HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/19/1984Wednesday,September 19, 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, September 19, 1984, at 9:00 o'clock A.M.
Present were Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Patrick B.
Lyons, Vice Chairman; William C. Wodtke, Jr., Margaret C.
Bowman, and Richard N. Bird. Also present were Michael J.
Wright, County Administrator; Gary Brandenburg, Attorney to
the Board of County Commissioners; L.S. "Tommy" Thomas,
Intergovernmental Director; Jeffrey K. Barton, OMB Director;
and Barbara Bonnah, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order. Reverend Tom
Bates, First Church of God, gave the invocation. and
Commissioner Bird led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Administrator Wright requested a 90 -day postponement of
Item 9 - Appraisal of SR -512 Right-of-way.
ON MOTION by,Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board
unanimously postponed the above item for
90 days.
Chairman Scurlock requested the addition to today's
agenda of a discussion re Treasure Coast Regional Planning
Council.
s E P 1 1-984
BOOK 8 PA,E 3?3
I
1984 BOOK
SEP 19 5� Fr c
Chairman Scurlock requested the addition to today's
agenda of two items: a discussion re the Beach Preservation
and Restoration Committee and a very short report on the
matter of the sewer rates the City charges to unincorporated
areas in the County.
Commissioner Wodtke requested the addition to today's
agenda of a discussion regarding the Data Processing
Committee.
Commissioner Lyons requested the addition of a report
on his negotiations with the Medical Examiner, Dr. Leonard
Walker.
Chairman Scurlock requested the addition of a
discussion regarding the temporary closing of Jungle Trail
during the canker threat to the citrus trees.
Attorney Brandenburg requested the addition of two
items: a report on Fred Waterfield's suit against the
Sheriff and a report as to the closing costs involved in the
purchase of the Perlini property in the "Save Our Coast"
program.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously added the above items to today's
agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Wodtke asked that Items C, D, F and N be
removed from the Consent Agenda at this time.
VA. Report
Received and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk:
General Development Utilities, Inc. Financial Statements as
of 6/30/84; Statement of Earnings, Seven Months Ended
July 31, 1984.
2
�B. Budget Amendment - FEC Payments
The Board reviewed the following budget amendment:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: September 6, 1984
.
otl�
FROM: Jeffrey K. Barton,
OMB Director
SUBJECT: FEC Payments
REFERENCES:
FILE:
The following budget amendment is to allocate the funds to cover the FEC payments
for the remainder of this fiscal year as there is approximately $5,000.00 left in
the account and we have $12,493.71 in invoices.
Account Title
A ---...ted. %I—
FEC Payments 004r243-519-34.46
Reserve for Contingencies 004-199x-51399.91
Balance in Reserve
as of 8/30/84
$197,194
Increase Pecrease
7,500
7,500
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously approved the above budget amendment,
as recommended by OMB Director Barton.
3
SEP 19 1984 Boas 58 FAUE 32.5
r-3,96
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58 F',-V
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING
IRC BID #207 1 Aug. 28, 1984
BID TITLE ELEVATOR SERVICE ,� 0 3��
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
h�
1840 25th Street
w�
ti
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
114
�
BID TABULATION
v �:
s o
�,tr 0110v �m
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING
IRC BID #207 1 Aug. 28, 1984
BID TITLE ELEVATOR SERVICE ,� 0 3��
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE
1. Service Maintenance Agreement
for Two(2) Passenger Elevators
Co. Admin. Bldg. 2 Each 341 00
686 84 1 342 82
2. Service Maintenance Agreement
?
for One (1) Passenger Elevator
IRC Jail 1 Each 63 001
255 83 80 0
3. Service Maintenance Agreement
for One 1) Passenge
County Court House 1 Each 78 00
265 40 80 0
Total Monthly Cost 482 OC
1208 07 502 8
E. IRC Bid #207 - Elevator Service Maintenance Agreement
(Annual Bid)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/31/84:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 31, 1984 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright SUBJECT: IRC BID #207 - Elevator Service
County Administrator
Maintenance Agreement (Annual Bid)
FROM: REFERENCES:
Caroly "Goodrich, Manager
Purchasing Department
1. Description and Conditions
Bids were received August 28, 1984 at 11:00 A.M. for IRC #207- Elevator
Service Maintenance Agreement.
4 Bid Proposals were sent out, 3 Bids were received.
4
I
2. Alternatives and Analysis
The low bid was submitted by Electro Mechanical Systems, Inc. in the amount
of $482.00 per month.
Electro Mechanical Systems currently has the contract at a monthly charge of
$510.00 per month.
This agreement is for the period October 1, 1984 through September 30, 1987,
with yearly renewal options at the end of each year.
3. Recommendation and Funding
It is recommended that IRC #207 be awarded to the low bidder, Electro Mechanical
Systems, Inc.
Funds budgeted in Building & Grounds.Account #001-220-519-33-49 and
County Jail Account #001-906-523-33-49.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously awarded annual Bid #207 to the low
bidder, Electro Mechanical Systems, Inc. in the
amount of $482.00 for the annual elevator service
maintenance, as recommended by Purchasing Manager
Goodrich.
I- - -- ----- -- ------- -- -- -- - I /y -
uwr nu ur vvu" 1 T % u1v11v11JJ1VIVCnJ
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960 h�
BID TABULATION
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING ��3i F s�,
IRC BID #207 Aug. 28, 1984 �� y ro ^ o
BID TITLE ELEVATOR SERVICE10
3
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE
1. Service Maintenance Agreement
for Two(2) Passenger Elevators
Co. Admin. Bldg. 2 Each 341 00
686
84 342
82
2. Service Maintenance A reement
,
for One 1 Passenger Elevator
IRC Jail 1 Each 63 00
255
83 80
0
3. Service Maintenance Agreement
for One 1) Passenge
County Court House 1 Each 78 00
265
4080
0
Total MonthlyCost 482 0
1208
07 502
8
67
SEP 19 1984 BOOK FIE 3? 7
SEP 19 1994
BOOK
G. IRC Bid #209 - Road Striping Paint (Annual Bid)
G
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/31/84:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
THRU: Michael Wright
County Administrator
DATE: August 31, 1984 FILE:
SUBJECT: IRC BID #209 - Road Striping _
Paint (Annual Bid).
FROM: REFERENCES:
Carolyn odrich, Manager
Purchasi g Department
I. Description and Conditions
Bids were received August 28, 1984 at 11:00 A.M. for IRC #209 - Road
Striping Paint for the Traffic Engineering Department.
7 Bid Proposals were sent out, 4 Bids were received.
2. Alternatives and Analysis
This year bids were requested on both oil base paint and water base paint.
The Traffic Engineering Department has determined they will be using oil
base paint. The low bid for oil base paint was submitted by Roadway Supply,
Atlanta, Ga.
Traffic Engineering will be using only approximately 1 - 5 gal. pail of black
paint in 1 year.
3. Recommendation and Funding
It is recommended that IRC #209 be awarded to the low bidder for oil base
road striping paint, Roadway Supply.
Funds to come from Account #001-245-541..-35-35
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously awarded annual Bid #2.09 to the low
bidder, Roadway Supply of Atlanta, Ga., for oil
base road striping paint at the prices set out in
the following bid tabulation.
IP
C.1
BID
BID
NO. DATE OF OPENING
IRC BID 209 Aug. 28, 1984
TITLE ROAD STRIPING PAINT
Qy
a.
- i `a
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ITEM
NO.
4a
A
1840 25th Street
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
(5/gal Pails)
b
6 25
5
89
5 75
BID TABULATION
BID
BID
NO. DATE OF OPENING
IRC BID 209 Aug. 28, 1984
TITLE ROAD STRIPING PAINT
a� h
1F
- i `a
_
ITEM
NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT
(5/gal Pails)
5 8
6 25
5
89
5 75
2.
Water Base -Yellow Price Pe gallon
(5/gal Pails)
5 94
6 30
'� 5
81
5 45
3.
Water Base - Black Price Per Gal.
(5/gal Pails)
5 56
8 90
NB
7 10
4.
Oil Base -White Price Per Ga
(5/gal Pails)
5 94
5 17
5
44
5 85
5.
Oil Base -Yellow Price Per Gal.
(5/gal Pails)
6.
Oil Base - Black Price Per Gal.
(5.gal Pails)
5 45
5 qq
5
1
5 9
7.
Days required for Del. Days
Days
Days
Days
Days
./H. IRC Bid #210 - Guard Rail (Annual Bid)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/31/84:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 31, 1984 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright SUBJECT: IRC BID #210 - Guard Rail (Annual Bid)
County Administrator
FROM: . / e" -L; -Z REFERENCES:
Carolyn( oodrich, Manager
Purchasing Department
I. Description and Conditions
Bids were received August 28, 1984 at 11:00 A.M. for IRC #210 - Guard Rail
for the Road & Bridge Department.
6 Bid Proposals were sent out, 2 Bids were received.
7
SEP 191984 Boa 58 F. jF1311
BOOK -58 p,A,r 330
2. Alternatives and Analysis
The low bid was submitted by Mike Hunter, Inc. Tampa, Fl. Many of the bid
prices are lower than the current bid prices. Mike Hunter has the current bid.
3. Recommendation and Funding
It is recommended that IRC #210 be awarded to the low bidder, Mike Hunter, Inc.
Funds budgeted for FY84-85 in Account #004-214-541-35-39.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously awarded annual Bid #210 to the low
bidder, Mike Hunter, Inc. of Tampa, for guard
rail at the prices set out in the following bid
tabulation.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
v
,rc
BID TABULATION
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING
IRC BID #210 Aug. 28, 1984 o a Q
BID TITLE GUARD RAIL
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT PI
Z5Ft Section Stee-T Ga v.
1• Guard R 'l _ Lineal Ft, 4
75
3
79
16
00
2. 121Ft. Standard Rail " 6
85
43
00
3. 121Ft- AnChor Rail 7
85
46
00
'.
4. 5Ft Convex RadiusIT
8
00
53
-6V
00
5. IOFt Convex RadiusJU
7
75
53
00
6. 15Ft Convex Radius7
75
5 00
7. I Beam Post 617t 0" Each 69
00
24
00
8. Special End Shoes Each 65
00
23
00
9. Buffer End Section Each 75
00
42
00
•
I
M
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATION
vo
Cr
'� o
to
y�
BID NO.
IRC BID 210
DATE OF OPENING
BID TITLE
GUARD RAIL
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRII
Steel Galvanized
10. Guard Rail Post Bolts Each
9
00
1
25
bteel Ualvanized
11. Guard Rail Post Washers Farh
1
00
26
12. ee Galvanize .
Rail Pnst Nutc Fac
13. Amber Reflectors Each
15
00
2
0
for Guard Rail
14. End Anchorage Type IV Each
15. Standard Flare P Each
38
00
285
00
All 0
None
Min.
5000 1
e
I. IRC Bid #211 - Asphalt Coated Steel Corregated &
Aluminum Metal Pipe (Annual Bid)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/31/84:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 31, 1984 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright S U BJ ECT:IRC BID #211- Asphalt Coated Steel
County Administrator Corregated & Aluminum Metal Pipe
_ (Annual Bid)
FROM: �-z�-c. REFERENCES:
Caro lynjloodrich, Manager
Purchas ng Department
1. Description and Conditions
Bids were received August 28, 1984 at 11:00 AM for IRC #211- Asphalt Coated
Corregated & Aluminum Metal Pipe for the Road & Bridge Department.
7 Bid Proposals were sent out, 2 Bids were received.
0
SEP 19 1984 BooK 58 FSE 331
SEP 19 1984
BOOK 58 FACE,3,32
2. Alternatives and Analysis
The overall low bidder is Southern Culvert Operations, Pinellas Park, F1., on
the sizes of pipe used most often by the Road & Bridge Department.
3. Recommendation and Funding
It is recommended that IRC #211 be awarded to the overall low bidder
Southern Culvert.
Funds to come from Account #004-214-541-35-32.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously awarded annual Bid #211 to the
overall low bidder, Southern Culvert, of
Pinellas Park, F1. for asphalt coated corregated
and aluminum metal pipe at the prices set out in
the following bid tabulation.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATION
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING
IRC BID #211 Aug. 28, 1984
BID TITLE ASPHALT COATED v a
ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
NO.
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE 1
1. Asphalt Coated Steel Corregated
s
m
'Q!^
��
' 4
Pipe:
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING
IRC BID #211 Aug. 28, 1984
BID TITLE ASPHALT COATED v a
ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
NO.
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE 1
1. Asphalt Coated Steel Corregated
Pipe:
0" - 165 Gauge Per Foot 5
12" "'
0
84
NB
51.87
„
11
7
02 '•
Isla 11
24" 14 Gauge Per Foot 13
48
12
79
�� 11 11
36" 11 1120:
05
18
81
42" 12 Gauge Per Foot 30
48
29
73
„ 1,
71-34
05
„ 11 39
22
40
69
60" 10 Gauge Per Foot 53
'82
56
26
64
4
67
00
10
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
481 011
47
1840 25th Street /
24" 14 Gauge Per Foot
Vero Beach, Florida 32960Qj
14
83
Z
1956
18
10
BID TABULATION
23 42
21
81
BID NO.
DATE OF OPENING
34
6
ti
48" "
BID TITLE
ITEM DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE
NO.
ITEM DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT
NO.
Asphalt Coated Steel Corregated Pipe
ALUMINUM METAL PIPE CONT'D
Cont'd.
84" - 8 Gauge Per Foot
130 72
112
31
23
11 11
149 891
129
76
2. ALUMINUM METAL PIPE
Y
1011
16 Gauge Per Foot 6 Ng
2" - " 6 52 61511 80
"
54" 11Ii
481 011
47
1 17
24" 14 Gauge Per Foot
15 76
14
83
30" is 99
1956
18
10
36" ° "
23 42
21
81
42" 12 Gauge
5
34
6
IRC BID #211
48" "
42 71
39
7
54" 11Ii
481 011
47
1 17
1
L BOARD OF COUNTY CiJPfPA1SSIONEii
1840 25th Street
o
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
i
� w
BID TABULATION
,oi =
BID NO.
DATE OF OPENING
IRC BID #211
BID TITLE ASPHALT COATED
CORREGATED & ALUM. METAL PIPE
ITEM DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT
NO.
ALUMINUM METAL PIPE CONT'D
60" - 10 Gauge Per Foot
68".
25
65
23
72" it
81
77
77
66
84" 8 Gauge Per Foot
123
55
NB
11 it
141 -
34
NB
11
SEP 19 1984
SEP 19
1984
BOOK
5
334
. IRC Bid #212
- Reinforced Concrete Pipe (Annual
Bid)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/31/'84:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 31, 1984 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright SUBJECT: IRC BID #212- Reinforced Concrete
County Administrator Pipe (Annual Bid)
0
FROM: ;0�n&,c-,G REFERENCES:
Carolyn 6* drich, Manager
Purchasing Department
1. Description and Conditions
Bids were received August 28, 1984 at 11:00 AM for IRC #212- Reinforced
Concrete Pipe for the Road & Bridge Department.
4 Bid Proposals were sent out. Of the 4 Bids returned, 1 was a "No Bid".
2. Alternatives and Analysis
The low bid was submitted by Hydro Conduit Corporation, Orlando, F1. This
years bid is a few cents lower on all sizes of pipe than last years bid.
Hydro Conduit has the current bid.
3. Recommendation and Funding
It is recommended that IRC #212 be awarded to the low bidder, Hydro Conduit
Corporation.
