HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/6/1988r An W
Tuesday, September 6, 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,
September 6, 1988, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Don C.
Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Richard N. Bird; Margaret C. Bowman; and
Carolyn K. Eggert. Absent was Vice Chairman Gary C. Wheeler,
who was out of town. Also present were William G. Collins, ll,
Acting County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, Attorney to the
Board of County Commissioners; Joseph Baird, OMB Director; and
Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order.
Dr. James Sanders, Chaplain of the State Correctional
Institute gave the invocation, and Commissioner Bowman
led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Chairman Scurlock asked that an emergency item be added in
regard to rescheduling a public hearing for the Utilities
Department for certain water system improvements.
Commissioner Eggert requested that Item 6D - Reappointments
to the Alcohol, Drug Abuse S Mental Health Planning Council - be
tabled for one week.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, Commissioner Wheeler being absent,
the Board unanimously (4-0) added the item for the
Utilities Department as requested by the Chairman
and agreed to table Item 6D for one week.
IEP 6 1988 Boos °— =;,cE 01
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or addi-
tions to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of August 10, 1988.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
the Minutes of the Special Meeting of August 10, 1988,
as written.
The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or addi-
tions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 16, 1988.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 16, 1988,
as written.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioners Eggert and Bowman asked that Items 0 and P be
removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion, and the Chairman
requested the Item R be removed also.
A. Reports
The following reports were received and placed on file in
the Office of Clerk to the Board:
Inspection Report, County S Municipal Detention
Facilities, 2nd Annual Routine Inspection,
IRC Jail, 7/28/88
Report of Convictions, Month of July, 1988
Copy of Financial Statement for the Vero Lakes Water
Control District, September 30, 1987
Copy of Financial Statement for the Delta Farms Water
Control District, September 30, 1987
2
soOK 74- Ffie O
SEP 6 1988
B. Out -of -County Travel
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) author-
ized out -of -County travel for Commissioners and
appropriate staff to attend the Florida Association
of Counties 58th Annual Conference & Educational
Exposition, Orlando, Fla., September 27-30, 1988.
C. Permission for Com. Eggert to be on School Board's Building
v -is nry Comms t tee
The Board reviewed memo from Commissioner Eggert:
TO: Board of County Commi.ssioner[)ATE: August 26, 1988 FILE: '
SUBJECT: School Board's Building
Advisory Committee
FROM: Carolyn K. Eggert REFERENCES:
County Commissioneg
I have been appointed to the Building Advisory Committee by the
School Board. May I please have the approval of the Board of
County Commissioners to be a member of this committee. Thank
you.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
the appointment of Commissioner Eggert to the Building
Advisory Committee by the School Board.
D. Reappts. to Alcohol, Drug Abuse & Mental Health Plnng. Council
This item was tabled for one week.
3 BOOK 6
SEP 6 1988
E. Resignation from Tourist Development Council (T. Reynolds)
The Board reviewed letter from Terry Reynolds:
LOS ANGELES (f
AUG IM
RECEIVED
BOARD COUKIY
COMMISSIONERS
DODGERTOWN
P. O. Box 2887
Vero Beach, Florida 32961-2887
(407) 5694900
0
August 25, 1988
Gary Wheeler, Chairman
Tourist Development Council
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Dear Gary:
It is with regret that I am forced to resign from
the Tourist Development Council of Indian River County.
I will be moving to -Los Angeles in early September and
cannot carry out my term.
Thank you for your understanding.
Sincerely,
Terry Reynolds
Director Dodgertown
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) accepted
the resignation of Terry Reynolds from the Tourist
Development Council -with regret.
F. Resignation from Code Enforcement Board
The Board reviewed the following letter from Mr. Walluk:
4
BOOK 74 F'1�1 F 04
r�•�
��-!91C4L ;1071 �F�s,�,✓��iv.�
/Gti�t/�=Urcc.€nr.�i%
C..✓ce'e'ezy"
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) accepted
the resignation of Anthony Walluk from the Code
Enforcement Board with regret.
G. Appointment to Code Enforcement Board
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) appointed
David J. Haeseler to the Code Enforcement Board to
replace Anthony Walluk.
H. Appointment to Transportation Planning Committee
The Board reviewed letter from the City of Fellsmere:
SEP 6 1988 5 BOOK 74 FAu 0
City of 34 Tritsump
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE POST OFFICE BOX 38
PHONE 571-0116 FELLSMERE, FLORIDA - 32948
August 16, 1988
Board of County Commissioners
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
POLICE DEPARTMENT
PHONE 571-1360
DISTRIBUTION LIST
Commissioners
Administrator
Attorney
Personnel
Public Works
Community Dev. ^
Utilities
Finance
Other
Commissioners:
This is just to let you know that Jonathan Washington is replacing
Fred Derry as our representative on the Transportation Committee.
If you have any questions, or need any additional information, please
do not hesitate to contact our office.
Sincerely, '� n
Jeanette E. Dale
,City Clerk
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
the appointment of Jonathan Washington to the Trans-
portation Planning Committee to replace Fred Derry
as the representative from the City of Fellsmere.
1. Request for Site Plan Extension - A. Forlani
The Board reviewed memo of Staff Planner McCoy:
6
Boox. 74 0S)
TO'Bill Collins II DATE:August 22, 1988 FILE:
Acting County Administrator % - — -- —
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M.
Kea n , ICP SUBJECT: SITEOPLAN IEXTENSIONT FOR
Community DevLr1opaitnt Director
THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP 4.6,
Chief, Current Development
FROM: John W. McCoy 1!�A REFERENCES: forlani
Staff Planner JOHN2
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of September 6, 1988.
On October 7, 1987 the Planning and Zoning Commission approved a
minor site plan application submitted by Al Forlani. Approval was
given to construct a dock on a vacant single-family lot on Lot 9,
Unit 4 River Shores subdivision.
Due to financial constraints, Al Forlani has been unable to
commence construction prior to the expiration of the approved site
plan. - However, if no construction has begun by October 7, 1988,
the site plan approval will lapse unless otherwise extended .by the
Board of County Commissioners.
No regulations have changed since the time of site plan approval
which affect this plan.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 23.2(G)(2), Appendix A of
the Zoning Code, Al Forlani is requesting a full 1 year extension
of the approved site plan. It has been the policy of the Board to
grant extensions to projects which conform to current codes.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Al Forlani's request for a one year
extension of the approved site plan; the new expiration date to be
October 7, 1989.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
a one year site plan extension as requested by Al
Forlani.
7
J. Final Plat Approval - Grand Harbor Phase 3 Plat, Pod "J"
The Board reviewed memo from Staff Planner Wiegers:
TO: The Honorable Members of The Board of County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M. Keati , A
Community Developmen Director
THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP '4.6.
Chief, Current Djev lopment
FROM: Robert E. Wiegersiv
Staff Planner, Current Development
SUBJECT: FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE GRAND HARBOR
PHASE 3 PLAT, POD "J"
DATE: August 29, 1988
It is requested that the information herein presented be given
forma1-'-Cons-ideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its
regular meeting -.of September 6, 1988.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Grand Harbor Phase 3 is a proposed ±8 acre subdivision located in
the southwest portion of the overall Grand Harbor DRI, immediately
west of ,POD "K" (Belle -Island) and south of Grand Harbor Boule-
vard.
At its regular meeting of June 23, 1988, the Planning and Zoning
Commission granted preliminary PRD approval for this development.
The Phase 3 final plat area consists of the POD "J" (Newport
Island) boundary.
The subject property is zoned RM -6, Multi -Family Residential 6 (up
to 6 units/acre), and has an MD -1, Medium Density Residential 1
(up to 8 units/acre) land use designation. The residential
density for this POD is ±10.3 units/acre and at the current rate
of development the overall density for the entire Grand Harbor
DRI, with the addition of this POD, is ±4 units/acre.
The owners, Gulf Cove Corporation, are now requesting that final
plat approval be granted to the Grand Harbor Phase 3 plat and have
submitted:
1. a final plat, substantially in conformance with the approved
preliminary PRD plat.
ANALYSIS:
Site development -within the POD "J" boundary will be controlled by
the approved preliminary PRD plan. The Phase 3 plat is in confor-
mance with the approved preliminary PRD plat, the Grand Harbor
Development Order, and all other applicable County regulations.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant
final plat approval to the Grand Harbor Phase 3 plat.
8 RooK 09
'S"EP 6 1988
J
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) granted
Final Plat Approval to the Grand Harbor Phase 3 Plat.
K. 1988 Estimate of Population
The Board reviewed memo from Staff Planner Loeper:
TO: DATE: FI LE:
William G. Collins, II August 31, 1988 -
Acting County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: 1988 ESTIMATE OF
POPULATION
R ext M Keatripg, CP
Community Develbpmeht Director
FROM' REFERENCES:
obert M. Loeper L 1988 Est.
''-Staff Planner - DIS:JEFF3
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
;consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
_,regular meeting of September 6, 1988.
:Background
;.Each year the University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and
Business Research (BEBR) produces estimates of population for
each_of the counties and municipalities of the state. BEBR then
sends these estimates to the appropriate local government for
*,review. Once adopted,. -these figures become the official.estimate
",used by -the :state for -'revenue sharing purposes for ;the 1988
1989 fiscal years
.:* i '` .:�.;' �•. � � �" ��� z '`«gra r� '� � }�, i i-. .
Summary
'The preliminary estimate for Indian River County for April 1,
J988 is 87,512. This represents an increase of 3,997 persons
`over the April .1, 1987 estimate. -For revenue sharing, the number
of inmates (206) is subtracted from the total population.
Staff has reviewed this estimate by examining past estimates,
projections and residential units added to the housing inventory
since the previous year. Review of this data indicates that the
county population has grown slightly faster than in previous
years but within the range of commonly accepted projections.
Review of housing completions -(certificates of occupancy) for the
unincorporated county, Vero Beach and Sebastian indicate that
=1666 new residential units have become available in.the past
year. =:_.By applying vacancy rates and average household size,
=staff considers this estimate.to be reasonably correct.
S E P 6` 988 9 BOOK 7 4. pAce 09
_Recommendation
"Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners accept
the preliminary.April 1, 1988 estimate of 87,512 for Indian River
:County and authorize the Director of Community Development to
"execute the attached form indicating that the County concurs with
the estimate.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) accepted
the preliminary April 1, 1988 population estimate
for Indian River County and authorized the Director
of Community Development to execute form indicating
the County's concurrence with.the estimate.
:'INDIA2: RIVER
'fn's=;�• +�: '� ;. r'.
PRELIMINARY POPULATION ESTIMATE (PERMANENT RESIDENTS) APRIL 1, 1988 .
''.'`err iF-, •. . • .. • :' ..: +.
r b•; TOTAL PRELIMINARY PRELIMINARY EST.
;g am CENSUS POPULATION ESTIMATE INMATES LESS INMATES
4/1/80 CHANGE 4/1/88. 4/1/88 4/1/88
59, 896 27,616 i 871512 -206 87,306
riZHE POPULATION ESTIMATE PROPOSED FOP. STATE REVENUE SHARING, 1988-1989 FISCAL
YEAR IS 87,306
-------------
;YOUR PRELIMINARY POPULATION ESTIMAT� FOR APRIL 1, 1988 IS * 87,512
t"- ----
r
,jtSEE ENCLOSED SHEET FOR AN EXPLANATI I OF TERMS.)
fR.� Lc ': f E..^'ir' i >.: ; ., I• }'° ':a. v: .. 'ia' . t y t ' - J
'''PLEASE MARK THE APPROPRIATE RESPONSE AND RETURN ONE COPY OF THIS FORM BEFORE
:.SEPTEMBER 15,.1988. RETAIN THE OTHER `OPY FOR YOUR FILE.
'� > ' jf^°, $`Y iy: i �+ � t� t > 7 y; w r=,x .� � � _ r y vJ/: F� _:-`t l •y - ,r _ , �} '�'d`.
�C "..I HAVE REVIEWED THIS PRELIMINARY VE'I,PULATION ESTIMATE AND CONSIDER IT TO BE
REASONABLY CORRECT li s
A.
I HAVE REVIEWED THIS PRELIMINARY POPJLATION ESTIMATE AND DO NOT CONSIDER IT
.,.TO BE REASONABLY ACCURATE. I BELIEVE A MORE ACCURATE ESTIMATE WOULD BE
I REQUEST THAT YOU RECOiQSIDER YOUR PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE.
' I HAVE REVIEWED THIS PRELIMINARY POPULATION ESTIMATE AND DO NOT CONSIDER IT
BE REASONABLY ACCURATE. I AM ENC_OSING DOCUMENTATION WHICH I BELIEVE
''•' SUPPORTS AN APRIL 1, 1988 ESTIMATE OF I REQUEST THAT YOU
_REVIEW THIS DOCUMENTATION AND RECONS:�JER YOUR PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE.
F. TITLE SIGNATURE
:IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT THIS ESTIMATE YOU MUST REQUEST A
'•..REVIEW BEFORE SEPTEMBER 15, 1988.
BUREAU OF ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS RESEARCH
POPULATION PROGRAM
221 MATHERLY HALL
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
GAINESVILLE, FL. 32611
(904) 392-0171
10 BOOK 74 1-[ 10
SEP 6 1988
UNINCORPORATED
PRELIMINARY POPULATION ESTIMATE (PERMANENT RESIDENTS) APRIL 1, 1988
X I HAVE REVIEWED THIS PRELIMINARY POPULATION ESTIMATE AND CONSIDER IT TO BE
REASONABLY CORRECT.
.I HAVE REVIEWED THIS PRELIMINARY POPULATION ESTIMATE AND DO NOT CONSIDER IT
TO BE REASONABLY ACCURATE. I BELIEVE A MORE ACCURATE ESTIMATE WOULD BE
I REQUEST THAT YOU.RECONSIDER YOUR PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE.
I HAVE REVIEWED THIS PRELIMINARY POPULATION ESTIMATE AND DO NOT CONSIDER IT
TO BE REASONABLY ACCURATE. I AM ENCLOSING DOCUMENTATION WHICH I BELIEVE
SUPPORTS AN APRIL 1, 1988 ESTIMATE OF I REQUEST THAT YOU
REVIEW THIS DOCUMENTATION AND RECONSIDER YOUR PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE.
4Z4
'1A*T ZTLE SIGNATURE
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT THIS ESTIMATE YOU MUST REQUEST A
REVIEW BEFORE SEPTEMBER 15, 1988.
BUREAU OF ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS RESEARCH
POPULATION PROGRAM
221 MATHERLY HALL
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
GAINESVILLE, FL. 32611
(904) 392-0171
L. Budget Amendment #057 - Cubit Engineering
The Board reviewed memo from the OMB Director:
SEP 6 1988 11 BOOK
..TOTAL
PRELIMINARY
PRELIMINARY EST.
CENSUS
POPULATION
ESTIMATE
INMATES
LESS INMATES
4/1/80
CHANGE
4/1/88
4/1/88
4/1/88
38,455
19,786
58,241
206
58,035
THE POPULATION ESTIMATE PROPOSED FOR STATE REVENUE
SHARING,
1988-1989 FISCAL
YEAR IS
58,035.
YOUR PRELIMINARY POPULATION
ESTIMATE FOR APRIL 1, 1988
-------------
IS *
-------------
58,241
.' (SEE ENCLOSED SHEET FOR AN EXPLANATION OF TERMS.)
PLEASE MARK
THE APPROPRIATE
RESPONSE AND RETURN ONE
COPY OF.THIS
FORM BEFORE
.SEPTEMBER
15, 1988. RETAIN
THE OTHER COPY FOR YOUR
FILE.
X I HAVE REVIEWED THIS PRELIMINARY POPULATION ESTIMATE AND CONSIDER IT TO BE
REASONABLY CORRECT.
.I HAVE REVIEWED THIS PRELIMINARY POPULATION ESTIMATE AND DO NOT CONSIDER IT
TO BE REASONABLY ACCURATE. I BELIEVE A MORE ACCURATE ESTIMATE WOULD BE
I REQUEST THAT YOU.RECONSIDER YOUR PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE.
I HAVE REVIEWED THIS PRELIMINARY POPULATION ESTIMATE AND DO NOT CONSIDER IT
TO BE REASONABLY ACCURATE. I AM ENCLOSING DOCUMENTATION WHICH I BELIEVE
SUPPORTS AN APRIL 1, 1988 ESTIMATE OF I REQUEST THAT YOU
REVIEW THIS DOCUMENTATION AND RECONSIDER YOUR PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE.
4Z4
'1A*T ZTLE SIGNATURE
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT THIS ESTIMATE YOU MUST REQUEST A
REVIEW BEFORE SEPTEMBER 15, 1988.
BUREAU OF ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS RESEARCH
POPULATION PROGRAM
221 MATHERLY HALL
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
GAINESVILLE, FL. 32611
(904) 392-0171
L. Budget Amendment #057 - Cubit Engineering
The Board reviewed memo from the OMB Director:
SEP 6 1988 11 BOOK
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: August 18, 1988
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT - 057
CUBIT ENGINEERING
FROM: Joseph A. Bair
OMB Director
-Description and Conditions
Cubit Engineering had a contract to do the Beach Renourishment
Study. When staff was developing the 1987/88 FY budget it was
anticipated that the final payment would have been paid before this
current fiscal year. The .Board of County Commissioners at the
meeting of August 16, 1988 authorized final payment in the amount of
$16,493.11 to Cubit Engineering.
Since the final payment was not made by September 30, 1987, we had a
higher cash balance in Federal Revenue sharing for the 1987/88
fiscal year than was anticipated. The attached budget amendment
increases Cash Forward Revenue and "Professional Service" Expenses
.to appropriate funds for the Cubit final payment.
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve Budget
Amendment 057.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
Budget Amendment #057 appropriating funds for the
final payment to Cubit Engineering on the Beach
Renourishment Study as recommended by staff.
TO: Members of the Board
Ayr-Z-aunty-commissio` a--z-s-
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
NUMBER: 057
DATE: August' -18. 1988
Entry
Number
Funds/Department/Account Name
Account Number
Increase
Decrease
1.
FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING
Expense:
Federal Revenue Sharing/
Professional Services
102-110-515-033.19
$16,494.00
0
Revenue:
Cash Forward
102-000-389-040.00$16,494.00
0
12
S E P 6 1988 Fra 71yF
r � �
M. Budget Amendment #059 - Increase_ Const. Officers' Salaries
(Supervisor of Elections udget�-
The Board reviewed the following memo:
TO: Members of -the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: August 30, 1988
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT - 059
INCREASE IN CONSTITUTIONAL
.OFFICERS SALARIES
CONSENT AGENDA
THROUGH: Ann Robinson A -P,
Supervisor of Elections
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director W -"-
Description
of Conditions
The Governor of the State of Florida signed a law (85-775) that
raised the Clerk of Circuit Court, Tax Collector, Property Appraiser
and Supervisor of Elections salaries by $2,100 per year. The law
was effective July 1, 1988 which meant that the above mentioned
constitutional officers would each only receive a.$1,073 increase
for the 1987/88 fiscal year. The Clerk of the Circuit Court,
Property Appraiser and Tax Collector are able to absorb the increase
within their budget. However, because the Supervisor of Elections
budget is small, she is unable to absorb the increase. The total
impact of the increase including benefits will require $1,351 to be
transferred from the General Fund Contingencies to the appropriate
salary line items in the Supervisor of Elections budget.
Executive Salaries $1,073.00
Social Security 81.00
Florida Retirement 187.00
Worker's Compensation. 6.00
Life Insurance 4.00
TOTAL $1,351.00
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
attached budget amendment.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
Budget Amendment #059 appropriating funds to the
Supervisor of Elections budget as recommended by the
OMB Director.
13 BOOK 744 F,'GE 1
SEP 6 1988
TO: Members of the Board SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
Of County Commissioners
NUMBER: 059
THROUGH: Joseph A. Baird
DATE: --August 30, 1988
Entry
Number
Account
Fund Department Name
Account Number
Increase
Decrease
GENERAL FUND
1.
Executive
Su v. of Elections Sala
001-700-519-011.11
S1.073.00
S 0
Social
Su v. of Elections/Security
001-700-519-012.11
81.00
0
Retirement
Su v. of Elections Contribution
001-700-519-012.12
S 187.00
S 0
Insurance
Su v. of Elections-Life&Health'
001-700-519-012.13
4.00
•-:a
Worker's
Su v. of Elections -Compensation
001-700-519-012.14
S 6.00
9 0
Reserve for Contingency
001-199-581-099.91
S 0
S1.351.0-0
N. Budget Amendment #060 - Refuse to Solid Waste District
The Board reviewed the following memo:
Description of Conditions
;The attached budget amendment transfers the Refuse Department from
,the General Fund to the newly established Solid Waste District per
-.the:requirements of the Bond Covenanents.
ter.•=S 4: ;i y �a- s
-Recommendation ^�
-Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
attached budget amendment.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
Budget Amendment #060 transferring the Refuse Depart-
ment to the Solid Waste Disposal District.
BOOK .1.4 F,qF 14
14
SEP u,1 1988
TO: Members of the Board
.of County Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
Entry
General /Refuse ZOther Oper.Supp.
General/Refuse/Herb. & Insect.
IGeneralZTransfer out
15
SUBJECT: -BUDGET AMENDMENT
NUMBER: 060
DATE: Auc7ust 30, 1988
1691
1,728
2,000
3.3.67
Budget Amendment: 060
Page, I — of 2.
A r"
BOOK 74 r,u 15
- M M
Entry
Account
Number
Fund Department Name
Account Number
Increase
Decrease
REVENUE
Funds Transfer In
411-000-381-020.00
133.715
S 0
EXPENSE
Solid
Waste Refuse Re lar Salaries
411-209-534-011.12
55,604
0
Solid
Waste/Refuse/Overtime
411-209-534-011.14
956
0
Solid
Waste Refuse/Special Pay
411-209-534-011.15
902
-
Solid
Waste/Refuse/S.S. Matching
411-209-534-012.11
4.995
9 0
Solid
.•
Waste Refuse Retirement Contri.
411-209-534-012.12
10,464
Solid_ - -
Waste Refuse Ins. Life & Health
411-209-534-012.13
10.177
S 0
Waste/Refuse/Worker's Comy.
411-209-534-012.14
9,119
0
Solid
Waste Refuse All Travel
411-209-534-034.02
182
0
Solid" = - -- -Garbage
Waste Refuse Solid Waste
411-209-534-034.33
S 13.33
0
Solid
Waste/Refuse/Rent Heavy E i .
