HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/5/1995=MINUTES AtTACHED =
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. FLORIDA
A G E N D A
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5,1995
9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER
County Administration Building
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida
Kenneth R. Macht, Chairman (District 3)
Fran B. Adams, Vice Chairman (District 1)
Richard N. Bird (District 5)
Carolyn K. Eggert (District 2)
John W. Tippin _ (District 4)
•11•• 1 II 9 11 D1 ;
James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board
2. INVOCATION Elinor O'Malley
Science of Mind Center
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE EGIANC E - Comm. John W. Tippiln
Add Item 11-E, New Horizons In -House Jail Program
Funding.
411111111114-M1791 :►l: 1. 7. 10 95 Dki 515 Y 1�
None
Regular Meeting of November 14, 1995
A. Report on Voucher for Payment of Annual
Contributions
Housing Assistance Payments Program
(memorandum dated November 21, 1995)
B. Award Bid #602 / Fumish & Install Sod
(memorandum dated NeireLnber 27, 1995)
C. 65th Avenue R -O -W Acquisition; Ronald Baratta
(memorandum dated November 27, 1995)
D. Temporary Water Service Agreement - Indian
River County and Jean & Herbert Simigran
(memorandum dated November 27, 1995)
E. Temporary Water Service Agreement - Indian
River County and David R. & Bambi L. Simigran
(memorandum dated November 27, 1995)
F. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 007
(memorandum dated November 29, 1995)
G. Renewal of 9-1-1 Center Annual UPS Maintenance
Agreement with EPE Technologies, Inc.
(memorandum dated November 28, 1995)
H. Cancellation of Outstanding Taxes
(memorandum dated November 22, 1995)
YYII 119 1130411 OKI] �1 31 y 04 :
Qr"11
/ DI 11400 1 AN VA WA" DIC1611 N .7
None
9:05 A.M. 9. PUBLIC ITEMS
.1: . 1►
1. Dorothy McGee Perfect's Request to Rezone
Approximately 17.5 Acres from A-1 to RS -3
(memorandum dated November 20, 1995)
2. Consideration and Formal Selection of Neigh-
borhood Revitalization Category for Com-
munity Development Block Grant Application
Submittal
(memorandum dated November 20, 1995)
3. Escambia County Housing Finance Authority
(memorandum dated November 21, 1995)
t ' 1- 1113 11 043
None
1►Y 11 :I u 1_I►1 Y:- 711, FTV 11 Y
None
i �, : YuIY :u :11Y '
Staff's Request for the Board of County
Commissioners to Invoke the Pending
Ordinance Doctrine for a Change in a
Setback Regulation
(memorandum dated November 29, 1995)
11. DEPARTMENTAL ATTE S (conte:
B. Emerged Services
None
C. General Services
None
D. Leisure Services
None
E. Office of Management and Budget
None
F. Personnel
None
G. Public Works
Wentworth Ditch Maintenance Agreement
(memorandum dated November 21, 1995)
H. Utilities
Water Expansion Plan - Phase V, Contract 3
Change Order No. 1 and Final Pay Request
(memorandum dated November 27, 1995)
12. COUNTY ATTO NE
Agreement for Extension of Time for Performance -
Grand Harbor / EMS Station
(memorandum dated November 29, 1995)
1 ulul 1 �I Y u
I X11 I � I 1� I : ,J •. I
C. Commissioner Richard N Bird
E. Commissioner John W. Toppin
None
B. Solid Waste Disposal District
None
C. Environmental Control Board
None
1 1 1; ZIu Z
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 x408 at least 48 hours in advance
of meeting.
M
Iulul 1►I
; Y u �
E. Commissioner John W. Toppin
None
B. Solid Waste Disposal District
None
C. Environmental Control Board
None
1 1 1; ZIu Z
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 x408 at least 48 hours in advance
of meeting.
M
December 5, 1995
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, December 5,
1995, at 9:00 a.m. Present were Kenneth R. Macht, Chairman; Fran
B. Adams, Vice Chairman; Richard N. Bird; and John W. Tippin.
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert was absent due to illness. Also
present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P.
Vitunac, County Attorney; and P. J. Jones, Deputy Clerk.
Chairman Macht called the meeting to order.
Reverend Elinor O'Malley of Science of Mind Center gave the
invocation, and Commissioner Tippin led the Pledge of Allegiance to
the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
County Administrator Chandler requested the addition of Item
11-E, discussion regarding New Horizons In -House Jail Program
Funding.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously added
the above item to the Agenda.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or additions
to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 14, 1995. There
were none.
ON MOTION
Commissioner
(Commissioner
approved the
November 14,
by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by
Bird, the Board by a 4-0 vote
Eggert being absent) unanimously
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
1995, as written.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 1
BOOK
96 N:jE 697
PF -
BOCK 96 WH 6,98
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Adams asked that Item 7-C be pulled for
discussion.
A. Report on Voucher for Payment of Annual Contributions - Housing
Assistance Payments Program
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 21, 1995:
DATE: November 21, 1995
TO: The Honorable Members of the SUBJECT: Report on Voucher for payment
Board of County Commissioners of Annual Contributions
Housing Assistance Payments
Program
FROM: Finance Department
Rental Assistance Department
The attached HUD Forms 52681 and HUD Form 52595, covering the 1994/95 Fiscal Year, were prepared
by the Finance Department and the Rental Assistance Department staff.
We respectfully request that the Honorable members of the Board of County Commissioners authorize the
Chairman's signature for the submission of these forms to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
authorized the submission of HUD Forms to the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development, as
recommended by staff.
B. Bid ##6032 - Furnish & Install Sod - East Coast Sod
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 27, 1995:
DATE: November 27, 1995
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director
Department of General Service
FROM: Fran Boynton Powell, Purchasing Manager�
SUBJ: Award Bid #6032/Furnish & Install Sod
Annual Contract/Road and Bridge
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Bid Opening Date:
Advertising Dates:
Specifications Mailed to:
Replies:
DECEMBER 5, 1995
2
November 15, 1995
November 1, 8, 1995
Twenty Two (22) Vendors
Three (3) Vendors
VENDOR
East Coast Sod
Ft Pierce, FL
Florida Sod Enterprises
Vero Beach, FL
R & R Turf Farms
Palm Bay, FL
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the following:
BID TABULATION
Bahia - .11 Sq Ft
St Augustine - .19 Sq Ft
XL 19 Floratam - .20 Sq Ft
Bahia - .13 Sq Ft
St Augustine - .20 Sq Ft
XL 19 Floratam - No Bid
Bahia - .15 Sq Ft
St Augustine - .21 Sq Ft
XL 19 Floratam - No Bid
1. Award the bid for Sod to East Coast Sod, as the lowest
most responsive, and responsible bidders meeting
specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid.
2. Establish an Open End Contract with East Coast Sod, for
Sod with a not to exceed amount of $90,000.00 during
the period December 1, 1995 through September 30, 1996.
Last year's expenditures were $76,977.39.
3. Authorize the Purchasing Manager to renew this contract
subject to satisfactory performance, zero cost
increase, vendor acceptance, and the determination that
renewal is in the best interest of the County.
ON MOTION
by Commissioner Bird,
SECONDED
by
Commissioner
Adams, the Board by
a 4-0
vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
awarded Bid #6032 to East Coast Sod and approved an
open end contract in a not -to -exceed amount of
$90,000 for the period December 1, 1995 through
September 30, 1996, as recommended by staff.
CONTRACT WILL BE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD WHEN EXECUTED AND RECEIVED.
C. 66th Avenue R -O -W Acquisition - Ronald Baratta
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 27, 1995:
TO: James E. Chandler, DATE: November 27, 1995
County Administrator
CONSENT AGENDA
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Directo
SUBJECT: 66th Avenue Right -of -Way Acquisition; Ronald Baratta
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
A 50' wide, 1,290' strip of land on the east side of Ronald Baratta's property
adjacent to 66th Avenue is needed for the paving improvement project.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 3 BOOK 96 pg[ 699
Fr
Boa 96 park 700
The property owner has executed a $25,000 contract on the condition that the
County provides Mr. Baratta with two culverted driveway accesses, required for
maintenance of the grove. Both accesses should be located on 66th Avenue, one
at the south end of the property and one at the center of the properly. Mr. Baratta
intends to subdivide his property into five acre parcels and requests the culvert
in the center access be a minimum width of 30 feet.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Staff request the Board of County Commissioners approve the purchase and
authorize the Chairman to execute the contract.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
66th Avenue (Lateral "Al funding to be from Secondary Road Account 109-214-
541-067.74.
Commissioner Adams questioned the purchase price of $25,000
for the additional right-of-way and providing 2 culverted driveways
and wanted to know whether 1 driveway would be sufficient.
Public Works Director Jim Davis explained this is the normal
provision for citrus grove property and this is a long road which
requires 2 culverted driveways.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
approved the Contract with Ronald Baratta in the
amount of $25,000, as recommended by staff.
CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
D. Temporary Water Service Agreement -
Simiaran - 119 Bristol_ Street. Sebastian
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 27, 1995:
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR NOVEMBER 27, 1995
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINT
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY S RVICES
PREPARED JAMES D. CHAS
AND MANAGER OF ASTAe-i-T PROJECTS
STAFFED BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: TEMPORARY WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AND JEAN AND HERBERT SIMIGRAN
BACKGROUND
Jean and Herbert Simigran have requested that temporary service be
installed from the water line on Arcadia Drive to service their
property on 119 Bristol Street, Sebastain, Florida prior to the
installation of a water main on Bristol Street.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 4
ANALYSIS
The Agreement states that the Indian River County Department of
Utility Services shall provide temporary water service to Mr. and
Mrs. Simigran until such time that a water line may be constructed
on Bristol Street by assessment. They agree to pay all fees
required to make this connection. They further agree to
participate in the assessment and to reconnect to this water line
as required by the Indian River County Department of Utility
Services.
RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners approve the attached Agreement with Mr. and
Mrs. Simigran on the Consent Agenda.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
approved the Agreement with Jean and Herbert
Simigran, as recommended by staff.
CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
E. Temporary Water Service Agreement -
Simigran - 115 Bristol Street, Sebastian
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 27, 1995:
DATE: NOVEMBER 27, 1995
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR l�
FROM: TERRANCE G. PI v
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
PREPARED JAMES D. CHAST
AND MANAGER OF AS NT PROJECTS
STAFFED BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: TErPORARY WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AND DAVID R. AND BAMBI L.
SIMIGRAN
BACKGROUND
David R. and Bambi L. Simigran have requested that temporary
service be installed from the water line on Arcadia Drive to
service their property at 115 Bristol Street, Sebastian, Florida
prior to the installation of a water main on Bristol Street.
ANALYSIS
The Agreement states that the Indian River County Department of
Utility Services shall provide temporary water service to Mr. and
Mrs. Simigran until such time that a water line may be constructed
DECEMBER 5, 1995 5 boa 96 PAu 701
BD�K96 wz 702
on Bristol Street by assessment. They agree to pay all fees
required to make this connection. They further agree to
participate in the assessment and to reconnect to this water line
as required by the Indian River County Department of Utility
Services.
RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners approve the attached Agreement with Mr. and
Mrs. Simigran on the Consent Agenda.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
approved the Contract with David R. and Bambi L.
Simigran, as recommended by staff.
CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
F. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 007
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 29, 1995:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: November 29, 1995
SUBJECT: MISCELLANEOUS BUDGET AMENDMENT 007
CONSENT AGENDA
FROM: Joseph A. Bain
OMB Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The attached budget amendment is to appropriate funding for the following:
1. At the October 3, 1995 Commission meeting the Board of County Commissioners
approved ShenffWheelees request to authorize the purchase of a StepVan, Rescue
Phone, Tactical Equipment and Radar and Video Equipment for a total amount of
$68,038. This budget amendment will allocate the funding.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached budget amendment
007.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
approved Budget Amendment 007, as recommended by
staff.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 6
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A Baird
OMB Director
BUDGET AMENDMENT: 007
DATE: November 29, 1995
Entry
Number
Funds/Department/Account Name
Account Number
Increase
Decrease
1.
REVENUE
SPECIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
FUND/Cash Forward
1124000-389-040.00
$68,038
$0
EXPENSE
SPECIAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT/Automotive
112-600-521-066.42
$68,038
$0
G. Renewal of 911 Center Annual UPS
Maintenance Agreement - EPE Technologies, Inc.
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 28, 1995:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Jim Chandler, County Administrator
FROM: Doug Wright, Directo�GG DATE:, November 28, 1995
Emergency Services �,
SUBJECT: Renewal of 9-1-1 Center Annual UPS Maintenance
Agreement With EPE Technologies, Inc.
The UPS Maintenance Agreement for the UPS system at the 9-1-1
Communications Center has been in effect with EPE Technologies since
February, 1990, and is renewed on an annual basis. The agreement is
necessary to provide annual maintenance of the batteries and other
components of the UPS system to preclude a failure of the 9-1-1
equipment at the Communications Center.
The Agreement provides the same level of service, however, the cost
has increased $600 over the previous year from $6,900 to $7,500.
Although the cost has increased, it should be noted that the contract
price for the current fiscal ' year is less than the $7,822 amount paid
in 1993.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Board authorize staff to renew the UPS
Maintenance Agreement for the amount of $7,500 to be paid from funds
allocated for this purpose in the current fiscal year budget.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
approved the UPS Maintenance Agreement with EPE
Technologies, Inc., as recommended by staff.
AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
DECEMBER 5, 1995
Boa 96 pnE` 04
H. Cancellation of Outstanding Taxes:
Yawn - MF Indian River Holdings - United Companies
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 22, 1995:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: November 22, 1995
j2.FROM: Le R. Beller, CLA, County Attbrney's Office
THRU: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
RE: CANCELLATION OF OUTSTANDING TABES
PROPERTY PURCHASED FOR COUNTY USE
The County recently acquired some rights-of-way and lots by Purchasing,
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 and copies sent to the Property Appraiser
and Fixed Assets Department.
REQUESTED ACTION: Board authorize the . Chairman to sign the
attached resolutions cancelling taxes upon lands the County recently
acquired.
Attachment: Resolutions - Parcel #05-33-39-00004-0020-00003.0
Tilara E. and Donald E. Yawn
R/W - 58th Avenue - Parcel #123
Parcel #07-33-40-00000-0030-00001.0
MF Indian River Holdings, Ltd.
,Indian River Blvd. South
Parcel #35-32-39-00004-0050-00001.0
United Companies Lending Corp.
Acquisition by Purchasing Dept.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
adopted Resolution 95-149, cancelling taxes on
publicly owned lands for Parcel #05-33-39-00004-
0020-00003.0, Tilara E. and Donald E. Yawn, pursuant
to recommendations by staff.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 8
Re: R/W - Parcel #123, 58th Avenue
Parcel #05-33-39-00004-0020-00003.0
Tilara E. and Donald E. Yawn
RESOLUTION NO. 95-.149
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:
1. Any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, against the property
described in O. R. Book 1079, Page 1662, 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.
2. The Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners is hereby directed to
send a certified copy of this Resolution to the Tax Collector and the
Property Appraiser.
The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner Bird ,
and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Adams , and, upon being
put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Kenneth R. Macht Aye
Vice Chairman Fran B. Adams Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Absent
Commissioner John W. Tippin Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted
this 5 day of December , 1995.
BOARD OF LINTY COMM HERS
INDI CO Y, IDA
B
enneth ach , airman
J fln . Cl -Q-
A achment: Sketch Legal Description
co: Fixed Assets Department
DECEMBER 5, 1995 9 BOOK 96 PArE 705
BOOK
RESOLUTION 95-149
Statutory Warranty Deed
Parcel $123 - R/W - 58th Ave. DOCUMENTARY STAMPS
0 Tax ID A05-33-39-00004-0020-00003.0 DEED S 7 a
n NOTE S
STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED INMAN K. BARTON. CLERK
NIIIAN RIVER COUNTY
THIS INDENTURE, made this 47 day of OqA' -�L�
1995, between
TILARA E. YAWN, formerly known as TILARA
COFFEY, joined by her husband DONALD E. YAWN,
whose address is 5815 24th Street, Vero Beach, FL
32966, GRANTOR,
and
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of
the State of Florida, whose address is 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960, GRANTEE,
IN THE RECORDS
OF
iERrR�unWITNESSETH: Cc K.
T
INDIAN RIVER CO., FLA.
That GRANTOR, for and in consideration of the sum of $10.00
and other good and valuable consideration to GRANTOR in hand paid by
GRANTEE, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, has granted,
bargained, and sold to the GRANTEE, and GRANTEE'S heirs and assigns
forever, the following. described land, situate, lying, and being in
Indian River County, Florida:
EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF
and GRANTOR does hereby fully warrant the title to the land, and will
defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever.
SignAinhe press ce of:signprin y.i Tsign-
Witness
printed name: rg,�r1/4 C'p"&a
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
0
Tiles E. Yaw
e_L _
Donald E. Ye
APPRQVEO AS TO FORM
AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
Ch -Aries P. Vilmac
County Attorney
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ,I l r,*
day of , 1995, by TILARA E. YAWN, formerly known as
TILARA COFF , oined by her husband DONA.LD E. YAWN. They are
personally known to me or produced fW fr0v-*f-Q-rWas identification.
nx YSu0•/n =tasYw o
sign:
a
Cprint(/a
a e:
z4y CDmM4n
IERRYICYPERT
NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORR)A
COMMISSION NO. CC34�76
MY COMMLSSION EXP. MAR.11998
DECEMBER 5, 1995 10
96 PA.tE 706
to
CA
i
c�
0
N
i
a%
0
H
a
0
N
C
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The East 15 feet of Lots 3 do 4, Block '2
according to the plat of Rivera Estates recorded
in plat Book 1, Page 12 of the Public Records
of Indian River County, Florida.
Lying in Indian River County, Florida.
24TH STREET (Oleander Ave — Plat)
150' Plat
SCALE 1'-40'
150' Plat
110
I
15•
N
®
I�
3
0
CERTIFlCATION
W
N
1
(W
r
Mapper licensed to practice in the state N
of Florida, that this sketch was made under my
immediate supervision, and that it is
accurate and correct. I further certify
that this sketch meets the Minimum Technical standards as described in Chapter 61G17
O
1
75
PREPARED FOR INDIAN RIVER OOUNTY
I
a
THIS IS NOT A SURVEY 9
I
!1 ol
15'
SCALE 1'-40'
-•.ten i n,r ► n i in
0
rq
rq
kn
Os
w
w
U
w
A
150' Plat
3
0
CERTIFlCATION
N
I, Charles A. Cramer, hereby certify that I am a
registered Professional Surveyor and
Mapper licensed to practice in the state N
of Florida, that this sketch was made under my
immediate supervision, and that it is
accurate and correct. I further certify
that this sketch meets the Minimum Technical standards as described in Chapter 61G17
of the Florida Administrative Code,
pursuant to F.S. Chapter 472.
PREPARED FOR INDIAN RIVER OOUNTY
EN014EERING DEPARTMENT c
�7
11
THIS IS NOT A SURVEY 9
Charles A. Cramer, P.S.M. Reg.X4094 1840
25th St, Vero Beach, FL 32960
SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY LES' DESCRIPTION
Indian River County Surveyor (407)
567-8000
Date 7-/49 Ar
-•.ten i n,r ► n i in
0
rq
rq
kn
Os
w
w
U
w
A
MOK 9 � H 708
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
adopted Resolution 95-150, cancelling taxes on
publicly owned lands for Parcel #07-33-40-00000-
0030-00001.0, MF Indian River Holdings, Ltd.,
pursuant to recommendations by staff.
Re: R/W - Indian River Blvd. South
Parcel #07-33-40-00000-0030-00001.0
MF Indian River Holdings, Ltd.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-.150
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
CANCELLING CERTAIN DELINQUENT TABES 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:
1. Any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, against the property
described in O. R. Book 1079, Page 1657, which was recently acquired by
Indian River County for right of way purposes on South Indian River
Boulevard, are hereby cancelled, pursuant to the authority of section
196.28, F.S.
2. The Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners is hereby directed to
send a certified copy of this Resolution to the Tax Collector and the
Property Appraiser.
The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner Bird
and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Adams , and, upon being
put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Kenneth R. Macht Aye
Vice Chairman Fran B. Adams Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Absent
Commissioner John W. Tippin Aye
DECEMBER 5, 1995
12
RESOLUTION 95-150
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted
this _ 5 day of ar , 1995.
BOARD OF COUNTY CO HERS
INP IAN VER CO , F A
Attest:
By
Re eth R. Ma t, ratan
(�arton, C k
�j tachment: Sketch Legal Description
cc: Fixed Aooets Department
Signed Cine the presence of:
sign: /C - Y4�
Witness 'e. 9ka EX
printed me: AeJ4
sign: �&4 ag,
Witness
printed name: Chariu. Funk
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
M F INDIAN RIVER HOLDINGS,
LTD., a Florida limited
partnership
By: Indian River Joint Venture,
a Florida general partnership,
Its sole general partner
By: The Housing Group, Inc., a
FlPjef5eyr�Ks&6,AftV-s1dent ation, as a general
pa
B
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
/n day of -AA , 1995, by Jeffrey Meehan, as President of The
Housing Group, Inc., a Florida corporation, on behalf of said
DECEMBER 5, 1995 13 �an� ' j� 70
Statutory Warranty Deed
Shp
Indian River Blvd. South (West R/W)
r
Tax ID $07-33-40-00000-0030-00001.0
c IN THE RECORDS OF
JEFFRFYKSAR10N
` CLERK CIRCUIT COURT
STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED INDIAN RIVER CO., FLA.
.o d
THIS INDENTURE, made this i'l day of 7� ,
05
PH �
1995, between
M F INDIAN RIVER HOLDINGS, LTD.,. a Florida
w
limited partnership, the address of which is 601
_.
