Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/9/1989Tuesday, May 9, 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, May 9, 1989, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Gary C. Wheeler, Chairman; Carolyn K. Eggert, Vice Chairman; Richard N. Bird; and Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Absent was Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman, who was on vacation. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; Joseph Baird, OMB Director; and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order, and Commissioner Bird led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS Chairman Wheeler requested that the following items be added to the Agenda under the Administrator's matters: 1) Staff report on a proposed Joint City/County meeting (8A) 2) Scheduling of a budget workshop with the Sheriff (8B) 3) Property Appraisal for McKee Jungle Gardens property (8C) ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, Commissioner Bowman being absent, the Board unanimously (4-0) added the above matters to the agenda as requested by the Chairman. CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Eggert requested that Item A be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. " i0m, BOOK i ,� �E J MY 9 1989 u I B��K i r'� l�C. 90) A.__Approval of Minutes of Regular_ Meeting of 4/18/89 The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc- tions to the Minutes of April 18, 1989. Commissioner Eggert noted that on Page 19, the main thrust of the Motion in regard to approving the floor plan and d architecture for the Main Library wasn't so we could file for the state grant, and she, therefore, would like to add language'to the end of the Motion so that it would read "......and continue to move forward with site plan approval and specifications." ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner, Commissioner Bowman being absent, the Board unanimously (470) approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 18, 1989. B. Report Received and Placed on File in the Office of the Clerk to the Board: Original and 2 copies of the 1988 General Development Utilities, Inc. Annual Report for the Vero Beach Shores and Vero Highlands Division C. Approval of Crumpler Water Service Agreement The Board reviewed the'following memo dated 5/1/89: y 2 4 DATE: MAY 1, 1989 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO DIRECTOR OF UTILITY VICES SUBJECT: CRUMPLER WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT PREPARED AND STAFFED BY: JOHN FREDERICK LANG ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIX DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES BACKGROUND The Crumplers, in order to build on their 80' x 125' lot, need public water to build their home according to HRS regulations. This will enable them to have a septic tank installed for the home on their lot. Attached is the agreement written by the Department to allow the home to be'built and be served by public water. ANALYSIS The agreement delineates the need for an easement from the property owner between the water main and the subject property and the requirement to pay the future water main extension assessment. RECOMMENDATION The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners sign the proposed agreement so that the Crumplers may receive County water and thus build their home. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, Commissioner Bowman being on vacation, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved an agreement with the Crumplers for extension and installation of water services, thus enabling them to build their home, and authorized the Chairman's signature. SAID AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD. MAY 9 1989 3 boor, 76 J aca, Rl F'r 79Z. D._IRC_Housing_Authority __Approval of Section 8 Annual Contributions Contract A -3409-V The Board reviewed the following memo dated 4/28/89: TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: April 28, 1989 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: James E. Chandler County Administrat r�C SUBJECT: Request for approval and signature on Section 8 Annual Contributions Contract A -3409V «' FROM: Guy L. Decker, Jr. REFERENCES: Executive Director IRC Housing Authority 140 . p ;a•.�v..•t n- It is recommended that the data presented be given formal consideration X,:- �: by the County Commission. The Department of Housing and Urban Development has forwarded five (5) copies of the Annual Contributions Contract (ACC) which have been amended to include Project 006 to the existing Housing Voucher Program. The documentation required by HUD for their final approval and execution of the contracts is submitted for consideration and approval of the Board of County Commissioners. (1) Five (5) copies of ACC Part I Number A3409V of the Annual Contri- butions Contract for the Housing Voucher Program. Original signa- tures are required on all copies of the Contract and no change in its format is permitted. We respectfully request the County Commission to authorize its Chairman to execute these Contracts for transmittal to the Jacksonville office of HUD. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously 4-0 approved the ACC Part I Number A -3409-V of the Annual Contributions Contract for the Section 8 Program, and authorized the Chairman's signature. COPY OF PARTIALLY SIGNED CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD 4 E. Budget Amendment #062 - Federal Revenue Sharing The_Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/2/89: TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: May 2, 1989 SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT 062 - FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING CONSENT AGENDA FROM: Joseph A. Bair OMB Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS On October 1, 1988 the actual cash forward balance for our Federal Revenue Sharing budget was $145,279.71, the Budget Director had anticipated a balance of $234,464.00. Most of the difference of $89,184.29 results from an accounting adjustment made by our auditors for equipment purchased by Road and Bridge that was charged in the wrong year. Although the equipment was in fact budgeted in the Road and Bridge fund, the auditors did an adjustment against Federal Revenue Sharing. As a result, Road and Bridge was left with a higher cash balance than anticipated on October 1, 1988. Since the majority of capital item expenditures budgeted in Federal Revenue Sharing were meant for Road and Bridge, staff feels that the remaining monies in this fund should be transferred to them. Cash Forward - Revenue - October 1 would then be increased thus enabling Road and Bridge to purchase all capital items budgeted in Federal Revenue Sharing. RECOMMEENDATION Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners authorize the transfer of money to Road and Bridge fund and approve the attached budget amendment to close the Federal Revenue Sharing Fund. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0, authorized the transfer of money to Road S Bridge fund, and approved Budget Amendment #062, as recommended by OMB Director Baird. 5 BOOK 7 Y �� 01 • TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners FROM: Joseph A. Baird, OMB Director SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER: 062 DATE: May 2, 1989 Entry Number Funds/Department/Account Name Account Number Increase Decrease FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING Revenues Interest - Investments 102-000-361-010.00 S 6.146S 0 Cash Forward - October 1 102-000-389-040.00 S 0 S 89,185 EXpenses Road & Bridge/Automotive 102-214-541-066.42 SS 61,116 Road & Bridge/Heavy Equipment 102-214-541-066.43 S 0 S 106,350 Office Furn. Risk Mana ement and Eauipment 102-214-246-066.41 S 173 S 0 Fund Transfer All 102-199-581-099.21 S 84.254 S 0 ROAD AND BRIDGE Revenues Fund Transfer In 11-000-381-020.00 S 84,254 S 0 Cash Forward - October 1 11-000-389-040.00 9 83,212 S 0 Expenses Road & Bridge/Automotive 11-214-541-066.42 S 61,116 S 0 Ro d & Brid a Hea E i ment 11-214-541-066.43 106 350 F. Budget Amendment #075 - Historical Grant The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/2/89: 6 0 f TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: May 2, 1989 SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT 075 - HISTORICAL GRANT CONSENT AGENDA FROM: Joseph A. BairdG OMB Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The attached budget amendment appropriates funding for $12,500.00 Historical Grant which the Community Development department received from the Florida Division of Historical Resources. Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached budget amendment. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0, approved Budget Amendment #075, appropriating funding for a Historical Grant in the amount of $12,500, as recommended by OMB Director Baird. TO: Members of the Board SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT of County Commissioners FROM: Joseph A. Baird OMB Director NUMBER: 075 DATE: May 2. 1989 Entry Number Funds/Department/Account Name Account Number Increase Decrease 1. REVENUE M.S.T.U. Historical Grant 004-000-334-073.00 $12,500.00 S 0 EXPENSE M.S.T.U. Planning/Other Prof. Services 004-205-515-033.19 $12,500.00 0 VA nox F�ti�E 705 Fr,_ h kV 01999, PRESENTATION ON NORTH COUNTY LIBRARY BY ARCHITECT 60011 76 96 Commissioner Eggert introduced William A. Bibo, Chief Architect of Stottler, Stagg & Associates, to make a presentation on the North County Community Library. Mr. Bibo informed the Board that the plans and specifica- tions for the North County Community Library are ready to go to Tallahassee. He then displayed a model of the building they have developed, noting that a great deal of the facade is made up of reflective safety glass with a bronze tint. The building itself will be a dark blue-green color. The parking will be in front of the main entrance, and in addition to the staff offices, adult reading and reference areas, and young adult and children's areas, it will have a community meeting room which is separated from the main part of the library off of the lobby. Commissioner Scurlock commented that the building as presented seems functional and it is very attractive. Mr. Bibo stated that it is an energy efficient type of building, very flexible, and designed so that it can be manned with very little staff. Administrator Chandler informed the Board that he feels very comfortable with what is designed. It is well within budget; the estimate is 1.2 million and we have 1.4 million set aside. Commissioner Eggert advised that what is needed is a Motion to accept the library plans and give approval so that when state approval has been obtained, we can move ahead and go out to bid. ON MOTION BY Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) accepted and approved the library plans as presented and authorized going out to bid upon said plans receiving state approval. 