BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
C O M M I S S I O N A G E N D A
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 2009 - 9:00 A.M.
County Commission Chamber Indian River County Administration Complex 1801 27th Street, Building A Vero Beach, Florida, 32960-3388 www.ircgov.com
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Wesley S. Davis, Chairman District 1 Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator Joseph E. Flescher, Vice Chairman District 2 William G. Collins II, County Attorney Gary C. Wheeler District 3 Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board Peter D. O’Bryan District 4 Bob Solari District 5
1. CALL TO ORDER 9:00 A.M. PAGE
2. INVOCATION Jim Davis, Public Works Director
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator
4. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA / EMERGENCY ITEMS
Agenda Modification Notification by Chairman Wesley S. Davis: Public Hearing Item 10A1 will be heard prior to Proclamations and Presentations Item 5A 10A1. PUBLIC HEARING: Emergency Ordinance (memorandum dated February 11, 2009) Legislative 1-17
5. PROCLAMATIONS and PRESENTATIONS A. Presentation of Proclamation Designating February 15 – 21, 2009, as the
Healthy Floridians Initiative Week 18
February 17, 2009 Page 1 of 7
5. PROCLAMATIONS and PRESENTATIONS PAGE B. Presentation of Proclamation Honoring D. Allen Watters upon His
Retirement Effective February 19, 2009 19
C. Presentation of Proclamation Honoring Victor Hart, Sr. 20
D. Presentation of Proclamation Honoring February as African American
Pioneer Month
E. Presentation for Children’s Services Advisory Committee by Verna Wright,
Dasie Bridgewater Hope Center
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Regular Meeting of December 16, 2008
B. Regular Meeting of December 23, 2008
C. Regular Meeting of January 6, 2009
7. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS FROM STAFF OR COMMISSIONERS NOT REQUIRING BOARD ACTION
A. 2009 Election of Environmental Control Hearing Board Chairman and Vice Chairman (memorandum dated February 5, 2009) 21
8. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Warrants and Wires, January 30, 2009 thru February 5, 2009 (memorandum dated February 5, 2009) 22-30
B. FPL Utility Easement for Hobart Tower Site (memorandum dated January 12, 2009) 31-33
C. Authorization for Out of County Travel (memorandum dated February 9, 2009) 34-43
D. Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 006 (memorandum dated February 11, 2009) 44-56
February 17, 2009 Page 2 of 7
8. CONSENT AGENDA PAGE rd E. Work Order No. 1 ARCADIS U.S., Inc. Release of Retainage, 43 Avenue (Oslo Road to 8th Street), Right-of-Way Mapping project (memorandum dated February 6, 2009) 57-58
F. Wabasso Beach Park Restoration; Project No. 0822 Bid Number 2008070, Change Order No. 3; Repairs to Lifeguard Station; Ocean Gate General Contractors Inc. (memorandum dated February 9, 2009) 59-62
9. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS and GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
A. Indian River County Sheriff Deryl Loar Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) Grant (letter dated February 11, 2009) 63-87
10. PUBLIC ITEMS
A. PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Hattie Roberts’ Request for Special Exception Use Approval for a Child Care Facility to be known as Roberts Family Day Care (memorandum dated January 27, 2009) 88-98 Quasi-Judicial
3. Quail Ridge of Vero Beach, LLC’s Request for PD Special Exception Use and Conceptual PD Plan Approval for an
Agricultural PD to be Known as Quail Ridge (memorandum dated January 27, 2009) 99-115 Legislative
4. Indian River Associates, II, LLLP’s Request for Conceptual Planned Development (PD) Special Exception Use Approval for a
Project to be known as Falcon Trace Phase III (memorandum dated January 27, 2009) 116-128 Legislative
B. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS
Please give your name and address, and then give your remarks. Please try to limit your remarks to three minutes.
None
February 17, 2009 Page 3 of 7
10. PUBLIC ITEMS PAGE
C. PUBLIC NOTICE ITEMS
None
11. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR MATTERS
A. North County Aquatic Center (memorandum dated February 5, 2009) 129
12. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS
A. Community Development None
B. Emergency Services None
C. General Services None
D. Human Resources None
E. Human Services None
F. Leisure Services None
G. Office of Management and Budget None
H. Recreation None
February 17, 2009 Page 4 of 7
12. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS PAGE
I. Public Works 1. Work Order #15, Applied Technology and Management Inc., Sector 7 Beach Restoration, Post-Construction Monitoring (Summer 2009) (memorandum dated February 9, 2009) 130-142
J. Utilities Services 1. Replacement of 24” Force Main on 15th Avenue From Oslo Road to Master In-Line Pump Station No. 89 – UCP No. 3096 – Approval
for Additional Materials (memorandum dated February 11, 2009) 143
2. South County Reverse Osmosis Plant – Final Pay to ARCADIS RMA, Inc. for Work Order No. 4 to Determine County’s Required Contribution to Participate in a Joint Project to Construct a
Transmission Pipe and an Injection Well at the City of Vero Beach (COVB) Water Treatment Facility – UCP 3059 (memorandum dated February 6, 2009) 144-146
3. Winter Grove Subdivision Petition Water Service 28th & 29th Courts & 70th Place, North of North Winter Beach Road – 69th Street, Indian River County Project No. UCP – 3013, Resolution IV – Final Assessment (memorandum dated February 6, 2009) 147-157
4. Presentation to Commission Regarding Partnering with the City of Vero Beach on the Provision of Wastewater Treatment Services (memorandum dated February 11, 2009) 158
13. COUNTY ATTORNEY MATTERS
A. Proposed Settlement Regarding Litigation Between Double R&D and Indian River County (memorandum dated February 9, 2009) 159-180
B. Unconditional Offer for Parcel of Property owned by Evangelos and Ann Abazis, 6800 57th Street, Vero Beach (memorandum dated February 4, 2009) 181-184
th C. Unconditional Offer for a Parcel of Land on the Corner of 66 Avenue and 57th Street owned by Steven, William, and Evan Abazis (memorandum dated February 11, 2009) 185-192
February 17, 2009 Page 5 of 7
13. COUNTY ATTORNEY MATTERS PAGE
D. Unconditional Offer for Parcel of property owned by Evangelos and Ann Abazis, 6880 57th Street, Vero Beach (memorandum dated February 4, 2009) 193-196
E. Mensing Options (memorandum dated February 12, 2009) 197-208
14. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS
A. Commissioner Wesley S. Davis, Chairman 1. Two Year Moratorium for Non-Residential Impact Fees
(memorandum dated February 11, 2009) 209
2. Appointments to Committees without Commissioner Liaisons
(memorandum dated February 11, 2009) 210
B. Commissioner Joseph E. Flescher, Vice Chairman None
C. Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler None
D. Commissioner Peter D. O’Bryan None
E. Commissioner Bob Solari 1. Life Science Research and Technology Advancement
(memorandum dated February 10, 2009) 211-214
2. Impact Fees
(memorandum dated February 10, 2009) 215-218
15. SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND BOARDS
A. Emergency Services District None
B. Solid Waste Disposal District 1. Approval of Minutes Regular Meeting of December 16, 2008
February 17, 2009 Page 6 of 7 15. SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND BOARDS PAGE
B. Solid Waste Disposal District 2. RFA No. 2009025 Waste Hauling Franchise – Unincorporated Enterprise Zone – Application Process Update & Notice of Public
Meeting on March 3, 2009 (memorandum dated February 10, 2009) 219-220
C. Environmental Control Board None
16. ADJOURNMENT
Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made which includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal will be based.
Anyone who needs a special accommodation for this meeting may contact the County’s Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Coordinator at (772) 226-1223 (TDD # 772-770-5215) at least 48 hours in advance of meeting.
The full agenda is available on line at the Indian River County Website at www.ircgov.com The full agenda is also available for review in the Board of County Commission Office, the Indian River County Main Library, the IRC Courthouse Law Library, and the North County Library.
Commission Meeting may be broadcast live by Comcast Cable Channel 27 Rebroadcasts continuously with the following proposed schedule: Tuesday at 6:00 p.m. until Wednesday at 6:00 a.m., Wednesday at 9:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m., Thursday at 1:00 p.m. through Friday Morning, and Saturday at 12:00 Noon to 5:00 p.m.
February 17, 2009 Page 7 of 7 PUBLIC HEARING.: 2/17/09 MEETING /0 Aj,,. C!lfice o/ntinuation from 2/10/09 meeting) INDIAN·RIVER COUNTY ATTORNEY
William G. Collins II, County Attorney William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney Marian E. Fell, Senior Assistant County Attorney George A Glenn, Assistant County Attorney
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: ~William G. Collins II - County Attorney
DATE: February 11, 2009
SUBJECT: Emergency Ordinance
On February 10, 2009 the Board was presented an emergency ordinance addressing the impact of the credit crisis on the local development community. The Board took public input, which was favorable, but postponed action for one week to allow for further consideration. The Board directed staff to delay the scheduled February 16th drawings on two letters of credit until after their February 1th meeting.
Mr. Thompson suggested 3-year warranties of private roads in commercial/industrial subdivisions were unnecessary and that the proposed reduction in maintenance security in years two and three should be automatic, i.e., not require the project engineer to certify the improvements were properly functioning and in good repair.
Mr. Mechling suggested a 1-year warranty period should suffice. There was some Board discussion of requiring year two and three security only if deficiencies existed at the end of year one. Mr. Mechling inquired how often the County had to draw on 3-year warranty security. (County Office of Management and Budget records show we have drawn against two projects, Pine Grove and The Fountains at Amber Lakes. In these cases the drawings were because the banks would not renew the letters of credit and the developers had not posted alternate security, rather than because of paving or drainage deficiencies.)
COUNTY ATTORNEY Budget Oei,t 1 RECOMMENDATION
1. Open and conduct a public hearing to consider, and if necessary, modify the proposed emergency ordinance amendments.
2. Adopt the emergency ordinance (4/Sth"vote required).
WGC/nhm
Attachment: County Attorney's Add-On Item 13.B from 2/10/09 BCC Meeting
2 2 ADD-ON ATTORNEY'S MATTER rin;,,,,, f ITEM 13.B '-JJ t,U, a 2/10/09 BCC MEETING INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ATTORNEY
William G. Collins II, County Anomey William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Anomey lvlarian E. Fell, Senior Assistant County Anomey George A Glenn, Assistant County Attorney
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: WL William G. Collins II - County Attorney
DATE: February 9, 2009
SUBJECT: Emergency Ordinance
At its February 5, 2009 Economic Summit/Goals & Visions meeting there was a concensus to bring forward an emergency ordinance to address the international credit crisis, and its impact on the local development community.
Local developers are being turned down by banks when they request extensions of letters of credit which support warranties of subdivision improvements or future sidewalk construction in subdivisions.
To address these concerns, the Community Development Department has drafted ordinance amendments to Indian River County Code section 913.09(5)(b)2c allowing: ·
• annual sidewalk security reductions
o deferral of sidewalk construction and the posting of sidewalk const;uction security if certain criteria are met
!ndl:;m Rivti Cli. A.pprov-ed Date Admln. APPROVED FOR - A.. - / ~ ~ C> 'o/ Legal IR-5( 2/t-/e>'f' Budge! - B.C.C. MEE~ ~A~ AGE~DA Dept :'/J -~ ,,,__ Risk Mgr. - i COUNTY ATTORNEY ' 3 Similar amendments to Indian River County Code section 913.10 allow:
• reduction in posted maintenance security at the end of year 1 of the 3-year warranty period
• deferral of paving and drainage warranty security if certain criteria are met
Finally, site plan approval time limitations under Indian River County Code section 914.08 would be extended from 12 to 24 months.
Emergency ordinances
May be enacted pursuant to F.S. 125.66(3) with waiver of the notice provisions of F.S. 125.66(2) by four-fifths vote of the Board, if the Board declares an emergency exists and that the immediate enactment of the ordinance is necessary.
Within the next 30 days more than $1.1 million of security are scheduled to be drawn against nine separate development projects (see attachment).
Recommendation
1. Unanimously add this emergency ordinance to the February 10, 2009 agenda.
2. Open and conduct a public hearing to consider, and if necessary, modify the proposed ordinance amendments.
3. Adopt the emergency ordinance.
WGC/nhm Attachments
2 4 ORDINANCE NO. 2009-__
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING INDIAN RIVER COUNTY CODE SECTION 913.09(5)(b)2c TO ALLOW ANNUAL SIDEWALK SECURITY REDUCTIONS, AND, DEFERRAL OF SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION AND THE POSTING OF SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION SECURITY IF CERTAIN CRITERIA ARE MET; AMENDING INDIAN RIVER COUNTY CODE SECTION 913.10 TO ALLOW REDUCTION OF 3-YEAR POSTED MAINTENANCE SECURITY AT THE END OF YEAR 1, AND, DEFERRAL OF PAVING AND DRAINAGE WARRANTY SECURITY IF CERTAIN CRITERIA ARE MET; AND AMENDING INDIAN RIVER COUNTY CODE SECTION 914.08 TO EXTEND SITE PLAN APPROVAL TIME LIMITATIONS FROM 12 TO 24 MONTHS; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING FORTH EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the current international credit crisis has kept lending institutions from extending credit to many development projects in the community; and
WHEREAS, Indian River County is expected to draw $1.1 million in security on nine development projects in the next thirty days; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County declares an emergency exists and immediate enactment of this ordinance is necessary to avoid crushing impacts of the current credit crisis on the local Indian River County economy,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION 1.
