HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/24/2000MINUTES A f TACHED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AGENDA
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2000 - 9:00 A.M.
County Commission Chamber
County Administration Building
1840 25`h Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Fran B. Adams, Chairman
District 1
Caroline D. Ginn, Vice Chairman
District 5
Kenneth R. Macht
District 3
Ruth M. Stanbridge
District 2
John W. Tippin
District 4
•
James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney
Kimberly Massung, Executive Aide to BCC
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board
9:00 a.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER BACKUP
PAGES
2. INVOCATION
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Comm. Fran B. Adams
4. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS to the AGENDAIEMERGENCY ITEMS
1. Add Item 7.1, Florida Healthy Kids Program, Request for State Support
2. Delete Item 9.A.4. as to Civic and Social Membership Clubs and Group Homes and ALFs in the MED District
only.
3. Defer Item 9.B.1., Mr. and Mrs. Vernon Slavens - Discussion Regarding Proposed Retention Pond Behind Their
Property in Wauregan Subdivision (East Roseland Stormwater) to November 7, 2000.
4. Add Item 13.A., Annual Evaluation of County Administrator James E. Chandler.
5. Add Item 13.B., High Speed Ground Transportation System - Proposed Article X, Section 19 of Florida
Constitution.
6. Add Item 13.E., Treasure Coast Council of Local Governments Annual Meeting To Be Held November 9, 2000 at
Disney's Vero Beach Resort
5. PROCLAMATION and PRESENTATIONS
Presentation of Proclamation Hononng Elden Auker the Last
Living Player to Have Faced Babe Ruth 1
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Regular Meeting of October 3, 2000
B. Regular Meeting of October 10, 2000
7. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of Warrants
(memorandum dated October 12, 2000) 2-12
BK 1 15 PG 556
,
_I
BACKUP
_ 7. _ CONSENT AGENDA (cont'd.):
PAGES
B.
Submittal of Clerk of Court Constitutional Officers
Financial Report for FY Ending September 30, 2000
(letter dated October 16, 2000)
13-15
C.
Payments to Vendors of Court Related Costs
(memorandum dated October 16, 2000)
16-17
D.
Submittal of Division of Forestry Annual Fire Control
Report
(letter dated October 11, 2000)
1845
E.
Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for
Earring Point Tower, Tax Parcel ID No. 11-32-39-00000-
0010-00001.0
(memorandum dated October 18, 2000)
46-50
F.
Bid Award: IRC #3020 Annual Bid for Zinc Orthophosphate
(memorandum dated October 18, 2000)
51-56
G.
Bid Award: IRC #3021 Annual Bid for Sidewalk Construction
(memorandum dated October 18, 2000)
57-63
H.
Bid Award: IRC #3018 Annual Bid for Catch Basins & Storm
Water Inlets
(memorandum dated October 17, 2000)
6475
I.
Annual Award: Bid #3017 Type S -III Asphalt Concrete
(memorandum dated October 16, 2000)
76-84
8. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS and
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
None
9. PUBLIC ITEMS
A. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Sebastian Water Expansion Phase III -A
Resolution III
(memorandum dated October 13, 2000) - 85-94
BK I
15 PG 55 7
BACKUP
9. PUBLIC ITEMS (cont'd.):
A. -PUBLIC HEARINGS (cont'd.): PAGES
2. AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE
AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM
RS -3, TO PD FOR APPROXIMATELY 297 ACRES
OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN 13'x`
STREET SW ON THE SOUTH, 27TH AVENUE ON
THE EAST, AND 43RD AVENUE ON THE WEST; AND
DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE
The Gralia Group's Request to Rezone Approxi-
mately 297 Acres of Property from RS -3 (Single -
Family up to 3 units/acre), to PD (Planned Deve-
lopment) and to Receive Conceptual PD Plan
Approval for a Development to be Known as
The Colony (Legislative)
(memorandum dated October 17, 2000) 95-138
3. First Hearing: Proposed LDR Amendment on
Rooster Regulations (Legislative)
(memorandum dated October 17, 2000) 139-188
4. First Hearing on Proposed LDR Amendments: Road
Names; Civic and Social Membership Clubs; Group
Homes and ALFs in the MED District; CR510 East
Corridor Entry Features (Legislative)
(memorandum dated October 17, 2000) 189-232
B. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS
1. Request from Mr. & Mrs. Vernon Slavens to
Speak Regarding Proposed Retention Pond
Behind Their Property in Wauregan Subdivision
(memorandum dated October 9, 2000) 233-236
2. Request from Nancy B. Wood to Discuss the
Airport and the Need for County Representation
at the Ad Hoc Committee Meetings
(letter dated October 18, 2000) 237-238
3. Request from Frank Zorc to Discuss "County Health
Department records on residents living with no water
supply or sewer service in the Wabasso area"
(memorandum dated October 17, 2000) 239
BK 1 15 PG 558
r
BACKUP
9. _ PUBLIC ITEMS (cont'd.): PAGES
C. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS
1. Public Hearing scheduled for November 7, 2000 to
hear public comments on the establishment of a
Municipal Service Benefit Unit for the East Gifford
Watershed Area
(memorandum dated September 20, 2000) 240
2. Public Hearing scheduled for November 7, 2000:
Westgate Colony Sewer Assessment, Resolution III
(memorandum dated October 17, 2000) 241
3. Public Hearings scheduled for November 7, 2000:
a) Yukon Land Corporation and Daniel N.
Spencer's request to amend the Compre-
hensive Plan to redesignate 1180 acres
located at the northeast comer of 90th Ave.
and 85h St. from F, Rural Residential (up to
1 unit/acre), to L-1, Low -Density Residen-
tial- / (up to 3 units/acre); and to rezone
those ±180 acres from A-1, Agricultural
District (up to 1 unit/5 acres), to RS -3,
Single -Family Residential District (up to 3
units/acre) (Legislative)
b) Red Stick Golf Club, Inc.'s request to amend
Figure 4.13 of the Transportation Element of
the Comprehensive Plan to delete 81S` Street,
between 58th Ave. and Old Dixie Highway
(Legislative)
C) County -initiated request to amend the text of the
Capital Improvements Element Comprehensive
Plan (Legislative)
e) County -initiated request to amend the text of the
Future Land Use Element, the Recreation and
Open Space Element, the jCoastal Management
Element, the Sanitary Sewer Sub -Element, and the
Potable Water Sub -Element of the Comprehensive
Plan (Legislative)
f) Request for authorization for the community deve-
lopment director to make application -for a commu-
nity development block grant in the economic deve-
lopment category (Legislative)
BACKUP
9. PUBLIC ITEMS (cont'd.): PAGES
C. —PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS
3. (cont'd.):
g) Purchase of the Simmons and Andre Parcels of
the Oyster Bar Salt Marsh LAAC Site under the
County Environmental Lands Program (Legislative)
h) Proposed LDR Amendments: Rooster Limitations;
Road Names; Civic and Social Membership Clubs;
Group Homes and ALFs; CR 510 East Corridor
Entry Features (Legislative)
4. Public Hearings scheduled for November 14, 2000:
County initiated request to amend the Comprehensive
Plan to:
a) redesignate ±5,361 acres located northwest of the
intersection of I-95 and CR512, south of the C-54
Canal, and east of Babcock Street, from AG -1,
Agricultural -1 (up to 1 unit/5 acres), and AG -2,
Agricultural -2, (up to 1 unit/10 acres), to C-1,
Publicly Owned Conservation -1 (zero density),
and rezone those ±5,361 acres from A-1, Agricul-
tural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres), and A-2, Agri-
cultural District (up to 1 unit/10 acres), to Con -1,
Public Lands Conservation District (zero density);
b) redesignate ±3,288 acres located at the southeast
corner of 130`h Ave. and 77`h St. from AG -2, Agri-
cultural -2 (up to 1 unit/10 acres), to C-1, Publicly
Owned Conservation -1 (zero density), and rezone
those ±3,288 acres from A-2, Agricultural District
(up to 1 unit/10 acres), to Con -1, Public Lands
Conservation District (zero density);
C) redesignate ±44.4 acres located on the west side of
Jungle Trail, north of Windsor, from L-1, Low -
Density Residential -1 (up to 3 units/acre), to C-1,
Publicly Owned Conservation -1 (zero density), and
rezone those ±44.4 acres from A-1, Agricultural
District (up to 1 unit/5 acres), to Con -1, Public Lands
Conservation District (zero density); and
r
9. _ PUBLIC ITEMS (cont'd.):
C. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS
4. (cont'd.):
d) redesignate ±20 acres located on the west side of
BACKUP
PAGES
58'' Ave., approximately an eighth of a mile south of
49'' St., from L-2, Low -Density Residential -2 (up to
6 units/acre), to C-1, Publicly Owned Conservation -1
(zero density), and rezone those t20 acres from RS -3,
Single -Family, Residential District -(up to 3 units/acre),
to Con -1, Public Lands Conservation District (zero
density). (Legislative)
5. Minor J. Platt Jr.'s Request for Special Exception Use
Approval for an Outdoor Gun Range on a 25 Acre Parcel
(Quasi -Judicial)
(memorandum dated October 16, 2000) 242-244
10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS
None
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS
A. Community Development
1. Request to Modify the County's Local Jobs Grant
Program
(memorandum dated October 16, 2000) 245-261
B. Emergency Services
Approval of Benefit Changes in the Vero Beach Firefighters
Pension Fund Recommended by the Firefighters Pension Board
(memorandum dated October 13, 2000) 262-272
C. General Services
Adoption of Resolution Authorizing the Lease of
2525 St. Lucie Avenue (former HRS building), Vero
Beach, Florida to the Coalition for the Homeless of
Indian River County Florida, Inc. and Approval of
the Proposed Lease
(memorandum dated October 18, 2000)
D. Leisure Services
None
E. Office of Management and Budget
None - -
273-298
0
I
BACtiI'Y
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS (cont'd.): PAGES
F. `Personnel
Guardian Voluntary Dental Insurance
(memorandum dated October 11, 2000) 299-309
G. Public Works
1. Right -of -Way Acquisition / 33Td Street at Oak
Chase Subdivision, Oak Chase Development,
L.L.0
(memorandum dated October 9, 2000) 310-313
2. Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND)
Jungle Trail Shoreline Stabilization
(memorandum dated October 11, 2000) 314-354
3. 43`d Avenue Widening and Drainage Improvements
Developer's Agreement with Unity Center
(memorandum dated October 18, 2000) 355-362
H. Utilities
Interlocal Agreement Between the City of Fellsmere and
Indian River County for the Provision of Emergency Water
Supply Services
(memorandum dated October 12, 2000) 363-366
I. Human Services
None
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY
None
13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS
A. Chairman Fran B. Adams
B. Vice Chairman Caroline D. Ginn
C. Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht
F,
13. _ COMMISSIONERS ITEMS (cont'd.l:
D. Commissioner Ruth Stanbridge
E. Commissioner John W. Tippin
14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS/BOARDS
A. Emergengy Services District
None
B. Solid Waste Disposal District
None
C. Environmental Control Board
None
15. ADJOURNMENT
BACKUP
PAGES
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 x1223 at least 48 hours in advance of
meeting.
Indian River County WebSite: http://bccl.co.indian-river.fl.us
Full agenda back-up material is available for review in the Board of County Commission Office,
Indian River County Main Library, IRC Courthouse Law Library, and North County Library
Meeting may be broadcast live on AT & T Cable Channel 13
Rebroadcast continuously Thursday 1:00 p.m. until Friday morning and Saturday 12:00 noon until
5:00 p.m.
BK 1 15 PG 563
0
INDEX TO MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OCTOBER 24, 2000
1. CALL TO ORDER ............................................... -1-
2. INVOCATION .................................................. -1-
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ...................................... .2-
4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA ................................... .2-
5. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS ........................ .3-
A. Proclamation Honoring Eldon Auker, the Last Living Player to Have Faced
BabeRuth ................................................ .3-
B. Keep Indian River Beautiful Trophy and $5,000 Award ............... .4-
6.A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - OCTOBER 3, 2000 ..................... .5-
6.B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - OCTOBER 10, 2000 .................... .5-
7. CONSENT AGENDA ............................................ .5-
7.A. List of Warrants ............................................ .5 -
OCTOBER 24, 2000 BK 1 1 5 PG 5 6 4
-1-
J
r
7.B. Clerk of Court Constitutional Officers Financial Report for FY Ending
September 30, 2000 ........................................ .15-
7.C. Payments to Vendors of Court -Related Costs .................... .18-
7.D. Division of Forestry, Annual Fire Control Report ................ .20-
7.E. Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver - Earring Point Tower - Atlantic
Coast Tower of Florida - Tax Parcel No. 11-32-39-00000-0010-00001.0
........................................................ .22-
7.F. Bid #3020 - Zinc Orthophosphate - CalciQuest, Inc. (Utilities Department)
........................................................ .24-
7.G. Bid #3021 - Sidewalk Construction - PAVCO Construction (Road and
Bridge Division) .......................................... .26-
7.11. Bid #3018 - Catch Basins & Stormwater Inlets - American Concrete
Industries (Road and Bridge Division) ........................ .28-
7.I. Bid #3017 - Type S -III Asphalt Concrete - Ranger Construction Industries
(Road and Bridge Division) ................................. .30-
7.J. Florida Healthy Kids Program - Request For State Support ........ .32-
9.A.1. PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTION 2000-131 CONFIRMING THE SPECIAL
ASSESSMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH A WATER MAIN EXTENSION
TO THE SEBASTIAN AREA PHASE III -A - PROJECT UW -97 -16 -DS .. -34-
ocToV'D`xjap52OA° 5 6 5
-2-
U
•
9.A.2. PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE 2000-034 AMENDING THE ZONING
ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM RS -3 TO
PD FOR APPROXIMATELY 297 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY
LOCATED BETWEEN 13TH STREET SW ON THE NORTH, 17TH STREET
SW ON THE SOUTH, 27TH AVENUE ON THE EAST, AND 43RD AVENUE
ON THE WEST AND CONCEPTUAL PD PLAN APPROVAL FOR
DEVELOPMENT (THE GRALIA GROUP - THE COLONY) .......... .41-
9.A.3. PUBLIC HEARING - ROOSTER REGULATIONS - FIRST HEARING ON
PROPOSED LDR AMENDMENT ................................ .67-
9.A.4. PUBLIC HEARING - (1) ROAD NAMES; (2) CIVIC AND SOCIAL
MEMBERSHIP CLUBS; (3) GROUP HOMES AND ALFS IN THE MED
DISTRICT; (4) CR -510 EAST CORRIDOR ENTRY FEATURES - FIRST
HEARING ON PROPOSED LDR AMENDMENTS .................. .77-
9.13.1. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS - MR. AND MRS. VERNON SLAVENS -
DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED RETENTION POND BEHIND
THEIR PROPERTY IN WAUREGAN SUBDIVISION (EAST ROSELAND
STORMWATER).............................................. .85-
9.13.2. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS - NANCY B. WOOD - DISCUSSION
REGARDING THE AIRPORT AND THE NEED FOR COUNTY
REPRESENTATION AT THE AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETINGS -85-
OCTOBER 24 2000 BK 1 15 PG 566
-3-
•
9.13.3. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS - FRANK ZORC - DISCUSSION REGARDING
"COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT RECORDS ON RESIDENTS LIVING
WITH NO WATER SUPPLY OR SEWER SERVICE IN THE WABASSO
AREA" ....................................................... .87-
9.C. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS ........................................ .89-
1. SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 7, 2000
........................................................ .89 -
Public Comments on the Establishment of a Municipal Service Benefit
Unit for the East Gifford Watershed Area
........................................................ .89 -
SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 7, 2000 ...... .89 -
Westgate Colony Sewer Assessment, Resolution III .............. .89 -
SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 7, 2000 ...... .90 -
Yukon Land Corporation and Daniel N. Spencer - Request to Amend the
Comprehensive Plan to Redesignate ± 180 Acres Located at the Northeast
Corner of 90' Avenue and 85' Street from F, Rural Residential, to L-1,
Low -Density Residential -1; and to Rezone Those ± 180 Acres from A-1,
Agricultural District, to RS -3, Single -Family Residential District
(Legislative) ............................................. .90 -
Red Stick Golf Club, Inc. - Request to Amend Figure 4.13 of the Transportation
Element of the Comprehensive Plan to Delete 8 V Street, Between 58`''
Avenue and Old Dixie Highway (Legislative)
COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST TO AMEND THE TEXT OF THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ................ .90-
ocToBDET ft o�o567
-a-
•
County -Initiated Request to Amend the Text of the Future Land Use Element, the
Recreation and Open Space Element, the Coastal Management Element,
the Sanitary Sewer Sub -Element, and the Potable Water Sub -Element of
the Comprehensive Plan (Legislative) ......................... .91 -
Request for Authorization for the Community Development Director to Make
Application for a Community Development Block Grant in the Economic
Development Category (Legislative)
PURCHASE OF THE SIMMONS AND ANDRE PARCELS OF THE OYSTER BAR
SALT MARSH LAAO SITE UNDER THE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LANDS
PROGRAM (LEGISLATIVE) ................................... .91 -
Proposed LDR Amendments: Rooster Limitation; Road Names; Civic and Social
Membership Clubs; Group Homes and ALFs; CR -510 East Corridor Entry
Features (Legislative) ...................................... .91 -
SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 14, 2000 ..... .91 -
Redesignate ±5,361 Acres Located Northwest of the Intersection of 1-95 and CR -
512, South of the C-54 Canal, and East of Babcock Street, from AG -1,
Agricultural -1 and AG -2, Agricultural -2, to C-1, Publicly Owned
Conservation -1, and to Rezone Those ±5,361 Acres from A-1, Agricultural
District and A-2 Agricultural District to Con -1, Public Lands Conservation
District................................................. .91 -
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-5-
s
•
Redesignate ±3,288 Acres Located at the Southeast Corner of 130`' Avenue and
77' Street from AG -2, Agricultural -2 to C-1, Publicly Owned
Conservation -1 and to Rezone those ±3,288 Acres from A-2, Agricultural
District, to Con -1, Public Lands Conservation District ............ .92 -
Redesignate ±44.4 Acres Located on the West Side of Jungle Trail, North of
Windsor, from L-1, Low -Density Residential -1, to C-1, Publicly Owned
Conservation -1, and to Rezone Those ±44.4 Acres from A-1, Agricultural
District, to Con -1, Public Lands Conservation District ............ .92 -
Redesignate ±20 Acres Located on the West Side of 58th Avenue, approximately
1/8th of a mile South of 49' Street, from L-2, Low -Density Residential -2,
to C-1, Publicly Owned Conservation -1, and to Rezone Those ±20 Acres
from RS -3, Single -Family Residential District, to Con -1, Public Lands
Conservation District (Legislative) ........................... .92 -
SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 14, 2000 ..... .92 -
Minor J. Platt, Jr. - Request for Special Exception Use Approval for an
Outdoor Gun Range on a 25 -Acres Parcel (Quasi -Judicial) ........ .92-
I I.A. COUNTY LOCAL JOBS GRANT PROGRAM - REQUEST TO MODIFY
............................................................. .95-
11.B. VERO BEACH FIREFIGHTERS PENSION FUND - APPROVAL OF
BENEFIT CHANGES RECOMMENDED BY THE FIREFIGHTERS PENSION
BOARD..................................................... . 100-
0 6 0
I I.C. RESOLUTION 2000-132 PURSUANT TO SECTION 125.38, FLORIDA
STATUTES (2000) AUTHORIZING A THIRTY-YEAR LEASE OF REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2525 ST. LUCIE AVENUE, VERO BEACH,
FLORIDA, TO THE COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, INC. AND APPROVAL OF LEASE ..................... .101-
I I .F. GUARDIAN VOLUNTARY DENTAL INSURANCE ................ .107-
I I.G.1. RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION - 33RDSTREET AT OAK CHASE
SUBDIVISION - OAK CHASE DEVELOPMENT, LLC ........ .109-
11.G.2. FLORIDA INLAND NAVIGATION DISTRICT (FIND) - JUNGLE
TRAIL SHORELINE STABILIZATION - PROJECT AGREEMENT IR -
00 -31 .................................................. .110-
I I.G.3. 43RD AVENUE WIDENING AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS -
UNITY CENTER DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT - PROJECT 9601
....................................................... .112-
I I.H. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF FELLSMERE FOR
PROVISION OF EMERGENCY WATER SUPPLY SERVICES ........ .114-
13.A. CHAIRMAN FRAN B. ADAMS - ANNUAL EVALUATION OF COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR JAMES E. CHANDLER ....................... .115 -
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-7-
'A
I
13.13. VICE CHAIRMAN CAROLINE D. GINN - HIGH SPEED GROUND
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM - PROPOSED ARTICLE X, SECTION 19 OF
FLORIDA CONSTITUTION
............................................................ .116-
13.E. COMMISSIONER JOHN W. TIPPIN - TREASURE COAST COUNCIL OF
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS - ANNUAL MEETING TO BE HELD
NOVEMBER 9, 2000 AT DISNEY'S VERO BEACH RESORT ....... .118-
14.A. EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT ............................ .120-
14.13. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT ........................... .120-
14.C. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL BOARD ......................... .120 -
OCTOBER 24 200%
8K 1 19 PG 57 1
October 24, 2000
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 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on
Tuesday, October 24, 2000, at 9:00 a.m. Present were Fran B. Adams, Chairman; Caroline
D. Ginn, Vice Chairman; Kenneth R. Macht; John W. Tippin; and Ruth Stanbridge. Also
present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney;
and Patricia "PJ" Jones, Deputy Clerk.
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Adams called the meeting to order.
2. INVOCATION
Charlie Cox of the VFW delivered the Invocation.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-1-
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chairman Adams led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Chairman Adams requested 6 changes to today's Agenda:
1. Add Item 7.J., Florida Healthy Kids Program, Request for State Support.
2. Delete Item 9.A.4. as to Civic and Social Membership Clubs and Group
Homes and ALFs in the MED District only.
3. Defer Item 9.13.1., Mr. and Mrs. Vernon Slavens - Discussion Regarding
Proposed Retention Pond Behind Their Property in Wauregan Subdivision
(East Roseland Stormwater) to November 7, 2000.
4. Add Item 13.A., Annual Evaluation of County Administrator James E.
Chandler.
5. Add Item 13.B., High Speed Ground Transportation System - Proposed
Article X, Section 19 of Florida Constitution.
6. Add Item 13.E., Treasure Coast Council of Local Governments Annual
Meeting To Be Held November 9, 2000 at Disney's Vero Beach Resort.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Ginn, SECONDED
by Commissioner Stanbridge, the Board
unanimously made the above changes to the
Agenda.
0Cr97NVpg93
0 0f
•
-'%
5. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. PROCLAMATIONHONORING ELDONA UKER. THE LAST LIVING PLAYER TO
HAVE FACED BABE RUTH
The Chairman presented the following Proclamation to Mr. Auker:
PROCLAMATION
HONORING ELDEN AUKER THE LAST LIVING
PLAYER TO HAVE FACED BABE RUTH
WHEREAS, Eldon Auker has resided in Indian River County since 1974. In 1933, as
a rookie with the Detroit Tigers, he made his first ever trip to the Big Apple and Yankee
Stadium, where he pitched to the late, great Babe Ruth; and
WHEREAS, Eldon Auker remains today the last living player to have pitched to Babe
Ruth, and will be honored by many famous people at a Legends Goff and Banquet Event
at Dodgertown In Vero Beach on November 3id and 4'", 2000; and
WHEREAS, Eldon Auker pitched for the Detroit Tigers In the 1934 and 1935 World
Series, and his best season was in 1935 where his 18 win, 7 loss percentage was the
American League Best; and
WHEREAS, he spent the 1939 season with the Boston Red Sox, where he roomed
with the great Jimmy Foxx and saw the major league debut of a rookie named Ted Williams;
and
WHEREAS, Eldon Auker ended his ten-year career In 1942, pitching his final three
seasons with the St. Louis Browns, where he was voted into the Team's Hall of Fame. He
compiled a career recons of 130 wins and 101 losses, including 126 complete games; and
WHEREAS, in 1969, former Kansas State University President James McCain called
Eldon Auker the Greatest Athlete in Kansas State History and College Humor Magazine
picked him for All American In football, as quarterback: in basketball, as a guard; and
baseball where he pitched.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the Board recognizes the
accomplishments of Eldon Auker and honors him on his Se Birthday, not just as a great
pitcher, but as an outstanding human being.
Adopted this 20 day of October, 2000.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-3-
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Fran B. Adams, Chairman
•
Eldon Auker thanked the Board and stated that a New York fellow wrote the
information contained in the Proclamation which is incorrect. He has 2 friends still alive
who also pitched to Babe Ruth. The fundraiser is being held at Dodger Pines, not
Dodgertown, and is a fundraiser for Lou Gehrig's disease. Lou Gehrig was very good friend
of his. In 1939, when he was with the Red Sox, he saw Lou Gehrig standing by a post and
slapped his shoulder. Lou fell and asked him not to do that again. He said he did not have
enough strength to hit a ball into the outfield but did not know what was wrong with him.
He then went to the Mayo Clinic and found out about this disease. Mr. Auker continued
that the first time he played at Yankee Stadium in New York in 1933, the coach sent him in
and the first pitch he threw was to Babe Ruth. He struck out Babe Ruth on 4 pitches and
then struck out Lou Gehrig who was the next hitter. He also stated that he was one of only
2 underhanded pitchers in the major leagues and Lou Gehrig commented that the experience
was the "first time a damn woman struck me out".
Mr. Auker stated that he was one ofthe highest paid ballplayers in his time at $27,500
per year but now hitters make that much each time they go to bat.
A KEEP INDIANRIVER BEAUTIFUL TROPHYAND $5, 000 AWARD
Commissioner Stanbridge displayed an award received from Keep Florida Beautiful
and presented to Keep Indian River Beautiful for having the most volunteers at the beach
cleanup this year. KIRB had 1600 volunteers. The award will remain in Indian River
County until next year when, hopefully, KIRB will again win it. There is also a $5,000
award presented to KIRB at the same time.
=-
1 11111, 0- ���
6.A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - OCTOBER 3, 2000
The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or additions to the Minutes of the
Regular Meeting of October 3, 2000. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Tippin,
SECONDED by Commissioner Stanbridge, the
Board unanimously approved the Minutes of the
Regular Meeting of October 3, 2000, as written.
6.B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - OCTOBER 10, 2000
The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or additions to the Minutes of the
Regular Meeting of October 10, 2000. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Tippin,
SECONDED by Commissioner Stanbridge, the
Board unanimously approved the Minutes of the
Regular Meeting of October 10, 2000, as written.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
7.A. LIST OF WARRANTS
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 12, 2000:
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-s-
BK I IS PG 576
I
TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DATE: OCTOBER 12, 2000
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WARRANTS
FROM: EDWIN M. FRY, JR., FINANCE DIRECTOR
In compliance with Chapter 136.06, Florida Statutes, all wamdnts 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 October 5, 2000 to October 12, 2000.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously approved the list of Warrants as issued
by the Clerk to the Board for October 5, 2000
through October 12, 2000, as recommended by staff.
