HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/28/1989Tuesday, February 28, 1989
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,
February 28, 1989, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Gary C.
Wheeler, Chairman; Carolyn K. Eggert, Vice Chairman; Richard N.
Bird; Margaret C. Bowman; and Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Also present
were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac,
Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; Joseph Baird, OMB
Director; and Barbara Bonnah, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order, and Commissioner
Eggert led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Chairman Wheeler requested the following additions to
today's Agenda:
1. As Item G on the Consent Agenda - bonds for Karl Hedin
and Helen Glenn, members of the Mosquito Control Board.
2. Update on the parking for the main library.
3. Presentation of proposed realignment of Jungle Trail
north of CR -510.
Commissioner Bird requested the addition of a discussion
regarding proposed legislation which would allocate 25% of the
additional 1 -cent sales tax to the School District.
FEB 2819$9
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously added
the above items to today's Agenda.
BOOK 1 6 F,1C,E f?,
FEB $1989
BOOK t a I 'J
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Bowman requested that Item A be removed from
the Consent Agenda for discussion.
A. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of 2/7/89
Commissioner Bowman requested in the 4th paragraph on Page
69 that "Sebastian Exchange Club" be changed to read: "Fellsmere
Exchange Club".
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of 2/7/89, as
corrected.
B. Proclamation - RSVP Day
PROCLAMATION
DESIONATINO MARCH 8, 1489
AS RSVP DAY IN
INDIA" RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
WHEREAS, in 1988, 425 senior volunteers, members of The
Retired Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP) of Indian River County
donated a total of 82,000 hours of volunteer service to Indian
River County at a savings of close to 8500.0001 and
WHEREAS, to honor these unselfish senior citizens, the
Retired Senior Volunteer Program of Indian River County will hold
its fourth annual Recognition Luncheon on Wednesday, March 8,
1989 at the Polish American Club; and
WHEREAS, The RSVP is eponaored by the Indian River County
Council on Aging and ACTION, the federal volunteer agencyt end
WHEREAS, RSVP isifounded on dedication and a commitment to
provide a variety of opportunities for retired persons who aro
age 60 or more to participate more fully in life through
significant volunteer servicer and
WHEREAS, Indian River County benefits greatly by the
thousands• of volunteer hours that senior citizens donate each
•years end
WHEREAS, p sly more then 84 non-profit organizations and
agencies have senior volunteers doing a number of challenging and
interesting volunteer jobs in our community.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that Wednesday.
March 8, 1989 be designated as
RSVP DAY
in Indian River County.
BE IT FURTHER' PROCLAIMED that the Board commends the
unselfish senior citizen vol who donate their time and
efforts in this County.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1NDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Ire. 1,04.ry y. irheeler, Chairman
Adopted this 28th day of February; 1989
2
C. Sheriff's Request to Transfer Funds
The Board reviewed the following letter dated 2/20/89:
•t Y'"
Y
R.T.1TIM" DOB ECK • INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
MEMBER FLORIDA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
P. O. 80% 608
PHONE 569.6700
-February 20, 1989
Honorable Gary Wheeler, Chairman
Board Of County Commissioners
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
MEMBER OF NATIONAL SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
VERO DEACII. FLORIDA 38901 -Owe
Dear Gary:
This letter is a request 'to ,transfer $7,200.00 from the Law Enforcement
Contingency Account, to the Law Enforcement .Operating Account. This transfer is
necessary to cover the increase in the Regional- Crime Lab Agreement. Attached is
a copy of the letter frj m Daniel C. Nippes, Chief Criminalist, which outlines the
necessity for the adjustment to the Crime. Lab. costs. We feel it is necessary to
pay our share of the shortfall due to the services providdd by the Lab.
If you have any questions, or any further 'information is required, please let me
know.
Sincerely:
)/
R. T. "Tim" Dobeck, Sheriff
Indian River County
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
the transfer of $7,200 from the Law Enforcement
Contingency Account to the Law Enforcement Operating
Account, as requested by Sheriff Dobeck.
D. Budget Amendment #045 - Medical Examiner
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/21/89:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: February 21, 1989
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT 045 -
MEDICAL EXAMINER
CONSENT AGENDA
17.7
FROM: Joseph A. Baird,L-;
OMB Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Indian River County's final portion of the Medical Examiner's
expenses for the 1987/88 fiscal year in the amount of $14,566.57
)FEB3
E 2 8 1989 BOOK. 76 Mi. 220
FEB 2 8 1989
ROOK
76 FAU 224
has been requested for payment. Due to complications caused by
the change in Medical Examiner's during the 1987/88 fiscal year
St. Lucie County had to oversee the year end accounting and
administration of the Medical Examiner's office. Dan Kurek,
Assistant County Administrator St. Lucie County just last week
informed me of Indian River County's proportionate share.
We have finalized the 1987/88 fiscal year and the final audit has
been completed. The $14,566.57 expense will have to be charged
to the current year requiring the attached budget amendment.
RECOMMENDATIONStaff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve
the budget amendment and permission to remit payment in the
amount of $14,566.57 to St. Lucie County for Indian River
County's portion of the Medical Examiner's expenses.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
Budget Amendment #045 and authorized the remittance
of $14,566.57 to St. Lucie County for Indian River
County's portion of the Medical Examiner's expense.
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
NUMBER:
045
DATE: February 21. 1989
Entry
Number
Funds/Department/Account Name
Account Number
Increase
Decrease
1.
EXPENSE
GENERAL FUND/Medical Examiner
Medical Services
001-907-527-033.12
$14,567.00
$ - 0
GENERAL FUND/Reserve for Cont.
001-199-581-099.91
$ 0
$14.567.00
4
E. Modification #1 to Highway Safety Grant
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/21/89:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: February 21, 1989
SUBJECT: MODIFICATION # 1
TO HIGHWAY SAFETY GRANT
CONSENT AGENDA
FROM: Joseph A. BairdIT
OMB Director
Indian River County received a Highway Safety Grant in the
1987/88 fiscal year from the State of Florida Department of
Community Affairs for the Indian River County Sheriff to perform
traffic services. The Sheriff only utilized $159,483.40 of the
$166,888.00 grant allotment. The Department of Community Affairs
is requiring a Grant Modification # 1 be approved by the Board of
County Commissioners reducing the grant by $7,404.60 to
$159,483.40.
RECON NENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approved
Modification # 1 decreasing the grant by $7,404.60 to
$159,483.40.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
Modification #1 to the Highway Safety Grant, decreasing
the grant by. $7,404.60 to $159,483.40, as recommended
by OMB Director Baird.
F. Resolution to Governor and Legislature Relating to Funding
Problems of the Florida Dept. of Transportation
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 89-22 to the Governor and the Legislature
relating to funding problems of the Florida Dept. of
Transportation (DOT).
nOOF .76
FAU 2
25
5
FEB 2 8 1989
Pr"
FEB 28 1989
eooK 6 FAUE,2
RESOLUTION NO. 89- 22
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
BY ITS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, TO THE
GOVERNOR AND THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF
FLORIDA, RELATING TO FUNDING PROBLEMS OF THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (DOT).
WHEREAS, Indian River County has multi-year capital
plans for construction of needed roads and roadway
improvements; and
WHEREAS, the contributions of the state, through
the DOT, are vital parts of these plans; and
WHEREAS, the DOT has recently indicated that it will
no longer .be participating in the Local Government
Cooperative Assistance Program, under which Indian River
County was schedgled to receive approximately $736,000 for
the construction �f Indian River Boulevard, Phase 111; and
WHEREAS, the DOT has also indicated that it will be
unable to fund its portion of a new bridge to replace the
SR 60 Merrill P. Barber Bridge in the city limits of Vero
Beach and to construct. what is known locally as the SR 60
Twin Pairs Project between 20th Avenue and Indian River
Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, the recent plan by the state to balance its
budget without the need for increased taxes by reclassifying
state roads so that county governments will have to fund
improvements to them instead of the state, without giving
the counties the funds to construct these improvements, is
placing an enormous burden on the counties which Indian
River County finds unacceptable,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that
the Board respectfully requests the state to honor its
commitments for the projects listed in this resolution,
i.e., the Local Government Cooperative Assistance Program,
the replacement of the. SR 60 Merrill P. -Barber Bridge in
Vero Beach, and the construction of what is known as the
SR 60 Twin Pairs Project in Vero Beach; and further respect -
6
fully requests that the state not reclassify state roads as
county roads without giving the county the revenue necessary
to support the improvements needed to these roadways.
The resolution was moved for adoption by
Commissioner Eggert
and the motion was seconded by
Commissioner Scurlock , and, upon being put to a
vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Gary C. Wheeler
Vice -Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert
Commissioner Richard N. Bird
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman
Aye
Aye
Aye
Aye
Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 28th day of February, 1989.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Attest
ary
.� . �riee er
Chairman
G. Bonds for Helen Glenn and Karl Hedin of Mosquito Control
Board
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized
the signatures of the Commissioners on the Bonds for
Helen M. Glenn and Karl Hedin of the Mosquito Control
Board.
COPIES OF BONDS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD
7
FEB 28 1989
BOOK 76 FALL 2 1
FEB81989
BOOK '76228
PUBLIC HEARING - SHOPCO REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND
USE PLAN AND REZONE 82 ACRES
The hour of 9:05 o'clock having passed, the Deputy Clerk
read the following Notice with Proof
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
of Publication attached, to
a
in the matter of
in the Court, was pub -
fished in said newspaper in the issues of
5; /9,r7'
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. �i
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 4�— day of %. !¢ . 19 .f J
(SEAL)
Vdsi a r)
(Clerk-of•-the-6ircuii..Go tan_
ez Cotyt ty,-Florida)---
8
--
NOTICE — PUBLIC HEARING •
. Notice of hearing to considerthe adoptitii
01
a County ordinance rezoning land from: Cl. •
Limited Commercial and RM -6, Multiple -Family
Residential District to CG, General Commercial
District The subject property G presently owned .
by Leonard Hatala, as - Trustee and is located at
the northeast comer of the intersection of U.S. 1
and 53rd Street
The subject property is described as: -
That part o1 the southwest one-quarter .
of Section 14, Township 32 South. ..Rae North • :
Relief Carnall a and lying South
of Hig ay
Number 1 (S.R.N. 5). said lands lying
and being in Indian River County. Flor-
ida.
LESS AND EXCEPT:
Harbor Town Center, Parcel 2 described
. as follows:
Commence at the northeast caner..of.__
the southwest one-quarter of Section 14r7 ^_•:
Township 32. South, Range 39 East, In •
-
dian River County. Plaids: thence run...w"
south 00 degrees 49' 21" west, along the
east Zine of said southwest one-quarter.
a distance of 315.98 feet to a concrete .
monument on the south right-of-way line
of the INDIAN RIVER FARMS WATER •
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT North Relief
Canal for the Point of Beginning of the
parcel to be described herein; thence'
continue south 00 degrees 49' 21" west,
945.33 feet; thence leaving the said east
line of the southwest one-quarter. nm
north 89 degrees 10' 39" west. 130.00
feet men north 55 degrees 30'00" west,
621.00 feet thence north 85 degrees 36'
00" west 300.00 feet; thence north 27
degrees 25 31" west. 70.39 teed to a
p0rht on the south line of the said North
Relief Canal; thence following said line.
run north 62 degrees 34' 29" east
1010.70 feet; thence on a curve to the
right, having a radius of 917.71 feet and
a central angle of 06 degrees 09' 14",
run an arc distance of 98.57 feet to the
point of beginning. .
•
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 Bosch, Florida on Tuesday, Febnt- -
ary 28. 1989. at 9:05 a.m.
The Board of County Commissioners may
grant a less intense zoning district than the dis-
trict
intrict requested provided it is within the same
general use category; however. unless denied no
final action conceming this item will be taken at
this meeting. • • • - • •
Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision
which may be made at this meeting wdl need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings
1s made. which includes the testimony and evi-
dence upon which the appeal will be based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By:Gary Wheeler. Charcman
rsh A 1989
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/14/89:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
obert M. Keatin
Community Development Director
FROM: Robert M. LoeperL
Staff Planner
DATE: February 14, 1989
SUBJECT: SHOPCO REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN
AND REZONE 82 ACRES
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of February 28, 1989.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The Shopco Group has submitted a request to amend the
Comprehensive Plan and rezone property. The subject property is
located at the northeast corner of U.S. Highway #1 and 53rd Street
and south of the North Relief Canal. The parcel occupies
approximately 82 acres.
The request entails changing the existing land use from MD -1,
Medium -Density Residential (up to 8 units per acre) to General
Commercial Node, and rezoning the property from CL, Limited
Commercial; and RM -6, Multi -Family Residential (up to 6 units per
acre) to CG, General Commercial District. This request is
considered an expansion of the Storm Grove Road and U.S. #1
Commercial Node from 10 acres to 92 acres.
The purpose of this request is to secure the necessary land use
designation and zoning for a regional shopping center. The
applicant is proposing to construct a 747,000 square foot
commercial facility as part of a multi -use project that includes
64 residential units. The entire project is to be reviewed as a
Development of Regional Impact (DRI). Only that portion of the
project designated as commercial is covered in this request.
The procedures for reviewing Comprehensive Plan Amendments
associated with DRI's are the same as those which are normally
used; however, these amendments are exempt from the normal
amendment submittal timeframe. The concurrent Comprehensive
Plan/Rezoning/DRI review process is outlined in attachment 1.
The following steps occur upon completion of the DRI review by the
regional planning council. The Planning and Zoning Commission as
the Local Planning Agency conducts a public hearing to review the
request. The Commission has the option to recommend approval or
denial of the comprehensive plan amendment request to the Board of
County Commissioners. As is normally the case, the Planning and
Zoning Commission may approve or deny a rezoning request. In the
case of denial, only the land use amendment request goes on to the
Board, unless the denial to rezone is appealed.
9
FEB 2 8 1989
BOOK .76 F. L 2
FEB 2 8 1989
Page 2
February 14, 1989
BOOK 76 fACE
Following the Planning and Zoning Commission action, the Board of
County Commissioners (BCC) conducts two public hearings. The
first of these two hearings is for a preliminary decision on the
land use amendment and to consider the rezoning request. The
Board may transmit the request to the State Department of
Community Affairs (DCA) if the request warrants further
consideration. Once transmitted, the DCA conducts a 90 day review
of the request including comments from the Regional Planning
Council and neighboring local governments. Failure by the Board
of County Commissioners to transmit the request constitutes
denial. The second and final Board of County Commissioners public
hearing is conducted after the receipt of comments from the DCA.
It is at this time that the Board takes final action to approve or
deny the request.
0 60
On T ., 1989, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0
to ecommend the enlargement of the node from 10 acres to 92
acres, and the rezoning of 82 acres from CL, Limited Commercial
and RM -6, Multi -Family Residential (up to 6 units/acre) to CG,
General Commercial for inclusion in the node.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli-
cation will be presented. The analysis will include a descrip-
tion of the current and future land uses of the site and sur-
rounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and
utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environ-
mental quality.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property, east of U.S. #1 at 53rd Street and south of
the North Relief Canal, is currently occupied by the Whisper Lakes
Golf Club and a citrus grove. The parcel contains two zoning
designations. That portion of the parcel which abuts U.S. #1 is
zoned CL, Limited Commercial District. The CL zoning extends east
of U.S. #1 a distance of approximately 600 feet and occupies
approximately 15 acres. The remainder of the parcel,
approximately 67 acres, is zoned RM -6.
To the north across the Indian River Farms
the existing 10 acre Storm Grove Road/U.S. 1
configuration of this triangular shaped node
the node is adjacent to the subject parcel.
zoned CG and includes undeveloped land, a
and a country gift market.
North Relief Canal is
Commercial Node. The
is such that a tip of
Land in the node is
small retail facility
To the north of the subject property and east of the existing node
is undeveloped land extending to a depth of about 1500 feet east
of U.S. 1; the land use east of this is citrus. This property is
zoned RM -3, Multi -Family Residential (up to 3 units per acre)
along the east side of the U.S. 1 right-of-way and RS -3,
Single -Family Residential (up to 3 units per acre) further east.
East of the subject property is the River Club portion of the
Grand Harbor Development. While platted for single-family home
development, this property has RM -6, multiple family zoning. This
area also contains part of the River Club Golf Course.
