately $133
plus interest. The County would accept these roads for maintenance.
In most cases, some drainage improvements can be made, but
due to buildings, etc. adequate drainage may not be accomplished.
As such projects come in by petition, they will be placed
on the County's petition list and processes accordingly.
it is also recommended that the County begin to acquire 35'
of right-of-way along 10th Court S.W. south of Oslo Road and
that the County accept these roads for maintenance.
Public Works Director Jim Davis explained staff's
recommended process to allow the paving of 10th Court S.W.
from Oslo Road south to 11th Court S.W.
Attorney Brandenburg advised that the County actually
may have the right-of-way to these roads through virtue of
them having been used by the general public over a number of
years, which will save the County the trouble and expense of
the condemnation process.
Public Works Director Jim Davis felt that in those
situations, it is not going to be easy to acquire the
right-of-way to these roads, either through condemnation or
donation. After the right of way is established, the
property owners are in agreement to paying for the paving.
64 BOOK 57 FAr,E672
J U L 111984
JUL 111984 Box 57 c,AGF673
The problem, however, is that some of the people in these
areas do not feel that they can meet the assessment schedule
as it is now defined in our assessment ordinance, and
Director Davis suggested that they be allowed to string
their payments out over a longer period of time than two
years.
Commissioner Wodtke did not feel there was a problem
with the payment situation, but asked about the low con-
struction cost of $4 per foot and Director Davis explained
that they would be working with constrained right-of-ways
using a shell base rather than soil cement.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, that the
Board authorize the County Attorney and the
Public Works Division to do the necessary
title search in acquiring the right-of-way
to construct roads under our petition paving
program on 10th Court S.W. from Oslo Road south
to 11th Court S.W. and 34th Avenue North Gifford
Road to 47th Street; with the understanding that
if condemnation is necessary, the County Attorney
will bring the matter back to the Board.
Joe Wiggins, President of the Oslo Community League
asked if the large holes in the road in the Oslo area could
be filled now while waiting for the petition paving to be
processed, and Administrator Wright advised that we must
acquire the right-of-way before we start maintaining private
roads.
Attorney Brandenburg felt the public has a right to
access those roads as they have been using them for a number
of years. He thought the Commission might want to consider
65
the ability of the fire department and ambulance squad to
access the road to serve those residents.
Administrator Wright and Commissioner Bowman thought
that we would be setting a precedent if the County began
paving roads that are unique.
Attorney Brandenburg commented that the County would be
looking to these residents for their assistance in obtaining
the right- of -way.
Mr. Wiggins reported that there is an individual who
will never give the right-of-way, and Attorney Brandenburg
explained that condemnation would require a couple of
appraisals and is a complicated process.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion was voted on and carried
unanimously (4-0).
Attorney Brandenburg explained that one of the things
that.makes this road unique is that it is identified in the
Community Block Grant Program and the County already has
identified this area as being a prime area for improvement.
Administrator Wright felt that we could maintain the
road before paving it, if the road is legally ours. He just
wanted the Commissioners to be aware of all the roads in the
western part of the County that also might be classified as
unique.
Attorney Brandenburg repeated his belief that the
general public has established a right-of-way by the fact
that it has been using these roads for the last 25 years.
Mr. Wiggins noted that this is the rainy season and the
road is in terrible shape.
JUL 111984 57 PmGE 674
JUL 111984
BOOK 57 P",UE 6 1 5
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the
Board unanimously authorized whatever
improvements are necessary to make
10th Court S.W. passable in a one time
only effort before the right-of-way is
acquired and it is paved.
Under discussion, the Commissioners felt that the
one-time maintenance job should only take a crew 2-3 days to
bring it up to the standard of a regular dirt road.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion was voted on and carried
unanimously (4-0).
DISCUSSION RE 16th STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY AND PAVING
Public Works Director Jim Davis explained that 16th
Street is not paved from 51st Ave. west to King's Highway
and there is interest by the owners of Kingswood Estates,
Inc. and other property owners along 16th Street to have
that portion paved.
Director Davis advised that one of the constraints to
paving this portion is that there is only a 30 -ft right-
of-way, which is not sufficient according to the DOT's 40
ft. requirement. The other constraint is being able to
build the road without having to remove several large oak
trees.
He gave three alternatives:
1) To acquire the 10 feet of right-of-way along the north
side of 16th Street and pave the road in accordance with
the DOT Green Book; or
2) Not to pave the road at all and let the existing
condition remain; or
67
3) Pave the road in the 30 -ft. -right-of-way, which would
not be in accordance with the standards of the DOT Green
Book.
Director Davis recommended Alternative #1, emphasizing
his reluctance to build the road with just the 30 -ft.
right-of-way because of the safety factory, as he is a
Registered Engineer and could be subject to liability.
Chairman Scurlock asked if anyone wished to be heard in
this matter.
Ed Schlitt, President of Kingswood Estates, Inc.,
explained that several property owners along the north side
of 16th Street have indicated their opposition to donating
right-of-way and having to pay their proportionate share of
paving costs. He stated that as a gesture of good will to
the property owners in this area, Kingswood Estates would be
willing to pay the paving costs allocated to those
properties which will be providing the right of way. They
have also considered moving their entryway in order to
accommodate the situation and pave the entrance way to
King's Highway, but there are other property owners along
16th Street who have indicated that it is unfair to put in a
new development of 49 homes, which would generate increased
traffic and have a greater effect on the unpaved portion of
the road. Mr. Schlitt said that they are willing to do
anything the County wants and whatever the property owners
want in order to get the street paved. He thought that it
could be done within the 30 -feet right-of-way if a low speed
limit was posted. In regard to their paving the entire
length, their budget would only allow a layer of asphalt
over the existing dirt base. He pointed out that most of
the property owners along 16th Street want to see that
portion paved, but are concerned about losing several large
W.
JUL 111984 BOOK 7 PACE 676
JUL 111984 Baca 57 cA„E677
oak trees which are growing very close to the road. Mr.
Schlitt felt a solution could be worked out by the developer
and the property owners, and he emphasized their willingness
to cooperate.
Dr. Robert H. Vinson, 5600 16th Street, believed that
everyone agrees that the road should be paved, but the
difficulty is trying to build it within a 40 -ft.
right-of-way as required by the DOT. They were concerned
that several large oak trees would have to be removed in
order to obtain the extra 10 ft. of right-of-way. He did
not think an oak tree was any more deadly than having a
telephone pole close to a road.
Lengthy discussion ensued in regard to finding a way to
pave the road and save the oaks.
Ray Scent, local realtor, also felt that most of the
property owners along 16th Street wanted the road paved as
it iq dusty and rough, but also wanted everything possible
done to save the trees.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, that the
Board instruct Registered Engineer Jim Davis
to prepare the necessary estimates to construct
the extension of 16th Street from 51st Ave. to
King's Highway within the existing 30 -ft. right-
of-way, with the understanding that it is against
his recommendation.
Under discussion, Attorney Brandenburg wanted to
clarify "against his recommendation,” and Director Davis
stated his position is that you can't build the road on a
30 -ft. right-of-way according to DOT's requirements, and he
would rather not comment upon whether the road would be
safer paved or unpaved, but he did feel, however, that a
paved road would encourage more traffic.
Dr. Vinson asked if the Motion included instructions to
save the oak trees and noted there is one very large oak
tree on the right-of-way.
