HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/14/1992BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, 1992
9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
1840 25TH STREET
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman
Margaret C. Bowman, Vice Chairman
Richard N. Bird
Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Gary C. Wheeler
James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board
9 : 0. 0 A. M. 1. CALL TO ORDER
2. INVOCATION - None
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Comm. Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
1. Com. Bird requested addition of Item 13,C,
regarding railroad blocking four. -cros 7sings in
Gifford area for more than one-half hour.
5. PROCLAMATION AND PRESENTATIONS
None -
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Regular meeting of 11/26/91
B. Regular meeting of 12/3/91
7. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Appointment of Deputy Sheriff by Sheriff Tim Dobeck:
Stuart M. Campbell (Part-time)
B. Received E - placed on file in the office of Clerk to
the Board:
Copies of Auditor's Report for FY1990/91 as
follows:
I.R. Mem. Hospital, Inc., 6 Subsidiaries
1.R. Co. Hosp. Dist .6 1.R. Mem. Hosp., Inc.
E Subsidiaries combined
1. R. Co. Hospital District
C. Report of Convictions, Month of November, 1991
Report of Convictions, Month of December, 1991
D. Occupational License Taxes Collected, Dec. 1991
( memorandum dated January 3, 1992 )
JAS
r
7. CONSENT AGENDA (cont'd):
_ E.
Cable Television Law Seminar
(memorandum dated January 6,
1992)
F.
Out -of -County Travel Request
by Liz Forlani
( memorandum dated January 7,
1992 )
G.
Geographical Information System (GIS)
( memorandum dated January 3,
1992 )
_ H.
Community Services Block Grant
Housing Rehabilitation
Program Application
( memorandum dated January 3,
1992 )
I.
Misc. Budget Amendment 009
( memorandum dated January 8,
1992 )
J.
Release of Utility Liens
( memorandum dated January 8,
1992 )
8. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AND
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
None
9:05 a. m. 9. PUBLIC ITEMS
A. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS
I. The Community Development Director's Appeal of
the Planning and Zoning Commission's Decision to
Allow the Use of Road Names for Rosewood Crt. S/D
( memorandum dated January 6, 1992 )
2. The Community Development Director's Appeal of
the Planning and Zoning Commission's Decision to
Allow the Use of Road Names for the Florida
Baptist Retirement Center
(memorandum dated January 6, 1992)
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. First Church of the Nazarene's Request for Special
Exception Approval for a Church Expansion
( memorandum dated December 30, 1991)
2. William S. Ford Request to Rezone Approximately
+/-6.4 Acres from CH to IL
( memorandum dated December 23, 1991)
3. Anderton Investments, Inc. Request to Rezone
Approximately +/-1.5 Acres from CH to CG
( memorandum dated December 18, 1991)
4. Mills Request to Rezone Approximately +/-12.5
Acres from A-1 to RS -3
( memorandum dated December 19, 1991)
5. Lykes Bros. inc.'s Request for Special Exception
Use Approval to Construct a 280' Radio Trans-
mission Tower
(memorandum dated January 3, 1992)
� r r
10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS
Winter Beach Cemetery Conversion Proposal
.(memorandum dated January 3, 1992 )
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
None
B. EMERGENCY SERVICES
None _
C. GENERAL SERVICES
None
D. LEISURE SERVICES
None
E. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
None
F. PERSONNEL
None
G. PUBLIC WORKS
I. As -Built Resolutions & Assessment Rolls for
Paving and Drainage Improvements to:
1) 42nd Ave. between 6th -St. E 8th St.
2) 39th Ave. between 6th St. & 8th St.
( memorandum dated December 19, 1991)
2. Rotary Sunrise Dole Bicycle Classic ( 2nd Annual)
(memorandum dated January 7, 1992)
H. .-UTILITIES
None
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY
Reduction in Size of Water Management Tract at Grand
Harbor
( memorandum dated January .8, 1992 )
13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS
A. CHAIRMAN CAROLYN K. EGGERT
Community Partnership Study Program
( memorandum dated January 8, 1992 )
B. VICE CHAIRMAN MARGARET C. BOWMAN
I
JAN 14L, 1992
BOOK
13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS (aont'd):
C. COMMISSIONER RICHARD N. BIRD
D. COMMISSIONER DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.
E. COMMISSIONER GARY C. WHEELER
14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS
A. NORTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
None
B. SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
None
C. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
None
1S. ADJOURNMENT
ANYONE WHO MAY WISH TO -APPEAL ANY DECISION WHICH MAY BE MADE
AT THIS MEETING WILL NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF
THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND
EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL WILL BE BASED.
Tuesday, January 14, 1992
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, January 14,
1992, at 9:00 o'clock A. M. Present were Carolyn K. Eggert,
Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman; Vice Chairman, Richard N. Bird, Gary
C. Wheeler, and Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Also present were James E.
Chandler, County Administrator; William G. Collins II, Deputy
County Attorney; and Patricia Held, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order.
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr., led the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Commissioner Bird requested the addition of Item 13.C,
regarding the blocking of railroad crossings.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously added
the above item to the Agenda.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections
to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 26, 1991. There
were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board approved the
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 26, 1991
as written.
MR CJ 11,,U*c.11JU
JAN 14 1992 BOOK
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections
to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 3, 1991. There
were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner _Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved
the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 3,
1991 as written.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Scurlock requested the removal of Item E from the
Consent Agenda.
A. Anoointment of Deputy Sheriff by Tim Dobeck
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
approved appointment of Stuart M. Campbell as Deputy
Sheriff (Part-time) .
B. Reports
The following reports were received and placed on file in the
office of Clerk to the Board:
Auditor's Report for Fiscal Year 1990/91 for:
Indian River Memorial Hospital, Inc., and Subsidiaries
Indian River Memorial Hospital District and Indian River
Memorial Hospital, Inc., and Subsidiaries combined
Indian River County Hospital District
C. Reports
The following reports were received and placed on file in the
office of Clerk to the Board:
Report of Convictions for the month of November, 1991
Report of Convictions for the month of December, 1991
D. Occupational License Taxes Collected December 1991
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler,
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board
accepted the following report from
Gene E. Morris:
`q
,
SECONDED by
unanimously
Tax Collector
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Gene E. Morris, Tax Collector
SUBJECT: Occupational Licenses
DATE: January 3, 1992
Pursuant to Indian River County Ordinance No. 86-59, please be
informed that $4,747.71 was collected in occupational license taxes
during the month of December, representing the issuance of 201
licenses.
E. Cable Television Law Seminar
The Board reviewed memo from Utility Services Director Terry
Pinto dated January 6, 1992:
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: dames E. Chandler
County Administrator
FROM: Terrance G. Pinto, Director /�
Utility Services Department !iy
DATE: January S. 1992
RE: CABLE TELEVISION LAW SEMINAR
The Department of Utility Services requests that the County Attorney
be authorized to attend the annual cable television law seminar being
given by the Practising Law Institute February 27-28, 1992, in New
York City. The seminar will discuss the legal matters currently in flux
which might affect the County's regulation of two cable TV systems
franchised by the County.
The expenses of the trip have been budgeted in the Department of
Utility Services Account. We request that the Board authorize the trip.
Commissioner Scurlock stated that this law is still pending
and this topic will be discussed at the National Association of
Counties Meeting which will be attended by Indian River County
Commissioners. He felt they will be able to gather information on
this subject at that meeting, and when the law is in place we will
have something to study.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously denied
the request for travel.
3
PK3E kdf-)o
JAN 14
mor
F. Out -of -County Travel Request by Executive Aide Liz Forlani
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
approved out -of -county travel to a Professional
Supervision Skills Clinic on February 10, 1992 in
Melbourne.
G. GeograRhical Information System
The Board reviewed memo from Utility Services Assistant
Director Harry Asher dated January 3, 1992:
DATE: JANUARY 3, 1992
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILr4 SERVICES
PREPARED HARRY E. ASHER
AND STAFFED
BY: ASSISTANT DIRE TOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS)
BACKGROUND:
The Department has budgeted funds in prior and in the current fiscal
year for the necessary hardware, software, installation, and
training for a GIS to service the Department. The Department
currently has $150,000.00 approved in its 1991-92 budget for a GIS.
In prior fiscal years, the base maps maintained by the Property
Appraiser's Office were not on a compatible system to be networked
and utilized.
The Department has investigated thoroughly the required hardware,
software, and other required services to provide asystem that will
integrate with existing equipment/software utilized by other
Departments within the County.
The Property Appraiser's Office has now installed an IBM AS/400
computer for processing and data storage and an IBM RS/6000 computer
for property tax mapping. The RS/6000 is networked to the IBM
AS/400. The Property Appraiser's Office has installed the ARC/Info
Software System on the RS/6000 as the platform from which to
maintain the County's property tax maps. The ARC/Info Software
System is the.software platform utilized by many State agencies
(D.E.R. and St. Johns River Water Management District) with which
all County agencies will need to interface in the future.
4
= 1P
ANALYSIS:
The'Department of Utility Services utilizes on a daily basis parcel
maps and data from the Property Appraiser's Office for existing,
current, and future assessments. In meeting the requirements under
the Comprehensive Plan for connection to water and wastewater and
availability of facilities for concurrency, the Department's growing
need to adequately respond to requests for information is to
computerize its existing facilities utilizing the Property
Appraiser's maps as a base. The addition of existing utility
facilities to the base will give Indian River County the beginning
of an integrated Geographical Information System.
Major functions of the system will be (in addition to mapping of
water and wastewater systems):
* Tracking of data by parcels for assessment projects (over
7,000) in the next four years.
* Water and wastewater facilities management for mains, manholes,
valves, hydrants, meters, water services, sewer laterals, and
lift stations.
* Tracking of both water and wastewater plant capacity by
regional systems.
* Facilities inventory of both water and wastewater systems (pipe
size, type, date installed, maintenance history, etc.).
The Department of Utility Services proposes to install a
Geographical Information System that will network with the Property
Appraiser's RS/6000 and AS/400. The system proposed by the
Department of Utility Services would utilize ARC/Info Software in
order for Utility Services to utilize the Property Appraiser's tax
maps and parcel information. The Department of Utility Services'
proposed system and existing AS/400 would network with the Property
Appraiser's AS/400 and RS/6000. This network -would interface the
Property Appraiser's Office (maps, parcel data), Department of
Utility Services (maps, facilities data, facilities location,
customer data), and Planning Department (planning and concurrency
data bases), when connected to the system.
This approach will take advantage not only of the informational data
available on the Property Appraiser's RS/6000 and AS/400 but also
will allow for the access of data that otherwise would have to be
copied and maintained separately. In addition, it will allow for
future integration and expandability through additional networking
with the other departments in the County.
All hardware and software that is available would*be purchased under
the State of Florida equipment contract. The Department would
propose to contract the GIS Technical Tasks sole source with IBM and
ESRI (ARC -Info) due to the technical aspects of the interconnection
between the Property Appraiser's AS/400 and RS/6000 systems and the
Department of Utility Services' system.
A brief description of the installation is as follows:
Installation of the GIS hardware and software set forth in the
attached proposed budget would network Utilities Services with the
Property Appraisers Department, including use of the County tax
base maps. This will enable the Department to enter its water and
sewer facilities data into the system. This use would consist of
Utilities Services' facilities_ and data being external and would be
available to Public Works and Planning Departments as a part of the
network. Completion of the installation will put into place the
necessary hardware and software for the Utilities Services
Department to become an integral part of a future County -wide
departmental GIS network.
The Department will continue to utilize
digitizer as a part of the system. This
primarily for departmental requirements.
G
JAN 14 1992
its existing plotter and
equipment will be utilized
JAN 14 'IN:
BOOK F'AGF. 41
�.YLY_ID4.0 t_r. _ e 1
The staff of the Department of Utility Services requests approval to
proceed with the purchase and installation of the Geographical
Information System as outlined in the proposed budget.
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM
PROPOSED BUDGET
IBM RISC/6000 - MODEL 550
WITH 2 WORKSTATIONS
$68,871
IBM RISC/6000 OPERATING SYSTEM
$5,452
IBM INSTALLATION AND INTEGRATION OF SYSTEM
$4,500
LESS SPECIAL DISCOUNT (EXTENDED TO 1-20-92)
$2,000
SUBT"AL
$69,960
ARC INFO -SOFTWARE $9,900
SINGLE USER BASE PROGRAM
NETWORK MODULE
$1,403
TIP MODULE
$1,403
COGO MODULE
$1,403
INSTALLATION
$2,000
SUBT"AL
$16,109
ON SITE TRAINING
$8.500
24,609 $24,609
CONTINGENCY
CABELING, MISC. BOARDS, CONNECTIONS
$5,000
a TOTAL COST:
$99,569
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
approved the purchase and installation of the
Geographical Information System for a total cost of
$99,569, as recommended by staff.
H. Community Services Block Grant Housing Rehabilitation Program
Application
The Board reviewed memo from I.R.C. Housing Authority
Executive Director Guy Decker dated January 3, 1992:
6
� i ift
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: January 3, 1992 FILE:
Board of -County Commission
THROUGH: H. T. "Sonny" Dean, Directo
General Services
SUBJECT: qty Services Block Grant
Housing Rehabilitation Program
Application
1
FROM: Guy L. Decker, Jr., REFERENCES:
Executive Director
I.R.C. Housing Authority
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by
the County Commission.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITION:
The State of Florida's Department of Community Affairs advised Indian River County
they will accept applications for projects to be funded through the Cammnnity Services
Block Grant (CSBG) for local activities to assist low-income individuals. Section 675
(C) (1) (a) through (E) , Public Law 97-35, as amended, and Section
Rule ion22,
Florida Administrative Code, provide the criteria for such projects. These grants will
be for a six-month period from April 1, 1992 through September 30, 1992, and the alloca-
tion for Indian River County to cover administrative costs is X6,097. Applications
must be postmarked no later than February 3, 1992.
The Indian River County Housing Authority is the non-profit subgrantee for the
Indian River County Commissioners. The program covered under this grant will provide
rehabilitation consulting services which will activate rehabilitation funding from
governmental sources.
The Farmers Home Administration Section 504 Program provides housing rehabilitation
funds in the fort: of (1) low-interest loans, (2) loans and grants, and (3) grants to the
low-income elderly owner -occupant. There are approximately 600 owner -occupied substandard
housing units suitable for rehabilitation in Indian River County. Low-income and elderly
families lack the money to make their homes safe and sanitary.
This program will be targeted in the three most distressed areas of the County in
Sebastian, Wabasso and Winter Beach. We plan on assisting between 8 and 14 low-income
and elderly owners in bringing their homes up to safe and sanitary standards.
ALTERNATIVE AND ANALYSIS:
This is our tenth funding cycle under legislation passed by Congress which consoli-
dated various social programs into the block grant categories for administration by the
State and local government, and funds not applied for from the Community Services Block
Grant Program will be redistributed among counties that make 14 t'
app ca ion.
M• 1 11 • 11
We respectfully request the County Commission to authorize its Chairman to execute
the Community Services Block Grant Program Application for submission to Florida's
Department of Community Affairs along with the required accompanying Resolution.
This program will bring about improvements in safety and sanitation for approxi-
mately 14 homeowners. The average cost of improvements will be $5,000 per unit. The
$6,097 Grant plus $2,697 of cash and in-kind contribution by the Housing Authority would
be supplemented with about $72,000.00 in loans and grants from the Farmers Home
Administration.
This program requires no additional County Fiends.
7
JAN 14 1992 Roox t 1-044,
JAN 14 1992
800K Sa Fr,u �4Q2
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 92-06 authorizing the Chairman to execute
an application for a Housing Rehabilitation Program
to assist Low-income families, as recommended by
staff.
RESOLUTION NO. 92- 6
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE
CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD TO EXECUTE AN APPLICATION
FOR A HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM TO ASSIST
LOW-INCOME FAMILIES AS ADMINISTERED BY THE STATE
OF FLORIDA'S DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County has reviewed this proposal and has received the recom-
mendation from the Executive Director of the Indian River County
Housing Authority,
NOW, THEREFORE,'BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Chairman
and the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners are authorized
to execute the attached Application to the State of Florida's
Department of Community Affairs for a Community Services Block
Grant Program (CSBG). _
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner Wheeler
who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner
Scurlock and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Vice Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed
and adopted this 14 day of January, 1992.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Chairman
8
I. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 009
The Board reviewed memo from OMB Director Joe Baird dated
January 8, 1992:
VIG
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
January 8, 1992
MISCELLANEOUS BUDGET AMENDMENT 009 - CONSENT AGENDA
FROM: Joseph A. Baird*
OMB Director `''
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The attached budget amendment is to appropriate funding for the following:
1. At their December 10, 1991 meeting the Board of County
Commissioners approved acquisition of Voting Machines in the amount
of $12,736.00.
2. The Board of County Commissioners approved monitoring wells for
Fleet Management in the amount of $1,350.00
3. Traffic Engineering Storage Building was not completed at the end of
the 1990/91 fiscal year and the funds need to be moved to the current
year.
4. Welfare Department had computer terminals in their 1990/91 fiscal year
budget; however, the terminals were not delivered until the 1990/92 fiscal
year and the funds need to be moved to the current year.
5. The Board of County Commissioners approved the acceptance of
additional- funds from South Beach residents to purchase equipment for
the EMT D program. This budget amendment is to allocate the funds.
