HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/12/1985r
Wednesday, June 12, 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,
June 12, 1985, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Patrick B.
Lyons, Chairman; Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Vice Chairman; Richard N.
Bird; Margaret C. Bowman; and William C. Wodtke, Jr. Also
present were Michael J. Wright, County Administrator; Gary
Brandenburg, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; L.S.
"Tommy" Thomas, Intergovernmental Relations Director; Jeffrey K.
Barton, OMB Director; and Barbara A. Bonnah, Deputy Clerk.
Chairman Lyons opened the meeting and Commissioner Bird led
the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Administrator Wright requested the addition to today's
Agenda for authorization to schedule a labor relations caucus.
Commissioner Scurlock requested the addition of an emergency
item re the purchase of a new tape recorder for the Clerk's
Office, and also requested the addition of a discussion re the
proposed gas sales tax.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously added
the above items to today's Agenda.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or
additions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 8, 1985.
There were none.
JUS 12 1985 1; F J ;7
rJUN 121985
BOOK 61 DGIF iSS
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved
the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 8, 1985,
as written.
The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or
additions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 15, 1985.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved
the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 15, 1985,
as written.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of Renewal Applications for a Permit to Carry a
Concealed Firearm
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/23/85:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: May 23, 1985 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: PISTOL PERMIT RENEWALS
.
FROM: Michael Wright REFERENCES:
County Administrator
_ The following named persons have applied to the clerk's office
for pistol permit renewals:
C. Reed Knight
James T. Hanna
All requirements of the ordinance have been met and are in
order.
2
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously issued
permits to carry a concealed firearm to the
following persons:
C. Reed Knight
James T. Hanna
B. Report
Received and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk:
Second Quarter Report FY 1984
Indian River County Health Department
C. Out -of -County Travel, NACo Convention
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
out -of -county travel for Commissioners and staff
to attend the NACo Convention in Orlando, Florida,
on July 13-16, 1985.
D. Hold Harmless Agreement between City of Vero Beach and County
re South Beach Water Service Refund I
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
the Hold Harmless Agreement Between the City of Vero
Beach and Indian River County re South Beach Water
Service Refund, and authorized the Chairman's
signature.
3
L- JUN 121985
BOOK U rAnx.89
r : �
�-� AN � 2 1 PF:
BOOK 61 E 1®
9®5 5/7/85 (23b) C.A.
HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF VERO BEACH AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
RE
SOUTH BEACH WATER SERVICE REFUND
THIS AGREEMENT, made this 19th day of June , 1985 by and
between the City of Vero Beach, a municipal corporation of the State of Florida,
hereinafter referred to as the "CITY", and Indian River County, a political
subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY",
WITNESSETH:
w
WHEREAS, on September 16, 1981 the CITY and the COUNTY entered into an
agreement which is attached hereto as exhibit "A" which specified certain rights
and responsibilities of the parties with respect to ultimate provision of potable
water service to the south beach area in Indian River County, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to paragraph 7 of that agreement if the COUNTY was
unable to provide this water service to the south beach as referenced in the
contract then the COUNTY was to return to the CITY all assets in existence on the
k
date of the agreement, certain other improvements, and "any remaining
unexpended escrow funds plus accrued interest", and
WHEREAS, the COUNTY is willing to return these funds to the CITY provided
that the CITY hold the COUNTY harmless from any and all claims regarding these
funds from those customers who advanced the funds, and
WHEREAS, it is only right that the governmental agency receiving the money
should accept responsibility concerning that money,
NOW THEREFORE, the CITY and the COUNTY agree as follows:
1. The COUNTY shall return the unspent escrow funds plus interest held by
the COUNTY pursuant to the terms of the Agreement between the CITY and the
COUNTY dated September 16, 1981, less a G a A charge not to exceed 5% of the
adjusted cost of the improvement, including the site work for the fire district. See
attached exhibit "B".
2. In return for the return of the money referenced in paragraph 1 the CITY
holds the COUNTY harmless from any and all claims regarding these funds from
customers of the system who advanced the money.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned CITY and COUNTY have executed _
this agreement on the date first above written by their respective Chairman and
Mayor.
ATTEST:
Freda Wright
Clerk of the Board
Approvgd4sX form
and le6i wfficiency
y #anaen-Durg
ntg Attorney _
ATTEST:
�, k, - L�Aft,
Az
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency:
City Attorney
Approved by:
Finance DIrect r
-2-
BOARD OF COUNTY
COI IONERS OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY. FLORIDA
ons
hairman
Michael Wright t \'
County Administrator I
CITY OF VERO BEACH, FLORIDA
Mayor 6/W '
Approved as to technical
requirements:
City Manag r
BOOK Ar
FHV C. �C. AAA
JUN 1219 5/
OrricE Or THE
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
February 2, 1985
I
M
City of Vero Beach
1053-201h PLACE - P. 0. BOX 1389
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA - 32961
Telephone: 567-5151
Mr. Terry Pinto
Director of Utilities
Indian River County
1840 - 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Mr. Pinto:
BOOK I P1,Gr 1."?
This letter is to document the results of the meeting between Joe
Baird and Andres Paap on 1-30-85 concerning the transfer of South
Beach Water Project from the County to the City.
They agreed that the funds payable.to the City as a result of this
transfer were calculated in a manner that was reasonable and
acceptable to the County with one minor exception. Joe felt that the
cost of site preparation work performed by the Water Project for the
Fire District, $18,360.54, even if not a part of the project cost,
should have been included in the base amount of the G & A
calculation. His point that the County was administratively involved
is well taken, and'I have therefore reduced the amount.payable to the
City by 5% of $18,360.54, or $918.03. An adjusted statement is
enclosed.
Only one thing remains to be done now, and this is for you to effect
the transfer of these funds to the City. We would appreciate your
sending us in the next few days a check for $100,177.37.
Very truly yours,
T. R. Naso
Director of Finance
AP:rn
Enclosure
cc: J. Baird, Indian River County
A. Paap, City of Vero Beach
J. V. Little, City Manager, City of Vero Beach
_I
w
Off= OF THE
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
1 D0114 16 11:
02
City of. Vero Beach
1053 -20th PLACE - P. 0. BOX 1389
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA - 32961
Telephone: 567-5151
2-1-85
RECEIVABLE FROM INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FOR TRANSFER OF
SOUTH BEACH WATER DISTRICT
TO
CITY OF VERO BEACH, FLORIDA
L
Total., expended .,per Indian River County -
"Analysis of Cash, 9-30-84" $ 997,186.09
Less :,:-; :Charges._.for G & A 125,729.10
Total Non—G & A Expenses 871,456.99
Adjustments
`Add: Payable to Vero Beach
Utilities 9-30-84 151.49
Sverdlup Retainage 9-30-84 1,789.39
Southern Bell, 10-84 128.68
Florida Sod 11-6=84 676.20
Total Additions 2,745.76
Ded: A/R from Fire Distr 9-28-84 18,360.54
Adjusted Costs w/o G & A 855,842.21
Add: 5% G & A*, .05 x 874,202.75 43,710.14
Total Costs 899,552.35
Revenue Collected 999,729.72
Due to the City 100,177.37
*Base for G & A Calculation:
Adjusted cost w/o G &* A
Add: Cost of work done by Water
Project for Fire District
G & A Base
AP:r
855,842.21
18,360.54
874,202.75
BOOK PACE 103
JUN 121995
rJUN 121985
BOOK 1 F'PU 19
E. Work Authorization for Camp, Dresser, 8 McKee Engineering
Services to obtain DER Permit for Vista Royale and Gifford
Wastewater Treatment Plants
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized
Camp, Dresser & McKee Engineering Services to obtain
DER Permit for Vista Royale and Gifford Wastewater
Treatment Plants.
DISCUSSION RE CENTRAL ASSEMBLY OF GOD PARKING LOT
Public Works Director Jim Davis advised that the paving of
the parking lot has been agreed upon and did not know of any
outstanding items.
Planning 8 Development Director Robert Keating reported that
Reverend Tipton submitted a copy this morning of an as -built plan
which can be used to give administrative approval to the other
items addressed in staff's letter of June 20, 1985. Staff has
not made any consequent visits to the site to see if any of the
remaining issues have been resolved, such as the sodding and the
trees. However, Reverend Tipton has agreed to pave that portion
of the parking lot, which resolves the major issue. Attorney
Brandenburg has advised that their bond has been extended to
September, so it is just a question of the Board determining when
the rest of the improvements are to be completed, primarily the
paving.
Reverend Tipton advised that Global Paving will have the
paving done by the end of four weeks.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved
the improvements, accepted the letter of credit, and
required the church to finish the parking requirements
in one month's time.
8
- S -
NEW SEBASTIAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LOCATED ON CR -512
Public Works Director Jim Davis reviewed the following memo
dated 5/30/85:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: May 30, 1985 FILE:
the Board of County Camiissioners
THROUGH:
Michael Wright,
County Administrator
FROM:James W. Davis, P.E.
• Public Works Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
New Sebastian Elementary
SUBJECT: School Located on CR 512
REFERENCES:
As stated in the above referenced letter from Dr. Burns to Michael Wright,
the County staff and School District staff have met on numerous occasions
to review and modify the new Sebastian Elementary School plans so that
adverse impacts associated with the school's construction can be mitigated.
The result has been a major relocation of the entrance driveway and parking
facilities.
The Public Works staff also recommends that the 100' wide railroad right-of-
way through the school property be dedicated for future CR 512 expansion.
This involves 6-7 acres of land. t
Since the school is being built with major access to a moderate speed
arterial roadway, left turn lanes and deceleration lanes are rec=ended
along CR 512 at the school's driveway. The School District has indicated
that they do not have funds for these roadway improvements.
ALTTFMMTIVES AND ANALYSIS
Dr. Burns has proposed that the School District dedicate the 100' wide
railroad right-of-way along CR 512 in exchange for the County constructing
turning lanes. The Engineering Department has estimated that the road
construction cost should not exceed $32,000.
��*,ulUl�lkll� G 1� • 11 It 1
It is recommended that the County Road and Bridge Department construct left
turn and deceleration lanes along CR 512 in exchange for the School
Districts dedication of additional right-of-way along CR 512. Funding to
be from the Constitutional Gas Tax (5th and 6th Cent) or frau Local Option
Gas Tax, if adopted.
Director Davis pointed out that the County has need for the
100 feet of FEC right-of-way that fronts CR -512 and the School
Board has proposed a trade off. On a map of the area, he pointed
out the proposed direction of the right-of-way, which will
intersect U.S. #1 just north of Cleveland Street.
9
BOOK 61 F' E 105
JUN 12 1985 BOOK Fn,r:1 6
Administrator Wright felt the bottom line is that we will be
giving the School Board just about the same price per acre for
the right-of-way as that paid Roland Miller.
Commissioner Scurlock stated he has always felt that the
School Board should have to comply with a site plan process like
everyone else, and Chairman Lyons agreed, but noted that in this
case they circumvented that by being annexed in.
Commissioner Bird asked the status of the project as far as
moving ahead to definitely relocating the crossing at that point
because some of the merchants along the old stretch are upset
over what will happen to them when we change the road.
Commissioner Scurlock believed that the decision is really
contingent on future development along that corridor increasing
traffic levels to a point where improvements are necessary. At
this point, however, it is not even in our 5 -year plan, but if a
large development came in, it might generate traffic volumes that
would make the improvements necessary in just a couple of years.
