HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/15/1989Tuesday, August 15, 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 15, 1989, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Gary C.
Wheeler, Chairman; Carolyn K. Eggert, Vice Chairman; Richard N.
Bird; Margaret C. Bowman; and Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Also present
were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac,
Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; and Virginia
Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order.
Pastor Jack Diehl, Our Savior Lutheran Church, gave the
invocation, and Administrator Chandler led the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Administrator Chandler asked that an item be added regarding
the designation of one Commission member to serve on the School
Site Committee.
Commissioner Bowman requested that discussion of the report
on the entrance fees at'Sebastian Inlet be added under her
matters.
Administrator Chandler advised that he had an emergency
matter regarding a dewatering pump for the Landfill to be added
on the Solid Waste Disposal District agenda when that meeting
convenes.
AUG 15- 1.69 BOOK, AGE. U 7
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously added the first two
of the above items to today's agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA
Chairman Wheeler asked that Item A be removed from the
Consent Agenda for discussion.
A. Minutes of Regular Meeting of July 18, 1989
Chairman Wheeler asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of July 18, 1989. The Chairman
referred to Page 31, 3rd paragraph, which reads as follows:
"The Chairman noted that this Commission did not
want to change the engineers and designers of the
Phase I electronics, but on Schopke's recommendation
we went to ECSI, which saved him about $35,000....."
Chairman Wheeler believed this should be changed to state
that the "previous Commission`changed the engineers and designers
of the Phase 1 electronics on Schopke's recommendation and went
to ECSI....... " but Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that this
involved a subcontractor to the contractor so the Commission
actually did not make the change; we allowed the contractor to
select a different pre -qualified sub.
It was agreed to reword the Minutes as follows:
"The Chairman noted that the previous Commission
allowed Schopke to make his recommended change of the
engineers and designers of the Phase I electronics
to ECSI..... "
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved the
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 18, 1989, as
corrected.
N
B. Reports
The following was received and placed on file in the Office
of Clerk to the Board:
Traffic Violation Bureau, Special Trust Fund,
Month of July, 1989 - $47,528.62
C. Request for Site Plan Approval Extension - (Ed Schlitt)
The Board reviewed memo of Staff Planner John McCoy:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Ro ert M. Keatintl, P
Community Developmexie Director
THROUGH: Stan Boling,-6A9P
Chief, Current D velopment
FROM: John W. McCoy A
Staff Planner; Current Development
DATE: July 21, 1989
SUBJECT: ED SCHLITT'S REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL EXTENSION
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of August 15, 1989.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On September 8, 1988, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved
a major site plan application submitted by Ed Schlitt. Approval
was given to construct a 7,845 square foot retail building at the
southwest corner of Indian River Boulevard and the Vista Gardens
access road. Due to marketing difficulties (see attachment 1))the
applicant has been unable to commence construction prior to the
expiration of the approved site plan. However, if no construction
has begun by September 8, 1989, the site plan approval will lapse
unless otherwise extended by the Board of County Commissioners.
No regulations have changed since the time of site plan approval,
which will affect the design of, or conditions attached to, this
site plan. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 23.2(G)(2),
Appendix A of the Zoning Code, Ed Schlitt is requesting a full 1
year extension of the approved site plan. It has been the policy
of the Board to grant extensions to projects which conform to
current codes.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Ed Schlitt's request for a one year
extension of the approved site plan; the new expiration date to
be September 8, 1990.
ROOK �0"
AUG
3 F� :�
moK tic
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved a
one year extension of the approved site plan for
the property described above as requested by Ed
SchIitt.
D. Resignation of Sheriff from Alcohol, Drug Abuse & Mental
FleaTtFi�ommittee—Appt.at
_oRfierine'S eer
6t
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously accepted the
resignation of Sheriff Dobeck from the 9B Alcohol,
Drug Abuse 8 Mental Health Planning Council with
regret and, upon the Sheriff's recommendation,
appointed Katherine P. Siebert as his replacement
on the said committee.
E. Occupational License Taxes Collected - July, 1989
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously accepted the
following report from Tax Collector Morris:
4
Ip1 I)7, SII USI
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Gene E. Morris, Tax Collector
SUBJECT: Occupational Licenses
DATE: August 2, 1989
Pursuant to Indian River County Ordinance No. 86-59, please be
informed that $1,285.53 was collected in occupational license
taxes during the month of July, representing the issuance
of 97 licenses.
zlz tem/6VMIS�'
ene E. Morris, Tax Collector
F. Authorize Necessary Amendments for Balancing 1988/89 Budget
The Board reviewed memo from OMB Director Baird:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: August 9, 1988
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE THE MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET DIRECTOR TO DO THE
NECESSARY AMENDMENTS FOR
BALANCING THE BUDGET FOR THE
1988\89 FISCAL YEAR
CONSENT AGENDA
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
The 1988/89 fiscal year ends September 30, 1989. To be in proper
compliance all budget amendments must be done prior to the close
of the fiscal year.
I would like the Board of County Commissioners to authorize the
Management and Budget Director to do the necessary budget
amendments for balancing the budget for the 1988/89 fiscal year.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized the
OMB Director to do the necessary budget amendments for
balancing the budget
AUG 1 1989
for the 1988/89 FY.
AUG 15 `�Kn`I RooK l `y'�.
t
F:, GE 0
G. Appointment of Terry _Goff _to Finance Advisory Committee
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously appointed
Terry Goff as a member of the Finance Advisory
Committee.
APPEAL OF P&Z COfVJVIISSION APPROVAL OF A PRIVATE STREET DESIG-
NATION FOR SAINT EDWARDS UPPER SCHOOL
Chief Planner Boling made the staff presentation, as
follows:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M. Keatin , AXC
Community Developmen DD rector
13
THROUGH: Stan Boling,"AICP
Chief, Current Develo ent
FROM: Robert E. Wiegers
Staff Planner, Cu rent Development
DATE: August 3, 1989
SUBJECT: PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S APPEAL OF A PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION DECISION TO APPROVE A PRIVATE STREET
DESIGNATION FOR SAINT EDWARDS UPPER SCHOOL
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of August 15, 1989.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
At its regular meeting of July 13, 1989, the Planning and Zoning
Commission voted 4 - 2 to overturn the Planning Director's deci-
sion to deny Saint Edwards Upper School's request to designate its
entrance road as a private drive and to name it "Saint Edwards
Drive". Subsequently, the County Planning Department, with
support from the Vero Beach Postmaster and the County's Emergency
Services Coordinator, filed a written appeal of this approval to
the Board of County Commissioners. It should be noted that in
considering St., Edward's request, the Planning and Zoning Commis-
sion did not have input from either the Postmaster or the Emergen-
cy Services Coordinator.
11
In considering this application the Board of County Commissioners
has the option to either uphold the decision of the Planning and
Zoning Commission and grant the school's request or overturn the
Planning and Zoning Commission decision and uphold the decision of
the Planning Director.
APPLICATION BACKGROUND:
Mr. Ronald Brink, acting on behalf of Saint Edwards Upper School,
submitted an administrative approval request to the Community
Development Department to officially designate and address an
existing entrance driveway off of S.R. A.I.A. as a street to be
named "Saint Edwards Drive". Subsequently, and pursuant to the
County's road addressing ordinance, (Ordinance #87-62) the Plan-
ning Director denied the request. The applicant subsequently
appealed the Director's denial to the Planning and Zoning Commis-,
sion which overturned the Director's denial and granted the
applicant's request to officially utilize a road name designation
for the Saint Edwards Upper School complex.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant is proposing to designate the -access drive that
services the school site as a private road and subsequently to
have an official address of "Saint Edwards Drive" as opposed to
the current address of "246 South A.I.A."
Section 18-55 of the County Code (Ordinance 87-62) deals with road
designations. The sole guideline for road designation decisions,
which is specifically the responsibility of the Community Develop-
ment Department, is to ensure that "...all new building numbers
and road designations [are] in conformance with the grid system
described in this article". The "article" that is referenced goes
on to describe the basic road grid system employed throughout the
County for addressing purposes. Thus, road designations must
conform to the basic road grid system throughout the County.
Pursuant to Section 18-55 of the County Code, it is staff's
opinion that Saint Edwards request does not conform to the
County's road addressing requirements for the following reasons:
1. The proposed road name designation is not needed as part of
an overall road addressing system.
Road names have previously been allowed where there is a need
to extend or expand the existing grid system to service and
address multiple residences or separate sites off of a common
roadway. Examples of this include multiple lot subdivisions
on the barrier island (i.e. Sandpointe, Ocean Oaks, etc.),
and large multiple family projects (i.e. Grand Harbor, Grove.
Isle, Sea Oaks, etc.).
2. The current address, 246 South A.I.A., conforms to the
existing and working grid addressing system.
For road addressing purposes, the current address designation
is the most logical address in terms of general deliv-
eries/mail and delivery of emergency services. (See Postmas-
ter's letter: attachment #3).
3. The proposed road name designation may adversely affect
emergency response.
Ordinance #87-62 was established to provide an orderly
process of determining addresses throughout the County. This
AUG 1519
AUG 10 1969
k
results in emergency response personnel being able to travel
in a timely and knowing fashion to preserve life and
property. To allow a change in the road addressing desig-
nation at this point would require amendments to the Master
Street Address Guide (MSAG), changes to map books prepared
for all emergency responders, amendments to E-911 maps, and
changes to the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) for emergency
responses. (See Emergency Service's letter: attachment
#4).
4. There are currently two Saint Edwards educational complexes
on the barrier island.
Utilizing a name designation address instead of the current
246 South A.I.A. address may result in confused mail deliv-
eries. The existence of two Saint Edwards complexes may also
delay emergency response in the event that these services are
needed.
5. Approving one property owner's request to designate his
private drive as a named road may result in a proliferation
of road name requests.
The biggest concern, if the Saint Edwards request is
approved, is how many more businesses, organizations and/or
private citizens will be requesting exceptions to the
County's road addressing requirements. Once such a request
as this is granted, a gradual deterioration of the
traditional grid system could occur that would completely
undermine the guidelines and requirements of Ordinance
#87-62. '
6. This request does not conform to the County's basic grid
address system provided for in Section 18-55.
In accordance with this section, the designation of Saint
Edwards Drive is not appropriate because the "Drive" desig-
nation is reserved for roads that run north/south not
east/west which is the direction of the Saint Edwards drive-
way. In addition, any road name in this area of the barrier
island would have to utilize a southeast (S.E.) directional
suffix.
