Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/6/1985Wednesday, March 6, 1985 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, March 6, 1985, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman; Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Vice Chairman; Richard N. Bird; and Margaret C. Bowman. Absent was William C. Wodtke, Jr., who was out of state on County business. Also present were Michael J. Wright, County Administrator; Gary Brandenburg, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; Jeffrey K. Barton, OMB Director; and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order. Reverend Stan Sanford, Wabasso First Baptist Church, gave the invocation, and Commissioner Bird led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA Administrator Wright wished to add an item for discussion under General Services in regard to the purchase of the telephone building for the Sheriff. Attorney Brandenburg requested that a discussion be added under his matters in regard to a letter to the City Attorney regarding the purchasing of Hutchinson Utilities. Commissioner Bowman asked an item be added under her matters in regard to naming the barrier island Orchid Island. Commissioner Bird requested that a discussion re construct- ing a new ballfield at Kiwanis Hobart Park be added under his matters. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, Commissioner Wodtke being absent, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the addition of the above items to today's agenda. MAR 6 1955 BOOK E 40 L- t. Tiriffin NOW u APPROVAL OF MINUTES BOCIK 0 F�,�r. 41 The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc- tions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of Feburary 6, 1985. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 6, 1985, as written. The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc- tions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 13, 1985. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 13, 1985, as written. CLERK TO THE BOARD - Security for Courthouse Clerk Freda Wright believed the following memo and attached proposal is self-explanatory: February 18, 1985 S. DEAN MEMORANDUM TO: "Sonny" Dean FEB 20 S5 General Services FROM: Freda Wright, Clerk I am enclosing herewith quotation from Sonitrol Security System, with a proposal for providing security for the Courthouse. As you know, we have had two break-ins within the last few months, and with all of the computer equipment and expensive machinery we have, not to mention the large amounts of cash collected, it seems feasible that we take some action for more security. We do have vaults for overnight stibrage of cash, but the equipment is throughout the building. I would appreciate your reviewing this proposal and present it to the Board for their consideration. 2 C Phone: SKI— SQ00 A SONITROL SYSTEM FOR THE DETECTION OF UNAUTHORIZED INTRUSION TO THE ABOVE PREMESIS WILL INCLUDE: INTRUSION Central Station Monitor (s) --:W ERR 7 bAY Master Control Panel (s) Mcr 2400 Jzsea Recharging Back-up Battery 14 t2 Pre -amplified Sound Activated Microphones.. t.. . Door Contact Switches r� Portable.Hold-up Button(s) FIRE Control Adaptor NAMED Heat Sensors) 135dg 190dg s Smoke Detector (s) 9)Vno&l 20 ;FA Other (Specify) C.C xed Hold-up Button(s) =Off Control.Switch Rey Touchpad Other (Specify) AAC= 7-qM SYS -t46 - t W1LL ZSbc=� UtLL 2EGLLLZ' A_bDi'WontA-(__ JELCG 2I.4or4C C 14A.246 -S (Ulc1- ZZCco 'jEZeC Gt4R24ieS THE SONITROL SYSTEM OUTLINED ABOVE IS LEASED AT: $ Z`] 3p installation charges Go $ monthly monitoring and maintenance �r an initial term of one year. )POSAL VALID FOR THIRTY (3Q) DAYS. . SON R L OF VEtO BEACH, INC. 1845-14t Avenue Vero Beach, FL 32960 (305) 567-2045 3 LIAR 61985 BOOK MAR 6 1995 BOOK 6 0 f'ACE 4 Chairman Lyons felt the first consideration is whether we are or are not going to add security, and then we should go out for proposals. Chairman Lyons asked Clerk Wright if she had asked for formal bids, and Mrs. Wright stated that she had only received the estimate from Sonitrol. General Services Director Dean recommended that the Board do go to bid on this as he has had a proposal from several vendors. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, to authorize staff to advertise for bids on a security system for the Courthouse as requested by the Clerk. Commissioner Bird inquired how we decide what part of the Courthouse we want to cover as he felt we must give the bidders a scope of service; Director Dean believed we would cover the entire Courthouse and stated that staff will bring the Board a recommendation. Commissioner Bowman inquired if this would include the Annex, and it was stated that it would not. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0). CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Scurlock asked that Item E be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion and clarification. A. Budget Amendment, Traffic Engineering The Board reviewed the following budget amendment requested by Traffic Engineer Orr: 4 � � r TO: Board of County Ccnmissioners DATE: February 26, 1985 FILE: SUBJECT: Traffic Engineering �—U FROM: Jeffrey K. Barton, REFERENCES: CMB Director Per the attached request from the Traffic Engineering Department, the following budget amendment is requested to cover the costs of ma:ntenance_autanotive eguiSuent for the balance of this fiscal year: Account Title Maintenance-Autanotive Reserve for Contingencies Account No. 111-245-541-34.64 111-199-581-99.91 Balance in Road & Bridge Fund Ccntingercies $150,000.00 as of 2/19/85 Increase 3,000 Decrease 3,000 TO: Jeffrey K. Barton DATE: February 20, 198FILE: Office of Budget and Management THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.' Public Works Director SUBJECT: Budget Line Transfer FROM: Michael L. OrrREFERENCES: Traffic Engine r Please accept the following budget line -to -line transfers: From To Amount 111-245-541-34.02 35.22- $'100.00 111-245-541-35.42 35.25 20.00 N/A 34.64 3000.00 Because of the great costs associated with our in-house vehicle maintenance, the budgeted amount for line item 34.64 is expended. An amount from another item to cover anticipated expenses for the balance of FY84-85 is not available without deleting some capital items or seriously affecting other maintenance activities. Therefore, a contingency transfer is requested from fund 111. 5 MAR 6 1985 BOOK 6 0 PACE 44 . V MAR 6 1985 BooK 60 Fa,E 45 ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the above budget amendment. B. Agreement between County and WTVX ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the License Agreement with WTVX granting v them the right to install and operate electronic transmitting and receiving equipment at the County Administration Building. 6 J W W LICENSE i. This License made this 6th day of March , 1985, by and between Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as the "Grantor" and WTVX Television, a division of WTWV, Inc., hereinafter referred to as the "Licensee"; W I T N E S S E T H: That the Grantor, in consideration of ONE DOLLAR ($1.00) and other good and valuable considerations, and in accordance with the agreements and covenants set forth below, does hereby grant to the Licensee a non-exclusive license to install and operate electronic transmitting and receiving equipment at the Indian River County Administration Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida. Grantor and Licensee hereby agree and covenant as f of lows: 1. This License may be terminated without cause by either party upon sixty days prior written notice. 2. This License shall authorize Licensee to install and operate a microwave dish transmitter and, when necessary, a temporary microwave receiving dish and accessory equipment in accordance with all governmental agency permit requirements, for the express purpose of broadcasting emergency management or civil defense information affecting the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Indian River County, and for no other purpose without the prior written consent of the Grantor. 3. The Licensee shall maintain the equipment described herein and all attachments in a safe and functional condition. The Grantor may inspect the licensed equipment to insure that said equipment is properly maintained in a safe and functional condition. 4. Licensee warrants that the use of the property by the Licensee for the purposes provided herein will not interfere with the Grantor's use of the property in any manner whatsoever. 5. Licensee shall not assign this License without the prior written approval of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County. 6. Licensee agrees that in the event of a suit brought on this License for ejectment or to enforce the covenants of this agreement or for any default hereunder on the part of Licensee, its successors or assigns, and should the Grantor be successful, Licensee agrees to pay the reasonable costs and expenses of the suit including reasonable attorney's fees. 7. It is expressly understood and agreed that the Licensee shall indemnify for and hold the Grantor harmless from any claim, damages, liability, cause of action, or demand whatsoever, including the duty to defend, and attorney's fees which may arise out of or result from the installation of the equipment herein or use of the premises by the Licensee. 8. Licensee agrees that Licensee, his agents, affiliates or subsidiaries or assigns, will make no unlawful or improper use of the premises and will abide by all of the health, safety and other regulations as required by Indian River County, the State of Florida or any other governmental authority. -1- AR 6 1985 60 ; .,F 46 • MAR- R ' 1985 BOOK47 9. Grantor covenants and agrees that if the Licensee shall pay and otherwise perform and do all the things and matters herein provided for to be kept and performed by the Licensee, that the Licensee shall peacefully and quietly have the right to use the premises for the purposes herein provided together with the necessary right-of-way to said persons without any hinderance by the Grantor or by any other person or persons claiming by or through or under the Grantor. 10. Upon termination of the License, Licensee shall peacefully and quietly surrender and yield up to the Grantor the premises, subject to the right of Licensee to remove all equipment and related attachments owned by the Licensee. At the time of the removal of all equipment and related accessories owned by the Licensee, Licensee will repair at his expense any damage caused by the removal of said equipment or attachments and return the premises to its original state. • 11. It is mutually agreed that each and every one of the covenants and agreements herein contained shall be extended to and be bonded upon the respective successors, heirs, legal representatives and assigns of the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals on the day and year first above written, in duplicate. INDIAN COUN LORIDA By K B. L S, Chairman Attest: By FREDA WRIGHT, Clerk of Circuit Court WTVX Television, a division of WTWV, Inc. By P si en Attest: By S retary STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this � day of , 1985, before me personally appeared PATRICK B. LYONS, Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners, and FREDA WRIGHT, Clerk of Circuit Court, respectively, to me known to be the persons described in and who executed before me the foregoing License Agreement. WITNESS my hand and fficia al in the County and State last aforesaid on this day of , 1985 ti(lr C NO RY BLIC 140TAR PUBLIC STATE 01`. LORIDAr LONDED THRU GENERAL INSURANCE UND , My COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 8,1986 -2- STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 2�day of �i��G%�► 1985, before me personally appeared�o�� , and President and Secretary of WTVX AMC Television, respectively, known to be the persoYfs"described in and who executed before me the foregoing License Agreement. WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid on this LS++^ day of fit, 1985. NOTARY PUBLrC HoOry +lu+=15-01te .31 r efida My Commission Expires Nov. 14, 1985 Q. @oodod Thru Troy Fol4: lumnm, lac, -3- BOOK @�� P�,;E 48 MAR 6 1995 . J BOOK 60 mun 49 C. Final Plat Approval - Oak Ridge Subdivision V The Board reviewed staff recommendation, as follows: TO: The Honorable Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: February 22, 1985 FILE: DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE FINAL PLAT APPROVAL _ SUBJECT: FOR OAK RIDGE Robert M. Keat� ICP SUBDIVISION Planning & Develo�ent Director IVB) THROUGH: Mary Jane V. Goetzfried 'yyJ Chief, Current Development Section FROM: Stan Boling, C, 4, 6, REFERENCES: Staff Planner It is requested that the following information be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting on March 6, 1985. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: Oak Ridge Subdivision is located on the west side `of Old Dixie Highway, south of Oslo Road. The proposed development has 60 lots on a ±22 acre site. The subject property is zoned R-1, Single -Family Residential, (6.2 dwelling units/acre), and has a LD -2, Low Density. Residential, (6 dwelling units/acre), land use designation. The proposed building density is approximately 2.7 dwelling units/acre. The proposed subdivision received preliminary plat approval from the Planning & Zoning Commission on July 26, 1984. The applicant, Oak Ridge Investments, Inc. (John C. Rexford, President) is requesting final plat approval and has submit- ted the following: a) a total dedication of $6,322.00 to a County escrow account for the future extension of 4th Court S.W. to the southern plat boundary ($3,122) and a share of the future construction costs for a left turn lane at Oslo Road and Old Dixie Highway ($3,200); b) an executed Contract for Construction of Required Improvements for remaining grass seeding work; c) an executed three -party escrow agreement holding $1,725.00 to secure the above referenced contract; d) an approved cost statement of the subdivision improvement costs; e) an executed warranty maintenance agreement covering the subdivision improvements; f) an irrevocable letter of credit for $33,000.00 guaranteeing the above referenced agreement. 8 ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS: This application has been reviewed by all of the appropriate County departments. The final plat is in conformance with the approved preliminary plat. The Public Works division has inspected and approved all of the completed improvements and has approved the dollar amounts proposed for contract surety and held in escrow. The Utility Services division has approved the water distribution system and has no objection to final plat approval. The County Attorney's office has approved all submitted documents, including the contract to construct the remaining improvements and the three -party cash escrow agreement, both subject to being signed by the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners. The proposed subdivision is traversed by a 33' AT & T easement, which contains the Orlando/West Palm Beach tele- phone cable. South of the South Relief Canal, this cable easement runs along the western side of Old Dixie Highway. Sections of this easement lie within existing County rights-of-way in other subdivisions such as Dixie Gardens Unit 2, Dixie Heights, Vero Beach Highlands, and Florida Ridge. The easement and cable lie within some of the road right-of-way to be dedicated to the County upon final approval of this plat (see attachment 3). Staff phone conversations with AT & T personnel in Indian River County, Orlando, and Atlanta have confirmed that AT & T staff supervised all construction and paving work within the easement, and that AT & T has no objection to the Oak Ridge Subdivision project. County staff has sent a letter to AT & T's Atlanta office, requesting written confirmation that AT & T has no objections (see attachment 10). This will ensure that AT & T will not have the ability to exercise its easement rights contrary to the County's interests. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant final plat approval to Oak Ridge Subdivision, accept the submitted warranty maintenance agreement and irrevocable letter of credit, and authorize the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners to sign the submitted Contract for Construction of Required Improvements and three -party escrow agreement. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) granted final plat approval to Oak Ridge Subdivision, accepted the warranty maintenance agreement and irrevocable letter of credit, and authorized the Chairman to sign the Contract for Construction of Required Improvements and three -party escrow agreement. SAID .DOCUMENTS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK. P] WIAR 6 1985 Boor 6A k-cr, 50 MAR 6 1995 BOOK 60 FADE 51 D. Final Plat Approval - Courtside Subdivision The Board reviewed memo of Planner Boling, as follows: TO: The Honorable Members DATE: February 20, 1985 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners V DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: FINAL PLAT FOR COURTSIDE SUBJECT: SUBDIVISION Robert M. t atXng, OUCP Planning & Development Director �p THROUGH: Mary Jane V. Goetzfried 'ly'� Chief, Current Development Section FROM: E. Stan Boling A(►j� REFERENCES: Courtside Staff Planner • DIS:STAN It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of March 6, 1985. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: Courtside Subdivision is a twenty-nine lot subdivision located on a ±18 acre site. The proposed development is located on the north 'side of Rebel Road, east of 43rd Avenue. The subject site is zoned R-1, Single -Family Residential (6.2 dwelling units/acre ) and has a LD -1 (3 dwelling units/acre) land use designation. The proposed building density is 1.6 dwelling units/acre. The applicant, Westside Partnership (Fred Tuerpe and Earl Spytek), is requesting final plat approval. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS: Courtside Subdivision received preliminary plat approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission on January 12, 1984. The final plat is in conformance with the preliminary plat. The subdivision will be served by individual wells and septic tanks. All on-site construction has been completed and is in conformance with the land development permit. The Public Works Division has inspected and approved the construction of all the required improvements. The applicants have submitted a Warranty Maintenance Agreement, committing them to guaranteeing against defect for 1 (one) year the subdivision 'improvements dedicated to the County. The applicants have also submitted an irrevocable letter of credit for $13,743.82, representing 25% of the total cost of con- struction of the covered improvements. This letter of credit serves as surety to guarantee the Warranty Maintenance Agree- ment; its amount has been approved by the Public Works Division. Thus, the Courtside Subdivision final plat applica- tion meets all applicable County regulations and requirements. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant final plat approval to Courtside Subdivision, and accept the submitted Warranty Maintenance Agreement and surety for same, in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit for $13,743.82. 