411-209-534-034.51
S 1.296
S 0
Waste Refuse/Rent Heavy Eauip.
411-209-534-034.64
S 691
0
Solid=_ -- -- - -
Waste Refuse Maint.Hea Equip.
411-209-534-034.65
S 16.728
S 0
Solid
Waste Refuse Maint.Strt.Exce t
411-209-534-034.66
S 2,000
0
Solid_.
Waste Refuse Maint.Other Ecruip.
411-209-534-034.69
3,167
S 0
Solid
Waste/Refuse/Legal Ads
411-209-534-034.91
S 71
0
Solid
Office Supp.
411-209-534-035.11
S 190
0
'Waste/Refuse/All
Solid
Waste/Refuse/Fuel & Lubricant
411-209-534-035.21
S 2.309
S 0
Solid
Tire & Tube
411-209-534-035.22
S 343
0
'Waste/Refuse
Solid
Uniform & Clothing
411-209-534-035.24
S 614
0
'Waste/Refuse
Solid
Waste Refuse Instutional Su
411-209-534-035.25
S 37
0
Solid
,Waste/
efuse/ELcRendable Tools
411-209-534-035.26
21
0
Solid
Waste Refuse Medical Supplies
411-209-534-035.27
6
0
Solid
Waste/Refuse/Other O er. supp. 1411-209-534-035.291310
0
Solid
'Waste/Refuse
Herb. & Insect. 1411-209-534-035.381
200
0
Explanation:
See attached agenda item
C:\WP\BUDAMD88\BA060.REF
L_
16
Budget Amendment: 060
Page 2 of 2
Boy, 74 16
0. Bid #40911 - Chemicals Lot 5 (Caustic Soda 50%)
The Board reviewed memo from Purchasing Manager Ambler:
TO: William G. Collins II DATE: August 18, 1988 _ FILE:— — -
Acting County Admi r for
SUBJECT:
AWARD OF IRC BID #409R
CHEMICALS LOT 5
CAUSTIC SODA 50%
FROMkt, — REFERENCES:
Gus Ambler, C.P.M.
Purchasing Manager
1. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Bids were opened Wednesday, August 17, 1988 at 2:00 p.m.
for IRC Bid #409R.
12 Invitations to Bid were mailed. 5 bids were received
including 2 No Bids.
This bid was advertised in the newspaper.
2. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
The low bid meeting specifications for Caustic Soda was submitted
by Allied Chemical at $180.00 per ton. They have taken no exceptions'
to our specifications.
3. PEJMING:
Purchasing is not holding a budget approved requisition. No
Purchase Order will be issued before one is received.
4. REOOMMMATION:
Staff recommends that the bid be awarded and staff be authorized.
to proceed.
Commissioner Eggert wished to know what method is followed
to keep a P.O. number from being issued when we get these items
with no budget approved requisition.
Purchasing Manager Ambler advised that staff has a double,
check system to make sure no P.O. number is issued before Budget
has actually approved the requisition and stressed that they are
very careful about that.
Commissioner Bowman stated that her question related to the
reason for the 50% difference in the spread of the bid prices.
17�QQps 7 F1U 17
�
SEP 6 198
Purchasing Manager Ambler noted that is a volatile chemical
right now, and he could only suggest that the distributor that
Was low probably has a very good deal and a continuing contract
with his supplier.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) awarded
Bid #40911 for Caustic Soda 50% to the low bidder
Allied Chemical at $180 per ton as recommended by
staff per the following Bid Tabulation:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATION
BID NO. DATE F OP NING
-elo9 7
BID TITL
Fo
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION
UNIT
PRICE
UNIT
PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT
PRICE
UNIT
PRICE
?Sly
i9r,
`.
n/.�
2W
ca
^A
A
w lit- WA 0;
m
P. Bid #423 - Hazardous Waste Disposal
The Board reviewed memo from Purchasing Manager Ambler:
TO: _03arlas D Ba1czun_ __:
County Administrator
DATE: June 22, 1988
�N'ir�rrrrrrrr�r
SUBJECT: Amm OF IRC BID #423
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL
FROM: REFERENCES:
-Ambler, C.P.M.
Purchasing Manager
1. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:-
, --_
Bids were received Wednesday, April 13, 1988, at 2:00 p.m.
for IRC Bid #423.
This bid was advertised in the local newspaper.
18 BOOK 74 f'nE IS
2. ALTEMwws Am- ANALYSIS:
The low bid meeting the intent of our specifications was
submitted by Chemical Pollution Control, Inc., of New York.
The7t have taken minor exceptions to our specifications,
which should be waived. Their exceptions were to disposal
of some items, listed in our specifications. They slid .
not quote on these items. All other bidders took similar
exceptions.
3. FUNDING:
Purchasing is not currently holding -a requisition to purchase
these services. No purchase order will be issued before a
requisition approved by budget is received.
4. Fecom ID.VDATION:
Staff reccmTends that award be made to Chemical Pollution
Control, Inc. and a contract be negotiated and signed.
Commissioner Bowman commented that a warning flag always
goes up whenever anything about hazardous materials comes up.
She felt this is a really thorny subject and she would like to go
over the contract because there are a lot of things she would
like to have verified before she would approve it. She,
therefore, would like to table this item for a week, and
Commissioner Eggert agreed.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, to table action on awarding the
bid for Hazardous Waste Disposal for one week.
Acting Administrator Collins believed this contract is a
requirement under state law. He explained that the Landfill is
required to open up for the collection of hazardous materials
twice a year, and we have to have a contract with someone to pick
up this material and take it away to be disposed of properly. He
felt the problem with the delay could be that we have some
statutory deadlines.
"Sonny" Dean, Manager of Solid Waste, informed the Board
that last year about this time we entered into a contract with
the DER to receive a grant of $50,000 to build a hazardous waste
collection station hazardous materials at our Landfill. The
SEP 6 1988 19 t300W. �74 F''"U--E 19
I
W
station has been completed for several months -and we have been
trying to get a contract with a certified hauler to dispose of
this material. The contract before the Board is copied from a
sample contract which has been approved by the DER.
Commissioner Bowman noted that the contract conditionally
exempts small quantity generators, and Mr. Dean advised that a
small quantity generator is someone that generates less than half
a drum of hazardous waste a month in their business. If we get
into a contract with handling the conditionally exempt, it
requires different permitting and a lot more preparation than we
have facilities to accept at the Landfill. He, therefore, would
like to stay completely out of that and collect for the home
owners only. He further explained that the hauler we are
contracting with is for the homeowners. The conditionally exempt
and the other generators will have to arrange their own contract
with this hauler or someone else.
Chairman Scurlock believed the answer is that those who
generate the hazardous waste are not exempt from having to
deposit it in the proper place and have it taken care of. This
is just our effort to make available a process for it to get to
the right place.
Commissioner Bowman commented that the contract also refers
to hazardous wastes that are not landfilled and wanted to know if
that means some are going to be landfilled.
Mr. Dean stated that they will not be at our Landfill, but
at other facilities that are properly licensed and equipped, and
they are not in the State of Florida.
Commissioner Bowman then noted that there is a provision
about liability resulting from "negligent supervision," and she
wished to know who is supervising this facility.
Mr. Dean explained that we have this collection facility at
the Landfill and our supervisors are supervising that facility.
Commissioner Bowman still wished to have the item tabled for
a week so she could go over the contract with the Attorney.
SEP 6 1988 20 BOOK ���,���20
L_
I
It was confirmed that one week's delay would not cause a
problem with the time constraints.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE question.
It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0)
Commissioner Wheeler being absent.
Q. Bid #462 - Roll Off Containers
The Board reviewed memo from Purchasing Manager Ambler:
TO: i„; am�nl l i n� 'rte._ DATE:August 18, 1988 FILE:_
Acting County Administrator
I -
FRO SUBJECT:AMm of -IRC BID #462
Gus Ambler, C.P.M. ROLL OFF CONTAINERS
Purchasing Manager
1. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: -.
Bids were opened Wednesday, August 17, 1988 at 2:00 p.m.
for IRC Bid #462.
19 Invitations to Bid were mailed. 6 bids were received
including 3 No Bids.
This bid was advertised in the newspaper.
` 2. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
The low bid meeting specifictions was submitted by U. S.
Container Corporation (Hesco) at $13,925.00 for fire
containerS. They have taken no exceptions to our specifications.
3. FUNDING:
A budget approved requisition has been received.
Account #411-209-534-066.49
4. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the bid be awarded and staff be authorized.
to proceed.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) awarded
Bid #462 for Roll Off Containers to U.S.Container
Corporation in the amount of $13,925 as recommended
by staff per the following Bid Tabulation:
SEP 6 1988 21 BOOK 74 f,,A, . 21
7-7
L
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vera Beach. :329:0
TABULATIONBID
\•
it
T.RC 462
.. .•
MEMOMEMMMMMOMI
for an additional 5 units to be
��o���r���■-��a�
cbmed before 12-30-88, if
rN
R. Resolution declaring Cocaine Dealing in Oslo Area Constitutes
an Emergency Hazard to Public Health and Safety
Chairman Scurlock noted that he was absent when the question
of declaring cocaine dealing in the Oslo area an emergency was
discussed and his question is why we are only addressing the Oslo
area. He also believed this may be an intervention in due
process which would allow us not to follow the 90 day notice
requirement, and he did not want to mess with due process.
County Attorney Vitunac advised that the people still would
have notice and the right of appeal, but those rights would be
compressed; we would still be in compliance with due process, but
would shorten that period.
Chairman Scurlock asked if there was testimony given to
address this area specifically and eliminate the other areas.
Commissioner Bird explained that he put the item on the
agenda after a meeting he had with the Sheriff. From the Press
22
SEP 6'1988 Boor 7 r�-. 2
M
articles, it would appear that we have one area giving us a real
black eye.. He realized the Sheriff is doing what he can and
asked what we could do to assist him. The Sheriff noted that
this is a very small consolidated area, and there are certain
dilapidated shacks being used by the dealers; certain wooded
overgrown areas where they hide; and possibly certain roads that}
could be closed. The Sheriff felt it would be a help if we could,
get rid of some of these shacks and underbrush some of the
overgrown areas, etc. Commissioner Bird noted that we would, of
course, contact property owners and not tear anything down that
someone is living in, but he believed we want to send a message
loud and clear that'we are going to start with that area and
clean it up and use whatever legal resources we have to attack
the problem in that area.
Chairman Scurlock stated that his main concern is that we be
uniform. He noted that he had a young black mother come to him
who was living in Gifford and was extremely upset about how to
protect her young daughter from the "crack" house located next to
her. He, therefore, had a concern about just identifying one
area as having this problem.
Commissioner Eggert stated that was not the intention at
all. She advised that residents and businesses in the Oslo area
are extraordinarily upset with what is happening there and how it
is affecting them, and this is just a step in trying to deal with
the whole situation.
The Chairman asked if the proposed resolution is broad
enough to apply to other areas, and Acting Administrator Collins
stated that it is not. He pointed out that we can address
demolition of hazardous and abandoned buildings on a case by case
basis anywhere, but this Resolution just declares an emergency
for the area between 8th Court to 11th Court on Oslo Road.
Chairman Scurlock again expressed his concern about allowing
proper time for notice and due process, and Commissioner Eggert
appreciated his concern, but believed there is the ability to get
SEP 6 1988 'A
in touch with the property owners. The only thing that is being
eliminated is the time it requires to go before the Commission.
She did not believe we have an irresponsible Building Department.
The Chairman continued to emphasize his problem with
designating one specific area.
Commissioner Bird did not have any problem with that. He
pointed out that it is a known problem; it is a consolidated
situation; and he is tired of that little part of the county
giving us such a black eye. Obviously, there is a problem in
Gifford too, but that is a much larger area.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, to adopt Resolution 88-53
declaring the dealing of crack cocaine in the Oslo
Road vicinity an emergency hazard to public health
and safety.
Chairman Scurlock stated that he would vote for the Motion,
but with concern.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0)
with Commissioner Wheeler being absent.
24 Boor 14
I
RESOLUTION NO. 88- 53
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY DECLARING
THAT THE DEALING OF CRACK COCAINE IN THE OSLO
ROAD VICINITY BETWEEN 8TH COURT AND 11TH COURT
CONSTITUTES AN EMERGENCY HAZARD TO PUBLIC
HEALTH AND SAFETY
WHEREAS, Indian River County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Section
4-16 thru 4-24 provides the authority to declare unsafe buildings a nuisance;
and
WHEREAS, those unsafe buildings constitute a hazard to the safety or
health of the public by reason of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation,
obsolescence or abandonment; and
WHEREAS such buildings are declared illegal and said nuisance must
be abated by improvements or demolition; and
WHEREAS such abandoned and
dilapidated
buildings are being
utilized
in the illegal dealing.. of crack cocaine
according
to reports from the
Indian
River County Sheriff's Department;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the dealing of
crack cocaine in the area of 8th Court to 11th Court along Oslo. Road
constitutes a health and safety emergency to the public and in view of this
health and safety emergency the Building Official is directed to proceed on an
emergency basis in nuisance abatement pursuant to Ordinance Sections 4-16
thru 4-24.
This Resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner
Eggert and the motion was seconded by Commissioner
Bird and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as
follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman Gary C. Wheeler went
Commissioner Richard N. Bird
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Awe
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this
6th day of September, 1988. .
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By Z4
Don C. Scurlock, Jr
Chairman
25 BOOK .74 F' CE 19.15
L_
S. Acceptance of Payment for Demolition Lien (Spriggs)
The Board reviewed memo from the County Attorney:
TO:oard of County Commissioners
FROM: VCa es P. itunac -oun Attorney
DATE: August 31, 1988
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Payment for Demolition Lien
In 1986 a lien was filed against Ethel Spriggs to secure
payment of $4,008.03 which was. incurred by the County in
connection with demolishing a hazardous structure on
property owned by Ethel Spriggs." Because of the length of
time between the recording of the lien and its enforcement,
this office believes it is only fair to collect one year's .
interest. Ethel Spriggs has deposited a check with the
County in the amount of $4,488.99 which sum represents the
principal and one year's accrued interest at 12% per annum.
This office recommends acceptance of Ethel Spriggs' payment
of $4,488.99 as full payment to satisfy the lien and that
the Chairman of the Board be authorized to execute a release
of I i en.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) accepted
Ethel Spriggs' payment of $4,488.99 as full payment
to satisfy the lien filed in connection with demoli-
tion of a hazardous structure on her property and
authorized the Chairman to sign Release of Lien re
same.
26 �n
�
090E FOIE
I
0
56'7114
RELEASE OF LIEN
For and in consideration of the sum of $4,488.99
RECEIVED from Ethel Spriggs, the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA (the "County")
hereby releases the property hereinafter described from a
certain Lien recorded by the County in its Official Records
Book 0744, Page 1124, in the amount of $4,008.03, for
demolition and removal costs of a nuisance structure, said
IIen .levied in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 4
of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Indian River County,
Florida; and the County hereby declares such lien fully
satisfied. The property, located in Indian River County, is
more fully described as follows:
Part of the South 1/2 of the S_E 1/4 of
Section 22, Township 32 South, Range 39
East, being a lot 150 feet North and
South, and 300 feet East and West, as in
Deed Book 63 at page 353, Public Records
of Indian River County, Florida.
Executed by the Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, and attested
and countersigned by the Clerk of such Board, all as of this
6th day of September, 1988.
Attested and countersigned
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:Azwa, BY: / c
re a err ii g t . — Don -U.- cu oc ,
G I e r��% Ch a i rma n
T. Release of County Liens
The Board reviewed memo from Attorney Vitunac:
L
27
Bou 74 Fm., 27
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Charles P.•Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: August 31,1988
RE: CONSENT AGENDA - BCC MEETING 9/6/88
RELEASE OF COUNTY LIENS
Lea Keller of this office has processed the following
=and requests permission for the Chairman to execute the
..release forms:
n Release of Water Lien - GERVASIO
Un i t #201 - P I NECREEK CONDO 1 1 1
`Release''of Sewer Lien GERVASIO
Un i tc If 2 01 (.- V1 NECREEK CONDO
}'ai°t"rfs'.;x Cly�aki._R� }.f Fa' - cC d. i Y.. t
7•'s 'Phr '4, Sy�Ii]:c
°h�kr9A
'w"sAZ
V r 4:.f,/U. •.
Dig.
tC• n7 s a �_
i .�
-.-,.,Back-up 'information for the above is on file
in the
r'3 County Attorney's S Utilities Department Offices.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized
the Chairman to execute the Release of Liens listed
above.
COPIES OF SAID RELEASES ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE
EXCHANGE CLUB CHRISTMAS TREE SALE
Acting Administrator Collins reviewed the following and
introduced Dan Nelson of the Exchange Club:
SEP 6 1988 28
TO: Board of County
DATE: August 26, 1988 FILE:
Commissioners
SUBJECT: PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEM
FOR 9/6 AGENDA -
4' '
EXCHANGE CLUB CHRISTMAS
TREE SALE
�r William G. Collins II
'FROM: Acting County Administrator
REFERENCES:
.Dan 'Nelson of the Exchange
Club of Vero Beach has requested an opportunity
:oto address the Commission.
The Exchange Club is initiating advance sales of
Christmas trees and wants to inquire whether - the County Commission would
Abe
interested in purchasing
a Blue Spruce .or Fraser Fir (10-12 ft. tall) in
zadvance. r w
_Please see attached material.
Mr. Nelson advised
that they will have special orders for
larger trees this year and wanted to give the county the first
opportunity. He informed the Board that last year the Club
raised over $30,000 which is staying right here in the community
for local charities.
Commissioners Eggert and Bird both noted that they are or
have been members of the Exchange Club and did not feel they
could make a Motion.
Commissioner Bowman commented that she really favors buying
live trees and planting them at Christmas, and she wished to know
if it is possible that the Exchange Club could offer us a live
tree.
Mr. Nelson felt it probably is possible, but they would have
to make a special arrangement to have it shipped in.
Commissioner Bowman believed that a Fraser Fir or Blue
Spruce will not grow here, but we do have one native evergreen
which grows up in'the Roseland area.
Commissioner Bird suggested that we cormnend the Exchange
Club on their efforts and wish them continued success with their
Christmas tree sales. In the meantime we will buy some type of
spruce or fir that will live in this area and plant it, and try
to start that practice on an annual basis as part of our
29
SEP 6 1988
BOOK 74 FS r,,E 29
W W W
landscaping program, and if the Exchange Club wishes to help
arrange for the tree, we will be glad to buy it through them.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) agreed
to proceed as suggested by Commissioner Bird.
JANUARY 1988 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
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:
P.O. Box 1498 TELEPHONE 582-2319
]�ROREACH
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
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 newspaper published at Vero Beach in
Indian River County, Florida; that
a display ad measuring 33^ at $7.80 per col, in.
(Notice of change of land use)
billedto Indian River County Planning Department
was published in said newspaper in the issue (a)
Of August 30, 1988
Sworn to and subscribed before me this
2nd day of September A,D 1988
lJ[S
�- Business Manager
(SEAL)
Votary Pubtk, Swte of gamic at large
My..ammtWon ExWm Sept. 26, 1080
3 °
E P 6 1988 BOOK 30
NOTICE OF CHANGE OF LAND USE
I F I
\ �• �� __�•�LL., , / ,&USACT PROPERTY
TPROPERTY • '~ .
AM -0 'CHI.. IL II• I}�. .,
-!
47..
t. RM -8
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, will consider on proposals to change the use
Of land within the unincorporated portions of Indian River County as shown in the maps of this advertisement. A
public hearing on the proposals will be held on Tuesday, September 6, 1988, ot'9.05 a.m. in the County Commis-
sion Chambers of the County jidministration Building, located of 1840 25th Street, -Vero Beach, Florida. At this
public hearing, the Board of County Commissioners will consider approval of these amendments to the County's
Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendments are included in the proposed ordinance entitledti
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND USE AND TRANS-
PORTATION, AS WELL AS CHANGING THE LAND USE OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE
UNINCORPORATED PORTIONS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, TO REDESIGNATE THE LAND USE OF
UP TO APPROXIMATELII 20 ACRES SITUATED EAST OF U.S. HIGHWAY 1 FROM A POINT SOUTH I
OF INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD TO THE SOUTH RELIEF CANAL, AND AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE
LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REDEFINING THE GEOGRAPHIC DE-
SCRIPTION OF THE U.S. l COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR EXCLUDING LAND FROM A POINT SOUTH
OF THE INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD TO THE SOUTH RELIEF CANAL; CHANGING THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 1.1 ACRES OF LAND SITUATED 560 FEET NORTH OF OSLO
RD. AND WEST OF 12TH AVENUE SW, AND AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT
REDEFINING THE GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION FOR THE OSLO RD. MIXED USE DISTRICT EXTEND-
ING THE DEPTH AN ADDITIONAL 150 FEET FOR 1.1 ACRES SITUATED 560 FEET NORTH OF OSLO
RD. AND WEST OF 12TH AVENUE SW; TO AMEND THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN OF THE TRANS-
PORTATION ELEMENT BY DELETING ALL OF A NORTH/SOUTH SECONDARY COLLECTOR ROAD
SITUATED IN GOVT. LOT 2 SEC. 15 TWP 315 RGE 39E; AMEND THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN BY
ADOPTING A SUBDIVISION COLLECTOR MAP TO INCLUDE; RECLASSIFYING ALL COLLECTOR
ROADS ON THE NORTH BARRIER ISLAND TO SUBDIVISION COLLECTORS, ALL PORTIONS OF
81ST, 77TH, 73RD, 69TH, 61ST AND 57TH STREETS WHICH LIE EAST Of U.S. 1, 30TH STREET
FROM U.S. 1 TO COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, 2ND STREET FROM OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY TO 20TH
AVENUE, 20TH AVENUE SW FROM 17TH LANE SW TO 25TH STREET SW, 32ND AVENUE FROM
4TH STREET TO 1 ST STREET SW, 33RD AVENUE SW FROM OSLO ROAD TO 13TH STREET SW,
63RD AVENUE FROM 4TH STREET TO 8TH STREET, 99TH STREET FROM U.S. 1 TO BREEZY VILLAGE
MHP, 87TH STREET FROM CR 510 TO 55TH AVENUE, 55TH AVENUE FROM CR 510 TO 87TH
STREET, 64TH AVENUE FROM 83RD STREET TO BOTH STREET, INDIAN RIVER DRIVE FROM U.S. 1
TO U.S. 1, ROSELAND ROAD FROM U.S. 1 TO INDIAN RIVER DRIVE, OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM
ROSELAND ROAD TO NORTH SEBASTIAN CITY LIMITS, OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM CR 512 TO
U.S. 1, 28TH COURT FROM 45TH STREET TO 49TH STREET, 40TH AVENUE FROM 45TH STREET TO
49TH STREET, 38TH AVENUE FROM 41 ST STREET TO 45TH STREET; TO AMEND THE THOROUGH-
FARE PLAN OF THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT BY ADDING 102ND AVENUE FROM SR 60 TO
4TH STREET AS A COLLECTOR, ADD 16TH AND 12TH STREETS BETWEEN 98TH AND 102ND AVE-
NUES AS COLLECTORS, DELETE 101ST AVENUE BETWEEN 87TH STREET AND CR 510, DELETE
61ST STREET EAST OF 58TH AVENUE, RECLASSIFY 31ST AVENUE BWETEEN 41ST STREET AND
45TH STREET FROM COLLECTOR TO SUBDIVISION COLLECTOR AND ADD THIS TO THE SUBDI-
VISION COLLECTOR MAP, RECLASSIFY 33RD AVENUE BETWEEN 45TH STREET AND 49TH STREET
FROM COLLECTOR TO SUBDIVISION COLLECTOR AND ADD THIS TO THE SUBDIVISION COLLEC-
TOR MAP, DELETE 33RD AVENUE BETWEEN 49TH STREET AND 53RD STREET; AND TO AMEND
THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS SECTION OF THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT TO INCORPORATE
ALL AMENDMENTS TO THIS ELEMENT CONTAINED WITHIN THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE; AND
PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
Interested parties may appear and be heard at the public hearing regarding the approval of these proposed
Comprehensive Plan Amendments.
