Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/13/19980 MINUTES ATTACHED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA A G E N D A TUESDAY, JANUARY 13,1998 9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER County Administration Building 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS John W. Tippin, Chairman (District 4) Kenneth R. Macht, Vice Chairman (District 3) Fran B. Adams (District 1) Carolyn K. Eggert (District 2) Caroline D. Ginn (District 5) 0 James E. Chandler, County Administrator Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board 9:00 a.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER BACKUP PAGES 2. INVOCATION None 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Comm. Caroline D. Ginn 4. ADDITIONS to the AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS 1. Item S, Proclamation Designating January 15 through January 18, 1998 as Fellsmere Frog Leg Festival Days. 2. Item 7-H, Committee Reappointment Correction, Land Acquisition Advisory Committee, Reappointment of Robert Swift and Removal of Jim Granse from the Reappointment List 3. Item 13-D, Discussion regarding Library Matters. 5. PROCLAMATION and PRESENTATIONS None 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES None 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Received & Placed on File in Office of Clerk to the Board: Report of Convictions, Dec., 1997 B. Approval of Warrants (memorandum dated December 31, 1997) 1-9 C. Document Management & Imaging Seminar Ft. Lauderdale, FL - Jan. 28, 1998 (memorandum dated January 6, 1998) 10-12 D. County Government Law Seminar - Orlando, FL. Jan. 23, 1998 13-14 E. Changing the Interest Rate on All County Financing (Petition Paving, Utility Assessment Projects, Utility Impact Fee, Etc.) (memorandum dated January 6, 1998) 15 BOOK 104 FACE 51 7. CONSENT AGENDA (cont'd.52 600K 104 PAGE - BACKUP): F. Request to Enter into a Public Transportation Joint Participation Agreement with the Fla. Dept. of Transp. (memorandum dated January 6, 1998) 16-36 G. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 003 (memorandum dated January 7, 1998) 8. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS and GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES None 9:05 A.M. 9. PUBLIC ITEMS A. B. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3 - Quasi -Judicial 1. AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM RS -1 AND RS -6 TO RM -8, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 41 ST STREET, EAST OF INDIAN RIVER BLVD., AND DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE (memorandum dated January 5, 1998) 37-38 39-54 2. Mary Brackett's Request for Planned Develop- ment (PD) Special Exception Use and Prelimin- ary PD Plan/Plat Approval for an Agricultural PD to be Known as the Lost Hammock S/D (memorandum dated January 6, 1998) 55-70 3. Indian River Club, Ltd.'s Request for Special Exception Use Approval to Modify the Waivers for the Indian River Club Conceptual Planned Development Plan (memorandum dated January 6, 1998) 71-84 PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS Requests for Public Discussion from Frank Zorc and Sidney Turner (memorandum dated January 7, 1998) 85-89 PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS None 10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS None 11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS A. Communfty Development Request for Approval of a Conceptual Master Landscape Plan for the I-95/SR 60 Interchange and Authorization to Prepare an FDOT High- way Beautification Grant Application (memorandum dated January 7, 1998) 90-116 0 0 • BACAPT, 11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS (cont'd.): PAGES A. Communi Development (cont'd.): 2. Staff Request for Board Approval of a Con- tract with Georgia-Pacific Corporation for the Removal of Pine Trees from the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area, in Fulfillment of Scrub Habitat Mitigation Requirements for the CR512 Widening Project (memorandum dated January 7, 1998) 117-128 B. Emergency Services None C. General Services Administration Building Telephone Equipment (memorandum dated December 30, 1998) 129-132 D. Leisure Services None E. Office of Management and Budget None F. Personnel None G. Public Works 1. Wabasso Causeway Park Beautification Project (memorandum dated January 6, 1998) 133-142 2. Vero Tropical Gardens S/D, Proposals for Environmental Assessment (memorandum dated January 6, 1998) 143-158 3. Additional R -O -W Acquisition - Intersection Improvements at 43rd Ave. & 41 st St. (memorandum dated January 5, 1998) 159-163 H. Utilities None 12. COUNTY ATTORNEY None 13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS A. Chairman John W. Tipuin B. Vice Chairman Kenneth R. Macht C. Commissioner Fran B. Adams BOOK 104 PAGE 5 13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS (cont'd.): BOOK 104 PAGE 5ZPACKUP PAGES D. Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert E. Commissioner Caroline D. Ginn Regional Planning Council Discussion 14. SPECIAL DISTRICTSBOARDS A. Emergency Services District None B. Solid Waste Disposal District 1. Award Bid #8029 / Five (5) Portable Office Buildings (memorandum dated January 5, 1998) 164-168 2. Award Bid #8031 / 40 -Yazd Roll -Off Con- tainers - Purchase of 20 Units (memorandum dated January 6, 1998) 169-174 C. Environmental Control Board None 15. ADJOURNMENT Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made which includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal will be based. Anyone who needs a special accommodation for this meeting may contact the county's Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) coordinator at 567-8000 x408 at least 48 hours in advance >f meeting. Meeting may be broadcast live on TCI Cable Channel 13 - rebroadcast various times throughout the week Falcon Cable Channel 35 - rebroadcast Friday evening 0 INDEX TO MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS JANUARY 13, 1998 1. CALL TO ORDER .............................................. .1- 2. INVOCATION .................................................. 1- 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ...................................... .1- 4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA .................................. .1- 5. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS ........................ .2 - Designate January 15 through January 18, 1998 as Fellsmere Frog Leg Festival Days.................................................... 2- 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES ....................................... .3- 7. CONSENT AGENDA ........................................... .3- 7.A. Reports ................................................. .3- 7.B. List of Warrants ........................................... .3- 7.C. Document Management & Imaging Seminar ...................... 8- 7.D. County Government Law Seminar ............................. .9- 7.E. County Financing Interest Rate (Petition Paving, Utility Assessment Projects, Utility Impact Fees, Etc.) ............................ .10- 7.F. Public Transportation Joint Participation Agreement - Florida Department of Transportation ........................................ .11- 7.G. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment #003 ....................... .14- 7.H. Committee Reappointment Correction - Land Acquisition Advisory Committee - Reappointment of Robert Swift - Removal of Jim Granse from Reappointment List ....................................... .16 - JANUARY 13, 1998 _1_ BOOK 104 PAGE 55 BOOK 304 PAGE 56 9.A. PUBLIC HEARINGS ........................................... .17- 9.A.1. RICHARD TOBIN - ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM RS - 1 AND RS -6 TO RM -8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 41ST STREET, EAST OF INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD (Approximately 36.3 Acres) ................................. .17- 9.A.2. MARK BRACKETT - REQUEST FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE AND PRELINIINARY PD PLANT/PLAT APPROVAL FOR AGRICULTURAL PD TO BE KNOWN AS LOST HAMMOCK SUBDIVISION ....................... .28- 9.A.3. INDIAN RIVER CLUB, LTD. - REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE APPROVAL TO MODIFY WAIVER FOR INDIAN RIVER CLUB CONCEPTUAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAN ............................................................ .34- 9.B. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS FRANK ZORC AND SIDNEY TURNER - REQUEST FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION REGARDING PIPER AIRCRAFT SUPERFUND SITE ..... .40- 11.A.1. HORIZON OUTLET CENTER - REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CONCEPTUAL MASTER LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR I-95/SR-60 INTERCHANGE AND AUTHORIZATION TO PREPARE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HIGHWAY BEAUTIFICATION GRANT APPLICATION .................. .46- 11.A.2. GEORGIA -PACIFIC CORPORATION - CONTRACT FOR REMOVAL OF PINE TREES FROM WABASSO SCRUB CONSERVATION AREA IN FULFILLMENT OF SCRUB HABITAT MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS FOR CR -512 WIDENING PROJECT .......... .52 - JANUARY 13, 1998 -2- 0 • 11.C. ADMIlqISTRATION BUILDING TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT - BELLSOUTH AND SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT - BUDGET AMENDMENT #004 ........................................... .55- 11.G.1. WABASSO CAUSEWAY PARK BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT - BRAD SMITH ASSOCIATES .................................... .58- 11.G.2. VERO TROPICAL GARDENS SUBDIVISION - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CONSULTANT - ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT GROUP (REESE KESSLER)............................... .59- 11.G.3. JACKSON BROTHERS GROVES AND RAYMOND JACKSON - RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION - INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT 43RDAVENUE AND 41ST STREET ....................... .60- 13.D. LIBRARY MATTERS DISCUSSION ............................................................ .61- 13.E. REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL DISCUSSION ................... .62- 14.A. EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT ............................. .62- 14.B. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT ............................ .62- 14.C. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL BOARD .......................... .62 - JANUARY 13, 1998 -3- BOOK D 4 FACE 57 L_J January 13, 1998 REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, met in Regular Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25' Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday, January 13, 1998, at 9:00 a.m. Present were John W. Tippin, Chairman; Kenneth R Macht, Vice Chairman; Fran B. Adams; Carolyn K. Eggert; and Caroline D. Ginn. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; and Patricia 'TF' Jones, Deputy Clerk. 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Tippin called the meeting to order. 2. INVOCATION Chairman Tippin gave the Invocation. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Ginn led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA Chairman Tippin requested two additions to today's Agenda: 1. Item 5, Proclamation designating January 15 through January 18, 1998 as Fellsmere Frog Leg Festival Days. 2. Item 7-H, Committee Reappointment Correction, Land Acquisition Advisory Committee, Reappointment of Robert Swift and Removal of Jim Granse from the Reappointment List. Commissioner Eggert requested the addition of Item 13-D, Discussion regarding Library Matters. JANUARY 13, 1998 -1- BOOK 104 FAGS BOOK 104 F,�GE 59 ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board unanimously added the above items to the Agenda. 5. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS DESIGNATE JANUARY 15 THROUGH JANUARY 18. 1998 AS FELLSMERE FROG LEG FESTIVAL DAYS Chairman Tippin presented the following Proclamation to :Bob Baker, Mayor of Fellsmere, and "Festus the Ran": PROCLAMATION ',11 FROG LEG FESTIVAL DAY WHEREAS, the seventh annual Fellsmere Frog Leg Festival will be held on January 15 through January 18, 1998; and WHEREAS, this Festival showcases local culinary skills resulting in frog legs that are unsurpassed; and WHEREAS, the fame of this Festival has reached beyond the borders of the county and state; and WHEREAS, this Festival has over the years attracted thousands of visitors and tourists to the area; and WHEREAS, the City of Fellsmere has been designated as the Frog Leg Capital of the World; and WHEREAS, it is appropriate to recognize this festival as a premier event in Indian River County: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the period of January 15 through January 18, 1998 is designated as FELLSMERE FROG LEG FESTIVAL DAYS in Indian River County. Adopted this 13 day of January, 1998. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY #nW."T ippin, Cha n JANUARY 13, 1998 -2- ® 0 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES None. 7. CONSENT AGENDA 7.A. REPORTS Received and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk to the Board: 1. Report of Convictions, December 1997. 7.B. LIST OF WARRANTS The Board reviewed a Memorandum of December 31, 1997: TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: DECEMBER 31, 1997 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WARRANTS FROM: EDWIN M. FRY, JR., FINANCE DIRECTOR In compliance with Chapter 136.06, Florida Statutes. all warrants issued by the Board of County Commissioners are to be recorded in the Board minutes. Approval is requested for the attached list of warrants. issued by the Clerk to the Board, for the time period of December 18 to December 31. 1997. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved the list of Warrants as issued by the Clerk to the Board for the period from December 181 1997 through December 31, 1997, as recommended by staff. JANUARY 13, 1998 -3- BOOK 104 PAGE CHECK NAME CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE AMOUNT 0019038 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 12/18/97 74.41 0019039 SEBASTIAN, CITY OF 12/18/97 25,312.59 0019040 COOGAN, MAUREEN 12/19/97 387.28 0019041 UNITED WAY OF INDIAN RIVER CTY 12/19/97 789.00 0019042 STEWART, NALL, EVANS & HAFNER 12/22/97 15,000.00 0019043 ST JOHNS RIVER WATER MGMT DIST 12/23/97 250.00 0019044 MULLINS, B FRANK 12/23/97 975.00 0019045 LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE 12/23/97 5,000.00 0019046 COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE CO 12/23/97 10,000.00 0019047 KRUCZKIEWICZ, LORIANE 12/23/97 138.50 0019048 BREVARD COUNTY CLERK OF THE 12/23/97 422.04 0019049 ORANGE COUNTY CLERK OF THE 12/23/97 135.20 0019050 ST LUCIE COUNTY CLERK OF THE 12/23/97 350.50 0019051 RICHLAND COUNTY CLERK OF THE 12/23/97 150.00 0019052 VELASQUEZ, MERIDA 12/23/97 200.00 0019053 JACKSON COUNTY CLERK OF THE 12/23/97 124.80 0019054 DOUGLAS COUNTY CLERK OF COURT 12/23/97 23.08 0019055 GENESEE COUNTY FRIEND OF THE 12/23/97 163.60 0019056 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY CLERK OF 12/23/97 5,768.58 0019057 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT 12/23/97 244.57 0019058 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF 12/23/97 149.94 0019059 INDIAN RIVER FEDERAL CREDIT 12/23/97 87,385.46 0019060 VERO BEACH FIREFIGHTERS ASSOC. 12/23/97 1,944.00 0019061 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT 12/23/97 257.69 0019062 KEY TRUST COMPANY 12/23/97 868.81 0019063 NACO/SOUTHEAST 12/23/97 3,993.73 0019064 LEDUC, SUSAN M 12/29/97 358.00 0019065 STEWART TITLE OF INDIAN RIVER 12/29/97 10,000.00 0019066 CANTLON, PAULA 12/29/97 296.60 0225925 MASON LAND INC 7/17/97 .00 0230660 BELLSOUTH 10/16/97 .00 0234028 MCCORKLE RADIOLOGY 12/11/97 .00 0234137 UNIVERSAL SIGNS & ACCESSORIES 12/11/97 .00 0234527 SEBASTIAN, CITY OF 12/18/97 .00 0234772 A A FIRE EQUIPMENT, INC 12/31/97 638.90 0234773 ABC-CLIO INC 12/31/97 33.81 0234774 ACTION PRINTERS 12/31/97 90.30 0234775 ADVANCED GARAGE DOORS, INC 12/31/97 55.00 0234776 AERO PRODUCTS CORPORATION 12/31/97 147.00 0234777 AMERICAN BUSINESS INTERIORS 12/31/97 186.50 0234778 ANIMAL CARE EQUIPMENT AND 12/31/97 780.07 0234779 ATLAS PEN & PENCIL CORP 12/31/97 313.41 0234780 AUTO SUPPLY CO OF VERO BEACH, 12/31/97 1,000.00 0234781 ATLANTIC REPORTING 12/31/97 507.80 0234782 AQUAGENIX LAND -WATER 12/31/97 86.00 0234783 ALL POWER SERVICES, INC 12/31/97 142.43 0234784 ALL FLORIDA BEVERAGE & OFFICE 12/31/97 59.90 0234785 ALL SERVICE GRAPHICS, INC 12/31/97 2,241.50 0234786 A T & T 12/31/97 19.10 0234787 ALL RITE WATER CONDITIONING 12/31/97 362.60 0234788 ART KRIEGER CONSTRUCTION 12/31/97 2,590.75 0234789 ALBIN, DIANE 12/31/97 75.25 0234790 A T & T 12/31/97 39.84 0234791 A T & T LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES 12/31/97 50.00 0234792 APPRAISAL INSTITUTE 12/31/97 755.00 0234793 ATLANTIC COASTAL TITLE CORP 12/31/97 251.00 0234794 ALBERTSON'S 12/31/97 350.02 0234795 AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION 12/31/97 22.50 0234796 AVATAR UTILITY SERVICES, INC 12/31/97 10,663.59 0234797 AMERICAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 12/31/97 140.00 0234798 ACQUARO, JOSEPH & GRALL, 12/31/97 342.48 0234799 A T & T 12/31/97 24.73 0234800 ALLIANCE CONSULTING & 12/31/97 1,260.00 0234801 AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS 12/31/97 62.40 0234802 AQUA -MARINE SERVICES 12/31/97 846.37 0234803 BAKER DISTRIBUTING CO 12/31/97 164.21 0234804 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 12/31/97 5,311.91 0234805 BENT PINE GOLF CLUB, THE 12/31/97 351.00 0234806 BLACKHAWK QUARRY COMPANY 12/31/97 358.93 0234807 BELLSOUTH MOBILITY 12/31/97 101.72 0234808 BARTON, JEFFREY R- CLERK 12/31/97 178,495.83 0234809 BARTON, JEFFREY K -CLERK 12/31/97 6,658.25 0234810 BARTON, JEFFREY K -CLERK 12/31/97 53.00 0234811 BARNETT BAIL BONDS 12/31/97 472.00 0234812 BARTON, JEFFREY K 12/31/97 2,067.60 0234813 BRODART CO 12/31/97 48.72 0234814 BRENNAN, THOMAS J PID 12/31/97 1,100.00 0234815 BILLING SERVICE, INC 12/31/97 600.81 0234816 BUDGET INN OF VERO BEACH 12/31/97 248.00 0234817 BAKER & TAYLOR ENTERTAINMENT 12/31/97 34.25 0234818 BELLSOUTH 12/31/97 7,095.12 0234819 BUILDING OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION 12/31/97 55.00 0234820 BETTER COPY CENTER, A 12/31/97 921.00 0234821 BLUE CROSS/BLUE SHIELD OF 12/31/97 8,228.00 0234822 BELLSOUTH PUBLIC COMMUNICATION 12/31/97 45.51 0234823 BAKER & TAYLOR INC 12/31/97 749.10 0234824 BRUCE, KELLY 12/31/97 84.98 0234825 BAUMGARDNER, MELINDA 12/31/97 384.54 0234826 BUILDINGS BOOK CLUB 12/31/97 5.00 0234827 BENHAM, LISA L 12/31/97 20.00 0234828 BAF FOODS II CORPORATION 12/31/97 500.00 0234829 BROWN & CALDWELL- 12/31/97 34,261.66 0234830 CARTER ASSOCIATES, INC 12/31/97 5,757.00 0234831 CLEMENTS PEST CONTROL 12/31/97 19.00 0234832 COLD AIR DISTRIBUTORS 12/31/97 29.81 JANUARY 13, 1998 -4- (� � d1 BOOK 1U4 PAGE CHECK NAME CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE AMOUNT 0234833 COMMUNICATIONS INT'L INC 12/31/97 847.30 0234834 CHEMSEARCH 12/31/97 140.54 0234835 CLINIC PHARMACY 12/31/97 367.82` 0234836 COBB GROUP, THE 12/31/97 39.00 0234837 CUSTOM CARRIAGES, INC 12/31/97 772.41 0234838 COLLINS & AIRMAN 12/31/97 4,265.80 0234839 CARTER, BECKY 12/31/97 87.55 0234840 CRITTENDEN GOLF INC 12/31/97 39.00 0234841 CANTERBURY 12/31/97 496.63 0234842 CORPORATION OF THE PRESIDENT 12/31/97 53.78 0234843 CITY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 12/31/97 9,565.00 0234844 CAREERTRACK PUBLICATIONS 12/31/97 158.00 0234845 CENTRAL PUMP & SUPPLY INC 12/31/97 35.00 0234846 CENTER FOR EMOTIONAL AND 12/31/97 342.00 0234847 CARTER, KELLY 12/31/97 59.23 0234848 CUMMINS, CHERYL 12/31/97 60.00 0234849 COASTLINE EQUIPMENT CO INC 12/31/97 153.84 0234850 CABO (COUNCIL OF AMERICAN 12/31/97 60.00 0234851 CERTIFIED INSURANCE SERVICE 12/31/97 500.00 0234852 CENTRAL A/C & REFRIG SUPPLY, 12/31/97 233.83 0234853 DEEP SI% DIVE SHOP, INC 12/31/97 24.95 0234854 DEPENDABLE DODGE, INC 12/31/97 171.45 0234855 DICKERSON FLORIDA, INC 12/31/97 467.78 0234856 DOCTOR'S CLINIC 12/31/97 2,782.26 0234857 DATA SUPPLIES, INC 12/31/97 4,636.39 0234858 DAVIDSON TITLES, INC 12/31/97 1,839.29 0234859 DATA FLOW SYSTEMS, INC 12/31/97 251.74 0234860 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF 12/31/97 75.00 0234861 DADE PAPER COMPANY 12/31/97 477.77 0234862 DOWNTOWN PRODUCE INC 12/31/97 162.00 