HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/1/1984Wednesday, August 1, 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, August 1, 1984, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present
were Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Patrick B. Lyons, Vice
Chairman; Richard N. Bird; Margaret C. Bowman; and William
C. Wodtke, Jr. Also present were Michael J. Wright, County
Administrator; Gary Brandenburg, Attorney to the Board of
County Commissioners; Jeffrey K. Barton, OMB Director; and
Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order, and Commis-
sioner Wodtke led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Commissioner Bird requested that retroactive approval
of out -of -county travel be added for his travel to
Tallahassee re beach acquisition.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously added
the above item requested by Commissioner Bird
to the Consent Agenda.
Commissioner Bowman requested that discussion re a
letter from St. John's River Water Management District be
added to today's agenda under her items.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously added
the above item to today's agenda as requested
by Commissioner Bowman.
AUG 1 1984 RooK 5 7 FADE 805
r
AUG 1 1984 sooK 57 PA,E806
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July
11, 1984. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting
of July 11, 1984, as written.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. County Jail Inspection Report - Routine
The Routine Inspection Report on the Indian River
County Jail, dated March 16, 1984, has been received and is
on file in the Office of the Clerk.
B. County Jail Inspection Report - Follow-up
The Follow-up Inspection Report on the Indian River
County Jail, dated May 8, 1984, has been received and is on
file in the Office of the Clerk.
C. Budget Amendment - Sheriff for Jail Equipment
The Board reviewed the following letter from the Jail
Administrator and proposed Budget Amendment:
6
l_ I
�I�eriff
P. O. BOX 608
PHONE 562-7911
July 24, 1984
Commissioner D. Scurlock
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
R.T."Tl ' DOBECK • INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
MEMBER FLORIDA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
MEMBER OF NATIONAL SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
111W BEICIL FWIUDA 32961-0608 �n
Re: Request for Budget Transfer
Dear Commissioner Scurlock:
The following is a list of equipment that will be needed at the
Indian River County Jail. (To be interchangeable with existing
equipment, it is requested that the Curtis Mathis brand be pur-
chased.)
1) One video recorder Model # H 749
2) One audio -video camera (Auto -focus) Model # JC764_
3) One power supply
TOTAL PRICE - $ 1,275.00
This equipment will be used to complete the procedures in booking _
and processing DWI cases. Additionally, the equipment will be -used -
to make in-service training films for jail personnel.
The second request is for a fingerprint and palm print inker which
will be used by the jail staff in order to produce better quality
fingerprints. Palm prints are currently being taken on all prisoners
charged with felonies. This breakdown is as follows:
1) Print -Master Model FP -R
2) Replacement pillow
TOTAL PRICE - $ 450.00
In order to purchase the aforementioned equipment, I am respectfully
requesting a budget amendment of $ 500 to be transferred from account
52.45 Food for Jail to the equipment account of 64.42 -Jail Equipment.
Respectfully yours
William 0. Baird, Captain
Jail Administrator
3
Box. 57
i
v+
w
CD
u
r—
L�
ut
0
0
CIO
Bnwnn Supply Cr. , Ltd . Plan! City, Fla
1
1
I.
BUDGET ACCOUNT AMENDMENT
Indian River
DATE REQUESTED
COUNTY
t Sheriff's Department
No.:
2
FY: 1983-84
Jul 23, 1984
y
Form 82-7.4
TO: Indian River COUNTY
I hereby request approval for the amendment of the Sheriff's Department budget as set forth below:
Board of County Commissioners
R.T. "Tim" Dobeck
Sheriff
Original Budget or Last
Amended
1983-84
Budget Including Amendments
Budget Accounts FY
Amendments Requested Requested
.10 Personal Services $
481,474
s - $ 481,474
.30 Operating Expenses
271,804
(500) 271,304
.52.45 Food For Jail
.60 Capital Outlay
1,300
500 1,800
.64.42 Jail Equipment
Contingency
5,000
TOTAL BUDGET $
5,000
$ - $ 759,578
759,578
This is to acknowledge receipt by the Board of County Commissioners
This is to certify that this budgeMacount amendment has been
It s! Approved / Disapproved
Date:
^P G! Date:
Signature
Signature
Title:
Title: SHERIFF/INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Bnwnn Supply Cr. , Ltd . Plan! City, Fla
1
1
I.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
approved the above Budget Amendment as re-
quested by the Jail Administrator.
D. Out -of -County Travel
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
granted retro -active approval of out -of -County
travel to Tallahassee on Tuesday, July 31, 1984,
for Commissioner Bird and Attorney Brandenburg to
meet with members of the Florida Department of
Natural Resources re beach acquisition under the
"Save Our Coast" Program.
FILING FEE FOR PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD
The Board reviewed memo from the OMB Director, as
follows:
TO: Board of County
Commissioners
FROM: Jeffrey K. Barton,
OMB Director
DATE: July 26, 1984 FILE:
SUBJECT: Property Appraisal
Adjustment Board -
Filing Fee
REFERENCES:
1) Appointment of three (3) members to PAAB so it can have
it's organizational meeting.
2) Recommendation to increase filing fee to appear before
PAAB from present $10.00 to Florida Statute limit of
$15.00, for the following reasons:
A) Postage Costs for required letters alone cost $6.70.
B) Increased staff time.
C) Cost of Special Master.
D) Payments to Five (5) members of PAAB.
E) Supplies.
The fee increase at $15.00 will still not cover the cost
involved in running the complete PAAB process.
5
AUG 1 -1994 e,00K. 57 F��F 809
J
AUG 1 1984 BooK 5
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
recommended that the Property Appraisal Adjust-
ment Board increase their filing fee for appear-
ance before that Board to $15.00.
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT
BOARD
Discussion ensued as to who would serve on the PAAB
this year; the following Commissioners volunteered and were
approved by the Board:
Commissioner Bird
Commissioner Lyons
Chairman Scurlock
APPOINTMENT TO OVERALL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Chairman Scurlock recommended the appointment to the
above committee of Duncan 0. Bowman, who is associated with
Laurel Builders. He reported that he has contacted Piper,
Rampmaster, and some other local industries, and hopes to
have another recommendation from the industrial area soon.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
approved the appointment of Duncan 0. Bowman
to the Overall Economic Development Committee.
ACCEPT SETTLEMENT ON DEMOLITION LIEN - ROSS
The Board reviewed staff memo, as follows:
0
TO: The Board of County DATE: July 24, 1984 FILE:
Commissioners
SUBJECT: Offer of settlement on
demolition lien
FROM: Jam ZP. Wilson REFERENCES:
Assi ant County Attorney
This office.requests input from the Board on the following:
We have received an offer of settlement of $2,000.00 from an
attorney representing the estate of Ethel Ruth Ross, owner of the
property against which the County has a lien dated January 10, 1979, in
the original amount of $1,747.36, plus 6% interest, currently totalling
approximately $2,415.00. The Board has rejected a previous settlement
Of $1,500.00. If the Board rejects the present offer, this office is
prepared to immediately file a foreclosure action against the estate.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, to accept the settlement of
$2,000 on the demolition lien against the estate of
Ethel Ruth Ross, as recommended by staff.
Commissioner Lyons inquired if it would be more costly
to proceed with further legal action to try to obtain a
higher settlement, and Attorney Brandenburg confirmed that
it would.
Administrator Wright wished to know if these funds
would go into the land acquisition account, and it was
agreed that they would.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION RE ST. JOHN'S RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT MEETING
Commissioner Bowman informed the Board that St. John's
River Water Management District is planning to meet in
Sanford on August 8th in regard to acquisition of a basin in
7
AUG 1 1984 Boa 7 F,fI-JE811
E
AUG 1 1994 BOOK �£7 P'nUE 812
this area. Since this affects property owners in this
County, she requested that the Chairman be authorized to
send the District a letter requesting that the meeting be
held in the Sebastian area in the evening so that local
people can participate and have input.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bowman,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, to authorize
the Chairman to send a letter to St. John's
River Water Management re changing the loca-
tion of their August 8th meeting, as above.
Commissioner Bird felt this would be quite short notice
as there probably would have been an advertised notice of
the meeting.
Chairman Scurlock noted that we can indicate that if in
the future something directly affecting our county is to be
discussed, we would like that meeting to be held in Indian
River County.
Commissioner Wodtke believed if the meeting of August
8th has not been advertised, we could request that it be
changed to another time, if it has, then we could make the
request suggested by the Chairman.
Commissioner Bowman and Lyons agreed with the above
suggestions.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION,
including the suggestions made by Board
members. It was voted on and carried
unanimously.
0
i
COUNTY -INITIATED REZONING - 27TH AVE. SOUTH OF KELLY RD.
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 Dally
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 oatt
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper publishec
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
i e17i
in the matter
in the
lished in said newspaper in the issues
Court, was
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press-Joumal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement: and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed b fore m thi � day of A.D. 19
` �usine Ma r)
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River C nty, Florida)
G
NOTICE — PUBLIC HEARING
Notice of hearing initiated by Indian River
County to consider the adoption of a County or-
dinance rezoning land from C-1, "Commercial
District" to R-1, "Single -Family District.— The
subject property is located on the East side of
27th Avenue, S.W. (S.R.607) south of 13th Street,
S.W. (Kelly Road) to 600 feet north of the County
Une of Indian River County.
-i"The subject property is described as:
Y BEING A PART OF SECTION 26, TOWN-
u: SHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, AND
` A PART OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 33
SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, INDIAN
, RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND IS
MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS:
LOTS 11, AND 12, BLOCK A AND LOTS
1 THROUGH 13 INCLUSIVE, BLOCK B.
OSLO PARK SUBDIVISION, UNIT NO. 7,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 4, PAGE 28,
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY RECORDS;
SAID LAND LYING AND BEING IN IN-
DIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
TOGETHER WITH:
THE WEST 330 FEET OF TRACT 13,
SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH,
RANGE 39 EAST; THE WEST 330 FEET
OF TRACTS 4, 5, AND 12, AND THE
WEST 330 FEET OF THE NORTH 756.62
FEET OF TRACT 13, OF SECTION 35,
TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39
EAST; LESS RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF
RECORD, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT OF
INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY SUB-
DIVISION AS RECORDED IN PLAT
BOOK 2, PAGE 25 OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY,
FLORIDA; SAID LAND NOW LYING AND
BEING IN 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 the County Adminis-
tration Building, located at 1840 25th Street,
Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, August 1,
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 is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By: s -Don C. Scurlock Jr.
Chairman
July 12, 24. 1984.
AUG 1 1984 BOCK 57 FA GE 813
L
AUG 1 1984 BOOK 57 FniS14 7
Chief Planner Richard Shearer made the staff
presentation and recommendation, as follows:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: July 17, 1984 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners - -
COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: TO REZONE 45.5 ACRES FROM
C-1, COMMERCIAL DISTRICT,
��� Jt
l�rs SUBJECT: TO R-1, SINGLE-FAMILY
Robert M. KeatiAg, A&CP DISTRICT
Planning & Development Director
FROM:chard Shearer, AICP REFERENCES: P&z Memo/ZC-067
Chief, Long -Range Planning RICH2
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of August 1, 1984.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The County is initiating a request to rezone approximately 45.5
acres located on the east side of 27th Avenue and south of
Kelly Road (13th Street, S.W.) from C-1, Commercial District,
to R-1, Single -Family District (up to 6.2 units/acre).
On May 23, 1984, the Board of County Commissioners rezoned 13.8
acres located north of the subject property from C-1 to R-1.
At that time, the Board instructed the staff to prepare a
proposal to rezone the remaining commercially zoned property
located south of that rezoning request.
On June 28, 1984, the Planning and Zoning commission voted
3 -to -0 to recommend approval of this request with the exception
of two lots at the north end of the subject property. Because
these two lots contain a contractor's business, the Commission
felt that this property should remain zoned C-1 instead of
becoming a nonconforming use.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
Because this request is part of the administrative rezoning
process, this section will deal primarily with the existing
land use pattern, the current zoning pattern, and the subject
property's Land Use designation.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property currently contains a contractor's office,
a nonconforming storage yard, a nonconforming mobile home, a
power substation, agricultural land, vacant land, and two
single-family homes. North of the subject property is vacant
land zoned R-1. East of the subject property is a single-.
family subdivision, agricultural land, and vacant land zoned
R-1. South of the subject property is a fish farm zoned A,
Agricultural District. West of the subject property, across
27th Avenue, are several single-family homes, a mobile home
park, agricultural land, and vacant land zoned C-1, and
agricultural land zoned A, Agricultural District.
10
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and
the land north, south, and east of it as LD -2, Low -Density
Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre). The land to the west,
across 27th Avenue, is designated as LD -1, Low -Density
Residential 1 (up to 3 units/acre). The commercial needs of
this part of the County will be served by the proposed
commercial node at the intersection of 27th Avenue and Oslo
Road and the recently designated neighborhood commercial node
at 27th Avenue and the County line. Since the C-1 zoning of
the subject property is not in conformance with the
Comprehensive Plan, and the property north and east of the .
subject property is zoned R-1 (which is in conformance with the
LD -2 designation), the most appropriate zoning for the subject
property is the R-1 district.
