HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/12/2002MINUTES ATTACHED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
County Commission Chamber
County Administration Building
1840 25t1 Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Ruth M. Stanbridge, Chaiinian
John W. Ttppin, Vice Chaiiuian
Fran B. Adams
Caroline D. Ginn
Kenneth R. Macht
D istrict 2
D istrict 4
District 1
District 5
District 3
James E Chandler, County Administrator
Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney
Kimberly Massung, Executive Aide to BCC
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board
CALL TO ORDER
BACKUP
PAGES
INVOCATION
P LEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Comm. Kenneth R. Macht
ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA /
E MERGENCY ITEMS
Add Item 5., Proclamation Honoring Volunteer Stewards of the Oslo Riverfront
Conservation Area.
2. Delete Item 7.F., M.A.C.E. Grant.
3. Add additional backup to Item 8.
4. Add additional backup to Item 9.A.4.
5. Add additional back to Item 9.A.6.
PROCLAMATION and PRESENTATIONS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Regular Meeting of February 19, 2002
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Received & Placed on File in Office of Clerk to the Board:
Report of Convictions, February, 2002
1.073
7. CONSENT AGENDA (cont'd.):
B. Approval of Warrants
(memorandum dated February 28, 2002)
BACKUP
PAGES
1-13
C. Proclamation Honoring St. Peter's Missionary Baptist
Church on Its 100th Anniversary
14
D. Proclamation Honoring Stephanie Altmiller as a
Distinguished Finalist in the Prudential Spirit of
Community Awards
Suntree Partners, Inc. Request for Final Plat Approval for
Citrus Springs P.D. — Village 'A'
(memorandum dated February 26, 2002)
F M.A.C.E. Grant (Multi -Agency Criminal Enforcement
Unit) Project Generated Income — Budget Amendment 007
(memorandum dated March 6, 2002)
G. Developer's Agreement with Margo Stanford (for Water
Main Replacement on 9th Place, 9th Street, and 8th Place
Between 6th Avenue and 7th Avenue) — Release of
Retainage for Work Completed to Date
(memorandum dated March 4, 2002)
15
16-38
39-44
45-62
Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 008
(memorandum dated March 6, 2002) 63-64
I. IRC Bid 14044 Backhoe Transport Trailer
Utilities Department
(memorandum dated February 27, 2002)
65-82
J Declare Equipment Surplus for Sale or Disposal
(memorandum dated February 27, 2002) 83-90
8. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS and
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
Space for Supervisor of Elections
(continued from BCC meeting of March 5, 2002)
3
/ 8
PUBLIC ITEMS
A. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE
AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FOR
1.26 ACRES, LOCATED 717 FEET NORTH OF 9th
STREET SW (OSLO ROAD), AND APPROXIMATELY
HALF A MILE WEST OF 74th AVENUE, FROM A-1,
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT (UP TO 1 UNIT/5
ACRES), TO IL, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND
DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING SEVER-
ABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE
Knight Enterprises' Request to Rezone 1.26
Acres from A-1 to IL (Quasi -Judicial)
(memorandum dated March 1, 2002)
Board Consideration to Approve Purchase of the
Simonye Parcel Addition to the North Sebastian
Conservation Area (Legislative)
(memorandum dated March 5, 2002)
BACKUP
PAGES
106-123
Tri -Partners, L L C 's Request for Special Excep-
tion Use Approval for a Self -Service Storage
Facility (Quasi -Judicial)
(memorandum dated March 4, 2002)
124-133
Sun -Up of Indian River, Inc.'s Request for Special
Exception Use Approval for an Adult Congregate
Living Facility and for an Adult Care Facility
(Quasi -Judicial)
(memorandum dated March 4, 2002)
134-154
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE
AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM
CG TO PD -COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROPERTY
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF S.R. 60 AT
5001 S.R. 60 AND DESCRIBED HEREIN AND PRO-
VIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE
Mc\ ab & McNab "V' Inc.'s Request to Rezone
Approximately 2.32 Acres from CL to PD and
Request for Conceptual Approval for a Restaurant
with a Drive-thru Lane (Sonny's Bar -B -Q)
(Legislative)
(memorandum dated February 7, 2002)
155-176
9. PUBLIC ITEMS (cont'd.):
A. PUBLIC HEARINGS (cont'd.):
6. AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, REGARDING TREE PROTECTION AND
LAND CLEARING REQUIREMENTS; AMENDING
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (LDRs)
CHAPTER 901, DEFINITIONS; AND CHAPTER
927, TREE PROTECTION AND LAND CLEARING;
AND PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICT-
ING PROVISIONS, CODIFICATION, SEVER-
ABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE
Board Consideration of and Adoption of Revisions
to the County Land Clearing and Tree Protection
Ordinance (Legislative)
(continued from BCC Meeting of Jan. 22, 2002)
(memorandum dated March 6, 2002)
B. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS
None
BACKUP
PAGES
177-232
C. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS
1. Scheduled for Public Hearing March 19, 2002:
a. Yukon Land Corporation's request to
amend the Comprehensive Plan to redesignate
142 acres located at the northeast comer of 85th
Street and 90th Avenue from R, Rural Residential
(up to 1 unit/acre), to L-1, Low -Density Residen-
tial -1 (up to 3 units/acre); and to rezone those
142 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. Indeco, Inc.'s request to amend Figure 4.13
of the Transportation Element of the Comprehen-
sive Plan to delete 25th Street, SW, between 20th
Avenue and 27th Avenue (Legislative)
c. County Initiated request to amend the Com-
prehensive Plan to redesignate five publicly owned
tracts from various residential land use designations
to C-1, Publicly Owned or Controlled Conservation -
1 (zero density); and to rezone those tracts from
various residential zoning districts to Con -1, Public
Lands Conservation District (zero density). The
tracts are known as Hainiony Oaks (88.5 acres);
South Oslo Riverfront Conservation Area (66 acres);
South of Round Island Park (59.5 acres); Anstalt
K
•
9. PUBLIC ITEMS (cont'd.):
C. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS (cont'd;)
1. c. (continued):
(19 acres); and Spallone (1.5 acres). (Legislative)
(memorandum dated March 5, 2002)
2. Scheduled for Public Hearing March 19, 2002:
a. (First Heanng): Request to Adopt an
Interim Wireless Telecommunications Facilities
Ordinance, Amending Various Sections of LDR
Chapter 911 and Section 971.44 (Legislative)
Scheduled for Public Hearing April 2, 2002:
b. (Second Hearing); Request to Adopt an
Interim Wireless Telecommunications facilities
Ordinance, Amending Various Sections of LDR
Chapter 911 and Section 971.44 (Legislative)
(memorandum dated March 4, 2002)
10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS
None
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS
A.
Community Development
None
B. Emergency Services
1. Approval of Resolution Adopting the 2001/2002
Indian River County Emergency Plan for
Hazardous Materials
(memorandum dated February 21, 2002)
C.
2. Approval of Renewal for a Class "E" Certificate
of Public Convenience and Necessity for Associa-
tion for Retarded Citizens of Indian River County
to Provide Wheelchair Services
(memorandum dated March 4, 2002)
Approval of Renewal for a Class "A" Certificate
of Public Convenience and Necessity for Indian
River Shores Department of Public Safety
(memorandum dated February 18, 2002)
General Services
None
[ir
•
BACKUP
PAGES
233-234
235
236-240
241-253
254-266
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS (cont'd.):
D. Leisure Services
None
Office of Management and Budget
None
Personnel
None
BACKUP
PAGES
Public Works
None
Utilities
Water Production Pumping System Upgrade (Rocha
Controls, Inc.)
(memorandum dated February 28, 2002)
Human Services
None
267-288
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY
None
13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS
A. Chairman Ruth M. Stanbridge
Updates
Vice Chairman John W. Tippin
Commissioner Fran B. Adams
Commissioner Caroline D. Ginn
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht
•
•
14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS/BOARDS
A. Emergency Services District
None
B. Solid Waste Disposal District
IRC Bid #4039 Roll -off truck with hoist and tarp
(memorandum dated February 27, 2002)
C. Environmental Control Board
None
15. ADJOURNMENT
•
BACKUP
PAGES
289-316
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.
Meeting broadcast same as above on AT & T Broadband, Channel 27 in Sebastian.
IJ + i I 9fl
J
it i ..,r s dJ i J
•
INDEX TO MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MARCH 12, 2002
1 CALL TO ORDER -1-
2. INVOCATION -1-
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -1-
4. ADDITION S/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS -2-
5. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS -2-
Proclamation Honoring Volunteer Stewards of the Oslo Riverfront Conservation
Area
-2-
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 19, 2002 -4-
7 CONSENT AGENDA -4-
7.A. Reports -4-
7 B List of Warrants -4-
7.C. Proclamation Honoring St. Peter's Missionary Baptist Church on Its 100`h
Anniversary -14-
MARCH 12, 2002
-1-
•
7.D. Proclamation Honoring Stephanie Altmiller as a Distinguished Finalist in
the Prudential Spirit of Community Awards -15-
7 E Suntree Partners, Inc. - Final Plat Approval for Citrus Springs P.D. -
Village "A" -16-
7.F. Sheriff -MACE Grant (Multi -Agency Criminal Enforcement Unit)
Project Generated Income - Budget Amendment 007 -18-
7.G. Margo Stanford - Developer's Agreement for Water Main Replacement on
9th Place, 9`" Street, and 8" Place between 6`" Avenue and 7th Avenue -
Release of Retainage for Work Completed to Date -18-
711. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 008 -20-
7.I. Bid #4044 - Backhoe Transport Trailer - Vermeer Southeast Sales and
Service (Utilities Department) -22-
7.J. Equipment Declared Surplus for Sale or Disposal -24-
8. SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS - SPACE NEEDS -25-
9.A.1. PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE 2002-009 AMENDING THE ZONING
ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FOR 1.26
ACRES LOCATED 717 FEET NORTH OF 9TH STREET SW (OSLO ROAD)
AND APPROXIMATELY HALF A MILE WEST OF 74TH AVENUE FROM A-
1 TO IL - KNIGHT ENTERPRISES (Quasi -Judicial) -29-
9.A.2. PUBLIC HEARING - NORTH SEBASTIAN CONSERVATION AREA -
PURCHASE OF THE SIMONYE PARCEL (Legislative) -38-
MARCH 12, 2002
-2-
1► Pb y �ij
9.A.3. PUBLIC HEARING - TRI -PARTNERS, LLC - SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE
APPROVAL FOR SELF-SERVICE STORAGE FACILITY AT 445 27TH
AVENUE SW (Quasi -Judicial) -44-
9.A.4. PUBLIC HEARING - SUN -UP OF INDIAN RIVER, INC. - SPECIAL
EXCEPTION USE APPROVAL FOR AN ADULT CONGREGATE LIVING
FACILITY AND AN ADULT CARE FACILITY - SUN -UP ASSISTED
LIVING (Quasi -Judicial) -51-
9.A.5. PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE 2002-010 AMENDING THE ZONING
ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM CG TO
PD -COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF SR -60 AT 5001 SR -60 (MCNAB & MCNAB "V", INC. - SONNY'S
BAR -B -Q) (Legislative) -65-
9.A.6. PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE REGARDING TREE PROTECTION AND
LAND CLEARING REQUIREMENTS; AMENDING LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS (LDRs) CHAPTER 901; DEFINITIONS AND CHAPTER 927,
TREE PROTECTION AND LAND CLEARING (Legislative) -81-
MARCH 12, 2002
-3-
•
9.C.1. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS - SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING MARCH
19, 2002 -91-
1.A. Yukon Land Corporation - Request to Amend the Comprehensive Plan to
Redesignate 142 Acres Located at the Northeast Corner of 85th Street and
90th Avenue from R to L-1 And to Rezone Those 142 Acres From A-1 to
RS -3 (Legislative) -91-
1 B Indeco, Inc. - Request to Amend Figure 4.13 of the Transportation Element
of the Comprehensive Plan to Delete 25th Street SW Between 20th Avenue
and 27th Avenue (Legislative) -91-
1.C. County Initiated Request to Amend the Comprehensive Plan to
Redesignate 5 Publicly Owned Tracts From Various Residential Land Use
Designations to C-1, Publicly Owned or Controlled Conservation -1 (Zero
Density) and To Rezone Those Tracts From Various Residential Zoning
Districts to Con -1, Public Lands Conservation District (Zero Density) -
Harmony Oaks - 88.5 Acres - South Oslo Riverfront Conservation Area -
66 Acres - South of Round Island Park - 59.5 Acres - Anstalt - 19 Acres
and Spallone - 1.5 Acres (Legislative) -92-
9.C.2. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS - SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING MARCH
19, 2002 -93-
2.A. (First Hearing) Request to Adopt An Interim Wireless Telecommunications
Facilities Ordinance, Amending Various Sections of LDR Chapter 911 and
Section 971.44 (Legislative) -93-
MARCH 12, 2002
-4-
Bi a 2
J
• •
9.C.2. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS - SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING
APRIL 2, 2002 -93-
2.B. (Second Hearing) Request to Adopt an Interim Wireless
Telecommunications Facilities Ordinance, Amending Various
Sections of LDR Chapter 911 and Section 971.44 (Legislative) -93-
11 B 1 RESOLUTION 2002-015 APPROVING THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMERGENCY PLAN -95-
11.B.2. ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED CITIZENS OF INDIA\ RIVER
COUNTY (ARC) - RENEWAL OF CLASS "E" CERTIFICATE OF
PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY TO PROVIDE
WHEELCHAIR SERVICES -99-
11.B.3. INDIAN RIVER SHORES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY -
RENEWAL OF CLASS "A" CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC
CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY -100-
11.H. WATER PRODUCTION PUMPING SYSTEM UPGRADE - BENRO
ENTERPRISES, INC. D/B/A ROCHA CONTROLS, INC. -101-
13.A. CHAIRMAN RUTH M. STANBRIDGE - UPDATES -105-
14.A. EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT -105-
MARCH 12, 2002
-5-
14 B SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT -105-
14.C. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL BOARD -105-
MARCH 12, 2002
-6-
•
• •
March 12, 2002
REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
The Board of County Commissioners ofIndian River County, Florida, met in Regular
Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25`h Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on
Tuesday, March 12, 2002, at 9:00 a.m. Present were Ruth M. Stanbridge, Chairman; John
W. Tippin, Vice Chairman; Fran B Adams; Caroline D. Ginn; and Kenneth R. Macht. Also
present were James E Chandler, County Administrator; Paul G. Bangel, County Attorney;
and Patricia "PJ" Jones, Deputy Clerk.
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Stanbridge called the meeting to order.
2. INVOCATION
Commissioner Tippin delivered the Invocation.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Macht led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
MARCH 12, 2002
-1-
(nti
yt y .1! -1
z.+U F
Y
i a... i•
L. 0
4. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY
ITEMS
Chairman Stanbridge requested 5 changes to today's Agenda:
1. Add Item 5., Proclamation Honoring Volunteer Stewards of the Oslo
Riverfront Conservation Area.
2. Delete Item 7.F., MACE Grant.
3. Add additional backup to Item 8.
4. Add additional backup to Item 9.A.4.
5. Add additional backup to Item 9.A.6.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Ginn, SECONDED
by Commissioner Adams, the Board unanimously
made the above changes to the Agenda.
5. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
PROCLAMATION HONORING VOLUNTEER STEWARDS OF THE OSLO
RIVERFRONT CONSERVATIONAREA
The Chairman presented the following Proclamation to Kathy Wegel:
MARCH 12, 2002
-2-
• •
1
PROCLAMATION
HONORING VOLUNTEER STEWARDS OF THE OSLO RIVERFRONT
CONSERVATION AREA
WHEREAS, in 1991, Indian River County and the St. Johns River Water Management
District jointly acquired the Oslo Riverfront Conservation Area (ORCA) to preserve natural
woodland and wetland communities for the public's enjoyment and education; and
WHEREAS, ORCA was the first property acquired by the County under its environmental
lands program and the first such property improved for public access; and
WHEREAS, ORCA, being the County's first environmental land acquisition with public
facilities, sets the example for conservation lands management, education and public access
envisioned for other such lands in the County's overall conservation lands system, and
WHEREAS, it is the County's policy and in the public interest to encourage volunteer
stewardship of conservation lands; and
WHEREAS, under the guidance of Janice Broda and Dick Baker, in association with the
Florida Medical Entomology Laboratory of the University of Florida, a program of volunteer
stewards has been established at ORCA offering regular guided nature walks, as well as
educational workshops and canoe excursions; and
WHEREAS, ORCA volunteers, including students of Sebastian River High School teacher
George Anderson, have contributed countless hours maintaining ORCA trails and battling
nuisance invasive plants.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA that the Board recognizes the
accomplishments of the volunteer stewards of ORCA, and honors those volunteers for their
selfless achievement and contribution towards the public good
Adopted this 12th day of March 2002.
MARCH 12, 2002
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
•
Ruth M. Stanbridge, Chairman
-3-
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 19, 2002
The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or additions to the Minutes of the
Regular Meeting of February 19, 2002. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Tippin,
SECONDED by Commissioner Adams, the Board
unanimously approved the Minutes of the Regular
Meeting of February 19, 2002, as written.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
7.A. REPORTS
The following have been received and are on file in the office of the Clerk to the
Board:
1. Report of Convictions, February, 2002
7. B. LIST OF WARRANTS
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of February 28, 2002:
TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DATE: February 28, 2002
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WARRANTS
FROM: ED
M. FRY, JR., FINANCE DIRECTOR
MARCH 12, 2002
-4-
nu
G IP
• •
In compliance with Chapter 136.06, Florida Statutes, all warrants issued by the Board of County
Commissioners are to be recorded in the Board minutes
Approval is requested for the attached list of warrants, issued by the Clerk to the Board, for the
time period of February 26 2001 to February 23, 2002.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously approved the list of Warrants as issued
by the Clerk to the Board for February 26-28, 2002,
as recommended by staff.
CHECK NAME
NUMBER
O 021624 CHASE MEADOWS, LLC
O 021625 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE
0021626 THE GUARDIAN
O 287360 LIST, DARLENE
O 287694 WAL-MART STORE 931
O 288091 BURDINES
O 288281 VERO LAKE ESTATES VOLUNTEER
0288292 WAL-MART STORE 931
O 288300 WINGO, CYNTHIA A
O 288303 COURTRIGHT, STEPHEN
O 288311 PALMER, THERESE L
O 288372 TREASURE COAST BUILDERS INC
O 288387 CHAVEZ, MICHELE
O 288396 BROOKS, DONNA AND CITY OF VERO
O 288789 SANDERSON, JACK N
O 288791 HUGHES, DAVID R
O 288794 BURGOON BERGER CONST CO
0288805 FITZPATRICK, DONALD SR
O 288822 COLLINS, KATHLEEN
O 288833 HIPE, PHILIP J
O 288835 PINKERTON, MADGE A
O 288882 BEAZER HOMES CORP
O 289086 XL REALTY INC
O 289092 ANDO BUILDING CORP
O 289096 AMERITREND HOMES
O 289098 WESTON REAL ESTATE
O 289102 RION, FOUNT IV
O 289104 GIBBINS, KRISTI
O 289107 NARENKIVICIUS, BARBARA
O 289696 ST JOHNS RIVER WATER MGMT DIST
0290092 ATTIC 60
O 290102 KOCH, DAVID
O 290108 FRADETTE, LEE ANN
0290110 MGB CONSTRUCTION INC
O 290113 HIPE, PHILIP J
O 290114 BURGOON BERGER CONST CO
MARCH 12, 2002
-5-
CHECK
DATE
2002-02-26
2002-02-27
2002-02-27
2000-08-03
2000-08-10
2000-08-24
2000-08-24
2000-08-24
2000-08-24
2000-08-24
2000-08-24
2000-08-24
2000-08-24
2000-08-25
2000-08-31
2000-08-31
2000-08-31
2000-08-31
2000-08-31
2000-08-31
2000-08-31
2000-09-07
2000-09-07
2000-09-07
2000-09-07
2000-09-07
2000-09-07
2000-09-07
2000-09-07
2000-09-21
2000-09-28
2000-09-28
2000-09-28
2000-09-28
2000-09-28
2000-09-28
CHECK
AMOUNT
22,299.67
3,970.37
9,651.28
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 0C VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
O 290123
O 290129
O 290140
O 290142
O 290148
O 290183
O 290544
O 290547
O 290552
0290554
O 290559
O 290588
O 290608
O 290612
O 290622
0290629
0290655
O 290667
O 290839
O 291025
0291027
0291799
O 291800
0291813
O 291818
0291823
O 291824
O 291848
0291851
0291852
0292179
0292224
O 292237
0292249
O 292259
0292592
O 292624
0292632
O 292660
0292781
O 293066
0293565
0293588
0293616
O 293639
0293660
O 293761
0293828
0294423
0294430
0294442
0294446
0294494
0294650
O 294913
O 294928
O 299829
O 315206
O 316795
O 317063
O 317223
O 317236
BARTH CONSTRUCTION III INC
GHO VERO BEACH INC
BANOV ARCHITECTURE & CONST
CHAMBLISS, MICHAEL D
BROWN, JACQUELINE L
FT PIERCE, CITY OF
THOMAS, ALAN AND
ALLEN, DEAN
SAMOKS, JESSICA
BERNARD, RACHEL
SILVERMAN, MICHAEL
HINZMAN, FRANK D
ROYAL PALM HOMES INC
SMITH, KAREN LINDA
POWERS, DOREEN C
TROUTMAN, GERLIE
JOHNSTON, JOSEPH
RATHBURN, ROBERT
LIGHT SOURCE BUSINESS SYSTEMS
YATES, DALLAS
VERO BEACH LANDINGS
FLOWERS, JATOBIA
PAULISIN, AMY
REDFIELD, SCOTT
CUFF, TATASHA
L ITTLE, ALASHEIA
G IAMBANCO, GIUSEPPE F
CHANNING CORP XXIX
HARRIS, JULIE A
BELFORD, SUZANNE
ROSELAND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT
SOUTH CAROLINA GENEALOGICAL
TUCKER, THOMAS
WAL-MART STORES, INC
WAL-MART STORE 931
WAL-MART STORE 931
LUTHER, HELEN
MARTIN, SHANNON
WALLACE, MAE MILLER
DAUGHERTY, JOYCE
MCGRIFF, SHARON AND CITY OF
JONES, WILLIE L
HURST, NINA
WELKER, CRAIG
JOYNER, BONNIE
WALKER, DODDIE
COMMERCIAL TITLE SERVICE,INC
HOUSCH, Y TOMMY
THORPE, BONNIE J
DIMINOVICH, MARIE
FL OCEAN HOMES CORP
PRESLEY, MARIAN
ALASCIO, NICOLE
GOODMAN, ELLA
PUPO, MAYRA
STEIN, HARRY
QUALITY COPY ACQUISITION CORP
BREVARD TITLE L L C
RIVER VALLEY FARMS INC
BAUGHMAN, BERTA B H
NEW HORIZONS OF THE TREASURE
PETRILLA, FRED J, PHD
MARCH 12, 2002
-6-
2000-09-28
2000-09-28
2000-09-28
2000-09-28
2000-09-28
2000-10-02
2000-10-05
2000-10-05
2000-10-05
2000-10-05
2000-10-05
2000-10-05
2000-10-05
2000-10-05
2000-10-05
2000-10-05
2000-10-05
2000-10-05
2000-10-12
2000-10-12
2000-10-12
2000-10-26
2000-10-26
2000-10-26
2000-10-26
2000-10-26
2000-10-26
2000-10-26
2000-10-26
2000-10-26
2000-11-02
2000-11-02
2000-11-02
2000-11-02
2000-11-02
2000-11-09
2000-11-09
2000-11-09
2000-11-09
2000-11-16
2000-11-21
2000-11-30
2000-11-30
2000-11-30
2000-11-30
2000-11-30
2000-12-07
2000-12-07
2000-12-14
2000-12-14
2000-12-14
2000-12-14
2000-12-14
2000-12-21
2000-12-21
2000-12-21
2001-03-29
2001-12-27
2002-01-24
2002-01-31
2002-01-31
2002-01-31
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
.00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
_00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
. 00 VOID
II c
•
O 317396
O 317505
O 317596
O 317599
O 317867
O 318077
O 318674
O 318675
O 318676
0318677
O 318678
O 318679
O 318680
O 318681
O 318682
O 318683
0318684
0318685
0318686
0318687
O 318688
O 318689
O 318690
O 318691
0318692
O 318693
0318694
O 318695
O 318696
O 318697
O 318698
O 318699
O 318700
O 318701
O 318702
O 318703
O 318704
O 318705
O 318706
O 318707
O 318708
O 318709
O 318710
O 318711
O 318712
O 318713
O 318714
O 318715
O 318716
O 318717
O 318718
O 318719
O 318720
O 318721
O 318722
O 318723
O 318724
O 318725
O 318726
O 318727
O 318728
O 318729
O 318730
O 318731
CUNNINGHAM, RICHARD MD
LABOR FINDERS
S PHERION
S NOW, CATHY
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
AMERON HOMES
A A FIRE EQUIPMENT, INC
ACE PLUMBING, INC
ACTION TRANSMISSION AND
AERO PRODUCTS CORPORATION
AMERICAN CONCRETE INDUSTRIES,
APPLE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO
ATCO TOOL SUPPLY
ATLANTIC ROOFING OF
AUTO SUPPLY CO OF VERO BEACH,
ADAMSON, RONALD
ALL RITE WATER CONDITIONING
ADDISON OIL CO
ALLIED ELECTRONICS, INC
A T & T
ATLANTIC COASTAL TITLE CORP
ALL COUNTY MOWER & EQUIP CO
AUTO PARTS OF VERO, INC
ABCO GARAGE DOOR CO
APOLLO ENTERPRISES
AMERITREND HOMES
AVERY DENNISON CORP
AQUA -MARINE SERVICES INC
ABSOLUTE PROTECTION TEAM
AKINS, JAMES
ARMY/NAVY OUTDOORS
ALLIED TRAILER SALES & RENTALS
ALARM PARTNERS
BAIRD, JOSEPH A
BARTON, JEFFREY
BOARD OF COUNTY
BARTON, JEFFREY
BARTON, JEFFREY
K -CLERK
COMMISSIONERS
K- CLERK
K -CLERK
BRIDGESTONE SPORTS, INC
BARNETT BAIL BONDS
BARTON,
BAKER &
BRODART
BRANDTS
BOYNTON
JEFFREY K
TAYLOR INC
CO
& FLETCHERS APPLIANCE
P UMP & IRRIGATION
BROWN, DONALD JR
BLAKESLEE MAINTENANCE
BELLSOUTH
BEAZER HOMES, INC
BRADFORD, MADGE A
BEST WESTERN FLORIDA
B USHNELL CORP
BROWN, KIMBERLY AND
B UNNELL, ELIZABETH
BELLSOUTH
CAMP, DRESSER
CLEMENTS PEST
COLKITT SHEET
COMMUNICATIONS
MALL
FPL
& MCKEE, INC
CONTROL
METAL & AIR, INC
INT 'L
INC
COUNCIL OF COMMUNITY SERVICE
CRAMER, CHARLES A
CROOM CONSTRUCTION CO
CHEMSEARCH
COMPUTYPE, INC
MARCH 12, 2002
-7-
2002-02-07
2002-02-07
2002-02-07
2002-02-07
2002-02-14
2002-02-14
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
. 00
. 00
. 00
. 00
. 00
. 00
316.25
2,640.00
603.45
44.00
2,940.00
313.49
35.22
4,540.00
1,900.22
1,591.89
145.00
730.36
541.94
77.93
55.00
4.25
892.01
75.00
8.33
1,000.00
3,600.00
103.00
25.00
55.00
134.00
150.00
145.00
260.03
2,434.00
6,973.25
213,108.83
2,868.00
91.68
997.00
3,311.10
115.96
169.28
148.00
229.68
2,497.00
200.00
8,508.82
500.00
143.00
117.00
329.03
18.00
20.15
43.26
492.50
21.00
2,363.00
13,484.83
20.00
82.68
32.04
295.27
360.14
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
VOID
•
O 318732
O 318733
O 318734
O 318735
O 318736
O 318737
O 318738
O 318739
O 318740
O 318741
O 318742
O 318743
O 318744
O 318745
O 318746
O 318747
O 318748
O 318749
O 318750
O 318751
O 318752
O 318753
O 318754
0318755
0318756
O 318757
O 318758
O 318759
O 318760
O 318761
O 318762
O 318763
O 318764
O 318765
O 318766
O 318767
O 318768
0318769
O 318770
O 318771
O 318772
0318773
O 318774
O 318775
O 318776
O 318777
O 318778
O 318779
O 318780
O 318781
O 318782
O 318783
O 318784
O 318785
O 318786
O 318787
O 318788
O 318789
O 318790
0318791
O 318792
O 318793
O 318794
COMMAND POST, THE
CVSOA
CHIVERS NORTH AMERICA
CLIFF BERRY,INC
CINDY'S PET CENTER, INC
CES
CLIFFORD, MIKE
CORPORATION OF THE PRESIDENT
CENTER FOR EMOTIONAL AND
CULTURAL COUNCIL OF INDIAN
CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
COLUMBIA PROPANE
COMMUNITY ASPHALT CORP
CALLAWAY GOLF BALL CO
CLARRY, ALISON
COM -PAC FILTRATION, INC
C E M ENTERPRISES
CLARK, FRANCES K.
