HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/23/1989Tuesday, May 23, 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 23, 1989, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Gary C. Wheeler,
Chairman; Carolyn K. Eggert, Vice Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman;
and Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Absent was Richard N. Bird, who was out
of town on personal business. 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
Eggert led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
The Chairman asked that an item be added under Utilities as
9G (4) because of an emergency that has arisen in regard to the
previous award of a contract to Jammal & Assoc. for a hydrogeo-
logical study of the West Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant
percolation ponds.
Chairman Wheeler also wished to add under his matters a
letter from The Sebastian Inlet Taxing District Commission and a
report on actions of the Tourist Development Council as Items 12A
(1) and 12A (2).
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Scurlock, Commissioner Bird being absent,
the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the addition
to the Agenda of the items listed above.
800 tl �{GE. � �
MAY 2 3 1989
F -
SAY 2 3 1989
BOOK AG f',1�E 8-84
CONSENT AGENDA
A.rApproval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of 5/2/89
The Chairman asked if there were*any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 2, 1989.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0),
Commissioner Bird being absent, approved the
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of•May 2, 1989, as
written.
B. Report
Received and Placed on File in the Office of the Clerk to
the Board:
Traffic Violation Bureau, Special Trust Fund
Month of April, 1989 - $45,163.84
C. Approval of Deputy Sheriff Appointments by Sheriff Dobeck
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0),
Commissioner Bird being absent, approved the
following Deputy Sheriff appointments by Sheriff
Dobeck:
Kenneth E. Hagin
Scott Leonard Taylor
Solomon J. Parrish
William L. Hall
John W. Grimmich
Kenneth R. Bennett
D. State Revenue Sharing Application for FY 1989-90
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/1/89:
2
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
.t
TALLAHASSEE. FLORIDA 12399-0100
KATIE D. TUCKER -
•xaco►mmoncTon May 1, 1989
To All Units of Local Government
As Addressed:
Subjects State Revenue Sharing Application
For Fiscal Year 1989-90
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Enclosed is the' state Revenue Sharing application for the fiscal year
1989-90. The application form must be completed and returned to the Department
of Revenue NO LATER THAN JUNE 30, 1989. Section 218.26(4), Florida Statutes,
states in part:
"It shall be the duty of each agency and unit of
local government required to submit certified
Information to the department pursuant to the
administration , of this act to file timely
Information. Any unit of local government failing to
provide timely information required pursuant to the
administration of this act shall, by such action,
authorize the department to utilize the best
Information available or, if no such information is
available, to take any necessary action including
disqualification, either partial or entire, and shall
further by such action, waive any right to challenge
the department as to its share, if any, pursuant to
the privilege o£ receiving shared revenues under this
part."*
a
Each unit of local government is required to file an application in order
to be considered for any funds to be distributed under the Revenue Sharing Act.
Also enclosed is an -information bulletin on the state Revenue Sharing program.
Estimated allocations -for each unit of local government will be forthcoming.
Your cooperation in • this matter will be greatly appreciated and will
expedite timely distribution of revenue sharing funds.
sincerel ,
J/,`LC.f-Cry
Michael J. Gomez, Chie
;_
Bureau of Finance and Accounting
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0),
Commissioner Bird being absent, approved the
State Revenue Sharing Application for FY 1989-90,
and authorized the Chairman's signature, as
recommended by staff.
COPY OF SAID APPLICATION IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO
THE BOARD
WAY 2 3 1989 3 BooK 76 r{Ia, 8
A
W
BOOK 76 mu 8,8
E. Proclamation
The following Proclamation is to be presented to Dan K.
Richardson on June 1, 1989:
P R O C L AM A T I O N
WHEREAS, through the efforts of- the Vero Beach Rotary Club
and under the leadership of DAN K. RICHARDSON, the Citizens'
Scholarship Foundation of Indian River County was chartered on
June 8, 1964; and
WHEREAS, the Indian River County- Chapter of Citizens'
Scholarship Foundation is celebrating its 25th anniversary; and
WHEREAS, DAN K. RICHARDSON has served as the Foundation's
first president and only chairman of the board; and
WHEREAS, under his leadership, 784 students have received
scholarships from the initial awards in 1965 through 1988
totalling $729,578; and
WHEREAS, because of DAN K. RICHARDSON's leadership during
the past 25 years, hundreds of volunteers. have gladly
participated in this outstanding work; and
WHEREAS, throughout its 25 years, the Citizens' Scholarship
Foundation has enjoyed the support of the citizenry of Indian
River County through gifts of time and money; and
WHEREAS, the national board of Citizens' Scholarship
Foundation of America has given recognition for exemplary work to
two chapters in the State of Florida, one of which is the Indian
River County Chapter; and
WHEREAS, DAN K. RICHARDSON's dedication to the education of
students of Indian River County and his commitment to their
future proves that education can make a difference.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED THAT THE- BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA recognizes
DAN K. RICHARDSON
and the Citizens' Scholarship Foundation for outstanding
achievement in providing a method for student education.
Adopted this 23rd day of May, 1989
4
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
c
Gary C Wheeler, Chairman
F. Grant Agreement - Florida Long-range Program for Library
Service
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/5/89:
DATE: MAY 5, 1989
TO: I BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: --,, JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
..FROM H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERV ES
J
SUBJECT: GRANT AGREEMENT; FLORIDA LONG-RANGE PROGRAM
FOR LIBRARY SERVICE
BACKGROUND:
The Indian River County Main Library has been awarded the following
grants:
1. Community Information Referral Centers - $16,500
2.1\ Library Services through Technology - $30,000
ANALYSIS:_
It is required that we enter into a Grant Agreement in order for us to
receive the monies.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is therefore respectfully requested that the Board authorize their
Chairman to execute the agreements as per the attached instructions and
return to this writer to be forwarded back to the Florida Department of
State.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0),
Commissioner Bird being absent, approved the Grant
Agreements, and authorized the Chairman's signature,
as recommended by staff.
(FULLY SIGNED COPIES OF SAID AGREEMENTS ARE ON FILE IN THE
OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD.)
MAY � IS8 '
�5 BOOK �16
MAY 2 2 1999 BOOK 76 PacE 8Q,
G. Federal National Mortgage Assoc. Public Nuisance: Assessment
for Abatement of Nuisance
The Board reviewed the following*memo.dated 5/11/89:
TO: James E. Chandler FROM: C.G. Bowling
County Administrator Code Enforcement Officer
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: DATE: May 11, 1989
SUBJECT: Federal National Mortgage
Ro ert '74M. Keatin , P Assoc. Public Nuisance;
Community Develo me Director Assessment for Abatement
THROUGH: Roland M. DeBlois'94AP RE: CV -89-05-156
Chief, Environmental Planning
It is requested that the data presented herein be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of May•23, 1989.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On February 9, 1989, Code Enforcement staff sent a Notice of
Public Nuisance to Federal National Mortgage Assoc. concerning the
overgrown weed condition of their property in Clearview Terrace
Subdivision. The respondents were cited as maintaining their
property in violation of Section 13-18(a)(1) of the County Code,
which prohibits the accumulation of weeds in excess of 18 inches
in height within a platted, recorded subdivision (where the lots
are at a minimum of 50% developed).
The subject property was also posted as set forth in Section 13-23
of the County Code, giving the Respondents thirty (30) days to
abate the weed nuisance.
The weed violation was not abated within the required thirty (30)
day time period. Therefore, in accordance with Section 13-19(b),
County Code, County Personnel (i.e., Road & Bridge Division)
cleared the weed violation, with costs to be assessed against the
property owners.
Section 13-21 of the County Code requires that the cost of a
County weed nuisance abatement shall be calculated and reported to
the County Commissioners, who, by resolution, shall assess such
costs against the subject property. This matter is presented
herein to the Board for consideration to adopt said resolution.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
Section 13-21(a), Public Nuisances, of the Code of Laws and
Ordinances of Indian River County specifically reads as follows:
"After abatement of nuisance by the county, the cost thereof
to the county as to each lot, parcel or tract of land shall
be calculated and reported to the Board of County
Commissioners. Thereupon, the Board of County Commissioners
by resolution, shall assess such costs against such lot,
parcel, or tract of land. Such resolution shall describe the
land and state the cost of abatement, which shall include an
administrative cost of seventy-five dollars ($75.00) per lot.
6
Such assessment shall be a legal, valid, and binding
obligation upon the property against which made until paid.
The assessment shall be due and payable thirty (30) days
after the mailing of notice of assessment after which
interest shall accrue at the rate of twelve (12) per cent
per annum on any unpaid portion thereof."
Cost for equipment use and labor, as indicated by the Road &
Bridge Division, plus the $75.00 administrative cost, calculates
to be:
Labor:
Equipment:
Administrative Fee:
$246.00
200.00
75.00
Total: $521.00
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the
proposed resolution assessing $521.00 in abatement costs, in
accordance with Section 13-21(a), of the Indian River County Code
of Laws and Ordinances.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0),
Commissioner Bird being absent, adopted Resolu-
tion 89-50, assessing costs of County weed
nuisance abatement on Lot 6, Block 1, of Clearview
Terrace Subdivision, such assessment being a binding
obligation upon the property until paid.
RESOLUTION NO. 89 - 50
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION-
ERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ASSESSING
COSTS OF COUNTY WEED NUISANCE ABATEMENT ON LOT
6, BLOCK 1, OF CLEARVIEW TERRACE SUBDIVISION;
SUCH ASSESSMENT BEING A BINDING OBLIGATION
UPON THE PROPERTY UNTIL PAID.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County has determined that the regulation of the accumu-
lation of weeds is in the public interest and necessary for the
health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Indian River
County; and
WHEREAS, Indian River County Ordinances No. 87-33,
"Public Nuisances," defines as a public nuisance weeds in
AY 2 b 1989 7 Boa 76 fmc,c $x'11
_I
WAY 2 1999 BOOK 76 mu. 8,9
excess of 18 inches in height on a lot contiguous to a residen-
tial structure and within a platted residential subdivision
where the platted lots are at -a minimum of 50% developed; and
WHEREAS, Tkeeds in excess of 18 inches in height
existed on property owned by Federal National Mortgage
Association, such property having a legal description as
follows: Clearview Terrace Subdivision, PBI 4-56, Lot 6, Block
1; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County has determined that landowners are responsible for
abating public nuisances existing on their property; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Nuisance calling for the
abatement of the described nuisance was sent to the owner(s) by
certified mail, and notice was posted on the subject property
for 30 days, in accordance with Section 13-23, "serving of
notice," of the County Public Nuisance Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the landowners of the subject property
failed to abate the described weed nuisance within 30 days of
the posted and mailed notice; and
WHEREAS, Section 13-19(b) of the County Public
Nuisance Ordinance (No. 87-33) authorizes County personnel to
abate a public nuisance if the nuisance is not abated by the
landowner within 30 days of notice; and
WHEREAS, the County Road & Bridge Division has, as of
April 20, 1989, abated the herein described weed nuisance; and
WHEREAS, Section 13-21(a) of the County Public
Nuisance Ordinance provides that, after abatement of a nuisance
by the County, the cost thereof shall be calculated and
reported to the Board of County Commissioners; thereupon, the
Board, by resolution, shall assess such costs against the
subject property, such costs to include an administrative fee
of seventy five dollars ($75.00) per lot; and
WHEREAS, the total cost of equipment use, labor, and
administrative fee for County abatement of the herein described
nuisance is determined to be five hundred -and twenty one
dollars ($521.00); and
WHEREAS, Section 13-21(c) of the County Public
Nuisance Ordinance provides that the assessment shall be due
and payable thirty (30) days after the mailing of a notice of
assessment, whereby if the owner fails to pay assessed costs
within the thirty (30) days, a certified copy of the assessment
shall be recorded in the official record books of the County,
constituting a lien against the property, subject to twelve
(12) percent per annum interest;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
1) The foregoing recitals are adopted and ratified in
their entirety.
r � �
2) The costs of county abatement of the herein described
weed nuisance, totaling an amount of $521.00, is
hereby assessed against Lot 6, Block 1, of Clearview
Terrace Subdivision presently owned by Federal
National Mortgage Association, whose listed address
is c/o Laten, Trute, Robbins and Howard, 1090 Kane
Concourse, Bay Harbor Islands, Florida.
3) The $521.00 assessment shall be due and payable to
the Board of County Commissioners thirty (30) days
after the mailing of a notice of assessment, to the
landowners, after which, if unpaid, a certified copy
of the assessment shall be recorded in the official
record books of the County, constituting a lien
against the described property, subject to twelve
(12) percent per annum interest.