CHECK
NAME
CHECK
CHECK
NUMBER
DATE
AMOUNT
0020787
AETNA LIFE INSURANCE AND
2000-10-05
1,487.21
0020788
FLORIDA RETIREMENT SYSTEM
2000-10-05
386,147.54
0020789
THE GUARDIAN
2000-10-05
9,566.88
0020790
GIFFORD GROVES, LTD
2000-10-06
430.00
0020791
KRUCZKIEWICZ, LORIANE
2000-10-11
138.50
0020792
BUREAU FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFOR
2000-10-11
115.38
0020793
VELASQUEZ, MERIDA
2000-10-11
200.00
0020794
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
2000-10-11
225.00
0020795
IRS - ACS
2000-10-11
50.00
0020796
CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE
2000-10-11
664.73
0020797
VERO BEACH FIREFIGHTERS ASSOC.
2000-10-11
1,935.00
0020798
INDIAN RIVER FEDERAL CREDIT
2000-10-11
79,075.05
0020799
COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT
2000-10-11
213.83
0020800
NACO/SOUTHEAST
2000-10-11
8,342.18
0020801
SALEM TRUST COMPANY
2000-10-11
421.05
0020802
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
2000-10-11
.286.51
0020803
WISCONSIN SUPPORT COLLECTIONS
2000-10-11
23.08
0020804
FL SDU
2000-10-11
6,367.90
0020805
AMERICAN DENTAL PLAN (FLORIDA)
2000-10-11
1,019.84
0020806
AMERICAN FAMILY LIFE ASSURANCE
2000-10-11
162.86
0290669
A A FIRE EQUIPMENT, INC
2000-10-12
370.50
0290670
ACE PLUMBING, INC
2000-10-12
273.94
0290671
ACTION TRANSMISftON AND
2000-10-12
161.45
0290672
APPLE MACHINE & SUPPLY CO
2000-10-12
739.85
0290673
AT YOUR SERVICE
2000-10-12
56.25
•
CHECK
NAME
CHECK
CHECK
NUMBER
DATE
AMOUNT
0290674
AUTO SUPPLY CO OF VERO BEACH,
2000-10-12
844.52
0290675
ATLANTIC REPORTING
2000-10-12
119.20
0290676
ABS PUMPS, INC
2000-10-12
200.00
0290677
ALL FLORIDA COFFEE & BOTTLED
2000-10-12
59.90
0290678
A A ELECTRIC BE, INC
2000-10-12
26.02
0290679
A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES
2000-10-12
547.76
0290680
A T & T
2000-10-12
188.31
0290681
ALL COUNTY MOWER & EQUIP CO
2000-10-12
9.38
0290682
ARCH
2000-10-12
207.37
0290683
AMERISYS, INC
2000-10-12
462.85
0290684
A T & T
2000-10-12
79.87
0290685
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL
2000-10-12
400.00
0290686
A T & T MEDIA SERVICES
2000-10-12
75.00
0290687
AKE, RICHARD -CLERK OF CIRCUIT
2000-10-12
18.00
0290688
ALL CLEAR LOCATING SERVICES
2000-10-12
197.00
0290689
ADVANCED COMMERCIAL DESIGNS
2000-10-12
1,002.00
0290690
BAKER DISTRIBUTING CO
2000-10-12
553.25
0290691
BARTON, JEFFREY K -CLERK
2000-10-12
1,268.50
0290692
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
2000-10-12
9,333.49
0290693
BLACKHAWK QUARRY COMPANY
2000-10-12
717.80
0290694
BRISTER SIGNS CO
2000-10-12
90.00
0290695
BARTON, JEFFREY K- CLERK
2000-10-12
42,972.57
0290696
BERGGREN EQUIPMENT CO, INC
2000-10-12
163.28
0290697
BARTON, JEFFREY K
2000-10-12
2,277.90
0290698
BRAD SMITH ASSOCIATES, INC
2000-10-12
14,221.75
0290699
BAKER & TAYLOR INC
2000-10-12
1,414.07
0290700
BRODART CO
2000-10-12
1,340.22
0290701
BOYNTON PUMP & IRRIGATION
2000-10-12
46.40
0290702
BREVARD BOILER CO
2000-10-12
374.10
0290703
BELLSOUTH MOBILITY
2000-10-12
45.26
0290704
BOBCAT OF ORLANDO
2000-10-12
188.62
0290705
BLACK DIAMOND
2000-10-12
280.00
0290706
BAKER, PAMELA A
2000-10-12
150.00
0290707
BRYANT, JAMES O JR
2000-10-12
240.00
0290708
B & S SOD INC
2000-10-12
150.00
0290709
BLACKMON, SHANITA
2000-10-12
41.20
0290710
BAILLARGEON, LEE
2000-10-12
915.16
0290711
BOND, EDWIN
2000-10-12
107.00
0290712
BRADFORD ELECTRIC
2000-10-12
97.00
0290713
BOOK4GOLF.COM INC
2000-10-12
2,238.00
0290714
BELLSOUTH
2000-10-12
246.16
0290715
BEAZER HOMES CORP
2000-10-12
1,500.00
0290716
CALLAWAY & PRICE, INC
2000-10-12
4,500.00
0290717
CAMP, DRESSER & MCKEE, INC
2000-30-12
22,590.89
0290718
-COASTLINE EQUIPMENT CO., INC
2000-10-12
172.96
0290719
CITRUS MOTEL
2000-10-12
120.00
0290720
CLEMENTS PEST CONTROL
2000-10-12
782.50
0290721
COLD AIR DISTRIBUTORS
2000-10-12
9.45
0290722
COMMUNICATIONS INT'L INC
2000-10-12
4,823.17
0290723
CORBIN, SHIRLEY E
2000-10-12
609.00
0290724
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
2000-10-12
24,906.60
OCTOBER 24, 2000
09115 PG 578
•
CHECK
NAME
CHECK
CHECK
NUMBER
DATE
AMOUNT
0290725 CHUCK'S NEWS STAND
2000-10-12
0290726
COASTAL REFINING & MARKETING
2000-10-12
612.00
0290727
CLINIC PHARMACY
19,700.81
0290728
CLARKE, DOROTHEA
2000-10-12
628.38
0290729
CARTER & VERpLANCg
2000-10-12
23.49
0290730
CUSTOM CARRIAGES, INC
2000-10-12
2000-10-12
0290731
CINDY'S PET CENTER INC
2000-10-12
2000-10-12
100.00
0290732 CENTER FOR EMOTIONAL AND
2000-10-12
25.98
0290733 COPYCO, LIBERTY DIV OF
2000-10-12
285.00
0290734 C H C PRINTING
2000-10-12
60.37
2,935.00
0290735 CLARK EQUIPMENT CO
2000-10-12
35,644.00
0290736 CREATIVE CHOICE
2000-10-12
500.00
0290737 CONVENIENCE CONCEPTS INC
2000-10-12
0290738 DAILY COURIER SERVICE
2000-10-12
500.00
0290739 DAVES SPORTING GOODS
2000-10-12
630.00
0290740 DELTA SUPPLY CO
2000-10-12
198.80
9.21
0290741
DEPENDABLE DODGE, INC
2000-10-12
646.64
0290742
DICKERSON-FLORIDA, INC
2000-10-12
275.03
0290743
DOCTOR'S CLINIC
2000-10-12
1,159.00
0290744
DON SMITH'S PAINT STORE, INC
2000-10-12
656.46
0290745
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
2000-10-12
500.00
0290746
DAVIDSON TITLES, INC
2000-10-12
366.66
0290747
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
2000-10-12
250.00
0290748
DARBY PRINTING CO
2000-10-12
2,460.00
0290749
DANIEL ELECTRIC
2000-10-12
30.00
0290750
DADE PAPER COMPANY
2000-10-12
199.55
0290751
DOWNTOWN PRODUCE INC
2000-10-12
105.92
0290752
DATABASE TECHNOLOGIES INC
2000-10-12
26.25
0290753
DILLARD, CABBIE
2000-10-12
16.73
0290754
DOCTORS' CLINIC
2000-10-12
1,392.00
0290755
DOLPHIN DATA PRODUCTS INC
2000-10-12
1,383.50
0290756
DEWEESE, GERALD
2000-10-12
39.00
0290757
E -Z BREW COFFEE SERVICE, INC
2000-10-12
12.50
0290758
ERRETT, NANCY
2000-10-12
210.73
0290759
EMERGENCY MEDICINE ASSOCIATES
2000-10-12
300.00
0290760
EXCHANGE CLUB CASTLE
2000-10-12
1,347.51
0290761
ELECTRONIC BUSINESS AND
2000-10-12
1,850.00
0290762
ENLOW, CAMERON
2000-10-12
250.00
0290763
FGFOA
2000-10-12
110.00
0290764
FEDEX
2000-10-12
76.74
0290765
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY
2000-10-12
350.00
0290766
FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF
2000-10-12
360.00
0290767
FLORIDA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION
2000-10-12
15.00
0290768
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
2000-10-12
9,464.77
0290769
FLORIDA WATER & POLLUTION
2000-10-12
20.00
0290770
FLINN, SHEILA I
2000-10-12
528.50
0290771
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
2000-10-12
500.00
0290772
FLORIDA TRANSCOR, INC
2000-10-12
87,95
0290773
FALZONE, KATHY
2000-10-12
72.26
0290774
FACTICON, INC
2000-10-12
909.50
0290775
FLORIDA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
2000-10-12
50.00
0290776
FPL
2000-10-12
199.00
0290777
FGFOA
2000-10-12
20.00
0290778
FIRSTLAB =+.-
2000-10-12
73.-00
0290779
FULLER, APRIL L
2000-10-12
19.31
ocTo�� 7 9
-8-
•
OCTOBER 24, 2000
In
•
CHECK
NAME
CHECK
CHECK
NUMBER
DATE
AMOUNT
0290780
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE
2000-10-12
0290781
GALE GROUP, THE
2000-10-12
88.11
0290782
GOODKNIGHT LAWN EQUIPMENT, INC
2000-10-12
841.86
0290783
GENTILE, MICHELLE
2000-10-12
392.12
0290784
GIFFORD COMMUNITY CENTER
2000-10-12
20.30
0290785
GOLLNICK, PEGGY
2000-10-12
3,973.30
0290786
GALE INSULATION
2000-10-12
784.00
30.00
0290787
GARCIA, ARTURO L
2000-10-12
500.00
0290788
G K ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
2000-10-12
170.00
0290789
HARRIS SANITATION, INC
2000-10-12
523.38
0290790
HARRISON COMPANY, THE
2000-10-12
87.70
0290791
HARRISON UNIFORMS
2000-10-12
67.50
0290792
HBS, INC
2000-10-12
1,175.00
0290793
HEINTZELMANS TRUCK CENTER
2000-10-12
23,500.00
0290794
HUMANE SOCIETY OF VERO BEACH
2000-10-12
16,830.00
0290795
HUNTER AUTO SUPPLIES
2000-10-12
57.12
0290796
HELD, PATRICIA BARGO
2000-10-12
38.50
0290797
HOLIDAY INN WEST OCALA
2000-10-12
46.00
0290798
HACH COMPANY
2000-10-12
78.35
0290799
HORIZON NURSERY
2000-10-12
270.00
0290800
HEALTHSOUTH TREASURE COAST
2000-10-12
640.80
0290801
HOMETOWN PET CARE CENTER
2000-10-12
270.25
0290802
HOLMES, IDA
2000-10-12
121.80
0290803
HANSEN, SUSAN
2000-10-12
174.00
0290804
HUNTER, TAMIKA
2000-10-12
41.20
0290805
HOLMES, EDWARD
2000-10-12
240.00
0290806
HARRIS, KAREN
2000-10-12
36.05
0290807
HARVARD LAW REVIEW ASSOCIATION
2000-10-12
12.00
0290808
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
2000-10-12
75.00
0290809
INDIAN RIVER BATTERY, INC
2000-10-12
361.00
0290810
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITY
2000-10-12
114.24
0290811
INDIAN RIVER FARMS WATER
2000-10-12
200.00
0290812
INDIAN RIVER OXYGEN, INC
2000-10-12
491.58
0290813
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SCHOOL
2000-10-12
1,408.75
0290814
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
2000-10-12
150.00
0290815
IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS
2000-10-12
532.38
0290816
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HEALTHY
2000-10-12
9,081.45
0290817
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ALLIANCE
2000-10-12
994.12
0290818
INFO LINE
2000-10-12
287.50
0290819
IRRIGATION CONSULTANTS UNLIMIT
2000-10-12
485.00
0290820
JUDICIAL & ADMINISTRATIVE
2000-10-12
529.00
0290821
JANITORIAL DEPOT OF AMERICA
2000-10-12
1,608.49
0290822
JOHNSON CONTROLS INC
2000-10-12
492.48
0290823
JACKSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
2000-10-12
165.34
0290824
JACKSON, CARLOS
2000-10-12
51.50
0290825
JUDAH, HUSTON
2000-10-12
180.25
0290826
JUNGINGER, GEAN CARY, JR
2000-10-12
135.00
0290827
JEFFERSON, MICHALENE
2000-10-12
219.56
0290828
KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES, INC
2000-10-12
6,778.44
0290829
KELLY TRACTOR CO
2000-10-12
360.83
0290830
KURTZ, ERIC C MD
2000-10-12
225.00
0290831
K & M ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC
2000-10-12
178.40
0290832
KNOWLES, CYRIL
2000-10-12
1,039.04
OCTOBER 24, 2000
In
•
CHECK
NAME
CHECK
CHECK
NUMBER.
DATE
AMOUNT
0290833
LENGEMANN OF FLORIDA, INC
2000-10-12
84.46
0290834
LEARY INCORPORATED
2000-10-12
1,335.60
0290835
LOWE'S COMPANIES, INC.
2000-10-12
1,259.86
0290836
LIBRARY CORP, THE
2000-10-12
-• 2,995.00
0290837
L B SMITH, INC
2000-10-12
308.07
0290838
LIVE OAR ANIMAL HOSPITAL
2000-10-12
51.00
0290839
LIGHT SOURCE BUSINESS SYSTEMS
2000-10-12
1,063.92
0290840
LFI VERO BEACH, INC
2000-10-12
3,487.61
0290841
LESCO, INC
2000-10-12
382.84
0290842
LICARI, LINDA
2000-10-12
25.69
0290843
LANGSTON, BESS, BOLTON,ZNOSKO
2000-10-12
590.34
0290844
LEXIS LAW PUBLISHING
2000-10-12
119.16
0290845
LUNA, JORGE
2000-10-12
164.80
0290846
LONGARDNER, SHARON A
2000-10-12
65.00
0290847
LUNA, JUVENAL
2000-10-12
131.32
0290848
LEGENDARY CONSTRUCTION
2000-10-12
500.00
0290849
LACE FOOD SERVICE
2000-10-12
6,433.00
0290850
LEBLANC, AMY
2000-10-12
256.13
0290851
LUI MD, ALEC
2000-10-12
200.00
0290852
MAXWELL PLUMBING, INC
2000-10-12
150.84
0290853
MARTIN'S LAMAR UNIFORMS
2000-10-12
3,381.10
0290854
MEDICAL RECORD SERVICES, INC
2000-10-12
319.28
0290855
MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANY
2000-10-12
183.79
0290856
MULLER, MINTZ, KORNREICH,
2000-10-12
6,325.93
0290857
MARTIN COUNTY PETROLEUM
2000-10-12
145.34
0290858
MENZ, NICHOLE
2000-10-12
233.25
0290859
MR BOB PORTABLE TOILET
2000-10-12
382.60
0290860
MGB CONSTRUCTION INC
2000-10-12
1,000.00
0290861
MOSS, ROGER
2000-10-12
38.62
0290862
MEZZINA, PATRICIA
2000-10-12
1,418.16
0290863
MOSS, MARY
2000-10-12
36.05
0290864
MUSCO SPORTS LIGHTING, INC
2000-10-12
195,090.30
0290865
OLGA MAS
2000-10-12
62.50
0290866
MERCURI, DEBRA
2000-10-12
59.74
0290867
MEDICAL SERVICES COMPANY, INC
2000-10-12
45.00
0290868
MARTIN, CRISTI
2000-10-12
126.00
0290869
MAXWELL, KIMBERLY
2000-10-12
14.16
0290870
MANUFACTURERS NEWS
2000-10-12
154.00
0290871
NEW HORIZONS OF THE TREASURE
2000-10-12
37,142.32
0290872
NU CO 2, INC
2000-10-12
86.23
0290873
NAPIER, WILLIAM MATT
2000-10-12
18.85
0290874
NICHOLS DR, GEORGE
2000-10-12
750.00
0290875
NEC BUSINESS NETWORK SOLUTIONS
2000-10-12
3,571.00
0290876
NICHOLS, EVELYN
2000-10-12
95.33
0290877
OSCEOLA MEDICAL SUPPLY
2000-10-12
5.00
0290878
ORLANDO, KAREN M
2000-10-12
427.00
=ti
CHECK
NAME
CHECK
NUMBER
DATE
0290879
PARKS RENTAL INC
2000-10-12
0290880
PEACE RIVER ELECTRIC
2000-10-12
0290881
PEPSI -COLA COMPANY
2000-10-12
0290882
PERKINS DRUG, INC
2000-10-12
0290883
PERKINS INDIAN RIVER PHARMACY
2000-10-12
0290884
PETTY CASH
2000-10-12
0290885
PETTY CASH
2000-10-12
0290886
PETTY CASH
2000-10-12
0290887
PHILLIPS, LINDA R
2000-10-12
0290888
POSTMASTER
2000-10-12
0290889
PUBLIC DEFENDER
2000-10-12
0290890
POSTMASTER
2000-10-12
0290891
PAVCO CONSTRUCTION, INC
2000-10-12
0290892
PORT PETROLEUM, INC
2000-10-12
0290893
PLEZALL WIPERS, INC
2000-10-12
0290894
POSTMASTER
2000-10-12
0290895
PAGE, LIVINGSTON
2000-10-12
0290896
PRIZE POSSESSIONS
2000-10-12
0290897
PARK, LYNN
2000-10-12
0290898
PARKER, DEBBIE
2000-10-12
0290899
PROSPER, JANET C
2000-10-12
0290900
PARSONS TECHNOLOGY
2000-10-12
0290901
PESBA, JESSICA
2000-10-12
0290902
POTTER, LARRY
2000-10-12
0290903
RADIOSHACK
2000-10-12
0290904
RICHMOND HYDRAULICS INC
2000-10-12
0290905
RUBBER STAMP EXPRESS & MORE
2000-10-12
0290906
RAY TECH ENTERPRISES INC
2000-10-12
0290907
RIA GROUP
2000-10-12
0290908
RAPP, PAMELA
2000-10-12
0290909
REXEL CONSOLIDATED
2000-10-12
0290910
REGIONS INTERSTATE BILLING
2000-30-12
0290911
ROYAL, THOMAS
2000-10-12
0290912
RASMUSSEN, KARA
2000-10-12
0290913
SCHOPP, BARBARA G
2000-10-12
0290914
SEBASTIAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT
2000-10-12
0290915
SEWELL HARDWARE CO, INC
2000-10-12
0290916
SEWELL HARDWARE CO, INC
2000-10-12
0290917
SMART CORPORATION
2000-10-12
0290918
SOUTHARD, TERRY
2000-10-12
0290919
SOUTHERN CULVERT, DIV OF
2000-10-12
0290920
SOUTHERN ELECTRIC SUPPLY
2000-10-12
0290921
ST LUCIE BATTERY & TIRE, INC
2000-10-12
0290922
STANDARD & POOR'S
2000-10-12
0290923
STATE ATTORNEY 19TH CIRCUIT
2000-10-12
07.90924
STURGIS LUMBER & PLYWOOD CO
2000-10-12
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-11-
CHECK
AMOUNT
814.65
199.69
170.50
408.46
408.76
209.66
38.26
7.76
220.50
264.00
4,596.05
114.00
11,153.50
569.40
109.05
132.00
60.00
231.96
684.86
203.42
238.00
11.95
55.35
500.00
6.95
96.50
29.88
1,642.91
415.00
24.00
648.00
852.23
52.78
108.15
87.50
71.00
155.91
58.12
84.14
52.40
2,476.78
83.01
89.85
772.15
177.61
15.18
CHECK
NAME
CHECK
CHECK
NUMBER
DATE
AMOUNT
0290925
SUN COAST WELDING SUPPLIES INC
2000-10-12
254.95
0290926
SUNRISE FORD TRACTOR &
2000-10-12
432.78
0290927
SUNSHINE PHYSICAL THERAPY
2000-10-12
105.00
0290928
ST JOHN'S RIVER WATER MGMT
2000-10-12
200.00
0290929
SUN TELEPHONE, INC
2000-10-12
78.00
0290930
SIGNS IN A DAY
2000-10-12
42.00
0290931
SHADY OAR ANIMAL CLINIC
2000-10-12
18.89
0290932
SAFETY EQUIPMENT COMPANY
2000-10-12
556.80
0290933
SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS
2000-10-12
697.00
0290934
SUBSTANCE ABUSE COUNCIL
2000-10-12
6,991.89
0290935
SELIG CHEMICAL IND
2000-10-12
830.60
0290936
STEVENS BROTHERS FUNERAL HOME
2000-10-12
800.00
0290937
SOUTHLAND PAINTING CORP
2000-10-12
3,282.00
0290938
STEWART MINING INDUSTRIES INC
2000-10-12
11,703.69
0290939
SEBASTIAN, CITY OF
2000-10-12
6,634.83
0290940
STANBRIDGE, RUTH
2000-10-12
64.00
0290941
SOUTHERN SECURITY SYSTEMS OF
2000-10-12
973.00
0290942
SUNSHINE STATE ONE CALL
2000-10-12
678.71
0290943
SHEPARD'S
2000-10-12
661.40
0290944
SOUTHERN EMBROIDERY WORKS
2000-10-12
629.50
0290945
SEBASTIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT
2000-10-12
50.00
0290946
SPHERION CORPORATION
2000-10-12
255.75
0290947
SUNCOAST COUNSELING &
2000-10-12
2,625.00
0290948
SCANSOFT INC
2000-10-12
99.95
0290949
SMITH HEATING AND CONDITIONING
2000-10-12
2,614.00
0290950
STAODYN, INC
2000-10-12
141.60
0290951
SHELL CREDIT CARD CENTER
2000-10-12
125.60
0290952
SEBASTIAN POWER CENTER RENTAL
2000-10-12
416.38
0290953
SCHLITT, LARRY
2000-10-12
500.00
0290954
STEWART, SARAH LYNN
2000-10-12
16.73
0290955
TEN -8 FIRE EQUIPMENT, INC
2000-10-12
3,700.09
0290956
THOMAS, DEBBY L
2000-10-12
115.50
0290957
TRI -SURE CORPORATION
2000-10-12
72,820.80
0290958
TREASURE COAST REFUSE
2000-10-12
325.59
0290959
TEXACO CREDIT CARD CENTER
2000-10-12
3,180.33
0290960
TAYLOR, ED
2000-10-12
124.50
0290961
SAFETY ZONE SPECIALIST INC
2000-10-12
633.50
0290962
TREASURE COAST CONTRACTING,INC
2000-10-12
219,111.90
0290963
TABAR, JEFFREY
2000-10-12
67.88
0290964
TRUGREEN CHEMLAWN
2000-10-12
21.00
0290965
TRAVEL BY PEGASUS
2000-10-12
2,068.00
0290966
TREASURE COAST NEWSPAPERS
2000-10-12
3,130.40
0290967
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
2000-10-12
18.00
0290968
ULVERSCROFT LARGE PRINT
2000-10-12
71.97
0290969
US FILTER DISTRIBUTION GROUP
2000-10-12
11,551.18
0290970
UNIQUE MARBLE INC
2000-10-12
1,063.60
0290971
URGENT CARE WEST
2000-10-12
25.00
0290972
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE
2000-10-12
13.16
0290973
VELDE FORD, INC
2000-10-12
510.48
0290974
VERO BEACH, CITY OF
2000-10-12
56,736.87
0290975
VERO CHEMICAL DISTRIBUTORS,INC
2000-10-12
28.57
0290976
VERO VENTURES
2000-10-12
1,748.19
0290977
VERO BEACH, CITY OF
2000-10-12
234.03
0290978
VERO BEACH, CITY OF
2000-10-12
127.00
0290979
VILLARS, RICHARD
2000-10-12
179.25
0290980
VERO LAKE ESTATES VOLUNTEER
2000-10-12
8.00
0290981
VERO BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT
2000-10-12
75.00
0290982
VERO BEARING & BOLT
2000-10-12
72.79
0290983
VERO BEACH POWERTRAIN
2000-10-12
31.39
0290984
VALENCIA COMMUNITY ,LEGE
2000-10-12
235.00
0290985
VON HOLTZBRINCK PUBLISHING
2000-10-12
107.93
0290986
WAL-MART STORES, INC
2000-10-12
484.96
0290987
WALGREENS PHARMACY
2000-10-12
_ 158.25
83
• iz-
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-13-
L_J
CHECK
CHECK
CHECK NAM
DATE
AMOUNT
NUMBER
2000-10-12
1,174.59
0290988 WALGREENS PHARMACY #03608
2000-10-12
136.73
0290989 WAL-MART STORES, INC INC
FIRE SPRINKLERS,
2000-10-12
490,00
55.54
0290990 WIGINTON
WAL-MART PHARMACY, INC
2000-10-12
130.00
0290991
2000-10-12
0290992 WILLHOFFr PATSY
WHITE ALUMINUM PRODUCTS, INC
2000-10-12
1,408.68
110.00
0290993
BETTY R, RN
0290994 WINDOW
2000-10-12
2000-10-12
4,880.00
SALES & SERVICE INC
0290995 WINDOW S
2000-10-12
1,000.00
0290996 WHEELER, GARY SHERIFF
2000-10-12
205.85
0290997 WHEELER PUBLISHING, INC
2000-10-12
408.96
0290998 WALGREENS PHARMACY $4642
2000-10-12
500.00
0290999 WELLINGTON HOMES
2000-10-12
3,075.50
0291000 WEST GROUP PAYMENT CTR
2000-10-12
1,016.95
0291001 WALGREEN CO
2000-10-12
2,153.23
0291002 W.S. DARLEY & CO
2000-10-12
250.00
0291003 WATSON INDUSTRIES INC
2000-10-12
264.48
0291004 XEROX CORPORATION
2000-10-12
51.85
0291005 ZIMMERM m, KARL
2000-10-12
180.54
0291006 MILLER, JOSEPH
2000-10-12
591.94
0291007 WODTKE, RUSSELL
2000-10-12
226.34
0291008 LICARI, LINDA
2000-10-12
243.07
0291009 MERCURI, DEBRA
2000-10-12
540.00
0291010 COLSON, RENE
2000-10-12
486.30
0291011 ROYAL, THOMAS
INC
2000-10-12
24.28
0291012 EGERTON PROPERTIES,
2000-10-12
42.14
0291013 OWENS, CHARLES
2000-10-12
27.56
0291014 BROOKOVER, CARL
2000-10-12
4.51
0291015 GELINAS, ARMANDZO
2000-10-12
9.59
0291016 KEENEY, DAVID
23.14
2000-10-12
0291017 ELIS, JOHN
2000-10-12
13.06
0291018 WELLINGTON HOME
2000-10-12
12.62
0291019 BABCOCL, NABILA
2000-10-12
357.02
0291020 DITTRICH, JULIA
2000-10-12
442.44
0291021 SCHWABEL, RUDIGER
2000-10-12
16.61
0291022 VALENTINE, E C
2000-10-12
26.41
0291023 BIRKINS, PARKER
2000-10-12
87.06
0291024 PASSAGE ISLAND HOMES
2000-10-12
2.64
0291025 YATES, DALLAS
2000-10-12
292.26
0291026 PALM COAST LAND CO
2000-10-12
22.87
0291027 VERO BEACH LANDINGS
2000-10-12
44.88
0291028 DOMAN, DOROTHY
2000-10-12
16.42
0291029 RHOADES, JOHN
2000-10-12
16.63
029Y030 HOLIDAY BUILDERS
2000-10-12
35.28
0291031 PASSAGE ISLAND HOMES
2000-10-12
116.13
0291032 AMERITREND HOMES
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-13-
L_J
0291033
PRICE JR, WILLIAM R
2000-10-12
96.75
1-291034
CAL BUILDERS INC
2000-10-12
30.67
0291035
ATKINS, BARNEY
2000-10-12
28.97
0291036
PROCTOR CONSTRUCTION CO, INC
2000-10-12
24.77
0291037
PHELPS, DR JANE L
2000-10-12
137.15
0291038
HANNA, VALERIE
2000-10-12
61.22
0291039
SPEEGLE CONSTRUCTION, CO
2000-10-12
319.35
0291040
REYNOLDS, R F
2000-10-12
21.80
0291041
HARP, GLYNN & DOROTHY
2000-10-12
31.44
0291042
GHO VERO BEACH INC
2000-10-12
111.37
0291043
QUINN, GAIL S
2000-10-12
57.43
0291044
HOLCOMB, JAMES S
2000-10-12
3.82
0291045
FRANCO, CARMEN
2000-10-12
68.57
0291046
CAMERON CORPORATION
2000-10-12
61.55
0291047
BOERUM, HOWARD
2000-10-12
75.58
0291048
L & S MANAGEMENT
2000-10-12
50.49
0291049
JOHNSON, MICHAEL T & RHONDA
2000-10-12
20.80
0291050
MAYER, JOHN J
2000-10-12
21.52
0291051
SURGEON, WILLIAM
2000-10-12
26.07
0291052
DELLA PORTA, ASHLEY SWAIN
2000-10-12
88.80
0291053
SAFRAN, ROBERT S & VIRGINIA
2000-10-12
34.14
0291054
SEA OARS INVESTMENT LTD
2000-10-12
25.39
0291055
LUTHER, HELEN O
2000-10-12
22.49
0291056
VOYCE, KEVIN & KARIN
2000-10-12
18.90
0291057
D AVILA, DENNIS
2000-10-12
26.78
0291058
LALLIER, ESTELLE
2000-10-12
39.23
0291059
K A MORELLO CONTRACTING
2000-10-12
33.36
0291060
BLACKWELL, SARA
2000-10-12
36.27
0291061
3080, SHELLY NICOLE
2000-10-12
11.27
0291062
BINRLEY, DEBRA
2000-10-12
32.57
0291063
SHABOUNI, MOHAMMED A
2000-10-12
20.41
0291064
BAKHSH, KHALID A
2000-10-12
69.96
0291065
MC CLUNKY, CHARLES
2000-10-12
15.47
0291066
GROTE, HENRY G
2000-10-12
30.16
0291067
LEGENDARY CONSTRUCTION, INC
2000-10-12
90.47
0291068
ISOLA, LAURALIE
2000-10-12
22.50
0291069
CREATIVE CHOICE HOMES
2000-10-12
348.38
0291070
RECORD, ROBERT
2000-10-12
29.70
0291071
BARRASFORD, THOMAS
2000-10-12
68.43
0291072
GAUDREAULT, JASLYN
2000-10-12
7.77
0291073
GIARMITA, KENNETH
2000-10-12
12.97
0291074
BORGGREEN, TINA
2000-10-12
28.43
1,555,416.50
OCTOBER 24, 2000
BKI15PG581 5
-14-
0 0
7.B. CLERK OF COURT CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS FINANCL4L REPORT
FOR FUNDING SEPTEMBER 30.2000
The Board reviewed a letter of October 16, 2000:
JEFFREY K. BARTON
Clerk of Circuit Court
P. O. Box 1028
Vero Beach, Florida 32961-1028
October 16, 2000
The Honorable Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Commissioners:
Telephone (561) 770-5185
Pursuant to Section 218.36, Florida Statutes, the Clerk of the
Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida, respectfully submits
the Constitutional Officers Financial Report for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2000.