6. Indian River County Citrus League donated an additional $824.00 to the
County Ag. Extension Department for the purchase of a fax machine to
use for a weather advisory program.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached budget
amendment number 009.
9
JAN i4 1997
66 Fair ' s
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
approved Budget Amendment 009 as follows:
TO: Members of the Board SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
of County Commissioners NUMBER: 009
FROM: Joseph A. Baird(T DATE: January A. 7.992
oMB Director l"�
J Release of Utility Liens
The Board reviewed memo from Lea Keller, CLA, dated January 8,
1992:
10
TO: Board of County Commissloners
31V_0-' 62 . 'iii` �cx►c�v ,
FROM: -Lea R. Keller, CLA, County Attorney's Office
DATE: January 8, 1992
RE: CONSENT AGENDA - B.C.C. MEETING 1/14/92
RELEASE OF U'T'ILITY LIENS
I hnvo prepnred the followh:g lien-reinted documents and request that
the Bonrd authorize the Chnirman to sign them:
1. Sntisfaction of Impact Fee Extension Lien
In the nam of:
YORK
2. Reieases of Sper.Tnl Assessment Liens from
A -I -A (North Beaches) PROJECT in the names of:
CROSBY
IIATALA
BUCK
COOK
PRAKASII
KRYGIER
VERO VENTURES (3)
RILEY
ROBESON
GREFE
B EEI I
MALIN
SPIESS
THOMPSON (2)
�
REED
McCORD
GORSUCII/LEWIS
RADCLIFF
3. Releases of Special Assessment Liens from 12th STREET
PROJECT in the names
of:
YOUNG
STIERER
AUSTIN
HEICHLINGER
4. Releases of the following miscellaneous assessments:
Anglers Cove - Leiva
Hedden Place - Schmidi
Royal Poinciana Park - Viamontes
River Shores - Schubert
Summerplace - Webster
Phase I - Zander '
State Road #80 - Map #41 (Countryside)
Eighth Street - Eckman
U.S. #1 (North of 12th Street) - First Union Bank
Rockridge - John
North County Sewer Project - Preuss (2) Allen (1)
Additional back-up information is on file in the County Attorney's
Office.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
approved the Satisfaction and Releases of Liens, as
recommended by staff.
COPIES OF SAID LIENS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR"S APPEAL OF PLANNING & ZONING
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO ALLOW USE OF ROAD NAMES FOR ROSEWOOD COURT
SUBDIVISION
Planning Director Stan Boling commented from the following
memo dated January 6, 1992:
11
W 141992
POOK 811
FF_
BUCK 6b FACE �4 d
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Obert M. R a id91j,_AIQW
Community Develo went irector
THROUGH: Stan Bolinil'PAICP
Planning Director
FROM: Christopher D. Rison Cpv-,
Staff Planner, Current Development
DATE: January 6, 1992
SUBJECT: The Community Development Director's Appeal of the
Planning and Zoning Commission's Decision to Allow the
Use of Road Names for the Rosewood Court Subdivision
SD -91-11-014
#91090025
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners gt.its regular
meeting of January 14, 1992.
Backaround and History:
On November 14, 1991, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved
a preliminary subdivision plat submitted by Tashkede Properties to
develop a 37 lot residential subdivision. Designated street
numbers were initially assigned for the subdivision's roadways, in
compliance with LDR Chapter 951. The applicant then appealed the
requirement to utilize street number designations to the Planning
and Zoning Commission; the applicant wishes to use road names
rather than road numbers. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted
4 to 3 in favor of permitting the Rosewood Court Subdivision to
utilize road name designations. (Please see Attachment #4). In the
Post -meeting action letter sent to the applicant from staff, staff
reserved the right to appeal the Commission's decision to the Board
at a later date.
Pursuant to Section 902.07(5) of the county's Land Development
Regulations, the applicant, the' county administration or any
department thereof may appeal an action of the Planning and Zoning
Commission to the Board of County Commissioners for its review.
While staff has seldom appealed Planning and Zoning Commission
action in the past, the appeal authority was incorporated into the
LDR's to provide a mechanism for the Board to consider certain
Planning and Zoning Commission actions that otherwise would be
final. It is staff's position that this case, and the road
name/number issue generally, warrant Board consideration. For that
reason, the Community Development Department, based upon Chapter
951 standards and a recommendation from the Emergency Services
Department that road numbers should be used and assigned so as to
maintain the integrity of the 911 -EMS emergency response system, is
appealing the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision that the
Rosewood Court Subdivision be allowed to use road names instead of
road numbers.
12
M
In addition, it is staff's opinion that Planning & Zoning
Commission members may have operated under a faulty impression
during their deliberations at the November 14th meeting.
Statements made at the meeting by the project developer and a
project agent appear to have left an impression that the Emergency
Services Department had no objection to the road name request.
The fact is that the Emergency Services'Department does object to
the use of road names.
Analysis
*Road'Designations for the Rosewood Court Subdivision:
In general, Chapter 951 sets -forth standards for establishing and
continuing a grid pattern of numbered roadways and a logical,
properly sequenced residence/business addressing system (see
attachment #1). The purpose of maintaining and continuing such a
system is to enhance delivery of emergency services, postal
services, and navigation of the roadway system by the general
public. As with any such system, there are historical patterns and
historical exceptions which do not neatly fit within the system.
However, new development serviced by new roadways should be made to
conform to the Chapter 951 standards; if the standards are not
applied, the system looses its integrity little by little.
Degradation of the system adversely affects delivery of services,
emergency response, and the county's investment in its .911 -EMS
emergency response system.
As shown on the area graphic (see attachment #2), the proposed
subdivision is located within area where a grid pattern of numbered
roads already exists. Thus, designating the Rosewood Court
subdivision streets with street numbers would merely continue the
established pattern in the area of road numbers.
Chapter 951 of the LDRs governs the appeal issue and is intended to
facilitate timely and efficient emergency response (911) as well as
a logical addressing pattern helpful to the general public. In
staff's opinion, approval of the street name appeal would adversely
affect emergency services response time and the continuation of a
logical addressing system.
The Director of the Emergency Services department has stated that
the department consistently supports the use of road number
designations for new projects. Therefore, both planning staff and
emergency services staff believe that the Community Development
Director's appeal should be approved, that the Planning and Zoning
Commission's November 14th decision concerning the use of road
names should be overturned, and that the use of road names for the
subject project should be denied.
*The Dual Designation Compromise
At its regular meeting of December 17, 1991, the Board of County
Commissioners considered a road name request by the Indian River
Country Club Planned Development project developer. Staff
recommended denial of the request and noted during the hearing that
the Postal Service opposed the use of a dual street designation
(eg. 1153rd Drive/Rosewood Drive"). The Board decided that an
acceptable compromise between the developer's desires and the
staff's position was to allow a dual designation on street signs
(the street number would be more prominent), while emergency
services would use the street number in its response system and the
Postal Service would presumably use the street number designation
as well. The Board subsequently voted to allow the developer to
use the dual designation compromise. Since the Board's December
17th decision, the Postal Service has written staff and strongly
recommends against the use of any dual designations (see attachment
13
SAN 14 1 9S, d
r
SPA144: 19W iC10� �il� F'rVA
#3). The Postal Service asserts that dual designations, even as
applied -only to road signs, cause postal delivery problems. Thus,
the dual designation compromise applied on December 17th is not an
option that satisfies the Postal Service.
It was staff's intent that the Board's decision on the Indian River
Country Club road name request would resolve the issue of road
names/road numbers generally. Accordingly, prior to the Indian
River Country Club hearing, staff planned either to take no action
or to appeal two recent road number decisions by the Planning and
Zoning Commission, depending on the Board's action. After the
Board's dual designation compromise on the Indian River Country
Club request, staff intended to apply the dual designation
alternative to the other contested road number cases (Rosewood
Court, Florida Baptist). However, since the post office has now
determined, in writing, that dual designations are unacceptable, a
final decision on road names/road numbers must be made in light of
the post office's recommendation against dual designations.
*Summary
By requiring this development to utilize number designations rather
than names, the county is facilitating the quick response of
emergency services, providing the potential for enhanced postal
services, and is continuing a logical addressing system helpful to
navigation by the general public. In staff's opinion, approval of
the use of road names would not be consistent with the intent and
purpose of Chapter 951. The only alternative that would meet both
the 951 standards and the Postal Service's recommendation would be
to approve staff's appeal and continue to use and apply road number
designations to the Rosewood Court Subdivision project.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners approve the Community Development Director's
appeal and require the use of road numbers for the Rosewood Court
Subdivision project pursuant to the standards set -forth in Chapter
951 of the LDRs.
Emergency Services Director Doug Wright supported the numbered
road system and urged the Board to be consistent with our ordinance
regarding the numbered road system, unless there is a good reason
for a variance. He advised that Emergency Management Services
(EMS) maintains the base for all emergency and law enforcement
agencies in the county and any delay in arriving on the scene makes
a difference in fire fighting and life saving techniques.
Commissioner Scurlock asked whether EMS is opposed to dual
designation.
Deputy County Attorney Collins advised that the EMS computer
accepts a name or a number, but cannot handle both.
Commissioner Bird agreed that varying from the grid system
should be the exception rather than the rule and we should have
some criteria as to why we allow names and why we do not. He
understood that when a street is created it is given either a name
14
_I
or a number and it goes into the EMS data base and onto the maps.
When there is a need to respond to that location, it shows up on
the map and can be identified. Then whoever is to respond can be
given directions to that location whether it has a name or number.
Director Wright stressed that if there is an abrupt change
from a name to a number, there is potential for extended response
time, particularly at times when another station must respond and
there may be error or confusion because they are not familiar with
the area.
Chairman Eggert recalled that was the reason we put the
numbering system in the ordinance.
Discussion ensued regarding historic names as exceptions to
the numbered road system.
Commissioner Scurlock understood a developer's desire to have
nice -sounding names to print in a brochure, rather than a number.
Commissioner Bird felt it was not only the developer's
preference but also the potential purchaser.
Chairman Eggert felt that if it were a choice between a nice
name and quick emergency service, she would prefer the quick
service.
Commissioner Bird thought that in new subdivisions where the
road system follows and interconnects with the adjoining areas, it
would be confusing to abruptly change the designation, but in the
case of a small subdivision where the roads are strictly private,
winding in character, and internal to the subdivision, there is a
possible exception.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in this matter.
William Roolage, 815 26th Avenue, came before the Board and
spoke in favor of the numbered roads system. He has been a
resident of Indian River County for 20 years and finds it difficult
locating named streets as well as explaining to someone how to get
to certain named roads. He urged the Board to keep the grid system
for the benefit of citizens and tourists as well as to assist
Emergency Management.
Tony Cueto, Postmaster of Vero Beach, came before the Board,
and stated the Postal Service supported the address system which
Indian River County adopted in 1987 and still vigorously objects to
the dual address system. He explained that by 1995, 95 percent of
the mail is going to be automated; multi -line readers, optical
character readers and article sorters will be reading all
addresses. Mr. Cueto said the Postal Service can live with named
15
r
DAN i4 M*2
streets but not with dual addresses. It must be one designation
per street. When the County Commission adopted the road addressing
system, certain named streets were grandfathered in and the Postal
Service accepted that, but some of them are not in the Postal
Service data bank because it can only accept one designation.
Postal employees simply know that, for example, Kings Highway is
58th Avenue, but at this point the Postal Service wants to go on
record as objecting to dual addresses; they prefer the numbered
road system.
Dean Luethje, Engineer with Carter and Associates,
representing William Nyland, the developer of Rosewood Court
Subdivision, explained that the Community Development Director's
appeal is a financial drain on Mr. Nyland because he has had
brochures printed showing the name of the project and named
streets. Mr. Luethje clarified his presentation before the
Planning and Zoning Commission regarding EMS and felt if there is
a problem with EMS, it should be detailed in writing. Mr. Luethje
said he did not misrepresent anything before the P & Z Commission.
Director Boling agreed that the P & Z members got the
impression that EMS had no objection to street names, but nothing
had been said by Mr. Luethje to indicate that.
Mr. Luethje agreed with comments made during' the
Commissioners' discussion that we need to follow the ordinance or
change it. If variances are allowed, the criteria should be
spelled out so that applicants know exactly what to expect.
Commissioner Scurlock asked for clarification on the timing of
the printing of the brochures relative to the appeal.
Director Boling stated that within a few days after the P & Z
meeting on November 14, 1991, he sent an action letter to the
applicant indicating that staff reserved the right to appeal the
decision of P & Z.
Mr. Luethje was not sure exactly when the brochures were
printed, but it was after the P & Z meeting.
Discussion ensued regarding the dates and timing of the letter
and the brochures, and everyone agreed it was important to Mr.
Nyland to have the brochures ready for the winter season.
Commissioner Scurlock wished to know the cost of printing the
brochures, and Mr. Nyland stated it was approximately $8,000.
Discussion ensued regarding the importance of the details in
the brochure and the fact that no title could be conveyed on the
basis of information in the brochures.
Olske Forbes, 5324 Rosewood Road, came before the Board and
spoke in favor of applicant's request for named streets. She and
her husband own property abutting the subject subdivision. She
16
I
felt the name Rosewood is unique to that particular area and would
cause no problem on the 911 emergency system.
Mr. Nyland stated he had applied for the preliminary plat
approval on November 12. He received a letter stating the approval
had been granted, P & Z approved the use of street names, and the
County staff had the option to appeal. There was no further
communication until January 6, which was a phone call to Carter and
Associates. In the meantime, he continued with his plans for the
subdivision, which included the printing of the brochures.
Chairman Eggert asked Mr. Nyland whether he made inquires
after he received the November letter stating staff could appeal
the P & Z decision.
Mr. Nyland explained he did not inquire about any further
action by staff because he was involved with his construction
plans.
Director Keating said he had been waiting for Board action on
the Indian River Country Club subdivision, which happened at the
December 17 Board meeting. At that time he understood Rosewood
Court's streets were to have dual designations, which staff felt
could be accommodated, but then staff received notice from the
Postal Service that they could not accommodate dual designations.
Staff's appeal did not delay any aspect of preliminary plat
approval. Mr. Keating also noted that the Board has, the ability to
change the street designation at any time.
Commissioner Scurlock concurred that, theoretically, the Board
can change the designations on the grid system; there is no
absolute assurance of street names. However, he felt staff's
appeal was not timely.
Chairman Eggert pointed out that the applicant was on notice
in November.
Mr. Nyland clarified that more was involved than the
brochures. There was a complete concept to be structured and
marketed. They placed ads in newspapers and planned to take
advantage of the sales season. He said construction is to begin in
eight to ten weeks. Mr. Nyland said he had met with EMS people as
well as the mail service who said there would be no problem with
name designations.
It was determined that no one else wished to be heard and the
Chairman closed the public hearing.
17
,,
JAN 14 19 POR 8b F:1,c42t,
F-
,� a� 4 1991
BOOK F'
GE ,5 elt
12
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, to approve the use of names for
streets in Rosewood Court Subdivision based on the
following points of uniqueness: the name "Rosewood"
is familiar to EMS and law enforcement; this is a
private subdivision with no through streets; there
was some confusion with the Planning and Zoning
Commission and some conflicting communication with
various departments of the County.
Under discussion, Commissioner Scurlock agreed the layout of
the streets is unique.
Commissioner Bowman stated we are setting a precedent for the
area when another property owner wants to develop a subdivision in
the same manner.
Chairman Eggert felt variances should be allowed because of
uniqueness of a situation, or we should re-examine our ordinance.
Commissioner Bowman agreed the ordinance should be reviewed.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPER DIRECTOR'S APPEAL OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO ALLOW THE USE OF ROAD NAMES FOR THE
FLORIDA BAPTIST RETIREMENT CENTER
Planning Director Stan Boling commented from the following
memo dated January 6, 1992:
is
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
15bert M. Re t ,AIOT
Community Deve(�lopmen irector
THROUGH: Stan BolingACP
Planning Director
FROM: John W. McCoy
Staff Planner, Current Development
DATE: January 6, 1992
SUBJECT: The Community Development Director's Appeal of the
Planning and Zoning Commission's Decision to Allow the
Use of Road Names for the Florida Baptist Retirement
Center
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of January 14, 1992.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On November 15, 1990, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved
a site plan submitted by the Baptist Retirement Center to construct
15 duplexes adjacent to and north of the old retirement center
facility. The site plan proposed an extension of 10th Parkway to
provide access to the proposed duplexes. During the initial review
and approval process, the use of road names was not a contested
issue. In accordance with section 951.05 of the county's land
development regulations (LDRs), street numbers were automatically
assigned to the proposed street extension. At the time the street
numbers were assigned, the applicant did not appeal the action to
the Community Development Director as provided for in LDR Chapter
951.
The approved plan was released for construction on May 5, 1991, and
construction commenced. The street layout and numbers were placed
on the 911 maps pursuant to standard procedures. Staff have
assigned addresses using the appropriate street number designations
in accordance with Chapter 951 standards.
On August 28, 1991, the applicant submitted an administrative
approval application to use road names; this request was
subsequently denied by the Community Development Director on
September 5, 1991 (see attachment #1). On November 18, 19911 the
applicant appealed that decision for the reasons listed in the
attached letter (see attachment #2). Despite the fact that the
appeal was not filed in a timely manner, staff felt that the
request should be brought before the Planning and Zoning Commission
for its consideration.