8 PUBLIC HEARING -(ESTUARY DEVEL/MONICA_TAYLOR) TO REZONE TO RM -8 27 ACRES IN THE GIFFORD MXD 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 Reach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a in the matter of in the Court, was pub- lZiA 0_ ished In said newspaper in the issues of NOTICE — PUBUC NEARING Notice of hearing to consider the adopdon-a..1 a County ordinance rezoning land from RS -8'1 Single Family Residential District to RM -8, Multi. Family Residential District The SUbloct proper- liesresen owned by EstuaryDevelopment Corporation and Monica Taylor Eshleman we located on the south side of 48th Street (Undsey Road) approximately 27001.eaet ot58th Avsnug .1, The subjects properties contain approximately. 27.48 acres and areNlnc In 8o".21. 7 Ship 32 South, Range 9 est A public hearing at width parties 61 ntwom and citizens $hall have an opponunHy to be heard, will be held by the Board of County Com. missioners of Indian River County, Florida In the County Commission Chambers of the Countlyy Administration Building,. located at 1840 25(ft.; Street, Van) Beach, Florida, on Tuesday, May 9, 1889, at 8:015 a nL , - r'. •.,•� , ,. The Board of County Commissioners may grant a less Intense zoning district than the dls trict requested provided R to within the same general use category. Anyone who may wish to appeal decision which maybe merle at this meeting will need to Afflant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore Ings e made which includes testimony and ew. been continuous) upon RiverCouch the ppeallsba$ed. y published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been IndtanRlverCounty entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- Board of County Commissioners P Y preceding P copy of April 19 1988 ary wheeler, Chairman ty, Florida, fora period of one year next recedin the first publication of the attached 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 -1—.q— da of usiness Mant ger) ( (SEAL) ',,may l ublic, 5tcrl t 4 Flnrk r ; y,y Ccrnenmmun ax+Irta Jon,, ;O, . k-10ttlnvGovluta. hauLaWA " Staff Planner Robert Loeper made the staff presentation recommending approval of the requested rezoning, as follows: BOOP. / 1'F��E 197 MAY S 1 e MAY 2 199 e ��)� 8 -- BOOK d' F���E. TO: James Chandler County Administrator DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: 4 Obert M. Keati g, P Community Developme Director FROM: Robert M. Loeper/P/j%L Staff Planner DATE: April 25, 1989 SUBJECT: ESTUARY DEVELOPMENT/MONICA TAYLOR REQUEST TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM RS -6 TO RM -8 It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of May 9, 1989. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: Estuary Development Corporation and Monica Taylor have submitted a request to rezone two parcels of land from RS -6, Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) to RM -8, Multi -Family Residential District (up to 8 units/acre). The parcels contain approximately 27.46 acres and are located on the south side of 49th Street (Lindsey Road), approximately 2700 feet east of 58th Avenue (Kings Highway). On March 23, 1989, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4 to 2 to recommend approval of this zoning request. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli- cation will be presented. The analysis will include a descrip- tion of the current and future land uses of the site and sur- rounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environ- mental quality. Existing Land Use Pattern The subject property is undeveloped and is currently zoned RS -6. Property to the north is zoned A-1, Agriculture District, and is used for cattle grazing. Property east and west is vacant property zoned RS -6, except for the cut out portion northwest of the property which contains a residence. Immediately south, is Cavalier Estates, a residential subdivision zoned RS -6. Housing within the subdivision is scattered. A church is also located on two lots of this subdivision adjacent to the subject property. Property east of Cavalier Estates (southeast of the subject) is zoned IL, Light Industrial and IG, General Industrial. That portion adjacent to the subdivision is vacant property; further east is an auto salvage yard. Property west of Cavalier Estates (southwest of the subject) is zoned RMH-8, Mobile Home District (up to 8 units/acre). Development in this area is scattered with some mobile homes as well as site built housing. Future Land Use Pattern The subject property and all surrounding property south of 49th Street is in the Gifford MXD, Mixed Use District. The Gifford MXD permits a variety of zoning classifications including residential densities up to 14 units per acre. Property north of 49th Street 10 is designated on the Future Land Use Map as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2, permitting up to 6 units/acre. The Gifford Small Area Plan designates the property as RS -6, Single -Family Residential, up to 6 units/acre. Transportation System The subject parcel has access on 49th Street (Lindsey Road) which is a designated collector road on the County Thoroughfare Plan. There are currently no operationial problems with this two lane road segment. Environment The Comprehensive Plan does not environmentally sensitive nor is area. Utilities designate the subject parcel as it located within a flood prone Public water lines are in place along 49th Street. Sewer service, while not currently available, is programmed for the area along 49th Street. Analysis In reviewing this request, staff has examined the existing land use pattern, and the land use patterns set forth in both the Comprehensive Plan and the Gifford Small Area Plan. The requested zoning is of a higher density than currently exists; however, the RM -8 is consistent with the MXD land use designation. A review of existing land uses in the area reveals a vacant site in a undeveloped area, in close proximity to a wide variety of uses. Several of these uses are high density uses generally incompatible with low density residential uses. In particular, these include a concentration of auto salvage or junk yards on North Gifford Road. Residential uses in the immediate vicinity are confined to single family residences and mobile homes. Higher density residential areas containing both single and multi -family developments are generally located east of 43rd Avenue. The Gifford Community Center and Park are located nearly at the intersection of 49th Street and 43rd Avenue. The MXD land use designation, which permits a broad range of uses, was applied to those areas of the county which have a mixture of land uses. Development and ,.redevelopment in the MXD's was intended to be compatible with the dominate land uses while at the same time permiting flexibility in dealing with these unique areas. The Gifford Small Area Plan was developed to provide additional guidance for future zoning and development review and to supplement the Comprehensive Plan. Among the major goals of this plan is increased housing opportunities and neighborhood development, decreased land use conflicts between industrial and residential areas and the discouragement of several undesirable land uses such as bars and auto salvage yards. The requested zoning change is not consistent with the precise use in the Gifford Plan; however, it does advance the objectives of the plan. Conclusion The subject parcel is located on the fringe of development in the northwest portion of Gifford. As such, it will serve in the future as a transition area between the broadly mixed and sometimes incompatible uses of the gifford area from the lower density residential area designated to the north and west. 11 BOOK F'iJL 71)-0 MAY �9®9 MCI, d � F�:;'c 8490 In review of this request staff had concerns with the apparent inconsistency with the small area plan. Further review has relieved these concerns. The subject property is in an area which will shortly have a full range of Urban Services which will warrant or support the increased densities. The relatively large size of the parcel will aid in the design and site plan possibilities and ensure adequate transition between the MXD and the low density area to the north. The close proximity of incompatible land uses also raises questions regarding the likelyhood of developing the property for single-family residences. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the increased density and multi -family designation would be consistent with county land use plans, provide and encourage efficient use of both land and public services, and provide for increased housing opportunities. RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis performed, :staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve this request. RMH-8 TR6 i TRT' TR8 A-1 ; Subject Property .a.:e '49th 3T TM I <a TWO E TR9 E I • .S 11 J M� IL IG - 1 IL 1,1 I. IQ I r TR6 R H-8 I4g RS -6 PALM I I 12 M _ M M Planner Loeper stated that said property is located west of the Gifford Community Center and the Lindsey Road/43rd Avenue intersection, and there is very mixed use in the surrounding area, varying from mobile homes to Light Industrial and General Industrial. Commissioner Scurlock asked about the zoning in the large area north of Lindsey Road, and was informed it was mostly RS -6. Commissioner Eggert believed the subject property actually is quite a distance west of the Community Center which is at 43rd Avenue. She noted that when the P&Z went through the Gifford Small Area Plan, a lot of the community turned out and a great many of them indicated they wanted more single family. She, therefore, has a hard time changing to multiple family just above that area when the community told us they didn't want anything but single family and that is why we zoned it RS -6. Commissioner Scurlock agreed with Commissioner Eggert's concern, and he also felt that the large tract to the north is an extremely attractive piece of property that has a good chance of being developed as one unit. He is concerned about the transi- tion between this area and that property as he feels it has the potential of becoming a real asset through a DRI process. Chairman Wheeler informed the Board that he has had some conversation with an individual who owns a house in the RMH-8 area and wants to add on a screen enclosure, but cannot because his single family residence is a non -conforming use. The Chairman noted that he would like to have consideration given to changing the zoning where the mobile homes are to single family residential. Then, of course, the mobile homes will become non -conforming, but when they wear out or deteriorate, they can be replaced with single family homes. Commissioner Eggert wished to know how many acres there are in the mobile home park between 45th and 47th Streets west of 51st Court, and Tony Brown of the Housing Authority advised it is approximately 8-10 acres. 