Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/19/1993r MINUTES=XTTACHED. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY; JANUARY 19, 1993 9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1840 25TH STREET VERO BEACH, FLORIDA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Richard N. Bird, Chairman (Dist. 5) John W. Tippin, Vice Chairman (Dist. 4) Fran B. Adams ( Dist. 1) Carolyn K. Eggert ( Dist. 2 ) Kenneth R. Macht ( Dist. 3 ) 9: 00 A. M. 1. CALL TO ORDER James E. Chandler, County Administrator Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board 2. INVOCATION - Rev. Elinor O'Malley Science of Mind Center 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Comm. John W. Tippin 4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS Item 7.I, Resignation of Lynn Wright, Appointment of Ann Luke - Affordable Housing Committee Item 13.B, Discussion of Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Item 13.C, Invitation to Fellsmere Frogleg Festival Item 13.E, Withdraw Discussion of Increase in Cablevision Rates 5. PROCLAMATION AND PRESENTATIONS None 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Special Meeting of 12/3/92 B. Regular Meeting of 12/15/92 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Report of Convictions. Month of Dec., 1992 B. Occupational License Taxes Collected During Month of December, 1992 (memorandum dated January 7, 1993) C. Release of Easement Request by: Robt. J. E Karen A. Vatland, Lots 2-21, Blk. 2, Casa Rio S/D ( memorandum dated January 5, 1993 ) D. Assignment of Warranty to County Grand Harbor Construction (memorandum dated January 8, 1993) E. Release of Utility Liens (memorandum dated January 7, 1993) JAN 131993 �60� i r;4� � BOOK 88 FAGF. 5 7 JAN 19 igo 7. CONSENT AGENDA (cont'd. ): F. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 009 ( memorandum dated January 13, 1993 ) G. Transfer of Golf Course Clubhouse to Park and Recreatiort (memorandum dated January 13, 1993) H. Award Bid #3044 / Emergency Generator ( memorandum dated January 11, 1993 ) S. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES None 9:05 a.m. 9. PUBLIC ITEMS A. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS Countryside Mobile Home Park (Realcor-Vero Beach Associates) Requirement to Connect to Indian River County Regional Wastewater System ( memorandum dated January 8, 1993 ) (add'i. backup provided by Mr. Robt. A. Woods of Countryside) B. PUBLIC HEARINGS Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Request to Rezone Approx. 32.5 Acres from CL and CG to PD, and Receive Concurrent Planned Development Conceptual Plan Approval (memorandum dated January 12, 1993) 10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS None 11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT None B. EMERGENCY SERVICES Approval of Renewal of Halon Fire Suppression System Maintenance Contract with Engineered Computer Environments for E911 Central Communications Center (memorandum dated January 11, 1993) C. GENERAL SERVICES None D. LEISURE SERVICES None 11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS (contd.): E. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET None F._ _ PERSONNEL None G. PUBLIC WORKS I. Sandridge Golf Course Clubhouse, Cart Storage li Maint. Bldgs. - Change Order #5 - Final Payment (memorandum dated January 7, 1993) 2. Construction Engineering and Inspection Services for AIA Widening Improvements - City of Vero Beach Project #8821 ( memorandum dated January 12, 1993 ) H. UTILITIES 1. Delegation of Authority Chapter 403.1815 Florida Statutes ( memorandum dated January 11, 1993 ) 2. Courtside S/D - 38th Square, S.W. Water Service Project - Resolution IV Final Assessment Roll (memorandum dated January 4, 1993) 12. COUNTY ATTORNEY None 13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS A. CHAIRMAN RICHARD N. BIRD 1. Invitation to Tour the Jail Facility ( letter dated January 11, 1993 ) 2. Request for Funding for Council of 100 ( letter dated January 13, 1993 ) (additional back-up provided separately) B. VICE CHAIRMAN JOHN W. TIPPIN C. COMMISSIONER FRAN B. ADAMS D. COMMISSIONER CAROLYN K. EGGERT JAN 19 1993 BOOK 88 F,��F 568 BOOKJAN 19 13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS (contd. ). E. COMMISSIONER KENNETH R. MACHT Increase In Cablevislon Rates ( memorandum dated January 13, 1993 ) 14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS A. EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT None B. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT I. Approval of Minutes - Meeting of 12/15/92 2. Biohazardous Waste Collection Service ( memorandum dated January 7, 1993 ) 15. 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. ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION FOR THIS MEETING MAY CONTACT THE COUNTY'S AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) COORDt-NATOR AT 567-8000 X 408 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF MEETING. Tuesday, January 19, 1993 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 19, 1993, at 9:00 A. M. Present were Richard N. Bird, Chairman; John W. Tippin, Vice Chairman; Fran B. Adams; Carolyn R. Eggert; and Kenneth R. Macht. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; and Patricia Held, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order. Commissioner John W. Tippin led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS Commissioner Macht requested that Item 13.E. be withdrawn. Commissioner Eggert requested the addition of Item 7.I., the resignation of Lynn Wright and the appointment of Ann Luke on the Affordable Housing Committee. Commissioner Tippin requested addition of Item 13:B., a discussion of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. Commissioner Adams requested addition of Item 13.C. regarding an invitation. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously added and deleted the above items on the Agenda. Later in the meeting Commissioner Eggert requested that Item 13.A.2., regarding the Request for Funding the Council of 100, be deferred and channelled through the Economic Development Committee. JAN 191993 BOOK 88 FADE 5 i 6 JAN 19 1993 BOOK 88 pnr 571 APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of December 3, 1992. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board approved the Minutes of the Special Meeting of December 3, 1992 as written. The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 15, 1992. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Tippin, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 15, 1992 as written. CONSENT AGENDA A. Report of Convictions Month of December 1992 The report of Convictions for the Month of December 1992 is on file in the office of Clerk to the Board. B. Occupational License Taxes Collected - Month of December 1992 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously accepted the report from Tax Collector Karl Zimmermann summarizing Occupational License Taxes collected during the month of December, 1992. TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Karl Zimmermann, Tax Collector SUBJECT: Occupational License DATE:: January 7, 1993 Pursuant to Indian River County Ordinance No. 86-59, please be informed that $4,712.78 was collected in occupational license taxes during the month of December 1992, representing the issuance of 179 licenses. 2 v C. Release of Easement Reauest by Robert J. and Karen A. Vatland Casa Rio Subdivision, Lots 2-21, Block_a The Board reviewed memo from Code Enforcement Officer Charles Heath dated January 5, 1993: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE: 4�r' Obert M. atin , AICP Community Development 4rec�tt�or THROUGH: Roland M. DeBlois, AICP9y Chief, Environmental Planning & Code Enforcement - FROM: ,/ Charles W. Heath ow- Code Enforcement Officer DATE: January 5, 1993 SUBJECT: RELEASE OF EASEMENT REQUEST BY: Robert J. Karen A. Vatland Lots 2 through 21, Block 2, Casa Rio Subdivision It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of January 19, 1993. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: The County has been petitioned by Robert J. & Karen A. Vatland, owners of the subject property, for the release of the common rear lot five (5) foot utility easements of Lots 2 through 21, Block 2, Casa Rio Subdivision. It is the petitioner's intention to combine the lots into a single parcel, and to come into compliance with all setback requirements of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of the County. The current zoning classification of the subject property is CG, General Commercial District. The Land Use Designation is Commercial/Industrial. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS: The request had been review by Southern Bell Telephone Company, City of Vero Beach Power Company, United Artists Cable Corporation, the Indian River County Utilities Department and the Road & Bridge and Engineering Divisions. Based upon their reviews, it is staff's position that there would be no adverse impact to utilities being supplied to Lots 2 through 21, Block 2, Casa Rio Subdivision. 3 JAN 19 1993 BOOK ®8 FAGE 572 r JAN 191993 RECOMMENDATION: BOOK 88 Pnu 573 Staff recommends that the Board, through the adoption of a resolution, release the common rear lot five (5) foot utility easements of Lots 2 through 21, Block 2, Casa Rio Subdivision, being the westerly five (5) feet of Lots 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10, & 11, and the easterly five (5) feet of Lots 12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20 & 21, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 81 of the Public Records of.Indian River County, Florida. and ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously, adopted Resolution 93-16, releasing easements as described therein, as recommended by staff. RESOLUTION NO. 93-16 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA WHEREAS, Indian River County has easements as described below, WHEREAS, the retention of those easements serves no public Purposes, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida that: This. release of easement is executed by Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose mailing address is 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, Grantor, to Robert J. & Karen A. Vatland, Grantees, their successors in interest, heirs and assigns, whose mailing address is P.O. Box 970, Vero Beach, Florida 32961, as follow: Indian River County does hereby abandon all right, title, and interest that it may have in the following described easements: the common rear lot five (5) foot utility easements of Lots 2 through 21, Block 2,.Casa Rio Subdivision, being the westerly five (5) feet of Lots 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 & 11', -and the easterly five (5) feet of Lots 12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20 & 21, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 81 of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida 4 THIS RESOLUTION was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert , seconded by Commissioner Adams , and adopted on the 19 day of January , 1993, by the following vote: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Commissioner Richard N. Bird AYe Commissioner John Tippin Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Awe Commissioner Fran B. Adams AXe this The Chairman declared the resolution duly passed and adopted 19 day of January , 1993. BOARD OF COUNTY, COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By Richard N. Bird C?iaijZmari D. Assignment of Warranty to County - Grand Harbor Construction The Board reviewed memo from County Attorney Charles Vitunac dated January 8, 1993: TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney DATE:- January 8, 1993 RE: ASSIGNMENT OF WARRANTY TO COUNTY GRAND HARBOR CONSTRUCTION The Development Order for Grand Harbor required that certain utility Improvements be constructed. The contractor has issued a warranty bond in favor of Grand Harbor and has refused to make the -bond run in favor of Indian River County. Therefore, Grand Harbor, at our office's suggestion, has agreed to assign the Maintenance Bond to the County. The attached agreement is this Assignment and requires the signature of the County to accept it. If for some reason the Assignment fails and there is warranty work to be performed, Grand Harbor has agreed to enforce the Maintenance Bond according to its terms. REQUESTED ACTION: The Board authorize the Chairman of the Board to execute the Assignment. 5 SAN 19 1999 BdOK ©8 F.+;A. bi -7 rJAN 9 1993 BOOK 88 ma 575 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved the Assignment of Rights Under Maintenance Bond with GHA Grand Harbor, Ltd., as recommended by staff. SAID ASSIGNMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD E. Release of Utility Liens The Board reviewed memo from Lea R. Keller, CLA, dated January 7, 1993: TO: `.BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: Lea R. Keller, CLA, County Attorney's Office DATE: January 7, 1993 RE: RELEASE OF UTILITY LIENS The attached lien releases are in proper form for the Board of County Commissioners to Authorize the Chairman to sign them so that they can be recorded. They are as follows: (1) Satisfactions of Impact Fee Extension In the names of : _ BARKER BRENNAN BRYSON CONN FULLER LEE McCALL NOWAK YEMMA (Z) Releases of liens from Rockridge Sewer Project in the names of : SCHLITT/SIMKO ENGLE REQUEST: The Board approve the releases and authorize the Chairman to sign. 6 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved the satisfactions and releases of liens as listed in staff's memorandum. SAID SATISFACTIONS AND RELEASES ARE RECORDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY F. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 009 The Board reviewed memo from OMB Director Joe Baird dated January 13, 1993: TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: January 13, 1993 SUBJECT: MISCELLANEOUS BUDGET AMENDMENT 009 CONSENT AGENDA FROM: Joseph A. Bair OMB Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The attached budget amendment is to appropriate funding for the following: 1. At the final budget hearing the Board of County Commissioners approved $90,000 for the Barber Street Sports Complex which was to be transferred from M.S.T.U. contingencies. The entry was not done on the budget program before it was entered into the General Ledger, therefore, the attached entry needs to be done. 2. The Board of County Commissioners approved funding $5,000 towards the operational expense of the Dental Van that was purchased by the HRS State Health Department. The attached entry transfers the $5,000 to the Health Department budget from General Fund contingencies. 