19
JAN 14 1992 IQ00K
FF_ -1
JAM 14 1992
BOOK� � `
F a �L 41�NN_
At the December 12, 1991 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting the
Commission voted 4 to 1 to approve the use of road names for the
Florida Baptist Retirement Center. The Planning and Zoning
Commission's rationale for the decision was that the Florida
Baptist project streets did not inter -connect with any other
streets and were in effect private, isolated, dead end streets.
Furthermore, the Commission felt that since there are other street
names in the area, the addition of a few more street names would
not adversely affect the addressing system (see attachment #7).
Pursuant to Section 902.07(5) of the county's Land .Development
Regulations, the applicant, the county administration or any
department thereof may appeal an action of the Planning and Zoning
Commission to the Board of County Commissioners for its review.
While staff has seldom appealed Planning and Zoning Commission
action in the past, the appeal authority was incorporated into the
LDR's to provide a mechanism for the Board to consider certain
Planning and Zoning Commission actions that otherwise would be
final. It is staff's position that this case, and the road
name/number issue generally, warrant Board consideration. For that
reason, the Community Development Department, based upon Chapter
951 standards and a recommendation from the Emergency Services
Department that road numbers should be used and assigned so as to
maintain the integrity of the 911 -EMS emergency response system, is
appealing the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision that the
Baptist Retirement Center be allowed to use road names instead of
road numbers.
ANALYSIS:
*Road Designations for the Florida Baptist Project
In general, Chapter 951 sets -forth standards for establishing and
continuing a grid pattern of numbered roadways and a logical,
properly sequenced residence/business addressing system (see
attachment #5). The purpose of maintaining and continuing such a
system is to enhance delivery of emergency services, postal
services, and navigation -of the roadway system by the general
public. As with any such.system, there are historical patterns and
historical exceptions which do not neatly fit within the system.
However, new development serviced by new roadways should be made to
conform to the Chapter 951 standards; if the standards are not
applied, the system looses its integrity little by little.
Degradation of the system adversely affects delivery of services,
emergency response, and the county's investment in its 911 -EMS
emergency response system.
As shown on the area graphic (see attachment #4), the road
extending north into the project is an extension of 10th Parkway,
and the staff has given this street segment the designation of
"10th Parkway". At the point where this road changes general
direction, the remaining segment has been designated as 1110th
Road". The one short cul-de-sac road running east -west has been
designated 34th Street. These road number designations conform to
the 951 standards.
There is no grid pattern of inter -connecting roads in the area of
the Florida Baptist project. Also, there is no set pattern of road
name designations in the area. The development connects directly
to a numbered road (10th Parkway).. The most logical road
designation for the project driveways would include a continuation
of the 10th Parkway road number designation into the project, as
assigned by staff and shown on the area graphic (attachment #4).
P411
M
Chapter 951 of the LDRs governs the appeal issue and is intended to
facilitate timely and efficient emergency response (9 11) as well as
a logical addressing pattern helpful to the general public. In
staff's opinion, approval of the street name appeal would adversely
affect emergency services response time and the continuation of a
logical addressing system.
The Director of the Emergency Services department has stated that
the department consistently supports the use of road number
designations for new projects. Therefore, both planning staff and
emergency services staff believe that the Community Development
Director's appeal should be approved, that the Planning and Zoning
Commission's December 12th decision should be overturned, and that
the use of road names for the subject project should be denied.
*The Dual Designation Compromise
At its regular meeting of December 17, 1991, the Board of County
Commissioners considered a road name request by the Indian River
Country Club Planned Development project developer. Staff
recommended denial of the request and noted during the hearing that
the Postal Service opposed the use of a dual street designation
(eg. 1110th Parkway/Walter Road"). The Board decided that an
acceptable compromise between the developer's desires and the
staff's position was to allow a dual designation on street signs
(the street number would be more prominent), whereby emergency
services would use the street number in its response system and the
Postal Service would presumably use the street number designation
as well. The Board subsequently voted to allow the developer to
use the dual designation compromise. Since the Board's December
17th decision, the Postal Service has written staff, noting that
its system cannot support dual street designations and strongly
recommending against the use of any dual designations (see
attachment #6). The Postal Service asserts that dual designations,
even as applied only to road signs, cause postal delivery problems.
Thus, the dual designation compromise applied on December 17th is
not an option that satisfies the Postal Service.
It was staff's intent that the Board's decision on the Indian River
Country Club road name request would resolve the issue of road
names/road numbers generally. Accordingly, prior to the Indian
River Country Club hearing, staff planned either to take no action
or to appeal two recent road number decisions by the Planning and
Zoning Commission, depending on the Board's action. After the
Board's dual designation compromise on the Indian River Country
Club request, staff intended to apply the dual designation
alternative to the other contested road number cases (Rosewood
Court, Florida Baptist). However, since the post office has now
determined in writing that dual designations are unacceptable, a
final decision on road names/road numbers must be made in light of
the post office's recommendation against dual designations.
*Summary
By requiring this development to utilize number designations rather
than names, the county is facilitating the quick response of
emergency services, providing the potential for enhanced postal
services, and is continuing a logical addressing system helpful to
navigation by the general public. In staff's opinion, quick
emergency response time is especially critical for this project
which houses the elderly and persons with health problems. In
staff's opinion, approval of the use of road names would not be
consistent with the intent and purpose of Chapter 951. The only
alternative that would meet both the 951 standards and the Postal
Service's recommendation would be to approve staff's appeal and
continue to use and apply road number designations to the Florida
Baptist Retirement Center project.
21
r -
JAM 14 X992
BOOK
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of -
County Commissioners approve the Community Development Director's
appeal and require the use of road numbers for the Florida Baptist
Retirement Center project pursuant to the standards set -forth in
Chapter 951 of the LDRs.
Planning Director Stan Boling pointed out that in this
situation the roadways had been given designations by number, and
the applicant came back with a request to change the numbers to
names to memorialize certain people. He referred to an enlarged
graph and demonstrated the alignment of 30th Street and 10th
Parkway and indicated that the entrance roadway is a continuation
of an existing numbered street. So, following the reasoning of
previous discussions, staff's recommendation is that the Board
require street number designations as have been previously
assigned.
Chairman Eggert agreed with Commissioner Bowman's suggestion
that there are other ways to memorialize roads; for example, a
marker on the side of the road.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in this matter.
Lois Thompson, 3360 Buckinghammock Trail, a director of
Florida Baptist Retirement Center, came before the Board and spoke
in favor of the applicant. The applicant wanted to name certain
streets within the Center in honor of Walter and Elvira Buckingham.
Ms. Thompson told the history of the couple coming to Indian River
County, their contributions to the County in service and property,
and the fact that Mrs. Elvira Buckingham was 93 years old and
living in the nursing home. Ms. Thompson also described the
groundbreaking ceremony at which the living members of the
Buckingham family were surprised and honored that streets would be
named "Elvira" and "Walter." In early November Ms. Thompson
learned that the planning department had assigned numbers to these
particular streets and advised her that she would be able to appeal
to the Planning and. Zoning Commission if there were good reason.
Ms. Thompson explained that these streets exist entirely on Baptist
Retirement Center property and are not through streets.
It was determined that no one else wished to be heard and the
Chairman closed the public hearing.
22
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wheeler, to approve the use of name
designations for certain roads in Florida Baptist
Retirement Center.
Under discussion, Commissioner Wheeler noted Buckinghammock is
an older, established area in the community and it is more a self-
contained compound than a neighborhood. He felt the road would
never be a through street. He supported the idea of giving
recognition to the Buckinghams, and Commissioner Bird concurred.
Commissioner Bowman pointed out that the whole area is named
for the Buckinghams; there was no need to break it down by streets.
COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
FIRST CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE"S REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION
APPROVAL FOR A CHURCH EXPANSION
The hour of 9:05 olclock A. M. having passed, the Deputy
County Attorney announced that this public hearing has been
properly advertised as follows:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
'COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
In the matter of
In the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of & Q 1) '�o
Afflant 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 Iri the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this ���( A.D. 19 9L_
v4
s ne
(SEAL) Noftny Public, Stete of IYetkle. .
MYC01ftmkston Expires June 29, IWJ
23
JAN i 4l 1992
1 Y
If
c
p
rn
a S
,• # T
1•
i
�wew$9
,•
'I 1
II
•��A al
IST4 ST �
Mi
I
.A)
n4
o
r1
la s
,11 1-!
!1 i
Jj.
17 4
1 1
IY
it
w
wSIT8
sure vo
Mao, wh
which the
Dam
t
OF PUBLIC WAAMO
=P= oIftWnee.BM4 rfworeluv'Z�ile
enols acbt " FM
3 S. erl� ftw 39 E. 8es tlls
8t wldCh I artlea in ht maf mrf
esf
Farr
r ri�C, b
J
Fr- -1
JAN 14 X99
Q.i
The Board reviewed memo from Current Development Senior
Planner John McCoy dated December 30, 1991:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator _
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Obert M. Keat g, #VCP
Community Developme t Director
46
THROUGH:, Stan Boling, AICP
Planning Director
FROM: John W. McCoy, AICD
Senior Planner, Current Development
DATE: December 30, 1991
SUBJECT: First Church of the Nazarene's Request for Special
Exception Approval for a Church Expansion
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of January 14, 1992.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Peterson and Votapka, Inc. has submitted an application for major
site plan and special exception use approval to construct a church
building expansion at 1280 27th Avenue. The existing church is
located on the east side of 27th Avenue, just north of 12th Street.
The subject property is zoned RS -6 which requires special exception
approval to construct or expand a place of worship.
Pursuant to Section 971.05 of the LDRs, the Board of County
Commissioners is to consider the appropriateness of the requested
use based on the submitted site plan and the suitability of the
site for that use. The Commission is then to approve, approve with
conditions or deny the request to expand the special exception use.
The County may attach any conditions and safeguards necessary to
mitigate impacts and to ensure compatibility of the use with the
surrounding area.
At its December 12, 1992 meeting)the Planning and Zoning Commission
voted 5 to 0 to recommend special exception use approval to the
Board of County Commissioners and granted major site plan approval
contingent upon special exception use approval by the Board of
County Commissioners. Thus, if the Board grants special exception
approval, the major site plan approval will become effective.
ANALYSIS:
1. Size of Development Area:
2. Zoning Classification:
3. Land Use Designation:
3.35 acres or 146,315 sq. ft.
RS -6 (residential single family
district, up to 6 units per acre)
L-2 Low Density Residential (up to 6
units per acre)
24
4. Building Area:
Existing
Proposed:
Total:
5. Total Impervious Area:
Existing:
Proposed:
Total:
6."
-Open Space Required:
Provided:
71717 sq. ft.
3,717 sq. -ft.
11,434 sq. ft.
40.0%
45.4%
19,524 sq. ft.
21,152 sq. ft.
40,676 sq. ft.
7. Traffic Circulation: The project is currently accessed from
27th Avenue and 13th Street. The applicant will be improving
these two access driveways in conjunction with this
construction project. A 22' wide driveway will be paved to
27th Avenue, and two one-way drives will be paved to 13th
Street. The circulation plan has been approved by the public
works department.
B. Off -Street Parking Required: 100 spaces
Provided: 101 spaces
The plans reviewed by the Technical Review Committee (TRC)
depicted paved driveways throughout the site's northern
parking lot. Subsequent to the plan being reviewed by the
TRC, the applicant indicated that it may want to exercise the
option available to churches (considered infrequent uses) to
not pave any of the northern parking lot driveways. Prior to
being able to exercise this non -paving option, the applicant
must submit revised plans pursuant to LDR section 954.08(4)
indicating an acceptable parking area cross-section showing an
acceptable non -paving wearing surface option. The revised
plans must be approved by the public works department prior to
site plan release. Such plan revisions may be approved by
staff without further review by either the Planning and Zoning
Commission or the Board of County Commissioners.
The project's handicap spaces are proposed within the northern
parking lot. If the non -paving option is used, the applicant
must ensure that a handicap access plan meeting the criteria
of F.S. 553.48 is provided prior to site plan release.
9. Stormwater Management: The Stormwater Management Plan has
been approved by the Public Works Department.
10. Landscape Plan: The landscape plan is in conformance with
Chapter 926 and includes a type "C" buffer along the south and
east property lines as required by the applicable specific
land use standard.
11. Utilities: The site will be serviced by City water and sewer
services. The City Utilities department has indicated
existing capacity is available.
12. Dedications and Improvements: Twenty-seventh Avenue is
classified as a major arterial on the County's thoroughfare
plan which requires 130' of right-of-way. Currently, 27th
Avenue has a right-of-way width of 80' - 90' along the subject
site's frontage. Twenty-seventh Avenue is a State Road and
the public works department does not want to purchase
additional 27th Avenue right-of-way at this time. The
project design makes provisions for the future right-of-way
purchase so that no nonconformities will be created when the
additional right-of-way is purchased in the future.
25
JAN 4' 092
J N, 1i B": 912
ti
The comprehensive bikeway sidewalk plan requires that a 5'
wide public sidewalk be provided along the project's 27th
Avenue frontage. The location of the proposed sidewalk is
subject to approval from the Florida Department of
Transportation which is currently formulating plans for the
subject area of 27th Avenue. However, at this time FDOT's
plans are not known. This leaves the applicant three options:
escrow funds for future construction of the sidewalk,
construct the sidewalk at the edge of the proposed 130' right-
of-way and grant a public access easement for the sidewalk, or
wait for the Florida Department of Transportation to finish
its plans to determine where to locate the sidewalk and
construct the sidewalk in that location. Regardless of which
option is chosen by the developer, the sidewalk must either be
constructed or escrowed for prior to the issuance of a C.O.
The final location of any sidewalk segment to be constructed
must be approved by the Public Works department prior to
construction.
The project site abuts 13th Street, an unpaved local road.
Section 952.08 of the LDRs requires that the project developer
provide for the paving of 13th Street in proportion to the
amount of frontage along 13th Street. In lieu of escrowing
37}$ of the cost of paving the entire 13th Street segment
abutting the site, the developer is proposing to completely
pave half of the project's frontage. This proposal is
acceptable to staff and satisfies section 952.08 requirements.
13. Concurrency: The concurrency certificate for this project has
been issued.
14. Specific Land Use Criteria:
a. No building or structure shall be located closer than
thirty (30) feet to any property line abutting a
residential use or residentially designated property;
b. Access shall be from a major thoroughfare unless
otherwise approved by the public works department;
C. Any accessory residential use, day care facility or
school upon the premises shall provide such additional
lot area as required for such use by this section and
shall further be subject to all conditions set forth by
the reviewing procedures and standards for that
particular use. Accessory residential uses may include
covenants, monasteries, rectories or parsonages as
required by these regulations;
d. Type "C" screening shall be provided along all property
boundaries where the facility is located adjacent to a
single-family residentially designated property. Type
"D" screening shall be provided along all property
boundaries when the facility is located adjacent to a
multiple -family residentially designated property.
The application satisfies all of the above criteria.
15. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North: Single Family Homes/RS-6
South: Single Family Homes/RS-6
East: Single Family Homes/RS-6
West: Single Family Homes/RS-6
26
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the analysis performed, staff recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners grant the requested special exception use
expansion with the following conditions:
(1) prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy
the applicant shall provide either a 5' wide public
sidewalk to be constructed along the project's 27th
Avenue frontage in a location acceptable to the
Public Works Department, or escrow funds with the
County for future construction. In addition, if
the sidewalk is constructed on private property, a
pedestrian access easement must be granted prior to
the issuance of a C.O.; and
(2) prior to site plan release the applicant shall
provide revised plans which are satisfactory to the
Public Works Department and address the unpaved
parking lot option by satisfying all criteria of
LDR section 954.08 and handicap accessibility
requirements pursuant to FS 553.48.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, she closed
the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously granted the
special exception use expansion for First Church of
the Nazarene with the conditions set out in the
above staff recommendation.
WILLIAM S. FORD REQUEST TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY +1- 6.4 ACRES FROM
CH TO IL
The hour of 9:05 o'clock A. M. having passed, the Deputy
County Attorney announced that this public hearing has been
properly advertised as follows:
27
JAN 141992
BOCK V F'r�:c
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
'r Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he Is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press-JOUm81, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach In Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a�lD�i eP
In the matter of P ti�
In the Court, was pub.
fished in said newspaper in the issues of ( I V
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 sold Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this,8� 1���h,��� A.D. 18
,rfi (Business Ma ager)
(SEAL)
�Ptirmmt!rlen r •;,�.. ; IL•. , �
111
das T�y18 0 28th sheat, Vero Besot[, Fb►
a t
The y °rJOnuRr14,1992 a,s os a nt
MW ptpyi t9sha M. the �
category. _ theeppsaM a gen&W use
Ampm who
whichum a at sea "'eetu9 ors tib
wappesand IS
'
h0h Rim
Bowdof
0. 20,%ti
881088
MY
PUUK S"u PAGE 2,63
� .3ubject Property-
CRVP '
IL
� W7K
1T��• �` �•, s
j.�.�.. •x CD
Community Development Director Bob Keating commented from memo
dated December 23, 1991:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE
aweirt. Kat g, AP
Community Developmen Director
THRU: Sasan Rohani C'- • L.