10 Lk ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) granted final plat approval to Courtside Subdivi- sion and accepted the Warranty Maintenance Agreement and surety in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit for $13,743.82. WARRANTY, MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, AND BILL OF SALE FOR REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the undersigned Developer has obtained approval by the Board of County Commissioners for the recordation of the final subdivision plat for a project known as Courtside Sub- division, pursuant to the Indian River County Subdivision Ordinance; and WHEREAS, Developer has constructed certain required improvements as defined by, and in accordance with the require- ments of said ordinance, all as described and evidenced in the various drawings and.plans supporting the issuance of the Land Development Permit, together with the as built plans, test results, and certificate of completion of the Developer's engineer and WHEREAS, Developer desires to transfer all its right, title and interest to the County in and to all those improvements constructed within publicly dedicated lands of said project, free and clear of encumbrances, together with the assignment of all existing warranties and Developer's agreement to maintain the improvements, as required by the ordinance, and as stated herein below. W I T N E S S E T H: That for and in consideration of value received, the receipt of which is'hereby acknowledged, Developer, on behalf of itself and all successors and assigns, does hereby: 1. Represent unto Indian River County, a political sub- division of the State of Florida, that the required improvements in said project have been constructed and installed as required by the ordinance, in the manner described above; and 2. Agree that, should the required improvements fail or. otherwise become defective during a period of one year from the date of acceptance of said required improvements, due to defective materials or workmanship, the Developer shall upon each occasion, be responsible in all respects for such failure or defect. Developer shall immediately, upon 20 days written notice by the County, correct such failure or defect at Developer's sole cost and expense and bring them into compliance with the requirements of the applicable ordinance(s); and 3. In the event Developer fails to begin repair of the defective required improvements within the 20 days as specified above, or to complete such repairs within a reasonable time thereafter, the County shall have the right to make such needed repairs and Developer shall be liable to the County for the actual cost expended by the County for such repairs and any cost incident to the collection of such sums, including but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees and costs of litigation, including any appeals; and 11 BOOK 6� P'; MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 P,,, 53 4. Provides herewith, or has provided heretofore in a manner satisfactory to the County, a surety instrument to guaranty Developer's performance of this maintenance agreement, being either a Performance Bond, cash escrow deposit, or irrevocable letter of credit. In the event Developer has not undertaken the repairs contemplated by this Agreement following a request by the County, the proceeds of any such surety instrument may be drawn upon by the County to the final total cost of Developer's obligations hereunder not to exceed, however, the applicable limits of a given surety instrument. 5. Grant and convey unto Indian River County all its right, title and interest in and to all such improvements, other than land dedicated by plat or separate easement, which lies within the areas dedicated to the County, and Developer hereby warrants to the County that it has free and unencumbered title thereto, that all persons or entities which have supplied labor or materials with respect to such improvements have been paid in full, that none of them has any claim whatsoever with respect thereto, and that that Developer shall hereafter forever warrant and defend the County's title thereto. IN WITNESS WHERE9,F Developer has hereunto set its hand and seal this IP' day of1985, with the understanding that the agreement date for the pu 'poses of reference to the Letter of Credit supplied herewith shall be considered January 25, 1985. Notwithstanding this reference, the one-year warranty and maintenance period shall begin running upon the date of formal acceptance of the improvements by Indian River County. Z. S4 71 WESTSIDE PARTNERSHIP DEVELOPER, A Partnership under the laws of the State of Florida Earl T. Spytek / (Title) r By: A4d Tu'rp (Title) FLORIDA NATIONAL BANK o� DATE- Vermian 13� 1995 Miami, Fl. 33131 23WOCABLE STANDBY LEITER of CREDIT No.SB: M-1147 To Indian Diver County Board of County C missioners 1840 25th Street Vero'Beach, Fl. 32960 WE HEREBY ISSUE OUR IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT IN YOUR FAVOR FOR THE ACCOUNT OF Westside Partnershin_ P_O_ RM 2558_ Vf m PA-Pnh_ ri _ ".am IN THE AMOUNT OF $ i a 74s 87 WHICH IS AVAILABLE AGAINST YOUR DRAFT DRAWN AT SIGHT ON FLORIDA NATIONAL BANK, BEARING THE' CLAUSE 'DRAWN UNDER FLORIDA NATIONAULLBARK STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT NO. w_i l47 AS DATED ABOVE ACCOMPANIED BY: 1. A resolution,purporting to be that of the -Indian River County Board of County Cami.ssioneM, certifying that Westside Partnership has defaulted - under that certain Agreement•entitled "Warranty, Maintenance Agreement, and Bill of Sale for Required Improvements" between-Vestside Partnership and Indian River County, relating to the Courtside;'vhich agreamt is dated January 25, 1985. This resolution must also certify that the amount of the draft represents the amount required by t>ie.;.Sbunty to fulfill the performance of the obligations stated in said stxci<;. 2. The original of this letter of.ared t DRAFTS) DRAWN UNDER THIS CREDIT MUST BE NEGOTIATED AT THE OFFICE OF THE ISSUING'BANK . NO LATER THAN May 13, 1986 AND THE AMOUNT ENDORSED ON THE REVERSE OFTHLS ORIGINAL LETTER OF CREDIT. _ WE HEREBY ENGAGE WITH YOU THAT DRAFTS DRAWN UNDER AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS CREDIT WILL BE DULY HONORED UPON PRESENTATION: FaU1MUlp 12 0,tU(7A AUU109Md 51 azure I E. Discuss G&A Charges and Refunds - South Beach Water Project 1� The Board reviewed memo of Assistant Utility Director Joe Y Baird, as follows: To: The Honorable Members of np�: February 14, 1985 FILE: the Board of County Commiss THRU: Michael Wright County Administrator SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF G & A CHARGES Terrance G. Pint FOR SOUTH BEACH WATER Utility Service Rector PROJECT AND RETURN OF REMAIN MONIES IN CONSTRUCTION FUND TO CITY OF VERO BEACH FROM:REFERENCES: Joseph'f Baird Letter from City of Vero Assistant Utility Director Beach dated 2/2/85 DESCRIPTIONS: On September 16, 1981, Indian River County entered into an agreement with the City of Vero Beach to serve an additional 255 customers water on the Barrier Island. In accordance with the agreement Indian River County was to construct a water transmission line from the City limits south on A -1-A to Sea Turtle Lane.- After the completion of the Construction the City was -to serve all vested water customers until such a time as the County was able to build a subaqueous crossing to the Barrier Island or through mutual agreement the waterline would be conveyed to the City. Presently the County is in the process of conveying the water line to the City of Vero Beach, however in September 16, 1981 agreement, the remaining funds in the South Beach construction fund revert to the City of Vero Beach There is $143,887.51 remaining in the Construction Fund before the County charges the General & Administrative charge for overseeing the project. Through negotiations between City and County, we have finally arrived at a General and Administrative Charge that both parties feel is reasonable. Th General and Administrative Charge is 5% of total constructions costs which would be in the amount of $43,710.14. This would leave $100,177.37 of Sout Beach Construction monies that would revert to the City of Vero Beach. ALTERNATIVE AND ANALYSIS:, 1. Approve the General Administrative Charge of $43,710.14 and return the remaining monies in Construction Fund to the City of Vero Beach. 2. Disapprove the General and Administrative Charge of $43,710.14 and the return of the remaining monies in the Construction Fund. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the approval of the 5% General and Administrative Charge in the amount of $43,710.14 and return of remaining monies in the Construc- tion Fund to the City of Vero Beach. 13 BOOK 60 PAGE 54 rMAR 61985 BOOK 60 FAn 55 Commissioner Scurlock believed it is possible we may have overassessed for this particular activity, and if so, those funds should be returned to those who paid the original assessment; he felt this needs to be clarified. Administrator Wright explained that after this memo was written, Attorney Brandenburg brought up the point that we may have assessed for items not actually purchased or included in the project, i.e., the purchase of a water line and also the purchase of utility meters from the City of Vero Beach. This was assessed in anticipation of us serving the South Beach with water; but we are not serving them with water; therefore, if we turn these funds over to the City, the 255 customers will, in effect, have paid twice for the meters and the lines. This amounts to $400 per unit, or $110,000, which is a goodly amount. Administrator Wright reported that staff met with the City on this matter and they don't quite agree, but it was decided to leave this with the legal people to see if they could work out an amicable arrangement. Commissioner Scurlock felt the Commission should go on record that our position is that we are not entitled to those monies, the customer is. Administrator Wright stated that he would like to continue this item to another meeting, and the Commission agreed. V RESURFACING OF COUNTY LIBRARY PARKING LOT The Board reviewed recommendation of Public Works Director Davis, as follows: 14 M TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: February 27, 1985 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Michael Wright, SUBJECT' County Administrator Resurfacing of County Library Parking Lot FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. REFERENCES: Public Works Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Due to additional asphalt needed to properly crown the M527.73. king lot at the library, the final resurfacing cost is The original estimate provided by the County Public Works Division was $3,340. The construction of a proper crown on the lot will result in better drainage and should reduce the need for resurfacing in the future. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS To fund the overage, the same 50% County/50% Library formula approved by.the Board on December 12, 1984 can be applied. This would result in an additional cost of $563.87 to the library.and an equal cost to the County. RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING It is recommended that the County and Library equally share the $1,127.73 additional cost for paving the parking lot. Funding to be from Fund 111-214-541-35.39. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, to share equally with the Library Association in the additional $1,127.73 needed for paving the Library Parking lot. Chairman Lyons requested that there be a different action. As a member of the Library Board, he emphasized that they really had to squeeze to come up with the half promised before, and he did not think they have any more. He, therefore, would like to ask the County to take the additional $1,100 from contingency and add it to the Library Budget. 15 V/ BOOK F�:GE 57 Commissioner Bird gave the Chairman the history of how the Commission arrived at this arrangement. Commissioner Bowman felt the Library could have a book sale or something of the sort to raise funds, but stated that another year, she would like to see the County budget more money for the library. Chairman Lyons agreed. Commissioner Scurlock stated that he would keep his Motion as originally stated. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried 3 to 1 with Commissioner Lyons voting in opposition and Commissioner Wodtke being absent. EXPENSES INCURRED IN MOVING VOTING MACHINES Public Works Director Davis reviewed the following memo: TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: February 26, 1985 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Michael Wright, SUBJECT: Expenses Incurred to Road and Bridg County Administrator- Department for Moving Voting Machines FROM: James W. Davis, P . E . REFERENCES: Albert VanAuken, Supt. Road anc Public Works Direct0 Bridge Dept. to J. Davis dated Feb. 19, 1985 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS As the various election needs arise, the Road and Bridge Department and County staff have transported and moved voting machines to designated Precincts. It had been determined that in the case of elections that are not the Qoun.ty'•s.the Road and Bridge Department should be reimbursed for the cost of labor and equipment expended. At the present time, the Road and Bridge Department fund is not adequately compensated for their services. 16 r ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Attached is an estimate of costs incurred to the Road and Bridge Department for moving the machines. Mrs. Ann Robinson, Supervisor of Elections and her staff have reviewed the costs and have indicated that they appear reasonable. A $10 charge is now being billed to any governmental entity for the use of each voting machine. The Road and Bridge Department charges would be added to this billing. RECOMMENDATIONS ANF FUNDING It is recommended that the Board authorize the Supervisor of Elections to charge the appropriate entity the costs for moving voting machine based upon the attached cost estimate, as it may apply: TO: James W. Davis DATE: February 19 1985 FILE: Public Works Director SUBJECT: Estimated Costs to Move Voting Machines FROM: Albert Van Auken, Suptx' REFERENCES: Road & Bridge Department As per your request, the following is an estimate for labor and equipment costs to move voting machines: EQUIPMENT COST PER HOUR COST PER DAY I closed van 30.00 240.00 1 lift gate truck 30.00 240.00 1 pickup truck 24.00 192.00 LABOR COST PEk HOUR COST PER DAY BENEFITS PER HOUP 1 truck driver 6.00 48.00 2.10 GENERAL ELECTIONS - (6 days in & out) Van - 1440.00 Lift Gate - 1440.00 Pickup - 1152.00 6 men - 2.332.80 TOTAL - $6364.80 PRIMARY ELECTIONS - (6 days in & out) Van - 1440.00 Lift Gate - 1440.00 Pickup - 1152.00 5 men - 1944.00 TOTAL - $5972.00 SCHOOL BOARD, COUNTY WIDE REFERENDUM Van - 960.00 Pickup - 1b$i.00 4 men - 1036.80 TOTAL - 2764.80 17 (NAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 Ft„E 58 MAR 6 1995 BOOK 60 F,,cF 59 Director Davis stressed that in the past these expenses have come out of the Road & Bridge budget and he feels it would be appropriate for Road & Bridge to be reimbursed if the election is not a county election. The $10.00 charge made by the Supervisor of Elections in the past in no way recoups the costs involved. Commissioner Scurlock noted that basically this establishes a specific policy and lets the entities decide whether they want • us to provide this service for them. Commissioner Bird stated that he agrees with the philosophy, but he questioned the rates on the use of the vehicles, for instance, $24.00 an hour for the use of a pickup truck. He did not want to overcharge anyone. Director Davis informed the Board that the rates are from the State G.S.A., plus this includes fuel for the vehicles, insurance, maintenance, etc. He further noted that some of the vehicles used, such as the closed van and the lift gate trucks, we had to purchase specifically for the purpose of transporting the voting machines, and we are trying to recoup the cost of having to buy that specialized equipment. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted the fee structure for moving voting machines as requested by the Superintendent of Road & Bridge and authorized the Supervisor of Elections to charge accordingly. 43RD AVENUE COMMERCIAL STUDY 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: 18 VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a in the matter of in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation ably discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed Before me this o2 d ot� .19 (Business anager) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian R ver Cou o (SEAL) j NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING " - CONCERNING INTERPRETATION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ,';: fo Notice of heating to consider the' llowing commercial land use designation request for the desig- nated aect s mercal lanWhich is proposed rIn� ordance wito be th the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive`I Plan of Indian River County, Florida {111 The subject property is described as: The west 330' of the S'h of the south 20:1 acres of the, west 30 acres of Tract 12. Said, parcel lyingin Section 15„,Town- ship 33S, Range 39E TOGETHER WITH From the NW comer of Tract 13, Section 15, Township 33S, Range 39E, said point- being ointbeing the point of beginning. Thence run 385.03' in a southerly direction parallel to the west boundary of Tract 13, thence run 330' in an easterly direction parallel;: to the north line of Tract 13, thence runt ,_. 385.03' in a northerly direction parallel to the west boundary of Tract 13, thence . run_ westerly 330' to the point of begin ninngg;. TOGETHER WITH��= r , ;7-' ,+ Commence at the SW comer of Seclion 15, Township. 33S. Range 39E; said point ' being the point of beginning. Thence run , north along the west line of said Section r.15 a distance of 984.88'. thence'rum east ; at a "tit angle to said west line. of .Sec- tion 1, a distance of 238', thence'run south a distance of 984.88' to the south.. line of Tract 13,thence run west 238', to. ,the point of beginning. TOGETHER WITH The north 230' of the west 330' Of Tract `4,'Section 22. Township 33S. Range 39E. r, All above.described property lying ,In -In 'titan River County, Florida according to, the last general plat of lands of ths,i” ­ 'than River Farms Company as regorded ''In' Plat Book 2. Page 25, public' records OfSt..LucieOounty.F19ir,Ida.. TOGETHER WITH, Lots t through 13, inclusive, Block J, andt •," .": Lots 1 through 12,1nolusive, Block K.;Ste--,,, vens Park, &lt 2, as'recorded ifi'Piat Book 4, Page 54,: In the Public SoOk of Records of Indian River„County? F{oflda z ; A public hearing "at which' partes: W interest and citizens shall have an ,Opportunity to be heard, *All be held by the Board of CoOnty-Com= missioners of Indian River County Florida In the County Commission Chambers of pas County Administration Building, located at 1540 25th street, Vero Beach, Floridax W1 IlNedl�esdayq March 8,1985, at 9:15 a.m. if any person decides to appeal eny'dec1si6n made on• the above: matter, he/she will neem a record of the proceedinggs, and for "Wch' pur- poses, he/she may deed to'Wmre that :a Orba- tim record of the proceedings is made, which in- cludes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. Indian River County r Board of County Commisslonx Bir -s -Patrick B L its : - Chairman 1 G #k t Feb. 14.26.1MS. . +t c Chief Planner Shearer reviewed the staff memo and recommendation, as follows: 19 LIAR 6 1985 BOOK Co l eUF 6®' BOOK 0 PAH 61 TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: February 18, 1985 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: Robert M. Keatiig, 5rCP Planning & Development Director FROM: Richard Shearer, AICP REFERENCES: Chief, Long -Range Planning 43RD AVENUE COMMERCIAL STUDY 43rd Ave. CHIEF It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of March 6, 1985, at 9:15 a.m. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The Planning Department has received several inquiries about the zoning and land use designation of numerous properties fronting 43rd Avenue between 2nd Street on the north and 1st Street SW on the south. The land fronting 43rd Avenue in this area has been zoned C-1, Commercial District, for many years. The land on the east side of 43rd Avenue is designated as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre) on the land use plan, and the land on the west side of 43rd Avenue is' designated as LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (up to -3 units/acre). However, several of the properties along 43rd Avenue developed in commercial uses prior to the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, and two site plans for future commercial development were submitted prior to the adoption of the Plan. The result has been vacant lots designated as residential on the land use plan and zoned C-1 which are situated between existing commercial uses. On May 16, 1984, the Board of County Commissioners approved a County -initiated request to rezone 6 acres on the east side of 43rd Avenue, south of 4th Street and north of the Moose Lodge from C-1 to R-1, Single -Family District. On November 21, 1984, the Board of County Commissioners approved a County -initiated request to rezone 6.83 acres located on the east side of 43rd Avenue, 230 feet south of 1st Street SW and north of the South Relief Canal from C-1 to R-1. On December 20, 1984, the Planning and Zoning Commission considered this study and instructed the staff to schedule a public hearing on this matter. On January 24, 1985, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4 -to -4 to recommend approval of this request based on paragraph 5 on page 34 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS In this section, an analysis of'the reasonableness of the application will be presented. The analysis will include a description of the current and future land uses of the site and surrounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environmental quality. 20 Existing Land Use Pattern The subject property contains two single-family residences, three mobile homes, the Trading Post, three buildings housing space for contractors, repair services, and offices, the Meadows office/apartment complex, Don's Import car repair facility, two commercial buildings under construction, and undeveloped land (see existing land use map - Attachment #2). The land around the subject property consists of single-family dwellings, mobile homes, and undeveloped land. Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Plan designates the land on the east side of 43rd Avenue as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre), and the land on the west side of 43rd Avenue as LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (up to 3 units/acre). However, there is a provision in the Land Use Element of the Plan that states: "It is not the intent of the Board of County Commissioners to create nonconforming uses by the adoption of this Plan. All lawful, conforming uses in existence at the date of Plan adoption shall be considered consistent with the Plan." Based on this provision, the existing commercial uses can retain their commercial zoning. There are several small vacant lots on the west side of 43rd Avenue which, because of the Land Use Plan designation, should be rezoned in conformance with the LD -1 land use designation. However, because of'the size of these lots and the fact that they are situated in between existing commercial uses, rezoning them to a single-family zoning district does not seem to be appropriate. There is another provision in the Plan that states: "5) Certain parcels of land which do not conform to the policies for nodal development, but can be demonstrated to be suitable for commercial or industrial development and otherwise meet the performance standards described in this element, may receive consideration by the Board of County Commissioners for commercial or industrial zoning classification." The Planning Department feels that this provision is ideally suited to this situation where small lots are situated between commercial uses but generally designated as residential on the Land Use Plan. On the east side of 4'3rd Avenue, most of the land is developed in commercial uses or is under development. However, there are several lots in the Meadows Subdivision which lie approximately 200 feet east of 43rd Avenue and are split by the zoning district boundary. The west half of each of these lots is zoned C-1, and the east half of each lot is zoned R-1. The west half of each lot should be rezoned to R-1. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, particularly the provisions of paragraph 5 of the Comprehensive Plan cited above and the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recom- mends that the property on -the west side of 43rd Avenue between 2nd Street and 1st Street SW remain zoned C-1 and that the property on the east side of 43rd Avenue from 450 feet north of 2nd Street to 230 feet south of 1st Street SW also remain zoned commercial, except for the west half of the lots in the Meadows Subdivision which should be rezoned R-1. 21 BOOK 60 PAGE 62 NEAR 6 195 BOOK 40 FAGE 63 Planner Shearer noted that this came about because the Planning Department had requests from several individuals. It is an area the Planning Department has been looking at for a number of years because of the number of commercial uses concentrated within it. There have been three county rezonings in this general area in the last year from C-1 to residential, but the remaining land is scattered in between the commercial uses and • some pieces are very small. The only appropriate Land Use would be single family, but because of the primary use in this area, staff does not feel this would be appropriate, and they would like to go by Provision 5 in the Plan. Mr. Shearer then discussed the lots which lie in Meadows Subdivision and are split by the zoning district boundary, noting that staff recommends these be made all residential, which would require another public hearing. Staff is asking that everything considered at this hearing be allowed to retain its commercial zoning. Commissioner Bird asked if the Board needs to take any formal action to accomplish this, and the Attorney advised that the Board can simply have a Motion to adopt staff's recommendation. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) V adopted staff's recommendation that the property on the west side of 43rd Avenue between 2nd Street and 1st Street SW remain zoned C-1 and that the property on the east side of 43rd Avenue from 450 22 feet north of 2nd Street to 230 feet south of 1st Street SW also remain zoned commercial, except for the west half of the lots in Meadows Subdivision, which should be rezoned R-1. COUNTY -INITIATED REZONING 1.39 ACRES 43RD AVE. TO R-1 The hour of 9:15 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of d all Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this of� (Bu r�„e s Manag �- 1 ' (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County,,I ids) (SEAL) 1 tl 'Commission Chambers of eye ucun Administration Building. located at 1840 26th street,, Vero Beach, Florida on, Wednesday, Marche, 1966, a19:115 a.m. t; : if any person decides to appy any decision made on 9% above matter, he/ she win need a record of tim Proceed` o 'need todennssure that a verbatim record r�rd may Me proceedings Is made, which includes, tetimony and evidence upon which, the appeal Is based. a Indian Rhrer County " s :Board of County Commissioners By.--s-Patrick S. Lyons Chairman Feb.14.26.1966..,'. Chief Planner Shearer made the staff presentation as follows, and it was noted that this goes along with the previous item: 23 BOOK 60 �,,�,uF. 64 NOTICE - PUBLIC NEARING '` COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Notice of hearing Initiated by Indian Ri County to consider the adoption of a County Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath dinance rezoning land from C-1, Commer says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published being District to R-1, Single -Family Dls cL The -4 Property it located east 43rd Avenue i at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, , north off 1st Street, SW :,�_-„ , ,. The subject properly iadesoribsd as: The west 92 Of Lots 9 through 18. Inciu- a ��� . sive. of .The Meadows Subdivision as re- Corded in Plat Book 11 Page 36. Public off Indian River County. Florida. AboveRecordsp Above Property lying and being in Indian Florlda. in the matter of River County, A public hearing at which parties I0In- terest and citizens shall, have an oppor- tunity to be heard, ,win' be; held byettW _wrwrd of .Cn�inb Commiselonera`of. In; in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of d all Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this of� (Bu r�„e s Manag �- 1 ' (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County,,I ids) (SEAL) 1 tl 'Commission Chambers of eye ucun Administration Building. located at 1840 26th street,, Vero Beach, Florida on, Wednesday, Marche, 1966, a19:115 a.m. t; : if any person decides to appy any decision made on 9% above matter, he/ she win need a record of tim Proceed` o 'need todennssure that a verbatim record r�rd may Me proceedings Is made, which includes, tetimony and evidence upon which, the appeal Is based. a Indian Rhrer County " s :Board of County Commissioners By.--s-Patrick S. Lyons Chairman Feb.14.26.1966..,'. Chief Planner Shearer made the staff presentation as follows, and it was noted that this goes along with the previous item: 23 BOOK 60 �,,�,uF. 64 AM'F BOOK C0 F',GF 65 TO: The Honorable Members DATE: February 19, 1985FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners COUNTY -INITIATED RE - DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: QUEST TO REZONE 1.93 _ ACRES FROM C-1, COM- a2AI. 2�r,`u SUBJECT: MERCIAL DISTRICT, TO Robert M. Keating,0 ICP R-1, SINGLE-FAMILY Planning & Development Director DISTRICT 95 FROM: Richard Shearer, AICP REFERENCES: ZC-115 Memo Chief, Long -Range Planning 1PRICH2 It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of March 6, 1985. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The County Planning Department is initiating a request to rezone 1.93 acres located 198 feet east of 43rd Avenue, 92 feet west of 41st Court, and on the north side of 1st Street SW from C-1, Commercial District, to R-1, Single -Family District (up to 6.2 units/acre) . This rezoning request is consistent with the 43rd Avenue Commercial Study prepared by staff. On January 24, 1985, 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 environmental quality. Existing Land Use Pattern The subject property consists of the west halves of eight undeveloped lots in the Meadows Subdivision. The east halves of these lots are zoned R-1. North of the subject property is Don's Import Car Service zoned C-1. East of the subject property, across 41st Court, are undeveloped lots zoned R-1. Further east is undeveloped land zoned R-1. South of the subject property, across 1st Street SW, are commercial buildings under construction and a residence and contractors business zoned C-1. West of the subject property is the Meadows Country Square office/apartment complex and undeveloped land zoned C-1. Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and all of the land around it as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre). The subject property is part of a subdivision intended to be developed for single-family residences. The proposed R-1 zoning is consistent with the LD -2 land use designation and the zoning of the east half of each of the lots. 24 i Transportation System The subject property has access to 41st Court (classified as a local street on the Thoroughfare Plan). The maximum development of the subject property would generate 80 average annual daily trips. Environment The subject property is not designated as environmentally sensitive nor is it in a flood -prone area. T74-; 1;4 -;en County water and wastewater facilities are not currently available for the subject property. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, particularly the zoning of the east halves of the lots, and the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends approval. Planner Shearer reported that the lots in question are 1/2 acre lots and meet all requirements of the zoning district. This subdivision was platted about 3 years ago, and apparently when it was platted, no one caught the fact that these lots would be split down the middle by zoning districts. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (40) adopted Ordinance 85-18 rezoning the west 92' of Lots 9 through 16 inclusive, of The Meadows Subdi- vision from C-1 to R-1 as recommended by staff. 25 MAR 6 1985 BOOK 616 FACE 66 BOOK C 0 PA. G'E 67 ORDINANCE NO. 85-18 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 west 92' of Lots 9 through 16, inclusive, of The Meadows Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 11, Page 36, Public Records of Indian River County., Florida. Above property lying and being in Indian River County, florida, Be changed from C-1, Commercial District, to R-1, Single - Family District. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Zoning Regulations. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 6 day of March 1985. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF IND AN RIVER COUNTY BY : airman Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of • Florida this 13th day of March , 1985. Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department. -of State received on this 18th day of March , 1985, at 11 A.M./P.M. and filed in the office of the Clerk of the Boar=of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. APPROVED AS T jj FORM AND LEGAL SUF kENCY. i , Cpunty Attorney � ® i REZONING - 4.78 ACRES OSLO RD. WEST OF 36TH AVE. TO C-2 (SIMON) The hour of 9:30 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a��� in the matter of in the Court,, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of s d Affiant further says, that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. �v . Sworn to and subscribed before me this d of A 19 Bu sines Manager) ' , (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River Cou y, I a) (SEAL) NOTICE PUBLIC NEARIN©� Notice of hearing to consider the adoption of` Co muer�y ordinance rdina oto zonI g land from G1; ct Heavy Commercial District The subject Properly Is presently owned by Robert D. and Roxie Simons, and Is located west of 35th Avenue and south of Oslo Road (9th: Street) The Being hie North 645', of :% at the East 20.7 acres of Tract 3, of Section". .27, Township 33S, Range 39E, LESS rights-of-way according to the Plat of In. dlan River Farms Company Subdivision, 'as recorded In. Plat Book 2, Page 25 Public Records of Indian River County. Florida A public hearing at which "parties tn`Jntereat - and citizens shall have an-opportunity:to•be,.Y heard, will be held by the Beard of County Com- missioners of Indian River County,Florida in the , ,County Commission Chambers of the Counityy Administration ng.,locatQd at 1840 25tf, Streak Vera Beach° 'Florida, an Wddnesdayr` March 8,1885, at 9:30 a.m. If any Person decides to appeal any deoleton E made on the above matter, he/she will need a record of the proceedings, and for Such pur- poses, he/she may raced to ensure that a verba 8m record of the proceedings Is madej which In.'� : MAR 6 1985 I BOOK C0 FAGF 6 TO: The Honorable Members DATE: February 18, 1985FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners SIMON REQUEST TO REZONE DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: 4.78 ACRES FROM C-1, COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, TO �t� SUBJECT: C-2, HEAVY COMMERCIAL Robert M. Keati g, CP DISTRICT Planning & Development Director FROM: Shard Shearer, AICP REFERENCES: ZC-117 Memo Chief, Long -Range Planning RICH2 It is 'requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of March 6, 1985. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS John Rexford, an agent for Bob Simon, the owner, is requesting to rezone 4.78 acres located on the south side of Oslo Road and 600 feet west of 36th Avenue from C-1, Commercial District, to C-2, Heavy Commercial District. The applicant intends to develop this property for a commercial subdivision. On January 24, 1985, 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 environmental quality. Existing Land Use Pattern The subject property is undeveloped. North of the subject property, across Oslo Road, is a paving contractor's business and Vero Mini Storage zoned C-2. East of the subject property is undeveloped land zoned C-1. South of the subject property is undeveloped land zoned R-1, Single -Family District (up to 6 units/acre). Further south, is a single-family subdivision zoned R-1. West of the subject property is undeveloped land and Ven -Mar Irrigation Company zoned C-2. Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and the land north, east, and west of it as part of the west area of the Oslo Road MXD, Mixed -Use District (up to 3 units/acre). The land south of the subject property is designated as LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (up to 3 units/acre). The MXD land use designation allows residential, commercial, or industrial development which will be regulated by the zoning ordinance in accordance with the dominant land use pattern in the area. W The proposed C-2 zoning is consistent with the C-2 zoning north and west of the subject property and would allow development consistent with the existing commercial development along Oslo Road. Transportation System The subject property has direct access to Oslo Road (classified as an arterial street on the Thoroughfare Plan). The maximum development of the subject property under C-2 zoning would attract up to 321 average annual daily trips. Environment The subject property is not designated as environmentally sensitive nor is it in a flood -prone area. Utilities A county water main runs along the north side of Oslo Road. County wastewater facilities are not available for the subject property. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends approval. Planner Shearer emphasized that this would be a natural extension of the district the County previously rezoned to C-2. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner'Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Ordinance 85-19 rezoning 4.78 acres south of Oslo Road and west of 36th Avenue to C-2 as recommended by staff. 29 r Boa 60 PAGE 70 KOK POU 71 ORDINANCE NO. 85-19 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone the hereinafter described property and pursuant thereto held a public hearing in relation thereto, at which parties in interest and citizens were heard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River County, Florida, and the accompanying Zoning Map, be amended as follows: 1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the following described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: Being the North 645', of the West a of the East 20.7 acres of Tract 3, of Section 27, Township 33S, Range 39E, LESS rights-of-way, according to the Plat of Indian River Farms Company Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 25, Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. Be changed from C-1, Commercial District, to C-2, Heavy Commercial District. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Zoning Regulations. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 6 day of March 1985. BOARD OF COUNTY"COMMISSIONERS OF IND/�� RIVER COUNTY BY: sir PATRICK B�. J Chairman Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida this 13th day of March , 1985. Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department -of State received on this 18th day of March , 1985, at 1.1 A­-M./P.M. and filed in the office of the Clerk of the Boar_f County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SU 5ENCY. BRAPJDENBURG, Tounty Attorney COUNTY—INITIATED REQUEST TO ENLARGE KINGS HWY/SR 60 NODE The hour of 9:30 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: 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 11 / a in the matter in the Count,, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of A7� Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me thisay cf� . 