Transportation System
The subject property has direct access to 27th Avenue
(presently classified as a primary collector street but
proposed to be an arterial street on the County's Thoroughfare
Plan). Rezoning the subject property from C-1 to R-1 would be
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policy of..discouraging
strip commercial development along major streets. Residential
development is an acceptable use in this location because the
County's Subdivision Regulations prohibit single-family lots
from having direct access to primary collector and arterial
streets, and the regulations also require buffering of a
subdivision from an arterial roadway.
Environment
The subject property is not environmentally sensitive nor is -it
in a flood -prone area.
Utilities
The subject property is not served by County water nor
wastewater facilities. However, County water facilities are
scheduled to be extended to the Oslo Road/27th Avenue
intersection in August.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this
rezoning with the exception of two lots for the reason outlined
in the Description and Conditions section of this memorandum.
While the Planning Department respects the Commission's
position of not creating a nonconforming use, excepting these
two lots from this rezoning would result in spot zoning.
Based on the above analysis,
subject property be rezoned
R-1, Single -Family District.
WS
staff recommends that all of the
from C-1, Commercial District, to
11
BOCK 57 P�-JE815
AUG 1 1994
Boc,5 57 NAGE 816
Chief Planner Shearer displayed an aerial photo showing
the acreage previously rezoned to R-1 in this same area, and
informed the Board that the property in question is 330'
deep and 1h miles long. He noted that since the Land Use
Plan designation is LD -2, commercial zoning is not
appropriate. Mr. Shearer emphasized that staff feels all
the property should be rezoned, including the two lots the
Planning & Zoning Commission wishes left out.
Attorney Brandenburg pointed out that the rezoning of
those two lots was denied at the Planning & Zoning Commis-
sion and that denial is final unless the matter is appealed
to the County; therefore, we could not overturn that denial
today. The remainder can be rezoned, however.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be
heard. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
adopted Ordinance 84-45 rezoning approximately
45.5 acres east of 27th Avenue and south of
Kelly Road from C-1 to R-1, with the exception
of the two lots at -the north end of the subject
property.
12
r
ORDIIIANCE N0. 84-45
W''HEREA.S, 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 ORDAMED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning Ordinance of
Indian River County, Florida, and the accompanying Zoning Map,
be amended as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in
Indian River County, Florida, to -wit:
The subject property is described as being a part of
Section 26, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, and a part of
Section 35, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, Indian River
County, Florida, and is more specifically described. as:
LOTS 1 THROUGH 13 INCLUSIVE, BLOCK B, OSLO PARK SUBDIVISION,
UNIT 110. 7, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT
BOOK 4, PAGE 28, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY RECORDS; SAID
LAND LYING AND BEING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
THE WEST 330 FEET OF TRACT 13, SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP
33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST; THE WEST 330 FEET OF TRACTS
4, 5, and 12, AND THE WEST 330 FEET OF THE NORTH 756.62
FEET OF TRACT 13, OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE
39 EAST, LESS RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF RECORD, AS SHOWN ON THE
PLAT OF INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED
IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST. I=
COUNTY, FLORIDA; SAID LAND NOW LYING AND BEING IN INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. _
Be changed from C-1, Commercial District, to R-1, Single -
Family District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Zoning Regulations.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida on this 1 s t day of Au gu s t
1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
„% r.
DON -C. SC'URLOCK, JR.
Chairman
AUG 1 1984 Bm 57 PmGE 817
L
AUG 1 1984 BooK 7 L' $�
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of
Florida this 13 day of August, 1984.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State
received on this 17 day of Augusts 1984, at 10*_A.2. /p.M. and
filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AMID
M
SCOPE OF SERVICES - BIENNIAL SANITARY LANDFILL REPORT
Utility Services Director Terry Pinto reviewed the
following memo:
TO: The Honorable Members of theDATE: July 24, 1984 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Michael Wright
County Administrator SPECIFIC SERVICES ADDENDUM
SUBJECT: FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE
1984 BIENNIAL SANITARY
LANDFILL MANAGEMENT REPORT
FROM:Ter anc Pinto REFERENCES',) Scope o Letter 7/12/84
Utility Services Director •a) Scope of Services
b) Specific Services Addendum
c) Bond Requirement Section 0
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Attached as Exhibit "1" is a letter from Post, Buckley, Schuh, and_
Jernigan, Inc. They have submitted a scope of services (Exhibit
"a") and a specific services addendum (Exhibit "b") for the 1984
biennial sanitary landfill management report for the County's
approval and signature.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSES:
The only alternative is to go out for bid to other engineers to
provide this service. At this time, staff does not recommend this.
The biennial sanitary landfill management report is a requirement
of our Solid Waste Disposal System Revenue Bonds, Series 1977,
Section 0 (Exhibit
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Board authorize its Chairman to sign the specific
services addendum and approve the scope of services as stated in
Exhibit "a".
Chairman Scurlock inquired about interviewing other
engineering firms as he wished to be sure we continued to
make this a competitive situation; otherwise, firms tend to
escalate their prices.
Director Pinto explained that staff feels it is best to
keep the original consultant at this time since we are going
through some difficulties in the final permitting stages for
the closeout of this cell. When we go into the next cell,
however, he believed we then would go into competitive
interviews.
14
AUG 1 1984 BOOK 1 7 Fa,r X19
AUG 1 1984 Bux 57 F,.,,t 89Q
Administrator Wright noted that the second cell is a
major expense.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
approved the scope of services set out in
Exhibit "A," and authorized the Chairman to
sign the specific services addendum submitted
by Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc.
15
� SPECIFIC QiIBIT "b"
Pos , kley, Schuh & Jernigan, SERVICES ADDEN�
CONSULTING ENGINEERS and PLANNERS
PROJECT NUMBER 099-948.88
889 North Orange Avenue Indian River County 1984
Orlando, Florida 32801 SHORT TITLE Biennial Report
(305)423-7275 NOTICE TO PROCEED FROM (NAME/DATE):
Terry Pinto, August 1984
THIS ADDENDUM to the Agreement dated between Post, Buckley, Schuh
& Jernigan, Inc., (PBS&J) and the Client identified herein is for the Additional Services described in Item 5 of
this Addendum.
1. CLIENT: Indian River County Board of Commissioners
2. ADDRESS: 1840 25th Street 3. TELEPHONE
Vero Beach, FL 33960 NUMBER: (305)567-8000
SPECIFIC upon
4. PBS&J shall begin work promptly on the requested 7dMXd`dld0 Services, iXtX*h AKYoYMAMiWbXXK1
iX�t�(X�Xi?XXkY�i�4iGX►i6�(dI1�1� receipt of a fully executed copy of this Addendum. (Client
retain white copy, return remaining copies
SPECIFIC
5. Description of 1(i414}EMM Services to be provided by PBS&J (attach additional pages, if necessary):
SEE EXHIBIT A - SCOPE OF SERVICES
Approved s of m
and le,' ffi ' r
-
ar JI. 'randenbu
qty Attor-
6. The compensation to be paid PBS&J for providing the requested services
[X A. Direct personnel expceed $4ense plus a surcharge of 150°to plus reimbursable costs. See explanation on
revers side. Tota fees shall not ex,700 without prior authorization from
the Cfient.
❑ B. A Lump -Sum charge of $ -
❑ C. Unit Cost/Time Charges identified in Exhibit A, attached.
❑ D. I n accordance with the provisions for Additional Services compensation set forth in the aforemen-
tioned Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Addendum is accepted this1 s t� day of Ai,g„ G r
19 84 , subject to the terms and conditions of the aforementioned Agreement and the provisions on the
reverse hereof.
CLIENT: POST, BUCKL Y, UH &
SIGNED: SIGNED:
TYPED NA&E: on curlock J&. TYPED NAM evi n oo
TITLE: airman TITLE: Manager. So i d and
DATE: August 1, 1984 DATE: 7 �Y
SIGN WiTH BALL POINT PEN
AUG 1 1984-
JV"r Distribution: White -Client; Yellow - PBS&J; Pink- Project Manager; Gold -Acct. Proposal File
BOOK
LFORM NO. CA/070-05
57
Service
AUG 1 W4
BOOK 57 FSE 8?2
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BIENNIAL REPORT
TASK 1 REPORT PREPARATION
The Engineer shall prepare a Biennial Sanitary Landfill Management Report
on the solid waste operations for the County sanitary landfill and shall
submit 20 copies of the report to the County within 60 working days
after authorization to proceed.
The report shall address specific items as follows:
° Condition and adequacy of existing equipment and need for
repair, replacement, and addition of equipment to meet antici-
pated needs over the next two fiscal years.
° Performance and adequacy of existing labor to efficiently
operate and maintain existing and anticipated new equipment
and facilities during the next two fiscal years.
° Adequacy of system revenues derived from user charges and
other services to pay the projected costs of operating and
maintaining the equipment and facilities (existing and proposed
new) during the next two fiscal years (FY83 and FY84).
TASK 2 MEETINGS
2.1 The Project Manager or Project Engineer shall attend a 'one -day
meeting in Vero Beach, Florida, to receive and review information
necessary for the preparation of the Biennial Report detailed in
Task 1 above.
2.2 The Project Manager or Project Engineer shall attend a one -day
meeting in Vero Beach, Florida, to review the draft Biennial Report
with representatives of Indian River County, prior to the completion
and issuance of the final Biennial Report.
INFORMATION TO BE SUPPLIED BY THE CLIENT
° Inventory list of current landfill equipment.
° Current personnel list for the Indian River County Sanitary Landfill.
° Indian River County Landfill Monthy Statistical Summary, April
1982 through June 1984.
° Fund summary by account, April 1982 through June 1984.
Indian River County Detail Budget Report for fiscal years 1983
and 1984 and proposed for 1985.
° Current insurance information including the insurance company name,
period of coverage, type of coverage, and coverage limits.
Balance sheet for the Solid Waste Disposal System Bond funds for
the month of June 1984 listing assets and liabilities.
17
EXHIBIT "c"
pay such charges. The revenues so received shall be deemed to be Revenues derived from the operation of the
Facilities, and shall be deposited and accounted for in the same manner as other Revenues derived from such
operation of the Facilities.
L. ENFORCEMENT OF COLLECTIONS. The Issuer will diligently enforce and collect the rates, fees and
other charges for the services of the Facilities, will take all steps, actions and proceedings for the enforcement and
collection of such rates, charges and fees as shall become delinquent to the full extent permitted or authorized by
law; and will maintain accurate records with respect thereof. All such fees, rates, charges and revenues shall, as
collected, be held in trust to be applied as herein provided and not otherwise.
M. REMEDIES. Any holder of Obligations or any coupons appertaining thereto issued under the provisions
hereof or any trustee acting for the holders of such Obligations 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, and may enforce and compel the
performance of all duties herein required or by any applicable statutes to be performed by the Issuer or by any
officer thereof.
Nothing herein, however, shall be construed to grant to any holder of such Obligations any lien on any
property of, or in, the Issuer.
N. OPERATING BUDGET. (1) The Issuer shall annually at least thirty (30) days preceding each of its
Fiscal fears, in cooperation with its Consulting Engineers, prepare and adopt a detailed final 'budget for the
operation of the Facilities during such next succeeding Fiscal Year. If the budget discloses that the estimated
Gross Revenues will be insufficient during such Fiscal Year to make fully the current payments required in this
resolution, then the Issuer shall forthwith revise the rates, fees, rentals or other charges in order to cure such
estimated deficiencies and to comply with the rate covenant as provided in Subsection 15F herein. (2} The
Consulting Engineers will annually review the depreciation schedules established for each major capital asset, the
same being any asset of the Facilities having an original acquisition cost in excess of $10,000. There shall be
included in the budget amounts necessary for deposit in the Renewal and Replacement Fund as stipulated but no
less than the amount necessary to provide for the orderly replacement of such depreciable capital assets in
accordance with the depreciation schedules that the Consulting Engineers shall establish. (3) No expenditure for
the Operation and Maintenance of the Facilities shall be made in any Fiscal Year in excess of the amounts
provided therefor in such budget without a written finding and recommendation by the general manager of such
Facilities or other duly authorized officer in charge thereof, which finding and recommendation shall state in
detail the purpose of and necessity for such increased expenditures for the Operation and Maintenance of the
Facilities and no such increased expenditures shall be made until the governing body of the Issuer shall have
approved such finding and recommendation by a resolution duly adopted. No such increased expenditures in
excess of ten per centum (10%) of the amount provided therefor in such budget shall in any event be made
except upon the further certificate of the Consulting Engineers that such increased expenditures are necessary
and essential to the continuance in operation of the Facilities.
O. CONSULTING ENGINEERS. The Issuer will annually retain an independent Consulting Engineer or
engineering firm having a favorable reputation for skill and experience for the design, construction and operation
of Facilities of comparable size and character as the Facilities, for the purpose of -providing the Issuer competent
engineering counsel affecting the economical and efficient operation of the Facilities and in connection with the
making of capital improvements and renewals and replacements of the Facilities. The Issuer may, however,
employ additional engineers at any time with relation to specific engineering and operation problems arising in
connection with the Facilities.
The Issuer shall, at least every two (2) years, cause to be prepared by the Consulting Engineers a report or
survey with respect to the management of the properties thereof, the sufficiency of the rates, and charges for
services, the proper maintenance of the properties of the Facilities and the necessity for capital improvements and
recommendations therefor. Such a report or survey shall also show any failure of the Issuer to perform or comply
with the covenants herein contained.
