HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/11/1993MINUTES ATTACHED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1993
9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
1840 25TH STREET
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Richard N. Bird, Chairman ( Dist. 5 )
John W. Tippin, Vice Chairman ( Dist. 4)
Fran B. Adams ( Dist. 1)
Carolyn K. Eggert ( Dist. 2 )
Kenneth R. Macht (Dist. 3)
9: 00 A. M. 1. CALL TO ORDER
James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board
2. INVOCATION - None
3. - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Comm. Richard N. Bird
4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Item 9.B.6. - Public hearing on expansion of the
County seat
Item 11.H.5. - Update on New Horizons Mobile
Home Park
S. PROCLAMATION AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Adoption and Presentation of Proclamation
Honoring AARP Chapter 1406 on Its 20th
Anniversary
B. Presentation of Distinguished Budget Presen-
tation Award from the Government Finance
Officers Association
( letter dated March 19, 1993 )
C. Presentation of Proclamation - Teacher
Appreciation Week
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Regular Meeting of March 23, 1993
B. Special Meeting of March 30, 1993
7. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Received and placed on file in office of
Clerk to the Board:
March 1993 Expenditure Report, Office of the
Medical Examiner, District 19
Report of Convictions. Month of April
B 000 6 f.r
MAY 111993 4u'_ y )-
MAY I I i, o
p r 27
900K 89 PACE 462
7. CONSENT AGENDA (cont'd. ):
B. Amendment of Elections Budget
( memorandum dated May 3, 1993)
C. Budget Workshop Schedule
( memorandum dated April 30, 1993 )
D. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 017
( memorandum dated May 4, 1993 )
E. Release of Easements Request By: Laverne M.
Ellis, Lots 8, 10, 12, 8 14, Block 13,
Tropical Village estates, Unit 2
(memorandum dated April 28, 1993)
F. Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance
Waiver for Lot 14, Block 21, Vero Lake Estates,
Unit 4
( memorandum dated April 30, 1993 )
G. Oslo Road Water Main Project
( memorandum dated May 3, 1993 )
H. Land Swap Near Tracking Station Park to Indian
River Shores
( memorandum dated May 3, 1993 )
S. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AND
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
None
9:05 a.m. 9. PUBLIC ITEMS
A. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS
Request From Abundant Life Apostolic Church
( memorandum dated April 30, 1993 )
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS
I. Proposed Change ( Minor Amendment) to the
Grand Harbor DRI Development Order
( memorandum dated April 28, 1993 )
2. Faith United Fellowship, Inc.'s Request
for Special Exception Use Approval and
Conceptual Site Plan Approval to Expand
A Place of Worship
( memorandum dated May 3, 1993 )
3. AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA LIMITING THE PARTICIPATION OF
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON ADVISORY
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
4. AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA AMENDING SECTION 302.04 OF
THE CODE TO PROVIDE FOR ANIMAL
LICENSE RENEWAL TO COINCIDE WITH
VACCINATION REQUIREMENTS
9. PUBLIC ITEMS (contd.):
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS (cont'd.):
S. AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA PROVIDING FOR AN ALTERNATE FOR
EX OFFICIO MEMBERS OF COMMISSIONS AND
BOARDS
(cont'd. from 5/4/93 BCC meeting)
10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS
None
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
1. Status Report on the EDA Grant Proposal and
Request for Authorization to Apply for the
Planning Assistance Grant
( memorandum dated May 4, 1993 )
2. Request from Town of Indian River Shores
Regarding Residential Resort Uses in the
RM -6 Zoning District
( memorandum dated May 3, 1993 )
Additional backup submitted by Mr. Axtell
Additional backup submitted by Mr. Bibow
B. EMERGENCY SERVICES
None
C. GENERAL SERVICES
None
D. LEISURE SERVICES
None
E. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
None
F. PERSONNEL
None
G. PUBLIC WORKS
1. CR512 Electric Utility Relocation
( memorandum dated May 3, 1993 )
2. Paving of 12th Ave. between 4th Street
and 5th Place
( memorandum dated May 3, 1993 )
3. Settlement of Construction Claim
Phase III Boulevard
( memorandum dated May 3, 1993 )
4. City of Vero Beach - AIA Widening Request
for Traffic Impact Fees District 2
( memorandum dated May 3, 1993 )
A� I1�� BOOK �9 FAGE �.
r MAY 111993
BOOK
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS (cont'd.) •
H. UTILITIES
1. Sewer Force Main/Relocation Project County
Road 512 ( east of Food Lion) -
Work Authorization No. 9
( memorandum dated April 27, 1993 )
2. North County Wastewater Treatment Plant
Phase. I Landscaping
( memorandum dated April 30, 1993 )
3. Low Pressure Force Main System to Serve
Durrance Place S/D and Properties to the
South Along the Indian River Lagoon to
County Road 510
( memorandum dated May 3, 1993 )
4. Water Expansion Pian - Phase III
Resolutions I and 11
( memorandum dated April 30, 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. MRCHT
89 f, vu,r 464
14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS
A. EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT
None
B. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
None
15. ADJOURNMENT
ANYONE WHO MAY WISH TO APPEAL ANY DECISION WHICH MAY BE MADE
AT THIS MEETING WILL NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF
THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND
EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL WILL BE BASED.
ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION FOR THIS MEETING MAY
CONTACT THE COUNTY'S AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA)
COORDINATOR AT' 567-8000 X 408 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF
MEETING.
BOOK 89 FA,; 465
Tuesday, May 11, 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, May 11, 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.
Chairman Bird led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
The Chairman requested the addition of the following:
Item 9.B.6. - Public hearing on expansion of the County seat
Item 11.H.5. - Update on New Horizons Mobile Home Park
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously added the
above items to the Agenda.
PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Adoption and Presentation of Proclamation Honoring Chapter 1406
of the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) on its 20th
Anniversary
Chairman Bird read aloud and presented the following
proclamation to Tom Buchanan, representative of AARP Chapter 1406:
L2MAY 11 193
FF -MAY 111993
P R O C L A M A T I O N
HONORING AARP CHAPTER 1406
ON ITS 20TH ANNIVERSARY
��.�
t�ooK 89 Fr,,r6i -7
WHEREAS, each chapter charted by AARP is established as a
not-for-profit corporation to represent the national Association
in its community; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the social benefits, members realize
a new sense of independence, purpose and dignity by contributing
their experience, talents and maturity in service to their
community; and.
WHEREAS, through chapter programs and activities, they give
visible witness to the motto of the AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
RETIRED PERSONS: "To Serve - Not to be Served"; and
WHEREAS, the purposes and functions of an AARP Chapter are
to serve as an Instrument of community service and social change
in keeping with Association purposes; to provide a strong public
image of the Association in its local community, a means of
communication between ,members and the Association, and a source
of recruitment. and training of members and leaders; and to
provide opportunities for older persons in its community to
achieve their individual goals and meet their personal and social
needs; and
WHEREAS, the objectives of an AARP Chapter are to provide a
channel through which members can engage in community volunteer
service; to enable members to be active in fostering legislation;
to furnish th6 medium through which members can develop needed
community programs and activities; to give members an opportunity
to meet each other at the local level; to give members a deeper
understanding and appreciation of the total AARP program; to
provide a constant source of membership recruitment at the local
level; to give members an opportunity to participate in AARP
programs of national scope, such as Tax -aide, 55 -Alive Mature
Driving, Legislation, Criminal Justice, Health Advocacy, Travel,
Widowed Persons Service, Minorities Affairs, Women's Initiative,
Etc:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that May 17, 1993 is
the twentieth anniversary of Chapter 1406. The Board urges all
citizens of Indian River County to recognize and support AARP
Chapter 1406 for its service to the community.
Adopted this 11 day of May, 1993.
2
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Richard N. Bird, Chairman
B. Presentation of Distinguished Budget Presentation Award from
the Government Finance Officers Association
OMB Director Joe Baird commented that this is the second year
we have received this award, which is given to only 5% of
governments across the nation. He thanked his staff for putting
the book together, which is a difficult process involving many
hours of work, and emphasized that it could not have been done
without the joint effort of several other departments.
Chairman Bird presented the following letter, press release
and plaque to OMB Director Joe Baird:
GOVERNMENT FINANCE
OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
180 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 800, Chicago, Ilrinois 80801
312/977-9700 • Fax: 312/977-4808
March 19, 1993
Mr. James E. Chandler
County Administrator
Indian River County Board of County Commnrs.
1840 25th Street-.
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Mr. Chandler:
I am pleased to notify you that Indian River County Board of
County Commnrs. has received the Distinguished Budget Presentation
Award from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA).
This award is the highest form of recognition in governmental
budgeting and represents a significant achievement by your
organization.
Your government's plaque will be shipped under separate cover to
Mr. Joseph A. Baird, who originally submitted the budget for
consideration. We hope you will arrange for a formal public
presentation of the award, and that appropriate publicity will be
given to this notable achievement. A press release is enclosed
for your use.
We appreciate your participation in GFOA's budget awards program.
Through your example, we hope that other governments will be.
encouraged to achieve excellence in budgeting.
Sincerely,
A�0_41_540?
Jeffrey L. Esser
Executive Director
3
MAY I 11993 BOOK 89 FAG -r.468
MAY i i
GOVERNMENT FINANCE
OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
180 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 800. Chicago, Illinois 60601
312/877-8700 • Fax: 312/977-4806
March 19, 1993
P R E S S R E L E A S E
RELEASE IMMEDIATELY
BOOK 89 PA,,r 469
, 7
For Further Information Contact
Dennis Strachota (312) 977-9700
CHICAGO --The Government Finance Officers Association of the United
States and Canada (GFOA) is pleased to announce that Indian River
County Board of County Commnrs., Florida has received GFOA'S
Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for its budget. This
award is the highest form of recognition in governmental
budgeting. Its attainment represents a significant accomplishment
by the management and elected officials of Indian River County
Board of County Commnrs., Florida. To receive the award,
governments submit their budget document for review by a panel of
independent budget experts. Using extensive criteria, the
reviewers evaluate the effectiveness of the budget as:
o A policy document
o A financial plan
o An operations guide
o A communication device
Award-winning documents must be rated 'proficient' in all four
categories.
Since 1984, over 500 governmental entities have received the
Distinguished Budget Presentation Award nationwide. Winning
entries represented truly pioneering efforts to improve the
quality of budgeting and provide excellent examples for other
governments throughout North America.
The Government Finance Officers Association is a nonprofit
Professional association serving 9,500 government finance
professionals throughout North America. Over 11400 governments
participate actively in the association's activities. The
association produces a variety of technical publications in
various fields of governmental finance; and represents the public
finance community in Washington, D.C. The association provides
numerous training opportunities, and conducts an annual conference
attended by over 3,000 public finance professionals.
WASHINGTON OFFICE
1750 K Street, N.W., Suite 200, Washington, D.C. 20006
202/428-2750 • Fax: 202/429-2755
4
GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
Distinguished
Budget Presentation
Award
PRESENTED TO
Indian River County Board of County Commissioners,
Florida
For the Fiscal Year Beginning
October 1, 1992
yo- Z;
President Executive Director
C. Presentation of Proclamation - Teacher Appreciation Week
Chairman Bird read aloud and presented the following
proclamation to Ed Kohtala, Indian River County Teacher of the
Year:
5
AY i 11,993 BOOK 9 F,qr, 470
BOOK �� �:
MAY 111993 �9 Fr � . 471
PROCLAMATION
DESIGNATING MAY 9 - 15;=1993
AS
TEACHER APPRECIATION WEEK
WHEREAS, a strong, 'effective system of free public
education for all children and youth is essential to our
democratic system of government; and
WHEREAS, the Indian River County School system has made
considerable progress in the social, technological and scientific
fields due to our system of free and universal public education;
and
WHEREAS, much of this progress can be attributed to the
qualified and dedicated teachers entrusted with educational
development of our children and their full potentials; and
WHEREAS, teachers should be accorded high public
esteem, reflecting the value that the community places on public
education; and
WHEREAS, it is appropriate that teachers be recognized
for their dedication and commitment to educating their students:
NOW., THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the week of
May 9 through May 15, 1993 be designated as
TEACHER APPRECIATION WEEK
in Indian River County, Florida, and the Board urges all citizens
to pay tribute to our public school teachers.
Adopted this 11 day of May, 1993.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Richard N. B rd, Chairman
Mr. Kohtala thanked the Board on behalf of the Indian River
County teachers who gave him gave the privilege and honor of
representing them as Teacher of the Year.
6
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections
to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 23, 1993. There
were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Tippin, the Board approved the Minutes
of the Regular Meeting of March 23, 1993, as
written.
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections
to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of March 30, 1993. There
were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Tippin, the Board approved the Minutes
of the Special Meeting of March 30, 1993, as
written.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Received and Placed on File:
March 1993 Expenditure Report, Office of the Medical Examiner,
District 19.
Report of Convictions, Month of April 1993.
B. Amendment of Elections Budget
The Board reviewed the following memo dated May 3, 1993:
May 3, 1993
TO: HON. DICK BIRD, CHAIRMAN, BCC
FROM: ANN ROBINSON, SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
RE: ITEM FOR BCC CONSENT AGENDA OF MAY 11, 1993
We need for the BCC to vote to amend the elections budget
so that we may accept the reimbursements from the four
municipalities for administering their elections on
March 9, 1993. The amounts are as follows:
Fellsmere- $1,563.32
Indian River Shores 2,110.77
Sebastian 4,973.95
Vero Beach 8,231.29
Total $16,879.33.
We plan to put $16,879 into our special elections account,
and give 3U to the BCC.
Thank you.
7
BOOK 89 PAGE 4 12
MAY I 11993
BOOK
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously amended
the elections budget, as set forth in the above
memorandum from the Supervisor of Elections.
89 P4,4 73
C. Budget Workshop Schedule
The Board reviewed the following memo dated April 30, 1993:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: April 30, 1993
SUBJECT: BUDGET WORKSHOP SCHEDULE - CONSENT AGENDA
FROM: Joseph A. Bair
OMB Director
Due to a conflict with one of the proposed dates for the 1993/94 Budget Workshop, we are
scheduling the Workshop for Wednesday, July 21, 1993 beginning at 9:00 a.m.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved
the following corrected Budget Workshop Schedule:
CORRECTED
BUDGET SCHEDULE - FISCAL YEAR 1993/94
DATE ACTION
March 3, 1993 Budget packets to non-profit/agencies.
March 5, 1993 Purchasing to reply on capital item costs
April 12, 1993 Budget packets to Department/Division Heads,
Monday Constitutional Officers.
April 12, 1993 Non-profit/agencies to return budget packets.