3. Sheriff Wheeler has requested that up to $240,000 of the Sheriffs Operational budget be transferred to capital for the purchase of vehicles. Since this is just a classification change and does not increase or decrease the overall budget, .no entry is required; however, the change of classification must be approved by the .Board of County Commissioners. 4. Property Appraiser, David Nolte, is requesting a Budget Amendment for the 2% salary increase (consistent with the Board of County Commissioners) at a cost of $24,350 in total. The General Fund portion will be $20,171.50. In reviewing the request, we noticed the Property Appraiser's original budget was $1,955 more than we had shown at budget time due to changes that were made by the Department of Revenue. The General Fund portion of the $1,955 is $1,628. The total budget entry that will be needed is $21,800 ($1,628 + $20,172) from General Fund contingencies. 7 J A� 9 1993BOOK F•,G� 57 r JAN 19 1991 BOOK 88 FACE 57fl 5. At the meeting of January 12, 1993 the Board of County Commissioners approved a Special Election. With an estimated cost of $30,000. The attached entry transfers $30,000 from the General Fund contingencies. RECOMMENDATION Board of County Commissioners approved Budget Amendment 009 and authorize the Chairman to sign the Property Appraiser's Budget Amendment in the amount of $24,350 for the Department of Revenue. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved Budget Amendment 009 and authorized the Property Appraiser's Budget Amendment #1 in the amount of $24,350 for the Department of Revenue, as recommended by staff. TO: Members of the Board of County Comm&,ssioners FROM: Joseph A. Bair OMB Director SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER: 009 DATE: January 13. 1993 8 OR -404 PA Request Number U. 02M9 PROPERTYAPPRAISER WA 1 BUDGET TRANSFER/AMENDMENT eR County Indian River OFFICIAL David C. Nolte DATE 1/6/93 Year ending September 30, 19 93 t icia •*:+►**•♦stst*••s••r•tit♦��••**t*••wt•�+tf*•r******:+t�**ses•iesfsttt**•+e*r+:�*ner**••**•t*r• 9 BOOK 88 NMU 5 8 JAN 199j -A r JAS 191991 BOOK 88 PA, t 579 G. Transfer of Golf Course Clubhouse to Park and Recreation The Board reviewed memo from OMB Director Joe Baird dated January 13, 1993: TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: January 13, 1993 SUBJECT: TRANSFER OF GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE TO PARK AND RECREATION CONSENT AGENDA FROM: Joseph A. Bair OMB Director At the request of the Board of County Commissioners the old Golf Course Clubhouse was moved to Donald McDonald Park for use by the Parks and Recreation Department The Clubhouse had a net book value of $34,388.71 in the Golf Course enterprise fund and will be now in the General Fund, a governmental fund. Since the transfer was made without any compensation from the General Fund or M.S.T.U., there will be a loss from the "Sale of an Asset" of $34,388.71 reflected on the Golf Course financial statements for this transaction. RECOMMENDATION Board of County Commissioners approve the transfer of the Clubhouse from the Golf Course Enterprise fund to the General Fund as a donation. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved the transfer of the old Golf Course Clubhouse to Donald McDonald Park and accounting transfers as set out in staff's memorandum. H. Award Bid #3044 - Emergency Generator The Board reviewed memo from Purchasing Manager Fran Boynton Powell dated January 11,.1993: 10 a DATE: anuary c 11, . 1993 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director Department of General Servic FROM: Fran Boynton Powell, Purchasing Manager Ae SUBJ: Award Bid 13044/Emergency Generator Buildings and Grounds BACKGROUND INFORMATION Bid Opening Date: Advertising Dates: Specifications Mailed To: Replies: TAW Power Systems Pompano Beach, FL Cummins SE Power Orlando, FL All Power Services Ft Pierce, FL Alturdyne Deltona, FL TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID: December 9, 1992 November 18, 25, 1992 Twenty -Six Vendors Four (4) Vendors BID TABULATION $ 26,449.00 $ 27,118.00 $ 27,275.00 $ 34,055.00 $ 26',449.00 SOURCE of FUNDS: Bldg Opr-County Buildings Building Alterations Account BUDGETED AMOUNT: $ 50,000.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the bid be awarded to TAW Power Systems as the lowest, most responsive and responsible bidder meeting specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously awarded Bid #3044 for Emergency Generator to TAW Power Systems in the amount of $26,449.00 as the lowest, most responsive and responsible bidder meeting specifications, as recommended by staff. it 9004( 88 FADE 35u Fr'_ -I JAN 19 1993 BOOK 88 PAGE. 5,81 I Resignation of Lynn Wright from and Appointment of Ann Luke to the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously accepted, with regret, the resignation of Lynn Wright from the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, and the appointment of Ann Luke to that committee. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEM - COUNTRYSIDE MOBILE HOME PARR (REALCOR-VERO BEACH ASSOCIATES) REQUIREMENT TO CONNECT TO INDIAN RIVER COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER SYSTEM Utility Services Director Terry Pinto made the following presentation: DATE: JANUARY 8, 1993 - TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PINT DIRECTOR OF UTI TYI I ES PREPARED AND STAFFED HARRY E. ASH BY: ASSISTANT DIRE OR OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: COUNTRYSIDE MOBILE_.HOME PARK (REALCOR-VERO BEACH ASSOCIATES) REQUIREMENT TO CONNECT TO INDIAN RIVER COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER SYSTEM BACKGROUND In February 1980, Indian River County completed its 201 Facilities Plan, which set forth the urban service areas to be serviced by County water and wastewater. The location of the Countryside Mobile Home Park (CMHP)(then known as Village Green) was designated as a part of the urban service area to be serviced with County water and wastewater. In September 1980, the County, by Resolution 80-88, gave Florida Atlantic Associates, the developer of CMHP, a nonexclusive franchise for water and sewer service, with the understanding that the water and wastewater plants would be temporary facilities (copy attached). In July 1981, the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council issued its. Development of Regional Impact Assessment Report (copy of report summary attached) for the CMHP. The report acknowledged the IRC 201 Facilities Plan, that the CMHP location was included as a designated service area, and that it was anticipated a wastewater transmission line -serving the service area would be available by 1990. The report stated that Council policy was as follows, "The - 12 use of package sewage treatment plants should be discouraged. In areas where package plants are the only reasonable alternative to sewage disposal, they should be considered a temporary facility ... In line with Council policy, the package plant should be regarded as a temporary facility until a regional facility becomes available." On April 3, 1985, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) authorized the County Attorney to take whatever steps necessary to resolve disputed portions of Village Green (CMHP) franchise, including permission to file for declaratory relief, and also determine if we have the right to require the entire park to hook up to the County system (copy attached). On June 5, 1985, the County adopted Resolution 85-61 transferring and amending Resolution 80-88 from Florida Atlantic Associates to Realcor-Vero Beach Associates, including an agreement relating to wastewater treatment services between the County and Realcor-Vero Beach Associates (copy attached), which states in Section 3, "Developer agrees that it will connect the project to the County wastewater system within 60 days of written notification from County to Developer. Developer will pay the full cost of such connection, including but not limited to engineering, construction of linea, lift stations, and all other necessary appurtenances to the point of connection determined by County" (copy attached). A copy of the transcript of the June 5, 1985 BCC meeting is attached. On October 10, 1986, Utilities notified Realcor that wastewater was available to Countryside North and to prepare to connect to the County system -within 90 days. Various correspondence and actions transpired between October 1986 and 1988 concerning payment of franchise, impact, and renewal and replacement fees as required under the franchise and June 5, 1985 Agreement. Also, in 1987, Countryside South (287 lots) was connected to the County water and wastewater system. On April 12, 1990, Utilities notified Realcor to connect to the County wastewater system within 60 days as outlined in the June 5, 1985 agreement (copy attached). Subsequently, various correspondence between County, Realcor, and Realcor-'s engineer occurred on May 8, 11, 24, and 29, and on June 10 and 11, 1990, regarding the required force main connection point. After required notice to connect within 60 days was given on April 12, 1990, and with Utilities committed to provide the capacity required, Utilities began monthly billing for base facility charges as required under its ordinance. The first billing period was for the period of June 13 - July 12, 1990. No payments have been received to date, and the current balance as of December 31, 1992, including penalties and interest, is $171,728.84 (copy attached). On August 27, 1990, Utilities served notice to Realcor of failure to comply with the April 12, 1990 notice to connect, and requested submittal of a time schedule for completion of the wastewater connection. The Department received no response. There was various correspondence attorney, Samuel A. Block, on concerning the required point of between Utilities and Realcor's October 2, 22, and 25, 1990, connection. On February 22, 1991, a memo was sent from Harry Asher to Charles Vitunac, County Attorney, requesting his office to proceed with all legal options due to lack of response by Countryside to connect. 13 LJA N J 9 1993 600K ®� F',1;F, 592 JAN 19 1993 BOOK 88 PAGE5,53 On March 13, 1991, a memo was sent from the County Attorney to the BCC regarding the Countryside franchise. On March 19, 1991, Mr. Ed Nelson gave a presentation to the BCC concerning the Countryside franchise. After that presentation, the BCC passed a motion "that the Board abide by the 1985 agreement; give an accounting from 1985 to date; and maintain the Commission"s position to enforce the 1985 agreement and those impact fees, but take no position on whether the park owner can pass on those fees and charges to the residents" (copy attached). On July 1, 1991, the County was notified by Samuel Block that the CMHP was prepared to connect its sewer system with the County wastewater system (copy attached). On January 21, 1992, after further assurances of connection, and at the request of CMHP for an extension of the final payment of all wastewater impact fees from 1995 to 2002 and an extension of the requirement to connect to County water from 1995 to 2002, the BCC approved a Modification to the June 5, 1985 agreement (copy attached), acknowledging and approving the use of approximately $150,000 in escrowed funds paid by Florida Atlantic to be used for the cost of connecting the CMHP to the County system (it is estimated that this will cover the connection costs), extending the final payment of all wastewater fees from 1995 to 2002, and extending the date required for connection to County water from 1995 to 2002. On March 23, 1992, Utilities advised the County Attorney, by memo, of lack of action by CMHP toward connection and payment of monthly base facility -fees. On May 20, 1992, the County received a copy of the FDER Permit to CMHP for construction of the.facilities required to connect (copy attached). On June 22, 1992, Utilities advised the County Attorney, by memo (copy attached), of the May 21, 1992, meeting between Utilities and Realcor, at which Realcor advised of their receipt of the FDER Permit for construction and that they had received bids for the construction of the project and would submit the low bid to County for review and approval. As of the June 22, 1992 date, after repeated calls to Realcor, no further action toward connection had occurred. Utilities recommended proceeding with legal action at the County Attorney's convenience to force connection. On June 24 and 26, 1992, Utilities advised the County Attorney and County Administrator, by memo, of correspondence received from Samuel Block concerning Countryside wastewater billing (copy attached). On December 22, 1992, the Department received a copy of the response by-FDER in regard to the renewal of the operating permit for the Countryside wastewater treatment plant (copy attached). The response stated, "The Department has determined that this facility is a threat to the Indian River. Therefore, in accordance with the requirements of the Indian River Lagoon Protection Act (Chapter 90-262, Laws of Florida), it will be necessary to abandon this facility and connect to the regional centralized sewer system." On January 7, 1993, the Department conducted its quarterly franchise utility inspection of the CMHP facilities; a copy of the inspection report mailed on January 8, 1993, is attached. 