Administrator Wright believed that land will develop when
one of those large tracts west of Sebastian is sold and
developed.
Chairman Lyons wished to see the County Commission agree on
the route of the road so that everyone in ownership of property
on that road will know what to expect. He believed that with the
exception of the small strip just east of the school, that
everyone will benefit by having a limited access road. He noted
that the commercial lots on the old road would then have no
problem getting curb cuts, etc.
Commissioner Bird asked what would be gained on the new
route that we don't already have on the old, and Director Davis
stated we would obtain the right-of-way in order to give us the
ability to expand to 4 -lanes. Most of the property in the area
is undeveloped, but a few commercial establishments such as the
convenience store will have access off of CR -512.
10
� � s
W)
Commissioner Bowman was concerned about commercial
establishments on U.S. #1 and Old Dixie not having access to the
new road.
Attorney Brandenburg advised that previously the Board has
given the authority to acquire 3 lots going into U.S. #1 and we
are now in the process of condemning them. He recommended that
the condemnation process be put on hold if the Commission is
considering changing their position on this project.
Administrator Wright felt that if we decide to change the
right-of-way then we are looking atone -half to one mile of
right-of-way acquisition.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that today is not the proper time
to make the final decision because we have not advertised the
issue so that people can come in and have their say.
Chairman Lyons recommended that we schedule a meeting on
this matter and get this straightened out. He felt the big
question here is whether we will have to move the railroad
crossing and we won't know that until we actually get into the
nitty gritty of designing the road.
Director Davis confirmed that we have abandoned the Schumann
Drive railroad crossing, which was really a trade, and that is
what will happen here most likely.
ON MOTION MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved
staff's recommendation as set out in the --above memo
re the Sebastian School.
Attorney Brandenburg asked if the Board wished to have staff
proceed with the condemnation proceedings on the 3 lots going
into U.S. #1, and Chairman Lyons answered "until further notice."
Further discussion took place on the question of whether the
School Board'is required to comply with the requirements of a
full site plan review by the Planning Department.
11
JUN 12 1985 BOOK C% PA.. r 1 7
L
,JUN 12 1985
Boa 6
Attorney Brandenburg advised that school boards have their
own separate building codes and it is written that they do not
fall within our building code. However, school boards do have to
abide by county zoning codes. If the Zoning Code contains an
item that is covered by the State Building Code, then the State
Building Code supercedes it. School boards are not exempt from
zoning requirements or other site plan considerations.
Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that the County has been
consistent in following our own Zoning Code procedures and felt
we need to change the rules and make the School Board comply
also.
Chairman Lyons felt that the School Board's business is to
build schools and part of the cost of building a school is to
provide the necessary transportation. He pointed out that when a
large development goes in, we expect them to come up with their
fair share of the road improvements, and felt the School Board
should not be any different.
Commissioner Bowman felt we did not need their drainage
problems either.
AWARD OF BID - SAND REPLENISHMENT AT WABASSO BEACH AND TRACKING
STATION PARKS
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/4/85:
12
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: June 4, 1985 FILE:
The Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH:
Michael Wright,
County Administrator
James W. Davis, P.E.(:V
10Public Works Director
FROM: Donald G. Finney .'
Parks Engineering Toth
DESCRIPTION
SUBJECT: Award of Bid - Sand Replenishment
Wabasso Beach Park and
Tracking Station Park
REFERENCES:
ian
The Board of County Commissioners approved $35,800 to replace 4475 cubic
yards of sand and in-house planting of sea oats on the entire length of
dunes at Wabasso Beach and Tracking Station Parks to protect the dune and
walkover structures.
Three bid packages were picked up thru advertising for bids. One sealed
bid was received from Saw Mill Ridge as follows:
Wabasso Beach Park
Deliver and unload 1645'cubic yards $ 4359.25
Tracking Station Park
Deliver and unload 2830 cubic yards $ 8490.00
12849.25
Performance Bond $ 520.00
13,369.25
(original Estimate $13,500)
The County Road and Bridge Department estimate is $5.50 per cubic yard -
$24,613. This is more than the Saw Mill Ridge price of $2.87 per cubic
yard because the County trucks are of smaller capacity requiring more trips
to and from the Hobart Sand pit. '
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
If'Saw Mill Ridge is awarded the contract, a savings of $10,.724. would
result over in-house work with smaller trucks.
The sand obtained from Saw Mill Ridge is compatable with the existing beach
sand and the contract involves only transportation and dumping of sand.
The placement will be by the County Road $ Bridge Department.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
It is recommended that the bid be awarded to Saw Mill Ridge in the amount
of $12,849.25 and that the performance bond.be.:waivd. Funding to'be
from Account # 001-199-581-99.91 General Contingengy Fund
13 BOOK F''„ E
JUN 12 1985
L
r
JUN 12 19 5 BOOK 61 F; 1. 'H
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously awarded
the bid for sand replenishment at Wabasso Beach Park
and the Tracking Station Park to Saw Mill Ridge in the
amount of $12,849.25 and that the performance bond be
waived. Funding to come from Account
#001-199-581-99.91 General Contingency Fund.
(CONTRACT FOR SAND REPLENISHMENT AT WA-5At5PO 5EACR PAU 1�S ON
FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERIC)
Intergovernmental Relations Director Tommy Thomas
anticipated that the final cost might go over the original amount
appropriated for this project, but advised he would get back to
the Board on the matter.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1AAn 9Ffh -20—f a
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATION
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING
June 3, 1985
BID TITLE Sand Replenishment-Wabasso
Beach & Tracking Station Parks
e
ITEM
NO.' DESCRIPTION
UNIT
PAICE UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE U�
1. Wabasso Beach Park- Furnish
_.
'
deliver and unload over edge of
existing dune clean compatible
sand 16457 C.Y.
4/i65r
t
2. Tracking Station Psh
de of
existing dune clean.com atible
sand 2830 C.Y.
F#0
!�D
3
amount-ofBond equal-to.the the
Total Bid Amount
J�J
O'C"
14
SCHEDULING OF CAUCUS TO DISCUSS LABOR RELATIONS
Administrator Wright felt that 1-1/2 hours would be needed
for the caucus on labor relations and the Board scheduled it for
Monday, June 17, 1985 at 8:30 A.M.
PURCHASE OF NEW TAPE RECORDER FOR CLERK'S OFFICE
Commissioner Scurlock advised that Freda Wright contacted
him regarding the frequent malfunctioning of the present tape
recorder and is requesting authorization to purchase a new one.
Finance Director Ed Fry explained that the present
reel-to-reel recorder which is used to tape the County Commission
meetings was acquired in 1971 and has been getting rather
unreliable and requested the Board's authorization to purchase a
new tape recorder at an estimated cost of $2,000. Recording
Secretary Virginia Hargreaves has recommended that we purchase
the recorder from Dave Reuscher of Pride Electronics here in Vero
Beach who offers excellent service capabilities.
Administrator Wright advised that the cost is under the
bidding limit, but Commissioner Scurlock felt we should get a
couple of prices and that it should be funded from the Clerk's
budget from some of the salary positions that have been open for
some time.
Director Fry advised that those funds were used for the new
Data Processing equipment and computer memory expansion.
Administrator Wright suggested that we run a line item in
the Clerk's budget and if they run out of money, come back and
take it out of contingencies.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously authorized
the purchase of a new tape recorder for the Clerk's
Office at a cost of up to $2,000.
15
JUN 12 1985 BOOK 0�. rA;
Fr -
AN
12 1985
BOOK
Ft4,F202
PUBLIC HEARING
- ACTS, INC. APPEAL OF REQUEST TO REZONE
7.26
ACRES FROM MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO RESTRICTED
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
The hour of 9:15 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to wit:
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
in Indian River County, Florida: that the attached copy of advertisement, being
ro
a MAL
In the
lished in said newspaper in the issues ofL�/%
4 /17X6'
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 corporateop any discount, rebate. commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. �
Sworn to and subscribed before m his y f `—ly A.D. 19
4 IBu'a a rl Lj
c, list ,_R4,41 --f
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court. Indian River County, F4ofida)
' NOTICE—PUBLIC HFJ1RINa
Noficd of a hearing t0 comrdm the adoption .
oT a Camty artlinanca retonm8 IaM from RM -B.
MuiSp�Femity Reaitlenbat Disbic6 M C -1A Re-
finno Bd Commercial District. The suged prop .
arty re presentty owned by AdWt Corms P=
Sh�fcht ( and north of 20th
��Wf74M AVennto (Range
Theged proPetty is daxriEed as: • 1
A pordam of Tredt & m Sec4af t. Town-
ship 33S. Range 38E, Indian Rim Farms
pang Subdn4slon as recorded m
Ramat Boca 2 at page 25. PaNld Rec=n '
- St Lutes Count, Florida and tying m lot -
OW RNm County. Ronda . being more
per5 11 described as f 0019:
Comments at tae SE comer of the NEIA
Of - saw Bedpaf I. hence North
said S21" East along dins East line of
said Secson t for 782 73': mance North
89°40'40" West along the North Ri9ht-
of-Way lira WStale Road CA for B0. to
the Point of Beginning: n 0 continue
along the last tleaCnbed Course for
576.07': hence North u°3G' Co West for
4248': thence N0rth.00''27'18" East for
464.W.,==.4.1:.2 5'16" East for i
42.40': '48" East for
548.25': thanes South 44'34'13" East lot
4246'; thence South 00'28'21" West
along 8 Erre parallel Mint tie BMW wed
of the East line o1 ea4 Section 1 tar i
493.81" to the Point of Beginning and
contammg 7.26 acres mac Of less. �
The Board of county, Cammssronem will Co"' I
dint a Wtmlip teeming ragerdn9 the appeal by 1
the epdreaet of the decmon try the Planning and
zoning Commisswn w recommeml disapproval
a the Clza g request. The iwblre hearing. at
which parses in interest and ertiaacs stra0 have
an opportunity to be hearo. will be held by the
Board of County Commrsswrevs of Indian Rom
County. Flonda. in the County Comm-wn
Chambers of the County damn stration 8u11dsmg.
roosted at 1840 25th Street. Vero Beach. Famnda
on Wednesday. June 12. 1985 at 9:15 a.m. of as
soon thereafter as may be heard.
if any person erdes appeal arty e do
•.
made on ins above matter. nee she rolll need e
recordof the or mgs. antl for such pur-
pose& he.'she may need ld ensure that a Wba.
tem record of the proeeedmgs IS made. -tent In' f
nudes tesuma y and enoenaa upon wtwcn go I
appeal is based. . .
Indian Riven County
Board of County Commeasi xws
Sy:- a:TCk S. Ly— Chamsent May 22. June 4, 1985.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/31/85:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: May 31, 1985 FILE:
of the Board of
Countv Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT:
i Robert M. Keats g, P
Planning & Developm nt Director
ACTS, INC .`, ,.APPEAL OF
PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF
REQUEST TO REZONE 7.26
ACRES FROM RM -8, MULTIPLE -
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT,
TO C-lA, RESTRICTED
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
FROM: Ric ard
ihard Shearer, AICP REFERENCES:
Chief, Long -Range Planning
ZC-130 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 June 12, 1985.
16
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Adult Communities Total Services (ACTS), Inc., the owner, is
appealing the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission to
deny their request to rezone 7.26 acres located north of State r
Road 60 and west of 74th Avenue (Range Line Road) from RM -8,
Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 8 units/acre), to
C-lA, Restricted Commercial District.