13 BOOK AE:' �F.� Ir4 MAY 919 soon 7 6 Commissioner Eggert commented that, in working with the Housing Authority, she has found that although they have had some problems, there still are a tremendous number of people in line who want to get single family homes. It is difficult to do, but it is something the community is continuing to work on. Commissioner Bird felt the question is do we have more demand.for single family homes with people who can qualify or more demand for multi family. Commissioner Eggert noted that Guy Decker and Tony Brown of the Housing Authority are here today, and she asked them what zoning is needed to make the multi family projects work. Mr. Brown stated that it would require RM -10, and he also noted that they are now dealing with FmHA to get a feasibility analysis in that area for single family. Commissioner Scurlock believed there is no question that there is a need for both types of housing, and Commissioner Bird agreed but just wondered what the present demand is and whether we have an adequate inventory of property at 8-10 upa for someone to do multiple family. Commissioner Eggert asked if what is being presented today is to be affordable housing, and Planner Loeper was not sure but felt it is more middle priced. Commissioner Bird believed that while many in that area want the American dream of their own home, the hard reality is that most simply cannot afford it. He believed the single family lots are selling in the range of $10-12,000, which will eliminate many. They certainly do need better than what they have now, and he believed the only alternative is multi -family. He asked if there are enough existing areas at 8-10 upa to encourage this type of housing to be built. Planner Loeper advised that staff will be looking at a lot of this in the new Comprehensive Plan and especially in the Land Use Element. He is not sure what is being proposed is what 14 L_J normally would be considered low cost housing, but is more just of an affordable nature. Commissioner Eggert had a big problem with this being on the agenda when we are bringing the Land Use Plan and the Housing Element up to date, and they are still in flux. Commissioner Bird wished we could do a new development plan for the whole area, but unfortunately we have a very mixed bag to deal with. He knew there are unsold single family lots available in the Gifford area, but was not sure how many vacant multi family apartment units there are in that area. Guy Decker of the Housing Authority adv-ised that there are no vacancies in the multi family apartments; in fact, they have a waiting list of over 300. Commissioner Eggert noted that is for the Victory Park type thing, but there is also a list of over 100 waiting for single family. Planner Loeper continued to stress reasons for this property being multi family, noting that the P&Z at first raised some questions about whether this is buffering in the wrong direction, but they agreed that this is a very difficult area. If Cavalier Estates were not there, it would be a much cleaner decision. However, the reality is that the services are in place that will permit the higher densities, and considering the surrounding land uses, the likelihood of single family being developed in the area is questionable. Staff, therefore, felt this application was in order. Commissioner Bird pointed out that in order to make this type of multiple family project economically feasible, you need to have a tract of land large enough to accommodate sufficient units to enable you to stretch the cost of the infrastructure over a larger base. The problem in finding places for this type of affordable housing in the Gifford community is that much of it is already subdivided and broken up in small lots. 15 BQQR ;E, ,'SAY J AY 7. Chairman Wheeler was not sure that what is proposed answers the need for low income housing. Commissioner Scurlock noted that in the process of estab- lishing water and sewer into this area, the message he kept hearing is that the Gifford community doesn't want to be treated differently on zoning issues for too long. He believed we are finally trying to come up with a good plan that provides a mix of housing that will upgrade the community, and he personally sees this project as doing that. Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that we have not proceeded with the demolition of many sub- standard structures in the area, simply because we have had nowhere to move the people. Also, as Commissioner Bird noted, there are quite a few single family lots available. His one I concern is that he wants something to be developed that provides a more compatible transition with the larger tract to the north, and he felt what is proposed will give whoever ends up developing that property a better opportunityeto do something nice. Chairman Wheeler commented that looking at the map, he sees good and bad. Right now you have 47th Street as kind of a buffer into the area going north, and with this proposal, you will be moving that to 49th Street. He personally would like to see the RMH-8 areas readdressed as the need for residential development becomes more prevalent in the area. He has mixed emotions about what is proposed, and feels we may be a bit premature with the new Comprehensive Plan still being developed. Commissioner Bird noted that he is not that familiar with the mobile home parks in this area. If they have not been subdivided, he agreed we can do something with them, but if they are sub -divided and the lots separately owned, it becomes very difficult. Director Keating advised that this is something that was not an easy decision for staff, but they wanted to encourage develop- ment and questioned whether single family would become a reality. 16 - M Chairman Wheeler asked if putting this on hold a month or two until we get further into the Comprehensive Land Use Plan would help staff. Director Keating did not think so. He explained that one of the things they are looking at is in the Gifford MXD; essentially, there is an allowance to go up to 14 upa, and the idea was that could be an incentive for low cost and public housing. What we are looking at here is a density of a lot less than conceivably could go in there. Commissioner Scurlock commented that he finds the Victory Park project attractive, well maintained, and a real asset, and it certainly compares more than favorably with what they have done with single family. The comments he hears from the residents are all positive. Commissioner Eggert agreed, but wanted the Board to know that one of the main reasons for that is Tony Brown, who is running that project with an iron hand. She felt he deserves a lot of praise. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. John Hett, vice president and broker for Estuary Development Corporation, the applicant, informed the Board that he purchased this property for an individual who was interested in coming in with private money. He is hearing a lot of talk about low income housing, but would like to call this project more affordable housing because this is a transitional area. He agreed that 8 upa is right at the threshhold for such a project and that with 10 upa, you are a lot safer, but Mr. McGeary, the developer, has done these type projects all over the south for the last 40 years. Mr. Hett pointed out that since they are using private money, they obviously are going to make sure the property is maintained. He also hears over and over how the Gifford area has been neglected, but this area is not conducive to single family development. There is no demand for single family lots or homes except on a rental basis, but there is a heavy demand for a F�'C�Ux B a � Sf� pp b17 F'' r4 AY p'poor e T living situation. As to this being a transitional area, Mr. Hett emphasized that you have junkyards to the SE and mobile homes to the SW. If this becomes a rental residential neighborhood with different owners, he believed everyone knows it is much more difficult to have the constraints necessary to keep the neighborhood up. He felt Mr. McGeary should be commended for taking the risk. Commissioner Eggert inquired what Mr. Hett expected their market to be and about the need for rent subsidies in what they are planning. Mr. Hett answered that at the present, the idea is not to use subsidies. If it turns out that they have to, they will. They are talking about developing the first phase as a rental situation and the second phase, possibly condos where it is conceivable the government money could be involved as these probably would be $30-40,000 units. Commissioner Scurlock asked if Mr. Hett had any problem with a 4 member Board voting on this proposal. Chairman Wheeler commented that, to clear the air, Mr. Hett has convinced him of the benefit of the proposed project. Commissioner Eggert noted that Gifford is in her District, and she always has pledged to the community that we would keep in communication with them about things such as this. She did feel this is an excellent project, however. Director Pinto pointed out to the Board that the sewer and water system was designed so that there are lines that run along Lindsey Road and along 47th Street, and it was anticipated that whole area would be developed. Anthony Brown of the Housing Authority advised that they see no problem with the area being changed if it helps the community of Gifford. It is true there are a lot of vacant lots, but as a result of the sewer and water project, this area now becomes feasible for building. He felt the moderate to upper income subdivision that is proposed will not help any of the problems 18 associated with the housing needs of the residents of Gifford because if there are to be no subsidies, it would block out a large portion of the residents. Mr. Brown felt the biggest issue is that this violates the Gifford PLUM as well as the Land Use Plan for the area, and he did not feel it would be acceptable to approve this without first having a meeting to see how the citizens of Gifford feel. Commissioner Eggert believed there had been conversation about having a middle income type of thing, and she asked if Mr. Brown felt what is proposed would be beyond the school teachers, business owners, etc. Mr. Brown believed some of those people are moving in the area, but they are building their own moderate to upper class homes. If you put the moderate income houses for people in the $45-60,000 area, he did not see any problem, but if it were $80- 90,000 homes or apartments with no subsidies running $400-500 a month, the Gifford resident cannot afford that. He felt it is a toss up. If what they are proposing can enhance the Gifford community, he has no problem with it. If it doesn't, and it brings in others and affords them a better life style, then he has a problem. Commissioner Scurlock believed the goal is to have a mix in the Gifford community, and he did not feel you want to have nothing but subsidized housing. The Gifford people should have a variety of housing options to choose from in their own community. Mr. Brown reiterated that he has no problem if what is being proposed enhances the community and the PLUM and coincides with what they are trying to do. If you are talking subsidized housing, however, he pointed out that FmHA doesn't subsidize; they give you a loan. He further stressed that if you lock this acreage out for the Gifford resident and eat up the land, then where do those residents go. Commissioner Eggert asked Mr. Hett about the cost projected for these units. 