Section 913.09(5)(b)2c, sidewalk segment(s) along local roadways, is amended to read as follows:
5 Section 913.09(S)(b)2c Sidewalk segment(s) along local roadways
C. Timing. The developer shall be responsible for providing the required sidewalk segment(s) in compliance with subsection 913.09(5)(b)2.b.i. or ii. prior to receiving a certificate of completion for required subdivision improvements, feF the corresponding subdivision pFo:ieet with the following exceptions:. HoweveF, in the e•,eRt the de•,elopeF is required to construct the FeqHiFed sidewalk segment(s) (subsection 913.09(5)(b)2.b.i.), the
~i·~--T=h~e_developer may delay construction of the required sidewalk segment(s) beyond the final plat approval date of the corresponding subdivision development. In electing to delay construction, the developer shall provide a completed contract for construction for remaining required improvements and post security to guarantee the completed contract in conformance with subsection 913.10(1). The construction contract and security arrangement may provide for annual reductions in the posted security amount based on completed and inspected sidewalk segments. The developer may initially delay construction of the required sidewalk segment(s) for a period of two (2) years following final plat approval, regardless of the number oflots to be platted via the subdivision project. The developer mav, upon approval of both the public works director and the commnnity development director, further extend the contract for construction, beyond the initial two-year period, at a rate of two (2) years for every eight (8) project lots: vllrich received final pla-t approval upon appFe•,al of beth the public woFks directoF and the comrmmity development diFectoF. At no time may a contract for construction be extended beyond ten (10) years following final plat approval for the corresponding subdivision project. In its review of contract extension requests, the county may consider whether or not existing project residents are provided a functional sidewalk system or sub-system in a timely manner.
ii. The developer {owners) and the county may agree to defer both sidewalk construction and the posting of security for future sidewalk construction if the following criteria are met:
A. Existing project residents are provided a functional sidewalk system or sub-system in a timely manner.
B. The developer {owners) defines the area of the subdivision where sidewalk construction and security posting are to be deferred, and agrees to not sell any lots/units or obtain any building permit for construction within the "deferral" area until sidewalks are constructed or security is posted.
C. The agreement is in a form acceptable to the county attorneys office, and is structured as a covenant that cannot be terminated or modified without county approval.
D. The agreement/covenant is recorded in the public records.
Bold Underline: Additions to Ordinance StFike tAFe1:1gA: Deleted Text from Existing Ordinance F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\STAN\2009\913.09(5).rtf ORDINANCE NO. 2009-__
SECTION 2.
Section 913.10, security for construction and for maintenance of required improvements, is amended to read as follows:
[remainder of this page has been intentionally left blank]
7 Section 913.10. Security for construction and for maintenance of required improvements.
(1) Construction security.
(A) When construction of required improvements is to be completed following final plat approval, the developer shall, at or prior to final plat approval, execute a contract for construction of the required improvements and post security in an amount equal to one hundred twenty-five (125) percent of the estimated total cost of required improvements remaining to be constructed. For residential subdivisions, contracts for construction of required improvements shall be limited to twenty-five (25) percent of all required improvements, based upon the estimated cost of improvements. [Note: the proYisien in * the preceding sentence shall apply to all COfflPlete final plat applications received after March 31, 2005. All final plats approved after 8epternl3er 20, 2005 shall COfflPIY with these "Section I" changes regardless of the date a COfflPle!e final plat application '.vas ~
(B) The contract shall be on a form provided by the county and shall obligate the developer to complete all "bondable" required improvements and all other improvements shown on the land development permit (unless the improvement is shown on the land development permit as not required and optional) in accordance with the land development permit, the approved plans and specifications, and county development regulations and standards, within a period of one ( 1) year from the date of final plat approval. Sidewalks may be bonded-out for multiple years in accordance with subdivision ordinance section 913.09(5).
(C) The estimated total cost of improvements remaining to be constructed shall include survey, engineering and construction costs and shall be approved by the county engineer after review of an itemized cost estimate prepared and certified by the developer's engineer, or an actual contract price or portion thereof for the work remaining, if available.
(D) The security posted to guarantee performance of the contract shall expire, if at all, no less than ninety (90) days beyond the last date for performance established by the contract, or any extension thereof. The security shall run in favor of the board of county commissioners, must be in a form acceptable to the county attorney, and may be either:
1. Cash and a cash deposit and escrow agreement governing control and use thereof; or
2. An irrevocable letter of credit (issued by a financial institution authorized to conduct business within the state).
(E) For good cause shown, the board of county commissioners may in its discretion grant one (I) or more extensions of time for performance of any contract for required improvements, provided the security supporting such contract remains valid for the required ninety-day period following the newly extended time for performance.
*Editor's Note: no longer necessary
Bold Underline: Additions to Ordinance Strike tlueHgfl: Deleted Text from Existing Ordinance I !?:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\STAN\2009\913.10.rtf 8 (F) No certificate of occupancy for residential occupancy for any structure within a subdivision shall be issued until a certificate of completion has been issued for all required improvements, including required buffers, of the subdivision serving the residence, with the exception of sidewalks fronting lots rather than common areas, and any final lift of asphalt in excess of the amount required by county development regulations as of the date of issuance of the land development permit for the subdivision. Prior to issuance of a certificate of completion, the required code minimum layer of asphalt must be in place or the developer shall provide to the county either an irrevocable letter of credit or cash escrow in the amount of one hundred twenty-five (125) percent of the estimated cost of the final lift including striping and resetting survey PCPs, as certified by the developer's engineer and approved by the county engineer. Security for a final lift of asphalt shall be by contract for construction of final lift of asphalt and either an irrevocable letter of credit or cash deposit and escrow agreement. The final lift of asphalt must be installed prior to two (2) years from project's certificate of completion; prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the last residence within the subdivision ( or a separately platted phase of a subdivision); or sixty ( 60) days prior to turnover to a homeowners' association, whichever occurs first.
(G) The board of county commissioners may charge fees to process requests to extend, modify, or substitute security and contracts for construction. Said fees shall be established by a formal resolution of the board of county commissioners.
(2) Maintenance security.
(A) Prior to issuance of the .!! certificate of completion for required subdivision improvements, the developer shall execute an either a warranty and maintenance agreement as provided in sub-section (B) below or an agreement to defer the warranty and maintenance agreement and posting of maintenance security as provided in sub-section (C) below. In conjunction with the execution of a warranty and maintenance agreement, aoo the developer and/or its contractor shall provide security guaranteeing the required road and drainage improvements against all defects in workmanship or materials, for the period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of the certificate of completion. The three-year maintenance period commences at the time the certificate of completion is issued and not when the final lift of asphalt is applied in the event a final lift of asphalt is secured by either an irrevocable letter of credit or cash escrow rather than installed.
(B) The warranty and maintenance agreement shall be on a form provided by the county attorney's office and shall be secured by an amount equal to twenty-five (25) percent of the total actual cost of the improvements covered. At the end of the first of the three (3) year guarantee period, the developer may submit a written request to reduce the maintenance security from 25% to 5% or $10,000.00 (whichever amount is greater) of the total cost of the improvements covered. Such request shall be accompanied by a letter from the project engineer stating that the project road and drainage improvements are properly functioning and in good repair. Upon inspection by the public works department and a determination that the road and drainage improvements are properly functioning and in good repair, the county administrator or his designee shall approve the security reduction request and any associated modifications to the warranty and maintenance agreement and security instrument(s).
The-Maintenance security shall be either: Bold Underline: Additions to Ordinance 2 £Hike tflFetlgR: Deleted Text from Existing Ordinance F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\STAN\2009\913.1 0.rtf 9 1. Cash and a cash deposit and escrow agreement govemmg control and use thereof; or
2. An irrevocable letter of credit issued by a financial institution authorized to conduct business within the state; or
3. A maintenance bond underwritten by a security insurer with an A.M. Best's rating of A-VI or greater and authorized to transact such business in this state.
The posted security shall expire, if at all, no earlier than ninety (90) days following the end of the three-year guarantee period. Security for required road and drainage improvements shall run to the benefit oflndian River County.
Upon receipt of a request to release maintenance security to a developer, and within approximately thirty (30) to sixty (60) days prior to a county inspection of required improvements, seheduled at the end of the three (3) year maintenanee guarantee period, the county shall notify subdivision residents of the request and inspection. Notice may be provided by sign posting, mail, flyers, or advertisement.
At the end of the three-year period, the public works director may release the posted security under the terms of the warranty and maintenance agreement which shall require certified inspection reports under seal from the developer's engineer and a determination from the county engineer that required road, drainage, and sidewalk improvements meet applicable county performance standards.
(C) The developer (owners) and the county may agree to defer execution of a warranty and maintenance (which may include more than one party) agreement and posting maintenance security at the time of issuance of a certificate of completion if the following criteria are met:
1. The road and drainage improvements that are the subject of the deferral are not needed to serve existing project residents.
2. The developer (owners) defines the "deferral area" and agrees to not sell any lots/units or obtain any building permit for construction within the deferral area until a warranty and maintenance agreement is executed and maintenance security is posted for road and drainage improvements within the deferral area.
3. The agreement is in a form acceptable to the county attorneys office, and is structured as a covenant that cannot be terminated or modified without county approval.
4. The agreement/covenant is recorded in the public records.
(3) Failure to perform. In the event a developer and/or its contractor fails to perform the obligations for construction or maintenance required under the above referenced agreements, the board may call upon the surety provided, or any portion thereof, to be used for completion of the necessary remaining work. If the surety is exhausted prior to completion of the work necessary to complete the required improvements, the developer shall remain liable to the county for any resulting deficiency. The county is not responsible to complete any subdivision with county funds.
Bold Underline: Additions to Ordinance 3 StFike thFeH:gh: Deleted Text from Existing Ordinance F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\STAN\2009\913.1 0.rtf 10 (4) Release or reduction ofsecurity.
(A) No construction security shall be released until a certificate of completion has been approved by the public works director, or his designee and security for maintenance has been established as required above.
(B) Reduction in the amount of surety required, other than a final draw or reduction, may be authorized by the public works director after completion of any distinct and separate phase or portion of the required improvements. The amount of any given reduction shall not exceed eighty (80) percent of the cost of the completed work, as determined by the public works director following review of a cost estimate for said work prepared and certified by the developer's engineer. A reduction in construction security shall not be construed as acceptance of the improvement. Formal acceptance shall occur as provided elsewhere in this chapter, and only upon establishment of proper maintenance security, where required.
(C) There shall be no reduction in the amount of security posted for residential subdivisions reeeiving final plat apprnval after Septemller 20, 2005 except as provided for * maintenance security in sub-section (2), above, and for sidewalk improvements as provided in section 913.09(5)(b)2c.
*Editor's Note: no longer necessary
(5) Security for municipalities. If the applicant is required to construct a public system which will be accepted by a municipality, the applicant shall furnish the municipality such security as the municipality may require, including security for both performance and maintenance of the system. Furthermore, prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall furnish to the planning department, evidence from the municipality that its requirements have been satisfied.
(Ord. No. 90-16, § 1, 9-11-90; Ord. No. 96-6, § 4, 2-27-96; Ord. No. 2005-007, §§ 3, 4, 3-15-05; Ord. No. 2005-012, § 3, 4-19-05; Ord. No. 2005-032, § 1, 9-6-05; Ord. No. 2006-023, § 2, 8-22-06; Ord. No. 2007-014, § 1, 6-5-07; Ord. No. 2008-009, § 1, 4-29-08)
Bold Underline: Additions to Ordinance 4 Strike tflFs1:±gh: Deleted Text from Existing Ordinance F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\STAN\2009\913. l 0.rtf 11 ORDINANCE NO. 2009-__
SECTION 3.
Section 914.08, time limitations on site plan approval, is amended to read as follows:
[remainder of this page has been intentionally left blank]
12 Section 914.08. Time limitations on-site plan approval.
(1) Commencement of construction.
(a) All site plan approvals shall terminate and become null and void automatically without notice if construction has not commenced within twelve (12) twenty-four (24) months from the date of approval.
(b) For the purposes of this paragraph, construction will have commenced when the developer has built a portion of a structure shown on the plan ( e.g. the pouring of footers), or has made substantial improvements to the site, other than land clearing, or filling or grading, in accordance with the approved site plan, evidencing a good faith effort to diligently pursue construction to completion in accordance with completion dates noted on the approved plans.
C;\Documents and Settings\willc\Local Settings\Ternporary Internet Flles\OLK28\914 08(1}.rtf 1 13 ORDINANCE NO. 2009-__
SECTION 4. CODIFICATION
It is the intention of the Board of County Commissioners that the provision of this ordinance shall become and be made part of the Indian River County Code, and that the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered arid the word ordinance may be changed to section, article or such other appropriate word or phrase in order to accomplish such intention.
SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY
If any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, then said holding shall in no way affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall be effective and deemed filed when a certified copy has been accepted by the postal authorities of the Government of the United States for special delivery by certified mail to the Florida Department of State.
The Clerk to the Board shall mail the certified copy of the ordinance to the Department of State as soon after enactment as practicable.
This ordinance was moved for adoption by Commissioner ______seconded by Commissioner ______, and adopted by the following vote:
Wesley S. Davis, Chairman Joseph E. Flescher, Vice Chairman Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Commissioner Peter D. O'Bryan Commissioner Bob Solari
The Chairman thereupon declared the ordinance duly passed and adopted this __ day of _____, 2009.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:.~--,---,---,-----c-c---- Wesley S. Davis, Chairman ATTEST: Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk
By:------Deputy Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM ANO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
BY [,J'd ~ J,.,j WiLLIAM G. COLLINS II COUNTY ATTORNEY 14 ORDINANCE NO. 2009-__
MAILING DATE/EFFECTIVE DATE:. ______
ACKNOWLEDGMENT by the Department of State of the State of Florida, this __ day of ______, 2009.