Property to the south, across 53rd Street, is currently zoned RM -6
and is planted with citrus. West of the subject property, across
U.S. 1, is undeveloped property which is zoned IL, Light
Industrial.
10
Page 3
February 14, 1989
Future Land Use Pattern
The subject parcel and all lands located east and south are
designated by the Comprehensive Plan as MD -1, Medium -Density
Residential 1 (allowing up to 8 units per acre). Land to the
west, across U.S. 1, is designated MXD, Mixed Use. The lands to
the north are designated as LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1
(allowing up to 3 units per acre). Also to the north is the Storm
Grove Road/U.S. 1 Commercial Node. The node is currently
designated at 10 acres.
Transportation System
U.S. Highway 1 forms the western boundary of the subject parcel.
This highway is classified as a principal arterial on the County
Thoroughfare Plan and is a four lane divided highway in this area.
U.S. 1 is currently operating at a Level of Service (LOS) "A"
along the segment adjacent to this site.
Fifty-third Street which forms the southern limits of the subject
parcel has two roadway classifications. That portion east of U.S.
1 (which is adjacent to the site) to the proposed Indian River
Boulevard is classified as a principal arterial on the
Thoroughfare Plan; however, it is currently a two lane road. West
of U.S. 1, 53rd Street is classified as a minor arterial. At the
present time the road only extends westward to Old Dixie Highway.
The County Thoroughfare Plan also identifies the northern
extension of Indian River Boulevard, a principal arterial,
extending north and terminating at 53rd Street just east of the
U.S. 1 intersection. This new roadway is designed to be a four
lane divided roadway and is expected to provide an alternative -to
U.S. 1.
Environment
This property is not designated as environmentally sensitive by
the County Comprehensive Plan, nor is it prone to flooding. There
are, however, several man-made lakes with marginal littoral areas
on the site.
Utilities
Currently, public water and wastewater are not available at the
subject site. However, water and wastewater facilities are
located within a reasonable distance from the site.
The nearest county water lines are located at the U.S. 1 entrance
to Grand Harbor, approximately 3/4 of a mile south of the subject
property. Water lines are expected to be expanded along the
Indian River Boulevard extension.
The nearest county sewer lines are also located at the Grand
Harbor U.S. 1 entrance. Expansion of these lines the 3/4 mile to
the subject site would require a force main and lift station.
Analysis
The subject parcel is the proposed site for a regional shopping
facility. Because of the scope of such a facility, DRI review has
been conducted simultaneously with the land use and rezoning
amendment analysis. As such, the DRI Application for Development
Approval (ADA) and the staff review of the application address the
potential impact of the proposed project as well as site issues
and required improvements.
11
'E'B 28 1989
L
BOOK .76 FACE 231
r
FEB 2 8 1989
Page 4
February 14, 1989
BOOK
In analyzing the request for the land use change and rezoning,
staff has focused on several key issues. One issue is regional
mall land availability. The Urban Land Institute estimates that
shopping centers require about 10 acres of site for each 100,000
square feet of building area.. Since regional malls are usually
750,000 square feet or larger, a regional mall would therefore
require a site of at least 75 acres. Site requirements, of
course, are also influenced by local land development and site
plan regulations that determine the required parking, loading,
circulation, open space and drainage areas needed to support this
size shopping facility. Using this standard, the subject parcel
would be adequate for a regional shopping facility.
A review of land uses reveals a total of 561 acres in 12 existing
commercial nodes. Of this total, 40% (222 acres) is presently in
a vacant state. This does not include commercially designated
land in the Mixed Use Districts, or the commercial/industrial
nodes. Thus, there is an adequate supply of vacant commercially
designated land to meet the growing needs of county businesses.
General commercial land is also available in proximity to this
site. The North Gifford/U.S. 1 node, at the entrance to Grand
Harbor contains approximately 95 acres of which 2/3 is currently
vacant or planted in citrus.
Further review of commercially designated lands reveals that no
one node, except the large commercial/industrial nodes atthe
interstate, contains both an adequate supply of vacant land (over
75 acres) which is also in a configuration suitable for a regional
shopping mall. Therefore, accommodating a mall in the urbanized
area of the county would require redesignating property to
commercial. For that reason the subject request appears
reasonable.
Since the comprehensive plan did not provide commercially
designated areas adequate in size to accommodate a regional mall,
there appears to have been an oversight in preparing the plan.
Generally, the staff has applied a three part test to evaluate
comprehensive plan amendments in the past. It has been staff's
position that a plan amendment would be warranted if it can be
shown that there was either a mistake or an oversight in initial
plan preparation or a change in conditions since then. The lack
of mall sites appears to be an oversight justifying the amendment
request.
The second major issue is the compatibility with existing
development patterns. Large scale facilities such as the one
proposed must be located in proximity to the population it serves.
There are several areas in the county which could be used for the
proposed use, but there is arguably no one 'best site'. The
subject site provides the benefit of being between the two urban
centers of the county. Being located in the urbanizing area
between Vero Beach and Sebastian, the subject property constitutes
a central location which could result in shorter trip lengths - a
transportation planning objective.
The third issue is the adequacy of services and facilities. At
the present time the public infrastructure (roads, water, sewer)
would not be adequate for this large a facility. However, the
site is located within an urban service area where such services
are planned. The thoroughfare plan depicts major roadways
adjacent to the site, and these, when in place, can accommodate
projected traffic demand. Water and sewer service, while
currently not available, are programmed for or capable of being
extended to this site. These issues, while important in the
consideration of this request, are covered in detail in the DRI
process.
12
Page 5
February 14, 1989
The fourth issue is the impact on area land use patterns. It is
likely that a facility such as proposed would act as a catalyst
for additional development in the vicinity. With the county's
nodal approach, however, future commercial development would have
to occur only in established nodes.
Conclusion
It has been demonstrated that regional malls are special land uses
which have minimum size needs. Because of the lack of undeveloped
commercially designated land sufficient in size to accommodate a
regional mall, the staff acknowledges the need to redesignate land
in the county so that a mall can be accommodated. The subject
site meets the criteria for designation of a mall site. It is
within an urban service area, has access to major roadways, is
centrally located, and is not within an environmentally sensitive
area.
While staff feels that the subject property is appropriate for a
mall, the staff feels that the site should not be used for general
commercial development which does not have the size requirements
of a mall. Because this request is part of a DRI, the county has
certain control which is not available in a normal rezoning or
plan amendment. That control involves conditioning the DRI
development order. In this case since the county does not want
the subject property available for general commercial use (for
which there is sufficient land currently available) if a mall is
not constructed, the staff feels that the development order should
provide sufficient time for the county to redesignate and rezone
the property if a mall is not constructed. With that condition,
the request is acceptable.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning
Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners authorize staff to transmit to the state the
request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to include the subject
property in the commercial node and rezone to CG, General
Commercial, and announce their intention to hold a second public
hearing concerning this matter.
Robert Keating, Director of Planning & Development,
explained that, in reviewing this request for a land use
amendment, staff looked at a regional mall request as a unique
entity since a regional mall needs a minimum amount of acreage in
contiguous parcels or contiguous area in order to be
accommodated. In looking at the minimum sizes, staff also
reviewed the amount of commercial land available in the existing
nodes in the county. Although there is a substantial amount of
vacant, commercially zoned and designated lands in the commercial
13
FEB 2 81989
BOOK .76 FAr3.E 233
FEB 28 1989
BOOK fpA.€
nodes, staff determined that there was not a sufficient amount of
contiguous land to accommodate a regional mall. Therefore, staff
determined that there probably was an oversight when,the Comp
Plan was adopted in not actually providing contiguous acreage to
accommodate a regional mall site. For that reason,.staff
determined that the request was warranted.
Commissioner Eggert understood that the requirement for
contiguous land means contiguous land with services, and Director
Keating confirmed that requirement, explaining that staff looked
at the closer -in nodes and did not consider the large nodes out
on Interstate 95. He emphasized that urban service area would be
an important concept in the new Comp Plan.
Commissioner Scurlock understood that Indian River Boulevard
was going to bisect some golf course property, which would leave
2 pieces of land which he believed were designated for
multi -family residential, one being to the east of the Boulevard,
and one to the west, with U.S. #1 being the border on the west.
Although he realized that property is not part of this request,
he felt some attention should be given at this time to the use of
that property, because he didn't feel those 2 triangles of land
would develop as multi -family residential. Commissioner Scurlock
emphasized that we have an opportunity here to see that those 2
pieces of land are designated properly so that we have an orderly
transition from commercial.
Director Keating stated that those points would be addressed.
in the land use element of the new Comp Plan.
Chairman Wheeler opened the Public Hearing and asked if
anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, he
closed the Public Hearing.
14
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 89-23, authorizing the transmittal of a
Comprehensive Plan amendment application, staff
recommendations, and the recommendations of the local
planning agency to the Florida Dept. of Community
Affairs for a mandatory 90 -day review period.
RESOLUTION NO. 89- 23
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE
TRANSMITTAL OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION,
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE LOCAL
PLANNING AGENCY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OF THE
STATE OF FLORIDA FOR A MANDATORY NINETY DAY REVIEW PERIOD.
WHEREAS, Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes, requires that
local governments prepare and adopt Comprehensive Plans, and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has adopted a
Comprehensive Plan pursuant to Florida Statutes, and
WHEREAS, Florida Statutes provide for the amendment of
Comprehensive Plans directly related to a proposed development of
regional impact, and .
WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the
local planning agency, has held public hearings and made
recommendations concerning this amendment, and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has held a
preliminary public hearing concerning this amendment, and
WHEREAS, Florida Statutes require that the Board of County
Commissioners pass a resolution authorizing the transmittal of
this Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Department of Community
Affiars of the State of Florida for a mandatory ninety day review
period,
15
FES 28 1989
BOOK 76 PACE 235
FEB 2 8 1989
nu 16 f„W_E 236
NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the enclosed
Comprehensive Plan Amendment application, staff recommendations,
and the recommendations of the local planning agency are hereby
authorized for transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs
for a mandatory ninety day review period.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Eggert who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Scurlock and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was
as follows:
Chairman Gary Wheeler Aye
Vice -Chairman Carolyn Eggert Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared Resolution No. 89- 23 ,
and duly passed this28th day of February. 1989.
Attest:
Jeffre
adopted
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Gary
PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ORDER FOR HARBOR TOWN
CENTER DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT
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:
16
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL.
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of }til
-v,-•,mCLQ
in the Court,Qwaasspub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of ^�i4'C��"�'� , r TS'
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 thisCA . day,of
(SEAL)
FEB 2 8 1989
Lfeh.
_114-4
C'"C AD 19 J
:i r./uay ;Volk, State of' Ptrivtriii• `
Ccmm.ssion Expires June 29, 19D9,
aond.d lhu Troy Fair - irauaam. lac
17
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
NOTICE OF PUBLIC NEARING
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County hereby gives notice of a PUBLIC ,I
HEARING to be held at 9:05 a.m. on February
28, 1989, in the County Commission Chambers
of the County Administration Building, located at
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida.
The subject of the hearing is a Development of
Regional Impact for the project to be known as
Harbor Town Center mall. •
General Location: Bound on the north by the
North Relief Canal. on the south by 53rd Street,
on the east by the River Club golf course, and
on the west by U.S. erl; located on the existing
"Whisper Lakes" golf course site.
All documents pertaining to the development re-/
"HARBOR TOWN CENTER"
quest are filed in the Indian River County Plan-
ning and Development Division, 2nd floor of the
County Administration Building, located at 1840
25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida Documents
may be reviewed by members of the public dur-
ing normal business hours.
All members of the public are invited to attend
and participate in the public hearing.. •
This official public notice is hereby given by the
Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County. Florida, that the Board intends to con-
duct a public hearing pursuant to Chapter
380.06(11) (a) (b) (c) (d) Florida Statutes and 9B-
16.23 of the Florida Administrative Code, for the
Development of,Regional Impact known as Har-
bor Town Center, proposed to contain.:
a 647,000 square foot retail regional
mall; 100,000 square feet of retail devel-
opments on "outparcels"; and 64 multi-
family units. Said land situated in Sec-
tion 14, Township 32 South, Range 39
East, entirely within the unincorporated
area of Indian River County.
This notice is being published at least sixty (60)
days in advance of the public hearing by the
Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida. and is an addition to any re-
quired public notice(s) of local public hearings
to be conducted by the Board of County Com- .
.. missioners pursuant to notice and public hearing ,
`;; provisions of the Code of Law and Ordinances of
:•:: Indian River County. Florida. where applicable.
This notice is being provided to the Department
of Community Affairs of the State of Florida; the
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council; St.
Johns River Water Management District; Depart-
• ment of Environmental Regulation; Department
of Natural Resources; State of Florida Depart-
ment is of Transportation; The City of Vero Beach;
The Town of Indian River Shores; the City o1
•- Sebastian. The Town 01 Orchid. The Town of
Fellsmere; and the Counties of Brevard, and SL
Lucte.
If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above matter, he/she will need a •
record of the proceedings, and for such pur-
poses, he/she may need to ensure Mat a verba-
tim record of the proceedings is made, which in-
cludes testimony and evidence upon which the
appeal is based. The County does not provide or
prepare such record.
Dec. 22. 1988
Boob. 76 ou 237
FEB 28 1989
BOOK
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/17/89:
238
TO:
James E. Chandler
County Administrator
atifj DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M. Keatipg, n 4P
Community Dev/l1elopme Director
FROM: Stan Boling, �AICP
Chief, Current Development
DATE: February 17, 1989
SUBJECT: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ORDER FOR THE HARBOR TOWN CENTER
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of February 28, 1989.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
°DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) CONSIDERATIONS
Harbor Town Center is a large commercial development project (with
some residential units) proposed for an area northwest of Grand
Harbor at the northern terminus of the proposed Indian River
Boulevard. Its scale and scope are such that the project requires
development of regional impact (DRI) review pursuant to Florida
Statutes Chapter 380.06.
The purpose of the DRI process is to provide a mechanism to review
large projects from a regional perspective, culminating in an
assessment -by the regional planning council of the anticipated
multi -county impacts of the project and recommendations to miti-
gate any adverse impacts of the project. Supplied to the local
government of jurisdiction, this regional assessment provides a
basis for the local government to draft a development order (D.O.)
for the project. Overall, the DRI process enables area govern-
ments and agencies that do not have jurisdiction over the project
a chance to review and comment on the project. The DRI process
also enables the Regional Planning Council, State Department of
Community Affairs (DCA) and the project applicant an opportunity
to appeal any local government actions or issued requirements in
connection with the application for DRI approval.
- Regional Planning Council Review -
The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (T.C.R.P.C.) has
coordinated the review of the Harbor Town Center project and has
submitted, in the form of official recommendations, an assessment
of the regional impacts of the project. The Planning Council
coordinated the first part of the DRI review process, following
these general steps:
June '88 1) Pre -application conference with T.C.R.P.C. and
other affected agencies and government entities;
18
Sept.'88 2) Formal application for development approval (ADA),
which includes proposals, and supporting informa-
tion.
Oct.
'88
Nov.
Oct.
,88
Nov.
3) Review process involving all affected agencies and
government entities submitting comments and
questions regarding the ADA;
4) Responses from the applicant; [note: one round of
questions and responses ensued];
Nov. '88 5) T.C.R.P.C. notification to the County that all
questions and comments had been adequately ad-
dressed - known as a letter of sufficiency;
Dec. '88 6) T.C.R.P.C. public hearing on the project; approval
of a report and recommendation regarding the
regional impacts of the project;
Jan. '89 7) T.C.R.P.C. transmittal of its official report and
recommendations to the County.
- Local Government Review -
Jan. '89 1. [OPTIONAL] The Planning and Zoning Commission,
after reviewing T.C.R.P.C. and County staff recom-
mendations, makes a recommendation to the Board of
County Commissioners. Planning and Zoning Commis-
sion review of the DRI is concurrent with its
review of the necessary comprehensive plan amend-
ment and rezoning requests.
ACTION TAKEN: At its regular meeting of January
26, 1989, the Planning and Zoning Commission
unanimously voted to recommend that the Board of
County Commissioners adopt the D.O. as proposed and
with any modifications deemed necessary by staff.
Since the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting,
in response to additional comments from County and
Regional Planning Council staff, and from the
developer, some D.O. conditions have have been
modified. The Planning and Zoning Commission, at
its January 26th meeting, also recommended approval
of thecomprehensive plan amendment and rezoning
that are being considered concurrently with the
D.O.
