Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/6/1994MINUTE3WTACHED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 1994 9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1840 25TH STREET VERO BEACH, FLORIDA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS John W. Kenneth Tippin, Chairman -(Dist. 4) R. Macht, Vice Chairman ( Dist. 3 ) James E. Chandler, County Administrator Fran B. Richard Adams(Dist..1) N. Bird (Dist. 5) Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney Carolyn K. Eggert (Dist. 2) Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board as Constitution Week In Indian River County, Florida C. Annual Fire Control Report from Division of Forestry ( letter dated August 4, 1994) 9:00A.M_ I. CALL TO ORDER 2. INVOCATION - 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Comm. John W. Tippin 4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS 9-A-2 Appeal of Building Code of Adjustment and Appeals decision - Outlet Mall. 13-B Council of Public Officials' recommendation to create a Technological Task Force. 5. PROCLAMATION AND PRESENTATIONS None ¢c APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Regular Meeting of July 19, 1994 B. Regular Meeting of July 26, 1994 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Received E Placed on File in BCC Office: SWDD Annual Report for FY 92/93 B. Proclamation Designating Sept. 17 thru 23, 1994 as Constitution Week In Indian River County, Florida C. Annual Fire Control Report from Division of Forestry ( letter dated August 4, 1994) D. Traffic Impact Fee Allocation for 1. R. Blvd. Projekt - Phase III - Budget Amendment 024 (memorandum dated August 30, 1994) E. Final Plat Approval for Walkers Glen West Unit 1 (memorandum dated August 24, 1994) F. Cancellation of Outstanding Taxes Properties Purchased for County Use (memorandum dated August 19, 1994) September 6, 1994 0 9:05 a. m. 7. CONSENT AGENDA (cont'd. ) G. Surplus Property ( memorandum dated August 26, 19'94) H. Sole Source Purchase of Alphanumeric Paging System Upgrade ( memorandum dated August 26, 1994) 1. Award Bid #4104 / Icom IC -2340H Radios -(29) ( memorandum dated August 16. 1994 ) J. Award Bid #4106 / St. Rd. 60 Gravity Force Main ( memorandum dated August 16, 1994 ) K. Award Bid #4105 / Woo dlawn Manor Force Main Ext. (memorandum dated August 16, 1994) L. 1995 Holiday Schedule (-memorandum dated August 22, 1994) M. Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot 15, Block 17, Vero Lake Estates ( memorandum dated August. 30, 1994 ) N. Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot 10, Block 12, Vero Lake Estates ( memorandum dated August 22, 1994 ) O. Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot 4, Block 24, Vero Lake Estates (memorandum dated August 23, 1994) P. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 025 ( memorandum dated August 31, 1994 ) Q. • Permission to Interfund Borrow Money for Court- house and Land Acquisition (memorandum dated August 31, 1994) S. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES None 9. PUBLIC ITEMS A- PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS a. - Herbert G. Sturm Request to Address Commission Regarding State Attorney and Assistant State Attorneys for Indian River County ( letter dated August 29, 1994 ) PUBLIC HEARINGS I. AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM A-1 TO IG, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED APPROX. 600 FEET SOUTH OF 9TH STREET, S.W. AND APPROX. ONE HALF OF A MILE WEST OF 74TH AVE., AND DESCRIBED ---,.HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE ( memorandum dated August 26, 1994 ) 2. -AN .ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM RS -6 TO RM -8, FOR -THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE *OF INDIAN RIVER BLVD., APPROX. 1200 FEET NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF 37TH STREET AND INDIAN RIVER BLVD., AND DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE ( memorandum dated August 25, 1994 ) w I 10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS None 11. DEPARTMENTAL' MATTERS A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Request for County Commission Authorization for FloridAffinity, Inc. to Subcontract Environmental Land Pre -Acquisition Services, Contingent Upon County Administrator Approval (memorandum dated August 23, 1994) B. EMERGENCY SERVICES ' Authorization to Purchase Equipment to Expand and Improve the Emergency Management Program with Funds from the Emergency Management, Preparedness E Assistance Trust Fund Grant (memorandum dated August 24, 1994) r C. GENERAL SERVICES None D. LEISURE SERVICES None E. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET None F. PERSONNEL None G. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Requests from Property Owners for the County to Assume Maintenance of the Following Roads: * 100th Ct from 93rd St. to 95th St. 102nd Ct from 92nd St. to 93rd St. * 56th Ave. from 43rd St. to 42nd St. * 77th St. East of Willow St., (Fells.) * 79th' St. East of Willow St. (Fells.) 99th Ct from gist St. to 83rd St. ( memorandum dated August 29, 1994 ) 2. License Agreement - Storm Drainage Struc- tures, I.R. Blvd.—R-O-W (memorandum dated August 30, 1994) • H. UTILITIES 1. 45th St. Water Service Project (memorandum dated August 26, 1994) 2. 10th Court, SW Water Assessment Project, Change Orders No. 1, 2, E 3, Final Pay Request (memorandum dated August 23, 1994) 3. Force Main from Grove Isle to Vero Shores, Work Authorization No. 21 - Labor Contract, Change Order No. 2 E Final Pay Request (memorandum dated August 29, 1994) 4. Removal of the Old General Development 1 Vero Highlands - Two Office Buildings, One (1) Equipment Building, Foundation Concrete Walkways, All Existing Concrete Structures and Asphalt Drive ( memorandum dated August 29, 1994 ) t 1 s 12. COUNTY ATTORNEY .. A. ' Courthouse Advisory Comm. Condemnation Request (memorandum dated August 25, 1994) B. Vero Beach's Municipal Firemen's Relief and Pension Fund (memorandum dated August 17, 1994) - 13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS A. CHAIRMAN JOHN W. TIPPIN B. VICE CHAIRMAN KENNETH R. MACHT C. COMMISSIONER FRAN B. ADAMS D. COMMISSIONER RICHARD N. BIRD E. COMMISSIONER CAROLYN K. EGGERT 14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS A. EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT 1. Approval of Minutes - Meeting of 7/5/94 2. Interlocal Agreement with Town of Indian River Shores for Fire Inspection and Plan Review Services ( memorandum dated August 24, 1994 ) 3. Agreement Between Emergency Services District E Yamaha Motor Corp. for Two Outboard Motors for Fire/ Rescue Boat (memorandum dated August 29, 1994) _ B. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT • 1. Southeast Paper Recycling Contract ( memorandum dated August 17, 1994) 2. Landfill Volume Survey ( memorandum dated August 23, 1994) i ; 3..--.1994-95 Budget Evaluation (memorandum dated August 29, 1994) 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. n I Tuesday, September 6, 1994 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, September 6, 1994, at 9:00 a..m. Present were John W. Tippin, Chairman; Kenneth R. Macht, Vice Chairman; Fran B. Adams; and Carolyn K. Eggert. Commissioner Richard N. Bird was on vacation. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; and Barbara Bonnah, Deputy Clerk. Chairman Tippin called the meeting to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Chairman Tippin requested the addition as Item 9-A-2 of an appeal by Horizon, Inc. of a Building Code of Adjustment Board decision re the Outlet Mall presently under construction. Commissioner Macht requested the addition as Item 13-B of a Council of Public Officials' recommendation to adopt a resolution creating a Technological Task Force. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) approved the addition of the above items to today's Agenda. APPROVAL OF AIMUM The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or additions to the Minutes of the Regular Meetings of July 19, 1994 or July 26, 1994. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) approved the Minutes of the Regular Meetings of 7/19/94 and 7/26/94, as written. 1 BOOK �� f'jGE b September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 PAGE A5 CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Eggert requested that Item L be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion, and Attorney Vitunac requested that Item E be removed also. A. Report Received and Placed on file in the Office of the Board of County Commissioners: SWDD Annual Report for FY 92/93 B. Proclamation - Constitution Week PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING SEPTEMBER 17 THROUGH 23, 1994 AS CONSTITUTION WEEK IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA WHEREAS, Our Founding Fathers, in order to secure the blessings of liberty for themselves and their posterity, did ordain and establish a Constitution for the United States of America; and: WHEREAS, it is of the greatest import that all citizens fully understand the provisions and principles contained in the Constitution -in order to support, preserve and defend it against encroachment; and WHEREAS, the two hundred seventh anniversary of the signing of the Constitution provides a historic opportunity for all Americans to learn about and recall achievements of our Founders, and to reflect on the rights and privileges of citizenship, as well as its attendant responsibilities; and WHEREAS, the independence guaranteed to the American people by the Constitution should be celebrated by appropriate ceremonies and activities during Constitution Week: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the week of September 1.7 through September 23, 1994 be designated as CONSTITUTION WEEK in Indian River County, and the Board urges all citizens to pay special attention during that week to our Federal Constitution and the advantage of American Citizenship. Adopted this 6 day of September, 1994 September 6, 1994 M 2 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Jci W. Tippim j C airman -I � � s C. Annual Fire Control Report from Division of Forestry The Board reviewed the '-following letter dated 8/4/94 and report dated 7/28/94: Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services e The Capitol PI EASE RESPOND TO: BOB CRAWFORD Tallahassee COMMISSIONER 32399-0810 Division of Forestry 4330 4TH. Street FP/ANNUAL REPORT Vero Beach, FL. 32968 �5161I 18�y, August 4, 1994 �Q �• vG1g9 �,' Mr James Chandler County Administrator \S` Indian River CountyCP PQM, OEC\C� 1840 25th. Street ti Vero Beach, Fl.' 32960 Dear Mr. Chandler Each year the Division of Forestry submits an annual report to the County Commissioners for their review. I respectfully submit my annual report to•the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners. This report covers most forestry activities for the Fiscal Year 93/94. The Urban Forester will be submitting his annual report to the commission under a separate cover. I would like to be present at the Commission meeting when it is reviewed by the commissioners. If at all possible, can this item be placed on the August 30 meeting agenda, and would your office please notify me of the meeting date. If you require any additional information, or if I can answer any questions, please let me know. Sincerely Bob Crawford Comm ssioner of Agriculture Joe Spa at' ro Forest Area Supervisor (407) 778-5085 3 September 6, 1994 BOOK BOOK 93 PAGE 16 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) accepted the Annual Fire Control Report from the Division of Forestry. ANNUAL FIRE CONTROL REPORT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JULY 289-1994 As required by the Division of Forestry Fire Manual, an annual report is submitted each fall to cover the work undertaken by the Division during the past fiscal year. Currently Indian River Co. is assessed $3,079.71 for fire protection of 105,657 acres. The following is a break down of the Division activities for July 1, 1993 to June 30, 1994. A. Burning Authorizations - During the past twelve months the Division issued 1,256 authorizations, for 23,934 acres. The authorizations were for agriculture, silviculture, and limited landclearing type fires. The number of authorizations are for the entire county including the cities of Fellsmere, Sebastian,. Orchid Island, and Vero Beach. The Division of Forestry does not charge for burning authorizations or smoke complaints. B. Fires - The number of fires increased this past year from 30 to 56 fires. There was a increase in the total acreage, from 293 to 8951.2 acres. Two fire in the St. Johns marsh accounted for 8150 acres. The fires were 4500 and 3650 acres respectively. The Fire Department handled numerous fires where our assistance was not needed. These are not reflected in this report. Lightning caused fires are our leading cause of fires. C. Law Enforcement - In Indian River County we issued 12 Notice of Violations to people for illegal burning, carelessly starting a fire, or allowing their fire to escape. Suppression bills were sent to the known violators, when the Division of Forestry occurred any cost. Suppression billinggs used instead of criminal proceedings for most first time offenders. D. Fire Prevention - Fire prevention this past year was directed at adult to help reduce our fires to ZERO HUMAN CAUSED FIRE& This was accomplished by radio talk shows and by passing out material during Fire Prevention week Several'news articles relating to fire prevention and current fire situations were given to local newspapers. This next fiscal year will bring a renewed commitment to the local schools. With the purchase of the Smokey Bear 50th. birthday materials, we are committed to cover as many schools aspossible this year. The Division assisted local landowners and governmental agencies (state and county) with 14 prescribed burns for approximately 6,500 acres. E. R.C.F.P. Lease - Indian River County currently has leased from the Division one 5,000 gallon tanker. This unit is stationed at Station 70 in Sebastian. 4 September 6, 1994 F. Training - There were 4 training courses given to the Fire District. Three training sessions were primarily in the field of fire suppression and tactics. One training courses was I-220, the Incident Command System. The total number of students were 53. G. Division of Forestry Staffing = The Division of Forestry has one Forest Area Supervisor, one Urban/County Forester, four Forest Rangers, and one Fire Tower Lookout. H. Goals for F.Y. 94/95 - Our main goal is to continue to reduce our human caused fires. The use of the Incident Command System by the Division of Forestry and the Fire Department will help prepare us for an emergency or disaster if it should strike. The next year will be filled with challenges if fire predictions are correct. The continuing cooperation between the Division of Forestry and The Indian River Co. Fire District will help reduce the potential for the loss of life or property. In closing I would like to invite the county staff to call upon the Division if they need assistance with any forestry related subject. The Division of Forestry is committed to serve the citizens of Indian River County. A Traffic Impact Fee Allocation for I.R. Blvd., Phase III - Budget Amendment 024 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/30/94: TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 30, 1994 SUBJECT-* TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ALLOCATION FOR INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD PROJECT - PHASE III BUDGET AMENDMENT 024 - CONSENT AGENDA FROM: Joseph A. Baird OMB Director _ DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Under the County Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance adopted in 1985, a provision is included that states that projects which provide "capital expansion of bridge facilities and their access roads" connecting the barrier island to the mainland can be funded from all Traffic Impact Fee Districts based upon specified pereentages. Tun Davis, Public Works Director, through the attached memo, has requested that $2 million of the County costs for Phase III of the Indian River Boulevard project be funded from the Traffic Impact Fee Districts. The funding was originally provided through Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) District 5 and Fund 109 - Secondary Roads Construction Fund (i.e., Local Option and Constitutional Gas Tax). This agenda item is to request approval to reallocate the funding for a portion of the Phase III costs. This results in a reimbursement of $650,000 to the Secondary Roads Construction Fund and a reimbursement of $1,350,000 to TIF District 5. TIF District 5's final share of the funding would be $200,000. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request for the reallocation of funding and the attached budget amendment reflecting the allocation. 5 BOOK 93 F-,�ct 168 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 FA,E A69 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) approved the request for reallocation of funding and Budget Amendment 024 reflecting the allocation. TO: Members of the Board BUDGET AMENDMENT: 024 of County Commissioners FROM: Joseph A. Baird. DATE: _ August 30. 1994 - OMB Director Entry Number Funds/Department/Account Name - Account Number Increase Decrease EXPENSE 1. ROAD M PROVEIVIENT FEES District 1/Transfer Out 101-151-581-099.21 $620,000 $0 District 2/Transfer Out 101-152-581-099.21 $380,000 $0 District 3/Transfer Out 101-153-581-099.21 $160,000 $0 District 4/Transfer Out 101-154-581-099.21 $180,000 $0 District 5/Transfer Out 101-155-581-099.21 $200,000 $0 District 6/Transfer Out 101-156-581-099.21 $80,000 $0 District 7/Transfer Out 101-157-581-099.21 $80,000 $0 District S/Transfer Out 101-158-581-099.21 $200,000 $0 District 9/Transfer Out 101-159-581-099.21 $100,000 $0 REVENUE ROAD IMPROVEMENT FEES/ District 5 Transfer In 101-000-381-020.00 $1,350,000 $0 ROAD IMPROVEMENT FEES/ Cash Forward 101-000-389-040.00 $650,000 $0 REVENUE SECONDARY ROAD CONSTRUCTION/Transfer In 109-000-381-020.00 $650,000 $0 SECONDARY ROAD CONSTRUCTION/Cash Forward 109-000-389-040.00 $0 $650,000 N September 6, 1994 E. Final Plat Approval for Walkers Glen West, Unit I The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8%24/94: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Obert M. Keating AIC Community Development rector THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP Planning Director FROM: John W. McCoy, AICP /' N Senior Planner, Current Development DATE: August 24, 1994 SUBJECT: Final Plat Approval for Walkers Glen West Unit I SD -93-10-09 It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of September 6, 1994. DEVELOPMENT AND LOCATION: Walkers Glen West Unit I is a 30 lot subdivision of a ±12.8 acre parcel of land located on the south side of 26th Street just west of 54th Avenue. A second unit comprised of 26 lots on 7.66 acres is to be constructed and platted in the future. The subject property is zoned RS -6, Single Family Residential (up to 6 units per acre) and has an L-2, Low Density 2 (up to 6 units per acre) land use designation. The proposed density for this unit is 2.34 units per acre, while the proposed density for the overall subdivision is 2.73 units per acre. At its regular meeting of August 12, 1993, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted preliminary plat approval for the entire subdivision, including Unit I and Unit II. The owner, Walkers Glen West Ltd., is now requesting final plat approval and has submitted the following: 1. A final plat in conformance with the approved preliminary plat. 2. Two cost estimates, one for remaining required improvements and one for completed improvements, as follows: a. Cost estimate for upland edge plantings around lake (incomplete improvement) b. Cost estimate for all other required improvements (completed improvements) 3. A warranty and maintenance agreement for constructed, publicly dedicated improvements and a letter of credit to secure the agreement. 7 BOD!( P,�GE 170 September 6, 1994 BOOK. 93 171 4. A contract for construction of remaining required improvements (upland edge plantings) and a letter of crddit to secure the contract. _ 5. Escrow for the future paving of 22nd Street. ANALYSIS: All of the required subdivision improvements have been completed with the exception of the upland edge planting around the project lake, and paving of a portion of 22nd Street, which is adjacent to the southern boundary of the area to be platted. A contract for construction for the upland edge planting has been submitted along with a letter of credit to secure the contract. A warranty and maintenance agreement for publicly dedicated roadway improvements and a letter of credit to secure the agreement has been submitted. In addition, the applicant has submitted an escrow payment for the future paving of 22nd Street. The County Attorney's Office has approved the Warranty Maintenance Agreement, the Contract for Construction, and the format of the letters of credit. The public works department has approved the amounts of the cost estimates, the letters of credit, and the road paving escrow submittal. The utilities for the project have been approved and accepted by the City of Vero Beach. All applicable requirements regarding the final plat approval have been satisfied. Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant final plat approval for Walkers Glen West Unit I, authorize the Chairman to execute the contract for construction and the warranty/maintenance agreement, and accept the letters of credit and cash escrow submittal. Attorney Vitunac advised that because the developer presented a cash escrow after this memo was prepared, we are asking for approval of a cash escrow agreement instead. