HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/5/1988Tuesday, July 5, 1988
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, met in Regular Session at the County Commission
Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday,
July 5, 1988, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Don C. Scurlock,
Jr., Chairman; Gary C. Wheeler, Vice Chairman; Richard N. Bird;
and Margaret C. Bowman. Absent was Carolyn K. Eggert, who was
out of town. Also present were*Charles P. Balczun, County
Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of
County Commissioners; and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order.
Russell Burns, Chaplain of the Cox -Gifford Funeral Home,
gave the invocation, and Commissioner Bowman led the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Administrator Balczun asked that 'a request from the local
Veterans of Foreign Wars Post for assistance in the Federal
Commodity Distribution Program be added to the agenda under his
matters as 9A (5).
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, Commissioner Eggert being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0) approved the above addition
to the agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Bird requested that Item 3 be removed from the
Consent Agenda for discussion.
141
,JUL 51998
1. Release of Easement - Indian River Heights Subdv. (Mark.Odom)
The Board reviewed memo from Code Enforcement Officer Heath:
TO: Char l.es P. Balczun DATE: June 16, 1988 FILE:
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURR)NCE:
XL RELEASE OF EASEMENT
Robert M. Kea i g, P SUBJECT: PETITION BY MARK ODOM
Community DevelKjpme Director SUBJECT PROPERTY: LOT 18
BLOCK L, INDIAN RIVER
THROUGH: Roland M. DeBloisHEIGHTS SUBDIVISION UNIT NO. 8
S a f Planner
FROM #aef #.eath REFERENCES:
Cnt Officer a
DISK CHEATH
It is requested that the data herein be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of July 5, 1988.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The County has been petitioned by Mark Odom, owner of the -
subject property, for the release of a two (2) foot portion of
the northerly twelve (12) foot utility and drainage easement of
Lot 18, Block L, Indian River Heights Subdivision, Unit No. 8,
being the southerly two (2) feet of the northerly twelve (12)
feet of Lot 18, Block L, Indian River Heights Subdivision Unit
No. 8, Section 13, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, Indian
River County, Florida; according to the Plat thereof as
recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 31, of the Official Records of
Indian River County, Florida. It is- the Petitioner's intention
to construct a single-family residence on the property; the
release of that portion of the easement is to prevent the
extension of the roof eaves into the easement.
The current zoning classification of the property is RS -6,
Single -Family Residential District. The Land Use Designation
is LD -2, Low Density Residential, allowing up to six (6) units
per acre.
ALTERNATIVE AND ANALYSIS:
The request has been reviewed by Southern Bell Telephone,
Florida Power and Light, Florida Cablevision Corporation, and
the Indian River County Utility and Right -of -Way Departments.
Based upon their reviews, there are no objections to the
release of the southerly two (2) feet of the easement. Staff
analysis indicates that the drainage would still be handled
on-site.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends to the Board, through the adoption of a
resolution, the release of the southerly two (2) feet of the
northerly twelve (12) foot utility and drainage easement of Lot
18, Block L, Indian River Heights Subdivision Unit No. 8,
Section 13, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, Plat Book 7, Page
31, of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida.
JUL 5 1988 2 BOOK 7 r,a,E 142
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Resolution 88-42 approving Release of Easement of a
2' portion of the northerly 12' utility and drainage
easement of Lot 18, Block L, Indian River Heights
Subdv., Unit No. 8, as requested by Mark Odom.
RESOLUTION NO. 88-42
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, ABANDONING A
PORTION OF A CERTAIN EASEMENT IN
INDIAN RIVER HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION
UNIT NO. 8, LOT 18, BLOCK L
WHEREAS, Indian River County has an easements as
described below, and
WHEREAS, retention of the full easement width
serves no public purpose,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of
County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida that:
This release of easement is executed by Indian
River County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State
of Florida, whose mailing address is 1840 25th Street, Vero
Beach, Florida 32960, Grantor, to Mark Odom, -his successors
in interest, heirs and assigns, whose mailing address is
4395 2nd Circle, Vero Beach, Florida, 32962. Grantee,-- as
follows:
Indian River County does hereby abandon all right,
title, and interest that it may have in the following
described easement portion:
SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED. HERETO AND
INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE.
THIS RESOLUTION was moved for adoption by Commis—
sioner Wheeler seconded by Commissioner
Bowman , and adopted on the 5th day of
July 1988, by the following vote:
Commissioner Scurlock Aye
Commissioner Bowman. Aye
3 BOOK ."e% F1t �4
AL 5 1988
Commissioner Bird Aye
Commissioner Eggert Absent
Commissioner Wheeler Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution
duly passed and adopted this 5th day of July ,
1988.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA
By r 4
Don C. Scurl ck, Jr.
Chairman
EXHIBIT "A"
The southerly two (2) feet of the northerly twelve foot
utility and drainage easement of Lot 18, Block L, Indian
River Heights Subdivision, Unit No. 8, according to the Plat
thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 31, of the
Official Records of Indian River County, Florida.
2. Change Order #2 - Final Payment, Utilities Alteration Project
The Board reviewed memo from the Building & Grounds Super-
intendent:
TO: Charles P. Balczun DATE: June 28, 1988 FILE:
County Administrator
THRU.* Joe Baird
Budget Director
SUBJECT: CONSENT AGENDA - CHANGE ORDER 02
FINAL PAYMENT; UTILITIES
ALTERATION PROJECT
CROEM:L 1 Williams, Supt.
REFERENCES:
ilding and Grounds Division
DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS
The above -referenced agreement.between Indian River County and
Jim Wright Construction was executed on February 23, 1988. The
total price of the original contract was $64;620.00. Change
order -#I approved by the Board on May 17, 1988 to upgrade the
carpet adds $2,0.24.00. During the projects final phases it was
brought to my attention that a problem existed in the return air
ducting and secondary drain pans for an existing fan coil unit
serving the Administration area of the Utilities Department.. In
order to keep the project moving I directed the air conditioning
sub -contractor to install the necessary duct work and secondary
drain pan (required by code). The plans did not address this
unit, except as an exisitng system.
0
BOOK 73 PAGE 144
The additional work was necessary in order for the unit to
operate correctly, efficiently and according to code; the total
change to contract for this work is $1597.35
Original Contract
Change Order #1
Change Order #2
Adjusted Total Contract
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
$64,620.00
2,045.00
1,597.35
$68,262.35
Progress payments to date total $53,317.00, leaving final payment
request of $14,924.35. Payment is due within 30 days of request
by the terms of the contract.
RECOMMENDATIONS • AND FUNDING
Staff recommends approval of change order # 2 for.air conditioning
extras and final payment request as submitted by Jim Wright
Construction 'June 16, 1988. Funding account #471-000-162-003.00.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved Change_
Order #2 and final payment request for Jim Wright
Construction as recommended by staff.
CHANGE ORDER #2 WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE RECORD WHEN RECEIVED.
3. Bid #447 - Auto Parts after Market Brands - Final Award -
Fleet Management
The Board reviewed memo of Purchasing Manager Ambler:
5
AL 5 1989
L_ - -
BOOK 7F,g-ULF 145
TO: Charles P. Balc zun DATE: June 27A.1988 FILE:
County Administrator
SUBJECT: AWARD OF IRC BID #447 -
AUTO PARTS AFTER MARKET
BRANDS FOR FLEET MGMT
PARTIAL AWARD, FINAL
FRO REFERENCES: '
Gus Ambler, C.P.M.'
Purchasing Department
1. Description and Conditions:
Bids were received Wednesday, June 1, 1988, at 2:00 P.M. for
IRC BID #447.
18 Invitations to Bid were -sent out. 10 Bids were received
including 1 No Bid.
This bid was advertised in the newspaper.
2. Alternatives and Analysis:
This bid was issued to establish term contracts for Auto Repair
Parts. It contains ten different categories or lots of parts.
In each lot several manufacturers have been approved as being
of sufficient quality to meet our requirements. Award is being
recommended to the contractors offering the best discount
schedules for the manufactures listed in each lot. In all cases
award is being made to the low bid.
Lot 5 -Bearings, Seals, Bushings, Yokes,
U -Joints. "
The manufacturer.is BCA. The low bid meeting
specifications was submitted by Universal Brake
and Driveline at 12% discount from Distributors
price sheets.
Lot 6 -Alternators, Starters, Generators,
& Regulators
The manufacture is Arrow. The low bid meeting
specifications was submitted by Universal Brake
& Driveline at 50% discount from list.
Two alternate brands were offered by Hale Automotive.
After review by Fleet Management, Staff considers
them to meet our quality requirements and should
therefore be accepted. Manufacture is ACE Delco
starters at 45% discount and Lucus at 40% discount.
Lot 7, Welding Supplies, Torches, Tips, Rods, ,
Gauges, etc.
Manufacture is Lincoln. The low bid meeting specifi-
cations is from M & M Auto parts at 30% discount.
Lot 9 -Suspension Parts
Manufacture is'TRW. The low bid meeting specifications
was submitted by Universal Brake & Driveline at 10%
discount from net resale price.
JUL 1 6 BOOK 73Fnx 146
Lot 10 -Body Shop Supplies
Manufacturer is 3-M. The low bid meeting specifications
was submitted by M & M Auto parts at 30% from list.
3. Recommendation and Funding:
Staff recommends award to the Vendors listed above.
Budgetary funding will be confirmed for expenditure on
an as needed basis before a purchase order is issued
from Fleet Management Accounts and Landfill Accounts.
Commissioner Bird advised that he just wished to comment on
the tremendous waste of paper and also staff time involved in the
backup material submitted for this item. In this case, there
were five items that were bid and the backup was 55 pages of
which 22 pages were completely blank.
Chairman Scurlock agreed that some of this material could
just be put on file in the Commission Office, and then if any
Commissioner has a question, they can refer to it.
Administrator Balczun realized Purchasing likes to give the
Board all the Bid Tabulation forms for their information, but
agreed that in the future, they will just file one complete copy
of the bid documents in the Commission Office and include a
summary in the staff recommendation.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved the
final award of Bid #447 to the vendors listed in
memo dated June 27, 1988, as recommended by staff.
4. Bid #450 - IBM Computer
The Board reviewed memo of Purchasing Manager Ambler:
7 BOOKFADE 14
J U L 5 1988
TO: Charles P. Balczun DATE: June 17, 1988 FILE:
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Amm OF IRC BID #450
IBM -COMPUTER
FROMREFERENCES:
Gu.4 Ambler, .P.M.
Purchasing Manager
1. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Bids were received Wednesday, June 8, 1988 at 2:00 p.m.
for IRC Bid #450 -IBM Computer.
6 Invitations to Bid were mailed. 3 Bids were received.
This bid was advertised in the newspaper.
2. ALTER aTIVES AND ANALYSIS:
The low bid meeting specifications was submitted by IBM
Corporation at $6462.00. They have taken 2 minor exceptions
to our specifications, that should be waived. They have
offered us terms of net. Our specifications required Net
30 days. Secondly, their prices are subject to change
without notice, our specifications required firm prices for
60 days.
3. FUNDING;
$6549.00 is available for the purchase of this item in
Public Works Accounts #111-243-519-066.41.cc
4. RECOM ENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that we proceed to purchase this item
frcam IBM.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously awarded Bid #450
for an IBM Computer to IBM Corporation in the amount
of $6462 as recommended by staff per the following
Bid Tabulation:
JUL 51988 8
BOOK
73 148
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATION
BID NO. DATE OF OPENING
IRC BID #450 June 8,-1988
BID TITHE BID #450 -IBM COMPUTER
ITEM DESCRIPTION
NO.
UNIT PRICE
U ' F
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
IBM COMPUTER AND ACCESSOMES
7013
a
�1!96
Z-
.1.
as Listed below:
1-411
1
11
Delivered, Setup & Ready to Go.
1 LOT
i
Warranty Da y s
11ja
t
A.,�
•QQ
i
I
3. Complete on Site Maintenance..
CIO
Joel -
Agreement After Warranty.
PER YEAR
4. Delivery ARO
�f 5. Terms (net 30 Minj �Q `=� I AW1 I &Lt� I I I
DISCUSSION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS ON 700 BLOCK OF 14TH STREET
Mr. Ed Faber, President of the Faber Press, Inc., located at
740 -14th St., came before the Board to discuss the conditions on
14th Street which are causing him a business hardship. Mr. Faber
stated that the reason he wished to get on the agenda is that he
has been told so many different things by the people in charge.
He noted that the only thing he has succeeded in doing is that he
did get the road people to do some maintenance on the road, and
it took 11 dump trucks full of dirt to fill up the holes. When
he bought the buildings, he was shown plans of what was going to
be done and advised that they had put up a bond and given up land
towards this, but nothing is being done. He then spoke of his
considerable drainage problems, noting that they are washing cars
9 my 49
� 'JUL5 198^
across the street from his other building in the front, and the
Clock Restaurant has dug up a whole lot of dirt and put it on the
border'of his line and then paved it. This creates a lake every
time it rains, and it all drains onto his property. This has
stopped him from renting that property three times already. Mr.
Faber stressed that there is a lot of traffic coming through 14th
Street even though the county may not be aware of it.