15 LETTERS OF CREDIT PENDING INSPECTIONS/ ~",/ORK NOT COMPLETED - DRAWS?
LOC expires Amount Draw Date
Stoneybrook Farms group Feb. 28, 2009 $154,406,85 Feb. 16, 2009 3-yr warranty - bank sent notice of non-renewal Letter sent to developer requesting alternate security
Indian River Industrial Center March 8, 2009 $71,989.50 Feb. 23, 2009 3-yr warranty - bank sent notice of non-renewal letter sent to developer requesting alternate security
Antilles March 1, 2009 $387,059.84 Feb. 16, 2009 3-year warranty - notice from bank they will not renew LOC Letter sent to developer requesting alternate security
Citrus Springs Village G - sidewalks March 4, 2009 $68,212.50 Feb. 20, 2009 Per Public works - work not completed as of Dec. 2008
The Reserve at Grand Harbor March 15, 2009 $59,029.90 March s, 2009 Utilities maintenance Sent memo to Utilities Dept.for inspection of faci!ities
Pointe West East Village Phase 1 March 19, 2009 $166,900.33 March 10, 2009 Contract for construction - to be completed by Dec. 19, 2007 Per Public Works - work not completed - no request for inspection received
Pointe West East VJUage Phase 1 March 19, 2009 $193,201.25 March 10, 2009 Contract for sidewalks to be completed by Dec. 19, 2008 Per Public Works - work not completed
Revl5ed 02/04/09 16 Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes :->2008->Ch0125->Section 66 : flsenate.gov Page 1 of3 '
Home Select Year: j 206s 2J Session • Committees • Senators • The 2008 Florida Statutes Information Center • Title XI Chapter 125 View Entire Statutes &. Constitution • COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND COUNTY Chapter Video Broadcasts INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS GOVERNMENT
Session: (1) In exercising the ordinance-making powers conferred bys. 1, Art. VIII of the State Constitution, WU#: counties shall adhere to the procedures prescrib_ed herein.
_, LI (Z)(a) The regular enactme_nt procedure shall be as follows: The board of county commissioners at · · - - _ any regular or spec1al meetmg may enact or amend any ordmance, except as provided m Session: l2~o9 3 subsection (4), if notice of intent to consider such ordinance is given at least 10 days prior to said ___ lffl meeting by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the county. A copy of such notice Ch.-irnbf.:r: ISenate j] g shall be kept available for public inspection during the regular business hours of the office of the _ clerk of the board of county commissioners. The notice of proposed enactment shall state the _-~~~pi9J date, time, and place of the meeting; the title or titles of proposed ordinances; and the place or 11111r I places within the county where such proposed ordinances may be inspected by the public. The 2krlf-lJ· i I ~ ~~:~~~:~~l~:~s~r~~~i::d t~~~i~nat~~=~ted parties may appear at the meeting and be heard with Y,w, I 2008 .::J IJ (b) Certified copies of ordinances or amendments thereto enacted under this regular enactment )iW (3) The emergency enactment procedure shall be as follows: The board of county _commissioners at any regular or special meeting may enact or amend any ordinance with a waiver of the notice •~m•a requirements of subsection (2) by a four-fifths vote of the membership of such board, declaring ~lmtCWJP~ that an emergency e:Xists and that the immediate enactment of said ordinance is necessary. However, no emergency ordinance or resolution shall be enacted which establishes or amends the actual zoning map designation of a parcel or parcels of land or changes the actual list of permitted, conditional, or prohibited uses within a zoning category. Emergency enactment procedures for land use plans adopted pursuant to part II of chapter 163 shall be pursuant to that part. Certified copies of ordinances or amendments thereto enacted under this emergency enactment procedure by a county shall be filed with the Department of State by the clerk of the board of county commissioners as soon after enactment by said board·as is practicable. An emergency ordinance enacted under this procedure shall be deemed to be filed and shall take effect when a copy has been accepted by the postal authorities of the Government of the United States for special delivery by certified mail to the Department of State. {4) Or_dinances or resolutions, initiated by other than the county) that change the actual zoning map designation of a parcel or parcels of land shall be enacted pursuant to subsection (2). Ordinances or resolutions that change the actual list of permitted, conditional, or prohibited uses within a zoning category, or ordinances or resolutions initiated by the county that change the actual zoning map designation of a parcel or parcels of land shall be enacted pursuant to the following procedure: http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?App_ mode=Display_ Statute&Search_String=&... 2/9/2009 17 sff PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING FEBRUARY 15 - 21, 2009 AS THE HEALTHY FLORIDIANS INITIATIVE WEEK WHEREAS, a healthy and productive community is essential ti the mission of Indian River County's ability to successfully promote and protect the health 1nd safety of all of its citizens; and i - C' 1 - -·-·a ·.a ... _ ; .J WHEREAS, citizens who are engaged in health promoting h~bits are less likely to develop the chronic conditions of coronary heart disease, stroke, lung cancer, chronic obstructive lung disease and diabetes, all of which are causes of death; and WHEREAS, much of the chronic disease burden is preventable because effective prevention measures exist today to substantially curtail the illnesses, disabilities and unnecessary or early deaths caused by these diseases; and WHEREAS, the implementation of a wellness event can benefit residents by improving their physical health and morale. ·. NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA proclaims February 15 through February 21, 2009 as "Healthy Floridians Initiative" week and encourages our residents to set goals to improve their health and wellness and strive for healthy lifestyles. Adopted this 17th day of February, 2009. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ~IVER COUNTY, FL~DA Wesley~~- S.Davis,Ch ~~½7 e:~~ Bob Solari PROCLAMATION 58 Honoring D. Allen Watters, Jr. upon His Retirement Effective February 19, 2009 WHEREAS, Allen Watters is a native of Indian River County graduating from the Vero Beach High School, and has always been known for his strong sense of community; and WHEREAS, Allen served in the United States Army and graduated from Embry Riddle Aeronautical Institute; and WHEREAS, Allen was hired by the Indian River County Health Department on August 22, 1975, in the Environmental Health Division as a Sanitarian I; and WHEREAS, since that time he received numerous promotions becoming an Environmental Specialist III in 1999, primarily performing site evaluations, issuing permits for onsite sewage disposal systems, and inspecting systems for final approval; and WHEREAS, Allen devoted himself to Indian River County Health Department working as a dependable, conscientious, and knowledgeable employee and with his compassionate manner he put citizens at ease while educating and helping them understand the regulatory process; and WHEREAS, Allen has served the citizens of Indian River County in an exemplary manner for thirty-four years, treating each customer like his neighbor. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the Board expresses its deep appreciation for the dedicated service D. Allen Watters has given to Indian River County over the past 34 years and furthermore extend their heartfelt wishes for success in his future endeavors. Adopted this 17th day of February, 2009. Board of County Commissioners, Indian River County, Florida Wesley S. Davis, Chairman Joseph E. Flescher, Vice Chairman Peter D. O'Bryan Bob Solari Gary C. Wheeler PROCLAMATION HONORING VICTOR HART, SR. WHEREAS, Victor Hart, Sr., known as "chief" by his Bahamian countrymen and family members, was born on January 29, 1931 in Old Bight Cat Island, Bahamas. In 1952, at the age of 22, Victor immigrated to Indian River County under a labor agreement between the American and Bahamian governments with Florida's citrus industry. Between 1953 and 1958, he traveled between Florida and New York as a seasonal worker; and WHEREAS, Victor was a visionary and, innately, a social activist and leader. His personal identity, however, was rooted in an ability to organize people for action. Disheartened by the systematic social injustices imposed upon the Gifford community, Victor, who was not an American citizen, in 1953 collaborated with selected Gifford citizens to organize and found the Gifford Progressive Civic League. The mission of the organization was to address the county's inadequate provision of social services and infrastructure issues such as unpaved roads, contaminated water, improper handling of sewage, and the need of street lights; and WHEREAS, Victor learned of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), which aimed to address the social plight of black people on a national platform. In 1953 he founded and organized the Indian River County Branch of the NAACP as a vehicle to advance his cause of social justice. After becoming an American citizen in April, 1961, he was finally able to become president of this organization in 1963, serving dutifully for forty-six years until his retirement in January,2009;and WHEREAS, Victor also serves as a member of the Gifford Masonic Lodge #347; and on the Boards of the Gifford Health Center; Gifford Youth Activity Center; Florida Partnership for End of Life Care; Juvenile Justice Council; Economic Development Council; Primary Care Public Health Committee; Community Development Block Grant Citizen Advisory Task Force; Florida Community Health Center; and is a deacon in the Friendship Missionary Baptist Church. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the Board recognizes the accomplishments of Victor Hart, Sr., and thanks him for his efforts on behalf of Indian River County. Adopted this 17th day of February, 2009. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA seph . Flescher, Vice Chairman ~7~.w~ ~°lefo2~ Bob Solari 1A FEBRUARY 17, 2009 INFORMATIONAL ITEMS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM To: Members of the Board of County Commissioners Date: February 5, 2009 Subject: 2009 ELECTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL HEARING BOARD CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN From: Darcy Vasilas Commissioner Assistant, District 3 At the February 5, 2009 Environmental Control Hearing Board, the members voted to re-elect Alan Polackwich as Chairman and Steve Snoberger as Vice Chairman of the Environmental Control Hearing Board for the year 2009. No Board action is required. FF:\BCC\Agenda Items\2009\2009 Chairman and Vice Chairman\ECHB - Polackwich and Snoberger.docx 21 CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: FEBRUARY 5, 2009 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WARRANTS AND WIRES JANUARY 30, 2009 THRU FEBRUARY 5, 2009 FROM: DIANE BERNARDO- FINANCE DIRECTOR In compliance with Chapter 136.06, Florida Statutes, all warrants issued by the Board of County Commissioners are to be recorded in the Board minutes. Approval is requested for the attached list of warrants, issued by the Clerk to the Board, for the time period of January 30, 2008 to February 5, 2009. Attachment: DB:MS 22 CHECKS WRITTEN CHECKNBR CKDATE VENDOR AMOUNT 228192 2/2/2009 1 THE GUARDIAN 20,008.74 228193 2/2/2009 1 AMERICAN FAMILY LIFE ASSURANCE CO 13,463.56 228194 2/2/2009 1 ALLSTATE 1,316.53 228195 2/2/2009 1 ALLSTATE 1,163.40 228196 2/2/2009 1 ALLSTATE 926.64 228197 2/2/2009 1 RELIANCE STANDARD LTD 6,904.70 228198 2/2/2009 1 ALPHONSO JONES 488.00 228199 2/2/2009 1 ORANGE COUNTY HOUSING AND 579.70 228200 2/2/2009 1 SANDY PINES 3,626.00 228201 2/2/2009 1 ALL FLORIDA GMAC REAL ESTATE 5,219.00 228202 2/2/2009 1 GERALD T CAP AK 291.00 228203 2/2/2009 1 PAUL CARONE 472.00 228204 2/2/2009 1 CHERYL DOYLE 362.00 228205 2/2/2009 1 EDGEWOOD PLACE (305-113) 1,458.00 228206 2/2/2009 1 GIFFORD GROVES LTD 4,909.00 228207 2/2/2009 1 GRACES LANDING LTD 7,013.00 228208 2/2/2009 1 GINA HODGES 250.00 228209 2/2/2009 1 MICHAEL JACKOWSKI 772.00 228210 2/2/2009 1 PHILLIP G LANGLEY 386.00 228211 2/2/2009 1 TERRY A LAWRENCE 101.00 228212 2/2/2009 1 LINDSEY GARDENS APARTMENTS 12,902.00 228213 2/2/2009 1 MOD INVESTMENTS 1,651.00 228214 2/2/2009 1 RIVER PARK PLACE 12,492.00 228215 2/2/2009 1 RICHARD C THERIEN 1,473.00 228216 2/2/2009 1 WOODS OF VERO BEACH 8,511.00 228217 2/2/2009 1 DAVID YORK.