14 ANALYSIS As of January 4, 1993, wastewater impact fees have been paid for 184 ERUs (lots) of the 648 ERUs in the CMHP (summary attached), as required by Resolution 85-61. Wastewater impact fees continue to be collected from CMHP as permits are pulled for new units or units are transferred as required by Resolution 85-61. Pursuant to the above Resolution 85-61 and the Agreement Relating to Wastewater Treatment Services between the County. and Realcor- Vero Beach Associates, CMHP was sent the 60 -day notification to connect on April 12, 1990. The connection has been designed and was permitted with FDER on May 5, 1992. The Department has received various assurances from CMHP and their attorney of its intent to connect, but the connection has not been made as of this date. Operating violations have occurred at this facility. On May 5, 1992, during the DepartmentIs scheduled franchise inspection of the wastewater treatment plant, sludge was observed spilling into the chlorine contact chamber and then into the holding pond. Both CMHP and FDER were notified of the violation and the problem was corrected (copy attached). On December 22, 1992, the Department received a copy of the response by FDER in regard to the renewal of the operating permit for the Countryside wastewater- treatment plant. The response stated, "The Department has determined that this facility is a threat to the Indian River. Therefore, in accordance with the requirements of the Indian River Lagoon Protection Act (Chapter 90- 262, Laws of Florida), it will be necessary to abandon, this facility and connect to the regional centralized sewer system." As displayed by.the many actions above, the Department of Utility Services believes that the County has worked with this developer to the greatest extent possible by agreeing -to the use of approximately $150,000 of escrowed funds to construct the connection, extension of time for payment of fees, and connection to the County water system. The Department of Utility Services believes that the County Resolutions and Agreements for this development should be enforced immediately. RECOMMENDATION: The Department of Utility Services recommends the Board of County Commissioners authorize the County Attorney to pursue immediately all necessary actions necessary to: (a) require CMHP compliance with IRC Resolutions and Agreements between IRC and Realcor-Vero Beach Associates requiring connection of the Countryside Mobile Home Park to the County regional wastewater system, and (b) collection of any and all charges due. Chairman Bird led discussion regarding the following letter from Florida Department of Environmental Regulation: 15 JANv r JAS 19 1993 BOOK 88 Pg F. J Florida Department of Environmental Regulation Central Distri= i 3319 MWdm Houk+ 4 sure 232 • of wilt pkwk t 3Z033767 Lawson CMI°'' 600MI °r Cam1 R1. Enrwom Sm�y December 16, 1992 STEVEN D VAUGHN PE 568 E PORT ST LUCIE BOULEVARD PORT ST LUCIE FL 34984 r r% ramirmil DEC 22 1992 OCD—DW-92'0917 Indian River County —CS Countryside of Vero Beach, 5 T P #2 Dear Mr. Vaughn: This in response to your December 10, 1992 letter addressed to Mr. Peter F. Dentice of this office, in regards to the renewal of the operating permit for the above referenced wastewater facility. The Department has determined that this facility is a threat to the Indian River. Therefore, in accordance with the requirements of the Indian River Lagoon Protection Act (Chapter 90-262, Laws of Florida), it will be necessary to abandon this facility and connect to the regional centralized sewer system. Should you have any further concerns, please contact Mr. Lee Miller or me at (407) 894-7555. Sincerely,' -Christianne C. Ferraro, P.E. Program Manager Domestic Waste Chairman Bird asked whether that letter is a mandate which would leave the Commission with no option to grant the requested extension for connection to the County wastewater system. County Attorney Charles Vitunac advised that since the State requires the connection, the County does not have the option to grant an extension. Now it is a matter of which governmental agency will force Countryside to connect: the County, through our procedures, or the DER through their procedures. Attorney Vitunac also reported that in a telephone conversation the previous Friday, Mr. Lee Miller of DER told Director Pinto that DER will not issue an operating permit for Countryside to continue their treatment plant. Countryside must connect to a public wastewater treatment system. Attorney Vitunac pointed out that there is no question of impact fees. The issue of impact fees was settled in 1985 giving Countryside 1O years to pay the impact fees, and several months 0V ago the County extended that to the year 2002. As the mobile homes change ownership, a certain number of impact fees are paid per year and that procedure will continue whether they connect to the County wastewater treatment system or not. It is strictly a matter of the monthly sewer bill because the Regional Wastewater System monthly charge is higher than what the developer is charging those people. Commissioner Macht asked, and Attorney Vitunac clarified that the Board has only one decision: whether we want to initiate the action here or let the State do it. Attorney Vitunac believed that this letter is the final word, unless Countryside files a challenge to the authority of the DER. - Commissioner Adams asked about the timing of the requirement to connect, and Director Pinto responded that Countryside's operating permit will expire in February 1993 and DER wants them to connect immediately. The timing for connection would probably depend on the time needed for construction. Director Pinto further explained that the permits and. -design are approved and ready for construction. Edson Nelson, immediate past president and now vice president of the Countryside North Homeowners' Association, Inc., came before the Board and described the conditions at that mobile home park. He stated that homeowners are not able to sell their homes at full value and sometimes are leaving the home to the developer. He blamed this on the bureaucracy of government which puts demands on the developer which affects the homeowners. He recounted the promises of the Commission to bring the County out of the dark ages with public utilities. Instead the County created a monster which must be fed. He related that two years ago he spent thousands and thousands of hours going through the financial records of the County and that those records were "atrocious" and "a financial disaster." Mr. Nelson recalled that the original plan was to replace septic tanks and package plants in areas where the residents voluntarily approached the County to do so. He -stated that Countryside never asked to be connected to the County Utilities System, and he asked that the County leave them alone. He accused the County of ignoring neighborhoods which are on septic tanks and pursuing the replacement of package plants based on the requirements of the DER. He did not believe the County's contention that connection to regional utilities would increase the value of their property. He referred to a packet which he distributed to the Board members earlier, containing newspaper articles detailing the counterproductive effects of impact fees in Hillsborough County compared to the positive results in the economy in Jacksonville, which does not and will never impose impact fees. 17 JAN 191993 BOOK 88 PAGE � r JAN 19 1993 BOOK 88 FAl� 58 He felt that Indian River County should eliminate impact fees. That action would jar the Utilities Department, but he felt it is a necessary move. He counted on the new Board with three new members to make long overdue changes and lead the County in a different direction. Mr. Nelson considers Countryside North as extremely unique from any other manufactured home community, not only in Vero Beach but the entire state of Florida. He pointed out that the wastewater treatment plant at Countryside originally was designed to handle twice as many homes as it actually handles, and therefore is not being used to its full capacity. It has been in use for 11-1/2 years, is in good operating shape, and .should last another 20 years. Mr. Nelson personally monitors the plant with the assistance of the County Environmental Health Department. Mr. Nelson and his neighbors realized that they paid more for their homes than they were actually worth because the cost included water, sewer, garbage, maintenance and all the amenities of the mobile home park. He reminded the Commissioners that the homeowners appeared before the Commission in 1985 -to fight for and defeat a scaled-down site modification request. They also appeared before the Commission regarding impact fees. 'Those fees were paid by the developer but not in accordance with the ordinance, resolutions and franchise agreements. He stated that County employees were negligent in collecting the proper amounts for impact fees. He contended that there is a second -time -around collection of impact fees on the resale of the homes, which is a detriment to the homeowners. Mr. Nelson cited his version of approximate monies paid to the County by Countryside North to date, and accused the County of collecting fees more than once. He calculated that with interest on the accounts, over a 12 -year period Countryside Mobile Home Park (CMHP) has contributed at least three-quarters of a million dollars to the County. If the County had been efficient in the collection of proper fees up to June 5, 1985, this amount today would be in the vicinity, plus or minus, of two million dollars. He reported that in Vero Beach we have about 9,000 residents in about 5,000 mobile homes who add much to the economy of the area and who demand few services. He felt that CMHP should not be forced into a utility service which is no different from what they already have and which would cost three times what they already pay. Mr. Nelson recited the capacity in the treatment plant versus actual use. He predicted that the park would never exceed the present 596 homes because of this controversy and, therefore, the park would never use the full capacity of that treatment plant. He also felt that a mobile home should be allowed 18 r a M 1/2 ERU (Equivalent Residential Unit) rather than a minimum of 1 ERU because their records show an individual home does not use 1 full ERU of capacity. That would leave capacity which the County could sell to other customers. He urged the Board to listen to and seriously consider the facts, the quotes, the suggestions and the requests from the grassroots people who rely on the Board to represent them. The Board should then comprehend their situation, give equal weight to each side, and base the decision on personal knowledge, conscience, judgment and conclusions. Mr.�Nelson referred to the 201 facility plan, the temporary nature of package plants and the County's need to comply with DER requirements in order to obtain federal grants for the regional utilities system. He stated that everyone was aware of the temporary nature of the package plants based on ordinances, resolutions, and agreements but the County did not abide by every detail of those ordinances, resolutions and agreements. Rather they chose to enforce certain clauses and ignored the rest. Mr. Nelson addressed the letter from the DER which stated that CMHP is a threat to the Indian River Lagoon. He argued that CMHP is 9 miles from the Indian River Lagoon, and he asked the Board to allow the homeowners to fight that issue with the DER. They want to make DER prove that the park is a threat to the lagoon 9 miles away. Mr. Nelson expected litigation because a change from the private system to a public system will create additional costs to the homeownersin violation of their leases. Mr. Nelson urged the Commissioners to make their decision based on the fact that there would be no advantage to a change; more study must go into the pros and cons of impact fees and so- called reserved plant capacity; the cost of public service should not be thrice the cost of a private system; CMHP has never voluntarily reserved capacity in any County system; CMHP has a perfectly good, well -operating and well-maintained plant, working at a little over 40 percent of design capability with many years of life left;, there is not and never has been any environmental health problem; not one person in CMHP favors connection to the County system; and on December 15, 1992 County Attorney Vitunac verified that the Commission does have the right to legally change dates for connection to the County system. Mr. Nelson asked the Board to make its decision and let the mobile home owners fight the DER, and the Board's decision would be contingent upon the homeowners' final success over the DER. The homeowners agree with the park owner in the request for the extension of the date for connection to the County wastewater system to coincide with the date for water connection to the year 2002. 19 JAN 191993 BOOK 88 PAGE 588 fflmllum BOOK 88 FACE g, 559 Commissioner Eggert was concerned because other agencies are involved in the requirement for connection. The Department of Community Affairs is involved through the approval process of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. The mobile home park was approved as a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) on the condition that it would be hooked up to the regional wastewater facility. Mr. Nelson responded that the treatment plant at Countryside is in good shape. The year 2002 would be the limit and the park owner should not be allowed an extension beyond that date. Commissioner Eggert pointed out that the DER can impose penalties on the County in the form of withholding funds, and Commissioner Macht cited the problem in the City of Vero Beach and the penalties imposed for ignoring an environmental order. Mr. Nelson felt the Board should make the decision to extend the time for wastewater connection to coincide with water connection in the year 2002, and allow the residents to contend with the DER. Arthur Aker, resident of Countryside, Number 915, stated he has lived there for 11 years. He brought to the Board's attention the fact that the buyers of used homes in Countryside North are told by management that paying the sewer impact fee is a condition of sale and that the full amount must be paid before a new lease is signed. He contended that their leases do not call for an impact fee. There is also a water impact fee, which brings the total to about $5,000. A buyer of resale property is not going to pay that. It is going to have to come off the selling price. Mr. Aker stated that when Realcor purchased the park in 1985 they sent a letter to all residents indicating that there was no need to amend the lease obligations. Now Realcor is saying that the fee must be paid as a condition of sale and to obtain a new lease. Attorney Vitunac advised that none of the County agreements require the owners to collect anything from the tenants. Some agreements require that the park owner pay the impact fee to the County at the time of a resale, but there is no requirement to get that fee from the mobile home tenant. That requirement is a matter of contract or bargaining between the tenant and the park owner. It has nothing to do with the County. Mr. Aker was sure that there is no contract between the residents and the park owner that payment of the impact fee is a condition of sale. This is the owner's interpretation. Mr. Aker further informed the Board that Countryside North Mobile Home Park is for sale and has been for sale for a long time. He thought that the extension is Realcor's way of avoiding his obligations as spelled out in the contract. He described it as a delaying tactic 20 M M M whereby a future owner will ask for another extension. He urged the Board to connect the system and force Realcor to pay the fee as required by the contract. Samuel Nuss, owner of Lots 419 and 274 in Countryside North, supported. Mr. Nelson's argument. He related