Director Davis was not sure whether that particular
tree could be saved if its roots were shallow as they
approached the roadway.
Chairman Scurlock felt that previous discussion
indicated that every effort would be made to save this tree.
Administrator Wright pointed out that they are asking
that an oak tree with an 11 -ft. diameter be allowed to
remain within one foot of the asphalt, and Commissioner Bird
stated he could not approve that.
Dr. Vinson presented the following letter received from
Urban Forester Paul Palmiotto, which Chairman Scurlock read
aloud:
70
JUL 111984 BOOK 7 Fr 'U- 678
J U L 11 .1984 BooK 57 F,,� CE 679
JQY'6�4iyF9
STATE OF FLORIDA o0a R¢R¢WWI
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE & CONSUMER SERVICES
DOYLE CONNER, COMMISSIONER * 3125 CONNER BLVD. TALLAHASSEE 32301
July 10, 1984
Mrs. Augusta Vinson
5600 16th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Mrs. Vinson,
As per your request I went out to your property to
the site of a very old Live Oak (Quercus vir iniana) tree,
to obtain the overall dimensions of the tree.
The Live Oak tree is eleven feet in circumference or
forty-two inches in diameter at breast height. The tree
is sixty-nine feet tall and has a crown spread of sixty-eight
feet.
A Live Oak tree of this size could be estimated to be
between one hundred and fifty and two hundred years old.
The tree in question is adjacent to the road right -of
way at 5600 16th Street. It is a beautiful, healthy tree
that canopies over the road. It would be a shame to see
this stately old oak cut down for any reason.
If I my be of further assistance to you please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Se7ly you
:�i
Paul Palmiotto
Urban Forester
Ph: 569-2840
r�,BIRT�,
1944 1984,y
71
Commissioners Wodtke and Bird agreed to add to their
Motion that the road will be built within the 30 -ft. right-
of-way with the intent of saving every tree possible.
Commissioner Bird felt that the Motion is a compromise
and covers the issue as best we can to satisfy all parties,
and we are just going to have to wait to see how
construction of the road affects that tree.
Chairman Scurlock felt that the tree will have to go
and we might as well face it right now.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION,
with the addition as noted above.
The Motion was voted on and carried
unanimously (4-0).
The Board of County Commissioners thereupon recessed at
12:50 o'clock P.M. for lunch and reconvened at 1:30 o'clock
P.M. with the same members present, Commissioner Lyons being
on vacation. Deputy Clerk Virginia Hargreaves took over for
Deputy Clerk Barbara Bonnah for the remainder of the
meeting.
72
JUL 111984
BOOK 57 FvIi - 680
JUL 111984
BOOK
DISCUSSION RE WINTER BEACH ROAD ON BARRIER ISLAND
5.7 Fk„t 8
Ruth Stanbridge, Chairman of the Scenic Roads and
Trails Committee, came before the Board and reviewed her
letter, as follows:
Mr. Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
Indian River County Board of
County Commissioners
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Re: Old Winter Beach Road
Dear Chairman Scurlock:
4835 66th Avenue
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
July 2, 1984
The Scenic Roads Committee met on June 21 to discuss the status of
the Winter Beach Road on the barrier island. This old road is
designated on the Comphensive Land Use Plan as one of Indian River
County's historic and/or scenic roads. This road with its 70 foot
right-of-way and the approximately 120 feet of bridgehead property on
the river is scheduled to play an important part in our Committee's
recommendations for Jungle Trail. This roadway by itself has great
significance not only from the standpoint of its historical past but as
a highly potential land resource for the future.
Unfortunately, the control and maintenance of this road was
conveyed to the Town of Indian River Shores by Resolution in 1962. On
June 6 of this year, the Town offered it back to the county after 22
years. This offer, however, was withdrawn from the consent agenda the
morning of the meeting. The next day on June 7, the maintenance and
resurfacing of this road was transferred from the Town to private
developers in a special -called meeting of the Town Council.
With this background fresh in our minds, our committee discussed
with the county staff on May 21 the status of the Winter Beach Road.
The fact that the Town could convey the resufacing and maintenance of a
county road to a third party without benefit of coordination with the
owner (the County) was alarming. It was the understanding from the
County Attorney that the control of the road and the possibility that
the Town has the legal means with the Resolution of 1962 of closing the
road does, indeed, exist.
Therefore, the Scenic Roads and Historical Trails Committee
recommends that the County take the steps necessary to protect against
this possibility and to assure that the Winter Beach Road, its
right-of-way, and the bridgehead property will not be closed to the
people of Indian River County. Our committee feels that because of the
existing resolution and the agreement between the private developers and
the Town on the resurfacing and maintenance of this road that the County
must retain control of this property.
Again, our committee takes very seriously the responsibilities
assigned to them by this Commission and if we may be of further
assistance, please call on us.
Sincerely,
Mrs. Ruth Stanbridge
Chairman, Scenic Roads
Mrs. Stanbridge emphasized the Committee's concern that
the Town could close the road for various reasons and felt
the County should assure the people that the road will not be
closed. She reported that she had visited the site with
Indian River Shores Councilman George Bunnell, who was very
upset with all the clearing out there, but said the Town was
not responsible for that. He did feel strongly that it was
Old Winter Beach Road and should remain as such.
Chairman Scurlock believed we should establish the road
as ours and have as much control as possible so if there
should ever be an attempt to relocate the road or abandon
it, we don't end up with a worthless strip.
Attorney Brandenburg assured the Board that the County
does own the road right-of-way; we did, however, give away
the maintenance and supervision of the right-of-way to
Indian River Shores by Resolution many years ago and they
accepted it. While it is true that the people with control
and supervision can close the road, they do not have the
right to abandon it or give it away. One possibility would
be for the County to take back the road and control and
maintenance. The City had requested that this be taken off
the agenda while they talked with a local developer, and
Attorney Brandenburg did not know what the status of this is
now.
J. C. Dorsky, Indian River Shores City Manager,
informed the Board that Indian River Shores never had any
designs or intention of closing the Winter Beach Road from
A -1-A to Jungle Trail. What he felt seems to be the major
concern is the tail end of Winter Beach Road, which runs
from the paved section down to the water where there was a
gatehouse for the old bridge. That, of course, is unpaved
at the present time. The Town was asked if they would allow
it to be paved by representatives of Lost Tree Village, and
they indicated that when a site plan came in that called for
JUL 11 1984 74 BOOK 57 PnF- 682
J U L
111984
BOOK
57 F�,,cE 683.
a road,
consideration would be given to paving
it. Mr.
Dorsky did not feel that portion has any particular value as
a county road. The other portion that runs in connection
with Jungle Trail is the continuation of a loop of county
road and, therefore, it is understandable the County would
want to retain ownership of that portion; although when
development is completed on that section of the island, Mr.
Dorsky did not feel it would be much of a county road any
more. Mr. Dorsky reiterated that the Town does not have any
plans to close this road except possibly that little tail
which people have used as a dumping ground. He noted that
it now has been cleared out and someday in the future, it
may be developed.
Attorney Brandenburg inquired whether the Town does+
acknowledge that the County owns that right-of-way and the
bridgehead property down at the end of it, and City Manager
Dorsky stated that they do; their records show that
ownership never was transferred to the Town.
Commissioner Bowman informed those present that Old
Winter Beach Road has been declared a scenic and historic
trail from A -1-A to the river, including the bridgehead
property.