· 494.00 228218 2/2/2009 1 LILLYBYORK 357.00 228219 2/2/2009 1 ST FRANCIS MANOR OF VERO BEACH 1,594.00 228220 2/2/2009 1 SALLIE (WYNN) BLAKE 451.00 228221 2/2/2009 1 KYLES RUN APARTMENTS 7,445.00 228222 2/2/2009 1 BRACKETT FAMILY LTC & PARTNERSHIP 256.00 228223 2/2/2009 1 CHRISTIAN MILLIMAN 545.00 228224 2/2/2009 1 LLONALD E MIXELL 360.00 228225 2/2/2009 1 MELECH BERMAN 364.00 228226 2/2/2009 1 FULCHINI ENTERPRISES INC 315.00 228227 2/2/2009 1 VENETIAN APARTMENTS OF VERO BEACH 459.00 228228 2/2/2009 1 HERMOSA PROPERTIES LLC 361.00 228229 2/2/2009 1 PINNACLE GROVE LTD 2,870.00 228230 2/2/2009 1 THE CLUB OF VERO 9,541.00 228231 2/2/2009 1 FORT PIERCE HOUSING AUTHORITY 716.64 228232 2/2/2009 1 CRAIG & KAREN MERRILL 1,472.00 228233 2/2/2009 1 CHRISTINE SALTER 587.00 228234 2/2/2009 1 HAGGERTY FAMILY LTD 1,077.00 228235 2/2/2009 1 WILLIAM J KEISER & OANH HUYNH 677.00 228236 2/2/2009 l THE PALMS AT VERO BEACH 13,320.00 228237 2/2/2009 1 JODI ZORC 690.00 228238 2/2/2009 1 CLEMENCIA CAMACHO 1,627.00 228239 2/2/2009 1 DAVID AND PATRICIA CONDON 762.00 228240 2/2/2009 1 HILARY MCIVOR 466.00 228241 2/2/2009 1 WALKER CLUB APARTMENTS 962.00 228242 2/2/2009 1 PAULA LANE 435.00 228243 2/2/2009 1 VERO PINES LLC 125.00 228244 2/2/2009 1 WARREN ROBERT BEANS 488.00 228245 2/2/2009 1 DENIS AND NORMA JEAN ROCK 475.00 228246 2/2/2009 1 TCG SONRISE II LLC 447.00 228247 2/2/2009 1 GLENN STRUNK 412.00 228248 2/2/2009 1 PELICAN ISLE 5,183.00 228249 2/2/2009 1 GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS 756.64 1 23 CHECKNBR CKDATE VENDOR AMOUNT 228250 2/2/2009 1 MID FLORIDA RENTALS INC 668.00 228251 2/2/2009 1 LUCY HORNE 442.00 228252 2/212009 1 VEROMA MANAGEMENT 4,304.00 228253 2/2/2009 1 SUNCOAST REALTY & RENTAL MANAGEMENT LLC 3,877.00 228254 2/2/2009 1 OAK RIVER PROPERTIES 417.00 228255 2/2/2009 1 S0NRISE VILLAS 668.00 228256 2/2/2009 1 MICHAEL MAZZARELLA 668.00 228257 2/2/2009 1 JOSERPOMPA 597.00 228258 2/2/2009 1 PATRICIA MACLEOD 494.00 228259 2/2/2009 1 KENNEN COHEN 454.00 228260 2/2/2009 1 INVESTORS REALTY 2,211.00 228261 2/2/2009 1 KING COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY 612.70 228262 2/2/2009 1 SLR PROPERTIES INC 673.00 228263 2/2/2009 1 BOGDAN HYTROS 234.00 228264 2/2/2009 1 COLLETTA DORADO 494.00 228265 2/2/2009 1 NANCY SAUNIER 743.00 228266 2/2/2009 1 EMELE MONCION 729.00 228267 2/2/2009 1 STEPHEN J SHORT SR 536.00 228268 2/2/2009 1 MIKE KANNER 597.00 228269 2/2/2009 1 MICHAEL NOTARIANNI 393.00 228270 2/2/2009 1 SUZANNE MONAGHAN 549.00 228271 2/2/2009 1 ADINA GOLDMAN 480.00 228272 2/2/2009 1 ANCEL BROWN 700.00 228273 2/2/2009 1 HERITAGEVILLASOFVEROBEACH 1,168.00 228274 2/2/2009 1 DONNA FINLAYSON-BROWN 735.00 228275 2/2/2009 1 MAURICE W BROWN 524.00 228276 2/2/2009 1 SAMUEL P N COOK 371.00 228277 2/2/2009 1 CSS BUILDERS INC 312.00 228278 2/2/2009 1 LAzy JLLC 416.00 228279 2/2/2009 1 ANTHONY STEWART 335.00 228280 2/2/2009 1 DEBRA YOUNG 380.00 228281 2/2/2009 1 WINSTON REYNOLDS 892.00 228282 2/2/2009 1 STEPHANIE FOUNTAIN 283.00 228283 2/2/2009 1 WINFRIED AND LESLIE ARENDT 339.00 228284 2/2/2009 1 CEDAR COVE RENTALS PA 627.00 228285 2/2/2009 1 KATHY NYSTROM PROPERTY MGMT 645.00 228286 2/2/2009 1 116 SUTTON PLACE ASSOCIATES LLC 282.00 228287 2/2/2009 1 ROBERT BAILEY 1,281.00 228288 2/2/2009 1 SYLVIA MCNEILL 726.00 228289 2/2/2009 1 NANCY J OUELLETTE 481.00 228290 2/2/2009 1 SKOKIE HOLDINGS INC 441.00 228291 2/2/2009 1 LILIAN N BEUTTELL 421.00 228292 2/2/2009 1 ANGELA GLAD 820.00 228293 2/2/2009 1 ROGER WINSLOW 494.00 228294 2/2/2009 1 LEONA ROCKWELL 289.00 228295 2/2/2009 1 RUTHIE SWAN 527.00 228296 2/4/2009 1 ILLINOIS STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT 142.32 228297 2/4/2009 1 CHAPTER13TRUSTEE 2,373.18 228298 2/4/2009 1 VB FIREFIGHTERS ASSOC 5,760.00 228299 2/4/2009 1 IR FEDERAL CREDIT UNION 58,863.71 228300 2/4/2009 1 COMPBENEFITS COMPANY 358.74 228301 2/4/2009 1 SAN DIEGO COUNTY OFFICE OF THE 132.25 228302 2/4/2009 1 MISDUMICHIGAN STATE 518.85 228303 2/4/2009 1 PENNSYLVANIASCDU 300.00 228304 2/4/2009 1 NEW JERSEY FAMILY SUPPORT CENTER 50.00 228305 2/4/2009 1 INDIAN RIVER CO BOCC 6,651.17 228306 2/4/2009 1 ADMIN FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 299.36 228307 2/4/2009 1 NYS CHILD SUPPORT 195.27 228308 2/4/2009 1 OHIO CHILD SUPPORT 235.39 228309 2/5/2009 1 EVERGLADES FARM EQUIPMENT CO INC 254.30 2 24 CHECKNBR CK DATE VENDOR AMOUNT 228310 2/5/2009 1 CONTECH CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS INC 290.40 228311 2/5/2009 1 PORT CONSOLIDATED INC 29,404.03 228312 2/5/2009 1 STURGIS LUMBER & PLYWOOD 16.47 228313 2/5/2009 1 FLORIDA DETROIT DIESEL ALLISON 15,000.00 228314 2/5/2009 1 GOODKNIGHT LAWN EQUIPMENT INC 99.85 228315 2/5/2009 1 INDIAN RIVER AUTO PARTS LLC 439.40 228316 2/5/2009 1 INDIAN RIVERAUTOPARTSLLC 1,130.66 228317 2/5/2009 1 COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL 538.65 228318 2/5/2009 1 SOUTHERN SEWER EQU!PMENT SALES 5,257.35 228319 2/5/2009 1 TEN-8 FIRE EQUIPMENT INC 8,293.48 228320 2/5/2009 1 FISHER SCIENTIFIC COMPANY 94.86 228321 2/5/2009 1 VERO CHEMICAL DISTRIBUTORS INC 20.80 228322 2/5/2009 1 TOSHIBA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS FLORIDA 197.23 228323 2/5/2009 1 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS 142.38 228324 2/5/2009 1 SCOTTS SPORTING GOODS 129.60 228325 2/5/2009 1 MATRX MEDICAL INC 2,244.00 228326 2/5/2009 1 NORTH SOUTH SUPPLY 775.14 228327 2/5/2009 1 VELDE FORD INC 20.23 228328 2/5/2009 1 SAFETY PRODUCTS INC 274.20 228329 2/5/2009 1 STEW ART MINING INDUSTRIES 19,726.66 228330 2/5/2009 1 DATA FLOW SYSTEMS INC 2,198.70 228331 2/5/2009 1 PARALEE COMPANY INC 400.00 228332 2/5/2009 1 E-Z BREW COFFEE & BOTTLE WATER SVC 102.82 228333 2/5/2009 1 INDIAN RIVER BATTERY 5,138.90 228334 2/5/2009 1 GRAINGER INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY 70.80 228335 2/5/2009 1 INDIAN RIVER OXYGEN INC 377.50 228336 2/5/2009 1 KELLY TRACTOR CO 396.88 228337 2/5/2009 1 COCA COLA ENTERPRISE 354.24 228338 2/5/2009 1 BRIGGS CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT 70.72 228339 2/5/2009 1 PULSAFEEDER c/o TSC-JACOBS 3,713.57 228340 2/5/2009 1 TREASURE COAST REFUSE 674.70 228341 2/5/2009 1 ALPHA HARDWARE 46.85 228342 2/5/2009 1 AMERICAN CONCRETE INDUSTRIES 440.00 228343 2/5/2009 1 F&WPUBLICATIONS 53.84 228344 2/5/2009 1 THE GALE GROUP 120.58 228345 2/5/2009 1 DAVIDSON TITLES INC 13.60 228346 2/5/2009 1 AMERIGAS INC 4,564.31 228347 2/5/2009 1 MARSHALL CAVENDISH CORP 176.29 228348 2/5/2009 1 MIKES GARAGE & WRECKER SERVICE 265.00 228349 2/5/2009 1 DAILY COURIER SERVICE INC 119.00 228350 2/5/2009 1 GAYLORD BROTHERS INC 33.94 228351 2/5/2009 1 APPLE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO 148.81 228352 2/5/2009 1 LABOR FINDERS INC 918.76 228353 2/5/2009 1 ICIPAINTS 854.65 228354 2/5/2009 1 OMNIGRAPHICS INC 231.12 228355 2/5/2009 1 ALLIED ELECTRONICS INC 508.48 228356 2/5/2009 1 SMITH BROTHERS CONTRACTING EQUIP 706.64 228357 2/5/2009 1 DEEP SIX DIVE SHOP INC 89.18 228358 2/5/2009 1 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS, LTD 7,369.77 228359 2/5/2009 1 PETES CONCRETE 600.00 228360 2/5/2009 1 EGPINC 879.10 228361 2/5/2009 1 ALL-RITE WATER CONDITIONING 795.00 228362 2/5/2009 1 VERO BEARING & BOLT 250.87 228363 2/5/2009 1 BRODART COMP ANY 204.75 228364 2/5/2009 1 ACE PLUMBING INC 127.50 228365 2/5/2009 1 PROFORMA IMAGING 26.10 228366 2/5/2009 1 FLORIDA VETERINARY LEAGUE 246.00 228367 2/5/2009 1 ABCO GARAGE DOOR CO 217.50 228368 2/5/2009 1 ALLIED UNIVERSAL CORP 12,892.65 228369 2/5/2009 1 WILSONS PETROLEUM EQU!PMENT INC 530.64 3 25 CHECKNBR CK DATE VENDOR AMOUNT 228370 2/5/2009 1 LAPSCOINC 151.00 228371 2/5/2009 1 CARQUESTAUTOPARTS 1,048.14 228372 2/5/2009 1 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER 49.00 228373 2/5/2009 1 BLAKESLEE MAINTENANCE 710.00 228374 2/5/2009 1 BAKER & TAYLOR ENTERTAINMENT 1,762.92 228375 2/5/2009 1 BAKER & TAYLOR ENTERTAINMENT 319.67 228376 2/5/2009 1 MIDWEST TAPE 1,391.09 228377 2/5/2009 1 BASS CARLTON SOD INC 46.00 228378 2/5/2009 1 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 961.86 228379 2/5/2009 1 LOWES CO INC 1,608.11 228380 2/5/2009 1 GRAPHX PRINTING 392.00 228381 2/5/2009 1 ODYSSEY MANUFACTURING CO 15,479.70 228382 2/5/2009 1 BAKER DISTRIBUTING CO 387.00 228383 2/5/2009 1 SUN BELT MEDICAL 776.92 228384 2/5/2009 1 PALM TRUCK CENTERS INC 244.38 228385 2/5/2009 1 NORTRAX EQUIPMENT CO 140.19 228386 2/5/2009 1 SEBASTIAN OFFICE SUPPLY CO 320.54 228387 2/5/2009 1 HARBOR BRANCH ENVIRONMENTAL LAB INC 2,722.50 228388 2/5/2009 1 JUNIOR LIBRARY GUILD 100.00 228389 2/5/2009 1 PARKS AND SON INC 6,350.42 228390 2/5/2009 1 CITY OF VERO BEACH 69,760.35 228391 2/5/2009 1 CITY OF VERO BEACH 347.85 228392 2/5/2009 1 REXEL 36.73 228393 2/5/2009 1 INDIAN RIVER ALL F AB 1,885.00 228394 2/5/2009 1 AT&T 66.52 228395 2/5/2009 1 AT&T 131.55 228396 2/5/2009 1 AT&T 2,429.40 228397 2/5/2009 1 AT&T 1,926.89 228398 2/5/2009 1 AT&T 69.00 228399 2/5/2009 1 AT&T 361.22 228400 2/5/2009 1 SOUTHEAST STAFFING INC 3,701.80 228401 2/5/2009 1 PETTY CASH 143.25 228402 2/5/2009 1 FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMP ANY 9,592.36 228403 2/5/2009 1 WILBERT SHEPHARD 90.00 228404 2/5/2009 1 JANITORIAL DEPOT OF AMERICA 2,130.50 228405 2/5/2009 1 PUBLIX PHARMACY 55.58 228406 2/5/2009 1 PUBLIX PHARMACY 49.95 228407 2/5/2009 1 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITIES 2,360.02 228408 2/5/2009 1 TOTAL TRUCK PARTS 70.35 228409 2/5/2009 1 FOOTJOY 2,717.54 228410 2/5/2009 1 GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS INC 32,170.19 228411 2/5/2009 1 DUMONTCOMPANY,INC 1,186.50 228412 2/5/2009 1 OFFICE DEPOT BSD CUSTOMER SVC 2,137.10 228413 2/5/2009 1 AMERICAN RED CROSS 64.95 228414 2/5/2009 1 FEDERAL EXPRESS 9.79 228415 2/5/2009 1 CENTRALA/C & REFRIGERATION SUPPLY 16.95 228416 2/5/2009 1 KILPATRICK TURF EQUIPMENT INC 386.50 228417 2/5/2009 1 NATIONAL RECREATION & PARK ASSOC 45.00 .228418 2/5/2009 1 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 509.32 228419 2/5/2009 1 CORPORATION OF THE PRESIDENT 99.00 228420 2/5/2009 1 CALLAWAY GOLF 1,208.25 228421 2/5/2009 1 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT 15,027.98 228422 2/5/2009 1 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT 3,413.28 228423 2/5/2009 1 GOLF MAGAZINE 32.00 228424 2/5/2009 1 TITLEIST 4,937.17 228425 2/5/2009 1 FLORIDA PUBLIC EMPLOYER LABOR 95.00 228426 2/5/2009 1 VERO BEACH COURT REPORTERS 352.50 228427 2/5/2009 1 SPHERION CORP 365.62 228428 2/5/2009 1 GLOBAL GOLF SALES INC 93.60 228429 2/5/2009 1 WASTE MANAGEMENT 1,749.62 4 26 CHECKNBR CK DATE VENDOR AMOUNT 228430 2/5/2009 1 JASON E BROWN 105.00 228431 2/5/2009 1 SASAN ROHAN1 72.00 228432 2/5/2009 1 GERALD A YOUNG SR 80.00 228433 2/5/2009 1 ROBERT KOMARINETZ 472.30 228434 2/5/2009 1 ESRIINC 8,410.00 228435 2/5/2009 1 HENRY SMITH 90.00 228436 2/5/2009 1 INDIAN RIVER FARMS WATER CNTRL DIST 660.00 228437 2/5/2009 1 GENE MILES 198.00 228438 2/5/2009 1 RUSSELL CONCRETE INC 645.00 228439 2/5/2009 1 WESTSIDE REPROGRAPHICS OF VERO BEACH INC 44.46 228440 2/5/2009 1 CHILDRENS HOME SOCIETY OF FL INC 2,750.00 228441 2/5/2009 1 COMCAST 60.00 228442 2/5/2009 1 H & D CONSTRUCTION CO INC 312,053.22 228443 2/5/2009 1 BROWN & CALDWELL 1,748.20 228444 2/5/2009 1 REGATTA CONSTRUCTION LLC 11,565.10 228445 2/5/2009 1 ADVANCED XEROGRAPHICS IMAGING SYS 13,978.98 228446 2/5/2009 1 SUNCOAST AUTO BODY 592.00 228447 2/5/2009 1 LINDSEY GEIB 72.00 228448 2/5/2009 1 TIM GEIB 72.00 228449 2/5/2009 1 C & C ELECTRIC WORKS INC 11,104.00 228450 2/5/2009 1 