Administrator Balczun believed that the Board will recall
that we have discussed this matter in some detail, particularly
with respect to the cost of building 14th Street to the standard
county R/W width, as set out in the following memo:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TO: Charles A. Balczun
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
FROM: Donald G. Finney, SRA
Right -of -Way Acquisition Agent
SUBJECT: 14th Street Right -of -Way Acquisition (U.S. 1 to 6th
Avenue) LaCava, Southgate MHP, Clock Leasehold
DATE: June 29, 1988
------------------ ------
In response to Mr. Ed Farber's June 28, 1988 letter to
Chairman Scurlock, the Public Works' staff is pursuing r/w
acquisition along 14th Street r/w to U.S. 1. There are 3 parcels
of right-of-way to be -acquired as shown on the attached map.
1) Parcel #1 is owned by Southgate Mobile Home_ Park and staff
is presently negotiating purchase of Southgate r/w 19'
outside fence as appraised $8,977.00;
2) Parcel #2 & #3 is owned by Mrs. Grace LaCava. Staff is
pursuing purchase of two LaCava r/w parcels at less than
appraised value $30,000 (appraised $113,359.00);
3) Also, a triangular corner road easement needs to be acquired
at the corner of the Clock Restaurant parcel.
The owner of Faber Press is primarily concerned with access
to U.S. 1. Secondly, money has been escrowed by Faber Press for
paving of the road.
i
The 35' private road owned by Mrs. LaCava lying between. the
Clock Restaurant and the Home & Patio is paved. The private
property from the rear line of the Clock to the LaCava residence
property is in use and unpaved. There is a county utility
easement on the LaCava property and thence the waterline is on
the county 25' right-of-way.
Mrs. LaCava is willing to sell the necessary property to the
County. If Southgate cooperates and is willing to sell 191, we
can acquire a 44' r/w which is below minimum standards. If
condemnation is required to acquire the Southgate property, our
total cost would exceed $500,000 which the Board rejected as an
alternative at this time. The Board's direction is very clear to
work toward a settlement. (See attached Don' Finney memo June 8,
1988; Faber Press -letter June 28, 1988; sketch of road &
properties as of May 10, 1988; Property Appraiser's map)
10 BOOK f,�GE: 15 -0
'JUL 51998
Neit.7H
t
N
3
CLOCMC JU3-r vj.&,1T
_ 0
PAZ'.*
jos
N
FAUK
PtLtrs
,N7 .
SOuTN4hTi M µ
�^ JAR&
s.
a
cow~- ort AwaG
fie:.
N ° 1 4n/ S Iz..cr
14-T "ra kA,e
'ts'Aoo,rwv.l RiwR�+u�f�o
SoKA of StC"G,4l...E=
SwTk OF FeAce op,
0401LTH OF FE.+ce /4T
LACAvA 4 Se.W14CsATe
Administrator Balczun pointed out that Mr. Faber's western-
most property boundary is at the point where the county's
existing R/W ends, and the county has been talking to private
property owners from that point to-U.S.1 with the -view of
acquiring R/W at substantial cost in order to improve the roadway
to at least 44' in width. Another concern is that if we were
able to build 14th St. to existing county standards, we would in
all probability have to install signalization at 14th St -and
U.S.1, which no one felt was desirable.
Chairman Scurlock reviewed the history of trying to work
with Mrs. LaCava to purchase the R/W, noting that at one time
Home &.Patio was considering participating financially, but Mrs.
LaCava and Southgate are unwilling to sell at a reasonable price.
I.f we condemn this property, it appears it would cost 1/2 a
million, and he could not in good conscience vote for the
community to spend half a million to solve this problem; we must
find something economically feasible. As to the drainage
JUL 51989
BOOK `73 r�cE 151
problem, the Chairman believed we are now in litigation with The
Clock Restaurant.
Director Keating confirmed that the Clock Restaurant has
been under fine from Code Enforcement for quite a while, and the
county is in the process of terminating that fine which would
involve foreclosure proceedings.
Commissioner Bird assured Mr. Faber that we are trying to
remedy this, but it is a very complicated situation since we do
not own the R/W.
Administrator Balczun noted that the public R/W extends
westerly and what people assume is a public road is, in fact,
private property. Chairman Scurlock believed the Board decided
we do not want to have it a public road.
Attorney Steven Lulich informed the Board that he has been
retained as counsel for Mr. Faber. He felt whether the county
owns the property or not is not one of the main considerations.
This R/W is being used by the public and it is being maintained
by the county; so, the county has some liability whether they
actually own it or not. The condition of the road is severe, and
Mr. Lulich believed it is possible an accident could cost the
county more than I a million in damage suits. He further noted
that the county is holding $1,500 that was placed in escrow to
have that road paved and the county received a 25' easement
from the previous owner of the Faber property. When Mr. Faber
purchased this property, he knew about all this, and he bought
the property relying on the county to perform.
Attorney Lulich realized this is a complex issue with a lot
of parties involved, and if the county doesn't.feel it is
economical to fix it properly, that is understandable, but it is
leaving Mr. Faber hanging. They, therefore, feel the county
should either do something about this or give back the $1,500
cash and the'25' easement that was taken so at least Mr. Faber
can straighten up the property himself. However, once that is
12
BOOK 73 F.,,. 152
1,
in
taken care of by Mr. Faber and that road is closed to U.S.1, you
will have commercial traffic going through a residential area.
Chairman Scurlock did not agree. He pointed out that you
could put a barrier across which would prevent access from U.S.1
to the residential area, but you still would have access to the
commercial area from U.S.1.; it just would not be through
traffic.
Discussion ensued at length in regard to various alterna-
tives, price, etc., and Mr. Faber continued to emphasize the
street problems which affect not only his business, but the
Senior Citizen's center as well as a few of the residences on
14th St. He pointed out that actually that street is split with
commercial and then houses, which is an unfortunate situation.
He advised that his attorney has suggested that they can live
with just paving their portion themselves and blocking it at his
730 house. That is only a parking lot now for the Clock
Restaurant and the people on the other side. When this is done,
the access to Faber Press would be from 6th Avenue so that the
only traffic coming down their side would be people coming to
their building, and there are not that many and only a few
trucks.
Commissioner Bird agreed that blocking it off as suggested
by Mr. Faber probably is the best alternative since we don't want
14th Street to become a through street and encourage people to
get onto U.S.1 from that location.
Mr. Faber continued to emphasize the problems caused by the
people who drive through and run over their water meters, their
lawn, etc., and stated that he, therefore, would like to fence
around his buildings, pave his own part, block off the road right
there', get back his $1,500 and forget about the street. If in
the future the county wants to build the street, that is fine -
they will.take down the barricade, give the land back, etc.
Chairman Scurlock believed the prior owner gave the $1,500,
and Mr. Faber advised that the prior owner was Bobby Hiers, and
13
BOOK 7 (o �E 53
the builder was Chris Ekonomou. Mr. Ekonomou originally paid the
$1,500 and gave up the land in order to get the building in
there.
Commissioner Bowman asked if they wouldn't have a problem if
they are accessed only by a private road; she believed 14th
street east of them is private.
It was explained that the paved part of 14th Street in from
6th Avenue is the City's road.
Administrator Balczun confirmed that from U.S.1 easterly to
the Faber property line is privately held. If the Board is of a
mind to accept Mr. Faber's proposal, he suggested they direct
staff to negotiate an agreement as to standard of construction,
maintenance, etc.
Chairman Scurlock commented that he would be negotiating
with adjoining property owners to allow them to construct a -
private road on their private property, but the Administrator
noted that 25' is county R/W, and he believed Mr. Faber is
suggesting that he would, in fact, construct a road across his
frontage on county R/W.
Commissioner Bird noted that if you come west on 14th St.
from 6th Avenue, it is a City street, but that R/W ends and there
is private property between there and U.S.I. The point where we
are talking about putting the barricade is at the end of the R/W
so that people cannot cross the private property to get to U.S.1,
and Chairman Scurlock agreed it would be on the eastern end of
Mrs. LaCava's property.
Attorney Lulich again requested that either the County do
something or allow Mr. Faber to do something about it, noting
that either way, they will not have a road up to county
standards.
Administrator Balczun believed we are about ready to settle
with Southgate and La Cava for the 19' across their property, and
he felt this would be a better solution as we then would have R/W
fully from 6th Avenue to the western part of the Faber Press.
,JUL 5 1988 14 BOOK 73 Fmu.154
Chairman Scurlock felt that is just wishful thinking since
at this point neither one of them has been willing to donate
anything as far as he has been told.
Assistant County Attorney William Collins informed the Board
that the last word he had from R/W Agent Finney was that we had
talked with Mrs. LaCava, who was in a position where she would be
willing to sell but did not settle on a price. Southgate's
trustee, Attorney Joe Collins, indicated they were not interested
In having a road that would go inside the boundaries of their
fence, but they would be willing to negotiate on 19' additional
R/W if it went outside north of their fence; however, no price
was discussed. This still would result in a 44' road rather than
our 50' standard.
Chairman Scurlock felt the logical thing to do, since we
have no assurance we can ever acquire the R/W at a reasonabl-e
price, would be to allow Mr. Faber to construct a paved driveway
into his property on the 25' R/W, and we will barricade it at the
eastern boundary of his property.
Commissioner Bird agreed as he believed it would be a bad
situation to bring that road through to intersect with U.S.1. in
any event.
Commissioner Wheeler felt the proposed solution might cause
Southgate to look at this more closely.
Commissioner Bird stated that he would like staff to pursue
this option with Mr. Faber and his attorney and bring this back
at a subsequent meeting. He asked if we need to get involved
with the City if we barricade their road. Discussion continued
as to whether we should be involved with this.matter or the City,
and it.was confirmed that the portion we are discussing is in the
county.
Administrator Balczun asked if the Board would like staff to
negotiate -a form of construction agreement with Faber.Press.
Commissioner Bowman noted that.still won't solve his water
JUL 1988 15 Boor `7 ,AG -155
problem, and Mr. Faber agreed that the neighbors are continuing
to dump water on his property.
Attorney Lulich confirmed that they would like to negotiate
some sort of agreement for the construction of a driveway or
pavement there and also have staff look into whatever drainage
situation needs fixing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized
staff to negotiate an agreement with Faber Press in
regard to construction of a paved driveway to be barri-
caded as discussed, and also look into the drainage
situation.
DISCUSS DESTRUCTION OF ROADS (86TH AVE. SW 8 25TH ST. SW TO
FLY -IN -RANCHES SUBDV.)
The Board reviewed request from Robert Youngblood and staff
memo, as follows:
TO: Charles P. Balczun,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Road Conditions Along 86th Avenue SW
South of Oslo Road and 25th Street SW
to Fly -In -Ranches Subdivision
REF. LETTER: Robert W. Youngblood to Chairman,
County Commission dated 6-23-88
DATE: June 30, 1988
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Property owners residing at Fly -In -Ranches Subdivision located
south of 21st Street *SW just west of I-95, are requesting that
86th Avenue between Oslo Road and 21st Street SW and 21st Street
SW from 86th Avenue to Fly -In -Ranches Subdivision be more
frequently maintained due to the mining operation (Global
Paving's Coquina Pit) located west of the Subdivision. Recent
meeting onsite with the owner of the mine (on Friday 6-24-88)
have resulted in a Commitment by the owner of the mine to grade
the approximate two mile length of roadway on a more frequent
basis.
6 B o o K P73 156 f'����.
'JUL � �9��
In addition, Global Paving has agreed, by copy of the attached
letter, to supply all of the base rock to pave the road.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Staff presents the following alternatives:
Alternative # 1
Accept Global Paving's offer to supply the base rock and
proceed to pave the 2.0 miles of road at a cost. of $6/sy or
$170,000. Funding for the additional project cost could be
assessed to the 480 acres of abutting citrus grove at an
estimated assessment of $352/acre if 100% assessment is
applied. At the present time, only a few residential homes
are located in Fly -In -Ranches Subdivision. The majority of
the area is citrus grove. Right-of-way acquisition may be
required and would require research.
Alternative #2
Require the mine operator to grade the two miles of road
with a motor grader on a frequent basis. When frequent
hauling is on-going, daily grading may be necessary. The
addition of coquina rock on the road would be required as
needed and supplied by the mining operation.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
At the time, the County does not have funding identified for this
project. Paving is recommended to be funded by the mining
operation and special assessment to a benefited area. Staff
requests authorization to begin engineering on paving the road
and report back to the Board with accurate cost estimates,
right-of-way needs, and a benefited assessment area.
Mr. Youngblood came before the Board representing the
property owners of Fly -in Ranches, which consists of 14 five acre
tracts. He stressed the problems the property owners are having
due to the improper maintenance of their entrance roads which are
being absolutely destroyed by the volume and intensity of traffic
from the nearby mining operation. He believed the County Mining
Ordinance that was revised in April specifically talks about
maintenance of roads to and from a mining operation, and he would
like the Commission to consider adopting some type of new format
to ensure that the residents out there do not have to contend
with these road problems on a continual basis.
Commissioner Wheeler felt that staff's second alternative,
which would require the mining operator to grade on a frequent,
even daily basis, could offer a solution while Mr. Youngblood
works on getting the people together for a petition paving
program.
17 BOOK 73 157
County Engineer Ralph Brescia advised that staff would like
some time to review and be able to present more accurate figures
as to just what the paving costs will be because the $6/sy set
out in the memo is just for the asphalt; it doesn't include the
compaction and stabilization required or drainage. Mr. Brescia
confirmed that Mr. Price of Global Paving has indicated that he
will grade the road as needed.