CONCLUSIONS:
By requiring the Saint Edwards Upper School to continue to utilize
its present address of 246 South A.I.A., instead of officially
redesignating its driveway as Saint Edwards Drive, the County is
ensuring that the development conforms to the existing and future
road numbering system. Furthermore, by overturning the Planning
and Zoning Commission's decision, the Board would ensure that the
integrity of the road addressing system will be -maintained from an
onslaught of future applications.
For the reasons stated in staff's analysis, it is staff's opinion
that granting this appeal would violate Ordinance 87-62 and should
not be allowed.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department,, in conjunction with the Vero Beach
Postmaster and the County's Emergency Services Coordinator,
strongly recommends that the Board of County Commissioners reverse
the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision and deny Saint
Edwards request to officially designate the private driveway
accessing the school as a named road.
8
M
Planner Boling's main points were that our grid system works
and the existing address works. There are two St. Edward's
Schools - Upper and Lower, which could make this confusing, and
staff feels approving this private street designation would set a
precedent and possibly undermine the grid system.
Chairman Wheeler agreed with some of what staff is saying,
but he believed St. Edward's Lower School faces Club Drive, which
he felt would serve to eliminate any confusion. Also due to the
fact that St. Edward's School is one of the focal points on the
Beach and it also is a voting precinct, he believed the school
and its functions are unique. Because of that, he did not
necessarily see it as setting a precedent.
Commissioner Bird asked if we didn't purposely leave
ourselves some flexibility to allow the use of street names as
well as numbers in some cases when we adopted the grid system.
Planner Boling confirmed that on South Beach, for instance,
because there is a pattern of street names set up, street name
designation can be given to new subdivisions that come in, but
this goes beyond that; this is taking a private driveway and
making it an official private road. It is also turning a private
driveway into a road for a single address.
Commissioner Eggert agreed with the Chairman about the
school being a focal point, and she believed a lot of roads have
been carrying the dual designation, but the Post Office has been
recognizing the number not the name. She was, however, kind of
torn about the private driveway situation and asked if this would
qualify as an official county road.
Planning Director Keating advised that we consider it a
driveway because it is completely on one piece of property.
Chairman Wheeler believed it still could be a private road
though, and Commissioner Scurlock believed staff had made mention
of the fact that it is one road coming back, and he would assume
'j Fa
9 t;00K ��v
AUG r.
198 i
AUG 1531989
noF fi7 PA.0 606
in their developmental plans for the future, they may envision
having more than just one driveway.
Planner Boling agreed that could make a difference and that
would be an appropriate request to tack on to any site plan
approval request in the future.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if that would allow them at that
point to designate their entranceway St. Edward's Drive, and
Planner Boling confirmed that if they had multiple addressing
sites there, it would fall in line with the policy we have had in
projects such as Sea Oaks and others. However, you have one
institution with one address site now.
Commissioner Scurlock could understand staff's position
about precedent and concern about the possibility of receiving
many applications for changing designation; however, he felt the
Board does have the ability to say this is unique, and he
believed the precedent isn't going to be something we can't
overcome.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Eggert, to deny staff's appeal and
uphold the PEZ Commission decision to officially
designate the private driveway accessing the school
as a named road.
John Stinson, Growth Management Coordinator for the Post
Office, informed the Board that part of their concern was not
just the name change of the street, but also the fact that St.
Edward's wished to change the number and call it One St. Edward's
Drive. If the name change is going to be allowed, the Post
Office would ask that the number at least fall into the 100 block
range that it should for that area.
Commissioner Bird did not feel there would be any problem
with that, and this was confirmed by a gentleman from the audi-
ence representing St. Edward's School. Commissioner Bird stated
10
S
_I
that he could understand the need for the grid system and did not
feel we should deviate from it except for something that is
either historic or a landmark type situation.
Commissioner Eggert believed that the fact that it is a
voting precinct as well as a school makes it even more different.
Commissioner Bowman asked what happens if another private
school comes in with a similar request, and the Chairman believed
we would look at it and weigh it on its own merits.
Commissioner Bird hoped the Post Office is not going to
start insisting that all the old road names in the county be
deleted and we go to the grid numbering system entirely.
Commissioner Bowman believed we have already allowed for
that and decided they could use the old names such as Oslo,
Winter Beach Road, etc., along with the number. We have a lot of
double names, but she did not feel this particular situation
qualifies for a double name.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard, and
there were none.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION on the
Motion to approve St. Edward's request with
the number to stay in the proper range.
It was voted on and carried 4-1 with
Commissioner Bowman voting in opposition.
REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE PRECINCTS 15, 24, 36 S 51
Supervisor Robinson reviewed the following memo:
r �
I'liuG1 5 `1989 " eoo� / 1 F;�,,e: 607
F,
AUG15 M
ANN ROBINSON
SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
1840 25TH STREET, SUITE N-109
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960-3394
TELEPHONES: (407) 567-8187 or 567-8000
SOD 7 7 F'A E608
DATE: AUGUST 9, 1989
TO: HON. GARY C. WHEELER, CHAIRMAN, BCC AD
FROM: ANN ROBINSON, SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
RE: AGENDA ITEM FOR BCC MEETING OF AUGUST 15, 1989
(Request to subdivide Precincts 15, 24, 36, and 51)
I request your approval to subdivide Precincts 15, 24, 36, & 51
as follows:
Precinct 15 would be divided along Fellsmere Road, County Road 512.
The northern part of the subdivided precinct would be Precinct 14
and the southern part would be Precinct 15. We have asked to use
the First Church of the Nazarene as the new polling place for 14.
Precinct 24 would be divided at the northern boundary of the Town
of Indian River Shores. The northern part of the subdivided precinct
would be Precinct 26 and the southern part would be Precinct 24.
We have asked to use the McLarty Visitor Center as the new polling place
for Precinct 26.
Precinct 36 would be divided along 74th Avenue. The eastern part
of the subdivided precinct would be Precinct 36 and the western
part would be Precinct 37. Indian River Estates has approved the
use of its facilities as the new polling place for Precinct 37.
Precinct 51 would be subdivided along the east -west boundary of
the property line between Riomar Drive and Iris Lane and continuing
across the entire existing precinct. The northern part of the
subdivided precinct would be Precinct 51 and the southern part would
be Precinct 56. St. Edwards' Lower School has approved the use of
its facilities as the new polling place for Precinct 56.
I also request your approval to move the polling place to Highlands
Elementary School for Precinct 43.
Thank you. A precinct map showing the changes in red is a part of
this request.
/Xe qwe /",S 0 t7 -)Cik In _e�(2 ge
Mrs. Robinson wished to go over the precincts one at a time
because there is a change in one of them. She advised that
Precinct 15 has more than doubled since she divided Sebastian
from one precinct into 3 in 1985, and also advised that since she
wrote this memo on August 9th, they have received permission to
E77
••yam►
���
ANN ROBINSON
SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
1840 25TH STREET, SUITE N-109
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960-3394
TELEPHONES: (407) 567-8187 or 567-8000
SOD 7 7 F'A E608
DATE: AUGUST 9, 1989
TO: HON. GARY C. WHEELER, CHAIRMAN, BCC AD
FROM: ANN ROBINSON, SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
RE: AGENDA ITEM FOR BCC MEETING OF AUGUST 15, 1989
(Request to subdivide Precincts 15, 24, 36, and 51)
I request your approval to subdivide Precincts 15, 24, 36, & 51
as follows:
Precinct 15 would be divided along Fellsmere Road, County Road 512.
The northern part of the subdivided precinct would be Precinct 14
and the southern part would be Precinct 15. We have asked to use
the First Church of the Nazarene as the new polling place for 14.
Precinct 24 would be divided at the northern boundary of the Town
of Indian River Shores. The northern part of the subdivided precinct
would be Precinct 26 and the southern part would be Precinct 24.
We have asked to use the McLarty Visitor Center as the new polling place
for Precinct 26.
Precinct 36 would be divided along 74th Avenue. The eastern part
of the subdivided precinct would be Precinct 36 and the western
part would be Precinct 37. Indian River Estates has approved the
use of its facilities as the new polling place for Precinct 37.
Precinct 51 would be subdivided along the east -west boundary of
the property line between Riomar Drive and Iris Lane and continuing
across the entire existing precinct. The northern part of the
subdivided precinct would be Precinct 51 and the southern part would
be Precinct 56. St. Edwards' Lower School has approved the use of
its facilities as the new polling place for Precinct 56.
I also request your approval to move the polling place to Highlands
Elementary School for Precinct 43.
Thank you. A precinct map showing the changes in red is a part of
this request.
/Xe qwe /",S 0 t7 -)Cik In _e�(2 ge
Mrs. Robinson wished to go over the precincts one at a time
because there is a change in one of them. She advised that
Precinct 15 has more than doubled since she divided Sebastian
from one precinct into 3 in 1985, and also advised that since she
wrote this memo on August 9th, they have received permission to
E77
use the First Church of the Nazarene as the new polling place for
Precinct 14.
Mrs. Robinson explained that Precinct 24 is a split precinct
right now, and when the Town has elections and the Sebastian
Inlet District is on the ballot, the people in the Town of Indian
River Shores cannot vote on that, but the people north of the
Town can. She feels this division would clarify that situation.
They have not had an answer in regard to the use of the McLarty
Visitor Center for a polling place.
Commissioner Bird commented that he would question the use
of the McLarty Visitor Center as a polling place, and Commis-
sioner Eggert concurred.
Mrs. Robinson informed the Board that they have had a very
difficult time getting polling places. She did agree that the
McLarty Visitor Center is pretty far north and advised that the
different developments in the area did not respond to her request
for polling places. She, therefore, would Like the Board to
approve the subdivision of Precinct 24 as described and leave the
polling place as it is for the time being. There is a possibil-
ity they may be able to use the Orchid Bank, but she confirmed
that they will not use the McLarty building and will stay with
the Indian River Shores Community Center unless they can get the
use of Orchid Bank.
Mrs. Robinson continued that Precinct 36 would be divided
along 74th Avenue, and thanks to former County Commissioner Pat
Lyons and the new Administrator of Indian River Estates, they
have received approval for the use of that facility as a polling
place. She again stressed the problem of finding polling places
as the county grows, and advised that she at some time would like
to have a polling place ordinance, the same as in Collier County,
so that big developments that come in and have a definite impact
on the voting would be required to allow the use of their club-
house facilities for polling places if we need them.
pp r-�
AUG 1 �9rb7 13 poor
_
AUG I �, 1989
Mrs. Robinson informed the Board that they have used the
Highlands clubhouse as a polling place for years, but all of a
sudden she got a letter saying she had to pay the $200 for the
use of that facility; so, she moved the polling place to
Highlands Elementary School although she is reluctant to move
back into the schools.
