HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/21/1985Wednesday, August 21, 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,
August 21, 1985, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Don C.
Scurlock, Jr., Vice Chairman; Richard N. Bird; and William C.
Wodtke, Jr. Absent were Chairman Patrick B. Lyons, who was
recuperating from surgery, and Margaret C. Bowman, who was on ,
vacation. Also present were Michael J. Wright, County
Administrator; L.S. "Tommy" Thomas, Intergovernmental Relations
Director; Charles P. Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of County
Commissioners; Jeffrey K. Barton, OMB Director; and Barbara
Bonnah, Deputy Clerk.
Vice Chairman Scurlock, acting as Chairman in the absence of
Commissioner Lyons, called the meeting to order.
Reverend Dallas Enfinger of Glendale Baptist Church gave the
invocation and Vice Chairman Scurlock led the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE MINUTES
Commissioner Bird requested the addition to today's Agenda
under Committee Reports of a discussion re the selection of the
architect to design the County golf course.
Commissioner Wodtke requested that a discussion re the
Economic Development Opportunity Council be added to today's
Agenda under Committee Reports.
� AUG 211985
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, Chairman Lyons and Commis-
sioner Bowman being absent, the Board unani-
mously (3-0) added the above described items
to today's Agenda.
BOOK F'.GE9 6
AUG 2 11985 BOOK
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1 PA,H798
The Vice Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 24,
1985. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
July 24, 1985, as written.
CLERK TO THE BOARD
A. Approval of Pistol Permit Renewal Applications
The Board reviewed the following memos dated 8/6/85 and
8/13/85:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 6, 1985 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Pistol. Permit - Renewal
FROM: Michael Wright. REFERENCES:
County Administrator
The following named person has applied through the Clerk's
Office for renewal of a pistol permit:
Alphonso E. Davis, Jr.
All requirements of the ordinance have been met.
August 13, 1985
The following person has made application through the Clerk's
Office for renewal of a pistol permit:
Gary Dell Hudmon
All requirements of the ordinance have been met.
2
W W
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (3-0)
approved issuance of renewal pistol permits to
the following: Alphonso E. Davis Jr.
Gary Dell Hudmon
B. Approval of New Application for Pistol Permit
The Board reviewed the following memos dated 8/6/85 8
8/13/85:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 6, 1985 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Michael Wright
County Administrator
SUBJECT: PISTOL PERMIT - NEW
REFERENCES:
The following persons have applied through the Clerk's
Office for a new pistol permit:
William D. Bryant
.Ronald E. Bengston
All requirements of the ordinance have been met.
August 13, 1985
The following person has made application through the Clerk's
office for a new pistol permit:
Lemuel Mussetter Stevens
All requirements of the ordinance have been met.
AUG 211985
L:
BOOK 61 F'AH 799
AUG 211985
BOOK 61 PAGE 800
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (3-0)
issued a Permit to Carry a Concealed Firearm for
the following: William D. Bryant
Donald E. Bengston
Lemuel Mussetter Stevens
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Wodtke removed Item A for discussion, and Vice
Chairman Scurlock removed Item D.
A. Report
Commissioner Wodtke suggested that future reports also show
the amounts received last year and that we ask the Clerk to keep
a running report.
Received and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk:
Traffic Violation Bureau - Special Trust Fund
Month of July, 1985 - $51,442.85
B.Report
Received and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk:
Traffic Violations by Name - July, 1985
C. Resolution Providing Per Diem Compensation for 1985 P.A.A.B.
Members
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
adopted Resolution 85-84 providing for statutory
per diem compensation for 1985 Property Appraisal
Adjustment Board members.
4
RESOLUTION NO. 85- 84
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR STATUTORY
PER DIEM COMPENSATION FOR 1985 PROPERTY APPRAISAL
ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEMBERS.
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting of August 7, 1985, the
Board of County Commissioners appointed Vice -Chairman Don C.
Scurlock, Jr., Commissioner William C. Wodtke, and Commissioner
Margaret C. Bowman to serve as the County Commission's delegates
to the Property Appraisal Adjustment Board for the 1985 hearings;
and Chairman Patrick B. Lyons and Commissioner Richard N. Bird as
alternates;
WHEREAS, the School Board of Indian River County adopted
Resolution No. 86-03 on July 23, 1985, appointing their membership
to the Board and providing for allowance of per diem compensation
for such members in accordance with Florida Statutes 5194.015
(1983); and
WHEREAS, the cited statute requires a specific election
from both the County Commission and the School Board in order to
allow such compensation,
NOW THEREFORE BE' IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS that:
1. The foregoing recitals, including the appointments to
this year's PAAB by the County Commission are hereby ratified and
acknowledged; and
2. The above-named members of the 1985 Property Appraisal
Adjustment Board, or their duly authorized replacements, may
receive per diem compensation for services provided on the Board,
as allowed by law for State employees, pursuant to the above-cited
statute.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commmissioner
Bird who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Wodtke and, upon being put to a
vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Absent
Vice -Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Absent
Commissioner William C. Wodtke Aye
5
AUG 211985 BOOK dA mu, 801
AUG 211985 Book 61 PacE 802
The Chairman thereupon delcared Resolution No. 85-84 duly
passed and adopted this 21st day of August, 1985.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY 2Lr C
DON C. SCORLOCR, JR.
Vice -Chairman
D. Resolution Establishing Public Library Advisory Board
Vice Chairman Scurlock reported that Chairman Lyons will be
back on August 28th for the next meeting of the Public Library
Advisory Board. At the first meeting the recommendation was to
expand the board to a total of nine by adding three members -
Michael Rose, Fran Ross, Esq., and a representative from the
School Board He felt that one of the difficulties in
establishing the structure of"the Advisory Board is that the goal
of the board is not to consider a north or south county library
system but truly an Indian River County library system, and the
approach has been to try to get a composition on the board which
doesn't necessarily represent a special interest north or south,
but the community at large.
Commissioner Wodtke questioned the referendum date, and Vice
Chairman Scurlock advised that the date of March 31st was coordi-
nated with the Supervisor of Elections Anne Robinson in terms of
when the first election could be held in conjunction with another
regularly scheduled election in order to reduce the expense, and
that would be a City election.
Attorney Vitunac explained that the election must be held no
later than March 31, 1985, and he believed the City election is
the second Tuesday in March.
Commissioner Bird asked if the intent was that this Board is
going to be set up as an ad hoc board to make this report and
recommendations and then disband.
Commissioner Scurlock stated that the thought process was
that this particular board, much the same as in the fire
6
district, would explain the capital improvement program, the
millage cap, etc., and also establish and recommend the actual
r advisory board which will serve in an advisory capacity to the
County Commission acting as the district when, in fact, the
people go to the polls to vote. He believed, similar to the
E.O.D.C., it may either keep the same type of composition or may
be modified but that actual recommendation would come as a part
of their district to the people for the referendum.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (3-0)
adopted Resolution 85-85 authorizing establishment
of a Public Library Advisory Board; establishing goals,
responsibilities and time frames for action by said
advisory board; and appointing members to said advisory
board.
RESOLUTION NO. 85-35
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING ESTABLISHMENT
OF A PUBLIC LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD; ESTABLISHING GOALS,
RESPONSIBILITIES AND TIME FRAMES FOR ACTION BY SAID
ADVISORY BOARD; AND APPOINTING MERBERS TO SAID ADVISORY
BOARD.
WHEREAS, the delivery of public library service to the
citizens of Indian River County is an appropriate and worthwhile
goal deserving of support by state and local government;
WHEREAS, the Indian River County Public Library is
currently operated by the Indian River County Library Association,
a non-profit corporation chartered under the laws of Florida for
the purpose of providing library service in the County;
r
WHEREAS, the Sebastian Area County Library is
currently operated by the Sebastian River Library Association, a
non-profit corporation chartered under the laws of Florida for the
purpose of providing library service in the County;
WHEREAS, the population of Indian River County has
grown and is expected to continue growing, requiring a public
7
AUG BOOK 61 fact S03
21 1995
AUG 2.11985BOOK 61 FA, 804
library capable of serving a wide variety of citizens and public
needs;
WHEREAS, requirements for financial support for a
public library system have grown far beyond that which can be
supplied with even the most dedicated and capable efforts at
private fund raisings;
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners presently
contributes approximately 62% of the funding necessary to operate
the Indian River County Library and approximately 80% of the
funding necessary to operate the Sebastian Area County Library;
WHEREAS, it would be desirable and worthwhile. to
insure that planning and actions with regard to the public library
are conducted under citizen scrutiny and with accountability to
the citizens of Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, the future delivery of high-quality public
library services to the citizens of Indian River County will
require
planning
and operation
by qualified individuals and a
greater
amount of
funding than is
presently available;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
1. There is
established the
Indian River
County Public
Library Advisory Board,
which shall be
composed of
the following
members:
Dr. Jeffrey Slade Fran Ross
Mary Louise Scheidt Mike Rose
Betty Jean Hensick A member to be designated by
Terry Goff the Indian River County
Fred West School Board
2. The Advisory Board shall prepare a Report and
Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners establishing
a plan for the future of the Public Library. The plan should
address, but not be limited to, administration, finance,
personnel, and physical facilities necessary for delivery of
quality public library services by a department to be created
within County government. The plan should be presented to the
Board of County Commissioners no later than December 31, 1985.
7A
3. The plan should include presentation to the public
of a referendum to establish a special taxing district and a
millage cap sufficient to implement the plan.
4. The referendum should be presented for approval by
March 31, 1986.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Wodtke who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Bird and, upon being put to a vote, the
vote was as follows:
Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Absent
Vice -Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Absent
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared Resolution No. duly
passed 'and adopted this 21st
Attest:.� l:
FREDA WRIGH
Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: i
BRUCE BARRETT, Assistant
County Attorney
day of August , 1985.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
___\
By rC-1 � ZIAz&z.W.- — .. —
D . S OCR, JR ,
Vice -Chairman
E. Release of Assessment Liens, SR -60 Water- Old Sugar Mill
Estates and Vista Plantation Pro Shop
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
approved Release of Assessment Liens for one (1) ERU
for Lot 26 of Old Sugar Mill Estates, Unit III; and two
(2) ERUs for the Vista Plantation Pro Shop.
8
AUG 211985 BOOK 6I F,,E805
AUG 211985 BOOK 61 F'.� c 806 -7
State Road 60 Water Project
RELEASE OF ASSESSMENT LIEN
For and in consideration of the sum of $970.45
RECEIVED from ELSEBETH M. SEXTON, RALPH WALDO SEXTON and
CHARLES RANDOLPH SEXTON, as Trustees under Trust "B" under
the Will of WALDO E. SEXTON, deceased, in hand this day paid,
the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, (the "County") hereby releases the property hereinafter
described from a certain special assessment lien recorded by the
County in
its
Official Records, Book
0691,
Page 0077, for a
special
assessment
in
the amount of $970.45,
plus
accrued interest
at the
rate of ten percent (10%) per annum, levied in accordance with the
provisions of Ordinance No. 83-46 of the County, as amended, and
Resolution No. 84-47 of the Board of County Commissioners of the
County; and hereby declares such special assessment lien fully
satisfied . The property, located in Indian River County, is more
fully described as follows:
Lot 26 of OLD SUGAR MILL ESTATES, UNIT III,
according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat
Book 11, Page 98 of the public records of Indian
River County, Florida.
Executed by the Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, and attested and
countersigned by the Clerk of such Board, all as of this 21st day
August 1985.
,1'iUIUl17;,
,. Att,est,ed;,'a,rid countersigned: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
� ' r ' �' y,, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
: ,JA
Freda Wright,. Clerk By
• Don C. Scurlock, Jr
Vice Chairman
Approved as to form and
legal sufficiency:
C ARLES P. VITUNAC,
County Attorney
9
State Road 60 Water Project
(Release of Two ERUs)
RELEASE OF ASSESSMENT LIEN
For and in consideration of the sum of $1,940.90
plus interest and costs, RECEIVED from VISTA PROPERTIES OF VERO
BEACH, INC., in hand this day paid, the receipt of which is
hereby acknowledged, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, (the
"County") hereby releases the property hereinafter described from a
certain special assessment lien recorded by the County in its
Official Records, Book 0691, Page 0077, for a special assessment in
the amount of $970.45 per equivalent residential unit reserved,
plus accrued interest at the rate of ten percent (10%) per annum,
levied in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 83-46 of
the County, as amended, and Resolution No. 84-47 of the Board of
County Commissioners of the County; and hereby declares such
special assessment lien fully satisfied. The property, located in
Indian River County, is more fully described as follows:
The "PRO SHOP" at VISTA PLANTATION,
according to the Declaration of Condominium,
recorded in O. R. Book 699, Page 1817,
Public Records of Indian River County, Florida.
Executed by the Vice Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, and attested and
countersigned by the Clerk of such Board, all as of this 21st day
August• 1985.
j 11'
'Attested' 'arid%;countersigned: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
-,
Freda Wright;' Clerk By / G
Don . Scurlock, Jr.
Vice Chairman
Approved as to form and
legal sufficie cy:
e—acl-a-V i,
tz�_
Charles P. Vitunac,
County Attorney
10 BOOK 61 F,�UE ®17
AUG 21 1985
AUG 21 1985
BOOK 61 F'AcE 808
F. Approval of Out -of -State Travel
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
approved out-of-state travel for Commission
members and staff to attend Jail Seminar,
Boulder, Colorado, 9/29/85 - 10/4/85.
G. Approval of Out -of -County Travel
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
approved out -of -county travel for Commission
members and staff to attend SACC Conference in
Jacksonville, Florida, 9/24/85 - 9/28/85.
H. Approval of Final Pay Request, Change Orders 5 8 6, - 16th
Street Traffic and Pedestrian Improvements
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/23/85:
TO: DATE: FILE:
THE HONORABLE M&4BEIRS OF
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMM
JULY 23, 1985
ichae
Michaell Wright SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF FINAL PAY REQUEST,
M
County Administrator a1ANGE ORDER NO. 5, and CHANGE
ORDER N0. 6 - 16th SZPP
TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN
IMPROVEMENTS
FROM: James W. Davis, P. E. REFERENCES: Monte Falls, p. E. Lloyd
Public Works Director and Assoc. Inc. to James
W Davis, dated 7-5-85
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The 16th Street Project is complete. Lloyd and Associates, Inc. and County
staff have inspected the work and measured final pay quantities. The
Contractor, (Dickerson, Inc. ) is requesting the following final payment
Oriainal Contract
Final Construction Cost $1,883,872.44
Less Testing 11,051.00
Final Cost 1,872,821.44
Previous Payments $1,866,607.04
Pay Requested $ 6,214.40
M
Change Order # l(e)(12th St at 20th Ave)
Original CO #1(e) cost $ 3,776.47
Final Cost
Previous Payment
Pay Requested
$ 18,189.44
4,676.54
$ 13,512.90
Change Order # 4 - 16th Street at 27th Ave Improvements
Original CO # 4 cost $ 30,131.10
Final Construction Cost $ 21,694.70
Previous Payment -0-
Pay Request $ 21,694.70
Proposed Change Order #5 $ 12,420.25
TOTAL FINAL PAYMENT REQUESTED $ 53,842.25
Two final Change Orders have been prepared Change Order # 5 reconciles
final construction quantities, adds construction of a yard drain, and
includes $2,450 for utility relocation work. Change Order # 6 adjusts all
contract quantities to as -built quantities.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Staff has analyzed the above pay requests and presents the following:
1) Original Contract
STAFF CONCURS THAT $6,214.40 IS DUE DIC ERSON, INC. AS FINAL PAYMENT
FOR THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT.
2) Change Order No. 1
Lloyd and Associates, Inc. has verified that $13,512.90 is due the
Contractor for driveway restoration through the project and staff
concurs.
STAFF CONCURS THAT $13,512.90 IS DUE DICKERSON, IW. AS FINAL PANT
FOR CHANGE ORDER # 1.
3) Change Order # 4
STAFF CONCURS THAT $21,694.70 IS DUE DICKERSON, INC. AS FINAL PMENT
FOR CHANGE ORDER # 4.
4) Change Order # 5
THis proposed change order includes additional canpensation in the
amount of $2,450 for force main relocation work that Owl and Assoc.,
Inc. has previously been compensated. In addition, item $639-2-1
Electric Service wire in the amount of $48 has been included on the
original Contract pay request and should be deleted on Change Order #
5.
AS A RESULT, STAFF RECO*1ENIDS THAT $2,498 BE DEL= FROM CHANGE ORDER
# 5 AND THAT $13,526.80 IS DUE THE CONTRACTOR AS FINAL PAYMENT FOR
CHANGE ORDER # 5.
RECONIlKENDATIONS AND FUNDING
In summary, staff recommends the following payment
Original Contract
$
6,214.40
Change Order
#
1
$
13,512.90
Change Order
#
2
$
-0-
Change Order
#
3
$
-0-
Change Order
#
4
$
21,694.70
Change Order
#
5
$
12,420.25
12
BOOK 61 PAGE 809
AUG 21 1995 BOOK
Staff also recommends the following action:
1) Accept the Project as complete on Decembers 22, 1984 with the exception
of the 16th St/27th Avenue intersection which was completed on or
about May 1, 1985.