My check for $495,706.78 was hand delivered on October16, 2000.
This check represents excess fees and unexpended funds.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey K. Barton
Clerk of Circuit Court
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-15-
r
'A
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
STATEMENT OF REVENUES,EXPENDITURES AND
CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES -BUDGET AND ACTUAL
ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,2000
GENERALFUND
CURRENT:
PERSONAL SERVICES
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
CAPITAL OUTLAY
DEBT SERVICE:
PRINCIPAL RETIREMENT
INTEREST
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER(UNDER) EXPENDITURES
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES(USES)
TRANSFERS FROM BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
CAPITAL LEASE PROCEEDS
TRANSFERS TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCES(USES)
EXCESS OF REVENUES AND OTHER SOURCES OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDITURES AND OTHER USES
FUND BALANCES 10/01/99
FUND BALANCES 9/30/00
I, Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk of the Circuit & County Courts of
Indian River County, Florida, do hereby cw* that the
foregoing are true and accurate annual reports of all official
expenses and net income and unexpended budget balances
as of the dose of the fiscal year ended September 30,2000
I have hereunto set my official seal this date. October 16, 2000.
;:-
$3,571,086 $3,417,436 $153,652
$652,663 $547.452 $105,211
$179,555 $183,878 ($4,323)
$4,549
$4,548
$1
VARIANCE
REVENUES
BUDGET
ASA-
FAVORABLE
$254,543
($2,472,603)
($1,976,896)
(UNFAVORABLE)
RECORDING OF LEGAL INSTRUMENTS
COUNTY COURT FEES
$610'000
$572,284
($37,716)
CIRCUIT FEES
OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES
$168,600
$911'200
$131,180
$1,124,411
($37,410)
INTEREST
$165,200
$194,604
$213,211
$29,404
OTHER REVENUES
$81.000
$154,675
$73,675
TOTAL REVENUES
$1,936,000
$2,177,164
$241,164
EXPENDITURES
CURRENT:
PERSONAL SERVICES
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
CAPITAL OUTLAY
DEBT SERVICE:
PRINCIPAL RETIREMENT
INTEREST
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER(UNDER) EXPENDITURES
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES(USES)
TRANSFERS FROM BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
CAPITAL LEASE PROCEEDS
TRANSFERS TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
TOTAL OTHER FINANCING SOURCES(USES)
EXCESS OF REVENUES AND OTHER SOURCES OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDITURES AND OTHER USES
FUND BALANCES 10/01/99
FUND BALANCES 9/30/00
I, Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk of the Circuit & County Courts of
Indian River County, Florida, do hereby cw* that the
foregoing are true and accurate annual reports of all official
expenses and net income and unexpended budget balances
as of the dose of the fiscal year ended September 30,2000
I have hereunto set my official seal this date. October 16, 2000.
;:-
$3,571,086 $3,417,436 $153,652
$652,663 $547.452 $105,211
$179,555 $183,878 ($4,323)
$4,549
$4,548
$1
$748
$746
$z
$4,408,603
$4.154,060
$254,543
($2,472,603)
($1,976,896)
$495,707
-16-
$2,413,914 $2,413,914
$58.689$58,689
($495.707) $0
$2,472,603 $1,976,896 $0
so $0 $495,707
$0
pf the Gi�rarit Court
Indian er County, Florida
P.O. Box 1028 Vero Beaeh. FL 32960
Fits Union National Bank
Date 1011612000
020305
BDOF CTY COMMISSIONERS
!NDlAN RIVER COUNTY
NO. 0315975
Cle of he Circuit Court
0a03L5975lla i:06?0064321:265850L099?6609
Jeffrey K. Barton
Clerk of the Circuit Court NO. 0315975
Indian River County Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Invoice Number Invoice Date (Amount : Invoice Number Invoice Dcue Amount
EXCESS FEES 1011612000 5137.619.88 EXCESS FEES 1011612000 5352.561.60
EXCESS FEES 55,525.30
i
t
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously accepted the Clerk of Court
Constitutional Officers Financial Report for FY
Ending September 30, 2000, and the Clerk's check
in the amount of $495,706.78 representing excess
fees and unexpended funds, as requested.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-17-
7.0 PAYMENTS TO VENDORS OF COURT -RELATED COSTS
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 16, 2000:
Board C-rudLed, City, County & Local Govert,amt Law
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney j b
DATE: October 16, 2000
SUBJECT: Payments to Vendors of Court Related Costs
Paul G. Bangel, Count• Attorney'
William G. Collins IL Deputy County Attorney -
The Office of the County Attorney has processed and approved payment to the following vendors for
the weeks of October 2, 2000 through October 9, 2000. Listed below are the vendors and the
amount of each court -related cost.
Vendor..
Payment for.
Amount:
Travel by Pegasus
State Attorney Costs
572.00
Nicole P. Manz, Esq.
State Attorney Costs
233.25
Suncoast Counseling
Clinical Evaluation
537.50
Richard Ake, Clerk
State Attorney Costs
18.00
Olga Mas
Court Interpreter
62.50
Sheila I. Flinn
Transcription
21.00
Sheila I. Flinn
Transcription
112.00
Karen M. Orlando
Transcription
154.00
Peggy Dixon
Transcription
206.50
Peggy Gollnick
Transcription
14.00
Peggy Gollnick
Transcription
21.00
Suncoast Counseling
Clinical Evaluation
550.00
Suncoast Counseling
Clinical Evaluation
573.50
Cristi Martin
Transcription
31.50
Cristi Manan
Transcription
17.50
Office of the State Attorney
State Attorney Costs
177.61
Travel by Pegasus
State Attorney Costs
205.00
Lynn Park, Esq.
State Attorney Costs
330.82
Sheila 1. Flinn
Transcription
1225.50
Suncoast Counseling
Clinical Evaluation
500.00
Lynn Park, Esq.
State Attorney Costs
354.04
Travel by Pegasus
State Attorney Costs
258.00
Suncoast Counseling
Clinical Evaluation
500.00
Shirley E. Corbin
Transcription
77.00
Shirley E. Corbin
Transcription
175.00
Ed Taylor
State Attorney Costs
124.50
Amy LeBlanc
State Attorney Costs
_.-
256.13
ocTo101PR 24,2PG 589
-is-
•
Travel by Pegasus
Janet C. Prosper
Peggy Gollnick
Debby Thomas
Debby Thomas
Shirley E. Corbin
Barbara G. Schopp
Cristi Martin
Peggy Golinick
Peggy Gollnick
Spherion
Michael C. Riordan, Psy.D.
Kevin Hammonds
Pegasus Travel
Suncoast Counseling
Atlantic Reporting
Green & Metcalf, P.A.
Marsha Ewing, Clerk (Martin)
American Reporting
Patricia B. Held
Spherion
Medical Record Services
Suncoast Counseling
Michael C. Riordan, Psy.D.
Patricia B. Heid
Richard Ake Clerk Hillsborough
Richard Ake Clerk Hillsborough
Sheldon H. Rifkin, Ph.D.
American Reporting
Investigative Support Spec.
Michael C. Riordan, Psy.D.
American Reporting
Unishippers
Unishippers
Medical Record Services
Treasure Coast Ct Reporting
Medical Record Services
Nicoloe P. Manz
Pegasus Travel
Michael C. Riordan, Psy.D.
Suncoast Counseling
Cardiology & Medicine Assoc.
University Medical & Forensic
Total
State Attorney Costs
Transcription
Transcription
Transcription
Transcription
Transcription
Transcription
Transcription
Transcription
Transcription
Transcription
Clinical Evaluation
Witness Coordination
Witness Coordination
Clinical Evaluation
State Attorney Costs
Indigent as to Costs
State Attorney Costs
Transcription
Transcription
Transcription
State Attorney Costs
Clinical Evaluation
Clinical Evaluation
Transcription
State Attorney Costs
State Attorney Costs
Clinical Evaluation
Transcription
Public Defender Costs
Clinical Evaluation
Transcription
State Attorney Costs
State Attorney Costs
State Attorney Costs
Court Reporter/Transcription
State Attorney Costs
State Attorney Costs
State Attorney Costs
Expert Witness
Expert Witness
Public Defender Costs
Expert Witness
cc: Honorable Paul B. Kanarek, Chief Judge
NO ACTION REQUIRED OR TAKEN.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-19-
1,033.00
56.00
70.00
52.50
63.00
45.50
87.50
77.00
357.00
115.50
160.25
725.00
170.70
337.00
562.50
34.25
36.00
12.00
279.00
81.00
207.00
6.55
587.50
950.00
118.00
26.00
2.00
650.00
1,309.50
400.00
1,050.00
704.00
18.49
16.07
144.00
81.00
29.33
338.82
205.00
300.00
300.00
18.99
808.64
$19,933.44
•
J
I
7.D. DIVISION OF FORESTRY, ANNUAL FIRE CONTROL REPORT
The Board reviewed a letter of October 12, 2000:
Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services
BOB CRAWFORD, Commissioner
The Capitol • Tallahassee, FL 32399-0800
MANNUAL REPORT
October 11, 2000
Mr. James Chandler
County Administrator
Indian River County
1840 25th. Street
Vero Beach, FL. 32960
Dear Mr. Chandler.
Please Respond -fie -
Please find attached a copy of the Annual Fire Control Report as required by Division of
Forestry Policy. This report outlines the Fire Control Activities for the past year and is intended
for the County Commissioners.
% To assure complete understanding of the commitment between emergency response
agencies in Indian River County and the Division of Forestry, attached you will find a copy of the
County Operating Plan. The plan is a working document that outlines capabilities and
responsibilities of the Indian River County Department of Emergency Services and the Division of
Forestry.
20-
-20-
0
•
-I
•
Would you please place the report on the Commission's consent agenda and notify my
office of the date it will appear before the Commissioners. If you have any questions or need any
additional information, please let me know.
SINCERELY
BOB CRAWFORD
COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE
J �ataro
Forest Area Supervisor
(561) 778-5085
pc: Bill Theobald, Deputy Chief; Field Operations
inn Rath, District Manager, Okeechobee
Fresh
n&Wa
Florida Agriculture and Forest Products
$i3 Billion for Florida's Economy
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously accepted the Division of Forestry
Annual Fire Control Report, as requested.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
COPY OF REPORT IS ON FILE WITH THE
BACKUP FOR TODAY'S MEETING
-21-
BK 1 15 PG 592
•
F,
7.E. FLOODPLAIN CUT AND FILL BALANCE WAIVER - EARRING PonyT
TOWER - ATLANTIC COAST TOWER OF FLORIDA - TAx PARCEL No. H-
32-39-00000-0010-00001.0
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 18, 2000:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
AND
Christopher J. Kafer, Jr., P.
County Engineer
FROM: David B. Cox, P.E., Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Request for Floodplain Cut and Fill Balance Waiver for Earring Point Tower,
Tax Parcel I.D. No. 11-32-39-00000-0010-00001.0
REFERENCE: Project No. 2000050252-23750/AA-00-08-109
CONSENT AGENDA
DATE: October 18, 2000
H. Lee Chapman, has submitted a site plan application for a communication tower on the subject
property, and has requested a waiver of the cut and fill balance requirement of Section 930.07(2)(d)
of the Stormwater Management and Flood Protection Ordinance. The site is located in special flood
hazard area Zone AE with base flood elevation of 8.0 feet N.G.V.D. The ten-year flood elevation
is 5.0 feet N.G.V.D. The proposed displacement of the floodplain below 5.0 feet for which the
waiver is requested is 930 cubic yards as indicated in the attached calculations from the applicant's
engineer dated October 11, 2000.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The project meets the cut and fill balance waiver criteria provided in Section 930.07(2)(d)1. of being
situated in an estuarine environment within the 100 year floodplain along the Indian River and in
staff s opinion it appears that all other Stormwater Management and Flood Protection Ordinance
requirements can be met without adverse impact on other lands in the estuarine environment. The
ocTos�x��,�z�o
593
-22-
•
applicant has not submitted an alternative grading plan that satisfied the cut and fill balance
requirement without needing the waiver. The applicant is requesting the waiver so he will not be
required to construct an on site retention area if the waiver is granted.
Alternative No. 1
Grant the cut and fill balance waiver based on the criteria of Section 930.07(2)(d)1.
Alternative No. 2
Deny the cut and fill waiver. Require an on site retention area be provided to compensate for the
proposed floodplain displacement.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval of Alternative No. 1.
1. Letter from H. Lee Chapman
2. Calculations for cut and fill from Russell C. Morrison, P.E. dated Oct. 11, 2000
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously granted the cut and fill balance waiver
for Earring Point Tower, Atlantic Coast Tower of
Florida, based on the criteria of Section
93 0.07(2)(d) 1, as recommended by staff.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-23-
•
,.A
F,
7.F. BID #3020 - ZINC ORTHOPHOSPHATE - CALciOuEST. INC. (UTILITIES
DEPARTMENT)
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 18, 2000:
DATE: October 18, 2000
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Thomas Frame, General Services Director (ktat--A.--
FROM: Fran Powell, Purchasing Manager
SUBJECT: Bid Award: IRC #3020 Annual Bid for Zinc Orthophosphate
Utilities Department
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Bid Opening Date:
October 4, 2000 at 2:00 P.M.
Advertising Dates:
September 20, & 27, 2000
Notices Sent to:
Twelve (12) Vendors
Replies:
Two (2) Vendors
No Bids:
Four (4) Vendors
Vendor
Est Qty
Unit Price
Bid Total
Current Year Prices
4,800 gals
$4.78 gal
$22,944.00
Calciquest Inc.
4,800 gals
$3.78 gal
$18,144.00
Belmont, N.C.
Sweetwater Technologies
4,800 gals
$3.869
$18,571.20
Water Treatment Controls
Nashville, TN
LAST YEAR EXPENDITURE $20,985.00
RECOMMENDATION:
CalciQuest Inc. is a vendor incorporated with the State of North Carolina. It is not presently
registered in the State of Florida nor does it have a registered agent here in Florida. Should any
problem develop between CalciQuest Inc., and Indian River County that would -require any legal
proceedings, the County Attorney cautions that jurisdictional and venue questions may arise, i.e.,
whether a lawsuit would be properly brought in a North Carolina court or in a Florida court.
The second and only other bidder was a firm from Tennessee also unregistered within Florida.
CalciQuest, Inc., has been a vendor fosthe County since 1994 with $100,000 in open purchase
orders over that period of time with no problems. Based on this history, staff recommends that
the County continue to purchase from CalciQuest, Inc., as follows:
OC����22Q�Q
��� -24-
• Award the bid to CalciDuest Inc. as the overall low bidder meeting specifications as set forth
in the Invitation to Bid.
• Establish an Open End Contract with CalciOuest Inc. with a not to exceed amount of $30,000
for the period October 24, 2000 through September 30, 2001.
• Authorize the Purchasing Manager to renew this contract for two (2) additional one (1) year
periods subject to satisfactory performance, zero cost increase, vendor acceptance and the
determination that renewal of this annual contract is in the best interest of the County.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously awarded Bid 43020 for zinc
orthophosphate to CalciQuest, Inc. in a not -to -
exceed amount of $30,000 for the period October
24, 2000 through September 30, 2001, as
recommended by staff.
BID DOCUMENTS WILL BE ON FILE IN THE
OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
WHEN EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
OCTOBER 24, 2000 BK 1 15 PG
596
-25-
J
I
Z G. BID #3021- SIDEWALK CONSTR UCTION - PA VCO CONSTRUCTION
(ROAD AND BRIDGE DIVISION
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 18, 2000:
DATE: October 18, 2000
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
TBRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Thomas Frame, General Services Director
FROM: Fran Powell, Purchasing Manager
SUBJECT: Bid Award: IRC #3021 Annual Bid for Sidewalk Construction
Public Works Department/Road and Bridge Division
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Bid Opening Date: October 5, 2000 at 2:00 P.M.
Advertising Dates: September 21, 28, 2000
Notices Sent to: Thirty (30) Vendors
Replies: Five (5) Vendors
VENDOR
Cost per sq. yd. for 4" thick sidewalk
Cost per sq. yd. for 6" thick sidewalk
Current Year Prices
$15.00
$17.50
P.A.V.C.O. Construction, Inc.
$20.25
$22.50
Melbourne, Fl
Roy Clark Masonry
$22.50
$27.00
Vero Beach, Fl
P.L.A.N. Estimated Services
$31.50
$39.40
Palm Coast, Fl
Calhoun Enterprises of Central
$36.00
$40.50
Florida Inc., Ocoee, Fl
Jon & Michael Capitol Inc
$139.49
$206.77
New Smvma, Fl
LAST YEAR EXPENDITURE $4,682.50
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the following:
• Award the bid to the sole bidder, P.A. VCO. Construction. Inc., for the construction of both the
4" and 6" thick sidewalks in accordance with the specifications as set forth in the Invitation to
Bid.
ocTos Ff,g°&° 597
-26-
_I
•
• Establish an Open End Contract with P.A. VCO. Construction, Inc., with a not to exceed amount
of $11,000 for the period October 24, 2000 through September 30, 2001.
• Authorize the Purchasing Manager to renew this contract for two (2) additional one (1) year
periods subject to satisfactory performance, zero cost increase, vendor acceptance and the
determination that renewal of this annual contract is in the best interest of the County.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously awarded Bid #3021 for sidewalk
construction to PAVCO Construction, Inc. in a not -
to -exceed amount of $11,000 for the period October
24, 2000 through September 30, 2001, as
recommended by staff.
BID DOCUMENTS WILL BE ON FILE IN THE
OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
WHEN EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
OCTOBER 24, 2000 BK 1 15 PG 5 9
-27-
•
F,
0
7.H. BID #3018 - CATCHBASINS & STORMWATER INLETS -AMERICAN
CONCRETE INDUSTRIES (ROAD AND BRIDGE DIUISION�
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 17, 2000:
DATE: October 17, 2000
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Thomas Frame, General Services Director tea%-4r�—�
FROM: Fran Powell, Purchasing Manage*
SUBJECT: Bid Award: IRC #3018 Annual Bid for Catch Basins & Storm Water Inlets
Public Works Department/Road and Bridge Division
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Bid Opening Date: October 4, 2000 at 2:00 P.M.
Advertising Dates: September 20, 27, 2000
Notices Sent to: Six (6) Vendors
Tri County Concrete Products, Mack Concrete Industries, Inc, Astatual, Fl
West Palm Beach, Fl Ferguson Underground, Pompano Beach, Fl
American Concrete Industries, Ft Pierce, Fl Rocklin Vac Systems, Ft Lauderdale, Fl
Joelson Concrete Pipe Co., Venice, Fl
Replies: One (1) Vendor
BID TABULATION ( EXHIBIT A)
LAST YEAR EXPENDITURE $6,555.00
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the following:
• Award the bid to the sole bidder, American Concrete Industries ;"'as the overall low bidder
meeting specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid
• Establish an Open End Contract with American Concrete Industries.with a not to exceed amount
of $17,000 for the period October 24, 2000 through September 30, 2001.
• Authorize the Purchasing Manager to renew this contract for two (2) additional one (1) year
periods subject to satisfactory performance, zero cost increase, vendor acceptance and the
determination that renewal of this annual contract is in the best interest of the County.
-28-
9
_I
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously awarded Bid #3018 for catch basins
and stormwater inlets to American Concrete
Industries, in a not -to -exceed amount of $17,000 for
the period October 24, 2000 through September 30,
2001, as recommended by staff.
BID DOCUMENTS WILL BE ON FILE IN THE
OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
WHEN EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
OCTOBER 24, 2000 BK 1 15 PC
600
-29-
Fr-
ZL BID #3017 -TYPE S -III ASPHALT CONCRETE -RANGER CONSTRUCTION
INDUSTRIES (ROAD AND BRIDGE DIVISION
The Board reviewed Memoranda of October 16 and October 23, 2000:
DATE:
October 16, 2000
TO:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU:
James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Thomas Frame, General Services Directory-au41)• tsc.c-L-
FROM:
Fran Boynton -Powell, Purchasing Manag
SUBJECT:
Annual Award: Bid #3017 Type S -Ill Asphalt Concrete
Public Works Department/Road & Bridge Division
Bid Opening Date
Advertising Dates:
Specifications Mailed to:
Replies:
BID TABULATION (Exhibit A)
October 5, 2000 at 2:00 P.M.
September 21, & 28, 2000
Seven (7) Vendors
Three (3) Vendors
Note: Option A (Base Bid with NO Bituminous Materials Adjustment during the contract period.)
Option B ( Base Bid with a monthly Bituminous Materials Adjustment only as per DOT
Specifications, no other adjustments will be made) '
LAST YEAR EXPENDITURE S930,809.00 (This includes paving, patching and resurfacing)
Staff recommends the following:
• Award the bid for Option B (Items 1— 81 to Ranger Contraction Industries. Inc. . as the overall
low bidder meeting specifications as set forth in the Invitation to Bid. Award Option A (Item 4)
for the pick up of Type S-lII Asphalt by county trucks to all of the bidders based on of the daily
production availability of the Type S -III material and the plant closest to the job site. Dickerson's
plant is located in Ft. Pierce, Community Asphalt's plant is located in Vero Beach and Ranger
Construction Industries Inc plants are located in Ft. Pierce and Valkaria, Florida..
• Establish an Open End Contract with Ranger Consn action Industries. Inc for a not to exceed
amount of $800,000.00 for the period October 24, 2000 through September 30, 2001.
• Authorize the Purchasing Manager to renew this contract for two (2) additional one year periods
subject to satisfactory performance zero cost increase, vendor acceptance and the determination
that renewal of this annual contract is in the best interest of the County.
ocrpyg �t'6°8i
-30-• 0
•
DATE: October 23, 2000
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Thomas Frame, General Services Director swot cJ .C -L_
A
FROM: Fran Boynton -Powell, Purchasing Manager I 1
SUBJECT: Correction of the Annual Award: Bid #3017
_ Type S -III Asphalt Concrete
Public Works Department/Road & Bridge Division
Please note the following correction.
Statrs recommendation of this agenda should read, Ontlon $ (Items 10 —17)
instead of Option B (Items 1— 8).
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously awarded Bid #3017 for Type S -III
asphalt concrete, Option A (Item 4) for the pick up
of Type S -III asphalt by county trucks to all of the
bidders based on the daily production availability of
the Type S -III material and the plant closest to the
job site (Dickerson, Community Asphalt, and
Ranger Construction Industries, Inc.) And the
Option B (Items 10 through 17) to Ranger
Construction, Inc. in a not -to -exceed amount of
$800,000 for the period October 24, 2000 through
September 30, 2001, as recommended by staff.
BID DOCUMENTS WILL BE ON FILE IN THE
OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
WHEN EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
OCTOBER 24, 2000 BK @ ! PG 602
-31-
0
'A
7j. FLORIDA HEALTHYKIDS PROGRAM- REQUEST FOR STATE SUPPORT
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 19, 2000:
TO: Members of the Board of
County Commissioners
DATE: October 19, 2000
SUBJECT: Letter to the Governor and the Florida Healthy Kids Board
OA FROM: Commissioner Ruth Stanbridge
s In the upcoming Legislative session, one of the policies that the Florida Association of
Counties (FAC) will be promoting, through the Health and Human Services Policy
Committee, is the replacement of the match to the Florida Healthy Kids Program.