Supervisor Robinson explained that because of the census
next year, Precinct 51 has to use a different property line. She
can't use the property line between Riomar Drive and Iris Lane,
but will have to use Riomar Drive itself and divide the precinct
right down the middle of the street. So, for Precinct 51, the
language should be "subdivided along the E/W boundary of Riomar
Drive and continuing across the entire existing precinct." St.
Edward's Lower School has approved the use of its facility as the
new polling place for Precinct 56. Mrs. Robinson noted that the
main problem with using schools for polling places is that it
creates a traffic problem and a hazard for the children, and we
do have educational programs in the schools.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, to approve the request by
the Supervisor of Elections to subdivide Precincts
15, 24, 36 and 51 as outlined by her verbally, and it
being understood we will not use the McLarty Visitors
Center for a polling place and that we will use
Highlands Elementary School as a polling place for
Precinct 43.
William Koolage, interested citizen, spoke in support of an
ordinance re polling places as proposed by Supervisor Robinson.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
14
r � �
Supervisor Robinson informed the Board that it is required
by law that she have a legal description written of each
precinct. She has obtained an estimate from Marvin Carter of
about $75 a precinct, which would be a total of $600 for this,
but she does not have that provided for in her budget.
Discussion followed as to how this can be done and whether
it can be done in-house. Mrs. Robinson explained that one reason
she would like to have it done by Carter & Associates is that
they have all the other legal descriptions of our precincts on
their disks. It is on-going task and time consuming, and she
also has to have the mylar brought up to date.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously directed
the Administrator to work with the Supervisor of
Elections to find the best vehicle to accomplish
having the legal description of the subdivided
precincts written in the most cost effective way
and approved Budget Amendment #092, as follows:
:O: members of the Board
of County Commissioners
?R011: Joseph A. Bairo__
OMB Director
SUWECT: BUDGET AN133`1DRENT
NUINBE.n: 092
DATE: Aticn2st 1.5, 1989
3ntry
dumber_
wunds De artmen•b Account Fame
Accaun-i: jTL?mbe':: 1 increase ! DLcre !se_
i ,
EXPENSE
I
GENERAL FUND/Supervisor of
Elections Other. prof. Services
I
1001_-700-519-033.1.9
`•t 600.001
�0
i
GENERAL FUND
Reserve for Contingency
001-700-581-099.91k
0
( s 600.00
i
AUG 1 5 1989 ' S goo t' �'',c 6.
AUG 15 1989 poor. 77 Fac,L 612-
SITE PLAN & SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVAL FOR A FAST LUBE/MINI
STORAGE FACILITY (K. Hedin)
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:
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. A A
Sworn to and subscribed before me this
(SEAL)
day of &L, _& A.D. 19 -
Notary Public, 3wrb u...,,..4..
Chief Planning Boling made the staff presentation recom-
mending approval with 5 conditions, as follows:
16
I
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL •,e2930
, ,
= Published Dafly �4
-
iVero Beach, Indian River Codnty, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
+� +lonci LIC HEARING �
'' nalder the ranting of
Nde of hearing o
Before the undersigned authority y appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who o h
9 y personal)
epeciel YxcePticn fora ltoniminl-storao0s,
Cb„I,� to �, ConimerctalzoNng dls•
is owned by
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper publi
trltt•The wbJ presently
!Karl Hedln � wesi
at Vero Beach In Indian River County, Florida; that.the attached copy of advertisement, bei !
:U i9Tw� Mh �n
s ect`ProPeny contains ap roxl-
01 acres and Is lying in the N 'A of
aR //�(.//A/�
ma -
Section 20. Township 31 S. Range 39E. --V., -.•
-- A public hearing at whldr. parties'M Interest
In the matter of�,�_
and CNzene,.shali•,hays an opportunitytyto be
mi�oners of Indian Riivveer County. In In the County
Administration Building, located at 1840 25th
Street. Vero Beach. Florida on Tuesday,.Au2ust
'
e:•
15.1989 at 9:05 a.m.
m y be made ay at thisall meetingm 0 will reed to
(
whAnyone
ch
ensure that s verbatim record of the proeesd-
" t.. in the Court, was pub-
'
Ings is made. which Includes the testimony and
evidence upon which the appeal 18 based:
'
jf
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY' - --f
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS'
'r lashed in said in the issues of newspaper
P
,
B" -GARY WHEELER. CHAIRMAN
Ju 1r 28.11989 �•��aui>tS:'i.:r►!....
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. A A
Sworn to and subscribed before me this
(SEAL)
day of &L, _& A.D. 19 -
Notary Public, 3wrb u...,,..4..
Chief Planning Boling made the staff presentation recom-
mending approval with 5 conditions, as follows:
16
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Z A %(5 1 P
Ro Fr_ Jt M. Keati g,
Community Development Director
THROUGH: Stan Boling; "AICP
Chief, Current Development
FROM: John W. McCoy
Staff Planner Ant Development
DATE: August 2, 1989
SUBJECT: KARL HEDIN'S REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL EXCEPTION
APPROVAL FOR A FAST LUBE AND MINI STORAGE FACILITY
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of August 15, 1989.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND LOCATION:
`Carter and Associates, Inc., on behalf of Karl Hedin, owner, has
submitted an application for site plan and special exception use
and mini -storage facility to be located
approval for a fast lube
at 5955 99th Street, which is at the southwest corner of the U.S.
#1/99th Street intersection. The subject parcel is zoned CG which
requires special exception approval for a mini -storage use.
Special exception uses are those types of uses that would not
generally be appropriate throughout a particular zoning district.
However, when special exception uses are carefully controlled as
to number, area, location, and/or relationship to the vicinity,
such uses would not adversely impact the public health, safety,
comfort, good order, appearance, convenience, morals and general
welfare and as such would be compatible with permitted uses within
the particular zoning district. In granting any special excep-
tion, the Board may prescribe appropriate special conditions and
safeguards to assure the use is compatible with surrounding uses
in the district.
At its July 13, 1989 meeting the Planning and Zoning Commission
unanimously recommended approval of this application with the
conditions as outlined at the end of this report.
ANALYSIS:
1. Size of Development Area: 1.71 acres
2. Zoning Classification: CG (General Commercial)
3. Land Use Designation: MXD Mixed Use District
4. Building Area: commercial (fast lube): 4,127 square feet
mini -storage: 13,536 square feet
Total: 17,663 square feet
S. Total Impervious Area: 54,450 square feet
6. Open Space Required: 20%
Provided: 26%
7. Off -Street Parkins s r Required: 48 spaces
Provided: 48 spaces
'R (
�
s� ,
�OGK I,4�;r
AUG i
8. Stormwater Management: The Stormwater Management Plan has
been approved by the Public Works Department, and a Type "A"
stormwater permit has been issued.
9. Traffic Circulation: The applicant is proposing three
two-way driveways to enter and exit the .project onto 99th
Street. The centerline of the eastern driveway is 80 feet
from the edge of the pavement of U.S. Highway 1. The public
works director has now approved of this driveway separation
distance.
Off-site traffic safety concerns have been expressed in an
'DOT request to not allow construction or any additional
development along 99th Street until a northbound left turn
lane is provided on U.S. #1 to 99th Street. This left -turn
lane condition was applied to the Sebastian Warehouse project
on 99th Street near the subject site, and this condition must
be satisfied prior to the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy for the warehouse.
Recently, the developer (Karl Hedin) requested that the
public works department take the issue of the left turn lane
before the Board of County Commissioners to initiate a forced
petition of area property owners to fund the left turn lane.
The Board of County Commissioners denied the request to
initiate a forced petition but instead voted to require the
developer of this project to dedicate his fairshare of the
cost of the left turn lane prior to the issuance of a Certif-
icate of Occupancy.
�Pursuant to the Board's direction, the Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended that prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy the developer escrow his fairshare
of the funds to construct the left turn lane.
Because an existing traffic safety problem has been iden-
tified, and because allowing additional development -related
traffic will only exacerbate an existing problem, planning
staff is still of the opinion the no Certificate of Occupancy
(C.O.) should be issued for this project prior tothe
construction of the left -turn lane at 99th Street and U.S.
#1. However, due to the Board's previous direction on this
issue, staff is recommending that fairshare funds be escrowed
for the turn lane prior to C.O.
10. Landscape Plan & Tree Protection: Although the landscape
plan conforms to the landscape ordinance, there is a 36"
diameter live oak which the developer is proposing to remove
under the provisions of the tree protection ordinance. In
staff's opinion, such removal is contrary to the spirit of
the tree protection ordinance. This oak is the most signifi-
cant tree located on the entire site and, as such, warrants
preservation. In an initial pre -application meeting and
during formal application review, staff has repeatedly
recommended that the project be designed and now redesigned
to save this tree. The developer has refused to redesign,
stating that preserving the tree would require moving the
fast -lube back from U.S. #1 and would leave a canopy; both
items would diminish the project's U.S. #1 exposure. Fur-
thermore, the applicant states that the tree cannot be saved;
his contention is that development impacts will kill it.
However, according to the Urban Forester, steps can be taken
to better ensure survival of the tree if the site plan is
redesigned; no evidence has been submitted to substantiate
this claim.
In staff's opinion and the opinion of the Planning and Zoning
Commission, the project should be redesigned to save one of*
the few significant trees on
contends that the tree protection
the destruction of this oak.
18
this site. The applicant
ordinance provisions allow
11. Utilities: The project proposes to use a well and septic
tank system to provide sanitary facilities to this
development. The County Environmental Health Department has
not approved the utilities design because the proposed septic
tank and drainfield are within 200' of a community supply
well, which serves the mobile home park to the south.
The Environmental Health Department has stated that the
applicant will need to either redesign the utilities layout
or obtain a variance through the Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services in order for the proposed design to
be approved. This redesign or variance approval must be
accomplished prior to site plan release.
[NOTE: At a July 1989 meeting the Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services denied the variance; the applicant
can appeal this decision.]
12. Dedications and Improvements: The applicant has agreed in
writing to provide marginal access easements to facilitate
inter -connecting parking to the property to the south.
However, at the July 13th Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting, the application objected to the marginal access
requirement. Regardless, the marginal access arrangements
are required by section 23.3(d)(10)d. of the zoning code.
Furthermore, removal of the marginal access would require
site plan redesign since a special sideyard setback waiver is
being granted based upon the future connection, via the
marginal access easements, to an adjacent site.
13. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North: Vegetable Market/CG
South: Mobile Home Park/CG
East: U.S. #1, groves/ RM -6 _
West: Vacant/CH
14. Special exception criteria for self -storage (mini -storage)
facilities:
"c. Criteria for self-service storage facilities:
1. Buildings shall not exceed twelve (12) feet in
height.
2. Storage units shall not exceed three hundred (300)
square feet in size.
3. Outdoor storage shall be prohibited.
4. All outdoor lights shall be shielded to direct
light and glare only onto the self-service storage
• facility premises. Light and glare shall be
deflected, shaded and focused away from all adjoin-
ing property.
5. Self-service storage facility lots shall not exceed
three (3 ) acres.
6. Quarters for resident managers may be included
within the facility."
Staff has verified that the application meets all of these specif-
ic criteria related to the mini -storage use.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners approve the special exception use for a
mini -storage facility with the following conditions:
1. That the project be re -designed to preserve the 36" oak.
AUG If 1961
I b FIs �,i
BOGK F4.Gr�
2. That the project be redesigned to meet the 200' sepa-
ration distance between the proposed septic system and
the existing community supply well, or a variance from
this requirement be obtained prior to -site plan release.
3. That the Technical Review Committee re -review the
revised plans to ensure compliance with conditions #1,
and #2 prior to site plan release.
4. That prior to site plan release, marginal access ease-
ments be granted as depicted on the site plan.
5. That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupan-
cy, the applicant escrow his fairshare for a north bound
left turn lane at the U.S. 11/99th Street intersection.
Commissioner Scurlock brought up the utilities aspect. He
felt strongly that we do not want a septic tank with a variance
and noted that we have made a number of arrangements with Lake
Delores, Pelican Point, Breezy Village, etc. He asked Utilities
Director Pinto if there is any way to coordinate services to this
project with existing facilities we have in the area.
Commissioner Bird noted that this facility will have only
two employees and possibly about 30 customers a day.
Director Pinto did not believe there would be any big
problem. He advised they could get to our system, but it would
be expensive at this point.
Planner Boling reported that the applicant has acknowledged
that when service becomes available, they will hook up to water
and sewer, and Commissioner Scurlock noted that he was just
trying to find them an alternative in case the state denies their
appeal for a variance.
Commissioner Eggert asked what the DOT has said about the
left turn.
Community Development Director Keating did not know if
Public Works Director Davis has received an answer from the DOT.
The way it is addressed in staff's memo is based on the Board's
decision that the applicant escrow his fair share.
Planner Boling further noted that the warehouse across the
street hasn't gotten its C.O. They can't get it without the left
turn lane, and they haven't paid for it.
20
M e r
In the following discussion, it was felt that there has not
been any change in the DOT position. Apparently they recognize
the turn is needed, but dropped it off their construction
schedule because of lack of funds.
Commissioner Bird continued to stress the DOT's responsibil-
ity and his reluctance to let them off the hook.
Commissioner Eggert pointed out that time is the problem,
and in the meantime we are holding up the already constructed
warehouse, but Commissioner Bird noted that warehouse is in
bankruptcy and has many other problems.
Planner Boling brought up Condition #1 in regard to
redesigning the project to preserve the 36" oak. He stressed
that it is a Live Oak, which is a protected tree, and it is
healthy.
Commissioner Scurlock inquired if this tree is in the
footprint of the building.
Planner Boling confirmed that it is, and went on to present
slides showing the location of the tree on the site. He also
displayed slides of the new Taco Bell building where a similar
tree located only about 8' from that building was saved. Mr.
Boling presented a drawing of the subject site, showing the
location of the tree and the proposed building. He pointed out
that it is a large site, and staff feels the building could be
moved back 10' to 12' to preserve the tree. He did note that the
problem here, which did not occur at the Taco Bell site, is the
fill that would be required. Staff feels the tree is worth
saving, but it would require a tree well.
Commissioner Bird believed that everyone wants to protect
such a beautiful tree, but asked if it is the County Attorney's
opinion that we have the legal right to require this.
Attorney Vitunac explained that this is not like. a PRD where
you have almost unrestricted rights to make good conditions to a
project, and Asst. County Attorney Collins further explained that
there is no Special Exception criteria directed towards trees,
AUG 15-198 21 ROCK �� i,vr: D -L r
F-
A UG M`c, t� S-
poor I F,, _.
but there is a Tree Protection Ordinance. Under that ordinance,
this tree falls within the definition of a protected tree;
however, there are also about 14 circumstances under which the
protected tree cannot be required to be maintained, and the
burden on the applicant is to demonstrate that he falls under one
of the exceptions to the Tree Protection Ordinance.
Discussion followed as to the different things the applicant
could claim. Commissioner Scurlock felt they probably don't want
to kill the tree either, but he believed that relocation of the
proposed building might cause problems with the circulation of
traffic through their bays.
Planner Boling felt the applicant also will claim that the
tree causes them a visibility problem from U.S.I, but he still
believed there is a lot of room to work around and save the tree.
He then noted there is general criteria for review of Special
Exception uses which says "The proposed use shall be consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and with the stated purpose and
intent of all applicable regulations of the Code." The stated
purpose and intent of the Tree Protection Ordinance is to save a
tree if it is not necessary to remove it and it can be saved.
Attorney Collins noted that Mr. Boling is relying on the
general stated purpose of intent to argue that we can place this
condition. We do have a general purpose of saving trees, but we
also have stated criteria and the general can't control the
specific. If Mr. Hedin can meet one of the exception
circumstances, Attorney Collins did not think we can require him
to preserve the tree.
Chairman Wheeler opened the public hearing and asked if
anyone present wished to be heard.
Attorney Michael O'Haire came before the Board representing
the applicant, Karl Hedin. Attorney O'Haire referred to the
history of the problem they have had to reach the decision
regarding the left turn lane that Mr. Hedin would not be required
to hold up the use of his property until that was accomplished,
22
but just escrow his fair share, which he will do. He noted that
they had to refight this all over again at the P&Z hearing on the
site plan and special exception as staff once again the use of
the property should be conditioned on the installation of that
turning lane. In this climate of cooperation with the property
owner and taxpayer, things degenerated. Attorney O'Haire noted
that the Board has had the opinion of their attorney that the
county does not have the right to require redesign of the site to
save the tree, and they also have the opinion of the Urban
Forester that even with all the various measures that would have
to be taken, the tree has only a 50/60% chance of surviving the
construction process.
Attorney O'Haire then addressed staff's requirement for
dedication of a marginal access easement and stressed that his
client's position on this requirement is that it is no different
than a street or R/W since it is for traffic for access by the
general public, and it is not a Constitutional requirement that
they dedicate property or that they be required or blackmailed
into giving it to the county as a condition to be able to use
their property. He stressed the costs that have resulted from
months and months spent in trying to meet staff's unfair
requirements. Attorney O'Haire asked that the Special Exception
and the site plan be approved with requiring only the escrow of
their fair share with credit against impact fees for the offsite
improvement and that they not be required to redesign to protect
a tree that is located within the net buildable area, which
criteria exempts it from protection under the county ordinance.
Mr. O'Haire also asked they not be required to dedicate the R/W
or marginal access, which is a road by some other name. He
believed the Board has visited this issue before and deleted the
requirement of giving R/W from their Plat and Site Plan
Ordinances.
Commissioner Eggert believed we have done some marginal
access where we have parking lots joined, and Director Keating
AUG 1 23
BOOK
I
AUG I F) 1989
agreed that is exactly what we are requiring, and it is a part of
the ordinance. Actually, it is not a requirement to dedicate
property, but just a requirement to facilitate the use.
Commissioner Bird noted that in other words, we are just
asking them to reserve it, and Director Keating explained that we
just want them to record a document that says the public has the
right to use their driving aisles and access points to access
other properties.
Attorney O'Haire contended that what he is talking about is
a street or a road, and if they are going to be required to give
the public the right to travel across their property, they should
have credit against impact fees for what they are giving up.
Attorney Vitunac addressed the question as to why the County
shouldn't have to pay for this. He explained that it is the same
type of road as a turning movement into someone's property. It
may be a public road, but it is strictly 100% site related. If
it wasn't for this development, we wouldn't need that road, and
it is strictly for his own benefit.
Commissioner Bird disagreed completely. He pointed out that
the only people who would use this are people to the south of
this property fronting on U.S.I, and they would use it to access
their property rather than have another curb cut on U.S.I. This
site is on the corner and doesn't need the marginal access at
all; in fact, it is a nuisance to them.
Director Keating noted that the whole intent of the marginal
access easement is to minimize curb cuts onto U.S.I.
Attorney O'Haire stated that they would be happy not to
build on it, but just don't require them to let the public use
it. It is theirs.
Commissioner Scurlock believed we visited this issue before
and decided that if we take something, we are going to pay for it
and adjust our impact fees to reflect this.
Commissioner Bird believed the problem we are going to find
is that historically we didn't require reservation of property
PW
from some of the properties facing on South U.S.I and didn't give
them credit against impact fees.
Discussion ensued about K -Mart and Luria's, which are
adjoining facilities and have made provisions to have an inner
traffic flow.
Public Works Director Davis explained that marginal access
is provided for in the Fla. Statutes and in the DOT Manual, and
what it does is protect the integrity of the arterial roadway
from side friction. It is a benefit to all the abutting property
owners that are connected to the marginal accesses. It is a
shared benefit, and he believed there is no question that Mr.
Hedin's business would benefit from this.
Commissioner Eggert asked if you can go a whole block and
not give access to U.S.I, and Director Davis advised that ideally
you would like to have marginal access roads with only two points
of ingress and egress.
Attorney O'Haire claimed that this is inverse condemnation
and noted that his firm has made a lot of money on that kind of
proceedings.
Attorney Vitunac pointed out that the County could adopt a
road program to buy some land from Mr. O'Haire's clients and some
others, put in a road, and assess the cost back to the people
benefited, which would be his client to some degree and the lots
to the south in a greater degree. The general public wouldn't
pay a cent for it, and you would have a public marginal access
road paid for by the people who benefited. This comes out to the
same thing that the county is doing there right now, and possibly
we should do that.
Attorney O'Haire pointed out that machinery is not in place
today, and his client has a right to say don't take my land
without compensation.
Director Davis continued to contend that this is more of a
site related improvement. It is not something the general public
would be using other than for access to Mr. Hedin's property and
25 "
AUG 16 1c► ��� �F t'
98 R�o� 77 F49,A 622
adjacent businesses. He noted that many cities and counties
have marginal access roads. They take an easement for ingress
and egress the same way you do for a utility line. It is not
taking title to the property; there is a benefit to the property
owner that still remains.