Attorney Brandenburg suggested perhaps the Commission
could adopt a resolution stating that the County owns the
right-of-way and the bridgehead property and desires to keep
it open to traffic by the public and forward it to the Town.
City Manager Dorsky continued to emphasize that the
unpaved portion down to the water became a nuisance because
of dumping, and the trail was not kept up in any way. He
did not believe the Town had a responsibility to keep up
that area. They have only kept up the paved section that
connects with Jungle Trail.
Mrs. Stanbridge noted that originally there was a
bridge across the river from Winter Beach Road, and it was
open all the way to the ocean.
The section on the ocean was
negotiated away, however. Mrs. Stanbridge believed there is
always the possibility that the County may want a bridge
here in the future, and she pointed out that the County has
a 70' right-of-way on Hole in the Wall Island and Pine
Island, as shown in the following excerpt from the St. Lucie
County records of 1923:
ST* /}LUC;IET CUUATX UUVUv1100jLu"rn0
'"R CCRD. NUNL'' 2, 1923
BOOK .4, PAGE 77. ed by law nudes'" PAGE NO. 12
weprf.y to b4 di schar d �-� 1•
) t`�
1 �• Birt Bell
` l J.u.lYynr3
,
._� Ldw. Ma inmn.
BOB d .UO:suittee.
and if no protest id filen with the Board, game will be deolcred c public County road
after hr.ving given thirty days notice of same.
No protest btvirg been iiled agai: of the establishment of a public county road as ✓
follows, uL-m is hereby declared a public county rot.•d by this -board:
-Beginning at a point on the west shore of Hole -in -the -wall aslant which Point is
1992.9 feet seat gad 899.8 feet north of thesouth►west Oosner of section 'i'wo (8),jownship
ls.ty too (38) . Sotuth ii€n ge ti '$&y nine (39) East, run north 60 degrees and 83 mUnte s
Best 1990 feet to tht East shore of hole -in -the -well Island.
,,,so. beginning at a point on the west hors of Mine Islam, which point In 4460.9
feet seat id 8899.8 feet north of the gauth wgUt owner of Section Two (2) Township J
thin q two •(38) tb. hangs thirty nine (39) oast, run north 6m degrees and 28 minutes
.1ssst 690 feet to the met shore Of Bung Island.
+ Also beginning at a point on the Hest bank of tie Indian &Iver which 1a 8830.3'
feet south and 264.1 test west -of the- interaIotion of the east bank at tite_jndian haver
dth he north line of .Township +hirty two (38) south, Uvngs thirty nine (39) aetst, run
north 60 degrees art, 20 minutes east 46 feet, thenoe on a 18 d®gree and 0 minute Curve to
the Is ft 349 feet, thenoe north 18.degrees and 30 minutes Bast 690 feet tie or lase to
a point which is 1380 test south Of the aforesaid Vownship line. %honed Soot affi poral -
lel to the s: -id 10wnship_line•��et more or lose to the •t3aat.ic ocean. 'fie right of
way of eEid road to be 70 feet wide. `,`����1+�i��,,,;•f
bee d against the establishaant t�! a public ccuA*- t
Ito protest hadr�
•r.
se follows, said road is hereby declared a putliO county sou d by this Dogra."',
Beginning at the intersection Of .the ceffira line Of Mast St., borteArC ytth the
Bann .�+� .
south torpor r. to limits of the amity of Fort PieroP. being 1he south line of :�dtiWAA tTen, +
. c
s.3 ft.,
Twp• 35 So* H..40 d, theme a 0 deg* 08 min• W 698.4 ft, thenoe S 1 deg 19 ffi91,< �i e)
V A y i.1
JUL 111984 _ 76 'T cn-684
I
JUL 111984 BOOK 57 FnE685
Mrs. Stanbridge further noted that one of their
alternatives for fishing on Jungle Trail was to utilize that
3/4 acre, and she brought up the possibility of a boat ramp.
Administrator Wright did not believe a boat ramp is
feasible on 3/4 of an acre as there would only be space to
park one car, and Governmental Coordinator Thomas reported
that we did apply for a boat ramp and a dock there about
seven years ago, and the DNR turned us down.
Discussion continued at length in regard to getting the
Town to agree that Winter Beach Road will remain open to the
public between SR A -1-A and Jungle Trail, and it was noted
we could either leave the road under the Control of Indian
River Shores or request the Town to return it to the County
for maintenance and control.
Discussion continued as to whether we are talking about
the Jungle Trail connection or the bridgehead connection,
and City Manager Dorsky asked if the -County felt they did
not give the Town control of the bridgehead portion.
Attorney Brandenburg noted that the resolution only
talks about roads that were in existence when it was
adopted; it did not talk about right-of-way.
City Manager Dorsky did not feel that whether the
right-of-way was paved or not is material; he did believe it
was a road.
Administrator Wright asked if that road does not split,
and the City Manager stated that Winter Beach Road
intersects with Jungle Trail. Jungle Trail obviously has
never been turned over to the Town, but Winter Beach Road
was part of the system that was turned over to the Town at
the time that Resolution was adopted. The end of it,
however, has not been used as a thoroughfare at all, but has
been a dumping ground for years until recently cleaned up.
He felt a Resolution expressing the County's interest in
maintaining the openness of the road would be satisfactory.
The Town has no intent to close it.
7® -
Commissioner Bird asked if we could get a response from
Indian River Shores acknowledging that, and Mayor Dorsky was
sure that could be done.
Attorney Brandenburg asked for comment from former
Property Appraiser Homer Fletcher who was in the audience,
and Mr. Fletcher stated that he only knows Winter Beach Road
has been a road since the construction of the old Quay
bridge, and at that time it was the main artery across the
river. He confirmed that the County did own it and he felt
we should never have given it away.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, Commissioner Lyons
being absent, the Board unanimously (4-0)
instructed the County Attorney to draw up a
Resolution clarifying the public's right for
access to Winter Beach Road; draft of that
Resolution to be sent to the Town of Indian
River Shores and hopefully acknowledged and
accepted.
HAZARDOUS WASTE ASSESSMENT PROJECT
Planning Director Keating reviewed the following memo
in regard to establishing a hazardous waste assessment
project:
JUL 1 1 1984 - 78 BOOK 57 FnUE 686
r
JUL 111984
BOOK 57 P,, S 7
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: July 21 1984 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners
HAZARDOUS WASTE
SUBJECT: ASSESSMENT PROJECT
Robert M. Keating, AICPpflK Hazardous Waste
FROM: planning & Development REFERENCES: CHIEF
Director
It is requested that the following information be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at this
regular meeting of July 11, 1984.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
On July 1, 1983, the Florida Legislature passed the Water
Quality Assurance Act, a•law which addresses various
environmental issues in'the state. One such issue is hazardous
waste.
This act mandates a local involvement in the area of hazardous
waste management. It requires that hazardous waste assessments
be conducted for each county and that an on-going notification
program be established by each county. To ensure that the
local hazardous waste assessments are undertaken, the
Legislature has provided funding for county governments to do
the assessments. This funding will be provided through the
Regional Planning Council, the agency which is required to
coordinate local assessments with technical assistance to be
provided through the Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation (FDER). In fact, the Regional Planning Council is
responsible for completing the local assessment if a county
decides not to participate in the program.