DATA SUPPLIES, INC
DELTA SUPPLY CO
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
DEPENDABLE DODGE, INC
D ICKERSON-FLORIDA, INC
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS
D IETZ, DANIEL
D IVERSIFIED DRILLING CORP
DAVIDSON TITLES, INC
DADE PAPER COMPANY
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS
DOWNTOWN PRODUCE INC
DRISKELL, JEROME
DELL MARKETING L.P.
DANCY, BASIL
E -Z BREW COFFEE SERVICE, INC
ELPEX, INC
EDLUND & DRITENBAS
EDUCATIONAL RECORD CENTER, INC
EVERYTHING PERSONALIZED INC
EGGLESTON, WILLIAM
EVERGLADES FARM
ELLIS, ANGIE
FEDEX
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY LLC
FLORIDA COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
FLOWERS BAKING COMPANY OF
FLORIDA TIRE RECYCLING, INC
FWPCOA
FELLSMERE POLICE DEPARTMENT
FLORIDA VETERINARY LEAGUE
FLOYD, IRA MD
FIRESTONE TIRE & SERVICE
FORE HEAD THREADS, INC
FLORIDA HIGHWAY PATROL
FLORIDA EMERGENCY MEDICINE
FREELANCE SERVICES INC
FRYE,LANE
FREY, MICHAEL L
FLESCHER, ROSEMARY
GALE GROUP, THE
GATOR LUMBER COMPANY
GENE'S AUTO GLASS
MARCH 12, 2002
-8-
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
429.74
360.00
64.60
155.00
33.44
51.24
200.00
48.75
427.50
2,056.36
242.09
18.30
5,384.58
1,652.19
12.00
10,949.44
267,439.23
320.00
196.24
437.11
1,679.15
58.13
9,184.57
1,870.00
111.60
15,850.00
30.00
285.10
221.00
127.80
111.25
5,046.00
132.78
49.50
110.64
2,803.92
11.45
6.90
182.00
373.82
200.00
27.55
40.00
22,695.64
389.30
14,497.03
80.89
3,811.20
195.00
25.00
60.00
37.00
404.00
260.00
25.00
100.00
217.21
68.06
226.12
12.00
349.04
2.78
400.00
• •
O 318795
O 318796
O 318797
O 318798
O 318799
O 31880
O 31880
O 31880
O 31880
O 31880
O 31880
O 31880
O 31880
O 318808
O 318809
O 318810
O 318811
O 318812
O 318813
O 318814
O 318815
O 318816
O 318817
O 318818
O 318819
O 318820
O 318821
0318822
O 318823
O 318824
O 318825
O 318826
O 318827
O 318828
O 318829
O 318830
O 318831
O 318832
O 318833
O 318834
O 318835
O 318836
O 318837
O 318838
O 318839
O 318840
O 318841
O 318842
O 318843
O 318844
O 318845
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
O 318846
O 318847
O 318848
O 318849
O 318850
O 318851
O 318852
O 318853
O 318854
O 318855
O 318856
O 318857
O 318858
GOODKNIGHT LAWN EQUIPMENT, INC
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO INC
GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER
GLIDDEN PAINT AND
GREENE, ROBERT E
GIFFORD GROVES, LTD
G INN, CAROLINE D
GENERAL CHEMICAL CORP
G IFFORD YOUTH ACTIVITIES CENTE
GREGORY HARRIS, PHD, CVE
GAGNON, MARIE
HARRISON UNIFORMS -196
HERE'S FRED GOLF CO, INC
H ICKMAN'S BRAKE & ALIGNMENT
H IGHSMITH, INC
HELD, PATRICIA BARGO
HACH COMPANY
HUSSAMY, OMAR MD
HARRIS COTHERMAN & ASSOCIATES
HOTCHKISS, MICHAEL
HOMELAND IRRIGATION CENTER
HOUSER, DANIEL R
HARRIGAN, TEANNA
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
INDIAN RIVER BATTERY, INC
INDIAN RIVER BLUEPRINT CO INC
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITY
INDIAN
INGRAM
INDIAN
INDIAN
INDIAN
INDIAN
RIVER FARMS WATER
LIBRARY SERVICES
RIVER ELECTRIC
RIVER ALL -FAB, INC
RIVER SOIL &
RIVER HAND REHAB INC
JANET'S AUTO TRIM & GLASS
JERRY SMITH TILE
JANITORIAL DEPOT OF AMERICA
JOHNSON CONTROLS INC
JANNACH PROPERTIES LTD
J F MEYERS GENERAL CONTRACTOR
KELLY TRACTOR CO
K ING, JOHN W
KOUNS, DARLENE
K S M ENGINEERING & TESTING
KOFKE, DANIEL
K & M ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC
KNOWLES, CYRIL
KELLER, JENAE
KEMIRON INC
KIRBY VETERINARY HOSPITAL
K'S PRINTING
KING'S BAPTIST CHURCH
LOWE'S COMPANIES, INC.
LIGHT SOURCE BUSINESS SYSTEMS
LABOR FINDERS
LESCO, INC
LOWE'S COMPANIES, INC
LANGSTON, HESS, BOLTON,ZNOSKO
LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES
L UNA, JUVENAL
LANCY, OLIVEANN, PA
L IVINGS, W MIKE
MAXWELL PLUMBING, INC
MARCH 12, 2002
-9-
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
nit
LJit
340.59
78.97
78.00
113.48
2,461.17
824.00
27.96
2,075.70
6,761.52
355.15
500.00
126.99
284.88
2,350.27
332.52
472.50
269.31
91.00
8,500.00
81.61
36.23
2,822.80
16.73
62,127.16
20,539.50
250.00
1,571.45
570.90
229.02
100.00
136.24
30.00
5,938.02
750.00
78.30
200.00
5,806.62
1,085.91
708.50
3,900.00
3,684.00
387.20
29.40
133.90
110.00
27.43
30.74
1,044.84
37.33
1,598.98
32.00
350.00
15,920.00
4,694.73
444.65
1,617.44
141.95
499.83
6,982.50
610.01
175.00
150.00
154.50
11,922.00
O 318859 MCDONOUGH, WAYNE R ESQ
O 318860 INDIAN RIVER COMMUNITY COLLEGE
0318861 MIKES GARAGE
O 318862 MUNICIPAL EQUIPMENT CO
O 318863 MOSS, HENDERSON, BLANTON &
O 318864 MATRX MEDICAL INC
O 318865 MARTIN'S LAMAR
O 318866 MIDWEST TAPE EXCHANGE
O 318867 MEDICAL SERVICES COMPANY, INC
0318868 MUELLER, MARK
O 318869 METTLER-TOLEDO FLORIDA, INC
0318870 MILES, GENE
O 318871 MUNNINGS, WANDA
O 318872 MGM CONTRACTING INC
O 318873 MENZ,NICOLE
O 318874 MANN JR, DON
O 318875 MORIN, LORI
O 318876 MONTANARO JR, JERRY
O 318877 MOXEY, KATIE
O 318878 NATIONAL AUTOMOBILE DEALERS
0318879 NOLTE, DAVID C
O 318880 NORTH SOUTH SUPPLY INC
O 318881 NICOSIA, ROGER J DO
O 318882 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
O 318883 NORTRAX SE L.L.C.
O 318884 NORTHSIDE AGAPE MINISTRIES
0318885 NOWLIN, TIAIRA
O 318886 NEWMAN, ALICE M
O 318887 OFFICE PRODUCTS & SERVICE
0318888 OFFICE DEPOT, INC
O 318889 ORANGE COUNTY HOUSING AND
0318890 ODYSSEY MANUFACTURING CO
0318891 ON ITS WAY
O 318892 PAN AMERICAN ENGINEERING CO
0318893 PARKS RENTAL INC
O 318894 P B S & J
O 318895 PERKINS MEDICAL SUPPLY
0318896 PORT CONSOLIDATED
O 318897 PINEWOODS ANIMAL HOSPITAL
0318898 PALM BEACH REPORTING SERVICE
0318899 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION
0318900 POMEROY COMPUTER RESOURCES
0318901 PETERSON, COLLEEN
0318902 PROFESSIONAL CASE MANAGEMENT
0318903 PERSONNEL PLUS INC
0318904 PRYOR, ELIGHA SR
0318905 PERMA-FIX
0318906 PESHA, JESSICA
O 318907 PETTY CASH
O 318908 PREFERRED GOVERNMENTAL CLAIM
0318909 PORT SUPPLY
O 318910 PIERCE, DEBRA ESQ
0318911 RINGHAVER EQUIPMENT COMPANY
0318912 RINKER MATERIALS
0318913 ROSELAND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT
0318914 RUSTIC DIMENSIONS, INC
0318915 ROBERTS & REYNOLDS PA
0318916 ROTH, ROBERT R AND
0318917 REDSTONE, MICHAEL
0318918 RANGEMASTER S E, INC
0318919 RECORDED BOOKS, LLC
0318920 R & G SOD FARMS
0318921 RUBBER STAMP EXPRESS & MORE
0318922 RANGELINE TAPPING SERVICE INC
0318923 ROCHA CONTROLS
MARCH 12, 2002
-10-
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
1,471.25
19,100.16
225.00
572.00
525.00
250.00
6,827.08
849.50
9.60
500.00
1,443.75
325.00
24.75
34,560.00
15.70
29.80
56.65
19.60
17.36
58.00
210,665.92
114.65
1,500.00
531.44
258.64
4,033.37
16.73
136.10
1,766.55
4,624.81
2,575.01
4,387.50
944.55
255.00
58.00
1,400.00
12.75
802.35
60.00
156.00
81.84
143.00
23.00
115.75
570.00
550.00
11,614.00
38.62
100.00
1,815.00
247.61
3,886.01
756.00
28.16
1,347.15
4,945.00
4,030.49
41.64
450.29
1,940.00
177.60
70.00
84.00
675.00
720.00
9
•
O 318924
O 318925
O 318926
O 318927
O 318928
O 318929
O 318930
O 318931
O 318932
O 318933
O 318934
O 318935
O 318936
O 318937
O 318938
O 318939
O 318940
O 318941
O 318942
O 318943
O 318944
O 318945
O 318946
O 318947
O 318948
O 318949
O 318950
O 318951
O 318952
O 318953
O 318954
O 318955
O 318956
ROYAL CUP COFFEE
REGIONS INTERSTATE BILLING
RASMUSSEN, KARA
ROGER DEAN CHEVROLET
RICHARDS, MIRANDA
RIGEL, ROBERT A.
REPLAY SYSTEMS INC
SAFETY KLEEN
SEBASTIAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT
SEWELL HARDWARE CO, INC
SEXUAL ASSAULT ASSISTANCE
SMART CORPORATION
SOUTHERN EAGLE DISTRIBUTING,
ST LUCIE BATTERY & TIRE, INC
S TATE ATTORNEY OFFICE
S TURGIS LUMBER & PLYWOOD CO
S TEIL, HOLLY
SKAGGS, PAUL MD
S PALDING
S UN BELT MEDICAL SUPPLY, INC
S MITH BROS CONT EQUIP
SMITH, GARY
S YSCO OF SOUTHEAST FLORIDA
S NYDER, DONNA E
S TEVENS PRINTING
S OUTHEAST LIBRARY BINDERY, INC
S UNSTATE PEST MANAGEMENT
SOUTHERN/ALARM PARTNERS
S TAGE & SCREEN
UTHERN COMPUTER WAREHOUSE
CURITY FIRST TITLE PARTNERS
BASTIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT
ARK, AYALA (TR)
ERICYCLE INC
RRA, RACHEL
NNYTECH INC- FL
MS CRANE & EQUIPMENT, CO
EPHENS, LARRY
UTHERN GULF WEST
QUOIA VOTING SYSTEMS
S IN, CAROLE D AND
STATE PEST MANAGEMENT
JAYS'
-8 FIRE EQUIPMENT, INC
OTHY ROSE CONTRACTING
DALE OLIVER & ASSOC., INC
MPSON PUBLISHING GROUP, INC
KETT, WILLIAM AND
IPPS TREASURE COAST
ASURE COAST IRRIGATION AND
INING TREE INC, THE
TAMERICA INC
RSCROFT LARGE PRINT
VERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA
FILTER DISTRIBUTION GROUP
E FORD, INC
BEACH VOLUNTEER FIRE
BEACH LINCOLN MERCURY INC
BEACH, CITY OF
BEACH, CITY OF
SO
S E
SE
S T
O 318957 ST
0318958 SE
O 318959 SU
S I
S T
SO
SE
S T
S UN
TEE
TEN
TIM
TIN
THO
TAC
SCR
TRE
O 318974 TRA
O 318975 TES
O 318976 ULVE
O 318977 UNI
O 318978 U 5
0318979 VELD
O 318980 VERO
O 318981 VERO
O 318982 VERO
O 318983 VERO
O 318960
O 318961
O 318962
O 318963
O 318964
O 318965
O 318966
O 318967
O 318968
O 318969
O 318970
O 318971
O 318972
O 318973
MARCH 12, 2002
-11-
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
run
,.:1i
162.56
378.16
229.17
2,415.18
225.58
500.00
8,645.20
118.50
23.00
34.24
4,964.16
12.80
300.60
30.00
12,513.72
37.28
56.26
9.00
667.80
73.44
1,110.52
150.00
763.27
129.36
450.00
537.56
195.00
100.00
60.48
91.20
7,500.00
50.00
500.00
228.66
38.62
995.37
478.75
182.00
3,500.00
9,400.00
8,625.00
1,150.00
129.00
3,790.00
37,857.60
4,551.37
632.50
15,113.99
870.32
550.00
1,834.48
7,416.00
672.06
430.00
11,223.47
732.92
18.00
2,300.00
2,497.81
9,462.50
•
0318984
O 318985
O 318986
O 318987
O 318988
O 318989
0318990
O 318991
O 318992
O 318993
O 318994
0318995
O 318996
O 318997
O 318998
O 318999
O 319000
O 319001
O 319002
031900
O 31900
O 31900
O 31900
031900
031900
O 31900
0319010
O 319011
0319012
O 319013
O 319014
0319015
0319016
O 319017
O 319018
0319019
O 319020
0319021
O 319022
O 319023
O 319024
O 319025
O 319026
0319027
O 319028
O 319029
VERO LAWNMOWER CENTER, INC
VERO LAKE ESTATES VOLUNTEER
VERO ORTHOPAEDICS
VERO BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT
VERO BEARING & BOLT
VERO BEACH POWERTRAIN
W W GRAINGER, INC
W ILLHOFF, PATSY
WILLIAM THIES & SONS, INC
WEST GROUP PAYMENT CTR
WHEELED COACH INDUSTRIES INC
WALGREEN COMPANY
W W GRAINGER INC
WOODS OF VERO BEACH
WESTERN VIDEO, INC
WASHBURN, DANIEL JOE JR
WIDNER, BRADLEY J
WINGFOOT COMMERCIAL TIRE
WHITE, HELEN B
3 WAKE COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY
4 XEROX CORPORATION
5 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE
6 MILLER, JOSEPH
7 WODTKE, RUSSELL
8 RUDD, ALAN
9 LICARI, LINDA
REXFORD BUILDERS
MOORE, DIANE
BURGOON BERGER CONST CO
FLOODTIDE INC
PARENT CONSTRUCTION INC
MGB CONSTRUCTION
AMERON HOMES
DEBUS, JON E AND
WILLIAMSON, BRIAN
JOHN LLOYD BUILDERS INC
THOMAS, DAWNA
GHO VERO BEACH INC
HOELKE SR, WILLIAM H AND
PATCHINGTON, INC
PASSAGE ISLAND HOMES
PALLAS,RICHARD AND
WARD, RONNIE
LAMB, EILEEN
NORTHERN, SHAMEIKA
LURIA IMPROVEMENTS LLC
O 319030
O 319031
O 319032
O 319033
0319034
O 319035
0319036
0319037
0319038
O 319039
O 319040
O 319041
O 319042
O 319043
WARNICK, DOHR
DAUCHER JR, ROBERT
DONLEY, SHEILA JAMES
BECKER, GARY L
STALTER, RONALD
BAKER, BERNICE
BEST, ROBERT
MCGRATH, ROBERT C
MCCORD, KACEE
CUPP, DEBRA C
NTP CONSTRUCTION
LUEHRMANN, JANE
HUMPHREYS,ELIZABETH M
FIRST AMERICAN TITLE
MARCH 12, 2002
-12-
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
P
192.85
14.00
159.00
100.00
80.39
48.56
318.84
104.00
184.40
998.04
18.80
330.32
169.16
1,075.00
698.75
36.05
84.97
107.42
11.00
30.15
189.42
65.86
665.44
295.97
404.24
408.68
10.86
38.51
87.17
50.72
52.24
101.83
45.18
33.20
25.76
3.57
13.51
26.42
7.52
127.66
104.52
18.46
17.38
32.75
27.42
69.02
6.45
63.61
49.13
42.89
70.11
22.88
65.10
43.33
5.62
4.08
334.04
46.79
64.34
16,780.68
•
O 31904
O 31904
O 31904
0319047
O 319048
O 319049
O 319050
O 319051
0319052
O 319053
O 319054
O 319055
O 319056
O 319057
O 319058
O 319059
O 319060
O 319061
O 319062
O 319063
O 319064
O 319065
O 319066
O 319067
O 319068
O 319069
0319070
O 319071
O 319072
O 319073
O 319074
O 319075
4 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE
5 PROFESSIONAL TITLE
6 COASTAL TITLE
COASTAL TITLE
UNIVERSAL LAND TITLE
LULICH PA, STEVE
GOULD, COOKSEY, ET AL
MASON & ASSOC., PA
S UPERIOR TITLE
S ECURITY FIRST TITLE
BREVARD TITLE
ATLANTIC COASTAL TITLE
COMMERCIAL TITLE
ISLAND TITLE
DILL & EVANS, PA
VANDEVOORDE, RENE
STEWART TITLE
LAWYERS TITLE
OLTMAN, GERALD W AND
KEEFE, EDWARD J AND
KILBOURNE, TIMOTHY E
MCCOMAS, GARY W AND
SHIELDS, ELIZABETH AND
BLEAKLEY, KENNETH M AND
THOMPSON, KENNETH M AND
BRICKER, MARIE A
GRAHAM, MARK S AND
MELAGRANO, STEPHEN M AND
SAVAGE, CATHERINE E
PRIMMER, JOHN W
MADIGAN, JANICE
SLAWSKI,JOSEPH R AND
O 319076
O 319077 G
REED, ROBERT F AND
AMA, ROBERT D AND
MARCH 12, 2002
-13-
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
2002-02-28
410.84
33,059.22
2,777.49
4,045.92
869.47
1,424.97
1,932.15
386.43
457.11
6,479.63
2,379.95
483.04
4,445.17
1,602.72
1,276.58
1,255.90
2,011.38
386.43
434.74
412.63
386.43
458.89
386.43
772.86
691.63
410.59
483.04
772.86
386.43
410.59
386.43
386.43
377.43
491.61
1,477,431.43
•
•
7. C. PROCLAMATION HONORING Si'. PETER'S MISSIONARY BAPTIST
CHURCH ON ITS 100TH ANNIVERSARY
The Chairman entered the following Proclamation upon the record:
PROCLAMATION
HONORING ST. PETER'S MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH
ON ITS 100TH ANNIVERSARY
WHEREAS, St. Peter's Missionary Baptist Church was organized in March, 1902, by a
group of dedicated members under the leadership of the late Reverend Madison; and
WHEREAS, members demonstrated a commitment of service and loyalty to the building
of God's Kingdom and played a key role in erecting a building for the purpose of fellowship and
worship. When the original structure was damaged by storms between 1926 and 1928, the
membership, under the pastorate of Reverend F. Little, proceeded to plan for another building.