that he placed an advertisement in the newspaper to sell his home and he received 5 calls in response to the ad. The callers asked where the mobile home was located. When they learned it was in Countryside North, they did not want any part of it because of the controversy. Attorney Sam Block, representing Realcor, the owner of Countryside North, stated that Realcor has acknowledged the requirements of the franchise agreement. The park owner never said, "We will not connect." This request is for an extension of the required connection to the County's wastewater system to the year 2002, which is the same time the water lines will be connected to the County's system. Mr. Block reported that the tenants at Countryside contacted the park owner and said they cannot afford the increase from $8 to $28 per month for wastewater service. Mr. Block predicted that the tenants and the park owner will continue to resist this connection and he thought it would be better to avoid the expected litigation. He noted that the Commissioners have the discretion to extend the time of connection. He pointed out that DER approved the operating permit twice before. Mr. Block felt there are areas that can be explored including the Lagoon Protection -Act which was mentioned in the DER letter of December 16. He was sure that as the mobile homes are resold and turned over, all the impact fees will be paid by 2002. In the meantime, the people living there now have certain expectations and abilities to pay, and the park owner supports the position of Mr. Nelson and the homeowners. Lincoln Nystrom, resident of Countryside, noted that the original owner and the present owner agreed to connect to the water and sewer systems. With that knowledge, leases were signed providing free water and sewer to the residents during their lifetime. The conclusion to be drawn is that the park owner was not caught off guard. It is the park owner's obligation to pay the fees and not the obligation of each individual resident of the park. Mr. Nystrom also pointed out that a number of people living in Countryside who are second owners have paid the impact fee and they have lifetime leases from the current park owner providing free water and sewer service. George Hinlicky, homeowner at Countryside North, noted that most of the arguments have been geared to the personal feelings of the speakers, but that is not the question before the Board. The 21 �A �� 1�9� BOOK �� PAGE��:� BOOK 88 PAGE County Attorney pointed out that either the DER or the Commission is responsible for enforcing the agreement. He noted that the Board heard that most of the people in attendance were in favor of an extension and would convey that feeling to the DER. He urged the Board to convey to the DER that the Board also supports an extension. Robert Woods, 8775 20th Street, Lot 541, Countryside North, addressed the issue of payment of the impact fee. He pointed out that the leases state that the residents do not have to pay for water, sewer, garbage and so forth. When a resident originally paid for the home, that price included those amenities. When Realcor purchased the mobile home park in 1985, a letter was sent to each resident stating that Realcor would honor the leases of the residents. Now they are demanding that the residents pay the impact fees. That is not right because it means the residents are paying twice. He also pointed out that the reasoning behind the lifetime leases was that the residents would not live for more than 10 years. Mr. Woods reported that he has been there for 11 years. He felt that Realcor is taking advantage of the, residents. He cited the increases in his rent over the past 11 years and pointed out that if he sells his home or dies, the next owner will pay a much higher monthly rent. He predicted that if Realcor sells the park, the next owner could come before the Board in 5 years and ask for another extension. He understood that the Commissioners have a serious obligation. He calculated that the utilities could cost him an additional $600 per year, and while nobody wants to go to court, he would be willing to contribute $100 or even $200 to support a lawsuit to see who is right because he did not think any jury would agree that the residents are obligated to pay the impact fees. Commissioner Adams led discussion regarding the costs and timing of construction of the utilities, and Director Pinto responded that the estimated cost of $130,000 has been funded, and the project is ready to go to bid now. Director Pinto clarified that the issue is the increased monthly service charge for the wastewater service and whether the park owner can recover those charges from the residents. There is no question about the impact fees because even if the connection did not take place, the impact fees would continue to be paid. Director Pinto explained that the franchise gives the park owner the ability to charge for utility services. If he eliminated his treatment plant and connected to a utility system other than the County's, under his existing franchise there is a rate structure and he has the ability to charge that rate structure to any tenant 22 - . M who does not have a contract that says something different. The tenants have contracts that state they do not have to pay for that service, so this is a problem between the park owner and the tenant. Commissioner Eggert asked whether the Board's decision is complicated by the development order, and Director Pinto confirmed that the development order stated that the system is temporary and will be abandoned when the County facilities become available. That is the condition under which the County constructed the regional wastewater treatment system. Administrator Chandler further confirmed that there is a mandate through the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, and the Department of Community Affairs reinforces that mandate. Chairman Bird asked if there is a master meter for Countryside North Mobile Home park. Director Pinto responded that there is a master meter and the rate structure is set up to charge a reduced rate if there is a master meter. Commissioner Macht asked for clarification on the scope and latitude of the Board's decision-making authority, because he did not want to avoid the responsibility of making a decision and depend on the DER to enforce the requirements. Attorney Vitunac summarized that the connection is required by the Development of Regional Impact, the 201 facility Plan, the 1985 agreement with the park owner, and the acquiescence of the residents in 1991 when the agreement was updated. There are at least five documents and policies that require Countryside to connect to the County wastewater treatment system. He thought Attorney Sam Block might possibly win in a challenge to the DER's letter, but he felt the County will prevail because the owner signed many agreements and has had the benefit of a delay for at least 7 years. Commissioner Macht led discussion regarding the purpose of the 10 -year extension, which is that the ownership of mobile homes would change and thereby relieve the situation. Attorney Vitunac agreed that the original time limit for the delay in paying impact fees was based on the reasoning that the residents would either move or die, ownership would change, and the original lifetime leases no longer would exist. When a home is sold, part of the selling price of the home goes to the County in the form of impact fees. Either the seller or the buyer will bear the burden of paying that impact fee. However, the impact fee is not an issue. The monthly charge of approximately $28 is the problem. The park owner is not required to pass all costs through 23 JAN 19 1993 BOOK 88 F,,,rS, rJ AN j-9 1993 BOOK 88 P,?GE 503 to the tenants. He can absorb them and suffer the loss. That is his choice. Commissioner Adams observed that throughout the years the intention was expressed that the connections would be made. There have been diversions, and she was concerned about the lack of responsibility because the DRI order and the DER letter make it very clear that connection must be made. She was not sure that the development and retention ponds affect the Indian River Lagoon but the effect on the aquifer must be investigated. The disposal of sewage waste is an environmental problem for all of us. It keeps growing every year, creating a heavier burden on ourselves, our children and grandchildren. We need to come to grips with it, take the bull by the horns and solve the problem. We cannot ignore it and let somebody else worry about it 10 years from now. The park owners are irresponsible when they ignore the order to connect. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, to authorize the County Attorney to pursue immediately all necessary actions necessary to: (a) require CMHP compliance with IRC Resolutions and Agreements between IRC and Realcor- Vero Beach Associates requiring connection of the Countryside Mobile Home Park to the County regional wastewater system and (b) collection of any and all charges due, as recommended by staff. Under discussion, Commissioner Tippin asked whether the motion should include the language regarding the wholesale rate. Commissioner Eggert recalled an evening workshop at which staff was directed to review rates versus impact fees and we are expecting that information within the next few weeks, so she thought the matter of rate amounts should not be included in the motion. Director Pinto explained that the rate structure recognizes when a master meter is used and takes into account the specific connection in calculating the rate. Commissioner Macht asked about the method of processing the wastewater, and Director Pinto stated that with the new requirements our treatment plant meets a higher standard than the park's package treatment plant. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. 24 The Chairman recessed the meeting briefly at 10:15 A. M. and the Board reconvened at 10:30 A. M. with all members present. PUBLIC HEARINGS - WAL-MART STORES, INC.. REQUEST TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 32.5 ACRES FROM CL AND CG TO PD AND RECEIVE CONCURRENT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTUAL PLAN APPROVAL The hour of 9:05 o'clock A. M. having passed, the 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 f rally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Ver :seach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being C ' i. . In the matter in the /Coou'rt, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the -issues of _ loyq 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 r day ofi29Ze-ND.•19 (Business Manager) NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING Notice of hearing to the 890- of a from CC wdal District and CL, m Umtiad Cawn=W District to PD, Planned DevelopmentDistrict. The rus . Edgar Woodlwds Comr erdal Center, The subiect properly Is located on the south side of S.R. 80 proximate 300' east of 58th Avenue Kngs Huh 1Neyb contains approxhnateiy 32.58 acres. fha pop" Res In the Southwest 1/4 section of Range 39,;" and being In Indian Rive Canny, fl4, Township loorkk , A puttiic heartrg at which parties in Interest and dme� shag have an opportunity to be heard, will be held by the Board of County Caranissiorers of Indian River County, Florida, in the Canty Commis- sbn Chambers of the Comfy Admhhistrathrn Build- Ing, locate da t 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Fla- , The uesday,Board o 19, 1983 at 9:05 a.m. another zoning district, other is may quested, provided it is wthfi the sarins geeral use category.Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this win need to en- sure that a verbatim record of the proceedings (&- made, which Includes testho ny and evidence upon which the appeal Is based. Anyone who needs a special accommodation for INS nesting rust contact the county's Americans WO Disabilities Act (ADA) Coordinate at 567 -MM extension 408 at least 48 hours In advance of Indian River county Board of Cox" Commloners g Dec. 22,1992s-u*n IC Eggert, (xneirnen Community Development Director Bob Keating commented from the following: 25 BOOK JAN ig 1993 BOOK 88 FACE 59 TO: James Chandler County Administrator DIV N HEAD CONCURRENCE: ert M. Re t ng, AICP Community Developnfent Di ctor THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP Planning Director FROM: John W. McCoy, AICP �iNry\ Senior Planner, Current Development DATE: January 12, 1993 SUBJECT: Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Request to Rezone Approximately 32.5 Acres from CL and CG to PD, and Receive Concurrent Planned Development Conceptual Plan Approval It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of January 19, 1993. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: •The General Request This is a request by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., through its agent Michael B. Schorah & Associates, Inc., to rezone approximately 32.5 acres from CG (General Commercial) and CL (Limited Commercial) to PD (Planned Development). As part of the PD rezoning request, a PD conceptual site plan has been submitted for concurrent approval. The. subject site is located on the south side of S.R. 60 approximately 300' east of 58th Avenue, and lies between S.R. 60 and the Main Relief Canal. The subject property consists of three individual parcels. While the eastern two parcels are wooded and vacant, a single family home is located ,on the western parcel. The purpose of this request is to secure the proper zoning and development plan approval to develop the subject site with two large, retail department stores and related facilities. •PZC & BCC Consideration At its regular meeting of December 10, 1992, the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) voted unanimously (6-0) to: 1. Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approve the PD rezoning request and corresponding PD conceptual plan and that prior to Board approval the applicant submit to staf f a development of regional impact (DRI) clearance letter from the Department of Community Affairs (see item 1 on p. 8 for additional information). 