The applicant is requesting that this property be designated as
a neighborhood node.
On April 4, 1984, this property was rezoned from R-3, Multiple -
Dwelling District (up to 15 units/acre), to R -3A, Retirement
District. On April 11, 1985, the Board of County Commissioners
assigned this property to -the RM -8 Zoning District..
On April 11, 1985, the Planning & Zoning Commission tabled
action on this request pending further staff analysis of the
criteria to be used in establishing neighborhood nodes. On
April 25, 1985, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied this
rezoning request. The Commission gave as their reason for
denial the fact that the subject property could not meet the
neighborhood node distance requirement, one criterion of the
neighborhood node Comprehensive Plan ammendment recommended by
the Planning and Zoning Commission for adoption.
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 vacant except for a sales office.
North and west of the subject property is land owned by ACTS
which is zoned RM -8 and has received site plan approval for a
total care facility. East of the subject property, across 74th
Avenue, is Village Green, a mobile home park zoned RMH-8,
Mobile Home Residential District (up to 8 units/acre). South
of the subject property, across State Road 60, is undeveloped
land zoned RM -6, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 6
units/acre).
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and all
of the land around it as MD -1, Medium -Density Residential 1 (up
to 8 units/acre). The applicant is proposing that the subject
-property be designated as a neighborhood commercial node.
Presently, the Comprehensive 'Plan describes neighborhood
commercial nodes as follows:
SPECIAL POLICIES REGULATING NODAL AREAS
1) Unspecified nodes may include:
Neighborhood Commercial Nodes - Neighborhood
commercial centers not less than two (2) acres nor in
excess of eight (8) acres per center. These
neighborhood commercial nodes are designed for public
convenience businesses, professional offices and other
17
JUN 12 1985 BOOK 61 ��AcF X03
r JUN 12 1985
BOOK 61 r,I, 29
uses as defined in all applicable land development
ordinances including, but not limited to, the zoning
and subdivision ordinances. The characteristics of a
neighborhood will also'be considered in determining
uses which will be allowed in a particular
neighborhood commercial node.
However, the Planning Department has proposed an amendment to
the Comprehensive Plan based on discussions of neighborhood
nodes at node workshops in 1983 and 1984. This proposed
amendment lists specific criteria for designating neighborhood
nodes, including limiting the size of neighborhood nodes to six
acres and requiring that neighborhood nodes be at least one
mile from any other neighborhood node, commercial node,
commercial/industrial node, hospital/commercial node,
tourist/commercial node or MXD area.
The subject property does not meet either of the criteria
listed above. The subject property is larger than the six acre
size limit and is only 4,793.4 feet (.91 miles) west of the
neighborhood commercial node located at the northwest corner of
the intersection of State Road 60 and is only 3,936.4 feet (.75
miles) east of the First Bankers' facility located at 8055 20th
Street which has been considered the eastern boundary of the
I-95 and State Road 60 commercial/industrial node.
Transportation System
The subject property has direct access to State Road 60
(classified as an arterial street on the Thoroughfare Plan) and
to 74th Avenue (classified as a secondary collector street).
The maximum development of the subject property as a
neighborhood commercial area could attract up to 6,887 average
annual daily trips.
Environment
The subject property is not designated as environmentally
sensitive nor is it in a flood -prone area.
Utilities
County water is available for the subject property. County
wastewater facilities are not currently available.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, particularly the facts that the
subject property meets neither the size nor distance criteria
proposed for establishing neighborhood commercial nodes, and
the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff
recommends that this rezoning request be denied.
Richard Shearer, Chief of Long -Range Planning, recalled that
at last week's meeting the Board adopted an ordinance amending
the Comprehensive Land Use Plan limiting the size of neighborhood
nodes to 3 acres and requiring a minimum distance of one mile
with a variance procedure to allow neighborhood nodes to be
18
M r
established at 9/10's of a mile apart. Based on those
requirements, staff is recommending that this request be denied.
Commissioner Scurlock understood that the node is not
established on the west end per se, but wondered how it would be
measured if it was established to the west end. Would it be
measured to the bank or to the property on the same side as this
property. It seemed that by going to the east, it would pretty
well meet the distance requirements, but going west they would
fall short by a quarter of a mile or .15 miles if the variance
was granted. He asked how far is the distance between the
subject property and the next neighborhood commercial boundary on
the north side.
Mr. Shearer explained that, basically, we are looking at
86th Avenue as the eastern boundary of the SR -60 & 1-95 node on
the north side and that is more than a mile from the subject
property, probably about 1-1/4 miles. He pointed out that the
distance criteria in establishing neighborhood nodes does make
mention of a node falling on both sides of a 4 -lane highway.
Chairman Lyons and Commissioner Scurlock felt that only one
side of the street should count on a 4 -lane highway because
pedestrian traffic is most unlikely.
Commissioner Bird asked what the Planning & Zoning
Commission's main reason was for denial and Planning &
Development Director Robert Keating explained that it did not
meet the distance requirements and at that time it exceeded the
acreage requirements of 6 acres. The Comp Plan states that
neighborhood nodes can be from 2 to 8 acres, but staff has been
operating on policies evolving out of the workshops.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if it would be possible to
reduce the number of acres in the applicant's request.
Attorney Brandenburg confirmed that the applicant could
reduce the size of the node request today; however, the Board can
always refuse to rezone any properties. They also can say that
they are not going to approve a neighborhood node today larger
19
JUN 12 1985 BOOK 61 F". 1H. ��Ub
JUN 12 1995 aooK FAG 206
than 3 acres. The criteria established for creating neighborhood
commercial nodes in the ordinance adopted last week is not
effective because we have not received it back from the Secretary
of State as yet. He advised that ordinance should not be
controlling on this issue today and that the Board should
consider existing policies in the Comp Plan and policies that
staff had prior to the adoption of the ordinance.
Mr. Shearer explained that at one time there was some intent
to establish some commercial activity on a small square of
property east of 74th Avenue, but did not know if it was ever
approved by site plan. If it was, it has since expired.
Administrator Wright felt we should be careful on how we
measure the subject node because we have some nodes that are
entirely on one side of the road. Theoretically, he felt we can
put in a neighborhood node on the north side of the road within a
very close distance from an existing node that is entirely
located on one side of the road. He suggested that the Board
might want to consider measuring it in the same manner as that
used for alcoholic establishments/,church situations, which is the
closest pedestrian path. In other words, measure it the way you
are walking -- measure it west and then cut across the 4 -lane
highway.
Chairman Wodtke asked if this was approved, would it
preclude the C-1 property to the east from being used as a
neighborhood node, and Director Keating explained that it would,
but if this is not approved and the distance requirements are
still in effect, that could not be utilized as a neighborhood
node in any event.
Steve Henderson, Attorney representing ACTS, Inc., reported
that his clients have attempted to go along with the spirit of
the requirements of the new ordinance by reducing their request
from 8 acres to 6 acres. He stated that they would further
reduce their request to 3 acres, measured equidistance on 74th
Avenue and SR -60, so that even though the ordinance is not in
20
r
effect as yet, they would like to least comply with what the
Board has conceived to be a neighborhood node. Attorney
Henderson noted that the Planning 8 Zoning Commission's sole
reason for denial was the distance requirements as it related to
the 1-95 node. He stressed, however, that his client's feel this
location is ideal for a small commercial neighborhood node which
would meet the unique needs of Indian River Estates, a life care
community.
George Logie, General Contractor for the development,
believed that in the future the bulk of the population will
reside on the north side of SR -60, and what they are looking to
do there is to simply have a small area to supply basic needs and
some services to not only their own community of 475 senior
citizens, but also to the residents in the surrounding area.
They want the facility to be an asset to the community. In
conclusion, Mr. Logie confirmed that reducing the size of the
neighborhood node to 3 acres would not be a problem.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if there would be commercial uses
within the complex, and Mr. Logie explained that if permission is
received for a commercial neighborhood node, they would not build
commercial establishments in the complex itself. If this is
denied, they would have to include some type of gift and snack
shops in the complex.
Commissioner Bird asked if we have the ability to disregard
our distance requirements that we have set and go ahead and grant
this request today, and Attorney Brandenburg advised that there
is some flexibility in determining the one -mile distance because we
have not set specifically the node from which we are measuring.
In addition, the ordinance is not yet in effect. However, the
Board has been applying certain policies over a period of time
and has now formalized them into an ordinance. That policy is an
elaboration of what is already in the Comp Plan which states that
a neighborhood node is to be within 2-8 acres and that the
21
i
BOOK PA'E 207
r- -7
JUN 12 1985 800K< FnUE208
characteristics of the neighborhood should be considered when
determining where to locate one.
Commissioner Scurlock recalled that when some of the
Commissioners visited another ACTS, INC. total care facility,
they noticed that beauty salons, barber shops, etc. were
contained with the the project, and asked if those uses are still
available.
Director Keating stated that those uses still would be
allowable as a modification to their site plan.
Commissioner Wodtke understood that internal shops would be
open to the public, but Mr. Logie stated that internal shops are
not intended for use by the general public, just by residents and
their guests.
William Caldwell, Attorney representing Dale Sorensen,
William Becker and Charles Bradshaw, owners of a 20 -acre tract on
the southwest corner of 74th Avenue, advised that his clients
have filed a petition for a rezoning which is scheduled for the
June 27th meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission. He asked
Attorney Brandenburg if their petition would fall under the same
provisions as that of the ACTS request.
Attorney Brandenburg explained that the Board did not
specifically say whether or not the ordinance would be applied to
petitions that were pending as of the date the ordinance was
adopted, and asked the Board to clarify their position on that.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that we should be consistent
since both applications were in prior to the adoption of the
ordinance and because he did not see how we could do it for one
and not the other.
Attorney Caldwell asked if that were the case, would he be
correct in saying that the neighborhood node concept for that
particular intersection could be considered for up to 8 acres,
assuming that the distance requirements for the Sorensen petition
was satisfied. He noted that the ACTS people do not intend to
develop the node, just the Indian River Estates project.
22
Attorney Caldwell felt that one approach would be to defer action
today and consider both locations on their own merits sometime in
August or September. Another approach would be to go ahead and
do the rezoning and then let his client submit a request after
they go through the Planning & Zoning Commission. He believed
this particular intersection is concerned because it is unique
due to its proximity to 1-95, and could foresee the need in the
future for additional commercial because of higher densities
being developed.
Commissioner Bird had a problem approving 3 acres at 74th
Avenue when it is going to affect the commercial use of the C-1
property to the south.
Attorney Caldwell stressed that his clients had submitted
their request for an 8 -acre node before the ordinance was in
place.
Attorney Brandenburg again requested the Board to clarify
their position on this matter by adopting a Motion as to whether
or not the neighborhood commercial node ordinance is applicable
to the petitions pending prior to the date the ordinance was
adopted.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously adopted the
position that the neighborhood node ordinance adopted
last week is not applicable to petitions received
prior to the date the ordinance was adopted.
Chairman Lyons opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in this matter. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously closed
the Public Hearing.
23
JUN 12 1985 sooK �;,,F�
Fr- I
JUN 12 1995 BOOK 61 f'GE
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, that the Board recognize the
applicant's request to reduce his request for a
neighborhood node down to three acres and adopt
Ordinance 85-53, approving a 3 -acre node square
on the northwest corner of 74th Avenue and SR -60.