The plan amendment application may be Inspected by the public at the Community Development Division offices
located on the second floor of the County Administration Building located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida,
between the hours of 8:30 o.m. and 5:00 p.m. an weekdays.
Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meeting will need to ensure that a ver-
batim record of the proceeding is made which includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal will be
based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
Byt -s-Don C_ Scurlock, Jr., Chairman I
31 BOOK 74 F.vUE 31
SEP 61988 J
Chairman Scurlock informed those present that we will now
move into public hearings. He explained the procedure to be
followed and requested that organized groups have a representa-
tive speak for them. He further noted that on Comprehensive Plan
amendments and zonings, we do not discuss site plans.
Community Development Director Keating reviewed the
following memo, noting that four Comprehensive Plan amendment
requests were submitted originally and one was subsequently
withdrawn so that today we are considering 3 Comprehensive Plan
requests:
TO: William G. Collins II DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Acting County Administrator r'`:-
FROM: David C. Nearing,
e4 R ert M. eat g, CP
Staff Planner - Director, o nity Development;
SUBJECT: JANUARY 1988 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
DATE: August 24, 1988
it
,It is requested that the information presented herein be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at
their regular meeting of September 6, 1988.
.DESCRIPTION ANDCONDITIONS'
i•. II
'The Community Development Department has processed four applica-
tions -:to amend the Comprehensive Plan. -.One application was
;initiated by the Board of 'County Commissioners; one application
t.- was •- a.rjoint County/Private application involving the Thoroughfare `� :f <<°•
'Plan, Sand two were privately initiated.
The staff .reviewed .these amendment 'applications and made rec
ommendations to the Planning and Zoning Commission which, sitting
as the Local planning Agency, held public hearings on March 10,
'1988, ` to .consider making recommendations on the proposed. amend- �:..
'ments`to the County's Comprehensive Plan.
��_ y. _,. ,r;.. it r ,.. •i.. :_ �,. ..: .: .... .. .. .:- . .. ,, , �`.
The following is a list of amendments which were reviewed;.
+1.^ I.R. County/Windsor Polo Club Initiated - various amendments
."'to .the Thoroughfare and Thoroughfare Capital Improvements
`! Plans .
2. •,I1.R. County Initiated - Land Use/Zoning amendment for Vista
Royale Gardens Commercial property (Boulevard Shoppes) from
i.��r _Commercial/CL to MD-2/RM-10 _
;:3_'- Richard Zorc, Owner/Sam Block, Agent - Extend the Oslo Road
MXD::.district north to include 1.1 acres of property, and
rezone `'it from RS -6 to CH. F y"
4.'::Stenger, et -al. Owner/Michael 0 Haire, Agent To enlarge
Z�_` `the CR 510/US 1 Node from 120 to 125 acres,
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted to recommend approval of
amendments #1 and #3, and recommended denial of applications #2
:and'.#4."-1The County Planning staff has appealed the Planning and
Zoning .Commission's recommendation with respect to application
°;#2. The applicant for application #4 has withdrawn his request.
8ocK 74 rAGE 32
® SEP � �9 J
In 1986, the State Legislature revised the local government
.Comprehensive Plan amendment procedure. The process now requires
°the first public hearing by the Board of County Commissioners to
-be held prior to the transmittal of each request to the State
Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for a mandatory ninety -day
review period. At that public hearing, the Board has the option
of transmitting or not transmitting any or all of the proposed
amendments to the State for review. Failure to authorize trans-
mittal of any proposed amendment constitutes denial of that
request; however, transmittal of an application does -not in—Icica-te
Board approval of the request.
On April 26, 1988, the Board of County Commissioners reviewed the
three remaining requests for consideration to transmit each
-:request to the DCA for review. The Board approved transmittal of
,all requests which it reviewed.
All comments from DCA have been received. The Board of County
Commissioners must now consider the proposed amendments for final
action. At the close of these final hearings, the Board may
adopt all, part of, or none of the proposed amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan. The attached flow chart illustrates the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment process as -amended by the 1986 state
planning legislation.
In order to approve each request, it will be necessary for the
Board to vote on each of the Comprehensive Plan amendment appli-
cations individually. Three affirmative votes are required for
approval. a,
a
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS -
These amendments are to the Comprehensive Plan and associated
';Land Use Map. -''Because of - this, the staff feels that the best
method of approval is -through one ordinance containing all
_amendment requests. This `ordinance is attached to this item.
Once all public ,hearings have been completed, the Board should
emotion and vote to approve the attached ordinance in its entirety
y f 1;all` amendments are approv�3ed,p'•-or in part, if any amendments are .f
=b'denl.ed. ��'F`';'{�.='geti4'�'N3�•4%�*it.f*'�sy •,PP';,,h Zk �: iH.f, 7`• ` 'n' 3
P h'
'i�c'.o. 'i�-6 4�ik+,> 4� vi.
Because ` it :will .. be : necessary '-to amend the land use 'of those
parcels "!with .;accompanying ' .concurrent request for rezoning, it
':will be -necessary • to have --the :new land uses in place prior to
,:.final action .on the .concurrent rezonings. Therefore, it is
>recommended that action on these rezonings be delayed until the ..�
"attached ordinance has been .formally acted on.
`RECOMMENDATION
`Action on concurrent rezonings be delayed until formal
` F p'Y';.x action has been taken on all land use amendments • and
,
2. That the Board of County Commissioners approve the
:- -v- -attached ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan and
related Land Use Map as presented.
Director Keating advised that since all the Comprehensive
Plan amendments are included in one ordinance, the Board should
review and act on all of them before adopting the overall
ordinance and then could adopt the appropriate rezoning
ordinances.
S E P 6 1988 BOOK .74 IdE 33
33
E71
APPEAL OF COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST TO AMEND LAND USE & ZONING
DESIGNATION FOR UP TO 17.9 ACRES AT VISTA ROYALE GARDENS ENTRANCE
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:
'VEIRO 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 Lam__ 11`-111 40
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 -- y of D
(SEAL)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING '-
Notice of hearing initiated by Indian River i
County to consider the adoption of a County or-
dinancerezoning alt or a portion of the following
described land from: CL, umited Commercial Di-•
trict to RM -10. tial
The subject property isily locateddeneast of U S
Highway #1 and south of Indian River Boule-
vard. and is presently owned by Vista -Properties
of Vero Beach, Inc. j
The subject property Is described as:
A PARCEL LYING IN PORTIONS OF
SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH,
RANGE 40 EAST AND SECTION 13,
TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39
SCEAST, MORE PARTICULARLY DE
RIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING
AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF
SAID SECTION 18 (ALSO BEING THE
EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID I
SECTIONACY Al 13) RUN
nuOaRRER F&CTTION
05004.00" WEST, 975.30 FEET TO THE
NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF
THE SOUTH RELIEF CANAL: THENCE
SOUTH 74°1438" WEST, ALONG SAID
RIGHT-OF-WAY 524.93 FEET TO THE i
EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF U.S.
HIGHWAY NO. 1 AND TO A POINT ON
THE CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY
HAVING A RADIUS OF 9649.39 FEET
AND THROUGH WHICH A RADIAL LINE 1
BEARS SOUTH 73°45'03" WEST;
THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY
1072.61 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF
SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 6°22'0811: THENCE RUN
NORTH 37°3208" EAST. 107.54 FEET
TO A POINT ON A NON -TANGENT
CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAV-
ING A RADIUS OF 647.96 FEET AND
THROUGH WHICH A RADIAL LINE
BEARS NORTH 4°01'20" WEST:
THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY
108.28 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID
CURVE THROUGH THE CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 9°34'29" TO A POINT OF
THE QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION
13, THENCE NORTH 89°47'53" EAST,
ALONG SAID QUARTER SECTION UNE
501.31 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGIN-
NING.
ALL THE OVE SITUATE IN INDIAN
RIVER COUBNTY, FLORIDA, AND SUB-
JECT TO AN ENTRANCE ROAD EASE-
MENT AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL
RECORD BOOK 618, PAGE 2244 OF
THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN,
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
The Board of County Commissioners will con-
duct a public hearing regarding the appeal by
the applicant of the decision by the Planning and
Zoning Commission to deny the rezoning re-
QuesL The public tarst d citizens shall hearing. ve an opt ity to In -
Wet
heard, will be held by the Board of County Com-
missioners of Indian River County, Florida, in the
County Commission Chambers of the County
Administration Building, located at 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday. Septem-
ber 6. 1988 at 9:05 am. decision
Anyone who may wish to appeal arry
which may be made at this meeting will need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings
Is made which includes the testimony and evi-
dmtce upon which the appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By--s-Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman
August 16, 1988
Staff Planner David Nearing made the following presentation:
S E P 6 1988 s 4 BOOK 74 f'S.E 3
TO: William G. Collins DATE: August 23, 1988 FILE:
A ` Tm-t ng ou y A „=strator -- —
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
APPEAL BY APPLICANT OF A
Robert M. eat'ng, CP SUBJECT: COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST
Planning & DevilopitYent Director TO AMEND THE LAND USE
AND ZONING DESIGNATION
FOR UP TO 17.9 ACRES OF
LAND LOCATED AT THE
ENTRANCE TO VISTA ROYAL
FROM: David C. Nearing REFERENCEtS1DENS
Staff Planner
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal '`-
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of September 6, 1988:
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
This is an appeal by- the Planning Staff of a decision made on
March 10, 1988 by the Planning and Zoning Commission concerning a
request, initiated by the Board of County Commissioners, to
consider amending the land use/zoning designation for up to 17.9
acres of land. This request is to redesignate all or a portion
of the subject property from U.S. 1 Commercial Corridor to MD -2,
:Medium Density Residential 2 (allowing up to 10 units/acre), and
to concurrently rezone the affected portion from CL, Limited
Commercial to RM -10, Multi -Family Residential District (up to 10
units/acre). The subject property is situated along U.S. 1 south
of the Indian River Boulevard at the access to Vista Royal
Gardens.
On January 23, 1988, the Board of County Commissioners considered
a request by the residents of Vista Gardens that the County
initiate a downzoning of the subject property. After
considerable discussion, the Board determined that the concerns
of the affected citizens warranted the County to reexamine the
status of this property. As a result, the Board directed the
staff to initiate the land use plan amendment/rezoning process
for ten acres of the subject property. Because the Board did not
specify which ten acres to consider and to allow maximum
flexibility in designating an appropriate area, the staff
advertised the entire site as under consideration for action.
On March 10, 1988, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-2
to deny this request. The Commissioners felt that commercial
zoning was appropriate for the entire 17+ acres and should be
retained. The staff has appealed this request in order to permit
the Board of County Commissioners, by whose directive this
action was initiated, a chance to review this request.
On April 26, 1988, the Board of County Commissioners voted
unanimously to transmit this request to the Department of
Community Affairs (DCA) for their mandatory review.
On June 13, 1988, the DCA comments were received by the Planning
Staff. These comments are as follows:
Item #CPA 102 - The. proposed change in land use
designation from commercial to residential has been
initiated by the Board of County Commissioners, at
the request of Vista Gardens, an adjacent
residential development. The densely forested
parcel under consideration is a portion of the
former site of McKee Jungle Gardens, a tourist
attraction. Although operations ceased in the
1960's, the site is still dominated by mature oak
and palm trees and contains a number of exotic
tropical and subtropical plants.
The County Planning and Zoning Commission has
recommended denial of the proposed land use change,
indicating that commercial use remains appropriate.
The County Planning staff recommends the retention
of some commercial land use (a 400 -foot strip along
U.S. 1 totaling 10.5 acres),. and a change in
designation to Residential for the remainder (7.4
acres). County staff quoted the reduction of
future traffic impacts, buffering of residential
uses, and the reduction of noise and usual impacts
as reasons for a partial change.
Whether or not the proposed change is made, the
botanical value of this site should be recognized
in development plans. Since there is some local
support for preserving many of the unique
specimens, a future developer might be encouraged
to work with local organizations to relocate the
specimens if they cannot be preserved on site in
conjunction with development.
Since U.S. 1 sometimes operates at an unacceptable
level of service adjacent to this property,
development of the property should be preceded by a
traffic study/analysis. The study should address
the traffic impact upon the roadway network and
identify mitigative measures to obtain acceptable
levels of service. The study should be submitted
to and approved by the County Engineer.
Given the location of this property in the rapidly
developing southern Indian River County U.S. 1
corridor, careful consideration should be given to
visual, aesthetic, and transportation issues in the
development -of the property. Despite the potential
impacts to the U.S. 1 corridor; the size of this
parcel, its unique history and location, and other
factors suggest that land use for this property
should be a matter for local determination.
Chronology of Past Events
Because of the extensive zoning/land use history of this site,
a brief chronology and follow-up graphic support document has
been included with this item. This material references action
concerning this parcel and adjacent property back to 1969.
Because records are incomplete prior to this date, no reference
is made to action occurring before 1969. However, as shown in the
chronology, all or part of this property has been zoned
commercial since 1969.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli-
cation will be presented. The analysis will include a descrip-
tion of the current and future land uses of the site and sur-
rounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and
utility -systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environ-
mental quality.
EF 6 198 36 BOOK 7 r F '6
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject parcel is currently vacant land zoned CL. To the
north , across Indian River Boulevard, is a Zippy Mart, radiator
shop and the Wal-Mart zoned CG, General Commercial and to the
south is a commercial plaza zoned CL. To the west is U.S. 1. To
the east are the Vista Garden Villas zoned RM -10.
-.
,. ?.. .. .. : G :.. .. " }* /fie yj ':.- �::. ; ;.' , ' '-• ...'. �--
-The subject property was the•subject of a site plan approval
- -
request. Submitted initially in July of 1987, the site plan
application proposed uses compatible with the existing CL -zoning
of the site. Because of a number of staff concerns and resulting
�"--
,plan.revisions, 'no action was'taken on the request until March
10, �1988. ;,-At their March . 10, `'1988 -meeting, the Planning and
Zoning Commission denied the.'site plan request. On April 5,
.1988, the Board of County Commissioners reviewed an appeal by the
;applicants of the site plan. • The Board upheld the Planning and
.-Zoning :Commission's decision based on traffic and safety
f4����` i' •
Future Use Pattern i �§
��
♦Land
f a i F�fv-i 1 ir•KAt i ji' �,y�rv�Y.2�' �' H �. 's - : .. � ' - '. .', . , ; _ :. ._,
The Comprehensive"Plan designates the subject property as U.S. 1
Commercial 'Corridor.•`7The property north across the boulevard
also::;lies'.within the corridor. To the south lies the South
Relief•.Canal:with the next 360 feet of property also lying within
the eco=ridor; "all land east of the_U.S. 1 Commercial Corridor
I's- designated ;MD -2,' --°Medium Density Residential 2 (allowing up to
Y10 •units/acre) .";The 'property Immediately east .of subject
=u
.the
parcel also'lies.within the MD -2 district.
*4111 e •�'f x*"V'e •Sr �'. ., .._ %`.�'k ` r 1r t c -GF off,..
„Mt" `k�je�sTt
Q
:y4.:�- ,. '. 5� r
T 'i s "fit•_ %. e+'. �: D €y r .!•-FrTe"• rj. I ai - _ _
Transportation System
--
;The' subject parcel currently has frontage on U.S.' 1, �*classified.
on the.,.Thoroughfare Plan as an arterial road. The site also has
minimal frontage on Indian River Boulevard, also classified as an
:arterial. •- located within the north end of this site. is the
'private access drive to the Vista Royal Gardens development.
Currently, this portion of U.S. 1 is operating at a marginal
'L 1- f -S I"E" d
eve o e_.LV ux ng the peak season. .Level -of -Service E
pis -characterized by lower operating speeds than permissible,
--limited freedom to maneuver, with occasional restricted flow.
Critical maneuvers at this level of service, such as left turns,
�are._often restricted. Reduction or elimination of commercial
property at this•location would not substantially improve current
,conditions; however, -it would limit potential impacts due to new
development. sem,. ti
•L4+•►---t?_"T6'^3.s lug a4,'9'8r �.'F Y'� ,c ic,�1�5 if r n; }: 6 -Y-`+ •q.. uC•l:Y•. t _ ` .. S f ••y
Even ...though this site is not suited for larger^ scale commercial
iievelo went due to'traffic traffic constraints it is
P , possible that some
-limited "commercial development could act as a beneficial buffer
7ie-tween°the adverse traffic impacts of U.S. 'l and the F.E.C.
Railroad *and the -residential to the east. Such adverse impacts
;as noise.and odor could be screened out from the residential area
to ..the east by the structures involved in a commercial develop-
ment.,
Environment
.The site is not considered to be environmentally sensitive, nor
is it located in a flood prone area. However, the easterly
portion of this site, though not considered environmentally
sensitive nor flood prone, does.have several depressional areas,
and soils not considered conducive to good drainage.
Utilities
The site currently has access to public water and sewer
facilities.
37 BOOK 74 F 37
Analysis
In reviewing this request, staff considered the historic zoning
activity of the subject parcel, specifically the fact that there
has always been a minimum of 600 feet of commercial zoning at
this location, and the fact that in 1983 the owners successfully
regained their commercial land use designation which had been
lost when the Comprehensive Plan was approved in 1982. When that
land use change was considered in 1983, the staff opposed the
change to commercial. However, at that time, conditions were
much different. Wal-Mart, Royale Gardens Plaza, and Indian River
Boulevard did not exist. In addition, Vista Development had
several other requests for commercial land use changes in the
area under consideration at the time.
In reviewing this request, several factors should be considered.
First, it should be noted that the subject property is surrounded
by commercially zoned lands on two sides - with those sides
having developed commercial uses. Second, the property abutting
the subject parcel on the east side is residential, and the
principal access for that residential property is over an ease-
ment through the subject property. Third, high traffic volumes
on both U.S. 1 and Indian River Boulevard have resulted in an
unacceptable level of service in the area. Allowing a large
traffic generator/attractor in this location could exacerbate
these problems. y
Conclusion
Staff feels that amending the land use and zoning for the entire
.parcel is not warranted. However, a decrease in the commercial
acreage would be beneficial. A reduction to approximately 10+
acres of commercial zoning/land use at this site would substan-
tially reduce future traffic impacts, allow for additional buffer
of the adjacent residential uses, reduce noise and visual impacts
on a major portion of the Vista Royal Gardens development, yet
maintain commercial zoning on that part of the property that
abuts commercial on two sides.
In order to reduce the commercial land use/zoning for this site
to approximately 10 acres, the depth of the zoning east of U.S. 1
would have to be decreased from an average of 600 feet to 400
feet. This would decrease the acreage from its current 17.92
acres to 10.5 acres. This reduction to 400 feet would correspond
with the commercial plaza to the south which has a depth of 360
feet.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis performed and the comments received by the
DCA, and despite the decision of the Planning and Zoning
Commission, staff recommends that the Board of County
Commissioners approve the following:
1.
2.
The land use designation for the easternmost 7.4 acres
be changed from Commercial to MD -2, and that this
acreage be rezoned from CL to RM -10.
The commercial land use designation and CL zoning of
the subject property be retained for the first 400 feet
east of U.S. 1, equaling approximately 10.5 acres.
38
Boor, 74 38
Chairman Scurlock believed staff basically is talking about
bisecting the property north to south, and Commissioner Eggert
felt the CL zoning for the 400' depth would conform to the
commercial plaza to the south and asked if it would allow
something similar to the Vero Mall.
Staff Planner Nearing confirmed that the Vero Mall is
approximately 10 acres and Ryanwood Shopping Center is 101 to 11
acres.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
Attorney Michael O'Haire came before the Board on behalf of
Vista Properties, Inc., the owners of the entire tract in
question, and asked that the Board deny the appeal made by staff.
He noted, however, that he had understood staff's recommendation
would be RM -10 rather than the RM -6 which was just mentioned by
Mr. Nearing.
Staff Planner Nearing confirmed he had meant to say RM -10.
Attorney O'Haire stressed the property's history of commer-
cial zoning. noting that this rezoning was occasioned by an
application for site plan approval, which application is
currently in litigation, and another site plan has been filed for
approval because while this was taking place, the Board amended
the site plan ordinance to erase a problem that occurred during
the first site plan application. Mr. O'Haire pointed out that
this property is at the intersection of two arterials, and it
conforms in every respect with the policy of this Board in
locating commercial nodes at the intersection of major arterials.
The Board has not addressed commercial development in the sense
of strips along a thoroughfare. This property is surrounded by
commercial uses on three sides, and the use of this property for
residential is not going to solve the traffic problems that
commercial development would solve. The last developer who
proposed development of the entire tract committed to over
$200,000 of offsite traffic improvements, but to justify that
SEP 6 1988 39 wa, 74 u1,JE 9'
kind of expenditure with a strip center would be much more
difficult and it will not solve the problems in the area.