Since the contract time of 510 calendar days was not exceeded, no
liquidated damages are applicable.
2) Approve Change Order # 5 in the amount of $12,420.25. This cas-
sation is for reconciling as -built quantities with bid quantities.
The total construction cost for the project was as follows:
1) Construction by Dickerson, Inc. $ 2,140,157.07
2) Engineering & Inspection -
Lloyd & Assoc. Inc. 179,232.00
3) Soil Testing, Aerial Photos, Etc. 11,980.00
4) FEC Railroad 114,860.00
5) R/W Acquisition approx. 50,000.00
Total Approximate Cost $ 2,496,229.07
1982 Engineering Estimate ( not
including R/W Acquisition) $ 2,900,000.00
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
approved the Final Pay Request, Change Orders 5 & 6,
for the 16th Street Traffic and Pedestrian Improve-
ments, as recommended and set out in the above
memo by Public Works Director Davis.
13
M
CHA.VGE ORDER
NO. 5
Dated
Owner's Project No. 8105 Engineer's Project No. 83-182
Project 16th Street Traffic Improvements
Owner Indian River County
Contractor Dickerson Florida. Tne_ Contract Date 7/22/83
Contract For Pavina Improvements on 16th Street, Vero Beach, Florida
To: Dickerson Florida, Inc. r Contractor
You are directed to make the changes noted below in the subject contract:
Eproved as to form Owner Indian River County
d legal sufficiency,
.. �By:/�Ct7w P. Mr UWC Date
Nature of the Change: 16th Street @ 27th Avenue and mics. striping and
to correct mistakes in change order R.
�. See attached break down sheet
_f
Additional work totaling: )2,420.25
anges re
suit in the7dllowing adjustment of con -Act Price and Time:
$ 2,293 746.66_
contract Price Prior to this Change order
mrt'�is Change Order S 12,420.25
�f
• Net (Increase) (Decrease) resultingfrom
g 2,3)6_,166-91' a
Current Price Including This Change. Order
510 Calendar Days.
Contract Time Prior to this Change Order
Net (Increase) (Decrease) resulting
Brom this 0 Calendar Days
Change Order
Current Contract time including this Change 510 Calenday Days
Order
The above changes are approved:
Q2IRRELZ E.:1�1c •DFE
Engineer
--
Date:
M .
Dicke s
The above changes are accepted: Contract r
SpN FEOR�� TED TYSON
4,� y By PRESIDENT
CORPORATE z
a SEAL n Date:
1982
tri Rr rlOR�eP ACCEPTED BY: ..
Date: t
14
L_AUG 211985
BOOK P IVE. 811
r�AUG 21 19$5
BOOK 61 PAGE. 812
RIPTION
QUANTITY
UNIT
UNIT/PRICE
TOTAL/AMOUNT
maintenance of traffic
1
L.S.
1250.00
1250.00
110-1 Clearing & Grubbing
1
L.S.
1750.00
1750.00
425-76A Storm drainage modifications
1
L.S.
3934.00
3934.00
i52-1 Sidewalk 4"
•240
SY
9.64
2313.60
i52-2 Sidewalk 6"
79.5
SY
12.35
981.82
i75-1 Sodding
730
SY
0.72
525.60
PA.n.
O A
T F
• I A
9-49-
48.H
11-6-61W 6" white stripe (thereto)
38
LF
0.52
19.76
11-6-241W 24" white stripe (thereto)
353.2
LF
2.10
741.72
22-1(30) Traffic signs (speed limit)
-- 4
EA
131.25
525.00
3-1 Traffic signs (no Rt. turn)
1
EA
71.25
71.25
i-1 Traffic signs (one way)
5
EA
61.50
307.50
?36 7-1- 5 Utility eabien (wed MKF 000 - Aa
dene-pee-
-Tv-so
2450.00-
242459.0-0�--
s A-. W
-ever maie)--.
Subtotal
STAKE ON CHANGE ORDER # 1
l21420-25
�' DE,4C
2-1
th Avenue North: 430-1-152 conc. pipe CULT (15"SS) was shown @ $30.85/L.F.
it should have been $20.85/L.F. net change - $240.00
th Street and 20th Avenue: 200-1-4 Limerock base (12") was shown @ $7.97/S.Y.
it should have been $6.06/S.Y. net change 162.35 (This was a deduct quantitiy)..
=h Street & 27th Avenue: 200-1-4 Limerock base (12") was shown @ $7.97/SY
it should have been $6.00/SY net change $1184.20 (This was a deduct quantity;
0.00 + 162.35 + 1184.20 = 1106.55
ere is no'change in price clue to the fact TOTAL
at this mistake was never carried through
the billing.
15
KF ..
12, 420.25 '�
y•.
M M M
CHANCE ORDER
NO. 6
Dated
Owner's Project No. 8105 Engineer's Project No. 83-182
Project 16th Street Traffic Improvements
Owner Indian River County
Contractor Dickerson PlmriAa, Tnn- Contract Date 7/22/At
Contract For Paving Improvements on 16th Street. Vero Ream+,yinriA-
To: Dickerson Florida, Inc. r Contractor
You are directed to make the changes noted below in the subject contract:
FAA'10V_-dsto form Owner Indian River Countl ufficiencY. By:Date-?�-
Vitunac
AitornnY
�.
Nature of the Change:
To adjust contract quantities to al -built quantities.
-"=
es.result in t following adjustment of Co _ tact Price and Time:
'.�
act Price Prior to this Change Order S_ 2dO6,166.91
136,755.62 K�
t (Decrease) resulting from this Change Order S _ _ M
Brent Price Including This Change Order S_ 2,169.411.29 ,
Contract Time Prior to this Change Order Calendar Days.
Net (Increase) (Decrease) resulting from this Calendar Days
Change Order
Current Contract time including this Change
Calenday Days
Order
_ The above changes are approved: DARRET.� E--1Nr0u2msi P E.
_ Engineer /
By: >
f Date:
DICKERSON FLORIDA, INC.
The above changes are accepte
FLpR�oq Contract,
TED TYSON
CORPORATE y'
_ Z PRESIDENT
0 SEAL
ate:
1982
,rlU4ftr iLo��oP ACCEPTED BY:
Date:
16
BOOK 61 F° Gr ®13
r-AUG'21
1985
,g
BOOK 61 Ftmu. 814
I. Engineering Services for
Renovation of
the Whispering Palms
Lift Station
The Board reviewed the
following memo
dated 8/14/85:
TO:
THE HONORABLE BOARD OF
DATE:
AUGUST ln, 191—
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU:
TERRANCE G. PINTO
SUBJECT:
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR
RENOVATION OF THE
WHISPERING PALMS LIFT
STATION
FROM:
JOSEP A. BAIRD
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
A lift station located in Whispering Palms is not adequate and needs to be
renovated to meet current standards. This will encompass removing the well
lid and superstructure, removal of pump, piping and valves, removal of
electrical controls and the installation of new duplex pumps, an electrical
control panel, new valve chamber and connection to existing force main.
Attached is a copy of an agreement with Masteller and Moler Associates,
Inc. for designing and overseeing the renovation of the list station. Per
the agreement, the services that are specified will not exceed a total cost
of $3,800.00.
ALTERNATIVES
1. The Honorable Board of County Commissioners may approve the above
referenced renovations together with the agreement from Masteller and
Moler Associates, Inc.
2. The Honorable Board of County Commissioners may disapprove the above
referenced renovations together with the agreement from Masteller and
Moler Associates, Inc.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Honorable Board of County Commissioners approve
the renovation of Whispering Palms lift station and approves the agreement
with Masteller and Moler Associates, Inc.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
approved the agreement with Masteller and Moler
Associates, Inc. for designing and overseeing the
renovation of the lift station at Whispering Palms, as
recommended by staff, and authorized the Vice
Chairman's signature.
17
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Date: 8-21-85
Work Authorization No. 1 for Consulting Services (Wastewater)
Project No. 1 , County Serial No. (Masteller & Moler
Associates, Inc.)
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Title: Consulting Engineering services relative to modifications of
the Whispering Palms pumping station including removal of wet
well lid and superstructure; removal of pump, piping and valves;
removal of electrical controls/panel; extend existing wet well
to grade, construct new wet well cover; install new duplex pumps
and electrical controls/panel; install new valve chamber and
connect to existing force main. Budget estimate for construction
cost is $28,000.00.
II. SCOPE OF SERVICES AND LUMP SUM FEE FOR SERVICES
Reference is made to the "Agreement for Professional Services"
dated June 5, 1985 and specific Article numbers and paragraph
numbers which are listed hereinafter to describe the scope of
services included on this project:
A. Project Design Services per Article 4, paragraph 4a. and
4b.
B. General Services During Construction per Article 5, para-
graph 5a. and 5b.
C. Supplementary and Special Services per Article 6, paragraph
6c., 6d., 6e., 6f., and 6g. In addition, our services
shall include field surveys necessary for design and prep-
aration of construction plans and assistance to the County
in obtaining various permits and approvals for construction
(permit fees to be paid by the County).
D. Payment for Services per Article 8, paragraph 8a.(1) and
8a.(2), the fee for A, B, and C shall not exceed a total
of $3,800.00. Payment shall be per paragraph 8d.
APPROVED BY:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SUBMITTED BY:
MASTELLER & MOLER ASSOCIATES, INC.
By: �/�► C _ By
Don C. SCUY`lOCk, Ear H. Masteller, P.E.
Vice Chairman President
Date: August 21, 1985
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
aj,. i,—
Charles Vitunac
County Attorney
Date: _ " 17_
18
BOOK 61 FAG -E815
AUG 211995BOOK 61 f'N IE 81
COUNTY EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE - DEPENDENT COVERAGE - $155
nnnnrru rna
OMB Director Jeff Barton reviewed the following memo dated
8/14/85:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 14, 1985 FILE:
Jeffrey K. Barton
,4
Director 0MB
SUBJECT: Health Insurance,
Dependent Coverage
$155.00/month Cap.
FROM: & Lois Hoder, REFERENCES:
Personnel Director
Beginning Oct. 1, 1985, you have instructed that employees would begin to pay the
difference between the $155.00/month.cap and the $167.50/month cost for dependent
health care (a difference of $12.50/month or $150.00 annually).
A policy decision is necessary on the following condition when both the husband
and wife are employed within the county system. In the past, the department em-
ploying the first of the husband/wife is charged with the entire cost of the de-
pendent health care coverage and nothing is charged to the department employing
the spouse. Monies have been saved by handling the insurance in this manner.
Recommendation
It is our recommendation that, if there are no dependents, that the husband and
- wife be allowed to each convert to a single plan and if there are dependents,
that the employee currently carrying the family plan,'pay the $12.50 per month
additional premium.
Director Barton advised that two single plan contracts cost
the County less than one family plan contract, if there are no
children.
Commissioner Wodtke felt we should keep on eye on new
developments where health care insurance is being offered by
hospitals as he believed this would promote good competition.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (3-0)
accepted staff's recommendation and approved a
policy decision condition effective when both
husband and wife are employed within the County
19
system to allow each to convert to a single plan
if there are no dependents; and if there are
dependents, the employee currently carrying the
family plan will pay the $12.50 per month addi-
tional premium.
AWARD OF ARCHITECTURAL CONTRACT TO CHARLES BLOCK FOR SHERIFF'S
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/14/85:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 14, 1985 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Proposed Agreement
FROM: Michael Wright REFERENCES:
County Administrator
Attached is the proposed agreement between the County and
Charles Block for the design and construction supervision
of the Sheriff's Administration Building.
The agreement basically follows the format used by the County
for the construction of the jail with the fee set at 6-3/40
of construction costs, or low bid, whichever is greater.
The staff recommends the Chairman be authorized to sign the
.agreement.
Administrator Wright informed the Board that there is a
contract change. Under Article 15, item 2 in regard to civil
engineering should be deleted. The Administrator believed that
basically the fee is below the architectural curve and below the
jail fee, and he would recommend approval.
Commissioner Wodtke asked about the timeframe. Administrator
Wright did not recall one being included but stated that a
deadline could be specified if the Board desired. However, he
assured the Board that Mr. Block wants to progress as fast as we
do, and he did not feel one was necessary.
20
L_ AUG 21 1gR5
BOOK 1 P„c 817
AUG 211985
BOOK 61 F'U 818
Vice Chairman Scurlock noted that we received correspondence
just recently offering the 2001 Building to the County but not
specifying a purchase price. He wondered if that would be
involved in this consideration.
Administrator Wright did feel we should take a look at that
building; however, he was not sure we want to put the Sheriff's
office there for a couple of reasons - 1) our space needs in the
Administration Building are growing rapidly and 2) we are going
to need courthouse space and space for the Health Department. He
felt we need to look at the 2001 Building in relation to those
needs and go ahead and build the Sheriff's building where we have
expansion capabilities, plenty of parking area, and proximity to
the jail.
Vice Chairman Scurlock understood then that Administrator
Wright was saying that this decision would not be affected by the
availability of the 2001 Building, and the Administrator agreed,
stressing that he felt we should look at it but in terms of the
many other areas where space is needed.
Commissioner Bird asked who would be working with Architect
Block on conceptual design and Administrator Wright advised that
General Services Director Sonny Dean has been assigned that task
and he also would be keeping an eye on it.
It was noted that Commissioner Wodtke also had the assignment
of watching for additional space.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
awarded the architectural contract for the Sheriff's
Administration Building to C. E. Block Architect,
Inc., with the recommended deletion and agreed it
was not necessary to include a timeframe.
SAID CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK.
21
o
PUBLIC HEARING - REFLECTIONS ON THE RIVER INC_ REQUEST TO REZONE
2_33 ACRES FROM C -1A to RM -6, AND TO REZONE 1.24 ACRES FROM_RM_8
to C -1A
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:
i
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
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 weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of � 7" .
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, 'in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; 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 adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
' � I
Sworn to and subscribed be e m hisday of A. D. -�"- -
' NOTICE'S- PUBLIC HEARING -
Notice of hearing to consider the adoption of
a County ordinance rezoning land from: C -1A,
R�Uicted Commercial.Distrlct,to RM -6, Multiple -
Family Residential District. The subject property
is presently owned by Reflections on the River.
Inc., and is located on the edst Side of U.S. High-
way x1, and south of Schumann Drive
L v The,
heW-'-N�S-H- a-I-cPt *per
pe HISO1U11�TdHesc> ribed as tiM
A71*OIV OF THSOUTHEAST ih':O';
AUG 211985 -7
BOOK 61 G�,F8'2!0
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
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 weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
i
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of eA-4 ,
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; 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 adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed
•• NOTICE — PUBLIC HEARING -
Notice of hearing to consider the adoption of
9 County ordinance rezoning land from: RM -8,
Multiple -Family Residential District to C -1A, Re-
stricted Pommerciai District. The subject prop-
nty. is presently owned by Reflections on the
liver, Inc., and is located on the east side of U.S.
highway al, and north of Schumann Drive 1
The subject property Is described
A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST % OF
THE NORTHWEST % OF SECTION 17;
TOWNSHIP 31 SOUTH, . RANGE 39,,
EAST, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLOR
IDA BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DE=
SCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF NORTHEAST % OF THE
NORTHWEST,. V# OF SAID SECTION -17,
THENCE SOUTH 89° 36' 42" EAST
ALONG .THE NORTH LINE 'OF SAID
r' SECTION,'17 FOR 86.32 FEET: THENCE
!- SOUTH 25°57'59" EAST ;ALONG THE
EASTERLV RIGHT-OF-WAVK . OF U.S.
HIGHWAY NO. 1 FOR 896.56 FEET TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE
NORTH .64°02'01" EAST FOR '84.00
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 25°6719" EAST
FOR •140.00, IFEET; THENCE NORTH::,,,
".64°02'01" EAST, FOR 216.00. FEET;,
THENCE' SOUTH 25°57'59" EAST FOR `
214.89: THENCE NORTH' 89',47'06"..,.
WEST FOR, 334.30 FEET,, -'THENCE
NORTH 25757'5$" WEST ALONG THE
EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF
-
-U.S. HIGHWAY NO, 1 FOR 207.39 FEET
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND
CONTAINING 1.244 ACRES MORE OR
A public hearing at which; parties in In-
tarest and citizens shall have an oppor
tunity to be heard, will be' hold by the -
Board of County Commissioners• of in
than River County, Florida, ft the County
Commission Chambers • of. the .. County.
Administration Building, `locAted 'at 1840 '
:25th -Street' ,Vsto Beach, Florida on
Wednesday. August 21, 195, at .9:15
a.m.
If any person decided to-a0peal any,
decision made on the above matter; he/
she will.need a record:pt the proceed��`
Ings, and.fpr such putpo he7she fray
mat -a varbatffftecord of
the proceedings is made, whlchjncludes,:
testimony and evidence upon which the -
<-
appeal is based.
liQL-17 , Indian Rivet County:
., I tt, • Board of County Cornmissioners:,
a 13y:-s-Pateick B Lyons.