Chief, Long-Ran;I-T
ing
FROM: Cheryl A. Twore
Senior Planner,nge Planning
DATE: December 23, 1991
RE: WILLIAM S. FORD REQUEST TO REZONE APPRMIMATELY t6.4
ACRES FROM CH TO IL (RZON-91-10-0061)
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular
meeting of January 14, 1992.
28
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
This is a request to rezone approximately 6.4 acres from CH, Heavy
Commercial District, to IL, Light Industrial District. The
property is located on the north side of 99th Street (Vickers
Road), just east of the FEC Railroad right-of-way. The property is
owned by APD, Inc. The applicant, William S. Ford, intends to
utilize the property for light industrial uses.
On December 12, 1991, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0
to recommend the approval of this request to rezone to IL.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property coptains a substantially constructed warehouse
structure, paving for driveways and parking, and a stormwater
management system. While the site plan for this property was
released and improvements were made to the site several years ago,
the applicant filed for bankruptcy before all improvements were
made; therefore, final inspections were never made, .and no
Certificate of Occupancy (CO), was' issued.
The property is zoned CH, Heavy Commercial District. Property to
the south shares the same CH zoning and is vacant land. Properties
to the north and east of the subject property are zoned CG, General
Commercial District and contain some vacant land, a fruit and
vegetable stand, a hair salon and a single family residence. The
FEC Railroad right-of-way lies to the west; beyond that to the west
lies a small triangular piece of property within the City of
Sebastian, containing the 99th Street Industrial Park. Southwest
of the subject property, opposite the FEC Railroad right-of-way,
lies Breezy Village Mobile Home Subdivision, zoned RMH-8,
Residential Mobile Home - 8 (up to 8 units per acre).
Future Land Use Pattern
The subject property is located within the U.S. #1
Commercial/ Industrial Node (Schumann Drive to Breezy Village).
This designation permits various types of commercial and industrial
zoning categories. Properties to the north, south and east of the
subject- property share this land use designation. A small
triangular piece of property to the west of the subject property
and the, FEC Railroad right-of-way lies within the city limits of
Sebastian.
Transportation
The subject property has access from 99th Street (Vickers Road),
which is not classified as a thoroughfare plan road on the future
roadway thoroughfare plan map. As such, it is considered a local
road and must meet the local road requirements of the county's land
development regulations. At present, Vickers Road is a two lane,
paved road with approximately sixty (60) feet of existing public
road right-of-way.
Environment
There is an existing warehouse structure on the subject property,
along with other required site improvements such as parking,
landscaping and stormwater management. The site does not lie
within a floodplain as identified by the Flood Insurance Rating
Maps (FIRM).
The eastern third of the property is a
wetland, altered for stormwater management
was originally developed a few years ago.
underdeveloped portion of the property is
wetland. 29
JAN 14 119
remnant bay -forested
purposes when the site
.Most of the remaining
largely jurisdictional
BOOK 13 F',1,;E 4:104
I
Utilities
The site -is within the urban service area of the county.
Wastewater lines do extend to the site from the North County
Wastewater Plant. Water lines do not extend to the site at the
present time; however, the site does contain an existing well.
ANALYSIS _
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the
application will be presented. The analysis will include a
description of:
o Concurrency of public facilities
o Consistency with the.Comprehensive Plan
a Potential impact on environmental quality
o Compatibility with the surrounding area
This section will also consider alternatives for development of the
site. `
Concurrency of Public Facilities
This site is located within the County Urban Service Area (USA), an
area deemed suited for urban scale development. The comprehensive
plan establishes standards for: Transportation, Potable Water,
Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage and Recreation (Future Land Use
Policy 3.1). The adequate provision of these services is necessary
to ensure the continued quality of life enjoyed by the community.
The comprehensive plan also requires that new development be
reviewed to ensure that the minimum level of service standards for
these services and facilities are maintained. For rezoning
requests, this review is undertaken as part of the conditional
concurrency application process.
As per Section 910.07 of the County's Land Development Regulations,
conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of
each facility with respect to a proposed project. Since rezoning
requests are not projects, county regulations call for the
concurrency review to be based upon the most intense use of the
subject property based upon the requested zoning district or land
use designation. For industrial rezoning --requests, the most
intense use (according to the county's LDRs) is retail commercial
with 10,000 square feet of gross floor area per acre of land
proposed for redesignation. Since the subject rezoning request is
for an industrial designation, the 10,000 square feet of retail
commercial floor area per acre of land proposed for rezoning is
used as the basis for the concurrency determination of the proposed
request. The site information used for the concurrency analysis is
as follows:
1.
Size
of
Property:
t6.4 acres
2.
Size
of
Area to be
Rezoned: t6.4 acres
3. Existing Zoning Classification: CH, Heavy Commercial
4. Existing Land Use Designation: C/I, Commercial/Industrial
5. Proposed Zoning Classification: IL, Light Industrial
District
6. Proposed Land Use Designation: C/I, Commercial/Industrial
7. Most Intense Use of the Subject Property: 64,000 sq.ft. of
Retail Commercial
30
As per section 910.07(2) of the Concurrency Management Chapter of
the County's Land Development Regulations, projects which do not
increase density or intensity of use are exempt from concurrency
requirements. This provision is particularly applicable to
rezoning requests involving a change from one type of non-
residential district to a different type of non-residential
district. Since all commercial/ industrial zoning districts are
considered to be comparable in terms of intensity of use, changing
a property's designation from one commercial/ industrial zoning
district to another commercial/industrial zoning district
represents no change in intensity. Therefore, any rezoning
request, including the subject request, which involves a change
from CH to IL would be exempt from the county's concurrency
requirements.
It is important to note that there will be no effect on service
levels for any public facility as a result of this rezoning. Since
non -residentially zoned properties are considered to have a maximum
development potential of 10,000 square feet of "retail commercial"
use, there will be no increase in intensity of development and
therefore no additional impact on facilities from a site zoned IL
than from a site zoned CH.
In this case as in all cases, a detailed concurrency analysis will
be done at the time of site development or redevelopment. With
this site, a change of use site plan will need to be submitted to
convert the vacant warehouse to an industrial facility. At that
time a concurrency analysis will be done to ensure that facility
service levels will be adequate to accommodate the change of use.
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan
Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of
the comprehensive plan. Rezonings must also show consistency with
the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land
Use Map, which include agricultural, residential, recreation,
conservation, and commercial and industrial land uses and their
densities. Commercial and industrial land uses are located in
nodes throughout•the unincorporated areas of Indian River County.
The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of
the Comprehensive Plan. Policies are statements in the plan which
identify the actions which the county will take in order to direct
the community's development. As courses of action committed to by
the county, policies provide the basis for all county land
development related decisions. While all comprehensive plan
policies are important, some have more applicability than others in
reviewing rezoning requests. Of particular applicability for this
request is Future Land Use Policy 1.17.
-Future Land Use Policy 1.17
Future Land Use Policy 1.17 states that the industrial land use
designation is intended for uses such as manufacturing, assembly,
materials and processing, heavy repair services, outdoor equipment
storage, related commercial uses and other similar type uses. In
addition, that policy states that all industrial uses must be
located within an existing or future Urban Service Area (USA).
31
�i 1
BOOK 85 F- -E E
BOOK 85 PAr,E 267
Since the property is located within a commercial/industrial node
within the county's urban service area and the applicant intends to
use the existing warehouse for industrial activities as allowed by
the industrial land use designation, the proposed request is
consistent with Policy 1.17 and the commercial/industrial corridor
policy.
While policy 1.17 is particularly applicable to this request, other
comprehensive plan policies also have relevance. For that reason,
staff evaluated the subject request for consistency with all plan
policies. Based upon that analysis, staff determined that the
request is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Potential Impact on Environmental Quality
The proposed rezoning will have no significant effect on
environmental quality with regard to the existing developed portion
of the property. County (as well as state and federal) wetland
protection regulatory requirements will necessitate that the
eastern third of the property remain relatively undisturbed, in
that the area consists of jurisdictional wetlands.
Compatibility with the Surrounding Area
Compatibility is not a major concern for this property. The
subject property is located within a commercial/industrial node.
Property to the east of the subject property is zoned for
commercial development. Properties to the west and southwest
contain warehouse development, which is compatible with the
existing warehouse on-site and the proposed use of the subject
property. Adjacent properties are either developed commercially or
are undeveloped at the present time.
-Compatibility of IL Use to Surrounding Uses
The purpose of this rezoning request is to establish the zoning
necessary for the applicant to utilize the subject property for
wire manufacturing. While some limited manufacturing is allowed in
the CH district, most types of manufacturing activities, including
that proposed by the applicant, are allowed only in the industrial
districts.
The principal issue then is whether the subject property should be
rezoned from CH to IL. In considering this issue, staff reviewed
the intent of both the CH zoning district and the IL zoning
district. While many similar uses are allowed in both the CH and
the IL districts, the districts were each established for a
specific purpose, and there are differences between the two
districts. Generally, IL uses are more intense than CH uses.
Since general manufacturing and limited industrial activities are
allowed in the IL district, more adverse impacts on adjacent
properties can occur from IL uses than from CH uses.
As indicated in sections 911.10(2) and 911.11(2) of the County's
Land Development Regulations, the purpose of each of these
districts is as follows:
32
o CH, Heavy Commercial District, is intended to provide
areas for establishments engaging in wholesale trade,
major repair services and restricted light manufacturing
activities. The CH district is further intended to
provide support services necessary for the development of
commercial and industrial uses allowed within other non-
residential zoning districts.
0 IL, Light Industrial District, is intended to provide
opportunities for limited manufacturing and industrial
uses and to promote the establishment of employment
centers which are accessible to urban services and
facilities, the area labor force, and local industrial
and business markets while minimizing the potential for
any adverse impacts upon nearby properties.
As indicated in the district descriptions referenced above, the IL
district allows uses which are more intense than those allowed in
the CH district. Consequently, IL district uses can have more
adverse impacts than CH uses, a fact which warrants careful
consideration in establishing IL zoning.
On several previous occasions, staff had expressed reservations to
applicants proposing a CH to IL rezoning of the subject property.
That staff --position was based on several factors. First, there is
no other IL zoning between the FEC railroad and U.S. #1 in this
part of the county. Second, the CH zoning and proposed/approved CH
uses already in place are compatible with 'the existing general
commercial zoning and uses to the north and east. Finally, the
change to IL for the subject property could provide an impetus for
more industrial rezoning requests.
Despite staff's previous reservations regarding a CH to IL rezoning
Of the subject property, there are factors that support the zoning
change. First, the site is adjacent to the railroad tracks.
Although a location adjacent to the railroad tracks does not, in
and of itself, warrant an industrial designation, such a location
is generally appropriate for industrial uses. Second, there are
other industrial uses adjacent to the site - on the west side of
the railroad tracks within the City of Sebastian. Finally, IL uses
in this location will not conflict with uses allowed on adjacent
properties.
Given those circumstances, staff has determined that, although
there are factors that support the proposed change and factors that
do not support the change, the proposed rezoning is warranted.
Conclusion
The rezoning is compatible with the surrounding area, consistent
with the goals, objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan,
and meets all applicable concurrency criteria. The subject
property is located in an area deemed suitable for commercial and
industrial uses of various types and has met all applicable
criteria. Staff support the subject request.
RECONNENDATION
Based upon the analysis performed, staff recommends that the Board
Of County Commissioners approve the request to rezone the subject
Property to IL.
33
Chairman Eggert stated she had received a letter from Alan
Campbell, Economic Development Director of the Indian River County
Council of 100, urging approval of this request.
Commissioner Scurlock led discussion regarding this area of
the County and the fact that growth in the area near the
intersection of 99th Street and U.S. 1 is going to become a problem
if we do not address turning lanes and traffic lights.
Director Keating stated that the issue of that intersection
was addressed in the site plan for this project. In 1987 when a
warehouse building was approved and was constructed, one of the
conditions imposed upon the site plan was that before a certificate
of occupancy could be issued for that site, a northbound left turn
lane on U.S. 1 at 99th Street would have to be installed. It did
not say that the applicant had to put it in, but it had to be there
before a CO. Mr. Keating was sure that was the reason the CO was
never obtained. He further advised the Board that this rezoning
would have no effect on that requirement.
Chairman Eggert asked whether Florida Department of
Transportation has been contacted.
Public Works Director Jim Davis reported that Public Works
staff has communicated with DOT on a number of occasions requesting
that the northbound left turn lane be included in the median
revision project along North U.S. 1. The response from DOT has
been negative. Due to financial considerations they did not want
to include it. That project has not gone to bid and has not been
constructed and we are still encouraging DOT to consider a
northbound left turn lane. Mr. Davis further reported that a crew
is currently at that location surveying the right-of-way and plans
to design it. That decision was made after the fast -lube and mini -
warehouse facility was approved and they agreed to escrow $3,000
toward the project.
Commissioner Scurlock asked how long it would be to complete
the improvement.
Director Davis estimated that with surveying and design work,
with the current progress being made on the project, it might be
six months. If the developer completes his work prior to stafffs
timing on getting the improvement completed, then we will drop our
project.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wheeler, to authorize Indian River
County to proceed with the design improvements for a
left turn lane on North U.S. 1 at 99th Street.
34
Under discussion, Director Davis advised that when the fast -
lube mini -warehouse facility went in, a special assessment project
was developed for that facility and to include any additional area
that received benefit from the turn lane; as a result, the fast -
lube mini -warehouse facility escrowed $3,000. If that philosophy
is not continued with other development as it occurs, then it is
not fair to the fast -lube mini -warehouse facility.
Commissioner Scurlock felt it was not fair to force one party
to make the intersection improvement when the whole area is
impacted by this particular intersection. He realized that we want
to use our resources as best we can and try to get someone else to
pay, but this intersection of U.S. 1 and 99th Street services a
larger area than just the fast -lube mini -warehouse and the subject
warehouse site and it is a very dangerous intersection.
Commissioner Bird asked about plans for funding the
intersection improvement.
Director Davis said his plan was to proceed with surveying and
design and engineering. If the warehouse facility's timing to do
the improvement and get his CO is ahead of ours, we would drop the
project. If our timing is ahead of his, we would get permits for
the project and come back to the Board for funding, estimated at
about $20,000 for the turn lane; signalization is not warranted.
Commissioner Scurlock stressed that the County has a
responsibility for making improvements rather than putting the
burden on the last guy to come along. He cited examples of people
who had plans that were thwarted because of requirements that were
too costly.
Director Davis explained the negative implications of looking
at new development as it occurs in the community is that you shift
priorities so rapidly that you cannot focus on the long-term
expansion system. If we put $20,000 here because of development
that is occurring on this street when tomorrow, down the street,
there may be some other improvement that necessitates improvements,
there goes your funding for the major transportation improvements
like Indian River Boulevard. The County does not have revenues nor
staff resources to respond and to change our priorities so quickly.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
Commissioner Bowman was in favor of the rezoning but was
concerned about the nature of the business planned for the subject
warehouse site.
35
JAN J4 1992
BOOK 0 F, GES
JAR 14 1912i
BOOK C�i� PAGE
(Continuing with the public hearing)
William Ford, 8515 Waco Way, came before the Board in response
to Commissioner Bowman's question. He said they manufacture
electrical wire. They process copper wire, drawn to various sizes
which is then insulated and packaged to ship to electrical
distributors. He described it as a very clean, quiet, light
industrial operation, and everything is self-contained within the
building. They have about 15 employees with plans of increasing to
40 or 50 ultimately. It is not retail so there would not be a lot
of traffic.
Community Development Director Keating cautioned the Board
that when looking at a rezoning, we do not consider the particular
use that is approved right now because two years down the road it
may be changed. Staff has determined that generally all IL uses
would be appropriate for this site and that includes the current
applicant.
Eric Pollard, 6153 98th place, came before the Board
representing Breezy Village Home Owners Association and spoke in
favor of the rezoning. He said they are satisfied the proposed
operation will not be a deterrent nor detrimental to Breezy Village
homeowners. Mr. Pollard was glad to hear the discussion regarding
the left turn lane at U.S. 1 and 99th Street, but was discouraged
that the project was 51st on the Public Works Department's design
list. He felt Breezy Village Homeowners' Association, Indian River
County, the transportation committee and industry must join in a
comprehensive team effort to put the left turn project on a higher
priority on the State's Road Project Program.
Commissioner Wheeler thought it was refreshing to hear from a
supporter of the project. The Commission is always interested in
hearing both sides and he said it was nice of Mr. Pollard to take
the time to speak to the Board.
Bruce.Bunnell, 9715 61st Parkway in Breezy Village, Sebastian,
came before the Board to speak in favor of the rezoning but
disagreed with Mr. Ford that the operation is quiet. He said he
had worked in a wire mill for over 36 years and suggested the
County should place some noise restrictions in the plan approval.
He was glad the County is moving along with the left turn lane.
It was determined that no one else wished to be heard and the
Chairman closed the public hearing.
36
M
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously adopted
Ordinance 92-01 amending the Zoning Ordinance and
the accompanying map from CH (Heavy Commercial) to
IL (Light Industrial), for the property generally
located on the north side of 99th Street (Vickers
Road) just east of the FEC Railroad right-of-way, as
recommended by staff.