Chairman Scurlock suggested that we put someone in contact
with Global Paving and set up a schedule for the grading, and
also show Mr. Youngblood the process to follow to get up a paving
petition.
Mr. Youngblood emphasized the need to have someone to follow
up on the promised grading because they have been told in the
past that these things will be done, and they have not come
about. He informed the Board that about two months ago, Mr. -
Price brought a large dredge machine in there to take some base
out from the bottom of his pit and turned it over in the middle
of the highway and part of that machine is still sitting on the
road today. Mr. Youngblood claimed that the mining trucks have
also destroyed county property; i.e., knocked down a street sign
and also knocked down part of a county bridge at Olso Road.
They have talked to Mr. Price before, but nothing seems to be
done until they move ahead and instigate something. The property
owners would like to take care of this hazardous road situation,
which would be to the benefit of everyone involved, and they want
to settle this amicably.
Commissioner Bird asked if within the mining permit we have
the ability to require Global to grade that road once a week, and
Commissioner Wheeler felt once a week would not be sufficient as
that is undoubtedly the worst road in the county.
Director Keating believed Mr. Youngblood cited a section of
the Mining Ordinance that requires the mining operator to
maintain a county -owned unpaved road that is part of his hauling
route, but
that is the new ordinance,
and Global's current
mine
'JUL
4^01MBoa's
��
F;cE158
was approved under the old ordinance where there was no such
specific stipulation. However, Mr. Price has an application in
right now for another mining operation in the same area, and he
will be using the same general routes for hauling; so, in that
case, he will be required to maintain the roads.
Chairman Scurlock suggested that we give staff direction to
pursue this, which he felt is all we can do today until we get
into contact with Mr. Price and review our options.
Commissioner Wheeler wished to have it made very clear that
no new permit will be issued until this problem is resolved.
Administrator Balczun believed we can get his attention by
requiring that he grade the road twice a week and suggesting that
if he doesn't, we will do it and bill him for it, or go to court,
if necessary.
Commissioner Bowman asked if we can do that legally, and
County Attorney Vitunac advised that if his trucks meet the state
road weight requirements, he has a right to use the roads, but if
we can show some specific damage attributable to his trucks, we
can ask him to fix that. It is a gray area as to what is causing
the damage - long term normal use or specific incidents.
Mr. Youngblood stated that the residents' use of the road is
negligible but he has counted as many as 200 loads coming in and
out of the mining operation on a 8 hour basis. He continued to
express concern about having some schedule they must adhere to,
and he was assured that the new Mining Ordinance will protect
them in the future and the county will contact Mr. Price in the
meantime asking for his cooperation.
Commissioner Bowman asked if Mr. Price isn't liable not only
for the sign he destroyed but also the county bridge and wished
to know if we can go after him for that.
Attorney Vitunac confirmed that he would be liable if we can
prove it was his equipment that did the damage, and it was felt
we should pursue this.
JUL
9 Book 7 pni 159
5 �9
Administrator Balczun clarified that staff will pursue that
and will also proceed to start work on the petition paving
project.
Further discussion ensued, and the Board indicated that they
did not
want
staff to
spend time
on any engineering for this
project
until
a valid
petition is
received..
PALM COAST ELDERLY HOUSING'S REQUEST FOR CONCEPTUAL SPECIAL
EXCEPTION APPROVAL
The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of
in the _ d Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in ttie issues of d
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. A
Sworn to and subscribed before me this y of lA. 19 •ore
A (Bu es iivJanageq
(SEAL) W
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian RiCounty, Florida)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice of Public Hearing to consider the
granting of special exception approval for a
Residential Center. adult congregate care faC&
ty. The subject properly Is presently under con-
tract by the Palm Coast Eldedr Housing and Is
located at 1250 30th Street
The sublect property fs described as:
THE EAST 10 ACRES OF THAT PART '
OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER " LYING
NORTH OF THE MAIN CANAL IN SEC--;
TION 35, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH,
RANGE 39 EAST AS THE SAME IS
DESIGNATED ON THE LAST GENERAL .
.PLAT OF LANDS OF THE INDIAN RIVER
FARMS COMPANY SUBDIVISION AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK'2, PAGE 25,' r:•
PUBLIC RECORDS OF. ST. LUCIE
COUNTY, FLORIDA. SAID LANDS NOW
LYING AND BEING IN INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA
A public hearing at which parties In Interest
and citizens shall have an opportunity -to be
heard, will be held by the Board of County Com-
missioners of Indian River County, Florida In the I
Commission Chambers of the County Adminis- ,
tration Building, located at 1840 25th ' Street.
Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday. July S. 1988 at.j
Anyone who may wish to appeal any deolalch'"
which may bemade at this meeting will need to .
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings
Is made -which Includes the teatimany end evi-
dence upon which the appeal will be based.. i
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BY: s -Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
June 14,1988
Chief Planner Stan Boling made.the staff presentation, as
follows:
��UL 20 BOOK , l 3 pnf,1,t1®
TO.Charles P. Balczun DATE:June 14, 1988 FILE:
County Admininstrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
RobertPALM M. a tin , SUBJECT: HOUSING'S
Community Devel pmen Director CONCEPTUAL
THROUGH: Stan Boling �6+" �•
Chief, Current Development
FROM: John W. McCo VIK
Staff Planne
EXCEPTION
T ELDERLY
REQUEST FOR
SPECIAL
APPROVAL
REFERENCES: palm coast
JOHN
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of July 5, 1988.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND LOCATION:
Masteller and Moler Associates, Inc. has submitted an application
for special exception approval for a residential center, along -
with a conceptual site plan. Because the property is zoned RM -6 -
(maximum 6 units per acre) and the project proposes 8 "units" per
acre, the applicant is pursuing approval of the project as a
"residential center". Residential centers are treated differently
from normal multi -family .projects in that a density "bonus" is
available based on persons per acre. Residential center units are
considered less intense than normal multi -family units. Thus, the
zoning code measures the land use intensity of residential centers
by persons per acre instead of the usual units per acre density
measure.
Since the property is zoned RM -6, special exception approval is
required for the residential center use.
Special exception uses are those types of uses _that would not
generally be appropriate throughout a particular zoning district.
However, when special exception uses are carefully controlled as
to number, area, location, and/or relationship to the vicinity,
such uses would not adversely impact the public health, safety,
comfort, good order, appearance, convenience; and general welfare
and, as such, would be compatible with permitted uses within the
particular zoning district. Special exceptions require submittal
of an approvable final or conceptual site plan meeting all appli-
cable site plan criteria, zoning district criteria and the crite-
ria set forth in the regulations for the specific use. In con-
sidering the request, it is the responsibility of the Board of
County Commissioners to approve, approve with conditions, or deny
the application.
If the Board of County Commissioners grants the conceptual special
exception approval, the applicant will need to submit a major site
plan application which will need to be approved by the Planning
and Zoning Commission. The subject property is located at 12.50
30th Street, approximately 630' east of U.S. Highway #1 on the
north side of 30th Street.
As reflected in the attached minutes, the Planning and Zoning
Commission unanimously recommended approval of this application at
their June 9, 1988 meeting.
Pursuant to Section 25.3 of the Zoning Code, Regulation of Special
Exception Uses, the Board of County Commissioners is to consider
the appropriateness of the requested use based on the submitted
conceptual site plan and the suitability of the site for that use.
JUL 52' Boa 73 Feu 161
198
- M
The Board, after considering the application, the staff's and
Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendations, is to act upon
the request. The Board may attach any conditions and safeguards
necessary to assure compatibility of the use with the surrounding
area.
Proposed Use:
The staff is concerned about this use being defined as a residen-
tial center. The code defines residential centers in the follow-
ing way:
"...residential centers shall be defined as facilities
which provide a family living environment including
supervision and care necessary to meet physical,
emotional and social needs of clients. These facilities
may also provide education and training for resident
clients."
The applicant has provided staff with the following information
about the proposed use:
"The proposed development will consist of 80 one -bedroom
apartments and a community building specially designed
to meet the physical, emotional and social needs of the
elderly and handicapped tenants. Each apartment will
consist of a bedroom, living -dining room, bath and small
kitchen area. Eight of the apartments will be specially
designed for the handicapped, with full wheelchair turns
and otherwise barrier -free layouts. Each unit will be
equipped with an emergency call system which may be
activated by the tenant in case of emergency, or will be
automatically activated in case of fire or smoke. The
alarm system is monitored 24 hours a day by on-site
staff personnel. The residents are monitored twice a
day and must check out when leaving for extended
periods.
The community space will allow for the assembly of the
residents. A multi-purpose room will be included, with
space for viewing television, reading, playing cards,
bingo, puzzles, crafts and other family -and dommunity
type activities. A small kitchen is just off the
assembly area which can be used for catering -type
services.
A Regulatory Agreement with the Department of Housing
and Urban Development which restricts the use of the
facility to the purposes for which it was constructed,
for the term of the mortgage, 40 years, must be
executed. The maximum number of tenants per unit is
two. The Regulatory Agreement will assure local govern-
ment authorities that the use of the development will
not be changed for construction.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development requires
that each apartment contain kitchen facilities. To meet
this requirement, there will be a small stove and
refrigerator in each apartment."
Analysis of Use:
Staff feels this use displays many of the characteristics of a
residential center by providing supervision and care necessary to
meet physical, emotional and social needs of the residents.
However, staff also feels the best interpretation of the "family
living environment" clause in the definition calls for a more
communal atmosphere which would be provided by common eating
facilities and a dormitory style of living. In such a setting,
units are not independent but are dependent upon common facili-
ties. For example, units would not have kitchen facilities but
would be serviced by common kitchen and dining facilities. This
JUL 51988 22 now. 73mF162
is the area where
meet the "family
center.
staff feels the application does not adequately
living environment" definition of residential
Staff's opinion notwithstanding, the Board of County Commissioners
has established the policy of allowing individual kitchens within
each residential unit. The policy was established when the Board
granted approval to the "Lake -in -the -Woods" residential center
project, which provided complete kitchens within individual units
along with communal kitchen (full food preparation) and common
dining facilities. Therefore, the County has a policy of allowing
individual kitchens within adult residential center units, which
is consistent with the applicant's proposal.
ANALYSIS:
1. Total Parcel Size: 10 acres
2. Zoning Classification: RM -6, Residential Multi -Family (up to
6 units/acre).
3. Land Use Designation: MD -1, Medium Density Residential (up
to 6 units/acre).
4. Proposed Building Area:
10 bldgs. (residential) x 4446.4 s/f = 44,464 s/f
1 bldg. (community facility) x 1,064 s/f = 1,064 s/f
Total = 45, 528 sq. ft.
5. Off -Street Parking Required: 120 spaces
Provided: 120 spaces
6. Traffic Circulation: The project will access 30th Street via
a two-way drive.
7. Dedication and Improvements: The applicant has agreed to
dedicate 25' of property for 30th Street right-of-way.
8. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North:* RM-6/Vacant - -
South: N/A/Main Relief Canal
West: Residences/City of Vero Beach/RM-10/12 "
East: Vacant, Residences/RS-3
9. Allowable Density: A residential center project is eligible
for a density bonus based Qn people per acre. There are two
calculations specified in the ordinance which need to be
performed. The first is on the subject property which is as
follows:
6 units x 2.0 people per unit = 12 people per acre x 1.5
(bonus) = 18.0 people per acre or 10 acres x 18 = 180
people, maximum allowable
According to the ordinance, the density cannot exceed 1.5
times the density of the adjacent zoning. The adjacent
zoning density is checked by averaging the project's frontage
along the three existing adjacent zoning districts.
Population and Density
P = People DU = Dwelling Unit AC = Acre
A. East side 2.5 P/DU x 3 DU/AC x 1.5 = 11.25 P/AC
B. North side 2.0 P/DU x 6 DU/AC x 1.5 = 18.0 P/AC
C. West Side 2.0 P/DU x 11 DU/AC x 1.5 = 33.0 P/AC
Weighted average by perimeter frontage analysis:
23 BOOK 73 f,t'EE 163
JUL 5199
(11.25 P/AC x 989.71) + (18.0 P/AC x 421.271) + (33.0 P/AC X 1001.689 = 21.45 P/AC
2412.65' (the total perimeter.frontage)
21.45 P/AC x 10 acres = 214.5 people, maximum allowable number
Therefore, the maximum project density allowed is 180 people,
which is less than the maximum "compatibility" density of
214.5 people. The project proposes a legal maximum of 160
people. Thus, the project is within the maximum allowable
density.
10. Special Exception criteria for the residential center group
home are as follows:
1. Level I, II and III group homes and residential centers
shall be defined as facilities licensed by HRS which
provide a family living environment including super-
vision and care necessary to meet physical, emotional,
and social life needst for clients. The facility may
also provide education and training for resident
clients. These group homes shall be distinguished by
their resident capacity as follows:
-- Level I group home, up*to eight (8) residents;
-- Level II group home, up to twelve (12) residents;
-- Level III group home, up tib twenty (2 0) residents; -
and
-- Residential centers, twenty-one (21) or more
residents
2. The use shall satisfy all applicable regulations of the
State of Florida and Indian River County as currently
exist or may hereafter be amended.