Attorney O'Haire continued to argue that use of the property
for residential purposes is not reasonable, and the property
owner is entitled to a reasonable use of his property. He
emphasized that this property is at a major intersection within a
few hundred feet of the railroad tracks; it has always been
considered as commercial, and it is just a question of the extent
of the commercial. While site plan considerations are not
appropriate to discuss in a Comprehensive Plan decision, everyone
is aware that the site plan ordinance has built in safeguards -
buffering, transitional areas, etc., - to permit orderly
development of the property for commercial uses. Attorney
O'Haire continued to contend that to suddenly switch from a nodal
approach to the property and consider strip development runs
counter to what the Board has been doing in the rest of the
County. He, therefore, asked that the Board deny the appeal and
follow the P&Z Commission's recommendation to allow the property
to be planned and zoned for commercial uses as its neighbors are.
Commissioner Eggert commented that the little stub access
road at the east end of the property that comes out onto Indian
River Boulevard on a dangerous curve gives her almost as big a
concern as coming out onto U.S.I. She didn't see why commercial
traffic coming out there wouldn't hurt that to a greater degree
and asked Attorney O'Haire to speak to this issue.
Attorney O'Haire noted that first he would say that a car is
a car, and if a car is going home, it is no more dangerous than a
car going to a shopping center. It is not the type of traffic;
it is the volume of traffic. If this is an insurmountable
problem and that access point needs to be eliminated in order to
do away with whatever problem the Commission perceives in
retaining the planning and zoning of this property for commercial
purposes, then they will do away with it, and the land owners
won't be permitted access from that point.
40 BOOK 71 P I)E. 40
SEP 6 1988
� J
Robin Lloyd, Attorney for Vista Gardens Property Owners,
next took the floor. He referred to Mr. O'Haire's statement that
"a car is a car," and wished to point out, that if it stays
commercial, a car is not a truck.
Chairman Scurlock interjected that he believed the residents
even prohibit pickup trucks being parked in that area, and that
was confirmed.
Attorney Lloyd continued that the present owner of the
property is the one who brought all this about. They formed the
condo that was Vista Gardens and they also provided Vista Gardens
Trail, the easement through the middle of this property which is
connected to the access road, and it is that easement that is the
sole access to get his clients back and forth to their homes As
to the history of this property, when the developer acquired this
land, it had been a small jungle farm and garden where you could
walk and look at the flora and fauna and even animals. Attorney
Lloyd stressed that the property in question actually is not on
two arterials; it runs up to a self-imposed easement and then you
have another section on the north and then the access road. His
clients do not agree that the studies that have been submitted
would correct the traffic level of service "E," and the traffic
is likely to be even heavier this peak season than last. Mr.
Lloyd again noted that while Mr. O'Haire said a car is a car, we
are dealing not with a car but with a number of trips and with a
parking lot for 700-800 cars, you are dealing with a lot of
trips. Mr. Lloyd pointed out that WalMart has open access on the
two arterials and brought up the severe problems experienced with
the access to the shopping center to the south. He informed the
Board that his clients support the recommendation of the Planning
Department that the property should be rezoned to a smaller
portion of CL; actually, they would prefer to down zone the
entire property.
Commissioner Bowman asked if his client would accept OCR,
and Mr. Lloyd confirmed that they would.
SEP P 19 41 BOOK 7 Fa,E 41
Attorney Bruce Barkett came before the Board representing
the Vista Civic Association and asked that everyone present from
Vista Civic and the Property Owners Association, who is
interested in this issue raise their hands. A hundred or so
people raised their hands. Mr. Barkett believed the statements
regarding this property being zoned commercial since 1969 hides
the fact that the Comprehensive Plan was amended in 1982 to
downzone this to residential, and then against the Planning
Department's recommendation and based on the owner's representa-
tions, the Board in 1983 redesignated it in the Comp Plan to
commercial use because the owner said he would build something
like the Village Shops- Mr. O'Haire now says the owner had a
change of heart and can't do that, and that was the Board's only
grounds for changing the Comp Plan in 1983. Mr. Barkett
supported the staff's recommendation to change the Land Use
designation for the eastern portion of the property to
residential and reduce the commercial portion; although he agreed
with Attorney Lloyd that it is no.t the best solution. He
believed the OCR suggested by Commissioner Bowman is the best
solution because it would avoid a lot of the co -mingling of
residential and commercial traffic and also would preserve the
trees and the entrance to Vista Gardens.
Chairman Scurlock asked the County Attorney if it is
possible to consider OCR for the commercial portion of the
property at this meeting.
Attorney Vitunac did not believe that is properly before the
Board today and that it would have to be readvertised for OCR and
have another hearing.
Attorney Barkett wished to know why, if the Board is saying
they could zone the whole parcel residential or keep 1/2 residen-
tial and half commercial, they could not go to half residential
and half something less than commercial, which is OCR.
Discussion continued regarding the language in the ad, and
Acting Administrator Collins did not believe we can consider
42
BOa7 P'.{rye
changing the zoning on the front 10 acres today because we never
made a transmittal to the state recommending that.
Director Keating noted that the state does not consider
zoning at all; they only consider the Land Use Plan and OCR is
consistent with commercial. Argument continued regarding what
can be considered today and exactly what was transmitted to the
state.
Director Keating clarified that staff submitted to the state
the request to redesignate up to the 17.9 acres, but the staff
recommendation to the Board was for half of that.
Acting Administrator Collins contended that the zoning can't
be changed to OCR today because there is nothing advertised, and
Attorney Vitunac agreed that normally our advertisements say we
recommend a rezoning to a certain category or a category in the
same general heading but of a lesser intensity. This ad does not
include the language "or any other lesser zoning," and he,
therefore, felt to be cautious we should not consider the OCR
today.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard.
Attorney O'Haire wished to point out that the property owner
did indeed create this situation. The owner has always
maintained their commercial zoning at this corner and in this
area. He believed everyone who purchased from the owner had
knowledge of that property and its zoning designation, and
this is an appeal to change what has been historically in place
for decades.
It was determined that no one further wished to be heard,
and the Chairman thereupon declared the public hearing closed.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, to approve staff recommendation
to change the Land Uge designation for the easternmost
7.4 acres from Commercial to MD -2 and rezone that
acreage from CL to RM -10 and to retain the Commercial
SEP 19 43 Bole~ 74 ufF.
Land Use designation and CL zoning of the subject
property for the first 400 feet east of U.S.I., which
is approximately 10.5 acres. Said Land Use redesigna-
tion and rezoning to be included in ordinances adopted
when all agendaed Comprehensive Plan amendments have
been considered.
The Chairman commented that he would like to consider OCR at
the appropriate time, and Commissioner Bowman stated that she
would also.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0)
REQUEST TO AMEND LAND USE FROM LD -2 to MXD & REZONE TO CH (ZORC)
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
v Published Daily
4
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 _ Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of <<�<<''•Lc ��✓ �t�� -
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 athant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate. commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this & __ day < r A.D. 19 dil
•
11
_I t !'1 i 1 (Bursine Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida)
(SEAL)
NOTICE — PUBLIC HEARING
Notice of hearing to consider the adoption of
• County ordinance rezoning land from: RS -6.
Single -Family Rasidenbal District to CH, Heavy
Commercial District The subject property is pro.
sandy owned by Richard S. and Arte Zorc and
: N located ecroximatey 560 Ft. North of 9th
Street S.W. (Oslo Road) and Wast of 12th Ave.
nue S.W. i
The subject OmPerty Is described as:
The north 150 feet of the south 240 feet
Of the following described parcel: A par.
cal of land situated In Indian River Court
yy Florida being the East 20 acres lass
Its West 10.19 acres of the East 20
acres and also. less the South 560 feet
Of the East 20 acres — all In Tract 18,
Section 23. Township 33 South, Range
39 East, according to the last general
plat of lands of the Indian River Farms
Company Subdivision, Bled In Plat Soo*
2, page 5, Public Records of SL Lucie
County. Florida. Containing 5.66 acres,
more or less.
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.
missionma of Indian River County, Florida, in the
County Commission Chambers of the County
Administration Building, located at 1840 25th
Street. Vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday. Septem.
bar 8, 1988• at 9:05 am.
The Board of County Commissioners may
consider a less Intense zoning district than the
district requested provided it is within the same
general use category.
Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision
which may be made at this meeting will need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings
Is made, which includes the tesbmony and '
dance upon which the appeal is based.
Indian Him County
Board of County Commissioners
By: -s -Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman
August to. 1988
44
SEP 6 1988 Boor 74 F-,{L,F 44
Staff Planner Nearing made the staff presentation:
TO: William G. Collins, II DATE:August 23, 1988 FILE:
Acting County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT: RICHARD & ARLYNE ZORC' S
o ert I. Ke in g AICP REQUEST TO AMEND THE
Planning & D vel ment Director LAND USE FOR 1.11 ACRES
OF LAND FROM LD -2 TO MXD,
AND TO REZONE THIS LAND
FROM RS -6 TO CH
FROM: David C. Nearing-eO REFERENCES:
Staff Planner
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of September 6, 1988.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Richard and Arlyne Zorc, as represented by Attorney Samuel Block,
have requested an amendment to the Land Use Plan for designation
of 1.11 acres of a 5.6 acre parcel of land. The request is to
redesignate the property from LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2
(allowing up to 6 units/acre) to MXD, Milted Use District
(allowing up to 6 units/acre), and to rezone this land from RS -6,
Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) to CH,
Heavy Commercial. The property included in this request is
situated 600 feet north of Oslo Road on the west side of 12th
Avenue S.W.
This request involves the north 150 feet of the south 240 feet of
a 5.6 acre parcel. Currently, the south 90 feet of the Zores'
property is zoned CH and IL, Light Industrial, and situated in
the Oslo Road MXD area. The current use of this 90 feet of
property is an automobile repair shop. The property involved in
this request, the next 150 feet of the south 240 feet,, contains a
single-family structure used as an office for the auto repair
business. The office has apparently been illegally operating for
at least the past 10 years.
The applicant intends to bring the office use into conformance
through this request.
On March 10, 1988, the Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously
recommended approval of this request.
On April 26, 1988, the Board of County Commissioners unanimously
voted to transmit this request to the Department of Community
Affairs (DCA) for their review.
On June 13, 1988, the DCA responded to this request. The DCA had
no opposition to approval of this request.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli-
cation will be presented. The analysis will include a descrip-
tion of the current and future land uses of the site and sur-
rounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and
utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environ-
mental quality.
45 BOOK, 14 FADE 45
r � �
Existing Lard Use Pattern
The 150 feet involved in this request currently contains a single
family structure housing an accessory office for the auto shop,
zoned RS -6, and a portion of the shop itself which encroaches
into the RS -6 portion of the property. The property to the north
is the remainder of the Zorc property, also zoned RS -6. Further
to the northwest is the County's reverse osmosis water treatment
plant and well fields. To the east of the property is a single
family subdivision zoned RS -6. This subdivision is not highly
developed.
To the southeast of the subject property are many small
commercial/ industrial buildings zoned IL, Light Industrial. To
the south of the property is vacant land zoned CH and IL.
Further to the south is an auto body shop zoned IL. To the west
of the subject parcel is a plant nursery currently zoned CH and
RS -6.
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan designates the south 240 feet of the 5.6
acre parcel as follows:
1. The south 90 feet of the south 240 feet - MXD
2. The north 150 feet of the south 240 feet (subject land)
- LD -2.
All land within 600 feet of Oslo Road and south of the subject
land is designated as the Oslo Road MXD. All land surrounding
the subject land and north of the 600 foot dimension is LD -2.
Analysis
Generally, the staff does not recommend approval of expanding an
MXD. Expansion of an MXD can often lead to commercial/industrial
encroachment into residential districts. Since MXD's were
created specifically for areas of mixed uses, expansion is
usually not consistent with the purpose of the MXD designation.
However, this particular situation is unusual. The existence of
the single-family structure and its use as an office gives this
parcel a mixed use character. This is a situation where a
nonresidential use extended beyond the delineated MXD boundaries.
Various safeguards are currently in place which would mitigate
any adverse effects on the surrounding residential areas. First,
the illegal office would be required to receive site plan
approval for the change of use from residential to office. This
will require that a nonencroachable bufferyard be established and
visual screening be put into place. This action would actually
improve the existing conditions by decreasing any existing
adverse effects. Second, the County could initiate, or entertain
requests for, rezoning to multi -family for the lands north of
this property and surrounding the County's water plant.
Multi -family zoning would permit variations in site design to
further buffer residential development from the
commercial/ industrial uses in this area. Third, the County can
control additional requests for expansion of the MXD through the
land use amendment/rezoning +process.
Although this request appears to lend itself to setting a
precedent for additional MXD expansion on adjacent property, the
staff does not feel that this is the case. First, this request
will remedy an existing problem, that being the current operation
46
P 6 1988 DOM 74, Fpk 1')'E 6
of a business on the property included in this request. This is
not the same as a similar amendment request for vacant property.
Second, the 150 feet of additional MXD depth for this portion of
the district is not a major encroachment into a residential area,
and it only includes that portion of the overall 5.6 acre parcel
which has been operating as a business for at least 10 years.
Third, the 1.11 acres involved in this request is not a
substantial increase in land with an MXD designation.
Transportation System
The site currently has access to 12th Avenue S.W. designated as a
local road on the County's Thoroughfare Plan. The increase of
1.11 acres of land zoned CH will not have any substantial impact
on the current traffic situation.
Environment
The site is not designated as environmentally sensitive, nor is
it located in a flood prone area.
Utilities
Public water facilities are currently available to this area to
the south along Oslo Road.
Conclusion
Staff feels that, because this property has been in its current
use for at least ten years, this: request is not really an
expansion of the MXD land use, but more of a clarification and
correction of the actual land use for this property. Further,
its dimensions and size are not a substantial increase in this
MXD area and will not encourage or legitamize additional similar
requests. This land use/zoning amendment should not have any
substantial adverse impacts on this area and is consistent with
the area's development.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis performed and the lack of opposition by the
DCA, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners
approve this request to change the land use designation from LD -2
to MXD for 1.11 acres, and approve the request for rezoning from
RS -6 to CH.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the
change of Land Use designation to MXD for the 1.11 acres
and the rezoning to CH as requested by Richard 6 Arly ne
Zorc. Said Land Use redesignation and rezoning to be
included in ordinancds adopted when all agendaed Compre-
hensive Plan amendments have been considered.
47
BOOK 74 F,1GE 47
r � �
AMENDMENTS TO TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Director Keating made the staff presentation, as follows:
TO: William G. Collins, II DATEgust 24, 1988 FILE:
Acting County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
o ert M. Keatin ATMY SUBJECT: JANUARY 1988 AMENDMENTS
Community Developmen VDirector TO THE TRANSPORTATION
ELEMENT OF THE COMP-
REHENSIVE PLAN
65tl
FROM: Cheri J. Boudreaux REFERENCES:
Staff Planner
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regularly scheduled meeting of September 6, 1988.
DESCRIPTIONS & CONDITIONS
The Public Works Department is requesting an amendment to the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan amending the
Thoroughfare Plan as follows:
1. Adding 102nd Avenue as a collector road from S.R. 60 to
4th Street;
2. Adding 16th Street as a collector road from 98th Avenue
to 102nd Avenue;
3. Adding 12th Street as a collector road from 98th Avenue
to 102nd Avenue;
4. Deleting 101st Avenue as a collector road between 87th
Street and C.R. 512;
S. Deleting 61st Street as a collector road east of 58th
Avenue;
6. Reclassifying the north barrier island roads from
collector to subdivision collector roads;
7. Reclassifying 31st Avenue between 41st Street and 45th
Street from a collector to a subdivision collector;
8. Reclassifying 33rd Avenue from a collector to a
subdivision collector between 45th Street and 49th
Street;
9. Deleting 33rd Avenue between 49th Street and 53rd
Street;
10. Adding the following roads as subdivision collectors to
the Subdivision Collector Map:
a)
81st
Street
east
of
U.S.
1;
b)
77th
Street
east
of
U.S.
1;
c)
69th
Street
east
of
U.S.
1;
d)
65th
Street
east
of
U.S.
1;
SEP 6 1988 48 BooK 74 ucE 40'
e)
61st Street
f)
57th Street
g)
20th Avenue
Street S.W.;
h)
30th Street
Drive;
k)
1)
m)
n)
o)
P)
q)
r)
east of U.S. 1;
east of U.S. 1;
S.W.. from 17th Lane S.W. to 25th
from U.S. 1 to Country Club
32nd Avenue from 4th Street to 1st Street
S.W.;
33rd Avenue S.W. from Oslo Road to 13th
Street S.W.;
63rd Avenue from 4th Street to 8th Street;
99th Street from U.S. 1 to Breezy Village
M.H.P.;
87th Street from C.R. 510 tc
55th Avenue from C.R. 510 tc
64th Avenue from 83rd Street
Indian River Drive from U.S.
Roseland Road from U.S. 1 tc
Drive;
55th Avenue;
87th Street;
to 88th Street;
1 to U.S. 1;
Indian River
Old Dixie Highway from Roseland Road to North
Sebastian City Limits;
s) Old Dixie Highway from C.R. 512 to U.S. 1;
t) 28th Court from 45th Street to 49th Street;
u) 40th Avenue from 45th Street to 49th Street;
v) 38th Avenue from 41st Street to 45th Street.
In addition, the staff has received an application requesting
that the Thoroughfare Plan be amended as follows:
1. Deleting the north/south secondary collector road in
Government Lot 2, Section 15, Township 31 South, Range
39 East.
The applicant is also requesting that the east/west secondary
collector road in Sections 10 and 15, Township 31 South, Range 39
East be reclassified to a subdivision collector. This request is
part of the staff's amendments.
Most of the Thoroughfare Plan roads located on the barrier island
north of C.R. 510 are part of the designated scenic and
historical road called "Jungle Trail". These roads provide
access to land -locked parcels of property in the area.
The Board at its April 26, 1988 meeting unanimously approved the
transmittal of these proposed amendments to the Department of
Community Affairs for the required 90 day review period.
On July 18, 1988, the Planning Department received comments from
the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) relative to the
comprehensive plan amendments. Their comments are as follows:
"Our review of the proposed amendments to the Transportation
Element of the Comprehensive Plan indicates that they are
generally consistent with the provisions of Section
163.3177, Florida Statutes, which were in effect prior to
October 1985".
Also, the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC), the
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and the Indian River
Historical Society, Inc. provided comments. Their comments are
found in attachment #9.
49
SEP 66 1988 BOOK f 49
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
The addition of 102nd Avenue from S.R. 60 to 4th Street as a
collector and the addition of 16th and 12th Streets between 98th
to 102nd Avenues as collectors are requested to serve proposed
developments in these areas.
Deletion of 101st Avenue between 87th Street and C.R. 512 is
requested in order to eliminate the excessive number of collector
roads in the area and to eliminate a major future offset
intersection with 102nd Terrace north of C'.R. 512.
The deletion of 61st Street east of 58th Avenue is requested due
to the lack of roadway system interconnections. This situation
resulted from a previous deletion of 43rd Avenue north of 57th
Street which created a dead-end corridor on 61st Street.
The requested reclassification of the north barrier island roads
from collectors to subdivision collectors is the result of short
segment lengths, localized traffic and low anticipated traffic
volumes on these roads.
Also, the reclassification from collectors to subdivision
collectors of 31st Avenue between 41st Street and -45th Street and
33rd Avenue between 45th Street and 49th Street is requested due
to the fact that these roads have localized traffic,- low
anticipated traffic volumes and short segment lengths.
The deletion of 33rd Avenue between. 49th Street and 53rd street
is requested since it runs through a mobile home park
development.
The addition of numerous roads to the Subdivision Collector Map
is requested because these roads serve as localized collectors
and are not part of the major road network.
An applicant is requesting that the Thoroughfare Plan be amended
to delete a north/south secondary collector road on the north
barrier island. This road will no longer be needed since the
individual parcels of land surrounding the collector road will be
developed under one self-contained development. Therefore, the
entire road network of this proposed development eliminates the
need for the north/south collector road.
The Thoroughfare Plan roads, located on the barrier island north
of C.R. 510, which are also part of "Jungle Trail" provide access
to land -locked parcels of property in the area. Since roadways
designated on the Thoroughfare Plan and/or Subdivision Collector
Maps are generally earmarked for future paving as the need
arises, the sections of "Jungle Trail" located on the
Thoroughfare Plan will likely be paved in the future if
development occurs in that area.
As development occurslthese land -locked parcels must be provided
with access through designated subdivision collectors. At the
present time, parts of "Jungle Trail" are part of the subdivision
collector system. An alternative to using "Jungle Trail" as a
subdivision collector would be to designate several east -west
subdivision collectors with appropriate north -south connectors
accessing these land -locked parcels. This alternative would
require additional right-of-way to be acquired by the county for
these roadways.
The staff's proposed amendments to the Thoroughfare Plan Map and
Subdivision Collector Map are depicted in attachments #1 and #2,
respectively.
SES 6 195 50
ma 71 u,UE 50
r�
The applicant's proposed amendments to the Thoroughfare Plan Map
and Subdivision Collector Map are depicted in attachments #3 and
#4, respectively.
Attachment #5 is the existing Thoroughfare Plan Map and
attachment #6 is the existing Subdivision Collector Map for the
county.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, the staff recommends approval of
these changes to the Thoroughfare Plan as an amendment to the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
Director Keating advised that the only controversy seems to
relate to reclassifying the north barrier island roads from
collector to subdivision collector roads as evidenced by the
following letter from the Historical Society:
hiw;
VENO STATION 1010
Wum [Umr caw1y
HISTORICAL
SOCIETY -
INC.
P•O.Borc 6535
Vcro Beach, FL 32961 I
September 2, 1988
U
Mr. Doug Scurlock
Chairman
Members of the Indian River county 0=9ssioners
RE: Proposed January 1988 AmersIments, Transportation Element
"reclassifying the north barrier island roads from collector to
subdivision collector'roads"
our Society has participated in the public hearing of April 26, 1988
on the above referenced amendments and we would like to state, again, our
cbjection to the collector status and the proposed subdivision collector
designation for segments of Jungle Trail. The corresponding construction
criteria (i.e. width of pavement, curbing, drainage swales, etc.) of
these designations, if implemented, will allow the destruction of this
very narrow, scenic, historic road, thereby destroying its historic
value.
Section 6 of. the Scenic Trails Ordinance adopted in 1985 states that
I"I'he Public Works Division—, the Parks Department and the COMMUnity
Development Division shall implement guidelines for maintenance of the
scenic and historic roads." This has not been accomplished. It was our
hope the guidelines would be ready by the date of this public hearing.