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) granted final plat approval for Walkers Glen West, Unit I; approved the contract for construction, the warranty/ maintenance agreement and cash escrow agreement, as recommended by staff. SAID CONTRACT AND AGREEMENTS -ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD 8 September 6, 1994 F. Cancellation of Outstanding Taxes on Properties Purchased for County Use The Board reviewed the T61lowing memos dated 8/19/94: TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: Lea R. Keller, CLA, County Attorney's Office THRU: Charles P. vitunac, County Attorney DATE: August 19, 1994 RE: CANCELLATION OF OUTSTANDING TABES PROPERTIES PURCHASED FOR COUNTY USE The County recently acquired some rights-of-way, and, pursuant to Section 196.28, Florida Statutes, the Board of County Commissioners is allowed to cancel and discharge any taxes owed on the portion of the property acquired for public purposes. Such cancellation must be done by resolution of the Board.with a certified copy being forwarded to the Tax Collector. REQUESTED ACTION: Board authorize the Chairman to sign the attached resolutions cancelling taxes upon lands the County recently acquired. Attachments: 2 Resolutions - (1) Parcel #17-33-39-00001-0090-00002.0 David & Elan Feldman (Tr & Individ.) R/W - Parcels #106 & 106A, 58th Avenue (2) Parcel #25-31-39-00000-1000-00006.0 Woodhouse/Werner R/W - Parcel #130, Oslo Road ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) adopted Resolutions 94-106 and 94-107, cancelling certain delinquent taxes upon publicly -owned lands, pursuant to Section 196.28, Florida Statutes. E September 6, 1994 BOOK 9 3 Fm,, E 172 r}`.J nr nor U� iCntur. 7r39 Rea R/W - 58th Avenue (Parcels 106 & 106A) Parcel #17-33-39-00001-0090-00002.0 David & Elan Feldman (Trustee & individ.) RESOLUTION NO. 94-106 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CANCELLING CERTAIN DELINQUENT TAXES UPON PUBLICLY -OWNED LANDS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 196.28, FLORIDA STATUTES. WHEREAS, section 196.28, Florida Statutes, allows. the Board of County Commissioners of each County to cancel and discharge any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, held or owned by the county or the state, upon lands heretofore or hereafter conveyed to or acquired by any agency, governmental subdivision, or municipality of the state, or the United States, for road purposes, defense purposes; recreation, reforestation, or other public use; and WHEREAS, such cancellation must be by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners, duly adopted and entered upon its minutes properly describing such lands and setting forth the public use to which the same are or will be devoted; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of a certified copy of such resolution, proper officials of the county and of the state are authorized, empowered, and directed to make proper entries upon the records to accomplish such cancellation and to do all things necessary to carry out the provisions of section 196.28, F.S.; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, against the property described in O.A. Book 1030, Page 212, which was recently acquired by Indian River County for right of way purposes on 58th Avenue, are hereby cancelled, pursuant to the authority of section 196.28, F.S. The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner -Eggert and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Adam5 . and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman John W. Tippin Aye Vice Chairman Kenneth R. Macht Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Absent Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 6 day of September , 1994. Attest: Attac ent: Deed 10 September 6, 1994 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By ' Chairman J n W. Tippin Rea R/W - Oslo Road (Parcel 130) B/Sa/94(roao\ta..aa)Vk_137 Parcel $25-33-39-00000-1000-00006.0 Woodhouse/Werner RESOLUTION NO. 94-.107 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CANCELLING CERTAIN DELINQUENT TAXES UPON PUBLICLY -OWNED LANDS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 196.28, FLORIDA STATUTES. WHEREAS, section 196.28, Florida Statutes, allows the Board of County Commissioners of each County to cancel and discharge any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, held or owned by the county or the state, upon lands heretofore or hereafter conveyed to or acquired by any agency, governmental subdivision, or municipality of the state, or the United States, for road purposes, defense purposes, recreation, reforestation, or other public use; and WHEREAS, such cancellation must 'be by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners, duly adopted and entered upon its minutes properly describing such lands and setting forth the public use to which the same are or will be devoted; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of a certified copy of such resolution, proper officials of the county and of the state are authorized, empowered, and directed to make proper entries upon the records to accomplish such cancellation and to do all things necessary to carry out the provisions of section 196.28, F.S.; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, against the property described in O.R. Book 1029, Page 2374, which was recently acquired by Indian River County for right of way purposes on Oslo Raod, are hereby cancelled, pursuant to the authority of section 196.28, F.S. The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner Fggpr} , and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Adamc , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman John W. Tippin Aye Vice Chairman Kenneth -R. Macht Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Absent Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Ayr Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 6 day of September , 1994. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Att '; : By 1'L Chairma Att�ent: Deed 11 BOOKS FhGF September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 wut- 1d 0' G. Surplus Property - Site of Dismantled Rivers Edge Water Treatment Plant The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/26/94: DATE: AUGUST 26, 1994 _ TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES SUBJECT: SURPLUS PROPERTY BACKGROUND: The Utility Department has a 80' x 80' lot in Rivers Edge Subdivision, Roseland where a water treatment plant was once located. That plant has been dismantled and the subdivision now receives water from the North County Regional Water System. The lot is excess real property. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the Board declare this property to be surplus and authorize the sale of said real property in accordance with Florida State Statue 125.35. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) declared the property surplus and authorized its sale in accordance with Florida Statute 125.35, as recommended by staff. 12 September 6, 1994 O � H. Sole Source Purchase of Alphanumeric Paging System Upgrade The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8%26/94: TO: Honorable Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Jim Chandler, County Administrator H. T. °Sonny" Dean, Director General Services FROM: Fran Boynton -Powell, Purchasing Manager DATE: August 26, 1994 SUBJECT: Sole Source Purchase of Alphanumeric Paging System Upgrade It is respectfully requested that the information contained herein be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at the meeting scheduled for September 6, 1994. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS In FY 93/94, the Board of County Commissioners approved funds in the amount of $5,700 from the general fund and $11,214 in. EMS County Award Grant funds to upgrade the county owned paging system at Hobart Tower which included the purchase of software and thirty (30) additional pagers for a total of $16,914. Bid specifications were prepared and submitted, however, after review of the bid documents, staff recommends sole source purchase of the equipment and pagers from Communications International. The upgrade will provide for alphanumeric and numeric paging while still retaining the existing voice and tone type pagers. The existing voice and tone pagers can still be used with the new system. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The staff recommendation is based on the fact that Communications International installed the original paging system and seventy-five a (75%) percent of the original GE equipment will remain with the new equipment, which is propriety to GE. To preclude replacing seventy- five percent of the existing equipment and increasing the paging system upgrade expense, staff requests the Board favorably consider the sole source purchase from the vendor referenced above.. Suggested alternatives for the Board to consider are as follows: Alternative #1 - Deny the staff recommendation and seek bids for the paging system upgrade. Alternative #2 - Approve the staff recommendation waiving bids and award the paging system upgrade to Communications International in the amount of $16,914 as recommended by staff. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board approve Alternative #2. 13 BOOK f tj September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 FAut 177 7 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) awarded the paging system upgrade to Communications International in the amount of $16,914, as recommended by staff. I. Bid #4104 - Icom Radios - Emergency Services The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/16/94: DATE: August 16, 1994 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director General Services FROM: Fran Boynton Powell, Purchasing Manager SUBJ: Award Bid #4104/Icom IC -2340H Radios (20) Emergency Services BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Bid Opening Date: Advertising Dates: Specifications Mailed to: Replies: VENDOR Amateur Electronic Supply Orlando, FL Signal Communications Boca Raton, FL TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID August 3, 1994 July 20, 27, 1994 Twenty (20) Vendors Two (2) Bids UNIT PRICE $ 619.95 $ 699.00 $ 12,399.00 SOURCE OF FUNDS Emergency Management Communications Equipment All 001-208-525-066.45. ESTIMATED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION $ 12,000.00 Staff recommends that the bid be awarded to Amateur Electronic Supply as the lowest, most responsive and responsible bidder meeting ..specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid. ' 14 September 6, 1994 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the -Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) awarded Bid #4104 to Amateur Electronic Supply in the amount of $12,399, as recommended by staff. T. Bid #4106 - State Road 60 Gravity Force Main The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/16/94: DATE: August 16, 1994 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator H.T. "Sonny" , Dean, Director ir'W General Services FROM: Fran Boynton Powell, Purchasing Manager SUBJ: Award Bid #4106/State Road 60 Gravity Force Main Utilities Department BACKGROUNr INFORMATION; Bid Opening Date: August 11, 1994 Advertising Dates: July 13,20,27,Aug 3,,-1994 Specifications Mailed to: Twenty -Five (25) Vendors Replies: Four-(,) Vend BID TAB Driveways, Inc Titusville, F1. Tim Rose Contracting Vero Beach, FL JoBear, Inc Palm Bay, FL Johnson -Davis Lantana, FL TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID or s TOTAL LUMP SUM $22,675.60 $24,918.10 $30,167.00 $33,240.00 $22,675.60 SOURCE OF FUNDS Utilities General Impact Fees ESTIMATED BUDGET RECONMMMATION $35,000.00 Staff recommends that the bid be awarded to Drivewa s Incas the lowest, most responsive and respons ble bidder meeting specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid. In addition, staff requests Board approval of the attached Agreement when all the requirements are met and approved as to form by the County Attorney. 15 September 6, 1994 BOOK W PAUE 178 8 boa 93 F,�U- F 179 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) awarded Bid 4106 to Driveways, Inc. in the amount of $22,675.60, as recommended by staff. K. Bid #4105 - Woodlawn Manor Force Main Extension The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/16/94: DATE: August 16, 1994 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THRU: James E. Chandler, County Adm'nistrator H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Directo General Services FROM: Fran Boynton Powell, Purchasing Manager #1 SUBJ: Award Bid #4105/Woodlawn Manor Force Main Extension Utilities Department BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Bid Opening Date: Advertising Dates: Specifications Mailed to: Replies: BID TAB Driveways, Inc Titusville, Fl. JoBear, Inc Palm Bay, FL TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID August 11, 1994 July 13,20,27,Aug 3, 1994 Twenty -Five (25) Vendors Two (2) Vendors TOTAL LUMP SUM $59,160.20 $82,440.00 $59,160.20 SOURCE OF FUNDS Utilities General Impact Fees ESTIMATED BUDGET RECOMMENDATION $60,500.00 Staff recommends that the bid be awarded to Driveways. Inc. as the lowest, most responsive and responsible bidder meeting specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid. In addition, staff requests Board approval of the attached Agreement when all the requirements are met and approved as to form by the County Attorney. 16 September 6, 1994 i ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the -Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) awarded Bid #4105 to Driveways, Inc. in the amount of $59,160.20, as recommended by staff. L. 1995 Holiday Schedule Commissioner Eggert felt the way the holidays are labeled on the proposed schedule may be very confusing, and asked that it be retyped showing the actual dates we are closed for specific holidays, rather than saying, for example, that Christmas Eve will be observed on December 25, and Christmas Day observed on December 26. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) approved the following revised holiday schedule for 1995. The following schedule of holidays for'i Indidn ,River County employees has been approved by the Board of County" Commissioners for 1995: Holiday County Observance New Year's Day Monday, January 2, 1995 Good Friday Friday, April 14, 1995 Memorial Day Monday, May 29, 1995 Independence Day Tuesday, July 4, 1995 Labor Day Monday, September 4, 1995 Veteran's Day Friday, November 10, 1995 Thanksgiving Day Thursday, November 23, 1995 Day after Thanksgiving Friday, November 24, 1995 Christmas Day Monday, December 25, 1995 Day after Christmas Tuesday, December 26, 1995 17 BOOK 9j F,,,E l,80 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 PnE181 Employees are eligible for holiday pay only if they are in pay status the last scheduled work day before and the first scheduled work day after a holiday. NOTE: The Property Appraiser, Supervisor of Elections, and Sheriff's offices will observe the schedule above. The Clerk of the Court will also, except that they will probably be open on December 26. In addition to the schedule above, the Tax Collector will observe Martin Luther King Day on January 16, 1995. M. Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot 15, Block 17, Vero Lake Estates, Unit No. 3 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/30/94: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator THROUGH: James W. DavisP.E Public Works Direct AND Roger D. Cain, P. County Engineer AND FROM: David B. Cox, P.E.48G Civil Engineer BIIHJECT: Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot.15, Block 17, Vero Lake Estates, Unit No. 3 REFERENCE: Project No. 94080130 DATE: August 30, 1994 CONSENT AGENDA DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Randy Hines 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 22.4 ft. N.G.V.D. In the attached letter from the applicant's engineer dated August 30, 1994, a waiver of the cut and fill balance requirement is requested. The lot area is 1.07 acres. The volume of the 100 year floodplain displaced by the proposed grading plan is estimated to be 1,102; -cubic yards. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The waiver 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. 18 September 6, 1994 Alternative No. 1 - Grant the cut and fill balance waiver based on the criteria of Section 930.07(2)(d)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. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Alternative No. 1. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) granted the cut and fill balance waiver requested for Lot 15, Block 17, Vero Lake Estates, Unit No. 3, as recommended by staff. N. Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot 10, Block 12, Vero Lake Estates, Unit No. 2 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/22/94: TO: James Chandler County Administrator THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Director ' and Roger D. Cain, P.E. JR� •'� County Engineer FROM: David B. Cox, P.Ed& Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot 10, Block 12, Vero Lake Estates, Unit No. 2 REFERENCE: Project No. 94070092 DATE: August 22, 1994 CONSENT AGENDA John Lloyd Builders 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 22.2 017 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 FAGF 18?' BOOK 93 PA,E 183 ft. N.G.V.D. In the attached letter from the applicant's engineer dated August 17, 1994, a waiver of the out and fill balance requirement is requested. The lot area is 1.08 acres. The volume of the 100 year floodplain displaced by the proposed grading plan is estimated to be 513 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(2)(d)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. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) granted the cut and fill balance waiver for Lot 10, Block 12, Vero Lake Estates, Unit No. 2, as recommended by staff. O. Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot 4, Block 24, Vero Lake Estates, Unit No. 5A The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/23/94: TO: James Chandler - County Administrator DATE: August 23, 1994 THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. �-- Public Works Director —,),L REFERENCE: Project No. 94080059 and Roger D. Cain, P.E. Cas" jaBc County Engineer FROM: David B. Cox, P.E. 48e - Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Lot 4, Block 24, Vero Lake Estates, Unit No. 5A DESCRIPTION AND CONDMONS Tozzolo Brothers 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 23.0 20 September 6, 1994 ft. N.G.V.D. In the attached letter from the applicant's engineer dated August 18, 1994, a waiver of the cut and fill balance requirement is requested: The lot area is 1.08 acres. The volume of the 100 year floodplain displaced by the proposed grading plan is estimated to be 589 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(2)(d)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. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) granted cut and fill balance waiver for Lot 4, Block 24, Vero Lake Estates, Unit No. 5A, as recommended by staff. P. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 025 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/31/94: TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners - DATE: August 31, 1994 SUBJECT: MISCELLANEOUS BUDGET AMENDMENT 025 CONSENT AGENDA FROM: Joseph6A. Bair j� OMB Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The attached budget amendment is to appropriate funding for the following: 21 Boa 93 184 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 PAGE 185 1. At their November 23, 1993 meeting the Board of County Commissioners agreed to the purchase of maintenance equipment for the Prisoner Work Force Program. The Sheriffs request was for $17,000. The total of the equipment amounts to $9,372. This entry will move the money to cover the expense. 2. This entry increases our revenues to match our expenses in the Self Insurance Fund. 3. Allocate fiords to the Fleet Management department to close the fiscal year in a positive financial position. 4. The Board of County Commissioners approved the bid from C1eanNet U.S.A. for IAQ Cleaning in the amount of $6,408 at their March 8, 1994 meeting. Funding was to come from contingencies. 5. This entry will reallocate the distribution of Gas Tax and Fund Transfers for the Transportation Fund. 6. Building and Grounds purchased a vehicle from the Property Appraiser for $3,500 to replace a vehicle in their department that was not worth repairing. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached budget amendment 025. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) approved Budget Amendment 025. 22 September 6, 1994 TO: Members of the Board BUDGET AMENDMENT: 025 of County Commissioners FROM: JosephA. Bai DATE: August 31. 