Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/6/1993MINUTES ATTACHED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS_ INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, APRIL 6, 1993 9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1340 25TH STREET VERO BEACH, FLORIDA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Richard N. Bird, Chairman (Dist. 5) John W. Tippin, Vice Chairman (Dist. 4) James E. Chandler, County Administrator Fran B. Adams ( Dist. , 1) Charles P. Vltunac, County Attorney Carolyn K. Eggert ( Dist. 2) y Kenneth R. Macht (Dist. 3) Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board 9:00 A. M. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. INVOCATION - Rev. Jerry �'Y Sweat' �'y Methodist Church 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - James E. Chandler 4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/BHERGENCY ITEMS 13.A.1. Appointment to fill Executive Aide to the Board vacancy. 11.C.1. IRC Judicial Complex Project Closed Circuit Video/Voice Transmission system - Deferred for one week S. PROCLAMATION AND PRESENTATIONS None 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A • Regular Meeting of Flebruary 16, 1993 Be Special Meeting of March 2, 1993 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Received and placed on file in office of Clerk to the Board the following Reports: General Purpose Financial Statements for Vero Lakes Drainage District dated 9/30/92 Fla. Inland Navigation District Financial Report for 1992 Operational Performance Audit of the Office Of the Public Defender, 19th for period 7/1/91 throughl 4/93dicial Circuit, B. Proclamation Designating April 25 to May 1, 1993 as Crime Victims' Rights Week In IRC C• Proclamation Designating as Soil & Water StewardhiprWeek in IRC2. 1993 APR ® A 1993 Boa 89 L� .. 'BOOK 7. CONSENT AGENDA (cont'd. ): D. Press Journal for BCC Office Imemorandum from Comm. Ken Macht) E. Approval of Sob. City Council Members Appointed to Serve on IRC Committees (letter dated March 25, 1993 ) F. Nomination of Barbara Holmen as Representative on County's Parks E Rec. Committee 1 tetter dated March 25, 1993 ) G. Release of Easement Request By: Yolanda E Arthur Jackson, Jr. Lots 4 E 5, Block 1, King's Music Lands S/D ( memorandum dated March 16, 1993 ) H. Final Plat Approval for Serene Acres S/D ( memorandum dated March 26, 1993 ) I • Release of Utility Liens ( memorandum dated March 18, 1993 ) T. J. Release of Utility Liens ( memorandum dated March 23, 1993 ) K. Transfer of Park Place Water Treatment Plant Site to the City of Sebastian ( memorandum dated March 29, 1993 ) L. Award Bid #3079/Wood Hollow Water Main ( memorandum dated March 29, 1993 ) M• Proclamation Designating the Week of April 24-30, 1993 as National Pre -School Immunization Week (backup provided separately) 8• CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES None 9:05 a.m. 9. PUBLIC ITEMS A. Pt1BLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS Verbal Request by Eric John to S Board of Count _ Pik � the Billing, Utility Rights, Commission" Utility Mane Utility Y agement B. PUBLIC HEARINGS - 1 • Sharon Swezey and Others Request to Rezone Approximately 2.6 Acres from RS -3 to PRO (mmnorandum dated March 26, 1993 ) 89 PACE194 - 2. County Initiated Request to Administra- tively Rezone Approximately 10.81 Acres from RS -6 to RM -10 ( memorandum dated March 22, 1993 ) 3. Establishment of Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program ( memorandum dated -March 30, 1993) -- G 600Kt6E.�U S. PUBLIC ITEMS (aont'd. ) B. PUBLIC HEARINGS (oont1d. ): 4. AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN DIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING CHAPTER 207 LICENSING AND LICENSE TAX TO REDUCE CERTAIN TAXES SO THAT THEY SHALL BE UNIFORM THROUGHOUT THE CLASS (mono dated March 10, 1993 ) S. Expansion of the County Seat _ ( This is the first of two public hearings on this Resolution) ( memorandum dated March 15, 1993 ) 10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS FY 1993-94 Anti -Drug Abuse Grant Funding (memorandum dated March 19, 1993 ) 11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT None B. OCRGENCy SERVICES None C. GENERAL SERVICES I. IRC Judicial Complex Project Closed Circuit Video/Voice Transmission System ( memorandum dated March 31, IM) 2. Award Bid #3068 / I.R. Blvd. Phase IV ( memorandum dated March 30, 1993 ) D. LEISURE SERVICES None E. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET None F. PE_ Policy Manual ( backup provided separately) G. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Improvements to 130th Ave. (Willow St.) South of CR512 In Fellsmere (memorandum dated March 30, 1993 ) 2. Purchase Authorization: 45th St. R -O -W Acquisition, Grace Walker Parcels (memorandum dated March 19, 1993) 3. Eminent Domain Litigation - Settlement Agreement - Parcel 103 ( Ind. Riv. West) _ Indian River Blvd. Ph. ill (111dum dated -March 26, 1993 ) 11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS (cont'd. ): G. PUBLIC WORKS (cont'd. ): 4. Additional R -O -W Purchase / 33rd St. Between 58th Ave. 9 =66th Ave. / Plato Kirby, Jr. and Beneta Kirby Parcel (memorandum dated March 22, 1993 ) H. UTILITIES I. Water Main Replacement Project - 16th PI. ( West of 20th St.), 17th Ave. ( North of 8th St.), and loth St.* (between 17th and 18th Ave.) (memorandum dated March 26, 1993 ) 2. Sludge/Septage Processing Facility Change Order No. 2 ( memorandum dated March 26, 1993 ) 12. COUNTY ATTORNEY None 13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS A . CHAIRMAN RICHARD N. BIRD B. VICE CHAIRMAN JOHN W. TIPPIN C. COMMISSIONER FRAN B. ADAMS D. COMMISSIONER CAROLYN K. EGGERT E. COMMISSIONER KENNETH R. MACHT 14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS A. ERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT None APR o 6 BOOK urs' ._. 14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS (cont'd. ): B. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT 1. Approval of Minutes - Meeting of 2/9/93 2. Solid Waste Master Plan Selection of Engineering Firm RFP 3050 ( memorandum dated March 24, 1993 ) 15. ADJOURNMENT V. 0 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) COORDINATOR AT 567-8000 X 408 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE MEETING. OF APR - 6 199,1 BooK PnE 19-7/" Tuesday, April 6, 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, April 6, 1993, at 9:00 A.M. Present were Richard N. Bird, Chairman; John W. Tippin, Vice Chairman; Fran B. Adams; Carolyn K. Eggert; and Kenneth R. Macht. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; and Diane Albin, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order. Rev. Jerry Sweat of Asbury Methodist Church gave the invocation, and Administrator Chandler led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS The Chairman requested the addition of Item 13.A.1, appointment to fill the vacancy of executive aide to the Board. AL Administrator Chandler requested the deferral for one week of Item 11.C.1., IRC Judicial Complex Project Closed Circuit Video/Voice Transmission System. ON MOTION by Commissioner. Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously added and deferred the above items. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 16, 1993. There were none. APR ® 61993 w3f 89 fral APP - 6 993 BOOK 89 Farr 1,97 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 16, 1993,, as written. The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of March 2, 1993. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved the Minutes of the Special Meeting of March 2, 1993, as written. CONSENT AGENDA A. Reports Received and placed on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board: General Purpose Financial Statements for Vero Lakes Drainage District dated 9/30/92 Florida Inland Navigation District Financial Report for 1992 Operational Performance Audit of the Office of the Public Defender, 19th Judicial Circuit, for period 7/1/91 through 1/4/93 B. Proclamation Designating April 25 to May 1 1993 as Crime Victims' Rights Week in Indian River County Florida PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 25 TO MAY 1, 1993 AS CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS WEEK IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA WHEREAS, violence is on the. rise in America, with one violent crime committed every 17 seconds; and WHEREAS, with 35 million Americans victimized in the United States each year, crime victims are rapidly becoming a majority in our nation; and WHEREAS, as a nation devoted to liberty and justice for all, America must increase its efforts to protect and restore crime victims' rights; and WHEREAS, all citizens must do their part to stop violence by reporting crimes, by supporting more equitable sentencing laws, .and by refusing to tolerate injustice in our homes or on our streets; and WHEREAS, crime victims and those who serve them deserve our support for their quest to secure victim justice; and 2 WHEREAS, a national commitment to violence reduction and victim assistance will help bring criminals, to justice, and justice to victims: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED By THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COMM, FLORIDA that the week of April 25 to May 1, 1993 be designated as CRIME VICT3MS' RIGHTS WEEK in Indian River County. The Board further urges all citizens to join forces with victim service programs, criminal justice officials and concerned citizens throughout Indian River County to support victims' rights. Adopted this 20th day of April, 1993. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Ide"A.—or r�:aee- Richard N. Bird, Chairman C. Proclamation Designating April 25 - May 2, 1993 as Soil & Water Stewardship Week in Indian River County, Florida P R O C L A M A T I O N DESIGNATING APRIL 25 THROUGH MAY 2, 1993 AS SOIL AND WATER STEWARDSHIP WEEK IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA WHEREAS, out well-being depends on the production'of ample food, fiber and other products of the soil; and WHEREAS, the quality and quantity of these products depend •on the conservation, wise use and proper management •of soil and water resources; and WHEREAS, protection of our water from pollution depends on sound conservation practices; and WHEREAS, conservation districts provide a practical and democratic organization through which landowners take the initiative to conserve and make proper use of these resources; - and 3 L:� APR - 6 1993 �ooK $9 PA ^' -'o uO I r APR - 61993 BOOK 89 M401 WHEREAS, the conservation movement is carrying forward a program of soil and water conservation in cooperation with numerous agencies and countless individuals: NOW, THEREFORE; BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the week of April 25 through May 2, 1993 be designated as SOIL AND WATER STEWARDSHIP WEEK in Indian River County. The Board appreciates the value of our soil and water to the public welfare, and honors those who protect those resources. Adopted this 13th day of April, 1993. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Richard N. Bird, Chairman D. Press Journal for BCC Office The Board reviewed the following memo from Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht: TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht /IYIA RE: Press Journal for BCC office Frequently Commissioners need to refer to articles printed in the Press Journal newspaper and must go to other offices to borrow one. The cost for one year's subscription is $76.00. I recommend that the County Commission approve the purchase of a six month subscription for the County Commission office to take us through this fiscal year. There is enough money in account 001-101-511-35.40 (Books and Magazines) to cover this. 4 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously agreed to purchase a 6 -month subscription to the Vero Beach Press Journal, at a total cost of $38.00. E. AyRroval of Sebastian City Council Members Appointed to Serve on IRC Committees The Board reviewed the following letter dated March 25, 1993: ,�Z3242576 MAR 193, RftgvkA rftAA. �►V Ca City of Sebastian rPOST OFFICE BOX 780127 o SEBASTIAN, FLORIbA 329 _ TELEPHONE (407) 5WS330 o FAX (407) 589-5570 March 25, 1993 The Honorable Richard Bird Chairman -- Board of County Commissioners Indian River County 1840 25th Street Vero Beach,'FL 32960 Dear commissioner Bird: The following Sebastian City Council members were selected to serve on various Indian River County Committees. * Councilmember Norma Damp will serve as member to the Economic Development Council. * Vice Mayor Frank Oberbeck will remain as member and Robert Freeland will serve as altbrnate to MPO (previously Transportation Planning) * Mayor Lonnie Powell will remain as member to Emergency Services District Committee. * Cduncilmember Carolyn Corum will remain as member to the Land Acquisition Committee. All members can be contacted at Sebastian City Hall,. PO Box 780127, Sebastian, Florida 32958. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. sincerely, . Yn . M. O'Halloran, CMC/AAE City Clerk KOH/sam cc: City council 5 APR - 6 1993 BOOK 89 F'AGc 20 r APR ® 61993 BOOK 89 FACE 203 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously accepted the appointments of Sebastian City Council Members to various IRC committees, as set forth in the above letter. F. Appointment of Barbara Holmen on Parks and Recreation Committee The Board reviewed the following letter dated March 25, 1993: MAYOR: ROBERT J.SCHOEN VICE MAYOR: CHARLES C. WURMSTEDT COUNCIL GEORGE P. BUNNELL BARBARA J. HOLM& JOHN E. O'SUWVAN TOWN MANAGER; JOSEPH C. DORM TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES 6001 NORTH A -1-A, INDIAN RIVER SHORES, FLORIDA 32963 r (407) 231-1771 FAX (407) 231-4348 Richard N. Bird, Commissioner The Board of County Commissioners 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, F1. 32960 Dear Dick, 'fi n 1993 BOARD co/ED ION� � { El March 25, 1993 At its March 25 meeting, the Town Council of Indian River Shores voted by resolution to nominate Barbara Holmen as its representative on the County's Parks & Recreation Committee. I would appreciate your submitting this nomination to the Board of County Commissioners at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, %�� Robert J. Schoen, Mayor ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously appointed Barbara Holmen as representative of the Town of Indian River Shores on the Parks & Recreation Committee. 6 G. Release of Easement Reauest by Yolanda and Arthur Jackson, Jr.. Lots 4 and 5. Block 1. King's Music Lands S/D The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 16, 1993: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE: 4obertt' Keat g,CP Community Development Director THROUGH: Roland DeBlois, AICP Chief, Environmental Planning & Code Enforcement FROM: Charles W. Heathc4JA Code Enforcement Officer DATE: March 16, 1993 SUBJECT: RELEASE OF EASEMENT REQUEST BY: Yolanda & Arthur Jackson, Jr. Lots 4 & 5, Block 1, King's Music Lands Subdivision It requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of April 6, 1993. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: The County has been petitioned by Arthur Jackson, Jr. and Yolanda E. Jackson, his wife, owners of the subject property, for the release of the common three (3) foot side lot utility and drainage easements of Lots 4 & 5, Block 1, King's Music Lands Subdivision. It is the petitioner's intention to construct a single-family residence on the subject property. The current zoning classification of the subject property is RS -3, Single -Family Residential District. The Land Use Designation is L- 11 allowing up to three (3) units per acre. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS: The request has been reviewed by Southern Bell Telephone Company, Florida Power and Light Corporation, T.C.I. Cable Corporation, and the Indian River County Utilities Department and the Road & Bridge and Engineering Divisions. Based upon their reviews, it has been determined that there would be no adverse impact to utilities being supplied to the subject property. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends to the Board, through the adoption of a resolution, release of the common three (3) foot side lot utility and drainage easements of Lots 4 & 5, being the southerly three (3) feet of Lot 4, and the northerly three (3) feet of Lot 5, Block 1, King's Music Lands Subdivision, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 6, Page 17 of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. 7 APR - 61993 Roof 89 FACE 204 and BOOK ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 93-73A, abandoning certain easements on Lots 4 and 5, Block 1, King's Music Lands Subdivision, as recommended by staff. RESOLUTION NO. 93-73 A 89 wutk205 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ABANDONING CERTAIN EASEMENTS ON LOTS 4 & 5, BLOCK 1 KING'S MUSIC LANDS SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 6, PAGE 17 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS 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 329601 Grantor, to Arthur Jackson, Jr. & Yolanda E. Jackson, his wife, their successors, in interest, heirs and assigns, whose mailing address is 3420 50th Place, Lot 43, Box 64, Vero Beach, Florida 32960-6208, Grantee, as follow: Indian River County does hereby abandon all right, title, and interest that it may have in the following described easements: the common three (3) foot side lot utility and drainage easements of Lots 4 & 5, Block 11 King's Music Lands Subdivision, being the southerly three (3) feet of Lot 4, and the northerly three (3) feet of Lot 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 6, Page 17 of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. Tax parcel control number: -17-32-39-00002-0010-00004.0 THIS RESOLUTION was moved for adoption by Commissioner _Eggert , seconded by Commissioner Tippin , and adopted on the 6 day of April , 1993, by the following vote: 8 -- RESOLUTION NO. 93-73 A Commissioner Richard N. Bird AYE Commissioner John W. Tippin wvr Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert ----AYE Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Commissioner Fran B. Adams AY—E The Chairman declared the resolution duly passed, and adopted this 6 day of April STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER) , 1993. BOARD OF COUNTY, COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY ichard N. Bird Attest By ��_Zaa� Jeffrey K. Barton Clerk �%(! _ y. �� /�' I HEREBY CERTIFY, that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized in the State and County aforesaid, to take acknowledgments, personally appeared Richard N. Bird and Jeffrey K. Barton well know to me to be the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners and Clerk, respectively, of Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, and they acknowledged executing the same. WITNESS my�and and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this t< day of �,,,,,z(?' 1993. PATMCIA BARGO HELD Notary Pub5c, Et le of lod& Myr e- mm cx-ucs ': ^• �t 28 1993 1r:4atAss �,e 30-mrt.lle-L t Notary Public 1P,4M c (f+ DA -e-" Os AZ -a 0 BOOK 89 PAGE 206 r APR - 6 1993 H. Final Plat Approval for Serene Acres SID pply � d00!( 09 PnF.207 The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 26, 1993: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Robert M.-Ke-at4hg,, AIEP Community Deve opmen Director THROUGH: Stan Bolin AICP Planning Director FROM: John W. McCoy d M Senior Planner, Current Development DATE: March 26, 1993 SUBJECT: Final Plat Approval for Serene Acres Subdivision SD -91-01-012 91070109 It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board.of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of April 6, 1993. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: Serene Acres is a proposed 6 lot subdivision of a 2.75 acre parcel of land located at the northwest corner of Roseland Road and North Indian River Drive. The subject property is zoned RS -61 Single Family Residential District (up to 6 units per acre) and has an M- 1, Medium Density Residential (up to 8 units per acre) land use designation. The proposed density for the subdivision is 2.2 units per acre. , On January 23, 1992, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted preliminary plat approval for the Serene Acres Subdivision. A land development permit for the project was subsequently issued, and project construction has been completed. The developer, Nocam Ventures, Inc. and Fredrick E. Kengeter, through its agent Masteller & Moler, Inc. is requesting final plat approval and has submitted the following: 1. A plat in conformance with the originally approved preliminary plat; 2. A certificate improvements. ANALYSIS: of completion for all required subdivision The required improvements have been completed by the developer, and a certificate of completion has been issued by the Public Works Department. A warranty and maintenance agreement and cash escrow agreement have been submitted to cover certain drainage improvements within the existing county road right-of-way. The utility improvements have been warranted separately. The developer has complied with the appropriate requirements to obtain final -plat approval. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant final plat approval for the Serene Acres Subdivision, and authorize the chairman to sign the cash escrow agreement. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously granted final plat approval for the Serene Acres Subdivision and authorized the Chairman to sign the cash escrow agreement, as recommended by staff. COPY OF AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD I. Release of Utility Liens The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 18, 1993: TO: BOARD of COUNTY COHNISSIONERS FROM: Lea R. Keller, CLA, County Attorney's Office DATE: March 18, 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 so that they can be recorded. The name and parcel ID # are: 1. Releases from Rockridge Sewer Projects DALEY BYERS 2. Satisfaction of extended payments of impact fees: BRYNAN DILLARD JOHNSON LOMBRIM MANAHAN MARINI GLINTON/STITSON 3. Releases from 8th Street Water Project: DUNN LYNN JOHNS MORRISON YOUNG 11 APR 6 i��� BOOK 89 FacF'208 APP m 6 1993 BOOK 89 FAGF.209 3. Releases from 12th Street Water Project: PICKERILL (4) THOMPSON 4. Release from Rings Hwy. Water project: VAUGHN 5. Release from North County Sewer Project: BERLINGIERI 6. Releases from Phase I Water Project: BARKER BRACKETT BROOKS CANCILLA CARLINI CLARKE T CHAFFEE GIUFFREDA GASKEY HAMMETT HARMODY KNUDSEN SABINA SCHATZBERG SHILKUSKI 6. Releases from Phase II Water Project: GRIFFETH HHFFMAN KING LALA LAUSENSTEIN RODGERS WEST 7. Release of River Shores Water Project: BRADSHAW S. Releases of Seminole Shores Wastewater Project: DILORETO (2) FUFIDIO/McCAIN (2) POLCE (2) 9. Releases of Summerplace Water Project: LANG (Glendale Federal) WILTON RZ=ST: The Board approve the document and authorize the Chairman to sign. ON MOTION -by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved satisfactions and releases of liens, as listed in the above staff's memorandum. SAID SATISFACTIONS AND RELEASES ARE ON FILE IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 12 e J. Release of Utility Liens The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 23, 1993: TO: _ Board of County Commissioners FROM: Lea R. Keller, CIA, County Attorney's Office DATE: March 23, 1993 RE: CONSENT AGENDA - BCC MEETING 4/6/93 RELEASE OF UTILITY LIENS The following lien -related documents -are prepared in proper form for the Board to authorize the Chairman to sign them: 1. Release of Special Assessment Lien from Kings Highway Water Project in the names of: 2. 