SOUTHERN GULF WEST CONST INC 384.07 228451 2/5/2009 1 FORT PIERCE HOUSING AUTHORITY 1,108.64 228452 2/5/2009 1 GCR TIRE CENTERS 1,285.92 228453 2/5/2009 1 SCHOOL DISTRICT OF I R COUNTY 1,354.61 228454 2/5/2009 1 SHRIEVE CHEMICAL CO 6,366.56 228455 2/5/2009 1 GATOR'S SOD 100.00 228456 2/5/2009 1 HABITAT FOR HUMAN1TY 65.70 228457 2/5/2009 1 ARCADIS US INC 70,408.30 228458 2/5/2009 1 THE PALMS AT VERO BEACH 758.00 228459 2/5/2009 1 SAL PERO 108.00 228460 2/5/2009 1 ANDRITZ SEPARATION INC 1,062.00 228461 2/5/2009 1 ROWMAN & LITTLEFIELD 111.68 228462 2/5/2009 1 FOX MARINE 1,149.62 228463 2/5/2009 1 FLAGLER CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT LLC 2,794.91 228464 2/5/2009 1 MALCOLM PIRN1E INC 8,878.77 228465 2/5/2009 1 JEAN PETERS 60.00 228466 2/5/2009 1 JESSE VIOLANTE TRUCKING INC 748.02 228467 2/5/2009 1 POLYDYNE INC 2,507.00 228468 2/5/2009 1 THE GRILL PLACE 160.00 228469 2/5/2009 1 TREASURE COAST RAD IA TOR 152.00 228470 2/5/2009 1 SOUTHERN JANITOR SUPPLY INC 805.26 228471 2/5/2009 1 CAPITAL OFFICE PRODUCTS 1,225.68 228472 2/5/2009 1 DICKERSON FLORIDA INC 1,781.21 228473 2/5/2009 1 ETR LLC 958.08 228474 2/5/2009 1 PRIME STAKES INC 237.50 228475 2/5/2009 1 HARCROS CHEMICALS, INC. 2,819.60 228476 2/5/2009 1 GT ,OVER OIL COMPANY INC 30,909.90 228477 2/5/2009 1 STEVE FAISON 54.00 228478 2/5/2009 1 DANELLA NATIONAL INC 366.99 228479 2/5/2009 1 JOE RIVERA 36.00 228480 2/5/2009 1 DANE PFARR 144.00 228481 2/5/2009 1 JACOB GEIB 54.00 228482 2/5/2009 1 BRILLIANCE AUDIO 153.86 228483 2/5/2009 1 1ST FIRE & SECURITY INC 100.00 228484 2/5/2009 1 KENNY CAMPBELL JR 36.00 228485 2/5/2009 1 MILLERS HEALTH MART PHARMACY 83.99 228486 2/5/2009 1 JOSEPH E FLESCHER 26.66 228487 2/5/2009 1 EASY STORAGE INC 60.24 228488 2/5/2009 1 DOROTHY GABBARD 434.00 228489 2/5/2009 1 GERARD CHAMBERS 475.00 5 27 CHECKNBR CKDATE VENDOR AMOUNT 228490 2/5/2009 1 CHRIS COFFEY 50.00 228491 2/5/2009 1 SILVER, MELISSA PATRICIA 18.99 228492 2/5/2009 1 JOHNNY B SMITH 95.00 228493 2/5/2009 1 MARK HEBERLING 90.00 228494 2/5/2009 1 TERRY TANKERSLY 36.00 228495 2/5/2009 1 ADAM PREUSS APPRAISAL SERVICES INC 550.00 228496 2/5/2009 1 VILLAGE WALK SOUTH OF VERO BCH LLC 88.71 228497 2/5/2009 1 CHARLES AWALKER 162i.OO 228498 2/5/2009 1 JESSE MILLIMAN 135.00 228499 2/5/2009 1 EAST COAST TREE CO 4,062:00 228500 2/5/2009 1 PARK GENEALOGICAL BOOKS 25'00 ·.. , 228501 2/5/2009 I NEWMAN WHEELER 31.52 228502 2/5/2009 1 ITT SANITAIRE 22,600.00 228503 2/5/2009 1 APPRAISAL MASTERS INC 1,207.50 228504 2/5/2009 1 ELECTRIC MOTOR SITE 696.29 228505 2/5/2009 1 UP TO CODE INC 11,192.32 228506 2/5/2009 1 ROB MOORE 270.00 228507 2/5/2009 1 DI VOSTA HOMES LP 213.36 228508 2/5/2009 1 CEMEX 1,190.68 228509 2/5/2009 1 MORGAN, ROBERT A & MARIA 30.82 228510 2/5/2009 1 LEMA, CLARA V 41.80 228511 2/5/2009 1 GUARDIAN COMMUNITY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 1,400.00 228512 2/5/2009 1 CHRISTODOULIDES, PARIS 28.48 228513 2/5/2009 1 RENAE CHANDLER 60.00 228514 2/5/2009 1 TREASURE COAST FOOD BANK 120.60 228515 2/5/2009 1 DYER CHEVROLET 115.54 228516 2/5/2009 1 DANA SAFETY SUPPLY 39.84 228517 2/5/2009 1 FIRST CLASS COACH SALES CORP 260.83 228518 2/5/2009 1 K'S COMMERCIAL CLEANING 930.00 228519 2/5/2009 1 SMITH, JULIE BURKE 70.00 228520 2/5/2009 1 CUSTOM PRODUCTS CORPORATION 2,919.00 228521 2/5/2009 1 KARRISSA MORGAN .. 32.50 228522 2/5/2009 1 DRAGON FIRE BY FIE,EMANS SffiELD 3,415.11 228523 2/5/2009 1 THERMAL TECH INC 17,854.00 228524 2/5/2009 1 VAN 2YL, RICHARD H 187.57 228525 2/5/2009 1 CARDIAC SCIENCE CORPORATION 10,844.00 228526 2/5/2009 1 BRIAN CAMPBELL 45.50 228527 2/5/2009 1 CATHY KELLY 91.00 228528 2/5/2009 1 ALMARAZ, ELISABETH 41.67 228529 2/5/2009 1 SIAS, ANNETTE M 43.53 228530 2/5/2009 1 WATSON, KENNETH G 6.15 228531 2/5/2009 1 FITCH, GABRIEL 62.86 228532 2/5/2009 1 RUTKOWSKI, ALLEN 30.85 228533 2/5/2009 1 BECK,BETTY 19.15 228534 2/5/2009 1 COBURN, JOSHUA 30.28 228535 2/5/2009 1 SULLIVAN, IEANNEMARIE & DANIEL 2.80 228536 2/5/2009 1 BATES, HARRY & PATRICIA 16.66 228537 2/5/2009 1 REMAX MASTERPIECE REALTY 39.50 228538 2/5/2009 1 GOBER JR, CHARLES ALLEN 16.38 228539 2/5/2009 1 SWANIGAN, JOYCE 31.08 228540 2/5/2009 1 GRANT, ALBERTA 43.51 228541 2/5/2009 1 SHOGRAN,COURTNEY 68.21 228542 2/5/2009 1 NORTHERN FINANCIAL CORP 73.58 228543 2/5/2009 1 MC CARTY, CRAIG A 33.47 228544 2/5/2009 1 CHANDLER, JUNE 31.44 228545 2/5/2009 1 DWYER, THOMAS E 31.08 228546 2/5/2009 1 DANIEL J MC KENZIE 269.88 228547 2/5/2009 1 KELLIE SIMPSON 105.00 228548 2/5/2009 1 SANDRA K CRAWFORD 621.76 228549 2/5/2009 1 ABBY FAISON 13.00 6 28 CHECKNBR CK DATE VENDOR AMOUNT Grand Total: 1,189,037.39 7 29 WIRES SENT CHECKNBR CK DATE VENDOR AMOUNT 648 1/29/2009 ATLANTIC COASTAL TITLE CORP 96,266.86 649 1/30/2009 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SHERIFF 3,387,401.01 650 1/30/2009 SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS 57,150.05 651 2/2/2009 1 FL RETIREMENT SYSTEM 461,619.47 652 2/5/2009 1 IRS-PAYROLL TAXES 18,221.47 Grand Total: 4,020,658.86 1 30 Office ef Consent Agenda INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ATTORNEY William G. Collins II, County Attorney William K. DeBraal, DeputyCounty Attorney Marian E. Fell, Senior Assistant County Attorney George A. Glenn, Assistant County Attorney MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney~ THROUGH:'°Wflliam G. Collins II, County Attorney DATE: January 12, 2009 RE: FPL Utility Easement for Hobart Tower Site On November 4, 2008, the Board of County Commissioners approved a License Agreement between the County and Global Tower Partners for construction of a replacement tower at Hobart Park. Obviously, electricity is needed to run the equipment stored at the base of the new tower, and Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) has requested an Easement from the County for the necessary electric lines. Attached you will find the Utility Easement requested by FPL. Recommendation: Staff recommends authorizing the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners to execute the Easement so the proper electric lines may be run to the new tower site. WKD/lk Attachment Indian River Co. Admin. Co. Atty. ,PPROVED FOR-~- 11-0q Budget B.C.C M~~~AGEND/\ Dept. COUNTY ATTORNEY ~31 Work Request No. 3335883 EASEMENT This Instrument Prepared By Sec.33, Twp 31 S; Rge 39E Name: Cathy Kemp Parcel I.D. # Co. Name: Florida Power & Light Company Address: 3301 Orange Ave (Maintained by County Appraiser) Ft Pierce Fl. 34947 pg1ofg. Form 3722 (Stocked) Rev. 7/94 The undersigned, in consideration of the payment of $1.00 and other good and valuable consideration, the adequacy and receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, grant and give to Florida Power & Light Company, its licensees, agents, successors, and assigns, an easement forever for the construction, operation and maintenance of overhead and underground electric utility facilities (including wires, poles, guys, cables, conduits and appurtenant equipment) to be installed from time to time; with the right to reconstruct, improve, add to, enlarge, change the voltage, as well as, the _size of and remove such facilities or any of them within an easement 1O feet in width described as follows: ReseNed for Cin:uit Court SEE EXHIBIT "A" A TTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF Together with the right to permit any other person, firm or corporation to attach wires to any facilities hereunder and lay cable and conduit within the easement and to operate the same for communications purposes; the right of ingress and egress to said premises at all times; the right to clear the land and keep it cleared of all trees, undergrowth and other obstructions within the easement area; to trim and cut and keep trimmed and cut all dead, weak, leaning or aangerous trees or limbs outside of the easement area which might interfere with or fall upon the lines or systems of communications or power transmission or distribution; and further grants, to the fullest extent the undersigned has the power to grant, if at all, the rights hereinabove granted on the land heretofore described, over, along, under and across the roads, streets or highways adJoining or through said property. · IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed and sealed this instrument on------~ 2009. Attest: J. K. Barton, Clerk INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FLORIDA BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By ______By: ______Deputy Clerk Print Name: Wesley S. Davis, Chairman (Affix County Seal) Print Address: 1801 2?'h Street. Vero Beach, FL 32960 BCC Approval date 8/19/2008 ::p'°illffi~nWcy: William K. DeBraal, County Attorney (Per Florida Statutes Chapter 125, County document does not require an acknowledgment for recordation.) 32 (V') LEGAL DESCRIPTION• UTILITY EASEMENT \ A STRIP OF LAND FDR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING AN UTILITY EASEMENIT LYING UPON THOSE LANDS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 251, \ 0 50 100 PAGE 265, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA; I SAID LANDS LYING IN SECTI•N 33, T• \vNSHIP 31 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST; \ BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS F• LL•lvS• COMMENCE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE S•UTH\vEST •NE-QUARTER, GRAPHIC SCALE OF THE S•UTH\vEST •NE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE RUN I ( IN FEET ) S89"58'13'\v, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID QUARTER-QUARTER SECTION I LINE, A DISTANCE OF 169.26 FEET FOR A POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE \ RED STICK GOLF CLUB INC. ,a" DEPARTING SAID NORTH LINE RUN S32"48'28'E A DISTANCE OF 255.12 P .1.0. No. FEET; THENCE RUN N57'11 '32'E A DISTANCE OF 5.00 FEET; THENCE RUN 31-39-33-00006-0000-00001.D -~ PER P.8. 16, PG 41 S32'48'28'E A DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET; THENCE RUN S57'11'32'\v A P.O.C. NE CORNER OF THE SW 1/4, OF DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET; THENCE RUN N32'48'28'\v A DISTANCE OF 20.00 \ THE SW 1/4, OF SECT!ON FEET; THENCE RUN N57'11'32'E A DISTANCE OF 5,00 FEET; THENCE RUN \ \~ LINE OF THE SW 1/4, OF 33-31-39 FOUND 4"X4" N32'48'28'\v A DISTANCE OF 261.56 FEET TD A P•INT ON THE NORTH ":• \ \HE SW 1/4, SEC 33-31-39 CONCRETE MONUMENT l LINE OF THE AFORESAID QUARTER-QUARTER SECTION LINE; THENCE RUN S89'58'13"W 169.26' N89'58'13'E, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, A DISTANCE OF 11.89 FEET; TD QH £,,j\ __ h= ~ =-- ---of:!'S- - ---r:/·P· , "=i THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ~ P' -;\OE JV OE V, OE GUY ;;, m CONTAINING, 2,983 SQUARE FEET, 0.07 ACRES, MORE DR LESS. ':~\ ~71 NOTES 'ciio .;;; I 0 1. THIS SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION IS NOT VALID \.JITH• UT THE SIGNATURE AND THE ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL ~ c:)~ OF THE FLORIDA REGISTERED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER NAMED HEREON, ~ ' ef" ~o ~~I"u"'w 2, THIS SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION MEETS OR EXCEEDS ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MINIMUM G) ~ ~ Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator Michael C. Zito, Assistant County Administrator MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners FROM: Joseph A. Baird County Administrator DATE: February 9, 2009 SUBJECT: Authorization for Out of County Travel The County Administrator is requesting authorization to attend the FSBP A National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology February 18 - 20, 2009 in St. Petersburg Beach, Florida. Funding has been approved in account 00120112. Indian River Co ~ved Date Administrator I l Pl l a J1:i. I~~ { , '-- ---. 34 FSBPA Page I of2 National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology February 18-20, 2009 Tradewinds Island Resort St. Petersburg Beach, FL View_ ConfEmmc_ef'rQgram RElgister NQvv! We would like to thank the following conference sponsors: VisitStPeteC/earwater.com Conference Luncheon Conference Note Book and Conference Registration Wednesday Bag 3:00 p.m. Coffee Break COASTAL olsen ENGINEERING a·ssoda1es. me. • Ca,,~lal E<"li)11c...in<'>;j CONSULTANTS '1;4'.!,~ Htm:it;t,n! Stc<>O! J.,1~~-i,,n-,lla. Fl ~?l(J INC J~:'/4i:ltsl- TAYLOR ENGINEERING. IN(. le ~2!'YC~!'