Chairman
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/6/85:
23
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: August 6, 1985 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
REFLECTIONS ON THE RIVER
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: INC., REQUEST TO REZONE
2.33 ACRES FROM C -1A TO
SUBJECT: RM -6 AND TO REZONE 1.24
Robert M. Keatin , P ACRES FROM RM -8 TO C-lA
Planning & Development Director
FROMRicchard Shearer, AICP REFERENCES: ZC-144&145 BCC Memo
Chief, Long -Range Planning CHIEF
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of August 21, 1985.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Reflections on the River, Inc., the owner, is requesting to
rezone 2.33 acres located east of U.S. 1 and south of Schumann
Drive from C-lA, Restricted Commercial District, to RM -6,
Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre), and to
rezone 1.24 acres located east of U.S. 1 and north of Schumann
Drive from RM -8, Multiple -Family Residential district (up to 8
units/acre), to C -1A, Restricted Commercial District.
This request is to rearrange the commercial zoning lying between
U.S. 1 and the approved residential portion of Reflections on the
River. Reflections has an existing neighborhood commercial node
of 7.6 acres designated in 1982.
On July 11, 1985, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4 -to -0
to recommend approval of this request.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli-
cation will be presented. The analysis will include a descrip-
tion of the current and future land uses of the site and sur-
rounding areas, potential impacts on the .transportation and
utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environ-
mental quality.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property is undeveloped. North of the subject
property is undeveloped land zoned C-lA, Restricted Commercial
District. East of the subject property is the multiple -family
part of Reflections which is currently under construction and
zoned RM -8. South of the subject property are single-family
dwellings, a real estate office, and a photographer's studio
zoned C -1A. West of the subject property, across U.S. 1, are
single-family dwellings, a church, and a real estate office.
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as LD -2,
Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre), and Neighborhood
Commercial Node. The land north, south and east of the subject
property is designated as LD -2. The land west of the subject
property is in the City of Sebastian.
AUG 211985 24 BOOK 61 r. �E 821
L_
AUG 211985
BOOK 6i PAGE 8�2
The applicants have supplied the following information to summa-
rize their existing and proposed zoning, acreage involved, and
the number of dwelling units permitted under both zoning config-
urations.
Number of
Dwelling
EXISTING Zoning Acreage Units Permitted
RM -8 31.20 249
C-lA 7.60 -
38.80 249
PROPOSED RM -8 29.95 239
RM -6 2.58 15
C-lA 6.27 -
38.80 254
The applicants are requesting to realign their zoning in order to
provide additional residential development along U.S. 1 and to
utilize land approved but no longer needed for a wastewater
treatment plant. This proposed rezoning will concentrate their
neighborhood commercial node, at the center of the development
along U.S. 1 and surround the commercial uses with multiple -
family development on three sides. In addition, this proposed
rezoning will reduce the amount of commercial zoning by 1.33
acres from 7.6 acres to 6.27 acres.
Transportation System
The subject property has direct access to U.S. 1 (classified as
an arterial street on the Thoroughfare Plan). Under the existing
zoning, the subject property could generate up to 1,743 average
annual daily trips (AADT) and attract up to 7,275 AADT for -a
total of 9,018 AADT. Under the proposed zoning, the subject
property could generate up to 1,778 AADT and attract up to 5,917
for a total of 7,695 AADT.
Environment
The subject property is not designated as environmentally sensi-
tive nor is it in a flood -prone area.
TT'f"l 1 i t'l Pc
County water and wastewater facilities are not available for the
subject property. Water and wastewater service will be provided
by General Development Utilities.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning
Commission's recommendation, staff recommends approval.
25
M M M
Richard Shearer, Chief of Long -Range Planning, reported that
at the end of last week Reflections had submitted a proposed
change in their zoning. Instead of having the proposed 6.27
acres of commercial that would be reduced another 4/10ths of an
acre to 5.86 acres commercial. This would give them a total of
30.362 acres zoned RM -8; 2.58 acres zoned MVI -6; and 5.858 acres
zoned commercial if these two rezoning requests were granted.
The total number of dwelling units permitted would 242 in the
RM -8 and 15 in RM -6, or 257 units.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked if we have any problem
considering the modified application.
Attorney Vitunac advised that the Board did not have any
problem with considering the amended request because it is less
of a change than presented previously.
Vice Chairman Scurlock inquired if Planning anticipated any
change of opinion from the Planning & Zoning Commission based on
this modification, and Mr. Shearer did not because reducing the
commercial would reduce the amount of traffic that would be
generated.
Planner Shearer then pointed out the location of the .
existing commercial on blueprints of aerial views of the site.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked about possible additional curb
cuts, and Director Keating assured the Board that the site plan
will be reviewed and all our usual standards applied. Mr.
Shearer noted that the two access points will be a considerable
distance apart.
Vice Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked
if anyone wished to be heard. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
closed the Public Hearing.
26
AUG 2 1 198A,
BOOK
BOOK 61
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
adopted Ordinances 85-69 and 85-70, providing for
the rezoning of 2.584 acres from C -1A to RM -6; and
.830 acres from RM -8 to C -1A, respectively.
ORDINANCE NO. 85-69
WHEREAS, the
Board of County
Commissioners of
Indian River
County, Florida,
did publish and
send its Notice
of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property and pursuant thereto
held a public hearing in relation thereto, at which parties in
interest and citizens were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning
Ordinance of Indian River County, Florida, and the accompanying
Zoning Map, be amended as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in Indian
County, Florida, to -wit:
A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4
OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 31 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST,
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BEING MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
27
COMMENCE AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST
1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 17; THENCE
SOUTH 89036'42" EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
SECTION 17 FOR 86.32 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 25°57159"
EAST ALONG THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF U.S.
HIGHWAY NO. 1 FOR 1820.27 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING AND POINT ON A CURVE, SAID POINT BEARS
SOUTH 0046'39" WEST FROM THE RADIUS POINT; THENCE
SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG A CIRCULAR CURVE TO THE LEFT
HAVING A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
00 33'45" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 0.39 FEET TO A
POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 89°47'06" EAST FOR
117.97 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 86°15151" EAST FOR 73.28
FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY
ALONG A CIRCULAR CURVE TO THE RIGHT,- HAVING A
RADIUS OF 250.00 FEET A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 31030'00"
FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 136.44 FEET TO A POINT OF
REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG A
CIRCULAR CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 97.50
FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24°35'30" FOR AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 41.85 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 25°57'59" EAST
FOR 325.58 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°47106" WEST ALONG
THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 660.00 FEET OF SAID
GOVERNMENW LOT 2 AND ITS WESTERLY PROJECTION FOR
334.30 FEET; THENCE NORTH 25°57159" WEST ALONG THE
EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY- OF U.S. HIGHWAY NO. 1 FOR
386.20 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND CONTAINING
2.584 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
Be changed from C-lA, Restricted Commercial District to
RM -6, Multiple -Family Residential 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 21 day of August 1985.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY:2�
DON C. SCURL CK, JR.
Vice Chairman
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida
this 29th day of August , 1985.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State _
received on this 5th day of Sept. , 1985, at 10:00A:M. P.M. and
filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY.
v
CHARLES P. VITUNAC, County Attorney
28
AUG 211985
BOOK 61 F'cc825
ORDINANCE NO. 85-70
BOOK 1 Pf G -C 8 �6
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property and pursuant thereto
held a public hearing in relation thereto, at which parties in
interest and citizens were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning
Ordinance of Indian River County, Florida, and the accompanying
Zoning Map, be amended as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in Indian
County, Florida, to -wit:
A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4
OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 31 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST,
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BEING MORE PARTICULAR-
LY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTHEAST 1/4
OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 17; THENCE
SOUTH 890 36' 42" EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
SECTION 17 FOR 86.32 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 25°57'59"
EAST ALONG THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF U.S.
HIGHWAY NO. 1 FOR 896.56 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 64°02101" EAST FOR 84.00
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 25°57159" EAST FOR 140.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 64002'01" EAST FOR 122.50 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 25057'59" EAST FOR 168.92 THENCE
NORTH 89047'06" WEST FOR 230.11 FEET; THENCE NORTH
25057'59" WEST ALONG THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
OF U.S. HIGHWAY NO. 1 FOR 207.39 FEET TO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING AND CONTAINING 0.830 ACRES MORE OR
LESS.
Be changed from RM -8, Multiple -Family Residential District
to C -1A, Restricted Commercial District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and de-
scribed in said Zoning Regulations.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida on this 21 day of August 1985.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY: C
DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.
Vice Chairman
29
PUBLIC HEARING - GREGORY 6 WIGGINS REQUEST TO REZONE 29.27 ACRES
FROM RS -6 AND RS -1 to RM -8
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 Weekly
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 weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a�
in the matter of
in the
Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of a%i4i� /
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tiserr.ent; 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 adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscrib
`:f'",NOTICE—PUBLIC HEARING
:1YoriCe' of. hearing to consider the adoprien of
a County ordinance rezoning land from: RS -1,
Single -Family Residential District, and RS -6, Sin-
gle -Family Residential District, to RM -B, Multiple -
Family Residential .District Subject property i
owned by:Martm A. Gregory and Richard B., Wigg
gins a9 Trustees. Located one mile east of A.
Highway ,#1, 'north .of,Barber ; Avenue (37th
Street) bounded on the east,by the,existing Vero
Beach City Limit Line. :>. i
-The subject property is described as: -
The SW . Y4 of the .SE 'A of Section 25,
,Township 325, Range 39E, LESS AND. i
EXCEPT the SW 'A of the SW .% of the SE
'/4 and less any rights-of-way of record.
All above described.prop" now lying
and being in Indian River County Flor;
ida
A 'publk hearing. at which parties in interes
and citizens 'shall :have in opportunity to tx
heard, will be held by the, Board of County Com
missioners of Indian River. County, Florida, In thi
County Commissiort 'Chambers of the. Count?
Administration Building, located' at 1840 250
Street, Vero Beach, Florida on, Wednesday, Aug
ust 21, 1985, at 9:15 a.m.
If, any. person decides to' appeal any decisioi
made on the above matter, he/she vnll need
record of the%proceedings;' ;and for such pw
poses,'Wshe niay need to enaurd that g verba
tim record of the proceedings is made, which it
ciudes testimony and Evidence upon which th
appeal is based. -
Indian River CountyBoard of County Commissioners t
By:-s-Patnck B. Lyons
Chairman
Aug: 1. 13,.1985.., :4.11
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/6/85:
30
AUG 211985
BOOK
AUG 91 1985 BOOK �� P ;F.
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: August 6 , 1985 FILE:
of the Board of
County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: GREGORY & WIGGINS
REQUEST TO REZONE
liell SUBJECT: 29.27 ACRES FROM
Robert M. Keatin , AXi7yP RS -6 AND RS -1 TO
Planning & Developme t Director RM -8, MULTIPLE -
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT
FROM chard Shearer, AICP REFERENCES: ZC-076 BCC Memo
Chief, Long -Range Planning CHIEF
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of August 21, 1985.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Michael O'Haire acting as agent for Martin Gregory and Richard
Wiggins, trustees, is requesting to rezone 29.27 acres located
north of 37th Street and one mile east of U.S. Highway 1 from
RS -6, Single -Family Residential District, and RS -1, Single -Family
Residential District, to RM -8, Multiple -Family Residential
District.
The owners intend to develop this property for a life care center
and related uses.
On September 19, 1984, the Board of County Commissioners approved
the rezoning of 10 acres located south and west of the subject
property from R-lA, Single -Family District, to MED, Medical
District. No action was taken on this property pending an
environmental survey. Subsequently, the applicants have amended
their application to request RM -8 zoning.
On July 11, 1985, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 3 -to -1
to recommend approval of this request.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli-
cation will be presented. The analysis will include a descrip-
tion of the current and future land uses of the site and sur-
rounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and
utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environ-
mental quality.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property and the land north and east of it are
undeveloped. South of the subject property is the Indian River
Medical.Center zoned MED, Medical District, and undeveloped land
zoned B-1, Planned Business District. West of the subject
property are citrus groves zoned RS -6 and MED.
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as MD -1,
Medium -Density Residential 1 (up to 8 units/acre) and
environmentally sensitive (up to 1 unit/acre). In addition, the
Plan also designates a 130 acre hospital/commercial node north of
Indian River Memorial Hospital along 37th Street. The boundaries
of the hospital/commercial node do not include the subject
property.
31
Based on an environmental survey submitted by the applicants,
approximately 17.17 acres of the subject property are environ-
mentally sensitive, and approximately 12.1 acres of the subject
property are upland. Based on the designations of the subject
property, the Comprehensive Plan would allow up to 113 dwelling
units.
The requested RM -8 zoning is in conformance with the MD -1 land
use designation and is consistent with the MED zoning to the
south which also allows up to 8 units/acre.
Transportation System
The subject property has direct access to 37th Street (classified
as a secondary collector on the Thoroughfare Plan). Rezoning the
subject property could generate up to 791 average annual daily
trips (AADT) .
Environment
A little more than half of the subject property is designated as
environmentally sensitive. The environmentally sensitive land
contains kesson muck and typic hydraguents soil types which are
common to wetlands. The vegetation includes black, white, and
red mangroves, cordgrass, and sea oxeye. In addition, the
subject, property is in an A9 flood zone (elevation 5) . The A-9
zone includes areas within the 100 year flood plain.
Utilities
County water is available for the subject property. City waste-
water facilities might be available to the subject property on a
temporary basis. The City and County have agreed to transfer
100,000 gallons of wastewater treatment allocation from the south
county to the hospital/ commercial node. Future developments may
apply for this allocation with the understanding that it is
temporary. The County has tentative plans to provide wastewater
facilities to this area in the future, but it will probably be at
least two -to -five years before service is available.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and zoning
Commission's recommendation, staff recommends approval.
Planner Shearer explained that the applicants did submit an
environmental survey to the Planning Department. Staff has
reviewed it, and they modified their rezoning request to request
RM -8 instead of the Medical District. Their long range plans are
to develop this property for a total care facility which would be
allowed in a Medical District and as a special exception use in
RM -8 zoning. Based on their analysis, staff recommends approval.
Commissioner Wodtke inquired about the location of the
project as related to the right-of-way for Indian River
Boulevard, and Administrator Wright stated that it will come
32
BOOK 1 PAGE
AUG 211985 - J
AUG 21 1985
J
BOOK °'+ F 830
pretty close to that and we will be stressing that point during
site plan hearings. Lloyd & Associates are doing a preliminary
survey now.
Vice Chairman Scurlock noted we have a concern about the
alignment of Indian River Boulevard, which is pretty much
dictated by staying out of the environmentally sensitive land,
and this pushes it west, which, in fact, may split this project.
Michael O'Haire, attorney for Martin Gregory and Richard
Wiggins, trustees, reported that the survey stakes in the ground
now are west of the subject property.
Public Works Director Jim Davis confirmed that a preliminary
alignment has been staked out and pointed out the projection of
Indian River Boulevard on a map of an aerial view of the subject
property. He felt it would very likely bisect the property in
some degree, but it most probably would be mainly on the western
perimeter of the property.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked if thought has been given to
having the Boulevard routed between the hospital and the Vero Med
Center.
Director Davis confirmed that there has, but the problem is
that would result in a too tight reverse curve, which would
reduce the operating speed on the roadway significantly; it also
would be hard to do that without taking a hole out of the golf
course.
Commissioner Wodtke emphasized that when we get into site
plan review, we will have to be able to address this problem, and
he believed the property owner is aware of this since there has
been a great deal of discussion about the right-of-way for Indian
River Boulevard.
Vice Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked
if anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Attorney O'Haire informed the Board that his clients, the
applicants, do intend this as the site for a proposed life care
33
center, and they have been working with staff for almost a year
now delineating the environmentally sensitive areas. Their en-
vironmental consultant, Steven Lumbert of Mangrove Systems, is
present and would be glad to answer any questions. Mr. O'Haire
confirmed that his clients are aware of the Indian River
Boulevard discussion and are following it with great interest.
He agreed it is a site plan consideration, and it also is a
consideration in the overall development of the property.
Ideally, they would like to see it on the westerly boundary of
the property.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
closed the Public Hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
adopted Ordinance 85-71, rezoning 29.27 acres from
RS -6 and RS -1 to RM -8, as requested by Martin Gregory
and Richard Wiggins.
34 1
BOOR 61 F'GE �p�
r AUG 2'1195
BOOK 61 PAGE 832
ORDINANCE NO. 85-71
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property and pursuant thereto
held a public hearing in relation thereto, at which parties in
interest and citizens were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning
Ordinance of Indian River County, Florida, and the accompanying
Zoning Map, be amended as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in Indian
County, Florida, to -wit:
The SW $ of the SE I of Section 25, Township 32S,
Range 39E, LESS AND EXCEPT the SW j of the SW I of
the SE j and less any rights-of-way of record
All above described property now lying and being in
Indian River County, Florida.
Be changed from RS -1, Single -Family Residential District,
and RS -6, Single -Family Residential District, to RM -8, Multiple -
Family Residential 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 21 day of August 1985.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY: � C 24e�
DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.