3. INDIAN RIVER MOSQUITO CONTROL HANSON/WILD RAY HOLTZCLAW LAFOND SCHWIERING HAY BRAUN GOIN SNYDER JACQUES RUNNELS Release of Special Assessment Lien from Phase I Water Project in the names of: FERNANDEZ COOK POWELL LEE SCHLAUFMAN BLANCHARD COLLIER ST. PIERRE PEDRAZZOLI VORDERMEIER III ROMANO NEVILLE SABONJOHN MURRAY WOODARD GIETZEN FANTACONE SULLIVAN EVANS WHITNEY McCABE GRAVLIN ARNOLD DEISS Release of Special Assessment Lien frau Map #26, State Road 60 Sewer project in the name of: BRIGGS ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved releases of special assessment liens, as listed in the above staff's memorandum. SAID RELEASES ARE ON FILE IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 13 SPR 61993 BOOK 89 FACE210 FF,_ APR BOOK 89 K. Transfer of Park Place Water Treatment Plant Site to the Cit of Sebastian The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 29, 1993: TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney DATE: March 29, 1993 RE: TRANSFER OF PARK PLACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT SITE TO THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN When Indian River County became the utility provider for the City of Sebastian, the County became the owner and operator of a water and wastewater plant in Park Place Mobile Some Park. With the connection of the park to the County sewer system, the wastewater site was returned to the former owner, Nelson Hyatt, pursuant to an agreement of the County to return the land when it was no longer needed. Approximately one year ago the County and the City agreed to return the County's utility authority to the City under an agreement during which the County would provide certain operation, maintenance, and billing activities for the City for one year. At the end of that one year, on May 1, 1993, the City will undertake total responsibility for the water and sewer operation in Sebastian. By May 1, 1993, it will, therefore, be necessary for the County to transfer the water plant site in Park Place to the City for use by the City as the first water plant for the City system. The City will take title subject to its obligation -to return the water plant site to Nelson Hyatt if and when the site is no longer used for utility purposes. REQUESTED ACTION: That the Board authorize the Chairman to execute the attached County Deed of the water treatment plant site in Park Place to the City of Sebastian. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously authorized the Chairman to execute the County Deed transferring the water treatment plant site in Park Place to the City of Sebastian, as recommended by staff. COPY OF DEED IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD 14 � � s L. 'Award of Bid #3079 - Wood Hollow Water Main The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 29, 1993: DATE: March 29, 1993 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director Jig Department of General Services FROM: Fran Boynton Powell, Purchasing Manager SUBJ: Award Bid #3079/Wood Hollow Water Main IRC Project # UW -92 -37 -DS Utilities Dept BACROROUND INFORMATION Bid Opening Date: March 24, 1993 Advertising Dates: March 10, 17, 1993 Specifications Mailed To: Forty -One (41) Vendors Replies: Six (6) Vendors BBCOMMENDATIONs Staff recommends that the bid be awarded to Treasure Coast Contracting as the lowest, most responsive and responsible bidder meeting specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid. In addition, staff requests the Board's approval of the attached Agreement when all requirements are met and approved as to form by the County Attorney. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously awarded Bid #3079 in the amount of $42,399.20 to Treasure Coast Contracting, as recommended by staff. CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD 15 APR -61993 BOOK 89 F+,,F212 BID TABULATION Treasure Coast Contracting $ 42,399.20 Vero Beach, FL Timothy Rose Enterprises $ 45,884.30 Vero Beach, FL Driveways, Inc $ 52,700.60 Titusville, FL Chaz Equipment $ 71,162.85 Delray Beach, FL JoBear, Inc $ 73,035.60 Palm Bay, FL Tri -Sure Corporation $ 74,310.00 Auburndale, FL TOTAL AMOUNT OF BIDS $ 42,399.20 SOURCE OF FONDS: Utilities General Impact Fees BUDGETED AMOUNT: $ 66,165.00 BBCOMMENDATIONs Staff recommends that the bid be awarded to Treasure Coast Contracting as the lowest, most responsive and responsible bidder meeting specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid. In addition, staff requests the Board's approval of the attached Agreement when all requirements are met and approved as to form by the County Attorney. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously awarded Bid #3079 in the amount of $42,399.20 to Treasure Coast Contracting, as recommended by staff. CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD 15 APR -61993 BOOK 89 F+,,F212 BOOK 89 PAGE 213 M. Proclamation Designating the Week of April 24-30, 1993 as National Preschool Immunization Week in Indian River Count Florida PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 24-30, 1993 AS NATIONAL PRESCHOOL IMMUNIZATION WEER IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA WHEREAS, early immunizations for preventable diseases, such as measles, mumps, rubella, polio, diptheria and tetanus are necessary to maintain our children's health and well-being; and WHEREAS, nearly 95 percent of America's four million children are fully immunized by the time they enter school; one third of our preschoolers fail to get the proper immunizations, and in the inner cities, the immunization rate is as low as 40 to 50 percent; and. WHEREAS, the Children's Aption Network and a coalition of business, health, government and community organizations, including the Office of the Surgeon General and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, have joined together to launch the National Immunization Campaign; and WHERMS, the National Immunization Campaign is a nationwide public awareness and grass roots organizing campaign to educate the families in America about immunization and to help address the nation's long-term immunization and overall child health needs; and WHEREAS, during the week of April 24-30, 1993, the National Immunization Campaign is undertaking an intensive effort to vaccinate children at risk for preventable childhood diseases by expanding clinic hours, increasing the number of immunization screenings at hospitals and clinics, distributing educational materials, and providing access to local hotlines; and WHEREAS, Indian River is one of the counties in the country where a coalition of health and social service providers, advocacy, business, civic and religious organizations have joined with the National Immunization Campaign to offer families expanded access to immunization services: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the week of April 24-30, 1993 be designated as NATIONAL PRESCHOOL IMMUNIZATION WEEK in Indian River County, and the Board calls upon all residents of this great county to join with us in supporting the goals and activities of the National Immunization Campaign to ensure that our children are fully immunized. Adopted this 6th day of April, 1993. 16 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Richard N. Bird, Chairman r _ � PUBLIC DISCUSSION - VERBAL REQUEST BY ERIC JOHN TO SPEAR TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REGARDING UTILITY BILLING, UTILITY RIGHTS, AND UTILITY MANAGEMENT The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 31, 1993: DATE: MARCH 31,1993 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATO THRU: TACE G. PINTO DIRECTOR OF UTILITY VICES FROM: HARRY E. AS ASSISTANT OR OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: MR. ERIC JOHN This is to advise that the Department attempted to meet with Mr. Eric John, but he advised that he wanted to take his matters directly to the Board of County Commissioners... Eric John, 136 Sue Avenue, Whispering Palms Mobile Home Park, Sebastian, requested a copy of today's minutes after they are approved by the Board. He distributed copies of utility bills, several pieces of correspondence, and newspaper articles to the Board. Mr. John mentioned his neighbor, Donald Helmboldt, who continued to receive utility bills at his new address for service to a mobile home that he sold. Mr. Helmboldt called the Utilities Department on several occasions and was told to ignore any future bills. He also wrote a letter but did not receive a reply. Mr. John felt that the Utilities Department should have transferred the unpaid bills to the owner of the mobile home park and that Mr. Helmboldt deserves an apology. Mr. John contended that his own billing problems have not been resolved, even though he wrote several letters to the Utilities Department. He complained about a bill he received for 3,000 gallons of water when he was up north. He felt that someone at the Utilities Department should inform the customers that the water can be shut off next to the meter, which he did not learn until recently. Mr. John felt that the penalties charged by the Utilities Department are outrageous. He mentioned an article in the Vero 17 3 BOOK 89 Fut X14 FF- -7 APR igo BooK 8v9 PAUF 215 Beach Press Journal stating that the Utilities Department has spent $10 million on consultants, which he felt was horrendous. Chairman Bird indicated that in addition to consulting services, the $10 million included engineering for system and plant design, line extensions, etc. Mr. John strongly suggested that if that is the case, the County should provide the public with exact totals for engineering, architects, and other consultants. Continuing, he related that his sewer bill used to be $2.50 a month when the mobile home park had its own sewage treatment plant. Now he pays $15.11, which is a 600% increase. In addition, he had to pay an impact fee of $1,250.00 when the County took over the system. He directed the Board's attention to a newspaper editorial stating that impact fees are counterproductive. Mr. John could not understand why the Utilities Department cannot give people a discounted rate when they are up north like the telephone, electric and cable television companies do. He thought that the utilities bills should include a return envelope for the customers to use when they mail their payments. Chairman Bird directed Utility Services Director Terry Pinto to prepare a written response to the above issues and mail a copy to Mr. John at his summer address. 18 1 PUBLIC BEARING - REZONING REQUEST OF SHARON SWEZEY AND OTHERS 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 personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being in the matter In the Court, was pub- lished In said newspaper in the issues of % Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed b 6f b � is 'Fday of A,.D. 19 ag _ (Business Manager) (SEAL) NOTICE — FRO MARM U tine of Fwedrp to o Wit ft goffaa ficeDbvi PRt1 Pro}aaeebnYel owed b AdAeO�Wilyrn8hwa^�— tu�bleet pMroper�ly boated at t t =.W of f91h �6et "ard 43rd Awawa, and 0WWM gW=kW* 2.9 - emee The eubJaot pop " lee in the eoutheaat N aeatlon of Seaton 4, Towm* 33% Rop W Wf end b ft In tdm RNwcoirgy Fla PN+bto at whbh prfjea In tderaet and; elm elwfl twee an omanunMv in ia.t mo Z& Ing ouao m %.nwnyGipmnaeQlarwrr! adopt soothe► mdr�i .dletrbt, cher tion Mw dot re• _ WNW. prod" ItIS wiffln far same ge„e,al uae Mjrorw who may, wish t? +meet &Vdedebn wNW may be nwde at foie ��'°°Q'o WN need to art.awe that a wrbasn rewd of the bb wtaoh�ttwappsellebesed w� jaeetlnp ==W MoVj Amftm Comdkoft at 59 toendon 408 ateea tt 48 Wm in - o , i ofof -Ndm Film eBowdotcou�ha fA_ WM ta i I� �' QWWM r Community Development Director Bob Keating presented the following memo dated March 26, 1993: 19 BOOK 89 FAU k4 r APR - Go 1993 TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DEPARTMENT BEAD CONCURRENCE Robert Z. Reat g, ,P THRU: Sasan Rohani e;•2 Chief, Long-Range/Planning FROM: John Wachtel Staff Plann , Long -Range Planning DATE: March 26, 1993 , BOOK 89 PmU ` 17 RE: Sharon Swezey and others Request to Rezone approximately 2.6 acres from RS -3 to PRO (RZON 92-12-0066) It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of April 61 1993. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS This is a request to rezone approximately 2.6 acres from RS -3, Single -Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre) to PRO, Professional Office District. The subject property is located at the southwest corner of 43rd Avenue and 19th Street. It consists of five lots with six owners. The owners are Sharon B. Swezey, Ellen Mae West, Andrew Wayne Blanton, Donna R. Blanton, Paul R. Mathis, and Ethel L. Mathis. The purpose of this request is to secure the necessary zoning to develop the property with professional and medical office uses. As originally submitted, this request involved thirteen lots and 3.9 acres. Attachment 3 depicts the originally submitted 3.9 acre property, while Attachment 5 shows the property in more detail. At its meeting of February 11, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-0 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request to rezone the 3.9 acre property to PRO. Although the Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend approval of the original request, the Commission raised the issue of access during its deliberations. This issue was important because several individual lots had frontage only on 44th Avenue. Even though each of the lots having frontage only on 44th Avenue was owned in combination with lots fronting 43rd Avenue, the Planning and Zoning Commission correctly noted that nothing would prohibit the lots fronting on 44th Avenue from being sold off separately. If that occurred, the county would then be required to provide access to 44th Avenue for those lots having frontage on only 44th Avenue. The access issue is important because it affects the adjacent residentially zoned property. If professional or medical office uses were allowed on sites accessing 44th Avenue, the result would be an increase in traffic on 44th Avenue and a mixture of residential and non-residential traffic on that roadway. Such a mixture of traffic would not only impact the neighborhood, but also conflict with the county's policy of separating residential and non-residential traffic. - 20 Subsequent to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, staff coordinated with the applicants to resolve the access issue. As a result, the applicants amended their rezoning request to omit the five lots that have frontage on only 44th Avenue (see Attachments 2 and 4). With that action, access is no longer an issue. Since the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, action has also been taken to resolve one other issue. That was the issue of the minimum lot size requirement of the PRO district. According to PRO district regulations, the minimum lot size for non-residential uses for parcels zoned PRO is 10,000 square feet. Because most of the individual lots comprising the subject property were smaller than that minimum, those lots would be non -conforming if rezoned PRO and used for non-residential purposes. To address this problem, the applicants unified several of the remaining lots. These unifications were accomplished:` by combining lot 8 with lot 9, combining lot 10 with lot 11, and combining lot 12 with the adjacent parcel to the south. Attachment 6 depicts the lots that were combined. As a result of these unifications, each lot that comprises the subject property is at least 10,000 square feet in size and conforms with PRO district regulations. Consequently, lot size is no longer an issue. Since the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, the total number of lots comprising the subject property has been reduced from thirteen to five. This was a result of eliminating the five lots with frontage only on 44th Avenue and unifying several of the remaining lots. Therefore, the subject property now totals approximately 2.6 acres and consists of five lots. The subject property is graphically depicted on Attachment 4. Existing Land Use Pattern The subject property and property to the west are zoned RS -3, Single -Family Residential District. Of the five lots comprising the subject property, one is vacant, while the other four are developed with five single-family homes. The five lots that were removed from the subject property are currently vacant. To the west of the subject property, across 44th Avenue, there are two lots. The northern lot is approximately 3.66 acres and consists of vacant, uncleared land. The southern lot is approximately one acre in size and contains a single-family home. The land to the south of the subject property is zoned RS -2, Single -Family Residential District. This property is a 4.36 acre parcel containing a church. To the north of the subject property, the land is zoned CG, General Commercial District, and developed with an animal hospital and a convenience plaza. Since 43rd Avenue is the boundary between the city of Vero Beach and unincorporated Indian River County, the property to the east of the subject property, across 43rd Avenue, is within the Vero Beach city limits. This property is zoned RM -10, Medium Density Multiple -Family District, on the city's zoning map, and consists of one- and two-story professional and medical office buildings. Under the city's land development regulations, these offices are non -conforming uses in the residentially zoned area. The City of Vero Beach is presently considering action to rezone this area to POI, Professional Office and Institutional District. With POI zoning, the uses in this area would be conforming. 21 APR o 6 1993 BOK APR m 6 1993 BOOK Future Land Use Pattern 89 PA -UM The subject property and properties to the west and south are designated L-1, Low -Density Residential, on the county future land use map. The L-1 designation permits residentAal densities up to 3 units/acre. Properties to the north of the subject property are designated C/I, Commercial/ Industrial,, which permits commercial and industrial zoning designations. Land to the east of the subject property, across 43rd Avenue, is within the city of Vero Beach. This land is designated RM, Residential Medium, on the city's future land use map. The RM designation permits residential densities up to 10 units/acre. Environment The property is not designated as environmentally important or environmentally sensitive by the comprehensive plan; no wetlands exist on site. Although there are native trees (oaks) on the property, environmental planning staff have indicated that no native upland plant communities `exist on site. According to Flood Insurance Rating Maps, the subject property does not contain any flood hazard areas. Utilities and Services The site is within the Urban Service Area of the county. Water lines extend to the site from the South County Water Plant. The subject property is within the area serviced by the West County Wastewater Plant; however, wastewater lines do not extend the site. Transportation System The property abuts 43rd Avenue to the east, 44th Avenue to the west, and 19th Street to the north. Forty-third Avenue is classified as an urban minor arterial road on the future roadway thoroughfare plan map. This segment of 43rd Avenue is a two-lane paved road with approximately 80 feet of existing public road right-of-way. Forty-third Avenue is programmed for expansion to 100 feet of public road right-of-way by 2010. Forty-fourth Avenue is a two-lane, partially paved, local road with approximately 50 feet of existing public road right-of-way. A barricade on 44th Avenue prevents through traffic from 16th Street to 19th Street. Nineteenth Street is a two-lane paved local road with approximately 50 feet of existing public road right-of-way. The Professional Office District The PRO district is designed to encourage the development of vacant land and the redevelopment of older residential areas along major thoroughfares in selected areas of the county. The PRO district serves as a transitional district between commercial and residential districts. According to the land development regulations, the PRO district shall be limited in size so as not to create or significantly extend strip commercial development. Specifically, the regulations state that PRO districts shall have a minimum size of five acres and a maximum size of 25 acres. However, the district may be reduced to 2.5 acres if it meets all of the following criteria: W • The parcel(s) abuts a commercial node; and • The parcels) is located within a substantially developed area; and • The parcel(s) is located in an area dominated by nonresidential uses. The PRO district is one of only two commercial zoning districts (the Neighborhood Commercial District is the other) allowed in areas with residential land use designations. Therefore, the PRO district is intended to be compatible with residential uses. As the name suggests, the PRO district is limited almost exclusively to professional offices. These uses generally produce less noise, traffic, and lights and fewer impacts than commercial. uses. Besides offices, uses allowed within the PRO district include single- and multiple -family residential, places of worship, bed and breakfasts, post offices, libraries, and child care and adult care facilities. ANALYSIS In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the application will be presented. The analysis will include a description of: • concurrency of public facilities; • compatibility with the surrounding area; • consistency with the comprehensive plan; • potential impact on environmental quality; and • appropriateness of the PRO district for the subject property. Concurrency of Public Facilities This site is located within the county Urban Service Area, an area deemed suited for urban scale development. The comprehensive plan establishes standards for: Transportation, Potable Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage and Recreation (Future Land Use Policy 3.1). The -adequate provision of these services is necessary to ensure the continued quality of.life enjoyed by the community. The comprehensive plan and land development regulations also require that new development be reviewed to ensure that the minimum acceptable standards for these services and facilities are maintained. Policy 3.2 of the Future Land Use Element states that no development shall be approved unless it is consistent with the concurrency management system component of the Capital Improvements Element. For rezoning requests, conditional concurrency review is required. Conditional voncurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility with respect to a proposed project. Since rezoning requests are not projects, county regulations call for the concurrency review to be based upon the most intense use possible of the subject property given the requested zoning district. For commercial rezoning requests, the most intense use possible (according to the county's land development regulations) is retail commercial with 10,000 square feet of gross floor area per acre of land proposed for rezoning. 23 APR - 61993 Booz 89,Fa,E,2?0 APR 4 R 1993 op BOOK F'AGE 2?1 As discussed in the description and conditions section, the size of the subject application's requested zoning district has been reduced from 3.9 acres to 2.6 acres. Since the following concurrency analysis was completed before the size of the subject property was reduced, the information used is for the original application's 3.9 acres, rather than the current 2.6 acres. Therefore, the impacts of the requested zoning district are actually somewhat overstated in this concurrency analysis. Based on the original application, the site information used for this concurrency analysis is as follows: 1. Size of Property Analyzed: 2. Size of Area to be Rezoned: 3. Existing Zoning Classification: 4. Proposed Zoning Classification: 5. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Existing Zoning Classification: t3.9 acres t2.6 acres RS -3, Single -Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre) PRO, Professional Office District 12 dwelling units (DU) 6. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Proposed Zoning Classification: 390000 sq. ft. of Retail Commercial (Shopping Center in the 5th Edition ITE Manual) - Transportation A review of the traffic impacts that would result from the development of the property indicates that the existing level of service "D" or better on 43rd Avenue and other impacted roads would not be lowered. The site information used for determining traffic impacts is as follows: Existing Land Use and Zoning 1. Average Weekday Trip Ends: 12 DU B 9.55 trip ends/DU (based on the ITE Manual) = 115 2. P.M. Peak Hour Trip ends: 12 DU 8 1 trip/DU (based on the ITE Manual) = 12 a. Inbound: . 65% or 8 (based on the ITE Manual) b. Outbound: 35% or 4 (based on the ITE Manual) Proposed Land Use and Zoning 1. Retail Commercial use Identified in 5th Edition ITE Manual: Shopping Center 2. For structures 10400 to 50,000 square feet (based upon the ITE Manual): a. Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends: 91.65/1000 gross sq. ft. b. 5-6 p.m. Peak Hour Vehicle Trip Ends: _ 8.44/1000 gross sq. ft. 24 3. - Formula for Determining Total New Trip Ends: Total Square Footage X Vehicle Trip Rate (trip distribution based on a Modified Gravity Model) a. Total Average Weekday Trip Ends: 39,000 X 91.65/1000 = 3,574 b. Total P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Season Trip Ends: 39,000 X 8.44/1000 = 329 c. Percentage New Peak Hour/Peak Season Trip Ends: 49% (based on the ITE Manual) d. New Total Average Weekday Trip Ends: 0.49 X 31574 = 18751 e. New P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Season Trip Ends: 0.49 X 329 = 161 - Inbound: 50% (based on the ITE Manual) or 80 - Outbound: 50% (based on the ITE Manual) or 81 4. Peak Direction of 43rd Avenue, from 16th Street to S.R. 60: Southbound 5. Traffic Capacity on 43rd Avenue, from 16th Street to S.R. 60 at a Level of Service "D": 830 peak hour/peak season/peak .direction trips 6. Existing Traffic volume on this segment of 43rd Avenue: 373 peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips The number of Average Weekday Trip Ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the present zoning is 115. This was determined by multiplying the 12 DU's (most intense use) by ITE's factor of 9.55 Average Daily Trip Ends/DU. The number of peak hour/peak season/peak direction trip ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the present zoning is S. This was determined by taking 658 (ITE Manual) of 12 DU's (most intense use) multiplied by ITE's factor of 1 peak hour trip end/DU. The number of Average Weekday Trip Ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the requested zoning is 3,574. This was determined by multiplying 39,000 square feet of Shopping Center Use (most intense use) by ITE's factor of 91.65 Average Weekday Trip Ends/1000 square feet. The number of P.M. Peak Hour Trip Ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the requested zoning is 329. This was determined by multiplying 39,000 square feet of Shopping Center Use (most intense use) by ITE's factor of 8.44 Peak Hour Vehicle Trip Ends/1000 square feet. The ITE has determined that 498 of the trip ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the requested zoning will be new trip ends. Therefore, 498 of the 30574 Average Weekday Trip Ends, or 1,751, will be new. Similarly, 498, or 161, of the 329 P.M. Peak Hour Trip Ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the requested zoning will be new. According to ITE, 508, or 81, of the New P.M. Peak Hour Trip Ends will be outbound, and 508, or 81, will be inbound. Therefore, the most intense use of the subject property under the requested zoning 25 APR - 6 1993BOOK 89 U'U' 2? Opp BOOK 89 FA;E 223. will generate 81 new p.m. peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips. This is 73 more than the eight generated by the most intense use of the subject property under the present zoning. Using a modified gravity model and a hand assignment, the -trips generated under the proposed zoning classification were then assigned to roadways on the network. Capacities for all roadway segments in Indian River County are calculated and updated annually, utilizing the latest and best available peak season traffic characteristics and applying Appendix G methodology as set forth in the Florida Department of Transportation Level of Service Manual. Available capacity is the total capacity less existing and committed traffic volumes; this is updated daily based upon vesting associated with project approvals. The traffic capacity for the segment of 43rd Avenue adjacent to this site is 830 trips (peak hour/peak season/peak direction) at a Level of Service "D", while the existing traffic volume on this segment of 43rd Avenue is 373 trips (peak hour/peak season/peak direction). The additional 81 peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips created by the proposed zoning district will increase the total peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips for this segment of 43rd Avenue to approximately 454. Based on staff analysis, it was determined that 43rd Avenue and all other impacted roads can accommodate the additional trips without decreasing their existing levels of service. Impacted roads are defined in the county's Land Development Regulations as roadway segments which receive five percent (5%) or more daily project traffic or fifty (50) or more daily project trips, whichever is less. The table below identifies each of the impacted roadway segments associated with this rezoning. As indicated in that table, there is sufficient capacity in all of the segments to accommodate the Projected traffic associated with the request. TRAFFIC CONCURRENCY DETERMINATION Impacted Road Segments (peak hour/peak season/peak direction) Roadway Segment Road From To Segment Capacity LOS "D" 1325 1330 U.S. 1 Q.S. 1 12th at. S. vsC Limits 2370 1335 U.S. 1 S. VBC Limits 17th at. 2270 1925 S.R. 60 17th St. 66th Ave. S.R. 60 58th Ave. 2270 1760 1930 1935 B.R. 60 58th Ave. 43rd Ave. 2650 1940 S.R. 60 S.R. 60 43rd Ave. 27th Ave. 2650 1945 S.R. 60 27th Ave. 20th Ave. 20th Ave. 2600 1950 S.R. 60 Old Dixie Hwy. Old Dixie Hwy. 10th Ave. 1638 1638 1955 2030 S.R. 60 16th 10th -Ave. U.S. 1 1638 2040 St. 16th St. 43rd Ave. 27th Ave. 27th Ave. 830 2050 2060 16th St. 20th Ave. 20th Ave. Old Dixie Hwy. 830 970 2260 16th/17th St. Old Dixie Hwy. U.S. 1 970 2330 12th St. Old Dixie Hwy. Old Dixie Hwy. S. VBC U.S. 1 830 2335 Old Dixie Hwy. Limits 16th St. 16th at. 830 2460 2470 27th Ave. S. VBC Limits S.R. 60 16th St. 830 830 2925 27th Ave. 43rd Ave. 16th ft S.R. 60 830 2930 43rd Ave. 12th 8t. 16th St. 16th St. 830 2935 43rd Ave. S.R. 60 S.R. 60 26th St. 830 830 26 - M M - Water The subject property is serviced by the South County Water Plant. With the most intense use allowed under the proposed rezoning, the subject property will have a water consumption rate of 11.7 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU), or 21925 gallons/day. This is based upon a level of service standard of 250 gallons/ERU/day. Since the South County Water Plant currently has a remaining capacity of approximately 2,400,000 gallons/day, the plant can accommodate the additional demand generated by the proposed zoning. - Wastewater The subject property is within the area serviced by the West County Wastewater Plant. Based upon the most intense use allowed under the proposed zoning classification, development of the property will have a wastewater generation rate of approximately 11.7 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU), or 2,925 gallons/day. This is based upon the level of service standard of 250 gallons/ERU/day. Since the West County Wastewater Plant currently has a remaining capacity of more than 500,000 gallons/day, the plant can accommodate the additional wastewater generated by the proposed zoning. - Solid Waste Solid waste service includes pick-up by private operators and disposal at the county landfill. For a 39,000 square foot commercial development on the subject site, solid waste generation will be approximately 195 Waste Generation Units (WGU) or 578 cubic yards of solid waste/year. A WGU is a waste generation unit measurement equivalent to 2.9625 cubic yards of waste/year. While WGU's are units of measurement which can be applied to either commercial or residential uses, WGU's must be considered in terms of residential units in order to correspond to the county's solid waste level of.service standards. According to the county's solid waste regulations, each residential unit generates 1.6 WGUs/unit. With the county's adopted level of service standard of 2.37 cubic yards/person/year and the county's average of two persons/unit, each WGU is equivalent to 1.25 people (2/1.6 = 1.25) and 2.9625 27 APR - 61993 OK 89 F,;E2,24 Existing Demand -e -t -i Total Available Positive Roadway Ex Is i ng Me a Segment segment Project Concurrency segment volume Volume Demand Capacity Demand Determination 1325 1526 58 1584 786 9 Y 1330 1341 57 1398 872 13 Y 1335 1341 56 1397 873 17 Y 1925 972 59 1031 729 4 Y 1930 972 110 1082 1568 17 Y 1935 612 73 685 1965 62 Y 1940 878 51 929 1671 45 Y 1945 747 41 788 850 33 Y 1950 747 33 780 858 25 Y 1955 747 31 778 860 13 Y 2030 337 32 369 461 17 Y 2040 463 33 496 334 13 Y 2050 851 30 881 89 4 Y 2060 851 19 870 100 4 Y 2260 527 23 550 280 4 Y 2330 441 56 497 333 4 Y 2335 139 39 138 652 9 Y 2460 369 4 373 457 4 Y 2470 369 9 378 452 13 Y 2925 454 17 471-- 359 4 Y 2930 373 25 398 432 79 Y 2935 373 31 404 426 4 Y - Water The subject property is serviced by the South County Water Plant. With the most intense use allowed under the proposed rezoning, the subject property will have a water consumption rate of 11.7 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU), or 21925 gallons/day. This is based upon a level of service standard of 250 gallons/ERU/day. Since the South County Water Plant currently has a remaining capacity of approximately 2,400,000 gallons/day, the plant can accommodate the additional demand generated by the proposed zoning. - Wastewater The subject property is within the area serviced by the West County Wastewater Plant. Based upon the most intense use allowed under the proposed zoning classification, development of the property will have a wastewater generation rate of approximately 11.7 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU), or 2,925 gallons/day. This is based upon the level of service standard of 250 gallons/ERU/day. Since the West County Wastewater Plant currently has a remaining capacity of more than 500,000 gallons/day, the plant can accommodate the additional wastewater generated by the proposed zoning. - Solid Waste Solid waste service includes pick-up by private operators and disposal at the county landfill. For a 39,000 square foot commercial development on the subject site, solid waste generation will be approximately 195 Waste Generation Units (WGU) or 578 cubic yards of solid waste/year. A WGU is a waste generation unit measurement equivalent to 2.9625 cubic yards of waste/year. While WGU's are units of measurement which can be applied to either commercial or residential uses, WGU's must be considered in terms of residential units in order to correspond to the county's solid waste level of.service standards. According to the county's solid waste regulations, each residential unit generates 1.6 WGUs/unit. With the county's adopted level of service standard of 2.37 cubic yards/person/year and the county's average of two persons/unit, each WGU is equivalent to 1.25 people (2/1.6 = 1.25) and 2.9625 27 APR - 61993 OK 89 F,;E2,24 rAPR m61993 P 900K S9 cubic yards of solid waste/year (1.25 % 2.37). To calculate the total cubic yards of solid waste for the most intense use allowed on the subject property under the proposed zoning district, staff utilized the following formula: Total number of WGU's R 1.25 B 2.37 (195 8 1.25 R 2.37 a 578 cubic yards/year). A review of the solid waste capacity for the active segment of the county landfill indicates the availability of more than 900,000 cubic yards. The active segment of the landfill has a 3 year capacity, and the landfill has expansion capacity beyond 2010. Based on staff analysis, it was determined that the county landfill can accommodate the additional solid waste. - Drainage All developments are reviewed for compliance with county stormwater regulations which require on-site retention, preservation of floodplain storage and minimum finished floor elevations. In addition, development proposals must meet the discharge requirements of the county Stormwater Management Ordinance. The subject property is located within the M-1 Drainage Basin and the Indian River Farms Water Control District (IRFWCD). Since the site is located within the IRFWCD, development on the property will be prohibited from discharging any runoff in excess of 2 inches in a 24 hour period, which is the approved IRFWCD discharge rate. In this case, the minimum floor elevation level of service standards do not apply, since the property does not lie within a floodplain. However, both the on-site retention and discharge standards do apply. With the most intense use of this site under the proposed zoning, the maximum area of impervious surface will be approximately 110,425 square feet, or 2.5 acres. The maximum runoff volume, based on that amount of impervious surface and the 25 year/24 hour design storm, and given the IRFWCD 2 inch discharge requirement, will be approximately 127,700 cubic feet. In order to maintain the county's adopted level of service, the applicant will be required to retain approximately 99,400 cubic feet of runoff on- site. With the soils characteristic of the subject property, it is estimated that the pre -development runoff rate is 10.7 cubic feet/ second. Based upon staff's analysis, the drainage level of service standards will be met by limiting off-site discharge to the IRFWCD's maximum discharge rate of 2 inches in 24 hours, and requiring retention of 99,400 cubic feet of runoff for the most intense use of the property. As with all development, a more detailed review will be -conducted during the development approval process. - Recreation Recreation concurrency requirements apply only to residential development. Therefore, this rezoning request would not be required to satisfy recreation concurrency requirements. Based upon the analysis conducted, staff has determined that all concurrency -mandated facilities, including drainage, roads, solid waste, water, and wastewater, have adequate capacity to accommodate the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed zoning. Therefore, the concurrency test has been satisfied for the subject request. 28 r Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Rezoning requests must also be consistent with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land Use Map; these uses include agricultural, residential, recreational, 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 actions which the county will take in order to direct the community's development. As courses of action committed to by the county, policies provide the basis for all county land development related decisions. While all Comprehensive Plan policies are important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing rezoning requests. Of particular applicability for this request are Future Land Use Element Policies 1.30 and 2.51 and Economic Development Element Policy 1.4. - Future Land Use Policy 1.30 Future Land Use Policy 1.30 states that the county zoning code shall contain provisions for a Professional Office District in medium and low density residential districts along arterial roadways to encourage infill development of residential areas. The subject property is located along an arterial roadway, within an area designated low density residential. Therefore, the requested zoning is consistent with Future Land Use Policy 1.30. — Future Land Use Policy 2.5 Future Land Use Policy 2.5 states that the county shall use zoning regulations to encourage and direct growth into the Urban Service Area. This policy further states that such regulations shall promote efficient development and incentives for mixed uses. The subject request will encourage development of the subject property by providing the property owners with a wide range of allowable uses. In addition, the proposed zoning will facilitate mixed use development since both office and residential uses are allowed within the PRO district. For these reasons, the requested zoning is consistent with Future Land Use Policy 2.5. - 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 wage. The proposed zoning will increase the number of professional office sites within the county. This will facilitate the location of doctors, lawyers, architects, engineers, accountants, financial advisors, and other consultants within the county. The promotion of these businesses, which often create higher paying jobs, is consistent with Economic Development Policy 1.4. Compatibility with the Surrounding Area It is staff's position that a Professional Office zoning district would be appropriate for the subject property and would result in development compatible with surrounding property. Because of the existing commercial uses to the north and east, the subject property would provide a logical transition to the residential 29 APR m 61993 BOOK 89 F11* r BOOK 89 PnF.997 APR m 6 199 areas to the south and west. Even though the subject property contains existing residential uses, these are permitted uses within the PRO zoning district; so the proposed rezoning will not create any non -conforming uses. The 44th Avenue traffic concerns that were raised at the Planning and Zoning Commission Hearing have been addressed by eliminating those lots that have frontage only on 44th Avenue. With this action, every lot in the subject property fronts either 43rd Avenue or 19th Street. Office development on the subject property is not anticipated to generate any traffic on 44th Avenue. The principal impacts of this request would be on the five residential lots abutting the subject property and on the two residential lots, across 44th Avenue, west of the subject property. There are, however, several circumstances which would serve to mitigate the potential impacts associated with this request. One of these mitigating circumstances is the land development regulations' requirement that office uses in the PRO district provide six foot high, type C. buffers to abutting single-family areas, and three foot high, type D buffers to abutting multi -family areas. Another mitigating circumstance is physical separation. Twenty- five foot front and rear yard setbacks are required in both the RS - 3 and the PRO zoning districts. The required side yard setbacks for PRO and RS -3 are 20 and 15 feet, respectively. These setback requirements, ensure a separation of at least 35 to 50 feet between buildings on the subject property and buildings on adjacent property. Combined with 44th Avenue's 50 foot right-of-way, the setback requirements ensure that no building in the PRO district will be closer than 100 feet to any home in the RS -3 district west of 44th Avenue. Another factor that mitigates potential impacts that could be associated with this request relates to the characteristics of the PRO district. The PRO district was created for, and intended to be compatible with, areas designated as residential by the county's comprehensive plan. In fact, the PRO district is one of only two commercial zoning districts allowed in areas with residential land use designations. Because no retail sales are permitted in the PRO district, there will be fewer trucks, less activity, reduced hours of operation, and generally fewer impacts from PRO uses than would occur with general commercial uses. In terms of allowable uses, PRO is the county's least intense and most restrictive commercial zoning district. For these reasons, staff does not anticipate compatibility problems associated with this request. Potential Impact on Environmental Ouality It is staff's position that the proposed zoning change would have no significant adverse impacts on the environmental quality of the subject property, since no native uplands or wetlands exist on site. In accordance with Land Development Regulation Chapter 929, all nuisance exotic vegetation will have to be removed in conjunction with any site development. Native oak trees existing on site will be subject to protection as regulated under Chapter 927, Tree Protection and Land Clearing. Appropriateness of the PRO District for the Subject Propertv Because the PRO district allows non-residential uses _to locate in areas designated as residential on the comprehensive plan,- any request for PRO district rezoning must be reviewed carefully: Not W11 - ® M only is land use compatibility important with respect to a PRO rezoning, -but even more important is the effect that a PRO rezoning has on the land use pattern. Structured for limited use in specific situations, the PRO district was not established as an alternative to expanding commercial nodes through land use plan amendments; instead, it was established to provide for -office type uses in those areas which are no longer appropriate for strictly single-family residential uses but also not appropriate for a complete range of commercial uses. This is reflected in the PRO district's purpose and intent section. As stated in the county's land development regulations, the intent of the PRO district is to encourage development in areas which are considered marginally suitable for residential use, but not suitable for a broad range of commercial uses. Further, the PRO district is intended to aid in the redevelopment of such areas when they are deemed blighted or declining. The PRO district is also appropriate to prevent the anticipated decline of an area. Accordingly, the PRO district may be established in areas in transition from residential to commercial land uses. Based upon its analysis, staff has determined that the subject property is not appropriate for strictly residential development (although it may have been in the past) or a broad range of commercial uses. Staff has concluded, however, that the subject property is appropriate for PRO district designation. Staff's conclusions are based upon several factors. Foremost among those factors is the proximity of the property to existing commercial and institutional uses. Both the existing commercial to the north and the offices to the east affect the property, as does, to a lesser extent, the church to the south. In fact, the subject property is bordered on only one side by residential uses. Additionally, the subject site's configuration and its location on a major roadway (43rd Avenue), near the busy S.R. 60 and 43rd Avenue intersection, further justifies the PRO rezoning. Providing additional justification for the PRO rezoning is the lack of new development on the subject property. Each lot on the subject property is either vacant or developed with an older home. This situation indicates that the'subject property has an increased potential to deteriorate. The county's land development regulations specifically state that the PRO district is designed to encourage the development of vacant land and the redevelopment of declining residential areas. While potential deterioration alone does not warrant a PRO rezoning, this condition may be resolved by a PRO designation. Not all land adjacent to existing commercial uses or located on major roadways is appropriate for PRO zoning. If it were and if PRO zoning were applied, the result would be strip commercial development and more land use incompatibilities. This property, however, has unique characteristics that make it appropriate for PRO designation and inappropriate for strictly residential uses or a commercial designation. It is inappropriate for strictly residential development because it is bordered on three sides by commercial and institutional uses and it fronts a major roadway near a major intersection. The lack of new development on the subject property demonstrates its inappropriateness for strictly residential development. The subject property is inappropriate for a commercial designation because the site is not within a commercial node; the site presently supports single-family residences; and adjacent land is designated for single-family use. This property is appropriate for PRO district designation because it meets PRO district size and 31 APR ® o ig- BOOK 89 PRUE 7>8 APP - 6 1993 BOOK 89 PA'U'E intent criteria, serves a necessary buffer function, provides a logical transition from commercial to residential uses, and provides a termination point for non-residential uses on this part of 43rd Avenue. Specific Requirements of the PRO District According to the County's Land Development Regulations, the specific requirements for PRO districts located in an area with a residential land use designation are: • the district must be located on an arterial or collector road; • the district must have a_maximum depth of 300 feet; and • the district must have a minimum size of five acres and a maximum size of 25 acres. However, the district may be reduced to 2.5 acres if it meets the following criteria: • The parcel abuts a commercial node; and • The parcel is located in a substantially developed area; and • The parcel is located in an area dominated by nonresidential uses. Staff has determined that the subject property meets these criteria. While the property is less than five acres in size, it is larger than -2.5 acres, is located adjacent to the S.R. 60/58th Avenue node, is located in a substantially developed area, and is located in an area dominated by non-residential uses. Conclusion It is staff's position that the request to rezone the subject Property to PRO is consistent with the comprehensive plan and the land development regulations, meets all concurrency requirements, will not negatively impact environmental quality, and is compatible with the surrounding area. Staff also feels that rezoning the subject property will encourage infill development and a more efficient use of land and public facilities. For these reasons, staff supports the request. Recommendation Based on its analysis, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve this request to rezone the subject property from RS -3 to PRO. The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. 