0234863 DILLARD, CABBIE 12/31/97 34.77 0234864 DAMES & MOORE 12/31/97 2,765.79 0234865 DOCTORS' CLINIC 12/31/97 1,620.00 0234866 E -Z BREW COFFEE SERVICE, INC 12/31/97 33.50 0234867 ELLIS K PHELPS AND CO, INC 12/31/97 210.70 0234868 ENVIROMETRICS, INC 12/31/97 1,121.00 0234869 EMERGENCY MEDICINE ASSOCIATES 12/31/97 78.00 0234870 EVANS, ANNE FISHER 12/31/97 3,140.00 0234871 EMERGENCY LINEN SUPPLY CO 12/31/97 1,143.45 0234872 FISHER SCIENTIFIC COMPANY 12/31/97 1,030.15 0234873 FLORIDA COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO 12/31/97 563.00 0234874 F P & L 12/31/97 12,029.77 0234875 FRASER ENGINEERING & TESTING 12/31/97 40.00 0234876 FLETCHER'S TV & APPLIANCE 12/31/97 645.00 0234877 FLOWERS BAKING COMPANY OF 12/31/97 63.62 0234878 FLORIDA TIRE RECYCLING, INC 12/31/97 802.20 0234879 FLORIDA SPECIFIER 12/31/97 24.95 0234880 FIRE CHIEF 12/31/97 54.00 0234881 FLORIDA WOMEN'S STATE GOLF 12/31/97 50.00 0234882 FALCON CABLE TV 12/31/97 23.90 0234883 FLORIDA MEDICAID COUNTY 12/31/97 36,120.33 0234884 FLORIDA BEVERAGE LAW 12/31/97 810.00 0234885 FALZONE, MATTHEW 12/31/97 54.08 0234886 FENNIMORE, CHARLES 12/31/97 156.00 0234887 FLORIDA DESIGN CONTRACTORS 12/31/97 39,530.77 0234888 FLORIDA SOFTWARE, INC 12/31/97 77.50 0234889 FRAKER, EVAN 12/31/97 28.33 0234890 FLORIDA SPINE INSTITUE 12/31/97 500.00 0234891 FLORIDA HISTORICAL LIBRARY 12/31/97 212.45 0234892 FAIRWAY FOLLIES 12/31/97 73.25 0234893 GATOR LUMBER COMPANY 12/31/97 47.60 0234894 GLISSON & SONS, INC 12/31/97 1,050.00 0234895 GOODKNIGHT LAWN EQUIPMENT, INC 12/31/97 103.76 0234896 GROLIER PUBLISHING COMPANY 12/31/97 253.34 0234897 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER 12/31/97 538.81 0234898 GALE RESEARCH, INC 12/31/97 71.79 0234899 GREENE, ROBERT E 12/31/97 1,736.98 0234900 GANGER, CHARISE 12/31/97 48.93 0234901 GIACHINO, JUAN C 12/31/97 19.95 0234902 GERBER, KARL 12/31/97 20.00 0234903 GLASER, EDWARD 12/31/97 180.25 0234904 GILSON, SUSAN 12/31/97 35.00 0234905 HAMMOND, KATHARINE R 12/31/97 4,946.92 0234906 HARRISON COMPANY, THE 12/31/97 75.70 0234907 HARRISON UNIFORMS 12/31/97 327.00 0234908 HORNUNG'S PRO GOLF SALES, INC 12/31/97 83.89 0234909 HUNTER AUTO SUPPLIES 12/31/97 323.74 0234910 HOLIDAY BUILDERS, INC 12/31/97 500.00 0234911 ROGAN, JAMES D 12/31/97 500.00 0234912 HERITAGE BOOKS, INC 12/31/97 92.50 0234913 HUDSON PUMP & PROCESS EQUIP 12/31/97 946.01 0234914 HELD, PATRICIA BARGO 12/31/97 129.50 0234915 BACH SUPPLY 12/31/97 136.50 0234916 HILL MANUFACTURING 12/31/97 11095.50 0234917 HEALTHSOUTH TREASURE COAST 12/31/97 201.60 0234918 HATFIELD, ERIC 12/31/97 154.50 0234919 HEALTHSOUTH CORP DBA 12/31/97 14.40 0234920 HARRIS, COTHERMAN & ASSOC 12/31/97 20,000.00 0234921 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 12/31/97 32,779.12 0234922 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 12/31/97 55,288.75 0234923 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 12/31/97 50.00 0234924 INSTRUMENTATION SERVICES, INC 12/31/97 890.00 0234925 INDIAN RIVER BATTERY, INC 12/31/97 925.00 0234926 INDIAN RIVER BLUE PRINT, INC 12/31/97 562.52 0234927 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITY 12/31/97 385.39 0234928 INTERNATIONAL MUNICIPAL 12/31/97 160.00 JANUARY 13, 1998 -5- BOOK 104 PAGE 62 ri Ir BOOK x.04 PAGE 6 CHECK NAME CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE AMOUNT 0234929 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 12/31/97 167.00 0234930 INTERSTATE BILLING SERVICE 12/31/97 1,526.42 0234931 INDIAN RIVER MEMORIAL HOSPITAL 12/31/97 7,144.90 0234932 INSURANCE SERVICING & 12/31/97 1,575.00 0234933 IBM CORP-DVV 12/31/97 333.50 0234934 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 12/31/97 2,000.00 0234935 INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION 12/31/97 225.50 0234936 IRC EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE- 12/31/97 103,723.25 0234937 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS 12/31/97 52.85 0234938 INTERNATIONAL MUNICIPAL 12/31/97 490.00 0234939 INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY 12/31/97 189.00 0234940 I B F ORIGINALS, INC 12/31/97 310.00 0234941 INDIAN RIVER HAND 12/31/97 93.98 0234942 JACOBS ELECTRIC MOTOR REPAIR 12/31/97 1,106.00 0234943 JORGENSEN, PETER ESQ 12/31/97 3,001.25 0234944 J R REPORTING ASSOCIATES, INC 12/31/97 325.00 0234945 JANKOWSKI, LENNY 12/31/97 272.50 0234946 JONES CHEMICALS, INC 12/31/97 2,355.52 0234947 KARSTEN MANUFACTURING CORP 12/31/97 579.39 0234948 POWELL, MARY D 12/31/97 136.30 0234949 KNIGHT & MATHIS, INC 12/31/97 369.50 0234950 KANO LABORATORIES, INC 12/31/97 122.51 0234951 KEEN'S FOODTOWN 12/31/97 70.34 0234952 KT MOWER & EQUIPMENT 12/31/97 442.25 0234953 KLINK, RICHARD 12/31/97 880.00 0234954 KELL TELEPHONE 12/31/97 37.50 0234955 KAPLAN, KAREN DC PA 12/31/97 147.00 0234956 KOMARNICKI, WALTER 12/31/97 195.00 0234957 KEEP INDIAN RIVER BEAUTIFUL 12/31/97 1,483.29 0234958 KLAPSA, TOM 12/31/97 295.75 0234959 LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE 12/31/97 15,000.00 0234960 LONG, JAMES T ESQUIRE 12/31/97 12,600.00 0234961 LOS ANGELES DODGERS, INC 12/31/97 230.00 0234962 L M P/ I CO 12/31/97 407.76 0234963 LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, INC 12/31/97 225.56 0234964 LIGHT SOURCE BUSINESS SYSTEMS 12/31/97 172.96 0234965 LFI VERO BEACH, INC 12/31/97 1,249.84 0234966 LESCO, INC 12/31/97 144.47 0234967 LAPSCO INC 12/31/97 68.75 0234968 LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES 12/31/97 1,020.24 0234969 LETTS, DAVID 12/31/97 497.00 0234970 LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, INC 12/31/97 216.85 0234971 MAX DAVIS ASSOCIATES 12/31/97 105.58 0234972 INDIAN RIVER COMMUNITY COLLEGE 12/31/97 14,174.17 0234973 MICKLER'S FLORIDIANA, INC 12/31/97 15.75 0234974 MID COAST TIRE SERVICE, INC 12/31/97 26.00 0234975 MILLER GOLF COMPANY 12/31/97 455.00 0234976 MORGAN AND EKLUND 12/31/97 4,767.75 0234977 MATRK MEDICAL, INC 12/31/97 1,568.90 0234978 MARTIN PAVING COMPANY 12/31/97 179,735.40 0234979 MAC PAPERS, INC 12/31/97 53.75 0234980 MASTELLER & MOLER, INC 12/31/97 11,802.57 0234981 MEDICAL RECORD SERVICES, INC 12/31/97 14.78 0234982 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANY 12/31/97 107.94 0234983 MCDOWELL PUBLICATIONS 12/31/97 236.50 0234984 MONNETT EYE & SURGERY CENTER 12/31/97 13.05 0234985 MOTYKA, EDWIN J 12/31/97 20.00 0234986 MERCURY TECHNOLOGIES 12/31/97 290.12 0234987 MICHIE 12/31/97 98.82 0234988 M G B CONSTRUCTION 12/31/97 500.00 0234989 MR BOB PORTABLE TOILET 12/31/97 76.12 0234990 MARC INDUSTRIES 12/31/97 536.43 0234991 MANCINO, DANIELLE 12/31/97 21.89 0234992 MOSS, ROGER 12/31/97 41.20 0234993, MIELBECK, ROB 12/31/97 30.00 0234994 MCCALL, BONNIE 12/31/97 20.00 0234995 M V SPORTS CORP 12/31/97 1,336.64 0234996 MEZZINA, PATRICIA 12/31/97 474.93 0234997 MORRIS, RODNEY 12/31/97 137.50 0234998 MUINJA, MARILYN 12/31/97 30.00 0234999 NOLTE, DAVID C 12/31/97 172,250.10 0235000 NICOSIA, ROGER J DO 12/31/97 1,500.00 0235001 NEW HORIZONS OF THE TREASURE 12/31/97 31,762.08 0235002 NATIONAL VETERANS LEGAL 12/31/97 83.00 0235003 OMNIGRAPHICS, INC 12/31/97 38.00 0235004 OFFICE DEPOT, INC 12/31/97 3,621.40 0235005 ON GUARD 12/31/97 1,236.50 0235006 OSCEOLA PHARMACY 12/31/97 167.04 0235007 O'NEIL, LEE & WEST 12/31/97 9,551.25 0235008 PEPSI -COLA BOTTLING GROUP 12/31/97 76.50 0235009 PETTY CASH 12/31/97 40.50 0235010 PETTY CASH 12/31/97 146.19 0235011 PRECAST CONCRETE PRODUCTS 12/31/97 60.00 0235012 PUBLIX SUPERMARKET 12/31/97 297.32 0235013 PROCTOR CONSTRUCTION 12/31/97 500.00 0235014 PAVCO CONSTRUCTION, INC 12/31/97 1,083.00 0235015 PORT PETROLEUM, INC 12/31/97 296.29 0235016 PUBLIX 12/31/97 185.00 0235017 PRESS JOURNAL 12/31/97 452.81 0235018 POSTMASTER 12/31/97 128.00 0235019 PAGE, LIVINGSTON 12/31/97 117.00 0235020 PRIMESTAR BY TCI CABLE 12/31/97 39.95 0235021 PANGBURN, TERRI 12/31/97 36.00 0235022 PRESS JOURNAL/STUART NEWS 12/31/97 353.00 0235023 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION SOUTHEAST 12/31/97 87.49 0235024 PUBLIX 12/31/97 354.94 0235025 QUALITY BOOKS, INC 12/31/97 209.30 0235026 RADIO SHACK ACCT RECEIVABLE 12/31/97 511.37 JANUARY 13, 1998 -6- • E CHECK NAME CHECK NUMBER DATE 0235027 RUSSO PRINTING, INC 12/31/97 0235028 RICHMOND HYDRAULICS INC 12/31/97 0235029 RECYCLE FLORIDA TODAY INC 12/31/97 0235030 RIVERSIDE NATIONAL BANK 12/31/97 0235031 RANGEMASTER S E, INC 12/31/97 0235032 R & G SOD FARMS 12/31/97 0235033 RELIABLE TRANSMISSION SERVICE 12/31/97 0235034 ROSE, ROBERTA S, DO 12/31/97 0235035 ROY CLARK 12/31/97 0235036 REGIONAL ENGINEERS 12/31/97 0235037 RIA GROUP 12/31/97 0235038 ROSS, WILLIAM 12/31/97 0235039 SCHOPP, BARBARA G 12/31/97 0235040 SCOTT'S SPORTING GOODS 12/31/97 0235041 SEBASTIAN BUSINESS SUPPLY, INC 12/31/97 0235042 SEBASTIAN, CITY OF 12/31/97 0235043 SEWELL HARDWARE CO, INC 12/31/97 0235044 SEXUAL ASSAULT ASSISTANCE 0235045 SOUTHERN BUILDING CODE 0235046 SOUTHERN CULVERT 0235047 SOUTHERN ELECTRIC SUPPLY 0235048 ST LUCIE BATTERY & TIRE, INC 0235049 STATE OF FLORIDA 0235050 STURGIS LUMBER & PLYWOOD CO 0235051 SUNSHINE PHYSICAL THERAPY 0235052 ST LUCIE PAPER & PACKAGING,INC 0235053 SERVICE REFRIGERATION CO, INC 0235054 SIMON & SCHUSTER 0235055 SUN TELEPHONE, INC 0235056 JA SEXAUER INC 0235057 SKAGGS, PAUL MD 0235058 SHEPARD'S 0235059 3YSCO FOOD SERVICES OF 0235060 STEWART INDUSTRIES 0235061 SHOWCASE PROPERTIES 0235062 SEBASTIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 0235063 SIMS, MATTHEW 0235064 SOUTHEASTERN EMERGENCY EQUIP 0235065 SCHWEY SERVICES 0235066 STAMM MANUFACTURING 0235067 ST LUCIE COUNTY 0235068 SOUTHERN LOCK AND SUPPLY CO 0235069 SKALA, ERIC 0235070 SOUTHERN SECURITY SYSTEMS OF 0235071 SUNSHINE STATE ONE CALL 0235072 SMYTH SYSTEMS INC 0235073 SANFILIPPI, NINA 0235074 THOMAS, DEBBY L 0235075 TITLEIST DRAWER 0235076 TREASURE ISLAND INN 0235077 TOTAL PRINT, INC 0235078 TRANE PARTS CENTER OF SOUTH 0235079 TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS 0235080 TRACEY, MARTIN L., JR, DR 0235081 TEXACE CORP 0235082 TATTEGRAIN, RAYMOND 0235083 TRUGREEN CHEMLAWN 0235084 TROTMAN, MICHAEL 0235085 TREASURE COAST BUILDERS INC 0235086 UDELL, ROBERT G ESQUIRE 0235087 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, THE 0235088 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 0235089 US FILTER DISTRIBUTION GROUP 0235090 VELDE FORD, INC 0235091 VERO BEACH, CITY OF 0235092 VERO SUCH, CITY OF 0235093 VERO LAWNMOWER CENTER, INC 0235094 VONBUELOW, ROBERT 0235095 VERO BEACH, CITY OF 0235096 VERO BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT 0235097 VEY, CARRIE 0235098 VERO BEARING & BOLT 0235099 VERO ORTHOPAEDICS 0235100 VERO BEACH POWERTRAIN 0235101 VANTAGE EQUIPMENT CO 0235102 VANSTAR 0235103 WAL-MART STORES, INC 0235104 WAL-MART STORES, INC 0235105 WALGREENS Y 1547 0235106 WQOL FM 0235107 WILLHOFF, PATSY 0235108 WHARTON-SMITH, INC 0235109 WHEELER PUBLISHING, INC 0235110 WALKER, KEITH 0235111 WOLFE, MEGAN 0235112 WBBE-FM 0235113 WOSN-FM RADIO STATION 0235114 WILKES, TALI 0235115 WEST GROUP PAYMENT CTR 0235116 WOLFE, ERIN 0235117 XEROX CORPORATION 0235118 ZEE SERVICE COMPANY 682 0235119 ZUKOWSKI, DANNY 0235120 ZUKOWSKI, DAVID 0235121 ZUCKERMAN, ROMANA AND 0235122 RODDENBERRy, ALFRED JANUARY 13, 1998 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 12/31/97 CHECK AMOUNT 399.52 592.87 75.00 31.83 195.50 60.00 5,795.00 154.00 675.00 2,194.28 269.06 12.00 192.50 2,027.60 49.36 150.00 574.85 4,420.75 125.00 189.00 159.37 58.24 5,627.72 90.79 45.00 237.75 30.00 351.66 25.00 312.82 10.00 1,340.52 370.37 4,848.54 500.00 25.00 69.02 162.55 95.00 2,152.59 1.85 610.37 88.84 743.00 350.16 582.84 20.00 497.00 734.76 256.00 791.47 77.84 65.00 225.00 172.30 50.00 630.00 28.33 500.00 18,858.93 19.00 108.00 9,124.79 757.41 2,623.36 9,175.00 169.15 11.20 1,621.54 50.00 103.00 137.11 150.00 63.26 534.22 363.27 198.04 28.81 111.28 270.00 260.00 415,305.33 135.49 78.00 47.64 400.00 164.00 640.50 2,053.25 63.09 390.00 81.68 20.00 20.00 15,000.00 256.41 1,829,873.73 • �� BOOK 104 FACE 64 r, BOOK 10PAGE 7. C. DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT & IMAGING SEMINAR The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 6, 1998: To: Board of County Commissioners From: Alice E. White, Executive Aide Date: January 6, 1998 Subject: Document Management and Imaging Seminar Ft. Lauderdale, Florida - January 28, 1998 I am requesting permission for me and appropriate staff to attend this seminar. The main speaker formerly worked with the Florida Division of Records and Archives, and has helped set up numerous document management and imaging systems. THE 0 INNOWON GROUPS The Florida Innovation Groups r! and hosts Broward County and The City of Temple Terrace present Document Management and Imaging Wednesday, January 28,1998 — Broward County, FL Lauderdale, FL Thursday, January 29,1998 — City of Temple Terrace, FL Document imaging systems allow local governments to process, store, retrieve and manage paper and electronic documents more efficiently and effectively. Imaging allows any form of media to be digitized by scanning and storing the information in a graphic image and/or a text file. Once stored, this enables users to retrieve the needed documents from a collection of thousands or millions in a matter of seconds while reducing the space requirement of hard copy by up to 98 percent. Some governments are already using electronic storage, however, problems with records management, indexing, retention and deleting files are already creeping in. This one -day workshop will focus on document imaging and management, the "smart" design of a system based on a needs analysis, tools and equipment, costs involved, retention management and legal requirements. Dr. Powder will address hardware, long and short-term storage issues, retention schedules, the advantages and disadvantages of electronic storage and more. A 120 -page guidebook will be included Learn about: . The hardware and software components of an imaging system. . The storage options available. . How to scale and cost justify an imaging system. . How imaging systems meet audit and long-term records retention requirements. . How other jurisdictions use the technology to serve customers more efficiently and effectively. . Records indexing and retention. . Deleting files— purging and expungement. Workshop Agenda: Registration is from 8:30 a.m. - 9:00 am. 9:00 am. Overview of Imaging Technology 9:30 am. Tools for Process Innovation 10:30 am. Imaging Technology 11:30 a.m. Question and Answer Session 12:00p.m. Lunch (on your own) 1:00 P.M. Planning an Imaging Strategy 2:15 p.m. Local Government Examples 3:15 p.m. Legal Aspects/Retention 3:45 p.m. Questions and Answers 4:00 p.m. Wrap-up About the premier. Charles Powder. Ph.D., is the Chief Executive of Creative Microsystems. software developers and systems integrators specializing in implementing new technologies for local governments. Chuck has more than 15 years of knowledge in software and systems design and support experience. Creative Microsystems has developed governmental management and public safety systems for more than 300 local governments, villages to counties. covering all departments: finance, planning and building, libraries, city clerk, the courts and others. JANUARY 13, 1998 65 1 • 0 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved attendance at the Document Management and Imaging Seminar at Fort Lauderdale, Florida on January 28, 1998, for Alice White, Executive Aide, and appropriate staff.. 7.D. COUNTY GOVERNMENT LAW SEMINAR The Board reviewed the following brochure: ■ MENUS M mmm so SCIES `11112/� Florida Counties Foundation and the Florida Institute of Government present COUNTY GOVERNMENT LAW January 23, 1998 Riu Orlando Hotel Orlando, Florida JANUARY 13, 1998 C... Cmuu.� ABOUT THE PROGRAM The Commissioners Voluntary Certification Program created by the Florida Counties Foundation, began November, 1996. The idea for this educational endeavor originated from the Florida Association of Counties Long Range Plan, adopted by the FAC general membership in June, 1995. Certification requirements for this 2 -year program include twenty-four (24) hours of core curriculum and six (6) hours of continuing education for a total of thirty hours. "County Government Law" is the third six (6) hour core curriculum course offered by the Foundation. This workshop is designed to help county commissioners understand their county's role as a code enforcer. It will also broaden their knowledge of the legal liabilities of local government. In addition, Commissioners will learn about comprehensive planning, land use, and zoning. Register as soon as possible because seating is limited. University of Central Florida Florida Institute of Government Orlando, FL 32616 WHY YOU SHOULD ATTEND To broaden your knowledge of county government law j To understand the role of county government as a code enforcer i To learn about the liability of local government i To interact and exchange information with your peers Program for Commissioners Voluntary Certification Program WHO SHOULD ATTEND .j Commissioners participating in the Commissioners Voluntary Certification Program Commissioners with a special interest in county government structure FEE The fee for the workshop is $75. This includes morning coffee and danish, lunch, afternoon sodas, and materials The Honorable Caroline Ginn Commissioner Indian River County 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 -9- Boa 104 PAGE (66 � �1 1 600K juli WAGE 9, ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved travel for Commissioner Ginn to attend the County Government Law Seminar January 23, 1998 in Orlando, Florida. ZE. COUNTYFI1yANCI1VGINTERESTRATE ftaTIONPAV17VG, UTILITY ASSESSMENT PROJECTS. UTILITYIMPACT FEES, E The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 6, 1998: TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: January 6, 1998 SUBJECT: CHANGING TRE INTEREST RATE ON ALL COUNTY FINANCING (PETITION PAVING, UTIIXrY ASSESSMENT PROJECTS, UTII.ITY IMPACT FEE, ETC.) - CONSENT AGENDA FROM: Joseph A. Bard OMB Director DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Fixed interest rates charged by the County for financing utility assessments, utility impact fees, petition paving assessments, and any other financing is scheduled to be set on an annual basis in January of each year. For the 1997 calendar year, the assessment/financing fixed interest rate was set at the prime rate which was 8'/a% at the time. The prime interest rate in the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday, January 6, 1997, is 8'/z %which would mean an increase in the rate from 1997 to 1998 of/.%. The only exception to this interest nate would be if the project was directly affiliated with a bond issue and the requirements dictated a different interest rate. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the fixed interest rate of 81/2 %. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved a fixed interest rate of 81/2% for the 1998 calendar year for financing utility assessments, utility impact fees, petition paving assessments and any other financing, as recommended by staff. JANUARY 13, 1998 -10- 0 0 • Z F. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION JOINT PARTICIPATIONAGREEMENT - FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 6, 1998: TO: James Chandler County Administrator THROUGH: Robert M. Keating, AICP �rM K - Community Development Director FROM: Jacob Riger -TR MPO Planner DATE: January 6, 1998 SUBJECT: REQUEST TO ENTER INTO A PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION It is requested that the information presented herein be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of January 13, 1998. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS At the December 2, 1997 Board of County Commissioners meeting, the Board approved the submittal of an application for Federal Transit Administration grant fiords under 49 USC Ch. 53, Section 5307 (formerly known as Section 9 of the Federal Transit Act). The grant application requested $340,000 of federal fiords in operating assistance, which is to be matched by $340,000 in local fiords. Of the $340,000 match amount, $109,571 is to come from a state Public Transit Block Grant, and $230,429 was to be provided by Indian River County and the City of Vero Beach. To receive the state Public Transit Block Grant funds, the county must enter into a Joint Participation Agreement with FDOT. The County will pass through the grant funds to the Indian River County Council on Aging, Inc. for continuation and expansion of public transportation services. The Council on Aging will use the Section 5307 grunt award to fiord its Community Coach fixed route, dial -a -ride. and paratransit services. A significant component of the matching funds for the operating assistance portion of the Section 5307 grant comes from the state Public Transit Block Grant. Enacted by the Florida Legislature to provide a state -based source of funding for public transit, state Public Transit Block Grant funds are awarded to those public transit providers eligible to receive funding from the Federal Transit Administration's Section 5307 and Section 18 programs and to Community Transportation Coordinators. According to state regulations, the block grant funds may be used for eligible capital and operating costs of public transit providers. Projects are to be consistent with applicable approved local government comprehensive plans. For support of transit operations, state participation may not exceed the lesser of 500/6 of the total eligible operating costs of the public transit services, or the total revenue (excluding federal funds and farebox and advertising revenues) received by the transit provider for operating expenses. Local tax revenues made available for operating costs shall not be supplanted by block grant funds. Because the capital portion of the County's FY 1996/97 Section 5307 grant is being thatched by soft -match rather than cash -match funds, the entire $109,571 state block grant is being used to provide match for operations funding. As with the FTA Section 5307 grant program, only public agencies may be designated recipients of block grant funds, although a nonprofit provider may receive block grant fiords through a designated recipient. Under these restrictions, the Indian River County Council on Aging has requested that the Board of County Commissioners apply for the block grant funds on its behalf. The JPA is an agreement between FDOT and Indian River County, and specifies the requirements which the County must meet in order to receive Public Transit Block Grant funding. One of the most important of these requirements is that the County submit a Transit Development Plan to FDOT. The Indian River County MPO recently developed an updated Transit Development Plan for the entire MPO area and submitted the plan to FDOT in October 1997 for use with this Public Transit Block Grant. By May 1998, the County must also publish in the newspaper the productivity and performance measures established for the transit system. The Council on Aging will provide these data along with other required reports of local transit service. There are also equal employment and JANUARY 139 1998 0 -11- BOOK 104 PAGE 68 Boa 104 PAGE 69 disadvantaged business requirements in the JPA. While no formal plan is required of the County, the County is to ensure that disadvantaged persons and businesses are afforded the maximum' opportunity to participate in employment or contracting. As the transit service provider, the Council on Aging prepared plans to meet the equal employment and disadvantaged business requirements, and these plans were approved by the Federal Transit Administration. The attached resolution (Attachment 1) authorizes the Chairman to sign the Joint Participation Agreement with FDOT. A complete copy of the JPA is available for review in the offices of the Board of County Commissioners. Upon the Board's approval of the JPA and adoption of the resolution. County staff will transmit the JPA to FDOT. Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached Public Transportation Joint Participation Agreement and adopt the attached resolution authorizing the Chairman to sign the agreement. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously adopted Resolution 98-005 authorizing the signing of a Public Transportation Joint Participation Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation, as recommended by staff. AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 98-05 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF A PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. 9 WHEREAS; funding under the Florida Public Transit Block Grant program may be used as a portion of the required funding match for grants under 49 USC Ch. 53, Section 5307 and 49 USC 1614; and WHEREAS, Indian River County has submitted an application for funding assistance under 49 USC Section 5307, with the required matching funds to come from local funds and a Florida Public Transit Block Grant; and WHEREAS, Indian River County is eligible to receive grant funding under Section 341.052(1), Florida Statutes, and under 49 USC Ch. 53, Section 5307 and 49 USC 1614; and WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Transportation will provide a Public Transit Block Grant to Indian River County to assist in the continuance and expansion of local public transportation. JANUARY 13, 1998 -12- 40 0 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AUTHORIZES THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO SIGN A PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO PROVIDE FUNDING ASSISTANCE TO BE USED AS A PORTION OF THE REQUIRED FUNDING MATCH FOR THE COUNTY'S FEDERAL TRANSIT ACT 49 USC CH. 53, SECTION 5307 GRANT FOR OPERATIONS FUNDING ASSISTANCE. THIS RESOLUTION was moved for adoption by Commissioner Fggprt , and the motion was seconded by Commi ssi onpr Adams , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman John W. Tippin Aye Vice -Chairman Kenneth R. Macht AyP Commissioner Fran B. Adams Aye+ Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert dye Commissioner Caroline D. Ginn Aye The Chairperson thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 13 day of January , 1998. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIANR COUNTY, FLORIDA By h . Tippin, Ch i an Board of County Commissioners ATTEST: �a ey K Bartlerk ,may. ,mi.;.. State of Florida County of Indian River I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized in this State and County to take acknowledgments, personally appeared JOHN W. TIPPIN, as Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners, andP#+TP.re I A Rj -0FjC-- as Deputy Clerk, to me known to be the persons described in and who executed the oregoing instrument and they acknowledged before me that they executed the same. WffNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this �3 day of , A.D., 1998. Notary Public y����'".....'•PATWCIA L JONES '.� W COMM I I C4=2 FxPM ow W' RMw25.1999 jj O wmumoriArreMMCE.W. JANUARY 13, 1998 WM AM Ca I Aofror-d Oat - Admin cr Legal V C dg -t f OeOt Riak Mgr. -13- BOOK 104 PAGE 7 Pr booK 104 FACE 71 1 7- G. MISCELLANEOUS BUDGET AMENDMENT #003 The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 7, 1998: TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: January 7, 1998 SUBJECT: MISCELLANEOUS BUDGET AMENDMENT 003 CONSENT AGENDA FROM: Joseph A. Baird, OMB Director DESCRIPTION AND COMMONS The attached budget amendment is to appropriate funding for the following: 1. At the December 16, 1997 BCC meeting the Emergency Services District Board approved refurbishing the aerial platform ladder truck at a cost of $190,445.00. The attached entry appropriates funding. 2. At the December 16, 1997 BCC meeting the Emergency Services District Board approved funding the purchase of a hazardous material trailer and equipment from donations. The attached entry appropriates funding. 3. Indian River County received a grant from the Florida Inland Navigation District (F.I.N.D.) which is passed through to the Environmental Learning Center. The County has received $14,482.96 in checks. 4. At the September 16, 1997 BCC meeting the BCC approved the $53,351 EMS County Award Grant. The attached entry appropriates the funding. 5. At the August 5, 1997 BCC meeting the BCC approved amendment number 3 to the agreement between SJRWMD and Indian River County for Florida Yards and Neighborhood (FYN) Program which increased the agreement by $50,596 to $163,211.64. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached budget amendment 003. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved Miscellaneous Budget Amendment #003, as recommended by staff. JANUARY 13, 1998 -14- 0 0 0 TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners FROM: Joseph A. Baird OMB Director BUDGET AMENDMENT: 001 DATE: January 7. 1998 Entry Number Funds/Depamnent/Accoum Name Account Number Increase Decrease 1. EXPENSES EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT/FIRE SERVICES/Cash Forward 114-120-522-099.92 $0 $190,445 EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT/ Maintenance Automobile Equipment 114-120-522-034.64 $190,445 $0 2. REVENUES EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT/ FIRE SERVICES/Contributions 114000-366-094.00 $35,223 $0 EXPENSE EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT/ Other Machinery and Equipment 114120-522-066.49 $35,223 3. REVENUE GENERAL FUND/Other physical Environment 0014)00-334-039.00 $14,483 $0 EXPENSE GENERAL FUND/Environmental Leaming Center 001-110-572-088.85 $14,483 $0 4. REVENUE EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT/ EMS Grant 114-000-334290.00 $53,351 $0 EXPENSES EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT/ ALS/Other Furniture & Equipment 114253-526-037.23 $18,910 $0 EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT/ ALS/Other Operating Supplies 114253-526-037.31 $25,441 $0 EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT/ ALS/Other Machinery & Equipment 114-253-526-037.24 $9,000 $0 5. REVENUE GENERAL FUND/SJRWMD/ Yards and Neighbors 0014)00-337-031.00 $50,596 $0 EXPENSE GENERAL FUND/Landscape Materials 001-212-537-035.34 $50,596 $0 JANUARY 13, 1998 -15- BOOK 104 FACE .72 r� Boa 104 PACE 7 7.H. COMMITTEE REAPPOINTMENT CORRECTION - LAND ACQUISITION ADVISORY COMMITTEE - REAPPOPM11ENT oFROBERT SWIFT - REMOVAL OF Jim GRANSE FROM REAPPOINTMENT LIST The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 12, 1998: To: Board of County Commissioners From: Alice E. White, Executive Aide Date: January 12, 1998 Subject: Correction in Committee Reappointment On the January 6, 1998 backup material under committee reappointments, there was an error in the Land Acquisition Advisory Committee list. The master list incorrectly showed Jim Granse's term as expiring in January, 1998. His term expires in 1999. The list should have shown Robert Swift as expiring in 1998. Out of 9 meetings last year, he attended 7 and had 1 excused absence. It is requested that you reappoint Mr. Swift to serve another two-year term on the Land Acquisition Advisory Committee. Land Aern±asa+aon Adv3eory C a*+ee (2 year terms) Carl Pease (Vero Beach) Steve Fuller (Fellsmere) Robert Leshe (IRShores) Ernest Polverari (Orchid) Ruth Stanbridge (Sierra Club) Jack Chestnutt (Bd.Realtors) x' ASSOC.) r d'f �U `' i l J ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously reappointed Robert Swift to another two-year term on the Land Acquisition Advisory Committee and removed Jim Granse's name from the Reappointment List. JANUARY 13, 1998 -16- • 0 • 9.A. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.A.1. RICHARD TOBIN- ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING -ORDINANCE AAD THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROMRS-1 AND RS -6 TO RM -8 FOR PR OPER TYLOCA TED ON THE NOR THSIDE OF 41 sT STREET. EAST OFINDIANRIVER BOULEVARD (Appmx MATELY36.3 ACRES, PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared Darryl K. Hicks who on oath says that he is President of the Press,kumal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, tag a I��ie,n In the Court, was pub - fished fished in said newspaper in the issues of .� �,O 2r 3/� 19577 Affiant further says that the said Press Journal Is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian Riv County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously pu shed In said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County Florida, for a period of one year need preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor pry any person, firm or advertlnent for publicationt any in said newspaper a refund for the purpose of securing oft Y MV �OMAOSAONX1ts %A UAgMD1. 2001 Ew'011 = ate. ,c�olAx. : c L4o� ELIC, SZP� �e before me 3/ - day ofle - D.19 7 .ia& ':.4�� Notary Public, State of Florida My Commission Exp. Jan. 01, 2001 Comm. No. CC 61109 Personally Knownwor Produced ID 0 Type of ID Produced JANUARY 13, 1998 -17- sago NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING The Board of County Commis- sioners of Indian River County, Florida, will consider the adoption Of a County ordinance rezoning land from: RS -6, Single -Family Res- idenfial District (up to 6 units/ave) and RS -1, Single -Family Residential District (up to 1 unit/ave) to RM -8, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 8 units/ave). The subject Property is owned by Richard W. Tobin, Jr. The subiect property is located on the north. side of 41 st Street, east of Indian River Boule- vard, and contains approximately 36.3 acres. The subject property lies in the northwest 1/4 section of. Section 25, Township 32S, Range 39E, lying -and -being in.-Indtarr-~• River County, Florida. A public hearing at which par- ties in ingest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard, r will be held by the Board of County Commissioners . of Indian River County, Florida, in the County Commission Chambers of the County Administration Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday, Janu- ary 13, 1998, at 9:05 a.e. The proposed ordinance to rezone the subject property is entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOM PANYING ZONING, MAP FROM RS -6 AND RS -1 TO RM -8, FOR i PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE• OF 41ST STREET, EAST •OF INDIAN RIVER BOULE- VARD, AND DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. The proposed ordinance may be inspected by the public during reg- ular business hours at the office of, the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida. For more information, contact John Wachtel at 567-8000, extension 247. 0 The Board of County Commis- sioners may adopt another zoning district, other than the district requested, provided it is within the some general use category. 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 testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. Anyone who needs a special accommodation for this meeting must contact. the county's Ameri- cans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Coordinator of 567-8000 wen- sion 223 at least 48 hours in advance of meeting. Indian River County Board of County Commissioners By: -s -Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman Dec. 31, 1997 1231027r BOOK 104 PAGE 74 BOOK 104 PAGE 75 The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 5, 1998: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator D TMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE ober M. Keating, AI P J THROUGH: Sasan Rohani, AICPS o , Chief, Long -Range, Planning FROM: John Wachtel,0 Senior Planner, Long -Range Planning DATE: January 5, 1998 RE: Richard W. Tobin, Jr.'s Request to Rezone Approximately 363 acres from RS -6 and RS -1 to RM -8 (RZON 97-07-0174) It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of January 13, 1998. This is a request to rezone approximately 36.3 acres located on the north side of 41 ' Street, east of Indian River Boulevard. The request involves rezoning the property from RS -6. Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre), and RS -1, Single -Family Residential District (up to 1 unit/acre), to RM -8. Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 8 units/acre). The purpose of this request is to secure the necessary zoning to develop the site with multiple -family uses. On December 11. 1997, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7 to 0 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve this request to rezone the subject property to RM -8. The ±36.3 acre subject property consists of the undeveloped wooded uplands portion of a±39.8 acre parcel. The remaining ±3.5 acres of the ±39.8 acre parcel consist of environmentally important estuarine wetlands. Approximately 25 acres of the subject property, generally in the western portion of the site, are zoned RS -6, while the remaining ±11.3 acres are zoned RS -1. The irregular eastern boundary of the subject property indicates the border between uplands and environmentally important estuarine wetlands. Some environmentally important estuarine wetlands may also be present on land to the north and south of the subject property. Although the county's zoning atlas depicts estuarine wetlands within the county as having various zoning designations, all environmentally important estuarine wetlands are deemed to be zoned Con -2. Estuarine Wetland Conservation District (up to 1 unit/40 acres). Land east of the ±39.8 acre parcel containing the subject property is presently in the permitting process to become a private wetlands mitigation bank. Land north of the subject property consists of undeveloped wooded uplands and is zoned RS -6 and RS -1. Land west of the subject property consists of citrus groves and is zoned RS -6. Land south of the subject property consists of citrus groves and is zoned RM -8. The subject property and properties to the north, south and west are designated M-1. Medium - Density Residential -1, on the county future land use map. The M-1 designation permits residential uses with densities up to 8 units/acre. East of the subject property is an environmentally important wetland that is designated C-2. Conservation -2, on the county future land use map. The C-2 designation permits conservation uses. limited recreational uses, and residential uses with densities up to 1 unit/40 acres for on-site development or 1 unit/acre for transferable development rights. Environment The subject property consists primarily of forested native uplands, although some of the site has been invaded by non-native nuisance plants such as the Brazilian Pepper. The subject property is within an "AE" 100 year floodplain, with a minimum base flood elevation requirement of seven feet NGVD. JANUARY 13, 1998 -18- 0 a 0 The site is within the Urban Service Area of the county. Water lines from the South County Reverse Osmosis Plant extend along Indian River Boulevard to within approximately one quarter of a mile of the subject property. The nearest wastewater collection lines are more than 3,000 feet from the subject property. Those lines extend from the Central County Wastewater Treatment Plant, along 37"' Street, east to Indian River Boulevard. C;.lMMO - - YM, The subject property is accessed via 41" Street. West of Indian River Boulevard 411, Street is a two- lane road with approximately 100 feet of public road right-of-way. That segment of 41 a Street, classified as an urban minor arterial road on the future roadway thoroughfare plan map, is paved. except for the portion from US I to Indian River Boulevard. The unpaved portion is programmed to be paved by the middle of 1998. East of Indian River Boulevard the public road right-of-way for 41 ° Street is generally 50 feet wide and extends approximately 450 feet. In that area. 419 Street is a2 lane local road, the western 2/3 of which is paved. Near 411 Street, Indian River Boulevard is classified as an urban principal arterial road on the future roadway thoroughfare plan map. This segment of Indian River Boulevard is a four -lane paved road with approximately 200 feet of public road right-of-way. There are no plans to expand Indian River Boulevard. Subject PropcM*s Zoning History Past zoning practices of the county explain why the eastern portion of the subject property is currently zoned RS -1. Because of its location near the Indian River Lagoon. the eastern portion of the subject property was historically treated as riverfront land. The RS -1 zoning of that portion of the subject property is related to its proximity to the Indian River Lagoon. Currently, zoning in the county is based on future land use designations depicted on a future land use map that is part of an adopted comprehensive plan. That, however, has not always been the case. Although zoning was established in the county in 1957, the county's first comprehensive plan was not adopted until 1976. Not until 1985 was zoning made to conform to the county's comprehensive plan. Prior to 1985, the entire subject property was zoned R -IA. Single -Family. That zoning district required that all conforming lots be at least 10,000 square feet in size. The