Monday
May 3, 1993 ORIGINAL budget packets to be returned to the Office of
Monday Management and Budget.
8
May 10-21, 1993
June 11, 1993
Friday
County Administrator to meet with Department Heads
County Administrator to finish reviewing department budgets.
June 30, 1993 Recieve "Certification of Taxable Value" from the
Wednesday Property Appraiser (must return to Property Appraiser within
thirty (30) calendar days).
July 28, 1993
September 8, 1993
Wednesday
September 12, 1993
Sunday
September 15, 1993
Wednesday
Give proposed millage rate to the Property Appraiser and Talc
Collector.
Public Hearing on TENTATIVE budget and proposed millage
rate at 5:01 p.m.
Advertisement in newspaper for FINAL budget and adoption
of millage rate.
FINAL budget hearing at 5:01 p.m.
D. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 017
The Board reviewed the following memo dated May 4, 1993:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: May 4, 1993
SUBJECT: NIISCE ULANEOUS BUDGET AMENDMENT 017
CONSENT AGENDA
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director Id r
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The attached budget amendment is to appropriate funding for the following:
1. Court Reporting Services are higher than anticipated in fiscal year 1992/93.
2. At the Board of County Commission meeting of April 27, 1993, Sheriff Gary
Wheeler requested funds to purchase vehicles for the Sheriffs Department.
The Board approved $171,500 to purchase vehicles. ,
E
MAY 11 1993 BOOK 89 FAGf.4'74
r—
MAY 111993 �ooK 89 F��c�%0
3. Library books paid for in current year 1992/93 under prior year 1991/92
obligation.
4. The Main Library has received $1,615 from donations for books. This entry
allocates the donations.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached budget
amendment number 017.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved
Budget Amendment 017:
TO.: , Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
NUMBER: 017
DATE: MAV 04. 1993
10
E. Release of Easements - Laverne Ellis - Lots 8 id 12 and 14
Block 13, Tropical Village Estates, Unit 2
The Board reviewed the following memo dated April 28, 1993:
TO:
James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
P - -� W. ",
Robert M. Reat g, A&CP
Community Devello�opl►jm�ent Director
THROUGH:
Roland DeBlois,T ycp
Chief, Environmental Planning
& Code Enforcement
FROM:
Charles W. Heath C.u).9
Code Enforcement Officer
DATE:
April 28, 1993
SUBJECT: RELEASE OF EASEMENTS REQUEST BY:
Laverne M. Ellis
Lots 8, 10, 12, & 14, Block 13,
Tropical Village Estates, Unit 2
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular
meeting of May 11, 1993.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The County has been petitioned by Laverne M. Ellis, owner of the
subject property, for the release of the common three ( 3 ) foot side
lot utility and drainage easements of Lots 8, 10, 12 & 14, Block
13, Tropical Village Estates Subdivision, Unit No. 2. 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 -61
Single -Family Residential District. The Land Use Designation is L-
2, allowing up to six (6) units per acre.
11
MAY 11 199 -
B®OK 8.9 fxr.
, 476
MAY i1 1993
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
BOOK 89 FacE 47
-7
The request has been reviewed by Southern Bell Telephone Company,
Florida Power and Light Corporation, Falcon Cable Corporation, 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 8, 10, J2 & 14, being the southerly
three (3) feet of Lot 8, the northerly three (3) feet of Lot 10,
the southerly three (3) feet of Lot .10, the northerly three (3). of
Lot 12, the southerly three (3) feet of Lot 12, and the northerly
three (3) feet of Lot 14, Block 13, Tropical Village Estates
Subdivision Unit No. 2, according to the plat thereof as recorded
in Plat Book 5, Page 65 of the Public Records of Indian River
County, Florida.
and
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 93-87, abandoning certain easements on
Lots 8, 10, 12 and 14, Block 13, Tropical Village
Estates, Unit 2, as recommended by staff.
RELEASE OF EASEMENTS IS RECORDED
IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
RESOLUTION NO. 93-87
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
ABANDONING CERTAIN EASEMENTS ON LOTS 8, 10, 12 & 14
BLOCK 13, TROPICAL VILLAGE ESTATES, UNIT 2,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT
BOOK 5, PAGE 65 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:
12
RESOLUTION NO. 93-S7
This release of easements is executed by Indian River County,
a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose mailing
address is 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, Grantor, to
Laverne M. Ellis her successors in interest, heirs and assigns,
whose mailing address is P.O. Box 794, Fellsmere, Florida 32948,
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 8, 10, 12 & 14, Block 13, Tropical
Village Estates Subdivision, Unit No. 2, being the
southerly three (3) feet of Lot 8, the northerly three
(3) feet of Lot 10, the southerly three (3) feet of Lot
10, the northerly ( 3 ) feet of Lot 12, the southerly three
(3) feet of Lot 12, and the northerly three (3) feet of
Lot 14, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat
Book 5, Page 65 of the Public Records of Indian River
County, Florida.
THIS RESOLUTION was moved for adoption by Commissioner
Eggert , seconded by Commissioner
Tippin
and adopted on the 11 day of MaY , 1993 by the following
vote:
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Ayp
Commissioner John W. Tippin Ayp
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert AyP
Commissioner Fran B. Adams AyP
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht -Aye
The Chairman declared the resolution duly passed and adopted
this j1day of May , 1993.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA
By
ichard :—&N. Bird
C aan
Attest By
Jeffrey K. Barton
2Cerk
13
MAY j 1993 BOOK 89 F'Au 78
Fr,
7
MAS � � `��� BOOK 89 FacE 479
F. Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver - Lot 14 Block 21 Vero
Lake Estates, Unit 4
The Board reviewed the following memo dated April 30, 1993:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Directo
�ez,
and
Roger D. Cain, P.E.
County Engineer
FROM: David B. Cox, P.0
Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot 14, Block 21, Vero Lake
Estates, Unit 4
REFERENCE: Project No. 93040048
DATE: April 30, 1993 CONSENT AGENDA
Fashion Homes, Inc. has submitted a building permit application for a single family residence on
the subject property. The site is located in an AE special flood hazard zone, base flood elevation
22.7 ft. at 8020 93rd Avenue. In the attached letter from the applicant's engineer dated April 27,
1993, a waiver of the cut and fill balance requirement is requested The engineer's letter also
certifies that all other requirements of L.D.R. Chapter 930 will be met and a material adverse impact
on flood protection will not be created. The lot area is 1.07 acres. The volume of displacement of
the 100 year floodplain proposed by the grading plan is estimated to be 288 cubic yards.
The waiver request has been reviewed by staff and appears to meet the criteria of Section
930.07(2)(d)4. of the Stormwater Management and Flood Protection Ordinance for lots located in
the Vero Lake Estates Municipal Services Taxing Unit.
Alternative No. 1 - Grant the cut and fill balance waiver based on the criteria of Section
930.07(2xd)4.
Alternative No. 2 - Deny the cut and fill waiver. Require an on site retention area be provided to
compensate for the proposed floodplain displacement.
Staff recommends approval of Alternative No. 1.
14
77
1 __1
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously granted
the cut and fill balance waiver for Lot 14, Block
21, Vero Lake Estates, Unit 4, as recommended by
staff.
G. Oslo Road Water Main Project
The Board reviewed the following memo dated May 3, 1993:
DATE: MAY 3, 1993
TO.: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINIS;I;;
FROM: TERRANCE G. PI
DIRECTOR OF SERVICES
STAFFED AND
PREPARED BY: ROBERT 0. WISEMEN, P.
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINE
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: OSLO ROAD WATER MAIN PROJECT
IRC PROJECT NO. UW -92 -28 -DS
On August 25, 1992, the Board of County Commissioners approved the
survey, design, and permitting for the above -referenced project. It
is currently ready to construct. The project will provide water
service at the Oslo Road and the I-95 commercial/industrial
corridor.
ANALYSIS:
Estimated costs are as follows:
Construction cost (including 10% contingency)
Engineering and design cost (including construction,
administrative costs, ACAD, permitting, structural
engineering design, etc.)
Resident inspection
Estimated total project cost:
$753,285.00
35,000.00
15,000.00
$803,285.00
The cost of the project shall be initially paid from water impact
fee funds.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Department of Utility Services recommends the approval of the
project, and requests approval from the Board of County
Commissioners to advertise the project for construction.
15
L_ MAY i 11993 BOOK 89 m,;,499
A
MAY 111993 BOOK
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously approved
the Oslo Road Water Main Project at an estimated
total cost of $803,285.00 and authorized staff to
advertise the project for construction, as
recommended by staff.
89 FacE431
H. Land Swan Near Tracking Station Park - Indian River Shores
The Board reviewed the following memo dated May 3, 1993:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
,2�1'�,
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: May 3, 1993
RE: LAND SWAP NEAR TRACKING STATION PARK
TO INDIAN RIVER SHORES
As part of the process of
transferring five -acres of land near
Tracking
Station
Park to' -the
Town of
Indian River Shores in return for land
near the
Gifford
Community
Center,
the Town is obtaining a title policy.
The title
search
has uncovered a
1980 dedication by the Board of
County
Commissioners that
the land
be used as a public park and that a referendum
be held
before any
such dedication could be removed.
As a matter of law the 1980 Commission did not have the power to limit the
1993 Commission to an election in this matter. The recent decision by the
County to sell the land to the Town without a public use restriction repeals
the 1980 dedication; however, the title would be cleaner if this park
dedication were formally released. Therefore, the County Attorney's Office
recommends a formal rescission of the 1980 dedication.
REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that the attached Release of Dedi-
cation be executed by the Chairman of the Board and recorded in the Public
Records.
ON MOTION by
Commissioner
Eggert,
SECONDED by
Commissioner
Tippin, the
Board
unanimously
authorized the
Chairman to
execute
Release of
Dedication, as recommended by staff.
RELEASE OF DEDICATION IS RECORDED
IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
16
PUBLIC DISCUSSION - REQUEST FROM ABUNDANT LIFE APOSTOLIC CMMCH
The Chairman announced that Rev. Eugene Smith of the Abundant
Life Apostolic Church had been delayed, and this public discussion
would be held later in the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED CHANGE (MINOR AMENDMENT) TO THE GRAND
HARBOR DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) DEVELOPMENT ORDER
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 -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 before' me this �d day of A.D. 19
5
7Business Manager)
A4
R�
(SEAL)
F 7�
MAY 111993
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY "it i
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ;
The Board of County Com ftftr ars of Indian,
River Comity herebylvesg notbe of a PUBLIC
HEARWG to be hell at 8:05 am. an Tuesday, May -
11 19M In the Comedy Con mission Chambers of
j the County Administration BBu�mpp located at 1840 '
j 25tlr Street, Vero Beach, Florida. The subject of the
I hearing to minor to oorsider adoption of minor
("proposed denges") to the exisft devel-
o�r order (D.O:) for the pro)ec1 kravvrr as trend
Harbor The mhnor anbardnbebts relate to the addl-
tion of +-1.08 aces to the muesliproject area an
update of the master project. plan to reflect de-
creases In project derisity, ante of project
phase buAdout dates, and tions to the
dove re-ana
transportationtransportationconditiae to re -
SW previousty appr� by slaff. ffic Import l"
generally lo.
r ed fo�wa �° B f
Bormd an the south by 48th Street aril
47th Street, by tte loan Rhrer ar the
east, located soutit of the North Relief
Canal Sedimentation Basin and 53rd
Street, and located east of US No1sy
AA rtes of the public are ImHed to attend
and parti9pate at the public hearing. Anyone who.
mel wish to� any dedNOrb wlbidr may be t
made et the will reed to ensure that a ver
batim record of the prooeedtrgs IS made, whubh lr
r� b� and evidence upon which the ap-
ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMO.
DATION FOR THIS MEETING MUST CONTACT
THE COUNTY'S AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES
ACT (ADA) COORDINATOR AT 587-8000 X408 AT t
LEAS . 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEET-
! ING
Rim eBy-st"YUI �m .:.
8931p
800K 89 PA AS -9
BOOK 89 Fnu.483
MAY 111993
Planning Director Stan Boling presented the following memo
dated April 28, 1993:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M. Rea in , A
Community Development --Director
FROM: Stan Boling; AICP
Planning Director
DATE: April 28, 1993
SUBJECT: Proposed Change (Minor Amendment) to the Grand Harbor DRI
Development Order
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of May 11, 1993.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On October 23, 1985, the Board of County Commissioners adopted a
development order (D.O.) approving the development of regional
impact (DRI) known as Grand Harbor. Over the last 71 years,
several amendments were approved that modified the original D.O.
The amended D.O. remains in effect and governs the general
development of the entire project via specific D.O. conditions and
approved application materials which includes a project master plan
(land use) map.
A provision in the last D.O. amendment (Resolution 92-68; approved
by the Board of County Commissioners on May 5, 1992) required that
by July 31, 1993 the developer must apply for and obtain approval
of a project -wide master project plan update and traffic re-
analysis, and obtain approval of a D.O. amendment to reflect the
project update and traffic reanalysis results. Last fall, the
developer submitted the required project plan update and traffic
reanalysis to staff of the Florida Department of Transportation
(FDOT), Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC), and the
county. Subsequently, all appropriate staff and agencies
(including county staff) approved the project update and traffic
reanalysis.
Based upon the staff -approved update and reanalysis, the developer
has filed for the required amendment to the D.O., to officially
update the project and the D.O. transportation conditions. The
developer is requesting that the county determine that the D.O.
amendments do not constitute a substantial deviation and approve
the D.O. amendments.
Pursuant to county requirements, the Planning and Zoning Commission
considered these requests at its April 22, 1993 meeting (see
attachment #7). Concurring with staff's recommendation, the
Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend that the
Board of County Commissioners determine that the D.O. amendments do
not constitute a substantial deviation and approve the D.O.
amendments.
18
REOUESTED AMENDMENTS:
The owner/applicant, GHA, Grand Harbor Ltd., is now requesting
amendments to the D.O. to effect three modifications, as follows:
1. To add #1.06 acres of property to the overall Grand Harbor
project.
2. To update the project master (land use) plan, approved uses,
densities, intensity of development, and build -out dates.
3. To replace the existing D.O. transportation conditions with a
new set of transportation conditions which are based on the
results of the staff -approved traffic re -analysis.
Pursuant to FS 380.06 which governs DRIs, the county may determine
that the request does not constitute a substantial deviation. If
such a determination is made, the request may be treated as a
proposed change or "minor amendment". As a minor amendment, a
change in an approved D.O. can be made by the Board of County
Commissioners without a formal recommendation from the Regional
Planning Council.