32 � � r Peter 13euttell, 1740 32nd Avenue, Vero Beach, president of the company that developed the office and professional -medical complex across the street from these parcels, stated that his company fully supports the rezoning. It was determined that no one else wished to be heard and the Chairman closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted Ordinance 93-11, amending the zoning ordinance and the accompanying zoning map from RS -3 to PRO, for the property generally located at the southwest corner of 19th Street and 43rd Avenue, as recommended by staff. ORDINANCE NO. 93-11 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM RS -3 TO PRO, FOR THE PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 19TH STREET AND 43RD 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 describedproperty; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined that this rezoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has held a public hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at which parties in interest and citizens were heard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the zoning of the following described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: 33 APR - 6 1993 BOOK 89 FA6E 230 APR -6 1993 BOOK $g L.ArF 91 ORDINANCE NO. 93-11 All that tract of land in Section 4, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, being more particularly described as follows: The East 1 acre of the South 2 acres of the East 20 acres of Tract 9 of said Section 4, according to the last general plat of the lands of the Indian River Farms Company recorded in Plat Book 2 Page 25 of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, LESS road right-of-way; and also lots 7-12 (inclusive) LESS the East 15 feet thereof; also lot 18, all in the Pinewood Subdivision, the plat of which is recorded in Plat Book 2 Page 89 of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. All lying in Indian River County, Florida. Be changed from RS -3 to PRO. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Land Development Regulations. i. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, on this 6th day of April, 1993. This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal on the 16th day of March, 1993 for a public hearing to be held on the 6th day of April, 1993 at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert , seconded by Commissioner Adams , and adopted by the following vote: Chairman Richard N. Bird Agp Vice -Chairman John W. Tippin Ajp _ Commissioner Fran B. Adams AQP Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert AMP Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Age BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BY: ATT Acknowledgement by the Depart this 19th day of April , 1993. lorida Effective Date: Acknowledgement from the Department of State received on this 22nd day of April , 1993, at 10:00. A.M./9CM. and filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL S�UFFICIIENNCY William G. Collins II, Deputy County Attorney Robert M. eat g, A Community Developme Director 34 PUBLIC BEARING - COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST TO ADMINISTRATIVELY REZONE APPROXIMATELY 10.81 ACRES FROM RS -6 TO RM -10 The hour of 9:05 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 personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press-Joumal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attacho,d copy of advertisement, being a in the matter ` in the. / Court, was pub- lished In said newspaper in the issues of ! �� Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal Is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. �� I, Sworn to and subscribed before me this-'-' A/0'. day of/�L A.D. 19 �?=f -e, (Business Manager) AV (SEAL) 011 NOTICE — IRIBLIC NEARtt1 Naft of hesWdrMw" �taroygoana" " edgai ooof a �, ftWw usl MaM RM -t0, MuitPis- F" Room" Dbblot. The w�p� ty b Ix�ndy �a by Theo* Perry, Berle maid cteo►- We Heddle, Fbrbert W. tMaerb, CW*= 1_ and Dors Mee Fbrmft Mie in Lary, uW 1hdW Rhe► ca L 31t:s b,b�caed en The , Board 'of CMMV omwftbrrere my adopt swum 2"p dle" I 0fW am the dshtot W quested, provides B is WNW the W" general M ArWa who may vMeh to any dedaldn 8" 8W & yr r ffay be niuld at eo d of �prooeedi a, 10 Is meds, whkh h* des tees .a j end eMlferra upon vAdd Arrpm who raeft a epedel e000nerrodation for thb moat omod Bre ooAys Amolem whh = Ad (ADA) fbordrreter at 687.8008 exterabri 108 at bast 48 houa In advenoe of Yrdm FQw Boa lofCadwd rdyCd, Meeh 18,1883 1183100 BOOK ®. f`AGE sooK APR 0 6 i�9� 89 PAGE 233 Community Development Director Bob Keating presented the following memo dated March 30, 1993: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE I , Ro ert M. Xeati g, C7-- THRU: Sasan Rohani Chief, Lonpj,,, Planning FROM: John Wacht Staff Planng-Range Planning DATE: March 22, 1993 RE: COUNTY INITIATED REQUEST TO ADMINISTRATIVELY REZONE APPROXIMATELY 10.81 ACRES FROM RS -6 TO RM -10 (RZON 92-12-0057) It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of April 6, 1993. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS This is a request to rezone approximately 10.81 acres. Located on the north side of 47th Street, between 38th Court and 35th Avenue, the subject property consists of six parcels, each separately owned. The owners are Theola Perry, Barris and Georgia Reddie, Herbert W. Morris, Clarence L. and Dora Mae Flemming, Anne Lee Lane, and Indian River County. The request involves rezoning the property from RS -6, Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) to RM -10, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 10 'units/acre). This request is related to a recent rezoning action affecting adjacent property. In August of 1992, the Indian River County Housing Authority (IRCHA) requested that the parcel depicted on Attachment 3 and located north and west of the subject property be rezoned from RS -6 to RM -10. As shown, this property has an unusual configuration. Because of this configuration, staff determined that additional Property should be rezoned along with the IRCHA tract to produce a squared -off zoning boundary. For that reason, staff, while processing the IRCHA rezoning, attempted to contact adjacent property owners to determine if those owners would consent to join in the rezoning to produce a squared -off tract that could be zoned RM -10. In so doing, county planning staff contacted the property owners of parcels 1 through 8 and parcel 10 (shown on Attachment 4) to determine if those owners would object to their parcels being rezoned to RM -10. Of the nine owners, six (parcels 1-5, and 10) expressed no objection to having their property rezoned; two owners (parcels 6 and 8) did express objection, while the owner of parcel 36 7 was unable to be contacted by phone and did not respond to the letter which was sent to the property owners to gather their opinions. While most of the property owners indicated either approval of or no objection to rezoning the shaded area depicted in Attachment 2, the process of contacting those owners was time consuming. Because of advertising deadlines, staff had to advertise for the IRCHA rezoning public hearing prior to receiving responses from all affected property owners. Consequently, staff proceeded with the required legal advertising, identifying only the IRCHA tract as the subject property. Despite having advertised only for the IRCHA tract, staff also presented the shaded area site depicted on Attachment 4 to the Planning and Zoning Commission for consideration along with the IRCHA tract. Because of the advertising issue, however, the Planning and Zoning Commission could formally act only on the IRCHA site. At its meeting of October 22, 1992, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4 to 1 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve the IRCHA's request to rezone its property to RM -10. The Planning and Zoning Commission also recommended that a county -initiated rezoning be undertaken to square -off the zoning boundary. At its meeting of December 8, 1992, the Board of County Commissioners voted 5 to 0 to rezone the IRCHA's property. The Board of County Commissioners also authorized staff to initiate a rezoning to square -off the zoning boundary. Consistent with the Board's directive, staff initiated a rezoning for the subject property. On January 28, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners square -off the zoning boundary and rezone the subject property from RS -6 to RM -10, as recommended by staff. Existing Land Use Pattern The subject property is zoned RS -6, Single -Family Residential District. Of the six lots, three are vacant, two contain single- family homes, and one contains a non -conforming multiple -family building.' The Indian River County Housing Authority has a contract to buy the 15.41 acre property north and west of the subject property. This is vacant land, zoned RM -10. The land south and southwest of the subject property is zoned RS -6. This land is'developed with single-family homes and contains the Lord Calvert Estates subdivision. To the southeast of the subject property is unplatted land developed mostly with single-family homes. This area is zoned RM -10. East of the subject property is the RM -10 zoned Smith Plaza subdivision of mostly single-family homes. North of the subject property, across the H-2 Canal and 49th Street, is a large tract of vacant, A-1 zoned land. Future Land Use Pattern The subject property and land to the south, east, and west are designated M-2, Medium -Density Residential on the county future land use map. The M-2 designation permits residential densities up 37 pR -6199.1 MOK 89 F,nUE234 r'a AR - to 10 units/acre. H-2 Canal and Residential. The to 6 units/acre. Environment BOOK 89 F', ur Land north of the subject property, across the 49th Street, is designated L-2, Low -Density L-2 designation permits residential densities up The subject property consists primarily of undeveloped pine flatwoods. The area cleared for development is a relatively small percentage of the total subject property. Although no site specific environmental survey has been conducted, no rare or. endangered species are expected to occur on the subject property. The subject property is in flood zone "8", outside of the 100 year floodplain hazard area. Utilities and Services The subject property is within the Urban Service Area of the county. As such, the site has access to the services needed to accommodate urban development. For potable water, the site is currently serviced by the South County Water Plant; however, when the North County Water Plant is completed, potable water service will be provided by that facility. Wastewater service is available to the site from the Central County Wastewater Plant (Gifford). Transportation System The property abuts 49th Street to the north and 47th Street to the south. Forty-ninth Street is classified as a collector road on -the future roadway thoroughfare plan map. This segment of 49th Street is a 2 -lane paved road with approximately 35 feet of existing public road right-of-way. It is programmed for expansion to 60 feet of public road right-of-way by 2010. Forty-seventh Street is a 2 -lane paved road with approximately 70 feet of existing public road right-of-way. ANALYSIS In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the application will be presented. The analysis will include a description of: • concurrency of public facilities; • compatibility with the surrounding area; • consistency with the comprehensive plan; and • potential impact on environmental quality. Concurrency of Public Facilities This site is located within the county Urban Service Area, an area deemed suited for urban scale development. The Comprehensive Plan establishes standards for: Transportation, Potable Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage and Recreation (Future Land Use Policy 3.,1). The adequate provision of these services is necessary to ensure the continued quality of life enjoyed by the community. The Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations also require that new development be reviewed to ensure that the minimum acceptable standards for these services and facilities are maintained. - 38 M Policy 3.2F of the Future Land Use Element states that no development shall be approved unless it is consistent with the concurrency management system component of the Capital Improvements Element. For rezoning requests, conditional concurrency review is required. Conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility with respect to a proposed project. Since rezoning requests are not projects, county regulations call for the concurrency review to be based upon the most intense use possible of the subject property given the requested zoning district. The site information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows: 1. Size of Property: 110.81 acres 2. Size of Area to be Rezoned: #10.81 acres 3. Existing Zoning Classification: 4. Proposed Zoning Classification: 5. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Existing Zoning Classification: 6. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Proposed Zoning Classification: - Transportation RS -6, Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) RM -10, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 10 units/acre) 65 units 108 units A review of the traffic impacts that would result from the development of the property indicates that the existing level of service "D" or better on 49th Street and on 47th Street would not be lowered. The site information used for determining traffic is as follows: Existina Zoning Classification 1. Residential Use Identified in 5th Edition ITE Manual: Single - Family 2. For Single -Family Units, in ITE Manual: a. Average Weekday Trip Ends: 9.55/unit b. P.M. Peak Hour Trip Ends: 1.01/unit c. Inbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 65% d. Outbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 35% 3. Formula for Determining Number of Peak Hour/Peak Season/Peak Direction Trips Generated: Number of Units X P.M. Peak Hour Rate X Inbound P.M. Percentage (65 X 1.01 X .65 = 43) 4. Formula for Determining Number ._of Average Weekday Trips Generated: Number of. Units X Average Weekday Rate (65 X 9.55 = 621) 39 APR ®6 1993 BOOK 89 Fa,F;E 10' Proposed Zonina Classification f BOOK 89 PA;F2:37 -7 1. Residential Use Identified in 5th Edition ITE Manual: Condominium/Multiple-Family 2. For Condominium/Multiple-Family Units, in ITE Manual: a. Average Weekday Trip Ends: 5.86/unit b. P.M. Peak Hour Trip Ends: 0.55/unit C. Inbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 66% d. Outbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 34% 3. Formula for Determining Number of Peak Hour/Peak Season/Peak Direction Trips Generated: Number of Units X P.M. Peak Hour Rate X Inbound P.M. Percentage (108 X .55 X .66 = 39) (trip distribution based on a Modified gravity Model) 4. Formula for Determining Number of Average Weekday Trips Generated: Number of Units X Average Weekday Rate (108 X.5.86 = 633) 5. Peak Direction of 49th -Street, from Old Dixie Highway to 43rd Avenue: Westbound 6. Traffic Capacity on this segment of 49th Street, at a Level of Service "D": 630 peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips 7. Existing Traffic volume on this segment of 49th Street: 153 peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips The number of Average Weekday Trip Ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the existing zoning classification is 621. This was determined by multiplying the 65 units (most intense use), by ITE's single-family residential factor of 9.55 Average Daily Trip Ends/unit. The number of Average Weekday Trip Ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed zoning classification is 633. This was determined by multiplying the 108 units (most intense use) by ITE's multiple -family residential factor of 5.86 Average Daily Trip Ends/unit. Since the county's transportation level of service is based on peak hour/peak season/peak direction characteristics, the transportation concurrency analysis addresses project traffic occurring in the peak hour and affecting the peak direction of impacted roadways. According to ITE,,. the proposed zoning classification generates more volume in the p.m. peak hour than in the a.m. peak hour. Therefore, the p.m. peak hour was used in the transportation concurrency analysis. The peak direction during the p.m. peak hour on 49th Street is westbound. Given those conditions, the number of peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips that would be generated by the most intense use of the subject property under the existing zoning classification was calculated to be 43. This was determined by multiplying the total number of units allowed under the existing zoning (65) by ITE's factor of 1.01 p.m. peak hour trips/unit, then taking 65% of that total to ensure that only inbound trips were counted. To determine the number of peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips that would be generated by the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed zoning classification, the total number of units allowed under the proposed zoning (108} was 40 multiplied by ITE's factor of 0.55 p.m. peak hour trips/unit; that volume was then multiplied by the inbound trip factor of 0.66. The result was 39, or 4 less than the 43 that would be generated by the most intense use of the subject property under the existing zoning. Using a modified gravity model and a hand assignment, the trips generated under the proposed zoning classification were then assigned to roadways on the network. Capacities for all roadway segments in Indian River County are calculated and updated annually, utilizing the latest and best available peak season traffic characteristics and applying Appendix G methodology as set forth in the Florida Department of Transportation Level of Service Manual. Available capacity is the total capacity less existing and committed traffic volumes; this is updated daily based upon vesting associated with project approvals. The traffic capacity for the segment of 49th Street adjacent to this site is 630 trips (peak hour/peak season/peak direction) at a Level of Service "D", while the existing traffic volume on this segment of 49th Street is 153 trips (peak hour/peak season/peak direction). The additional 39 peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips created by the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed zoning classification will increase the total peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips for this segment of 49th Street to approximately 192. Based on staff analysis, it was determined that 49th Street and all other impacted roads can accommodate the additional trips without decreasing their existing levels of service. Impacted roads are defined in the county's Land Development Regulations as roadway segments which receive five percent (5%) or more daily project traffic or fifty (50) or more daily project trips, whichever is less. The table below identifies each of the impacted roadway segments associated with this proposed zoning classification. As indicated in this table, there is sufficient capacity in all of the segments to accommodate the projected traffic associated with the request. TRAFFIC CONCURRENCY DETERMINATION Impacted Road Segments (peak hour/peak season/peak direction) Segment Roadway Capacity Segment Road From To LOS "D" 1340 U.S. 1 S.R. 60 Royal Palm P1. 