The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10/27/1987Tuesday, October 27, 1987 The Board of County Commissioners of.lndian River County, Florida, met in Regular Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday, October 27, 1987, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman, Vice Chairman; Carolyn K. Eggert; and Gary C. Wheeler. Absent was Richard N. Bird, who was out of state on vacation. Also present were Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; Joseph'Baird, OMB Director; and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order, and Commissioner Eggert led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/ EMERGENCY ITEMS Chairman Scurlock advised that Commissioner Eggert has asked for the addition under her matters re Library Tours, and Commis- sioner -Eggert asked that an item re Florida Community Health Centers be added under her matters also. The Chairman requested that the resignation of Patrick Lyons from the Planning & Zoning Commission and recommendation re the appointment of Leland Gibbs as Mr. Lyons' replacement be added under his matters. Admin. Balczun requested that Items 6N. (Health Insurance) and 11B. (Camp, Dresser S McKee - Needs Study for Additional Solid Waste Haulers) be removed from today's agenda, noting that they anticipate rescheduling them within the next week or two. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com- missioner Eggert, Commissioner Bird being absent, the Board unanimously (4-0) added and deleted items from today's Agenda as requested above. ROOK 69 FA ., 174 L_ OCT 27.19$% OCT 2 7 1987 BOOK fig F�,,� 75 CAUCUS Chairman Scurlock announced that he would call for a caucus on Health Insurance and the CWA contract immediately on the adjournment of today's meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc- tions to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of September 14, 1987. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the Minutes of the Special Meeting of September 14, 1987, as written. The Chairman asked -if there were any additions or correc- tions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 22, 1987. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 22, 1987, as written. The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc- tions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 6, 1987. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 6, 1987, as written. 2 CONSENT AGENDA The Chairman asked if anyone wished to remove any items in addition to N., which was deleted from the agenda earlier, and Comnissioner'Eggert asked that Item I be removed for discussion. A. Appointment of Deputy Sheriffs. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the appointment of Deputy Sheriffs by Sheriff Dobeck, as follows: Allison E. Loudermilk Dane Morris Timothy A. Turner Robert B. Meadows B., C. & D. Reports The following reports were received and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk to the Board: Traffic Violation Bureau, Special Trust Fund Month of September, 1987 - $44,187.54 Month to Date Report by Last Name, Month of September Inspection Report - County and Municipal Detention Facilities, 2nd Annual Follow-up Inspection, Indian River County Jail, October 5, 1987 E. Acceptance of Reports on Financial Balances for 1986/87 FY ON.MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) accepted the following Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the 1986/87 FY from: Freda Wright, Clerk David Nolte, Property Appraiser R. T. Dobeck, Sheriff Gene Morris, Tax Collector SAID REPORTS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD. 3 BOOK 69 FAGE 776 ff �: BOOK 69 PACE 777 F. Proclamation Honoring Daphne Strickland P R O C L A M A T I O N WHEREAS, DAPHNE K. STRICKLAND was appointed by Governor Graham to the Indian River County Housing Authority Board on January 25, 1980 as one of the original Board members; and WHEREAS, DAPHNE K. STRICKLAND has submitted her resignation and has chosen to remain active on the Board until the Governor appoints her replacement; and WHEREAS, on May 15, 1984 DAPHNE K. STRICKLAND was elected Chairman of the Housing Authority Board and devoted an enormous amount of time, effort and energy in steering the Housing Authority through some difficult times; and WHEREAS, during her tenure as a member of the Housing Authority Board DAPHNE K. STRICKLAND actively participated in the development of Treasure Coast Village Subdivision, a 71 -lot development with all amenities, which provides affordable new construction for the low-income buyer; and WHEREAS, DAPHNE K. STRICKLAND has seen the completion and the pay-off of a loan on the Treasure Coast Village Subdivision; and WHEREAS, DAPHNE K. STRICKLAND was instrumental in securing Financing for theVictory Park Labor Housing Project and has overseen the completion of Phase I of that project; NOW BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the Board expresses appreciation for the service DAPHNE K. STRICKLAND has performed on behalf of the the citizens of Indian River County. Her L accomplishments will affect future generations of citizens within our County. BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED that our heartfelt wishes for her success in future endeavors go with her. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY Z a c Don C. Scurlock, Jr. 4 Chairman G. Proclamation "Take 5 For Fitness Day" P R O C L A M A T I O N WHEREAS, the 3rd ANNUAL SUNSHINE PHYSICAL THERAPY CLINIC "Take 5 for Fitness" will be held on SATURDAY, DECEMBER 5th, 1987 beginning at 8:00 o'clock A.M.; and WHEREAS, "Take 5 for Fitness" is a 5K Run and includes a 1 mile Health Walk; and WHEREAS, the Run/Walk will take place at the Sunshine Clinic located at 1705 17th Avenue in Vero Beach; and WHEREAS, the Run/Walk would promote community involvement with the Sunshine Physical Therapy Clinic; and W11EREAS, it would promote a healthy activity in which the entire family may participate; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COIAUMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that Saturday, December 5th, 1987 be designated as "TAKE 5 FOR FITNESS DAY" BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED that the Board on behalf of itself and the citizens of Indian River County, expresses appreciation to the SUNSHINE PIIYSICAL TIIERAPY CLINIC for sponsoring this Run/Walk and urges the citizens of the County to support the SUNSHINE PHYSICAL THERAPY CLINIC, both in spirit and financially. BOARD of COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY 5 Dor. c:. Scurlock, Jr. p Chairman BOOK PAGE 778 r OCT 2 7 198 Bou 69 Fa,F 779 H. Lease Amendment for Sheriff's North County Office Space ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved Lease Amendment for space in Washington Plaza for Sheriff Dobeck, extending the lease agreement for one year until November 30, 1988. LEASE AMENDMENT WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES WHEN FULLY EXECUTED AND RECEIVED. '�' r� --1 e jr- I. HRS Contract for Public Health Services Commissioner Eggert advised that she talked to Dr. Berman about the contract yesterday because she was having trouble tracking Primary Care. The $85,000 from the county and the $85,000 from the Hospital are in here, but any state money that comes on approval of our application for Primary Care, as she understood it, will come back in an amended contract; so, that isn't in here. Chairman Scurlock commented that on Backup Page 23, Sec. Vill, Payment For Services, he looked at the total the department agrees to pay, which is $1,040,133, and then there was a change on the next page where our participation, which originally was $588,347, has been reduced to $375,848, and he wished to make sure those are now the correct numbers. Commissioner Eggert understood that they are. Dr. Berman explained that the difference is that the fees, which are considered a local contribution, were included in the $588,000 figure. Chairman Scurlock asked if the $85,000 funding for primary and indigent care in our budget is within this agreement, and Dr. Berman confirmed that it is. Chairman Scurlock wished to know, in the event the state should decide to reduce the budget, if we are in any way locked 6 in to pick up additional locally for what may be dropped by the state. Dr. Berman noted that one of the purposes of the contract is to lock in what your liabilities would be to the specified appropriation. He cannot, of course, predict what Tallahassee may or may not do; however, the funds for Primary Care come out of a trust fund rather than out of tax revenues; so, they are more or less fixed. Chairman Scurlock wanted it on the record that Tallahassee often tempts you by giving you $100,000 to begin a program, and then all of a sudden, they say they are not doing that this year, but you are going to continue the program. Commissioner Eggert had always felt that the idea was that we will cut back our program to fit what we get; therefore, if we get funds this year and next year there are no funds, we do not necessarily have to pick up the whole program. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the contract with the Department of Health 8 Rehabili- tative Services for Public Health Services for FY 1987/88. SAID CONTRACT WILL BE MADE PART OF THE RECORD WHEN FULLY EXECUTED AND RECEIVED. J. C.O. #3 - Ercildoune Heights Concrete Work - Petition Paving The Board reviewed staff memo, as follows: OCT 7. i7 7 ao�K 69 F�,U 7$0 CCT 2 p BOOK 69 PAryCa GE I ,, TO:THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF DATE: October 8, 1987 FILE: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun County Admini trator SUBJECT: Change order #3 Ercildoune Heights S/D R ph N. Brescia, P.E. Concrete work -Petition Paving County Engineer FROM: Michelle A. Terr-67tTy CT. REFERENCES: Civil Engineer DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Due to the untimely death of the owner -operator of P.A.V.C.O., Concrete Pumping and Curbing, the county has prepared Change Order #3 eliminating additional concrete work that was required around catch basins and drives. This will reduce the original contract by $3,140.00 resulting in a final contract amount of $9,742.20. The county crews will perform the work, so we may proceed with this project as quickly as possible. RECOMMENDATION & FUNDING It is recomended that Change Order #3 be approved. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved Change Order #3 Ercildoune Heights Concrete Work (P.A.V.C.O. Concrete Pumping & Curbing) reducing the original contract by $3,140.00. PROIECT: Ercildoune Heights C11AN(.E MIAR NUMBER 3 (name. address) Sebastian, FL 32958 TO (Contractor): IN171A11ON ELATE October 7, 1987 ARC111ILCI''S 11RO ILCT N(): �P.A:V.C.O. Concrete Pumping (0NTRA(1 FOR: Curbing 2680,Rocky Point Drive Palm Bay, FL 32905 L. _J CONTKA(T DATL: Vou are directed to make the following changes in this Coniraf t 1). Eliminate drop curb at corner of 81st Avenue and 140th Street. Mr: Cave's drive. Approximately 81 L.F. curb Cost $ 490.00 2) Eliminate curb at corner of 79th Ave and 140th Street Approximately 37 L.F. curb Cost 225.00 3) Catch basins on 141st Street - Eliminate 2 catch basins with approx. 20 L.F. header curb & 80 - 90 S.F. 4" concrete around catch basin. 2 @ $400/each Cost 800.00 8 4) Eliminate Mr. Cristiano's drive and 1 catch basin Approximately 55 L.F. header curb Approximately 260 S.F. drive @ 6" thick w/6x6 10x10 wire mesh Cost 1,150.00 5) Eliminate catch Basin on south side of 140th Street 25 L.F*. curb header 140 S.F. 4" thick flatwork around basin Cost 475.00 TOTAL COST 53,140 00 Not valid until signed by both the Owner and Architect. Signature tit the Contractor indicates his agreement herewith, including any adlu.tment in the Contract Sum or Contract Irnu- The original (Contract Sum) was ........................... $14,816.10 Net change by previously authorized Change Orders ................................... $ 3 ,,14 0.00 Tike (Contract Sum) prior to this Change Order was .......... $ 12,882.20 The (Contract Sum) be (M8)}fiit"K by this Chane Order ........................................ ............... $ 3,140.00 The new (Contract Sum) (kXXpritgrA*30ti MRiAiodkncluding this Change Order will he $ 9,742.20 TI.e Contract Time will be 0R"pa od) Jdcwxa4vdJ (unchanged) by ( ) W Thra Date of Substantial Completion as of the date of t`.is Change Order therefore i. Authon/ed: Ral jL N. Rrr.GC1A., P.P.- __P .g.3Lf_.Q - _- --.-- _-Ind i an R i v—er- _Caunty_ i, k Engineer CONrRA( 1014 ()WN[R �t*'eet _ 2b..8D_ R_ y p-aint-.Dr.iv-e-1a4D.25- Address Addre%% Aildrr•+s Vero Beach F 32960 Palm Bad MFL 32905Vero_Beach F 32960 BY tit _C—P.�•t=� - - �J� -- ilv'v-C DAT[ I,AIt K, Ercildoune Heights SID - Curbing -Final Payment The Board reviewed staff memo, as follows: TO THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF DATE: October 19, 1987 FILE: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun County Administrator --SUBJECT: Curbing in Ercildoune Heights t�Bresc�ia, Subdivision a P.E. County Engineer FROM: Michelle A. Terry C:. E. T.�iEFERENCES: Civil Engineer DESCRIPTION -AND CONDITIONS The construction of the curbing in Ercildoune Heights Subdivision is complete. This project has been inspected and has met the requirements set forth in the contract documents and specifications. RECOMMENDATION & FUNDING It is Staff's recommendation that the final payment of $9,742.20 be paid in full to P.A.V.C.O. Concrete Pumping . The money is available from the Petition Pavina Account #173-214-541-035.31. L_' OCT 2 7 1987 9 BOOK 69 PAGE 182 CT 2 71987,,` BOOK 69 PAGE 783 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized final payment of $9,742.20 to P.A.V.C.O. Concrete Pumping for curbing in Ercildoune Heights SID in the amount of $9,742.20, as recommended by staff. L. Line Transfer - Circuit Court The Board reviewed memo of the OMB Director: TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: October 21, 1987 SUBJECT: LINE TRANSFER - CIRCUIT COURT FROM: Joseph A. Baird OMB Director �V Description and Condition In the circuit court judges budget, the Board of County Commissioners authorized $7,680 under Other Contractual Services to be used for hiring a part-time secretarial person. The judges in the past have hired secretarial help as needed through employment agencies. Judge Smith is requesting permission to hire a part-time secretary (20 hours per week) as a county employee. Money is to be transferred from Other Contractual Services to Salaries. Account Number Account Title Increase Decrease 001-901-516-011.12 Regular Salaries 6,000 0 001-901-516-012.11 Social Security 451 0 001-901-516-012.12 Florida Retirement 803 0 001-901-516-012.14 Worker's Compensation 50 0 001-901-516-033.49 Other Contractual Services 0 7,304 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the above line transfer in the Circuit Court Judges' budget for a part-time secretary. M. Bid # 372 - "Bank Run Shell" The Board reviewed memo of the OMB Director: 10 TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: October 21, 1987 SUBJECT: IRC BID NUMBER 372 - BANK RUN SHELL FROM: Joseph A. Baird OMB Director Description and Condition , The "Bank Run Shell" bids were opened on Wednesday, September 16, 1987 at 2:00 p.m. Nine (9) requests for bids were mailed out and two (2) proposals were received. Proposals were as follows: Vendor Global Paving Conrad Smith - Black Hawk Quaries Funding Price if delivered to County (per ton) $6.00 $7.30 Price if picked -up by County (per ton) $2.75 $4.75 Funds were budgeted to the Road and Bridge Department and Petition Paving. Recommendation Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners award the "Bank Run Shell" IRC Bid # 372 to the lowest bidder, Global Paving. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) awarded Bid #372 for "Bank -Run Shell" to the low bidder, Global Paving at $6.00 per ton delivered and $2.75 per ton picked -up. COUNTY -INITIATED REZONING WEONA SUBDV. - BLK 4 8 BLK 9 The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk ready the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: T 2 7 1987 " �ooK 69 Face 784 Boos 69 PnE / 85 OCT 2 7 1987' VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a in the matter in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues o'-_4644) z 17 . Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount,- rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of A.D. 19 gZ u nes anager) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, In ian RW County, Florida) (SEAL) r NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING Notice of hearing Initiated by Indian River County to. consider the adoption of a County or- dinance rezoning land from: CL, Limited Com- mercial District to RM -6, Multiple -Family Resi- dential District. The subject property is known as Block 4 of Weona Park, Subdivision. Also to consider the rezoning of land from RM -6, Multi- ple -Family Residential .Diptrict_to CL.r Limited Commercial District. The subject . property is known as Block 9 of Weona Park Subdivision. The subject property is described as: At[ of Block 4 and Lots 1 thru 5 inclusive and Lots 7 thru 10 inclusive, and Lots 12 and 13 of Block 9 of Weona Park Sub- division as recorded in. Plat Book 2 page 17, public records of Indian River Coun- ty, Florida. -A. public hearing at which parties in interest and citizens shall have, an opportunity to be heard, will be held by the Board of County Com- missioners of Indian River County, Florida, in the County ' Commission Chambers of the County Administration 'Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday; October 27, 1987; at 9:05 a.m. Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meeting will need to lensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which includes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. Indian River County, Board of County Commissioners By: -s-Don C. Scurlock, Chairman C Oct. 7'.1987 Staff Planner David Nearing made the staff presentation: 12 TO: The Honorable Members DATffictober 14, 1987 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: R er M. Kea ng, ICP Planning & Develo ent Diri THRU: Gary Schindler,,, Chief, Long -Range Planning FROM: SUBJECT: COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST TO REZONE BLOCK 4 OF THE actor WEONA SUBDIVISION FROM CL, LIMITED COMMERCIAL TO RM -6, MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, AND TO RE- David C. Nearing4-eO REFERENCESWEONABPARK SUBDIVISION Staff Planner, Long -Range Planning FROM RM -6 TO CL. It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 27, 1987. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The County Planning staff has initiated a request to rezone two blocks of the Weona Park Subdivision situated on the north side of Bridge Boulevard (C.R. 510) and east of U.S. 1. The request is to rezone Block 4 from CL, Limited Commercial to RM -6, Multi -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre), and to rezone that part of Block 9 lying north -of C.R. 510 from RM -6 to CL. The reversal of zoning for these two adjacent blocks is required to bring each into conformance with the County's Comprehensive Plan. The nonconformance was the result of action taken by the Board of County Commissioners at their meeting of March 10, 1987, during which they adopted the current boundaries for the 120 acre C.R. 510/U.S. 1 Commercial Node. The proposed node boundaries were originally to include Block 4 of Weona Park. However, when residents of Block 4 stated that they did not wish to be situated within the node, the Board excluded Block 4 and instead included Block 9 in the node. This resulted in Block 4 being zoned commercial but having a residential land use designation of LD -2, and Block 9 having a commercial land use designation with residential zoning. The requested rezoning would bring both blocks into conformance. On September 10, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 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 Block 4 of the Weona Park Subdivision currently contains single-family residences, a mobile home, and vacant property. To the north of the subject properties is a church zoned RM -6. To the east is Block 9 containing groves and zoned RM -6. To the south lie mobile homes and vacant land zoned CL, and to the west is vacant land zoned CL. Block 9 is currently in use for groves with Block 4 lying west. To the east and south across C.R. 510 are groves zoned CL, and north of the subject block are groves zoned RM -6. OCT 2 7.1987 13 a00K. 69 FHGi'786 ) CT ? 1987 Boor. WFa,c 787 Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Plan designates Block 4 as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (allowing up to 6 units/acre) and Block 9 as C.R. 510/U.S. 1 Commercial Node. The land north of Blocks 4 and 9 is LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (allowing up to 6 units/acre). The land south of both blocks and east of the portion of Block 9 involved in the request and west of Block 4 lies within the commercial node. With the revised boundaries of the CR 510/U.S. 1 Node, this rezoning will serve to bring the zoning into conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, this request is consistent with and necessary to further the Comprehensive Plan. Transportation System Block 9 has access to three local streets and C.R. 510 classified as an arterial road on the County's Thoroughfare Plan. Block 4 has access to 4 local roads. Rezoning Block 4 would alleviate the potential for commercial traffic being routed through residential areas. Environment These blocks are not designated as environmentally sensitive, nor are they considered to be flood prone. TTf- 4 1 4 +- 4 =a This area is not currently serviced by public water or wastewater facilities. RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis performed, staff recommends approval. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. There were none, and he thereupon declared the public hearing closed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Ordinance 87-60 rezoning Block 4, Weona Subdivision, to RM -6 and rezoning Block 9 to CL. 14 ORDINANCE NO. 87-60 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 WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone the hereinafter described property; and 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 the Zoning of the following described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: All of Block 4 of Weona Park Subdivision as recorded in plat. book 2 page 17, public record of Indian River County, Florida. Be changed from CL, Limited Commercial District to RM -6, Multi -Family Residential -District; and Lots 1 through 5 inclusive, and Lots 7 through 10 inclusive, and Lots 12 and 13 of Block 9 of Weona Park Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 2 page 17, public records of Indian River County, Florida. Be changed from RM -6, Multi -Family Residential District to CL, Limited Commercial District. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Zoning Regulations. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 27th day October of , 1987. OCT 1087 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY By y .� Don C7. Scurl ck, Jr., airman 15 BMOK �9 FacE 788 BOOK 69 PDGF 1, �OCT2 7 1907 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.HEARINGS 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: V111110 MACH M1111 OURNAL Published belly Vero Beath, Indian River County, Florida )LINTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath I Iii ,s that he is Bus -no" Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published � Vero Reach An Indian River County. Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being YIax.t 0 r 11 _,. In the matter ofSdilAAW QL 2Ltag A -- 1 in trio_ --��-,,-��--�� ---- ----_ . Court, was pub. [[} ned in said newspaper in the Issues of l�iA 101WI O1 Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach PresWcumal is a newspaper published at ro Beach, In said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said •newspaper has heretofore sn continuously published in Said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been .eyed as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- Florlda, for a period of one year nest preceding the first publication of the attached copy of ,ertisemenC and affiant further says that he has rtelther paid nor promised any person, firm corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this ,artfaament for pdtrdaUon In the said newspaper. e am to and suhserBte etor/Irro t ' 3' day of © A.D. 1g Yi1 Ay - (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River Co y, Flori da) M NOTICE OF CHANGE OF LAND USE )AREA ro BE INCLUDED I- A,aA i0 •i . S.R. e0 I 1-95 Coonorolalr bNuatrlal dodo .--1scs".7i-Y�.�_'-ty2sl5r• AREAa Ya Its omuwO 'D CN • a .I RM -6 MR411 I SUBJLCI PRBPERrY svaan vaonrai. �—_ _- _ _ _ _ a•aa .fru Ae. Elf �" Ao•. It 'ter u, lYT y MON SOUMaARY RS -t L S U l3 E. T PROPERTY F: _ � rTM sr•u s'� r•'� 1±� ��y-ll1 „� hT� • SUBJECT PROPERTY OCR The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, will consider proposals to change I use of land within the unincorporated portions of Indian River County as shown in the maps of this advertisement. A public hearing on the proposals will be held on Tuesday, October 27, 1987, at 9:05 a.n. the County Commission Chambers of the County Administration Building, located of 1840 25th Street, Ver• Beach, Florida. At this public hearing the Board of County Commissioners will consider authorizing the transmittal of these amendments to the County's Comprehensive Plan to the State Department of Commun t Affairs for their review. The proposed amendments are included in a proposed ordinance entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; ENLARGING THE COMMERCIAL/ INDUSTRIAL NODE AT C.R. 512 AND 1.95 FROM 650 ACRES TO 665 ACRES, ENLARGING THE COMMERCIAL NODE AT OSLO ROAD AND 27TH AVENUE FROM 58 ACRES TO 60 ACRES, ENLARGING THE COMMERCIAL/ INDUSTRIAL NODE AT OSLO ROAD AND 74TH AVENUE FROM 450 ACRES TO 690 ACRES, ENLARGING THE S.R. 60/1.95 COMMERCIAL/ INDUSTRIAL NODE FROM 650 ACRES TO 790 ACRES, ESTABLISHING A 25 ACRE COMMERCIAL NODE AT S.R. 60 AND 74TH AVENUE, REDESIGNATING 145 ACRES SOUTH OF 69TH STREET TO 65TH STREET AND EAST OF THE LATERAL "G" CANAL FROM LD -2 TO LD -1, ESTABLISHING A MIXED USE DISTRICT ON THE EAST SIDE OF U.S. 1 FROM A POINT SOUTH OF 35TH STREET SOUTH TO THE VERO BEACH CITY LIMITS, ESTABLISHING AN LD -2 LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THE RIVER EDGE SUBDIVISION RECENTLY DEANNEXED FROM THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, TO EXPAND THE U.S. 1 COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR EAST ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF 17TH STREET TO 6TH AVENUE, AMENDING THE NOMENCLATURE OF ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS OF THE COUNTY THOROUGHFARE PLAN, ADDING 43RD AVENUE BETWEEN 69TH STREET AND 771H STREET AS A SUBDIVISION COLLECTOR STREET TO THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN, ADDING 2ND STREET BETWEEN 20TH AVENUE AND OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY AS A SUBDIVISION COLLECTOR STREET TO THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN, CHANGING THE FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION ON THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN FOR 73RD STREET EAST OF U.S. 1 FROM A SECONDARY COLLECTOR STREET TO A SUBDIVISION COLLECTOR STREET; AND PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE. Interested parties may appear and be heard at the public hearing regarding the transmittal of these proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments. The plan amendment application may be inspected by the pA at the Community Development Division offices located on the second floor of the County Administration Building located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.rn weekdays. Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meeting will need to ensure a verbatim record of the proceeding is made which includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal will be based. n Indian River County Board of County Commissioners By: -s- Don C. Scurlock, Chairman Planning Director Keating explained that the next ten public hearings are a part of the process necessary to amend the Comprehensive Plan. The action required today is to determine whether or not the Board wants to transmit to the state for review each of the items being presented. After the public hearings are completed, those items which are approved for transmittal will be included in the Resolution adopted at that time. The Chairman emphasized that the action taken today is not the final action unless we fail to agree to submit the request to the state for review. PUBLIC HEARING - CO.-INIT. REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMP. PLAN AND ZONE RIVER EDGE SUBDIVISION 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: 17 OCT 2 7.1987 WN 69 FnE 790 CT 2 °d W VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being in the matter in the Court, was pub- lished in. said newspaper in the issues of A�W :ZZZdD 7- Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper pubfrshed 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. n A J , Sworn to and subsc (SEAL) ROOK 69 FacF 7,91 7 1 NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING Notice of hearing initiated by Indian' River County to consider the adoption of a County or- dinance assigning a zoning district designation of RS -6. Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) to the River Edge Subdivision re- cently 'deannexed from the City of Sebastian. The subject property is located west of Roseland Road and east of the Sebastian River. The subject property is described as: All of River Edge Subdivision as re- corded in Plat Book 8. page 81 of Indian River County records. of Indian River County, Florida. Said lands now lying and being in Indian River County A public hearing at which parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard, will be held by the Board of County Com- missioners of Indian River County, Florida, in the County Commission Chambers• of the County Administration Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday. October 27, 1987, at 9:05 a.m. The Board of County Commissioners will not take final action on this rezoning request at this meeting. Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which maybe made at this meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which includes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. Indian River County Board of County Commissioners By: -s-Don C. Scurlock, Chairman Oct. 7, 1987 Chief Planner Gary Schindler made the staff presentation: TO: The Honorable Members DAMctober 13, 1987 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: Robert M. Kea ng, ICP Planning & Develolment Director THRU: Gary Schindler Chief, Long -Range Planning COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHEN- SIVE PLAN AND ZONE THE RIVER EDGE SUBDIVISION FROM: Robert M. Loeper it/ •6 REFERENCES: 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 27, 1987. 18 DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The County is initiating a request to establish a land use designation of LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2, (up to 6 units/acre), and to establish zoning of RS -6, Single -Family Residential District for the River Edge Subdivision located on Roseland Road approximately 1.5 miles southwest of U.S. 1 in Roseland. On May 29, 1987, the Legislature of the State of Florida passed a special act permitting the deannexation of the River Edge subdivision from the City of Sebastian, thereby placing it under the jurisdiction of Indian River County. Because this property does not currently have either a land use or zoning designation, it is necessary for the Board of County Commissioners, based upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, to establish appropriate land use and zoning designations. On September 10, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission, by a vote of 5-0, recommended the establishment of a land use designation of LD -2, Low -Density 2 (allowing up to 6 units/acre) and zoning of RS -6, Single -Family Residential up to 6 units/acre for the River Edge Subdivision. 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 subdivided into 49 lots. Substantial building has taken place in the subdivision, with only 7 vacant lots remaining. Upon buildout, the gross density will be less than 3 units per acre. There is also a tract of commonly owned land which is used as a community park and contains a dock. The area to the north and south of the subject property and west of Roseland Road is vacant land zoned RS -1, Single -Family Residential District, allowing 1 unit/acre, while property to the north of the subdivision, and east of Roseland Road is vacant land zoned RS -3, Single -Family. Property to the east which is within the City of Sebastian is zoned industrial. Because the average lot size is 8,000 square feet, staff feels the RS -6, Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) zoning is necessary to avoid future complications. A less intense designation would create nonconforming lots, which could impose hardship if any structure were ever destroyed. Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Plan designates the land north and south, which is west of Roseland Road as RR -1, Rural Residential (allowing up to 1 unit/acre). The land to the north, and east of Roseland Road, is designated LD -1, Low -Density 1, (allowing up to 3 units/acre). Property to the east within the City of Sebastian has an industrial land use designation. Transportation System The subdivision is accessible to Roseland Road which is designated a primary collector road on .the County Thoroughfare Plan. OCT � �� Abd ' 9 �ju 69 mH 792 F""__ CT 2 d 1987 Environment BOG!( 69 uu7,93 7 The subject property is on the Sebastian River; however, because of modifications made when the subdivision was developed, the area is no longer environmentally sensitive as defined by County criteria. The subdivision, however, is in three flood zone areas. Beginning at Roseland Road and proceeding towards the Sebastian River for approximately 500 feet is zone C. The remaining 1/3 of the subdivision is in zones A and B, the "A" zone being within the 100 year flood plain, and subject to occasional flooding. Utilities The River Edge subdivision is currently operating its own water treatment and sewage plant; however, many of the homes are on private wells due to the disrepair of the water plant. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the staff be authorized to transmit to the State the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan designating a land use of LD -2, Low -Density 2 (allowing up to 6 units/acre) and zoning of RS -6, Single -Family Residential up to 6 units/acre for the River Edge Subdivision, and to announce their intention to hold a second public hearing concerning this matter. C C SUBJECT PROPERTY 20 _ .M The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard. There were none, and he thereupon declared the public hearing closed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved transmittal of the above request to the DCA as recom- mended by staff. PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENTS TO TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF CP Chief Planner Gary Schindler made the staff presentation: TO: The Honorable Members DATE: September 28, 1987 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO .THE TRANS - Robert M. Keat' g, CP PORTATION ELEMENT OF THE Community Deve opm t Director COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THRU: Gary Schindler //*j Chief, Long -Range Planning FROM &eri J. Boudreaux C:Z& REFERENCES: 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 27, 1987. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The Planning and Public Works Divisions are requesting an amendment to the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan amending the Thoroughfare Plan as follows: (1) Changing the functional classification nomenclature for roadways on the Thoroughfare Plan and developing an additional map for the new subdivision collector roads. The proposed changes to the nomenclature are as follows: Existing Proposed Classification Classification Arterial Principal Arterial Primary Collector Minor Arterial Secondary Collector Collector --- Subdivision Collector The Public Works Division has also requested the following amendments to the Thoroughfare Plan: CT � 11987 21 QooK 69 PA,UE76-4 OCT'2 Bou 69 FAu 7.95 (1) Adding 43rd Avenue as a subdivision collector road between 69th Street and 77th Street; (2) Adding 2nd Street as a subdivision collector road between 20th Avenue and Old Dixie Highway. In addition, the staff has received an application requesting that the Thoroughfare Plan be amended as follows: (1) Reclassifying 73rd Street, east of U.S. Highway #1 to the Indian River, from a secondary collector to a subdivision collector. In addition, the staff proposes to re-classify 73rd Street between O1d.Dixie Highway and the Indian River from a secondary collector to a subdivision collector. The Transportation Planning Committee approved 5-0 these requests as presented at their September 9, 1987 meeting. Also, on September 10, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to approve these requests. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS The proposed changes to the functional classification nomenclature for roadways on the Thoroughfare Plan are requested in order to provide a better description for the actual function of the roadways, to be consistent with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) classifications, and to designate a new class of road called subdivision collector. The requested addition to the Thoroughfare Plan of 43rd Avenue between -69th Street and 77th Street as a subdivision collector is proposed in order to ensure access to individual parcels of property in the area. Also, 43rd Avenue is necessary to provide proper access for proposed future development in the area. - Adding 2nd Street between 20th Avenue and Old Dixie Highway as a subdivision collector is proposed due to the fact that this street is functioning and is designed as a subdivision collector at the present time. The re-classification of 73rd Street, east of U.S. Highway #1 to the Indian River from a secondary collector to a subdivision collector has been requested by the applicant. The staff proposes extending the request to include the area east of Old Dixie Highway to the Indian River due to the fact that 73rd Street between 58th Avenue and Old Dixie Highway has previously been deleted from the Thoroughfare Plan to accommodate the County's Sandridge Golf Course. Also, 73rd Street east of U.S. Hwy. #1 does not serve a large enough area of land to generate traffic volumes demanding a secondary collector road. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize staff to transmit this request to the State Department of Community Affairs and to announce their intention to hold a second public hearing concerning this matter. 22 •�'� t �\ PROPOSED ,,: ',` •• Indian River County Thoroughfare Plan Lr' aaeaetian \\ P►laolpal Arterial r/// /�A\ t�• \ Minor Arterial 11111111111161 % L U1 Collector - NIV /� 0.11.610—eetnel PROPOSED CHANGE M 1111111111} •. O\ s \ _ aolnl. \ \\ \ 1111111111 nunuul_iuunwol 111111111 w '. — — 11 81 9 �V _"`=''dal. \_ - \\ X11111111111 1111111111 -11111111111`111415111111 Sit- a�\ �Iltlll l,l 11 Int,Illlll�lll rli 1115 IIII IIIMIII IIInlllll 111111 �ululu l`R�.\ ' ` , ,' ' \\\ = =7�n� 1• ..'` Vero Uoach \ so 1 31 1 T. \ '1111111111-11111111111 IIIIIIIIIIIIj1511111111�1111111111�1�_-lil ll�llll�lin WII11I 'lel 1� ; \\ 'll—ss 111111111 •1111111111lllt 11111 �11111111111IIII le /111, T 11111111111111-1111,111111 1111 111111111111 S 1 — o•,e ao•a = 1� =11611111111 litll\l�►//1 \ % 7 1e1n = 61.11 W e - \ 3nu•ra 1116.•11 a1.•r Coo•1, .1111111 110 1111 11111111 1111111 \� •1•wuna 0•el. \ t 1 = el.S.W. _ \ t e IF tan en• MINIMUM R -O -W Principal Arterial 120' Minor Arterial - 1o0' Collector - g0' The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard. There were none, and he thereupon declared the public hearing closed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved transmittal of the above request to the DCA as recom- mended by staff. OCT 2 7.1987 2 3 ROOK 6� raU 796 L_ GCT'2 7, 19S7, BOOK 69 FacE 797 PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST TO AMEND CP TO ENLARGE 1-95/CR512 NODE Chief Planner Gary Schindler made the staff presentation, which recommended adding back into the node the previously excluded 15 acres owned by Carson Platt. TO: The Honorable Members DATE: October 14, 1987 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: _ SUBJECT: COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST Robert.M. Kea , P TO AMEND THE COMPREHEN- Planning & DevelopntXt Director SIVE PLAN TO ENLARGE THE I-95/C.R. 512 INDUSTRIAL/ COMMERCIAL NODE FROM 650 THRU: Gary Schindler ACRES TO 665 ACRES FRO ief, Long -Range Planning REFERENCES: Robert M. Loeper Vu 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 27, 1987. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The County is initiating a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan by enlarging the- Commercial/Industrial node at the I-95 and County Road 512 interchange from 650 acres to 665 acres. The property proposed to be included is located on the.north boundary line of the node between the Hetra Electronics plant and I-95. On January 15, 1986, the Board of County Commissioners adopted boundaries for a 240 acre commercial/industrial node at this interchange. On July 29, 1986, the Board of County Commissioners enlarged the node to 650 acres. On March 26, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission considered revised node boundaries reflecting the increased node size. At that time, the Commission amended the staff's proposed node boundaries by deleting 15 acres located in the northern part of the proposed node and adding 15 acres of land on the south side of County Road 512. The Commission also recommended that the County initiate proceedings in July to increase the size of the node in order to add back the 15 acres which they had excluded from the proposed node. On May 5, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners adopted boundaries for the 650 acre node as proposed by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and directed staff to examine the possibility of increasing the node's size by 15 acres and including the 15 acres removed at the north end of the node. On September 10, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommended the enlargement of this node by 15 acres, for the inclusion of the subject property. 24 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, and is surrounded by undeveloped property to the north, south, east and west. The subject property is currently zoned A-1, Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres). The surrounding property on all sides is also zoned A-1. Future Land Use Pattern The current land use designation for the subject property is AG, Agricultural (allowing up to 1 unit/5 acres). The property to the south and east, lies within the current boundaries of the commercial/ industrial- node; while property north and west is designated AG, Agricultural (allowing up to l unit/5 acres). Transportation System The subject parcel has no access to a county road; however, the Thoroughfare Plan is proposed to be amended to include subdivision collector roads through which the property will have access. The existing interchange at County Road 512 and I-95 provides access to one of the major north -south transportation systems for the State of Florida. Environment The subject property is not designated as environmentally sensitive, nor is it located on the sand ridge or 10 mile ridge aquifer recharge area. However, the property is located in the 100 -year flood -plain as depicted on the Flood Insurance Rate Map for the area, and is therefore subject to occasional flooding. Special engineering techniques will be required at the time this property is developed in order to comply with the County's Flood Protection and Stormwater Management Ordinance. Utilities The subject property does not have public water or wastewater facilities at this time. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the staff be authorized to transmit to the State the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to enlarge this node by 15 acres, for the inclusion of the subject property; and to announce their intention to hold a second public hearing concerning this matter. OCT ' � � 25 BOCK 69 PAVE 798 1`CTS 2 7 1981' ,ROOK. 69 FHUF 79 PP 1-85 / C.R.512 Commercial/ Industrial Node NODE BOUNDARY 9z The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. Attorney Chris Marine came before the Board representing Carson Platt, owner of the 15.acres in question, and advised that he was available to answer any questions. No one further wished to be heard, and the Chairman declared the public hearing closed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com- missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved transmittal of the above request to the DCA as recom- mended by staff. PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST TO ENLARGE THE OSLO RD./27TH AVE. NODE >; REZONE 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: 26 VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a je � in the matter of in the Court, was pub - 1 lished in said newspaper in the issues of Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, 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. Sworn to and subscriled be,pre meLhisa% 4 day of A.D. 19 yZ Manager) y (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian! ver County,,:.Florida) (SEAL) NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING Notice of hearing Initihted by Indian River County to consider the adoption of a County or- dinance rezoning land from: RM -6, Multiple- " Family Residential District to CL, Limited Com- ' mercial District.The subject property is located " "I on the east side of 27th Avenue. and south of 5th street S.W. The subject property is described as; The north 285.64 feet of the following described parcel;, A parcel Tfolwannhi 33 In south, Rang12, Sec- tion9 23, east, according-to,Indian River Farms Company Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book .2, Page 25, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County. Florida; said lands now lying and being in Indian River County; Florida more particularly described:ae.f0110Ws;:: - Commencing at the northwest cornerof said Tract 12, proceed S 00°00'00" E along the west line of Tract 12 a dis- tance of 30.06 feet thence N 8914813" E along the south.right of way line for In- dlan River Farms Drainage District Canal E-7 (30' wide): a distance of 25.00 feet to the PointofBeginning; thence proceed N 89148'13" E along Indian River Farms Drainage District Canal E-7 south right of way line ,a distance ct:304.96 feet; thence S 00 00'07' E a distance of 1299.25 feet -to a point on the south line otTract 12; thence S 8904546" W along the. south line of Tract 12 a distance of 305.00 feet to a point on the east right of way line of 27th Avenue; thence N 00"0000" E along said east right of way line a distance of 1299.46 :feet to the Point of Beginning. A public hearing at which parties in iriterest and citizens shall have "an "opportunity to be heard, will be held by the Board.of County Com - in the County®rs. of Commissian River on Chambers County, County Administration Building, located at 1840 25th Street„Vero Beach. Florida on Tuesday, October 27,1987, at 9:05 a.m. The Board of County Commissioners wilh not take final action on the rezoning request at this meeting.. decision Anyone who may wish-lb,an appeal y which may be made at this meeting will need to ensure that a>verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which includes testimorry and -evidence upon which the appeal Is based. Indian River County Board of County Commissioners By; -s-Don C. Scurlock, Chairman Oct. T 1987 Chief Planner Schindler made the staff presentation recom- mending transmittal of request to enlarge the node to include the 2 acres owned by Chauncey Hatch and also rezone same to CL. TO: The Honorable Members DATE: October 13, 1987 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Rdbert 14. Keati g, ,P Planning & Deve op t Dirl THRU: Gary H. Schindler Chief, Long -Range Planning FROM: Robert M. Loeper V 1. REFERENCE : Staff Planner, Long -Range Planning SUBJECT: COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHEN- lctor SIVE PLAN TO ENLARGE THE OSLO ROAD AND 27TH AVE COMMERCIAL NODE FROM 58 TO 60 ACRES AND REZONE APPROXIMATELY 2 ACRES It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 27, 1987. 27 BOOK 6. PAGE 8"O T 2 .19�� OCT 2 7 1987 DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS RUCK 69 FA,F 801 The County is initiating a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan by redesignating 2 acres from LD -2, Low Density Residential 2 (allowing up to 6 units/acre), to Commercial, and to rezone from RM -6, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre), to CL Limited Commercial District. This application is considered a request to enlarge the Oslo Road and 27th Avenue node from 58 to 60 acres. On October 21, 1986, the Board of County Commissioners voted to approve the enlargement of the Oslo Road and 27th Avenue node from 50 to 58 acres and extend the boundaries to 5th Street S.W., which included the subject parcel, and directed the staff to transmit the request to the State Department of Community Affairs. On February, 17, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners approved the comprehensive plan amendment and rezoned the subject property from RM -6, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) to CL, Limited Commercial. However, it was determined that it was only possible to act on 7.1 acres, and the remaining 2 acres of land were deleted. At that time the staff was instructed to initiate proceedings to enlarge the node to include the remaining 2 acres. On September 10, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission, voted unanimously to recommend the enlargement of the node by 2 acres, and the rezoning of 2 acres from RM -6, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) to CL, Limited Commercial for inclusion in the node. 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 presently undeveloped. There is vacant land zoned CL, located south of the subject property. There are commercial establishments and vacant land, zoned CL, located west of the subject property. 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. Future Land Use Pattern The subject property is presently designated as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (allowing 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). Inclusion of establish a produce a commercially enhance the the subject property into the commercial node would natural feature boundary for the node, and it would more unified development pattern with the existing zoned land to the south. Therefore, it would. usefulness of the subject parcel. 28 Transportation Svstem The subject property has direct access from 27th Avenue, classified as an arterial, and 5th Street S.W., classified as a secondary collector on the County Thoroughfare Plan. The additional 2 acres of commercial development would not create a significant impact on 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. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation staff recommends that the staff be authorized to transmit to the State the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to include the subject property in the commercial node and rezone to CL, Limited Commercial, and announce their intention to hold a second public hearing concerning this matter. CA � CL a n L= SU4JECT, .I PROPERTY1 Ji I I UOCT 2 7 ,1987 29 3m 1 69 f'OUE'802 r7 OCT 2 7 . 1887 (BOOK 69 Fa,E 803 The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard. There were none, and he thereupon declared the public hearing closed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com- missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved transmittal of the above request to the DCA as recom- mended by staff. PUBLIC HEARING - ENLARGE 1-95/SR60 NODE Staff Planner David Nearing made the following presentation: TO: The Honorable Members DATE: October 14, 1987 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: •, SUBJECT: COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST Robert M. Kdfat9,,p TO ENLARGE THE I-95/S.R. Planning & Dev to nt Director 60 COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL _ NODE FROM 650 ACRES TO THRU: Gary Schindler/4.1 795 ACRES Chief, Long -Range Planning_ FROM: David C. NearingoD 6 % REFERENCES: 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 27, 1987. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The County Planning Department is initiating a request to amend the County's Comprehensive Plan by enlarging the I-95/S.R. 60 Commercial/Industrial node from its current size of 650 acres to 795 acres, a total of 145 acres. The proposed locations for expansion are: a) a 25 acre parcel along the north side of S.R. 60 from 85th Ct. east approximately 1700 feet and extending north for a depth of 650 feet, b) A parcel located approximately 600 feet south of S.R. 60 which is approximately 900 feet in width and 2000 feet deep, bounded on the east by I-95; c) a 60 acre parcel situated approximately 600 feet south of S.R. 60 approximately 1300 feet in width and 2000 feet deep which is bordered on the west by 98th Avenue. On March 3, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners voted to approve the boundaries for the I-95/S.R. 60 node which encompassed a total of 650 acres. However., the motion to approve also included direction for staff to examine the possibility of enlarging the node to include' the three previously described parcels. The intention of the Board was to square off the previously approved boundaries, and to avoid a situation where 30 residential development would be be surrounded on three sides development. forced to locate where it would by industrial and commercial On. September 10, 1987, the Planning and 'Zoning Commission voted 5-0 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. Normally when staff reviews a request to enlarge a node, an examination of the recent development activity and level of interest are examined. Additionally, staff looks at the long-range implications of the increase in acreage upon the area in relation to anticipated development patterns. Because of the location of this node at the intersection of two main state wide transportation corridors, it is believed that this will be a primary location for commercial and industrial development. Several new industrial developments have been proposed for the industrially zoned properties along 98th Avenue, south of S.R. 60, and additional interest has been shown in other areas of the node. This node is located at the west end of the S.R. 60 corridor which has a large amount of multifamily zoning, is provided with public water and sewer, and is anticipated to be a main growth area for the unincorporated portion of the County. Current Land Use Patterns The first parcel located north of S.R. 60 and east of 85th Ct. contains 12 nonconforming mobile homes and vacant property zoned RM -6, Multi -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre). The property east contains a mobile home park zoned RMH-8, Residential Mobile Home District (up to 8 units/acre). The property north is vacant and zoned RM -6. The property west of the subject parcel contains several single-family homes and vacant lots zoned CL, Limited Commercial. South of the subject parcel across S.R. 60 is vacant land zoned CG, General Commercial. The use of the second parcel' is currently vacant land and groves zoned RM -6 and A-1. To the east of the subject property is I-95. To the west of this property are groves zoned IL, Light Industrial District. North of the subject property are groves and single-family residences zoned CG, General Commercial. South of the subject parcel are groves zoned A-1, Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres). The third parcel currently contains an air strip and groves, and is zoned A-1. To the west across 98th Avenue are several industrial uses such as Ramp Master zoned IL. To the south of the subject property are groves zoned A-1, with groves also lying east zoned IL, and north zoned CG. Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Plan designates the first subject property as MD -1, Medium Density Residential (allowing up to 8 units/acre). The lands lying north and west are also designated as MD -1. The lands west and south across S.R. 60 lie within the current boundary of the I-95/S.R. 60 Commercial/Industrial Node. OCT 2 7 17 31 BOOK 69 FAGE 804 ]OCT 2V iSs,7 mu 69 Frac- 605 , The Comprehensive Plan designates the second and third properties as MD -1, as is the land south of them. The lands north, east, and west lie within the Commercial Industrial Node. Transportation System The first subject property has access to the south onto S.R. 60, classified as an arterial road on the County's Thoroughfare Plan, and also to 85th Ct. to the west classified as a local road. The second parcel has access to the south to undeveloped 16th Street classified as a local road. The third parcel has access to the west to 98th Avenue classified as a primary collector road, and to undeveloped, 16th Street to the south. The County is currently in the process of improving 98th Avenue. Since all existing roads in the area are currently at a level of service "A", a large surplus of road capacity exists. Any impacts to the transportation system which will occur as a result of development of the subject properties will be addressed during site plan or subdivision review. Environment The three subject properties are not considered environmentally sensitive land. The first and second are also not located within flood prone areas, however, the third property abutting 98th Avenue is within an area subject to occasional flooding. This property will require special engineering in order to meet the requirements for the County's Flood Protection and Stormwater Management Ordinance. Utilities Public water and wastewater are available along S.R. 60 up to the I-95 interchange. RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis performed, and the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize staff to transmit this request to amend the Comprehensive Plan by enlarging the I-95/S.R. 60 Commercial/ Industrial Node from 650 to 795 acres to the State Department of Community Affairs, and to declare their 'intention to hold a second public hearing concerning this matter. 32 S.R. 60 / 1-95 Commercial/ Industrial Node --- = 8i vr"'i i CC CL M-8.. >; A-1 RMH-e I f A-1 aU y� RS -1 A-1 IRS � RM -e I AREAS TO BE INCLUDED —W.W NOD E BOUNDARY The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. Attorney Chris Marine came before the Board representing #14 Corporation, owner of a portion of the easternmost parcel. It is a 20 acre parcel which basically has been bisected. The north 10 acres they are utilizing as a buffer to the residential on the north, but the frontage on SR60 they wish to have included within the Commercial/Industrial node. He advised that he is available to answer any questions as is the president of the corporation. Chairman Scurlock believed this gives us some transition between residential and commercial, and Director Keating confirmed that it does. The Chairman determined that no one further wished to be heard and thereupon declared the public hearing closed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved transmittal of the above request to the DCA as recom- mended by staff. _ 3 3 Boa 69 F,nur 806 0 7 19 L OCT 2 7.1987 AooK 69 F,,,GE 807 PUBLIC HEARING - AMEND CP ENLARGING OSLO RD./74TH AVE. NODE Staff Planner David Nearing made the staff presentation: TO: The Honorable Members DATE: September 2, 1987 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: 4g2,t .-X- SUBJECT: COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST Robert M. KeaftingyAICP TO AMEND THE COMPREHEN- Planning & Development Director SIVE LAND USE PLAN EN- LARGING THE OSLO ROAD/ THRU: Gary Schindler 1?AJ 74TH AVENUE COMMERCIAL/ Chief, Long -Range -Planning INDUSTRIAL NODE FROM 450 FROM: David C. Nearing t0l REFERENCECRES: TO 690 ACRES 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 27, 1987. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The Planning Department has initiated a request to amend the Comprehensive Land Use Plan by enlarging the Oslo Road/74th Avenue Commercial/ Industrial node from 450 to 690 acres. The property proposed for inclusion is located between 82nd and 74th Avenues and south of 5th Street S.W. On March 3, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners voted to establish the boundaries for the 450 acre node. Due to the interest by property owners in the area and the need for additional land for future industrial development, the Board, as part of its approval motion, directed staff to examine the possibility of expanding this node. On September 10, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-1 to recommend denial of this request. Their recommendation was based on their opinion that expansion of this node was premature at this time, and future expansion should be based on demand demonstrated by development. 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. Currently, this node is largely undeveloped, the principal occupants being the Oceanspray processing plant, a truss manufacturing plant, and the Hercules pectin processing plant. Adjacent to the node on agriculturally zoned property is a recently completed citrus packing plant. While not in the node, the packing plant abuts the node, and the use is similar to node uses. Normally, when staff looks at a node being considered for expansion, one key issue -is the recent activity in the subject node. Another issue is the interest which has been expressed in 34 - M M the subject node. In the case of the Oslo Road/74th Avenue node, the truss plant went into production within the last two years and is currently proposing expansion, and the adjacent citrus packing plant has recently come on-line. Also within the last two years, the Oceanspray facility has gone through expansion, and Hercules has completed renovations. A great deal of interest has also been expressed in this node, including a recently submitted request to rezone 34+ acres lying within the current boundaries from CG, General Commercial District to IL, Light Industrial District. This request received a recommendation for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular meeting of October 8, 1987. Another characteristic to be considered is the location of this node, especially its proximity to I-95 and Oslo Road. Eventually, the State, FDOT will construct an interchange at Oslo Road and I-95. This interchange will then provide the node with direct access to a major north/south state transportation corridor. The access will increase the attractiveness to this area, and it can be anticipated that development will then increase at a rapid rate. Because of demand for industrial and commercial uses in this area expected to arise from an I-95 interchange, there is a need to ensure that the buildout acreage of the node is protected from residential encroachment. Once residential development establishes itself in an area, expansion of a node near the area of residential development is difficult. Therefore, it is often desirable to ensure that adequate node _acreage is reserved. on the other hand, if too large an area is proposed for node use, inefficient and undesirable land development patterns occur. If the proposed node expansion is approved, it will assist in establishing a future development pattern in this area which will provide for an orderly transition from residential to commercial, as well as provide ample room for future commercial and indus- trial development. Existing Land Use Pattern Currently, the area proposed to be included in the expanded node is zoned A-1, Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres). The property north and east is vacant and zoned A-1. The property to the west of the subject parcel is vacant and currently zoned RS -1, Single -Family Residential District (up to 1 unit/acre). The property south of the subject area is vacant and zoned CG,_ General Commercial, and A-1. Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Land Use Plan designates the subject property as AG, Agricultural (allowing up to 1 unit/5 acres). The land north and east is also designated as AG. The land south of the subject site is within the currently defined Oslo Road/74th Avenue node. The property to the west is designated RR -2, Rural Residental 2 (allowing up to 1 unit/acre). Transportation System The subject property will have access to 74th Avenue, classified as a primary collector on the County's Thoroughfare Plan; 82nd Avenue, classified as a secondary collector; and 5th Street S.W. to the north, also classified as a secondary collector. The eventual build -out will have a substantial impact on the thoroughfare system; however, the level of service on the existing roads in the area is currently at a level of service OCT 42 71987 35 BOOK, 69 PACE 808 r I 'OCT 2 7 1987 BOOK 69 MME 899 "A", and each has a large percentage of unutilized capacity remaining. Any development impacts on the transportation system will be addressed during the site plan or subdivision review and approval process. Environment This area is not designated as environmentally sensitive nor is it in a flood prone area. Utilities The area is not currently serviced by public water and wastewater systems. RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis performed, and fully respecting the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation of denial, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize -staff to transmit this request to amend the Comprehensive Plan by enlarging the Oslo Road/74th Avenue Commercial/ Industrial Node from 450.to 690 to the State Department of Community Affairs, and that the Board state their intention to hold another public hearing concerning this matter. ' Oslo Rd. & 74th Ave SW Commercial / Industrial Node AREA* TO BE INCLUDED Vkqft1ftV&V& Node Boundary 36 The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. There were none, and he thereupon declared the public hearing closed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved transmittal of the above request to the DCA as recom- mended by staff. PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST TO AMEND THE CP BY ESTABLISHING AN MXD ON THE EAST SIDE OF US#1 Staff Planner David Nearing made the staff presentation: TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: October 14, 1987 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE Robert M. K a ng,z.ICP PLAN BY ESTABLISHING AN Community Development Director MXD, MIXED USE DISTRICT)ON THE EAST SIDE OF U.S. 1 THRU: Gary Schindler !�� Chief, Long -Range Planning FROM: David C. Nearing REFERENCES: MXDUSI Staff Planner �1�4 MISC/dc It is requested that the information presented herein be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 27, 1987. DESCRIPTION & LOCATION: By direction of the Board of County Commissioners, the Planning staff has initiated a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan by creating an MXD, Mixed Use District, east of U.S. 1. More specif- ically, the MXD area is proposed to include approximately 29 acres of land located approximately 600 feet south of 36th Street and east of the east City limits of Vero Beach running south to the north city limits and extending east approximately 900 feet. On April 14, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners reviewed a request by Penn Mobile Partnership to change the land use desig- nation of a 180+ x 700+ foot parcel located within the subject area from MD-11 Medium Density Residential 1 to MXD. As part of their motion to approve transmittal of that request to the State Department of Community, Affairs, the Board directed the staff to examine the possibility of establishing an r1XD district to include other properties located in the general area. This direction was due to the fact that there is currently a 200 foot deep strip of land along U.S. 1 which is zoned commercial and lying within the 37 zoK. 69 810 BOOK 69 PAGE 811 City of Vero Beach. Enabling a similar zoning to be established east of this strip would reduce the possibility of strip commer- cial development by permitting the development of larger, more manageable projects. On September 10, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 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 description of the current and future land uses of the site and surrounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and utility sys- tems, and any significant adverse impacts on environmental quali- ty. EXISTING LAND USE PATTERNS: Currently, the subject area contains a used auto sales, most of which lies within the City, and vacant land zoned RM -6, Multi - Family Residential (up to 6 units/acre). To the east lies vacant land zoned RM -6. To the south lie single-family lots within the City zoned RM -10/12, Multi -Family Residential District (up to 10-12 units/acre). To the north lies the Hospital/Commercial Node containing assorted medical related businesses and offices, the hospital and a total life care facility, zoned MED, Medical District. To the west in the City are several single family residences and the used car sales zoned C -1B, General Commercial Trades and Services. Most of the unplatted lots extend over 650 feet east of the city limits. Normally when boundaries are established for a zoning or land use district, it is desirable to follow property lines in order to avoid dividing property into different districts. When establishing bodndaries for land use districts, it is also desirable to establish boundaries in a uniform pattern and depth. After examining this area, it was found that following property lines would not permit a uniform depth from the city limits. For this reason, a depth of 900 feet was chosen to include the depth of all metes and bounds lots along U.S. 1. This depth includes portions of some larger tracts; however, these portions are of a sufficient size to permit a reasonable development if a rezoning were ever proposed. FUTURE LAND USE PATTERNS: Currently, the Comprehensive Land Use Plan designates the entire 29 acres as MD -1, Medium Density Residential -1. The land to the east is also MD -1. The land north of the subject parcel is part of the Hospital /Commercial Node. The property south is medium density residential within the city, and the land within the 200 foot strip of city land along U.S. 1 is commercial. In discussion with the City of Vero Beach Planning Department, it was agreed that, because of the split jurisdiction between the County and City, it would be advisable to do a small area type plan of study for this area to ensure coordinated development. TRANSPORTATION: Currently, the level of service (LOS) for this segment of U.S- 1 is LOS "A"; however, the LOS for the surrounding intersections is LOS "D" or "E". For this reason, the County Traffic Engineer strongly recommends that traffic concerns be a major consideration in commercial rezoning requests in this area. It will be neces- sary for the County and City Planning staffs to work closely to ensure that all adverse impacts of additional traffic will be minimized. 38 � s � UTILITIES: This area is currently serviced by the City of Vero and the County for water and wastewater service. ENVIRONMENT: This land is not designated as environmentally sensitive nor is it located within an area considered to be flood prone. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the analysis performed, and the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize staff to transmit this request to establish a Mixed Use District east of U.S. 1, to the State Department of Community Affairs, and to announce their intention to hold a second public hearing concerning this matter. SUBJECT PROPERTY I` MED MED N i C- F. u rr T �� _..ff_111RISTTCITY LIMIT sn9 a � uiri ;tiJ tiW ,qr.. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. There were none, and the public hearing was declared closed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved transmittal of the above request to the DCA as recom- mended by staff. 3 9 0 CT .2 .� -198Z BOOK 69 FA GE 812 4 CT 2 7 198R�o� 69 FacF $1� APPEAL P&Z DENIAL OF REQUEST TO AMEND CP ESTABLISHING A 25 ACRE COMMERCIAL NODE AND REZONING 3.5 ACRES TO CG (VILLAGE GREEN) 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: VER® BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being r a or Gwwuo in the matter of &t4t)- ��If in the U Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of v L�%/ a l Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed be�ore me this day of A.D. 19 (SEAL) NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING Notice of hearing to consider the adoption of a County ordinance rezoning land from: RMH-S, Mobile Home Residential District to CG, General Commerical District. The subject property Is Pre- sently owned by wilder Corp. of Delaware and Is located at the northeast corner. of S.R. 60 and 74th Avenue. The subject property is described as: From the southwest comer, of tract 6, section 6; township 33 south, range 39 east b k according page 25 public rto the lastecordsofgeneral plat Lucie.County, Florida said lands now lying and being in Indian River County, Florida: thence run north 00°24'18" east, along the west line of section 6, 163,16 feet thence run south 89°4339" east, 1 OO feet to the point of intersection of the north right-of-way'Iine of State Road 60 and the east line of Rangeiine Canal Lateral "C' for the point of begin 1 ning `:of the parcel , to be described herein: thence run north 00°241S' east, along the east line of said Lateral "C". 284.15 feet; thence run south $9°34'56 east, 59.29 feet; thence south 00 32'19" west, 108.92 feet; thence south 89°10'42" east,'110.67 feet; thence north 00°3219 east, 109.70 feet; thence south 89.34'56 east, 413.17 the north . right-of-way' line of .State Road 60'. } thence following said 'line, run north . 89°43'39" west, 582.68 feet to the Point of Beginning. ' Containing 3.514 acres, more or less. The Board of County Commissioners wiil,con- duct a public hearing regarding the appeal by the applicant of the decision by the planning and Zoning Commission to deny the .rezoning re- quest. The public hearing, at which parties n in- . terest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard, will be held. by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida in the County Commission Chambers of the County Administration Building; located at 1840 25th Street, vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday, October 27, 1967 at 9:05 a.m. The Board of County Commissioners'will not take final action omthis rezoning request at this meeting. eel an tlecision Anyone who may wish to app y, which may be made at this meeting wlll'need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which includes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal Is based. Indian River County Board of County Commissioners By -s -Don C. Scurlock, Chairman October 7,1987 Planner Nearing made the staff presentation, as follows: 40 TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: September 3, 1987 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING Robert M. XeWt_ifiVAICP SUBJECT: AND ZONING COMMISSION'S Community Development Director DENIAL OF THE WILDER CORPORATION'S REQUEST TO THRU: Gary Schindler/fv AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE Chief, Long -Range Planning PLAN ESTABLISHING A 25 ACRE COMMERCIAL NODE AND EZONING 3.5 ACRES FROM FROM: David C. Nearing, .,r/W REFERENCE H-8 To CG Staff Planner It is requested that the information presented herein be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of October 27, 1987. DESCRIPTION & LOCATION: The Wilder Corporation, represented by Steve Henderson, Attorney, has requested an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to establish a 25 acre Commercial Node at the intersection of S.R. 60 and 74th Avenue, and to rezone 3.5 acres of property from RMH-8, Mobile Home Residential (up to 8 units/acre) to CG, General Commercial. The subject parcel is located on the northeast corner of the S.R. 60/74th Avenue intersection in the southwest corner of'the Village Green Mobile Home Park. On September 1, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners voted to deny a request made by the Wilder Corporation to amend the CN, Neighborhood Commercial zoning district decreasing the minimum distance separation between neighborhood nodes and other areas where commercial activity is permitted. If this request had been approved, the applicant would have applied for CN zoning for this parcel. On September 10, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend denial of this request. The denial was based on the unsuitability of this location for a commercial node. The applicant has appealed the denial of the rezoning. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the application will be presented. The analysis will include a description of the current and future land uses of the site and surrounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environmental quality. EXISTING LAND USE PATTERNS: The subject parcel is currently the location of the Village Green Mobile Home Park Arboretum, zoned RMH-8. To the north and east is the Village Green Mobile Home Park with mobile homes and vacant land zoned RMH-8. To the south across S.R. 60 is a grove zoned A-1, Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres). West across the drainage canal and 74th Avenue is Indian River Estates zoned RM -8, Multi -family Residential District (up to 8 units/acre) and a neighborhood commercial node, which has recently had a site plan approved for retail shops, zoned.CN. Southwest across the S.R. 60 intersection is vacant land zoned CN. 41 ��oK 69 FacE 814 OCT 2 7.1987 I CT 2 s� ii987 FUTURE LAND USE PATTERNS: joK 69 F lu, 815 The subject parcel and all lands north and east are designated by the Comprehensive Plan as MD -1, Medium Density Residential 1 (allowing up to 8 units/acre). The lands located west across 74th Avenue are designated as MD -1, Medium Density Residential 1 (allowing up to 8 units/acre), excluding the commercial property designated as neighborhood nodes. The land located south is designated LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (allowing up to 6 units/acre) . Approximately 3/4 of a mile west is .the I-95/S.R. 60 Commercial/ Industrial Node which currently contains 650 acres. However, an amendment to -enlarge this node to 795 acres is currently being considered. Approximately .9 miles east of 74th Avenue is another neighborhood commercial node, and at the corner of S.R. 60 and 58th Avenue is a 150 acre commercial node also being considered for expansion to 155 acres. Including the two existing 3 acre neighborhood commercial nodes adjacent to the subject site, and assuming the approval of the two node expansions, there would be 956 acres of commercial land onS.R. 60 between the west city limits of Vero Beach and I-95. Adding an additional 25 acres of commercial 'land (actually 19 acres if the two existing CN pro- perties are excluded) would begin a process of commercial infill which would promote strip commercial development. Strip commer- cial development is highly discouraged due to its impact on the transportation system and the established land use patterns. In effect, the establishment of a node at this location would have the opposite effect of what the node concept was intended to have, that being the concentrating and confining of commercial activi- ties to a specific area. TRANSPORTATION: The property has access to S.R. 60 classified as an arterial on the County's Thoroughfare Plan. Access to 74th Avenue, classified as a secondary collector, may be barred due to the existence of a 100 foot wide drainage canal right-of-way between the subject parcel and 74th Avenue. The impact of the canal could be substantial when establishing a boundary for a 25 acre node at this intersection, due to the fact that most of the land in the area of the proposed node and not currently utilized for residential use lies in the southeast corner of the intersection. This would probably be the location at which the majority of the node acreage would be located. This property also has the canal right-of-way between it and 74th Avenue. If access to 74th Avenue is not possible, all access east of 74th Avenue would be on to S.R. 60, causing adverse impacts on traffic flow and safety. UTILITIES: Public water and wastewater facilities are currently available along S.R. 60. ENVIRONMENT: This property is not designated as environmentally sensitive, nor is it in a flood prone area. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the analysis performed, and the Planning and Zoning Commission's denial of this request for rezoning, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners deny transmittal of this request for an amendment 'to the Comprehensive Plan to the State Department of Community Affairs. Denial of transmittal will constitute an automatic denial of the rezoning request. 42 SUBJECT PROPERTY W t ' RM -8 IRMH-8 . i I "- {;I �l 1' uurl A-1 CN STATE ROAD 80 CN TR12 TTR11 y 1 05-8 >i 1 i 'R 1 1 t t iR TR 13 A-1 -1 FF1 The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. Attorney Steve Henderson came before the Board representing Wilder Corporation, owner of the Village Green property, noting that in previous hearings his client took the approach of asking for a neighborhood node and in order to qualify also had to ask for an ordinance amendment to get around the distance separation problem, and the Board turned this down. He briefly reviewed the history of the development of this property by Earl Groth, stressing that Mr. Groth presented a conceptual site plan of the property which included a commercial area of approximately 8 acres. Mr. Henderson displayed a copy of that site plan and advised that it was approved by the county in 1972. He continued that the property has changed hands several times since then, and the Wilder Corporation purchased it in 1986. In 1980 the commercial area was rezoned to reduce the number of acres zoned C-1 down to about 6 units per acre, and comments were made by the Planning Department at that time to the effect that this area would qualify for the neighborhood commercial that was under consideration. However, in 1981 the Comprehensive Plan was 19 T 77 43 BOOK 69 PA;E816 d C� . OCT 2 7.1997 Boa 69 Fna,r 817 adopted and the property was put into an MD -1 area; there was no commercial node designated at the intersection; and in 1985 conforming zoning took place which "zapped" the commercial zoning and put it into a mobile home zoning of 8 upa. Attorney Henderson continued to stress that the property was originally platted and developed to accommodate a commercial use at that corner and then pointed out the intensity of the develop- ment in the area of the intersection, the southwest and northwest corners of which already are zoned in neighborhood commercial. He noted that between the development at Indian River Estates and that at Village Green, there are approximately 3,000 people on less than 300 acres. If the interest is to keep traffic off SR60, he felt perhaps the county should be thinking about providing commercial services within walking distance of 3,000 people. Attorney Henderson advised that their request for a 25 acre node was made in order to give the Board some discretion to impose any size node they wanted to, and if their request for the 3.5 acres were granted, it would bring the total for the whole intersection to 9.5 acres, which is a minor node compared to what has been done out at 1-95. The Chairman asked if anyone further wished to be heard. Wayne Gerhold, resident of Village Green, advised that he was speaking in behalf of the residents. He pointed out that this matter has been heard several times before by both the Planning & Zoning Board and the County Commission, and they have had three unanimous decisions cast in their favor by these two Boards. Mr. Gerhold then informed the Board that for 284' along the west boundary of this proposed 3.5 acre node are grade stakes for the proposed county wastewater line, and those grade stakes are 12' inside the west boundary, which he felt may require an easement sometime in the future. He then pointed out there is Zoning Code provision which states that "no mobile home or other structure shall be located closer to any other district boundary than 25'." He noted that Webster defines "district" as a 44 defined tract of land. He continued to discuss boundaries, noting that on the west side there are three manufactured homes within 14' of this proposed line and the southwest corner of the newly constructed maintenance building is approximately 6' from the proposed north boundary line. If this zoning change is granted, he believed all this would be in violation of the Zoning Code. Mr. Gerhold viewed the attempt by the Wilder Corporation to establish a 25 acre node as a back door method to obtain the rezoning of the 3.5 acres. He further noted that there is a "For Sale" sign posted on that parcel, which would indicate that the Wilder Corporation will not be the developer whatever the project. Mr. Gerhold noted that at a previous hearing Commis- sioner Eggert stated she did not want to see any further erosion of this residential area, and he asked the Board to uphold the denial recommended by the Planning 6 Zoning Commission. Preston Miller, president of the Woodland Home Owners Association, Phase I, and president of Village Green Home Owners East, Inc., advised that he represents all home owners in Village Green. He expressed the residents' opposition to the proposed change this for the following reasons: 1) Because it would negatively impact the residential character of the surrounding area. 2) Because the commercial area would create a traffic hazard. (Mr. Miller informed the Board that the prospectus registered with the States of New Jersey and New York showing Village Green before it was developed, depic.ted a deceleration strip at the 7300 entrance which was never provided, and he further advised that a new prospectus approved by the state on July 29th states that management has no intention of changing the zoning at Village Green Park.) 3) Because the request by the Wilder Corp. may be illegal as the home owners associations were never given notice as required by law. U0 GT 2 7,1987 41 - - - RjoF 69 FaF818 L OCT 2 7,1987 ROCK 69 819 (Mr. Miller reported that Wilder Corporation stated the reason notice was not given is that the wooded area is not considered part of Village Green; however, they checked the tax records, and it is all assessed as one parcel.) Mr. Miller stressed that the Garden Club has done a