Under discussion, Commissioner Wodtke felt that
neighborhood nodes are needed more in areas where there is less
development and which are not so close to commercial nodes, such
as this one is to the one at Kings Highway and SR -60. He
believed that the Board has more or less set a policy for
limiting further commercial development on SR -60, and stated he
would not vote for the node because the facility has the ability
to establish commercial facilities internally.
Commissioner Bird felt that one of the most important
criteria for establishing a neighborhood node were densities and
stressed that the densities do indeed exist out in that area.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion
was voted on and carried by a vote of 4-1, Commissioner
Wodtke dissenting.
24
e r
ORDINANCE NO. 85-53
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 Commis-
sioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning Ordi-
nance 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:
A portion of Tract 8, in Section 1, Township 33S, Range
38E, Indian River Farms Company Subdivision, as
recorded in Plat Book 2 at Page 25, Public Records, St.
Lucia.County, Florida and lying in Indian River County,
Florida, being more particularly described as follows:
Commence at the SE corner of the NE$ of said Section 1,
th6nce North 00°28121" East along the East line of said
Section 1 for 162.731; thence North 89040140" West
along the North Right -of -Way line of State Road 60 for
80.00' to the Point of Beginning; thence continue along
the last described course for 361.5'; thence North
00027118" East for 361.51; thence South 89036148" East
for 361.5'; thence South 00028121" West along a line
parallel with and 80.00' West of the East line of.said
Section 1 for 361.5' to the Point of Beginning and
containing 3.00 acres more or less.
Be changed from RM -8", Multiple -Family Residential District,
to C-lA, Restricted 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 12th day of June 1985.
BOARD F CO NTY COMMISSIONERS
OF I DI4N WIVER COUNTY
M
reRICK B.` L
airman
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida
this 28th day of June , 1985.
JUN 121985
L_
d
BOOK
JUN 12 1985
0
BOOK f' Gr 2112
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State
received on this.8th day of July , 1985, at 10' A.M./P.M. and
filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County Commis-
sioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS -120 FORM AND
LEGAL SUFPICI�NCY.
ENBURG
ounty Attorney
PUBLIC HEARING - COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST TO AMEND THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO PROVIDE FOR THE BLUE CYPRESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT
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 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
NOTICE OF PUBLIC NEARIND
CONSIDER
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
THE ADOPTION O COUNTY ORDINANCE
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
AMENDING THE TEXT AND MAP OF THE LAND
USE ELEMENT
OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Indian
a
River County 8oartl of County Commfasloners,
shall hold a public hearing et which parties in in.
lereat and citizens shall have an opportunely to
be heats onmission Wednesday, June 12. teed, In the
V In the matter of / (/�7'.0
.County Commission Chambers located in the i
County Administration Buildf 1540 25th
Street. Vero Beach. Florida, at 9:e5 a.m. or as
soon thereafter as may be heard• to consider the.
adoption of an ordinance entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
in the Court, was pub-
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AMENDING
THE TEXT AND MAP OF THE LAND USE i
lished in said newspaper In the Issues of r
ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN, CREATING THE SCID, BLUE CY-
PRESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT: AND
- / f
PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CON-
FLICTING PROVISIONS. CODIFICATION,
SEVERABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above matter, he/she will need a
Vero Beach, In said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
for each pus -
recortl of the proeeedin o' eandnsure
Powe. he/she may need ensure Ihat a verbs.
been published in said Indian River Count Florida, each dais and has been
been continuous) y y
In
tlm record of the proceedmga Is made, which uh
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
cludee testimony and evidence upon which the
appeal is based
publication of the attached copy of
advertisement: and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
Indian RnrerCounty
Board of County Commissioners
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
p p 9
advertisement for
, June 4, 198 s. Lyons, Chairman
May 22, June 4, 1995.
publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before a Ih' _'� _ d of u A.D. 19
lvI
/ (Bti Man r)
Zz-
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, rtda)
26
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/31/85:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: May 31, 1985 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE
COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST
SUBJECT: TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN TO PROVIDE FOR
Ro ert M. Keatinig, A THE BLUE CYPRESS
Planning & Developm t Director IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
FROM: is and Shearer, AICP REFERENCES: Blue Cypress
Chief, Long -Range Planning RICH
It is requested that the information herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at
their regular meeting of June 12, 1985
DESCRIPTIONS & CONDITIONS
In the late 1950's, the Blue Cypress Lake Fish Camp was
established on the west shore of Blue Cypress Lake. This fish
camp was originally conceived as a 100 unit subdivision, located
on three fingers of land within Blue Cypress Lake. Its purpose
was to serve as a development of non -permanent residences,
primarily travel trailers and camping with tents.
In 1961, the fish camp was rezoned to C-1, a designation which
allowed mobile homes. From that time until 1971, various lots
were developed with either permanent residences or mobile homes.
In 1971, however, the zoning code was revised, deleting mobile
homes as a permitted use in the C-1 district. After 1971, most
activity occurring at the Blue Cypress Fish Camp was done with-
out County permits.
Beginning in the late 1970's, a number of problems were
identified in this area. Leaching from septic tanks, poor water
quality in the finger canals, and potential flooding problems
were identified. During this period, various structures were
built which conflicted with County zoning and land development
regulations. Finally, in 1982 the County adopted the land use
element of its comprehensive plan which designated this area as
environmentally sensitive.
Recently, the County has received several requests to build upon
several vacant lots in the subdivision. Because of the land use
designation, the environmental problems, and the substandard lot
sizes, the County has determined that a comprehensive solution
is needed to the problems in this area. Recognizing that an
undesirable situation currently exists in this area, the staff
has determined that various measures must be taken to resolve
current problems and prevent future problems in this area.
Prior to taking action to resolve these problems, however, it is
necessary to amend the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive
Plan and to. develop a specific zoning district applicable to
this area.
At this time, County
and map of the Land
establish a new land
Improvement District.
discussions among
is initiating a request to amend the text
Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan to
use designation entitled BCID, Blue Cypress
This proposed amendment is the result of
County staff, the Board of County
27
��.�
JUN 12 195 Boos
JUN 121985
BOOK 61 F°;GF?1A.
Commissioners, and affected property owners concerning problems
in the area and the appropriate procedures to resolve these
problems.
On May 9, 1985, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 -to -0
to recommend approval of this request.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
This proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment was designed to
recognize the existing situation at Blue Cypress fish camp,
including the existing density of 10 units per acre and various
environmental problems, and establish general guidelines to
allow future development and redevelopment while providing for
mitigation of the environmental problems. This amendment is
necessary because the existing land use designation of the fish
camp and surrounding area is Environmentally Sensitive (up to 1
unit/5 acres). Because the fish camp is on altered land at a
density of 10 units/acre, any proposed new zoning district for
this area could not be in conformance with the Environmentally
Sensitive land use designation and be able to provide reasonable
requirements for the future development of the subject property.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning
Commission's recommendation, staff recommends approval.
Richard Shearer, Chief of Long -Range Planning, explained
that there are two public hearings today involving Blue Cypress
Lake; the first is to amend the Comprehensive Land Use Plan to
provide for the Blue Cypress Improvement District (BCID) and the
second hearing is to amend the zoning to allow the District.
Chairman Lyons questioned the description of the Fish Camp
as being a "transient residential settlement" as used in Section
1 on Page 1 of the proposed ordinance, and suggested that be
changed to "recreational residential settlement" as it seems to
be inconsistent with the language in Item (5) on that same page
where it states that "Development or redevelopment shall
expressly exclude non-residential uses, including hotels or
motels." He wondered if we really want to make hotels and motels
completely non -conforming uses.
Director Keating explained that the reference to transient
was inserted to discourage permanent use of the existing
structures. Primarily, the intent was to indicate that the
structures would be second home and recreational uses of
single-family facilities.
28
Attorney Brandenburg felt there was no problem with changing
the word "transient" to "recreational", as far as the ordinance
is concerned, as he believed that some of the residents out there
do not consider themselves transients. In addition, with respect
to Paragraph (5) on Page 1 as it relates to the Zoning Code, the
hotel would be an existing non -conforming use and could not be
rebuilt if it burned down.
Commissioner Lyons felt that maybe we should find a way to
make the hotel an allowable use because it seemed to him that a
hotel was appropriate for the area.
Attorney Brandenburg suggested that if the Board wished to
make the hotel allowable, the way to accomplish that would be to
change the wording in the zoning amendment coming up next by
saying that everything that is currently there as of the date of
this ordinance constitutes a legal conforming use, which would
allow the motel or anything else that exists out there to be
rebuilt if it burned down.
Commissioner Bowman had a problem with the wording
"delineated development" used in the second paragraph on Page 1
of the ordinance and preferred that the legal descriptions be
spelled out as insurance against future claims of being
grandfathered in.
Attorney Brandenburg advised that the zoning ordinance
references a recorded sketch of the development, which is the
most definite record we have of what exists out there today.
Chairman Lyons opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in this matter. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously closed
the Public Hearing.
29
JUN 12 1985 BOOK FADE
r -JUN 121985
BOOK 6, - P� 1-j F. 2J 6
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously adopted
Ordinance 85-54, amending the Comprehensive Plan
Land Use Element and map by incorporating a new
land use designation "BCID: Blue Cypress Improvement
District", with the modification of "transient
residential settlement" being changed to "recreational
residential settlement."
30
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 85-54
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND
USE ELEMENT AND MAP BY INCORPORATING A NEW LAND USE DESIG-
NATION "BCID: BLUE CYPRESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT", PROVIDING
FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, CODIFICATION,
SEVERABILITY, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION 1
The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element
land use designation entitled "BCID": Blue
as follows (to be inserted on page 24
Residential -2 (RR -2)" policy statement):
"BLUE CYPRESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (BCID)
is hereby amended by incorporating a
Cypress Improvement District, to read
after the description of the "Rural
The Blue Cypress Fish Camp is an established recreational residential settlement
located within a remote west County location adjacent to the western shoreline
of the Blue Cypress Lake. The development lies within a designated environ-
mentally sensitive area and is surrounded by agriculturally designated lands.
The Blue Cypress Fish Camp consists of three fingers adjacent to manmade canals
which flow directly into the Blue Cypress Lake. The fingers have developed at a
density of,, ten. (10) units per acre. The area is designated "Blue Cypress
Improvement District" (BCID) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the
designation is not intended to be extended to undeveloped areas adjacent to -or
otherwise outside of the delineated development.
Analysis of the Blue Cypress Improvement District undertaken by the Indian River
County Unit of the State Department of Environmental Health and the St. John's
River Water Management District.reflects potential dangers to the public health,
safety and general welfare caused primarily by the use of inadequate septic
tanks in an area of concentrated density with a very high water table. These
conditions require implementation of a special- management program directed
toward construction of a central wastewater facility to promote the health,
safety and general welfare of the residents and visitors to the area. There-
fore, the Zoning Code shall be amended to incorporate appropriate regulatory
measures to abate continued deterioration of water quality. The land management
program shall address the following:
(1) Central Wastewater Facilities. A central wastewater system is desired
since on-site wastewater disposal is inappropriate due to: (a)
Inability of small lots to accommodate on-site waste disposal; (b)
Existing flood elevations present an unusually hazardous condition;
and (c) The high water table and flood hazard severely restricts the
efficiency of existing on-site wastewater disposal tanks and drain
fields.
(2) Central Water System. A central water system should be developed in
The event a central wastewater facility is not feasible.