The Board of County Commissioners must now determine whether or not
the proposed D.O. amendments constitute a substantial deviation and
must approve or deny the proposed D.O. amendments.
ANALYSIS:
•Determination: Not a Substantial Deviation Request
The developer's request states that the proposed D.O. amendment
should not be considered a substantial deviation request because
the amendment:
1. is required by the previously approved D.O. amendment,
2. involves merely an update of project development plans and
proposes a decrease in overall project density, and
3. involves the addition of only #1.06 acres, an amount of land
which does not exceed the substantial deviation threshold of
FS 380.06(19)(b).
County, DCA, and TCRPC staff have reviewed the proposed D.O.
amendment. No department or agency has any objection to the
applicant's request that the county determine that the amendment
does not constitute substantial deviation. The TCRPC has verified
in writing that it has no objections to the requests (see
attachment #6 from TCRPC). The DCA has verbally indicated to
county planning staff that it has no objection to the requests.
Thus, staff analysis indicates that the request does not constitute
a substantial deviation.
•Effects of Amendment
County staff, including public works, utility services, emergency
services, and planning, have reviewed the request and have no
objections to approving the D.O. amendment. Approving the request
would:
19
MAY I 11993 nox 89 FA.GF 19.
BOOK 89 FADE 485 -7
1. Add t1.06 acres to the project (see attachment #3). This
acreage currently functions as an enclave, separated from its
parent parcel by Indian River Boulevard right-of-way.
Consolidating the addition with Grand Harbor's property on the
east side of Indian River Boulevard will eliminate the need
for a boulevard access point otherwise needed to serve the
t1.06 acre _parcel.._ Thus, the .proposal has positive traffic
circulation benefits.
2. Update the project master plan (see attachment #4). The
result of the update is to reduce the maximum residential
density from 3,000 units to 21553 units. Also, the update
allows for some project areas to be developed as an ACLF
(adult congregate living facility) rather than as conventional
multi -family residential. No changes in the maximum allowable
commercial or office development are proposed. The project
build -out date is moved forward 5 years, from 1995 to 2000,
and the effective timeframe of the D.O. is also moved forward
from 2005 to 2010.
3. Update the transportation conditions based upon the staff -
approved traffic reanalysis (see attached #5). The revised
conditions reflect the decrease in project density, area
traffic improvements, and applicable traffic level of service
standards. Among other items, the new conditions require
monitoring for specific signalization improvements as well as
a "catch-all" condition that no development may proceed after
the year 2000 build -out date without subsequent traffic
reanalysis and approval.
County staff have no objections to the proposed D.O. amendment.
RECOW1ENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners:
1. Determine that the request does not constitute a substantial
deviation.
2. Adopt the attached resolution amending the Grand Harbor D.O.
to allow the requested changes as described in this report.
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
Resolution 93-88, amending the development order
approved by the BCC for The Grand Harbor Development
of Regional Impact, as recommended by staff.
20
RESOLUTION NO. 93- 88
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER
(D.O.) APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR
THE GRAND HARBOR DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI)
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 380 Florida
Statutes, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida has adopted Resolution 85-128 (adopted October 23, 1985)
establishing the development order approving the Grand Harbor
Development of Regional Impact (DRI), and has amended the adopted
development order by the adoption of Resolution 86-4 (adopted
February 5, 1986), Resolution 86-89 (adopted October 20, 1986),
Resolution 86-108.(adopted December 9, 1986), Resolution 87-147
(adopted December 8, 1987), Resolution 89-80 (adopted August 8,
1989), Resolution 92-68 (adopted May 5, 1992); and
WHEREAS, the project developer (GRA, Grand Harbor Ltd.) has
formally applied for and has agreed to certain changes to the
development approval relating to the addition of ±1.06 acres of
property to the overall project area, an update of the project
master plan and project phasing and build -out dates, and an update
and replacement of development order transportation conditions; and
WHEREAS, the proposed changes, including the addition of ±1.06
acres, will result in no increase in the maximum allowable
development intensity of the overall project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida that:
1. The Board of County Commissioners finds that the proposed
changes to the development approval and the addition of ±1.06
acres to the overall project site do not constitute a
substantial deviation pursuant to Chapter 380 of the Florida
Statutes.
2. The notification of proposed change application and materials
submitted by Dennis Matherne of behalf of the developer, GHA,
Grand Harbor Ltd., dated March 12, 1993, along with subsequent
and related staff and applicant correspondence are hereby
incorporated by reference into the Application for Development
Approval (ADA) for the project.
3. All conditions and restrictions specified in the project
development order (Resolution 85-128), and all subsequent
amendments (reference the Resolutions specified above), shall
remain in full force and effect on the entire project area and
shall be binding upon the ±1.06 acre site being added to the
project.
4. The ±1.06 acre parcel is hereby added to the project. The
updated legal description covering the overall DRI site,
including the ±1.06 acre parcel, is herebyrecognized to be
the legal description contained in Exhibit "A", attached.
5. The termination date specified in the development order
(Resolution 85-128, item 3) is hereby changed from November 1,
2005 to November 1, 2010.
6. The updated project master development plan as shown in
Exhibit "B", attached, is hereby incorporated into the
development order.
21
MAY �9�� BOOK 89 F,A,F 486
FF"_
MAY It 1993
BOOK 89 PA;E 487 -7
RESOLUTION N0. 93-88
7. The updated land use and phasing plan as shown in Exhibit "C",
attached, is hereby incorporated into the development order.
B. The transportation conditions specified in the development
order (Resolution 85-128, items 47-62) are hereby deleted and
replaced with the following transportation conditions.
47. Concurrent with the Phase I development of the US 1 commercial
site, the following improvements will be constructed:
a. Harbor Drive and Commercial Parcel
• Eastbound right -turn lane
• Westbound left -turn lane
b. Indian River Boulevard and Commercial Parcel
• Eastbound right -turn lane
• Northbound left -turn lane
• Southbound right -turn lane
No Certificates of Occupancy (C.O.) will be issued for the
Commercial Parcel until the above improvements are installed,
and accepted by Indian River County.
48. The Grand Harbor 1994 Annual Report, and all subsequent annual
reports until project build -out, shall evaluate the need for
a signal at the following locations:
a. U.S. 1 and Harbor Drive
b. Indian River Boulevard and Harbor Drive
In the event a signal is warranted and approved by the
appropriate agency(s) at either of the above intersections,
the developer shall design and construct the signal prior to
the next Annual Report. No Certificates of Occupancy (C.O.)
shall be issued for the Grand Harbor development beyond one
year from the time the signal warrants are approved until the
signal is constructed. The results of this signal need
analysis will be included in the Grand Harbor Annual Report.
49. Concurrent with the Phase II development of the US 1 office
site, the following improvements will be constructed:
a. Indian River Boulevard and Office Parcel
• Eastbound right -turn lane
• Northbound left -turn lane
• Southbound right -turn lane
No Certificates of Occupancy (C.O.) will be issued for the
Office Parcel until the above approved improvements are
installed, and accepted by Indian River County.
50. The first Grand Harbor Annual Report submitted after
commencement of Phase II development, and all subsequent
annual reports until project buildout, shall evaluate the need
for a signal at the following location:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-88
a. Indian River.Boulevard and 45th Street
In the event a signal is warranted and approved by the
appropriate agency at the above intersection, the developer
shall design and construct the signal prior to the next Annual
Report. No Certificates of Occupancy (C.O.) shall be issued
for the Grand Harbor development beyond one year from the time
the signal warrants are approved until the signal is
constructed. The results of this signal need analysis will be
included in the Grand Harbor Annual Report.
51. The developer shall not receive building permits for any
portion of development of Grand Harbor after December 31,
2000, until a traffic analysis is conducted by the developer
and submitted to Indian River County, Treasure Coast Regional
Planning Council, the Department of Community Affairs, and the
Florida Department of Transportation. The methodology to be
used in the traffic analysis shall be determined in agreement
between Indian River County, Treasure Coast Regional Planning
Council, the Department of Community Affairs, and the Florida
Department of Transportation. The traffic analysis will
address the following:
a. projected timing of the remaining building permits and
certificates of occupancy for the development of Grand
Harbor; and
b. identification of roadway and intersection improvements
necessary to maintain Level of Service C during average
conditions and Level of Service D during peak season
conditions (peak hour, peak direction) for the subject
transportation including project impacts and growth in
background traffic.
c. The Developer shall not receive building permits and/or
Certificates of Occupancy for the development of any
portion of Grand Harbor after December 31, 2000, until
the Transportation Section of the development order is
amended to incorporate new and/or revised conditions that
reflect the results of the traffic analysis identified
above.
52. The developer shall submit an annual traffic monitoring report
in accordance with General Condition 3(i) -ll of the
development order. In addition, the developer shall evaluate
the need for traffic signals at the following locations in
accordance with Conditions 48 and 50:
a. U.S. 1 and Harbor Drive
b. Indian River Boulevard and Harbor Drive
c. Indian River Boulevard and 45th Street
The annual traffic monitoring report shall be conducted during
the first quarter of each reporting year to provide traffic
information on peak season conditions.
53. Access to Grand Harbor shall be from 53rd Street, Grand Harbor
Boulevard, Indian River Boulevard, and the one U.S. 1 access
at Grand Harbor Boulevard. All future access locations and
designs shall be approved by Indian River County.
23
MAY 111993 900K 89 FAGE 4.88
I MAY I1 091
BOOK 89 FATE 489
RESOLUTION N0. 93-88
The remaining development order conditions #63 through #65 are
renumbered to be conditions #54 through #56 with no change to their
language.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
_F.ggar t and the motion was seconded by Commissioner
-ctamz , and, upon being put to vote, the vote was as
follows:
Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye
Vice Chairman John W. Tippin Axe
Commissioner Fran Adams Axe
Commissioner Carolyn Eggert Amp
Commissioner Kenneth Macht Age
This Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and
adopted this 11 day of May 1993.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVf4 COUNTY FLORIDA
by
Chairman Richard N. Bird
PUBLIC HEARING - FAITH UNITED FELLOWSHIP'S REQUEST FOR SPECIAL
EXCEPTION USE APPROVAL AND CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO EXPAND
A PLACE OF WORSHIP
The hour of 9:05 A.M. having passed, the County Attorney
announced that this public hearing has been properly advertised as
follows:
24
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 V`eero' Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter
In the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper In the issues of
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this .2e • day of A.D. 19
(SEAL)
Uly i:1nrt
w
t'
tl h
NOTICE OF PUBLIC WAM '
Notice of hearing to oonaidar Ww" of WWW ,
exception use approval for the expuWan of an ex- +
Place of Wo ship and cor ceptual site plan ap-
provel The hatb)ect rs presently owned
Fafth thaw am bcated at 1119 2A
Atimue. Sea the above map for the, genal bca- '
"'L
A phc hearhg at which parr in Wrest and
dtzerq OWhave an oM ttadry to be heard, will
be held by the. Board of Cann Car�siahars of
htd�n RNer County, Fbft4 In the Courtly Corrsrhb- '.
sbn Chambers of the Courtly AdrftMratbn Build-
kq, bated at 1940 25th Straet, Vero Beach, Fbr-
kfa on Tuesday May 11, 1993, at 9:05 a.
+ Anyom who m.
may wish to any dBClebrl
+ a which{ T bei �nuid��eyat ft rr s wB�rhee�d7�tyo 11
$Ilra brat a +W W W II VI t110 (n.w.cn�-•�+ t
i shade, which hxtiudes testimony and eve upon
which tte appeal is based.
ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMODA-
TION FOR THIS MEETING MUST CONTACT THE
COUNTY'S AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
(ADA) COORDINATOR AT 597-9000 X408 AT
LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF TW MEET -
WG.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Board of Qourtty Comrrhsbrters
BY-s-Rbtrerd N. BUd, Chalr rk e
Aid 20,19M 993208
Planning Director Stan Boling presented the following memo
dated May 3, 1993:
25
907
MAY i 11993 BOOK 89 pmu.490
` Subject
I
ti
1
CM
_
1st PL
-t W�lE-•R m nQRRACE
- -
0L
Q.Q� VIS 1
w
t'
tl h
NOTICE OF PUBLIC WAM '
Notice of hearing to oonaidar Ww" of WWW ,
exception use approval for the expuWan of an ex- +
Place of Wo ship and cor ceptual site plan ap-
provel The hatb)ect rs presently owned
Fafth thaw am bcated at 1119 2A
Atimue. Sea the above map for the, genal bca- '
"'L
A phc hearhg at which parr in Wrest and
dtzerq OWhave an oM ttadry to be heard, will
be held by the. Board of Cann Car�siahars of
htd�n RNer County, Fbft4 In the Courtly Corrsrhb- '.
sbn Chambers of the Courtly AdrftMratbn Build-
kq, bated at 1940 25th Straet, Vero Beach, Fbr-
kfa on Tuesday May 11, 1993, at 9:05 a.
+ Anyom who m.
may wish to any dBClebrl
+ a which{ T bei �nuid��eyat ft rr s wB�rhee�d7�tyo 11
$Ilra brat a +W W W II VI t110 (n.w.cn�-•�+ t
i shade, which hxtiudes testimony and eve upon
which tte appeal is based.
ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMODA-
TION FOR THIS MEETING MUST CONTACT THE
COUNTY'S AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
(ADA) COORDINATOR AT 597-9000 X408 AT
LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF TW MEET -
WG.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Board of Qourtty Comrrhsbrters
BY-s-Rbtrerd N. BUd, Chalr rk e
Aid 20,19M 993208
Planning Director Stan Boling presented the following memo
dated May 3, 1993:
25
907
MAY i 11993 BOOK 89 pmu.490
r MAY f 11993
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
FOR
Robert M. Ke t ng, AICP
Community Development Director
THROUGH: Stan Boling,, AjICP
Planning Director
FROM: Eric Blad -0 7
Staff Planner, Current Development
DATE: May 3, 1993
p n F `'
89
BOOK A;F 49,
SUBJECT: Faith United Fellowship, Inc. Is Request for Special
Exception Use Approval and Conceptual Site Plan Approval
to Expand A Place of Worship [AA-93-04-013/IRC #92120088-
002]
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of May 11, 1993.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Faith United Fellowship, Inc., represented by Pastor Hine, has
submitted an application for a conceptual site plan and special
exception use -approval to expand the existing place of worship at
186 27th Avenue. The site is located within a RS -6 zoning
district, which requires the granting of special exception use
approval for expansion of a place of worship.
The proposed plan for phased expansion is conceptual in nature and
is not an approval for construction. If the special exception use
and corresponding conceptual plan are approved, "final" site plan
approval will be required prior to actual site development. Such
site plans may be submitted and approved for various project
phases.