3. The approving body shall determine that the proposed use
is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in terms
of intensity of land use. As a measure of land use
intensity, the expected number of persons per acre• of
the proposed use may be compared to the equivalent -
number of persons per acre allowed within the respective
zoning district. The number of persons per acre within
the zoning district can be derived by multiplying the
density (d.u./acre) by household size estimates for, that
structure type. For the purposes of this section, the
following household size estimates shall apply: single
family homes, .2.5 persons/d.u.; multiple family, 2.0
persons/d.u. The intensity of the group home shall not
exceed one and one-half (1.5) times the intensity of
adjacent residential zoning.
4. To avoid unsafe or unhealthy conditions that may be
produced by the overcrowding of persons living in these
facilities, a minimum floor area per person shall be
required. Floor area requirements shall be measured
from interior walls of all rooms including closet space.
-- Total Interior Living Space. A minimum of two
hundred (200) square feet of interior living space
shall be.provided per facility resident. Interior
living space shall include sleeping space and all
other interior space accessible on a regular basis
to all facility residents.-
Minimum
esidents.
Minimum Sleeping Areas. A minimum of eight (80)
square feet shall be provided in each sleeping
space for single occupancy. A minimum of sixty
(60) square feet of sleeping space shall be provid-
ed .for each bed in a sleeping space for multiple
occupancy.
JUL 5 1988 24
5.
-- Bathroom Facilities. A full bathroom with toilet,
sink and tub or shower shall be provided for each
five (5) residents. An additional toilet and sink
shall be provided for each additional group or four
(4) persons or less.
To avoid an undue concentration of group care facilities
.in one area, all such facilities shall be located at
least 1,200 feet apart, measured from property line to
property line_.
6. If located in a single family area, the home shall have
the appearance of a single family home. Structural
alterations shall be of such a nature as to preserve the
residential character of the building.
7. The facility shall satisfy all applicable off-street
parking requirements of Section 24. The facility shall
meet or exceed all open space requirements for the
respective zoning district.
8. The maximum capacity of such facilities shall not exceed
the applicable number' permitted by the Department of
Health and Rehabilitative Services.
9. Any group home permit is nontransferable. If the type
of resident changes or the resident capacity increases
to such an extent that it would raise the facility to a
higher level group home as distinguished by the defini-
tion, the facility must be re-evaluated for an adminis-
trative permit or special exception approval.
10. Any group home application is subject to the publication
and notification processes as defined in section 27,
entitled "Administrative Procedures" in Appendix A of
the Code of Laws and Ordinances, known as the zoning
code, prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission's
public hearing.
Staff feels the Board of County Commissioners should consider the
following additional conditions to make this project more compati-
ble with uses in the area:
a. The residential center use should be approved speci-
fically for housing for the elderly and physically
handicapped and that any change in the clientele would
necessitate approval by the Board of County Commis-
sioners.
b. A buffer and 50' setback shall be established on the
north and east sides bordering the existing single-
family areas.
In staff's opinion, with the above conditions, the proposed -.use
satisfies the applicable residential center criteria in regards to
County policy.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of
County CoMmissioners grant special exception approval for the
project, subject to the following conditions:
1. prior to site plan release, 25' of. property shall be dedi-
cated for the 30th Street right -of -'way;
JUL 5 1988 25 BOOK 73 FACT 165
M
2. the final site plans shall depict a 50' setback be establi-
shed on the east and north sides of the subject property,
with a bufferyard to consist of a 3' (minimum) above finished
grade berm and hedge with intermittent trees as specified in
Section 23.3 of the zoning cede; and
3. Any change in the proposed number or type of clientele would
require approval of a new special exception use request.
Planner Boling summarized that what is before the Board is a
project to be used by the elderly and some physically handi-
capped, and they wish to place 80 units on ten acres. The
question is whether or not this is considered a residential
center. In this particular case, certain services for monitoring
and security of the clients are set up throughout the project and
some communal facilities are provided, but the units themselves
can also operate independently - there are full kitchens,
bathrooms, et.c. The Board, in the past, has approved such a
project (Lake in the Woods) where independent units were
constructed along with communal facilities, and staff is
recommending approval subject to the 3 conditions listed above.
Commissioner Bird commented that this subject came up at
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, and their staff was
asked to take a look on a regional basis to see how many of these
type facilities are really needed. He suggested our staff
coordinate with the RPC staff to see what their statistics show.
Chairman Scurlock questioned how the RPC actually can do
that; he did not believe they can decide how many shopping
centers you can have, and he did not want them looking at
competition between private and public enterprises.
Director Keating explained that one of the functions of the
Regional Planning Council is to check and see that there is no
duplication of federal grants, and Planning Staff provides
comments.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
There were none, and he thereupon declared the public hearing
closed.
,JUL 5 1988 26 BOOK 73 rnE166
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) granted
Special Exception approval for Palm Coast Elderly
Housing, Inc., subject to the three conditions recom-
mended by staff.
FAITH UNITED FELLOWSHIP - REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVAL
The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL.
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of
in the _ A Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
I JI
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, commissionerefund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspap�r. A
Sworn to and subsc
(SEAL)
tt,rern ur urn "lluun wun, inuran never
, Florida)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice Of Public Hearing to tortalderf
granting of special exception apprbis
ocated
place of worship. The subject ProDY
at 180 27th Avenue.
The subject roperlY ►s described a9:
TME WEST 3.0 ACCRES OF THE NORTH -
10.51 ACRES OF TRACT 13. SECTION
14. TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH. RANGE 39, 3!
EAST. ACCORDING TO THE LAST GEN- .
ERAL PLAT OF THE INDIAN RIVER;'t_i.
FARMS COMPANY AS RECORDED IN ,kio
PLAT BOOK 2. PAGE 25.. PUBLIORECO. a
FLORID NOW IOF NDIAN RIVER COON- . -_Ai
TY. FLORIDA. LESS ROAD RIGHT-OF,.aZ .
WAYS.
' • • . �, ,,�.; ..,. :.� :.:fid, _-
A public hearing at which Parties In Interest
and cltizens shell have an . oPPortunity to be
heard, will be held by the Board of County o
missioners o1 Indian River County. Florida le the
Commission Chambers of the County Adminls-.
tration Building, • to at 1840 256 1 966 at
et
Vero Beach. Florida, on Tuesday. July
9:05 a.m. , ...I......
Anyone who may wish to appeal anSt -
now 10
which may be made at this meeting wW
ensure that a verbatim record of the Wo nP 1
is made which Includes the testimony
dente upon which the appeal wilf be based: ^ • 1
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS •'
BY -s-Don C Scurlock. Jr.. _
Chairman i•; ;
June 14.1988 _ ...
Chief Planner Boling made the staff presentation recommend -
Ing approval, as follows:
JUL� x988 27 eooK 73
_
TO:Charles P. Ealczun DATE:June 14, 1988 FILE:
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Ro ert Keati , A SUBJECT: FAITH UNITED FELLOWSHIP'S
Community Devel pment irector REQUEST FOR SPECIAL
EXCEPTION APPROVAL
THROUGH: Stan Boling.��
Chief, Current Development
FROM: John W. McCo li�'� REFERENCES: faith united
Staff Planner JOHN
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of July 5, 1988.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND LOCATION
John Dean and Associates on behalf of Faith United Fellowship :has'
submitted an application for minor site plan approval. Because -
the property is zoned RS -6, the church is classified as a special
exception use and must go through the special exception process.
The church is now seeking special exception approval to convert a
single family home to a place of worship located at 180 27th
Avenue, which is at the northeast corner of the intersection of
27th Avenue and 1st Place.
Special exception uses are those types of uses that would not
generally be appropriate throughout a particular zoning district.
However, when special exception uses are carefully controlled as
to number, area, location, and/or relationship to the vicinity,
such uses would not adversely impact the public health, safety,
comfort, good order, appearance, convenience, and general welfare
and, as such, would be compatible with permitted uses within the
particular zoning district. Special exceptions -require submittal
of an approvable site plan meeting all site plan criteria, zoning
district criteria and the criteria set forth in the regulations
for the specific land uses. In considering the request, the Board
may approve, approve with conditions or deny the application.
Pursuant to Section 25.3 of the Zoning Code, Regulation of Special
Exception Uses, the Board of County Commissioners is to consider
the appropriateness of the requested use based on the submitted
site plan and the suitability of the site for that use. In
considering the application, the Board may attach any conditions
and safeguards necessary to assure compatibility of the use with
the surrounding area.
As reflected in the attached minutes, the Planning and Zoning
Commission -unanimously recommended approval of this project.
ANALYSIS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
0
Size of Development Area:
Zoning Classification:
to 6 units/acre).
Land Use Designation:
Existing Building Area:
2.4 acres ok 106,454 sq. ft.
RS -6, Single -Family Residential (up
LD -2,
3,211 sq. ft. (no change proposed)
28
BOOK 73 f'"CE 168
S. Total Impervious Area:
11. Utilities: The site utilizes an on-site well and septic
system. -These improvements have been approved by the State
Department of Environmental Health.
12. Special Exception Criteria: The following special exception
criteria are applicable:
1. No building or structure shall be located closer than
thirty (30) feet to any property line abutting a res-
idential use or district.
2. Access shall be from a major thoroughfare or as other-
wise approved by the County engineer.
3. -Any accessory residential -use or -school upon the prem-
ises shall provide such additional lot area as required
for such use by this section and -shall further be
subject to all conditions set forth by the reviewing
body. Accessory residential uses may include convents,
monasteries, rectories or parsonages.
4. Type "B" screening, as defined in Section 23.3(g)(7)
shall be provided along all property boundaries when the
facility is located within or adjacent to a residential
district.
The applicant satisfies all applicable requirements for
special exception approval.
13. Dedications and Improvements:
1. The applicant has agreed to dedicate 8.05' of property
for 1st Place right-of-way and 20' of property for 27th
Avenue right-of-way, to comply with the Thoroughfare
Plan.
2. The applicant will escrow money for a sidewalk along
27th Avenue, to comply with the RS -6 sidewalk require-
ment.
3. The applicant will join a petition paving application
for 1st Place or otherwise post its fair -share portion
prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, to
comply with the site plan ordinance paving requirements.
JUL 5 1988 29
BOOK 73 F1 C
Existing: 3,568 sq. ft.
Proposed: 4,988 sq. ft.
Total: 8,556 sq. ft.
6.
Open Space Required: 40%
Proposed: 920
7.
Traffic Circulation: The project will use a two-way 24'
wide
driveway off of 1st Place. An existing driveway onto
27th
Avenue will be closed -off.
8.
Off -Street Parking Required: 23 spaces
Provided: 23 spaces
9.
Stormwater Management: The Stormwater Management Plan
has
been :approved by the Public Works Department, and a Type
"A"
stormwater permit has been issued.
10.
Landscape Plan: The landscape plan is in conformance
with
Ordinance #84-47.
11. Utilities: The site utilizes an on-site well and septic
system. -These improvements have been approved by the State
Department of Environmental Health.
12. Special Exception Criteria: The following special exception
criteria are applicable:
1. No building or structure shall be located closer than
thirty (30) feet to any property line abutting a res-
idential use or district.
2. Access shall be from a major thoroughfare or as other-
wise approved by the County engineer.
3. -Any accessory residential -use or -school upon the prem-
ises shall provide such additional lot area as required
for such use by this section and -shall further be
subject to all conditions set forth by the reviewing
body. Accessory residential uses may include convents,
monasteries, rectories or parsonages.
4. Type "B" screening, as defined in Section 23.3(g)(7)
shall be provided along all property boundaries when the
facility is located within or adjacent to a residential
district.
The applicant satisfies all applicable requirements for
special exception approval.
13. Dedications and Improvements:
1. The applicant has agreed to dedicate 8.05' of property
for 1st Place right-of-way and 20' of property for 27th
Avenue right-of-way, to comply with the Thoroughfare
Plan.
2. The applicant will escrow money for a sidewalk along
27th Avenue, to comply with the RS -6 sidewalk require-
ment.
3. The applicant will join a petition paving application
for 1st Place or otherwise post its fair -share portion
prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, to
comply with the site plan ordinance paving requirements.
JUL 5 1988 29
BOOK 73 F1 C
- M M
14. Surrounding Land Use & Zoning:
North:
South:
East:
West:
RECOMMENDATION:
Residences/RS-6
Residences/RS-6
Vacant/RS-6
27th Avenue/RS-6
Based on the analysis -performed, staff recommends that the Board
of County Commissioners grant special exception approval with the
following conditions:
1. Prior to site plan release, the applicant shall dedicate
8.05' of property for 1st Place right-of-way and 20' of
property for the 27th Avenue right-of-way; and
2. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy being issued, the applicant
shall:
a. post security for a 4' wide sidewalk along the project's
27th Avenue frontage; and
b. either post security for the paving of 1st Place or join
in an approved petition paving application for lst-
Place.
Natalie Lepore came before the Board and submitted the -
following petition signed by 16 residents of the area objecting
to the church being allowed access on 1st Place:
PETITION
ATTENTION: County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Faith United Fellowship, 180 27th Avenue, Vero Beach, FL
As residents of the above mentioned neighborhood, we respectfully
request:
1. That said church be denied permission to convert a single family home
into a place of worship at this address;
2. That if conversion is allowed, that said church be denied permission to
access said property from First Place, an established residential area,
and that access to said property be made from 27th Avenue as is the
�scase with all other existing churches in this area.
a
NAME ADDRESS DATE
0
,1sr.