THIS RESOLUTION was moved for adoption by
Commissioner Eggert , seconded by Commissioner
Scurlock , and adopted on the 23rd day of
May , 1989, by.the following vote:
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Margaret Bowman Aye
Commissioner Richard Bird Absent
Commissioner Carolyn Eggert Aye
Commissioner Gary Wheeler Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed
and adopted this 23rd day of May , 1989.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Gary W eler, Chairman
H. Request to Dedicate Funds in Lieu of Public Access_ Easement
for Sandpointe Unit II Subdivision (Riverside)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/9/89:
IWAY 2 3 1989 V
Boos 76 891
_I
WAY 2 3 1999 eooK 76 FACE o92
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robertt M. Rea i g, P
Community Devel pme D'rector
�CP
THROUGH: Stan Boling,
Chief, Current Development
FROM: Robert E. Wiege r�
Staff Planner
DATE: May 9, 1989
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO DEDICATE FUNDS IN LIEU OF PUBLIC ACCESS
EASEMENT FOR SANDPOINTE UNIT II SUBDIVISION (RIVERSIDE)
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of May 23, 1989.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Sandpointe Unit II Subdivision (Riverside) is the second phase of
a proposed 100 lot subdivision of a ±52 acre parcel of land. The
property is located immediately south of Seagrove Subdivision and
lies on both sides of S.R. A.I.A.. The developer has developed
and platted the property on the east side of S.R. A.I.A.,and the
owners are currently undergoing .reparation to commence develop-
ment of the portion of this property which lies between S.R.
A.I.A. and the Indian River.
Because the property has over 600 feet of river shoreline, a
public access easement running from S.R. A.I.A. to the River is
required pursuant to Section 10(r) of the subdivision ordinance.
In lieu of actually providing such an easement, the Board of
County commissioners may accept a monetary dedication to the park
development fund in an amount equal -to the fair market value of
such an easement.
Currently, the County is involved in a lawsuit where a developer
is asking the Court to strike -down the County's public water
access requirement. The outcome of the lawsuit should greatly
affect the disposition of this requirement. Current County policy
is to continue to apply the requirement during the lawsuit, but to
hold "in escrow" any dedicated funds or easements until the
lawsuit is settled.
At its regular meeting of October 81 1987, the Planning and Zoning
Commission granted preliminary plat approval for Sandpointe
Subdivision, subject to the condition that either the actual
public access easement be provided or a monetary dedication be
offered that is acceptable to the Board of County Commissioners.
The owners, Wildfield Properties, Inc., through their agent,
Carter Associates, Inc., are now requesting Board approval to
accept an $8,200 dedication to the park development fund to
satisfy the water access requirement of Section 10(r) of the
subdivision ordinance.
10
ANALYSIS:
In lieu of dedicating an improved access easement from S.R. A.I.A.
to the river, the owners have agreed to dedicate to the County's
Park Development Fund $8,200 at the time of the final plat ap-
proval. The $8,200 amount is based on an Armfield-Wagner ap-
praisal (see attachment #3) of the fair market value of the
required 15' wide improved access easement. The Property Apprais-
er's office and the County's Right -of -Way Agent have verified
(see attachment #4) that the appraisal is a reasonable estimate of
the raw land value of the required easement and the Public Works
Department has verified that the cost estimate for an improved
pedestrian walkway is reasonable.
Dedication of the appraisal value is adequate for satisfying the
public access requirement of Section 10(r) of the subdivision
ordinance, if accepted by the Board of County Commissioners. If
the lawsuit outcome is known prior to final plat approval for this
project, then the County will address all active condition re-
quirements accordingly. If the outcome is not known at the time
of final plat approval, then the dedicated monies will be held ''in
escrow" by the County pending the ultimate disposition of the
County's ordinance requirements and active condition requirements.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve
the offer to dedicate $8,200 to the park development fund at the
time of final plat approval for this phase of Sandpointe Subdivi-
sion, in lieu of requiring a public, river access easement,
subject to the following condition:
1. that if the lawsuit outcome is known -at the time of
final plat approval, the disposition of the water access
requirement and related active condition requirements at
the time of final plat approval shall apply to the
proposed dedication; if the lawsuit outcome is not
known at the time of final plat approval, then dedicated
funds shall be escrowed pending the final disposition of
the water access requirement and related active
condition requirements.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0),
Commissioner Bird being absent, approved the re-
quest by Sandpointe Unit II Subdivision to dedicate
funds in lieu of public access easement for
Sandpointe Unit II Subdivision (Riverside), as set
out in the above staff recommendation.
_I
MAY 2 3 `1999 Bou 76 Fr�,�894
I. Assessment for Abatement of Nuisance - John & Sonia .Kim
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/2/89:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
42-/
bert M. Keati , A
Community Develo men irector
THROUGH: Roland M. DeBloi�
Chief, Environmental Planning
FROM: Charles W. Heath;
7-1
"After abatement of nuisance by the county, the cost thereof
to the county as to each lot, parcel or tract of land shall
be calculated and reported to the Board of County
Commissioners. Thereupon, the Board of County Commissioners
by resolution, shall assess such costs against such lot,
parcel, or tract of land. Such resolution shall describe the
land and state the cost of abatement, which shall include an
administrative cost of seventy-five dollars ($75.00) per lot.
Such assessment shall be a legal, valid, and binding
obligation upon the property against which made until paid.
The assessment shall be due and payable thirty (30) days
after the mailing of notice of assessment after which
interest shall accrue at the rate of twelve (12) per cent
per annum on any unpaid portion thereof."
Cost for equipment use and labor, as indicated by the Road &
Bridge Division, plus the $75.00 administrative cost, calculates
to be:
Labor: $ 50.00
Equipment: 200.00
Administrative Fee: 75.00
Total: $325.00
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the
proposed resolution assessing, $325.00 in abatement costs, in
accordance with Section 13-21(a), of the Indian River County Code
of Laws and Ordinances.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0),
Commissioner Bird being absent, adopted Resolu-
tion 89-51, assessing costs of County weed
nuisance abatement on Lot 15, Block 9, of Vero
Shores Subdivision Unit 1, such assessment being a
binding obligation upon the property until paid.
RESOLUTION NO. 89-51
A RESOLUTION OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ASSESSING COSTS OF COUNTY WEED
NUISANCE ABATEMENT ON LOT 15, BLOCK 9, OF VERO SHORES
SUBDIVISION UNIT 1; SUCH ASSESSMENT BEING A BINDING
OBLIGATION UPON THE PROPERTY UNTIL PAID.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County has determined that the regulation of the accumu-
lation of weeds is in the public interest and necessary for the
health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Indian River
County; and
WHEREAS-, Indian River County Ordinances No. 87-33,
"Public Nuisances," defines as a public nuisance weeds in excess
of 18 inches in height on a lot contiguous to a residential
structure within:.a platted residential subdivision where the
platted lots are at a minimum of 50% developed; and
13
bou
I
,MAY 2 3.1989 BOOK .76 P,1GE 896
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County has determined that landowners are responsible for
abating public nuisance existing on their property; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Nuisance calling for the
abatement of the described nuisance was sent to the owner(s) by
certified mail, and notice was posted on the subject property for
30 days, in accordance with Section 13-23, "serving of notice," of
the County Public Nuisance Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, the landowners of the subject property failed
to abate the described weed nuisance within 30 days of the posted
and mailed notice; and
WHEREAS, Section 13-19(b) of the County Public Nuisance
Ordinance (No. 87-33) authorizes County personnel to abate a
public nuisance if the nuisance is not abated by the landowner
within 30 days of notice; and
WHEREAS, as of April 21, 1989, County & Bridge Division
abated the herein described weed nuisance, in accordance with
Section -13-19(b), of the County Public Nuisance Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, Section 13-21(a) of the County Public Nuisance
Ordinances provides that, after abatement of a nuisance by the
County, the cost thereof shall be calculated and reported to the
Board of County Commissioners; thereupon, the Board, by resolu-
tion, shall assess such costs against the subject property, such
costs to include an administrative fee of seventy-five dollars
($75.00) per lot; and
WHEREAS, the total cost of equipment use, labor, and
i administrative fee for County abatement of the herein described
nuisance is determined to be three hundred twenty-five dollars
($325.00) ; and
WHEREAS, Section 13-21(c) of the County Public Nuisance
Ordinance provides that the assessment shall be due and payable
thirty (30) days after the mailing of a notice of assessment,
whereby if the owner fails to pay assessed costs within the thirty
(30) days, a certified copy of the assessment shall be recorded in
the official record books of the County, constituting a lien
against the property, subject to twelve (12) percent per annum
interest;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION-
ERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
1) The foregoing recitals are adopted and ratified in their
entirety.
2) The costs of county abatement of the herein described
weed nuisance, totaling an amount of $325.00 is hereby
assessed against Lot 15, Block 9, Unit 1, of Vero Shores
Subdivision presently owned by John & Sonia Kim, whose
listed address is 37-76 62nd Property Management Compa-
ny, 1951 Cedar Swamp Road, Brooksville, New York 11545.
3) The $325.00 assessment shall be due and payable to the
Board of county Commissioners thirty (30) days after the
mailing of a. notice of assessment to the landowners,
after which, if unpaid, a certified copy of the assess-
ment shall be recorded in the official record books of
the described property, subject to twelve (12) percent
per annum interest.
lit
THIS RESOLUTIbN was moved for adoption by Commissioner
Eggert , seconded by Commissioner Scurlock , and
adopted on the 23rd day of May , 1989, bylthe following
vote:
Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye
Commissioner Carolyn Eggert Aye
Commissioner Margaret Bowman Ayre
Commissioner Richard Bird Absent
Commissioner Doug Scurlock, Jr. Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 23rd day of May , 1989.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
,Chairman
J. Release of Easement Request - William R. and Shirley J. Hill
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 4/24/89:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HFAD CONCURRENCE:
dllmu,
Robert M. Keating; A.I.0
Ccemunity Develo t D' for
THROUGH: Roland M. DeBlois-RVAi >
Chief, Enviromiental ,P(llanning
FROM:' Charles W. Heath d ,0 if'
Code Enforcement Officer
DATE: April 24, 1989
SUBJECT: RELEASE OF EASEMENT REQUEST BY:
WILLIAM R. HILL & SHIRLEY J. HILL
1266 41ST AVENUE
VERO BEACH FLORIDA 32960
BE: Lot 26, Laurel Court Subdivision
Plat Book 11, Page 99
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by
the'Board of County Carmissioners at their regular meeting of May 23, 1989.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The County has been petitioned by William R. & Shirley J. Hill, owners of the
subject property, for the release of a five (5) foot portion of the rear lot
twenty (20) foot utility and drainage easement, being the westerly five (5)
feet of the easterly"'twenty (20) feet of Lot 26, Laurel Court Subdivision,
� ��
15 BOOK 76 FACE
MAY 2 3 1999
BOOK d [,,,, 89
Section 10, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, Indian River County, Florida;
according to the Plat thereof as recorded in P1at.Book 11, Page 99, of the
Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. It is the petitioner's
intention to remain in compliance with Indian River County regulations by
releasing a five (5) foot portion of the utility and drainage easement, to meet
set -back -frau -easement requirements for swimming pools and decking.
The current zoning classification is RS -6, Single -Family Residential District.
The Land Use Designation is LD -2, Low -Density Residential, up to six (6) units
per acre.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
Section 25(b)(6), Appendix A, Zoning, of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of
Indian River County, specifies that no pool shall be located closer than five
(5) feet to any easement, and.no pool deck shall encroach into any easement.
_ The request has been reviewed by the Southern Bell Telephone Company, Florida
Power & Light Company, Florida Cablevision Corporation, and the Indian River
County Utility Department, Engineering Division, and the Road & Bridge Divi-
sion. Based upon their reviews there will be no impact -on supplying utilities
and drainage to the subject property.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends to the Board, through the adoption of a resolution, the re-
lease of the westerly five (5) feet of the easterly twenty (20) foot utility
and drainage easement of Lot 26, Laurel Court Subdivision, as recorded in Plat
Book 11, Page 99, of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0),
Commissioner Bird being absent, adopted Resolution
89-52, abandoning certain easements on Lot 26,
Laurel Court Subdivision as shown in Plat Book 11,
Page 99, Public Records of Indian River County.
16
RESOLUTION NO. 89-52
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, ABANDONING CERTAIN
FASM4aM ON IAT 26, LAUREL COURT SUBDIVISION
AS SHOWN IN PLAT BOOK 11, PAGE 99, PUBLIC RECORDS j
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
WHEREAS, Indian River County has easements as described
below, and
WHEREAS, the retention of those easements serves no
public purpose,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida that:
This release of easement is executed by Indian River
County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida,
whose mailing address.is 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida
32960, Grantor, to William R. -Hill and Shirley J. Hill, his wife,
their successors in interest, heirs and assigns, whose mailing
address is 1266 41st Avenue, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, Grantee,
a
as follows.-
Indian
ollows:Indian River County does hereby abandon all right,
title, and interest that it may have in the following described
easements:
SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HEREIO ABED
INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE.