maximum density for the R -IA district. therefore, was approximately 4 units/acre. In 1985, a countywide rezoning effort was undertaken to make zoning in the county correspond to the 1982 comprehensive plan's land use designations. The 1982 plan designated most of the subject property as MD -I (up to 8 units/acre). Land near the Indian River Lagoon, however, was designated as environmentally sensitive. The eastern portion of the subject property fell into that category. Since the county at that time did not have a special zoning district for environmentally sensitive land that portion of the subject property was down -zoned from R -IA to RS -1. The RS -1 zoning district allows residential development at a density of up to I unittacre. That 1 unit/acre density was consistent with the then applicable 1 unittacre density of the environmentally sensitive land use designation. When the current comprehensive plan was adopted in 1990, the subject property was given the M -I land use designation. Also at that time, a provision was added to the comprehensive plan that required the boundaries of the Conservation land use designations to be based on a site specific environmental survey of estuarine wetlands on a site. In 1991, the county adopted Land Development Regulations (LDRs) which created the Conservation zoning districts. Those Conservation districts apply to environmentally important areas such as estuarine wetlands. Although not depicted on the county's zoning atlas, these districts are established when development is proposed for a site containing estuarine wetland or xeric scrub habitat. The boundaries of the conservation zoning district (like the boundaries of the conservation land use designations) are then based on a site specific environmental survey of the property. In this case, a recently completed site specific survey indicates that the boundary of the estuarine wetlands does not coincide with the RS-6/RS-1 zoning district boundary. Instead the survey indicates that the boundary of the subject property coincides with the boundary of the estuarine wetlands. Therefore, land east of the subject property would be deemed to be designated C-2. Conservation -2. and zoned Con -2, Estuarine Wetlands Conservation District (up to 1 unit/40 acres). In contrast. the subject property would be eligible to be zoned consistent with the M-1 land use designation (up to 8 units per acre) established by the comprehensive plan. This information is important because it indicates that the eastern portion of the subject property is currently zoned RS -1 because of a past broad brush approach to designating environmentally sensitive land. Since the underlying comprehensive plan designation is M-1. the subject property is eligible to be rezoned to any residential district up to the requested RM -8. JANUARY 13, 1998 -19- BOOK 104 PAUE 7 BOOK 104 PAGE 77 In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the request will be presented. Specifically, this section will include: • an analysis of the request's impact on public facilities; • an analysis of the request's compatibility with the surrounding area; • an analysis of the request's consistency with the county's comprehensive plan. and • an analysis of the request's potential impact on environmental quality. This site is located within the county Urban Service Area, an area deemed suited for urban scale development. The Comprehensive Plan establishes standards for. Transportation, Potable Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage and Recreation (Future Land Use Policy 3.1). The adequate provision of these services is necessary to ensure the continued quality of life enjoyed by the community. The Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations also require that new development be reviewed to ensure that the minimum acceptable standards for these services and facilities are maintained. Policy 3.2 of the Future Land Use Element states that no development shall be approved unless it is consistent with the concurrency management system component of the Capital Improvements Element. For rezoning requests, conditional concurrency review is required. Conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility with respect to a proposed project. Since rezoning requests are not projects, county regulations call for the concurrency review to be based on the most intense use of the subject property based on the requested zoning district. The site information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows: 1. Size of Area to be Rezoned: X63 acres 2. Existing Zoning District: RS -6, Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre) for t25 acres; and RS -1, Single -Family Residential District (up to 1 unittacre) for 1113 acres 3. Proposed Zoning District: 4. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Existing Zoning District: 5. Most Intense Use of Subject Property under Proposed Zoning District: - Transportation RM -8, Multiple -Family Residential District (up to 8 units/acre) 161 single-family units 290 single-family units As part of the concurrency review process, the applicant has submitted a Trac Impact Analysis (TIA). The county's Traffic Engineering Division has reviewed and approved that TIA. A TIA reports the number of peak hour/peak seasonipeak direction trips that would be generated by the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed zoning district, and assigns those trips to impacted roads. 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 project trips, whichever is less. According to the approved TIA, the existing level of service on impacted roadways would not be lowered by the traffic generated by development of 290 single-family units on the subject property. - Water Centralized potable water service is available to the subject property from the South County Reverse Osmosis Plant. With the most intense use allowed under the proposed rezoning, the subject property will have a water consumption rate of 290 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU), or 72,500 gallons/day. This is based upon a level of service standard of 250 gallons/ERU/day. Since the South County Reverse Osmosis Plant currently has a remaining capacity of approximately 1.880.000 gallonstday, the plant can accommodate the additional demand generated by the proposed zoning. - Wastewater Although centralized wastewater service is not available to the subject property at this time. the site is located within the Central County Wastewater Service Area. If a 290 unit residential project on the site connected to the regional sewer system. that project would have a wastewater generation rate of 290 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU), or 72.500 gallons/day. This is based upon a level of service standard of 250 gallons/ERU/day.- Since the Central County Wastewater Treatment Plant currently has a remaining capacity of approximately 360,000 gallons/day, the plant can accommodate the additional demand generated by the proposed zoning. JANUARY 13, 1998 -20- 0 0 - 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 approximately 2.3 persons/unit. a 290 unit residential development would be anticipated to house approximately 667 people (2.3 X 290). 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 1.581 (667 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 840.000 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 wider the proposed zoning district. - Drainage All developments are reviewed for compliance with county stormwater regulations which require on-site retention, preservation of floodplain storage and minimum finished floor elevations. In addition, development proposals must meet the discharge requirements of the county Stormwater Management Ordinance. Any development on the subject property will be prohibited from discharging any runoff in excess of the pre -development rate. In this case, the minimum floor elevation level of service standard applies, since the property lies within a floodplain. Consistent with Drainage Policy 1.2. "all new buildings shall have the lowest habitable floor elevation no lower than the elevation of the 100 -year flood elevation as shown on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map, or as defined in a more detailed study report." Additionally, section 930.07(2) of the county's LDRs requires that all residential development shall have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated to six inches or more above the base flood level. Since the subject property lies within Flood Zone AE -7, which is a special flood hazard area located within the 100 -year floodplain. any development on this property must have a minimum finished floor elevation of no less than 7.5 feet above mean sea level. Besides the minimum elevation requirement, on-site retention and discharge standards also apply to this request. With the most intense use of this site, the maximum area of impervious surface under the proposed zoning classification will be approximately 1,106.860 square feet, or 25.41 acres. The estimated runoff volume, based on that amount of impervious surface and the 25 vear24 hour design storm, will be approximately 1,223,049 cubic feet. In order to maintain the county's adopted level of service, the applicant will be required to retain approximately 262,566 cubic feet of runoff on-site. With the soil characteristics of the subject property, it is estimated that the pre -development runoff rate is 58.8 cubic feet/second. Based upon staffs analysis, the drainage level of service standards will be met by limiting off-site discharge to its pre -development rate of 58.8 cubic feettsecond. requiring retention of 262.566 cubic feet of runoff for the most intense use of the property, and requiring that all finished floor elevations exceed 7.5 feet above mean sea level. As with all development, a more detailed review will be conducted during the development approval process. - Recreation A review of county recreation facilities and the projected demand that would result from the most intense development that could occur on the property under the proposed zoning classification indicates that the adopted levels of service would be maintained. The table below illustrates the additional park demand associated with the proposed development of the property and the existing surplus acreage by park type. Park Information Park Type LOS (Acres per 1,000 Population) Project Demand (Acres) Surplus Acreage Urban District 5.0 2.90 159.54 Community (north) 3.0 1.74 13.57 Beach 1.5 0.87 58.26 River 1.5 0.87 19 26 Based on 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 Co=rehensive 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. JANUARY 13, 1998 -21- BOOK 104 FACE 7 rBOOK 104 PAGUE7 1 The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of the comprehensive plan. Policies are statements in the plan which identify the actions which the county will take in order to direct the community's development. As courses of action committed to by the county, policies provide the basis for all county land development related decisions. While all comprehensive plan policies are important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing rezoning requests. Of particular applicability for this request are the following policy and objective. - Future Land Use Element Policy 1.14 Future Land Use Element Policy 1.14 states that the M-1, Medium -Density Residential -1, land use designation is intended for residential uses with densities up to eight units/acre. In addition, that policy states that these residential uses must be located within an existing or future urban service area. Because the subject property is located within an area designated as M-1 on the county's future land use plan map and is located within the county s urban service area, and the proposed zoning district would permit residential uses no denser than eight units/acre. the proposed request is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy 1.14. - Future Land Use Element Objective 4 Future Land Use Element Objective 4 states that Indian River County will reduce the number and length of trips by implementing a land use pattern which places employment center; near residential areas. Already one of the county s major employment centers, projections indicate that the medical node near the subject property will continue to grow. This occurrence is expected to generate demand for multiple -family housing. Allowing that demand for multiple -family housing to be filled on property near the node implements Future Land Use Element Objective 4. While Future Land Use Element Policy 1.14 and Objective 4 are particularly applicable to this request. other comprehensive plan policies and objectives also have relevance. For that reason, staff evaluated the subject request for consistency with all plan policies and objectives. Based upon that analysis, staff determined that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Staffs position is that granting the request to rezone the subject property to RM -8 will result in development which will be compatible with surrounding areas. Located near a medical commercial node and the Indian River Boulevard/41st Street intersection, and adjacent to other RM -8 zoned land, the site is more suited for medium density, multiple -family development than it is for low density, single-family uses. Several factors indicate that development under the RM -8 zoning district would be compatible with surrounding areas. The first factor involves the border between single-family and multiple -family areas. Multiple -family development on the subject property will be required to provide buffers where the site abuts a single-family use or district. A second, more important issue involves the area -s development pattern. That pattern indicates that the RM -8 district is the most appropriate for the site. Located near an employment center, a hospital, and variolas other medical uses, the site is particularly suited for the multiple -family and institutional uses permitted in the RM -8 zoning district. Finally, one other fact is applicable. On November 4. 1997, the Board of County Commissioners voted to transmit Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) based comprehensive plan amendments to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for review and comment. One portion of that amendment would add 182.5 acres to the medical node. That land would be located between the node's current north boundary and 41" Street. Based on DCA's comments associated with the adopted EAR, no objections to that provision are anticipated. Adoption of that amendment would support higher zoning densities in the following ways: • increased node size would accommodate more workers, thus generating demand for more nearby housing; and the loss of residential land due to the amendment is mitigated through higher density on the subject property. For those reasons, medium density, multiple -fancily development is appropriate for the site, and is anticipated to be compatible with surrounding areas. Environmental impacts of residential development on the subject property would be essentially the same under either the existing or the proposed zoning district, Multiple -family development, however, increases opportunities for open space preservation and for buildings to be located in areas with the least environmental impacts. In this case, the county's 10-15% native upland plant community set aside requirement would apply to development under either the requested or the existing zoning district. For these reasons, no significant adverse environmental impacts associated with this request are anticipated. - JANUARY 13, 1998 -22- 0 0 CONCLUSION The requested zoning is compatible with the surrounding area, consistent with the comprehensive plan, meets all concurrency criteria, and will have no negative impacts on environmental quality. The subject property is located in an area deemed suited for medium -density residential uses and meets all applicable rezoning criteria. For these reasons, staff supports the request. 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 to RM -8. 624 45TH ST I \` I I� I I I I 41ST ST I ♦♦ I \ I \�Z f I MED JANUARY 13, 1998 • NMI Oadsyslo W civerfront wetlands ars X Con -Z, subject to survey verllteatlon. GOY. LOT 2 M►OMM z • -23- Bou 104 PAGE 80 BOOK 104 F°EE 81 1 Community Development Director Bob Keating advised this is a rezoning request - for property that now has 2 zoning designations. The request is to rezone the entire parcel to RM -8. When the County developed its 1982 Comprehensive Plan there were areas designated on the Plan for which there was no appropriate zoning designation. These areas were zoned RS -1 as it was the designation which most closely fit the category. These areas would now be designed CON (conservation). This was a broad brush approach with the understanding that, at the time of rezoning, specific boundaries were to be determined. The applicant has now done an environmental survey and determined that the property zoned RS - 1 has an M-1 land -use designation. The balance of the property, the other 3 acres, will retain the RS -1 zoning and actually are environmentally sensitive areas. The Planning & Zoning Commission has recommended the rezoning to RM -8 and the property to the south is zoned RM -8 so this would be an extension which would reflect the change in this part of the County. This is a part of the expanded hospital commercial node which will be a mixture of offices and residential. It is consistent with the Comp Plan, compatible with the area, and makes sense for future development. Commissioner Ginn questioned who did the environmental survey and where it is located, and Director Keating advised it had been examined by County environmental staff. Commissioner Ginn requested staff to supply the survey for her inspection. Director Keating then advised that Environmental Chief Roland DeBlois had verified the boundaries between the uplands and the wetlands. The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard regarding this matter. Michael O'Haire, Cardinal Drive, attorney for the owner, emphasized that the application is consistent with the Comp Plan and has been recommended by staff. Addressing Commissioner Ginn's question, Mr. O'Haire stated that the County does not do environmental surveys. These are always done by the applicant. The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard regarding this matter. There being none, the Chairman closed the public hearing. JANUARY 13, 1998 -24- MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, that the Board approve the request to rezone the subject property to RM -8, as recommended by staff. Commissioner Macht expressed his concern over the current situation and acknowledged that Mr. O'Haire was right in that this rezoning was recommended by staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission. The Board has no decision power over the disposition of the item in that if the Board voted to deny the rezoning, it would not hold up in court. Therefore, the Board becomes a rubber stamp. The Board's only alternative would be something presented by the public to refute what staff has found. He felt that densities can only go up which can have a devastating effect and suggested that perhaps the Board needs to look at the LDRs with an eye to restoring the authority of this Board. This particular matter will not have a devastating effect but steps should be taken to ensure that the Board has control. He felt there is a consistency of public opinion which says this is not what the community wants. He did not believe in rezoning to support adjacent zoning but felt the Board is under an obligation to support this with no ability to do otherwise. Chairman Tippin felt that would be quite a sizeable subject for future discussion and asked for any further discussion on the matter at hand. Commissioner Ginn concurred with Commissioner Macht and wondered whether the 11 acres could be separated from this request. Director Keating explained that the Comp Plan says that once an environmental survey has been completed and the property is determined not to be wetlands and not environmentally sensitive, then there is no justification for withholding the rezoning. Commissioner Ginn was opposed to the increased density and concerned that affordable housing could be introduced which would increase the density beyond 20%. Director Keating responded that subsidized housing tax credit projects can probably be avoided by the County but as far as affordable housing is concerned, staff cannot tell when a project is presented whether it is a subsidized project. However, the Board will have an opportunity to adopt EAR based amendment changes. JANUARY 13, 1998 -25- BOOK 104 FnE 82 Bou .1.04 PAGE 83 1 County Attorney Vitunac emphasized that the key to determining when the Board is allowed to vote each Commissioner's conscience. Today the Board is sitting as a quasi- judicial body and there is only 1 party giving evidence. The Board has no evidence to vote otherwise unless someone appears with opposing evidence. Another alternative would be to hire an opposing consultant and listen to both sides. Commissioner Ginn felt obtaining a another consultant's environmental survey would only lead to a stalemate and questioned whether the Board could act on evidence presented in the backup. County Attorney Vitunac stressed that staff's uncontroverted testimony is that the rezoning meets the County's Code. He felt the Board needs to be certain they have staff members in whom they can have confidence. Commissioner Macht emphasized that he believed staff to be very competent and felt the remedy would be in legislation. Attorney O'Haire commented that the Supreme Court says that involving politics in private property rights is illegal and unAmerican. He reminded the Board they must have opposing evidence to render an adverse decision and that they could not decide on the basis of gut feelings. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the Board, by a 3-2 vote (Commissioners Ginn and Macht opposed) adopted Ordinance 98-001 amending the Zoning Ordinance and the accompanying Zoning Map from RS -1 and RS -6 to RM -8, for the property located on the North side of 41' Street, east of Indian River Boulevard, and described herein, and providing for effective date (Richard W. Tobin, Jr.). ORDINANCE NO. 98-01 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM RS -1 AND RS -6 TO RM -8, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 41ST STREET, EAST OF INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD, AND DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the local planning agency on such matters, has held a public hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this rezoning request; and - JANUARY 13, 1998 -26- • 0 0 0 ORDINANCE NO. 98- 01 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, did publish 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 SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. LESS AND EXCEPT THE SOUTH 50.00 FEET OF THE WEST 319.54 FEET THEREOF. AND LESS AND EXCEPT ALL OF THOSE LANDS LYING WITHIN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 25; RUN N 73042'59" W A DISTANCE OF 128.50 FEET; THENCE N 88041147" W A DISTANCE OF 241.58 FEET; THENCE N 07051'35" E A DISTANCE OF 26.55 FEET; THENCE N 8205851" E A DISTANCE OF 59.34 FEET; THENCE N 20024122" E A DISTANCE OF 71.04 FEET; THENCE N 68054101" E A DISTANCE OF 29.42 FEET; THENCE S 21059158" E A DISTANCE OF 75.57 FEET; THENCE N 89029'46" E A DISTANCE OF 151.19 FEET; THENCE N 02016112" W A DISTANCE OF 326.51 FEET; THENCE N 24022159" W A DISTANCE OF 187.97 FEET; THENCE N 03024135" W A DISTANCE OF 271.82 FEET; THENCE N 13053144" E A DISTANCE OF 222.95 FEET; THENCE N 15027'20" E A DISTANCE OF 248.01 FEET; THENCE N 75056'43" E A DISTANCE OF 63.54 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 25; THENCE RUN S 00010115" W ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 A DISTANCE OF 1324.41 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD. SAID PARCEL CONTAINING 36.28 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Be changed from RS -1 and RS -6 to RM -8. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Land Development Regulations. This ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, on this 13th day of January, 1998. This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal on the 31th day of December, 1997 for a public hearing to be held on the 13th day of January, 1998 at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert , seconded by Commissioner Adams and adopted by the following vote: JANUARY 13, 1998 -27- BOOK 104 PAGE 84 Ir BOOK 104 EAGE 85 Chairman John W. Tippin Vice -Chairman Kenneth R. Macht Commissioner Fran B. Adams Commissioner Caroline D. Ginn Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ` BY: John W. Ti Chairma ATTEST BY: J K. Bar ^Clerk This ordinance was filed with the Department of State on the following date: 9.A.2. MARKBRACKETT - REQUEST FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) SPECM EXCEPTION USEAND PRELIMINARYPDPLANTIPLATAPPROVAL FOR AGRICULTURAL PD TO BE KNOWNAS LOST HAMMOCK SUBDIVISION PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared Darryl K. Flicks who on oa=that he in newspaper published qty, FI rich, that the attached copPresident of the Press ­Journal, y off advertl , being at Vero Beach In the matter ra cj&(!. L t T-- C © . In the %Court, was pub - fished in said newspaper In the Issues of'Df G I ► L 9� / Affiant further says that the said Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Bead, in said Indian RWer ed in y, Indian Rand that the said newspaper has heretofore been ==published class publishmall matter s the qty' Florida, each dally and has been entered as for a period of one ear r � office In Vero Beach, in said IrWlan RWar County, Florida, y 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 disrhannt, rebate, corraNssion or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication In said newspaper. ii1 C06UAISSION RMS IANUARY 01, 2001 COAW NO. CC611092 0¢ '�'9q`• 'rjp �tltltltl tltltlMMtl JANUARY 13, 1998 before me ws_� day ..� 1g��� —28— Notary Public, State of Florida My Commission Exp. Jan. 01, 2001 Comm. No. CC 611(42 Personally Known,13 r Produced ID O Type of ID Produced 0 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice of hearing to conside granting of special exception use Approval for an 8 lot residential agricultural planned development. The subject property is presently owned by Brackett and Company, and located in Section 17, Town- ship 33 and Range 39. See the above map for the location. A public hearing at which par- ties In interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard, will be held by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, 'in the Courcy Commission Chambers of the County Administration Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday, Janu- ory 13, 1998 at 9:05 o m. Please direct planning -related questions to the current develop- ment planning section at 567- 8000, ext. 242. Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meeting will need to ensure that a vetbatim record of the proceedings Is made, which Includes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPE- CIAL ACCOMMODATION FOR THIS MEETING MUST CONTACT THE COUNTY'S AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) COORDINATOR AT 567-8000 X223 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By -s -Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman Dec. 24.1997 1229887r The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 6, 1998: TO: James Chandler County Administrator D ION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Robert M Keating, AI / Community Developm r THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP Planning Director FROM: Eric Blad Staff Planner, Current Development DATE: January 6, 1998 SUBJECT: Mark Brackett's Request for Planned Development (PD) Special Exception Use and Preliminary PD Plan/Pig Approval for an Agricultural PD to be Known as the Lost Hammock Subdivision It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of January 13, 1998. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: Mosby & Associates, Inc. has submitted an application for PD (planned development) special exception use and preliminary PD plan/plat approval on behalf of Mark Brackett to create 8 lots within an agriculturally designated area The subject development is a +39.42 acre parcel located on the south side of 4th Street approximately one half mile west of 58th Avenue. Once used for groves decades ago, the subject property has long since been taken over by native and exotic vegetation. The subject property is zoned A-1, Agricultural (up to 1 unit/5 acres), is looted outside the Urban Service Area, and is designated AGI (Agricultural up to 1 unit/5 acres). The proposed 8 lot residentiallagricultural subdivision is allowed in the AG -1 area, subject to the special exception use provisions of sections 911.06(4) and 911.14(2) of the county's land development regulations (see attachment #4) for residential subdivisions in agricultural areas. •PDs in Agriculturally Designated Areas To address certain urban sprawl concerns raised by DCA during its review of the 1990 Comprehensive Plan, the county adopted special policies and regulations regarding development of single family subdivisions in agriculturvlly designated areas. The resulting special regulations require JANUARY 13, 1998 -29- 40 BOOK lug fwa 0 BOOK 104 pxa use of the PD process and a layout of the lots that "clusters" homesites in a manner that provides large remaining areas of open space (used for agriculture or preservation of fm natural tures). Therefore, the LDRs limit the maximum lot or homesite size to I acre, with rig areas designated as Open space (see attachment #4). Lot or homesite clustering also preserves the ability for finum opmcet of the overall property at a higher density if, in the future, the comprehensive plan is changed and the property is re -designated for residential development. Clustering can be accomplished in different ways. One approvable concept clusters the lots in a standard subdivision layout of 1 acre or smaller lots and creates I large tract which could be separately owned and limited to open space (agricultural or preservation) uses until such time as the land may be re -designated. Another approvable clustering concept awes 1-5 acre tracts, each with a designated buildable lot area (homesite). Such tracts can be laid out so as to cluster the buildable lot areas in close proximity to one another or in close proximity to a land feature or roadway. Under such a design, each tract could be individually owned. This concept has been used in the design of the proposed Lost Hammock Subdivision. GPD Project Process As a PD project, the process involved in review and approval of this proposal is as follows: Approval Needed l • Conceptual Plan/Speciai Exception 2. Preliminary PD PlWPlan 3. Land Development Permits or Waiver 4. Final PD (plat) Reviewing Body PZC & BCC PZC. Note: approved on December 11, 1997 subject to the Board granting the special exception use request. Staff BCC Thehcant is now requesting Board approval of the conceptual plan and special exception use. alI approval is granted, then the preliminary PD Phu/plan approval granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission will become effective and the applicant will need to obtain from public works a land development permit or LDP waiver for required PD improvements. OPlanning and Zoning Commission Consideration At its regular meeting of December 11, 1997, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7-0 to approve the preliminary PD plat/plan and recommend that the Board grant the special exception use request. The Board is to consider the appropriateness and compatibility of the proposed special exception use request and to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the use request. The Board may attach any conditions deemed appropriate to mitigate impacts of the proposed project. ALYSIS: 1. Size of PD Area: 39.426 acres (including access roadway) 2. Zoning Classification: A-1, Agricultural (up to 1 unit per 5 acres 3. Land Use Designation: AG -1, Agricultural (up to I unit per 5 acres) 4. Density: 0.20 units per acre (I unit per 4.928 acres or 214,674+ sq. ft. of land area per unit) Note: The county's LDRs recognize that many tracts within the county have previously dedicated property for canal and road rights-of-way; therefore, the LDRs set the minimum Parcel size in the A-1 zoning district is 200,000 square feet or 4.59 acres. For that reason, a tract consisting of 36.72 acres can be developed with 8 units. The proposed development complies with the 200,000 square feet per unit standard. 5. Maximum Lot/Homesite Area: Allowed: 1 acre Proposed: 1 acre 6. Open Space: Required: 60"/0 Provided: 80'/0 7. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning. North: 7th Street, residential single family/A-1 South: Groves, residenial/A 1 East: Residential/A-1 West: Residential/A-1 8. Traffic Circulation: Access to 4th Street for all eight lots will be via the subdivision's roadway, proposed as a single cul-de-sac that wdl curve through the center of the subdivision The submitted preliminary plat/plan proposes a paved road within a 60' private road riight-of- way. The Wits allow such a road to be unpaved, since the subdivision is private, generates less than 100 daily cps, and is located outside the Urban Service Area However, the applicant is proposing to provide a 20' wide paved roadway. The traffic engineering division has reviewed and approved the roadway layout. JANUARY 13, 1998 -30- • 0 0 0 9. Stormwater Management: The public works department has reviewed and approved a conceptual stormwater plan. A detailed engineering stormwater plan will be reviewed and approved as part of the land development permit or permit waiver process. 10. Utilities: Pursuant to the county comprehensive plan land use policy 5.9 (see attachment #5), public potable water is not generally made available outside the Urban Service Area. However, an exception is made specifically for "clustering of residential development within agricultural areas". Therefore, this agricultural PD project may be serviced by county potable water. County Utility Services and Environmental Health have approved use of county water and individual septic tanks for the proposed lots. Final design of the water service system will be reviewed through the LDP or LDP waiver process. 11. Dedications & Improvements: The existing 4th Street right-of-way is only g0' wide. Although 56' of additional road right-of-way is needed to bring 4th Street up to the 136' ultimate road right-of-way width standard, no additional 4th Street right-of-way is required from the subject site due to the location of the Indian River Farms Water Control District canal right-of-way between the subject site and 4th Street. Since the proposed development is a low traffic generatortattractor and is outside of the Urban Service Area, the applicant is not required to provide sidewalks or bikeways, and none are proposed. 12. Concurrency: The applicant has obtained a conditional concurrency certificate which satisfies concurrency requirements related to the special exception use and preliminary PD plan/plat requests. Therefore, all concurrency requirements related to special exception use and preliminary PD plan/plat approval have been satisfied. 13. Environmental Issues: Since the site is over 5 acres, the native upland set-aside requirements of section 929.05 apply. The developer has the option to preserve and/or pay a fee -in -lieu of preservation to satisfy the set-aside requirement. Prior to the issuance of a land development permit (LDP) or LDP waiver, the developer shall finalize a plan, acceptable to environmental planning staff; that satisfies the project's set-aside requirement. 14. Waivers: As allowed through the planned development special exception use process, the applicant is permitted to request waivers from normally applied provisions of the land developregulations. The applicant has requested a waiver from the method and time by which the land clearing provisions of section 927.07 are normally applied for removal of exotic vegetation within the boundaries of the project. The developer wishes to clear only those area needed to provide for the roadway, the associated stormwater management tracts, and common areas during development of the subdivision itself. Individual lot owners will then assume responsibility for clearing and construction activities on the individual lots. For these reasons, the applicant has requested a waiver to "phase" the land clearing permit in the following manner: a. The developer shall be responsible for removal of all exotic vegetation in those areas necessary for the road (right-of-way), project stormwater tract, common areas, and any other areas needed for utilities. b. Each lot owner will be responsible for obtaining a land clearing permit and removing all exotic vegetation from individual lots prior to issuance of a building permit for any construction on the lot. Even if the developer extricates all exotics from the 39+ acre development, individual lots may remain vacant for years and become overgrown again before being developed by the lot owner. For this reason, staff supports the applicant's waiver request. 15. Buffers and Setbacks: Given that the surrounding area is designated agricultural, no special buffering is required under the planned development LDRs. Since the A 1 district minimum 30' setback exceeds the 25' perimeter PD setback, the 30'A-1 district setback will control. Because the development is low density and is outside the Urban Service Area, no special residential/agricultural buffers are required, and none are proposed. 16. Caribbean Fruit Fly Host Plant: Whale the county does not address this issue in its LDRs, there has been a county policy of discouraging the planting of host plants in agricultural areas. That policy is being formalized by inclusion in the comprehensive plan via the EAR based amendments now being reviewed by DCA. The applicant has indicated that he has no objection to creating a restriction that would prohibit host plants on the subject property. Staff will continue to recommend inclusion of such a restriction when the project covenants and restrictions are reviewed at the time of final plat application. 17. Street Name Designations: The applicant has proposed the use of street names in the subdivision. It has been the county's policy and general requirements to mandate the use of street numbers. However, in addition to approving the preliminary plat, the Planning and Zoning Commission also approved the use of the street names for the project. JANUARY 13, 1998 -31- Box 104 mE bole 104 PnE 89 COIVIIVIENDATION: Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant PD special exception use approval, with the previously described exotic vegetation removal timing waiver, subject to the following: 1. That prior to or via the final plat, a restrictive covenant shall be established on the project site prohibiting Caribbean ffurt fly host plants. Furthermore, as a PD special exception use condition, Caribbean fiuit fly host plants are prohibited within the project area. 2. Each lot owner shall be responsible for obtaining a land clearing permit and removing all exotic vegetation from individual lots prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on any lot. 4th ST J S ST4*,.'3 Shl-*.W-326.43 IOT I Wr i LQr 3 4th T -S W N -b P. SropuWAIM Te kINOGEMEW TRACr f 0 01 WS T LOT 6 LOT 5 LOT 4 J..... ........................• ............... 0.; TBI i! --pi_-'--' 4 A OVERALL SUBDWISION LAYOUT ATTACHMENT 3 - JANUARY 13, 1998 -32- 0 & 0 • Director Boling advised that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval with the 2 conditions set forth in the Memorandum, together with approval of the use of street names for the project. These are also staffs recommendations. The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard regarding this matter. There being none, the Chairman closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Grin, the Board unanimously granted PD special exception use approval, with the previously described exotic vegetation removal timing waiver, subject to the following: (1) that prior to or via the final plat, a restrictive covenant shall be established on the project site prohibiting Caribbean fruit fly host plants; and furthermore, as a PD special exception use condition, Caribbean fruit fly host plants are prohibited within the project area; and (2) each lot owner shall be responsible for obtaining a land clearing permit and removing all exotic vegetation from individual lots prior to issuance of a building permit for construction on any lot; and approved the use of street names for the project; all as recommended by staff. JANUARY 13, 1998 -33- BROOK 104 �r��� r, Boa 104 PACE 9.A.3. INDIANRIVER CLUB, LTD. -REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE APPROVAL TO MODIFY WAIVER FOR IA NRIVER CLUB CONCEPTUAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAN PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian Rover County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA SrrE N •:. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice of hearing to consider recommending the granting of special exception use approval to modify some previously approved planned development waivers for the Indian River Club planned development. The subject property is presently owned by Indian River Club, Ltd., and *located in Section 36, Township 33 and Range 39, and Section 31, Township 33 and Range 40. See the above map for the location. 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 Commis- sioners of Indian River County, Florida, in the County Commission Cham- bers of the County Administration Building, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday, January 13, 1998 at 9:05 a.m. Please direct planning -related questions to the current development planning section at 567-8000, ext. 242. 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 proceed- ings is made, which includes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION FOR THIS MEETING MUST CONTACT THE COUNTY'S AMERICANS WITH DIS- ABILITIES ACT (ADA) COORDINATOR AT 567-8000 Xi AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BY-s-Corolyn K. Eggert Dec 24, 1997 1228724r oath says of ff the undersigned� Press,loumalpersonally tamed Darryl K. Hicks who ori Florida;hat the attached Beach at Vero in Indian River copy of advertisement, using a 0 11Q In the matter of In thee p Court, was pub- Nsired In said newspaper in the issues of Affiant further says that the said Press,loumal is a newspaper pubtlsfred at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County. Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been , second class mailmath at the published � River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as, Post office In Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida,, for as Period of oneyear r next Preceding the first publication of the attached of says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm; or edvcorporation t t for discount, rebate, Commission or refund for the purpose this Publication in said newspaper. before me this IQ co day a Aly COMSION EMUS MUD 01, 2001 ' COMM. NO. CC611092 Nd'..[lc, STAB .0 ........•p JANUARY 13, 1998 MNLY i►x.�ilh SC�� )d4"Notary Public, State of Florida Comm. No Niso. 61sion 1 n. 01, 2001 Personally Known or Produced ID C Type of ID Produced -34- 1 The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 6, 1998: TO: James Chandler County Administrator D ION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Lf/ 0 bert M Kea g, P Community Development Diror 14-16. THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP Planning Director FROM: Eric Blad Staff Planter, Current Development DATE: January 6, 1998 SUBJECT. Indian River Club, Ltd.'s Request for Special Exception Use Approval to Modify the Waivers for the Indian River Club Conceptual Planned Development Plan It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of January 13, 1998. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: Urban Resource Group Division of Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc., on behalf of Indian River Club, Ltd., has submitted a special exception use approval request to modify some of the original planned development waivers granted by the Board of County Commissioners in 1993. The developer is requesting a modification to some of the design waivers approved with the original conceptual plan. The purpose of the request is to allow the developer more flexibility in marketing the various styles and sizes of model products offered within the Indian River Club planned development. The waiver modifications are for minor adjustments to side and front yard setbacks, lot width, and open space. At its regular meeting of December 11, 1997, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-1 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners grant special exception use approval to modify the conceptual planned development plan waivers outlined in this report. Pursuant to section 971.05 of the LDRs, the Board of County Commissioners is to consider the appropriateness of the requested waivers for the subject site and the surrounding area and approve, approve with conditions, or deny the request. The county may attach any reasonable conditions and safeguards necessary to mitigate impacts and to ensure compatibility of the use with the surrounding area. ANALYSIS• 1. Overag Project Area: 292.55 acres 2. Zoning Classifications: RS -6, Residential Single Family (up to 6 units per acre) and RM -6, Residential Multi -Family (up to 6 units per acre) 3. Land Use Designation: L-2, Low Density 2 (up to 6 units per acre) 4. Surrounding Land Use. The Indian River Club is surrounding on all sides by residential development with RS -6 zoning. 5. Density: Total Approved Dwelling Units: 355 units Gross Residential Density: 355 units 292.60 ac. = 1.2 DU/ac Net Residential Density: " 355 units 73.36 ac. = 4.8 DU/ac No change to the number of allowable units is proposed by this request. The net residential area removes the golf course and conservation area from the gross project area. 6. Project Area Breakdown: Residential Parcels: 75.06 acres Golf Course: 139.77 acres Lakes: 36.49 acres Interior Roads: 14.26 acres Upland Preservation: 18.68 acres Wetlands: 6.29 acres S—Mmaenms Club: 2.00 acres Total: 292.55 acres 7. Requested Waiver Modifications: The existing approved conceptual plan waivers and the proposed waiver modifications are depicted in attachments #3 and #4, respectively, of this report. JANUARY 13, 1998 -35- C� BOOK 4 mq 92 r, BOOK 104 PAGE 9 Lot Size: The applicant is not proposing any changes to the previously approved lot sizes. Lot Width: The applicant's proposing to reduce the minimum width from 50' to 45' for one product type. 10. Setbadis: The focus ofthe applicant's waiver modification request is to refine the side yard and from yard building setbacks and building separation distances to accommodate the various product types, As proposed, the reduced mimmum side yard and from yard setbacks will be applicable to lots separated from the perimeter of the Indian River Club project by landscaped buffers and/or roadways. 11. Open Space: The applicant is proposing to reduce the open space required on a per lot basis from 301/6 to 20% for some product types. The change in open space per lot is needed because of the proposed setback modification. While the modification will reduce the amount Of open space on a per lot basis, the overall project will continue to exceed the 40% open space required for the RS -6 and RM -6 zoning districts. Please see item 6. above. 12. Stora water Mamagement: The overall conceptual starmwater management plan will remain the same, and the proposed PD modification will not alter or affect the master stormwater System Public Works has no objections to approval of the proposed waiver modifications. 13. Environmental Issues: There are no environmental issues related to this proposal. All environmental issues have been addressed with previous conceptual plan approval conditions, and those conditions will remain in effect. 14- Utilities: The existing development is served by public water and wastewater, and will continue to be served by these facilities. Utility Services has no objection to approval of the IropOSed waiver modifications. 15. Traffic Cimulation: The overall traffic circulation plan will remain the same. The traffic engineering department has no objection to approval of the proposed waiver modifications. 16. Compatibility: Essentially, all development within the Indian River Club is internal to the project. The few lots that are located cm the project perimeter have perimeter buffers and are located adjacent to road or canal rights-of-way. No development within the Indian River Club abuts surrounding residential development. The proposed waiver modifications are fundamentally consistent with the conceptual plan approved in 1993. The proposed modifications will be internal to the Indian River Club, and the modification of the side and from yard setbacks will not be apparent outside of the development boundaries. Lots along the perimeter of the development are separated from the surrounding development by landscaped buffers and/or roadways. Based on the proposed waiver modifications being internal to the Indian River Chib, staff has no objections to the proposed waiver modifications. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above analysis, staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners grana special exception PD approval for the proposed conceptual plan waiver modifications for the overall Indian River Club development. JANUARY 13, 1998 -36- 0 0 0 0 1. LUWL W.WUM IT 0- INDIAN RIVER CLUB EIT, I 9--41 00 O'k ON V-4 tf� V-4 --A AMONOW- Z JANUARY 13, 1998 0 r t r� -38- R ATTACHMENT 'S I wK 104 F,PE 95 0 The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard regarding this matter. Joe DeMayo stated that he is the oldest property owner in that area and wanted to give credit to Indian River Club for living up to their word. He brought to the Board's attention a hazard on a bend on Highlands Drive from Sunrise Drive to Sunset Drive where people have to walk in the street. His concern is mainly for the older people and the children coming from school. He requested a culvert be extended to the canal and an extension of the sidewalk to Sunset Drive as quickly as possible. Chairman Tippin thanked Mr. DeMayo for his comments and announced that the Board will take the matter under advisement. The Chairman directed Public Works staff to investigate and report back to the Board. Mr. DeMayo then displayed an old Indian River Club logo. Mary Christie, from the Board of Directors of Vero Beach Highlands, stated that her Board did not really understand the proposed ordinance and asked for further explanation. Director Boling noted that letters had been sent from the Planning Department which contain the telephone number and location of the department in order that the public might call for any desired explanations or come to the office to check the plans. Bob Swift, Vice President and General Manager of the Indian River Club, explained that they try to be good neighbors and are basically consolidating all the interpretations made by staff over the last several years and updating the plat, describing the types of structures which can be built in the property. The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard regarding this matter. There being none, the Chairman closed the public hearing. JANUARY 13, 1998 -39- Bm 104 PA")E atg BOOK 104 PACE 07 ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously granted special exception PD approval for the proposed _conceptual plan waiver modifications for the overall Indian River Club development, as recommended by staff. 9.B. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEM FRANKZORCAND SIDNEY TURNER - REQUEST FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSIONREGARDING PIPER AIRCRAFT SUPERFUND SITE The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 7, 1998; letters of January 6, 1998 and January 13, 1998, together with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, Piper Aircraft Superfund Site Update as follows: TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: January 7, 1998 SUBJECT: Requests for Public Discussion FROM: `m es E. Chanfdl ' County Administrator In accordance with policy, the attached requests are being placed on the January 13. 1998 agenda, under Public Discussion Items. The subject in question, is a matter in which the County does not have jurisdiction. It appears the requests would be more appropriately directed to the City of Vero Beach and/or the regulatory agencies. For your information, also attached, is a copy of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency January 1998 update. JANUARY 139 1998 -40- • 0 FRANK L. ZORC REAL ESTATE BROKER BUILDING CONTRACTOR REALTOR January 6, 1998 Indian River County Commission Administrators Office Attn: Ms. Gunter '_9111 27th \,r•nuc \'r•ru -'c h, linndd i26M1 Telephunc: I;hh'v.?•11. h Fax - Hand Deliver 770-M95 RE: Matters by the Public - January 13th. 1998 Please include my item on the above agenda to discuss: "Health concerns from P'iper's Chemical spill and the by products, into public water supply. Note: If this subject is placed on Commissioners Matters by Caroline Ginn and I can speak at that point. the above request should be deleted. R y, k ore 25 Years In Vero Beach Home Building & Real Estate Services use. onoasso 'We will appreciate the opportunity to help you in any real estate need!" HK 0099M JANUARY 139 1998 -41- BOOK dG C% r BaoK 104 PACE 8775 20th St. #3 Vero Beach, FL 32966 \041, January 6, 1998 Phone: 562-7270 Indian River County `�9ZSZbZ�° Board of County Commissioners Mr. James Chandler, County Administrator 1849 25th St. Vero Beach, FL 32960 AGENDA reouest Matters By the Public January 13, 1998 Subject: Piper's TCE Tricloroethylene chemical spill into City water and the possible effect s on City health. Respectfully, j. Sidney W. Turner J.�%So s U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY - REGION&Ir Z 18� PIPER AIRCRAFT SUPERFUND SITE JAN 0 2 7998 UPDATE BOARD OF CG COMMISotL.., JANUARY 1998 Vero Beach, Florida To Improve groundwater cleanup, the fol/ow/ng actions will be taken In 1998: I. Installation will begin in January 2. System will be operational by April 3 -Treated water will be returned directly to iter instead of drainage ditch tonal •For more information, please call: Randy Bryant Remedial Project Manger South Site Management Branch U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 61 Forsyth Street Atlanta, Georgia 30303 1-800-435-9234, ext 28938 The Piper Aircraft Superfund Site is located at 2926 Piper Drive which is adjacent to the Vero Beach '*Gmicipal Airport. The company manufachues small aircraft. Contamination at the site resulted from tank leakage of trichloroethylene (TCE) into the groundwater. The leak was fust detected in 1978. A nearby city water supply well was also impacted. The City took immediate actions to insure the quality of its water supply, piper Promptly removed the TCE from the tank and began sampling to define the extent of groundwater contamination. By 1981, Piper signed a consent agreement with the Florida Department Environ. mental Protection (FDEP), which authorized them to begin the initial cleanup of the groundwater. JANUARY 139 1998 In 1985, EPA began to evaluate the site for the National Priorities List (NPL) and ultimately determined that the site should be placed on the NPL. In June 1989, Piper continued the cleanup process which was overseen by FDEP. Piper rantoved the empty underground storage tank and surrounding soil. The excavated soil was aerated to remove the TCE. The soil was then tested and returned to the excavated area. The Piper Aircraft facility was added to the NPL in February 1991 because of the retraining ground water contamination. The initial Superfund investigations were completed by EPA during 1992- 1993.The results indicated that the groundwater contained TCE and its related breakdown products. In December 1993, issued a Record of Decision that called for pumping and treating the contaminated groundwater. The groundwater would be treated by air stripping and the treated groundwater would be discharged to an onsite drainage ditch or nearby canal. The groundwater treatment system recently designed still includes pumping the contaminated groundwater and treating it by air stripping. However, the treated groundwater will be returned directly to the aquifer, instead of being discharged to a drainage ditch. In December 1993, EPA issued a Record of Decision for the groundwater cleanup at the Piper Aircraft Site. Piper Aircraft was in bankruptcy and could not afford to start the work required by EPA. In 1994, EPA hired its own contractor to begin the design phase of the cleanup. However. Piper Aircraft told EPA that it hoped to emerge from bankruptcy and -42- 0 0 0 0 would be willing to do the work. In 1995. Piper emerged from bankruptcy and signed a Consent Decree with EPA to design and perform the cleanup. In 1996. Piper completed additional sampling that was necessary to complete the design. Piper also reimbursed EPA for its past costs associated with the site. In 1997, Piper completed the design of the groundwater cleanup and EPA approved the design. Construction of the groundwater system is scheduled to begin in early 1998. lI you have any a a tiort� Please contact the EPA Remedial Project Manager. Randy Bryant, at 1-800435-9234, and ask for extension 28938. Also, you can find documents related to this project at the information repository located: Indian River County Main Library 1600 21st Street veto Beach, Florida (561) 770-5060 Record Of Declslon: Document explaining EPA's rationale for selection of a cleanup remedy at a Supetfund site. Used for the Act ( CLACo�CI.A name w established by Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, an Liability sites. Bless to address uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste MARING LIST COUPON FOR PIPER AE,� U yon 'Would like to continue to receive fact sheets cone please fM out and return this 8 the Piper Aircraft Site Information from EPA, Return coupon so that you on. continue to get updated Coordinator, U,S. EPA. 61 F tree.. to Rose Jackson. Commtutity Relations questions con Forsyth call Atlanta. 43 G99 -u. 30303' Ryon have any concerning this list, 600-438-9234. c 001 NAME: ADDRESS: .omission= AdminisovW TELEPHONE: AiMm" ...