1994 OMB Director Entry Number Funds/Department/Account Name Account Number Increase Decrease 1. EXPENSE $3,500 $0 GENERAL FUND/Reserve for Contin en GENERAL FUND/SHERIFF Expendable Tools 001-600-521-035.26 $2,560 $0 Other Machinery & Equipment 001-600.521-066.49 $6,812 $0 Reserve for Contingency 001-199-581-099.91 $0 $9,372 2. REVENUE SELF INSURANCE FUND/Workees Comp. 502-000-395-023.00 $350,000 $0 EXPENSE' SELF INSURANCE FUND/Insurance Claims 502-246-523-034.58 $350,000 $0 3. REVENUE FLEET MANAGEMENT/Funds Transfer In 501-000.381-020.00 $50,000 $0 Auto Maintenance 501-000.395-010.00 $0 $50,000 EXPENSE' TRANSPORTATION FUND/Road & Bridge Funds Transfer Out 111-199-581-099.21 $50,000 $0 Paving Materials 111-214-541-035.31 $0 $50,000 4. EXPENSE GENERAL FUND/Building & Grounds Other Professional Services 001-220-519-033.19 $6,408 $0 Reserve for Contingency 001-199-581-099.91 $0 $6,408 5. REVENUE , SECONDARY ROAD CONSTRUCTION— FUND/Constitutional Gas Tax 109-000-335-042.00 $0 $198,934 Cash Forward - 109-000-389-040.00 $198,934 $0 TRANSPORTATION FUND/Constitutional Gas Tax 111-000-335-042.00 $198,934 $0 Funds Transfer In 111-000-381-020.00 $0 $198,934 EXPENSE GENERAL FUND/Funds Transfer Out 001-199-581-099.21 $0 $79,574 Cash Forward 001-199-581-099.92 $79,574 $0 MSTU/Funds Transfer Out 004-199-581-099.21 $0 $119,360 MSTU/Cash Forward 004-199-581-099.92 .$119,3601 $0 6. EXPENSE _ • GENERAL FUND/Building & Grounds Automotive 001-220-519-066.42 $3,500 $0 GENERAL FUND/Reserve for Contin en 001-199-581-099.91 $0 $3,5001 September 6, 1994 23 BOOK 93 PAGE 186 E BOOK 93 F�, )E 1 8 7 Q. Permission to Interfund Borrow Money for Courthouse and Land Acquisition The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/31/94: TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: August 31, 1994 SUBJECT: PERNIISSION TO INTERFUND BORROW MONEY FOR COURTHOUSE AND LAND ACQUISITION - CONSENT AGENDA FROM: JosephA. Baird OMB Director - DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Staff is requesting permission to interfund borrow money on a short term basis as needed for Funds 315 - Optional Sales Tax and 125 - Land Acquisition RECOMMENDATION The Board of County Commissioners grant staff permission to interfund borrow money on a short term basis as needed for the Optional Sales Tax Fund and Land Acquisition Fund. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) granted staff permission to interfund borrow money on a short term basis as needed for the Optional Sales Tax Fund and Land Acquisition Fund. HERBERT STURM REOUEST TO ADDRESS COMMISSION RE PERFORMANCE OF STATE ATTORNEY AND ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY Mr. Herbert G. Sturm, 549 Sanders Street, Sebastian, read aloud the following letter dated 8/29/94: 24 September 6, 1994 P eti i V, Ln , (/ _ ,,-„a'•'','' N�ocg6A.l W ' l/,yu X994 Ln �..G'�sq�/►1.t.P.ae�►wf-� • %'� /�iUF-yll��I,�t�Y��-t.L� i -u ,b6' jt�tt� ,4 c /,e47, -L PCZ • XL�t4L VL mow. &-nA- JA.14 o 2 - . � /730 -A4 4 awd -eA-� J" jot- ,66 a . September 6, 1994 C 3 P 9SS n 0 25 MOK 93 FAGS 188 I BOOK 93 PAGE 189 Mr. Sturm advised that his request is to complain about the unsatisfactory service given by the assistant state attorneys for Indian River County. His phone calls to them are never answered, and he felt an investigation by a grand jury is warranted. However, he was told that there is no need to convene a grand jury on this matter. He always had thought it was up to the grand jury to decide whether or not to convene. County Attorney Charles Vitunac advised that the Board of County Commissioners has no jurisdiction over the State Attorney's Office, and Chairman Tippin advised Mr. Sturm that he has the option of hiring a private attorney to pursue this matter. Mr. Sturm emphasized that he just wanted to make the Commission aware that we are not getting our money's worth out of the tax dollars going to the State Attorney's Office. APPEAL OF BUILDING CODE BOARD DECISION - OUTLET MALL The Board reviewed the following memo letter dated 9/2/94: Please be advised that I represent Horizon Inc. Please accept this letter as the initiation of an Appeal pursuant to Section 100.06, Indian River County code, from the decision rendered August 15, 1994, in the above -referenced matter. 26 September 6, 1994 !c, RAUPin L. EvANs APTonNSY AT LAW 0LTI 2920 CARDINAL DRIVE - P. O. BOX 3247 VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32964 �i Ca cb;: TEL (407) 231-1800 - FAX (407) 231-2612 ` rr September 2, 1994 Board of County Commissioners �w + •� ..`."' C/O Charles Vitunac, County Attorney County Commission Building--�- Vero Beach, FL 32960 ¢'` `" - •-----�•-•--� RE: CASE JF2 IRC 94-10 C� 'rr �'>:i �• _,��� IRC BUILDING CODE��:� �v��=• . BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS 0018, _ - �-�� - - HORIZON INC. APPLICATION FOR USE OF ALTERNATE METHOD OUTLETS AT VERO BEACH Dear Mr. Vitunac: Please be advised that I represent Horizon Inc. Please accept this letter as the initiation of an Appeal pursuant to Section 100.06, Indian River County code, from the decision rendered August 15, 1994, in the above -referenced matter. 26 September 6, 1994 M M This Appeal is based upon the board's interpretation of the applicable statute in a manner inconsistent with its historical application in Indian River county. Additionally, the proposed construction, by definition, meets the requirements of the code. As I mentioned to you, -I `would appreciate being given the opportunity to hear this appeal on Tuesday, September 6. I will be present at the county commission meeting on that date with the expectation that the board will consent to placing this item on its agenda. Thank you for your kind attention. Very truly yours, RAL H L. EVANS Attorney Vitunac advised that Title I of the County Code provides for an appeal from any board or commission to the Board of County Commissioners unless there is a specific method of appeal elsewhere in the Code. The Building Board of Adjustment and Appeals is one of the boards that does not have a specific appeal listed in the Code; therefore, under this catch-all appeal, an appellant has a right to come before the Board _of County Commissioners to contest a decision by the Building Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Attorney Evans, representing Horizon, Inc., has met the 2 -day filing period and the County Commission has 20 days to respond. This is only the third day of the response time, but because of the gravity of the situation, Attorney Evans wanted to come before the Board as soon as possible. The request to add it to today's Agenda received unanimous approval. This is an official appeal and the Board is sitting as the Board of County Commissioners as an appellant body of a decision by a lower board. Attorney Ralph Evans, representing Horizon, Inc., displayed a site plan of the outlet mall under construction, while Planning staff showed an overhead slide of the site plan. He noted that Bill Brown and Roy Brice from Horizon, Inc. are here today to answer any questions the Board may have. 27 BOOK 93 F>vcE190 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 PAGE 191 MA !i-81 \w �`"` . �,a�. o m S � —— Attorney Evans emphasized that Horizon has worked hand in hand with the County and State on every step of the way on this site and in obtaining 26 permits. Buildings A, B, D and F are at the point of construction where tenant improvements are being made and the other buildings shown are in the second phase of construction. He noted that a connective building is planned between Buildings D and F sometime in 1995. They anticipate a completion date on the first phase sometime prior to December 1, 1994. Attorney Evans explained that the reason for today's appeal is the requirement placed upon the stores with less than 4,000 square feet to provide a public toilet with direct access. Pre - construction meetings were held, and this building received a Certificate of Occupancy in the shell form in anticipation of tenant improvements. Every space in the 4 buildings has a toilet facility constructed and -in place. In addition, Buildings B and F have public facilities accessible from the outside. Apparently, the oversight in the toilet facilities resulted from Section 922 of the Plumbing Code which states: "Every building and each subdivision thereof intended for public use shall be provided with public facilities in accordance with this chapter. Facilities shall be directly accessible to the public through direct openings or corridor areas to the areas they are intended to serve." 28 September 6, 1994 M M M Attorney Evans maintained that there are sufficient toilet facilities to serve the site, but the problem is their accessibility. Unfortunately., this matter was never brought up, or overlooked, during the pre -construction hearings when efforts could have been made to accommodate the accessibility requirements. He suggested that the language included in Section 922 regarding "direct accessibility" does not take into account the physiological accessibility in the smaller stores when people read a sign saying that they can use the toilet upon request. Commissioner Eggert understood that this project is considered an outside mall and the public facilities accessed from the outside cannot be counted in meeting the requirements, but she wondered if there is any flexibility with direct access being through a natural walkway through a stockroom to the toilet at the back of a smaller store if the walkway is wide enough to satisfy the Americans With Disabilities Act. Building Director Ester Rymer advised that 'staff felt that the code was very specific and that direct access could not be through a stock room. We did contact Southern Building Code Congress International, who publishes the Standard Plumbing Code adopted by Indian River County, and received the following letter.: aetl NJ :r1" f:innd�rd for L4606 Come Mr. Wu)mlL- R. Ruch, C.B.U. Assistant Director Indiull River County Huilding Departmont 1840 25th Strcct VCni rit:tiell, Fluiitla 32960 (t'AX 407/770-5095) Re: 1991 Standard Plumbing CX,de 922.2.2 September 2, 1994 Southern Building Code Congress International Inc. - Pmoldent and Chairmen of Ow board Veorpe t. Walker, G,0.0. Ctvildi^Q Ofliolal Wnro. Texas Vice President Jimmy T. Pollard, G.t).o 8u•lding MIu:ial Opelika, Alabama Board of Direwwr• Nick D'Andrea, C.9 0 Mansper. In6pectional Ser, Division! Tampa, Florida 1),;ar Mr. Russ: winiAm i flack. Jr., C.B.n. Chief of Inspeetiom ane This is in response to your letter of September Z requesting an Code Enlorcament biviaton p y opinion from S11(;C:1 staK Colurrtt,wi, o•oryia concerning required minimum plumbing facilities in to "amp -type" multi -tenant "outlet mall". 29 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 P.1GE 1.9 J boa W PAUE193 When weather-protceled access is nut provided from each tenant space to public facilities within a reacnnsihle distanec. it is my opinion that the requirt;4 facilities must be provided in each tenant space. I-ur public ure, "direct uccum" would not be nchieved by travel frrtm lite retnil sales floor through a stcockroam to thu toilet facility whuthur such access is supervir-ed or not. In order to tote "dijtctly accenaiblc_to the public through direct openings or corridors from the area or arcaa dicy urn intended to serve", thcrc must be clearly marked doors openinc directly from the retail sales fkxx to each facility us to a curriduor loading to each facility. We are pleased to provide you with the opinions stated Urcia. Iiuwt:vw, it 11lu uld be noted that the final interpretation of the lode is the reVonsibiiity of the ituml bulldittg official. Yours► truly, ", 01. William W. Arnold. Jr., WAR AIA Architect ■ Training Services Gail Graves, C.9 0 Chief Building Official Alchardson, Tootim Douglas M. Smits, C.B.O. Director, Public Servic© Chief Budding+lre UT11cial Chartoston, uvudi Cwoli►w Vaughn P. Wicker, C.D.0 Building Codes Administ,at, Greenville. Sut1111 Gehl" •d Immediate Past President J. Lee Hauser, P E., C-5.0. Deputy commissioner N.C.Deportmont of Incuran Flnleigh. North Carolina Chief txacullve Officer William J. Tanyre, r'.t;. Headquarters Office 000 Montclair Road Damirtyhnsn, Alabama 35213-1206 1 203591-1963 Fax: 205-592-7001 Couthweet Raplonal Office 3355 Bole Coves Road Suite 202 Aui111-1, Tense 70746.6673 S19-377•A97A Fax: 512-327-8286 suutiwaet Rogionsl C114Ire 4,303 Vineland Road Suite F-7 Qrlando, Florioa 32611 Lengthy discussion ensued regarding the definition of a walkway versus a corridor, and Commissioner Macht believed that if there is an unobstructed means of access to a rest room, it would satisfy the direct access requirement. Commissioner Macht asked if the Board determines today that a corridor is indeed a walkway and not necessarily divided by a masonry separation, that definition would be applied to all future buildings. Attorney Vitunac confirmed that a decision to that effect would set precedent. It was Commissioner Macht Is opinion that the direct access requirement would be met if there is an unobstructed means of access to a rest room. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, :that the Board establish a policy that a rest room must be directly accessible by a corridor that is defined as a walkway sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the ADA and the -Southern Building -Code. 30 September 6, 1994 -I E7 Under discussion, Director Rymer emphasized that this is an appeal of a decision by the Building Code' of Adjustment Appeals. She pointed out that the applicant did not meet the intent of the code by the alternate method proposed. Actually, it goes a little bit further than just talking about direct access. A significant part of the issue was that there was never intent for facilities in the smaller stores to be open to the public. The developer provided public facilities in remotely located areas of the center in Buildings B and F. The rest rooms in the smaller tenant spaces were primarily designed for employee use only, but when we told the developer that the other facilities did not satisfy the requirements, they came back with the idea of having the rest rooms accessed through the stockroom by permission only and in a supervised manner. The Building Code of Adjustment and Appeals decided that the applicant was not entitled to any kind of relief on this. Commissioner Macht didn't know how any of that affected his Motion on the floor, and Chairman Tippin explained that we are under discussion of the Motion. Commissioner Adams disagreed with Attorney Evans' statement that accessibility is physiological; she believed it is physical. However, she didn't understand how this project differs from an enclosed mall where we allow public facilities to satisfy the requirements, and Director Rymer explained that in a covered mall you do not have to go outside to use the public' rest rooms. In this case, the public facilities in Buildings B & F are 600-700 feet apart and only accessible from the outside. Commissioner Macht understood there is a portico outside the building, but Director Rymer explained that all the buildings are not connected. Commissioner Adams felt the distance to walk to Buildings B & F would be similar to covered malls where the public facilities tend to be out of the way. However, she was concerned about increased liability and security by requiring the small stores to provide public access to their toilets. There are obstructions in stockrooms, and apparently that is the reason Director Rymer wants a corridor leading to the rest rooms. She felt we do put undue stress on small companies trying to make it in.a big world. Commissioner Macht felt we are talking as if the main reason people go to an outlet mall is to go to the rest rooms rather than to shop. Chairman Tippin felt the intent of the law is always good, but there is a limit. He felt we could survive with 50-60 public 31 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 PAGUE 1,.14 nox 93 pnl:195 toilets out there without requiring the developer to cut through the small spaces to create a corridor. Attorney Evans explained that all the stores with more than 4,000 square feet have a dedicated corridor leading to toilets that can be used by the public. Those toilets are in addition to the public facilities in Buildings B and F. He emphasized that there are 162 toilets/urinals designated in the project. Commissioner Eggert was concerned about speaking to the future on this issue. She wondered if we might say that we somehow feel that this mall would function just like an indoor shopping center, and, therefore, should be treated that way. Commissioner Macht suggested that he withdraw his Motion and frame a new Motion in the context of granting the appeal and directing staff to do a policy review. COMMISSIONERS MACHT AND EGGERT WITHDREW THEIR MOTION ON THE FLOOR. ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) granted the appeal by Horizon, Inc. and requested staff to do a policy review and bring it back to the Board. PUBLIC HEARING - GUNTER REQUEST TO REZONE APPROX. 30.55 ACRES FROM AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT The hour of 9:05 A. M. having passed,.the County Attorney announced that this Public Hearing has been properly advertised, as follows: 32 September 6, 1994 M VERO BEACN PRESS -JOURNAL Publistied Dally Vero Sancti, Indian Rhw 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 aIVero Beach In Indian Rhw County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being In tiro matter ofd in the Court, was pub• llahed In said newspaperto the ieeues o Afflant further says that the Said Vero Beach Pres"oumal 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 Wase mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian Rider 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 nelthei paid nor promised any person. firm or corpntLotf. any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this "'PSJ nVubticadon in the said newspaper. // mbefonWns the day oH�//,,..:�'� L��D.19 4,/ :A ? ° : •.� y.' ?7 My Comm. rid atneas Manager) Jere 29,1997 > am.d ymnxa. W camma.on t+r+.lw za,,tY Na CC=72 : ' .° cOAetli81pn kt bw. CC300672 MONW. nRRBAM G SPRAGUE September 6, 1994 33 NOTICE — MUC HEARING t�tice of hearing to consider the adoption of a AgnOul- tural county isotri�ct�IG, rezGw al Irx>ustrW D lard from: A-1, ract, The Sub1ect Property is Presently owned by David Ed- ward Gunter, Afx;e J. Gunter, Leonard SSM and Sandra Stawara. The sib properly is ID- C W mfttely 600 feet South of 9th Street, approximately V2 Of a mile west of 74th Avenue, and contains approximately 30.55 acres. Thetion Of SecdectoPmperly hes In the nortf>w8St 14 Sec - and Marg in Indian River County, Florida. 50wnship 33S, Range �� lying and ddA public shell at which parties In interest and Opportunity to be heard, will be Held by the Board of County of Indian SM Chambers h• F�da, in rite Comfy Cormrds- tration Build - Ing, located at 1840 25 Sthe �tA Vnero Beach, Flor- ida on Tuesday, September 6,1994 at 9:05 am. The Board of County Ccnun&. otters may adopt another zoning district, other than the district re_ quested, provided it is within the same general use category. Anyone who may wish to appeal any d8c ision which may be made at this meeting win need to en. sum that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which includes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. Anyone who reeds a Special accommodation for this meet must axttact the County's Americans with extension � test 48 In Coordinator at of meeting. Indian River County Board of Counttyy Commissioners By:-S,Iohn W. Tlppin, Chairman Aug. 16, 1994 1123408 BOOK 93 PAGE 1196 BOOK 93 PAGE 19 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/26/94: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator " ;DE7TMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE o er M. Kea in IC Community Develop Lt rector THRU:a Sawn Rohani, AICDs, " Chief, Long -Range Planning FROM: John Wachtel/�v) Senior Planner, Long -Range Planning DATE: August 26, 1994 - RE: DAVID GUNTER AND OTHERS REQUEST TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 30.55 ACRES FROM A-1 TO IG (RZON 94-05-0136) It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of September 6, 1994. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS This is a request to rezone the southern 30.55 acres of an approximately 40 acre parcel from A-1, Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres) to IG, General Industrial District. The northern 9.45 acres of the 40 acre.parcel are currently zoned IG. Running from Oslo Road (9th Street, S.W.), south to 13th Street, S.W., the 40 acre parcel is approximately one-half of a mile west of 74th Avenue. The subject property is owned by David Edward Gunter, Alice J. Gunter, Leonard Stawara, and Sandra Stawara. The purpose of this request is to secure the necessary zoning to develop the site with industrial uses. On July 14, 1994, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend that the Board. of County Commissioners approve this request to rezone the subject property to IG. Existing Land Use Pattern The subject property, zoned A-1, consists almost entirely of citrus groves. The county landfill, also zoned A-1, abuts the subject property on the south. West of the site, adjacent land is zoned A- 1 and is used for a citrus grove and a tree farm. A vacant field, zoned IG, abuts the site's northern boundary. East of the site, on IG zoned land, is a large tract of land consisting of a pump assembly, testing plant, and wooded areas. Future Land Use Pattern The subject property, and properties to the north, east, and west are designated-C/I, Commercial/Industrial on the future land use map. Land to the south is -designated PUB,. Public Facilities, on 34 September 6, 1994 the future land use map. The PUB designation permits various public facilities and services. Environment With the exception of two small isolated vegetative areas, the subject property is developed as a citrus .grove. Portions of the site lie within Flood Zone "A" as shown on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map. Located within a 100 -year floodplain, Flood Zone "A" is a special flood hazard area for which no base flood elevation has been determined. Utilities and Services Located within the Urban Service Area of the.county, potable water is available to the site from the South County Reverse Osmosis Plant, while wastewater is available from the West County Wastewater Treatment Plant. Transportation System Oslo Road (9th Street, S.W.) and 13th Street, S.W. provide access to the subject property. Oslo Road is a two-lane paved road with 60 feet of existing public road right-of-way and is classified as an urban principal arterial on the future roadway thoroughfare plan map. This segment of Oslo Road is programmed for expansion to 80 feet of public road right-of-way by 2010. The portion of 13th Street, S.W. that abuts the subject property is a two-lane unpaved road with 30 feet of existing public road right- of-way and is classified as a collector on the future roadway thoroughfare plan map. This segment of 13th Street, S.W. is programmed for expansion to 60 feet of public road right-of-way by 2010. ANALYSIS In this section, an analysis_ of the reasonableness of the application will be presented. The analysis will include a description of: _ • concurrency of public facilities; • compatibility with the surrounding area; • consistency with the comprehensive plan; and • potential impact on environmental quality. Concurrency of Public Facilities This site is located within the county Urban Service Area, an area deemed suited for urban scale development. The Comprehensive Plan establishes standards for: -Transportation,. Potable Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage and Recreation (Future Land Use Policy 3.1). The adequate provision of these services is necessary to ensure the continued quality of life enjoyed by the community. The Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations (LDRs) also require that new development be reviewed to ensure that the minimum acceptable standards for these services and facilities are maintained. 