Between 1930 and 1931, another building presently located on Old Dixie Highway, was erected; and
WHEREAS, five pastors served the congregation from 1907 to 1926, and during the
years of 1926 to 1955, the flock was led by eleven pastors, who played key roles in providing
stepping stones toward the future of St. Peter's; and
WHEREAS, individuals who merit recognition and commendation for their contributions
during the period of 1956 to 1990 are Pastors F. D. Kitchen, Tom E. Diamond and Ronald Wright,
who envisioned another building which would allow for facility accommodations as well as growth in
membership; and
WHEREAS, during the period of 1991 to 2002, a vision was evident and St. Peter's
Missionary Baptist Church, through its Human Services organization, has implemented St. Peter's
Academy, one of five Charter Schools in Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, having created the St. Peter's Child Development Center and the Boy's
Developmental and Training Institute, St. Peters Missionary Baptist Church, under the tutelage of
Reverend Andrew Jefferson, continues to be a beacon of light on the Treasure Coast of Florid&
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the Board congratulates the members
of St. Peter's Missionary Baptist Church on its 100th Anniversary, and extends best wishes for
continued growth and success.
Adopted this 12`" day of March, 2002.
MARCH 12, 2002
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Ruth M. Stanbri.ge, Chairman
-14-
O
• •
7. D. PROCLAMA TION HONORING STEPHANIE AL TMILLER AS A
DISTINGUISHED FINALIST IN THE PRUDENTIAL SPIRIT OF COMMUNITY
A WARDS
The Chairman entered the following Proclamation upon the record:
PROCLAMATION
HONORING STEPHANIE ALTMILLER
AS A DISTINGUISHED FINALIST
IN THE PRUDENTIAL SPIRIT OF COMMUNITY AWARDS
WHEREAS, Stephanie Altmiller, a senior at Sebastian River High School, was
recently named as one of Florida's Top Student Volunteers in The Prudential Spirit of
Community Awards, a nationwide program honoring young people for outstanding acts
of volunteerism; and
WHEREAS, a record 28,000 high school and middle level students submitted
applications for this year's program, which was conducted by Prudential Financial in
partnership with the National Association of Secondary School Principals; and
WHEREAS, as one of only ten students in the State to achieve this recognition,
Stephanie Altmiller represents the best of America's youth, and is a role model to her
peers and her community; and
WHEREAS, the soul of our County and its vitality as a place to live and work
depends on the relationship of families, friends and neighbors; and
WHEREAS, strengthening those bonds is not as much in the hands of
institutions or governments as it is in the hearts of individuals such as Stephanie, who
volunteer to help people of all ages, races and religions cope with illnesses, overcome
hardships and barriers, adjust to social changes, and fulfill their potential. These
volunteers are the unrecognized, unsung heroes of our society.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the Board recognizes the
accomplishments of Stephanie Altmiller and congratulates her for the honor she has
brought to Indian River County. -
Adopted this 12th day of March, 2002.
MARCH 12, 2002
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
`Ca-, 2 �.
Ruth M. Stanbridge, ChairP
-15-
an
7.E. SUNTREE PARTNERS, INC. - FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR CITRUS
SPRINGS P.D. - VILLAGE "A"
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of February 26, 2002:
TO:
THROUGH•
FROM:
DATE:
James E. Chandler
County Administrator
MENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
ert M. Keating, AICP
Community Development Di
Stan Boling, AICP
Planning Director
Mark Zans A17--
Senior
2.Senior Planner, Current Development
February 26, 2002
SUBJECT: Suntree Partners, Inc. Request for Final Plat Approval for Citrus Springs
P.D. - Village 'A'
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of
County Commissioners at its regular meeting of March 12, 2002.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Citrus Springs - Village 'A' is a 29.97 acre portion of the overall Citrus Springs PD (Planned
Development) project. Village 'A' has been broken-down into two phases: Phase I is being
platted into 52 duplex Lots (for a total of 104 units), and Phase II is being platted as future
development tracts. In the future, these Phase II tracts will be replatted as lots via a future final
plat. Citrus Springs Village A' is located on the east side of 58"' Avenue, north of 5th Street
S W. and south of the South Relief Canal. The property is zoned PD, Planned Development, and
has an L-1, (low density 1, up to 3 units per acre), land use designation. The density of Citrus
Springs Village 'A' is 1.94 units / acre.
On June 22, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted preliminary plat approval for
Citrus Springs PD- Village 'A, Village 'B' and Village 'C (all north of 5th Street S.W.).
Currently, the status of each village is as follows: Village B' has been platted, Village 'C' has
MARCH 12, 2002
-16-
•
been platted, and Village 'A' is to be platted with this request.
The developer, Suntree Partners, Inc., subsequently obtained a land development permit and has
started construction of the required subdivision improvements for Village 'A'. The developer is
now requesting final prat approval, and has submitted the following:
A final plat in substantial conformance with the approved preliminary plat, and
A cost estimate for the remaining required improvements, and
A contract for construction of remaining required improvements.
?.
ANAL YS IS:
Some of the required subdivision improvements for Village `A' have been constricted.
Remaining improvements to be constnicted include sewer and water lines, stonnwater, drainage,
and paving. At this time, the applicant is "bonding -out" the remaining required improvements
for Village 'A' Phase I, as provided for in the county s land development regulations. Both the
Public Works Department and the Utility Services Department have reviewed and approved the
submitted engineer s cost estimate and corresponding security amount. In addition, the County
Attorney's Office has reviewed and approved the submitted contract for construction The
financial security represents 115% of the estimated cost to construct the remaining required
improvements for Village `A' Phase I. It should be noted that all improvements within the
Citrus Springs PD subdivision will be private, except for the utility facilities. The utility
facilities will be dedicated to Indian River County as required by the Utility Services Department
and will be guaranteed separately through Utility Service's bill of sale procedures With the
contract signed, all final plat requirements are satisfied.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners, grant
final plat approval for the Citrus Spring- Village 'A planned development, authorize the
chairman to sign the contract for construction of remaining required improvements for Village
'A' Phase I, and authorize the accept the security that guarantees performance of the construction
contract.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application
2 Location Map
3. Plat Graphic
4. Contract for Construction for Required Improvements
5. Contract for Construction for Required Sidewalk Improvements.
MARCH 12, 2002
-17-
5
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDIID by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously granted final plat approval for the
Citrus Springs - Village "A" planned development;
authorized the Chairman to sign the Contract for
Construction of Remaining Required Improvements
for Village "A" Phase I; and authorized the
acceptance of the security that guarantees
performance of the construction contract; all as
recommended by staff
CONTRACTS ARE ON FILE IN THE
OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
7.F. SHERIFF - M.A. C. E. GRANT (MULTI -AGENCY CRIMINAL
ENFORCEMENT UNIT) PROJECT GENERATED INCOME - BUDGET
AMENDMENT 007
Deleted.
7. G. MARGO STANFORD - DEVELOPER'S A GREEMENT FOR WATER MAIN
REPLACEMENT ON 9TH PLACE, 9TH STREET, AND 8TH PLACE BETWEEN 6TH
A VENUE AND 7TH A VENUE - RELEASE OF RETAINAGE FOR WORK
COMPLETED TO DATE
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of March 4, 2002:
MARCH 12, 2002
-18-
B';
•
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
PREPARED
AND STAFFED
BY:
SUBJECT:
MARCH 4, 2002
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
W. ERIK OLSON
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
AARON J. BOWLES, P.E.
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER
NDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITIES
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT WITH MARGO STANFORD (FOR WATER
MAIN REPLACEMENT ON 9TH PLACE, 9TH STREET AND STH
PLACE
BETWEEN 6th AVE. AND 7TH AVE)
RELEASE OF RETAI "AGE FOR WORK COMPLETED TO DATE
BACKGROUND
On March 20, 2001 the Board of County Commissioners entered into a Developer's Agreement with
Margo Stanford (see attached agenda item and minutes -Attachment A) in the amount of $73,043.50 and
amended the contract on October 04, 2001 for an additional $50,559.00 (see attached Amendment —
Attachment B) fora total of $123,602.50 to provide water mains to the above referenced project. To date, all
utility construction located within the right-of-way has been completed by Pan American, Inc. and has been
accepted by the Utilities Department. The remainder of the project yet to be completed will be performed by
a separate plumbing contractor and includes the disconnection of existing services from the old 2" water main
located in the rear of the properties and reconnecting each service to the new 6" water math located within the
right-of-way. Upon installation of new meters in the new meter boxes, the plumbing contractor will
disconnect each residence from the old meter and reconnect them to the new meter. At that time, the Utilities
Department will re -visit the site and remove the old meters. The estimated time for completion of this second
task is two to three months.
This agenda item is requesting a partial release of retainage for the work completed to date by Pan-American.
Final payment for the remainder of the work and release of the remaining retainage will be issued upon
acceptance by the Utilities Department and final approval from the BCC.
ANALYSIS
Margo Stanford has been paid $99,126.50 for utility work performed to date, of which $87,376.50 has
been paid to Pan-American, Inc. thru Margo Stanford. The work performed to date includes design,
permitting and construction services. The Utilities Department is now requesting the release of retainage
for work completed to date, totaling 39.703.50.
Upon payment of this request for release of retainage, $14,767.50 will be available to perform the
remaining tasks. The remainder of the project is anticipated to be completed within the next two to three
months. At that time, the remainder of the fees can be paid.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department
approve the attached request for
of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners
the release of retainage held as indicated in Attachment -C as presented.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A) Approved Developer's Agreement dated March 20, 2001.
Attachment B) Amendment to Developer's Agreement dated October 04, 2001.
Attachment C) Invoice from Margo Stanford for Partial Release of Retainage
MARCH 12, 2002
-19-
`3
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously approved the request for the release of
retainage in the amount of $9,708.50, as
recommended by staff.
7.H. MISCELLANEOUS BUDGET AMENDMENT 008
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of March 6, 2002:
To:
Members of the
Board of County Commissioners
Through: Joseph A. Baird
Assistant County Administr
From. Jason E Brown
Budget Manager
Date: March 6, 2002
Subject: Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 008
Description and Conditions
The attached budget amendment appropriates funding necessary for the following:
1. Staff has reached an agreement with Holmes Regional Medical Center to pay for medical care
forindigent prisoners at the Indian River County Jail. The attached entry appropriates funding
in the amount of $83,500 from General Fund contingencies.
2. On May 11, 1999, the Board of Commissioners approved a new Traffic Impact Fee ordinance.
Part of this ordinance created a revised division of impact fee districts. In order to account for
the fees properly, separate funds were created for the old impact fees and the new impact
fees The plan was to expend any remaining balances in the old districts prior to expending
funds from the new districts. We have now reached the point where two districts (district 8 and
9) are nearly exhausted. However, a budget amendment is necessary to authorize
expenditure of the remaining funds in the amounts of $29,810 for district 8 and $59,329 for
district 9.
3. On June 5, 2001, the Board of Commissioners approved construction of the Sebastian Canoe
Launch with grant funds and a match from Florida Boating Improvement Program funds. The
attached entry appropriates funding.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Board of Commissioners approve the attached budget amendment.
MARCH 12, 2002
-20-
pi, 759
•
•
•
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously approved Miscellaneous Budget
Amendment 008, as recommended by staff.
To: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
From: Jason E. Brown
Budget Manager \.
Budget Amendment: 008
Date: March 6, 2002
MARCH 12, 2002
-21-
, 0
Entry
Number
Fund/ Departfnent/
Account dame
Account Number
Increase
Decrease
1.
Expenses
General
Department/
Fund/ Sheriffs
Hospital
001-600-521-033.17
$83,500
$0
General
Contingencies
Fund/ Reserve
for
001-199-581-099.91
$0
$83,500
2.
Revenues
Old Traffic Impact Fee Fund/ Cash
Forward — October 1
101-000-389-040.00
$89,139
$0
Expenses
Old Traffic Impact Fee Fund/
District 8/ 58th Ave. Improvements
101-158-541-067.31
$29,810
$0
Old Traffic Impact Fee
District 9/ 58`h Ave. Improvements
Fund/
010-159-541-067.31
$59,329
$0
3.
Revenues
Florida Boating
Fund/ State Grant
Improvement
133-000-334-039.00
$26,411
$0
Expenses
Florida Boating
Fund/ Sebastian
Improvement
Canoe Launch
133-210-572-068.25
$26,411
$0
MARCH 12, 2002
-21-
, 0
7.L BID #4044 - BACKHOE TRANSPORT TRAILER - VERMEER SOUTHEAST
SALES AND SERVICE (UTILITIES DEPARTMENT)
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of February 27, 2002:
DATE
TO:
THROUGH:
February 27, 2002
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Thomas Frame, General Services, Director _A te.)J
W. Erik Olson, Utilities Department, Director
FROM: Fran Powell, Purchasing Manager `� /9.z,
SUBJECT: IRC Bid # 4044 Backhoe Transport Trailer
Utilities Department
BACKGROUND:
The Utilities Department has requested the purchase of a backhoe transport trailer. The bid
results are as follows:
Bid Opening Date:
Advertising Dates:
DemandStar Broadcast to:
Specification s requested by:
Replies:
BID TABULATION:
February 8, 2002
January 25 and February 1, 2002
Four Hundred Fifty Five (455) vendors
Seventeen (17) vendors
Six (6) vendors
Vendor
Veil leer Southeast Sales & Service
Orlando, FL
Belshe Industries Inc
Tecumseh, OK
Make
Model
Total Cost
Custom
10T242E
DLP96
$8,160.40
Days
A.R.O.
45
Nortrax Equipment Co SE LLC
West Palm Beach, FL
Belshe
DT255-
2EP
$8,475.00
30
Ringhaver Equipment Company
Riverview, FL
Globe Trailers
Bradenton, FL
Interstate
20DT
$8,900.00
5
Trail King
TK20
$9,282.96
2-8 wk
Big Tex Trailers
Mt Pleasant, TX
Globe
GTTA 10
-29
$10,300.00
60
Big Tex
Trailers
20ED
20+5
$10,995.00
MARCH 12, 2002
-22-
BK
45
a' 6 1
•
• •
ESTIMATED BUDGET:
TOTAL AMOL
±T OF BID -
SOURCE OF FU?N
DS:
RECOMM NNDATION:
$9,000.00
$8,160.40
471-269-536-066.49
Water Distribution Capital Item
Staff recommends that the bid be awarded to Vermeer Southeast Sales & Service Inc as the
lowest most responsive and responsible bidder meeting the specifications as set forth in the
Invitation to Bid
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously awarded Bid #4044 for the backhoe
transport trailer to Vermeer Southeast Sales and
Service in the amount of $8,160.40, as
recommended by staff.
MARCH 12, 2002
-23-
BR
u
a
,r.
'-7
7. J. EQUIPMENT DECLARED SURPLUS FOR SALE OR DISPOSAL
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of February 27, 2002:
DATE: February 27, 2002
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THROUGH: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Thomas Frame, General Services Director ---*-4-44-t4").
FROM: Fran Powell, Purchasing Manager 'LrcRuccat
SUBJECT: Declare Equipment Surplus for Sale or Disposal
BACKGROUND:
The attached list of equipment has been declared excess to the needs of the County and should be
disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Florida State Statutes. The monies received
from this sale will be returned to the appropriate accounts
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners declare these items surplus and
authorize its sale and / or proper disposal.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously declared the items surplus and
authorized their sale and/or proper disposal, as
recommended by staff.
MARCH 12, 2002
-24-
•
• •
8. SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS - SPACE NEEDS
(CONTINUED FROM MARCH 5, 2002 MH STING)
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of March 8, 2002:
Date: March 8, 2002
To: The Honorable Board of County Commissioners
Thru: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
From. Thomas W. Frame, General Services Director
Subject: Detailed Costs for Space Comparisons
BACKGROUND
At the March 5th Board meeting, staff was requested to bring back to the board of County
Commissioners a more detailed analysis of cost associated with the placement of a modular
office for the needs of the Supervisor of Elections In addition, we were tasked to make a similar
comparison on the costs associated with the 43rd Avenue proposal.
Below is a table that compares the two facilities. The costs associated with each are based on
assumptions and are estimates meant to reflect the possible cost of utilizing each facility. The
assumptions may vary with each facility but should give a fairly accurate perspective of each
cost.
Relative to the 43`d Avenue facility, it assumes a cost of "build -out" at $150,000 for an 8,000
square foot facility ($18.75 per square foot). The net cost after an allowance of $37,500 is
1112,500. That `build -out' could vary as low as 515.00 per square foot depending on the actual
layout and the type of work that needs to be accomplished. That would provide a range from
$112,500 down to $82,500. For the purpose of this comparison the higher amount of $112,500
was selected.
The cost of bringing voice and data into the building is higher because of the need to jack and
bore under 43rd Ave. and the electronics necessary to fire up the fiber optics from that location
It is approximately $11,500 more than at the Administration building A 10% contingency was
added to the both proposals.
The Modular facility assumes a structure of approximately 9 800 square feet being located on a
grassed area in front of the current Administration building. The location would create a need of
33 additional parking spaces and appropriate stoup water attenuation. The improvements and site
plan approval process would require the preparation of plans by a registered engineer with
submittals to both the City of Vero Beach and the St Johns River Water Management District.
The costs of the modular are higher than originally reported but they are reflective of regulatory
and connection costs not originally identified. Impact fees for utilities and transportation are
major contributors to some of those higher figures.
MARCH 12, 2002
-25-
n
111 le
Site Plan Review / Building Permit Process
City of Vero Beach
Civil Engineer
St. Johns Permit
Concurrency Review
Impact Fees
County Transportation
VB Elect.
Modular
$ 350.00
$ 10,000.00
$ 350.00
$ 100.00
43rd
NA
NA
NA
NA
$ 14,875.20 NA
Meter fee $ 7,935.00 NA
Connection fee I $ 750.00 $ 750.00
VB Utilities
5/8' Water Meter
Sewer $212/6 fixtures
Backflow Preventor (Fireline)
Connection Costs.
Building Permit Fee
Data & Voice Connection Costs
Building Setup fees or Build -out
Delivery $112,500.00
Set-up Complex $ 3,300.00 NA
Other services $ 19,540.00 NA
$3,600.00 NA
$ 4,186.00 NA
$ 20,000.00 NA
Landscaping $ 20,000.00 NA
Site Preparation $ 20,000.00 NA
10% Contingency $ 2,500.00 NA
$ 12,000.00 $ 1.3,000.00
TOTAL $163,596.20 $147,119.00
$ 13.00
$ 13.00
$ 1,016.00 ! $ 1,016.00
$ 566.00 NA
$ 9,000.00 NA
$ 5,000.00 NA
$ 130.00 NA
$8,385.00 $ 19,840.00
skirting
Parking @$13 S.Y.
Storm Water
Annual Lease Price I $ 59,928.00 J
$ 54,000.00
As can be seen from the totals above, there is about a $16,477 difference shown between the two
proposals as to front-end costs. The difference in the annual lease cost is about $6,000. Staff is
searching to determine if a location other than the grassed area in the front of the Administration
Building can be found.
General Services Director Tom Frame briefly reviewed the options for the Board and
noted that he had also investigated the employee parking area to the east. Use of that area
would involve the loss of some parking and the responsibility to provide additional parking.
There is no easy solution to the problem.
Supervisor of Elections Kay Clem reiterated that the need is to have the voting
machines in the same place as the tabulation equipment. The split between the storage area
and the offices is the cause of the present problem and the storage area presently provided
MARCH 12, 2002
-26-
65
•
•
leaks and has no air conditioning. If the Board's decision involves a move away from the
Administration Building campus, she has considered possibly deputizing someone in the
Property Appraiser's Office to register voters and take change of address information.
However, her hope is that the offices can be located on this campus for the convenience of
the voting public. Her office did the required testing last week and it was a nightmare with
the machines in the office along with staff and the Canvassing Board. This was dust for a
city election and only 90 machines were required. There will be a county -wide election in
the fall and 420 machines will be needed.
Commissioner Ginn expressed her concerns about locating a modular unit on this
campus. She was concerned that another move would be necessary when the Space Needs
Committee brings their report to the Board in May and a decision is made that could involve
building on this property. She was also concerned about the large trees located in the open
spaces on this campus. She preferred to see the Supervisor's Office move to Luria's Plaza
if the price can be lowered somewhat.
Director Frame noted that there is a possibility of a buydown of some of the lease
cost for that space. When the Tax Collector moved to that location he bought out about
$150,000. He had spoken with the lease agent and his understanding is that the earliest
possible move -in date would be about July Pt. They want a 10 -year lease
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Macht,
SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, that the
Board do what the Supervisor wants; i.e., locate a
modular office on the campus of the County
Administration Building.
MARCH 12, 2002
-27-
•
Commissioner Adams questioned placing the modular unit to the east of the north
parking lot, and Director Frame replied that location would not impact any existing parking.
Any other location would necessitate providing additional parking plus stormwater
management expenses.
Commissioner Adams questioned the property to the northwest of the purchasing
building, and Director Frame stated that those lots are still zoned single-family and would
have to be rezoned. The City has advised that they cannot complete a rezoning prior to the
July 1st deadline. If the modular were located to the east of the north parking lot, it could be
relocated if a decision to build in that location were made at a later time.
Commissioner Tippin stated there is no easy answer but using one of the grassy areas
would be the lesser of the evils.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and
the Motion passed by a 3-2 vote (Commissioners
Adams and Ginn opposed) .
Commissioner Adams noted that her concern was with the haste to react. The entire
problem with the voting systems has been an incredible burden on the County with the
purchase of the new machines and now the move of the Elections Office.
Director Frame asked the Board for direction as to a specific location, and
Commissioner Macht noted that the vote was to use the modular unit to be located on the
County Administration Building campus.
County Administrator Jim Chandler commented that he will work with Director
Frame and they will choose the location which will be the least expensive to improve.
Supervisor Clem noted that the municipal voting is going very smoothly.
MARCH 12, 2002
-28-
•
9.A.1. PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE 2002-009 AMENDING
THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING
ZONING MAP FOR 1.26 ACRES LOCATED 717 FEET
NORTH OF 9TH STREET SW (OSLO ROAD) AND
APPROXIMATELY HALF A MILE WEST OF 74TH
AVENUE FROM A-1 TO IL - K\IGHT ENTERPRISES
(Quasi -Judicial)
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 March 1, 2002:
TO: Janes E. Chandler; County Administrator
DEP 1 SMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE
obert M. Keating, AICP; Crmmuuity Delopment Director
THROUGH: Sasan Rohani, AICP; Chief, Long -Range Planning S
FROM: Randy Deshazo; Planner, Long -Range Planning,
DATE: NIarch 1, 2002
RE• Knight Enterprises' Request to Rezone 1.26 Acres from A-1 TO IL
(RZON 2001-08-0114)
It is requested that the following information be given foirnal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of March 12, 2002.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
This is a request to rezone 1.26 acres from A-1, Agricultural District, up to 1 unit/5 acres, to IL,
Light Industrial District. The subject property, depicted to the figure on Page 2, is located 717 feet
north of 9th St SW (Oslo Road), and approximately half a mile west of 74th Avenue. The purpose
of the request is to secure the zoning necessary to allow the expansion of the industrial use located
south of the site.
MARCH 12, 2002
-29-
8I
•
On February 14, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6 to 0 to recommend that the
Board of County Commissioners approve the request to rezone the subject property.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The A-1 zoned subject property contains a warehouse and cleared land. To the north, land is zoned
A-1, Agricultural Distnct (up to 1 unit/5 acres), and consists of inactive citrus groves. To the west
land is zoned A-1, and contains citrus groves. To the east, land is zoned A-1 and contains inactive
groves. To the Southwest is land zoned CG, General Commercial Land to the south of the subject
property is zoned IL and contains structures belonging to Knight Enterprises.