In establishing time frames for the completion of local
hazardous waste assessments, all counties Within the state have
been divided into three groups according to regional planning
councils. Those in the first group were.required to complete
their assessments during FY 1983-1984; those in the second
group (including all counties within the Treasure Coast
Regional Planning Council) must complete their assessments
during the 1984-1985 fiscal year,. while those in the third
group must do their assessments in FY 1985-1986. For its four
county area, the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council has
been allocated $175,000, an amount which includes a fifteen
percent share for the Council, itself, to monitor the program
and undertake administrative activities.
The county hazardous waste assessment involves four components.
First, each potential hazardous waste generator must be
identified, notified, and surveyed. A representative sample of
these potential generators must then be interviewed on-site.
It is necessary to collect, maintain, summarize, and report all
data developed from this portion of the study. The second
component is to identify all abandoned dump sites in the
county. The third component is to assess the operating
procedures at the sanitary landfill concerning hazardous waste
management. The final component of the assessment is
identifying the need for off-site management services in the
county and the selection of at -least two potential sites for
hazardous waste storage facilities.
7
Besides the one year local hazardous waste assessment, counties
have other responsibilities delineated by the Act. On an
annual basis, counties must notify each potential hazardous
waste generator of his responsibilities. Counties must
identify and survey any new potential generator. Finally,
counties must conduct oar -site visits of at least twenty percent
of the potential generators each year until all have been
visited.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
The County staff has coordinated extensively with the Regional
Planning Council staff and the staff of other counties in the
region. In two meetings between local staff and RPC staff,
various alternatives for completing the local assessments have
been identified and analyzed. Strategies employed by other
regional councils which have done or are currently doing local
assessments were considered. These strategies ranged from
contracting with a consultant for the preparation of all
aspects of each local assessment in a region to preparation of
local assessments by in-house RPC staff. Some councils have
used a combination.of consultant services and in-house staff.
After assessing each.of the alternatives, the Council staff and
local staff representatives came to tentative agreement as to
how to proceed with the local assessments in this region. This
strategy would involve the RPC contracting with a consultant to
perform several tasks which would be part of the first .
component of the local assessment. Each county then would be
responsible for completing all other aspects of its local,
assessment.
Specifically, the RPC would contract with a consultant to
identify all potential generators in each county, notify and
survey (including follow-up) each potential generator, compile
and tabulate the results by county, and provide each county
with a hard copy and an electronic copy of the results for its
area. The Regional Planning Council would be responsible for
developing the survey questionnaire, supervising the
consultant, and coordinating local efforts. Each county then
would be responsible for doing on-site interviews of a
representative sample of its potential generators, identifying -
abandoned dump sites, assessing landfill operating procedures,
and identifying potential sites for hazardous waste
storage/transfer facilities.
Using this alternative the approximate funding levels would be
as follows. The Regional Planning Council would receive
$25,000, approximately 15% of the $175,000 total. A consultant
would receive approximately $40,000, based upon figures derived
from consultant costs for other RPC's and reflecting the amount
of work the consultant would be required to do in this study.
The remaining $110,000 would be divided among the four counties
based upon a formula whereby each county would be allocated a
base amount of $10,000 with the remaining $70,000 divided among
the counties based on each county's pro rata share of the total
estimated potential hazardous waste generators in the region.
With this method, Indian River County would receive
approximately $15,200 to complete its local assessment. This
figure is comparable to the amounts allocated to Martin and St.
Lucie counties but significantly less than the $63,500
allocated to Palm Beach.
J U L 111984 80 BOOK 5 7 FAGEM
r
JUL 111984
Booz 57 pnE 689
With the funds allocated to Indian River County, the County can
probably complete a substantial portion of the assessment.
Some local funds, however, would probably be required to
supplement the state money. In subsequent years, no state
funding will be available to the County for its mandated
activities. As proposed, the allocation of the state funding
available to the Regional Planning Council seems reasonable.
In addition, the use of a consultant for notification,
surveying, and data tabulation will ensure coordination among
the counties.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners
approve ,in concept, the alternative outlined above and direct
the staff to coordinate with the Regional Planning Council in
drafting a specific contract. The staff also recommends that
the Board assign the County Utilities Division the
responsibility to prepare the County's local hazardous waste
assessment.
Director Keating discussed the formula for splitting
the funds, which is that each county would be allocated a
base of $10,000, and the remainder would be distributed
based upon their proportion of the total number of hazardous
waste generators. He continued that since he wrote the
agenda item, he has received another -letter from the
Regional Planning Council and the amount of money that we
would get has increased from the initial estimate.
According to the DER's estimate, there are 694 potential
waste generators in this county. Mr. Keating noted that
when you look at this list, it is difficult to think of a
business in this county that isn't a potential generator.
Chairman Scurlock reported that this project was
discussed at the Regional Planning Council, and one of the
reasons for this concept is that Palm Beach County indicated
they would handle their own show. When you take their
percentage out, it would have made it impossible to have
enough funds remaining for the RPC to contract with the
remaining counties. Also it is felt a county knows itself
much better and could more easily document and identify the
potential waste generators.
Commissioner Bird asked if he means that staff is going
to have to interview over 600 businesses in the county.
M
Director Keating explained that this will be done over
five years. What is required the first year is that each of
the potential generators have to be notified and surveyed by
mail and only a representative sample of them visited for
on-site inspections. In subsequent years, although the
County will not get any funding, it will be responsible for
certain things, i.e., notifying them each year that they are
possible generators and what their obligations are and also
on-site visits to 200. The first year it is proposed that
the notification will be done by the consultant, who will
develop the survey questionnaire and also will set up and
structure a computer program. Since we have 694 generators,
we would be getting $17,000 to do the other three components
and the part of the first component that the consultant
wouldn't be doing, and staff, therefore, recommends that the
county approve in concept the alternative that the County
handle the three components and have a consultant for the
first component as outlined and direct the staff to
coordinate with the RPC and come up with a specific contract
between the County and the RPC describing the various
responsibilities and the money involved. Staff also is
recommending that this project be assigned to the Utilities
Division.
Administrator Wright commented that when this first
came to his attention, he viewed it with something less than
enthusiasm, but obviously we are going to have to do it. As
to assigning this to Utilities, he explained we have a
segment in there that is a franchise and regulation group.
We will be pulling them out this year and setting them up on
their own as a General Fund item because that is their
responsibility, not utilities, which is just where they
happen to work at the moment.
Commissioner Wodtke inquired about having this handled
by Civil Defense, and the Administrator explained that this
JUL 111984 82 BOOK 57 Fa„E 690
rU 1
JUL 11 984
BOOK 5 6 P, vL 69, 1
is not in reaction to an emergency; this is controlling the
situation befpre it becomes an emergency.
Commissioner Bird expressed concern about on-going
expenses and no funding, and Commissioner Wodtke inquired
about municipal government's responsibilities and whether
the County will be adopting franchise requirements that will
be effective within cities.
Administrator Wright informed the Board that the
responsibility rests on the County, and Director Keating
reported that right now there are no requirements as to the
counties getting into mandating anything re hazardous waste
disposal. The DER would have the responsibility of any
enforcement, and we are just coming up with an assessment to
identify the generators.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that hazardous waste can
really be a problem, and he did feel the Fire Chief should
be involved in some way.
Chairman Scurlock referred back to the problem of the
continued funding of this mandated program and asked if
there is any thought of possibly setting up some sort of
enterprise situation whereby those activities that are
identified as hazardous waste generators could be licensed.
He did not want the County to have to shoulder the whole
burden and not have a fair way to assess the cost of the
entire project.