THIS RESOLUTION was offered by Commissioner
Eggert 1 sanded by Commissioner Scurlock
and being put to a vote, the vote was as follow:
Commissioner Wheeler
Aye
Commissioner Eggert
Aye
Cossioner Bowman
md
Aye
Commissioner Bird
Absent
Commissioner Scurlock
Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 23rd day of May ,
1989.
BOARD OF COUNTY CMMSSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA
Byw
Gary
ieeler
Chaidfian
EXHIBIT "A"
A five (5) foot portion of the twenty (20) foot utility and drainage
easement of Lot 26, Laurel Court Subdivision, being the westerly five (5)
feet of the easterly twenty (20) feet of Lot 26, Laurel Court Subdivision,
according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 11, Page 99, of the
Public Records of Indian River County, Florida; Section 10, Township 33,
Range 39 East, Indian River County, Florida.
MAY 2 3 t-) 17 800K. `fib F" ", 899
SAY 2 3 1999 Boa 76 PnE900
K. Engagement Letter between IRC and_Attorney for Condemnation
Work on Indian River Boulevard
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/17/89:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: May 17, 1989 (dictated 5/16/89)
RE: ENGAGEMENT LETTER BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY AND ATTORNEY FOR CONDEMNATION
WORK ON INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD
At the May 9, 1989, meeting of the Board of County
Commissioners the�Board approved having the County Attorney
hire a condemnation lawyer to assist with the eight
condemnation parcels on Indian River Boulevard. Pursuant to
thatauthorization, I am enclosing an Engagement Letter from
the Attorney and request permission to initial the contract
on behalf of the County.
The letter is attached and in general calls for an hourly
rate of, $125.00. (This is the same favorable rate given by
that firm to Broward County, for which that firm does much
litigation work.)
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0),
Commissioner Bird being absent, approved the
Engagement Letter between IRC and the law firm
of Blackwell, Walker, Fasceli S Koehl for
condemnation work on Indi-an River Boulevard, as
recommended by staff.
I
COPY OF SAID AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK
TO THE BOARD
18
The Chairman asked that the public hearing regarding discon-
tinuing use of a portion of 17th Lane SW be moved up on the
agenda to be heard at this time as quite a few people are present
from Vero Highlands and Oslo Park to discuss this. The Board had
no objections.
DISCONTINUED USE OF A PORTION OF 17TH LANE SW, AKA LOCKWOOD LANE,
VENO BEACH HIGHLANDS
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 Darly
Vero Beach, Indian River Codnty,.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-Joumal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that.the attached copy of advertisement, being
In the matter of
In the
Hafted In said newspaper In the Issues of /may r /9Y9
Court, was pub•
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 not 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.
Swam to and subscribed before me this ' day of A.D. 19(( -1f
t
�I Business Manager)
(Cr6rRof the Shoal! G"FI;4ndfamRioer'Cantir Fl8718A
(SEAL) NOkef' PubIIL; Stafa of Fforido
AM canalbwm r+rr.., law. ao leer
VERO BEACH HIGHLANDS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC NEARING
Notice of hearing to consider the discontinue use and closing of 17th Lane S.W. AKA Lockwood
Lane at 27th Avenue, S.R. 607. Lying eyed being M Indian Alm County. Florida, more partioula h
described as follows:
The East 10' of the west 35' of tiro South 35' of Me Southwest Vi of Section 26. Township 33
South, Range 39 East
A public hearing at which parties In Interest and citizens strap have an ppportumiy to be heard.
will be held by the Board of Cauny Commissioners of Indian Rim County. Florida in the County
Commission Chambers of the County Adminkitratiort BulWing. 1840 231h Street Vam
Beach, Florida, on Tuesday. May 23, 1969 at 9:03 em.
Any orre who may wish to appeal any decider which may be made at Mia ng wed need to
ensure Mat a verbatim record of the proceedings Is made which Includes Me and evi-
dence upon which the appeal will be based.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Chairman
May 6,11189
Public Works Director Davis reviewed staff memo, as follows:
MIAAV 2 S 19 BooK 7 .. r,1,U 901
800K 76 90�
-----------------------------------------------------------�
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. C
Public Works Director 5011
Gu�
FROM: Michelle A. Gen il6', C.E.T.
Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Discontinued Use of A Portion of 17th Lane SW
AKA Lockwood Lane
DATE: May 2, 1989
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The County Public Works Division has initiated a public
improvement project for an additional entrance into the Vero
Beach Highlands Subdivision. The proposed road would be the
extension of 17th Street SW in Vero Highlands westward to 27th
Avenue, SR 607.
This proposed extension would connect to 27th Avenue
approximately 60' south of the existing location of 17th Lane SW
creating a substandard intersection separation. Therefore, 17th
Lane SW AKA Lockwood Lane would have to be barricaded at 27th
Avenue to prevent the flow of westbound traffic along 17th Lane
SW and eastbound traffic coming off of 27th Avenue.
I met with the Indian River Farms Board of Supervisors to discuss
this barricade, and they recommended a gate type of barricade
with a lock which would allow the "Farm's" access off 17th Lane
SW to maintain the Sub -Lateral B-9 Canal.
Residents along the north side of 17th Lane SW AKA Lockwood Lane
would have to go north on 20th, 21st, 22nd Avenue or 20th Court
to 14th Street SW which is paved, then west to 27th Avenue.
Please see attached map.
RECOMMENDATION
The County Engineering Department recommends discontinuing use of
17th Lane SW AKA Lockwood Lane at 27th Avenue, SR 607. A
Department of Transportation permit has been obtained and
approved. County Engineering is in the process of obtaining a
stormwater permit from St. Johns River Water Management District.
Permits will be obtained from Indian River Farms Drainage
District. All utility companies, School Board, Fire Department,
City of Vero Beach and Department of Transportation have been
notified of this pending matter.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Map.
2. Resolution
20
l� �
NoRTt�
VERO BEACH HIGHLANDS
Director Davis stated that this public hearing is necessary
to implement a project to accomplish the construction of an 1/2
mile access road to connect Vero Beach Highlands to 27th Avenue.
The construction of the proposed road will necessitate
discontinuing the use of 17th Lane SW, which is located approxi-
mately 60' north of the proposed road.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
present wished to be heard.
Barbara Buhr, 1325 20th Avenue SW, Oslo Park, stated that
she is representing some of the residents in the park who live on
L f 6
EOGI. rhuC �
MAY 2 3 1989
21
MAY
2 31989
BOOK
76
PAGE 904
20th Avenue SW.
She understood that the possibility of
the
extension of 20th Avenue into the Highlands might come up today,
and she would like to bring up the problems they are already
having in their subdivision with traffic control.
Chairman Wheeler advised that the extension of 20th Avenue
is scheduled to come up at another meeting in several weeks, and
the Administrator explained that he received a letter from Mr.
Gist requesting that the matter of 20th Avenue be on this agenda,
but it was not received in time to be included.
Commissioner Scurlock commented that the question he has is
in the event we should decide to extend 20th Avenue SW, would we
also go on with the 17th St. SW project. He noted that the
Commission became aware of the need for additional access to the
Highlands several years ago, and at that time proposed the
extension of 20th Avenue into the Highlands. However, a number
of residents along 20th Avenue came in and objected, and the
Board in an attempt to reach a happy medium of trying to provide
additional access to the Highlands but not impact the residents
of Oslo Park, began exploring the access that would connect to
27th Avenue. Commissioner Scurlock stressed that while we may
not want to talk about all this today, he, for one, did not want
to vote to do a project that we may not be doing if we make a
decision a week from today that we approve the 20th Avenue
extension.
Commissioner Eggert stated that her feelings were that
depending on what came out here today, we would still need some
staffing on the 20th Avenue situation. Probably she would prefer
tabling the final decision on 17th until we brought 20th forward.
Director Davis informed the Board that it has been staff's
position that both connections are desirable. The goal is to
disperse the traffic so that traffic with a westerly destination
could go out 17th St. SW and the traffic with a northern destina-
tion would use 20th Avenue. Director Davis advised that we have
done recent improvements at 20th Avenue and Oslo Road to make
22
� s �
that intersection easier to use and safer and have paved 20th
Avenue down to 14th Street SW, which is an existing paved road.
The remaining portion of 20th Avenue is approximately 318 mile
long, and the R/W is set aside for the roadway. He noted that
it not only always has been staff's position that both 17th St.
SW and 20th Avenue SW should be extended for access to the
Highlands, but this has been a part of the Thoroughfare Plan
since 1983 and endorsed by the Transportation Planning Committee.
Chairman Wheeler advised that he has talked with the Public
Works Director about this in the last month, and rather than
table it, he would like to see us proceed on with the 17th St.
access at this time as he believed that access would mitigate a
lot of the flow on 20th Avenue, and felt they are both needed.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if we have the funds to do both
roads, and Director Davis advised we have $100,000 programmed.
Mrs. Buhr asked if she understood that the discussion on the
extension of 20th Avenue will be continued on June 6th.
Chairman Wheeler confirmed that the extension of 20th Avenue
will be looked at separately. He has had many telephone calls on
this matter, and he felt everybody from both neighborhoods should
have an opportunity to be heard. Today he would like to address
the exit to 27th Avenue and then discuss 20th Avenue two weeks
from today. If we proceed with the action needed on 17th St,.
today, that project can continue on, and the Highlands residents
will have another exit by the end of the summer.
Roger Gist, 2109 SW 6th Avenue, displayed pictures showing
where the recent fire was near his home in the Highlands, and he
wished to know just how long it will be before the exit will be
open to 27th Avenue.
Director Davis advised that if we can secure the stormwater
permit from St. John's, we hope to be under construction by June
1st and through by the end of July. It probably takes about a
month of administrative time to get the permit, and it is not one
that is difficul.;.t to obtain.
23
POOK 1i
MAY
2 31999
Box 7
[,AGE 906
Mr. Gist wished
to know the estimated cost of extending
17th
as opposed to extending 20th Avenue.
Director Davis answered that to extend 17th Street involves
constructing approximately 1/2 mile of road through an existing
pasture, and he would anticipate a cost of about $75,000. The
20th Avenue extension is about V8 of a mile, and they estimate
that at about $50,000.
Mr. Gist asked the Commissioners to consider the safety of
the people in the Highlands; for instance, what if there is a
wreck on Old Dixie, and the fire truck loses 10 minutes getting
there.
Chairman Wheeler did not think anyone is denying the fact
that the Highlands has a safety problem and needs more access.
He believed that has been well established, and that is why we
have been working on this access for the last 2 years.
Mr. Gist wondered how the school was ever allowed to be put
in the Highlands when there is only one exit, and he was informed
that unfortunately. the County Commission does not have any
leverage with the School Board on site plans.
.Mr. Gist continued t•o.stress how much time could be saved if
the fire truck could access the Highlands by way of 20th Avenue.
Mrs. Edna Phillips, 655 SW 20th PI., wished to know why the
people were not notified about the meeting at the time 20th
Avenue was extended through part of Oslo Park.
Chairman Wheeler felt it had been published, but Director
Davis explained that it then was simply a staff agenda item to
the Board in regard to considering some signalization at Oslo
Road and some funding. It was not a public hearing and not an
action that requi.red public input. Some people from Oslo found
out about it, however, and attended on their own initiative.
Mrs. Phillips still did not understand why she was not
notified, and Director Davis explained that this was not a
situation where publication was required. Mrs. Phillips felt
that was just so much "gobbledygook."
24
Mr. Gist at this time submitted a petition signed by approx-
imately 500 Highlands residents urging the extension of 20th
Avenue SW into the Vero Beach Highlands. (Said petition is on
file in the Office of Clerk to the Board.)
Diane McGee, 2365 13th Avenue SW, informed the Board that
she lives way in the back of the Highlands by the cow pastures,
and she has been waiting 6 years for this exit. The night of the
fire was a terrible experience for her because she couldn't even
get back into the subdivision to get to her child. In addition,
she once had to have the ambulance come to her home, and it took
20 minutes because they couldn't locate the house. Mrs. McGee
believed from the Board's attitude that they intend to go ahead
with this, and while she certainly understands the problems
involved with working with government red tape as she has been
involved with it herself in her business, she would like to know
if the 17th St. extension really will be in by the end of the
summer, or do we have to wait for more and more red tape to be
dealt with. She realized the Oslo Park people have problems
also, but felt they all should try to work together. Mrs. McGee
continued to stress that she is stranded way in the back of the
Highlands with her only exit the one out to Old Dixie and U.S.I,
and she won't try to go across U.S.1 at 5 o'clock because that
intersection is so dangerous.
Chairman Wheeler agreed that the permitting does take a long
time. He pointed out that we have been working at the extension
of Indian River Boulevard for 5 years, and we have been in the
red tape process on this particular road for several years. This
is not something that just happened because of the fire, and the
red tape is all over except for the St. John's permit, with which
Director Davis does not anticipate a problem. The Chairman
assured everyone that the Commission certainly understands the
problems in the Highlands. Actually, he felt that development
never should have been allowed with only one access, and now,
with what has been learned from the massive growth that has
25 POOK 7 P0.907
qY
Boa 76 FAUGE 908
occurred all over Florida, he assured those present that you
could no longer develop such a subdivision without having the
proper ingress and egress, drainage, utilities, etc.