�S4
JUL 51998 30 BOOK 73 170
tA
,�,S,3c t Sr- �4flaqlll
Q��C Q••�Q��S�%v,�� 2,sms
Mrs. Lepore noted there are 10 children living along 1st
Place who are up and down the street all the time, and also the
church services will interfere with the residents' being abl-e to
get in and out of their driveways to get to their own services.
She did not understand why the church can't have their access on
27th Avenue as the other churches have.
Chief Planner Boling explained that on a corner lot such as
this, the Site Plan Ordinance requires that the driveway come off
the lower classification roadway to preserve the continuity of
the major road, and 27th Avenue is an arterial. If this driveway
came onto 27th Avenue, you would have several cuts that were all
offset in a short distance, and that is the type of thing this
ordinance tries to avoid. With a church site your main traffic
would be during off hours since most of the traffic would be on
Sunday mornings, and staff feels this regulation is not only
required, but makes a lot of sense, especially in this case.
Mrs. Lepore repeated that those in the vicinity very much
disapprove of this, and they don't want it.
Mrs. Alexander Kromhout next came before the Board and read
the following letter of opposition into the Minutes. (Other
copies of this letter signed by Mrs. & Mrs. Theodore Wujcik and
Mrs. & Mrs. John A. Weiss are on file in the Office of the Clerk:
51988
AR /
31 BO3 rnUE 171
Mr. and Mrs. Alexander Kromhout
2746 First Place
Vero Beach,
Florida 32962
July 5, 1988
County Commission
Indian River County
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Commissioners,
In the matter of granting to the Faith United Fellowship a
variance for use of residentially zoned property located on
the northeast corner of 27th Avenue and First Place,
impacted property owners who have signed below object to
the following aspects of the site plan as recommended by
the Zoning Board: 1. Attention to drainage problems;
2. Attention to traffic/access problems 3. Deviation from
master plan enforcement..,**
Specifically, on the mat-ter,o+'-drainageq currently run-off
in the .i.mpact.ed areA.,.ruips east --west over 27th Avenue,
cregtting standing.water-on.proper-ties directly west of and
across 27th Avenue from the project site. The resulting
mosquito infestation and sodden lawns will continue and
likely worsen fh.degree.under current site plan. We are
aware that. on Thursday, June 30, . and Friday, July 1, road
crews appeared in the area, cleaning and deapening the
north -south furrow fronting the site in question; however,
these minor improvements will only minimally mitigate the
existing drainage problems, which seem logically to
increase when one reviews the traffic/access problems as
follows.
Continually increasing north -south traffic flow song 27th
Avenue linking Indian River and St. Lucie Counties joins
with school hours' traffic to endanger all residents in the
impacted area. Happpily for school, children, a redesigned
intersection with full service traffic light now reduces
the likelihood of traffic injuries at the Citrus/27th
Avenue corner. However, this improvement has done little
to slow traffic on 27th Avenue and has done nothing to
reduce the drop-off/pick-up problems on First Lane just
south of Citrus Elementary School or on First Place just
south and east of the school --the same road on which the
current site plan proposes to allow access to the church
building site in question.
Superficially, granting access to the site from First Place
rather than from 27th Avenue appears to be the logical and
safe course of action. However, such an access
precipitates an equally insidious problem: far too many
vehicles now use First Place as an east -west conduit
between 27th Avenue and 20TH Avenue (and ultimately Old
Dixie Highway), a use increased not decreased by the
improvements to the Citrus Road/27th Avenue corner. At
present, only its unpaved condition and its sub -standard
width of bed save First Place east from 27th from being a
speedway. The two-year escrow for paving included in the
site plan as affirmed by the Zoning Board fails to
recognize the rights and interests of existing property
owners:
JUL 51900 32 Bou 73 un. 172
First, paving only the length of First Place from 27th
Avenue east to the east property line of the site
would create further run-off/drainage problems,
deteriorating First Place to the east and aggravating
the run-off problems to the west, over 27th Avenue.
Second, paving the entire length of First Place from
27ttf-Ave6ue to 3rd*' or 24th or beyond --viewed
officially as an 9nhancement.by county statutes --will
NOT .improve the .9tia,ility of: life in the impact area!
Raiher, itwill' " tnci *ease traffic, reducing safety and
increasing noise, unsettling what quiet and peaceful
qualities of t * he neighborhood that remain.
Moreover,"' -property owners'south of the site, along
First Place, do not want the cost incurred by mandated
paving, nor do they wish to surrender any footage to
widen the road bed. Such concessions involve them in
an active reduction of thda quality of their own
lifestyle --a lifestyle to which they are entitled.
.
Finally, with each granted variance, no matter how
seemingly harmless, the integrity of the master plan for
growth in Indian River County deteriorates. Such a plan,
no matter how well developed or how effectively written,
suffers assault with every change in political winds. Must
it also deteriorate as well with countless, well -intended,
but misguided acquiescences to equally well -intended but
poorly planned and poorly researched requests for variances
from its guidelines?
Commissioners, the points herein do not sound any
particular objection to Faith United Fellowship
congregation's building their facility for the practice of
their faith. The objections emanate from a deeply felt
concern about our local government's obligation to conduct
its business in response to and on behalf of the governed.
Established/existing property owners' rights should take
precedence over new orpotential property owners.
In this case, the governed, the existing property owners in
the impacted areav see their right to maintain neighborhood
integrity threatened by the Zoning Board's inability to see
that any request for a permit other than one for
residential use for the site in question irreparably
changes the nature of the surrounding area. Owners in that
surrounding area view the changes which can be reasonbly
predicted as ones repugnant to them. Therefore, the
request for variance should be denied.
Sincerely,,
Mr. Wd rs. Al e• ander .'K'ro hoot'
'JUL 1988 33 uv 1733
Willis Trennepohl, 27th Ave., informed the Board that he
lives right beside the subject property. He emphasized that
this is a residential area and he did not feel this ever should
have been brought before the Board just because of that fact; it
is zoned for residences, not churches. They already have two
churches down the street from them which cause a lot of traffic.
Mr. Trennepohl stated that he has a big piece of property right
next to this, and he keeps his property looking very nice. The
subject property has brown unmowed grass and he did not know why
they haven't been there to clean it up; in fact, that property
hasn't been cleaned up since they owned it. He further advised
that the state highway people put a sign at his place, 2nd
Street; there is only one house behind him and he owns his
street; he has lived there 11 years and has never had the county
grade it even one time. Mr. Trennepohl again stressed that -this
is a residential area, and it should remain a residential area.
Gordon Hine, Pastor of the Faith United Fellowship Church
and lifetime county resident, appreciated the home owners'
feelings, and assured everyone that the church wants to be a
blessing to the neighborhood not a hindrance. As far as the
appearance of the property is concerned, he advised that they do
not actually own the property as of yet. They did, however, get
a phone call saying that the property looked neglected; so, they
more or less trespassed in order to mow it. Pastor Hine believed
with the landscaping required by the county, the property will'be
a beautiful addition to the community. In addition, they will be
required to redo their swale and have a water retention area,
which should solve any drainage problems. Pastor Hine pointed
out that there are over 12 churches on 27th Avenue between Route
60 and 1st St. S.W.; it is basically a church type area. In
regard to the access, they wanted to come off 27th Avenue, but
the 1st Street access was a county requirement. He did not feel
their traffic will cause a problem, however, as there probably
will be about 25-30 cars there on Sunday mornings and possibly
34
Bou 7 3 u,J� 174
half that on Wednesday or Sunday nights. He continued to stress
that the church will enhance the appearance of the neighborhood.
It was determined that no one else wished to be heard, and
the Chairman declared the public hearing closed.
Commissioner Bird stated that while he certainly shares the
residents' concern about the traffic, etc., he is familiar with
that strip, and there are several churches. He explained that in
our Comprehensive Plan we do allow for churches in residential
areas since we do not think it is good planning to make churches
establish in commercial shopping center areas or industrial
areas, but feel that they should be in the residential areas near
where the people live. In this case, Commissioner Bird was
aware that this particular property has been poorly maintained
over the last years with everything from moving vans to junk
boats on it,.and he felt sure whatever the church does will -be an
improvement to the neighborhood. He also felt because of the
limited amount of traffic the church will generate, it is a safer
situation to have them enter and exit off of 1st Place rather
than onto a major arterial such as 27th Avenue.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) granted
Special Exception Approval to Faith United Fellowship
based on the conditions listed in staff's memo dated
June 14, 1988.
WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS - GLENDALE LAKES (47TH AVE./9TH PLACE)
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:
;JUL 5 1988 35 BOOK ,73 Pmu,1175
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, indlan River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County; Florida: that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of '
in the _ Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and.has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun.
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation 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 ._0$ _ day of. A.D. 19 %
in
L e s anager)
(SEAL)
}(Clerk of the Circuit Court, In River County, Florida)
'
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, will hold
a Public Hearing on Tuesday, July S. 1988 at
9:05 a.m.. In the Commission Chambers of the
County Administration Building. 1640 26th
Street, Vero Beach. Florida, 32960, to discuss;
the 47th Avenue and 9th Place, Glendale Laken=
Estates water main extension that has been pre-'
pared by Masteller & Moler, Inc., a consultant for
Indian River Count1yy.
All interested parties are Invited to attend the
Public Hearing, and all persons wishing to speak
will be given an opportunity to do so following a
brief presentation by the consultant For addt-
tfonal information, contact' the Indian'. River
County Utilities Department at 567-8000, exten-
sion 4610, or Rowena Sommers at MastellOr &
Molar, Inc., telephone number
Dated the 17th daq of June, 1988.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
DON C. SCURLOGX JR.
CHAIRMAN
JUNE 21.29,1988
Utilities Director Pinto came before the Board to review
staff's position:
TO: CHARLES P. BALCZUN DATE: MARCH 9, 1988
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
FROM: JOHN FREDERICK LAN
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIA I4-
SUBJECT: 47TH AVENUE & 9TH P , GLENDALE LAKES
WATER SYSTEM IMPROVE NTS - IRC PROJECT #UW -87 -19 -DS
BACKGROUND
At the meeting of September 15, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners
approved the -bidding out of this water main construction project and
the preparation of the Assessment Roll in the Resolution 87-17. Work
Authorization No. 15 was approved for execution. The Department of
Utility Services has had engineering plans drawn up by the firm of
Masteller & Moler, Inc.
ry ® 3 6 Boa °73 FmE 176
Included in the plans were firm cost estimates for construction
totalling $34,500.00. The Department of Utility Services wishes to
proceed with the project by adoption of a Resolution. The Department
has advertised this Resolution on March 17th, 24th and 31st. The
Resolution declaring the intent to have a preliminary Assessment Roll
was published August 27, 1987.
ANALYSIS
The bids for the project have been opened and the low' bid was
$35,802.50 made by Collee,Mechanical, Inc. This company, and the bid
submitted by them, has been approved by the consulting firm of
Masteller & Moler Associates, Inc. The total estimated project cost
for use in the Preliminary Assessment Roll is $44,880.00 at a cost of
$2,805.00 per connection.
RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County
Commissioners award the bid to the low bidder, Collee Mechanical, Inc.
and execute the contract documents for the subject project. These
documents will be forwarded under separate cover. The Department also
recommends adoption of the attached Resolution.
Director Pinto informed the Board that this petition has
been around for almost 21 years, and staff, during that time, has
had numerous meetings with the home owners. Unfortunately when
something takes this long, some of the homes have changed hands,
and what it seems to come down to at this point is that half of
the people want the water and half do not. However, we find that
the area is somewhat susceptible to bad water; so; the people who
want it are kind of in a quandary because they need the water.
In regard to construction cost, Director Pinto advised that
they have gotten the preliminary assessment down to $2500, but
that figure does not include the county impact fee or meter
installation. As the Board knows, the county ordinance requires
that people connect when water is available; however, because of
the demand we have for water, we have not been running out
banging on doors and forcing anyone to make connection. The
ordinance does say, however, that if someone is to pull a
building permit of any type, they must connect to the water at
that time.. Some of the people were willing to put the line in,
but did not want to connect, but then when they want to do
something to their house, they have to get a permit and they do
37
BOOK 73 PAGE 177
have to connect. The Utilities Department would recommend that
they do install the water. On several occasions, we have had
things happen to wells, and it then becomes an emergency
situation and they come banging on our door. This happened with
the Day's Inn where they threatened to sue if we put in the
water, but then their well failed, and they -threatened to sue if
we didn't get water out to them immediately.
Director Pinto noted that this particular case involves only
16 customers, and it would probably cost us more in services than
the utility would ever receive for it. He could understand that
people don't want to pay, but assured the Board that he and staff
have done everything they possibly can to get the cost down on
this project. Director Pinto commented that he felt uncomfort-
able with the petition process for water, which in many cases
divides neighborhoods, and believed that in the future we will
have to move towards picking areas we are able to expand in and
making a decision that area should have water. That way we would
have the people mad at him rather than each other. He felt
strongly that in the future public water will be a necessity.
The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard.