19 ROOK AY S 1989 J r MAY 9 1989 BOOK 7 Mr. Hett felt the rental rate in the first phase, depending on the size of the unit would be somewhere around $350-400 a month. He did understand Mr. Brown's concern, but felt they are in the same ballpark. They are trying to service the Gifford community; Mr.'McGeary has told him that he intends to rent the first phase and when they see how that goes, it will determine how they proceed. He noted that it was possible that the rent for a 3 bedroom unit could go up to $500 a month, but it all depends on the marketing situation. Commissioner Bird noted that we, of course, won't know until we see the final results of the project, but if the project is done along the guidelines indicated, it seems it will fulfill a housing need in the community. He also liked the fact that it is private enterprise and felt it will be an asset to the community. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com- missioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved Ordinance 89-13 rezoning the subject property south of 49th Street, and approximately 2700' east of 58th Avenue, to RM -8 as requested by Estuary Devel- opment Corporation. Commissioner Eggert explained that she voted for the Motion because she is willing to take a chance that it will be good for the community. She will watch it very closely, and if it should turn out that it isn't, it will not happen again. We do need development in the community, and she would suggest that staff sometime during the sumer revisit the Gifford SAP with the residents. 20 ORDINANCE NO. 89- 13 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM RS -6 DISTRICT TO RM -8 DISTRICT, FOR THE PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 49TH STREET APPROXIMATELY 2700' EAST OF 58TH AVENUE, AND DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the local planning agency on such matters, has held a public hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this rezoning request; and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone the hereinafter described property; and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has determined that this rezoning is in conformance with the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has held a public hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at which parties in interest and citizens were heard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning of the following described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: THE WEST 10 ACRES OF THE EAST 20 ACRES OF TRACT 10 AND THE WEST 660 FEET OF TRACT 10, SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, ACCORDING,TO LAST GENERAL PLAT OF LANDS OF INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 10, RUN IN A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION ALONG THE WEST BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID TRACT 10 A DISTANCE OF 283.60 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE RUN IN AN EASTERLY DIRECTION 343.53 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE RUN IN A NORTHERLY DIRECTION 283.60 FEET TO THE NORTH BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID TRACT 10; THENCE RUN IN A WESTERLY DIRECTION A DISTANCE OF 343.53 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID LANDS NOW LYING AND BEING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. Be changed from RS -6, Single -Family Residential District, up to 6 units/acre to RM -8, Multi -Family Residential District, up to 8 units/acre. 21 ROCK 7 MAY 91989 ROOK 76 810 All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Zoning Regulations. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, on this 9th day of May , 1989. This ordinance 19th advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal on the day of April , 1989, for a public hearing to be held on the 9th day of May , 1989, at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Bird , seconded by Commissioner Scurlock , and adopted by the following vote: Chairman Gary C. Wheeler Aye Vice Chairman Carolyn C. Eggert Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird ye Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman A sen Commissioner Don C. Scurlock Aye BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY By Gary Wheeler, Chairman DISCUSS AGENDA FOR PROPOSED JOINT CITY/COUNTY MEETING Administrator Chandler advised that the County staff does not have any specific items for the agenda for a joint meeting, nor does City Manager Little have any from the staff's stand- point. He understood, however, that the City Council members may have some items, and believed they would be in regard to such things as recycling, the Indian River Boulevard status, a City/County recommendation on a 'turtle nesting Resolution, and communication between the City and the County. Mr. Chandler felt staff can give a general update on most of these items. Commissioner Scurlock asked the Chairman if he had presented the City with the Board's Resolution opposing any increased building heights, and Chairman Wheeler advised that when he got to the meeting, the Motion had been changed, the Council had copies of the Resolution, and he did not feel it was necessary to read it to them. Commissioner Scurlock was concerned about this because apparently Mr. Krause and Mr. Macht have attributed the proposed height and density increase to him. This was given some 22 s � � consideration early on in the planning for the Courthouse Complex, and while he and Chairman Wheeler indicated the architects should explore all possibilities, that was never an indication they would vote for such a measure, and they, in fact, did not. He wished to stress that he never has endorsed this nor has the Chairman. Commissioner Eggert believed at the last meeting the City had some concern about our mitigation area for Indian River Boulevard, and she personally would like to know what the County's place is going to be in the YMCA, if any, and to understand just what is going on in that situation. Commissioner Bird advised that he has been to several meetings regarding the Y. In fact, the initial meeting was between Ken Macht and himself and members of the Y Board, but because it was within the City, it was felt the City should take the lead in purchasing the property. City/County Recreation is proceeding ahead, and the thought would be, if the City acquires the property and if we some day work out a joint City/County Recreation Department, that simply would become another one of the recreation facilities. Commissioner Scurlock believed that Commissioner Bird has worked diligently with Recreation over the years - trying to acquire and expand the beachfront facilities - the golf course - the Ansin property for a South County park, etc. All along there has been emphasis on the fact that the City had all the recrea- tion improvements centralized within the City, and we have tried to expand and decentralize to provide opportunities countywide. Commissioner Bird agreed, and noted that it certainly becomes easier to work with them if you have a more equal footing with facilities. The City still has many more programs than we do, but we are getting there. Discussion continued at length as to whether to have a joint City/County meeting or not, and Commissioner Eggert felt we should ask the City if they want this meeting. ;% 23 BOOK MAY 9 1999 Rcu, 7 Chairman Wheeler stated that if the City wants a meeting, he has no objection to meeting with them. Commissioner Bird, however, believed it is unfair to staff just to have a casual meeting without a more formal agenda. Commissioner Eggert believed the City simply wanted an update on things, and Administrator Chandler reiterated that staff is prepared to give general status reports if that is what is wanted. Discussion continued in regard to setting a date for the meeting and then determine if the Council members want a meeting, and Commissioner Scurlock stressed that he wished to have a set agenda. It was agreed to schedule a joint meeting for May 18th at 9:00 with an agenda unless the City does not wish to meet. PROPOSED BUDGET WORKSHOP WITH SHERIFF Administrator Chandler informed the Board that he has been in contact with the Sheriff, who has indicated that he is still finalizing some facts and figures and wouldn't be available for a full public meeting until probably the first week in July. He did indicate, however, that he would be available to meet with the Commission members on an individualized informal basis between now and then. Commissioner Eggert commented that she would have a hard time meeting with the Sheriff if that information will not be available until July. She felt a workshop would be very helpful. Commissioner Scurlock informed the Board that he called the Sheriff last Friday and suggested that he certainly would be willing to sit down and go over figures. He stated that he has found it is an almost impossible task to develop the numbers to compare all the Sheriff offices in the state. He actually had the County Commission secretaries call all 67 counties, and