Commissioner Bowman felt this would be a good sugges-
tion to make to the Regional Planning Council and have it
carried to the state.
Chairman Scurlock continued to discuss a future funding
formula and the possible use of occupational licenses, em-
phasizing that he would anticipate that a significant amount
of this work would take place within the municipalities.
Director Keating reported that the state has developed
an industrial classification code, and any business that
falls within one of their code numbers is a potential
generator and will have to be notified on an annual basis.
Commissioner Bird asked about the necessity of paying a
consultant rather than handling this entirely in-house.
Director Keating explained that one of the objectives
of doing this with that consultant is that the RPC wants to
make sure that everything that is done is consistent.
Staff's first feeling was that we should do everything
in-house as we would have to deal with this in subsequent
years, but at a later meeting it was felt it would be
cheaper to have the consultant set it up the first year,
develop the computer programs, and coordinate the four
counties.
Chairman Scurlock felt all these notices well may be
ignored, and Director Keating stated that if they are
ignored after three mailings, there could be a fine.
Further discussion followed, and it was agreed we must
be realistic and face that we must carry out this program,
and staff's approach seems to be the only feasible one.
Chairman Scurlock commented that the "disposal sites"
referred to actually are transfer sites from which the
material can be sent to a regional storage facility.
Commissioner Bowman brought up the problem of disposing
of old insecticide barrels, and Director Keating commented
that agricultural activities are not included in the list of
potential generators.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, Commissioner Lyons
being absent and Commissioner Wodtke voting
in opposition, the Board by a 3 to 1 vote
accepted staff's recommendation for estab-
lishing a Hazardous Waste Assessment Project
as outlined in memo dated July 2, 1984.
JUL 111984 - 84 BOOK 7 PACE 6,92
•�do �ty
J U L 111984 BOOK 5 7 P, CE9
6
REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING RE MSTU FOR VERO LAKES ESTATES
Public Works Director Davis reviewed his memo as
follows:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: July 3, 1984 FILE: If
the Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Michael Wright,
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Vero Lakes Estates Municipal
Service Taxing Unit - Road and
Drainage Improvements
FROM: James W. Davis, P.REFERENCES:') Carl Johnson, Vero Lake Estates
Public Works DirectoProperty Owners Assoc. to Board of
County CamAssioners, dated 4-10-84
1-20-84
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
During the December 7, 1983, meeting of the Board, action was
tabled on the establishment of a Municipal Service Taxing
Unit(MSTU) for drainage study and improvements for the Vero Lake
Estates area. Staff was directed to meet with Mr. Ansin and
the Vero Lake Estates representatives to discuss and clarify
their respective positions.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
In meeting with Mr. Ansin, his position is as follows:
1. Efforts should be undertaken to increase the outfall into
the Sebastian River.
As Mr. Ansin indicated, this effort must be coordinated with
both State and Federal agencies to insure that water quality
and quantity does not adversely effect the Sebastian River
Flood _Plain. The CR 510 outfall serves a large portion of
north Indian River County. Staff recommends that efforts
be initiated to have the U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers and
St. Johns River Water Management District study this area
under either the Corps. of Engineers "Small Project Program'.'
(under $4 million cost) or under a St. Johns River Water
Management District Study program. Along with the establishment
of a proper Legal Positive Outfall, Mr. Ansin indicates that
the existing lakes in the area may be used for retention/detention.
The three east/west canals in the subdivision may be upgraded,
however, these canals drain the Vero Lake Estates Drainage
District, and areas of responsibility must be established.
Land in the District is being sold at this time for development.
At this time, Mr. Ansin owns the lakes and canals in the
subdivision. There is a cooperative spirit towards setting
these facilities in proper easements or water management
tracts. Staff still recommends a drainage study for the
area, funded by the MSTU method. The Consultant chosen to
perform the study would make application to the Corps of
Engineers and SJRWMD. The Consultant could also develop
a lot grading plan for the subdivision to be used on an interim
basis. Assessments should be a maximum of $10 per acre or
part thereof.
-I
2. Pave 87th Street and 101st Avenue - the two main collector
roads in the area - This paving would reduce erosion and
silting of the main canals. Road paving and drinage
improvements compliment one another. The cost for this
paving could be funded by MSTU funds and traffic impact fees
via a Capital Improvement Program. Once again, the Consultant
should develop the program.
In summary, Mr. Ansin supports the establishment of an MSTU if
a specific Capital Improvement Program can be established to
include paving 87th Street and 101st Avenue.
The Property Owners Association has submitted a letter requesting
their Road and Drainage Committee be designated as the Advisory
Committee to the MSTU. Indications are that the Property Owners
would not object to an assessment of $10. per acre or part
thereof, or less.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends the establishment of the MSTU for the Vero Lakes
Estates area and requests authorization to schedule another Public
Hearing on this matter.
Director Davis informed the Board that the paving of
87th Street and 101st Avenue, which are the main two roads
through the subdivision, entails about five miles of road,
and staff feels this could be done for about $206,000. In
regard to the drainage, Mr. Ansin feels the outfall leading
to the Sebastian River outfall should be increased. Direc-
tor Davis continued that about 3 or 4 years ago, we entered
into an agreement with Mr. Ansin and Corrigan Ranch to clean
out that outfall; this cost about $12,000 and it was done on
a sharing basis with the owners contributing. Mr. Davis
believed that the efforts to increase that outfall will have
to be on a regional level as it will involve a very large
area of land.
Director Davis reported that the Vero Beach Lake
Estates Property Owners are going on record that they do not
oppose the MSTU, but they do want representation and are
recommending those set out in the following letter:
86 57 FAr,E694
J U L 111984 - J
r JUL 111994
Box 7 FACE 6,95
Owner's
e Estates, Inc.
April 10, 1984
Board of County Commissioners
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Attention: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
Re: Advisory Committee
Vero Lake Estates Subdivision :
Dear Mr. Davis:
We would strongly recommend that the following members of the Property
Owner's of Vero Lake Estates, Inc. who have already been appointed to our
Road and Drainage Committee be accepted as members of the above referenced
committee.
B. Vutano - Co -Chairman G. Kerr
C. Johnson - Co -Chairman R. Caron
J. Peeler C. Seifert
G. Giglio
Please advise us if our proposal is accepted. Thank you.
Yours very truly,
Property Owner's of Vero Lake Estates, Inc..
C rf nsP,Co-Chairman
Road nd Drainage Committee
cc: D. Scurlock P. Lyons
R. Bird M. Bowman
R. Wodtke
Members of Property Owner's of Vero Lake Estates, Inc.
Road and Drainage Committee
Carl Johnson
589-3890
7995 92nd Avenue
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Director Davis stated that staff would like to schedule
a public hearing to address this matter and would like to do
a drainage study of the Vero Lakes area and the surrounding
properties that would like to be included. There is an RV
(Recreation Vehicle) park on the east side of I-95 that
contributes drainage; they share a common outfall and their
drainage depends upon the system. Staff would like to go
ahead with an internal study of the Subdivision under the
Corps of Engineers "Small Project Program," which may take a
number of years to get established and approved, and at the
same time apply to the St. John's Water Management District
to address the outfall problems.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bowman,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke to authorize
staff to set up a public hearing on an MSTU
for Vero Lake Estates, as discussed, preferably
in the evening.