Timothy Askew, owner of Lots 1 and 2, Block 4, Glendale
Lakes Estates, informed the Board that he initially had signed
the petition and would like to see water in there, but he feels
he was misled as to the cost to be incurred. They were informed
originally that the cost would be $2,100, and possibly as high as
$2,500, and now it appears it will be close to.$4,000. Mr. Askew
noted that he has lived there for 15 years; he has never had any
problem with his water, and all his family is alive and well. If
the water is an issue, however, and if the Health Department says
it is no good, then why just bring it to 47th Avenue and not to
the entire subdivision, which should reduce the cost of putting
the water -in so they wouldn't have to pay so much. Mr. Askew
informed the Board that
in regard to
the financing, they were
,JUL
51989
38
I;OOK 73 NVA1
told the impact fee would be a 5 year financing and the
construction costs would be financed over 10 years at 10 over
prime.
Mrs. Mary Askew confirmed that they were given that informa-
tion by Jeff Boone of the Utilities Department before they signed
the petition.
Chairman Scurlock advised that 5 years is our standard type
plan. but we have done some special assessments for our larger
projects.
Utilities Director Pinto reported that staff has looked at
about 9 different options regarding placing water and trying to
bring the cost of the project down, but even including the whole
area, there isn't any substantial difference in the cost per
unit. He did feel we will be doing the rest of the area in the
near future. As to the numbers just quoted by the gentleman, the
construction cost is very close to what was originally estimated
several years ago, but what was omitted and not told was that
along with that is the impact fee which pays for the capacity in
the treatment plant itself and the major transmission lines, for
which omission he apologizes.
Chairman Scurlock gave the example of his neighborhood
assessment, which was $1,900 and the impact fee was $1,140, or
about $3,400 and noted there are about 50 people in his
neighborhood.
Mrs. Askew repeated that they spoke with Jeff Boone and were
specifically told that the $2500 included the .impact fee; he also
said 5 years on the impact fee and 10 on the construction cost at
10 over prime - they were misled.
D.irector.Pinto informed Mrs. Askew that Mr. Boone was a
former employee of the Utilities Department, but regardless of
what Mr Boone said, it was wrong.
Mr. and Mrs. Askew stated that they would withdraw their
name from the petition asking for water, not because they are not
for the water but because of the misrepresentation.
J U L 5 1988 39 BOOK .73 179
Chairman Scurlock realized that it is hard to pay for the
water, but believed when water is available, the property becomes
more valuable and tends to develop more quickly.
Question arose as to exactly how many are for or against the
water. People from the audience spoke out and claimed that a
majority of the people are against the water, and Director Pinto
believed it was half and half until recently.
The Chairman reviewed the history of petition paving which
originally required 100% and one person could stop the whole
project; then we went to 66-2/3% and now are down to about 50%.
Director Pinto noted that the county has proceeded before,
particularly with water, based on whether there is a need and not
necessarily whether there is a majority.
Commissioner Bird stated that he still likes the petition
system, and usually it has worked. He did not like to force
something down people's throats.
Chairman Scurlock agreed, but felt that once we disseminate
information re the proposed water, road, etc., we should validate
the percentage of neighborhood interest before we incur substan-
tial costs with engineering, staff time, etc.
Utilities Director Pinto pointed out that determining
figures for a water assessment is much different than a road
assessment. You can't just pick one street out and say do just
this particular street as you can with roads because most of the
time in order to get to that street, you have to go to wherever
the main water line is to bring in the water and you
inadvertently have to deal with other people who have not
petitioned for the water. He, therefore, did.not feel it is fair
to compare the assessment program for roads to water. Also,
construction estimates for water lines can vary considerably if
you run into rock, etc. This particular petition has changed
back and forth either direction several times, and it has put us
in an awkward position.
JUL 5 1988 40 B06K
The Chairman asked those in the audience in favor of the
water to raise their hands and then those in opposition to do the
same. The count was 4 in favor and 8 opposed, but it was noted
that not everyone was present.
Len Spangler, 936 47th Avenue, found it amazing that
Director Pinto says he doesn't care if they get the water or not
because he felt Utilities has been trying to cram this down their
throats from the beginning. He believed four families are in
support of the water, but he thought the petition was designed to
respond to the wants of the majority of the community. The
project was originally estimated at $2,100, and nine people said
they wanted it, but when the price got up to around $4,000, then
there was a change of attitude. Mr. Spangler stated that he
personally did not care to spend $4,000 and then $25-30 a month
for something he already has. He very much objected to the -
tactics used in promoting this and also the allegations made
regarding unsafe water when, in fact, there is nothing in the
report saying the water is unsafe for human consumption. He
believed the only well sampled was a shallow well, and while he
was told this didn't make any difference, professionals in this
field told him that the deeper the well, the clearer the water.
Mr. Spangler advised that he was at a public hearing about a
month ago, which he understood was to discuss whether the
community wanted the water or not. That meeting turned into a
shouting match when it became obvious the only thing staff wanted
to discuss was the unsafe condition of the water and how the
residents were going to mortgage their homes to pay for it. He
stated that the background memo for this meeting, which has been
alluded to again this morning, says that "the neighborhood is no
longer neighborly." That's a personal observation that certainly
doesn't reflect objectivity on behalf of the county employee who
offered the memo. Mr. Spangler continued that the same memo
contains a statement that the opposition expressed by the
residents is "Irrational," and he took strong personal offense at
J U L 1988 41 Boor 73 PnE 181
that. Mr. Spangler objected to tactics that include sending
letters from a member of,county staff to at least one resident's
employer, who happens to be a doctor; although, he did note that
the letter was not written on county stationery. This letter was
written to Drs. Gold, Vann & White of the Doctor's Clinic asking
how medical professionals can permit a member of their staff to
oppose the water and defined that doctor as a "recalcitrant
physician." Mr. Spangler noted that Webster's defines
"recalcitrant" as "one who is stubbornly disobedient and defiant
of authority;" so, it would seem that those who oppose this water
project are "irrational, disobedient, defiant of authority,
obstinate" and, therefore, should -be ignored.
Commissioner Bird wished to know who wrote that letter and
wished to see a copy of it.
Copies were supplied, and Director Pinto explained that -the
letter was written by someone who has been working for the county
staff but who also is a resident of the subject community. That
is that individual's personal opinion; we in no way, shape or
form, agree or disagree with that letter; and he is very sorry
the letter was written. We, however, have no way to control what
someone writes on his own personal time.
Mr. Spangler believed the whole point is that the majority
of the residents have said they do not want the water, and he,
therefore, did not think this matter ever should have come before
the Commission.
Environmental Health Director Michael Galanis came before
the Board, emphasizing that he is for the spread of public water
throughout the entire community, and he wished to talk about the
whole concept .of public water and what it has meant to public
health. Mr. Galanis noted that one of the reasons we now have a
I.ife span of over 75 years is due to the assurance of safe
potable public water supplies. We are living in a county
expected to grow by 41% in the next.10 years, in a state that is
now the 4th largest in the nation, and our population is largely
42 BOOK 73 pnx 182
dependent on ground water supplies. Right now the supply is
plentiful, but statewide they feel the quality of the ground
water is deteriorating. The DER estimates that there are well
over 6,000 leaking underground storage tanks in this state. In
the community alone there are 22 such tanks registered, and Mr.
Galanis suggested those estimates are way understated. He spoke
strongly in favor of mandatory hookup to utilities when available
and did not believe the petition method has been successful. He
then noted that Glendale Lakes draws all of its drinking water
from the shallow ground water aquifer, which water exhibits high
levels of iron, total dissolved solids and chlorides. They have
taken samples in this area, and his position is that there are
some potential public health problems.
Chairman Scurlock asked if Mr. Galanis intends to put out a
notice stating that you can't drink the water, and he stated that
he did not.
The audience had many questions regarding the specific
sampling done and the resulting statistics.
Mr. Galanis continued to discuss the quality of the water,
confirming that there were no negative bacteriological results,
but pointing out that the entire subdivision is served by septic
tanks, and the lots are not extraordinarily large. He estimated
that about 32,000 gallons of effluent are being discharged into
that shallow aquifer every day, and stressed that he felt it is
imperative that the county adopt a comprehensive and on-going
plan to spread public water over the county.
Chairman Scurlock pointed out that county utility system has
had a tremendous amount of expansion, going from 2,000 customers
to ove.r 10,000.; so, he did not feel anyone questions the
commitment of the county to move forward and make good water
available. He believed there is a tremendous need out there;
there are -many people who want it and it takes so I.ong to
actually get it, that he did not see why we should force this on
those who do not want it. He noted that we can leave them out,
JUL 1988 43 900K 73 FACE 183
and then in five years or so, when they do want it, it probably
will cost them $7,000.
Mr. Galanis argued that the Board will just keep on facing
this issue over and over, but the Chairman pointed out that we
have a great many more people wanting the water and the roads
than we can deal with; so, he felt we should give it to the ones
who want it rather than battle with those who don't want it.
Commissioner Bird agreed with the Chairman, but did believe
that from our utilities management perspective, it does make
economical sense to try to in -fill some areas we are leap-
frogging over now. He felt Indian River Heights is a major area
that should be on county water some day and possibly all of
Glendale Lakes at some time.
Mr. Galanis continued to stress the need for people to be on
public water, emphasizing that we are dealing with a prolifera-
tion of wells in areas with septic tanks which he felt is a
genuine health problem.
Chairman Scurlock felt the Health Department should not
continue to give people the permits for the septic tanks and
wells if that is the case.
Commissioner Wheeler noted that we have a procedure we set
and follow with our petition program, and the only instances
where he would be interested in going outside that procedure
would be where the water is not drinkable and would be a hazard
or in a subdivision that has whole lot of owners of vacant lots
petitioning against the people living there who want the water.
Otherwise, he would stay with the present procedure.
Commissioner Bowman believed that actually the vacant lots
also benefit from the available of water, and the Board members
agreed.
Director Pinto pointed out that you run into a "Catch 22"
situation - if you don't put in the lines when the lots are
vacant, then people have invested in septic tanks and wells, and
he believed it has been proven in the nation that you cannot run
44 BOOK. 73 vA13 184
r � �
a utility system on a petition basis. He stated that he was not
concerned about the economics involved if Glendale Lakes does not
connect. The utility does not need these customers; we do not
need the headache; and he did not want the people aggravated with
him. As to the question posed as to why this ever came to the
Commission, Director Pinto pointed out that there were those who
feel as strongly for the water as some feel against it, and he
can't refuse them the right to come to the Commission.
Lynn Hail, resident of Glendale Lakes, wished to speak
affirmatively of this project. He apologized to the Board for
getting them involved in a neighborhood squabble, but stated that
he did believe there is a need to address the petition process,
which he felt has a potential for doing some real damage, and it
is happening now. He felt the problem is two -fold - the poor
Information disseminated and the fact that someone working for
the county has written a letter that caused bad feelings and
exacerbated the negative feelings that were there. Mr. Hall
believed the neighborhood is divided about half and half - some
folks have good water and some don't. His house is four years
old, and he can't keep the iron off his fixtures. He believed
the method of the payment is a sticking point as well as the cost
and asked if there is any way to try to appease the folks who are
not in favor of this and possibly spread the payments out over a
longer term.
Chairman Scurlock noted that we have tried to work with
residents in terms of the payment schedule; however, we must be
consistent and can't adopt a program just for one neighborhood.
Jack Pearce, part time employee of the Utilities Department,
believed he has become the villain in this piece. He felt that
some of the comments made about his personal comments have been
appropriate and believed he owes the Commission an apology since
he works for the County part time. While he does feel that he
can express his private opinion to whomever he wants, he believed
he made an extreme tactical mistake, and he is sorry for that.
45 BOOK 7 rrlE 18 5
The friendliness is gone from the neighborhood, but that is all
incidental - the important thing is that we find a better way to
get water spread throughout the county. Mr. Pearce again wished
to express his personal opinion, which is that when you have a
system for getting water into old established neighborhood with
decaying tanks and wells, he does not feel that the petition
method works.
Virginia Spangler informed the Board that she is very upset
by the tactics that have been used and felt strongly that they do
not conform to the dignity of this chamber. She expressed her
belief that if some of the people in the neighborhood do not have
good water, it is probably due to the fact that they have very
shallow wells. Her well is 96' deep and she has no problems; so,
she did feel those with water problems have an alternative.
Chairman Scurlock advised that the depth.of the well depends
on the strata in the neighborhood. He personally has a good well
at 27'.
Mrs. Askew inquired about the possibility of adjusted terms
as she felt they might be in favor of the water if some of the
terms could be adjusted.
Chairman Scurlock emphasized that our utility system is not
supported by taxes; it is totally self-supporting. We cannot
talk about price, but we can talk about such things as length of
payment.
Administrator Balczun believed 5 or 10 years is rather
immaterial to us as far as interest and cash flow for this
particular project is concerned, and it was pointed out that
actually people can get better terms through a home equity loan
or through some institution other than the county.
Commissioner Wheeler noted that it appears we have got 16
residents quite evenly split, and it seems there is some effort
towards neighborhood reconciliation. He intends to support our
petition system as there doesn't seem to be a dire emergency.
While he personally disagreed with those who don't want the water
46 BOOK 9 3 F.��F 186
,JUL 1
as he believed it is cost efficient over a period of time, he
would like to table this for a week and have the neighbors talk
again and come up with a specific number of those for and
against.