ORDINANCE 92-01 IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD
ORDINANCE NO. 92-01
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE
ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING MAP FROM CH, HEAVY
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO IL, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, FOR THE
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 99TH STREET
(VICKERS ROAD), JUST EAST OF THE F.E.C. RAILROAD R/W, AND
DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the
local planning agency on such matters, has held a public hearing
and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this rezoning
request; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined that
this rezoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of
Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has held a public
hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at which parties in
interest and citizens were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning of
the following described property situated in Indian River County,
Florida, to -wit:
37
JAN 14 1992
JAN !4 1992
BOOK S 11 PAIJ_L
The south one-half of the Northwest one-quarter of the
Northeast one-quarter lying East of the Florida East Coast
Railway. LESS the South 30 feet for Vickers Road right-of-way
and also, LESS the North 200 feet thereof. Said land situate
in Section 20, Township 31 South, Range 39 East, Indian River
County, Florida.
Be changed from CH, Heavy Commercial District to IL, Light
Industrial District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in
said Zoning Regulations. 17
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, on this 14 day of January , 1992.
This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal
on the 20 day of December , 1991 for a public hearing to be
held on the 14 day of January , 1992 at which time it was
moved for adoption by Commissioner Bowman , seconded by
Commissioner Wheel er , and adopted by the following
vote:
Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Vice Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird _ ye
Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler _ ye
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY: /<
Carol y K. Eggert airman
The Chairman recessed the meeting briefly and the Board
reconvened at 10:35 A. M. Commissioner Wheeler was delayed in
returning to the meeting and was temporarily absent.
ANDERTON INVESTMENTS INC. REQUEST TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY +/_- 1.5
ACRES FROM CH (HEAVY COMMERCIAL) TO CG (GENERAL COMMERCIAL)
DISTRICT
The hour of 9:05 o'clock A. M. having passed, the Deputy
County Attorney announced that this public hearing has been
properly advertised as follows:
38
f
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a /lb•&l 4 i
In the matter of.t
in the. Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of, 4'mL-v JI.M 9,91
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate. commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this IF day of ¢►.D. 19
usiness Manager)
(SEAL)
CH G
igl�r SubJeCt
Property
•kath
S �
p IL
N
L N • '�
Note oNfOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
hearing to oonsloer the adV of a
CommercialDistrict county ordinance oniC_ fra
,end to , Generain: Heavy
CommemW
District. The subject POP"Is owned by Wamng-
ton Stevens a and Anderton Iamb, a, , Inc., and
Is located on the south side of 8th Street east of
Old Dbde Is the The sublsct contei
1.5 acres Is R the Nort 11VAPA � Section 13,
Township a 39E lying and being In Indian
RiverFlorida.
A public at which parties In interest and
s citizens shad have annity to be heard, will
be held by the Board v CmmftsbwsOf
Indian River County, Florida, in the County Commis.
slon Chambers of the County Admhdstratbn Build -
Ing, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Flor-
Ida on The I?� of Conus Jarruary 14,1992 C sbrws y
a less Intense M" district than the =at re -
guested provided it Is within the same genual use
catAny�one who may wish to appeal any decision
which may be made at this nee wiU need to an -
sure that a verbatim record of the pracesdlgg is
made, which Incudes tastimany and evlderx a upon
which the appeal Is based.
Indiaykw Cc"
BBoarrdd �k9►mrd N. onWssSK l
Dec. 20, 1991 881059 807
Community Development Director Keating commented from memo
dated December 18, 1991:
39
JAN1 � 41'2�BOOK.�
JAS
60nK
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE
Obert M. ']Keating,, CP
Community Developmmne t Director
THRU: Sasan Rohani ' 1�•
Chief, Long-Ra`iige Planning
FROM: Cheryl A. Twore
Senior Planner, g- ge Planning
DATE: December 18, 1991
RE: ANDERTON INVESTMENTS, INC. REQUEST TO REZONE
APPROXIMATELY ±1.5 ACRES FROM CH TO CG (RZON-91-10-0098)
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular
meeting of January 14, 1992.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
This is a request to rezone approximately ±1.5 acres from CH, Heavy
Commercial District, to CG, General Commercial District. The
subject property is located on the south side of 8th Street, east
of Old Dixie Highway. The property is owned by Wellington Stevens
and Anderton Investments, Inc. The applicant, Anderton
Investments, .Inc., intends to utilize the property with general
commercial uses.
On December 12, 19911 the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0
to recommend approval of this request to rezone to CG.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property contains vacant land and an existing
commercial strip center which is part of the Glendale Industrial
Park. The entire property is zoned CH, Heavy Commercial District.
Adjacent properties to the north, east and south of the subject
Property are also zoned CH. The 5uRene Mobile Home Park lies to
the north of the subject property on the north side of 8th Street,
while the remainder of the Glendale Industrial Park is located to
the south of the subject property. ASR Utilities and Pan American
Engineering are located to the east. The land to the west of the
subject property and west of Old Dixie Highway is zoned RS -6,
Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre), and
contains single-family homes and vacant lots in the Reams Glen
Subdivision.
Future Land Use Pattern
The entire ±1.5 acres of the subject property and all adjacent
properties to the north, south and east lie within the U.S. #1
Commercial/ Industrial Node (8th Street to lot Street S.W.) land use
designation. This designation permits various types of commercial
and industrial development. Land to the west of the subject
Property and west of Old Dixie Highway lies within the L-2, Low -
Density Residential - 2 (up to 6 units/acre), land use designation.
40
_ ® M
Transportation _
The subject property has access from- @th Street, which is
classified as a collector road on the future roadway thoroughfare
plan map. This segment of 8th Street is a two-lane paved road with
approximately sixty (60) feet of existing public road right-of-way.
Utilities and Services
The site is within the Urban Service Area. Water service is
available to the site from the South County Water Plant.
Wastewater service for the site is available from the City of Vero
Beach: The site is already developed and it is connected to the
county water system and City of Vero Beach wastewater system.
Environment
The subject property is not within a floodplain as identified by
Flood Insurance Rating Maps (FIRM).
ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the
application will be presented. The analysis will include a
description of:
0 Concurrency of public facilities
o Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan
o Potential impact on environmental quality
0 Compatibility with the surrounding area
Concurrency of Public Facilities
This site is located within the County Urban Service Area (USA), an
area deemed suited for urban scale development. The comprehensive
plan establishes standards for: Transportation, Potable Water,
Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage and Recreation (Future Land Use
Policy 3.1). The adequate provision of these services is necessary
to ensure the continued quality of life enjoyed by the community.
The comprehensive plan also requires that new development be
reviewed to ensure that the minimum level of service for these
services and facilities are maintained.
Policy 3.2 of the Future Land Use Element states that no
development shall be approved unless it is consistent with the
concurrency management system component of the Capital -Improvements
Element. For comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning requests,
conditional concurrency review is required.
As per Section 910.07 of the County's Land Development Regulations,
conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of
each facility with respect to` a proposed project. Since
comprehensive plan amendments and rezoning requests are not
projects, county regulations call for the concurrency review to be
based upon the most intense use of the subject property based upon
the requested zoning district or land use designation. For
commercial rezoning requests, the most intense use (according to
the county's LDRs) is retail commercial with 10,000 square feet of
gross floor area per acre' of land proposed for redesignation.
Since the subject rezoning request is for a general commercial
designation, the 10,000 square feet of retail commercial floor area
per acre of land proposed for rezoning is used as the basis for the
concurrency determination of the proposed request. The site
information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows:
41
JAN 141992 BOOK
1
14 Ro0r 85 pm E X77
1. Size of Property: ±1.5 acres
2. Size of Area to be Rezoned: ±1.5 acres
3. Existing Zoning Classification: CH, Heavy Commercial District
4. Existing Land Use Designation: C/I, Commercial/Industrial
-Node
5. Proposed Zoning Classification: CG, General Commercial
7. Most Intense Use of the Subject Property: 15,000 sq. ft. of
Retail Commercial
As per section 910.07(2) of the Concurrency Management Chapter of
the County's Land Development Regulations, projects which do not
increase density or intensity of use are exempt from concurrency.
requirements. This provision is particularly applicable to
rezoning requests involving a change from one type of non-
residential district to a different type of non-residential
district. Since all commercial/industrial zoning districts are
considered to be comparable in terms of intensity of use, changing
a property's designation from one commercial/industrial zoning
district to another commercial/industrial zoning district
represents no change in intensity. Therefore, any rezoning
request, including the subject request, which involves a change
from CH to CG would be exempt from the county's concurrency
requirements.
It is important to note that there will be no effect on service
levels for any public facility as a result of this rezoning. Since
non -residentially zoned properties are considered to have a maximum
development potential of 10,000 square feet of "retail commercial"
use, there will be no increase in intensity of development and
therefore no additional impact on facilities from a site zoned CG
than from a site zoned CH.
In this case as in all cases, a detailed concurrency analysis will
be done at the time of site development or redevelopment. With
this site, a change of use site plan will need to be submitted to
convert space in the existing commercial strip center to
accommodate a beauty parlor. At that time a concurrency analysis
will be done to ensure that facility service levels will be
adequate to accommodate the change of use.
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan
Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of
the comprehensive plan. Rezonings must also show consistency with
the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land
Use Map, which include agricultural, residential, recreation,
conservation, and commercial and industrial land uses and their
densities. Commercial and industrial land uses are located in
nodes throughout the unincorporated areas of Indian River County.
The goals, objectives and policies'are the most important parts of
the Comprehensive Plan. Policies are statements in the plan which
identify the actions which the county will take in order to direct
the community's development. As courses of action committed to by
the county, policies provide the basis for all county land
development related decisions - including rezoning requests. While
all comprehensive plan policies are important, some have more
applicability than others in reviewing rezoning requests. Of
particular applicability for this request is Future Land Use Policy
1.15.
42
-Future Land Use Policy 1.15
Future Land Use Policy 1.15 states that the commercial land use
designation is intended for uses such as retail and wholesale
trade, offices, businesses and personal services, residential
treatment centers, limited residential uses, and other similar type
uses. In addition, that policy states that all commercial uses
must be located within an existing or future Urban Service Area.
Since the subject property is located within a commercial/
industrial node within the county'.s urban service area and the
change of zoning will maintain commercial uses on the property as
allowed -within the commercial land use designation, the proposed
request is consistent with Policy 1.15 and the commercial/
industrial corridor policy.
While policy 1.15 is particularly applicable to this request, other
comprehensive plan policies also have relevance. For that reason,
staff evaluated the subject request for consistency with all plan
policies. Based upon that analysis, staff determined that the
request is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Potential Impact on Environmental Quality
In that the subject property has already been converted from
undeveloped land to a commercial strip center, no significant
environmental impact is anticipated as a result of this rezoning.
Compatibility with the Surrounding Area
Compatibility is not a major concern for this property. The
subject property is located within .a commercial/ industrial node,
and property to the east of the subject property is zoned for
commercial development. In addition, properties to the east and
south contain commercial development which is compatible with the
existing commercial development on-site, and compatible with the
proposed commercial zoning of the subject property. Residential
property to the west is physically separated and buffered from
commercial development by Old Dixie Highway.
While the SuRene Mobile Home Park lies directly north of the
subject property and Sth Street, the park is zoned for heavy
commercial development. Because of that zoning, the park is an
existing non -conforming use. As such, it is anticipated that the
park will eventually be removed and the land converted to
commercial uses. With the change in zoning of the subject property
to CG, impacts to the mobile home park would be less than with the
CH zoning of _the site, since the CG district is a less intense
zoning category. For that reason, staff feels that.compatibility
between the subject site and the existing mobile home park would be
enhanced by the proposed rezoning.
The purpose of this rezoning request is to establish the zoning
necessary for the applicant to convert space in the existing strip
center from heavy commercial uses to personal service uses.
Personal service uses are not allowed in the CH district, but are
permitted in CG zoned areas.
Since the CH district was established to accommodate uses which
have a substantial amount of heavy 'truck traffic, the intent was to
physically separate those uses from general commercial uses which
attract the general public. By doing so, conflicts between large
trucks and personal vehicles are minimized. This separation is
generally achieved by restricting personal service uses and general
retail uses from locating in CH districts, and restricting
warehouse, wholesale trade and light manufacturing uses from
locating in CG and CL districts.
43
JAN 14, 1992, Boor
JAN 1 `,99"
BOOK 6� f'i6L� j"J
The purpose statements -for both the CG and CH districts reflect
that intent. Those purpose statements, found in Section 911.10(2)
of the county's land development regulations, read as follows:
o CG, General Commercial District, is intended to provide
areas for the development of general retail sales and
selected service activities. The CG district is not
intended to provide for heavy commercial activities, such
as commercial service uses, heavy repair, assembly
production nor industrial -uses.
° CH, Heavy Commercial District, is intended to provide
areas for establishments engaging in wholesale trade,
major repair services and restricted light manufacturing
activities. The CH district is further intended to
provide support services necessary for the development of
commercial and industrial uses allowed within other non-
residential zoning districts.
Generally, CG districts are more appropriately located where they
are easily accessible to the general public. While accessibility
should not be justification for creating a stripdevelopment
pattern along the entire frontage of major roadways, accessibility
should be a consideration in the relative location of various types
of commercial zoning designations within an overall commercial node
area.
Because of the characteristics of CG and CH uses, it is preferable
to locate CH uses away from commercial/residential boundaries,
because the truck traffic, late night operations, noise, and other
impacts can adversely affect residential areas. To reduce
truck/automobile conflicts, CG uses should not be located internal
to a CH type of development.
In this case, 8th Street is a major roadway with a substantial
amount of traffic. Converting the subject property to CG zoning
would be consistent with the accessibility criterion referenced
above. In addition, locating the CG uses along 8th Street with the
CH uses to the south achieves the objective of minimizing
truck/personal vehicle interaction. Finally, the relationship of
CG uses along 8th Street with the CH uses adjacent to the south
produces a non -strip development land use pattern.
For those reasons, staff supports the request.
Conclusion
The rezoning is compatible with the surrounding area, consistent
with the goals, objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan,
and meets all applicable concurrency criteria. The subject
property is located -in an area deemed suitable for commercial uses
of various types and has met all applicable criteria. Staff
support the subject request.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the analysis performed, staff recommends that the Board
of County Commissioners approve the request to rezone the subject
property to CG.
44
M M M
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, she closed
the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Wheeler being absent) adopted Ordinance
92-02 amending the Zoning Ordinance and accompanying
zoning map from CH (Heavy Commercial) to CG (General
Commercial) for property generally located on the
south side of 8th Street east of Old Dixie Highway,
as recommended by staff.
ORDINANCE 92-02 IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD
ORDINANCE NO. 92-02
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING
ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM CH, HEAVY COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT TO CG, GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 8TH STREET, EAST OF OLD
DIXIE HIGHWAY, AND DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the
local planning agency on such matters, has held a public hearing
and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this rezoning
request; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined that
this rezoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of
Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has held a public
hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at which parties in
interest and citizens were heard;
45
JAN 1 1992 �o�� � F,,rJ�: °"
JAN 14 1992,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by
P00K So
the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning of
the following described property situated in Indian River County,
Florida, to -wit:
LOTS 24 AND 25, BLOCK 2, GLORIA GARDENS, ACCORDING TO PLAT
THEREOF FILED IN PLAT BOOK 5, PAGE 33, PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST.
LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. LESS THAT NORTHWESTERLY TRIANGULAR
PORTION OF LOT 25, AS DEEDED TO INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA;
AND
A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATE IN SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH,
RANGE 39 EAST, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEING MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF THE SAID SECTION 13:
THENCE S 00025'00" E., ALONG THE QUARTER LINE, A DISTANCE OF
30.00 FEET: THENCE WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 187.42 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING: THENCE SOUTH, A DISTANCE OF 82.13 FEET TO A POINT
OF CURVATURE OF A CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF
428.20 FEET: THENCE SOUTHERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE,
THRU A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07011'00", A DISTANCE OF 53.68 FEET;
THENCE S 67000'00" W. FOR A DISTANCE OF 288.35 FEET: THENCE
N 18046'01" W. A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET: THENCE N 71013'59"
E, A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 18046101" WEST A
DISTANCE OF 148.80 FEET TO A POINT 30.00 FEET SOUTH OF AND
PERPENDICULAR TO THE SAID QUARTER LINE; THENCE WEST, ALONG THE
SAID QUARTER LINE, A DISTANCE OF 320.05 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
Be changed from CH, Heavy Commercial District to CG, General
Commercial District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in
said Zoning Regulations.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, on this 14 day Of January , 1992 •
This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal
on the 20 day of December , 1991 for a public hearing to be
held on the 14 day of January , 1992 at which time it was
moved for adoption by Commissioner Bowman , seconded by
Commissioner Scurlock , and adopted by the following
vote:
Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert _Aye
Vice Chairman Margaret C. Bowman _dye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird _Bye
Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Absent
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY:
Carolyno. Egger ha .X*man;s4.
46
MILLS REQUEST TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY +1- 12.5 ACRES FROM A-1
-(AGRICULTURE) TO RS -3 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UP TO 3 UNITS PER
ACRE) DISTRICT
The hour of 9:05 o"clock A. M. having passed, the Deputy
County Attorney announced that this public hearing has been
properly advertised as follows:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA '
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach In Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
In the matter
In the, Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the Issues of
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, In said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach. in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this �d'� day A.D. 19
(SEAL)
Notary Public, Stale of Florida .- "'
filyCammisslon Expires June 29, 1993
d I 12th S
Q i'• A-1 -3
COto
SUBJECT
PROPERT 1118-3
=.y �..