A-1
ROPERTY
131
Future Land Use Pattern
x,3'NWEsjcluis-•- at AC
41 ,m
TP r?1
The subject property and properties on all sides
Commercial/Industrial, on the future land use map.
industrial zoning distncts.
Environment
int
74th Ave.
1/2 mile east
of the subject property are designated C/I,
The C/I designation peiruits commercial and
The subject property is currently cleared. No wetlands or native upland plant communities exist on
site. The subject property is not within a 100 year floodplain.
MARCH 12, 2002
-30-
•
•
Utilities and Services
The site is within the Urban Service Area of the county. Wastewater service is available to the site
from the West Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant. Centralized potable water service is available
to the site from the South County Reverse Osmosis Plant.
Transportation System
Access to the site is via a driveway off of 9`h Street SW (Oslo Road). Classified as a niral minor
arterial on the future roadway thoroughfare plan map, 9th Street is a two lane road. Although the
current right-of-way width is 60 feet, this segment of 9`h SW Street is programmed to contain 130
feet of public road right-of-way by 2020.
ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the rezoning request will be presented.
Specifically, this section will include:
• an analysis of the request's impact on public facilities;
• an analysis of the request's consistency with the county's comprehensive plan;
• an analysis of the request's compatibility with the surrounding area; and
• an analysis of the request's potential impact on environmental quality.
Concurrency of Public Facilities
This site is located within the county Urban Service Area, an area deemed suited for urban scale
development. The Comprehensive Plan establishes standards for: Transportation Potable Water,
Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage and Recreation. The adequate provision of these services is
necessary to ensure the continued quality of life enjoyed by the community. The Comprehensive
Plan and Land Development Regulations (LDRs) also require that new development be reviewed
to ensure that the minimum acceptable standards for these services and facilities are maintained.
Policy 3.2 of the Future Land Use Element states that no development shall be approved unless it
is consistent with the concurrency management system component of the Capital Improvements
Element. For rezoning requests, conditional concurrency review is required.
Conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility with respect to a
proposed project. Since rezoning requests are not projects, county regulations call for the
concurrency review to be based upon the most intense use of the subject property based upon the
requested zoning. For commercial or industrial rezoning requests, the most intense use (according
to the County's LDRs) is 10,000 square feet of retail commercial space per acre, given the size of
the property and the maximum density under the proposed zoning The site information used for the
concurrency analysis is as follows:
1. Size of Area to be Rezoned: 126 acres
2. Land Use Designation: C/I, Commercial/Industrial
3. Existing Zoning District: A-1, Agricultural District
4. Proposed Zoning District: IL, Light Industrial District
5. Most Intense Use Under Existing Zoning District:
1 Dwelling Unit
6. Most Intense Use Under Proposed Zoning District:
12,600 sq. ft. of Retail Commercial (Shopping Center in the 6th Edition ITE Manual)
MARCH 12, 2002
-31-
•
Transportation
As part of the concurrency review process, the applicant has submitted a Traffic Impact Statement
(TIS). The county's Traffic Engineering Division has reviewed and approved that TIS. A TIS
reports the number of peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips that would be generated by the
most intense use of the subject property under the proposed zoning district, and assigns those trips
to impacted roads. Impacted roads are defined in the county's LDRs as roadway segments which
receive five percent (5%) or more of the project traffic or fifty (50) or more project trips, whichever
is less.
According to the approved TIS, the existing level of service on impacted roads would not be
significantly degraded by the traffic generated by development of 12,600 Square Feet of Retail
Commercial use.
Water
With the proposed zoning, the most intense commercial use of the subject property will result in
water consumption at a rate of 3.78 Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs), or 945 gallons/ERU/day.
This is based upon a level of service of 250 gallons/ERU/day. Development on the subject property
would be served by the South County Reverse Osmosis Plant which currently has sufficient capacity
to accommodate the additional demand generated by the proposed rezoning.
Wastewater
Based upon the most intense use allowed under the proposed zoning, development of the property
will have a wastewater generation rate of approximately 3.78 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU), 945 gallons/day. This is based upon the level of service standard of 250 gallons/ERU/day.
County wastewater service is available to the site from the West Regional Wastewater Treatment
Plant, which currently has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional wastewater generated
by the subject request.
Solid Waste
Solid waste service includes pick-up by private operators and disposal at the county landfill. For a
12,600 square foot commercial development on the subject site, solid waste generation will be
approximately 63 waste generation units (WGU) annually. A WGU is a Waste Generation Unit
measurement equivalent to one ton (2,000 pounds) of solid waste. Using the accepted conversion
rate of one cubic yard for every 1,200 pounds of compacted solid waste generated, the 12,600 square
feet of commercial development would be expected to generate 105 cubic yards of waste/year.
A review of the solid waste capacity for the active segment of the county landfill indicates the
availability of more than 800,000 cubic yards. The active segment of the landfill has a 2 year
capacity, and the landfill has expansion capacity beyond 2010. Based on the analysis, staff
determined that the county landfill can accommodate the additional solid waste generated by the site
under the proposed zoning district.
Stormwater Management
All developments are reviewed for compliance with county stoimwater regulations which require
on-site retention, preservation of floodplain storage and minimum finished floor elevations In
addition, development proposals must meet the discharge requirements of the county Storinwater
Management Ordinance. Any development on the subject property will be prohibited from
discharging any runoff in excess of the pre -development rate.
In this case, the minimum floor elevation level of service standard does not apply, since the property
does not lie within a floodplain. On-site retention and discharge standards, however, do apply to this
request. With the most intense use of this site, the maximum area of impervious surface under the
MARCH 12, 2002
-32-
X71
•
•
•
proposed zoning classitication will be approximately 1.07 acres. The estimated runoff volume,
based on that amount of impervious surface and the 25 year/24 hour design stoini, will be
approximately 40,403 cubic feet. In order to maintain the county's adopted level of service, the
applicant will be required to retain approximately 31,255 cubic feet of runoff on-site. With the soil
characteristics of the subject property, it is estimated that the pre -development peak runoff rate is
4.057 cubic feet/second
Based upon staffs analysis, the drainage level of service standards will be met by limiting off-site
discharge to its pre -development peak runoff rate of 4.06 cubic feet/second, and requiring retention
of 31,255 cubic feet of runoff for the most intense use of the property.
As with all development, a more detailed review will be conducted during the development approval
process.
Recreation
Recreation concurrency requirements apply only to residential development. Therefore, this rezoning
request would not be required to satisfy recreation concurrency requirements.
Concurrency Summary
Based upon the analysis conducted, staff has determined that all concurrency -mandated facilities,
including storniwater management, roads, solid waste, recreation, water, and wastewater, have
adequate capacity to accommodate the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed
zoning district. Therefore, the concurrency test has been satisfied for the subject request
Consistency with Comprehensive Plan
Rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the comprehensive plan.
Rezonings must also be consistent with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future
Land Use Map, which include agriculture, residential, recreation, conservation, and commercial and
industrial land uses and their densities. Commercial and industrial land uses are located in nodes
throughout the unincorporated areas of Indian River county.
The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of the comprehensive plan. Policies
are statements in the plan that identify the actions which the county will take in order to direct the
community's development As courses of action committed to by the county, policies provide the
basis for all county land development decisions. While all comprehensive plan policies are
important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing rezoning requests. Of particular
applicability for this request are Future Land Use Element Policies 1.15 and 1.16.
Future Land Use Element Policies 1.15 and 1.16
Future Land Use Element Policy 1.15 states that all commercial/industrial uses must be located
within the county's Urban Service Area. In addition, Future Land Use Element Policy 1.15 states
that the commercial/industrial land use designation shall perniit uses that include manufacturing,
assembly, wholesale trade and distribution, storage/warehousing, repair services, and other similar
uses.
MARCH 12, 2002
-33-
nu r; L.
Since the subject property is located within the county's Urban Service Area, and the requested IL
district is intended for uses permitted within the commercial/industrial land use designation, the
request is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policies 1.15 and 1 16.
While the referenced policies are particularly applicable to this request, other comprehensive plan
policies and objectives also have relevance. For that reason, staff evaluated the subject request for
consistency with all applicable plan policies and objectives. Based upon that analysis, staff
determined that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Compatibility with the Surrounding Area
Industrial development on the subject property will be compatible with the surrounding area. In fact,
because the adjacent property on the south is zoned IL, the request is for a continuation of an existing
zoning pattern.
Properties to the east, west and north are zoned and used for agriculture, and therefore issues of
compatibility are not expected.
For these reasons, development of the subject property under the requested zoning district would be
compatible with surrounding areas.
Potential Impact on Environmental Quality
Because the subject property is not environmentally significant or environmentally important,
development of the site will not impact significant natural resources.
CONCLUSION
The requested zoning is compatible with the surrounding area, and is consistent with the goals,
objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan. Rezoning the site, as requested, will have no
negative impacts on environmental quality or the provision of public facilities and services. The
subject property is located in an area deemed suitable for light industrial uses. The request mtets
all applicable critena. For those reasons, staff supports the request.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis, the Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommend that the Board
ofCounty Commissioners approve this request to rezone the subject property from A-1 Agricultural
District, to IL, Light Industrial District, by approving the attached ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS
t Rezoning Summary
2. Rezoning Application
3. Minutes of the February 14, 2002 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission
4. Ordinance
MARCH 12, 2002
-34-
°am en
! t
•
•
REZONING SUMMARY
GENERA!
Applicant: Knight Enterprises
Location: located 717 feet north of 9th St SW (Oslo Road), and approximately half a
mile west of 7=1th Avenue
Acreage_ 1.26
Land Use Designation: C/I, Commercial/Industrial
Existing Zoning: A-1, Agricultural District
Requested Zoning: IL, Light Industrial District
Existing Land Use: Agriculturally related warehousing, and cleared land
ADJACENT LAND
North: Inactive groves; zoned A-1
South: Industrial; zoned IL
East: Inactive groves; zoned A-1
West: Active groves; zoned Al -
INFRASTRUCTURE
Water and sewer available; access from 9th Street SW
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
none
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
RECOtMMEiNDATION
Planning and Zoning Commission and Staff
recommend approval
ATTACHMENT 1
MARCH 12, 2002
n
Lr
A-1
A-1
Ma 4C
CC AC
YAW 6C
2
Mal a
frslolUdi
R15
`9� A-1
SUBJECT PROPERTY
1
t
PR?
74th Ave. -
1 1/2 mile east
-35-
•
Public
Notification
for:
Planning
and
Zoning
Board
of
County
Commissioners
Staff
Contact:
Randy Deshazo
Randy Deshazo
Date Advertised:
February 1, 2002
February 27, 2002
# of Surrounding
Property
7
7
Owner Notifications:
Date
Notification
Mailed:
February 1, 2002
February 25, 2002
Date Sign Posted:
February 5, 2002
February 27, 2002
RECOtMMEiNDATION
Planning and Zoning Commission and Staff
recommend approval
ATTACHMENT 1
MARCH 12, 2002
n
Lr
A-1
A-1
Ma 4C
CC AC
YAW 6C
2
Mal a
frslolUdi
R15
`9� A-1
SUBJECT PROPERTY
1
t
PR?
74th Ave. -
1 1/2 mile east
-35-
•
Community Development Director Bob Keating reviewed the project for the Board
with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard
regarding this matter. There being none, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Tippin,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously adopted Ordinance 2002-009
amending the Zoning Ordinance and the
accompanying Zoning Map for 1.26 acres located
717 feet north of 9`h Street SW (Oslo Road) and
approximately half a mile west of 74`h Avenue from
A-1, agricultural district (up to 1 unit/5 acres) to IL,
light industrial (Knight Enterprises).
ORDINANCE NO. 2002- 009
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE
ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FOR 1.26 ACRES,
LOCATED 717 FEET NORTH OF 9T" STREET SW (OSLO ROAD), AND
APPROXIMATELY HALF A MILE WEST OF 74TH AVENUE, FROM A-1,
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT (UP TO 1 UNIT/5 ACRES) TO IL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL;
AND DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING SEVERABILITY AND 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
MARCH 12, 2002
-36-
X75
•
• •
ORDINANCE NO. 2002- 009
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined that this rezoning is in
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has held a public hearing pursuant to this
rezoning request, at which parties in interest and citizens were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, that the zoning of the following described property situated in Indian River
County, Florida, to -wit:
THE NORTH 132 FEET OF THE SOUTH 817 FEET OF THE WEST 415 FEET OF TRACT 15,
SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH RANGE 38 EAST ACCORDING TO THE LAST
GENERAL PLAT OF LANDS OF THE INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY AS RECORDED
IN PLAT BOOK 2 PAGE 25, PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, SAID
LANDS NOW LYING AND BEING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Be changed from A-1, Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres) to IL, Light Industrial.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Land Development
Regulations.
This ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, on this 12`h day of March, 2002.
This ordinance was advertised in the Press -Journal on the 27`h day of February, 2002, for a
public hearing to be held on the 12`h day of March, 2002, at which time it was moved for adoption
by Commissioner Ti ppi n , seconded by Commissioner Gi nn
by the following vote: and adopted
MARCH 12, 2002
Chairman Ruth M Stanbridge
Vice -Chairman John W. Tippin
Commissioner Fran B. Adams
Commissioner Kenneth R Macht
Commissioner Caroline D. Ginn
Aye
Aye
A
Aya
'ye
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY: Laze r7.
Ruth M. Stanbridge, Chairman
ATTEST BY._;,—
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk
-37-
1
ORDINANCE NO. 2002- 009
This ordinance was filed with the Department of State on the following date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
William G. Collins II, Deputy County Attorney
APPROVED AS TO PLANNING MATTERS
i. _ J.. 0_lir
' obert` eating, AICP; C
mm nity Dev
Indian River Co.
Approved
Date
Arimin
j
WY°
Legal
Ze'e.' ,--VC
l' m
Budget
3 �,/�%
I _
Dept.
k7
N/l'
Risk Mgr.
f:\cd\u\j w\rz\cen tralgrove\ord. doc
ment Director
9.A.2. PUBLIC HEARING - NORTH SEBASTIAN
CONSERVATION AREA - PURCHASE OF THE
SIMONYE PARCEL (Legislative)
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 March 5, 2002:
TO:
James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DPAR tME T HEAD CONCU' ' NCE:
obert . Keating, AI P
Community Development Dire
FROM: Roland M. DeB1
Chief, Environmental Planning
DATE: March 5, 2002
MARCH 12, 2002
-38-
777
•
SUBJECT: BOARD CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE PURCHASE OF THE SIMONYE
PARCEL ADDITION TO THE NORTH SEBASTIAN CONSERVATION AREA
It is requested that the Board of County Commissioners formally consider the following information at the
Board's meeting of March 12, 2002.
SL1Y1i LAR Y
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners purchase (with environmental land bond
funds) the Simonye parcel addition to the North Sebastian Conservation Area. The proposed purchase
contract (already executed by the seller) -is summarized as follows:
Purchaser:
Seller:
Cost -Share -
Total Price:
Other er Costs:
County Bonds
Indian River County Board of County
Commissioners (Indian River County will hold title)
Louis Simonye
Not applicable
$58,000 (average +$9,119 per acre overall)
+$1,500 (appraisal)
Exne---enditure_ +$59,000 (approximate, not including initial management costs)
Acrenue: + 6.36 acres (+ 5 acupland tract plus —1.36 acre 60' wide quit -claim access)
LAAC Recommendation: The County Land Acquisition Advisory Committee (LAAC), at its meeting o
February 27, 2002, voted 13 to 1 to recommend that the Board of Coun
of the property under the terms of the option ao tY Commissioners approve purchas
.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
1 he proposed acquisition consists of a five -acre tract adjacent (on hvo sides) to the —407 acre North Sebastia
Conservation Area (NSCA), plus a 60' wide, 990' long quitclaim access. The Simonye parcel would brin
the total area of acquired land in the NSCA to —413 acres.
The Simonye parcel was added to the LAAC acquisition list in 2001. The project is ranked 13 out of 15 site
on the 2001 LAAC acquisition list. County bond finds are available for the purchase.
During the past year, the county's acquisition consultant, in coordination with county staff, conducted pre-
acquisition tasks and negotiations. Since the seller recently accepted and executed the purchase contract,
appraisal results and other confidential infounation have been released.
Confidentiality: Advertised Public Meetirm
Procedures adopted by the Board of County Commissioners for environmental land acquisition include
confidentiality of appraisals. In accordance with the County's Land Acquisition Guide, and Section 125.355
of the Florida Statutes, appraisals can be released for public infotniation once an option agreement is
executed between a seller and the County. Regarding the Simonye parcel, an option agreement has been
confidentiality.
executed (binding the seller to a negotiated purchase price), and subsequently the appraisal was released from
When a county exercises its confidentiality right in purchasing real property, Section 125.355, F.S. requires
that the county approve the purchase at a public meeting not less than 30 days after the appraisal is released
and public notice of the meeting is given. Since the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners,
pursuant to authority delegated by the Board, executed a purchase option for the Simonye parcel more than
30 days ago and since the appraisal of the parcel was made public at that time, the Board must now consider
whether to exercise its purchase option. Consistent with Chapter 125, F.S. requirements, this decision will
be made at the March 12, 2002 public meeting of the Board of County Commissioners. By having given 30
days public notice of this proposed action, the County will have complied with Chapter 125 requirements as
well as LAAC Guide requirements to hold a public hearing before purchasing propel ty with land acquisition
bond funds.
f
e
n
g
s
MARCH 12, 2002
-39-
Ll0
•''n
1 i•: V ••1 I \J
•
LAAC Recommendation
As indicated in the summary section of this memorandum, the County Land Acquisition Advisory Committee
(LAAC), at its meeting on February 27, 2002, voted 13 to 1 to recommend that the Board approve the
purchase contract (see attached unapproved minutes).
Site Characteristics
The parcel consists of pine flatwoods and is zoned Rose -4, Residential, up to four units per acre.
Ownership Characteristics
Louis Simonye owns the subject parcel. The current tax assessed value of the parcel is $33,150.
Acquisition Cost & Property Management
This acquisition is proposed as a "stand-alone" county purchase with no cost -share. Staffs position is that,
due to the relative low cost of the parcel compared to other environmental land acquisitions, it is not cost-
effective to expend county staff time and other resources in applying for a cost -share grant. Moreover, by
not having to meet cost -share agency criteria, the County has the opportunity to save on certain costs (i.e.,
professional services for an environmental assessment).
• Management Costs
Addition of the Simonye parcel will have minimal effect on management commitments already made by the
County in acquiring the North Sebastian Conservation Area.
Appraisal
In accordance with County Land Acquisition Guide procedures, an independent appraisal was obtained to
determine an approved appraised value. Since the property's value is less than $500,000, only one appraisal
was obtained.
The appraisal fiiul selected was Armfield-Wagner Appraisal & Research, Inc. The appraised value for the
property is summarized as follows.
SIMONYE PARCEL ADDITION TO THE NSCA
Ownership
Approx. Acres
Upland j Wetland
Approved Appraised
Value
Louis Simonye
6.36
(includes
1.36 acre
60' wide
access
0.00
s65,000
Negotiated Price (%
of Approved
Appraised Value)
$58,000 (89%)
MARCH 12, 2002
-40-
•
•
Contract
In coming to terms with county staff on the negotiated purchaserice
approval), the seller has executed a standard purchase contract Option Agreembnt with ct to minor mod fi actio on
A copy of the contract is attached to this staff report.
ANALYSIS
Appraised Value
As with all LAAO site purchase negotiations, staffs objective is to negotiate a purchase price at or below the
approved appraised value, and staff has fulfilled that objective in this case.
Armfield-Wagner, in determiningthe
the f1 wide, per, long appraised value, assumes that Mr. Simonye has legitimate
quitclaim deeded strip that affords access to the otherwise land -locked �fitve-acre
parcel. From a practical standpoint, the five -acre tract is contiguous to County
therefore the quitclaim strip is not critical to County theno the pa celconNotwithstanding, land, and
management acvass to the parcel. Noiwithstunding,
legitimacy of the quitclaim access is important to support the appraised
price is 89% of the appraised value, staff feels that it is sufficiefor the County to accept asst
Simonye's quit -claim interest without need for additional title work to supportalue. Smcee negotiated purchase
P gement pofrice. the negotiated purchase price.
Com rehensive Plan Act uisition Commitment
Conservation Policy 6.14 of the 2020 County Comprehensive Plan commits the County to acquire a minimum
of 500 acres of pine flatwoods/dry prairie for conservation purposes. Although the County has fulfilled this
minimum acreage requirement, the subject parcel contributes slightly to this policy by conserving +
of pine flatwoods. the purchase would also further objectives in the County comprehensive plan relating to
open space and passive recreation. _ acres
RECOMMEiNDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve exercise of the purchase contract for
the Simonye parcel addition to the North Sebastian Conservation Area, and authdrize staff to proceed with
closing on the subject parcel.
ATTACIMENTS:
• Maps of the Simonye parcel
• • Unapproved minutes excerpt from 02/27/02 LAAO meeting
Option Agreement
•
MARCH 12, 2002
-41-
I�
•
Sebastian City
Conserivation Area
+ ---------- ---
------------
FLEI4ISIC <RAN R
m L -y
h n
•
Commissioner Ginn questioned Mr. Simonye's legitimate interest in the strip being
quit claimed and asked whether that strip is south from 129th Street or 130" Street. She felt
this parcel was possibly involved in the Kirrie/Mensmg situation and was not in favor of the
purchase due to the possible title problems.
Chief of Environmental Planning Roland DeBlois responded that the strip is in a
southwesterly direction from 129' Street and, because the strip is not essential for
management access, staff feels it can be accepted without any further title work. In response
to further questioning, Mr. DeBlo,s stated that Mr. Simonye acquired that strip from Mr.
Mensing.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in
this matter.
Ray Scent, 1615 71st Court, questioned whether an asphalt roadway would be going
through this property, and Community Development Director Bob Keating responded that
the strip is a parcel Mr. Simonye acquired from Mr. Mensing and no one else has a right to
access. No roads will be paved in this area.
Mark Brackett, 1915 34"' Avenue, stated that this property had been on the market
for $45,000 for a year with no takers.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard regarding this matter. There
being none, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
MARCH 12, 2002
-43-
r.)
U
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDED by Commissioner Macht, the Board,
by a 4-1 vote (Commissioner Ginn opposed)
approved the exercise of the purchase contract for
the Simonye parcel addition to the North Sebastian
Conservation Area and authorized staff to proceed
with closing on the subject parcel, as recommended
by staff.
CLOSING DOCUMENTATION WILL BE ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
WHEN EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
9.A.3. PUBLIC HEARING - TRI -PARTNERS, LLC - SPECIAL
EXCEPTION USE APPROVAL FOR SELF-SERVICE
STORAGE FACILITY AT 445 27TH AVENUE SW (Quasi -
Judicial)
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 March 4, 2002:
TO: James E. Chandler; County Administrator
EPARMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
• obe — eating, AICP; o unity- 'elopment Director
44
THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP; Planning Director
FROM: Peter J. Radke; Senior Planner, Current Development
MARCH 12, 2002
If
DATE: March 4, 2002
SUBJECT: Tri -Partners, L.L.C.'s Request for Special Exception Use Approval for a Self -
Service Storage Facility
[SP-SE-02-02-12/CDPLUS #93100126-29233]
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of March 12, 2002.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Schulke, Bittle Stoddard, L.L.C. has submitted an application for special exception use approval
on behalf o f Tn-Partners, L L C to develop a portion of the subject site located at 445 27U Avenue SW
Currently, a one-story building that is being used for various commercial activities is located on the
eastern half of the subject site. The proposed self-service storage facility will be located on the western
half of the site. The subject site is zoned CL, Limited Commercial and has a C/I,
Commercial/Industrial land use designation. Special exception use approval is needed to constnict a
self-service storage facility in the CL zoning district
At its regular meeting of February 14, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to
recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve the special exception use request with
the condition contained in the recommendation at the end of this report (please see attachment #4).