--Feb. '89 -2. The Board of County Commissioners:
a. considers the comprehensive plan amendment
and, if it so desires, transmits the request
to the State;
b. the Board considers the rezoning request and
withholds any "final" approval until the
comprehensive plan amendment is re -heard;
c. the Board approves the D.O. subject to final
approval of the comprehensive plan amendment
and the rezoning.
3. After receipt of comprehensive
the State, the Board, if it so
hensive plan amendment and the
becomes effective.
plan amendment comments from
desires, approves the compre-
rezoning. The D.O. approval
4. The D.O. is issued by the County as a resolution: a reference
to the D.O. is then recorded in the public records.
FEB 28 1989
19
BOOK
F'A L 239
Pr -
FEE 2 81989
EOOK
FIL40
5. The issued D.O. is transmitted to the State, T.C.R.P.C., and
the developer. Within 45 days after the order is issued, the
State, T.C.R.P.C., the developer, or any other aggrieved
party may appeal the order to the Florida Land and Water
Adjudicatory Commission. This would trigger the D.O. appeal
process set forth in the Florida Statutes.
6. The developer obtains site plan approval for various phases
of the project (only Planning and Zoning Commission approval
required).
7. The County monitors the
that the terms of the D
approvals or permits are
approved D.O.
progress of the project to ensure
.0. are met. No local development
to be issued that conflict with the
8. The developer submits the required annual report to the
County, T.C.R.P.C., and the State. The report aids in the
monitoring of the project's progress.
- Board of County Commission Review -
The Board of County Commissioners is now to consider the ADA and
the proposed D.O. and should either approve, approve with modi-
fications/conditions, or deny the D.O. In making its decision,
the Board should determine whether and to what extent the develop-
ment would be:
a. consistent with the local land development regulations and
comprehensive plan, and other applicable County ordinances,
and
b. consistent with the report and recommendation of the Treasure
Coast Regional Planning Council.
°OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The proposed project is located at the northern terminus of the
proposed Indian River Boulevard, between U.S. 1 and the River Club
(part of Grand Harbor) and between the North Relief Canal and 53rd
Street. The site is currently the location of the Whisper Lakes
Golf Club and driving range, and adjacent citrus groves. The
project is summarized as follows:
1.
Size of Development and Uses:
-Regional Mall Facility: 647,000 sq. ft. GLA*
-Commercial Outparcels: 100,000 sq. ft. GLA*
Total Commercial: 747,000 sq.
-Residential Multi -Family
Total Project Area:
*Gross Leasable Area
ft. GLA*
64 units
on 81.8 acres
on 10.7 acres
92.5 acres
2. Existing Proposed Zoning/CLUP
Existing Zoning/CLUP: CL (Limited Commercial)/MD-1:15.0
RM -6 (Residential Multi-Family)/MD-1: 77.5
acres
acres
Proposed Zoning: CG (General Commercial)/Com Node: 81.8 acres
RM -6 (Residential Multi-Family)/MD-1: 10.7 acres
3. Surrounding Uses:
North: N. Relief Canal, Vacant
South: 53rd Street, Vacant
East: River Club golf course,
single-family lots
West: U.S. #1, Vacant, FEC railroad
4. Construction Schedule: Construction of the project is to
begin in 1990, with "continuous" construction ending in 1993
with the project completed.
20
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
°GENERAL APPROACH OF THE D.O.
Hundreds of pages of description and analyses are contained in the
ADA and supplemental reports which are incorporated by reference
into the D.O. [NOTE: all of these materials are available for
inspection at the Planning Department]. The D.O. sets the basic
parameters of the development and specifies conditions that must
be satisfied to mitigate any anticipated potential negative
impacts caused by construction and operation of the project. The
D.O. does not include all regulations that will apply to the
project: in fact, the D.O. states that adoption of the D.O.
"...does not obviate the duty of the developer to comply with all
other applicable local, State, and federal permitting require-
ments.
The proposed D.O. closely resembles the staff report and recommen-
dations of the T.C.R.P.C.; although a few substantive changes have
been made with the knowledge of and comments from T.C.R.P.C.
staff. The order has been prepared to specifically tie the
conditions to a particular and definable step in the County's
development approval and monitoring processes. Thus, the condi-
tions of the proposed D.O., if approved, would become part of a
standard checklist that would be reviewed during all steps in the
review and monitoring of the project.
It should be noted that after approval of the Development Order
the proposed uses require only site plan approval. Thus, unless
the Board of County Commissioners otherwise dictates (via an added
D.O. condition), the Planning and Zoning Commission will have
final approval authority for the detailed site planning.of this
project.
°THE PROPOSED D.O.
A copy of the recommended D.O. is attached to this memorandum. As
proposed, the development order will meet the requirements of F.S.
380.06. The order would be effective for a period of 20 years,
but it would lapse if construction was not initiated within three
years of the effective date. The following is a synopsis and
explanation of various issue categories covered in the D.O.
(1) Commencement of Development and Termination of Development
Approval
This section states that if construction of the commercial outpar-
cels or residential site(s) of the project has not commenced
within three (3) years of D.O. approval, then the approval termi-
nates. This section also states that if construction of the mall
portion of the project has not commenced by December 31, 1993,
then the approval terminates. Furthermore, if the approval
terminates for any reason the County will have a 9 month period in
which to consider rezoning and redesignating the land use over the
site.
(2) Transfer of Approval
This section would ensure that the project as a whole would remain
unified as to the commitments, conditions, and obligations of the
development order in the event that portions were sold -off. This
transfer of approval provision is similar to the transfer pro-
vision contained in the County's subdivision and site plan ordi-
nances.
FEB 2 8 1989
21
Baer 76 FkLE241
FEB 2 8 1989
MD.
ti� � °ii
FACE 4
(3) Aesthetics and Landscaping
Because of the size of the project and the corresponding massive
parking areas that would be unique to such a project, County staff
expressed concerns to the developer about the importance of
landscaping, as well as the visual impact a regional mall would
have on the community's image. The developer agreed to establish
minimum landscaping standards in the D.O. These standards exceed
the County's minimum landscape ordinance standards, as follows:
a. an increase of 60% (from 5% to 8%) in the minimum.
required internal parking landscaped area; and
b. an increase in the minimum height of the required trees.
Buffer and tree preservation areas are also established.
(4) Air
These conditions and the application of the County's Tree Pro-
tection Ordinance (includes land -clearing regulations) will
address dust and erosion problems that could arise during con-
struction. These conditions will be part of the land clearing and
tree removal permits that the Planning department issues prior to
development.
(5) Historic and Archaeological Sites
This section's condition requires the developer, upon discovery of
artifacts, to contact the State and arrange for preservation of
such artifacts.
(6) Habitat, Vegetation, and Wildlife
This section primarily requires the removal and proper disposal of
nuisance trees such as Brazilian pepper.
(7) Drainage
The Public Works Division has reviewed and approved the drainage
conditions, which are designed to ensure conformance with the
County's Stormwater Management Ordinance, St. John's River Water
Management District standards, and the policies of the Treasure
Coast Regional Planning Council.
(8) Water Supply: Potable/Nonpotable Water and Wastewater Treat-
ment
These conditions restrict the use of certain sources for irriga-
tion water, encourage water conservation, regulate the use and
abandonment of existing on-site wells, and ensure adequate potable
water and wastewater treatment capacity and service (including
funding obligations of the developer).
(9) Solid Waste
A solid waste plan, approvable by the County Utilities Department,
is required.
(10) Hazardous Materials and Waste
A hazardous materials management plan is required to be submitted
and approved prior to site plan release, by this condition.
(11) Education
The developer is required to submit verification from the School
Board that the school system can adequately accommodate the impact
of the project's 64 units.
22
(12) Police and Public Safety
These conditions require the use of a private security force
provided by the developer during construction and operation of the
project as well as written verification from the Sheriff's Depart-
ment that adequate manpower and equipment are available to accom-
modate the project's impact.
(13) Fire Protection
This condition ensures the provision of adequate water storage
capacity for this project to meet anticipated fire flow needs.
Also, by this condition the developer is required to submit
verification that the fire district can adequately provide the
fire protection services required for this project. It should be
noted that the South County Fire District Chief has verified that
an adequate response time of 2 minutes is available for the
project from Station #5 (Winter Beach), as well as a back-up
response from Station #2 (Barrier Island). It should be noted'
that the developer will be working with the County to help secure
a fire station site along Indian River Blvd. north of 45th Street.
(14) Energy
These conditions require an energy efficient project design.
(15) Transportation
All transportation conditions have been established based upon the
results of an extensive traffic analysis, and all of these condi-
tions have been agreed to by the County, T.C.R.P.C. and FDOT. The
entire project (and any portion thereof) is tied to the construc-
tion and completion of Indian River Boulevard from S.R. 60 to 53rd
Street, as well as other traffic improvements. Monitoring re-
quirements are included to continually update the traffic analy-
sis. Also, any delay in the projected project completion schedule
will require re -analysis of the traffic impacts and provisions for
any needed additional improvements.
- Substantive Changes from T.C.R.P.C. Recommendations -
A. Condition 13: The T.C.R.P.C. prohibition of bumper stops
conflicts with current County parking requirements in that
either bumper stops or curbs are required by the County to
ensure internal traffic control and safety. Condition 13b.
has been modified from the T.C.R.P.C'. recommendation to
..._ reflect the fact that the Countyrevise bumper stop
requirements. However, as proposed, -bumper stops are not
prohibited by the D.O.
B. Condition 14: The T.C.R.P.C. prohibition of reducing the
water table at any location on site could conflict with a
system that could be approved by the St. John's River Water
Management District (S.J.R.W.M.D.) to raise the water table
along the eastern portion .of the site (towards the fresh-
water/saltwater interface) and lower the water table along
the western portion of the site. The condition has been
modified to require that there will be no net change in the
water table for the site as a whole.
C. Condition 32: The T.C.R.P.C. condition inadvertently omitted
some required traffic improvements; these have been added to
the proposed D.O. Also, the U.S. 1/53rd Street signalization
condition has been modified to reflect the fact that FDOT
currently will not permit full signal operation (flashing
yellow only) until actual traffic increases and warrants are
met. Thus, the mall will need to be opened and attract/
generate traffic before warrants for signalization are
actually met and full signal operation commences. The
condition has been modified to tie-in the requirements to the
appropriate steps within the County's development approval
and monitoring process.
)FEB 28 1989
23
BOOKFACE 243
FEB 2 8 1989
BOOK f',{CES
Finally, Condition 32e. has been expanded from the T.C.R.P.C.
condition to include an alternative to 32e.1. Thus, if
Condition 32.e.1., making Royal Palm Boulevard a one-way
pair, does not get local (City) approval, then 32.e.2. would
automatically become the effective condition. The County
staff and T.C.R.P.C. staff have reviewed and approved Condi-
tion 32.e.2. as an alternative to 32.1.1.
°SUMMARY
All impacts determined during the ADA review have been addressed
in the proposed D.O. with some modifications to the T.C.R.P.C.
recommendations. County staff has sent the T.C.R.P.C. staff a
copy of the proposed preliminary D.O. Comments from T.C.R.P.C.
staff regarding modifications have been received. County staff
feels that all recently received T.C.R.P.C. comments have been
adequately addressed with'the exception of Condition 13b: the
County has not prohibited the use of wheel stops.
County staff (all departments, including the Attorney's Office),
the Sheriff's department, the South County Fire District, and the
Indian River County School Board have indicated no objection to
the approval of the proposed D.O.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve
the proposed D.O. subject to the following conditions:
1. approval of the necessary land use amendment; and
2. approval of the necessary rezoning request.
Said D.O. is to become effective and is to be executed by the
Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners at such time that
the above cited conditions are satisfied.
Stan Boling, Chief of Current Development, advised that the
Planning & Zoning Commission is recommending approval subject to
the many conditions in the D.O. The proposed mall would be a
little larger than the Orange Blossom Mali in Ft. Pierce, at
647,000 square feet. There would be 100,000 square feet in
commercial out parcels, plus 64 multi -family residential units.
There are some factors in the Development Order that are somewhat
unique. The D.O. is broken down into 2 portions, the regional
mall being one portion, and all the other out parcels and the
residential development being the other portion. Basically, one
condition says that something within the project has to start
within 3 years of the effective date of the D.O. whether it is
the mall or not. The other condition says that if the mall
24
4
doesn't start by December 31, 1993, the Board of County
Commissioners has a 9 -month period to reconsider the Comp Plan
amendment and the rezoning, and stipulates that no site plans can
be submitted for approval in the period. Basically, if the mall
doesn't go forward on this site, which has some 80 acres of
commercial zoning, the Commission may want to reconsider whether
or not they want to go into other types of commercial uses.
Commissioner Eggert noted that it states that the Board has
to reconsider the matter, and also that the D.O. would terminate
and they would have to go through the D.R.I. process if the mall
was to go forward. However, the land use and zoning would stay
in place unless the Board did something about it.
Mr. Boling advised that an addition was made to the first
sentence in Section 2.a on Page 3 of the D.O. After "pursuant to
Section 380.06, Florida Statutes," add "unless work has commenced
on the regional commercial facility (mall) as defined in 2.b.
(below) within 3 years from the effective date of the D.O." With
that addition, it means that within 3 years something has to
happen, either the mall has to start construction or the out
parcels. If the mall happens before the out parcels, fine. That
will satisfy that condition.
Chairman Wheeler was concerned that their plan would be kept
active if at any time during that 3 -year period they built some
kind of a commercial structure on one of the out parcels. He
emphasized that we are rezoning this with the primary thought of
it being a regional mall.
Mr. Boling pointed out that there are two thresholds. One
is a 3 -year threshold which would take place 3 years from now in
1991, and that is that something has to begin on the site, and it
doesn't have to be the mall. The other threshold is that if the
mall has not started by the end of 1993, the D.O. approval
terminates.
25
FEB 28 1989
BOOK
76 N,:E245
Pr"
FEB 2 8 1989
Boob 6 F'GE 4
Commissioner Eggert felt that when the T.C.R.P.C. reviewed
this development, the whole thrust was towards getting something
going on the mall first, not the out parcels.
Commissioner Scurlock hoped that we have defined this well
enough so that we don't run into a situation where we have to
decide whether one piling or one slab is sufficient progress. He
wanted to see it clearly defined so that we keep things on track
and substantial progress is made.
Mr. Boling noted that the D.O. defines "substantia,I
progress" as placing of a permanent structure, other than a
mobile home, on the subject commercial out parcels or residential
developments such as the pouring of slabs or footings or any work
beyond the stage of excavation, clearing, or earthwork.
Commissioner Scurlock had a problem with that, because he
felt that what the Board considers substantial progress is the
installation of plumbing, electricity, roofing, etc. There have
been cases where the builder went in periodically and laid a
slab or poured a footer. With such minimal effort from the
builder, the Board of County Commissioners gets stuck with
residents coming in and screaming at us because the project isn't
completed.
Director Keating suggested that in this case it could be
tied to specific milestones such as framing, plumbing,
electricity, etc., by client permit on a certain date.
Commissioner Scurlock still maintained that "substantial
progress" needs to be better defined, and Commissioner Eggert
wanted to see "structure" defined as "completed building",
because that is what we are talking about.
Commissioner Scurlock suggested that for the out parcels we
give a specific time between commencing construction and getting
a Certificate of Occupancy. He assumed that since the mall will
take more time, they probably would be getting partial C.O.s in
some cases.
26
Mr. Boling pointed out that the 1993 date was the
developer's projection and that all of their analyses, especially
their traffic analysis, was based on the mall being finished by
December 31, 1993.
Commissioner Scurlock wanted staff to put in a little better
language to make sure that the project not only commences, but is
completed in a timely fashion.
Mr. Boling understood that Commissioner Scurlock was talking
about C.O.s for development on the out parcels, and asked if the
Board wished to insert anything about the out parcels along U.S.
#1 in the commercial area.
Chairman Wheeler just wanted it clearly understood where we
want to go with this, because while we are all in agreement now,
sometimes the picture changes a year or so later, and he didn't
want that to happen.
Commissioner Bird understood that Chairman Wheeler is saying
that the development of the out parcels does not constitute
proper construction of the mall itself, and that the out parcels
are separate.