Residents stressed that the Board has a petition stating
that 9 are against the project, which is a majority.
Joseph Murphy, 916 47th Avenue, informed the Board that
initially they went to the meeting in March and then the vote was
11 to 4 against and they agreed to table and take a survey of the
area. Mr. Pearce surveyed 56 people, 25 responded and 9 were for
the water, but Mr. Murphy believed the survey went outside
Glendale Lakes and all the way to -12th Street. They had another
meeting and another vote of 8 to 5 against the water. Mr. Murphy
stated that he would like to resolve this, and he would certainly
go along with the Chairman's recommendation that the county -first
take the water to the many people who want it, and then if five
years from now it turns out that the Glendale residents have made
a mistake and it costs them $7,000 to get the water, so be it.
Commissioner Bird asked if we have a clear cut petition
policy on water; 1.e, do we require 66% be in favor or do we just
look for a simple majority.
Utilities Director Pinto advised that we have done it based
on a simple majority, and we have done some where there was not a
majority.
Commissioner Bird noted that if we were going to do it, he
would prefer to do all Glendale Lakes; however, it appears that
at this time a majority are not in favor of it, and although he
personally feels they are making a mistake, it is their decision
and he -does -not want to force this on them.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, that we not proceed with.the
water system improvements for 47th Avenue and 9th
Place, Glendale Lakes Estates, at this time.
47 Boor 73 �a E 187
Commissioner Bird wished to make it clear that, even though
it would be politically unpopular, if the Environmental Health
Director says the water is actually unfit, he will vote to put
the water in whether the majority want it or not. Also, Director
Pinto is the business manager of a multi- million dollar
operation, and if he feels it makes economic sense to put in
these improvements, he wants him to inform the Board of this so
we can make the decision to move ahead. Commissioner Bird wanted
to be sure that both Director Pinto and Mr. Galanis feel free to
tell the Board the actual situation.
Commissioner Wheeler echoed Commissioner Bird's comments and
assured those present that he would approve action to put the
water in if it were an unsafe situation and a health hazard.
Discussion ensued about the Health Department continuing to
issue permits for septic tanks and wells, and Commissioner Bowman
believed that if the only criteria for allowing septic tanks and
wells is the distance between them, a lot of other important
factors are being overlooked.
Director Galanis agreed, and noted that the point he tried
to make today is that he believes time is running out; however,
state criteria for issuance of the permits is the requirement
that there be 75' between the septic tank and the well, and he
works for the state. In regard to the quality of the water,
state law really doesn't care what you drink out of your private
well, but from a public health standpoint, he cares.
Discussion ensued as to whether the county can pass an
ordinance setting higher standards for a potable well.
Attorney Vitunac advised that we can for public water
supplies, but Mr. Galanis believed the Board is talking about
minimum standards on private water supplies.
Attorney Vitunac stated that he will have to check and see
if the state has pre-empted that field; other than that, the
county has the power to adopt technical regulation of that type.
JUL 51998 48 Boor 73 PA;E 188
Commissioner Bowman stated that she would like the Attorney
to give the Board an opinion on this, and Board members agreed.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION not to proceed
with the subject water improvements. It was voted
on and carried unanimously (4-0).
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
Administrator Balczun reviewed memo of Planning Director
Keating:
TO: Charles Balczun DATE: June 21, 1988 FILE:
County Administrator
SUBJECT: FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
FRCPbert M. Keating, AICP` `rREFERENCES: FIRM
Community Development Department DIS:FEE
It is requested that the information herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at
their regular meeting of July 5, 1988.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS:
On June 13, 1988, a public meeting on the revised flood insurance
rate maps for Indian River County was held. Conducted by rep-
resentatives of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA),
the purpose of the meeting was to explain the flood insurance
study recently completed for the county and to identify the
'procedures involved in final approval of the maps.
The flood insurance maps set the minimum elevations for con-
struction within flood hazard areas. Although flood insurance
maps were prepared when the county first joined the National
Flood Insurance Program and these maps have been and are being
used for setting minimum floor elevations for construction
activity, the new maps are the result of a more detailed flood
study. The new maps change minimum elevations in various parts
of the county. In some areas the minimum elevations increase,
while in other areas the elevations decrease.
49 no. ' PACE 189
JL 5 1988
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS:,
The County has had copies of these new maps for several months,
and the Public Works Department has reviewed them. Based upon
the Public Works analysis, no major flaws were identified with
the maps. In fact, the new maps are currently being used as a
basis for making recommendations for finished floor elevations
for projects undergoing site plan review.
According to FEMA, a formal process must be followed for adopting
the new maps. This process involves legal ad/public notice
requirements by FEMA, a ninety day appeal period for proposed
flood elevations on the new maps, and finalization (revision,
printing, distribution) of the new maps. This process is expect-
ed to take nine months. Until then, however, the new maps may
not be used in the building permit process even if they would
result in a lower minimum elevation.
The FEMA representatives noted that.if a community requests that
the new maps become effective as soon as possible and agrees not
to appeal or support .an appeal of the proposed elevations, the
timeframe for making the maps effective may be reduced signifi-
cantly. Since the Public Works Department concurs with the
elevations on the new maps and because having the new maps in
place would benefit the community, the staff recommends that the
county request -that FEMA make the maps effective as soon as
possible. To accomplish this, the attached form must be executed
and sent to FEMA.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners
authorize the chairman to execute the attached request for an
early effective date for Indian River County's new flood insur-
ance rate map.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized
the Chairman to sign the letter requesting an early
effective date for the County's new flood insurance
rate map, as follows:
,JUL 50 Boos 73 F. u 1! 0
,layys%.
isS `:
_
- -
_-,
S �lPLE EARLY-- CONVERSION
LETTER
4 t
k
- ?
s _.
..
�
OR1.
T
_,SAMPLE'£I3RLY
EFtECTIVE OF
FIRM LETTER
_ s
i -
rr
s
,DATE,
_
Y .
i. _
,
_
.__. -
•. �
t
1 �6
� a; ,--.c; ercency p afi-agement Adency
Sin' -, M:`;
C Peachtree Street. Id. E.
In�,A,i G, i a 30309
�,
, ��+n 4, {
7,y'lk �ff 1. p �.i a S d1. f t F, - 4r''�'�4
.; '1 Vh,s it Y AJ S J7.
� c - - ty J of
Indian River ���herAby` rev_ueats that
. ._._ _
City or rCounty� �11:(Nalnej
aye 4,i i et 'fi g , ,
f�.m .nr�-" -11 I a .I^surrYrice Fate trap recently'• presented at ,
3 t'> °xdt cr_,� I - t `i'� e a _ rt",.
4 I-, 5000. npeting �be mace. ef4ective as „.00n as possib�,G
ro�g t w
5�',rrt -_
J + -4- �" - �, t k r �'
Count of her �;b a rees with 'k
� Indian �t .ver Y 9
tCtyr CounLyj (I�.:mej
F '"ham rs t�,a i tr ` i '�Ji, t S c t F ' -•. .4. ,• C� c t, E';' -. K. 't i -
��, cr'.y ``; } , `. 4, �5 , .•rrr t. �' v5 I ,�14_. a r x j,
ati.16 " IV_ hshowr� o1.n 'the preliminary FISfFIRM ,and w� .i no10
' :,.
pr11
aposec elevation, nor will we support any_indivadualt
rr ��
k . ' s .. e
e J.'.14
w i , a, - - -1.1� ':i ,!, r_
o d m�qe-prevent on°tyrd3r,ande is in:;
TO: Charles A. Balczun
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.,
PuApph
'WWorr)�q Director
FROM: R&'. / -efs
cia,P.E.
County Engineer
SUBJECT: Indian River Boulevard - Final Payment on Landscaping
DATE: June 13, 1988
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On site inspection of the above subject by Rex Hailey,=Parks
Superintendent and Ralph N. Brescia, County Engineer indicated
that the Contractor has satisfied the contract specifications in
completing the project.
It should be noted that all shrubs are warranteed for 90
days and all trees are warranteed for 1 year.
At present, the contractor has received payment of
$11,952.73 or 50% of the total contract price.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the remaining 50% be paid in full at
this time to Lounds Nursery, Inc..
FUNDING - -
Funding for this project will come from 'Account
#304-214-541-066.51
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, to approve the final payment
of $11,952.73 to Lounds Nursery, Inc., as recom-
mended by staff.
Commissioner Bird agreed that the landscaping is an asset to
the Boulevard, but already it is starting to be overgrown with
weeds. He was concerned that the way it is laid out may not be
practical for our people to maintain. While he hoped we continue
to landscape such roads, he felt there may be a lesson to be
learned from the standpoint of maintenance about the type of
plantings to use and in what kind of clusters, etc. He wished to
know who is responsible for this maintenance, and Engineer Ralph
Brescia advised that it is Road S Bridge and Parks.
52
...
Bo®K 731VUL19
� � r
Chairman Scurlock informed the Board that he attended a
meeting with St. Lucie County recently and :learned that they did
an analysis in this regard with the result that they now are
contracting out for specific services for certain portions of
their roads and finding it very cost effective. He hoped that
during budget sessions we discuss that possibility.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0).
ADDITIONAL HRS FUNDING
Administrator Balczun reviewed the following:
TO: Board of County DATE: June 29, 1988 FILE:
Commissioners
FROM;Charles P. Balczun
County Administrator
SUBJECT: ADDITIONAL HRS FUNDING - -
AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE
AGREEMENT
REFERENCES:
We have been informed of the availability of additional state
funding for certain programs administered by the Indian River
County Public Health Unit.
The programs and amounts are:
PRIMARY CARE $ 67,415.00 -
FAMILY PLANNING $ 3,817.00
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH (SJRWDM) $ 11,316..00
These fundswill be made available to the County if the Board of
County Commissioners authorize the Chairman to execute a copy of
the notification letter dated June 14, 1988 from the HRS District
IX Administrator (copy attached).
It is recommended that you authorize execution of that document and
direct staff to prepare and forward to HRS the amended documents
referenced in the letter.
JUL 5 im 53 nox 73 F'nliE 193
rrn rwf.r n r w. •i w wu
NDNYIIITATrOk S"V1J}S
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT
ti J'JN 1988
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM D
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH C%J AlvuniFutUt s pttl°�
TO: Charles Balczun DATE: 6/28/88 FILE:
County Administrator
THRU: Bernard Berntan,,M. D.
County Health Director
SUBJECT: Attached Award letter from
the Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services regarding
increases in funding
. Galanis, M.P.H. REFERENCE: - -
Environmental Health
Chapter.154, Florida Statutes, requires the department to notify
the county when any increases in State Funding are received by the
County Public Health Unit.
The statute further requires that this modification of the contract
be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. These funds were
excess funds distributed to projects who applied and are earmarked for
capital equipment to be used at the health departments Vero Beach,
Sebastian, and Fellsmere locations.
It should be noted however that the eleven thousand three hundred
sixteen ($11,316) dollars awarded by St. John's will actually be granted
to the Board of County Commissioners and be passed through to the County
Public Health Unit. Further contract development by the County Public
Health -Unit will reflect these as county contributions to the overall-._.
operations of the Health Department.
If the Board of County Commissioners chooses to concur with the funding
increase, no action is necessary at this time.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
si-oner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) concurred
with the funding increase described above and as per
memo of the Environmental Health Director.
54
BOOK 73 F'"CC 194
ACQUISITION OF PARCEL ACROSS FROM ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
Administrator Balczun reviewed the following memo:
TO: Board of County DATE: June 27, 1988 FILE: -
Commissioners
r,il `,.
3 :3 `' a�
SUBJECT: ACQUISITION OF PARCEL
Charles P. Balczun
FROM: County Administrator REFERENCES:
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
The County has been acquiring parcels to the north of the County
Administration -Building for the last several years. _.-
Within the general area of those acquisitions another parcel has
become available. That parcel is located at -the Northeast corner
of the intersection of 19th Avenue and 26th Street and directly
across from our Warehouse. The available parcel is Block 6, West
1/2 of Lot 6 and West 1/2 of East 1/2 of Lot 6 - Booker T.
Washington Subdivision - and totals some 4,687.5 sf + or -.
The current asking price for the parcel is $20,000.
The County currently owns all of blocks 3 and 4, 650 of block 6,
50% of block 7.and 300 of block 5. Of the 5 blocks (3, 4, 5, 6, 7)
the County owns 32 of the 47 lots.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that this matter be given favorable consideration
by the Board of County Commissioners and that staff be directed to
enter into negotiations for the parcel.
FUNDING
The account against which this acquisition would be charged
currently has an unencumbered appropriation balance of $65,465 and '
a cash balance of approximately $75,000.
[JUL 198855 BOOK 7 f AGE 19,
s mt
,'��'
_ J
o
•—j a
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) directed
staff to enter into negotiations for the parcel
described above.
VFW REQUEST USE OF COUNTY VEHICLE FOR SURPLUS FOOD DISTRIBUTION
The Administrator reviewed the following memo:
I
,JUL 5 1988
56 Boa .73 PA40
rE 196
TO: Board of County DATE: July 5, 1988 FILE:
Commissioners
SUBJECT: SURPLUS FOOD DISTRIBUTION -
REQUEST FOR USE OF COUNTY
VEHICLE/DRIVER
FROM: Charles P. Balczun REFERENCES:
County Administrator
BACKGROUND
The local Veterans of Foreign Wars Post participates in the
distribution of surplus federal commodities to the needy.
