Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/8/1989August 8, 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, August 8, 1989, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Gary C. Wheeler, Chairman; Carolyn K. Eggert, Vice Chairman; Richard N. Bird; Margaret C. Bowman; and Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; William G. Collins, ll, Assistant County Attorney; Joseph Baird, OMB Director; and Barbara Bonnah, Deputy Clerk. " The Chairman called the meeting to order, and Attorney Collins led the Pledge of Allegiance to -the Flag. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS Chairman Wheeler announced that Item 713-2, listed on today's Agenda as a Public Discussion Item, was advertised as a Public Hearing and would be moved up on the Agenda to 7A-3. This item is the reconsideration of request for Development Order Amendment and PRD Special Exception Conceptual Plan Approval for a Golf Maintenance Site and Facility Addition to the Grand Harbor Project. Chairman Wheeler requested that Item 5-F - History Building Survey for Incorporated Indian River County -- be tabled for two weeks. Chairman Wheeler requested the addition of a recommendation by the Jungle Trail Committee to hire a consultant for the native plant landscaping. AUG 8 1989 !"'A L_ - r AUG 8 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously transferred, tabled, and added the above items. CONSENT AGENDA Chairman Wheeler requested that Item D be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. A. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of 7/11/89 ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 11, 1989, as written. B. Report — Re eeiived and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk to the Board: Copies of Minutes of Annual Meeting of Board of Supervisors of Sebastian River Water Control District held on 6/8/89; and Minutes of Annual Meeting of Landowners of Sebastian River Water Control District of 6/8/89/ C. Approval of Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously issued Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate No. 1219 in the sum of $109.94 to Henry J. Fischer. D. Release of Easement Request by Orchid Isle Associated Limited Partnership The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/20/89: E TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Robert M. Keatig, P Community Devel rm Director FROM: Charles W. Heath Code Enforcement Officer DATE: July 20,•1989 SUBJECT: RELEASE OF EASEMENT REQUEST BY: ORCHID ISLE ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP C/O ATTORNEY BRUCE BARKETT It is requested that the data herein be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of August 08, 1989. .:,....DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: =:The County has been petitioned by Orchid Isle Associates Limited Partnership, through their attorney Bruce * Barkett, owners of the subject property, for the release of a ten (10) foot utility easement granted to the Florida Power & Light Company and the Southern Bell Telephone Company by Resolution #84-34, dated May '23, 1984. The subject easement is described as the north ten (10) .,-'.feet of the south thirty-eight (38) feet of that part of Govern- ment Lot 1, Section 23, Township 31 South, Range 39 East, lying west of the centerline of State Road A -I -A, Indian River County, Florida, and recorded in Official Record Book 0699, Pages 1017, 1018, 1019, and 1020, of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. The subject property now lies, and is, within the corporate limits of the Town of Orchid, Florida, and it is the petitioners' inten- tion to utilize a large portion of the lands on which the easement lies for a residential development, at which time all the neces- sary dedications will be made to utility providers for service to the project. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS: The request has been reviewed by the Southern Bell Telephone Company, Florida Power & Light Company, Florida Cablevision Corporation, and the Indian River County Utility, Road & Bridge, and Public Works Departments. Based upon their review there was no objection to the release of the ten (10) foot utility easement; being the north ten (10) feet of the south thirty-eight (38) feet of that part of Government Lot 1, Section 23, Township 31 South, Range 39 East, lying west of State Road A -I -A, now lying and being in the Town of Orchid, Florida. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends t tion, the release ty-eight (38) feet Township 31 South, now lying and being A U 8 1989 D the Board, through the adoption of the north ten (10) feet of the of that part of Government Lot 1, Range 39 East, lying west of State in the Town of Orchid, Florida. BOOK of a resolu- south thir- Section 23, Road A -I -A, AUGFr- -I 8 1939 poor 77 F -AGE 526 Robert Keating, Director of Community Development, advised that there is a minor change in the legal description of the description as written in Exhibit A of the proposed resolution. Instead of the south 35 feet, it needs to be the north 10 feet of the south 38 feet. If the Board will approve it with that change, it will be fine. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved staff's recommendation set out in the above memo with the change in the legal description, and adopted Resolution 89-77A abandoning certain utility easements now lying and being in the Town of Orchid, as shown in O.R. Book 0699, Pages 1017, 1018, 1019, and 1020, Public Records of Indian River County Florida. RESOLUTION NO. 59-77A A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ABANDONING CERTAIN UTILITY EASEMENTS NOW LYING AND BEING IN THE TOWN OF ORCHID, AS SHOWN IN O.R. BOOK 0699, PAGES 1017, 1018, 1019, & 1020, PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. 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 Orchid Isle Associates Limited Partnership, A Florida Corporation, their successors in interest, heirs and assigns, whose mailing address is Orchid Isle Associates Limited Partnership, c/o Attorney Bruce Barkett, P.O. Box 3686, Vero Beach, Florida 32963-3686 Grantee, as follows: Indian River County does hereby abandon all right, title, and interest that it may have in the following described easements: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE. This RESOLUTION was moved for adoption by Commissioner Scurlock , seconded -by Commissioner Eggert , and adopted on the 8th day of August by the following vote: Commissioner Wheeler Aye Commissioner Eggert Aye Commissioner Bird Aye Commissioner Bowman Aye Commissioner Scurlock Aye AND The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 8th , day of August 1989. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By Zz" Gar C. Wheeler C firman �/i Attest By E' . LC c kjwC Y� e fre K. Barton �t /dirk U EXHIBIT "A" The North 10 feet of the South 38 feet of Government Lot 1, Section 23, Township 31 South, Range 39 East, which lies West of the centerline of A -1-A, as filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida, in Plat Book 4, Page 62, and terminating at the East right-of-way line of Jungle Trail. nor i Fr1:�C AUG 8 1989 BOOK�/� F',1r E. Old Sugar Mill Estates Unit 5 and 6 Subdivision Maintenance Agreement Security_and Contract for Construction The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/28/89: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Robert M. Reaty1g, AVP Community Development)Director THROUGH: Stan Boling'; §1CP Chief, Current Devel1op�ent FROM: Robert E. Wiegers Staff Planner DATE: July 28, 1989 SUBJECT: OLD SUGAR MILL ESTATES UNIT 5 & 6 SUBDIVISION MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT SECURITY AND CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION It is requested.that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of August 8, 1989. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: On January 24, 1989, the Board granted final plat approval to the .Old Sugar Mill Estates Unit 5 & 6 subdivision, an 8 lot subdivi- ..sion located on the north side of 12th Street, adjacent to the ::previously platted Old Sugar Mill'` Estates Subdivision. At the time of final plat approval, the owner's agent, Mr. Jim Beindorf, ;contracted with the County to finish construction of the required subdivision imparovements and posted an irrevocable letter of .credit in the .amount of $40,000 to secure the construction 'contract. The applicant is now requesting that the Board release the $40,000 letter of credit and accept the required warranty maintenance %agreement with the necessary maintenance bond. ANALYSIS: The Public Works department has inspected the subdivision and has verified that all required improvements have been constructed and are acceptable. Public Works has indicated that' the original construction contract and letter of credit may now be released. The project engineer has certified that 25% of the actual cost of the total required subdivision improvements is $10,000. The applicant has submitted a warranty maintenance agreement with a maintenance bond in accordance with Section 8 of the subdivision ordinance. The .Board may now accept the warranty maintenance agreement with the maintenance bond and release the existing contract for construction of required improvements. The applicant's submittals have been approved by the County Attorney's office, and satisfy all applicable County requirements. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the original contract and $40,000 letter of maintenance agreement ■ the Board of County Commissioners release for construction of required improvements credit, and accept the submitted warranty and bond. 0 M E E ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved staff's recommendation as set out in the above memo. AGREEMENT AND CONTRACT WILL BE PLACED ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD WHEN FULLY EXECUTED AND RECEIVED F. Historic Building Survey for Incorporated Indian River County ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously tabled this item for two weeks. G. IRC Housing Authority's Request for Final Plat Approval for 40th Avenue The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/31/89: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: 6Q�,ta 1�7_ IM 9�_4 Robert M. Keating, CP. Community Development Director THROUGH:- Stan BolineltCP Chief, Current Development FROM: John W. McCoy AA Staff Planner, Current Development DATE: July 31, 1989 SUBJECT: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY'S REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR 40TH AVENUE It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of August 8, 1989. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: The 40th Avenue road plat establishes the. right-of-way for 40th Avenue, which was constructed in conjunction with Phase I of the Victory Park housing project. Fortieth Avenue now provides a link from 45th Street to 49th Street and serves as access to Phase I and Phase II (under construction) of Victory Park. Currently, the 40th Avenue extension is an unplatted right-of-way. Although a deed has been executed to provide for right of way, the alignment of the 40th Avenue extension has not been legally described and AUG 0 M9 BOOK 7_7 AUG -its alignment has not been recorded via a final plat. Upon final _approval of this plat, the right-of-way will be formally estab- lished. Creation of new right-of-way requires a plat to be filed in accordance with Section 5 (54) and 6(a)(1) of the subdivision ordinance. Therefore, the Planning and Zoning Commission in approving the site plan for Victory Park Phase II imposed a condition that the developer. file a plat for the 40th Avenue extension to legally establish access and road frontage for the project prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Until the 40th Avenue right-of-way is platted, the project access will not be legally secure and no Certificate of Occupancy for Phase II can be issued. At its regular meeting of April 27, 1989, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted preliminary plat approval. The owner, Indian River County Housing Authority, has now submitted a final plat in conformance with the approved preliminary plat. ANALYSIS: The road has been constructed, and has been inspected and approved by the County's Public Works department. The final plat is in accordance with the approved preliminary plat, and all applicable final plat approval requirements have been met. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant final plat approval to the Indian River County Housing Authority for 40th Avenue and authorize the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners to sign the final plat. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously granted final plat approval to the IRC Housing Authority for 40th Avenue, and authorized the Chairman's signature on the final plat. PUBLIC HEARING - THOMAS ALDRICH'S REQUEST TO ABANDON A PORTION OF 31ST AVENUE_S.W. 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: ■ 0 E VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press-Joumal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a in the matter of in the A Court, was pub - fished In said newspaper in the issues of Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty. Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for he purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the *aid newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this >,�day of A.D. 19 •.r (SEAL) 77f'•N� IOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING `� Notice of hearing to consider a petition for the .'closing. abandonment. and vacatlon.ot all of that part of 31st Avenue Tying West of Lots 7, 8, '9 and 101n Block D of Emerson Villas, aecord- Ing to the plat recorded In Plat Book• 3, Pa 52. of the Public Records of Indian RNat Counry.j Florida. said land lying and being M Indian River County. Florfde, fibre tolkfws•.. Y.: •� � `�' �e;c;:�lt � qd'<��;�u��' The subject property Is described am ' A9 of that part- of 3tat Avenue (35' wide) ging West of Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10 In Block O of Emer- son Villas, according to the Plat recorded In Plot, Book 3, Page 52 of the Public Records of Indian. River County, Florida. . said land lying. in In`adian♦ River County. Fk* I iv A`public hearing at which parties f i lntiiest and citizens shall haw an opportunity to be heard, will be held by the Board of county Com- missioners of Indian River County. Florida In the County Commiaelon Chambers of the County Administration Building• located at 1840 2Stfr Street Vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday. August 8. 1989 at 9:05 a.m. Anyone who may wish to appeal a� decision which may be made at this meeting w111 now to ensure that a verbatim record of the praceed- Inge Is made which Includes testimony and evi- dence upon which the appeal will be based. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BY -s -GARY C. WHEELER. CHAIRMAN July 19.1989 . .I.- 'A, -1 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/31/89: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DIVISION HEAD'CONCURRENCE: Robert M. eat# g, AP Community Developmen FD,irector THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP Chief, Current Development FROM: John W. McCoy , W Staff Planner, Current Development DATE: July 31, 1989 SUBJECT: Thomas Aldrich's request to abandon a portion of 31st Avenue S.W. It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of August 8, 1989. AUG CO, 1989 Boor 71 r,, GL532 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: Thomas Aldrich has submitted a petition for abandonment of 31st Avenue S.W. north of 6th Street S.W., and adjacent to the Wood Hollow Subdivision Phase II. Per guidelines established by the Board of County Commissioners, the petition was reviewed by all County Divisions and utility providers having jurisdiction within the right-of-way. All reviewing agencies have recommended ap- proval of the abandonment, with the provision that the entire right-of-way be retained as a drainage and utilities easement. This portion of right-of-way is not part of the roadway system as noted on the County Thoroughfare Plan, and is not needed for the thoroughfare system. Presently the right-of-way is unpaved, unimproved, and vegetated. The right-of-way, provides legal access to lots 7, 8, 9, 10 of the Emerson Villas Subdivision and secondary access to an adjacent 1 acre tract, all owned by the applicant. The one acre tract has frontage on 5th Street S.W. (an arterial roadway), as well. The applicant will need to file a unity of title for all properties involved. The two reasons a unity of title is required is, first to prevent the applicant from selling off lots 8, 9 and 10 after the abandonment since these lots will not have any road right-of-way frontage and would be unbuildable under different ownership. Secondly, a unity of title is needed to legally unify the properties as one parcel, which will have frontage on 6th Street S.W. and 5th Street S.W. As an undivided "estate" parcel, access and frontage requirements would be satisfied. The subject segment of 31st Avenue is not needed to access adja- cent properties that may develop in the future. The adjacent areas are either already developed or would be accessed via extensions of other area streets. The applicant wants the right-of-way abandonment in order to secure and maintain the property. The applicant has indicated that people use the* right-of-way to dump garbage and to conduct other nefarious activities. The County's public works department has no objection to the abandonment, with the reservation of a drainage and utilities easement. Public works has stated that such an easement could not be fenced off, if the location of the fence were to obstruct access for county maintenance crews. Any proposal to locate fencing within the easement would need to be reviewed And approved by the Public Works department among other departments under separate consideration. With the stated easement reservation condition, all right-of-way abandonment criteria and policies for approval have been met. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the County abandon its rights to the subject portions of 31st Avenue S.W. and that the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners be authorized to execute the attached resolu- tion (Attachment #3), with the following conditions: 1. that a unity of title be executed for thees�o� property o -.ned by the applicant; and 7%�,�•� 2. that a drainage and utility easement be retained over the entire area abandoned. 10 Stan Boling, Chief of Current Development, explained that after the item had gone out, the property owner requested that he only tie together the 4 lots that abut this right-of-way. He has a 1 -acre piece that already has a driveway cut on 5th St.,S.W. and he is requesting that unity of title be filed for just 4 lots in Emerson Villas Subdivision. Staff recommends approval with that change under Condition #1 in staff's recommendation. Chairman Wheeler opened the Public Hearing, and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved staff's recommendation with the modification on the unity of title for 4 lots, and adopted Resolution 89-78, providing for the closing, abandonment, and vacation of a portion of 31st Avenue, between 6th Street S.W. and 5th Street S.W., said lands lying in Indian River County, Florida. AUG 8 1999 ' nor f j ga r. 5`1 J AUG sll�l '06-9 nv 1 7 FA - 534 RESOLUTION NO. 89 - 1� RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE CLOSING, ABANDONMENT, AND VACATION OF A PORTION OF 31ST AVENUE, BETWEEN 6TH STREET S.W. AND 5TH STREET S.W., SAID LANDS LYING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, on March 7, 1989 the County received a duly executed and documented petition from Thomas Aldrich of Vero Beach, Florida, requesting the County to close, vacate, abandon and disclaim any right, title and interest of the County and the public in and to a portion of 31st Avenue between 6th Street S.W. and 5th Street S.W., said lands lying in Indian River County, Florida. WHEREAS, in accordance with Florida Statutes §336.10, notice of a public hearing to consider said petition has been duly published; and WHEREAS, after consideration of the petition, supporting documents, staff investigation and report, and testimony of all those interested and present, the Board finds that said right-of-way is not a state or federal highway, nor located within any municipality, nor is said right-of-way necessary for continu- ity of the County's street and thoroughfare network, nor access to any given private property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMIS- SIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA hat: 1: All right, title and interest of thCounty and the public in and to that certain right-of-way bein; known more particularly described as: All of that part of 31st Avenue (351wide) lying West of Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10 in Block D of Emerson Vit as, according to the plat recorded in Plat Book 3 -Page 52 of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. Said land lying in Indian River County, Florida. is hereby forever closed, abandoned, vacated, surrendered, discontinued, remissed and released, with the exception that the entire right-of-way be retained as drainage and utilities easement (as described. above) and this easement is reserved in perpetuity unto the County and the Public and shall not be deemed to have been closed or abandoned in any way by this resolution. 2. Notice of the adoption of this resolution shall be forthwith published once within thirty (30) days from the date of adoption hereof; and 3. The Clerk is hereby directed to record this resolution together with the proofs of publication required by Florida Statues §336.10 in the Official Record Books of Indian River County without undue delay. The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner Scurloc 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 Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted .this 8th day of August , 1989. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF IND�I�AN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Gary C wheeler, Chairman Board f County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING - JOHN FOUNTAIN'S REQUEST FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY ABANDONMENT The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to wit: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority *personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a In the matter in the A Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper In the issues of 049 Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, In said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund forhe purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the *aid newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this _ � _qday off A.D. 19 ZE 'i �l (BusinessiManager) ( t, MveF6ounty{Florida)-. - (SEAL) NOTICE OR PUBLIC HEARING . Notice of hearing to consider a petition for' dosing. ahartdonmenL and vacation of a port Of 92nd Court from 20tit,to 22nd Street as aha on apIat of Paradise Park UnitNa s rsoordei Plat. Book age 34 at Indlnt RIVW Coni '.Flartde. Wd WN and being In Iridian RI I Honda, No..orgi ally. acheQidad 1o'b4 AugUs(t:•1988, and to oonNderihs ung. abandonnfard gnd xleation eta p�tio� of 21 Street between thq East tine of 128th Avenue (92nd• Wtvs) ehowrt on' Mrs plat of Paradise Park Unit No. 3 recorded In Ma Public Records of Indian Rhrer County. Flartda in Plat Book 4 Peg e 34- Florida. 4 Florida. A public hea►Mg at which parties In Interest and cltlzera shoo have aftnfty to be heard. will be hold by the Board of County Com-• missioners of Indian River Courcy. Florida In the County Commission Clambers the County Administration Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach. Florida on Tuesday. August 8.1989 et 9:05 a.m. **, <•-%. •a ,,.