Discussion ensued re the boundaries of the proposed
MSTU, and Director Davis informed the Board that Vero Lake
Estates Subdivision is about 2,400 acres and he believed
that plus the RV park site, which is contiguous, would
pretty much be the limits of the MSTU. The outfall,
however, affects a larger number of property owners and the
applications to the Corps and the Water Management District
should be on the basis of the MSTU plus the additional
property owners affected. Mr. Davis believed the County
could request the study and make application for it, and he
did not believe the property owners would object.
Some discussion ensued regarding whether the MSTU could
be in place by October, and Attorney Brandenburg noted that
the law as to when an MSTU must be in place in order to levy
88
JUL 1 1 1994 BOOK 57 w ffl
JUL 111984 Boox-uG97
is being changed; it is now July 1st instead of January 1st,
but he did not believe the MSTU could be in place in this
year.
Director Davis emphasized that it is not our intent to
rush this thing; it probably will take a year.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0).
16TH STREET CHANGE ORDER
Administrator Wright explained that the contractor was
working on the road just east of the intersection of Old
Dixie and 16th Street by Florida Cablevision, and it was
discovered there are three people who are currently hooked
up to a private force main which was left off the drawings,
and which runs to the west on the south side of 16th Street
and intersects a city manhole west of Old Dixie. This main
is only 2" or 3" under the final grade of the road so it
obviously has to come out. There is about 600' or 800' of
pipe involved, and Dickerson has a Change Order showing a
cost of $12,850. There are two or three others across the
street who are supposed to connect to it. The Administrator
believed that Director Davis has contacted two of the owners
currently on this line, and they each have agreed to pay 1/5
of the relocation cost.
Mr. Davis confirmed that he contacted the third owner,
Earman Oil Co., and they are going to call back. Action
Printers and Scott Plaza each have indicated they would be
willing to pay 1/5 of the cost to relocate the line as they
are having Health Department problems. Four out of the five
who will be on the line have given verbal consent to sharing
an assessment to relocate the line. When it is relocated,
it will be enlarged to 4" as the City will not accept it
until it is brought up to City standards.
Administrator Wright stated that staff would like to
have the ability to go ahead and execute the Change Order
and tell Dickerson to move the line, and then if the owners
don't pay the cost of approximately $4,000 each on a
voluntary basis, go ahead and assess them. He noted that
the roadwork is stalled until this can be resolved.
Commissioner Wodtke felt we should check into getting
another company to do this work, and it was explained we
would have to go through the whole bidding process in that
event, but since Dickerson is already under contract with
us, they can handle it without going into all that.
Commissioner Wodke emphasized that he wanted to do it
the cheapest way and felt we should get other proposals, but
the Administrator stressed the problems the delay would
cause as well as the coordination problems which would arise
from having a different contractor. Director Davis agreed.
Fred Mensing of Roseland suggested that, if the Board
is concerned with the cost, possibly they could work on a
change order basis for cost plus 50 or 100.
Director Davis believed if we did that, we would have
to monitor the contractor daily for his labor, his overhead,
etc., but Commissioner Bird felt it would just require that
the contractor submit his verified bills.
Administrator Wright suggested that the Board just
authorize a change order for the lowest possible amount and
let the Public Works Director see if he can negotiate some-
thing, possibly cost plus.
MOTION WAS made by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, to authorize
a change order to move the subject pipe line for the
lowest possible amount, as recommended by the
Administrator; the Public Works Director to
try to negotiate, possibly on a cost plus basis.
JUL 111984 90 'D 1K 57 F'„F 698
u �,
JUL 111984 BOOK 5 6 rr,t 6.19
n`nr.
Public Works Director informed the Board that the
proposed change order also includes the fourth lane west of
10th Avenue to Old Dixie that the Board previously indicated
they should move ahead on and get the cost worked up. He
reported that it came to $23,000 +. It originally was
estimated at $20,000 which did not include the crossing work
with the FEC. Mr. Davis continued that he has already
instructed the contractor to start work on the fourth lane,
and this is a part of the proposed No. 2 Change Order.
Commissioner Wodtke agreed to include authorization for
the work on the fourth lane in his Motion, and Commissioner
Bowman concurred.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION on the
Motion with the above addition. It was voted
on and carried unanimously (4-0).
Commissioner Bird stated that as far as he personally
is concerned, he is not going to be sympathetic to any
extensions of contract and waivers of penalty for late
completion on 16th Street.
Public Works Director Davis reported that along with
this change order, a 45 day extension was requested and
staff negotiated it down to 30 days.
Discussion continued re the completion date, and it was
noted with the present 30 day extension, completion would be
around November.
Chairman Scurlock believed the contractor will be
working hard to get to completion because if they don't
hurry, they will not be making any money on the project.
DISCUSSION RE CAR ALLOWANCES
The Board reviewed the following memo from the Clerk:
I&
June 28, 1984
FREDA WRIGHT
CLERK, CIRCUIT COURT AND RECORDER
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
P. O. BOX 1028
VERO BEACH • FLORIDA
32960. ?
l+. J
4
s� iagCTI
TO: Michael Wright, County Administrator
FROM: Freda Wright, Clerk of the Circuit Court
SUBJECT: Car Allowances
Please be advised that effective July 1, 1984 before any
checks will be written for car allowances a typical months'
travel statement will have to be filed with the Finance Department
for all individuals who will be receiving a car allowance.
The Administrator requested that Finance Director Ed
Fry explain the Clerk's position, but Attorney Brandenburg
offered to summarize the situation. He noted that, as the
Board is aware, the County has over a period of time used
the availability of car allowances as an incentive to hire
people in various positions, and this is specifically laid
out in some of the employment contracts. In the past there
has been a debate with the Clerk's Office as to how this car
allowance should be handled. They, therefore, wrote and
asked the Attorney General for his interpretation of the
Statutes, and he came back with an opinion that we probably
ought to change our practices with respect to car
allowances. Because of this, Clerk Freda Wright has
indicated she will not authorize any more checks. The
Attorney continued that what this comes down to is a
question of whether the car allowance itself should be
treated as other compensation and all the deductible items
taken out
or whether the employees
should follow the
exact
JUL
111984
92
BOOK
57 FmuE700
JUL 111984
Boor
57 UGE 701
letter of
the Florida Statute which requires the
filing of
an affidavit once a year showing a typical month's travel.
The position in the past has been not to relate the amount
of miles to the car allowance, and because there has been no
relationship, Attorney Brandenburg informed the Board that
it is the recommendation of the Administrator's office and
his office that we do away with difficulty by just consider-
ing it other compensation, which he believed would resolve
all problems. The net to the employees would be slightly
less, of course, because of the deductions.
Commissioner Wodtke asked what the problem is with just
filing a typical travel voucher.
Administrator Wright stated that it is inconsistent;
you can take your worst month or best, and it would vary a
great deal. Attorney Brandenburg agreed, noting that there
would be some employees who would file stating their average
is 100 miles and that is only $20.00.-
Commissioner
20.00:
Commissioner Wodtke did not see the difference as we
are going to pay the $200 regardless; they will not be paid
for actual mileage. He could not justify the County having
to pay FICA, retirement, etc., on this allowance.
Finance Director Fry explained that what the Attorney
General stated was that a typical month's travel statement
was at the rate of 20� per mile, but the Commission can set
an amount they feel is reasonable and it doesn't have to
correspond to that 20� a mile. If the employees just files
a travel statement annually, that would be sufficient.