Funds budgeted for FY 84-85 in Account #004-214-541-35-32.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously awarded annual Bid #212 to the
low bidder, Hydro Conduit Corporation, Orlando,
F1., for reinforced concrete pipe at the prices
set out in the following bid tabulation.
12
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATION
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING
IRC BID #212 Aug. 28, 1984 v°qv°i� �� a
BID TITLhINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE ��o 3'
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
or
D�
1. REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE:
J
jm
4j°
4t°
15" If6
95
8
76
6 98
NB
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING
IRC BID #212 Aug. 28, 1984 v°qv°i� �� a
BID TITLhINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE ��o 3'
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
1. REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE:
Diameter as follows: Per Ft.
15" If6
95
8
76
6 98
NB
18" " 9
10
11
59
9 13
24" it 13
88
17
47
'.13 92
30"
'.
20
19 64
" 27
34
34
79
27 40
42" 37
8L
46
48
37 89
48" If 46
93
58
35
47 02
54"
58 98
60" 1170
65
89
53
70 77
" If 84
17
108
24
84 32
72" If 97
70
124
24
97 86
78" If 110
00.
145
53
NB
Prices to include delivery
to Road & Bridge Department or
�K. IRC Bid #213- Ready Mix Concrete (Annual Bid)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/31/84:
TO: Board. of County Commissioners DATE: August 31, 1984 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright SUBJECT: IRC BID #213- Ready Mix Concrete
County Administrator (Annual Bid)
FROM: 4�7Ld-,) REFERENCE
Carolyn Wodrich, Manager S•
Purchasing Department
1. Description and Conditions
Bids were received August 28, 1984 at 11:00 AM for IRC 213 - Ready Mix Concrete.
4 Bid Proposals were sent out, 3 Bids were received.
13
�
BOOP(
SEP 19 1984 F',GF �p3
SEP 191984
c�
� 1
BOOK 58 P�,,� 33G
2. Alternatives and Analysis
The low bid was submitted by Russell Concrete Vero Beach, F1. Russell Concrete
currently has the bid for Ready Mix Concrete.
3. Recommendation and Funding
It is recommended that IRC #213 be awarded to the low bidder, Russell Concrete.
Funds to come from Road & Bridge Account #004-214-541-35-33.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously awarded annual Bid #213 to.the low
bidder, Russell Concrete, Vero Beach, for ready
mix concrete at the prices set out in the
following bid tabulation.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATION
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING
IRC BID #213 Aug. 28, 1984 i Q `ti o y
BID TITLE
READY MIX CONCRETE
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE
1. Ready -Mix Concrete
2,500 p.s.i. Per Yd 40 00
41
00
38 70
2. Ready -Mix Concrete
3,000 p.s.i. Per Yd 41 50
42
50
40 15
3. Quantity Purchase without
Minimum Load
lCharge
Per Yd 5 d
d
5 vd
4. Less than Minimum Load
Charge Per Yd 50 00
50
00
50 00
14
IRC Bid #214 - Soil Cement Base Limerock Base
(Annual Bid)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/31/84:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 31, 1984 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright SUBJECT: IRC BID #214 - Soil Cement Base
County Administrator Limerock Base (Annual Bid)
FROM: "UZ �REFERENCES:
Caroly ' oodrich, Manager
Purchasing Department
1. Description and Conditions
Bids were received August 28, 1984 at 11:00AM for IRC #214 - Soil Cement
Base and Limerock Base...
3 Bids were sent out, 2 Bids were received.
2. Alternatives and Analysis
The low bidder on Items 1 & 2 is Pan American Engineering, Vero Beach, F1.
Item #3 is no longer being used and will be deleted from next years bid.
3. Recommendation and Funding
It is recommended that Items 1 & 2 be awarded to the low bidder, Pan American
Engineering.
Funds to come from Account #004-214-541-35-39.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously awarded annual Bid #214 to the low
bidder, Pan American Engineering, Vero Beach, for
construction of soil cement base and limerock
base at the prices set out in the following bid
tabulation.
15
SEP 19 1984 BaoK 58 PmU*E 37
SEP 19 1994
-I
BOOK
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATION
pia fro'
h �y
vj, �+ a o
�= 4 �A
BID NO.
IRC BID #214
DATE OF OPENING
Aug. 28, 1984
BID TITLE
SOIL CEMENT BASE & LIMEROCK BASE
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE
st ct' n o Soil Cement Base
Sq. Yd.
2 52
2 50
2. Limerock Base Sq. Yd.
54175
§00
3. Mixed -In -Place -Base
Sq. Yd. J.
. 5 75
JM. IRC Bid #215 - Road Rock (Annual Bid)
58 F�";F'13 ts
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/31/84:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 31, 1984 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright SUBJECT: IRC BID #215 - Road Rock
County Administrator (Annual Bid)
FROM: C.��o���r,C�
REFERENCES:
—Ca rolyoodrich, Manager
Purchasing Department
1. Description and Conditions
Bids were received August 28, 1984 at 11:00 AM for IRC #215 - Road Rock
for the Road and Bridge Department.
5 Bids were sent out, 2 Bids were received.
2. Alternatives and Analysis
The low bid was submitted by Florida Rock Industries, Ft. Myers, delivered
from their Ft. Pierce Quarry. Florida Rock Industries has the current bid.
10U.,
3. Recommendation and Funding
It is recommended that IRC #215 be awarded to the low bidder, Florida Rock
Industries.
Funds to come from Road & Bridge
Account #004-214-541-35-39.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously awarded annual Bid #215 to the low
bidder, Florida Rock Industries, Ft. Myers, F1.,
for road rock at the prices set out in the
following bid tabulation.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATION
y�ro
cam; r
�_w y0 ti
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING a'0 vs, s
IRC BID #215 Aug. 28, 1984
h
BID TITLEROAD ROCK (OLITE OR NARANGA TY
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRI
1. Approx. 150/T of Pit Run,
Miami Olite Coquina, Ocala or
Narangip Type Road Rock
Delivered to the County as
Directed Per Ton 8
25
10
50
17
SEP 19 1984 B09K 58 FA CF 33 9
BOOK 9, 8 FADE -40
0. IRC Bid #217 - Bahia Sod and St. Augustine Sod
(Annual Bid)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/4/84:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: September 4, 1984 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright SUBJECT: IRC BID #217 - Bahia Sod and
County Administrator
St. Augustine Sod (Annual Bid)
FROM: �rp-inti REFERENCES:
Carolyn(goodrich, Manager
Purchasilfig Department
1. Description and Conditions
Bids were received August 28, 1984 at 11:00 AM for IRC #217- Bahia Sod and
St. Augustine Sod.
14 Bid Proposals were sent out, 4 Bids were received.
2. Alternatives and Analysis
The overall low bidder is Landscaping by Riverside, Vero Beach, Fl. However,
Landscaping by Riverside had the bid this year and could not deliver sod as
requested by the County, although ample time had been given.
The second low bid was submitted by Florida Sod Co., Vero Beach. Their bid
is the same as Landscaping by Riverside, with the exception of delivery &
installation of St. Augustine Sod, which is $2.00 more per pallet.
3. Recommendation and Funding
It is recommended that IRC #217 be awarded to the second low bidder, Florida
Sod Company.
Funds to come from Account #004-214-541-35-39.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
awarded annual Bid #217 to Florida Sod Company,
Vero Beach, for Bahia sod and St. Augustine sod,
at the prices set out in the following bid
tabulation.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATIONZ.
a
v°
p b"
°b v
ti
ba; ti
y y
c�� o
"y i C Q# o �
����+ `�y°i k�m
BID NO.
IRC BID #217
DATE OF OPENING
Aug. 28, 1984
BID TITLE
BAHIA SOD AND ST AUGUSTINE SOD
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRI
1. BAHIA SOD Per Pallet
30
00
29
25
29
25
30'
00
2- ST AUGUS.TINF SOD Per Pallet
50
00
5
52
50
50
0
3. Furnish, Deliver & Install
Sod on Prepared Surface
anywhere in County Per Pallet
BAHIA SOD
37
80 1
40
50
38
38
37
80
ST AUGUSTINE SOD
60
00
67
50
66
25
62
00
/C. Budget balancing for FY 83-84
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/11/84:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: September 11, 1984 FILE:
SUBJECT: Budget Balancing for FY 83-84
-14S2111
FROM: Jeffrey K. Barton, REFERENCES:
Management & Budget Director
Please entertain a motion as follows:
Authorization for the Management and Budget Director to do the necessary budget
amendments for balancing the budget for the 83-84 Fiscal Year.
we�
SEP t9 1984 BOOK 8 RGUE 341
r SEP 19 1984
BOOK 58 F' tU _�49
Commissioner Bird believed he understood this but felt
it seemed rather broad; and OMB Director Barton explained
that this is a year end cleanup for fiscal 83-84.
Administrator Wright advised that the Board will get a
copy of everything that is done; this process is the same as
last year.
Commissioner Wodtke just wanted the media to
understand that there will be a report brought back to the
Board as to what was involved.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
BY Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
authorized OMB Director Barton to do the
necessary budget amendments for balancing the
budget for 83-84 Fiscal Year, with the under-
standing that the Board will receive a report
outlining the action taken.
JD. IRC Bid #206 - Fire Extinguisher Inspection & Service
(Annual Bid)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/31/84:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 31, 1984 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright SUBJECT: IRC BID #206 - Fire Extinguisher
County Administrator
Inspection & Service (Annual Bid)
FROM: d6-r-z&� REFERENCES:
Carolyn( oodrich, Manager
Purchasing Department
1. Description and Conditions
Bids were received August 28, 1984 at 11:00 A.M. for IRC #206 - Fire Extinguisher
Inspection and Servicing.
3 Bid Proposals were sent out, 2 bids were received.
20
2. Alternatives and Analysis
The overall low bidder is Vero Beach Fire Equipment Company. Vero Beach Fire
Equipment currently has the bid for Fire Extinguisher Inspection -and Servicing.
3. Recommendation and Funding
It is recommended that IRC #206 be awarded to the overall low bidder, Vero Beach
Fire Equipment.
Funds are budgeted for FY84-85 in Account #001-220-519-33-49.
Commissioner Bird expressed his annoyance in having
periodic inspections of fire extinguishers. He realized
that there are different types of fire extinguishers for
different types of fires, but noted that there are more
modern types that do not require service as often as the
older ones which must have the chemicals emptied and
replaced. He hoped that Building & Grounds Superintendent
Lynn Williams and staff are keeping up with the technology
and making sure that we have the most cost effective fire
extinguishers available.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
awarded annual Bid #206 to the overall low
bidder, Vero Beach Fire Equipment, for fire
extinguisher inspection and service at the prices
set out in the following bid tabulation.
21
BOOK
SEP 1.9 1984 �� D,.0 - 43
SEP 19 1994 BOOK 58 PAA 34
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
4
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UP
1840 25th Street
a
Q
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
all Fire Extinguishers Each 2100
-m
00
o�
-LO-
5013.
1 Pound thru 15 Pound Each 9
13.11
BID TABULATION
^v
�u
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING m� '
IRC BID #206 Aug. 28. 1984 m a o �'
•p^ i io
BID TITLE
FIRE EXTINGUISHER INSPECTION & SERVIC NG
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UP
1. Annual Inspection & Tagging of
Recharge Co2 Ext.
all Fire Extinguishers Each 2100
-m
00
5
-LO-
5013.
1 Pound thru 15 Pound Each 9
13.11
Recharge Regular Dry Chemical Ext.
2. 21 Pound Each 3 50
3
00 t
3. 5 Pound Each 5 50
4
00
O
4.10 Pound Each 9150
6
00
5.20 Pound Each 10 50
1 9
00
15. 22 Pound Each 5
Recharge Purple K or ABC Chem Ext.
5
00
6. 21 Pound Each 3 50
3
90 1
1
7. 5 Pound Each 5 50
5
00
5
10 Pound ach 9 50
10
00
nnl
R.
9. 20 Pound Each 10 50
15
00 1
1
001
5
00
Recharge Co2 Ext.
I NB
10, 21 Pound Each 3.00
1
50
NB
11`1 - 13 Pound thru 5 Pound Each 4 00
3
1 00
23. Recharge 24 Sal Fnam Fxt. Fa- B
ELOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATION
a •.Q
� Zr
.Qj
� w
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING !, '
•Z4 0 �
BID TITLE
ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
NO.
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UI
Recharge Co2 Ext.
12_6 Pound thru 'In Pound Farh 6
00
5
-LO-
5013.
1 Pound thru 15 Pound Each 9
13.11
(in
1 6
14-1f; Pound fit 1
O
Hydro e Co2 Ext.
15. 22 Pound Each 5
00
5
00
16. 3 Pound thru 5 Pound Each 5
001
5
00
17. 6 Pound thru 10 Pound Each 10
001
5
00
18.11 Pound thru 15 Pound Each in
nnl
r,
nnl
19.16 Pound thru 20 Pound- Each 10
001
5
00
20- Prharn NB
I NB
00
NB
23. Recharge 24 Sal Fnam Fxt. Fa- B
1
50
24, Hydrd Test 21 Ga. Foam Ext. Fa. NB
NB
22
F. .IRC Bid #208 - Full Maintenance Service Contract for
`' Carrier Chiller (Annual Bid)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/7/84:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: September 7, 1984 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright
County Administrator
SUBJECT: IRC Bid #208 - Full Maintenance
Service Contract for Carrier Chiller
(Annual Bid)
�a
FROM: C% L1�/_ REFERENCES:
Carol Goodrich, Manager
Purchasing Department
1. Description and Conditions
Bids were recieved August 28, 1984 at 11:00 A.M. for IRC #208 - Full
Maintenance Service Contract for the Carrier Chiller in the Administration
Building.
7 Bid Proposals were sent out: Of the 5 Bidders responding, 2 were "No
Bids".
2. Alternatives and Analysis
This agreement is for the period October 1, 1984 through September 30,
1987, with yearly renewal options at the end of each year.
A firm 3 year price was requested. Hazen -Trane Service Agency was the
only bidder that submitted a firm 3 year price. Attached is a letter from
Melvin Webb, Hazen -Trane stating they feel they should be awarded the bid
for that reason.
The low bid was submitted by Carrier Building Services, Tampa, Fl., in the
amount of $6900.00 per year. Carrier has the current contract in the amount
of $7044.00 per year. When submitting their bid, Carrier stated that an
"annual price adjustment may be performed on any anniversary date to reflect
the increase/decrease ratio of change in material and labor costs." We
asked Carrier for more firm prices on the second and third years. They
returned the attached letter stating the second year will not exceed
$7950.00 per year, and the third year will not exceed $8349.00 per year.
3, Recommendation and Funding
It is recommended that IRC #208 be awarded to the low bidder, Carrier
Building Services.
Funds are budgeted for FY84-85 in Account #001-220-519-34.62.