35 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 FADE 800K 93 FADE 199 Policy 3.2 of the Future Land Use Element states that no development shall be approved unless it is consistent with the concurrency management system component of the Capital Improvements Element. For rezoning requests, conditional concurrency review is required. Conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility with respect to a proposed project. Since rezoning requests are not projects, county regulations call for the concurrency review to be based upon the most intense use of the subject property based upon the requested zoning district. For commercial and industrial rezoning requests, the most intense use (according to the county's LDRs) is retail commercial with 10,000 square feet of gross floor area per acre of land proposed for rezoning. The site information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows: 1. Size of Area to be Rezoned:- ±30.55 acres 2. Existing Zoning District: _ A-11 Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres) 3. Proposed Zoning District: 4. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Existing Zoning District: IG, General Industrial District 6 Dwelling Unit (DU) 5. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Proposed Zoning District: 305,500 sq. ft. of Retail Commercial (Shopping Center in the 5th Edition ITE Manual) - Transportation A review of the traffic impacts that would result from the most intense development of the property under the proposed zoning district indicates that the existing level of service "D" or better on Oslo Road. would be lowered. The site information used for determining traffic is as follows: Existing Zoning District (A-1) 1. Residential Use Identified in 5th Edition ITE Manual: Single - Family 2. Average Weekday Trip Ends: 6 DU X 9.55 trip ends/DU = 57 3. P.M. Peak Hour Trip ends: 6 DU X 1.O1*trip/DU = 6 Proposed Zoning District (IG) 1. Retail Commercial use .Identified in 5th Edition ITE Manual: Shopping Center 2. For 305,500 square footstructures: a. Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends: 46.81/1000 gross sq. ft'. b. 5-6 p.m Peak Hour Vehicle Trip Ends: 4.4/1000`gross sq. ft. M September 6, 1994 _I 3. Formula for Determining Total New Trip Ends: Total Square Footage X- Vehicle Trip Rate X Percentage New Trips (trip distribution based on a Modified Gravity Model) a. Total Average Weekday Trip Ends: 305,500 X 46.81/1000 = 14,300 b. Total P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Season Trip Ends: 305,500 X 4.4/1000 = 1,344 c. Percentage New Trip Ends: 63 percent d. New Total Average Weekday Trip Ends: 0.63 X 14,300 = 9,009 e. New P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Season Trip Ends: 0.63 X 1,344 = 847 - Inbound: 50 percent of 847 = 423.5 - Outbound: 50 percent of 847 = 423.5 4. Peak Direction of Oslo Road from 82nd Avenue to 58th Avenue: Eastbound 5. Traffic Capacity on Oslo Road from 82nd Avenue -to 58th Avenue at a Level of Service "D": 600 peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips 6. Existing Traffic volume on this segment of Oslo Road: 198 peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips The number of Average Weekday Trip Ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the existing zoning is 57. This was determined by multiplying the 6 DU (most intense use) by ITE's single-family residential factor of 9.55 Average Daily Trip Ends/DU. The number of peak hour/peak season/peak direction trip ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the existing zoning is 6. This was determined by multiplying 6 DU (most intense use) by ITE's single-family residential factor of 1.01 peak hour trip ends/DU. The number of Average Weekday Trip Ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the requested zoning is 14,300. This was determined by multiplying 305,500 square feet of shopping center use. (most intense use) by ITE's shopping center factor of 46.81 Average Weekday Trip Ends/1000 square feet. The number of peak hour/peak season/peak direction trip ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the requested zoning is 1,344. This was determined by multiplying 305,500 square feet of shopping center use (most intense use) by ITE's factor of 4.4 peak hour trip ends/1000 square feet. The ITE has determined that 63 percent of the trip ends associated with shopping center development are new trip ends. Therefore, 63 percent of the 14,300 Average Weekday Trip Ends, or 91009, would be new. Similarly, 63 percent, or 847, of the 1,344 P.M. Peak Hour Trip Ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the requested zoning would be new. According to ITE, '50 percent, or 424, Trip Ends would be outbound, and -50 Therefore, the most intense use of the 37 September 6, 1994 of the New P.M. Peak Hour percent would be inbound. subject property under the BOOK P4E 2'00 800K 93 NaGE2- 01 requested zoning would generate 424 new p.m. peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips. This is 418 more than the six trips generated by the most intense use of the subject property under the present zoning. Using a modified gravity model and a hand assignment, the peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips generated by the proposed use were then assigned to impacted roads on the network. Impacted roads are defined in section 910.09(4)(b)3 of the county's LDRs as roadway segments which receive five percent or more of the project traffic or fifty or more of the project trips, whichever is less. Capacities for all roadway segments in Indian River County are calculated and updated annually, utilizing the latest and best available peak season traffic characteristics and applying Appendix G methodology as set forth in the Florida Department of Transportation Level of Service Manual. Available capacity is the total capacity less existing and committed traffic volumes; this is updated daily based upon vesting associated with project approvals. The traffic capacity for the segment of Oslo Road adjacent to this site is 600 trips (peak hour/peak-season/peak direction) at a Level of Service (LOS) "D", while the existing traffic volume on this segment of Oslo Road is 198 trips (peak hour/peak season/peak direction). The additional 424 peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips created by the most intense development of the proposed zoning district would increase the total peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips for this segment of Oslo Road to approximately 622, or 22 more than capacity at LOS "D". The table below identifies each of the impacted roadway segments associated with this rezoning request. As indicated in this table, segment 2530E currently does not have sufficient capacity at LOS "D" to accommodate the projected traffic associated with the request. However, the applicant has entered into a developer's agreement with the county which states that the developer agrees to make the necessary improvements to segment 2530E to provide the additional capacity required to maintain LOS "D" on that roadway at the time of development. The execution of this agreement satisfies the transportation concurrency requirement for this request. TRAFFIC CONCURRENCY DETERMINATION Impacted Road Segments (peak hour/peak season/peak direction) Segment Roadway Segment Road From To Capacity LOS "D" 161ON S.R. AlA S. County Line S..VB City Lmt. 1320 10105 S.R. AlA S. County Line S. VB City Lmt. 1320 1020N S.R. AlA S. VB city Lmt. 17th Street 1320 1020S S.R. AIA S. VB City Lmt. 17th Street 1320 1040N S.R. AlA S.R. 60 N. VB City Lmt. 1120 10405 S.R. AlA 17th Street S.R. 60 1120 1050N S.R. AIA S.R. 60- Fred Tuerk Road 1240 10505 S.R. AlA S.R. 60 Fred Tuerk Road 1240 1090N S.R. AlA C.R. 51Q N. County Line 1340 1090S S.R. AlA C.R.6. 510 . N. County Line 1340 111ON IRB 4th'St. & U.S. 1 12th Street 1770 11105 IRB 4th St. & U.S. 1 12th Street 1770 1120N IRB 12th Street S. VB City Lmt. 1770 11205 IRB 12th Street. - S. VB City Lmt. 1770 1130N IRB - S. VB City Lmt. 17th Street 1770 11305 IRB S. VB City Lmt. 17th Street 1770 1220N I-95 C.A. 512 S.R. 60 3530 12205 I-95 -C.R. 512 S.R. 60 3530 1230N I-95 C.R. 512 Oslo Road 2710 12305 I-95 C.R. 512 Oslo Road 2710 38 September 6, 1994 M 39 September 6, 1994 8OOK 93 PAGE 202 Segment Roadway Capacity Segment Road From To LOS "D" 1240N I-95 Oslo Road S. County Line 2710 12405 I-95 Oslo Road S.'County Line 2710 1305N U.S. 1 S. -County Line Oslo Road 2300 13055 U.S. 1 S. County Line Oslo Road 2300 1310N U.S. 1 Oslo Road 4th St. & I.R. Blvd 2220 13105 U.S. 1 Oslo Road 4th St. & I.R. Blvd 2220 1340N U.S. 1 S.R. 60 Royal Palm Place 2300 1340S U.S. 1 S.R. 60 Royal Palm Place 2300 1345N U.S. 1 Royal Palm Place Atlantic Blvd. 2300 13455 U.S. 1 Royal Palm Place Atlantic Blvd. 2300 1350N U.S. 1 Atlantic Blvd. N. VB City Lmt. 2300 13505 U.S. 1 Atlantic Blvd. N. VB City Lmt. 2300 1910E S.R. 60 C.R. 512 I-95 540 1910W S.R. 60 C.R. 512 I-95 540 1915E S.R. 60 I-95 82nd Avenue 1680 1915W S.R. 60 I-95 82nd Avenue 1680 1920E S.R. 60 82nd Avenue 66th Avenue 1760 1920W S.R. 60 82nd Avenue 66th Avenue 1760 1930E S.R. 60 58th Avenue 43rd Avenue 2650 1930W S.R. 60 58th Avenue 43rd Avenue 2650 1935E S.R. 60 43rd Avenue 27th Avenue 2650 1935W S.R. 60 43rd Avenue 27th Avenue 2650 1940E S.R. 60 27th Avenue 20th Avenue 2330 1940W S.R. 60 27th Avenue 20th Avenue 2330 1945E S.R. 60 20th Avenue Old Dixie Hwy. 2328 1945W S.R. 60 20th Avenue Old Dixie Hwy. 2348 1950E S.R. 60 Old Dixie Hwy 10th Avenue 2328 1950W S.R. 60 Old Dixie Hwy 10th Avenue 2328 1955E S.R. 60 10th Avenue U.S. 1 2328 1955W S.R. 60 10th Avenue U.S. 1 2328 1960E S.R. 60 U.S. 1 I.R. Blvd. 2328 1960W S.R. 60 U.S. 1 I.R. Blvd. 2328 1965E S.R. 60 I.R. Blvd. ICWW 1520 1965W S.R. 60 I.R. Blvd. ICWW 1520 1970E S.R. 60 ICWW S.R. AlA 1520 1970W S.R. 60 ICWW S.R. AlA 1520 2120E 17th Street I.R. Blvd. S.R. AIA 1770 212OW 17th Street I.R. Blvd. S.R. AlA 1770 2220E 12th Street 58th Avenue 43rd Avenue 830 2220W 12th Street 58th Avenue 43rd Avenue 830 2230E 12th Street 43rd Avenue 27th Avenue 830 2230W 12th Street 43rd Avenue 27th Avenue 830 2240E 12th Street 27th Avenue 20th Avenue 830 2240W 12th Street 27th Avenue 20th Avenue 830 2250E 12th Street 20th Avenue Old Dixie Hwy. 830 225OW 12th Street 20th Avenue old Dixie Hwy. 830 2260E 12th Street Old.Dixie Hwy. U.S. 1 1770 2260W 12th Street Old Dixie Hwy. U.S. 1 1770 b 2305N Old Dixie Hwy. S. County Line Oslo Road 830 23055 Old Dixie Hwy. S. County Line Oslo Road 830 2410N 27th Avenue S. County -Line Oslo Road 830 2410S 27th Avenue S. Count Line Oslo Road 830 2420N 27th Avenue Oslo Road 4th Street 830 24205 27th Avenue Oslo Road 4th Street 830 2530E Oslo Road 82nd Avenue 58th Avenue 600 253OW Oslo Road 82nd Avenue 58th Avenue 600 2540E Oslo Road 58th Avenue 43rd Avenue 830 2540N Oslo Road 58th Avenue 43rd Avenue 830 2550E Oslo Road 43rd Avenue '27th Avenue 830 2550W Oslo Road 43rd Avenue 27th Avenue 830 2560E Oslo Road 27th Avenue 20th Avenue 830 2560W Oslo Road 27th Avenue 20th Avenue 830 2570E Oslo Road 20th Avenue Old Dixie Hwy. 830 257OW Oslo Road 20th Avenue Old Dixie Hwy. 830 2580E Oslo Road Old Dixie Hwy. U.S. 1 830 2580W Oslo Road Old Dixie Hwy. U.S. 1 830 2903N 43rd Avenue S. County Line Oslo Road 690 29055 43rd Avenue S. County Line Oslo Road 690 2910N 43rd Avenue Oslo Road. 4th Street 690 29105 43rd Avenue Oslo Road 4th Street 690 2915N 43rd Avenue 4th Street 8th Street 690 29155 43rd Avenue 4th Street 8th Street 690 2920N 43rd Avenue _ 8th Street 12th Street 690 29205 43rd Avenue 8th Street 12th Street 690 39 September 6, 1994 8OOK 93 PAGE 202 BOOK 93 PAGE -03 Existina Demand Total Available Positive Roadway Existing —Ve—s-t-e-3 Segment Segment Project Concurrency Segment Volume Volume Demand Capacity Demand Determination 101ON 184 144 328. Segment Roadwayy 10105 264 133 Capacity Segment Road From To LOS "D" 2930N 43rd Avenue 16th Street S.R. 60 830 29305 43rd Avenue 16th Street S.R. 60 830 2935N 43rd Avenue S.R. 60 26th Street 830 29355 43rd Avenue S.R. 60 26th Street 830 3005N 58th Street Oslo Road 4th Street 600 30055 58th Street Oslo Road 4th Street 600 3010N 58th Avenue 4th Street 8th Street 690 30105 58th Avenue 4th Street 8th Street 690 3015N 58th Avenue 8th Street 12th Street 630 30158 58th Avenue 8th Street 12th Street 630 3020N 58th Avenue 12th Street 16th Street 630 30205 58th Avenue 12th Street 16th Street 630 3025N 58th Avenue 16th Street S.R. 60 830 30255 58th Avenue 16th Street S.R. 60 830 3030N 58th Avenue S.A. 60 41st Street 830 30305 58th Avenue S.R. 60 41st Street 830 3035N 58th Avenue 41st Street 45th Street 630 30355 58th Avenue 41st Street 45th Street 630 3040N 58th Avenue 45th Street 49th Street 630 30405 58th Avenue 45th Street 49th Street 630 3045N 58th Avenue 49th Street 65th Street 650 3045S 58th Avenue 49th Street 65th Street 650 3050N 58th Avenue 65th Street 69th Street 630 30505 58th Avenue 65th Street 69th Street 630 0 3055N 58th Avenue 69th Street C.R. 510 650 30555 58th Avenue 69th Street C.R. 510 650 3120N 66th Avenue S.R. 60 26th Street 630 3120S 66th Avenue S.R. 60 26th Street 630 3130N 66th Avenue 26th Street 41st Street 630 31305 66th Avenue 26th Street 41st Street 630 3140N 66th Avenue 41st Street 45th Street 630 3140S 66th Avenue 41st Street 45th Street 630 3310N 82nd Avenue Oslo Rd. 4th Street 630 33105 82nd Avenue Oslo Rd. 4th Street 630 3320N 82nd Avenue 4th Street 12th Street 630 3320S 82nd Avenue 4th Street 12th Street 630 3330N 82nd Avenue 12th Street S.R. 60 630 33305 82nd Avenue 12th Street S.R. 60 630 3340N 82nd Avenue S.R. 60 65th Street 630 33405 82nd Avenue S.R. 60 65th Street 630 4440E 41st Street 43rd Avenue Old Dixie Hwy. 630 4440W 41st Street 43rd Avenue Old Dixie Hwy. 630 4830E 8th Street 58th Avenue 43rd Avenue 630 4830W 8th Street 58th Avenue 43rd Avenue 630 4840E 8th Street 43rd Avenue 27th Avenue 630 4840W Sth Street' 43rd Avenue 27th Avenue 630 4850E 8th Street 27th Avenue 20th Avenue 830 4850W 8th Street 27th Avenue 20th Avenue 830 4860E 8th Street 20th Avenue Old Dixie Hwy. 830 4860W 8th Street 20th Avenue Old Dixie Hwy. 830 4930E 4th Street 58th Avenue 43rd Avenue 630 4930W 4th Street 58th Avenue 43rd Avenue 630 4940E 4th Street 43rd Avenue 27th Avenue 630 4940W 4th Street 43rd Avenue 27th Avenue 630 4950E 4th Street 27th Avenue 20th Avenue 630 4950W 4th Street 27th Avenue 20th Avenue 630 4960E 4th Street 20th Avenue Old Dixie Hwy. 630 4960W 4th Street 20th Avenue Old Dixie Hwy. 630 4970E 4th Street Old Dixie Hwy. U.S. 1 630 4970W 4th Street Old Dixie Hwy. U.S. 1 630 Existina Demand Total Available Positive Roadway Existing —Ve—s-t-e-3 Segment Segment Project Concurrency Segment Volume Volume Demand Capacity Demand Determination 101ON 184 144 328. 992 3 Y 10105 264 133 397 923 3 Y 1020N 591 - 93 684 _636 6 Y 10205 586 88 674..646 6 Y 1040N 830 85 915 205 3 Y 1040S 745 88 833 287 3 Y 1050N 717 45 762 478 3 Y 10505 628 45 673 567 .. 3 Y 40 September 6, 1994 M M M Existing Demand Total Available Positive Roadway Ex,sting Vested Segment Segment Project Concurrency Segment Volume Volume Demand Capacity Demand Determination 109ON 201 44 245 1095 S Y 1090S 224 50 -174 1066 8 Y 111ON 771 35 806 964 8 Y 11105 1252 35 1287 483 8 Y 1120N 771 44 815 955 8 Y 1120S 1252 44 1296 474 8 Y 1130N 771 50 821 949 8 Y 1130S 1252 50 1302 468 8 Y 1220N 910 64 974 1656 21 Y 12205 914 58 972 1658 21 Y 1230N 990 105 1095 1615 11 Y 1230S 994 95 1089 1621 11 Y 1240N 990 91 1081 1629 11 Y 1240S 994 81 1075 1635 11 Y 1305N 1381 100 1481 819 19 Y 1305S 1526 90 1616 684 19 Y 131ON 981 59 1040 1180 6 Y 13105 1194 59 1253 967 6 Y 1340N 945 99 1044 1256 6 Y 1340S 1078 99 1177 1123 6 Y 1345N 933 126 1059 1241 3 Y 1345S 1090 129 1219 1081 3 Y 1350N 1082 102 1184 1116 3 Y 1350S 1235 108 1343 957 3 Y 1910E 322 108 430 30 8 Y 1910W 291 112 403 57 8 Y 1915E 661 387 1048 602 40 Y 1915W 943 366 1309 341 40 Y 1920E 821 271 1092 1118 10 Y 1920W 971 262 1233 977 10 Y 1930E 862 619 1481 1169 20 Y 1930W 979 604 1583 1067 20 Y 1935E 473 405 878. 1772 13 Y 1935W 610 390 1000 1650 13 Y 1940E 1053 300 1353 977 13 Y 1940W 500 297 797 1533 13 Y 1945E 881 267 1148 1180 12 Y 1945W 442 263 705 1623 12 Y 1950E 858 215 1073 1255 11 Y 1950W 464 212 676 1652 11 Y 1955E 858 192 1050 1278 11 Y 1955W 464 188 652 1676 11 Y 1960E 554 117 671 1657 6 Y 1960W 347 114 461 1867 6 Y 1965E 921 149 1070 450 3 Y 1965W 576 149 725 795 3 Y 1970E 754 107 861 659 3 Y 1970W 401 107 508 — 1012 3 Y 2120E 421 54 475 1515 8 Y 212OW 782 54 .836 _ 1154 8 Y 2220E 84 27 111 719 6 Y 2220W 85 26 111 719 6 y 2230E 217 36 _253 577 4 Y 2230W 253 33 286 544 4 Y 2240E 223 34 257 573 4 Y 2240W 247 34 .281 549 4 Y 2250E 314 56 370 460 3 Y 2250W 479 56 535 295 3 Y 2260E 656 40 ..696 1074 3 Y 2260W $58 43 501 1269 3 Y 2305N 163 164 327 503 6 Y 23055 168 135 303 527 6 Y 241ON 379 113 492 338 19 Y 2410S 314 86 400 430 19 Y 2420N 611 104 715 115 6 Y 2420S- 390 95 485 345 6 Y 2530E 198 31 229 371 424 N 253OW 145 30 175 425 424 Y 2540E 383 - 23 406 424 108 Y 254OW 231 21 .252 578 108 Y 2550E 383 43 426 404 66 Y 255OW 231 41 272 558 66 Y 2560E 350 26 376 454 37 Y 256OW 399 26 425 405 -. 