Essentially, on a once monthly basis, members utilize their private
vehicles to transport commodities from the break -bulk facility in
Gifford to the VFW Post in Vero Beach^ from which it is then
distributed.
Transportation of the foodstuffs not only causes wear and tear on
these privately owned vehicles, it also causes the process to be
unnecessarily cumbersome since the vehicles are relatively small
and not configured for this purpose.
Consequently, we have been requested to provide one truck and one
driver once monthly for approximately two hours for the purpose of
transporting the surplus commodities. The VFW would continue to
provide volunteer labor.
ANALYSIS
The County has an appropriately designed vehicle which would be
suitable for this purpose and is able to make a driver available.
The cost of doing so would be nominal, particularly in view of the
fact that absent volunteer participation, the responsibility would
otherwise be placed on the County together with attendant program
administration and overhead.
Mr. Vitunac has reviewed this matter and believes such
participation can legitimately be defined to be within the 'public
purpose' scope as provided by law.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners
1. Declare that provision of a truck and driver would result
in the public deriving a benefit.
2. Declare that the County could otherwise provide the
surplus commodity distribution itself.
3. Authorize staff to provide a vehicle and driver as
proposed.
'JL 5 1988 57
Bou E 19 7
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) declared
that provision of a truck and driver as requested by
the VFW would result in a public benefit; declared
that the County could otherwise provide the surplus
commodity distribution itself; and authorized staff to
provide a vehicle and driver as proposed.
PURCHASE OF SOD FARM BY UTILITIES DEPT.
County Attorney Vitunac reviewed his memo:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
Q"R��
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: June 28, 1988
RE: SOD FARM
Commission Meeting - July 5, 1988
At the June 7, 1988 meeting of the Board of County
Commissioners the Board held an advertised public hearing to
consider the purchase by the County of approximately 144
acres of land by the Utilities Department to be used in
conjunction with the expansion of the wastewater treatment
system. The band is currently used as a sod farm.
The appraisals obtained by the County did not support the
purchase price offered by the sellers, and the Board
directed the staff to negotiate a contract with a price not -
to -exceed $11,500.00 per acre. The attached contract is
based on a price of $11,500.00 per acre for a total purchase
price of approximately .$1,720,000.00. The purchase price
would be.paid $700,000.00 in cash at closing and the balance
paid over two years with interest at 94% simple interest,
evidenced by a nonsecured promissory note of the County
which indicates that the note is not payable from ad valorem
taxes and is not secured by any liens or mortgages.
Staff recommends execution of this contract.
JUL 5 1988 58 BOOK 73 f'duE 198
Attorney Vitunac informed the Board that since the price was
reduced, we are going to knock a year off on the payment - there
will be three payments altogether, including the one at closing,
and they are recommending deleting the last sentence under
Paragraph 3. Purchase Price and Method of Payment - "The Buyer
warrants that all interest payable to the Seller will be tax-free
for Federal income tax purposes and, if not, the interest will be
adjusted accordingly."
Attorney Robert Jackson, speaking for the sellers, confirmed
that is agreeable to them.
Utilities Director Pinto advised that the Budget Office has
informed him that the funding is available, and he assured the
Board that from the utilities aspect, they very much like and
need the property.
Attorney Vitunac stated for the record that the note which
will evidence this will state that there is no prepayment penalty
and we can pay it off at any time.
Discussion continued as to the specific acreage -involved.
Attorney Jackson advised that it is actually 148 acres, not 150,
and Director Pinto explained that the agreement says that the
price will be adjusted on a per acre basis. This -will be
surveyed.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) author-
ized the Chairman to execute the Contract with
Isabelle M. Beuttell for purchase of the subject
property.
JUL 5 1988 59 BOOK 73 u lu 199
CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE
THIS CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE is made and entered into
this 5th day of July , 1988, by and between
ISABELLE M. BEUTTELL, hereinafter called the "Seller", and INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a Florida political subdivision, herein-
after called the "Buyer".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Seller is the owner of certain real property
located in Indian River County, Florida`, the same being more
particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a
part hereof; and,
WHEREAS, Buyer intends to condemn ;the above referenced
property in the event that no agreement is worked out between the
parties' hereto; ,and,.
WHEREAS, the Seller wishes to sell and the Buyer wishes to
buy said property under the terms and conditions hereinafter set
forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and• in consideration of the mutual
promises and covenants contained herein, as well as other good
and valuable consideration,. the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, the parties to.this contract do.agree as follows:
1. AGREEMENT TO BUY AND SELL; Seller agrees to sell and
Buyer agrees to buy that certain real property located in Indian
River County, Florida, more particularly described on Exhibit A
attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein, which
property is approximately 148.396 acres, including easements but
excluding rights of way.
2. LIENS AND ENCUMBRANCES: Seller warrants that there are
no'liens and/or encumbrances on the herein described property
except those appearing of record and taxes for the year 1988.
I. PURCHASE PRICE AND METHOD OF PAYMENT:
A. The purchase price for the property is
$1,720,000.00; however, said figure is derived from a
purchase price of $11,500.00 per acre. The parties agree
that the price shall be adjusted based on a final survey
60
JUL 19 BOOK c; , 900
M
agreeable to both parties, at the rate of $11,500.00 per
acre.
B. The purchase price shall be paid in the following
manner:
3
1. The -Buyer wild. pay the Seller the sum of
$700,000.40 in cash at closing, which shall be applied
to the purchase price.
2. The balance of the purchase price shall be -
evidenced by an unsecured promissory note from the
Buyer to the Seller,'payable annually for one (1) year
after closing in the amount of $700,000.00, including
interest, and the balance to be paid in full at the end
W of the 2nd year after closing of the sums remaining
due. Interest shall accrue on said promissory note
from date of closing at the rate of nine _and 1/4
percent (9 1/4%) per annum simple interest. }g&qCXX@?MX
Dos
W�iCx�?�a`t�KX3{a�i3�eY xxx
b�x�xc�xxxXMWx"V0Wxd;Xxxxx
f
4. EXPENSES, TAXES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS: This is a net
sale, and all charges for expenses, taxes and special assess-
ments, -including title insurance, documentary stamps, recording,
stamps on the note, and all other costs of closing shall be paid
by the Buyer, except that each party will pay its own attorneys'
fees, and ad valorem taxes will be prorated as of the date of
closing. The Seller will provide said policy of title insurance
at the Buyer's expense.
5.- TITLE: The Seller shall convey full fee simple title
without encumbrances or title defects to the Buyer at closing by
a general warranty deed signed by the Seller.
6. SURVEY: The Seller has a survey of the subject proper-
ty, which shall be used by the parties to determine the acreage,
and if A re -certification is required by -the Buyer, the . Y y h Buyer
will pay the cost thereof.
61
JUL 198
BOOK 73 F,1,H t201
M M
7. INGRESS AND EGRESS: Seller covenants and warrants that
there is ingress and egress to and from the property.
8. DEFAULT: The parties to this contract agree that:
A. If the sale and purchase of:.the property contem-
plated by thiscontract. is not consummated as a result of
the Buyer's default, then the Seller .shall be entitled to
receive all of its accrued costs, expenses and attorneys'
fees as damages. When said sum is agreed upon and paid, all,
parties shall be released of all obligations hereunder.
B. If the sale and purchase of the property contem-
plated by this contract is not consummated as a result of
the Seller's default, Buyer may, at his option, declare the
contract void or sue for specific performance.
9. CLOSING: Closing of this transaction shall be at the
office'of attorney for the Seller or the Buyer, as agreed upon by le
the parties. Closing shall be on the 30th day of June, 1988, At..*/
closing, the Seller shall deliver to Buyer a Warranty Deed to the
property, subject only to those matters of record not adversely
affecting title or the use of the lands described herein. The
Seller shall also deliver to Buyer a Seller's Affidavit attesting
to the absence of any financing statements, -claims of lien or
potential lienors and that there have been no improvements to the
property for ninety (90) days immediately preceding the date of
closing. Full and complete possession of the property shall be
delivered to the.Buyer, •free.of all tenants and occupants.
10:' BROKERS: ;iloreal estate brokerage commission shall be
applicable to this contract.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to thisG contract have
hereunto set their hands and:seals the day and year first above
written.
ITNESSES:
ISABELLE M. BEUTTELL
As to 4eller.
SELLER
62
'JUL 5 198BOOK 10 1-46;E 20
/01P, _
',/ i.. , /;/,GJa1,Is to Buyer
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By ! ,o. C.
BUYER _-- --
SCHEDULEA
t
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Tracts 3 and 6, less canal right-of-way as described in OR
Book 403, Page 900, and also tract 4 less the west 65 feet
or road right-of-way and tract 5 less the west 65 feet from
road right-of-way and less road fright -of -way fo.r State Road
9 as described in OR Book 275, Page 278, all lying within
Section 14, Township 33, Range 38, Indian River County,
Florida.
Peter Beuttell noted that there is an old building on the
property that was used at one time for an office. He wished to
know if the county needs it; otherwise, they have some people who
would like to take it out of there.
The Chairman advised Mr. Beuttell to meet with Director
Pinto who will let him know whether or not we need it.
NON -WAIVER AGREEMENT (LAWSUIT/WYNN)
Attorney Vitunac reviewed the following:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Coz__X� �,
harles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: June 27, 1988
RE: AGENDA - BCC MEETING 7/5/88
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S MATTERS
Indian River County was recently sued by Margaret Wynn, and
our Insurance company has retained its chosen legal counsel
to defend the.Board of County Commissioners pursuant to the
policy. As is customary, the County is being asked to sign
the attached Non -Waiver Agreement, which Indicates that by
defending the Board the Insurance company is not waiving any
defenses It may have regarding the policy exceptions. .
Staff recommends execution of this agreement.
63
Attorney Vitunac informed the Board that this incident
involved a drug bust where one of the suspects was shot by the
law enforcement officers. Because of the Sheriff's involvement,
the decedent's estate has sued the county erroneously. The
insurance company is defending us. They have a standard letter
saying that they will defend us against going to court, but once
we do go to court, we will have to hire our own lawyer. We are
aware of that and The Non -Waiver Agreement is a standard form we
need to sign.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously authorized
the Chairman to execute the Non -Waiver Agreement as
recommended by the County Attorney.
• No.- P 826 580 110
NON -WAIVER AGREEMENT
June 17, 1988
RE: Our File Number: 81153-068
Date of Loss: 6/7/86
Claimant: Margaret Wynn
Agreement Number: 337
Our Member: Indian River County Board of County
Commissioners
Whereas, the County of Indian River hereim.and after
called..the designated member, holds a contract Agreement
under FML 337, issued by the Florida Municipal Liability
Self -Insurer Program, herein after called the Program; and;
Whereas, the said designated Member is claiming benefits
under the said self-insuring agreement with regard to a cer-
tain event occurKingonor about June 7, 1986, which
may or may not become the subject of litigation filed by
Margaret Wynn and'personal:representative of the Estate
of Lamar Wynn,•J•r. anfl Margaret Wynn, Individually, as
Plaintiff; and.
Whereas, .the said Program -contends, or may later contend that
the designated Member is not entitled to such benefits under
Exclusion Number 22 of page 7 of the Agreeement, which
states that the coverage agreement does not apply to
any liability arising out of or caused or contributed
to, by any actual or alledged legai discrimination or
64 BOOK 7
L 5 1988
Idget
1; Oep'
as a result of alledged damage to any person from the
administration of any Federal -State -Local cooperative
program. In addition, please refer to Exclusion Number
28, of page 8 of the Agreement which states that the
coverage agreement does not apply to any liability•for
the acts or ommissions of any insured committed while
acting outside the course and scope of his employment
or committed in bad faith with malicious purpose or
in a manner exihibiting wilfull and wanton disregard
of human rights safety or property and
Whereas, it appears the interest of both the designated
Member and the Program may be better served and protected
by an investigation of the facts and/or entering a defense
on behalf of the -designated Member.
Now, therefore, it is understood and agreed between the
designated Member and the Program that the Program may, by
its representatives proceed to investigate the said incident,
Q undertake the defense of any suit arising out of the said
incident, without prejudice to the rights of the said
Program,and that no action heretofore or hereafter taken
by the Program shall be construed as a waiver of the rights
of the Program, if in fact it has such rights, to deny
liability and withdraw from the case;
Also, that by'execuKtion.of.this agreement, the designated
Member does not-.:•wa3ve any rights under the agreement.
Further, this letter will confirm to the Member that we
have selected as defense attorney F. Scott Pendley
of the lata firm of.Dean, Ringers, Morgan, & Lawton,
P.O. Box 2928, Orlando, FL 32802
Your signature of this form will also indicate your
agreement to the assignment of this defense firm and
attorney.
Executed in duplicate, this 17th day of June. 19AR_
FOR THE PROGRAM BY: fiv (�:"
GAJ ,
Kenneth R. Hakanson
FOR THE DESIGNATED MEMBER BY:
Oatel
BY:
65
L
.C.
BOOK 3 f nUE p.005
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 11:30 o'clock A.M.
ATTEST:
66
Chairman
BOOK 73 ["vu 206