.. 8th ST
NOTICE - PUBUC NEARING
Notice of hearing to conalder the adoption of a
txxiuitl� aeon a rezoning land from: A -i, rlcul-
Mal DI {up to 1 umU6 aaeal to R3 3, t
F , Resdentiai Dls#M 9
subject property a owned (up
Bobby J. Haire, and is
located an the north slde of 8th street east of 58th
Avenue (���Q� Hghway). The subject property con-
tal" l9 X acres Is iy�g in the Southwest V4 of
Sectidbeim Town" W., Range 39E lying and .
A public hearing at whIch Florida
citizens shall have anc parties in Interest and
o�ppporhndty to be heard, wiq
be held by the board ofCounty Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, in the County Com mla-
slon Chambers of the County Admhstratbn Bulld-
11 loes at 1840 25th street, Vero Beach, Flor-
�Tuesday, January 14,1992 at 9:05 a.m.
e e8 Intense Boardof �Y Commissioners may adopt
quest provided it Is wtft the custrIet genean the ral use
category.
who may wish to appeal any decision
which maybe made at this meeting w@ reed to en-
anue that a verbatim resod of the proceedings is
made, which tndudes tes*nony and eve upon
which theIs
Indian iver C�v
County
Board ogkin:dkin N. Btrd�(rtn
Dec. 20, 1991 881080 807
Community Development Director Bob Keating commented from memo
dated December 19, 1991:
47
JAN 141,11-
1." a�
BOOK
I
JAN i4 1992
BOOK 6i PAGE 21.'0 8 J
TO:
James Chandler
County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE
obert M.eat g, P
Community Devel pme Director
54 -
THRU:
Sasan Rohani
Chief, Long -Range %aming
\
FROM:
Cheryl A. Tworek
Senior Planner, g ge Planning
DATE:
December 19, 1991
RE:
MILLS REQUEST TO REZONE APPROBIMATELy 112.5 ACRES FROM A-
1 TO RS -3 (RZON-91-10-0096)
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular
meeting of January 14, 1992.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
This is a request to rezone approximately 112.5 acres from A-1,
Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres), to RS -3, Single -
Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre). The subject
property is located on the north side of 8th Street, east of 58th
Avenue (Rings Highway). The property is owned by Bobby J. Hiers.
The applicant, Bill Mills, intends to develop the property with
single-family residences.
On December 12, 1991, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0
to recommend the approval of this request to rezone to RS -3.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The subject property is vacant land with a single family residence;
it is currently zoned A-1, Agricultural District. Adjacent
properties to the west and south of the subject property are also
zoned A-11 and contain single family residences and active citrus
groves. North of the subject property is the Rain Tree Corner
Subdivision, which is zoned RS -38 Single -Family Residential
District (up to 3 units/acre). To 'the east of the subject property
is the Laurel Oaks Subdivision, which is zoned RS -3. The area
located to the southeast of the subject property is zoned A-1 and
contains two single family residences.
Future Land Use Pattern
The entire ±12.5 acres of the subject property and all adjacent
properties lie within the L-1, Low -Density Residential - 1 (up to
3 units/acre) land use designation. This designation permits
various low density residential development.
48
Transportation
The subject property has access from 8th Street, which is
classified as a collector road on the future roadway thoroughfare
plan map. This segment of 8th Street 'is a two-lane paved road with
approximately one hundred (100) feet of existing public road right-
of-way.
Utilities and Services
The site is within the Urban
available to the site from
Wastewater service for the site
Wastewater Plant.
Environment
Service Area. Water service is
the South County Water Plant.
is available from the West County
The subject property is located within flood zone AE as identified
by Flood Insurance Rating Maps (FIRM). The north t3.5 acres of the
Property is old citrus grove. The remaining t9 acres is old
pasture, with a t.75 acre isolated freshwater wetland on the
central portion of the property. An upland vegetative fringe
exists along the north boundary line.
ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the
application will be presented. The analysis will include a
description of:
O concurrency of public facilities
O compatibility with the surrounding area
O consistency with the comprehensive plan
O potential impact on environmental quality
This section will also consider alternatives for development of the
site.
Concurrency of Public Facilities
The site is located within the county Urban Service Area (USA), an
area deemed suited for urban scale development. The Comprehensive
Plan establishes standards for: Transportation, Potable Water,
Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage and Recreation (Future Land Use
Policy 3.1). The -adequate provision of these services is necessary
to ensure the continued quality of life enjoyed by the community.
The Comprehensive Plan also requires that new development be
reviewed to ensure that the minimum adopted level of service
standards for -these services and facilities are maintained.
Policy 3.2 of the Future Land Use Element states that no
development shall be approved unless it is consistent with the
concurrency management system component of the Capital. improvements
Element. For comprehensive plan amendments or rezoning requests,
conditional concurrency review is required.
Conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of
each facility with respect to a proposed project. Since
comprehensive plan amendments and rezoning requests are not
projects, county regulations call for the concurrency review to be
based upon the most intense use of'the subject property based upon
the requested zoning district or land use designation. For
residential rezoning requests, the most intense use (according to
the county's LDR's) is the maximum number of units that could be
built on the site, given the size of the property and the maximum
density under the proposed land use designation. The site
information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows:
49
J A i�l 14 1992
r
JAN 1 4, 1992
BOOK' F'ar,Fa
1. Size of Property: 12.5 acres
2. Size of Area to be Rezoned: 12.5 acres
3. Existing Zoning Classification;' A-1, Agricultural District
(up to 1 unit/5 acres)
4. Proposed Zoning Classification: RS -3, Single Family
Residential District (up to
3 units/acre)
5. Existing Land Use Designation: L-1, Low -Density Residential -1
(up to 3 units/acre)
6. Maximum Number of Units with Proposed Zoning : #37 units
- Transportation
A review of the traffic impacts that `would result from the proposed
development of the property indicates that the existing level of
service "D" or better would not be lowered. The site information
used for determining traffic impacts is as follows:
1. Residential Use Identified in 5th Edition, ITE Manual:
Single Family Detached Housing
2. For Single -Family Dwelling Units in ITE Manual:
a. Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends: 10.062/1 dwelling unit
b. P.M. Peak Hour Rate: 1.012/1 dwelling unit
C. Outbound P.M. Peak Hour Split: 35%
d. Inbound P.M. Peak Hour Split: 65%
3. Formula for Determining New Trips (peak hour/peak season/peak
direction:
Number of Single Family Units 8 P.M. Peak Hour Rate 8
Inbound P.M. Percentage
(Trip distribution is based on a Modified Gravity Model)
4. a. P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction of Adjacent Roadway (8th
Street): West
b. Total Peak Hour/Peak Season/Peak Direction Trips: 24
5. Traffic Capacity on this segment of 8th Street at a Level of
Service "D": 630 Peak Hour/Peak Season/Peak Direction Trips
6. Existing Traffic Volume on this segment of 8th Street:
195 Peak Hour/Peak Season/Peak Direction Trips
Since the county's transportation level of service is based on peak
hour/peak season/peak direction characteristics, the transportation
concurrency analysis only addresses project traffic occurring in
the peak hour and affecting the peak direction of impacted
roadways. In this case, 8th Street has more volume in the p.m.
peak hour than. in the a.m. peak hour, so the p.m. peak hour was
used for the transportation concurrency analysis. According to
recent count data on 8th Street, the peak direction during the p.m.
peak hour is west.
50
Given those conditions, the number of trips associated with this
request was determined by taking the total number of residential
units (37) allowed under the proposed land use, applying ITE 's
1.012 p.m. peak hour trips per residential unit factor to get total
peak hour trips, and applying the ITE residential use p.m. peak
hour inbound factor of 65% to the total p.m. peak hour trips for
the use to get the west bound (peak direction) peak hour volume of
trips for the site. The same methodology was used to obtain the
site's p.m. peak hour exiting volume; however, a 35% outbound
factor was used instead of the 65% inbound factor. Using a
modified gravity model and a hand assignment, these trips were then
assigned to -roadways on the network.
As a result of this assignment, two volumes were obtained for each
impacted roadway segment. These volumes represent the p.m. peak
hour volume for each direction of the roadway. Using the volume
assigned to the peak direction of each roadway, a capacity
determination was made for each segment. This capacity
determination involved comparing the assigned volume to the
segment's available capacity.
Capacities for all roadway segments in Indian River County are
calculated and updated annually, utilizing the latest and best
available peak season traffic characteristics and applying Appendix
I methodology as set forth in the Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT) Level of Service (LOS) Manual. Available
capacity is the total capacity less existing and committed traffic
volumes; this is updated daily, based upon vesting associated with
project approvals.
Based upon staff analysis, it was determined that 8th Street and
the other impacted roadways serving the project can accommodate the
additional trips without decreasing the existing level of service.
Impacted roadways are defined in the County's Land Development
Regulations as roadway segments which receive five percent (5%) or
more daily project traffic or fifty (50) or more daily project
trips, whichever is less.
The table below identifies each of the impacted roadway segments
associated with this proposed amendment. As indicated in that
table, there is sufficient capacity in all of the segments to
accommodate the most intense use allowed by the proposed amendment.
51
BOOK
r
J A N 14 092
BOOK
TRAFFIC CONCURRENCY DETERKINATION
Impacted Road Segments
(peak hour/peak season/peak direction)
o PAGE �' fi
Roa&wW Segment
wi
Segment Road Frain To rAS WD
gm
1920
1925
1930
1935
1940
1945
1950
1955
1960
1965
1970
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
2110
2210
2220
2230
2240
2250
2260
2905
2910
2915
2920
2925
2930
2935
2940
3005
3010
3015
3020
3025
3030
3035
4830
4840
4850
4860
4870
4880
S.R. 60
S.R. 60
S.A. 60
S.R. 60
S.R. 60
S.R. 60
S.R. 60
S.R. 60
S.A. 60
S.R. 60
S.R. 60
16th at.
16th St.
16th 8t.
16th St.
16th/17th St.
17th St.
12th St.
12th at.
12th at.
12th St.
12th at.
12th at.
43rd Ave.
43rd Ave.
43rd Ave.
43rd Ave.
43rd Ave.
43rd Ave.
43rd Ave.
43rd Ave.
58th Ave.
58th Ave.
58th Ave.
58th Ave.
58th Ave.
58th Ave.
58th Ave.
8th St.
8th at.
8th St.
8th St.
8th St.
8th St.
82nd Ave.
66th Ave.
58th Ave.
43rd Ave.
27th Ave.
20th Ave.
Old Dixie Hwy.
10th Ave.
O.S. #1
I.R. Blvd.
Icww
58th Ave.
43rd Ave.
27th Ave.
20th Ave.
Old Dixie Hwy.
O.S. #1
82nd Ave.
58th Ave.
43rd Ave.
27th Ave.
20th Ave.
Old Dixie Hwy.
So. Co. Line
Oslo Road
4th St.
8th St.
12th at.
16th at.
S.R. 60
26th St.
Oslo Road
4th St.
8th St.
12th St.
16th St.
S.R. 60
41st. St.
58th Ave.
43rd Ave.
27th Ave.
20th Ave.
Old Dixie Hwy.
O.S. #1
52
M.
66th Ave.
58th Ave.
43rd Ave.
27th Ave.
20th Ave.
Old Dixie
10th Ave.
U.S. #1
I.R. Blvd.
ICWW
S.R. AIA
43rd Ave.
27th Ave.
20th Ave.
Old Dixie
Q.S. #1
I.R. Blvd.
58th Ave.
43rd Ave.
27th Ave.
20th Ave.
Old Dixie
,U.S. #1
Oslo Road
4th St.
8th at.
12th St.
16th St.
S.R. 60
26th at.
41st St.
4th St.
8th St.
12th St.
16th St.
S.R. 60
41st at.
45th St.
43rd Ave.
27th Ave.
20th Ave.
HWY.
Hwy.
Hwy.
Old Dixie Hwy.
O.S. #1
I.R. Blvd,
M
1760
1760
2650
2650
2600
1638
1638
1638
1638
1760
1760
830
830
830
970
970
1990
890
830
830
830
830
830
630
630
630
630
830
830
830
630
630
630
630
630
830
830
630
630
630
830
830
830
830
Roadway
Segment
Existina Demand
_ En et ng Vested
volume volume
Total
segment
Demand
Available
Segment
Capacity
Project
Demand
Positive
Concurrency
Determination
1920
950
67
1017
732
1
Y
1925
972
93
1065
685
3
Y
1930
972
39
1011
1631
3
Y
1935
612
35
647
1997
3
Y
1940
878
25
903
1691
2
Y
1945
747
4
751
883
2
Y
1950
747
12
759
874
2
Y
1955
747
9
756
878
2
Y
1960
509
5
514
1119
2
Y
1965
846
43
889
858
2
Y
1970
653
43
696
1051
2
Y
.2020
121
1
122
707
1
Y
2030
337
0
337
493
4
Y
2040
463
0
463
367
3
Y
2050
851
2.,
853
115
2
Y
2060
851
12
863
104
2
Y
2110
680
6
686
1300
1
Y
2210
81
0
81
809
1
Y
2220
81
9
90
740
3
Y
2230
225
8
233
595
4
Y
2240
400
3
403
425
4
Y
2250
400
7
407
421
4
Y
2260
527
33
560
266
4
Y
2905
135
1
136
493
1
Y
2910
225
3
228
399
1
Y
2915
360
0
360
270
1
Y
2920
454
0
454
176
5
Y
2925
454
1
455
374
5
Y
2930
373
1
374
455
4
Y
2935
373
9
382
446
2
Y
2940
283
10
293
330
1
Y
3005
144
9
153
477
2
Y
3010
144
6
150
480
3
Y
3015
144
6
150
480
11
Y
3020
144,
21
165
464
8
Y
3025
-400
20
420
410
6
Y
3030
414
29
443
386
3
Y
3035
414
9
423
207
2
Y
4830
99
11
110
509
2
Y
4840
193
2
195
433
4
Y
4850
342
1
343
486
3
Y
4860
342
4
346
483
2
Y
4870
351
3
354
476
2
Y
4880
198-
0
198
632
1
Y
- Water
The site is located within the South County Water Service Area. A
review of the water capacity in that plant indicates a remaining
capacity of approximately 4 million gallons per day. With the most
intense use -allowable under the proposed land use designation, the
subject property will have a consumption rate of 37.5 Equivalent
Residential Units (ERUs) or 91375 gallons per day. This is based
upon the level of service standard of 250 gallons per ERU per day.
Since no ERUs have been reserved as of the present time, the
applicant has entered into a developer's agreement with the county
which states that the developer agrees to pay his impact fees and
connect to the county system at the time of development or to
expand county water facilities or pay for their expansion if
capacity is not available at the time of site development. This is
consistent with Future Land Use Policy 2.7 which requires
development projects to maintain established levels of service.
93
BOOK PACE `y
JAN 14 1992,
PUUK PAf,� �j J
- Wastewater
Wastewater generation for ±37 units on the subject property will be
approximately 37.5 Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs), or 9,375
gallons per day. This is based upon the county's adopted level of
service standard of 250 gallons per ERU per day. County Wastewater
Service is available to the site from the West County Wastewater
Plant. The West County Wastewater Plant has an available capacity
of 404,000 gallons per day. Since no ERUs have been reserved as of
the present time, the applicant has entered into a developer's
agreement with the county which states that the developer agrees to
pay his impact fees and connect to the county system if capacity is
available at the time of development or to expand county wastewater
facilities or pay for their expansion if capacity is not available
at the time of site development. With this condition, the
wastewater concurrency test has been met for the subject request.
- Solid Waste
Solid waste service includes pickup by private operators and
disposal at the county landfill. Solid waste generation by
approximately 37 units of residential development on the subject
site will be approximately 60 waste generation units (WGUs), or
17'7.75 cubic yards of solid waste per year. This is based upon the
level of service standard of 2.37 cubic yards per capita per year.
A review of the solid waste capacity for the active segment of the
county landfill indicates the availability of more than 900,000
cubic yards. The active segment of the landfill has a 4 -year
capacity, and the landfill has expansion capacity beyond 2010.
Based upon staff analysis, it was determined that the county
landfill can accommodate the additional solid waste.
- Drainage
All developments are reviewed for compliance with county stormwater
regulations which require on-site retention and minimum finished
floor elevations. In addition, development proposals will have to
meet the discharge requirements of the county Stormwater Management
Ordinance. Since the subject property is located within the M-1
Drainage Basin and no discharge rate has been set for this basin,
any development on the property will be prohibited from discharging
any run-off in excess of the pre -development rate.
In this case, the minimum floor elevation level of service standard
applies, since the property lies within a floodplain. Consistent
with Drainage Policy 1.2, "all new buildings shall have the lowest
habitable floor elevation no lower than the elevation of the 100
year flood elevation as shown on the Federal Emergency Management
Agency FIRM, or as defined in a more detailed study report." Since
the subject property lies within Flood Zone AE, which is a special
flood hazard area located within the 100 -year floodplain, any
development on this property must have a minimum finished floor
elevation of. no less than twenty-two (22) feet above mean sea
level.
Besides the minimum elevation requirement, on-site retention and
discharge level of service standards also apply to this request.
With the most intense use of this site, the maximum area of
impervious surface for the proposed request will be approximately
±326,700 square feet. The maximum run-off volume, based upon that
amount of impervious surface and the 25 year/24 hour design storm,
will be ±91,476 cubic feet, using Indian River Farms Water Control
District limitations. In order to maintain the county's adopted
level of service, the applicant will be required to retain ±338,000
cubic feet of run-off on-site. It is estimated that the pre -
development run-off rate is ±15 cubic feet per second.