2. Grant approval of the preliminary PD plan ("final" site plan and preliminary plat), subject to the Board of County Commissioners' approval of the rezoning and PD conceptual plan request, and subject to the following conditions: a. That prior to PD site plan release, the applicant shall have finalized with environmental planning staff the precise amount of on-site native uplands set aside_ required and provided, and the amount of fees -in -lieu of 26 r r � M M M preservation to be paid. All fees -in -lieu of preservation must be paid prior to PD plan release. b. That prior to PD plan release, the applicant shall acquire any additional right-of-way needed for the 58th Avenue widening and associated improvements and shall obtain an Indian River County right-of-way permit for the 58th Avenue improvements. C. That all native upland conservation easements be dedicated via the final PD plat. d. That all internal access easements be granted via the final PD plat. e. That the proposed sign shall be a monument style sign, the size of the sign shall be controlled by the LDR requirements of chapter 956. [Please see attachment #6 for a copy of that part of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting minutes which relate to this request.] If the Board approves the rezoning and PD conceptual plan and rezoning request, then the Planning and Zoning Commission's preliminary PD plan approval will become effective, with all of the attached conditions. _ eConventional Zoning & PD Zoning Because the subject property is split between the CL (Limited Commercial) and CG (General Commercial) zoning districts, with approximately the eastern two thirds of the property being zoned CL, there are certain constraints to developing the site. The major constraint in this case is the CL zoning district's requirement that department stores not exceed 40,000 square feet in size. Because of this requirement, the applicant must rezone the site in order to proceed with his plans. Consequently, the applicant has requested that the subject property be rezoned to the PD .(planned development) district. In choosing to rezone the subject property to PD, the applicant has elected one of three options available to him. Any of these three options, if approved, would allow the applicant to proceed with his project, as proposed. Unlike the -,PD alternative chosen by the applicant, the other two alternatives relate only to the CL zoned portion of the site. The two non -chosen options available to the applicant are: To request that the portion of the site currently zoned CL be rezoned to CG (General Commercial). If the site were -rezoned to CG, all uses permitted within the CG zoning district, including large individual department stores, could be developed on the site via the conventional site plan approval process. Other uses allowed within the CG district, such as drive-through restaurants, unenclosed auction facilities, car washes, car dealerships, fuel dealers, motels and hotels, could also be allowed on the site. To request a PD special exception approval which would include a waiver from the CL district's 40,000 square foot limitation on individual department stores. The waiver provision is a mechanism available only through the PD special exception process. This option would ensure that the applicant could construct only what was approved on the PD plan, and would essentially grant a waiver to one specific land use criterion. The site, however, would continue to be split by the CL/CG zoning district boundaries. 27 L_jAN iq 1993 "1 r. DIJ6 l _I BOOK 88 PAGE 597 In opting not to pursue the traditional rezoning or the PD special exception alternatives, the applicant instead chose to rezone the entire property to the PD zoning district. This option can also provide for approval of the proposed use. Incorporated as a new zoning district when the new set of LDRs were adopted in 1990, the PD zoning district has not previously been used in the county. Unlike all other zoning districts, the PD district has no size or dimension criteria and no list of allowed uses. Instead, the PD district relies on the underlying.land use plan designation for use and density limitations. Special buffer and open space requirements established in the county's PD ordinance (LDR Chapter 915) are applied to all PD districts. As to setbacks and other typical zoning district regulations, in the PD zoning district these are established on a case by case basis through approval of a conceptual PD plan. Adopted as part of the PD zoning for a property, the conceptual plan serves as the zoning standard for the site. A rezoning to the PD district includes the submission of a binding conceptual PD plan which, along with certain PD district requirements, limits uses and sets -forth specific development standards on the site. Thus, a PD rezoning would allow a unique adaptation of the PD district to the subject site. In this case, the approved conceptual PD plan proposes the phased development of a 161,556 square foot store (Sam's) and a 158,222 square foot store (Wal-Mart) and related parking, drainage, landscaping, and buffering improvements. Aspects of the conceptual and preliminary PD plans are addressed in the "PLAN ANALYSIS" section of this report. In planning staff's opinion, the PD rezoning option is the best alternative in this case. Unlike other zoning districts, the -PD rezoning option allows the county to consider the appropriateness of the proposed development while giving the county a significant amount of control over certain aspects of site development. •The PD Zoning Process The PD zoning review, approval, - and development process is as follows: STEP 1. Rezoning and conceptual PD plan approval: review and recommendation made by staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission. Final action by the Board of County Commissioners. STEP 2. Preliminary PD plan (combination of site plan and preliminary plat) approval: review and recommendation made by staff. Final action by the Planning and Zoning Commission. STEP 3. Land Development Permit or Permit Waiver: reviewed and issued by staff. %STEP 4. Building Permit(s): reviewed and issued by staff. STEP 5. Final PD Plat approval: review and recommendation made by staff. Final action by Board of County Commissioners. STEP 6. Certificate of Occupancy: reviewed and issued by staff. As allowed by the PD ordinance, the applicant is pursuing concurrent approval of the rezoning request and the conceptual PD and preliminary PD plans (STEPS.1 a 2, together). 28 Once a conceptual PD plan is approved, only minor modifications to the conceptual plan can be approved at a staff level. Any changes proposed that would intensify the site use (e.g. increase the maximum square footage of building area) or reduce compatibility elements (e.g. reduce buffering) could only be approved via a process involving public hearings held by both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. *The Proposed PD District The subject -site has a C/I,- Commercial/ Industrial,, land use designation. This land use designation allows underlying properties to be zoned commercially or industrially. Since the land use designation of a property controls the use of the property by limiting the zoning districts applicable to the property, any rezoning must be compatible with the land use designation of a property and will control the specific types of uses permitted on the property. As indicated in the county's land development regulations, the PD zoning district is a compatible zoning district with sites having a commercial/ industrial land use designation. Once a specific PD rezoning is approved for a site, the applicable PD conceptual plan adopted as part. of the rezoning will then limit the type of specific uses allowed on the subject site. In accordance with the provisions of LDR Section 911.14, a PD district allowing retail and commercial shopping center uses may be approved within a Commercial/ Industrial designated area. Such a PD rezoning will limit the uses on the subject site to retail type uses. Certain standards related to uses, compatibility (buffering), infrastructure improvements, and open space areas are set -forth in LDR Chapter 915 (P.D. Process and Standards for Development Ordinance), and form the basis for the PD district. Based upon the proposed conceptual PD plan and the Chapter 915 standards, the proposed PD -district for the subject site contains the following elements, compared to CL/CG district elements: Blement Proposed PD District 1. Use(s) retail shopping center, dept. stores (includes accessary auto Lire and lubrication service) 2. Max. Bldg. Coverage 319,778 sq. ft. or 23% of site 3. Mia. Green Open 355,518 sq.ft. or 25% of sits Space 4. Max. Bldg. Height 30' 5. Building Setbacks vary from 58' to 650' 6. Landscape Buffers: a. northside (B.R. 30' to 40' vide MMm D" buffer and 60): landscape strip b. Southside (along 25' vide "Type B" buffer and perimeter Be canal): high concrete Pam" van c. along not a rest adjacent to other commercial properties: d. parking lot "interior area" landscape ares: 4' vide landsoape strip 12% 29 CL/CO Districts retail uses; restaurants/ automotive sales, and service; personnel services, motel i hotels (CL district requires that department stares not emceed 40,000 square feet in size) 30% of site 25% of site 35' 25' front and rear; 10' sides 10' vide landscape strip betrean B.R. 60 and parking spaces (along north side) 4' vide landscape strip 4' vide landscape strip 10% of parking/drivaW area JAN 49 BOOK �� FA"E BOOK 88 F,icE 509 It should be noted that, if the PD rezoning request is approved, the approved conceptual PD plan will be included as an actual exhibit to the ordinance that approves the rezoning request (see attachment #8). Additional items which are controlled by the conceptual plan include tree preservation, landscaping, and the type of main entrance sign. All of these controls ensure a degree of aesthetic control of the site that will be guaranteed through the conceptual plan. REZONING ANALYSIS Existing Zoning and Land Use Pattern: The site is located near the intersection of two principal arterials (SR 60 and 58th Avenue) and has direct access to both roads. Presently, the western one third of the site is zoned CG, (General Commercial), while the -eastern two thirds of the site is zoned CL (Limited Commercial). There is an existing single family house with several accessory structures on the western tract of land. The property to the west of the subject site is zoned CG (General Commercial) and is occupied by a restaurant and office with the remainder of the tract being vacant. The property to the east of the subject site is zoned CL (limited commercial) and is presently vacant. Across S.R. 60 to the north of the subject site, there are several single family subdivisions zoned RS -6 and the Ryanwood Shopping Center which is zoned CL. To the south is therMain Relief Canal (300' right-of-way) with residentially zoned (RS -2) property to the south of the Main Relief Canal. The Main,Relief Canal provides a physical barrier and buffer for the subject properties to the south and is owned, maintained and controlled by the Indian River Farms Water Control District (IRFWCD). The Main Relief Canal is approximately 100' wide (top of bank to top of bank) and centered in a 300' wide right-of-way. The 100' of right-of-way south of the canal has recently been cleared in conjunction with the City of Vero Beach power line extension. The 100' of right-of-way north of -the canal is heavily wooded and provides a good buffer. Even though this existing wooded buffer presently exists, the wooded portion of the right-of-way could be cleared in the future by the Indian River Farms Water Control District. Regardless of whether or not the northern portion of the right-of-way is cleared, the 300' main relief canal right-of-way will still provide a substantial physical barrier and buffer for the property to the south. As indicated, the subject property has two different zoning designations. This zoning pattern is the result of the natural and man-made features proximate to the site. Two characteristics in particular, those being S.R. 60 and the Main Relief Canal, affected zoning designations in the area. Since the Main Relief Canal runs at an angle, the canal intersects S.R. 60 at a point several hundred feet west of 43rd Avenue. This has created an unusual property configuration, with the property to the south of and adjacent to S.R. 60 narrowing from King's Highway to the S.R. 60/Main Relief Canal intersection point. Since this configuration produces property which has S.R. 60 frontage but only limited depth in the area near the road/canal intersection, a CL zoning district was applied to this area to encourage less intense uses on the narrow properties. Conversely, a CG zoning district was applied to the western portion of the property to reflect its capacity to accommodate larger, more intense uses. 30 The subject request essentially raises the issue of where the division between more and less intense uses should occur. Because the applicant has chosen the PD option, however, the issue is narrowed to whether or not the development project proposed by the applicant is appropriate for the subject site. eFuture Land Use Map Pattern The subject property is currently designated C/I, Commercial/ Industrial,, on the future land use map, as are the properties east and west of the subject site, as well as the Ryanwodd Shopping Center northwest of the site. The residentially _zoned property to the north of the subject site is designated L-2 on the future land use map, and the property to the south is designated L-1. The L-2 designation permits residential uses with a density up to 6 units per acre, while the L-1 designation permits residential uses up to 3 units per acre. •Zoning District Differences The substantive differences between the site's current CL/CG zoning and the PD zoning proposed for the subject property are that the proposed PD rezoning: sets no limits on the size of an individual department store (CL limits individual department stores to 40,000 square feet) . specifically allows only retail uses on the site (the CL and CG districts allow a wide range of uses such as automotive sales, hotels and motels), and - requires buffering and landscaping that is more extensive than that required of CL/CG conventional site plan developments. All other size and dimensional criteria in the proposed PD zoning district are either equal to or are more restrictive than the CL/CG zoning district standards, as previously described in this report. •Concurrency of Public Services: 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. By changing the zoning of the subject property from CL and CG to PD, various uses (department stores over 40,000 square feet) currently not permitted would be allowed on the site. However, because the most intense use of the property would be the same in all of the districts, changing the property's zoning from CL and CG to PD will not create additional impact on any concurrency facilities. The rezoning request then is exempt from concurrency review because the requested zoning would not increase the intensity of use of the site; instead, the rezoning will only change the form that commercial development could take. Concurrency, however, is an issue with respect to the conceptual and preliminary PD requests associated with the PD rezoning. Concurrency and traffic impact issues are addressed in the PD plan analysis section of this staff report. 