Chairman Wheeler felt that if the mall is never a reality,
we may not want to see development of commercial property back
along 53rd Street. U.S. #1, however, is another story because it
is already commercial.
Commissioner Eggert felt that if it had to be rezoned, we
would put it back somewhat the way it is.
Chairman Wheeler wanted to see Indian River Boulevard stay
clear of commercial development as much as possible, and
Commissioner Scurlock said that is why he raised the question of
the Boulevard bisecting the multi -family property. He guaranteed
that once that key intersection is established, there is going to
be pressure for it to develop as commercial.
Commissioner Wheeler felt we could find some mixed use for
that property, and Commissioner Eggert felt it may be a good
place for PRO.
27
FEB 28199
800K 76 TALE 247
FEB 281989
6001(
fQIr.0248 �
Commissioner Scurlock emphasized that is why he would like
staff to address that now instead of later, because what has
happened all over the country is that shopping plazas develop
just outside of the mall itself.
Steve Henderson, attorney representing the developer,
advised that it is most likely that the out parcels will start
development after the commencement of the regional mall; however,
the developer doesn't want to lose the flexibility. The total
acreage for the out parcel development is approximately 10 acres
compared to the existing commercial zoning of about 15 acres.
Although there is somewhat of a diminishment, they understand the
Board's concern about development outside the current boundaries
of that zoning.
Continuing with the D.O., Mr. Boling advised that another
change was made on Page 4 of the D.O. under Completion of
Construction. The last sentence was changed from "the developer
shall update the estimated completion date within every annual
report" to read "the developer shall state the reasons for any
changes made".
Mr. Boling next addressed the landscaping and drainage
conditions, and Commissioner Scurlock had a very serious concern
about the Main Relief Canal to the north as he understood that
the project is not within the Indian River Farms Drainage
District. He didn't believe it is clearly stated that stormwater
management will be maintained on site and that there will be no
discharge into the canal or the river. He had a problem with the
language under Item 12 on Pages 61-63, and wanted it to be very
clear that the Board will not approve any discharge into the
Indian River or the Main Relief Canal. Commissioner Scurlock was
concerned that when we get two years down the road somebody will
say that under Item 12 on Page 61-63 there is talk about the site
meeting minimum standards and receiving waters accepting this.
It gives the impression that there is some intent that if it
meets some standard, and if the St. Johns Water Management
28
District approves it, they can dump it into the receiving body.
He wanted it to state somewhere in there that it is the intent of
Indian River County not to permit any discharge into the Indian
River via the Main Relief Canal.
Director Keating stated that they could put that in.
Under Fire Protection, Commissioner Eggert noted that
staff's memo states that the developer will be working with the
County to help secure a fire station site along Indian River
Boulevard north of 45th Street. She didn't know whether or not
Indian River Boulevard would be the right place for a station.
She hoped that sometime soon, with the North County Fire District
moving their stations around, we could get some kind of an
overall plan for fire stations in the county.
Commissioner Scurlock suggested that rather than getting
site specific, we indicate that there would be a contribution
towards fire protection, which would give the County the
flexibility of acquiring a piece of land somewhere else and
building a fire facility there.
Commissioner Bird agreed that we would want that flexibility
since the Winter Beach station is very close to this site.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if we could structure the
language such that they will work with us and will, in fact, make
a reasonable contribution for their share of fire protection if
it is demonstrated that there is a need, but Mr. Boling pointed
out that the existing language in 27.b leaves it rather open.
Assistant County Attorney Bill Collins felt that the County
is limited by the D.O.I. Statutes which say that effective July
1, 1986, a local government cannot include as a D.O. condition
for a D.R.I. any requirement that the developer contribute or pay
for land acquisition for construction of or expansion of public
facilities or portions thereof, unless the local government has
enacted a local ordinance which would require other developments
FEB 2 E i989
29 BOOK 7b FACE 24
FEB 28 1989
BOOK
d F'AE5O
not subject to the D.R.I. Section, to contribute proportionate
share of funds, land, or public facility necessary to accommodate
the impact.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that maybe we will enact such an
ordinance before the project is finished.
Commissioner Scurlock was also concerned about the amount of
water storage capacity required for fire flow. He pointed out
that Grand Harbor is committed to providing some storage, and he
hoped that this developer would work in conjunction with them to
build enough storage for both projects. That is what the
Utilities Department prefers rather than any alternatives.
Mr. Boling advised that the applicant's attorney, Steve
Henderson, has requested in writing an additional sentence to
27.a under Fire Protection: At the end of the commitment to the
250,000 gatlons or more water storage, add "not withstanding the
foregoing, the County Utilities Department may approve other
facilities to provide the flow need for fire protection."
Utilities Director Terry Pinto is not in favor ofadding this
sentence, as he feels it could conflict with the utilities'
master plan for this area. Therefore, it is staff's
recommendation that the sentence not be added.
Attorney Collins pointed out that there is a provision that
the local government and the developer can enter into capital
contribution funding agreement as part of the D.R.I. Development
Order to reimburse the developer or a successor for voluntary
contributions paid in excess of his fair share. In other words,
if we do not have something in place right now, and they want to
front end the cost of getting utilities to their project, there
can be agreements that other people would reimburse them as they
came on line.
Commissioner Scurlock felt it is up to them to work on that
since their insurance costs are going to be dictated by what kind
of fire protection they have. If they do not meet fire flow and
30
have no paid fire response, their rating is significantly
different.
Attorney Collins emphasized that if the D.O. does not have a
provision for adequate facilities to provide the water flow for
fire protection, the D.O. cannot be approved under the Statutes.
However, this D.O. has the recommendation that the developer
participates in the Grand Harbor tank.
Mr. Boling explained that the way it is worded is that
capacity is available to the project. It doesn't have to be just
for that project, it can be a shared capacity situation, which is
what we anticipate happening.
With respect to the transportation conditions, Commissioner
Scurlock didn't understand why the intersection of U.S. #1 and
23rd Street was excluded from the analysis since it was so
important when we did the Grand Harbor DO1, as was the capacity
allocation of the two bridges and the one-way pair (Royal Palm
Boulevard and Royal Palm Way.
Mike Byrd from Kimley-Horn & Associates, traffic engineering
consultants for Harbor Town, explained that they looked at the
impact on roads or intersections where the project impact was
less than 5% of the level of service "D", peak hour, peak season
capacity. They looked at the intersection of U.S. #1 and 23rd
Street and determined that the project would not have a
significant impact.
Commissioner Scurlock was concerned that the accumulative
impact of the proposed mall and Grand Harbor would go over the 5%
impact.
Mr. Byrd pointed out that all new development in the county
is going to impact that intersection to some extent.
Public Works Director Jim Davis felt we were protected at
that intersection since both the Grand Harbor D.R.I. and this
D.O. provides for monitoring traffic on U.S. #1. Once Phase I
of Grand Harbor reaches the threshold of 14,000 total trips, they
have to do a monitoring study of the system, that intersection
31
FEB 2 8 1989
L
POOK 16 FAGS 251
FED 28 1989
BOOK 111 FACE 252
specifically. If there is a problem there, they would have a
commitment or the project could not proceed until that problem
was solved. He believed there is similar language in the Harbor
Town D.O., particularly if they don't finish construction by
1993.
Mr. Boling pointed out that specific language is not
included in this D.O., but it could be added.
Commissioner Bird believed that Indian River Boulevard will
take traffic off of U.S. #1, not add to it, and Director Davis
explained that Phase IV of the Boulevard has to be under contract
before the development can pull a building permit. That was not
a condition in the D.O. for Phase 1 of Grand Harbor, and he felt
satisfied that we have control.
Commissioner Eggert wanted staff to check with the City to
see if it is their intent to pursue a one-way pair for Royal Palm
Boulevard and Royal Palm Way, because if it is not, that language
should not be in the D.O.
Mr. Boling understood that it had not been removed entirely
from the City's intent, and Commissioner Scurlock felt that the
heat had been turned up, that's all.
With respect to the conflicts with the T.C.R.P.C., Mr.
Boling advised that basically we have worked out just about
everything except for the requirement of bumper stops in the mall
parking lots. The Regional Planning Council has a concern that
in this situation bumper stops would hamper the proper cleaning
of the parking lots.
Commissioner Bowman preferred to see curbs with vegetation
and tree islands, while Commissioner Scurlock was mainly
concerned about maintaining traffic circulation in the belt way
around the parking lot area, and pointed out that bumper stops
prevent drivers from riding around recklessly.
32
Commissioner Bird felt the bumper stops were not attractive,
especially when they are broken up or moved, and Commissioner
Eggert believed there are ways to do it and that fighting a
battle over bumper stops is ridiculous.
Mr. Boling advised that staff is recommending that the
requirement be left in and addressed by the Regional Planning
Council.
Attorney Henderson suggested that the Board hold up the
transmission of the D.O. to the T.C.R.P.C. to allow sufficient
time to address this issue, perhaps in the form of an amendment
to the county ordinances.
Mr. Boling repeated that it is staff's recommendation to
leave the requirement in and address it tater at the T.C.R.P.C.
Given the number of things we would like to look at, and there
are some alternatives especially with the outparcels, Mr. Boling
suggested continuing this public hearing for possibly 2 weeks. He
wished to come back to the Board with specific wording on the
number of changes so that staff doesn't end up with too much
discretion in these matters.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if that was too much of a time
restriction on the D.O., and Mr. Boling explained that the D.O.
doesn't become effective until the Comp Plan amendment and the
rezoning come back from Tallahassee and another public hearing is
held for final adoption of both the land use change and the
rezoning.
Attorney Henderson wished to get some form of final approval
today if possible. If the main concern is the provision relating
to good faith continuation of construction, he pointed out that
the County has pretty good coverage in its ordinances concerning
the issuance of site plans. He advised that they are willing to
agree to "continuous construction, once started" or some other
language we could agree to that would fill that bill.
FEB 2 s 1989
33 BOOK 76 rAc[ 253
FEB 2 8 1989
LOQ 0 DACE254
Commissioner Scurlock did not have any trouble at all in
defining "continued construction", because the goal is to have a
completed structure that can be occupied.
Attorney Henderson noted that the D.O. includes completion
deadlines.
Commissioner Bird pointed out that it is no secret that we
have another group that has expressed an interest in developing a
regional mall in this county, and he has met with both these
groups, as he was sure other Commissioners have. Both groups
realize that there is not room in this county for two regional
malls, and he has told both these groups that the people of this
county need a regional mall and that he did not have a strong
preference of who builds it or where it gets built. This group
has been on a timetable which has gotten them here first, and he
was ready to approve whatever there is here today. However, he
was a little bit concerned that we are talking about not even
starting construction until 1993 and total construction
completion until 1996, which is 7 years from now. He also was
concerned that by going ahead and granting these approvals today
we would slam the doors in the eyes of our staff or ourselves on
the possibility of anybody else starting the process of building
a regional mall. He emphasized that another group might even be
able to come in here and beat the construction timetable that
this developer has outlined here today.
Commissioner Eggert understood that they don't sign up
stores until they actually have their site plans and permits. It
could happen that we could approve two malls, since it has to
come through the D.R.I. process.
Commissioner Scurlock noted that we could have requests for
several malls, and all of them would have to go through the same
process and demonstrate that they have met all our requirements.
However, it would be their economic decision of how many malls
this area can support. That is the reason he was concerned about
making these timeframes very specific.
34
Chairman Wheeler emphasized that because of the economical
question of whether this area could support more than one mall,
he did not want to see any of the outparcels developed before the
mall. Our intent is a mall, and if they are not going to build a
mall, the outparcels should be left alone. That way we wouldn't
be locked in to one mall over another. He just didn't want to
see us start opening up areas to commercial development that
normally wouldn't be suitable for commercial development.
Director Keating advised that staff has been working with
both of these groups and feels that, both sites are suitable for a
regional mall. Staff had the same concerns that the Board has
expressed in that they didn't feel it was appropriate for staff
or the county to be in a position of dictating market choices.
That is one of the reasons the D.O. provides the ability for the
property on this site to revert to its prior zoning and land use
designation.
Commissioner Scurlock understood then that we have only so
much acreage that is going to be available for commercial, and
that it is being tracked, and that until this project receives
final approvals, we have not reduced that acreage down to a point
where somebody else could not come in and submit for a regional
mall.
Commissioner Bird was pleased to see that we are keeping the
door open and all our options open.
With respect to Chairman Wheeler's concern about the
outparcel development, Attorney Henderson advised that his client
would like to retain the flexibility of perhaps commencing an
outparcel before the start of construction of the main mall, but
would restrict that area to the present commercial zoning.
Chairman Wheeler stated that he would be more comfortable
with that.
Chairman Wheeler opened the Public Hearing, and asked if
anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, he
closed the Public Hearing.
FEB 281989
3 5 8001( 76 FACE 255
FEB 2 8 1989
EVA /) fr{uE 256
Director Keating asked if the Board wanted any more specific
criteria on the commencement of construction, continuation of
construction, or a timetable for C.O. for the regional mall, and
the Commissioners indicated that they would.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved
the Harbor Town D.O., subject to the Planning Dept.
bringing it back to the Board for verification of final
language at a time certain in the meeting of March 14,
1989.
With regard to the matter of requiring bumper stops in the
mall parking lots, Mr. Boling anticipated that the applicant will
propose an amendment to the zoning ordinance
PUBLIC HEARING - CZARNECKI REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVAL
OF A USED VEHICLE SALES/U-HAUL RENTAL FACILITY
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 Beath. Indian River County. Florida
140110E OF IRMO IIARING
Notice el Odle hewing
eimerw�l ler . used vehicle
• . • • —• • " . sales ted18y. The alibied pity is Mew*
owned by KM Edward Czarnecki end Is betted
at thway
o PPORTION OFoGp1YBRMYIENT LOT 4.
SECTION 7 AND GOVERNMENT LOT 1,
SECTION a. TOWNSHIP 31 SDU1FIs
• RANGE 39 EAST BE11IO snore
PARTICULAR.Y OESCRt8E0 AS FOL-
LOWS: FROM THE INTERSECTION OF.
THE CENTERLINE OF OLD O9aE HIGH-
WAY (e 68.0 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY)
AND THE SOUTH UNE OF THE 11041714
ONE-HALF OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1.
SECTION 8. TOWNSHIP 31 80uTH.
RANGE 39 EAST. INDIAN RIVER COUN-
TY. FLORIDA. RUN WEST ALONG SAID
SOUTH 1.11E OF THE NORTH ONE- --
HALF OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1. ADM- ,
TANCE OF 34.97 FEET TO THE WEST-
ERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID OLD.
DIXIE HIGHWAY. AND TO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING OF THE WREN DE- -
SCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND. THENCE
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann. Jr. who on oath
eaye that he Is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
8t Vero Beach in Indian River County. Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement. being
a
13.40
In the matter of (,.�.�'.i.24/ig--tJat.
In the _ Court. was Pub-
s
Baked In said newspaper in the Issues 01 t.../
19SYY
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, tor a period of one year next preceding thektrst ptrhlioation of the attached copy of
advertisement; and atitant further says that he has neither paid nor prormsed 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
CONTINUE WEST ALONG BALD SOUTH
-HALF OF
GOVOVERNRNMENT LTHE OT T1 am GOVERN-
MENT LOT 4 A DISTANCE OF 291.13
FEET TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF
WAY OF U.S. HIGHWAY NO. 1 (A 120.
FOOT RIGHT OF W__ AY) THENCE RUN
NORTH 28.11• wear ALONG SAID
EASTHIGHWAY 140. 1 AA RIGHT OF DISTAD U.S.
152.93 FEET; THENCE RUN EAST A
DISTANCE OF 311.60 FEET TO THE
WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY Of OLD
DIXIE HIGHWAY: THENCE RUN SOUTH
1/•80'08" EAST ALONG SAID WEST-
ERLY RIGHT OF WAY A DISTANCE OF
145.0 FEET 10 THE POINT OF BMW '
NINO.
A public heeling et which panes le Mimed
end citizen shill heldWbh�aereele an to be
heard, vrillmisslonereoIndian Slim Couny, Flue. bnme
County Commission Chamber, of the Comity
Admi dstradon Bending. boated al 1840 250h.
Street. Vero Beach. Florida. on Tuesday. Feteo-
dry 28.1989. el9:O5.em.