37 Y 41 September 6, 1994 ®�� 93 pnE 204 BOOK 93 Face 205 September 6, 1994 42 M M Existing Demand Total Available Positive Roadway Ex st ng Vested Segment Segment Project Concurrency Segment Volume Volume Demand Capacity Demand Determination 2570E 350 79 429 401 32 Y 257OW 399 78 477 353 32 Y 2580E 623 23 646 184 24 Y 258OW 476 23 499 331 24 Y 2905N 162 31 193 497 27 Y 29053 160 28 188 502 27 Y 291ON 138 75 213 477 11 Y 2910S 424 70 494 196 11 Y 2915N 319 23 342 348 8 Y 29155 399 23 422 268 8 Y 2920N 326 20 346 344 8 Y 29203 426 19 445 245 8 Y 2930N 667 60 727 103 3 Y 29305 505 60 565 265 3 Y 2935N 340 106 446 384 3 Y 2935S 413 107 520 310 3 Y 3005N 191 13 204 396 53 Y 30058 138 13 151 449 53 Y 301ON 191 25 216 474 37 Y 3010S 138 25 163- 527 37 Y 3015N 191 33 224 466 35 Y 3015S 138 33 171 519 35 Y 302ON 191 50 241 T 449 29 Y o 3020S 138 50 188 502 29 Y 3025N 423 227 650 180 29 Y 30255 416 224 640 190 29 Y 303ON 538 130 668 162 8 Y 3030S 388 137 525 305 8 Y 3035N 334 39 373 317 8 Y 3035S 436 42 478 212 8 Y 304ON 233 29 262 428 8 Y 3040S 355 30 385 305 8 Y 3045N 408 40 488 202 8 Y 3045S 244 48 292 358 8 Y 3050N 410 13 423 207 6 Y 30505 244 13 257 393 6 Y 3055N -187 32 219 431 6 Y 30555 283 32 315 335 6 Y 312ON 167 6 173 517 8 Y 31205 188 7 195 495 8 Y 313ON 181 7 188 462 3 Y 3130S 132 7 139 511 3 Y 314ON 181 7 188 502 3 Y 3140S 132 7 139 551 3 Y 3310N 102' 8 110 540 87 Y 3310S 102 8 110 540 87 Y 3320N 102 9 111 579 79 Y 3320S 102 9 111 579 79 Y 3330N 171 31 202 488 58 Y 33305 230 31 261 429 58 Y 3340N 58 12 70 530 6 Y 3340S 56 13 69 531 6 Y 4440E 184 42 226 404 3 Y 4440W 155 41 196 434 3 Y 4830E 78 53 131 499 6 Y 483OW 89 52 141 489 6 Y 4840E 167 39 206 424 4 Y 484OW 204 38 242 388 4 Y 4850E 251 35 286 544 3 Y 485OW 426 35 461 369 3 Y 4860E 251 64 315 515 3 Y 486OW 426 60 486 344 3 Y 4930E 110 28 138 492 16 Y 4930W 97 27 124 506 16 Y 4940E 215 48' 263 367 18 Y 4940W 173 44 217 413 18 Y 4950E 215 75 290 340 13 Y 495OW 173 75 248 _-382 13 Y 4960E 488 - 67 555 75 8 Y 4960W 377 64 441 189 8 Y 4970E 361 34 395 235 8 Y 4970W 583 35 618 12 8 Y September 6, 1994 42 M M � r � - Water The most intense commercial use of the sub j,ect property will result in water consumption at a rate of 91.65 Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs), or 22,912.5 gallons/day. This is based upon a level of service of 250 gallons/ERU/day. The subject property will be serviced by the South County Reverse Osmosis Plant. This plant has a remaining capacity of approximately 2,300,000 gallons/day and can accommodate the additional demand generated by the proposed zoning district. - Wastewater The subject property will be serviced by the West County Wastewater Plant. Based upon the most intense use allowed under the proposed zoning district, development of the property will have a wastewater generation rate of approximately 91.65 Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs), or 22,912.5 gallons/day. This is based upon the level of service standard of 250 gallons/ERU/day. The West County Wastewater Plant currently has a remaining capacity of more than 400,000 gallons/day and can accommodate the additional wastewater generated by the proposed zoning district. - Solid Waste Solid waste service includes pick-up by private 'operators and disposal at the county landfill. For a 305,500 square foot commercial development on the subject site, solid waste generation would be approximately 1,527 Waste Generation Units (WGUs) or 2,895 cubic yards of solid waste/year. A WGU is a Waste Generation Unit measurement equivalent to 1.896 cubic yards of waste/year. While WGUs are units of measurement which can be applied to either commercial or residential uses, WGUs must be considered in terms of residential units in order to correspond to the county's solid waste level of service standards. According to the county's solid waste regulations, each residential unit generates 1.6 WGUs/unit. With the county's adopted level of service standard of 2.37 cubic yards/person/year and the county's average of 2 persons/unit, each WGU is equivalent to 0.8 people (1.6/2 = 0.8) and 1.896 cubic yards of solid waste/year (0.8 X 2.37 = 1.896). To calculate the total cubic yards of solid waste for the most intense use allowed on the subject property under the proposed zoning district, staff utilized the following formula: Total number of WGUs X 0.8 X 2.37 (11527 X 0.8 X 2.37 = 21895 cubic yards/year). A review of the solid waste capacity for the active segment of the county landfill indicates the availability of more than 900,000 cubic yards. The active segment of the landfill has a 3 year capacity, and the landfill has expansion capacity beyond 2010. Based on staff analysis, the county.landfill can accommodate the additional solid waste generated by the site under the proposed zoning. Drainage All developments are reviewed for compliance with county stormwater regulations which require on-site retention, preservation of floodplain storage and minimum finished floor elevations. In addition, development proposals must meet the discharge requirements of the county Stormwater Management Ordinance. The subject property -is located within the M-1 Drainage Basin and the Indian River Farms Water Control District (IRFWCD). Since the site is located within the IRFWCD, development on- the property will be 43 BOOK 9F'�1,c O� September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 FAGE 20 l prohibited from discharging any runoff in excess of two inches in a 24 hour period, which is the approved IRFWCD discharge rate. In this case, the minimum floor elevation level of service standard applies, since portions of the property lie within a floodplain. Consistent with Drainage Policy 1.2, "all new buildings shall have the lowest habitable floor elevation no lower than the elevation of the 100 -year flood elevation as shown on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map, or as defined in a more detailed study report." Portions of the subject property lie within Flood Zone "A", which is a special flood hazard area located within the -100 -year floodplain. Since no base flood elevations have been determined for Flood Zone A, any development on this property must meet the requirements of LDR chapter 930, which relates the minimum finished floor elevation to the surrounding grade. Besides the minimum elevation requirement, on-site retention and discharge standards also apply to this request. With the most intense use of this site, the maximum area of impervious surface under the proposed zoning classification will be approximately 11110,780 square feet, or 25.5 acres. The maximum runoff volume, based on that amount of impervious -surface and the 25 year/24 hour design storm, and given the. IRFWCD two inch discharge requirement, will be approximately 961,600 cubic feet. In order to maintain the county's adopted level of service, the applicant will be required to retain approximately 526,000 cubic feet of runoff on-site. With the soil characteristics of the subject property, it is estimated that the pre -development runoff rate is 33 cubic feet/second. Based upon staff's analysis, the drainage level of service standards will be met by limiting off-site discharge to the IRFWCD's maximum discharge rate of two inches in twenty-four hours, requiring retention of.the 526,000 cubic feet of runoff for the most intense use of the property, and requiring that all finished floor elevations be consistent with the requirements of chapter 930. As with all development, a more detailed review will be conducted during the development approval process. - Recreation Recreation concurrency requirements apply only to residential development. Therefore, this rezoning request .would not be required to satisfy recreation concurrency requirements. Based on the analysis conducted, staff has. determined that facilities for drainage, solid waste, water,:. wastewater, and recreation have adequate capacity to accommodate the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed -.zoning district. The execution of a.developer's agreement has ensured that adequate road capacity will also be available at the time of development. For these reasons, the concurrency test has been satisfied for the subject request. Potential Impacts on Environmental Qualitv Being a citrus grove, the subject property is a disturbed site. Therefore, no significant.adverse environmental impacts associated with the proposed rezoning are -anticipated. . 44 September 6, 1994 O � � M If, at the time of development, a site specific survey of the two undeveloped vegetative areas indicates that they are native upland plant communities, then the site will be subject to the county's 10-15% native upland plant community set aside requirement. Similarly, if the site specific survey indicates the presence of wetlands, the development of the site will be subject to federal, state, and county permitting regulations. For these reasons, no significant adverse environmental impacts associated with the proposed rezoning are anticipated. Compatibility with the Surrounding Area Compatibility is not a major concern for this property. The site is centrally located within a commercial/industrial node. Development in the area is dominated by the landfill, agriculture, and various industrial uses. Since properties on the north and east are currently zoned IG, the request is for the continuation of an existing zoning pattern. For these reasons, staff feels that general industrial development on the subject property would be., compatible with surrounding areas. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the comprehensive plan. Rezonings must also be consistent with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land Use Map, which include agriculture, residential, recreation, conservation, and commercial and industrial land uses and their densities. Commercial and industrial land uses are located in nodes throughout the unincorporated areas of Indian River County. The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of the Comprehensive Plan. Policies are statements in the plan which identify the actions which the county will take in order to direct the community's development.- As courses of action committed to by the county, policies provide the basis for- all county land development decisions. While all comprehensive plan policies are important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing rezoning requests. Of particular applicability for this request are the following policies and objectives. Future Land Use Element Policy -1.17 Future Land Use Element Policy 1.17 states. that the industrial land use designation is intended for uses such as manufacturing, assembly, materials processing, heavy repair services, outdoor equipment storage, and similar uses, as -..well' as supportive and related commercial uses. In addition, that policy states that all industrial uses must be located within an existing or future urban service area. Since the subject property is located within a commercial/ industrial node within the county's urban service area, the request is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy 1.17. - Future Land Use Element.Policy 2.5 Future Land Use Element Policy 2.5 states that the County shall encourage and direct growth into the Urban Service Area. The site is located within the Urban Service Area, and rezoning the subject property to IG would encourage growth within the Urban Service Area by allowing industrial, development on the. site. Therefore,' 45 BOOK PAGE September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 PAGE 209 rezoning the subject property is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy 2.5. - Future Land Use Policy 4.3 Future Land Use Policy 4.3 states that activity centers, such as industrial developments, shall be located within commercial/ industrial nodes to ensure efficient utilization of the transportation network. Since the subject property is within a commercial/industrial node, the proposed request is consistent with Future Land Use Policy 4.3. - Economic Development Element Objectives 1 and 6, and Policy 1.1 These objectives and policy deal with lowering the county's unemployment rate by encouraging the expansion of existing businesses and industries, and the attraction of new ones. By providing additional industrially zoned land, the proposed rezoning will facilitate industrial development of the subject property. Therefore, the request is consistent with Economic Development Element Objectives 1 and 6, and -Policy 1.1. As part of the staff analysis, all policies in the comprehensive plan were considered. Based on that analysis, staff determined that the proposed zoning district is consistent with the comprehensive plan. CONCLUSION The requested zoning is compatible with the surrounding area, consistent_ with the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan, and meets all applicable concurrency criteria. The subject property is located in an area deemed suitable for industrial uses, and the.request•has met all applicable criteria. Staff supports the request. RECONNENDATION Staff recommends that -the Board of County Commissioners approve this request to rezone the subject property from A-1 to.IG. Commissioner Adams asked if a site plan for any of this property had been submitted, and Community Development Director Robert Keating answered that no site plans have been submitted. He explained that this property, which has split zoning, is under one ownership. The purpose of this rezoning is to secure the necessary zoning to develop the site with industrial uses. Chairman Tippin opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. 46 September 6, 1994 r Michael O'Haire, attorney for the applicant, stated he was available to answer any questions the Board may have. There being no others who wished to be heard, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) adopted Ordinance 94-26, rezoning approximately 30.55 acres from A-1 to IG. ORDINANCE NO. 94-26 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM A-1 TO IG, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET SOUTH OF 9TH STREET, S.W., AND APPROXIMATELY ONE HALF OF A MILE WEST OF 74TH AVENUE, AND DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the local planning agency on such matters, has held a public hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this rezoning request; and WHEREAS; the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone the hereinafter described property; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined that this rezoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of ' Indian River County; and _ WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has held a public hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at which parties in interest qnd citizens were heard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning of the following described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: September 6, 1994 47 Boa 93 pnf. 216 BOOK 93 NAGE 211 ORDINANCE NO. 94-26 The East 1/2 of Tracts 3 and 6, Section 25, Township 33 South, Range 38 East, according to the last general plat of lands of the Indian River Farms Company filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit'Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, in Plat Book 2, Page 25, said land now lying and being in Indian River County, Florida, LESS AND EXCEPT the North 604.4 feet thereof. Be changed from A-1 to IG. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and.described in said Land Development Regulations. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, on this 6th day of September, 1994. This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal on the 16th day of August, 1994 for a public hearing to be held on the 6th day of September, 1994 at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert , seconded by Commissioner Adams , and adopted by the following vote: Chairman John W. Tippin Aye Vice -Chairman Kenneth R. Macht Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Absent Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BY: hn W. Tip , thairmarP ATTEST BY: Je rre x. Barton, cleric Acknowledgement by the Department of tate of the State of Florida this 14th day of September 1994. Effective Date: Acknowledgement from the Department of State received on this 20th day of September , 1994, at 10:00 a.m. &WxARXt. and filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. PUBLIC HMAWNG - NATIONAL HEALTHCORP REQUEST TO REZONE APPROX. 18.23 ACRES FROM RS -6 TO RM -8 The hour of 9:05 a.m. having passed, the County Attorney announced that this Public Hearing has been properly advertised, as follows: 48 Se rP ber 6, 1994 VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Deily 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 as" that its is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach In Indian River County, Florida; that the attached COPY of advertisement, being a In the matter of In the Court, was pub- lished In said newspaper In the Issues Afflant further says that the said Vero Beach Prese•JOumel is a newspaper published at Vero fore been continuIn ously published in said Indian Riid Indian River County, vers County, nd that hFlorida. newspapere said h dally and hhaslobeen entered as second class mall matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in sold Indian River Coun• ty, Florida, for a Period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor premised any person, firm or eorpmetlap any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this gi ,-aavertiselrlillp Jet pubIIcatlon In the said newspaper. r p, n- 9yv6in fd ilil'eetittliRbed lore INF�� day of! 11117 - IF, NOIAtiy PUPILIC, Business Manager) aT2 tMale d Fbridn. My Cmmva•.a, f •p Juno 29,1 No.CC1�10 : Q,s Coamhsian Numl.n: CC3WSr1 lSE'A�1r1P F�n•'�� Nplary:BARRARAC SPRACRIE' , NOTICE — PUBUC HEARING : Notice of hearing to consider the adoption of a county ordinance rezoning lard from: RS -6, Single- Famiiy Residential District (up to 6 unWacre) to RM -8, Multiple -Fan Residential District (up to 8 unitslacre). The subject property is presently owned by Margaret Ann Knight, The subject property Is lo- cated on the west side of Indian River Boulevard, :approximately 1200 feet northwest of the tntersec- n of 37th Street and Indian River Boulevard, and contains approximately 18.23 acres. The subject property Res in the southwest Ya section of Section 25, Township 32S, Range 39E, lying and being in Man River County, Florida. " A public hearing at which parties In Interest and c1tizens shall have an opportunity to be heard, will be held by the Board of County Commissioners of Man River County, Florida, in the County Commis- sion Chambers of the County Administration Build- ing, located at 1840 25th Sireet, Vero Beach, Flor- ida on Tuesday, September 6, 1994, at 9:05 a.m. The Board of County Commissioners may adopt another zoning district, other than the district re- quested, provided it Is within the same general use cat�one who may wish toavasal any decision which may be made at this meed a will need to en- sure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which Includes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. Anyone who deeds a special accommodation for this meeting must contact the county's Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Coordinator at 567-8000 extension 223 at least 48 hours in advance of meeting. Indian River County Board of County Commissioners By: s -John W. Tippiln, Chairman Aug.16,1994 1123416 The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/25/94: 49 September 6, 1994 BOOK 9 3 FAGE 212 BOOK 93 FAGE 213 TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DEP,PAdftNT HEAD CONCURRENCE -NMEf:t H. `KeatiKig; AIC F THRU: Sasan Rohani, AIC S - Chief, Long -Range Planning FROM: John WachtelAl- Senior Planner, ong-Range Planning DATE: August 25, 1994 RE: National HealthCorp, L.P., -Request to Rezone Approximately 18.23 acres from RS -6 to RM -8 (RZON 94-05-0205) It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of September 6, 1994. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS This is a request to rezone approximately 18.23 acres located on the west side of Indian River Boulevard, approximately 1200 feet northwest of the intersection of 37th Street and Indian River Boulevard. The request involves rezoning the property, presently owned by Margaret Ann Knight, from RS -6, Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) to RM -8, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to -8 units/acre)....The applicant intends to develop an Adult Congregate Living Facility (ACLF) with more than 21 residents on the site. Although not permitted in single-family zoning districts, ACLFs with more than 21 residents are allowed as a Special Exception use in the RM -8 zoning district. On August 11, 1994, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve this request to rezone the subject property to RM -8. Existing Land Use Pattern The subject property, and properties to the north and west, consist of citrus groves and are zoned RS -6. To the south is the partially developed Medical Service Center Subdivision, zoned MED, Medical District. The portion of this subdivision that borders the subject property currently consists of citrus groves. Indian River Boulevard borders the site on -the northeast, while vacant RM -8 zoned land is directly east of the site. Future Land Use Pattern The subject property and properties to the north, east, and west are designated M-1, Medium -Density Residential -1, on the county future land use map. The M-1 designation permits residential uses with densities up to eight units/acre. Property south of the site is designated C/I, Commercial/Industrial Node. 50 September 6, 1994 Environment The subject property is currently a citrus grove. Environmental planning staff review of the site indicates that while there are no native upland plant communities, there may be two linear freshwater jurisdictional wetlands on the site. The subject property is within an "AE" 100 year floodplain, with a minimum base flood elevation requirement of seven feet;NGVD. Utilities and Services The site is within the Urban Service Area of the county. Both water and wastewater lines extend along 37th Street to within one quarter of a mile from the site. The South County Reverse Osmosis Plant would provide potable water service to development on the site, while wastewater service would be provided by the Central County (Gifford) Wastewater Treatment Plant. Transportation System The property abuts Indian River Boulevard which is classified as an urban principal arterial road on the future roadway thoroughfare plan map. This segment of Indian River Boulevard is a four -lane paved road with approximately 200 feet of public road right-of-way. There are no plans to expand Indian River Boulevard. ANALYSIS In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the application will be presented. The analysis will include a description of: • concurrency of public facilities; • compatibility with the surrounding area; • consistency with the comprehensive plan; and • potential impact on environmental quality. Concurrency of Public Facilities This site is located within the county Urban Service Area, an area deemed suited for urban scale development. The Comprehensive Plan establishes standards for: Transportation, Potable Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage and Recreation (Future Land Use Policy 3.1). The adequate provision of these services is necessary to ensure the continued quality of life enjoyed by the community. The Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations also require that new development be reviewed to ensure that the minimum acceptable standards for these services and facilities are maintained. Policy 3.2 of the Future Land Use Element states that no development shall be approved unless it is consistent with the concurrency management system component of the Capital Improvements Element. For rezoning requests, conditional concurrency review is required. Conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility with respect to a proposed project. Since rezoning requests are not projects, county regulations call for the concurrency review to be based upon the most intense use of the subject property -based upon the requested zoning district. 