Commissioner Bird felt you have to be consistent, and
if you pay the same to one who drives 100 miles or 1,000
miles, that would not be consistent.
Discussion continued re treating car allowances as
additional compensation. Chairman Scurlock asked why not
just raise the salary and reduce the car allowance, but the
Administrator believed that then you get to where in a few
years, the car allowance is forgotten, and you begin to hear
"I need a car to drive." He noted that the City has said
what is reasonable is $180.00 a month and 120 a mile, and
before he came to this county, he received $300 a month car
allowance. He further pointed out that for Public Works
Director Davis $200 a month doesn't even begin to cover what
he uses on the job.
Commissioner Bird stated that he also hated to see the
Board have to pay the matching benefits, etc., but that may
be the cleanest way to do it.
Motion was made by Commissioner Bird that the Board
accept staff's recommendation that the car allowance
payments be treated as additional compensation and proper
deductions be made. The Motion died for lack of a second.
Commissioner Wodtke asked when such a typical travel
statement could be filed, and Finance Director Fry stated
that one can be filed any month.
Chairman Scurlock felt that the word "typical" has a
specific meaning, and Attorney Brandenburg believed it puts
the employee in an awkward position, where he might feel he
has to justify the allowance by making unnecessary trips,
and he, therefore, would prefer to have the deductions out
of his salary.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that as a Commissioner, he
has to justify his travels, and he also questioned the car
allowance being used as an incentive to hire someone.
Attorney Brandenburg stated that there was no question
but that it was an incentive in his case. He had a full
time car wheh he worked for Palm Beach County, and when he
was hired in Indian River County, one of his questions was
whether he would be provided with a vehicle or a car
allowance.
Commissioner Wodtke again emphasized that it was not
his intent to change the $200 a month allowance, but he did
JUL 111984 94
BOOK 57 Fmu,E 702
JUL 1, 11984
BOOK 5 7 3
feel the employees could file a typical month's statement
rather than the county having to pay all the FICA,
retirement, etc. He continued that if the County Attorney
wished to challenge the Attorney General's position, he
would give him his support.
Chairman Scurlock noted that if we continue our present
practice all that will happen will be that we will have an
audit comment.
Administrator Wright did not feel that staff is con-
cerned with audit comments, but he did know that Mr. Fry is.
Discussion continued re filing typical month's
statements, and Commissioner Bird felt the only problem
would be that the Auditor will say the statements are
inconsistent.
Finance Director Fry stated that he has discussed this
with the auditors, and if an employee files a typical
month's statement that shows 100 miles a month and the Board
pays him $200, the auditors aren't going to argue whether
that is reasonable or not.
Commissioner Wodtke pointed out that basically these
employees are providing their car to be there ready and
available to be used; there is a price tag about just the
mileage consideration.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, to require
those County employees on car allowances
to file a typical travel voucher once a year
at a minimum $200.00.
Administrator Wright, speaking on behalf of the
employees, pointed out to the Commission that they would be
holding up the current car allowance checks for at least
another 45 days since the Clerk has said she will not
authorize any compensation until we go to one plan or
another.
Finance Director Fry confirmed that the Statute says
the checks will not be paid until the report is filed.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried 3 to 1 with
Commissioner Bird voting in opposition and
Commissioner Lyons being absent.
Commissioner Wodtke requested that, based on the Motion
just passed, the Clerk be receptive to paying the $200
allowance at this time, and Administrator Wright requested
that the Board go on record that they consider $200 a
reasonable sum for readiness to serve and to have a car
available and that the employees will file a report as soon
as possible and an annual one thereafter.
The Board members confirmed that was their position.
DISCUSSION RE PROHIBITING TRAIN WHISTLES AT CERTAIN HOURS
Chairman Scurlock announced that we have received
petitions both in favor of banning the train whistles at
guarded crossings between the hours of 10 P.M. and 6 A.M.
and in opposition to imposing such a ban. Said petitions
are on file in the Office of the Clerk.
Commissioner Bird believed the City was in the process
of drawing up a Resolution in this regard, but Attorney
Brandenburg informed the Board that the City thought it
would be better for us to draw up an ordinance and have it
countywide.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if we can't invite the cities
to a meeting to discuss this, and Commissioner Bird
suggested that we prepare an ordinance and submit it to the
JUL 111984 96
BOOK 57 PA;E l 04
JUL 111984
BOOK 57
F,�r, d 05
municipalities involved along the railroad corridors and
inform them that there will be a public hearing.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman to authorize
the Attorney to draw up an ordinance as
discussed to submit to the municipalities
for their indications and concurrence before
a public hearing.
Public Works Director Davis reported that the
engineering staff contacted the DOT to clarify the word-
ing in the Statute, and the wording is such that it must be
a blanket regulation covering all crossings in the county.
Commissioner Bowman asked if we have any crossings that
are not signalized, and Mr. Davis felt there may be one. He
reported that there would be signage -requirements if the ban
were imposed.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0).
RESIGNATIONS FROM THE BEACH PRESERVATION & RESTORATION
COMMITTEE
Commissioner Wodtke informed the Board that he has
received letters of resignation from the above committee
from both Frederick Rouse due to the pressure of business
and from Kenneth W. Damerow due to the disclosure
requirement, and he hopes to have recommendations for
appointment of three individuals at the next meeting.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
(4-0) accepted the resignations of Frederick
Rouse and Kenneth W. Damerow from the Beach
Preservation & Restoration Committee with
regret and instructed that the Chairman send
letters of appreciation for their services.
RESIGNATION FROM THE JAIL COMMITTEE
It was noted that Commissioner Lyons has received a
letter of resignation from the Jail Committee from Merrill
Barber for reasons of health.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
(4-0) accepted the resignation of Merrill Barber
from the Jail Committee with regret and in-
structed that the Chairman send a letter of
appreciation for his services.
DOCUMENTS TO BE MADE A PART OF THE RECORD
A. Temporary Wastewater Capacity Transfer Agreement
The above agreement between the City of Vero Beach and
the County having been fully executed and received is hereby
made a part of the record as approved at the Regular Meeting
of June 13, 1984.
JUL 111984 98 BOOK 57 uGF706
� JUL 11 194 � -
BOOK 57 F�q(J 0►°y
07
6/13/84 (23) C.A.
TEMPORARY WASTEWATER CAPACITY TRANSFER AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made this %jtb day of 3U 19849 by and between
THE CITY OF VERO BEACH, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of
the State of Florida, addres.s: P.O. Box 1389, Vero Beach, Florida 32961-1389,
telephone: 567-5151, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, a politicial subdivision of the State of Florida, address: 1840 N.W. 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, telephone: 567-8000, hereinafter referred to as
"COUNTY",
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Paragraph 26 of the "South County Mainland Wastewater Service
Agreement" (SCMWSA) reserves a 600,000 gpd wastewater treatment plant capacity
allocation to the South County Mainland Wastewater Service Territory (SCMWST),
and
WHEREAS, the COUNTY has formally requested of the CITY that the
aforementioned 600,000 gpd capacity be temporarily reduced to 500,000 gpd, +and
that the difference, i.e., 100,000 gpd, be allowed by the CITY to be used by the
COUNTY at the COUNTY'S hospital node near Indian River Memorial Hospital, and
WHEREAS, the CITY at a public meeting of April 17, 1984, authorized such a
transfer provided that the CITY would be protected from over -allocating the
CITY'S wastewater treatment plant, and provided that the system could technically
effect such a transfer,
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY AND THE COUNTY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1 - WASTEWATER ALLOCATION TRANSFER
The CITY authorizes a transfer of 100,000 gpd wastewater treatment plant
capacity allocation from that area served by the South County Mainland Wastewater
Service Agreement dated October 22, 1980, to the COUNTY'S hospital node located
adjacent to Indian River Memorial Hospital.