54
Based upon staff's analysis, the drainage level of service
standards will be met by limiting off-site discharge to its pre -
development rate of ±15 cubic feet per second, requiring on-site
retention of 1338,000 cubic feet of run-off for the most intensive
use of the property, and requiring that all finished floor
elevations exceed twenty-two feet above mean sea level.
- Recreation
A review of county recreation facilities and the projected demand
that would result from the most intense development that could
occur on the property under the proposed zoning indicates that the
adopted levels of service would be maintained. The table below
illustrates the additional park demand associated with the proposed
development of the property and the existing surplus acreage by
park type. This indicates that the level of service would be
maintained.
With the execution of the developer's agreements as referenced in
the water and wastewater sections, the concurrency test has been
satisfied for the subject request.
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan
Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of
the comprehensive plan. Rezoning requests must also be consistent
with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future
Land Use Map; these uses include agricultural, residential,
recreation, conservation, and commercial and industrial land uses
and their densities. Commercial and industrial land uses are
located in nodes throughout the unincorporated areas of Indian
River County.
The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of
the Comprehensive Plan. Policies are statements in the plan which
identify tate actions which the county will take in order to direct
the community's development. As courses of action committed to by
the county, policies provide the basis for all county land
development related decisions. While all comprehensive plan
policies are important, some have more applicability than others in
reviewing plan amendment requests. Of particular applicability for
this request is Future Land Use Policy 1.11.
- Future Land Use Policy 1.11
Future Land Use Policy 1.11 states that the L-1, Low -Density
Residential - 1 land use designation is intended for residential
uses up to 3 units per acre. In addition, that policy states that
these residential uses must be located within an existing or Future
Urban Service Area (USA).
Since the subject property is located within an area designated as
L-1 on the county's future land use plan map and is located within
the county's urban service area "and the applicant proposes to
develop the property with residential uses no higher than 3 units
per acre, the proposed request is consistent with Policy 1.11.
55
JAN 41 BOOK 5 F,�;;F .,
LOS
Project
(Acres per
Demand
Surplus
Park Type
1000 population)
Acres
Acreaae
Urban District
5.0
.43
194.12
Community (South)
1.25
.10
8.66
Beach
1.5
.12
68.63
River
1.5
.12
29.63
With the execution of the developer's agreements as referenced in
the water and wastewater sections, the concurrency test has been
satisfied for the subject request.
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan
Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of
the comprehensive plan. Rezoning requests must also be consistent
with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future
Land Use Map; these uses include agricultural, residential,
recreation, conservation, and commercial and industrial land uses
and their densities. Commercial and industrial land uses are
located in nodes throughout the unincorporated areas of Indian
River County.
The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of
the Comprehensive Plan. Policies are statements in the plan which
identify tate actions which the county will take in order to direct
the community's development. As courses of action committed to by
the county, policies provide the basis for all county land
development related decisions. While all comprehensive plan
policies are important, some have more applicability than others in
reviewing plan amendment requests. Of particular applicability for
this request is Future Land Use Policy 1.11.
- Future Land Use Policy 1.11
Future Land Use Policy 1.11 states that the L-1, Low -Density
Residential - 1 land use designation is intended for residential
uses up to 3 units per acre. In addition, that policy states that
these residential uses must be located within an existing or Future
Urban Service Area (USA).
Since the subject property is located within an area designated as
L-1 on the county's future land use plan map and is located within
the county's urban service area "and the applicant proposes to
develop the property with residential uses no higher than 3 units
per acre, the proposed request is consistent with Policy 1.11.
55
JAN 41 BOOK 5 F,�;;F .,
Ll
JAN 1419(''
BOOK
While policy 1.11 is particularly applicable to this request, other
comprehensive plan policies also have relevance. For that reason,
staff evaluated the subject request for consistency with all plan
policies. Based upon that' analysis, staff determined that the
request.is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Potential Impact on Environmental Quality
The environmental characteristics of the subject property are
suitable for low density residential development, provided that the
existing wetland on the property is taken into consideration during
site development design and provided that wetland impacts are
minimized. LDR Chapter 928, Wetland Deep Water Habitat Protection,
provides the county with regulatory control to ensure that any
wetland impacts will be minimized and mitigated, as applicable.
Therefore, staff feels that this request is consistent with the
county's conservation and environmental protection policies.
Compatibility with the Surrounding Area
It is staff's position that the proposed request to rezone the
subject property to RS -3 will result in development which will be
compatible with the surrounding area. Not only is the subject
property centrally located within the L-1 land use designation,
which allows up to 3 units per acre, but properties to the north
(Rain Tree Corner Subdivision) and east (Laurel Oaks Subdivision)
are already developed with single-family lots. While adjacent
properties to -the west and south are in active citrus development,
they also contain single-family residences. Based upon the
analysis performed, staff feels that the requested RS -3 zoning
would be compatible with the surrounding area.
Conclusion
The rezoning is compatible with the surrounding area, consistent
with the goals, objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan,
meets all applicable concurrency criteria, and has no negative
impacts on environmental quality. The subject property is located
in an area deemed suited for low density residential uses and has
met all applicable criteria. Staff support the subject request.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the analysis performed, staff recommends that the Board
of County Commissioners approve the request to rezone the subject
property to RS -3.
56
Commissioner Wheeler returned to the meeting.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, she closed
the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously adopted
Ordinance 92-03 and the accompanying zoning map from
A-1 (Agriculture) to RS -3 (Single Family
Residential, up to 3 units per acre) , for property
generally located on the north side of 8th Street,
east of 58th Avenue (Kings Highway),as recommended
by staff.
ORDINANCE 92-03 IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD
ORDINANCE NO. 92- 03
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER. COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE.
ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM A-1,
AGRICULTURAL -1 DISTRICT TO RS -3, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE
OF 8TH STREET, EAST OF 58TH AVENUE (KINGS HIGHWAY), AND
DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the
local planning agency on such matters, has held a public hearing
and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this rezoning
request; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined that
this rezoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of
Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has held a public
hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at which parties in
interest and citizens were heard;
57
JAN 14 1992 LtTOK 5 F�a, r 4,
JAN ik NM
BOOK 85 FA,,E. �(92
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning of
the following described property situated in Indian River County,
Florida, to -wit:
The East 121 acres of the West 20 acres of Tract 14, Section
9, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, according to the last
general plat of lands of the Indian River Farms Company filed
in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie
County, Florida in Plat Book 2, page 25; said land lying and
being in Indian River County, Florida. LESS AND EXCEPT land
described in O.R. Book 63, page 255, public records of Indian
River County, Florida.
Be changed from A-1, Agricultural -1 District to RS -3, Single -Family
Residential District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in
said Zoning Regulations.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, on this 14 day of January , 1992•
This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal
on the 20 day of December , 1991 for a public hearing to be
held on the 14 day of January , 1992 at which time it was
moved for ado tion by Commissioner Wheeler , seconded by
vote:
Commissioner curl ock , and adopted by the following
Chairman Carolyn R. Eggert Aye
Vice Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird AYP
Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye _
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr.yam_
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY: Z2� 4r'z� ".
Carol K. Egge Chairman
58
LYRES BROS. INC.'S REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE APPROVAL TO
CONSTRUCT A 280 -FOOT RADIO TRANSMISSION TOWER
The hour of 9:05 o'clock A. M. having passed, the Deputy
County Attorney announced that this public hearing has been
properly advertised as follows:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a J U
�JJi U
In'
the matter of d6,
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of4M,9,x,16t40 1991
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate• commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this Z o day of a ixi A.D. 19
a (Business Ma
aage )
(SEAL)
1`112tary Plel:llr:, S7r!, of Fj ,�i:•'.;i
71q� r.Orlht%hiWIC n �; .r.3 Jtu::h
it _ .. • -r--- ' --v - --
7.
.,.I ,.
JOIN
PROPOSED
t TOWER
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice of hearing to consider the grantlr� of spa.
cial exception approval for a radio transmission
tower. The subject pproperty La presently owned by
the Likes -Paso Packing Co., and Is located in see.
tion 7 Township 33 S. and Range 38 E. See the
above map for location.
A pubtic hearing at which parties in Interest and
citizens shall have an to be heardmty, will
be held by the Board of unty isskxrera of
Indian River Col tea, In County Commis -
Sion Adrnhstraton Build-
ing. located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Flor-
be on Tuesday. January 14, 19a9p2paatt 9:05 a.m.
whichAnyone who meymay be madeet this wish meeNreg wp rWteed t� o
en-
sure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is
made, which includes testimony and evidence upon
which the al Is based.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BY -s- Richard N. Bird, Orman
Dec. 20,1991 Selma
Planning Director Stan Boling commented from memo dated
January 3, 1992:
59
JAN 14 1992
GOOK FACE,
BOT
I
r
J A at
BOOKP,1;Fq 1
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Obert M. Resting AIC
Community De/vveelopment irector
THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP
Planning Director
FROM: John W. McCoy
Senior Planner, Current Development
DATE: January 3, 1992
SUBJECT: Lykes Brothers Inc.'s Request for Special Exception Use
Approval to Construct a 280' Radio Transmission Tower
It is requested that the data herein, presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of January 14, 1992.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND LOCATION:
Lykes Brothers Inc. has submitted an application for special
exception use approval to construct a 280' radio transmission tower
at 1450 118th Avenue. The subject site is approximately one mile
south of S.R. 60 and 3 miles west of I-95. The tower will be
located in the middle of several hundred acres of groves owned by
Lykes Brothers, in an area presently used as a compound for
agricultural operations. The tower will be accessory to Lykes
Brothers agricultural operations and will be used for the company's
communication needs. In conjunction with the special exception
request, the applicant has submitted a request for minor site plan
approval which has been granted by the Technical Review Committee
(TRC) subject to approval of the special exception use.
Pursuant to Section 971.05 of the LDRs, the Board of County
Commissioners is to consider the appropriateness of the requested
use based on the submitted site plan and the suitability of the
site for that use. The Board may approve, approve with conditions
or deny the special exception use. The County may attach any
conditions and safeguards necessary to mitigate impacts and to
ensure compatibility of the use with the surrounding area.
At its December 12, 1991 meeting the Planning and Zoning Commission
unanimously voted to recommend that the Board of County
Commissioners grant special exception approval. If the Board of
County Commissioners grants special exception approval, the minor
site plan approval will become effective.
ANALYSIS:
1. Size of Development Area: 6.8 acres
2. Zoning Classification: A-11 Agricultural (up to 1 unit per 5
acres)
3. Land Use Designation: AG -2, Agricultural (up to i unit per 10
acres)
60
S
4. Building Area: 280 sq. ft. (equipment building)
5. Total Impervious Area:
Existing 32,400 sq. ft.
Proposed 1,650 SQ. ft.
Total: 34,050 sq. ft.
6. Open Space Required: 80$
Provided: 85.3%
7. Traffic Circulation: The project will be accessed by 118th
Avenue, which connects to S.R. 60, and presently serves as
access for the existing agricultural facilities located on
this site.
S. Off -Street Parking Required: 1 marl space
Provided: 1 marl space
Note: It is anticipated that this project will generate
approximately one trip per month. Because the tower is an
infrequent use, the use of non -paved parking spaces has been
approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to LDR
Chapter 954.08 infrequent use parking standards.
9. Stormwater Management: The Stormwater Management Plan has
been approved by the Public Works Department.
10. Landscape Plan: The landscape plan is in conformance with
Chapter 926.
11. Utilities: None are required for this project.
12. Dedications and Improvements: None are applicable.
13. Concurrency: Since this is an accessory use to an existing
agricultural operation, no concurrency certificate is
required.
14. Specific -Land Use Criteria:
A. All towers shall have setbacks from all property lines
equal to one hundred ten (110) percent of the height of
the proposed structure. This provision may be waived or
modified upon a recommendation by the director of public
works, based upon the following criteria:
1. The designed fall radius of the tower is depicted
on the site plan and does not impact adjacent uses;
2. A certified, signed and sealed statement from a
Florida registered professional engineer states
that the tower would collapse within the designed
and specified fall radius depicted on the plans.
B. In no case shall the fall radius (one hundred ten (110)
percent of height or other approved design fall radius)
encroach upon existing off-site structures or
residentially designated property;
C. The distance of any guy anchorage or similar device shall
be at least ten (10) feet from any property line;
D. All accessory structures shall be subject to the height
restrictions provided in Accessory uses, Chapter 917;
E. If more than two hundred twenty (220) voltage is
necessary for the operation of the facility and is
present in a ground grid or in the tower, signs located
61
JAN 14 J992
BOOK. PAGE `J
F_
BOOK
every twenty (20) feet and attached to the fence or wall
shall display in large bold letters the following: "HIGH
VOLTAGE - DANGER";
F. No equipment, mobile or immobile, which is not used in
direct support of the transmission or relay facility
shall be stored or parked on the site unless repairs to
the facility are being made (applies only on A-1 zoned
property);
G. No tower shall be permitted to encroach into or through
any established public or private airport approach plan
as provided in the airport height limitations.
H. Suitable protective anti -climb fencing and a landscape
planting screening shall be provided and maintained
mound the structure and accessory attachments. Where
the first fifty (50) feet of a tower is visible to the
public, the applicant shall provide one canopy .tree per
three thousand (31000) square feet of the designated fall
radius. the trees shall be planted in a pattern which
will obscure the base area of the tower, without
conflicting with the guy wires of the tower;
I. All towers shall submit a conceptual tower lighting plan.
Louvers or shields may be required as'necessary to keep
light from shining down on surrounding properties.
Strobe lights must be used unless prohibited by other
agencies;
J. The reviewing body shall consider the impact of the
proposed tower on residential subdivisions near the
project site;
R. All property owners within six hundred (600) feet of the
Property boundary shall receive written notice;
L. Applicants shall explain in writing why no other existing
tower facility could be used to meet the applicant's
transmitting/receiving needs. An application may be
denied if existing tower facilities can be used;
M. Towers shall be designed to accommodate multiple users;
N. A condition of approval for any tower application shall
be that the tower shall be available for other parties
and interests. This shall be acknowledged in a written
agreement between the applicant and the county, or a form
acceptable to the county, that will run with the land.
All specific land use criteria will be satisfied with the
condition recommended below. 'It should be noted that the FAA
has already issued a permit for the tower.
15. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North: groves/A-1
South: groves/A-1
East: groves/A-1
West: groves/A-2
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the analysis performed, staff recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners approve the special exception use with the
following condition:
1. that the applicant execute an agreement providing for multiple
users as identified in specific land use criterion "N", as
described in item 14 of this report.
62
M
_I
JAW 14 ",-,
CURRENT
County staff spoke with FDNR officials about other possible convertible sites
such as Gifford Park, the recently acquired Oslo Road property, South County
Regional Park, and Treasure Shores Park. The FDNR rejected all the county's
potential sites because these properties are already parkland or proposed
parkland - a violation of FDNR requirements. However, a 20 acre undeveloped
tract of county -owned land with an estimated value of a minimum of $200,000
located along 58th Avenue has the potential of meeting FDNR requirements. The
FDNR needs another formal conversion proposal (i.e. appraisals, land surveys,
environmental assessments, and maps) from the County to officially determine if
the 58th Avenue site meets all the requirements.
Commissioner Bird pointed out that the 20 -acre site west of
58th Avenue has never been considered by the Parks and Recreation
Committee because we have the 40 -acre Gifford Park nearby and the
700 -acre Kiwanis Hobart Park just north on Rings Highway (58th
Avenue). He felt that particular 20 -acre site would some day make
a fine subdivision and he did not think it advisable to commit that
property for recreation purposes. Commissioner Bird could not
understand the Parks Service"s rejection of the Old Dixie landfill
site since there are any number of examples where old landfill
sites were converted into golf courses and parks. He felt we
should pursue this issue with the National Parks Service to the
point of contacting our federal senators and representatives to ask
for assistance. Commissioner Bird strongly recommended we
authorize staff to prepare the maps and aerial photos and other
documents necessary to convince Florida Department of Natural
Resources (FDNR) representatives in Atlanta that this is a logical
exchange.
Administrator Chandler agreed there are many examples of
landfill sites which have been converted to recreational purposes.
He pointed out that DNR had reviewed and approved the exchange for
the landfill site but currently is withdrawing that approval.
Commissioner Scurlock suggested that since we will have
Commissioners attending the NACO conference in Washington, D.C., we
should direct our representatives to meet with someone in DNR and
National Parks Services to make them aware of this situation.
Commissioner Bird thought we should follow the chain of
command by contacting the Atlanta officials, but it would not hurt
to make them aware we will contact other officials in Washington as
well.
Commissioner Bowman thought we should request that Senator
Graham and Representative Bacchus pursue this project in Washington
for us.
Discussion ensued about the contents of the landfill site.
Commissioner Bird recalled that we have always looked at this
site as a future recreation siteiand if it takes a certain amount
of cleanup and restoration to make it useful)weshould do it..
64
JAN 141992�`�
BOCK � E;,E 5 " y
r
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, she closed
the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
the special exception use to construct a 280 -foot
radio transmission tower with the condition that the
applicant execute an agreement providing for
multiple users as outlined in the above memo, as
recommended by staff.