!~ !=:?~ Thursday 3:00 p.m. Coffee Break Thursday 10:00 a.m. Coffee Break HU..\llSTON & ..\lOORE ENGINEERS http://www.fsbpa.com/ 2/10/2009 35 FSBPA Page 2 of2 Special One-Day Program for Local Elected and Administrative Officials at Beach Technology Conference We are offering a special one-day program for local elected and general administrative officials at the National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology on Wednesday, February 18, 2009, at the TradeWinds in St. Petersburg Beach. This special program begins at 10:30 AM with uBeaches 101: A Primer or Refresher for Non-Professionals" taught by Dr. Kevin Badge, Olsen Associates, Inc. Afteiward, officials are invited to join FSBPA Director of Governmental Affairs Debbie Flack for a working lunch to discuss the challenges of the 2009 Legislative Session and our mutual strategy on behalf of Florida's beaches. All are further welcomed to attend Wednesday's outstanding opening conference session from 1:00PM-5:10 PM, followed by a welcome reception at 6:30. http://www.fsbpa.com/ 2/10/2009 36 National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology February 18-20, 2009 TradeWinds Island Resorts St. Pete Beach, Florida Wednesday, February 18, 2009 10:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Beaches 101 - A Primer or Refresher for Non-Professionals Kevin Bodge, Ph.D., P.E., Olsen Associates, Inc., Jacksonville, FL OPENING SESSION 1:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. 1:00 p.m. Welcome Debbie Flack, Director of Governmental Affairs, FSBPA, Tallahassee, FL 1:10 p.m. Hurricane Ike: Preliminary Results From a Damage Assessment Team Bob Dean, Department of Civil and Coastal Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 1:40 p.m. Fish Haul Creek Shoreline Restoration and Protection Project, Town of Hilton Head Island, S.C. Christopher G. Creed, P.E., Olsen Associates, Inc. and Scott P. Liggett, P.E., Director of Public Projects and Chief Engineer, Town of Hilton Head Island, SC 2:05 p.m. Commonalities of Small Scale Beach Nourishment Projects Douglas W. Mann, P.E., Coastal Planning &Engineering, Inc., Boca Raton, FL 2:30 p.m. Rehabilitation of Rudee Inlet, Virginia Kevin Bodge, Ph.D., P.E. and Steven Howard, P.E., Olsen Associates, Inc., Jacksonville, FL; Rebecca Francese, Waterway Surveys & Engineering, Ltd., Virginia Beach, VA and Michael Kay, P.E., City of Virginia Beach, VA 2:55 p.m. Professional Exchange Break 3:30p.m. Investigation of Coastal Sediment Budget Methodology With Reference to Section 111 Studies, and Example Case Study at Mattituck Inlet, New York Nicholas C. Kraus, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, Vicksburg, MS and Brian K. Batten, Dewberry, Fairfax, VA 3:55 p.m. Brevard County Multi-Purpose Artificial Surfing Reef Feasibility Study Walker Dawson and Michael Walther, M.S., P.E., Coastal Technology Corp., Vero Beach, FL 4:20 p.m. Regional Analysis for Brunswick County, NC, Beaches and Inlets Michael J. Wutkowski, Greg L. Williams and William A. Dennis, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, NC, and Sophie Munger and Nicholas C. Kraus, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, Vicksburg, MS 37 National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology February 18-20, 2009 TradeWinds Island Resorts St. Pete Beach, Florida Wednesday, February 18, 2009 OPENING SESSION continued 1:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. 4:45 p.m. Long-Term Synthetic Wave Records for Florida's Beaches William R. Dally and Daniel A. Osiecki, Surfbreak Engineering Sciences, Inc., Winter Park, FL 5:10 p.m. Adjourn 6:30p.m. Welcome Reception Location: Exhibit Hall, Banyan Breezeway 38 National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology February 18-20, 2009 TradeWinds Island Resorts St. Pete Beach, Florida Thursday, February 19, 2009 CONCURRENT SESSIONS 8:30 a.m. to 12 noon SESSION A 8:30 a.m. Nearshore Reef Mitigation: Success Stories from Both Florida Coasts Chris Makowski, Andrew Hannes, Stacy Prekel, and Lauren Floyd, Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc., Boca Raton, FL 8:55 a.m. The Past, Present,_and Future of Mitigation Reefs in Palm Beach County, Florida Leanne Welch, Palm Beach County Department of Environmental Resources Management, West Palm Beach, FL 9:20 a.m. Analysis of Nearshore Exposed Hardbottom, Case Study in Singer Island, Florida Marc J. Damon, E.I., Brett Moore, P.E., and Ken Humiston, P.E,, Humiston & Moore Engineers, Naples, FL 9:45 a.m. Port Everglades Inlet Sand Bypass Project, Mitigation for Impacts to Rubble-Dominated Hardbottom Communities Cheryl L. Miller, Coastal Eco-Group, Inc., Ft. Lauderdale, FL, Christopher G. Creed, P.E., Olsen Associates, Inc., Jacksonville, FL, and Stephen H. Higgins, Broward County Natural Resources Planning and Management Division, FL 10:10 a.m. Professional Exchange Break 10:45 a.m. Marine Turtles: Species-Specific Response to Beach Nourishment Robbin N. Trindell and Meghan Koperski, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Tallahassee, FL 11:10 a.m. Real Time Coral Stress Observations Before, During, and After Beach Nourishment Dredging Offshore Southeast Florida, USA Lou Fisher, Ken Banks, and David Stout, Natural Resources Planning and Management Division, Broward County, FL; Dave Gilliam, Richard E. Dodge, and Brian K. Walker, National Coral Reef Institute, Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale, FL; and Bernardo Vargas Angel, Coral Reef Ecology Division, NOAA, Pacific Islands Fisheries Center, Honolulu, HI 11:35 a.m. Littoral Shoreline Change in the Presence of Hardbottom - Approaches, Constraints, and Integrated Modeling Dilip K. Barua, Ph.D., Coastal Technology Corp., Melbourne, FL and Adjunct Professor, Ocean Engineering Program, Department of Marine and Environmental Systems, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL, Michael Walther, P.E., Coastal Technology Corp., Vero Beach, FL, and CliffTruit, P.E., Ph.D., Coastal Technology Corp., Sarasota, FL 12:00 noon Luncheon 39 National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology February 18-20, 2009 TradeWinds Island Resorts St. Pete Beach, Florida Thursday, February 19, 2009 CONCURRENT SESSIONS 8:30 a.m. to 12 noon SESSION B 8:30 a.m. Engineering Analysis, Field Measurements and Delft3D Numerical Modeling to Select Inlet Management Alternatives at Wiggins Pass, Collier County, FL Lindino Benedet, Stephen Keehn, P.E., and Raphael Bonanata, Coastal Planning & Engineering Inc., Boca Raton, FL 8:55 a.m. Process-Based Models: Tools for Coastal Analysis on Timescales of Tides to Centuries Dr. Edwin Elias, Deltares, Netherlands and the US Geological Survey, Santa Cruz, CA 9:20 a.m. Beach Response to Hurricanes in the Florida Panhandle Emmett R. Foster, P.E., Florida State University, Beaches & Shores Resource Center, Tallahassee, FL 9:45 a.m. Inlet Evolution Modeling of Multiple Inlet Systems, Application Case Studies in Sou thwest Florida Mohamed A. Dabees, Ph.D., P.E., Brett Moore, P.E., and Ken Humiston, P.E., Humiston & Moore Engineers, Naples, FL 10:10 a.m. Professional Exchange Break 10:45 a.m. Coastal Analyst: Enhancing the Application of One-Dimensional Wave Height Models for Coastal Flood Hazards Through GIS Guillermo Simon and John Messer, Taylor Engineering, Inc., Jacksonville, FL 11:10 a.m. The Application of Response-Based Methods in Coastal Engineering Claudio Fassardi, Halcrow, Inc., Long Beach, CA 11:35 a.m. Evaluation of Full-Plane and Half-Plane STWAVE Model Results for Coastal Louisiana Christopher Bender, Ph.D., P.E., Taylor Engineering, Inc., Jacksonville, FL 12:00 noon Luncheon 40 National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology February 18-20, 2009 TradeWinds Island Resorts St. Pete Beach, Florida Thursday, February 19, 2009 CONCURRENT SESSIONS 1:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. SESSION C 1:30 p.m. Beach Nourishment Within the Purview of Environmental Limitations Thomas P. Pierro, P.E. and Charles W. Fink!, Ph.D., Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc., Boca Raton, FL 1:55 p.m. Technical Aspects for Designing and Permitting a Project Within a National Park on the South Shore of Long Island, New York Stephen Keehn, P.E. and Quin Robertson, Ph.D., Coastal Planning & Engineering Inc., Boca Raton, FL 2:20 p.m. Using Airborne LIDAR for Benthic Habitat Mapping Charles W. Fink!, Ph.D., Quin Robertson, Ph.D., and Jeffrey L. Andrews, Coastal Planning & Engineering, I~c., Boca Raton, FL, and Scott Ramsay, Tenix LADS, Biloxi, MS 2:45 p.m. A Review of What We Really Know About Sea Level Change Gary T. Mitchum, Ph.D., College of Marine Science, University of South Florida, St. Petersburg, FL and Nicole A. Elko, Ph.D., Department of Environmental Management, Pinellas County, FL 3:10 p.m. Professional Exchange Break 3:45 p.m. Morphology Changes Along the West-central Florida Barrier Islands Predicted by the Coastal Modeling System (CMS) Ping Wang and Tanya M. Beck, Department of Geology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, and Nicholas C. Kraus, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS 4:10 p.m. Long-Term Simulation of Channel Infilling at Pensacola Pass, FL Lihwa Lin, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, Vicksburg, MS, Julie D. Rosati, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District, AL, and Nicholas C. Kraus, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, Vicksburg, MS 4:35 p.m. The Formation and Evolution ofa New Breach at Chatham, MA: Implications for Regional Sediment and Navigation Management in a Multiple Inlet System Donald K. Stauble, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS, Theodore Keon, Department of Coastal Resources, Town of Chatham, Chatham, MA, and William M. Kavanaugh, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, Concord, MA 5:00 p.m. Adjourn 41 National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology February 18-20, 2009 TradeWinds Island Resorts St. Pete Beach, Florida Thursday, February 19, 2009 CONCURRENT SESSIONS 1:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. SESSION D 1:30 p.m. Incorporating Overwash Into the Design of Beach Nourishment Projects Along Uninhabited Barrier Islands Gordon Thomson, P.E., Christopher M. Day, P.E., Lindino Benedet, M.Sc., and Andrew Wycklendt, E.I., Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc., Boca Raton, FL 1:55 p.m. Terrebonne Basin Barrier Shoreline Restoration Project Michael Poff, P.E. and Dr. Michael Stephen, P.G., Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc., Naples, FL, and Dr. Aaron Bass and Robby Cangelosi, P.E., SJB Group, LLC, Baton Rouge, LA 2:20 p.m. The Saraya Islands Development - Creating the Florida Coastline in the Middle East Simon Burchett, Halcrow, Inc., Tampa, FL 2:45 p.m. Key Findings of the Corps Shore Protection Assessment Initiative William R. Curtis, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS and Susan Durden, U.S. Army Engineer Institute for Water Resources, Alexandria, VA 3:10 p.m. Professional Exchange Break 3:45 p.m. Shoreline Management Options With Regional Sediment Management Lesley Ewing, P.E., Californi!Sl Coastal Commission and University of Southern California, San Francisco, CA 4:10 p.m. Initiatives on a Systems Approach to Coastal Protection Donald E. Cresitello, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, Vicksburg, MS 4:35 p.m. Innovative Backpassing Concepts for Wildwood, NJ Brian Bogle and Jeff Gebert, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia District, PA; James E. Clausner, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS; and Richard Binning, J aveler Construction Company 5:00 p.m. Adjourn 42 National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology February 18-20, 2009 TradeWinds Island Resorts St. Pete Beach, Florida Friday, February 20, 2009 CLOSING SESSION 8:30 a.m, to 12 noon 8:30 a,m, Selecting a Stable Beach Material Size for Beach Replenishment using a Pragmatic, Field-Based Approach Kevin Black, Ph.D., Partrac Ltd., Glasgow, United Kingdom 8:55 a.m. Evolution of the Use of Beach Control Structures in Coastal Engineering Andy Schofield, Halcrow, Inc,, Tampa, FL 9:20 a.m. Analysis of Central Miami Beach Erosion and Review of Mitigation Alternatives Gary A. Zarillo, Lee E. Harris and Steven Jachec, Department of Marine and Environmental Systems, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL, and Juan Curiel, Marina Blanco-Pape, and Brian Flynn, Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management, Miami, FL 9:45 a.m. Miami-Dade County 32nd Street Breakwaters Hotspot Engineering Alternatives Design Study and Recommendations Jeffrey Tabar, P.E., PBS&J, Coastal & Waterways Division, Tampa, FL; Marina Blanco-Pape, P.E., Brian Flynn and Juan Curiel, P.E., Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management, Miami, FL; and Todd DeMunda, Lizbeth Childs, P.E., and William Jones, P.E, PBS&J, Coastal & Waterways Division, Tampa, FL 10:10 a,m. Professional Exchange Break 10:45 a.m. The Predictability of Beach Nourishment Sediment Characteristics Melany Larenas, P.G, and Beth Forrest, Ph.D., Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc,, Boca Raton, FL 11:10 a,m, The Florida Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems Statewide Reconnaissance Offshore Sand Search (ROSS) Database Lyle Hatchett, URS Corporation, Tallahassee, FL, Jennifer Koch, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems, Tallahassee, FL, and Melany Larenas, Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc., Boca Raton, FL 11:35 a.m. Coastal Structures Inspection and Assessment Tool Box Cheryl E. Pollock and Stan J. Boe, U.S. Army Engineer Research Center, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, Vicksburg, MS 12:00 noon Conference Adjourns 43 Consent Agenda Indian River County Interoffice Memorandum Office of Management & Budget To: Members of the Board of mmissioners From: Jason E. Brown Director, Office of Manage Date: February 11, 2009 Subject: Miscellaneous Budget Amendment 006 Descriptions and Conditions The attached budget amendment appropriates funding necessary for the following: 1. Each year it becomes necessary to "roll over" certain expenses to the current fiscal year. The attached entry appropriates funding for these projects from fiscal year 2007/2008 to fiscal year 2008/2009. 2. The Florida Department of Labor has invoiced the County for Q/E 12/31/08 unemployment compensation in various departments in the amount of $ 66,560. The attached entry appropriates funding for unemployment compensation from General Fund Contingency in the amount of 21,288, MSTU Fund Contingency for $14,875 and Transportation Fund Contingency for $11,519, Sandridge Golf Fund Contingency for $2,750, County Building Fund Contingency for $12,553, Secondary Roads Cash Forward for $3,300, and Solid Waste District Cash Forward for $275. 3. The Housing Authority is in need of a replacement server. The attached entry appropriates funding of $1,600 from General Fund Reserve for Contingency. 4. The 2009 Florida Police & Fire Games will be hosted by the Treasure Coast. Bid fees will be paid by three counties with Indian River County's portion totaling $15,000. The attached entry appropriates funding from Tourist Tax Cash Forward to the Treasure Coast Sports Commission. 5. Electrical improvements are needed at the Fairgrounds for the Midway at the fair. The attached entry appropriates funding of $25,000 from Fairground Fee Revenue. 6. According to Section 985.686 of the Florida Statutes, Indian River County is responsible for contributing to the financial support of the Department of Juvenile Justice. The County is billed for this expense based upon the estimated number of juveniles, and the total is reconciled at year-end. Additional funds are due to the State based upon the reconciliation for FY 07-08. The attached entry appropriates these funds from General Fund Reserve for Contingency in the amount of$ 126,393. 7. Additional funds have been received from FEMA for Hurricane Frances. The attached entry appropriates funding in the amount of $930 for cleaning services at the local Disaster Recovery Centers. F:\Budget\Jasonlbudget amendments 2008091006 msc ba.doc 44 February 11, 2009 Page 2 8.. Professional services and expenses incurred regarding negotiations with potential Major League Baseball operators at the Dodgertown facility make it necessary to appropriate funding in the amount of $25,000 from General Fund Reserve Contingency. 9. On December 23, 2008, the Board of County Commissioners approved the Energy Conservation Measures 1 through 3 included in the Phase I Technical Audit at a cost of $687,396. The attached entry appropriates the additional funding of $187,396 from Optional Sales Tax Reserve for Contingency. 10. On November 4, 2008, the Board of County Commissioners approved the submittal of the final application to the Florida Green Building Coalition. The attached entry appropriates funding in the amount of $4,000 from the Indian River Green Team donation. 11. In order to remotely broadcast commission meetings, additional equipment is needed. The attached entry appropriates funding the in the amount of $3,000 from General Fund Reserve for Contingency. 12. Developments that are in default of their Contract for Construction of Required Improvements or Contract for Construction of Required Sidewalk Improvements have had their letters of credit drawn and funds wired to Indian River County. These funds are deposited into an escrow account. Then the County completes the required improvements. The attached entry appropriates funding to the respective revenue and expense accounts for each development. 13. Indian River County has been awarded an Emergency Medical Service County Awards Grant. This grant is for improving and enhancing prehospital emergency medical services and will be utilized to purchase various medical equipment. The attached entry appropriates the grant amount of $32,406. 14. On November 18, 2008, the Board of County Commissioners approved the payment of up to one week for excess vacation time over the maximum cap. Additionally, several employees have or will retire within the next three months. The attached entry appropriates funding for these payouts in the amounts of $49,231 from General Fund Reserve for Contingency, $2,682 from MSTU Fund Reserve for Contingency, $31,145 from Transportation Fund Reserve for Contingency, $28,526 from Emergency District Reserve for Contingency, $2,555 from Sandridge Golf Course Reserve for Contingency, $5,274 from Utilities Reserve for Contingency. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Board of Commissioners approve the attached budget resolution amending the fiscal year 2008/09 budget. Attachments Budget Resolution Indian River Coun APPROVED AGENDA ITEM: Administrator Legal Budget Department Risk Management FOR February 17, 2009 F:\Budget\Jasonlbudget amendments 200809\006 msc ba.doc 45 RESOLUTION NO. 2009-__ A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009 BUDGET. WHEREAS, certain appropriation and expenditure amendments to the adopted Fiscal Year 2008-2009 Budget are to be made by resolution pursuant to section 129.06(2), Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County desires to amend the fiscal year 2008-2009 budget, as more specifically set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Fiscal Year 2008-2009 Budget be and hereby is amended as set forth in Exhibit "A" upon adoption of this Resolution. This Resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner ______, and the motion was seconded by Commissioner _____ and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Wesley S. Davis Vice Chairman Joseph E. Flescher Commissioner Peter D. O'Bryan Commissioner Bob Solari Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler The Chairman thereupon declared this Resolution duly passed and adopted this __ day of ______, 2009. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Attest: J. K. Barton, Clerk Board of County Commissioners By ______By ______Deputy Clerk Wesley S. Davis, Chairman COUNTY ATTORNEY F:\Budget\Jason\budget amendments 200809\budget amendment resolution.doc 46 Vr_hibit "A" Resolution No. 2009~ Budget Office Approval: ~"\ l ~/VY y Budget Amendment 006 Jason E Bro7, Budget! lret!or . Entry Account Fund/ DepartmenU V Account Number Increase Decrease Number Name 1. Revenues General Fund/Cash Foiward 001039-389040 $4,812,144 $0 General Fund/Homeland Security Grant 001033-06801 $30,759 $0 M.S.T.U. Fund/Cash Forward 004039-389040 $3,287,000 $0 Impact Fees/Cash Forward 103039-389040 $2,485,060 $0 Impact Fees/lntergovernmental/South County 103033-334710-07028 $200,000 $0 Park Grant #F8138 Secondary Roads/Cash Forward 109039-389040 $19,793 $0 Transportation Fund/Cash Forward 111039-389040 $96,414 $0 Emergency Services Fund/County Awards 114033-334290 $10,384 $0 Grant EMS Emergency Services Fund/HUD CDBG 114033-331209-04027 $709,769 $0 Grant/Fire Station #12 Eri'lergency Services Fund/Cash Forward 114039-389040 $2,184,929 $0 Tourist Tax Fund/Cash Forward 119039-389040 $16,137 $0 Beach Restoration Fund/Cash Forward 128039-389040 $665,990 $0 Beach Restoration Fund/DEP Grant #07IR3/Sectors 1 & 2 Post Construction 128033-334301-08003 $240,774 $0 Monitoring Beach Restoration Fund/NFWF Sea Turtle 128033-331390-07808 $155,730 $0 Habitat Grant Beach Restoration Fund/DEP Wabasso Beach Grant #07IR2/Sector 3 Beach 128033-334303-05054 $342,608 $0 Preservation Beach Restoration Fund/FEMA/Hurricane 128033-331580 $176,865 $0 Frances Intergovernmental Grants/Hud HMIS Grant 136033-331601-07814 $33,151 $0 FL298609003 Intergovernmental Grants/Hud Alcohope TRA 136033-331601-08806 $0 $20,487 Grant #C709005 Intergovernmental Grants/HUD Shelter Plus 136033-331626 $102,240 $0 Grant C309022 F:\Budget\Jason\BudgetAmendmen!s0809\BA 006 2/11/2009 47 1, )lbit "A" Resolution No. 2009- Budget Office Approval: 0 r ✓ ~-/"l . Budget Amendment: 006 Jason E Brow , Budget Director Account Entry Fund/ Department/ Account Number Increase Decrease Number Nam / Intergovernmental Grants/Shelter Plus Care 136033-331601-06813 $61,198 $0 FL29C509001 Intergovernmental Grants/HUD New Horizons 13616364-331601-08802 $0 $21,853 #C709001 Intergovernmental Grants/HUD Shelter Plus 13616364-331601-08805 $0 $29,103 Care Grant #C709004 Intergovernmental Grants/HUD Family 136033-331601-08803 $0 $27,360 Options Grant #B709002 Land Acquisition Fund/FCT Grants 145133-334390-07809 $596,000 $0 Land Acquisition Fund/Cash Foiward 145039-389040 $0 $76,000 Optional Sales Tax/Fund Transfers In 315039-381020 $883,266 $0 Optional Sales Tax/Cash Forward 315039-389040 $13,535,601 $0 Fleet Fund/Cash Forward 501039-389040 $50,000 $0 GlS Fund/Cash Forward 505039-389040 $61,021 $0 Expenses General Fund/Agencies/Piper Incentive 00111059-083002 $4,800,000 $0 General Fund/Communication/Emergency 00110719-066490 $12,144 $0 Management/other Machinery & Equipment General Fund/Emergency 00120825-033190-06801 $29,818 $0 Management/other Professional Services General Fund/Emergency 00120825-034020-06801 $231 $0 Management/Travel General Fund/Emergency 00120825-035430-06801 $710 $0 Management/Tuition/Registration M.S.T.U./Agencies/Piper Incentive 00411059-083002 $3,200,000 $0 M.S.T.U./Recreation/Other Machinery & 00410872-066490 $12,000 $0 Equipment M.S.T.U./Recreation/Computer Software 00410872-035120 $75,000 $0 Impact Fees/Intergovernmental/Brackett 10311371-066510-06047 $885,000 $0 Library Construction Impact Fees/Intergovernmental/Wabasso 10321072-066110-07016 $54,118 $0 Parking Construction Impact Fees/Intergovernmental/Parks/Other 10321072-066390 $24,508 $0 Improvements F:\Budget\Jason\BudgetAmendments0809\BA 006 2/11/2009 4 8 'ibit "A" Resolution