Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/21/1986Tuesday, October 21, 1986 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 Tuesday, October 21, 1986, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Patrick B. Lyons, Vice Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman; Richard N. Bird; and William C. Wodtke, Jr. Also present were Bruce Barkett, Assistant County Attorney; L. S. "Tommy" Thomas, Director of Intergovernmental Relations; and Barbara Bonnah, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order. Reverend Robert. Bradley of the Anglican Church of the Advent gave the invocation, and Chairman Scurlock led the Pledge of - Allegiance to the Flag. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS Chairman Scurlock requested the addition to the Consent Agenda as Item 6K the matter of the Board's authorization for staff to apply for grant monies for Golden Sands Park. Commissioner Bird requested the addition of a report of the Parks 8 Recreation Committee on projects which need some action by the Board. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously - added the above items to today's Agenda and Consent Agenda. ®CT 211996 aooK � � � 212 9 r-OCT21 i986 APPROVAL OF MINUTES BOOK The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or additions to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of September 18, 1986. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved the Minutes of the Special Meeting of 9/18/86, as wr 1 tten. PRESENTATION OF PRESIDENTIAL CITATION TO CHRIS HUBBARD AS PAST -CHAIRMAN OF PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL On behalf of the President of the United States of America, Congressman Bill Nelson presented a White House citation to Chris Hubbard for his efforts on behalf of the Treasure Coast Private Industry Council in serving as Chairman and administering the federally funded employment and training programs of the Treasure Coast Job Training Centers in Indian River, Martin and St. Lucie counties. Mr. Hubbard accepted the award with deep thanks and stressed that a lot of work has been done on this Committee by all the members, not just the Chairman. Commissioner Bird introduced Werner Bols, the present Chairman of the Council. CONSENT AGENDA Chairman Scurlock requested that Item D be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion, and Commissioner Bird asked that Item K be removed also. 2 � � s A. _Approval of Appointments of Deputy Sheriffs by Sheriff Tim Dobeck ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, -SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved the following appointments of Deputy Sheriffs by Sheriff Tim Dobeck: David T. Patrick Stephen E. Nichols Kenneth G. Brown Ricky F. Sarcineilo Stephen J. DeJoia Thomas F. Gorman Ronnie J. Weaver Donald J. Smith Paul David Endicott David G. Harris B. Annual Reports for Constitutional Officers - Fiscal Year Ending 9/30/86• Received and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk: Annual Report for year ending 9/30/86 for: Freda Wright, Clerk David Nolte, Property Appraiser Gene Morris, Tax Collector R. T. "Tim" Dobeck, Sheriff - C.— Reports— Received and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk: Traffic Violation Bureau, Special Trust Fund Month of September, 1986 -- $60,982.30 Month -to -Date Report by last name: Sept., 1986 D. Request for Authorization to Advertise for Bid - Equipment for Sandridge Golf Clubhouse The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/15/86: 3 BOOK 66 FA E114 r OCT 21 16 TO: Board of County Commissioners THRU: Joseph. Baird Director, Budget Office BOOK 66 PAGE R5 DATE: Oct. 15, 1986- — -E: SUBJECT: Authorization to Advertise for Bid FROM: L� -L �- �4 f REFERENCES: Carolyn C odrich, M-anager Purchasing Department The Sandridge Golf Course Clubhouse & Golf Cart Storage Building project is in the process of being bid by the architect, C.E. Block. The attached specifications are for equipment for the clubhouse and are not included in the bid for construction. Staff requests authorization to advertise the -equipment for bid. Chairman Scurlock explained that he has some fundamental problems with the design of the clubhouse. He believed that the design is basically the same as that of Vista Plantation's clubhouse, where there would be an inability to monitor the area between the snack bar and the pro shop with only one person. In addition, he did not feel that the clubhouse facility matched the quality of the championship course. Commissioner Bird reported that Golf Pro Bob Komarinetz and Architect Charles Block will be in attendance a little later on this morning, and, if the Commissioners wished for them to do so, they would give a full blown presentation at that time. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously tabled this matter until later in the meeting. E. Request Authorization to Advertise for Bid - (2) Refuse Container Trucks The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/14/86: 4 TO. Board,of County _Commissioners DATE:Oct. 14, 1986 FILE: THRU: Joseph A. Baird SUBJECT: Authorization to Advertise Director, Budget Office for Bid FROM. REFERENCES: Carolyn96drich, Manager Purchasing Department During the FY86/87 budget hearings, the Board approved $150,000 for the purchase of (2) Refuse Container Trucks in the Landfill budget. At this time, staff requests authorization to advertise the 2 trucks for bid. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously authorized staff to advertise the two 'trucks for bid, as recommended by Purchasing Manager Carolyn Goodrich. F. Surplus Property - County Equipment and Vehicles The Board reviewed the -following memo dated 10/14/86: TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: October 14, 1986 FILE: THRU: Josep'IR—A. Baird �Q SUBJECT: Surplus Property Director, Budget Office Cq=ty equ;tpaent & vehicles FROIVI:C�-'t aro Y7 Goodrich,ana9 er REFERENCES: Purchasing Department 1. Description and Conditions At the September 16 meeting, the Board declared several pieces of equipment as surplus property and authorized staff to advertise the items for sale. Bids were opened Thursday, October 9, 1986 at 11:00 A.M. 8 Bidders responded. 2. Recommendation Staff recommends that all bids be rejected because they are too low, and staff be authorized to re -advertise the equipment. 5 ®�� 211966 BOOK 66 NGE 116 i�- BOOK 66 PtvUE 11.7 ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously rejected all bids received and authorized -staff to re -advertise the equipment. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 BID TABULATION 10 C ` BID NO. DATE OF OPENING ° Oct. 9, 1986 Sao Zr 0 c BID TITLE Surplus Property ITEM NO DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE ` UP IT 1973 Ford Maverick Asset #0005 101 00 101 00 165 00 127 00 1972 Ford Cab -Ch. Asset #1677 655 00 201 00 S8G00 2500 00 19Z5 Ford Flatbed Asset #7724 ___200 101' 00 00 1 328 00 1 116 _ 1973 Ford Maverick Asset x/2101 14r -nn 130 00 1974 Intl. Mower Asset #1705 135. 00 701 00 51 00 230 00 78 00 1979 odge-C-rew-Cab a«et_ 31a _18; 00 1979 Datsun PU Asset #3221 Q 0 1979 Datsun PU Asset #3711 130 00 211 00 G. State Emergency Communications Program Agreement The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/9/86: TO: Charles P. Balczun DATE: October 9, 1986 FILE: County Administrator THRU: H.T. "Sonny" Dean General Services Director Jim Wilson SUBJECT: State Emergency Communications Assistant County Attorney Program Agreement FROM: Doug Wrig,. REFERENCES: Director, Emergency Management The 1986 Legislature appropriated general revenue funds for the procurement of equipment and services for emergency communications systems between the State and Counties during emergency situations. The Florida Department of Community Affairs in this agreement is proposing to purchase a Panafax Facsimile, Model OF-400AD for Indian River County as well as funding for a single telephone line with terminal jacks for the equipment. The state also proposes to pay the costs of the primary NATIAS monthly line fee charge through June 30, 1987. 6 It is noted that funds for the maintenance and repair of the emergency communications systems enhancements is the respon- sibility of Indian River County. The recurring charges for the phone line for the facsimile will also have to be paid for by the County. The recurring charges for the phone line is estimated to be $25.00 per month. Maintenance and repair on the facsimile should be negative on the new equipment for the first year per the warranty. Additional funds will be budgeted in FY 87-88 if this agreement is approved. The title to the equipment transfers immediately to the County upon installation and testing. Staff recommends approval of this agreement as it will provide _ immediately print quality copy between the County EOC and State EOC during natural and/or manmade disasters. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved the State Emergency Communications Program Agreement and authorized the Chairman's signature. AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD H. Extension of Preliminary Plat Approval for Heritage - Subd i vt-s i on— The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/13/86: TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: October 13, 1986 FELE: the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD /�� t CONCURRENCE: f-'3�Q �� � .� Robert M. xeat� ng, j! Ick- SUBJECT: EXTENSION OF PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE HERITAGE SUBDIVISION THROUGH: Michael K. Miller M Chief, Current Development FROM: Stan Boling , �. REFERENCES: Heritage Staff Planner STAN3 It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 21, 1986. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS: The Heritage is an approved 93 lot 40 acre subdivision located on Jungle Trail approximately 1.3 miles north of C.R. 510. The BOOK ""6fr{UC IR r. - OCT 21 1sss BOOK 66 PAGE 119 Planning and Zoning Commission granted conditional preliminary plat approval to The Heritage on March 28, 1986. No improvements have been constructed and no land development permit- has been issued. Ben Bailey, III, owner, is now requesting an 18 month extension of the preliminary plat approval. ANALYSIS: Extensions, requested in writing prior to expiration of approval, are allowed pursuant to _section 7(d)(10) of the subdivision ordinance. The Board has historically granted one 18 month extension of preliminary plat approval to applicants requesting such an extension. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant one 18 month extension of the conditional preliminary plat approval granted to The Heritage subdivision; said approval shall expire on March 28, 1988. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously granted one 18 -month extension of the Gond-tion-I preliminary plat approval for Heritage Subdivision to expire on March 28, 1988, as recommended by staff. I. Adoption of Resolution 86-90 - Cronin -Wells Property on Indian River Boulevard Southerly Extension The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/15/86: TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: P. Wilson, Assistant County Attorney DATE: <)Iober 15, 1986 RE: Cronin -Wells Property on Indian River Boulevard Southerly Extension BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 21, 1986 The above -referenced parties have donated a parcel of land along the Indian River Boulevard corridor in exchange for a transfer of density credit and execution of the attached resolution by the Board. The deed conveying this property has been executed by Cronin and representatives of the Wells' estate and has been recorded. It is my recommen- dation that we execute the resolution in accordance with our agreement with the above -referenced parties. 8 ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 86-90, accepting the dedication of land from James M. Cronin -and the Estate of Appling S. Wells, III, for the southerly extension of Indian River Boulevard; granting transfer of density credit for development purposes; agreeing not to file condemnation proceedings against that property; and agreeing not to assess the initial costs of construction against James. M. Cronin and the Estate of Appling S. Wells, III. 9 BOOK 66 PAGE 120 OCT 211966 L_ NIT 21 1986 10/86(Reso)LEGAL(Wk) RESOLUTION NO. 8 6 - 9 0 BOOK �� FAGE 11 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE DEDICATION OF LAND FROM JAMES M. CRONIN AND THE ESTATE OF APPLING S. WELLS, III FOR THE SOUTHERLY EXTENSION OF INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD; GRANTING TRANSFER OF DENSITY CREDIT FOR DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES; AGREEING NOT TO FILE CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THAT PROPERTY; AND AGREEING _ NOT TO ASSESS THE INITIAL COSTS OF CONSTRUCTION AGAINST JAMES M. CRONIN AND THE ESTATE OF APPLING S. WELLS, III. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County has determined that the construction of a southerly extension to Indian River Boulevard is necessary to relieve traffic congestion along the U. S. #1 corridor; and WHEREAS, the Indian River County Public Works - Department, in conjunction with private consultants, has prepared plans for and begun construction of the paving and drainage improvements to complete the southerly extension of Indian River Boulevard; and WHEREAS, James M. Cronin and the Estate of Appling S. Wells, 111 were the owners of property through which a portion of the southerly extension of Indian River Boulevard shall pass; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County was prepared to file court proceedings to acquire the property described herein through condemnation; and WHEREAS, upon being advised of the Board's intent to file condemnation proceedings, James M. Cronin and the Estate of Appling S. Wells, III agreed, subject to the conditions contained herein, to donate to Indian River County the portions of their property necessary to create the right of way for the southerly extension of Indian River Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, on behalf of all the citizens of Indian River County, wishes to thank James M. Cronin and the Estate of Appling S. Wells, III for their donation to Indian River County; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 1. Indian River County hereby accepts the donation and dedication of land for the Indian River Boulevard right of way from James M. Cronin and the Estate of Appling S. Wells, III said land being more fully described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. 2. The land herein described may be included in the acreage calculation for the purposes of density determination when the parcel from which the land was dedicated is proposed for development, pursuant to Indian River County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Appendix A, Zoning, Section 25(t). 3. Indian River County agrees not to file any court action against James M. Cronin and the Estate of Appling S. Wells, III to acquire the property described herein- through condemnation. 4. Indian River County will not assess any of the initial costs of paving and drainage improvements to Indian River Boulevard against James M, Cronin and the Estate of Appling S. Wells, III. The foregoing resolution (No. 86-90 ) was offered by Commissioner LXons _ who moved its adoption. The motion was -seconded by Commissioner Bowman and, upon being put to a -vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye Vice -Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 21st day of October, 1986. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By __0_c Attest on Scur ock, J r. Chairman rendaWright a �-- 4ndp] ve sformeg� Pi' Ai c) ency: neshwrn son sistat County Attorney BOOK 00 P'Gt %T 211986 L_ I Fr' -1 ' MCT 2 1 1986 Schedule "A" BOOK INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD (PARCEL NO. 110.0 y�=r 'i"�7GED -` A111LS 111. CRONIN AND APPLING S. (YELLS, Ul As TenanLs in Common O.R.B. 0638 PG. U010 1 rr�� _•.� 66 The following described parcel of land lying in Section 13, Township 33 South, Rance 39 East, Indian River County, Florida more particularly described as follmus, to wit: • That portion of the following; described P111 -cel as recorded in OI1U, 0638, Page 0010 Public Records of Indian River County, Florida: The North 10 Acres of the North hrli f (N U of tlse Northeast quarter (NEI) of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 13, Township 33 South, Ran;e 39 East, Indian River County,, Florida. That lies within the following described road Right-of-1vay: A strip of land 150.00 feet in width lying in Sections 12 and 13, Township 33 South, Range -39 East and Sections T assd 18, Township 33 South, Range 40 East, 811 in Indian River County, Florida, lying 75.00 feet on each side of the following described centerlines • Commencing at the intersection of the South line of Government Lot 2 in said Section 7 with the Southerly terminus of the centerline of an existing Night of Way 200.00 feet wide, as described in Official Record 13ook 110, Pncre 204 Public Records of Indian River Countv; thence N 8901313811 1V along said South line, a distance of 10.01 feet to the ['DINT OF BEGINNING; Thence S 0105110511 I's a distance of 542.76 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the Northwest havintr n radius -of 954.93 feet: thence — Southwesterly along the are of said curve through a central angle of 3302012211 a distance of 555.66 feet; thence S 31°29'17'1 W a distance of 940.00 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the Southeast Is.