(3) Design Considerations. The land management program shall incorporate
regulations governing minimum floor elevation, maximum building
coverage, and preservation of open space. Any future development or
redevelopment within the area will conform to design criteria directed
toward minimizing flood damage potential and reducing the overall
polluting effects of development on the water quality of adjacent
canals in the Blue Cypress Lake.
(4 ) Land Use'and Density. Appropriate land use controls shall be drafted
in order to assure that neither the density nor intensity of develop-
ment within the Blue Cypress Improvement District is increased.
Development or redevelopment shall be restricted to single family
dwelling units, approved accessory structures, and shall expressly
exclude nonresidential uses, including hotels or motels. The dwelling
unit mix may include both conventional single family dwelling units as
JUN 12 19 -1-
BOOK F'�,,r; i
r -
JUN T2195
ORDINANCE NO. 85-54
BOOK
well as mobile homes meeting performance standards of the Zoning
Code.
SECTION 2
REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS
All previous ordinances, resolutions, or motions of the Board of County Commis-
sioners of Indian River County, Florida which conflict with the provisions of
this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. All Special
Acts of the legislature applying only to the unincorporated portion of Indian
River County and which conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby
repealed to the extent of such conflict.
SECTION 3
INCORPORATION IN CODE
The provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated into the County Code and
the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or other appropri-
ate word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered, reserved or
relettered,to accomplish such intentions.
SECTION 4 - - -
SEVERABILITY
If any section, part of a sentence, paragraph, phrase or word of this ordinance
is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such hold-
ings shall not affect the remaining portions hereof and it shall be construed to
have been the legislative intent to pass this ordinance without such unconstitu-
tional, invalid or inoperative part.
SECTION 5
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 this 12th day of Tune 1985.
BOARD OF
OF INDON RI
Patrick B.
Chairman
-2-
COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY
M
ORDINANCE NO. 85-54
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of
Florida this 28th day of June , 1985.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State
received on this 8th day of July , 1985, at 10:00
A•M•/P.M. and filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED RM AND
LEGAL SOFICIENCY.%
By.
ry,,aanaenburg
UN Y/ATTORNEY
PUBLIC HEARING - COUNTY-INITATED REQUEST TO AMEND THE ZONING
ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE BLUE CYPRESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
The hour of 9:45 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy 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
Iished in said newspaper in the issues
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. A
Sworn to and subscribed befo
of Ll ww�_, A.D. 19
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River Cou
33
A
n N'jjr. ......_......__-
NOTICE ,IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Indian
Inver County.Board of County,Commissloners,
shall hbld a public hearing at which parties in in-.
terpst and; citizens shall have .an opportunity to
be heard. 66 Wednesdayi June -12, 1985, in the
Counthe
County dTlnistration.. Bulking; 11ission Chambers locat8401n25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida,`at .9:45 a.m. or as
soon thereaftefae may be heard, to consider the
if any person decides to appeal any aecislon�
made on the above matter, he/she will need. a
record of the proceedings. and for such pur-
poses, he/she may need to ensure that a verba
tim record of t . he oceedins is made, which In-
ciudes testimony and evidence upon which the
i appeal is based.
Indian River County -
Board of County Commissioners .
By:_s-Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman
May 22, June 4,_1 985.
JUN 12 1985BOOK.'. F�:cr�
JUN 12 1985
e
BOOK
Planner Richard Shearer reviewed the following memo dated
5/31/85:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: May 31, 1985 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST
' TO AMEND THE ZONING
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR
Robert M. Keat' g, P THE BLUE CYRPRESS
Planning & Developnfeent Director IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
FROM Richard Shearer, AICP Blue Cypress2
Chief, Long -Range PlanninsREFERENCES: RICH2
It is requested that the information herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at
their regular meeting of June 12, 1985.
DESCRIPTIONS & CONDITIONS
The County is initiating a request to amend the text and map of
the Zoning Ordinance to establish a new zoning district entitled
RBCID, Blue Cypress Improvement District.
This proposed amendment is the result of discussions among
County staff, the Board of County Commissioners, and affected r
property owners concerning problems in the area and the
appropriate procedures to resolve these problems.
On May 9, 1985 the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 -to -0
to recommend approval of this request.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
This proposed amendment was designed to recognize the existing
situation at Blue Cypress fish camp, including the existing
density of 10 units per acre and various environmental problems,
and establish general guidelines to allow future development and
redevelopment while providing for mitigation of the
environmental problems. This amendment will implement the
proposed BCID Comprehensive Plan amendment and provide
reasonable requirements for the future development" of the
subject property.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the Planning.. and Zoning
Commission's recommendation, staff recommends approval.
With respect to Chairman Lyons' earlier suggestion of making
the hotel a legal conforming use, Attorney Brandenburg suggested
that could be accomplished by adding the hotel as an allowable
use in the District in Section 2 on Page 4 of the proposed
ordinance. He pointed out, however, that if the Commission is
going to allow one conforming use in that District, they must do
34
it for everybody. Attorney Brandenburg understood that the
individuals in the District were satisfied with the way this
ordinance is currently written and that they did not want to open
it up to the possibility of additional motel development.
The Commissioners agreed that since everything out there
seems to fit right now, they would leave it like it is.
Director Keating believed that the existence of the
hotel/motel situation brought this whole issue to a head. He
felt that this was built completely contrary to every County
ordinance in effect, without building permits, etc., and from his
perspective, he recommended that it not even be grandfathered in.
It was his understanding that this was one issue that was going
to be pursued after the zoning district was in place and that the
zoning district was not going to specifically grandfather that
particular use in.
Commissioner Bird explained to Joe Middleton, owner of the
hotel, that by grandfathering it in, he would be allowed to
operate it, but it could not be rebuilt if it was burned down,
etc., and Mr. Middleton stated he understood and accepted those
conditions.
Chairman Lyons opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in this matter. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously closed the
Public Hearing.
Chairman Lyons withdrew his objection to not having the
hotel/motel included as an allowable conforming use in the new
District.
35
6
JUN 12 1985 BOOK
��.
JUIN BOOK 611 NkGE 222
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously adopted
Ordinance 85-55, amending Appendix A of the Zoning Code
by creating Section 14, "R-BCID: Blue Cypress
Improvement District."
Administrator Wright reported that the sewer issue is
basically at a standstill and asked the Board for direction as to
whether they want it left as it is or want staff to pursue
setting up a special district for a sewer system.
Utilities Services Director Terry Pinto advised that we
would be starting from scratch in order to put a sewer system out
there and would have to build collection, treatment and effluent
disposal systems, which would run in the neighborhood of
$300,000, amounting to a $3000 assessment for each of the 100
lots out there.
Director Pinto felt that would be up to the Board to decide
whether it would be an assessment or a voluntary assessment, but
pointed out that someone has to pay the estimated $300,000,
assuming we get some land donated for the facility and don't have
to purchase any.
Commissioner Scurlock felt it would not be a clear cut deal
for determining just who would be assessed.
Attorney Brandenburg believed we would be able to assess the
lease -hold interests as well as the individual who holds a fee
title.
Attorney Robert Jackson advised that the property owners
have been discussing another solution to the sewer problem as
they feel that $300,000 is a little high for this project and
that they plan on continuing working with the County on this
matter.
11
36
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
authorized staff to continue working with the same
group of residents to see if we can come up with a
recommended solution to the problem.
37
JUN 12 195
BOOK, P'„E ��
JUN 12 `686
BOOK
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 85-55
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING APPENDIX A OF THE CODE OF
LAWS AND ORDINANCES, KNOWN AS THE ZONING CODE, BY CREATING,
SECTION 14, "R-BCID: BLUE CYPRESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT;
PROVIDING A PURPOSE AND INTENT STATEMENT; ESTABLISHING
PERMITTED USES, SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES, AND ACCESSORY USES
AND STRUCTURES WITHIN THE DISTRICT; SETTING FORTH DIMENSION-
AL REGULATIONS, PERMITTED SIGNAGE, REGULATIONS FOR WALLS AND
FENCES, AND MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS; STIP-
ULATING COMPLIANCE WITH MAP OF RECORD, MOBILE HOME UNDERCAR-
RIAGE SKIRTING, CENTRAL WASTEWATER FACILITIES, AND FLOOD
PROTECTION; APPLICABILITY OF CODE; AND PROVIDING FOR REPEAL
OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY, AND
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION 1
Section 14, entitled "R-BCID: Blue Cypress Improvement District", is hereby
incorporated into the Zoning Code and shall be read as.follows:
"SECTION 14. R-BCID: BLUE CYPRESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
L
14 A. PURPOSE AND INTENT - -
The R-BCID Blue Cypress Improvement District is designed to implement
Comprehensive Plan policies for managing development and resource
conservation within the Blue Cypress Improvement District as designat-
ed on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Based on findings of the
County Environmental Health Department and the St. John's Water
Management District, the Comprehensive Plan mandates improvements
within this district and requires development of a land management
program guide development within the district. The expressed intent
of this district is to provide a regulatory framework for promoting
needed improvements within the district.
The R-BCID is intended to restrict development options in order to
avoid potential adverse impacts of continued uncontrolled development.
The R-BCID shall continue to accommodate residential and transient
housing needs of persons desiring to pursue water oriented recreation-
al activities on a periodic basis. The land use mix is restricted to
single family performance standards. The R-BCID is not intended for
use outside specified boundaries delineated on the Comprehensive Plan.
14 B. PERMITTED USES
In the R-BCID Blue Cypress Improvement District no building or struc-
ture shall be erected, altered or used, except for one or more of the
following. Minor site plan review shall be required for all new uses
on lots that are undeveloped as of the date of this ordinance, pursu-
ant to the provisions of Section 23.
1. Residential Uses.
Single Family Dwellings
Mobile Homes
2. Community Service Uses.
- Emergency Services
14 C. (RESERVED)
14 D. SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES
ORDIN. 85-55 _
The following uses may be permitted within the R-BCID Blue Cypress
Improvement District, subject to the specific use criteria established
in Section 25.1 "Regulations for Specific Land Uses" and review
procedures established in Section 25.3, "Regulation of Special Excep-
tion Uses".
1. Utility Uses. (Section 25.1(I))
- Public and Private Utilities, Limited
14 E. ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES
As provided in Section 25(G), "Accessory Uses and Structures".
14 F. DIMENSIONAL REGULATIONS
As provided Table 14, herein, and Section 3.1, "Application of Dis-
trict Regulations".
14 G. PERMITTED SIGNAGE
As provided in Section 25(0), "Signs".
14 H. WALLS AND FENCES
14 I.
14 J.
As provided in Section 25(I), "Walls and Fences".
MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Each dwelling unit shall require two (2) off-street parking spaces.
ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS
I. Compliance With Map of Record. The maximum density of future
development shall be one 1 unit per lot as shown on the record-
ed map of the development filed in the Indian River County
Official Record Book 453, page 310.
2. Mobile Home Undercarriage Skirtin . The frames, axles, wheels,
crawl space storage area and utility connections of all mobile
homes shall be concealed from view through the use of durable
all-weather materials and shall effectively cover the undercar-
riage areas.
3. Central Wastewater System. Prior to any development, expansion,
or addition to a lot, building site, or structure within the
R-BCID, except additions of docks, utility buildings or similar
accessory uses on lots with existing structures, plans for
providing a central wastewater system to the District shall be
approved by the County, the Department of Environmental Regu-
lation and the St. John's River Water Management District. The
County shall require assurances to guarantee availability of the
central wastewater system prior to any further development of the
area.