If any such report or survey of the Consulting Engineers shall set forth that the provisions hereof or any
reasonable recommendations of such Consulting I.ngincers have not been complied with, the Issuer small
19
AUG 1 1984 BOOK 7 F,, 893
-IV
BOQK 57 F"�,�;f
AUG 1 1984
REPORT ON "SAVE OUR COAST" PROGRAM
Commissioner Bird informed the Board that he and
Attorney Brandenburg went to Tallahassee yesterday and had
an opportunity to meet with Dr. Gissendanner of the Florida
Department of Natural Resources and some of his staff, as
well as a representative from the Governor's office and our
two consultants from the Tallahassee area, for the purpose
of clarifying as much as possible our status in the -"Save
Our Coast" Program. Dr. Gissendanner indicated that the
eight ranked above us have either been purchased or
optioned, and it appears our project now is number one on
the priority list. Therefore, it now is a question of
getting everything in proper form to be presented to the
Governor and Cabinet for them to make the final decision and
authorize the State to enter into the purchase agreement.
Commissioner Bird noted that we are talking about property
in the value of around 4.5 million, and we have an
indication that at least a portion, if not all, of the 4.5
million possibly could be purchased from the funds that will
be available in September. He stressed that it was a very
encouraging meeting and he felt very worthwhile.
Attorney Brandenburg confirmed that we received a very
positive attitude from the Department of Natural Resources
staff and their head man that our project was number one on
the list and will be bought, if it all possible, from the
funds left from the September issue.
Commissioner Bird believed that it will be necessary to
make more trips to follow through on this matter.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
authorized whatever out -of -County travel is
necessary for acquisition of this property for
Commissioner Bird and appropriate staff members.
19
I
COUNTY -INITIATED REZONING - 27TH AVE. SOUTH OF OSLO ROAD
The hour of 9:30 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
VERO 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 dally newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of/.LCA G
In the ''// Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the Issues of�y, /�/
Afflant 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
(SEAL)
a_T.
NOTICE — PUBLIC HEARING
Notice of hearing Initiated by Indian River,
County to consider the adoption of a County or
dinance rezoning land from: C-1, "Commercial.
District' to R-1AA, "Single -Family District.• Thal
subject property is located on the west side ofl
27th Avenue, S.W. (S.R.607) one-quarter mile[
south of 9th Street, S.W. (Oslo Road/CR 608) to
one-eighth mile North of'the County. Line of In-
than RiverCounty.
The subject property is described as:
BEING A PART OF SECTION 27, TOWN-
SHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 FAST, AND
A PART OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 33
SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND IS
MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS:
THE EAST 330 FEET, OF THE SOUTH 2
ACRES OF THE EAST 10 ACRESOF _=
TRACT 1, AND THE EAST 330 FEET OF
TRACTS 8, 9, AND 16, IN SECTION 27,
TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39
EAST: AND THE EAST 330 FEET OF
TRACTS 8 AND 9, AND THE EAST 330
FEET OF THE NORTH 731.6 FEET OF
TRACT 16 IN SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP
33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, LESS
RIGHT-OF-WAY OF RECORD, AS RE-
CORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25 OF -
THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE
COUNTY, FLORIDA; SAID LAND NOW
LYING AND BEING IN 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 Com-
missioners of Indian River County, Florida, in the
County Commission Chambers of the County
Administration Building, located at 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday. Aug-
ust 1, 1984, at 9:30 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 is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By:s-Don C. Scurlock Jr.
Chairman
July 12, 24, 1984.
Chief Planner Richard Shearer made the staff presenta-
tion, as follows:
20
AUG 1 1984 Bou 5 7 Fri,,FS9fS
BOOK 57 FA -CE, 8?6 1
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: July 17, 1984 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners
COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: TO REZONE 48.33 ACRES
FROM C-1, COMMERCIAL
SUBJECT: DISTRICT, TO R-lAA,
SINGLE -FAMILY -DISTRICT
Robert M. Keatin , ATdb
Planning & Developmen Director
FROM: Richard Shearer, AICP REFERENCES: west Side of 27th
Chief, Long -Range Planning RICH2
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of August 1, 1984.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The County is initiating a request to rezone approximately
48.33 acres located on the west side of 27th Avenue and
one-quarter mile south of Oslo Road from C-1, Commercial
District, to R-lAA (up to 2.6 units/acre).
On May 23, 1984, the Board of County Commissioners rezoned 13.8
acres located east of the subject property from C-1 to R-1,
Single -Family District. At that time, the Board instructed the
staff to prepare a proposal to rezone the remaining
commercially zoned property located west of that rezoning
request.
On June 28, 1984, the Planning and Zoning commission voted
3 -to -0 to recommend approval of this rezoning.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
Because this request is part of the administrative rezoning
process, this section will deal primarily with the existing
land use pattern, the current zoning pattern, and the subject
property's Land Use designation.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property contains several single-family residences,
a nonconforming mobile home park, vacant land, and agricultural
land. North of the subject property is undeveloped land zoned
C-1 (which has been designated a neighborhood commercial node).
East of the subject property, across 27th Avenue, is a mobile
home park zoned R-1MP, Mobile Home Park District, undeveloped
land zoned R-1; a contractor's home and office, a storage yard,
a mobile home, vacant land, a power substation, and agricul-
tural land zoned C-1. South of the subject property is a
convenience grocery store and the Pony Keg in a C-1 zoning
district. West of the subject property is vacant land, agri-
cultural land, and a single-family subdivision.
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and
the lard west of it as LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (up to 3
units/acre). The land north of the subject property was
designated a neighborhood commercial node during the public
21
hearings on the Comprehensive Plan in 1982 and could be
included as part of the general commercial node proposed for
the 27th Avenue and Oslo Road intersection. The land east of
the subject property, across 27th Avenue, is designated as
LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre). South of
the subject property is a recently designated neighborhood
commercial node. Based on the LD -1 land use designation of the
subject property, the most appropriate zoning district is the
R-lAA, Single -Family District.
Transportation System
The subject property has direct access to 27th Avenue
(presently classified as a primary collector street but
proposed to be an arterial street on the County's Thoroughfare
Plan). Rezoning the subject property from C-1 to R-lAA would
be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policy of
discouraging strip commercial development along major streets.
Residential development is an acceptable use in this location
because the County's subdivision regulations prohibit single-
family lots from having direct access to primary collector and
arterial streets; and the regulations also require buffering of
a subdivision from an arterial roadway.
Environment
The subject property is not environmentally sensitive nor is it
in a flood -prone area.
TI -1 l ; +i o
The subject property is not served by County water nor
wastewater facilities. However, County water facilities are
scheduled to be extended to the Oslo Road/27th Avenue
intersection in August. _
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning
Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the subject
property be rezoned from C-1, Commercial District, to R-lAA,
Single -Family District.
Chief Planner Shearer informed the Board that it was
originally intended to rezone from 1/8 mile south of Oslo
Road down to the County line, but someone who had pulled a
building permit some time ago in that area south of Oslo
Road, kept it active and is ready to go into building, so
that property was excluded.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be
heard. There were none.
Commissioner Bird inquired if we followed all the
normal procedures of advertising, etc., and Chief Planner
Shearer confirmed that notice was sent to everyone on the
Property Appraiser's list, and they only had one person
22
BOOK Ft,,UE897
L AUG 1 1984 �
AUG 1 1984 Boox 57 Fa -H8 -?8
appear at the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. They
did get a number of calls, but none were opposed.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
closed the public hearing.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, to adopt
Ordinance 84-46 rezoning 48.33 acres
west of 27th Avenue and 1/4 mile south
of Oslo road from C-1 to R-lAA.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if 48.33 acres is correct
rather than 51, and Chief Planner Shearer stated that it
was; they had to exclude 3 acres, but those acres can be
included in the proposed new node.
Mrs. Shirley Brown entered the meeting late and wished
to speak in opposition to the rezoning. Mrs. Brown informed
the Board that she paid a commercial price for her property
which is located nearly at the County line close to Lakewood
Park and about two lots from the Zippy Mart. She purchased
this property from Mr. Sharkey about five years ago and had
.plans to build a nice little restaurant on it. Mrs. Brown
believed that her property would lose most of its value if
it were rezoned to residential.
Director Keating reported that Mr. Sharkey did appear
and speak about this at the Planning & Zoning Commission
meeting.
Commissioner Bird felt it might be premature to leave
that spot of commercial in there at this time, but noted
that if Mrs. Brown comes up with a bona fide use for her
property as that area develops, she can always come back to
the Commission and request that it be rezoned.
23
Commissioner Wodtke commented that although we are
looking at the whole of Indian River County, we should take
into account that there are a lot of homes very near to this
area which are in St. Lucie County. He asked if there is a
neighborhood node there.
Chief Planner Shearer stated that there is, but noted
that Lucinda Eddy came in with a rezoning request for her
four acres in this area and the Planning & Zoning Commission
has recommended approval, which would make the node about 7
acres. Including Mrs. Brown's property which is further
away, would exceed the eight acres set for neighborhood
nodes.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if Mrs. Brown was antici-
pating moving forward with her plans to build a restaurant
in the next year or two, and she stated that she was not.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
24
AUG 1 1984 BOOK 57 Fa,ESj9
AUG 1 1984
BOOK 7'1-1f riL. V30
ORDINANCE NO. 84-46
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:
BEING A PART OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39
EAST, AND A PART OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE
39 EAST, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND IS MORE
SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS:
THE EAST 330 FEET OF THE SOUTH 2 ACRES OF THE EAST 10
ACRES OF TRACT 1, AND THE EAST 330 FEET OF TRACTS 8, 9,
AND 16, IN SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST;
AND THE EAST 330 FEET OF TRACTS 8 AND 9, AND THE EAST 330
FEET OF THE NORTH 731.6 FEET OF TRACT 16 IN SECTION 34, -
TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, LESS RIGHT-OF-WAY OF
RECORD, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25 OF..THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA; SAID LAND NOW LYING
AND BEING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
Be changed from C-1, Commercial District, to R-lAA,
Single -Family District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Zoning Regulations.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida on this 1st day of August
1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY'
BY :
DON C. SCURLOCK, JR
Chairman
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of
Florida this 13 day of August , 1984.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department.of State
received on this 17 day of August, 1984, at 10 A.M./P.M. and
filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
ft
-I
s � �
PROPOSED CHANGES TO LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE
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:
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 /L��
in the matter
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of—"
a
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. n
Sworn to and subscri d be re m is day of A.D. 19
siness nagVq
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida)
NOTICE OF INTENT To CONSIDER
COUNTY ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE 78-1, KNOWN AS THE
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE
Notice is hereby given that the Indian River
County Board of County Commissioners, acting
as the governing body, will'conduct a public
hearing on Wednesday, August 1, 1984, at 9:45
a.m. in the Commission Chambers at the County
Administration Building, 1840 25th Street, Vero
Beach, Florida, to consider the adoption of an
ordinance entitled: -
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO LAND-
SCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR CER-
TAIN PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS
WITHIN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
PROVIDING FOR A SHORT TITLE; DE-
CLARING PURPOSE AND INTENT;
PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; '
PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS;
PROVIDING FOR PLANT INSTALLA-- .
TION, MAINTENANCE, AND MATERI-
ALS; PROVIDING CREDIT FOR EXIST-
ING PLANT MATERIAL;. PROVIDING
FOR REQUIRED LANDSCAPING IN OFF-
STREET PARKING AND OTHER VEHIC-
ULAR USE AREAS; PROVIDING. FOR
REQUIRED LAND96iPING IN NON-
VEHICULAR OPEN SPACE AREAS;
PROVIDING FOR LANDSCAPE PLAN
APPROVAL AND ISSUANCE OF A CER-
TIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY; PROVIDING
FOR VARIANCES AND ADMINISTRA-
TIVE APPEALS PROVIDING FOR EN-
FORCEMENT, • VIOLATIONS, PENAL-
TIES. AND OTHER LEGAL ADMINISTRA-
TIVE REMEDIES; PROVIDING FOR THE
REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVI-
SIONS;.PROVIDING.FOR INCLUSION IN
THE CODE OF LAWS -AND ORD[--!'
NANCES OF INDIAN RIVER-- COUNTY;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
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
record includes the testimony in evidence on
which the appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By; -s -Don C. Scurlock Jr.
Chairman
July 12, 24, 1984.
Chief of Environmental Planning, Art Challacombe, made
the staff presentation and recommendation, as follows:
26
AUG 1 1984 Bm 57 F� cF P31
1
r
AUG 1
BOOK 57 f'uF 8
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: July 12, 1984 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LAND -
SUBJECT: SCAPE ORDINANCE
Robert M. Keating, AI
Planning & Development Director
C��
FROM: Arthur Challacombe REFERENCES: Rec/Landscp.
Chief, Environmental Planning DIS:MISC1
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of August 1, 1984.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
In response to concerns from the development community, Plan-
ning staff has assessed the County's existing landscape ordi-
nance and has prepared a draft ordinance with several major
modifications. The draft ordinance is the result of research
prepared by staff and public input gathered from'two advertised
workshop meetings. On June 28, 1983, the Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval of the proposed ordinance.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
The analysis prepared by staff was based upon the concerns
raised by the public. Most of these concerns focused upon the
interior tree requirements of the present ordinance'as well as
other landscape regulations. To evaluate the County's current
ordinance in relation to other jurisdictions, comparisons of at
least fifteen landscape ordinances from south and central
Florida were examined in the following areas:
1) interior tree and landscape requirements for parking areas
and non -vehicular open space;
2) perimeter tree and landscape requirements for abutting
properties and rights-of-way;
3) minimum tree height requirements;
4) existing hedge credit.