�ving a radius of 954.93 feet; thence Soiitinvesterly along the are of said curve through a central angle of 31°00'1)0" R distance of 516.67 feet to its point of tangency with a line p:u•allel with and 75.00 feet Ensterly • of, as measured at right angles, tlse Westerly line of said Section 7s thence S 00 2911711 1V along snid parallel line, R distance of 979.31 feet to the beginninc; of dcurve concave to the Northwest having a radius of 2291.83 feet; thence Southerly along the arc of said curve through n central angle of 08052118", a distance of 354.87 feet; thence S 09°31135" IV a distance of 319.85 feet to the Northerly line of said Section 13• thence continuing S 0902113511 1V 'n distance of 310.88 feet to tine beginning of a curve concave to the Southeast having a radius of 2291.83 feet; thence Southerly along; the arc of said cu" through 8 central angle of U8°41'16" n distance of 347.50 feet to its point of tgngency with n line parallel with and 75.00 feet Westerly of, as measured at right angles, the Rast line of said Section 13; thence S 00°40'20" 1V nlong said parallel line a distance of 1371.23 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the Northwest having a radius of 572.96 feet; thence Southwesterly along the circ of said curve through a central angle of 86°1.1'44", a distance of 862.46; feet; thence S 805510,1" 11' n _ distance of 141.6,1 feet to the Easterly slight of 1Vav of U. S. RIlighsnv • No. t (State Road No. 5) as shown on Right of 1Cnv map for Section No. 88010-2206, Sheet 2, dated April 1952, revised 8-21-57. The sidelines of said strip are to be prolonged or shortened to terminate • Westerly at said Easterly Right of Way said Section 7 line of said U. S. Ilirrhivay and to teminate Northerly at said Sotttls lisle of Covet•nme:st T.ot 2 in • rw aooK 014 5 PAGE 110 10 Schedule "A" 8th Street Parcel No. 123 9 Parent Dee - James M. Cronin and Appling S. Wells, III as. Tenants in Common ORB -0638 Page 0010 The following described Township 33 South, Range 39r E stcel �fIndian Rland iver Countin y,, 13, and more particularly described as follows: y+ Florida, That portion of the following described parcel as recorded in ORB 0638, Page 0010, Public Records of Indian River County, Florida: The North 10 acres of the N.-1/2 of the NE 1/4 of th 1/4 of Section 13, Township33 South a NE Indian River'Count Range 39 East, y, Florida: o That lies within the following described road right-of-way: Y Commence at the Northeast corner of Section 13, Township 33 South, Range 39 East; thence N 89025111" W, along the North line of said Section 13, a distance of 77.64 feet to the Westerly right-of-way line of River Boulevard (as - proposed) and the POINT OF Indian BEGINNING. Thence S 09021135" W, along said Westerly right-of-way. line, a distance of 55.36 feet; thence N 40001'48" W 'a distance of 32.54 feet; thence N 89025111" W, with and 30.00 feetparallel •South of the said North line of Section 13, a distance of 1167.08 feet; thence South 45'35131" W a distance- of 35.36 feet to thEast of -way line of 6th Avenue; thence N 00 361130, E right- said E said East right-of-way of 6th Avenue + along 130.00 feet; 'thence S 44°24'29" E a a distance of feet; thence S 89°25111" E, parallel with tnde50.003f.35 eet North of the said North line of Section 13, a distance 1174.40 feet; thence N 49°58112" of ' feet to the aforesaid WesterlyE a distance of 45.55 Indian River Boulevard (as right bf-way line of W along said West right-of-way°posed), thence S 09°21'35" feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, line, a distance of 80.59 17. _I w �T 1986 Bio 014 5 ME -1 101 OCT 21 1986 BOOP( 66 F 'AIt 125 J. Adoption of Resolution: Final Order for General Development Utilities, Inc_ Water Pass-through Rate Increase — The Board reviewed the following memo -dated 10/13/86: TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: OCTOBER 13, 1986 THRU: JEFFREY K. BARTON Assistant Director of Utility Services FROM: LISA M. ABERNETHY; Franchise Manager SUBJECT: FINAL ORDER GENERAL DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES, INC. o BACKGROUND On September 18, 1986 a duly notified and published public hearing was held before the Board of County Commissioners regarding a water pass- through rate increase for General Development Utilities, Incorporated. At that time, the Board of County Commissioners followed staffs recommendation to delay their decision until October 21, 1986. RECOMMENDATION Staff has reviewed all materials presented at the public hearing and maintains their position of the proposed consumption charges as follows: $1.70 Present approved rate .70 Adjustment of operating costs $1.00 Adjusted approved rate plus 1.72 Pass-through $2.72 Proposed Rate/1,000 gallons Attached hereto is a Resolution passing the final order and placing into effect the water pass-through rate increase. Staff requests the Board of County Commissioners to sign and approve said Resolution. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 86-91, authorizing a new water rate for General Development Utilities, Inc., to include pass-through amounts for county water purchases. 14 10/13/86 UTIL I� RESOLUTION NO. 86-91 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AUTHORIZING A NEW WATER RATE FOR GENERAL DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES, INC., TO INCLUDE PASS-THROUGH AMOUNTS FOR COUNTY WATER PURCHASES. THIS MATTER comes before the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County following a duly notified and published hearing where the Commission, having heard testimony of all interested parties, and having thoroughly reviewed and analyzed the recommendation of County staff, now adopts the findings and conclusions as set forth in the staff report dated September 11, 1986, and attached hereto as Exhibit "A". NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. the General Development Utilities, Incorporated, current application for rate pass-through is hereby terminated and marked closed. 2. the authorized rate include a pass-through of the following items: 2a. Base facility charge of $5.34 per Equivalent Residential Unit. 2b. Water purchase at a rate of $1.72 per 1,000 gallons. This, added to the net adjusted current charge of $1.00 per 1.,000 gallons, makes the total adjusted charge for consumption at $2.72 per 1,000 gallons. 3. General Development Utilities, Incorporated, amend its water tariff to state that the water meters will be read on a timely basis and, if the bill is estimated, the words ESTIMATED BILLING will show on the face of the bill. THIS ORDER SHALL BE EFFECTIVE with the first meter readings after November 1, 1986, and after the billing cycle for which those readings are applicable. -1- BOOK FE 211986 r OCT.211986 ATTEST: BOOK 66 PAI -JE i"?7 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Freda Wright V Don C. -Scurlock, Jr., C an Clerk of th 10 Approved. 10-21-86 Approved for legal form Approved for Utility Matters: and sufficiency: e Charles P. Vitunac Je f K.( Nrton County Attorney Asst. Direbtok of Utility Services -2- INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA ITEM TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: SEPTEMBER 11, 1986 THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTO DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICro 7 FROM: V-„ EFFREY K. BARTON ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: G.D.U. - RATE HEARING FOR PASS THROUGH CHARGES BACKGROUND Indian River County and General Development Utilities entered into a contract on December 7th, 1983 (known as the Water Purchase Agreement) for the sale of water at a wholesale rate of $1.72/1000 gallons. Paragraph A (4) of the contract calls for a pass through of charges by G.D.U. once adjustments are made by the utility. The utility has been purchasing water from the County since May 2, 1986. G.D.U. has continued to bill their customers at the old rate structure of: This public hearing is to consider the pass through rate to be charged by G.D.U. A copy of the G.D.U. proposal is attached. In summary, the proposal is as follows: Present Rate Proposed Rate $ .69 Use Charge $ .69 --- Base Facility Charge $5.34 $1.70/1000gal. Consumption Charge $2.89/1000gal. * $1.70 Present Approved Rate/1000 gal. .70 Adjustment to operating expenses $1.00 Adjusted approved rate/1000 plus 1.89 Pass Through Rate/1000** $2.89 Proposed Rate/1000 ** Pass Through Rate $1.72 County Wholesale Charge x 1.1 Allowance for unaccounted for water $1.89 17 ROOD 66 FA.3E 28 FACILITY USAGE CUSTOMER CLASS METER SIZE CHARGE CHARGE Residential 5/8"x 3/4" $ .69 $1.70/1000gal. 1" 1.59 1.70/1000gal. Commercial 5/8"x 3/4" $ .69 $1.70/1000gal. _ _ 0 1" 1.59 1.70/1000gal. Multiple Unit All sizes $ .35/unit $1.70/1000gal. This public hearing is to consider the pass through rate to be charged by G.D.U. A copy of the G.D.U. proposal is attached. In summary, the proposal is as follows: Present Rate Proposed Rate $ .69 Use Charge $ .69 --- Base Facility Charge $5.34 $1.70/1000gal. Consumption Charge $2.89/1000gal. * $1.70 Present Approved Rate/1000 gal. .70 Adjustment to operating expenses $1.00 Adjusted approved rate/1000 plus 1.89 Pass Through Rate/1000** $2.89 Proposed Rate/1000 ** Pass Through Rate $1.72 County Wholesale Charge x 1.1 Allowance for unaccounted for water $1.89 17 ROOD 66 FA.3E 28 QCT 21.1986 Page Two. AGENDA ITEM G.D.R. RATE HEARING SEPTEMBER 11, 1986 RECOMMENDATION FOR PASS THROUGH CHARGES BOOK 66 P,A,F 1�� County Utility staff has reviewed the proposed adjustments to the current consumption charges of $.70 per 1000 gallons and the adjustment is justified. Staff has reviewed the proposed consumption charge adjustment of $1.89 for the pass through consumption charge and disagrees with G.D.U.'s theory about the factor of adding the 10% to the wholesale rate of $1.72 to arrive at the $1.89. At the present time, G.D.U. doesn't have such a factor as part of its approved rate and should not be allowed to impose such a charge at this time. The pass through is to recognize only the increases of water cost charged by the County versus approved costs of G.D.U.'s operation as part of current rate structure. Any other costs or charges should be a part of a new rate case filed. It—is Staff's position that the consumption charge of $1.72/1000 gallons be the only pass through on the consumption, making the proposed consumption charge as follows: $1.70 Present approved rate .70 Adjustment of operating costs $1.00 Adjusted approved rate e plus 1.72 Pass through $2.72 Proposed Rate/1000 gallons Staff recommends to the Commission that they take under advisement all evidence and testimony given in evidence at this public hearing and an order of finding be issued by the Commission within 60 days. APPROVED FOR AGENDA Ely: For: 18 10 Ke Golden Sands Park - Master Plan Phase I Cost Estimate The Board reviewed the following cost estimate dated 10/26(86: Ii1caEroneersArchitects Msyes, Suddertlt & EUmnxlge, hro. 11"0M*eR 757s'Dr•. Phitlr;FS $IVA. ORLANDO. FLORIDA 32819 305-361-2981 1 TO ZJ(dut rz;-Jef COt..KIr IiG k)ofVS �L�/►bimw 1840 216t1 Gjt"treG 1 UP.t'O Bz," .fit, GENTLEMEN: � .,,ic �` `+ WE ARE SENDING YOU Er Attached 01 Under separate cover via a following items: ❑ Shop drawings 931"Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples 0 Specifications ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑ DAT[ JO. fl0 O I& ,p .M. .o. I �� Hr�U,g�.n ,tivrn COPIES DATE NO. - DESCRIPTION t!�oldt>ti, r Mast -G - THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: C] For approval ❑ Approved as submitted 01 -or your use ❑ Approved as nored ❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ Retum corrected prints ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US IVlAYF.R. SiVDI)FRTR .ANT) ET11FRED013. INC. SIGNED: 1r--Tiia- It e -1—.e e.e not ei noted. Lundy nobly of of e *- GOLDEN SANDS PARR FIRST PHASE CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE e Item Cost Restrooms Building $ 60,000.00 Playground Structure 11,000.00 Picnic Shelters 10'x10'(5) 9,000.00 Parking & Driveway 111,155.00 Dune Walkover w/Ramp & Lifeguard Tower 28,000.00 Dune Walkover w/Steps 16,000.00 Well & Pump 3,500.00 500.00 Signa Concrete Walk 5,700.00 Mulch Paths 1,876.00 Fence & Gates 16,690.00 Landscape & Irrigation 13,000.00 Bicycle.Rack 385.00 Clearing & Grubbing 16,500.00 Water Distribution 1,250.00 Septic Drainfield 1,500.00 Benches 360.00 Outdoor Showers (2) 1,000.00 Grille (5) 335.00 Trash Cans (6) 612.00 Earthwork 5,000.00 Continquency (10%) 30,363.00 Engineering (10%) 30,363-.00 TOTAL $364,089.00 19 9�T 211986 - BOOK 66 F�,ir130 OCT 2 11986 BOOK 6 6 PACE 131 ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously authorized staff to apply for a DNR grant for Phase I of Golden Sands Park and authorized the Chairman's signature on the necessary documents. Commissioner Bird presented a site plan of Golden Sands Park which will be displayed in the Commission offices. PUBLIC HEARING - JULY, 1986 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATIONS The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to wit: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press-Joumal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a I In the matter of 126W in the o) /Court, was pub. lished in said newspaper in the issues Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore Deet continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate. commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Swom to and subscribed befor me t ' 3 day of� A.D. 19 21 iness Manager) (SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, I tan River County, Florida) 20 W"CE RREMM Anon of Lko 118tH is inumew—GNU j&W the mmlswoners of kx ia„ hcew`°yq MAINIn tri ara efw0 o �n n be lamrd, in the county ama faaated ttfao � sA°.W%o oda, an Tuesday. October 21, 1988, toeoWdai ba ad�ep*m of an WdF aMm to9�e tollo�tn.� P_rePoeal . to r.urter seaeh eras and b deserila0 std That Pan of be souv mw W of sou#uvest u of section 3. TowmMp 32. 609 � � of Nva wVM °w'a srt+ '' Bne al the F.EC. Raihoed: nl9ttl'•�'•�,: ., The sauemst % of the soutibap ttFaA pa'' Seetbn 1. Towneftlp 32 Snub, Ramp 3Y ^ The S— 360 lest of Tract 20.. 8TM. ' 1 .39 The 366001e no EaP Tp suet at ,! pmct 2T", 8eceon a, T=' The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/9/86: TO: The Honorable Members. DATE: October 9, 1986 of the Board of County FILE: Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: JULY 1986 COMPREHENSIVE Robert M. Keat•ng,,&SCP PLAN .AMENDMENT APPLI- Planning & Development Director CATIONS FROM: Richard M. Shearer, REFERENCES: Chief, Long -Range Planning It is requested that the data herein presented be given- formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 21, 1986. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The Planning and Development Division received four Comprehensive Plan amendment applications in July of 1986 and initiated five amendment applications at the request of the Board of County Commissioners, the Planning and Zoning Commission, or one of the Administrative Divisions under direction of the Board of County Commissioners. The staff has reviewed these nine amendment applications and made recommendations to the Planning and Zoning Commission which, sitting as the Local Planning Agency, held public hearings on September 11, 1986, to consider making recommendations on the proposed amendments to the County's Comprehensive Plan. In_ 198-6, the State Legislature revised the local government comprehensive plan amendment procedure. The process now requires the first public hearing by the Board of County Commissioners to -be held prior to the transmittal of each request to the State Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for a mandatory ninety -day review period. After all the comments from DCA are received, the Board of County Commissioners will schedule a final public hearing to consider the proposed amendments. At the close of the final hearing, the Board may adopt all, part of, or none of the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The attached flow chart illustrates the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process as amended by the 1986 state planning legislation. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS The Planning Department feels that the best way to authorize the transmittal of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments to the State for review is through the passage of a resolution authoriz- ing the transmittal. Since a second public hearing must be held prior to action being taken on each of the amendment applica- tions, no final decision can be made on the applications at this time. However, action is needed on the attached resolution in order to comply with the plan amendment procedure. RECOMMENDATION - Based on the above analysis, staff recommends approval of the - attached transmittal resolution. 21 BOOK 6 J. OCT 211986 INT 21 W6 BOOK Commissioner Lyons understood that the proposed resolution is for the purpose of telling the State that these Comp Plan amendments are under consideration by Indian River County, and Richard Shearer, Chief of Long -Range Planning, explained that the Board is required to hold a Public Hearing on each land use amendment before transmitting it to the State for their review and to hold a final Public Hearing before adopting the amendments. The Chairman opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. Nancy Offutt, representing the Board of Realtors and the Vero Beach Chamber of Commerce, felt this would be the appropriate time to state that the two boards still oppose State intervention in these matters. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously closed the Public Hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 86-92, authorizing the transmittal of Comprehensive Plan amendment applications, staff recommendations, and the recommendations of the Local Planning Agency to the Department of Community Affairs of the State of Florida for a mandatory ninety -day review period. 