4. Flood Protection. A minimum ground floor elevation for single
family dwellings and mobile homes shall be 28.5 feet NGVD (i.e.,
two (2) feet above the ten (10) year flood elevation reported by
the St. John's River Water Management District).
BOOK
JUN 121985 -2-
. FADE 2�5
r
JUN 121985
ORDINANCE NO. 85-55
TABLE 14: SIZE AND DIMENSION CRITERIA
BCID: BLUE CYPRESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
BOOK 61 Nku U.
ZONING DISTRICT
BCID
35
% of gross area
MIN.
DISTRICT SIZE
REGULATION
gross acres
UNIT OF MEASURE
MAX. DENSITY
10*
d.u. per gross acre
MIN. LOT SIZE
3600
square feet
MIN. LOT WIDTH
60
feet
MIN. YARD
- Front
- Side u -
- Rear/Water Front
10
5
0
feet
- - -
MIN. FLOOR AREA
'---400
square feet per
dwelling unit
MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT
35
feet
MAX. LOT COVERAGE ___
_. 40
% of lot
MIN.
OPEN SPACE
35
% of gross area
MIN.
DISTRICT SIZE
10
gross acres
*NOTE: Maximum density is limited to one (1) residential unit per lot as
shown on the unplatted subdivision of Blue Cypress Fishing Club, located
in Township 22 South, Range 36 East, Fellsmere Farms Subdivision,
OR 453/310.
ORDINO. 85-55 W
SECTION 2
APPLICABILITY OF CODE
The requirements of this ordinance shall only be applicable to all new struc-
tures, additions, expansions and redevelopment. All development, structures and
uses in existence as of the date of adoption of this ordinance that would be
prohibited by this ordinance are hereby declared legally existing nonconforming
development, -structures -and uses under the provisions of this ordinance -
SECTION 3
REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS
All previous ordinances, resolutions, or motions of the Board of County Commis-
sioners of Indian River County, Florida which conflict with the provisions of
this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. All Special
Acts of the legislature applying only to the unincorporated portion of Indian
River County and which conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby
repealed to the extent of such conflict.
SECTION 4
INCORPORATION IN CODE
The provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated into the County Code and
the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or other appropri-
ate word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered, reserved or
4
relettered to accomplish such intentions.
SECTION -5
SEVERABILITY
If any section, part of a sentence, paragraph, phrase or word of this ordinance
is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such hold-
ings shall not affect the remaining portions hereof and it shall be construed to
have been the legislative intent -to pass this ordinance without such unconstitu-
tional, invalid or inoperative part.
SECTION 6
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 this 12th day of June 1985.
BOARD0 OUN Y COMMISSIONERS
OF I AN RI R COUNTY
FatricK u.
Chairman
-4- BOOK 61
ul
JUN 12. 1995 BOOK 61 Fvllr 2 8
ORDINANCE NO. 85-55
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of
Florida this 28th day of June , 1985.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State
received on this ath day of July , 1985, at 10:00
•A-'M./PX and filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Board
oCounty Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVE ICTO F RM ANDLEGAL UFFCY.
B
a ane urg
COU Y ATTORNEY
PUBLIC HEARING - HAZARDOUS WASTE/STORAGE TRANSFER FACILITIES
The hour of 10:30 o'clock 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 2L�Iee�
in the
lished in said newspaper in the issue—s
Court, was pub-
Affiant further says that the said Vero ITeach 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 befor>a'tirle tW% O,n n (joy ofA.D. 19 --
(SEAL)
tuiem or ine uircun uouri, inuian never uounry,
42
pul: ,tC NOTICE .
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, Will c nduct- at1 blit
Hearing on Wednesday -.J
A.M.' in the CnuMy Commission. Chambers. at
the County Administration Building., a0 -25th
street Vero Beach. • Florida
storaand transfer facilities. two sft, for future hazardous The ste tProPo ed
sites are within the old south Giff
ord � a�,
Land-
fill and the currentRit
. Indian e
Landfill �,:' I ? �` ,, t� •,
If jany person decides to appeal a will
i dac�bn
made on the above maWsluche P a
record of the proceedn9s and e.
Pur-
poses, he/she may need to ensure that a vwfiicfi
tim record of the proceedings is made, in evidence On
record includes i the
testimony
which the appeal
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
PATRICK B. L'yONS, CHAIRMAN
May 27, June 3. 1985.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/4/85:
TO: THE HONORABLE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTO
FROM: RONALD R. BROOKS
DESCRIPTION
DATE: JUNE 4, 1985
SUBJECT: SITE SELECTION FOR FUTURE
HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE/
TRANSFER FACILITIES
The Water Quality Assurance Act, which was passed by the Florida
Legislature on July 1, 1983, requires that each County designate sites for
the construction of future hazardous waste storage and transfer facilities
to meet a demonstrated need. According to guidelines provided by The
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation,, the storage and transfer
facilities are to be a warehouse -type facility where containerized wastes
are held for short periods of time, usually less than 90 days. The main
purpose of the facility is to consolidate smaller shipments of wastes from
individual local generators so that economical truckload reshipments can
be made to facilities where the wastes are treated, recycled, or disposed.
Each county is to select a minimum of two sites with a recommended acreage
of at least five acres but no less than two acres. The sites are to be
selected utilizing siting criteria suggested by the Florida Department of'
Environmental Regulation.
The two sites are to be approved by the Board of County Commissioners after
at least two public hearings, one of which could be a public workshop. The
sites must be selected and approved by June 30, 1985.
CONDITIONS AND ANALYSIS
Staff has selected two sites for approval by the Board of County
Commissioners for future hazardous waste storage/transfer facilities. Site
Number 1 is within the County landfill located on 74th Avenue approximately
1/2 mile south of Oslo Road. Site Number 2 is located within the solid
waste transfer station in the closed Gifford Landfill on South Gifford
Road, approximately 1/2 mile west of 43rd Avenue. Location maps and
descriptions of both sites are provided in Exhibit I. The two sites
encompass a little over two acres of surface area each and comply with
specific selection criteria suggested by the Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation in that they are:
1. Located on cpublic land owned by the County.
2. Within industrial zoning or the equivalent so as not to be
inconsistent with the intended land use.
3. Within land already used for solid waste transfer or disposal.
4. Within a large enough area to provide buffering to surrounding
properties.
The two sites also
were obtained from
was provided to the
Regulation.
L_ JUN 121985
meet the general selection criteria in Exhibit II which
a "Hazardous Waste Assessment Assistance Manual" that
County by the Florida Department of Environmental
43
BOOK 6 1 FAGF V2 ,9
BOOK 61 P'°UF. �o30
Both sites were submitted to the Department of Planning and Development for
review. As indicated in Exhibit III, the sites should -not require rezoning
and should not be inconsistent with the intended land use (zoning maps are
provided in Exhibit IV). In addition, the designation of the sites for
future hazardous.waste storage/transfer facilities will not require an
amendment of the County's Comprehensive Plan. The Water Quality Assurance
Act requires that the County's Comprehensive Plan be modified only if
necessary. The decision as to whether it is "necessary" was left to the
County's discretion.
The primary concerns in selecting the sites are their impacts on
surrounding properties and residences, and impacts on surface and
groundwaters. In meeting the selection criteria provided in Exhibit II,
those concerns are minimized. The site locations combined with their
extensive buffering will minimize impacts on surrounding properties and
surface waters. Design requirements that can be imposed by the County
during site plan approval and issuance of building permits will further
limit impacts to surrounding properties, surface waters and groundwaters.
It should also be recognized that the Florida Department of Envirpnmental
Regulation must approve and permit any construction of a hazardous waste
storage/transfer facility; and will levy extensive design and operation
requirements during site specific evaluation of any proposed facility.
The Board should be aware that the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
is required to select a site within its regional jurisdiction -(Palm Beach,
Martin, St. Lucie and Indian River Counties) that could be utilized for a
future hazardous waste treatment facility. The sites selected by the four
counties for hazardous waste storage/transfer facilities will be considered
(along with independent sites in the four county area) as potential sites
for a hazardous waste treatment facility.
Staff has selected the two subject sites to satisfy only the State mandated
requirement for the County to select two sites for future hazardous waste
storage/transfer facilities. Staff does not intend for these sites to be
approved by the Board for use for future hazardous waste treatment =
facilities. It is the opinion of the Staff that any site within Indian
River County that the Regional Planning Council intends to designate for a
future hazardous waste treatment facility must be independently evaluated
and submitted before the Board of County Commissioners for approval.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff will hold a public workshop regarding the selection of the two
subject sites within the Commission Chambers at 7:00 P.M. on June 10, 1985.
Staff will also provide a formal presentation to the Board and the public
-during a public hearing before the Board during the Commission meeting on
June 12, 1985.
Staff recommends that, after the public hearing, the Board, upon weighing
all matters presented, make a decision on the designation of the suggested
sites for future hazardous waste storage/transfer facilities. Staff
further recommends that the Board's decision be reflected in a resolution
drafted by the County Attorney and executed by the Chairman of the Board;
and that the resolution be authorized for submittal to the Regional
Planning Council as Indian River County's decision on selection of two
sites for future hazardous waste storage/transfer facilities.
In the event only one of the sites is approved by the Board,. Staff
recommends that the resolution reflect that two sites were selected but
only one was approved due to whatever conditions or issues affected the
decision. Staff does not believe that a hazardous waste storage/transfer
facility is needed or financially feasible in Indian River County at this
time. As such, we do not believe that the selection of two sites is
absolutely necessary and recommend that, in the event only one site is
approved, Indian River County not pursue the selection and approval of
another site unless directed to do so by the Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation.
44
Chairman Lyons suggested that today's discussion be limited
to the County Landfill site and that the Gifford Landfill site be
tabled.
Commissioner Bird asked if there is a deadline to meet for
selecting two sites and if, indeed, it was necessary to select
two sites.
Utilities Services Director Terry Pinto confirmed that two
sites must be selected and approved by June 30, 1985, and
recommended that the Oslo Road site be designated today and staff
be instructed to further investigate the concerns of the Gifford
residents and also to check to see if there might be other areas
to consider before coming back to the Board with a recommendation
for Site #2.
Chairman Lyons asked if we could submit designations for two
sites on Oslo Road in order to meet the technical requirements
and thereby gain some time to consider other sites.
Director Pinto pointed out that one site must be a transfer
site. The requirements state that the residents in the area are
to be protected from illegal dumping of hazardous materials; the
whole idea is to protect the quality of life in the surrounding
community. He suggested that Ronald Brooks, Environmental
Engineering Specialist/Utilities Services give his presentation
this morning and explain what we have gone through in the
selection process; however, he recommended that Site #2 not be
selected at this time. He felt we have to keep in mind that we
are presently considering hiring a consultant to do a County -wide
master study on solid waste and will be addressing these same
issues. When that study is finished, staff may come back and
take a second look at some of the things that have already been
approved.
Mr. Brooks announced that printed material was available for
the public to review, and briefly summarized the above memo. He
45
JUN 12 1985 BOOK L��
JUN �� BOOK FAoF.2 2
noted that the public workshop meeting held on Monday night, June
10, 1985, was the first of the two public hearings required by
the State and today's meeting is the second. Mr. Brooks
reviewed the criteria suggested by the Department of
Environmental Regulations and stressed that both of the proposed
sites meet that criteria.
Chairman Lyons felt it most important that everyone
understands what is going to happen at the designated transfer
station.