Bayshore Blvd., Suite 650, Tampa, FL 33606,
-n ? j
�a A.�
GRANTOR,
o
and
`n
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of
.,,
the State of Florida, whose address is 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960, GRAN'INgUMENTARY STAMPS
DEED $ /
1
WITNESSETH : NOTE_
JEFFREY K. BARTON. CLERK
,
INDIAN iIYT COUNTY
E10.00
That GRANTOR, for and in considers on o t e sum of
and other good and valuable consideration to GRANTOR in hand paid by
�?
GRANTEE, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, has granted,
--
bargained, and sold to the GRANTEE, and GRANTEE'S heirs and assigns
o
forever, the following described land, situate, lying, and being in
Indian River County, Florida:
EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF
and GRANTOR does hereby fully warrant the title to the land, and will
defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever.
Signed Cine the presence of:
sign: /C - Y4�
Witness 'e. 9ka EX
printed me: AeJ4
sign: �&4 ag,
Witness
printed name: Chariu. Funk
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
M F INDIAN RIVER HOLDINGS,
LTD., a Florida limited
partnership
By: Indian River Joint Venture,
a Florida general partnership,
Its sole general partner
By: The Housing Group, Inc., a
FlPjef5eyr�Ks&6,AftV-s1dent ation, as a general
pa
B
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
/n day of -AA , 1995, by Jeffrey Meehan, as President of The
Housing Group, Inc., a Florida corporation, on behalf of said
DECEMBER 5, 1995 13 �an� ' j� 70
Mox
RESOLUTION 95-150
c' U corporation, in its capacity as a general partner of Indian River Joint
r? � T Venture, a Florida general partnership, in its capacity as the sole
CL) C a) general partner of M F Indian River Holdings, Ltd., a Florida limited
F- U- > o partnership. He is personally known to me ei>.gredt
a a.
U)alga: �
.�
w �, 'o •�+^'•., OFFICIAL SEAL Notary Public
V LEA R. KELLER
a. a - C7 My Commission Expires printed nam ;•• q Q /{eLLFk
Z a� May 18, 1998 COmmI88io
< �i:s� Cc or
••!and;• Comm. No. cc 194154
commencing apt the Notthwert t:dtHoi: bf dot/AthUhtt,bk 3,•. gGetion
�. Township 33 booth f1AHglI 40 fyArt tUH goUkh 9!6ji 1 g9" l;ast
along the North iihe of .Aid dd,06f• MAntLett i A didtAhca of
'740.25 te*t to the Webt tight-of-4►ay bf ihdiAH ki.rrt boulbvdtd
and Point of beginhingl 'thAHCA *UK IbUth Djolitd4w haat Alog
said Meet right-of-way A diltAHbr b 416,tl1 iobt td A poiht of n
curve) Thbnce cohtihuA bodthotiy Altih l eutito boncave tb the
weat having a central Ah die df 260 9146 0 A itte of 610.93
Eeet, stn dtc diatancs of 3i2,18 foot Eb ILA 1htetrectioti bf thio
900th lihe of the North 25 AE+ter Of raid dodAtHaibht Lot i!''lhehce
run North 89021'S9" 1446t 61t1Hg @Aid 9oUCh 11He a di6tAHcA of
26.32 felts TheII fun 14otthrtiy AloHg a II eoncdve td the
Wes. having d eenttdl angle bf 26090125", a tadiue of 894.93
feet, do atc dibt>lneb of 31j:94 f!►At td A boittt of tahjAhcy)
Thencd tUh Nottlt 01015105 Wd@t A dirtlhce of til -ib fbbt to the
North 11he of said dovbthmeht J,tit 2l thlthcll tun South 09021159
East 15.02 feet t0 Chit poiHt Of hA4ihHihcj.
said 13atcbi cohtdinlhg 0.41! AbtoA, II Ot i@@r.
I I FARWNC XWODR NoeR.e
r equal POCK RIM 3UBO WOP UNIT a.I I ROAR PARK
,ro.� I Mclf 'Y UNAMS m sY uNAW To W M011141AST C s c6I
70.09 PALS w CANAL •r"S IN CANAL "AOC
-% uTa6011 so• e 1 3x.301 1 FAW M CAt
!140.40• ti
0016'12' w
1_ 740.26' 40.00'
24 660.62
r
r—T—-- —_— 1&07,175.07, 429 s'
I NdIM LKI COVE"NMENi LOT J� an.
1 y M96351 OCT Ota• CO1CIII
35.00 AS60G' jji 3 6041's6• E J
I.. M00, A7D UWIfn '-25.02 40.00'
W -W -CF -MAY ' « K� W7 U?" T"'r"'"
TO 6t DMCATED s aesro& r, ».�
w ;j auj
25.00' MOTIONALOP. D:
RIGHT-OF-WAY 26.00' ADDI110NAL
�1TD at ACWUftU RIOIIT-Or WAY
l (0.45! AC) m Y TO BE 9 COIARCD
MUN RIVSH APTNRRTS b, 111 8
TRACT 'A' n lil
8 9 z2(MUM RIFER AP17fiM I
IA a N TRACT •1r• b
�r 11W__ _11f0AP irAY►ID- Q �n���
(� WI G%D9ERNYENT
WT'q 'M%7& l -W1Gf 44fOL• y N WT 9 co y�
4-••- 25 00' ��AopOFFD''11W1E10��NYrAL Fau! M M01 _
5l TO OEDICATEO ��• 'q sR •Yr CaeAER
z`asI1Q4r nArKD I R 'sn°e�-� I
-Crow AS60a• Z
JIM sT>wrr 1 � ?
J
a 20W'25' ' e - TT•a4'ao
40.00' ' CET 4-W C'AMA 2046'46' I D . 1742'31
t/ wm l'i A. P/�
nWT o r/�rr° sTA�lI I
•� O
'.VAAP. �'•.
1 N 6671'9' w t
gy
1720.30' l
• sauTN Lou[ K iNE NmTu s tom;, -I �r No= CORMEe -•
23 ACRCS OOYlRNYLNf LOT 3 •CMTOI AA76G" `_ • I n �1 al PIX
93 � � �� tASTia 4u6e.• 8
I� OOYM OUNT LOT 9 yry ry COMNUI LOT 9
�^ •f -rOWp 1200 ROC
SSPE ' 01A. Na' '\
•4Nr10 ale 6RIDOc y / .^/ Ayy 'cAOiEAfm
L-Ms ro olDeM!MIM.35
�,-•S.OURnE 60RK
LOT J'�M:70O.Dp7w$7.
"/Cap TUOlO •4p•.. 42ITa. LWR COKI»wEly LOT 4
1l11141a! t880Ct6�
OOV'NJU NRNT LOT 6 T=1 •"mApl" Ye Yn wl../wY
O DIIDLIN R(yER APARAnDn8S
SKETCH UI•' U� SC1{ZPTIOIV 6 �T'A'AM'r
PAW w 4041D1rM L9r 2.
rn6 ver. o+ rr roll mro+NAnawl �uAroxs ara.r.
DECEMBER 5, 1995
EXHIBIT "A"
r
14
M
M
Nt 710
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
adopted Resolution 95-151, cancelling taxes on
publicly owned lands for Parcel #35-32-39-00004-
0050-00001.0, United Companies Lending Corp.,
pursuant to recommendations by staff.
Re: County purchase of Lots by Purchasing
Parcel 435-32-39-00004-0050-00001.0
United Companies Lending Corp.
RESOLUTION NO. 95- 151
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:
1. Any and all liens for taxes, delinquent or current, against the property
described in 0. R. Book 1080, Page 0005, which was recently acquired by
Indian River County for additional land by the Purchasing Dept., are
hereby cancelled, pursuant to the authority of section 196.28, F.S.
2. The Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners is hereby directed to
send a certified copy of this Resolution to the Tax Collector and the
Property Appraiser.
The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner Bird
and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Adams and, upon being
put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Kenneth R. Macht Aye
Vice Chairman Fran B. Adams Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Absent
Commissioner John W. Tippin Aye
DECEMBER 5, 1995
F41.
BOOK 96 ea^� 711
bou 96 PAGc 71
RESOLUTION 95-151
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted
this 5 day of December , 1995.
BOARD OF CO COI�lI IONERS
INDIAN IVER CO , FLO A
By /
eth R. Ma t, Chairman
✓' .C.
Attachment: Sketch &\&bgal Description
cc: Fixed Assets Department
Marla L. Russell DOCUME;JTARY$T,
COJD(O n"TN LAND TZTLs IHSURANCB COAWANr DEED $ a °
2601 20th Street NOTE
s 7
Vero Beach, n 32960-3049
(407) 362-9006 JrrrRF, K RART�N
File NO.: VB28192 tNINIV RIVER CDUNI
Property Appraisers Parcel ID#: 35-32-39-00004-0050-00001.0
8 35-32-39-09004-0050-0000210
OF
0.
INC/gN klV 'r ouw
WARRANTY DZ ED CD
�O
THIS INDENTURE, Made November ✓3rd, 1995 between:
QNITED COIPANIZS LENDING CORPORATION, a corporation organized and existing under the Cn
lava of the State of Louisiana co
and having its principal place of business at: 4041 ESSEN LANE REO DEPT. 4TH FLOOR CA
BATON ROUGE, LA 70809
hereinafter called the grantor, to:
INDIAN RIvzz COUNTY, a Political Subdivision of the State of Florida
whose post office address iss 1840 25TH STREET
VERO BEACH, FL 32960 to
hereinafter called the grantee: Cn
("grantor" and "grantee" are used for singular or plural, as context requires)
C7
WITNESSETH: That the grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN and No/100 _.
($10.00) Dollars, a:.d other good and valuable consideration to the grantor in hand paid by ca
the grantee, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and sold -.a
to the grantee, and grantee's heirs and assigns forever, the following described land, _..
situate, lying and being in Indian River County, Florida, to -wits w
Lots 1 and 2, Block d, BOOKER T. WASHINGTON SUBDIVISION, according to the Plat thereof on J
file in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for St. Lucie County, Florida
recorded in Plat Book 2, page 34, said lands situate, lying and being in Indian River
County, Florida.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the same in fee simple forever.
AND the grantor hereby fully warrants the title to said land and will defend the same
against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever.
SUBJECT TO covenants, restrictions, easements of record and taxes accruing subsequent to
December 31, 1995.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantor has caused these presents to be executed in its name, by
its proper officer thereunto duly authorized, the day and year first above written.
Signed, sealed and delivered
In the presence ofs
witne�
✓& 6;
J
Witness Chris McCormick
DECEMBER 5, 1995
UNITED COMPANIES LENDING CORPORATION.
a corporation organized and existing, r.
under the 1 f the8tate of Lou 231f
BY
GEORGE KIL , Vice -President
16
RESOLUTION 95-151
State off221k=Louisiana
Waxof a6 st Baton ouge
THE FOREGOING instrument was acknowledged before me on November/
GEORGE KILLAH, Vice -President of UNITED COMPANIES LENDING CORDO
Co atipn, behalf of the corporation. He has prod ed
�sver a L ense , , , , , , , , , , , , , , as ideatificatlt'on.