23
SEP 19 1984
BOOK U.F' U,- -345
rSEP191994
BOOK 8 c,�F 946
Administrator Wright assured Commissioner Wodtke of the
legality of accepting the low bid in this case.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
awarded annual Bid #208 to the low bidder,
Carrier Building Services, Tampa, F1., for
the full maintenance service contract for
the Administration Building at the prices set
out in the following bid tabulation.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATION
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING
IRC
IRC BID #208 Aug. 28, 1984
BID TITLE FULL MAINTENANCE SERVICE
FQR CARRIER CHILLER
m
ro
G�tiHti
0
0
C,
H
UNIT PRICE
44�
O
y
!v
py
ti� • ~�
G04`
$"
4
VO �4~
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING
IRC
IRC BID #208 Aug. 28, 1984
BID TITLE FULL MAINTENANCE SERVICE
FQR CARRIER CHILLER
aH y4
ti�
ro
G�tiHti
yILA
e y
i3CONTRACT
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE
1. Full Maintenance SPrvic
Contract For Carrier Chiller:
Total
NB
690000
NB
1st
8820
00
8976 0
_
"
2nd
9432 00
3rd
9912 00
N. IRC Bid #216_- Type II Asphalt Concrete (Annual Bid)
V
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/4/84:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: Sept. 4, 1984 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright SUBJECT: IRC BID #216 - Type II Asphalt Concrete
County Administrator (Annual Bid)
FROM: �� ��� REFERENCES:
Caroly Goodrich, Manager
Purchasing Department
1. Description and Conditions
Bids were received August 28, 1984 at 11:00 AM for IRC #216 - Type II
Asphalt Concrete.
7 Bid Proposals were sent out, 4 Bids were received.
2. Alternatives and Analysis
The low bid was received by Dickerson Florida, Inc., Stuart F1. Dickerson
currently has the bid for Type II Asphalt Concrete.
Dickerson has included an escalator clause in their bid price, per the
attached letter. The increase would amount to 0.18 per ton, still placing their
bid well below the second low bidder, Fort Pierce Contracting.
3. Recommendation and Funding
It is recommended that IRC #216 be awarded to the low bidder, Dickerson
Florida, Inc.
Funds budgeted for FY 84-85 in Account #004-214-541-35-39.
Commissioner Wodtke asked how this asphalt price
compares to last year's price and Public Works Director Jim
Davis believed last year's price was $38 compared to $40.75
for this year with an escalation clause predicated on the
increased cost in oil.
Commissioner Wodtke thought the cost of oil was coming
down and asked what effect this higher price of $40.75 a ton
would have on our petition paving program.
25
SEP 19 1984
Director Davis
BOOK 58 Pt: -UF , 47
SEP 19 1954 BOOK 5 pp F,q^ , Q
C� �E , 8
explained that an estimated $40 a ton was projected into the
program budget.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
awarded annual Bid #216 to the low bidder,
Dickerson Florida, Inc., for Type II asphalt
concrete at the prices set out in the following
bid tabulation.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATION
i c i
oro vo k
--[
BID NO DT
IRC BID 1216 {dug. ��, �� Q w Y z 4
BID TITLE �CIO � h�' 'Z'
TYPE II ASPHALT CONCRETE
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PF
1. TYPE II ASPHALT CONCRETE
Delivered O.B. Vero Reach
Est. 500/17 NB
28
90 58
00 32
00
2. Hauling & Spreading by approved
Mechanical spreader & furnishing
Type II Asphalt Concrete Surface
Course Material Est. 5000/1' 45 00
40
75 NB
45
00.
26
INTRODUCTION OF APPOINTEES TO ALCOHOL, DRUG ABUSE, AND
MENTAL HEALTH PLANNING COUNCIL
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/12/84:
TO: County Commission DATE: September 12, 1984 FILE:
FROM: Alice White
Introduction of
SUBJECT: Appointees to Alcohol,
Drug Abuse, and Mental
Health Committee
REFERENCES:
The appointees to the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health
Committee are:
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr.
Harry Hurst, Ph.D.
Stephen L. Derkash, M.D.
John Y. Ma, M.D.
Warren Winchester
Commissioner Wodtke introduced Dr. Ma and Warren
Winchester who were in attendance. He announced that the
organizational meeting of the new committee will be at 7:00
P.M. on September 26, 1984 in St. Lucie County. This
committee will have five representatives from each of the
four counties and will be an advisory board only.
27
SEP 19 1984 Boa 58 im-11 X49
SEP 1.9 1984
BOOK 58 FA,F 50
ETITION TO PAVE 16TH STREET BETWEEN KINGS HIGHWAY AND
51ST AVENUE
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/11/84:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: September 11, 1984 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Michael Wright,
County Adminstrator
SUBJECT: petition to Pave 16th Street
between Kings Highway and 51st Ave
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. REFERENCES: D. Michael Carpenter,, Ed Schlitt,
Public Works Director Realtors, to Michael Wright, County
AaTLinistrator dated Sept 6, 1984
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The petition has been submitted for the paving of 16th Street
from Kings Highway to 51st Avenue. The area benefiting from
the improvements is approximately 149.02 acres. Property owners
which own approximately 103.05 acres have signed the petition,
which computes to 69.150 of the benefited owners.
On July 11, 1984, the Board of County Commissioners approved
paving the road in the existing 30' right-of-way and to save
all trees possible.
The Schlitt Agency has requested permission to retain the
services of Beindorf, Associates, Consulting Engineers, to design
the road improvements immediately and contract out the construction
improvements so that the project would not have to be delayed
until the 20 projects for which previous petitions were submitted
are completed.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Beindorf and Associates would design the project and prepare
the preliminary assessment roll. County staff would then schedule,
advertise, and prepare for the Public Hearing. Engineering costs
will be paid by the Schlitt Agency.
If a Contractor constructs -the paving, certain charges such
as overhead, profit, and equipment charges will result in a higher
direct assessment to the County. Considering the 50% property
owner/50o County assessment for a collector road, the County
share could be $10,000 greater than the direct cost if the County
Road and Bridge Department did the work. The project is estimated
to cost approximately $70,000 if contracted out. Direct cost
if the County did the work would be approximately $45,000. A
.saving to the County would result in the County not having to
perform the Engineering and field work by County personnel, and
less maintenance on the road. The Ed Schlitt Agency has agreed
to consider paying the added direct cost that the County would
have for contracting out the work so that the Project could be
expedited.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FU14DING
It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners
approve the request to have Beindorf and Associates engineer
the 16th Street improvements�a.nd that the work be contracted
out. No funding considerations are presented for approval, since
this will be considered once bids are received.
28
Chairman Scurlock was concerned about having a
consistent policy in these situations and wanted to be sure
that whatever vehicle was found to accomplish this task
could be applied uniformly to other applicants who wished to
do the same sort of thing.
Public Works Director Jim Davis thought they would not
treat any future projects any differently as it would be to
the Department's benefit to get roads off the maintenance
route.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that this is a collector road
and believed the basic criteria required should be a
petition by the property owners, a cost determination, and
willingness by the property owners or the developer to pay
the extra amount resulting from having an outside firm do
the engineering. He felt that the County should not pay
more than its share, whatever the escalator price.
Director Davis confirmed that was what was intended,
but pointed out that many of our costs are indirect costs,
such as labor, etc., which do not deplete the petition
paving fund, and he was not sure that Mr. Schlitt would pay
the additional direct costs. If the project is going to be
allowed to proceed in this nature, i.e., designed by an
outside engineering firm and contracted out, Director Davis
believed some sort of commitment is needed that the County's
direct cost will not be more than if the County did the work
in-house.
Ed Schlitt agreed that the County needs to be
consistent in their policy, but pointed out that if this
project is delayed another year, the County would have some
on-going maintenance expense. Mr. Schlitt stated he did not
have a problem with the extra cost differential as long as
it did not exceed the estimated $10,000. He advised that
they have agreed to hire an design engineer at a cost of
$8,000-$9,000.
29
SEP 19 1984 Boa 8 ?,,-N X51
SEP 19 1994 BOOK 5 +;r5
Commissioner Bird understood then that we will crank
the $10,000 contribution into the project and then
distribute the remaining costs of the project among the
petitioners.
Director Davis explained that the $10,000 contributed
by the developer would offset the County's cost of $45,000.
The County would end up paying only $35,000 of the $90,000
total cost and the property owners will pay $45,000.
Mr. Schlitt was not sure whether or not the engineering
fees were included in the totals being discussed, and
Administrator Wright interjected that he understood that the
developer is saying that the engineering is part of the
project and is giving the County $10,000 to offset the extra
cost to the County.
Commissioner Bird wished to be sure the Commission set
a precedent here that they could live with, and Director
Davis advised that if the County did the engineering, the
costs allocated to the project would be considerably less.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, that the Board
approve the developer's request to have Beindorf &
Associates do the engineering work on the
extension of 16th St, from 51st. Avenue to
58th Avenue (Kings Highway).
Under discussion, Commissioner Bird understood then
that the developer has agreed to this formula, but he wanted
to be assured that the other property owners will have an
opportunity to be heard.
Director Davis advised that before the project can
begin, Beindorf & Associates will prepare and deliver the
design plans, assessment roll, and the cost estimate to the
30
A
L__ J
County. The County will schedule and advertise a public
hearing and notify the property owners by registered mail.
Chairman Scurlock noted that if the petition fails in a
public hearing, Mr. Schlitt would be responsible for the
engineering expense.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The
Motion was voted on and carried unanimously.
10 >r9 PUBLIC HEARING - COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST TO REZONE 149.9$,*(
�V,o �X -;', ) �—
ACRES FROM R -1A, B-1, AND C-lA, to MEDICAL DISTRICT E Jp,�-
a
The hour of 9:15 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a7��
in the matter of Ute• ,ice"%
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of l d" 1 `r �.., 7 ay,s�•,'
NOTICE — PUBLIC HEARING
Notice of hearing initiated by Indian River County to consider the adoption of a County onance rdis
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Rertricted Commercial District t land from to MED, Medical DisDistritrict. S bl ect proanned Bust I s District, and C-tA
p party is located North, and
Vero Beach, In said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore South of 37th Street, East Of U.S. Highway #1 and West of the Vero Beach City Limit Line—,,...
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been The subject property Is described as: -
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- Parcel #1: S'h of S''/a of SW% of Section 25, Township 32S, Range 39E. r : } j4 4 f F_
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of Parcel #2: SE'/. of SETA of SETA of Section 26, Township 32S, Range 39E f c;
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither aid nor promised an i > > p 9
Y p p y person, firm Parcel #3: Nh of NE/. of NE/s of Section 35, Township 32S, Ran a 39E +
or corporafton any discount, rebate. commission or refund for the purpose of securing this Parcel #4: NWV. of NW% of NE% of Section 36. Township 32S, Range 39E.
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.Parcel #5: NI/2 of NW% of Section 36, Township 32S, Range 39E.
moi/ All above described property subject to easements, restriction reservations and rights -of`.
Sworn to and subscribe befo met day o -4 tZ. 19 way of record. All property 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 Commissioners of Indian River County Florida, in the County
(eu ss Manager) Commission Chambers of the County Administration Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero i
Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, September 19, 1984, at 9:15 a.m.
If any person decides to appeal any decision made on the above matter, he/she will need a
(Clerk of t e Circuit Cou , Ind' River County, Florida) {record of the proceedings, and for such purposes, he/she may need to ensure that a verbatim
(SEAL) record of the proceedings is, made, which includes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal
Is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
Byy_
s
-Don C. Scurlock Jr. ,: ` v
Chairman
A% 29, Sept. 11, 1984. _
31
SEP 19 1984
BOOK 58 F'• PE 353
SEP 19 1984
BOOK 58 .{;F 354
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/6/84:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: September 6, 1984FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT:
.,n
Robert M.-Keatingl,1�Gt4AIg
Planning & Development Director
COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST
TO REZONE 149.98 ACRES
FROM R-lA, SINGLE-FAMILY
DISTRICT, B-1, PLANNED
BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND
C-lA, RESTRICTED COMMER-
CIAL DISTRICT, TO MED,
MEDICAL DISTRICT
FROM: Richard Shearer, AICP REFERENCES:zc-077 P&Z
Chief, Long -Range Planning CHIEF
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of September 19,.1984.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Indian River County is initiating a request to rezone 149.98
acres of land located east of U.S. Highway #1 on both sides of
37th Street (Barber Avenue) from R-lA, Single -Family District
(up to 4.3 units/acre), B-1, Planned Business District, and
C-lA, Restricted Commercial District, to MED, Medical District.
This request was initiated to establish a consistent zoning
pattern for this area and to provide an appropriate zoning
district for the area around Indian River Memorial Hospital.
On August 9, 1984, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
4 -to -0 to recommend approval of this request.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the
application will be presented. The analysis will include a
description of the current and future land uses of the site and
surrounding areas, potential.impacts on the transportation and
utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on en-
vironmental quality.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property includes Indian River Memorial Hospital,
the Medical Arts Center, the Neurological Associates building,
the North River Center professional office building, the Vero
Beach Care Center (a nursing home), the Indian River Village (a
nursing home under construction), the Indian River Medical
Center, citrus groves, and undeveloped land. North of the
subject property are citrus groves that are zoned R-lA. East
of the subject property is undeveloped land which is zoned
R-lA. Further east is the Indian River. South of the subject
property is a citrus grove, a retirement center, a golf course
and undeveloped land. Further south are single-family subdi-
visions. West of the subject property are undeveloped land and
single-family residences which are zoned C-lA and R-2, Multi-
ple -Family District (up to 15 units/acre).
32
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan generally designates the north and west
parts of the subject property as MD -1, Medium -Density Residen-
tial 1 (up to 8 units/acre), and the south and east parts of
the subject property (including the hospital) as LD -1,
Low -Density Residential 1 (up to 3 units/acre). However, the
Plan also designates.a 130 acre hospital/commercial node north
of the hospital, along 37th Street. This 130 acre node does
not include the hospital's property.
The Comprehensive Plan describes hospital/commercial nodes as:
The hospital commercial node is a concept which permits
the flexibility to promote a wide variety of uses which
support or are accessory to a major medical facility.
Selective uses within residential, institutional and
commercial zoning districts may be permitted. In effect,
the node would encompass a Commercial/Residential/Insti-
tutional mix with selective uses being permitted, which
are outlined in the County's land development ordinances.
The MED District was created specifically to be used with the
hospital/commercial nodes. The purpose of the MED District is
described as follows:
The MED, Medical District is intended to implement the
Comprehensive Plan policies for managing the development
of the major portions of lands designated as part of a
hospital/commercial node, to provide a variety of uses
which support a major medical facility, and to protect
such major medical facility from encroachment by land
uses which may have an adverse effect on the operation
and potential expansion of the facility. Land uses that
could cause an adverse effect would generally include
those uses that are likely to be objectionable to neigh-
boring properties because of noise, vibration, odors,
smoke, amount o= traffic attracted or generated, or other
physical manifestations.
Based on the stated Purpose of the hospital/ commercial nodes
and the purpose of the MED District, the MED District is the
most appropriate zoning district for the hospital and the land
adjacent to it. This rezoning request includes the hospital's
75.45 acres of land and 74.53 acres of land adjacent to the
hospital. Rezoning :his adjacent property to MED would leave
55.47 acres (130 - 4.53) of the node unallocated.
Transportation Svstp-
The subject property has direct access to 37th Street (clas-
sified as a secondar: collector street on the Thoroughfare
Plan). Rezoning the subject property could attract an addi-
tional 9,823 average annual daily trips (AADT). However, the
existing zoning alicws for future development that could
attract an additions-_ 7,069 AADT.
Environment
The subject proper:_ is not designated as environmentally
sensitive. However, the eastern half of the subject property
is in a flood -prone area. The eastern one-third of the subject
property is in an Zone which includes areas within the
100 -year flood pla_. The base flood elevation for this area
is "5". The remai"--='g parts of the subject property in a
flood -prone area are in a B zone which includes areas between
the limits of a 10:-7ear flood and a 500 -year flood.