We are asking once again that this commission guarantee that Jungle
Trail from AlA on the north to its intersection with Winter Beach Bridge
Road on the south will remain untouched, in its present state until
guidelines are established.
our Society has tried to work in a positive mariner with Indian River
County and the other communities within our County to enhance the rich
historic heritage found in our area. We understand, sometimes, this is
difficult because of tremendous development pressure on these resources.
our Society continues to offer our input toward long-range goals of
preserving the unique Areas of Indian River county's historical past for,
further generations T enjoy.
Sincerely,
Mrs. Millie Bunnell
President
51 BOOK � � F,�E
SEP 6 1988
M M
Chairman Scurlock inquired how staff would respond.to the
Historical Society's letter.
Director Keating explained that the reason collector roads
were initially established on the Barrier Island was to insure
that a lot of parcels that were landlocked, except by having
access just to Jungle Trail, would have some alternate access to
get back out to SR A -1-A without using Jungle Trail. Director
Keating pointed out the location of the lots on the map, noting
that while a number of these separate lots may be commonly owned,
they can be sold individually. When.staff looked at this a
couple years ago, they felt the best way to assure access to most
of these lots was to make Jungle Trail from its intersection at
A -1-A going south a collector roadway whereby as those lots
developed, they would have access. The alternative is to put in
a number of collector roadways east/west accessing A -1-A and then
you would have a number of curb cuts there.
Chairman Scurlock felt the bottom line is that all that
property, or large tracts of it, has been acquired by single
entities, and as he understood it, we are about to see a proposal
regarding annexation of a number of these lots into the Town of
Orchid. In view of that, he did not know what kind of control
we will have, if any, over Jungle Trail.
Director Keating advised that the County would still control
the access way for which a maintenance map has been filed, but
the county's ordinance regarding buffers and setbacks to Jungle
Trail would not be applicable if this area were to be annexed
into another jurisdiction.
The Chairman noted that this is a very serious question. He
expressed his hope and expectation that these people will be good
neighbors, but felt that we will have to take some position on
annexation; although, he believed we have little ability to do
anything more than possibly -have an interlocal agreement up front
to resolve a lot of those issues relating to Jungle Trail. He
felt strongly about preserving the historic part of Jungle Trail.
52 BOOK 74 FADE 52
Commissioner Eggert wished to know if changing the
designation of this road is going to make any difference as far
as the County's ability to oversee it is concerned.
Director Keating did not believe so. He noted that ideally -
Jungle Trail will never be used as an access road for
development, and if a lot of parcels are consolidated under one
ownership in the northern part of this area, a situation may
occur where access can be provided without using a number of
different roadways.
Chairman Scurlock commented that possibly it could be like
the beautiful development at John's Island where they have very
controlled access.
Director Keating agreed that is what is hoped, but right now
we are looking at the reality and there are a lot of parcels.
Discussion continued as to the likelihood of this area being
developed as one large consolidated parcel rather than several
smaller developments.
Public Works Director Jim Davis informed the Board that the
DOT is getting more actively involved in connections to the state
system. He suggested that perhaps the Board could draft a
Resolution to the DOT and officially state that the County would
like a well controlled access management plan for A -1-A as
opposed to connections to Jungle Trail.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, to adopt Resolution 88-54 re-
questing the DOT to develop a well controlled
management plan for A -1-A as opposed to connections
to Jungle Trail.
Commissioner Bird wished further clarification on this, and
Director Davis explained that he is recommending that the county
take a formal position that as this area develops, we would be
asking that the DOT exercise their authority with a controlled
53 P00� 74 F"i;E 53SEP 6 198
management plan for A -1-A as opposed to connections to the scenic
trail to the west. If the County is taken out of the picture,
and this becomes a Town of Orchid jurisdiction, then we would not
have the permitting authority or the site plan or subdivision
control we now exercise, and the DOT would have to take a more
active role.
Commissioner Bowman wished to know the required width for a
subdivision collector roadway, and Director Davis advised that it
is 60' with curb and gutter or 50' without. Jungle Trail is 40'
to 50' according to the maintenance map.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0)
RESOLUTION 88-54 WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE RECORD WHEN FULLY
EXECUTED AND RECEIVED.
Commissioner Bowman felt what might happen here is sicken-
ing. We asked our local Legislative Delegation to sponsor a Bill
in regard to abolishing the Town of Orchid and nothing happened.
She felt we might just as well count Jungle Trail as wiped out
today.
Chairman Scurlock believed we do have some control, but
agreed that our State Legislators did not listen to us and
basically totally ignored this community and its concerns, which
he felt is appalling.
Commissioner Bowman felt perhaps our resource is to have
Jungle Trail declared a national monument and made part of the
Refuge.
Chairman Scurlock believed the key is that the Commission is
very concerned about Jungle Trail and what the future holds for
it, and he believed we have -a majority commitment to do as much
as we can to protect it. Certainly we want good development to
take place in the county, and maybe the Polo Club and this new
54
SEP Boas 74 mE 54
M
Connecticut group will do the right thing, but seeing is
believing.
Commissioner Bowman believed the National Refuge system has
an interest in acquiring that whole north area and that there is -
a movement afoot in that direction.
Director Keating commented that he has heard that also. He
pointed out that the county does have the opportunity to comment
on Orchid's comprehensive plan and in that way can exert some
influence on how it will be done.
Commissioner Bird stated that he is very much concerned
also. We have a situation where we have the Town of Orchid which
is somewhat of an unknown, but it is a setting similar to what
Indian River Shores was 15-20 years ago. He envisioned the area
developing something like Indian River Shores and he is trying to
picture this dirt road preserved in its present form winding
through a golf course community of multi million dollar homes.
He was not sure how this would blend in without being a detriment
to that type community, its security, etc.
Acting Administrator Collins noted that they are working on
trying to blend this together along Sea Oaks and Indian Trails
where the dirt road still does exist.
Discussion continued about trying to work Jungle Trail in
with such development. Acting Administrator Collins advised that
we do have one other protection, which is that a county ordinance
applies in a municipality until they enact a conflicting
ordinance, but Attorney Vitunac noted that if the Town is
opposed, they could get rid of that control within several weeks.
The Board continued to express concern about the Town of
Orchid, but it was noted the issue before us today is the amend-
ments to our Transportation Plan.
Commissioner Bowman continued to express concern about the
coastal hammock and whether -we jeopardize Jungle Trail by giving
it the designation of subdivision collector.
SEP 6 1988
55 BOOK .74 N' GE 55
Commissioner Eggert noted that we are requiring less R/W by
going from collector to subdivision collector.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
Doug Schuler believed that the County Commission had
provided there would always be an access path on the Jungle Trail
section that went through the Polo Club grounds and wished to
know if he is now hearing that because of the actions of the Town
of Orchid, the Town possibly legally could take away that access.
Chairman Scurlock did not think the Polo Club section could
be affected, but the south portion certainly could be impacted.
Commissioner Bowman still felt we should somehow require
that Jungle Trail stay at the existing 40' width.
Millie Bunnell, President of the Indian River County
Historical Society, stated that she also would like to determine
if there is any way to control the width of Jungle Trail as it is
now, and she would also encourage the Commission to establish a
Jungle Trail Committee so they could discuss this with profes-
sionals and give some recommendations.
Acting Administrator Collins pointed out that the Board has
some flexibility because the county also has an ordinance desig-
nating Jungle Trail an historic and scenic trail and requiring it
to be maintained as it is with certain buffering and to be left
in its natural state. He felt the Board can choose to give one
ordinance more weight and have it supersede the other and waive
some of the subdivision design safeguards for Jungle Trail. The
background discussion in the Minutes is replete with the
intention that this not be a paved road.
Director Davis noted that we have a 40' maintenance map
filed for the section south of CR 510, but did not believe
anything is on record north of 510. It was felt one should be
filed.
County Attorney Vitunac felt that if the road is going to
function as a subdivision collector, it really should meet our
56 800� F' L;
E P 6 �9 E6
criteria, but Commissioner Eggert pointed out that it is
designated a collector road now which is really worse.
Discussion continued, and Commissioner Bowman felt we need
to follow the Acting Administrator's recommendation that our
Jungle Trail ordinance supersede the Subdivision ordinance.
Acting Administrator Collins noted the Board can do that as
a matter of policy now and could do it by ordinance later.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) directed that
it be a matter of policy that the County's ordinance
designating Jungle Trail a scenic and historic trail
supersede the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance.
It was determined that no one further wished to be heard,
and the Chairman thereupon closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
the proposed changes to the Thoroughfare Plan as an
amendment to the Transportation Element of the Compre-
hensive Plan as proposed by staff. Said amendment to
be included in ordinance adopted when all agendaed
Comprehensive Plan amendments have been considered.
ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE TO COVER ALL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Ordinance 88-35 amending the Comprehensive Plan with
all the various amendments just approved.
SEP 6 1988
57 BOOK 74 f,1U,E 5''1
ORDINANCE NO. 88-35
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE
LAND USE, AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN, AS WELL AS CHANGING THE LAND USE OF PROPERTY LOCATED
WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED PORTIONS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY;
TO REDESIGNATE THE LAND USE OF 7.4 ACRES SITUATED EAST OF
U.S. HIGHWAY 1 FROM A POINT SOUTH OF INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD
TO THE SOUTH RELIEF CANAL, AND AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE LAND
USE ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REDEFINING THE
GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION OF THE U.S. #1 COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR
EXCLUDING LAND FROM A POINT SOUTH OF THE INDIAN RIVER
BOULEVARD TO THE SOUTH RELIEF CANAL; CHANGING THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 1.1 ACRES OF LAND SITUATED 560
FEET NORTH OF OSLO RD. AND WEST OF 12TH AVE. S.W., AND
AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT REDEFINING THE
GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION FOR THE. OSLO RD. MIXED USE DISTRICT
EXTENDING THE DEPTH AN ADDITIONAL 150 FEET FOR 1.1 ACRES
SITUATED 560 FEET NORTH OF OSLO RD. AND WEST OF 12TH AVE.
S.W.; TO AMEND THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN OF THE TRANSPORTATION
ELEMENT BY DELETING ALL OF A NORTH/SOUTH SECONDARY COLLECTOR
ROAD SITUATED IN GOVT. LOT 2 SEC. 15 TWP 315 RGE 39E; AMEND
THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN BY ADOPTING A SUBDIVISION COLLECTOR
MAP TO INCLUDE; RECLASSIFYING ALL COLLECTOR ROADS ON THE
NORTH BARRIER ISLAND TO SUBDIVISION COLLECTORS, ALL PORTIONS
OF 81ST, 77TH, 73RD, 69TH, 61ST, AND 57TH STREETS WHICH LIE
EAST OF U.S. 1•, 30TH STREET FROM U.S. 1 TO COUNTRY CLUB
DRIVE, 2ND STREET FROM OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY TO 20TH AVENUE,
20TH AVNUE S.W. FROM 17TH LANE S.W. TO 25TH STREET S.W.,
32ND AVENUE FROM 4TH STREET TO IST STREET S.W. 33RD AVENUE
S.W. FROM OSLO ROAD TO 13TH STREET S.W., 63RD AVENUE FROM
4TH STREET TO 8TH STREET, 99TH STREET FROM U.S. 1 TO BREEZY
VILLAGE MHP, 87TH STREET FROM C.R. 510 TO 55TH AVENUE, 55TH
AVENUE FROM C.R. 510 TO 87TH STREET, 64TH AVENUE FROM 83RD
STREET TO 88TH STREET, INDIAN RIVER DRIVE FROM U.S. 1 TO
U.S. 1, ROSELAND ROAD FROM U.S. 1 TO INDIAN RIVER DRIVE, OLD
DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM ROSELAND ROAD TO NORTH SEBASTIAN CITY
LIMITS, OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM C.R. 512 TO U.S. 1, 28TH
COURT FROM 45TH STREET TO 49TH STREET, 40TH AVENUE FROM 45TH
STREET TO 49TH STREET, 38TH AVENUE FROM 41ST STREET TO 45TH
STREET; TO AMEND THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN OF THE TRANSPORTATION
ELEMENT BY; ADDING 102ND AVENUE FROM S.R. 60 TO 4TH STREET
AS A COLLECTOR, ADD16TH AND 12TH STREETS BETWEEN 98TH AND
102ND AVENUES AS COLLECTORS, DELETE 101ST AVENUE BETWEEN
87TH STREET AND C.R. 510, DELETE 61ST STREET EAST OF 58TH
AVENUE, RECLASSIFY 31ST AVENUE BETWEEN 41ST STREET AND 45TH
STREET FROM COLLECTOR TO SUBDIVISION COLLECTOR AND ADD THIS
TO THE SUBDIVISION COLLECTOR MAP, RECLASSIFY 33RD AVENUE
BETWEEN 45TH STREET AND 49TH STREET FROM COLLECTOR TO
SUBDIVISION COLLECTOR AND ADD THIS TO THE SUBDIVISION
COLLECTOR MAP, DELETE 33RD AVENUE BETWEEN 49TH STREET AND
53RD STREET; AND TO AMEND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS SECTION
OF THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT TO INCORPORATE ALL AMENDMENTS
TO THIS ELEMENT CONTAINED WITHIN THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE;
AND PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, Chapter 163 of the Florida Statues requires that local
governments prepare and adopt Comprehensive Plans; and
ORD. 88-34 IS ON FILE IN OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD IN ITS
ENTIRETY.
SEP 6 1988 58 Bou 74 PnE 58
� r �
ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES FOR REZONINGS APPROVED IN CONJUNCTION
WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Ordinance 88-36 rezoning approximately 7.4 acres
located at the Vista Royale Gardens entrance from
CL to RM -10 as requested by staff.
ORDINANCE NO. 88- 36
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING
ZONING MAP FOR THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND
PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as
the local planning agency on such matters, has held a public
hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this
rezoning request; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has determined
that this rezoning is in conformance with the Land Use Element
of the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has held a
public hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at _which
parties in interest and citizens were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida,- that the Zoning
of the following described parcel situated in Indian River
County, Florida, to -wit:
The subject property is described as:
A PARCEL LYING IN PORTIONS OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 33
SOUTH, RANGE 40 EAST AND SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH,
RANGE 39 EAST, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18
59 600K .74 59
.EP � �9�
(ALSO BEING THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13)
RUN SOUTH 89053'24" EAST, ALONG THE QUARTER SECTION
LINE, 274.36 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 05°04'00" WEST, 975.30
FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE SOUTH
RELIEF CANAL; THENCE SOUTH 74°14'36" WEST, ALONG SAID
RIGHT-OF-WAY 524.93 FEET TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF
U.S. HIGHWAY NO. 1 AND TO A POINT ON THE CURVE, CONCAVE
WESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 9649.39 FEET AND THROUGH
WHICH A RADIAL LINE BEARS SOUTH 73045103" WEST; THENCE
RUN NORTHWESTERLY 1072.61 .FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID
CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6022'08"; THENCE RUN
NORTH 37032'06" EAST, 107.54 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON -
TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF
647.96 FEET AND THROUGH WHICH A RADIAL LINE BEARS NORTH
4001'20" WEST; THENCE RUN NORTHEASTERLY 108.28 FEET
ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH THE CENTRAL ANGLE OF
9034'29" TO A POINT ON THE QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION
13, THENCE NORTH 89°47'53" EAST, ALONG SAID QUARTER
SECTION LINE 501..31 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
LESS AND EXCEPTING THE WESTERLY 400 FEET THEREOF.
ALL THE ABOVE SITUATE IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
AND SUBJECT TO AN ENTRANCE ROAD EASEMENT AS RECORDED IN
OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 618, PAGE 2244 OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
Be changed from CL, Limited Commercial District to RM -10,
Multiple -Family District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described
in said Zoning Regulations.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, on this 6th day of Sept. 1988.
This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach
Press -Journal on the 16th day _of August , 1988, for a public
hearing to be held on the 6th day of Sept. , 1988, at which
time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert ,
seconded by Commissioner Bowman , and adopted by the following
vote:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice Chairman Gary C. Wheeler Absent
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By �.
Don C. Scurlock, Jr., rman
SEP 6 1988 60 BOOK 71, 60
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Ordinance 88-37 rezoning 1.11 acres north of Oslo Road
on 12th Ave. S.W. from RS -6 to CH as requested by
Richard and Arlene Zorc.
ORDINANCE NO. 88-37
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING
ZONING MAP FOR THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND
PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as
the local planning agency on such matters, has held a public
hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this
rezoning request; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has determined
that this rezoning is in conformance with the Land Use Element
of the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has held a
public hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at'which
parties in interest and citizens were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County,•Florida, that the Zoning
of the following described parcel situated in Indian River
County, Florida, to -wit:
The subject Property is described as:
The north 150 feet of the south 240 feet of the following
described parcel: A parcel of land situated in Indian River
County, Florida., being the East 20 acres less the West 10.19
acres of the East 20 acres and also, less the South 560 feet.
of the Est 20 acres - all in Tract 16, Section 23, Township
33 South, Range 39 East, according to the last general plat
of lands of the Indian River Farms Company Subdivision,
filed in Plat Book 2, page 25, Public Records of St. Lucie
County, Florida. Containing 5.66 acres, more or less.
Be changed from RS -6, Single -Family District to CH, Heavy
Commercial District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described
in said Zoning Regulations.
61
SEP
1998 Bou 74 u,.` 61
Approved and adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this -6th
day of September 1988.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By _
Don C. -Tc -r]70 , Jr., C an
COUNTY -INITIATED REZONING TO OCR (QUAY SUBDV. - TERRY)
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
7 a
in the matter of dL/a//� — t
in the _ / Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of v
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in sajd 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 farther 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 Qay of a�D. 19 Ad
(SEAL)
e e,
QN-
singss Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida)
a
NOTICE —PUBLIC HEARING
Notice of hearing to consider the adoption of
a County ordinance rezoning land from: RM -6,
Multiple -Family Residential District to OCR. Of -
way approximately 88th Place and west of U.S.
Highway 1.. -
.. The subject property Is described as:
The West 10 feet of Lot 3 and Lot 20, '
Block 2, Quay Subdivision and Lots 4'
thru 8 and Lots 12 thru 19, Block 2 Quay
Subdivision and the west 10 feet of Lot 3
and Lot 17 and Lots 4 thru 16 Block 3,
Quay Subdivision as recorded In Plat -
Book 4, Page 59 Public Records of SL
Lucie County. Florida; said land 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
County Commission Chambers of the County
Administration Building, located at 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday, Sep-
tember 6. 1988, at 9:05 a.m.
The Board of County Commissioners may
consider a teas Intense zoning district than the
district requested provided it Is within the same
general use category.
Anyone who may wish to appeal any debtsion
which may be made at this meeting will need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings
1s made, which includes the testimony and evi-
dence upon which the appeal Is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners '
By: -s -Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman
August 16, 1988
Staff Planner Nearing reviewed the following:
62
poor 74 �a E
TO: William G. Collins, II DATE: August 23, 1988 FILE:
Acting County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT:
TERRY AND COUNTY
4 47
Rdbert M. t g, A= INITIATED REQUEST TO RE -
Planning & Developmai Director ZONE 4± ACRES FROM RM -6
TO OCR
FROM: David C. Nearing. -Lox REFERENCES:
Staff Planner
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of September 6, 1988.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
In June, 1988, Mr. and Mrs. Terry submitted a request to rezone
several lots in.the Quay Subdivision, consisting of approximately
one acre, from RM -6, Multi -Family Residential District (up to 6
units/acre) to OCR, Office, Commercial and Residential District.
For the reason explained in this item, the staff felt that the
beneficial impacts of this request were substantial enough to
warrant additional acreage to be included. For this reason, the
planning staff has joined with the Terrys to submit a joint
request for all of Blocks 1 and 2 of the Quay Subdivision. -
The Terrys own a triangular parcel on U.S. 1 which abuts the east
side of the Quay Subdivision. They intend to utilize their
property in Block 2 to increase the size and developability of
the triangular parcel which is zoned CL, Limited Commercial. The
staff's intent in joining this request is to promote
redevelopment on these two blocks, make a nonconforming post
office conforming to the zoning, and to halt the further strip
commercialization of the. U.S. 1/Old Dixie Highway Corridor with
more intense commercial uses.
On July 28, 1988, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
unanimously to recommend approval of this request.
ALTEP1%TATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section,
cation will be F
tion of the cur:
rounding areas,
utility systems,
mental quality.
an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli-
iresented. The analysis will include a descrip-
rent and future land uses of the site and sur -
potential impacts on the transportation and
and any significant adverse impacts on environ -
Existing Land Use Pattern
Those lots included in this request currently contain 10 single
family residences,some showing signs of aging, a post office, and
vacant property. All lots are zoned RM -6. The post office is
currently a nonconforming use. In the northwest corner of Block
1, situated on four lots,- is a radiator shop zoned CH, Heavy
Commercial District. South of Block 2 is a single family
residence zoned RM -6. East of the subject property is vacant
land currently zoned CL. North of Block 1 is an appliance
warehouse zoned CH, Heavy Commercial, and to the west across Old
Dixie and the FEC Railroad is vacant land zoned IL, Light
Industrial District.
63
ROOK 7 4 F.;E 63
Future Land Use Pattern
Currently, the Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property
and all land north, south, east, and west as MXD, Mixed -Use
District (up to 6 units/acre).
The subject property also lies within the area included in the
Winter Beach Small Area Plan (SAP). Incorporated into the SAP is
a Precise Land Use Map (PLUM). The PLUM is a land use map
designed to act as a guide for future development in the Winter
Beach Area. Currently the PLUM designates the subject property
as residential. North and east of the subject property is
designated as commercial. South of the subject property is
designated residential. West across the FEC is designated as
industrial.
C Consistency
Though the OCR zoning is considered -consistent with the MXD land
use designation, it does not appear consistent with the SAP and
PLUM. However, staff feels that after a closer examination of
the OCR district, such zoning could be considered as consistent.
Staff feels that there are two major reasons why the OCR district
is consistent with the residential designation of the SAP and
PLUM. First, the OCR district is a district intended to provide,
by right, the same residential uses as RM -6. In other commercial
districts, multi -family residential uses require administrative
permit approval. Administrative permit approval requires that
the use must meet specific criteria before it can be considered
compatible to the uses in that district. The OCR district,
however, permits residential uses consistent with the residential
use requirements in the RM -6 district.