At this time, the Board of County Commissioners is to consider the request and is to approve,
approve with conditions, or deny the special exception use request for a self-service storage facility.
Pursuant to section 971.05 of the land development regulations (LDRs), the Board is to consider the
appropriateness of the requested use for the subject site and surrounding area. The Board may attach
reasonable conditions and safeguards necessary to mitigate impacts and to ensure compatibility of
the use with the surrounding area.
ANALYSIS
1. Project Site Area: 60,572 sq. ft. or 1.39 acres
2. Zoning Classification: CL, Limited Commercial
3. Land Use Designation: C/I, Commercial/Industrial
4. Building Area: Existing Commercial Building: 2,548 sq. ft.
Proposed Self -Service Storage Facility: 20,975 sq. ft.
Total: 23,523 sq. ft.
5. Open Space: Required: 25.0%
Proposed: 31.6%
6. Impervious Surface Area: Existing: 18,400 sq. ft.
Proposed: 22,364 sq. ft.
Total: 40,764 sq. ft.
7. Stormrvater Management: The preliminary stornrwater management plan has been
reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. The proposed plan includes seven
dry retention areas that will retain and treat all stounwater runoff generated by the subject
site. Stoinrwater runoff will be directed to the retention areas via storm sewers. Pursuant to
Chapter 930 of the LDRs, a County Type "A" Stonnwater Penult will be required prior to
site plan release.
MARCH 12, 2002
BR 1'
8!.s
v"
-45-
8. Off -Street Parking: Required: 17 spaces
Proposed: 17 spaces (14 standard, 2 compact, 1 handicap)
9. Traffic Circulation: Vehicles entering and exiting the site from 27th Avenue SW will
continue to use the two existing one-way driveway connections. A one-way driveway that
will connect to the existing internal traffic circulation system will provide access to the self-
service storage facility. As shown on the site plan, that one-way driveway will be gated at
the entrance and exit of the storage facility Fire Department staff has reviewed and
approved the internal traffic circulation plan. Traffic Engineering has reviewed and
approved the internal traffic circulation plan and project traffic impact statement. No off-site
improvements are required for this development, and none are proposed.
10. Landscape Plan: The proposed landscape plan has been reviewed by planning staff and
meets the requirements of Chapter 926 of the LDRs for perimeter, interior, roadway and
non -vehicular open space landscaping areas. In addition to the standard landscape
requirements, specific land use criteria for a self-service storage facility require that a type B
landscape buffer be provided along property lines that abut single-family residential uses As
indicated in section 12 of this staff report, the landscape plan shows a type B landscape
buffer along the rear property line, which is the only property line that abuts a single-family
residential use. A type D landscape buffer and 3 -foot opaque feature is required and
proposed along the front property line since multi -family residential zoning exists across 27th
Avenue SW.
11. Utilities: While the existing commercial building is connected to county water and sewer
services, the proposed self-service storage buildings will not be connected to county water or
sewer services. As per the applicable specific land use criteria, no utilities other than A/C
may be supplied to the storage units
12. Specific Land Use Criteria for Self -Service Storage Facilities [971.12(3)]:
1. Storage unit interior areas shall not exceed ten (10) feet in height.
Note: It is noted on the site plan that the individual storage units will not exceed 10 feet
in height.
2. Storage units shall not exceed one hundred fifty (150) square feet in size.
Note: It is noted on the site plan that the individual storage units will not exceed 150
square feet in size.
3. Outdoor storage is prohibited.
Note: No outdoor storage is proposed for the subject site.
4. All outdoor lights shall be shielded to direct light and glare only onto the self -storage
facility premises. Light and glare shall be defected, shaded and focused away from all
adjoining property and road rights-of-way.
Note: Since no outdoor lighting shall be located on any exterior wall that fronts onto an
adjacent property and since the proposed storage facility is located 101 feet from the
right-of-way, all light and glare will be focused away from all adjoining property and
rights-of-way.
MARCH 12, 2002
SS
-46-
S. Self-service storage facility sites shall not exceed three (3) acres in gross area.
Note: The gross site acreage for the site is 1.39 acres.
6. Notwithstanding the applicable buffering requirements contained in section 911.10, a
type B landscape buffer with six-foot opaque feature shall be provided between all
structures and adjacent properties zoned16r single-family residential use.
Note: Single-family residential zoning exists to the west of the subject site and a 30 foot
wide type B landscape buffer is proposed along the west property line. The storage
buildings are designed so that all building entrances front the internal driveway of the
facility and no openings (doorways or windows) are proposed along any exterior wall
that faces an adjacent property. Therefore, the west wall of the storage buildings will act
as an opaque feature between the self-service storage use and the adjacent residential use.
In addition to the type B landscape buffer and the west wall of the building, the applicant
will install a 6 -foot high wax myrtle hedge along the west property line, which will act as
an opaque feature between the adjacent residential uses and the self-service storage use.
7. Building containing storage units shall not exceed ten thousand (10, 000) square feet in
floor area each and shall not exceed one hundred thousand (100, 000) square feet offloor
area for all buildings.
Note: Three self-service storage buildings are proposed for the subject site. The
smallest building will be 5,400 sq. ft. in size and the largest building will be 8,400 sq ft.
in size. Overall, 20,975 sq. ft. of self-service storage use is proposed for the subject site.
8. Access shall only be to arterial or collector- roadways and in no case through areas
zoned for residential use.
Note: The self-service storage use shall be accessed from 27' Avenue SW, which is a
collector roadway.
9. No utilities (other than air conditioning) may be supplied to storage units.
Note: It is noted on the site plan that no utilities (other than air conditioning) will be
supplied to the storage units.
10. Hours of operation shall be limited to between 6:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall provide appropriate signage
on the site stating the hours of operation of the facility.
Note: It is noted on the site plan that the hours of operation for the storage facility will
be limited to between 6:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.
11. Buildings may not exceed fifteen (I5) feet in height.
Note: The proposed building will be 12 feet in height.
MARCH 12, 2002
Therefore, all applicable specific land use criteria are satisfied by the proposed site plan. The
project use, intensity, and design will be compatible with the surrounding land uses.
13. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning•
North: Mobile Home Park/CL
South: Enclosed Commercial Amusement Facility (Skating Rink)/CL
East: 27°' Avenue SW, Vacant/RM-6
West: Single -Family Residential/RS-3
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, the staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners find
that, in conjunction with the recommended condition:
1. It is empowered under the provisions of Chapter 971 to review the special exception applied for;
2. The granting of the special exception will not adversely affect the public interest;
3. The application satisfies the general and specific criteria required for special exception approval;
and
4. The condition stated below is adequate to ensure compatibility between the special exception use
and surrounding land uses.
Staff further recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant special exception use
approval for the self-service storage facility with the following condition:
1. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy (C.O.), the required type B landscape buffer must
be installed along the west property line and approved by Planning Division staff
ATTACHMENTS
1. Application
2. Location Map
3. Site Plan
4. Approved Minutes from 02/14/02 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
MARCH 12, 2002
Tr..8
nth St -eet SW
20 � 15
3
ll
1
32
31
30
20
28
P.A
27
. n-05.3
2!
26
u
ra
23
21
20
10
1
ll
70
-71111.1111
13
6
$2.1
Tr..8
nth St -eet SW
20 � 15
3
a_
1
L
s _ _ _
5
15
9
0
19
b
10.
0
ti
7
in
e..
u
Ill 12
;
ll
70
-71111.1111
13
20115`.211
a_
1
Jl _n
It
s _ _ _
5
J 16
5
7
.....a.
a— v
e
14
11
in
m19
a_
1
111
2
16
4
16
6
1.4
Ca
In
!
13
nm
1_
7
13
6
$2.1
a'',
IL
to
MARCH 12, 2002
K�
m'i
an
20131
10
3
is
15
9
0
is
1.4
2
90
�4
13
nm
a
MARCH 12, 2002
Planning Director Stan Boling reviewed the Memorandum for the Board.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard
regarding this matter. There being none, the Charman closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Tippin,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously (A) found that: (1) it is empowered
under the provisions of Chapter 971 to review the
special exception applied for; (2) the granting of the
special exception will not adversely affect the public
interest; (3) the application satisfies the general and
specific criteria required for special exception
approval; and (4) the condition stated below is
adequate to ensure compatibility between the special
exception use and surrounding land uses; and (B)
granted special exception use approval for the self-
service storage facility with the condition that prior
to issuance of a certificate of occupancy the required
Type B landscape buffer must be installed along the
west property line and approved by Planning
Division staff; all as recommended by staff
MARCH 12, 2002
9.A.4. PUBLIC HEARING - SUN -UP OF INDIAN RIVER, INC. -
SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE APPROVAL FOR AN ADULT
CONGREGATE LIVING FACILITY AND AN ADULT
CARE FACILITY - SUN -UP ASSISTED LIVING (Quasi -
Judicial)
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 March 4, 2002:
TO: James E. Chandler; County Administrator
D ' • ' TME NT HEAD CON,CL-RRENCE:
SUBJECT:
obert M. Keating, AIC
ommury. Development Director
Peter J. Radke; Senior Planner, Current Development a
March 4, 2002
Sun -Up of Indian River, Inc.'s Request for Special Exception Use Approval for
an Adult Congregate Living Facility and for an Adult Care Facility
It is requested that the data herein presented be given foil al consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of March 12, 2002.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
W.F. McCain & Associates, Inc. has submitted two applications on behalf of Sun -Up of Indian River,
Inc to develop 24.26 acres located at 2455 5th Street SW. The site is located on the south side of 5th
Street SW, east of the 5th Street SW/27th Avenue SW intersection and the Salvation Army facility.
One application is for special exception use approval for an adult care living facility (ACLF), which
will be comprised of 17 single-family homes. The second application is for special exception use
approval for an adult care facility that will serve residents of the ACLF units as well as off-site clients.
Proposed clients and residents will include adults with developmental disabilities. The subject site is
zoned RM -6, multi -family residential (up to 6 units per acre) and has an L-2, low density residential -2,
land use designation. Special exception use approval is needed to construct an ACLF and/or adult care
facility in the RM -6 zoning district.
MARCH 12, 2002
A total of 17 ACLF units are proposed for the subject site. These units will be in the form of single-
family houses arranged in a. conventional single-family subdivision layout, although no individual lots
will be conveyed. Each house will be set up to allow living space for 6 individuals participating in the
assisted living program. Living space will include individual bedrooms and bathrooms, a common
living room and a common kitchen. Each unit will also have a separate supervisor's suite for a full-
time caregiver to meet the residents' needs. Limited medical care will be available on an as -needed
basis since the site will not have full-time doctors or full-time nurses on staff
The adult care building will be for adults with developmental disabilities and their families. Primarily,
the building will be used to conduct classes for ambulatory adults with mild to moderate disabilities.
Since the activities held in this building will be available to off-site clients, the use of the building has
been classified as an adult care facility for zoning purposes. Upon build -out of this overall project, the
adult care building will also serve as a community center for the project by becoming the focal point for
a variety of social, educational, and recreation activities for the residents of the ACLF units. In
addition, the building will accommodate administrative office staff for the facility, board meetings for
Sun -Up of Indian River, Inc., and occasional fund raising activities.
The subject site is comprised of two separate parcels of land. Based on a review of historical tax maps,
staff deterudined that an illegal lot split had occurred creating one of the parcels involved in this project.
To make the lot split legal, an affidavit of exemption application has been submitted to the county for
review and approval. Prior to site plan release for the adult care facility, the applicant must obtain
approval of the affidavit of exemption.
At its regular meeting of February 14, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to
recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve the special exception use requests
with the conditions contained in the recommendation at the end of this report (please see attachment
#5)
At this time, the Board of County Commissioners is to consider the requests and is to approve,
approve with conditions, or deny the special exception use requests for the proposed ACLF units and
the adult care facility. Pursuant to section 971.05 of the land development regulations (LDRs), the
Board is to consider the appropriateness of the requested uses for the subject site and surrounding
area. The Board may attach reasonable conditions and safeguards necessary to mitigate impacts and
to ensure compatibility of the uses with the surrounding area.
ANALYSIS
•..
1 l VJCLL
l ll uJtu�
Phase
Buildings
Construction Schedule
1
Adult Care BuildinCommunity Center
March 2002 — March 2003
2
4 ACLF Houses
March 2002 - March 2003
3
3 ACLF Houses
March 2004 — March 2005
4
5 ACLF Houses
March 2005 — March 2006
5
5 ACLF Houses
March 2006 — March 2007
2. Project Site Area: 24.26 acres
3. Zoning Classification: RM -6, Residential Multi -Family (up to 6 units per acre)
4. Land Use Designation: L-2, Low Density Residential -2 (up to 6 units per acre)
5. Density: Pernrited. 6.0 units per acre
Proposed: 0.9 units per acre
MARCH 12, 2002
-52-
PK 1
•
6. Building Area: Adult Daycare Building: 9,227 sq. ft.
17 ACLF houses a ,4,667 sq. ft. per building 79,339 sq. ft.
Total: 88,566 sq. ft.
7. Open Space: Required: 40.0%
Proposed: 77.0%
8. Impervious Surface Area: 243,184 sq. ft. or 5.58 acres
9. Stormwater Management: The preliminary stoiuiwater management plan has been
reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. Two wet detention areas are
proposed for the subject site. The smaller stoiinwater pond located in the north area of the
site will be constructed as part of phase one. The larger stounwater pond located in the
middle of the site will be constructed as part of phase two. Pursuant to Chapter 930 of the
LDRs, a County Type 'A" Stoiniwater Permit will be required prior to site plan release.
10. Off -Street Parking: Required:
64 spaces
Proposed: 75 spaces (65 standard, 10 handicap)
11. Traffic Circulation: The site will be accessed from 5"' Street SW by one full -movement,
two-way driveway connection. Internal circulation of the site will consist of a two-way
driveway that will form a roadway "loop " This loop road will be constructed as the various
phases are constructed. Fire Department staff has reviewed and approved the internal traffic
circulation plan. Traffic engineering staff has reviewed and approved the project's traffic
impact statement and internal circulation plan. No off-site improvements are required for
this development, and none are proposed.
12. Landscape Plan: The proposed landscape plan has been reviewed by planning staff and
meets the requirements of Chapter 926 of the LDRs for perimeter, interior, roadway and
non -vehicular open space landscaping areas In addition to the standard landscape
requirements, the specific land use criteria for an adult care facility requires a type D
landscape buffer along all perimeter property lines. The applicant proposes satisfying the
type ID buffer requirement utilizing existing upland vegetation along the west and north
perimeter property lines. Since the adult care facility does not abut the cast or south
perimeter property lines, no special landscape buffers are required along those property lines.
Also, no special landscape buffers are required for the ACLF facilities.
13. Utilities: The proposed development will be served by the County Utility Services
Department for potable water and sewer services. Connection to public water and sewer
services has been approved by the Utility Services Department and the Department of
Health.
14. Environmental Issues:
➢ Uplands: Since the site is over five acres, the native upland set aside requirement ofland
development regulation section 929.05 applies. For the entire project area, native upland
communities cover a total of 21.9 acres or 90% of the total site area. The applicant has
proposed to satisfy the native upland set-aside criteria by preserving 4.3 acres of native
uplands, which equates to 20% of the total 21.9 acres of uplands that exist on the site.
Prior to site plan release, a conservation easement must be established over those 4.3
acres of native uplands
MARCH 12, 2002
-53-
•
➢ Wetlands: Approximately 0.66 acres of isolated wetlands exist on the project site. All
0.66 acres will be impacted by the proposed development s stormwaterpond. Mitigation
for the impacted wetlands, which have been categorized by environmental planning staff
as moderate quality wetlands, will be addressed via a county wetland resource permit
As part of the mitigation activities the applicant will create a littoral zone in a portion of
the large central stoiniwater pond. Environmental planning staff anticipates that the
remaining mitigation activities will be at a 1:1 ratio to offset the impacts on the existing
wetlands.
15. Specific Land Use Criteria for an Adult Care Facility /971.25(1)]:
The specific criteria for the proposed adult care facility are addressed as follows:
1. The site shall be located on a paved road with sufficient width to accommodate
pedestrian and vehicular traffic generated by the use. The facility shall be located near
thoroughfares, as designated in the county's major thoroughfare plan, so as to
discourage traffic along residential streets in the immediate area;
Note: Traffic Engineering Division staff has approved the location of the proposed adult
care facility. The subject property is located on 5th Street SW, which is a paved road that
is designated as a collector roadway on the county's thoroughfare plan. The adult care
building will be accessed via a paved road and served by a paved drop-off area on its east
side.
2. Special passenger loading and unloading facilities shall be provided on the same site for
vehicles to pick up or deliver clientele. Such facilities shall include driveways that do not
require any back-up movements by vehicles to enter or exit the premises;
Note: A one-way driveway turnaround has been provided for vehicles to pick up and
drop-off clientele. Traffic Engineering Division staff has approved the driveway
turnaround and the overall internal traffic circulation plan.
3. All regulations of the State of Florida that pertain to the use as presently exists or may
hereafter be amended shall be satisfied;
Note: .The applicant has submitted a signed affidavit stating that all applicable
regulations of the State of Florida and Indian River County as currently exist have been
satisfied.
4. Child care facilities shall provide recreation area(s) and facilities that meet or exceed
applicable state standards. Theapplicant shall supply to the planning division, prior to
site plan approval, written acknowledgement from the state that the proposed recreation
area(s) and facilities meet or exceed applicable state standards. The applicant shall
provide either a six-foot opaque buffer or one hundred fifty foot setback between all
outdoor recreation areas and adjacent residentially designated properties.
Note: Since the proposed facility is an adult care facility, this criterion does not apply to
the project.
5. A Type "13" buffer will be required, acceptable to the planning department.
Note: Hy preserving existing upland vegetation along the west and north perimeter
property lines, the project meets the type D landscape buffer requirement.
MARCH 12, 2002 BK 1 9 1 PG 7 9
•
Therefore, all applicable specific land use criteria for the proposed adult care facility are
satisfied by the proposed site plan.
16. Specific Land Use Criteria for an Adult Congregate Living Facility (ACLF) 071.28(3)J:
The specific criteria for the proposed ACLF houses are addressed as follows:
1. The use shall satisfy all applicable regulations of the State of Florida and Indian River
County cis currently exist;
Note: A signed affidavit has been submitted by the applicant stating that all applicable
regulations of the State of Florida and Indian River County as currently exist have been
satisfied.
The approving body shall determine that the proposed use is compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood in terms of land use intensity. The maximum allowable land
use intensity shall be computed as follows:
a. Regarding single-family zoningdistricts: (number of allowable dwelling units) x
(2.5 residents per dwelling unit) x 1.5 = maximum number of residents allowed.
b. Regarding multi family and commercial zoning districts: (number of allowable
dwelling units) x (2 residents per dwelling unit) x 1.5 = maximum number of
residents allowed.
In no case shall the maximum number of residents allowed on a project site exceed the
average maximum number of residents allowed (as calculated by the above formula) on
adjacent sites bordering the project site. Averaging for adjacent sites shall be based upon
length of the common border between the project site and the adjacent site.
Note: Since the subject property is zoned RM -6, the multi -family formula shall apply to this
project. The table below shows the calculations to determine the maximum number of
residents permitted for the subject site and the number of residents proposed for the subject
site.
# of allowable dwelling
units
X
2 residents per dwelling
unit
X
1.5
Maximum # of residents
allowed
145
X
2
X
1.5
435
# of Proposed Residents
102
Thus, the proposed ACLF intensity is about 23% of the maximum allowed on the site.
3. To avoid unsafe or unhealthy conditions that may be produced by the overcrowding of
persons living in these facilities, a minimum floor area per person shall be required.
Floor area requirements shall be measured from interior walls of all rooms including
closet space.
a. Total interior living space. A minimum of two hundred (200) square feet of
interior living space shall be provided per facility resident. Interior living space
shall include sleeping space and all other interior space accessible on a regular
basis to all facility residents.
Note: The applicant proposes 596 sq. ft. per resident living space.
b. Minimum sleeping areas. A minimum of eighty (80) square feet shall be provided
in each sleeping space for single occupancy. A minimum of sixty (60) square feet
of sleeping space shall be provided for each bed in a sleeping space for multiple
occupancy.
Note: The applicant proposes 172 sq. f t per resident for sleeping space
MARCH 12, 2002
L.
79b,
=+Y
•
c. Bathroom facilities. A fill bathroom with toilet, sink and tub or shower shall be
provided for each five (S) residents.
Note: The applicant proposes 1 full bathroom per resident.
4. To avoid an undue concentration of group care facilities within residential
neighborhoods, all such facilities within residential zoning districts shall be located at
least one thousand two hundred (1,200) feet apart, measured from property line to
property line, unless exempted as follows. The separation distance requirement and
measurement shall not apply to group home or ACLF uses involving twenty-one (21) or
more residents, where such uses are located on major arterial roadways.
Note: No other group home or ACLF facility exists within 1,200 feet of the subject site.
S. If located in a single-family area, the home shall have the appearance of a single-family
home. Structural alterations or designs shall be of such a nature as to preserve the
residential character of the building.
Note: While the subject site is zoned RM -6, which is a multi -family zoning district,
single family zoning does exist to the north and east of the subject site. All 17 ACLF
units will be designed to resemble single-family homes. Given the proposed layout, the
project will appear to be a low-density conventional single-family subdivision with a
clubhouse/community center near the project entrance.
6. If located in the AIR -1 zoning district, the site shall have an L-1 land use designation.
Note: The subject site is located in the RM -6 zoning district.
7. The facility shall satisfy all applicable off- street parking requirements of Chapter 954.
The facility shall meet or exceed all open space requirements for the respective zoning
district.
Note: As discussed in sections 7 and 10 of this staff report, the project does satisfy the
off-street parking and open space requirements.
8. The maximum capacity of such facilities shall not exceed the applicable number
permitted by the department of health and rehabilitative services.
Note: Prior to site plan release, the applicant must provide a certification from the
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services stating the maximum capacity
permitted in the proposed facilities.
9. Group home permits are transferable. If the type of resident/client changes or the
resident capacity increases to such an extent that it would raise the facility to a higher
level group home as distinguished by the definition, the facility must be reevaluated for
an administrative permit or special exception approval.
Note: The applicant has been advised of this condition and will adhere to this condition.
Therefore, all applicable specific land use criteria for the ACLF houses are satisfied by the
proposed site plan.
PG 7MARCH 12, 2002
17. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North: 5`h Street SW, Single -Family Residential (The Preserve)/RS-6
South: Vacant/RM-6
East: Vacant/RS-6
West: Salvation Army/RS-6 Sc CL
Vacant/CL
In summary, staff's analysis indicates that the applications, with the conditions recommended below,
meet the general and specific criteria for special exception use approval for the proposed adult care
and ACLF uses. The project uses, intensity, and design will be compatible with the surrounding land
uses.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, the staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners find
that, in conjunction with the recommended conditions:
I . It is empowered under the provisions of Chapter 971 to review the special exceptions applied for;
2. The granting of the special exceptions will not adversely affect the public interest;
3. The applications satisfy the general and specific criteria required for special exception approval;
and
4. The conditions stated below are adequate to ensure compatibility between the special exception
uses and surrounding land uses.
Staff further recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant special exception use
approval for the proposed ACLF houses and for the adult care facility with the following conditions:
1. Prior to site plan release, the applicant shall:
a. Obtain approval of the affidavit of exemption that covers the subject site; and
b. Establish a conservation easement over those 4.3 acres of native upland communities
being preserved on site, as shown on the approved site plan.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Application
2. Location Map
3. Conceptual Site Plan for ACLF and Adult Care Facilities
4. Site Plan for Adult Care Facility (Phase 1)
5. Approved Minutes from 02/14/02 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
MARCH 12, 2002
7th Street SW
MARCH 12, 2002
LL
MI
n
30
Fs
a
P9
VI
06003
70
26
24
271
22
to
mL
7th Street SW
MARCH 12, 2002
•
Planning Director Stan Boling reviewed the project for the Board and noted that there
will be some wetland mitigation with a wetland resources permit required. The County
required that 15% of the uplands be preserved and the developer is preserving 20%. 435
residents would be allowed under the multi -family zoning while the developer is only
proposing 102 residents, or 23% of the allowed amount. Mr. Boling also pointed out that
the proposed adult care facility will be a small-scale building, will be located 200 feet south
of 5' Street SW, and will be screened by existing mature vegetation with a 30 +-foot-deep
buffer.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard
regarding this matter.