�, I ! Anyone who may wish to appeal any dedslen which may be mads at this meeting wlp need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed. Inge Is made which Includes testimony and evi- dence upon which the appeal will be 10 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BY -GARY C. WHEELER, CHAIRMAN July 19. 1989 L , Commissioner Bird declared a Conflict of Interest and left the Chambers during the discussion and vote on this matter. Fr- 'I AUG U 1989 BOOK 7 7 F'Ar. -RM 8B , MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR C LINTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS) LAST N AiL•-I IRST NA\I -:+11D LE NAME % f NAMiE OF OARD. COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, R COMMITTED /, , / %� (.ACX( AC1 �fL��'� ltC.(w> IG�cLcGt� t'L%1. MAILING ADDRESS CME v �Cr� ��T �"' e��Z Q BOARD. COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORI Y. OR COMMITTEE ON IS A WHICH CITY I SERVECOUNTYNIT Q OTHER LOCAL AGENCY OUN'rY e&K • C CITYM06 NAME OF POL TICAL SUBDIVISION: (' ` DATE ON WHICH VOTE OC ' RR . MY POSITION IS: k ELECTIVE '. APPOINTIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 811 This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non -advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. The requirements of this law are mandatory; although the use of this particular form is not required by law, you are encouraged to use it in making the disclosure required by law. Your responsibilities under the law'when faced with a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason. please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. - INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3943, FLORIDA STATUTES ELECTED OFFICERS: A person holding elective county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom tie is retained. In either case, you should disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; wird WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and tiling this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: A person holding appointive county, municipal, or other local public office ;\-MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. A person holding an appointive local office otherwise may participate in a matter in which he has a conflict of interest, but must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision by oral or written communication, whether made by the officer or at his direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE (MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: • You should complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. • A copy of the form should be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. • The form should be read publicly at the meeting prior to consideration of the matter in which you have a conflict of interest. 11..u.. r.. 14 s � � PA(iF I IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION OR VOTE AT THE MEETING: • You should disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. • You should complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. DISCLOSURE OF STATE OFFICER'S INTEREST hereby disclose that on 19 ; (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) _ inured to my special private gain; or X inured to the special gain of t t,l �CJi 141 VA , by whom I am retained. (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my interest in the measure is as follows: /►/�! /� i/7` G��.'T/ �CAL1 �'l , IfJh'7S fG`�. (J�[LLAIG-1 i)/© — It4 qASLrLGtet,/ egcA /`? P;e O t 2�� 7r %ice- / Gel E 44 U Z- Zi S i- -i�,e :�4 t/i . Date Filed Signature NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317 (1985), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: - IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A.CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $5,000. LI: ras» 89 . 10-86 15 r r tJt9 d r�i�C PAGE 2 AUG 31 1989 800K. 77 538 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/18/89: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Robert M. Keatin , Airyw Community Develo men t irector THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP Chief, Current Development FROM: John W. McCoy 4 � Staff Planner,�urrent Development DATE: July 18, 1989 SUBJECT: John Fountain's request for right-of-way abandonment It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of August 8, 1989. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: John Fountain has submitted a petition for the abandonment of 92nd .=Court and 21st Street (both "paper streets") in the Paradise Park subdivision near the I-95/S.R. 60 interchange.. Per guidelines established by the Board of County Commissioners, the petition was :reviewed by all County divisions and utility providers having jurisdiction within the right-of-way. All reviewing agencies have recommended approval of the abandonment, with the provision that the entire right-of-way areas for both roads be retained as a drainage- utilities easement. Neither of these right-of-way portions are part of the roadway system as noted on the County _Thoroughfare Plan, and neither are needed for the thoroughfare system. ANALYSIS: As shown on attachment #2, 92nd Court separates the subdivided lots in block R and S of Paradise Park from a 4 acre (unsubdivid- ed) tract to the east. The applicant owns all of block R and the 4 acre tract to the east. The areas containing Blocks P, S, 0 & R are accessed off of S.R. 60 by a 60' wide FDOT service road right-of-way which parallels S.R. 60 and the I-95 access ramp and which connects into the 92nd Drive right-of-way. FDOT has verified that this service road right-of-way is available for access; this service road is not affected by the abandonment request. The applicant's stated purpose for the abandonment is to consoli- date block R and his 4 acre tract to the east in order to enhance development opportunities. The staff agrees that a large consol- idated tract of land is more viable in a commercial land use category, than the small lots platted within Paradise Park; approval of the request will allow such a consolidation. However, the staff feels it is prudent to retain the right-of-ways as drainage and utility easements, until a plan has been submitted for development. At that time alternate provisions can be made for drainage and utilities if necessary. 16 With conditions relating to reservation of easementiand a unity of title to consolidate parcels, staff has no objection to the request. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the County abandon its rights to 92nd Court and to 21st Street and that the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners be authorized to execute the attached resolution (Attachment #3), with the following conditions: 1. that the right-of-way area be retained as drainage and utility easements; and 2. that a unity of title be filed for the lots in block R and the tract to the east owned by the applicapt. Commissioner Eggert asked whether 92nd Drive goes through, because it appears that the people living to the back of this tract have to zig-zag through the space set out as a park. Stan Boling, Chief of Current Development, pointed out the zoning changes to commercial between the park tract and the properties that are closer to SR -60, and felt the Board may not want to mix residential and commercial traffic. Commissioner Scurlock understood there has been an overall problem with ingress and egress because of the close proximity to the intersection of SR -60 and 1-95, and felt the situation would certainly be improved by consolidating more than one piece of property. Mr. Boling advised that the DOT has verified that their 60 -ft. access service road can be utilized by developers. Chairman Wheeler opened the Public Hearing, and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. John Fountain, petitioner, questioned the wording in the above staff recommendation where it says that staff feels it is prudent to retain the right-of-way as drainage and utility easements until a plan has been submitted for development and at that time alternate provisions can be made for drainage and utilities, if necessary. Since they are planning to submit a development plan in the very near future, he asked if they could 17 L AUG 8 1989, r -I I `� 7 54� @ Ft:i�C swap off and trade the position of the utilities within the drainage easements without having to come back before the County Commission. Attorney Collins explained that whether or not it will come back to the County Commission depends on the nature of the development and whether it is something that requires a public hearing. If it is something that can be handled administratively, but involves a release of easement, it can be brought to the Board on the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Scurlock believed the real effort here is to retain the County's utility rights in case the project doesn't go ahead in an overall concept. Mr. Boling felt that Mr. Fountain's concern was time delays and that he didn't want to be slowed down in the process and have to come before the Board again. Attorney Collins noted that the procedure for a release of easement is a lot easier than a road abandonment. Mr. Boling advised that it takes 4-6 weeks for a release of easement, but site plan approval takes that long also. They could track both requests through concurrently. Mr. Fountain understood that there would not be any rezoning necessary, and Chairman Wheeler explained that Mr. Fountain could come in and do his site plan and take care of all the drainage, and after the site plan is approved at the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting, the release of easement probably would come before the Board the following week. Chairman Wheeler emphasized that we are not talking about an additional 6-8 weeks; we are talking about tracking the two requests concurrently. 18 Mr. Fountain understood then that it is the Board's intent to approve this if adequate drainage and utility easements can be worked out and if staff and the P & Z have approved it. Commissioner Scurlock felt there is no intent to hold him up, it's just that the County has to make sure we retain our utility right-of-way. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird having declared a conflict of interest) approved staff's recommendation as set out in the above memo, and adopted Resolution 89-79, providing for the closing, abandonment, and vacation of a portion of 92nd Court and 21st Street, said lands lying in Indian River County, Florida. AUG e, 1999 19 j NIj` r A -O G RESOLUTION N0. 