These selected ordinance requirements were then compiled in a
matrix for comparison and analysis. The analysis, combined
with input derived from the two workshops, has produced the
following proposed changes from the current landscape
ordinance:
1) a definition of non -vehicular open space;
2) maintenance regarding native plant landscape areas;
3) reduction of the minimum number of tree species required
on the barrier island;
4) changes in the specifications for required plant material
in terms of size and time allowed for required full
growth;
i
27
5) a provision granting the Planning and Development Director
discretion in allowing interior trees within parking areas
to be placed along the parking lot perimeter;
6) removal of wording which limits the ordinance to only new
construction or enlargement;
7) sight distance requirements.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve
the proposed landscape ordinance.
Planner Challacombe noted that it is the intent of the
proposed changes to make the ordinance more standard and
equitable in its application.
Chairman Scurlock and Board members expressed concern
about having some provision in the ordinance to make certain
that the required plantings continue to exist as this
concerns not only aesthetics, but in some cases, erosion
control.
Planning Director Keating reported that the ordinance
requires that the landscaping be maintained. Staff does not
go out and check this on a regular basis, however, but does
act on it if it is brought to their attention that the
required landscaping is not in place.
Assistant County Attorney Paull quoted a provision that
calls for "maintenance in a good condition so as to present
a healthy, neat and orderly appearance, kept free from
refuse and debris." He felt possibly we could improve on
that by specifying the same number of plants required by the
site plan, and noted there is also a provision that
addresses irrigation.
Planner Challacombe informed the Board that this is one
item staff was extremely concerned with. The old ordinance
only required an adequate irrigation system, and staff felt
there had to be a certain spacing for the irrigation system
to provide adequate water; they did not want to get down to
specifying type, however.
W-1
AUG 1 1984 BOOK Q -i7 ��,c83
p
AUG 1 1984 BOOK 57 F':GF 831
Chairman Scurlock believed if you can get past that
first year after planting, the plants will have established
a good root structure. He suggested a provision that would
call for review of the site a year later.
Discussion ensued as to requiring review possibly one
year from the anniversary date or one growing season, etc.,
and Director. Keating noted that could be taken care of
administratively or it could be required in the ordinance.
Attorney Brandenburg suggested language the Board might
want to insert after the first paragraph under B on Page 4
of the ordinance, as follows: - "All sites approved under
this ordinance shall maintain landscaping at least to the
minimum requirements of this ordinance as it existed at the
time of site plan approval for the duration of use of this
site. This provision shall be enforced through the Code
Enforcement Board."
Attorney Paull agreed with the wording, but suggested
that it be as it existed at the time of issuance of the
certificate of occupancy based on the site plan approval
rather than at the time of site plan approval.
Commissioner Bowman wished to know if there is a
requirement that the plants be #1 stock, and Planner
Challacombe confirmed that is set out on Page 5.
Discussion followed regarding palm trees, and Planner
Challacombe stated that the status of palm trees is exactly
the same as in the existing ordinance - no more than 500 of
your tree count, with the exception that if there are
existing palms that exceed 50%, you will be given credit for
them.
The Chairman was concerned about the reasonableness of
our ordinance, and did not want to put a burden on someone
by requiring a particular type tree.
Planner Challacombe stated that the only place where we
get to anything resembling specific trees is on the barrier
29
M M
island, and here they lessened the requirement for the
number of varieties, but did stipulate the trees would-be
salt tolerant and indigenous to barrier island conditions.
Planner Challacombe then highlighted proposed changes,
noting that the old ordinance had a blanket number of trees
on site, but did not specifically locate them. The result
was that some developers would put all the trees in a corner
in a grouping and none in the parking lot area. Another
inequity was that it required the same amount of trees for
commercial or industrial sites as for multi -family
residential. In the proposed ordinance 50 of the parking
lot is to be landscaped and within every 300 sq. ft. of
that, you will have a tree in the parking lot itself. In
the non -vehicular open space, a graduated effect was used -
a greater number of trees was required in residential sites
than in industrial sites, which obviously would take up more
impervious surface and require more retention. They also
excluded retention ponds and lakes from that non -vehicular
open space requirement. Because of our requirements with
storm water management, staff did not feel it was fair to
penalize the applicant twice.
Commissioner Bowman asked if there is anything in the
proposed ordinance that will prevent us from having another
Luria's Plaza with a barren parking lot, and Planning
Director Keating believed that one thing that will help is
that the interior landscaping is to be located so that it
divides and breaks up the expanse of parking.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that basically this ordinance
would be triggered at the request for a site plan, and he
was concerned that the Planning & Zoning Commission is the
Board which will hear any appeal of the landscape
requirements since they are the same Board which will be
approving the site plan.
30
AUG 1 1984 BooK 57 F" E835
AUG 1 1984 BOOK 57 F' jE 836
Assistant County Attorney Paull explained that the
appeal that is referred to in here is a preliminary step,
similar to what you would do when you appeal to the Board of
Adjustments. He did not feel the fact that the Planning &
Zoning Commission is hearing an appeal on the substantive
requirements of the ordinance creates a conflict because the
ultimate appeal regarding site plan approval is to the Board
of County Commissioners.
Commissioner Wodtke continued to express concern
because the Planning & Zoning Commission is advised by the
Planning staff, and if this goes back and forth between them
and the staff, he felt they will end up making the same
decision that staff recommends. Commissioner Wodtke
questioned if this might not be a cumbersome process and
possibly there should be somewhere else to address this.
Attorney Paull noted that the idea is to save the.
applicant from having to go through the further step of
going to a separate board, and Attorney Brandenburg con-
firmed that the intent is to streamline the procedure so
that the applicant does not have to go through two
procedures at one time and have to explain the problem all
over again in front of a different Board.
Commissioner Lyons noted that this actually is a tool
for the Planning & Zoning Commission which gives them an
opportunity to have a variance.
Chairman Scurlock was of the opinion that we should go
along with the proposed ordinance and then review it to see
how it functions.
Attorney Brandenburg suggested for these variances that
we refer specifically to the Board of Adjustment's criteria
so there would be no mistake as to what standards the Plan-
ning & Zoning Commission are going to apply, and Attorney
Paull agreed.
31
M
Commissioner Bird inquired about the financial effect
of the proposed changes on proposed development projects.
Planner Challacombe believed they actually should
create additional money in the developer's pocket because
less trees are required.
Planning Keating noted that one of the major complaints
with the current ordinance is that our interior tree
requirement is unrealistic. He believed most of the people
in the development community feel the proposed ordinance is
much more workable, and he agreed that it would be a
lessening of cost to the developer.
Commissioner Wodtke wished to know if transplant of a
living tree would fulfill the requirements for #1 grade
plants, and Planner Challacombe clarified that #1 material
is that which is balled and commercial stock.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if the ordinance requires
that everything is bought from a nursery, and Mr.
Challacombe stated that it does not; it does require
juvenile plants come from nursery stock, but cabbage palms,
etc., it is better to get from natural habitat.
Chairman Scurlock believed that in most cases you will
see landscape designers specifying that plants be #1 grade.
Commissioner Bird asked why you can't put a cabbage
palm from the west of town on the barrier island, and Mr.
Challacombe explained that it would not be salt resistant.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be
heard. There were none.
Chairman Scurlock felt the fact that no one was present
to present objections demonstrated the fact that the
workshops do help to resolve these problems.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
closed the public hearing.
32
AUG 1 . 1984
BOOK 5;7 P�VuFR 17
AUG 1 1984 BOOK 5 7 P,+rz 838
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
adopted Ordinance 84-47, County Landscape
Ordinance.
ORDINANCE 84-47 - IS HEREBY MADE A PPRT. OF THE
RECORD, AS FOLLOWS:
33
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE #84-47
AN ORDINANCE TO BE KNOWN AS THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR A SHORT TITLE; DECLARING
PURPOSE AND INTENT; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR PLANT INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE, AND
MATERIALS; PROVIDING CREDIT FOR EXISTING PLANT MATERIAL;
PROVIDING FOR REQUIRED LANDSCAPING IN OFF-STREET PARKING AND
OTHER VEHICULAR USE AREAS PROVIDING FOR REQUIRED LANDSCAPING IN
NON -VEHICULAR OPEN SPACE AREAS; PROVIDING FOR LANDSCAPE PLAN
APPROVAL AND ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY; PROVIDING
FOR VARIANCES AND ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS; PROVIDING FOR EN-
FORCEMENT, VIOLATIONS, PENALTIES, AND OTHER LEGAL ADMINISTRA-
TIVE REMEDIES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PRO-
VISIONS; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND
ORDINANCES OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the
Indian River County Landscape Ordinance.
SECTION 2. DECLARATION OF PURPOSE AND INTENT.
It is the purpose and intent of this ordinance to
improve the appearance of certain setback and yard areas
including off-street vehicular parking and non -vehicular open
space areas in Indian River County; to protect and preserve the
appearance, character and value of the surrounding neighbor-
hoods and thereby promote the general welfare by providing for
installation and maintenance of landscaping for screening and
elimination of visual pollution, since the County Commission
finds that the unique characteristics and qualities of Indian
River County justify regulations to perpetuate the appeal of
its natural visual pollution free environment.
SECTION 3. APPLICABILITY.
This ordinance shall be applicable to all land lying
in the unincorporated area of Indian River County, Florida.
SECTION 4. DEFINITIONS.
1. Accessway: A paved area intended to provide
ingress and egress of vehicular traffic from a public or
private right-of-way to an off-street parking area.
1
AUG 1 1984 BOOK 57 F,,F8P39
AUG 1 1984 BOOK 57Fn
2. Encroachment: Any protrusion of a vehicle
outside of a parking space, display area or accessway into a
landscaped area.
3. Frontage: Lineal distance measured along
abutting public or private rights-of-way.
4. Ground cover: Low grounding plants planted in
such a manner as to form a continuous cover over the ground,
such as, but not limited to Grass, Wandering Jew, Ajuga,
Asparagus Fern, and Confederate Jasmine.
5. Landscaping: Landscaping shall consist of any
of the following or combination thereof; material such as but
not limited to grass, ground covers, shrubs, vines hedges,
trees, or palms; and nonliving durable material commonly used
in landscaping, such as, but not limited to rocks, pebbles,
sand, walls or fences, but excluding paving.
6. Mulch: Nonliving small aggregate material such
as gravel, rock, pebbles, bark, or pine needles used as a
ground cover.
7. Non -vehicular open space: That portion of a
site or parcel upon which buildings, pavement, or other im-
provements have not been placed, but excluding lakes and wet -
storage stormwater retention areas.
8. Off-street parking: An area not within a
building service way or other structure where motor vehicles
may be stored for the purpose of temporary, daily or overnight
parking. This definition shall include a motor vehicle display
lot, or display of boats, trailers, and mobile homes.
9. Planning and Zoning Commission: The planning
and zoning commission of Indian River County.
10. Planting area: Any area designated for land-
scape planting having a minimum of ten (10) square feet and at
least one dimension on any side of three (3) feet; except that,
wherever a tree shall be planted, a minimum area of twenty-five
(25) square feet, with a minimum dimension of at least five (5)
feet, shall be required.
2
11. Shrub: Any low growing self-supporting woody
evergreen and/or flowering species.
12. Tree: A woody plant having a well defined stem,
a more or less well defined crown, and which is capable of
attaining a height of at least eight (8) feet with a trunk
diameter of not less than two (2) inches, or a cluster of main
stems having an aggregate diameter of not less than two (2)
inches, at a point four and one-half (4-1/2) feet above ground.
13. Vines: Any of a group of woody or herbaceous
plants which may climb by twining, by means of aerial rootlets
or by means of tendrils, or which may simply sprawl over the -
ground or other plants.
14. Code Enforcement official: Authorized employ-
ee in the Indian River County Planning and Development Divi-
sion.
SECTION 5. PLANT INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE, AND
MATERIALS
A. Installation.
All landscaping shall be installed in a sound
workmanlike manner and according to accepted good planting
procedures with the quality of plant materials as hereinafter -
described. All elements of landscaping exclusive of plant
material, shall be installed so as to meet all other applicable
ordinances and code requirements. Landscaped areas shall
require protection from vehicular encroachment. A Code En-
forcement official shall inspect all landscaping, and no final
certificates of occupancy and use or similar authorization will
be issued unless the landscaping meets the requirements provid-
ed herein.
B: Maintenance.
The owner, or his agent, shall maintain all landscap-
ing depicted on the approved plan in good condition, so as to
present a healthy, neat, and orderly appearance, free from
refuse and debris, and in a manner meeting at least the minimum
standard of quality, quantity and variety required by this
3
AUG 1 1984 BOCK 57 F,;u 841
AUG 1
1994
BOOK
7 f; F �4?
ordinance,
for the duration of use of the site. All
land-
scaped areas shall be provided with a readily available water
supply having at least one outlet located within 50 feet of all
plant material to be maintained, or an adequate irrigation
system. Completed project sites shall be reviewed periodically
by Code Enforcement Officials for compliance with these pro-
visions, and any uncorrected violations shall be presented to
the Code Enforcement Board.