�T Penortnei Public Worcs Community Dev. Willies Rnance 40MO imerg. Serv. Risk Mgt. mer JANUARY 13, 1998 43- BOOK �1 m,,E ,�6 BOOK 10 PAPP 101 Sidney Turner, of 8775 20' Street, stated that, after reading about the continuing problem in Port St. Lucie, he became concerned that a similar or worse condition could exist in Vero Beach from the Piper spill affecting well #15 near the airport, which supplied drinking water for many residents in 1978. The EPA notified Piper in 1990 that the groundwater still contained TCE. He believed that a higher than normal number of childhood cancers in Ft Pierce are linked to TCE. His objective is not to cause panic and he is aware that experts are attempting to determine what is causing those cancers. However, the link between TCE in the groundwater and those cancers appears to be strong. He questioned whether a study has been made to learn whether there are a larger number of childhood cancers in this area and hoped the Commissioners will use their influence to obtain this information. Frank Zorc, of 2044 DeLeon Avenue, cited a recent article in the Press -Journal and implored the Board to hear the information and consider what actions may be proper. County property owners pay taxes to and for the operation of the City of Vero Beach, including the water plant, and Indian River County residents drink City water. Mr. Zorc quoted from several articles (an October, 1997, Palm Beach Post report; a December, 1997, Scientific American article) which stated that toxic spills could take decades to eliminate. He questioned the impact of the Piper spill on the Vero Beach water supply and expressed his concern over the on-going clean-up efforts. He felt there has been a mishandling of public information with apparent coverups by City officials and expressed his belief that City officials make decisions behind closed doors in secret on public issues in violation of Sunshine Laws. He asked the Board to conduct some research and find answers to the problem. Commissioner Ginn commented that Mr. Zorc and Mr. Turner had come to see her last week to discuss this matter and she thought it might be wise to include Indian River County in the study being done. However, she spoke with Jean Kline, Indian River County Health Department Administrator, who is here to give an updated report. Jean Kline, Administrator of the Health Department, stated that she welcomed Commissioner Ginn's call about the St Lucie -Martin County Study. She had attended the initial meetings with representatives- of the University of Miami, the American Cancer Society, Representatives Sembler and Pruitt, and a representatives from Suffer the Children, JANUARY 13, 1998 -44- 0 0 the group formed to investigate the matter. Indian River County does not stand out in the incidence of childhood cancers. We have had 12 cancers, 11 brain and central nervous system, and have not had a case since 1994. Officials from St Lucie County went back into the information to make sure the report was correct and found some discrepancies. The experts also noted a variety of cancers were reported and finding the causative agent would be even more difficult. According to the U.S. Census, Indian River County had a 5.6 increase in cancers in children under the age of 5 and St Lucie County had a 9.6 increase in these same children under the age of 5. Also an investigation by the American Cancer Society found they were unable to associate exposure to TCE and these cancers. The - approach taken by the Department of Health, is an ongoing controlled scientific study investigating 31 cases to assess the air, water and soil. The Health Department is watching this study and does not claim to have all of the answers. Commissioner Macht stated that he became interested in this subject in 1995, when there were 4 cases of multiforma cancer; all of which were fatal and one of which was his dear wife. He subsequently met 3 persons who had spinal tumors, all of who have passed away since that time. He called the cancer centers in Houston and Kansas City and asked their experience and was told they had 2 cases in Houston and none in Kansas City. There were 4 in Indian River County. Commissioner Eggert emphasized that Jean Kline has been wonderful about bringing reports to the Primary Care Committee and asked that she report any updates, as it would be very informative for all of us. Ms. Kline assured the Board that the Health Department does not mean to minimise this situation and will watch the results very carefully. Mike Galanis, Director of Environmental Health, wanted it noted that Piper, through the years, has attempted cleanup of the situation and has made progress. The EPA standard is for drinking water rather than groundwater and there is very little drinking water supplied from any private wells in this area. The City operates the drinking water plant and tests have shown the level of TCE to be way below the national standard in this drinking water. This spill is not the only incidence in Indian River County but is one of hundreds in this community and one of hundreds of thousands in the state. JANUARY 13, 1998 -45- BOOK PAGE r- 6m 104 PACE 1031 Commissioner Ginn questioned whether any consideration had been given to including Indian River County in the study, and Ms. Kline responded that the Health Department did not feel it was necessary given the preliminary reports. Commissioner Ginn asked Ms. Kline to keep a close eye on the progress and report to the Board. If there should be a need at a later time, then the County could ask to be included in the study. No action taken. 11.A.1. HORIZON OUTLET CENTER - REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CONCEPTUAL MASTER LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR I-95/SR-60 INTERCHANGE AND AUTHORIZATION TO PREPARE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HIGHWAY BEAUTIFICATION GRANT APPLICATION The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 7, 1998: TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator MDN HEAD CONCURRENCE: 1Cobert M Ceating, AI Community Develo Directo FROM: Stan Boli* AICP ` Planning Director DATE: January 7, 1998 SUBJECT: Request for Approval of a Conceptual Master Landscape Plan for the I-95/SR 60 Interchange and Authorization to Prepare an FDOT Highway Beautification Grant Application It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of January 13, 1998. BACKGROUND: In the fall of 1996, staff began discussing and reviewing draft sketches of plans by The Horizon Group, Inc. (owners/operators of the Horizon Outlet Center) to trim and landscape the I-95/SR 60 interchange area, including a segment of I-95 1/h mile north and south of SR 60 (see attachment #1). Horizon gave two principal reasons for its request. First, Horizon wanted to trim and maintain adsting vegetation and beautify a "window" to its project located on the west side of I-95 south of SR 60. Second, Horizon wanted to beautify the interchange area in general to enhance the primary "entrance area" to its project. As with any proposal for special landscaping in the right-of-way, FDOT will allow such landscaping only if the county agrees to assume maintenance responsibilities of all specially landscaped areas. At the end of 1996, staff provided comments and indicated to Horizon that once detailed conceptual plans were submitted, reviewed, and revised to respond to staff comments, staff would bring the proposal to the Board for the Board's consideration of a master conceptual interchange landscape plan and corresponding maintenance responsibilities. Subsequently, some limited clearing and trimming within the I-95 median and interchange areas were authorized by FDOT and performed by the applicant In addition, FDOT installed a standard pattern of Washingtonian palms and Seagrape planings within the I-95 medians immediately north and south of SR 60. That landscaping has been established without a permanent irrigation system. JANUUAII 13;1998 -46- • 0 • In June 1997, staff met with Horizon representatives and FDOT's landscape architect, Carl Higgins, and, in October 1997, staff met with Horizon representatives and its landscape architect, Frank Johnson. Subsequently, Horizon submitted to staff a detailed conceptual landscape plan, and staff responded with comments and a request for estimated maintenance costs. Now, staff has received revised landscape Plans, some estimated maintenance cost information, and a written proposal from Horizon (see attachment #5). Staff has analyzed the proposal and is presenting the request for Board consideration. ANALYSIS: •Policy Considerations Having Special landscaping in the I-95/SR 60 road right-of-way is encouraged and anticipated in the adopted SR 60 Corridor Plan (see attachment 42).In fact, in the fall of 1996 when staff informed the SR 60 Task Force of discussions with Horizon about special interchange landscaping, task force members whole-heartedly supported the idea Also, as discussed at the SR 60 Corridor Plan adoption hearing last spring, the Board has approved design, installation, and maintenance of special landscaping as part of the county's Kings Highway road project. At its landscaping workshoplast September, the Board re -affirmed its support for special roadway landscaping to considermaintenancey P� and its commitment priority e funding Edi g a CR o a proles b' Project basis. Because the Board has given a dor Planning, the Board should consider that commitments to special landscaping at the I-95/SR 60 interchange could prompt a similaropportunity at the I-95/CR 512 interchange. In staff's opinion, it would be consistent with the SR 60 Corridor Plan and the Board's stated policy to commit to landscaping the I-95/SR 60 interchange area. *Landscaping Plan The Proposed design is a conceptual master plan of the I-95/SR 60 area that roughly corresponds to the SR 60 Corridor Plan's north and south boundaries at I-95. The conceptual plan lays out an overall design intended to: 1 • Accent and tie into the pattern of existing natural and planted vegetation within the I-95 medians and interchange area. 2• Line the interchange on and of ramps with Palms, entryway features. shrubs, and bahia sod to provide clean 3. Provide symmetrical, bemed I-95 median landscape features with mass plantings immediately north and south of SR 60. 4. Provide babia sod around special median landscape features and roadway -95 lane edges and inside lane edges adjacent to the median) to provide a cls ( look. outside 5. Provide an unigation system with options to save on maintenance and/or installation costs by scaling -back from 1000/- coverage and by disconnecting the system after landscaping is established (after 1 year). The system could be re -activated in fixture years if needed or desired. The design and species selection are intended to minimize maintenance needs while providing ""tic impac" Pmt material list fothe overall ed are reduced copies of the conceptual landscape plans and the proposed Prepared to address any Board P� (see attachments #3 and #4). Final landscape Plans could be final plans. and the Board could require its review and approval of any The Project is proposed in three Phages, as follows: Phase 1: Existing I-95 median Plantings installed by FDOT Phase 2: I-95 median plantings (next phase, 1998) Phase 3: Entrance%xit ramp phmtings (last phase, to be coordinated with anticipated MOT ramp/SR 60 improvements). *Commitments & Funding To date, Horizon has committed resources to design a conceptual landscape plan and gather maintenance cost information. In addition, Horizon is willing to commit installation funds that will provide a match for highway beautification grants. When FDOT installed the existing Washingtonian palm and Seagrape Plantings, FDOT used discretionary funds. At that time, FDOT anticipated that the county would take over the maintenance of those plantings as part of some future grant application FDOT anticipates that a series of FDOT grants and discretionary monies, along with Horizon's contributions, will fiord installation costs for more landscaping. The county's commitment will be perpetual maintenance (and replacement) costs. Under the proposal, commitments would be as follows: Horizon Groun Inc Design and prepare all landscape plans. Prepare Florida Highway Beautification Grant application in coordination with county staff. Fund a significant portion of installation costs (to match beautification grants on a 50/50 basis). JANUARY 13, 1998 47 -BOOK �� � FAJ104 BOOK 104 PAGE CC Fund a significant portion of installation costs (subject to grant award, on a 50/50 basis with county finds). Provide some small amount of on-going maintenance funding (corresponds to what FDOT would normally spend to perform routine mowinghrimming maintenance of areas to be covered by special landscaping and to be maintained by the county or its maintenance provider). Apply for grant application. Enter into maintenance agreements with FDOT (subject to grant award) for existing Washingtonian palm and Seagrape plantings and new landscape areas, as grants are awarded. Contract out or perform maintenance in perpetuity. The most feasible funding source, according to the Public Works Director, is gasoline tax money. •Costs and Alternative Proposals Horizon estimates the following costs: Installation *Phase 1: installed and paid for by FDOT at a cost of approximately $90,000. •Phases 2 and 3: $225,000 (includes earthwork, irrigation, wells and electrical service to the wells, mulch and plant materials); 50% from Horizon and 501/6 from FDOT grants. Maintenance Phase 1: $ 7,880 per year Phase 2: $14,200 per year Phase 3: $ 9.500 perms Total: $31,580 per year (current dollars) The maintenance estimates provided by Horizon do not include: adjustments/maintenance/replacemem parts for the irrigation system (note: system could be disconnected or scaled-back after 1 year, after landscaping is established), electricity (energy) charges for use of well pumps. Maintenance estimates do include: annual re -mulching of plant beds and trimming of palms; quarterly fertilizing of all areas, vertical trimming of shrubs; monthly mowing of all sod areas and herbiciding all plant beds. Horizon proposes 3 alternatives for the conceptual plan, as follows: Proposal #1: Implement all 3 phases with 100% irrigation coverage as shown on the proposed plans. Maintenance costs would total $31,580 per year plus electrical (energy) charges for well pumps and cost of irrigation system adjustmerns/maintenancetreplacement parts. P or posal #2: Implement all 3 phases but irrigate the four I-95 median berrned planting beds only. Maintenance costs would total $31,580 per year plus other electrical and irrigation maintenance costs similar to Proposal #1 but lower due to scaled-back irrigation coverage. Installation costs would be reduced due to scaling -back of the irrigation system. Proposal #3: Implement Phases 1 and 2 only, without irrigation. Maintenance costs would be $22,080 per year plus cost of using watering trucks for the first year. Installation costs would also be decreased by the cost of the Phase 3 installation (emtrancelexit ramp plantings). Maintenance costs should drive the Board's decision, since installation costs should be covered by non -county sources. If the Board concludes that the species and design proposed (or as amended based on Board direction given at the January 13th meeting) can be properly maintained without an active irrigation system beyond the first year, then the maintenance costs of Proposal #1 would be virtually the same as Proposal #2, and would be roughly $32,000 per year after completion of Phase 3. However, if an active irrigation system is determined to be needed after the first year, then additional maintenance costs beyond the $32,000/year estimate would need to be funded by the county. •CONCLUSION At this time, the developer of a large commercial project adjacent to the I-95/SR 60 interchange is offering to design and contribute half of the installation costs for an interchange landscaping plan. FDOT staff has also indicated a willingness, through grants and use of yearly discretionary funds, to fiord the other half of installation costs. In staff s opinion, this proposal represents the county's best chance to begin upgrading interchange landscaping. At this time, detailed installation cost information (broken-down by phase) and maintenance cost estimates for on-going irrigation system maintenancelreplacemem costs and electricity charges are not available. Also, the highway beautification grant application and final landscaping plans have not been prepared. Staffs position is that the Board does have sufficient information to select a landscaping plan concept for the interchange, direct changes to be made in the proposed landscaping JANUARY 13, 1998 -48- 0 0 • design and species selection, and commit to a level of on-going special maintenance costs associated with the selected landscaping concept. After the Board makes these decisions, then Horizon can work with county and MOT staff to revise the landscaping plan, provide more cost details, and prepare a grant application. The Board could then, at a subsequent meeting in February, grant final approval of a landscaping plan and authorize submission of a gram application. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Select a conceptual master landscape plan option (Proposal #1, #2, #3 or other agreed to option) and direct any changes to be made in terms of design and species selection. 2. State its intention to enter into a maintenance agreement with MOT for all areas covered by special landscaping in accordance with the selected concept, subject to a grant award for installation of additional special landscaping. 3. Authorize staff to coordinate with The Horizon Group, Inc. and MOT for The Horizon Group, Inc. to prepare a highway beautification gram application and submit said application, revised landscaping plans, and financial commitment for Board review and approval in February 1998. JANUARY 13, 1998 -49- BOCK 104 FALE L BOOK 104 PAGE107 07 MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, for discussion, that the Board approve staffs recommendations. Commissioner Ginn commented that Wedelia is not lowmaintenance; there is nothing attractive about Pampas Grass; and Ixora is not cold tolerant. Chairman Tippin noted that all wild stuff does not turn him on but he realized native plants are the "in" thing. Commissioner Macht questioned why the Board should be acting for the benefit of a private organization for perpetual maintenance. Director Boling noted that the applicant was in the audience, as well as Mr. Higgins from Florida DOT. The landscaping as proposed will be placed along I-95 through the entire interchange, from %2 mile north to 1/2 mile south of SR -60. Horizon is putting up $112,500 for this installation. Staff has presented the proposal for the Commissioners' comments and all installation will be funded by others. The County's only responsibility will be the maintenance. Staff will take the comments and work with representatives of Horizon in order to come back before the Board in February with the final details. Commissioner Ginn emphasized that she was in favor of beautifying the area but wanted to make certain it is low maintenance since the County will be troubled with the maintenance forever. Commissioner Adams noted that the majority of the cost of maintenance is irrigation and maintaining the irrigation system but if we are going to have a nice landscaping median approach, it will involve some maintenance. Chairman Tippin noted that all plants have advantages and disadvantages and there is no such thing as maintenance -free plants. Anything attractive requires maintenance which is why we have beauty parlors. Commissioner Eggert felt this is our County entrance and we need to be involved in the maintenance and have some control over our County entrances. Commissioner Macht expressed his opinion that it is inappropriate for the County to subsidize private industries and he felt this would set a bad precedent. Commissioner Adams felt this would not be any different than landscaping Route 60. We have 2 entrances to the County -Route 60 and 512. She noted that when she is traveling, it is such a pleasure to see something nice besides trash, skid marks and paper wrappers. JANUARY 13, 1998 -50- 0 0 • 0 When you see a nice, well -kept landscaped area you know that city or that county cares about its image. She believed the landscaping would increase the value of everything in the area and make people want to come here. She believed it would be a win-win situation for all. Commissioner Macht had no argument with any of that but wondered whether a requirement could be added that the landscaping would not produce extra maintenance costs to the County. Chairman Tippin believed that would be splitting hairs. Anything, such as picking up trash, might improve a business. He was in favor of private industry kicking in dollars to help beautify public properties near their place of business. Commissioner Macht pointed out that other businesses along Route 60 have imposed no additional requirements for maintenance. Director Keating noted that none of this landscaping is required of Horizon. It is not part of their DRI, PD or any of their site plans. He also noted that staff is still hopeful of getting a similar contribution from Simon DeBartolo (Indian River Mall) so similar landscaping can be done on that part of SR -60. Commissioner Ginn emphasized that she was in favor of the plan but felt some of the plants should be revisited, especially the Wedelia, unless this is a variety that doesn't creep and grow on itself and trees. Chairman Tippin noted that Wedelia grows in sun or shade and will choke out other plants. However, it is a ground cover, and in all horticultural circles it would be considered low maintenance; not no maintenance but low maintenance. It also gives the "critters" someplace to hide. Commissioner Macht then questioned how much of the plan depends on the continuity of grants, and Director Boling stated that it is proposed to be done in 2 phases, which will probably involve 2 grant applications. costs. Commissioner Macht explained that he was referring to grants toward maintenance Director Boling explained that, as far as he knows, there are no grants available for maintenance costs. Those costs would be borne completely by the County, although there is some funding that DOT gives toward maintenance of areas such as slopes. These have already been landscaped with sea grape so some funds will come from DOT because they will be saving on maintenance. Commissioner Macht then questioned whether the County would require additional positions to maintain this, and Director Boling responded that a decision would have to be JANUARY 13, 1998 -51- Boa 104 fAKA08 L Booz 104 v�to is made as to whether to do the maintenance in-house or not. The maintenance numbers were derived from the presumption that the work would be contracted out. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION, and the Board, by a 4-1 vote (Commissioner Macht opposed) (1) approved Proposal #1 as set forth in stafrs Memorandum; (2) stated its intention to enter into a maintenance agreement with Florida Department of Transportation for all areas covered by special landscaping in accordance with the selected concept, subject to a grant aware for installation of additional special landscaping; and (3) authorized staff to coordinate with The Horizon Group, Inc. and Florida Department of Transportation for The Horizon Group, Inc. to prepare ahighway beautification grant application and submit said application, revised landscaping plans, and financial commitment for Board review and approval in February, 1998; all as recommended by staff. 11.A.2. GEORGIA -PACIFIC CORPORATION - CONTRACT FOR REMOVAL OF PINE TREES FROM WABASSO SCRUB CONSERVATION AREA IN FULFILLMENT OF SCRUB HABITAT MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS FOR CR -512 WIDENING PROJECT The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 7, 1998: JANUARY 13, 1998 -52- 0 0 • TO: James E. Chandler County Administrator DE RTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE: �, ObertNrKeating -JTP" Community Develop ern _ or FROM: Roland Ni DeBloisrAICP Chief; Environmental Planning DATE: January 7, 1998 SUBJECT: Staff Request for Board Approval of a Contract with Georgia-Pacific Corporation for the Removal of Pine Tri from the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area, in Fulfillment of Scrub Habitat Mitigation Requirements for the C.R. 512 Widening Project It is requested that the information herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of January 13, 1998. DESCRIPTION AND CONDPPIONS The CR 512 road widening project, nearing completion, impacted approximately 3 acres of scrub jay habitat (near Sebastian Elementary School). In 1996, as part of the road widening permitting process, the County obtained an "incidental take" permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to impact the 3 acres of scrub. As a condition ofthe FWS permit, the County must mitigate the CR 512 scrub impacts by restoring scrub habitat on the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area property. The ±111 acre Wabasso Scrub property, located at the northwest corner of Kings Highway and CR 510, was purchased by the County under its environmental lands program with a 509/6 cost -share grant from the Florida Communities Tryst (FCT). A condition of the Wabasso Scrub FCT Grant Award Agreement is that the County restore and manage scrub habitat on the property in coordination with the FWS. As such, CR 512 scrub mitigation on the Wabasso Scrub property is consistent with the intended management of the conservation land. A main component of the CR 512 scrub jay habitat conservation plan (HCP) is the removal of sand pines (and some slash pines) from ± 32 ams of the Wabasso Scrub property, in order to "open up" the tree canopy to allow establishment of low -growing oak snub, which is the prime habitat of scrub jays. Subsequently, periodic prescribed burns will be conducted as part of habitat maintenance. County staff has investigated the most cost-effective means to thin the sand pine canopy on the subject property in fiil6llment of management commitments. As a result, county staff has negotiated a contract with Georgia-Pacific Corporation for selective removal of pines, which contract is hereby presented to the Board for approval consideration. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS There are basically two alternatives regarding the removal of pine trees from the Wabasso Scrub Property- The first alternative is for the County, using either county staff or a private contractor, to cut the trees and dispose of the debris at the county landfill (or burn the debris with a debris burning permit). This first alterative would require an expenditure of county funds for such costs as staff time and equipment, or private contractor fees, as well as possible landfill tipping fees. The second alternative is for the County to seek a timber company that sees the timber as a commodity such that the company would remove the trees at no cost to the County, and in fact would pay the County some amount for the timber. Since the second alternative is more cost-effective and environmentally sound than the first alternative, county staff sought out a timber company for the task. In seeking timber companies that might be interested in the Wabasso Scrub pine thinning project. staff coordinated with the Division of Forestry. Environmental land management staff from nearby counties were also contacted to identify potential timber companies. Stairs finding was that the Wabasso Snub property is considered a small project from the timber harvesting perspective; therefore, it was difficult to find a company interested in the job, particularly since the property is remote from other timber removal projects. Georgia-Pacific initially expressed this concert. However, this past year, Georgia-Pacific was awarded contracts with Brevard County and the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) to remove timber from public lands in southern Brevard County. Because of the relative close proximity of those job sites to the Wabasso Scrub property, Georgia-Pacific was able to justify its mobilization and time to consider timber removal from the Wabasso Scrub property. Based on the explained circumstance that Georgia-Pacific is able to enter into a contract with the County largely due to proximity of its other job sites, coupled with the fact that the County incurs no cost under the proposed contract, staffs position is that it is justified for the County to contract with Georgia-Pacific without going through a formal bidding process. C� JANUARY 13, 1998 -53- BOOK PLE I-L BOOK FACEl Contract Under the proposed contract, Georgia -pacific will coordinate closely with county environmental planning staff to ensure that the selective timber removal will be compatible with the conservation management objectives of the subject property. Condition 5 of the contract (page 2) summarizes a price per unit (cord) that Georgia-Pacific will pay the County on a weekly basis, depending on the type and amount of timber removed the previous week. As proposed, timber cutting will be completed no later than June 8, 1998. Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached contract with Georgia-Pacific Corporation for the selective -removal of pine trees from the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area, and authorize the Board Chairman to execute said contract. a� Jill 11 1 gill all as JANUARY 13, 1998 -54- 0 0 C� • ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved the Contract with Georgia- Pacific Corporation for the selective removal of pine trees from the Wabasso Scrub Conservation Area, and authorized the Chairman to execute said contract; as recommended by staff. CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD 11.c. ADMINISTRATION BUILDING TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT - BELLSOUTH AND SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT - BUDGET AMENDMENT #004 The Board reviewed a Memorandum of December 30, 1997: Date: December 30, 1997 To: Honorable Board of County Commissioners Through: H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director Department of General Services From: Terry L. Smith, Telecommunications Manager Department of General Services Subject: Administration Building Telephone Equipment BACKGROUND: The existing telephone switching equipment was placed in service in 1981 when the County Administration Building was occupied The switch, an AT&T Dimension 400 PBX (Private Branch Exchange), has been maintained by Lucent Technologies under a maintenance agreement. Due to the age of the equipment, we are experiencing an increasing number of problems in our PBX. The Customer Service Engineer from Lucent warned that replacement parts are becoming hard to find because this equipment is no longer in production, and he suggested we start looking into a replacement switch. We requested a commitment from Lucent Technologies on how long they were going to support the Dimension 400. They have indicated that the offering of a maintenance plan for this switch beyond 18 months from now is unlikely; they also stated that the Dimension 400 switch is not year 2000 compliant and there are no plans to make it year 2000 compliant. At the present time, when we have power fluctuations, we are losing all but one incoming line and do not even know that we have a problem until someone complains that incoming calls are not getting through When this happens, County personnel have to reprogram the PBX to restore service. The capacity of the switch was recently reduced by 12 stations due to a problem that cannot be repaired; future reductions in capacity are likely if we experience similar card failures. The tape drive unit in the PBX has started making unsettling noises. If the switch fails completely, it will take approximately 75 days to get a replacement. JANUARY 13, 1998 -55- BOOK 104 FACE BOOK 104 PAGE M Taking all the above into consideration, staff suggests replacing the switch as soon as possible. Staff has considered many alternatives to be sure that the replacement equipment would meet our present and fugue needs at the lowest possible cost The School District had informed us we could hook into their switch, and we approached Lucent Technologies with the idea When Lucent priced out our alternatives, with the discount available for trading in our old switch, a replacement switch was more economical than running a remote moduli: firnn the School District switch. The switching equipment that was purchased as a part of the 800 MHz radio system could be retrofitted to work as a PBX for the County, but this solution proved to be more costly than a new switch. We obtained price quotes from those PBX providers who are on the State Contract and from some vendors who have recently been awarded contracts with governmental agencies through a competitive bid process. With the specifications already in place in a contract, we were able to pick and choose to get the best equipment at the lowest price. We also specified that. 1. The equipment could be readily relocated if we move to another building in the next few years. 2. All equipment would be the most current technology and would support expansion throughout the life of the switch. 3. The equipment must be compatible with the existing automated attendant and voice mail system. 4. The equipment must be compatible with our existing wiring and telephone sets. 5. The cut -over from the old to the new switch will be made on a weekend so there will be no loss of telephone service during normal business hours. The costs are shown below. I . Cost of Equipment $104,000 2. Training S 3,500 3. Auto Attendant Integration S 5.000 Total $112,500 RECOMMENDATION: Staff reviewed the proposals as shown in Exhibit A, and recommends that the NEC NEAR 2400 system be purchased from BellSouth off of Contract C-8358 between BellSouth and the South Florida Water Management District BellSouth provided the lowest price quote, BellSouth,s maintenance contract is one of the most attractive, BellSouth has numerous PBX repairmen in the area, and by having the same company Provide incoming lines (network access) and the switching equipment, there is only one companY to deal with when a problem arises. It is further recommended that this new equipment be funded from the one cent sales tax. The attached budget amend - mentis to appropriate funding. Budget amendment 004. JANUARY 13, 1998 -56- r� G c-7 m Sheetl INDIAN RIVER COUNTY EXHIBIT "A" PBX REPLACEMENT - COMPARISON MATRIX Capacnles Equipped Equipment Maximum With Remote Analog Analog Tie Line Tie Line Music Size -Sens Standby CO Ports CO Ports Remote Installed Monthly Supplier Specified Ports Upgrade Units Packs Ports Packs Ports On Hold Pricing Power Analog Digital Maint, Cost Maint. Ericsson Ericsson Consono MD110 1,000 32,000 62 32 512 3 12 1 NA 120 4 48 2417 $125,000 $1,740 Lucent Lucent Def1nityG3siv5 2,400 25,000 2(EPN) 32 512 1 4 1 600 15 8 48 24/7 $151,000 $1,363 Siemens Siemens Hicom 300E 5,120 27,000 64 22 528 2 18 1 594 8 16 48 2417 $145,000 $1,713 NEC BellSouth NEAX2400 1,536 24,576 66 33 528 2 18 1 NA 30 32 24 24/7 $104,000 $1,146 NorTel Wiltel Meridian 51C 1,000 10,000 33 528 2 18 1 NA 60 48 24/7 $156,000 NEC "list NEAX2400 1,536 24,576 64 33 528 2 16 1 NA $132,000 NEC NECBCS NEAX2400 1,536 24,576 64 32 512 2 16 1 NA 60 32 24 24/7 $121,000 $1,300 0 • boa 104 PAPA -15 ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved the purchase from BellSouth (Contract C-8358 between BellSouth and the South Florida Water Management District) of the NEC NEAX 2400 system and approved Budget Amendment #004; all as recommended by staff. TO: Members of the Board BUDGET AMENDMENT: 004 of County Commissioners FROM: Joseph A. Baird DATE: January 7. 1998 OMB Director Entry Number Funds/Department/Account Name Account Number Increase Decrease 1. REVENUE OPTIONAL SALES TAX/ Interest Investments 315-000-361-010.00 $112,500 $0 EXPENSE OPTIONAL SALES TAX/Communication Equipment 315-220-519-066.45 $112,500 $0 11.G.1. WABASSO CAUSEWAY PARK BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT - BRAD SMITH ASSOCIATES The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 6, 1998: TO: James Chandler County Administrator THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. C Public Works Director Terry B. Thompson, P.E. Capital Projects Managelp_J FROM: G. Sean McGuire, P.E,: Project Engineer SUBJECT: Wabasso Causeway Park Beautification Project DATE: January 6, 1998 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Brad Smith Associates has been selected to provide Professional Architectural Services for enhancement to Wabasso Causeway Park. The scope of these services is the design of a Master Plan for future development of the park, the design and production of contract documents for a $100,000.00 Beautification Project and preparation of a Florida Department of Transportation Beautification Grant Application. The grant application deadline inFebruary 1, 1998. Total compensation for these services is $6,250.00. JANUARY 13, 1998 -58- • 0 • Staff recommends that the Board authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Professional Services Agreement. Funding will be from Account #315-210-572-068.09. ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously approved the Wabasso Causeway Park Beautification Project Professional Services Agreement with Brad Smith Associates, Inc. and authorized the Chairman to execute same, as recommended by staff. AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD 11.G.2. VERO TROPICAL GARDENS SUBDIVISION - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CONSULTANT - ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT GROUP ( EESE KESSLER) The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 6, 1998: TO: James Chandler s County Administrator ,. DATE: January 6, 1998 Di THROUGH: James W. Davis, P. ' Public Works rect AND Roger D. Cain, P. County Engineer FROM: Michelle A. Gentile, CET Civil Engineer 1(4 SUBJECT: Vero Tropical Gardens Subdivision, Proposals for Environmental Assessment DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS After meeting with St. Johns River Water Management District, the Engineering Division staff is concerned with the significant wetlands and other environmental issues in this subdivision and in order to provide water expansion, pave the roads and improve the drainage in the Vero Tropical Gardens Subdivision, a consultant needs to be retained to provide professional services directed toward determining and locating the limits of the wetland jurisdiction in the subdivision. Staff received proposals from three different environmental firms. All three proposals are less than the limits of the Consultant Competitive Negotiation procedure, therefore the Board can approve this contract without that procedure. The following are the proposals received: JANUARY 13, 1998 fJ -59- WOK J, L Ir Bm 104 P�z-EiP Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. $3,500.00 G.K. Environmental, Inc. $3,000.00 - $4,000.00 Environmental Consultant Group $3,400.00 (Reese Kessler) ALTERNATIVES Alternative No. I - Approve the proposal with Environmental Consultants Group, Reese Kessler in the amount of $3,400.00. Alternative No. 2 - Select one of the other firms. Alternative No. 3 - Not approve any of the proposals. RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. Staff has worked with this firm concerning the environmental issues in the Vero Lake Estates Subdivision and believes they will provide a quality service. Funding from the Petition Paving Account number 111-214-541-035.51. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously approved Alternative No. 1, the proposal with Environmental Consultants Group (Reese Kessler) in the amount of $3,400, as recommended by staff. AGREEMENT I5 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD 11.G.3. JACKSON BROTHERS GROVES AND RAYMOND JACKSON - RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION - INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT 43RDAVENUE AND 41sT STREET The Board reviewed a Memorandum of January 5, 1998: TO: James Chandler County Administrator THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Directo AND Roger D. Cain, P.E. County Engineer FROM: Donald G. Finney, SRA, County Right -of -Way Agent SUBJECT: DATE: JANUARY 13, 1998 Additional Right -of -Way Acquisition - Intersection Improvements at 431 Avenue and 41° Street January 5, 1998 -60- 0 0 ! DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Forty-five feet (45) of additional right-of-way is needed on the northwest corner of 43`d Avenue and 41` Street for the sidewalk at the intersection widening and tesignalization improvement project (from the corner to the County Road and Bridge property). The property is zoned RS -6. Two rows of citrus trees (75 trees) must be removed for tractor access between the rows and are included in the total paid. Contract For Sale and Purchase as follows: LAND, 45'x 925.57 (.956 acre) @ $22,500/acre $21,510.00 Cost of 75 trees in Right -of -Way, 5 year income loss to maturity $ 3,938.00 $25,448.00 Staff feels the contract is an equitable negotiated settlement with no additional attorney or appraisal fees. Although the land is at the upper range of value, with comparable sales in the neighborhood, the same price per acre for right-of-way and trees was paid on the northeast comer of this project. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff requests the Board accept the contract and direct the Chairman to execute the contract on the Boards' behalf. FUNDING Funding is available from Right -of -Way Acquisition Account No. 315-214-541- 066.12. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board unanimously approved the Contract with Jackson Brothers Groves, Inc. and Raymond A. Jackson and directed the Chairman to execute same, as recommended by staff. CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD 13.D. LIBRARY MATTERS DISCUSSION Commissioner Eggert announced that February 1' is the projected first opening of the Main Library on Sundays. This will be the 7' anniversary of the initial opening of the Main Library and there will be celebrations. No action taken. JANUARY 13, 1998 -61- BOOK J BOOK 1.04 PACUEl"J9 13.E. REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL DISCUSSION Commissioner Ginn stated that she had a call from the Chairman of the Brevard County Board of County Commissioners as to whether there were any interest in aligning resources with Volusia and Brevard Counties, and for leaving Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. She also spoke with Director Keating and researched the Minutes and it is her recommendation that the County stay with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. No action taken. 14.A. EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT None. 14.B. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment, the Board would reconvene as the Board of Commissioners of the Solid Waste Disposal District. Those Minutes are being prepared separately. 14.C. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL BOARD None. There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 10:48 a.m. ATTEST: I on, Clerk Minutes Approved: ® /-,,? 7 - 9 8 JANUARY 13, 1998 -62- 40 0