Commissioner Bowman inquired about the status of a traffic
light at the intersection of Highlands Drive and U.S.I., and
Director Davis reported that we have just been informed by the
DOT that their study of that intersection shows that a traffic
signal is now warranted. This will be on the agenda of the next
Transportation Planning Committee meeting.
Norma Kragon, 1760 14th Avenue SW, stated that she worked in
the Property Appraiser's office for 4 years, and she knows that
back when Unit IV of the Highlands was platted, it was supposed
to have a back entrance and there was a proposed road to go
through; so, why all the red tape now when the residents were
told in 1960 that there would be a road in the back.
Commissioner Scurlock believed the residents were also told
there would be utilities and all sorts of other things.
Mrs. Kragon noted that she lived in the back of the
Highlands when they were the only house back there. It is very
built up back there now, and they should have a road out. They
realize the Oslo Park residents have traffic problems, but what
about the Highlands children who have to walk down Highlands
Drive to school. '
Director Davis informed the Board that when Vero Highlands
development was platted, there was not a R/W secured from the
western edge of the Highlands to 27th Avenue. The County secured
that R/W through the pasture to connect to 27th Avenue by
purchase from the property owner; so, at no time was there a
platted R/W from the Highlands to 27th Ave.
Discussion continued at length regarding both extensions,
and Commissioner Scurlock felt we are getting off the track. He
felt the important thing is to get the road to 27th Avenue built
as fast as possible, and then on June 6th, we will discuss the
extension on 20th Avenue. So, the issue before us today is not
26
"Who struck John," but to take the action needed so the extension
to 27th can get built as quickly as possible.
Joseph Theriault, 659 SW 20th PI., noted that he arrived at
the meeting late and this may have been addressed, but the map in
the Press Journal described an interesting situation where it is
proposed to build a road parallel to an existing road and the
only thing separating them is a canal. He believed we then will
have 2 roads, and we don't need 2. If we simply could cross the
canal, we would have an existing road that could be developed out
to 27th Avenue, and they could also connect up to 20th Avenue.
He felt that would solve the traffic problem and cost less money.
Mr. Theriault believed the people in Oslo Park are overestimating
their traffic problem because all the traffic on Highlands Drive
will not be going out on 20th Avenue. Now, the Highlands has
only one entrance with everybody going through it, but the more
exits you have, the more the traffic volume is spread out.
Commissioner Eggert informed Mr. Theriault that it was noted
earlier that both extensions were included on the Transportation
Plan.
Mr. Theriault wished to know if it would not be less
expensive to cross the canal and pave the existing road, but
Director Davis explained that to pave the existing road north of
the canal, we would have to relocate the sublateral canal to the
south or purchase more R/W. It is cheaper the way it is
proposed.
Kenneth Henry, 1075 24th PI. SW, president of Vero Beach
Highlands Property Owners Assoc., wished to set the record
straight. He believed the map presented is incorrect because
17th Lane is south of the canal and 17th Street is to the north
of the canal.
Director Davis confirmed that there has been some confusion
in that regard, and the fact is that in order to keep consistency
up
in the county,
we would like the
new road called
17th
St. SW
MAY
2 3
1989
27
BOOK
'76
4
MAY
2 31989
BOOK
P,�JE
9.01
primarily because that
is what the street is labeled
in the
Highlands itself.
There was objection from the audience., and Commissioner
Eggert believed it is called 17th Lane in the Highlands, which
members of the audience confirmed.
Director Davis noted that is not what the records in the
Property Appraiser's office show.
Discussion continued at length in regard to which road is
properly called 17th Street and which 17th Lane, and it was noted
that apparently the street signs in the Highlands call the road
south of the canal 17th Lane.
Commissioner Scurlock suggested that we just build the road
and then sign it properly.
Mr. Henry understood that, regardless of what the street is
called, the intent is to build the road south of the canal for
this egress to 27th Avenue, and he informed the Board that the
Board of Directors of the Property Owners Association asked him
to request that this extension be done as soon as possible.
Tom Virt, 2336 17th St. SW, advised that he lives on the
road that they are saying they don't know what it is. The street
he lives on is the one north of the canal, and that is the one
they are planning to close. He wished to know why the county is
building a road in the cow pasture and closing his road.
Director Davis explained that the existing road north of the
canal connects to 27th Avenue, but when the new road is con-
structed, it will connect to 27th Avenue only 60' from where the
existing road connects, and that intersection spacing is sub-
standard; so, one of the two has to be closed. They did pursue
at one time the idea of developing the road to the north of the
canal, but in Oslo Park Subdivision there is a 30' road R/W north
of the canal. When staff began to contact property owners re R/W
acquisition, it was found that besides Mrs. Lucinda Eddy, who
owns a 40 acre tract of undeveloped land, there are 8 single
family lots between 20th Avenue and 23rd, and some have houses on
28
them. If they had secured that R/W, it would put the R/W very
close to two of the existing houses, and they decided it would be
more economical and the path of least resistance to secure the
R/W to the south.
Mr. Virt stated that he was not contacted, and he would have
given his R/W. He noted that it is aggravating to live there 27
years and then all of a sudden, you don't have a road. He felt
it was a mistake to buy the land in the cow pasture for the road.
Director Davis pointed out that buying the property to the
south also met the objective of segregating the Highlands from
Oslo Park, which was the objective at one time.
Ronald Beam, 104 Highlands Dr. SE, advised that he lives on
the existing exit from the Highlands. He appreciated that it has
been said that staff wants both exits, but his concern is the
fire and other emergencies. He believed that the 20th Avenue
entrance would bring the emergency vehicles in almost immedi-
ately, which he felt is the important thing, and was scared that
if the 17th Street extension is done first, when will they ever
get 20th Avenue.
Janet Zaniewski, of Oslo Park, wished to know when they will
know which street they will call 17th Street SW. The map they
were sent notifying them of this meeting said they live on 17th
Lane SW; however, the mail was sent to what they think they live
on, which is 17th St. SW, and she asked if they are going to have
to change their addresses again.
Director Davis confirmed that there is a discrepancy between
what the Property Appraiser's records show and what the Highlands
labels the road, and that needs to be straightened out and
resolved.
Commissioner Eggert agreed that is important to get this
cleared up because it causes problems for the 911 grid system
also.
Mrs. Zaniewski felt that closing and barricading the one
side will
create the same problem for
Oslo Park that
the
Al'
ig�9
29
eou
`�
[,A,E 911
NAY 2 3 1999
PWF. 76 912
Highlands have now because all of those on SW 15th Street then
will have to go out to 20th Avenue and turn west to get to 27th
Avenue.
Director Davis agreed that what is planned will block the
Oslo residents off from that former exit, but they can easily go
out 14th Street SW to access 27th Avenue.
Mrs. Zaniewski complained that those on the south end of
Oslo Park then will have to go out of the way to use that road
and noted that she had an uncle who died because it took the fire
department, which is only one mile away, 20 minutes to get to her
house.
Director Davis stated that to go to a destination north of
Oslo Park, it would be the same distance north to 14th Street and
then west to 27th AVenue as it would be if they used the existing
17th Street exist to 27th Avenue and then north.
Mrs. Zaniewski contended the Oslo Park residents would only
have one exit out now, but Director Davis emphasized that they
have more than one connection out of Oslo Park.
Mrs. Zaniewski brought up the idea of using 17th Street and
17th Lane as one-way pairs, but Director Davis stressed that you
still would have to bridge the canal in order to make that an
effective design. Staff did look into that, but felt it would
not meet the objective of segregating the two subdivisions.
Mrs. Zaniewski asked if 17th Street will continue to be
blocked up into the future, and Director Davis advised that once
it is blocked off, we do not anticipate it being reopened.
Mr. Theriault felt the problem that needs to be addressed is
do we want to continue to have the traffic from Oslo Park and the
Highlands separated, or is it possible to have traffic flowing
either way with both extensions. He felt this question should be
addressed now because the county is building a road that could be
affected by that decision.
Commissioner Eggert informed him that it was decided at the
very beginning of the meeting that because it wasn't an
30
"either/or" situation, we would discuss the possibility of the
20th Avenue extension at the meeting of June 6th.
Mark Poole, 1540 20th Ct. SW, Oslo, asked if he understood
it already has been decided that the road will go through on 20th
Avenue.
Commissioner Scurlock advised that it has not yet been de-
cided, but he believed it would be fair to say that it has been
recommended by staff that 20th Avenue be extended, and the fire
and emergency situation has shed a new light on this whole
problem. Commissioner Scurlock noted that he voted against the
20th Avenue extension the first time it was proposed, but new
facts have been brought forward, and he felt we need to hear from
the public and then we can make the best decision for the most
people.
Mr. Poole noted that it appears that he then should gather
his forces from the Oslo area and be here at the meeting on June
6th, and Commissioner Scurlock agreed.
Patricia Webb, 364 SW 16th St., believed that it has been
said it is cheaper to do the 20th Avenue extension and she wished
to know if there is any less red tape involved with that.
Director Davis advised that we are now at the point where
both extensions can progress at about the same rate, and either
project would be easy to implement at this time.
Mrs. Webb wished to know if there will be a stop light at
the exit onto 27th Avenue, and Director Davis stated that there
will be a stop sign; they do not anticipate the need for a light
at this time.
Mrs. Zaniewski had a question about 17th Street, which she
calls 17th Street and the County calls 17th Lane. She believed
that is a state road that goes from Old Dixie all the way to
1-95, and wished to know if that is correct.
Director Davis advised that the road north of the canal is
not a state road. It is a 30' R/W that was established in 1922
when Indian Rive°.r Farms platted the western part of the county.
31
AY 2 � 1989 BOOK.
14f
MAY 2 31989 BOOK 76 91
It is a continuous -road from the Lateral "H" Canal to the Lateral
"B" Canal at abort 43rd Avenue.
Mrs. Buhr, Oslo resident, commented that she has been
listening to the comments from the Highland residents and only
wants to state that the Oslo residents sympathize with their
traffic problems. However, since their road was paved in Oslo,
they have had people going through at 80 mph, and they have been
on the phone to the Sheriff almost every day. If there wasn't a
speeding problem, she believed a lot of this could be recon-
sidered, but her child walks to school and there are no
sidewalks. They have the same concerns as the Highlands and
cannot control the traffic even now.
Pat Ross, 1826 14th Ave. SW, stressed that the Highlands
residents have the same problem, probably even more so, with
people speeding along Highlands Drive, and they are just as
concerned about their children. If the people in Oslo want a
sidewalk, she suggested that they get out and work for one the
same way the people in the Highlands did.
Chairman Wheeler asked Fire Chief Allen about response time
for fire engines to get to the Highlands from the various
locations discussed.
Chief Allen felt that when receiving a call and getting the
right address, they should be able to expedite to any location
from their station on Oslo. If the road went to 27th from their
Oslo station to the central section of the Highlands, they are
looking at a response time of 31-4 minutes. If it goes on 20th
Avenue to the central location, they are looking at 21-3 minutes.
With the existing entrance, they are looking at 4-5 minutes.
Sometimes when they don't get the right address, they have
problems.
Ann Lau from Oslo Park, newly arrived at the meeting,
pointed out that Oslo Park is mostly made up of working families
with small children. It contains many small lots, and the
subdivision is not designed for a road like 20th Avenue would be.
32
She agreed that the Highlands needs another access, but let it be
out to 27th Avenue.
The Chairman informed her that we will be having another
meeting on June 6th to settle the matter of the 20th Avenue
extension.
Chairman Wheeler determined that no one further wished to be
heard and thereupon closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
staff recommendation and adopted Resolution 89-53
authorizing discontinuing the use of 17th Lane SW
AKA Lockwood Lane at 27th Avenue (SR 607).
RESOLUTION NO. 89— 53
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO DISCONTINUE
USE AND CLOSE LOCKWOOD LANE SW AT 27TH AVENUE.
WHEREAS, the County Public Works Department has
initiated a public improvement project for an additional entrance
into the Vero Beach Highlands Subdivision, which road would be
the extension of 17th Street SW between 20th Avenue SW and 27th
Avenue; and
WHEREAS, 17th Street SW would connect to 27th Avenue
(S.R. 607); and
WHEREAS, the proposed extension of 17th Street SW would
connect to 27th Avenue within approximately 60' of the existing
location of Lockwood Lane SW, thereby creating a substandard
intersection separation distance; and
WHEREAS, to_ avoid the above substandard intersection
spacing, the County shall discontinue use and close Lockwood Lane
SW at 27th Avenue; and
WHEREAS, Lockwood Lane SW is not being abandoned or
vacated; and
33
r
MAY 2 3 1999 Roos /6 raF 916
WHEREAS, the County reserves the right to reopen the
closed or discontinued road by future action of the Board of
County Commissioners,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
1. 'The foregoing recitals are affirmed and ratified in
their entirety.