51 BOOK 93 FACE 21 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 F,1,UE 2 5 The site information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows: 1. Size of Area to be Rezoned: ±18.23 acres 2. Existing Zoning Classification: RS -6, Single- Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) 3. Proposed Zoning Classification: 4. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Existing Zoning Classification: 5. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Proposed Zoning Classification: - Transportation RM -8, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 8 units/acre) 109 single-family units 145 single-family units A review of the traffic impacts that would result from the development of the property indicates that the existing level of service "D" or better on Indian River Boulevard would not be lowered. The site information used for determining traffic is as follows: Existing Zoning District 1. Use Identified in 5th Edition ITE Manual: Single -Family Residential 2. For Single -Family Units, in ITE Manual: a. Average Weekday Trip Ends: 9.55/unit b.- P.M. Peak Hour Trip Ends: 1.01/unit c. Inbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 65% i. Northbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 75% ii. Southbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 25% d. Outbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 35% i. Northbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 25% ii. Southbound -(P.M. Peak Hour): 75% 3. P.M. Peak Direction of Indian River Boulevard, from the Vero Beach City Limits to 53rd Street: Northbound 4. Formula for Determining Number of Peak Hour/Peak Season/Peak Direction Trips Generated: Number of Units X P.M. Peak Hour Rate X Inbound P.M. Percentage X Inbound -Northbound Percentage (109 X 1.01 X .65 X .75 = 54) 5. Formula for Determining Number of Average Weekday Trips Generated: Number of Units X Average Weekday Rate (109 X 9.55 = 1,041) Proposed Zoning District 1. Use Identified in 5th Edition ITE Manual: Single -Family Residential 2. For Single -Family Units, in ITE Manual: a. Average -Weekday Trip Ends: 9.55/unit b. P.M. Peak Hour Trip Ends: 1.01/unit 52 September 6, 1994 � r i C. Inbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 65% i. Northbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 75% ii. Southbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 25% d. Outbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 35% i. Northbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 25% ii. Southbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 75% 3. P.M. Peak Direction of Indian River Boulevard, from the Vero Beach City Limits to 53rd Street: Northbound 4. Formula for Determining Number of Peak Hour/Peak Season/Peak Direction Trips Generated: Number of Units X P.M. Peak Hour Rate X Inbound P.M. Percentage X Inbound -Northbound Percentage (145 X 1.01 X .65 X .75 = 71) (trip distribution based on a Modified Gravity Model) 5. Formula for Determining Number of Average Weekday Trips Generated: Number of Units X Average Weekday Rate (145 X 9.55 = 1,385) 6. Traffic Capacity on this segment of Indian River Boulevard, at a Level of Service "D": 1,770 peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips 7. Existing Traffic volume on this segment of Indian River Boulevard: 320 peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips The number of Average Weekday Trip Ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the existing zoning district is 1,041. This was determined by multiplying the 109 units (most intense use) by ITE's single-family residential factor of 9.55 Average Daily Trip Ends/unit. The number of Average Weekday Trip Ends associated with the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed zoning district is 1,385. This was determined by multiplying the 145 units (most intense use), by ITE's single-family residential factor of 9.55 Average Daily Trip Ends/unit. Since the county's transportation level of service is based on peak hour/peak season/peak direction characteristics, the transportation concurrency analysis addresses project traffic occurring in the peak hour and affecting the peak direction of impacted roadways. According to ITE, the proposed use generates more volume in the p.m. peak hour than in the a.m.-peak hour. Therefore, the p.m. peak hour was used in the transportation concurrency analysis. The peak direction during the p.m. peak hour on Indian River Boulevard is northbound. Given those conditions, the number of peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips that would be generated by the most intense use of the subject property under the existing zoning district was calculated to be 54. This was determined by multiplying the total number of gnits allowed under the existing zoning district (109) by ITE's factor of 1.01 p.m. peak hour trips/unit, to determine the total number of trips generated.- Of these trips, 65% (72) will be inbound and 35% (39) will be outbound. Of the inbound trips, 75% or 54 will be westbound. To determine the number of peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips that would be generated by the most intense use of the subject property under the requested zoning district, the total number of units allowed under the proposed district (145) was multiplied by ITE's factor of 1.01 p.m. peak hour trips/unit to determine the total number of trips generated (146). Of these 53 September 6, 1994 am 93 PAGE 217 trips, 65% (95) will be inbound and 35% (51) will be outbound. Of the inbound trips, 75% or 71 will be westbound. Therefore, the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed zoning district would generate 17 more peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips than the 54 that would be generated by the most intense use of the subject property under the existing zoning district (71 - 54 = 17). Using a modified gravity model and a hand assignment, the peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips generated by the proposed use were then assigned to impacted roads on the network. Impacted roads are defined in section 910.09(4)(b)3 of the county's LDRs as roadway segments which receive five percent (5%) or more of the project traffic or fifty (50) or more of the project trips, whichever is less. Capacities for all roadway segments in Indian River County are calculated and updated annually, utilizing the latest and best available peak season traffic characteristics and applying Appendix G methodology as set forth- in the Florida Department of Transportation Level of Service Manual. Available capacity is the total capacity less existing and -committed traffic volumes; this is updated daily based upon vesting associated with project approvals. The traffic capacity for the segment of Indian River Boulevard adjacent to this site is 1,770 trips (peak hour/peak season/peak direction) at Level of Service (LOS) "D", while the existing traffic volume on this segment of Indian River Boulevard is 320 trips (peak hour/peak season/peak direction). The additional 71 peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips created by the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed zoning district would increase the total peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips for this segment of Indian River Boulevard to approximately 391. Based on the above analysis, staff determined that Indian River Boulevard and all other impacted roads can accommodate the additional trips without decreasing their existing levels of service. The table below identifies each of the impacted roadway segments associated with this proposed zoning classification. As indicated in this table, there is sufficient capacity in all of the segments to accommodate the projected traffic associated with the request. TRAFFIC CONCURRENCY DETERMINATION Impacted Road Segments (peak hour/peak season/peak direction) Roadway Segment Road From TO segment Capacity LOS "D" 1030N SR AlA 17th Street SR 60 1,060 1030E SR AlA 17th Street SR 60 1,060 1040N SR AlA SR 60 - N. VBC Limits 1,120 1040S SR AlA SR 60; N. VBC Limits 1,120 1110N IR Blvd. 4th Street Q U.S. 1 12th Street 1,770 1120N IR Blvd. 12th Street S. VBC Limits 1,770 1130N IR Blvd. S. VBC Limits 17th Street 1,770 1140N IR Blvd. 17th Street - 21st Street 1,770 11405 IR Blvd.- 17th Street 21st Street 1,770 1150N IR Blvd. 21st Street SR 60 1,770 1150S IR Blvd. 21st Street SR 60 1,770 1160N IR Blvd. SR 60 W. VBC Limits 1,770 1160S IR Blvd. SR 60 W. VBC Limits 1,770 54 September 6, 1994 M r M Roadway Capacity Segment Road From To LOS "D" 1170N IR Blvd. W. VBC Limits 53rd Street 1,770 1170S IR Blvd. W. VBC---Limits 53rd Street 1,770 1355N U.S. 1 N. VBC Limits Old Dixie Hwy. 2,300 1355S Q.S. 1 N. VBC Limits Old Dixie Hwy. 2,300 1365N U.S. 1 41st Street 45th Street 2,650 1365S U.S. 1 41st Street 45th Street 2,650 1370N U.S. 1 45th Street 49th Street 2,650 13705 U.S. 1 45th Street 49th Street 2,650 1375N U.S. 1 49th Street 65th Street 2,650 13755 U.S. 1 49th Street 65th Street 2,650 1380N U.S. 1 65th Street 69th Street 2,650 1380S U.S. 1 65th Street 69th Street 2,650 1385N U.S. 1 69th Street Old Dixie Hwy. 2,650 1385S U.S. 1 69th Street Old Dixie Hwy. 2,650 13905 U.S. 1 Old Dixie Hwy. Schumann Drive 2,370 1830E CR 510 58th Avenue U.S. 1 650 1960E SR 60 U.S. 1 IR Blvd. 2,328 1960W SR 60 U.S. 1 IR Blvd. 2,328 1965E SR 60 IR Blvd. ICWW 1,520 1965W SR 60 IR Blvd. ICWW 1,520 1970E SR 60 ICWW SR AIA 1,520 1970W SR 60 ICWW SR AlA 1,520 2110E 17th Street U.S. 1 IR Blvd. 1,990 3840E 65th Street Old Dixie Hwy. U.S. 1 650 384OW 65th Street Old Dixie Hwy. U.S. 1 650 4250E 49th Street Old Dixie Hwy. U.S. 1 690 425OW 49th Street Old Dixie Hwy. U.S. 1 690 Existin Demand Total Available Positive Roadway Ex st ng Vested Segment Segment Project Concurrency Segment Volume Volume Demand Capacity Demand Determination 1030N 617 90 707 353 8 Y 1030S BOB 89 897 163 4 Y 1040N 830 85 915 205 4 Y 1040S 745 88 823 287 4 Y 111ON 771 35 806 964 4 Y 1120N 771 44 815 955 4 Y 1130N 771 50 821 949 4 Y 1140N 725 82 807 963 12 Y 1140S 1022 82 1104 666 4 Y 1150N 725 107 832 938 20 Y 1150S 1022 107 1129 641 8 Y 1160N 428 95 523 1247 40 Y 11605 473 96 569 1201 20 Y 1170N 320 44 364 1406 71 Y 1170S 171 45 216— 1554 68 Y 1355N 1082 60 1142 1158 16 Y 13555 1235 59 1294 _ 1006 16 Y 1365N 942 59 1001 1649 8 Y 13658 668 58 726 1924 4 Y 1370N 942 67 1009 1641 24 Y 1370S 668 72 740 1910 32 Y 1375N 942 82 1024 1626 24 Y 1375S 668 95 763 1887 32 Y 1380N 942 48 990 1660 8 Y 13805 668 48 716 1934 16 Y 1385N 1015 52 1067 1583 8 Y 1385S 735 53 788 1862 16 Y 1390S 735 90 825 1545 8 Y 1830E 328 41 369 281 8 Y 1960E 554 117 671-- 1657 8 Y 1960W 347 117 464 1864 4 Y 1965E 921 149 1070 450 8 Y 1965W 576 151 727 793 12 Y 1970E 754 107 861 659 8 Y 1970W 401 109 510 1010 12 Y 2110E 421 - 54 475 1515 4 Y 3840E 49 2 51 599 8 Y 384OW 54 2 56 594 4 Y 4250E 117 11 128 562 4 Y 425OW 120 11 131 559 4 Y 55 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 FAGE 91 Boa 93 PAGE 219 - Water The subject property is serviced by the South County Water Plant. With the most intense use allowed under the proposed rezoning, the subject property will have a water consumption rate of 145 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU), or 36,250 gallons/day. This is based upon, a level of service standard of 250 gallons/ERU/day. Since the South County Water Plant currently has a remaining capacity of approximately 2,300,000 gallons/day, the plant can accommodate the additional demand generated by the proposed zoning. - Wastewater The subject property is serviced by the Central County Wastewater Treatment Plant (Gifford). With the most intense use allowed under the proposed rezoning, the subject property will have a wastewater generation rate of 145 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU), or 36,250 gallons/day. This is based upon a level of service standard of 250 gallons/ERU/day. Since the Central County Wastewater Treatment Plant currently has a remaining capacity of approximately 500,000 gallons/day, the plant can accommodate the additional demand generated by the proposed zoning. - Solid Waste Solid waste service includes pick-up by private operators and disposal at the county landfill. Solid waste generation by a 145 unit residential development on the subject site will be approximately 232 Waste Generation Units (WGU) or 440 cubic yards of solid waste/year. A WGU is a Waste Generation Unit measurement equivalent to 1.896 cubic yards of waste/year. According to the county's solid waste regulations, each residential unit generates 1.6 WGUs. With the county's adopted level of service standard of 2.37 cubic yards/person/year and the county's average of 2 persons/unit, each WGU is equivalent to 0.8 people (1.6/2 = 0.8) and 1.896 cubic yards of solid waste/year (0.8 X 2.37 = 1.896). To calculate the total cubic yards of solid waste for the most intense use allowed on the subject property under the proposed zoning district, staff utilized the following formula: Total number -of WGUs X 0.8 X 2.37 (232 X 0.8 X 2.37 = 440 cubic yards/year). A review of the solid waste capacity for the active segment of the county landfill indicates the availability of more than 900,000 cubic yards. The active segment of the landfill has a 3 year capacity, and the landfill has expansion capacity beyond 2010. Based on staff analysis, it was determined that the county landfill can accommodate the additional solid waste generated by the site under the proposed zoning district. - Drainage All developments are reviewed for compliance with county stormwater regulations which require on-site retention, preservation of floodplain storage and minimum- finished floor 'elevations. In addition, development proposals must meet the discharge requirements of the county Stormwater Management Ordinance. Any development on the subject property will be prohibited from discharging any runoff in excess of the pre -development rate. In this case, the minimum floor elevation level of service standard applies, since -the property lies within a floodplain. Consistent with Drainage Policy 1.2, "all new buildings shall have the lowest habitable floor elevation no lower than the elevation of the 100- 56 September 6, 1994 year flood elevation as shown on the Federal -Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map, or as defined in a more detailed study report." Since the subject property lies within Flood Zone AE, which is a special flood hazard area located within the 100 - year floodplain, any development on this property must have a minimum finished floor elevation of no less than seven feet above mean sea level. Besides the minimum elevation requirement, on-site retention and discharge standards also apply to this request. With the most intense use of this site, the maximum area of impervious surface under the proposed zoning classification will be approximately 555,869 square feet, or 12.76 acres. The maximum runoff volume, based on that amount of impervious surface and the 25 year/24 hour design storm, will be approximately 565,000 cubic feet. In order to maintain the county's adopted level of service, the applicant will be required to retain approximately 104,260 cubic feet of runoff on-site. With the soil characteristics of the subject property, it is estimated that the pre -development runoff rate is 76 cubic feet/second. Based upon staff's analysis, the drainage level of service standards will be met by limiting off-site discharge to its pre - development rate of 76 cubic feet/second, requiring retention of 104,260 cubic feet of runoff for the most intense use of the property, and requiring that all finished floor elevations exceed seven feet above mean sea level. As with all development, a more detailed review will be conducted during the development approval process. - Recreation A review of county recreation facilities and the projected demand that would result from the most intense development that could occur on the property under the proposed zoning classification indicates that the adopted levels of service would be maintained. The table below illustrates the additional park demand associated with the proposed development of the property and the existing surplus acreage by park type. Based upon the analysis conducted, staff has determined that all concurrency -mandated facilities, including drainage, roads, solid waste, recreation, water, and wastewater have adequate capacity to accommodate the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed zoning. Therefore, the concurrency test has been satisfied for the subject request. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the comprehensive plan. Rezoning. requests must also be consistent with the overall. designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land Use Map, ' which includes agricultural, residential, recreational, conservation, and commercial and industrial land uses and their densities. Commercial and industrial land uses are 57 BOOK 93 PAGE $2042 0 September 6, 1994 LOS Project (Acres per Demand Surplus e Park Type 1000 population) Acres Acreage Urban District 5.0 - 1.67 195.246 Community (south) 1.25 0.42 10.048 Beach 1.5 0.50 68.974 River 1.5 0.50 29.970 Based upon the analysis conducted, staff has determined that all concurrency -mandated facilities, including drainage, roads, solid waste, recreation, water, and wastewater have adequate capacity to accommodate the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed zoning. Therefore, the concurrency test has been satisfied for the subject request. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the comprehensive plan. Rezoning. requests must also be consistent with the overall. designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land Use Map, ' which includes agricultural, residential, recreational, conservation, and commercial and industrial land uses and their densities. Commercial and industrial land uses are 57 BOOK 93 PAGE $2042 0 September 6, 1994 BOOK 53 DGE M located in nodes throughout the unincorporated areas of Indian River County. The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of the comprehensive plan. Policies are statements in the plan which identify the actions which the county will take in order to direct the community's development. As courses of action committed to by the county, policies provide the basis for all county land development related decisions. While all comprehensive plan policies are important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing rezoning requests. Of particular applicability for this request are the following policy and objective. - Future Land Use Element Policy 1.14 Future Land Use Element Policy 1.14 states that the M-1, Medium - Density Residential -1, land use designation is intended for residential uses with densities up to eight units/acre. In addition, that policy states that these residential uses must be located within an existing or future urban service area. Since the subject property is located within an area designated as M-1 on the county's future land use plan map and is located within the county's urban service area, and the proposed zoning district would permit residential uses no denser than eight units/acre, the proposed request is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy 1.14. - Future Land Use Element Objective 4 Future Land Use Element Objective 4 states that Indian River County will reduce the number and length of trips by implementing a land use pattern which places employment centers near residential areas. Projections indicate that the medical node adjacent to the subject property will become one of the county's major employment centers. This occurrence is expected to generate demand for multiple -family housing. Allowing that demand for multiple -family housing to 'be filled on property bordering the node implements Future Land Use Element Objective 4. While Future -land Use Element Policy 1.14 and Objective 4 are particularly applicable to this request, other comprehensive plan policies and objectives also have relevance. For that reason, staff evaluated the subject request for consistency with all plan policies and objectives. Based upon that analysis, staff determined that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Compatibility with the Surrounding Area Staff's position is that granting the request to rezone the subject property to RM -8 will result in development which will be compatible with surrounding areas. Bordering both a medical commercial node and Indian River Boulevard, the site is more suited for medium density, multiple -family development than it is for low density, single-family, uses. - With multiple -family development and required buffers, potential impacts from those adjacent uses can be mitigated. To ensure compatibility, development of those lots in the medical subdivision that are adjacent to the subject' property will require the provision of buffers where those lots abut the subject property. Similarly, multiple -family development on the subject property will be required to provide buffers where the site abuts a single-family use or district. 