based on that, it seemed there were some glaring inconsistencies. Then 24 S � _ second calls were made to all 67 counties to verify the numbers, and it turned out that out of the 67, 45 were the same numbers obtained the first time, and 22 were wrong. In Bay County, for instance, they contract out for their jail and that figure was not included. Commissioner Scurlock believed he now has a list that is fairly accurate; so, he can understand that the Sheriff probably is having the same difficulty in working up his numbers. Commissioner Scurlock stressed that he has been trying to gather information to see if we are treating our Sheriff fairly, and it is a very difficult task to put this data together. Some places were very uncooperative. He noted that he now has had a number of other counties, including Sheriffs departments, asking for the report that he has had put together. Commissioner Scurlock referred to an article written by Phil Long of the MIAMI HERALD, and believed he had made it clear that this was not audited material, but just work done by one Commissioner to attempt to learn about what the proper budget should be. This is not meant to reflect negatively on the Sheriff. He just felt it is important for this Commission, when you are spending 12 million dollars and asked to increase it by 4 million, that we get some numbers to help determine that we are all playing in the same ballpark and if we are doing a good job in funding law enforcement. If these unaudited figures are correct, it would appear that in the categories that seem fairly important, such as sworn personnel per thousand population, we are in the top 20 of the 67 counties. Discussion continued in regard to the benefit of having figures that jibe so we know where we stand when we work on the budget. Commissioner Eggert did not have any problem with delay- ing a workshop, but she did feel one is needed. If the Sheriff cannot be ready until July, she felt that is when we should have the workshop. Commissioner Scurlock asked if the Chairman felt that he is out on a tangent trying to get this information, i.e., is this �oo� � MAY 9 `1,90000 25 MAY S 1989 DooK 76 rr what the Commission wants, or should he just stop trying to put these numbers together. Chairman Wheeler felt each Commissioner has a responsibility to look at the numbers, and in talking with others about this, he has found there doesn't seem to be any specific numbers anyone agrees upon. The Sheriff is talking about a formula for long range planning, but what formula. Chairman Wheeler felt the net effect of gathering this information and having a workshop would be healthy for the community as a whole. He gives credit to the Sheriff that he has had the courage to ask for increases over the last years and make the improvements that he has, and the Chair- man believed we have an aggressive, well manned and well equipped Sheriff's Department. The Chairman stressed that he is very much interested in continuing the dialogue with the Sheriff and he would like to have a workshop so we all can consider and evaluate just what is needed. He did not believe anyone is on a "witch hunt," but just trying to get some answers. We cannot justify everything with numbers from other departments; we must look at the needs of our county and what the community wants and what we can afford. He personally felt the stockade theory would be beneficial. Commissioner Bird realized that trying to get these figures has been frustrating, but we do need some numbers we can rely on, and he was sure the people in the county are interested. He wondered if between now, Commissioner Scurlock and the Sheriff and the FDLE can reach some numbers all can agree on. Commissioner Scurlock noted that he is just trying to find the numbers, and he will be happy to present them to the Sheriff at any time. Commissioner Eggert personally appreciated his making this effort. After further discussion, it was agreed to set the workshop on the Sheriff's budget for July 6th at 9:00 A.M. 26 PROPERTY APPRAISAL FOR McKEE JUNGLE GARDENS PROPERTY Administrator Chandler reviewed the following memo: TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: May 8, 1989 FILE: SUBJECT: r FRO • James E. Chandler REFERENCES: County Administrator As you are aware, I am in the process of preparing a feasibility study and recommendations on the McKee Jungle Gardens proposal. In that regard, I have had an initial meeting with Mr. Ronald Ewing. He emphasized that from his perspective a decision must be made by early June. If the property is acquired, regardless of the method of financing, two appraisals are required. Additionally, an appraisal is needed to evaluate the $2.5 million asking price for the 99 acres. Considering the time element, requested quotes for two appraisals to be completed by June 9, 1989. One firm could not complete the appraisal until the end of June. A second could meet the time element, but we believe the fee of $6,300 is too high. Napier Appraisal Services will provide an appraisal by June 9th at a fee of $4,500. It is my recommendation that the Commission approve the appraisal by Napier and authorize staff to obtain a second at a cost not to exceed $5,500. Funding would be provided from the General Fund Contingency. With this schedule I would intend to have a full report and recommendation to the Commission at the June 13, 1989 meeting. In relating the schedule to Mr. Ewing, Monday, he indicated that he would contact me Tuesday as to whether it is acceptable. As a result, I would recommend that the approval be contingent upon their acceptance of the schedule. Administrator Chandler clarified that this is a separate appraisal from the one needed for the lawsuit over the down - zoning, and it would include the full 99 acres, including the parcels in the wetlands. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, to approve the appraisal by Napier Appraisal Services in the amount of $4,500 and authorize staff to obtain a second appraisal at a cost not to exceed $5,500, funding from General Fund Contin- gency, as recommended by the Administrator. 27 BOOKY 9 1989 Flit BOOK Commissioner Bird commented that in addition to the appraisal, he would like to see more definitive numbers and plans as to restoration costs, a maintenance plan, fundings, etc. Administrator Chandler confirmed that is part of the whole study, and he felt comfortable that staff can give the Board the full picture by June 13th. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0) Commissioner Bowman being absent. SURPLUS PROPERTY The Board reviewed memo from CPO Dominick Mascola: DATE: April 26, 1989 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COW4ISSIONERS THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director Department of General Serv' s r FROM: Dominick L. Mascola,,CCPO Manager Division of Purchasing SUBJ: SORPUJS PROPEEN BACKGROUND: i The Property attached herewith, from Various Departments, has been declared Surplus to the needs of Indian River County. ANALYSIS: Staff reccmTends the authority be granted by the Board of County Commissioners to declare surplus and authorize a sale of the attached list. E i' 0,002u o M • A Surplus Property Sale open to the public will be held as per State Statutes. The Seal Bid method, advertised in the local newspaper will be offered indicating sale to the highest bidder. A review of Surplus Equipment will be scheduled for all departments to reclaim any Surplus Items, prior to advertisement for sale to the Public. Items not sold at the sale will be offered on a in- dividual basis to interested parties. FUNDS: The monies received from this sale will be returned to the General Fund. 28 9 ;4 Rtjrt,!- TLI7.5 VORD 0 11 1 . . Ml IL" -7 EW i Liv­ollo I-01,11 1Y67 TRIICK- L4AHN 001'709-000000 lRUCKT, FLATPEE, FORD 12 FT FLAP BED *S F1 #-004 P OR11 1974.-- - - -­-oof, mort.c. I--1 r, 197s ruviri 4-. C. ror t333, TRN 57,1 *f 002653-000001 HEAVY FOL11P. / ATTArl4MENTS TANKvBDDYvPIJMP,ZTC. **--FL#-000 TURNER-- 19-76- 302661-000000 FURNITURE / DESK DLSK 1916 002669-000000 OFFICE EUUlPs/ CALCULATOR CALCULATOR Fl. 4 - -4000 MONROE PrFICE EQUIP- -rTilr- r -ATE STAMP Ti?llF CLOCK AND PACK FL.4­000 LATUEM- 1975 St 00200S-000000 HEAVY EOUIP. / TRACTOR DIESEL"TRACTOR Ft.49--031 MASSFY FFRGUCfJN ... .... ____ _4_97X_._ - - - ----- - - 002703-000000 COKMUN1;__ATI(7N / RACAL: -MOBILE REPCO PORTAMOBILE FL* --000 REPCO 003168-000000 PHOTOGRAPHIC ACCESSORY ENLARGER -PRINTER F1.* -000 OCE INDUSTRIES 1979- 003220-000000 TRUCKS / 1/2 TON 1979 DATSUN 1/2 TON P/U -FL4-137 DATSUN --1979 - --GFA--- SURPLUS- FW ifiAL E 003247--000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO -MOBILE RCA MOBILE FI -4--l00 RCA -19.7-9 - FRO --SURPLIIS 003270-OOu000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO -MOBILE RCA MOBILE **---FL4-000 ...RCA 1978 -IN-4574—­ A03271-0-DA000 COMMUNICATION RADTO-MOBILE MOBILE RCA VHF 'FL4- -000 RCA 1978 Fri 1420 PARKS 111 F -M 003277-000000 AUTOMOBILE / SEDAN 4 DR ASPEN DODGE FL# -153 CHRYSLER CORP 2977- --GO.-ENG FROM 003283-000000 COMMUNICATION RCA MOBILE' rL*_000 RCA 197e 1390-R/A-080338 DTSP-05 003284-000000 COMMUNICATION RADIO -MOBILE RCA MOBILE St FL# -004L RCA 00320S-000000 COMMUNICATION RAD10-MOBILE: RCA MOBILE FLO-000 RCA .19713 1390-R/A.080308 DISP 05 003286--000000 COMMUNICATION RADIO -MOBILE RCA MOBILE X* FL* -000 - RCA 1973 1390-RI'A 060386-DISP- 0Z-- 003287-000000 LUMMUNI CATION RADIO -MOBILE RCA MOBILE -FL*-00b RCA. 1390-R/A 080388 DISP 05.. 003268-000000 COMMUNICATION./ RADIO -MOBILE RCA MOBILE FL # =000 - ...RCA- - ------ --- - -- - - : - - _* ___ —, - -1-9 7-8- -1 3-94---RZ"80388 - DJ SP Od 003290-000000 COMMUNICATION RADIO -MOBILE MOBILE RCA Vl:F rL-1 -.0oo rxtj ...... 4 "o nnuta- n rM 4* 0032921-7,-_0000 COMMUNICATION roAE:10-MOBTLi: RCA MORTLE FLt--000 RCA 197? 1390-R/A 00033E DISP C5 00329-3-030000 COMMUNICATION RADIO -MOBILE 6E MOBILE FLO-000 GENERAL ELCTRIC. __ 1777. -1320-4/4 0m03ll2_4LZfalp_ 0-s V* 007294-0-!0000 COililroUNICATION RAIll 0-14.3;4 IL7 RCA MOBILE 1:-L* -OUG' RCA DISP ob 003296-000000 CQllM.0NT?_'.-1TI9N RADIO-W)b7lA:- RCA MORTLE FL* -000 RCA 1973 1390­R/A-0CO3a8 UISP*05 t* 003313-000000 C UMMUN I' 'Al I U14 RADJO-MOI{IL!_:' RrA MOBILE FLt-000 RCA 1.973 003314-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO -MOBILE RCA MOBILE FL4-000 RCA 197H 1470-R/A-080338- DISP_ 05.. 003323-000010 COMMUNICATION / MOTOROLA MOBILE RADIO PiwKf, fo Lh 003342-000000 ADUIO / AMPLIFTER rAH 70 AMPLIFIER 9* FLI-000 RENSECY 1979 003343 -0i.,000%) COMMUNILA11ON/NADIU -PAWNG TT,.M FL* -000 REGENCY 1777 003344-000000 COMMUNICATION /_ACCESSORi4S MICRO . COM . 