33
S E P 19 1994 BOOK 58 Ft{,f 155
L-7-
SEP 19 1954 BOOK 58 Fq;F.15
Utilities
The subject property is generally served by County water
facilities and by City wastewater facilities.
Water: A ten -inch County waterline extends from the County
water main on the west side of U.S. Highway #1 along 36th
Street to the west end of the subject property. An eight -inch
line extends eastward from the ten -inch line to the hospital
property, runs north along the hospital property line, and
continues eastward along Barber Avenue.
Wastewater: The City of Vero Beach provides wastewater service
for the hospital and will provide service to all future devel-
opment on the hospital's 75 acres. In addition, the City and
County have agreed to temporarily transfer 100,000 gallons of
the County's wastewater treatment allocation from the South
County area to the hospital/commercial node. Future develop-
ments may apply for this allocation with the understanding that
it is temporary. The County has tentative plans to provide
wastewater facilities for this area in the future but it will
probably be at least two -to -five years before service is
available.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the above analysis, including the Planning and
Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that all
of the subject property be rezoned to MED, Medical District.
Richard Shearer, Chief of Long -Range Planning,
presented staff's recommendation that all of the subject
property be rezoned to MED, Medical District. He showed the
zoning map of the area and slides of the subject property,
and explained that this request includes the hospital
property and the property immediately adjacent to it,
30 acres of which are currently zoned C-lA.
Commissioner Bird reported that most of the objections
he has heard were from property owners who were concerned
about limiting their options regarding uses for their
property.
Chairman Scurlock felt another concern was that perhaps
in the future the location of another hospital in the County
would be limited to this node. Commissioner Bird, however,
did not think we had limited the Medical District to this
area.
Mr. Shearer explained that at present we have two
hospital/commercial nodes, Humana Hospital in Roseland and
Indian River Memorial Hospital in Vero Beach, and if someone
34
M M
wished to build a hospital somewhere else, the Board could
consider amending the Comprehensive Land Use Plan to allow
that.
Chairman Scurlock thought that the possibility of
another medical district west of town should be included in
the County's long-range planning.
Director Keating pointed out that it is the Comp Plan,
which actually limits the location of a hospital by
designating hospital/commercial nodes. It is staff's
philosophy that it would take an amendment to the Comp Plan
to allow another hospital and that such an amendment should
be considered at the time a concrete proposal is received.
Mr. Shearer explained that they are not trying to
restrict all medically related uses to locating in this
area. He then quoted the many special exception uses in
C-lA zoning which are not allowed in the MED District,
including such things as flea markets, lumber yards, service
stations, theaters, laundries, dry cleaning pickup
establishments, hotels and motels, etc.
Chairman Scurlock believed there is a pretty broad
range under the allowable uses in the MED District and the
special exception uses made it even a broader range. From
what he could see, the uses range from office to
residential.
Mr. Shearer confirmed that the purpose of the MED
district is to implement policies of the Comp Plan in regard
to hospital/commercial nodes being a mixture of residential,
institutional, and commercial uses.
Considerable discussion ensued as to how many medical
districts might be needed to allow for long term growth in
the County, how much acreage should be allowed for
expansion, the range of uses permitted in the MED District
and how these matters affect free enterprise, etc.
35
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58 F�:u 357
Fr -
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58 F,,,F 158
Director Keating emphasized that the intent of the uses
permitted under special exceptions is to try to maintain a
continuity of uses in the general area and to keep them
medically related. That is not to say that general offices
will not be allowed there, but it is intended to discourage
a major corporation from building its headquarters in the
area, which would not be compatible with the hospital. Mr.
Keating felt that on a small basis, however, changing the
use from medical offices to general offices would be
acceptable. He reported that under the proposed new zoning
code, special exception uses will be required to come before
the Board of County Commissioners for approval as opposed to
coming before the Planning & Zoning Commission only.
Mr. Shearer advised that the Comp Plan designates a
130 -acre hospital/commercial node north of the hospital,
which is in addition to the hospital property. This adds up
to a total of 205 acres in this area. What is being
proposed is the rezoning of approximately 75 acres of the
130 acre node to Medical District. He noted there will
still be some unallocated acreage in the node and pointed
out that we are not really setting the final boundaries of
the node today.
Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked
if anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Dr. James Cain, President of the Medical Arts
Condominium Association, Inc., asked that the following
letters be made part of the record.
7,
1
36
MEDICAL ARTS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION
Sept. 14, 1984
Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Sirs:
We, as a condominium association, would like to voice our
objection to the proposed zoning change for the Medical Arts
complex located at 1300 36th Street, Vero Beach.
During the time that each of these condominiums were purchased,
the zoning for this complex was commercial. We, as owners of
this complex would request that it be maintained as commercial
rather than the proposed change to Medical.
Respectfully,
James Cain, M.D.
President, Medical Arts Condominium
Association, Inc.
GASTROENTEROLOGY ASSOCIATES
OF
VERO BEACH
EDWARD ATTARIAN M.D., F.A.C.P., P.A. RICHARD A. FRANCO, M.D., P.A.
The Board of County Commissioners September 17, 1984.
Administration Building
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
RE: MASTER PLAN ALTERATIONS FOR. 1300 36TH STREET
Gentlemen:
It has come to my attention that this Wednesday, September -19,
1984, the County Commission will review the Master Plan for
the area in which we currently have our medical offices. I have
37
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 5 8 F,�cF 359
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 8 FA � r 8o
been told that it is being proposed that this entire area by
the Indian River Memorial Hospital will be designated a medical
developmental type of area only.
Although my current use of this office is as a physician's office,
when I bought my property from the Ralmar Development Company,
it was specifically knowing that there were no restrictions for
the use of this office, except the restrictions placed by the
condominium owners.
:laving been here since 1979., no one has ever approached me
regarding any changes'in the use of this property. It would
be my hope that the County Commissioners would not restrict
the type of use that this land could be put to.
If there is some overriding reason that the county government -
feels the property should be restricted to medical purposes
only, I would certainly hope that it would exclude all of those
office properties that were here before the recommendations
were made, i.e., that we would be excluded by a grandfather clause.
Specifically, if Dr. Franco and I would choose to change the nature
of this office rental or sales, that we would only be governed
by our own condominium by-laws and not by county restriction
at this point in time.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Respectfully,
Edward Attarian, M.D., F.A.C.P., P.A.
AMERICAN BOARD CERTIFIED
INTERNAL MEDICINE
GASTROENTEROLOGY
1
Richard A. Franco, M.D., P.A.
1300 36TH STREET, SUITE H
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960
1305) 569-4224
Dr. Cain thought that their biggest concern was not so
much for their investment, but for the flexibility of the
medical community. In the last six months there have been
tremendous medical changes by the federal government which
have significantly affected hospital functions and may well
change the whole picture of medicine delivery in the next
5-10 years. Dr. Cain personally felt that there will be a
need for an outpatient facility in the Vero Beach area and
that it should go where the population growth is, south and
west of town. He noted that the Hospital already is
exploring areas to locate a surgery center and an
out-patient emergency department, and he--believed another
hospital will be built here within the next ten years; Dr. Cain,
38
therefore, felt strongly that it would be a mistake to box
in a future hospital by including all this property in one
medical node and he urged the Commission not to vote it in.
Chairman Scurlock agreed another hospital would be
built in the Vero Beach area before too many more years and
felt a third medical district should be defined by staff in
the very near future. He believed that we are also going to
see private medical facilities in direct competition with
public facilities in the future.
Commissioner Bird understood then that we will have the
flexibility to allow a medical facility, other than a major
hospital facility, to build elsewhere and not limit it to
this MED District.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if the Board approved the
medical district, what restrictions it would impose on the
owners compared to C-lA, and Mr. Shearer believed that they
would still be able to sell their property to someone for
general office use and, of course, a medically related use.
He could not really anticipate an office use that would be
particularly harmful to the medical area, and noted that
under the new zoning code, it would be the Board's decision
to approve a change in use.
Michael O'Grady, Assistant Executive Director of Indian
River Memorial Hospital, recalled that they had assisted in
the drafting of the MED District Ordinance and have had
extensive discussions with staff about the size and quality
of the node itself. He thought Dr. Cain's comments were
very well founded, but felt that the conditions he described
were really in existence today -- there is no provision in
the Comp Plan for a major facility other than Humana
Hospital or IRMH. Mr. O'Grady believed the intent in
creating the MED District was to protect the nature of the
hospital node and not necessarily to restrict the property
owners in disposing of their property in any way. He
39
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 5 8 F' Gr 361
SEP 19 1984 BOOK
pointed out that the area is being developed to reflect the
character which would be consistent with the MED District
zoning. He informed the Board that the hospital taxing
district favors the adoption of these rezoning requests.
Chairman Scurlock pointed out the lack of long-range
planning for medical areas in other parts of the country.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board
unanimously closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Bird noted that the limited uses found in
the MED District actually could be to the property owners'
advantage because this provides them with the assurance that
someone cannot come in and build something that would be
detrimental to their property that might have been allowed
under the C-1 or C-lA zoning.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, that the
Board adopt Ordinance 84-63, rezoning 149.98
acres of land from Single -Family District,
Planned Business District, and Restricted
Commercial District to Medical District.
Commissioner Bird stated that the Motion is made with
the understanding that we are going to remain flexible as
needs arise for future MED Districts.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if the Motion includes the
C-lA, and Commissioner Bird confirmed that it did because
there are existing medical facilities in that area and he
could not see leaving the C -1A acreage out if what we are
trying to create is a consistent medical zone in the area.
40
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The
Motion passed by a 3-2 vote, Commissioners
Lyons and Wodtke dissenting.
ORDINANCE NO. 84-61
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:
Parcel #1: S2 of SZ of SA of Section 25, Township 32S,
Range 39E.
Parcel #2: SE4 of SE4 of SE4 of Section 26, Township
32S, Range 39E.
Parcel #3: N4 of NE4 of NE4 of Section 35, Township
32S, Range 39E.
Parcel #4: NWa of NWh of NE4 of Section 36, Township
32S, Range 39E.
Parcel #5: Na of NWa of Section 36, Township 32S, Range
39E.
All above described property subject to easements,
restriction reservations and rights-of-way of record.
All property lying and being in Indian River County,
Florida.
Be changed from R-lA, Single -Family District, B-1,
Planned Business District, and C-lA, Restricted Commer-
cial District, to MED, Medical 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 19th
Sentember
day of /1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
SEP 19 1994 BY: p 58 PAGE -3 63'
�,.
DON C. SCU0LGCK, JR. Chairman ,
SEP 19 1994
BOOK 58 FmuE 391 4
PUBLIC HEARING - GREGORY & WIGGINS REQUEST TO REZONE 10
I� ACRES FROM SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO MEDICAL DISTRICT"
"y
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:
,1
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
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 y/in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a /C'i�e
ished in said newspaper in the issues
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 Co
ty, Florida, fora period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of un -
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.
Swom to and
(SEAL)
County, Florida)
I
\1 f4
NOTICE — PUBLIC HEARING
Notice of hearing to consider the adoption of a County ordinance rezoning land from R -1A,
Single -Family District, to MED, Medical District Subject property is presently owned by MARTIN A.
GREGORY and RICHARD B. WIGGINS as Trustees. Subject property is located one mile East of
U.S. Highway #1, North of Barber Avenue (37th Street) bounded on the East by the existing Vero
Beach City Limit Line. , "..
The subject property is described as:
The SWIA of the SWIA of the SETA. of Section 25, Township 32S, Range 39E,.1ndian River
County less and except any easements of rights-of-way of record.
A public hearing at which parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard,
will be held by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, in the County
Commission Chambers of the County Administration Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero
Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, September 19,1984, 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 purposes, he/she may need to ensure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings is made, which includes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal
Is based.
Indian River Courtly
Board of County Commissioners
By: -s Don C. Scurlock Jr.... .
Chairman
Aug. 29, Sept 11,1 N4 .
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/6/84:
i
42
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: September 6, 1984FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners GREGORY & WIGGINS
REQUEST TO REZONE 10
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: ACRES FROM R-lA, SINGLE -
SUBJECT: MEDICAL FAMILY DDISTRICT TO MED,
Robert M. Keating, VICP
Planning & Development Director
?_7
Richard Shearer, AICP REFERENCES: RICH Rezoning
FROM: Chief, Long -Range Planni RICH
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of September 19, 1984.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Michael O'Haire acting as agent for Martin Gregory and Richard
Wiggins, trustees, is requesting to rezone 10 acres located
north of 37th Street and one mile east of U.S. Highway 1 from
R-lA, Single -Family District (up to 4.3 units/acre), to MED,
Medical District.
The owners intend to develop this property for a life care
center and related uses.
F
On August 9, 1984, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
3 -to -1 to recommend approval of this request.
This rezoning request originally included 40 acres. At the
public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission, the
applicant agreed to reduce the request to 10 acres until an
environmental survey could be completed for the remaining 30
acres.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the
application will be presented. The analysis will include a
description of the current and future land uses of the site and
surrounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and
utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on en-
vironmental quality.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property and the land north and east of it are
undeveloped. South of the subject property is the Indian River
Medical Center and undeveloped land zoned B-1, Planned Business
District. West of the subject property are citrus groves.
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan generally designates the subject proper-
ty as MD -1, Medium -Density Residential 1 (up to 8 units/acre).
In addition, the Plan also designates a 130 acre hospi-
tal/commercial node north of Indian River Memorial Hospital
along 37th Street. The land east of the subject property is
designated as environmentally sensitive (up to 1 unit/acre).
The subject property is contiguous to the Indian River Medical
Center to the south and contiguous to property to the west
43
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58 Ft3 U165
SEP 19 194 �
BOOK 5 8 FACE 8�66
which is proposed for rezoning to MED district. For this
reason, it seems logical to include the subject property in the
hospital/commercial node and to rezone it to MED.
Transportation System
The subject property has direct access to 37th Street (clas-
sified as a secondary collector on the Thoroughfare Plan).
Rezoning the subject property could attract an additional 2,240
average annual daily trips (AADT).
Environment
The subject property is not designated as environmentally
sensitive. However, the subject property is in an A9 flood
zone (elevation 5). The A-9 zone includes areas within the 100
year flood plain.
Utilities
County water is available for the subject property. City
wastewater facilities might be available to the subject proper-
ty on a temporary basis. The City and County have agreed to
transfer 100,000 gallons of wastewater treatment allocation
from the south county to the hospital/commercial node. Future
developments may apply for this allocation with the understand-
ing that it is temporary. The County has tentative plans to
provide wastewater facilities for this area in the future but
it will probably be at least two -to -five years before service
is available.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the subject
property (including 10 acres), be rezoned to MED, Medical
District.
Planner Richard Shearer presented staff's
recommendation and explained that originally the request was
for 40 acres and reduced to 10 acres when it was found that
a certain portion of this land is designated as
environmentally sensitive on the Comp Plan. The remaining
thirty acres will be considered after the findings are
received from a environmental/ecological reconnaissance
survey being done by Mangrove Systems.
Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked
if anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Michael O'Haire, attorney representing owners Martin A.
Gregory and Richard B. Wiggins, stated that this request
involves acreage which is actually part of a 250 -acre tract
and they have requested that the remaining 30 acres (those
designated environmentally sensitive) be tabled until the
line of demarcation is determined.
44
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously closed the Public Hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board
unanimously approved the request by Gregory &
Wiggins and adopted Ordinance 84-64, rezoning
10 acres from R -1A, Single Family District, to
MED, Medical District.