My Commission Eypiress✓ At Death
3rdr 1995 by
ZaLOUZBIANA;
M
Printed Notary Signature
Commissionad in tho Parish of Livingslon
qui,1lifiLld to act in 1110 Parish of E:I-,t Bator•
Rouge, Iitaln (if Lovl;,ir.:in ►�; carr ���?•hn
,( Wigrr:i:Il t%
r
0
CD
CID
CD
0
n
O
C
Ln
DOROTHY MCGEE PERFECT'S REQUEST TO REZONE
APPROXIMATELY 17.5 ACRES FROM A-1 TO RS -3
1
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL RS -31
Published Daily t' .33rd 8;
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida � ;:;3�9�,'•:t;:; '
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press•Joumal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being q :c:Z%i:,' �' _L,
in the matter of
�• s' 'nt
_ in the Court, was pub- ~_af 110E-#Ijb_tt=MNI�O'i - " ` e
1 of aam*s wfs+ros Will tfane
fished in said newspaper in the issues of _ r%li %/ �JS . �/� A 111
1.� �-00"
ta>t 8} Pal =papnq R owlnd Dara
Affiant further e01f81eabt 40 Is bmw
Moth 60 AVWar Wd Od
says tnat the said Vero Beach Press•Journal is a newspaper published at �, �d OOrdaYr �ar� •37.5 �, MIS
at
Vero Beach• in said Indian River County. Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretoforeN � ( h be h Ste =Owed N �n of
been continuously publisned in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been 1taC1lal1 SL T&M32L �P
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun OeYgYt jtdtl Ri+lerOotalhr, FIOIIda
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of A polfa hlwkV A Niel pwft N Illefaet
advertisement; ana attianf further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm l *m,*I* rr ed hre an qpa tm* fa be Heald, W1111;
or corporation any discount, rebate. commission or refund for the purpose of securing this be held by Or Itho - 1p and Z0!*B OartnIN11011 d.
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. bdM PAW pgrfiy Flpldl, In ft palal(y pp11M115,
SP�(f►�achp-:lypscr,bed before me this � .� tion boated at 1810 26C1�
da o .p. 19 ALI-
�. . Bead4 �"
'f !+ R CG frl t TMT P= I W 1'1,1885, at7�
ter• J , n mrq
noorttmer111 nO" ddatrlet. COW frlefl VW
[/ wdealt.:.t1 tetA,s,.e�etyed,,,, pralded It M WM Or twee
• ., BARBARA C SPRAGUE NOTARY Platl Jr,"gypity t
. _..,r.: i� Stale W FlonOa. My Comrmasun ! :o .loon 79. i 99)
rsEn11cCrIRY.AtMruT " a;!W.az 11ltidt Ray be meds at fMe wr need b A.
atm art • titfdribt faoad d�prool>adpe Y
F OF F r ,. +ed ) /'' : s i—/L�(,. , qi'. 1.� Midi ft gipped b baled. .w.wi.1
Noia+Y'BARI;ARA f. SP; 1q(;iIF NWO Mb rteeda a wrw••- 1 for
thistp must oWOM the aourdVe AntIdme
wph .Aat (ADA) Cowdnetor at 51174M
man 223 at lent w hears In ndlrartoe of'!
1ndeRRhlerrblefty xl -
Prretr>A and 7.airlp Canuhilbn
r..+0MW R. Rldry, Clri men .
SepL 18,,885 , 12342r:
DECEMBER 5, 1995 17 BOOK �r; �
03 U 714
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 20, 1995:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
THROUGH: Sasan Rohani, AICP
Chief, Long -Range Planning
FROM: John Wachtekw
Senior Planner, Long -Range Planning
DATE: November 20, 1995
RE: Dorothy McGee Perfect's Request to Rezone Approximately
17.5 acres from A-1 to RS -3 (RZON 95-08-0082)
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular
meeting of December 5, 1995.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
This is a request to rezone approximately 17.5 acres located at the
southeast corner of 33rd Street and 66th Avenue. The request
involves rezoning the property, owned by Dorothy McGee Perfect,
from A-1, Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres), to RS -3,
Single -Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre). The
purpose of the request is to secure the necessary zoning to develop
the site as a subdivision of single-family residences.
On October 12, 1995, the Planning and
to recommend that the Board of County
request to rezone the subject property
Existing Land Use Pattern
Zoning Commission voted 7-0
Commissioners approve this
to RS -3.
The subject property and properties to the south, east, and west
are zoned A-1 and contain citrus groves. The subject property also
contains a single-family house near the northwest corner of the
site. North of the subject property, land along 66th avenue is
also zoned A-1, and contains citrus groves and a single-family
house. North of the eastern part of the subject property is land
zoned RS -3. That land contains 1 single-family house.
Future Land Use Pattern
The subject property and properties to the south and east are
designated L-21 Low -Density Residential -2, on the county future
land use map. The L-2 designation is intended for residential uses
with densities up to 6 units/acre. North and west of the site,
across 33rd Street and 66th Avenue, respectively, land is
designated L-1, Low -Density Residential -1, on the county future
land use map. The L-1 designation is intended for residential uses
with densities up to 3 units/acre. Land that is north of 33rd
Street and west of 66th Avenue is outside of the county's Urban
Service Area and is designated AG -1, Agricultural -1, on the county
DECEMBER 5, 1995 18
future land
agricultural
unit/5 acres.
Environment
use map. The AG -1 designation is intended for
uses and residential uses with densities up to 1
Being a site that has been cleared for agriculture, the subject
property is not designated as environmentally important or
environmentally sensitive by the comprehensive plan. No wetlands
or native upland plant communities exist on site. According to
Flood Insurance Rating Maps, the subject property does not contain
any flood hazard areas.
Utilities and Services
The site is within the Urban Service Area of the county; however,
neither water nor wastewater lines extend to the site at this time.
Transportation System
The property is bordered by 66th Avenue which is classified as an
urban minor arterial road on the future roadway thoroughfare plan
map. The segment of 66th Avenue adjacent to the subject property
is a two lane road with approximately 50 feet of public road right-
of-way. This segment of 66th Avenue is programmed for expansion to
four lanes and 80 feet of public road right-of-way by 2010.
Additionally, the site abuts 33rd Street. Classified as a
collector road on the future roadway thoroughfare plan map, the
segment of 33rd Street adjacent to the site is a two-lane paved
road with approximately 30 feet of public road right-of-way. This
segment of 33rd Street is not programmed for expansion at this
time.
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.
AMAT.vS T S
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.
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.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 19 Bou 96 PAGE 715
Fr
BOOK 96 PAGE 16
The site information used for the concurrency analysis is as
follows:
1. Size of Area to be Rezoned:
2. Existing Zoning Classification:
±17.5 acres
A-1, Agricultural
District (up to 1 unit/5
acres)
3. Proposed Zoning Classification: RS -3, Single -Family
Residential District (up
to 3 units/acre)
4. Most Intense Use of Subject
Property under Existing
Zoning Classification:
5. Most Intense Use of Subject
Property under Proposed
Zoning Classification:
- Transportation
3 units
52 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 impacted roadways would not be lowered.
The site information used for determining the amount of 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: 10.1/unit
b. P.M. Peak Hour Trip Ends: 1.01/unit
C. Inbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 65%
d. Outbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 35%
3. P.M. Peak Direction of 66th Avenue, from 26th Street to 41st
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 (3 X 1.01 X .65 =.2)
5. Formula for Determining Number of Average Weekday Trips
Generated: Number of Units X Average Weekday Rate
(3 X 10.1 = 30)
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: 10.1/unit
b. P.M. Peak Hour Trip Ends: 1.01/unit
C. Inbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 65%
d. Outbound (P.M. Peak Hour): 35%
3. P.M. Peak -Direction of 66th Avenue, from 26th Street to 41st
Street: Northbound
Al. Formula for Determining Number of Peak Hour/Peak Season/Pak
Direction Trips Generated: Number of Units X P.M. Peak Hour
Rate X Inbound P.M. Percentage (52 X 1.01 X .65 = 34)
(trip distribution based on a Modified Gravity Model)
DECEMBER 5, 1995 20
5. Formula for Determining Number of Average Weekday Trips
Generated: Number of Units X Average Weekday Rate(52 X 10.1 = 5251
6. Traffic Capacity on this segment of 66th Avenue, at a Level of
Service "D": 650 peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips
7. Existing Traffic volume on this segment of 66th Avenue: 181
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 30. This was determined by multiplying the 3 units
(most intense use) by ITE's single-family residential factor of
10.1 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 525. This was determined by multiplying the 52 units
(most intense use), by ITE's single-family residential factor of
10.1 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. There f ore , the p.m.
peak hour was used in the transportation concurrency analysis. The
peak direction during the p.m. peak hour on 66th Avenue 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 2. This was determined by multiplying the total
number of units allowed under the existing zoning district (3) 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% (2) will be
inbound and 35% (1) will be outbound.
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 (52) was
multiplied by ITE's factor of 1.01 p.m. peak hour trips/unit to
determine the total number of trips generated (53). Of these
trips, 65% (34) will be inbound and 35% (19) will be outbound.
Therefore, the most intense use of the subject property under the
proposed zoning district would generate 32 (34 - 2 = 32) -more peak.
hour/peak season/peak direction trips than the 2 that would be
generated by the most intense use of the subject property under the
existing zoning district.
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.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 21 BOOK 96 PnE 717
L_
BOOK 96 PAGE 718
The traffic capacity for the segment of 66th Avenue adjacent to
this site is 650 trips (peak hour/peak season/peak direction) at
Level of Service (LOS) "D", while the existing traffic volume on
this segment of 66th Avenue is 181 trips (peak hour/peak season/
peak direction). The additional 34 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 66th Avenue to approximately 215.