2. Lockwood Lane SW is hereby closed, but not
abandoned or vacated, for a distance of 25 feet at 27th Avenue.
-The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Scurlock who moved its adoption. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Eggert and, upon being 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 Absent
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution passed
and adopted this 23rd day of May , 1989.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Q
By j-,Vc
GARY 'WHEELER, Chairman
PRESENTATION OF 1988 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT
Finance Director Ed Fry came before the Board to make the
presentation of the Annual Financial Report, and introduced
Christine Hill and Dan O'Keefe, auditors from Coopers & Lybrand.
Finance Director Fry advised that the report is broken into
4 sections - Introductory, Financial, Statistical and Compliance.
The Letter of Transmittal gives a narrative of the last year.
There is also an organization chart. On Page xiii is the
34
Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting,
which we received for our 1987 Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report, and at this time Indian River County is one of only 187
counties throughout the United States that have received this
certificate..
Page 1 of the Financial Section is the Report of the Independent
Accountants, and it is a non-qualified opinion, which is the
highest opinion you can receive.
Pages 4 and 5, which are the Combined Balance Sheet for the
County as a whole, show that the County had Total Assets of
$165,740,000 as of September 30, 1988, and a Total Fund Equity of
$99,662,000. Mr. Fry wished to point out that the Total Fund
Equity also includes $43,923,000 as an investment in our General
Fixed Assets.
Pages 8-11 is the Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures
and Changes in Fund Balances for the General Fund, Special
Revenue Funds, Debt Service Funds, and Capital Projects.
Page 12 is the Combined Statement for the Enterprise Funds and
Fleet Management.
Pages 14-52 are the Notes to the Financial Statements, which
explain many things which are not evident in the statements.
Pages 54-55 are descriptions of all Special Revenue Funds. This
is where you see the Law Library Fund and some funds under the
control of the Clerk and the Sheriff.
Pages 56-59 contain the Balance Sheet for each Special Revenue
Fund.
Pages 60-75 are the Combining Statements of Revenues, Expendi-
tures and Changes in Fund Balances for each Special Revenue Fund.
Page 77 describes the Debt Service Funds. This was the last year
for the Beach Bonds and now have Refunding and Improvements Bonds
and Special Assessments on Route 60 Water 8 Sewer Projects.
Pages 78-79 is the Combining Balance Sheet for the Debt Service
Funds, followed by the Combining Statement of Revenues, Expendi-
tures, etc.
Page 85 is a description of the Capital Projects Funds.
Pages 86-87 is the Combining Balance Sheet for the Capital
Projects Funds, followed by the Combining Statement of Revenues,
Expenditures, etc.
Page 95 is a description of the Enterprise Funds. This is where
the Housing Authority is located, and it is the first year they
have been classified as an enterprise fund because they now have
income coming in from their projects.
Pages 96-99 are the Combining Balance Sheets for each individual
Enterprise Fund, followed by the Combining Statement of Revenues,
Expenditures, etc.
Finance Director Fry wished to note in regard to the Solid
Waste Disposal District Fund that we had a loss this year which
MAY 2 � 1989 35 mu �10 i ,� F 917
Boa 76 Fa.,E91
was created because of the closure costs associated with Phase I.
We should have made some type of allocation to provide for this
in other years, but no one really anticipated that the DER would
change their rules to mandate all the things that are now
required.
Commissioner Scurlock wished to know, in regard to the SWDD,
why the coverages shown for the Sanitary Landfill on Table 10,
Page 165 of the Statistical Section, are so high, and Mr. Fry
advised that we backed out the one-time charge for the closure
cost; we were attempting to make it so that coverage from year to
year was comparable.
Commissioner Scurlock continued to question the coverages
shown which range during the 10 year period from 1.42 to 3.73 and
then in 1987 and 1988 up to 5.83 and 5.28. He believed we are
only required to have a coverage of 1.25 and felt the lay person
would be asking why we have 5 times the coverage that is
required.
Finance Director Fry explained that what has happened is
that we have been able to hold the expenses at a relatively
stable level, but with the growth of the county and the addi-
tional usage of the Landfill, we wound up with much larger
revenues than we anticipated.
Commissioner Scurlock felt, in -that case, the question from
the public will be why then are we looking for a significant
increase in our Landfill fees.
Mr. Fry believed one of the things that possibly is
misleading on the debt coverage is that it does not take into
consideration the other restrictions that funds have to be set
aside for. The Board has to look not only at what your coverage
is for your debt service, but also must provide funds for Renewal
& Replacement of assets that are in place, and on the Landfill
the closure costs that are involved.
County Attorney Vitunac asked if Mr. Fry was saying that if
you put the closure costs of Cell I in this year, the coverage
36
r
_I
factor would not be 5.28, and Mr. Fry advised that if the closure
costs had been put in for this year, we would have had negative
coverage.
Commissioner Scurlock did not feel you would put the closure
costs all in any one particular year anyway. He would imagine
you anticipate closure costs and should be funding that each year
so that when you get to the closure, there is no big surprise
unless the DER made a major change, and Mr. Fry noted that is
exactly what they did.
Further discussion ensued regarding the Statistical Section,
and Commissioner Scurlock commented that on Page 154, for
example, you kind of get an idea of where the County is spending
its money. Obviously Law Enforcement and Public Safety used to
be almost equal to General Government, and now Law Enforcement
and Public Safety is 39% as compared to 20% for General
Government. Then on the next pages, it says the County has
adopted a philosophy of new development funding itself with user
fees, impact fees, etc., while actually our reliance on ad
valorem taxes has increased from 51% in 1979 to where today 64%
of our funds are coming from taxes.
Mr. Fry clarified that there are the ad valorem taxes and
then the franchise taxes also; it is not all ad valorem.
Commissioner Scurlock continued that going from 1979 to
1988, we went from a fairly constant level of 4 mills and then
jumped 2 mills in a fairly short period of time. He feels the
Statistical Section says a lot to us, but is what it says really
valid? In fact, last year we ended up levying almost 2 mills
that it now appears we didn't have to and created this reserve,
which is nice to have, but the bottom line is that we went out
and taxed someone almost 11 mills and apparently didn't render
the service they were taxed for.
Mr. Fry could not argue that, but he felt the Statistical
Section is very useful in that it does show the 10 year trend in
many various areas.
MAY 2 S 1989
It also shows population trends, and our
37
BOOK 7Fa.Cc. ��
Fr
MAY .2 31999 I1 �MrI � C fJ)
POOK y �. Jl.>ad�
population has grown from 56,000 in 1979 to 87,512 in 1988 and
the estimate for 1989 is 92,500 people.
Finance Director Fry stated that'the only other items he
would like to go through quickly are as follows:
Page 105 explains the different agencies and trust funds, and
this includes, the Board, the Clerk, the Sheriff, the Tax
Collector and the Property Appraiser, followed by their Combining
Balance Sheet.
Pages 112-115 is a Schedule of the General Fixed Assets of the
County, and these do not include the fixed assets of the
Enterprise Funds.
Page 120 to the end of the Financial Section are Statements for
the Board of County Commissioners and each one of the Constitu-
tional Officers.
Next is the Statistical Section and then the Compliance Section.
COPY OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR
ENDED 9/30/88, IS ON FILE 1N THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD.
Commissioner Scurlock still wanted more answers on the bond
coverages. He happened to know the answers, but felt all the
Commissioners need to understand the answers so that we can
explain it to the public when the question is presented.
Auditor Christine Hill of Coopers & Lybrand noted that when
you look at coverages, you look at one point in time, and when
you set rates, you are trying to look forward into the future and
take into account bond issues that aren't even on the books yet.
In the case of the Landfill, we had a new bond issue that we
haven't had to start funding yet, but we implemented rates in
anticipation of those required payments. Ms. Hill further noted
that before you go to the bond market, you want to demonstrate
that you already have mastered the ability to raise the necessary
funds and generate the revenue to pay off the bonds. She agreed
that unless you understand the entire process, you just look at
the schedule and think the rates are too high because you do not
consider what is going to occur in the future. She felt the only
38
way this could be set out and explained in the Financial Report
would be to include something about it in the Transmittal Letter.
Commissioner Scurlock continued to stress that there is a
different picture painted between our financial statements and
what we are really doing, and it makes it difficult for the Board
to justify these things to the general public.
Finance Director Fry felt one of the problems you always run
into with financial reporting is that it is all history. The
Board must look to the future, but financial statements always
look back.
Commissioner Scurlock again referred to the Landfill
coverage and noted the figures indicate that we have had only one
year in the last ten where we were close to the 1.25 coverage.
Ms. Hill pointed out that the 1.25 coverage is a minimum. It
is only designed to protect the bond holders and may not be all
the money you need to operate effectively. If you were right at
minimum coverage, you would be very close to potential problems.
Commissioner Scurlock noted that we had talked at one time
about a surcharge to take care of unexpected land closure costs,
and he questioned Utilities Director Pinto about that.
Director Pinto advised that we are required to have a 100
R&R fund plus an amount each year for future closure costs, which
are substantial. There is also a requirement each year for a
maintenance fund of the old cell.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if we did not have the Special
Assessment program we have developed for Solid Waste, what the
tipping fees would be at the Landfill at this time, and Director
Pinto estimated that for the coming year they would be in the $50
range. He also felt the rates probably would have tripled for
those who were having the garbage picked up at their homes.
Commissioner Scurlock wished to make the point that if we
did away with the special assessment and went back to some sort
of tipping fee, there would have been a significant increase in
any event. All we have changed is how we collect the money, and
3 9 9�1
MAY 2 3 1989 �oo�
MAY 2 3
1989
ootl 76
F 9 ? 2
he believed what
we are doing is the best and most effective
way
to collect it.
Finance Director Fry commented that we originally had
anticipated a cost of $200,000 for the closure of Phase I, and
the estimate now is 1.8 million.
Commissioner Scurlock believed we have saved a great deal in
financing costs by having the special assessment on the Tax Roll,
and asked how many basis points we have saved on future bond
issues by going to that method.
Clerk Barton explained that it is not only the coverage that
is important, but the source of the revenue. When there were
tipping fees, there was always the question of how much material
would arrive at the Landfill, and when we switched to the assess-
ment program, we were pretty sure we would collect 990 of what
was on the assessment roll. He stated that there is no question
that our bond costs are lower - there is a factor that is lower
but he could not say just how many basis points.
Commissioner Scurlock complimented the Finance people,
noting that they have done an excellent job as usual, and the
Board members agreed.
PRD CONCEPTUAL SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVAL - SANDFOREST SUBDV.
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:
40
VERO BEACH PRESS-JOWINAL
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 -1,.li%
In the matter of �4
1
In the
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
Court, was pub-
l '
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post off ice in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate. commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.. / -A—
Sworn to and subsc
(SEAL)
0'"y WIN11c, Sir** it
r
23
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice of hearing to consider granting a
Planned Residential Development (P.R.D.) con-
ceptual special exception plan approval for an
88 unit, single family, small lot subdivision proj-
ect. The subject properly Is located on the
Southwest Comer of Old xle Highway and 5th
Street S.W. and Iles In the SE % of Section 24,
Township 33 S, Range 39E, containing + 16
acres.
A public hearing at which parties in Interest
and citliens 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 2516
Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday May 23,
1989, at 9:05 a.m.
Anyone who may wish to appeal ar�y decision
which may be made at this meeting will need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed -
Ings Is made which 4ncludes the testimony and
evidence upon which the appeal will be based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By-s-0ary Wheeler, Chairman '
May 3.1989 . —
Director Keating made the staff presentation, as follows:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M. Keatin , AI
Community Deve-lopmen Director
THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP
Chief, Current De oBittent
FROM: Robert E. Wieger G
Staff Planner, Current Development
DATE: May 10, 1989
SUBJECT: PRD CONCEPTUAL SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVAL FOR SANDFOREST
SUBDIVISION, A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of May 23, 1989.
MAY 2 8 1989 �+� �oGK �l� Fa.,E 9'Ctj
Bou 76 f'A,E 924
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Carter and Associates, Inc., on behalf of Sandforest Corp. Inc.,
is requesting Planned Residential Development (PRD) conceptual
plan/special exception and preliminary PRD plan approval for an 88
lot subdivision located on the west side of Old Dixie Highway;
immediately south of 5th Street S.W. The owner is requesting PRD
r approval and certain "waivers" to allow a design .that helps
maximize normally allowable densities and helps preserve existing
vegetation that is outside of individual buildable lot areas..