19 L� (Clerk of the (SEAL) (Busi es A it Court, Indian i er Co NOTICE-- PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A COUNTY OR-' DINANCE TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN This is notice of a public hearing to consider adoptinga County. Ordinance amending the - Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan by enlarging the commerclal: node at •the; irrtersec tion of 581h Avenue (Kings Highway) and State: Road 60 from 140 acres to 180 acres, as desig- nated on the future land use map and described In the text of the Land Use Element pf the Com- prehensive Plan of Indian River County, Florida. A public hearing at which parties In interest and citizens , shall have an opportunity to � be, heard, will be held by the: Board of County Com- misafoners 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, March 8, 1985. at 9:3o a.m. made on Bite above matter,des he/she wiU ��a record ofthe proceedings, and for such pur- poses, he/she may need to ensure that a verba- tim record'of the proceedings Is made, which In- cludes testimony and evidence upon which the: appeal is based. .,; , -f Indian Rhrer County Board of County Commisafonels BByy s -Patrick B Lyons „• Chairman„ a$ tfi Feb 14,26, 1 ON. Chief Planner Shearer reviewed staff recommendation, noting that this came about when considering an appeal of the Poteat denial of rezoning: 31 MAR 6 1985 Boor. C0 P,'n 72 r BOOK 0 P °� Uq 3 TO: The Honorable Members DATE: February 18, 1985 FELE: of the Board of County Commissioners COUNTY -INITIATED RE- QUEST TO ENLARGE THE DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: 140 ACRE KINGS HIGHWAY/ ,.7 c S.R.60 COMMERCIAL NODE SUBJECT: TO 160 ACRES Robert M. Keating, IPP77 Planning & Development Director CIS FROM: Richard shearer, AICP Enlarge Node Chief, Long -Range PlanniRjEFERENCES: RICH2 It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of March 6, 1985. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The County is initiating a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan by enlarging the 140 acre commercial node at the intersection of Kings Highway and State Road 60 to 160 acres. On January 2, 1985, the Board of County Commissioners tabled a request to rezone 20 acres located 600 feet west of Kings Highway on the south side of State Road 60 because there was an inadequate amount of unallocated acreage in the node. The Board instr,icted the staff to initiate an amendment request to enlar-� On January 24, 1985, the Planning and--i.ing 3 -to -0 with one abstention to recommend approval of this request. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS Presently, this node contains 139.19 acres of land that is zoned C-1, Commercial District; C-lA, Restricted Commercial District; or R-1, Single -Family District. This acreage is broken down as follows: 1) Winn Dixie and adjacent commercial 6.38 acres uses on 43rd Avenue 2) Indian River Farms Drainage District .59 acres office and service station 3) Ed Schlitt Agency.office .19 acres 4) First Bankers West Side Facility 1.79 acres 5) Ryanwood Shopping Center 18.68 acres (site plan approved) 6) Oak Terrace Restaurant 7.82 acres (site plan approved) 1 7) Infill property zoned C-1 or C-lA 49.58 acres 8) Infill property zoned R-1 16.23 acres 9) Other property zoned commercial 37.93 acres west of Kings Highway 32 Based on the existing 140 acre size of the node, there are only .81 acres of unallocated acreage in the node. Tentative boundaries for this node were prepared previously to represent 140 acres (see attachment 1). Enlarging the node to 160 acres would allow the property southwest of the existing node to be included in the node which would square off the western boundary of the node. If that property is included in the node, the commercial zoning on S.R.60 would be a consistent length on the north and south sides of S.R.60 and a consistent depth on the south side. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan be amended by enlarging the commercial node at State Road 60 and Kings Highway from 140 acres to 160 acres. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. Attorney Michael O'Haire came before the Board representing the Poteats, who were the original cause for this action. He noted that the intersection is under development right now; enlarging the node is compatible with the Master Plan; and he urged that the Board do so. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Ordinance 85-20, enlarging the commercial node located at the intersection of SR 60 and Kings Highway to 160 acres. 33 BOOK 60 FnE 74 BOOK 60 P'• )F 75 ORDINANCE #85 - 20 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVIDING FOR ENLARGING THE 140 ACRE COM- MERCIAL NODE AT THE INTERSECTION OF KINGS HIGHWAY AND STATE ROAD 60 TO 160 ACRES AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. QvrimTn" l Page 36 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended to read as follows: S.R. 60 AND KINGS HIGHWAY TO 43RD AVENUE A one hundred and temp -4140} sixty (160) acre commercial node is located at the S.R. 60 and Kings Highway intersection and extends eastward to 43rd Avenue between S.R.60 and the main relief canal. SECTION :2 EFFECTIVE DATE The provisions of this ordinance shall become effective upon receipt from the Florida Secretary of State of official acknowledgement 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 the 6th day of March 1985. BOARD OF OUNTY'COMMISSIONERS OF 7APAKRICK: RIVER COUNTY BY: .. O S, Chairman Acknowledgment by the Department of State of th oS ate of Florida this 13th day of March , 1985. Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State received on this 18th3ay of March , 1985. 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 FORM AND LEGAL SU F ENCY._ 7 ,=WWWAZMP- NT Mimi ty Attorney CODING: Words in struek-threugh-type are deletions from .exist- ing law; words underlined are additions. F7�1 DISCUSSION RE PURCHASE OF SOUTHERN BELL BUILDING Since the time period for signing the contract for the purchase of the Southern Bell building is expiring before the next regular Board meeting, Administrator Wright felt the Board should be made aware that it appears the appraisal is going to come in 5-8% below the purchase price; also, after two inspec- tions having been made by a structural engineer, it appears the roof structure will not sustain 110 mph winds, and it may cost as much as $100,000 to correct that problem. The final report will not be in until Friday, however. Administrator Wright felt the information about the roof is especially significant as we would be relocating the 911 system to this building; he, therefore, recommended that we extend the time period for signing the contract another week or ten days until we get the final report from the engineer. Additionally, there is some concern from the owners of the building that we not proceed any further with the appraisal until we get the final report as they may not want to continue with a detailed appraisal on a building they may not sell to the County. Chairman Lyons agreed that this preliminary information is very significant, and asked if staff felt it is to our advantage to extend the period for signing. Administrator Wright advised they would like to wait at least until we get the engineer's final report, which will be a week from Friday. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) agreed to extend the period for signing the contract re purchase of the Southern Bell building two weeks from today. 35 MAR 6 1985 BOOK RGE 76 LIAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 FA.rE 1 DISCUSSION RE NAMING OF ORCHID ISLAND Chairman Lyons informed the Board that information recently received from Congressman Nelson indicates that the people who are in charge of naming the island are more interested in how people think about it today than the historical significance involved. It seems that St. Lucie County has applied to have the barrier island named North Hutchinson Island and has backed up their application with signatures. Therefore, if we are interested in having it named Orchid Island, we need to give Congressman Nelson a Resolution indicating our interest and to get as many people as possible to write letters supporting the name Orchid Island. One further problem is that we have very little time to do this, and the Chairman requested help from the Press to make this known. Any letters can be sent to the County Commission. Nancy Offutt thought we had already done this, and Chairman Lyons agreed that we did apply through the Historical Commission, but it appears the state agency responsible is saying that they are not interested in historical significance. He believed we should contact the municipalities and the public, and see if they felt strongly enough about this to get their letters in. Commissioner Bowman felt possibly the name Orchid Island could cover the area from the Sebastian Inlet to the south limits of Indian River County. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Resolution 85-25 to be prepared by the County Attorney indicating our continuing interest in having the barrier island named Orchid Island. 36 r 1. RESOLUTION NO. 85- 25 WHEREAS, the Barrier Island lying within Indian River County is currently unnamed on all official U.S. Government maps, and; WHEREAS, since before the turn of this century, the Barrier Island within Indian River County has been known and referred to by County residents and others concerned with the history and tradition of Indian River County as "Orchid Island," and; WHEREAS, despite the historical designation of the Barrier Island as "Orchid Island," the name "Orchid Island" was never formally submitted to the U.S. Board of Geographic Names for official approval and designation; and WHEREAS, it has come to this Board's attention that certain parties have suggested that the Barrier Island lying within Indian River County be officially designated as "North Hutchinson Island"; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners and the citizens of Indian River County wish to officially reserve the historical designation of the Barrier Island within Indian River County. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA that, on behalf of the citizens of Indian River County, the Board wishes to recommend and request that the United States Board of Geographic Names officially designate the Barrier Island within Indian River County as "Orchid Island" in order to preserve the history and tradition that name implies. The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner Scurlock who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Bird and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Aye Vice -Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Absent The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 6th day of March , 1985. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ARIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA B. Lan A Attest: -7 ; , FREDA WRIGHT Clerk 37 MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 FAGF. 79 POTEAT APPEAL OF REZONING DENIAL (Continued) The hour of 9:45 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: VERO REACH PRESS -JOURNAL ' Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being •- 9 a in the matter in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of �4jC� 4A4 Z�� . Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this ay of,9 . 19 a (B SS � (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, rida) (SEAL) � � , , �, ' I ` NOTICE — PUBLIC HEARING Notice of hearing to consider the adoption of a County ordinancerezoning land from A, Agri- cultural District to C-1, Commercial District The subject property is presently owned by WILLIE. FLfiRENCE Pt)TEAT end is located west of Kings Highway (59th Avenue/C.R.505A) and south of State Road 80 (20th Street). -, . The subject property Is described as: ' The west 20 acres of Tract 9, Section 5, Township 33S, Range 39E, according to the last general plat of lands of the In- dian' River Farms Company filed in the . office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, in Plat Book 2; Page 25; said land now lying and being, In Indian River County, Florida The Board of County Commissioners will con- duct a public hearing regarding the appeal by. the applicant of the decision by the Planning and Zoning Commission to recommend disapproval. of the rezoning request The 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, March 8, 1985, at 9:45 a.m: III any person decides to appeal any decision made on the above matter, he/she will need a record of the proceedings, and for such pur- poses, ire/she may need to ensure that a verba- tim record of the proceedings is made, which In- cludes testimony and evidence upon which the appealis based. Indian River County Board of County Commissioners By: s -Patrick B. Lyons Chairman ` Feb.14, 28,1985 Chief Planner Shearer reviewed the following memo: 38 ® s TO: The Honorable Members DATE: February 18, 1985 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: Robert M. Keating, ICP Planning & Development Director Rev FROM- Richard Shearer, AICP OEFERENCES: ' Chief, Long -Range Planni POTEAT APPEAL OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COM- MISSION'S DENIAL OF HIS REQUEST TO REZONE 20 ACRES FROM A, AGRICUL- TURAL DIST., TO C-1, COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ZC-101 Memo CHIEF It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of March 6, 1985. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS Michael O'Haire, an agent for Willie Florence Poteat, the owner, is appealing a November 8, 1984, decision by the Planning and Zoning Commission to deny a request to rezone 20 acres located 600 feet west of Kings Highway on the south side of State Road 60 from A, Agricultural District, to C-1, Commercial District. On November 8, 1984, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4 -to -0 to deny this request for the following reasons: 1) They did not feel that the subject property could be included in the Kings Highway/S.R.60 commercial node; 2) Commercial zoning should not extend indefinitely along State Road 60; 3) The line between commercial and noncommercial zoning had to be drawn somewhere. On January 2, 1985, the Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing to consider the appeal of the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision. The Board agreed with the Planning and Zoning Commission that, the subject property could not be included in the node based on its 140 acre size limita- tion. However, based on the existing zoning pattern in this area with commercial zoning north and east of the subject property, the Board felt that the subject property would be suitable for commercial zoning. Based on this finding, the Board instructed the. staff to initiate a Comprehensive Plan Amendment request to enlarge the node to 160 acres. The Board tabled the rezoning request until it was determined whether or not the node would be enlarged. On January 24, 1985, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4 -to -0 to recommend that the node at Kings Highway and State Road 60 be enlarged from 140 acres to 160 acres. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS In this section, application will description of the surrounding areas, utility systems, environmental an analysis of the reasonableness of the be presented. The analysis will include a current and future land uses of the site and potential impacts on the transportation and and any significant adverse impacts on quality. q 39 MAR 6 1985 BOOK 6 0 PgF �® MAR 6 198 BOOK 0 FAGS 8 1 Existing Land Use Pattern The subject property contains a single-family dwelling, a fruit stand, and an old citrus grove. North of the subejct property, across State Road 60, is undeveloped land zoned C-1. East of the subject property is an undeveloped parcel of land zoned C-1, Commercial District. South of the subject property is undeveloped land zoned Agricultural. West of this property is the Mueller Center of Indian River Community College. West of the subject property is a citrus grove zoned Agricultural. Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Plan generally designates the subject property and the land around it as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre). In addition, the Plan designates a 140 acre commercial node at the intersection of Kings Highway and State Road 60 which extends eastward to 43rd Avenue. The applicant is requesting to include the subject property in the node. Presently, this node contains 139.19 acres of land that is zoned C-1, C-lA, Restricted Commercial District, or R-1, Single -Family District. This acreage is broken down as follows: 1) Winn Dixie and adjacent commercial 6.38 acres uses on 43rd Avenue 2) Indian River Farms Drainage District .59 acnes office and service station 3) Ed Schlitt Agency office .19 acres 4) First Bankers West Side Facility 1.79 acres 5) Ryanwood Shopping Center 18.68 acres (site plan approved) 6) Oak Terrace Restaurant 7.82 acres (site plan approved) 7) Infill property zoned C-1 or C-lA 49.58 acres 8) Infill property zoned R-1 16.23 acres 9) Other property zoned commercial 37.93 acres west of Kings Highway If the node is enlarged to 160 acres, there will be 20.81 acres of unallocated land available in the node. This would be enough acreage to include the subject property in the node. Transportation System The subject property has direct access to State Road 60 (classified as an arterial street on the Thoroughfare Plan). Commercial development of the subject property could attract up to 14,000 average annual daily trips (AADT) with approximately 1200 trips in the peak hour. 40 Environment The subject property is not designated as environmentally sensitive nor is it in a flood -prone area. County water and' wastewater facilities are not currently available for the subject property. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, if the node is enlarged to 160 acres, staff recommends approval of this rezoning request. Mr. Shearer further reported that the Planning & Zoning Commission has had a hearing on establishing boundaries for this node, and they did recommend approval of including the subject property. This will be coming before the Board in a few weeks. Director Keating commented that if the Commission determines the subject property should be in the node, they are, in effect, establishing the boundaries. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. Attorney Michael O'Haire spoke in favor of granting the rezoning to his clients, the Poteats. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Ordinance 85-21 rezoning 20 acres west of Kings Highway and south of S.R. 60 to C-1 as re- quested by the Poteats. 41 MAR 6 1985 aooK 60 1 H', 82 r BOOK 60 FACE 8 ORDINANCE NO. 85-21 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 It 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 West 20 acres of Tract 9, Section 5, Township 33S. Range 39E, according to the last general plat of lands of the Indian River Farms Company filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County, Florida r 4^ _ -_ - _ ._ -: _ re 1 5 said land now lying and being in Indian River Ccunzy, Florida. Be changed from A, Agricultural District, to C-1, Commercial District. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Zoning Regulations. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 6 day of March 1985. BOARD OF C0 TY COMMISSIONERS OF INDI R' R COUNTY BY: ATRICK B. LY S Chairman Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida this 13th day of March , 1985. Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of -State received on this 18th day of March , 1985, at ll'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 S. PETITION PAVING OF 16th ST. - 58th AVE, to 51st COURT 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 w// e / 411-1 In the Court, was pub - Ratted in said newspaper In the Issues of- Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, In said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, fora period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisemek�na and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporstibn any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publicationyn jhe said newspaper. Swotn to and subscribed beforkme this J/ vy;J1 19 ti u neas Me g (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian Riva oun lorida) h1 l PLEASE TAOTEet,8m Board c Will hold ac t AM on 1 ecated aft 1840 28ffi S"4 Vero scam 18. the County Publk; works Del he owners at morethen % m the and drainage bnprovernenm to If 0, the petition has been verified k ka:lhdhhg cost estlrrnetes hes bee 18, the tont estimated coal m aha 1 ,Iver r:wlny shag pay cial assessment not p at a ram esteWietred d amend rob. am 9. "= tram am C sminafion of Bre new ommteamners het dell ;W barefit from Rrese 0100 Eget right oFw 1 fits irdkln diver Fant ear line m t6fiw Street NOTICE' �-:...t,..r •; r.. ,....r�. p :. '4: I m Maslen River Froom, to Vie, 1 Yin a Canml�on Cnembete 1Wbwms proposed ; I VNO. MS ' tmerd has received a public improvement pautom iperly in the area to be speo101y tranepted. request - Street between IQnga Highway (68th Ave.) and Slat d meal; the requirements Of Ordinance 81-27. and =ited b h; Pub: Works Division; and mprovemanm0tla 8121,687.98; art0 heranader shall. for any given record owner of prop. In amount equal to Bun proportion of Ray percent umber of apes ofJand N the benefited area owned some within the area specialty benefitedand shall mCollector of Indian River CoanA• ninety (80) days arMnt pursuant to Ordinance 81-2 ; and mmainkhg flay percent (lig%) of 8re'total Cost of the WOM said fth" (90) day shelf bow inter he BoIII parryd of Cwmtir Coo mi�7odne at the find m late ard.the Mcoul In two to Die made twenty-four (� to wit Together with - within the}�o}_ _ — _ _-_ _�...,....,....- , : ,: • : r - 39 39East Iland � River CWF(pkfenre (m secRal B. lopinstin 83 sung. Range . LE89 Canty row tight -of -way artd tdfen Farms Wetar Cordrol Distrito pigMot-wa)sr r, . NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY 1 jE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF lid• DUAN RIVER COUNTY. FLORIDA. as too. 1. The foregoing racists are affirmed and In their entirety. 2 ( pact provk ing for Paving and d drat al movements m 16th Street between Kings High- way (66th Avenue and 6181 designated as Public Wort® Project No. 5418, Is rl-2el� approved Subject to the terms MdUned bove and an applicable requirements of Ordinance The edreeot tlon was offered by • moved as adcpSon. The ma tion was by Commisaiwtet.—yrd.C being put to a vot% the vote was as follows Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Vice-Chakman Don C. Seurtock. Jr. . . Commissioner Richard N. Birdmen r .. . Commisaioner willism C. Wodtke. Jr. 'am8 Chaitmaa thereuPwt deGared the duly passed end adopted ft --.day at BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OFA INMAN RIVER COUNTY. FLORIDA . • .. PATRICK B. LYONS Chairman Aftest— . FREDA WRIGHT. Clerk VAPPROVED AS TO FORM 4 AND LEGAL SLWRCIE14CY �--- A TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that at the same Public hearing, the Board of County Commis- I"a shan � �he hear mall h n. TMS � ns regarding Me Proposed roll fw me improvements de. I*bld hdhe end lminer! aeses9ment rob is Currently on file with the Public through open ter Inspection between the hours of 8:30 AM ant S-00 PM. Monday it a person d�eeldas to appeal any decision made by the Commission with MSpect to m need sidered at this -W-0 th8mtla verbatim resod of them the proceedings. a, and that. fo Suet any matter mony and evidence upon which oro tuoceedmgs b mane, which reCoro bheludes Ute t Indian River Comy appeal is m DB lased. Michael Wright Feb. 18C18 1g8SAemmistratw ' . • , Public Works Director Davis reviewed the staff recommendation, as follows: 43 MARr 1985 �nc,iK ' 0 PACE 84 r MAR 6 1985 BOOK F.1GE 85 TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: February 26 1985 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Michael Wright, County Administrator SUBJECT' • Petition Paving of 16th Street from 51st Court to Kings Highway FROM: James W. Davis, P . E REFERENCES: Public Works Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS A petition has been submitted for the paving of 16th Street from Kings Highway to 51st Avenue. The area benefiting from the improvements is approximately '151.5 acres. Property owners which own approximately 103.05 acres have signed the petition, which computes to 69.15% of the benefited land. 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. Beindorf and Associates have completed engineering design drawings and the project was let for bid with bids received Jan. 18, 1985. The low bidder was Dennis L. Smith, Inc., with a low bid of $115,236.15. The estimated cost of the project for the preparation of a preliminary assessment roll is $121,997.96. The Preliminary Assessment Roll has been repared and is attached. The preliminary assessment is 402.634 per acre of benefited area. All advertising has been accomplished, and an authorizing resolution prepared. A property owners meeting was held Feb. 27, 1985 at 7:30 PM to answer any questions concerning the project. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS - Since bids were received Jan. 18, 1985, the bid should be awarded prior to March 19, 1985. Bids are valid for 60 calendar days. Six bids were received and it is the Public Works Division's opinion that competitive bidding occurred. Removal.of australian pine trees was added as an alternate bid, and it is recommended that these be removed. Since 16th Street is a Collector Roadway, the County would fund 50% of the cost of the project, and benefited owners would fund 50% of the cost. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING Subject to.comments presented at the Public Hearing, the Public Works Division recommends the following: 1) The authorizing resolution be approved. 2) The preliminary assessment roll be approved. 3) The bid be awarded to Dennis L. Smith, Inc., Vero Beach, F1. in the low bid amount of $115,236.15 4) Authorize $57,618.08 (50% of cost) be allocated from Petition Paving Fund #703-214-541-35.39. Balance as of Feb. 271, 1985 is $323,988. 44 Director Davis explained that when staff developed the preliminary assessment roll and the benefited area about a year ago, they did not have a physical survey of the end of the road; they now have a map showing the end of the road and Silver Oaks Estates to the north having 100' lineal feet of unpaved road frontage. The assessment roll that was computed earlier defined all of Silver Oaks Estates as in the benefited area. At this time, staff would like to amend that assessment roll and only assess these properties in Silver Oaks Estates and also the 9.7 acre Perkins tract to the south of 16th St. based on the 100' frontage and not on the 323' frontage. That would reduce the assessment to these benefited owners to about $85.42 as opposed to the original $285.00. Commissioner Scurlock commented that, in other words, we would just assess for that 100' unpaved portion and this would assess to all owners in Silver Oaks Estates as well as Mr. Perkins. Director Davis confirmed that was correct and reported that Mr. Perkins' attorney has indicated their agreement that this is an equitable formula. Several owners in Silver Oaks Estates stated they did not feel it was fair for them to be assessed the total frontage, and some of the property owners, not only in Silver Oaks, but in other subdivisions in the area did not feel an assessment was appropriate for the project per se. Commissioner Scurlock emphasized that our intent is to establish a policy which will enable us to assess on a uniform basis throughout the County, and he requested Director Davis to review the history of how we arrived at this formula. Director Davis informed those present that approximately 3 years ago, the County amended the petition paving program for local roads so that a road could be paved if 66.70 of owners in the benefiting area were represented on the petition. Some years ago, we required 1000, and as a result very few roads got paved. The response to the new program has been tremendous. Since this 45 MAR 6 195oo FES Fr - MAR 61985 BOOK 6 0 PA,E 87 was popular for local roads, we saw the possibility of using this program for collector road paving on the same basis. We did, however, recognize that collector roads are used more by the general public,.and, therefore, the County's share should be greater than for local roads. Accordingly, the County's share was raised from the 25% contributed for local roads, to 50% for collector roads. Director Davis felt this is an equitable way to • get some of these unpaved roads off the maintenance system, and it eventually will result in a savings to the community. Commissioner Bird asked if we have done any paving of collector roads other than the petition type. Director Davis stated that previously the County staff looked at the total system and, based on traffic county analysis and engineering studies, prioritized areas under a five year work program, which was sent to the Board for approval. The only road similar to this - R. D. Carter Road - was paved 3 to 4 years ago, prior to this program, and it was much easier to pave due to wider rights-of-way and no oak trees. Commissioner Scurlock believed the key is that in the last 3 to 4 years, we have formed the Transportation Planning Committee and have developed specific criteria as to how to develop the roads and assess a fair impact fee. He believed the decision the Commission makes today will be quite far reaching. Commissioner Bird concurred that what this is all about is fairness, but determining how much is used by the public and local residents can vary. He did believe, in this particular case, Meuller Center may draw more public traffic, and asked if we have any data to draw from to determine this. Director Davis stated that at this point we are talking about 25-30 homes which each generate 8 - 10 trips a day. As the total 150 acres develops, then the demand from the benefited area would be more substantial. Right now, there are about 1,000 - 1,500 vehicles a day using this road. 46 _I Commissioner Scurlock explained that in arriving at these figures, leaving home and returning home are counted as separate trips. Director Davis pointed out that 16th Street does not exist west of Kings Highway. Our policy on collector roads is 50/50 and this is the first implementation. Discussion ensued as to how these assessments compare per front foot to some of the residential streets we have done, and Director Davis noted that it is hard to compare because of various factors involved, but basically the assessments run substantially less than the typical local road because the depth of the land is so much greater; it is spread over 1/4 mile north and 1/4 mile south. Commissioner Scurlock noted that this will be consistent with other areas when we do them, and Director Davis agreed because the way the community was laid out in the 1920's was with the roads and canals spaced every half mile, so the benefited areas would be 1/4 mile north and 1/4 mile south. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. Jack Dritenbas, 1522 53rd Ave., Sundowners Subdivision, former County Commissioner, came before the Board representing himself. Mr. Dritenbas stated that although his name does not p - appear on the petition for paving, he is 100% in favor of the proposed improvements but 100% against the method of funding them. He then recapped the history of this road back to October of 1965 when the property owners from 43rd Ave. to 58th Ave. petitioned the Board to make the necessary improvements for this stretch of road, but the project was terminated on approximately the west 1/2 mile of the road because of some objections. He continued that although this unimproved portion remained on the County's priority list, no further improvements have been made to this portion for 19 years. Mr. Dritenbas was shocked that a road which was listed for years as a County priority project, suddenly should be labeled a collector road specifically benefiting those 47 MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 P�,UE 88 Fr - LIAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 PA["F 89 particular properties on or near the unpaved portion of 16th St. He argued that this allows the County to treat a road which is a direct route to A -1-A and a potential evacuation route for the barrier island, and which will have greatly increased traffic due to the impact of commercial development at Route 60 and Kings Highway, in a similar manner to an unpaved subdivision street, and he did not feel property owners should be involved with something that was solely a County responsibility. Brian Weaver, 687 51st Court, agreed with Mr. Dritenbas. Although he did want the road paved, he felt there will be many others who will benefit and use the road, and he believed the residents may be the losers in the end because of the increased traffic. Commissioner Scurlock asked how 16th St. would differ from 8th Court and Oslo, and Director Davis explained that 16th St. is a secondary collector route and Oslo Road is an arterial road; 16th St. is classified as the lowest collector roadway because it ends at Kings Highway. Dan Nelson, 51st Court, felt all his neighbors agree that it is somewhat of an advantage to have the street paved, but they also feel it will be a benefit for the entire community. Commissioner Bird asked what Mr. Nelson felt would be a fair share for the residents to pay. Mr. Nelson believed that is difficult to say. He did understand that the County does not have impact fees, and if it did, he noted this could be evaluated on a Development of Regional Impact basis and bring in traffic counts for a long range plan. Commissioner Scurlock informed Mr. Nelson that we are developing an impact fee ordinance now and doing a traffic analysis of our road system, and we hope this will be in place in August or September. Mr. Nelson commended the County for doing this, but felt at this point this road is more the responsibility of the county. 48 1. He felt the benefited area should be expanded to include all residents lying south and east of 16th St. Commissioner Scurlock asked the Director of Public Works if we even would be considering this project today as a County priority and Mr. Davis stated that we would not. The County is only addressing roads with a 13-15,000 traffic count. Ed Schlitt, Realtor, came before the Board as a trustee for a group developing a piece of property on the south side of the unpaved strip. Mr. Schlitt agreed that they will be benefited from this paving, and that they were probably the most instru- mental in getting this paving project moving again. He did sympathize and tend to agree, however, with the comments of some of the speakers regarding the rather low priority being placed on this road because it is an important road now, being a direct route to the barrier island, and as the improvements on Route 60 are completed, it will be even more important. Mr. Schlitt noted that because his group's situation is somewhat different, they are willing to pay the proportionate share agreed to in the petition regardless of what the Commission decides to do. He did not believe the project costs included the engineering his group advanced so they could proceed with the project; although he does feel it is part of the overall cost. Mr. Schlitt also believed there are some cost factors in the expenses that can be cut back some - such as methods of disposing of the Australian pines that are being removed rather than hauling them to the dump. Since this is the first major road the County is paving on this basis, Mr. Schlitt suggested,in fairness to the residents of the area, not his group which is more directly involved, that the County do some more analysis as to the use of this artery by the public and perhaps develop a sliding scale rather than a set 50/50. Commissioner Bird asked the Public Works Director about the engineering costs of which Mr. Schlitt spoke, and Public Works Director Davis explained that staff indicated that if this were 49 MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 raF 90 i r BOOK 60 FACE. 91 to be treated as a normal petition paving project, it would simply be added to our existing priority list. Some of the benefited owners wanted to accelerate the project, and to do so, they agreed to perform the engineering work. Commissioner Bird noted that, in other words, the engineer- ing was a contribution, and Mr. Davis confirmed that it was. Administrator Wright wished to point out that the traffic count for this road in March and June last year was 700 cars a day. Dr. Donald Ames, 5445 16th St., understood that 16th Street is classified as a secondary road because it deadends at Kings Highway while 12th Street and Oslo Road go through, and Director Davis agreed that is one of the reasons, but another reason is that an arterial route, SR 60, is half mile to the north and staff feels it will carry most of the through traffic. Dr. Ames believed the same logic could apply to 16th St. because it goes all the way to the beach and probably would be an evacuation route. He also took exception to the statement that he needs access to 16th St. because he does have access to the north of him to Atlantic Boulevard as well as another street that dead ends on his acreage, and he did not think that was taken into consideration in his assessment. Director Davis did not believe Atlantic Boulevard is a completed roadway all the way to Dr. Ames property line and felt the other road is a residential street. Dr. Ames agreed but noted that it is a dedicated right-of- way. He stated that there is an easement to the north of his property between the canal and his property from Atlantic Boulevard and wished to know if the County is saying it is useless and is willing to give it up. Director Davis stated that it is not useless, but it is a restricted type use because the right-of-way is not wide enough for a standard road. He continued that staff does try to 4 recommend two accesses, but it was felt the proper access for Dr. Ames tract would be 16th St. Roy Howard, 53rd Ave., Sundowners Subdivision, informed the Board that he is Principal of Rosewood Elementary School and some years ago worked for the County as assistant to the County Engineer. He stated that he could assure everyone that once a road is improved, its gets a much heavier load of traffic, and not just from adjoining property owners. He felt the sense of urgency the Board is feeling now is because they realize that traffic is going to need to cross 43rd Avenue and go to Kings Highway because of Meuller Center, the new shopping center on Kings Highway, the expansion of the County to the west, etc. Mr. Howard believed it is more to the County's interest than the residents to have this road paved now. Hal Mayes, 1550 53rd Ave., wished to know approximately how many land owners are involved as benefited owners, and Mr. Davis replied that there are approximately forty. Mr. Mayes believed there were three petitioners out of those forty who have pushed this through. He noted that his assessment was $422, but the Board now has said they want to reduce the assessment for those on 51st Court and Mr. Schlitt has asked to be reimbursed for his engineering costs; he, therefore, doesn't know where he stands, but he did not feel forty land owners should be required to pay $60,000 on a County road. Commissioner Bird inquired if Mr. Schlitt had asked to be reimbursed, and Mr. Schlitt explained that he indicated if this goes through as is, he is willing to pay the engineering and his group's proportionate share; if, however, the County does find this to be a more public road than originally believed, his group still would be willing to pay their total assessment, but then would like their engineering to be figured into the total cost of the program. James Sharp, Silver Oak Estates, noted that he wrote the Commissioners and Public Works Director Davis last week, and 51 MAR 6 1985 BOOK B0 PAGE �� FF - MAR 61995 , BOOK 60 WE 9Q:.