Vice Chairman
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida
this 2.6thday of August , 1985.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of. State
received on this 30thday of August , 1985, at 2:00 A.M./P.M. and
filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY.
v
CHARLES P. VITUNAC, County Attorney
35
PUBLIC HEARING - O'HAIRE 8 COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST TO
REDESIGNATE 27 ACRES FROM LD -2 to MXD, AND TO REZONE 28 ACRES
FROM C-1 to CH, HEAVY 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 Weekly
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 weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of Ae,& 4
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues ofG4 /93:�5
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; 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 adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed torej4e this/c}--f, —, day ofA.D..LL=—
.>,,.-A— _ I % in _ . 'k
36
NOTICE OF REGULATION OF LAND USE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING.;, ,.,
TO CONSIDER' ,
THE ADOPTION OF A COUNTY ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that' the India
River County Board of County Commissioner
shall hold a public hearing at which parties in ii
terest and citizens shall have an opportunity '
be heard on Wednesday. August 21, 1985, in If
County Commission Chambers located 'In .III
County Administration Building, 180.'25
Street -Vero. Beach, Florida, at 9:15 a.m. or
'soon thereafter as may be heard, to. consid
adoption of an ordinance entitled: 4. - 'u
RIVER COUNTY,, FLORIDA, AMtrvumv
THE TEXT AND MAP.OF. THE LAND USE
ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE='
PLAN PROVIDING - FOR ENLARGING _
THE OSLO ROAD MXD, MIXED USE 01S
IDCERTAIN-
PROPER-
TIES N THISENLARGED MIXED USE
DISTRICT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE
the*,follceving described properties located on
the south side of. Oslo, Road and, east of 20th
Avenue are proposed t6 be Included in this 4
larged Mixed Use
Distriotand to be redesignated
from LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2, to. MXD,
Mixed Use District, do the Land Use Map:'
The NQrttr-,620 "of .the West 15 acres of
F'ract 1 pnd 1hs;Nprth 820' of the East 30
acres of"Fret W�®ction 28; •Township
;33S;_.Range 39E; according to the last;'),
'general plat of lands of the Indian River_,,
.:Farms Company Subdivision - as re-
Yddrded in Plat, Book 2. Page 25, St. Lucie,; 6;`i
County Public Records, now tying and
losing inIndian River County, Florida
AND ; , : 4
� ;L'ots 7. through 11, inclusive, Block D c
Lots 1, 1A and 2 through;.11', Inclusive. 4,
Block E, " •
". Oslo Park Unit 2, according to the plat '
thereof as recorded in Plat Book 4, Page �I
13, of the PubLic;Records of Indian River !
,County, Florida..'
If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above matter, he/she will need a
record. of the proceedings, and for such puri
poses, he/she may need to ensure that a verba-
tim record of the proceedings is made, which In-
cludes -testimony and - evidence upcn,"Ich the
appealisbased . ` a<se3s1$"
Indidn RrveY f ouhty
Board of County Commissioners t t
By: s -Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman
Aug 1, 13, 1985.
BOOK 1
AUG 211985 J
r AUG 211985
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
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 weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continudusly published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; 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 adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before a ih' y of A. D.V JIF. V_
j'�� ess Manager)
BOOK
J _ _...
NOTICE — PUBLIC HEARING --
Notice of hearing initiated by Indian River
County and Michael O'Haire as Agent for Monte
and Donna L. Mann, Jack 0. King, Sr., James
end Yvonne Whalen, Leroy L. and Evelyn D:
Cousins, and Allan A. and Glenna Y. Campbell
owners of part of the subject property, to con -
elder the adoption of a County ordinance rezon-
ing land from: C-1, Commercial District, to CH,
Heavy Commercial District. Located on the south
side of Oslo Road (91h Street S.W.), east of 20th
Avenue S.W. and west of 12th Avenue S.W,-..k
The subject property is described as: I +
The North 620' of the West 15 acres'of t
Tract 1 and the North 620' of the East 30
acres of Tract 2, Section 26, Township
33S, flange 39E,, according to the last
general plat of lands of the Indian River
Farms Company Subdivision as re-
corded in Plat Book 2, page 25. St. Lucle ,i
County. Public Records, now lying and r
being in Indian River,County, Florida.,
AND h.
Lots 1; 1A, and 2 through.111, inclusive,
Block D.
Lots 1, IA, and 2 through 11 i1n6168W. `
Block E.:' a
Oslo Park Um! 2, according to the plat
thereof as recorded in Plat Book 4, Page
13, of the Public Records of Indian River
County: Florida,.,-,
A public hearing at whlCh parties in interest
and. citizens shall have an opportunity to be
heard, will be held by the Board of County Com-
missioners of Indian Ricer County; Florida, In the
County, CommissHm Chambers of the' County
Administration Building, located at 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida on Wednesday. Aug-
ust 21.. 1985, at 9:15 am.-,
If
.m.„ If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above Matter, he/shewily need a
recoro of the procesdings,-rend for such pur-
poses, he/she may need to ensure that a verba-
tim record of the proceedings Is made, which in-
cludes testimorry and evidence upon which the
appeal is based.
Indian-RlverCounty
Board of County Commissioners
By--s,-Patrick B Lyons s.
Chairman
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/6/85:
37
TO: The Honorable Members DATE:
of the Planning and
Zoning Commission
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
August 6, 1985 FILE:
e��J SUBJECT:
Robert M. Keat ng, CP
Planning & DevelopWent Director
O'HAIRE & COUNTY -
INITIATED REQUEST TO
REDESIGNATE 27 ACRES
FROM LD -2, TO MXD,
AND TO REZONE 28 ACRES
FROM C-1 TO CH, HEAVY
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
FRtJMRichard Shearer, AICP REFERENCES: ZC-124 BCC Memo
Chief, Long -Range Planning CHIEF
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of August 21, 1985.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Michael O'Haire, an agent for five (5) owners, and the Planning
Department are requesting to amend the Comprehensive Plan by
redesignating approximately 27 acres located south of Oslo Road,
east of 20th Avenue and west of 14th Avenue, from LD -2,
Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre), to MXD, Mixed -Use
District (up to 6 units/acre) and to rezone 28 acres from C-1,
Commercial District, to CH, Heavy Commercial District. This
request is to amend the text and map of the land use element of
the Comprehensive Plan and to rezone 27 acres currently designat-
ed LD -2 and 1 acre currently designated MXD.
On December 13, 1984, the Planning and Zoning Commission lessed
most of the subject property out of a County -Initiated request to
rezone this area from C-1, Commercial District, to R-1, Single -
Family District., in conformance with the LD -2 land use desig-
nation. At that time, the Commission instructed the staff. to
review this area to determine whether or not the LD -2 land use
designation was appropriate.
Mr. O'Haire filed a request, on behalf of five of the property
owners, to amend the Comprehensive Plan and rezone five parcels
of land on January 31, 1985.
On July 11, 1985, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4 -to -0
to recommend approval of these requests.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli-
cation will be presented. The analysis will include a descrip-
tion of the current and future land uses of the site and sur-
rounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and
utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environ-
mental quality.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property contains a welding shop, two car repair
facilities, a warehouse, a screen door contractor, a landscaping
service, an ice plant, two single-family dwellings and vacant
land zoned C-1, Commercial District. North of the subject
property, across Oslo Road, is a South County Fire Station and
vacant land zoned C-1. Further north, is the County's water
38
L_ AUG 211985
BOOK
' AUG 211985
BOOK 61
treatment plant and vacant land zoned RS -6, Single -Family
Residential District (up to 6 units/acre). East of the subject
property is undeveloped land zoned C-1. Further east are
single-family dwellings and vacant land zoned RS -6. South of the
subject property are single-family dwellings and vacant land
zoned RS -6. West of the subject property is a shopping center
zoned C-1 and vacant 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 the
land east, south and southwest of it as LD -2, Low -Density
Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre). The land north and northwest
of the subject property is designated as MXD, Mixed -Use District
(up to 6 units/acre).
When the staff originally recommended rezoning this area to
single-family last fall, that rezoning request included the part
of the subject property that contains single-family residences,
businesses being conducted out of residences, and vacant land.
Subsequently, a Comprehensive Plan amendment application and
rezoning application were received for several noncontiguous
parcels of land in this area. These applications were for an MXD
land use designation and M-1, Restricted Industrial District,
zoning.
In reviewing this area, the staff determined that based on the
fact that there are more commercial uses in this area than
originally thought and the fact that there are several heavy
commercial uses along 19th Avenue, the LD -2 land use designation
does not seem to be appropriate. The Comprehensive Plan is set
up to allow commercial uses only in commercial nodes or MXD
areas. In order- to accommodate commercial uses in this area,
then, the land needs to be resdesignated as either commercial or
MXD on the land use map. One alternative would be to establish a
commercial node for the area. Another alternative would be for
this land to be included in the Oslo Road MXD which adjoins the
subject property to the north and west. Because the subject
property contains a mixture of uses and adjoins the existing MXD
area, it seems more logical to extend the MXD area than to create
a commercial node in this area.
After discussions between the staff and the owners' agent,
consideration of the Planning and Zoning Commission's direction
concerning review of the land use designation of this area, and
consideration of the heavy commercial uses along 19th Avenue,
this proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning request
was determined to be the most appropriate solution for this area.
Based on a second study of this area,
subject property should be included in
that, based on the heavy commercial
property should be rezoned to CH, Heavy
Transportation System
staff does feel that the
the Oslo Road MXD area and
uses in this area, the
Commercial District.
The subject property has direct access to Oslo Road (classified
as an arterial street on the Thoroughfare Plan) and to 18th and
19th Avenues (classified as local streets). The maximum develop-
ment of the subject property under CH zoning could attract up to
1,823 average annual daily trips.
39
Environment
The subject property is not designated as environmentally sensi-
tive nor is it in a flood -prone area.
r7-; l;f-;-�
A County watermain runs along the north side of Oslo Road.
County wastewater facilities are not available.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning
Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that 27 acres be
redesignated from LD -2 to MXD and that 28 acres be rezoned from
C-1, Commercial District, to CH, Heavy Commercial District.
Planner Shearer explained that this request came about late
last fall when the Planning Department submitted a request to
downzone 70 acres on the south side of Oslo Road from C-1 to
single family. When the Planning & Zoning Commission considered
that request, they agreed to recommend approval for property
lying east of 12th Avenue, but instructed staff to take a more
detailed look at the property west of 12th Avenue because they
did not feel that should be rezoned to single family. After
further analysis, staff concurred and agreed it should be
designated MXD because of the mixture of uses and the difficulty
of establishing a predominant use. In January, Attorney O'Haire
filed a rezoning request and Comprehensive Plan amendment request
on behalf of several property owners in the area to redesignate
to MXD and rezone to M-1 restricted industrial. Staff went along
with the MXD and recommended including some additional property
so we would have a contiguous area. Staff, however, was not
ready to recommend approval of M-1 and requested they modify the
request to CH, heavy commercial, which they agreed to do. Staff
and the Planning & Zoning Commission are recommending approval.
The Vice Chairman opened the Public Hearing and asked if.
anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Helen Ruth Cooper, 4707 39th Avenue, stated she would not be
in opposition to the rezoning if she could be assured that it
would not affect Coopers Temple Church of God in Christ and the
ability to add or expand the church, move it to another site in
40
600K 1 F,vF. 8'-' 7
�I U G 211985 J
BOOK U FAut 83
this area or rebuild if the church burned down, etc. She informed
the Board that the church is located on the corner of 9th Street
S.W. and stated that she would like the record to show that the
church property will not be affected by the change.
Planner Shearer advised that Mrs. Cooper received a surrounding
property owner letter of notification of the proposed rezoning.
He assured Mrs. Cooper that the church property would not be
impacted as that property was rezoned in January to RS -6;: the
church is a conforming use and it could be expanded or rebuilt if
it burned down, etc.
Mrs. Cooper asked that she be sent a copy of the approved
minutes of today's meeting with regard to this subject.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (3-0)
closed the Public Hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (3-0)
adopted Ordinances 85-72 and 85-73, redesignating 27
acres from LD -2 to MXD; and to rezone 28 acres from
C-1 to CH, Heavy Commercial District; respectively.
41
ORDINANCE NO. 85-72
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE TEXT AND MAP
OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN;
PROVIDING FOR ENLARGING THE OSLO ROAD MXD, MIXED USE
DISTRICT; INCLUDING CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN THIS ENLARGED
MIXED USE DISTRICT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the. Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
amend the text and map of the Land Use Element of the Comprehen-
sive Plan and pursuant thereto held a public hearing in relation
thereto, at which parties in interest and citizens were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Land Use
Element of the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County,
Florida, be amended. as follows:
nz�nmTnwT �
Page 38 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan is
hereby amended as follows:
OSLO ROAD MIXED USE DISTRICT
Oslo Road is the major east -west thoroughfare serving the
southern part of the county. The greatest amount of new residen-
tial development will occur within the South County area; there-
fore, a Mixed Use District along Oslo Road has been established
to accommodate the anticipated growth.
The Mixed Use District on Oslo Road consists of two separate
areas. One area includes land for a depth of six hundred (600)
feet deep north of Oslo Road extends -#rent between Lateral J Canal
westward -,to and 22nd Avenue, this-a-�l�o--�re�txeles---o-rfi-ion
land for a depth of three hundred (300) feet deep on the south
side of Oslo Road between 22nd Avenue and +9th 20th Avenue, land
for a depth of six hundred and twenty (620) feet on the south
side of Oslo Road between 20th Avenue and 14th Avenue, and land
for a depth of 300 feet between 12th Avenue and 10th Avenue.
CODING:
L_AUG 211985
Words in strueh-threugh type are deletions from existing
law; words underlined are additions.
42
BOOK F''GE 8:3
BOOK 61 P', E. 8,40
ORDINANCE NO. 85-72
The other area extends 600 feet north of Oslo Road from 32nd
Avenue to 43rd Avenue. To the south of Oslo Road and 43rd Avenue
the area extends 600 feet and then runs eastward to a point
approximately 200 feet east of 35th Avenue.
Where future residential development occurs within the two
mixed use areas of this district, densities shall not exceed
those maximum densities of the surrounding and adjacent land use
categories as described in the text and shown on the Land Use
Map.
The following described properties located on the south side
of Oslo Road and east of 20th Avenue are hereby redesignated from
LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 to MXD, Mixed Use District, on
the Land Use Map:
The North 620' of the West 15 acres of Tract 1 and the North 620'
of the East 30 acres of Tract 2, Section 26, Township 33S, Range
39E, according to the last general plat of lands of the Indian
River Farms Company Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page
25, St. Lucie County Public Records, now lying and being in
Indian River County, Florida.
AND
Lots 7 through 11, inclusive, Block D, Lots 1, 1A, and 2 through
11, inclusive, Block E, Oslo Park Unit 2, according to the plat
thereof as recorded in Plat Book 4, Page 13, of the Public
Records of Indian River County, Florida.
EFFECTIVE DATE
The provisions of this ordinance shall become effective upon
receipt from the Florida Secretary of State of official acknowl-
edgement 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 21stday of August
1985.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY: / C " A10
DON—C. SCURWCK, J
Vice Chairman
43
ORDINANCE NO. 85-73
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property and pursuant thereto
held a public hearing in relation thereto, at which parties in
interest and citizens were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning
Ordinance of Indian River County, Florida, and the accompanying
Zoning Map, be amended as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in Indian
County, Florida, to -wit:
The North 620' of the West 15 acres of Tract 1 and
the North 620' of the East 30 acres of Tract 2,
Section 261 Township 335, Range 39E, according to
the last general plat of lands of the Indian River
Farms Company Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book
2, Page 25, St. Lucie County Public Records, now
lying and being in Indian River County, Florida.
AND
Lots 1, 1A, and 2 through 11, inclusive, Block D,
Lots 1, 1A, and 2 through 11, inclusive, Block E,
Oslo Park Unit 2, according to the plat thereof as
recorded in Plat Book 4, Page 13, of the Public
Records of Indian River County Florida.
Be changed from C-1, Commercial District, to CH, Heavy
Commercial District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Zoning Regulations.
Approved
and adopted by the Board
of County
Commissioners
of Indian River
County, Florida on this
21stdayof
August
1985.
44
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
of /10
BY: /
DON C.. SCUIMOCK, JR.
Vice Chairman
AUG 211985 BOOK. F;cE841
AUG 211985
BOOK 61 F•Nu[.840
PUBLIC -HEARING - REAMS. ET AL, REQUEST TO REZONE 18.5 ACRES FROM
RS_6_TO_RM_6, AND 4 ACRES FROM RS -66 to C_1
The hour of 9:30 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
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 weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a ,� 6
in the matter of 4A��
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of J . 1/13. /57-r5
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tiserrent; 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 adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscrib
8/6/85:
The Board reviewed the following memo dated
45
NOTICE —PUBLIC HEARING
I Notice of hearing to consider the adoption of
a County ordinance rezoning land from: RS -6,
Single -Family Residential District to RM -6, Multi-
ple -Family Residential District. The subject prop-
erty is presently owned, by William A. Reams,
Lola L. Edwards, Mary K Elliott, Dewey- D.