Based on
the above analysis, staff
determined that 66th Avenue 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)
segment
Roadway
Capacity
Segment
Road
From
To
LOS "D"
1920E
S.R. 60
82nd Avenue
66th Avenue
2210
1920W
S.R. 60
82nd Avenue
66th Avenue
2210
1925E
S.R. 60
66th Avenue
58th Avenue
2650
1925W
S.R. 60
66th Avenue
58th Avenue
2650
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
1940W
S.R. 60
27th Avenue
20th Avenue
2330
2470N
27th Avenue
16th Street
S.R. 60
830
2930N
43rd Avenue
16th Street
S.R. 60
830
29305
43rd Avenue
16th Street
S.R. 60
830
3025N
58th Avenue
16th Street
S.R. 60
1770
303ON
58th Avenue
S.R. 60
41st Street
1770
30305
58th Avenue
S.A. 60
41st Street
1770
312ON
66th Avenue
S.R. 60
26th Street
690
31205
66th Avenue
S.R. 60
26th Street
690
313ON
66th Avenue
26th Street
41st Street
650
31305
66th Avenue
26th Street
41st Street
650
4720W
26th Street
66th Avenue
58th Avenue
630
zxistias Demand
Total
Available
Positive
Roadway
Ex st ng Vested
Segment
Segment
Project
Concurrency
Segment
Volume Volume
Demand
Capacity
Demand
Determination
1920E
1045 426
1471
739
2
Y
1920W
971 391
1362
848
4
Y
1925E
945 411
1356
1294
14
Y
1925W
991 396
1387
1263
32
Y
1930E
985 700
1685
965
3
Y
1930W
1147 681
1828
822
8
Y
1935E
1102 457
1559
1091
1
Y
1935W
1156 435
1591
1059
4
Y
1940W
896 331
1227
1103
2
Y
2470N
225 36
261
569
2
Y
2930N
667 67
734
96
2
Y
29305
505 67
572
258
1
Y
3025N
423 240
663
1107
8
Y
303ON
538 147
685
1085
1
Y
30308
388 161
549
1221
16
Y
312ON
167 12
179
511
34
Y
31205
188 13
201
489
18
Y
313ON
181 9
190
460
1
Y
31305
132 9
141
509
34
Y
4720W
173 7
180
450
2
Y
- Water
A residential development of 52 single-family units on the subject
property will have a water consumption rate of 52 Equivalent
DECEMBER 5, 1995 2.2
Residential Units (ERUs), or 13,000 gallons/day. This is based
upon a level of service standard of 250 gallons/ERU/day. County
water lines do not currently extend to the site. However, county
LDRs require the developer to connect to the county water system at
the time of development. When the subject property connects to
county lines, it will be serviced by the South County Reverse
Osmosis Plant. Since that plant currently has a remaining capacity
of approximately 21100,000 gallons/day, the plant can accommodate
the additional demand generated by the most intense use allowed
under the proposed zoning. When the North County Reverse Osmosis
Plant is complete, it will serve the subject property. This plant,
which is currently being designed, will have a capacity of
approximately 2,000,000 gallons/day and will be able to accommodate
the additional demand generated by the proposed amendment.
- Wastewater
The site is within the urban service area; however, wastewater
lines do not extend to the site at this time. County LDRs require
the developer to connect to the county wastewater system at the
time of development.
When the subject property connects to county lines, it will be
serviced by _ the Central County Wastewater Treatment Plant
(Gifford). Based upon the most intense use allowed under the
proposed zoning district, development of the property will have a
wastewater generation rate of approximately 52 Equivalent
Residential Units (ERUs), or 13,000 gallons/day. This is based
upon the level of service standard of 250 gallons/ERU/day. The
Central County Wastewater Treatment Plant currently has a remaining
capacity of more than 400,000 gallons/day and can accommodate the
additional wastewater generated by the proposed rezoning.
- Solid Waste
Solid waste _service includes pick-up by private operators and
disposal at the county landfill. The county's adopted level of
service standard for landfill capacity is 2.37 cubic yards/person/
year. With the county's average of approximate1y;Z:3 persons/unit,
a 52 unit residential development would be anticipated to house
approximately 120 people (2.3 X 52). For the subject request to
meet the county's adopted level of service standard of 2.37 cubic
yards/person/year, the landfill must have enough capacity to
accommodate approximately 285 (120 X 2.37) cubic yards/year.
A review of the solid waste capacity for the active segment of the
county landfill indicates the availability of more than 895,000
cubic yards. The active segment of the landfill has a 2 year
capacity, and the landfill has expansion capacity beyond 2010.
Based on the analysis, staff 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. Since
the site is located within the M-1 Drainage Basin and the Indian
River Farms Water Control District (IRFWCD), development on the
property will be prohibited from discharging any runoff in excess
of 2 inches in a 24 hour period, which is the approved IRFWCD
discharge rate.
In this case, the minimum floor elevation level of service
standards do not apply, since the property does not lie within a
floodplain. However, both the on-site retention and discharge
standards apply. With the most intense use of this site under the
DECEMBER 5, 1995 23 BOOK 96 PnE 719
BOOK 96 P,.0 720
proposed amendment, the maximum area of impervious surface would be
approximately 228,690 square feet, or 5.25 acres. The maximum
runoff volume, based on that amount of impervious surface and the
25 year/24 hour design storm, and given the IRFWCD 2 inch discharge
requirement, would be approximately 541,868 cubic feet. In order
to maintain the county's adopted level of service, the applicant
would be required to retain approximately 358,916 cubic feet of
runoff on-site. With the soil characteristics of the subject
property, it is estimated that the pre -development runoff rate is
91.35 cubic feet/second.
Based upon staff's analysis, the drainage level of service standard
would be met by limiting off-site discharge to the IRFWCD's maximum
discharge rate of 2 inches in 24 hours, and requiring retention of
the 358,916 cubic feet of runoff for the most intense use of the
property.
As with all development, a more detailed review will be conducted
during the development approval process.
- Recreation
A review of 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.
Project
LOS (Acres per Demand Surplus
Park Type 1000 population) Acres Acreage
Urban District 5.0 0.60 180.818
Community (north) 3.0 0.36 17.550
Beach 1.5 0.18 64.645
River 1.5 0.18 25.642
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
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 Future Land Use Element Policies 1.11 and 1.12.
- Future Land Use Element Policies 1.11 and 1.12
Future Land Use Element Policy 1.12 states that the L-2, Low -
Density Residential -2, land use designation is intended for
DECEMBER 5, 1995 24
s - �
residential uses with densities up to 6 units/acre. In addition,
Future Land Use Element Policy 1.11 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
L-2 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 less than the 6 units/acre permitted
by the L-2 designation, the proposed request is consistent with
Policies 1.11 and 1.12.
While policies 1.11 and 1.12 are particularly applicable to this
request, other comprehensive plan policies also have relevance.
For that reason, staff evaluated the subject request for
consistency with all plan policies. Based upon that analysis,
staff determined that the request is consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
Compatibility with the Surrounding Area
Staff's position is that granting the request to rezone the subject
property to RS -3 will result in development which will be
compatible with surrounding areas. Since land to the north is
currently zoned RS -3, the request is for an expansion of the
existing zoning pattern.
Based on population projections and current development patterns,
residential development in this area of the county•is'expected to
increase and eventually become the dominant land use. This
development pattern would be consistent with the comprehensive
plan, since the area is located within the Urban Service Area and
is designated for low-density residential development.
Any potential incompatibilities associated with residential
development on the subject property would be with the adjacent
areas that are currently used for agricultural purposes. These
incompatibilities, however, will be somewhat mitigated since the
subject site is large enough to buffer itself from adjacent
agricultural uses as required in section 911.04(3)(c)5b of the
county LDRs. That section states that where residential projects
in areas zoned for more than one unit/acre are adjacent to active
agricultural operations, the residential project must provide one
of the following:
• A 50 foot building (residence) setback; or
• A 25 foot buffer yard with a type "B" buffer and a six-foot
opaque feature.
This buffer/setback requirement will be addressed during the review
process for any development project proposed for the property.
Therefore, this is not an issue at this time.
For these reasons, staff feels that the requested RS -3 zoning would
be compatible with the surrounding area.
Potential Impact on Environmental Quality
The site has been cleared, and contains no environmentally
important land, such as wetlands or uplands. Therefore,
development of the site will have little or no impact on
environmental quality. For this reason, no adverse environmental
impacts associated with this request are anticipated.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 25 BOOK 96 mrE 72
Boa 96 PnE 722
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 low-density residential uses and meets all applicable rezoning
criteria. For these reasons, staff supports the request.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis, staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve this
request to rezone the subject property from A-1 to RS -3.
Director Bob Keating explained that the project is a rezoning
of 7.5 acres east of 66th Avenue and south of 33rd Street. The
subject property is a grove, as is the surrounding property. The
Planning &.Zoning Commission voted 7-0 to approve the request.
Commissioner Adams inquired whether the property would be
required to hook up to County water and sewer, and Director Keating
responded in the affirmative.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in this matter.
Attorney Bruce Barkett, representing the applicant, advised he
was present to answer any questions.
Peter Robinson of Laurel Homes stated that Laurel Homes owns
property to the south of the subject property. When the notice of
the application came out, his partner in Orlando, Milton Friedman,
wanted to know why the applicant was going for the low zoning
category. The Apopka weevil has affected the citrus in the area
and there is no citrus left on the property. His concern is that
he and his partner may eventually be at war with their neighbors
regarding future zoning in the area because of the. applicant's
request for such low density zoning. The applicant inherited the
property and is trying to prevent the house from being vandalized.
He recommended that the zoning change be granted but at a higher
density, RS -6.
Commissioner Bird stated that he would have no problem with
granting RS -6 zoning in that area.
Director Keating explained that staff would not have a problem
with the RS -6 zoning, but the County Attorney has indicated the
applicant would have to start the process all over from the
beginning.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard in this
matter. There being none, he closed the public hearing.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 26
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Adams, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
adopted Ordinance 95-34 amending the zoning
ordinance and the accompanying zoning map from A-1
to RS -3 for the property located at the southeast
corner of 33rd Street and 66th Avenue, and described
herein, and providing for effective date.
ORDINANCE NO. 95-34
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE
ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM A-1 TO
RS -31 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 33RD
STREET AND 66TH 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 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 WEST 18.66 ACRES OF TRACT 12, LESS THE SOUTH 50.00
FEET THEREOF, IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH, RANGE 39
EAST, AS THE SAME APPEARS ON THE LAST GENERAL PLAT OF
LANDS OF THE INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY, FILED AND
RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, NOW INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA.
ABOVE REFERENCED PLAT RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 21 PAGE 25,
OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 27 BOOK 9 6 "
L
BOOK 96 N, GE E724
ORDINANCE 95-34
Be changed from A-1 to RS -3.
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 5th day of December, 1995.
This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal
on the 22nd day of November, 1995 for a public hearing to be held
on the 5th day of December, 1995 at which time it was moved for
adoption by Commissioner Bird , seconded by Commissioner
.Adams , and adopted by the following vote:
Chairman Kenneth R. Macht Ave
Vice -Chairman Fran B. Adams Ave
Commissioner Richard N.. Bird Ave
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Absent
Commissioner John W. Tippin Ave
BOARD OF CfflJNTY COMMISS
OF INDIAWRIVER COUNTY
BY:
. MaCht,
ATTEST BY:
., Ba , .0
Acknowledgement by the Department of State of the State of Florida
this 13 day of Dec. , 1995.
Effective upon filing with the Department of State.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
G1/!�
William G. Collins II, Deputy County Attorney
Community Development
Inaan Riva Ca
Approved Date
Admin.
a9 5
Legal
toe___
Budgtt
Dept.
I 1140/W
Risk Mgr.
This ordinance was filed with the Department of State on the
following date: December 13 1 Q9
DECEMBER 5, 1995 28
M
M
CONSIDERATION AND FORMAL SELECTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD
REVITALIZATION CATEGORY FOR COACUUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION SUBMITTAL
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) APPLICATION
NOTICE OF FIRST PUBLIC HEARING
Indian River County is considering applying to the Florida Department of Community Af-
fairs (DCA) for a Small Cities Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) of up to
$750,000.00. These funds must be used for one of the following purposes:
1. To benefit low and moderate income persons; or
2. To aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight; or
3. To meet other community development needs having a particular urgency
because existing conditions pose a serious and immediate threat to the
health or welfare of the community and where other financial resources
are not. available to meet such needs.