Anyone whom (Limy wish to appeal any ded-
T 3 don which may be made el this meeting Mil
. (Business Mtjrlager) need toe a that a verbatim recant or aro pro-
. ) _.il Is made wWcr Includes VA tea0innony
'`.! .t .... upon which the appeal will be
...,.....i...••
U , • :'`...!,•:.....;.,"
n Hwer t.ounly. trondal' based.
laden River h County ,.
IBEAuttio•...r'.3rf:. °.�rw.',l.. ». Fsb.B.1988•
-s•GmyWIMNm. t.. ...
36
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/20/89:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M. Keati
g
Community Devel•pmeD' ector
THROUGH: Stan Boling, ICP
Chief, Current Development
FROM: Robert E. Wiegers7`
Staff Planner, Current Development
P
DATE: February 20, 1989
SUBJECT: ED CZARNECKI'S REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVAL
FOR A USED VEHICLE SALES/U-HAUL RENTAL FACILITY
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of February 28, 1989.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
ED CZARNECKI, owner of the subject property, has submitted a minor
site plan application as part of a request for special exception
approval for a used vehicle sales/U-Haul rental facility in the
CG, General Commercial District. The subject property is located
at 11420 U.S. Highway #1.
Pursuant to Section 25.3 of the Zoning Code, Regulation of Special
Exception Uses, the Board of County Commissiners is to consider_
the appropriateness of the requested use based on the submitted
site plan and the suitabilityof the. site for that use. The Board
of County Commissioners,after a recommendation by the.Planning_and
Zoning Commission, approves, approves with conditions, or denies
the request and in doing so may attach any conditions and safe-
guards necessary to assure compatibility of the use with the
surrounding area.
At its regular meeting of January 12, 1989, the Planning and
Zoning Commission voted to recommend to the Board of County
Commissioners that special exception approval of the used vehicle
sales/u-haul rental facility be granted with the condition
outlined at the end of this report.
An analysis of the submitted site plan is as follows:
ANALYSIS:
1. Property Size: 41,300 sq. ft.
2. Area of Development: 13,150 sq. ft.
3. Zoning Classification: CG, General Commercial
4. Land Use Designation: Commercial Node
37
FEB 2819$9
L_
BOOK 76 F GE 25 j
FEB 2 8 1999
BOOK 76 F'Ar.,F 258
5. Existing Use: The site is currently being used for an
automotive repair shop that has been in existence for many
years. Pursuant to an administrative determination made by
the Planning Department, a u -haul rental facility has been
classified in the same category as used vehicle sales (the
most similar listed use category), therefore requiring
special exception approval in the CG zoning district.
6. Site Improvements: With this plan the applicant is construc-
ting site improvements that will bring this site substan-
tially into conformance with current County site plan
requirements. These improvements include off-street paved
parking areas (where none existed before), an improved
stormwater management design, new landscaping, and a marginal
access road that will connect to the adjacent properties in
the future.
To ensure that the proposed development accommodates existing
site parking demand, the six (6) easterly spaces must be
designated as generalparking only; the four (4) westerly
spaces are to be used for storage/parking of rental vehicles.
7. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:
North: Vacant/CG, General Commercial
South: Vegetable Market (under construction)/CG, General
Commercial
East: Indian River Drive & Residence/RM-6 Multi -Family
Residential
West: U.S. Highway 1/Vacant
8. Ordinance requirements for used vehicle sales [Sec.
25.1(V)3]:
a. No such establishments shall be permitted on a lot of
record having less than 10,000 sq. ft. in a CG district
or 15,000 sq. ft. in a CH district;
b. All vehicular sales and off-street parking areas shall
have paved surfaces which meet the standards of Section
24 (f) lor2;
c. No vehicular sales area or structure shall be located
closer than 25' to any property line;
d. The site shall provide for separation of vehicular sales
areas and off-street parking areas; and
e. All designated sales areas shall provide for a minimum
of 300 sq. ft. per vehicle. Drives and maneuvering
areas shall be designed to permit convenient on-site
maneuvering of the vehicles.
The applicant submitted a minor site plan which has been
approved by the County's Technical Review Committee and which
shows all existing and planned improvements on this property.
Staff review has verified that all applicable site plan
requirements and requirements of Section 25.1(V)3 have been
met.
38
IMP
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners:
1. Grant special exception approval of the used vehicle sales/
u -haul rental facility subject to the condition that the
proposed six (6) easterly spaces be designated for use as
general parking only, prohibiting the use of these spaces for
parking/storing rental vehicles.
Commissioner Eggert asked if opaque screening would be
required between this and the multi -family residential on Indian
River Drive.
Stan Boling, Chief of Current Development, explained that
all this development is very close to U.S. #1 and there is
sufficient screening now between Indian River Drive and this
project.
Chairman Wheeler opened the Public Hearing, and asked if
anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, he
closed the Public Hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously granted
Ed Czarnecki's request for special exception approval
for a used vehicle sales/U-Haul rental facility,
subject to parking conditions as set out in the above
staff recommendation.
PUBLIC HEARING - DENNIS L. SMITH, INC.'S REQUEST FOR SPECIAL
EXCEPTION APPROVAL TO OPERATE PHASE II OF A SAND MINE AT 17TH
STREET S.V./27TH AVENUE
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:
39
FEB 2 8 1989
8001( 76 [ALE 259
FES 2 81989
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press•Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of
in the _ // Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of,;f2GCQ4.: /7.1r,
r�
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 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
(SEAL)
eici
4' ,_._ day of ✓..rj d( -D 19 e, •
y . .. :>
1—'4'7\nn\_ V „.:•1i : 1 i..- v -,"--;,,,,,14,....._.„, -•
i Alliiusiness Manager)
1
The
•
r , In Ian Iver ovnty, ori ate^
BOOK
lh
FAcE2,60
NOTICE OF PUBUC HEARING
Notice of hearing to consider the gran of
special exception approval for a sand mine.
subject property is presently owned by John and
Barbara Tripson. 4
The subject property Is described as
TRACT 2 AND THE NORTH 250 FEET.
OF TRACT 7, SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP
33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, ACCORD-
ING TO THE LAST GENERAL PLAT OF
LANDS OF THE INDIAN RIVER FARMS •
COMPANY FILED IN PLAT BOOK 2,
PAGE 25, PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST.
LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA; SAID
LANDS NOW LYING AND BEING IN IN-
DIAN 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 In the County Administration Build •
-
ing, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach,
Florida on Tuesday, February 28, 1989. at 9:05
a.m.
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- ,
dence upon which the appeal will be based.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By: s -GARY WHEELER CHAIRMAN
Feb. 8.1989
Notary Public, State of Florida
My Commission Expires June 29, 19119
t3ondid 'broker Fain - tnsuronca, Inc
Board reviewed the'foliowing memo dated 1/27/89:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
obert M. Ke tint AICP
Community Development Director
THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP
Chief, Current
FROM: John W. McCoy
Staff Planner,
Development
DATE: January 27, 1989
urrent Development
SUBJECT: DENNIS L. SMITH, INC.'S REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION
APPROVAL TO OPERATE PHASE II OF A SAND MINE AT
17TH STREET S.W./27TH AVENUE
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of February 28, 1989.
110
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
DENNIS L. SMITH, INC., on behalf of JOHN R. AND BARBARA S.
TRIPSON, has submitted a request to receive special exception
approval for a sand mining operation ("Phase II") located in the
RS -3, Residential Zoning District. Because a portion of the
property is residentially zoned, special exception use approval is
required. The proposed mine is located on the south side of 17th
Street S.W., approximately 1400' west of 27th Avenue.
The applicant received approval for Phase I of the mining opera-
tion (located entirely with in the A-1 zoning district) at the
December 15, 1988 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. The
applicant is now seeking approval for Phase II, the portion that
includes RS -3 property that is covered by the special exception
use.
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4 to 1 to recommend
approval and directed staff to try and get more definite informa-
tion on noise levels for the Board of County Commissioners.
Special exception uses are those types of uses that would not
generally be appropriate throughout a particular zoning district.
However, when special exception uses are carefully controlled as
to number, area, location, and/or relationship to the vicinity,
such uses would not adversely impact the public health, safety,
comfort, good order, appearance, convenience, and general welfare
and, as such, would be compatible with permitted uses within the
particular zoning district. Special exceptions require submittal
of an approvable site plan meeting all site plan criteria, zoning
district criteria and the criteria set forth in the regulations
for the specific land uses.
The Board may attach any conditions and safeguards necessary to
ensure compatibility of the use with the surrounding area.
ANALYSIS:
1. Project Size: Phase I: 39.81 acres
Phase I and Phase II: 47.46 acres
2. Area to be Excavated: Phase I: 12.6 acres
Phase I and Phase II: 16.1 acres
3. Zoning Classification: Phase I: A-1
Phase I and Phase II: RS -3 & A-1
4. Land Use Designation: Phase I: LD -I
Phase I and Phase II: LD -1
5. Estimated excavated Volume: Phase I: 610,919 cubic yards
Phase I and Phase II: 822,431 cubic yards
6. Setbacks: Phase II: 150' from property lines
7. Depth of Mine: Phase II: 50' below natural grade (-29.0
N.G.V.D.)
8. Ground Water Table: In both phases the water table varies
from one to four feet below natural grade. The agent has
provided a sealed statement from a registered engineer
stating this operation will have no adverse effect on ground
water quality or quantity.
9. Method of Mining (Both Phases): The overburden will be
removed down to the water table by conventional dry mining
equipment, (i.e. backhoes, bulldozers, and trucks).
41
FEB 2 8 1989
BOOK 76 FACE 261
FEB 2 8 1989
ROOK FACE L.0%
Once the water table is reached, the materials will be mined
hydraulically by the use of a dredge, which siphons out the
materials to stockpile and dry, and lets water drain back
into the pit. The mining operation will achieve 100% recir-
culation of water; thus, no dewatering will occur.
10. Restoration Plan: The applicant proposes the use of littoral
zones with planted vegetation to create a lake from the
remaining mining pit. This plan will conform to Section
25r(5) of Appendix A of the zoning code regarding mining
reclamation.
11. Bond Requirements: Phase II: $ 8,650 compliance bond
$ 3,500 restoration bond
Both Phases: $47,460 compliance bond
$16,100 restoration bond
The applicant has indicated a completion date of January,
1994; these bonds should run through January of 1995 to
ensure the work is complete and all restoration work is
inspected and accepted by the County.
12. Roadway Protection: The applicant has agreed to install a
paved apron at the access point to 27th Avenue with adequate
site distance around the access point on to 27th Avenue and
provide warning signs along 27th Avenue to alert traffic that
trucks are entering the highway.
The site plan conforms to all the requirements of Section
25(R) mining and excavation provisions.
13. Noise: The Planning and Zoning Commission has expressed some
concerns over the level of noise generated by these op-
erations. As a result of this concern, staff imposed a noise
limit of no more than 90 dbl at one hundred feet from the
property of the mining operation on Phase I. This specific
level was derived through the research of county reference
material.
In response to the Planning and Zoning Commission request for
additional information, staff visited another mine in full
operation which uses a similar method of mining (24 hour
hydraulic dredging). Staff took noise readings at this mine
with a decibel meter and got readings in the 60 to low 70
decibel range. The 70 decibel range is comparable to the
interior of a poor quality car at highway speeds, 85 dbl is
what the Air Force considers safe working conditions. While
60-70 dbl's is not extremely loud, area residents have
informed the County that the particular mine operation that
was monitored could be heard late at night and in the early
morning. This is probably due to a lack of background noises
during these times. Under present regulations, there are no
specific controls for noise abatement or duration of mining
for sites in the A-1 zoning district.
The Board of County Commissioners can attach additional or
more restrictive conditions to the approval of this appli-
cation which would limit thetime, level and intensity of the
noise generated. These could be conditions such as restric-
ting the noise level after or before a certain hour,
requiring all equipment to be muffled, etc.
Special Exception Criteria
The following special land use criteria found in Section 25.1 of
the zoning ordinance apply to the proposed Phase II:
1. Applicants operating in the A-1, Agricultural District, where
the project does not abut a single-family residential dis-
42
MEI
trict, shall not be limited to specific hours of operation
unless a determination is made by the Planning and Zoning
Commission concerning the need of limiting hours of operation
due to the anticipated impact of the mining operation on
surrounding properties. Applicants operating in residential
zoning districts (as in the proposed Phase II) shall be
permitted to operate between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. on weekdays; operation on Saturday and Sunday and/or
operation other than 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. may be permitted
by the Board of County Commissioners if the impact of the
mining operation on surrounding properties will not consti-
tute a nuisance to the neighborhood.
2. A site plan meeting all requirements of Sections 23.1 and
23.2 of the County Zoning Code.
3. A reclamation plan including littoral zone plan and water
quality management plan, as applicable.
4. All mining activities must comply with Section 25(r), Excava-
tion and Fill, Appendix A, Zoning, of the County Code.
5. All mining sites shall have direct access to a.collector or
arterial roadway; access from a roadway of lesser functional
classification may be approved by the Public Works Director
upon a finding that no significant adverse impactwill affect
residential units on the subject road.
6. The site must not be located within one thousand (1,000) feet
of any platted subdivision that is not serviced by public
water.
Regarding criterion #1, the applicant is requesting 24 hour
operation of the mining project. Staff believes extended hours
could be permitted, if the applicant takes steps to ensure that
the mining operation will not produce noise great enough to
constitute a nuisance to the surrounding property owners (i.e.
does not trigger complaints from people who live in the area).
Other than this request, the application meets all applicable
criteria.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the analysis performed, staff• recommends that Board of
County Commissioners approve the special exception use with the
following conditions:
1. That prior to site plan release:
a. The applicant shall post the necessary funds for the
restoration and compliance bonds, these bonds shall not
expire until the County has approved the reclamation of
the mine.
b. The applicant shall submit details of the 27th Avenue
apron design that are acceptable to the County Engineer.
2. That prior to the issuance of a mining permit:
a. The paved apron shall be installed along 27th Avenue as
approved by the County Engineer.
b. The sight distances along 27th Avenue shall be improved
to 750' north and south of the access driveway on 27th
Avenue.
c. The proper signage shall be placed to alert motorists
that trucks will be entering the highway.
3. During the operation of the mine, the applicant shall take
all reasonable steps to minimize noise generated at the site.
4. A mining permit shall be issued conditionally for extended
hours (no restriction on hours of operation); however, if
valid complaints are received and verified in regard to noise
generated outside of normally set operating hours, then the
County can restrict the mine's operation to the normal
operating hours set forth by the ordinance (7:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. Monday thru Friday).
43
FEB 28 '1989
BOOK 76 GL.263
Ir"
FEB 2 8 1989
BOON 76 4
Stan Boling, Chief of Current Development, pointed out that
the fourth condition for approval is that through special
exception the Board can open it up for 24-hour operation, which
is what the applicant is requesting. Staff does not have a
problem with that in this situation given the fact that this is
not around a residential area. However, condition #4 does state
that if there are complaints from surrounding neighbors,
operations can be restricted through a mining permit.
Commissioner Bowman asked if limiting the well drawdown to
1000 feet is enough, and Director Keating felt it would be
because there would be no off-site discharge from the pumping.
Everything is going to be recirculated.
Mr. Boling explained that they are wet mining, not pumping
out the pit.
Commissioner Bowman asked how much of the abutting property
is zoned at RS -3, and Mr. Boling confirmed that basically
everything was at RS -3.
Chairman Wheeler opened the Public Hearing, and asked if
anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, he
closed the Public Hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously granted
special exception use subject to the conditions
set out in the above staff recommendation.
PUBLIC HEARING - GRAND HARBOR REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO
DEVELOPMENT ORDER
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:
44
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach. Indian River County. Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
•
in the matter of .JA1//t ,4441
in the Court, was pub-
Iished 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 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 ftirther 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
(SEAL)
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Indian River County Board of County
Commissioners hereby gives notice of a public
hearing to be held at 9:05 a.m. on February 28,
1989 In the County Administration Building, lo-
cated at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida.
The subject of the hearing is to consider a
change to amend the development order for the
Development of Regional Impact known as
Grand Harbor and determine whether the pro-
posed change constitutes a substantial devia-
tion subjecting the development to further DRI
review, pursuant to Chapter 380.06(19) of the
Florida Statutes. The petitioner is Grand Harbor,
Inc.