� Commissioner Scurlock confirmed that the letter was received and will be made a part of the record, as follows: N Q p"' 4 February 27, 1935 Chairman Patrick B. Indian River County Commission 1846 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Mr. Lyons: RE: ASSESSMENT FOR PAVING OF 16TH STREET FROM KINGS HIGHWAY ERST TO PRESENT PAVING This is to offer a few facts on the Proposed Project as it concerns our ProPerty, Lot 9 of Silver Oaks Estate, which is on the East side of 51st Court, two blocks from the Proposed Paving. The ProPerty owners on 5ist Court (Silver Oaks Estate) Paid for construction and Pay for maintenance of our street. 16th Street, to which our street connects, is Paved, and has been comPletels Paved, east of our street; and is Paved west of our street, Past our front ProPerty line, Past our street and continues west 50 feet Past our street. We daily use 16th Street to the East; rarely to the West. To say that Pavins 16th Street to the West of this Point benefits us more than ProPerty owners on 16th Street, and other streets connectins 16th, between 44th Avenue and 51st Court, is simPly untrue. It is to misunderstand use of streets in this area. In fact, the use of this Proposed 16th Street Paving by us will be infinitesimal compared to the use of this road by PeoPle from all over the county; Particularly to the East and South. It is only because of the increased traffic to the Community Collece, the ProPosed construction at 16th Street and Kin(is Road and access to the new shoPPin6 center at Kings Road and Route 60, access not ,lust for us, but the county, that Pavine should be considered at this time. We cannot see how in any way this "benefits ProPerty owned by...." us above ProPerty to the East, and, in fact, thousands of other PeoPle in the county. We suGGest that our ProPerty is outside the area which the "....Protect sPecifically benefits...". Consideration of this Property'_ being deleted from assessment will be aPFreciated. Cordially, 1 James J. and Bertha B. h P 666 51st Court Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Mr. Sharp emphasized that 16th St. is the only street in the county that goes directly all the way from the ocean to Kings Highway, and although it does stop there, it can be extended even across the canal. Mr. Sharp believed the paving is necessary and will be 'done over the years, but from the point of view of living on a quiet street, he felt it is detrimental to his property. Nancy Offutt, liaison for the Board of Realtors, wished to know if the ratio of intensity from a local road to a collector road is in the same ratio with the percentage 25% to 50%. Director Davis felt it is hard to generalize. Basically the ratio is not equal, but the nature of the work does not involve only paving, but also drainage, possibly curbing, etc. He also did not feel you can make a comparison of the 75/25 ratio based on traffic count because a local road usually has less than 400 trips a day, while a collector road serves to collect traffic from the residential streets. Mrs. Offutt stated that she was just asking about possibly having a more consistent ratio as it seems there may be more beneficiaries than was assumed. Commissioner Scurlock felt when you look at the presentation of how we got to the 50/50 formula, it may be a little clearer. We went through a series of workshops before this came to the Commission for approval. Benefit is one thing that must be considered, and he did not believe anyone can argue that there is no benefit. Then you must consider classification and must look at the common average and not consider the uniqueness of every road. What we wanted is a uniform consistent policy to figure out how to pay for these. After hearing the comments today, however, Commissioner Scurlock believed the road in question is actually a hybrid situation, and, therefore, possibly should be something other than a 50/50 split. He agreed the timing is unique and that we moved ahead because of new development, but we were able in this way to take advantage of a contribution to make a needed improvement; also there was additional cost involved because of the special consideration given the oak trees, etc. All these factors must be considered, and it is a complex situation. 53 • BOOK 0 pAr, UL 94 . MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 FADE 95 Commissioner Scurlock believed the Commission is acting in good faith in trying to set a uniform policy, and while he did not want to have to sit here and go through this every time we pave a road, he felt we should make some adjustments in terms of Silver Oaks Subdivision residents, as well as Mr. Perkins, who already have access by a paved road. In addition, because of the uniqueness of 16th Street running from the beach to Kings Highway and by two schools, Commissioner Scurlock felt the percentage should be 60/40 instead of 50/50. Mrs. Offutt noted that her comments weren't based specifically on this particular project, but the fact that this is the first implementation of the new policy and it would appear we are leaning more toward having people who are in closer proximity to improvements that are benefiting the county as a whole bear the larger percent of the cost than they should. Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that people keep talking about the County, but actually the County is the people themselves. We have done this in an effort not to have to increase taxes; we could say it is the County's responsibility to build all the roads. Administrator Wright asked that the Board consider very carefully amending this policy, which was very carefully and thoroughly thought out and discussed at great length with the Transportation Committee both at staff level and with the Commission. Commissioner Scurlock stressed that he was not saying change the formula, but just that we may have misclassified the road. Administrator Wright felt in that case, this should be de- ferred and reworked rather than making an arbitrary change today. Chairman Lyons noted that it is the old story of looking at a general situation and then being faced with a specific situa- tion, and Commissioner Bird also did not feel we can cast the 50/50 policy in stone for all collector roads. Administrator Wright continued to stress that he did not want to change the formula which was developed only after a lot of work, and Commissioner Scurlock again pointed out that he was not advising that we change the formula but just give some consideration to the uniqueness of this particular road and the possibility that it may have been misclassified. Kathy Rovella, 5090 16th St., informed the Board that she lives on the portion of 16th Street that is already paved, and she does not want to pay for the unpaved portion. Her question is why the petition letters were arbitrarily stopped at her house and none sent to those on the east who would benefit from the road as much as she does. Director Davis stated that the benefited area was the east line of Silver Oaks Estates and the east line of Mr. Perkins' property, and others did not receive a letter because there was no assessment. Mrs. Rovella emphasized that the paving does run the entire length of her property, and she is being assessed, although she personally does not benefit. Director Davis pointed out that Mrs. Rovella owns two lots in Silver Oaks Estates, which subdivision does have frontage on the unpaved road, and we are adjusting the assessment there to reflect only the unpaved 100' frontage. He did believe these people will use the road to go west to the new shopping center. Mrs. Rovella felt the people living an acre away from her will benefit as much as -she does and even with the adjustment still felt it should be shared more equally. Mr. Dritenbas made the point that this being the first such application for this type of road, it will set a precedent, and if the residents are forced to pay under Ordinance 81-27, he wished to know if the so-called specific beneficiaries will have to share in future improvements to this same stretch of road - possibly widening and three laning, bicycle paths, bridge re- placement, street lighting, etc., on a so-called dead end street. 55 MAR 6 1985 BOOK bu p3a 96 MAR 6 1995 aooN6, 0F,;c Q7 Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that part of this road is unique and a 30' right-of-way limits what can be done. Mr. Dritenbas believed need will dictate if it ever gets wider, and that is a possibility. As to 700 cars using this street and the proportionate formula, he asked that the Board remember those who live on this unpaved street have no other choice but to use it while for others, he believed it will become an A1A to the west. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) closed the public hearing. Motion was made by Commissioner Scurlock, seconded by Commissioner Bowman, that for all the reasons stated and because this falls in an in-between classification, the petition formula be changed in this particular case to 60% County 40% resident; the recommended adjustments re Silver Oaks Estates and the Perkins property to be implemented as discussed. Commissioner Bird commented that he did believe this project was expedited specifically to help push the project Mr. Schlitt spoke of and while he appreciated the offering of the engineering services, he did not feel, even if we adjust the formula, we should saddle other people on the roll with the cost of that engineering. Commissioner Scurlock stated that he was accepting the engineering as a donation and that's why it wasn't part of the Motion. Administrator Wright commented that the Board knew his position and he still felt if the Board changes their policy, they are putting staff in a very difficult position. He believed the Board is now saying that they will take each road on a case by case basis, which he felt is a mistake. Commissioner Scurlock noted that any decision can be appealed, and Commissioner Bird stated that he did agree that the 50/50 formula is right for the normal, average collector road. Commissioner Bowman did believe that when this is paved, we will see tremendous growth and later will be assessing impact fees. Administrator Wright asked if the Board wished to take this money out of Petition Paving because that account is set up on certain ratios and this would be hurting that account. Commissioner Bird felt we should take the difference out of our 5th and 6th Cent Gas Tax Fund. He noted that he is not sure what the proper percentage is because it is a judgment call; it could be 70/30 or 60/40. Chairman Lyons believed it is important to try to be as near right as we can be. He felt certain this road is going to get a whale of a lot more through traffic than some others we are thinking about and as we do not yet have the Impact Fee Ordinance in place, he felt we may be asking the people in the existing subdivisions to pay a little more than is justified; he, therefore, would lean towards a 70/30 ratio. Administrator Wright suggested that we just junk the petition; make this paving a priority based on need; and let the County assume the whole cost. The Board today is telling him that there is a definite need for this road - not to accommodate the people who live there since they seem to be fairly happy, but to accommodate development and traffic for the shopping center, etc. He urged that we not jeopardize the Petition Paving Program. Commissioners Scurlock and Bowman withdrew their Motion. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, to adjust the formula for the assessment roll to 70/30 in this particular 57 BOOK 0 FAr,E MAR 6 1985 MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 F,�GE 99 case because it is felt with the additional development that is going to occur on SR 60, 16th Street will bear a greater percentage of traffic than a normal secondary collector road. Public Works Director Davis stated that account is in the red a million dollars as we get into 1986, and the Administrator stressed we will be adjusting other projects because of this. Commissioner Bird asked if the account is actually in the red by the total commitments, and Director Davis stated that there are approved projects, and we will have to do some bonding or some innovative financing; he also noted that the Traffic Impact Fee money will not pay for this type of project where you are paving an existing two lane unpaved road. The impact fee is set up to be a revenue source to expand a multi lane type roadway to accommodate new development, and he believed we are wandering from this philosophy. Commissioner Scurlock felt these fees could be used to widen the bridge, and Attorney Brandenburg confirmed that impact fees may be used to take care of future needs, and if that need happens to include paving an unpaved road, that can be included. Commissioner Scurlock clarified that we haven't spent a million dollars today that we do not have - what Mr. Davis is relating to is projections on a graph stretched out to the year 2000. Commissioner Bird agreed we may have to adjust some of our priorities. Commissioner Bowman stated that she would prefer to defer the whole project until the area is further developed and more people can pay. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried 3-1 with Commissioner Bowman voting in opposition and Commissioner Wodtke being absent. r M Director Davis noted that it is also necessary to adopt the authorizing Resolution, approve the preliminary assessment roll, award the bid, etc. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Resolution 85-26, authorizing paving and drainage improvements to 16th St. between 58th Ave. and 51st Court; approved the preliminary assessment roll; awarded the bid to low bidder Dennis L. Smith, Inc., in the amount of $115,236.15; and authorized the allocation of 50% of the cost from the Petition Paving Fund, the remaining 20% to be taken from the 5th & 6th Cent Gas Tax monies. Chairman Lyons felt we need to be more specific regarding the assessment roll. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the preliminary assessment roll as adjusted per the changed ratio and with adjustments to residents in Silver Oaks Estates and the Perkins property as di.scussed; accepted the engineering contribution of the Schlitt group; and agreed the interest is to be 1% above the prime rate at the time of the approval of the final roll. ( Resolution 85-26 and the adjusted assessment roll is hereby put on file -in the office of the Clerk. ) MAR 6 1985 5 9 BOOK U"0 [". c 100 I MAR 6 1985 . BOOK 60 FAGE 101 TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP AND FRANCHISE NAME CHANGE - GULF & WESTERN FOOD PRODUCTS TO FELLSMERE MANAGEMENT CO. The hour of 10:15 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being aG� GL i 0 9 9. NA1,al- WeA i i , in the lished in said newspaper in the issues of Court, was pub- Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this da�f%i vim• (Clerk of the Circuit (SEAL) NOTICE OF, PUBLIC NEARING rhe Indian River County Board of County Com- nissloners will hold a public hearing on March 8. 1985, at 10-.15 a.m., in the Commission Cham- 3,ers located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, to consider the transfer of ownership, franchise name change and modification to ex - sting resolution 75-20, Gulf & Western Food Produce Water & Sewer Franchise to Felismere Mgt. Company. Located at 7735 State Road 512. All interested persons are Invited to this meeting. It any person decides to appeal any decision made by the' Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, be/she will need a record of the pro- ceedings, and that for such purpose he/she may need to,ensure that a verbatim record of the pro- ceedings. ro- ceedings. is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon the appeal to be heard.Patrick B. Lyons. Chairman Indian River Courcy Board of County Cammisalonera Feb. 27,1985. The Board reviewed staff memo, as follows: TO:THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE DATE: February 21, 1985 FILE: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: Terrance G. Pinto Utility Services Director TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP & SUBJECT: FRANCHISE NAME CHANGE GULF & WESTERN FOOD PRODUCTS FROM: Joyce S. Hamiltoii`.j REFERENCES: A) Location Map Franchise Administ for B) Physical Inspection Utility.Services C) Modified Resolution DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: The Commission granted Gulf & Western Food Products, a division of Gulf & Western Industries, Inc., a sewer and water franchise in Resolution 75-20. Gulf & Western sold t -heir facilities to Fellsmere Management Company May 1, 1978. e Fellsmere Management Company is at this time requesting a name change to Fellsmere Management Company Water &..Sewer Franchise and the transfer of ownership of the franchise to their company. These facilities are located at 7735 State Road 512 in Fellsmere (Exhibit "A"). ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSES: Applicant has met the requirements of our application and has agreed to accept the terms of Resolution 75-20 as amended and has agreed to perform all of the conditions therein. Several deficiencies were noted during this department's physical inspection (Exhibit "B"). Applicant has been made aware of same and requested to make corrections. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board approve the transfer of ownership to Fellsmere Management Company, approve the name change of this franchise to Fellsmere Management Company Water & Sewer Franchise provided the noted deficiencies are corrected and approve the modified resolution (Exhibit "C"). BRE✓ARO COMWrr 61 S T. L f/C/E COUNTY rav ; s4s s f EXHIBIT "A" Fellsmere Management Cc Trailer Park MAR 6 1985 BOOK 0 UGE102 =9 2 io /o xia •o 39i8 34 JI6 0 3 f EXHIBIT "A" Fellsmere Management Cc Trailer Park MAR 6 1985 BOOK 0 UGE102 BOOK 60 pgF 103 EXHIBIT "B" TO: File . DATE: October 25, 1984 FILE: SUBJECT: FF,E'� L SN�EEAGEMEIPONiP ~ ' 'WASTEWATER SYSTEMS: FROM: Ronald R. Brooks REFERENCES: Environmental Engineering Specialist/Utility Services The subject facilities were inspected on October 22, 1984, in the presence of Mr. Sam Stalvey. The following was noted: 1.. -Mr. Sam Stalvey, 7735 S.R. 512, Fellsmere, FL 32948, is the individual responsible for daily maintenance of the water and wastewater systems. Hli �'!,,cne no. is 571-0040. Mr. Stalvey is not a certified operator. 2. Vaughn Service Corporation provides certified operator service to the water and wastewater plants. 3. The water and wastewater plants are presently servicing only a single residence; and cleaning activities in the remainder of the units. The plants serve a trailer park used for housing migrant workers during the -fruit picking season. The season is approximately 7 months long from the beginning of December to June. During the remainder of the year the units are vacant, however, maintenance personnel are generally cleaning the units in preparation for the next season. Approximately 450 men, women, and children are housed in the park during the peak of the picking season. Water Plant 1. There is one well which is approximately 90 feet deep. The pump consists of an above ground mounted motor with a submersible turbine. 2. The water plant was in satisfactory condition with the exception that a chlorine injection line between the chlorinator and the water plant has been recently replaced with a rubber heater hose. The heater hose should be removed and replaced with polybut lene tubing approved for potable water service lines. MM-41�4l_ 3. The water distribution system has several fire d`�_ hydrants. 