45
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58
J
F"_
SEP 19 1994
BOOK $ PAr,
ORDINANCE NO. 94-64
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of
Intent to rezone the hereinafter described property and
pursuant thereto held a public hearing in relation thereto,
at which parties in interest and citizens were heard; NOW,
THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning Ordinance of
Indian River County, Florida, and the accompanying Zoning
Map, be amended as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in
Indian River County, Florida, to -wit:
The SW4 of the SWC of the SE4, of Section 25, Township
32S, Range 39E, Indian River County less and except any
easements or rights-of-way of record.
Be changed from R -1A, Single -Family District, to MED,
Medical 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 Commission-
ers of Indian River County, Florida on this 1.9thday of -entember,
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 27tYday of Sept. , 1984.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State
received on this lst day of Oct. , 1984, at 11 A.M./P.M.
and filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY.
County Attorney
46
o ® r
PUBLIC HEARING - CLOSING of 85th STREET ACCESS TO U.S. #1
The hour of 9:15 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
L
attached, to wit:''''
VERO REACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at VeroBeachin Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a / 1WZ1
in the matter
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of lC�
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 bejpre mWis,/4 17-3 day of�/A'Y�.D. 19
iness Manager,
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, lWan River County, Florida)
(SEAL)
ar NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE OF HEARING TO CONSIDER A PETI-
TION FOR THE CLOSING OF THE 85TH
STREET ACCESS TO THE EAST SIDE OF U.S.
HIGHWAY =1 IN WABASSO.
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, Sep-
tember 19, 1984, at 9:15 A.M.
If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above matter, he will need a record
of the proceedings, and for such purposes, he
may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the
proceedings is made, which includes testimony j
and evidence upon which the appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By: -s -Don C. Scurlock Jr.
Chairman
Aug. 31, 1984.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/10/84:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: September 10, 1984FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: CLOSING OF 85TH STREET
ACCESS TO U.S. HIGHWAY #1
,., y; 4 SUBJECT:
Robert M. Keating, A
Planning & Development Director
THROUGH: Mary Jane V. Goetzfried
'y Chief, Current Development Section
FROM: Karen M. Craver�,,\\\� REFERENCES: 85th St.
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 September 19, 1984.
47
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58 FPIC�9
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58 PAGE 370
0
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The Traffic Engineering Department has received FDOT approval
of the signalization of the U.S. Highway #1/County Road 510
intersection. It was the recommendation of FDOT, and the
unanimous decision of the Transportation Planning Committee, to
close the 85th.Street access to the east side of U.S. Highway
#1. The closing necessitates a public hearing and the adoption
of a resolution similar to that required for the abandonment of
County right-of-way.
In addition to the customary reviewing agencies, the Volunteer
Ambulance Squad, the Sheriff's Department, and the North County
Fire District were all contacted regarding the closing. All
responses were positive. Staff feels it will be beneficial to
close 85th Street in that the elimination of the 5 -leg inter-
section will reduce.the number of required signal phases, thus
improving the capacity of the U.S. 1/C.R. 510 intersection.
Access to U.S. 1 from the properties along 85th Street will not
be significantly impaired as the internal streets of the Graves
Addition to Wabasso subdivision will provide an easy
connection.
It is anticipated that all signalization equipment will be
received and installed by March 1,•1985. At the time of
installation, a double guardrail will be placed at the 85th
Street access.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the.' County Commission close the 85th
Street access to the east ide of U.S. 1, and adopt and execute
the attached resolution.
Planner Mary Jane Goetzfried presented staff's
recommendation to close the 85th Street access to the east
side of U.S. #1.
Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked
if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There were
none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board
unanimously closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, that the
Board adopt Resolution 84-64, closing the 85th
Street access to the east side of U.S. #1.
m
_I
� � r
Under discussion, Public Works Direct Jim Davis advised
that veterinarian Dr. Moon, whose office is located at this
corner, has been notified of the closing of 85th Street.
Commissioner Wodtke thought that someone should stop by
Dr. Moon's office and explain to him what we are doing and
how it is going to affect parking and access to his office.
Chairman Scurlock felt that staff would do everything
they could to assist Dr. Moon and make this an orderly
transition from the existing situation.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
The Motion was voted on and carried unanimously.
49
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58 FnuE371
Fr
S E P P 7984 BOOKF';F
372
RESOLUTION NO. 84-64
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE CLOSING OF THE 85TH STREET
ACCESS TO THE EAST SIDE OF U. S. HIGHWAY #1.
WHEREAS, on July 30, 1984, the County received a duly
executed and documented petition from Michael Orr, Traffic
Engineer of Indian River County, Florida, requesting the County
to close the 85th Street access to the east side of U.S.
Highway #1,
WHEREAS, the intent of this resolution is to close
physical access to 85th Street to alleviate a hazardous traffic
situation, rather than to abandon or release any easement or
right of ownership the County has in said right-of-way,
inasmuch as said right-of-way shall remain available for other
appropriate uses such as utilities or drainage improvements,
WHEREAS, in accordance with 'Florida Statutes §
336.10, notice of a public hearing to consider said petition
has been duly published; and
WHEREAS, after consideration of the petition, sup-
porting documents, staff investigation and report, and testimo-
ny of all those interested and present, the Board finds that
said access is not a state or federal highway, nor located
within any municipality, nor is said access necessary for
continuity of the County's street and thoroughfare network, nor
the sole access to any given private property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; FLORIDA that:
1. The physical access for the traveling public to
and from 85th Street at the U. S. Highway #1 intersection is
hereby closed, with the express understanding that the County
does not intend hereby to abandon or release any right or
easement of the County in and to the existing 85th Street
right-of-way.
2. Notice of adoption of this resolution shall be
forthwith published once within thirty (30) days from the date
of adoption hereof; and
3. The Clerk is hereby directed to record this
resolution together with the proofs of publication required by
Florida Statutes §336.10 in the Official Record Books of Indian
River County without undue delay.
The foregoing resolution was offered by
Commissioner Lyons who moved its adoption. The motion
was seconded by Commissioner ►'lodtke 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 William C. Wodtke, Jr.4ve
Commissioner Maggy Bowman Ave
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Ave
50
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution
duly passed and adopted this 19th day of September 1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY / .y, C
DON C. SCURLO , JR., CHAUKT
ATTEST:
FREDA.WRIGHT, Ltlerk
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF.INDIAN RIVER
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an
officer duly authorized in this State and County to take
acknowledgments, personally appeared DON C. SCURLOCK, JR. and
FREDA WRIGHT, as Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners
and Clerk, respectively, to me know to be the persons described
in and who executed the foregoing instrument and they acknowl-
edged before me that they executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and official sea in the County and
State last aforesaid this __4;Z = day of W. A.D. ,
1984.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY-- _ _
. . 1.
Notar Public
NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA
BONDED THRU GENERAL INSURANCE UNDO
MY Commiss1oN1 WIRES;JAY B IV"
51
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58 RUM M
Fl -
SEP 19 1954 BOOK 58 FAu.374
PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL OF ROYALE GARDEN VILLAGE SITE PLAN
APPROVAL`�
�'�� rb
The hour of 10:00 o'clock A.M. having passed, the
Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of
Publication attached, to wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida: that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a Zi
4 .1�.;J
in the matter of
in the _. G 'C/ourt, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of /r3U, Im
47 /9-n—
I
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 ottice 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 subscrib d bet a me is o day ofj0;n''T�D.19
h abness Manager)
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, In an River County, Florida)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
REGARDING APPEAL OF
BITE PLAN APPROVAL
On August 9. 1994, the Planning and Zoning
Commission of Indian River County, Florida. mt-
.ting as the local Planning agency, apProvetl the
site plan application submitted by Mr. John M.
iLyon to construct a 22,345 square tool commar.
dal facility.
The Indian River County Board of County
'Comm�svOneB vnll conduN a public (rearing, re -
ale of the dead Eby i e Pllanning a Association.
Planning and zoning
Commission to approve the site plan. The public
hearing, at which parties in interest and citizens
shall have an opportunity to be heard, will be
Administration Building. located at 1940 25th
Street. Vero aeach. Florida, on Wednesday. Sep-
tember 19. 1984. at 10:00 a.m. This notice supw-
sedes all prior notices regarding this appeal.
If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above matter, he may need to en-
sure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is
made, which includes testimony and evidence
upon which the appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commiselonera.
By: -s -Don C. Scurlock Jr. '
chairman
Aug. 30. Sept. 12. 19M.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/10/84:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: September 10, 1984 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
APPEAL OF ROYALE GARDEN
VILLAGE SITE PLAN
SUBJECT: APPROVAL
piK
FROM: Robert M. Keating, AICP REFERENCES: Roy. Gard.
Planning & Development Director DIS:RMK
It is requested that the _data'herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of September 19, 1984.•
52
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On August 9, 1984,, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved
a site plan application for Royale Garden Village, a proposed
shopping center and restaurant complex. Located on the east
side of U.S. 1 immediately south of the South Relief Canal, the
project site is currently occupied by the WAXE radio station
and transmitting tower. The property is 2.98 acres in size, is
zoned C-1, Commercial District, and presently supports an
approved commercial use.
The applicant, John Lyon, has proposed a 16,850 square foot
retail center and a 5,495 square foot restaurant for the site.
As proposed,. the commercial facility would gain access from
U.S. #1 via two 21 foot one-way drives and be served by a 22
foot perimeter belt drive. The number of parking spaces would
exceed those required. The stormwater management plan, the
landscape plan, and the utilities plan all meet County
regulations and have been approved. The site is surrounded by
multi -family residential on both the east and south, while it
is bounded by the South Relief Canal on the north and the U.S.
#1 right-of-way and F.E.C. Railroad right-of-way on the west.
On August 20,. 1984, Mr. J. E. Luckett, President of the Vista
Royale Association, formally appealed the Planning and Zoning
Commission's- approval of the Royal Garden Village site plan
application. In his appeal letter, written on behalf of the
Vista Royale Association, Mr. ,Luckett cited three principal
factors which support his position. Mr. Luckett feels that the
approved site plan does not provide for adequate access and
circulation of vehicles; he contends that the site plan does
not ensure' adequate safety and convenience for the public.
Second, he charges that the site plan does not provide adequate
protection and separation.for contiguous and nearby residential
property. Finally, Mr. Luckett states that the approved site
plan does not conform to the Land Use Element of the County's
Comprehensive Plan.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:.
Subsequent'to submittal of the initial site plan application
for the.Royale Garden Village project, the staff worked closely
with agents for the applicant to secure modifications to the
proposed site plan, modifications which would reduce or elimi-
nate potential problems identified by the staff. Among the
issues identified by the staff and adequately addressed by the
applicant were access to the site, internal circulation,
removal of the existing radio tower, adequate provision for
wastewater treatment$ and establishment of a buffer between the
proposed retail center and the adjacent multi -family struc-
tures. Since each of these issues was adequately addressed by
the applicant prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting at which the proposed project was to be considered, the
staff recommended approval of.the site plan application.
Upon receipt of a, site plan application, one of the first
factors considered* by the staff is the site's present zoning
and land use designation. In this case, the staff found that
the subject property was zoned C-1 .and had a land -use desig-
nation of 'MD -2, medium density residential. Because the
property contained a lawfully conforming commercial use that
was established prior to adoption of the Land Use Element of
the Comprehensive Plan and because the Plan states that the
purpose of the Plan is not to create non -conformities and,
therefore, any lawfully conforming use existing at the time of
Plan adoption would be considered consistent with the Plan, the
53
SEP 19 1994 Bou 58 PnUE-375
I
F_
SEP 19 1984
BOOK 5 8 FACE 376
staff determined* that the commercial zoning of the site was
valid. In essence, the commercial use of this property repre-
sents an extension of the U.S. #1 commercial corridor which had
previously been extended to the South Relief Canal by approval,
in 1983, of a .comprehensive plan amendment submitted by Vista
Properties, Inc.
A major concern of the staff with the initial site plan appli-
cation was traffic safety, specifically access and internal
traffic circulation. As originally submitted, the plan
depicted no proposed U.S..#1 traffic improvements, showed a
two-way traffic access point, proposed two-way traffic in the
two center driving aisles, and showed the existing radio tower
retained and located within a proposed driving aisle. The
staff initially recommended. that the applicant obtain access
from the existing .Vista Royale access road located directly to
the south of the subject property.. The applicant, however,
informed staff that'he had requested approval to obtain access
from the .existing private road, but his request was denied by
the Vista Royale Association. The staff then recommended that
the applicant install a deceleration lane in the U.S. #1
right-of-way, install a median or- striping in his entrance to
create_ separate ingress/egress points, change the two center
driving aisles from two-way to ane -way flows, make several
other modifications to align driveways, and to remove the radio
tower. After a number of meetings with the applicant, the
staff was successful in having all of its recommendations
incorporated into a revised site plan. Although this site is
located on a busy and hazardous section of U.S. #1, it is the
staff's position that the -project, as approved, will provide
for adequate public safety:_
Another concern of the staff with the original submittal was
the need for a more extensive buffer between the proposed
retail buildings. and the existing multi -family structures to
the east. Although current zoning regulations require mainte-
nance of a ten foot setback where a commercial site abuts a
residential district, the staff felt that the setback should be
extensively landscaped to provide a more effective buffer. In
response to -the staff comment, the applicant agreed to plant
8' to 10' .trees along with hedge material in the required
setback area, a landscape*plan which will ensure that the space
between the ground and a ten foot height is filled.
With establishment of the proposed landscape buffer, an ade-
quate transition will be provided in the opinion of the staff.
Oftentimes, multi -family land uses are located adjacent to
commercial uses to establish a transition between commercial
and low density residential; so commercial and higher density
residential uses are not necessarily incompatible. In this
case, the proposed commercial use will be an intense uti-
lization of the site, with approximately 91 percent of the site
in impervious surface. This will'be accomplished by use of an
underdrain system of stormwater management, a system which
eliminates surface retention areas which serve as green space
for many developments.
It is the•staff's position that all of the issues raised in the
appeal letter were addressed by the*- staff in its review of the
initial site plan submittal and subsequently addressed by the
applicant -in submission of a revised site plan. The staff
feels that the applicant has complied with all applicable___ ---.._—
County regulations and agreed to additional improvements to
mitigate or resolve .potential problems identified by the staff.
Based upon those factors; the staff feels that the Planning and
Zoning Commission made the correct decision in approving the
Royal Garden Village site plan application.
0
54
_I
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff' recommends that the Board .deny the appeal of the
Vista Royale .association and affirm the decision of the Plan-
ning and Zoning Commission in approving the subject site plan.
Planning & Development Director Robert Keating
explained that this is an appeal of a site plan approval by
the Planning & Zoning Commission of a retail center and
restaurant and presented an aerial view and location map of
the area. He advised that they also have a copy of the
original site plan available. At present, station WAXE has
a radio tower on the site. Prior to submitting the site
plan, the applicant, John Lyon, met with staff and after•the
plan was carefully reviewed, several suggestions were
incorporated into the site plan. Staff then made a positive
recommendation and took it to the Planning & Zoning
Commission which approved the site plan as submitted. On
August 20, 1984, J. E. Luckett, President of Vista Royale
Association, formally appealed the Planning and Zoning
Commission's approval of the Royale Garden Village site plan
application giving three major points of contention:
1) Inadequate access and circulation of vehicles to
the site.
2) Inadequate protection and no separation from
contiguous nearby residential properties.
3) Does not conform to the approved county land use
plan.