At present, Florida is the only state that requires a local match. Since children in need
of health care is a statewide problem, the FAC feels that Florida should carry the entire
cost of this program. At the state level there are several revenue sources that could
provide the dollars - primarily the "tobacco! funds.
I would like this Commission to approve the attached letter to be sent prior to the
October 26th meeting of the Florida Healthy Kids Board.
OCTA 2000
0333 -32-
• 0
•
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Fran B. Adams
Chairman
District 1
Caroline D. Ginn
Vice Chairman
District 5
October 24, 2000
Honorable Jeb Bush, Governor
State of Floirda
Office of the Governor
The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001
- RE: - Florida Healthy Kids Report to the Legislature
Dear Governor Bush:
Ruth M. Stanbridge
District 2
Kenneth R. Maclit
District 3
John W. Tippin
District 4
The rapid and continuing growth throughout Florida has caused all counties, especially small rural
counties, into the position of choosing how they spend their limited health dollars. Counties are
struggling with a variety of local needs brought on by growth while continuing to fund a multitude of
health and human service issues ranging from health care for children, homelessness, substance
abuse and many others. Since all counties, large and small are encountering these issues; the
Governor and the Legislature should recognize these health issues, not as local problems, but as
Florida's problems.
Therefore, Indian River County urges the Governor's office and the Florida Healthy Kids Board to
consider the following:
1. Replacement of the Florida Healthy Kds local match with state funds. The tobacco
funds, alone, as a replacement for the local match would enable counties to expand
other local health needs.
2. Remove all barriers that prevents Florida's children -in -need from having health care.
At present, Florida is the only state that requires a local match for children health
insurance and it is time we joined the rest of the Nation.
We appreciate your carefully consideration of this letter and hope to continue to work with you on
solutions to one of Florida's outstanding problems.
Sincerely, t l
iJ.� Q7ECHUF
Ruth M. Stanbridge, Commissioner OCT 2 5 ?".011
Indian River County _
CLERK TO THE BOARD
1840 25ei Street, Suite N-158
Vero Bcach, FL 32960-3365
Teleplmme. (561) 567-8000 x490 Fax: (561) 770-5334
Suncom: 224 -1490e -mail. kniassung@bcaco.indian-river.fl.us
OCTOBER 24, 2000 g 1 1 PG GO 4
-33-
•
-I
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously approved a letter to the Governor
requesting State support for the Florida Healthy
Kids Program, as requested.
COPY OF LETTER IS ON FILE WITH THE
BACKUP FOR TODAY'S MEETING
9.A.1. PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTION 2000-131
CONFIRNIING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IN
CONNECTION WITH A WATER MAIN EXTENSION TO
THE SEBASTIAN AREA PHASE III -A - PROJECT UW -97-
16 -DS -
PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR HEARING IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 13, 2000:
ocToRfE'l j$ z�Guo605
-34is 0
-
•
DATE: OCTOBER 13, 2000
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: DONALD R. HUBBS, P.E.
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY CES
PREPARED JAMES D. CHAST
AND STAFFED MANAGER OF S PROJECTS
BY: DEPARTMENT O SERVICES
SUBJECT: SEBASTIAN WATER EXPANSION PHASE III -A
RESOLUTION III — PUBLIC HEARING
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO UW -97 -16 -DS
BACKGROUND
On October 3, 2000, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approved Resolutions 2000-122
(Resolution 1) and 2000-123 (Resolution In, which contained the preliminary assessment roll and established the
date of the public hearing for the subject project. Property owners have been notified of the public hearing by mail.
Resolution 2000-122 was published in the PRESS JOURNAL on October 9, 2000.
Construction of the Phase II -D & II -E portions of the project area is underway and should be completed by August
2001. We are now ready to proceed with Phase III -A.
ANALYSIS
Design of the water distribution system is complete. Approval of the attached Resolution III will confirm and
approve the preliminary assessment.
On October 12, 2000 at 7:00 p.m., an informational meeting was held, in the North County Library, for the benefit of
the property owners. Within the Phase III -A project area, bordered by Barber Avenue, to the East, with Periwinkle
Drive, along the South and West and Caravan Terrace to the North, there are 861 lots and tracts, and 384 homes, to
benefit from this project. Typical platted lot sizes are .25 acre, plus or minus.
More effective management of project construction, inspections, cash flows, and interaction with property owners
is being accomplished by having divided Phases II and III into smaller projects. This may enable more utility
construction contractors to bid on these projects possibly making the bid process more competitive. The attached
map displays the area to benefit from the assessment projects, as divided into parts A, B, C, D & E. for Phase IN
(Exhibit 3). Phases II -D & II -E were combined to adhere with scheduling agreed upon with the City of Sebastian
and to complete the remainder of Phase II (North of CR 512). Phase II -E will serve the City of Sebastian
municipal complex, as well as provide potable water and fire protection to an area noted for failing well systems.
The City of Sebastian is waiting for the completion of the water line installation in order to complete road &
drainage improvements and comply with bonding requirements.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-35-
•
,
Engineering design hasbeen coin IIM-19
P Y Dep lty -A We are
now ready to begin the assessment process associated with this project, as outlined herein. A summary assessment
roll for Phase M -A is attached (Exhibit 4). The full assessment roll is on file in the commission office. This
project is to be paid through the assessment of property owners along the proposed water line route. Financing will
be from the assessment.fim
d 473, account number 473-000-169-489. If needed, inter -fund borrowing will be
available from the capacity fee fund 472. The estimated project cost and amount to be assessed for Phase III -A is
$ 1,856,564.20 (rounded) (Exhibit -5). The estimated cost per square foot is $0.202375 (rounded). The actual
assessed cost, as with any project will be determined based on actual competitive bid prices.
�
_ PHASF•ODTEIOIa6R•
S'OUTAWESTOFBARBER•STREPih
III -A UW -97 -16 -DS 861 773 / 384~• South of Caravan Terrace with Periwinkle Drive
along the South & West
III -B UW -97 -17 -DS 540 476 / 230 East of Laconia St.& West of Shakespear St..
Between Crystal Mist & Lanfair Ave's
111-C UW -97 -18 -DS 900 822 / 402 Between Laconia & Barber St's , between Bayfront
Terrace and Rolling Hills (Lansdowne)
III -D UW -97 -19 -DS 698 639 / 232 East of Laconia St., between Clearmont & Capon
Streets.
III -E UW -97 -20 -DS 735 654 / 276 West of Laconia St, between Granduer & Gladiola
Avenue's
Total 3,734 3,364 /1,524 South of CR 512 and SW of Barber Street
leted b the staff of flee artment of Uti i
On September 25, 2000, a letter was sent to the City Manager, of the City of Sebastian, with a copy of a draft
agenda item and a map of the project area (Exhibit 6).
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
attached Resolutions III.
LIST OF EXHIBrrS•
1 -October 3, 2000 MgAa r tatim 4 -Estimated Project cost
2 -Map of Project area 5 -Letter to City of Sebastian
3 -Summary assessment roll
Utilities Director Don Hubbs commented that Phase II ofthe project had been broken
into 5 segments, A through E, and supplied water to 2,186 lots through 229,000 feet of
water line. All the phases of the project have been done in house, both the design and
construction, using staff members. Phase III involves 3,734 lots and 40 miles of pipe. An
informational meeting regarding Phase III was held on October 12' at the North County
Library.
OCTOJJ 1'1520 0 7
-36-
0 0
-1
Services for Phase III
Engineering design hasbeen coin IIM-19
P Y Dep lty -A We are
now ready to begin the assessment process associated with this project, as outlined herein. A summary assessment
roll for Phase M -A is attached (Exhibit 4). The full assessment roll is on file in the commission office. This
project is to be paid through the assessment of property owners along the proposed water line route. Financing will
be from the assessment.fim
d 473, account number 473-000-169-489. If needed, inter -fund borrowing will be
available from the capacity fee fund 472. The estimated project cost and amount to be assessed for Phase III -A is
$ 1,856,564.20 (rounded) (Exhibit -5). The estimated cost per square foot is $0.202375 (rounded). The actual
assessed cost, as with any project will be determined based on actual competitive bid prices.
�
_ PHASF•ODTEIOIa6R•
S'OUTAWESTOFBARBER•STREPih
III -A UW -97 -16 -DS 861 773 / 384~• South of Caravan Terrace with Periwinkle Drive
along the South & West
III -B UW -97 -17 -DS 540 476 / 230 East of Laconia St.& West of Shakespear St..
Between Crystal Mist & Lanfair Ave's
111-C UW -97 -18 -DS 900 822 / 402 Between Laconia & Barber St's , between Bayfront
Terrace and Rolling Hills (Lansdowne)
III -D UW -97 -19 -DS 698 639 / 232 East of Laconia St., between Clearmont & Capon
Streets.
III -E UW -97 -20 -DS 735 654 / 276 West of Laconia St, between Granduer & Gladiola
Avenue's
Total 3,734 3,364 /1,524 South of CR 512 and SW of Barber Street
leted b the staff of flee artment of Uti i
On September 25, 2000, a letter was sent to the City Manager, of the City of Sebastian, with a copy of a draft
agenda item and a map of the project area (Exhibit 6).
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
attached Resolutions III.
LIST OF EXHIBrrS•
1 -October 3, 2000 MgAa r tatim 4 -Estimated Project cost
2 -Map of Project area 5 -Letter to City of Sebastian
3 -Summary assessment roll
Utilities Director Don Hubbs commented that Phase II ofthe project had been broken
into 5 segments, A through E, and supplied water to 2,186 lots through 229,000 feet of
water line. All the phases of the project have been done in house, both the design and
construction, using staff members. Phase III involves 3,734 lots and 40 miles of pipe. An
informational meeting regarding Phase III was held on October 12' at the North County
Library.
OCTOJJ 1'1520 0 7
-36-
0 0
-1
•
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard
regarding this matter.
Alida Hirschfeld, 368 Concha Drive, Sebastian, stated she had received a letter
October 4' notifying her about the public hearing to consider the water project and the
workshop meeting on October 12' at the Library. When she attended the meeting, she felt
as though this were already a "done deal". Some of the people in this area have barely
enough money for food and medication and simply cannot afford this $2,000 or more lien
on their homes. If the bids are correct, they will be paying about $50 per linear foot for
some plastic pipe. This project was determined between the County Commission and the
City of Sebastian Council in 1995 and most of the residents do not want the water. She
questioned why they were not alerted about this upcoming project when they purchased their
properties and built their homes. She felt this is taxation without representation.
Diane Wihlborg, 386 Concha Drive, Sebastian, felt she is being charged $2,000 for
something she does not want and also felt that this is taxation without representation.
Fred Hess, 437 Concha Drive, Sebastian, agreed with the ladies and felt the residents
were not given a voice in this decision.
David Costa, 499 Concha Drive, Sebastian, commented that this is a hardship on
people trying to sell their properties. He is on total disability and cannot afford this. He then
questioned how his property will be assessed as he is on a corner lot.
Director Hubbs stated that the assessments apply to the entire front footage. The
useable portion of the lot is assessed. He continued that he had discussed the project with
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-3 7-
'A
r
0
Mrs. Hirschfeld and went into a number of her questions. Each segment of the project is
built to stand alone and the City can interrupt the project at any point pursuant to the
Interlocal Agreement. This is not mandated by the State but the County's Comprehensive
Plan does have goals. There are a number of agencies available to help individuals in
unfortunate circumstances. SHIP funds can be used for connections but not for assessments.
Chairman Adams asked County Attorney Bangel to look into legal funding for
assistance to those who cannot pay the assessments. She recalled that the City of Sebastian
had requested that the County take over the project in 1995 and it is a huge undertaking.
Director Hubbs noted that the liens are to be recorded after the bids are open. The
County cannot proceed with the project until funding is secured and the lien is the
mechanism for that funding. However, if the project does not go forward, the monies would
be refunded.
Ms. Hirschfeld stated that if she had known the assessment was coming in 1998 when
she bought her property, she might have waited to build her house.
Commissioner Ginn suggested that maps be sent to the Sebastian Building
Department so that they could alert people who come in for a permit to build.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard regarding this matter. There
being none, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
After further discussion regarding ways to notify people of the project through the
City, Director Hubbs noted that the City is doing the paving and drainage project and those
projects are being coordinated. They could also do another brief presentation.
-38-
0
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Ginn, SECONDED
by Commissioner Stanbridge, the Board, by a 4-1
vote (Chairman Adams opposed) adopted
Resolution 2000-131 confirming the special
assessments in connection with a water main
extension to the Sebastian Area Phase III -A;
providing for special assessment liens to be made of
record.
P.M. Hearing (Third Reso.) 10/00(reso\seb3a)BkIDC
IN THE RECORDS OF
JEFFREY K. BARTON
RESOLUTION NO. 2000- 131 CLERK CIRCUIT COURT
INDIAN RIVER CO., FLA.
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
CONFIRMING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IN CONNECTION
WITH A WATER MAIN EXTENSION TO THE SEBASTIAN AREA
PHASE III -A; PROVIDING FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LIENS TO
BE MADE OF RECORD.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County has, by
Resolution No. 2000-122, adopted October 3, 2000, determined to make special
assessments against certain properties to be serviced by a water main extension to the
Sebastian Area Phase III -A (an area located south of Caravan Terrace with Periwinkle
Drive along the South and West); and
WHEREAS, said resolution described the manner in which said special
assessments shall be made and how said special assessments are to be paid; and
WHEREAS, the resolution was published in the Vero Beach Press Journal, as
required by Section 206.04, Indian River County Code; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County passed
Resolution No. 2000-123 on October 3, 2000, and set a time and place for a public
hearing at which the owners of the properties to be assessed and other interested
persons would have the chance to be heard as to any and all complaints as to said
project and said special assessments, and for the Board to act as required by Section
206.07, Indian River County Code; and
WHEREAS, notice of the time and place of the public hearing was published in
the Press Journal Newspaper on Friday, October 6, 2000, and once again on Friday,
October 13, 2000 (twice one week apart; the last being at least one week prior to the
hearing), as required by Section 206.06, Indian River County Code; and _
OCTOBER 24, 2000 BK I 15 PG 6 10
-39-
•
r
0
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-131
WHEREAS, the land owners of record were mailed notices at least ten days prior
to the hearing, as required by Section 206.06, Indian River County Code; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County on
Tuesday, October 24, 2000, at 9:05 a.m. conducted the public hearing with regard to
the special assessments;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
1. The foregoing recitals are affirmed and ratified in their entirety. -
2. The special assessments shown on the attached assessment roll are hereby
confirmed and approved, and shall remain legal, valid, and binding first liens against
the properties assessed until paid in full.
3. The Board finds that the properties assessed by this resolution will receive special
benefits equal to or greater than the cost of the assessment.
4. The County will record the special assessments and this resolution, which describes
the properties assessed and the amounts of the special assessments, on the public
records, which shall constitute prima facie evidence of the validity of the special
assessments.
The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner Ginn , and the motion
was seconded by Commissioner Stanbridge , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote
W!MQ ac fnllnws-
Chairman Fran B. Adams
Nay
Vice Chairman Caroline D. Ginn
Aye
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht
Aye
Commissioner John W. Tippin
Aye
Commissioner Ruth Stanbridge
Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this
24th day of October, 2000.
..Attest; ,,J. K. Barton, Clerk
Deputy filer
Attachment: ASSESSMENT ROLL
(to be recorded on Public Records)
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Fran B. Adams
Chairman
ASSESSMENT ROLL IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE
OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AND IS RECORDED
IN THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
.0
0
W
Cn
N
-0
N
O
N
in -sen Eva G7
ADY•o:ed Date
ACM,ri
t7m /b hfko
L<+c+n
SD
1018 oL
utiot;es
/D ao
Fti.k Mqr.
ASSESSMENT ROLL IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE
OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AND IS RECORDED
IN THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
.0
0
W
Cn
N
-0
N
O
N
•
•
9.A.2. PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE 2000-034 AMENDING
THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING
ZONING MAP FROM RS -3 TO PD FOR
APPROXIMATELY 297 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY
LOCATED BETWEEN 13TH STREET SW ON THE
NORTH, 17TH STREET SW ON THE SOUTH, 27TH
AVENUE ON THE EAST, AND 43" AVENUE ON THE
WEST AND CONCEPTUAL PD PLAN APPROVAL FOR
DEVELOPMENT (THE GRALIA GROUP - THE
COLONYI
PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR HEARING IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 17, 2000:
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-41-
BK 1 15 PG 612
F,
•
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
MEMORANDUM
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DPRNON HEAD CONCURRENCE:
�ober4tmKeatingAICouty Development 'rector
THROUGH: Stan Boling,,AAI'CP
Planning Director
FROM: John W. McCoy, AICP ��
Senior Planner, Current�evelohpment
DATE: October 17, 2000
SUBJECT: The Gralia Group's Request to Rezone Approximately 297 Acres of Property
from RS -3 (Single -Family up to 3 units/acre), to PD (Planned Development) and
to Receive Conceptual PD Plan Approval for a Development to be Known as
The Colony
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of October 24, 2000.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS:
This is a request by The Gralia Group, through its agent Knight, McGuire and Associates, Inc., to
rezone approximately 297 acres. All of the project's acreage (297 acres) is currently zoned RS -3.
As part of the rezoning request, a conceptual PD plan has been submitted for review and approval.
The subject site is located between 27th Avenue and 43nd Avenue on the east and west, and 13' Street
SW and 17th Street SW on the north and south. The purpose of this request is to secure a zoning
which allows construction of single family and multi -family dwellings, an 18 hole golf course and
driving range, and clubhousetrecreation facility.
-42-
•
_I
•
♦ Planning and Zoning Commission Action
At its regular meeting of September 28, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
unanimously (6-0) to recommend approval of the project, with some recommended conditions
different from the conditions recommended by staff. The Commission recommends that the
applicant be allowed direct private driveway access to 43' Avenue as shown on the conceptual plan:
however, staff recommends that access to 43nd Avenue be only via a new bridge at 17' Street SW.
Also, the Commission recommends that all of the site's perimeter be Type "C" buffering rather than
Type "C" and Type "D" buffering as recommended by staff. Thus, the conditions contained in
staff s recommendation at the end of this report differ from the Planning and Zoning Commission's
recommendation on these two issues.
♦ Development Approval Options Available to the Developer
Since the site is zoned single-family, the applicant must rezone the property to a type of residential
zoning that allows for multi -family residential development, recreation uses, and accessory
commercial uses. Any rezoning action must comply with the site's land use designations which are
L-1, Low Density Residential 1 (up to 3 units/acre) on the western one quarter of the site, and L-2
(up to 6 units/acre) on the eastern three quarters of the site. Multi -family development is proposed
on a portion of the site that has an L-2 land use designation. There are two options available to the
developer to seek approval of the proposed project. Either of the two options, if approved, would
allow the applicant to proceed with a residential project. These options are as follows:
1. Rezone the L-2 portion of the site to a standard residential zoning district (e.g. RM -6) which
allows single-family and multi -family at a density of no more than 6 units/acre, and propose
development under a site plan or PD (planned development) application for special
exception use approval, or
2. Rezone the site to a PD zoning district that allows single-family and multi -family residential,
golf course, and accessory commercial uses and that is tied to a conceptual PD plan
proposing a density not exceeding the site's underlying land use designation densities.
The developer has opted for a PD rezoning, option #2 above. If approved, the proposal would
effectively rezone the property and approve the conceptual PD plan in one set of public hearings.
♦ The PD Zoning District, Generally
Several residential projects have been approved through the PD rezoning process. These include
Pointe West, Old Orchid, River Bend, and Citrus Springs. Unlike standard zoning districts, PD
districts have no prescribed limits regarding lot size or dimensional criteria. Instead, the PD district
is based on the underlying land use plan designation for density and use limitations, and on
compatibility requirements regarding lot sizes and setbacks. In the PD zoning district, setbacks and
other typical zoning district regulations are established on a project by project basis through approval
of a conceptual PD plan. Adopted as part of the PD zoning for a property, the conceptual plan
establishes the lot size and dimensional standards for the project.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-43-
•
I
A rezoning to the PD district requires submission of a binding conceptual PD plan which, along with
certain PD district requirements, limits uses and sets -forth specific development standards on the
site. Thus, a PD rezoning allows a unique PD district to be developed specifically for each
development site.
In this case, the conceptual PD plan proposes the phased development of 550 residential units.
including a mix of single-family units on individual lots (400) and 150 two-story multi -family units.
Also included in the project will be an 18 -hole golf course and driving range, clubhouse, recreational
amenities, common open space, lakes, and certain buffers.
In planning staff s opinion, the PD rezoning option is the best alternative for approving residential
development on the subject site. Unlike other zoning districts, the PD zoning district allows the
county to consider the appropriateness of the proposed development design and project benefits as
part of the rezoning request.
♦ The PD Rezoning Process
The PD rezoning review, approval, and development process is as follows:
STEP 1 Rezoning and conceptual PD plan approval: Review and recommendation made by
staff and by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Final action taken by the Board
of County Commissioners.
STEP 2 Preliminary PD plan (combination of site plan and preliminary plat) approval:
Review and recommendation made by staff. Final action taken by the Planning and
Zoning Commission, subject to the Board's action on the rezoning request.
STEP 3 Land Development Permit or Permit Waiver. Reviewed and issued by staff for
construction of subdivision improvements (roads, utilities, drainage).
STEP 4 Building Permit(s): Reviewed and issued by staff for construction of buildings.
STEP 5 Final PD Plat approval: Review and recommendation made by staff. Final action
taken by the Board of County Commissions.
STEP 6 Certificate of Occupancy: Reviewed and issued by staff for use and occupancy of
buildings.
The applicant is pursuing STEP 1 of the process.
Once a PD conceptual plan is approved, only minor modifications to the conceptual plan can be
approved at a staff level. Any changes proposed to an approved conceptual plan that would reduce
setbacks, intensify the site use (e.g. increase the maximum number of lots), or reduce compatibility
elements (e.g. reduce buffering) can be approved only via a process involving public hearings held
by both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners.
ocT�� g4PPM5
-440 0
-
♦ Proposed PD District for the Project Site
The eastern 3/4s of the site has an L-2 land use designation, while the western 1/4 has an L-1 use
designation. Since the land use designation controls the use of the property by limiting the zoning
districts applicable to the property, any rezoning must be compatible with the uses and densities
allowed by the property's land use designations. Once a specific PD rezoning is approved for a site,
the applicable PD conceptual plan adopted as part of the rezoning will limit the type of specific uses
and the densities allowed on the subject site. The conceptual plan will also establish the dimensional
criteria applicable to the site.
Although PD zoning district parameters are flexible, certain standards related to uses, compatibility
(buffering), infrastructure improvements, dimensional criteria, and open space areas are set forth in
Chapter 915 (P.D. Process and Standards for Development ordinance) of the county's land
development regulations (LDRs). The Colony project proposes to ring the site perimeter with a golf
course (green belt) and create 7 residential development "pods" within this green belt. One of the
pods is proposed to contain multi -family units which will be site planned in detail at a later date
through the preliminary PD plan process. Each of the 6 single-family pods will contain a certain
residential product type with corresponding lot size, width, and setback standards. For review
purposes. the standards/waivers proposed for the individual single-family product types are
compared to the RS -3 and RS -6 zoning district standards in the chart below, since the site has both
L-1 and L-2 land use designations.
COMPARISON OF RS -6 & THE COLONY SINGLE-FAMILY "POD" STANDARDSIWAIVERS
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-45-
•
RS -3 and RS -6
The Colony
Single Family
50' Lots
Pods C, D, E,
and F
The Colony
Single Family
60' Lots
Pod B
The Colony
Single Family
75' Lots
Pod A
Minimum Lot Size
12,000 s.f. and 7.000 s.f.
®
8,100 s.f.
9,450 s.f.
Minimum Lot Width
80' and 70'
®
®
75'
Minimum Yard Setbacks
Primary Residence/Bldg
- Front
25' and 20'
20'
20'
20'
- Side
15' and 10'
- Rear
25' and 20'
20'
20'
20'
Pool
Side
15' and 10'
- Rear
10'
10'
10'
10'
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-45-
•
I
0
Patio/Decks
Side
5'
- Rear
5'
5'
5'
5'
Maximum Building
30%
30%
Coverage on Individual
Lot
Minimum Open Space on
40%
®
®
40%
Individual Lot
Waivers from the RS -6 zonin-- standards have been shaded.
USESABLE
L RS -3 and RS -6 District Uses I PROPOSED PD DISTRICT USES
Single -Family detached, accessory dwelling units, Same uses as RS -3 and RS -6 (including a golf course and
places of worship, child care, golf courses, recreational driving range), and multi -family units, and accessory
uses, and other uses as listed in LDR section 911.07. commercial in accordance with LDR Chapter 915 PD
limitations.
It should be noted that, if the PD rezoning is approved, the approved conceptual plan will be
included as an actual exhibit to the rezoning ordinance. In addition to the above referenced
standards, the conceptual plan also regulates buffering, certain design improvements, and the overall
subdivision layout.
REZONING ANALYSIS:
The project's 297 acres consist mostly of native upland habitat, but also include some scattered and
isolated wetlands and some upland property which has been used for agricultural purposes or
modified to the extent that it does not constitute a native upland. The native uplands are located
primarily in the central portion of the property, with the agricultural area located on the west side of
the site. A cleared upland area is located in the eastern portion of the site.
South of the subject site is 17th Street SW, sand mines, and existing groves. The sand
mines are zoned A-1, while the western 1/z of the area to the south is zoned RS -3.
East of the subject site is 27t1 Avenue. Across 27th Avenue is a vacant parcel and a
portion of Oslo Park. Oslo Park is adjacent to the northeastern portion of the project
site running between 13" Street SW and 151h Street SW and is zoned RS -6. The area
between 15t1 Street SW and 1T1 Street is a vacant wooded parcel zoned
RS -6.
OCTO R�2�q 0 17
M.
0
•
North of the subject site are the Grovenor Estates and Shady Oaks subdivisions. One
block of Grovenor Estates extends south of 13d' Street SW, and the proposed project
wraps around this area on three sides. All of Grovenor Estates and Shady Oaks are
zoned RS -3, although Grovenor Estates contains lots that fall below the RS -3
minimum lot width.
West of the subject site is 43rd Avenue. Across 43rd Avenue are groves. The area
west of 43'd Avenue is zoned A-1.
As is standard for PDs, the development will have a minimum 25' building setback from all
perimeter property lines.
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan
Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with the policies of the comprehensive plan and
must also be consistent with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land Use
Map. Consistency with goals, objectives, and policies is also essential. 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 policies and objectives.
Future Land Use Policies 5.3 and 5.4
Policy 5.3: Indian River county zoning districts shall permit a variety of residential building and
development styles.
Policy 5.4: Indian River County LDRs shall contain a special Planned Development (PD) zoning
district. That district shall be designated as an overlay on the County Zoning Atlas. The PD zoning
district is intended to provide for the development of projects which require flexibility in order to
maximize open space, conserve natural features, provide alternative designs,
facilities, and create a mix of uses.incorporate recreational
The proposed PD is consistent with these policies in that the PD plan proposes a mixture of housing
types with significant common open space, and accommodates a golf course design that preserves
native upland and wetland areas on site.