Attorney Bruce Barkett, 756 Beachland Boulevard, representing Sun -Up, introduced
Charlie Block, Architect; Bill McCain, Engineer; and John Swanson, President of Sun -Up.
He gave some background on Sun -Up and explained that when a child is born with mental
retardation or Downs Syndrome, they are, hopefully, born into a loving family who is able
to meet their needs. However, these children would be institutionalized when their parents
pass away without such a project as is proposed. The institutions he had seen were dark and
forbidding, offering no education or cures. They were in no way hospitals but solely
warehouses for people. Now it is thought that if these people can be mainstreamed and live
under more normal conditions they can be educated and lead happier, more successful lives.
This project meets the general criteria for special exception use and is consistent with the
land use and zoning. The traffic and drainage plans have been approved, infrastructure is
available and no adverse impacts have been noted. He asked the Clerk to enter into the
record his handout containing letters from Governor Jeb Bush, The Salvation Army, the
MARCH 12, 2002
-59-
]LLL'
J1
•
•
School District of Indian River County, Larry and Ellen Rodin, and Michael Fecca, as well
as a copy of portions of F.S. 309, Fair Housing. He also requested that staffs memorandum
be included in the backup. (CLERK'S NOTE • THESE ITEMS ARE ON FILE WITH THE
BACKUP FOR TODAY'S MEETING.)
Charlie Block, Architect, 2044 14th Avenue, commented that this is a non-profit
organization and entered into the record site maps, a proposed project plan and photographs
of the area (INCLUDED WITH TODAY'S BACKUP). This is actually a multi -family
property being developed as a single-family, pedestrian friendly, heavily landscaped project.
Each residence will be 4600 square feet, have 6 bedrooms and 2 -car garages.
Jerry Swanson, President of Sun -Up, spoke on behalf of 3388 residents of Indian
River County identified as developmentally disabled. Sun -Up was formed as a 501(c)(3)
in 1992 by concerned friends and parents of these disabled persons to make arrangements
for their care in the event their parents should become unable to care for them. This project
is not about technicalities and buffers, but about people less fortunate than we are who have
the same frustrations and emotions as we do. These communities are springing up all over
the nation in an effort to avoid institutionalization for these people. He is very proud of his
involvement with Sun -Up and hoped the community would also be proud of this project.
Ray Scent, 1615 71st Court, enthusiastically supported the project and suggested that
any "up -scale" projects who might be opposed to this project might make a tax-free
contribution to the project to bring it up to their level of approval. This is not a half -way
house for recovering alcoholics or drug addicts but a safe home for human beings not as
fortunate as most of us. If you met these people on the street, you would not be able to tell
MARCH 12, 2002
-60-
•
them from any other people. They share a love for life and their fellow human beings with
all of us.
Attorney Steve Henderson, 817 Beachland Boulevard, representing Gen
Development, developer of The Preserve, asked that the focus be on land use and not on
charitable issues. His client has no bias against handicapped persons but is protesting land
use issues. Special exception issues are designed to protect compatibility with surrounding
developments, especially adjoining single-family subdivisions. His client is opposed to the
design of the project. The entryway to The Preserve is located directly across from this one.
The main concern is the facility located on the north side of the project. The applicant owns
adjacent acreage between the west boundary of this project and 27th Avenue which is not
included in this project. His client believes if the adult care facility could be located on this
property it could eliminate any incompatibility. His client has no problem with the single-
family residences, only with the 10,000 square foot adult care facility which will be used for
offsite clients as well as residents. This will create an impact on traffic that could be
eliminated if the facility were located on 27" instead of 5`" 5th Street deadends and is not
a through street, but more of a residential street. His client is requesting that the adult care
facility be located on 27th Street and that the northern buffer be enhanced to ensure
obscuring visibility. His client is also requesting controls on any signage and a condition
that issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy be restricted until a certain number of single-
family residences are constructed to ensure that the adult care facility is not built without the
single-family units.
Director Boling commented that a sign permit will be required.
MARCH 12, 2002
-61-
,
•
John Genoni, President of Gen Development, 4760 North US#1, Melbourne, stated
that he is requesting 2 changes; that the entryway be relocated to 27`h Street and/or that the
adult care facility be moved to the south, east or west in order not to impact The Preserve,
and that any signage be restricted. He did not want this to be an adversarial relationship but
is just asking for more consideration.
William McCain, project engineer, pointed out that the front ofthe adult care facility
is set back 30 feet, not 20 feet.
Ruth Livingston, 655 SW 40th Avenue, agreed that 27`h Street would be a better
entrance for the development.
Judy Avril, 680 32nd Avenue SW, stated that she walks down 5th Street to Oslo
Middle School every evening and does not believe the project will impact traffic. She
expressed her concern that moving the adult care facility might impact the uplands and
questioned what sort of buffer The Preserve will install.
Priscilla Susie Painter works with mentally challenged patients with special needs
and with Alzheimers patients. She has worked in some of the residential hospitals for these
individuals and felt they are definitely not a place you would want to be. She stated that
each and every person present probably lives within 2 or 3 blocks of a mentally challenged
person and is not aware of it.
Kathy Wegel, 8060 142nd Street, Sebastian, had no intention of addressing this issue
but she is the sister of a disabled brother whose mother and father cared for him until they
MARCH 12, 2002
! ! 0!
-62-
•
• •
became too elderly and ill to continue. Another brother then took on the responsibility for
the disabled brother while she cared for her mother and her husband's mother. She had used
an adult care facility and noted that the day will come when her disabled brother will need
a comfortable, safe place to live and someone to care for him. She supported the project.
Attorney Barkett presented into the record a copy of a December, 1999 deed and
rezoning letter of April 2000 indicating when Sun -Up purchased their property and
requested their rezoning, together with a copy of a deed from October, 2000 where Gen
Development purchased their property. (CLERK'S NOTE & DOCUMENTS ARE ON FILE
WITH THE BACKUP FOR TODAY'S MEETING.) Today is the first day Mr. Genoni has
asked that the project be redesigned. Mr. Block and Mr. McCain have done an excellent job
designing this project. The adult care facility is actually 200 feet back from 5th Street and
the buffer proposed approaches a Type A buffer. There is also a canal between 5th Street and
Mr. Genoni's project.
Earl Morgan, Senior Vice President ofNorthern Trust Bank; Chairman ofthe Board
and Finance Committee of the Association for Retarded Citizens (ARC); and Pastor of First
Christ Church; emphasized that from a development lender position there would certainly
not be any limitations for this project. He also noted that it would be illegal to discriminate
against the handicapped. As a pastor, Sun -Up is a good corporate citizen. His church has
a ministry to the handicapped and has tried to help underwrite the shortages from state
funding by allowing them to use that facility as a meeting place. Finally as Chairman on
behalf of ARC, he asked for the Board's support and noted that state funding is in crisis
because of the September 11th tragedy. The state funding has been cut back by 26% making
it even more difficult to operate group homes and provide housing for these people.
MARCH 12, 2002
r02
-63-
Peter Robinson, President of Laurel Homes, 315 Greytwig Road, felt that Mr.
Swanson's corporation is doing an excellent job and, as a single-family developer, he has
absolutely no problem with this project.
Jerry Swanson, President of Sun -Up, stated that they will be happy to cooperate with
Mr. Genoni on the sign. They are not looking for walk-up business. He suggested that
perhaps Mr. Genoni could consider donating a sign.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard regarding this matter. There
being none, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Macht reminded the Board of a request for rezoning in 1986 where
a project involving handicapped persons was completed and the engineer had failed to get
the rezoning prior to development. This was an interesting case because the rezoning was
being done after -the -fact and the Chambers was filled with protesting neighbors while the
project had been completed for over 3 years and the neighbors did not even know the project
was there.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Macht,
SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board
unanimously (A) found that: (1) it is empowered
under the provisions of Chapter 971 to review the
special exceptions applied for; (2) the granting of
the special exception will not adversely affect the
public interest; (3) the application satisfies the
MARCH 12, 2002
•
general and specific criteria required for special
exception approval; and (4) the conditions stated
below are adequate to ensure compatibility between
the special exception uses and surrounding land
uses; and (B) granted special exception use approval
for the proposed ACLF houses and for the adult care
facility with the conditions that prior to site plan
release, the applicant shall (a) obtain approval of the
affidavit of exemption that covers the subject site
and (b) establish a conservation easement over those
4.3 acres of native upland communities being
preserved on site, as shown on the approved site
plan; all as recommended by staff.
Chairman Stanbridge called for a break at 11:02 a.m. The meeting resumed at 11:08
a.m. with the same persons present.
9.A.5. PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE 2002-010 AMENDING
THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING
ZONING MAP FROM CG TO PD -COMMERCIAL FOR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
SR -60 AT 5001 SR -60 (MCNAB & MCNAB "V", INC. -
SONNY'S BAR -B -Q) (Legislative)
MARCH 12, 2002
-65-
BR !i' 01:
•
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 February 7, 2002:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
D - `AR"IMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M. Keating, AI P
Community Development Dire
I :
THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP
Planning Director
FROM: John McCoy, AICP 4V
Senior Planner, Current Development
•
DATE: February 7, 2002
SUBJECT: McNab & McNab "V" Inc.'s Request to Rezone Approximately 2.32 Acres from
CL to PD (Commercial) and Request for Conceptual Approval for a Restaurant
with a Drive-thru Lane (Sonny's Bar -B -Q)
It is requested that the data herein presented be given fouual consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of March 12, 2002.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS:
Thus is a request by McNab & Mc&\ ab "V", Inc. through its agent, Masteller & Moler, Inc , to rezone
approximately 2.32 acres from CL (Limited Commercial) to PD (Commercial) to construct a
restaurant (Sonny's Bar -B -Q) with a drive-thru lane. The subject site is located on the south side of
S.R. 60 in the 5000 block, just to the west of Rex T.V. As part of the rezoning request, a conceptual
and preliminary PD plan has been submitted for approval. The purpose of this request is to secure
a zoning district which allows for construction of a restaurant with a drive-thru lane. The subject
property's current CL zoning district prohibits dnve-thru restaurants. A rezoning to PD however,
will allow a drive-thni lane as proposed, and allows the county greater control over the project
design and use limitations.
• PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTION
At its regular meeting of February 14`h, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
unanimously (6-0) to recommend that the Board approve the PD rezoning and conceptual plan with
the conditions as recommended by staff. In addition, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted
preliminary PD plat/plan approval, subject to the Board's approval of the PD rezoning request.
MARCH 12, 2002
-66-
0
Li
i
,*
•
•
• DEVELOPMENT ISSUE AND APPROVAL OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THE
DEVELOPER:
A restaurant with a drive -thio lane is not allowed in the CL (Limited Commercial) zoning district,
but is allowed as a permitted use in the CG (General Commercial) zoning district. To seek approval
for a drive -thio restaurant, the developer has two options. The first option would be to make an
application for a rezoning from CL to CG. If the property were rezoned to CG, then the applicant
would need to submit a site plan application for the project. The second option involves seeking a
rezoning to PD Commercial and submittal of a concurrent conceptual PD plan.
It is staffs position that the PD rezoning process is the best option for accomplishing the applicant's
objective. Therefore, staff encouraged the applicant to pursue the PD rezoning option. While a
rezoning to CG would allow a drive-thru restaurant on the subject property, it would also allow
higher volume fast food restaurants as well as uses like vehicle sales. Such uses may not be
desirable in the area of the subject site. Unlike a CG rezoning, a rezoning to PD provides for the
county to control the type of dnve-thio restaurant and to prohibit or limit other less desirable uses.
For such reasons, the nearby Wal-mart/Sam's Club site was rezoned to PD Commercial rather than
to CG.
• THE PD ZONING DISTRICT, GENERAI LY:
There have been several commercial PD rezoning districts approved by the county. Unlike standard
zoning districts, there are no specific size or dimension criteria for PD districts. Instead, the PD
district is based on the underlying land use plan designation for density and use limitations, and on
compatibility requirements. In the PD zoning district, specific allowable uses, setbacks and other
typical zoning district regulations are established on a site by site basis through approval of a
conceptual PD plan. Aesthetic design standards may also be required under the PD rezoning
process. Adopted as part of the PD zoning for a property, the conceptual PD plan serves as the
zoning standard for the site.
A rezoning to the PD district requires the 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 and preliminary PD plan proposes a 5,885 square foot restaurant and a
3,000 square foot office building on 2.32 acres Aspects of the proposed conceptual and preliminary
PD will be addressed in the 'Plan Analysis" section of the staff report
•
THE PD REZONING PROCESS:
The PD rezoning review, approval, and development process is as follows:
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.
Preliminary PD Plan/Plat (combination of site plan and preliminary plat)
Approval: Review and recommendation made by staff. Final action taken
STEP 1.
STEP 2.
MARCH 12, 2002
6E-67-
1
,
r-�
I '3
a06
•
STEP 3.
STEP 4.
STEP 5.
STEP 6.
by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Land Development Permit or Permit Waiver: Reviewed and issued by staff
for construction of subdivision improvements (road, utilities, drainage).
Building Peiniit(s): Reviewed and issued by staff for construction of
buildings.
Final PD Plat Approval: Review and recommendation made by staff. Final
action taken by the Board of County Commissioners.
Certificate of Occupancy: Reviewed and issued by staff for use and
occupancy of buildings.
The applicant is pursuing approval of Steps 1 and 2 at this time.
Once a PD conceptual plan is approved, only minor modifications to the conceptual plan
may be approved at a staff level. Any proposed changes that would intensify the site use
(e.g. increase the maximum building area) or reduce compatibility elements (e.g. reduced
buffering) may be approved only via a process involving public hearings held by both the
Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners.
• PROPOSED PD DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT SITE:
The subject site has a C/I (Commercial/Industrial) land use designation. The C/I land use
designation allows a variety of commercial and industrial districts. Since the land use
designation controls the use of the property by limiting the applicable zoning districts, any
rezoning must be compatible with the uses allowed by the property's land use designation.
Once a specific PD rezoning is approved for a site, the applicable PD conceptual plan
adopted as part of the rezoning limits the type of specific uses and intensity of development
on the site and establishes the site's dimensional criteria.
Although PD zoning district parameters are flexible, certain standards related to uses,
compatibility (buffering), infrastructure improvements, and open space are set forth in
Chapter 915 (P.D. Process and Standards for Development Ordinance) of the County's Land
Development Regulations (LDRs). Based upon the proposed conceptual PD plan and the
Chapter 915 standards, the proposed PD district for the subject site contains the special
elements identified in the table below. That table also lists corresponding CL district criteria
for companson purposes. The table illustrates that the proposed PD district will allow all the
same uses that are allowed in the CL district plus drive-thru facilities for restaurants.
MARCH 12, 2002
-68-
Y1
P 9 8
7
REZONING ANALYSIS:
EXISTING ZONING & LAND USE PATTER\
The subject site is commercially zoned and, until recently, had a single family home on the site. The
properties to the east and west are also commercially zoned, with the site to the east developed as
a Rex T.V. retail store. The site to the west is currently vacant. To the north, across S.R. 60, the
properties are zoned RS -6, residential, and developed with single family homes (Lake Park
Subdivision). To the south, across the Main Relief Canal, properties are zoned RS -3, Residential
Single Family (up to 3 umts/acre), and developed with single family homes.
Future Land Use Map Pattern
The subject property has a Commercial/Industrial land use designation, as do the properties to the
east and west. The property to the north across S.R. 60 has an L-2, Low Density 2 (up to 6
units/acre), land use designation. The property to the south, across the Main Relief Canal, has an
L-1, Low Density 1 (up to 3 units/acre) land use designation. The proposed commercial PD
rezoning of the subject property is consistent with the County's Future Land Use Map.
MARCH 12, 2002
Element
CL Zoning -District
Proposed PD District
Uses Allowed
Retail Restaurants, Office,
and other uses as listed in
LDR section 911.10
Same as allowed in CL with
an addition: restaurants with
drive-thru facility as a
permitted use
Minimum Open Space
25%
25%
Setbacks
Front:
25'
25'
Side:
10'
10'
Rear
10'
10'
Aesthetic Controls
S.R 60 Corridor regulations
apply
S.R 60 Corridor regulations
apply
REZONING ANALYSIS:
EXISTING ZONING & LAND USE PATTER\
The subject site is commercially zoned and, until recently, had a single family home on the site. The
properties to the east and west are also commercially zoned, with the site to the east developed as
a Rex T.V. retail store. The site to the west is currently vacant. To the north, across S.R. 60, the
properties are zoned RS -6, residential, and developed with single family homes (Lake Park
Subdivision). To the south, across the Main Relief Canal, properties are zoned RS -3, Residential
Single Family (up to 3 umts/acre), and developed with single family homes.
Future Land Use Map Pattern
The subject property has a Commercial/Industrial land use designation, as do the properties to the
east and west. The property to the north across S.R. 60 has an L-2, Low Density 2 (up to 6
units/acre), land use designation. The property to the south, across the Main Relief Canal, has an
L-1, Low Density 1 (up to 3 units/acre) land use designation. The proposed commercial PD
rezoning of the subject property is consistent with the County's Future Land Use Map.
MARCH 12, 2002
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. These include agricultural, residential, recreation conservation, and commercial and industrial
land uses Commercial and industrial land uses are located in nodes throughout the unincorporated
areas of Indian River County.
The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of the comprehensive plan. Policies
are statements in the plan which identify the actions which the county will take in order to direct the
community's development. As courses of action committed to by the County, policies provide the
basis for all County land development related decisions. While all comprehensive plan policies are
important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing rezoning requests. Of particular
applicability for this request are the following policies and objectives.
FUTURE LAND USE POLICY 1.21 states that the commercial/industrial land use designation
shall be applied to those areas which are suitable for urban scale development and intensities. Those
areas are limited to lands located within the urban service area and near existing urban centers. Since
the site is located on S.R 60 near the City of Vero Beach, is in an area of significant commercial
development, and has a Cif land use designation, the proposed rezoning is consistent with policy 2.1
FUTURE LAND USE POLICY 4.1 states that land use districts shall be located in a manner,
which concentrates urban uses thereby discouraging sprawl. The subject rezoning is in an existing
commercial node along S.R. 60 where the land use plan proposes to concentrate urban uses, such
as those uses proposed with this application Redevelopment of the site (residential to commercial)
discourages sprawl by directing development to an existing, fonner residential site In essence, the
proposed rezoning facilitates commercial "in fill" development via redevelopment. Since the site
is located on S.R. 60 and the rezoning/redevelopment project proposes to concentrate urban uses,
the proposed rezoning is consistent with policy 4.1.
FUTURE LAND USE POLICY 5.4 encourages the use of the Planned Development (PD) overlay
district to provide design flexibility. The PD overlay zoning district provides the ability to allow for
a wide range of uses, while controlling site development and appearance. In this instance, some use
and design flexibility are needed for the proposed restaurant lay -out. Since the subject PD re -zoning
and plan incorporate PD overlay district design flexibility to provide for a specific site- appropriate
use with sufficient design controls, the proposed rezoning is consistent with Policy 5.4.
Based on the above referenced specific policies and the land use plan, it is staff's position that the
proposed PD zoning of the subject property is consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan. The
commercial redevelopment of this site will be in an urbanizing area, on an arterial roadway, and
served by public water and sewer services.
• COMPATIBILITY
Staff's position is that granting the request to rezone the property to the proposed PD district will
result in development which will be compatible with the surrounding areas. Since the properties to
the east and west are commercially zoned, the proposed development will be compatible with those
MARCH 12, 2002
BR 121 PG 809
-70-
two properties.
The properties to the north and south are residentially zoned. With respect to the property to the
north, that property is separated from the subject property by S R. 60 (106' right-of-way). In
addition, the S R. 60 landscape stnp, the proposed site lighting, and the scale of the proposed
building will help provide compatibility for the residential property to the north. With respect to the
property to the south, that property is separated from the site by the Main Relief Canal (300' right-
of-way including vegetation). To ensure compatibility, a Type `C ' buffer with an 8 foot wall is
being provided along the south property line.
CONCURRENCY IMPACTS
\o concurrency related services or facilities will be adversely affected by the rezoning, since the
rezoning is essentially a "lateral" rezoning from one type of commercial category to another.
Concurrency for this project, however, is more specifically addressed in the PD plan analysis section
of this staff report.
•
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
These issues are addressed in the PD plan analysis section of this report.
PD PLAN ANALYSIS:
The conceptual PD plan proposes a restaurant building with a drive-thru, a separate detached office
building, and supporting Infrastructure. The applicant is proposing to construct the office as a second
phase.
Size of Site: 2.32 Acres
Zoning Classification:
Current: CL, Limited Commercial
Proposed: PD, Planned Development Commercial
Land Use Designation: C/I, Commercial/Industrial
Building Area:
Proposed Use:
Restaurant: 5,885 square feet
Office: 3,000 square feet
Total: 8,885 square feet
Building Coverage:
Proposed:
Allowed in CL
MARCH 12, 2002
Impervious Area:
Proposed: 55,077 square feet
Open Space:
Required in CG: 25%
Proposed in P19 District: 25%
Provided: 37.5%
Note: The calculation does not include any credit for stoimwater pond area.
Parking:
Required Restaurant 89 spaces
Office 10 spaces
Total 99 spaces
Provided Restaurant 89 spaces
Office 10 spaces
Total 99 spaces
Note: It should be noted that the applicant is proposing to construct parking spaces
along the west side of the site within an existing 25' wide FDOT drainage easement.
The easement was established to provide for an FDOT drainage pipe which runs from
S R. 60 to the Main Relief Canal and provides drainage for S.R. 60. Prior to site plan
release, the applicant will need to provide written authorization from the FDOT that
all proposed construction within the easement is acceptable to the FDOT or other
documents acceptable to the County Attorneys office that allow for the pavement
within the easement.
Setbacks:
Restaurant Office
Front (from S.R. 60)
Required: 75' 75'
Provided: 97.5' 329'
Side
Required: 10' 10'
Proposed: 23' 28'
Rear
Required: 10' 10'
Proposed: 253' 84'
10. Traffic Circulation: The PD plan proposes a single 26' wide driveway connection to S.R. 60.
The driveway will be limited to right in/right out movements. Also, the plan proposes two
inter -connected driveways with the Rex T.V. site to the east, and a driveway stub -out to the
vacant site to the west. Since the driveway for the Rex T.V. site is accessed by a left -tum lane
MARCH 12, 2002
•
on S.R. 60, west bound traffic on S.R. 60 will be able to tum left into the Rex T.V. site and
access the subject site via the inter -connection. The County's Traffic Engineering Division and
Fire Department have reviewed and approved the internal traffic circulation plan.
The County's Traffic Engineering Division has
analysis (TIA) for the site. There are no additonal
none are required.
reviewed and approved the traffic impact
off-site improvements that are required, and
11. Stormrvater Management: The project's conceptual stounwater management plan has been
approved by the public works department, and the developer will be required to obtain a Type
"A" county stouuwater pezrnit prior to site plan release. There will be a storinwater retention
pond constricted at the southern end of the site. A small portion of the storniwater
management pond is proposed to be located in an existing FDOT drainage easement, as
referenced in the parking section of this report. Prior to site plan release, the applicant will
need to obtain authorization from the FDOT for any proposed construction in the easement.
12. Utilities: The project is required to connect to County water and sewer. These utility
provisions have been approved by the County Utilities Department and the Environmental
Health Department.
13. Landscape Plan and Buffers: The landscape plan is in compliance with Chapter 926 and S.R.
60 Corridor Plan criteria. This includes an S.R. 60 landscape buffer, a Type "C" buffer with
an 8' high wall on the south property line, and foundation plantings around the building. The
Type `C ' buffer is similar to the buffers provided at the Rex T.V. site and approved in the
recent Sciara site plan (located east of the subject site and Rex T.V.). The landscape plan
includes preservation of most of the protected trees on-site. The trees are located along the east
and south property lines.
14. Environmental Issues:
• Uplands- Since the site is under 5 acres, the native upland habitat requirements of section
929.05 do not apply.