Beginning with the third contention, Director Keating
presented staff's position on each of the above issues:
3) At the time of the adoption of the Comprehensive
Land Use Plan, the site was, and still is, lawfully being
55
S E P 191984BOOK 58 F�.,,E 377
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58 F ut 378
used as commercial. The Comp Plan specifically states that
all lawful, conforming uses in existence at the date of the
adoption of the Plan will be considered consistent with the
Plan. Staff consistently has interpreted this to mean that
A any property that is a lawful, confirming use can be
expanded and used for any use allowable in that zoning
district. Therefore, it is staff's philosophy that since it
was zoned commercial, used commercial and grandfathered in,
it should be allowed to be used for a commercial use even
though that use would intensify in the future.
2) The Zoning Ordinance specifically states that there
is no side yard setback requirement for commercial
properties unless they abut a residential district. There
is no requirement for buffering an adjacent residential use
from commercial. Staff discussed this with the applicant
and suggested that the setback be extensively buffered with
B-10 ft. trees and hedges between the residential use and
the commercial use. The applicant agreed he would not put
his buildings right up to the setback, and his road comes up
to the setback area, which will contribute a little more to
the transition and the buffer. Staff feels that when the
condominiums were established, the developer should have
borne some responsibility in establishing some sort of
buffer with the thought that eventually this parcel was
going to be developed commercial.
1) In regard to inadequate access and public safety in
relation to transportation, staff agrees that section of
U.S. #1 is a dangerous area, but the developer has agreed to
take certain actions which will mitigate some of those
problems. Staff made a number of recommendations which were
all incorporated into the final submittal of the site plan:
the installation of a deceleration lane coming north on U.S.
#1, which would be just south of the access point; access
from U.S. #1 will be provided via two 21 -ft. one-way drives
56
M M s
and be served by a 22 -ft. perimeter belt drive; alignment of
certain points in the internal circulation system; and
removal of the existing radio tower.
Director Keating advised that staff feels that the site
plan provides for adequate traffic safety in relation to
accessing the development and internal circulation; gives an
adequate buffer, even though it is minimal in terms of
distance, and the developer has agreed to put in more
landscaping than what is required; and that a correct
decision was made in relation to the land use and zoning
designation given to the site. In light of these
conditions, staff recommends that this appeal be denied and
that the Planning & Zoning Commission decision be upheld.
Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked
if anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Ed Luckett, President of the Vista Royale Association,
stated he was prepared to talk on all three issues, but will
limit it to one. He felt that the WAXE site is a veritable
enclave of Vista Royale. It is zoned Medium Density
Residential under the Comprehensive Plan and the only
private property it touches is Vista Royale. It mystifies
the residents how this plan could be approved under the
ordinances in effect. The Planning Department has based
their conclusion in this matter on the provision in the
Comp Plan that states all lawful conforming uses in
existence at the date of adoption of the plan will be
considered consistent with the plan.
Mr. Luckett thought that staff had taken a quantum leap
to an illogical conclusion, as every up-to-date zoning map
he could find shows this site to be Medium Density
Residential, not Commercial. The Association agrees that
the property was lawfully used for a radio station at the
time the plan was adopted, but opposes a totally different
57
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58 Ft.1,JF379
r
S E P 19,
1954
BOOK
58
PAGE 380:
commercial use now.
They feel that the site plan
never
should have been considered in the first place.
Harold Putnam, a Director of the Vista Royale
Association, stated that Vista Royale residents are angry
because they believe the Planning Department is ignoring
State law in regard to what can be done with a
non -conforming commercial parcel that has been in existence
for a long period of time and strongly object to the
proposed retail center and restaurant because they believe
it will lower their property values.
Mr. Putnam presented three legal problems the County
might encounter if they proceed: 1) Lower property values
may result in property owners asking for an abatement of
their taxes; 2) Law suits holding the County responsible
for traffic accidents that are bound to happen on U.S. #1;
and 3) Law suits resulting from staff's interpretation of
the Zoning Ordinance, Subsection 25, Subsection J, under
Section 2 relating to non -conforming uses. He advised that
Vista Royale intends to pursue the language in this law.
Mr. Putnam believed this is a matter of grave importance
and urged the Board to give great consideration to their
objections.
Claude Perosa, resident of Vista Royale, felt the
Planning & Zoning Commission was very fair and open at the
last meeting even though some of the Vista Royale residents
were rather rude. He stated that he has been aware of this
project for six months and has seen the plans, but the
Association's Board has steadfastly refused to discuss or
show the site plan to anyone in Vista Royale. He believed
the directors of Vista Royale have their rights, but pointed
out that they live in the two buildings adjacent to the site
and have tried to round up all the opposition possible and
have them in attendance today. Mr. Perosa objected to the
president and director of Vista Royale Association appearing
M
i
on behalf of the property owners in Vista Royale. While he
thought they have a right to object personally, he did not
think they have a right to appeal the P & Z decision in the
name of the association without first holding a meeting.
Mr. Perosa felt that the majority of the residents are in
favor of the site. He would like to see the development
have access to the Vista Royale property so that 3000
residents could access the retail center without having to
go out on U.S. #1.
Frank Zorc, local realtor, explained that he has many
friends living in Vista Royale and is concerned about the
far reaching impact of the decision in this matter. The
land is undoubtedly designated as residential. He recalled
that when the master plan was adopted, all owners were
invited to come in and speak. Many land designations were
changed along U.S. #1 and many people were unhappy and
appealed, but he does not remember that any changes were
granted. He did not think the issue was whether the site
plan was good or bad, but rather whether a precedent would
be set on grandfathered commercial uses. He asked the Board
to consider an example of a fruit stand being grandfathered
in and later being allowed to expand or engage in a totally
different type of commercial.
John Koch, resident of Vista Royale, expressed great
concern over the issue of safety in this area as they have
had many serious accidents. He urged the Board, before
taking any further action, to take a look at the north
entrance of Vista Royale. Mr. Koch reminded the
Commissioners that they were elected by the majority of the
people in the County and their decisions should benefit the
majority of the people in the County. He stated that he has
not talked with anybody yet who has said they are in favor
of this site plan.
59
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58' PAGE 181
r
SEP 1.9 1984
BOOK 58 F'',GF,
John Lyon, the applicant and developer of the proposed
site plan and who also owns a unit in Vista Royale,
proceeded to address the concerns mentioned today.
1) As far as non -conformity is concerned, it has always
been in conformance with the Comp Plan. The radio station
has been there since 1954 and an insurance office was also
located on the property. The radio station's transmitter
was in the building and there was an engineer on the
premises until the radio tower ceased operation on August
15, 1984.
2) It is his belief that property values will increase, not
decrease.
3) As to traffic safety, he reported that when Vista Royale
Association tried to get DOT to put a traffic light at the
north entrance because of the high use and the high accident
rate, DOT found that it was was not a high use section and
that it did not have a high accident ratio. DOT has
determined that there will not be a light installed there
until the traffic count increases. In addition, Mr. Lyon
advised that the acceleration lane could be the deceleration
lane.
Attorney Brandenburg addressed Mr. Putnam's concerns
over the County running into legal problems if the Board
approves this site plan. He believed Director Keating's
viewpoints on the way he has interpreted the legal aspects
of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan are correct. When the
plan was being adopted, one of the largest issues
confronting the Commission was what to do with the existing
uses, and as a result, language was written into the plan
specifying that a commercial use that was present and legal
on the property at the time of adoption of the plan could
remain and would be considered consistent with the plan. If
it is consistent with the plan, it is not considered a
grandfathered use under the Zoning Code for two reasons:
60
_I
1) The grandfathered provisions under the Zoning Code that
Mr. Putnam relied on relate to non -conformities due to
zoning. They do not relate in any way to non -conformities or
differences established in the Comp Plan, which is what we
have in question here. As far as the Zoning Code is
concerned, this property always has been in conformance
because it was and still is zoned commercial. Therefore,
the provisions Mr. Putnam relied on are just not applicable.
2) The only question comes down to the wording in the Comp
Plan and what the intent of the Board was when they adopted
it. Attorney Brandenburg believed that Mr. Putnam's
interpretation is that the actual use itself, such as a gas
pump for instance, is what the Board was considering making
consistent with the plan and, therefore, any other
commercial use, no matter what it would be, would be an
additional use that would not necessarily be consistent with
the plan. That is the most narrow way that provision can be
read. In the past the County has not applied that provision
so narrowly, and there have been instances where an
individual with valid commercial zoning in existence at the
time the plan was adopted was allowed to develop further
commercial uses on his property, which is the case here.
Louis Williamson, resident of Vista Royale, pointed
out that until you get to the area north of the South Relief
Canal on U.S. #1, the speed limit is 55 mph and reported
that a person was killed in an accident on that bridge just
last year. He also pointed out that there is no access
from this piece of property for southbound traffic. In
addition, the site plan does not provide any access for
dredging the canal, but Planner Goetzfried advised that
there is a 250 -ft. right-of-way for the canal and the canal
is in the center of that right-of-way.
61
SEP 19 1984 Booz 58 mu 383
J
r
SEP 19 1994 Boos
Administrator Wright noted that with the planned
extension of Indian River Boulevard, a light will be
installed at 4th Street and U.S. #1.
Mr. Luckett just wanted to correct the impression that
Vista Royale is an ogre for not allowing access from their
north entrance. Florida Statute, Chapter 17., more commonly
known as the Condominium Code, states that allowing public
access to a privately owned street requires the consent of
at least 75% of all the property owners in the development.
He reported that Mr. Lyon's request for access was heard at
their meeting and was turned down in a resolution. There
was nothing else the directors -could do by Florida law.
Mr. Putnam asked those in attendance who support the
Association's position to stand and approximately 50 people
stood up.
Louise Donovan, resident of Vista Royale, explained
that she is just renting in Vista Royale at present and is
thinking of buying in the area, but advised that she
definitely would not purchase a unit in the area adjacent to
the proposed commercial area.
Ruth Meade, resident of Vista Royale, thought it was
outrageous that the retail center will have 19 store bays
and one restaurant on such a small site.
Mr. Lyon explained explained that although there were
19 bays, a grocery store may take as many as 6-7 and he
anticipated that 8 or 10 stores would occupy the 19 bays,
which have a total of 16,850 sq. ft. The restaurant area is
5495 sq. ft.
Frank Zord again stressed that the Board's intention in
implementing the Comp Plan was to stop strip zoning along
U.S. #1 and go to the node concept. He pointed out that
there is residential on three sides of the proposed site and
a canal on the other side;. As commercial, therefore, it
could be considered as spot zoning. He felt there has been
M
�J
_I
/
a lot of confusion in the differences in the Comp Plan
designations vs. the zoning designations, but he did not
think that those who worked on the Comp Plan intended to
remove the old standard understanding of the Zoning Code
whereas a use which was grandfathered in was limited to just
that use and not allowed to expand or change it to a
different use.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Bowman felt the Board needs more
information about the number of trips per day that this
development would generate.
Administrator Wright reported that U.S. #1 is capable
of carrying 40,000 daily trips, and is presently carrying
21,000 trips. Royale Garden Village would generate another
2300 daily trips.
Commissioner Bowman wanted to find out what it would
take to get a light installed other than someone getting
killed.
Commissioner Bird was mainly concerned about the egress
and ingress into U.S. #1 and the problem with the exiting
traffic having to blend into a 55 mph zone. He pointed out
the further problem of someone wanting to go south and being
forced to go north for a distance and look for a spot to
reverse his direction.
Director Keating stated that the staff definitely
agrees it is a very dangerous spot and that is why they
originally hoped that they could connect to that private
drive into Vista Royale, just like the bank has done further
to the south. Staff looked at it from the standpoint of
whether these movements could be made safely and it was
63
SEP 19 1984 BOOK FAGE 3S5
r
SEP 19
1994
BOOK
58
determined by the Traffic
Department and the DOT
that
accessing the site would not be an unsafe condition. '
Director Keating believed there is sufficient right of way
and sufficient distance to sight cars coming north by
drivers pulling out onto U.S. #1.
Lengthy discussion took place regarding the traffic
problems at the entrance to the proposed site.
Commissioner Wodtke felt it is difficult to tie in the
traffic problems of Vista Royale to the approval of the
proposed site plan, but believed the whole traffic situation
there should be reworked and these problems solved in some
way.
Commissioner Lyons had no problem with the Planning
Department's decision, but he did have a problem with the
intensity of use of the commercial property, which again
comes back to traffic safety.
Chairman Scurlock thought that it is a very complicated
issue, but he also was very concerned about the intensity of
use of this particular project. He believed that the owner
of the property has a right to use it for commercial, but
when you go from a radio station to traffic generated by a
retail center in a very dangerous spot, that is something
else again and he intended to vote against the approval of
the site plan.
Commissioner Lyons questioned the unanimous consent
needed to use the private road in Vista Royale because there
is other commercial property along the line there in Vista
Royale, and he was curious how that was approved.
Mr. Luckett explained that property is not part of the
association, and it was reserved.
Commissioner Bird felt there were good efforts by the
developer and the Planning staff to mitigate the negative
impact this development would have on the residential area.
His main concern, however, was traffic safety, and he stated
64
I
M M M
that he probably would vote against this site plan because
of the difficulty in exiting. He did believe, however, that
the property eventually would be used for commercial as he
does not envision it being used for residential, but
whatever commercial use is finally located on this site will
have to find some way not to create such a hazardous traffic
situation as he thought this site plan would.
Attorney Brandenburg read from the provisions in the
site plan ordinance which state that the Commission shall
not approve a site plan unless it finds that such site plan
conforms to all applicable provisions of the zoning
ordinance, that the safety and convenience of the public are
properly provided for, that adequate offstreet parking and
loading facilities are provided for owners., tenants,
visitors and employees and that adequate protection and
separation are provided for contiguous nearby residential
property.
ON,MOTION by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board
unanimously approved the appeal of the Vista
Royale Association and denied the approval
of Royale Garden Village site plan for the
reason that the site plan does not deal
satisfactorily with the traffic safety.
PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE AMENDING ORD. 72-8 - TEMPORARY
U �J UTILITY PERMITS ( Continued from 9/5/84)
tyk
Attorney Brandenburg explained that this I a` rovision
modifying the current ordinance which presently states that
prior to an individual obtaining a utility permit he must
have a franchise. In some of the areas of the County where
the County is planning an immediate expansion, this creates
65
SEP 19 1984 ROOK9 PAG ,87
r
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58 U. 3C
a lot of wasted time, effort and money for both the
developer and the County to process a franchise when they
ultimately are going to hook up to the County system. This
ordinance allows the County to issue a temporary permit for
18 months under the conditions that are spelled out in the
proposed resolution to be presented in the next item on
today's agenda.
Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked
if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There were
none.
W
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board
unanimously closed the Public Hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
adopted Ordinance 84-65 amending Ordinance 72-8,
providing for the issuance of temporary utility
permits not exceeding 18 months in duration.
A
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 84- 65
1-11
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 72-8,
SECTION 5, CONSTITUTING SECTION 24-5 OF THE
CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY; PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF
TEMPORARY UTILITY PERMITS NOT EXCEEDING
18 MONTHS IN DURATION; SEVERABILITY; AND
EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT;
SECTION 1
Indian River County Ordinance No. 72-8 constituting
Section 24-5 of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Indian River
County is hereby amended to add the following paragraph;
The Utility Department may issue permits not exceeding
18 months in duration for temporary systems which have not been
issued a County franchise if the services are for specific
buildings that have made arrangements to receive permanent service
from the County system within the 18 -month period and the service
offered is not generally available to the public."