Future Land Use Element Policies 1.11 and 1.12
Future Land Use Element Policy 1.12 states that the L-1, Low Density Residential 1, and L-2. Low
Density 2 land use designations are intended for residential uses with densities up to 3 and 6
units/acre, respectively. In addition, Future Land Use Element Policy 1.11 states that these
residential uses must be located within an existing or future urban service area.
Because the subject property is located within an area designated as L-1 and L-2 on the county's
future land use plan map and is located within the county's urban service area, and the proposed
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-47-
"
A A,
•
F,
0
zoning district provides for residential uses that are less than 3 units/acre in accordance with the L-1
and L-2 designation, the proposed request is consistent with Policies 1.11 and 1.12.
While the referenced policies and objectivesare 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 on population projections
and current development patterns, residential development in this area of the county is expected to
increase and eventually become the dominant land use. Since the project area is located within the
Urban Service Area and is designated for low-density residential development. the proposed
rezoning is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Future Land Use Pattern: The subject site has an L-1 and L-2 land use designation
South of the subject property across 17' Street SW, the eastern half of the area
between 27' Avenue and 43' Avenue has an L-2 land use designation, while the
western half is designated L-1.
' East of the subject property across 2r Avenue, all of the property has an L-2 land
use designation.
West of the subject property across 43nd Avenue, all of the subject property has an L-1
land use designation.
1. North of the subject property, all of the property has an L-2 land use designation.
Compatibility
Compatibility is an important consideration in any PD rezoning request. In this case, it is
important to consider compatibility of the proposed project with properties in the immediate
area and those within the general area.
Immediate Area: Other than the one block of Grovenor Estates which the project
wraps on 3 sides, the proposed development is not directly adjacent to any other
Properties, but is separated from surrounding properties by a road and/or road right-
of-way. All of the roads on the project perimeter are Thoroughfare Plan roads.
One block of Grovenor Estates will be the most impacted by the proposed
development due to its immediate proximity to the project. The conceptual plan
proposes to place conservation areas and golf course areas adjacent to this Grovenor
Estates block. These design features will ensure compatibility between the existing
conventional development and the uses proposed within the planned development.
General Area: The site is located in southern Indian River County and, with the
exception of the one block of Grovenor Estates, is bounded on all sides by canals
and/or Thoroughfare Plan roads. The canals and Thoroughfare Plan roads provide
physical separation of the project from other properties in the general area. All
adjacent land use designations are similar to the portions of the subject site they abut.
ocTosE-It"MM 2e,,210t 6 19
_I
C
While the majority of the property to the north and some of the property to the east
is developed, most of the remainder of the adjacent properties are undeveloped.
The PD plan design provides a green belt, hundreds of feet wide, around the entire
project site perimeter. This green belt ensures compatibility and actually provides
an aesthetic amenity along the site's perimeter.
Environmental Impacts and Concurrency: These issues are analyzed in the PD plan
analysis.
Proposed Development
The applicant is proposing seven PODs of residential development, one of which is proposed
for multi -family residential. The remaining 6 are proposed to be single-family. Four of the
single-family PODs will contain 50' wide lots, while one will contain 60' wide lots and the
other 75' wide lots. All of the residential development will be internal to the development,
with golf course improvements on the perimeter. The driving range and clubhouse will be
located in the northwest corner of the site, adjacent to 43'd Avenue. The proposed multi-
family POD is to be located in the southeast comer of the site, where the subject location
and properties to the south and east have an L-2 land use designation. Also, the multi -family
POD will be separated from the project perimeter by a 200' to 300'+ wide golf course area
and buffer, and will be accessed internally from the proposed project. In staff s opinion, the
project layout will be compatible with the overall area and surrounding properties.
Public Benefits of the PD Plan
Recently, the planning staff has been asking PD applicants to identify the public benefits that
their project will provide in exchange for the county's flexibility with the design criteria. In
this case, the applicant is proposing a design which will provide significant green space
adjacent to four Thoroughfare Plan roads, as well as significant common green space internal
to the project site. These green space locations will provide a low density open space "feel"
along the public sides of the project (its perimeters) and will accommodate preservation of
uplands and wetlands.
In addition. the applicant will provide stormwater capacity within the project's lakes to treat
the stormwater from future paving improvements to the adjacent Thoroughfare Plan roads.
To facilitate joint use of the stormwater system, the developer will grant an easement to the
county for stormwater purposes. Use of the stormwater system should enable the county to
design roadway paving projects within less right-of-way area, resulting in less right-of-way
acquisition impacts on surrounding property owners in the future. Details of the easement
and stormwater capacity provisions will be addressed in a developer's agreement which will
need to be approved prior to the issuance of a land development permit (LDP) for The
Colony.
PD Plan Analysis:
Size: 297 acres
OCTOBER 24, 2000
•
2. Zoning Classifications: Current: RS -3, Residential Single -Family (up to 3
units/acre)
Proposed: PD. Planned Development (up to 2.50
units/acre)
3. Land Use Designations: L-1, Low Density 1 (up to 3 units/acre) 72 acres
L-2, Low Density 2 (up to 6 units/acre) 225 acres
4. Density: 550 units on 279 acres = 1.85 units/gross acre
5. Open Space: Required: 40.0%
Provided: 50.0%
Note: Open space consists of common open space, private yards, and golf course area.
6. Recreation Area: Required: 6.6 acres
Provided: 179.61 acres
Note: Recreation areas include clubhouse, golf course, pedestrian system and pool.
7. Phasing: The applicant is proposing to phase the development in the following manner.
■ Phase 1 is proposed to include the main boulevard from 431 Avenue, PODs A. B,
C, and D, the golf course, clubhouse and maintenance building improvements, lake
excavation, fill for all 7 PODS, and all perimeter buffers.
■ Phase 2 will include POD E.
■ Phase 3 will be POD F and the main boulevard connection to 27s' Avenue.
■ Phase 4 will included the construction of POD G (multi -family).
The phasing is proposed so that all required improvements necessary to serve a phase will
be completed either prior to or with construction of the phase.
8. Environmental Issues:
Uplands: Since the site is over 5 acres, the native upland set aside requirement of
LDR section 929.05 applies. Native upland communities cover a total of 157.5 acres
on the overall 297.5 acre site, or 53% of the total site.
Based upon county golf course specific land use criteria, at least 30% of existing
native uplands within the golf course area must be preserved. Existing native
uplands in non -golf course areas are subject to the county -wide 15% setaside
requirement. The conceptual plan accommodates these requirements, and the
preliminary PD plan will provide the preservation of a minimum of 33 acres (or 21%
of the total upland area) to meet these requirements.
ocTo�M '61906 2 1
-50-
Wetlands: There are 8 relatively small isolated wetlands on site which comprise a
total of 17.34 acres. The applicant is proposing to preserve the majority of the
wetlands on-site (12.11 acres) and create 7.85 of new wetlands. The result will be
19.96 acres of preserved and created wetlands on site at the completion of
construction.
Endangered Species: There are no endangered species on site which will be
adversely impacted by the proposed development.
9. Concurrency Management: Long-range planning staff has indicated that a conditional
concurrency certificate will be issued for this project prior to Board of County
Commissioners consideration of this item. Thus, all concurrency related requirements
related to conceptual PD plan and rezoning approval have been satisfied.
10. Stormwater Management: As with standard single-family subdivisions, a conceptual
stormwater management plan is required prior to conceptual PD approval. For this project,
a conceptual stormwater management plan has been approved by the Public Works
Department. This includes a system of stormwater ponds within the golf course and
residential pods, and "oversizing" of the system capacity to accommodate run-off from future
adjacent roadway paving. Final review and approval of the stormwater management plan
shall be accomplished through the land development permit process.
11. Thoroughfare Plan: The project has frontage on 4 thoroughfare plan roads. These are: 13'
Street S.W., 17'" Street S.W., 2r Avenue, and 43'd Avenue.
— The Thoroughfare plan classifies 13' Street S.W. as an urban collector which
requires 90' of right-of-way. Since the project site is located on the south side of a
sub -lateral canal, no additional right-of-way is required from the site for 13'b Street
S.W.
— The Thoroughfare Plan classifies 17' Street S.W. as an urban collector requiring
100' of right-of-way. Presently 30' of right-of-way exists. The applicant will need
to dedicate an additional 30' without compensation to create the minimum 60' local
road right-of-way width. In addition, the project survey shows a Murphy Act
easement which extends 100' into the subject site along 17' Street S.W. Despite that
survey information, Public Works has not been able to verify the existence of a
Murphy Act Easement along 17' Street S.W. If the Murphy Act easement exists,
then the county will not need to compensate the applicant for the 40' of right-of-way
above and beyond the 60' local road standard. The applicant's design proposes all
improvements outside of the potential 100' Murphy Act Easement which is also
consistent with the ultimate right-of-way. Therefore, the PD plan accommodates the
appropriate amount of r -o -w, regardless of the Murphy Act easement issue.
However, that issue does need to be resolved to determine compensation. Prior to
the issuance of a land development permit, the applicant will need to provide
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-51-
BK 1 15 PG 622
documents from the State of Florida indicating the presence or absence of a Murphy
Act Easement along 1T" Street S.W.
The Thoroughfare Plan classifies 27' Avenue as an urban collector which requires
130' of right-of-way. Since there is 50' of r -o -w existing, the applicant will need to
dedicate, without compensation, 5' of fee simple right-of-way to complete the site's
local road fairshare of 60'. The site's 27' Avenue frontage is covered by a Murphy
Act Easement, which extends 100' into the site. Therefore, no additional right-of-
way beyond the 5' dedicated area is needed from the site. The plan does not propose
any improvements within the Murphy Act Easement, and provides for appropriate
setbacks from the Murphy Act easement line.
The Thoroughfare Plan classifies 43`d Avenue as a major rural collector, which
requires 100' of right-of-way. Since there is a 100' canal right-of-way between 43rd
Avenue and the subject site, no additional right-of-way is necessary from the subject
site for 43'd Avenue.
12. Traffic Circulation: The applicant is proposing the project's primary access to be from 43'd
Avenue (major rural collector), with a second access to 27' Avenue (urban collector) in a
later phase. The Public Works Director has indicated that he will not approve direct access
to 43'd Avenue, but will allow the applicant to construct a portion of 17' Street S.W. to gain
access to 43"d Avenue via 17' Street S.W. Based on LDR sections 952.12(2)(a) and
952.12(2)(g), the Public Works Director has discretion in approving requests for multiple
access connections to a project. The applicant is seeking to have the 431 Avenue entrance
approved as shown, and proposes direct access to it. As stated previously, the Planning and
Zoning Commission agreed with the applicant on this point. It is the opinion of the Public
Works Director that the project access be from 27' Avenue and 17t° Street SW only.
Planning staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the applicant
provide a connection to 17' Street SW, and the applicant is agreeable to providing a
connection to 17' Street SW in addition to the private driveway connection to 43'd Avenue
that is shown on the conceptual plan. Again, the private connection to 431 Avenue is not
acceptable to the Public Works Director.
A traffic impact analysis (TIA) has been reviewed by the county's traffic engineering
division. The TIA is based on the proposed connection to 43'd Avenue as depicted on the
proposed plans. The traffic engineering division has not approved the TIA since it is based
on a 43'd Avenue connection. Therefore, if the 43id Avenue connection is not approved, the
TIA will need to be revised to reflect the revised connection locations. Based upon the TIA
that has been reviewed, the following improvements could be required.
1. A south bound left turn lane on 43'd Avenue at the project entrance.
2. A south bound right -tum land on 27" Avenue at the project entrance.
These improvements will need to be constructed when the proposed access points are
constructed, if said access points are approved.
13. Utilities: Connection to public water and wastewater, and utilization of reuse water are
required and proposed by the applicant. These utility provisions have been approved by the
Health Department and the County Department of Utility Services. The applicant will extend
water, sewer, and reuse water improvements to serve the site pursuant to separate utility
1IF
-52-
• 0
developer's agreements with the Department of Utility Services. These utility developer's
agreements will be brought to the Board later in the project development process and will
need to be approved by the Board prior to the issuance of the land development permit for
the project.
14. Caribbean Fruit Fly Host Plant: While the subject site is well within the Urban Service
Area. there is still significant citrus production in the area. Therefore, this special exception
requirement is subject to the Carribean fruit fly host plant restriction to ensure compatibility
with citrus groves in the area. Such restriction will need to be noted on each final plat for
the project.
15. Dedications and Improvements: The following dedications and improvements are required
by the LDRs or have been provided through the PD process.
Pedestrian Connection to 13' Street SW. • Staff has requested that the applicant
provide a pedestrian connection to 131 Street S.W. The applicant has proposed a 10'
wide pedestrian connection to 13' Street SW in POD F. The design for the
pedestrian connection will need to be provided with the land development permit for
POD F and constructed prior to the issuance of a certificate of completion for POD
F.
- Local Road Right -of -Way for 17`' Street SW., As indicated in the Thoroughfare Plan
section, the applicant will need to dedicate an additional 30' of road right-of-way
without compensation for 170' Street SW to complete the local road minimum of 60'.
The dedication will need to occur prior to site plan release.
- Local Road Right -of -Way for 27° Avenue: As indicated in the Thoroughfare Plan
section, the applicant will need to dedicate an additional 5' of right-of-way without
compensation for 27"' Avenue to complete the local road minimum of 60'.
- External Pedestrian Improvements: A five foot wide sidewalk is required along the
site's 27'" Avenue and it Street SW frontage. The sidewalk will need to be
constructed or bonded -out prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the
project golf course.
- Internal Pedestrian Improvements: The development will have sidewalks along one
side of all streets. These sidewalks along with golf cart paths will provide the
internal pedestrian system. More details will be provided with the preliminary PD
plan.
- Escrow for Paving: The project has frontage on two unpaved Thoroughfare Plan
roads, 431" Street SW and 17' Street SW. Pursuant to section 952.09(5)(d), the
applicant is required to escrow funds for the paving of his fairshare of 13d' Street SW
and 171 Street SW. The funds will need to be escrowed prior to the issuance of the
first certificate of occupancy. The amount and timing will be addressed in a
developer's agreement with Public Works, and the agreement will need to be
approved prior to the issuance of the first land development permit (LDP).
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-53-
r I
Local Road Right -of -Way for 15* Street SW. • A portion of 1511 Street SW was platted
with Grovenor Estates as a 35' wide half -street. The applicant will either need to
dedicate an additional 25' to complete the local road right-of-way for 1511 Street SW
or seek to have the right-of-way abandoned. The right-of-way dedication or
abandonment will need to occur prior to the issuance of an LDP for the area adjacent
to 1511 Street SW.
Drainage for Thoroughfare Plan Roads: As part of the PD process, the staff has
requested that the applicant provide drainage capacity in the site's lake for the future
paving of 1311 Street SW, 1711 Street SW, and the widening of 2711 Avenue. Such an
arrangement should result in less future right-of-way acquisition by the county. The
applicant has agreed in concept to provide drainage capacity for the paving
improvement. The details of the drainage capacity would need to be provided for in
a developer's agreement which needs to be approved prior to the issuance of the first
land development permit.
16. Landscape and Buffering Plan: The conceptual landscape plan meets the criteria of
Chapter 926 for conceptual approval. Detailed landscape plans will be submitted with the
preliminary PD plan.
Staff has recommended that a Type "D" buffer be provided around the entire development
except in two areas. The fust area is between 43' Avenue and the proposed clubhouse and
maintenance building facility where the staff has recommended a Type "C" with a 6' opaque
feature. The applicant's plan notes such a buffer. The second area is along 1711 Street SW
and 2711 Avenue adjacent to the multi -family POD. Staff has recommended that a Type "C"
buffer be provided along 2711 Avenue from the project entry to 1711 Street SW, and along 1711
Street SW from 2711 Avenue to the proposed stormwater pond. The plan labels the buffer
along 2711 Avenue but does not label the buffer along 1711 Street SW. The plan needs to be
revised to label the buffer along 1711 Street SW, prior to site plan release. These Type "C"
buffers are needed to buffer the proposed multi -family development from adjacent off-site
single-family areas. As previously stated, the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommends that a Type "C" buffer be provided around the entire project site. In staff s
opinion, not all perimeters need a buffer "upgrade" due to provision of the golf course on the
perimeter.
Golf Course Specific Land Use Criteria: Golf courses are subject to the following specific land
use criteria which can be waived or modified through the PD process:
1. Golf courses and accessory facilities shall not be interpreted to include freestanding
commercial miniature golf courses and/or driving ranges or other unenclosed
commercial amusements;
Note. The conceptual PD plan demonstrates that the golf course is a conventional
golf course, and that the driving range is not freestanding.
2. No major accessory use or principal building or structure shall be located closer than
one hundred (100) feet to any lot line which abuts a residentially designated property;
however, the one hundred (100) foot setback may be reduced to normal zoning
ocTosE101 i"Z-5)"'M 6 2 5
-54-
•
district setbacks if the use of the abutting residentially designated property is non-
residential (e.g. institutional, recreation, community services uses) and if a type "B"
buffer with six (6) foot opaque feature is provided between the building and
structures and the abutting residentially designated property.
Note: The main and accessory buildings will not be located within 100' of a property
which abuts a residentially designated property.
3. Golf courses shall, to the most reasonable extent, retain and preserve native
vegetation over at least thirty (30) percent of the total upland area of the course due
to their characteristically high water demand and heavy nutrient loads;
Note: The applicant has agreed to preserve 30% of the native uplands for the golf
course. The preserved areas are accommodated by the conceptual design and will be
specifically determined at preliminary PD plan review for the golf area with the
native upland habitat area.
4. The golf courses shall be designed so that any lighting is shielded and directed away
from residential areas;
NOW No such outdoor lighting is proposed
5. Type "B" screening shall be provided between golf maintenance facilities and
adjacent residentially designated property within two hundred (200) feet of the golf
maintenance facility.
Note: If the maintenance building is located within 200' of 43'd Avenue, the buffer
along 43'd Avenue will be upgraded to a Type `B" buffer. This detail will be
addressed during the future review of a maintenance building site plan.
CONCLUSION:
Subject to recommended conditions, the requested PD rezoning and corresponding conceptual PD
Plan are compatible with the surrounding area, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, meet all
concurrency requirements, and are consistent with the site's L-1, (Low Density 1 up to 3 units/acre),
and L-2 (Low Density 2 (up to 6 units/acre) land use designations and LDRs. The subject property
is suitable for residential development based on its location within the urban service area, proximity
to other residential development and frontage on four thoroughfare plan roads.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the Board of County
Commissioners grant approval of the PD rezoning request and the PD conceptual plan, subject to
the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall redesign the conceptual plan to
a. Eliminate the 43rd Avenue access, and
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-55-
0
r
•
b. Provide access from the project to 17i1 Street S.W., at a location acceptable
to the Public Works Director.
2. The applicant shall revise the traffic impact analysis to reflect the access point
revisions of condition 1., above. -
3. The applicant shall revise the conceptual plan to provide a Type "C" buffer along the
portions of 17' Street S.W. and 27' Avenue adjacent to the multi -family POD.
4. Prior to the issuance of a land development permit, the applicant shall:
a. Apply for and obtain preliminary PD plan approval from the Planning and
Zoning Commission, and
b. Obtain Board of County Commissioners approval of a developer's agreement
regarding the following:
(1) Provision of water, sewer, and reuse water utility improvements, and
(2) Provision of drainage capacity within the development for the future
paving of 13`h Street SW, 17' Street SW and expansion of 27h
Avenue, and
(3) Fairshare escrow of funds for the improvement for 13th Street SW and
17`h Street SW, and
(4) Construction of all off-site traffic improvements, including the timing
for paving all or a portion of 17'h Street SW for project secondary
access.
C. Dedicate local road right-of-way for 1Th Street SW and 2r Avenue, and
d. Obtain a right-of-way abandonment for 15`h Street SW or dedicate an
additional 25' right-of-way for 13`h Street SW.
5. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of completion for any respective project phase
or POD, the applicant shall:
a. Construct any other required improvements such as sidewalks and buffers
that are tied to that specific phase, or otherwise guarantee the improvement
as provided for in the LDRs.
6. Via the final plat(s), a restrictive covenant shall be established on the project site
prohibiting Carribean fruit fly host plants.
N
-56-
C,
ARAAlIS
AAAIAAAAR aR��Rs' � � '' � s'
V
� YOQO�O� fi�6Y8Q�°
:
1�IRARAAR AR�Il�RRR�
� ,
®e��R
Nfi�e
`
� -
lIARA�IRAb��RRRA��AI
�fiY69Y8F1�SY�fi �
'�
s.
tam e�
r
Planning Director Stan Boling reviewed the project for the Board and noted that the
upland and wetland areas will be preserved. Stormwater will be managed through an
interconnected system of lakes which will also be available for use by the County.
Regarding the entrance on 43' Avenue, the Public Works Director has some
recommendations to present to the Board.
Commissioner Stanbridge wished developers would not put "lakes" on stormwater
tracts. They are not lakes.
Public Works Director Jim Davis advised, regarding the 43' Avenue access, that the
developer is planning a private bridge over the Indian River Farms Water Control District
canal which is 30 to 40 feet in width. The District discourages private bridges because they
interfere with drainage. Also, any bridge over 20 feet in length must be inspected every 2
years. If the developer would move the bridge south 1/4 mile, then his 550 homeowners and
the general public could both utilize the bridge and the County could cost -share in the
construction. 43rd Avenue is a dangerous major truck hauling avenue. This could be a
better, safer project if the bridge were relocated and made a public bridge at 17' Street SW.
This bridge could then go a long way toward a major east -west thoroughfare in the County.
Chairman Adams announced to those persons in the audience waiting for the public
hearings on civic and social membership clubs, as well as group homes and ALFs in the
MED district, that those items are being postponed to November 7' because of an error in
the advertisement for the public hearing.
ocToBBINE1 a�aszPo6 2 9
• 58 •
0
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in
this matter.
Bruce Barkett, Attorney for applicant, 756 Beachland Boulevard, stated this is a very
good project with 66% open space which exceeds the requirement. There is a conservation
area around Grovenor Estates, the total density is only 1.85 units, and the developer is
donating 30 feet of right-of-way along 17' Street to the County without compensation. He
stressed that the 43' Avenue access should be approved as they believe it is critical to the
project. The developer would also like to use street names instead of numbers and has no
problem with the abandonment of the 13' Street right-of-way.
Scot McGuire of Knight & McGuire, urged the Board to approve the project with
the recommended conditions.
Chris Squires of Kimley-Horn stated that the 43rd Avenue access is a good thing and
will not hurt the County Thoroughfare Plan.
Mr. McGuire stated that there will be a private community fund for the bridge and
roadways and the developer feels it is worth any extra monies to have the entrance on 43rd
Also, the developer will be contributing roughly $100,000 to the construction of 17U' Street
plus the impact fees.
Keville Worthington, 1266 32nd Avenue, stated that his father was concerned about
animals coming into Grovenor Estates after the land clearing.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-59-
•
Fr -
Renee Renzi, 340 East Waverly Place, questioned which schools would be impacted
from this community, and Commissioner Stanbridge stated the school would be either
Thompson or Citrus Elementary.
Ms. Renzi noted that there could be 1,000 children in that enormous piece of property
and felt that should be taken into consideration.
Mark Tripson, 5020 12th Street, felt the developer does need the bridge on 43', not
at 17' Street. He mentioned that Arbor Trace, The Grove and Shady Oaks all have
entrances on 43`a Avenue.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard regarding this matter. There
being none, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Macht stated that safety is a very real issue which became a reality for
him last year when a friend was killed by a mining truck making a turn on 43`a
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Tippin,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, that the
project be approved with access as outlined on 43'
and other staff recommendations
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and
the motion failed by a 2-3 vote (Commissioners
Macht, Adams and Stanbridge opposed).
0CJ?J'1E2J.'R%.-2tt2 00
Tb 931
0
0
SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board,
by a 3-2 vote (Commissioners Ginn and Tippin
opposed) granted approval of the PD rezoning
request and the PD conceptual plan, subject to the
conditions set forth in the Memorandum of October
17, 2000; and adopted Ordinance 2000-034
amending the Zoning Ordinance and the
accompanying Zoning Map from RS -3 to PD for
approximately 297 acres of land generally located
between 13' Street SW on the north, 17' Street SW
on the south, 27th Avenue on the east, and 43'
Avenue on the west (The Gralia Group - The
Colony).
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-61-
BK 1 15 PG 632
•
A
L
ORDINANCE NO. 2000 --MA
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE
ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM RS -
3, TO PD FOR APPROXIMATELY 297 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY
LOCATED BETWEEN 13" STREET SW ON THE NORTH, 11" STREET SW
ON THE SOUTH, 27TH AVENUE ON THE EAST, AND 43RD AVENUE ON THE
WEST; AND DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the local planning agency on
such matters, has held a public hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this
rezoning request; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, did
publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone the hereinafter described property; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined that this rezoning is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County and the county land development
regulations, including but not limited to the Planned Development (PD) Process and Standards for
Development chapter, 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 property situated in Indian River County, and legally
described in EXHIBIT A (attached) be changed from RS -3 to PD, residential and that the PD
conceptual plan (see EXHIBIT B, attached) will control and regulate development on the subject
land. Said zoning shall revert to RS -3 on December 31, 2001, unless a land development permit for
OCTOBER 24, oPoGo 3 3
-62-
• 0
0
ORDINANCE NO. 2000- 034
all or any portion of the project has been issued prior to that date.
All with the meaning and intent as set forth in the land development regulations, and the
approved conceptual plan as may be amended pursuant to the provisions of the Planned
Development (PD) Process and Standards for Development chapter of the land development
regulations.
This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal on the _ 191h day of
nctnhPr , 2000, for a public hearing to be held on the 24th day of October
2000, at which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Stanbridge
seconded by Commissioner Macht , and adopted by the following vote;
The ordinance was adopted by a vote of :
Chairman Fran B. Adams
Vice Chairman Caroline D. Ginn
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht
Commissioner John W. Tippin
Aye
Nay
Aye
Nay
Commissioner Ruth M. Stanbridge Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the ordinance duly passed and adopted this 24th day
of October , 2000.
Axqt: J.K. Barton, Clerk
Deputy Clerk
OCTOBER 24, 2000
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Fran B. Adams
Chairman
•
r 'I
ORDINANCE NO.2000-034
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM
William G. Collins
Deputy County Attorney
APPROVED AS TO PLANNING MATTERS
Robert M. Keating, AICP
Community Development D' ector
�7
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10-24-00 by Fran B.
Adams as Chai q Oie Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, and
pA"'CIA "PJ" 1
by liu ;'Clerk, of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, who are personally known to me
Notary Public
W•r"y4F KanberyEMassung
;.. '..= MY COMMISSION 3 CCM36 EXPIRES
g'.July 15, 2003 Printed N e: Kimberl
%per •
BOM
o TMraor rnI uauwwcE we
Commission No.: CC855436
Commission Expiration: Jul y 15, 2003
Acknowledgment by the Department of State of the State of Florida this 24th day of October ,
2000.
Effective upon filing with the Department of State.
This ordinance was filed with the Department of State on the following date: 11-0 1
ocTo��� �a�zPPo6 3 5
-64-
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TRACTS 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 AND 16, SECTION 27,
TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, INDIAN RIVER FARMS
COMPANY SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF,
AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25, OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE(NOW INDIAN RIVER)COUNTY, FLORIDA.