Attorney O'Haire continued to argue that it is a taking
since his client doesn't need the access for any reason; and the
only benefit is to someone else's property.
Director Keating advised that we already have acquired quite
a few marginal access easements, and the one place where you see
it working the best probably is in the Gifford area on the east
side of U.S.I. where you have a number of properties connected
with a marginal access easement. He further noted the big thing
about the marginal access easement is that parking is allowed on
each side of that easement. if the county had to acquire these
and it became R/W, there would be the additional setback and
parking wouldn't be allowed.
Commissioner Scurlock likened this to utilities and asked if
we couldn't take the position that,it is developing a system that
services the area.
Director Davis agreed we are developing a system; it is
managing the ingress and egress for a facility, particularly on
an arterial roadway, which in this case happens to be a state
roadway. He personally has not heard of any case where a
marginal access easement has been considered a taking, and he
believed the Board has been given authority for planning the
county.
Commissioner Bird believed that although it may not be a
pure taking, you are restricting the applicant's use of his land
to some degree. He asked Mr. O'Haire, if this reservation of the
marginal access easement does not interfere with their site plan,
is the question just as to whether they get paid for it, and Mr.
O'Haire confirmed that it does not interfere with their site plan
26
M M M
and agreed the question is compensation. He continued his
argument that the corner property doesn't benefit.
Director Davis made the point that there are certain code
requirements in regard to separation of a driveway from an inter-
section, and this site plan actually doesn't meet that code
requirement He explained that staff has been trying to work with
the property owner on his site plan to make certain things work,
and one of the things we relaxed a little bit was the distance of
the driveway to the intersection because we understood marginal
access connection was being provided for. Now, if you are
taking away that marginal access easement provision, he felt we
need to readdress the whole site plan.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if the applicant still gets to
figure the marginal access easement footage in on his density
calculations, and this was confirmed.
Commissioner Eggert further noted that with the marginal
access easement, they can park on both sides, and they would have
to change their parking without it.
Planner Boling explained we are just overlaying an easement
on pavement they are already proposing in their site plan.
Attorney O'Haire pointed out that they might want to have
that driveway somewhere else entirely and again stated that all
his client wants is credit against the impact fees"if the Board
is going to take the property.
Planner Boling informed the Board that there is a special
setback provision in this district which allows going to zero
setback where you have interconnected parking areas, and they are
going to a lesser setback on the mini storage building. If the
marginal access easements are taken away, they will need to
redesign the site because there won't be interconnected parking.
Chairman Wheeler believed that he is hearing from staff that
without the marginal access easement, the site plan need to be
redone, and that was confirmed. He personally agreed that
further down
the road as the county develops,
it would
be
to
I r.
R� ell 19®9
2 7
noF
�" F.,
Y
,. „I
F' uc �2.
,AUG 1, 198
l
rlir— 624 6c` J
24
ROCK. FAGS
everyone's advantage to have this access. His decision will be
based on what we can do legally; he did think we need the
marginal access easement; and if we don't have it, then the site
plan needs to be redone..
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard.
Marion Sanders of Breezy Village read the following
statement:
HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS:
My name is Marion J. Sanders. I reside at 6165 98th Lane,
Breezy Village, Sebastian.
I am Vice President of Breezy Village Homeowners Association
and I am a member of the Board of Directors of Breezy Village
Association, Inc.
I am representing the Homeowners of Breezy Village Subdivision
and the Homeowners of New Horizon Trailer Park.
Mr. Pollard and Mr. Bonnell have been pursuing the issue
of turning lanes at U. S. Highway 1 and 99th Street for the
past year.
They were informed at that time that it was premature.
In the meantime, 99th Street, west of U.S. Highway 1 has
added more businesses and industries.
1. Industrial Park site was constructed on the north side
of 99th Street.
2. Fisher has opened a mining operation. This operation
alone has 30 trucks per hour using 99th Street.
3. A huge warehouse completed and located at the F.E.C.
Railroad, on the north side of 99th street.
4. A large building for storage and sale of fertilizer
located on 99th Street. °
5. A mini storage area, located west of the F.E.C. Railroad
on the south side of 99th Street.
6. A cabinet shop located in the mini storage area on the
south side of 99th Street.
7. Wong's Produce Market, a new building located on the
northwest corner of U.S. Highway 1 and 99th Street.
This Produce Market has caused extra traffic to enter 99th
Street, causing considerable congestion and a traffic hazard
at U.S. Highway 1.
8. Now a mini Storage is to be constructed along 99th Street
28
M ® M
With all this business and a mini storage to be built along
99th Street, and a Lube Business to be located at the south-
west corner of 99th Street and U.S. Highway 1, the residents
of this area are asking that this high risk intersection
be investigated.
We feel there is a dire need of turning lanes at 99th Street
and U.S. Highway 1.
Now is the time to take action while U.S. 1 is being repaved.
We believe this corner is considered a high risk intersection.
Also approved by the Zoning Department, a Lube Business
tc be built and opened at the southwest corner of 99th Street
and U.S. Highway 1.
New Horizon Trailer Park is located at the end of 99th Street.
Breezy Village Subdivision is located west of F.E.C. Railroad
track off 99th Street.
99th Street is the only exit for all of this industry to use.
We believe there is as much traffic using 99th Street as there
is at Schuman Drive and U.S. Highway 1. They have turning lanes
and a traffic light.
Commissioner Bird asked about the status of pushing DOT on
this, and Director Davis advised that we have written them and
been in touch with the construction manager of the work on U.S.I.
We have not heard anything from them regarding installing the
left turn lane. The estimated cost of that was about $30,000,
but he felt it can be done for less than that.
Commissioner Scurlock stated that he would be willing, as
one Commissioner, to approach DOT and suggest some cost sharing.
He did agree that it is their responsibility; however, if they
are going to tell us it will be 35 years before they can do it
because they don't have the money, it won't accomplish our goal.
Commissioner Eggert agreed, and Commissioner Bird felt he
possibly could take that as a compromise position, but he still
felt strongly we should keep the heat on the DOT to do it.
Director Davis commented that this was proposed to the DOT
earlier, but their attitude was that they did not want to issue a
change order for that one intersection.
Commissioner Scurlock suggested that staff pursue this, and
Director Davis stated that he is writing a letter today for
Chairman Wheeler's signature.
ez rF=,
A U G i IiZ5 198 29
AUG 15 19'�'� '��'j
R U V f� tltlyJ � E O� C.Y
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard.
Gayle Jones, employed by Carter Assoc., informed the Board
that he also has been in contact with the DOT re the left turn
lane, and they told him they did not want to issue a change order
unless some other change came up in the contract and in addition,
they did not have the funds.
Chairman Wheeler commented that he would be willing to apply
whatever pressure we can through Rep. Patchett, Sen. Deratany,
the Governor's Office, etc.
Attorney O'Haire requested that the Board please approve
their Special Exception and site plan request without the
requirement of saving the tree and without requiring the marginal
access easement without compensation. All the requirements that
legally can be made of them is all they are asking.
Nancy Offutt, representing the Board of Realtors, noted that
they are an advocate of private property rights. Without
speaking of the merits of the particular application, they
recognize that there has been an awareness from the Board and
staff of private property rights and hope they continue to keep
it in mind on all decisions. She was sure that no one wants to
destroy the tree, but it is in the footprint of a building and
that is why the ordinance was drafted that way.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard.
Marg Masters of Breezy Village informed the Board that there
have been several serious accidents on 99th Street and there are
so many trucks that it is hard to get in and out.
Director Davis wished the Board to be aware that when we
developed the impact fee program, we did not consider any
marginal access funding, and the program was not intended for
that purpose.
The Chairman determined that no one further wished to be
heard and thereupon closed the public hearing.
Attorney Vitunac informed the Board that he must agree with
Attorney O'Haire that we cannot legally defend keeping the tree
30
there. As to the "taking" issue, it is not going to be a public
road, and the question is how much does allowing the southern
neighbors access across the property reduce the value of it. He
felt actually that property may be worth more because of the
benefits from the southern customers coming. We are not taking
anything; we are requiring him to give one neighbor an easement.
It is a property development regulation. It will not be a public
road.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, to approve staff's recommendation
with the exception of the provision that we require
them to save the tree, but that we do require the dedi-
cation of the marginal access easement as we believe
there is a benefit for them, and not a negative impact,
or in other words, approve all the conditions except #1.
Commissioner Bird stated that he will vote for the Motion
because right or wrong, he believed we have been fairly consist—
ent in the way we handle the marginal access issue. In regard to
Condition #3, he would not be in favor of sending them back to
the Technical Review Committee again, but Planner Boling pointed
out that it would only be required if they have to redesign for
separation distance between the proposed septic system and the
existing community supply well.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
31
A U G � 1989
F_
AUG 190- �.�,.
aUOK
. 1 � F.a
HOUSING AUTHORITY REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF RESIDENTIAL MULTI
FAMILY HOUSING IN GIFFORD
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 Codnty, Florida
COUNTY OF. INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Beforb 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 Court, was pub-
lashed in said newspaper in the issues of d
:µ•..'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. A
Sworn to and subscribed before me this - d V, of A.D. 19 ¢�
,11
le, Ausiness Man o
,
I
(Creo e Ir wCour F1er+da)
ISEAL)• )
` n N0ta►1' Public,
' Z m Ex,Duess -cuw 29, 194
public hearing on Aug:.15:111ee et e:cu AM., ml
the Commission Chambers:�1,840.25th ,Street,
Vero Beach, Florida, for -the purpose of: t+I) T'IV4
•1: -To review a proposal Of'lheIndian River
County Housing Authority. -requesting approval
of a alta for purchase to: Onatruct resident)al
t multi -family rental housing for 100 low and mod-
eratpeelncome families on,the following described
and eor uthl of t455th treet a133M north A Avenue sn In -
than River County, Florida (1810 a�jres) to wi
• Tract 1: A parcel of land ettuafa Wthe south-
quarter of the northwest quarter of Section
' 27, Township 32 souCc; Range :39 east 1ndlan
River County, Florida,::baing ;more;.per0culary
described as fduows •:,-4,sl ki.�"Q2�k:
Commence at'the,southwest, of the said
sou#MM, quarter, of::,the ..norgtweat. quarter,
distance of 46&00'tW m the point of beginning
and the northwest carrier of land ea described In
Deed Book go at page 331•ot the Public Records
of Indian Rhrer County, Florida #woe continue
north, along the said west line, ' a distance of
961.86 feet to the northwest.corner of the said
southeast quarter of the northwest quarter,
thence east along the north line •of the said
southeast quarter. of the northwest quarter, a
distance of 600.59 feet to the wast right-of-way
line of 38th Avenue (100'R/w),••'thence.soutfa,
t322k�( gthe said rlght-of-way One, a distance of
41 feet to the northeast comer of land as
described in Deed Book 112 at page 14 of the
Public Records of Indian River County, Florida:
thence west, along the north line of said land, a
distance of 250.00 feet to the northwest comer
of said land: thence south, along the west line of
said land, a distance of 39.59 feet; thence west,
along the north line extended. at the said land
described in Deed Book 90 at page 331, a dis•
tante of 352.32 feet to the point of beginning. '
• Containing 11.66 acres, mora or less.