The second reason why OCR is consistent with a residential
designation is OCR's similarity with the PRO, Professional Office
District. As with the PRO district, the OCR district is intended
to be a transitional and buffering district. This district is
intended to act as a buffer between intense commercial activities
and established residential areas. Furthermore, as with the PRO
district, the OCR district could be used as a redevelopment tool.
As previously stated, several of the homes are showing signs of
age. The two blocks of the Quay Subdivision are beginning to
show signs of decline. The OCR zoning could provide an
attractive method of restoring aging housing stock, instead of
allowing it to continue to decline.
In reference to the commercial aspects of OCR district,
commercial is listed as an accessory use. The portion of a
building permitted to be utilized for commercial activity is
limited to only 20% of the ground floor area. Those commercial
uses permitted in the OCR district are limited in scale, and are
more similar to uses traditionally considered neighborhood
services such as beauty and barber shops, novelty and gift shops,
laundromats, etc. As indicated, commercial activities are
actually accessory uses to the permitted residential and
professional office uses.
Transportation Impacts
The subject property has access to 69th Street on the north,
classified as a minor arterial on the County Thoroughfare Plan,
Old Dixie Highway to the west which is classified as a collector,
and to Palm and Citrus Avenues classified as local roads.
Currently, all roads are operating at a Level -of -Service (LOS)
64 BOOK 14rl GE D 14
"B" or better.
LOS of any roads.
Environment
This rezoning will not substantially impact the
The Comprehensive Plan does not classify this area as
environmentally sensitive, nor is it located in a flood prone
area.
Utilities
This area.is not currently serviced by public water and sewer
facilities.
Conclusion
It is staff's opinion that the rezoning of the subject property
to OCR will be beneficial to the area. It is also the opinion of
staff that the OCR zoning district is compatible with the intent
of the residential designation of the Winter Beach SAP and PLUM..
This rezoning will:
1. Provide a transitional area between the heavy
commercial uses to the north, the commercial zoning to
the east, and the residential uses to the south;
2. Provide an incentive to redevelopment of this area,
halting the decline which has begun;
3. Discourage future requests for intense commercial
zoning, an action often initiated by property owners
attempting to enhance the value of their property when
the property has deteriorated as a result of heavy
commercial uses in an area;
4. Make the existing nonconforming post office a
conforming use;
5. Permit only low intensity non-residential uses at a
critical intersection (69th St. and U.S. 1);
6. Permit further residential development or redevelopment
of this area as demand dictates.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis performed, staff feels that this request is
consistent with not only the Comprehensive Plan, but also with
the intent of the Winter Beach Small Area Plan and Precise Land
Use Map. This rezoning should provide several beneficial
impacts, yet avoid potential requests for more intense commercial
development in the future. Staff recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners grant this request.
Commissioner Eggert inquired about the Winter Beach PLUM
(Precise Land Use Map) and wished to know if that has been
brought concurrent with all the Land Use Plan changes and
rezonings.
Planner Nearing advised that staff brought a number of
rezonings to the Board in order to bring it into conformance with
SEP 6 1988 65 ROOK 7 4 P�cE 65
L_
the Small Area Plan, but the Board felt because of the nature of
the area involved and the fact that the residential to the west
already has an LD -1 Land Use designation, that perhaps we should
re-examine the SAP. Staff has done some preliminary work but
because of their time tables has not been able to initiate
anything.
Commissioner Bowman inquired about any residential use in
that area, and Planner Nearing confirmed that there are several
single family residences there, but single family residential is
compatible with OCR and no non -conformities will be created.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard:
Dave Autry, owner of property in the designated area,
informed the Board that the main concern of the group he
represents is the traffic area created by Ocean Spray and the
heavy duty trucks. They have had some bad accidents at that
location and would like Public Works Director Davis to do a study
on putting a caution or red light there.
Chairman Scurlock asked that the Transportation Planning
Committee take a look at this situation.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Ordinance 88-38 rezoning 4+ acres in Quay Subdivision
from RM -6 to OCR as requested by staff and Ernest
Terry.
66 BOOK 74 FDr� 66
� E P � 19��
ORDINANCE NO. 88-__M
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING
ZONING MAP FOR THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND
PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as
the local planning agency on such matters, has held a public
hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this
rezoning request; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has determined
that this rezoning is in conformance with the Land Use Element
of the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has held a
public hearing pursuant to this 'rezoning request, at which
parties in interest and citizens Were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning
of` the following described parcel situated in Indian River
County, Florida, to -wit:
The subject property is described as:
The West 10 feet of Lot 3 and Lot 20, Block 2, Quay
Subdivision and Lots 4 thru 8 and Lots 12 thru 19, Block 2
Quay Subdivision and the west 10 feet of Lot 3 and Lot 17
and Lots 4 thru 16 Block 3, Quay Subdivision as recorded in.
Plat Book 4, Page 59 Public Records of St. Lucie County,
Florida; said land now lying and being in Indian River
County, Florida.
Be changed from RM -6, Multiple -Family District to OCR, Office,
Commercial, and Residential District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described
in said Zoning Regulations.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 6th
day of September• 1988.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By
Don C. Scurlo c, Jr., C an
67 Bou 74 P,A� 67
J
REZONING TO CG - 16+ ACRES AT CR 510, USI & OLD DIXIE (SEVCO
DEVELOPMENT/GRAVES BROS.)
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
Publishes! 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 J1i<GCL
in the matter of
in the
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
Court, was pub-
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in szyd 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. I
Sworn to and subscribed before me this Lam— _ dq�of VD. 19 20;2
(SEAL)
Ih (Busipess Manager)
_ �... /� �' - lam_ �� � U_c���/''•_ iii
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian Rivdr,County, Florida)
NOTICE — PUBUC HEARING
Notice of hearing to consider the adoption of
a County ordinance rezoning land from: CH, I
H=HeavCommercial District to CG, General Com- I
DIA The subject property is pre- I
sently owned by Graves Brothers company and
Is located on the south side of 87th Street west
of Old Dixie Highway east of the F.E.C. Railroad
right-of-way. - .
.The subject property is described as:
All that part of the SE % of SW% of See -
Von 28 Township 31 South, Range 39
`East, lying east of the east R/W of the
F.E.C.R.R. less right-of-way of record.
All that part of government Lot 5, See-
' Bon 28 Township 31 South, Range 39
i' E�wyyyNLying gnd westof
of thethe westR/Wy of
-_Old record.Dixie Hl Saldhway. Less parrce s containingi1a6.28
of
'.'- net acres. Begin more fully described as:
Begin at northwest comer of govern-
ment Lot 5, Section 28, Township 31
South, Range 39 East, run west to F.E.C.
Railroad right-of-way, thence run south-
easterly along railroad right-of-way to
State Road 510, thence run east along
State Road 510 right-of-way to westerly
right-of-way of Old Dixie Highway;
thence run north along westerly right-of-
way of Old Dixie Highway to U.S. High-
way No. 1; thence run northerly along
westerly right-of-way of U.S. Highway
No. 1 to north line of said government
Lot 5; thence run west to point of begin-
ning. (Less right-of-way of River Street).
I
A public hearing at which parties In Interest
and citizens shall have an opportunity to be
heard, will be held by the Board of County Com-
missioners of Indian River County, Florida, in the
County Commission Chambers of the County !
Administration Building, located at 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday, Septem-
ber 6, 1988, at 9:05 a.m.
The Board of County Commissioners may
consider a less Intense zoning district than the
district requested provided It is within the same
general use category. i
Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision
which may be made at this meeting will need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings
is made which includes the testimony and evi-
dance upon which the appeal Is based.
Indian River County I
Board of County Commissioners
By: -s -Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman
August 16,1988
Staff Planner Nearing made the staff presentation:
68
S E P 6 1988
BOOK 7 4 i'A�
TO: William G. Collins, II DATE:August 23, 1988 FILE:
Acting County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT:
SEVCO DEVELOPMENT CORP
o ert Keat'ng, CP REQUEST TO REZONE 16.29±
Planning & Develop nt Director ACRES FROM CH TO CG
FROM: David C. Nearing a�L°/%7 REFERENCES:
Staff Planner
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of September 6, 1988,
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The Sevco Development Corp., acting as agent for the Graves
Brothers Company, has requested the rezoning of 16.29± acres of
land from CH, Heavy Commercial District to CG, General Commercial
District. The subject property is situated near the northwest
intersection of C.R. 510, U.S. 1, and Old Dixie Highway.
The applicant intends to develop a shopping center on the subject
property.
On July 28, 1988, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
unanimously to recommend approval of this request.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli-
cation will be presented. The analysis will include a descrip-
tion of the current and future land uses of the site and sur-
rounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and
utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environ-
mental quality.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The site is currently the location of a packing house facility
and groves, zoned CH. To the north of the site is a tire store
and retail shop zoned CL, Limited Commercial District. To the
west of the subject site is the FEC Railroad and additional
packing facilities. To the east of the subject parcel across Old
Dixie Highway is a gas station/bait shop zoned CH, and across
U.S. 1 is vacant land and several commercial buildings zoned CL.
South of the subject property is a packing house zoned CH.
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as being
within the C.R. 510/U.S. 1 Commercial /Industrial Node. The land
east, west, and south also lies within the node. The land north
of the subject property is within the MXD, Mixed -Use District (up
to 6 units/acre).
Transportation Impacts
The site has frontage on several roads. To the south is C.R.
510, classified as a major arterial on the County Thoroughfare
Plan. To the north is Bridge Blvd., classified as a local road.
At the southeast corner of the site is Old Dixie Highway,
classified as a collector road, and at the northeast corner is
69
BOOR 74 pni 69
U.S. 1., classified as a major arterial. Currently, C.R. 510,
Bridge Blvd., and Old Dixie are operating at a Level of Service
(LOS) "A". U.S. 1 is operating at a good level of service. Even
though this site could potentially generate/attract a large
volume of traffic, the traffic impact analysis for large trip
generators/attractors required with site plan approval will
enable all new traffic to be properly handled.
Environment
The Comprehensive Plan does not designate the subject site as
environmentally sensitive, nor is it situated in a flood prone
area.
Utilities
Currently, this area is not being serviced by public water and
sewer facilities.
Conclusion --
The. current zoning is in place specifically to keep the use
(packing house) consistent with the code. However, staff feels
that due to the sites central location within the north county,
and its direct access to both north/south and east/west major
arterial roadways, this site best meets the intent of the CG
zoning district. The CG zoning district is intended to provide a.
location for major commercial activities intended to serve a
large geographic location, such as the north county. Further,
this location will have little adverse impact on residential uses
in the area due to its location adjacent to heavy commercial and
industrial zoning. This request is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan policies dealing with development within nodal
areas, and with the intent of the CG district.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis performed, staff recommends approval.
The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard.
Dean Luethje, Engineer with Carter Associates, came before
the Board representing Sevco Development Corp. and advised that
he was just present to answer any questions.
It was determined,that no one else wished to be heard, and
the Chairman thereupon declared the public hearing closed.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Ordinance 88-39 rezoning 16.29+ acres from CH to CG
as requested by Sevco Development Corp.
70 door 7A p r -in
SEP 6 198
ORDINANCE NO. 88- 39
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING
ZONING MAP FOR THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND
PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as
the local planning agency on such matters, has held a public
hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this
rezoning request; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has determined
that this rezoning is in conformance with the Land Use Element
of the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has held a
public hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at which
parties in interest and citizens were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning
of the following described parcel situated in Indian River
County, Florida, to -wit:
The subject parcels being described as:
All that part of the SE $ of SW $ of Section 28 Township
31 South, Range 39 East, lying east of the east R/W of the
F.E.C.R.R. less right-of-way of record.
All that part of government Lot 5, Section 28 Township 31
South, Range 39 East. Lying west of the west R/W of U.S.
Hwy No. 1 and west of the west R/W of Old Dixie Highway.
Less rights-of-way of record. Said parcels containing
16.28 net acres. Being more fully described as: Begin at
northwest corner of government Lot 5, Section 28, Township
31 South, Range 39 East, run west to F.E.C. Railroad
right-of-way, thence run southeasterly along railroad
right-of-way to State Road 510, thence run east along
State Road 510 right-of-way to westerly right-of-way of
Old Dixie Highway; thence run north along westerly
right-of-way of Old Dixie Highway to U.S. Highway No. 1;
thence run northerly along westerly right-of-way of U.S.
Highway No. 1 to north line of said government Lot 5;
thence run west to point of beginning. (Less right-of-way
of River Street).
71
SEIP 6 198 BooK4
Be changed from CH, Heavy Commercial District to CG, General
Commercial District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described
in said Zoning Regulations.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 6th
day of September, 1988.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By G-
Don C. Scurl c , Tr irman
REZONING 5 ACRES 73RD ST. WEST OF 66th AVE. TO RFD (JANICE DYE)
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
_M "NOTICE—PUBLIC HEARING
Nonce of hearing to consider the adoption of
at Vero Beach in Indian River Count Florida, that the attached co of advertisement, being
Y. PY 9
1,
� a County ordinance rezoning land from: A-1,
'a I
Agricultural RFD, Rural Fringe Devel-
Distrlcl The subject property is pre-
opmentrIcL T e
- I
•tiLC/
sently owned by Janice Dye and is located on
the north side of 73rd Street approximately 950
feet west of 66th Avenue (C.R. 615).
—
Is
.-_The subject progeny is described as:
South h
in the matter of !rte `,(�
The west 341.44 of the of
} Tract 8, Section 6, Township 32 South,
- ,Range 39 East, according to the last
>� general plat of lands of the Indian River
• . Farms Company Subdivision as re-
corded in Plat Book 2, Page 25, Public
Records of SL Lucie County, Florida,
in the _ Court, was pub-
:• now lying and being In Indian River
County, Florida.
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
A public hearing at which parties In Inter
and citizens shall have an opportunity to be
heard, will be held by the Board of County Com-
missioners of Indian River County, Florida, in the
County Commission Chambers of the County
Administration Building, located at 1840 25th:
Street. Vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday, Septem-
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
ber 6. 1988, at 9:05 a.m.
The Board of County Commissioners may
Vero Beach, in sajd Indian River Count Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
Y.consider
a less Intense zoning district than the
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
district requested provided It Is within the same
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
general use category.
Anyone who may wish to appeal any decisloW
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
which may be made at this meeting will need to
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
pro proceedings
js made which inc� des�e t
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
testimony dievgis-
dente upon which the appeal is based.
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Indian River County
' ��
Board of County Commtssloners
By: -s -Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman '
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 1 da of D. 19
August 16,1986
Manager)
i(Business
r
(Clerk of th4e li�Court�l¢,diye�jcoun y, Florida)
(SEAL)
72
S E P 6 1988
BOOK 74 PAGE
Staff Planner Nearing made the following presentation:
TO: William G. Collins, II DATE: August 23, 1988 FILE:
Acting County Administrator
DIV ON HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT: REQUEST BY JANICE DYE TO
Robb -ft- M. Keat n , REZONE 5 ACRES OF LAND
Community Develop en irector FROM A-1 AGRICULTURAL
DISTRICT TO RFD, RURAL
FRINGE DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT
FROM: David C. Nearing REFERENCES: DYE REZONING
Staff Planner &4 JEFF2
It is requested that the information presented herein be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of September 6, 1988.
DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION:
Ms. Janice Dye has submitted a request to rezone 5 acres of land
from A-1, Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres) to RFD,
Rural Fringe Development District (up to 1 unit/2.5 acres). The
subject property is situated on the north side of 73rd Street
approximately 900 feet west of 66th Avenue.
The applicant intends to develop the property into single family
residences.
On July 28, 1988, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
unanimously to recommend approval of this request.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the applica-
tion will be presented. The analysis will include a description
of the current and future land uses of the site and surrounding
areas, potential impacts on the transportation and utility sys-
tems, and any significant adverse impacts on environmental quali-
ty.
Current Land Use Pattern
Currently the subject property and all land north, south, and east
is vacant and zoned A-1. To the west of the subject property is a
grove, also zoned A-1. Approximately 550 feet east of the subject
property is a 300 ft. wide strip of RFD zoning which runs parallel
to 66th Avenue. This strip was put in place through a County
initiated rezoning. The intent of locating the strip was to put
in place a base of RFD zoning on which other properties could
connect to expand the district westward.
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan
north, south, east and
up to 2.5 units/acre)
Comprehensive Plan.
SEP
designates the subject parcel and all land
west as RR -1, Rural Residential 1 (allowing
This request is consistent with the
73
soar 74 uix 7
The RFD zoning district is a large lot zoning district which is
intended to act as a transitional buffering district. It is
intended to buffer not only higher density areas from potential
adverse impacts of agricultural uses, but also to protect agricul-
tural lands from encroachment by higher density development.
Further, the RFD district is intended to permit various accessory
and non-commercial agricultural activities desired by residents of
such areas. Due to the large lot size and semi -agricultural
nature of the RFD district, it is considered a compatible use to
the A-1 district, and not subject to the normal scrutiny of spot
zoning given other zoning districts.
In this particular case, the subject property is within 550 feet
of an RFD district. Staff has found that in many instances when a
person rezones land to RFD, surrounding property owners often
approach staff concerning rezoning of their adjacent properties to
RFD. In essence, the establishment of an RFD district in an area
acts as a core around which the district expands. In this partic-
ular instance, staff has already been approached by property
owners to the east, between the subject property and the RFD
district along 66th Avenue. These adjacent owners have also
expressed interest in the RFD district.
Transportation
The subject property has access to 73rd Street, classified as a
collector road on the County Thoroughfare Plan. Currently, this
unpaved road serves primarily as a grove service and water manage-
ment district maintenance road. This rezoning will not cause any
,substantial impact on the road. :
Environmental
The Comprehensive Plan does not designate this property as En-
vironmentally Sensitive, nor is it situated in a flood prone area.
Utilities
This area is not serviced by public water and sewer facilities.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the analysis performed, staff recommends approval of this
request.
The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard. There were
none, and he thereupon declared the public hearing closed.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Ordinance 88-40 rezorring 5 acres of land at 73rd
Street 900' west of 66th Avenue from A-1 to RFD as
requested by Janice Dye.
SEP 6 1988
74
BOOK 74 74
ORDINANCE NO. 88- 40
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING
ZONING MAP FOR THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND
PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as
the local planning agency on such matters, has held a public
hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this
rezoning request; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has determined
that this rezoning is in conformance with the Land Use Element
of the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has held a
public hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at which
parties in interest and citizens were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning
of the following described parcel situated in Indian River
County, Florida, to -wit:
The subject property is described as:
The West 341.44 feet of the South 3 of Tract 8, Section 6,
Township 32 South, Range 39 East, according to the last
general plat of lands of the Indian River Farms Company
Subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 25,.Public-
Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, now lying and being in
Indian River County, Florida.
Be changed from A-1, Agricultural District to RFD, Rural Fringe
Development District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described
in said Zoning Regulations. -
Approved and adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 6th
day of September. 1988•
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
- OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By
Don C. Sc flock, Jr., Cha' a
75
I
F
` �
e
Approved and adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 6th
day of September. 1988•
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
- OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By
Don C. Sc flock, Jr., Cha' a
75
I
1
L 7
REQUEST ADOPTION OF TEFRA RESOLUTION - (PROFOLD IND. DEV. BONDS)
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
Azys 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
9&r_ -_W
in the _ Court, was pub -
lashed in said newspaper in the issues of J
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, fora period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate. commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this _ ay of L•t� D. 19 �
(Busine5ArMa ger)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida)
(SEAL)
1 Indian River County, Florida
-�!:!17;1 NOTICE OF PUBUC HEARING
- r For Issuance of
Industrial Development Revenue Bonds
PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on
September 8, 1988, at 9:05 a.m., prevailing local ;
time, the Board of County Commissioners of In-
dian River County, Florida, will convene a public
hearing at the Indian River County Administra-
Von Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero ,
Beach, Florida, concerning the proposed Issu-
ance by Indian River County of industrial devel- .
opment revenue bonds In the approximately ag-
gregate principal amount of $973,000 to finance
the acquisition, construction, equipping and fur-
nishing of a manufacturing facility to be located
at 9500 102nd Terrace, Sebastian, Florida. The
Initial owner and occupant of such facility will be i
Profold, Inc., a Florida corporation engaged In 1
the manufacture of paper folding equipment.
The proposed Industrial development revenue i
bonds will be payable solely from revenue to be
derived by Indian River County from payments
to be made by the facility owner under a financ-
Ing agreement, or such agreements as the i
County shall approve, between the County and
owner of the facility. Such bonds and the inter-
est payable thereon shall not constitute an in-
debtedness or pledge of the general credit or
taxing power of Indian River County or of the
State of Florida.
At such public hearing, further Information
concerning the proposed facility and Its financ-
Ing will be available and/or presented and inter-
ested Individuals will be given a reasonable op-
portunity to express their views on the proposed
Issue of bonds and the nature and location of ;
the proposed facility to be financed.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN, that Immedl-
ately-following the aforementioned public hear.
Ing. the Board of County Commissioners will .
consider approving the issuance of the above-
described bonds for purposes of Section 147(f)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1988, as
amended, and take such other action related to
the foregoing matters as may be necessary or
appropriate.
Freda Wright, Clerk
Board of County Commissioners t
of Indian River County, Florida i
August 18, 1988
County Attorney Vitunac reviewed his memo:
L,
76
BOOK 74 FAGE 76
77
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: August 30, 1988
RE: ADOPTION OF TEFRA RESOLUTION RE: PROFOLD
INC.'s INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONDS
Public Hearing - Board Meeting 9/6/88
The Board of County Commissioners recently approved the
Issuance of industrial revenue development bonds to assist
Profold, Inc. in its move to Indian River County. Federal
---law requires that a public hearing be held regarding the
issuance of the bondst which are in the amount of $973,060.'
The proposed resolution has been advertised properly and is
before the Board today for a public hearing at which members
of the public may comment. -
Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
There were none, and he thereupon declared the public hearing
closed.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0)adopted Resolu-
tion 88-55 approving the issuance of industrial develop-
ment bonds for Profold, Inc., in compliance with the
requirements of the Internal Revenue Code.