At its regular meeting of April 8, 1993, the Planning and Zoning
Commission unanimously recommended that the Board of County
Commissioners grant special exception use and conceptual plan
approval. The Board of County Commissioners is now to consider the
granting of an approval, approval with conditions, or denial of the
special exception use request. Pursuant to Section 971.05 of the
land 'development regulations '(LDRs), the Board of County
Commissioners is to weigh the appropriateness of the requested use
for the subject property and surrounding areas. The Board may
grant approval and attach any conditions and safeguards deemed
appropriate to mitigate impacts and to ensure compatibility of the
use with the surrounding area.
ANALYSIS:
1. Zoning Classification: RS -6, Single Family Residential (up to
6 units per acre)
2. Land Use Designation: L-2, Low Density 2 (up to 6 units per
acre)
26
3. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North: Single Family Residential/RS-6
South: 1st Place, Single Family Residential/RS-6
East: Single Family Residential/RS-6
West: 27th Avenue, Single Family Residential/RS-6
4. Total Area of Development: 183,573 sq. ft. or 4.214 acres
5. Building Area: Existing: 6,441.75 sq. ft.
Proposed: 29,623.50 sc. ft.
Total: 36,065.25 sq. ft.
6. Impervious Surface: Existing: 12,426.75 sq. ft.
Proposed: 74,033.50 sq. ft.
Total: 86,460.25 sq. ft.
7. Open Space (overall site)
Required: 40%
Provided: 40%
Note: The site plan data calculations section for impervious
surface and for open space square footage includes the
applicant's acknowledgement that grass parking areas cannot be
credited toward meeting the open space requirement.
B. Traffic Circulation: The conceptual plan proposes to continue
using the existing 1st Place driveway for access. Internal
vehicular circulation has been reviewed by Traffic Engineering
and received conceptual approval, subject to a more detailed
submittal with subsequent site plan requests.
9. Stormwater Management: The Public Works Department has
approved the conceptual drainage system for the proposed
project. The final drainage plan design, as required by the
Stormwater Management and Flood Protection LDRs, will be
determined during the subsequent site plan review and approval
process.
10. Landscaping: The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed
conceptual plan provides for the dimensional and spatial
requirements necessary to accommodate sufficient landscape and
buffering requirements to comply with county regulations.
11. Utilities: County water is available to service the project
and connection will be mandated for future site plan approvals
for construction. At this time, county wastewater service is
not available to the project. Future site plan approvals will
require a Developers Agreement to be executed with County
Utilities in regards to future wastewater service. Such' an
agreement will require the applicant to connect to wastewater
service when it becomes available.
12. Environmental Issues: Environmental planning staff has
determined that there are no environmental issues relevant to
this application.
13. Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS):
Health has no objection to approval of this
plan. As required by the LDRs, applicable
issued by the HRS Environmental Health
construction.
27
Lf
AY $ J 193
Environmental
conceptual site
permits must be
office prior to
Bou 89 Far.
NSA �
��� BOOK 89 PA�F.493
14. Dedication and Improvements: No dedications or improvements
are required as part of this conceptual plan approval request.
Right-of-way and sidewalk requirements have been addressed
during previous plan approvals.
15. Concurrency: The applicant has obtained a Conditional
Concurrency Certificate Determination regarding the proposed
overall, ultimate site development. Prior to the
implementation of future site plans, an Initial/Final
Concurrency Certificate must be obtained for -each respective -
phase.
16. Specific Land Use Criteria: The application must satisfy the
following specific land use criteria applied to a place of
worship in the RS -6 zoning district.
a. No building or structure shall be located closer than
thirty (30) feet to any property line abutting a
residential use or residentially designated property;
b. Access shall be from a major thoroughfare unless
otherwise approved by the public works department;
c. Any accessory residential use, day care facility or
school upon the premises shall provide such additional
lot area as required for such use by this section and
shall further be subject to all conditions set forth by
the reviewing procedures and standards for that
particular use. Accessory residential uses may include
convents, monasteries, rectories or parsonages as
required by these regulations;
d. Type "C" screening shall be provided along all property
boundaries where the facility is located adjacent to a
single-family residentially designated property. Type
"D" screening shall be provided along all property
boundaries when the facility is located adjacent to a
multiple -family residentially designated property.
All of the above specific land use criteria have been
satisfied by this conceptual site plan application.
The applicant has acknowledged in writing to staff that there
are no plans for a child care or school facility on the site.
No child care or school facility will be approved as part of
this request.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the analysis performed, staff recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners grant special exception use approval for the
requested expansion of a place of worship.
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.
28
ON MOTION by Commissioner
Commissioner Adams, the Board
Macht, SECONDED by
unanimously granted
the request of Faith United Fellowship, Inc., for
special exception use approval to expand their place
of worship, as recommended by staff.
PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE LIMITING THE PARTICIPATION OF THE COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS ON ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
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 -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 o ZaO I,/.�
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, fora period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me thi day P't A.D. 19
(Business Ms sager)
(SEAL)
29
The, Boerd'1`of Censrdssloner8' of wo, -
RIM Co07ty.oFbrlda� rrotke o1 a;
PW do � self for 9: a m: on Tr day; i
MMa�yy 11.1, 1993, to &M= ,jj, tVvwfn9 proposed]
ardinerrce .,�-�
dip AN ORDINANCE OF THE' BOARD OF } =.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN , -d
Rpm COUNTY, FLORIDA UMITINQ THE PARTN3PATlONOF THE COUNTY COM- t;
' MISSIONERS ON ADVISORY a; BOARDS,�€��
i AND COMM iBSIONS. I
'Anyone who may •wish'to appeal mW dedWm wf�l
'mmaayy DB made at the Pubo HearirKl ai May t1 t
1993 will need to ensrae that a ver tIM record o�
i ft pmeedrgs Is made. which WWW teat =W ,'.
WW evifoe aper which the appeal Is bawd.
i Anyone who needs a special acw--daft for
tyqmay oomact the County's Americm
with Act (ADA) Coordinator at 59 -MM
ext. 408st least 0 harain adv of,meetirg. 992328
April t8,1993:.. - :, , _ . 7 :..
n
BOOK 89 fA;F. A-94
MY
MAY I I IPQI
BOOK 89 Fmu.495
Commissioner Macht explained that the purpose of this
ordinance is to prohibit Commissioners from voting on advisory
boards and committees on which they are chairmen. He felt that the
chairman of a public advisory board should simply direct meetings
and obtain input from the public. Also, this would avoid the
embarrassment of a Commissioner voting one way based on the
information that is presented at the advisory board meeting, and
then discovering later at the public hearings that the situation
demands a different vote. Commissioner Macht emphasized that
having a vote implies a disproportionate amount of power on the
part of Commissioners. He pointed out that the Chairman of the BCC
votes but does not generally make motions or second them.
Commissioner Tippin felt that Commissioner Macht should have
had an open discussion with his fellow Commissioners before
directing staff to perform research and prepare a draft ordinance.
Although he did not object to this particular ordinance, he did not
see any evidence that the Commissioners have abused their roles as
committee chairmen. His concern with adopting an ordinance like
this is that it creates the appearance of a problem where no
problem exists.
Chairman Bird did not recall ever serving on an advisory
committee or board where the chairman did not have the ability to
vote. He felt that Commissioners can exert their influence
regardless of whether they are permitted to vote. He did not see
a problem with voting one way at an advisory board meeting and a
different way at a BCC meeting. For example, he might vote one way
as chairman of the Parks & Recreation Committee. When the Parks &
Recreation Committee presents a request to the Board for approval,
the Commissioners must weigh it against numerous other requests.
This might result in a different vote, particularly on budget
requests.
Chairman Eggert doubted that not having a vote takes away
influence.
Commissioner Adams felt that Commissioners should be more than
facilitators. They should play a leadership role and let other
committee members know where they stand on issues. The chairman of
a committee is expected to assume some responsibility, which
includes voting. Further, she did not believe that ethics can•be
legislated.- She pointed out that advisory boards and committees
have five to seven members and a Commissioner can be outvoted at
any time.
Commissioner Macht clarified that it was not his intent to
legislate ethics, but he felt that standards of acceptable conduct
should be established.
30
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in this matter.
Joe Guffanti, 441 Holly Road, felt that the influence of the
Commissioners should be restricted to matters in this room. He
commended Mr. Macht for his intent with this proposed ordinance.
William W. Koolage, 11 Vista Gardens Trail, pointed out that
Commissioners have a great deal of influence and should limit
themselves to being facilitators, getting the views of the public,
and presenting those views to the Board. He urged the Board to
adopt this ordinance.
It was determined that no one else wished to be heard and the
Chairman closed the public hearing.
Chairman Bird commented that he had seen advisory committees
act effectively without any Commissioners on them. He did not know
how it got started where Commissioners are almost automatically
placed on committees and would not be opposed to eliminating their
participation on many of the committees. However, Chairman Bird
felt that Board members who are on committees should have the
ability to vote.
Commissioner Macht suggested that committee assignments be
rotated every two or three years.
COMMISSIONER MACHT"S MOTION TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE LIMITING THE
PARTICIPATION OF THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON ADVISORY BOARDS AND
COMMISSIONS DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 302.04 OF THE CODE TO
PROVIDE FOR ANIMAL LICENSE RENEWAL TO COINCIDE WITH VACCINATION
REQUIREMENTS
The hour of 9:05 A.M. having passed, the County Attorney
announced that this public hearing has been properly advertised as
follows:
31
BOOK 89 Pnu 496
MAY 111993
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
1,_� / i
a
00
In th natter of /. %/L /,/L /r/Ard-/. ,M�'
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 porporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this da of A.D. 19 If -5
rJ (Business Mkniagej
(SEAL)Tt,. '`f�HG�9iG
BOOK 89 FnF 4,97
The Board 7 of ov
Commie ers'! of IndMy,
Rhrer Cou, Fbrida, hereby mrd notice of
Pubic Hearing scie&tkd for 9:05 am. on Tuesdh
May 11, 1993 to disaras fte tf llcwkV pmpas
�ardlrharhoe entitled:
AN IDRDWANCE OF MIAN RIM COUN-
I rY •Tv of naina AMCWnIun Cin-rin. •-
Cty CIDE WITH µVACCINATION MEQUIRE-
MENT3.,' .1 .J .,.,• .:t_ _ .
Ar"s ",May wish tg appeal arty decision which:
may be made at the PudAc a an. May 11 ,�
1993 will meed to pure that Ha verbatim record o
the proceeds gs b made, which' includes. testimony
and evidence upon which the appeal is based.'
Anyone who' needs a spacial accornrnodatioi for.1
s.16- may contact (a
tact ountys Artrokamsr
<..t1ft Aa (ADA) Coordinator at 567 -MM
ext 4W
least to tronas b advance of meeli g.
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 Tippin, the Board unanimously adopted
Ordinance 93-17, amending Section 302.04 of the Code
to provide for animal license renewal to coincide
with vaccination requirements.
32
807
ORDINANCE 83- ]„Z
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA AMENDING SECTION 302.04 OF THE CODE
TO PROVIDE FOR ANIMAL LICENSE RENEWAL TO
COINCIDE WITH VACCINATION REQUIREMENTS.
WHEREAS, the current rules provide for animal license renewal
during the period of June 1 and September 30 of each year; and
WHEREAS, orderly administration would be better by having the
license period run concurrently with the vaccination period,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, that:
SECTION 1. AMENDMENT.
Paragraphs (1) and (2) of Section 302.04 are amended as follows:
1. On Of / 1501 004 / AA6 / 1 / "d / $0 b1$1hlb0* / $0 / of / "O>k / 4W0A1%f
tit/ the annual due date of vaccination, every person subject to the
requirement of section 302.03 shall make written application to the
division of animal control for issuance or renewal of a license. Each
application shall provide the applicant's name, residential address, and
telephone number ( home and business) , and shall give an accurate
description of the dog or cat being licensed, including name, breed,
color, gender, size, reproductive status, and date of birth or age. In
addition, an applicant shall provide proof of vaccination for rabies,
administered by a licensed veterinarian within the twelve-month period
immediately proceeding the date of application. No license shall be
issued in the absence of such proof, which shall be by signed
certificate of the admuustering veterinarian, indicating the date of the
vaccination, the manufacturer, and the lot or serial number of vaccine
used. A certificate shall not be valid for more than one (1) animal
unless clearly indicated otherwise thereon by the certifying
veterinarian. When N a dog or cat attains the age of four (4) months
the owner shall have thirty
(30) days thereafter in which to make application for and obtain a
license as required above.
2. Any license issued shall be valid until $$1510*160/$0 the next
due date of the vaccination of the following calendar year and shall be
renewed by repeating the above application procedure.
SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY.
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.
33
MAY 1 11993 BOOK 89 Fa,r 498
I
BOOK 89 PAuE 499MAY � i �
ORDINANCE NO. 93-17
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 _U day of M Ay , 1993.
(Deletions are indicated by 41 ftO f IVA"06Yi type
and additions are indicated by underline)
This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal on
the 16 day of A p r i 1 , 1993, for a public hearing to be held on
the 11 day of M a y , 1993, at which time it was moved for
adoption by Commissioner E g g e r t , seconded by Commissioner
T i p p i n , and adopted by the following vote:
Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye
Vice Chairman John W. Tippin Aye
Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By ojee
Richard N. Bird
Chairman
Attest By
Clerk
Acknowledgement
1 dgement by the Department of State of the State of Florida,
this 19thday of May , 1993.
Effective date: Acknowledgement from the Department of State
received on this 25thday of —May , 1993, at 10:00 a.m/lx.=X
and filed in the Office of the Clerk of the Board of-Zounty
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida.
34
PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR AN ALTERNATE FOR ES
OFFICIO MEMBERS OF COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS (CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC
HEARING OF MAY 4, 1993)
Assistant County Attorney Terry O'Brien announced that the
ordinance being presented today is an amended version of the,
ordinance presented at last week's public hearing. The purpose of
the ordinance is to give municipalities and other agencies the
ability to send an alternate to meetings when the designated
representatives are unable to attend. The alternates would have
the same voting power as the designated representatives.
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 Tippin, the Board unanimously approved
Ordinance 93-16, providing for an alternate for ex
officio members of commissions and boards.
ORDINANCE 93-16
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA PROVIDING FOR AN ALTERNATE FOR
EX OFFICIO MEMBERS OF COMMISSIONS AND
BOARDS.