2300 1345 U.S. 1 Royal Palm P1. Atlantic Blvd. 2300 1350 U.S. 1 Atlantic Blvd. N. vB City Lmt. 2300 1355 U.S. 1 N. VB City lmt. Old Dixie Hwy. 2300 1360 U.S. 1 Old Dixie Hwy. 41st Street 2300 1365 U.S. 1 41st Street 45th Street 2650 1370 U.S. 1 45th Street 49th Street 2650 1375 U.S. 1 49th Street 65th Street 2650 1925 S.R. 60 66th Ave. 58th Ave. 1760 1930 S.A. 60 58th Ave. 43rd Ave. 2650 2350 Old Dixie Hwy. 45th Street 49th Street 630 2355 Old Dixie Hwy. 49th Street 65th Street 630 3025 58th Ave. 16th Street S.R. 60 830 3030 58th Ave. S.R. 60 41st Street 830 3035 58th Ave. 41st Street 45th Street 630 3040 58th Ave. 45th Street 49th Street 630 4230 49th Street 58th Ave. 43rd Ave. 630 4240 49th Street 43rd Ave. Old Dixie•Hwy. 630 4250 49th Street Old Dixie Hwy. U.S. 1 630 4330 45th Street 58th Ave. 43rd Ave. 630 4340 45th Street 43rd Ave. Old Dixie Hwy. 630 4350 45th Street Old Dixie Hwy. Indian River Blvd. 630 41 Wor•., BOOK 89 FAGUE 4'48 r� . BOOK 89 PAGE Roadway Segment ]Ixiftina -Ex st ng Volume Demand Vested Volume Total Segment Demand Available Segment Capacity Project Demand Positive Concurrency Determination 1340 1143 57 1200 .1100 3 Y 1345 1143 72 1215 1085 5 Y 1350 1309, 81 1390 910 7 Y 1355 1309 34 1343 957 10 Y 1360 1309 74 1383 917 15 Y 1365 1309 41 1350 1300 18 Y 1370 1309 33 1342 1308 16 Y 1375 747 39 786 1864 2 Y 1925 972 59 1031 729 2 Y 1930 972, 110 1082 1568 2 Y 2350 139 10 149 481 2 Y 2355 76 9 85 545 2 Y 3025 400 21 421 409 2 Y 3030 414 31 445 385 6 Y 3035 414 20 434 196 9 Y 3040 414 16 430 200 10 Y 4230 153 7 160 470 8 Y 4240 153 12 165 465 20 Y 4250 153 11 164- 466 16 Y 4330 130 14 144 486 4 Y 4340 256 12 268 362 12 Y 4350 256 9 265 365 6 Y - Water The site is within the North County Water Service Area. Since the North County Water Treatment Plant has not been built yet, this area is served by the South County Water Plant. With the most intense use allowed under the proposed rezoning, the subject property will have a water consumption rate of 108 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU), or 27,000 gallons/day. This is based on a level of service of 250 gallons/ERU/day. Since the South County Water Treatment Plant has a remaining capacity of approximately 21400,000 gallons/day, the plant can accommodate the additional demand generated by the proposed zoning. When the subject property connects to county lines, it will be serviced by the North County Water Plant. Phase 1 of the North County Water Plant will have a capacity of 21000,000 gallons/day and will be able to accommodate the additional demand generated by the property under the proposed zoning. - Wastewater The subject property is serviced by the Central County Wastewater Plant (Gifford). Based upon the most intense use allowed under the proposed zoning classification, development of the property will have a wastewater generation rate of approximately 108 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU), or 27,000 gallons/day. This is based on the level of service of 250 gallons/ERU/day. The Central County Wastewater Plant currently has a remaining capacity of approximately 537,000 gallons/day and can accommodate the additional wastewater generated by the site under the proposed zoning. - Solid Waste Solid waste service includes pick-up by private operators and disposal at the county landfill. Solid waste generation by a 108 unit residential development on the subject site will be approximately 173 Waste Generation Units (WGU) or 513 -cubic yards of solid waste/year. A WGU is a Waste Generation Unit measurement equivalent to 2.9625 cubic yards of waste/year. 42 _ M According to the county's solid waste regulations, each residential unit generates 1.6 WGU/unit . With the county's adopted level of service standard of 2.37 cubic yards/person/year and the county's average of 2 persons/unit, each WGU is equivalent to 1.25 people (2/1.6 = 1.25) and 2.9625 cubic yards of solid waste/year (1.25 X 2.37). To calculate the total cubic yards of solid waste for the most intense use allowed on the subject property under the proposed zoning classification, staff utilized the following formula: Total number of WGUs X 1.25 X 2.37 (173 X 1.25 X 2.37 = 513 cubic yards/ year). A review of the solid waste capacity for the active segment of the county landfill indicates the availability of more than 900,000 cubic yards. The active segment of the landfill has a 3 year capacity, and the landfill has expansion capacity beyond 2010. Based on staff analysis, it was determined that the county landfill can accommodate the additional solid waste generated by the site under the proposed zoning. - Drainage All developments are reviewed for compliance with county stormwater regulations which require on-site retention, preservation of floodplain storage and minimum finished floor elevations. In addition, development proposals must meet the discharge requirements of the county Stormwater Management Ordinance. The subject property is located within the M-1 Drainage Basin and the Indian River Farms Water Control District (IRFWCD). Since the site is located within the IRFWCD, development on the property will be prohibited from discharging any runoff in excess of 2 inches in -a 24 hour period, which is the approved IRFWCD discharge rate. The minimum floor elevation level of service standards do not apply in this case, since the property does not lie within a floodplain. However, both the on-site retention and discharge standards do apply. With the most intense use of this siteunder the proposed zoning, the maximum area of impervious surface will be approximately 329,618 square feet, or 7.6 acres. The maximum runoff volume, based on that amount of impervious surface and the 25 year/24 hour design storm, and given the IRFWCD 2 inch discharge requirement, will be approximately 354,350 cubic feet. In order to maintain the county's adopted level of service, the applicant will be required to retain approximately 276,000 cubic feet of runoff on-site. With the soils characteristic of the subject property, it is estimated that the pre -development runoff rate is 39 cubic feet/second. Based upon staff's analysis, the drainage level of service standards will be met by limiting off-site discharge to the IRFWCD's maximum discharge rate of 2 inches in 24 hours, and requiring retention of 276,000 cubic feet of runoff for the most intense use of the property. As with all development, a more detailed review will be conducted during the development approval process. - Recreation A review of count eation facilities and the projected demand that would result from the most intense use that could occur on the property under the proposed zoning classification indicates that the adopted levels of service would be maintained. The table below 43 ABOOK 89 PIKE -,4 LP �� -.,94 APR - 6 1993 illustrates development park type. BOOK 89 wF 241 the additional park demand associated with the proposea of the property and the existing surplus acreaae by Based upon the analysis conducted, staff has determined that all concurrency -mandated facilities, including drainage, roads, solid waste, water, wastewater, and parks, have adequate capacity to accommodate the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed zoning. Therefore, the concurrency test has been satisfied for the subject request. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Rezoning requests must also be consistent with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land Use Map; these uses include agricultural, residential, recreation, conservation, and commercial and industrial land uses and their densities. Commercial and industrial land uses are located in nodes throughout the unincorporated areas of Indian River County. The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of the Comprehensive Plan. Policies are statements in the plan which identify actions which the county will take in order to direct the community's development. As courses of action committed to by the county, policies provide the basis for all county land development related decisions. While all comprehensive plan policies are important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing rezoning requests. of particular applicability for this request are Future Land Use Policies 1.13 and 1.14, and Economic Development Policies 8.3 and 8.4. - Future land Use Policy 1.13 Future Land Use Policy 1.13 states that the medium -density residential land use designations are intended for urban scale development and intensities. In addition, this policy states that these residential uses must be located within an existing or future Urban Service Area. Since the subject property is located within an area designated as M-2 on the county's future land use plan map and is located within the county's urban service area, the proposed request is consistent with Policy 1.13. - Future Land Use Policy 1.14 Future Land Use Policy 1.14 states that Single -Family, Multiple - Family and Mobile Home uses at densities of up to 10 units/acre are permitted in the medium density districts. The subject property is located within the M-2 land use designation and abuts properties already zoned 10 units/acre. Therefore, the subject request is consistent with Future Land Use Policy 1.14. 44. Los Project Park Type (Acres per 1000 population) Demand Acres Surplus Acreage Urban District 5.0 1.08 211.477 Community (north) 3.0 0.65 25.746 Beach River 1.5 0.32 73.843 1.5 0.32 34.840 Based upon the analysis conducted, staff has determined that all concurrency -mandated facilities, including drainage, roads, solid waste, water, wastewater, and parks, have adequate capacity to accommodate the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed zoning. Therefore, the concurrency test has been satisfied for the subject request. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Rezoning requests must also be consistent with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land Use Map; these uses include agricultural, residential, recreation, conservation, and commercial and industrial land uses and their densities. Commercial and industrial land uses are located in nodes throughout the unincorporated areas of Indian River County. The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of the Comprehensive Plan. Policies are statements in the plan which identify actions which the county will take in order to direct the community's development. As courses of action committed to by the county, policies provide the basis for all county land development related decisions. While all comprehensive plan policies are important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing rezoning requests. of particular applicability for this request are Future Land Use Policies 1.13 and 1.14, and Economic Development Policies 8.3 and 8.4. - Future land Use Policy 1.13 Future Land Use Policy 1.13 states that the medium -density residential land use designations are intended for urban scale development and intensities. In addition, this policy states that these residential uses must be located within an existing or future Urban Service Area. Since the subject property is located within an area designated as M-2 on the county's future land use plan map and is located within the county's urban service area, the proposed request is consistent with Policy 1.13. - Future Land Use Policy 1.14 Future Land Use Policy 1.14 states that Single -Family, Multiple - Family and Mobile Home uses at densities of up to 10 units/acre are permitted in the medium density districts. The subject property is located within the M-2 land use designation and abuts properties already zoned 10 units/acre. Therefore, the subject request is consistent with Future Land Use Policy 1.14. 44. M - Economic Development Policy 8.4 M Economic Development Policy 8.4 states that the county shall designate land for higher density housing. Since RM -10 is the highest density allowed under the M-2 Land Use Designation, the proposed zoning is consistent with Economic Development Policy 8.4. - Economic Development Policy 8.5 Economic Development Policy 8.5 states that the county shall direct higher residential densities to certain areas to reduce cost per unit and thereby provide more affordable housing. It is staff's position that the subject rezoning request is consistent with Economic Development Policy -8.5. Based upon its review of the county's comprehensive plan policies, staff feels that the proposed rezoning is not only consistent with the plan, but will serve to implement several specific plan policies. Compatibility with the Surrounding Area It is staff's position that a multiple -family zoning district would be appropriate for the subject property and would result in development compatible with the surrounding area. Because the area to the west is already zoned for and is planned to be developed with multiple -family housing, and the area to the east is zoned for multiple -family development, rezoning the subject property would result in an extension of an existing land use pattern. The principal impacts of the proposed rezoning would be on the single-family areas to the south of the subject property. Any such impacts though, would be minimal. Unlike commercial, multiple - family development provides an acceptable transition to single- family uses. Whereas commercial sites often produce impacts such as lights, noise, and other activities which adversely affect single-family residential areas, multiple -family development is similar to single-family, differing primarily in dwelling unit type and density. Even though the impacts are anticipated to be minimal, there are several county land development regulation provisions which would serve to mitigate any potential negative effects associated with this request. Among these provisions are the newly enacted buffer requirements for occasions when a multiple -family project in an RM - 10 district abuts a single-family zoning district. Another provision is the requirement that multiple -family developments undergo site plan review. Through this process, potential impacts will be minimized with site design. Additionally, 47th Street provides a physical separation between the subject .property and most of the RS -6 zoned single-family residential area to the south. For these reasons, the proposed rezoning can be expected to have only minimal impacts on the adjacent property. Potential Impact on Environmental Quality The proposed rezoning would have no more of an adverse impact on environmental quality than the present zoning. Under both the existing RS -6 zoning and the proposed RM -10 zoning, the county's 10/15% native upland plant community set-aside requirement will apply. These issues will be addressed at the time of site development. 45 BOOK 89 FA6F.247 I r APR - 6 199 89 � BOOK PAGE 24 Conclusion The request to rezone the subject property to RM -10 is consistent with the comprehensive plan, meets all concurrency requirements, will not negatively impact environmental quality, and is compatible with the surrounding area. Not only does the subject property have the necessary utilities and roadway access required by multiple - family developments, but it is also accessible to other urban services. Rezoning the subject property to RM -10 will simplify zoning administration and eliminate potential use conflicts. As proposed, the RM -10 zoning would provide an efficient use of both land and public services. For these reasons, staff supports the request. Recommendation ° Based on the analysis performed, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners rezone the subject property from RS -6 to RM - 10. The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, he closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously adopted Ordinance 93-121 amending the zoning ordinance and the accompanying zoning map from RS -6 to RM -10 for the property generally located on the north side of 47th Street between 35th Avenue and 38th Court, as recommended by staff. ORDINANCE NO. 93- 12 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM RS -6 TO RM -10, -FOR THE PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 47TH STREET, BETWEEN 35TH AVENUE AND 38TH COURT, 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 46 ORDINANCE NO. 93-12 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined that this rezoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has held a public hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at which parties in interest and citizens were heard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the zoning of the following described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: South 150 feet of the North 600 feet of the East 130 feet of the East 10 acres of the Northeast I of the Southwest I of Section 22, Township 32, Range 39; and also the East 5 acres of the East 10 acres of the Northeast j of the Southwest j of Section 22, Township 32, Range 39, less the North 600 feet of the East 130 feet; and also the West j of the East 10 acres of the Northeast j of the Southwest j of Section 22, Township 32, Range 39; and also the South 300 feet of the East 163 feet less the South 35 feet & less the West 35 feet of the West 20 acres of the East 30 acres of the Northeast j of the Southwest j of Section 22, Township 32, Range 39; and also the South 267 feet of the West 163 feet of the East 326 feet less the South 35 feet of the West 20 acres of the East 30 acres of the Northeast I of the Southwest j of Section 22, Township 32, Range 39; and also the South 267 feet of the East 163 feet less the South 35 feet and West 35 feet of the West 20 acres of the East 30 acres of the Northeast j of the Southwest j of Section 22, Township 32, Range 39. Be changed from RS -6 to RM -10. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Land Development Regulations. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, on thks 6th day of April, 1993. This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal on the 16th day of March, 1993 for a public hearing to be held on the 6th day of April, 1993 at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Adams , seconded by Commissioner Tippin and adopted by the following vote: 47 , BOOK 89 Fa,E 244 APR ® 993 J BOOK. 89 Fr�6c m .. APR 6 1993 ORDINANCE NO. 93- 12 Chairman Richard N. Bird Vice -Chairman John W. Tippin Commissioner Fran B. Adams Commissioner Carolyn R. Eggert Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST; OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BY: Ric and N. Bird, Chairman J.K. BARTON. CLERK zy ATTEST BY: Jeffrey aK.If rt� i/"' - Acknowledgement by the Department of State of the State of Florida this 19th day of April , 1993. Effective Date: Acknowledgement from the Department of State received on this 22nd day of A ril , 1993, at 10.00 A.M./. and filed in the office of the --Clerk of the •Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND _ LEGAL SUFFICIENCY , William G. Collins II, Deputy County Attorney Robert . Keatlfig, A P Community Developmen Director PUBLIC HEARING - ESTABLISHMENT OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM The hour of 9:05 A.M. having passed, County Attorney announced that this public hearing has been properly advertised as follows: 48 VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press-Joumal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being -- ---- vvuI i, was puu- lished in said newspaper in the issues of Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed orAe this!"� day of 14 D. 19 %usiness Manager) (SEAL) <J I n�• lam OF PUKIC HEARili lhti'Board at mmiasi Gaws of hndier► tweb wao' Fl0f c8ed tar 9.pvd" mffice of a .05 aAL on Tumft, e, 199d to d== theldowrg proposed or - A Arryarb who may wish to enp de I I which VAWW 993, will raw tD aamn tlmtei mbft, reaad ' off the prooeer8rge b meds which Ykiudes testlmorry at eridabe upon whlCh the_eg�pael is based _ _ _ -- - -- -, —._�mw�tyty y Cwvnh*nse , 1� 1 K itrdChdm� , rm' . k4arch The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 30, 1993: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Robert M. Kat ng, VCP Community Development Director THROUGH: Sasan Rohani Chief, Long -Range Planning FROM: Christopher D. Rison CV`" Senior Planner, Long -Range Planning DATE: March 30, 1993 SUBJECT: Establishment of Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program It is requested that the, data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of April 61 1993. 49 APR © 6 1993 Boa 89FAUF246, APP m 6 1993 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: BOOK 89 FADE 247 Very low-, low-, and moderate -income households typically encounter various obstacles in their attempt to obtain "affordable housing". These obstacles include, but are not limited to, obtaining sufficient funds for the payment of impact fees and/or down payments for housing units. To address this issue, Housing Element Policy 4.4 of the County Comprehensive Plan was adopted. That policy reads as follows: "The county shall establish a Housing Trust Fund which will provide below-market interest rate financing and/or grants for land acquisition, construction and other related costs for the development of affordable housing units in the unincorporated area. The fund will also assist non-profit facilitators with pre -development expenses associated with very low, low and moderate income housing development. Some disbursements from the Housing Trust Fund will be grants, but the majority of funds will be revolving loans, with borrowers paying back into the trust; therefore ensuring a permanent source of financing." In March, 19911 the Board of County Commissioners established the county's current Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. This Committee was charged with the duty of reviewing the Housing Element Policies of the Comprehensive Plan, including Policy 4.4.1 to determine suitable actions which could be undertaken by the county in order to satisfy the adopted policies. During the course of the Committee's investigations, the State of Florida Legislature adopted the William E. Sadowski Affordable Housing Act which created a number of statewide programs. One of the programs created by the Act provides for the creation and funding of local Housing Trust Funds. That program is the State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) Program. The SHIP Program provides a specialized funding source to be utilized in meeting the "affordable housing" needs of very low-, low- and moderate -income households. Funds are collected for this program by the state and allocated to counties through a program titled State Housing. Initiatives Partnership (SHIP). Indian River County will be eligible to receive an estimated $250,000.00 each year for the 1992-93, 1993-94, and 1994-95 fiscal years, with an estimated increase to $574,186.00 for the 1995-96 fiscal year. In order to qualify to receive the allocation of funds from the SHIP Program, the county must comply with the following three requirements: 1. Adopt a local ordinance which establishes a Local Housing Assistance Program (LHAProgram) and a Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund. 2. Adopt a Local Housing Assistance Plan (LHAPlan) which details the intent and guidelines of the Local Housing Assistance Program (LHAProgram). 3. Create a Local Affordable Housing Advisory Committee which will conduct a regulatory review of the county's regulations and develop a Local Housing Incentive Plan (LHIPlan) to be adopted by the county within one (1) year of adoption of the ordinance establishing the LHAProgram. - 50 M M In conjunction with the three items listed, the county must also adopt three separate resolutions. The first resolution must establish a maximum expenditure of SHIP funds per housing unit and expected average cost per housing unit for each of the assistance strategies to be utilized by the county Local Housing Assistance Program. The second resolution must increase the amount of SHIP funds which may be utilized for administration of the Local Housing Assistance Program to ten percent (10%) from the five percent (5%) initially permitted by the SHIP Program. The third and final resolution must formally appoint the members of the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee created by the implementing ordinance. ANALYSIS: Establishing an Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program will provide an established, ongoing mechanism to provide "affordable housing" for very low-, low-, and moderate -income households. Under the direction of the current Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC), staff completed the necessary Implementing Ordinance and Local Housing Assistance Plan. The Ordinance and Plan were approved by the AHAC and forwarded to the Florida Housing Finance Agency for courtesy review. Upon receipt of the Florida Housing Finance Agency's comments, staff revised the plan. A copy of the revised plan, with strikethroughs and underlines to indicate changes made since the AHAC review, is attached. The implementing ordinance (Attachment #1) creates the local trust fund to receive and hold the SHIP monies distributed by the State, and establishes the program through which the county will disperse the monies received from the State to persons in the local community. The Assistance Plan (Attachment #2) provides the guidelines and procedures for operation of the Program and distribution of the funds received from the State. The Plan also identifies the assistance strategies which will be utilized in distributing the funds. Along with establishing the Program and approving the Plan, the Hoard must adopt a resolution establishing a maximum investment of SHIP distributed funds per housing unit and expected average cost per housing unit for each of the assistance strategies (Attachment #3). As provided for by the state Affordable Act, a portion of the SHIP funds may be utilized for administrative and implementation costs. While the initial limit imposed by the SHIP Program is five percent (5%) of the SHIP fund distribution, a local government may, by separate :resolution, increase the limit for administrative and implementation costs to a maximum of ten percent (10%). As the Plan utilizes such an increase in the limit for administrative costs, a resolution to increase the limit for administrative costs to ten percent (10%) is proposed (Attachment #4). This increase may be reduced at a later date; however, the increase is appropriate at this time in order to accomodate the necessary activities in starting the Program. 