58 September 6, 1994 M M M More importantly, several factors indicate that the RM -8 district is the most appropriate for the site. Located near an employment center, a hospital, and various .other medical uses, the site is particularly suited for the multiple -family and institutional uses permitted in the RM -8 zoning district. Additionally, an RM -8 zoning district on the site woiuld provide a logical transition from the more intense uses south and east of the subject property (the medical commercial node and Indian River Boulevard) to the RS -6 zoning district bordering the site on the -north and west. Since the M-1 land use designation allows multiple -family and single-family development with densities of up to eight units/acre, several zoning districts are consistent with the M-1 land use designation. In the past, the Board has not zoned all property with the most intense zoning district allowed under its land use designation. The Board has often placed the densest multiple - family districts along the border of a high impact use such as a commercial/ industrial node or a major road, while reserving less dense, single-family districts for land bordering the multiple - family districts. In this way the intensity of the use of land is gradually decreased as the distance from the high impact use is increased. This strategy, which is consistent with the subject request, reduces the difference between the intensity of use of adjacent lands, thus reducing potential incompatibilities. For these reasons, staff feels that the requested RM -8 zoning would be compatible with the surrounding area. Potential Impact on Environmental Quality Environmental impacts of residential development on the subject property would be essentially the same under either the existing or the proposed zoning district. In fact, changing the zoning of the subject property from RS -6 to RM -8 may enhance. environmental quality by encouraging residential development of the site which is currently a grove. The environmental quality of the site may be enhanced by residential development, because site development would result in construction of a stormwater management system, and protection of jurisdictional wetlands which may be on site. Due to the county's stormwater retention requirements for residential development, residential development on the subject property would reduce the amount of stormwater runoff from the site. The requirements for residential development contrast -with the present agricultural use that allows runoff to occur without any stormwater retention. Prior to residential development of the site, the applicant would be required to complete an environmental survey to determine the extent of any jurisdictional wetlands on the site. That survey would have to be approved by the county's environmental planning staff. Any jurisdictional wetlands determined to be located on the parcel are protected by federal, state, and county regulations. For these reasons, no significant adverse environmental impacts associated with this request are anticipated. CONCLUSION The requested zoning is compatible with the surrounding area, consistent with -the comprehensive plan, meets all concurrency criteria, and will have no negative impacts on environmental quality. The subject property is located in an area deemed suited for medium -density residential uses and meets all applicable rezoning criteria. For these reasons, staff supports the request. 59 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 PAGE Bou 93 Fact 223 RECONMENDATION Based on the analysis this re resat to rezonnds e the Board of County subject property Commissioners approve 4u •from RS -6 to RM -8. Community Development Director Robert Keating advised that a site plan has been submitted for this parcel and its approval is contingent upon approval of this rezoning request. Chairman Tippin 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 Eggert, the, Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) adopted Ordinance 94-27, rezoning approximately 18.23 acres from RS -6 to RM -8. 60 September 6, 1994 ORDINANCE NO. 94- 27 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM RS -6 TO RM -8, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD, APPROXIMATELY 1200 FEET NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF 37TH STREET AND INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD, AND DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING�FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the local planning agency on such'matters, has held a public hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this rezoning request; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone the hereinafter described property; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined that this rezoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has held a public hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at which parties in interest and citizens were heard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida,. that the Zoning of the following described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: The north one-half of the southeast one-quarter of the southwest one-quarter of Section 25, Township 32 South, Range 39 East, Indian River County, Florida. Less the following described parcel: Beginning at the northeast corner of the southeast one-quarter of the southwest one-quarter of Section 25, run south 00003130" east along the east line of said southeast one- quarter of the southwest one-quarter, 411.32 feet, then run north 44056105" west, 579.71 feet to the north line of said southeast one-quarter of the southwest one-quarter, then north 89052106" east, 409.03 feet to the point of beginning. Be.changed from RS -6 to RM -8. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Land Development Regulations. 61 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 Pvu�F 0�4 BOOK 93 FA -E 225 ORDINANCE NO. 94- 27 Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, on this 6th day of September, 1994. This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal on the 16th day of August, 1994 for a public hearing to be held on the 6th day of - September, 1994 at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Adams , seconded by Commissioner Eggert , and adopted by the following vote: Chairman John W. Tippin Aye Vice -Chairman Kenneth R. Macht Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Absent Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye I BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY / rI BY: ohn W. Tippif4, /Chairma ATTEST BY.* Jef f yt� r C�u�� " Acknowledgement by the Department of State of the State of Florida this 14th day of September 1994. Effective Date: Acknowledgement from the Department of State received on this 20th day of September , 1994, at 10:00 a.m. AxXxjRxNx and filed in the office of the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY G. Collins II, Rbbekt'M.-Keating; AI Community Develop nt u\v\j\knight.ord September 6, 1994 ty County Attorney or 62 Indian River Ca j�.aN���JVCd A drn i rt. I . LiUClflnj _�-�— Risk. Myr. AUTHORIZATION FOR FLORIDAFFINITY, INC. TO SUBCONTRACT ENVIRONMENTAL LAND PRE-ACQUISITION SERVICES .CONTINGENT UPON COUN'T'Y -ADMINISTRATOR'S APPROVAL The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/23/94: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE: agog Obert M. Reat g, AWV Community Developmen Director FROM: Roland M. DeBlois; AICP Chief, Environmental Planning DATE: August 23, 1994 RE: Request for County Commission Authorization for FloridAffinity, Inc. to Subcontract Environmental Land Pre -Acquisition Services, Contingent Upon County Administrator Approval It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of September 6, 199,4. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The Board of County Commissioners, at its regular meeting on August 2, 1994, approved a contract with FloridAffinity/Conservation Consultants for environmental land acquisition/management services. Section 1.10 of the contract (see attached) provides that the County may elect to direct FloridAffinity to subcontract pre- acquisition due diligence services, including: land surveys; title reports; appraisals; and environmental audits. Funding for these subcontracted services would be from environmental land acquisition bond referendum monies. In some cases, these services will be cost -shared as part of approved state acquisition program funding. The Budget Department has indicated that inter -fund borrowing could make funds available for pre-acquisition services prior to bonds issuance, whereby inter - fund reimbursement would occur when the bonds are issued. The cost for each of the services will vary anywhere from +$2,000 to +$2010001 depending on site specific factors. For example, appraisals may cost from $2,000 to $8,000, depending on the nature of the property being evaluated. Likewise, land surveys may vary from a few thousand dollars upwards to +$20,000, depending on variables such as the size of a property, survey history, wetland boundary surveying, sovereignty lands issues, etc. Staff is requesting that the Board authorize FloridAffinity to subcontract pre-acquisition due diligence services on an as -need basis, contingent upon county administrator approval. 63 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 PnF.2 b BOOK 93 PAGE 227 ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS The primary advantage of authorizing FloridAffinity to subcontract pre-acquisition due diligence services is expediency. If the County elects not to subcontract such services through FloridAffinity, procedural requirements would entail staff issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP) each time that a particular service is needed. More than one RFP would need to be issued for any particular acquisition project site, because different services require different consultants (e.g., surveying, appraising, auditing, management planning). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize FloridAffinity to subcontract environmental land acquisition due diligence services on an as -need basis, contingent upon county administrator approval. - ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) authorized FloridAffinity to subcontract pre-acquisition due diligence services on an as -needed basis, contingent upon County Administrator's approval. AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE EQIIENTWITH FUNDS FROM THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PREPAREDNESS & ASSISTANCE TRUST FUND GRANT The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/24/94: TO: Honorable Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Jim ChandleF, Cpunty Administrator FROM: Doug Wright, Director Department -of Emergency Services DATE: August 24, 1994 SUBJECT: Authorization to Purchase Equipment To Expand and Improve the Emergency Management Program with funds from the Emergency Management, Preparedness and Assistance Trust Fund Grant It is respectfully requested that the information contained herein be given formal consideration .by the Board of County Commissioners at the meeting scheduled for September 6, 1994. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS In 1993, the Florida Legislature enacted a funding mechanism for the purpose of improving and expanding local emergency management agencies and other.. programs through an Emergency Management, Preparedness and Assistance Trust Fund. The funding comes from an 64 September 6, 1994 annual nonrefundable surcharge of $2.00 on every homeowner's, mobile homeowner's, tenant homeowner's, and condominium unit owner's insurance policy; and an annual $4.00 nonrefundable surcharge on every commercial fire, commercial multiple peril, and business owner's property insurance policy issued or renewed. Rules were promulgated by -the Department of Community Affairs, Division of Emergency Management, resulting in Rule 9G-19, Florida Administrative Code, wherein each county employing a full-time emergency management director receives, on an annual basis, an allocation of $71,924 in non -supplanting funds to improve and expand the emergency management program. On March 8, 1994, the Board of County Commissioners approved the recurring grant in the amount of $70,424. The $71,924 grant was reduced by $1,500 to $70,424 as the result of a deduction by the state for prorated costs to each county for a statewide satellite communications network for -all county emergency operations centers (EOCs). The Board at that time approved use of a portion of the grant funds for an emergency management planner position, office equipment to support the position, fax machines, computer equipment, EOC television, radar weather equipment, and a video projector. All the equipment has been purchased except for the video projector. Staff noted in the prior agenda item that the balance of the grant funds would be retained in a contingency account for later allocation during the fiscal year. This was noted due to the fact that any part of the grant funds not expended in this fiscal year must be returned to the state for reallocation to other counties who agree to expend the funds for emergency management programs. Staff is now requesting the Board to authorize the expenditure of the balance of the grant funds totaling approximately $37,000 for the following equipment to improve and expand the emergency management program: 1. Upgrade -weather system with 1.2 meter KU meter antenna, two -port FM3 KU satellite receiver, shipping and installation for $2,400. Equipment will receive enhanced weather images, measurements, and soundings from the new and recently launched Geostationary Orbiting Earth Satellite 8 (GOES 8) satellite. Staff is requesting the Board approve the sole source purchase of this equipment from Alden Electronics to preclude replacing a large portion of the existing $_30,000 county weather technology and equipment. Also requested is a converter @$500 to interconnect the large screen television to the weather information achieved from the equipment referenced above, for use by personnel in the Emergency Operations Center. 2. Two 35MM slide projectors with audio @$700 each for $1,400. The slide projectors would be used for public presentations and department training in conjunction with audio tapes which can be cued to automatically change the slides. 3. Two Omega 6 wireless remote units @$250 for $500. These units can be utilized with existing slide projectors and would eliminate the need to hard -wire remote slide changers over long distances in locations where disaster information presentations are given to large audiences. 65 �� BOOK 93 f'Auc F�8 September 6, 1994 BOOK 4. video projector for $6,600. The purchase of a video projector was earlier approved at an expense of $2,500. However, upon review after obtaining quotes, staff made the determination that the earlier price was incorrect and additional funds would be needed for this purchase. The projector would be used in the EOC, training sessions, and emergency services presentations. 5. Two laser pointers @$425 each for a total of $850. The laser pointers would be used in emergency services presentations, enabling speakers to point out and emphasize visual aids without having to leave the podium or microphone. The pointers would also be of benefit during Commission meetings when visual aids are utilized. 6. Laser printer @$700 to; be used in the Emergency Operations Center and as backup for existing printers when maintenance or repairs are needed. 7. Two overhead projectors @$400 each for a total of $800, to be used in department training programs and public presentations related to disaster preparedness. Equipment would be available to other departments when not in use by Emergency Services staff. 8. Two bubble jet printers @$500 for a total of $1,000. Printers are small and will be used with various computer systems in an EOC, static environment, or mobile field situation where information could be transmitted into hard copy without using a printer associated with the network system. 9. Replace the copy machine in the emergency management division with a new copier for $7,500. The equipment is available on state contract and the existing copier would be transferred to the Fire Division resulting in a ten- year -old copier now used being surplused. 10. Purchase approximately 15 tables @$300 each and approximately 30 chairs @$340 for an approximate total of $14,700. The tables and chairs would be used in the EOC when planned renovations are completed, or sooner if necessary. The tables now in the EOC are not functional in terms of emergency operations for use by the various agencies manning positions in the EOC. The conference type tables presently being used allow only one representative from each agency to sit at the Operations Group table, and when other representatives are present, they must be grouped behind the agency position. This creates space problems and personnel movement limitations in the EOC. The tables and chairs requested would be similar to the ones used at the State EOC and, if approved, will permit four individuals at each position and promote an orderly process for EOC operations. The chairs requested would be more comfortable and reduce fatigue for personnel required to staff the position for extended hours. The tables and chairs could also be arranged and used for conference room type meetings as necessary. M September 6, 1994 M M M ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Since staff has estimated prices for some of the above items, it is requested that the Board authorize staff to adjust the number of items purchased in order to expend the balance of the grant funds, in lieu of returning monies to the state to allocate to other counties for improving or expanding their emergency management programs. Alternatives suggested for -the Board to consider as follows: 1. Deny the expenditures and direct staff to return the unexpended funds to the State for reallocation to other counties to improve and expand their respective emergency management programs. 2. Approve a portion of the expenditures requested, and direct staff to return the balance of the grant funds to the State. 3. Approve a portion of the expenditures requested and direct staff to purchase other equipment with the balance of the grant funds, returning none to the State. 4. Approve the staff recommendation and authorize staff to adjust the number of items purchased in the categories stated in order to expend the balance of the grant funds in lieu of returning giant monies to the state for allocation to other counties. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board approve alternative #4 which will improve and expand the emergency management program in the county. Emergency Services Director Doug Wright recommended approval of Alternate #4 as set out in staff's recommendation. In response to Commissioner Adams inquiry, Director Wright verified that any part of the grant funds not expended in this fiscal year must be returned to the State for reallocation to other counties who agree to expend the funds for emergency management programs. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) approved Alternative #4 which will improve and expand the emergency management program in Indian River County, as recommended by staff. 67 BOOK 93 FAGS �-ju September 6, 1994 BOOK 9 3 F,tiU.E 2:31 ADDITION OF SIX NORTH COUNTY ROADS TO COUNTY'S ROAD The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/29/94: TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Director SUBJECT: Requests from Property Owners for the County to Assume Maintenance of the Following Roads: 1) 100th Ct from 93rd St. to 95th St.(Vero Lake Estates) 2) 102nd Ct from 92nd St. to 93rd St.(Vero Lake Estates) 3) 56th Ave from 43rd St to 42nd St. (Ranch Estates) 4) 77th St. East of Willow St. (Fellsmere) 5) 79th St. East of Willow St. (Fellsmere) 6) 99th Ct. from 81st St to 83rd St. (Vero Lake Estates) DATE: August 29, 1994 FILE: MUNT.Am DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Property owners along the above subject roadways have requested that their unpaved roads be added to the county's road grading program. Staff has evaluated the roadways using the standard unmaintained road evaluation criteria. The following score results were assigned: 1) 100th Court 80 Points 2) 102nd Court 75 Points 3) 56th Avenue 75 Points 4) 77th Street 110 Points 5) 79th Street 70 Points 6) 99th Court 75 Points ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Assigned scores for 100th Court, 102nd Court, 56th Avenue, 77th Street and 99th Court meet or exceed the minimum warrant of 75 points. The 79th Street score of 70 points is below the 75 minimum warrant, however, when Willow Street(130th Avenue) is paved, the score will increase to 75 points since it will connect with a paved county road. Also, the attorney for the Fellsmere Farms Water Control District is preparing an addendum to the 1975 Road Maintenance Agreement between the County and the District which will add South Willow Street(130th Avenue), 79th Street east of Willow Street, and 77th Street east of Willow Street to the list of roads covered by the agreement. In July, 1994, the District verbally approved adding these roads to the county grading route. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING Staff recommends the addition of all six roads to the county grading program-. The grading of -77th Street and 79th Street will commence after the Board approves the amendment to the 1975 Road Maintenance Agreement between the County and the Fellsmere Farms Water Control District. 68 September 6, 1994 Public Works Director Jim Davis explained that his recommendation is a little different from'the one - set out in the above memo. The District simply is granting the County easements to give us authority to grade 77th and 79th streets and South Willow Street instead of amending the 1975 Road Maintenance Agreement between the County and the"Fellsmere Farms Water Control District. He noted that his recommendation now is to accept the easements in lieu of the amendment to the agreement with the District. Commissioner Adams advised that the problem is that we would be amending an amendment. We are in the process of drawing up a whole new amendment. Director Davis explained we are looking at some alternatives in trying to first put together the South Willow Street paving project. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) approved the addition of the six roads listed above to the County grading program and accepted the easements from -the Fellsmere Farms Water Control District which allow the County to grade 77th Street, 79th Street, and Willow Street. LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH GHA GRAND HARBOR LTD. - STORM DRAINAGE STRUCTURES - I.R. BLVD. RIGHT-OF-WAY a The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/30/94: TO: James Chandler DATE: August 30, 1994 County Administrator r THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.y- Public Works Director p2m: Terry B. Thompson, PA Capital Projects Manager SUBJECT: License Agreenent Storm Drainage structures Indian River Boulevard Right -of --Way The attached license agreement with GAA Grand Harbor Ltd. allows Grand Harbor to occupy and maintain drainage pipes and structures located within the Indian River Boulevard right-of-way. M September 6, 1994 BOOK U� PA r -1 1w, BOOK 73 Ft�G-c 233 In consideration for the grant of, -this license, Grand Harbor will allow the County to drain runoff from the Indian River Boulevard right-of-way into the drainage pipes covered by this Agreement. The license also allows the County to drain runoff from the 53rd Street right-of-way into an outfall located at the east end of 53rd Street. Staff recommends that the Board approve the attached license agreement. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) approved the License for Use of County Right Of Way, as recommended by staff. LICENSE AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD 45TH STREET WATER SERVICE PROTECT The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/26/94: DATE: AUGUST 26, 1994 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PI DIRECTOR OF UTILITY ERVICES PREPARED JAMES D. CHAS AI C..� AND STAFFED MANAGER OF AS PROJECTS BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: 45TH STREET WATER SERVICE PROJECT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UW -94 -13 -DS BACKGROUND This is an area (45th Street, North Gifford Road, between 43rd Court and 58th Avenue/icings -Highway) where well water quality is substandard (reportedly confirmed by residents). County water needs to be provided. 45th Street/North Gifford Road is a master -planned line. There are 243 parcels included (platted and non -platted lots) to benefit from water service. ANALYSIS The area to be served include: Kings Highlands - 49 platted lots - 56th to 58th Avenues, 45th to 47th Streets. 70 September 6, 1994 Cavalier Estates - 126 platted lots 45th to 47th Streets. - 47th Court to 50th Avenue, Non -platted Parcels - 68 on the north and south sides of 45th Street and throughout the project area for a total of 243 lots. Of the non -platted parcels, 16 are undersized, 26 are more than .50 acres and less than 2 acres, and 26 are 2 acres or more. One hundred seventeen or 48% of the properties have improvements, including residences, mobile homes, salvage yards, and retail stores. Typical lot sizes in this project average .23 acres. One hundred ninety-one or 79% of the total lots in this project 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. Lots not meeting these minimum standards are called __"undersized lots." Environmental Health Director, Mike Galanis, advises this project should be a high priority especially due to the proximity of the salvage yards, mixed commercial, and small mobile home parks. Glenn Schuessler, Assistant Director of Environmental Health, added that the well water in this area is of poor quality. The attached map displays the area to benefit from the assessment project. This project is to be paid through the. assessment of -property owners along the proposed water line route.. In the interim, financing will be through the use of impact fee funds. Engineering design services for this project will be by the Department of Utility Services staff.' RECOMI ErTDATION The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve this proposed assessment project and authorize engineering design services by the Department of Utility Services staff. Commissioner Eggert asked if this project includes part of the extension that was requested by some of the subdivisions after we completed the Gifford system, and Utilities Director Terry Pinto confirmed that it does but there still are some other areas that have to be included. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED, by Comihissioner Macht, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) approved the proposed assessment project and authorized engineering design services by Utilities' staff, as recommended by Utilities Director Terry Pinto. 71 September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 FAGS• BOOK 93 F-nE 23 101H COURT, SW WATER ASSESSMENT PROTECT - CHANGE ORDERS & FINAL PAYMENT - TREASURE COAST CONTRACTING, The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/23/94: DATE: AUGUST 23, 1994 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PI P116- DIRECTOR OF UTILIT�VICES PREPARED ROBERT O. WISEMEN, P.E. AND STAFFED ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY S VICES SUBJECT: 10TH COURT, SW WATER ASSESSMENT PROJECT CHANGE ORDERS NO. 1, 2, AND 3 AND FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UW -93 -29 -DS on May 17, 1994, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approved and awarded the above-mentioned project to Treasure Coast Contracting, Inc., to construct a water main extension with all appurtenances to -provide service for all residences on the subject road. Construction has been completed, and the contractor has made application for final payment (see attached change orders and payment request). ANALYSIS All Indian River County requirements have been met; final clearance has been obtained from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. The original contract price for this project was $22,811.20. Change order numbers 1 and 2 were necessary to meet the requirements of Public Works. In order to avoid cutting the pavement and because of limited right-of-ways, the location of the water main was changed to the opposite side of the road. This change necessitated more sodding restoration. This additional sodding contributed to the largest change in the dollar amount. Change Order No. 3 was required to make the line more accessible for connection to Phase IV Water Expansion assessment project. Change Order No. 3 will be paid from Account No. 473-000-169-215.00 since it will benefit properties to be assessed in the Phase IV water expansion program. Change Order No. 1 $ 734.00 Change Order No. 2 3,442.50 Change Order No. 3 1,135.00 Total $5,311.50 These change orders adjust the contract price to $28,122.70. This adjustment does not exceed the estimated preliminary project cost. The previous payment made was $20,530.08 leaving a balance of $7,592.62 including retainage. RECOMMENDATION The Department of Utility Services recommends approval of Change Order Nos. 1, 2, and 3 and of the final payment request of $7,592.62 as payment in full for services rendered to Treasure Coast Contracting, Inc. 72 September 6, 1994 ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) approved Change Orders 1, 2, and 3 and final payment request from Treasure Coast Contracting, Inc. in the amount of $7,592.62, as recommended by staff. CHANGE ORDERS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD FORCE MAIN FROM GROVE ISLE TO VERO SHORES - CHANGE ORDER 2 AND FINAL PAYMENT - DRIVEWAYS, INC. The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/29/94: DATE: AUGUST 29 , 1994 TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER -" COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. PIwvp- DIRECTOR OF UTILITY VICES PREPARED ROBERT O. WISEMEN, P.E. AND STAFFED ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: FORCE MAIN FROM GROVE ISLE TO VERO SHORES WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. 21 - LABOR CONTRACT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. US -93 -31 -CS CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 AND FINAL PAY REQUEST BACKGROUND On March 15, 1994, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approved work authorization No. 21 on the labor contract to Driveways, Inc., to provide labor for installation of a force main from Grove Isle to Vero Shores Subdivision for the amount of $42,076.99. On June 28, 1994, the Board of County Commissioners approved Change Order No. 1 (copy -attached), which increased the fee to the amount of $76,108.19. ANALYSIS All Indian River County requirements have been met, and the project is accepted. The present approved labor cost is $76,108.19. Change Order No. 2 consists of additional clearing, seeding, mulching and hauling debris to'the landfill with dump fees, as well as some reduction in the estimated dewatering, paving, sodding, and pipe installation. These adjustments result in a change order in the amount of $2,266.96, which increases the labor cost to '$18,37A.,15. The previous amount paid was $46,400.98, leaving a balance of $31,974.17, including retainage. RECOMMENDATION The Department of Utility Services recommends approval of Change Order No. 2 and of the final payment request of $31,974.17 as payment in full for services rendered by Driveways, Inc. September 6, 1994 73 �0 BOON BOOK 93 NAGE 37 In response to Commissioner Eggert's inquiry, Utilities Director Terry Pinto confirmed that these fees were unexpected. We were pushed around on this project by other utilities, the D.O.T. and our own county departments. This was a very difficult job to build partly because of the water table. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) approved Change Order #2 and final payment request by Driveways, Inc. in the amount of $31,974.17, as recommended by staff. CHANGE ORDER #2 IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD REMOVAL OF OLD GENERAL DEVELOPMENT UTILITIESNERO HIGHLANDS STRUCTURES - TIM WRIGHT CONSTRUCTION DATE: AUGUST 29, 1994 ` TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: TERRANCE G. O DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES PREPARED TERRY H. DRUM AND STAFFED ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: REMOVAL OF THE OLD GENERAL DEVELOPMENT/VERO HIGHLANDS (TWO OFFICE BUILDINGS, ONE (1) EQUIPMENT BUILDING, FOUNDATION CONCRETE WALKWAYS, ALL EXISTING CONCRETE STRUCTURES AND ASPHALT DRIVE On June 29, 1994, area demolition contractors were contacted for quotes for the removal of the above -referenced subject facilities. Three contractors have submitted their quotes (see attached list). On August 10, 1994, the Indian River County Public Works Department was contacted for a possible in house project., ANALYSIS The condition of these small buildings are very poor; including, but not limited to, leaking roofs, sagging ceilings and insect infestation. All usable materials, equipment and files have been removed and the buildings are ready for demolition. Upon completion, the property will be surplused. 74 September 6, 1994 F_ A The lowest quote to remove all the above -referenced items is $24,400.00. This quote was submitted by Jim Wright Construction, Inc. The Public Works Department submitted a memo to the Department of Utility Services, stating that it would be of, no savings to the County for their Department to complete the job. (See attached memo.) The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the awarding of the lowest bid to Jim Wright Construction, Inc., in the amount of $24,400.00. ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) approved the Agreement for the removal of the old GDU/Vero Highlands structures by Jim Wright Construction, Inc. in the amount of $24,400, as recommended by staff . AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD COURTHOUSE ADVISORY COMMITTEE'S REQUEST FOR CONDEMNATION OF HARSHBARGER PROPERTY FOR TUDICUL COMPLEX The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/25/94 and letter dated 9/6/94: TO: `!71 O OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROMs Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney DATE: August 25, 1994 RE: COURTHOUSE ADVISORY COMMITTEE CONDEMNATION REQUEST On August 18, 1994, the Courthouse Advisory Committee passed a motion requesting that the County Commission authorize the County Attorney's Office to proceed with condemnation proceedings against the Harshbarger property, which is the last remaining piece of property in the judicial complex. The Committee felt that the entire block had been dedicated as a judicial complex and that to allow inconsistent uses to be made of the property now would only increase the ultimate acquisition cost in the future. Judge Vocelle and members of the county bar association have requested the opportunity to speak to the commission concerning this matter. REQUESTED ACTION: Request direction from the Board. 75 BOOK 93 FADE « j September 6, 1994 BOOK 9 3 PnuE 239 JOHN H. POWER ATTORNEY AT LAw 1413 21ST STREET, SUITE ATELEPHONE: (407) 776-3393 VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960 3456�$A FACSIMILE: (407) 778-3394 September 6, 1994 Indian River County Commission 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Re: Acquisition of the Harshbarger property Dear Commissioners: The Indian River County Bar Association would like to reiterate their previously stated position that the county should acquire the above -referenced parcel of property. We feel that this property is needed in order to complete the symetry of the physical boundaries of the courthouse complex and we believe that given the growth of the county, this parcel will have a functional use at some point in the future, whether that be for expansion of courthouse facilities, additional parking or a small park for the use of those involved in court -related activities. Judge Charles Smith has requested that I advise the County Commission that the local circuit judges concur with the position of the Bar Association. Assuming the parcel in question will eventually be needed, the county can either pay now or pay more later. The Bar Association submits that it is better to pay now. Thank you for your attention in this matter. Pr 'W' c e , J hn . Power ent Indian River County Bar Association Commissioner Macht advised that the Courthouse Advisory Committee wants the County to purchase the property as soon as possible or, failing that, to issue a declaration of taking. 76 September 6, 1994 Commissioner Adams didn't consider the taking of the Harshbarger property necessary for public health, safety, or welfare. Administrator Chandler' felt we need to renew our appraisals if we go forward with condemnation. Commissioner Macht explained that the property is supposed to be the site of the offices of the Public Defender and State Attorney in the year 2020. Commissioner Eggert noted that the County Clerk is supposed to move also when that happens, but she never remembered that being discussed at all during the Courthouse planning sessions. After brief discussion, Chairman Tippin announced that the current consensus is that there is no immediate need for the property. VERO BEACH MUNICIPAL FIREMEN'S RELIEF & PENSION FUND The Board reviewed the following memo dated 8/17/94: TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney DATE: August 17, 1994 RE: Vero Beach's Municipal Firemen's Relief & Pension Fund The attached letter from the City of Vero Beach requests County approval of an amendment to the Vero Beach Municipal Firemen's Relief and Pension Fund Ordinance (Pension Plan), which would allow for a wider range of investments for the fund assets. Under the agreements between the County and the City resulting in the creation of the South Indian River County Fire District, firemen then working were given the opportunity of joining the Florida Retirement System or of staying in the Pension Plan. Once that choice was made, the fund was closed. By agreement with the County the City retained the sole responsibility and authority for managing the pension assets. In spite ..of the County's lack of authority over the fund, the County retains liability for any shortfall in the pension benefits. It is this latent responsibility of the County which leads the City to ask for the County's permission in the requested pension fund investment changes. The requested changes are allowed by Chapter 175, Florida Statutes, and are shown on the attached ordinance, section 3.13.1. In short the City is asking the County to allow some additional risk in exchange for some expected increase in return on invested funds. Requested Action: Request direction' of the Board's position regarding approval of the proposed City ordinance. 77 September 6, 1994 BOOK f'AGF. 40 aooK 93 F,,1GE 241 Vero Beach City Manager Tom Nason presented the City's position. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) favored approval of an amendment to the Vero Beach Municipal Firemen's Relief and Pension Fund Ordinance which would allow a wider range of investments for the fund assets. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING COORDINATION OF PURCHASES OF HIGH-TECH EQUIPMENT THROUGH TECHNOLOGICAL TASK FORCE APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/1/94: TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Commissioner Kenneth A. Macht DATE: September 1, 1994 RE: Council of Public Officials - Creation of Technological Task Force At the last meeting of the Council of Public Officials, the Council unanimously moved to create a technological task force as a forum for coordinating high-technology purchases by the Council's member: governments. Requested Action: I would like to ask that the Chairman be authorized by the Board of County Commissioners to sign the attached letter to the Council governments asking that the governments authorize their staffs to coordinate their high-technology purchases with the task force. Commissioner Macht explained that --the adoption of the proposed resolution would not imply that the various entities have to do this. He noted that Hetra is making a presentation to the Vero Beach City Council on November 15. 78 September 6, 1994 O � Commissioner Eggert suggested and the Board agreed to change the language in the second paragraph' to read: "to make recommendations in all matters relating to high-technology equipment purchases." ON MOTION by Commissioner— Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0, Commissioner Bird being absent) adopted Resolution 94-108 (with the change in paragraph 2), authorizing and directing its staff to coordinate all decisions concerning purchase or use of advanced technology equipment with the Technology Task Force appointed by the Council of Public Officials. RESOLUTION NO. 94- 108 A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER. COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AND THROUGH ITS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING ITS STAFF TO COORDINATE ALL DECISIONS CONCERNING PURCHASE OR USE OF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT WITH THE TECHNOLOGY TASK FORCE APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County is a member of the Council of Public Officials, which is a local body created to foster coordination and cooperation among various Indian River County governmental agencies, with a goal of making government more efficient and less expensive; and WHEREAS, the Council of Public Officials' has created a Technology Task Force to make recommendations concerning all matters relating to high- technology equipment purchases and use and coordination of the technology needs of the member governments; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County finds that having its staff coordinate with the Technology Task Force on technology would be in the interest of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 1. The staff of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County is hereby authorized and directed to cooperate with the Technology Task Force of the Council of Public Officials on all decisions relating to purchase or use of high-technology equipment. 79 BOOK 93 PAGE 244" September 6, 1994 BOOK 93 PAu 243 2. This authority and direction shall be interpreted broadly to encourage full cooperation with the Task Force. The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner Adams, and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Eggert, and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as followss Chairman John W. Tippin Aye Vice Chairman Kenneth R. Macht Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Absent Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 6th day of September, 1994. Attests Jeff�gy K. Barton, Clerk INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA -By its Board of County Commissioners B �,• John Awfilr Chairman EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING Chairman Tippin announced that immediately upon adjournment, the Board would reconvene sitting as the District Commissioners of the Emergency Services District. Those Minutes are being prepared separately. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT MEETING Chairman Tippin announced that immediately upon adjournment of the Emergency Services District Meeting, the Board would reconvene sitting as the District Commissioners of the Solid Waste Disposal District. Those Minutes are being prepared separately. J .`- —. hying no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded 441 imously, the Board adjourned at 10:40 o'clock a.m. :tion; ` CIerk APPROVED ON OCTOBER 25, 1994 80 September 6, 1994 71 hn W. Ti pin, Chairman