WHEREAS, a number of commissions and boards have ex officio
members; and
WHEREAS, it is important that these commissions and boards
have the benefit of the views of the organization represented by the
ex officio member, and
WHEREAS, the named ex officio member may from time to time be
absent and representation by an alternate would fill the void created
by the absence,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
that:
SECTION 1. NEW SECTION. -
A new section 103.04.1 is added to Chapter 103 of the Indian
River County Code as follows:
Section 103.04.'1 Ex Officio Members of Commissions and Boards.
Whenever a commission or board has an ex officio member, the
named representative when absent may be represented by another
35
MAY
BOOK 89 f'AuF.500
11 1993
BOOK 89 FACE 501 -1
ORDINANCE 93-_U
representative of that member's organization. The purpose of ex
officio membership is to allow the commission or board to have the
benefit of the views of the organization represented by the ex officio
member.
SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY.
If any section, sentence, paragraph, phrase, or word of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, inoperative,
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 on becoming law. '
Approved and adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, on this 11th day of
May, 1993.
This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal
on the 16th day of April, 1993, for a public hearing to be held on
the 4th day of May, 1993, at which time it was continued to May 11,
at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert and --
the motion was seconded by Commissioner Tippin, and, adopted by
the following vote:
Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye
Vice Chairman John W. Tippin Aye
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye
36
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Richard N. Bird
Attest by �^J�'�•�,
Jeffrey K Barton
Clerk
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida,
this 19th day of Mayr ,
1993.
Effective date: Acknowledgment for the Department of State received
on this 25th day of May,
, 1993, at 19: p0 a.m. /Wxg( and filed
in the Office of the Clerk of
the Board of Counfy Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida.
36
PUBLIC HEARINGS - EXPANSION OF THE COUNTY SEAT
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 -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
L'e-,I-
a
In the matter
` - • • ---- -
.in the Court, was pub-
lished In said newspaper in the issues of
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before his day f A.D. 19
(BusineW Manager)
.4
(SEAL)
P;,af:•+y t+�:!k. Sltrte of itutltq `'�
i itwrfrcU;tt Fx9irp.S Jum 29, i99IIi
} 1i The `~Boers` 'of qty � Of lour
.1 saver caariy, Fbrlda, herefryr pis mu, a <
PdAb Hearhia for 9.15 a m. on Twsday
May 11, 1993 :diswse}tlle'.foADvrMg prepoaemsommc
RESOLUTION OF'`THE:ABOARD 0121�:
•COUNTY COMMISSIONERStOF INDIAN;?-.
+RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA -EXPANDING �.
? i.THE BOUNDARIES OF THE- COUNTYV
meq' SEAT TO ENCOMPASS THE LOCATION
OF THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND JAI_
a Amnayyow who may wish to e�peallaaanypde ywtid
1993, wneed ttD ensure that Fa vw5aft recad c
lie proaeedhp Is made, which t tesUmpm
and evidence upon W*h the Is lased.
Anyaa who reeds a a000mma idw to
tFde may amts« .the CmmW's Ametben
vrith D� Act (ADA) CDordk�etor et .687.8
:', exL 409 at 1801 48 hags In advance of OOOV.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated May 7, 1993:
37
r
®ooK �9 F,,��S02
MAY i �9��
r
MAY I 1093
TO: B rd of County ommissioners
FROM: Charles P. -Miunty Attorney
DATE: May 7, 1993
RE: EXPANSION OF THE COUNTY SEAT
BOOK 89 PnE, 503
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. Public Hearings have already been
held on April 6, and April 27, 1993. No member of the public spoke.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends, after the public hearing on May 11, 1993, that the
attached resolution be adopted expanding the County seat to include the
Sheriff's Office and Jail.
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
Resolution 93-89, expanding the boundaries of the
County seat to encompass the location of the
Sheriff's office and_ jail.
38
RESOLUTION NO. 93- g cL
A" RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, EXPANDING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE
COUNTY SEAT TO ENCOMPASS THE LOCATION
OF THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND JAIL.
WHEREAS, Section 30.10 requires that the place of office of
every sheriff shall be at the county seat of the county; and
WHEREAS, the current location of the office of the sheriff is just
outside the City of Vero Beach, which is the county seat; and
WHEREAS,
the
office
may be brought
into the
county seat by
annexation into
the
City or
expansion of the
county
seat boundaries;
and
WHEREAS, it appears that the easier method would be expansion
of the county seat boundaries pursuant to Section 138.12, Florida
Statutes; and
WHEREAS, this section requires two advertised public hearings,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
that:
The geographical area of the county seat is hereby expanded
beyond the corporate limits of the City of Vero Beach to include the
location of the Sheriff's Office and Jail site, more particularly
described as:
The West 10.07 acres of the East 20.07 acres of Tract 12,
and the East 10 acres of the West 20 acres of Tract 12,
Section 27, Township 32 South, Range 39 East, according to
the last general plat of land of Indian River Farms
Company, filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit
Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, in Plat Book 2, Page
25; said land now land now lying and being in Indian River
County, Florida.
This resolution, after two
public
hearings on
A o r i 1 2 7. 19 9 3
and May 11, 1993, was
moved
for adoption
by Commissioner
Adamn and the motion was seconded by Commissioner
T ippi-A , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as
follows:
39
MAY1 1993 BOOK 89 FnUF 504
J
MAY i i X993
BOOK 89 PAGE 505
RESOLUTION NO. 93-89
Chairman Richard N. Bird
Vice Chairman John W. Tippin A�e
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert A y e
Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and
adopted this jL day of _May , 1993.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMNIISSIONERS
Attest: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
1� Q�
By
Jeffrey K., Barton, Clerk , Richard N. Bird
chairman
PUBLIC DISCUSSION - REQUEST FROM ABUNDANT LIFE APOSTOLIC CHURCH
The Board reviewed the following memo dated April 30, 1993,
and attached letter dated April 9, 1993:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: April 30, 1993 FILE'
THRU: Jim Chandler, County Administrator
Request From Abundant
SUBJECT: Life Apostolic Church
FROM: Asst. ooClo. Admin. REFERENCES:
The County Administrator's office received a letter from the Abundant Life
Apostolic Church requesting to appear before the Board and ask for support and
funding for the church's Neighborhood Prayer Watch Program.
Rev. Eugene Smith will attend the May
questions about the program.
40
11, 1993 Commission meeting to answer
ABUNDANT LIFE APOSTOLIC CHURCH
"The church where you will find life more abundantly"
4323 North U.S. 1 Vero Beach, FL 32967
(407) 562-3256 Church • (407) 569-7738 Residence 2629
Pastor. Rev. Eugene Smith & Family a'th1'
N� pt'R�9g3 ,g
0�
Apr31 9, 1993
/. 0a: . ... I q 7701
We, the Constituents of the Abundant Life Apostolia Church/The Pentecostals of
Vero Beach, are requesting a Meeting with Committee members of the County
Commissioners Office. at this time, we request to be placed on ,your nett
upcoming Agenda to bring before you a very deep, sincere and much needed
concern regarding our Community and great City of Vero Beach.
After hearing our intense concerns, we would greatly appreciate your support
and if permitted, your financial help. Please notify us as soon as possible
concerning your acceptance of our request.
Sincerely For Jesus,
4
Pastor:
Rev Eugene mm
The Congregation of The Abundant Life
Apostolic Church - The Pentecostals of Vero Beach
Reverend Eugene Smith, Pastor of the Abundant Life Apostolic
Church, apologized for being late. He distributed information
packets to the Board concerning a proposed neighborhood prayer
watch, and asked the Board for moral support, funding, and
permission to place posters or signs throughout the community. He
stressed that the neighborhood prayer watch would be open to all
denominations.
Attorney Vitunac advised that the Board can give Reverend
Smith moral support, but the First Amendment makes it illegal to
use public property or funds to advance a private religious cause.
Commissioner Adams suggested preparing a proclamation
supporting Reverend Smith's effort.
41
IMIAY 111993 som 89 Ph X96
MAY I 11993
BOOK 89 PAGE 507
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Tippin, the Board unanimously agreed to
send the following letter to Reverend Smith,
commending his efforts and offering the Board"s
moral support:
Telephone: (407) 5674MM
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960
May 13, 1993
Reverend Eugene Smith
The Abundant Life Apostolic Church
4323 North U.S. #1
Vero Beach, Florida 32967
Dear Reverend Smith:
Suncom Telephone: 224-1011
The Board of County Commissioners applaud the concern and
efforts of you and the congregation of the Abundant Life
Apostolic Church to establish a Neighborhood Prayer Watch
Program. While we are unable to expend taxpayers dollars for
this program, we offer our moral support and encourage all county
citizens to join you in this endeavor.
Sincerely,
Richard N. Bird
Chairman
N
42
REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO APPLY FOR AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ADMINISTRATION (EDA) PLANNING ASSISTANCE GRANT
Community Development Director Bob Keating presented the
following memo dated May 6, 1993:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
DIV ION HEAD CONCURRENCE
Robert M. Keat ng AIC
Community Development 191rector
FROM: Sasan Rohani 5; -It
Chief, Long -Range Planning
DATE: May 6, 1993
RE: REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO APPLY FOR AN ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION PLANNING ASSISTANCE GRANT
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular
meeting of May 11, 1993.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
For the past nine months, county staff have been coordinating with
representatives of the Federal Economic Development Administration
(EDA) regarding grant opportunities available to the county. This
coordination began in July , 1992, when EDA officials participated
in a workshop with county officials and representatives from the
Council of 100. At that time, EDA staff indicated that the county
could submit a two page proposal and receive a $25,000 grant.
Since that time, county staff have prepared three proposals and one
application - all substantially longer than two pages. Although
each was well received by EDA, none was approved. Instead, EDA's
response to each submittal has been a request that the county apply
under a different grant program. This process began with a Title
IX proposal, then a Title III proposal and application, and finally
a 302(a) proposal. At the same time, EDA's proposed funding has
gone from $25,000 to $24,000 to $18,000 to $25,000 and now to
$75,000.
In response to the county's last grant proposal, EDA has invited
the county to formally apply for a Section 302(a) grant. For the
staff to submit this application, the Board of County Commissioners
must approve a resolution authorizing submittal of the application.
Staff has prepared the referenced application and attached a copy
to this staff report. As proposed, the application requests a
$75,000 grant and reflects a $25,000 match. The match will be a
combination of in-kind services and funds already programmed for
economic development activities. No additional local funding will
be required.
43
MAY 111993 800K 89. FAGE 598
MAY 111993
BOOK . 09 FACE 509
The proposed grant application includes several activities, the
most significant of which involves preparation of a detailed
strategy plan. Besides development of the strategy plan, other
activities include:
Update of county's Commercial/Industrial Data Source
Preparation of an economic base study
Development of a fiscal impact model
Preparation and distribution of an informational brochure
ANALYSIS
As drafted, the application reflects a one year program funded with
$75,000 in EDA funds and $25,000 in local matching funds.
According to the EDA, a second year of funding is probable.
The referenced activities will be done in-house with existing staff
and a new economic development planner. While staff's preference
was to retain a consultant for much of the work, EDA
representatives indicated that the grant would not be approved
unless the county hired an economic development planner. In taking
this position, EDA's intent is to encourage the county to develop
in-house expertise in the area of economic development.
By undertaking the activities identified in the grant application,
the county will develop a better economic development program. The
proposed strategy plan, for example, will complement the recently
approved Overall Economic Development Plan. With better data and
more detailed analysis, the strategy plan will provide a more
useful document to guide the county's economic development
activities.
Several of the proposed activities will result in tools used to
prepare the strategy plan and to address economic development
issues subsequent to plan preparation. These are the economic base
study and the fiscal impact model. Another activity, preparation
and distribution of an informational brochure, is a function
already programmed for the Council of 100 to undertake. This
activity will be done jointly by county staff and the Council of
100.
It is staff's position that the proposed grant activities will
result in useful products. Since no additional county funds will
be necessary to undertake these activities, staff feels that the
county should accept EDA's invitation to apply for 302(a) grant
funds.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the
attached resolution authorizing staff to submit an EDA Section
302(a) grant application.
Commissioner Macht asked whether the County had a staff member
_with the necessary expertise to be placed in the position of
economic development planner.
Director Keating explained that staff had suggested that, but
the Economic Development Administration (EDA) representative was
44
adamant that no grant would be forthcoming if we did not hire a new
economic development planner.
Administrator Chandler confirmed that there was absolutely no
flexibility on the part of the EDA. However, if and when the
funding stops, the position would be eliminated.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, to adopt Resolution 93-90,
authorizing the Community Development Director to
apply for and accept an Economic Development
Administration (EDA) Section 302(a) planning
assistance grant, as recommended by staff.
Under discussion, Commissioner Tippin announced that he had a
problem with having to hire new staff in order to take advantage of
this grant money because this is taxpayers' money. He did not see
enough benefit to vote in favor of approving this request.
Commissioner Macht asked, and Director Keating confirmed, that
it would be worthwhile for the County to take advantage of this
grant.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried 4-1, Commissioner Tippin
dissenting.
RESOLUTION NO. 93-Qn
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR TO APPLY FOR AND ACCEPT AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ADMINISTRATION (EDA) SECTION 302(a) PLANNING ASSISTANCE GRANT
WHEREAS, Indian River County's average unemployment rate is
consistently more than 3.6 percentage points higher than the
state's unemployment rate; and
WHEREAS, the Board has made a strong committment to solve the
economic development problems of the county; and
WHEREAS, the Board is pursuing various economic development
activities; and
WHEREAS, the Board believes that an economic development
strategy plan is necessary to enhance the county's economy; and
45
BOOK 89 Fs,r .510
B03 89 Pair 511
WHEREAS, the Economic Development Administration (EDA) has
formally invited Indian River County to submit an application for
a Section 302(a) Planning Assistance Grant;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida that:
1. The Board hereby authorizes Robert M. Keating, Community
Development Director, to apply for a Section 302(a)
Planning Assistance Grant from the Economic Development
Administration (EDA) in the amount of $75,000.00. The
Community Development Director is authorized to sign all
appropriate forms.
2. The Board also authorizes the Community Development
Director to accept the EDA grant and be accountable for
performance under the EDA grant.
3. The Board authorizes a 25% local match from county funds
to pay a portion of the costs associated with the grant
related work activities. No federal money will be
included in the county's share.
The foregoing resolution was offered by
Commissioner' Adams and seconded by Commissioner Fggprt
and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Commissioner Richard N. Bird Ave
Vice Chairman Commissioner John W. Tippin Nay
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Ave
Commissioner Fran B. Adams Ave
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Ave
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and
adopted this 11th day of May, 1993.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY:
Richard N. Bird, Chairman
REQUEST FROM THE TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES REGARDING RESIDENTIAL
RESORT USES IN THE RM -6 ZONING DISTRICT
Community Development Director Bob Keating presented the
following memo dated May 3, 1993:
46
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
. FoR
Robert M. Rea ng, AICP
Community Development Director
FROM: Stan Boling, AICP
Planning Director
DATE: May 3, 1993
SUBJECT: Request from Town of Indian River Shores Regarding
Residential Resort Uses in the RM -6 Zoning District
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of May 11, 1993.