LESS HOWEVER THAT PORTION OF TRACT 10 LYING WITHIN
THE PLAT OF GROVENOR ESTATES UNIT 2-A, ACCORDING TO
THE PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 5, PAGE
19, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA
AND ALSO LESS AND EXCEPT RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND
EASEMENTS OF RECORD.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
EHiair "a
-65-
-I
4
aMaaee2ore
ro rras
ii r• r• s•
u• u• ue
II Y� ui Y1
�
xHiiT "B"'
R...ar.nmv
O
�qT Ai
nw wanner
yAeeerM
r wrwis
r Ae
r rw
&tee
Lm
M.Ar
M..rpr�r
rr i
Mee rtlr0•
YrOYI
A1AAdA �v.
YrYL
TY Preen. �Y rrrr.a
YA1DN1 AlL6MARL Datum
euWr
W.• am r.�m rm
mot � ottan . w ur
.CIE a .w.e' M
a 000w .to uri/,w
®ma em.. SSW ea
a •.w FIs r v
�Ys .
�q : iiyr.VM
erw : r rr/b
. W rAy/A
ti w�s�u.1Y
q : Y�I.yy►a.
P�i1 w :rA t�
�.:.m.W.
10 •.weelp ftow
aw�� K
.. ryr
ee.....,rr�
I P.O. OVERALL PLAN 4' xi�aturr,13M XN sM sass, nvc
1IIq"ala 2 d
• one err a+r.aa m .m wrt.nar
ror�naaa• uneow w�r.reM.r
COMPLETE COPY OF EXHIBIT `B", P.D. OVERALL
PLAN IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK
- TO THE BOARD
OCTOBEJ�aj a�o�oPG 637
-66-
•
9.A.3. PUBLIC HEARING - ROOSTER REGULATIONS - FIRST
HEARING ON PROPOSED LDR AMENDMENT
PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR HEARING IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 17, 2000:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DM HEAD CONCURRENCE:
tl—1,lN
Robert M. Keating, AICP
Community Development Director /
FROM: Stan BolinA-6
Planning Director
DATE: October 17, 2000
SUBJECT: First Hearing: Proposed LDR Amendment on Rooster Regulations
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its meeting of October 24, 2000.
BACKGROUND:
Over the past two years, the county has received and acted on several complaints involving a rooster
(game fowl) breeding/raising operation conducted by Mr. Willis Wilson that was initially conducted
in the Roseland area on a residentially zoned site. Within the last year, the use was moved to an
agriculturally zoned site in the Fellsmere area.
Staff's interpretation of the existing LDRs is that county regulations allow the raising of game fowl
in agricultural areas. This interpretation is based on a determination that such a use is similar to
"poultry raising", which is a permitted "by right" agricultural use. Subsequent to staff s rooster use
determination, residents living near the Fellsmere area location of the game fowl operation appealed
staff s determination to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
At its August 10, 2000 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission overturned staffs decision
and determined that a game fowl operation is more similar to a "small animal specialty farm" use
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-67-
than "poultry raising". As a "small animal specialty farm", the game fowl use would be allowed
in agricultural areas subject to administrative permit criteria and limitations. The game fowl operator
has appealed the Commission's decision to the Board of County Commissioners, and requested that
the appeal not be scheduled for Board consideration until after the Board considers the subject LDR
amendment proposal.
Responding to neighbors' complaints, the Board of County Commissioners, at its August 8, 2000
meeting, directed staff to propose an LDR amendment that addresses nuisances related to roosters
(see attachment #1). Based on the Board's directive, staff researched issues related to raising
roosters and cock fighting, and prepared an LDR amendment intended to address the noise nuisance
impacts of rooster concentrations, while accommodating legitimate poultry operations.
Rooster regulation proposals have been considered by the Professional Services Advisory Committee
(PSAC), Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC), and Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC).
Now the Board is to consider the amendment and direct staff to make any desired changes. In
response to Board direction, and any format sufficiency comments from the County Attorney's
Office, staff will prepare revised, `final" ordinances for the Board to act on at a second public
hearing which is scheduled for November 7, 2000.
ANALYSIS•
As stated, the Board's directive centered on the need to address the negative noise impacts
(nuisances) created by concentrations of roosters, and the concerns that raising game fowl contributes
to cock -fighting. In so doing, staff analyzed cock -fighting related legal issues and agricultural land
use issues.
Legal Issues - Florida Law
The County Attorney's Office and planning staff researched the Florida Statutes and case law
(see attachment #2). Staff concludes that:
Fighting or baiting an animal to fight, including cock -fighting, is illegal in
Florida under Florida Statutes 828.122. There appears to be no separate
Florida Statute definition of fighting cocks.
2. Although fighting cocks, betting on cock -fights, and owning, managing, or
operating a cock -fighting facility is illegal in Florida, it does not appear to be
illegal to raise or breed fighting cocks. The premise that fighting cocks can
be raised in a state like Florida that prohibits cock -fighting is supported by a
1953 Florida case (Mikell v. Henderson) and a 1994 Oregon case (Hogan v.
Gridelli).
3. The Florida Right to Farm Act does not pre-empt the county from regulating
agricultural uses, and it does not "grand father -in" uses on a particular site
that are less than 1 year old or that were a nuisance at the time the use was
established. However, staff also concludes that the county's regulations need
to allow legitimate agricultural uses that have generally accepted agricultural
and management practices.
ocTo�x�2�5-20A°639
Legals Issues - Non -conformities and Grandfathering
During review of the proposed ordinance, there have been discussions on non -conformities
and grandfathering issues. According to agricultural extension agent Dan Culbert, there are
no state agricultural census data on chickens or roosters in Indian River County, and there
are no significantly sized poultry operations in this county. Staff has no count of either the
number of farms with roosters or the number of roosters on individual farms. Based upon
statements made by rooster owners/breeders at various public meetings there could be several
to a few dozen rooster breeders in the county. Based upon statements made at these meetings
it appears that Mr. Wilson's operation on 5 acres has up to 300 roosters, about twice as many
as any other known operation.
To date, the only rooster raising operation that has been determined (by the PZQ to not be
legally established is the Wilson operation, which recently commenced on a site in the
Fellsmere area. The PZC's decision is under appeal. That operation appears to have the
highest number and concentration of roosters. Therefore, at this time, Mr. Wilson has the
only operation that requires "specialty farm" administrative permit approval. Other existing,
longer -standing operations would appear to be grandfathered -in and, therefore, would not be
affected by new regulations unless moved to or expanded onto a new location.
Accommodating Poultry Uses
Staffs research indicates that "poultry raising" is a legitimate agricultural use that involves
the raising of domesticated birds primarily for the purposes of meat or egg consumption.
This use has accepted practices, is allowed under the existing LDRs as a permitted use, and
needs to be accommodated. Also, it is staffs understanding that a limited number of roosters
(defined as adult male chickens that crow) are needed as part of poultry operations. Egg
producing operations involve no roosters. Likewise, meat producing operations either
involve only hens (pullets) or hens and young male chickens (broilers, fryers) that usually
have not matured into roosters and that usually are not capable of producing the noise of
roosters. Furthermore, it appears that a limited number of roosters are necessary for poultry
breeding purposes. Therefore, it appears that the number of roosters on a site could be
limited without adversely affecting poultry operations. Conditions on rooster -raising
operations can be used to address the adverse noise impacts (nuisances) that concentrations
of roosters can produce.
Limiting Rooster Noise Impacts
As evidenced by findings in a recent Mississippi case (Labert v. Matthews), it is generally
accepted that concentrations of roosters generate noise impacts that can constitute a nuisance,
even in a rural area. However, it is logical to expect a wide variety of animals to be raised
in significant numbers in agricultural areas. Thus, care should be given when considering
limitations or conditions on raising animals in agricultural areas since such areas are the very
places where animal raising activities should generally occur.
The principal basis for regulating concentrations of roosters in agricultural areas is the
county's code enforcement experience that concentrations of roosters generate more of a
noise nuisance than other animal concentrations that occur in agricultural areas (e.g. hens,
OCTOBER 24, 2000
other types of birds, livestock, dogs, etc). To date, staff's experience with animal noise
complaints in agricultural areas bears out this distinction between rooster concentrations and
concentrations of other animals and birds.
Allowing "by right" a reasonable number of roosters on agriculturally
necessary for legitimate poultry uses and should be considered o zoned sites is
all agricultural areas. Based upon information provided b Agricultural may and compatible in
Director Dan Culbert from the University of Florida Institute of F000d and Agriculturaln Service
Science (IFAS), and based upon input from interested parties, the Agricultural
y
Committee (AAC) determined that two dozen (24) roosters on an gnn agricultural
Advisory
should be allowed "b right',. Y given agricultural site
YThe AAC also determined that 25 or more roosters on an
agricultural site would reasonably constitute a "specialty farm", and that conditions placed
on such a farm should accommodate the use but also provide some visual screening from
neighbors that also could provide a small degree of noise attenuation for neighbors (see
attachment #5).
Staff has given significant weight to the AAC's recommendations and h
The proposed LDR amendment would
recommendations in the proposed LDR amendment. as used those
allow the keeping of up to 24 roosters The as adult male chickens that crow) as a "by
right" permitted use in agricultural areas. This standard could be enacted via the proposed
definitions contained in section 1 of the proposed ordinance (see attachment #6). Under the
1.Proposed amendment, any site containing 25 or more roosters would be defined as a
specialty farm" and would be defined not to be "poultry raisin
Permitted use by right). A "specialtyg" ("Poultry raising" is a
use as is required for that use unr the existing Lwould �� administrative Permit approval,
The proposed LDR amendment would also add specific land use criteria for specialty farms
to address concentrations of 25 or more roosters. The "specialty farm" criteria would require
concentrations of roosters to be located in a designated area or structure that is set back from
surrounding properties by a distance of 75' or more, unless the roosters are kept in an
enclosed, soundproofed structure If such a soundproofed structure .is proposed,
agricultural zoning district setback would apply (A-1, A-2, and A-3 districts) In addition
to the special setbackisound-proofed enclosure criterion, the proposed LDR amendment
would require physical buffering similar to the active agricultural buffer standard used
elsewhere in the LDRs. Such a buffer (see attachment #7) would provide visual screening
and some noise attenuation. Such a buffer could consist of existing vegetation (preserved)
and/or planted vegetation located between the site boundaries and the designated rooster
area.
ALTERNATIVES:
There are several alternative approaches the county can take, including the proposed LDR
amendment, if it wants to regulate the raising of roosters in agricultural areas. These are:
1 • Establish a threshold number of roosters allowed(e.g. 5 10, 20,
50, r below the
threshold threshold, allow that number of roosters on site by right, without c°nditions.oAbove the
and bufferinPically classify the og. peration as a "specialty fans" and require special setbacks
•
NOTE. This is the alternative supported by the AAC and incorporated into the current LDR
amendment proposal (see attachment #6). _
2. Establish a rooster per acre standard (e.g. 1 rooster per acre) .
OPTION: also establish a specialty farm threshold and conditions (see #1 above).
NOTE: This was the alternative initially proposed by staff and rejected by the PSAC
(Professional Services Advisory Committee) at its September 25' meeting. Specifically,
what was proposed at that time was the following:
One (1) rooster per 2.5 acres.
Over 10 roosters constitutes a "specialty farm".
"Specialty farms" provide an agricultural buffer around a designated rooster
area that is set back 600' from property lines (requires 40 acre tract).
3. Establish a rooster to hen ratio (e.g. no more than 1 rooster per 4 hens).
OPTION: also establish a "specialty farm" threshold and conditions (see #1 above).
4. Establish noise standards for agricultural areas to be applied to all agricultural uses.
(Currently, agricultural zoning districts are specifically exempt from the county's noise
ordinance requirements).
NOTE: This option was recommended by the PSAC.
5. Allow specialty farms in A-2 (10 acre minimum) and A-3 (20 acre minimum) zoning
districts only.
These types of alternatives were discussed by the PSAC, the AAC, and the PZC. The
recommendations of those committees, the Commission, and staff are as follows:
• PSAC Recommendation: Deny the originally proposed LDR amendment (1 rooster per 2.5
acres, over 10 roosters constitutes a "specialty farm", require a 600' setback and agricultural
buffer), and have the Agricultural Advisory Committee consider a noise ordinance in
agricultural areas.
• AAC Recommendation: Adopt an LDR amendment defining operations with 25 or more
roosters as a "specialty farm" requiring a conditional use permit (e.g. administrative permit)
and a 75 foot setback with a Type "B" buffer.
• PZC Recommendation: Voted 3-2 to deny the proposed amendment.
■ Staff Recommendation: Based upon the AAC recommendation, adopt an LDR amendment
defining operations with 25 or more roosters as a "specialty farm" requiring administrative
Permit approval in the A-1, A-2, and A-3 districts. Require a 75' setback between property
boundaries and designated rooster areas or a 30' setback if roosters are kept in an enclosed,
sound proofed structure. Also, require a Type `B" buffer with 6' opaque feature (same as
active agricultural buffer) between the designated rooster area and site boundaries.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-71-
0
'A
F,
•
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners:
Direct staff to make any necessary changes to the proposed ordinances, and
2. Announce its intentions to take final action on the proposed ordinances at the Board
hearing scheduled for 9:05 am on November 7, 2000 to be held in the County
Commission Chambers.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Minutes from August 8, 2000 BCC Meeting
2. Memo from County Attorney's Office & F.S. 828.122
3. Information from Agricultural Extension Services &IFAS
4. PSAC Minutes (unapproved)
5. AAC Minutes (unapproved)
6. Proposed LDR Amendment: Limitations on Roosters
7. Type `B" Buffer Graphic
8. PZC Minutes (unapproved)
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard
regarding this matter.
Tamara Lupo, 13400 103' Street, stated she and Mr. Wilson purchased this property
6 months ago to raise game roosters. She has certificates from the Environmental Health
Department and from the State of Florida confirming that their farm does not have a noise
or sanitary issue. If the Board forces them to reduce the number of their birds to 25, they
will not be able to stay in business. They believe they have complied with all the
regulations.
Willis Wilson, 13400103' Street, also felt that they have done everything the County
asked them to do. They are up to code and are legal farmers. They have more than 25
breeds of chickens and it will take them 3 years just to break even.
oc'roa�Rl2��2T�u 643
-72-
0
Orlando Riera-Gomez, 9921 SW 1570' Terrace, Miami, President of the Florida
Game Fowl Breeders Association, noted that they have members all over the state and quite
a few in this County. He sympathized with neighbors who complain about agricultural noise
but felt that they know when they purchase the land that it is zoned for agriculture and
someone will have a farm on that land. These people could move to a restricted residential
property if they do not want to be next to agricultural uses.
Cornelius Crawford, Vice President ofPreservation ofGame Fowl, State ofFlorida,
noted that roosters date back to the Spaniards who first colonized the State and they are very
important to a lot of people. He has a rooster farm with approximately 400 roosters on 5
acres and has never had any complaints from neighbors. From inside his house, he cannot
hear the roosters at all. He believed that a buffer zone and a privacy fence would stop a lot
of the noise.
Morris Thomas, 10385 130' Avenue, raises chickens and has about 50 hens and 50
roosters. He sells the grown roosters for $5 to $10 each. He felt that if the Board were
going to take away the agricultural uses, they might as well remove all agricultural uses at
one time.
Responding to questions about the status of current chicken farmers, Commissioner
Ginn stated that they would either be "grandfathered" in or would have to get a permit to
operate as a "specialty farm".
Mr. Thomas commented that he had attended a meeting of the Agricultural Advisory
Committee and believed that this decision has already been made and approved.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-73-
_I
Chairman Adams emphasized that decisions made at the Agricultural Advisory
Committee level have no bearing on decisions made here and that there have been no
discussions with any other commissioners regarding this matter.
Mr. Thomas stated that his concern was that the County would be involved in
expensive lawsuits and he did not want the County to spend money to fight something as
trivial as a rooster making noise.
Scarlett Chesser, 10420 134th Court, felt that the rooster operations are devaluing
surrounding properties. These roosters start crowing about 3:00 a.m.. and continue all day.
She presented a petition signed by over 60 residents. (CLERK'S NOTE: COPY OF
PETITION IS ON FILE WITH THE BACKUP FOR TODAY'S MEETING.) She did not
feel that raising fighting game roosters is an agricultural use and believed that a change to
"specialty" farming would not restrict bona fide agricultural operations. She then played a
video recording demonstrating the noise of the roosters. (CLERK'S NOTE: A COPY OF
THE VIDEO TAPE IS ON FILE WITH THE BACKUP FOR TODAY'S MEETING.)
Attorney Greg Gore, 709 Washington Street, representing Mr. and Mrs. Robert
McMillan who live across from the rooster farm, stated that Florida Statutes, Chapter 583
does not include fighting game hens. His client contends that the rooster farm causes a
significant degradation in the surrounding locale. Mr. Gore then read from a letter received
from a realtor stating that the noise and odor from the rooster farm had significantly affected
the sale of his clients' property. (CLERK'S NOTE: COPY OF LETTER IS ON FILE
WITH THE BACKUP FOR TODAY'S MEETING.)
•
John Stewart, Attorney representing Mr. Wilson and Ms. Lupo, asked for an
explanation of the proposed LDR that will apply county -wide, and Chairman Adams
explained that the purpose behind the proposed amendment is an effort by the County to
alleviate some of the problems caused by rural interface areas, while keeping up the value
of the property and guaranteeing the health and safety of neighbors.
Mr. Stewart suggested that the problem could be addressed as a noise issue and
questioned why no noise testing was done and why one animal is being singled out. He felt
that this amendment will be an enforcement nightmare and that the County is attempting to
micro -manage permitted uses. He felt that there is no data indicating that roosters are any
noisier than any other animal and restrictions would impinge on private property rights.
Chairman Adams stated that the noise is particularly offensive because it occurs at
3:00 a.m.., day after day.
Cindy Hodge stated that she lives directly behind Mr. Wilson and hears the roosters
every day, all day long. Mr. Wilson also has several other animals: 5 cows, 5 calves, 6 dogs
and a boar hog. He does not have any buffers and the roosters are on his property right at
the fence line. She believed there needs to be some sort of regulation of this use.
Morris Thomas then questioned whether the video tape presented by Ms. Chesser was
made from their front porch or from the fence line and whether the volume control was set
on high.
Mr. Gomez stated that game fowl have been shipped in and out of Florida since the
time of the Louisiana purchase and are used for food and fiber. This is a bona fide, legal
agricultural product of the State of Florida.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-75-
•
Mr. Wilson stated that he does not have 300 roosters, but only 187. He also repeated
that the Health Department has inspected his farm and stated that there are no health hazards
and no smells.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard regarding this matter. There
being none, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Chairman Adams noted that staff is recommending that a farm with 25 or more
roosters be defined as a "specialty farm".
Commissioner Macht believed that the Board is way off base trying to prohibit certain
types of farm animals and felt that when you move into an agriculturally designated area,
you take the risk of being a neighbor to a farm with its attendant noises and smells.
Commissioner Ginn believed there is something to be said for quiet enjoyment of
your property and the pull is between quiet enjoyment and private property rights.
Commissioner Tippin could not support the recommendation and stated that people
do a lot of things he doesn't like, but government cannot pass a law against sin. He felt this
was going too far.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board, by
a 3-2 vote (Commissioners Macht and Tippin
opposed) approved the staff recommendation, based
upon the AAC recommendation, to adopt an LDR
amendment defining operations with 25 or more
roosters as a "speciality farm" requiring
ocTo�� 2�Zp�o� 47
c:
administrative permit approval in the A-1, A-2 and
A-3 districts; requiring a 75 -foot setback between
property boundaries and designated rooster areas or
a 30 -foot setback if roosters are kept in an enclosed,
sound -proofed structure; and requiring a Type `B"
buffer with 6 -foot opaque features (same as active
agricultural buffer) between the designated rooster
area and site boundaries; and announced its
intention to take final action on the proposed
ordinance at the Board hearing scheduled for 9:05
a.m. on November 7, 2000 to be held in the County
Commission Chambers; all as recommended by
staff.
9.A.4. PUBLIC HEARING - (1) ROAD NAMES; (2) CIVIC AND
SOCIAL MEMBERSHIP CLUBS; (3) GROUP HOMES
AND ALFS IN THE MED DISTRICT; (4) CR -510 EAST
CORRIDOR ENTRY FEATURES - FIRST HEARING ON
PROPOSED LDR AMENDMENTS
PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR HEARING ON ITEMS (1) ROAD NAMES AND
(4) CR -510 EAST CORRIDOR ENTRY FEATURES IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO
THE BOARD
ITEMS (2) CIVIC AND SOCIAL MEMBERSHIP CLUBS AND (3) GROUP HOMES AND ALFS IN THE
MED DISTRICT WERE INCORRECTLY ADVERTISED AND WILL BE RE -ADVERTISED AND HEARD
OCTOBER 24, 2000
AT A LATER DATE
-77-
QK1l5PG64
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 17, 2000:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
WVIMN HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Obert M. Keating, AICP %
Community Development Director
FROM: Stan Boling -I&P
Planning Director
DATE: October 17, 2000
SUBJECT: First Hearing on Proposed LDR Amendments: Road Names; Civic and Social
Membership Clubs; Group Homes and ALFs in the MED District; CR 510 East
Corridor Entry Features ,
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its meeting of October 24, 2000.
BACKGROUND:
Recently, four unrelated land development regulation (LDR) amendment proposals were initiated
for consideration. As per county procedures. these amendments have been reviewed by the
appropriate committees and the Planning and Zoning Commission. Three of the amendments are
Board (Board of County Commissioners) initiated while one is staff initiated These amendments
are:
1. Allowance for Road Names (BCC - initiated)
2. Civic and Social Membership Clubs (BCC - initiated)
3. Group Homes and Adult Living Facilities (ALFs) in the MED District (Staff -
initiated)
4. Entry Feature Height Allowance in the CR 510 East Corridor (BCC - initiated)
Staff has drafted an individual ordinance for each amendment. A copy of each of these proposed
amendment ordinances is attached (see attachments 5 through 8).
These amendments are being reviewed at two hearings (October 20 and November r ). The Board
is now to consider each amendment and is to direct staff to make any desired changes. In response
to Board direction, and any format sufficiency comments from the County Attorney's Office, staff
will prepare revised `final" ordinances for the Board to act on at a second public hearing which is
scheduled for November 7, 2000.
ANALYSIS:
Allowance for Road Names (BCC - initiated)
Chapter 951 of the LDRs was established years ago to ensure that a coordinated road and
housebuilding address system is maintained throughout the county and applied to new
developments. That system is based upon the existing numbered grid system for roads, and
standardizes road designations and suffixes by location and direction/orientation within the grid.
Currently, Chapter 951 regulations require all public roads and many private roads to have street
number designations (e.g. 29' Court). However, Chapter 951 currently contains some exceptions
whereby new private roads are allowed to be given name designations (e.g. "Planner Way") based
upon a special approval. These exceptions allow name designations for new roads that:
(1) Are an extension of an existing named road, or
(2) Are located on the barrier island (where road names rather than road numbers are in
place), or
(3) Are within PDs and do not fit into the existing grid of east -west and north -south
streets.
For some time, it has been the practice of the Board of County Commissioners to approve all
requests for name designations for private roads, sometimes contrary to staff (emergency services
and planning) recommendations. It should be noted that most projects contain some segment(s) of
roadway (e.g. curved entrance road) that does not run either north -south or east -west and does not
fit into the existing grid (see criterion 3, above). During its review of the Riverbend PD project, the
Board not only granted the applicant's request for the use of road names for that project, but also
instructed staff to revisit the LDRs to allow for private roads to be name designated without special
approval (see attachment #1).
Staff has now initiated an LDR amendment to implement the Board's practice of allowing road name
designations, rather than requiring road numbering designations, for all private roads regardless of
the `fit" within the grid system. Because most new development projects involve private roads and
most developers desire road names, staff anticipates that the proposed LDR amendment will result
in most new roads being given name designations.
Therefore, it is likely that if the amendment is adopted then roads in newly developing and infill
areas of the county will not fit into the road number designation system, and the integrity of the
number designation system will be lost over time. For that reason the Emergency Services
Department recommends against the proposed LDR amendment (see attachment #2).
PSAC Recommendation: Voted 7-0 to recommend that road names be allowed for all
private roads and dedicated public roads as well.
PZC Recommendation: Voted 41 to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance
to allow use of road names for new private roads.
Staff Recommendation: Emergency Services recommends against the proposed
change. Planning staff recommends adoption of the
ordinance so that the Board's practice of allowing use of road
names for private roads is codified.
■ Civic and Social Membership Clubs (BCC - initiated)
At its August 8, 2000 meeting, the Board directed staff to propose an LDR amendment to allow
Civic and Social Membership Clubs as special exception uses in areas similar to the non-commercial
properties located between the Indian River Mall and 26' Street (see attachment #3). That area is
zoned agricultural, contains large parcels, and has an M-1, Medium Density Residential (up to 8
units/acre) land use designation.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-79-
6'K 1 15 PG G50
�1
Currently, county LDRs allow civic and social membership clubs in the MED, CL, and CG
commercial districts only. Accordingly, existing social clubs in the unincorporated county are
located in commercial districts (e.g. Polish American Club and the Moose Lodge). Thus, the current
LDRs treat these types of club uses similar to restaurants and ban;, uses which are purely commercial
in nature. The Board's direction is to treat such clubs similar to a type of `community service" use,
such as a not-for-profit facility or theater or community center. Thus, the essential use question is
whether or not social clubs should be treated as a bar/restaurant commercial type of use or as a
community service type of use. Based upon the Board's direction, staff has drafted an LDR
amendment that treats social clubs as a community service type use with strict conditions.
Under the proposed LDR amendment, civic and social membership clubs would be allowed as
special exception uses in M-1 and M-2 (the county's highest density residential) designated areas
only, on sites that front on a Thoroughfare Plan road and that have sufficient area to accommodate
significant setbacks. The proposed setback and buffering criteria were derived from existing criteria
for community centers and schools that are located in residentially designated areas. These setbacks
(50' to 100') and buffering requirements are necessary to ensure compatibility with adjacent
residential uses, and will ensure that such clubs would be located on larger sites (probably 2 or more
acres in size to accommodate the facility and special setbacks).
If the proposed amendment is adopted, then social clubs will continue to be permitted uses in
commercial districts and will be allowed as special exception uses only in M-1 and M-2 designated
areas in the A-1. RM -8. and RM -10 districts, subject to special criteria.
PSAC Recommendation: Voted 6-1 to deny the proposed amendment, keep the
commercial district requirement for social clubs, and amend
the LDRs to allow social clubs in the CH district where bars
and restaurants are currently allowed.
PZC Recommendation: Voted 41 to approve the proposed ordinance to allow social
clubs as special exception uses in M-1 and M-2 areas.
Staff Recommendation: To approve the proposed LDR amendment, based on the
Board's directive.
Group Homes and ALFs in the MED District
The MED (Medical) district is designed to include medical uses and uses that complement medical
uses and exclude uses that can and should be accommodated outside of a medical node.