31 BOOK S FA;F L_JAN1 199 r,➢An! 19 1,99 *Consistency with Comprehensive Plan BOOK 88 P,1GF 601 Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the comprehensive plan. Rezonings must also be consistent with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land Use Map, which include agriculture, 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 development decisions. While all comprehensive plan policies are important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing rezoning requests. Of particular applicability for this request are Future Land Use Element Policies 1.15, 1.19, 1.21, 4.3; Economic Development Policies 1.1 and 1.4; and Overall Economic Development Plan objective 2.0 and policy 2.4. Future Land Use Policy 1.15 Future Land Use Policy 1.15 states that the commercial land use designation is intended for uses including: retail and wholesale trade, offices, business and personal services, _residential treatment centers, limited residential uses and other similar type uses. All commercial areas must be located within an existing or future Urban -Service Area.. Since the subject site already has a commercial land use designation and is located within the Urban Service Area, it is consistent with Future Land Use Policy 1.15. - Future Land Use Policy 1.19 Future Land Use Policy 1.19 states that commercial and industrial land uses are designated as corridors and nodes. These corridors and nodes shall be located along roads and at intersections with functional classifications appropriate to the level of activity. The existing S.R. 60/58th Avenue Commercial/ Industrial node was established at that location because of the functional classification of the two roadways (both are principal arterials). The S.R. 60/58th Avenue intersection will be one of the most active intersections in the county. Therefore, the rezoning proposal is appropriate and consistent with Future Land Use Policy 1.19. - Future Land Use Policy 1.21 Future Land Use Policy 1.21 states that node boundaries are designated to provide for efficient land uses and maximum use of transportation and public facilities while eliminating sprawl and strip development. As the county grows, this area will be centrally located in regards to population distribution and will provide convenient shopping to a majority of the county's residents. Therefore, the rezoning proposal is consistent with Future Land Use Policy 1.21. 32 M M M Future Land Use Policy 4.3 Future Land Use Policy 4.3 states that activity centers such as commercial, office, and industrial centers shall be located within commercial and industrial nodes and corridors to ensure efficient utilization of the transportation network. This proposal is within a commercial node, centrally located, and has access on two principal arterials. Therefore, the rezoning proposal is consistent with Future Land Use Policy 4.3. Economic Development Policy 1.1 Economic Development Policy 1.1 states that the county shall encourage the expansion of existing businesses and attraction of new industries and businesses. This proposal would provide for expansion of an existing and a new business in the county. Therefore, the rezoning proposal is consistent with Economic Development Policy 1.1. Economic Development Policy 1.4 Economic Development Policy 1.4 states that the county shall promote the growth of businesses which provide skilled and semi- skilled jobs with salaries higher than minimum wages. This development would provide both skilled and semi -skilled jobs that would be higher than the minimum wage. Therefore, the proposed rezoning would be consistent with Economic Development Policy '1.4 . Overall Economic Development Plan Objective 2.0 Overall Economic Development Plan objective 2 states that by January 1, 1996, the county will have an unemployment rate that has decreased -to around the middle third (1/3) of Florida counties as published by the Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security. This development will provide additional jobs in the community and help Indian River County meet the stated objective. Overall Economic Development Plan Objective*2.4 Overall Economic Development Plan objective 2.4 states that the Indian River County Council of 100 shall identify areas of the county providing summer employment opportunities and make this information available to agricultural related businesses and employees. This proposal will make additional employment opportunities available in the summer, thereby helping the county provide steady year round employment. •Compatibility with the Surrounding Area: It is the staff's position that granting the PD rezoning request would ensure a greater degree of compatibility with the surrounding areas than the minimum development standards that would be applied to a normal CL/CG zoned development. As indicated above, the increased buffering and building setback standards proposed as part of the PD zoning district exceed the CL and CG standards. The Board of County Commissioners does have the ability through the PD process to require additional conditions or restrictions to ensure compatibility with the surrounding area. 33 R� �9 Ba®K c� �acF PD PLAN ANALYSIS: BOOK 88 NAu. 60 3, The PD plans indicate that two separate department stores, a Wal- Mart (126,249 square feet) and a Sam's (134,900 square feet), are proposed on the subject site as part of Phase I project construction. An additional 31,973 square foot and 26,656 square foot expansion of the Wal-Mart and Sam's stores respectively, is proposed for Phase II project construction. 1. Size of Development Area: 32._58 acres Florida Statutes governing developments of regional impact (D.R.I.$) presume that a commercial development proposal is a DRI if the project area involves more than 40 acres of land. If the project is from 80% - 1008 of the threshold (32 to 40 acres), then the project is presumed not to be a, DRI. Although. the county's DRI requirements (Chapter 916) give the Board of County Commissioners the authority to require either a clearance letter or a binding letter of interpretation from the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for projects over the 80% threshold, staff does not recommend that the Board of County Commissioners require either letter in this case. Though neither county staff nor the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council has requested a DRI -related letter, DCA has required that the applicant obtain a clearance letter from the DCA. The applicant and county staff have worked with DCA staff for several months in order to allow the DCA sufficient time to issue a clearance letter. As of the writing of this report, no clearance letter has yet been issued. County staff contacts with DCA staff indicate that a clearance letter should be issued in the near future. 2. Zoning Classification: Current: CL, (Limited Commercial) CG, (General Commercial) Proposed: PD, (Planned Development) 3. Land Use Designation: C/I, (Commercial/Industrial) 4. Building -Area: Phase I.Sam'a; 134,900 square feet Phase I Wal-Mart: 126,249 square feet Phase I Total: 261,149 square feet Sam's Expansion (Phase II): 26,656 square feet Wal-Mart Expansion (Phase II): 31,973 square feet Phase II Total: 58,629 square feet Total of Phases I & II: 319,.778 -square feet 5. Impervious Area: 1,0311429 square feet (Phase I) 31,973 square feet (Phase II) 1,0631402 square feet Total (Phase I & II) 6. Open Space: Required*: 25% Provided: 25% *required in the CL, CG, and proposed PD districts 7. Parking: Required: 1,599 parking spaces Provided: 1,599 parking spaces The applicant has requested a tire stop waiver pursuant to section 954.07(4)d of the county's land development regulations. The Public Works Director and Community Development Director may waive the tire stop criteria if the following criteria are met: 34 M M M a. The waiver would not allow vehicles to encroach upon landscape or pedestrian areas (such areas shall be protected by tire stops, curbing, or the equivalent); b. The waiver would not allow vehicles to abut or "head into" one another in any fashion other than bumper to bumper [any bumper to fender (or side) parkin configurations shall require tire stops, curbing, or the equivalent]; C. The waiver would not apply to spaces accessed from driveways that serve as circulation driveways which channel traffic around or through the site or parking lot area; and d. The site plan parking area and traffic circulation design provide circulation driveways, as needed, to adequately channelize traffic flow. The application meets all of the above referenced criteria; therefore, the Public Works Director and Community Development Director have waived the tire stop requirement. Note: Pursuant to section 954.08(5), the applicant could request up to a 10% reduction in the amount of required parking if more of the existing trees within the proposed parking area were to be preserved. However, the applicant has not opted to preserve more trees in the parking area since.the minimum number of parking spaces acceptable to the applicant (1,599) is being provided. Therefore, although county regulations could allow more tree preservation in the parking area, the applicant has stated that the minimum number of parking spaces now proposed is essential to the project. 8. Traffic Impacts: The County Traffic Engineer has reviewed the traffic impact analysis submitted with the PD plans and has determined that the analysis is acceptable and that there are no concurrency problems or level of service problems related to project traffic. Furthermore, the analysis indicates that, other than some S.R. 60 turn lane and median improvements as well as 58th Avenue widening, no off-site traffic improvements are required for the project (built -out, both phases). The Public Works department has approved the proposed traffic layout with the proposed traffic improvements. The table below identifies each of the impacted roadway segments associated with the proposed project. Since the county's transportation level of service is based on peak hour/peak season/peak direction characteristics, the traffic impact analysis addressed project impact occurring in the peak hour and affecting the peak direction of impacted roadways. As indicated in the table below, there is sufficient capacity in all of the affected segments to accommodate the traffic projected to be associated with this project. 35 L_ AN 191993 BOOK 88 F-nF.60 ImpactedRoadway Segments (peak hour/peak season/peak direction) BOOK 88 RAGE 605 Roadway Segment Road From To Capacity LOS "D" 1320 O.S. 1 8th Street 12th Street 2270 1325 O.S. 1 12th Street S. VB City Lmt. 2370 1340 O.S. 1 S.R. 60 Royal Palm P1. 2300 1345 O.S. 1 Royal Pal Palm P1. Atlantic Blvd. 2300 1915 S.R. 60 I-95 82nd Ave. 1680 1920 S.R. 60 82nd Ave. 66th Ave. 1760 1925 S.R. 60 66th Ave. 58th Ave. 1760 1930 S.R. 60 58th Ave. 43rd Ave. 2650 1935 S.R. 60 43rd Ave. 27th Ave. 2650 1940 S.R. 60 27th Ave. 20th Ave. 2600 1945 S.R. 60 20th Ave. Old Dixie Hwy. 1638 1950 S.R. 60 Old Dixie Hwy. 10th Ave. 1638 1955 S.R. 60 10th'Ave. U.S. 1 1638 1960 S.R. 60 O.S. 1 I.R. Blvd, 1638 2020 16th Street 58th Ave. 43rd Ave. 830 2030 16th Street 43rd Ave. 27th Ave. 830 2040 16th Street 27th Ave. 20th Ave. 830 2050 16th Street 20th Ave. Old Dixie Hwy. 970 2060 16th/17th St. Old Dixie Hwy. O.S. 1 970 2110 17th Street O.S. 1 I.R. Blvd. 1990 2220 12th Street 58th Ave. 43rd Ave. 830 2230 12th Street 43rd Ave. 27th Ave. 830 2240 12th Street 27th Ave. 20th Avenue 830 2250 12th Street 20th Ave. Old Dixie Hwy. 830 2440 27th Avenue 8th Street 12th Street 830 2450 27th Avenue 12th Street S. VB City Lmts. 830 2460 27th Avenue S. VB.City Lmts. 16th Street 830 2470 27th Avenue 16th Street S.R.60 830 2830 20th Avenue 8th Street 12th Street 630 2840 20th Avenue 12th* Street S. VB City Lmts. 1760 2850 20th Avenue S. VB City Lmts. 16th Street 1760 2860 20th Avenue 16th Street S.R. 60 1760 2915 43rd Avenue 4th Street 8th Street 630 2920 43rd Avenue 8th Street 12th Street 630 2925 43rd Avenue 12th Street 16th Street 830 2930 43rd Avenue 16th Street S.R. 60 830 2935 43rd Avenue S.R. 60 26th Street 830 2940 43rd Avenue 26th Street 41st Street 630 3010 58th Avenue 4th.Strest 8th Street 630 3015 58th Avenue 8th Street 12th Street 630 3020 58th Avenue 12th Street 16th Street 630 3025 58th Avenue 16th Street S.R. 60 830 3030 58th Avenue S.R. 60 41st Street 830 4430 41st Street 58th Avenue 43rd Avenue 630 4440 41st Street 43rd Avenue Old Dixie Hwy. 630 4830 8th Street 58th Avenue 43rd Avenue 630 4840 8th Street 43rd Avenue 27th Avenue 630 4930 4th Street 58th Avenue 43rd Avenue 630 4940 4th Street 43rd Avenue 27th Avenue 630 4950 4th Street 27th Avenue 20th Avenue 630 4960 4th Street 20th Avenue Old Dixie Hwy. 630 4970 4th Street Old Dixie Hwy. O.S. 1 630 36 M M M ZxietiMg Demand Total Available Positive Roadway Ex st ng Vested segment Segment Project Concurrency segment Volume Volume Demand Capacity Demand Determination 1320 1526 44 1570 700 4 Y 1325 1526 58 1584 786 4 Y 1340 1143 57 1200 1100 4 Y 1345 1143 72 1215 1085 4 Y 1915 734._ 57 791- 889 17 Y 1920 950 55 1005 755 34 Y 1925 972 59 1031 729 60 Y 1930 972 110 1082 1568 252 Y 1935 612 73 685 1965 72 Y 1940 878 51 929 1671 34 Y 1945 747 41 788 850 23 Y 1950 747 33 780 858 23 Y 1955 747 31 778 860 13 Y 1960 509 27 536 1102 4 Y 2020 121 35 156 674 55 Y 2030 337 32 369 461 38 Y 2040 463 33 496 334 13 Y 2050 851 30 881 89 9 Y 2060 851 19 870 100 9 Y 2110 680 19 699 1291 4 Y 2220 81 12 93 737 13 Y 2230 225 13 238 592 9 Y 2240 400 11 411 419 9 Y 2250 400 13 413 417 4 Y 2440 405 7 412 418 4 Y 2450 369 8 377 453 4 Y 2460 369 4 373 457 4 Y 2470 369 9 378 452 4 Y 2830 310 10 320 310 4 Y 2840 297 4 301 1459 4 Y 2850 297 5 302 1458 4 Y 2860 265 6 271 1489 4 Y 2915 360 17• 377 253 2 Y 2920 454 14 468 162 4 Y 2925 454. 17 471 359 4 Y 2930 373 25 398 432 4 Y 2935 373 31 404 426 47 Y 2940 283 27 310. 