BACKGROUND:
Recently, the Board of County Commissioners received a letter from
Indian River Shores Mayor Robert Schoen regarding the LDR
amendments adopted in March that allow residential resort projects
as special exception uses in the RM -6, RM -8, and RM -10 zoning
districts (see attachment #1). The letter included a request that
the "...Board of County Commissioners direct staff to initiate the
action to restore all RM -6 parcels to their "pre -March 1993 status"
(see attachment #2). The letter states that the Town's request is
not to oppose the proposed Disney resort project but rather to
"...restore all other RM -6 parcels to their pre -March 1993 status".
Planning staff has revisited the resort residential regulations in
light of the concerns expressed.
ANALYSIS:
As noted in staff's January 14, 1993 presentation to the Planning
and Zoning Commission and in staff's March 1993 presentations to
the Board of County Commissioners, analysis indicates that the type
of residential resort projects now allowed under the LDRs will have
no greater (and probably less) negative traffic, density, and
aesthetic impacts than the conventional multi -family development
allowed "by right" in -the RM -6 zoning district. Also, staff's
survey of 15 central and south Florida local governments indicates
that jurisdictions treat residential resort type uses in a variety
of ways, as either multi -family uses, residential "conditional
uses", or commercial uses. Consequently, it appears to county
staff that the residential "conditional use" approach is a logical,
middle of the road approach which recognizes that residential
resort projects can be made to be appropriate and compatible in
higher density multi -family zoning districts. Furthermore, it is
staff's opinion that as a special exception use, the county has the
ability to properly regulate and attach reasonable conditions to
any such project proposal.
ALTERNATIVES:
There are several alternatives available to the Board in responding
to the Indian River Shores request. These include the following:
47
BOOK 89 F.,,r,512
r
MAY I1 1993
BOOK 09 FAGS .S13
1. Conclude that the existing LDRs are sufficient, adequately
address the expressed concerns, and require no change.
2. Conclude that more restrictions should be added to the
residential resort specific land use criteria in order to
provide more assurances that project impacts are fully
addressed.
3. Conclude that the existing LDRs related to residential resorts
should be repealed, and address Disney's "grandfathering"
status via a determination of vesting under the current
regulations or alternative re -zoning action.
CONCLUSION:
It is planning staff's opinion that the residential resort use is
an appropriate special exception use in the RM -6 zoning district.
Therefore, staff is not in :favor of repealing the residential
resort LDRs and does not recommend pursuing alternative #3, above.
It is staff's opinion that some of the expressed concerns could be
more specifically addressed by adding to the specific land use
criteria applied to residential resorts (alternative #2, above).
Staff believes that there could be justification for adding the
following types of specific land use criteria to the existing
residential resort LDRs:
• Increase the existing minimum project size (currently 25
acres);
• Require Planned Development (P.D.) review and approval as part
of the special exception use review and approval process to
give the county even more regulatory and approval authority;
• Specifically require a traffic analysis demonstrating that
traffic impacts for the residential resort are no greater than
the impacts of developing the site as conventional multi-
family residential; and
• Limit or prohibit conversion of existing multi -family projects
to residential resorts in order to prevent potential internal
incompatibilities within existing conventional multi -family
projects.
At the Board's direction, staff could initiate changes to the
existing residential resort LDRs to augment the existing specific
land use criteria in a manner that would provide even more
assurances that address the expressed concerns. Staff does not
recommend the Board take action that would prevent a residential
resort project application, such as the one being proposed by
Disney, from being reviewed and considered for approval.
RECOEMNDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board:
1. Determine what specific additional approval criteria and
assurances should be incorporated into the LDRs to address
concerns expressed about residential resort. projects in the
RM -61 RM -81 and RM -10 districts; and
2. Direct staff to initiate any necessary LDR amendments.
48
Bob Schoen, Mayor of Indian River Shores, reported that the
Town Council had a meeting on April 22, 1993, to discuss ways to
alleviate the disagreement that had arisen over the March 3.993
amendments to the Land Development Regulations (LDRs). Mayor
Schoen directed the Board's attention to the following letter dated
April 27, 1993, summarizing the results of that meeting:
MAYOR%
ROOMISCHOEN .
VICE MAYOR: '
CHARLES C. WUR0.UMM .
COUNCIL: ,
OEORM P. BUNNM
eAMMM J. H"9N
JOHN E. OSULUYAN
TOWN MANAGER:
JOSEPH C. DORSKY
T
-M. IAN RIVER SHORES
NgRTH AM -A
• • •�'•`�' ,Fes
Richard N: Bird, Chairman ti ;APR 193
Board of County Commissioners N RECEIVED - w
1840 25th Street ' ' MARI) CWNryD;r
Vero Beach, Fl. 32960 r�SfiM/SS/ON �v`
N RIVER SHORES. FLORIDA 32963
dff0tM)?b43tJST
Commissioners ✓
Administrator
Attorney
Personnel
Public Works
Community Dev.
Utilities
Finance
ether r '
il
Dear Commissioner Bird,
�`tiEl Zl1�ev' Apr ,
At it's meeting of ,April 22, 1'993 the Indian River Shores Town
Council voted to petition the Board of County Commissioners to
amend the County's -.Land Development Regulations to. eliminate the
March 18 changes that.•weremade to zoning classification RM -6.
Our intent in this-request:is not to oppose the Disney project,
but rather to restore all.other RM -6 parcels to their pre -March
193 status. ,
We believe there are several ways to accomplish this end. One.
would.be to simply reverse the March !;93 changes and rule that
Disney was vested or grandfathered as.Yto the two RM -6 parcels
covered in their'proposal. Alternati#ely, reversing the March
193 amendments and then re -zoning ihe.4two Disney RM -6 parcels to
Tourist Commercial would accomplish the same result. In either
case the.Disney project would not be.hindered.-
We believe the action we are requesting would represent a
compromise•way`of.supporting Disney while avoiding the across the
board approach to all RM -6 parcels throughout the County.
Excluding the Disney/Nutt-70 acres, there are.some 500 acres of
RM -6 property -adjacent to the Northern border of our Town
extending up to Route.510. To the North of Route 510 there are
.additional RM -6 parcels and also Agricultually zoned lands which
could be re -zoned Rm-6 to further aggravate the potential
problem.
We ask that the Board of Cotinty•Commissioners direct the staff to
initiate the action to restore all R14-6 parcels to their
pre -March 193 status.
Respectfully jubmitted,
Robert J. Schoen, Mayor
cc: Commissioners•Tippin, Eggert,
Adams 6 Macht
49
-MAY 111993
BOOK 89 FAcr 51 4
500K 89 515
Mayor Schoen felt that the community would be better served by
encouraging long-term rather than transient use. After writing the
above letter, he met with County staff to explore other ways to
limit residential resort development. A compromise that appeals to
the Indian River Shores Town Council would be to require concurrent
development of adjacent or contiguous commercially zoned land equal
to 25% of the total acreage in the residential resort. This would
not affect the Disney project, because Disney has 16 acres of
commercial land on the beach, which is more than 250 of the 60 RM -6
acres. Mayor Schoen urged staff to consider the above suggestion,
which would be responsive to the residents of Indian River Shores
who are anxious to preserve the residential character of the
island.
Rolf Bibow, 500 Beach Road, representing 751 petitioners,
distributed the following statement:
INDIAN RIVER CITIZENS' STUDY GROUP
STATEMENT BEFORE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
May 11, 1993
1. I am Rolf Bibow, a resident of Indian River County, repre-
senting %.i/ petitioners as of 5/10/93, who are residents
and property owners of Indian River County.
2. The petitioners oppose the March, 1993 change in RM -6 zoning
in Indian River County. They do not oppose the Disney
proposal, if it is restricted to the size and scope an-
nounced to date.
3. The Study Group, initially comprising 39 people, was formed
on April 5, and announced its position on April 21. The
position paper has already been made available to the Board
of Commissioners. The Study'Group has concurrently initiat-
ed a campaign to solicit petitions. It expects to receive
a significantly larger number of petitions from a wide
geographic area once they are all in.
4. The conclusions of the Study Group are:
a. The Disney proposal, while it is at variance with the
land use portion of the County Comprehensive Plan, is
not opposed.
b. The zoning change adopted in March of 1993 in all RM -6
areas is believed to open the path to large scale
commercial development on the barrier island far beyond
the scope of the project announced by Disney. It is
vigorously opposed.
c. The March, 1993 zoning change is believed to violate
both the language and intent of the County's Comprehen-
sive Plan. The Commissioners are respectfully request-
ed to act to contain the impact of the change.
50
d. The process which allowed the land use change to occur
without prior knowledge of the municipalities and the
citizens most directly concerned, and which has led to
extreme divisiveness in the community, is strongly
opposed.
5. The variances to the intent and specific language of the
Comprehensive Plan pose grave risks to the community.
Protection of the county's rich and varied environmental re-
sources was stated as a Plan goal. With the present approv-
al to allow commercial activity in residential areas, the
county's most precious natural resources, its shorelands,
are at risk with consequential financial and job related
impacts over the long run. Following are some of the risks
to Indian River County:
a. Residential resorts (e.g. hotel/motel operations) and
related commercial activity may expand into the 500
acres available between John's Island and Route 510.
We have reason to believe that three of the major hotel
chains are considering Disney's move with possible
interest of their own.
b. Under the current zoning, allowing hotel/motel opera-
tions in any RM -6 areas, and with the special excep-
tions expected to be granted to Disney, it is doubtful
that other entrants may be denied similar approval.
I.e. by the actions taken to date the.County and the
towns will have lost control.
as Hotel/motel chains, like all major corporations, are
managed for profit. They employ centralized purchasing
and other centralized practices to control cost.
Therefore, with hotel/motel operations.-' as opposed to
private ownership - little real benefit is expected to
accrue to area merchants and contractors. Nor will
there be much impact on area jobs, other.than in manual
and entry level positions.
d. In the likley event that hotel/motel operations begin
to pre-empt residential space in the scenic shorelands
areas, property values will deteriorate. Residents who
had orgiinally selected Indian River County for its
scenic attractions may seek other destinations, and
potential new property owners may be deterred.
e. The adverse impact on present and future area business-
es may be similarly dramatic. At present, Indian River
County's scenic beauty and uncrowded conditions repre-
sent strong selling points for drawing new business 'to
the area. Eliminate that, and Indian River may become
just another area in economic decline.
6. For the reasons stated above, we respectfully appeal to the
Board of Commissioners either to reverse the March, 1993
decision allowing hotel/motel operations in RM -6 areas (with
exception for Disney's proposal) or to institute new safe-
guards within the present zoning to positively preclude
further proliferation of such resorts.
We thank the Board for its consideration of our petitions.
Mr. Bibow believed that the ratio requirement proposal made a
lot of sense, and urged the Board to give it careful consideration.
51
Boa PnI F 516
MAY i 11993 �
r
IY�
BOOK 89 FA Ur 517
John O'Hara, 1155 Winding Oaks Circle East, did not understand
the significance of the March LDR hearings at the time they were
being held. He recently obtained copies of the minutes of those
meetings and was surprised to find that not one person had spoken
against the changes. Now that the changes have been made, numerous
people have come forward in opposition. Mr. O'Hara felt that the
public did not realize these changes would permit development of
residential resorts or time share communities. He stressed that
advertising the hearings in the newspaper was insufficient, and
other ways should be found to inform the public about matters such
as this. Mr. O'Hara stated further that it would help if the
County could be more specific in defining residential resorts.and
how they differ from hotels or motels.
Director Keating explained that a residential resort lies
somewhere between the two extremes of the transient commercial use
of hotels and motels and permanent residential facilities.
Residential resort usage implies a stay of longer than one night
and could be as long as several weeks. Staff determined that
residential resort communities are closer to residential use than
commercial use.
Commissioner Macht commented that hotels or motels have a
number of transient uses, whereas a residential resort is a
destination of one purpose only - to take residence for rest and
recreation and the enjoyment of the amenities contained therein.
Director Keating noted that residential resorts are required
to have kitchen facilities. Other requirements include having a
minimum of 25 acres, location on a thoroughfare planned road, and
Type A buffering, which is more than twice the buffering required
in CG and RM -6 zoned areas that are not used for residential
resorts.
Mr. O'Hara commented. that the residents of Sea Oaks are
concerned that the new regulations would allow the developer to
change what the residents bought into as a planned community.
Director Keating explained that conversion of an entire
project would be allowed if all criteria were met.
Commissioner Adams wanted to know if a developer could come
back in and change the original planned development if the criteria
were all met.
Director Keating responded that it could be allowed if all
criteria were met and it was approved by the Board as a special
exception use.
52
Commissioner Macht suggested changing the LDRs to prohibit
conversion of existing developments.
Joe auffanti, 441 Holly Road, spoke in opposition to all time
share projects, including the Disney proposal. He moved here
because this was a laid-back town and suggested that anyone who
would have it otherwise should visit Atlantic City or Nags Head or
even Melbourne to see what overdevelopment has done. He asked, and
Director Bird confirmed, that the public will have other
opportunities to speak in opposition to the recent changes in the
LDRs.
Doke Morrison, Coral Park Lane, a director of Coralstone
Condominium Association, spoke in favor of Mayor Schoen's
suggestion. He did not feel that the Disney project was a failsafe
operation.
Chairman Bird asked whether any of the remaining parcels could
be developed into a time share resort.
Planning Director Stan Boling explained that a developer could
combine several parcels and then come in with a special exception
request for conversion. About 394 acres currently are zoned RM -6,
and several additional parcels could be rezoned RM -6. Sea Oaks
could not be converted because it does not have 25 acres with
direct access to a main thoroughfare. It might be possible to
convert a portion of Coralstone, but that would be difficult
because of lack of direct access to a thoroughfare.
Director Boling commented that although Disney has indicated
they do not intend to expand, it would be possible for them to come
before the Board in the future with a request for special exception
approval to expand into adjacent property.
Commissioner Macht felt that except for a parcel adjacent to
the northern boundary of the Town of Indian River Shores controlled
by Robert Cairns, residential resort development would be
difficult. Even so, he recommended amending the LDRs to establish
a required ratio between commercial and RM -6 development and
prohibit existing developments from converting to residential
resorts.