77
BOOK 74 pmx 77
27. 88- 5 5
SAB, Isxdi.an River Oo mt, Florida ( the "County") , heretofore
adopted a Resolution- on August Z, 1988, zml.ating to Frofold, Tm. (the
"Corporation"), wherbby the Canty authorized the iommme of .-its ravemm
bands for the purpond of payirq the oast of acquisition, a m atmction and
equipping of the corporation's proposed facility oonaisting of certain
land, buildings, structures and equigmt to be umd as a manufacturing
facility (the "Project") which shall b3 located in Indian River Wunty,
irlorida t and
MMMS, the County is a:_ rhorized to im mr industrial
devalopn>erwwme bonds to finer= the project pursuant to the
provisions of the Florida industrial DMI >p mt Financing Art, Pout II of
Chapter 159, Florida Statutes, as amended; and
MMM,, in . order to satisfy the requirement of Station 147 (f )
of the niternal RwmnxkeCode of 1986, as a mxkd, the Chanty held a public
hearing on the pr pow d issuance of $973, 000 industrial develeptnent
revenue bonds to finance the Project (the "Bores") on the date of adq*ian
hereof, move than 14::days following the first publication of notice of
such public hearing in a newspaper of Genial cirdilation in Indian River
Cmby, Florida (a true and aoaneate copy of the publication of notice is
attached hereto as Edlibit "A")► which public haering was conducted it a
manner that provided a z+easonable opportunity for persons with differing
views to be heard on both the issuance of the Bw4s and the location and
nature of the Proj®ctt and
WHMWM, the Hoard of Cmm -y C mmi.ssioners of Indian River
G=Aty, Florida, is the elected legislative body of the Qmntyt
"l THEREFM, BE IT MMM RESOLVED, by the Board of County
Cemissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the issuance of the
Bm-4 is hereby approved in oepliance with the requirea m t s of Section
147(f) of the Internal Pavenue Coda of 1986, AS amended. The Clerk in
authorized to mala such applications to the Stats of Florida, Departrmt
of General Services, Division of Bond Firwnce, as may be necessary to
enable the county to issue the Bonds.
AWPM this 6th day of Sq er, 1988.
Bow of coIJNay C1CHMISSIC
of INDIAN RIM OCxm, nORMA
L_
78
By:- 44:t�
Don C. Scurlock, Jr., sfiiRi
FLEET WATCH PROGRAM
Acting Administrator Collins reviewed the following:
TO: Board of County DATE: August 26, 1988 FILE:
Commissioners
SUBJECT: FLEET WATCH PROGRAM
FROM: William G. collies II REFERENCES:
• Acting County Administrator
On August 24, 1988 1 met with Jack Fitzgerald and Kathy Siebert, the Fleet
Watch coordinators for Sheriff Tim Dobeck, and James Davis, Doug Wright
and Susan Tillman of our County staff. The purpose of the meeting was to
discuss the feasibility of having suspicious and/or criminal events observed
by County personnel while out on the road in County cars equipped with
radios to report over their radio into the Sheriff's 911 system.
The concept is similar to a neighborhood crime watch or a business watch—,----
i.e.,
atchi.e., to enhance crime protection capability by providing extra eyes and ears
for the Sheriff.
Since this program is entirely voluntary and would impose no additional cost
to the County, while at the same time having considerable potential in crime
prevention, I would recommend that the County authorize the Sheriff's Fleet
Watch team to meet with dispatchers and drivers of County cars equipped
with radios for a briefing on participation in the Fleet Watch Program.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized
the Sheriff's Fleet Watch team to meet with dispatchers
and drivers of County cars equipped with radios for
a briefing on participation in the Fleet Watch Program.
ADMINISTRATOR SEARCH - AUTHORIZATION TO CONTRACT
Acting Administrator Collins reviewed his memo:
SEP ����
79 ROOK 74 FACE 79
�
TO: Board of County DATE: August 31, 1988 FILE:
Commissioners
SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATOR SEARCH -
AUTHORIZATION TO
CONTRACT
William G. Collins II
FROM: Acting County Administrator REFERENCES:
request the Board to authorize either myself or the Chairman to execute a
contract with the executive search firm of Mercer/Slavin, Inc. for a County
Administrator search, as proposed by Mercer/Slavin, Inc., with minor
modifications.
Acting Administrator Collins noted that last week a
representative of Mercer/Slavin met individually with each of the
Commissioners to discuss the Administrator search, and he would
like authorization to enter into a contract with this firm. The
contract as proposed calls for 1/3 payment at the start of the
search or about $4,175.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, to authorized either the Acting
Administrator or the Chairman to execute a contract
with Mercer/Stavin, Inc., for a County Administrator
search.
Commissioner Eggert wished to know what the minor modifica-
tions he referred to are.
Acting Administrator Collins advised that on Page 7 there
was a provision that they would at no extra charge conduct
simulation processes with the finalists if we wished, and he
would like to delete "if you wish" and say that we do so wish and
we want to be involved in the development of the simulated task
they would be tested on.
80 eto or, 8
SEP 6 198 J
Commissioner Eggert noted that when she finally got to talk
with the representative from Mercer/Slavin, she got the feeling
that he was more or less back pedaling out from what she had
thought they were going to do re general testing and giving the
applicants problems to solve, and she wanted to be very sure we
understand clearly just what they will and what they won't do.
Acting Administrator Collins believed they are committed to
doing the problem solving type of practical testing at no extra
cost, but there were some other things, such as psychological
testing which would be an extra cost.item. Mr. Collins' personal
feeling was that was not needed, but if the Board wished, that
could be included.
Commissioner Eggert did not feel that was necessary, but
just wanted to be very sure that Mercer/Slavin are capable and
willing to give the general tests.
Mr. Collins confirmed that is one of the things he specifi-
cally insisted on and we are making a minor contract change to be
sure they do that and at no extra cost.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried (4-0)
COPY OF SAID CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE
=•'�
CHANGE TO REROOFING CONTRACT
The Board reviewed memo from the Building & Grounds Super-
intendent:
$,
SEP 6 1988 79 81
E�OK 1� F
TO: Bill Collins DATE: August 25, 1988 FILE:
Acting County Administrator
THRU: Joe Baird SUBJECT: CHANGE TO REROOFING CONTRACT
OMB Direct 1
<!njB
t williams , Supt. REFERENCES: �`�' AUG lsss
lding and Grounds Division Q �EOr.Irw�
DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS
At the August 23, 1988 Board of County Commissions Meeting bid
# 458 was approved for reroofing portions of the County
Administration Building. The proper budget amendment
transferring $96,000 into the Building and Grounds Division
budget was also approved.
During the preparation of specifications I projected
approximately $90,000 would be required to reroof the worst areas
of the building. The specifications and drawings were prepared
to reflect the choice of certain sections of the roof.
The bid awarded by the Board, $64,000 from Lucas Waterproofing,
leaves approximated $32,000 in funds specifically for reroofing.
I requested Lucas provide a proposal for additional areas or
sections of the roof not to exceed the available funding and
attempting to tie together the previously designated sections.
ALTERATIONS AND ANALYSIS
The attached proposal for sections designated F & G will, when
added the originally bid sections, complete approximately 700 of
the roof. These sections represent the major recurring problem
areas. The unit price per hundred square foot is consistent with
that included in bid 458.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends approval of proposal from Lucas in the amount of
$27,934.00 for sections F & G as noted on the roof drawings,
totaling approximately 12,600 square feet.
Funding is available in Building and Grounds Division budget
account # 001-220-519-066.51.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
proposal from Lucas Waterproofing Co., Inc., in the
amount of $27,934.00 for reroofing sections F and G
as recommended by staff.
82
,ROOK 74 u�E 82
JAIL INSPECTION, MAY 4
The Board reviewed memo from the Building 8 Grounds Superintend-
ent:
TO: Bill Collins DATE: August 12, 1988 FILE:
Acting County Administrator
THRU: Joe Baird SUBJECT:
OMB Director MAY 4, INSPECTION
AQ, '_n...��t�N� A� i i�88
ROM: L nr Williams , Supt . REFERENCES: k� . "D
uilding and Grounds division cLsns :�:-reay'a
n
DESCRIPTIONS AND CONDITIONS
The Florida Department of Corrections cited the County during a
May 4, 1988 inspection of the Jail for a total of five (5)
violations. Violations 1 through 3 of the attached report
apply specifically to supervision and monitoring ofeinmates.
Also attached is correspondence from Captain Bob Reese of the
Sheriffs Department reference a proposal to install closed
circuit cameras and monitors to meet the D.O.C. requirement of
section 33-8.004-.005.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Staff has investigated the cost of installation of cameras and
monitors in two holding cells. Installation can be accomplished
in-house, as this will be a free standing system not integrated
with main CCTV System. Component prices were obtained from
Richardson Electronics (Winter Park, F1.). The total required
expenditure will be $2,705.00.
The alternative to CCTV monitoring of the cells is the installa-
tion of large viewing windows in existing security walls. This
poses additional security risks as well as significant installa-
tion problems. Additional staffing may be required with this
alternative, but this writer cannot comment on that possibility.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
Staff recommends approval of $2,705.00 for equipment to install
cameras and monitor system in two (2) holding cells.
Funding is available in the Jail construction account #391-906 C
523-066.51.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
the expenditure of $2,705 from the Jail construction
account for equipment to install cameras and monitor
system
in 2 holding cells as recommended by staff.
E�
1988
83
POOK 74 E" �GE:
83
AUTHORIZATION TO PREPARE A PLANNING CONSULTANT RFP
The Board reviewed memo from the Community Development
Director:
TO: The Honorable Members of The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Robert M. Keating, AICP AA4
Director, Community Development
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO PREPARE A PLANNING
CONSULTANT RFP
DATE: August 26, 1988
It is requested that the information herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its
regular meeting of September 6, 1988.'.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Indian River County's new comprehensive plan must be completed and
submitted to the state by September 1, 1989. Although the intent
has been to try to do as much of the plan as possible in-house
with existing staff, it has been recognized since the beginning of
the comp plan preparation process that the existing staff may be
unable to complete the work due to the time demands of on-going
activities. Because of that concern, $80,000 was budgeted in FY
87-88 for comprehensive plan consulting services.
During FY 87-88, no consultants have been retained by the County
for comprehensive plan activities; consequently, none of the
$80,000 has been expended or committed. However, the Community
Development Department's FY 88-89 budget, as approved in budget
hearings, contains $50,000 for comprehensive planning consultant
services. Therefore, funds are available to retain consultant
services in FY 88-89.
Although a substantial amount of work has been done on the plan,
there is a considerable amount left to do. Some work has been
done on all required plan elements, with some elements further
along than others. Recently, however, two senior members of the
staff (Mike Miller, and Gary Schindler) who had been responsible
for several comp plan elements resigned and accepted positions
with other agencies. Therefore, less staff time is available to
devote to comprehensive planning activities, and comp plan pre-
paration timeframes have not been met.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
With the recent loss of key staff, the inability to attract
experienced personnel because of low pay scales, and the amount of
on-going planning responsibilities and non -comp plan projects
assigned to the staff, it will not be possible to meet the compre-
hensive planning requirements with existing staff. Since the
level of completion varies for each required comp plan element,
the work remaining is different for each. Some elements have been
drafted through the analysis section, while others are less
complete.
The only workable alternative for meeting the County's comprehen-
sive plan preparation requirements appears to be obtaining consul-
tant services. However, several options exist with regard to
84
1`Ak
�00V 74 84
retaining a consultant. One option is to obtain one or more
consulting firms to complete all aspects of one or more elements.
A second alternative would be to specifically define various
activities associated with several elements, prepare a specific
scope of services, and retain a consultant for those specified
activities. The third alternative would be to qualify one or more
consulting firms to provide continuing planning services on an
as -needed basis.
Because the staff has done a considerable amount of work on the
comp plan as a whole, including much of the research and data
collection for all elements, assigning one or more entire elements
to a consultant would not be desirable. The second alternative of
preparing a detailed scope of services at this time and requesting
proposals for that work also has disadvantages. Since much of the
remaining work in several of the elements is policy development,
an activity with which the staff needs to be actively involved,
establishing that as a consultant activity would not be efficient. -
Also, developing a detailed scope of services at this time would
involve preparing specifications for a number of different activ-
ities relating to various elements, and this would be a more
cumbersome process with less of an opportunity to tailor the work
of the consultant to the specific needs of the County.
Given the existing circumstances, the best alternative appears to
be retaining one or more consulting firms to provide continuing
planning services on an as -needed basis. With this option, one or
several firms could be chosen through this selection process.
Then, when specific work activities are identified by the County,
one of the qualified firms could be retained to do the job without
the County having to go through the selection process again. With
this option, each contract for a specific scope of services would
be approved by the Board of County Commissioners prior to its
execution.
The advantages of the continuing services option include flexibil-
ity to limit consultant work to specific needed activities,
ability to structure consultant services over time based upon
staff progress on comp plan elements, opportunity to allocate work
in small increments and to evaluate consultant work quality, and
efficiency in consultant selection. With this process, the staff
can maintain more control over plan preparation and ensure that a
better product is produced.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends that the Board authorize the staff to prepare
and distribute a request -for -proposal (RFP) for continuing ser-
vices for preparation of the County's comprehensive plan.
of
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized
staff to prepare and distribute a RFP for continuing
services for preparation of the County's Comprehensive
Plan.
85
Roos 74 PDE 8
GRANT AGREEMENT WITH STATE BUREAU OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION
The Board reviewed memo from Staff Planner Nearing:
TO:William G. Collins, II DATE:August 30, 1988 FILE:
Acting County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE: APPROVAL TO EXECUTE GRANT
SUBJECT: AGREEMENT WITH STATE
4f A BUREAU OF HISTORIC PRE -
Robert M. -Keating Dir or SERVATION
Community Develop ent epartment
FROM David C. Nearing REFERENCES: Grant Agree.
Staff Planner DIS:JEFF2
It is requested that the information presented herein be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of September 6, 1988.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
After having submitted to the state Bureau of Historic
Preservation several grant applications approved by the Board of
County Commissioners, Indian River County -has been awarded
$12,500.00 in Federal Historic Preservation Grants-in-aid. This
money has been awarded to the County to conduct a survey of
historic resources situated within the unincorporated portions of
the County. The grant program is being administered by the State
Bureau of Historic Preservation, which will provide funds for the
county to enter into a contract with a professional to conduct the
survey.
The staff was informed in February, 1988, that the County had been
awarded these funds. However, delays by the State in processing
the grant award have delayed commencement of actual survey work.
In August, 1988, the Planning staff finally received the official
grant agreement documents. With the receipt of these documents,
the staff commenced work on preparing a Request For Proposals
(RFP) to solicit perspective consultants.
ANALYSIS
As with all contractual agreements, the planning staff forwarded a
copy of the grant agreement to the County Attorney's Office for
review. After their review, the attorneys informed the Planning
staff that they had some concerns over some of the "boiler plate"
wording in the Agreement document. Their primary concern was over
several clauses holding the State harmless in the event that the
funding was not available, or was withdrawn.
In discussion with Historic Bureau Staff, the Planning Staff has
found that the funding is available and could only be withdrawn
through a special act of the legislature. The Historic Bureau
feels that this is a remote possibility. The Historic Bureau
staff has also informed staff that the wording in question is a
standard part of all contracts, and required by Florida Statues to
be in all state contracts.
P
86 BooK 74 r'ni 86
X14
CONCLUSION
The Planning Staff acknowledges the legal concerns of the
Attorney's Office. However, the attorney's also concede that
similar language has been incorporated in all other contracts
between the county and the state. Therefore, staff feels that
there is no reason for the County to delay executing the document
as presented. Further delays could affect the timing of the
proposed work activities and could result in forfeiture of the
funds due to lack of action by the county. Also, if survey
activities are delayed too long, the information may not be
available in time for inclusion in the county's revised
Comprehensive Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve
the grant-in-aid agreement, authorize the Director of the
Community Development Department to execute the attached grant
agreement as presented, and authorize staff to proceed with
obtaining consultant services to be funded by the grant money.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, to authorize the Community Develop-
ment Director to execute the grant agreement as pre-
sented and authorize staff to proceed with obtaining
consultant services to be funded by the grant money.
Acting Administrator Collins expressed some concern that
this contract doesn't really pin the state down to much of
anything. It says any work performed or expense incurred is
undertaken at the sole risk of the grantee. The state tells him
they do that because they don't want to incur any liability to
the third party we contract with, but as an attorney, he did not
feel comfortable with that language. However, the assurance we
have is that the funds have been appropriated, and the only way
they would be eliminated would be if the Legislature called a
Special Session and line item deleted that appropriation out of
the budget.
Commissioner Eggert questioned if we ever make contracts
based on our ability to get the appropriation from the state, and
after further discussion as to making the Motion contingent on
funding, it was agreed we do not have that ability.
5EP 6 kW88 87 NOOK 74 FAf,E 87
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0)
COPY OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION GRANT AWARD AGREEMENT IS ON FILE.
IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD.
PROPOSED FY 88/89 RATE SCHEDULE - SANDRIDGE GOLF CLUB
Golf Director Komarinetz came before the Board to review the
following:
TO: Members of the Board of DATE: August 25, 1988 FILE:
County Commissioners
7m: William Collins SUBJECT:
Acting County Administrator Proposed Rate Schedule Approval
Joseph Baird for 1988-89 Fiscal Year at
Budget Director Sandridge Golf Club
OA
FROM: Bob Komarinet REFERENCES:
Director of Go
DL ZA r • � n • k It •:
� r �
reported that the total rounds played the first 12 months of
operation was 57,000, and he anticipates around 60,000 rounds
this year; they could play more, but that would not be
comfortable and they could run into some problems.
Chairman Scurlock felt when we start running into that
situation, it would be time to start looking at the next phase of
the golf course.
Commissioner Bird believed we should get one more good year
under our belts and then look to the.future regarding an
additional` nine holes, a clubhouse, etc.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Resolution 88-56 approving a schedule of rates for
Sandridge Golf Club for FY 1988-89, etc.
s9
W 1988 Boa 74 F,�JF S�
r � �
RESOLUTION NO. 88- 56
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD' OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY APPROVING A SCHEDULE OF
RATES FOR THE SANDRIDGE GOLF CLUB FOR FISCAL YEAR
1988-89; AUTHORIZING FUTURE RATE AMENDMENTS BY
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND BUDGET DIRECTOR.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
1. The attachment entitled "Fiscal Year 1988-89, Rates
and Fees" shall be adopted as the official rates and fees
fo-r Sandridge Golf Course for the referenced fiscal year.
2. The rates and fees may be amended' at any time by
approval of the County Administrator and Budget Director,
providing that the bond covenants contained in Resolution
No. 85-78 are satisfied. These covenants require the County
to keep fees and rates at a level to provide in each year
gross revenue sufficient to pay 100% of all operation and
maintenance costs and all reserve and other payments
required in the bond resolution.
The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner
Eggert , and the motion was seconded by Commissioner
Bird and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as
follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman Gary C. Wheeler Absent
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this b11j_ day of _September . 1988•
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLO IDA
By c
Attest Don C. Scurlock, J
Chairman
reda right, rk
C
�� 9 0 BOOK 74 PnF. gO
FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 RATES AMID FEES
OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
18 HOLES 9 HOLES 118 DIES 9 HOLES 18 HOLES 9 HOLES
GREEN FEES 9.00 4.50 10.00
RESIDENT W/I.D. CARD 7.00 3.50 8.00
RESIDENT W/I.D. CARD
GREEN FEE & CART SPECIAL 9.00 13.00
GREW FEES AND CART SPECIAL
AFTER 12:00 NOON 11.00 15.00
FLAG CARDS 10.00 14.00
CART FEES 6.00 4.00 7.00
0
L_
NDTE: I.D. CARD SPECIAL
AND FLAG CARD RATES
APPLY ANYTIME DURING
THE WEEK AND AFTER 12:00
NOON ON WEEKENDS AND.
HOLIDAYS
5.00 12.00
4.00 10.00
16.00
AFTER 1:00 P.M.
18.00
AFTER 1:00 P.M.
4.50
NOTE: I.D. CARDS SPECIAL
AND FLAG CARD RATES APPLY
ANYTIME DURING THE WEEK
AND AFTER 12:00 NOON ON
WEEKENDS & HOLIDAYS.
WALKING OR 9 HOLE RATES
BEFORE 8:30 ON THE BACK
9 ONLY OR AFTER 1:00 P.M.
ONLY.
JAN 1 RHFIJ APRIL 19 7M U
APRIL 18- SEPT 30
18 HOLES 9 HOLES 18 BOLES 9 HOLES
6.00
16.00 8.00
5.00
13.00 6.25
19.00
AFTER 1:00 P.M.
22.00
AFTER 1:00 P.M.
8.00 5.00
NOTE: I.D. CARD
SPECIAL APPLY AFTER
1:00 P.M.
WALKING OR 9 HOLE RATES
BEFORE 8:30 BACK 9 ONLY
OR AFTER 1:00 P.M. ONLY!
OTHER SERVICE FEES
1988-89 INDIAN RIVER CO. RESIDENT I.D. CARD --EXPIRE SEPT. 30, 1989--$20.00
RENTAL CLUBS ---$8.00 18 HOLES --$5.00 9 HOLES
HANDICAP SERVICE ---$12.00 ANNUALLY --RESIDENT I.D. CARD HOLDER --$10.00 ANNUALLY
DRIVING RANGE --$1.25 PER TOKEN
PULL CARTS --$1.25
9.00 5.50
9.00 4.50
7.00 3.50
10.00
12.00
11.00
6.00 4.50
NOTE: I.D. CARDS SPECIA
APPLY AFTER 1:00 P.M�
WALKING OR 9 HOLES
RATE EITHER BEFORE 8.30
ON THE BACK 9 ONLY OR
AFTER 2:00 P.M.
NOTE: SAME AS
OCTOBER
1
�I
Richard Schuler, member of the original Golf Club Advisory
Committee, expressed his gratitude to the Board for going ahead
with the golf course and expressed his belief that it will be
necessary to go to another phase. Mr. Schuler, however, did
wish to remind the Board that this is a municipal course and that
the belief is prevalent that the number of players could be
increased if the cost were decreased. He believed the feasabil-
ity study originally showed that 60,000 rounds at considerably
less than what is being charged would be sufficient to support
the course.
Director Komarinetz noted that study by National Golf
Foundation was done three years ago, and he believed some of the
calculations were incorrect. They estimated a yearly budget of
$800,000 would be sufficient, but staff feels a budget of
$1,200,000 is required to maintain the golf course at the
standards they have brought it to. He stressed that they really
looked hard at the whole system and they want to be able to give
the residents the best quality golf course for the least amount
of money. Director Komarinetz pointed out that people who live
here can play golf 82 months of the year for about $10 even with
a cart, and he did not think you can compare that with just about
anywhere else in south Florida. We could give the residents a
lesser product, but he did not believe that is what we want to
achieve.