Reams, Helen Reams, and James W. Stapp. Lo-
cated west of Old Dixie Highway (C.R. 605),
north of 9th Street and south of 11 th Lane. , l.:
The subject property Is'described'as:
`
The North 660 feet of the Southwest. '."
quarter of the Southwest quarter of Sec
tion 12, Township 33 South, Range 39.
East, and the North 660 feet of the.
Southeast quarter of the Southwest
quarter of Section 12, Township 33
South, Range 39 East; lying West of the
West right-of-way line of the Old Dixie
Highway, LESS THE FOLLOWING DE-
SCRIBED PARCELS:
;. From the intersectionof the
North line of the Southwest quar-
ter of the Southwest quarter. of
Section 12, Township 33 South,
Range 39 East, with the Westerly .
right-of-way line of the Old Dixie r:
Highway, run West and along the
North line of the said Southwest ',a "
quarter of the Southwest quarter
of Section 12 (being also the
North line of the William M:;!,,
Reams Estate Subdivision per
plat thereof recorded in Plat
- Book 4 at Page 77, Public- -
-.Records, of St. ,Lucie County,';
Florida) a' distance of 300 feet;',,
thence. run, Southeasterly ang
parallel to the West rightof-way rrs,
line of the Old Dixie'Highway, a'., 1:1.
distance of 699.15 feet, more or, ,, ; ,
less, to the North right-of=way.�;.:`'� .'
line of 9th Street;. thence run..,,':.
East and along the North right;;'-,._;:."
of -way line of 9th Street to the.
West right-of-way, line of the Old
Dixie Highway; thence run North-,,","
westerly and along the West
right-of-way line of the Old Dixie 1 `
Highway, a distance of 699.15 '
feet, more or less, to the Point of
Beginning.
-All of the above described land now lying
and, being, in Indian River County,. Flor-
ida.,
lor-ida. c.a s
And to consider the adoption -of's County ordi-
nance rezoning land from 13", -Bingle -Family.
The subject property i$ described is:'
"Frd-m-the fritersectiorrtif the North rme of
the Southwest quarter of the Southwest
quarter of Section 12, Township P,
r South, Range 39 East, With the Westerly
right-of-way line of the Old Dixie Higgh
way, run West and along the North line'
of the said Southwest quarter, of the'i'
Southwest quarter of Section 12 (being
also the North line of the William M.
Reams Estate Subdivision' per piet
thereof recorded in Plat Book 4•atp e
77, Public Records of St. Lucie Counj,
Florida) a distance of 300 feet, thence
run Southeasterly `and parallel to the
West right-of-way line of the Old -Dixie
Highway, a distance of 699.15 feet, more
or less, to the' North right-of-way line of
9th Street; thence run East and along the
North right-of-way fine of 9th Street to
the West right-of-way line of •the Old
Dixie Highway; thence run Northwesterly
and along the West right-ot-way line of
the Old Dixie Highway, a distance of
699.15 feet, more or less, to the Point of
Beginning; LESS AND EXCEPT the North
105.44 feet thereof. •
All of the above described land now lying
and being in Indian River County, Flor-
ida.
A public hearing at which parties in interest
tnd citizens shall have an opportunity to be
ieard, will be held by the Board of County Com-
nissioners of Indian River County, Florida, in. the
'ounty Commission Chambers of the County
\dministration Building, located at 1840 25th
itreet, Vero Beach, Florida on Wednesday, Aug-
Ast 21, 1985, at 9:30 a.m.
If any person decides to appeal any decision
rade on the above matter, he/she wilf need a
ecord of the proceedings, and for such pur-
wses, he/she may need to ensure that a verba-
im record of the proceedings is made, which in-
:ludes testimony and evidence upon which the
appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of C issioners
By:-s-Patri
Chairman
Wg-1. 13. 1985. ,
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: August 6, 1985 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: REAMS, ET AL., REQUEST TO
REZONE 18.5 ACRES FROM
SUBJECT: RS -6 TO RM -6 AND 4 ACRES
Robert M. Keati g, CP FROM RS -6 TO C-1
Planning & Develop ent Director
FROMR�S rd Shearer, AICP REFERENCES: ZC-134 BCC Memo
Chief, Long -Range Planning CHIEF
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of August 21, 1985.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Michael O'Haire, an agent for the six owners, is requesting to
rezone 18.5 acres located 300 feet west of Old Dixie Highway and
north of 9th Street from RS -6, Single -Family Residential District
(up to 6 units/acre), to RM -6, Multiple -Family Residential
District (up to 6 units/acre), and to rezone 4 acres located
immediately west of Old Dixie Highway and north of 9th Street
from RS -6 to C-1, Commercial District.
On July 11, 1985, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4 -to -0
to recommend approval of both of these rezoning requests. The
Planning and Zoning Commission indicated that they felt the
commercial rezoning request should be granted because the
industrial uses located east of the subject property rendered the
subject property unsuitable -for residential development. In
addition, the Planning and Zoning Commission stated that they did
not feel that commercial development would generate any more
traffic than multiple -family development in this area.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli-
cation will be presented. The analysis will include a descrip-
tion of the current and future land uses of the site and sur-
rounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and
utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environ-
mental quality.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property contains single-family dwellings and un-
developed land. North of the subject property are multiple -
family dwellings, single-family dwellings, mobile homes, and
vacant land zoned RM -6. East of the subject property is R & J
Crane Service, Bain Underground utilities, and Knight and Mathis
zoned M-1, Restricted Industrial District. South of the subject
property is a single-family subdivision zoned RS -6. West of the
subject property is undeveloped land zoned RM -6.
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as LD -2,
Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre), and MXD, Mixed -Use
District (up to 6 units/acre). The applicants are requesting to
rezone that part of the subject property designated LD -2 from
RS -6 to RM -6 and to rezone that part of the subject property
designated as MXD from RS -6 to C-1.
46 g00K 6i `'°Gr. 843
AUG 9.x.1985
The proposed RM -6 zoning is in
designation and is consistent
of the subject property.
BOOK 61 F UE 844
conformance with the LD -2 land use
with the RM -6 zoning north and west
In reviewing the request for commercial zoning, the staff re-
viewed the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan relative to
establishing zoning in Mixed -Use Districts and the potential
traffic impacts based on that zoning. The Comprehensive Plan
states that within MXD areas zoning shall be established based on
the predominant land use pattern.
Old Dixie Highway has traditionally been the dividing line
between commercial and industrial uses on the east side of Old
Dixie and residential uses on the west side. There are currently
only two areas on the west side of Old Dixie south of Vero Beach
where there is commercial zoning. One small area is located at
14th Street SW. The other area extends from the city limits
southward to 10th Place (one block north of the subject prop-
erty). Rezoning the subject property to commercial would encour-
age further strip commercial development along the west side of
Old Dixie.
The Planning Department has been concerned about the current
levels of traffic on Old Dixie Highway and the amount of addi-
tional traffic that would be attracted to additional retail
commercial development in this area. For this reason, the staff
has successfully recommended rezoning more than 125 acres of land
on the east side of Old Dixie from commercial districts allowing
retail development to C-2, Heavy Commercial District. The C-2
district primarily permits trades and warehousing, uses which
attract significantly fewer trips than retail development. This
concern about additional traffic prompted the staff to recommend
against a commercial rezoning request on the west side of Old
Dixie last fall.. That request was denied by the Planning and
Zoning Commission.
Transportation System
The subject property has direct access to Old Dixie Highway
(classified as a secondary collector street on the Thoroughfare
Plan) and to 9th Street (classified as a local street). The
maximum development of the subject property would generate 777
average annual daily trips (AADT) from the proposed multiple -
family area and attract 3,977 AADT to the proposed commercial
area or a total of 4,754 additional AADT.
Old Dixie Highway currently carries 10,400 AADT at level -of -
service "C". The 4,754 additional trips would reduce Old Dixie
Highway to level -of -service "E". The Comprehensive Plan contains
an objective of maintaining level -of -service "C", or better on
all major thoroughfares. This objective is further stated as:
The minimum standard to be used to determine whether or
not future development efficiently uses the transporta-
tion system shall be level -of -service "C" on an annual
basis and level -of -service "D" during the peak season.
Proposed projects shall not be approved by the County
when existing traffic, the proposed projects' traffic
and committed traffic on existing major thoroughfares
do not meet level -of -service "C" on an annual basis and
level -of -service "D" during the peak season.
47
Environment
The subject property is not designated as environmentally sensi-
tive nor is it in a flood -prone area.
Utilities
County water is available for the subject property. County
wastewater facilities are not available.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning
Commission's recommendation, staff recommends approval of the
request to rezone 18.5 acres from RS -6 to RM -6. While the
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the
request to rezone four (4) acres of the subject property to C-1
for the reasons stated in the descriptions and conditions section
of this memo, staff does not recommend approval of this rezoning.
This negative recommendation is based on the level -of -service
standard in the Comprehensive Plan and the fact that Old Dixie
Highway has been the boundary between the commercial and indus-
trial land uses to the east and the residential uses to the west.
Moreover, staff feels that granting this commercial rezoning
request would encourage more property owners on the west side of
Old Dixie to apply for commercial zoning resulting in strip
commercial zoning.
The following letter of opposition was received 8/19/85:
BOARD Cgt dlan )
COMMISSIONERS -(,#
841 Old Dixie Highway -P.O. Box 1922
Vero Beach, Fla. 3296 - 9 LIST
August 15, ].985 E'ls I �IJrt Ja
County Commissioners Fttcrr.,�j
1110",
1 7liam Wodtke
�5 Z atrick Lyons
Margaret C. Bowman
Don C.Scurlock, Jr.
Dick Bird
Dear Commissioners:
P U', ; ,
Comrz��.:r�i: Cw.
UtiIItieS
Finance
RE: The rezoning of land from R -S-6 SILgla Family-
, -residential district to C-1 commercial district
-Dewey D. Reams - Helen Reams -and James W. Stapp
Since your meeting on Wednesday, Aug. 21st, 1985, is at 9:30 a.m., my working
hours, I may not be able to be there to express my reasons for being against the
rezoning of the above-mentioned land. This property is located west of Old Dixie
Highway (C.R.605) North of 9th St. and South of 11th Lane. Following are some of
our reasons for No:
1- Restricted Commercial years ago was the result of "Naiemy Enterprises"� or
AAA AUTO SALVAGE etc. as it is called today. The solution to that problem was
a ridiculous looking fence. The land is now Restricted Industrial use.
48
BOOK 61 FAZE 845
AUG 21.1995
BOOK 61 PvUE 846
2- On Industrial Property there was a 150 ft. frontage - thus Knight & Mathis --
who adheres to this requirement and tries to keep some landscaping. This property
I believe was sold to Knight & Mathis by Mr. Stapp years ago.
3- The old Fletcher property - cleaned up many times by order -- now Bains Utilities -
no frontage requirements it seems -- now restricted industrial use. What are the
restrictions here?
4- The Commercial zoning at 12th and Old Dixie looks like cement city with chain -
linked six-foot fences out to the frontage and no landscaping ...... This is hardly
the restricted commercial of years ago. The Business (B-1 zoning)doesn't look
much better.
5- Traffic between 12th St. and 8th or Glendale is intolerable. A two-lane high-
way with no turning lane at 8th piles up the traffic at peek hours as far north
as the Stapp property, making it impossible to get into our driveway before two
or three lights at times. What would stores or offices do to increase this traffic?
6- This is to be my retirement home in a few years and do not want to be pushed out
of it by commercial areas.
7- The new building set back off Old Dixie between 10th and 12th, with cement drive-
way, seems to be a warehouse with huge trucking going in and out. Commercial????
For these reasons above, we are against the request for Commercial zoning and ask your
deep consideration before making a decision. I know the argument given at the Zoning
meeting was that "No-one would want to live residential and look at the mess across
the street" --by the same token what office or store would want to either?
Thanking you, We ave,
Sry Sinc r y,
IRENE J. MO ISON AND MAUD M..MORRISON
Planner Shearer advised that it was staff's feeling that if
the 4 acres were rezoned from RS -6 to C-1, it would result in a
domino affect. Since single family zoning is no longer realistic
for the west side of Old Dixie, instead of going commercial which
would severely impact this road, staff preferred the alternative
of going to multiple family to encourage residential redevelop-
ment in this area. He pointed out that the rezoning of this
property commercial would lower the level of service on this area
of Old Dixie Highway from the current level of Service C to
Service level E and the Comprehensive Plan provides that we
cannot approve any development that exceeds level of Service C on
an annual basis or a level of Service D during peak season. Mr.
Shearer explained that the Planning g Zoning Commission
recommended approval of this basically because there is
industrial zoned property across the street, and they felt the
commercial would be a transition.
49
Commissioner Bird asked what the Transportation Committee
plans were for the future of Old Dixie as he felt this is one
road that is getting away from us in regard to being able to
control traffic.
Vice Chairman Scurlock agreed that Old Dixie is a nightmare
in some spots, especially north from the bowling alley where it
is so restricted that there is virtually no ability to expand the
roadway. As you move to the south, the situation does get a
little better and has some flexibility. In his opinion, however,
it would be extremely difficult to effect any substantial change
in Old Dixie without having to go to mass condemnation.
Commissioner Bird believed that we might have to change our
thinking in the Comprehensive Plan in regard to a blanket
provision that no development would be allowed that would exceed
a traffic service level of "C". He didn't think we could put a
moratorium on development along Old Dixie just because of those
requirements, and he further pointed out that any type of
development will throw us over Level of Service "C".
Vice Chairman Scurlock agreed there are certain situations
in the county where there is no effective solution to this
problem.
Mr. Shearer emphasized that there is a great deal of
difference between traffic generated by multiple family and that
generated by commercial.
Planning & Development Director Robert Keating stressed that
having a level of service sets a standard and says this is the
maximum amount of inconvenience someone will put up with. �In
this case, staff is saying that the Comprehensive Plan envisions
Old Dixie as a completely different type of road than U.S.1, for
instance, and we are looking at maintaining it as that type of
road based on the types of land uses that are allowed adjacent to
it. Multi -family residential really is a very low trip
generation rate type of land use. He pointed out that heavy
commercial districts attract far fewer trips than a general
commercial district which has retail sales.
50
L_ AUG 211985
BOOK 61 PA -IE ®47
AUG 911985 BOOK 61 F."I 84
Director Keating emphasized the whole thing we are looking
at here is keeping the same general type and pattern of land use
on the west side of Old Dixie where commercial has not made a
significant inroad yet.
Commissioner Wodtke talked about the situation on 6th Ave.,
12th St., 8th St., etc., the allowing of commercial, the traffic
movement from east to west, etc., and felt it is a really
difficult dec-ision. He believed we don't want to go west with
any more industria4 or commercial, and the only area where we do
have any 6, 8 or 10 multiple family is in this area, and it will
impact the road system.
Administrator Wright noted that the impact of multiple
family is significantly less than commercial, and the Vice
Chairman felt it is a matter of degree - you are going to stress
the road network less than if you approved the maximum.
Mr. Shearer explained that multiple family at 6 units per
acre is probably going to generate around 42 trips a day whereas
an acre of commercial at this level could attract about 1,000
trips per day.
Vice Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked
if anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Michael O'Haire,. Attorney representing the Reams family who
have owned this property since 1907, displayed demographics of
the site which were prepared by his office, plus photographs of
adjacent uses. He stressed that since the R 8 J,Crane Service
and Knight 8 Mathis Machine Shop are located there and there is
industrial zoning, industrial designation for the plant and
industrial uses on the east side of Old Dixie, that is what
prompted their application for a buffer between the multiple -
family property to the west. Attorney O'Haire felt that to deny
a buffer or a transitional zone from the industrial use on the
east side of Old Dixie is, in effect, to say to the Reams that
there is no use for their property for a 300' depth because
51
people are not going to build multiple family structures to face
industrial uses. As to the traffic problem on Old Dixie, Mr.
O'Haire did not feel the theory that multiple -family generates
more traffic than commercial is really so in this case. He
agreed there is a traffic problem, but only during the hours of
8:00-9:00 o'clock in the morning and 4:00-6:00 o'clock in the
afternoon; there is no problem during the rest of the day.
Furthermore, the traffic flow is mainly east and west, not north
and south. Mr. O'Haire continued to emphasize that the Compre-
hensive Land Use Plan says there must be a buffer and although
they felt CH (Heavy Commercial) would be reasonable, they agreed
to apply for the lighter commercial use for a buffer and
transition area; the buffer, however, has to be more than just a
road right-of-way. Attorney O'Haire believed that Old Dixie
between 8th and 12th Streets will develop into a commercial node
and that, in fact, it really is a node now even though it may be
called a strip.
Vice Chairman Scurlock felt it depends on what kind of
commercial activity is there; he felt for the most part the types
of businesses there now are low volume business which do not
generate a great deal of traffic. He did agree the biggest
impact is from people going to and from work.
Commissioner Bird understood that these requests could be
treated separately - we could grant one and not the other.
Vice Chairman Scurlock felt the problem in the long run is
that the limiting factor is going to be the service level on the
road, which will have to be addressed by one of two things -
place a moratorium on new development or find some vehicle to
expand the roadway.