Section 25(A).4. of the zoning code establishes regulations and
provisions governing the Planned Residential Development (PRD)
review and approval procedures. Under the regulations, PRD
proposals must be granted the following approvals:
Approval Needed Reviewing Body
1. Concept Plan/Special Exception P&ZC and B.C.C.
2.- Preliminary PRD P&ZC
3. Land Development Permit Staff
4. Final PRD (plat) B.C.C.
The PRD ordinance encourages the concurrent review and consid-
eration of the first two steps. The applicant is seeking approval
for the first two steps and has submitted plans for special
exception approval as well as a preliminary PRD plan.
At its regular meeting of April 13, 1989, the Planning and Zoning
Commission voted to recommend that the Board of County Commission-
ers grant PRD special exception approval to the Sandforest proj-
ect. The Commission also voted to approve the submitted prelimi-
nary PRD plan with conditions, subject to the Board granting PRD
special exception approval to the project. Therefore, if the
Board grants PRD special exception approval, the Sandforest
preliminary PRD plan will be automatically conditionally approved.
Carter and Associates, Inc. is now requesting that the Board grant
PRD special exception approval to the Sandforest PRD project.
The following is an analysis of the Sandforest project, based on
the submitted conceptual and preliminary PRD plan.
ANALYSIS
1. Size of Property: ±15.08 acres
2. Zoning Classification: RS -6, Single Family Residential, up
to 6 units per acre
3. Land Use Designation: LD -2, Low Density Residential 2, up to
units per acre
4. Proposed Building Density: 5.84 units per acre (88 lots on
15.08 acres)
5. Surrounding Uses/Zoning:
North: single family residential (Dixie Gardens)/RS-6
South: vacant, single family residential/RS-6
East: (across Old Dixie Hwy) commercial/CH
West: single-family residential, (Dixie Gardens),
Timber Ridge multi -family development
(southwest) /RS -6 & RM -6
Note: The buildable density of the adjacent Dixie
Gardens subdivision is approximately 4.7 units
per acre.
42
_ ® M
6. Environment and Site Conditions: The site is located in the
coastal sand ridge area, with site elevations ranging from
14' to 28' above MSL. Most of the site is densely wooded
with scrub vegetation (oak, hickory, wax myrtle, sand pine),
although the southwestern portion of the site contains slash
pine and saw palmetto and the northwest corner is cleared of
vegetation (excavated years ago). An abandoned residence is
located on the site.
The PRD process allows greater County control over vegetation
preservation than would the normal subdivision approval
process. The proposed PRD plan layout provides for 88
buildable lot areas surrounded by common areas and perimeter
buffer areas that are to be preserved in the natural state.
Thus, the proposed lots are actually building envelopes for
detached single-family homes that will be separated by common
areas containing scrub vegetation. Also, passive recreation
tracts (common areas) are proposed where vegetation will be
preserved. Because minimal amounts of fill will be needed
for building sites, vegetation preservation is feasible.
In the opinion of staff,, the proposed PRD plan allows for
greater preservation of vegetation than a normal subdivision
plat.
7. Landscaping and Buffering:
North: 25' perimeter buffer with preserved vegetative
screening where vegetation exists, Type "B"
buffer installed in cleared areas.
South: 25' buffer with preserved vegetation
East: 35' buffer and recreation tracts with preserved
vegetation
West: 25' buffer with preserved vegetation and Type
"B" provided in sparsely vegetated spots.
Except for walls and fences and other "screening" structures,
no structures, including accessory structures such as pools
and sheds will be allowed within the perimeter buffer areas.
8. Open Space:
Required: 40%
Provided: 63.3%
9. Recreational Space:
Required: 45,999 square feet
Provided: 48,754 square feet
(includes pedestrian paths and wooded, passive park tracts
with benches)
10. Drainage: The Public Works Department has conceptually
approved the proposed drainage plan; a stormwater permit will
be issued in conjunction with the land development permit.
11. Utilities: Sewer and water services will be provided by
Indian River County. The County Utilities department has no
objections to project approval.
12. Traffic Circulation: The site is to be accessed via a
two-way street off of Old Dixie Highway. A private, internal
loop road system will provide access to individual lots. The
Public Works department has approved the road system layout.
Bou 7 6 2 5'
Boa 7 E 99
13. Dedications and Improvements: Sidewalks will be provided
along the Old Dixie and 5th Street S.W. frontages.
Right-of-way (401) for 5th Street S.W. will be dedicated via
the final plat. The amount of right-of-way over and above
the developer's 60' local road standard liability will be
compensated through impact fee credits.
14. Phasing: The project will be developed in four phases.
Phases 3 and 4, located in the western portion of the site,
are traversed by the old AT&T easement. The lines within
this easement are no longer in use,and the easement is to be
abandoned in the near future. Prior to final PRD approval of
any phase covering the original easement location, the
easement must be abandoned.
15. Waivers: The applicant is requesting the following waivers
from normal zoning district and subdivision requirements, as
allowed in the PRD ordinance, to accomodate the proposed
project design:
A. RIGHT-OF-WAY (SECTION 10 (C) 2)
Required - 50 feet
Requested - 40 feet
Purpose - Maximize open space and preserve existing
vegetation.
B.- BUILDING SETBACK (SECTION 6(C))
Required - Front = 20 feet
Side = 10 feet
Rear = 20 feet
Requested - Varies according to site: Minimum
separation between lots = 10 feet.
Purpose - Allow maximum preservation of existing
vegetation through building location.
- C. MINIMUM LOT
SIZE (SECTION 6(C))
Required
- 7000 square feet
Requested
- Minimum (3,113 S.F.)
Purpose
- Maximize open space and preserve existing
vegetation.
D. MINIMUM LOT
FRONTAGE (SECTION 10(G)(3)(e))
Required
- 30 feet
Requested
- Minimum (21.2 feet for lots on curves)
Purpose
- Maximize open space and preserve existing
vegetation.
E. SIDEWALK (SECTION6(J)2)
Required -
Along frontage on all streets.
Requested -
Along Old Dixie Hwy., 5th Street S.W.
and along one side of the Sandforest
Manor, Sandforest Court West,
Sandforest Place and Sandforest Court
Purpose -
East.
Maximize open space and preserve existing
vegetation.
F. PAVEMENT WIDTH (10 (C) (2) (F) )
Required -
22 feet
Requested -
20 feet
Purpose -
Maximize open space and preserve existing
vegetation.
Staff has no objections to any of' -the requested waivers.
44
M
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Based upon staff's analysis and a recommendation of the
Planning and Zoning Commission, staff recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners grant PRD special exception
approval (including the requested waivers) with the following
conditions attached:
a. that at a minimum, a Type "B" buffer be provided by the
developer within all perimeter buffer areas; the land
development permit application shall show that all areas
of these buffers meet this requirement either with
preserved vegetation and/or installed materials;
b. that all improvements necessary to establish a passive
park area in the recreational tracts are shown in the
land development permit applications;
C. that a covenant will be placed over perimeter buffer
areas (excluding recreational areas) prohibiting the
placement of accessory structures such as pools and
sheds; fences, walks'or other "screening" structures may
be located within the buffers;
d. that road numbers be used in accordance with the
County's road numbering ordinance; and
e. that prior to final PRD approval of any phase covering
the AT&T easement location, the- easement shall be
abandoned properly.
45
SLOT
R00K l i 9A;Wl7
AY 2 3 1999 p !y�
C'oo 76 F,,cc 928
Director Keating informed the Board that the actual build-
out density will be 5.48 upa. These waivers represent a little
lessening of restrictions because the project is under unified
control. In a normal subdivision, a number of builders can go
in, but in this case, it is unified. He further noted that there
is an old AT&T easement running through the project. It is no
longer in use, but prior to one of the final phases, that will
have to be formally abandoned.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if there is sufficient access
for all the residents to get in and out, and Director Keating
explained that there is one main entrance and access point„ but
it is a boulevarded access so that if one side were closed,
access could be out the other and the circulation pattern allows
people to go different directions in the internal roadway system.
Commissioner Eggert asked what if there were an emergency,
and they all had to end up on Old Dixie, and Director Keating
noted that 5th Street SW is on the Thoroughfare Plan and eventu-
ally will be an east/west roadway connecting to 20th Avenue.
Commissioner Bowman stated that she would like to see an
access onto 6th Avenue. She realized they want it private, but
if there were a big emergency, then they would be coming back in
complaining.
Director Keating advised that they did look at this issue in
the site plan process, and staff didn't think a western access
point was really necessary on this project given the number of
units. Discussion ensued about the fact that it was not
desirable to access them to 6th Avenue because it goes into the
Timber Ridge development to the south and is not projected to
extend any further.
Commissioner Bowman felt you could run them out on Rebel
Road and stated that she would like to add a condition about
access to staff's recommendation.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
46
� r
Renee Renzi, 1956 Club Drive, came before the Board and
advised that she has no particular interest in this project and,
in fact, never heard of it until this morning. She believed,
however, the statement made by the Board to the Vero Beach
Highlands people earlier was that no projects would be built in
the future without two roads in and out, and it would really be
disturbing to her as a member of the public to see the Board
immediately back off that earlier declaration by approving this
without such accesses.
Director Keating wished to point out that projects are
approved all the time with only one access point. In the
Highlands you are talking about more than 5,000 lots, which
involves a very substantial number of trips, but in this case,
staff has considered the magnitude of the traffic which will be
generated by only 88 lots and does not feel another access is
required.
Chairman Wheeler agreed that in this case we are looking at
a relatively small private condo neighborhood of only 88 units -
not something like Oslo Park or the Highlands.
Ms. Renzi believed that when it comes to safety, people
aren't concerned about numbers.
Director Keating informed the Board that in some cases, when
there is a concern about another access for safety purposes, what
we have done is work with the applicant to make sure an emergency
access point is put in there with a break -away wall. That was
done at the Garden Grove development, and that could be consid-
ered in this case.
Dean Luethje, Engineer with Carter Associates, informed the
Board that the traffic access point was the first item addressed,
and it is very important that they do not have to have access to
6th Avenue SW or 5th Street SW. They are planning on making
special improvements to Old Dixie with a right turn in and a left
turn lane as well as widening it in that area. The project is
intended to be totally private, and for security reasons, they
MAY 1989 47 BOOK �l F�,�� 999
_I
W14Y 2 3 1999 Boa 76 P,.PE 96,30
only want one access. This project is only 88 lots, which does
not generate a great amount of traffic; so, they would request
that it be approved with the conditions in the staff's
recommendation.
Commissioner Eggert asked why they wouldn't want an
emergency break -away situation, which essentially keeps the
project private, and Mr. Luethje asked where the Board would want
such an exit. He noted that he has had no previous experience
with this and asked where they would be coming from with any
emergency rescue vehicles.
Public Works Director Davis felt 5th Street SW would be the
best location.
Commissioner Eggert believed the main purpose of this
emergency exit is not access for emergency vehicles, but would
relate to a more catastrophic situation where you are trying to
get people away; in other words, just a place they could get
through for an emergency evacuation. She did not believe it
would be allowed to be used except in an extreme situation.
Mr. Luethje noted that the intent" of this project is to keep
it landscaped and buffered on all sides, and he believed an
emergency exit would necessitate eliminating some of the
landscaping. He asked about putting it on the southeast corner.
Commissioners Eggert and Bowman did not want to see it
coming out onto Old Dixie.
Director Keating commented that if the Board wished, they
could approve this with the condition of an emergency break -away
exit and staff could work the location out with the applicant and
give administrative approval.
Commissioner Eggert reiterated that she would not like to
see it access Old Dixie, and Director Davis felt the fact is that
no matter how they exit, they will work their way back to Old
Dixie because of the canal.
Debate continued at length as to the effectiveness of a
48
break -away wall and as to whether there is a need for such an
exit in a project of this small size.
Chairman Wheeler believed if we are going to start
addressing things with a break -away wall, possibly we should
address this with an ordinance and set a policy.
County Attorney Vitunac asked Director Keating whether, in
his professional opinion, there is a need for two exits or one,
and Director Keating stated that staff did not feel there was a
need for more than one.
Commissioner Bowman inquired what is projected for
improvements on Old Dixie, and Director Davis advised that the
consultant and staff are working on this together, and at this
point in time, they envision at least a 3 lane road along Old
Dixie with major improvements at each intersection. The 16th
Street, 12th Street, 8th and 4th Street intersections already
have been signalized and widened, and the Oslo intersection is on
the agenda today. We have been monitoring the traffic count, and
it does drop as you go further south on Old Dixie.
The Chairman determined that no one else wished to be heard
and thereupon closed the public hearing.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, to add to staff's recommendation
a condition requiring an emergency break -away exit.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on
and carried 3 to 1 with Commissioner Scurlock voting in
opposition and Commissioner Bird being absent.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, Commissioner Bird being absent
and Commissioner Scurlock voting in opposition, the
Board by a 3 to 1 vote approved staff's recommenda-
tion for PRD Conceptual Special Exception Approval
MAY 2 198 49 'ROOK7 F `CE 90�
FF,_ -7
BOOK .76 PAGE 932SAY 2 � �9�9
for Sandforest Subdivision with an added condition
requiring an emergency break -away exit, the location
of same to be worked out with 'staff.