89 - 79 poor 77 {,E. 542 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE CLOSING, ABANDONMENT, AND VACATION OF A PORTION OF 92ND COURT AND 21ST STREET, SAID LANDS LYING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, on March 9, 1989 the County received a duly executed and documented petition from- John N. Fountain of Rockledge, Florida, requesting the County to close, vacate,- abandon and disclaim any right, title and interest of the County and the public in and to portions of 92nd Court and 21st Street, said lands lying in Indian River County, Florida. WHEREAS, in accordance with Florida Statutes §336.10, notice of a public hearing to consider said petition has been duly published; and WHEREAS, after consideration of the petition, supporting documents, staff investigation and report, and testimony of all those interested and present, the Board finds that said right-of-way is not a state or federal highway, nor located within any municipality, nor is said right-of-way necessary for continu- ity of the County's street and thoroughfare network, nor access to any given private property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMIS- SIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: 1. All right, title and interest of the County and the public in and to that certain right-of-way being known more particularly described as: All of 21st Street between the East line of Blocks R and S and the East line of 92nd Drive (128th Avenue as shown on the plat of Paradise Park Unit No. 3 recorded in the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida in plat Book 4 Page 34.) Lying in Indian River County, Florida. The East 35 feet of Tract 7 in Section 3, Township 33 South, Range 38 East, of the Indian River Farms Company plat, as shown on the plat of Paradise Park Unit No. 3, recorded in Plat Book 4 Page 34 of the Public Records of Indian. River County, Florida, LESS and EXCEPT that part lying within the right-of-way of the Interstate 95 - SR 60 interchange, the said 35 -foot strip more fully described as follows: e Begin at the Northwest corner of the said Tract 7 and run Southerly, along the East line of the said tract, a distance of 1109.59 feet to a point in the North line of a 60 -foot wide service road lying North of and adjacent to the limited -access right-of-way of the Interstate 95 - SR 60 interchange. Then run Northwesterly along the said right-of-way on an interior angle of 56°45' to the left, a distance of 41.85 feet to a point. Then run Northerly, on a line parallel with and 35 feet measured normal to the first course here described, a distance of 1086.64 feet more or less to a point in the North line of Tract 7. Then run Easterly along the North line of Tract 7 a distance of 35 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Lying in Indian River County, Florida. is hereby forever closed, abandoned, vacated, surrendered, discontinued, remissed and released, with the exception that the entire right width be retained (as described above) and this easement is reserved in perpetuity unto the County and the Public and shall not be deemed to have been closed or abandoned in any way by this resolution. 2. Notice of the adoption of this resolution shall be forthwith published once within thirty (30) days from the date of adoption hereof; and 3. The Clerk is hereby directed to record this resolution together with the proofs of publication required by Florida Statues 5336.10 in the Official Record Books of Indian River County without undue delay. 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 Richard N. Bird Abstained Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 8thday of August , 1989. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA �i BY: aryWheeler, Chairman Board f County Commissioners ATTEST: eyYo Barton Cllr State of Florida (,r • County of Indian ver ' I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized in this State and County to take acknowledgements, personally appeared GARY C. WHEELER, and JEFFREY K. BARTON, as Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners and Clerk, respec- tively, to me known to be the persons described in and who execut- ed the foregoing instrument and they acknowledged before me that they executed the same. WITNESS my hand and officia seal 'n the County and State last aforesaid this M day of , A.D., 1989. CA aq• Ndtary Public XTARY PUBLIC SU OF fLORIDA Ky CONNISSION EXP. JULY -8;1990 GENERAL INS. 'JNO. _ APPROVED AS TO PLANNING MATTERS BY Robert M. Kea ng, CP Director, Co;;Junity Development Division 7 Alm Cc' AVprO':-!d j Dale Admlr. /-^s ,dSPt ' { Dept. j ,Z HISh AUG" 98 poa� 1 FA, �4j r- A U G 'E") 19 8 9 Poor 17 f'1Gc 4 PUBLIC HEARING - GRAND HARBOR'S REQUEST FOR D.O. AMENDMENT AND PRD SPECIAL EXCEPTION CONCEPTUAL PLAN APPROVAL FOR GOLF MAINTENANCE SITE AND FACILITY The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to wit. VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River CoJnty, 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 in the matter o In the __.. _ ._J'�,_ Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of V l 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 office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.. i� Sworn to and subscribed before me this _ day ofd ' A.D. 19_ 1 f (BuSines3 61anaggr) .'— (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River Count', Florida) (SEAL) I`i: .:.17 it�w^ • 'n rr, r! r�,y{rtY. 22 ma NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice of hearing to reconsider the granting of a Planned Residential Development (P.R.D) conceptual plan and special exception approval and approval of a development order minor amendment for a +-4.9 acre golf course and ground maintenance facility for the Grand Har- bor project. The subject property Is located in the NE quarter of the NW quarter of Section 23, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, north of the Grand Harbor entrance road and east of the proposed Indian River Boulevard. (NOTE: This proposal was originally considered at the June 13, 1989 Board of County Commissioners meeting.) A public hearing at which parties In Interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard, will be held by the Board of County Com- missioners of Indian River County, Florida in the County Commission Chambers of the County Administration Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday. August 8, 1989 at 9:05 a.m. Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed- ings Is made which Includes testimony and evi- dence upon which the appeal is based. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BY -s -GARY C. WHEELER, CHAIRMAN July 19. 1989 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/31/89: TO: The Honorable Members of The Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Robert ea g, P Community Deve�jopme Director FROM: St%n Boling ? Chief, Current Development DATE: July 31, 1989 SUBJECT: RECONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR DEVELOPMENT ORDER AMENDMENT AND PRD SPECIAL EXCEPTION CONCEPTUAL PLAN APPROVAL FOR A GOLF MAINTENANCE SITE AND FACILITY ADDITION TO THE GRAND HARBOR PROJECT. It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of August 8, 1989. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: Proiect Requests , Grand Harbor, Inc. is requesting approval to add a ±4•acre site to the overall Grand Harbor project. The subject site, adjacent to =:the existing Grand Harbor golf course and the planned POD I area, is to be used for a golf and grounds maintenance :•_;facility. To officially add the site to the project, both the project development order (D.O.) and the existing overall PRD plan need to be amended to include the addition. 'Approval to construct the facility would require preliminary PRD plan approval and the `'issuance of a land development permit... normal steps in the PRD process. Grand Harbor, Inc. has applied for the necessary D.O. amendment and the PRD plan amendment, and has also applied for preliminary PRD plan (site plan and plat) approval. Pursuant to State regu- lations, the D.O. amendment has been reviewed by the State and the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Coun_cil. Neither the State nor the Planning Council objected to having the amendment handled purely on the local level. Subsequent to State and Planning Council review, at its February 28, 1989 meeting the Board of County Commissioners determined that the amendment request does not constitute a substantial deviation and can be reviewed and adopted on the local level as a minor D.O. amendment. At its regular meeting of June 13, 1989, the Board initially considered the subject requests and voted to deny them (see attachment #8). Subsequently, upon a request by the developer, the Board voted at its July 11, 1989 meeting to reconsider the requests to allow the applicant's engineers (absent at the June 13th meeting) to make a full presentation. The requests have been re -advertised and noticed; the Board may now reconsider the requests. 23 R;,riK l l �.,�r 54 i AUG 8 `1989 Planning and Zoning Commission Action poor 77 Fa,t 546 At its..regular meeting of May 11, 1989, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted to: a. Recommend that the Board approve the proposed D.O. amendment; b. recommend that the Board approve the PRD special exception conceptual plan with conditions outlined by staff; and C. approve the preliminary PRD plan (site plan and plat) subject to the Board approving the D.O. amendment and the PRD special exception conceptual plan. Board of County Commissioners Review The Board is now to consider approving the requested D.O. amend- ment by adoption of a proposed resolution (see attachment #9) and the PRD special exception conceptual plan. Because the Planning and Zoning Commission has taken action on the preliminary PRD plan, approval of the conceptual plan would automatically put into effect the preliminary plan approval along with any conceptual PRD plan conditions approved by the Board. AP?ALYSIS : Conceptual and Preliminary PRD Plans: i The subject ±4.0 acre site is to be "switched" for the existing 2.5 acre maintenance facility site that was conceptually approved along with the DRI and PRD. This existing 2.5 acre site is adjacent to (west) the proposed Indian River Boulevard, a proposed Grand Harbor office park (zoned CL) and to property zoned for multi -family development (RM -6). Upon approval of the subject ±4.0 acre golf maintenance site, the existing 2.5 acre site would be designated within the DRI as open space at this time, retaining its current RM -6 zoning. Later, the applicant could redesignate the existing site for an appropriate use within the project. 1. Size of Property: ±4.012 acres (new site) [Note: area of the facility use includes some existing golf course area; total development area: ±4.904 acres]. 2. Zoning Classification: RM -6 Residential, Multi -Family up to 6 units per acre. 3. Land Use Designation: MD -1 Residential, Medium Density 1 up to 8 units per acre. 4. Proposed Building Floor Area: 17,600 square feet enclosed building; 3,200 square feet "pole barns" 5. Surrounding Uses/Zoning: North: vacant/RM-6 South: golf course/RM-6 East: golf course, planned for POD I (residential) /RM -6 West: proposed Indian River Boulevard, vacant/RM-6 6. Environment and Site Conditions: The site contains some significant hardwood "hammock" areas. Out of 34 existing "protected" trees on site (all oak), only 7 are to be removed, 27 are to be preserved. In staff's opinion, the facility has been well-designed to preserve trees, and thus adequately protect the site's main environmentally significant characteristics. 24 � s � M M r 7. Landscaping and Buffering: A 25' (minimum) landscape perimeter buffer area is provided around the entire site. The combination of preserved trees, planted trees, and hedging will exceed landscape require- ments. The proposed perimeter buffering meets or exceeds "Type B" landscape screening requirements. 8. Open Space: Required: 50% (total PRD) Provided: 58%+ (total PRD) [4 acre site: 49%] 9. Recreation Space: Requirement applies only to residential unit development. Overall PRD exceeds requirements with golf course, tennis, club, and bikepath facilities. 10. Drainage: A stormwater permit will be issued along with the land development permit. Public Works has approved the site plan drainage layout. 11. Utilities: Water and sewer services will be provided by the County. Utilities permits will be obtained prior to issuance of a land development permit. 