Mr. Brooks defined a "waste generator" as any type of
business in the County that generates 220 pounds or more per
month of such things as solvents from gas stations and painting
operations. Wastes would include pesticides, such as DDT,
chlordane and even battery acids, some of which will be recycled,
some disposed of at the landfill, and some stored at transfer
stations and later transported either to the County Landfill or a
designated State waste facility. He pointed out that until now
the small waste generator has not been controlled, but will be in
the near future after an amnesty period is declared to allow the
small generator and homeowners to get rid of anything that is
considered hazardous.
Mr. Brooks gave an excellent slide presentation of a waste
disposal center located at a landfill in Pompano, Florida,
explaining that eventually the remaining hazardous material is
hauled off to a site in Alabama. He pointed out that a facility
of this size is not feasible for our County, but officials at
this particular center indicated that they can handle the waste
for all of south Florida at this time.
Chairman Lyons opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard regarding the selection of the County Landfill
as Site #1.
46
� r �
Sherman Reed, member of the Hazardous Waste Committee of the
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, believed staff has done
0
a thorough job of analyzing the problem, and expressed his
support of the selection of the County Landfill for Site #1.
John Amos, representing the Indian River Farms Water
Control, voiced no objection to the selection of Site #1 after
being assured that all hazardous wastes would be hauled off
somewhere else after being held only temporarily in Indian River
County.
Reverend Wright, Pastor of St. Peter's Missionary Baptist
Church, asked if the Board is deferring discussion on the Gifford
site pending further investigation, as he wished to voice the
adamant objection the people of Gifford have to the Gifford site
being designated as the second site and suggested that the Public
Hearing on that site be held in the evening when more Gifford
residents can attend, such as they did at last Monday's public
workshop meeting.
Ralph Lundy, Gifford, suggested that consideration be given
to other sites in the County other than the Gifford site and then
schedule another public hearing to reach a decision.
Commissioner Scurlock believed that was the direction the
Board would take, but felt there would be considerable objections
raised to whatever transfer site is selected in the County. He
stressed that the Gifford site is not being rejected today, but
will be given the same consideration as other possible sites.
Reverend Ora, Pastor of Mt. Sinai Baptist Church, commended
the Board on the selection of the County Landfill as Site #1 and
also complimented staff on the excellent presentation of the
Pompano waste station. He pointed out that the Pompano site is
located near the Turnpike on Sample Road and is one-half mile
away from any homes. He hoped that Site #2 would also be located
47
1 JUN 12 195
BOOK F'.ur. 2,33
FF--
JUN 12 1985 BOOK 61 rnUF2634
away from any residential district, and pointed out what
pesticides did to Lake Apopka in Orange County.
Reverend Wright asked if he was hearing correctly that even
if Gifford residents overwhelmingly oppose the designation of the
Gifford Road site, the Board might still vote to have it there.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that the entire community would
have to be taken into consideration when that decision is made
because we must designate two sites somewhere in the County and
there is bound to be objection to whatever location is selected.
Kathy Dowd, speaking in behalf of the Indian River School
Board, expressed the School Board's unanimous opposition to the
Gifford site due to its proximity to where a new school is to be
built. She noted that while the School Board does understand the
transfer station criteria, they still object to the Gifford site
being desi.gnated as Site #2.
Commissioner Bird wondered if we could submit one site and
then petition for having only one site since we are such a small
county.
Mr. Brooks repeated that the State requires two sites for
each county, no matter how large or how small the county is.
James Richardson, Gifford, wished to know why Gifford was
even considered since it is so densely populated. He pointed out
that the largest waste generator in that area probably would be
the County Road & Bridge Department which is further west on
Gifford Road.
Director Pinto repeated that the DER's criteria is that the
second site be an existing transfer station.
Chairman Lyons felt that the Commission is leaning to
designate only one site today and that Mr. Richardson had nothing
to worry about.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird; SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously closed
the Public Hearing.
48
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, that the Board approve staff's
recommendation to submit the selection of the County
Landfill for the designation of Site #1.
Commissioner Wodtke wished to stress that the Landfill is
the only site he feels comfortable with because it is the only
controlled station. He asked if it would be utilized by licensed
carriers only, and Director Pinto believed that the intent is to.
have all material put into containers before it leaves its place
of origin and brought to the site, whether its done by licensed
carriers, small generators or private individuals.
Commissioner Wodtke felt that the public needs to have a
safe place to dispose of their hazardous waste.
Director Pinto pointed out that a small quantity generator
will have to follow State requirements and one of the reasons for
hiring a consultant is to determine how to totally dispose of all
types of waste.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion
was voted on and passed unanimously.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
instructed staff to pursue having only one site
being required in Indian River County at this time
with the understanding that our master plan may
indicate that we may have to build another landfill in
another part of the County and when that is completed,
we would consider that as a second site; and also
instructed staff to discontinue at this time all
consideration of the Gifford site as the second site
for hazardous waste disposal.
49
JUN 121985 BOOK 61 FAG PF. 9'
I JUN 12 195
DISCUSSION RE PROPOSED GAIN TIME RESOLUTION
BOOK 6-11- ?P,a
�6
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/5/85:
TO: The Board of County
Commissioners
r FROM:
DATE: June 5. 1985 FILE:
SUBJECT: GAIN TIME RESOLUTION
Jame Wi lson REFERENCES:
Assi tant County Attorney
Attached is an amended resolution regarding computation of gain time
for County prisoners. Resolution 85-41A was amended at the request of
Judge Vocelle and Judge Smith to prevent Weekend Work Program partici-
pants who are not actually incarcerated at the jail from receiving extra
gain time credit for participation in a work program. Under the amended
resolution, prisoners sentenced to the Weekend Work Program may continue
to receive 5 days per month credit as required under Florida Statutes _
5951.21. However, such prisoners shall not be eligible for discre-
tionary gain time as provided within Florida Statutes §951.21.
I understand that representatives of the Public Defender's office
and State Attorney's office may appear at the hearing to comment on this
amendment. If you have any questions or comments on this matter, please
do not hesitate to contact me.
Bruce Smith, Public Defenders Office, commended the
Commission for establishing the successful Weekend Work Program,
but expressed concern about the proposed amendment to make
prisoners under the program ineligible for discretionary gain
time. He felt that if a person is sentenced to 6 months
straight time, he has the choice of whether to just sit in jail
or work it out in the Gain Time Program, where the better they
work, the more time they gain. However, a person sentenced to 6
months in the Weekend Work Program must work every weekend for
almost two years. He felt that after awhile they would lose
their incentive to work every weekend with no other reward than
staying out of jail. He felt that pretty soon people would
realize that it is a better deal to just do the six months in
jail. For all purposes, they are prisoners, and to say that we
are now going to treat them not as prisoners, but as weekend
50
workers, would be a mistake.
He felt that by changing this
program, we would lose the incentive aspect and urged the Board
not to tamper with this successful program and to allow gain time
for prisoners in the Weekend Work Program.
Commissioner Scurlock made a Motion to adopt the proposed
resolution amending the Gain Time Resolution. The Motion died
for lack of a second.
Attorney Brandenburg explained that this was put on the
Agenda today at the request of the judges who feel that there is
sufficient incentive for people to show up and do their time only
on the weekends. The following letter dated 6/7/85 was made a
part of the record:
gtate of Alaribs
FutdcZ4 Jubirw ah=ff 61ST"[DUTION LIST
Co, -,ii °:s:ur.-ars ✓
June 7, 1985
(C.
�1?IAtzotney
LE►1iyer" �InaIce, �; PublicVdorks
CDU ��Lev.
Utilities
Finance
1���� ;, GLx, Other 5� �rv,� Ds , ,
Patrick Lyons, Chairman �
Board of County Commissioners
County Administration Building
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Re: Gain Time Resolution
Dear Chairman Lyons:
We urge the adoption of amending Resolution No. 85-41A
prohibiting gain time for the weekend work program.
Under the weekend work program, defendants never enter
the Detention Center. They are not fed nor confined
there, but simply report to the Detention Center for
work assignments. They go home each evening.
Defendants afforded this program should serve such time
as ordered. They should not have the same benefits
afforded confined prisioners within the Detention
Center itself.
Sincerely yours,
L. B. Vocelle
Circuit Judge
La �
. Smith
Circuit Judge
51
a
y �
Boon 0 r r,, E, j9_3
FF" --
JUN 1935
BOOK 6-� F'°.F 2� 8
Assistant County Administrator Sonny Dean believed that the
proposed wording might result in future problems with respect to
alternative sentencing, and recommended further investigation
into the possibility of this creating a problem for this or
future programs.
Assistant County Attorney Jim Wilson noted that the judges
have already addressed their concerns by amending their standard
order to specifically state that individuals in the Weekend Work
Program are not entitled to gain time under the provisions of the
Resolution.
Attorney Brandenburg stated that the judges are saying that
the individuals sentenced to the Weekend Work Program are not
going to get gain time, period. It is up to the judge to decide
how he does his order and it is up to the County Commission to
establish the guidelines for gain time for sentenced prisoners.
Basically, what has happened is that the judges have entered an
order to get around the Resolution.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that the real incentive is not
having to spend time in jail.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board by a vote of 4-1,
Commissioner Scurlock dissenting, moved to table
this issue for further investigation as recommended
by staff.
RESOLUTION REQUESTING STATE TO REESTABLISH THE COASTAL
CONSTRUCTION CONTROL LINE IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Chairman Lyons felt that all the proposed resolution states
is that we are in agreement with getting this started as soon as
possible.
Commissioner Wodtke reported that the Beach Preservation and
Restoration Committee have no objection to the proposed
resolution as written. He pointed out that if we request an
52
� � r
interim control line, we might set back the timeframe of
December, 1985, when the DNR has indicated they will be in Indian
River County to reestablish the construction control line.
Attorney Brandenburg noted a typographical error in the
fourth "whereas" clause on Page 1 of the proposed resolution and
advised that June 9, 1981 should read June 9, 1974.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 85-64, requesting the State of Florida to
reestablish the Coastal Construction Control Line in
Indian River County under the rule-making measures of,
the State.
53
JUN 1985 BOOK C 21,39
JUN 12 1985
BOOK 6 1 F'a.',)�rE J9. ` 0
RESOLUTION NO. 85-64
A RESOLUTION .OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, REQUESTING THE STATE OF FLORIDA
TO REESTABLISH THE COASTAL CONSTRUCTION
CONTROL LINE IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY.
WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida has found and
determined that beaches in this State and the coastal barrier dunes
adjacent to such beaches, by their nature, are subject to frequent
and severe fluctuations and represent one of the most valuable
natural resources of Florida; and
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest of the residents of the
State of Florida to preserve and protect the beaches from imprudent
construction which can jeopardize the stability of the beach -dune
system, accelerate erosion, provide inadequate protection to upland
structures, and endanger adjacent property including the beach -dune
system; and
WHEREAS, in furtherance of these objectives the Legislature
adopted a
law providing
for
the
establishment of
coastal
construction
control lines in
all
counties
along the Atlantic
Ocean
so as to define that portion of the beach -dune system which is
subject to severe fluctuations based on a 100 -year storm surge,
storm waves, or other predictable weather conditions; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Natural Resources, pursuant to the
goals set forth by the Legislature, surveyed Indian River County and
adopted a coastal construction control line in 1974; and
WHEREAS, since the establishment of the Indian River County
coastal construction control line, our beaches have suffered from
several severe storms, including the Thanksgiving Day, 1984, storm
which caused extreme erosion and loss of property; and
WHEREAS, as the result of the recent storm activity along our
coast, there has been a recession of the beach -dune sytem;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
1. The State of Florida Department of Natural Resources is
requested to take whatever action is necessary to reestablish a
coastal construction control line in Indian River County; and
-1-
MA
/jpir2CK 15 Lyon
Chairman
Att'es�c
Breda Wright Clerk
APP 'ED,' TO FORM AND LEGAL
SII I CYC
ary ju. Branaenburg,
aniff y Attorney
-2-
JUN 12 1985 BOOK 61 F',GE ?4-41
2. The Department of Natural Resources
is urged to
commence this process of developing a new coastal
construction
control line as expeditiously as possible.