22 10/8/86 rich LR -Planning RS/vh RESOLUTION NO. 86-92 A RESOLUTION ,OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE TRANSMITTAL OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATIONS, STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOR MANDATORY NINETY DAY REVIEW PERIOD. WHEREAS, Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes, requires that local governments prepare and adopt Comprehensive Plans, and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has adopted a Comprehensive Plan pursuant to Florida Statutes, and WHEREAS, Florida Statutes provide for the amendment of Comprehensive Plans twice per calandar year, and WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the local planning agency, has held public hearings and made recommendations concerning these amendments, and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has held a preliminary public hearing concerning these amendments, and WHEREAS, Florida Statutes require that the Board of County Commissioners pass a resolution authorizing the transmittal of Comprehensive Plan Amendments to the Department of Community Affairs of the State of Florida for a mandatory ninety day review period, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the enclosed Comprehensive Plan Amendment applications, staff recommendations, and the recommendations of the local planning agency are hereby authorized for transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs for a mandatory ninety day review period. The foregoing resolution was offered by Commis- sioner Lyons who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Bowman and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: OCT 21 1986 BOOK 66 FnUE 134 I CT 2 11986 RESOLUTION NO. 86-92 Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Vice -Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Commissioner Richard N. Bird Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. BOOK Aye Aye Aye _ Aye Aye The Chairman thereupon declared Resolution No. 86- , adopted and duly passed this 21st day of October_, 1986. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By DON—C. SCURLOCK, Jt-/ Chairman Attest: 2 , FREDAW IGH�,,� Clerk �� 009. a— r PUBLIC HEARING - GRALL REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The hour of 9:05 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-Joumal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being in the matter of In the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of r! Tom✓;/ - A / IiI �J G/ 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 heretotore 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 before me this day of `� ` L A.D. l `" / 1 / Business Manager) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida) (SEAL) 24 NOTICE nFA1BtIG - - e Cattery p litelxe reaatmg . aof t =W' 1R IdenUal DiMW psyVkt. The I Con81 ProO h seu of 20M Sweat Ic Records of St. Ludo Caumy. I IN we; said CW43dWY, lying and Wng in 00*n Apublk haartn9 at vrhleh paroppoirmity to be t" In Noted heard be hula by Via Board Ot county misstonera of Indian R.0 Ceunry. Florida m tee County Ch'u'm cn Chambers of the Cathay Adminletration Building. Ideated at 1640 25th S. Vero Beach. flon" an Tussdry. October 21. ism. et 905 am. The Board of Courcy =.1*-ers w� n Mel action on thn rtuontng appts:ario^ at tan public hearing. Aftyone who may wish t0 appeal any, sn eier to ' whrch may be meas at eco d of the wet tined to ensure that a verbetan regard Ot iM protd i, 11 n an w made whleh mdWes the tsetinrony and av► OenCB upon which the appeal s hued. . Indian River County - Board of County Commiolonen By'.-a-Oan C. Iiaunoea Jr.. Chaemari Oct. 1.1988 Richard Shearer, Chief of Long -Range Planning, presented the following staff recommendation for denial of the Grall request to have 4.5 acres redesignated from Medium -Density Residential to Commercial: TO: The Honorable Members DATE: October 6, 1986 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: GRALL REQUEST TO AMEND Robert M. Kea ing, P) CP THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Planning & Development Director FROM: Richard Shearer, REFERENCES: Chief, Long -Range Planning Grall Memo It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 21, 1986. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS Bernard and Margaret Grall, the owners, are requesting to amend the Comprehensive Plan by redesignating 4.5 acres located 700 feet west of 74th Avenue -'on the South side of State Road 60 from MD -1, Medium -Density Residential 1 (up to 8 units/acre), to Commercial. On September 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 -to -0 to recommend approval of this request. The applicants are proposing to develop this property for a professional office complex. 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 part of a 10 acre parcel which contains a single-family house on the south 5 acres zoned A-1, Agricultural District (up to 1 units/5 acres), and vacant land on the north 5 acres zoned RM -6. North of the subject property, across State Road 60, is a citrus grove zoned RM -6 and a life care facility zoned RM -8, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 8 units/acre), and CN, Neighborhood Commercial District. East of the subject property is undeveloped land zoned RM -6, CN, and A-1. South of the subject property is a single-family house zoned A-1. Further south is a single-family subdivision zoned RS -1, Single -Family Residential District (up to 1 units/acre). West of the subject property are single-family dwellings zoned RM -6 and A-1. 25 BOOK 66 F,,,F 1P36 ID CT 2 1 IS86 BOOK 66 F'AGF 13 7 - Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and all of the land around it as MD -1, Medium -Density Residential 1 (up to 8 units/acre)-. There are two neighborhood commercial nodes on the west side of 74th Avenue on either side of State Road 60 which' are zoned CN. - The Planning Department is concerned with the increasing pressure to strip zone arterial streets in the County for commercial development which is contrary to the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and damages the effectiveness of the arterial streets in moving traffic. Staff feels that this pressure will continue on State Road 60. As an alternative to strip commercial zoning along arterial streets, the staff has prepared a draft professional office.. zoning district. The applicants have expressed an interest in this zoning district. However, when the Board of County Commissioners decided to send this proposed zoning district back to the planning department for further study on July 23rd, 1986, the applicants decided to apply for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning of the subject property. The staff does not feel that professional office zoning nor commercial zoning is nece-ss-.ry for the subject property. The proposed CG zoning would allow a broad range of retail uses which` would encourage further strip commercial development along State Road 60 which is contrary to the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Transportation System The subject property has direct access to State Road 60 (classified as an arterial street on the County's Thoroughfare Plan). The maximum development of the subject property under CG zoning could generate up to 4,171 average annual daily trips. Environment The subject property is not designated as environmentally sensitive, nor is it in a flood -prone area. Utilities A County watermain runs along the north side of State Road 60. A -wastewatermain runs along the south side of State Road 60. RECOMMENDATION The planning staff respects the Planning and Zoning Commission's opinion. However, based on the above analysis, particularly the fact that this request would encourage further strip commercial development along State Road 60 which is contrary to the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, staff recommends that this request be denied. - Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak in this matter. Attorney Bernie Grail, applicant, stated that he and his wife live on the subject property and are requesting that a portion of the property be rezoned in order for him to locate his 26 law practice there. They purchased the property 5 years ago before the Comp Plan went into effect. Attorney Grail expressed his disappointment in the Board having twice turned down the creation of a Professional Ott -ice District zoning category because he felt that there is a great need for growth out SR -60. At present there are only a limited number of neighborhood nodes which are not really appropriate for professional offices. He understood the Board's concern about setting precedents, but stressed that all he wants to do is put one office building on those 5 acres which he believed would not spoil the integrity of surrounding area. With the present zoning, he would be limited to using his property for condos because the.property is too valuable for single family residences. Commissioner Bird believed that Attorney Grail's law office would be an asset to the area, but felt that if the Board approved his request, it would open the floodgates to a multitude of requests from other property owners along the SR -60 corridor from 43rd Avenue to 1-95. Commissioner Wodt.ke also was sympathetic to Attorney Grail's siT-uation and wo`UId like to see him be able to have his office fronting SR -60. Commissioner Bird suggested that the Board reconsider having staff establish criteria for a Professional Office District. Fred Mensing, resident of Roseland, believed that Mr. Grail has given sufficient reason why he should be allowed to have his law practice on his property. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously closed the Public Hearing. Considerable discussion ensued regarding the Board's reluctance to encourage strip commercial along the SR -60 corridor. 27 OCT 11986Boor F�cr2P� OCT 21 1986 BOOK 66' PAGE 1P� Attorney Grail offered to put a deed restriction on his frontage property immediately stating that this property will be used only for his law office, and then when this comes back from - the State, the Board could approve it subject to his deed restrictions. Assistant County Attorney Bruce Barkett advised that although the Board can rezone this property to Commercial, they would have to do it with the knowledge that it may not be used by Mr. Grail for the purposes he intends and that it may be used to the fullest limits allowed in Commercial. The Board can amend the Comp Plan to redesignate this property to Commercial, and once that is done, Mr. Grail is free to place whatever restrictions he wants on his property. He does not need to bring those restrictions back to the Board, as mthey cannot—be made .a_ _ condition of site plan or anything else. COMMISSIONER LYONS' Motion that this request be denied on the basis that we do not haye a vehicle at the present time to accommodate it failed for lack of a second. Local attorney Steve Henderson suggested a vehicle similar to the one that was.used by the Vista Royale Property Owners Association recently, where -a restrictive covenant was created prior to any decision by the Board, which restricted the property to several types of uses within the Commercial zone. if the Board approves it, the restriction would become effective auto- matically. He explained that the restrictive covenant would travel with the land and would be effective indefinitely. Chairman Scurlock stressed that the difference in this case is that there is only one owner, not a multitude of owners that would have to agree if a deed restriction was to be removed. Attorney Barkett informed the Board that when someone puts a restriction on his own property which is not part of a platted 28 subdivision, he can remove that restriction without anyone's approval. Attorney Henderson explained that in the Vista Royale case, they gave the property owners association the right to amend it, and in this case, they could give the County Commission the right to amend it. Attorney Barkett emphasized that if you make a rezoning contingent upon that, then it becomes contractual, but Attorney Henderson pointed out that in this case the covenant is conditional to the zoning. Attorney Barkett still maintained that if removal of the covenant would be up to the County Commission, it would be contract zoning. Attorney Henderson felt Mr. Grail should go ahead and record the deed restriction while the request is being reviewed by the State. Commissioner Lyons felt we should maintain a status quo on the land use along that corridor until we establish a limited access traffic plan for the area. Robert Keating, Director of Planning & Development, emphasized that the Board does not necessarily confer any kind of approval by agreeing to transmit a proposed land use amendment to the State for their review. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board by a vote of 3-2, Commissioners Lyons and Scurlock dissenting, authorized staff to transmit this request to the DCA for review in order to give Mr. Grall an opportunity to prepare documentation to bring back to the Board for further consideration. — 29 OCT 2 11985 LL BUOY �b F' �E:.,9,.40 OCT 2 11986 BOOK 66 1 vJF 141 PUBLIC HEARING N BEUTELL REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY REDESIGNATING 150 ACRES FROM AG TO LD -1 - The hour of 9:05 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 e 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-Joumal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a — ^s in the matter of in the J/ Court, was pub - fished in said newspaper in the issues of z &—,0& Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press-Joumal 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. /(/n / Sworn to bef a to and subscribed me 's day of G A.D. lzO"" (Business Manager) (SEAQ (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida) A public hearing at which Parties In mismat fled dtiielle shall have en opporturndY to be heard. win O t held M the Boerd .County Com• miesiorers M Indlen Riva Coumy.�Fi�eCIn the ounb i County Commniasion Chamoere Adminiatretlon BWldin9 located at 1840 25tim St, Veto Beach. Florida, on Tues"y. Oetobo 21, i 196& at e:g8 a.m. The Board of Comb Comte am Mal action on this rexonnp aPPlicaton at this public hearing. Anyone wno mey wleh to eppeaf aro dadebn whish Ma be made at thio meeM9 wnl need to ensure mils is e which�Urclud record o s the � am -I- dents i whichrdfian appeal a easedc Board of County Co my—ioneme %a -Don C. Soaloos,W*l UWman Oct 1,1998886 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/6/86: TO -- The Honorable Members DATE: October 6, 1986 FELE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: �fG,.�rl1i �j SUBJECT: BEUTTELL REQUEST TO AMEND Robert M. Keating, ,�AICP THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Planning & Development Director - FOR 150 ACRES 1?l FROM: Richard Shearer, REFERENCES: Chief, Long -Range Planning It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 21, 1986. 30 DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS George Beuttell, an agent for Isabelle Beuttell, the owner, is requesting to amend the Comprehensive Plan by redesignating 150 acres located south of 8th Street, one-half mile west of 82nd Avenue, north of 4th Street, and east of 90th Avenue from AG, Agricultural (up to 1 unit/5 acres), to LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (up to 3 units/acre). On September 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 -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 being used as a sod farm. North of the subject property, across 8th Street, is undeveloped land zoned A-1. East of the subject property is the West County Sub -Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant and citrus groves zoned A-1. South of the subject property, across 4th Street is a citrus grove zoned A-1. West of the subject property is a single-family residence and vacant land zoned A-1 and I-95. Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and the land east, south and west of it as AG, Agricultural (up to 1 unit/5 acres). The land north of the subject property is designated as MD -1, Medium -Density Residential 1 (up to 8 units/acre). Since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1982, there -have -been -significant changes in this area. Since 1982, the County has constructed. a wastewater treatment plant adjacent to the subject property to. service the State Road 60 corridor. Moreover, in July of 1986, the County amended the Comprehensive Plan to redesignate approximately 80 acres of land located one mile south of the subject property from AG to RR -2, Rural Residential 2 (up to 1 unit/acre). Based on these changes and the fact that the land north of the subject property is designated as MD -1, the AG land use designation is no longer appropriate for -the subject property. Transportation System The subject property has direct access to- 90th Avenue and 8th Street (classified as secondary collector streets on the thoroughfare plan), and to 4th Street (classified as a primary collector street). The maximum development of the subject property under RS -3 zoning could generate up to 3,150 average annual daily trips. Environment The subject property is not designated as environmentally sensitive nor is it in a flood -prone area. BOOK � OCT 1 196 31 BOOK66 PAGE 143 Utilities A County watermain is located at the northeast corner of the subject property. County wastewater service will be available under phase 2 of the wastewater treatment plant if -the applicants reserve capacity by paying the necessary impact fees. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, particularly the fact that* conditions in this area have changed significantly since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1982, and considering the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the subject property be redesignated as LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1. Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. Mary Jane Goetzfried of CCL Consultants, representing the Beutells, stated that it was the owners' intention to develop this 150 -acre tract into a low density, single family residential community. Based on the policies set out in the Comp Plan, it has been the owners' contention that this, area could support more than 3 units per acre. However, in an effort to cooperate with the Planning staff and receive a positive recommendation, the application was amended to request LD -1 at 3 upa. Mrs. Goetzfried urged the Board to transmit this request to the State. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously closed the Public Hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously authorized staff to transmit the Beutell request for a Comp Plan -amendment to the State for review. PUBLIC HEARING - ZAMBATARO REQUEST FOR REDESIGNATION OF 2.5 ACRES FROM MD -2 TO COMMERCIAL The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to wit: 32 VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press•Joumal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida: that the attached copy of advertisement, being a�� �(Ll.f..Le✓rG /r in the `,/) Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the Issues of___ �e&ea Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press-Joumai is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun. ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. /,///► Sworn to and subscribed beton me 1 ' 3 day otter A.D. 19 JVZ _ • ` ( loess Manager) (SEAL) (Clerk of th Circuit Court, I n River County, Florida) ' The East 37% teat of t* totowino de. from thence nm South 195 feet arta tram thence run Fast 149.75 feet to aald powand �n967�"Inns t Said icy' Dr. Richard & Bultington Subdivision. re. corded a Poet Book 2, page 5. Dao9a records of St Lucie County, Florae, said land now Mrhg and beep In Indian River County, FI, a; the South 14.5 feet of the fVdrth '75 190 of the Fest 149.75 feet Of the west one•halt of Lot e. Six" 2. Sublattt to easemenls, resonators. reser- v and right&aRwar of public The Soard having. A final public having eapprom any W me reiluesla toConvidealuts WWb `. 8130fling these nequeab held a" . 199Anyone . m�naayy which bye nhadetoof eal " need to wm" that a varbatm record of me poceed"gs b axle which Includes the testmony and "I- d•r":• Upon which the appeal is baaed. Indian Rhrer County 6004 Of County iIiiijorem B). -s -Don Scurlock Jr.. Oct. 1.13. ISM _ 1— The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/3/86: T0. - The Honorable Members DATE: October 3, 1986 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners 0 - DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Q0Z n SUBJECT: ZAMSATARO REQUEST TO Robert M. Keatingj2 ICP AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE Planning & Development Director PLAN FROM: Richard Shearer, REFERENCES: Chief, Long -Range Planning It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 21, 1986. - - 33 BOOK 66 Pr�GE 144 OCT 211986 L_ .I OCT 2 11986 BOOK 66 F�,UE145 - -- DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS Dennis Zambataro, an agent for Frank Baratta, the owner, is requesting to amend the Comprehensive Plan by redesignating 2.5 acres located on the south side of 17th Street and the west side of 6th Avenue from -MD -2, Medium -Density Residential 2 (up to 10 units/acre), to Commercial. On September 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 -to -0 to recommend that this request be denied. They indicated that they did not feel that this area is suitable for commercial development but is suitable for -professional offices. They indicated that the County may need to consider a new professional office zoning district. 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, across 17th Street, are multiple -family residences zoned RM -10. West of the subject property are three single-family residences zoned RM -10, an office building zoned OCR, Office Commercial and Residential District (up to 6 units/acre), and a new car sales facility, service station and "motel zoned CG, General Commercial District. South of the subject property are single-family residences zoned RM -10. East of the subject property, across 6th Avenue, are single-family residences zoned RM -10. Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Plan generally designates the subject property and all of the land around it as MD -2, Medium -Density Residential 2 (up to 10 units/acre). However, in 1985 the County amended the definition of the U.S. 1 Commercial Corridor. Originally anticipated to extend exactly 600 feet east of the east right-of-way line of U.S. 1, the revised definition states that the eastern boundary of the corridor is flexible being roughly 600 feet east of the east right-of-way line of U.S. 1. Moreover, this amendment allowed the boundary to be extended up to 800 feet east of U.S. 1 if the property could meet one of three conditions. One of those conditions was if the property abutted commercially -zoned property and had frontage on an arterial street. The subject property does abut commercially -zoned property to the west and has frontage on an arterial street (17th Street). However, only the west 100 feet of the subject property lies within 800 feet of U.S. 1. The Planning Department is concerned -with the increasing pressure to strip zone arterial streets in the County for commercial development which is contrary to the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and damages the effectiveness of the arterial. streets in moving traffic. While this pressure has been evident along U.S. 1, State Road 60, and Oslo Road in the past, the County will see considerable interest in strip commercial development along 17th Street and the Indian River Boulevard Extensions with spillovers onto 12th street and 8th Street in the near future. This pressure resulted in property on the south side of 17th Street approximately one-quarter mile east of the subject property being annexed by the City of Vero Beach and being rezoned to the City's Professional Office District. 34 As an alternative to strip commercial zoning along arterial streets, the staff has prepared a draft professional office zoning district. The applicants have expressed an interest in this zoning district. However, when the Board of- County Commissioners decided to send this proposed zoning district back to the planning department for further study on July 23rd, 1986, the applicants decided to apply for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning of the subject property. While the planning staff would be amenable to professional office development of the subject property, the proposed CL zoning district would allow a broad range of retail uses which could encourage further strip commercial development along 17th Street and 6th Avenue. Transportation System The subject property has frontage on 17th Street (classified as an arterial street on _the Thoroughfare Plan), 6th Avenue (classified as a secondary collector street), and to 16th Place (classified as a local street). The maximum development of the subject property under CL zoning could generate up to 2,318 Average Annual Daily Trips (AADT).. Currently, 6th Avenue carries 12,700 AADT at level -of -service "E", and 17th Street carries 22,700 AADT at level -of -service "A". This additional traffic would cause severe problems on 6th Avenue which is already below the desired level -of -service "C". Environment The subject property is not designated as environmentally sensitive nor is it in a flood -prone area. Utilities A 6 inch watermain is located on 6th Avenue. County wastewater facilities are not currently available. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, particularly the fact that granting .this request would encourage further strip commercial development along 17th Street and 6th Avenue, and considering the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the Comprehensive Plan not be amended to redesignate this property as commercial. Richard Shearer, Chief of Long -Range Planning, presented staff's recommendation for denial of this request for redesignation of 2.5 acres. He noted that this is one of the areas that staff has felt would be appropriate for establishing a Professional Office District. Chairman Scurlock believed that strip zoning would stop at Rockridge, but Mr. Shearer stated that they have been approached by many individuals who wish to buy homes along there for beauty parlors, etc. - OCT 211986 35 Buoy 66 P,'I, 146 BOCK 66 uu,F 147 OCT 2 11986 Chairman Scurlock stressed that the County might be buying homes along 6th Avenue sometime in the future in order to widen that road. Mr. Shearer advised that the applicant has shown an interest in the OCR (Office Commercial and Residential District), but came in and requested Commercial instead. The Planning 6 Zoning Commission felt this area was suitable for professional offices, but since there is -no vehicle to do that without opening it up to Commercial, they voted to deny it. Chairman Scurlock pointed out that the County could initiate requests for a land use redesignation and rezoning, so that it could be made OCR. The Chairman opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. Attorney Steve Henderson, representing Dennis Zambataro, wished to have the opportunity to debate this issue of receiving a Commercial designation, if not now, then in January. He suggested that in the meantime the Board send this request to the State for review. Chairman Scurlock emphasized that we don't have the vehicle at present to redesignate this property to Professional Office District. Attorney Henderson stated that their basic position on this matter is that 6th Avenue provides a natural barrier between districts. At present, the Commercial stops in the middle of a block which is between 6th Avenue and U.S. #1. In any event, they would like to argue those points in January. Commissioner Bird felt this Board has been fairly consistent in trying not to expand commercial all the way from U.S. #1 to 6th Avenue, but he would be inclined to accommodate some office buildings on this site through the Professional Office designation. He hoped that we might have such a designation available when this comes back to the Board in January. 36 Director Keating advised that staff would push that assignment ahead on their priority list. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously closed the.Public Hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously authorized staff to transmit the Zambataro request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to the State for their review. PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO DRAINAGE ELEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to wit: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Dally Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press-Joumal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a In the matter of - 12rla-1 o In the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the Issues Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, fora period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in ,the said newspaper. (q� Sworn to and subscribed befor met ' 3 day of� A.D. 19 _ s — / /,� ( iness Managed Q� (� (SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, I an River County, Florida) �, nonce i* uum usE Nth aR Pumt NiEARLNa , -- m cwNsloeanrc = �- AUMMOTHE OFACOURMORMNAMMKAN ts+ NOTICE is HEREer GIVEN sin the Board qi Flaitla, ahal hold a�8pr f oy County, at a an partlea in interest and Citizens shell aring have mt on Chempto m aie County c�� Bratton � ,�loetea 61 1840 Z4U SL vmro n tros 7111011. a m m consider aro +Daat of en v BOOK �� NAUE 148 d OCT 21 1996aooK66 F,149 - r The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/6/86: TO: The Honorable Members DATE: October 6, 1986 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: � !% SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO Robert M. Keat g, CP DRAINAGE ELEMENT OF COM - Planning & Development Director PREHENSIVE PLAN FROM: Richard Shearer, REFERENCES: Chief, Long -Range Planning Drainage Element Memo It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 21, 1986. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The Public Works Division has requested several minor changes to the Drainage Element of the Comprehensive Plan to include information that was unavailable in 1982 when the Comprehensive Plan was prepared. On September 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 -to -0 to recommend approval of this request. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS In reviewing these proposed changes, the planning staff has noticed that studies have been completed since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted which need to be reflected in the Drainage Element and that amendments to the Stormwater Management Ordinance have been adopted which are reflected in these proposed changes. It is important that the Stormwater Management Ordinance be consistent with the Drainage Element since the Stormwater Management Ordinance is designed to assist in the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends approval of the attached minor changes to -the Drainage Element. Richard Shearer, Chief of Long -Range Planning, confirmed. that Jim Davis, Director of Public Works, also recommended approval. Commissioner Lyons had a question regarding the language on the bottom of page 7 in the Drainage Element where it states that "Water from the Floridan Aquifer is of poorer quality and is used primarily for agricultural purposes." He felt that we should insert in there that we are using that water for the County water 38 system just in case somebody gets the idea that we don't have any interest in it. The Chairman opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously closed the Public Hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously authorized staff to transmit the proposed amendments to the drainage element of the.Comprehensive Plan to the State for their review, with the modification recommended by Commissioner Lyons. PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication - at-rachied, t-Twi t': VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr, who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press•Joumal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being t in the matter of - �rl t _ In the I B) Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of Cl� A 64 Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal Is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matterat the post office in Vero Beach, In said Indian River Coun- ty. Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount• rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. (q� Sworn to and subscribed betor me t ' 3 day 04 A.D. 19 — — a mass Manager) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, I ran River County, Florida) (SEAL 39 L_ OCT 2 11981 iyOM OF RXGULAi& CF LAKD UW �— S NOTICE of vUKX HEM" f� Al1oFTroN OF AO�INANGH .j= TNB C= s fWPREf YE • NOTICEIS HEREBY OMEN Uat Mfrs eons m Floraday, of WaIn s aa'o r o�whp�trq. at WhWh Partes in 6rPored nq o18:err dwN have as ttyy to be hear0, In theOqpay Commladon Charn6are of the Cor V A= Beach. Honda, an Tuesday, 000ber 21.1. 1SM at M a.m. to C0ndder 00 edoptlon of an drill - mance erg •.; t .:, F ._,y,,�_ t AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. FLORIDA. AMENDINO THE . LAND USE. DRAINAGE. AND TRANS. PORTXn0N "ELEMENrS OF THE AND CREA�TIE IC - DEVELOPMENT EL.EMEDIr: PROVIDING 8OR s0 F,gGE 150 OCT 21 1996 BOOK 66 FACE 151 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/6/86: TO; The Honorable MembersDATE: October 6, 1986 FELE: _ of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMEND - SUBJECT: Robert M. Keating „ ICP MENT TO UPDATE TRANSPORT - Planning & Development Director ATION CAPITAL IMPROVE- MENTS PROGRAM FROM: Richard Shearer, REFERENCES: Chief, Long -Range Planning It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 21, 1986. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The Public Works Division has requested a comprehensive amendment to the transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan. This proposed amendment includes very minor changes to the existing projects listed in the transportation capital improvements program but organizes the projects by five-year increments and provides a new section on revenue sources to pay for these proposed amendments. On September 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 -to -0 to recommend approval of this request. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS In reviewing this proposed amendment, the planning staff has determined the changes have little effect on the existing project listinq in the transportation capital improvements program. However, the proposed amendments would more clearly establish priorities in the capital improvements program and specify the sources of revenue to pay for these improvements. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends approval.. Commissioner Wodtke asked if the Transportation Planning Committee had looked at this, and Commissioner Lyons advised that this is an on-going thing. He wanted to be sure that the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council has our up -dated transportation plan at all times because they use it in 40 H consideration of DRIs. He strongly recommended that we formally notify them every time we make a change in the plan. Robert Keating, Director of Planning & Development, confirmed that we do work very closely with them. Commissioner Bird suggested that the TPC take a good hard look at the possibility of paving Hobart Road, but Director Keating advised that it is just a question of when it is to be accomplished because part. of the paving is a condition of site plan for Sawmill Ridge. The Chairman opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously closed the Public Hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously authorized staff to transmit the proposed amendment to update the transportation capital improvements program of the Comprehensive Plan to the State for their review. PUBLIC HEARING - COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST TO REDESIGNATE 466 ACRES IN WINTER BEACH FROM LD -2 to LD -1 AND REZONE 457 ACRES FROM RS -6 TO RS -3 AND TO REZONE 35.4 ACRES FROM RS -6 to RM -6 The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to wit: 41 BOOK 66 N%F 152 OCT 2 11986 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 r a in the matt of �- In the 'r / Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press-Joumal 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. ,J Sworn to and subscribed before/fie Anti day o r 4 :=fT"1� _ �i_/riv.A,n�t� a A.D. UC - t.C`I , ^ i A 16usiness Manager) (SEAQ (Clerk of the Circuit Court; Indian River County, Florida) 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 r f a z Al in the matter of •a in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of V C•'js(� /1ly/ 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 beep 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 bre this day of A.D. 2h /"(Business Manager) (SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, radian River County, Florida) 42 MR.. PAGE 153 or - 82 Iwe ri ngm•Or-way 10110 w me F.E.C. ifie South 300 feet of ine Eaaf 300 feet the NW V. of the NW K of Section 10, wnship 32 Soum. Rar 39 East e East 3001101 a ane SW a q me Hyy of Section 10. Towretup 32 Sotto, nge 39 East e East 300 left of the East is of the All Carers L herd ting n thdian River County, FtOnoa and containing approximately 35.1 aomm ewre or bet. A Public training at iii ev Parties in im aM and Mean Shah have an oppwumdy to be heat0, will be held by the Board at County Com- mesldners of Irlden Riva County Fonda, in the County Commiseum Champes a the County Administration Budding, is =011 at INC 25th SL, Vero Beach. Florida, on Tuesday. October 21. 1950, at 9:05 am. The Board of County Commissioners may Prove a lass Intensezo," thedi. trio rapueated Provided d is Within the Gema general use category. Anyone who may wish tO aPPM any dedild. which may be made at 1Ria 1710" w01 need to ensure that a verbatim record of re Proceedings is made which includes the @snmany and evi, denc9 upon which the appeal b oaSBtl. Indian River County Board of County Conmsse ortea BYY.-;-Don C. Scurlock Jr.. Chairman Oct. 1,_1 380 n 1 O0o fteribed West caw afire 3. 32 ymg more than am tot righ-way Southeast u of Range 38 04 2% Sectior, ge39 East East feet at KillIP 32ySouth. 7 In plat a. TtaCt81010 01ru I 25 gull 28, In - I , RAar�igs 3 Cordial WMW Bmea h Plat Book ubdkdsion. affil RWin�te, BombM°grind�aa'� recadea m Phot Book 8, Pa: was Rica County. Florida: Supd_ is do 1k 0, trailer, BoRWWty. Fkinctia The Fast n of the Noreesst tis of Sao. tion 9. Township 32 South, Range 39 East; The Northwest ib of the Norfhweot A of Section 10. Town p 32 South Range 39 East less the South app feet a Ota east 300 to% and tees the Nor9teast G Of the Nadu! % Of the Northie old A The swmwast N a the Northwest %,'W Secoon 10. Townahp 32 Sough, Range 39 East Iesa the East 300 feet All L81103 River Counylormaa, anuwmitt ePProsimodwy 157.0 apes more er loss. anA public d d enstm" at which have an 88 a m paroferert be heard. wdl be held by the Board of Courdy `Com, County""aakimanI of Indian River A County Cormewi n Cham ears of abtMafits re . n Budding. located at 18=0 25thCo Std., 1988, at 91M am. Vero Beach. Flor" onThy October 21. Anyone who may wish to appeal any depetairt which may be made aI ere mealu, will reed to anwra mat a verbatim record of the proceedinp is made when mWudm the esbmony ata ew- deficit uPon which the appeal b Nosed. BBInd�ian Riva County Boarro of C-" Cammealkim, Oct 1, %44)- Sounpok'k" Chairman Scurlock declared a conflict of interest in this matter, and stated that even though he has disposed of his property in that area, he felt he could not sit in on this Public Hearing. He turned the meeting over to Vice Chairman Lyons and left the Chambers temporarily. The Board reviewed the following memo date 10/1/86: TO: The honorable MembersDATE: October 1, 1986 FELE: of the Board of County Commissioners COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST - DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: TO REDESIGNATE 466 ACRES SUBJECT: LOCATED IN WINTER BEACH FROM LD -2 TO LD -1, TO RE - Robert M. Keat-i4g, Ar P ZONE 457 ACRES FROM RS -6 Planning & Development Director TO RS -3, AND TO -REZONE APPROXIMATELY 35.4 ACRES THROUGH: Richard Shearer, AICP ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH Chief, Long Range Planning WINTER BEACH ROAD INDUST- RIAL NODE FROM RS -6 TO FROM: Jeffrey A. Goulet REFERENCES:RM-6. Staff Planner, Long -Range Planning It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 21, 1986. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The County is a.nitiating a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to redesignate approximately 466 acres, located between 71st Street (Cemetery Road) and 65th Street (South Winter Beach Rodd) from 58th Avenue (Kings Highway) to 600 feet west of the F.E.C. Railroad from LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre) to LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (up to 3 units/acre). The County is also requesting to rezone approximately 457 acres (in the area described above) from RS -6, Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre), to RS -3, Single -Family Residential District -(up to 3 units/acre), and to rezone approximately 35.4 acres, located adjacent to the west side of the South Winter Beach Road Industrial Node, from RS -6, Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre), to RM -6, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre). On July 23, 1986, the Board of County Commissioners voted 4 -to -0 to approve Resolution No. 86-48 which amended the Winter Beach Precise Land Use Map to provide more detailed land use policies for the subject property. The Board resolved that the area located between 71st Street (Cemetery Road) and 65th Street (South Winter Beach Road) from 58th Avenue (Kings Highway) to 600 feet west of the F.E.C.R.R. should be limited to single-family _ residential development with a maximum density of 3 units/acre (see Figure 1). On September 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4 -to -1 to recommend approval of the land use amendment and the rezoning requests. 43 BOGS 66 PA' E154 oGT- 1986_ BOOK 66 ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS Y 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 currently consists of undeveloped land, a church, and a number of single-family residences situated throughout the area, with most of the homes located along 69th Street, 51st Avenue, and 52nd Avenue._ The homes along 69th Street are situated on lots which range in size from } acre to 10 acres. The homes located along 51st and 52nd Avenues are on lots which range from i acre to 1 acre in size. The property to the east is an industrial node with several industrial uses, zoned IL, located on South Winter Beach Road. The F.E.C. Railroad is located approximately 600 to 1,500 feet east of the subject property. There are also heavy commercial uses, zoned CH, located east of the railroad between U.S. 1 and Old Dixie Highway. The property to the south is primarily vacant and zoned. RS -6 with a residential subdivision, made up of .15 acre lots, also located to the south. The Bent Pine Golf Club, zoned RM -4 is located further south. The land to the north—contains Kiwanis-Hobart Park and additional vacant land, zoned A-1, currently being mined. Ciba-Geigy, zoned RS -3, is located just west of the subject property. Future Land Use Pattern, The subject property is currently designated as LD -2, Low -Density - Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre) on the County's Comprehensive Plan. The property to the north and south is also designated as LD -2. The property to the east, running a distance of 300 feet west of the F.E.C.R.R., is part of the U.S. 1 MXD, Mixed -Use Corridor. There is also a 100 acre Industrial Node located just east of and adjacent to the subject property. The property located to the west of 58th Avenue (Kings Highway) is designated as LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (up to 3 units/acre) The LD -2 land use designation is a general category which allows residential development up to a maximum of 6 units/acre with public water and sewer facilities. The County can provide less intense zoning, such as RS -3, in areas with the LD -2 designation. The present situation (absence of both public water and wastewater facilities) will not' allow development at 6 units/acre. However, County water is scheduled to be supplied to the Winter Beach area between 1988 and 1992, which would make it possible to attain the maximum density that the LD -2 land use designation allows. Transportation Svstem The subject property is served by several roadways which vary in functional classification. The north section of the area is served by 69th Street (North Winter Beach Road) which is classified as a primary collector•on the Thoroughfare Plan. 65th Street (South Winter Beach Road) serves the southern section of the subject property and is classified as a secondary collector on the Thoroughfare Plan. Both of these roads intersect with 58th .Avenue (Kings Highway), designated as an Arterial on the Thoroughfare Plan, on the west side of the subject property. North and South Winter Beach roads also intersect with Old Dixie Highway and U.S. 1 to the east of the subject property. Old Dixie Highway is designated as a Secondary Collector and U.S. 1 is designated as an Arterial on the Thoroughfare Plan. 44 All of these roads are currently rated at a level -of -service "A" throughout the year. The proposal to redesignate the subject property from a maximum of 6 units/acre to 3 units/acre would decrease the, total number of trips generated under build -out conditions. . Environment Approximately 80% of the subject property, located on the east side of the Lateral G Canal, consists of excessively drained soils and is considered to be located in the coastal sand ridge primary aquifer recharge area. The remainder of the subject property consists of fine sandy poorly drained soils. A low depressional area which is seasonally flooded is located north of South Winter Beach Road between 52nd Avenue and 57th ,Court. This area is located in zone "A", a 100 year flood plain. T7t-i1if-iPG The subject property is not currently served by County water or wastewater facilities. However, County water is scheduled to be supplied to the area between 1988 and 1992. CONCLUSIONS Due to the fact that the subject property is located only 300 feet from an industrial node, is located less than J mile from U.S. 1, is located on a primary collector, and is scheduled to be supplied with County water facilities by 1992, the existing LD -2 land use designation is more appropriate than the LD -1 land use designation. RECOMMENDATION Based on the policies which were established by the Board of County Commissioners on July 23, 1986, when they adopted the revisions to the Winter Beach Precise Land Use Map, the Planning Department intiated the request to redesignate the subject property from LD -2 to LD- l and to rezone it from RS -6 to RS -3 and RM -6. On September 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4 -to -0 to recommend approval of the County -initiated requests to redesignate 466 acres located in Winter Beach from LD -2 to LD -1, to rezone 457 acres from RS -6 to RS -3, and to rezone 35.4 acres adjacent to the South Winter Beach Industrial Node from RS -6 to RM -6. - Although the planning staff respects the policies. established by -the Board and the recommendations made by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the staff still feels that its original proposal for this area was correct and continues to recommend the following: 1) The subject property retain its LD -2 land use designation; 2) The area west of the Lateral G Canal between North and South Winter Beach Road be rezoned to RS -3; 3) The area east of Lateral G retain its RS -6 zoning; and 4) The 300 foot multiple -family buffer strip be extended southward along the west side of the South Winter Beach Road Industrial Node, rezoning that property from RS -6 to RNI-6. _ 45 BOOK 156 iT 1� F'QGT 2 BOOK 66 PAGE15 Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. Ted Herzog, attorney representing George Williams, part owner of 102 acres east of the Lateral G Canal, distributed copies of the following map: T4r-.n l C INDUSTRIAL N — — South Winter Beach Road Tom Schlitt, Tr. t t 25 acres Indian River County Garbage Vary Barn Thomas Barnes Jr. Transfer. 97 acres 64 acres 46 Hobart Brothers 43 acres Continental Mineral Co. 40 acres Indian River Zounty — — — — — 6ertid Roast James Pinto 5 acres Leonard Hatala. ..�....-. 35 acres Cemetery Cemetery Doug Pat Sousa Harrison - TuckerAallace 5 4 acres 10 acres acre North jinter Beach Road cm N Funis Proctor Dan Ford Laverne Murrill Anders Nyquist 8 acres 9 acres 17 acres 15 acres M _ Paul m Carin m 2 ac. ti 0 Nm c Lost Tree Village Corp m 25 acres Williams/AmSouth 102 acres Paul Carini 10 acres INDUSTRIAL N — — South Winter Beach Road Tom Schlitt, Tr. t t 25 acres Indian River County Garbage Vary Barn Thomas Barnes Jr. Transfer. 97 acres 64 acres 46 Attorney Herzog pointed out the Williams' property located in the lower center of the map, and advised that they are in tavor of retaining the existing land designation of LD -2 and RS -6 zoning. He explained that wherever you see a name typed in on the map there is a letter from those individuals in favor of retention of the land use and zoning. The land owned by the Hobart brothers is under option to sell, but the prospective buyers also are in favor of retaining the present zoning and land use designation. Attorney Herzog recalled that when the Comp Plan was being written, there was significant interest by the Board of County Commissioners, in densities up to 14 upa in that area. He stressed that the 6 upa actually equates to 4.2 or 4.5 upa depending on how the developer works out his site plan. He stressed that this is not just a situation where we have raw land; the Roberts, Tuckers, and Nyquists have homes or home improvements on their property. He realized that there has been considerable opposition to the retention of this land use designation, but pointed out that it has come from homeowners west o f-the—cana-l. However, the owners of 900 of the acreage east of the canal are in favor of retention of the present land use designation of LD -2 with densities of 6 upa. Attorney Herzog emphasized that staff is still recommending to the Board that the LD -2 Land use designation and the RS -6 zoning be retained. He understood that one of the reasons is that it would not be cost feasible for the County to service the area with water and sewer if densities are at 3 upa. He realized there is no vested right in zoning or land use designations, but pointed out that there has not been a substantial change or significant development since the time the Comp Plan was adopted. He urged the Board to preserve the LD -2 and RS -6. Paul Carini, representing the property owners of 900 of the property east of the canal, stated that they are in opposition to any downgrading of zoning. He felt that since the zoning was 47 OCT 211986'aooK Fac5 OCTFr- -1 21 1996 BOOK 6b F',�,E 159 suitable back in 1957 when the population was low, it should be suitable now. He believed that 6 upa might even be considered too low considering the expected growth in Indian River County. _ Lynn Kirk, 4210 North Winter Beach Road, thanked the Board for their July 23rd decision to change the land use designation from LD -2 with 6 upa to LD -1 with 3 upa. He recalled that Commissioner Bowman had noted at that meeting that people were building homes on large tracts, and that values would increase greatly because of the golf courses being built in the area. Mr. Kirk stressed that there have been no significant changes since the Board made their policy decision at that July 23rd meeting. Commissioner Lyons stated he was very tired of this issue, and believed the people up there are tired of it also and would like to see it settled. W. R. Broocke, 6185 65th Street, believed that the Board's actions should be to the maximum benefit of the maximum amount of people, and urged the Board to continue with the policy decision made on July 23rd. John Hansen, 4290 North Winter Beach Road, explained that his house is west of the Lateral G Canal and that he is in favor of the downzoning. He pointed out that most of that area is in the sand ridge, which recharges the aquifer, and to put more homes on that land would put a strain on the aquifer. He noted that one of the members of the Planning 6 Zoning Commission had n been very concerned about the impact on the sand ridge, and he hoped the Board would vote the same way they did at the July 23rd meeting. Rebecca B. Hampton, President of the Winter Beach Progressive League, urged the Board to vote the same way they did on July 23rd. She recalled that they turned in petitions with 220 names of people opposed to the LD -2 land use and RS -6 zoning. She stated that the Progressive League is still in support of the Winter Beach PLUM (Precise Land Use Map). 