Native plant areas used for landscaping purposes may be
left in their natural condition providing they are maintained
so as not to create a health or safety hazard. These areas may
also be excluded from the.water supply requirement providing
they are in a healthy condition upon issuance of a final
certificate of occupancy.
C. Plant Material
1. Quality.
Plant materials used in conformance with provisions
of this ordinance shall conform to the Standards for Florida
No. 1 or better as given in "Grades and Standards for Nursery
Plants" Part I, 1973 and Part II, 1975 State of Florida,
Department of Agriculture, Tallahassee, or equal thereto.
Grass sod shall be clean and reasonably free of weeds and
noxious pests or diseases. Grass seed shall be delivered to
the job site in bags with Florida Department of Agriculture
tags attached, indicating the seed grower's compliance with the
Department's quality control program. Plant materials which are
known to be intolerant of paving environments, or whose phys-
ical characteristics may be injurious to the public, shall not
be specified for use.
2. Trees.
a) Trees shall be species having an average mature
spread of crown of greater than fifteen (15) feet when growing
in the County of Indian River, Florida, and eventually having a
trunk(s) which can be maintained in a clean condition over five
(5) feet of clear wood.
Trees having an average mature spread
4
of crown less than fifteen (15) feet may be substituted by
grouping the same so as to create the equivalent of a fifteen
(15) foot crown spread. Palms shall be considered trees and if
used, they shall consist of no more than fifty (50) per cent of
total new tree requirement for any area. Palms may constitute
more than the fifty (50) per cent of total new tree requirement
when said palms are existing on the site and either remain on
site or are relocated on the same site. Tree species shall be
a minimum of eight (8) feet overall height at time of planting.
The number of different species of trees, other than palms,
shall be as follows:
"Required Number" "Minimum Number"
of Trees of Species
1-10 ............................. 1
11-30 .............................. 2
31-60 ............................. 3
61-100 ............................. 4
100 -over ............................. 5
b) For sites or parcels located on the barrier island,
the minimum number of species required herein shall not exceed
three (3), notwithstanding that -the required number of trees
may exceed sixty (60). Such trees shall be species both
indigenous to and tolerant of barrier island conditions.
c) At least fifty (50) per cent of all new required trees
shall be of a native species. Trees of a species whose roots
are known to cause damage to public roadways or other public
works or easements shall not be planted closer than twelve (12)
feet to such public works, unless the tree root system is
completely contained within a barrier for which the minimum
interior containing dimensions shall be (5) feet square and
five (5) feet deep, and for which the construction requirements
shall be four (4) inches thick concrete reinforced with No. 6
road mesh (6 x 6 x 6) or equivalent.
d) The following species will not be used to fulfill the
requirements of this article:
Australian Pine - (Casuarina equisetifolia), (Casuarina
lepidophlia), (Casuarina cumminghamiana);
Chinaberry - (Melia azedarch);
Ear pod - (Enterlobium cyclocarpum);
5
AUG 1 1984 aooK 57 rACE 843
AUG 1 1994 ono 7 Face 844
Brazilian pepper - (Schinus terebinthifolius);
Melaleuca - (Melaleuca quinquenervia).
3. Shrubs and hedges. Shrubs shall be a minimum of
eighteen (18) inches in height when measured immediately after
planting. Hedges, where required, shall be planted and main-
tained so as to form a continuous, unbroken, solid screen
within a maximum of two years after time of planting.
4. Vines. Vines shall be a minimum of eighteen
(18) inches in height directly after planting and may be used
in conjunction with fences, screens, or walls to meet physical
barrier requirements as specified.
5. Ground covers. Ground covers other than grass
shall be planted in such a manner as to present a .finished
appearance and reasonably complete coverage within one (1) year
after planting.
6. Grass. Grass areas may be sodded, plugged,
sprigged or seeded, except that solid sod shall be used in
swales or other areas subject to erosion. Seed, where used,
shall be of a variety that will produce coverage within ninety
(90) days from sowing; where other than solid sod, grass seed
or grass sprigging is used, nurse grass seed shall be sown for
immediate effect and protection until coverage is otherwise
achieved. When necessary, a reseeding program shall be
implemented to produce complete coverage within one (1) year.
SECTION 6. EXISTING PLANT MATERIAL.
Where healthy native plant material exists on a site
prior to development and provision is made to preserve same,
credit shall be given for such natural growth areas in meeting
the requirements of this ordinance. Such native plant material
receiving a credit must be maintained in substantially the
quantity and locations approved until such time as site modi-
fications are approved which meet the intent of this ordinance.
SECTION 7. LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR OFF-STREET
PARKING & OTHER VEHICULAR USE AREAS.
A. Required Landscaping adjacent to public rights -
of way.
G
on the site of a building or open lot providing an
off-street parking area, where such area will not be entirely
screened visually by an intervening building or structure from
any abutting right-of-way, excluding dedicated alleys, there
shall be provided landscaping between such area and such
right-of-way as follows:
(1) A strip of land at least ten (10 ) feet in depth
located between the abutting right-of-way and the off-street
parking area which is exposed to an abutting right-of-way
shall be landscaped, such landscaping to include one tree for
each forty (40) lineal feet or fraction thereof. Such trees
shall be located between the abutting right-of-way and off-
street parking area, and shall be planted in a planting area of
at least twenty-five (25) square feet with a minimum of the
dimensions being at least five (5) feet. In addition, a hedge,
wall, fence or other durable landscape barrier of at least two
(2) feet in height shall be maintained along the perimeter of
such landscaped strip. If such durable barrier is of nonliving
material, at each ten (10) feet thereof, one shrub or vine
shall be planted abutting such barrier, but need not be spaced
ten (10) feet apart. Such shrubs or vines shall be planted
along the street side of such barrier unless they are of
sufficient height at the time of planting to be readily'vlsible
over the top of such barrier. The remainder of the required
landscaped areas shall be landscaped with grass, ground cover
or other landscape treatment excluding paving.
(2) All non -vehicular open space other than the
required landscaped strip lying between the right-of-way and
off-street parking area shall be landscaped as provided in
section 8 of this ordinance.
(3) Necessary accessways from the public
right-of-way through all such landscaping areas shall be
permitted to service the parking, and such accessways may be
subtracted from the lineal dimension used to determine the
number of trees required.
7
AUG 1 1984 800K 7 SAGE 845
BOOK 57 F,SE'846.
B. Perimeter landscaping relating to abutting
properties; exemption.
(1) On the site of a building or structure or open
lot use providing an off-street parking area where such areas
will not be entirely screened visually by an intervening
building or structure from abutting property, that portion of
such area not so screened shall be provided with a hedge or
other durable landscape barrier maintained at not greater than
six (6) feet in height nor less than three (3) feet in height
to form a continuous screen between the off-street parking area
and such abutting property. Such landscaped barrier shall be
located between the common lot line and the off-street parking
area, and shall be planted in a planting strip no less than
four (4) feet in width. In addition, one tree shall be provid-
ed for each fifty (50) lineal feet of such landscape barrier or
fractional part thereof. Such trees shall be located between
the common lot line and the off-street parking area. Each such
tree shall be planted in at least twenty-five (25) square feet
of planting area with a minimum dimension of at least five (5)
feet. Each such planting area shall be landscaped -with grass,
ground cover or other landscape material, excluding paving, in
addition to the required tree.
(2) The provisions of subsection (1) above shall not
be applicable in the following situations:
(a) When a property line abuts a dedicated alley, or
to those portions of the property that are opposite a building
or other structure located on the abutting property;
(b) Where the subject property and abutting property
are zoned or used for nonresidential uses, only the tree pro-
vision with its planting area as prescribed in this subsection
shall be required; however, the number of trees may be reduced
to one tree for every one hundred twenty-five (125) lineal feet
or fraction thereof.
C. Parking Area Interior Landscaping.
For Off-street parking, an area or areas equal to at
0
M
least five (5) percent of the total paved area shall be provid-
ed with interior landscaping. Each separate landscaped area
shall contain a minimum of twenty-five (25) square feet and
shall have a minimum dimension of at least five (5) feet and
shall include at least one (1) tree having a clear trunk of at
least five (5) feet, with the remaining area adequately land-
scaped with shrubs, ground cover or other authorized landscap-
ing material not to exceed three (3) feet in height.
The total number of trees shall not be less than one
(1) for each three hundred (300) square feet or fraction
thereof of required interior landscaped area. Such landscaped
areas shall be located in such a manner as to divide and break
up the expanse of paving. When, upon the request of the
developer and in the opinion of the Planning & Development
Director, the placing of all required interior trees would
create an impractical landscape effect, a portion of the
required interior trees may be placed along the perimeter of
the parking area to satisfy this -requirement.
D. Encroachment.
Landscape areas shall require protection from vehicu-
lar encroachment. Car stops shall be placed at least three (3)
feet from the edge of such landscaped areas. Where a wheel
stop or curb is utilized, the paved area between the curb/wheel
stop and the end of the parking space may be omitted, provided
it is landscaped in addition to the required landscaping
provided. Car stops shall be located so as to prevent damage
to any planting areas by automobiles.
E. Site Distance for Landscaping Adjacent to
Roadways and Points of Access.
(1) All landscape plans submitted hereunder shall
meet the minimum sight distance requirements established
herein, as viewed from the perspective of the driver of a
vehicle leaving the project premises onto the abutting public
or private roadway.
AUG 1 1984
BOOK 57 FACE847
r -
AUG 1 1994 Boa 5 7 uc,E 848
(2) Crossing Maneuver.
The sight distance required for the safe execution of
a crossing maneuver is dependent upon the acceleration capabil-
ities of the vehicle, the crossing distance, and the design
speed of the street or highway to be crossed. The minimum
required sight distance in both directions, measured from the
centerline of the roadway being entered to the initial position
of the vehicle before the crossing (as shown on Figure #1) for
various classes of vehicles shall be as stated in Tables #1 and
#2, which follow. Table #1 or #2 shall be applied as the case
may be, depending upon whether a given vehicle class consti-
tutes five percent or more of the total crossing traffic, or if
that class experiences 30 or more crossings per day. A devel-
oper shall provide sufficient information on the nature of
vehicles using the project to substantiate which class of
vehicle table is being incorporated into the landscaping plan.
(3) Assumptions.
The vehicle offset shall be assumed to be at least
ten feet from the nearest pavement edge. The setback required
for site distance shall be at least five feet greater than the
vehicle offset, as reflected in Figure #1.
(4) All landscaping shall be installed and main-
tained in a manner which provides unobstructed visibility
within the sight distance area calculated hereunder, at a level
between two -and -one-half feet and ten feet above grade; provid-
ed, however, trees or palms having limbs or foliage trimmed in
such a manner that no limbs or foliage extend into the visibil-
ity area shall be allowed, provided they are so located so as
not to create a traffic hazard. Other landscaping, except
required grass or ground cover, shall not be located closer
than three feet from the edge of any access -way pavement.
(5) Left -Turn Crossings.
Sight distance for left -turn crossings shall be
measured in the same manner as provided for crossing maneuvers.
On median separated roadways, sight distance to the left may be
based upon the sight distance required for a two-lane road.
10
1711
TABLE 1
DESIGN VEHICLES: PASSENGER CAR, SINGLE UNIT TRUCK,
SINGLE UNIT BUS
SIGHT DISTANCE
SPEED TWO LANE FOUR LANE
30 or less
375
500
35
425
575
40
500
650
45
550
700
50
600
750
55
675
900
TABLE 2
DESIGN VEHICLE: SEMI -TRAILER COMBINATION; INTERMEDIATE, AND
LARGE
SIGHT DISTANCE
SPEED TWO LANE FOUR LANE
30 or less
550
650
35
640
750
40
725
850
45
800
950
50
900
1050
55
975
1200
AUG 1 . 1984 11 BOOK 5 7 par 849
AUG 1 1984
BOOK 57 FA -U.0750
SECTION 8. LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR NON-
VEHICULAR OPEN SPACE AREAS
A. General Landscaping Treatment
All non -vehicular open spaces on any site proposed
for development in all zoning districts, except for sin-
gle-family dwellings, shall conform to the minimum landscaping -
requirements herein provided.
Grass, ground cover, shrubs, native plant areas and
other landscaping materials shall be used to treat all ground
not covered by building, paving, or other structures.
B. Trees Required
Trees shall be planted in the non -vehicular open
space to meet the following requirements:
(1) Multiple -family residential zoning districts and
mobile home residential zoning districts requiring site plan
approval - a minimum of one tree per each 2000..square feet or
fraction thereof;
(2) B-1, C-lA, C-1 Commercial Zoning Districts and
Medical District - minimum of one tree per each three thousand
(3,000) square feet or fraction thereof;
(3) C-2 Commercial, LM -1, and M-1 Industrial Zoning
Districts - a minimum of one tree per each four thousand five
hundred (4,500) square feet or fraction thereof.
SECTION 9. LANDSCAPE PLAN & CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY
A. No construction requiring site plan review shall
be undertaken in Indian River County until a landscape plan has
been approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The
Planning and Zoning Commission will not approve any landscape
plan unless it conforms to the requirements of this ordinance,
and is submitted for site plan approval under Section 23 of the
Zoning Ordinance [Appendix A], if required.