INDIAN RIVER BLVD. PHASE 111, R/W ACQUISITION (SULLIVAN)
Public Works Director Davis reviewed the following memo:
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Director /
SUBJECT: Indian River Boulevard Phase III
Right-of-way Acquisition - Parcel # 106 & 107
REF. LETTER: Charles A. Sullivan, Sr. to Donald Finney
dated April 4, 1989
DATE: May 3, 1989
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITION
Mr. Charles Sullivan, Sr., owner of two parcels along the west
side of the proposed Indian River Boulevard Phase III project
(SR60 to .37th St), has agreed to deed the necessary road
right-of-way to the County for Indian River Boulevard subject to
access being provided to his two small lots (approx. 100' x 180'
in size each lot). At the present time, it does not appear that
the subject parcels have public road access. If access is not
provided, Mr. Sullivan requests that the County purchase both
lots at an estimated value of $60,000.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The following alternatives are presented:
Alternative # 1
Accept the right-of-way donation and agree to provide a
single common access point for the two lots in question.
The access point would be from the southbound lanes only and
would be right turn in/right turn out. For the single
family land use proposed, this driveway should have no
adverse affect on the operation of the Boulevard. The
access point should be designed so that egressing vehicles
can turn onto Indian River Boulevard while in a forward
movement. No backing onto the Boulevard would be allowed.
Alternative # 2
Purchase the two parcels for the appraised value if the
compensation is agreeable to Mr. Sullivan. Appraisals
should be complete by June 1, 1989.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
It is recommended that staff proceed to offer Alternative No. 1
to Mr. Sullivan. No funding is applicable at this time.
50
Director Davis noted that this matter was tabled at the last
meeting and the feeling was that staff would communicate with the
Vero Beach Country Club. Staff has been in communication with
representatives. Our appraisals on this are not due until early
June; however, there is good communication between the Club and
the property owners, and Director Davis felt it would be pre-
mature for us to take action at this time.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) agreed
to table the above matter.
INDIAN RIVER BLVD. PHASE IV, R/W ACQUISITION
Pub.lic Works Director Davis reviewed the following:
------------------------------------------------------------
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
FROM: Donald G. Finney, SRA•
Right -of -Way Acquisition Agent
SUBJECT: Right -of -Way Acquisition
Indian River Boulevard Phase IV
Parcels #101, #102, #103, #104, #12, #19 & 19A
DATE: May 10, 1989
------------------------------------------------------------
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Attorney B. T. Cooksey requested, for his client's review,
updated appraisals of seven (7) right-of-way partial taking
parcels.
The drainage and access concerns have been addressed and it
is my understanding that the purchase price and a reverter
clause are the remaining issues before a settlement can be
reached.
Attached are the updated appraisals for the seven (7)
parcels. Total cost for all right-of-way is $1,267,266.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
1) Staff is requesting that the Board turn down a reverter
clause for any of the parcels, whereas, the property
will be purchased in fee simple rather than by a
donation where a reverter clause has been granted in
the past.
AY � 1989
51
BOOK. X16 FacE 93
r
MAY 2 3 1999 eooK 76 FnE 93-
2) Staff is requesting that the revised appraised values
be conveyed to Mr. Cooksey as the County's final offer
to purchase and if the offer is not agreeable to his
clients, that he present his clients' settlement
proposal.
Each parcel will then be brought back before the Board
for discussion, authorization to purchase, or for
Eminent Domain proceedings, in an effort to equitably
settle all parcels within 45 days.
One other parcel (Martin Gregory) remains outstanding,
negotiations are ongoing with William Collins, Esq. and
Michael O'Haire, Esq.
Funding in the amount of $928,805. is available in the
Indian River Boulevard North (Phase 3 and Phase 4) Fund
309-214-541-066.12. A line transfer of $338,461. from
309-214-541-066.50, Construction in Progress (balance
4/30/89 is 2,846,913.) to 309-214-541-066.12 is necessary to
fund the remainder.
The District 4 Road Impact Fee Account has a balance of
$396,105. (4-30-89) and the Gas Tax Fund 109 has a balance
of $6,203,057. (4-30-89).
Director Davis informed the Board that R/W Agent Don Finney -
has been communicating with property owners and has done an
excellent job. Actually, the R/W we are asking for severs the
parcels and splits them somewhat in half. The appraisers have
updated their appraisals, and the value of the R/W for the 7
parcels is approximately 1.267 million. Staff would like
direction to present these appraisals to the property owners and
offer the appraised value.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, to approve staff's recommendation
as set out in the above memo dated May 10, 1989.
Director Davis advised that there was an issue of a reverter
clause in the deeds the property owners wants. We don't usually
give that unless they donate something; however, there is the
possibility of a right of first refusal if for some reason the
county did not use the R/W. Staff would recommend the right of
first refusal be included in the deed if the attorney's feel it
is appropriate. He clarified that they do not recommend a
reverter clause, but just a right of first refusal.
52
Attorney Vitunac stated that unless the property owner gives
us something other than making us pay full value, he shouldn't
get anything extra, and the Board also did not feel that a right
of first refusal should be included.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0)
Commissioner Bird being absent.
5 -LANE WIDENING IMPROVEMENTS_TO OSLO ROAD FROM 500' WEST OF OLD
DIXIE TO U.S.1.
Public Works Director Davis reviewed the following:
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Director OP
SUBJECT: Five Lane Widening Improvements to Oslo Road from 500'
West of Old Dixie Highway to US 1 - Joint Project by
Indian River County and Deckinger Properties
REF. LETTER: Brooks H. Peed, Kimley-Horn and Assoc. to Jim Davis
dated May 17, 1989
DATE: May 17, 1989
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
A large commercial shopping center is currently under construc-
tion located on the East side of US 1 north of Oslo Road. In
reviewing the developer's traffic impact analysis for the shop-
ping center, signalization of the Old Dixie Highway/Oslo Road
intersection is required by the developer prior to a certificate
of occupancy being issued for the shopping center.
Staff has reviewed the County's approved 20 -year Road Improvement
Program for this section of Oslo road (as approved by the Trans-
portation Planning Committee and Board of County Commissioners)
and the County's Master Plan include a five lane widening project
for this link of Oslo Road.
The County staff is of the .opinion that the ultimate five lane
section of Oslo Road within this area should be implemented at
this time as a joint effort between the County and developer,
Deckinger Properties. The developer has $33,949.72 of un-
committed traffic impact fee funds attributable to the shopping
center project,. The developer's engineer, Kimley-Horn and
Associates, has done extensive work for the developer and can
�AY �
53 KOOK �P4 a 93
AAY 2 3 1999 Bou 6 F,aUF 936 7
perform the engineering services at a reasonable cost. The
estimated costs of construction of the improvements $550,000.
.Engineering costs funded by the County.are $30,050 plus right-
of-way survey which may be performed by County crews or by the
Consultant once preliminary work is accomplished. Costs to the
developer total $33,950(impact fee credits). The County Commis-
sion approved entering into a Master Agreement with Kimley-Horn
and Associates in 1987 after formal advertising and selection
under the CCNA.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The Alternatives are as follows:
Alternative No. 1
Approve a joint County/Developer project to design five lane
widening improvements along Oslo Road from approximately
500' west of Old Dixie Highway to US 1. The County's work
tasks shall be authorized under a Work Order under a Master
Agreement between Indian River County and Kimley-Horn and
Assoc. at a cost of $30,050. The developer would perform
certain work tasks and receive impact fee credits of
$33,950. Once engineering and right-of-way acquisition is
complete, District 6 impact fees and gas tax revenue would
fund construction.
Alternative No. 2
Implement only signalization of Oslo Road/Old Dixie Highway
at this time without road widening. If this is performed,
the County would have to remove these improvements in 1996
when five laning is scheduled.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
It is recommended that Alternative No. 1 be approved. Funding at
this time in the amount of $30,050 would be from District 6 Road
Impact Fees (balance on 4-30-89 is $541,414.34 and $96,000 is
presently uncommitted to projects). A formal Work Order and
Master Agreement will be forthcoming.
Director Davis informed the Board that the Helseths have
concerns. They live on both corners of Oslo and Old Dixie and
own just about all of the property -along the length of the
project west of the railroad track. Their concerns are due to
the fact that there is a garage structure on the north side of
Oslo in close proximity to the project, and their elderly mother
lives in the house to the north of the roadway. They would
appreciate it if we would not 5 lane the section west of Old
Dixie at this time. Director Davis noted there is some
flexibility to maybe drop out a lane or two to the west of Old
Dixie, and he felt that could work for probably a 4-5 year
period. We still could implement the ultimate section east of
Old Dixie, and he believed we can design with the Helseth's
interests in mind.
54
Commissioner Scurlock asked if that would inhibit safety in
any way or make the project more expensive.
Director Davis stated that it wouldn't inhibit the safety of
the intersection, but eventually that will be affected as the
traffic count builds up in the future. He believed we can work
with them and design the western leg to be expandable to 5 lanes,
but noted that he would like to see the signal poles spaced far
enough apart so that we wouldn't have to move them in the future.
Commissioner Scurlock asked it Mr. Davis is saying we can do
this and keep it safe and cost effective, and Director Davis
confirmed that he was.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, to approve Alternative No. 1 and
authorize staff to work with the Helseths as discussed.
Mrs. Helseth addressed the Board and noted that both homes
were built in the early 1900's. It is a historical area of the
community, and they try to keep it up. She believed Mr. Day.is
knows how they feel, and this would certainly give them a little
time to prepare themselves for the future as the county continues
to grow.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0)
Commissioner Bird being absent.
TEMPORARY SLUDGE AND SEPTAGE FACILITY
The Board reviewed memo from the Utility staff:
MAY 2 3-1989 55 Door 1 E 913
bou 76 FtgGE 93
DATE: MAY 11, 1989
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY' I�p
TOR
FROM: TERRANCE G. PI
DIRECTOR OF UTIL T SERVICES
SUBJECT: TEMPORARY SLUDGE AND SEPTAGE FACILITY
IRC PROJECT #US -88 -20 -CCS
THRU: 0. FRED MERKEL
ASST. DIRECTOR IF ENGINEERING AND
OPERATIONS
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
PREPARED AND STAFFED BY: JOHN FREDERICK LANG
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIA IST
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
BACKGROUND
The Department of Utility Services received Board approval on
February 7, 1989, to rework the Gifford 100,000 gallon wastewater
treatment plant into a sludge/septage treatment facility. The
project has been completed; however, the existing precast concrete
cell originally intended to be used as a receiving basin was not
large enough to handle loads in the event of a power failure. The
contractor, Ted Myers, agreed to utilize another cell from a
different location for the same labor costs. Additional materials
were provided by his firm at -cost.
ANALYSIS 1,
The facility was reworked and the contractor provided labor above
and beyond the scope of services. The cost incurred for the.
additional materials was $782.19. The original receipts have been
submitted to the County and it has been verified that the materials
were utilized on the job site.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff'of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board authorize a Change Order to the proposal from Ted Myers
Contracting for the amount of $782.19. The funding for this change
order will be transferred from the Landfill Account
$411-217-534-099.92.
TED MYERS CONTRACTING CO.
P.O. BOX 229
WINTER BEACH. FLORIDA 32971
' 5674390
t
INVOICE # 8901 DATE: April 20, 1989
{ TO: Indian River County PURCHASE ORDER NO: 32334
Utilities Department
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
PROJECT: Indian River County Treatment Plant CTF11P $c,taDUE. FACII.:rli
QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE TOTAL
Labor & Machinery (uPa4d 0-b o6 5/61ea) Lump Sum $4,400.00
Miscellaneous Invoices (Copies Attached) 0782 19J
TOTAL: $5,182.19
56
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) authorized
a Change Order to the proposal from Ted Myers Contracting
for the amount of $782.19.
INDIAN RIVER BLVD. FORCE MAIN PROJECT - W.A.#2 LLOYD & ASSOC.
The Board reviewed memo from Utility staff:
DATE:
MAY 4, 1989
p
I TO:
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATO
FROM:
TERRANCE G. PIN
DIRECTOR OF UT I SERVICES
PREPARED AND
STAFFED BY:
WILLIAM F. McCAIN
PROJECTS ENGINEER
i
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT:
INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD FORCE MAIN
PROJECT WORK AUTHORIZATION #2
LLOYD & ASSOCIATES, INC.
"PROPERTY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM"
BACKGROUND:
On February 14, 1989, the Indian River County Board of County
Commissioners approved a Sewer Force Main Project, IRC Project No.
US -89 -01 -CCS, to run up Indian River Boulevard. As was stated in
the agenda item for the aforementioned work, the force main was to
be paid for by way of a Developer's Agreement with the 1400
Development Corporation, and Property Assessment along the
boulevard.. a.