SECTION 2
SEVERABILITY
If any provision of this Ordinance or the application
thereof , to any person or circumstance is held invalid, it is the
legislative intent that the invalidity shall not affect other
provisions or applications of this Section which can be given in
effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this
end, the provisions of this Section are declared severable.
SECTION 3
EFFECTIVE DATE
The provisions of this Ordinance shall become effective
upon receipt from the Secretary of State of the State of Florida
of official acknowledgment that this Ordinance has been filed with
the Department of State.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, on this 19th day
of September 1984.
-1-
66a
BOOK 58 FnUF 389
BOOK 98 FAGET90
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By �'L"41L
C. S urlock, Jr
Chairman
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida _
this 27th day of September , 1984.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State,
received on this 1st day of October , 1984, at 11
A.M. /P.M. and filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Board of
County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AFO�Fk�R.f4IV!
AND L L 'CY:
" ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION RE ISSUANCE OF TEMPORARY WATER AND
WASTEWATER SYSTEM PERMITS
% Chairman Scurlock thought that the Resolution addressed
the concerns that he has had in this matter.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board
unanimously adopted Resolution 84-65,
providing criteria for the issuance of temporary
water and wastewater system permits.
MA
P
RESOLUTION NO. 84-65
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, PROVIDING CRITERIA FOR THE
ISSUANCE OF TEMPORARY WATER AND
WASTEWATER SYSTEM PERMITS.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, has adopted an ordinance providing for the
issuance of temporary water and wastewater system permits in
certain circumstances, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, now desires to adopt a set of criteria for
the issuance of such permits,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
that:
SECTION 1.
Temporary water or wastewater pemits may only be issued
under the following conditions:
1. A permit for a temporary water or wastewater system may
only be issued under this Section at the discretion of the
Division of Utility Services, only after receipt of written
request for the same; and shall be issued upon specified
conditions reasonably necessary to insure that the water or
wastewater systems shall be constructed, operated and maintained
so as to provide safe and dependable service in compliance with
County ordinances and the laws, rules and requirements of the
Department of Environmental Regulation and the Department of
Health and Rehabilitative Services.
2. A conceptual site plan of the temporary water or
wastewater facility shall be submitted and approved by the
Planning and Zoning Commission; and shall show the hook-up to the
proposed County systems and an alternative water or wastewater
system which will meet the requirements of the Division of Utility
Services and all other applicable agencies for servicing the
proposed project.
3. A performance bond or cash escrow shall be provided to
Indian River County equivalent to the greater of the total impact
fees required by Indian River County or the total estimated cost
of the alternative water or wastewater system.
SEP 19 1984 -1 BOOK �f�,cc
r
SEP BOOK
39�
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Lyons who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Bowman and, being put to a vote, the vote
was as follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice Chairman Patrick B. Lyons .Ave
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Ave
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Ave
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Ave
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 19thday of September , 1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By C..,e"A
Don C. Scu lock, Jr.,
Chairman
Attest:
Freda Wrigh Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL
SUFFICIENC -7 17
By
m. Branaenaur
y Attorney
j HOLMES REQUEST FOR ANOTHER REZONING HEARING
,
The Board reviewed the following letter dated 6/7/84:
SAMUEL A. BLOCK
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
2127 10TH AVENUE
VERO BEACH, FLQRU;�et+C
SAMUEL A. BLOCKw �9JO
TELEPHONE
MARGARET E. MANN is
(305) 562-1600
DAVID A. CAIRNS �`++ `�F/3 j
i96�
ti R --
DISTRIBUTION LIST
ogRaF��FO
4
Commissioners
�—
%1ISS/pN >_'
September 7, 1984 1
Administrator
Attorney
��^
•' 4> :,,-,,,,yam, �; p
Personnel
Public Works
Mr. Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman
Com:ilunit;/ ."%v., _•
Board of County Commissioners
Utilit;es
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Financa _
Othcr -
Re: County—Initiated Rezoning on 27th
Avenue
17.5 acres from C-1 & R-1 to R -2D
ZC-074 RICH2
_I
Dear Mr. Scurlock:
At the regularly scheduled County Commission meeting held
on September 5, 1984, the four Commissioners present at
the meeting considered the above request after a public
hearing was held.
At the time of the public hearing, my office represented
Mr. and Mrs. Mannie Holmes who own approximately 8 acres
within the acreage which was being rezoned. The Holmes
requested at the time of the hearing for the Commission
to consider allowing 1.89 acres instead of .8 acres to
remain C-1. This request affects the property located
in the Northeast corner of the property to be rezoned.
The basis for the Holmes -request was that on November 21,
1974 the Commissioners approved a Plot Plan for the 1.89
acres for commercial use. There presently exists within
this Plot Plan area two buildings, one building houses
a gas station operation and convenience store and the other
building has from time to time been used for storage purposes,
however, presently both are not being utilized.
The Commissoner's vote on whether or not to allow 1.89
acres instead of the .8 acres to remain commercial was
turned down as a result of a tie vote. On behalf of Mr. and
Mrs. Holmes, I would request that the Commissioners reconsider
their request to leave 1.89 acres located at the Northeast
corner of the property which was rezoned to a C-1 Commercial
zoning. The request is based on the fact that the full
Commission was not present at the time the vote was taken
thereby causing a tie in the ballot.
The Holmes would appreciate a consideration of their
request at the time a full Commission is present.
Very truly yours,
,Samuel A. Block
David Cairns, attorney representing Mr. & Mrs. Mannie
Holmes in the absence of Attorney Samuel Block, explained
that his clients were not at home when the rezoning notices
were sent out and did not attend the meeting of the Board of
County Commissioners of September 5th at which Attorney
Block requested that all of the Holmes' property be excluded
from the County -initiated rezoning of 17.5 acres to R -2D.
At that meeting the request for exemption was denied because
of a tie vote of 2-2, and the Holmes' are now requesting
that the matter be heard by a full Commission.
70
SEP 19 1984 BOOK U8
SEP 19 1984BOOK 58 F� 394
Chairman Scurlock pointed out that at the meeting of
September 5th Attorney Block did not take the option of
postponing the matter to be heard before a full Commission
and asked the County Attorney if there would be any legal
problem in the Board's reconsideration of this matter.
Attorney Brandenburg advised that the ordinance that
was adopted that day has already rezoned this property. The
ordinance has been filed with the Secretary of State and is
in effect. There is really nothing for the Board to
reconsider at this point. The only thing the Board can do
is to start from scratch and go through the entire rezoning
process again. The problem with that is that the Zoning
Code says that once there has been an application filed for
a rezoning on a piece of property that the County will not
consider any other rezonings on it for a 12 -month period.
Another problem is in establishing a precedent in that
everyone who does not like the outcome of their rezoning,
will be requesting another hearing for one reason or
another. The third problem is that once an administrative
determination has been made with respect to a zoning matter
and everyone was given the opportunity to present their
arguments, there is a doctrine that requires a change of
circumstance that was not known about at the time in order
to go back and rezone it. He, therefore, recommended that
the Board not reconsider this matter.
Commissioner Bird asked what would happen if the
Holmes' wanted to build another structure on the land that
was not included in the rezoning, and Attorney Brandenburg
advised that would require an approved modified site plan
which is the same process as a normal site plan approval.
He explained that when the Planning staff looked at this
site, they looked at how much of this parcel was actually
being used or had been used in the recent past in this type
71
M M
of activity, and that is why they made the recommendation to
go with only .8 acres instead of the entire 1.89 acres.
Attorney Cairns asked Director Keating if he and his
staff were aware that in 1974 the Commission approved a Plot
Plan for the 1.89 acres for commercial use and Director
Keating confirmed that he and his staff were not aware of
that before the meeting and it was not part of their
analysis and recommendation to the Board.
Attorney Brandenburg asked Director Keating if staff
had been aware of that, would that have changed their
recommendation, and Director Keating answered that in the
past their position has been that if a parcel had been used
or was being used in a lawfully conforming use at the time
the Comp Plan was adopted and was zoned commercial, they
normally would recommend that it retain its commercial
designation; however, there are certain times when they
recommend that property be rezoned which would put it in
non-conformance with the Comp Plan because it is staff's
opinion that it would be better for the use to cease
eventually. In this case, since one of the parcels was
considered as commercial and staff did not realize that more
than.one parcel had been joined together through a site
plan, their recommendation would have been to have the whole
property retain its commercial designation.
Attorney Brandenburg advised the Board that based on
Director Keating's answer, there is reason that they have
new evidence to qualify for a new hearing, but Director
Keating interjected that the Plot Plan commercial use of .8
acres had been discussed at the meeting of September 5th.
Attorney Brandenburg then restated his original
recommendation that the Commissioners ought not to
reconsider this matter.
72
SEP 19 1984 BOOK 58 Fr: -A,95
J
SEP 19 1954 BOOK 58 pg F fI
,6
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, that the
Board deny the Holme's request for another
rezoning hearing on the grounds outlined today
by the County Attorney.
Under discussion, Commissioner Wodtke recalled that in ""
the 10 years he has been a commissioner he has not missed
more than3 or 4 regularly scheduled meetings and apologized
for not being in attendance at the meeting of September 5th.
He noted, however, that the Board now meets weekly and it is
difficult to guarantee that a full Board will be.present at
all the meetings for reasons of illness, family crisis, or
being out of town on County business.
Commissioner Lyons thought that the applicant had
adequate time to acquire the necessary evidence before the
meeting of September 5th.
Attorney Cairns emphasized that Mr. & Mrs. Holmes were
out of town at the time of the Planning & Zoning Commission
meeting and were not aware that the matter was going to the
Board of County Commissioners.
Attorney Brandenburg advised that the Holmes can
request a rezoning of the .8 acres in 12 months and
explained that provision also applies to County -initiated
requests.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The
Motion was voted on and carried unanimously.
\,UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF THE HUTCHINSON ISLAND RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/11/84:
73
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: September 11, 1984FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF
THE HUTCHINSON ISLAND
SUBJECT: RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
FROM: Robert M. Keating, AICP4EFERENCES: Update/Hutchinson
Planning & Development Director DIS:RMK
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissionersat
their regular meeting of September 19, 1984.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On October 6, 1983, the Hutchinson Island Resource Management
Committee formally adopted the Hutchinson Island Resource
Planning and Management Plan. The Governor and Cabinet,
sitting as the Administration Commission, took similar action
On November 29, 1983, adopting the plan by resolution. Subse-
quent to adoption of the plan by the Administration Commission,
the plan became effective in the three county study area.
As part of the joint resolution of the Governor and Cabinet
adopting the Hutchinson Island Plan, it was noted that the
Department of Community Affairs would monitor the actions taken
by state agencies and local governments towards implementing
the plan during the initial nine month period and report to the
Cabinet in August, 1984 on their progress. Since that initial
nine month period has ended, the Department of Community
Affairs has requested information from local governments in the
study area as to actions- taken to implement the adopted
Hutchinson Island Resource Management Plan.
Like the other local governments in the study area, Indian
River County has been requested to provide the Department of
Community Affairs with a statement of actions taken to imple-
ment the plan along with appropriate supporting documentation.
As requested by the state, the County prepared its implementa-
tion statement in matrix form and submitted it to Tallahassee.
Subsequent to that submittal, County staff met with staff from
the Department of Community Affairs to discuss the County's
success in implementing the approved plan. At that time, the
state informally informed the County staff that it appeared
that the County had performed adequately in implementing the
policies of the plan.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
Now that the Department of Community Affairs staff has reviewed
the implementation activities of the local governments, it is
the state staff's responsibility to prepare a written assess-
ment for the Hutchinson Island Resource Planning and Management
Committee. The state must also prepare a recommendation for
the committee in relation to action to be taken at the commit-
tee meeting scheduled for September 27, 1984. The alternatives
available to the committee include: finding that all local
governments in the study area have adequately implemented the
74
SEP 19 1984 BOOK58 FACE'
SEP 19, 1994
BOOK 58 FA;E 3.98
Hutchinson Island Resource Management Plan and that no further
action is necessary; finding that one or more local governments
in the study area have not taken sufficient action to implement
the plan and recommending that those local governments be
designated as areas of critical state concern; or finding that
insufficient implementing actions have been taken by local
governments in the study area and recommending that the entire
study area be designated as an area of critical state concern.
A copy of the County's submission to the state detailing
implementation activities relating to each of the plan's
policies is attached. Because of the high degree of County
compliance and the favorable review by the state, it is likely
that the Department of Community Affairs staff will recommend
that the committee find the County's actions sufficient.
Despite the state recommendation, the committee will at its
September 27, 1984 meeting, consider the adequacy of Indian
River County's implementing actions as well as the implementing
actions of other local governments in the study area. The
County staff will present any information and respond to any
questions concerning its implementation activities at the
September 27, 1984 meeting. At this time, the staff would
request further direction from the Board of County Commission-
ers.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff requests further direction from the Board of County
Commissioners on action to be taken at the September 27, 1984
meeting of the Hutchinson Island Resource Planning & Management
Committee.
Planning & Development Director Robert Keating
explained that since the Hutchinson Island Resource Plan was
adopted last October, each local government in the area was
to undertake certain actions to implement the policies of
the HIRMP. It was understood that the Department of
Community Affairs would evaluate the progress made by the
local governments in the area in August or September of
1984. These evaluations will determine whether or not the
Dept. of Community Affairs will recommend to the Governor
and the Cabinet that sufficient action is being taken by the
governments in this area or whether the State should take
more drastic action such as designating the whole study area
as an area of critical concern.
75
Director Keating reported that during this past year,
Indian River County has been successful in adopting a number
of ordinances and changes that will serve to implement the
policies of the HIP. He recently received some additional
information from the State which shows that in most
categories Indian River County has taken sufficient action
to implement the Plan. In addition, he received a report
from the Dept. of Community Affairs stating that they find
that all the local governments in the study area have
undertaken sufficient action to implement the policies in
the Plan.
Director Keating advised that the evaluations will be
discussed at a meeting scheduled for next week, and he and
Commissioner Bowman, being committee members, are asking for
direction and input from the Board on this matter.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, that the
Board instruct our representatives on the
HIRMP Committee to report that Indian River
County is taking the necessary steps to meet with
the spirit of the HIRMP Study Committee and
request that we not be designated as an area of
critical concern.
Under discussion, Commissioner Wodtke was concerned
whether Director Keating or Commissioner Bowman were
notified of the Dept. of Community Affairs special call
meeting of September 8, 1984 and Commissioner Bowman stated
they had not received any notification.
Chairman Scurlock suggested that a letter be written to
the Dept. of Community Affairs requesting adequate notice of
any and all committee meetings, and that the County should
respond to any inappropriate action taken at those meetings.
76
SEP 19 1984 Boor 58 FA,f 3.99
I
SEP 19 1994 BOOK 58 Ft„f 400
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The
Motion was voted on and carried unanimously.
COPY OF IRC COMPLIANCE/IMPLEMENTATION OF HIRMP IS ON FILE IN
THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK
RESOLUTION RE REFERENDUM BALLOT FOR ADDITIONAL ONE CENT
SALES TAX TO BUILD COUNTY JAIL
Attorney Brandenburg advised that this iteis on the
Agenda today for the Board to approve the exact wording to
go on the November general election ballot.
Commissioner Lyons wanted to be sure that we don't have
people misunderstand the fact that we are not asking for
anything lasting more than just one year. He suggested that
the word "legal” be deleted from Item #1 in the proposed
resolution.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, that the
Board adopt Resolution 84-66 establishing the
form of ballot for a referendum to be held in the
November general election for an additional
one -year -only, one cent sales tax to build a
County jail, with the above deletion suggested
by Commissioner Lyons.