Consequently, the MED district allows family counseling services, but does not allow retail
department stores. Some uses which have health care and residential characteristics, such as nursing
homes, are specifically listed as permitted uses in the MED district. Although group homes and
adult congregate living facilities are similar to nursing homes and complement medical uses, the
MED district does not currently specifically allow such uses. Even so, the county has interpreted
group home and ACLF (ALF) uses to be less intense types of "nursing home" uses and has allowed
them in the MED district based on that interpretation (e.g. National Health Corporation and Hospice
House projects). This interpretation is logical and needs to be codified. The proposed staff -initiated
amendment would specify that group homes and ALFs are permitted institutional uses in the MED
district.
PSAC Recommendation: Voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance.
PZC Recommendation: Voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance.
ocTo��� a�� PG 6 5 I
-80-
0 0
Staff Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance.
■ Entry Features in the CR 510 East Corridor BCC - initiated)
This past July, the Board adopted special "overlay" regulations within the CR 510 East Corridor.
These regulations, which were initiated by the CR 510 East Corridor Committee and reviewed by
the PSAC, include maximum heights for walls (8') and guardhouses (20' overall) and a 125'
guardhouse setback. The 20' height standard and special 125' setback were based upon the height
and location of the existing Orchid guardhouse located on the east side of SR A -1-A. There was a
consensus among Corridor Committee members that the existing Orchid guardhouse and
corresponding standards are aesthetically good and accommodate developer needs.
In August, the Board considered the Seasons PD project, which is located within the CR 510 east
corridor and which is subject to the current 20' guardhouse height requirement. In its discussions
with the project developer, staff stated that the recently adopted LDR amendment allowed ample
room for a one-story guardhouse and sloped roof and that the developer should adjust his original
design to meet the new standard. Thus, staffs position was (and is) that the current 20' limitation
reasonably accommodates guardhouse designs. As indicated in attachment #5, the PSAC also
concludes that the existing 20' height limitation reasonably accommodates guardhouse designs.
However, during the Board's consideration of the Seasons PD project, the developer presented the
Board architectural elevations showing a 20' tall guardhouse with and without a 6' tall cupola (total
height: 26 feet). Upon review, the Board decided that the cupola would be acceptable and directed
staff to change the LDRs to allow for such an architectural embellishment and accommodate the
developer's proposal (see attachment #4).
Based upon the Board's direction, staff has drafted an LDR amendment to the CR 510 east corridor
requirements to allow architectural embellishments, such as cupolas, to project up to 6' above the
20' height limit for the main roof of a guardhouse. The total height of the overall structure under the
proposed LDR amendment would be 26 feet.
PSAC Recommendation: Voted 7-0 to recommend denial of the proposed ordinance.
PZC Recommendation: Voted 5-0 to recommend denial of the proposed ordinance.
Staff Recommendation: To approve the proposed amendment based on the Board's
directive.
Planning staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners:
Direct staff to make any necessary changes to the proposed ordinances, and
2. Announce its intentions to take final action on the proposed ordinances at the Board
hearing scheduled for 9:05 am on November 7, 2000 to be held in the County
Commission Chambers.
OCTOBER 24, 2000 BK 1 15 PG 652
-81-
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY
oc3
-82-
•
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Board of County Commissioners Minutes: Riverbend PD/Road Names
2. Memo from Emergency Services
3. Board of County Commissioners Minutes: Civic and Social Membership Clubs
4. Board of County Commissioners Minutes: Seasons PD/Entry Features
5. Proposed Ordinance: Allowance for Road Names
6. Proposed Ordinance: Civic and Social Membership Clubs
7. Proposed Ordinance: Group Homes and Adult Living Facilities (ALFs) in the MED
District
8. Proposed Ordinance: Entry Feature Height Allowance in the CR 510 East Corridor
9. Draft PSAC Minutes (9/26/00 Meeting)
10. Draft PZC Minutes (10/12100 Meeting)
The Chairman opened the public hearing as to road names and asked if anyone
wished to be heard regarding this matter.
George Blythe, 825 90' Avenue, was in favor of naming roads.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard regarding road names. There
being none, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-83-
15 PG 654
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Tippin,
SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board
unanimously approved the (1) allowance for road
names: adoption of the proposed ordinance so that
the Board's practice of allowing use of road names
for private roads is codified; and announced its
intention to take final action on the proposed
ordinance at the Board hearing scheduled for 9:05
a.m. on November 7, 2000 to be held in the County
Commission Chambers.
The Chairman opened the public hearing as to CR -510 East Corridor Entry Features
and asked if anyone wished to be heard regarding this matter.
Bill Glynn, 1802 East Barefoot Place, Acting Chairman of the CR -510 Corridor
Committee, presented some photographs of an entrance and stated that the Committee's
recommendation did not come about easily. They are attempting to keep the standards in
the CR -510 Corridor high. He believed that you do not need a 26 -foot structure to house
a 6 -foot guard. (CLERK'S NOTE: PHOTOGRAPHS ARE ON FILE WITH THE
BACKUP FOR TODAY'S MEETING.)
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard regarding this matter. There
being none, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
ocTo121 �T 6 5 5
-84-
0 0
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Ginn, SECONDED
by Commissioner Stanbridge, the Board
unanimously denied the proposed ordinance
regarding (4) entry features in the CR -510 East
Corridor. .
Director Boling announced that Items (2), Civic and Social Membership Clubs, and
(3), Group Homes and ALFs in the MED District, will be re -advertised for a first public
hearing on November 7, 2000 and a final public hearing on November 21, 2000.
9.B.1. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS - MR. AND MRS. VERNON
SLAVENS - DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED
RETENTION POND BEHIND THEIR PROPERTY IN
WAUREGAN SUBDIVISION (EAST ROSELAND
STORMWATERI
Deferred.
9.B.2. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS - NANCY B. WOOD -
DISCUSSION REGARDING THE AIRPORT AND THE
NEED FOR COUNTY REPRESENTATION AT THE AD
HOC COMMITTEE MEETINGS
The Board reviewed a letter of October 18, 2000:
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-85-
BK 1 15 PG 656
•
October 18, 2000 ...
Dear Administrator Chander
Thank von for a0owiog me to speak at the last Indian River County Counnissionas nwaang an
October 17, 2000. I am still interested in ongoing discussions about the airport and the need for
minty representation at the Ad Hoc Comm nee taumi W. E - dosed imdthe schedule for
the rest of those meetings. The October 27i° insisting will be held at Fie Steam #3. i bops
someone will attend and repro the county's iniatrest m the future of the City of Vero Beach
Unforturtudy at the and of my talk 1 made as off the cuff remark about the football games and
the (Pride of TheTreasure Coast) V.B.Ii.S. hbxd=g Band I must admit I went to only ace game
this year and wbtle I was two 1 took special notice of the air tniffic. 'mese plana however ,% e
500 feet above the —&— bit the NUMBER of them was my cancers These palate are not
bemsed4ramedprofessiomL but often -young stu&— (that ohms do sat have the command of
the English language4he global language of avtatian) that man these large and tie
eagiaes that roumdy hover over our schools, chnirches and hospitals! 1 am aware that 1 didnot
myself dear and warned to correct that ill-fated reanaik. The 9th Grade Band hwtruetar, Mr.
Plack has approached mein regpd to the airport is =-& told me the heavy air n EFI r rounnely
interrupts them at practices. I will ask him to write a lamer stating that but I cannot promise he
will find the tuna or make the formal complaint. This is not the Larne though.
The oasis is the Airport and it's affeM an Indian River Comity amdeota. There is a GREAT
disparity between the 800.1000 pilots that make the now and the 112,000 people that are
affected by it The airport is owned and operated by rite City of Vero Beach but county land and
sudors atrrouniit Is there so intental aggncy that would deet whit issues such as
these? What ave am are available to me an a county I" for dealing with a solation m this lam&
standing and coil-docmnerttsdpaoblem we all face is our he= wananny'1
I called this mooning and left word with Cindy that 1 would like to make appousinmts with each
of the Comam mons s; to be able to discos this ism from the county's pempemve. I look
forward to hearing from thein scam In the mean time I will make ibis written reTwst to be placed
an the agenda sit the neat Coity Commiasiomar's meetimg which is October 24". Peinaps in the
inteom, whon time allova for individual dialogue between the Comnnissioners and myself to
progress, I might not fed it necessary to speak at the October 20 mae0mg I do tmdis stand your
procedne and will rapeet and ham it with this letter of intent to be placed as the agenda for
October 246. Thank you very---hfor ymrtime and effort. I am available any time at 7713-4833,
please feel free to call me. Thanks again
v Very Best`i""
� U y�
UWW B. Wood
ocTOB �19�oho 6 5 7
•
Nancy B. Wood read from her statement and stated that she hoped to see some
County representation at the meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee on October 27'. -
NO ACTION REQUIRED OR TAKEN.
9.B.3. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS — FRANK ZORC —
DISCUSSION REGARDING "COUNTY HEALTH
DEPARTMENT RECORDS ON RESIDENTS LIVING
WITH NO WATER SUPPLY OR SEWER SERVICE IN
THE WABASSO AREA"
The Board reviewed a letter of October 17, 2000:
FRANK LEO ZORC
REALTOR - DEVELOPER - BI:ILDER -STORAGE
2044 DeLeon Ave. Vero Beach, Fla. 32960 j
USC 00N) 0 BK OrR"94 Telephones and Fax 1-561-562-4646 j
Cell Phone 24 hours 1-561-532-3808
October 17th. 2000
i
770-5095 fax /and' Hand Deliver
Dear Ms. Gunter
OCTOBER 24, 2000
—87—
s
w-
•
Please place me on the Oct. 24th. 2000 Commission Public Matters agenda to discuss:
County Health Department records on residents living with no water supply or sewer
service in the Wabasso area. (Follow up from previous presentation.)
XC To All concerned Parties
Mike Kaiser Press Journal writer
REALTOR
35 Years In Vero Beach Horne Building b Real Estate Services USC. 0000880
�
BK 0099894
Frank Zorc believed the County should get involved in the airport noise issue. He
then questioned whether Commissioner Ginn had made the personal inspection of the homes
lacking water previously discussed, and Commissioner Ginn stated that she is waiting for
Mike Galanis to get a more definitive list of these locations.
Mr. Zorc again asked Commissioner Macht whether he would support a mail -out
ballot on the Dodgertown issue.
NO ACTION REQUIRED OR TAKEN.
ocTc�E���a, PG 6 5 9
9.C. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS
L SCHEDULED FOR PUBLICHEARING ONNOVEMBER 7, 2000
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OFA MUNICIPAL
SERVICE BENEFIT UNIT FOR THE EAST GIFFORD WATERSHED AREA
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of September 20, 2000:
TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: PUBLIC NOTICE of Public Hearing for Establishing a Municipal Service
Benefit Unit East Gifford Watershed Area
DATE: September 20, 2000
Indian River County intends to hold a public hearing during the November 7, 2000 meeting
of the Board of County Commissioners to hear public comments on the establishment of a
Municipal Service Benefit Unit for the East Gifford Watershed Area.
SCHEDULED FOR PUBLICHEARING ONNOVEMBER 7 2000
WESTGATE COLONY SEWER ASSESSMENT. RESOLUTIONIII
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 17, 2000:
OCTOBER 24, 2000
:'
BK1 15 FIG .
DATE:: _ OCTOBER 17, 2000
TO: MARGARET GUNTER
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY/ASSISTANT
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
THRU: DONALD R. HUBBS, P. K. �^
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SER�VI
FROM:: JAMES D. CHAST
MANAGER OF PROJECTS
SUBJ:: PUBLIC NOTICE ITEM FOR BCC —11/7 PUBLIC SEARING
WESTGATE COLONY PRELIMINARY SEWER ASSESSMENT
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. US -98 -19 -CS
The following item is scheduled for public hearing on November 7, 2000
WESTGATE COLONY SEWER ASSESSMENT
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. US -98 -19 -CS
RESOLUTION III
SCHEDULED_ FOR PUBLIC HEARING ONNOVEMBER 7.2000
YU%ONLAND CORPORATIONAND DANIEL N. SPENCER - REQUEST TO AMEND
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO REDESIGNATE f180 ACRES LOCATED AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF 90THA VENUE AND 85TH STREET FROM F, RURAL
RESIDENTm, TO L-1, LOW—DENSITY RESIDENTIAL -1: AND TO REZONE
THOSE f180 ACRES FROMA-1, AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT, TO RS -3, SINGLE-
FAMILYRESIDENTL4L DISTRICT (LEGISLATIVE
RED STICK GOLF CLUB. INC. -REQUEST TO AMEND FIGURE 4.13 OF THE
TRANSPORTATIONELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO DELETE 81sT
STREET. BETWEEN 58TH AVENUE AND OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY (LEGISLATIVE)
COUNTY-INITL4TED REQUEST TO AMEND THE TEXT OF THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
OCT"" 1A9M16 I
-90-
COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST TO AMEND THE TEXT OF THE FUTURE LAND
USE ELEMENT, THE RECREATIONAND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT, THE COASTAL
MANAGEMENT ELEMENT. THE SANITARYSEWER SUB ELEMENT, AND THE
POTABLE WATER SUB ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
((LEGISLATIVE)
REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COMMUNITY DE VEL OPMENT
DIRECTOR To MAKE APPLICATION FORA COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENT BLOC%
GRANT IN THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CATEGORY (LEGISLATIVE)
PURCHASE OF THE SIIVIMONS AND ANDRE PARCELS OF THE OYSTER BAR
SALT MARsHLAACSITE UNDER THE COUNTYENVIRONMENTAL LANDS
PROGRAM (LEGISLATIVE)
PROPOSED LDR AMENDMENTS: ROOSTER LIMITATION: ROAD NAMES: CIVIC
AND SOCIAL MEMBERSHIP CL UBS: GROUP HOMES AND AM CR -510 EAST
CORRIDOR ENTRY FEATURES (LEGISLATIVE
SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING ONNOVEMBER 14.2000
REDESIGNATE ±5.361 ACRES LOCATED NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION
of I-95 AND CR -512, SOUTH OF THE C-54 CANAL, AND EAST OF BABCOC%
STREET. FROMAG-1. AGRICULTURAL -1 AND AG -2, AGRICULTURAL -2: TO C-
1. PUBLICLY OWNED CONSERVATION -1, AND TO REZONE THOSE ±5.361
ACRES FROMA-1. AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTAND A-2 AGRICULTURAL
DISTRICT TO CON -1. PUBLIC LANDS CONSERVATIONDISTRICT
REDESIGNATE +-3.288 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 130"'
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-91-
ljuflg�M
AVENUEAND 77"I STREET FROMAG--2. AGRICULTURAL-2 TO C-1. PUBLICLY
OWNED CONSERVATION-I AND TO REZONE THOSE X3.288 AcREs FRoMA-2.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT. TO CON-1. PUBLIC LANDS CONSERVATION
DISTRICT
REDESIGNATE ±44.4 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF JUNGLE TRAIL,
NORTH OF WINDSOR, FROML-1. LOW-DENSITYRESIDENTL4L-1. TO C-1.
PUBLICLY OWNED CONSERVATION-1. AND TO REZONE THOSE ±44.4 ACRES
FROMA-1. AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT. TO CDN-1. PUBLIC LANDS
CCONSER VA TION DISTRICT
REDESIGNATE ±20 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF 58TH AVENUE.
APPROXIMATELY 118T OFA MILE SOUTH OF 49TH STREET. FROML 2. LOW-
DENSITY RESIDENTI4L-2. TO C-1. PUBLICLY OWNED CONSERVATION-1, AND
TO REZONE THOSE ±20 ACRES FROMRS--3, SINGLE-FAMILYRESIDENTiAL
DISTRICT. TO CON-1, PUBLIC LANDS CONSER VA TION DISTRICT
(LEGISLATIVE
SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING ONNOVEMBER 14.2000
MINOR J. PLATT. JR. - REQUEST FOR SPEmL EXCEPTION USE
APPROVAL FOR AN OUTDOOR GUNRANGE DNA 25 ACRES PARCEL
(QUASI-JUDICIAL)
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 16, 2000:
-92-
,7
TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
DIV4M.
EAD CONCURRENCE:
zz
�.
obating. AICP; C6ntmuni elopment Director
THROUGH: Sasan Rohani, AICP; Chief, Long -Range Planning
FROM: John Wachtel, Senior Planner, Long -Range Planning
DATE: October 16, 2000
SUBJECT: Notice of Scheduled Public Hearings for the November 7, and November 14,
2000, Board Meetings
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of October 24, 2000.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Please be advised that the following public hearings have been scheduled for Board consideration
at its November 7, 2000, meeting.
1. Yukon Land Corporation and Daniel N. Spencer's request to amend the Comprehensive Plan
to redesignate 1180 acres located at the northeast comer of 901 Avenue and 85`h Street from
R, Rural Residential (up to 1 unit/acre), to L-1, Low -Density Residential -1 (up to 3
units/acre); and to rezone those ±180 acres from A-1. Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5
acres), to RS -3, Single -Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre). (Legislative)
2. Red Stick Golf Club, Inc.'s request to amend Figure 4.13 of the Transportation Element of
the Comprehensive Plan to delete 8 V Street, between 58' Avenue and Old Dixie Highway.
(Legislative)
3. County -initiated request to amend the text of the Capital Improvements Element
Comprehensive Plan. (Legislative)
4. County -initiated request to amend the text of the Future Land Use Element, the Recreation
and Open Space Element, the Coastal Management Element, the Sanitary Sewer Sub -
Element, and the Potable Water Sub -Element of the Comprehensive Plan. (Legislative)
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-93-
•
5. Request for authorization for the community development director to make application for
a community development block grant in the economic development category (Legislative)
6. Purchase of the Simmons and Andre Parcels of the Oyster Bar Salt Marsh LAAC Site under
the County Environmental Lands Program (Legislative).
7. Proposed LDR Amendments: Rooster Limitations; Road Names; Civic and Social
Membership Clubs; Group Homes and ALFs; CR 510 East Corridor Entry Features
(Legislative).
Please be advised that the following public hearing has been scheduled for Board consideration at
its November 14, 2000, meeting.
1. County initiated request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to:
A. redesignate x,361 acres located northwest of the intersection of I-95 and CR 512,
south of the C-54 Canal, and east of Babcock Street, from AG -1, Agricultural -1 (up
to 1 unit/5 acres), and AG -2, Agricultural -2, (up to 1 unit/10 acres), to C-1, Publicly
Owned Conservation -1 (zero density), and rezone those x,361 acres from A-1,
Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres), and A-2, Agricultural District (up to 1
unit/10 acres), to Con -1, Public Lands Conservation District (zero density);
B. redesignate x.288 acres located at the southeast corner of 130' Avenue and 77"
Street from AG -2, Agricultural -2 (up to 1 unit/10 acres), to C-1, Publicly Owned
Conservation -1 (zero density), and rezone those x,288 acres from A-2, Agricultural
District (up to 1 unit/10 acres), to Con -1, Public Lands Conservation District (zero
density);
C. redesignate ±44.4 acres located on the west side of Jungle Trail, north of Windsor,
from L-1, Low -Density Residential -1 (up to 3 units/acre), to C-1, Publicly Owned
Conservation -1 (zero density), and rezone those ±44.4 acres from A-1, Agricultural
District (up to 1 unit/5 acres), to Con -1, Public Lands Conservation District (zero
density); and
D. redesignate ±20 acres located on the west side of 58' Avenue, approximately an
eighth of a mile south of 491 Street, from L-2, Low -Density Residential -2 (up to 6
unitstacre), to C-1, Publicly Owned Conservation -1 (zero density), and rezone those
±20 acres from RS -3, Single -Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre), to Con -
1, Public Lands Conservation District (zero density). (Legislative)
2. Minor J. Platt Jr.'s Request for Special Exception Use Approval for an Outdoor Gun Range
on a 25 Acre Parcel (Quasi -Judicial).
RECOMMENDATION:
The above referenced public hearing dates are provided for the Board's information. No action is
needed.
NO ACTION REQUIRED OR TAKEN.
•
11.A. COUNTY LOCAL JOBS GRANT PROGRAM - REQUEST
TO MODIFY
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 16, 2000:
TO: James E. Chandler; County Administrator
N HEAD CONCURRENCE
Robert M. Keating, AICP; ommr�evelopment Director
THROUGH: Sasan Rohani, AICP; Chief, Long --Range Planning S 4
FROM: Peter J. Radke; Economic Development Planner
DATE: October 16, 2000
RE: Request To Modify The County's Local Jobs Grant Program
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of October 24, 2000
In 1996, the Board of County Commissioners established a package of economic development
incentives in order to attract businesses to the county and to encourage existing businesses to expand
their operations within the county. Included in that package of incentives was a local jobs grant
program. This program was designed to improve the county's economic base by providing a
financial incentive for businesses that create jobs in Indian River County.
Since the jobs grant program was established in 1996, staff has met with several businesses that were
interested in the incentive; however, the county has received only one application for the incentive
over the last four years. Given the low use of the jobs grant program incentive, county staff has
reviewed the existing program as well as the jobs grant program in St. Lucie County. St. Lucie
County's program was used as a guideline in 1996, when Indian River County developed its own
program.
For a business to become eligible to receive a local jobs grant in Indian River County, that business
must meet the following criteria:
be a manufacturing industry as defined by the Standard Industrial Classification
(SIC) system or be in an industry targeted by the county;
create at least 20 new jobs; and
provide a salary or wage for each new job that is equal to 100% of the county's
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-95-
BK 115
s.' '!
•
average annual salary/wage level.
A business must submit a jobs grant application to the Community Development Department for
review. Upon staff review, all eligible applications are presented to -the Board of County
Commissioners for their consideration and approval.
When considering the issue of whether or not a business should receive a jobs grant, the Board shall
consider the following items:
► the anticipated number of employees;
► the average wage of employees used to qualify the business;
► the type of business;
► the environmental impacts; and
► the volume of business or production.
In addition, special emphasis shall be given to whether or not the business would be likely to relocate
or expand in Indian River County without the jobs grant.
The amount of the grant awarded to a business is based on the following thresholds:
• 20 - 49 new employees
• 50 - 99 new employees
• 100 -149 new employees
• 150 + new employees
_ $1,000 per job created
_ $1,250 per job created
$1,500 per job created
$2,000 per job created
Provided that the minimum threshold is met, businesses may also be eligible to receive bonuses
which will increase the grant amount awarded per job. These bonuses include:
► 10% bonus — 50 or more jobs created in the county's target industries
► 10% bonus — 75% or more of those hired are Indian River County residents
► 10% bonus — The salary of each employee used to qualify the business for the grant
is at least 125% of the county's average salary;
► 20% bonus — The salary of each employee used to qualify the business for the grant
is at least 150% of the county's average salary;
► 25% bonus — The salary of each employee used to qualify the business for the grant
is at least 175% of the county's average salary;
Based on information from the Florida Office of Labor Market Statistics, Indian River County's
1998 average annual salary was $24,432.
A grant to an individual company may not exceed $500,000.
Grant funds awarded to a business may be used for the following activities:
moving expenses;
permitting costs;
► impact fees;
infrastructure costs;
rent;
ocTosEx za, 'NoI 15 PG 6 6 7
day care facilities;
equipment purchases; and
other expenses approved by the Board of County Commissioners.
A business that is awarded a jobs grant will receive the funds over a three year period. In the first
year, the business would receive 50% of the total grant, and then 25% for each of the final two years.
Any business that receives a jobs grant must sign a legally binding agreement with Indian River
County and must post a letter of credit or other surety. Conditions in the agreement will require the
business to perform according to the criteria used to approve the jobs grant application (number of
jobs created, average salary levels, % of county residents hired, etc.). Another condition of the
agreement shall require that the business not close or relocate out of the county for at least ten years
from the time of receiving the jobs grant unless the business pays back the grant funds which it has
received
Local jobs grants awarded to businesses will be financed from the general fund continency account.
In any given fiscal year, the maximum amount that may be dispersed through the local jobs grant
program is $100,000.
Economic Development onn it
At its October 10, 2000 meeting, the Economic Development Council (EDC) voted in favor of
revising the county's local jobs grant program. A description of the revised program is presented
in attachment one of this staff report.
ANALYSIS
Minimum Job rreatien Threshold Requirements
Since the Board of County Commissioners established the local jobs grant program, only one
application has been received by the county. One of the reasons for the low participation in this
program may be due to the minimum threshold level of 20 new jobs. Due to Indian River County's
small labor force, many businesses that do locate in Indian River County are small businesses.
Based on 1998 information from the Florida Office of Labor Market Statistics, the average
employment size for a manufacturing firm in Indian River County is 23 employees. That average
is based on 114 manufacturing firms located in Indian River County and 2,629 employees working
for those firms.
Since 1996, St. Lucie County has lowered its minimum job creation threshold to five jobs for its jobs
grant Program- In lowering the minimum threshold, St. Lucie County envisioned that the five job
threshold may encourage many of its small existing businesses to expand their operations. In the
Past two years, St Lucie County has approved 12 jobs grant applications that resulted in the creation
of 3,600 jobs. Of those 3,600 new jobs, the QVC call center represents 1,600. Call centers are not
eligible for Indian River County's program.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-97-
BK 1 15 PG 668
FF -
C]
Given St. Lucie County's success with the lower job creation threshold and the average size of
manufacturing firms in Indian River County, it may be necessary to lower Indian River County's
minimum job creation threshold for the jobs grant program to be a more effective economic
development incentive.
St. Lucie County's jobs grant program is much broader than Indian River's in the type of businesses
that can qualify for funds. In addition to manufacturing firms, many service related firms may be
able to qualify for a St. Lucie County jobs grant. This explains why St. Lucie County has a minimum
job creation threshold of five jobs. In comparison, Indian River County limits its incentives to
manufacturing firms and firms identified as a targeted industry. Generally, manufacturing firms
require more than five employees to maintain the manufacturing process. Therefore, reducing Indian
River County's minimum job creation threshold from twenty jobs to ten jobs may encourage more
local businesses to take advantage of the jobs grant program.
Another difference between St. Lucie County's and Indian River County's jobs grant programs is
the method in which the grant funds are awarded to the business. St. Lucie County spreads the
payment of the grant funds over six years, and the payments are based on an executed grant
agreement. Each year, the business is required to submit a job status report that verifies the business
has created and maintained the number of jobs and salary level to remain qualified for the grant. If
all of the criteria have been met for that year, the business is awarded a portion of the grant. This
performance review continues for six years.
Indian River County's program spreads its payment of the grant funds over three years. Instead of
requiring an annual job status report each year, Indian River County requires the business to post a
letter of credit for the grant amount. That letter of credit is to be effective for ten years. If at any
point over those ten years the company fails to maintain the necessary jobs and salary levels, the
county may draw upon the company's letter of credit.
Based on feedback from local businesses, the method of payment and assurance used by St. Lucie
County is preferred by potential recipients of the jobs grant program. A drawback to the letter of
credit requirement is that the business is required to incur costs to obtain that letter of credit.
In 1996, the Board of County Commissioners established the local jobs grant program in order to
attract new businesses to the county and encourage existing businesses to expand. The objectives
of this effort were to create a more diverse economic base and lower the unemployment rate.
Based on its analysis, staff has determined that the county's local jobs grant program should be
modified to make the program available to smaller businesses and to make the program more
attractive to new and existing businesses. By reducing the minimum job creation criteria to ten jobs,
more businesses will be able to apply for the grant. By modifying the payment method of the grant,
the program will become more attractive to potential businesses.