The foregoing resolution was offered
by Commissioner
Wodtke who moved its adoption. The motion
was seconded by
Commissioner Scurlock and, 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 William C. Wodtke, Jr.
Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman
Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared Resolution
No. 85-64 duly
passed and adopted this 12th day of June
, 1985.
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIA4,4t-IVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MA
/jpir2CK 15 Lyon
Chairman
Att'es�c
Breda Wright Clerk
APP 'ED,' TO FORM AND LEGAL
SII I CYC
ary ju. Branaenburg,
aniff y Attorney
-2-
JUN 12 1985 BOOK 61 F',GE ?4-41
JUN 12 1985
BOOK 6 242
COASTAL BARRIERS RESOURCE ACT
Planning & Development Director Robert heating reviewed the
following memo dated 6/3/85 and urged the Board to approve
staff's recommendation:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: June 3, 1985 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners
SUBJECT:COASTAL R
RESOURCESAACTERS
FROM: AMEFERENCES:
Robert M. Keating, AICP
Planning & Development Director
It is requested that the information presented herein be
given formal consideration by the Board of County Commis-
sioners at their regular meeting of June 12, 1985.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
In 1982 Congress passed and President Reagan signed into law
the Coastal Barrier Resources Act. This act precludes
certain federal subsidies to coastal development, including
flood insurance, in areas designated by Congress as undevel-
oped. The act also requires the U.S. Department of the
Interior to study possible additions to or deletions from
the list of designated undeveloped areas and report their
findings to Congress by October 1985.
The Department of the Interior has recently released a draft
report and maps of the additions the Department of the
Interior will propose to Congress.
Indian River County presently contains two areas on Orchid
Island (Areas P10 & P10A) designated as "undeveloped coastal
barriers". The new maps submitted by the Department of
Interior continue to depict the original boundary desig-
nations of 1982 with proposed new additions to both areas.
The new proposed additions primarily contain submerged lands
of the Indian River and adjoining wetlands; however, a
portion of the Moorings development also appears to be
included. The additions appear to be the result of the
expanded definition of "undeveloped coastal barrier" that
includes certain wetland areas.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
The following is a description and brief analysis of each of
�.. the two areas (P10 & P10A) in Indian River County designated
as undeveloped coastal barriers:
56
Area P10
This area is located on the northern portion of Orchid
Island and generally encompasses the Ambersand Subdivision.
The area is proposed to be expanded to include:
1) the Collins Hole mosquito impoundment;
2) the Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge;
3) certain submerged lands of the Indian River _
eastward of the Intracoastal Waterway. --
Since the proposed boundary contains wetland areas that the
County would discourage from development through the Compre-
hensive Plan, the staff has no objection to the boundary as
delineated.
I
Area P10A
This area is located on the southern portion of Orchid
Island generally to the south of the Moorings to the County
line.
The area is proposed to be expanded to include:
1) all County wetland areas on both sides of the river
to the City of Vero Beach;
2) all submerged lands within the Vero Beach - Fort
Pierce Aquatic Preserve;
3) a portion of the Moorings development including
the Anchor and South Passage.
i It appears that the proposed map of P10A is in error by the
inclusion of the Moorings. Under the criteria stipulated in
the act, this area is to be considered "developed" and
i should be withdrawn from the map. Failure to do so would
preclude new housing in this portion of the Moorings from
receiving federal flood insurance.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners
authorize staff to transmit review comments to the Depart-
ment of Interior proposing that the portion of the Moorings
development included within the P10A undeveloped coastal
barrier area be deleted from that area's boundaries.
Commissioner Scurlock believed we need to address the effect
of both the U.S. Coastal Barrier Resources Act and recent State
legislation with respect to our building limitation height of 35
feet.
Commissioner Bird understood that we are going to request
the U. S. Dept. of the Interior to adjust their boundary line so
that developed portions of the Moorings which appear to be
included will not be included. The Board agreed that from the
map it appeared that River Shores was included also.
57
JUN 12 1985 BOOK
61 F� ..2e
JUN 121985 BOOK 61 Ul.)E2
Dorothy Hudson, counsel for the Moorings Development
Company, pointed out the "developed" areas in the Moorings which
seem to be included in the designated "undeveloped" area. She
believed these additions were mistakenly included due to the
Dept. of Interior's map being so small and indistinct. She
advised that the Moorings Development Company plans to request
the deletion of these areas and urged the County Commission to
formally do the same.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized
staff to notify the U. S. Dept. of the Interior to
delete any developed areas in the Moorings, River
Shores or any other area in the County from the map and
list of designated undeveloped areas in the coastal
barrier boundaries.
DISCUSSION RE GAS TAX
Commissioner Scurlock advised that this whole issue has to
be settled by July 15, 1985 and he understood that the interlocal
agreement was on the Agenda for the meeting of June 19th.
Attorney Brandenburg announced that the Public Hearing for
the gas tax ordinance has been advertised for the meeting of June
26, 1985, but he understood a full Commission would not be
available for that meeting. He suggested that any Commissioner
who would not be attending the June 26th public meeting indicate
their position with respect to the imposition of the gas tax at
the June 19th meeting when the interlocal agreement with the
municipalities within the County is addressed.
DISCUSSION RE MINIMUM SECURITY FACILITY
Chairman Lyons recommended that we go ahead with a 110 -bed,
minimum security facility now to accommodate the unanticipated
rapid growth in the County's jail population. Staff has asked
58
Frizzell Architects if it would be to our advantage to tack this
job on to the other jail project and if we could be assured of
the continuing services of Tom Pinkerton.
Assistant County Administrator Sonny Dean reported that
Frizzell has said they are very willing to extend the contract to
include this facility, and that Attorney Brandenburg has
confirmed that this is legal. It is staff's recommendation that
we go with the extended contract with Frizzell for the design of
the minimum -security facility and go out to bid for the actual
construction of the building.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, that the Board authorize
staff to negotiate an extension of services contract
with Frizzell Architects for the design of the 110 -bed
minimum -security facility, and come back to the Board
for approval.
Administrator Wright stated that this will provide a
sentencing alternative for the judges and will have some positive
effect on the current lawsuit by the State.
Attorney Brandenburg advised that they are flying to
Tallahassee on Friday to meet with the Department of Corrections
to see if this action will satisfy the State for the moment.
Administrator Wright stated that we have only one option for
funding the project and that is to borrow money, because we
cannot extend the one-year, one -cent sales tax without a
referendum.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion
was voted on and carried unanimously.
59
JUN 1 9, 1985 BOOK 61 PA;F 245
JUN ,, 21985
AUTHORIZATION TO HIRE PROBATION OFFICER
BOOK rW.) 24
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/7/85:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: June 7, 1985 FILE:
the Board of County
Commissioners
THRU: Michael Wr' g SUBJECT: County Probation Officer
County Adminis or Program
H. T. "Sonn De n
FROM: General Director
Services ivisi6 ff- CES:
On Monday, June 3, 1985, Judge L. B. Vocelle called a meeting with
members of the Criminal Justice System, Commissioner Lyons, and --Staff
to discuss the feasibility of a County Probation Officer. Judge
Woodrow Hatcher of Jackson County, Florida was guest speaker. Judge
Hatcher is a veteran of nine years on the Bench with some eight
additional years in the Criminal Justice System as a State
Parole/Probation Officer and Juvenile Officer.- He has set up a
County Probation Officer System in Jackson County and assisted five -
other Counties with starting a like program. Judge Hatcher outlined
such a program with the following benefits:
1. Conditional Release for Arrestees: A person arrested could be
released under this program (misdemeanant or felon). He must
comply with certain conditions or be re -arrested and returned
to jail without bond and very little chance of getting
probation if convicted of the crime charged because of the
failure to live up to the same condition on Conditional
Release. This would help judges in being concerned over low
bonds and Releases on Own Recognizance by giving them an
alternative.
2. Work Release Program: A County Probation Officer would
administer this program. Sentenced prisoners would be allowed
to work in a job during daytime, but required to spend nights
in the jail.
3. Two for One Program If a prisoner qualified, he could be
worked in County Projects (i.e. Road and Bridge, Parks, etc.)
with a reward of one day served for one day worked.
4. Community Services: A person could be sentenced by the Court
to perform hours of public service work during hours he is not
employed on his regular job in lieu of a fine or confinement.
The County Probation Officer would be responsible for
administering this program.
5. Payment of Fines: The Clerk of the Court cannot accept partial
payment of fines imposed by the Court. Mrs. Wright stated
there are thousands of dollars of uncollected fines in her
office. A County Probation Officer could be ordered to accept
partial payment and follow up on persons who are required to
pay. There is no one assigned to do this now.
60
i i M
6. Furnish Background Information: Presently, at First Appearance
the Judge has no history of the arrestee to make a
determination as to what program of possible release that
person may be eligible for. The Probation Officer will set up
and keep a system to supply that information.
The funding for a County Probation System can be accomplished by
charging fees to the persons receiving such services as set by law.
It is authorized to charge each individual under probation up to
$50.00 per month for this service. Conditional Release and Community
Service enrollees can be charged an administration fee. The Board of
County Commissioners are authorized to charge a prisoner under the
Work Release Program for board and other incidental expenses. This
does not include the cost of $35.00 per day to keep a prisoner in the
jail that should be taken into consideration.
In summary, the need for a County Probation Program is recognized by
the Judges, other members of the County Criminal Justice System, and
Staff. It is, therefore, recommended that such a system be
implemented and funded. Due to the case load, it is estimated that
two officers and two secretaries will be needed to operate this
program. — -- - ---- - ---- - -- – --
Administrator Wright stated we are looking .at=,,four peop-le,
w
two probation officers and two secretaries.,: This staff would
coordinate many aspects of the jail, including administrating a
work -release program, community service program, payment of fines
and furnishing background information on people who are arrested.
Chairman Lyons felt it would be advantageous to the County
to get into the business of collecting fines through a Probation
Officer. He reported that Freda Wright, Clerk of the Court, has
indicated there are so many outstanding fines that it would take
weeks to go through files and records to determine just how many.
He recommended that we move ahead with this program now and
authorize the expenditure of $10,000 for the salaries of one
probation officer and one secretary for the remaining portion of
the fiscal year with the money to come out of the General Fund,
He also recommended that another probation officer and secretary
be considered at budget time.
61
JUN 12 1985, BooK 61 947
L
JUN 121985
J
BOOK uC. J.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously authorized
staff to set up a Probation Dept. of two people and
come back with a budget amount for the necessary costs,
with the understanding that expansion of the department
to four people will be considered at budget time.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made and
seconded, the meeting adjourned at 12:20 o'clock P.M.
ATTEST:
Clerk