Said development order amendment request
is to add to the overall Grand Harbor project an
adjacent four (4) acre parcel to be used ss a golf
maintenance facility for the two golf courses
contained within the overall project (River Club
golf course and the Grand Harbor golf course).
The project location Is bound by 45th Street
and 47th Street on the south, by the Indian River
on the east, located east of U.S. *1 and located
south of the North Relief Canal.
This notice, being published at least 15 days
prior to the public hearing and pursuant to
Chapter 380.06(19) of the Florida Statutes, is
being provided to the Department of Community
Affairs of the State of Florida and to the Treas-
ure Coast Regional Planning Council.
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 proceed-
ings is made which includes the testimony and
evidence upon which the appeal will be based.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Feb. 13,• By-s-
t� S. Wheeler, Chairman
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/20/89:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
4//�CJ
Robert M. Rest g. Aerp
Community Developmen meDirector
FROM: Stan Boling, AA�CP
Chief, Current Development
DATE: February 20, 1989
SUBJECT: GRAND HARBOR DEVELOPMENT ORDER AMENDMENT REQUEST:
DETERMINING LEVEL OF REVIEW
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of February 28, 1989.
FEB 28198
45
• 76PNG` Lr..6
mot(
FEB 2 81989
800K
FACE
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
In accordance with State DRI regulations, Grand Harbor, Inc. has
applied for an amendment to the development order (D.O.) issued
for the Grand Harbor DRI project. The request is to enlarge the
overall project by adding a ±4 acre parcel that is adjacent to the
project's existing boundaries. The new 4 acre parcel is to be
used as a central golf maintenance facility to serve the project's
River Club and Grand Harbor golf courses.
The applicant wishes the request to be treated as as minor amend-
ment, and has asserted that the change does not create a "substan-
tial deviation". A substantial deviation requires a full regional
review, the same as an original application. A minor amendment is
only subject to local review and approval, with the usual oppor-
tunity for the State or the Regional Planning Council to appeal
any adopted amendment.
Pursuant to Florida Statutes Chapter 380.06(19)(e)3, any addition
of land to the project is presumed to constitute a "substantial
deviation" unless the presumption is "...rebutted by clear and
convincing evidence." Thus, the request must be reviewed as a
substantial deviation unless the applicant can convince the State,
the Regional Planning Council, and the County that the amendment
is a minor, local matter and need not undergo a full regional
review. The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, has in-
formed County staff in writing that the request would not have
significant regional impacts and that no further Regional Planning
Council review of the request is warranted. The State, through
the Department of Community Affairs, has verbally indicated that
no further State review of the request is needed.
Therefore, in essence the State and the Regional Planning Council
have been convinced that the requested amendment does not create a
substantial deviation. The Board of County Commissioners must now
determine whether or not the requested change creates a substan-
tial deviation. Regardless of the Board's determination, actual
adoption of the requested amendment will be considered at another
to -be -scheduled public hearing.
ANALYSIS:
The existing approved Grand Harbor development plan shows two
separate golf maintenance facilities: one for each of the proj-
ect's two golf courses. The DRI conceptual plan shows a 2.5 acre
"Golf Maintenance" parcel located on the west side of Indian River
Boulevard. The proposed amendment would add a ±4 acre parcel on
the east side of Indian River Boulevard as shown in attachment #1.
The 2.5 acre site originally designated for golf maintenance, for
the time being, would be designated as open space. [NOTE: as a
result of its initial amendment review, staff has recommended that
the 2.5 acre site be re -designated as a future fire station site].
The assessment of the State and the Regional Planning Council is
that no significant regional impact would result from the proposal
and that no regional review is necessary. County staff concurs:
the proposed change is minor in nature and will not significantly
affect transportation, the environment, land uses, infrastructure,
service demands, or other issues that would normally require
regional review. Therefore, it is the opinion of County staff
that the proposed D.O. amendment does not require regional review
and can be handled through local review and adoption as a minor
amendment.
46
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners determine
that the Grand Harbor, Inc . ' s request to add a ±4 acre parcel to
the overall Grand Harbor project area for use as a golf mainte-
nance facility does not constitute a substantial deviation (as
defined in Florida Statutes Chapter 380.06) and shall be reviewed
and adopted as a minor amendment.
Stan Boling, Chief of Current Development, explained that it
is the opinion of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
and the Dept. of Community Affairs that this is not something
that would require regional review, and staff concurs. However,
Assistant County Attorney Bill Collins has advised that according
to State Statutes, the developers should be given an opportunity
to convince the Board that the change is not substantial enough
to require regional review.
Chairman Wheeler opened the Public Hearing, and asked if
anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Darrell McQueen, engineer representing Grand Harbor, advised
that State Statutes stipulate that any addition of Land requires
the developer to show that there is not a substantial deviation,
and he believed that they have shown successfully to the
T.C.R.P.C. and the DCA that this is not a substantial deviation.
Part of the basis for that was that the 4 acres of land mass that
they are adding to this development is to replace a use that they
had there previously. Alt the golf maintenance will be put on
this site. The 1.7 and 2.5 -acre tracts are being left as open
recreation space. The drainage was considered previously in the
Grand Harbor plan for off-site areas, and there should be no
trouble with the drainage. Mr. McQueen stated that this addition
does not meet any of the threshold listed in the Statutes for a
substantial deviation.
There being no others who wished to be heard, Chairman
Wheeler closed the Public Hearing.
47
FEB 28198
FF—
FEB
FES 2 8 3989
ROOK
lb F„t268
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously determined
that Grand Harbor's request to add a ±4 -acre parcel to
the overall Grand Harbor project area for use as a golf
maintenance facility does not constitute a substantial
deviation (as defined in Florida Statutes Chapter
380.06), and shall be reviewed and adopted as a minor
amendment.
STATUS OF PARKING FOR MAIN LIBRARY
Administrator Chandler reported that he and County Attorney
Charles Vitunac met with representatives of the First Baptist
Church this past week and also with Vero Beach City Manager John
Little on the overall parking requirements and street vacations.
This Sunday the church is scheduled to consider the lease for the
parking lots that we need for the library parking, as well as the
vacation of 22nd Street. The church would be required to sign
the application with the County for the vacation of 22nd Street.
The proposed agreement for leasing of the church parking lot
would be for an indefinite term, but the church has insisted that
there be a cancellation -with -notice clause within that lease. We
have provided that a notice of cancellation be at least a minimum
of 12 months. This impacts us on site plan approval with the
City, as we would have to specify that if the lease was
cancelled, we would provide parking space within 1000 feet of the
library site. We are talking about 25% of our required parking,
or about 24 spaces. We think we are sufficiently protected in
that case, as we would look to the area to the east where we are
looking at parking for the Courthouse.
Another requirement of the City, once we vacate 22nd Street
and until such time that we acquire Lot 9, is that we provide a
traffic easement through that parking lot for vehicles to come
down that alley. We have to provide access out of that area. In
48
addition, because of the parking requirements for the existing
laundry, there is an internal circulation situation, the City
wants to hold harmless and say we would be vacating that area.
Since that circulation situation can and will be accommodated,
Administrator Chandler did not see any problem with that.
Administrator Chandler advised that those are the basic
provisions they are proceeding with, and he pointed out how
critical this is to our overall plan. Sunday the church will be
considering the lease agreement for the parking and the joint
application for the vacation of 22nd. In the meetings with the
City, Mr. Little indicated that we will be all right in
proceeding in this direction, so if the church approves it, we
will put together the application for submission to the City.
LEASED SPACE - CAPPELEN BUILDING
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/21/89:
DATE: FEBRUARY 21, 1989
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: JAMES E. CANDLERS
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
-
SUBJECT: LEASED SPACE CAPPELEN BUILDING
,E-5,,AP I
a4152/fq
BACKGROUND:
On January 31, 1989 the Board instructed staff to proceed with
negotiating for additional space to be used by the Health Department.
,ANALYSIS:
The County is presently, leasing one compartment (1472 square feet) of
the subject three (3) compartment building. Mr. Cappelen has offered a
second area in this building which is the same size of what is now under
lease. At present we are paying $750.00 per month for the one
compartment. Mr. Cappelen has offered the second area in a package deal
for a total of $1400.00 per month.
FEB 2 8 1989
49
Boos 76 F E 269
FEB 281989
ROGK It f4E 2 70
FUNDING:
The Health Department has agreed to pay the cost to renovate this
additional space to meet their specifications. Monies have been
budgeted to pay the $750 monthly lease for the remainder of this fiscal
year. There are no budgeted funds to cover the additional $650 monthly
cost.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends Board authorization for the Chairman to execute the
attached lease of the two (2) compartments of the Cappelen Building on a -
annual basis until the new Health Department building is constructed.
It is also requested that staff be authorized to prepare a budget
amendment that will cover the additional $650 per month, during the term
of this lease.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously tabled
this item for one week.
PRESENTATION BY DARRELL McQUEEN OF PROPOSED REALIGNMENT OF A
NORTHERN PORTION OF JUNGLE TRAIL
Darrell McQueen, engineer for five developers along Jungle
Trail, presented the following plan for realignment of a section
of Jungle Trail north of CR -510:
•
i••:�'i .M• •::?int\.+.??:-??%a?.v?•?i?:�:•i:v:•�:•i?:•.�-::?:
.. !�t°II..k..•1a��1�1btiii.EE��i�l�"'�:<:::;.......,.......................::A.?:>::N:?::«::<:;:
k TO
SEBASTIAN ATLANTIC.ri
til
'�.z
ccn'.....---,-,,i,.......—
z
iF
••o
of
—I ,.
No
es
es 4NoN
.v.4N
COUAS INIVsfesd
2:/
4 •ti
4111111
HOMESITES . .: r
\ INLET.
\
\
/\i
,
p,` 20
ro
v�r•01^
OCEAN v
•.
��
00 • \
-4fn
0, \
r
\‘
\
WABASSO
�—
., BEACH
..............
50
MIN
Mr. McQueen advised that the realignment would occur in the
Town of Orchid for the Orchid Island development now under
construction. There would be an 18 -foot dirt roadway, an 11 -ft.
conservation easement on both sides of the road, a 20 -ft. buffer
zone, and an additional 30 -ft. building setback. The realignment
would affect north Jungle Trail about half a mile from County
Road 510 where the road would meander 500-1,000 feet east of its
present alignment for about a quarter mile and then be realigned
100 feet north until it intersects again with the original road.
Mr. McQueen advised that the realignment will allow Orchid Island
to fit in its Arnold Palmer golf course while providing a buffer
of security and beauty for both motorists and the development's
residents. Nothing would be done in that buffer except to
replace the undesirable vegetation with native vegetation, or
remove all all the undesirables and create a berm with new
vegetation.
Referring to the drawing of the plan, Mr. McQueen stated
that this is typical of what would be in place and they would
prepare and record a plat on what is shown here today. He noted
that the Board recently instructed staff to do a maintenance map
that will include the 18 -ft. of graded roadway, and with the
30 -ft. building setback, it puts the first building approximately
70 feet from the center line of Jungle Trail. There are no
habitable structures abutting Jungle Trail throughout the Town of
Orchid; it is primarily golf course and groves. Mr. McQueen
advised that they will be meeting soon with the Planning staff
regarding the proposed route through the Windsor Polo Club.
Commissioner Bird felt the proposed realignment would make
the northern portion of Jungle Trail more scenic and appealing,
and Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that the realignment would
result in a safer condition as it takes out some of the 90°
angles in that northern portion of the road.
Mr. McQueen noted that he is scheduled to give the same
presentation to the Orchid Town Council later today. These plans
FEB 2 8 1989
51
mil 76 ocE 271
FEB 2 81989
Uvw\ 1NJE272
also were given to Millie Bunnell, President of the Historical
Society, but she has not given any input as yet.
Returning to the plans for the proposed realignment, Mr.
McQueen showed how Jungle Trail would meander through a virgin
stand of live oaks which are probably 75-100 years old. It is a
jungle look. A work crew has already cleared an 18 -ft. swath for
the road. Approval to do the clearing was obtained by the Town
of Orchid, but since Jungle Trail is a county road, the County
Commission must approv a any realignment. Mr. McQueen explained
that the clearing was done without removing any oak trees. If
the realignment is not approved, the cleared path will be used as
a walking trail for the development. He invited anyone that is
interested in the realignment to walk the path themselves to
decide. He felt this plan is good for the county and the
developer, and couldn't imagine anyone not liking the realignment
once they see it.
The Commissioners thanked Mr. McQueen for his presentation
of the proposed realignment.
IRC BID #89-47 - DEMOLITION OF MAIN LIBRARY SITE
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/20189:
DATE: February 20, 1989
T0: Board of County Commissioners
THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director
Department of General Seivi
FROM:
Doaninick L. Mascola, CRO Manager
Division of Purchasing
SUBJ: IRC Bid No. 89-41'
Demolition of Main Library Site
/
BACKGROUND
The subject bid was properly advertised and seven (7)
invitations were sent out. On January 25, 1989 bids were
received. Three (3) contractors submitted proposals for
the project.
52
ANALYSIS:
Staff has reviewed the submittals to ascertain adherence to
specifications. Graves and IJa11was the law bidder and met
all the requirements.
FUNDING:
Monies for this project will come from the Main Library
Construction budget. Total budgeted funds is $82,000 to
cover demolition and associated fees.
RECCMME VDATION:
Staff recommends the award of a fixed contract for $19.400.00
'to the law bidder Graves and Hall for the subject project.
Commissioner Eggert understood that the tow bid does not
include Landfill fees, and General Services Director Sonny Dean
confirmed that it did not.
Chairman Wheeler asked if the $82,000 that was budgeted for
this job included demolition and dumping fees, because he noticed
that the $38,000 bid included dumping fees.
Commissioner Eggert explained that it is for a few other
things also, and Director Dean added that we had anticipated
dumping fees. If we hauled everything to the Landfill, it would
be in the neighborhood of $14,000. However, we do not intend to
haul alt of it to the Landfill as there will be some clean debris
which Road & Bridge can use in their various projects. We do not
anticipate spending the $14,000.
Chairman Wheeler asked what the remaining $50,000 was
budgeted for, and Commissioner Eggert advised that it is for the
demolition of the store and two houses. All the demolition on
that site is included.
FEB281989
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Eggert, that the Board approve
staff's recommendation to award a fixed contract for
$19,400 to the low bidder Graves and Hall for the
demolition of the main library.
53 BOOK 76 [AGE 273
FEB 2 8 1989
BOOK 6 f.��E 4
Under discussion, Commissioner Bowman wondered why all the
bidders did not have the advantage of walking the site and
consulting with the Superintendent of Building & Grounds, and
Director Dean explained that everybody had that opportunity. We
didn't require them to come, but we offered them the opportunity
to come.
Commissioner Bowman didn't feel that it looked quite right.
Public Works Director Jim Davis advised that is standard
procedure in pre-bid conferences. Usually, when you advertise
for the bid, you advertise that there is a pre-bid conference and
if they wish to come, they can, but they aren't required to come.
Commissioner Eggert felt that perhaps it should be written
up a little differently.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion
passed by a vote of 4-1, Commissioner Bird dissenting.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BID TABULATION
`Q'
,
BID NO.�►
IRCBID89-47
DATE OF OPENING
JAN. 25, 1989
BID TITLE
DEMOLITION MAIN LIBRARY SITE
ITEM
NO. DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRICE
UNIT PRM
XJ-i2L lM
ai-41
TA
a'D4,.c g
4Ar�/Lf�l'�i�% ,•
414
•
-00
54
RETAINAGE RELEASE FOR ARCHITECT FOR GOLDEN SANDS PARK
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2116/89:
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Director
FROM: James D. White, P.E.
Capital Project Manager
SUBJECT: Retainage Release - ayes, Sudderth & Etheredge, Inc.
Architect for Golden Sands Park
DATE: February 16, 1989
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The Architect for the Golden Sands Park (Mayes, Sudderth &
Etheredge, Inc.) project was recently discharged. The retainage
balance on the contract earned, but unpaid is $841.64.
The Architect has requested release of this money since he has
been discharged. The unearned balance of the contract is not
requested.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval to release the $841.64 retainage.
Funds to come from Account # 310-143-572.033.13.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
the release of $841.64 retainage to Mayes, Sudderth
& Etheredge, Inc., architect for Golden Sands Park, as
recommended by staff.