12. Traffic Circulation: There are two basic alternatives to site access from Indian River Boulevard. The -Public Works director has approved alternative #1; alternative #2 is possible and is under consideration; both are described below. The developer has indicated that either alternative is acceptable to him. [Alternative #11 The site would be accessed differently in the two phases of the project. In the first phase, the project is to be accessed by a temporary stabilized, unpaved driveway which is to connect to the existing Grand Harbor Boulevard. The route of this road is to run along side the Indian River Boulevard right-of-way. In the second phase, a permanent paved driveway is to connect to the constructed Boulevard at an approved future Boulevard median cut which is to serve several parcels that "line up" with the median cut. The applicant has submitted a certified cost estimate for the phase 2 driveway construction as well as for construction of 4 deceleration lane, and has agreed to escrow funds to guarantee construction. During land development permit review, Public Works will have to approve the alignment and specifications of the temporary driveway, as well as arrange- ments for temporary re -alignment during Boulevard con- struction. [Alternative #2] There would be one permanent driveway built toward the southern portion of the site to align with the proposed median cut that is to serve the Grand Harbor office park. Thus, under alternative #21 access would align with a proposed median cut south of the site. Alternative #1 driveway would share a common access point and median cut with multi -family zoned property. The Alternative #2 driveway would share a median cut with a proposed office park. However, sharing the median cut with the office park could alter current plans for a limited median cut design. With more design information, required within the land development permit application, the public works director can determine which alternative is best from a traffic circu- lation standpoint. AUG 25 FOCI 7'7 G,,U- 54 d A U lel c) 1989 puo� 77 54S Public Works has requested that, as part of the land develop- ment permit application, the applicant submit a traffic impact analysis and commit to any traffic improvements indicated as necessary by the analysis. The applicant has agreed to this condition; no improvements are known to be needed at this time. The facility will be connected to both the Grand Harbor and River Club golf courses via internal service roads; thus, no conflicts should arise between maintenance vehicles and normal project traffic. 13. Dedications and Improvements: No Boulevard right-of-way is needed (adequate Boulevard right-of-way has already been obtained adjacent to this site). As referenced above, funds are to be escrowed to guarantee construction of the permanent driveway and a deceleration land off of the Boulevard. 14. Phases: The project will be phased in relation to a tempo- rary and permanent driveway, as referenced above. 15. Waivers: none requested or needed. All applicable PRD special exception and preliminary plan requirements are met with the application subject to con- ditions specified at the end of this report. D.O. AMENDMENT: The D.O. amendment is to be adopted by a resolution, which simply incorporates the new 4 acre site into the DRI project area and provides for assumption of all applicable D.O. obligations.All local government DRI concerns can be addressed through normal site plan and/or PRD ordinance requirements and review. The PRD applications under consideration satisfy staff concerns. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Adopt the proposed resolution which approves the requested D.O. amendment to add the subject site to the DRI project for use as a golf and grounds maintenance facility. 2. grant PRD special exception approval to add the site to the PRD project for the requested use subject to the following conditions: a. as part of the land development permit, the developer must submit information and analysis necessary for the public works director to determine the best alternative M or #2) as described in item #12 of this report; b. prior to issuance, the land development permit shall include alignment and construction specifications, for the best alternative as determined by the public works director, that are acceptable to the public works director; 26 M C. prior to issuance of a land development permit, the developer shall submit a traffic impact analysis report acceptable to the public works director; .any traffic improvements indicated within the accepted report as necessary shall be provided prior to the issuance of a C.O. for the facility. d. If alternative #1 is chosen by the public works direc- tor, then prior to issuance of a C.O. for the facility, the applicant shall escrow funds in the amount of the submitted and accepted certified cost estimate to guarantee construction of the permanent driveway and the deceleration lane off of the Boulevard to the permanent entrance. Stan Boling, Chief of Current Development, noted that two things are different in the information to the Board. He didn't feel that he stressed enough at the last meeting the fact that through the Development Order process there is an existing maintenance facility site on the west side of Indian River Boulevard that would have accessed with the marginal access road to an office parking tract. He pointed out the location of a 21 acre piece which is called out in the D.O. as a golf maintenance facility, and explained that what the D.O. would do is switch those sites -- one would become a larger maintenance facility and would be on the same side as the golf course it would service, and the other space would go to open space for the time being. It would have to come back through for an amendment to the D.O. if it were to go to any other use than open space. Those tracts are surrounded by multi -family development. Commissioner Scurlock hadn't understood when this request came before the Board the first time that there was this other golf maintenance facility site called out in the D.O. 'He understands now that there is a planned facility on the west side and what they are doing, in effect, is moving that facility over to the other side and consolidating the two on the east side into one. Commissioner Eggert understood that another cut in the Boulevard north of this property was approved as part of 27 0 ,,.,� AUG 8 ` 989 nog � l �,,,c �� AUG Vie` 550 negotiations on another matter and that this road now will be joining with that cut. Mr. Boling referred to the charts and explained a couple of options. He advised that Jim Davis favors the northerly access. Commissioner Bowman questioned the large amount of impervious surface, and Mr. Boling advised that a lot of that area probably will be marl, which is less impervious than asphalt. Darrell McQueen of McQueen & Associates, engineers on the project, explained that the two acres of impervious surface is the combined amount for this site and the River Club site. Commissioner Bowman also noted that it has significant hardwood areas, and emphasized that they are supposed to leave 27 trees. Mr. McQueen explained that they took a survey of the actual trees growing in there and counted 32 oaks of substantial size of 30 to 48 inches. Twenty-seven of those have been retained on that site, plus another cluster closer to the river. The site plan has been laid out in an effort to save the trees. Mr. McQueen pointed ou� the entrance into the office park and explained the alternative of putting the entrance into the maintenance facility. He understood that it would be up to Jim Davis to decide whether or not that would be a right turn in and right turn out. Commissioner Eggert asked what the northerly driveway would do to those trees, and Mr. McQueen believed they have enough room in there to work around the trees. They have talked with Mr. Davis about increasing that 25 ft. buffer along the Boulevard.to 35 feet. In addition, they have taken one phase off of that building from what was previously submitted. Commissioner Scurlock preferred the other entrance, but agreed that it is a traffic engineering design matter. Mr. McQueen felt that they could live with either entrance. Commissioner Bowman was concerned about the soil, sand and rock storage section on that corner, and hoped it would be 28 V// adequately buffered because she didn't want to drive up the Boulevard and look at that sort of thing. Mr. McQueen stated that the storage area would be set out from the Boulevard and would be well buffered by the trees. Chairman Wheeler was primarily concerned about the Boulevard and d.idn't want to open up a door that we can get back out of if we change properties around there with another cut or a golf cart path, or whatever. Commissioner Eggert explained that this is not another cut. It is fitting in one of two cuts, and Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that it actually would eliminate potential impact on the Boulevard by moving it to the other side. Director Davis advised that staff recommends utilizing the northern access. He felt it would be even better for the Boulevard to have a marginal access road from that same access south to the office park property by Grand Harbor. That would eliminate the office park connection to the Boulevard and give better spacing. Commissioner Scurlock stressed that is a different issue than what is before the Board today, but Commissioner Eggert emphasized that this has.to be made to fit the Boulevard, not the Boulevard made to fit this. The Chairman opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 89-80, amending the Development Order approving the Grand Harbor Development of Regional Impact, as recommended by staff. U G 8 1999 2 9 R00� , ail Pa,, c I ,AUG 8 '689 800K 77 552 RESOLUTION NO. 89 - 80 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER APPROV- ING THE GRAND HARBOR DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT. WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions in Chapter 380 Florida Statutes, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County has adopted Resolution 85-128 establishing the Development Order approving the Grand Harbor Development of Regional Impact, and has adopted Resolution 86-4, Resolution 86-89, Resolution 86-108, and Resolution 87-147, amending the adopted Development Order; and WHEREAS, the project developer has requested a certain amendment to the Development Order to add a ±4 acre parcel, legally described in the attached "Exhibit All, to the total project site to be used for a golf and grounds maintenance facility, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 380 of the Florida Statutes said request has been reviewed by the Treasure Coast Regional Planning_ Council and the Florida Department of Community Affairs, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 380 of the Florida Statutes Indian River County has determined that said request does not constitute a substantial deviation, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMIS- SIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the adopted Develop- ment Order approving the Grand Harbor Development of Regional Impact as amended is hereby amended to include the requested addition of a ±4 acre area to the overall project site with conditions as follows: 1. The referenced request is hereby incorporated by reference into the Application for Development Approval for the proj- ect. 2. All conditions specified in the Development Order (Resolution 85-128), and all subsequent resolutions previously refer- enced, shall remain in full force and effect and shall be binding upon the ±4 acre site being added to the project. 3. The ±4 acre site being added to the project shall be used as a golf and grounds maintenance facility. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION WAS PASSED AND ADOPTED in a public hearing held on this 8th day of August , 1989. c�_<-� Gary C. heeler, Chairman BOARD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST Wf� y ar o , Co nClerk APPROVED AS TO PLANNING MATTERS: W. 241;J24S_e' A, Robert M. Keatln , A 17P 30 "EXHIBIT A" "Commence at the Northeast corner of Section 23, Township 32 South, Range 39 East, Indian River County, Florida. Thence run North 890 56' 17" West along the North line *of the aforesaid Section 23 a distance of 2662.76 feet to the quarter Section line; thence run South 001 01' 24" West along the aforesaid quarter Section line a distance of 995.01 feet to the point of beginning of a parcel of land lying in the aforesaid Section 23 of which is more particularly described as follows: thence continue South 000 01' 24" West along the. quarter Section line a distance of 331.67 feet; thence run North 89° 48' 01" west a distance of 439.66 feet to intersect with the East right-of-way line of Indian river Boulevard; thence run Northwest along the East right-of-way line of Indian river Boulevard on a curve to the right with a chord bearing of North 310 15' 13" west having a radius of 3766.10 feet with a central angle of 00° 18' 13" and run an arc distance of 19.95 feet to a•curve to the right having a radius of 1800.00 feet with a central angle of 11° 07' 30" and run an arc distance of 349.50 feet; thence leaving the aforesaid West right-of-way of Indian River Boulevard run South 89° 49' 49" East a distance of 600.59 feet to the point of beginning, containing 4.012 acres more or less and subject to all easements of record" PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT DEFINING "FRONT YARD" FOR CORNER LOTS The Board reviewed the following letter dated 7/24/89: GEORGE d COLLINS, JFV CALVIN B. BROWN WILLIAM W. CALDWELL BRADLEY W. ROSSWAV BRUCE D. BARKETT • BOARD CERTIFIED REAL ESTATE HAND DELIVER Collins, Brown & Caldwell CHARTERED ATTORNEYS AT LAW 744 BEACHLAND BOULEVARD VERO BEACH. FLORIDA 32963 FAX * 407-234-5213 Mr. Gary Wheeler, Chairman Board of County Commissioners Indian River County 1840 - 25th Avenue Vero Beach, FL 32960 July 24, 1989 Re: Proposed Ordinance Amendment Dear Gary: PLEASE REPLY TD. POST OFFICE BOX 3688 VERO BEACH. FLORIDA 32964 407.231-4343 DISTRIBUTION LIST Commissioners Administrator Attorney Personnel Public Work3 COM.