OCTOBER 24liogol 5 PG 6 6 9
MA
Staff and the Economic Development Council recommend that the Board of County Commissioners
revise the local jobs grant program as follows:
► Reduce the minimum job creation threshold to ten jobs;
► Use a performance based review method to disperse grant funds;
► Extend grant payment to five equal annual payments; and
► Eliminate the requirement for a letter of credit or other surety.
1. Proposed Jobs Grant Program Description and Requirements
2. Economic Development Council Meeting Minutes from 10/10/00 (unapproved)
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board,
by a 4-0 vote (Commissioner Tippin absent)
unanimously approved revision to the local jobs
grant program as follows: (A) reduce the minimum
job creation threshold to ten (1) jobs; (b) use a
performance based review method to disperse grant
funds; (c) extend grant payment to five (5) equal
annual payments; and (d) eliminate the requirement
for a letter of credit or other surety; all as
recommended by staff.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
'A
11A VERO BEACH FIREFIGHTERS PENSION FUND -
APPROVAL OF BENEFIT CHANGES RECOMMENDED
BY THE FIREFIGHTERS PENSION BOARD
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 13, 2000:
TO: Honorable Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
FROM: Douglas M. Wright. Director ^�
Emergency Services'`
DATE: October 13, 2000
SUBJECT: Approval of Benefit Changes in the Vero Beach Firefighters Pension Fund
Recommended by the Firefighters Pension Board
The Vero Beach Firefighters Pension Board, through Chairman Tom Nason, has proposed an
ordinance of the City of Vero Beach which provides for two (2) administrative changes required by
the Florida Division of Retirement (FRS) and one (1) economic change to the firefighter's benefits
under the pension plan.
The two (2) administrative changes are required to be in compliance with the new statutes recently
passed by the state legislature. Per Mr. Nason, these proposed changes do not have any effect on the
plan benefits but make the plan provisions parallel with other plans in the State as deemed necessary
by the Division ofRetirement. The economic change relates to an automatic annuity increase benefit
for members from one percent (1%) to two percent (2%).
Mr. Nason notes in his document that the Florida Retirement System uses a three percent (3%)
adjustment (the amount provided to the remaining firefighters in the District under the FRS Plan).
He states that it is only fair to provide this increase in benefit for a group of firefighters for a pension
fund that has not cost either local government any expense in retirement cost for the past 20 years
and notes that each participant in the plan has paid seven percent (7%) of their own salary as a
contribution to this plan during their active fire service career.
Mr. Nason will be present at the Board of County Commissioners meeting to provide additional
information and respond to any questions or concerns regarding this matter.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of proposed Vero Beach Firefighters Pension Fund benefit changes set
forth in the attached proposed City of Vero Beach ordinance.
09VIDRYWOO
T G 9 1
0
-100-
0
-I
0
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board,
by a 4-0 vote (Commissioner Tippin absent)
unanimously approved the proposed Vero Beach
Firefighters Pension Fund benefit changes set forth
in the proposed City of Vero Beach ordinance, as
recommended by staff.
11.C. RESOLUTION 2000-132 PURSUANT TO SECTION 125.38
FLORIDA STATUTES (2000) AUTHORIZING A THIRTY-
YEAR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2525
ST. LUCIE AVENUE, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, TO THE
COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, INC. AND APPROVAL OF LEASE
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 18, 2000:
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-101-
BK 1 15 PG 672
DATE: October 18, 2000
TO: The Honorable Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
FROM: Thomas Frame, General Services Director • -,&4.A u/
SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution Authorizing the Lease of 2525 St. Lucie Avenue
(former HRS building), Vero Beach, Florida, to the Coalition for the
Homeless of Indian River County Florida, Inc. and Approval of the Proposed
Lease.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Attached is a proposed resolution and lease agreement. The proposed resolution is the
authorizing document which will allow the Board of County Commissioners to lease the former
HRS building located at 2525 St. Lucie Avenue to the Coalition for the Homeless of Indian River
County, Inc. The authority for the Board to lease this property to the Coalition is as provided for
in Section 125.38, Florida Statutes (1999).
The proposed lease is the results of several rounds of discussions between representatives of the
Coalition, the County Attorney and the Director of General Services, and the following are
highlights of the proposed lease:
• The term of the lease is for a thirty-year period for one dollar per year with an ability to
renew the lease for additional periods of ten (10) years. Initially, the Coalition had requested
a fifty- year lease.
• The Coalition would responsible for all utility charges and costs.
• The Coalition is specifically prohibited from using the facility for any unlawful, improper or
offensive use. They further will undertake the proper posting of the property by posting signs
to discourage loitering or lingering on the property. They further would be required to
investigate such complaints and take prompt measures which may include the filing either
civil or criminal complaints to eliminate such loitering or lingering.
• They would be required to keep the premises free of garbage and trash. And they would be
required to screen with fencing/landscaping any area that would be used for congregation of
people outside the building.
• The Coalition would be required to obtain the Board's prior approval if it desired to assign
the lease or the Board's/County Administrator's approval in writing in order to sublet the
premises or any part thereof.
• Should the Coalition vacate the premises or cease to use at least 75% of the building, the
lease would terminate.
OCTOBER')A 2000 PG
t� 6 7 3 -102-
• The Coalition may expand or renovate the building at no cost to the County, but all such
work and costs shall be the responsibility of the Coalition with the County's prior approval.
• The Coalition shall comply with the County's risk management requirements relative to all
appropriate insurance and hold harmless stipulations.
• The Coalition's use of the facility shall be for the providing of services to the homeless and
indigent communities.
• The County and the Coalition have agreed on a schedule for the relocation of stored items
presently stored with the building. (See Exhibit A to the lease).
• The lease provides for termination for breach of the lease and provides for written notice to
the Coalition with a time period certain to cure such breach prior to any termination.
• All maintenance costs associated with the upkeep of the building and grounds shall be the
responsibility of the Coalition.
As noted within the proposed lease and highlights above, the building is currently being used for
temporary storage of numerous items including surplus property. In addition, EMS stores the
equipment used for the special needs shelter, and the Clerk's Finance Department stores a number
of financial records within the building.
"Exhibit A" of the lease provides for a schedule to remove these items. Staff has searched and
found some temporary areas where most of these items can be stored with the exception of the
financial records. The solution to that problem will require additional time and possibly
budgetary approvals for next year's budget consideration.
Additionally, more temporary storage to accommodate surplus properties between sales and
auctions may have to be found and funded until a permanent solution is available. Staff has
identified several alternatives that could be considered for future consideration.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Resolution and Lease along with the Board's authorization for
the Chairman to execute the appropriate Resolution and lease agreement.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-103-
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board, by
a 4-1 vote (Commissioner Stanbridge opposed)
approved the Lease Agreement with the Coalition
for the Homeless of Indian River County, Inc. for
the real property located at 2525 St. Lucie Avenue,
Vero Beach, Florida; and adopted Resolution 2000-
132 pursuant to Section 125.38, Florida Statutes
(2000), authorizing a thirty-year lease of real
property located at 2525 St. Lucie Avenue, Vero
Bach, Florida, to the Coalition for the Homeless of
Indian River County, Inc.
LEASE AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE
OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
OCTOBEJ�11 3TPG 6 7 5
-104-
• •
RESOLUTION 2000-132
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, PURSUANT TOEION 125.3A
FLORIDA STATUTES (2000),AUTHORIZING
THIRTY YEAR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 2525 ST. LUCIE AVENUE,
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA '
FOR THE HOMELESS OF INDIANALITION RIVER
COUNTY, INC.
WHEREAS, Indian River County owns property located at 2525 St. Lucie Avenue,
Vero Beach, Florida, and more particularly described as
All of Block 3, Original Town of Vero,
alk/a, City of Vero Beach,
according to the plat thereof, as recorded in Plat 2, sa d land
of the public records of St. Lucie County,
now lying and being in Indian River County, Florida; Parcel No.
02-33-39-00001-0030-00000.1;
and -
WHEREAS, Coalition for the Homeless of Indian River County, Inc., anot-for-profit
corporation organized under the laws of the State of Florida, has applied to the Board of
County Commissioners for a lease of property located at 252514 Avenue (2525 St. Lucie
Avenue), Vero Beach, Florida,
ED by the Board of County Commissioners of
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLV
Indian River County as follows:
1, Coalition forthe Homeless of Indian River County, Inc., having applied to the
Board of County Commissioners for a lease of real property located at 2525 St. Lucie
Avenue, Vero Beach, Florida, the Board of County Commissioners is satisfied that the
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-105-
BK 115 PG 676
Resolution 2000- 1 -12
subject property is required for public or community interest and welfare, and is not needed
for county purposes.
2. The above-described property may be leased to Coalition forthe Homeless
of Indian River County, Inc., for a term of thirty (30) years for $1.00 (one dollar) per year
rent, for the purpose of providing assistance to homeless and indigent people in Indian
River County, according to terms contained in a separate Lease Agreement.
The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner M a r h t
and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Ginn , and, upon
being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Fran B. Adams
Aye
Vice Chairman Caroline D. Ginn
Aye
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht
Aye
Commissioner Ruth Stanbridge
N a y
Commissioner John W. Tippin
Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this
24th day of OrtnhPr , 2000.
Att>asi�J. K. Barton, CI
Deputy Cler
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ByC�la.�
Fran B. Adams
Chairman
I11d2n aWw Ca Aparave0 Date
Admin o p'77
Legal �o 0
2 Budget 1�
fey 1. [O
Risk Mgt.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
BK 1 15 PG 677
-106-
1 LF. GUARDIAN VOLUNTARY DENTAL INSURANCE
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 11, 2000:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
THRU:
James E. Chandler, County Administrator
FROM:
Joseph A. Baird, Assistant County Administrator;
DATE:
October 11, 2000
SUBJECT: Guardian Voluntary Dental Insurance
Guardian has been Indian River County's voluntary dental plan provider for over a year.
Their contract ran concurrent with Indian River County's fiscal year (Oct. 1 to Sept. 30)
consistent with all other insurance products offered through the County. This enables Indian
River County to have an open enrollment period once a year for employees to add or change
their voluntary benefits.
In order for employees to be able to make a decision on the voluntary products during the
open period, they need to know the cost of the product for the ensuing year. Indian River
County requires that in all voluntary products, that notice of any change in rates for the
following year must be sent, and received by the County, 45 days prior to the end of the contract
period.
Guardian Dental has this provision in their contract. Indian River County did not receive
notification 45 days prior for either of the two plans offered to employees. Indian River County
held open enrollment on voluntary products from August 1, 2000 to August 31, 2000 and
showed no change in the cost of the voluntary dental plans. On September 23, 2000 we received
a notice of change in the cost of the two plans offered. This violated Guardian's contract with
Indian River County.
On October 3, 2000 staff met with Guardian representatives to discuss the matter. They
have offered the following rate increase shown below, to go in affect December 1, 2000 for the
remaining fiscal year which is through September 30.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-107-
_I
Plan 1 x 7
Plan 2 x 7
Currently
Proposed
Change
Currently
Proposed
Change I
Employee
25.16
42.52
17.36
18.20
30.76
12.56
Employee/
95.64
119.11
2321
62.02
74.06
12.04
Spouse/
Children
Employee/
59.06
57.29
<1.77>
42.02
40.26
<1.76>
Spouse
Only
Employee/
61.72
61.78
.08
38.20
33.80
<4.40>
Children
Presently, Indian River County has approximately 222 employees (includes all
Constitutional Officers except the Sheriff).
Alternatives
1. Cancel the contract with Guardian.
2. Make an exception regarding open enrollment and offer employees a chance to sign up
at the new rates.
Recommendation
Cancel the contract with Guardian, effective December 1, 2000.
Assistant County Administrator Joe Baird stated that a survey had been sent to the
participating employees and, of 222 employees affected, 140 surveys were returned, 80
declining coverage and 60 wishing to continue coverage due to long-term plans for dental
work. He asked for permission to begin an open enrollment period for this product only and
for permission for staff to try to negotiate reduced rates for the next year to insure that there
is no break in service for the employees.
ocTosrraj n 679
-ios-
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht,
SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board
unanimously approved another open enrollment
period for this product only and gave permission for
staff to try to negotiate reduced rates for the next
year, as recommended by staff.
11.G.1. RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION - 33RDSTREET AT OAK
CHASE SUBDIVISION - OAK CHASE DEVELOPMENT.
LLC
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 9, 2000:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
THROU James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
Terry B. Thompson, P. i
Capital Projects Manag
FROM: William M. Napier, SRPA, SRA *f,(/
Right -of -Way Agent SRW
SUBJECT: Right -of -Way Acquisition
33ro Street at Oak Chase Subdivision
Oak Chase Development, LLC.
DATE: October 9, 2000
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Additional right-of-way of twenty feet (20') along the north side of 33rd Street is needed
for future road improvements according to the thoroughfare plan. The additional right-of-
way has been denoted on the Oak Chase subdivision plat. The developer has executed
a contract at a negotiated purchase price of $20,000.00 per acre for the RS -3 zoned
land. This price per acre is comparable to other similar parcels the County has purchased
based upon appraisals or evaluations.
OCTOBER 24, 2000 BK I IS PG 680
-109-
'A
The total Contract Price is $5,800.00, based on a total of .29 acre according to the legal
description prepared by the County Surveyor. There are no appraisal or attorney fees.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND Fl1NDiNG
Staff requests and recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve the
$5,800.00 purchase and authorize the Chairman to execute the contract.
Funding to be from Account #315-214541-066.12
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously approved the Contract with Oak Chase
Development, L.L.C. for the $5,800 purchase of the
33' Street right-of-way, as recommended by staff.
CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE
OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
11.G.2. FLORIDA INLAND NAVIGATION DISTRICT (FIND) -
JUNGLE TRAIL SHORELINE STABILIZATION -
PROJECT AGREEMENT IR -00-31
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 11, 2000:
ocTOB i'l �ooPG 6 8
•
-110-
•
•
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Director
FROM: Jeffrey R. Tabar, P
Coastal Engineer
SUBJECT: Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND)
Project Agreement No. IR -00-31
Jungle Trail Shoreline Stabilization
DATE: October 11, 2000
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
During the Board of County Commissioners regular meeting on March
21, 2000, the Board approved a grant application for the Florida
Inland Navigation District's (FIND) Waterways Assistance Program.
The application requested funds to complete shoreline stabilization
to approximately 900 feet of Jungle Trail.
The County Coastal Engineer made a presentation on June 24, 2000 to
the District Board for Phase I (Permitting & Design) of the
project. Subsequently, the District awarded the County funds for
Phase I. Attached is the project agreement, No. IR -00.31. A Phase
II construction application will be submitted during FY 2001/2002.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
County staff has reviewed the attached agreement and finds the
conditions acceptable. The first phase of the project must be
completed on or before September 1, 2002. The District will
provide matching funds in the amount of $13,000.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends approval of the attached agreement for $13,000
(50%) County contribution, and $13,000 (50%) FIND contributions.
Funding to be from the Beach Restoration Fund.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-111-
•
'A
ON MOTION by Commissioner Stanbridge,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously approved the Project Agreement No.
IR -00-31 with Florida Inland Navigation District
(FIND) for the Jungle Trail Shoreline Stabilization,
Phase I with a $13,000 County contribution from the
Beach Restoration Fund, as recommended by staff.
AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE
OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
1 LGA 43RDAVENUE WIDENING AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS - UNITY CENTER DEVELOPER'S
AGREEMENT - PROJECT 9601
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 18, 2000:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
THROUG James W. Davis, P.E
Public Works Directo
Terry B. Thompson, E.
Capital Projects Manager
FROM: G. Sean McGuire, P.E.
Project Engineer
SUBJECT: 43nd Avenue Widening and Drainage Improvements
Project # 9601
Developer's Agreement with Unity Center
DATE: October 18, 2000
OCTOBR 8
-112-
•
The Unity Center of Vero Beach is constructing a new facility on 43id Avenue at I Uh Street.
They have designed their stormwater management pond to accommodate runoff from their
site and a portion of 43'd Avenue. The attached Agreement details the assignment of costs
and responsibilities necessary for both the County and the Unity Center to benefit from the
joint use of this pond.
The Unity Center is providing the land valued at $24,920.00 for the County's portion of the
pond. The County is providing other off-site improvements valued at $24,679.67, in trade
for that land value. The County is to pay a total of $67,500.00 for the County's share of the
construction costs of the pond and the continued maintenance. The cost to the County is
approximately the same as it would otherwise cost to purchase a parcel of land and
construct a pond separately for the planned improvements to the roadway. The key
benefits to sharing Unity Center's pond is that the pond is an aesthetic feature of their site
development and will be maintained by them in perpetuity. Additionally, we will not have
to remove another parcel of otherwise developable land from private ownership.
Staff recommends that the Board approve the attached Developer's Agreement for a total
cost of $67,500.00 and authorize the Chairman to sign the agreement.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Ginn, SECONDED
by Commissioner Stanbridge, the Board
unanimously approved the Developer's
Agreement/Easement with Unity Center of Vero
Beach, Inc. for a total cost of $67,500, and
authorized the Chairman to execute same, as
recommended by staff.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE
OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
-113-
BK 115 PG 684
0
"A
11.H. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF
FELLSMERE FOR PROVISION OF EMERGENCY
WATER SUPPLY SERVICES
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of October 12, 2000:
DATE: OCTOBER 12, 2000
16•
BACKGROUND
The City of Fellsmere has approached Indian River County with the prospect of providing a water interconnection for
emergency standby service, first tendered to the County on April 20, 1999. At that time, the Interlocal Agreement
between City of Fellsmere and Indian River County, providing for wastewater transmission and treatment services was
being finalized. The Board of County Commissioners approved the wastewater agreement on the 22 ad of June 1999. The
existing Interlocal Agreement provides for the transmission and treatment of wastewater generated by retail customers
within the City of Fellsmere and sets forth provisions for long term wastewater service within the City limits.
The attached Interlocal Agreement for emergency water supply services provides for no capacity reserve, nor a service
that cannot be interrupted on a short-term basis. Under the provisions, the City of Fellsmere will be required to pay a
bulk water charge in accordance with Resolution 99-58, and a single billing charge for meter reading purposes, but would
not be required to pay other charges, ie., connection and base charges, normally required for permanent retail customers.
Other provisions of the agreement provide for ownership and operation, meter calibration, consistent maintenance, and
water quality concerns, as well as a 90 -day termination clause, by either parry. The Fellsmere City Council approved the
attached agreement on October 19, 2000.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached
Interlocal Agreement between the City of Fellsmere and Indian River County, and authorize the Chairman to execute
same.
ocTotz� �Z PG
�G 8 5
-114-
0 0
fit= ► • .. . .
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: DONALD R. HUBBS
—t- ✓
DIRECTOR OF UTILITYr:S" -
SUBJECT: INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FELT RE AND INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY FOR THE PROVISION OF EMERGENCY WATER SUPPLY SERVICES
BACKGROUND
The City of Fellsmere has approached Indian River County with the prospect of providing a water interconnection for
emergency standby service, first tendered to the County on April 20, 1999. At that time, the Interlocal Agreement
between City of Fellsmere and Indian River County, providing for wastewater transmission and treatment services was
being finalized. The Board of County Commissioners approved the wastewater agreement on the 22 ad of June 1999. The
existing Interlocal Agreement provides for the transmission and treatment of wastewater generated by retail customers
within the City of Fellsmere and sets forth provisions for long term wastewater service within the City limits.
The attached Interlocal Agreement for emergency water supply services provides for no capacity reserve, nor a service
that cannot be interrupted on a short-term basis. Under the provisions, the City of Fellsmere will be required to pay a
bulk water charge in accordance with Resolution 99-58, and a single billing charge for meter reading purposes, but would
not be required to pay other charges, ie., connection and base charges, normally required for permanent retail customers.
Other provisions of the agreement provide for ownership and operation, meter calibration, consistent maintenance, and
water quality concerns, as well as a 90 -day termination clause, by either parry. The Fellsmere City Council approved the
attached agreement on October 19, 2000.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached
Interlocal Agreement between the City of Fellsmere and Indian River County, and authorize the Chairman to execute
same.
ocTotz� �Z PG
�G 8 5
-114-
0 0
ON MOTION by Commissioner Ginn, SECONDED
by Commissioner Stanbridge, the Board
unanimously approved the Interlocal Agreement
with the City of Fellsmere for provision of
emergency water supply services, as recommended
by staff.
AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE
OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
13.A. CHAIRMAN FRAN B. ADAMS - ANNUAL EVALUATION
OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR JAMES E. CHANDLER
The Chairman read from the following statement:
CHANDLER EVALUATION
As the year 2000 comes to a close, Jim Chandler has guided Indian River County
through some interesting challenges this past year. His knowledge of the issues and
instant recall of details is an asset we are fortunate to have. Jim continues to see the
overall picture very well. He picks up on new issues very quickly and his ability to put
them into perspective is a testament to the advantage our county carries over all our
neighbors.
OCTOBER 24, 2000 BK f 15 P
-115-
His choice of a new Assistant Administrator has increased his capacity to carry
mDre of load. He has not lightened his load, but increased his ability to get more done.
Selection of new County Attorney, finalization of the Dodger negotiations, running a
Personnel Department with an absent Director and now seeking a new Director, remaining
neutral and professional throughout a colorful election, the continual beach issues, and
keeping a budget within acceptable limits while providing demanded services have been a
few of the balls Chandler juggled throughout the year.
Competent, professional, precise, thorough. Chandler is not a good -ole -boy nor
does he subscribe to such behavior. He expects objectivity and each issue evaluated on its
merits.
Chandler's support of the capital improvement projects throughout the County is
the reason that so much has been accomplished over the past few years. We are fortunate
to have Jun Chandler and I recommend a 5% raise this year retroactive to October 1.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht,
SECONDED by Commissioner Stanbridge, the
Board unanimously approved a five (5%) percent
increase for County Administrator James E.
Chandler, retroactive to October 1, 2000.
U.B. VICE CHAIRMAN CAROLINE D. GINN - HIGH SPEED
GROUND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM - PROPOSED
ARTICLE X. SECTION 19 OF FLORIDA CONSTITUTION
The Board reviewed a handout as follows:
ocTosEY,21' F!" � G 6 8 7
41 -116 0
-
•
Addendum to Commtinfeation Package
NO. I
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE X, SECTION 19
(Initiative)
BALLOT TITLE: Florida Transportation Initiative for statewide high
speed monorail, fixed guideway or magnetic levitation system.
BALLOT SUMMARY: To reduce traffic and increase travel alternatives,
this amendment provides
for development of a high speed monorail, fixed guideway or magnetic
levitation system linking
Florida's five largest urban areas and providing for access to existing
air and ground transportation facilities and services by directing the
state and/or state authorized private entity to implement the financing,
acquisition of right-of-way, design, construction and operation of the
system, with construction beginning by November 1, 2003.
FULL TEXT OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT:
BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF FLORIDA THAT:
Article X, Section 19,
vivrF111c
Florida Constitution, is hereby created to read
as follows:
OCT 2 3 ?0110
High Speed Ground Transportation System.
CLERK TO THE BOARD
To reduce traffic congestion and provide alternatives to the traveling
public, it is hereby declared to be in the public interest that a high
RECENED AT 1RC-8CC MEEITING
speed ground transportation system consisting of a monorail, fixed
�0 -Z � t I
guideway or magnetic levitation system, capable of speeds in excess of
Date
120 miles per hour, be developed and operated in the State of Florida to
provide high speed ground transportation by innovative, efficient and
Item #
effective technologies consisting of dedicated rails or guideways
`
separated from motor vehicular traffic that will link the five largest
By Dei ty Clerk
urban areas of the State as determined by the Legislature and provide
for access to existing air and ground transportation facilities and
services. The Legislature, the Cabinet and the Governor are hereby
directed to proceed with the development of such a system by the State
and/or by a private entity pursuant to state approval and authorization,
including the acquisition of right-of-way, the financing of design and
construction of the system, and the operation of the system, as provided
by specific appropriation and by law, with construction to begin on or
before November 1, 2003.
YES FOR APPROVAL
NO FOR REJECTION
OCTOBER 24, 2000 BK I IS PG 686
-117-
0
Commissioner Ginn felt that this is not the proper vehicle for transportation for the
State and the ballot does not address funding or even give an estimate of the cost. It also
fails to identify the 5 major areas and has no defmition of the partnership. Construction
would begin November 1, 2003 and MOT dollars earmarked for local roads would be
siphoned off for this project. She believed the public is unaware of the facts and thinks the
project would be a good thing. She stated there needs to be some publicity to defeat this
proposal.
Commissioner Stanbridge agreed that this is an unfunded mandate.
CONSENSUS was reached to appoint Commissioner Ginn to further investigate the
project and come back with recommendations for opposing it.
13.E. COMMISSIONER JOHN W. TIPPIN - TREASURE COAST
COUNCIL OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS - ANNUAL
MEETING TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 9. 2000 AT
DISNEY'S VERO BEACH RESORT
The Board reviewed the following:
OCTOBER 24, 2000 BK
0
8 15 PG 689
-118-
•
-I
)['\'TIES
than River
Martin
6eecku6ee
t. Lucie
CITIES
,"ort Pierce
n River Shores
.pater Island
%eechobee
at St. Lucie
Sebastian
:wall's Point
ero Beach
RECEI'VF
OCT 2 5 2000
CLERK TO THE BOAR
TREASURE COAST COUNCIL
Of
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
1840 25`6 Street, St►ite No. N-158 . Vero Beach, FL 32960-3365
Tel: (561) 567-8000, Ext. 447
IMPORTANT MEMORANDUM
TO: Members, Treasure Coast Council of Local Governments
FROM: john Tippin,Chairman
Everything is all set for our Annual Meeting THURSDAY,
NOVEMBER 9'x, 6:30 P.M. TO 10:00 P.M. AT DISNEY'S
VERO BEACH RESORT!
Our meeting will feature a "Country Hoe Down" theme with good
southern cooking, country band, etc. Plan to come and relax with
excellent food and fellowship! Dress should be very casual. We will, of
course, have a formal 5-10 minute pause to conduct important
business such as election of officers for our new year.
DIRECTIONS: Disney's Vero Beach Resort is between AIA and the
ocean 6-7 miles north of Vero Beach. From I-95 the simplest route
is to take the Fellsmere/Sebastian exit (exit 69), go east 2-3 miles on
County Road 512 and turn right onto County Road 510. Stay on
510 all the way to Highway AlA. turn right on AIA and Disney will
come up immediately on your left.
IMPORTANT: Let's work diligently to get all of our fellow
commissioners, councilmen, managers, attorneys and
husbands/wives/dates to attend!! The charge is $30.0 ' person.
_ Please return the attached reservation form with check soon.
P.S. — Disney has offered reduced room rates for those who may want
to spend the night. Room reservations should be made directly with
Disney at (561) 234-2000.
OCTOBER 24, 2000
-119-
Commissioner Tippin invited all the Commissioners to bring their friends and attend
the annual meeting on Thursday, November 9' at Disney.
14.A. EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT
None.
14.B. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
None.
H.C. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL BOARD
None.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the
Board adjourned at 1:20 p.m.
ATTEST:
J. K'Clerk
Minutes Approved:�/,
OCTOBER 2W111r, PG 69 I
Fran B. Adams, Chairman
-120-