ANALYSIS: `
We have contacted our engineer for this project to provide us with
proposals for the Indian River Boulevard Assessment (attached). The
fees associated with this assessment shall be $15.00 per parcel or
$500.00 (minimum fee) for the entire project, whichever is greater.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners approve the attached Work
Authorization with Lloyd & Associates.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
Work Authorization #2 with Lloyd & Associates re
"Property Assessment Program."
SAID DOCUMENT WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES WHEN EXECUTED
AND RECEIVED.
(NOW RECEIVED AND. ON FILE IN. OFFICE OF CLERK .TO BOARD 7/17/89)
57 "_, ��
MAY 1989 HOK I F; Ij �P �
AY 2 3 1989
i 94e
UPDATING OF WATER SYSTEM MAPS AND ANALYSES OF WATER SYSTEM - 1989
The Board reviewed memo from Director Pinto:
DATE: MAY 11, 1989
►TO: JAMES E. CHANDLf
COUNTY ADMINISTFROM: TERRANCE G. PINDIRECTOR OF UTISERVICES
SUBJECT: UPDATING OF WATER SYSTEM MAPS AND
ANALYSES OF WATER SYSTEM - 1989
PREPARED AND STAFFED BY: WILLIAM F. McCAIN
PROJECTS ENGINEER
DEPARTMENT OF UTILRVICES
BACKGROUND
E
Since short -listing of consulting firms took place, we have decided
to set up a continuing services Work Authorization with Boyle
Engineering Corporation. The purpose of this Work Authorization is
to allow us to continue to update the water system maps, have water
distribution system analyses performed, and update the Master Plan
as requested by the Utilities Department.
ANALYSIS
The general services are outlined in the attached Work
Authorization, see section "Scope of Services." Each specific task
will be outlined on a case-by-case basis and will be authorized by
the Director of Utility Services. The cost of such services is
outlined in Exhibit A, "Standard.>.Hourly Rate Schedule." The funds
for this Work Authorization will come from Account No.
#471-219-536-033.13. The upper end limit we will spend in this year
is $15,000.00.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approve the
signing of the attached Work Authorization Number 2.
Commissioner Eggert asked if this is an on-going thing, and
Director Pinto noted that depends on how many as -built plans come
in. Every time one comes in, we sent it over and they put it on
the program.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if Utilities is happy with the
services of Boyle Engineering, and Director Pinto advised that
they are for now and actually the way we are set up now, we have
to continue with them.
58
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved Work Authorization #2 with Boyle Engineering
to update the water system maps, do analyses and update
the Master Plan as recommended by staff.
Date: May 3,1989
Engineering Services Work Authorization
Work Authorization No.: 2
County Project Identification: Updating of Water System Maps and Analyses of Water
System/ 1989
Consultant: Boyle Engineering Corporation
1. Project Description
The engineering services that will be provided during the 1989 calendar year as part of this
project may consist of updating the Indian River County water system maps that were prepared
by Boyle Engineering Corporation as part of the water system master planning services, revis-
ing the water system computer model, analyses of the County's water system, and providing
advise to the County on matters relating to the water system and water system computer
model.
11. Scope of Services
I
The following services will be provided pursuant to the Professional Civil Engineering Master
Agreement between Indian River County and Boyle Engineering Corporation dated December
6,1988:
1. Revise water system maps based on data provided to Boyle by the County, and furnish
reproducible mylars of the revised maps to the County.
2. Revise water distribution system computer model based on data provided to Boyle by
the County.
3. Perform analyses of the County's water system, utilizing the water transmission system
computer model when appropriate, and present the results of the analyses to the
County in the form of a brief letter report.
4. Advise the County on matters related to the water system and the water transmission
system computer model.
5. Update water system master plan.
The above services will be provided by Boyle on an 'as needed' basis. The County's Utility
Services Director shall determine when such services are required, and shall so notify Boyle of
the services desired. Upon request, Boyle shall submit a letter to the Utility Services Director,
which shall describe the work tasks that Boyle understands the County desires the estimated
fee to complete such work tasks, and the time to complete the work tasks. The Utility Services
Director may authorize Boyle to proceed with such services by signing the letter in the space
provided, and returning it to Boyle.
MAY 2 a 1989 59 BooK .76 Fr�GL 941
WAY 2
BOOK 76 P��GE 94
III. Period of Service
Boyle shall provide services to the County under this Work Authorization until December 31,
r 1989. The period of service may be extended by mutual agreement of the County and Boyle.
IV. Insurance Requirements
Boyle shall maintain insurance policies with at least the following coverages throughout the
performance of services under this Work Authorization:
General Liability Insurance -
Automobile Liability Insurance -
Worker's Compensation -
Professional Liability Insurance -
V. Compensation for Services
In a combined single limit of $1,000,000 each
occurrence and aggregate.
In a combined single limit of $1,000,000 each
occurrence.
In accordance with Florida Statutes.
In a combined single limit of $1,000,000 each
occurrence and aggregate.
The County shall pay Boyle for services rendered an amount based on Standard Hourly Rates
for services rendered by employees assigned to the project, plus Direct Project Expenses, plus
Standard Rates for Computer Services as contained In the attached Standard Hourly Rate
Schedule marked Exhibit A. Boyle shall submit invoices monthly.
SUBMITTED BY:
BOYLE ENGINEERING CORPORATION
Byes
RicKiard J. Coleman, PE
Assistant Managing Engineer
Date:_
APPROVED BY.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By:
Gary Wh eler
Chairm n
Date: 5—a3-87
CONSULTANT FOR HYDROGEOLOGICAL WORK AT WEST REG. WASTEWATER PLANT
County Attorney Vitunac reviewed the following:
60
TO:
The Board
of County
Commissioners
FROM:
Sharon P.
Brennan -
Assistant County Attorney
DATE: May 19, 1989
SUBJECT: Hydrogeological Work at West Regional Wastewater
Treatment Plant
It has been determined by this office that the previous
award of this contract on March 21, 1989 was based on the
understanding that the requirements of the Consultant's
Competitive Negotiation Act (CCNA) were complied with prior
to submittal for the Board's approval. It has subsequently
been determined that the requirements of CCNA were not
adequately followed.
The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation Operating
Permit requires that the County perform a hydrogeological
analysis of the percolation ponds when the average daily
flows exceed 250,000 gallons per day. That figure was
reached in December, 1988. Because the analysis has not
been done, we are currently in violation of the conditions
for the permit and, therefore, there exists a valid public
emergency as certified by the County Administrator, whereby
an exception to the requirements of CCNA for the award of
this contract exists.
The contract, therefore, is being presented today for your
approval with the understanding that the previous award did
not meet with the requirements of CCNA, but that the delay
has caused a valid public emergency -whereby the County is
currently in violation of its operating permit for the West
Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant and, therefore, an
exception to the CCNA requirement for competitive
negotiation for the award of this contract exists.
Administrator Chandler informed the Board that when the
contract with Jammal & Associates was presented to the Commis-
sion on March 21st, it was for $5,575 and within the $6,000
threshold of the Consultants Competitive Negotiations Act. There
is a possibility if the DER required additional information, it
could increase $500 to a total of $6,075. The Administrator
believed actually this is splitting hairs.
Commissioner Scurlock was concerned that we have been hold-
ing this up for quite some time for such a small amount, and
noted that he would like to have enough flexibility for the
Administrator to be able to use his judgment on things such as
this and not have to split hairs.
61 Boa 7 f'A.GE ��
c- e
6 AY 2 W8
L_
M��
BOOK 944
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved the contract with Jarrmal &.Associates,
Inc. with the understanding that the previous
award did not meet with the requirements of CCNA,
but the delay has caused a valid public emergency.
LETTER OF COMMENDATION FROM THE SEBASTIAN INLET TAX DISTRICT COM.
Chairman Wheeler asked that the following letter commending
Public Works Director Jim Davis be made a part of the record:
The Sebastian Inlet Tax District Commission
1900 S. harbor City Blvd, Suite 115, Melbourne FL 32901, (407) 724-5175
V. David Rowell, Chairman - J. Michnel Schram, Commissioner
Charles Sembler Jr., Vice Chairman Thomas O. Lawton, Jr., Commissioner
Richard G. Giteles, Secretary -Treasurer r��'�6171 �OCi Raymond K. LeRoux, Administrator
May 19, 1989 R� 41gy19 N
R 89
The Hon. Gary Wheeler, Chairman cm v
Indian River County Board of Commissioncep RD
Indian River County Complex �9pM4;1;. N
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960-3365 s C-24
Re: Indian River County Public Works Department Assistance on Grading/Retilling Escarpment on
South Shoreline at Sebastian Inlet State Park
Dear Chairman eeIe
The Commissioners of the Sebastian Inlet Tax District would like to acknowledge the enthusiastic
assistance and cooperation of Jim Davis and his staff of the Indian River County Public Works
Department in grading and retlliing a storm caused escarpment on the south shoreline at the Sebastian
Inlet State Park.
The Tax District had moved 100,000 cubic yards of sand to the beach as part of our "beach
renourishment" program (to reduce the negative impact of the Inlet on down* drift beaches In Indian
River County). After we had alreadi tilled the material and graded it, a 72 hour storm (a) moved most
of the material toward the Wabasso area, but (b) created, as anticipated, an escarpment that might have
had a negative impact on sea turtles. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Florid DNR departmental
biologists were extremely concerned.
Weturned to Jim and he immediately solved the situation. We believe it to be the first time the tax district,
the state park, and county government cooperated as swiftly and effectively. In our minds, this is a
premiere example of how various units of government can work jointly. The project was carried out with
full cooperation from park management and our own consulting engineering people.
We have asked our own staff to develop closer working relationships with county government, and
think this project is one Indication that we have ever improving cooperation and lines of communica-
tion. Although the scope was modest, we hope It Is a foreshadow of even closer cooperation in the
future, when the county, the tax district and perhaps the City of Vero Beach begin to sit down and jointly
plan the problems of beach renourlshment.
62
Most people are quick to criticize government when it doesn't work. This time, when it did, we thought
we should take a moment to thank you, Jim Davis and his crews for a Job exceedingly well done. We
have communicated, the above to Tom Gardner, DNR executive director. Jim Is a fine young man doing
an excellent Job forthe people and taxpayers of Indian River County. We were delighted this assistance
received ample coverage in the Press Journal before and while it was being carried out.
We hope that you might read our words of appreciation Into the written record of county government.
With warm egards,
Charles Sembler, Jr.
Vice Chairman
cc- James Davis
a�
REPORT ON ACTIONS OF TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
Chairman Wheeler reviewed the following summary:
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS
TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
MAY 17, 1989
The Committee members unanimously recommended that the County
Commission approve the City of Vero Beach's request for $155,500
for the period April 1, 1989 to September 30, 1989.
The Committee members unanimously recommended that the County
Commission allocate $5,000 to the Indian River Arts .Council 'to
help fund the Fourth of July Extravaganza.
The Committee members unanimously recommended that the County
Commission approve $7,500 for the Chamber of Commerce and $7,500
for the Indian River Arts Council not including the $5,000 that
was made as a special' grant to the Arts Council for the period
April 1, 1989 to September 30, 1989.
The Committee members unanimously recommended that the County
Commission approve the City of Vero Beach's request for $155,000
for the 1989/1990 fiscal year.
The Committee members unanimously recommended that the County
Commission approve the Indian River Arts Council request for
$15,000 for the 1989/1990 fiscal year.
The Committee members unanimously recommended that the County
Commission approve the Chamber of Commerce request for $39,000
for the 1989/1990 fiscal year.
Commissioner Scurlock inquired what the $7,500 for the
Chamber of Commerce is for, and Chairman Wheeler explained that
they are our designated Chief Tourism Promoter.
Commissioner Scurlock wished to know what the $155,000 for
the City of Vero Beach for the 1989/90 FY is intended for, and
4
J
989 6 3 mumu76 f"G
SAY e L 945
L-
4
MAY4,9�
BOOK 76- PAGE 946
Chairman Wheeler believed it is to be used for improvements at
Riverside Park.
OMB Director Baird confirmed that it is for two restrooms
and formal parking at the Center for the Arts and the Theatre
area. These are capital improvements out of District #1 funds.
Commissioner Scurlock asked why the Arts Council is the
prime receiver of the funds other than the City of Vero Beach and
the Chamber of Commerce, and the Chairman explained that these
monies must be spent for tourist -oriented functions and benefits.
E
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
the recommendations of the Tourist Development Council
as set out above.
NORTH COUNTY AND SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICTS
The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment,
the Board of County Commissioners would reconvene acting as the
District Board of Fire Commissioners of the North Indian River
County Fire District and upon adjournment of that meeting would
thereupon reconvene acting as the District Board of Fire
Commissioners of the South Indian River County Fire District.
Those Minutes are being prepared separately.
There being no further business, upon Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 11:40 o'clock A.M.
ATTEST:
Clerk
64
Chairman