-nuni-t ccv. c- Utilities Finance Other QLe,3S My client, Sandra Holland, is prevented from building a swimming pool at her home because of a quirk in the County ordinances defining "front yard" for corner lots. I have discussed the problem with Bob Keating and Stan Boling 31 AUG `989 FQ®,�rJ BOCK 1 e f r� �C 5"rL and they would be receptive and supportive of an amendment to the ordinance to clear up the quirk and give Mrs. Holland the right to build her swimming pool. The County has a procedure which allows a citizen to apply for an ordinance amendment by paying an application fee of $500.00. Alternatively, the County Commission can initiate the ordinance amendment process and save the citizen the application fee. This letter is to request the County Commission to initiate the process to amend the ordinance. There is justification in this case because (a) the ordinance really does create an unfair situation which should be corrected, and (b) Mrs. Holland bought this home with good reason to believe that the County staff would approve construction of this pool. The proposed ordinance title and amendments are attached for your review. Please ask_ the. Commission to ask staff._to initiate _the _process to make_these.amendments.,as soon as possible. -- u Very truly yours, BRUCE BARKETT Attorney Bruce Barkett of Collins, Brown & Caldwell referred to a graphic showing the location of his client's property in Dune Subdivision off of AIA, and explained that his client wants to build a pool behind the 10 -ft. planting easement. Robert Keating, Director of Community Development, explained that the variance criteria is structured very tightly and that Attorney Barkett feels this is appropriate for a variance because it affects a large number of lots in the same category. Staff agrees that this is a definition that could use some work. In most cases when an applicant wants a change, staff recommends that they pursue it through the land development regulations or pay a $500 fee. However, the County is being required to redo its land development regulations as soon as the new Comp Plan is submitted, which won't be until the end of this month. Attorney Barkett explained that the question today is whether or not the Commission will allow staff to explore the possibility of his client building a pool in that spot without her paying the $500 application fee. 32 Chairman Wheeler felt the fee should be waived in a case like this where someone would have to wait a substantial time for the land development regulations to be redone, especially since there are a number of cases like this. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously directed staff to look at this ordinance amendment and bring it back to the Board, and waived the $500 application fee for Sandra Holland. CANCELLATION OF TOWER SPACE LEASE WITH FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/2/89: DATE: AUGUST 2, 1989 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DOUG WRIGHT, DIRECTOR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SERVICES SUBJECT: CANCELLATION OF TOWER SPACE LEASE `.iTITH FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION It is respectfully requested that the information contained herein be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at the next regular scheduled meeting. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: On June 14, 1988, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approved a Tower Space Lease for antenna space on Hobart Tower for the Federal Communications Commission. The lease provided for antenna space at 390 foot level at the rate of $180.00 per month or $2,160.00 annually. The Federal Communications Commission has requested that the lease be terminated and cancelled effective June 29, 1989. .:u, �. �iLTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS: The cancellation is requested due to budget restrictions as stated in ,-%the letter received from the Federal Communications Commission on 10, 1989. The transmitter, antenna, and other equipment has , 'j�.-already been removed from the site. ,AUG 8 1989 33 Boor '/7 F',t53j AUG no 1989 BOOK l 7 f'Ai,;�E 556 The Federal Communications Commission has been cooperative during 5`;the �•�, period of the lease. St. Lucie ' County offered the Federal Communications Commission space on a County tower free of charge and the Commission accepted, subsequently relocating the equipment on Hobart Tower to the new location. - RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve cancellation of the Tower Space Lease with the Federal Communications Commission and authorize the Chairman to execute the necessary documents to effect the cancellation. TO: ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved cancellation of the Tower Space Lease with the FCC, and authorized the Chairman's signature, as recommended by staff. AMENDMENT OF CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE EMERGENCY FUNDING FOR IRRIGATION RECHARGE WELL The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/1/89: Members of the Board of DATE: pest 1, 1989 FILE: County Commissioners Bob KomarinetzSUBJECT: Director of if Kfe Emergency Funding for Irrigation Recharge Well FROM: Roger Welker .0 I/" I� REFERENCES: Golf Course Supt. Due to the hot/dry conditions we have experienced over the past year, we are finding it impossible to maintain an adequate water, level in our irrigation supply lakes to meet our irrigation demands during these dry periods. Our current system of recharging the lakes by pumping out of a drainage canal is very expensive and does not supply us with the proper amount of water. This method costs us approximately $350.00 per week on fuel alone and will have cost us between $10,000 and $15,000 before the year is over. 34 The staff at Sandridge Golf Club recommends we install a 5" artisian well on our property to use as a recharging system, this will help eliminate the old gasoline pump. I have received verbal quotes concerning this well and I am told that for the size well and the amount of water we need will run us about $7,500.00 to have one installed. I recommend using $7,500.00 from our capital equipment account (418-221-572-066-49). This account currently has a surplus of $15,000. I would also like to recommend to the board that we except three written quotes in place of the normal bid process, which could take months. Commissioner Bird explained that when we designed the golf course we put in a series of lakes, one of which was designated as an irrigation lake. That is where we have the large pumps and where we draw water from to irrigate the golf course. A normal daily watering is approximately 600,000 gallons. We did that with the understanding that Utilities would get effluent up there sometime in the future and we would recharge that lake with effluent and everything would be fine. However, we are probably two years away from getting effluent, and this year's drought conditions have brought on an emergency situation because we don't have a way to recharge that lake. We have a hodge podge system of transferring the water from another lake, but it is a very expensive process as the fuel bills on that pump are running $300-$350 a week. The request today is to get permission to go ahead and put down a 5" well at the irrigation lake site and recharge that lake until such time as we get the effluent. Then if we don' -t need it, we will just valve it off, but it will be there in an emergency situation. Roger Welker, Golf Course Superintendent, explained that the well would be approximately 600 feet deep. Commissioner Bowman was concerned about putting chlorides into the shallow aquifer, but Mr. Welker estimated that the chlorides would be only about 660 parts per million. They do have a permit from the St. Johns River Water Management District. rte?. AUG 8 1989 35 ��o 9/ �., c 55 7 AU G8 1989 �QOK �- l FaUE.� ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved staff's recommendation and authorized Administrator Chandler to work with Mr. Welker to get the lowest possible bid on this job. MASTER AGREEMENT S WORK ORDER FOR COASTAL TECHNOLOGY CORP. AND CARTER ASSOCIATES, INC. The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/21/89: ----------------------------------------------------------------- TO: James Chandler County Administrator THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Director and James D. White, P.E. bo County Engineer �: •'' FROM: Michelle A. Gentile, C. .T. t •R Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Master Agreement and Work Order for Coastal Technology Corporation and Carter Associates, Ince DATE: - July 21, 1989 ----------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS On April 18, 1989 the Board of County Commissioners authorized staff to proceed with negotiations for outside engineering services to accelerate the Petition Paving Program. To date we have received a Master Agreement and Work Order No. 1 from Coastal Technology Corporation, and Work Order No. 4 with Carter Associates, Inc. Staff has reviewed the cost estimates from these two firms for Engineering Services, they are as follows: Coastal Technology Corporation - Work Order No. 1 1) 12th Avenue - Between 12th and 14th Street. County Project #8821. Approximate Length 1286 L.F. 2) 85th Avenue and 85th Court, Paradise Park Subdivision County Project #8822. Approximate Length 4440 L.F. 3) 15th Place - East of U.S. #1. County Project #8820. Approximate Length 585 L.F. 4) 35th Avenue - From 4th Street to 6th Street. County Project #8903. Approximate Length 1300 L.F. Total cost for these projects is $25 0.• �C2-4, 0v --v Carter Associates, Inc., - Work Order No. 4 1) 84th Street - South of Wabasso Road between Old Dixie Highway and U.S. #1. County Project #8639. Approximate Length 570 L.F. 36 ^' 2) 83rd Place - out of Wabasso Road between Old Dixie Highway and U.S. #1. County Project #8640. Approximate Length 660 L.F. 3) Tropical Avenue - South of Wabasso Road between Old Dixie Highway and U.S. #1. County Project #8641. Approximate Length 370 L.F. 4) Granada Gardens - 11th Street, 11th Place and Madrid Avenue. County Project #8627. Approximate Length 1860 L.F. Total cost for these projects is $ 19,'004. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Approve the Master Agreement and Work Order No. 1 for Coastal Technology Corporation and Work Order No. 4 for Carter Associates, Inc. Authorize execution of Master Agreement and Work Orders for these two (2) firms. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Master Agreement and Work Order No. 1 for Coastal Technology Corporation and Work Order No. 4 for Carter Associates, Inc. be approved. Funding will from Account #173-214-541 Petition Paving Account. Administrator Chandler advised that a change has been made in Coastal Technology's Work Order No. 1. The total cost for these projects is $22,000 instead of $25,700. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved the Master Agreement for Professional Civil Engineering/ Land Surveying Services Agreement with Coastal Technology Corp. and Work Order No. 1 in the amount of $22,000, and Work Order No. 4 for Carter Associates, Inc. in the amount of $19,000 SAID MASTER AGREEMENT AND WORK ORDERS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AUG 8 '1989 37Rucl / / F:i,,� 5f5 in V lig+ � � n `�y-a ,�;:• ,i i,, (' J FUCK Q F,1E 56L WORK ORDER NO. 6 FOR LLOYD 6 ASSOCIATES FOR PETITION PAVING PROJECTS The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7125189: ------------ TO: James Chandler County Administrator THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Director and a�I� James D. White, P. P/ County Engineer FROM: Michelle A. Gentile,C/.`E.T- Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Work Order No. 6 for Lloyd & Associates; for Petition Paving Projects_ DATE: July 25, 1989 . DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS On April 18, 1989 the Board of County Commissioners authorized staff to proceed with negotiations for outside engineering services to accelerate the Petition Paving Program. Our department has an active Master Agreement with Lloyd & Associates, Inc. that was signed on June 21, 1988. We have issued Work Order No. 6 to Lloyd & Associates, Inc. for the Lloyd & Associates, Inc. have added additional insurance coverage to this Work Order No. 6. They are as follows: A. Automobile Insurance covering all owed, non -owed and hired vehicles in amounts not less than $1,000,000, combined single limit. B. Professional Liability Insurance in the amount of $3,000,000 with deductible per claim, if any, not to exceed $300,000 providing for all sums which the ENGINEER shall become legally obligated to pay as damages for claims arising out of the services performed by the ENGINEER or any other person employed by him in connection with this Work Authorization. C. Public Liability Insurance for bodily injury and property damage in the amount of $1,000,000, combined single limit. 38 following projects: 1) 42nd Avenue - Between 10th and 12th Street. County Project No. 8709. Approximate Length 1345 L.F. 2) 42nd Avenue - Between 6th and 8th Street. County Project No. 8705. Approximate Length 1312 L.F. Z. ,;.. 3) 13th Avenue - Between 12th and 14th Street. County Project No. 8708. Approximate Length 1316 L.F. 4) 44th Avenue - From 16th Street to Pinewood Subdivision. County Project No. 8711. Approximate Length s• 5) 2nd Street - 1240 L.F. Between 23rd and 24th Avenue. County Project No. 8847. Approximate Length 272 L.F. for a total cost of $19,220.00. Lloyd & Associates, Inc. have added additional insurance coverage to this Work Order No. 6. They are as follows: A. Automobile Insurance covering all owed, non -owed and hired vehicles in amounts not less than $1,000,000, combined single limit. B. Professional Liability Insurance in the amount of $3,000,000 with deductible per claim, if any, not to exceed $300,000 providing for all sums which the ENGINEER shall become legally obligated to pay as damages for claims arising out of the services performed by the ENGINEER or any other person employed by him in connection with this Work Authorization. C. Public Liability Insurance for bodily injury and property damage in the amount of $1,000,000, combined single limit. 38 D. Workmen's Compensation Insurance in compliance with Chapter 440, Florida Statutes, as presently written or hereafter amended. E. Umbrella or excess coverage is to be provided in the amount of $5,000,000, over and above the coverage listed in Paragraphs A., C., and D. above. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Approve and authorize the execution of Work Order No. 6 with the insurance coverage additions to the Master Agreement, or approve and authorize the execution of Work Order No. 6 with the insurance coverages listed in the original Master Agreement. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Work Order No. 6 for Lloyd and Associates, Inc. be approved with the additional insurance coverage. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved Work Order No. 6 for Lloyd and Associates, Inc. with the additional insurance coverage, as recommended by staff. WORK ORDER NO. 6 IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE EFFLUENT DISPOSAL MASTER PLAN - WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. 3 WITH POST, BUCKLEY, SCHUH AND JERNIGAN, INC. The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/31/89: DATE: JULY 31, 1989 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO DIRECTOR OF UTILITY S RVICES .SUBJECT: EFFLUENT REUSE MASTER PLAN PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT BY POST, BUCKLEY, SCHUH AND JERNIGAN, IN . IRC PROJECT NO. US -88 2 -ED PREPARED AND STAFFED BY: 0. FRED MERKEL MANAGER OF OPERATINS AND ENGINEERING :..�.. DEPARTMENT OF UTIL TY SERVICES BACKGROUND On November 15, 1988, the Board of County Commissioners approved a contract with Post, Buckley, Schuh and Jernigan, Inc. (PBS&J). Prior to this contract approval, PBS&J was shortlisted as our .....primary consultant for Wastewater Effluent Disposal. On February 7, 39 AUG 8`�9 � a��,� d 581 AUG 2 `93 R�� mu � F^1 562 1-----1989, Work Authorization No. 2 was approved for PBS&J to prepare a ..::.,;.Preliminary Assessment Report to develop a Scope of Work for an ' Effluent Disposal Master Plan. This report has been completed. x =1 _ The Scope of Work has been reviewed and approved by the County and a fee in the amount of $174,229.00 has been negotiated. The funding '-.. for this Master Plan will be provided by the Utility Department's Engineering Services Account No. 471-218-536-033.13. RECOMMENDATION The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached Work Authorization No. 3 for the aforementioned project. ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved Work Authorization No. 3, as set out in the above staff recommendation. WORK ORDER NO. 3 IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE SEWER LATERALS FOR PREVIOUSLY VACANT LOTS IN THE GIFFORD SEWER PROJECT The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/17/89: DATE: JUNE 16, 1989 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATO FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO DIRECTOR OF UTILIT SERVICES PREPARED AND STAFFED BY: JOHN FREDERICK LAN ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIA IST DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: SEWER LATERALS FOR PREVIOUSLY VACANT LOTS IN THE GIFFORD SEWER PROJECT BACKGROUND: The Gifford Sewer Project has been certified for connections by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER) and connections to the system are ongoing. The project, in its early phases, did not make allowances for service to vacant lots. As a 40 result, buildings for which building permits were granted prior to FDER certification and after sewer line construction began do not have a sewer lateral to connect up to in two sewered areas. These buildings, for which building permits were granted (on vacant lots), have paid all fees for connection to the system, and the Department must provide the lateral. .ANALYSIS: The South Sixth Avenue Sewer Improvement Project has been previously bid and awarded to Ted Myers Contracting. This project has unit pricing for this work. Therefore, the cost of bidding will be saved and quantity discounts are available because of the larger size of .-the project. The Department, because of these reasons, desires to .utilize this contractor for the missing sewer laterals in the Gifford area for existing granted building permits. Future new building permits still require the owner to arrange for construction of the lateral. RECOMMENDATION: The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize a change order to the contract to allow for sewer laterals to be installed in the Gifford Project, on an as -needed basis, for an period of time not to exceed 18 months. The funding for this project would be from the Contingency Fund for the Gifford Sewer Project. The costs shall not exceed $15,000.00. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved staff's recommendation as set out in the above memo. SAID WORK ORDER WILL BE PLACED ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD WHEN FULLY EXECUTED AND RECEIVED I FINAL PAY REQUEST AND FINAL CHANGE ORDER - KINGS HIGHWAY AND LINDSEY ROAD CONTRACT #2 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/18/89: 77 AUGPUR 1989 41 DATE: JULY -18, 1989 TO: JAMES * E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATO FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO , DIRECTOR OF UTILI SERVICES STAFFED AND WILL AIN PREPARED BY: CAPIT L EER DEPAR T UTILITY S tl'i�ES SUBJECT: FINAL.:PAY REQUEST AND'FINAL CHANGE ORDER KINGS''HIGHWAY AND LINDSEY ROAD CONTRACT #2 INDIAN RIVER.COUNTY PROJECT NO. UW 87 -23 -DS BACKGROUND On July 10, 1989, 'we received final certification on the Kings Highway project, Contract #2. We now wish to address their final pay request. There is a final change order to adjust quantities within -the contract. ANALYSIS All required punch list work has been completed. We have received the Maintenance Bond, release of liens, and as-builts from the contractor. The final change order reduces the total contract price by $23,580.00, making the final pay request in the amount of $48.355.50. (See attached final change order and pay request.) RECOMMENDATION The staff of the Indian River Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the final pay request of $48,355.50. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved the final pay request of $48,355.50, as set out in the.above staff recommendation. PARTIAL PAYMENT ESTIMATE IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD 42 77 PETITION ASSESSMENT PROJECT FOR A POTABLE WATER MAIN IN FLORAL PARK AND RANCH ESTATES SUBDIVISIONS The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7121189: DATE: JULY 21, 1989 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO �- DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES STAFFED AND: WILLIAM F. McCAIN:-- PREPARED BY CAPITAL PROJECTS L�T;ikEER DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: PETITION ASSESSMENT PROJECT FOR A POTABLE WATER MAIN IN FLORAL PARK AND RANCH ESTATES SUBDIVISIONS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BACKGROUND We have received a petition for a county water line extension off of our King's Highway water main. The proposed extension would serve the subdivisions of Floral Park and Ranch Estates. ANALYSIS The petition contains more than 500 of the signatures of the existing homeowners in the developments. The roads covered by this project are 57th Court and 57th Avenue between 43rd Street and South Gifford Road; it also picks up.56th Avenue between South Gifford Road and 42nd Street. Monies -for this project will come from account No. 472-000-169-070.00. RECOMMENDATION The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners consider approving the aforementioned assessment project. Commissioner Eggert noticed that the corrected staff recommendation takes out the dollar amount, and Utilities Director Terry Pinto explained that when the original memo was written the price was $91,393.50 plus 10% contingency. The estimated amount, before the preliminary assessment hearing is $100,500. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved the petition assessment project for a potable water main in Floral Park and Ranch Estates Subdivisions, as recommended by staff. AUG 43 U K 77 , AUG 1989 `7 mor I ENGINEERING WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. W-1 WITH MASTELLER & MOLER ASSOCIATES IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD RECOMMENDATION FROM THE JUNGLE TRAIL COMMITTEE FOR CONSULTANT ON NATIVE PLANT_ LANDSCAPING The Board reviewed the following letter dated 8/4/89: Ian River County :cal society Jnc. 336 14th Avenue - 3each, Florida 32961 August 4, 1989 Mr. Gary Wheeler Chairman, Indian River County Board of Commissioners Indian River County Administration Building 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Re: Jungle Trail Realignment Progress Report Dear Chairman Wheeler: The realignment of the portion of Jungle Trail within the Town of Orchid has been laid out, cleared and a shell/marl base has been applied. In the process, a considerable amount of the native undercover vegetation and trees have been severely damaged or removed within the protected corridor. We refer to a section of the staff action letter dated July 10, 1989 which sums up the agreement to alignment as follows: #2 that the applicant dedicate "absolute fee simple" 25' (from centerline) of road rights-of-way, and that the applicant dedicate conservation tracts and grant the remaining proposed buffer easement to the county for vegetation preservation uses along the prc.6 er_t's entire Jungle Trail frontage and that the language establishing said area ensures that the Jungle Trail Management Plan "protected areas" provisions are met or exceeded where applicable. The Jungle•Trail Comunittee of the Indian River County Historical Society regrets to report that the protected area provisions have not been met. In fact, recent inspections by county commissioners, county staff, and committee members indicated flagrant abuses have occurred within this protected area. 44 Therefore, the Jungle Trail Committee recommends the following: That the applicant be required to employ a consultant in native plant landscaping so as to assure a natural refurbishing of the violated areas, and also to avoid further damage to the corridor. It is this committees belief that the urgency of the situation requires an early response from the Board of County Commissioners. Respectfully submitted, Millie Bunnell Chairman Indian River County Historical Society's Jungle Trail Committee cc: Commissioner Carolyn Eggert Commissioner Maggy Bowman Commissioner Doug Scurlock Commissioner Dick Bird Charles Vitunac, Esq. William Collins, Esq. Chief, Current Development Stan Boling Carolyn Short Hazel Crews Ruth .Stanbridge Deborah Sembler MB/cs 0 Commissioner Scurlock assumed that the main reason for this outside help is that we have no one on staff with that expertise. He felt we should have a reporting process here if this person or firm would be working for the County, not the Historical Society. Chairman Wheeler felt that if the County hires the consultant, he would like to see the County reimbursed somehow by the developer. Robert Keating, Director of Community Development, recommended that the Board to direct staff to come back next week with a set of parameters that the consultant would have to adhere to. The primary concern is to make sure that the vegetation that was removed be replaced or something comparable put in. Another concern is that the understory was removed and should not have been. Having walked the site, staff feels that certain conditions of the realignment approval were not adhered to. 45 es �: A ���� RUG' / � f.�uC• 5 O f r -8 9 7 F" � e �UCJF 1 f,'� ,E 568 Commissioner Bird felt that an alternative would be to have the developer use their engineer or retain engineers to come up with a restoration plan and submit it to the County for approval. He believed they are embarrassed by what has happened and would like to try to do something about it. Commissioner Eggert stressed that something definite needs to be done, regardless of how the burden should be placed. Commissioner Bowman emphasized that a few weeks ago the Board was told that the Town of Orchid had adopted a landscaping ordinance, and Director Keating explained that one of the conditions of the realignment of Jungle Trail is that they would adopt tree protection and landscaping ordinances that are at least as strict as the County's, but he wasn't sure whether they have accomplished that as yet. Chairman Wheeler preferred to have the developer hire an outside consultant rather than using their own engineer because this isn't the first time this has happened. We end up approving something and then mysteriously some things occur that nobody seems to know why or how they happened. All the apologies are there, but the trees are gone and the mangroves are gone. He asked if our tree protection ordinance affects this, but Director Keating explained that our tree protection ordinance doesn't apply to the Town of Orchid. He believed the trees are missing from the buffer area or the conservation area that is adjacent to the realigned Trail, and our tree protection ordinance applies only within the unincorporated parts of the county. It doesn't even apply to the County rights-of-way in the incorporated areas nor does it address the understory. Commissioner Bowman pointed out that it does address West Indian species; so, if the understory is West Indian, it is protected. Commissioner Bird preferred to give them an opportunity to develop a restoration plan and see if it meets our approval before we go out and hire a consultant. 46 Millie Bunnell, Chairman of the IRC Historical Society's Jungle Trail Committee, explained that in the action letter that Stan Boling wrote on July loth summarizing the June 27th meeting, it states that "the applicant is to arrange a field meeting with staff, Stan Boling, Roland DeBlois, and Jim Davis, to tag trees that will need to be removed in the new Trail corridor. In this way agreement can be reached in a timely manner and you can better ensure that the satisfaction of tree preservation conditions is not jeopardized." Mrs. Bunnell stated that this was not done until after those trees were removed. She had counted 23 holes out there within the buffer zone where trees or something had been removed, and she has pictures of those holes if the Board would like to see them. Commissioner Scurlock understood that Rex Hailey and Public Works had taken some trees out of there, but Chairman Wheeler understood that Rex Haily had removed 4 palm trees at the direction of Mr. McQueen, who identified the trees that were within the realignment portion. Darrell McQueen of McQueen & Associates, engineers for Orchid Isle Development, explained that those holes were dug to put in palm trees that were being removed from other spots in the project. He felt that each of the Commissioners needs to drive this project and look at the site. Chairman Wheeler commented that he went through there two weeks ago and the holes he saw looked like holes where trees had been removed, not holes made to put trees in. Mr. McQueen replied that you use the same thing to make a hole to put a tree back in as you do to take trees out. There are trees being planted up there all the time to buffer this road more. Mrs. Bunnell emphasized that the trees are being planted without any sort of advice on native landscaping or vegetation. Somebody just points and says put a tree in here, and sometimes the trees are all in a straight line. 47 dd ® EOOK. Fw ``h1 ���� EOOK. 77 Fq�r 570 Commissioner Scurlock felt that is what is being addressed today, but Mrs. Bunnell cautioned that the developer is doing that planting now. Chairman Wheeler repeated that the holes appear to be holes that were made when trees were removed, and felt the photographs show that. Mr. McQueen explained that the spade takes out a 7 -ft. hole, and that there was no intention to take any trees out and push dirt in. They had no reason to take trees out of that alignment other than to clear for the roadway. Throughout 900 of that realignment, the clear from tree to tree is no more than 20 feet. The roadway is generally about 18 feet wide, and it has the turn in it. He felt they did a pretty good job, and offered to drive each of the Commissioners through the project. He knew that Mrs. Bunnell feels that he was ignoring the problem, but he was not. He has agreed with staff to go and replant where they have taken too much out, and do it to the County's satisfaction. If they cannot satisfy the County with replanting, then he would pay for a consultant to come in and tell them what wasn't done right. Mr. Boling felt the way they left it was that there were definite areas of concern, specifically that certain areas would take different treatment than others regarding the replacement of the understory and in the areas off the side of the road where vehicles had backed in to do the clearing. Commissioner Scurlock felt the important thing here today is for the Commission to take action to direct Mr. McQueen to make this thing right and bring that plan back to staff, and if that is not acceptable, then we will take further steps. Commissioner Eggert wanted the developer to come back with a plan to restore scrub oak, bay trees and some of the understory, but Mr. McQueen felt it would be very difficult to replant scrub oak. 48 MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, that the Board direct staff to receive a plan submitted by McQueen & Associates to make restoration of this particular area that is acceptable to staff and to authorize staff to acquire the necessary expertise to evaluate that plan and get on about our business. Under discussion, Chairman Wheeler asked how long it would take to get this plan, and Mr. McQueen felt that he could have the plan back within two weeks if the areas are the same ones he is thinking of, but wanted someone to walk that part of the Trail with him and mark the areas in question. Mrs. Bunnell advised that after they walked the Trail that day, she had suggested to Mr. McQueen that he get some expertise from Mr. Hagger. Mr. McQueen stated that he didn't mind conferring with Mr. Hagger. Turning to another problem on the Trail, Mr. McQueen brought up the possibility of the Trail going through where the old house is located instead of working around it, and noted that staff seems to feel that is a good idea. He would like some direction in that matter as well as about getting back to the original northerly alignment quicker than was planned. Mrs. Bunnell felt that had been discussed at the meeting of June 27th, and Commissioner Scurlock recalled that his feeling was that the Trail should go back to the original Trail as soon as possible because that way there would be less realignment, not more. Mrs. Bunnell agreed that we need to address that area where the Trail comes through that old house and also how to maintain narrow sections of citrus trees when they are used as buffer. Mr. McQueen stressed that whether the road went through the house or not, there still would be an open space that would have AUG `U999 49 t G�� `1`/ F ;� AUG nu `12391 572 to be landscaped and buffered. If we went behind the house, there aren't any citrus trees there. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK RESTATED HIS MOTION that the Board direct Mr. McQueen to work with staff and bring back a restoration plan for the Board's review, plus a plan that he feels will work best for the area where the old house is. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion was voted on and carried unanimously. Mrs. Bunnell stressed that the Historical Society's plans for a seven -mile touring park the length of Jungle Trail is coming together beautifully, and the reason she is pushing to keep it .coming together like this is because it will be an asset to this county. NORTH AND SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT MEETINGS The Chairman announced that immediately following 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 immediately following adjournment of that meeting, would reconvene acting as the District Board of Fire Commissioners of the South Indian River County Fire District. Those Minutes are being prepared separately. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT MEETING The Chairman announced that a Solid Waste Disposal District meeting would be held immediately following adjournment of the South Indian River County Fire District Meeting. Those Minutes are being prepared separately. 50 There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 10:10 o'clock A.M. ATTEST: Clerk Chairman AUG 1 51 RUGS