great deal of work at the wooded entrance and want to maintain the exotic trees in the arboretum; the residents claim a vested interest in the wooded area, and if this request is granted, this area will be lost forever. They, therefore, urge that the Board deny the request. Mr. Miller requested the Homeowners who support his statements to rise, and about 90 people stood up. Attorney Henderson believed his client can appreciate the residents' concerns. He reminded the Board that his clients are new owners, and he believed they are doing what they can to improve things at Village Green. He felt the site plan process can respond to any problems that might exist re access, buffering or setbacks; so, he did not feel these are legitimate concerns at this point. Attorney Henderson further stated that this property is not a common area of the park and is not included within the park. The property is not platted, and he did not feel the fact that it is assessed as one parcel is really pertinent to the issue. This issue has been raised before, but he believed there is no way the prospectus would lead you to believe that it is included within the park. Commissioner Wheeler commented that the brochure the gentleman presented, which showed it as botanical gardens, would certainly indicate to him that it would be included in the park. Attorney Henderson believed if you want to include it in the park, you would have to include it as a commercial as has always has been intended from the beginning - you can't have it both ways -'but Commissioner Wheeler felt if anyone is trying to have it both ways, it is the developer. Commissioner Wheeler stated that while he feels strongly about property rights, he does have a problem with developers 46 coming in, developing a large residential area, and cutting.out a commercial area in front and leading people to believe it is part of their entranceway and part of the residential development. He believed this has been done for a long time in Florida, but people are starting to fight back now. If the intent is to develop the commercial he felt it should be done first so people know it is there. Discussion continued re the feeling that the commercial should have been developed sooner if that was what intended, and it was emphasized that what the Commission is concerned with is the best use of the property today. William Koolage, interested citizen, commented that he agreed with Commissioner Wheeler's remarks, and it bothers him when a developer comes in and holds out a corner piece to develop commercial and doesn't tell the people he -is doing it. He felt Vista Royale is another prime example of this. .Mr. Koolage stated that he had heard no compelling argument in favor of reversing the denial. There being no one further who wished to be heard, the Chairman declared the public hearing closed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler,-the.Board unanimously (4-0) approved the recommendation for denial of transmittal, which constitutes an automatic denial of the rezoning request. APPEAL P&Z DENIAL OF REQUEST TO AMEND CP TO EXTEND THE US#1 COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR FURTHER EAST AND REZONE 2.5 ACRES TO OCR (BARATTA) 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: r 47 1k 69 uu. 820 F,F— -) -, I OUT r .� FOOK 69 FAGFB9 VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Reach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a i in the matter of_/��%amu in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, 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. Sworn to and (SEAL) day of (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian fAAqq A.D. 19 � County, Qorida) NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING Notice of hearing of consider the adoption of a County ordinance rezoning land from: RM -10, Multiple -Family Residential District to OCR. Of- fice, Commercial and Residential District. The subject property is presently owned by Frank Baratta, Trustee and is located at the southwest corner of 17th Street and 6th Avenue. The subject property is described as: The north half of the east of Lot 6 of Block 2, of Dr. Richard E. Bullington Subdivision, which plat was filed May 25, 1912, and recorded in Plat Book 2, page 5, public records of St. Lucie County, Florida, said land now lying and being in Indian River County, Florida. Except the right-of-way over the north 50 feet of the above'described"propeity conveyed to the City of Vero Beach for a street; and except street right-of-way as in Official Record Book 73, page 225,, public records of Indian River County. Florida. LESS AND EXCEPT the -last 35" feet thereof. The north 160.5 feet of the west half of Lot 6, Block 2, Dc Richard E. Bullington Subdivision, according to plat filed May' 25, 1912,'and recorded in Plat Book 2,, page 5, public records of St: Lucie County, Florida; said land now lying and beingg In Indian River County,' Florida. t:XCEPT HOWEVER, the west 100 feet of the above described property and ex- cept the north 50 feet of the above de- scribed property conveyed to the City of Vero Beach for road right-of-way. Being in Indian River County. Florida, to wit: The east 371/2 feet of the following de - 'scribed property: Commencing at the Southeast comer of the west half of Lot 6, Block 2, according to Map or Plat of Dr. Richard E. Bullington's Subdivison, according' to plat filed'in Plat Book 2; Page 5, St. Luice County; Florida, records, and running north X25 feet to the point of beginning. From said point of beginning, run north 165 feet and fromthence run west 149.75 feet; and from thence run -south 165 feet, and from thence run east 149.75 feet; to said point of beginning; said laird lying and being. in indian River County,• Florida: -Dr. Richard E. Bullington Subdivision re- corded in Plat Book 2, page 5, public records -of St. Lucie County, Florida. said land now lying and being in Indian River County, Florida; the south 14,5 feet of the north 175 feet of the east 149.75 feet of the west-one-half.pf Lot 6, Block 2 Subject tq,.edsement, 'restrictions, reser- vations,. and ,rights-of-way of public record, The' Board of County Commissioners will con- duct a public hearingregarding the appeal by the applicant of the decision by the Planning and Zoning Commission to deny the rezoning re- quest. The public hearing, at which parties in in- terest and n-terest.and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard, will be held by the Board of County . I Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida in I the County Commission Chambers of the County Administration Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach. Florida on ilruesday, October ' 27, 1987at 9-05 a.m, The Board of County Commissioners will not take final action on this rezoning request atthis meeting. Anyone who. may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meeting will need to ensure that.a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which includwtestimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. Indian River County Board of County Commissioners By -s -Don C. Scurlock. Chairman ; October 7. 1987 Staff Planner David Nearing made the staff presentation: 48 '�J TO: The Honorable Members DATE:October 14, 1987 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Robert M. Y, I , AICP Community'D vel pment Division THRU: Gary Schindler ./ FROhfi ief, Long -Range Planning SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DEC- ISION CONCERNING.BARATTA REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND REZONE 2.5 ACRES FROM REFERENCE -10 TO OCR David C. Nearing"o"e4 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 27, 1987. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS Mr. Frank Baratta, as represented by Steve Henderson, Attorney, has requested an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to extend the U.S. 1 commercial corridor an additional 500 feet east of U.S. l along the south side of 17th Street to 6th Avenue, and to rezone 2.5 acres of property from_ RM -10, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 10 units/acre) to OCR, Office, Commercial and Residential District (up to 6 units/acre). The subject property is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of 17th Street and 6th Avenue. The proposed land use change is from MD -1, Medium Density Residential 1 (allowing up to 10 units/acre) to U.S. 1 Commercial Corridor.. On February 17, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners denied a similar request for this property. The requested zoning at that time was for CL, Limited Commercial. On June 16, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners denied a County initiated request to rezone 5 acres, which included the subject property from RM -10 to PRO, Professional Office District (up to 6 units/acre). On September 10, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan amendment and also to deny the rezoning. The applicant has appealed the denial of the rezoning. The reason for denial was based on County policy to avoid promoting strip commercial development. 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. Currently, the Comprehensive Plan will permit commercial zoning to extend beyond the originally established 600 foot depth of the commercial corridor to a maximum depth of 800 feet if it meets one of the following criteria. 1. The Property is located on an arterial street as designated on the County's Thoroughfare Plan; 2. The property is part of a larger parcel of land that has at least 100 feet of frontage on U.S. 1 and extends more than 600 feet east of the east right-of-way line of U.S. 1; or 49 L�OCT @x.1987 ROOK. 69 u"IF.M r •� OCT 719,0 BOOK 69 Fajr 8�3 3. The property is split by the 600 foot boundary of the commercial corridor with the major part of the property zoned commercial. The subject property does have the necessary frontage on an arterial road; however, only 100 feet lies within 800 feet of U.S. 1, and the site is not bisected by the commercial and residential zoning boundary. For this reason the applicant must amend the permissible extension distance for the commercial corridor an additional 500 feet in order to encompass all of his property. 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 retail sales facility, a service station and a 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 subject parcel and all lands immediately north, east, and south are designated on the County's Comprehensive Plan as MD -1. The property to the west lies within the U.S. 1 commercial corridor. While the applicant is requesting OCR zoning, it should be emphasized that once a commercial land use designation is in place, it would be possible to rezone the property from OCR to CL or CG, General Commercial District. Staff realizes that it is the intent of the applicant to develop this property for offices; however, all potential impacts must be considered. Whether the use is offices or not, extending the Commercial Corridor further east will increase the potential for strip commercialization, and encourage other future applications for extending commercial further east. Strip commercial is highly discouraged due to its impacts on the transportation system and stability of neighborhoods. Even though staff would be amendable to offices at this location, staff feels that offices should be established through the PRO zoning instead of a commercial land use designation. Since the June, 1987, denial of the PRO rezoning which included this property, staff has been working on alternate criteria to permit parcels less than 5 acres in size to be rezoned to PRO. At a recent Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, however, the latest staff proposal was tabled for additional workshops. Despite that action, staff feels that the PRO ordinance can be revised and presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission and to the Board of County Commissioners in the next several months. Transportation System The subject property has access to 17th Street, classified as an arterial road on the County Thoroughfare Plan, and 6th Avenue, classified as a secondary collector. Currently 6th Avenue is at a level of service (LOS) "E", and 17th Street is at a LOS of "A". The county Traffic Engineer feels that access could be critical in a high use situation such as commercial. If access were onto 6th Avenue, it would have a substantial impact on the intersection. Following are the anticipated average annual daily trips (AADT) for multiple -family, office, and retail: a) Multiple -Family 188 AADT b) Office 363 AADT C) Retail 1971 AADT 50 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 analysis performed, including the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners deny transmittal of this request to amend the comprehensive plan to the State Department of Community Affairs. Denial of transmittal of this request will constitute an automatic denial of the rezoning. 3 HIKO I Ia I n I PARK UM <� 8_ � �` i 9 _ ---------- _ _ STREE i a OAKMON T 4 PARK Ui Is 24 22 121 4 2 �, V T 8 i 20 LOT 3 RLR 15 ESTATES FAN/THA 2S tt 2T v C 14TH PL W Z 4 A E EUL LINGTON SUB ITR T 1 > >EHICE W e Z KEYSTONE 3 Q u ST}IEET 1sTw w[ I Ix PSIS SUBDIVISION I ADD 1 s 8 ►I LOT T I LOT 0 N 1sr�ri EIA LOT 6 ELK. I 0.E. RLOCN I R. E. RULLINGTgN SUEDIVISION I A I I BULUNGT 1 1 RIRTJN EPEATrm •NTRLEPLA A 6 X. n."i .T - . C TIr7RS� SUBJECT PROPERTY I ��1 ♦ LOT 3-X Z LOT I OLK 2 FLOC 2 T C V W X R.[. WLLMTON SUR. R E RULLINGT SUR V t 1 17TH _+ STREET YJ mmW MANOR CG W Z > -PLACELOT S LUI s $ n U ~ W Y ` Z RL K 2 At RUL Ll TO suE— — QA i H The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard. Attorney Steve Henderson came before the Board representing the applicant, Frank Baratta, Trustee. Attorney Henderson claimed that the subject property is a problem piece of property because the tendency of the County in the past has been to treat it just as a good buffer area. However, it is plainly unfair to the property owner to utilize this as buffer property between existing commercial and the Rockridge area. Attorney Henderson noted that they did seek commercial zoning on this property last year', and the Commission at that time did not feel commercial was 51 sc7 Ff�.i;E 824 OCT 2 d '1987 80a L 17I-0 c°r 2 7 1987 R• Q uGK 69 FAr . I U 825 appropriate but that offices would be an acceptable use. He then read from the Minutes of the meeting wherein former Chief Planner Richard Shearer had indicated that the Planning 6 Zoning Commis- sion felt the area was suitable for professional offices, but since there was no vehicle to accomplish this, they ended up voting to deny it. Board members indicated they hoped some vehicle could be found whereby this could be done, and a PRO District was subsequently adopted, but imposed an acreage limitation that did not permit its application to this property. Mr. Henderson advised that his client is committed to a PRO zoning and would be more than happy to take that rather than pursuing a Land Use change which is more radical but is the only avenue available at this time. He asked the Board*to at least keep the option alive by forwarding their request on to Tallahassee and then consider it again in January, by which time hopefully the PRO District can be amended so they can qualify. Commissioner Eggert assumed, since this has come up so many times, that if we do amend the PRO and this can qualify, this could be brought forward as a county -initiated action. Planning Director Keating agreed it could. He then reviewed how the Board denied the PRO for this property but asked staff to consider some alternatives in the PRO requirements. He informed the Board that they did so and took their revision to the Planning 6 Zoning Commission on October 8th. The P&Z was not satisfied and requested that this matter go back to a workshop, which will be held in two weeks. Discussion continued as to whether we can still consider the PRO for this property if we deny the transmittal today, and Director Keating advised that if the PRO were revised so that it made this property eligible, it would not be necessary to amend the Comprehensive Plan to include this. The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard. Don Reams, 621 16th Place, advised that his property is directly south of the subject property. He noted that this is 52 � � r the 6th time he has appeared to protest the rezoning of this property, and he believed the Board members all remember what has transpired before. He emphasized that the property always has been residential, and it should remain residential. The first request for rezoning here was in May of 1961, and other property owners in 27 years have had a chance to develop the property before it came to this point. Mr. Reams stressed that he agreed with the County staff who are paid professionals and should be unbiased, and he felt if the Board doesn't honor their recommendation, then we don't need them. Charles Engel, 645 16th Place, informed the Board that he has a letter written by Charles Pfitzer who is unable to attend, which speaks out against the proposed rezoning. He also had a phone call from Paul Clinker advising that he had sent a registered letter to the Commission asking that they deny the zoning change. Mr. Engel noted that he has attended five hearings to express his opposition, and he is very much against the proposed change. Ruth Chapman, resident of Rockridge, also agreed with staff's recommendation. She wished to re-emphasize the consid- erable traffic problems in this area and urged the Board to deny the appeal. Hortense Rogers, 6th"Avenue, also expressed her deep concern about traffic, stressing that if 6th Avenue had to be widened, it would make the houses there untenable. Attorney Henderson stated that he could understand everyone's concern about extending commercial nodes, but emphasized that this Commission has plenty of discretion to control the zoning that is applicable within any commercial node, and at this point his client is simply asking for an office designation; so, extension of the node doesn't mean it is going to creep irrevocably on down 17th Street. He continued that his client has concern for his neighbors, and if PRO is not going to become available for this property, possibly the Board may decide OCT 2 7 .V387 53 mu 69 826 OCT 2 7 ,1987 ROOK 69 Ftc 819.07 in January to grant a nodal area in some OCR zoning for a part of this property, i.e., possibly taking it down 100' short of 6th Avenue, and, in effect, legislate some buffer area. He felt there are many options available, but with the status of the PRO, they did not know just what those options may be, and he again asked that the Board keep their options open by keeping the petition alive for a few more months. Commissioner Wheeler took exception to Attorney Henderson's remark about this property being used only as a buffer area. He noted this is valuable property, and he felt it is valuable as RM -10 since it is close to shopping, movies, banks, etc., and much around it is already built in units. He believed there is a lack of RM -10 and not a lack of commercial and did not subscribe to the.idea that this can be nothing but a vacant buffer. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com- missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the recommendation for denial of transmittal, which constitutes an automatic denial of the rezoning request. PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST TO AMEND THE CP REDESIGNATING_145 ACRES IN WINTER BEACH to LD -1 Staff Planner Davis Nearing made the staff. presentation: 54 TO: The Honorable Members DATE.october 14, 1987 FILE:. of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: Rbbert M. Ke ti g, P Planning & DeveloprWInt Director THRU: Gary Schindler /%w Chief, Long -Range Planning COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHEN- SIVE PLAN REDESIGNATING APPROXIMATELY 145 ACRES OF WINTER BEACH FROM LD -2, LOW DENSITY RES- IDENTIAL 2 TO LD -1, LOW- DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 1 FROM: David C. Nearing &M REFERENCES: 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'27, 1987. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The County planning staff has initiated a request to the Comprehensive Plan to redesignate approximately 145 acres of land located in Winter Beach from LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (allowing up to 6 units/acre), to LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (allowing up to 3 units/acre). The subject property lies south of North Winter Beach Road, north of South Winter Beach Road, and east of the Lateral G Canal. On November 13, 1985, the Board of County Commissioners voted 5-0 to approve the Winter Beach Small Area Plan. After several attempts to rezone property lying within the boundaries of the small area plan were denied, the Board directed staff to reassess the small area plan. On July 23, 1986, the Board amended the Winter Beach Small Area plan for land between the FEC Railroad and 58th Avenue. On October 21, 1986, the Board rezoned approximately 250 acres of Winter Beach from RS -6 Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) to RS -3, Single -Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre). On February 17, 1987, the Board voted to amend the Comprehensive Plan for the previously mentioned 250 acres, redesignating it from LD -2 to LD -11 and directed staff to initiate a comprehensive plan amendment for the property involved in this request. On May 5, 1987, the Board approved a rezoning from RS -6 to RS -3 for the subject property. Additional actions are outlined in the attached chronology of events which have taken place in Winter Beach. On September 10, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial of this request. The commission felt that the current LD -2 designation was appropriate for this area. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli- cation will be presented. The analysis will include a descrip- tion of the current and future land uses of the site and sur-. rounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environ- mental quality. OCT 2 7,1987 55 BOOK ua. D�O Q BOOK 69 Pr- AGE O? 9 . OCT 271987 Existing Land Use Pattern The subject property consists of undeveloped land, a church, and several single-family dwellings zoned RS -3. North of the subject property, across North Winter Beach Road, are single-family dwellings and undeveloped land zoned RM -6, a plant nursery zoned RS -3, and undeveloped land zoned IL. Further east is the F.E.C. railroad. South of the subject property, across South Winter Beach Road, is undeveloped land zoned A-1, a church and undeveloped land zoned RS -6, undeveloped land zoned RM -6 and IL, and two industrial buildings zoned IL. West of the subject property, across the Lateral "G" Canal, are single-family residences and undeveloped land zoned RS -3. Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and the land south and immediately east of it as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre). Further to the east is the 100 acre South Winter Beach Road Industrial node and the U.S. #1 MXD, Mixed -Use Corridor (up to 6 units/acre). The land north and west of the subject property is designated as LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (up to 3 units/acre). - The Winter Beach Precise Land Use Map, as amended by the Board of County Commissioners on July 23, 1986, designates the subject property as LD -1 with an appropriate zoning of RS -3. It is staff's opinion and consistently has been staff's opinion that the current LD -2 land use designation is appropriate for this property. The RS -3 zoning in place on the subject property is consistent with the land use designation, and a change in land use designation is not required for control of density in this area for the immediate future. This is due to the fact that several other control methods are available, including rezonings, and state environmental controls. There are a number of reasons why the 'staff has consistently recommended that the_LD-2 designation remain in place. One is that the County's growth has been in a linear pattern. The major growth and higher population densities in the county have occured parallel to the U.S. 1 corridor. Development along this. corridor has occured due to the proximity of the area to major service areas and transportation access. This pattern of higher density in the eastern part of the County and lower densities to the west is reflected.in the County's Comprehensive Plan and is encouraged to continue. This is consistent with the County's objective to have a more compact development pattern, a system which permits more efficient provision of urban services, and avoids the complications of urban sprall. With the future projected growth rates for Indian River County, staff anticipates intense growth pressures. Eventually these growth pressures will require additional lands to be developed at higher densities in areas where urban services are available. According the the Comprehensive Plan, the Winter Beach area lies within an urban service area scheduled for development between the year 1991-2000. However, the Utilities Division anticipates having a water treatment plant in the Hobart Park area on line within the next two years and, with the soon to be expanded Gifford plant, this proposed time frame will probably be changed to a less distant period, such as 1988-90. In addition to urban services, the. Winter Beach area has a good transportation network, being accessible to two main east/west collector roads. These roads are capable of carrying a large volume of traffic through the north county area and linking this area to major north/south roads such as Kings Highway. This linkage also enables the area to be highly accessable to the remainder of the County. 56 A substantial portion of the subject area consists of threatend coastal sand pine scrub habitat. While staff feels that this habitat should be preserved, it is staff's 'opinion, based upon available research, that only acquisition can protect the resource. Staff feels that a density reduction will not save the scrub. Transportation System The subject property has access to North Gifford Road designated as a primary collector on the County's Thoroughfare Plan and South Gifford Road classified as a secondary collector. Several local roads also extend north and south into the property off of the collectors. All roads are at a current level of service "A". Environment Approximately 80 percent of the subject property consists of excessively drained soils and is considered to be located in the coastal sand ridge primary aquifer recharge area. The subject property is not located within a flood -prone area. Utilities County water and wastewater facilities are not currently available for the subject property. RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis performed, and the Planning and Zoning Commissions recommendation, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners deny transmitting this request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to the State Department of Community Affairs. m Q t cc VVIN I th btHUN PRECISE LAND USE MAP Indian River County Resolution No. 86-48 LEGEND LAND USE: LD -1 ® ZONING: up to ftS-3 LAND USE: LD -2 ZONING: up to RM -6 LAND USE: LD -2 ZONING: up to RM -4 .+� 'i• \;,'v :.. 'T� 1�'.�. �• ?,'' v: ti.. 1\ I \v� IAS -7 � 'y. � m Q t cc VVIN I th btHUN PRECISE LAND USE MAP Indian River County Resolution No. 86-48 LEGEND LAND USE: LD -1 ® ZONING: up to ftS-3 LAND USE: LD -2 ZONING: up to RM -6 LAND USE: LD -2 ZONING: up to RM -4 LAND USE: LD -2 20NING: up to RS -0 LAND USE: MXD b NODE ZONING: IL 6 IG r;J LAND USE: PARKS ZONING: A-1 Resolution No. 86-48 passed on June 23, 1986. DCT .`687 57 RooK 69 F'.1Ur. OCT 2 7 1987 RooK 69 rAGE831. Planner Nearing commented that there has been a lot of Board action on this property. It has been heard many times, approxi- mately -twenty in all. He advised that staff still feels LD -2 is appropriate for the area and emphasized that a Land Use designa- tion is not necessary to control the density, which can be controlled by other means. Commissioner Wheeler asked if there are any residences there now that don't conform to RS -3 usage, and Planner Nearing believed there were none that would be non -conforming. Director Keating believed there were several on the property to the west of the, canal, but the subject property is made up primarily of the holdings of one large land owner. Commissioner Wheeler wished to know if there is any date set for servicing this area with utilities, and Planner Nearing advised that this is an urban service area listed in the Comprehensive Plan for service between 1990-2000. With the utilities now being developed, this probably could be moved forward, but unfortunately, with lower density, it is far more costly to install the urban services. Commissioner Eggert pointed out that the density is already there, and Planner Nearing noted that under the Comprehensive Plan, the permissable density is 6 upa; however, currently with RS -3 zoning, it could not develop at that. Commissioner Eggert commented that the P&Z Minutes talked about this being a "taking," and she did not see why. Attorney Vitunac stated that as long as the owner has a beneficial use remaining on his property, there is no "taking." The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. Ennis Proctor, owner of 17 acres on 69th St. (North Winter Beach Road), advised that he has listened to the Commission go along with the Planning & Zoning Commission on every recommenda- tion they have made today, and apparently this matter has gone through about 20 hearings, but he was informed there is a lot of politics involved here and was told by a neighbor not to bother 58 to show up because the vote would be 3 to 1. Mr. Proctor expressed his belief that LD -2 or 6 units per acre is one of the best zonings you can get for something like this property. He personally would be glad to have his developed at 2 upa, but felt it would not be fair to those people who own the other property who don't understand why they can't get the zoning that has been recommended over and over. Mr. Proctor understood that at one time the County Commission voted unanimously to go along with the LD -2 and then reversed itself. Chairman Scurlock did not remember anything about this that has ever been unanimous, and Director Keating believed at one meeting there was a compromise about the land west of the canal being 3 upa and the land we are currently considering would be 6 upa. Mr. Proctor felt the residents would-be better off with a buffer between the single family residents and the small apartments down on South Winter Beach Road right next to the industrial complex and over next to the railroad tracks. While he realized the decision is up to the Commission, he felt to go directly against the P&Z Commission in this one instance when they have gone along with all the rest, did not seem fair. Commissioner Eggert pointed out that the Winter Beach Small Area Plan adopted for this area calls for LD -1 and RS -3. Attorney Sam Block came before the Board representing the Winter Beach Progressive League and confirmed that the Small Area Plan was adopted in 1985 at LD -1 and RS -3. He felt the Commission has been consistent in their actions. He further wished to point out that when the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1982, it was said that it was done as a broad sweep, and Planning at the time said they then would need to go into particular areas and do small area plans. Attorney Block felt this is a logical conclusion of what has happened over the last few years as related to the character of the neighborhood. As to this being an urban service area, that is not why the people OCT 2 7.1987 L 59 RUCK 69 F'AGr 8.32. r OCT 2 7.1987 BOOK 69 rn 80 3 moved there. There is no date for services, and environmental concerns have always been an issue of the Commission. Mr. Block pointed out that the Board used their discretion when looking at the 16th St. (Rosewood) area and considered the character of the neighborhood, and he felt this should be looked at in the same light. On behalf of the Winter Beach Progressive League, he asked that the Board do what the neighborhood calls for and approve LD -1 and RS -3 as set out in the Small Area Plan. Attorney Ted Herzog, appeared representing LaRue Equities, owner of approximately 102 acres of the 145 being discussed today. He believed there are two.special interest groups here today, each trying to focus the Board's concern on specific issues, but he felt no matter how you cut it, the overall concern is good planning. Mr. Herzog then referred to the map being displayed, noting that generally speaking along the whole linear corridor, the Comprehensive Plan has historically related to a density of 6. We now have a piece of property described as the subject property, 2/3s of which is owned by his clients, and right above them is a peninsula of 3 upa sticking out into the more or less 6 upa zone. That peninsula is a zoning anomaly established by the Board, and it is a poor reason for perpetua- ting the bad zoning policy previously enacted by this Commission. The P&Z staff consistently has asked for 6 upa. Many of the arguments the Board has heard have been environmental in nature, but Mr. Herzog believed that virtually any development will affect the habitat and the wildlife; so, he did not feel that is a valid concern. This happens to be about the only area of the ridge that has not been mined, and he felt it is again an anomaly that the Board would focus the restrictive zoning in the one area where the mining hasn't been complete. Mr. Herzog noted that since the last time they were here, there has been one signifi- cant change in the area - the Treasure Ridge property which was granted RM -6. The only difference in that area is that the trees and the sand are gone, which would lead one to conclude that the 60 Board must be focusing on this property for reasons of sand, plants, and animals, but there are ways to protect the county in that regard other than decreased density. Mr. Herzog again asked that the Board not make the Comprehensive.Plan change to LD -1 and further noted that he believed his client has substantial grounds for applying for rezoning at RM -6 because of the zoning that was granted Treasure Ridge. William Koolage, interested citizen, noted that he has spoken many times against the extension of commercial into other areas, but he felt you can make just as much of a mistake in pushing real low density out into higher density areas. He did not agree with the Board's action in pushing the low density further out on 16th Street in the Rosewood area, and he believed this property, especially the eastern edge of it, can stand a higher density. Judy Fennell, owner of 10 acres of the property in question, stated that she has lived there 27 years and raised her family there. She saw no reason whatsoever to change the designation, and wanted it left at LD -2. Carmel Hudson, owner of property directly across the road, noted that they have LD -1 on their side of the road but did not know what good it will do them to have LD -2 on the other side. It is a beautiful area; they are concerned with the wildlife, etc., and she urged that the area be kept as it is. Tom Barnes advised that he owns a 65 acre citrus grove on the south side of Winter Beach Road and his sister owns 100 acres east of his property. He noted that he has been to many meetings about this, and he is getting tired of some people telling only part of the story on the area and some people who are not directly affected coming in here and clouding the issue. Mr. Barnes felt strongly about the private property rights of the people who own this land and have been paying taxes on their property for a long time, and he emphasized that when you downzone someone's property, you are affecting their value OCT 7.19187 61 t 000 69 F'',UC 8.34 OCT 2Roos 6 F,,.8935 directly and take away their alternatives for what they might do with that property. He did not understand why the Board would go against their staff's recommendations, particularly when they coincide with those of the property owners', and he further noted that if we keep shrinking the tax base of the county, it will affect the overall economy of the county. Lynn Kirk, owner of 5 acres on North Winter Beach Road, read a note from the Tuckers, owners of 10 acres across the street from the subject property, expressing their support of the LD -1. Mr. Kirk then expressed his support of the LD -1, citing the beauty of the area., the wildlife, :the large homes on large pieces of property, etc. He stated that most of the property around them is RS -1 and they want to make this final piece consistent with the rest. He noted that the Winter Beach Progressive League has been very active; the residents want the LD -1; and they have submitted petitions with over 100 signatures urging the LD -1. He stressed that the Board was sympathetic to the people in the Rosewood area, and the Winter Beach people want to maintain the character of their area also. Rebecca Hampton, president of the Winter Beach Progressive League, advised she has a letter from Catherine Grovenmeier, owner of 21 acres in this area, supporting low density. Mrs. Hampton believed everyone is familiar with how the League feels, and they are still searching for low density. Nancy Offutt, legislative liaison for the.Board of Realtors, advised that they take no position as regards this particular request, but on the issue of private property rights, they would like to echo Mr. Barnes' sentiments. Mrs. Offutt noted that people who have an LD -2 tract have bought it because of that zoning and in reliance on that designation. She suggested that some other people who have developed their home sites on such property have done so in spite of the zoning, and now they are asking the Board to change it to coincide with what they have done. She further suggested that the people who have developed 62 on large tracts have in that way already buffered themselves; they have chosen their life style, but Mrs. Offutt did not believe that should affect the property rights of those who bought under the existing LD -2. She further pointed out that when you make these drastic changes in the Land Use Plan, you are affecting the utility development of the county, as well as impact fees and all the things that were based on certain pro -rated densities. Robert Mooney, came before the Board representing 100 acres of the 145 being discussed. He stressed that staff does not feel the density should be lowered, and the P&Z with only one dissension voted to leave it as it is. Last October before the elections, there was a unanimous decision to leave this property LD -2, RS -6, but in February, it was decided to re-examine the area, and Mr. Mooney believed we are in the 21st month of examination. Mr. Mooney pointed out that the only thing that has changed during all this time is that there is now RM -6 north of this area. There is LD -2 zoning west of the canal and LD -2, RS -3, south of Winter Beach Road. Everybody is getting their little piece in, and he felt the zoning is a disgrace. No one lives east of the.bridge on South Winter Beach Road - there are two small churches. In regard to concerns about the character of the neighborhood, Mr. Mooney stressed that the character of his neighborhood is an industrial zone and a garbage transfer station and across the street is a grove and some warehouses. He stated that he would like those who may vote against him to explain to him in simple terms why they are ignoring staff's and the P&Z Commission recommendations, and he also wished to know why the problems set out in the Winter Beach PLUM have been ignored, i.e., substandard housing. 20% mobile homes, etc. He noted there are a lot of problems in Winter Beach; it is not a Rosewood. Mr. Mooney stated that we have created here a wart on the LU Plan by extending a designation into undeveloped property under the guise OCT 2 1987 63 RUGS 6 FA 8Q36 OCT 2 7 1987 RooK 69 PAGE 837 that it is because of the character of the neighborhood. What happened here some months ago cost him about 300 units on his property, and if that doesn't amount to "taking," he would like to know why. James Taylor, 69th St., advised that he is not a direct resident of the subject property, but he does live in the overall corridor, and he is here on behalf of a number of people living there. He advised that he has a letter from John Hanson, which states that the Hansons and the Gayneys, who own and have developed 3 acres of land on 69th -St., -are in favor of downzoning the 145 acres. Mr. Taylor then spoke eloquently re environ- mental issues and the importance of protecting the sand ridge and the natural habitat, emphasizing that the property is essential to aquifer regeneration. He stated that the residents have no objection whatsoever to the development of this property, but they do have a concern, as Mr. Herzog mentioned, that his client has the right not only to develop at RS -6 but to come back and badger for the right to develop at RM -6. He continued that the reason for RS -6 west of the canal is because those properties are totally enclaved in that they are surrounded by properties that will not allow encroachment into the mini -estate development of the area. Mr. Taylor felt that Planning Departments are of themselves a bureaucratic entity and they work out of books, which is why the final process comes before the elected council. He felt that it is the Commission's duty to go along with those who have elected them and entrusted them with their lives and homes, and he continued to stress the need for LD -1 to protect the area. Tom DeBarry, 69th St., agreed with Mr. Taylor and wished to see the density as low as possible. It was determined that no one further wished to be heard, and the Chairman thereupon closed the public hearing. 64 MOTION WAS MADE BY Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, to transmit the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan redesignating the 145 acres to LD -1 to the DCA for review. Chairman Scurlock noted that he has consistently voted to have the LD -2 for this area, and he still believes in that. He stated that he is very familiar with this area, and he believed we,have gotten a different picture of it than what really exists there; it actually is significantly different from the Rosewood area. He believed the Planning staff has done a good job in assessing the whole area, and he concurred with their recommenda- tion. The Chairman noted that many of the people who spoke bought when the zoning was higher, and they chose to use and develop tower on a larger piece of land, and then we have people who have owned this land for 26 years at the higher density and relied on it and want their rights to be upheld, and he found this situation inconsistent, even though he is not one for high densities. Commissioner Eggert believed there can be an honest difference of opinion. She expressed her belief in keeping with the Small Area Plan and with what is out there, and she felt that the Land Use designation should be brought into conformance with the density. Commissioner Wheeler did not believe any particular subject has caused him more confusion, and he found it an extremely difficult decision to make. He noted that he has spent.literally hours up there looking around, and while he is always in favor of preserving the environment, he felt that concern is not relevant to making this decision. When he looks at the area and the corridor and the people who live there and the large tracts of land that want to be upheld for RS -6, it almost seems it is investors versus residents. He noted that the arguments on the other side were very good, but he will stay consistent with his OCT 2 2 1987 65 p RiiGf' 69 F'r�ur 838 ; OCT 2 7 1987 BOOK 6� pace $e9 previous position and and go with the people living in the area to uphold the LD -1 designation. Commissioner Bowman stated that she will vote for the LD -1 as she sees this as a unique area of small estates. She agreed that the environmental issues have nothing to do with it, because once it is gone, it is gone, but she felt the people who have developed the small estate atmosphere deserve to continue their life style. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was ,voted on and carried3 to 1, Commis- sioner Bird being absent and Chairman Scurlock voting in opposition. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TRANSMITTAL OF COMP. PLAN AMENDMENTS The Board reviewed memo from the Planning staff: TO: The Honorable Members DATE: October 13, 1987 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: 67 SUBJECT: JULY 1987 COMPREHENSIVE Robert M. Keatih#1 P PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATIONS Community Development Director THRU : Gary Schindler _1 , Chief, Long -Range Planning FROM: David Nearing tC11 REFERENCES: 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 27, 1987. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS The Community Development Division received two Comprehensive Plan amendment applications in July of 1987 and initiated ten amendment applications, three at the request of the Public Works Division. The staff has reviewed these amendment applications and made recommendations to the Planning and Zoning Commission which, sitting as the Local Planning Agency, held public hearings on September 10, 1987, to consider making recommendations on the proposed amendments to the County's Comprehensive Plan. 66 In 1986, 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. At that public hearing, the Board has the option of transmitting or not transmitting any or all of the proposed amendments to the State for review. Failure to authorize transmittal of any proposed amendment constitutes denial of that request; however, transmittal of an application does not indicate Board approval of the request. 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. It is necessary for the Board of vote on each of the Comprehensive Plan amendment applications in order to authorize transmittal of the applications to the State for review. Three affirmative votes are required to authorize transmittal. Further, it is necessary for the Board to state their intent to hold a second public hearing concerning those amendment requests authorized for transmittal. 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 authorizing the transmittal. Since a second public hearing must be held prior to action being taken on each of the amendment applications, 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. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Comnis- sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously adopted Resolu- tion 87-129 authorizing transmittal of those Comprehen- sive Plan amendments approved today for transmittal. OCT ?'t" 1987 67 840 n ROOK 69 �'.�;F 840 OCT 2 7 1997 mor 69 f'"cf 841 RESOLUTION NO. 87-129 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 A 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 Cpunty 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 Commissioner Eggert who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Coifimissioner Bowman and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as fbilowsi. 68 Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Vice -Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Commissioner Carolyn Eggert Commissioner Gary Wheeler Commissioner Richard N. Bird The Chairman thereupon declared J Aye Aye Aye Aye Absent Resolution No. 87- 129 adopted and duly passed this 27th day of October 1987. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: ��.+ C_ DON C. SCURLOCK, J . Chairman WIDENING OF KINGS HIGHWAY NORTH OF RYANWOOD SHOPPING CENTER Administrator Balczun reviewed the following: TO: The Honorable mmbers of the DATE: October 19, 1987 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: - Charles Balczun, county Administrator SUBJECT: Widening of Kings Highway North of Ryanwood Shopping Center FROM: Jams W. Davis, P.E. REFERENCES: Public Works Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS During a recent rezoning hearing, the Board requested staff to investigate traffic operational improvements along Kings Highway to serve 23rd Street and 24th Street (Rivera Estates Subdivision). Residents in the area requested a northbound left turn lane. The recent five laning of Kings Highway caused a transition to two lanes in this area. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Staff has reviewed the .area. At the present time, the County has a 50' wide right-of-way along the Rivera Estates frontage. For a 3 -lane roadway (36' wide), a minimum 90' right-of-way is recommended. This would provide for two 8' wide shoulders and two 19' wide drainage swales on each side of the roadway. At least 20' of additional right-of-way would be require along each side of the roadway. The cost of the right-of-way is estimated at $1/sf. For the 40 ft. x 1300 lf. area needed for right-of-way south of Walker Ave. (26th St) , a cost of $52,000 is estimated. The road improvements are estimated to cost $40,000, for a total cost of $92,000. This would provide a three lane roadway from Walker Ave. to the existing five lane section. No buildings are within the right-of-aaY required. OCT 27 1987 69 E9(� Ri)GK � Ft4uC S"`�iar OCT d � 7 BOOK 69 FAcF 843 RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING Funding for widening this section of Kings Highway should be appropriated from Zone 8 Traffic Impact Fee account. Presently, approximately $126,000 is in the fund, however, these funds are committed to existing projects. It is recommended that right-of-way acquisition begin immediately. Depending on the willingness of the property owners, the right-of-way acquisition will take a minimum of six months. Once right-of-way is acquired, staff recommends the work be prioritized along with other projects in Zone 8. Funding to be from Impact Fee Revenue, Zone 8. Once surveys and legal descriptions are prepared, funds should be available in the Zone 8 fund. The Administrator informed the Board there are currently insufficient unencumbered funds in Zone 8 impact fee funding; however, Public Works Director Davis has informed him that there are sufficient planning proposals and building proposals in the mill to fund the R/W acquisition and perhaps construction by the time we complete the acquisition, and staff, therefore, is asking for authorization to proceed with the acquisition of R/W and design. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, to authorize staff to proceed with the acquisition of R/W and design as described above. Chairman Scurlock disagreed with the recommendation. He had a problem in that in the case of Ryanwood Shopping Center we extracted about $78,000 for improvements on that roadway as part of the development process. We have the bank currently talking with us about access, and in addition, he understood from Director Pinto�Cardinal Industries is going to develop to the north of Ryanwood. He, therefore, would like to try to get what is necessary out of the adjacent development that is currently in the process rather than relying entirely on impact fees. Commissioners Eggert and Bowman agreed to amend their Motion to include dealing directly with new development as discussed. 70 THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION on the Motion as amended. It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0). Director Davis emphasized that what staff was requesting was that they be allowed to go ahead and do some title search work and look at R/W acquisition primarily along Rivera Estates. He noted that regardless of what development comes in there, there still has to be some R/W work. Chairman Scurlock explained that the Motion gives staff the flexibility to do that; funding is what we are concerned about, and we want staff to be able to push for other contributions beyond impact fees. REQUEST FROM PFIZER CHEMICAL TO SURVEY WABASSO BEACH COASTLINE The Board reviewed memo from the Public Works Director: TO: The Honorable Metmbers of the DATE: October 19, 1987 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Charles Balczun, County Administrator FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.0 Public Works Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS SUBJECT: Request from Pfizer Chemical Division to Survey Coastline along Wabasso Beach REFERENCES: Sheldon Brandes, Marketing Manager, Pfizer Chemical C` -n- ni v f -n .Tim na.qri-g dated 10-13-87 Pfizer Chemical Division has developed a chemical dune stabilization system to prevent dune erosion caused by storm surge. Pfizer is requesting at this time permission to survey the dune and shoreline at Wabasso Beach. A formal presentation to the Board on the experimental process will be forthcoming. The project will be at no cost to the County. WDAW614IN114101 • It is recommended that the Board approve the request by Pfizer to survey the Wabasso Beach area at no cost to the County. Commissioner Eggert asked if there is any problem with their surveying. OCT 2 7' 190017 71 m�K r 69 844 OCT 2 7 1987 BooK 69 ui,F845 Director Davis reported that staff has no problem. He noted they since have received another letter that describes in more detail what the stabilization process really involves, and staff's thought was that at this time they would simply present the Board with the request to do the survey work and then at a later date bring in a more formal request to do the project. Commissioner Eggert believed Pfizer is looking at Brevard County also, and Chairman Scurlock advised that he spent a lot of time with them, and he believed the real question is the number of movements of turtles within a certain area. He noted they were also considering an area near`Chuck's Steak House, which is in Brevard County, and he personally.told them to go do it there. Commissioner Wheeler noted that he would like to see it done here as he felt some of the data received could be beneficial to the County. He also believed erosion is considerably heavier south of the inlet than it is by Chuck's Steak House and this should give us some idea of how well this substance works. Chairman Scurlock commented that, in that case, he would like to move the project to Ambersand Beach because we keep getting washouts there, and if the material works, we could at least get some benefit from it. Commissioner Bowman believed they don't want to do it at that location because they can't get their equipment in there. Commissioner Wheeler suggested that we allow them to do their surveying and prepare; and in the meantime, he can come back with a report from the Beach Preservation & Restoration Committee as to their feelings about this project. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com- missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) agreed to allow Pfizer Chemical to proceed with their survey of the dune and shoreline at Wabasso Beach and have Commissioner Wheeler come back with a report from the Beach Preservation & Restoration Committee. 72 SEBASTIAN INLET NAVIGATION CHANNEL - USE OF DREDGED MATERIA_ L ON COUNTY BEACHES The Board reviewed, memo from the Public Works.Director: TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: ower 29, 2987 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator SUBJECT: Sebastian Inlet Navigation Channel - Use of Dredged Material on Indian River County Beaches FROM• p' REFERENCES: Michael P. Walther, James W. Davis, P.E. , 1\' Coast Tech to Jim Davis public Works Director Ant Permit attached DESCRIPTION AMID CONDITIONS The Engineering Consultant for the Sebastian Inlet Tax District, Mike Walther, Coastal Tech., has transmitted to the County staff a copy of the Florida DNR Permit for the dredging of the Sebastian Inlet Channel. Approximately 85,000 cubic yards of material is to be dredged west of the inlet and the spoil is to be placed on the upland disposal site located southwest of the campground area within the Sebastian Inlet State Park in Indian River County. Special Condition #4 of the DNR permit for this project states that "all beach quality sand material dredged from the Inlet channel shall be used as beach nourishment south of Sebastian Inlet prior to expiration of this permit". The permit will expire on August 5, 1992. The beach compatible sand can be used anywhere in Indian River County, however, if the material is used 4000' or more from the inlet, a Coastal Construction Control Line permit is required. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The County has the discretion as to where this material can be placed. The staff has reviewed the Cubit Beach Preservation Plan for recommended sand placement location. The following areas are in need of nourishment: 1) Between station R 11 + 120 feet and R 15 - This area along Ambersand Beach is in need of nourishment. Single family dwellings are in jeopardy. 2) Between Station R 37 and R 40 along Summerplace and the Wabasso area - this area is in need of dune fill and nourishment. The sand could also be used as an emergency stockpile for use in the case that a severe Northeast storm occurs. On September 21 1987, the Beach Preservation Committee approved using the material in the above locations, however, a quorum was not in attendance. D ATIONS AND FUNDING It is recommended that the, County staff be authorized to apply for a DNR construction permit to place a portion of the sand in the above Ambersand and Sumrerplace areas and that an emergency stockpile also be retained. The cost of hauling the material is $1.50/cy. 73 OCT 2 7.1 987 moK 69 �rur, 846 Fr- I ICT 2 71987 z ,�,� 69 Pour 847, Chairman Scurlock only wanted to be sure that the agreement does not lock us in to use all 85,000 cubic yards at $1.50/cy, which is $140,000, and he doesn't know where the funding is. Director Davis advised the thought is that the cost to send an end loader up there and load the material in county trucks and truck it to the disposal sites and dump it on the dune system and spread the materials would probably be about $1.50 a cubic yard. If we are going to use this sand source as an emergency stockpile, we would have the material available and perhaps we would use county trucks and crews to do the work. Chairman Scurlock wished to know if we, in fact, have this many thousands of cubic yards available at no cost to us and we are just responsible for moving it, why we can't contract with Saw Mill Ridge or Jenkins Trucking because they also put that materials on private property in the City of Vero Beach, and maybe we can net something from this material. Director Davis did not believe we can sell this material. Debate continued as to whether or not we can sell the sand, the price of it, etc., -and Director Davis pointed out that it belongs to the state and the DNR permit has a condition requiring that it is to be used on the beaches. The Chairman noted that we would be using it on the beaches, but it would be on private property in the City where there is an ongoing erosion problem. Commissioner Bowman suggested stockpiling it south of the inlet and letting the ocean bring it down to the beaches, and Director Davis agreed it could be put there as a feeder beach. The Chairman noted that it would cost $140,000 to do that, and Commissioner Wheeler questioned what percentage we would get from the downdrift. Discussion as to various alternatives continued and as to whether we can sell it or not if it ends up on the south beach, and it was noted that this material is available to us until 1992. Director Davis -advised that the permit doesn't say we 74 can't sell it. It was further noted there is the possibility that the City of Vero Beach might want the material if we don't, and Chairman Scurlock emphasized that he wanted to stay as flexible as possible. He felt we should go ahead and approve this just as long as we are not locked in to having to move it. Even if we can't sell it, we could get credit for making it available to the City and saving them money. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized staff to apply for a DNR permit as recommended above and explore the other possibilities. HAZARDOUS WALKING CONDITIONS - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS The Board reviewed memo of the Public Works Director: TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: October 21, 1987 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator FROM•1_� James W. Davis, P.�:; Public Works Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS SUBJECT: Hazardous Walking Conditions - Elementary Schools REFERENCES: Pursuant to the Sept. 2, 1987, Joint School District/County Liaison Canittee meeting, Dr. Doug King, Bob Veres, and Jim Davis met on Sept. 12, 1987 to discuss the alleged hazardous walking conditions as included in the August 11, 1987 letter from Robert Veres, School District to Jim Davis. The Public Works Department has prepared the following analysis of both short term and long term solutions for the alleged Hazardous Walking Conditions: I. Vero Beach Highlands Elementary Dixie Heights Subdivision - A. Short Term Solution Both staff's have declared this area as "Hazardous Walking Conditions" due to the non-availability of right-of-way along Old Dixie Highway. 75 OCT 2 7199 aooK �UG� 6� F F 849 T 2 1987 B. Long Term Solution - Recommend a Pedestrian Bridge over the Lateral "J" Canal and Sublateral B-9; a paved sidewalk along 17th Street SW from Dixie Heights Subdivision to 6th Avenue SW, thence south along 6th Avenue to School. Approximate cost Bridge - $20,000 Right-of-way 13,000 Sidewalk 23,760 $56,760 II. Vero Beach Highlands Elementary Florida Ridge - South of Highland Drive - A. Short Term - Declared Hazardous Walking Conditions due to unavailability of right-of-way along Old Dixie Highway B. Long Tenn - Acquire right-of-way along Old Dixie Highway south of Highland Drive. Construct a pedestrian path along the north side of Highland Drive to Sunset Drive. Construct a handrail on bridge along 21st Street SW over Lateral "J" Canal. Right-of-way 660' @ $10' = $ 6,600 Sidewalk 1320' x 5 @ $1.50 9,900 16,500 Bridge rails 3,000 $19,500 III. Thompson Elementary A. Short Terns Solution - Since the traffic count along Oslo Road (7500 VPD or 600 VPH) exceeds the minimus threshold (360 VPH), it is declared "Hazardous Walking Conditions" to cross Oslo Road for those students living in Oslo Park north of Oslo Road. Those students living south of Oslo Road should travel to 10th Court SW, thence south to 11th Street, thence west to Thompson School. B. Long Term Solution - The County is in the process of acquiring park property on the north side of Oslo Road east of 20th Avenue. It is anticipated that a sidewalk will be constructed in this area within the next three years. A traffic signal is scheduled to be installed at 20th Avenue and Oslo Road in FY 87/88. Estimated cost - Oslo Road Sidewalk $24,000 IV. Glendale School A. Short Term Solution - The bridge over Lateral "B" Canal just east of Rings Highway is too narrow for a safe pedestrian path. Areas west of the bridge would qualify for "Hazardous Walking conditions". East of the bridge, a four foot clear zone exists. There exists a fill berm on the south side of 8th Street from Rings Highway to the School. The County Road and Bridge Department will remove this berm. B. Long Term Solution - Intersection improvements at 8th Street and 43rd Avenue are scheduled for FY 87-88 construction. Right-of-way acquisition from 43rd Avenue to the School is necessary. East of School Estimated cost right-of-way $40,000 Sidewalk 19,800 $59,800 West of School New bridge' $150,000 Right-of-way 79,000 sf @ $.50/sf = 39,500 Sidewalk 20,000 $209,500 76 V. Dodgertown Elementary School - 45th Street west of 43rd Avenue A. Short Term Solution - The School Board is presently bussing children living west of 43rd Avenue along N. .Gifford Road. At this time, this area is declared "Hazardous walking conditions". B. Long Term Solution - The County is in the process of acquiring right-of-way along N. Gifford Road from Ord Avenue to 58th Avenue. A pedestrian path is to be constructed along this.area in 1988/89. Approximate cost Right-of-way $52,800 Pedestrian Path 40,000 (included in Gifford Improvements Project) $92,800 VI. Pelican Island Elementary CR 505 (Lateral "Al road between CR510 to Schumann Drive A. Short Term Solution - At this time, the County staff does not feel that a hazardous walking condition exists along CR505 north of CR510. A wider shoulder than four feet exists. B. Long Term Solution - The County Road and Bridge Department is scheduled to construct a sidewalk along the east side of CR505 during. calendar year 1988 in the unincorporated area Q mile). Estimated construction cost $ 20,000 Staff recommends that the above Short Term and Long Terns Solutions be approved. Total funding required is $482,360, however, the following projects will be constructed with other projects already programmed: III. B. Thompson School - Oslo Road Sidewalk $24,000 IV. B. Glendale School - East to 43rd Avenue Right -o€ -way $40,000 Sidewalk 19,800 $59,800 (included in Miscellaneous Intersections, Phase III) V. B. Dodgertown Elementary Right-of-way $52,800 Pedestrian Path 40,000 $92,800 (included in N. Gifford Road Improvements) Funding of the remaining projects ($304,760) should be a joint effort between the School District and the County, with phasing to be considered over a 5 -year period. Commissioner Eggert wished to know what the School Board and the County Commission's policy is on doing sidewalks. Chairman Scurlock commented that he had not been all that aware that sidewalk improvements to the tune of about $200,000 were included in some of our road projects, i.e., Thompson, Glendale and Dodgertown Elementary, and he wished to know why we OCT 2 ? 