48 Commissioner Wodtke asked if any of the property owners shown on the map distributed by Attorney Herzog were involved in the Winter Beach Progressive League in forming the PLUM, and Mrs. Hampton noted that Doug and Brenda Tucker are members and understood that they support the PLUM. She did not see any other names of people who are involved in the League. Attorney Herzog stated that Brenda Tucker has submitted a letter stating that the Tuckers are now neutral on the zoning issue. Mr. Kirk pointed out that property owners in the area did not have to be League members to attend the workshops. Most of the property owners in that area live elsewhere, however. Tommy Barnes, owner of two pieces of property in this area, supported the owners and was a little alarmed that people who have little or minimal in-terest can initiate a land use amendment. He emphasized that property taxes have increased dramatically up there in the last few years, and felt that people should have the right to use their property if it does not hurt the surrounding property. He urged the Board to carefully — conside-r th-rs dowmzoning, keeping in mind the property rights of .the taxpayers in this County. Tom Schlitt, 2245 47th Terrace, explained that he and some other individuals recently purchased a parcel of property on South Winter Beach Road which is not affected by this zoning, but he was concerned that owners of surrounding property can impact the zoning of property they don't own. He felt it would be best to use that property at its present zoning. While he appreciated the fact that the people up there want to keep the traffic down, he felt the Board needs to consider the rights of all the property owners. Ramona Hamilton, owner of property on 52st Avenue in Winter Beach, noticed that comments have been made that some people did not have the opportunity to ask for downzoning and this is not true. When the Planning staff started to meet with the people in 49 BOOK 66 PAGE 160 Fir - OCT 21 198 BOOK 66 NAGE 161 Winter Beach, it was advertised in the paper many times. Notices appeared in the Press Journal, the Today Newspaper, the Miami Herald and it was also on the radio stations. There was ample _ notice for those people who wished to participate; so she did not know why these people have waited until now to let their feelings be known. She thanked the Commissioners for their consideration. and urged them to rezone the property. Pat Moon, resident of 52nd Avenue, expressed her support for the downzoning. She understood that the residents all around her property are in favor of the downzoning because they want to maintain the family-oriented neighborhood. She urged the Commissioners to stick with their policy decision of July 23rd. Anders Nyquist:, owner of property on North Winter Beach Road, stated that he is against the rezoning proposal because it _ seemed to him that a handful of people in Winter Beach have been the catalyst in this rezoning and that many people in the area have been the victims of scare tactics. There is documentation that owners of 900 of the I -and east of the canal are against the rezoning and wish to retain their present densities. Jim Taylor, 6365 69th Street, urged the Board to vote for the rezoning in order to eliminate the possibility of crowded housing_and retain the overall -complexion of the community. Lomax Gwathmey of Vero Beach believed that the residents up there should have more of a say than the people who are not living there, and he believed this is a good opportunity to limit the densities in that fast-growing area. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously closed the Public Hearing. 50 MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, that the Board adopt Ordinance 86-69, rezoning the area east of the Lateral G Canal from RS -6 to RS -3; and authorize staff to transmit to the State the proposed land use amendment of LD -2 to LD -1. Under discussion, Mr. Shearer confirmed that the Board has the ability to change the zoning today, but cannot adopt a land use amendment prior to the State's 90 -day review. Commissioner Lyons commented that as far as he was concerned, a new set of•facts has been presented today and he now believed he might have made a bad decision in voting against staff's recommendation on July 23rd. However, it is up to the Board to protect the rights of everyone, and he felt we should keep in mind that the people who live in that area purchased their property at LD -2 and should not have expected that area to be downzoned. While he was against the overall redoing of this, he certainly would be glad to consider a compromise situation, if - there is a compromise to try to satisfy both the people who live there and those who have their money invested in property there. Commissioner Wodtke felt it was going to be very difficult for the Board to make everyone happy. He suggested that the Board approve a land use amendment that would bring that LD -1 across the canal and extend it to all those single-family residences who want to maintain the single family residential, including the Tucker/Wallace 10 acres and extend the 3 upa across • to Doug Sousa's property. He felt that would include everyone other than the one property owner who is south of Winter Beach Road that had a request to downzone to 3 upa. Commissioner Wodtke stressed that -LD -2 on the Comp Plan is simply -a - designation for up to 6 upa and does not necessarily mean that it will develop at 6 upa. He asked if staff would have much of a problem to do the extension he suggested to bring that LD -1 51 BOOK ["�1, 6' OCT 11986 9 OCT BOOK 66 FACE 163 across the canal to protect those property owners on North Winter Beach Road who want to maintain the integrity of that entire North Winter Beach Road area, as well as those people who live south of the County -owned property. Director Keating did not feel it would be a problem, but recommended that we keep everything east of the canal LD -2, and zone the compromise area that Commissioner Wodtke described at RS -3. That way the land use plan can be pretty much standard with the canal the dividing line between LD -1 to the west and LD -2 to the east, and those properties that are just north of North Winter Beach Road would be zoned at RS -3. In other words, we would do the compromise by zoning rather than changing the land use designation. Commissioner Bowman asked if anyone in attendance who lived south of North Winter Beach Road was in favor of the lower density, and there were not. Commissioner Bird stated that when the Board considered this issue at the July 23rd meeting, he was pretty vocal about being in favor of downzoning all the way from the railroad tracks to Kings Highway. However, after that meeting he felt that perhaps he should have made a little more of an attempt to try to reach some kind of a compromise, and felt that he could go along with Commissioner Wodtke's suggestion. 4 Commissioner Lyons asked staff to define the suggested boundaries of the LD -1 extension. Mr. Shearer stated that the line would be on the north side of North Winter Beach Road and extend about 600 feet north. it appears to be like a 660 line and staff will follow the property line when we write the ordinance. Commissioner Lyons wanted confirmation that it includes the fucker/Wallace, Sousa, and Harrison properties, and Commissioner Bird said that it would not include the Harrison property.as it would stop at the property just west of the Sousa property. 52 _ r COMMISSIONERS BOWMAN AND WODTKE AGREED TO WITHDRAW THEIR MOTION ON THE FLOOR. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Commmissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0, Chairman Scurlock having declared a conflict) approved a land use amendment to include all of the property west of the Lateral G Canal, east of Kings Highway, south of North Winter Beach Road, and north of South Winter Beach Road in the LD -1 designation; and in addition, include a strip of land approximately 600 feet deep running north along the Lateral G Canal north of North Winter Beach Road and extending east and following the property line of the Sousa 5 acres and then going south a little ways and then east and then south to North Winter Beach -Road and then going west along North Winter Beach Road to the Lateral G Canal; and authorized staff to submit this proposed land use amendment to the State for their review. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Ordinance 86-69, rezoning the same property delineated as LD -1 in the above land use amendment from RS -6 to RS -3. 53 BOOK 66 P', E164 - b • OGa 1 r- 1 BOOK 66 F4„E165 10/8/86 pnot LR -Planning RS/vh ORDINANCE NO. 86-69 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FOR THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the local planning agency on such matters, has held a public hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this rezoning request; and jv"HEREnS, 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 WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has determined that this rezoning is in conformance with the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners-has—held a public hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, 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: 1. The zoning of the following described property situated in Indian River County,Florida, to -wit; The west 550 feet of the south 670 feet of the Southwest of Section 3, Township 32 South, Range 39 East; The east 210 feet of the west 766.5 feet of the south 445 feet of the southwest j of the southwest j of Section 3, Township 32 South, Range 39 East; The south 670 feet of the Southeast j of the Southeast $ of Section 4, Township 32 South, Range 39 East; The South 360 feet of Tract 28, Section 4, Township 32, South, Range 39 East; The South 360 feet of the East 70 feet of Tract 2719 Section 4, Township 32 South, Range 39 East; Lots 1 thru 4, inclusive, Brumley Acres Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 8, Page 79, Indian River County, Florida; That part of tract 6 located west of the Lateral "G” Canal, Tracts 7 and 8, Tracts 10 thru 21, inclusive, Tracts 25 thru 27, inclusive, and that part of Tract 28 lying west of the Lateral "G" Canal, located in the North } of Section 9, Township 32 South, Range 39 East; Winter Beach Park Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 10, page 7, Indian River County, Florida; ORDINANCE NO. 86-69 Winter Beach Highlands Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 6, page 58j Indian River County, Florida; Reece Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 10, page 32, Indian River County, Florida; All Lands Lying and being in Indian River County, Florida. Be changed from RS -6, Single -Family Residential District, and A-1, Agricultural District, to RS -3, Single -Family Residential District. 2. The zoning of the following described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to wit: That part of the NE j of NW $ of Section 10, TowrMhip 32 South, Range 39 East lying more than 600 feet west of the west right-of-way line of the F.E.C. Railroad; The South 300 feet of the East 300 feet of the NW i of the NW } of Section 10, Township 32'South, Range 39 East; The East 300 feet of the SW j of the NW of Section 10, Township 32 South, Range 39 East; The East 300 feet of the East j of the SW of Section 10, Township 32 South, Range 39 East; All Lands Lying and being in Indian River County, Florida, and containing approximately 35%A acres, more or less. Be changed from RS -6, Single -Family Residential 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 21st day of October, 1986. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY By n E Don C. Scurlock, Jr., airman ATTEST BY: . FREDA WRI,gHT, C r . e. Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida this 31st day of October , 1986. CT 2 1 1986 BOOK 66 mn166 OCT 21 1986 BOOP E167 Chairman Scurlock returned to Chambers and took over the chair from Vice Chairman Lyons. Commissioner Wodtke left the meeting at 12:00 o'clock noon as he is still recuperating from his recent angino plasti procedure. PUBLIC HEARING - COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ESTABLISH AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT ?he hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to wit: VERO BEACH PRESS-JOURK,'-1 L Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press•Joumal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being t in the matter of 121CA'd 1014 414 in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of e"*) lfa b Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press,loumal'is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. (q� Sworn to and subscribed befor met ' 3 day of� A.D. 19 • — / ( iness Manager) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, I Wan River County, Florida) (SEAL) 1�.an _ NOIXE.IS HEW- =, T ttua the &Wd a* ary pu�l>fiW: c�°`.iedrpp. Mh parties in MWWnst ane deme r11e°enaG at M ars b Wbnaia•r or adogon of an a nano•enttllad: •- _,w �,1- The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/2/86: 56 TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: October 2, 1986 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: Robert 11r. Keating, AI Planning & DevelopmentDirector THROUGH: Richard Shearer, AICP Chief, Long -Range Planning COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPRE- HENSIVE PLAN TO ESTABLISH. AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT FROM: Jeffrey A. Goulet REFERENCES: memo ,K/', Staff Planner, Long -Range Planning CIDG It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 21, 1986. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: This ;is a County -initiated request to establish an Economic Development Element in the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County. In June, 1985, the Board of County Commissioners .adopted the Overall Economic Development Plan (OEDP) for Indian River County and submitted the OEDP to the Economic Development Administration (EDA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce. On July 31, 1985, the EDA designated Indian River County as a title IV redevelopment area which qualified the County to apply for federal funds to assist with economic development projects. In June, 1986, the OEDP Committee met and conducted the required annual review of the OEDP. ' This evaluation consisted of updating the statistical data, documenting progress in implementing the OEDP, and reevaluating the objectives, strategies, and priorities in the OEDP. The Annual OEDP Report was approved by the Board of County Commissioners on June 25, 1986. On September 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 -to -O to recommend approval of this request. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS: The purpose of establishing an Economic Development Element in the Comprehensive Plan is to aid the implementation of the goals and objectives of the Overall Economic Development Plan. By establishing the Economic Development Element as part of the Comprehensive Plan, all new development and rezoning proposals will be reviewed in conjunction with economic development policy as well as with those policies outlined in the other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed Economic Development Element is a synopsis of the Overall Economic Development Plan. The element is divided into two sections. The first section is an analysis- of existing conditions. This analysis includes a discussion of the role of the transportation system in economic development, and a review of the role of the labor force, employment, and income characteristics of the County. The analysis also outlines the potentials and constraints for economic development and the relationship between the Land Use Element and the proposed Economic Development Element. The second section consists of the goals, objectives and policies which were formulated based on the 57 T 21 1986 F��E C CT- 2 1 1986BOOK 66 Fa �F potentials and constraints within Indian River County for economic development. The goals and objectives are accompanied by an implementation matrix which outlines these statements and their priority, besides identifying the agency which is responsible for implementation of each of the strategies. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning tion, stff nds that the Commission's re mmenda presented, be establishedposed asppart - Economic Development Element, as of Indian River County's Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Bird asked how this ties in with the committee that Commissioner Wodtke is chairing, and Mr. Goulet explained that this came out of the Overall Economic Development Plan Committee which developed the strategies and objectives of the Overall Economic Development Plan. Commissioner Bird asked if it would be proper for Commissioner Wodtke's committee to gi.ve any input on this matter, and Mr. Shearer advised that staff had hoped to get this before them so that they could make a recommendation, but that committee has not held a meeting since July when this amendment request was originated. Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner. Bowman, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Wodtke having left the meeting earlier) closed the Public Hearing. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, that the Board authorize staff to transmit the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to the State for review. Commissioner Bird stated that he seconded the Motion with the understanding that the plan will be sent to Commissioner Wodtke's committee for comment. 58 IHE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0). PUBLIC HEARING - COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR PROPERTY DETACHED FROM TOWN OF ORCHID The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Prooflof Publication attached, to wit: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Deily Vero Beach, Indian Rirer County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIOA Before the undereigned autnoNly, personally appealed J. J. SChuraann. Jr. whO Ort oath says teat he is Business ManMw of the Vem Beam Press4ournal. a lady newspaper puboened at Van) Beach to Indian River County, Florpa; trial the attached Copy of alvenaement, being a in the matter In the ] o Court.wee put - fished in Said rrewapaper In Ina issues of dKw/ Alhant lurtnar says that the Said Vero Beach PressJoumal IS a newspaper published at • Vero ReecR in Said Indian River County, FWd& and that the set newspaper has rand fora Soon ContinuouaY punished in sat Ind= Rorer County. Florida, each daily and has bean _ entered as second class mad Suffer 0 the post off28 in Vero Beach. In sat Indian RiM Co— ty. Florida, fora period of one year nett preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisamenr. and affiantlunnar sets trial ire rias neither psid nor promised any person. firm Or CGrmatlWtally tl scowrlt, rebate. Commiss ort M refund for the purpose of sepuring title aitvannemnnt for pubheehon in the said newepaper. /,(//t {q� Sam m and subsoribed befo me it' .