51 APR ® 199 KKK, 85 FAU,248 APR - 6 19 -03 BOOK 89 u� F . In order for the county to be eligible to receive funds from the SHIP Program, the Board of County Commissioners must adopt the ordinance establishing the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program, approve the- Local Housing Assistance Plan, adopt the resolution establishing a maximum expenditure of SHIP funds per housing unit and establishing an estimated average amount Of SHIP funds per unit by assistance strategy, and adopt the resolution increasing the amount of SHIP funds which may be utilized for administering the Local Housing Assistance Program from five percent (5%) as permitted by the SHIP Program to ten percent (10%). RECOZWMNDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Adopt the Ordinance to establish the Indian River, County Local Housing Assistance Program; 2. Adopt the Local Housing Assistance Plan; 3. Approve. the resolution which establishes monetary limits for SHIP funds dispersed via the Local Housing Assistance Program; and 4. Approve the resolution permitting administrative expenditures Of up to ten percent (10%) of SHIP funds for the Local Housing Assistance Program. Community Development Director Bob Keating stressed that an important aspect of a comprehensive plan is affordable housing. A housing district fund was previously established but the sources of revenue were tenuous. It was hoped that the barrier island communities would contribute to the fund because they were unable to provide affordable housing, but that did not happen. This money from the State of Florida will enable IRC to help very low, low and moderate income families to obtain affordable housing. Director Keating discussed the major objectives of the program: 1. Create a revolving fund so that the maximum number of people will benefit from the program. 2. Keep the total amount provided each household to a minimum so that more people can be assisted. The maximum award for any one housing unit will be $15,000.00. 3. Provide loans or grants to pay impact fees. 4. Provide loans to pay down payments and closing costs. 5. Provide land acquisition loans to enable non-profit organizations such as Habitat for Humanity and Bootstrap Housing to construct affordable housing units. 6. Provide housing rehabilitation loans. 52 7. Provide money for purchase of land by the County, including tax deed purchases. Director Keating indicated that many people cannot buy a home because they do not have enough money to pay the down payment and closing costs. This program will make funds available to cover down payment and closing costs at the below-market interest rate of 3%. The interest charges will be deferred until the property is sold, and if the borrower keeps the home for 20 years or longer, they will not have to pay the interest. Chairman Bird agreed that up -front cash requirements are a problem for people and this should help. He asked whether the private sector will assist the County with program administration. Director Keating responded that financial institutions are not willing to service the loans. Applicants who are unable to qualify for a conventional mortgage will be referred to the County by the financial institutions. Or, people might come directly to the County after hearing about the program. The County will be responsible for servicing the loans. The County may or may not be the principal mortgage holder, depending on the circumstances. Discussion ensued, and Director Keating confirmed that this will be a county -wide program. Indian River County is one of the first counties to take advantage of this program and should receive a substantial sum of money from the state. Chairman Bird was concerned that the cost of administering the program might outweigh the benefits to the people, and Commissioner Eggert pointed out that there is a 10% cap on administrative costs. Director Keating explained that the ordinance designates the Community Development Department as the program administrator. However, day-to-day administrative activities can be contracted out, and staff hopes to make specific recommendations to the Board in this respect at future board meetings. Director Keating advised that staff prepared a draft of the plan and presented it to the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. The Affordable Housing Advisory Committee directed the finance subcommittee to work with staff, make several changes and then submit the plan to the state housing finance agency for a courtesy review. The state housing finance agency reviewed the plan and made ten comments. Christopher Rison, senior long-range planner, spent a lot of time with the review agency, and a number of substantive changes were made. The strike-throughs and underlines represent the changes that were made after the plan was reviewed. 53 SINK 1993 b0®K 89 PAGE 25, 0 � ®� APP - 6 1993 BOOK 89 Fr,r ?51 The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, he closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted Ordinance 93-13, establishing the State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) Program; providing for the establishment of a local housing assistance trust fund, etc., as recommended by staff. ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 AN ORDINANCE OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PURSUANT TO THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) PROGRAM, PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR THE CREATION OF A LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE TRUST FUND; PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM; DESIGNATING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM; PROVIDING FOR THE CREATION OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE; PROVIDING FOR TERMS OF SAID COMMITTEE; PROVIDING FOR DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF SAID COMMITTEE; PROVIDING FOR GUIDELINES TO BE UTILIZED BY SAID COMMITTEE IN ADOPTION OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County: SECTION I. PURPOSE AND INTENT A. The purpose of this Ordinance is to comply with the requirements of the State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) Program and Rule 9I-37.004 Florida Administrative Code (FAC). As such, this ordinance provides for: (1) Creation of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund in accordance with Rule 9I- 37.008 FAC; (2) Establishment of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program in accordance with Rule 9I-37.007 FAC; 54 ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 (3) Designation of the responsibility for the implementation and administration of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program; and (4) Creation of the Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee in accordance with Rule 9I-37.009 FAC. SECTION II. DEFINITIONS A. The definitions provided in Rule 9I-37.002, Florida Administrative Code (State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program Rules), and in the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Plan shall apply to the terms used in this Ordinance. SECTION III. CREATION OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE TRUST FUND A. The Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund (IRCLHATF) is hereby created and established. The Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund shall be a separate fund account maintained by the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners. B. All monies received from the state as the County's share of the Local Housing Distribution under the State Housing Initiative Partnership Act (SHIP Program) and .other funds received or budgeted to provide funding for the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program shall be deposited into the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund. Administration of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund shall be consistent with Rule 91-37.007, Florida Administrative Code. All funds deposited into the Indian River County Local Housing 55 BOOK 89 PAGE 252 APR - 6 1993 BOOK 89 FAGF.253 ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 Assistance Trust Fund will be subject to the requirements of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program and Plan as identified by this Ordinance, and the provisions of Rule 9I-37.007, Florida Administrative Code. C. Expenditures other than for the administration and implementation of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program shall not be made from the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund. Administration expenditures may include, but not be limited to: salaries for persons responsible for the preparation, reporting, and administration for the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program; office expenses of persons responsible for conducting the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program; production of application and public information materials utilized in conducting the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program; travel expenses related to Local Housing Assistance Program activities; and the preparation of studies and collection of data relating to affordable housing needs and demands in the County. D. Amounts on deposit in the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund may be invested as permitted by Federal, State and Local law. All investment earnings shall be retained in the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund and used for the purposes thereof. E. Until utilized for the purposes thereof, monies in the Indian River.County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund shall be held in trust by the county solely for use pursuant to the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program. F. The Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund shall be separately stated as a special revenue fund in the county's audited financial statements. Copies of such audited financial statements shall be forwarded to the Florida Housing Finance Agency as soon as available. 56 ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 SECTION IV, ESTABLISHMENT OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM A. The Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program is hereby created and established. B. The intent of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program is to increase the availability of affordable housing units to Eligible Persons by combining local resources and cost-saving measures into an Indian River County Local Housing Partnership and using private and public funds to reduce the cost of housing. C. The Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program shall use the funds held in the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund to implement the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Plan. D. The distribution and expenditure of funds from the Indian River County Local Housing Trust Fund for implementing and conducting the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program shall comply with the following distribution requirements: (1) A minimum of sixty-five (65) percent of the funds shall be reserved for Local Housing Assistance Program activities which result in homeownership for eligible persons; (2) A minimum of seventy-five (75) percent of the funds shall be reserved for construction, rehabilitation, or emergency repair of housing which will be utilized by eligible persons; and (3) A maximum of five (5) percent of the funds may be expended to provide for the costs of administration and implementation of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program. The Indian River County Board of County Commissioners may make a finding by separate resolution that expenditures to administer and implement 57 APR — 61993 OoQK 9 Pvt-25 APP - 6 1993 BOOK - 89 pm� 255 ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program may exceed five (5) percent; however, at no time shall the funds expended for administration and implementation of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program exceed ten (10) percent. (4) The percentages identified in items 1, 2 and 3 above shall be based upon the existing annual balance of funds in the Indian River County Local Housing Trust Fund on the first day of the fiscal year combined with the expected annual allocation from the State SHIP Program for the commencing fiscal year. The monetary amounts determined by the percentage allocations shall be revised on a quarterly basis during the fiscal year to reflect variations in the funds received from the State as a part of the County's Local Housing Distribution and additional contributions to the Indian River County Local Housing Trust Fund from other sources. E. The housing units provided or assisted by the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program shall comply with the following distribution requirements: (1) All housing units provided or assisted by the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program must be occupied by Eligible Persons; (2) A minimum of thirty (30) percent of the housing units provided or assisted by the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program must be occupied by Very Low - Income Persons; and (3) A minimum of thirty (30) percent of the housing units provided or assisted by the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program must be occupied by Low -Income Persons. 58 � s ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 F. All housing units provided or assisted by the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program shall comply with the following criteria: (1) The sales price of new or existing eligible housing units shall not exceed ninety (90) percent of the median area purchase price for the area where the eligible housing is located. The ninety (90) percent limit price shall be established by the United States Department of Treasury in accordance with Section 3(b) 2 of the United State Housing Act of 1937; (2) The amount of monthly mortgage payments or the amount of monthly rents charged in order to occupy or purchase the housing unit must be affordable to eligible persons occupying the housing unit; (3) Loans for housing units from the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund shall be provided for periods not exceeding thirty (30) years; however, deferred payment soft -second loans or loans that extend beyond thirty (30) years may be provided with the condition that each housing unit financed in either manner must be occupied by eligible persons for the same period of time as the extended loan period. (4) Owner -occupied housing constructed, rehabilitated, or otherwise assisted from proceeds provided from the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program shall be subject to subsidy recapture provisions which are identical to those specified in Section 143(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The funds obtained through these recapture provisions shall be redeposited into the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund for redistribution by the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program. 59 APR 6 1993 Boa 89 PA't?56 J BOOK 89 PAGE 257 APR m ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 (5) Rental housing constructed, rehabilitated, or otherwise assisted from proceeds provided from the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program shall be reserved for Eligible Persons for the greater of fifteen (15) years or the term of the assistance. Eligible sponsors who offer eligible rental housing for sale before fifteen (15) years or that have remaining mortgages funded under the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program must give a first right of refusal to eligible nonprofit organizations for purchase at the current market value for continued occupancy of the housing units by eligible persons. G. The activities and strategies to be undertaken by the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program in providing and encouraging affordable housing shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 1. Impact fee assistance: Eligible persons or sponsors may be awarded loans or grants for the payment of impact fees for eligible housing for eligible persons. 2. Purchase assistance: Ownership opportunities may be created for eligible persons through mortgage interest reductions, and/or low or no interest loans for down payments and closing costs. 3. Predevelopment: Community-based organizations may be awarded loans for site acquisition for the development of eligible housing. 4. Rehabilitation: Eligible persons who own substandard housing units may be awarded loans to renovate such units for use as eligibl-e housing. 60 M M ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 5. Land Bank: Indian River County may, through purchase, auction or donation, acquire land independent of a specific project for the expressed purpose of providing eligible housing at a future time. H. The Indian River County Board of County Commissioners may elect to provide additional funding to supplement and/or augment funds provided from the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund for administration and implementation of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program. I. The Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program shall include a program activity to annually monitor and determine tenant eligibility and amount of subsidy pursuant to the provisions of this Ordinance and the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Plan. J. The county shall comply with all rules and regulations of the Florida Housing Finance Agency and the SHIP Program to provide the required annual reporting on the status of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program and its compliance with the State SHIP Program requirements and the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Plan. R. Housing units receiving assistance from both the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program and other State or Federal Programs shall comply with the requirements of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program and the State SHIP Program, as well as the requirements of the other State and/or Federal Programs. Where eligible persons or sponsors receive assistance from multiple programs and those programs have different regulations, recipients shall comply with the program having the most restrictive requirements; however, at no time may persons or �M APR o BOOK 89 PAGE 258 L 6 a99, BOOK. 89. FADE 259 ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 sponsors receiving assistance violate the requirements of any of the other applicable programs, including the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program and the State SHIP Program. L. The Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program shall include all other lawful objectives not previously listed, if said objectives have been adopted as part of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Plan in the manner provided for by Sections 420.907-420.9079, Florida Statutes and Rule 91-37, Florida Administrative Code. SECTION V. DESIGNATION OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM A. The Indian River County Community Development Department is hereby designated the agency responsible for the implementation and administration of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program. In its capacity as the responsible agency, the Community Development Department, with concurring approval from the Board of County Commissioners, 'may contract with various profit or non-profit agencies for various administrative activities. B. The Community Development Department shall monitor the success of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program, and provide advice and suggestions as to whether and in what ways the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program might be improved from year to year. C. The total amount paid from the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund for any administrative expenses in connection with the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program shall not exceed five (5) percent of the funds of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund, unless otherwise approved by resolution of the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners. Should the Indian River County Board of 62 M ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 County Commissioners approve such a resolution, the total amount paid from the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund for any administrative expenses shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the funds of the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Trust Fund as noted in Section IV.D.