55
FEB 2 8 1989
BOOK '76 F,„E 275
FEB 2 8 1989
FINAL ASSESSMENT
1) 22nd Avenue from 1st St. SW to 2nd St.
and 2nd St. from 21st Ave. to 22nd Ave.
2) 1st St. SW from 20th to 21st Ave.
3) 126th St. (Havenview Dr.) Roseland Road
to 79th Ave.
BOOF. 76 f4E
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/3/89:
TO: The Honorable Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
FROM: Michelle A. Gentile, C.E.T.
Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Final Assessment
1) 22nd Avenue from 1st St. SW to 2nd St.
and 2nd St. from 21st Ave. to 22nd Ave.
2) 1st St. SW from 20th to 21st Ave.
3) 126th St. (Havenview Dr.) Roseland Road
to 79th Ave.
DATE: February 3, 1989
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The paving of the above roadways have been completed.
Listed below is a comparison of the preliminary estimate and the
final costs to the homeowners by street. It is noted that all
construction costs are under the original estimates:
Prelim. Est. Final Cost
1) 22nd Avenue
100% $48,810.00
75% $36,606.00
2) 1st St.SW
100% $ 4,976.48
50%* $ 2,488.24
3) 126st St.
100% $62,970.00
75% $47,228.46
$34,795.45
$26,616.52
$ 4,578.42
$ 2,334.99
$38,348.01
$29,336.23
*1st St. SW is a secondary collector road and Property Owners are
assessed 50%
The final assessment roll has been prepared and is ready to
be delivered to the Clerk to the Board. Assessments are to be
paid within 90 days or in two equal installments, the first to be
made twelve months from the due date and the second to be made
twenty-four months from the due date at an interest rate of 12%
established by The Board of County Commissioners. The due date
is 90 days after the final determination of the special
assessments.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Since the final assessment to the benefited owners will be
less than computed on the preliminary assessment rolls, the only
alternative presented is to approve the final assessment rolls.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the final assessment rolls for the
paving of the above mentioned roads be approved by The Board of
County Commissioners and that they be transferred to the Office
of the Clerk to the Board for collection.
56
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved
the final assessment rolls for the paving of the above
listed roads, and authorized the transfer of the
assessment rolls to the Tax Collector's Office for
collection.
FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLLS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO
THE BOARD
RESOLUTION SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING ON SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR
PAVING AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO 87TH STREET IN VERO LAKE
ESTATES FROM 102ND AVENUE TO CR -510
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/17/89:
TO: Honorable Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: James D. White, P.E.
Acting County Engineere‘,.)
FROM:
Michelle A. Gentile, C.E.T.
Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Special Assessment for
Paving and Drainage Improvements to 87th Street
in Vero Lakes Estates from 102nd Avenue to C.R. 510
DATE: February 17, 1989
Description and Conditions
On January 31, 1989 at the regular meeting of the Board of County
Commissioners, a Resolution was adopted providing for certain
paving and drainage improvements to 87th Street from 102nd Avenue
to C.R. 510.
A separate resolution will need to be adopted to hold a Public
Hearing to discuss the advisability, cost an amount of the
assessment against each property owner.
This Public Hearing has been scheduled for Tuesday March 21, 1989
at 9:05 A.M. in the County Commission Chambers.
An assessment roll has been prepared and filed with the Board.
Recommendations
It is recommended that the resolution setting the time and place
of the Public Hearing be approved.
57
FEB 2 8 1989
HOF 76 r1GE 277
FEB 2 8 1989
76 fri i 0
. C F®r A
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 89-24, scheduling a Public Hearing for March
21, 1989 on the special assessment for paving and
drainage improvements to 87th Street in Vero Lake
Estates from 102nd Avenue to CR -510.
RESOLUTION 89_ 24
PUBLIC HEARING '
NOTICE
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida, will hold a Public Hearing
at 9:05 AM on Tuesday March 21 , 1989 in the
Commission Chambers located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach,
Florida to discuss the advisability, cost and the amount of the
assessments against each property for paving and drainage
improvements, located on 87th Street from 102 Avenue to C.R. 510
in Vero Lakes Estates.
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that at the same public hearing,
the Board of County Commissioners shall also hear all interested
persons regarding that proposed assessments contained in the
preliminary assessment roll for the improvements described above.
The preliminary assessment roll is currently on file with the
Clerk to the Board.
If any person decides to appeal any decision made by the
Commission with respect to any matter considered at this hearing,
he will need a record of the proceedings, and that, for such
purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the
proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and
evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
58
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INI?IAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, the foregoing
recitals are affirmed and ratified in their entirety.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Scurlock
seconded by Commissioner
who moved its adoption. The motion was
Bird
put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Gary C. Wheeler Aye
Vice -Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
and, upon being
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution passed and
adopted this 28th day of February , 1989.
BOARD OF
OF INDIA
By Q�Gd
GAR 1 C.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
HEELER, Chairman
•
PAYMENT REQUEST FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES - KINGS HIGHWAY BRIDGE
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/17/89:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
FROM: James D. White, P.E.
Acting County Enginee
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Payment Request for Engineering Services
Kings Highway Bridge
DATE: February 17, 1989
Description and Conditions
The Kings Highway bridge over the North.relief canal is completed
and Lloyd & Associates, Inc. has billed for Engineering Services
59
FEB 28 1989
L
BOOK 76 F{CE 2 9
Pr -
FEB 281989
during construction, including staking, inspection, contract
administration, and some design modifications. The
pre -construction services were payable without retainage in
accordance with the terms of the contract. These terms were
apparently approved because of the urgency of the project and the
short design period (30 days). The contract is a bit vague
regarding payment and retainage for construction related
services. The total of these services is $9,220.50 of which
$4,981.50 has been paid and $4,239.00 remains on the current
billing.
Recommendations and Funding
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners ratify the
previous payment of $4,981.50 and authorize release of final
payment of $4,239.00 for construction related services from
Account #111-214-541-033.19.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
staff's recommendation as set out in the above memo.
PAVING OF 17TH STREET S.W. FROM 20TH AVENUE TO 27TH AVENUE TO
PROVIDE A SECOND ACCESS TO VERO BEACH HIGHLANDS
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/17/89:
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.,,
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Paving of 17th Street S.W. from 20th Avenue to 27th
Avenue to Provide a Second Access to
Vero Beach Highlands
,
• .• O •
DATE: February 17, 1989
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Staff is finalizing the design of a second access road into Vero
Beach Highlands along 17th Street SW between 20th Avenue and 27th
Avenue (map enclosed). Existing physical features along 17th
Street S.W. have presented several design problems that require
eliminating certain existing road connections onto 17th Street
S.W. so that thru traffic is not allowed to travel through the
Oslo Park Subdivision. The proximity of the Indian River Farms
Water Control District Sublateral Canal lying between the
existing 17th Street S.W. road and a 60' wide road right-of-way
is also a design consideration.
60
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Staff presents the following design alternatives:
Alternative # 1
Connect the Vero Beach Highlands Roads (20th Ave. S.W. and
17th Lane S.W..) to 17th Street S.W. at 20th Avenue S.W. by
culverting the sublateral canal at 20th Avenue S.W. So that
traffic cannot use the internal roads within Oslo Park
Subdivision, the following existing road closures are
proposed:
1 - Close 20th Avenue S.W. at the north right-of-way line of
17th Street S.W.
2 - Close 20th Court S.W. at the north right-of-way line of
17th Street S.W.
3 - Close 21st Avenue S.W. at the north right-of-way line of
17th Street S.W.
4 - Close 22nd Avenue S.W. at the north right-of-way line of
17th Street S.W.
5 - Close 17th Street S.W. just east of 20th Avenue S.W.
The Indian River Farms Water Control District has verbally
indicated that the County can relocate the sublateral canal
60' to the south so that a 95' wide road right-of-way along
17th Street S.W. can be created.
This alternative will allow a typical 4 -way, non -offsetting
intersection at the 17th Street S.W./27th Avenue
intersection. Since 27th Avenue is a State DOT roadway,
permit issuance conditions requires good intersection
design.
Alternative No. 2
Construct the new roadway along 17th Lane S.W. (which is
located south of the IRFWCD sublateral canal) to a point
200' west of 22nd Avenue S.W., west of which will be a
gentle reverse horizontal curve to bend the road northerly
to 17th Street S.W. To accomplish this alternative,
approximately 600 L.F. of 60" culvert will be required and
an approximate cost of $50,000. The IRFWCD has indicated to
the County staff that they do not prefer to see such a long
culvert bridging this section of canal and they may not
permit it. If it is permitted, then 17th Street S.W. east
of the crossing would be closed so that two roads do not
merge into one road.
With this alternative, approximately 1000 L.F. of the canal
would also be relocated to the south.
Alternative No. 3
It is possible to implement Alternative No. 2 with a lesser
length of culvert, however, DOT minimum geometric standards
would be difficult to meet unless a reduction in the design
speed of the roadway is proposed.
61
FEB 2 8 1989
NOOK 76 ME 281
mire
MEC
.D
MEE
IME
Fr -
EEE 2 8 1989
POU 76F,, f "�
.J
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
It is recommended that Alternative No. 1 be approved for
implementation. If this alternative is accepted, staff will
immediately schedule a public hearing to close the five roads so
that public notice is given.
Funding in the amount of $80,000 has been approved from Fund 109
and Zone 6 Impact Fees.
ATTACHMENT
Map of Alternative # 1
•
•
oiy.
• eel �
LEGEND
. """"*"'"' • PROPOSED 17th ST.SM.(22'WIDE)
als•m• ....L NEW CANAL ALIGNMENT
PROPOSED ROAD CLOSING
=I K
9 30
0110
01
4
•," ;is
ED -
9
sG
Ys •
I a .
.I•
•
•
•
(BLARNEY)
. r
( 3 9i -e)
.. 9 y
0
0
911 s.1
02"3
Is.J
IJs •
k Jc Its •
e1A� r .
I$TN
9
w
e
i
2'•;�
Ye i
1"..ai
h
• 11
Q
r .
. iA
,._ , 1 I f 'i � a io
2J 26 �4-'I t
2.e• DP Rth ST. S.W. =j1 •o:.o Ia W* Ir 3`,47.41-W IIQ"*
j....alwriarri. rINsAIyarwsssinymsrNnorrs t--_ter--c -surb smrs
rCANAL :REALIGNMENT
; b 9
J
•
REVISION
(REVISION 11
• 1 1 111111.1.191112
E
REVISION
JAN. I. 1978
A
REVISION
JAN. 41973
N I
JAN. 1. 1999
N
J 1 JAN. 1. n93
F
JAL 1.1979
9
JAN. 1,1973
n
R 1 JAN. 4
9
JAN.I,I9SO
C
JAN.1.1978
9
I.1JAN.1.1985
IN
JAN. 1.1991
0
JAN.1,1977
62
Public Works Director Jim Davis recommended that we hold a
public hearing before any of the streets are closed, as he
anticipated some complaints.
He explained that the only way to
segregate the Oslo Park intersection from the Vero Highlands
intersection and still provide a second access out of the
Highlands is to do some road closings. There are some
alternatives, but Alternative #1 is the least costly, and that is
what staff is recommending.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously authorized
staff to schedule a public hearing on this matter.
Chairman Wheeler asked what happened to the right-of-way
that the County purchased south of 17th Street S.W., and Director
Davis explained that the County purchased a 60 -ft. wide
right-of-way south of the sub -lateral canal, which is to be used
in conjunction with shifting the canal.
Discussion ensued regarding alternatives to providing
another access into Vero Highlands, and Director Davis agreed
that it would be a very desirable alternative to relocate 17th
Street S.W. west of 27th Avenue, south of the sub -lateral canal,
to line up with our new right-of-way. However, Mr. Tripson, who
owns those two tracts of land, has indicated that he is not
willing to give up that right-of-way.
Chairman Wheeler wished to see that explored as a fourth
alternative, and Commissioner Scurlock suggested that we talk to
Mr. Tripson again.
Administrator Chandler advised that staff will bring all the
alternatives to the Board one week before the public hearing is
held.
FEB 2 8 1989
63
BOOK 76 PAGE 283
FEB 2 8 1989
800K 76 Pa - 284
RIVER EDGE REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER TREATMENT PLANT
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/15/89:
DATE: FEBRUARY 15, 1989
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
TERRANCE G. PIN
DIRECTOR OF UTIRVICES
WILLIAM F. McCAIN
PROJECTS ENGINEER,,
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: RIVER EDGE REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER TREATMENT PLANT
BACKGROUND:
Approximately one year ago, Indian River County acquired the River
Edge Subdivision Utility System. To date, we have rebuilt the lift
stations associated with the wastewater collection system and
completed major maintenance to the wastewater treatment plant,
percolation ponds, and substantial upgrades to the building
associated with the plant site. The engineering for these
activities was accomplished in-house.
We retained the firm of Camp, Dresser & McKee, Inc. to do
specifications for a deep well and a reverse osmosis plant to serve
the subdivision, with the intent of issuing a second authorization
for bid evaluation, contract preparation, and construction
supervision. The well has been completed and tested. Indian River
County has moved a 100,000 gallon ground storage tank to the site to
accommodate fire flow. We have also had soil work done under the
tank site which indicated necessary earth work to be done to prepare
the site; this is being done by Ted Myers Construction and will be
complete by the end of February.
The first week in March, Allen's Environmental will begin erecting
the storage tank. The tank relocation and re -erection was
accomplished through a trade of surplus equipment to Allen's
Environmental for the work. We have solicited bids for the water
plant and have chosen Hydro -Pro of Fort Lauderdale, Florida as low
bidder on the plant; award of this contract will soon be coming to
the Board.
ANALYSIS:
The permitting process for this water plant involved the acquisition
of three permits:
1. Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) Construction
Permit.
2. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Discharge Permit.
3. Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) Industrial
Waste Discharge Permit.
64
It was anticipated at the onset of this project that the permits
would be very easily obtained. However, many additional hours have
been required in the preparation of permit applications, additional
drawings, permitting fees, and extra design time on the plant so
that it could pull double duty as a membrane test facility for the
rest of our plants.
The aforementioned items have caused an increase in the cost of
engineering services. Originally $6,000.00 was budgeted for this
job. We now are requesting an additional authorization of
$13,798.00 to complete the job through construction and final
acceptance (see attached letter of January 5, 1989 and associated
exhibits).
RECOMMENDATION:
The Staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners approve the additional authorization
of $13,798.00 for engineering services needed to complete this
project. The funding for this project will come from the Impact Fee
Fund.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
staff's recommendation as set out in the above memo.
65 esocir 76F''CE 8
FEB 2 8 1989
FEB 2 8 1989
mu 76 E ti86
ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION SERVICES WORK AUTHORIZATION
DATE: 3-10-89•
WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. 3 FOR CONSULTING SERVICES
COUNTY NO. CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC. CDM PROJECT NO. 6706-16
(CONSULTANT)
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Consulting engineering services related to the construction of the
River's Edge Reverse Osmosis Plant located on Roseland Road.
II. SCOPE OF SERVICES
Reference is made to the attached Scope of Work from the proposal
dated January 5, 1989 and the "Master Agreement for Utilities Service"
dated November 1, 1988.
III. CONSULTING ENGINEER INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
A. Workers Compensation Insurance in accordance with Florida
Statutes.
B. Comprehensive and Automotive Liability with a minimum coverage of
$100,000/$3Q0,000 per occurrence for bodily injury or accidental
death.
C. Comprehensive General Liability with a minimum limit of
$100,000/$300,000 covering property damage. •
D. Liability for Property Damage, while operating motor vehicle,
with minimum limits of $100,000 per occurrence.
E. Contractual Liability including limits established for Items
IIIB., C., and D. above.
F. Umbrella coverage, Excess Liability with minimum limits of
$1,000,000 per occurrence.
IV. COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES
Engineering Services: $13,798 (Lump Sum)
SUBMITTED BY:
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC.
(Consultant)
APPROVED BY:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By L� 'r./---'�f4%?". By
Donald G. Munksg
Vice President
DATE: Z/i '/e 9
IRC.VB9
66
ary eeler
Chai n
DATE:
••roved: 2-28-89
Indian River Ca
Afproved
Dale
Admin.
IMINI,
3-) n -12,[f
Legal-
��=f.
<-- 1-jr
Budget
M]'
_- 9
Utilities
Fri J
"7 `t -- `6`1
Risk Mgr.