Commissioner Bird stated there is a third approach and that
would be to exempt the road from the level of Service C; however,
52
AUG 211985 BOOK 61 NAGE 849
AUG 211985 BOOK 1 F.� Ij $50
the Vice Chairman, Administrator and staff members, all felt that
was not a viable alternative.
Commissioner Bird pointed out that there are quite a few
county families who own property along that roadway and should
not be denied a reasonable use of their property, and Vice
Chairman Scurlock noted that if there is a lot of property
available, we would require setbacks and then go in and condemn
and built the road network.
Director Keating reported that the traffic consultant did an
analysis and has a capital improvement plan for the future, but
it all was based on projections of future traffic volumes related
to the land uses that are proposed there. He did not feel they
were proposing any improvements to Old Dixie nor would they need
it with the residential type uses.
Public Works Director Jim Davis explained that the County's
approach to traffic problems on Old Dixie is to widen the major
intersections to three lanes because the major constraints are
the intersections. They anticipate that as the Boulevard is
extended south some of the through traffic in that area will be
diverted from Old Dixie and U.S.1 onto Indian River Boulevard as
long as we provide the major east west connections. Staff's
philosophy is that we do not want Old Dixie to be an attraction
for through traffic.
Attorney O'Haire informed the Board that the Reams family
did give additional right-of-way for the expansion of Old Dixie
in 1972.
W. E. "Kinky" Orth, 3045 10th Court, explained that he has
been here since 1913 and that back in 1927 Old Dixie was
considered a commercial entity. There were a few residences
there, but the main development there over the years has not been
residential. Mr. Orth noted that the only reason Old Dixie has
not expanded commercially is because of the road itself. He
could not understand why the zoning there was based on the road
instead of changing the road itself. He felt we are acting like
53
we are going to keep the same road throughout the years, when, in
fact, we are not. He believed that the Board would not be doing
the right thing by telling Mr. Reams that he cannot use his
property. There has been no improvements on Old Dixie throughout
the years. Mr. Orth urged the Board to take all this into
consideration.
Thomas Smith informed the Board that his son owns the
property adjacent to the subject property on the south side and
could not be here today because he is working. He stated that
his son was in favor of the change because he felt that most of
the residential area on the west side is deteriorating and that
the area would just become one big slum as it is not a high rent
district.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
closed the Public Hearing.
Vice Chairman Scurlock stated there was no question in his
mind but that it would be inappropriate to allow the expansion of
that entire area to exceed the road capacity, but on the other
hand, he felt there is a need for some kind of vehicle for
redevelopment of the area because the corridor has deteriorated
over the years. He agreed that the pictures show that it is an
ugly area and getting uglier and felt we are kidding ourselves
unless we can come up with some kind of overall plan to have it
redeveloped that would allow everyone a reasonable use of their
property and at the same time improve the road network.
Commissioner Wodtke did not have any problem with the
rezoning, but was concerned with the traffic problem. He
wondered if the applicant, in order to mitigate the traffic
situation, might consider accepting something less than 300 feet
in depth as a commercial use.
54
AUG 211985
L-
BOOK PAGE ��
BOOK 61 Ff1GE 852
After conferring with his client, Attorney O'Haire informed
the Board that Mr. Reams indicated that the 300 feet was an
arbitrary number and actually the only property that would be
hurt by the commercial is what lies west of it, which also is the
Reams property. He reported that Mr. Reams agreed that possibly
200 feet or something workable would be acceptable.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (3-0)
approved the Reams, et al, request and adopted
Ordinance 85-74 rezoning 18.5 acres from RS -6 to RM -6.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, that the Board in adopting Ordi-
nance 85-74 also approve rezoning of the second part
of the Reams request, a total of four acres, as
follows: the westerly 100 feet from RS -6 to MVI -6 and
the easterly 200 feet from RS -6 to C-1.
Administrator Wright wished to be sure we have taken into
consideration our requirements for setbacks and right-of-way, and
Planner Shearer confirmed that we have the right-of-way and the
setback in the new zoning would be 25 feet.
THE VICE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The
Motion was voted on and carried unanimously (3-0).
55
ORDINANCE NO. 85-74
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property and pursuant thereto
held a public hearing in relation thereto, at which parties in
interest and citizens were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning
Ordinance of Indian River County, Florida, and the accompanying
Zoning Map, be amended as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in Indian
County, Florida, to -wit:
The North 660 feet of the Southwest quarter of the
Southwest quarter of Section 12, Township 33 South,
Range 39 East, and the North 660 feet of the
Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of
Section 12, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, lying
West of the West right-of-way line of the Old Dixie
Highway, LESS THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCELS:
From the intersection of the North line of the
Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of
Section 12, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, with
the Westerly right-of-way line of the Old Dixie
Highway, run West and along the North line of the
said Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of
Section 12 (being also the North line of the
William M. Reams Estate Subdivision per plat
thereof recorded in Plat Book 4 at Page 77, Public
Records of St. Lucie County, Florida) a distance of
200 feet; thence run Southeasterly and parallel to
the. West right-of-way line of the Old Dixie
Highway, a distance of 699.15 feet, more or less,
to the North right-of-way line of 9th Street;
thence run East and along the North right-of-way
line of 9th Street to the West right-of-way line of
the Old Dixie Highway; thence run Northwesterly and
along the West right-of-way line of the Old Dixie
Highway, a distance of 699.15 feet, more or less,
to the Point of Beginning.
All of the above described land now lying and being
in Indian River County.
Be changed from RS -6, Single -Family Residential
District to RM -6, Multiple -Family Residential District.
AND
2. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in Indian River
County, Florida, to -wit:
AUG 211995 BOOK FF1tcr 85�
L_ .
AUG 211985 BOOK 61 f�a�c854
ORDINANCE NO. 85-74
From the intersection of the North line of the
Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of
Section 12, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, with
the Westerly right-of-way line of the Old Dixie
Highway, run West and along the North line of the
said Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of
Section 12 (being also the North line of the
William M. Reams Estate Subdivision per plat
thereof recorded in Plat Book 4 at Page 77, Public
Records of St. Lucie County, Florida) a distance of
200 feet; thence run Southeasterly and parallel to
the West right-of-way line of the Old Dixie
Highway, a distance of 699.15 feet, more or less,
to the North right-of-way line of 9th Street;
thence run East and along the North right-of-way
line of 9th Street to the West right-of-way line of
the Old Dixie Highway; thence run Northwesterly and
along the West right-of-way line of the Old Dixie
Highway, a distance of 699.15 feet, more or less,
to the Point of Beginning; LESS AND EXCEPT the
North 105.44 feet thereof.
All of the above described land now lying and being
in Indian River -County, Florida.
Be changed from RS -6, Single -Family Residential District
to C-1, Commercial District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Zoning Regulations.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida on this 21 day of August 1985.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY: C
DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.
Vice Chairman
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida
this 29th day of August , 1985.
Effective Date: Acknowledgment from the Department of State
received on this5th day of Sept. , 1985, at 10:0'0'A:M./P.M. and
filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY.
i
CHARLES P. VITUNAC, County Attorney
ZC-134 Ordinance
CHIEF
RYANWOOD SHOPPING CENTER REQUEST FOR C.O. PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF
PROJECT
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/20/85:
TO:-- The Honorable Members of the DATE: August 20, 1985 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
Request By
THROUGH Development Company of America
Michael Wright,SUBJECT: For County to Issue Certificates of
County Administrator Occupancy at Ryanwood Shopping
Center (NE Corner of SR 6and
Kings Highway) Prior to Rings
Highway Being Widened to 5 Lanes
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. , REFERENCES: Letter from D.P. Spilotros
Public Works Director to Indian River County dated
July 16, 1985
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The Public Works Division staff met with Dennis Spilotros, Senior Vice
President of Shopping Center Development Company of America, bn August 19, 1985
for the purpose of detailing the Developers proposal to obtain Certificates of
Occupancy for certain stores at Ryanwood Shopping Center prior to completing 5
lane widening improvements along the projects' Kings Highway frontage. The
pertinent data and Developer's proposal is as follows:
Project: Ryanwood Shopping Center
Location: NE Corner of SR 60 and Kings Highway (58th Avenue)
Project Data:. 108,425 S.F. Commercial Shopping Center
47 Retail Stores
Required Off Site
Transportation Improvements: at the time of Site PlanApproval (6-28-84)
See Figure 1 (Kings Highway) & Figure 2
Revised Offsite Improvements presented to TPC and BCC Sept. 6, 1984:
See Exhibit 1 memo dated Sept. 6, 1984 to TPC
Developer's Request
The developer is requesting the following Certificate of Occupancy
dates prior to Kings Highway improvements being coupleted. All other on site
improvements are scheduled to be complete:
Oct. 31, 1985
Publix 39,795 S.F.
Walgreens 13,000 S.F.
52,795 S.F.
A Certificate of Occupancy is requested at this time so that the
stores can be stocked. The Grand Opening will be around Nov. 30, 1985.
Nov. 30, 1985
Video Biz
1,200
S.F.
Dee's Hallmark
30,200
S.F.
Mimesa Clothing
1,600
S.F.
Prestige Travel
900
S.F.
Ft. Pierce Optometrist
1,700
S.F.
Hair & Face Place
2,300
S.F.
10,900
S.F.
58
BOOK 61 PnE 855
AUG 211985
rr__ -7
AUG 211985 BOOK F,10E O56
The Developer has proposed the following:
1) To contribute all design engineering and the approximately
$77,000 for offsite road improvements prior to any Certificate
of Occupancy being issued. The County would bid the construc-
tion. Plans should be complete on August 31, 1985.
2) To fund a Patrol officer to direct traffic at the SR 60 access until
Kings Highway widening is complete.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
In analyzing the above requests, staff presents the following potential
problems:
1) The Florida DOT has not yet permitted the eastbound left turn lane
along SR60. The Sept 28, 1984 letter (copy attached, Exhibit 2) from
George Denti, DOT, to Ryanwood Shopping Center indicates that the
Proposed left turn lane warrants research to determine the impact on
SR 60.
2) Permitting and Utility Relocation for the Kings Highway work has not
been accomplished. It is doubtful that this can be accomplished
within 60 days.
3) _Signalization Modifications at SR 60 and Kings Highway may not be
__.__... completed prior to- the widening dening work beginning. This may result in
teMporary signal pole installation to allow road work to occur.
Delivery dates for signal poles is usually somewhat long (3-6 months).
It is recaimended that this request be approved contingent upon:
1) The Developer's Engineer securing all DOT permits by October 15, 1985.
2) The Developer's Engineer personally work with all utility companies
having utilities .in the right-of-ways effected so that utility
relocation can occur prior to Oct. 15, 1985.
3) The Developer's Engineer fast tract signal modifications including
immediate acquisition of 4 signal poles.
4) The developer arrange to provide and fund a Patrol Officer at the SR
60 connection. Beginning at the opening of the first store until all
improvements are complete.
Public Works Director Jim Davis reviewed the developers
request for a Certificate of Occupancy prior to road improvements
being made on Kings Highway, which were agreed upon at site plan
approval in June, 1984.
Vice Chairman Scurlock understood that our decision delayed
the project and now we are looking for something that is
equitable for the developer, but he did not feel the backup
material explained adequately whether the developer is requesting
a C.O. prior to completing all the other on-site improvements or
just the road improvements on Kings Highway.
Administrator Davis stated that staff's recommendation deals
only with the roadway, and Director Davis reported that the
59
M
Senior Vice President of the development company has stated that
all on-site improvements will be completed - parking lot,
drainage, buildings, landscaping, etc. - and the only request
they are making is that they would like to pull C.O.s on units
prior to Kings Highway being widened to five lanes.
Vice Chairman Scurlock stated he would not have a problem
with that, but if they are talking about completing only three
buildings and not making all of the improvements for all of the
other buildings, that is another problem. He wished it to be
made very clear that the only waiver will be the road improvement
above and beyond what was originally requested.
Commissioner Wodtke noted that there is a letter written by
Public Works Director Davis to the Transportation Planning
Committee on September 6, 1984, at which time the decision was
made to five lane and do the additional intersection
improvements, and this was a year ago. Although we did change
the situation because the county decided we wanted to do some
additional improvements - what affect did that have on the
completion? Commissioner Wodtke felt it seems the developer
might not have even been able to do what they originally said
they were going to do within the same timeframe. If the County
caused a delay because of wanting to do some additional
improvements, then he felt we need to make it a consideration
because that would not set a precedent. However, since the
developer agreed to do the engineering back in September of 1984,
he wished to know if it is our fault that the engineering has
just been completed 12 months later, and Director Davis stated he
did not feel that it was.
Commissioner Wodtke did not see in that case how we could
legitimately say no to owners of other commercial developments
who request a C.O. prior to road improvements being made. He
felt that if it was the County's fault that caused the delay,
that would be one thing, but he didn't want to set a precedent
for similar requests from developers in the future. Furthermore,
60
AUG 211985 BOOK
AUG 211985
BOOK
61 F,q F 858
he understood that
the development has been sold since
site plan
approval.
Administrator Wright advised that the only reason staff is
recommending this change is that it was a change for the County's
benefit and in the long run it will save us money.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked if the engineering, sufficient
just for the turning lanes, could have been completed in time,
and Director Davis felt it could have.
Dennis Spilotros, Senior Vice President of Shopping Center
Development Company of America, assured the Board that all
on-site improvements will be 100% completed, and all they are
looking for is the opportunity to meet their lease commitment
with Publix and Walgreens and get the center delivered in a
timely fashion. Their sales contract has a basic penalty clause
in it for late delivery, but the critical point is meeting their
lease obligation with Publix and Walgreens as without them they
don't have a shopping center.
Commissioner Bird asked Director Davis when the road
improvements actually would be in place.
Director Davis stated that basically the engineering is
about finished; we need some changes to utilities and some
utility poles have to be moved, DOT permits obtained, etc. Staff
is recommending the developer's engineer fast track some of these
items, including some signalization work which staff feels is
critical to widening Kings Highway. Director Davis stated that
basically it can all begin as soon as the DOT permit is acquired
which could be 30-60 days.
Vice Chairman Scurlock did not feel staff should tie them-
selves to such a timeframe considering all the outside agencies
involved; he believed it could take as much as six months, and
the Administrator agreed we could only state completion
contingent on outside agencies.
Commissioner Bird wished to ascertain if in the meantime
those two stores will open and use Kings Highway and SR -60 as
M -
they presently exist, but Director Davis stated that they will
not use Kings Highway if it is in construction. They will mainly
have SR -60 access, which they have pledged to provide traffic
control and have two patrol officers.
Commissioner Bird then had it confirmed that all other
on-site improvements will be done by the day Publix and Walgreens
open, and Commissioner Wodtke wished to know how you say no to
the 45 other stores.
Administrator Wright stated that they are asking to occupy
only a percentage of the shopping center, and he believed it
would be necessary to have all the improvements in to occupy all
the shopping center.
Mr. Spilotros reported that they have approximately six
local tenants under lease now, and this obviously is the optimal
time for them to come in and set up before the Christmas season.
He noted that it is not an economic point for the developer, but
he would hate to see these local tenants penalized because the
off-site improvements are not in place.
Vice Chairman Scurlock again wished to make it clear that he
is not just talking about Publix and Walgreens being complete,
but the whole project being complete and ready to be occupied,
and Mr. Spilotros explained that all the spaces will be completed
and ready for occupancy; the local tenants will just have to get
permits to do their improvements on their individual units.
Administrator Wright stated that if the Board approves this
today, they would be approving 64,000 square feet of the shopping
center, not 108,0001. He noted that if you occupy even one
store, you have to meet the site plan.
Director Keating asked if that means there will be no C.O.s
given to the other stores until all these roadway improvements
are completed, and it was noted that this involves not just
Publix and Walgreens, but 64,000 square feet or 8 stores.
L AUG 211985
62
BOOK PACE. 859
AUG 21 1985BooK 61 FAPE860
Commissioner Bird wondered what do we tell the other six
stores they have contracted with who will be anxious to open
also.
Vice Chairman Scurlock felt we will have to tell everyone
they can occupy - you can't discriminate as long as all
improvements are met with the exception of the Kings Highway road
improvements.
Administrator Wright asked why we can't say since you
haven't completed all road improvements, you can't occupy all the
center, and County Attorney Charles Vitunac advised that there is
no legal objection to having the developer agree to waive his
right to develop the rest of the shopping center until the rest
of the off-site improvements are done.
Director Keating reported that staff's current policy on
major projects has been to recommend issuance of C.O.s on certain
parts of the project as long as all the improvements relating to
those parts of the project are completed; in the case where
off-site improvements are involved, it depends on how the
conditions relating to approval of the site plan were written or
what the actual need is; for instance, we will allow 50%
occupancy if that 50% won't create adverse conditions.
Vice Chairman Scurlock again emphasized that he was talking
about all the parking lot being completed, striped, landscaping
done, etc. - the only exception being the off-site improvements.
Now it appears Attorney Vitunac is saying that, in addition, the
developer could agree to occupy only a portion of the space.