Commissioner Adams mentioned that she was concerned about the
impact on Jungle Trail if the Cairns property is developed into a
residential resort community. She suggested increasing the minimum
acreage and also wanted to make certain we provide for ample
conservation of trees and foliage.
53
'MAY 111993 BOOK 89 PmF 518
BOOK S9 FACE 5i9
MAY i 11993
Director Boling agreed there is justification for increasing
the minimum parcel size, because destination resorts need to have
a large enough setting to have amenities.
Chairman Bird stressed that we should not mislead ourselves
into believing that we will ever see any more of the type of
development that Disney is proposing if we put in the requirement
that it has to be connected to commercial zoning.
Commissioner Eggert commented that we are not misleading
ourselves.
Commissioner Tippin was not worried that development will get
out of hand, even though a lot of short-term rental is going on in
residential areas.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, to direct staff to develop
criteria consistent with good planning and zoning
laws based on non -conversion, coupling with
commercial, and minimum property size.
Under discussion, Chairman Bird requested that staff present
the proposed changes to the Board for consideration before we go
through the lengthy public hearing process.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
CR -512 ELECTRIC UTILITY RELOCATION
The Board reviewed the following memo dated May 3, 1993:
54
TO: James Chandler
County'Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
FROM: Roger D. Cain, P.E. !
County Engineer
SUBJECT: CR512 Electric Utility Reloc 'on
DATE: May 3, 1993
D
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITION
In order to construct the improvements to CR 512, it will be necessary to relocate an FPL
transmission pole and facilities located within an easement held by FPL over the Right of Way of
CR 512 and predating the existence of the Right of Way. It will be necessary in this case to pay FPL
to relocate their facilities at this location. FPL estimates the cost of this relocation will be $41,844.
A letter from FPL is attached for verification. FPL indicates the Board of County Commissioners
must indicate its agreement to pay the relocation expense before it will move the facilities. The
Board may do : this by -authorizing the Chairman to execute the attached form letterprovided by FPL
for this purpose.
Alternative No. 1, authorize the Chairman to execute the letter agreement, and when the Chairman
has signed it.,return it to the Engineering Department for handling.
Alternative No. 2, do not authorize the Chairman to execute the letter agreement.
RECOhOdENDAMON AND El MIDING
Staffrecommends Alternative No. 1., with funding to come from Account No. 101-153-541-06738,
the project account for the County Road 512 improvement project.
Chairman Bird asked, and Attorney Vitunac confirmed, that in
this instance the County is responsible for payment of costs
associated with relocating the utility because the utility easement
was in existence before the County acquired the right—of—way.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved
Alternative No. 1, payment of expenses to relocate a
Florida Power & Light transmission pole and
facilities at a total estimated cost of $41,844.00,
as set forth in staff's recommendation.
COPY OF LETTER OF AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT,
IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD
55
SAY i��g BOOK 89 FACH 5 00
I
MAY I 11993 BOOK
PAVING OF 12TH AVENUE BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND STH PLACE
89 PAGE 521,
Michelle A. Gentile, civil engineer, presented the following
memo dated May 3, 1993:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, PE
Public Works Director
and
Roger D. Cain, P.E.
County Engineer
FROM: Michelle A. Gentile, C
Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Paving of 12th Avenue between 4th Street and 5th Place
DATE: May 3, 1993
A petition was received from the property owners along the west side of 12th.Avenue between 4th
Street and 5th Place in the Royal Poinciana Park Subdivision. On the east side of 12th Avenue there
is the Indian River Farms Water Control District "Lateral E" Canal. Under our petition paving
program,the property owners on the west side would have to share in the 75% cost of this project,
due to the fact that in the past Indian River County has never assessed the IRF WCD for a paving
assessment. The water control district would prefer that the road not be paved. By assessing the
property owners on the west side the normal assessment cost for a Petition Paving Project just about
doubles.
A Cost Estimate and Preliminary Assessment Roll were prepared and an informal meeting was held
with the property owners to discuss this project and the estimated costs.
7596 to be paid by Property Owners $28,146.74
251% to paid by the County 9.382.25
TOTAL COSTS $37,528.99
Since meeting with the property ownersthere is a definite consensus not to pave 12th Avenue under
the Petition Paving Program due to the large assessment that would be placed on the property
owners. They were concerned about the high speed traffic along this corridor and the minor
drainage problems. The County is currently grading this road.
Staff discussed with the property owners that there is a possibility of paving portions of 12th Avenue
to allow residents who have drives on 12th Avenue to have a paved access to another intersection
street. (Maps Attached) Alsothe four intersecting streets at 12th Avenue (4th Place, 4th Lane, 5th
Street and 5th Place) would dead end at 12th Avenue. A paved turnaround would be constructed
with proper traffic delineaters installed. 12th Avenue would be closed -off between 4th Place and
5th Place. Indian River County would still own and maintain the 45 foot right-of-way along the 12th
Avenue Corridor.
56
The costs to do these improvements would amount to $15,578.16. This is about $6,195.91 more
than the 251% costs the County would pay on the petition paving assessment as set out above. A
public hearing would be held for closing -off portions of 12th Avenue and work could be scheduled
and performed by the Road and Bridge Division.
This would be a benefit to the County by eliminating an unpaved road in the grader route.
Direct staff to make the improvements along the 12th Avenue corridor and hold a public hearing to
close -off portions of 12th Avenue as shown on the attached map. County will pay for the additional
$6,195.91 above the normal 25% funding that the county pays on petition paving projects.
The County would continue to grade 12th Avenue on a regular grader route, and not do any paving
at this time.
Staff recommends Alternative No. l and funding would come from the Road and Bridge Fund # 111-
214.
Commissioner Adams asked why we are not assessing the property
owners for some of the cost.
Ms. Gentile explained that the property owners preferred to
leave the road unpaved if they were going to be assessed any amount
for paving it.
Public Works Director Jim Davis commented that not all of the
property owners have driveways onto 12th Avenue. Since this was a
relatively small sum of money and paving will benefit the County
because the road can be taken off the grader route, staff
recommends that the County go ahead and pay the cost of paving.
Commissioner Adams agreed that the amount involved is probably
not worth the cost of advertising and holding public hearings to
assess the property owners.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by
Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously approved
Alternative No. 1, authorizing staff to make
improvements along the 12th Avenue corridor at a
total cost of $15,578.16, and hold a public hearing
to close off portions of 12th Avenue, as set forth
in staff's recommendation.
57
BOOK 09 Pa;F 522
L MAY 111993 �
r o
MAY I i P99 BOOK 89 Fa,F.523
SETTLEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION CLAIM - INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD PHASE III
The Board reviewed the following memo dated May 3, 1993:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
James E. Chandler, County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, Director of Public Works
Terrence P. O'Brien, Asst. County Atty.
DATE: May 3, 1993
RE: SETTLEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION CLAIM PHASE III
BLVD.
This matter concerns a contract between Sheltra and Sons Construction
Co., Inc. (Sheltra) and Indian River County ( County) for the
construction of Indian River Boulevard, Phase III. The portion of the
contract in dispute is an item in Addendum No. 1 which calls for the
installation of two 30" diameter utility sleeves on behalf of and for the
use of the City of Vero Beach (City) . The installation of these sleeves
during the construction of the boulevard was to the County's benefit in
that it would remove the necessity for the City to jack and bore under
the new boulevard at a latter date.
On December 23, 1991, Sheltra started excavation and installation of the
two 30" steel pipe utility sleeves. On December 24, 1991, work on the
installation of the sleeves was continued and completed. Boyle's daily
report of construction for this date indicates that utility conflicts were
encountered. Its weekly summary for the period including this date did
not emphasize that there was or could be a problem. It merely stated
"utility conflicts everywhere." Location of existing utilities was
different from that shown on sketch prepared by Kimball Lloyd for the
City. The report also states that Sheltra chopped approximately an 8'
wide by 165' long trench through rock to install the pipe sleeves and
"Tapered last two lengths of pipe to get under water mains that was
incorrect on prints . " i.e., the sketch prepared by Kimball Lloyd for
the City that was included in Addendum No. 1.
The deflection in the casing was not discovered until August 4, 1992
when the City took a video of the interior of the casing. ,
Asa result of the tapering or deflection of the utility sleeves, the
16" ductile iron water main and 14" ductile iron force main could not be
fed through the utility sleeves. The bought and paid -for ductile iron
pipe was, therefore, not useable or returnable. The City then
purchased poly pipe which was then successfully fed through the utility
sleeve; however, the final cost to the City was considerably more under
the circumstances.
It appears to the County that (1) the City provided incorrect
information as to the location of other utilities; (2) Sheltra should not
have proceeded to install the utility sleeve in the manner in which they
did but should have immediately contacted the City with respect to the
conflict between information received and actual conditions; and (3)
Boyle should have stopped work on the project until the conflict was
58
resolved. It is Boyle's position that it kept the County informed of
conditions by its daily reports. These reports, in our opinion, were
less than informative as to the nature of the problem and the solution.
The County, in view of the foregoing, retained $24, 320 from its
contract with Sheltra and approximately $171,000 from its engineering
contract with Boyle. Sheltra has sought final payment for a number of
months. In order to resolve the matter and hopefully avoid a costly
trial the parties agreed to mediation. The terms agreed to, subject to
commission approval are as follows:
City pays $12,933
Boyle pays 4,506---
County
,500`-
County pays 2,567
Sheltra receives $20,000
In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the County pay the
$2,567.00 to Sheltra in settlement of all claims. Administratively, the
City will give the County $12,933 the County will deduct $4,500 from
the retainage on the Boyle contract and give Sheltra a final payment
and settlement of all claims check for $20,000. Release of final payment
to Sheltra & Son Construction was originally approved by the Board on
August 4, 1992 (copy attached) . It is recommended that the Board
approve release of final payment to Boyle less the $4,500 settlement.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously agreed to
settle the contract dispute with Sheltra and Sons
Construction Co., Inc., at a total cost to the
County of $2,567.00, under the terms set forth in
staff's memorandum.
CITY OF VERO BEACH - SR-AlA WIDENING - REQUEST FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT
FEES
The Board reviewed the following memo dated May 3, 1993:
59
MAY 111993 BOOK 89 FAUF 524
MAY 111993 BOOK 89 pAcE 525
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
RE:
DATE:
James E. Chandler
County Administrator
James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
City of Vero Beach - AlA Widening
Request for Traffic Impact Fees
District 2
Clifford J. Suthard, Director of Engineering
City of Vero Beach to James Davis
Dated April 27, 1993
May 3, 1993
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The City of Vero Beach Engineering Department has received bids for three
lane widening of SR AlA between Castaway Boulevard and Beachland
Boulevard. The programmed improvement will result in added capacity to
a State Arterial Road. The Florida Department of Transportation budgeted
$3,200,000.00 for the construction, however, the, contract amount is
approximately $3,500,000.00. To fund the approximate $300,000.00
shortfall, the City is requesting a $300,000.00 allocation from the
District 2 Traffic Impact Fee Fund (balance as of March 31, 1993 is
$1,160,391.00).
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The projects to be funded with District 2 Traffic Impact Fees in the next
18 months include the following:
Estimated Cost
SR AlA Widening from Castaway Cove to Moorings
Widen to three lanes 1996 $ 700,000.00
Intersection Improvements
SR AlA/Mooring Line Drive 1996 $ 150,000.00
Subtotal $ 850,000.00
Requested AlA Widening $ 300,000.00
Total $1,350,000.00
RE—CO�ONS AND FUNDING
Based on the current District 2 balance, it appears that planned
improvements can proceed if the District 2 funds are approved for AlA
Widening. Staff recommends that $300,000.00 be allocated at this time to
cover the existing shortfall. Funding to be from District 2 Traffic
Impact Fee Fund 101-152 in the amount of $300,000.00
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously authorized
payment of $300,000.00 to the City of Vero Beach for
SR-AlA widening, to be funded with District 2
Traffic Impact Fees,
as recommended by staff.
60
r
SEWER FORCE MAIN RELOCATION PROJECT - CR -512 EAST OF FOOD LION -
WORR AUTHORIZATION NO. 9
The Board reviewed the following memo dated April 27, 1993:
DATE: APRIL 27, 1993
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINT
DIRECTOR OF UTIL VICES
PREPARED TERRY H. DRUM
AND STAFFED ENVIRONMENTAL IGINEER
BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: SEWER FORCE MAIN/RELOCATION PROJECT
COUNTY ROAD 512 (EAST OF FOOD LION)
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BID NO. 91-113
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT No. US -92 -24 -CS
WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. 9
BACKGROUND
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 relocate a section of an existing 6" force main
within the above subject area. This is in response to coordinate with
the Public Works Department, Indian River County, Florida, the
relocation of the force main to accommodate the proposed drainage and
roadway improvements.
ANALYSIS
The project is comprised of the relocation of approximately 795 L.F. of
existing 6" P.V.C. force main. The 6" P.V.C. force main is to be
relocated to within five (5) feet of the south right-of-way line of
County Road 512.
The cost of the labor to construct the
force main under the labor contract is
Authorization No. 9 with Driveways, Inc.)
be supplied by the County at a co
engineering, inspection, administration
estimated to be $3,170.00. Funding fo
renewal and replacement funds.
RECOMMENDATION
relocation of the 6" P.V.C.
$5,730.71 (see attached Work
. The pipe and fittings will
It of $3,898.40. In-house
costs and contingencies are
r this project will be from
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners execute the subject agreement, which
approves Work Authorization No. 9 to construct the subject project with
Driveways, Inc., for the amount of $5,730.71 to relocate an estimated
total of 795 linear feet of sewer force main and authorize expenditure
of $7,068.40 for materials and in-house support, for a total project
cost of $12,799.11.
61
MAY i 11993
BOOK 89 Fac.526
MAYi11993 BOOK 89 wuF.527
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by
Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously approved
Work Authorization No. 9 with Driveways, Inc. in the
total amount of $12,799.11, as recommended by staff.
AGREEMENT IS ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD
NORTH COUNTY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT PHASE I LANDSCAPING
Utility Services Director Terry Pinto presented the following
memo dated May 3, 1993:
DATE: APRIL 30, 1993. _
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILI SERVICES
STAFFED AND
PREPARED BY: WILLIAM F06!McWN
CAPITAL S ENGINEER
DEPAR UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: NORTH COUNTY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT PHASE I
LANDSCAPING
BACKGROUND:
In January 1991, the Indian River County Department of Utility
Services put the North County Wastewater Treatment Plant on line.
At that time, all of the plant capacity had been reserved, and it
was anticipated that an immediate plant expansion would be required.