i- Tract 2 A parcel of land situate In the south:
OW quarter of the northwest quarter of Section
W. Township 32 south,'Range 39 east Indian
'River County, Florida, being more particulary
idescribed as follows: ,
Commence at the southwest comer of the said
boutheast quarter of the northwest quarter,
thence east along the south line of the said
southeast quarter of the northwest quarter, a
distance of 702.99 feet to the east right-of-way
fine extended of 36th Avenue 11W R/VWr thence
forth, along the sold extension. a distance of
,30.00 feet to thepoint of beginning and the
north right-oVway line of 41st Street (South GIF.
ford Roadr thence continue north, along the
'said east right-of-way line of 38th Avenue, for a
distance of 727.86 feet to the southwest comer
of land as described in Official Record Book 520
at page 506 of the Public Records of Indian
River County, Florida, thence east, along the
south line of said land, a distance of 263.76 feet
to the west One of the west 330 feet of the ees1
340 feet of the said southeast quarter of the
northwest quarter, thence south, along the said
west line.. a distance of 732.56 feet to the said
north right-of-way line of 4/at Street. thence
west, along the said right-of-way fine, a distance
of 263.24 test to the point of beginning.
Containing 4.42 acres, more or Ins.
2. A public hearing In relation thereto at which
part iiyn Interest and Citizens shall have an op-
portunito be heard.
Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River Coun
8y. Gary C. wheeler. Chairman
July 24, ie89 - .J
The Board reviewed memo from Guy Decker, the Executive
Director of the County Housing Authority:
32
TO: Board of County DATE: August 1, 1989 FILE:
Commissioners
THROUGH: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Request for Approval for the
Development of Residential
Multifamily Housing
FROM: Guy L. Decker, Jr.', �► REFERENCES:
Executive Director
Indian River County Housing Authority
The Indian River County Housing Authority respectfully requests a
Public Hearing by the Board of County Commissioners for approval of a
site for the development of residential multifamily housing for low and
moderate -income families.
Florida Statutes 79-481, House Bill No. 854 requires the Housing
Authority to receive the approval of the County Commission, or the gov-
erning body which has jurisdiction, for a site of a proposed project.
This site approval is independent of zoning and other regulatory approvals.
In accord with the statute, Notice was published in the Vero Beach
Press -Journal on July 24th, 1989. Consistent with the requirements, we
have notified all owners within 300 feet of the site and posted a Notice
.on the site. -
. :.";`TV The Housing Authority has prepared an Application to the Housing
'Assistance Council, Inc. for a loan of funds to acquire 16.10 acres in
.=•:Gifford north of 41st Street, south of 45th Street on 38th Avenue (location i
map attached). The Housing Authority has optioned a parcel owned by
Jackson Brothers Grove, Inc. for $217,350.00. We have received a loan
.approval on November 30, 1988, pending a loan obligation from the Farmers
Home Administration.
The objective is to acquire the land and develop 100 townhouse rental
units for low and moderate -income families. The complex, like Victory Park,
will be owned and managed by the Housing Authority.
The cost of the land and the availability of water and sewer makes it
feasible to meet the standards set by the Farmers Home Administration's
Section 514 Loan and 516 Grant Farm Labor and 515 Mortgage Interest Subsidy
Programs. The conditions do not exist at this time in many other areas of
the County. The fund to acquire the land, plan and design a multifamily
building site will be made available by the Housing Assistance Council,Inc.
We request approval of this site for purchase by the Indian River
County Housing Authority to develop residential multifamily housing for
low and moderate -income families on the following described 16.10 acres
in Gifford north of 41st Street, south of 45th Street on 38th Avenue in
Indian River County, Florida, to wit:
Tract 1: A parcel of land situate in the southeast quarter of the
northwest quarter of Section 27, Township 32 south, Range 39 east, Indian
River County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows:
Commence at the southwest corner of the said southeast quarter of the
northwest quarter; thence north, along the west line of the said south-
east quarter of the northwest quarter, a distance of 468.00 feet to the
point of beginning and the northwest corner of land as described in Deed
Book 90 at page 331 of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida;
thence continue north, along the said west line, a distance of 861.68 feet
to the northwest corner of the said southeast quarter of the northwest
quarter; thence east, along the north line of the said southeast quarter
of the northwest quarter, a distance of 600.59 feet to the west right-of-
way line of 38th Avenue(100'R/W); thence south, along the said right-of-
way line, a distance of 822.41 feet to the northeast corner of land as
33
AUG I i
AUG JE, `g ,. _
MoG /
described in Deed Book 112 at page 14 of the Public Records of Indian
River County, Florida; thence west, along the north line of said land, a
distance of 250.00 feet to the northwest corner of said land; thence south,
along the west line of said land, a distance of 39.59 .feet; thence west,
along the north line extended of the said land described in Deed Book 90
at page 331, a distance of 352,32 feet to the point of beginning.
Containing 11.68 acres, more or less.
Tract 2: A parcel of land situate in the southeast quarter of the
northwest quarter of Section 27, Township 32 south, Range 39 east, Indian
River County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows:
Commence at the southwest corner of the said southeast quarter of the
northwest quarter; thence east, along the south line of the said southeast
quarter of the northwest quarter, a distance of 702.99 feet to the east
right-of-way line extended of 38th Avenue (100' R/W); thence north, along
the said extension, a distance of 30.00 feet to the point of beginning and
the north right-of=way line of 41st Street (South Gifford Road); thence
continue north, along the said east right-of-way line of 38th Avenue, for
•a distance of 727.86 feet to the southwest corner of land as described in
Official Record Book 520 at page 506 of the Public Records of Indian River
County, Florida; thence east, along the south line of said land, a dis-
tance of 263.76 feet to the west line of the west 330 feet of the east
340 feet of the said southeast quarter of the northwest quarter; thence
south, along the said west line, a distance of 732.56 feet to the said
north right-of-way line of 41st Street; thence west, along the said right-
of-way line, a distance of 263.24 feet to the point of beginning.
Containing 4,42 acres, more or less.
;r
;'TRACT 4
SITE MAP
u .tPFnRn Rn_ — -
MORON
��lRR
44TH PL.
44TH ST.
tID P V N
W
44TH ST.
IMS
s
h
n
—32"FORD RD.
--____----- � CANAL—+; _.—=_— i.�:•:
34
RM
M
T -Z
195
20�
�I
22
23
42R
_ M M
� � r
Martin Wall, Chairman of the Housing Authority, noted that
this is merely a pro forma approval from the Board of County
Commissioners for the Housing Authority to purchase and begin
construction of its next Farm Labor project on 38th Ave. and
South Gifford Road. He informed the Board that the site already
has been approved by the Housing Authority and the FHA,
Chairman Wheeler stated that the only thing that concerns
him is that the site approval is independent of zoning and other
regulatory approval, and he asked if that means they do not have
to go through site plan approval.
Commissioner Eggert noted that they did with Victory Park,
and Mr. Wall advised that the statute that was enacted requires
the County Commission to approve any project the Housing Author-
ity undertakes before its commencement. They still have to go
through site plan approval; this is an additional step. He
further stressed that the site does have proper zoning for their
project, and various agencies have agreed it is a desirable site
for funding purposes.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
Isaac Hunter, 4121 38th Ave., informed the Board that he
built and moved in his house there in 1975, and he was interested
in how they would go about building and developing this project
because they have him surrounded.
In discussion it was noted that the Housing Authority is to
the east and the north of Mr. Hunter, and it will be near him but
not right up against his property.
Executive Director Guy Decker wished to assure Mr. Hunter
that he would be welcome at any time to look at their Victory
Park project, and he could assure Mr. Hunter that their proposed
project will do nothing but increase the value of his property.
It was determined that no one else wished to be heard, and
the Chairman thereupon closed the public hearing.
5 j98,9
35
ROD 77
�;�Gc. ���
AUG 155 N89
KOK l 6 632
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved the
above described site for purchase by the Indian River
County Housing Authority to develop residential multi-
family housing for low and moderate income families.
SCHOOL SITE COMMITTEE
Administrator Chandler reported that the School Site Com-
mittee will be meeting shortly to discuss the new high school and
would like to have the Board designate a Commission representa-
tive to that Committee. He believed Commissioner Scurlock had
previously served.
Commissioner Scurlock confirmed that he would be interested
in continuing to serve, and with the Board's concurrence,
Chairman Wheeler officially appointed Commissioner Scurlock the
Board representative on the School Site Committee.
SALE OF COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY ON OSLO (CHILDREN'S HOME SOCIETY)
"Sonny" Dean, Director of General Services, reviewed the
following memo:
36
DATE: AUGUST 4, 1989
TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRII: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRECTOR
A,
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERV S
SUBJECT: SALE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY OKNED PROPERTY
f.
BACKGROUND:
-The Children's Home Society of Florida, a tax exempt entity that
offers shelter and counseling for run -away children, has made an
official request to purchase a parcel of land owned by Indian River
..County. The "pie shaped" property is located on the north side of
Oslo Road and parallels the west bank of Lateral "J" canal. There
• are approximately 3.5 acres in the parcel with a 15' utility easement
along the entire east boundary.
This parcel is part of the Utility Department's property and is in
surplus. Terry Pinto, Director of Utilities has requested that we
'dispose of the land due to the location and liability to the County.
4 Florida State Statue 125.38 authorizes the sale of surplus property
1;:.to a non-profit organization based on an application, at a private
.,sale for a price whether nominal or otherwise as the Board of County
,.Commissioners may fix, regardless of the actual value of such
property. The law also requires a Board resolution stipulating the
:fact of an application for purchase of the land, purpose for which
`such property is to be used, and selling price.