SECTION 2 - TERM.
The authorization for this transfer shall be effective only on a temporary
basis, it being the intention of the COUNTY to provide alternate wastewater
treatment facilities for the hospital node so that in due course the capacity will be
returned to the SCMWSA. The CITY reserves the rights listed in Section 6 of this
Agreement to keep wastewater use within the gallonage limits of the SCMWSA as
affected by this Transfer Agreement. If the CITY is ordered by a court of
competent jurisdiction to allow connections which would cause the wastewater flow
to exceed 500,000 gpd to the SCMWST then the temporary transfer of the 100,000
gpd shall expire within 24 months after such court order and it will be the
responsibility of COUNTY or its customers to provide 'alternate remedies or
treatment for its customers.
SECTION 3 - COST AND COMPLIANCE WITH CITY SPECIFICATIONS.
It shall be the duty of the COUNTY or approved COUNTY customers to
construct all lines, pumps, and other necessary equipment to the specifications
and locations designated by the CITY, which shall be coordinated with the
COUNTY, all at the cost of other than the CITY. The points of interconnection
with the CITY'S existing wastewater system shall be approved by the CITY.
SECTION 4 - TITLE TO IMPROVEMENTS.
The CITY shall have title to all lines, pumps, and other necessary equipment
installed for the purpose of providing temporary service under this Agreement,
and shall operate and maintain the equipment to which it has title, at the City's
expense. At the time COUNTY provides service to the area, CITY shall transfer by
appropriate instrument all the said improvements at no charge to the COUNTY or to
the CUSTOMER. All disconnection and restoration costs to effect this transfer from
the City system shall be at the expense of other than the City.
SECTION 5 - SERVICE AVAILABILITY FEES.
The CITY reserves the right, and the COUNTY acknowledges the CITY'S
right, to adopt fees for the privilege of connecting to the CITY'S wastewater
trelitment plant for the subject 100,000 gpd, which fees shall be designed to
reimburse the CITY for all or part of the following costs: physical connection
charges of the interconnection, "readiness to serve" fees appropriate to
maintaining the unused -but -available plant capacity in such a state as to be ready
to serve the COUNTY'S allocation when the COUNTY customers desire to connect,
commodity charges for measured use, and any other charges authorized under
Florida Law.
SECTION 6 - MORATORIUM ON CONNECTION.
The COUNTY acknowledges that the CITY reserves the right to declare a
moratorium pursuant to Florida law on further connections to be counted towards
the COUNTY'S remaining 500,000 gpd in the SCMWST, once the wastewater use (as
determined by sound engineering practices) approaches 500,000 gpd, unless and
until the subject 100,000 gpd is retransfered to the SCMWST by the COUNTY or
unless other adequate measures satisfactory to the CITY are taken.
JUL 111984 100 BOOK 57 PAGE708
D
SECTION 7 - REAFFIRMATION OF SCMWSA.
BOOK 7 PD,r 109
All terms and conditions of the SCMWSA not changed by this Agreement shall
remain in effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned CITY and COUNTY have executed
this Agreement on the date first above written by their respective duly authorized
officers.
Signed, Sealed, and
delivered in the presence of:
Clerk of the Board,!of County
Commissioners Ij
Approved by:
(9C2 c
City Manager
Approved by:
City Attorney
CITY OF VERO BEA,6H,' a mu,nicipaT,,
corporation < < <
r
Mayor
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political
subdivision
Chairman of t e Board of CaWnty
Commissioners
Approved by:
_ 101 -
B. Modification of License Agreement - 16th Street Grade
Crossing
The above agreement between the Florida East Coast
Railway and the County having been fully executed and
received is hereby made a part of the record as approved at
the Regular Meeting of June 13, 1984.
Exhibits "A", "B", and "C" are on file in the Office of
the Clerk.
JUL 111984 102 aocK ,7 pnE 710
JUL 11 1994
Boy 57 FnUE 911
MODIFICATION OF LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR
16TH STREET GRADE CROSSING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
THIS AGREEMENT, to be effective from the 3rd day
Of July , 1984, is between the Florida East Coast Railway
Company, (address: Post Office Drawer 1048, St. Augustine,
Florida, 32085-1048), a Florida Corporation hereinafter called
"RAILWAY" and INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, apolitical subdivision of the
State of Florida, acting by and through its Board of County
Commissioners, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960,
hereinafter called "SECOND PARTY;"
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, on November 22, 1983, the parties entered into
a License Agreement governing the SECOND PARTY'S privilege and
right to establish, use, and maintain a public at -grade, road,
pedestrian, and bike path crossing, as more fully described in
said Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the.parties desire to modify the Agreement to
take into account certain design changes in the SECOND PARTY'S
16th Street Improvement Program.
NOW THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the parties
hereto agree that the November 22, 1983 License Agreement is
hereby amended and modified as follows:
1. The "Crossing Site," as described and defined on
Page 1 of said Agreement is hereby modified to read as follows:
See Exhibit "A"
2. The first sentence in paragraph 6 of said Agreement
is revised to read as follows, (and the remainder of paragraph 6
shall remain as originally approved:) "The RAILWAY shall widen,
maintain, and replace a 74 foot wide Modified Type "T" concrete
crossing structure for the public road crossing.
3. The estimate of cost stated in paragraph 18 of said
Agreement is revised to read "$128,587.00," and the two page
Estimate of Cost for Crossing Work and Signal Department Work,
dated 4/10/84 and attached hereto as Exhibit "B", is substituted
for the original two page Estimate, having a date of 6/2/83.
4. The engineering sketch entitled "Proposed Widening
of 16th Street for Indian River County, Vero Beach, Florida",
dated 3/27/84 and attached hereto as Exhibit "C", is substituted
for the original Engineering Sketch having the same title and a
date of 4/13/83.
5. All other provisions, exhibits and details of the
original November 22, 1983 Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect as originally prepared and approved by the parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the RAILWAY and the Second Party
have each caused this instrument to be executed in their Corporate
Names and respective seals to be hereunto affixed in duplicate the
first day hereinafter written by their undersigned officials
.nto lawfu11 authorized.
e� 0 -
Wt t -ni -e'- ; s t
as to RAILWAY
Witnesses as to SECOND PARTY
1111r,0111 WE, la I q
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LE
0
Low Dowcm4at
FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY
COMPANY-,-�-Flbrida Zomoration
(SEAL)
' —Pf a 3lden—".".J '
ATTEST: �� ".
Assistantretary
Date: 2L,5/
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political
subdivision of the State of
Florida, acting by and through its
Board of County Commissioners
By_ / G SEAL)
DON C. SCU LOCK, J
Chairman
ATTEST: .-
Freda rig t
Clerk "'
J'y.
Date: June 13, 1934
JUL 111984 104 BOOK 7
II
JUL 111984
BOOK
J d Fri CE 713
The several bills and accounts against the County
having been audited were examined and found to be correct
were approved and warrants issued in settlement of same as
follows: Treasury Fund Nos. 11135-11421 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 3:15 o'clock
P.M.
Attest:
O
Clerk
Chairman
`I