The activity categories for which these funds may be used are in the areas of housing,
neighborhood and commercial revitalization, or economic development (new jobs). Eli-.
gible uses of funds include such physical improvement activities as housing and commer-
cial building rehabilitation, clearance, water and sewer improvements, street
improvements, drainage, housing site development, parking, and loans to businesses.
Additional information regarding the range of activities that may be undertaken will be
provided at the public hearing.
For each activity that is proposed, at least 70% of the funds must benefit low and mod-
erate income persons.
In developing an application for submission to DCA, the county must plan to minimize
displacement of persons as a result of planned CDBG activities. In addition, the county is
required to develop a plan to assist displaced persons. '
A public hearing at which parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be
heard, will be held by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Flor-
ida, in the County Commission Chambers of the County Administration Buildina, located
Anyone who needs a special accommodation for this meeting, including non-English
speaking persons must contact the county's Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Coor-
dinator at 567-8000, extension 223, at least 48 hours yin advance of meeting.
A FAIR HOUSING/EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/HANDICAP ACCESS JURISDICTION
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By: -s- Kenneth R. Macht, Chairman
The. Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 20, 1995 and the
listing of the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee
as follows:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
ON HERn CONCURRENCEDATE: November 20, 1995
ober M. Keat 11AIC';'rector
Community Developm nt /J
FROM: Sasan Rohani, AICP S
Chief, Long -Range Planning
RE: CONSIDERATION AND FORMAL SELECTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD
REVITALIZATION CATEGORY FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT (CDBG) APPLICATION SUBMITTAL
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular
meeting of December 5, 1995.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On November 21, 1995, the Board of County Commissioners selected
the consultant firm of Clark, Roumelis and Associates, Inc., to
DECEMBER 5, 1995 29 BOOK 96
P4'F 7�5
Boa 96 PAa 726
prepare a CDBG application for the county. CDBG grants are
available in the following categories:
C Economic Development
G Neighborhood Revitalization
0 Commercial Revitalization
0 Housing
At this time, the Board must formally choose the grant category for
which it will apply.
ANALYSIS
For the past year, county staff have been working with residents of
the Whitfield and Colored School Subdivisions to get roads paved
and water lines installed throughout the subdivisions. One of the
few funding sources for these improvements is the Neighborhood
Revitalization category of the Community Development Block Grant
program. Since the Whitfield and Colored School Subdivisions have
a high percentage of low and moderate income residents and
infrastructure improvements are necessary for the areas, staff feel
that neighborhood revitalization should be selected as the CDBG
application category.
A representative of Clark, Roumelis & Associates, Inc., the
consulting firm preparing the county's grant application, will
attend the December 5th Board meeting and will make a presentation
regarding the different CDBG grant categories. Then, the Board
must formally choose the appropriate grant category. Also, the
Board must establish a CDBG Citizen Advisory Task Force or
reactivate the existing one (a copy of the membership list of the
existing CDBG Citizens Advisory Task Force is attached). Finally,
the Board must establish a date for a second public hearing.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners choose the
Neighborhood Revitalization grant category. Staff also recommends
that the Board of County Commissioners reactivate the existing CDBG
Advisory Committee. Finally, staff recommends that the Board
establish December 12, 1995, as the date for the second public
hearing.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
VERO BEACH
Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman
J.E. Chandler, County Administrator
Larola F. B. Gamble, Exec. Dir., IRC Housing Authority
Robert M. Keating, Director, Community Development Department
WABASSO
Solomon Murphy
P.O. Box 272
Wabasso, FL 32970
William Rigby
P.O. Box 872
Wabasso, FL 32970
Billy Minnis
P.O. Box 381
Wabasso, FL 32970 589-4604
Ervin Cartwright
P.O. Box 433
Wabasso, FL 32970 589-5332
DECEMBER 5, 1995 30
"Alfyr
Joe Idlette
4320 35th Avenue
Gifford, FL 32960
562-6656
a,
Walter Jackson
P.O. Bos 254
Vero Beach, FL 32961-0254
562-6501
Ralph Lundy
4520 38th Avenue
Vero Beach, FL 32960'
562-5275
Victor Hart, Sr.
P.O. Box 5193
Vero Beach, FL 32961-5193
567-4406
Mrs. Bernice Johnson
4274 31st Avenue
Vero Beach, FL 32960
562-7350
GEOFFREY SUBDIVISION
Mrs. Annie Jenkins
P.O. Box 1764
Vero Beach, FL 32961-1764
Arthur J. Harris
1850 38th Place
Vero Beach, FL 32960
562-5272
OSLO
Joe Wiggins
895 SW 11th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32962
Christine Browning
P.O. Box 650495
Vero Beach, FL 32965-0495
Director Keating reviewed the process and introduced a
representative from the consultant's office, Robert Johnson of
Clark, Roumelis and Associates, Consultants.
Robert Johnson explained the 4 grant categories: (1) housing
rehabilitation; (2) neighborhood revitalization; (3) commercial
revitalization; and (4) economic development and advised that the
County is eligible up to $750,000 in any of the 4 categories but
that the consultant is recommending the neighborhood revitalization
category.
Chairman Macht questioned the economic development category,
and Director Keating stated that a specific business or industry
must be coming in with a certain number of jobs. This category
will be used with the new industrial park.
Commissioner Adams inquired whether the County could apply
again next year, and Mr. Johnson explained that the opportunity
arises every fiscal year.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, he closed the
public hearing.
BOOK 96 �,��,:� �7
DECEMBER 5, 1995 31
boa 96 Ptu 728
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
approved the Neighborhood Revitalization grant
category; reactivated the existing CDBG Advisory
Committee; and established December 12, 1995 as the
date for the second public hearing on this matter,
as recommended by staff.
COPY OF GRANT APPLICATION WILL BE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
THE CLERK TO THE BOARD WHEN EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
ESCAMBIA COUNTY HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Deily
Vere Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he Is Business Manager of the Veto 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 -
Itched M said newspaper in the lames of //, M 1' /9w- --
AHlant further says that the said Vero Beach PressJoumal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian RWer County. Florida, and that the said newspaper hes heretofore
been continuously published In said Indian River County. Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office In Vero Beach, In said Indian RWet Cour"ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
V"M Ltld'��Ibacribed bel6k .4 fhis ► : M day o D. 19 01,
(BLdineft Manager)
NOTAW PUBLIC.
• r:w�w.artpm Runi+o. CC3an572
I: IJ,5::7ARA C SPRAGUE
NOME OF PUBLIC NEARMIG
Fa the purpose of Section 147(f) of tamal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amendedfhe In, notice is
hereby �givernt that the Board of County C naftsion.
ers of Man River Co q, Florida, wil conduct a
pubic g at their ray edheduled rtleeting
an Tues., December 5, m1995, -at 9:05 A.M. in the
18C 40 25th Street Bpi, Florieoth da, 32960 located to
consider the approval of the issuance by the Es -
cambia Cat q Wousttg Fiance Authbrity. an be-
half of Men River and other
counties, of riot � $60.000, 0 le
Thee of �h bonds wit be used to finance
the purchase of single terrify reddenoes to be occu-
pied
carpied prialarlt by first-time home buyers of moder-
ate. middle or .lesser income within Indian River
Flor=ida. and various other Counties I1 the State of
The bands wet not constitute a debt of the State of
Florida, Indian River County, or other pertidpeting
counties o Hosing Finance Authorities. but wet hie
p
from
ac pa�b rraogrea from , the revs-
AI pugs are advised that, cif tliey decide to ap-
peal any 11erisi, made at this meeting, they wet
need a record of theand to Such pur-
pose, toy may to ensure that a verbatim
recorof the praoeedings Is made, which record in -
du peal La to be based. and evidence upon which the
AD Interested persons are invited to Present their
comments at thefiorlyr orarssat forth above.
Boa my
Nov. 17,1995 1253231
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 21, 1995:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: November 21, 1995
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
RE: Escambia County Housing Finance Authority
The U. S. Congress has recently reauthorized provisions of a federal housing
program which allow for low-cost mortgages to be issued to qualified people.
The Escambia County Housing Finance Authority has undertaken a $80,000,000
mortgage program and will act as the lead agency for other smaller counties
DECEMBER 5, 1995
32
which may wish to join in the program. Combining these counties into one
pooled mortgage program will result in lower administrative costs. The
attached resolution would authorize our county to join with Escambia County
in a low-cost mortgage program.
Requested Action: Respectfully request permission for the Chairman of.tk'ae
County Commission to execute the attached resolution and interlocal agree-
ment.
Budget Director Joe Baird reviewed the project and explained
the purpose is to participate in the bond program being
administered by Escambia County which targets first time homebuyers
with low to moderate income. Indian River County participated in
this program in 1991, 1992, 1993 and 1994. Director Baird pointed
out that the public advertisement regarding this item made mention
of 11$60,000,000" when it should have read 11$80,000,000".
County Administrator Chandler informed the Board that
Commissioner Carolyn Eggert had called and is very supportive of
this program. ,;`
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, he closed the
public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
adopted Resolution 95-152 authorizing the Escambia
County Housing Finance Authority to operate within
the boundaries of Indian River County; authorizing
the Board to enter into agreements with the Escambia
County Housing Finance Authority and to execute and
deliver certain documents and instruments ` in
connection therewith; approving a form of interlocal
agreement; approving the issuance by the Escambia
County Housing Finance Authority of not exceeding
$80,000,000 single family mortgage revenue bonds,
Series 1996 (Multi -County Program), pursuant to
Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
as amended; and providing an effective date.
BOOK, 96 F'ir;E 72
DECEMBER 5, 1995 33
BOOK 96 PEE 730
RESOLUTION NO. .5-1 5 2
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COSSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE ESCAMBIA COUNTY
HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY TO OPERATE WITHIN
THE BOUNDARIES OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY:
AUTHORIZING THE BOARD TO ENTER INTO
AGREEMENTS WITH THE ESCAM 31A COUNTY HOUSING
FIIITANCE AUTHORITY AND TO EXECUTE AND DELIVER
CERTAIN DOCUMENTS AND INSTRUMENTS IN
CONNECTION THEREWITH: APPROVING A FORM OF
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT; APPROVING THE ISSUANCE
BY . THE ESCAMBIA COUNTY HOUSING FINANCE
AUTHORITY OF NOT EXCEEDING $80.000,000 SINGLE
FAMMY MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1996
(MULTI -COUNTY PROGRAM). PURSUANT TO SECTION
147(it) OF THE INTERNAL, REVENUE CODE OF 1986, AS
AMENDED; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Chapter 159, Part IV. Florida Statutes (the "Act") authorized
counties to create housing finance authorities to exercise powers of the Act within
their boundaries or outside their boundaries with the consent of the governing body of
the territory outside their area of operation; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Escambia County, Florida,
on May 29. 1980, adopted Ordinance No. 80-12. by which it created the Escambia
County Housing Finance Authority (the "Authority") and authorized the Authority to
exercise all powers under the Act; and
WHEREAS, there is no housing finance authority currently operating in Indian
River County: and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Act the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida. has found a shortage of affordable housing and capital for
investment therein and a need for a housing finance authority to function in Indian
River County, and
WHEREAS, it is not practicable at this time under existing Florida and federal
laws and regulations for a single local agency to issue its bonds for the purpose of
implementing a single family housing program, although the shortage of such single
family housing and capital for investment therein is continuing in Indian River
County: and
WHEREAS, the Authority has by resolution duly adopted on July 6, 1995 (the
"Escambia Resolution") authorized the issuance of not exceeding $80.000,000 Single
Family Mortgage Revenue Bonds. Series 1996 (Multi -County Program) (the "Bonds").
and has indicated to the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County its
willingness to exercise its powers in Indian River County to finance single family
housing therein as permitted by the Act upon approval of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County: and
WHEREAS, Section 147(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. as amended
(hereinafter referred to as the "Code") requires public approval of certain private
activity bonds by an applicable elected representative or governmental unit following a
public hearing and the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County.