� day *f . A.O.7B I meas Manageq (SEAU ' (Clark of the Caton Coat, Iiiiidai Riva County, Florida) The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/29/86: TO: The Honorable Members DATE: September , 198PILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: Robert M. Keating, A;CP Planning & Development Director �7 Richard Shearer, FROM: Chief, Long -Range Plann#FERENCES: COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST TO_ESTABLISH A LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR PROPERTY DETACHED FROM TOWN OF ORCHID Land Use Memo rich4 Itis requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their -- regular meeting of October 21, 1986. 59 BOOK Fr�ut1 IQ1[�(p i r� i0 OCT 2 11986 BOOK 6� f',1uc 171 DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The Planning Department is initiating a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to establish a land iise d-esign-ation for approximately 40 acres of land detached from the Town of Orchid during the Spring of 1986. The subject property is located on the south side of County Road 510 and the east side of the Indian River. On September 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 -to -0 to recommend approval of this request. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS The Comprehensive Plan designates the land south and east of the subject property as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre). Beoause of the small size of the subject property (approximately 40 acres) and the fact that all of the land in the unincorporated part of the County surrounding the subject property is designated as LD -2, staff feels that the subject property should also be designated as LD -2. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the subject property be designated as LD -2, howl -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre) . Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously (4-0) closed the Public Hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized staff to transmit the proposed Comp Plan amendment to the State for review. HATCH REQUEST TO ENLARGE THE OSLO ROAD/27TH AVE_. COMMERCIAL NODE BY REDESIGNATING 7.1 ACRES FROM LD -2 to COMMERCIAL The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to wit: 60 Staff .Planner Jeffrey Goulet presented the following staff recommendation for denial of the Hatch request to amend the Comp Plan: TO: The Honorable Members DATE: October 1, 1986 of the Board of County FILE: Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: uSUBJECT: Robert M. Keat'ng, ICP Planning & Development Director THROUGH: Richard Shearer, AICP Chief, Long -Range Planning HATCH REQUEST TO ENLARGE THE OSLO ROAD/27TH AVENUE COMMERCIAL NODE BY REDES-, IGNATING 7.1 ACRES FROM LD -2 TO COMMERCIAL FROM: Jeffrey A. Goulet REFERENCES: Staff Planner, Long -Range Planning Hatch Memo It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 21, 1986. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS Mr. Chauncy R. Hatch, Jr. is requesting to enlarge the Oslo Road/27th Avenue Commercial Node from 50 acres to 57 acres by redesignating approximately 7.1 acres from LD -2,_ Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre), to Commercial. The subject property is located south of 5th Street S.W. and east of 27th Avenue. On September 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 -to -0 to recommend denial of this request. 61 BOOK 1-72 ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS BOOK 66 P,�,UE 173 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 presently undeveloped. There is vacant land and a Cumberland Farms convenience store, zoned CL, located south of the subject property at the northeast corner of Oslo Road and 27th Avenue. There are also several retail establishments and vacant land, zoned CL, located west of the subject property. Several single-family residences, also zoned CL, are located south of the subject property on the west side -of 27th Avenue. North of the subject property is undeveloped property zoned RM -6. The property to_ the east of the subject site is also undeveloped and zoned RS -6, Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre). Approximately 15 acres of the node are presently being utilized for commercial activities which represents less than 1/3 of the acreage allocated to this node. Future Laffif OWce_ Pattern The .,ubjec-L r_..,- _.- _j is presently designated as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre) on the Comprehensive Plan and is located adjacent to the Oslo Road/27th Avenue Commercial Node. The property to the south and west of the subject property is part of the Oslo Road/27th Avenue Commercial Node. The land located west of the node is designated as LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (up to 3 units/acre). The land to the north and east of the subject property is designated as LD -2, Low -Density_ Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre). The County created a 50 acre Commercial Node at Oslo Road and 27th Avenue in 1984 to recognize the existing commercial uses and to allow properties situated between existing commercial uses to be developed for commercial use. Transportation System The subject property has direct access from 27th Avenue, classified as an Arterial on the County's Thoroughfare Plan. Maximum development of the site based on the proposed commercial land use designation could generate up to 3,121 Average Annual Daily Trips (AADT). This additional traffic would not alter the level -of -service "A" that presently exists along 27th Avenue. Environment The subject property- is not designated as environmentally sensitive nor is it in a flood -prone area. Utilities A County watermain runs along the north side of Oslo Road. No wastewater facilities are available at the present time. CONCLUSIONS The proposed property is and west of boundaries o encroach on site plans h Commercial land use designation for the. subject consistent with the commercial zoning to the south the subject property and would neither extend the f the node more northerly than they already are nor any existing residential development. However, no ave been submitted for any commercial establishment 62 since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1982, and there has been very littleinterestin this area for further commercial development since the Commercial Node was created in 1984. Due to the fact that the node is less than 1/3 developed, an increase in the amount of commercially zoned land in this area does not seem to be justified at this time. RECOMMENDATION Based on the fact that less than 1/3 of the node is developed commercially at this time, the fact that no commercial development has been approved in this area since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1982, and considering the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment application be denied. Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. Chauncey N. Hatch, Jr., applicant and owner of property on 5th Street SW (Rebel Road) and 27th Avenue, explained that he made the trip from his home in Kentucky just to attend this meeting because it means a great deal to him. He pointed out that the Minutes of the Planning 8 Zoning meeting of September 11, 1986, are incorrect as they that state he was present, at the meeting and had nothing to add to sta'ff's recommendation. He wished to state that he was not in Vero Beach at the time, and if he had been, he certainly would have made some objections. The main reason he purchased this land in 1978 is because the front 3307feet were zohed commercial, and he believes that he has been discriminated against and treated unfairly for a number of reasons. Referring to a map of the Oslo Road/27th Ave. commercial node, Mr. Hatch pointed out that everyone who has frontage from 5th Street SW to Oslo Road, and even property beyond Oslo Road on the west side has been given limited commercial except for him. He could not understand why he should be singled out to be eliminated from the zone and downgraded. Mr. Hatch pointed out that the only objection the P s Z Commission had regarding this matter was that only about one-third of the 50 acres designated as limited commercial has been utilized. He explained that the simple reason for that is because the property owner south of him does not wish to sell. In addition, there are 3 residences on the west side of 27th Ave. before Oslo Road which were originally T 2 119"16 6 3 BOOK 66 raE x.714 1986BOOK 66 f':;F 15 zoned single family residential. After those owners came in and complained that their property values would go down and they. would be unable to sell, they were granted limited commercial. Mr. Hatch just wanted the same treatment they were given. He believed it was very unfair that his property has been zoned single family since it was zoned commercial all along. He humbly asked the Board to expand the node from 50 to 57 acres which would give.him 7 acres of his 340 ft. frontage on which to build offices suitable for small businesses. Commissioner Bird explained that the reason for granting light commercial to the 3 residences was because of their adjacency to the intersection. In establishing these commercial nodes we have tried to consolidate the.commercial development around certain major intersections rather than extend strip _ fashion, and he believed if we go ahead and redesignate Mr. Hatch's property to commercial, other property owners would be asking for it also, which eventually would extend commercial all the way to the main canal. Mr. Hatch emphasized that he could only speak for his property which has been zoned commercial for years and years. Commissioner Lyons suggested that since commercial extends to 5th Street SW on the west side of the road, that we extend it to 5th St. SW on the east side of the road. Mr. Shearer explained that commercial was granted on the west side of the road because there were existing commercial uses, and in addition, there was the constraint of the 50 -acre node. Staff has a problem in justifying an expansion of the node when only one-third of the 50 acres is developed. Commissioner Lyons believed that even though there is no request before us on the piece of property north of Mr. Hatch's property to 5th St. SW, that we should include that whole piece in the node out of fairness and consistency. Peter Robinson, local developer, stated he tried to buy the ` property next to Mr. Hatch, but the owners refuse to sell. He 64 felt it is not fair to use the argument that the node is only one-third developed just because those owners want to hold on to that property, apparently just to grow nice pine trees on it. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird; the Board unanimously (4-0) closed the Public Hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) extended the boundaries of the Oslo Road/27th Ave. commercial node to 5th Street SW to include the Hatch property and the property to the north up to 5th St. SW; and authorized staff to transmit the proposed land use amendment to the State for review. DISCUSSION RE PURCHASING OF SOUTH COUNTY PROPERTY FOR POSSIBLE COUNTY PARK AND OTHER COUNTY USES The Board reviewed the -following memo dated 10/1/86: 'fY J try TO •s,;�5 FROM: DATE: RE: a ert Keating, Director nning & Development Division Ch"arries P. Vi tunac, County Attorney October 1, 1986 GRAPHICS PRESENTATION - COMMISSIONER BIRD Commissioner Bird would like to make a presentation to the Board of County Commissioners concerning buying 20 to 40 acres near Oslo Road and 20th Street (on the western edge of the County's utility property) for use as a County park. — Could you please prepare appropriate graphics to assist the presentation? You may wish to coordinate with Commissioner Bird for an exact description of the land in question. -OCT 211986 65 BOOK DD BOOK � � F',i � � U CT 21 d Commissioner Bird reported that he and Assistant County Attorney Bruce Barkett have had some preliminary talks with Mr. Ansin who has indicated he might have some interest in selling a portion of this property for use as a park and some other potential County needs. The Parks & Recreation Committee wishes to know if the Commission has any other interests in pursuing the possibility of purchasing this property, such as a library site or future expansion of the water plant on Oslo Road. If there is a combined interest, perhaps by pooling some resources we could establish the need and acquire the funds to purchase the property from Mr. Ansin� It is a beautiful piece of property that has access to Oslo Road. Chairman Scurlock agreed it certainly was something we should pursue, and Commissioner Lyons felt that 3 acres on Oslo Road would be suitable for a library site. ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized Commissioner Bird and Attorney Barkett to continue negotiations on this piece of property and bring it back to the Board, and authorized an appraisal. -CONTINUATION OF DISCUSSION ON SANDRIDGE CLUBHOUSE Continuing the discussion re the Sandridge clubhouse tabled from the Consent Agenda, Commissioner Bird explained that $250,000 was allocated for the construction of the clubhouse and Architect Charles Block was contracted to design the clubhouse, the cart storage building, and the maintenance building. General Services Director Sonny Dean, Charles Block, and he began looking at different clubhouse facilities in the area, particularly Vista Plantation's clubhouse, and got some ideas of what the cost had been for that facility. After talking with the Vista Plantation people and putting those ideas down on paper, 66 I M they expanded upon the basic layout and carne up with a clubhouse that they felt would be adequate to meet the needs of the Sandridge Golf Club. The dining room is slightly larger and will seat 60 people; there is more storage capacity; the kitchen area is somewhat larger, as is the area in the pro shop. They liked the basic traffic flow of the Vista Plantation clubhouse because of the way the golfers would come in one door of the pro shop, go past the counter where they would pay their fees, and then out the door to play golf. On the other side of the clubhouse the same basic thing happens as far as the food operation is concerned. There is a pass-through window for outside service, along with an outside door for those people who are just interested in foodservice. The facility will seat approximately 60 people on the inside and there is a large, covered porch where people can get a sandwich or a drink or just watch the golfers. If the dining room needs to be expanded in the future, it could be done by enclosing this porch. The clubhouse is definitely set up to be a two -person operation, one for the pro shop and one for the snack shop, and he.did not feel it is conceivable to design the clubhousne to`operate under only one person. Commissioner Bird encouraged the Board to accept this design and authorize staff to go to bid on the kitchen equipment for the clubhouse. Chairman Scurlock stated that he recognized the design as that of Vista Plantation's and was concerned about the traffic flow between the pro shop and the snack shop. He noted that during portions of the day at Vista Plantation they have only one individual responsible for the whole facility and at times have had to lock the doors to keep someone from coming in and removing merchandise from the pro shop. He was also concerned whether the clubhouse is in keeping with the golf course itself, which is a professional course. He realized there are constraints in the $250,000 but he just wanted to make sure that if we go ahead and build that building on that prime site, that it doesn't become a maintenance building of some sort a few years down the road when 67 T 2 11986 Booz 66 FaE 178 21126- BOCK 6 we may find it preferable to build a grander clubhouse. If that would be the case, he would prefer to pay a little more now and build something we will be happy with for many, many years. Charles Block was not sure that he had all the answers, but stressed that the facility, as designed, is quality for the square footage that is there. However, it is not a social club approach. Commissioner Bird felt that the snack bar approach fits the nature of a public golf course. It is not like a private club where people go just to socialize. Chairman Scurlock asked if an additional $50,000 would make the clubhouse more comfortable, but Commissioner Bird felt that if he had an additional $50,000 to spend, he would spend it on the golf course, n,' on the clubhouse. He felt confident that the proposed clubhouse will serve our i.,;eds and emphasized that the design affords the ability to expand on that site. Architect Block did not have any reservations about under- spending the budget; if anything, they overspent. He felt pretty good about it to the degree that he thought that some of the dollars in the clubhouse might have to go for cart storage. Chairman Scurlock asked Golf Pro Bob Komarinetz for his opinion on whether the clubhouse would be adequate, and Mr. Komarinetz believed it will be very adequate for our needs. He felt that we would need three people during the busiest times of the year, and in addition, we might need a person on the first tee to check receipts because that tee can't be seen very easily from the pro shop. If we were to spend any additional money, it would be his recommendation to pave the cart paths around the clubhouse. 