When the redevelopment, reconstruction, upgrading,
expansion or change in use of a previously developed site is
such that site plan review is required by County ordinance,
12
_I
then this ordinance shall be applied to such site as if it were
previously undeveloped. The Planning and Zoning Commission
will not approve any landscape plan unless it conforms to the
requirements of this ordinance, and is submitted for site plan
approval under Section 23 of the Zoning Ordinance [Appendix A],
if required.
B. Landscape plans submitted pursuant to this
ordinance shall be drawn to scale, including dimensions and
distance, and clearly delineate the existing and proposed
parking spaces, access aisles, driveways, and the location,
size and description of all landscape materials including the
method of watering and maintaining the landscape area.
C. Certificate of occupancy.
No final certificate of occupancy shall be given or
issued to the owner or his agent until all conditions of this
ordinance have been met and the Code Enforcement official has
given an approval. However, a temporary certificate of occu-
pancy may be issued in those instances where all improvements
on a site except landscaping have been completed, where power
is required for the irrigation system, and where the developer
of the project certifies in writing that the required landscap-
ing for the project will be installed as depicted on the plan
and provides a timetable for installation of the landscaping.
Failure to fulfill the proposed timetable shall be grounds for
immediate and summary revocation of the temporary certificate
of occupancy by the County.
SECTION 10
VARIANCES AND ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS
A variance from any of the substantive requirements
of this ordinance or an appeal of any administrative determina-
tion made by the Planning & Development Division may be ob-
tained in accordance with the procedures and criteria set forth
for such relief in Section 26 of the Zoning Ordinance of Indian
River County, as may be amended from time to time, however, the
Planning and Zoning Commission of Indian River County shall be
13
AUG 1 1984 sooty 57 FHc.r851
r AUG 1
1984 BOOK 5 9 PnF ®��
the Board to which all such variance requests or appeals are
submitted.
SECTION 11
PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT -- CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
JURISDICTION
A violation of any provision of this ordinance shall
be punishable upon conviction by a fine not to exceed FIVE
HUNDRED DOLLARS ($500.00), or by imprisonment in the County
jail up to sixty (60) days, or both such fine and imprisonment.
Any violation of this ordinance is also subject to prosecution
before the Indian River County Code Enforcement Board in
accordance with applicable law and subject to penalties
allowable under the Code Enforcement Board Ordinance. In
addition to either of the foregoing remedites, the County or
any aggrieved party having a substantial interest in the
protections provided by this ordinance may apply directly to a
court of competent jurisdiction for mandatory or prohibitive
injunctive relief.
SECTION 12
REPEAL OF COP:FLICTING 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,
and specifically, Ordinance No. 78-1 as amended, codified as
Sections 132 - 16 through Section 132 - 27-- of the Code of
Laws and Ordinance of Indian River County, 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.
SECTION 13
INCORPORATION IN CODE
The provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporat-
ed into the County Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed
14
_I
s � �
to "section", "article", or other appropriate word, and the
sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to
accomplish such intentions.
SECTION 14
SEVERABILITY
If any section, part of a sentence, paragraph, phrase"
or word of this ordinance is for any reason held to be uncon-
stitutional, 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.
SECTION 15
EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall become effective as law on the
10th calendar day following the date of receipt of acknowledge-
ment from the Department of State of the filing of this ordi-
nance. Any project for which a completed site plan application
has been received prior to the effective date of this ordinance
may be reviewed, approved, and developed in accordance with
Ordinance No. 78-1 as amended.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commis-
sioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 1st day of
August , 1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
By z on. G
DO SCURL CK,,JR., airman
Acknowledgment by the Department of the State'..of Florida this
20th day of August , 1984.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State
received on this 23rd day of Aucrust , 1984, at10:15
A.M./P.M. and filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Board of
County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY.
By
AC/ra/tw
DIS:MISC1
Landscaping Ord.
15
AUG 1 1984 BOOK 5 7 PA -H.853
AUG 1 1984 nox 5 7 `FnE 854
RIGHT-OF-WAY ABANDONMENT - 2ND ST. BET. 16TH & 17TH AVES.
The hour of 10:15 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
in the matter of
in the
lished in said newspaper in the issues of Uy �✓ ��,L,4 L/
Court, was pub-
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed beforne tr dpy of A.D. ,yam
(SEAL) (Clerk of the CirLuit =u-rt,Tnrii6n Aitk ounty, Florida)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE OF HEARING TO A
PETITION FOR THE CLOSING CONS(DER ABAN-
DONMENT, AND VACATION OF THAT
PORTION OF SECOND STREET, CURV-
ING NORTHWESTERLY FROM THE IN-
TERSECTION OF SECOND STREET
AND 16TH AVENUE TO 17TH AVENUE,
LOCATED IN INDIAN RIVER HEIGHTS
SUBDIVAND RESERVING
UNTO THE COU INTY A UTILITY EASE-
MENT.
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 Com-
mission ens of Indian River County, Florida, in the,
County Commission Chambers of the County:
Administration Building, located at 1840 25th)
Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, Aug-
ust 1, 1884, at 10:15 A.M.
If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above matter, he will need a recordl
of the proceedings, and for such purposes, he
may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the
proceedings is made, which Includes testimony
and evidence upon which the appeal is
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
8 : s -Don C. Scurlock Jr. l
Chairman
July 13, 1884.
Staff Planner Karen Craver made the staff presentation
and recommendation, as follows:
34
TO:
The Honorable Members
DATE: July
23,
1984 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
RIGHT-OF-WAY ABANDONMENT
2ND
STREET BETWEEN 16TH
SUBJECT:
AND
17TH AVENUES
�-.
Ro k M. Keati Ag, AYCP
Planning & Development
Director
a�
THROUGH: Mary Jane V.
Goetzfried
Chief, Current Development Section
FROM:
Karen M. Craver
REFERENCES:
ROW Aban
Staff Planner �`,
DIS:KAREN
It is requested that the data herein presented.be given formal
consideration by the Board of County -Commissioners at their
regular meeting of August 1, 1984.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Throughout the past year, the County Attorney's Office and the
Public Works Division have been working with the property
owners along a portion of 2nd Street. The owners requested
that the County initiate the abandonment of that portion of 2nd
Street which curves northwesterly from the intersection of 2nd
Street and 16th Avenue to 17th Avenue (see attachment #2). The
petitioners cited -excessive traffic and speed as the _reasons
for the request. On April 6,•1983, the County Commission
approved a similar request to abandon the curved portion of 3rd
Street, between 18th and 19th Avenues.
In accordance with the administrative guidelines approved by
the Board of County Commissioners -for the processing of
right-of-way abandonment applications, the request -was reviewed
by all County Divisions and utility providers having jurisdic-
tion within the right-of-way. All County divisions approved
the abandonment and Southern Be'll' and Florida Power and Light
requested that easements be retained for their existing
facilities. The attached resolution provides for the retention
of said easements. The Planning staff concurs with the peti-
tioners' belief that the roadway 'creates a hazardous traffic
situation and, in light of the aforementioned abandonment of
3rd Street, feels that the request should be approved.
Due to the curved nature of the street, a small triangular-
shaped parcel, located at the northeast corner of 2nd Street
and 17th Avenue, was created at the time of platting. The
County has received.a Quit -Claim Deed from the developer to
ensure that no question arises regarding ownership once the
County discontinues its current policy of maintaining the
parcel as a park. The 4 property owners and the County have
agreed upon the final configuration of the lots following the
abandonment of the right-of-way. The, County -owned parcel,
together with a portion of the abandoned .right-of-way, will
constitute a totally new lot. The 4 lots now abutting the
right-of-way shall increase in varying degrees. The property
owners and the County have all executed Quit -Claim Deeds to
each other to eliminate any questions of who owns what after
the abandonment. The deeds, currently being held in escrow,
will be released following approval of the abandonment.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the petition to abandon that
portion of 2nd Street which curves northwesterly from the
intersection of 2nd Street and 16th Avenue to 17th Avenue.
35
1 BOOK. �7
AUG 1984
-I
AUG 1 1984
Boa FJOE 56
Planner Craver summarized that Public Works initiated
this action when they were approached by the property owners
who felt that the right-of-way led to excessive traffic and
speed in this area. The abandonment would result in the
creation of a new lot, which would be owned by the county,
and enlargement of four lots. The easements have been
retained.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be
heard. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
closed the public hearing.
Attorney Brandenburg stated that he would like the
Motion re the abandonment to include putting the new lot up
for sale and earmarking funds from its sale for park
development.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
adopted Resolution 84-53 abandoning that
portion of 2nd Street which curves north-
westerly from the intersection of 2nd Street
and 16th Avenue to 17th Avenue and authorized
staff to put the newly created County lot up
for sale, the funds derived from the sale to
be earmarked for park development.
36
RESOLUTION NO. 84-53
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR
THE CLOSING, ABANDONMENT, AND VACATION OF THAT
PORTION OF SECOND STREET, CURVING NORTHWESTERLY
FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SECOND STREET AND 16TH
AVENUE TO 17TH AVENUE, LOCATED IN INDIAN RIVER
HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, UNIT 3, AS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED
HEREIN -AND RESERVING UNTO THE COUNTY A UTILITY
EASEMENT.
WHEREAS, following inquiries from members of the
public, the County Public Works Department has initiated a
Petition to close, vacate, abandon, and disclaim any right, title,
and interest of the County in and to a certain portion of Second
Street, lying between 16th and 17th Avenues, more fully described
below in Exhibit "A," and depicted on the sketch attached hereto;
and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Florida Statutes, Section
336.10, notice of a public hearing to consider this matter has
been duly published; and
WHEREAS, after consideration of the request, supporting .
documents, staff investigation and report, and testimony of all
those interested and present at the Hearing, the Board finds that.
said right of way is not a State or Federal highway, nor located
within any municipality, nor is said right of way necessary for
continuity of the County's street and thoroughfare network; and
WHEREAS, a portion of said right of way should be
retained as a public Drainage and Utility Easement; and
WHEREAS, said right of way is not necessary for access
to any given private property, provided an appropriate
distribution of the abandoned right of way is made and agreed to
among all parties concerned, for which deeds have been executed
and delivered in escrow to the County pending a final
determination on the abandonment.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
1. All right, title, and interest of the County and the
37
AUG 1 .1994 Boox 57 F�.cF857
r
AUG 1 1984
BwK. 57 Fn,F858
public in and to that certain right of way known as the
"S-curve" from Second Street to 17th Avenue, being that area
shaded in the attached sketch, .and more particularly described by
metes and bounds description attached hereto as Exhibit "A," is
hereby forever closed, abandoned, vacated, surrendered,
discontinued, remised, and released with the exception that the
following described Utility Easements are hereby reserved in
perpetuity unto the County and public and shall not be deemed to
have been closed and abandoned in anyway by this Resolution:
A. A public Drainage and Utility Easement over the
easterly ten feet of that property described in Exhibit B-1
attached hereto; and
B. A public Utility and Drainage Easement over the
westerly ten feet of that property described in Exhibit B-2
attached hereto.
2. Notice of the Adoption of this Resolution shall be
forthwith published at least once within 30 days from .the date of
adoption hereof.
3. The Clerk is hereby directed to record this Resolution
together with Proofs of Publication required by Florida Statutues,
Section 336.10, in the Official Record Books of Indian River
County, without undue delay.
4. The Chairman and Clerk are authorized to execute on
behalf of the County and deliver the necessary Quitclaim Deeds to
accomplish an equitable settlement of the boundaries among the
owners of Lots 16, 17, 18, 19, Block A, INDIAN RIVER HEIGHTS
SUBDIVISION, UNIT 3, and Indian River County, as owner of the
traffic island, necessary to "square off" respective lots, after
accretion of the curved, abandoned right of way, all as more fully
described in the Minutes and Records of this Hearing.
The foregoing Resolution was offered by Commissioner RirO
who moved its adoption. The Motion was seconded by Commissioner
Ly°r.s and, upon being put to a vote, the votes were
as follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Ave
Vice Chairman Patrick B. Lyons. Ave
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Ave
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Ave
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Ave
38
I
The Chairman thereupon declared the Resolution duly passed
and adopted this 1st day of
Attest:
Freda Wright, cltpk
August 1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By / C
Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
RIGHT OF WAY TO BE ABANDONED
Beginning•at the intersection of the North right-of-way line of
2nd Street with the West right-of-way line of 16th Avenue as shown
on the plat of Indian River Heights Unit 3 as recorded in Plat
Book 6 Page 49 of the Public Records of Indian River County,
Florida; thence due West (for the purpose of this desription the
North right-of-way line of 2nd Street is assumed to bear due
West), a distance of 190.84 feet more or less to the Southeast
corner of a triangular piece of property, as shown on said plat of
Indian River Heights Unit 3, formed by the North right-of-way line
of 2nd Street, the East right-of-way line of 17th Avenue and the
Southwesterly right-of-way line of 3rd Street said Southeast
corner being also a point on a curve concave to the Northeast,
having a radius of 361.76 feet, and whose radius point bears North
36°14140" East; thence Northwesterly along the arc of said curve,
through a central angle of 17°34140", a distance of 110.98 feet
more or less; to a point on the Easterly right-of-way line of 17th
Avenue; thence North 0004100" East, along said right-of-way line,
a distance of 213.88 feet more or less to the Point of Curvature
of a curve, concave to the Northeast, having.a radius of 291.76
feet; thence Southeasterly, along the arc of said curve, through a
central angle of 85°3211511, a distance of 435.57 feet, more or
less, to a point on the Westerly right-of-way line of 16th Avenue;
thence South 0002100" West, along said right-of-way line, a
distance of 0.91 feet more or less, to the Point of Beginning.