4. PIr. Stalvey indicated that the following steps are taken 2 - 4 weeks prior to occupancy of the trailers to insure provision of satisfactory water quality to the incoming migrant workers at the beginning of each picking season. a. All fire hydrants are opened to flush the water mains. b. The spigots in each of the.trailers are opened to flush all service lines and plumbing. 62 � ® s Wastewater Plant 1. A large diesel operated generator is located near the waste- water plant. The generator serves the water and wastewater plant during power outages. Mr. Stalvey started the generator during --the inspection. 2. There is one lift station and the following was noted: a. Lift station rises above ground approximately.four feet -and has a metal lid. b. The station appears to be constructed of storm sewer pipe. '"c. The check valves are located within the lift station wet - well instead of within a separate valve box. A sewer line from the laundromat dumps was tew ter on top of the valves. .. C1��- -�e� :.a•Gw�d�J � Q�re:a�c�-w`u a�� t�aPjo..e-�(, 'd. The station has two submersible pumps hat are operated by a bubbler switch system. e. The force main has a single valve located outside of the lift station.- The valve is frozen -hand-inoperati e f. There are no provisions for em6rgec`ncncydJpumping of the lift station in the event of pu�m�lure. ., k�n2o� 4iv� g. An emergency generator is located aaj scent to the lift station to provide operation during -power outages. 3. The wastewater treatment plant was nat in operation due to the extremely low flows (Only one residence is occupied). 4. The filter media needs to be reworked because charcoal powder was mistakenly placed in the filter instead of granular charcoal. The powdered charcoal must be removed. 5. The water level within the percolation ponds is very low since they are not in use and the vegetation within the ponds has recently been cut down and removed. 6. The general appearance of the wastewater plant is satisfactory. 7. Mr. Stalvey placed the plant in operation during the inspection and all units of the plant operated satisfactorily. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Res. 85-27 authorizing a transfer of the sewer and water franchise granted to Gulf & Western Food Products. 63 MAR 6 1985 BOOK U PnF 104 . PF - MAR 6 1985 BOOK CA P -105 RESOLUTION NO. 85-27 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AUTHORIZING A TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP, AND A CHANGE OF FRANCHISE NAME GRANTED IN RESOLUTION NO. 75-20, AND PROVIDING FOR CERTAIN MODIFICATION TO THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT GRANTED TO GULF & WESTERN FOOD PRODUCTS, A DIVISION OF GULF & WESTERN' INDUSTRIES, INC., SEWER & WATER FRANCHISE., 1. Section I of Resolution 75-20 is hereby amended to read as follows: SECTION I WHEREAS Indian River County granted GULF & WESTERN FOOD PRODUCTS a non-exclusive franchise on February 3, 1975. This utility has sold its system and premises to FELSMERE MANAGEMENT COMPANY and has, requested the transfer of this franchise. Transferee accepts the terms of Resolution No. 75-20 as amended herein and agrees to perform all of the conditions thereof. Transferee also has requested the name of this franchise be changed to FELT SMERE MANAGEMU COMPANY WATER & SEWER FRANCHISE. NOW, =MFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMIISSIOENRS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY that Resolution No. 75-20 be amended as follows: 2. Section VII of Resolution 75-20 is hereby amended by adding the following paragraph; SECTION VII The Company shall supply the County with copies of its Department of Environmental Regulation monthly operating reports and trouble reports, if any. The Company shall supply the County with an annual report of ` operations and maintenance certified by the Company's engineer who must be registered in the State of Florida. 3. Section IX(b) clauses 1, 2, and 3 of Resolution 75-20 is hereby amended to read as follows: SECTION IX 64 J (b) At all times herein where discretionary power is left with the Board of County Commissioners, the Company, before discretionary action is taken by the Board of County Cam ussioners, can request said Board that a group of arbitrators be appointed, and such group shall consist of: 1. County Utility Services Director 2. Company Engineer 3. One person selected by the above two persons and this Board of Arbitrators shall make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners, but such recommendations are not mandatory. Any final decision the arbitrators or board may have, with respect to this franchise, can be appealed to the circuit court of Indian River County by either party. 4. Section XV of Resolution 75-20 is hereby amended by adding the following paragraphs: SECTION XV 14 v.-I&Oo7 dim 1. The Utility hereby agrees to pay to the County a franchise fee in the amount of six percent (6%) of the Utility's annual gross receipts or operating costs (which includes the rate of return) in the event Utility does not have a rate schedule (or the sum of five hundred dollars ($500), whichever is greater), derived from monthly service charges to defray the cost of regulation and for use of County rights-of-way and public places. The Utility shall pay the 6% franchise fee quarterly. Said fee shall be shaven as a separate additional charge on utility bills. 2. The Utility shall supply the County with a copy of the Utility's annual report and financial statements. All records and all accounting of Utility shall be in accordance with the Uniform System of Accounts of the National Association of Regulatory Utilities Commissioners and general accepted accounting principles. Within ninety (90) days after close of fiscal year, the Utility shall submit financial statements prepared by a CPA and in accordance with general accepting accounting standards and NARUC. Upon demand by the Board the Utility will submit audited financial statements certified by a CPA. Also, a letter from a CPA certifying that the six percent (6%) franchise fee and the two and one-half percent (22A) renewal and replacement account has been collected and disbursed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 65 MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 PAGE 106 MOR 6 1985 BOOK 60 PAA497 PMMAML & REPLACEME14T ACCOUNT 7 Two and one half percent (2�%) of the operating cost of the Utility shall be placed in an interest bearing renewal and replacement account for purposes of renewal and/or replacement of the capital assets of the water and/or wastewater system of the Utility. Additionally, the Utility shall initially fund said account with five hundred dollars ($500) which will also be reserved for capital maintenance items. Interest shall accumulate in said account until the account reaches five thousand dollars ($5,000); thereafter interest shall be paid to the Utility annually. Said funds shall be used as a sinking fund and applied only for renewal and/or replacement of the water and/or wastewater system by the Utility as the need arises; the percentage required to be placed in the renewal and replacement account may be amended after review by the County as necessary to maintain a sufficient account balance taking into account the general condition of the system. The County is granted the right to make necessary repairs using said funds in the event of default on the part of the Utility in maintaining the quality standards established herein. In the event that the County purchases the corporation's utility system pursuant to the provisions of this franchise as stated above, then any funds in said renewal and replacement account shall vest in the County. 5. Section XVI of Resolution 75-20 is hereby amended by adding the following paragraph: SECTION XVI The Company shall co -name Indian River County as an additional insured on all public liability and property damage insurance, to -wit: EXHIBIT "A" 6. Section XIX is hereby amended to read'as follows: The County shall have the right to purchase the Utility's water and/or wastewater plant at Utility's original construction cost, land cost, plus costs associated with capital additions and expansions to the system less three and one-half percent (3h%) depreciation per year. Depreciation on the system shall be calculated to start at the time the County issues a letter acknowledging the construction of the water and/or wastewater system as provided in Section VI. Upon acquisition of the water and/or wastewater plant and appurtenant real estate, the County would then own the entire water and/or wastewater system and would terminate this franchise and provide water and/or wastewater . utility service to the franchise territory. would vest in the County. All accumulated escrow fees In the event of an acquisition by the County, or the utilization of the County's own plants, the County shall receive the water distribution and/or wastewater collection system free of cost and in good repair, wear and tear excepted. The Utility agrees to grant to the County any easements necessary to connect the water and/or wastewater system to the County's water/wastewater systems without charge. The Utility shall pay all escrowed impact fees upon acquisition or upon connection to County's own plants. IN WITNESS WHERDOF, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida has caused this franchise to be executed in the name of the County of Indian River by the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners, and its seal to be affixed and attested by its Clerk, all pursuant to the resoluton of the Board of County Commissioners adopted on the 6th day of March , 1985. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER Patrick Lyons Board of Coun Approved So form and legal uffrc�e Attest: I �i Clerk my ttorney ACCEPTANCE OF FPJUq iISE FELLSMERE NJANAGEMEVT COMPANY does hereby accept the foregoing franchise, and for their successors and assigns does hereby covenant and agree to comply with and abide by all of the terms, conditions and provisions therein set forth and contained. ' DATED at 7ero Beach, Indian River County, Florida, this %4j-1day of McqxAll , 1985. Patrick D. Leary Executive Vice President and General Manager 67 MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 F'Pd')F.1 S- BIDS FOR NEW COUNTY JAIL BOOK 6 0 PAr,,F The Board reviewed the architect's recommendations, as follows: Am IV February 25, 1985 FRIZZELL ARCHITECTS The Board of County Commissioners Indian River County, Florida 1849 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 s Attn: Mr. Pat Lyons, Chairman o+ NJ0 a C5 Gentlemen: gc ��r Following are our recommendations concerning the bid £ the Indian River County Jail. BASE BID The low base bid at $3,772,800.00 was submitted by RHS Constructors, Inc. The firm enjoys a fine reputation and is, in fact, performing quite well on a new jail for St. Johns County which Frizzell Archi- tects designed. We recommend that their bid be accepted. ALTERNATE NO. 1 The Indian River Jail Administrator is convinced that the roller chain driven operators for sliding cell doors are easier to main- tain than the rack and pinion type operators. We agree and recom- mend acceptance of this deductive alternate in the amount of $1500.00. ALTERNATE NO. 2 We recommend acceptance of the $2339.00 deductive alternate to pro- vide Asphalt Sheet Roofing in lieu of the Modified Bituminous Membrane specified. Both are good, single ply roofing systems with similar guarantees. In our opinion, the Asphalt Sheet Roofing will stand up better under foot traffic, which is a consideration on this project because of the roof top air conditioning units and exhaust fans which will require servicing. Normally, the Asphalt Sheet Roofing is more expensive, but RHS Constructors have offered a credit for its use. ALTERNATE NO. 3 This additive alternate in the amount of $84,900.00 is in line with our earlier estimate. It would include 42 solar panels with piping, valves and storage tanks, fencing, etc. and would provide approxi- mately 65% of the hot water needs for the initial building when fully occupied. Additional heat will be required to boost water temperature above that provided by the solar system for dishwashing and possibly laundry. Based on today's fuel costs, we estimate the fuel savings at $5339. per year. Additional costs would be involved in maintaining the equipment. At the present time it does not appear that the savings will justify the capital expenditure. . Yours very truly, W. R. 4Bai ARCHITE S, INC. -14eGeorge AIA President GHB/vj W 1 1 1 1 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JAIL BID TABULATION VERO BEACH, FLORIDA February 21, 1985 - 2:00 P.M. FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY Commission Chambers, County Administration Bldg. 0 W.F.. FRIZZELL ARCHITECTS, INC� 1460 Colonial Blvd., Ste. 202 Fort Myers, Florida ALTERNATES: ADDENDA Alternate No. 1: Base bid includes rack and pinion type:.sliding detention BID SUB ADDENDA CONTRACTOR BASE BID ALT. #1 ALT. #2 ALT. #3 DAYS BOND LIST RECD 1984 opertors in lieu of rack and pinion type. No. 3, dated December 10, 1984 No. 4, dated December 28, 1984 Alternate No. 2: Base Bid includes modified bituminous membrane roofing as No. 5, ATLANTIC CENTRAL January 18, 1985 specified n 5ection 07533 - Modified Bituminous Membrane Roofing System. O H 3 6, dated February 6, 1985 Under this Alternate provide asphalt sheet roofing as specified in Section No. 7, r�zr February 14, 1985 C.M. SYSTEMS, INC.4 4 2 17, 000 - $1,000 + $33,000 + $78,000 X X D.I.C. COMMERCIAL CONST. . CT1 H M z DIPRIMA CONSTRUCTION CORP 6 $4,300,000 - $1,500 + $32,000 + $70,000 y b FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION CO. 5 $4,231,000 + $40,000 + $10,000 + $85,000 � y X X X JENDOCO CONST. ENTERPRISES (7) $4,373,000 - `$1,500 + $33,000 + $79,000 H X X X KLEIN CORP. 8 $4,480,000 - $2,000 - $6,000 + $79,000 M X X X MILNE & NICHOLLS 2 $4,100,000 + $128,000 + $32,000 + $75,000 z o X REfNHOLD-GONST.-Ee. REYNOLDS & FORDON CO. '30 RSH CONSTRUCTORS 1 $3,772,820' - $1,500 - $2,339 + $84,900 X X SCANDIA, INC. 9 $4,532,000 ----- + $32,400 + $104,800 N X X WALSH CONSTRUCTION CO. 3 $4,160,000 ----- t $11,500 + $74,000 X X ALTERNATES: ADDENDA Alternate No. 1: Base bid includes rack and pinion type:.sliding detention No. 1, dated December 4, 1984 door operators. Under this Alternate, provide roller 'chain driven type No. 2, dated December 7, 1984 opertors in lieu of rack and pinion type. No. 3, dated December 10, 1984 No. 4, dated December 28, 1984 Alternate No. 2: Base Bid includes modified bituminous membrane roofing as No. 5, dated January 18, 1985 specified n 5ection 07533 - Modified Bituminous Membrane Roofing System. No. 6, dated February 6, 1985 Under this Alternate provide asphalt sheet roofing as specified in Section No. 7, dated February 14, 1985 07531 - Asphalt Street Roofing System, izi lieu of modified bituminous membrane roofing. - Alternate No. 3: Under this Alternate add all work in connection with solar water heating system as specified in Division 15 and fencing which surrounds Fnlar nnn-la na RnA,ff1prl to R—t-ir,n n9Rin — rti.4.. 7r.ti v........... -..e C_ 01 ac 0 0 m MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 P,, U. III George Bail, of Frizzell Architects, noted that the low bidder was low by a substantial amount; he therefore, called them and determined that, although they would,have been happier not to leave so much money on the table, they felt confident in their figures and were eager to be awarded the contract. Mr. Bail informed the Board that RSH Constructors has an excellent reputation; he has had good experience with them on the St. John's jail, and he has no hesitancy in recommending that they be awarded the contract. Mr. Bail then reviewed Alternate 1, noting that roller chain is more flexible and less likely to jam, staff would prefer it, and they, accordingly, recommend this alternate be accepted, which will result in a credit of $1,500. Commissioner Bird felt it was interesting that the low bidder gave us a credit on this while the second low bidder wanted to charge over a hundred thousand dollars additional for the same item. Mr. Bail could not account for this. Mr. Bail felt the alternate on roofing is very good and recommended that it be accepted, but noted that Alternate 3 re solar heating is more of a question. General Services Director Dean reported that there is a system on the market that can be used with the type units we are putting in; it is less expensive to install and the savings may be more. He would like to give this information to the architect for consideration. Chairman Lyons was in favor of getting another reading on the savings involved, and Commissioner Scurlock noted that there is a recovery time of 15 years. Commissioner Bird asked if the jail is being constructed so the solar equipment could be added at a later time, and Mr. Bail felt sure it could. Commissioner Scurlock wanted further assurance that the contractor is confident with their low bid. He believed we have hired a very competent architect and he looked forward to building the jail without a lot of change orders. 70 Mr. Bail noted that in the case of the St. John's jail, which is about 55% complete, the contractor's price at present is slightly lower than when it started. Donald Cobb, Vice President of RSH Constructors, informed the Board that he does not see anything in the plans that would cause a significant problem, if the scope of the contract is not changed. He confirmed that they are doing one jail already at St. John's and the price has gone down considerably up there. He believed the jail plans are good and that there is a good set of contract documents. Administrator Wright asked if RSH could bring the jail in ahead of schedule, and Mr. Cobb stated that at the low price they quoted, he certainly would hope they could. Tom Stowe, project representative, stated that he has looked at the plans very thoroughly and did not see anything apparent that will require a change order. Mr. Bail spoke highly of Mr. Stowe's background knowledge and expertise and stated that he was confident of his ability. Commissioner Scurlock inquired if anyone present objects to the awarding of the bid to the low bidder, and no one did. Commissioner Bird asked how we handle the written.complaint that was received. Attorney Brandenburg reported that the complaint received contended that the bid bond submitted by RSH did not contain their corporate seal. That is a fact, but in the Board's instructions to bidders -and the way we bid, the Board is able to overlook and waive any little technical difficulties with the bid. The Attorney, therefore, suggested there be a Motion waiving this particular technicality. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) waived the requirement that the bid bond contain the company's corporate seal. 71 MAR 6 1985 BOOK. U FACF1� r MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 FACT x.13 Commissioner Bowman asked about the solar heating alternate. Chairman Lyons noted that the solar hearing can be added later, and until the savings can be clarified, it was his suggestion that we do not accept Alternate 3. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) • awarded the contract on the Jail to low bidder RSH Constructors in the amount of $3,772,820, approved Alternate 1 and Alternate 2 with respective decreases of $1,500 and $2,339, and authorized the signature of the Chairman. Commissioner Scurlock brought up the 5% sales tax, and believed it was the Commission's desire to take advantage of purchasing some large items directly. He felt this is being done on the St. Johns jail. Mr. Cobb did not feel this is worth the time involved; there are administrative costs involved and it requires a separate accounting system. RSH cannot write the purchase order; it must be written by the County; and it is a complicated procedure. Director Dean reported that he talked to the purchasing agent in St. Johns County; there the company issues a purchase order and sends it to the County, and the County, in turn, issues their order using their number with a slash and the contractor's number. Attorney Brandenburg stated that he would like to talk this over with the contractor, and the Board and Mr. Cobb agreed. RADIO TOWER FOR COUNTYWIDE COMMUNICATIONS General Services Director Dean reviewed the following memo: 77 72 TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: February 26, 1985 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners THRU: Michaelt SUBJECT: Radio Tower for County Adm'ni rator County -Wide Communications FROM: sonny D Directo REFERENCES: General Services Indian River County governmental entities are presently utilizing several antenna sites for two-way radio communications. These include County Administration Building, 120' tower at Hobart Park, Vero Beach Water Tower, The Spires, and Sheriff's tower at the County Nail. These various locations present problems such as lack of ` security, maintenance of several towers, and inadequate height to name a few. In order to eliminate these problems, Staff contacted each, governmental body and proposed a centrally located tower with adequate height and structure to accommodate their antenna as specified. If they participated, each one would be assessed an amount of money based on what was applicable to their use. The following results were received in written form: 1: City of Sebastian $ 5,000 2. Indian River County Sheriff $20,000 3. Indian River School Board $ 5,000 4. Indian River Volunteer Ambulance Squad $ 5,000 5. North County Fire District $15,000 $5 -0,0 0 0 To complete the project as proposed, it is estimated to cost approximately $65,000. The difference will be made up by construction of the required building by our Building Operations Department and funds from Emergency Management. Sheriff Dobeck indicated in his letter of'intent that he would help also. Application for permit has been made to erect the tower at Hobart Park. A location has been spotted and site plans drawn. Based on the above data it is requested the Board grant permission to bid the tower as soon as all permits are received. Director Dean explained that each entity would have their own space on the tower at a certain height. He believed that everyone approached thought this was a good idea and was eager to participate. Mr. Dean reported that he received telephone information just a few hours ago that the tower height of 405' 73 MAR 6 1 BOOK F; c. 114 MAR 6 1995 BOOK coo F'GE has been approved by the F.A.A.; so, we have the specifications and can go out to bid. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, to authorize staff to bid the tower as requested. Commissioner Bird inquired if the Fire District share of $15,000 is already budgeted for this project, and Director Dean replied that North County Fire had $50,000 budgeted for communications and a master plan for the entire communications system, and this is a portion of that. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0) FORFEITURE OF BOND - PRICE (GLOBAL PAVING) MINING OPERATION Director Keating reviewed the following staff memo: TO: The Honorable -Members DATE: a ruary , FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: i Robert M. Keati g, ICP Planning & Development Director REQUEST TO REQUIRE FORFEITURE OF BOND FOR CHARLIE PRICE MINING OPERATION FROM: <;zc REFERENCES: C. Price Betty Davis Code Enforcement Officer DIS:CED1 It is requested that the following information be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of March 6, 1985. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: On March 9, 1978, the County Planning and Zoning Commission approved a sand mining application submitted by Charlie Price of Global Paving Inc. to mine 5.6 acres of an 18 acre parcel of agricultural zoned land located off 22nd Street S.W. and I-95 74 in Section 36, Township 33, Range 38, Indian River Farms County Subdivision. At that time, the applicant tendered to Indian River County a bond of $10,000. The subject bond was condi- tioned upon compliance with the approved site plan, with forfeiture of the bond possible if the applicant failed to comply with the site plan as approved, including restoration of the site. Although the County's mining ordinance does not delineate a time frame within which a mining operation must be completed, it does however, as stated in Section 25(r)(11) of the County's Code of Laws and Ordinances, require a bond to be effective for full coverage protection at all time during the entire period of the operation. Due to the impending expiration of the bond, the staff feels that some action must be taken to ensure that the County has adequate funds to restore the subject property to an acceptable condition. The subject bond is due to expire on March 15, 1985, and the mining operation has not been completed. ANALYSIS: In October of 1984, the applicant was notified by letter that the County would need bond coverage for his mining operation through October of 1985, a time period consistent with the remainder of this year's permit period. Subsequent conver- sations and a letter dated February 12, 1985 have not resulted in a renewal of the continuation certificate for the bond, nor has restoration of the site occurred. It is staff's position that the applicant has not acted in good faith to comply with the County's Code of Laws and Ordinances by renewing his bond in an adequate time period before its expiration. The mining ordinance requires that performance bonds for completion of such projects remain active as a means of ensuring restoration of the site by the County, if neces- sary, using funds from the bond. Since the bond provides the funds for'site restoration and the bond is due to expire on - March 15, 1985 without restoration having been completed, staff feels that the County should exercise its option and require forfeiture of the bond. These funds should then be used by the County to bring the. subject mining operation into conformance with the approved site plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends to the Board of County Commissioners that the $10,000.00 bond be forfeited, and the County take the necessary actions to bring the subject mining operation into conformance with the County's Code. Director Keating informed the Board that he has gotten assurances from both the applicant and his bonding agent that the bond is en route or being developed, but we want to be sure the County is covered and the staff, therefore, would like authorization to call the bond. Attorney Bogosian came before the Board representing Global Paving and reported that bond originally was issued in 1978 and has been renewed each year since that time. It seems that on 75 MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 barE 116 MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 FACT 117 February 8th the County Commission received a letter in which Farm Bureau stated they would no longer be providing coverage under this particular bond, but Attorney Bogosian stated that after reviewing it, he determined they had no right to discontinue the bond. He wrote Farm Bureau accordingly, and he interprets their return letter addressed to the Board to mean they are renewing the bond by shifting it to another company. • Attorney Bogosian was satisfied his client will have an adequate bond. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized staff to call down the bond by March 15th if it is not renewed in satisfactory form by that date. SET PUBLIC HEARINGS TO ADOPT NEW ZONING DISTRICTS Administrator Wright informed the Board that he had a very short emergency item to add to the agenda re adoption of the new zoning districts. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0 added the emergency item as requested by the Admin- istrator. Planning Director Keating noted that the new zoning districts have been adopted, but in order to convert the existing districts into the new districts, it is necessary to have a public hearing before the Planning & Zoning Commission and two evening public hearings before the County Commission. The hearing before the Planning & Zoning Commission is set for the fourteenth of March. Director Keating could not estimate how 76 � r � much public interest or input we could anticipate, but -recom- mended that the Board schedule the public hearings for an earlier hour the same evenings as the Planning & Zoning meetings, March 28th and April 11th - 6:30 P.M. This needs to be done as soon as possible so we can start using the new districts. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized staff to schedule and advertise public hearings in regard to the adoption of the new zoning districts for Thursday, March 28, 1985, and Thursday, April 11, 1985, at 6:30 P.M. LETTER TO CITY ATTORNEY RE PURCHASE OF HUTCHINSON UTILITIES Chairman Lyons reported that it now appears that it is not necessary for the county to be involved in a bond issue for The Moorings -buy-out of Hutchinson Utilities, and Attorney Brandenburg has written City Attorney Vitunac stating that this can be handled directly between the City of Vero Beach and Hutchinson Utilities. The Chairman asked that the Board confirm the Attorney's statement as set out in the following letter: 77 MAR 6 1995 BOOK GO Ffict 118 NAR 6 1995 Boor 60 FACE 119 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1840 25th .Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Telephone: (305) 567-8000 Suncom: 424-1425 February 25, 1985 GARY M.BRANDENBURG County Attorney CHRISTOPHER J. PAULL Asst. County Attorney JAMES P. WILSON Asst. County Attorney Purchase of Hutchinson Utilities, Inc. facilities by The Moorings Homeowners Dear Charlie: -.I have been working with our bond counsel in an attempt to simplify the procedure for the H.'U.I. buy-out. The current proposal involves the County imposing an assessment lien against the. benefited properties with the proceeds of the lien pledged to pay a revenue bond which the H. U.I. owners will accept as payment :at , closing. The County immediately upon purchase of the system .will convey all facilities to the City to become part of the combined City of Vero Beach wastewater system; the County's only role being a conduit to aid in the financing of the project. This appeared to be necessary because of the City's lack of authority to impose special assessment liens in the unincorporated area. The City and County have now entered into an agreement relating to capacity rights which clears the way for the special assessment procedure to begin. It. -now appears that the City does have the authority to impose special assessment liens in the unincorporated area. In this .regard, please refer to §170.01(1)(8), F.S., which provides the necessary authority; i.e., "Any municipality which is legally obligated for providing capital improvements for water or sewer facilities within an unincorporated area of the county may recover the costs of the capital improvements by levying and collecting special assessments for the purposes authorized in this section on the specially benefited property." In light of this Statute it does 'not appear that any further County involvement in the acquisition is necessary. The City can impose the lien, issue the bonds, and acquire the system. This will eliminate an unnecessary party from the transaction and give the City more control in structuring the transaction and in combining the system into the City system. It also seems to make sense to have the debt and the job of collecting the special . assessments follow the assets that are acquired when issuing -the debt. Overall this will greatly simplify the process and reduce - the ultimate cost to The Moorings homeowners. The County -has completed two similar assessments, and I would be happy to give you copies of the documents to use as a guide. I would recommend that the City consider retaining Jud Freeman, Jr. as bond counsel, as he is very familiar with this process and has provided the County with excellent service in our previous assessment issues. Please review the Statute and discuss this matter with the necessary individuals --in the City and give me your thoughts. Since the homeowners in The Moorings are anxious to proceed, I will probably bring this to the attention of the County Commission at their next meeting. Sineer 7el- . Gary" M.7Brandenburg, , County: Attorney`l��J 78 Charles P. Vitunac City Attorney :..City of Vero Beach 'Post Office Box 1389 Beach, FL ...Vero 32.960 February 25, 1985 GARY M.BRANDENBURG County Attorney CHRISTOPHER J. PAULL Asst. County Attorney JAMES P. WILSON Asst. County Attorney Purchase of Hutchinson Utilities, Inc. facilities by The Moorings Homeowners Dear Charlie: -.I have been working with our bond counsel in an attempt to simplify the procedure for the H.'U.I. buy-out. The current proposal involves the County imposing an assessment lien against the. benefited properties with the proceeds of the lien pledged to pay a revenue bond which the H. U.I. owners will accept as payment :at , closing. The County immediately upon purchase of the system .will convey all facilities to the City to become part of the combined City of Vero Beach wastewater system; the County's only role being a conduit to aid in the financing of the project. This appeared to be necessary because of the City's lack of authority to impose special assessment liens in the unincorporated area. The City and County have now entered into an agreement relating to capacity rights which clears the way for the special assessment procedure to begin. It. -now appears that the City does have the authority to impose special assessment liens in the unincorporated area. In this .regard, please refer to §170.01(1)(8), F.S., which provides the necessary authority; i.e., "Any municipality which is legally obligated for providing capital improvements for water or sewer facilities within an unincorporated area of the county may recover the costs of the capital improvements by levying and collecting special assessments for the purposes authorized in this section on the specially benefited property." In light of this Statute it does 'not appear that any further County involvement in the acquisition is necessary. The City can impose the lien, issue the bonds, and acquire the system. This will eliminate an unnecessary party from the transaction and give the City more control in structuring the transaction and in combining the system into the City system. It also seems to make sense to have the debt and the job of collecting the special . assessments follow the assets that are acquired when issuing -the debt. Overall this will greatly simplify the process and reduce - the ultimate cost to The Moorings homeowners. The County -has completed two similar assessments, and I would be happy to give you copies of the documents to use as a guide. I would recommend that the City consider retaining Jud Freeman, Jr. as bond counsel, as he is very familiar with this process and has provided the County with excellent service in our previous assessment issues. Please review the Statute and discuss this matter with the necessary individuals --in the City and give me your thoughts. Since the homeowners in The Moorings are anxious to proceed, I will probably bring this to the attention of the County Commission at their next meeting. Sineer 7el- . Gary" M.7Brandenburg, , County: Attorney`l��J 78 ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) confirmed the Attorney's statement as set out in his letter dated February 25, 1985, and further noted that the County does not wish to be involved in this matter. APPOINTMENTS TO FAIRGROUNDS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Commissioner Bird requested that the Board try to make the majority of the appointments today as there is a need to get this Committee organized as quickly as possible. He asked that each Commissioner make one appointment and then he would like to add another four. Commissioner Bird reported that Commissioner Wodtke had submitted a letter stating that he would like his appointment to the Fairgrounds Authority to be Attorney Calvin Brown, and he concurred with this appointment. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the appointment of Calvin Brown to the Fairgrounds Advisory Committee as recommended by Commissioner Wodtke. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the appointment of Roy Raymond to the Fairgrounds Advisory Committee as recommended by Commissioner Scurlock. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the appointment of Judy Wakefield to the Fairgrounds Advisory Committee as recommended by Commissioner Bowman. 79 MAR 6 1985 B4O0� 60 PA;,a 120 BOOK 60 F°:GF 121 ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the appointment of Will Barker to the Fairgrounds Advisory Committee as recommended by Commissioner Bird. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the appointment of Bill Tripp to the Fairgrounds Authority Committee as recommended by Chairman Lyons. Commissioner Bird stated that he also would like to see Doug Bournique of the Citrus League on this committee, if he would agree to serve, and felt it was important that Earl Cason of the Kiwanis Club be a member. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the appointment of Earl Cason to 'the Fairgrounds Authority Committee. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the appointment of Attorney Robert Jackson to the Fairgrounds Authority Committee. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0) agreed to appoint Doug Bournique as a member of the Fairgrounds Authority Committee, pending his agreement to serve. 80 S Commissioner Bird noted that, including himself, if Mr. Bournique agreed to serve, this would make up the nine members, and Chairman Lyons felt we could add more members later, if needed. KIWANIS-HOBART - NEW BASEBALL FIELD AND FENCING Commissioner Bird reported that the Commission previously approved the construction of lights at the Kiwanis-Hobart baseball field, and the money was to come out of the capital improvements portion of the budget. The problem that arose was that making the present field into a regulation size 300' field to accommodate the Senior League would require placing the light structures immediately under the power lines, which cannot be done. The field, therefore, will have tq. be- -moved. to the ,north•: , d Moving the field would mean we would have to tear up the whole infield, which would, in turn, create a problem for Fellsmere Little League; so, the suggestion was made that rather than tearing up the existing field, we should leave it as it is, build a new field to the north:backing..up.to this field, and put the new lights on the new field. He continued that Intergovern- mental Relations Director Thomas has indicated we can do this with our own Parks crew. The only additional expense would be fencing around the new field. Therefore, the Parks & Recreation Committee recommends construction of a new field using in-house labor and fencing not to exceed $6,500 to be paid from the Parks & Recreation capital expense fund. Commissioner Bowman asked if the dimensions of the existing field are suitable and usable for Little League, and Commissioner Bird assured her that field is usable and is the right size for Senior Little League. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved construction of a new ballfield 81 MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 Palo -r 1?2.0 MAR 6 1985 BOOK 60 pArF at Kiwanis-Hobart Park as described by Commis- sioner Bird, using in-house labor and fencing not to exceed $6,500 to be paid from the Parks & Recreation capital expense account. The several bills and accounts against the County having been audited were examined and found to be correct were approved and warrants issued in settlement of same as follows: Treasury Fund Nos. 16455 - 16612 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 bUsinesz, on Motion made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 12:15 o'clock P.M. Attest: Clerk 82 W