21 FLIT -000 MICRO COM ,1900 •-__--.-- -- -• -- _ ## 0033:;6-000000 ----- 0033t;6-000000 COMMUNICATION RAIJIO-HANDHELD WALKIE TALKIE W/CHARGER FL# --000 REGENCY - ---- .. - .. _.1900 -STATION---- 1 29 BOOK uL ;1 817 MAY S 19zi 89 MAY 0 1989 0049@9-000000 COMMUNICA7IOM ! RA11IO-•MONILE &F MOFITLE F L#- 000 GE ,n. Boor d r 1,IJ L 8.' ** 003358-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO -HANDHELD WALKIE TALKIE W/CHARGER ** FI -0-000 REGENCY _. ~1979 - • ---._.—_�__ - -- --- •>A 0033-j',­,i•GOOv CGNNUNICAT17N / kADIU-HANDHELII WALKIE TALKIE +N/CFIARGEit *i F Ls -•700 ?',OT,ARuLA 1984 OFF ILC -�_-- ** +k* 003360-000000 COMMUNICATION p-VUv / RADIO -HANDHELD WALKIE TALKIE W/CHARGER ** •moi kEGENCY *# 00•s35'Y-vi'0000 LUMMUNICATION / RADIU-MOBILE GE MOBILE ** FL* -000 GF:NhRAL E:L_E(;TR7C . . . -49-79 .- .134+0-F4XA- 0S0388•-;rlSi- O:'• .. �,.,,.:.,..-�..••,.� �unw•.•ni_,,IiI:I , rinl•.�• r+ilI�aLt r11.r1 r]u..I_L•� CAPITALIZED EQUIPMENT OUTLAY RADIO INSTALLATION *# IPWR 1190-NXA 0f)0a8t• LITSr• 0' x: r. 1 4 ;,:: ;.r. rr,,l>~,.u:1:..T r.(_^:'"_r)r;i'� f:7:.,, .1 F;r1I TC -MOBIL' cr: tIA'iTf R 2 ** 0'13561-000000 COMMUNICATION / kADIU-MUHILE RCA m0biL.E ** ri_A-000 RrA 1900 TN 11EN 209 LfJ.'!r•iU,11CAT'IQN i RAVILI-rOVIL£ RCA MUBILL >F* i +_* -000 iCil iS+OU -1390-Ji/A -OC303i3I L�IS;P •0t; ** 003563-000001 COMMUNICATION / RADIO-MURILE GE MOBILE -RADIO IN TRK #131 *1 i'I_*-000 riF:NFRAi. ELECTRTL 1SOO FROM FLT MAN -TO -RBB 1,122/8B *1 CX3632-(jr:U:)00 COMMUNICATION / RADIOJiANDHELD HANDHEL.11 RADIO ECG ## Lk -U00 6ENEkA,L L-'LECT141C _-. -19x;0--MAIN-IN LOSET CLOSET- 003,3634-000000 OJ:634-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO-HANIIHEI_U HANDHELII RADTO ECG *x 1'• -•A.,+7 t;i Nl'^AI. I;LC:f TIiTC' 1980 MAIN ** C:i3635-LO0000 COMMUr.ILtT1CTrt / RADIU-HANDFIELD IIANDHELD RADIO ECO #)K - FL4-000 GENFAiAL L"LEC1141C ._ _....1-984 - MAIM ---•7. - - — - --- ** 003649-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO-HANDHELII HANDHELD RADIO ECG x>K I A—(111r1 I::I NF F.ryl i i I I' l ,.; f l 1980 MA jN ** 003730-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO-MUHILE BE MOBILE ## r LSF -000 GC -1981- 1:,90 -i -:/A 080JIM DISP 05 -.• --- --- ** 003754-000000 COMMUNICATION_ / RADIO-MOHIILE BE MOBILE ** FL* -000 BE -- - 11981-- 1390-R/A- 08038. 4DISP--05 - - #* 003763-t)C•G000 I1EWY EQUIT•. / TRACTOR DIESEL TRACTOR ##. FLO-173 MASS- ' c JJZ1-EEFCGUJON-.._-.. _- _1951-- #* 003905-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO -MOBILE BE MOBILE *: FL* -000 GENERAL ELECTRIC .. 981--1394--R/Q--080388 DISK- 05 tx r0 ?^06_r•:(,.^rt.n ^np+ifLl!JTrn7- +1l . R041:10 -MOBILE MOVILIi GI: VbIF #xc .__l Lai - Ovv uc 1482 1390 -TC/ A 000303 DISP 0.5 ** 004038-000030 COMMUNICATION / RADIO-MOB2LE-_ GC MOBILE RADIO SW . rL.4-000 BE __...1986 1390-R/A 480388 IiI!'si 05-----• ._ ___. ** 0041_8i-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO-MOL+IL.E GE MOBTLE 000 JE 1932 .. _._.-.....-_ - . *]t 004585-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO -MOBILE BE MOBILE #* FL# -000 BE 1992 —• --- _ _ --^_ . _ .. �-- #: COMMUNICATION / r4AI170-1;At1DHCLI: DE WALKIC TALKIE W CHAROF!i .9E _ ...._ - _ _ _ 1983- . TRl]Q1SrW,,F_D--=- 413:11 LUS ** 004589-000000 COMMUNICATION -4 ✓lADIO-HANDHELD, GL WALKIE TALKIE W CHAP{GE►: ** -ri-t-000 BE _.- -- ....... .1982--- -- _ _' _._. _.. .... __------. *�+ 004701-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADII( -MOBILE BE MOI<ILE ## _FLs-000 GENERAL ELLCTRIC,. _...__._-_. ___. -1233 I.-WeN-RA4 •0803J8_pisp 05 - - *# 004741-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO -MOBILE BE MOBILE ## -FL*-000 GENERAL ELCCTIRC....... _._._ 1983-. IN. 1761 - .. _ . ** 004746-000000 EDP EQUIP./ DISPLAY STATION IBM DISPLAY STATION A* _FL#1 000 IBM _ - _ ... _.._ -.. 1982_-F1'a"- FINANCE--- �c� -- • - -- ** 004950-000000 COMMUNICATION ! RADIO -MOBILE GE MOBILE *# FLf- COLD _ 1984 _ ** 0049@9-000000 COMMUNICA7IOM ! RA11IO-•MONILE &F MOFITLE F L#- 000 GE tt .-0-G70-r):1n7^•^• _7i:1+L'vlr ;,'1L+"1 ! r1A,+':ITI-•MCIT(TLF OF MnRTLE #>< F Lf -000 uE 1900 1390•- /f, 0510308 DIaR 0:, .. ** ()07200-000:)00 COMMLNTCA710N4 6CCr-CS0 :IED li, aNDSET CRADLE ACCEW-0 -•v *i F Ls -•700 ?',OT,ARuLA 1984 OFF ILC -�_-- #x 007418-000000 WORD PROCESSING / CANON S'YSTF:L SYSTEL III W/,F' W/ PERS MODULE ** FL# -000 CANON •1994--FROM--kMCH_-L•E'S OFf3CF ** 00770:1-000000 COMMUNICATION RADIO-MODIL-E GE MASTER 2 ** FL♦ -000 G6 - 1986 -lA 268 - ------ - - - ** 007785-000010 CAPITALIZED EQUIPMENT OUTLAY RADIO INSTALLATION *# FI_f-000 - -._ - -•-185• - 79.5 ....__..- -- -- - •-- •_. *; C ". Trsi, i_IG :C• . COMNUt!ICP.TIO, ,' F;r1I TC -MOBIL' cr: tIA'iTf R 2 30 ibCi:; iri 287 It# •••i?7t;e-Ofd,vli! CAPTTAI-17ED EGUIPNENT OUTLAY RADIO INSTALLATION ** FL# -000 F# 002059-009000 FIRE RE'jCUE / MISC. COMMUNICATION / RADIO -BASE RERUSrI ANNIE x* 1-I_A-000 I.ALRDAL MEDICAL CORE 4984---LGWAT-IDN-1 AkIrr ## 008037-000000 YARD TOOLS / LAWN MOWERS EDF' EDUIP./ DISF'LAY STATION YAZOO LAWN MOWER ** r' -O-000 �p?nn - - 4Q0(1-4T^T_7{TN_3--__- i.h & DESKS 4# r•L.#-00(0 ULYM('lA IYo0- -STATIisN 1-- - - *# 008264-000000 FIRE RESCUE / MISC. 4 BOXES MISC'SPEAKERS. MAST III KT! ## Fi-#-000 HAST - 1900- STATION 2 - ** 008403-000000- COMMUNICATION / RAVID-BASE: GE. MASTLR CONTROLLER I :KlC ('L4-000 iie ------'-- 1900 STATION 1 DISPATFH ## 008434-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO -BASE BE MASTER CONTROLLER ## FL3-000 BE 1900 £TATITJN 1 DISPATCH ** 008.109-000000 EDF' EDUIP./ DISF'LAY STATION IQM CRT DISPLAY STATION .r � ...... Ib, ag85 ""* t710 r.I-,. .•ijL4-.LAFT''- . IS;:- TIIA.Lrk 416V3-1 L $36 1 SE MASTER 11 IiADID W:IIARNESS MICROPHONE i LON1140L HEAD t I.ATHF.M TIME Ct OCK – -• PAPTD PRINT TIME !,ATI 1 UNBERWUOD LALC MOD 29H & DESKS I REFRIGERATOR 2 BE MASTER•II RADIOS 1 ROCKWELL CALCULATOR 4 BOXES MISC'SPEAKERS. 1 GMC TRIICK DED LOCATED ._ . » –_ _._.MlbROPHnNrR a-BRAr:KFTS P.T ROAP E P"riler: 1 1 ARrIF ANTr•NNA ' ,7rA Ta•IF',:f'I,M ylAT7,N l AflY 1!F' u{ITP ANTf;, NIvA!7 �a r.D: r.AD1L CG mcrlt.Z RAPID 1 MEMnnrx COr{P MnD .^.1v1 r4ESFNCY PORTABLE RABID – 1 FANNUt' MTCROpnow u REGENCY AL"'T-l"106 -. + rLYMI`lA. AUU.liA4NIN1�•-• - -_ 1 REGENCY BATIERY CHARCFR8 1 FALIT ABB MACH1NF 3 RCOENCY RADW CHARGERS 1 HEATH KIT TUNE CIII:CKER #* 0,)1700"000010 HEAVY EQUIP. / TRACTOR GAS TRACTON .W/SIDEBAR j IRIS - --FL #-026 MASSEY-FERGUSON - -- - _ . -. {3472-- • FROM, GOLF-C.OUt(SE - --- - - -- - - #* 003139-.000000 MOTOROLA RADIO � #* FL.4-000 MOTOROLA 1978 FROM -L08 60:10 - ## 003140-000000 MOTOROLA RADIO #* F1_4 -000 MOTOROLA -- 1978 'FROM -1=0E e.050-• - - - -- � *x 0'?? 1-: 4000-_ I OUTOROL A, I', A; I(! ** f'!_#_:• 10 MOTOROLA 1978 FROM LOC 605.5 i F>F' 003iZ=-000000 MOTOROLA ihDIO #* F-_ir–^00 MOTOROLA t 97EI - Ei:r!'3pj..}{iF'- #* 003143-000000 MOTOROLA RAIIIO ## FL4_000 MOTI_;;Oi.A - —'- ---1978 - -Rk4?4-LOC 6050 #* 00326:-000010 CntiMUNiCATInN / RADIO -MOBILE RCA MODILC RADIO ## --• F,_* -000 RCA -- -- - - -1978•- IN OFF -1 -CE -- 'JACK -AIC- CORKLE- #* 0032H2 -4l00000 COMMIINICATION / PADIO-MOPIL E RCA MOBILE *x F;_t-• 0Cl QL'A i773 IN .3:.:4- - -- --- -- -- - --, �-- rir# 003295-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO-MOFILE BE IWFILE ' ## -Fi44-000 (VE 1979 IN _ i ** 003303-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO -'BASF- REMOTE TRAN/REC #>I FL4-000 14CA -.. - •-lil78-. •I-N--JACKG-OFFICE j #* 003304-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO -BASE HOME CONTROL STATION SII* -FL4-000 RCA -- 1970 #* 003305-vO0000 COMMUNICATION / RAIIIO--BAGE REMOTE TRAN/REC ._.Fl.* -000 RCA • __ 1978•- - - - ----- - - - - __. _�_... _ >f# 003400-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO -'MOBILE -GE MOBILE- ## .--FL3-000 CTL -' -- - --- --3-4801 IN 7643... . ; ---------- - #!k 003621•-000000 COMMUNICATION / RADIO -HANDHELD BE HANDHELD F1.t-000 UE 1580 - F'(;OM LAC -:+060 #1 003623-000010 COMMUNICATION ! RADIO -MOBILE BE MOBILE RADIO #Ir F:. #- r,,•,0 rl- 19(d) SOLTI 70 !_ MAN EZUU'. f' lK R 0037-17-000000 POWE;•: TOOLS / (i(AN! BATOR GENEkATOk #* F;_#•-i:C>0 T1rl5�i_fi - :9SSe--•FJ-�Dt1•-U-TT1.I�:IE.S 4<R'AJ87 - - ## 003877-000000 LUMMUNICATION / RAD].O"MOBALEGE MOBILE ## FL# -000 GE IRs 004.%Lb-•)04I 000 LOHAUNiLAiiDN i RAL110--t•NSE GE itiv1pE FL41-000 G.E-, - 1953. 6060'-W/3-El3UIPNENT *# 0071177-000000 CUMMIINICAfIUN / RAIIIO-MOBILE RCA MOBILE RADIO *# FL* -000 RCA . • 1900 IN• F4LT -424-. )00000 G L. PHOENIX ;III "UBILL RAlsiLl xx F;# -I,!'' OEN LLL:. in6 PKOM LUC 60�O 04/21/07 ASSET !3248 A RCA RADIO, ANP 4327 A UE RADIO ARE INACTIVE ASSITS TO BE IIi SF•U3ED OF. BOOK y 19893^ MAY 1999 c400K 'ira, Commissioner Scurlock believed we had a plan to replace radios and asked if this is part of that plan. General Services Director "Sonny" Dean confirmed that these are the radios that have been phased out and are no longer used by the County. They will have an auction as there is some interest and they are usable, but these radios are not compatible with what we are using now. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) declared the equipment listed surplus and authorized sale of the same. ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL Administrator Chandler reviewed the following: To: James C. Chandler, County Zoe, ii2stra or From: Jack Personnel Date: April 28, 1989 Sub: Administrative Manual A major goal of your Personnel Department is to completely rewrite the policy manual for Indian River County operations responsible to you. The process approved involves having units of the Administrative Manual written by Personnel, reviewed by your Department Heads, finalized by Personnel for your approval and submission to the Board of County Commissioners for their • authorization to issue. The attached units are ready for the Board of County Commissioners. These represent approximately 15% of the anticipated units (and much more than 15% of the total anticipated pages). There will be 9 major sections of the Manual. Units AM -101 through AM -106 make up the "Introduction" section, for example. Following authorization from the Board of County Commissioners, each unit will be the topic of a Management Training session designed to orient management employees to the material and lead us toward a more consistent and uniform administration. As that process moves forward additional units will be written and moved through the review and approval stages. When the entire manual is complete an abbreviated version of appropriate units will become a new Employee's Handbook. The format chosen for this Manual will accommodate the addition of major divisions other than Personnel topics. Policy and procedure sections from all Departments could result in a single volume comprehensive operational guide for all Board of County Commissioners operations. If you approve, please request authorization from the Board of County Commissioners to proceed. 