The Utilities Department therefore put the majority of the required
landscaping on hold, as it would have to have been greatly modified
to accommodate the second phase of the project. It was our intent
that the entire landscaping package be constructed with Phase II of
the facility.
At this same time, the City of Sebastian* pulled out of our system,
putting a halt to the immediate plant expansion. Since Phase II
will not be constructed in the immediate future, we have modified
our original landscaping plan to accommodate Phase II, and must now
proceed with Phase I landscaping.
ANALYSIS:
We are now requesting the Board of County Commissioners" direction
as to how to proceed with the required landscaping. There are three
options available; they are as follows:
1. Solicit bids (at least three quotes) for this work and
proceed with same without going through the long process
of bid procurement. The cost of this work is estimated
not to exceed $20,000.00, and will be paid for out of the
impact fee fund.
62
2.
3.
Officially proceed through the bid process, adding both
time and additional expense to the project.
Do nothing, and construct all required landscaping at the
time of construction of Phase II, as previously planned.
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners authorize Option 1 - the expenditure
of $20,000.00 (not to exceed cost) on the basis of at least three
responsible and responsive quotes for the above -outlined work.
Commissioner Adams asked, and Attorney Vitunac confirmed, that
soliciting at least three bids is less time-consuming and expensive
than going through the bid procurement process.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously authorized
staff to obtain at least three bids and proceed with
the Phase I landscaping of the North County
Wastewater Treatment Plant at a total cost of not
more than $20,000.00, as recommended by staff.
LOW PRESSURE FORCE MAIN SYSTEM TO SERVE DURRANCE PLACE SUBDIVISION
AND PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH ALONG THE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON TO CR -510
The Board reviewed the following memo dated May 3, 1993:
DATE: MAY 31 1993
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRAT
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO// ' _-):
DIRECTOR OF UTILIT ERVICES
PREPARED WILLIAM F. MCWGYI
AND STAFFED CAPITAL PROJENEER
BY:DEPARTMENT OF SERVICES
SUBJECT: LOW PRESSURE FORCE MAIN SYSTEM TO SERVE DURRANCE
PLACE SUBDIVISION AND PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH
ALONG THE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON TO COUNTY ROAD 510
BACKGROUND
This project originally was started as a proposed developer's
agreement with Mrs. Barns on 94th Place, who required sewer service
to her lot (see attached exhibit) in order to develop it. We
currently have sewer (gravity) on Durrance Road from US 1 to 53rd
Avenue. This is the system to which the proposed project will
connect. The engineering firm of Marshall, McCully and Associates
63
MAY 111993
BOOK 89 PAGE 528
I
p
MAY i 11991,
BOOK 89 Pa;F 529
originally proposed the developer's agreement on behalf of the
property owner. We also retain the firm of Marshall, McCully and
Associates under a continuing services contract for work of this
nature. Due to the potential threat posed to the Indian River
lagoon from septic tanks in this area, we are proposing contacting
the firm of Marshall, McCully and Associates to design a low
pressure sewer system for this entire area, which would ultimately
service ± 70 lots (see attached letter from HRS).
ANALYSIS
We are proposing only to have the engineer design and inspect the
low pressure force main, as well as all required power conduit.
This design will duplicate the Rockridge sewer system almost
exactly. The lift stations will be designed; however, we do not
intend to construct them with this project. This will allow homes
to connect to the system as they wish. At the time of home
connections, we will either install the stations ourselves or allow
the homeowner to have his home connected as a separate utility
project. All homeowners will be provided lift station and wiring
detail. The estimated construction cost is ± $120,000.00 with
proposed engineering costs as follows:
1) Design/permitting/surveying $13,029.50
2) Permitting (FDOT) outfall crossing 1,500.00
3) Construction/inspection 5,438.40
4) Miscellaneous reproduction 100.00
$20,067.90
Should the entire project being designed be constructed; i.e.,
installation of all pumping stations, the project cost would be +.
$450,000.00. We, therefore, feel the engineering fee is well within
acceptable limits for a project of this type. However, should
homeowner participation in this project increase and become a major
change in project scope, we will have to come back to the Board for
additional monies -for engineering. Funding for this project will be
through assessment. However, in the interim, funding will come from
the impact fee fund.
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends the
approval of the attached Work Authorization with Marshall, McCully
and Associates.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
work authorization with Marshall, McCully and
Associates for engineering design and inspection in
the amount of $20,067.90, as set forth in staff's
recommendation.
WORK AUTHORIZATION IS ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD
64
WATER EXPANSION PLAN - PHASE III - RESOLUTIONS I AND II
The Board reviewed the following memo dated April 30, 1993:
DATE: APRIL 30, 1993
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRA'
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILIT /QERVICES
PREPARED JAMES D. CHAS l�-
AND STAFFED MANAGER OF ES PROJECTS
BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: WATER EXPANSION PLAN - PHASE III
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UW -91 -15 -DS
RESOLUTIONS I AND II
BACKGROUND
On October 23, 1990, the Indian River County Board of County
Commissioners gave conceptual approval of the installation of water
facilities as part of the Water Main Extension Growth Plan. The
Department of Utility Services has developed a phased plan to meet
the Comprehensive Plan requirements. Phase I was completed in
January 1993, and Phase II is under construction. On June 11, 1991,
the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approved a
negotiated agreement with Carter Associates for the Phase III design
and additional services. We are now ready to begin the assessment
process associated with this project. (See attached minutes and
agenda item.)
ANALYSIS
Attached are Resolutions I and II for the assessment project. The
project will generally serve the following described areas:
Subdivision Location
Pinetree Park South of 8th Street, west of 60th Avenue to
66th Avenue, north of 4th Street
Diana Park
Greenbriar
Westgate Colony
Rivera Estates
Cherrywood Estates
Sunniland Homesites
MAY 111993
61st Avenue, north of 4th Street
South of S.R. 60/20th Street to 18th
Avenue, from 78th Avenue west to 79th Avenue
80th Avenue on the west, 79th Avenue on the
east, 22nd Street on the north (Route 60),
20th Street on the south
24th Street, west of Kings Highway/58th
Avenue
59th Avenue, south of 33rd Street (Cherry
Lane)
62nd Avenue and 62nd Drive, south of 33rd
Street
65
BOOK ®9 FMGE 530
MAY I I �19P7� BOOK 89 Fa;F5.31
Cherry Lane Manor" .'62nd Court,'south of 33rd Street (Cherry
Lane)
Floral Park 57th Avenue, east to 56th Avenue, 43rd
Street on the north and 41st Street (S.
Gifford Road) on the south
Ranch Estates East side of Rings Highway to 57th Avenue,
43rd Street on the north and 41st Street
(S. Gifford Road) on the south
Metes and Bounds Various, abutting various streets
Acreage Parcels throughout the above
(non -platted)
The attached map displays the area to benefit from the assessment
project. The total estimated project cost is $2,166,044.27, less a
non -assessed transmission main cost of $418,669.82. The total cost
to be assessed is $1,747,374.45. The cost per spare foot is
$0.118489. This project contains 901 parcel I.D.'s, including 1,137
parcels and platted lots, of which 1,069, or 94%, are substandard or
"undersized," according to Indian River County's Comprehensive Plan
and the County Public Health Unit, Division of Environmental Health,
which require that new lots utilizing well and septic systems be a
minimum of one-half acre. If served by a public water system, the
lot may be reduced to one-quarter acre in size. Lots not meeting
these minimum standards are called "undersized lots."
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners approve the attached Resolutions and
set the public hearing date.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 93-91, providing for Phase III of the
water main extension growth plan, and adopted
Resolution 93-92, setting a public hearing for
Tuesday, June 8, 1993, at 9:05 A.M., as recommended
by staff.
66
RESOLUTION NO. 93- 91
- A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR PHASE III OF THE
WATER MAIN EXTENSION GROWTH PLAN;
PROVIDING THE TOTAL ESTIMATED COST,
METHOD OF PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENTS, NUMBER
OF ANNUAL INSTALLMENTS, AND LEGAL
DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA SPECIFICALLY
SERVED.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County has determined that the improvements herein described are
necessary to promote the public welfare of the county and has deter-
mined to defray the cost thereof by special assessments against certain
properties to be serviced by Phase III of the Water Main Extension
Growth Plan, located generally in various subdivisions off of Kings
Highway and State Road 60, hereinafter referred to as Project No.
UW -91 -15 -DS;
NOW., THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
1. The County does hereby determine that Phase III of the Water
Main Extension Growth Plan shall be installed in 901 properties,
which are located generally as described above, and the cost
thereof shall be specially assessed in accordance with the
provisions of Sections 206.01 through 206.09 of the Code of Indian
River County.
2. The total estimated project assessment cost of the above-described
improvements is shown to be $1,747,374.45 or $0.118489 per square
foot to be paid by the property specially benefited as shown on
the assessment plat on file with the Department of Utility Services.
3. A special assessment in the amount of $0.118489 per square foot
shall be assessed against each of the properties designated on the
assessment plat. This assessment may *be raised or lowered by
action of the Board of County Commissioners after the public
hearing, at the same meeting, as required by the referenced
County Code.
4. The.. special assessments shall be due and payable and may be paid
in full within 90 days after the date of the resolution of the Board
67
MAY i 11993 BOOK 89 :FacF 532
MAY I 11993
BOOK 89 FAcF 533
RESOLUTION NO. 93-_M_
with respect to credits against the special assessments after
completion of the improvements (the "Credit Date") without
interest.
If not paid in full, the special- assessments may be paid in ten
equal yearly installments of principal plus interest. If not paid
when due, there shall be added a penalty of 1-1/2% of the
principal not paid when due. The unpaid balance of the special
assessments shall bear interest at a rate of 8% from the Credit
Date until paid.
5. There is presently on file with the Department of Utility Services a
plat showing the area to be assessed, plans and specifications, and
an estimate of the cost of the proposed improvements. All of these
are open to inspection by the public at the Department of Utility
Services.
6. An assessment roll with respect to the special assessments shall
promptly be prepared in connection with the special assessments.
7. Upon the adoption of this resolution, the Indian River County
Utility Services Department shall cause this resolution (along with
a map showing the areas to be. served) to be published at least
one time in the Vero Beach Press Journal before the public hearing
required by Section 206.04.
The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner
Eggert , and the motion was seconded by Commissioner A d a mr-,
and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye
Vice Chairman John W. Tippin Aye
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and
adopted this 11 day of M d y , 1993.
_ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Attest: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
ti
By
Richard N. Bird,
Jeffrey K. Barton ClerkChairman
xhoe
68
s � �
RESOLUTION NO. 93- 92
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, SETTING A TIME AND PLACE AT WHICH
THE OWNERS OF PROPERTIES LOCATED
GENERALLY IN VARIOUS SUBDIVISIONS OFF OF
KINGS HIGHWAY AND STATE ROAD 60, AND
OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS, MAY APPEAR
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS -.
AND BE HEARD AS TO THE PROPRIETY AND
ADVISABILITY OF CONSTRUCTING PHASE III OF
THE WATER MAIN EXTENSION GROWTH PLAN, AS
TO THE COST THEREOF, AS TO THE MANNER OF
PAYMENT THEREFOR, AND AS TO THE AMOUNT
THEREOF TO BE SPECIALLY ASSESSED AGAINST
EACH PROPERTY BENEFITED THEREBY.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County has, by Resolution No. 93-91 , determined that it is
necessary for the public welfare of the citizens of the county, and
particularly as to those living, working, and owning property within
the area described hereafter, that a waterline be installed in
approximately 901 properties hereinafter described; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the cost to *be specially
assessed with respect thereto shall be $0.118489 per square foot; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has caused an
assessment roll to be completed and filed with the Clerk to the Board;
and
WHEREAS, Section 206.06, Indian River County Code, requires
that the Board of County Commissioners shall fix a time and place at
which the owners of the properties to be assessed or any other persons
interested therein may appear before the Board of County
Commissioners and be heard as to the propriety and advisability of
constructing such water main extension, as to the cost thereof, as to
the manner of payment therefor, and as to the amount thereof to be
assessed against each property benefited thereby,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
I. The County Commission shall meet at the County Commission
Chambers in the County Administration Building at the hour of
9:05 a.m. on Tuesday, June 8, 1993, at which time the owners
69
e
MAY 111993 BOOK �9 .FIN 5.3
MAY 1 1 1gg1 -
BOOK 09 PnF.535
RESOLUTION NO. 93- 92
of. the properties to be assessed and any other interested persons
may appear before said Commission and be heard in regard
thereto. The area to be improved and the properties to be
specially benefited are more particularly described upon the
assessment plat and the assessment roll with regard `to .the special
assessments.
2. All persons interested in the construction of said improvements and
the special assessments against the properties to be specially
benefited may review the assessment plat showing the area to be
assessed, the assessment roll, the plans and specifications for said
improvements, and an estimate of the cost thereof at the office of
the Department of Utility Services any week day from 8:30 a.m.
until 5:00 p.m.
3. Notice of the time and place of this public hearing shall be given
by two publications in the Press Journal Newspaper one week
apart. The last publication shall be at least one week prior to the
date of the hearing. The Indian River County Department of
Utility Services shall give the owner of each property to be
specially assessed at least ten days notice in writing of such time
and place, which shall be served by mailing a copy of such notice
to each of such property owners at his last known address.
The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner
Eggert and the motion was seconded by CommissionerAdams
,
and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye
Vice Chairman John W. Tippin Aye
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye
Commissioner Kenneth R'. Macht Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and
adopted this day of May , 1993.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Attest INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY
Richard N. Bird
Jeffrey K. arton, CCllerkk Chairman
70
REPORT ON NEW HORIZONS MOBILE HOME PARK
Commissioner Adams commended staff for doing a tremendous job
reinstating water to the residents of New Horizons Mobile Home Park
when the private water supply failed.
Attorney Vitunac thanked Commissioner Adams for her assistance
in acting as liaison between the owner of the park and the
residents.
Utility Services Director Terry Pinto advised the Board that
the residents had water the morning after the Board authorized the
Utilities Department to do whatever was necessary to restore water,
although a boil notice remains in effect until the final
bacteriological testing is complete. Director Pinto explained that
when the private system went down, there was negative pressure in
the lines which resulted in contamination. Staff connected them to
the County system, and within the next two days they will be
receiving water from a combination of the Breezy Village and
Pelican Pointe systems. There are several leaks that need to be
repaired and depending on what needs to be done, the work should be
finished in about 30 days.
The Chairman announced that no action was required of the
Board on this matter.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded
and carried, the Board adjourned at 11:10 A.M.
ATTEST:
J. K. rton, Clerk Richard N. Bird, Chairman
71
MAY 111993 BOOK 89 INVu.5:36