Together with the Fillet of a curve, concave to the Northwest,
having a radius of 25.00 feet whose tangents are the projections
of the West right-of-way line of 16th Avenue and the Northeasterly
right-of-way line of 3rd Street; and less, however, the fillet of
a curve concave to the Northwest having a radius of 25.00 feet
whose tangents are the projections of the West right-of-way line
of 16th Avenue and the North right-of-way line of 2nd Street.
Exhibit "A"
AUG 1 1984
39
Booik 57 PA;E S j9
FF,
AUG 1 1984 aocK 57 pr,CE 860
From the intersection of the North right-of-way line of 2nd Street
with the West right-of-way line of 16th Avenue as shown on the
Plat of Indian River Heights Unit 3, as recorded in Plat Book 6
Page 49 of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida bear
due West along the North right-of-way line of 2nd Street (For the
purpose of this description the North right-of-way line of 2nd
Street is assumed to bear due West), a distance of 135.06 feet
more or less to the Point of Beginning.
Said point being also the intersection of said North right-of-way
line with the Southerly projection of the East line of Lot 17,
Block "A" of said plat of Indian River Heights Unit 3; continue
thence due West a distance of 134.00 feet more or less to the East
right-of-way line of 17th Avenue; thence North 0°04100" East,
along said right-of-way line, a distance of 78.22 feet more or
less to the North corner of a triangular piece of property, as
shown on said Plat of Indian River Heights Unit 3, formed by the
North right-of-way line of 2nd Street, the East right-of-way line
of 17th Avenue and the Southwesterly right-of-way line of 3rd
Street; thence South 89°59'00" East, parallel with the North line
of aforementioned Lot 17, a distance of 134.00 feet more or less
to a point on the East line of said Lot 17; thence South 0°04100"
West, along said East line, a distance of 78.17 feet more or less
to the Point of Beginning.
Exhibit "B-1"
Beginning at the intersection of the North right-of-way
line of 2nd Street with the West right-of-way lineof
16th Avenue as shown on the plat of Indian River _
Heights Unit 3 as recorded in Plat Book 6 Page 49 of
the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida;
thence due West (for the purpose of this description
the North right-of-way line of 2nd Street is assumed to "-
bear due West), a distance of 135.06 feet, more or less
to the intersection of the North right-of-way line of
2nd Street with the Southerly extension of the West
line of Lot 16, Block A said Plat of Indian River
Heights, Unit 3; thence North 0°04100" East, along said
Southerly extension of the West line of said Lot 16, a
distance of 46.51 feet more or less to the Southwest
corner of said Lot 16, Block A, as shown on said Plat
of Indian River Heights Unit 3, said Southwest corner
being also a point on a curve concave to the North,
having a radius of 291.76 feet and whose radius point
bears North 32°47157" East; thence Easterly along the
arc of said curve through a central angle of 28°16'12",
a distance of 143.96 feet more or less to the
intersection of said curve with the Westerly
right-of-way line of 16th Avenue; thence South 0°02100"
West, along said right-of-way line, a distance of 0.91
feet more or less to the Point of Beginning.
Together with the Fillet of a curve, concave to the
Northwest, having a radius of 25.00 feet whose tangents
are the projections of the West right-of-way line of
16th Avenue and the Northeasterly right-of-way line of
3rd Street; and less, however, the Fillet of a curve
concave to the Northwest having a radius of 25.00 feet
whose tangents are.the projections of the West
right-of-way line of 16th Avenue and the North
right-of-way line of 2nd Street.
Exhibit "B-2"
40
M M
1
15
1.I
13\80�E3.
ZI
14.41
29
13
13 5'
•
4.46'
12
p
.2
1 34 '
134
1
4.sd'
Z(3I
1-5
.27
SCALE t"siod
1
4.55'
96
59
P.R.C. -
In . 1 35'
19
%
0
130' 1 90°13S' 7 0' .8.2
II
o2t
111.941;
1.94;.
130
A11132
E-_p
LF P, 1--3 ii,1i D
AUG -1 1984
'A
ZI
14.41
29
13
4.46'
p
hA
1 34 '
134
1
4.sd'
1-5
.27
SCALE t"siod
1
4.55'
96
59
25
4.63'
.24
�
134'
_
13,67-
.23
�"•vIIQI_m�tI
9
11
:72'
rn
13 4.76
.21
.20
134*
t9
.85
19
R
133.83
''
oo
N11II�w
.
1 .94'
�Z
/7
.3
co
-ell
m
I4
In . 1 35'
19
%
0
130' 1 90°13S' 7 0' .8.2
II
o2t
111.941;
1.94;.
130
A11132
E-_p
LF P, 1--3 ii,1i D
AUG -1 1984
'A
ZI
o
SCALE t"siod
In . 1 35'
19
%
0
130' 1 90°13S' 7 0' .8.2
II
o2t
111.941;
1.94;.
130
A11132
E-_p
LF P, 1--3 ii,1i D
AUG -1 1984
'A
AUG 1 1984 aooK 57 FVA.cF 86
ROYALE GARDEN VILLAGE - VISTA GARDENS WASTEWATER ALLOCATION
Utility Director Pinto reviewed the following memo,
with the correction that the applicant is John Lyon not
Lyons.
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: July 25, 1984 FILE:
The Board of County Commissioners
THRU: Michael Wright
County Administrator
407 0
FROM: Terrance G. Pinto
Utility Director
SUBJECT: ROYALE GARDEN VILLAGE
VISTA GARDENS WASTEWATER ALLOCATIO
REFERENCES:
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Mr. John LyonK has requested County wastewater service from the Vista
Gardens wastewater plant for the Royale Garden Village site plan
located at the old site of the WAXE radio station.
At Mr. Lyons expense, Carter and Associates performed an evaluation
of the Gardens Plant and determined that there would be sufficient
capacity within the plant to service the site plan at.buildout of
the Vista Gardens development. The evaluation also addressed alter-
natives fo-i expanding the Vista Gardens plant if future expansion
of the plant become necessary to accomodate future flows.
According to the evaluation, Mr. Lyons proposed development would
generate approximately 15000 gallons per day of wastewater, while
the Vista plant would have 18000 gallons per day of flow available
at buildout of the Vista Gardens service area.
ANALYSES:
It is the opinion of staff, based upon the evaluation prepared by
Carter and Associates, that the Vista Gardens wastewater plant can
service Mr. Lyons project and have sufficient capacity to satisfactorily
service the Vista Gardens development at buildout. In the event
problems were encountered in providing adequate service in the future,
the plant can be readily expanded.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the
Division of Utility Services to provide the requested wastewater service
to Mr. Lyons Royale Gardens Village site plan via the Vista Gardens
wastewater treatment plant. This approval should be subject to the
following conditions:
1. Mr. Lyons must construct the lift station and a 6 inch force
main as necessary to obtain service from the Vista Gardens facility.
He must also obtain all necessary utility easements for accomo-
dating the lift station and associated force main.
41
2. fir. Lyons must pay all required connection and impact fees.
3. A bond or appropriate funding should be provided to expand the
Vista Gardens wastewater plant if, as a result of the flows from
the subject project, an expansion of the Vista Garden facility
becomes necessary to accomodate future flows at buildout of
Vista Garden.
Staff feels the bond or appropriate funding is necessary since
the county, through agreements, is committed to provide adequate
service to the Vista Gardens development at buildout.
4. If an alternative means of effluent disposal becomes available
to Mr. Lyons prior to completing construction of the site plan, I
the alternative must be implemented rather than utilizing the I
Vista Gardens facility.
Director Pinto explained that what we have is someone
who is building on Route 1. His property is adjacent to two
existing sewerage treatment plants - one at Vista Gardens
where we feel there is some capacity that can be utilized
even though we do have a commitment when.the plant is turned
over to us that it has to accommodate Vista Properties total
build -out. He noted that the alternatives are what concerns
staff, i.e., one alternative being to wait until the final
master plan is completed and the build -out of Vista
properties. If this means construction of another treatment
plant, staff feels the best alternative for the County is to
utilize the plants we have to the very maximum. Mr. Pinto
felt strongly that any plant that is near capacity, we would
not want to have people buy up and reserve capacity, but
rather that the capacity should be available for whoever is
ready to build, has site plans, etc.
Commissioner Wodtke stated that he did feel it is
logical that those who are closest to the plant should
connect.
Chairman Scurlock agreed and emphasized that we must
have a consistent, well thought-out, firm policy, and
proximity should be one of the considerations.
Discussion ensued re our commitment to reserve enough
capacity for the build -out of Vista Properties, both
residential and commercial, and Utilities Director Pinto
42
AUG 11994 Boa `� PnE 86
-I
AUG 1 1994 BOOK 57 P�,,,F.86
noted that there is a provision that this particular plant
can be increased in capacity another 100,000 gallons.
The question of easements then arose, and Director
Pinto emphasized that it is Mr. Lyon's responsibility to
obtain those easements and make them available.
Discussion continued at length with the Board
emphasizing the importance of consistency and of reserv-
ing capacity for those who are ready to go, and Chairman
Scurlock suggested the following requirements:
1) proximity and engineering reasonableness;
2) existing site plan and permits;
3) additional capacity available;
4) all improvements necessary to effect service to be borne
by applicant; and
5) ability to develop the property.
The Chairman believed that Mr. Lyon could not get site plan
approval because he does not have sufficient area to build
with a package plant, but Director Pinto noted that Mr. Lyon
could reduce the size of his project accordingly.
Chairman Scurlock then questioned how you would decide
between two properties that met all the requirements.
Utility Director Pinto felt it would be whoever made
application first and had a site plan as he believed the key
is that it must be closer to reality than just an applica-
tion and a dream.
Other -development in the area was brought up, and Mr.
Pinto believed that the Schlitt property has purchased a
commitment to the City of Vero Beach. Mecca Convalescent
Home and Oslo Square are looking at a site plan based on
construction of a treatment plant, but Mr. Pinto stated that
we are going to try very hard to find a system for them to
go into.
Commissioner Bird commented that the engineering report
indicated 18,000 gallons of capacity still available at
43
L,
total build -out of Vista Properties, and Mr. Lyon is
requesting 15,000, which he felt seems a little close.
Mr. Pinto explained that the engineering figures are
based on the maximum build -out of Vista Properties, assuming
they built on every part they could build on, and the 15,000
requested by Mr. Lyon is based on maximum flow.
Chairman Scurlock inquired if there is anything that
indemnifies the county in the event we do exceed capacity,
and Mr. Pinto informed the Board that we are asking that a
bond be posted that if we did reach capacity because of
prior commitment, then the applicant would have to bear the
total cost of whatever modifications are needed to
accommodate his flow.
The Board continued to go over all facets of the
situation - possible increase of plant capacity, impact on
the residents from connection of the Lyon's property as
opposed to the impact of his building another plant in this
same area, making maximum use of existing capacity, etc. It
was generally agreed that from a business point of view it
makes sense to utilize all capacity and also noted that the
Board has been consistent in trying to discourage further
package treatment plants.
Chairman Scurlock discussed a possible Motion and felt
basically what we are doing is identifying that there is
excess capacity and that it has been documented that we are
going to render service to the subject property based on (1)
uniqueness, (2) the proximity, (3) engineering feasibility,
(4) the applicant being responsible for all necessary
improvements and in some way indemnifying us, and (5)
timeliness of the application and site plan and a building
permit being pulled.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, to authorize
44
BOOK FAPUE � �
r -
AUG 1 1984
Bou 5 7 FACE 866
staff to move ahead and draft a memo setting
out the criteria by which we have identified
this particular property, owned by John Lyon,
to receive service from the Vista Gardens plant;
this criteria to be consistent for connection to
any county wastewater facility.
Attorney Brandenburg questioned how you would require
the applicant to "bite the bullet" if the plant does go over
capacity, and if, for instance, the property has been sold
in the meantime. Director Pinto explained we would
calculate the cost of an expansion, and the applicant would
put up either cash or a bond to guarantee that cost until we
determine the expansion is or is not necessary; whether the
property is sold or not would not enter into it.
Commissioner Bird wished the Attorney to confirm that
we have the ability to use this excess capacity, and
Attorney Brandenburg assured him that we do as long as we
give Vista the capacity they need as they build.
Commissioner Lyons asked Mr. Lyon if he had any comment
to make.
John Lyon, developer, came before the Board and
confirmed that he could downsize his project and build a
package plant, but he did not believe anyone would be happy
with that solution. He believed what the Commission is
proposing makes sense, and he further believed that
eventually there will be a sewer line down U.S.1.
Commissioner Lyons asked if Mr. Lyon had any objections
to what has been proposed by the Utility Director, and Mr.
Lyon stated that he did.net, but he would prefer to put up a
bond rather than cash.
r
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
45
I
Commissioner Lyons asked if there is anything that
could be done now to help Mr. Lyon along with his project as
we are coming back with a policy to be approved.