ANALYSIS:
Don Finney in the Engineering Department was requested to provide
what he felt was a fair market price for the subject property, based
on his experience in the purchase of property for the County. He
advised that the shape, location, utility easement, and lack of
property sales in that area made it very difficult to place a price
on the parcel. A local realtor was contacted to ascertain a
suggested price and for the same reasons stated by Don, he felt that
$25,000 was a fair price. Don Finney was in agreement with the
realtor.
r
•RECOMMENDATIONS:
Based on the above information, staff recommends that the Board offer
the property to the Children's Society of Florida as is for $25,000,
instruct the County Attorney to prepare the proper paperwork, and
authorize the Chairman to execute the documents for sale.
37
AUG 15, I.S1189 B(1GKr. �•J►c�
2 IS__
14
I —i
1
I IPL
-- r,
I -ro
W —
86,
0
70,
ED
5—
14-
40
1 110
70,
(_
lers, ar-5,
4
0 (1)
*9
16
17
C-7)
IS
191
201
(7
2 12
1
�4
2D
1, 'N
5
2,
1 3r�
r�j
76
I IE
�
L�JS
27
127
1.
2
1 �_13
1 Z
10)
1 qllv�,
-so'
I
76
9
7
16'
rL
IL
I--
1tiINS
5TH PL. SW
A -pt
. . Dole %1-
TRACT *A"Do 8.1 I
86,
0
70,
ED
(2D
0
1
40
1 110
70,
(_
lers, ar-5,
4
0 (1)
*9
(D
1
I C?d
1
so
15 -14
75,
40
7d
5
(D
1
74
Op 0
—1
(0
co
cD
15
1 14
113
12
11
i9
9
7
16'
3
C!
JR.15
o LL_
0
V,
Iq
P-0
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
000 Oql
0
too
IV
.1b
afte
1L
Do
Do L052 ACRES
110
ATER MANAGEMENT TRACT
ei 41
(C.
v
TIMBER
RIDGE VILLAGE IE-- As%at.,%
0.R7S4-2069
I--
1tiINS
9 .,*
A -pt
. . Dole %1-
TRACT *A"Do 8.1 I
sea.
Ia. R Ee7l . .....
di
.9
a
8
44&
JR.15
V,
fraAA
CMN
n,
i
N . ks .,;
@age
W-65fr-
8&49' 0427� 100'
.2
�T.
iu. A.T.
d
40 -.4
TIMBER RIDGE o00o yA > Td'
VILLAGE1 TRACT- EC
O.L705-653
6214 A.5 4;.
njM%0jp?d 1.0.4 Rt nt
04
0
.Xr?
v000, 7ooca
*0 A,
7r
—OSLO RD.
Commissioner Scurlock asked what the site was originally
used for.
Director Pinto stated that it was the site of the old
38
I
wastewater plant for Treasure Coast Utilities, and it actually is
considered a liability because we are spending several thousand
dollars a year just to keep it cut down.
Question arose as to where the money realized from the
property would go. It was believed it would go into the Utility
Enterprise Fund rather than the General Fund, and Commissioner
Bird asked if the Utility Department takes title to the property
in that fund.
Attorney Vitunac advised that the property is always in the
name of the county, but it can be held for the trust of the
Utilities Department. It depends on where it came from and whose
money bought it.
Director Pinto advised that the Utility fund paid 1/4
million for that whole Ixora/Treasure Coast utility system.
Director Dean explained that due to the location and shape
of the property and the lack of sales in the area for comparison,
we did not get an appraisal but just requested a fair market
price from our R/W Agent and also a local realtor.
Commissioner Scurlock asked about the zoning, and Chief
Planner Boling advised that the main part of it going back 600'
from Oslo Road is Limited Commercial, which would allow a resi-
dential treatment center as a Special Exception.
Commissioner Scurlock did not believe we can make a sale
contingent upon zoning approval, and Attorney Vitunac agreed, but
noted that we can make a contract. They can apply for the
zoning, and if they get it, then the sale will go through.
Commissioner Bird felt we should have reverter clauses in
case the site isn't used for the set purpose in a certain period
of time. Also, because it is Limited Commercial, he felt $25,000
might be a low figure. If we were selling to a private indivi-
dual, he would not sell at that price.
Director Dean pointed out that if it went to a private
individual, we would have to take bids on it, but the Children's
Home Society is a non-profit organization.
P-4;-, ,.
AIJG 39
AUG 15 19
Poor 77
Commissioner Scurlock also had some problems with the price,
which he felt was low, particularly for commercial property, and
Commissioner Bird wondered where the funds come from for this
agency.
Dr. Karen Borchers, Executive Director of the Children's
Home Society, South Coastal Division, informed the Board that
they are a private not-for-profit agency with funding through
United Ways, various contributions, and they have some state
purchase -of- service contracts; they have no fees - most of their
services are free. They chose this -site primarily because of
the location. They established a Safe Harbor Runaway Center in
West Palm Beach in 1986, and it is the only runaway center
between Orlando and Fort Lauderdale. Dr. Borchers noted that the
typical runaway is a white girl about 14115 years old, and
whatever their reason is for running away, whether minor or not,
kids are in danger on the streets. She did feel there is a big
need for a runaway center in this area. The HRS budget for 1991
includes allocation for a new center somewhere, and this area is
a very high priority because it is a big gap area in the state.
Where the money actually goes depends on the Legislators for the
different areas, on having property to build on, and on having an
agency capable of operating the center. Dr. Borchers felt Oslo
Road is ideally located because it is close to U.S.I, close to
the border of Indian River and St. Lucie Counties, and halfway
between Orlando and Fort Lauderdale. The triangular shape and
the easements will limit them, and she believed the back portion
is residential which would further limit them, but they would use
it as green space.
Chairman Wheeler saw that the Society has a house donated to
them and funds donated to move it.
Dr. Borchers agreed, but did not know if they can move
quickly enough because there is a deadline involved in moving the
house before it is destroyed. It would be an excellent house for
them.
40
M
Commissioner Eggert inquired if their HRS funding comes
through District 9, and Dr. Borchers stated that it is under the
HRS total state budget.
Commissioner Bowman asked how many runaways they hope to
accommodate, and Dr. Borchers advised they hope to have a 10 bed
facility. They only have an 8 bed in Palm Beach, and they serve
about 500 kids a year there. About 20% are out-of-state runaways,
but 80% are local kids. She explained that the youngsters don't
usually stay that long. They also counsel the parents.
Discussion resumed regarding having a reverter clause, and
Commissioner Bird noted that he just wanted them to have a
reasonable amount of time to complete their project. He had no
problem with what is planned, but he did have a problem with the
price and asked if they are limited to that amount.
Dr. Borchers commented that in some instances, counties have
provided the land for their runaway center as they see it as a
public responsibility.
Commissioner Scurlock noted that if we are going to set a
lower value than what he feels the market conditions are, what he
would like to see is a provision that it would be conveyed back
to the County at the original purchase price in the event the
property ever ceased to be used for this purpose.
Dr. Borchers had a question about the possibility of having
offices in their complex to counsel pregnant teens and women and
work with teen parents, and wished to know if those functions
also meet the criteria for use of the property.
Commissioner Eggert believed any office would have to be in
the front 6001, which is zoned limited commercial. She believed
the group house for 8 could be in the back, but Planner Boling
pointed out that area is zoned RS -6.
Commissioner Scurlock felt the only other concern is any
impact on the surrounding property and acceptance by the neigh-
bors, i.e., Timber Ridge Tennis Ranch.
-.
AUG 1 41 mor 1 F i c. 6FJ I
'
AUG
1,5
1'989
l 63
Commissioner Bird
asked who would take title
to the prop-
erty, and was informed it would be The Children's Home Society of
Florida, which is a statewide organization.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved sale
of the subject property to the Children's Home Society
of Florida as recommended by staff, with the inclusion
of a reverter clause; instructed the County Attorney
to prepare the necessary documents; and authorized the
Chairman's signature.
SOUTH COUNTY R.O. PLANT - TREATMENT CAPACITY INCREASE
The Board reviewed memo from Engineer William McCain:
DATE: AUGUST 4, 1989
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRAPSERVICES FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILI
SUBJECT: TREATMENT CAPACITY INCREASE FOR THE SOUTH
COUNTY REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT ON 9TH STREET,
S.W.
IRC PROJECT #UW -89=07 -WC
PREPARED AND STAFFED BY: WILLIAM F. McCAIN
CAPITAL PROJECTS ENGINEER
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
BACKGROUND
The Department of Utility Services is now well into the Phase 1
expansion of the South County R.O. Plant as outlined in the Water
Master Plan by Boyle Engineering. We have recently completed
expanding our storage capacity, degasifier equipment, miscellaneous .
piping, the addition of a fourth well, and the retrofit of the high
service pumps to raise the distribution system pressure. The next
step in the Phase I expansion is to expand treatment capacity.
Attached please find a Work Authorization with Camp Dresser and
McKee, Inc., for the expansion of the South County Reverse Osmosis
t Plants treatment capabilities.
is
ANALYSIS
The South Count Plant is capable of
County p producing 1.89 million gallons
per day (mgd) of permeate and, with a raw water blend rate of 35.7
...percent, a total of 2.94 mgd can be produced. The peak day
production for June was 2,.92 mgd, or 99.3 percent of plant capacity.
42
We are currently preparing to take Gifford and Grand Harbor off of
the city water system, which will take the plant to its maximum
capacity. Since the rainy season has started, a peak demand as
great as that listed above, should not be expected until next
season. Based on the above information, it is evident that the
County needs to expand the plant as soon as possible. The lump sum
engineering costs associated with this project are $162,834.00 (see
attached Work Authorization).
The funds for this project will come from Account No.
472-000-169-041.00.
ECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners approve the attached Work
Authorization with Camp Dresser and McKee for the expansion of the
South County Reverse Osmosis Plant.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
Work Authorization with Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc.
in the amount of $162,834 for engineering services
related to the treatment capacity increase for the
South County R.O. Plant.
ENGINEERING SERVICES WORK AUTHORIZATION
DATE: November 8, 1988 1-70RK AUTHORIZATION NO. FOR CONSULTING SERVICES
COUNTY NO. CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC. CDPI PROJECT NO. 6706-23
(CONSULTANT)
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Consulting engineering services related to the Indian River County
Water Treatment Plant Expansion of the South County RO Water Treatment
Plant.
II. SCOPE OF SERVICES
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM) will prepare a Preliminary Design that
will assess the current treatment capacity of the South County RO
Plant, establish the necessary capacity for expansion and outline the
recommended methods for expansion. Subsequently, CDM will also
prepare a final design including plans and specifications, permitting
assistance and services during bidding.