• Wetlands: The environmental planning staff has verified that there are no jurisdictional
wetlands on the subject site. Therefore, no wetlands regulations apply.
15. Dedications and Improvements:
• U.S. 1 sidewalk: A 5' wide public sidewalk is existing along the site's S.R. 60 frontage,
and will need to be maintained.
• Inter -connected Parking: The proposed plan provides two driveway inter -connections with
the Rex T.V. site property to the east. Also a single driveway stub -out will be provided
to the property to the west in order to facilitate a future inter -connection, when the adjacent
property to the west is developed.
16. S.R. 60 Corridor Criteria: Due to the site's location, the applicant must comply with the
S.R. 60 Corridor plan:
Architectural: The applicant has submitted architectural plans for the restaurant that
comply with the S.R. 60 Corridor Plan criteria. The plans indicate the building will
be a concrete block building with the lower portion and chimney being brick and the
remainder being tan stucco. The roof will be a gable design, with a 5:12 pitch. The
roof matenal will be a galvanized 5 V crimp with no color applied.
MARCH 12, 2002
32
•
•
-73-
Foundation Plantings: There will be foundation plantings on all sides of the building.
Overall, the foundation planting area will exceed the area required by the Corridor
Plan. The planting plan is consistent with the S.R. 60 Corridor Plan.
Signage: The applicant has submitted a sign package that is under review by staff,
and will need some modification to meet the S.R 60 cnteria. The sign package will
need to be approved by staff prior to site plan release.
d. Lighting: The applicant has submitted a lighting plan that is consistent with the
Corridor Plan. This includes bronze light poles and fixtures with 90° cut-off The
building lights will consist of coach lamps with low watt lights.
17. Concurrency: The applicant has obtained a conditional concurrency certificate. This
satisfied the concurrency requirement for PD plan approval and the rezoning request.
18. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North: S.R. 60, Single Family/RS-6
South: Main Relief Canal, Residential/RS-3
East: Rex T V./CL
West: Vacant/CL
19. Public Benefits: Restaurants are peiinitted uses in the CL zoning district. The applicant's
request to allow a well screened, limited (low volume) drive-thru facility is not a large scale
change to the CL zoning district allowances. The use is appropriate and provides for a public
need in the area. The benefit to the public is that the applicant can, through the PD process,
construct a drive-thru restaurant facility without opening up the subject site's zoning to uses
that would not be appropriate on S.R. 60. The PD plan also ensures adequate buffering,
parking interconnections and other beneficial design features as previously described in this
report.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the above analysis, staff recormnends that the Board of County Commissioners
approve the conceptual PD plan and the rezoning to PD commercial, with the following
conditions•
1. Prior to site plan release,
a. The sign package shall be approved by staff.
b. The applicant shall obtain authorization from the FDOT to construct
parking and other proposed improvements within the FDOT drainage
easement, or provide the County Attorney's office with other documents
that allow the paving improvements within the easement.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application
2. Location Map
3. Preliminary PD Plan
4. Landscape Plan
5. Architecturals
6. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
7. Ordinance
MARCH 12, 2002
-74-
PG 813
20th Street
.. I. hi-.
R+
adia.
Di
T ■
1
it
■
II
Il
a
4.
f
CI
U
&
Intl
s
D.
3
■ :'
S.a
.. r
•Et
p
1
i
R+
adia.
Di
S
1
it
■
i
4.
X
L
---
a
----
1
LL
p
i
i
le
P
1
MARCH 12, 2002
Planning Director Stan Boling reviewed the Memorandum, and Commissioner Macht
questioned why we would allow a drive-through when the existing zoning prohibits thein.
Director Boling responded that one alternative would be to rezone the property to CG
which allows car dealerships and some types of storage which staff did not feel would be
a preference.
Community Development Director Bob Keating noted that the CL district is used as
a transition district adjacent to residential zoning so it is structured to be very strict. This is
principally a sit-down restaurant with a small drive-through which will have a small impact.
Commissioner Macht stated that there is residential zoning across the street and when
WalMart and Sam's were approved, those residents were very concerned about the
possibility of allowing car sales in their parking lots. There are no like facilities along the
SR -60 Corridor and he would hate to see this set a precedent adjacent to a residential area.
Any other drive-through restaurants in this corridor are reached through a shopping center.
Director Boling emphasized that this is a very narrow request. The developer is
providing more open space than required as well as more landscape buffering to save some
trees. This drive-through will be located behind the restaurant and not be visible from SR -
60. It will be a very low-volume, 1 -lane drive-through There is an interconnecting road
through the Rex parking lot. There will be no cross-over on SR -60.
Commissioner Ginn believed this to be an inappropriate use of a PD and an over-
development of the site and could not support the project.
Chairman Stanbridge agreed that this would be an overdevelopment of the site and
noted there are some major drainage problems in this area.
Director Boling noted that the proposal exceeds the 25% open space requirement and
the office building would not be a large traffic generator.
MARCH 12, 2002
-76-
1 '2
•
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard
regarding this matter.
Tommy Barnes, 23 Royal Palm Boulevard, stated that his family has owned a home
on SR -60 for over 50 years. His concern was that he believed it was time to install a traffic
signal at 53rd Avenue.
Director Keating responded that WalMart had wanted to signalize that intersection
and those plans are still in place. However, at the present time the intersection does not meet
the requirements for signalization.
James McNab, 519 Steeplechase, Melbourne, President of McNab & McNab, spoke
to the drive-through issue. His company currently owns 4 Sonny's Restaurants; 3 in Brevard
County and 1 in Flagler County. This is not a high impact drive-through but just a
convenience for their customers. It is actually more of a pick-up window and all new
Sonny's are required to have them. He also assured the Board that they understood that if
there is a problem with the parking area located in the easement that it is their responsibility.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard regarding this matter. There
being none, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Adams believed this to be a reasonable PD and liked the idea of the
interconnecting driveways.
MARCH 12, 2002
-77-
IFu0I6
+)
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board,
by a 4-1 vote (Commissioner Ginn opposed) (A)
approved the conceptual PD plan and the rezoning
to PD commercial with the conditions that, prior to
site plan release, the sign package shall be approved
by staff and the applicant shall obtain authorization
from the Florida Department of Transportation to
construct parking and other proposed improvements
within the FDOT drainage easement, or provide the
County Attorney's office with other documents that
allow the paving improvements within the easement,
and (B) adopted Ordinance 2002-010 amending the
Zoning Ordinance and the accompanying Zoning
Map from CG to PD -Commercial for the property
located on the south side of S.R. 60 at 5001 S.R. 60
(McNab & McNab "V", Inc. - Sonny's Bar -B -Q).
MARCH 12, 2002
-78-
BR c.i PG 3 i 7
•
ORDINANCE NO. 2002-010
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE
ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FROM CG
TO PD -COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF S R. 60 AT 5001 S.R. 60 AND DESCRIBED HEREIN AND
PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, on February 14, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the local
planning agency on such matters, 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 its Notice of Intent to rezone the hereinafter described property; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined that this rezoning is in
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has held a public hearing pursuant to this
rezoning request, at which parties in interest and citizens were heard;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, that the zoning of the following described property situated in Indian River
County, Florida to -wit:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The west 220 feet measured along the right of way line of State Road 60 of Tract 10, Section
4, Township 33 south, Range 39 east, north of main relief canal right of way as the same is
designated on the last general plat of lands of the Indian River Farms Company, filed in the
office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, St. Lucie County, Florida, in plat book 2, page 25,
said lands now lying an being in Indian River County, Florida
Be changed from CL (Limited Commercial)to PD (Planned Development — Commercial).
All with meaning and intent as set forth and described in said land development regulations,
and the attached approved conceptual PD plan and landscape plan.
MARCH 12, 2002 SI(
State.
ORDINANCE NO. 2002-0i 0
The provisions of this ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida on this 12th day of March , 2002.
This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press Journal on the 1st day of March
2002, for public hearing to be held on the 12th day of March , 2002 at which time at the
final hearing it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Adams
Commissioner Ti DID i n , and adopted by the following vote;
Chairman Ruth M. Stanbridge
Vice Chairman John W. Tippin
Commissioner Fran B. Adams
Commissioner Kenneth R. Macht
Commissioner Caroline D. Ginn
0 .
ATTEST` yt_ ;s,-� �.o t
Jeey . Barton
County of Indian River
afriec-L (377
Deputy Clerk
Aye
Aye
Aye
Aye
Nay
seconded by
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Ruth M. Stanbridge, Ch irman
Board of County Commissioners
BY
Effective Date: Filed with the Department of State on the
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM
William G. Collins, II
Deputy County Attorney
O; E
AS
OP
o.ert M. Keating, P
Community Development Direc
MARCH 12, 2002
RS
-80-
day of
ru,
, 2002.
•
•)
9.A.6. PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE REGARDING TREE
PROTECTION AND LAND CLEARING
REQUIREMENTS; AMENDING LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS (LDRs) CHAPTER 901; DEFINITIONS
AND CHAPTER 927, TREE PROTECTION AND LAND
CLEARING (Legislative)
(CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 22, 2002 MEETING)
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 March 6, 2002:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
TMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M. Keting, AICP
Community Development
f
d
erector
THROUGH: Roland M. DeBloi
Chief, Environmental Planning
& Code Enforcement
FROM: Brian Poole, FREP-----
Senior Environmental Planner
DATE: March 6, 2002
RE• Board Consideration of and Adoption of Revisions to the County Land
Clearing and Tree Protection Ordinance
It is requested that the Board of County Commissioners fouually consider the following
infoi niation at the Board's regular meeting of March 12, 2002.
BACKGROU'N`D
On January 72, 2002, the Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing to consider
proposed revisions to the County Land Clearing and Tree Protection Ordinance (see Attachment
1, minutes of January 22 meeting). At that hearing, several people spoke and made comments
MARCH 12, 2002
-81-
sees '2
regarding the proposed Ordinance amendments. Those comments addressed both substantive
Ordinance issues and a perceived lack of time to review the proposed amendments.
Consequently, the Board directed staff to conduct a public workshop regarding the draft
Ordinance.
On March 1, 2002, an advertised public workshop was held, and 28 people attended. In addition,
staff made post January 22 presentations at regular meetings of three environmental groups.
Those groups were: the Pelican Island Audubon Society, the Eugenia Chapter of the Florida
Native Plant Society, and the Pelican Island Preservation Society. A total of 75 people attended
these three meetings.
Based upon the input received at these additional meetings, staff has made changes to the
Ordinance version that the Board considered at its January 22 meeting. The Board is now to
consider the revised proposed Ordinance, and is to adopt, adopt with changes, or not to adopt the
proposed Ordinance.
ANALYSIS
Attachment 2 is a summary of public comment received at the March I, 2002, public workshop,
the three environmental group meetings referenced above, and e-mails that staff has received on
this subject. Staff has reviewed these comments and proposes revisions to the proposed
Ordinance based on these comments (see Attachment 3, proposed Ordinance). Section A below
identifies each comment that resulted in a staff change to the proposed Ordinance. That section
also identifies the change that was made, the applicable Ordinance citation reference, and staff s
reasoning behind making the particular change. Section B below identifies additional comments
that were received, but did not result in proposed Ordinance changes.
Section A Changes Made to Proposed Ordinance as a Result of Public Input
Comment: 1 here was concern expressed at the workshop that too few trees would
achieve the Specimen Tree requirement of having a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 30
inches. The January 22 draft Ordinance defined a Specimen Tree as having a dbh of 30
inches or greater.
Change: The currently proposed definition of a Specimen Tree has been changed to
include all trees with a dbh of 24 inches or greater (Section 901.03).
Reasoning/Result: This decrease in the proposed dbh requirement will result in more
trees being defined as Specimen Trees. Such trees are afforded more protection under the
proposed regulations. By lowering the threshold to 24 inch dbh, some smaller, slow
growing trees (e.g., hickory, maple) may meet the Specimen Tree criteria. By having a
lower size threshold for Specimen Trees, the opportunity for maintaining more canopy
becomes greater. This will also result in a larger number of younger trees being included
and possibly protected during a more vigorous period of their life spans.
Comment: Public comment suggested that all palm trees should be included in the
Protected/Specimen tree categories. Currently, cabbage palms are not defined as
Protected trees and may therefore be removed without the need for a Tree Removal
permit, however, the removal does require a Land Clearing permit.
Change: The definitionsof both Protected and Specimen trees have been changed to
include all palms with a dbh of 4 inches up to 24 inches as Protected Trees, and all palms
with a dbh of 24 inches or greater as Specimen Trees (Section 901.03).
Reasoning: The existing Ordinance specifically excludes cabbage palms from the
definition of a Protected Tree while all other palms are included. Palms, of any species
or variety, are not trees; however, since all other palms are already included as Protected
Trees, it is reasonable to include cabbage palms in the definitions of Protected and
Specimen Trees.
MARCH 12, 2002
-82-
',
E
q 2
•
•
3. Comment: Public comment suggested that the Ordinance make reference to the List of
Florida's Invasive Species, Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council, Category I Plants for a
determination as to whether or not a tree would be considered to be either Protected or
Specimen.
Change: A reference to the most current List of Florida's Invasive Species, Florida
Exotic Pest Plant Council, Category I Plants document has been added (Section 901.03).
Reasoning: This document contains the most comprehensive list of non-native invasive
plants in Florida and therefore should be used as a reference guide.
Comment: The public expressed a concern that there needs to be a minimum tree size
limit for replanting trees as a result of a violation (Section 927.22).
Change: Section 927.22 has been changed to reflect a replacement process that will
more closely reflect the actual loss due to the illegal removal of trees. This process will
require that the square inches of replacement trees be equal to or exceed the square inches
of the trees illegally removed. A minimum size for the replacement trees has also been
added. 1 he replacement trees must be at least two (2) inch dbh.
Reasoning: Using replacement dbh to account for lost dbh does not fully account for the
loss. For example, if a 10 inch dbh tree is illegally removed, it must be replaced by two 5
inch dbh trees. A 10 inch dbh tree has an area of 78 square inches, the two 5 inch dbh
trees have a combined area of 39 square inches. Replacement of square inch for square
inch will provide for better replacement value and over time will actually increase the
canopy cover.
Comment: There was concern that there would be a perceived conflict of interest for the
developer to pay a Certified Arborist to be onsite [Section 927.18(3)(a)].
Change: This section has been altered. The developer will pay the County a fee that
will cover the cost of the Certified Arborist. The County will establish and maintain a list
of Certified Arborists and will chose from that list. The County will then pay the
Certified Arborist from the monies received from the developer.
Reasoning: This is a perceived conflict; however, staff is of the opinion that some of
this perception could be changed by having the County pick the Certified Arborist and
pay for his/her service.
6. Comment: A suggestion was made that, under Section 927.18(1)(d)(6), the types of
acceptable sampling methods for a tree survey be listed.
Change: Examples of acceptable sampling methods are now included as well as some
language from the existing Ordinance regarding the option of not perfoiuiing a tree
survey in areas where all Protected 'Trees are to be save or removed.
Reasoning: 1 he inclusion of sampling methods will provide the developer/owner with
guidance. Depicting clumps/groups of Protected Trees (either to be totally saved or
totally removed) on development plans will provide sufficient information to Planning
staff to make decisions as to whether or not changes and/or modifications to the plan
need to be made in order to save trees.
Section B Comments Received but not Included in Current Proposed Ordinance.
1. Comment: There was extensive public comment regarding defining Specimen Tree by a
species specific dbh This would mean that each species of tree common to this area
would have a different dbh defining Specimen Tree status (as examples: a 15 inch dbh
MARCH 12, 2002
-83-
Dut)s
l,1/4If
maple tree might be a Specimen Tree; a 10 inch dbh hickory tree might be a Specimen
Tree; a 5 inch dbh Simpson stopper might be a Specimen Tree).
Reasoning: First, there would need to be agreement on when each species would
become a Specimen Tree. Second, the free survey would need to identify not only the
species of tree but the appropriate dbh for that species. This would require that the
surveyor be trained in tree species recognition. Third, County staff would have to make
site visits to confirm that the tree survey correctly identifies the tree species and note each
trees classification (Protected or Specimen). The complexity and administration would
be costly versus the benefits derived. It should be noted that all West Indian tropical
trees are already protected by the proposed Ordinance. For these reasons staff is of the
opinion that this change should not be made.
Comment: The developer/owner should provide pictures/video of trees/uplands to be
saved.
Reasoning: Staff has used this technique in the past and has determined that it is of
limited value. The pictures/video must be carefully done in order to capture a clear and
recognizable picture of existing vegetation. In addition, careful notes must be made as to
where the pictures/video was taken and the direction of sight.
3. Comment: The maximum Performance Guarantee does not have equal increase in
amounts for the two categories (i.e., for projects less than one acre the maximum
increases five times then two times, for projects greater than one acre the maximum
increases two times then 1.5 times)
Reasoning: It is staff's opinion that this is not necessary and that these amounts are
reasonable and will act as a deterrent.
4. Comment: Understory plants such as saw palmetto should be protected the same as
trees.
Reasoning: Groundcover, understory, subcanopy, and canopy are protected through the
Upland Protection Ordinance, Chapter 932. Saw palmetto, and other understory/ground
cover are not considered trees.
• - Comment: Protected/Specimen Trees in easements/ROW need to be protected so that
the trees are not topped or severely cut back.
Reasoning: Easements must be maintained so that they serve the function for which they
were established. It is necessary to trim or remove trees from these easements; therefore,
protection of the trees becomes problematic and counterproductive. Rights-of-way are
designated areas for roads. Moving of existing ROWs is difficult if not impossible;
therefore, protection of trees within the ROWs is also counterproductive as the frees may
need to be removed or trimmed at any time.
Comment: When a Specimen Tree is to be saved on a lot in a residential subdivision,
have deed restriction in addition to, or instead of, the required `Notice' in the public
records.
Reasoning: The County does not enforce deed restrictions. It is the consensus of staff,
the County Attorneys Office, and PSAC members that the most efficient means of
property owners notification is via the `Notice' in the County records. Such a notice
requirement is contained in the proposed Ordinance.
7. Comment: All single-family lots (even those less than one acre in size) should be
subject to the Ordinance.
Reasoning: On lots smaller than one acre, there are limited opportunities for saving
trees, considering the footprint of the house, the fill for the house and other structures, the
septic system, utility easements, and storinwater management. There is no evidence that
many of those trees are in immediate danger of removal. Anticdotal evidence suggests
that owners of lots less than one acre usually attempt to save as many trees as possible.
MARCH 12, 2002
-84-
t•
ei Pr
•
8. Comment: There was much public concern that the monetary penalties were not large
enough to create a deterrent; therefore, we should increase violation penalties.
Reasoning: Violation penalty amounts are established by Chapter 162, Florida Statutes.
In the proposed Ordinance, the penalty amounts are set to the maximum allowed by
Statute.
Comment: The County should require mitigation for authorized peunitted tree removal
(process similar to wetland mitigation).
Reasoning: The Landscape Ordinance requires planting of sufficient number of trees
such that in many cases there is little space left for more trees.
10. Comment: The County should suspend/revoke the County Contractor
License/Competency Card for illegal tree removal.
Reasoning: That authority is already present within other County Ordinances. Staff may
want to explore this possibility with egregious and/or repeat offenders.
SUMMARY
In the development of the proposed Ordinance, many reference sources have been reviewed, and
many public comments and suggestions have been received. 1 he proposed Ordinance has been
reviewed by the County Professional Services Advisory Committee and the Planning and Zoning
Commission. It is staff's opinion that this proposed Ordinance is fair and equitable and will
result in the intended purpose as stated in Section 927.03.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the proposed revisions to the
County Tree Protection and Land Clearing Ordinance (LDR Chapter 927) and Chapter 901,
Definitions.
ATTACFTb[ENTS
1. BCC Meeting Minutes of January 22, 2002
2. Summary of Public Comments from Public Meetings
3. Revised Draft Chapters 927 and 901 Ordinance
ChiefEnvironmental Planner Roland DeBlois credited Senior Environmental Planner
Brian Poole with most of the work on this proposed ordinance and summarized the proposed
changes brought about through public comment at the recent public presentations and public
workshop attended by staff. He also noted that the ordinance exempts single-family lots
under 1 acre.
Chairman Stanbridge commented that the penalties not large enough but are the
maximum allowed under the statutes.
MARCH 12, 2002
pi
•
ptai 2 t t) f
t... i ie' ',_,� .
Senior Environmental Planner Brian Poole noted that in order to apply the up -to -
$15,000 fines for removal of trees, the ordinance must be passed by a super -majority vote
of the Board.
Commissioner Macht commented that when lots are selling for $400,000 to
$1,500,000, these fines are scarcely more than an annoyance to the developers.
Mr Poole noted that the County Attorney has advised that we also have the authority
to revoke a contractor's license for repeat violators.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard
regarding this matter.
Bob Johnson, Coral Winds, felt the tree listings need more clarification. He also felt
that the Code Enforcement Department should have someone on staff who would be able
to enforce these regulations.
Director Keating noted that there are usually a number of projects occurring at the
same time which makes allocating a staff person to this task unreasonable. The ordinance
calls for a certification from a certified arborist or placement of a bond.
Ruth Livingston, 655 40`h Avenue, wanted to see a requirement that if new trees
planted die within one year, the developer would have to replace them.
Director Keating responded that the County has several ordinances dealing with trees.
The landscape ordinance deals with those requirements and there is also the native uplands
set-aside which preserves understory trees and grasses.
MARCH 12, 2002
-86-
i f_ PG
•
•
Jens Tripson, 2525 14' Street, President of Pelican Island Audubon Society, thanked
staff for their presentation. He noted that Queen palms are basically weeds and Cabbage
palms reduce in size as they grow bigger. He felt that the size of the tree should be based
on the species. He believed that most developers are conscientious but more attention must
be paid to inspection, enforcement and staffing. He suggested contacting the cities to
possibly act in unison and felt it will be necessary to hire someone with expertise to handle
this.
Dr. David Cox, 9495 Periwinkle, commented that a situation could arise at some
point in time where a pathogen, fungus or insect could have a devastating effect on a
monoculture. He wanted the ordinance to send a clear statement of public policy but
expressed his concern that staff do not have enough time or expertise to enforce these
regulations.
Janice Broda, 12396 North A1A, of the North Beach Civic Association,
complimented staff on the wonderful public presentations but noted that staff expertise in
these areas is very limited. She suggested that developers could underwrite with fees an
urban forester to represent the County. She noted that the critical root zone varies from
species to species and even from specimen to specimen and suggested that another table
could be developed. Many of the trees listed in the proposed ordinance do not even grow
in this County. She suggested using a list of prohibited plants which would be required to
be removed and wanted to see a provision included that, once these plants are removed, the
property be kept clear of them. She also suggested that tree removal plans require digital
photographic documentation.
MARCH 12, 2002
-87-
Mr. DeBlois stated that staff would certainly accept the assistance of the Florida
Native Plant Society in refining these listings.
Judy Avril, 680 32nd Avenue SW, of the Florida Native Plant Society Eugenia
Chapter, was not comfortable with the 24 -inch diameter and emphasized that the Simpson
Stopper trees at the mall would not qualify at that size. The Society will certainly be happy
to work with staff on the list.
Kathy Wegel, 8060 142nd Street, Sebastian, wanted to see the County have the
strongest tree protection ordinance possible. She asked that staff consider adopting the
Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council (FLEPPC) Category 1 list and possibly consider not
requiring a permit to remove those trees. She also wanted staff to consider more ways to
regulate understory plants.
Mark Brackett, 1915 34t Avenue, stated that he is a citizen, taxpayer and developer
who is concerned with the added cost to development which could result from this proposed
ordinance. He also expressed his concern about the subjectivity of much of the regulation
and wanted to know who will determine the environmental and aesthetic value of these
restrictions. He emphasized that the elevation of a site can be 3 to 5 feet below the final
elevation which does not allow for the necessity to bury trees up to those heights. He asked
the Board to consider postponing adopting this ordinance as the Professional Services
Advisory Committee and the Planning & Zoning Commission have not had a chance to re-
examine this ordinance since it has been changed substantially. He felt this ordinance as
now proposed is a product of environmental groups and environmental planning and
expressed a desire to have staff snake their presentation to the Builders Association and the
Board of Realtors.