Florida (the 'Board"). constitutes an applicable elected representative or governmental
unit: and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 147(f) of the Code a public hearing was
scheduled before the Board for D e c e m b e r 5 , 1995, and notice of such hearing was
given in the form required by the Code by publication more than 14 days prior to such
hearing: and
DECEMBER 5, 1995 34
RESOLUTION 95-152
WHEREAS, the Board has on D e c e m b e r 5 . 19R 5 , held the public hearing
and provided at such hearing reasonable opportunity for all interested individuals to
express their views. both orally and in writing. on the issuance of the Bonds: and
WHEREAS. the Board diligently and conscientiously considered all comments
and concerns expressed) by such individuals: and
WHEREAS, the Board desires to express its approval of the action to be taken
pursuant to the Escambia Resolution and as required by Section 147(f) of the Code;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
CONMUSSIONERS OF I NDLAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Because of the continuing shortage of affordable single family
housing and capital for investment therein in Indian River County and the continuing
impediments to a bond issue to alleviate such shortages as to single family housing. it
is hereby determined that the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County
consents to the Authority exercising its powers to issue the Bonds and to implement a
program from a portion of the proceeds of the Bonds to finance single family housing
within the statutory boundaries of Indian River County; provided, that the Authority
and Indian River County first enter into a written agreement setting forth the powers,
duties and limitations of the Authority as they pertain to the use of said bond proceeds
within Indian River County and payment of the issuance costs for such Bonds.
Section 2. In furtherance of the purposes set forth in Section. I. hereof the
Chairman or Vice -Chairman and Clerk or Deputy Clerk -of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County are hereby authorized to execute such
consents. intergovernmental agreements, applications or other documents as shall be
required to implement such single family housing program and to provide for payment
of Indian River County's proportionate share of costs of issuance of such Bonds, all as
shall be approved by counsel to Indian River County.
Section 3. The Interlocal Agreement, in substantially the form attached
hereto as Exhibit "A". and made a part hereof, between Indian River County and the
Authority is hereby approved. The officers of Indian River County are. hereby
authorized to enter into the Interlocal Agreement on behalf of Indian River County.
with such changes not inconsistent herewith as the officers executing same may
approve. such execution and delivery to be conclusive evidence of such approval. The
appropriate officers of Indian River County are hereby further authorized to execute
and deliver such other documents and instruments as may be necessary to implement
the Interlocal Agreement, including, without limitation. application for up to the
maximum available private activity bond volume allocations pursuant to Chapter 159.
Part VI. Florida Statutes, for the purposes set forth in the Interlocal Agreement.
Section 4. The Board hereby approves. within the meaning of Section 1470
of the Code. the issuance by the Authority of not exceeding $80,000.000 Single Family
Mortgage Revenue Bonds. Series 1996 (Multi -County program). and such other action
to be taken pursuant to the Escambia Resolution.
Section S. All resolutions or parts thereof of the Board in conflict with the
provisions herein contained are, to the extent of such conflict. hereby superseded and
repealed.
Section 6. Adoption of this Resolution does not authorize or commit the
expenditure of any funds of Indian River County to pay the costs of issuance of such
Bonds.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 35
Boos 96 fAa 732
RESOLUTION 95-152
Section 7. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Duly adopted in the r e g u l a r session this 5 day of D e c e m b rm 5,
IPML4N RIVER COUNTY. FLORIDA
KENNETH R. ACHT
Wo
(SEAL) hairman. Board —of County
Commissioners
ATTEST:
IlWOCATION OF PENDING ORDINANCE DOCTRINE FOR A CHANGE
IN A SETBACK REGULATION
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 29, 1995:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
D ISI N HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Obert M. Rea inXlent
AICP
Community De% C9ector
A,6.
FROM: Stan Boling, AICP
Planning Director
DATE: November 29, 1995
SUBJECT: Staff's Request for the Board of County Commissioners to
Invoke the Pending Ordinance Doctrine for a Change in a
Setback Regulation
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of December 5, 1995.
DECEMBER 5, 1995
36
M M
BACKGROUND:
Recently, a subdivision proposal and a single family home building
permit application brought the need for an LDR change to staff's
attention. The needed change relates to the setback implications
of locating a new subdivision road right-of-way along the border of
an adjacent property. To address this need, staff is proposing an
LDR amendment that will be processed along with several other LDR
amendments.
Staff is now requesting that the Board of County Commissioners
invoke the pending ordinance doctrine so that staff can begin
applying the substance of the proposed change prior to formal
adoption of the proposed LDR amendment.
ANALYSIS:
•Proposed Change
Under current regulations, subdivision developers are allowed to
locate new road rights-of-way along the border of a property being
subdivided (platted) and adjacent property. Where a right-of-way
is to be located next to an adjacent property, current regulations
require the subdivision developer to provide landscape improvements
between the new subdivision road and the adjacent property. The
current regulations allow the buffer to be located completely
within the boundaries of the new road right-of-way.
Staff's experience over the last several years is that the
requirement has worked well by resulting in effective landscape
buffers. Although these landscape requirements mitigate the visual
impacts of an adjacent road right-of-way, current regulations
affect adjacent property owners with increased setbacks. Current
regulations apply front yard setbacks in all circumstances where a
property is adjacent to a road right-of-way. These front yard
setbacks apply even where the right-of-way is established via a new
subdivision, where the right-of-way contains a landscape buffer,
and where the right-of-way provides no access to the adjacent
property. Thus, in certain circumstances, a new subdivision road
right-of-way established along the perimeter of an adjacent
property could change a side yard setback into a front yard setback
for the adjacent property owner. Such a change usually results in
a setback increase of 101. This increase is beyond the control of
the adjacent property owner and restricts the buildable area of the
parcel. To correct the negative impact of the existing setback
regulations under such circumstances, staff has drafted the
following proposed change to the land development regulations
(LDRs):
1. For parcels adjacent to existing subdivision road rights-of-
way, where the parcel is separated from the subdivision
roadway by required landscape improvements and where the
parcel cannot be accessed by the subdivision roadway, the
portion of the parcel adjacent to the right-of-way shall be
treated as a side yard where a side yard would exist absent
the right-of-way.
2. For new subdivisions where a road right-of-way is proposed
along the border of the property to be subdivided, the
required landscaping improvements shall be located in a
separate landscape tract (minimum width: 101) established
between the right-of-way and the adjacent property. (Note:
the result is that the setbacks on the adjacent property will
remain the same.)
With such changes, the landscaping requirements would continue to
be required, while the negative setback impacts would be eliminated
in existing and future situations.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 3
BOOK 96 P.Aa 73
•Pending Ordinance Doctrine
The pending ordinance doctrine allows a local government to declare
its intent to adopt a proposed regulation change and to apply the
proposed regulation prior to formal adoption. The pending
ordinance doctrine is generally used in cases where a local
government needs to prevent a rush of applications that may be
received prior to formal adoption of a pending regulation change,
or where relief or clarification of existing regulations is
determined necessary to address pending applications. Staff is
seeking use of the pending ordinance doctrine to provide setback
relief to a single-family building permit applicant, and to provide
clear direction to a subdivision applicant.
Since the LDR amendments now in process will not be considered for
final adoption by the Board until February 1996, it is staff's
opinion that the pending ordinance doctrine should be invoked now
to provide timely relief and direction for a pending application
and development proposal.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners invoke the
pending ordinance doctrine for the following, proposed LDR changes:
1. For parcels adjacent to existing subdivision road rights-of-
way, where the parcel is separated from the subdivision
roadway by required landscape improvements and where the
parcel cannot be accessed by the subdivision roadway, the
portion of the parcel adjacent to the right-of-way shall be
treated as a side yard where a side yard would exist absent
the right-of-way.
2. For new subdivisions where a road right-of-way is proposed
along the border of the property to be subdivided, the
required landscaping improvements shall be located in a
separate landscape tract established between the right-of-way
and the adjacent property.
Community Development Director Stan Boling reviewed the
memorandum for the Board.
Commissioner Adams felt the setback is an excellent solution
but was concerned about the landscaping 10' strip. She believed
that provision needs some flexibility, particularly in a
subdivision where the roads are not dedicated to the County.
Director Boling explained that a definition in the width of
the landscaping buffer is needed where the lot is actually abutting
the landscaping buffer rather than the road right-of-way.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Tippin, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
invoked the pending ordinance doctrine for the
proposed LDR changes set out in staff's
recommendation.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 38
� i f
NEW HORIZONS IN-HOUSE .TAIL PROGRAM FUNDING
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of December 1, 1995:
TO: Members of the Board • DATE: December 1, 1995
of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: NEW HORIZONS IN HOUSE JAIL PROGRAM FUNDING -
EMERGEINCYITEM
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
At the Board meeting of October 24, 1995 New Horizons made a verbal request for the County to continue the
In house Jail Substance Abuse program at a cost of $35,011.00.
The In house Jail Program was initiated utilizing the Anti -Drug Abuse Grant funds. The program was funded
through the Anti -Drug Abuse Grant for 1990/91; 1991/92; 1992/93 and 1994/95. They did not obtain grant
funds through the Anti -Drug Abuse Grant for 1993/94, but they were funded through the Indian River County
Drug Abuse Fund in the amount of $28,000. Under the Anti -Drug Abuse Grant they are only eligible for four
years of grant funding and therefore could not apply in the 1995/96 fiscal year. New Horizons wrote a letter to
the Board of County Commissioners, but did not complete an agency budget packet and was not funded in the
budget process.
At the October 24, 1995 Board of County Commissioners meeting, staff was directed to look at the potential of
funding the In house Jail Program through the County's' Drug Abuse trust fiord for the 1995/96 fiscal year. Staff
reviewed the cash position of the Drug Abuse trust fiord as well as the budgeted revenues and determined that
there was not sufficient money to cover the obligations already budgeted
At the November 19, 1995 Board of County Commissioners meeting the Board directed staff to ask the sheriff
if he would fund the program from his forfeiture fund Per the attached letter dated November 19, 1995, the
Sheriff has urged the Board to find other fimding vehicles to pay for the New Horizons In House Jail Program.