Commissioner Wodtke suggested that perhaps some sort of
dollar figure on the cost of the new jail should be inserted
in the ballot language, but Chairman Scurlock and
Commissioner Lyons felt that the building cost will be
sufficiently addressed through the media, etc., and it might
confuse the issue if the figures were included in the ballot
language.
77
The Commissioners suggested other changes in the "Yes"
or "No" questions on the ballot, but Attorney Brandenburg
explained that the wording for any language under the "Do
you favor" questions is regulated by State Statute.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The
Motion was voted on and carried unanimously.
78
SEP 19 1984 Boos / FA t 401
SEPI q 1994
BOOK 58 F':.GE 402
RESOLUTION NO.84-66
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTES
§101.161, ESTABLISHING THE FORM OF
BALLOT FOR A REFERENDUM TO BE HELD AT
THE GENERAL ELECTION IN NOVEMBER,
1984, FOR AN ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR-ONLYo
ONE CENT SALES TAX TO BUILD A COUNTY
JAIL.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, adopted Ordinance No. 84-60,
providing for the imposition of a one -year -only additional, one
cent sales tax, subject to voter approval in November, 1984, and
WHEREAS, Florida's Statutes provide that the County
must adopt an enabling resolution, setting forth the form of the
ballot.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
that:
1. The ballot, pursuant to Indian River County Ordinance
No. 84-60, shall appear on the 1984 general election as follows;
REFERENDUM
One year only additional one cent (1t)
sales tax to build a County jail.
The chief purpose of this measure is to:
1. Satisfy the requirement to build a new
jail.
2. Impose a one -year -only additional one
cent (1¢) sales tax for the 1985
calendar year on the first $1,000 of
value on transactions subject to sales
tax.
3. Provide an equitable means of funding
the jail, saving up to 3.5 million
dollars in interest and costs
associated with alternate financing.
Do you favor financing criminal justice
facilities with a one cent (4) sales tax
for twelve months only?
.....Yes -- for financing criminal justice
facilities
.....No -- against financing criminal
justice facilities
The foregoing resolution was
offered
by
Commissioner
Lyons who moved its adoption. The
motion
was
seconded by
Commissioner Wodtke and, being put to
a vote,
the
vote was as
follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Vice Chairman Patrick B. Lyons
Commissioner Richard N. Bird
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr.
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman
The Chairman thereupon declared
Aye
Aye
Aye
Aye
Aye
the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 19th day of September, 1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By C.
Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
Attest:
Freda Wright, Clerk
APPROVED AS TO. °FORM AND LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY 1-57
By
mranoenburg,
Attorney
�TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT
Commissioner Lyons read the following Summary of
Actions of meeting of September 11, 1984:
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE
Summary of Actions
September 11, 1984
1. Five-laning 58th Avenue North of State Road 60:
Committee recommends that staff negotiate with developers to
share the cost of 5-laning 58th Avenue north of S.R.60.
Since Ryanwood Shopping Center has agreed to donate $75,000,
proposed development on the northwest corner should donate
the same amount - with the -County contributing $100,000 from
gas tax revenue.
2. Commercial Rezoning, Southwest corner of State Road AlA at
.C.R. 510:
Committee recommends that traffic safety and access be
strongly considered when hearing this rezoning. If
approved, this site should provide adequate improvements at
the intersection.
80
SEP 7.9 1984aooK 58 pnr 403
SEP 19 IS84
BOOK 58 rw, 404
In regard to Item #1, Commissioner Lyons wished to see
the developer on the west side of Kings Highway agree'to
make a similar donation as the developer has on the east
side of Kings Highway so the road can be five-laned to
accommodate the traffic that will be generated by the
development of the commercial node at that intersection.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, that the Board
authorize staff to negotiate with the developer
of the property on the west side of Kings Highway
and SR -60 to share the cost of 5-laning 58th
Avenue north of SR -60.
Administrator Wright understood then that the Board is
obligating $100,000 of the County gas tax money and
cautioned that we are already running a million dollars in
the red based on the current plan.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The
Motion was voted on and carried unanimously.
,/REPORT ON NEGOTIATIONS WITH MEDICAL EXAMINER
Commissioner Lyons reported that after three meetings
involving Dr. Walker, he has come to the conclusion which is
shared by the County Attorney, that it is going to be very
difficult to reach an agreement that will be satisfactory to
Dr. Walker, Indian River Community College and the four
counties involved. The major problem is whether Dr. Walker
will work out of the community college or the hospital. Dr.
Walker submitted two budgets, one for the hospital location
and one for the college location. He estimates that his
expenses at the hospital will be $347,000 compared to
$424,000 at the college, or approximately $50,000 more. Dr.
81
Walker has estimated that Indian River County's share at the
hospital location would be $89,000 a year compared to
$108,000 a year at the college.
Commissioner Lyons noted that the numbers Dr. Walker
used in his budget are considerably in excess of the total
budgeted by the counties involved, which poses another
problem.
Commissioner Lyons recommended that the Board release
him and the County Attorney from further negotiations in
this matter and that we inform State Attorney Robert Stone,
if he would like to have the Medical Examiner located at the
college, that he make the necessary arrangements with the
college and Dr. Walker.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, that the
Board inform State Attorney Robert Stone
that Indian River County has ceased negotiations
with Dr. Walker and recommends that the State
Attorney continue negotiations with the
Medical Examiner in the interest of having
his office located at Indian River Community
College.
Attorney Brandenburg thought that a new formula for
distribution of the costs of the Medical Examiner's
operating expenses would be submitted prior to our final
budget hearing.
In regard to the location of the Medical Examiner's
office, the County Attorney felt that it comes down to the
fact that Dr. Walker does not want to work out of the
college and there is no way for this county to force him to
do so without the agreement of the other three counties.
The other counties have indicated they do not wish to
82
SEP 19 1934 �oox 58 ma 405 I
SEP q W'34
BOOK 8 Fr;E 496
support us in our quest to have the doctor located at the
college.
Commission Lyons explained that the matter of having
the Medical Examiner located at the community college was
pretty much the idea of State Attorney Robert Stone.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The
Motion was voted on and carried unanimously.
TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
Chairman Scurlock asked that this item be added to
today's agenda in order to have Commissioner Bowman
reappointed to the Council. He explained that he took her
position during her illness.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
replaced Chairman Scurlock with Commissioner
Bowman on the Treasure Coast Regional Planning
Council.
JBEACH PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION COMMITTEE
Chairman Scurlock explained that the Board would like
to request that Commissioner Wodtke continue to serve on
this Committee and Commissioner Wodtke agreed to continue in
his position of Chairman of the committee. He urged the
Commissioners to get in contact with Andy Hobbs of the Army
Corps of Engineers at the Beaches & Shore Conference being
held this week at Captiva Island.
`,REPORT ON WATER RATES CHARGED BY THE CITY OF VERO BEACH TO
UNINCORPORATED AREA USERS
Chairman Scurlock reported that he, Administrator
Wright and Utilities Dir-ector Terry Pinto attended last
83
I
l.�
night's meeting of the Vero Beach City Council and that the
City has indicated that the rates will be loo higher for
residents in the unincorporated areas rather than the 250
higher rates originally proposed. They were also successful
in having them postpone the rate hearing until after we got
back from the wastewater conference in New Orleans. He
reported that the rate consultants were in all today and
yesterday and are preparing written statements and questions
for the City Council to address. It was apparent to him
last night that it is going to be very difficult to get the
City Council to change their position, but that does not
mean we won't follow through on this matter.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that the City's revenue
needs are overstated and that we have acted as an advocate
of the consumer.
The Commissioners commended Chairman Scurlock for a job
well done.
.DATA PROCESS COMMITTEE REPORT -ef-�
Commissioner Wodtke presented a proposed resolution for
the Commission to consider. He reported that he had met
with all the constitutional officers of the County and the
County Administrator who have indicated they will approve
this resolution which authorizes a preliminary study of the
feasibility of implementing a central data processing system
for the County. It is understood by all the constitutional
officers that each entity has specific needs for data
processing functions which must be met, as well as the
County Commission and the utilities. The committee will be
composed of one County Commissioner, the officer of each
constitutional entity, and the County Administrator, who
will be a non-voting member. Commissioner Wodtke recalled
that the Board appointed him to chair this committee.
SEP 19 1984 BooK 8 P,, E ` 07
J
Commissioner Wodtke noted that if the Committee needs a
consultant, as set out in #7 on Page 2 of the proposed
resolution, it must be an impartial individual or firm, not
anyone that is presently connected with the computers now in
place, nor anyone in computer sales.
Assistant County Attorney James Wilson pointed out some
very minor grammatical changes that are to be made in the
resolution, and noted that a signature line for each consti-
tutional officer will be added to the end of the resolution.
Administrator Wright felt that this study was very much
needed and he recommended that the Commission adopt this
resolution.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board
unanimously adopted Resolution 84-67 establishing
a Data Processing Committee to study the
feasibility of implementing a central data
processing system for Indian River County, as
modified by Attorney Wilson, and signed by each
constitutional officer and be brought back to the
Board with a more detailed scope of work.
M
-I
RESOLUTION NO. 84-67
WHEREAS, Indian River County's data processing needs
are presently served by several separate and incompatible computer
systems; and
WHEREAS, many County government functions require the
large scale interdepartmental transfer of data; and
WHEREAS, the County has awarded contracts to private
companies to facilitate intergovernmental transfers of data; and
WHEREAS, current state of the art technology is
available which has the capability to eliminate unnecessary delays
and expense through the adoption of a central data processing
center to serve all Indian River County governmental departments;
and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County is interested in eliminating any and all sources of
unncecessary expense within the County budget in order to provide
lower taxes and expanded services to the citizens of Indian River
County; and
WHEREAS, implementation of advanced technology central
data processing systems has proven effective in reducing costs and
improving services in other counties:
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA as follows:
A. That the County's best interest would be served by
studying the feasibility of implementing a central data processing
system for Indian River County.
B. A Data Processing Committee is hereby established,
to be composed of the following members:
1. A member of the Board of County Commissioners,
appointed by the Chairman, subject to approval of the Board of
County Commissioners;
2. The Property Appraiser;
3. The Tax Collector;
4. The Clerk of the Circuit Court;
5. The Sheriff;
-1-
SEP ] q 1954 Bou 58AIGAJ9
I
I
SEP 19 1954 mox 58 FrcF,410
6. The Supervisor of Elections; and
7. The County Administrator (non-voting)
C. The duties of the Data Processing Committee shall be
as follows:
1. To review and evaluate current data processing
systems and procedures including, but not limited to analysis of
the following:
a. Actual tixed costs of operating current
data processing systems.
b. Review of current procedures and policies
regarding intergovernmental transfer of data.
c. Adaptability and expansion capability of
current data processing systems to growing needs of community.
2. Determine long range County data processing
requirements.
3. Evaluate alternative data processing systems.
4. Evaluate potential of current data processing
systems in relation to available new technology central data
processing systems.
5. Establish guidelines and specifications for
alternative data processing system.
6. Recommend appropriate action to Board of County
Commissioners.
7. The Data Processing Committee may consult
experts in the computer and data processing field to assist in
technical matters.
D. Meetings of the Data Processing Committee shall be
as follows:
1. The Board shall hold at least one regular
meeting each month on the second Tuesday of the month at
10 o'clock A.M., unless otherwise scheduled at a preceding
meeting.
2. The County Administrator shall serve as
Chairman of the Board.
3. Special Meetings of the Committee shall be
1/.
_ -2 _
called by the Chairman, or by a majority of the Committee members
upon reasonable notice to each Committee member. Notice of
special meetings may be in writing or by personal contact, and
shall state when and where the meeting is to be held and the
business to be considered.
4. A majority of the Committee shall constitute a
quorum. Approval or disapproval of any issue will be by a
majority of the members present.
5. The Chairman shall preside over all meetings of
the Committee and will issue the agenda for all meetings. The
Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County shall provide
a secretary to keep the minutes. In the absence of the Chairman,
the Committee shall elect a Chairman pro tempore.
E. All findings, policies, directives and
recommendations promulgated by the Data Processing Committee shall
become effective only after approval by the Board of County
Commissioners.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Wodtke who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Lyons and, upon being put to a vote, the
vote was as follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Ave
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. .Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 19th
Attest:A
FREDA WRIGHT
Clerk
APPROVED
AND, LECA
0
day of September , 1984.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
, '21� _'_ '11, e"'_/ /_ I
DON C. SCU OCR, JR. Cl
Chairman
SEP 19 1984 -3
BOOK y C
8 F,4 E 411
SEP 19 1984
BOOK 58 Fnc t P
We, the following named Constitutional Officers of
Indian River County, Florida, having had opportunity to review the
above resolution 84-67, hereby agree to serve as members of the
above created Data Processing Committee.
r
DAVID NOLTE, Property Appraiser
,4 A�lo�
GIENE E. MORRIS, Tax Collector
FREDA WRIGHT, Ckork of Circuit Court
,�_,J ��- &4,4�
R. T. "TIM" DOBECK, Sheriff
1po_ :? L/_ �
Date
O—Z,i
D to
"2-�I- ?Z/
Date
9-27-84
Date
ROSEMARY RIC Y, Supery sor of Elections Date
TEMPORARY CLOSING OF JUNGLE TRAIL DUE TO CANKER THREAT
Chairman Scurlock reported that he received a request
this morning from Alan Ryall and several other owners of
citrus property on the barrier island to close Jungle Trail
temporarily during the citrus canker threat.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
authorized the temporary closing of Jungle Trail
during the citrus canker threat with the under-
standing that signs will be posted advising that
the road is open to local traffic only.
`REPORT ON FRED WATERFIELD'S SUIT AGAINST THE SHERIFF
Attorney Brandenburg advised the Commissioners that
Fred Waterfield, accused murderer currently housed in the
County jail, has filed a'federal law suit against the
89
a�
s
Sheriff, the County and the Dept. of Corrections. The County
Attorney did not believe the suit has any merit, but the
allegation is that Waterfield has not been allowed to
exercise, has been shackled and handcuffed during yard
periods, and his health has deteriorated by this treatment.
He just wanted the Commissioners to be aware of this suit.
REPORT ON PURCHASE OF PERLINI TRACT - CLOSING COSTS
Attorney Brandenburg reported on the three tracts of
land in the "Save Our Coast" program, noting that the Erdo
property will be closing next week, and the State has
accepted an option on the Morris property which will be
exercised in September.
Mr. Perlini has accepted the State's offer of $295,000
for his property provided the County participates in picking
up some of the costs at closing -- specifically, title
insurance, documentary stamps and a survey that already has
been done.
Attorney Brandenburg estimated that these costs will
run about $3500 and suggested that the Board authorize this
expense as the County already has a tremendous investment in
the beachfront property.
Commissioner Bird felt it would be money well spent
especially since the Perlini property is contiguous to
property presently owned by the County.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons,
SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board
unanimously authorized the payment of
approximately $3500 for closing costs involved
in the Perlini property and authorized OMB
Director Barton to make the appropriate budget
transfers.
S E P 19 1954 BooK 58 PAGE -413
I
SEP 19 1984
600K 58 P'CE 414
The several bills and accounts against the County
having been audited were examined and found to be correct
were approved and warran-ts ssued in settlement of same as
follows: Treasury Fund Nos. 12182 - 12532 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 1:15 o'clock
P.M.
Attest:
G
Clerk
91
JZ� /J/
Chairman