III. CONSULTING ENGINEER INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
A. Workers Compensation Insurance in accordance with Florida
Statutes.
B. Comprehensive and Automotive Liability with a minimum coverage of
$100,000/$300,000 per occurrence for bodily injury or accidental
death.
C. Comprehensive General Liability with a minimum limit of
$100,000/$300,000 covering property damage.
D. Liability fox Property Damage, while operating motor vehicle, with
minimum limits of $100,000 per occurrence.
43 77
9
UG
E. Contractual Liability including limits established for Items IIIB,
C, and D above.
F. Umbrella coverage, excess liability with minimum limits of
$100,000 per occurrence.
IV. COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES
Lump sum fee of $162,834.
A. Lump Sum Cost Elements
For the Basic Services performed for a lump sum fee, Indian River
County (IRC) agrees to pay Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM)
partial payments to be made on a monthly basis in proportion to
the percentage of work completed.
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
CARP DRESSER & McKEE INC. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
(Consultant) BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BY v �� y B &-f C!l 41144-&�
Donald G. M sgaar Gary C. ,4heeler
Vice President ChairmM
DATE: GZZ -,-,Ze y DATE: D- l - o
ALTERNATE DESIGN OF NORTH COUNTY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
Director Pinto reviewed the following:
DATE: JULY 27, 1989
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILIY SERVICES
STAFFED AND
PREPARED BY: WILLIAM F. McCAI
CAPITAL PROJECTS R
DEPARTMENT OF UTI- SERVICES
SUBJECT: ALTERNATE DESIGN OF NORTH COUNTY WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. US-8725SC
BACKGROUND
During the review of the North County Wastewater Treatment Plant
(WWTP) design, the Department of Utility Services' staff had major
design changes which they wanted incorporated into the project to
utilize current state-of-the-art equipment and improved operating
;'•.procedures. Due to the magnitude of the changes we are requesting,
.:an additional Work Authorization has been prepared to cover the
additional design fees.
44
I... ANALYSIS
The attached Work Authorization covers the redesign of the '
Wastewater Treatment Plant primary treatment. This will be done and
bid as an alternate to the design originally proposed. The cost
associated with this alternate design is $13,800.00. It is
anticipated that the construction cost of the alternate will be
approximately the same as the engineer's proposed design but will
have reduced operating costs. The funds for the alternate design
will be charged to Account No. 472-000-169-006.00.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners approve the attached Work
Authorizations for the North County alternate wastewater treatment
,plant design.
Director Pinto explained that the plant originally was
designed with screening devices to be after the surge tanks, with
the thought that they would put a large head screen system in the
2nd or 3rd phase, but Utilities engineering staff wanted to look
at the alternative to build screening ahead of the surge tanks
immediately and thereby eliminate a pumping device that would not
be needed under that design. This ultimately over the life span
of the facility would save the operating and replacement cost of
that pump and probably would result in saving about $20,000 a
year.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved Work
Authorization #WW -2 with Masteiler & Moler for redesign
of the Wastewater Treatment Plant primary treatment.
l �1 r
45 POR<a,
P1UG Ib 1999
L
_I
A U G� � I�'�Y � ` � PUGK 77 F' t 642
.:4GINEERING WORK AUTHORIZAT .4
DATE: June 19, 1989 _. WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. WW -2 FOR CONSULTING
SERVICES. PROJECT NO. 16 COUNTY, I.D. 86004L MASTELLER & MOLER
ASSOCIATES, INC. WASTEWATER.
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Title: North County Subregional Sewer System
Wastewater Treatment Plant, Contract ill
Project #US87-25-SC
Consulting engineering services consisting of design, engineering,
preparation of contract plans and bid documents to prepare an
alternate design of the influent manually cleaned bar screen section
of the plant per Indian River County Utility Department's request.
Alternate plans will replace the manually cleaned bar screen with a
hydroscreen system. The contract documents will be revised and
amended to provide for a base bid with the manually cleaned bar
screen and alternate bid based on the hydroscreen system.
II. SCOPE OF SERVICES AND LUMP SUM FEE FOR SERVICES
Reference is made to the "Master Agreement for Utilities Service"
dated October 4, 1988, and specific Article numbers and paragraph numbers
which are listed hereunder to describe the scope of services included on
this project.
A. Proiect Design Services per Master Agreement.
B. General Services During Construction per Master Agreement.
The Resident Inspector shall be a full-time employee of the
Engineering Consultant. The Resident Inspector's duties shall be to
monitor construction and be at the job site when project
construction is taking place, on a preacheduled periodic basis.
C. General Services During Construction per Master Agreement.
In addition, services shall include field surveys necessary, for
design and preparation of construction plans and, with assistance
from the County, obtaining various permits and approvals for
construction (permit fees to be paid by the County).
Also, in addition, the consultant shall, with the approval of this
authorization, submit a time phased job completion schedule. This
task oriented schedule, as negotiated, shall include these elements
of work:'
1. Releases from each public utility pertaining to underground
installations and/or interfering utility structures.
2. Submittal of all required permits and inspection schedules.
3. First and final submittal of construction drawings.
4. Submittal of construction contract bid packages (5), with
recommended construction completion time frame and a complete list
of all material required for project installation.
Note: Failure to meet these negotiated schedules will leave
consultant open for a negative performance evaluation, and/or
contract cancellation, or liquidated damages.*'
D. Consultant Engineer Insurance Requirement
1.1. Workers Compensation Insurance in accordance with Florida
Statutes.
2. Comprehensive and Automobile Liability with a minimum coverage
of 0100/300 per occurrence for bodily injury or accidental death.
3. Comprehensive General Liability with a minimum limit of
0 100/300 covering property damage.
4. Liability for Property Damage, while operating motor vehicle,
with minimum limits of 9 100/300 per occurrence.
5. Contractural Liability including limits established for Items
D, 2., 3., and 4.
6. Umbrella coverage, Excess Liability with minimum limits of
9.1,000,000.00 per occurrence.
46
E. Compensation for Services
This authorization shall be bid with two price elements:
1. Total design, permitting, and bid package preparation, and
2---On-sits-Resident Inspection -Services.
Billing will be submitted monthly based on a percentage of
completion of cost element 111,• with 100% billed upon approval of
engineering design.
c t' ion -- -- percentage --8
n. The County shall make payments within thirty (30) days
of the invoice billing date.
Cost Element 111 813,800.00
SUBMITTED BY;
MASTELLER & MOLER ASSOCIATES, INC.
By.r
Earl H. Masteller, P.E.
President
84 800.00.
APPROVED BY:
INDIAN RIVER COUNty
BOARD OF COUNTY, COMMISSIONERS
By
Gary Wheeler,
Chair an
Date June 19, 1989 Date
DISCUSSION RE SEBASTIAN INLET FEES
Commissioner Bowman commented that she has received a copy
of the first Biennial Report from the State regarding the Inlet
Fees. This fee system only has been in existence for a year so
she did not understand why we are getting a biennial report now.
She felt we should tell them that we don't expect another report
for 2 years.
Commissioner Scurlock felt we should also convey to them
that there are certain solid waste fees that need to be paid and
that we are not listening to their objections. They have indi-
cated that our approach on solid waste is an assessment, and the
state is not required or responsible for assessments and,
therefore, they don't want to pay the landfill fee. He believed
staff will tell them "No ticket, no laundry."
Commissioner Bowman asked what other state recreation areas
do, and it was noted they don't have these kind of fees.
Commissioner Scurlock felt this is an appropriate place to
send them this message because we cooperated with the State to
allow them to charge fees.
47
U
-A.
r
AUG IE f39
EOOK 17 PA t 644
Chairman Wheeler felt the state's position could create a
problem for us with other entities, such as churches, the
Hospital, etc.
DOCUMENTS TO BE MADE PART OF THE RECORD
A. Proclamation Honoring Charles V. Joyce Jr.
P R O C L A M A T I O N
WHEREAS, CHARLES V. JOYCE, JR. died on August 12,
1989; and
WHEREAS, CHARLES V. JOYCE, JR. demonstrated a keen
interest in tourism in Indian River County and was appointed
to serve on the Tourist Development Council; and
WHEREAS, CHARLES V. JOYCE, JR. was instrumental in
assisting Indian River County in adopting a plan for levying
and imposing an additional one cent sales tax for planned
County improvements; and
WHEREAS, it was the unanimous consensus of the Tourist
Development Council that enacting this sales tax for a
limited time and purpose would be the fairest way to fund
capital items our County and cities need to provide a
quality place to live; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the
memory of CHARLES V. JOYCE, JR. be honored for his
participation in County government by his service on the
Tourist Development Council.
BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED that the Board commends the
past efforts of CHARLES V. JOYCE, JR. who volunteered and
donated his time to this County.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
e z
Gary C Wheeler, Chairman
Adopted this 15th day of August, 1989
48
I
B. Proclamation Commending Sebastian Volunteer Fire Department
P R O C L A M A T I O N
WHEREAS, the SEBASTIAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT was
organized and began operation in 1961; and
WHEREAS, on August 6, 1989 the SEBASTIAN VOLUNTEER
FIRE DEPARTMENT hosted the Grand Opening of a new fire
station located on US Highway 1 in Sebastian; and
WHEREAS, no revenues were utilized in the construction
of this fire station and this represents a savings of
$300,000 to the taxpayers of this County; and
WHEREAS, this is the second fire station the SEBASTIAN
VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT has constructed. The first was
accomplished at Barber Street which was opened in 1988 at a
cost of $100,000, and again no tax revenues were utilized;
and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS. -OF - INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that
congratulations be extended to the SEBASTIAN VOLUNTEER FIRE
DEPARTMENT for the tremendous job they did in"getting the
new station built in Sebastian.
BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED that the SEBASTIAN VOLUNTEER
FIRE DEPARTMENT be commended for this salutary undertaking
and demonstration of selfless dedication to improve the
facilities that house, to a large degree, the fire
apparatus/equipment used in fire suppression efforts in the
North County area.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
e:�Z e:�"Z
G RY WHEELER, CHAIRMAN
Adopted this 15th day of August, 1989
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment,
the Board would reconvene acting as the District Board of
Commissioners of the Solid Waste Disposal District.
Those Minutes are being prepared separately.
A U G 49 E00K 7 F: 645
L
F,
AUG I
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board unanimously adjourned at 11:20
o'clock A.M.
ATTEST:
Clerk
50
Chairman