WINTER BEACH CEMETERY CONVERSION PROPOSAL
County Administrator Jim Chandler made the following
presentation:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: January 3, 1992 FILE:
THRU: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
Winter Beach Cemetery
SUBJECT: Conversion Proposal
FRO Asst.to . Dowling
County AdministratorREFERENCES:
BACKGROUND
During the May 14, 1991 regular commission meeting, the Board approved giving
approximately 18 acres of Hobart Park ('valued at $200,000) to the Winter Beach
Cemetery Association for cemetery expansion and, in turn, restricting the old 30
acre Oslo Road landfill (valued at $200,000) to perpetual recreational use.
Appraisals and land surveys of both properties were completed and a formal'
conversion proposal was submitted on August 5, 1991 to the Florida Department
of Natural Resources (FDNR) for their review and approval.
Af ter the FDNR reviewed the application, the department forwarded thd- materials
to the National Park Service (NPS) in Atlanta for ultimate approval. The NPS
verbally rejected the application during late November 1991 on the basis that the
old landfill is not an appropriate site for recreation because of the potential
liability of methane gas and other harmful by-products of closed landfills. The
FDNR and the County are still waiting for a written rejection from the NPS
Washington, D.C. headquarters.
63
I
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
directed staff to prepare necessary documentation
and authorized staff to present our position to the
officials of Florida Department of Natural Resources
(FDNR) and National Park Service (NPS) in Atlanta to
try to convince them that the Old Dixie landfill
site would be appropriate for recreational use.
RAILROAD BLOCKING FOUR CROSSINGS IN GIFFORD AREA FOR ONE-HALF HOUR
Commissioner Bird requested that he be allowed to discuss an
item out of sequence at this point because he had to leave the
meeting. The Board agreed.
Commissioner Bird reported on a situation where the Florida
East Coast Railway (FEC) had blocked four crossings for more than
one-half hour, during which time the residents of Gifford and
emergency vehicles were not able to move back and forth. He had
been alerted to this fact by a telephone call from a resident.
Commissioner Bird requested a letter be sent to the president of
FEC strongly urging them make every attempt not to block all four
of those crossings at one time. He realized there are switching
procedures and handling of trains involved but if all four
crossings are blocked, the next alternative is to cross the tracks
south in Vero Beach or north at 65th Street, both of which are
great distances.
Commissioner Wheeler said if we do not have an ordinance to
control trains, we should adopt one, and Deputy County Attorney
Collins thought we could not adopt such an ordinance but would look
into it.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
directed staff to write a letter to the president of
the Florida East Coast Railway strongly urging them
not to block railroad crossings for any prolonged
periods of time.
Commissioner Bird excused himself from the meeting because he
had to attend another meeting.
AS -BUILT RESOLUTIONS AND ASSESSMENT ROLLS FOR PAVING AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS TO:
1) 42ND AVENUE BETWEEN 6TH STREET AND 8TH STREET
2) 39TH AVENUE BETWEEN 6TH STREET AND 8TH STREET
The Board reviewed memo from Michelle Gentile dated December
19, 1991:
65
iJAN A92 BOOK N3 PAGE -3001a
4 971�.
BOOK
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E
Public Works Director
and
Roger D. Cain, P.E
County Engineer
FROM: Michelle A. Genti e
Civil Engineer
SUWECT: As -Built Resolutions & Assessment Rolls for Paving and
Drainage Improvements to:
1) 42nd Avenue between 6th Street & 8th Street
2) 39th Avenue between 6th Street & 8th Street
DATE: December 19, 1991
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The paving of the above roads has been completed. The final
assessments are as follows:
1)
2)
42nd Avenue
39th Avenue
preliminary Estimates
$58,776.59 - -loot
$44,082.44 75%
(2321.35 Front Footage)
$18.99/per FF
Preliminary Estimates
$71,779.07 - 100%
$53,834.30•- 75%
(2459.31 Front Footage)
$21.89/per FF
Final Cost
$45,243.57 - 100%
$34,611.33 - 75%*
(2321.35 Front Footage)
$14.91/per FF
Final Cost
$57,769.67 - 100$
$44,193.80 - 75$*
(2459.31 Front Footage)
$17.97/per FF
*This figure includes 2% Tax Collector's fee.
The final assessment rolls have been prepared and are ready to be
delivered to the Clerk to the Board. Assessments are to be paid
within 90 days or in 2 equal installments, the first to be made
twelve months from the due date and subsequent payments to be due
yearly from the due date at an interest rate of 94$ established by
the Board of County Commissioners.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Since the final assessment to the benefitted owners is less than
the preliminary assessment roll, the only alternative presented is
to approve the final assessment rolls.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the final assessment roll and the "As -Built
Resolutions" for the paving of the above mentioned roads be
approved by the Board of County Commissioners and that it be
transferred to the Office of the Clerk to the Board for recording
in the "Assessment Lien Book" and to the Tax Collector's office for
collection.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Bird being absent) adopted Resolution
92-07 certifying "As -Built" costs for certain paving
and drainage improvements to 42nd Avenue between 6th
Street and 8th Street, as recommended by staff.
RESOLUTION NO. 92- 07
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY CERTIFYING
"AS -BUILT" COSTS FOR CERTAIN PAVING AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS TO 42ND AVENUE BETWEEN 6TH STREET AND
8TH STREET, DESIGNATED AS PROJECT NO. 8705, AND
OTHER CONSTRUCTION NECESSITATED BY SUCH PROJECT;
PROVIDING FOR FORMAL COMPLETION DATE, AND DATE FOR
PAYMENT WITHOUT PENALTY AND INTEREST.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County determined that the improvements described herein
specially benefited the property located within the boundaries as
described in this title, designated as Project No. 8705, are in
the public interest and promote the public welfare of the county;
and
WHEREAS, on October 23, 1990, the Board held a public
hearing in the Commission Chambers at which time the owners of
the property to be assessed were afforded an opportunity to
appear before the Board to be heard as to the propriety and
advisability of making such improvements; and
WHEREAS, after such public hearing was held the County
Commission adopted Resolution No. 90-161, which confirmed the
special assessment cost of the project to the property specially
benefited by the project in the amounts listed in an attachment
to that resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has certified the
actual "as -built" cost now that the project has been completed is
$14.91 per front foot, which is less than $18.99 per front foot
in the confirming Resolution No. 90-161,
RESOLUTION 92-07, IN ITS ENTIRETY WITH ATTACHED ASSESSMENT ROLL,
IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD
67
JAN 14 `1996
BOOK PA6'r r,��,�td
� J
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Bird being absent) adopted Resolution
92-08, certifying "As -Built" costs for certain
paving and drainage improvements to 39th Avenue
between 6th Street and 8th Street, as recommended by
staff.
RESOLUTION NO. 92- 08
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY CERTIFYING
"AS -BUILT" COSTS FOR CERTAIN PAVING AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS TO 39TH AVENUE BETWEEN 6TH STREET -AND
STH STREET, DESIGNATED AS PROJECT NO. 8911, AND
OTHER CONSTRUCTION NECESSITATED BY SUCH PROJECT;
PROVIDING FOR FORMAL COMPLETION DATE, AND DATE FOR
PAYMENT WITHOUT PENALTY AND INTEREST.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County determined that the improvements described herein
specially benefited the property located within the boundaries as
described in this title, designated as Project No. 8911, are in
the public interest and promote the public welfare of the county;
and
WHEREAS, on January 29, 1991, the Board held a public
hearing in the Commission Chambers at which time the owners of
the property to be assessed were afforded an opportunity to
appear before the Board to be heard as to the propriety and
advisability of making such improvements; and
WHEREAS, after such public hearing was held the County
Commission adopted Resolution No. 91-12, which confirmed the
special assessment cost of the project to the property specially
benefited by the project in the amounts listed in an attachment
to that resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has certified the
actual "as -built" cost now that the project has been completed is
$17.97 per front foot, which is less than $21.89 per front foot
in the confirming Resolution No. 91-12,
RESOLUTION 92-08, IN ITS ENTIRETY WITH ASSESSMENT ROLL,
IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD
68
ROTARY SUNRISE DOLE BICYCLE CLASSIC (SECOND ANNUAL)
The Board reviewed memo from County Traffic Engineer Michael
Dudeck dated January 7, 1992:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
Tom: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director'
l
FROM: • Michael S. Dudeck, Jr . ,
County Traffic Engineer
SUBJECT: Rotary Sunrise Dole Bicycle Classic (2nd Annual)
DATE: January 7, 1992
.... . .. . . .. . .. . . .....
Upon receipt of the initial request from the Sunrise Rotary Club
of Vero Beach to hold the 2nd Annual Bicycle Classic on County,
State, and City roadways, the County Traffic Engineer met with
members of the Rotary Club to discuss plans for the proposed April
4, 1992 race. (A separate series of shorter races will be held on
Private roadways within Grand Harbor on Sunday, April 5, 1992.)
After some discussion and field review of proposed route
modifications, it was mutually decided to use the exact same
routing as the very successful 1991 Classic.
The City of Vero Beach has already endorsed this event and both
members of the County Sheriff's Department and Traffic
Engineering Staff have reviewed all plans with the Rotary Club.
Committee. The race of 100 miles will begin and end at the Vero
Beach High School (V.B.H.S.) on 18th Street. Racers will cover
the following route three times:
1) 18th/17th Street @ V.B.H.S. over 17th Street Bridge to SRAlA
2) North on SRA1A to CR510
3) West on CR510 to 58th Avenue
4) South on 58th Avenue to Oslo Road
5) East on O®lo Road to 20th Avenue
8) North on 20th Avenue to V.B.H.S.
This route proved to be very successful last year and the "moving
envelop" of bike racers was ushered by an official lead vehicle,
a Sheriff's Car, Emergency Vehicles, Race Official vehicles as
well as Indian River Shores and City of Vero Beach Police
Vehicles.
Members of the."HAM" Operators Organizations, Vero Beach High
School R.O.T.C. Units, Traffic Engineering Division, and
Uniformed Rotary Club members were stationed all along the route
to ensure visual and radio contact and positive traffic control
at all times.
All signing materials donated by the 3M Corporation is in the
custody of Traffic Engineering and will be reused this year.
The race is scheduled to begin at approximately 8:00 AM and will
be concluded between 11:00 and 11:30 AM.
.•
BOOK 85
I
rr-- -I
A M 14 1192
J 5
BOOK 5
A great deal of advanced media publicity will be employed to
inform all citizens of the race.
I have attached copies of recently faxed.. insurance documents
covering the State of Florida, the Board of County Commissioners,
and the Florida East Coast Railroad Company as per our
requirements.
The request ,for approval of the Indian River County Board of
County Commissioners to hold the 2nd Annual Sunrise Bicycle
Classic on Saturday morning on April 4, 1992 and Sunday at Grand
'Harbor on April 5, 1992 is the proposal before the Board at this
time.• The Board may grant or deny this request.
Staff recommends that The Board of County Commissioners approved
this request based upon the success of last years event and the
fact that the exact same route and procedures are to be followed
this year.
If the Board approves this request, Traffic Engineering will
secure the final right-of-way permit from the Ft. Pierce office
of The Florida Department of Transportation.
Continuing liaison activities will be maintained between the Race
Committee, Sheriff's Department, and Traffic Engineering at
weekly morning meetings until the race is held.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Bird being absent) approved the Second
Annual Sunrise Bicycle Classic on Saturday, April 4,
1992 and Sunday, April 5, 1992 at Grand Harbor, as
recommended by staff.
INSURANCE CERTIFICATES WILL BE PLACED ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD WHEN FULLY EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
REDUCTION IN SIZE OF WATER MANAGEMENT TRACT AT GRAND HARBOR
The Board reviewed memo from Deputy County Attorney Will
Collins dated January 8, 1992:
70
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: w t— William G. Collins II - Deputy County Attorney
DATE:. January 8, 1992
SUBJECT: Reduction in Size of Water Management Tract at Grand Harbor
A portion of a stormwater management tract which was dedicated by virtue of
Plat 1, Grand Harbor, was subsequently replatted as a portion of Grand
Harbor - Plat 3 - PRD. The stormwater capability has been analyzed and a
determination made that the replatted portion was not necessary for the
functioning of the stormwater management system. The developer desires to
make express the implication that that portion of the stormwater management
tract which was replatted is no longer subject to the dedication for that
purpose. To that end, a resolution annulling that portion of the dedication
has been prepared and a "Release of Plat Restriction" has been presented
for execution.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the attached Resolution authorizing the Chairman to execute the
Release of Plat Restriction.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Bird being absent) adopted Resolution
92-09, authorizing the release of a plat
restriction, as recommended by staff.
RESOLUTION 92-09, IN ITS ENTIRETY WITH A COPY OF THE RELEASE
ATTACHED, IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD
RESOLUTION NO. 92- 09
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE RELEASE OF A PLAT
RESTRICTION AND ANNULLING A PORTION OF A
PLAT DEDICATION FOR GRAND HARBOR PLAT 1
AS RECORDED AT PLAT BOOK 121 PAGE 629
PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA.
WHEREAS, Grand Harbor - Plat 1 was platted and recorded
April 8, 1988 at Plat Book 12, Page 62 of the Public Records of Indian
River County, Florida, and
71
JAN 14 1992 BOOK 65 �J� -
I
JAN 14, MR BOOK 8_�l
WHEREAS, the, said Grand Harbor - Plat 1 had dedicated the
stormwater management tracts in the Certificate of Dedication,
paragraph 3, and had made the perpetual maintenance of the water
management tracts an obligation of Grand Harbor Community
Association, Inc., and
WHEREAS, Grand Harbor - Plat 3 - PRD was platted and
recorded on October 12, 1988 at Plat Book 12, Page 82 of the Public
Records of Indian River County, Florida, and
WHEREAS, Grand Harbor - Plat 3 - PRD is, in part, a replat
of Grand Harbor - Plat 1, which replatted portion had been shown as a
water management tract, and
WHEREAS, GHA Newport, Inc. is the owner and developer of
Grand Harbor - Plat 3 - PRD and is desirous of removing the plat
restriction for use as a water management tract on the portion of Plat 3
- PRD which was replatted from Grand Harbor - Plat 1 and is shown as
the outlined portion of Exhibit "A" attached hereto, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined
that the annulment of the dedication for the portion of the plat depicted
in Exhibit "A" will neither materially affect the right of convenient
access to lots previously conveyed under the plat of Grand Harbor -
Plat 1, nor affect the proper functioning of the stormwater management
tract;
NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT
RESOLVED BY
THE BOARD OF
' COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, that:
1.
That portion
of Grand
Harbor - Plat 1
shown as a water
management
tract which was
replatted
as a portion of
Grand Harbor -
Plat 3 - PRD and as further shown as the outlined portion of Exhibit
"All attached is hereby annulled and released from the dedication as a
stormwater management tract.
2. The Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners is
authorized to execute the release of plat restriction attached hereto as
Exhibit "B".
72
I
3. The Clerk of the Circuit Court is directed to make
proper notation of the book and page where the 'release of plat
restriction (attached hereto as Exhibit "B") is recorded in the Public
Records, on the face of Grand Harbor - Plat 1.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Scurlock and seconded by Commissioner Wheeler , and, being put
to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Vice Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed
and adopted this 14 day of January , 1992.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: / ,u
Carolyn 15 ' Eggert, Crman
190-
73
b� ij
BOOK 1 F'" ;r .Y� .
jAN 14-1992
BOOK
COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP STUDY PROGRAM
Chairman Eggert made the following presentation:
TO•Board of County January 8, 1992
• Commissioners DATE: FILE:
SUBJECT: Community- Partnership
Study Program
Carolyn R. Eggert
FROM: Chairman REFERENCES:
The Indian River County Community Partnership Study Program
is being formed under the direction of Robert Horrobin, Chairman
of the Substance Abuse Council of Indian River County. They want
to apply for .a 5 -year grant and ask Martin County to be the
comparison community.
Please approve my working with this partnership and signing
a letter made up of paragraphs 1 & 2, and a closing of the
"Sample Letter from Indian River Partnership Members."
A copy of "Renewing the Learning Process," which gives the
background of this program, is available in my office.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wheeler to approve
sending a letter in support of a Community
Partnership Study Program and the Chairman's
participation in said program.
Commissioners Bowman and Scurlock asked for clarification of
the procedures and funding of the program.
Chairman Eggert explained that this pilot program is to be
funded by the United States Public Health Service. The Substance
Abuse Council personnel will coordinate all agencies currently
involved with substance abuse, and supply information and materials
using every means of communication to work with community groups
and to reach families of very young children. Indian River County
will have an active program; another county of the same size and
demographics will not have an active program. At the end of five
years, the two counties will be compared to test the validity of
the program.
Commissioner Bowman was unsure of the participants and felt we
needed more information before we get involved.
74
Jim Granse, 36 Pine Arbor Lane, spoke in favor of the program
because it will be a combined effort of family, school, police,
churches, and other community groups working together for primary
prevention of substance abuse.
Commissioner Wheeler emphasized that there is no funding by
Indian River County, just a letter in support of the application
for a grant for the program.
COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK SECONDED the above Motion.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried 3-1, Commissioner Bird
being absent and Commissioner Bowman voting in
opposition.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded
and carried, the Board adjourned at 11:22 o'clock A. M.
ATTEST:
J. K. Barton, Clerk
75
/-� Z. ��
Carol K. Egge Chairman
BOOK 8 5 PAGE•-31Ur"