MARCH 12, 2002
0r 7
-88-
•
Commissioner Ginn noted that a public workshop was held last week, and Chairman
Stanbridge noted that this has been in the works for 2 years.
Director Keating agreed that there is a lot of subjectivity and he would prefer more
specifics but was uncertain how to accomplish that goal.
Mr. Poole commented that the public workshop last week was attended by
representatives of most of the environmental groups but that no developers were present
other than Peter Robinson.
Chip Landers, President of the 750 member Realtors Association. 1295 45`h Court
SW, also recognized the importance of landscaping and defining standards but noted they
have several questions and concerns. The ordinance as proposed is full of very subjective
terms such as economic value, aesthetic value, environmental benefit, and relative tolerance.
The practical application of those terms could be extremely confusing. He believed that the
realtors and builders are not happy with this ordinance and noted that the environmental
groups also do not seem happy with it. He also commented that the ordinance will exclude
governmental entities and will raise the cost ofhomes in the County. This will affect private
property rights and is an extreme reaction to a situation that occurred on Jungle Trail.
Debb Robinson, Vice President of Laurel Homes, 315 Greytwig Road, referred to
herself as a "wacko" tree hugger but noted that most Indian River County soils are pretty bad
with very high water tables. We also live in a stormwater "bathtub" and most lots need to
be filled at least 18 inches. You cannot put that much soil around oaks and have them live.
She felt that more attention should be paid to the horizontal lines of the County, as well as
the vertical lines. She commented that clearing a lot during development would cost a
homeowner approximately $500 while it could cost as much as $6,000 to clear once other
MARCH 12, 2002
1
M 1 C
homes are constructed and heavy equipment has to be brought in to clear just one lot around
already constructed homes. That substantially raises the cost not only of clearing the land
but of filling it. The homeowner is the one who will pay for this extra work. There is also
the cost of the number of trips to be made to the Landfill. If one trip is made when clearing
a development, the cost is much less than several trips for each lot cleared. This also
impacts the roads because you have heavy trucks making more trips. 10 years ago a
homeowner needed about $10,000 to get into a home of their own, while now that cost has
escalated to $100,000. The restrictions on land clearing could add as much as $10,000 per
home to the homeowners' costs. People should have the right to live the way they want on
their own property. She stated that she is a conservative and believes in private property
rights. She felt this is an unfortunate response to one developer in a "high rent" district who
did not follow the rules. She also resented the inference that she might try to influence the
opinion of a certified arborist because of having to pay his fees.
Dr. Richard Baker, of the Florida Entomology Lab, University of Florida,
emphasized that trees are very important to all of us He sarcastically remarked that the
whole County could be clear cut and we could have nothing but condominiums.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to be heard regarding this matter. There
being none, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Ginn expressed her dissatisfaction with the omission of the definitions
in each individual ordinance.
MARCH 12, 2002
-90-
1
Director Keating noted that the definitions are contained in the appropriate section
of the Code and take up a whole chapter, but Commissioner Ginn preferred to see them
spelled out so that people do not have to refer to several different authorities.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board
continued this matter with the understanding that
another public hearing will be held and the project
will be re -advertised upon completion of the
additional staff presentations and public workshop.
9.C.1. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS - SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC
HEARING MARCH 19, 2002
I.A. YUKON LAND CORPORATION - REQUEST TO AMEND THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO REDESIGNATE 142 ACRES L OCA TED AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF 85m STREET AND 90TH AVENUE FROM R TO L-
1 AND TO REZONE THOSE 142 ACRES FROM A-1 TO RS -3
(LEGISLATIVE
1.B. INDECO, INC. - REQUEST TO AMEND FIGURE 4.13 OF THE
TRANSPOR TA TION ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO
DELETE 25TH STREET SW BETWEEN 20TH AVENUE AND 27TH AVENUE
(LEGISLATIVE)
MARCH 12, 2002
• )
-91-
tWk
1. C. COUNTYINITLATED REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
TO REDESIGNATE 5 PUBLICLY OWNED TRACTS FROM VARIOUS
RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATIONS TO C-1, PUBLICLY OWNED OR
CONTROLLED CONSERVATION -1 (ZERO DENSITY) AND TO REZONE
THOSE TRACTS FROM VARIOUS RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS TO
CON -1, PUBLIC LANDS CONSERVATION DISTRICT (ZERO DENSITY) -
HARMONY OAKS - 88.5 ACRES - SOUTH OSLO RIVFRFRONT
CONSERVATION AREA - 66 ACRES - SOUTH OF ROUND ISLAND PARK -
59.5 ACRES - ANSTALT -19 ACRES AND SPALLONE -1.5 ACRES
(LEGISLATIVE)
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of March 5, 2002:
TO: James E. Chandler; County Administrator
DIVI ON HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M Keating, AId' Com (it)/ Development Director
FROM: Sasan Rohani, AICP; Chief, Long -Range Planning 9-4,
DATE: March 5, 2002
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE MARCH 19,
2002 BOARD MEETING
It is requested that the following infoiniation be given fouual consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of March 12, 2002.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Please be advised that the following public hearings have been scheduled for Board consideration
at its March 19, 2002 meeting.
MARCH 12, 2002
3 I
-92-
•
1. Yukon Land Corporation's request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to redesignate 142
acres located at the northeast corner of 85`h Streetand 90`h Avenue from R, Rural Residential
(up to 1 unit/acre), to L-1, Low -Density Residential -I (up to 3 units/acre); and to rezone
those 142 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. Indeco, Inc.'s request to amend Figure 4.13 of the Transportation Element of the
Comprehensive Plan to delete 25`h Street, SW, between 20th Avenue and 27`h Avenue.
(Legislative)
County Initiated request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to redesignate five publicly
owned tracts from various residential land use designations to C-1, Publicly Owned or
Controlled Conservation -1 (zero density); and to rezone those tracts from various residential
zoning districts to Con -1, Public Lands Conservation District (zero density). The tracts are
known as Haiuiony Oaks (88.5 acres); South Oslo Riverfront Conservation Area (66 acres);
South of Round Island Park (59.5 acres) Anstalt (19 acres); and Spallone (1.5 acres).
(Legislative)
RECOMMENDATION
The above referenced public hearing notice is provided for the Board's infoiniation. No action is
needed.
9.C.2. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS - SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC
HEARING MARCH 19, 2002
2.A. (FIRST HEARING) REQUEST TO ADOPT AN INTERIM WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES ORDINANCE, AMENDING VARIOUS
SECTIONS OF LDR CHAPTER 911 AND SECTION 971.44 (LEGISLA TI VE)
9.C.2. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS - SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC
HEARING APRIL 2, 2002
2.B. (SECOND HEARING) REQUEST TO ADOPT AN INTERIM WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES ORDINANCE, AMENDING VARIOUS
SECTIONS OF LDR CHAPTER 911 AND SECTION 971.44 (LEGISLA TI VE)
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of March 4, 2002:
MARCH 12, 2002
-93-
L"
•
"�
t
E.
• )
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
James E. Chandler
County Administrator
•
PAR
N
HEAD CONCURRENCE:
o ert M. Keating, AICP, C
Stan Boling, AICP
Planning Director
•
March 4, 2002
lei
miry Deve ment Director
SUBJECT: Notice of Scheduled Public Hearings
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at its regular meeting of March 12, 2002.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Please be advised that the following public hearings have been scheduled for Board consideration,
as follows:
March 19 2002 Meetin
(FIRST HEARING): Request to Adopt an Interim Wireless Telecommunications Facilities
Ordinance Amending Various Sections of LDR Chapter 911 and Section 971.44
(LEGISLATIVE).
A/�ri12 2002 Meeting
1 . (SECOND HEARING): Request to Adopt an Interim Wireless Telecommunications
Facilities Ordinance Amending Various Sections of LDR Chapter 911 and Section 971.44
(LEGISLATIVE).
RECOMMENDATION:
The above referenced public hearing dates are provided for the Board's infom-iation. No action is
needed.
NO ACTION REQUIRED OR TAKEN.
MARCH 12, 2002
-94-
•
11.B.1. RESOLUTION 2002-015 APPROVING THE INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
EMERGENCY PLAN
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of February 21, 2002:
TO: Honorable Board of County Commissioners
IHROUGII: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
THROUGH: John King, Director
Department of Emerge, e ces
4
FROM: Nathan McCollum, Emergency Management Coordinator /2'/
Department of Emergency Services
DATE: February 21, 2002
SUBJECT: Approval of Resolution Adopting the 2001/2002 Indian River County Emergency Plan For
Hazardous Materials.
On August 7, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners approved the 2001/2002 Hazardous Materials
Planning Agreement between Indian River County and the State of Florida. The agreement provided adequate
funding for the Emergency Management Division to review and modify our Indian River County Emergency
Plan for Hazardous Materials. Earlier this year, the updated plan was submitted to the Flonda Department of
Community Affairs/Division of Emergency Management for review.
The submitted plan, consisting of over 800 pages, is measured against compliance criteria established by
provisions of Section 303 (g) of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) and
administrative rulings by the State Emergency Response Commission. Per our agreement, the plan is reviewed
annually. Currently, Indian River County has 31 agencies which meet the threshold of SARA reporting and
review by the Emergency Management Division.
On February 19, 2002, the Emergency Management Division was notified by the Florida Division of
Emergency Management that our modifications meet the criteria outlined in our contract and is therefore
approved. The Board of County Commissioners' adoption of this plan finalizes the grant agreement (#02 -CP -
11 10 40 22 023) between Indian River County and the Department of Community Affairs/Division of
Emergency Management.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the attached Resolution and the 2001/2002 Indian River County Emergency
Plan for Hazardous Materials.
MARCH 12, 2002
-95-
E4t
• )
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution approving 2001/2002 Indian River County Emergency Plan for Hazardous
Materials.
Approval letter from Florida Division of Emergency Management dated 2-13-02.
**Because of the size of the plan, the 2001/2002 Plan is on file at the Department ofEmergency Services and
the Board of County Commissioners Office.**
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board
unanimously adopted Resolution 2002-015
approving the Indian River County Hazardous
Materials Emergency Plan.
MARCH 12, 2002
COPY OF PLAN IS ON FILE IN THE
OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
-96-
EK I21 M3t35
RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 015
Resolution of
the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida,
approving the Indian River County
Hazardous Materials Emergency Plan
WHEREAS, Chapter 252, Florida Statutes, assigns to the Board of County
Commissioners responsibility for disaster mitigation, preparedness, response and
recovery; and
WHEREAS, with the enactment of the Emergency Planning and Community
Right -To -Know Act of 1986, Congress imposed upon Local Emergency Planning
Committees and local governments additional planning and preparedness
requirements for response to emergencies involving the release of hazardous
materials; and
WHEREAS, each county within a Local Emergency Planning District is required
to develop an Emergency Response Pian for Hazardous Materials to become a
component part of the local Emergency Planning District Plan; and
WHEREAS, Indian River County's Hazardous Materials Emergency Plan has been
reviewed and approved by the Florida State Emergency Response Commission
for Hazardous Materials as meeting the criteria for such plans established by the
Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency and the National
Response Team, and
WHEREAS, this plan is intended to provide the framework for the development
of detailed operating procedures by first response public safety agencies
charged with the responsibility of protecting the public's health and safety from
the discharge or release of extremely toxic chemicals.
MARCH 12, 2002
-97-
ul�
•
• l
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-015
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
Indian River County's Hazardous Materials Plan be hereby adopted.
The foregoing Resolution was offered by Commissioner Adams who
moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Tipp' n
and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman
Vice Chairman
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Ruth M. Stanbridge Aye
John W. Tippin Aye
Fran B. Adams Aye
Caroline D. Ginn Aye
Kenneth R. Macht Aye
The Chair thereupon declared the Resolution duly passed and adopted this
day of March , 2002.
A
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk
MARCH 12, 2002
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY: 624%'7 ,-
Ruth M. Stanbridge, thairman
-98-
12th
ancien River Co.
Approved
Admin.
Co. Attorney
Budget
Risk Mgr.
General Svcs.
Purchasing
*Data
Br
837
•
11.B.2. ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED CITIZENS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY (ARC) - RENEWAL OF CLASS "E"
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND
NECESSITY TO PROVIDE WHEELCHAIR SERVICES
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of March 4, 2002:
TO: Honorable Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH' James E. Chandler, County Administrator
THROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
John King, Director l
Department of Emer
cy S rvices
Brian S. Burkeen, Chief f &J
Division of Emergency Medical Services
March 4, 2002
Approval of Renewal for a Class "ECertificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity for Association for Retarded Citizens of Indian River County to Provide
Wheelchair Services.
On October 5, 1999, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approved renewal of
a Class "E" Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Association for Retarded Citizens
to provide Wheelchair transportation and nating within Indian River County. This certificate was
necessary in order to comply with Indian River Code of Laws and Ordinances as specified in Chapter
304. The certificate was approved and renewed for a period of two (2) years.
The Indian River County Code provides for routine renewal of the EMS Certificate of Public
Convenience and Necessity on an application by the certificate holder. This can be accomplished
without a public hearing if the Board has no reason to believe that the public health, safety, and
welfare require it Staff submits that there is no reason to hold a public hearing and absent that
requirement, the Board is requested to renew the certificate.
An application for the renewal of the Class "E' certificate has been submitted by Association for
Retarded Citizens of Indian River County. Staff has reviewed the application and no reasons are
known or perceived that would require a public hearing pursuant to the established ordinance.
RE C ONIIVIENDATION:
Staff respectfully recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve renewal of the Class
'E" Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for Association for Retarded Citizens of Indian
River County, to be effective for a period of two (2) years.
MARCH 12, 2002
-99-
El► f
02
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board
unanimously approved renewal of the Class "E"
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for
the Association for Retarded Citizens of Indian
River County, to be effective for a period of two (2)
years, as recommended by staff.
11.B.3. INDIAN RIVER SHORES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
SAFETY - RENEWAL OF CLASS "A" CERTIFICATE OF
PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of February 18, 2002:
TO: Honorable Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: James E. Chandler, Administrator
THROUGH: John King, Director J �°
Department of Emerge cy ervices
FROM: Brian S. Burkeen, Chief, '
Division of Emergency Medical Services
DATE: February 18, 2002
SUBJECT: Approval of Renewal for a Class "A" Certificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity For Indian River Shores Department of Public Safety
On April 10, 2000, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approved a renewal of
Class "A' Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for Indian River Shores Department of
Public Safety to provide BLS/ALS Emergency Medical Services originating within Indian River
Shores. This certificate was necessary in order to comply with Indian River Code of Laws and
Ordinances as specified in Chapter 304. The certificate was approved and renewed for a period of
two (2) years and will expire April 10, 2002, and the renewal process should be accomplished prior
to that date.
MARCH 12, 2002
-100-
e; i2`
•
11.H.
The Indian River County Code provides for routine renewal of the EMS Certificate of Public
Convenience and 1\ ecessity on an application by the certificate holder. This can be accomplished
without a public hearing if the Board has no reason to believe that the public health, safety, and
welfare require it Staff submits that there is no reason to hold a public hearing and absent that
requirement, the Board is requested to renew the certificate.
An application for the renewal of the Class "A" certificate has been submitted by Indian River
Shores Department of Public Safety. Staff has reviewed the application and no reasons are lcnown or
perceived that would require a public hearing pursuant to the established ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff respectfully recoinmends that the Board of County Commissioners approve renewal of the
Class "A" Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for Indian River Shores Department of
Public Safety, to be effective for a period of two (2) years from April 10, 2002, to Apnl 10, 2004.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDED by Commissioner Tippin, the Board
unanimously approved renewal of the Class "A"
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for
Indian River Shores Department of Public Safety to
be effective for a period of two (2) years from April
10, 2002 to April 10, 2004, as recommended by
staff.
WATER PRODUCTION PUMPING SYSTEM UPGRADE -
BENRO ENTERPRISES, INC. D/B/A ROCHA CONTROLS,
INC.
The Board reviewed a Memorandum of February 28, 2002:
MARCH 12, 2002
-101-
•
DATE: FEBRUARY 23, 2002
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
W. ERIK OLSON
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
GENE A. RAUTH
OPERATIONS MANAGER GP\
WATER PRODUCTION PUMPING SYSTEM UPGRADE
(ROCHA CONTROLS, INC.)
BACKGROUND
On January 9, 2001, the Board of County Commissioner's approved the overall Supervisory Control and
Data Acquisition System (SCADA) plan for the Water Production and Distribution System This system is
a single comprehensive, countywide water production SCADA System to serve the County's Water
Production and Distribution Division. As part of three earlier Agenda Items, the Board of County
Commissioner's approved Staff to proceed with Phases I, II and III of the plan, which dealt with both the
North and South County Reverse Osmosis Water Treatment Plants. (See attached Agenda Items dated
03/01/01, 12/05/00, and 10/12/01). Additionally, as part of the authorization of phase III, the Board of
County Commissioner's approved Work Authorization Number 4 with ROCHA Controls Inc , in the
amount of $5,000.00. This Work Authorization authorized ROCHA Controls Inc. to conduct a radio
survey of the radio frequency and existing equipment used as part of the SCADA system. (See attached
agenda item dated 10/12/01). As explained in the 10/21/01 agenda item, the system is currently
experiencing minor intermittent signal disruptions, which results in a loss of system communication
between the two Water Plants.
ANALYSIS
Phase III is nearing completion. ROCHA Controls Inc. has completed the radio survey (See attached Radio
Survey). The radio survey has identified several system problems and deficiencies. These deficiencies and
problems primarily result from radio antennas, and can be corrected by equipment adjustments, repairs or
replacements. These corrections are necessary to insure proper performance of the system. Staff has
requested that an itemized cost breakdown and associated Work Authorization be provided by ROCHA
Controls Inc for the corrections. (See attached Work Authorization #5).
The following is summary of cost for the radio system corrections.
Locations and Type of Site
North County RO Plant / Master Site
Roseland, Gifford & Kings Highway Elevated Storage Tanks / Remote Monitoring
Grand Harbor, Sebastian Middle School & North Beach Sites / Remote Monitoring,
Total
Amount
$ 6,600
$ 5,700
$ 4,800
$17,100
It is staffs desire to utilize part of the of project contingency, and unused funds, from Phases 1, 2 & 3 in
order to fund the $17,100 required for the radio system corrections. (See depiction below). In doing so, the
approved overall budget for the entire project would remain the same, $207,700.00. The current actual
costs of the project are $125,274.00. The outstanding estimated costs for the project, including the $17,100
for the radio system repairs, would be $79,200.00. This would leave an unused fund balance of $3,-n6 00
($207,700.00 - $125,274.00 - $79,200.00 = $3,226.00)
MARCH 12, 2002
-102-
•
•
MARCH 12, 2002
-103-
04%
•
System
Upgrade
Priority!
Phase
-
System -Upgrade / Phase Description
Approved
Funded
Amount
($)
. OutstandingCurrent
Estimated
f Costs(S)
Actual
Cost ($)
Phase
I
NORTH COUNTY REVERSE OSMOSIS
$47,500.00
$43,734.00
➢ Upgrade the Human Machine Interface (HNMI) terminal and software with the latest
version of Rockwell Software (RS -VIEW) for the North County RO. High Service
Pumps station. Currently, the existing terminal and software is not compatible with other
plant (North and South Reverse Osmosis) systems.
A. Equipment, programming, and startup services for replacement of the Existing
HMI at North County Reverse Osmosis. (Estimated Cost $13,134 - R&R Fund)
B. Remove existing Panel view monitor and modify control panel for new Unit
converts existing application and integrate plant wide screens.
(Estimated Cost $4,950 - R&R Fund)
Miscellaneous Computer hardware and periphery upgrades as determined by Computer
Services Dept. (Estimated Cost $25,000 — 50% Capacity Charge Fund / 50% R&R)
> Contingency at approximately 10"/ to be utilized as approved by the Director of
Util i ties.
TOTAL
Phase 1I.
M,9LN PLANTS:
$111,700.00
$18,000.00
$13.000.00
$17,100.00
$2,620.00
$6,320.00
$40,000.00
$10,000.00
S76.5640.00
Upgrade the six (6) System HMI packages. to latest version Allen Bradley — RS — View
Software. The current software version being utilized is 6.00.41. The current and latest
revision is 6.30. This software upgrade will eliminate some nuisance errors currently
being experienced by the operators. (Estimated Cost 6 x $2,850 = $17,100 - R&R Fund)
Upgrade the telephone leased lines modems at both plants to handle a high transfer rate
to 19,200 bites per second (BPS). The current modems are 9600 BPS. This upgrade will
reduce plant operator's system wait time
(Estimated Cost 2 x $1,310 = $2,620 - R&R Fund)
Add Allen Bradley communication modules (computer cards) at both plants to bridge the
independent Data Highway (DH) networks.
(Estimated Cost 2 x $3,410 = $6,820 - Capacity Charge Fund)
➢ Merge North and South Reverse Osmosis HMI applications (computer screens) to
provide control of both plants from either location.
(Estimated Cost 2 x $20,000 = $40,000 - Capacity Charge Fund)
I> Enhance application and system performance errors as outlined by the operators at both
plants. (Estimated Cost(2 x $5,000 = $10,000 - Capacity Charge Fund)
Y Miscellaneous Computer hardware and periphery upgrades as determined by Computer
Services Dept. (Estimated Cost $25,000 — 50% Capacity Charge Fund / 50% R&R)
%' Contingency at approximately 10% to be utilized as approved by the Director of
Utilities.
TOTAL
MARCH 12, 2002
-103-
04%
•
System Upgraded/Phase Description
m
Phase III.
Approved -r
Funded
Amount
REMOTE SITES:
Upgrade the current Allen Bradley Radio Telemetry Units (RTU) to Allen Bradley
model Slick -500 (SLC -5/03 units & upgrade communication protocol to Modbus). This
replacement will modernize the system & eliminate obsolete equipment. Modbus
protocol is the preferred method for radio cornrnunication, because of its structural
simplicity.
A. Roseland Elevated Storage Tank Site equipment replacement.
(Estimated Cost S 10,500 — R&R Fund)
B. Grand Harbor Re -pump Station system upgrade.
(Estimated cost S4,200 — R&R Fund)
C. Gifford Elevated Storage Tank Site system replacement.
(Estimated cost 510,500 - R&R Fund)
D. Kings Highway Elevated Storage Tank Site system replacement.
(Estimated cost $10,500 - R&R Fund)
E. Highway 510 / 512 Pressure Station system.
(Estimated cost S4,200 - Capacity Charge Fund)
F. Sebastian Pressure Monitoring Station.
(Estimated cost $4,200 - Capacity Charge Fund
Outstanding
Estimated e;
Costs: $
➢ Contingency at approximately 10% to be utilized as approved by the Director of
Utilities.
$10,500.00
$4,200.00
$10,500.00
$10,500.00
$4,200.00
54,200.00
Radio Survey (Work Authorization #4)
Radio system corrections (Work Authorization #5)
TOTAL
$48,500.00
$44,100.00
517,100.00
RECOMMENDATION
S207,700.00
579,200.00
The Staff of the Depart lent of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners
approve Work Authorization # 5 with ROCHA Controls, Inc , for radio system corrections in the amount
of $17,100 and allow the Chair to execute same.
FUNDING SOURCE
The funding for the total project will corne from the Renewal & Replacement (R&R) Funds No. 471 and
Capacity Charge Fund No. 472
ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams,
SECONDED by Commissioner Ginn, the Board
unanimously approved Work Authorization #5 with
Benro Enterprises, Inc d/b/a ROCHA Controls, Inc.
for radio system corrections in the amount of
$17,100 and authorized the Chairman to execute
same, as recommended by staff
MARCH 12, 2002
WORK AUTHORIZATION IS ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
-104-
n
$125,274.00
13.A. CHAIRMAN RUTH M. STANBRIDGE - UPDATES
None.
•
t
14.A. EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT
None.
14.13. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment, the Board would
reconvene as the Board of Commissioners of the Solid Waste Disposal District. Those
Minutes are being prepared separately.
14.C. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL BOARD
None.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the
Board adjourned at 1:14 p.m.
ATTEST:
J. K Barton, Clerk
Minutes Approved:
MARCH 12, 2002
(52 1,j
Ruth M. Stanbridge, Chair
-105-
El t
t.