32 Administrator Chandler asked that the pages numbered 69 through 71 in the backup material, dealing with Hours of Work, Termination of Employment, and Grievance Procedure, be deleted at this time as there are some technical questions on these, and he would like to bring them back at a later date. Commissioner Scurlock believed that staff apparently has picked out certain portions that were easy to address and that is what has been presented to the Board today. Administrator Chandler advised that he and Personnel Director Price discussed whether to bring the Board just what was presented today or wait and bring it all at once. They are shooting at having this entirely completed by the end of this fiscal year, but felt that in the meantime, they should bring it back in sections. Commissioner Eggert had a few problems with the organiza- tion charts for the General Services Department. They include the Housing Authority, and the way it is set up, it looks as if "Sonny" Dean is Guy Decker's boss, and he isn't; the Housing Board is. Also, the Law Library doesn't appear in these at all, and she felt there should be a dotted line, or something that would indicate they work for different entities and are under different supervision. Administrator Chandler confirmed that they will change the charts accordingly as well as those titles. Commissioner Eggert further noted that on the Organization Chart for the Emergency Management Services, Sebastian Volunteer Ambulance Squad is listed, and that does not exist any longer. Commissioner Scurlock commented that he has some areas that he feels strongly about under Personal Conduct in the 800 series. He believed that will be more difficult to develop the process in terms of the hearing on a termination, going through the chain of command, and exhausting your administrative remedy, and he felt that should be looked at, especially in terms of the Board's involvement. He did not know today how he, as one Commissioner, 33 8001 761J 8?Z would like this to be developed, but felt it should have some special attention because he believed in the past the Board has been put in a situation it doesn't need to get into and been placed in the position of making judgments that in some cases they are not capable of making. Administrator Chandler noted that the only reason that section on the termination was pulled was because they were referring to another section they have not yet modified. He continued to emphasize the need to get this all developed is a top priority and all they wish to have now is the Commission's indication that they concur with what has been presented today. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) indicated their approval of the units of the Administrative Manual presented today, with the corrections noted, and authorized staff to proceed as presented. COPY OF ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL UNITS APPROVED TODAY ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK. AGREEMENT WITH WILDER CORP. RE VILLAGE GREEN WATER & WASTEWATER UTILITIES The Board reviewed memo from Harry Asher of the Utilities staff: 34 DATE: APRIL 26, 1989 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR THRU: TERRANCE G. PINT DIRECTOR OF UTILIT SERVICES FROM: HARRY E. ASHER jjJ& ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION SUBJECT: AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AND WILDER CORPORATION VILLAGE GREEN WATER & WASTEWATER UTILITIES BACKGROUND: Village Green Utilities currently serves approximately 795 customers with water and wastewater service within the Village Green Mobile Home Park. Due to problems with their water treatment plant, Village Green Utilities has been providing water service to its customers through an emergency connection to Indian River County's water system since July, 1988. During this same period of time, Village Green Utilities has experienced various problems with their wastewater treatment facilities. As a result of these problems, Village Green Utilities approached Indian River County Department of Utility Services concerning the possibility of Indian River County providing permanent water and wastewater service to the Village Green Mobile Home Park. 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/service to this system will assist us in implementing this policy in addition to expanding the customer base of the County's water and wastewater systems. Acquisition costs of the water and wastewater facilities are to be financed through a credit for the impact fees that will be due for the facilities that will be served. Water and wastewater services to the Village Green Mobile Home Park can be provided without any significant effect on the operating costs of the County facilities and with no effect on the rates and charges of the existing County customers. RECOMMENDATION: The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached agreement for water and wastewater service and purchase the various facilities. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved Agreement with Wilder Corporation re County Take - Over of Village Green Utilities. 35 f- jh)f 01989 EOOK F.� MAY • J a BOOK ; ��'�r' ?14 A G R E E M E N T BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AND WILDER CORPORATION RE: COUNTY TAKE-OVER OF VILLAGE GREEN UTILITIES THIS AGREEMENT, made this 9th day of May 1989, by and between INDIAN RIVER- COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960 (COUNTY), and WILDER CORPORATION, 3000 Gulf -to -Bay Blvd., Sixth Floor, Clearwater, FL 34619 (WILDER), W I T N E S S E T H That for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and other consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, COUNTY and WILDER agree as follows: 1. The COUNTY shall accept WILDER as a water and wastewater customer of the COUNTY's utili-ty- system for retail service to be provided to the customers of the Village Green Water and Wastewater Utilities franchise, under the terms and conditions of this agreement. 2. The COUNTY's obligation to provide service shall begin only when the water and wastewater connections have been made to a point specified by the COUNTY and only after acceptance of the lines and other equipment by COUNTY; all of which construction shall be performed by WILDER and at WILDER's expense. The COUNTY shall issue construction permits for the water and wastewater connections, lines, force mains, lift stations, meters, and other appurtenant equipment, after review and approval by the County Utilities Department. WILDER is responsible for obtaining all other permits that may be required from state, county, or local agencies. 3. in return for the COUNTY's acceptance of WILDER as a customer, WILDER agrees that it will pay to COUNTY an impact fee of $1,140 per equivalent residential unit (ERU) 36 7� _I � � r for water and $1,250 per ERU for sewer, or such higher fee(s) as the COUNTY may establish from time to time --both of which shall be paid at the time of sale or resale of existing units within the Village Green Mobile Home Park (PARK). Any structures that are connected that are not a residence shall be charged an impact fee in accordance with the COUNTY Rate Structure and paid upon connection to the COUNTY Utility System. If the PARK is expanded, any new residences will be paid immediately upon connection. At twelve years from the date of this agreement, -WILDER shall pay to the COUNTY the then -current impact fees for sewer for all units within the PARK for which such impact fees have not yet been paid. There shall be no time limit on the payment of water ERUs. 4. Water will be furnished and billed through a master meter of size to be determined to meet hydraulic requirements, installed to COUNTY!s specifications, by WILDER. An individual water meter shall be installed by WILDER at each unit in Village Green as the units are sold and the impact fees are paid. WILDER agrees that within 12 years from the date of this agreement, all units shall be individually metered for water. At the time all units are individually metered for water and the lost and unaccounted- for water is equal to five percent or less of the water being metered through the master meter, the COUNTY will take over the operation and ownership of the internal distribution system for water and WILDER will execute appropriate Bills of Sale or other documents as are required to acknowledge that fact. 5. At any time that the maximum infiltration rate into the wastewater collection system can be determined to be ten percent or less, the COUNTY will take over operation and 37 ' ly' 19 Boor. 76 111,31 K'j MAY 1999 d! F" i �� , '? BOOK F.�, ownership of the internal collection system of the PARK and WILDER will execute appropriate Bills of Sale or other documents as are required to acknowledge that fact. G. At the time of connection of the water and wastewater system to the COUNTY utilities system, WILDER shall transfer ownership of the existing water plant and wastewater treatment plant to the COUNTY for the following amounts: (a) $30,000 credit for the water plant, and (b) $40,000 credit for the wastewater plant, for a total of $70,000 to be applied against the water and/or wastewater impact fees. 7. As part of the required construction by WILDER, WILDER will be obliged to construct a force main of capacity greater than that necessitated by the PARK, and the COUNTY will therefore allow an 80% credit against the cost of the lift station and force main to be applied to wastewater Impact fees and/or wastewater utility bills. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands and seals on the date first above written. 