AWARD OF BID FOR RIVER EDGE REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2117/89:
DATE:
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
FEBRUARY 17, 1989
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
TERRANCE G, PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILITX S$RVICES
WILLIAM F. McCAIN
PROJECTS ENGINEER
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
AWARD OF BID FOR RIVER EDGE REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT
CONSTRUCTION
BACKGROUND
Approximately one year ago, the Department of
authorized the consulting firm of Camp, Dresser &
to prepare specifications for a deep well and for
Plant based on the test results from the finished
five bids for the Water Plant.
ANALYSIS
The five bids received are as follows:
Hydro -Pro
Itek
Harn
Osmonics
Allen Environmental
$73,364.00
$74,461.00
$78,848.00
$87,770.00
$98,000.00
Utility Services
McKee, Inc. (CDM)
a Reverse Osmosis
well. We received
The firm of Camp, Dresser & McKee, Inc. evaluated the bids (see
attached letter from CDM). The two lowest bidders, Hydro -Pro and
Itek, both submitted responsive proposals and are both qualified to
do the job. CDM recommends awarding the contract to Hydro -Pro since
it is the lowest bid.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners approve the award of this contract to
Hydro -Pro in the amount of $73,364.00 and by doing so approve the
forth coming contract documents.
67
FEB 2 E 1989
BOOK 76 P OF 287
FEB 2 81999
ocE
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
staff's recommendation as set out in the above memo.
CONTRACT WILL BE PLACED ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD WHEN FULLY EXECUTED AND RECEIVED (REC'D.& ON FILE IN CLERK'S
OFFICE/7/17/89)
SOUTH COUNTY REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT, MEMBRANE REPLACEMENT
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/17/89:
DATE:
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
FEBRUARY 17, 1989
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
TERRANCE G. PINTO_
DIRECTOR OF UTIL±VICES
JOHN FREDERICK LANG ;,/
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: SOUTH COUNTY REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT, MEMBRANE
REPLACEMENT
BACKGROUND
The original membranes at the South County Water Plant are
approaching the end of their life span. The plant has no spares
left. Eight (8) membranes are starting to fail. Arocon, a factory
licensee of Dupont, the manufacturers of our membranes, has nine (9)
membrane bundles for sale. They overbought for another project in
Sarasota, Florida to receive a substantial price reduction. They
are willing to offer them at manufacturer's cost to the County to
get them off of their inventory.
ANALYSIS
The Department of Utility Services needs spare membrane bundles to
ensure continued water production. The price quoted is $70.00 less
than our purchase of September 20, 1988 from Culligan International.
RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners approve the emergency purchase of nine (9)
membrane bundles for the South County Reverse Osmosis Water
Treatment Plant at a cost of $34,380.00. Membranes shall be
purchased for the Reverse Osmosis Plant utilizing earmarked Removal
and Replacement funds. Balance of Removal and Replacement funds as
of February 17, 1989 was $469,869.00.
68
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
staff's recommendation, as set out in the above
memo.
SOUTH COUNTY SUBREGIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/20/89:
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATA
THRU:
TERRANCE G. PINTO \`_,
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY/ SERVICES
DATE: FEBRUARY 20, 1989
FROM: WILLIAM F. McCAIN
PROJECTS ENGINEER
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: SOUTH COUNTY SUBREGIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
BACKGROUND
In March of 1988, we received the final version of the County's
Wastewater Treatment Plant Master Plan by Camp, Dresser and McKee,
Inc. (CDM). The Master Plan outlined the need for a South County
Subregional WWTP.
The Master Plan recommended the acquisition of General Development
Utilities' Vero Highlands Wastewater Treatment Plant. The plant
currently has a capacity of 0.85 million gallons per day (MGD);
however, they are restricted to 400,000 gallons per day by effluent
disposal and they are currently looking to expand their effluent
disposal.
ANALYSIS
The proposed schedule by CDM for a County owned South Regional
WWTP is based on the County acquiring the Vero Highlands plant, as
CDM recommended. The schedule is as follows:
Year
1987
1990
1997
2000
Action Required
Start sequences to expand
WWTP from 0.85 to 3.85 MGD
Plant on line at 3.85 MGD
Start sequence for 0.4 MGD
expansion
Plant on line at 4.25 MGD
Even though this schedule is based on acquisition of the Highlands
plant, the same schedule from the 0.85 MGD capacity should be
followed.
FEB 2 8 1989
69
KID 76 PACE 2 9
FEB 2 8 1989 BOOK 7 r» r 290
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners approve two possible courses of
action:
1. That the Utilities Department
of the GDU WWTP and pthe startroofeanwlexpansion�S7tToth
plant to match the County Master plan. of that
2. If the purchase of the GDU plant becomes infeasible, that
we be allowed to begin design and construction of a South
County plant of our own.
Monies for the aforementioned acquisition/construction of a South
County WWTP would come from User Fees, Assessments, and the Impact
Fee Fund.
Utilities Director Terry Pinto explained that the
recommendation is to proceed with the negotiations for the
acquisition, and Administrator Chandler noted that staff will be
bringing a recommendation back to the Board on the financial
feasibility.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
authorized the Utilities Dept. to explore the
financial feasibility of the acquisition of the GDU
water and wastewater plants and the start of an
expansion of that plant to match the County Master
Plan, and bring a recommendation back to the Board.
INVESTIGATION OF PURCHASE OF GENERAL DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES -
SEBASTIAN HIGHLANDS
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/17/89:
70
DATE: FEBRUARY 17, 1989
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
/7)COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
THRU:
TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILI�4'4 RVI
CES
FROM: HARRY E. ASHER
ASSISTANT DIRECTO OF ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: INVESTIGATION OF PURCHASE OF GENERAL DEVELOPMENT
UTILITIES - SEBASTIAN HIGHLANDS
BACKGROUND:
On January 23, 1987, the City of Sebastian granted a 30 -year
franchise to Indian River County for water and wastewater service
not already serviced by private utilities. A provision of the
franchise agreement guaranteed that the County would take over the
territory of any private water or sewer utility whose franchise
expired or was otherwise cancelled. The City of Sebastian is
proposing to act as a conduit to pass ownership of the General
Development Utilities to Indian River County.
ANALYSIS:
The County's policy has been to acquire such privately -held
utilities and to expand its regional and subregional water and
wastewater facilities. Acquisition of this system will assist in
implementing this policy. A County -owned system could better
address the environmental concerns regulated by the state and
federal governments. A County -owned system could eliminate
inconsistencies that exist in expansion by franchise holders and
will help to stabilize rates.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends the Board
of County Commissioners conceptually approve the purchase of the
aforementioned utility, in cooperation with the City of Sebastian.
FEB 2 8 1989
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously
authorized the Utilities Dept. to explore the
financial feasibility of purchasing the GDU water and
wastewater treatment plants in Sebastian Highlands and
bring a recommendation back to the Board.
71
BOOK r ct 291
FEB 28'989.
BaOK6 PAGE 292
RENAMING AND EXPANDING THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MARINE
ADVISORY BOARD
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/13/89:
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Gary C. Wheeler, Marine Advisory Board Chairman
DATE: February 13, 1989
SUBJECT: Renaming and Expanding the Indian River County
Marine Advisory Board
At the most recent meeting of the Marine Advisory Board,
there was discussion of the substantial overlap between the
material under consideration by the Marine Advisory Board
and the Narrows Watershed Action Committee set up by the
Marine Resources Council of East Florida.
Since many of the same people serve as members of both
committees, and since much of the work of each committee was
duplicative of the other, and since joinder of the
committees would both be more efficient and would promote
the intergovernmental coordination efforts required under
the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land
Development Regulation Act, it was the recommendation of the
Marine Advisory Board that it be expanded and consolidated
with the Narrows Watershed Action Committee. The Director
of the Marine Resources Council, Diane Barile, also
concurred.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached Resolution re-establishing, renaming, and
expanding the Indian River County Marine Advisory Board and
repealing Resolution No. 87-22.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 89-25, re-establishing, renaming, and
expanding the Indian River County Marine Advisory Board
and repealing Resolution 87-22.
72
RESOLUTION NO. 89- 25
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, RE-ESTABLISHING, RENAMING, AND
EXPANDING THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MARINE
ADVISORY BOARD AND REPEALING RESOLUTION
NO. 87-22.
WHEREAS, Indian River County is greatly affected
by, dependent upon, and served by the Indian River Lagoon;
and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the
citizens of Indian River County to maintain, preserve and
enhance the natural beauty, water quality and usefulness of
the Indian River Lagoon as an irreplaceable natural
resource; and
WHEREAS, the Marine Advisory Board has recommended
that the above purposes and the intergovernmental
coordination requirements of the Local Government
Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act,
F.S. 163.3177(4)(a) and F.S. 163.3177(6)(h), can be best
advanced by expanding the Marine Advisory Board to also
serve as the Narrows Watershed Action Committee for the
Marine Resources Council of East Florida; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County to expand the Marine
Advisory Board by repealing Resolution No. 87-22 and
renaming and adding to the membership of the Board to
accomplish the above -stated objectives,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of
County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida that:
1. Indian River County Resolution No. 87-22 is
hereby repealed.
2. The Indian River County Marine. Advisory and
Narrows Watershed Action Committee is hereby established to
consist of the following members who will be appointed by
the Board of County Commissioners:
73
FEB 28 1989
BOOK .16 PAGE 293
6 FACE 29
FEB 2 8 1989
BOOK
a. A County Commissioner who will serve as
Chairman of the Marine Advisory and Narrows Watershed Action
Committee.
b. A representative of a local environmental
organization, such as, but not limited to, the Audubon
Society, the Sierra Club, or the Florida Defenders of the
Environment.
c. A representative of commercial fishermen,
preferably a person affiliated with a commercial fishing
organization.
d. A representative of recreational fishermen,
preferably a person affiliated with a recreational fishing
organization.
e. A representative of recreational boaters,
preferably a person affiliated with a recreational boating
organization.
f. At least two persons not necessarily
affiliated with a.particular user -group of the Indian River
Lagoon, but who have expressed an interest in the objectives
stated herein.
g. One person from each governmental agency
having jurisdiction for land or water management within the
Narrows Watershed.
3. Members of the Marine Advisory and Narrows
Watershed Action Committee shall serve at the pleasure of
the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County and
may be removed by a majority vote of the Board. Vacancies
in the Marine Advisory and Narrows Watershed Action
Committee membership shall be filled by a majority vote of
the Board of County Commissioners of Indian •River County.
Any member who misses more than three (3) meetings without
an excused absence may be dropped from the committee and
replaced upon recommendation of the chairman.
4. The Marine Advisory and Narrows Watershed
Action Committee shall have advisory powers only. The
74
Marine Advisory and Narrows Watershed Action Committee shall
prepare and recommend policies and, where possible, specific
plans relating to:
a. Preservation and enhancement of
recreational uses in the Indian River Lagoon.
b. Protection and improvement of water quality
and marine habitat in the Indian River Lagoon.
c. Minimization of adverse impacts on the
Indian River Lagoon from all forms of pollution,
development, storm water run-off and over -fishing.
d. Utilization of the Indian River Lagoon and
its renewable resources in ways proven not to degrade water
quality, marine habitat, recreational utility and natural
beauty.
e. Intergovernmental coordination with respect
to surface and storm water management, storm water/fresh
water flow, wetlands protection, wetlands, seagrass and
flood plain management,and pollution loading.
f. Such recommendations shall be forwarded to
the Board of County Commissioners and the Marine Resources
Council of East Florida.
The foregoing resolution was offered by
Commissioner Scurlock and seconded by Commissioner
Eggert , and, being put to a vote, the vote was as
follows:
Chairman Gary C. Wheeler Aye
Vice Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared• the resolution
duly passed and adopted this 28th day of February
1989.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
75
FEB 28 1999
ary
e er, airman
BOOK .76 PAGE 295
Pr -
FEB 26 '089
BOOK ,76 FACE 296
DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED LEGISLATION THAT WOULD ALLOW SCHOOL
BOARD TO RECEIVE 25% OF THE PROPOSED ADDITIONAL 1 -CENT SALES TAX
REVENUES
The Board reviewed the following letter dated 2/15/89:
February 15, 1989
13OB .1OIINSON
:37 SOUTH GRAN(:E AVENUE
SARASOTA. FLORIDA 34236-582.2
Dr. James A. Burns
1990 25th Street
Vero Beach, 32960
Dear Jim:
I am
OIST-lEurllON. UST
At m:fin7
Pet:'
Pubic VL tk
COn' t1'1iI f - C•�• --
Utilities
Finance
ntl:or ..
e
--------------------------
filing a bill to amend the local option sales tax.
1. It gives 25% to the local school board.
a. used for construction, remodeling and renovating.
b. used to retire bond issues after July 1, 1986, if
ad valorem taxes are reduced by the amount
pledged.
c. if the school board receives proceeds for local
option sales tax it may not impose impact fees.
2. 75% of the revenue would be divided among the county
municipalities.
3. The counties, municipalities and school board shall
adopt Five Year Plans which can only be amended by
unanimous vote of the governing body.
4. 10% of the.surtax may be used for operational expenses.'
We are building infrastructure which governments can't
afford to operate.
5. The referendum requirement is retained as in current
law. With the addition of the school construction in
the bill, I believe it will add significant grass roots
support.
If you support the measure, you should contact your legislative
delegation.
Very, truly yours,
Bob Johnson
Senator, 25th District
76
Commissioner Bird was concerned, as worthwhile as the School
Board is, that 25% of these funds could be siphoned off for
another purpose, and suggested that we have staff take a look at
it and come back next week to see if we want to take any position
on it with our Legislative Delegation.
Attorney Vitunac believed that if our 1 -cent sales tax
passes in March, before this new law is passed, we probably would
be immune from it. He didn't see how they could take away part
of the money that we already voted for specific purposes. If we
bonded it, as Chairman Wheeler has suggested, we definitely would
be immune from redistribution.
Commissioner Scurlock wanted to go beyond that as he was in
opposition to the proposal, whether it affects us or not.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized
the Legal Dept. to prepare a resolution in opposition
to this particular proposal and bring it back to the
Board.
DOCUMENTS TO BE MADE PART OF THE RECORD
Proclamation - Ralph Lundy
FEB 2 8 `1989
77 BOOK 76 F,GE 297
8 )989
PROCLAMATION
HONORING J. RALPH LUNDY
BOOK 76 ME 298
WHEREAS, J. RALPH LUNDY has served as President of the
Gifford Progressive Civic League for 28 years and has persisted
in his effort to bring beautification and a better way of life to
Gifford; and
WHEREAS, J. RALPH LUNDY has been instrumental in improving
voter registration in the Gifford community, and in obtaining a
voting precinct in Gifford; and
WHEREAS, it is through J. RALPH LUNDY's efforts that many
Gifford roads have been paved; stop signs and stop lights have
been erected in the Gifford area creating safer driving
conditions; and
WHEREAS, J. RALPH LUNDY's leadership has brought about the
Gifford Street Lighting District, and county sewer and water is
now available to the Gifford residents; and
WHEREAS, MR. LUNDY has worked as liaison between the Indian
River County School Board, the Board of County Commissioners, and
the residents of the Gifford community to construct the Gifford
Community Center; and
WHEREAS, MR. LUNDY serves as a member of the Indian River
County Economic Development Committee, and the Gifford Housing
Improvement Committee to.acdomplish a better level of housing for
the Gifford residents; and
WHEREAS, J. RALPH LUNDY writes the Gifford news article in
the Press Journal keeping the residents of the county informed;
and
WHEREAS, MR. LUNDY's unfailing interest in his community has
established new goals for a healthier and safer place to live by
working toward a future branch library, branch health clinic, and
a senior citizen day care center.
NOW, THEREFORE,!on behalf of itself and all the citizens of
Indian River County, BE IT PROCLAIMED that the Board of County
Commissioners hereby expresses its sincere appreciation to J.
RALPH LUNDY for his years of dedicated and exemplary service in
striving to improve the lifestyle of the people in Gifford, and
wishes him success in all his future endeavors.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
e.
Gary C.eeler, Chairman
Adopted this 28th day of February, 1989
78
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 11:15 o'clock A.M.
ATTEST :
FEB 8 1989
04,1_
Clerk Chairman
79 BOOK 76 FAGE299