Attorney Vitunac suggested that all this could be included
in a written agreement wherein the developer would agree to keep
those other stores unoccupied and no C.O. issued until those
off-site improvements are completed, which he felt is what they
are asking.
Mr. Spilotros pointed out that the two major stores attract
the traffic and the local tenants play off that traffic flow; the
smaller tenants do not create a significant traffic impact. He
63
stated that essentially he is asking for the opportunity for
whoever they lease to between now and the time the off-site
improvements are completed to be allowed to go in. Mr. Spilotros
stated that re safety relating to the traffic situation, they
agree to implement whatever traffic controls the County deems
necessary, police officers, the four traffic poles the Public
Works Director has requested, etc.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked if a safe situation could be
attained without those additional lanes by using off duty police
to control traffic until all the road improvements are in at
Kings Highway. He also inquired if the entire space could be
occupied safely by using these off-duty policemen.
Mr. Spilotros stated that realistically they are not going
to have 108,000 sq, ft. leased between now and the time the road
improvements are in. He anticipated that between now and
Christmas they may do six additional leases.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked if they are the new owner or
the old owner, and Mr. Spilotros stated that they are the
developer and current owner. There is a contract in place, which
may or may not fly in the next 60 days, but either way they stay
on the deal for the next two years in the leasing and management
capacity.
Commissioner Wodtke asked why it took them over a year to do
the engineering for the five lanes, and Mr. Spilotros asked their
consultant from Avalon Engineering to address that question. He
agreed they do bear part of the responsibility.
Jack Schrager of Avalon Engineering explained that the
delays are on more than one issue and that he has been working
with the County and the developer to formalize the agreement and
attach it to their site plan. That together with his in-house
delays in doing the engineering are the main causes for that time
span. He did wish to clarify the issue of the approved site plan
roadway improvements. The developer has a contract with the
current site contractor to perform those improvements as shown on
64
AUG 21. 985 BOOK 61 MCE 861
AUG 21. 1985 BOOK IcE 8.6
the approved site plan, and that contractor has assured them that
he would have no problems completing those improvements within
the timeframe the developer has scheduled to open the center and
it would take him about 30 days to do that scope of work.
Commissioner Scurlock commented that there has been a Letter
of Credit problem in the past and it expires again September
11th; Mr. Spilotros advised that the new letter of credit already
has been ordered from Barnett Bank.
Commissioner Bird asked if the SR -60 improvements would be
completed and Director Davis stated that they would have to be
completed prior to any C.O.s being issued just to get traffic
eastbound into the site. He noted that first a permit must be
obtained from the DOT.
Mr. Spilotros confirmed that he understood that they could
not open prior to these improvements being completed.
Vice Chairman Scurlock suggested a Motion to authorize the
Chairman to sign an agreement to be prepared by the County
Attorney stipulating all the items we have discussed, and
Commissioner Bird believed that would be in addition to the
recommendations listed in Public Works Director Davis memo of
8/20/85.
Director Davis agreed those would be included and reported
that the developer has read those recommendations and agreed to
them; although he did express concern about being able to get the
DOT permits by October 15th.
Mr. Spilotros noted that obviously they can't move ahead
with a C.O. if they can't get that permit. He had no problem
with that, but was concerned about setting a finite date on it.
65
Commissioner Bird felt we should scratch the date and just
require that they have to get the permit, and this was agreed.
He then asked what the understanding was with regard to what the
developer's agreement is going to say in regard to the 8 tenants
and possibly more that will be coming on board.
Vice Chairman Scurlock felt that is the big decision -
whether or not we can feel comfortable with staff's
recommendation that 1/3 of the space can be leased and occupied
and not create a dangerous situation, or 1/2, or what?
Commissioner Wodtke noted that half is just Publix and
Walgreens. He realized that is the economic key for them, but
felt certain that if we start allowing other to get in there
before the season, it's going to be a big traffic hassle with two
policemen out on SR -60.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked if he would recommend we only
allow occupancy of Publix & Walgreens 52,795 sq. ft, prior to
road improvements, and Commissioner Bird asked about the other
six.
Commissioner Wodtke felt if you allow those six, you'll have
41 others.
Mr. Spilotros stated the point is that they have signed
leases with these six individuals now; they are planning on doing
fixturing when the C.O. is received. They need to get in before
the season, and they -are not a traffic impact.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if he was saying that Public and
Walgreens generate all the traffic and the 45 other stores won't
generate any traffic.
Mr. Spilotros did not believe they will have 47 stores
leased between now and the time the roadwork is completed. They
do have lease commitments with six people that they would like to
meet because this is an economic hardship on those people.
66
AUG 211985 BOOK 6 1 FvcF 863
��M
BOOK 61
Vice Chairman Scurlock emphasized that what he is asking
staff is how much of the center we can allow to be occupied
without creating a safety problem because he felt two traffic
officers could do only so much.
Director Davis felt that Kings Highway is going to have to
be built in phases to maintain the existing traffic there. If
half of Kings Highway from the median towards the project can be
built as the first phase and then traffic maintained in that
section until they are building the west phase, perhaps we could
have at least two lanes open on Kings Highway and maybe some
traffic control there and some access onto Kings Highway while
the west lanes are being constructed.
Commissioner Wodtke pointed out that at the time we are
going to be doing this construction on Kings Highway, they are
going to be jammed with people trying to get in and out of that
place.
Mr. Spilotros wished to make the point that they do have a
design for road improvement that is approved by the County with
which they can meet the deadline and can open the center and have
unlimited local tenants go in there. He noted that because that
area was scheduled for country road improvement, they agreed to
make their contribution to the road improvement instead. There
were some communications problems between the county and their
engineer, but it was never a question of their not agreeing, and
they have diligently pursued trying to find what the County
actually wants and contribute their dollars to that end. He
emphasized that the local tenants are an important consideration
to the shopping center.
Vice Chairman Scurlock inquired if there was water capacity
for the entire shopping center, and Director Pinto stated that it
was going to depend on what kind of stores there are. For
instance, a laundromat would require more capacity than a gift
store.
67
M M
Mr. Spilotros stated there were no plans for a laundromat in
the center.
Commissioner Bird asked if it is our recommendation to not
allow access from Kings Highway until the improvements are done,
and Director Davis noted that from a safety standpoint, we do not
want to mix through traffic with construction and project
traffic.
Vice Chairman Scurlock felt that the basic question is how
safe a situation can we create and at what point does it become
unsafe - is it 50,000 sq. ft. for Public and Walgreens or almost
70,000 square feet or is it the whole shopping center. He did
not feel he had the expertise to make that decision.
Mr. Spilotros pointed out that square footage numbers are
very deceptive and he would prefer to address it on a unit basis.
They have essentially 8 tenants - 2 major ones. If you look at
square footage, you say the center is 60% occupied, but they have
47 local units out there and only 6 leased.
Commissioner Bird felt any number we might try to attach, we
are just pulling out of the air, and he felt that we should go
with the recommendation of staff and enter into an agreement with
the developer along those lines and not try to limit it at this
point to X -Y -Z tenants, as he doubted they would be overwhelmed
with tenants, but the Vice Chairman also did not feel that they
would have the road improvements within eight months.
Director Keating pointed out that if the developer put their
approved improvements in now, the County only would have to come
in within a year or so and tear this up to put in the other
improvements when the center was all leased and occupied.
Director Davis did not think that would occur within a year
as currently the traffic count on Kings Highway is at half
capacity, and when the entire shopping center was occupied, it
would attract 4,000 trips putting Kings Highway at traffic level
licit.
AUG 21 1985
68
BOOK F'�E.
AUG 211985
BOOK
PAGE S66
Commissioner Wodtke asked
if we would be better
off to go
back to the old site plan for now, but Director Davis thought
that it would be a mistake for the future as wsthin 5 years or
less we would have to tear up Kings Highway, especially if there
is a center coming in on the west side.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke that the County enter into an
agreement with the developer as recommended by staff in
their memo of 8/20/85 without any stipulations re
number of units that can be leased and made ready
for occupancy.
Under discussion, Commissioner Wodtke explained that he
seconded the Motion because he felt with only three Commissioners
in attendance today, a Motion should be seconded. However, he
really had a concern over the traffic problem, and asked Director
Davis if staff could rethink it and then come back next week with
another recommendation because he did not intend to vote for this
the way it is written.
Vice Chairman Scurlock was uncomfortable about allowing them
to occupy the entire center, and noted he had trouble with
getting staff to come up with a number, but suggested 750
occupancy in square footage, which would provide some buffer and
give them the ability to lease a few more units.
Commissioner Bird agreed to modify the Motion to say that
C.O.s would not be issued exceeding 75% of the total occupancy of
the square footage of the center until such time as the road
improvements are complete, and Commissioner Wodtke agreed to
seconding the amended Motion.
Mr. Spilotros believed they could live with that.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion
carried 2-1, Commissioner Wodtke dissenting.
69
M M r
REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM USE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY AS DUMP SITE
The Board reviewed the following letter dated 8/8/85:
AUG Nub
��
RF-M11dEE)
A,
CT-*?
WAU eoUnrry
r LY1Elii/;�S�IaYL-�S
..cLY��
605 13th Avenue
Vero Beach, FL
August 8, 1985
;<
1i3►.1 T iOil LIST
Administrator
AtMr.ney —�
32962
The Honorable Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman
Indian River County Commission
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Dear Mr. Lyons:
PerS��;lil�l � 1
Public N�1Grks --�—�
Co unity Dev.
Utilities
Finance
Other.,?r.
I have owned and paid taxes on a 7 -acre parcel of unimproved
property, lying east of 38th Avenue and north of 43rd Street in
Gifford, for more than a quarter century. Several years ago,
trespassers started depositing junk on my property without my
knowledge and consent and against my will. I have placed "No
Trespassing" signs around the property, but trespassers have
continued to dump rubbish and junk on the property. Junk con-
sists of old furniture, appliances, auto parts, etc.
I have previously on several occasions, at my own expense,
had the property cleaned and had the rubbish removed. This has
cost me hundreds of dollars and is a financial hardship.
It is my understanding that the County has laws on its books
that make it illegal for people to trespass and dump rubbish on
my property. Additionally, I understand the Florida laws provide
for a procedure for the removal and destruction, by local en-
forcement officers, of abandoned motor vehicles, machinery,
refrigerators, washing machines, furniture, and other similar
articles that are found on private property.
I have complained to the County about this continuing
problem and was advised by the County representative that I
talked with that there was nothing that the County could do about
the dumping, and that the only thing she knew I could do was to
post more "No Trespassing" signs. I followed those instructions,
however, no one pays any attention to the signs, and they con-
tinue to dump on my property.
I was just recently required to appear before the Indian
River County Code Enforcement Board on the grounds that I was
using the property for an illegal junk yard. The use that is
being made of my property is by trespassers and not by me. The
Code Enforcement Board has directed me, at my expense, to remove
the rubbish and junk that was deposited on my property by tres-
passers. By burdening me with the continual expense of removing
junk and rubbish, which I did not bring to the property,
over which I never had any control, and which I have been
70
AUG 211985
BOOK Pt4�E ®6
AUG 21 1995 BOOK 61 `A Cu, F 868
attempting to stop, without success because of the lack of assis-
tance from the County, the County is requiring me, as an indi-
vidual citizen, to pay my own personal funds to operate a garbage
dump for the County.
By the County not enforcing its own laws and by the County
requiring me to go to the financial hardship of removing the
rubbish, the County has in effect established on my property a
sub -station garbage dump that I have to pay taxes on and that I
periodically have to pay to keep clean, and, additionally, I have
to expend my own personal funds to have the rubbish hauled to and
deposited at the County landfill. It seems to me that the County
has in effect taken my property for public use, by allowing
people to dump there, but requires me to be entirely responsible
for the expense of the same.
I can not afford to place a chain link fence around my
property, and from my experience do not believe that that would
do any good in any event, nor can I afford to pay someone to
perform surveillance 24 hours a day to keep trespassers off my
property, nor can I afford to continue- to run a sub -station
garbage dump for the County.
I realize that the County Code provides that, if I disagree
with the ruling of the Code Enforcement Board, my recourse is to
file an appeal with the Circuit Court. In order for me to do
this, I would have to incur several thousands of dollars in court
costs and attorneys' fees. Rather than doing that, I am coming
to you, the County Commission, and am asking that you help me out
of this unfair predicament by having the County crews remove the
rubbish from my property, or, in the alternative, if you wish my
property to be used for public use as a dumping ground, that you
buy my property and pay me for it.
I am sending a copy of this letter to Sheriff Dobeck and, by
so doing, am asking him to also assist me in this matter by
trying to catch the trespassers that are using my land as a
dumping ground.
Very truly yours,
or, , ; -
4
(Mrs.) Gertrude M. (Shug) Carter
Marvin Carter briefly summarized the above letter written by
his mother, Gertrude Carter, who is requesting some relief from
the County in this matter. He pointed out that they have cleaned
up this property several times at considerable expense and even
though "No Trespassing" and "No Dumping" signs were posted, the
dumping continued. Mr. Carter felt it was very unfair for his
mother to have been charged with running a junk yard and he
believed the County needs either more dump stations or more code
enforcement.
Vice Chairman Scurlock believed that the master plan being
prepared by the solid waste consultants will help solve these
71
situations by providing for acceptance of all types of debris,
trash and garbage, as opposed to trying to limit the transfer
stations to certain materials. The County envisions accepting
everything that needs to be disposed of and expanding our whole
concept by discontinuing a tip fee and going to a parcel type of
assessment which would make it unreasonable to dump in somebody
else's yard when you are paying for the service anyway. He felt
that the proximity of a transfer station makes a great deal of
difference in how much trash is dumped on a vacant lot or grove.
He felt it is a difficult situation at best.
Mr. Carter felt there seems to be a bureaucratic attitude
that it is the land owner that is the violator, when, in fact,
they are the ones being violated. He felt that, in essence, his
mother is operating a garbage dump for the County at considerable
expense by having to pay to remove the debris from the property
and having to pay for putting it into the landfill on top of
that. He repeated that he feels somethings needs to be done, and
that Sheriff Dobeck indicated that this is a Code Enforcement
problem not a law enforcement problem. Mr. Carter did not know
where you split the two, but noted that Sheriff Dobeck believed
there was some kind of an agreement with the County 4 or 5 years
ago that this was going to be a code enforcement deal and that at
one time the County had a Code Enforcement Officer who apparently
is not around any longer. Mr. Carter emphasized that our code of
ordinances needs to be changed in order to permit a code enforce-
ment officer to levy appropriate finds or penalties to make folks
think before they dump.
Mr. Carter explained that the perpetrators access the
property from the westerly boundary on 38th Avenue and dump old
refrigerators, etc., alongside roads that are within the
property.
Commissioner Wodtke believed that in a case like this, where
the property has been cleaned up and posted and the dumping
72 q
AU G 211985 BOOK D FA; 863
AUG 21 19 BOOK 61 F� F 0
continues, that we should devise some way to relieve or protect
the innocent property owner.
Director Keating noted that the Code Enforcement Board is
looking at it from the standpoint of getting it cleared up and
that is what they ordered Mrs. Carter to do. However, she asked
for additional time to bring her problem to this Board. He
emphasized that while we have adequate language in our ordinances
to prohibit someone from littering and dumping, the problem is in
catching the individuals particularly when it is vacant, unfenced
property. One of staff's recommendations to Mrs. Carter was to
erect a fence, but she did not feel that would solve the problem.
He believed that the Board is faced with deciding either to
enforce this or have the County clean it up.
Vice Chairman Scurlock felt in that case the County would be
cleaning up every grove in the county. He still felt that one of
the main problems is that people do not want to travel 12-17
miles to the Landfill and, therefore, dump their trash on the
nearest vacant lot. To discourage that, he believed the County
should provide for collection of all materials at the transfer
stations.
Mr. Carter felt that some of our Code Enforcement people
should investigate these situations, because it is almost
impossible to sit out there, day after day, and catch someone
dumping, which, in this case, amounts to roughly six truck loads
of debris and trash. Mr. Carter noted that most of the dumping
is done by lawn maintenance outfits and suspected several firms
located nearby.
Attorney Vitunac advised that the Code Enforcement Board is
not allowed to take action on matters that are essentially
criminal in act and dumping on -someone else's property is a
criminal matter subject to the County code. It is a law enforce-
ment problem. Code enforcement is not law enforcement, it is
property maintenance, and under common law and every other law,
73
it is the property owner's responsibility to keep the property in
good shape.
Mr. Carter repeated that the State Attorney's Office and the
Sheriff's Department consider it a Code Enforcement matter, so
that leaves his mother caught in a gray area where nobody really
wants to do anything about it.
Commissioner Bird felt that we would be opening up Pandora's
Box if we sent out County crews to clean up the property and
though he believed that it is an unnecessary, undo hardship on
the Carters, he felt we have to ask them to clean it up one more
time, and then through some power or authority try to do
something to further insure that it is not going to happen again.
Commissioner Bird suggested that we ask our Code Enforcement
people to be more vigilant in trying to catch persons doing this
dumping and also write a letter to the Sheriff asking him to give
some special attention to this area, and see if we can catch the
perpetrators.