Mr. Schuler did not disagree but suggested for the good of
the community that instead of putting in the paper what the rates
are, there should be an article explaining why the charges are
justified in order to keep it a quality course.
Commissioner Bird requested that the Press cooperate and get
together with Director Komarinetz and write such an article.
92
poor 74 P,r3:,L 9
I
AWARD CONTRACT - I. R. BLVD. PHASE IV (GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES)
The Board reviewed memo from the Public Works Department:
TO: William G. Collins II
Acting County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director �--�
FROM: James D. White, P.E.
.Capital Projects Manager
SUBJECT: Award of Contract -
Phase IV Indian River Boulevard -
Geotechnical Services
DATE: August 23, 1988
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
As required by Contract, Glace & Radcliffe obtained fee proposals
from three area consultants to provide the geotechnical investi-
gation for the project:
The proposals and fee prices received were as follows:
S & ME Inc., Altamonte Springs-- $23,181
Fraser Engineering & Testing, Fort Pierce, - $17,120
Ardaman and Associates, Port St. Lucie - $15,320
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The following alternatives are presented:
Alternate #1
Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached proposal
acceptance. Retaining the services of Ardaman & Associates
to do the work for a fee of $15,320.
This is the lowest cost of the three proposals and provides
a thorough investigation, and report with a reasonable time
frame and also is to be fully coordinated with the Engineer
and with all land holders/landowners along the route.
Alternative #2
Retain the services of one of the other two firms submitting
proposals. This alternative would be at a higher cost than
Alternative #1 and the proposals do not seem to be as
carefully planned or scheduled.
Alternative #3
A third alternative would be to reject the above proposals
and seek additional proposals from the other firms. This
alternative would. involve some delay in this phase of the
project as proposals were being prepared and at unknown
cost.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
Staff recommends awarding the work as presented in Alternative
#1. This work was planned for at the time of contracting with
Glace & Radcliffe by recognizing this item as an "additional
service for direct payment" at an expected cost of $23,181.
Alternative #1 represents a savings of $7,861.
The funding, as with the engineering design, is to be from zone 4
Traffic Impact Fees.
93
POOF
1 74 rl�GE 93
s
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
Alternate #1 and accepted the proposal of Ardaman &
Assoc. to do the geotechnical investigation for
Phase IV of Indian River Boulevard for a fee of
$15,320 as recommended by staff.
11M;�M 1A
ARDAMAN do ASSOCIATES, INC.
PROPOSAL/PROJECT ACCEPTANCE
PROJECT INFORMATION:
Client Name ......Board of county commissioners, Indian River county, Florida
Phase IV, Indian River Boev ..._.....___ __ _ .. _...___._ _.._-__ __
Project Name ..
Vero Beach. Fl. . _ _................ _
Project Location. _._.Ver o
81-61-107 _ _....... .......
........_............_. ___._ __.__.......
Proposal Number and Date*.'... _..
Description of Services.._. Geotechnical Investigation for Phase: 1V� ...........IiM&"ri River Blvd.
Estimated Fee. .... $15, 320...__ . __.......... ..........
PAYMENT RESPONSIBILTTY:
Invoices to be paid by _... Ii . �� Counnty Board of County Commissioners
Address 1840 25th Street
City/State __... Vero Beach, . FLS... Zip Code . 32960. Phone ...407-567-8000
............
Attention James D. White,.P.E. Title Capital Ma
Projects nager
APPROVAL OF CHARGES:
if the invoices are to be approved by a party other than the party responsible for
payment above, please fill in the space below.
Firm __ ................
Address_._.____............_._. _ _._...._._.... ......... _ ....
City/State __......... Zip Code Phone ..... .
Attention Title _..._ ... .._.. ......
PROPERTY OWNER iDENTIPICARION: (If other than above)
Name_ Oontact: Glace & c 1 fe
800 -
Address....-. _....... .
City/State..J!IaitS. Orlando Ave.land, Fl p 32751 407 647-6623
.. Zi Lode Phone_ ....
...... .
Attention Ed Dougherty, P.E., Title.... _........Pro _ ._.j . ect . _. Mariag er
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
PAYMENT TERMS:
-Net-90--day-7- invoices will be sent every four weeks for
continued o xten ded projects. intep_....,hat-ges, !1N per P_,t_.-_e__ .L_
-its-date, c
PROPOSAL ACCEPTANCE:
The Terms and Conditions of this Proposal, including the Terms on this page and
the General Conditions on the reverse are:
Accepted this _ 6th day of September 1988
nam
ve
(Print or type name of authorized representative and title)
tg
Approved Date 1
Admin
C
�=
+
Legal
1�.)�, C
_
11� IM Ardaman&Associates,hm
Budget
9
DeP t
oh" J
q
Form 10 - tourits
94
mor 74PnE
94
M M
Commissioner Eggert expressed her concern about the diffi-
culty she has encountered when heading north on U.S.1 at night
and trying to turn onto Indian River Boulevard. She felt that
perhaps installing pavement reflectors there might help people
negotiate this turn at night.
Public Works Director Davis advised that the DOT is
beginning to implement the 5 laning of U.S.I. from the South
Relief Canal bridge up to 10th Street, and they are going to be
looking at that approach and putting.in reflecting pavement
markings and chanellizing it a bit better.
-Commissioner Eggert stated that she would like to move ahead
with improving this approach sooner, if possible, and Director
Davis felt that while we could apply for a permit to do something
there, whatever, we could do would be taken up quickly as they
are going to be breaking up the pavement.
Board members continued to emphasize that they felt this is
a bad situation, and Director Davis agreed that he would talk to
the DOT about the possibility of doing something to improve it.
CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PHASE 111 JAIL (WORK ORDER #3/CARTER
The Board reviewed memo from the Public Works Department:
95 OK P9GE 95
TO: William G. Collins II
Acting County Administrator
C�
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
FROM: James D. White, P.E. /sociates
Capital Projects Manager
SUBJECT: Work Order #3 - Carter Inc.
Continuing Engineering Services Contract -
Provides Civil Engineering Services for Phase III
of Indian River County Jail
DATE: August 24, 1988
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
In October 1987, Indian River County contracted with W.R.
Frizzell Architects 'for professional services for the design of
Phase III County Jail Improvements.
The Contract with the Architect required the County to provide
for certain items and services including civil engineering
services and site plan design.
Staff has obtained a Proposal and Work Order #3 (4 copies
attached) which has been executed by Carter Associates providing
for delivery of the required services.
The cost of the services will be between $15,415 and $19,460
depending on contingencies as described in section V of the Work
Order. This would allow the timely completion of the Architects
work in a complete form.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The following alternatives are presented
Alternative No. 1
Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached Work Order to
Carter & Associates continuing contract. This would allow timely
completion of the design by the Architect at a reasonable cost.
Alternative No. 2
Reject the Carter proposal and direct staff to obtain additional
proposals for the work.
This alternative would provide for the services needed. but not in
a timely manner and at unknown cost, either greater or lessor.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends Alternative #1 as presented.
Funding will be from Phase III Jail fund #333-906-523-033.13
which has a $25,000 unused allocation.
96 -,
bid.
Commissioner Eggert had a question about why we didn't go to
Director Davis noted that this is part of the continuing
engineering contract that we went RFP for about 9 months ago.
We did short list the firms initially and have gone to one of
those firms and negotiated a price; so, he believed we have met
the requirements of the Competitive Bidding Act .
County Attorney Vitunac advised that the new law specific-
ally makes it illegal for us to go to bid with architects and
engineers. We could not bid; so, we would have to go out and
short list more firms and negotiate with one.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
Work Order #3 with Carter 8 Assoc. for the Jail Phase
III.
SAID WORK ORDER.#3 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD.
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT W/CORAL GROUP RE CORALWIND SUBDIVISION
The Board reviewed memo from William McCain of Utilities:
DATE:
AUGUST 18, 1988
TO:
WILLIAM G. COLLINS, II 0
ACTING COUNTY ADMINIS OR
THRU:
TERRANCE G. PINTOX
DIRECTOR OF UTIL Y RVICES
1 FROM:
WILLIAM F. MCCAI �',
PROJECTS ENGINEER ��JJyyy
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT WITH CORALWIND
SUBDIVISION OF CORAL GROUP, INC.
BACKGROUND
The Coral Group Inc., owner and developer of the Coralwind
Subdivision off of 5th Street S.W., East of 43rd Avenue, has agreed
to oversize the proposed watermain from 43rd Avenue East on 5th
Street S.W. to the Coralwind Subdivision.
97
BOOK 74 PnE 97
V
a
ANALYSIS
The Coralwind Subdivision required 1,349 feet of 8 inch line to serve
its water needs. The County agreed to a 10 inch line to serve the
surrounding area as well. The County is proposing a Developers
Agreement (attached) to compensate the Coral Group Inc., for
oversizing the line in the standard amount of $2.00 per inch, per
foot of line, that has been oversized, this amounts to $6,646.00.
RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners approve the attached Developer's Agreement with
the Coral Group Inc.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
the Developer's Agreement with Coral Group, Inc.
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
and
CORAL GROUP INC.
Granting reimbursements for oversizing certain
offsite utilities required by the County.
THIS AGREEMENT made this 6th day of September , 1988, by,'
and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the
State of Florida, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960, (County),
and Coral Group Inc P O Box 650195 Vero Beach Florida 32965
(Developer);
W I T N E S S E T H 2
WHEREAS, the Developer, in conjunction with the construction of
Coral Wind Subdivision, is extending offsite water facilities to
serve the subject project; and
WHEREAS, the County has required the Developer to oversize the
offsite utility improvements to serve the regional area and has
agreed to reimburse the Developer for the cost of oversizing these
offsite utilities;
NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises and
other good and valuable consideration, the County.and the Developer
agree as follows:
1. The Developer shall construct all necessary offsite
utilities, including oversizing necessary to serve the
subject project and surrounding area. The County agrees to
reimburse the Developer for the oversizing of offsite
utilities as outlined below:
ITEM
Water Main and Fire -Protection
TOTAL REIMBURSEMENT
TOTAL REIMBURSEMENT
$6.646.00
$6,646.00
98 Bou 74
E P 6 1988
2. The County shall reimburse the Developer with 508 of
all impact fees collected from the Coral Wind Subdivision,
and surrounding properties who connect to the portion of the
water system constructed by the Developer in conjunction with
the Coral Wind Subdivision project during the first five
years after acceptance of the subject construction by the
County, not to exceed the total allowable reimbursement of
$6,646.00.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,, the County and the Developer have caused these
presents to be executed in their name the day and year first above
written.
cyJysd� z(!/- (seal)
Clerk to the�_soaird
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency:
Charles P. V tunac
County Attorney
CORAL GROUP, INC.
el
BY
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BY 2�6. c -
Don C. Scurlock, Jr
Chairman
Approved for Utilit Matters:
J-m7,lvfC.p /7
Terrance G. Pinto, -Director
Department of Utility Services
SOLID WASTE DIV. - MAINTENANCE/ADMINISTRATION BUILDING PROJECT
"Sonny" Dean, Manager of Solid Waste Management Department,
reviewed the following:
DATE:
AUGUST 29, 1988
TO:
WILLIAM G. COLLINS, II
ACTING COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
THRU
GUS AMBLER �,� V/ _�
PURCHASING MANA4-:; -
TERRANCE G. PINTO)C
DIRECTOR OF UTILITYRV CES
FROM:
H. T. "SONNY" DEAN
MANAGER OF SOLID WA AGEMENT
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: SOLID WASTE DIVISION
MAINTENANCE/ADMINISTRATION BUILDING PROJECT
BACKGROUND
Bids for the subject project we're opened on August 17, 1988, for the
second time. Two local contractors bid on the project this time as
compared to one the first time. All local metal building
contractors were contacted on an individual basis at least two times
prior to submittal to encourage participation in the bid process.
For various and sundry reasons the majority of eligible contractors
refused to submit a proposal.
99
SEP 6 198n
Boos 74 P,,1,E 99
•
ANALYSIS
Both of the bids submitted were in excess of $650,000.00. The
monies budgeted for this project are $365,000.00. The first request
for bids on this project were received in July with only one
participant and that bid was in the $650,000.00 range.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above information, staff recommends all bids received
be rejected. It is also requested that staff be authorized to
negotiate this project within the established budget, since all
efforts to use the bid process has failed to yield a contract within
our allotted monies.
Commissioner Eggert asked if they were going to negotiate
with one of the bidders.
Manager Dean advised that they have bid this project twice
and have made personal contact with every local firm that builds
steel buildings, and when bidding time came, they had two bidders
and they were still twice the budget. He believed we have met
the requirements for bidding and felt we could do better with
negotiating.
Commissioner Eggert noted that her concern is that it might
be impossible for us to get what the specs call for within the
budget, and discussion ensued as to the Board's feeling that the
specs may be too elaborate
Manager Dean confirmed that they actually just want a basic
pre-engineered metal building, nothing elaborate, but with the
same floor plan. They did send out an addendum for a plain
6,000 sq. ft. building, but apparently it still called for
elaborate plumbing, electrical, etc.
Commissioner Bird felt we should go back to the consultants
who designed this and start all over and then rebid.
Chairman Scurlock concurred that we should tell the
engineers to reduce the specs to what we want; that is what they
are paid for, and he believed the Commission is saying that we
want Mr. Pinto to go back to the engineers and say we want this
redesigned so that we can get it for a reasonable amount.
� ® 100 BOOK J4 P,�IrE100
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) directed
staff to go back to Camp, Dresser, McKee to have them
redesign the subject project as discussed.
WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS - U.S.1, FROM 10TH ST. TO SOUTH RELIEF
CANAL - RESCHEDULE HEARING DATE
The Board reviewed memo from the Utilities staff:
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: SEPT. 1, 1988
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
FROM: JACK PEARCE
SPECIAL PROJECTS COORDINATOR
SUBJECT: WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
U.S.#1 FROM 10TH STREET TO SOUTH RELIEF CANAL
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT #UW -87 -05 -DS
Due to the fact that the Department of Utility Services was unable to
have this project ready for a scheduled public hearing on September 6th,
1988, permission is requested from the Board of County Commissioners to
re -schedule the public hearing for September 27th, 1988.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0)
adopted Resolution 88-56A rescheduling a public
hearing date regarding assessment of the above
project.
RESOLUTION 88-56A WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES WHEN FULLY
EXECUTED AND RECE I VED . C
� tv
101
SEP 6 1988
ROOK 74 PAGE 101
FIRE DETECTION & SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS CODE FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
The Board reviewed memo from County Attorney Vitunac:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: '-August 31, 1988
RE: FIRE DETECTION AND SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS CODE
FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY --Board Meeting 9/6/88
Attached Is a proposed ordinance which Fire Chief John Allen
has recommended for adoption by the Board. The ordinance
would require all fire alarms and similar systems to be
tested at least once a year.
We would like Board authorization to schedule the ordinance
for a public hearing and to publish notice in the Press
Journal Newspaper.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0)
authorized staff to schedule a public hearing
for the proposed ordinance and advertise same.
Commissioner Bird commented that he approved this in concept
but would like to see some information presented at the public
hearing as to the projected financial impact.
PAYMENT OF HOSPITAL BILLS FOR LIBRARIAN
The Board reviewed memo from the County Attorney:
102
BOOK
74 [',,GE 102
TO: Board of County Commissioners
J '
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: August 24, 1988
RE: PAYMENT OF HOSPITAL BILLS FOR
LIBRARIAN - B.C.C. Meeting 9/6/88
The former County Administrator, Charles Balczun, encouraged
County Librarian Mary Kiser to enter a medical program
offered at the Indian River Memorial Hospital. There is
strong evidence that she was told that if she left the
program she would be terminated from County employment.
With the recent dismissal of the County Administrator and
the return to duty of Mary Kiser, Mrs. Kiser has requested
that the County pay for the amount of her medical bills
which was not covered by the County's insurance policy. The
County Attorney's Office believes this is a proper request,
as does the new Acting County Administrator, and requests
authority from the Board to have these bills processed.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
payment of medical bills as described above for County
Librarian Mary Kiser.
SEBASTIAN INLET PARK
Commissioner Bird reviewed his memo:
TO: DATE: FILE:
Board of County Commissioners August 24, 1988
SUBJECT: Sebastian Inlet Park
FROM: County Richard
CommN. issionerirREFERENCES:
I understand we have received a request from the State Department
of Natural Resources to consider deleting the deed restriction
that would allow the State to charge entrance fees on the south
side of the Sebastian Inlet State Park.
103
I300K 74
� ® i
It would be my suggestion that we agenda this item for discussion
at the September 6 meeting, and at that time consider scheduling
a public hearing in order to receive public input prior to making
our decision.
I have contacted the Department of Natural Resources in
Tallahassee, Ellison Hardee, and he has indicated to me that the
State would be agreeable to participate in such a public hearing
if it is scheduled. I believe that after hearing from the public
and the State, we should then be in a better position to make our
decision on this matter.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized
staff to schedule a public hearing in regard to entrance
fees at Sebastian Inlet Park and invite the DNR to
participate.
Commissioner Bird advised that he had talked with state
officials and asked if they would be willing to come down and
participate in the public hearing and tell us what we can expect
to see on the south side of the Inlet if fees are charged versus
what may happen if they aren't allowed to charge fees. He
requested that staff coordinate with the DNR to make sure we have
all the appropriate material, aerials, research of the deed, etc.
Public Works Director Davis noted that the county is in the
process of preparing a management plan for the North Beach
complex and will be applying for DNR matching grant money to
construct improvements there. If a user fee were applied at the
Sebastian Inlet Park, perhaps there would be an incentive for the
county to receive some money to develop a North Beach Park, which
maybe at a preliminary stage would not have a user fee and
residents would still be able to go to a beachfront park without
paying a fee. Director Davis felt that if the state did charge a
user fee it could have a large impact on our parks, and he felt
strongly that we need to have a consistent program along the
whole coast.
Commissioner Bird agreed that is why we need to have the
hearing and get the DNR here to clarify their intentions.
SEP 6 1988 104 Bou 7 PAGF 10
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE (SUMMARY OF ACTIONS 8111188)
Commissioner Bird reviewed the following summary:
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS
August 11, 1988
During the 8/11/88 Parks and Recreation Committee meeting, the
following actions were recommended to the Board:
1) Request for fishing pier
Correspondence was received from the Department of
Transportation that they have no objections to the
construction of a fishing catwalk under the 17th Street
bridge, nor do they object to the use of the old Merrill
Barber Bridge structure for a fishing pier when it is
replaced by a new bridge.
2. Lakes in Vero Lakes Estates Subdivision
There is some question about whether or not the County owns
any of the lakes in the Vero Lakes Estates Subdivision. Jim
Davis and the Legal Department was asked to research this.
If the County does not own the lakes, it was suggested that
a letter should be sent to the appropriate property owners
disclaiming any County liability for accidents occurring in
the lakes.
3. Request for Archery Range in Kiwanis/Hobart Complex
Mr. and Mrs. Cadenhead requested permission to lease
property in the Kiwanis/Hobart Park Complex for an archery
range. The Committee agreed in principle to the placement
of an archery range near the fairground. Staff is to check
into the validity of the archery club's insurance coverage,
and research the potential location. The legal staff was
asked to prepare a draft proposal leaving the lease fee
amount open, and the Cadenhead's are to bring a sketch of
the archery range to the next meeting.
4. Amendments to model racetrack lease, and request for
permission to serve food and drinks at same
Mr. Upton requested the following modifications to his lease
with the County for a model car racetrack at the
fairgrounds:
a) change name to Action Speedway, Inc.
b) Allow Action Speedway, Inc. to either contract with a
reliable sanitation service to provide port -o -lets at
the racing functions, or pay the County to provide and
maintain them.
Mr. Upton also asked permission to sell hotdogs, hamburgers
and soft drinks. The Committee recommended approval for him
to provide food and beverage if he obtains the necessary
permits for operation of a portable concession stand.
105 BOQK 74 w, 10
SEP 0 IMPS
M
M
M
Commissioner Bird believed the only item that would require
some action is Item 4; however, there may be some confusion in
regard to who actually owns the speedway. Apparently the lease
was in Doug Upton's personal name, and if he, in fact, sold the
speedway, he nullified his lease according to our legal depart-
ment. Once this matter is sorted out, it will have to come to
the Parks & Recreation Committee before it comes back to the
Board for final action.
Chairman Scurlock felt there is a need for further discus-
sion and movement towards an overall.policy for leasing
county -owned property because he has a concern about getting all
these vendors on county property.
Commissioner Bird noted that if they feel something adds to
recreational opportunities, they have tried to encourage it, but
he agreed we need a concession policy and felt we had one.
Director Davis stated it was geared more towards soft drinks
and hot dogs and that type of thing. The policy said that if a
civic group wanted to provide a concession, they would have first
choice, and if they did not have an interest, it could be opened
up to outside vendors with certain conditions.
Chairman Scurlock commented that when we get to a size where
we have a master plan and want to implement it on a formal basis,
he did not want to get into the position of having to oust
someone who may have had a little concession there for years.
Commissioner Bird felt there doesn't seem to be any simple
answers because there is such a variety of uses.
Acting Administrator Collins noted that possibly instead of
calling these leases, the Board could make them licenses which
can be terminated at will.
UPDATE OF LIBRARY AUTOMATION PLANNING STUDY
The Board reviewed memo from Commissioner Eggert:
106
ROOK 74 F� EU
TO: Board of County Comm! ss i onerDATE: August 26, 1988 FILE:
SUBJECT: Update of the Library
Automation Planning Study
FROM: Carolyn K. Eggert REFERENCES:
County Commission
In 1986, RMG Consultants, Inc. presented -to the Board of County
Commissioners a study on automation of the Indian River County
Library System. Many changes have occurred in the field
recently.
Patrick McClintock of RMG Consultants, Inc. wrote on August 10,
1988 that this study could be updated at a fixed price of $2,500,
Including travel and travel -related expenses. Mary Kiser, Lynn
Walsh and 1 feel this update is necessary. The funds would come
from the Library Construction funds.
1 would like the Board of County Commissioner's permission to
begin this update immediately.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized an
update of the study on automation for the County Library
System by RMG Consultants at a fixed price of $2,500.
NORTH COUNTY FIRE
The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment,
the Board would reconvene acting as the District Board of Fire
Commissioners of the North Indian River County Fire District.
Those Minutes are being prepared separately.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 11:45 o'clock A.M.
ATTEST:
107
Chairman
.ROOK. 74 PAGE 10 d
L - i