68 ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized staff to go ahead and advertise for bid the kitchen equipment for the Sandridge clubhouse, as recommended by staff. SCHEDULING OF PUBLIC HEARING TO ESTABLISH IXORA PARK AND EASTVIEW GARDENS -SUBDIVISION STREET LIGHT DISTRICT The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/15/86: TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: October 15, 1986 FILE: Board of County Commissioners _ THROUGH: Charles Balczun, County Administrator Joe Baird FROM: Budget & Management James W. Davis, P.E., Uh ,]-%14 r TAZ�rI- r14 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS SUBJECT: Establishment of Ixora Park and Eastview Gardens Subdivision Street Light District REFERENCES: The County has received a petition from 109 property oamers in the ixora Park and Eastview. Gardens Subdivisions requesting an N�STU be established for Street Lighting. There are approximately 220 lots in Ixora Park and 56 lots in Eastview Gardens. The petition was circulated anticipating costs of $17 to $22 per lot per year. ALTERT T= AND ANALYSIS After receiving the petition, staff worked with FPL to develop the follaring project budget and yearly cost estimate: 45 - 9500 Lumen Lights with Pole @ $9.61 each = $ 5,189 3 - 9500 Lumen Lights on existing poles @ $7.61 each = $ 274 G & A charges $ 300 loo contingency $ 546 33% First year charge $ 1,821 Fees for Tax Collector, etc. $ 200 $ 8,330 This cost equates to $30.18 per year per lot for the first year and $23.58 per year per lot thereafter. RECONEMATION It is recommended that the Board authorize the scheduling of a Public Hearing to establish an MSTU for Street Lighting in the Ixora Park and Eastview Gardens Subdivisions. 69 800Ic 66 � Icy - I's0 BOOK c ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) scheduled a public hearing for November 18, 1986 to establish a street lighting district for Ixora Park and Eastview Gardens Subdivision. STATE OF FLORIDA VS. JIM ERIC CHANDLER The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/15/86: TO: The Board of County Commissioners DATE: October 15, 1986 SUBJECT: ate of Florida vs. Jim Eric Chandler FROM:( rit P.Wilson ant County Attorney This office has recently received a bill from an attorney, Robert Udell, who handled the defense of the above -referenced case in the recent sentencing hearing which was held in St. Lucie County. This was a first-degree murder case which the Public Defender originally handled but approximately one year 'ago was allowed to withdraw from due to excessive case load. The attorney's bill in the amount of $14,666.00 is wet I in excess of the statutory fee I imit established by statute for such cases, which is $3,500.00. Mr. Ude IIIs proposed fee is based upon a recent Florida Supreme Court decision, Makemson vs. Martin County, in which the statutory fee limit was declared unworkable in certain "extraordinary circumstances". Mr. Udell claims that .the Chandler case is an example of those extraordinary circumstances cited in the Court's opinion and has submitted numerous affidavits from private attorneys in support of his proposed fee. This matter is set for hearing for the Court on November 4, 1986. Mr. Udell has indicated that he is willing to accept a lesser figure than the amount requested to avoid the additional exppse and time which may be necessary to hold the hearing and'to litigate any appeals from the Court's decision. The Board is faced with three alternatives in this matter: 1. To accept and pay the original amount requested by Mr. Udell. 2. To attempt to renegotiate'a lesser amount with Mr. Udell. 3. To proceed to a hearing on this matter and to pursue any subsequent appeals, whether filed by Mr. Udell or by the County. a I wi 1 I be prepared to answer any questions you may have on this matter at your regularly scheduled meeting of October 21, 1986. 70 r r ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized -the Legal Dept. to negotiate a lesser amount with Mr. Udell and bring it back to the Board. TRAIN WHISTLE ORDINANCE The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/15/86: TO: The Board of County Commissioners DATE: October 15, 1986 SUBJECT:ain Whistle Ordinance FROM: J P. Wilson nt County Attorney Paul Risner, attorney for the Florida East Coast Railway Company, has contacted me regarding proposed changes to the above -referenced ordinance. Mr. Risner believes the following changes must be made to our ordinance because of an amendment to the enabling legislation and a recent Attorney General's Opinion. The changes are as follows: 1. The ordinance must prohibit audible signals at all railway crossings, public or private, rather than public as cited in our ordinance. Z. The ordinance must be effective on a county -wide basis and municipalities which prefer not be affected by the ordinance must pass a contrary ordinance. The existing ordinance is effective only in the unincorporated areas. 3. Any prohibition of audible warnings must be unconditional. The . Indian River County ordinance specifically permits railroad engineers to sound warnings in emergency situations. Mr. Risner is concerned that due to the mandatory nature of the enabling legislation, which requires an unconditional prohibition, -that any exceptions to the ordinance may render the ordinance unenforceable. As a practical matter, Mr. Risner advised me that the engineers on Florida East Coast Railway trains have been instructed to sound the horns in emergency situations. In the event that criminal charges are brought under those circumstances, the railroad will cite the emergency to the court as a defense to the charges. 71 BOOK 06 fA�r 1�,S2 OCT 2 1 198EBOOK F'$uCr r 83 The Indian River County ordinance is scheduled to go into effect on November 1, 1986. 1 have advertised the proposed amendments to this ordinance as suggested by the railroad for November 18, 1986. Mr. Risner is willing to appear before the Board at the public hearing to explain the Florida East Coast Railway's position on this matter. At that time Mr. Risner may also be able to answer any other questions you may have regarding the affect of this ordinance and the experience his company has had with such ordinances in other jurisdictions. Assistant County Attorney Jim Wilson explained that he placed this on today's Agenda just as an information item. UPGRADING OF RETIREMENT SERVICE BY ELECTED COUNTY OFFICIALS The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/3/86: TO: Iva� Boardof County Commissioners — — — DATE: October 3, 1986 SUBJECT: Upgrading of RetirementAService by Elected County Officers FROM: Bruce Barkett Assistant Cgunty Attorney Elected County officers are permitted by state law to purchase additional retirement credit in the Elected State Officers' Class of the state retirement system. Chapter 86-180, Laws of Florida, provides a limited period of time within which an elected County officer may declare his intent to purchase additional retirement credit in the Elected State Officers' Class of the state retirement system by paying only one-half of the contributions and interest due the System Trust Fund for the purchase of the additional retirement credit if the other half is paid by the County employer.• The period of time within which this election must be made ends December 31, 1987 or before leaving office, whichever occurs first. - The Department of Administratiorr has circulated a MEMORANDUM which explains that an officer resigning or seeking reelection must declare his intent to purchase additional retirement credit and actually make a payment of $1,000.00 prior to leaving office. This payment declares the officer's intent to upgrade service and will be applied toward the cost of the upgraded service. Further, the agency which elects to make payment of one-half the contribution necessary for the officer to receive the upgraded service must make its entire payment before the officer leaves office. Thereafter, the remaining amount due to upgrade the service may be paid by the off icer at any time prior to retirement. 72 A; copy of the relevant law and of the Department of Administration MEMORANDUM is attached. This item is put before the Board for its consideration of whether to elect to contribute one-half the amount due to upgrade retirement services for County officer -s participating in the Elected State Officers' Class of the Florida Retirement System. Assistant County Attorney Bruce Barkett advised that the Florida Retirement System was changed in 1980 to permit the vesting of elected public officials in 8 years instead of 10. The Board of County Commissioners can elect to contribute one-half the amount due to upgrade retirement services for elected County officers. Chairman Scurlock noted that Commissioner Lyons leaves office next month, so there is a deadline of November 17, 1986. Commissioner Lyons stated that in his case he has to vest about $2700 and the County would have to pay $2700 for a total of $5400. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0), Commissioner Wodtke having left the meeting early, elected to participate to the maximum limit of the law, and participation would affect only the elected officers of the Indian River County Board of Commissioners; funding to come out of general fund contingencies. DISCUSSION RE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR PHASE II OF NEW JAIL AND MOVING EXISTING MOBILE FACILITIES TO NEW JAIL SITE The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/10/86: 73 OCT 211986 KOK66 PnE184 BOOK Telephone: (305) 567-BOCO MEMORANDUM TO: Board ofC my Commissioners FROM: Commi i r Patrick B. -Lyons DATE: October 10, 1986 66 0.1ic. I.S5 Suncom Telephone- 424-1011 SUBJECT: Moving Existing Mobile Facilities and Feasibility Study for Phase III of New Jail Below are copies of two motions made by the Public Safety Advisory Committee at their September 23, 1986 meeting: "ON MOTION by Judge Smith, SECONDED by Mr. Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved recommending to the County Commission that the mobile facilities, now in use at the County jail, be moved to the new jail site and that they be used as additional temporary facilities until Phase II of the jail is completed." "ON MOTION by Mr. Wheeler, SECONDED by Mr. Scheeren, the Committee unanimously approved that the Public Safety Advisory Committee recommend to the County Commission that a Feasibility Study for Phase III of the jail be started". I will place the item regarding the Feasibility Study for Phase III of the jail on the October 21, 1986 agenda of the Board of County Commissioners' meeting. Commissioner Lyons explained that he had not planned to discuss the mobile facilities today and it was put on the Agenda by accident. He would like Administrator Balczun to bring that item up at a future meeting. The Public Safety Advisory Committee has recommended that a Feasibility Study for Phase III of the Jail be started, but Commissioner Lyons said his recommendation is that we delay this for 6 months until such time that we have had the opportunity to use the new Jail and see what bugs there might be. 74 ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Wodtke having left the meeting early) delayed the start of a Feasibility Study for Phase III of the new Jail for 6 months after the Jail is in operation or long enough to see how it is functioning. Chairman Scurlock advised that the Sheriff has a request on next week's Agenda for more personnel. PARKS 6 RECREATION COMMITTEE REPORT Commissioner Bird asked for the Board's blessings on the following matters: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING OCTOBER 16, 1986 SUMMARY OF ACTIONS RESTROOM FACILITIES AT JOE EARMAN PARK The Committee discussed the conceptual plan for restroom facilities at Joe Earman Park. It was recommended that a Tennessee Privy be constructed. MOTION: Unanimously recommended authorization to proceed with the rei�troonr conceptual plan, and make application to the Florida Boating Improvement Fund for an amount not to exceed $45,000 to complete the park. eREQUEST FOR FUNDS FOR PAVING ROADWAYS INTO LAUNCHING RAMPS AT BOB SUMMERS PARK These ramps are widely used by City and County residents alike. There have been a lot of complaints about the dirt roads leading to the ramps, and it is a lot of maintenance for the City of Vero Beach. It is estimated that it will cost $52,000 to pave the roads, and the City has requested a contribution toward the cost of the project. - MOTION: Unanimously recommended a $20,000 contribution toward the cost of paving the roadways to the launching ramps at Bob Summers Park, the money to come from Florida Boating Improvement Fund. USE OF KIWANIS-HOBART BALLFIELDS BY BABE RUTH LEAGUE The Committee received a letter from Al Ryan requesting use of the ballfields at Kiwanis-Hobart Park for the Babe Ruth League. It appears there are some problems regarding the recruitment of children for the league, as well as a problem with insurance coverage. The Committee felt they did not want to get in the middle of league problems, but they do need more information regarding the Babe Ruth League, and about the North County League schedules before a decision can be made regarding use of the ballfields. A letter will be written to Mr. Ryan and the other leagues involved asking them to send a representative to the next meeting. 75 0U"'T 2 11986 BOOK 66 {.:6 DONALD MAC DONALD AND DALE WIMBROW PARKS BOOK The Forestry Service is in the process of renovating the restrooms at Donald MacDonald Park. He said they built a bridge across the canal to the nature trail. The Committee discussed the possibility of improving the Donald MacDonald/Dale Wimbrow parks and turning the area into a money -making project similar to Long Point. The County Attorney's office was asked to review the Forestry Service lease for Donald MacDonald Park, and the Committee will continue its discussion at the next meeting. SOCCER PROGRAM AT FAIRGROUND Joe Spataro reported that the soccer program is doing extremely well. They have 133 children in the program at this time. PURCHASE'OF TREE SPADE Mr. Thomas stated there is a used truck and tree spade for sale for $22,000. Rex Hailey and Jack McCorkle inspected the equipment and reported that they are in good shape. In the past, the County has had to deny donated trees because it was too expensive to hire a company to move. them. With our own tree spade, we could accept all donated trees and use the spade as a rental item to other areas of the County, the City of Ver -o Beach, - and the Town of Indian River Shores. Mr. Davis indicated that the Road and Bridge Department would be able to use the tree spade frequently. MOTION: The Committee unanimously recommended the purchase of the used truck and tree spade for an amount not to exceed $22,000, the money to come from the Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Fund. MOTION: If the tree spade is purchased, the Committee would like top priority to be placed on developing plans for various County parks (such as Gifford Park) showing where trees could be planted so that when trees become available, they can be planted. It was also suggested that a place at the sanitary landfill site might be set aside for a small nursery to grow trees until they are needed for placement at various County properties. GOLDEN SANDS CONCEPTUAL PLAN The Committee reviewed the conceptual plan for the Golden Sands beachfront property. MOTION: The Committee unanimously approved the conceptual plan for the Golden Sands Park, and recommended that the County Commission apply for grant funds to begin the first phase of development. SEBASTIAN YACHT CLUB BOAT RAMP There is a problem with washout at the end of the Sebastian Yacht Club boat ramp. This is a very heavily used ramp by County residents as well as Sebastian City residents. The City of Sebastian has requested an amount not to exceed $3,000 to fill the washed out area with rock. Mr. Davis suggested other methods of correcting the problem. The Committee suggested that the representative from Sebastian.get in contact with Mr. Davis to discuss how the ramp should be fixed, and to come up with a definite cost of the project. The Committee will .consider. the request after this information is available. 76 PROPOSED SOUTH COUNTY.PARK SITE The possible purchase of 20-40 acres on the corner of 20th Avenue and Oslo Road was discussed. Joe Wiggins, Oslo resident, said the people of Oslo do not want to wait until a regional park can be developed; they need something now. Jim Davis -was asked if some of his staff could design a small park plan for the piece of property the County owns near the Timber Ridge development; perhaps the area could be graded and mowed, a backstop erected, and a few pieces of playground equipment could be installed that could be moved to the larger regional park when it is constructed. The Committee will discuss this matter further at the next meeting. SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD PARK PARCELS Attorney Barkett and Al MacAdam are reviewing these parcels, and hope to have recommendations for their disposal soon. Bob Summers Park Chairman Scurlock questioned the priority of paving the roadways to the launching ramps at Bob Summers Park because he felt the needs at Blue Cypress Park were greater with regard to paving and restroom facilities. Commissioner Bird agreed we need to rebuild the restroom facilities there, but pointed out that the $20,000 for the Bob Summers Park will not deplete all the funds because in January we will be getting a new allocation of $25,000 or $30,000, so we will have funds left in this year to do something out there. Purchase of Tree Spade ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the purchase of a used truck and tree spade for an amount not to exceed $22,000, the money to come from the Parks & Recreation Capital Improvement Fund. Commissioner Bowman felt we should develop a priority list of where to plant donated trees, so that when we receive notice 77 'Boor 66 1-1,88 nP. 1 196 L7: OCT 211996 -7 BOOK 66 f,kq at the last minute that we are to receive a tree, we can go right to that spot. — Chairman Scurlock felt very strongly that some of the additional gas tax monies should be directed towards beautifying our major entrance ways into this county, U.S. #1 and S.R. 60. There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 1:30 o'clock P.M. ATTEST: - -- S - Clerk Chairman 78