Director Keating believed that actually the Board has
approved Mr. Lyon's connection with the plant, and with that
approval, he has satisfied all site plan requirements and
will be on the agenda of the next P&Z meeting.
PETITION PAVING - 39TH AVE. BET. 10TH & 12TH STS. AND 11TH
AVE. BET. 2ND & 4TH STS.
Public Works Director Davis reviewed staff memo and
recommendation, as follows:
TO: The Honorable Members of ®ATE: Jul 18, 1984 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners y
THROUGH: Michael Wright,
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Public Hearing to Consider
Resolution Providing for the Pavinj
of 39th Avenue between 10th. & 12th
Streets and 11th Avenue between
2nd and 4th Streets and to Consider
Preliminary Assessment Rolls
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. REFERENCES:
Public Works Directo ,
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Valid petitions have been received from at least 66.70 of the
property owners of the following streets
1) 39th Avenue between 10th and 12th Streets (Preliminary
cost $22,864.00) 66.7% Consenting
2) 11th Avenue between 2nd and 4th Streets (Preliminary cost
$24,070.00)70% Consenting
Preliminary assessment rolls have been prepared for the paving
and drainage improvements. The total costs of these projects
is approximately $46,934.00. There is approximately $218,409.46
in the FY 83-84 budget for Petition Paving Account No. 703-214-
541-35.39.
Also, advertisement of the Public Hearing and notifications to
the property owners has been performed.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
After consideration of the public input provided at the Public
Hearing, it is recommended that motions be made to
AUG 1 1984
L-
46
P(iiiK e v PAISF 867
I
AUG 1 1994 Bou, 57 PPF 868
1) adopt resolutions, providing for the paving and drainage
improvements for each petition_ paving project, subject
to the terms outlined in the Resolutions. The applicable
interest rate shall be 1% over the prime rate at the time
the final assessment roll is approved.
2) approve preliminary assessment rolls including any changes
made as a result of the Public Hearing.
3) allocate $46,934 from the Petition Paving account to fund
this work.
4) the Road and Bridge Division be notified to schedule con-
struction, probably in early 1985.
Director Davis reported that staff held a meeting with
the block residents to explain the project. He informed the
Board that there was an error in the preliminary assessment
roll on 39th Avenue. James and Madeline Gaskell own two
lots, 12 and 13, but in the letter that was sent out, we
only informed them that they had been assessed for one lot.
Their assessment, therefore, would be twice what was shown
on the Roll. The Dixons, who own Lot 14, were assessed for
two lots, and their assessment will be half the amount of
which they were informed. Director Davis apologized to.the
Gaskells and Dixons, for these mistakes; he explained that
these numbers will be reversed on the roll, and this does
not affect the validity of the roll.
The Gaskells and Dixons concurred with the statement
made by Mr. Davis as to the ownership of lots.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard
re 39th Avenue.
Mrs. Madeline Gaskell, 1025 39th Avenue, had some
questions for the engineer. She noted that from 12th Street
to 39th Avenue, it is very dangerous and narrow with a deep
ditch. The entrance to 38th Avenue has been widened and
improved with cement bags. She wished to know if this will
be done on 39th Avenue.
Public Works Director Davis confirmed that the entrance
to 39th Avenue will be improved and headwalls put on the end
of the culvert.
47
Mrs. Gaskell also wished to know if there will be a
culvert under 12th Street rather than a ditch turning the
corner.
Director Davis explained that drainage in that area has
to run from south to north and we would like to cut around
the corner and use one culvert to serve two streets -
halfway between 38th and 39th Avenues. There is a back lot
easement there. If we don't do it that way, we would have
to keep the drainage out front.
James Gaskell noted that on 38th Avenue there is a
ditch on one side where the culverts go, and he wished to
know if the ditch will be just on one side of 39th Avenue.
Director Davis stated that the drainage for 39th Avenue
will be different than for 38th as we were working with some
existing conditions on 38th Avenue where some of the people
had driveways in county right-of-way and we did not want to
rip all that out; we felt we could live with the existing
conditions. He informed Mr. Gaskell that he has the road
design upstairs and would be glad to show him exactly what
it will look like.
Mrs. Gaskell then expressed concern about the depth of
the ditches on 38th Avenue.
Public Works Director Davis explained that project
isn't completed, and our crews still have to do some
finishing work. He pointed out, however, that to get the
water to run from 10th to 12th St., we must establish a
gradient so the water will flow. He believed the deepest is
about 21, but this is necessary because land in Florida is
so flat. He further noted that some of the residents elect
to purchase additional culverts for their frontage, and we
will work with them; a 20' length costs about $120.00 - $6 a
foot.
The Chairman determined that no one else wished to be
heard.
48
AUG 1 1984 BDDK 5 7 PACT 889
-I
AUG 1 1984 PooK 17 P,+rE 8` o
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
closed the hearing on 39th Avenue.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
adopted Resolution 84-54 providing for the
paving and drainage improvements for 39th
Avenue between 10th and 12th Sts.; the
applicable interest rate to be to over the
prime rate at the time the final assessment
roll is approved.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
approved the Preliminary Assessment Roll for
the petition paving of 39th Avenue between
10th and 12th Sts., including any changes
made as a result of the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
allocated $22,864 from the Petition Paving
account to fund the paving and drainage
improvements for 39th Avenue between 10th
and 12th Sts. and notified the Road & Bridge
Division to schedule construction.
49
RESOLUTION NO. 84- S4
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUN'T'Y
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COMM,
FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR CUMIN PAVING
AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT TO 39TH AVENUE
BETWEEN 10TH AND 12TH STREETS; PROVIDING
THE TOTAL ESTIMATED COST, METHOD OF
PAMM OF ASSESSMENTS, NUMBER OF MZXAL
INS'T'AI MF'NTS, AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF
THE AREA SPECIALLY BENEFITED.
WHEREAS, the County Public Works Department has received
a public improvement petition, signed by more than 2/3 of the owners of
property in the area to be specially benefited, requesting paving and
drainage improvements to 39th Avenue between 10th and 12th Streets; and
WHEREAS, the petition has been verified and meets the
requirements of Ordinance 81-27, and design work including cost esti-
mates has been completed by the Public Works Division; and
WHEREAS, the total estimated cost of the proposed im-
provements is $22,864.00; and
WHEREAS, the special assessment provided hereunder shall,
for any given record owner of property within the area specially bene-
fited, be in an amount equal to that proportion of seventy-five
percent(75o) of the total cost of the project which the number of lineal
feet of road frontage owned by the given owner bears to the total number
of lineal feet of road frontage within the area specially benefited, and
shall become due and payable at the Office of•the Tax Collector of
Indian River County ninety (90) days after the final determination of
the special assessment pursuant to Ordinance 81-27; and
MMZEA.S, Indian River County shall pay the remaining
twenty-five percent(25o) of the total cost of the project; and
WHEREAS, any special assessment not paid within said
ninety (90) day period shall bear interest beyond the due date at a rate
established by the Board of County Commissioners at the time of
preparation of the final assessment roll, and shall be payable in two
(2) equal installments, the first to be made twelve (12) months from the
due date and the second to be made twenty-four(24) months from the due
date; and
WHEREAS, after examination of the nature and anticipated
usage of the proposed improvements, the Board of County Commissioners
has determined that the following described properties shall receive a
direct and special benefit from these improvements, to wit:
Lots 10 thru 18, Block D; Lots 1 through 10, Block K;
Lots 1 thru 9, Block E; Malaluka Gardens Subdivision on
record in Plat Book 4 Page 10 of the Public Records of
Indian River County, Florida;
50
ROfiK e.� 7 Ft!.,E 871
� AUG 1 �9�4 J
I
AUG 1 1984
r,
goon �� 9 r�aC F 8 7 2"
together with: The East 180' of North 1.89 acres of East 12 -
of
of North 10 acres of East 1-12 of Tract 12,
Section 10, Township 33 South, Range 39 East; (OR Bk 477 Page
99); and
North 90' of the East 150' of the South 3 acres of the East 5
acres of the North 10 acres of the East h of Tract 12,
Section 10, Township 33 South, Range 39 East; and
the South 3 acres of the East 5 acres of the North 10 acres
of the East ;2 of Tract 12, Section 10, Township 33 South,
Range 39 East, and
the South 121.95 feet of the East 150' of the South 3 acres
of the East 5 acres of the North 10 acres of the East Z of
Tract 12, Section 10, Township 33 South, Range 39 East; all
according to the last general plat of the Indian River Farms
Company, filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit
Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, filed in Plat Book 2,
Page 25, now a part of the public records of Indian River
County, Florida
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY cavisSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
I. The foregoing recitals are affirmed and ratified in
their entirety.
2. A project providing for paving and drainage improve-
ments to 39th Avenue between 10th and 12th Streets, heretofore desig-
nated as Public Works Project No.8337, is hereby approved subject to the
terms outlined above and all applicable requirements of Ordinance 81-27.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Bird Who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commis-
sioner Wo dtke and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as
follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Ave
Vice -Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Ave
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Ave
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 1st day of August , 1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By I c.
DON C. SC[JRLOCK, JR.
51 Chairman
Chairman Scurlock requested that the Public works
Director explain how we set priorities to do this paving,
and Mr. Davis went over their schedule, noting that they are
scheduled to February of 1986 based on one project a month,
which is conservative. They have about 18 projects and they
go down the list as they are assigned; projects are added as
they come in and priorities do not change. Right now this
particular project is planned for October of 1984.
Chairman Scurlock asked if the residents can contract
with an outside contractor if they do not wish to wait for
the county to do the work, and Director Davis confirmed that
option is certainly there, but the cost will escalate.
The Chairman opened the public hearing on the petition
paving of 11th Avenue between 2nd and 4th Streets and asked
if anyone present wished to be heard. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 84-55 providing for the paving and
drainage improvements for 11th Avenue between
2nd and 4th Sts; the applicable interest rate to
be to over the prime rate at the time the final
assessment roll is approved.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously approved
the Preliminary Assessment Roll for the petition
paving of 11th Avenue between 2nd and 4th Sts.
52
AUG 1 1984
BUUK A Acf.
-I
AUG 1 1984 BOOK 57 PAGE 8 74
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
allocated $24,070 from the Petition Paving
account to fund the paving and drainage
improvements for 11th Avenue between 2nd
and 4th Sts. and notified the Road & Bridge
Division to schedule construction.
RESOLUTION NO. 84- 55
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR CAIN PAVING
AND DRAINACM IMPROVEMENT TO 11th AVENUE
BSZWEEN 2ND AND 4TH STREETS; PROVIDING
THE TOTAL ESTIMATED COST, METHOD OF
PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENTS, NUMBER OF ANNUAL
INSTM MP`.n1TS , AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF
THE AREA SPECIALLY BENEFITED.
WHEREAS, the County Public Works Department has received
a public improvement petition, signed by more than 2/3 of the owners of
property in the area to be specially benefited, requesting paving and
drainage improvements to 11th Avenue between 2nd and 4th Streets; and
WHEREAS, the petition has been verified and meets the
requirements of Ordinance 81-27, and design work including cost esti-
mates has been completed by the Public Works Division; and
WHEREAS, the total estimated cost of the proposed im-
provements is $24,070.00; and
WiH EAS, the special assessment provided hereunder shall,
for any given record owner of property within the area specially bene-
fited, be in an amount equal to that proportion of seventy-five
percent(75o) of the total cost of the project which the number of lineal
feet of road frontage owned by the given owner bears to the total number
of lineal feet of road frontage within the area specially benefited, and
shall become due and payable at the Office of the Tax Collector of
Indian River County ninety (90) days after the final determination of
the special assessment pursuant to Ordinance 81-27; and
WHEREAS, Indian River County shall pay the remaining
twenty-five percent(25a) of the total cost of the project; and
53
WHEREAS, any special assessment not paid within said
ninety (90) day period shall bear interest beyond the due date at a rate
established by the Board of County Commissioners at the time of
Preparation of the final assessment roll, and shall be payable in two
(2) equal installments, the first to be made twelve (12) months from the
due date and the second to be made twenty-four(24) months from the due
date; and
WHEREAS► after examination of the nature and anticipated
usage of the proposed improvements, the Board of County Commissioners
has determined that the following described properties shall receive a
direct and special benefit from these improvements, to wit:
Lots 1 through 17, Block G, Lots 18 thru 34, Block J,
Indian River Heights Unit 7 on record in Plat Book 7 Page
29 of Public Records of Indian River County, Florida
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
1. The foregoing recitals are affirmed and ratified in
their entirety.
2. A project providing for paving and drainage improve-
ments to 11th Avenue between 2nd and 4th Streets, heretofore designated
as Public Works Project No.8336, is hereby approved subject to the terms
outlined above and all applicable requirements of Ordinance 81-27.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Ccanmdssioner
Lyons Who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commis-
sioner Wo dtke and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as
follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Ave
Vice -Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Ave
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Ave
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Ave
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Ave
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 1st day of August , 1984.
Attest:/'.. a0)
. FREDA WRIGHT, Cled
L- AUG 1 1984
54
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
VIA.. ..«
BOCK 57 F'.InIE875
Fr -
BOOK 57 f'A�E 876
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. 11422 - 11636 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 11:10 o'clock
A.M.
Attest:
Clerk
55
J--7-
Chairman
EA
I