Therefore, the In house Jail Program would have to be funded from the General Fund Reserve Contingencies if
the Board of County Commissioners wishes to fimd this program. In the future, if New Horizons wants to be
funded they need to complete an agency budget packet by the given deadline and submit it as do other agencies.
Budget Director Joe Baird advised that New Horizons has
requested funding for its in-house jail program in the amount of
$35,011. The County funded this program for 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993
and 1994 through a substance abuse grant. However, the grant only
allowed funding for 4 years. At the November 24, 1995 meeting, the
Commissioners suggested funding through the Sheriff's forfeiture
fund; however, the Sheriff has advised that he does not have
sufficient funds. The only available solution is to fund the
program through general fund contingencies on a partial year basis.
Commissioner Adams felt that this is a good program; however,
the Board was forced to deny funding to some other very good
programs because of lack of funds and she did not feel it would be
fair to fund this one through the contingencies fund when all the
others had been denied.
DECEMBER 5, 1995 39
BUOK 96 PAGF 736
Commissioner Tippin agreed this is an excellent program.
However, the State is cutting back on a host of vitally important
programs, particularly children's programs, and in the early spring
the County will be faced with some very important decisions. He
could not support funding at this point in time.
Chairman Macht wondered if the Commissioners would be willing
to consider $10,000 if funding could be found from other sources,
and Commissioner Adams responded that she did not feel able to
offer anything at this time.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, that the Board deny funding at
this time.
Chairman Macht emphasized that the program is an excellent one
with measurable results in costs to law enforcement and the
judiciary. He stressed that what government can give with one
hand, they can take away with the other.
Sheriff Gary Wheeler made one last plea for funding for the
program which he considered to be extremely worthwhile. He did not
consider himself to be a "bleeding heart" but felt the program
saves many times $35,000 a year with a recidivism rate of less than
50%. The program keeps offenders from being rearrested and
multiplying 50% by what it costs to house them in jail and what it
costs the community in abuse to its citizens provides a benefit
whose savings is worth far more than the funding requested. He
stated that the money in his forfeiture fund will have to be used
for the Florida Crime Information Center system upgrade known as
FCIC2, which is mandated. Sheriff Wheeler stressed that this
program is something that benefits Indian River County by doing a
great service for the sons and daughters of people who live in this
community.
Chairman Macht inquired whether the purchase of the Sheriff's
step van could be deferred, and Sheriff Wheeler responded that the
ERT group is being used much more frequently which creates problems
in that the team members and their equipment are someplace else and
must be called in each time. The van will save valuable minutes in
having a command post for incidents we are seeing today such as
hostage taking, suicide, drug raids and rescue missions.
DECEMBER 5, 1995
Commissioner Bird wanted to know if the Sheriff felt he might
be able to fund the program next year, and Sheriff Wheeler reported
that the drug import business is on the increase and they will be
getting more forfeitures which could possibly fund more programs.
He would not like to see the funds come from that source but it is
a possibility.
Commissioner Adams felt that, in light of what is happening in
Tallahassee and Washington, the County needs to choose programs
very carefully. She believed that the Board should choose
programs which benefit young children first, as opposed to
rehabilitation.
Sheriff Wheeler emphasized his similar situation and stressed
that government is now in the position of trying to care for people
from the cradle to the grave.
Commissioner Bird stated he.would support the motion as it
stands but would like to leave the door open in the event some
other funding source is found and the County is not asked to
participate to such a high degree.
Mayor Art Firtion of the City of Sebastian expressed his
support for the program and reminded the Board that*' substance
abusers have young children.
Nollie Robinson, director of Criminal Justice Services, New
Horizons of the Treasure Coast, Inc., advised that their budget has
been cut down to the bare bones and that New Horizons has collected
$25,000 in St. Lucie County for DUI which they are spending in
Indian River County.
Jim Granse of 36 Pine Harbor Lane expressed his support for
the program and questioned the priority of the expenditures of LAAC
funds for environmental purposes.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED
passed unanimously
Eggert being absent).
DECEMBER 5, 1995
THE QUESTION and the motion
by a 4-0 vote (Commissioner
Bm 9 pv(7:37
41
WENTWORTH DITCH MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
TO:
Back 9 6 PA. TE 73
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 21, 1995:
James Chandler
County Administr
THROUGH: James W. Davis,
Public Works Dir
FROM.:
Roger D. Cain, P
County Engineer
SUBJECT: Wentworth Ditch
DATE: November 21, 1995
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
r
Agreement
Staff has been working with the city of Sebastian's staff and
attorney to devise a maintenance agreement for the area of CR 512
to which the new road discharges and conveys the stormwater from
the county right of way. The subject agreement is the result. It
sets out the terms for maintenance which are, except for specific
responsibilities as to treating with herbicide and mowing, to
equally share the responsibility for maintenance. The agreement
spells out the territorial extent of maintenance as well.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Alternative 1:
Approve the agreement and direct the chairman to execute the
agreement on behalf of the county and direct staff to submit the.
agreement to the city for their consideration.
Alternative 2:
Not approve the agreement and direct staff to revise the agreement
in specific ways.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
Staff recommends Alternative 1, funding to be from account number
111-214-541-033.49
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
approved the Interlocal Agreement with the City of
Sebastian for the 'purpose of providing for the
maintenance of CR -512 Wentworth and Blossom Ditches,
as recommended by staff.
AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
]DECEMBER 5, 1995 42
WATER EXPANSION PLAN - PHASE V, CONTRACT 3 - CHANGE
ORDER NO. 1 AND FINAL PAY REQUEST - MARTIN PAVING
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 27, 1995:
DATE: NOVEMBER 27, 1995
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTIL � E ICES
PREPARED ROBERT 0. WISEMEN, P.E.
AND STAFFED ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER
BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: WATER EXPANSION PLAN - PHASE V, CONTRACT 3
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 AND FINAL PAY REQUEST
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UW -93 -33 -DS
BACKGROUND -
On February 28, 1995, the Board of County Commissioners awarded the subject
project in the amount of $275,795.00 to'Martin Paving Company of Vero Beach.
(See attached.)
ANALYSIS
The project has been completed. All Indian River County requirements have
been met, and we have received clearance from the Department of Environmental
Protection. Change Order No. 1 (attached) decreased the contract cost by
$49,473.95. The total cost of the project is $226,321.05. This decrease is
due to major field reductions in non -paved drive restoration, sod and road
restoration. The contractor has been paid $197,989.65 to date, leaving a
balance of $28,331.40. Due to delay in the project closing, the liquidated
damage was assessed to the contractor for 41 days at $450.00 per day, which
equates to $18,450.00. This liquidated damage will pay additional
engineering services for inspection time to Masteller and Moler, Inc., in the
amount of $765.00. The final amount due to the contractor is $9,881.40.
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends approval of Change
Order No. 1, which reduces the contract price by $49,473.95 to a new contract
amount of $226,321.05 and the final pay request for $9,881.90 for services
rendered. Also, the staff recommends approval of the liquidated damage to be
deducted from the contractor's payment in the amount of $18,450.00 and
payment to Masteller and Moler, in the amount of $765.00.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
approved Change Order No. 1, reducing the contract
price to a new contract amount of $226,321.05;
approved final pay request for $9,881.90 to Martin
Paving; and approved the liquidated damage to be
deducted from the contractor's payment to Masteller
and Moler in the amount of $18,450, with payment to
Masteller and Moler in the amount of $765, as
recommended by staff.
CHANGE ORDER IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
BOOK 96 i A a�L 739DECEMBER 5, 1995 4 3
Boax 96 po�cE 740
AGREEMENT FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR PERFORMANCE -
GRAND HARBOR - EMS STATION
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of November 29, 1995:
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: e�t, William G. Collins II - Deputy County Attorney
DATE: November 29, 1995
SUBJECT: Agreement for Extension of Time for Performance - Grand
Harbor Fire/EMS Station
Under an Agreement for Disaster Preparedness between River Harbor, Inc.
and Indian River County dated January 9, 1991, River Harbor, Inc. agreed
to donate 1.1 acres of land at the northwest corner of Indian River
Boulevard and 45th Street for a future fire/emergency service station.
River Harbor, Inc. transferred the Grand Harbor project to a new
developer, GHA Grand Harbor, Ltd. which transfer was consented to by the
Board on August 6, 1991 by Resolution 91-87. Subsequently, GHA Grand
Harbor, Ltd. by Special Warranty Deed dated December 9, 1991 conveyed the
1.1 -acre fire/EMS station site to Indian River County.
The deed had a provision that the County must commence construction within
three years of the date of the deed and if they failed to do so, the
developer would have the right to repurchase the site within three years and
three months from the date of the deed.
The time for commencement of construction and to repurchase were extended
by an Agreement to Modify Restrictive Covenant dated 10/26/93 for a period
of one year. Under the extension, commencement of construction was to
begin by December 11, 1995.
Presented is a second "Agreement for Extension of Time for Performance"
which would extend the commencement and repurchase dates by an additional
two years. As conditions to the extension, GRA Grand Harbor, Ltd. wishes
to have the right to substitute a new location and review the architecture
and design. (See paragraphs 4 and 5 of the extension agreement.)
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the draft "Agreement for Extension of Time for Performance" with
the following revisions:
a. References in paragraph 6 to the Development Order for Grand
Harbor should refer to "Resolution 85-128, as amended."
b. Paragraph 4 should be revised to read "GHA Grand Harbor, Ltd.
has the right to substitute a new location of similar size, value,
access and utility for the fire/EMS station at any time within the
terms of this agreement, subject only to the County's approval,
which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld."
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board by a 4-0 vote
(Commissioner Eggert being absent) unanimously
approved the Agreement with GHA Grand Harbor, Ltd.
extending the date for commencement of construction
of the Fire/EMS Station by the County to and
including December 11, 1997, as recommended by
staf f .
AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
DECEMBER 5, 1995 44
GENERAL DISCUSSION
Chairman Macht noted that Commissioner Carolyn Eggert is doing
well and expects to be back for next week's meeting.
Chairman Macht also reminded everyone that on December 7th a
memorial service for Pearl Harbor will be held at 9:00 a.m. at the
Courthouse to dedicate commemorative plaques. He encouraged
everyone to attend, if possible.
DOCUMENTS TO BE MADE PART OF THE RECORD
Sidewalk and Bikeway Easement and Limited Access Easement
dated November 22, 1995, to Indian River County from DeBartolo
Realty Partnership, LP, regarding Indian River Mall DRI was
approved and made a part of the record. COPIES OF EASEMENTS ARE ON
FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD - FILED UNDER 12/05/95
There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded
and carried, the Board adjourned at 9:54 a.m.
ATTEST:
J. rton, Clerk
Minutes Approved: / q— 9 6
enneth R: acht, Chairman
DECEMBER 5, 1995 45 BOOK 96 Piu 741
I