38 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By _ ary Wheeler Cha i man (Seal) WILDER CORPORATION B---' — Mauricce�Wilder President (Seal) _I LEASED SPACE AT SOD FARM The Board reviewed memo from John Lang of the Utilities staff: DATE: APRIL 28, 1989 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRAT /01C FROM: TERRANCE G. PINT DIRECTOR OF UTILI�dl SERVICES SUBJECT: LEASED SPACE AT SOD FARM PREPARED AND STAFFED BY: JOHN FREDERICK ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIAL T DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY ERVICES BACKGROUND The firm of Ag Evaluations has solicited the County to lease a 23,000 sq. ft. parcel of land at the sod farm. This firm is currently a sod customer and needs an office and storage site due to the loss of their current lease. ANALYSIS The lease would provide improvements to the office site on the sod farm worth $5,760. After eighteen months, the lease could be cancelled or renewed. The improvements need to be made and would be shared by the current sod contractor, Brevard Sod and Ag Evaluations. The lessee would provide all necessary insurance. RECOMMENDATION The Department of Utility Services recommends authorizing the tendering of this lease proposal to Ag Evaluations. Commissioner Scurlock realized that right now we don't have any anticipated need for this particular property within the next 18 months; however, he felt the lease agreement should be modified to make sure we maintain all of our options in terms of timely notice if we should need it for effluent disposal. Secondly, in regard to the $5,000, which equates before depreciated value to about $320 a month, he questions the usefulness of the fence, the paving, etc. What would make him feel more comfortable with this lease would be to make sure we have all the flexibility and ability for this small amount of $5,000+ to say in 90 days you are out. He was not sure this r �� 39 BOOK �� ��, MAY �� 689, L- r . q`Y 9 Boa 76 fence or any of the other improvements are of any interest to us, and felt it would be easier just to establish a small monetary value. Thirdly, he wished to know if there is any requirement to go out publicly to entertain proposals. County Attorney Vitunac confirmed that there is a require- ment when the County leases land to go out to public bid. However, there is only one person making the proposal to us for a 100 x 200 piece of land to do certain things, and staff felt the expense and effort of going out to public bid wouldn't be worth it. It was felt this was almost like a sole source provider. In regard to the termination ability, there are no termination provisions earlier than 18 months and -if we cancel, we have to pay for the improvements, but we can adjust that if the Board desires. Utilities Environmental Specialist John Lang explained that the site in question is only half an acre. It contains a shallow well and since we would not be allowed to use it for effluent disposal within a 500' perimeter of that well, the entire chain link enclosure would be exempted. Mr. Lang advised that Ag Evaluations, our major bulk buyer of sod, had requested that the County provide him a security enclosure for his tractor/trailer; however, as the sod farm is a pay-as-you-go operation, he was informed he would have to provide it. He lost his lease on another piece of property where he kept his equipment, and since at the sod farm we have a well that is not functional, no electrical hook-up or phone hook-up, Mr. Lang felt the County could benefit from this arrangement and that Ag Evaluation, our bulk customer, could as well. Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that the well could be closed down and then we could use the property for effluent disposal, and Mr. Lang agreed but noted there also is a building that would have to be demolished 40 Commissioner Scurlock wondered if there would be any problem with others saying Ag Evaluations is getting preferential treatment, but Mr. Lang could not speak to that. Commissioner Bird felt we should put in the 90 day clause, and believed Ag Evaluation will go along with that. On 90 days' notice you can always pull up the chain link fence, and it has some salvage value. Commissioner Scurlock noted that he is mainly concerned about any limitation over 90 days. Commissioner Bird wished to know when we are going to start using this sod farm for effluent disposal. Mr. Lang reported that St. John's is out there today plugging two artesian wells. They have the gravity line in place to put effluent out there; the irrigation equipment is on site; and he hoped to be able to start using it Monday. It is presently being used for sludge disposal. ON MOTION By Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved Lease Agreement with Ag Evaluations, Inc., modified to reflect 90 day notice for cancellation and any removal of improvements and associated expense to be a burden of the lessee. {SAID'LEASE HAS NOW BEEN RECEIVED AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD) 41 i BOOK �1 F.�,�: 89 L � J Elm 800rK 830 VISTA PROPERTIES LAWSUIT OVER DOWNZONING TO OCR Assistant County Attorney Collins reviewed his memo: TO: The Board of County Commissioners FROM:Lx)6- William G. Collins If - Assistant County Attorney DATE: May 2, 1989 SUBJECT: Vista Properties Law Suit Over Down Zoning to OCR On December 6, 1988 the Board of County Commissioners rezoned approximately 101 acres of land in the vicinity of U.S. 1 and Indian River Boulevard from CL to OCR. After a public hearing on that date, the Board determined that the OCR rezoning was in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan which designated the property as a portion of the U.S. 1 commercial corridor and that the rezoning would lessen traffic impacts in an area where the adjacent street intersection was operating at a Level of Service E during peak season, peak hour (unstable traffic flow and delays); and that the OCR zoning would be more compatible with adjacent residential development in the existing CL zoning. On January 5, 1989 the owner of the property, Vista Properties of Vero Beach, Inc., sued the County and requested that the Circuit Court declare the down zoning unconstitutional. Vista alleges no reasonably viable, economic use of the property and no foreseeable market for such uses as are allowed in the OCR zone. In order to properly defend the County, expert testimony. must be presented in court as to this issue. Thus, 1 would request that the Board authorize the retention of an appraiser and/or marketing analyst to address the issue raised by Vista, i.e., the economic viability and foreseeable marketability for any of the OCR uses on the property which is the subject of this suit. Attorney Collins informed the Board that this will be coming out of the Planning Department's budget, and they have no funds for legal defense costs; so, they will have to come back with a budget amendment from the MSTU contingency funds. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) moved staff recommendation and authorized the retention of an appraiser and/or marketing analyst to address the issue raised by Vista Properties as requested by staff. 42 S REQUEST FOR 2 ALTERNATES FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD The Board reviewed letter from the Chairman of the Code Enforcement Board: ROBERT A. REID, ARCHITECT, P.A., SUITE 227 4445 N. A.I.A. VERO BEACH, flR 34963 (407) 231-4314 1989 a'co April 28, 1989 N .Gary Wheeler,' -Chairman ;:;•_ ,;:'' Indian River ' County Commission 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 Dear Commissioner Wheeler: �•�.:'tiff �,;-:;R. .. .. - ��' At'its April 24, 1989 meeting, the Indian River County Code Enforcement Board voted (4-0) to request that the County Commission appoint two alternates to this Board and that their attendance requirements be the same as regular members. This request is promulgated by a history of less than the full attendance we feel is necessary for fair hearings of those who appear before us. T for your consideration. O Robert A. Reid, Chairman I.R.C.C.E.B. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, to approve the request that the County Commission appoint two alternates to the Code Enforcement Board with attendance requirements the same as regular members. Commissioner Bird felt it is one thing to ask someone to volunteer for a Board that takes as much abuse as the Code Enforcement Board does but questioned the provision that they have all the same requirements as the members. WAY 1nW ;J 43 z WAY 01989 "'6 BOOK I F,.�E. Attorney Vitunac informed the Board that there are at least 3 Bills before the Legislature changing the law re the Code Enforcement Board. Attorney Brennan is preparing a synopsis of these Bills, and he would like to delay action on this until after June. COMMISSIONERS SCURLOCK AND EGGERT AGREED TO WITHDRAW THEIR MOTION. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com- missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) tabled action on the above item as suggested by the County Attorney. REQUEST FOR COMMISSION SUPPORT REGARDING NEED FOR BRANCH POST OFFICE IN WEST COUNTY The Board reviewed staff memo, as follows: TO: Board of County CommissioneiQATE: May 2, 1989 FILE: SUBJECT: Need for Branch Post Office in Western Part of Indian River County FROM: Alice E. white REFERENCES: •; ::.;.; _ Administrative Secretary II Our office received a call from Mr. Robert Warrick, 7000 20th Street, #732, Vero Beach, Florida 32966 (Telephone 567-2874) requesting assistance from the County Commission in obtaining a branch post office in the western part of the county. He said he contacted the local post office and was referred to the Orlando office; that office informed him that a building would have to be built. Mr. Warrick wondered why space could not be leased or rented in the Ryanwood Shopping Center. He asked that the County Commission endorse his request and write a letter to the Orlando postal service specifying a need for a branch post office in the western part of the county, and recommending that they consider leasing space, possibly in the Ryanwood Shopping Center. He felt that a letter from the County Commission would carry more weight than one from an individual resident. 44 Commissioner Eggert commented that she has heard a lot of comment about this, and she certainly has no objection to it. Commissioner Bird stated that he supports the concept, but he is not sure just where a branch office should be located. Chairman Wheeler concurred that he also supports the concept and felt a letter should be sent to the appropriate agency. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) indicated their support of the concept of a branch post office in the western part of the county. NORTH COUNTY AND SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICTS The Chairman announced that immediately on adjournment the Board would reconvene sitting as the District Board of Fire Commissioners of the North Indian River County Fire District, and upon adjournment of that meeting, would again reconvene sitting as the District Board of Fire Commissioners of the South Indian River County Fire District. Those Minutes are being prepared separatel There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board unanimously adjourned at 11:00 o'clock A.M. ATTEST: 45 Chairman Boor. r,4.,E �•