Code Enforcement Officer Betty Davis reported that she
talked with the Sheriff's Department and asked them to work with
us on this and notify us when they receive a complaint.
Commissioner Bird understood a Motion was not necessary
today, but agreed that, unfortunately, we must ask Mrs. Carter to
clean up the property once more, after which the County will
pursue every possible avenue through our staff, the Sheriff, and
everyone else to try to stop the violators.
REQUEST FOR FUNDS FOR MEDICAL EXAMINER
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/8/85:
74
BOOK CA PA,,H 71
AUG 211985
CHIEF MEDICAL EXAMINER:
LEONARD WALKER, M.D.
August 8, 1985
STATE OF FLORIDA
OFFICE OF THE MEDICAL EXAMINER
DISTRICT NINETEEN
6015 SILVER OAK DRIVE
FORT PIERCE, FL 33482
U.S.A.
Days
(305) 4614000 x140
After Hours
9
MM 679-2856
{ 1
Ms. Liz Forlini; Commission Secretary
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Ms. Forlini,
BOOK C%
CHIEF OF OPERATIONS:
ALBERT HALLONQUIST
:I. I..i:t- L"IUN LIST
'S
C: :... eV. —__.—
As per Our telephone conversation of 8/7/85, I am requesting that our
Office be placed on the Agenda for the earliest available County Commission
Meeting.
We are currently over budget, and need to appear in order to ask for a
Budget Amendment. Last year, we were granted $50,000 for Fiscal Year 84/85.
This was not an amount we requested, but came about after other people
submitted a budget proposal. Therefore, we have come out so far, over
budget, with at least 3 months to go.
We have estimated that we will need approximately $19,500 to finish out the
Fiscal Year. This would include Morgue Rental, Body Transport Fees, Toxicology
Fees, and Professional Fees. This figure is the same as estimated by Mr.
Jeff Barton at the last Budget Workshop where this request was not entertained.
PLease contact me if you need any further information, also, please contact
me as soon as possible regarding our appointment with the Commission.
Chief Medical Examiner
Sincerely ,
U -"Al Hala
Chief of Operations
CC: COMMISSION CHAIRMAN OR HIS ACTING CHAIRMAN
ST. LUCIE. OKEECHOBEE, MARTIN AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTIES
75
Dr. Walker stated that he is here to ask for an additional
$19,000 so his office can finish the last three months of their
fiscal year operations.
Commissioner Bird noted the budget under which the doctor
operates is a total overall budget for the four counties in the
district, and he asked if the $19,000 represented the shortfall
in that total budget or the shortfall is directly related to the
services in Indian River County.
Dr. Walker stated that it is directly related to Indian
River County only, and they ran out 'of funds in Indian River
County about the end of July.
Commissioner Bird pointed out that Dr. Walker allocated a
certain percentage of his overall budget to Indian River County
and has asked for funds from this Commission to offset that
proportionate expense, and the Commission feels it is a $19,000
shortfall between the services he is providing to us and charging
for them and that amount of money that has been provided in the
budget.
Dr. Walker agreed, but pointed out that what happened is
someone else presented his budget last, and they presented a
budget of $50,000 which just isn't enough to operate.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked the County Attorney about the
legal requirements for funding Dr. Walker's office.
Attorney Vitunac reported that Chapter 406 requires that the
Board of County Commissioners provide a reasonable salary and
expenses to the District Medical Examiner and that examiner shall
submit a budget which they shall approve; actually, this should
be determined at budget time and action taken then. However, it
is the same for any budgeted department; either the service has
to be curtailed or more money given.
OMB Director Barton informed the Board that we receive a
bill from Dr. Walker for the services as Medical Examiner; we
receive another bill from Longwood Medical Center for the use of
their facilities; and then we receive individual bills from the
76
AUG 211985 - BOOK 61 PGUE 8 3
AUGj 985 BOOK 1 FAG F. 814
different transporters that are delivering the bodies to the
facilities at Longwood. Dr. Walker signs these bills, sends them
to us, and we pay them direct.
Vice Chairman Scurlock asked if the Medical Examiner has the
legal ab.ility to overspend funds without authorization to do so,
and Attorney Vitunac noted that the law does not provide for
deficit financing; however, there are contingency funds because
of the possibility that some departments may go over.
Vice Cha-irman Scurlock wished to be more specific in terms
of where the overrun has taken place. He believed that last year
when Dr. Walker came in, and he really presented his own budget
since he is the Medical Examiner, the Commission chose not to
select that particular budget and intended to fund it at the
level of $50,000. He believed that at the budget workshop
session, the Commission had concern re the type of service that
was going to be offered to Indian River County, and in fact,
suggested that if the service of Drs. Rogers and Cox could
continue to be used, we would not have to pay transportation fees
for delivering bodies all the way down to Longwood; also that the
actual use of Indian River Memorial Hospital facilities was
substantially less than the fees charged at Longwood. The Vice
Chairman wished to have a breakdown of costs in terms of those
particular activities - transportation, the fees of Drs. Rogers
and Cox, etc.
OMB Director Barton reported that there is a budget of
$50,000 and we have spent $50,174.95. This is broken down as
follows for 91 autopsies:
Transportation $ 5,251.45
Longwood Medical Center 2,103.00
Medical Examiner's Office 42,820.50
As to the differences between last year and this year, the
OMB Director noted that Dr. Walker's office has been charging us
basically $400 per autopsy, plus the different types of tests
they perform, for which we get a separate bill. Dr. Rogers and
77
Cox were charging $375.00, but had sent a letter saying that as
of October 1st their fees would go to $400. Indian River
Memorial Hospital charged $25.00 per case, and Longwood charges
$61.00 per case. When the autopsies were performed in Indian
River County, we did not pay anything in transportation bills,
and the average charge which we are paying now is about $75 per
transport.
Commissioner Bird noted that $75 times 90 transports
multiplies out to $7,000, not $5,000, and the OMB Director noted
that he has some unpaid bills.
Vice Chairman Scurlock understood there was a state study
done re medical examiner's offices throughout the state, and it
seemed that the appropriate figure for funding these particular
activities fell around $1.00 per capital, which in Indian River
County would have been about $75,000 for this past year. What he
would suggest is that we possibly underfunded last year based on
this new study.
OMB Director Barton noted that the study said the state
average is about 80t per capital, but the Legislature felt $1.00
per capital would be more in lines.
Vice Chairman Scurlock emphasized that his main concern is
lack of communication'and also whether it is legal to spend funds
that are not budgeted. We budgeted only $50,000 and the proper
procedure that should have been taken before any additional funds
were spent would have been to approach this Commission and
request a budget amendment. That did not happen and Dr. Walker
continued to spend additional monies, even more than is reflected
here because there are unpaid bills.
Dr. Walker stressed that the budget under which he is
operating is not the budget he proposed; it was proposed by Dr.
Cox and States Attorney Stone without prior consultation with
him.
Commissioner Bird figured that if the number of autopsies
that were performed had been performed locally by Drs. Rogers and
78
AUG 91 19185 BOOKS Fr, c 8'-/ 5
r
AUG 2.1
BOOK
1
I
�'AUE 8-16
Cox without
the transportation costs and also figuring
the
lesser
charge made by the local hospital, the difference would have been
about $10,000.
Dr. Walker emphasized that he has an independent state/
county office to run and he has tried to run it the way he saw
fit. He is interested in those officials' opinions, but they
can't dictate to him.
Vice Chairman Scurlock continued to emphasize that Section
406.07 states that the medical examiner and associates shall be
entitled to compensation and such reasonable salary and fees as
are established by the Board of County Commissioners - not as
established by the medical examiner.
Commissioner Wodtke certainly felt we have to adequately
fund a medical examiner, and wished to stay out of the realm of
personalities and his right to hire or fire, but his basic
concern was taxpayers dollars. Dr. Walker's decisions re using
Longwood facilities, etc., have cost our taxpayers $10,000,and
he, therefore, requested that Dr. Walker be concerned about our
taxpayers.
Dr. Walker explained that the centralization of this
district was not his idea, but this county and the three others
had their attorneys get together and draft an interlocal
agreement. Under the provisions of that agreement, the medical
examiners office was supposed to relocate to the newly built
morgue at the Indian River Community College. Dr. Walker felt
this is a wonderful idea and has many advantages, but the basic
problem causing the present log jam is the agreement specified
that the office of the medical examiner would be under the
administrative and procedural control of the Board of Trustees of
the Community College. This would give the Board of Trustees the
ability to hire and fire his employees. Dr. Walker felt that is
an intolerable situation and believed that neither the States
Attorney, Public Defender or Sheriff would go along with a like
arrangement. Dr. Walker stressed that he is ready to make this
79
.M M r
M
move that everyone wants, but he cannot make it with those
constraints. Further, his budget was designed specifically for
that or to stay where he is now.
Administrator Wright stated if consolidation is the problem,
then let's deconsolidate and carve Indian River out as it was in
the past.
Dr. Walker noted that the centralization is the trend, but
the Administrator felt the important thing is to do what works
and works best, and our history shows it works best when we deal
here locally. He felt we should try to get out of the district
and try to get a local medical examiner appointed for this county
only.
Commissioner Wodtke felt that the County probably was
spoiled in the past, having Dr. Schofield, who lived here and had
his office here, serve in this capacity for many years. If there
was a problem with the other counties during those years, he was
not aware of it. He continued to speak of the advantages of
using Drs. Rogers and Cox and our local hospital and did not see
why that kind of arrangement could not still be a possibility.
Dr. Walker felt the new ways is working well and that we
ought to concentrate our efforts on getting it to work better.
Administrator Wright believed the Sheriff's office likes the
old way considerably better also.
Vice Chairman Scurlock wondered if the Board was aware Dr.
Walker never executed the agreement with himself and the County
Commissioner. It was only executed by the County.
Commissioner Bird asked if each county entered into an
agreement with him, and Vice Chairman Scurlock stated the
Commissioner authorized him to sign a contract. He did so and it
was conveyed to Dr. Walker but never has been signed by him. We
do not have a copy of a signed contract for these services.
Commissioner Bird asked if that was intentional, and Dr.
Walker stated it was not; he pointed out that there has been
three or more other contracts - they deal with four counties.
80
AUG 211985b-1 b-1 F-�,cE 77
61 �'�GE � �
AUG 211985 BOOK
Vice Chairman Scurlock noted that part of the doctor's
office is administrative knowledge and functioning.
Commissioner Bird noted we are dealing with two separate
things. The first deals with becoming an independent district
and being removed from the four-way district, and second is the
request before us today to make up the overrun so the medical
examiner can function the remainder of this fiscal year. He felt
these should be dealt with separately.
Vice Chairman Scurlock wished to know if the $19,000 would
cover the entire remainder of the year and there would be no more
requests for money this fiscal year.
Dr. Walker did not anticipate any.
Commissioner Bird felt that if the OMB Director just pays
the bills that are being held back that alone would use up the
$19,000, but the OMB Director stated that he has only around
$1,500 in bills, but has not received a bill from Dr. Walker's
office for July. His estimations of the amount needed, however,
were closer to $16,500.
Dr. Walker stated he would try very hard to stay within the
$19,000.
Vice Chairman Scurlock agreed more funding is needed and
$19,000 is a reasonable figure, but on the other hand, he could
not honestly feel that the attempt to regionalize the medical
examiner office has served as well as we thought, and he would
like to explore the possibility of getting Indian River County
carved out.
Administrator Wright asked if Dr. Walker would voluntarily
consider withdrawing from Indian River County since the Sheriff,
the States Attorney, etc., all would much prefer the old system.
Dr. Walker stated that he would not voluntarily withdraw and
and did not agree all the officials are unhappy with the service.
81
- M M
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird to increase
the Medical Examiner's budget by the $19,000
requested, reflecting a total budget for this
fiscal year of $69,000 with the additional funds
to come from the Reserve for Contingency per
budget amendment prepared by the OMB Director.
Vice Chairman Scurlock suggested that the Motion contain the
provision that Dr. Walker has no authority to expend funds above
that level until he gets prior permission from this Commission.
Commissioner Bird agreed to add that provision to
his Motion, and the Motion with that addition was
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke.
Discussion continued at length re the additional $10,000
which resulted from the changes made by Dr. Walker, and Dr.
Walker stated that another possibility would be for his office to
do autopsies up here if they could.
Administrator Wright pointed out that Dr. Walker would make
less money if we weren't in the district and felt he also would
lose money if the two other doctors did the autopsies, which he
believed had an influence on him when he terminated his relation-
ship with Rogers and Cox.
Dr. Walker contended that had absolutely no influence on
that action. If those doctors had gone along with contents in
the letter he sent them, he would be happy to bring them on
board; actually he did not fire them, they quit.
Administrator Wright noted that it is possible those
requirements weren't tenable just the same as with Dr. Walker and
the Junior College.
82
AUG 211985
BOOK 1 FAGS. 8 7 9
AUG 21 1985
g
Dr. Walker stated that his requirements are negotiable, and
further noted that he himself is still negotiating with the
Community College.
Vice Chairman Scurlock did not feel this is an efficient
operation by any means, but felt he could go along with an
increase based on the state study which indicated that $1.00 per
capita is reasonable.
Commissioner Wodtke believed we have made our point, but
stated he would prefer to go with the OMB Director's projection
of $16,500 for the remainder of the year. He could support the
Motion based on that figure.
COMMISSIONER BIRD agreed to amend his Motion to authorize
an increase of $16,500, and Commissioner Wodtke Seconded.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION AS AMENDED.
It was voted on and carried unanimously (3-0).
Dr. Walker asked if there was anything the Board wished him
to sign, and in the ensuing discussion, Vice Chairman Scurlock
noted that the interlocal agreement actually never has come into
play because none of the conditions have ever been met; he,
therefore, believed it is invalid.
Commissioner Wodtke suggested the Board authorize the County
Attorney to review the whole situation and bring it back.
Administrator Wright felt we should go a step further and
see if we can get out of it.
Commissioner Bird stated he also would like to review our
option in regard to creating our own district within our county.
Attorney Vitunac stated that he and the Administrator would
talk with the Sheriff and States Attorney and determine their
feelings. Administrator Wright suggested including language
stating "we will pursue all options to improving the current
83
working relationship." He assured the Board that they will come
back with an objective analysis.
ON NOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
authorized the County Attorney to review the con-
tract; review our options re creating our own
district; and staff to pursue all options towards
improving the current working relationship.
Dr. Walker again asked if the Board wanted him to sign
anything, and they did not.
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 21, 1985
SUBJECT: Budget Amendment
FROM: Jeffrey K. Barton, REFERENCES:
OMB Director
FILE:
Per approval by the Board on August 21, 1985, the following budget amendment
is necessary to allocate money that has been appropriated for the Medical
Examiner:
Account Title
Reserve for Contingency
Medical Services
L_ AUG 211985
Account Number
001-199-581-99.91
001-907-527-33.12
Increase Decrease
$16,500
$16,500
84
BOOK 61 FACE 881
AUG?. 11905 BOOK 61
SELECTION OF GOLF COURSE ARCHITECT
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/19/85:
TO: Board of Co. Commissioners DATE: August 19, 1985 FILE:
SUBJECT: Golf Course Architect
FROM: Richard N. Bird REFERENCES:
Chairman
Golf Course Feasibility Study Committee
1
After soliciting proposals from several golf course architects,
and narrowing that list down to four finalists, the Golf Course
Architect Selection sub -committee wishes to make the following
recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners.
The Committee's preference for the design of the County -owned
golf course to be built at Kiwanis-Hobart Park is as follows:
1. Ron Garl
2. George and Jim Fazio
3. Ward Northrup
4. Arthur Hills
- After visiting several golf courses in Florida designed by these
firms, and considerable other research, it is our opinion that
the County should proceed with negotiations based on the above
ranking.
Ron Garl, who is the number one selection, is world renowned for
his golf course architectural abilities, is located nearby in
Lakeland, Florida, and has shown an ability and willingness to
develop the Kiwanis-Hobart site into one of the most challenging
and enjoyable public golf courses in the State. His style of
developing a course in harmony with the natural topography and
amenities seems well suited to our County where the environment
and nature are ever present in our County's development.
GOLF COURSE ARCHITECT SELECTION SUB -COMMITTEE
Richard N. Bird
Clyde "Bud" Morrison
Adam Yurigan
RNB:aw
Michael Wright
Ron Fanaro
85
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (3-0)
authorized staff to proceed with negotiations for
the architectural design of the County Golf Course
with the first -ranked firm of Ron Garl, as recommended
by the Golf Course Architect Section Sub -Committee.
DISCUSSION RE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL
Commissioner Wodtke reported that there has been a recorrnnen-
dation to combine certain members from the Overall Economic
Development Plan Committee and the Economic Development Committee
to form one council, the Economic Development Council. The
Commissioners had no objections, and Commissioner Wodtke advised
that he would bring recommendations for council appointments to
the Board at the meeting of September 4th.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made and
Seconded, the meeting adjourned at 12:30 o'clock P.M.
ATTEST:
Clerk
86
BOOK P�.GE ct
O