(3) of this Ordinance. D. The County shall not treat as administrative expenses any costs previously borne by another funding source which could continue to be available at the time the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Plan is submitted for review and approval by the State of Florida. SECTION VI. CREATION OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE A. The Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee is hereby created and established. The members of the Advisory Committee shall be appointed by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners. B. The resolution appointing the Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee shall define affordable housing as applicable to the county in a way that is consistent with the adopted local comprehensive plan. C. The Affordable Housing Advisory Committee shall consist of sixteen (16) members. Nine (9) members shall be voting members, and five (5) of these voting members shall constitute a quorum. The committee may not take formal actions unless a quorum is present, but may meet to hear presentations and undertake other informal activities if duly noticed. The Indian River County Board of County Commissioners shall appoint the voting members of the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee in conformance with the following representational criteria: 63 BOOK 89 ma 2,60 APR - 6 199 90pK 89 ��� ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 (a) One (1) citizen who is actively engaged in the residential building industry. (b) One (1) citizen who is actively engaged in the banking or mortgage industry. (c) One (1) citizen who is a representative of those areas of labor engaged in home building. (d) One (1) citizen who is designated as an advocate for low-income persons. (e) One (1) citizen who is a provider of affordable housing. (f.) One (1) citizen who is a real estate professional. (g) One (1) citizen who is a representative of persons with special housing needs such as, but not limited to, the elderly, or the mentally and/or physically challenged. (h) One (1) citizen who is a representative of Indian River County Census Tract Number 503.02. (i) One (1) member of the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners who shall serve as the Committee Chairperson charged with the duty of conducting meetings in a manner consistent with law. The Indian River County Board of County Commissioners shall appoint the non-voting members of the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee in conformance with the following representational criteria: (a) One (1) member who is a representative of the City of Vero Beach, appointed by the City of Vero Beach. (b) One (1) member who is a representative of the Town of Fellsmere, appointed by the Town of Fellsmere. (c) One (1) member who is a representative of the City of Sebastian, appointed by the City of-Sebas-tian. 64 ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 (d) One (1) member who is a representative of the Town of Indian River Shores, appointed by the Town of Indian River Shores. (e) One (1) member who is a representative of the Town of Orchid, appointed by the Town of Orchid. (f) Two (2) members who are actively engaged in the banking or mortgage industry. D. The following terms of membership shall apply to members of the Committee: (1) Voting members shall serve for two-year terms and may be reappointed for subsequent terms. (2) Non-voting members shall serve for one-year terms and may be reappointed for subsequent terms. E. Meetings shall be held monthly for the first year of committee existence and quarterly, or more frequently, thereafter. F. The Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee shall comply with the Government in the Sunshine Law, the public records law, and the special provisions regarding notice of Affordable Housing Incentive Plan considerations found in Chapter 420.9076, Florida Statutes. Minutes of all meetings shall be kept by the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners. G. The Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee shall annually elect a Vice -Chairperson, and such other offices as it deems necessary. In the absence of the Chairperson, the Vice -Chairperson is charged with the duty of conducting meetings in a manner consistent with law. H. Staff, administrative and facility support for the Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee shall be provided by the Board of County Commissioners. I. The Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee shall review the established policies and procedures, 65 BOOK 89 PAGI APR - i9p J BOOK 89 ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 ordinances, land development regulations, and adopted local comprehensive plan of the county and shall recommend specific initiatives to encourage or facilitate affordable housing while protecting the ability of property to appreciate in value. J. Recommendations may include the modification or repeal of existing policies, procedures, ordinances, regulations, or plan provisions. At a minimum, the Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee shall make recommendations on affordable housing incentives in the following areas: (1) The affordable housing definition in the appointing resolution. (2) The expedited processing of permits for affordable housing projects. (3) The modification of impact fee requirements, including reduction or waiver of fees and alternative methods of fee payment. (4) The allowance of increased density levels. (5) The reservation of infrastructure capacity for housing for very low-income persons and low-income persons. (6) The transfer of development rights as a financing mechanism for housing for very low-income persons and low-income persons. (7) The reduction of parking and setback requirements. (8) The allowance of zero -lot -line configurations. (9) The modifications of sidewalk and street requirements. (10) The establishment of a process by which the county considers, before adoption, procedures and policies that have a significant impact on the cost of housing. _ 66 ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 R. The Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee recommendations shall also include other affordable housing incentives identified by the Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. L. To the maximum extent feasible, the approved affordable housing incentive recommendations submitted to the Board of County Commissioners must quantify the affordable housing cost reduction anticipated from implementing the specific recommendation. M. Within nine (9) months from the adoption of this Ordinance, the Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee shall convene a public hearing whereupon the Committee shall undertake final review and consideration of the recommendations developed over the course of the Committee's previous meetings. The final resulting recommendations, approved by a majority of the committee's membership at this public hearing, shall be the Affordable Housing Incentive Plan to be forwarded to the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners for review and adoption by the Board. Notice of the time, date, and place of the public hearing of the Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee to adopt final affordable housing incentive recommendations shall be published in a newspaper of general paid circulation in the county. Such notice shall contain a short and concise summary of the affordable housing incentive recommendations to be considered by the Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. The notice shall also state the public place where a copy of the tentative Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee recommendation can be obtained by interested persons. 67 BOOK 89, PAGUF,964 BOOK fKGE6 ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 SECTION VII. ADOPTION OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVE PLAN A. Within ninety (90) days after the date of the receipt of the affordable housing incentive recommendations from the Indian River County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, the Board of County Commissioners shall adopt the Indian River County Affordable Housing Incentive Plan. The Indian River County Affordable Housing Incentive Plan shall consist of the adoption of specific initiatives to encourage or fAcilitate affordable housing and a schedule for implementation and, at a minimum, must include: (1) A schedule for implementation of expedited permit processing for affordable housing projects; and (2) An ongoing process for review of local policies, ordinances, regulations, and comprehensive plan provisions that significantly impact the cost of housing. B. Upon adoption of the Indian River County Affordable Housing Incentive Plan, the Board of County Commissioners shall so notify the Florida Housing Finance Agency by certified mail. The notice shall include a copy of the approved Indian River County Affordable Housing Incentive Plan. SECTION VIII. SEVERABILITY If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance, or the particular application thereof, shall be held invalid or unconstitutional by any court, administrative agency or other body with appropriate jurisdiction, the remaining section, subsection, sentences, clauses, or phases and their application shall not be affected thereby. SECTION IX. EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of formal adoption. +. 68 ORDINANCE NO. 93-13 The above and foregoing Ordinance was read and approved at a duly convened meeting of the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners of Indian River , Florida, this 6th day of Apri 1 , 1993. This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal on the 16th day of March, 1993 for a public hearing to be held on the 6th day of April, 1993. by Commissioner Eggert Adams The ordinance was moved for adoption , seconded by Commissioner , and adopted by the following vote: Chairman, Richard N. Bird Ave Vice Chairman, John W. Tippin Ave Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye Commissioner Carolyn Eggert Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BY: Ric and N. Bird, Chairman ATTEST BY: effery K. Barton, Cle k Acknowledgement by the Department of State of The State of Florida this _ 19th day of April , 1993. Effective Date: Acknowledgement from the Department of State received on this 22nd day of April, 1993, at 10:00 A.M. /R=. and filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY BY: &Cs� William G. Collins, II 'Deputy County Attorney 69 APR - 6 1993 BOOK 89 FACE266 - � pn APR ��� BOOK 89 PACE267 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 93-75, increasing the limit of administrative costs from the state housing - initiatives partnership (SHIP) program for the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program (IRCLHAProgram), as recommended by staff. RESOLUTION NO. 93- 74 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SETTING A MAXIMUM AND AVERAGE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) INVESTMENT PER HOUSING UNIT. WHEREAS, Chapter 420.9075(3)(1), Florida Statutes, requires the County to set an average cost and maximum cost of SHIP funds per housing unit that -may be invested through the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program; and WHEREAS, the County has studied and is familiar with the uses Of SHIP funds and other funds it has available for housing; and WHEREAS, it has been deemed necessary to invest a maximum of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00) of SHIP funds per housing unit; and WHEREAS, it has also been deemed necessary that the average cost per housing unit will be Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) of SHIP funds per housing unit for Impact Fee Grants, an average amount of Seven Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($7,250.00) of SHIP funds per housing unit _ for Impact Fee Loans, an average of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) of SHIP funds per housing unit for Downpayment/Closing Cost Loans, an average of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) of SHIP funds per housing unit for Land Acquisition Loans, and an average of Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($7,500.00) of SHIP funds per housing unit for Rehabilitation Loans. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that a maximum of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00) of SHIP funds will be 70 RESOLUTION NO. 93-74 invested in any one unit, that the estimated average cost per unit will be Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) for Impact Fee Grants, an average amount of Seven Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($7,250.00) for Impact Fee Loans, and average amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) for Downpayment/Closing Cost Loans, an average amount of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) for Land Acquisition Loans, and an average amount of Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($7,500.00) for Rehabilitation Loans per housing unit. The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner Eggert and seconded by Commissioner Adams , and, being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman, Richard N. Bird Vice Chairman, John W. Tippin Aye Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye Commissioner Carolyn Eggert Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams UP The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this rth day of April , 1993. Jeffrey K, Barton, Clerk 0Y eze� f APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIE CY: William G. Collins, II Deputy County Attorney INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BgARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By :- - 2 4 &-4 _: Richard N. Bird, Chairman 71 APIA _ 1993 BOOK 09 - PAGE6® APR m 6 1993 BOOK 89 PvN 269 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 93-75, increasing the limit of administrative costs from the state housing initiatives partnership (SHIP) program for the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program (IRCLHAProgram), as recommended by staff. RESOLUTION NO. 93= 75 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, INCREASING THE LIMIT OF ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FROM THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) PROGRAM FOR THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE_,PROGRAM (IRCLHAProgram) WHEREAS, Chapter 420, Florida Statutes, describes the State Housing Incentive Partnership (SHIP) Program, which has been established to increase the amount of affordable housing within the State of Florida; and WHEREAS, the County has approved Ordinance Number 93-13 establishing the Local Housing Assistance Program; and WHEREAS, the County has studied its current staff and funding sources; and WHEREAS, consequently, it has been determined that use of five percent (5%) of available SHIP funds will be insufficient to pay the necessary costs of administering the SHIP program; and WHEREAS, it has also been determined that use of ten percent (10%) of available SHIP funds will be adequate at this time to properly administer the SHIP program. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, in regular session duly assembled, that up to ten percent (10%) of available SHIP funds may be used to pay the costs of administration of the SHIP program. 72 RESOLUTION NO. 93- 75 The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner Eggert and seconded by Commissioner Adams , and, being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman, Richard N. Bird All__ Vice Chairman, John W. Tippin Aye_ Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Ay_ Commissioner Carolyn Eggert Ay_ Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye _ The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 6th day of April , 1993. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By: Richard N. Bird, Chairman Jeffrey K Barton, Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: on . William G. Collins, II Deputy County Attorney PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 207 - LICENSING AND LICENSE TAR The hour of 9:05 A.M. having passed, the County Attorney announced that this public hearing has been properly advertised, as follows: 73 APR 1993 BOOK 89 FAU,-270 k, VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being — a , in the matter of In the . Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the Issues of �i2�l��✓ Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press.Joumal 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 mehis. day of ., � D. 19 f" f p► Cisiness Manager) (SEAL) BOOK 09 FMH 271 The BOW of N nn River County, f colo prp��y ofowe ^ 8. of a � edm tar 9:05 a mon Tuesday Snenoe '��•. oYsprss the foAowig Proposed madnW be e at att to may WM to' decra 6, wMch 993, W11 need to Won that a verbatlm retia d 'of ft prooaedrga is made, whim iodea 813130 Is ban& thli� w may 8 awmnoddm for exf 408�gham(ADA) COW&WtOi at U7400 March 12,1993 982291 The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 10, 1993: TO: Margaret Gunter - Administrator's Office FROM: Sandy Wright - County Attorney's Office�6W DATE: March 10, 1993 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING - APRIL 6, 1993 - AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 207 - LICENSING AND LICENSE TAX The attached revisions were discussed and considered by the Board of County Commissioners and scheduled for a March 23, 1992 public hearing. This public hearing - has been rescheduled for April 6, 1993. 74 Assistant County Attorney Terry O'Brien advised that the purpose of the ordinance is to charge the same amount for occupational licenses for all businesses. The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, he closed the public hearing. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, to adopt Ordinance 93-14, amending Chapter 207 Licensing and License Tax to reduce certain taxes so that they shall be uniform throughout the class, as recommended by staff. Under discussion, Commissioner Macht asked if it would be possible to change the name to "occupational fee" so that the meaning would not be misconstrued. Attorney O'Brien agreed that the word "license" is misleading. Commissioner Eggert felt something stronger was needed that would explain that this is a tax, not a license. Attorney O'Brien indicated that staff would bring this to the attention of Tax Collector Karl Zimmermann. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously. ORDINANCE 93- _ 14 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING CHAPTER 207 LICENSING -AND LICENSE TAX TO REDUCE CERTAIN TAXES SO THAT THEY SHALL BE UNIFORM THROUGHOUT THE CLASS. WHEREAS, the County imposes an occupation license tax for business operating in the County; and WHEREAS, said tax is required to be based on reasonable I classifications and uniform throughout any class; and WHEREAS, upon review of the said tax it appears that certain tax amounts should be adjusted downward, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, that: 75 APR - 61993 Boa 89 FAGF?72 TTIZINUM BOOK 89 mur, 273 ORDINANCE 93-14 SECTION 1. AMENDMENT. The license taxes currently set forth in Section 207.24, 207.25, 207.282 207.30, 207.37 and 207.39 as follows: Section 207.24 Circus, Traveling Shows, Tents & Side Shows $225 ' each day Section 207.25 Traveling Medicine Shows $75 Section 207.28 Dance Halls $225 3 Section 207.30 Fortune Tellers, Clairvoyants $300 Section 207.37 Pawnbrokers $337.50 Section 207.39 Permanent Exhibits $225 May operate a side show for $30.00 each side show " Plus the fee in Section 207.24 if there is entertainment 3 One night only $150 Are hereby reduced to $30.00 in each instance. SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY. M If any section, or if any sentence, paragraph, phrase, or word of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, in- operative, or void, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions of this ordinance, and it shall be construed to have been the legislative intent to pass the ordinance without such unconstitutional, invalid or inoperative part . SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall become effective upon becoming law. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, on this 6 day of Apri 1 , 1993. This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal on the 12 day of March , 1993, for a public hearing to be held on the 6 day of Apri 1 , 1993, at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert , seconded by Commissioner Ti ppi n , and adopted by the following vote: 76 W W -ORDINANCE 93-14 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 COMMISSION INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By Richard N. Bird Chairman Attest By go Clerk i4rtb t`. Acknowledgement by -the Department of State of the State of Florida, this 19th day of April , 1993. Effective date: Acknowledgement from the Department of State received on this 22ndday of April , 1993, at 10:00a.m1Rx @. and filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. PUBLIC HEARING - EXPANSION OF THE COUNTY SEAT The hour of 9:05 A.M. having passed, the County Attorney announced that this public hearing has been announced as follows: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he Is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach In Indian Rivir County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a 00, ' In the matter of ej In the Court, was pub- lished in sold newspaper In the Issues of // �✓ aJa ��,� Afflent further says that the sold Vero Beach Press -Journal Is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in sold Indian Rivei 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, lot 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. Lj'� ,'//n /� Q Sworn to and subscribed belbre�ne 1 �ay nY/—AIZ L, A.D t9 _ , •74(Bus ess Manager) 77 NOTICE me owd . of CaNq Cermdeeional of m com RIM Carly. Fbft herebyaoviden raft of a Pubo edadded IR 9* =.. e.m. m Tuesday agoY410FimrYanetd$kdto 411001 to lolowirp prapole� A gESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY CONMMWNERS OF INDIAN RIVER MOM. FLORIDA EXPANDING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE COUNTY BEAT TO ENCOMPASS THE LOCATION OF THE llHERIFi'S OFFICE AND JAL A"= who my wish to my dedeion which vA reedmay be toto sou s tlat oa w�eom e�ow I fro "ftcsWalNwhid�iMie~peelbbeefed. testhavy nd Areae who needs a epedel �oorrenodstlon for BOOK PAGE 274 APR - 6 1993 BOOK 89 PAGE 275 The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 15, 1993: TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Charles P. Vitunac Nounty Attorney DATE: March 15, 1993 RE: EXPANSION OF THE COUNTY SEAT Section 30.10, Florida Statutes, requires that the place of office of every County Officer shall be at the county seat, which in Indian River County is the City of Vero Beach. The Sheriff's Office is located in the unincorporated area of the County contiguous to the City of Vero Beach and, as far as our research can document, the county seat has never been expanded to include this property. The Sheriff's Office may be brought into the county seat by annexation of the land into the City or by expansion of the county seat boundaries. The easier method is the expansion of the county seat boundary. The Commissioners may expand the county seat boundaries pursuant to Section 138.12; Florida Statutes which requires the adoption of a resolution after the board has held at least two public hearings at intervals of not less than 10 days nor more than 20 days and after notice of the proposal and such meetings have been published in a newspaper of general circulation. Recommendation: Staff recommends that public hearings be advertised for April 6, 1993 and April 20, 1993 at which the attached resolution would be adopted expanding the County seat to include the Sheriff's Office and Jail. Attorney Vitunac advised that state law requires the Sheriff's office to be in the County seat and that this is the first of two public hearings on a proposed resolution to expand the county seat boundaries to include the Sheriffs Administration Building. The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, he closed the public hearing. Attorney Vitunac advised that the second public hearing is scheduled for April 20, 1993, and no Board action is required at this time. 78 FY 1993-94 ANTI-DRUG ABUSE GRANT FUNDING The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 19, 1993: TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: March 19, 1993 FILE: THRU: - James E. Chandler County Administratory/ SUBJECT: FY 1993-94 Anti -Drug Abuse Grant Funding RECEIVED FROM: Randy Dowling R• MAR 2 2 1993 Ass t. to County Administrato EFERENCES• Budget Office BACKGROUND For the previous three fiscal years, Indian River County has been allocated grant funds from the Florida Department of Community Affairs (FDCA) to fund local anti-drug abuse projects. The Board has funded the same four projects all three years. 1) Indian River County Jail Substance Abuse Counseling Program and Aftercare Program - administered by New Horizons of the Treasure Coast, Inc. 2) First Start Program - administered by the Indian River Cou Board nty School 3) Just Say No Program - administered by the Just Say No Council of Indian River County, Inc. 4) Substance Abuse Advisory Council Administrative Expenses. - administered by the Substance Abuse Council of Indian River County. CURRENT The County Administrator's Office received a letter dated March 15, 1993 from the FDCA stating that Indian River County has been allocated $138,816 in grant funds for FY 1993-94, the same amount as last year, to fund local anti-drug abuse projects. The letter also requested the Board to serve as the coordinating unit of government in applying for the funds. The Substance Abuse Advisory Council will be soliciting for and receiving grant applications as well as evaluating those applications and recommending to the Board what projects to fund and their funding levels. The Substance Abuse Advisory Council's recommendations will be brought to the Board for approval in May. The grant's fourth year will continue to be funded 75% from the state and 25$ from the county. The budgetary impact on the county will not exceed $50,000. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board accept the invitation to serve as the coordinating unit of government in the FDCA Anti -Drug Abuse act Grant Program and authorize the Board Chairman to sign the Certification of Participation naming Randy Dowling, Assistant to the County Administrator, as the contact person. W ®6X993 BOOK .8,9 F,f UE 276 APR ® 61993 BOOK - 89 qrt-277 Administrator Chandler explained that the actual grant application will be presented to the Board the early part of June. ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by - Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously accepted the invitation to serve as the coordinating unit of government in the FDCA Anti -Drug Abuse act Grant Program and authorized the Chairman to sign the Certification of Participation naming Randy Dowling, Assistant to the County Administrator, as the contact person, as recommended by staff. AWARD OF BID #3068 - INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD PHASE IV PUBLIC WORKS The Board reviewed the fol.lowing memo dated March 30, 1993: DATE: March 30, 1993 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director i -A Department of General Services FROM: Fran Boynton Powell, Purchasing Managerw SUBJ: Award Bid 63068/Indian River Blvd Phase IV Public Works --------------------------------------------------------- BA ZROUND INFORMATION Bid Opening Date: March 10, 1993 Advertising Dates: Jan 289 Feb 4, 1993 Specifications Mailed To: Thirty Four (34) Vendors Replies: Six (6) Vendors VENDOR BID TABULATION CORRECTED BID TOTAL Dickerson Florida, Inc $394539681.61 Stuart, FL Barco -Duval Engineering $3,8999926.43 Jacksonville, FL Ranger Construction — * $399289323.31 $3,959,310.31 Ft Pierce, FL Hardrives of Delray $492609593.87 Delray Beach, FL Bryant Contracting * $5,067,261.56 $494779703.09 Deerfield Beach, FL Martin Paving Company * $496939164.91 $496959536.52 Vero Beach, FL s0 * Asterik represents mathematical errors made by vendors on the original tabulation, the totals in the right column are corrected totals. (Attached Consultant's Letter and Department Memo) TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID: $394539681.61 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Indian River Blvd North Construction in Progress ' BUDGETED AMOUNT: $5.5 Million RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the bid be awarded to Dickerson Florida Inc as the lowest, most responsive and responsible bidder meeting specifications as set forth in the specifications in the Invitation to Bid. In addition, staff requests the Board's approval of the attached Agreement when all -requirements are met and approved as to form by the County Attorney. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously awarded Bid #3068 in the amount of $3,453,681.61 to Dickerson Florida, Inc., as recommended by staff. CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD POLICY MANUAL The Board reviewed the following memos dated March 31 and April 5, 1993: To: Board of County Commissioners Date: March 31, 1993 Through: James Chandler, S County Adminis rator� From: Jack Price, PersonnelSub: Policy Manual ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . These Administrative Policy Manual units are ready for approval by the Board of County Commissioners. Except as noted below, this will complete .the manual unless units are added in the future as conditions warrant. Two units, DRUG AND ALCOHOL ABUSE, AM -601.1 and MILITARY LEAVE, AM - 702.5 will be submitted for Board of County ComVissioners' approval following integration of the complex federal, state and local regulations which pertain to them. Six sections of the manual contain policy units previously approved by the Board of County Commissioners and currently in use. Because there is considerable cross referencing between policy units, those six sections are copied and included in sequence, in this package. The new units submitted for approval at this time are identified by the "Date Effective" in the upper right corner being 04-06-93. 81 APR - 6 1993 aooK 89 Pa -UE 2 ' 600K 89 PAGE 979 In the VACATION LEAVE unit, AM -502.1, the maximum amount of _ vacation time which can carry over from year to year is 30 days. This has previously been 20 days. Employees reques#ed this change and a study of other jurisdictions revealed that the 30 day maximum is typical. There are no cost implications since it will only delay the use of vacation that is now accrued on a monthly basis. Three units, NEPOTISM, AM -202.2; SOLICITATION AND DISTRIBUTION, AM - 604.1; and CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AM -806.1 are the work product of an employee team. The team members were Robert Cogar,'Library; Gerald Davis, Purchasing; Etta LoPresti, Emergency Services; William Meager, Engineering; Ramona Peterson, Probation; and William Collins, County Attorney's Office. Their efforts are greatly appreciated. The Administrative Policy Manual does not specifically apply to those employees whose relationship with•the County is governed by a contract. If departmental or division guidelines or practices are inconsistent. with this manual- those will be regarded as secondary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . To: James Chandler, County Administrator From: Jack Price, Personnels Date: ,April 5, 1993 Sub: Policy Manual Unit AM -212.1 Note: Page 44 of Commissioner's backup material•. In this "TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT" unit, one sentence is to be added at the end of comment 5. "Final pay will be ready on the last work day for those retiring employees who are vested in the retirement plan." Personnel Director Jack Price explained that the policy manual represents a merger of the old policy manual, a model policy guide, the requirements of Florida law, and current practices. Commissioner Eggert felt that retiring employees who are vested in the retirement plan will leave with much better feelings as a result of the addition to Unit AM -212.1. Commissioner Macht asked for clarification of Section AM -801.6 referring to employees' business associates. Deputy County Attorney Will Collins advised that the state ethics law refers to business associates as individuals -involved in 82 a partnersh-ip, joint venture, or a corporate shareholder having more than a 5% interest in a corporation. Discussion ensued regarding nepotism, and Attorney Collins advised that state law specifies that it is permissible to hire a relative of a Commissioner. An applicant who is related to a Commissioner would be given the same consideration as anyone else applying for a position. It only becomes unethical if a commissioner puts pressure on County staff to hire a relative. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner*Eggert, the Board unanimously approved the revisions to the Policy Manual effective April 6, 1993, as recommended by staff. IMPROVEMENTS TO 130TH AVENUE (WILLOW STREET) SOUTH OF CR -512 IN FELLSMERE Public Works Director Jim Davis presented the following memo dated March 30, 1993 and February 22, 1993: TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator FROM: James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Director " SUBJECT: Improvements to 130th Avenue (Willow St.) South of CR512 in Fellsmere REF. MINUTES: Board of County Commission Meeting Minutes of September -17, 199 1 DATE: March 30, 1993 ok During the September 17, 1991 meeting of the Board of County Commissioners, the Board authorized staff to develop a program for road and drainage improvements to 130th Avenue (Willow St.) south of CR512, and possibly forming a Special Assessment District. Attached is a status report on the findings. Commissioner Adams expected differing views at the public hearing. She felt that the County had done its part. Now it is a question of whether or not everybody wants to participate in the project. The joint hearing should settle the issue one way or another. Director Davis indicated that the County's participation in the project needs to be determined. The total cost of the road is estimated to be $894,000.00 or $450.00 an acre. Director Davis felt that a 25% contribution from the County would be equitable. 83 APP - 61993 BOOK 89 F,1,H 0 f BOOK ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously scheduled a public hearing at 7:00 P.M. on April 27, 1993 at the Fellsmere Elementary School cafeteria. PURCHASE AUTHORIZATION - 45TH STREET RIGHT -OF -NAY ACQUISITION GRACE WALKER PARCELS The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 19, 1993: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Director and Terry B. Thompson, P.E. Capital Projects �P J Manager FROM: Donald G. Finney, SRA• County Right of Way Agent SUBJECT: Purchase Authorization; 45th Street Right -of -Way Acquisition, Grace Walker Parcels DATE: March 19, 1993 Indian River County is proceeding to construct Indian River Boulevard, Phase 4, from 37th Street to 53rd Street. The additional right-of-way needed to accomplish this project consists of these two parcels at the intersection of the Boulevard and 45th Street. A Contract For Sale and Purchase was sent to the property owner at the appraised value of each .07 acre parcel. The property owner has not agreed to sell at the $2,961 appraised value for each parcel but originally requested compensation in the amount of $25,000. Staff has communicated with the property owner and his attorney that values in the area do not justify this cost, and the property owner has executed a Contract For Sale and Purchase at the purchase price of $4,900 each for a total of $9,800. The contract also specifies payment of $50.00 for each producing citrus tree which will have to be removed, and the number of trees is to be determined during construction. Approximately 30 trees are within a temporary construction easement that is also necessary to construct the Boulevard project. Mr. Roddenberry's attorney fee is $650, which is also a part of this contract. RECOMMEMATION Staff requests the Board accept the $9,800 contract, tree costs of approximately $1,500, and attorney - fee of $650, and direct the chairman to execute the contract on the Board's behalf. In addition to the right-of-way area being acquired, the land owner has executed a temporary construction easement included in this settlement. 84 ON iMOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously authorized acceptance of the $9,800.00 contract, tree costs of approximately $1,500.00, and attorney's fee of $650.00, as recommended by staff. CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD EMINENT DOMAIN LITIGATION - SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH INDIAN RIVER WEST - INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD PHASE III Public Works Director Jim Davis presented the following memo dated March 26, 1993: TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator FROM: James W. Davis, P.E , Public Works Directo SUBJECT: Eminent Domain Litigation - Settlement Agreement - Parcel 103 (Indian River West) - Indian River Blvd. Phase III REF. LETTER: Sidney A. Stubbs, Jr., to Kenneth J. Kavanaugh dated Mar. 22, 1993 DATE: March 26, 1993 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS In July, 1991, a jury trial was conducted to establish the final compensation to be paid by the County for Eminent Domain acquisition of approximately acres of right-of-way/mitigation area for Indian River Blvd Phase 3 One County appraisal valued the property at $365,200. The twelve person jury verdict was $365,000. There was testimony during the trial which established values of $365,000. In 1991, the trial judge granted a new trial on the basis that the jury should have awarded an additional $200. The County appealed that lower Court decision. Recently, the 4th District Court ruled in favor of the County on this issue. The property owners are appealing this decision to the Florida Supreme Court. At this time, the property owners are willing to enter into a settlement agreement which would resolve all issues. The agreement proposed is as follows: 1. Additional compensation to the property owners in the amount of $35,000. The Florida DOT has purchased the upland portion of the property and will pay approximately 80% of this amount. The state share is approximately $28,000 and County share is $7,000. 85 APR - 61993 800K 89 I BOOK 89 u -IN 2,8 2. Property owner Attorney fees from 1990 have been claimed to be approximately $250,000. Approximately $125,823 of these fees were incurred before June 15, 1991, which was the date that the County's final Offer of Judgment took effect. Attorney fees prior to this date are a County responsibility. The fees were examined by the County's legal counsel and appear reasonable. The settlement agreement includes the County paying $125,000 in attorney fees for the property owner. The DOT will pay 80% of this cost, or $100,000. The County share is $25,000. 3. Expert fees for appraisals, environmental consultants, planners, engineering consultants, litigation costs, and miscellaneous related costs have been claimed by the property owner to be $234,613.67. Approximately $207,997 of these costs are claimed to be incurred prior to the County's last offer on June 15, 1991. The property owner is willing to settle this issue for $125,000. The DOT will pay 80% of this cost or $100,000. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The County has incurred approximately $19,000 in outside legal costs on this parcel since July, 1991, as a result of appeals. Further costs will be necessary as appeals proceed to higher courts. The alternatives include the following: Alternative No. 1 Approve the proposed settlement agreement at a cost of approximately $285,000, $57,000 County share and $228,000 State of Florida DOT share. A majority of these costs, and possibly more, would be awarded to the property owner at a hearing before the Circuit Court on attorney fees and expert/related costs incurred prior to June 15, 1991, before the appeal process began. Alternative No. 2 Reject the settlement agreement, proceed defending the appeals, and argue legal fees, expert costs, and related costs before the Circuit Court in future hearings. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING Alternative No. 1 is recommended whereby the Settlement Agreement be approved. Funding to be from Fund 309 - Indian River Blvd. Project Fund, in the amount of approximately $57,000 cost to County and $228,000 to Florida DOT on a reimbursement basis. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin to approve the proposed settlement agreement at a total cost to the County of approximately $57,000.00, as set forth in the above staff recommendation. Under discussion, Commissioner Adams was upset about the high attorney and expert witness fees. Director Davis explained that the owner refused the County's offer of $365,200.00 and in fact wanted $1.3 million for the 86 property. The County entered into eminent domain litigation. In such cases, the County is required by law to pay all legal and expert witness fees up to the time a final offer of summary judgment is made, regardless of who wins the case. The County made its final offer of summary judgment in the amount of $575,000.00 - about 40 days before the trial and the property owners refused the County's offer. Attorney Collins explained that Indian River West planned to take the case to the Florida Supreme Court but have now made an offer of settlement. If we do not settle and a new trial is held, we risk the possibility of the appellant winning the case. The County would then have to pay the higher price for the land and be responsible for all costs associated with the appeal. Attorney Collins advised that we could file a lawsuit to have the attorney and expert witness fees reduced, but recalled a similar case where the Court decided that the attorney and expert witness fees were reasonable. Chairman Bird suggested that we review this whole scenario and determine if there was something that might have been handled differently. Administrator Chandler stressed that you always take a chance when you go to Court in these cases. The frustrating part of it is that we have to pay the legal fees even though we won the case. Commissioner Macht felt that we should take this to the Supreme Court because of the principal involved. Attorney Vitunac explained that if we reject the settlement, take the case to the Supreme Court and win, we will not save any money. Director Davis pointed out that we have already sent a strong message to the community by taking this to Court and prevailing. We would not have been able to settle parcels 110 and 111 if we hadn't won this case. The word has gotten around that we won a big one. Further discussion ensued, and Attorney Vitunac concluded that _ this settlement is not a bad deal for the County. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried 4-1, Commissioner Macht dissenting. 87 SPR 6199 BOOK $� FBF 2:84 APP m 1993 BOOK S9 P"""a� ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY PURCHASE - 33RD STREET BETWEEN 58TH AND 66TH AVENUES - KIRBY PARCEL The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 22, 1993: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Directo 1 and Roger D. Cain, P.E County Engineer FROM: Donald G. Finney, SRA. County Right of Way Agent SUBJECT: Additional Right -of --Way Purchase / 33rd Street between 58th Avenue and 66th Avenue / Plato Kirby, Jr. and Beneta Kirby Parcel DATE: March 22, .. DESCRIPTION AND CONDMONS Indian River County needs an additional 30 feet of right-of-way for the petition paving project on 33rd Street. The Board of County Commissioners previously approved the purchase of the right-of- way along this corridor on January 21, 1992. This is one of the last parcels to be acquired The property owner has signed a Real Estate Exchange Contract at $20,000, which is $.50 per square foot and $4,144 above the February, 1991 appraised value of $.40 per square foot, ($15,856.00). The right -of --way is 30'x 1,319.96 feet or 39,599 square feet. The county is to relocate the fence, trees and culverts which the county would do on a paving project as a matter of course. Considerable negotiations and three revised contracts have taken place with the owner. The owner, wants the $20,000 credit against the $28,030.61 estimated petition paving assessment rather then a cash saletpurchase. There are no attorneys' fees. Staff has discussed Eminent Domain proceedings with the County Attorney's office. The final cost of condemnation to acquire this parcel would be far in excess of the contract. Staff requests the Board accept the contract and direct the Chairman to execute the contract on the Board's behalf. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved the contract with Plato Kirby, Jr. and Beneta Kirby in the amount of $20,000.00, said amount to be credited against the $28,030.61 estimated petition paving assessment, as recommended by staff. CONTRACT IS ON FILE - IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD 88 WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT PROJECT - 16TH PLACE, 17TH AVENUE, AND 10TH STREET - WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. 8 The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 26, 1993: DATE: MARCH 26, 1993 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO DIRECTOR OF UTILIERVICES t" STAFFED AND TERRY H. DRUM 1W PREPARED BY: ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT PROJECT 16TH PLACE (WEST OF 20TH STREET), 17TH STH STREET), AND 10TH STREET (BETWEEN AVENUE) BACKGROUND: AVENUE (NORTH OF 17TH AND 18TH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BID NO. 91-113 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UW -92 -39 -DS WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. 8 On August 6, 1991, the Board of County Commissioners approved the award - of the labor contract bid to Driveways, Inc., Bid No. 91-113 (see attached minutes). The Department of Utility Services proposes to use this labor contract to replace the distribution system within the above subject area. This is in response to the continuing problems of rusting and low pressure with the existing galvanized water lines. ANALYSIS: The bid proposal process to obtain survey data for the subject project areas was completed and Masteller, Moler & Reed, Inc., was the lowest bidder for surveying services. Purchase orders were then processed and the survey work was ordered. The surveying work has been completed, and the subject project is comprised of the replacement of existing 2" galvanized water line with approximately 11390 linear feet of 2 -inch PVC water main and 970 linear feet of 6 -inch PVC water main. The cost of the labor to construct the 6 -inch and 2 -inch PVC water mains under the labor contract is $24,294.70 (see attached Work Authorization No. 8 with Driveways, Inc.). The pipe, valves, and fittings will be supplied by the County at a cost of $8,222.23. In-house engineering, inspection, and administration costs are estimated to be $4,875.00. The construction of these replacement water lines is a part of a continuing effort by the Department to replace galvanized water lines within the water distribution system in Indian River County. Funding for this project will be from renewal and replacement funds. 89 APR _ 61993 BOOK 89. PnF 2.86 FF_ 01=11�,� RECOMMENDATION: Booz 89 F.,1,;F2-S7 The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners execute the subject agreement, which approves Work Authorization No. 8 to construct the subject projects with Driveways, Inc., for the amount of $24,294.70 to replace an estimated total of 2,360 linear feet of water main and authorizes expenditure of $13,097.23 for materials and in-house support, for a total project cost of $37,391.93. Commissioner Adams asked whether the County had originally put in the galvanized lines, and Director Pinto explained that they were in existence prior to the County's acquisition of systems. The Utilities Department has never installed galvanized lines. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved Work Authorization No. 8 in the amount of $24,294.70 with Driveways, Inc. and authorized expenditure of $13,097.23 for materials and in-house support, for a total project cost of $37,391.93, as set forth in the above staff memorandum. CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD SLUDGE/SEPTAGE PROCESSING FACILITY - CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 The Board reviewed the following memo dated March 26, 1993: DATE: MARCH 26, 1993 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER -COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE PINTO DI RER OF UT TY VICES STAFFED AND PREPARED BY: H. „ o ER, p. ENVIRO ENTAL ENGINEER DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: SLUDGE/SEPTAGE PROCESSING FACILITY CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 BACKGROUND: The subject project is nearing its final completion date of May 3, 1993. The proposed change order requests a 7 -day extension due to inclement weather and further requests several field changes outlined in the attachment. 90 r ANALYSIS: During construction of a, project of this magnitude, there normally are changes necessary due to existing and/or unanticipated field conditions. These changes are consolidated into one change order for administrative purposes (see attached). The sum amounts to a reduction in contract price of $6,203.00. RECaM- MENDATION The Department of Utility Services recommends approval of the attached change order for a 7 -day time extension and for a $6,203.00 reduction in contract cost. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously approved Change Order No. 2 from The Poole and Kent Co. for a 7 -day time extension and a $6,203.00 reduction in contract costs, as recommended by staff. CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD APPOINTMENT TO FILL VACANCY OF EXECUTIVE AIDE TO THE BOARD Chairman Bird announced that the Executive Aide position was posted on County bulletin boards. The applications were reviewed and rated by each Commissioner and submitted to Liz Forlani late last week. In reviewing the applications and summarizing them, it was apparent that there was overwhelming support for promoting Alice White into that position. The applications and rankings are available for review if the Board members would like to interview any of the other applicants. If the Board wishes to offer Alice White the position at this time, the effective date of her salary increase would be May 7, 1993, which is the beginning of a new pay period. ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved the promotion of Alice White to the Executive Aide position, with her increase in pay to be effective May 7, 1993. 91 BOOK F}k,F.2�88 APR 461993 I APR ® 6 1993 BOOK 89 pg 2 9 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT Chairman Bird announced that immediately upon adjournment, the Board would reconvene sitting as the 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 11:24 A.M. ATTEST: J. rton, Clerk Richard N. Bird, Chairman 92