1987 77��oK 69 rnf 850 1987L; MK 69 PA,F 851: would get involved in such an active program of $482,000 and go ahead and do $200,000 that directly relates to schools and then wait for them to come up with some sort of commitment. He felt a better approach would be to go to the school system first and say we have three schools here that directly benefit from sidewalks and ask what kind of participation, if any, can we get because once we have already done the $200,000 worth of work, he was sure he knew what the answer would be. He noted that he has discussed this with them on a number of occasions, pointing out that even though in subdivisions we require people to put in sidewalks to get the children to schools, the school system has been unwilling to build sidewalks in front of their own schools. Commissioner Wheeler believed this lack of cooperation between the school system and the county has been going on fora time time, and speaking as a taxpayer, he felt this problem, which relates to the safety of the children, could have been addressed prior to the schools even being built if the schools would work with the county through a site plan. Chairman Scurlock advised that the school system has been doing this to a greater extent, but their attitude still is basically that these other items that are directly related to site plan are not a cost to be borne by them. We contended that if you put a school in a proper location, things such as proper roads, sidewalks, bike paths, already would be available, but they build in locations that are way out and cheaper, but they don't have adequate drainage, roads, etc. The Chairman believed we have sent the message that it might turn out to be a more economical site if services, etc., were already available , and he felt the message finally has been received. Commissioner Eggert noted that the recommendation says the funding should be a joint effort, and she asked if there is an agreement on this because she felt we would be premature to pass on this if they keep saying no. She personally would like to 78 M. M table this matter until we can have a joint meeting with the School Board. Chairman Scurlock agreed, but believed we have three improvements that are already approved. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Wheeler, to hold up on the $482,360 and attempt to negotiate an agreement with the School Board and then come back to the Board. Attorney Vitunac pointed out that in the meantime children are still walking in hazardous conditions. Board members realized that but noted that some of these schools are quite old and have been functioning under these same conditions for many years, and they felt we should have an understanding with the School Board before going further. Attorney,Vitunac advised he was going to ask Director Davis if we could declare the walking conditions hazardous but put off the time table on fixing the problem until we made an agreement; then the School Board could bus the children right away. Director Davis confirmed that a short term solution would be to declare some of these areas hazardous and the School Board can then apply for state funds for busing, but there must be some program to correct the hazard within 5 years. Discussion continued about tabling, and Commissioners Eggert and Wheeler reworded their Motion as follows: ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved declaring the said walking conditions hazardous and agreed to table further discussion re funding until there is some kind of policy agreement with the school system re these improvements. OCT - i 1 79 auOK 69 Fac.852 OCT 27 1981 noF 69 PDG, 853 US#1/6TH AVE. PROJECT (PEKING GARDENS, PIZZA HUT, SCOTTY'S) PUMP STATION 6 GRAVITY SEWER - W.O. #19 WMASTELLER & MOLER Utilities Director Pinto reviewed the following memos: DATE: OCTOBER 13, 1987 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISrES S FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO DIRECTOR OF UTILITY S SUBJECT: PEKING GARDENS, PIZZA HUT & SCOTTY'S VICINITY PUMP STATION AND GRAVITY SEWER PROJECT WORK AUTHORIZATION #19 - WASTEWATER BACKGROUND The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services has declared the US 1 / 6th avenue corridor to be an environmentally sensitive area that is subject to public health hazards and pollution problems due to prone and on-site wastewater disposal systems. Further the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services urges the County Utility Department to make wastewater service to this corridor top priority. RECOMMENDATION Utility staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the Chairman to sign the attached work authorization for the consulting engineering design services of Masteller and Moler, Inc., relative to the construction of a new sewage pump station and force main, and gravity sewer with manholes to service Pizza Hut, Peking Gardens, and Scotty's. This new construction will run along the west side of 6th Avenue from the pump station site north on 6th Avenue and East on 8th Street, for connection to the existing 6" force main on Indian River Boulevard. Construction cost estimate for the project, including 10% contingency and Florida Sales Tax is $83,600.00 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: OCTOBER 26, 1987 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISS RS TERRANCE G. PINTO ' DIRECTOR OF UTILITY JERV'ICES FUNDING OF THE US 1 / 6TH AVENUE PROJECT (MEMORANDUM DATED 10-13-87) The.funding for the above mentioned sewer project will be handled - through an, assessment. After the project is completed and all expenses finalized, the assessment will be calculated on each connecting parcel. Director Pinto informed the Board that we have had a lot of problems east of U.S.#1 with failing septic systems, and we have already picked up'from Rax Restaurant to Janie Dean Chevrolet, including the Clock Restaurant, where there were major problems, 80 � 1 i but further south there are other existing restaurants experiencing great problems with their septic systems, and the Health Department is tired of having this problem. Staff, therefore, recommends moving ahead with the project to get wastewater facilities to this area, the funding to be handled through the assessment process. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the staff recommendation and authorized the Chairman to sign Work Authorization #19 with Masteller 6 Moler. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY Date: Sept. 21, 1987. Work Authorization No. 19 for Consulting Services Project No. 19 County) (Masteller_& Moler Associates, Inc.) (WASTEWATER) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Title: Pump Station and Gravity Sewer to Serve Pizza Hut, Peking. Gardens and Scotty's on West side of 6th Avenue and 3" Diameter PVC Force Main on 6th Avenue North to 8th Street and East on 8th Street to Connect to Existing 6" Force Main on West Side of Indian River Boulevard. Consulting engineering design services relative to construction a new sewage pump station and approximately 2250 LF of 3" diameter force main and 850 LF of gravity sewer with manholes, to service Pizza Hut, Peking Gardens and Scotty's along the west side of 6th Avenue from the pump station site north on 6th Avenue and East on 8th Street, for connection to the existing 6" force main on Indian River Boulevard. Construction cost estimate for the project, including 10% contingency and Florida Sales Tax is 883,600.00 II.`SCOPE OF SERVICES AND LUMP SUM FEE FOR SERVICES Reference is made to the "Agreement for Professional Services" dated July 2, 1986, and specific Article numbers and paragraph numbers which are listed hereunder to describe the scope of services included on this project. A. Project Design Services per Article 4, Paragraph 4a. and 4b. B. General Services During Construction per Article 5, Paragraph 5a., and 5c. The Resident Inspector's duties shall be to monitor construction on a continuous basis and be at the jobsite when project construction is taking place. C. Supplementary and Special Services per Article 6, Paragraph 6c.,6d.,6e.,6f., and 6g. In addition, our services shall include field surveys necessary for design and preparation of construction plans and assistance to the County in obtaining verious permits and approvals for construction (permit fees to be paid by the County). 81 OCT . f7 BOOK 69 854 OCT 2'7 , 1987 BOOK. 69 ["WF 8,55 D. Payment for Services per Article 8, the lump sum fee for Article 4, Paragraph 4a. and 4b. above (Engineering Design Fee) is 89,750.00 and Article 5, Paragraph 5a. and 5c. above (Resident Project Inspection Fee) is 84,070.00. Payment shall be per Article 8, Paragraph 8b. and 8d. Payment for Article 6; Paragraph 6c.,6d.,6e.,6f., and 6g. shall be per Article 8, Paragraph 8a. and 8d. APPROVED BY: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By / C Don C. Scurlock, Jr Chairman Date /0 - 027- 9P7 APPROVED FOR UTILITY TERS: Terrance G. Pinto Director of Utility Services EPA GRANT FOR ROCKRIDGE SEWERS SUBMITTED BY: MASTELLER & MOLER ASSOCIATES, INC. By 4y�-�' g7,, Earl H. Masteller, P.E. President Date The Board reviewed memo of the Utilities Director: TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Terrance G. Pino U ilities Director THRU: Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator DATE: October 21, 1987 RE: EPA GRANT FOR ROCKRIDGE SEWERS B.C.C. MEETING - OCTOBER 27, 1987 CONSENT AGENDA _�---� Attached is a resolution which is necessary for the acceptance of the grant from the EPA in connection with the Rockridge collection system. We request the Board authorize the Chairman to execute this resolution on behalf of the County. 82 i ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Resolution 87-130 accepting the EPA Grant for the Rockridge Sewer System. RESOLUTION NO. 87- 130 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,241,303 FROM THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN ROCKRIDGE COLLECTION SYSTEM AND AUTHORIZING TERRANCE G. PINTO, UTILITIES DIRECTOR, TO EXECUTE THE REQUIRED ACCEPTANCE FORMS WHEREAS, Indian River County (County) has made application to the United State Environmental Protection Agency for a construction grant to assist in providing public sewers to the Rockridge area; and WHEREAS, the County has been offered a federal grant in the amount of $1,241,303, which represents 55% of the E.P.A. eligible costs; and WHEREAS, in order to accept this grant, it is necessary for the County to. execute the agreement with the E.P.A. which is attached to this resolution; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT: 1. The County accepts the offer of a federal grant in the amount of $1,241,303, and 2. The Utilities Director, Terrance G. Pinto, is authorized to execute the grant acceptance form on behalf of Indian River County. The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner Eggert who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Wheeler and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: ,OCT 2,?,, .19t37 83 ROOK 69 pm,JF856 OCTFP"_ I 21 1997 Boor 69 FIMIT�857 Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye Vice -Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Absent Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 27th day of October , 1987, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By Don k,( . Chairman FEES FOR MEDICAL EXAMINER The Board reviewed memo of the County Attorney: TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney DATE: October 20, 1987 RE: FEES FOR MEDICAL EXAMINER REGULAR AGENDA - B.C.C. MEETING 10/27/87 In accordance with the attached request from the newly appointed Medical Examiner, this office has prepared a form of resolution authorizing the District Medical Examiner to charge a fee of $20 for a Cremation Certificate and $30 for copies of autopsy reports, death investigation reports, and other printed documentary reports relating to investigations conducted by that office. We have received documentation from St. Lucie. County indicating a similar resolution was passed by their Board of County Commissioners on October 20. I have approved this document for form and legal sufficiency and Mr. Balczun has approved it for administrative matters. Therefore, we now request that you authorize the Chairman to sign it on behalf of the Board. Commissioner Eggert had questions regarding the proposed fees.and wanted to know if this included death certificates as she felt this could represent a considerable expense. She also wanted to have "other printed documentary reports" defined. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unani- mously (4-0) agreed to table action on the above. 84 PLANNING & ZONING COM. RESIGNATION & REPLACEMENT APPOINTMENT Chairman Scurlock announced that Pat Lyons, who was filling in temporarily, has tendered his resignation from the Planning & Zoning Commission, and he brought in an applicant to replace him on the Board, Leland Gibbs, Jr., with whose qualifications the Chairman was very impressed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) accepted the resignation of Patrick Lyons from the Planning & Zoning Commission with deep regret and appointed Leland N. Gibbs, Jr., to the Board as his replacement. LIBRARY TOURS Commissioner Eggert reviewed the foltowing.memo: TO: Board of County CommissioneDATE: October 26, 1987 FILE: SUBJECT: LIBRARY TOURS FROM: Carolyn K. Eggert REFERENCES: Commissioner. a The Public Library Advisory Board would like to take two tours of libraries - one to the west of here and one to the south. I would like permission to take these two trips and .to interfund borrow (with interest) to cover the cost of transportation until the Library Bonds are funded. This is an emergency item because we are going to try to take one trip before next meeting. 85 OCT 2 l . �7 mu 69 ullr858 L X987 a00 �9 Fay 859 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized the library tours and to interfund borrow to cover the cost until the Library Bonds are funded. In the ensuing discussion, Attorney Vitunac pointed out that the tour would come under the Sunshine Law, and the Board members could look at the sites, but not talk about them during the tour. It was further noted that the Press should be invited, and if a larger bus is required, they would have to pay. FLORIDA COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS - GRANT APPLICATION The Board reviewed letter from the Executive Director of the i Florida Community Health Centers, Inc., as follows: FLORIDA COMMUNITY Fey HEALTH CENTERS, INC. Cil. 3500 FORTY-FIFTH STREET, SUITE 12 William H. Willis C' WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33407-1810 Vim President TELEPHONE: (305) 684-0600 James Shearer Seaetery Lois Page October 1, 1987 7reas°rB1 Clewiston Cour X34 EF ec Brown Health Center ter 302 second Street Director ��3p3117 OCTl9CP Clewiston, 83-78orida 33440 .(813) 983-7813 Indian River County Board tet► of Commissioners ,�lq�o �►� �, o Indiantown Community 1840 25th . Street Health Center � 16008 S.W. 153rd street Vero Beach, Florida 32961 F Indiantown. Florida 34956 (305)597-3597 Dear Commissioner: Okeechobee Community In the face of economic crisis andreduced public funding, Health Center Florida Community Health Centers, Inc. still endeavors to meet the 308 N.W. Fifth Ave. Okeechobee, Florida 34972 basic health needs _ of the migrant and seasonal farmworkers, (813)763-7481 indigent, and elderly that constitute most of the population in the medically underserved` communities we serve. As we prepare our Ft. Pierce Community annual Public Health Service (PHS) Grant Application, we seek to Health Center 609 N. Seventh Street demonstrate the support of Florida leaders who share our Ft. Pierce, Florida 34950 commitment. (305) 461-1402 This is why I am writing at this time to ask for your expression of support, which can be done by writing a letter indicating your recognition of the health needs of the people in our service areas, together with your support of our 1988 Grant Application. PHS has requested us to include such letters of support with our Grant Application. 86 r Our primary health care centers, located in Clewiston, Indiantown, Okeechobee, and Ft. Pierce served approximately 44,000 low income/indigent residents and migrants in Glades, endry, Indian River, Martin, Okeechobee, and St. Lucie Counties - during 1986-87. Despite growing pressures of inflation and increasing numbers of needy persons, our PHS Federall grant request is sure to be reduced again in 1988, as it was this year. Patients will be required to shoulder a greater portion of the cost burden through out-of-pocket fees. 1 have enclosed for your information a synopsis describing our organization. Your letter of support should be addressed to: Regional Health Administrator DHHS/PHS/Region IV 101 Marietta Tower, N.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30323 However, since we need to Application, please send it directli, on the top of page 1 y Octo er 30, include It with our Grant to me at the address listed Thanks for your cooperation. and continued support of our efforts. Sincerely, _74:>/7 _ Edwin W. own' ExecutivEr Director ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized the Chairman to write a letter of support as requested by Florida Community Health Centers, Inc. PHASE III - JAIL CONTRACT Commissioner Wheeler reviewed the following memo: OOT 2 e? 11987 87 RDOK 69 OCT 2 71987RooK 66 Fe. r 861 TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Gary C. Wheeler, Commissioner DATE: October 21, 1987 RE: PHASE III - JAIL CONTRACT B.C.C. MEETING - OCTOBER 27, 1987 The Phase III, Jail Committee, comprised of me, the County Administrator, and the County Attorney, has been meeting with Pat Carroll of Frizzell Architects, Inc. to structure a change order to Frizzell's contract with the County so that a new Phase III Maximum Security Jail will be built as a duplication of Phase 1, for - which Frizzell was the architect. The attached contract contains architectural fees of 3.480 of the construction price of repeated phases, which is a significant reduction from the 6.78% that the County paid on Phase 1. For new design work an hourly rate plus a multiplier is to be used. There is a "not -to -exceed" figure of 6 included. In addition, the County has the option of paying the reimbursable expenses such as per diem and travel to insure that Tom Pinkerton is personally on the job as much as the County desires. If the County approves the architectural contract, it will be necessary for funding mechanism to be found to pay for the approximately $4,000,000 construction cost. There may be sufficient bonding capacity available in our 1/2� sales tax issue validated for $25,000,000, of which less than half has been issued. I recommend approval of this contract so that Phase 111 will be ready as soon as possible to take care of the overcrowding problem in Phases 1 and If. Commissioner Wheeler emphasized the reduction in fees from 6.78% to 3.48% which is due to re -using the design of Phase I. He noted that in committee meetings, Bill Baird, the ex Jail Administrator, presented a Fist of corrections that the committee would like to see done. Commissioner Wheeler did feel it is a good contract and we certainly need to continue on as rapidly as possible. Chairman Scurlock wished to know who is going to be our representative since "Sonny" Dean no longer is. Commissioner Wheeler advised that he has discussed this with Mr. Balczun, but they have not discussed names at this point. 88 Administrator Balczun stated that they now have it down to two people, and he will discuss it with the committee. This person will be the chokepoint for everything going back and forth between architect, county, etc. He confirmed that it won't be Mr. Dean, but for the record he wished to note that Mr. Dean, who started with the project and was transferred interdepartmentally to Utilities, was kind enough to see this project through even though it was no longer his responsibility. He wished to thank Mr. Dean and express his appreciation. Commissioner Eggert understood there was an original Phase I design that was cut, and asked if we are going back to the original. Commissioner Wheeler stated that we are going in to what we have currently built. In the original Phase I, some of the areas that were cut, for instance, were the kitchen, and in this contract we will have to readdress the kitchen and how many prisoners it can feed. He further advised that it has been suggested that we look into the possibility of sending out proposals for contracting for food services to see if it could be done cheaper than the county has been able to do it. The Sheriff has endorsed this idea verbally. Also some of the booking area has been cut down, and we are going to try to expand where they are. The only thing we will be building in Phase Il is the maximum security pod. All the support facilities will be back over in the original facility. Commissioner Eggert believed the statement has been made a number of times that cutting the design required more personnel because you couldn't see in all places. She knew that a change in design can cause a change in personnel, and since that statement was made, she wanted to be sure that if that were indeed a problem, we are not repeating it. Commissioner Wheeler assured her that these concerns will be addressed in the next phase. OCT 2? 1987 89 pp E BOOK 69 w 63` ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the contract with Frizzell Architects, Inc., for Phase III of the County Jail. SAID CONTRACT IS ON -FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD. There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 12:25 o'clock P.M. ATTEST: Clerk 90 `fir _ - --OAT r;J1.