320 9 Y 3010 144 6 150 480 13 Y 3015 144 9 153 477 21 Y 3020 344 10 154 476 34 Y, 3025 400 21 421 409 175 Y 3030 414 31 445 385 64 Y 4430 117 18 135 495 13 Y 4440 184 19 203 427 9 Y 4830 99 33 132 498 4 Y 4840 193 23 216 414 4 Y 4930 103 6 109 521 13 Y 4940 216 17 233 397 13 Y 4950 315 23 338 292 13 Y 4960 315 26 341 289 9 Y 4970 450 14 464 166 2 Y 9. Traffic Circulation: The project site will have three driveways, one on 58th Avenue and two on S.R. 60. The internal circulation plan makes provisions for access through the project site to the adjacent commercially zoned sites to the east and west. Legal access will be provided to these adjacent commercial properties through access easements granted with the final PD plat. The driveways on S.R. 60 will have limited movements. At the main entrance driveway on S.R. 60, traffic movements will be limited to right in, and right out of the site, and left into the site from S.R. 60. At the east entrance driveway on S.R. 60, traffic movements will be limited to right in, and right out of the site and left out of the site onto S.R. 60. This driveway and S.R. 60 traffic movement layout has been approved by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 37 1 93 BOOK 88 r SAN , 9 14 91 BOOK 88 PAGE b Due to the separation of the left turn movements at the two driveways on S.R. 60, the FDOT has indicated that a traffic signal at S.R. 60 and either project driveway will not be required and will probably never be warranted. 10. Stormwater Management: The stormwater management plan has been approved by the Public Works Department, and a Type "A" permit will be issued. - 11. Landscape Plan and Buffers: The landscape plan is in conformance with (meets or exceeds) Chapter 926 requirements, and includes a 301- 40' Type "D" buffer along S.R. 60 and a 25' Type "B" buffer with an 8' concrete wall along the south property line. Also, 166 laurel oaks ranging from a 2" to a 26" dbh are to be preserved on site. In addition, 471 new trees are to be planted on site. 12. Signage: The applicant has agreed to construct a monument type sign at its SR 60 main entrance as opposed to the standard pylon type sign. The size of the sign face will be regulated by the provisions of Chapter 956. 13. Utilities: The project will be connected to county water and sewer. This meets both concurrency and utilities connection matrix requirements. These utility provisions have been approved by the County's Department of Utility Services and the State Health Department. 14.- Environmental Issues: Since the site is 32.58 acres in size and contains some native -upland vegetation areas, the upland set-aside requirements of section 929.05 apply to the subject site. The applicant proposes to preserve as much native vegetation on site as possible and has agreed to contribute fees in -lieu of preservation to make-up the remainder of the requirements. The vegetation on the subject site consists of native oak/cabbage palm hammock interspersed with exotics (Brazilian peppers), and an old grove which has started to be reclaimed by native vegetation. A detailed vegetative analysis of the site has been conducted and is being reviewed by the staff to determine the total amount of native uplands and the preservation requirements. The applicant is required to preserve 15% of the native uplands or 10% of the overall site whichever is less, pursuant to Section 929.05. The applicant is proposing to preserve, at a minimum, .68 acres on-site and contribute fees -in -lieu of preservation for the remaining acreage of required set aside area. Two rare plants have been identified on the subject property: "Hand adder's tongue fern" (Ophioglossum palmatum) and "Shoestring fern" (Vittaria lineata). The Hand adder's tongue fern and the Shoestring fern are designated by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDA) as "endangered" and "threatened", respectively. The applicant has agreed to attempt to preserve the ferns on site to the extent feasible, by means of plant relocation to a proposed permanent green space. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission have been consulted, and staff has verified that the project as proposed does not contravene state or federal plant protection regulations. 38 M M M 15. Dedications and Improvements: As a site -related improvement, the developer will be required to widen 58th Avenue south of S.R. 60 to provide a south bound left turn lane into the site from 58th Avenue. The applicant has committed to the left turn lane improvements on 58th Avenue, and the improvements are shown on the plans. Detailed construction drawings for the 58th Avenue improvements need to be reviewed and approved through the county right-of-way permit review process. It is possible that the applicant will need to acquire additional right-of- way for the 58th Avenue widening and associated improvements. Any necessary right-of-way will need to be acquired by the applicant prior to approval of a right-of-way permit. The applicant will need to obtain a right-of-way permit prior to preliminary PD plan release. Additional work will also be done along S.R. 60 to facilitate the traffic overations on the site. The applicant will be modifying the existing sidewalk along the project's S.R. 60 frontage to construct a deceleration lane into the site. The applicant will also be constructing a sidewalk along the access driveway to 58th Avenue. These sidewalk improvements will be integrated with future improvements to provide adequate pedestrian circulation for the commercial area. 16. Concurrency: The initial concurrency certificate applied for in conjunction with the PD plan submittal has been reviewed and approved, but has not been issued pending payment of traffic impact fees. All utility and traffic system capacity required to serve the project has been reserved. The applicant has executed an agreement that states that all impact fees associated with the project will be paid within 90 days of PD plan approval. 17. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: S.R. 60; Single -Family Residential/RS-6 South: Main Relief Canal; Proposed Single -Family Subdivision, vacant/RS-2 East: Vacant/CL West: Restaurant, Office vacant/CG CONCLUSION: The requested PD rezoning and corresponding conceptual PD plan are compatible with the surrounding area, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, meet all concurrency requirements, and are consistent with the site's Commercial/Industrial land use designation. It is staff's position that the subject property is suitable for large, retail department stores given its size and configuration as well as its proximity and direct access to S.R. 60 and 58th Avenue. The preliminary PD plan is consistent with the proposed PD rezoning and the conceptual PD plan, and meets or exceeds applicable land development regulation requirements. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the proposed ordinance granting approval of the PD rezoning request and PD conceptual plan. ok, � � 9 ��0% BOOK 818 F" r .� rJAN 19 1993 BOOK 88 F,� 09 Planning Director Stan Boling, with the aid of slides and graphics, pointed out the features of the site plan. Commissioners Eggert, Adams and Tippin were concerned about the area behind the two buildings where trucks will be loading and unloading. Director Boling felt that the vegetative buffer along.with the 8 -foot concrete wall will be sufficient. There is a 350 -foot right-of-way alongside a drainage canal which is under the jurisdiction of Indian River Farms. That agency could clear that right-of-way in the future, but for now that is additional buffer. Commissioner Tippin discussed the green spaces in the parking lot and suggested that they do not necessarily have to be rectangular in shape. Commissioner Adams appreciated that there is a large buffer on the State Road 60 side of the site. Fred Roth, of Michael B. Schorah & Associates, Inc., representing Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., presented an aerial enlargement on which were superimposed the proposed buildings and the large trees which will be kept in place. He explained that the other trees will be replanted. That process involves orienting the trees not only to the same height but also facing the same direction as originally planted. Mr. Roth discussed the requirements for parking lots in various counties and assured the Board that Sam's and Wal-Mart provide more parking than the County requires. He described the building as a concrete block facility, which is more attractive than prefabricated metal. The two stores will be side by side and similar in design. The truck lanes are designed for heavy-duty use and truck traffic will be kept separate from the general parking traffic. Chairman Bird felt that there should be more flexibility in the design of the parking lot and the number of spaces. Director Keating confirmed that Wal -Mart's parking lot requirements are more stringent than the County's. Additionally, we give them further flexibility of design to allow trees to remain in place. Commissioner Adams noted that Wal-Mart is taking pains to save two endangered species of air plants which exist on several sabal palms. Nancy Offutt, Government Affairs Coordinator for Vero Beach - Indian River County Board of Realtors, supported the project, felt it is located in a commercial node, situated at a good intersection and meets the objectives of several elements in the Comprehensive Plan. She feels the community is anxious to see its completion and urged the Board's support of the project. 40 Director Keating announced that he received a hand -delivered letter opposing this project from Jean E. Friesell the day before the meeting. She felt that the project is not consistent with the Comp Plan. The site is not the right place for the proposed project and is more suitable for other uses such as the community college. The Chairman determined that no one else wished to be heard and thereupon closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously adopted Ordinance 93-5, amending the zoning ordinance and the accompanying zoning map from CL and CG to PD for approximately 32.58 acres of land generally located between State Road 60 and the Main Relief Canal, east of 58th Avenue, as recommended by staff. ORDINANCE NO. 93- 5 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM CL AND CG TO PD FOR APPROXIMATELY 32.58 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN STATE ROAD 60 AND THE MAIN RELIEF CANAL, EAST OF 58TH AVENUE; AND DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS; the Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the local planning agency on such matters, has held a public hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this rezoning request; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone the hereinafter described property; and WHEREAS,. The Board of County Commissioners has determined that this rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County,' and the county land development regulations, including but not limited to the Planned Development (PD) Process and Standards for Development chapter; and 41 JAN 19X991 BOOK 88 PAGE611-1 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, in conjunction with the rezoning request has approved a PD conceptual plan (see EXHIBIT B, attached) that controls and regulates development on the subject land; 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 property s'Ituated in Indian River County, and legally described in EXHIBIT A (attached) be changed from CL and CG to PD. All with the meaning and intent as set forth in the land development regulations, and the approved conceptual plan as may be amended pursuant to the provisions of the Planned Development (PD) Process and Standards for Development chapter of the land development regulations. Approved and adopted by the Board of County, Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, on this 19 day' of January , 1993. This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal on the 22 day of December 1992 for a public hearing to be held on the 19 day of Januar , 1993 at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert , seconded by Commissioner Tippin , and adopted by the following vote: Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye Vice Chairman John W. Tippin Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BY: chard (N; ATTEST BY: Jeffre K. Barton, Cl �y •' A 40 Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida this 25 day of January , 1993. Effective Date: Acknowledgement from the Department. of State received on this 29 day of January , 1993, at 10:00 A. M. A.M./P.M. and -filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. 42 r Chairman Bird wished to expedite the Wal-Mart project and asked whether there is anything we can do to move things along. Director Boling explained that he has been in contact with the State Department of Community Affairs. They had some staff changes which caused small delays and it is just a matter of time now. Commissioner Eggert suggested that sometimes the Chairman of the County Commission calling the department in Tallahassee makes a difference. Chairman Bird stated he would consider that, and staff should notify the Board if there is any further action that would help. AXPROVAL OF RENEWAL OF HALON FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM MAINTENANCE CONTRACT WITH ENGINEERED COMPUTER ENVIRONMENTS FOR E911 CENTRAL COMMUNICATIONS CENTER The Board reviewed memo from Emergency Services Director Doug Wright dated January 11, 1993: TO: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Jim Chandlerounty Administrator FROM: Doug Wright, Director Emergency Services DATE: January 11, 1993 SUBJECT: Approval of Renewal of Halon Fire Suppression System Maintenance Contract With Engineered Computer Environments for E911 Central Communications Center It is respectfully requested that the information contained herein be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at the next regular scheduled meeting. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS On July 28, 1992, the Board of County Commissioners approved a contract with Engineered Computer Environments for maintenance of the Halon System at the E911 Communications Center. The period of the contract year was approved as January 18, 1992, to January 17, 1993, which reduced the expenses of a service call which occurred on June 20, 1992. The Halon Fire Suppression System at the E911 Communications Center requires conformity to manufacturer's specifications and the National Fire Protection Association Standard 12A. Engineered Computer Environments of Boca Raton, Florida, was prior recommended to provide the semi-annual preventive maintenance program for this very important and necessary system. Quotes from other vendors were prior obtained who were qualified to service the Fike System at the E911 Center. The only other vendor found in this area was Protective Systems of Altamonte Springs, Florida, who gave a quote of $1,500 versus Engineered Computer Environments quote of $1,380. The price remains the same for next year. 43 JAl�'! i1,99 -1900K r JAN f 9 999: ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS BOOK 88 P.:GF 6i3 Although three levels of maintenance service is available, staff feels the Level 1 Program of two service calls per contract year is sufficient and the least expensive at a cost of $1,380 versus $2,735 for the full maintenance program. The essential difference between the levels is the 25% discount on the Halon 1301 agent discharged for cause or accidentally and the times at which the service is rendered. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the renewal of the contract with Engineered Computer Environments for the sum of $1,380 for a one year period. Staff also recommends the Board authorize the Chairman to execute the attached contract for the term of one year at the amount specified. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved the renewal of the contract with Engineered Computer Environments in the amount of $1,380 for a period of one year, as recommended by staff. SAID CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD SANDRIDGE GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE - CART STORAGE AND MAINTENANCE BUILDINGS - CHANGE ORDER #5 AND FINAL PAYMENT The Board reviewed memo from Public Works Director Jim Davis dated January 7, 1993: TO: James E. Chandler, County. -Administrator FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. ._Public Works Directo, SUBJECT: SANDRIDGE GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE, CART STORAGE AND MAINTENANCE BUILDINGS Change Order No. 5 - FINAL PAYMENT DATE: January 7, 1993 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS FILE: sanrdco5.agn Construction has been completed on the Clubhouse and Accessory Buildings. The Final Payment of $86,134.02 is being requested along with the payment of following items included on the attached Change Order No. 5: 44 1) Increases to the contract amount for the following work: Installation of Vinyl Flooring - the contract amount of $950 was under the actual cost of $1,449.32 for an additional cost of $499.32. 2) Deduction to contract for carpeting - An addition of $1,530.36 by Change Order No. 2 to the contract price of $8,350 allowed $9,880.36 for carpeting. The actual cost wds $8,437.60, leaving a reduction of $1,442.76. Deduction of Signage Allowance - The original contract price was $800 and actual cost is $86.07. The total net change in contract price for Change Order No. 5 is a decrease in the amount of $1,657.37. The new contract amount ,of $760,888.80 is $17,936.03 below the estimated budget. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Alternative No. 1 Authorize the Final Payment of $86,134.02 and Change Order No. 5, finalizing the Contract. Alternative No. 2 Deny authorization of Change Order No. 5 and re -negotiate. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. Funding is from Account 418-000-169-008.00, Sandridge Golf Course, Clubhouse Const. Construction in Progress. ON MOTION by Commissioner Fran, SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously approved Alternative No. 1, authorizing the Final Payment of $86,134.02 and Change Order No. 5, finalizing the Contract with Barth Construction, Inc., as recommended by staff. SAID DOCUMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION SERVICES FOR AIA WIDENING IMPROVEMENTS - CITY OF VERO BEACH PROJECT #8821 The Board reviewed memo from Public Works Director Jim Davis dated January 12, 1993: 45 JAW � � 1992 BOOK � F'AU . 61 JAN 19 1993 TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator FROM: James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Director 88 pnE615 -1 ®00 SUBJECT: Construction Engineering and Inspection Services for AlA Widening Improvements - City of Vero Beach Project #8821 REF. LETTER: Dale Bathon, Assistant City Engineer to Jim Davis dated Dec. 31, 1992 DATE: January 12, 1993 FILE: aia.agn DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The City of Vero Beach Engineering Department is managing the road widening project for SR AlA between Castaway Boulevard and Beachland Blvd. (approx. length two miles). The Florida DOT and Federal Highway Administration are funding construction of the project. Engineering Design Services have been funded through the District 2 Traffic Impact Fee Fund in the amount of $348,019. At this time, the City is requesting that $235,.000 be allocated from the District 2 Traffic Impact Fee Account to fund construction engineering and inspection services for the estimated $3.6 million dollar project., The current available balance in the Fund is approximately ,q-800,000 of which $700,000 has been allocated to widening improvements for South AlA. Funds, therefore, are available in the Account. The City staff and consulting Engineer are available for questions if necessary. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The alternatives presented include the following: Alternative #1 Approve the request that $235,000 be allocated from Fund 101-152-541-067.12 for construction engineering and inspection services for AlA widening. Alternative #2 Deny the request. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING The County staff has discussed the project costs with City staff and recommends that Alternative No. 1 be approved as requested by the City. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously approved Alternative #1 for $235,000 to be allocated for construction, engineering and inspection services for AlA widening, as recommended by staff. 46 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY The Board reviewed memo from Utility Services Director Terry Pinto dated January 11, 1993: DATE: JANUARY 11, 1993 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES PREPARED ROBERT O. WISEMEN, P.E AND STAFFED ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY CHAPTER 403.1815 FLORIDA STATUTES Under provision of Chapter 403.1815,. Florida Statutes, the Department of Environmental Regulation may upon request allow the County to regulate independently the construction of water distribution mains of 12 inches or less, gravity sewage collection systems of 12 inches or less, sewage force mains of 12 inches or less, and pump stations appurtenant to such force mains, provided the plant is owned by the County making the request for approval. ANALYSIS On October 9, 1992, the Department of Utility Services requested such delegation of authority (see attached letter). The Department of Environmental Regulation shall determine the administrative and engineering ability of the County to administer and comply with the requirements of Chapter 403.1815. The attached resolution shall demonstrate the support of the Board of County Commissioners for such delegation. The Department of Utility Services presently is in compliance with the F.D.E.R. requirements. The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached Resolution. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 93-17 regarding delegation of certain utility permitting authority under Section 403.1815, Florida Statutes, as recommended by staff. 47 JAN j9 1993 BOOK P,,Gr. . JAN 19 1993 RESOLUTION NO. 93- 17 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO THE SECRETARY OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION REGARDING DELEGATION OF CERTAIN UTILITY PERMITTING AUTHORITY UNDER SECTION 403.18151 FLORIDA STATUTES. BOOK 88 N. H617-1 WHEREAS, Section 403.1815, Florida Statutes, allows the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER), upon request, to allow any county to independently regulate the construction of water distribution mains of 12 -inches or less, gravity sewage collection systems of 12 -inches or less, and sewage force mains of 12 -inches or less, and pump stations appurtenant to such force mains, provided that the plant is owned by the county making the request; WHEREAS, in considering such request the FDER shall determine the administrative- and engineering ability of the county to administer and comply with the requirements of Section 403.1815 , F . S . ; and WHEREAS, Indian River County believes that its Department of Utility Services is qualified to administer and comply with the aforementioned requirements; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 1. The Secretary of the FDER is respectfully requested to consider delegating the permitting requirements under Section 403.1815, F.S. , for the utility facilities authorized in the referenced section. 2. An invitation is extended to the Secretary of the FDER to visit Indian River County and be shown the utility facility and the staff operations of the Department of Utility Services. The County agrees to sponsor this trip, since the County believes that the information to be learned from a visit by the Secretary will convince the FDER that the County is amply qualified to undertake its own permitting. 48 Y 3. The Depattment of Utility Services is authorized and directed to comply fully with the FDER in its application process and, if local regulation is allowed, to complete such monthly reports and other studies as are required by the FDER . The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert and the motion was seconded by - Commissioner Macht , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner John W. Tippin Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye The Chairman thereupon declared -the resolution duly passed and adopted this 19 day of January , 1993. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA zz��'erol lle�� Chairman COURTSIDE SUBDIVISION, 38TH SQUARE, S.W.. WATER SERVICE PROJECT RESOLUTION IV - FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL The Board reviewed memo from Utility Services Director Terry Pinto dated January 4, 1993: 49 JA19 N BOOK I JAN 19 1993 BOOK 88 PgUE 619 7 DATE: JANUARY 4, 199.3 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO DIRECTOR OF UTIL TY ERVICES PREPARED JAMES D. CHASTA Ci AND STAFFED MANAGER OF ASSES PROJECTS BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: COURTSIDE SUBDIVISION - 38TH SQUARE, S.W. WATER SERVICE PROJECT - RESOLUTION IV FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UW -92 -02 -DS BACKGROUND On July 7, 1992, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution III, No. 92-95, for the preliminary assessment roll on the above -referenced project. The construction of the project has been completed. Customer connections have begun and we request the Board of County Commissioners' approval of the final assessment roll (see attached minutes and Resolution III). ANALYSIS The preliminary assessment was for a total estimated cost to be assessed of $64,365.00, which equated to $0.10326421778 per square foot of property owned. The final assessment (see attached Resolution IV and the accompanying assessment roll) is in the amount of $56,825.25, which equates to a cost of $0.091168 per square foot of property. RECOMMENDATION The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the adoption of Resolution IV. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 93-18, certifying "as -built" costs for installation of a waterline extension to Courtside Subdivision, and other construction necessitated by such project, as recommended by staff. RESOLUTION 93-18, WITH ASSESSMENT ROLL ATTACHED IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD 50 RESOLUTION NO. 93-_JIL A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CERTIFYING "AS -BUILT" COSTS FOR INSTALLATION OF A WATERLINE EXTENSION TO COURTSIDE SUBDIVISION, AND SUCH 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 waterline improvements for the properties located in Courtside Subdivision (38th Square, SW) were necessary to promote the public welfare of the county; and WHEREAS, on Tuesday, July 7, 1992, the Board held a public hearing at which time and place the owners of property to be assessed appeared 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. 92-95, which confirmed the special assessment cost of the project -to the property specially benefited by the project in the amounts listed in the attachment to that resolution; and WHEREAS, the Director of Utility Services has certified the actual "as -built" .cost now that the project has been completed is less than in confirming Resolution No. 92-95, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows: I. Resolution No. 92-95 is modified as follows: The completion date for the referenced project and the last day that payment may be made avoiding interest and penalty charges is ninety days after passage of this resolution. 2. Payments bearing interest at the rate of 8% per annum may be made in ten annual installments, the first to be made twelve months from the due date. The due date isninety days after the passage of this resolution. 51 BOOK fr'E� JAN 19 1993 BOOK 88 FACE 62.1. 3. The final assessment roll for the project listed in Resolution No. 92-95 shall be as shown on the attached Exhibit "A." 4. The assessments, as shown on the attached Exhibit "A," shall' stand confirmed and remain legal, valid, and binding first liens against the property against which such assessments are made until paid. 5. The assessments shown on Exhibit "A," attached to Resolution No. 92-95, .were recorded by the County on the public records of Indian River County, and the lien shall remain prima facie evidence of its validity. The resolution was moved for adoption . by _ Commissioner Adams , and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Ti epi n , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye Vice Chairman John W. Tippin Aye Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 19 day of January, 1993. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA ByIF Chairman INVITATION TO TOUR THE JAIL FACILITY Chairman Bird announced that Captain Bob Reese invited members of the Board to tour the corrections facility. Commissioners Macht,. Adams, Tippin and Bird indicated an interest and suggested coordinating such a tour. 52 ® � r REQUEST FOR FUNDING FOR COUNCIL OF 100 Commissioner Eggert requested this item be deferred so that it may be addressed first by the Economic Development Council for their recommendation. INVITATION TO FROG LEG FESTIVAL JANUARY 21 TO 24, 1993 IN FELLSMERE Commissioner Adams announced that the Fellsmere Frog Leg Festival would be held from January 21 through January 24, 1993 and invited everyone to attend. INCREASE IN CABLEVISION RATES Commissioner Macht withdrew this item and will reschedule it. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment the Board would reconvene sitting as the District Board of Commissioners of the Solid Waste Disposal District. Those Minutes are being prepared separately. There -being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 12:04 P. M. ATTEST: J. arton, Clerk 53 'A6fg��- Richard N. Bird, Chairman BOOK F'. E '2