No. 2009- ()_ !i, A,i'"\_ Budget Amendment: 006 Budget Office Approval: Jason E Brow , Budget Direc or Account Entry Fund/ Department/ V Account Number Increase Decrease Number Nam Impact Fees/Intergovernmental/Parks/Construction 10320172-066510 $671,434 $0 in Progress Impact Fees/lntergovernmentalffrans 10360121-099210-02043 $1,050,000 $0 Out/Jail Expansion Secondary Roads & 10921441-033490-05008 $13,571 $0 Bridgesrrownship/Section Horizontal Control Secondary Roads & Bridges/NGVD/NAVDBB 10921441-033490-05009 $6,222 $0 Vertical Control Transportation Fund/Road & 11121441-066420 $26,160 $0 Bridge/Automotive Transportation Fund/Road & Bridge/Heavy 11121441-066430 $15,435 $0 Equipment Transportation Fund/Road & Bridge/Other 11121441-066490 $1,819 $0 Machinery & Equipment Transportation Fund/Public Works/GIS 11124319-033490-05075 $12,000 $0 Needs Analysis Study Transportation Fund/Stormwater/Other 11128138-033490 $41,000 $0 Contractual Emergency Services/County Awards Grant 11412022-066910 $10,384 $0 EMS Emergency Services/Fire Rescue/Fire Station 11412022-066510-04027 $709,769 $0 #12 Emergency Services/Fire Rescue/Fire Station 11412022-066510-06036 $65,000 $0 #2 Emergency Services/Fire Rescue/Fire Station 11412022-066510-03027 $1,250,870 $0 #9 Emergency Services/Fire Rescue/Fire Station 11412022-066510-08006 $342,000 $0 #13 Emergency Services!Fire RescuefOther 11412022-066490 $22,026 $0 Machinery & Equipment Emergency Servicesffire Rescue!Other 11412022-066290 $65;379 $0 Buildings Emergency Services!Fire RescuefAutomotive 11412022-066420 $439,654 $0 Tourist Tax/District II/Chamber of Commerce 11914572-088750 $16,137 $0 Beach Restoration Fund/Other Contractual ServicesfSectors 1 & 2 Post Construction 12814472-033490-08003 $543,466 $0 Monitoring Beach Restoration FundfOther Contractual 12814472-033490-04009 $19,710 $0 ServicesfMitigation Reef Monitoring Beach Restoration FundfConstruction in 12814472-066510-05079 $27,398 $0 Progress/Sector 7 Beach Preservation Beach Restoration Fund/other Professional 128144 72-033190-07808 $155,730 $0 Services/Sea Turtle Habitat Improvements Beach Restoration Fund/Construction in 12814472-066510-05054 $646,821 $0 Progress/Sector 3 Beach Preservation F:\Budget\Jason\BudgetAmendments0809\BA 006 2/11/2009 49 ~ ~ibit "A" Resolution No. 2009- /\.~ h,,,-~.-. Budget Office Approval: ---,~(...... ,d: ?1:-c--4='~';";::c=~-/;,;-f.1;,;:__ Budget Amendment: 006 Jason E Brow Budget DireGCor Entry Account Fund/ Department/ J Account Number Increase Decrease Number Nam Beach Restoration Fund/Construction in Progress/Fema Cat "G" Sectors 1 & 2 12814472-066510-05041 $185,708 $0 Renourishment Beach Restoration Fund/Beach Restoration 12814472-033190-06062 $3,134 $0 Plan Update Intergovernmental Grants/Hud HMIS Grant 13616364-08871-07814 $33,151 $0 FL29B609003 Intergovernmental Grants/Hud Alcohope TRA 13616364-036730-08806 $0 $20,487 Grant #C709005 Intergovernmental Grants/Rental Assistance 13617254_036730 $102,240 $0 Payments Intergovernmental Grants/Shelter Plus Care 136 16364-036730-06813 $61, 198 $0 FL29C509001 Intergovernmental Grants/HUD New Horizons 13616364-088871-08802 $0 $21,853 #C709001 . Intergovernmental Grants/HUD Shelter Plus 13616364-036730-08805 $0 $29,103 Care Grant #C709004 Intergovernmental Grants/HUD Family 13616364-088871-08803 $0 $27,360 Options Grant #8709002 Land Acquisition Bond/All Land 14514639-066110 $520,000 $0 Optional Sales Tax/Reserves/Cash Foiward 31519981-099920 $883,266 $0 Optional Sales Tax/Facilities 31522019-066510-03006 $153,849 $0 ManagemenUFiberoptics Optional Sales Tax/Facilities 31522019-066390-08007 $274,902 $0 ManagemenUJail Detention Door Retrofit Optional Sales Tax/Facilities 31522019-066390-08008 $125,000 $0 ManagemenUSheritrs Underground Tanks Optional Sales Tax/Facilities 31522019-066490 $50,392 $0 ManagemenUOther Machinery & Equipment Optional Sales Tax/Facilities 31522019-066510-03012 $25,000 $0 ManagemenUHealth Department Fire Alarm Optional Sales Tax/Facilities 1 _ 31522019-066510-04026 $55,000 $0 ManagemenUHealth Department HVAC Optional Sales Tax/Facilities 31522019-066510-05045 $20,800 $0 ManagemenUJail Rooftop AC Optional Sales Tax/Construction ln 31513371-066510-06041 $200,000 $0 Progress/Brackett Library Optional Sales Tax/Fire Services/Fire Station 31512022-066510-02009 $63,823 $0 #5 Relocation F :\Budget\Jason\BudgetAmendments0809\BA 006 2/11/2009 50 (A \,~bit"A" Resolution No. 2009- Budget Office Approval: "Iv ""'l.------., ~ Budget Amendment: 006 Jason E. Browo/Budget Dire mr Account Entry Fund/ Department/ V Account Number Increase Decrease Number Name Optional Sales Tax/Fire Services/Fire Station 31512022-066510-03027 $538,644 $0 #9 Renovation Optional Sales Tax/Fire Services/Fire Station 31512022-066510-04027 $2,045,038 $0 #12 Construction Optional Sales Tax/Emergency 31520825-066510-05065 $2,200,000 $0 Management/800MHz Optional Sales Tax/Parks/South County Park 31521072-066510-03028 $2,300,000 $0 Optional Sales Tax/Parks/JRC Parks 31521072-066510-05048 $1,079,548 $0 Maintenance Complex Optional Sales Tax/Parks/Wabasso Beach 31521072-066510-06052 $109,818 $0 Park Optional Sales Tax/Landfill/Landfill 31521734-033490-03004 $229,350 $0 Gfoundwater Testing Optional Sales Tax/Facilities Management/other Improvements Except 31522019-066390 $328,527 $0 Buildings Optional Sales Tax/Public Works/Engineering 31524338-033130-06046 $21,970 $0 Sercices/Rockridge Surge Optional Sales Tax/Public Works/Drainage 31524338-066340 $1,107,630 $0 Systems Optional Sales Tax/Public Works/Construction in Progress/Harmony 31524338-066510-04015 $17,921 $0 Oaks Optional Sales Tax/Public 31524338-066510-05057 $275,688 $0 Works/Construction in Progress/Egret Marsh Optional Sales Tax/Public Works!Construction in Progress/North Relief 31524338-066510-06049 $450,000 $0 Canal Optional Sales Tax/Public Works/Construction in Progress/Oslo S. 31524338-066510-06050 $485,000 $0 Relief Canal Optional Sales Tax/Public 31524338-066510-06054 $200,000 $0 Works/Construction in Progress!GIS/NPDES Optional Sales Tax/Public Works/Construction in Progress/Main Relief 31524338-066510-07026 $21,273 $0 Canal Optional Sales Tax/Public Works/Construction in Progress/Rockridge 31524338-066510-08004 $68,552 $0 Disaster Mit. Drainage Optional Sales Tax/Public Works/Construction in ProgressN.L.E. 31524338-066510-99002 $1,013,650 $0 Stormwater Optional Sales Tax/Public Works/Construction in Progress/Gifford 31524338-066510-99003 $11,519 $0 Stormwater Optional Sales Tax/Public Works/Construction in Progress/East IRC 31524338-066510-99004 $62,707 $0 Stormwater FleeWehicle Maintenance/Computer 50124291-035120 $50,000 $0 Software GIS Fund/Other Contractual Services/Aerial- 50510319-033490-08011 $61,021 $0 LIDAR Mapping Project F:\Budget\Jason\BudgetAmendments0B09\BA 006 2/11/2009 51 Resolution No. 2009- Budget Office Approval: {A-)~ Budget Amendment: 006 Jason . Brow Budget Director Entry Fund/ Department/ Account V Account Number Increase Decrease Number Nar 2. Revenues Secondary Roads/Non-Revenue/Cash 109039-389040 $3,300 $0 Forward Oct 1st SWDD/Non-Revenue/Cash Forward Oct 1st 411039-389040 $275 $0 Expenses General Fund/Human 00121164-012150 $275 $0 Services/Unemployment Comoensation General FuridNouth 00121323-012150 $542 $0 Guidance/Unemployme~t Compensation General Fund/Facilities 00122019-012150 $322 $0 Management/Unemployment Comp. Geiieral Fund/Computer 00124113-012150 $3,850 $0 Services/Unemolovment Comoensation General Fund/Clerk of Court/Unemployment 00130013-012150 $13.868 $0 Compensation . General Fund/Mailroom/Un~mployment 00125119-012150 $2.431 $0 Comoensation General Fund/Reserve/Reserve for 00119981-099910 $0 $21.288 Contingency MSTU Fund/Gifford Aquatic 00410572-012150 $2,035 $0 Center/Unemployment Compensation MSTU Fund/Recreation/Unemployment 00410872-012150 $10,101 $0 Compensation MSTU Fund/Ocean Rescue/Unemployment 00411672-012150 $2,739 $0 Compensation MSTU Fund/Reserves/Reserve for 00419981-099910 $0 $14,875 Contingencv Secondary Roads/County 10924441-012150 $3,300 $0 Engineering/Unemployment Compensation Transportation Fund/Road & 11121441-012150 $2,133 $0 Bridge/Unemployment Compensation Transportation Fund/Public 11124319-012150 $590 $0 Works/Unemployment Compensation Transportation Fund/County 11124441-012150 $5,771 $0 Engineering/Unemployment Comp. Transportation Fund/Real Estate 11124741-012150 $3,025 $0 Acquisition/Unemployment Compensation Transporation Fund/Reserves/Reserve for 11119981-099910 $0 $11,519 Contingency SWDD/Landfill/unemployment Compensation 41121734-012150 $275 $0 Sandridge/Admin-Club House/Unemployment 41823672-012150 $2,750 $0 Compensation Sandridge/Admin-Club House/Reserve for 41823672-099910 $0 $2,750 Contingency County Buflding/Building Dept/Unemployment 44123324-012150 $12,553 $0 Compensation County Building/Building Dep/Reserve for 44123324-099910 $0 $12,553 Continoency F:\Budget\Jason\BudgetAmendments0B09\BA 006 2/11/2009 52 ~ibit "A" - R"esolution No. 2009- / ;>._ Budget Office Approval: r -., ':? Budget Amendment: 006 Jasonn .. Bro n, Budget Director j Fund/ Department/ Account Entry ./ Account Number Increase Decrease Number Name 3. Revenues Housing AuthorityNon Revenue/!Transfers In 107039-381020 $1,600 $0 Expenses Housing Authority/EDP Equipment 10722654-066470 $1,600 $0 General Fund/Reserves/Reserve for 00119981-099910 $0 $1,600 Continaenf'\/ General Fund/Reserves/ Transfers Out 00119981-099210 $1,600 $0 4. Revenues Tourist Tax/Non-Revenue/Cash Forward-Oct 119039-389040 $15,000 $0 1st Expenses Tourist TaxfTreasure Coast Sports 1.1914572-088340 $15,000 $0 Commission 5. Revenues General Fund/Misc Revenues/Fairground 001038-369960 $25,000 $0 Fees Expenses General Fund/Parks/Fairground Expenditures 00121072-036750 $25,000 $0 6. Expenses General Fund/Agencies/Department of 00111023-088990 $126,393 $0 Juvenile Justice General Fund/Reserves/Reserve for 00119981-099910 $0 $126,393 Contingency 7. Revenues General Fund/Misc Revenues/Other 001038-369900 $930 $0 Miscellaneous Revenue Expenses General Fund/Facilities 00122019-035290-04037 $930 $0 Management/Hurricane Frances Recovery 8. Expenses General Fund/Office of Budget & 00122913-033190 $25,000 $0 Management/Other Professional Services General Fund/Reserves/Reserve for 00119981-099910 $0 $25,000 Contingency 9. Expenses Optional Sales Tax/Facilities 31522019-066390-09001 $187,396 $0 Management/Energy Conservation lmprov. Optional Sales Tax/Reserves!Reserve for 31519981-099910 $0 $187,396 Contingency F:\Budge1\Jason\BudgelAmendments0809\BA 006 2/11/2009 53 Resolution No. 2009- • l~~'A" Budget Office Approval: 0....-;. ~, ,,,,,. Budget Amendment: 006 Jason E Brow , Budget DirectO!' Fund/ Department/ ' Account Entry v' Account Number Increase Decrease Number Name 10. Revenues SWDD/Misc. Revenues/Reimbursements 411038-369940 $4.000 $0 Expenses SWDD/Recycling/other Professional Services 41125534-033190 $4,000 $0 11. Expenses General Fund/Facilities Management/Comm 00122019-066450 $3,000 $0 Equip-All General Fund/Reserves/Reserve for 00119981-099910 $0 $3.000 Contingency 12. Revenues Transportation/Misc 111038-36994 7 $867.915 $0 Revenue/Reimbursement/Letters of Credit Expenses Transp. Fund/Default Development/Other 11128841-033490-88004 $323.963 $0 Cont Svcs/Eagle Trace Phase 11 Transp.Fund/Default Development/Other 11128841-033490-88015 $32.377 $0 Cont Svcs/Eagle Trace Replat Services Transp. Fund/Default Development/other 11128841-033490-88005 $128,919 $0 Cont SvcsfThe Enclave Transp. Fund/Default Development/Other 11128841-033490-88013 $148,739 $0 Cont SvcsfThe Fountains Transp. Fund/Default 11128841-033491-88013 $80,899 $0 Development/SidewalksfThe Fountains Transp.Fund/Default 11128841-033491-88010 $17.473 $0 Development/Sidewalks/The Enclave Transp.Fund/Default 11128841-033491-88011 $135,545 $0 Develooment/Sidewalks/Stonevbrook 13. Revenues Fire Rescue District/Intergovernmental/EMS 114033-334290 $32,406 $0 County Awards Grant Expenses Fire Rescue District/EMS County Awards 11412022-066910 $32,406 $0 Capital F:\Budget\Jason\BudgetAmendments0B09\BA 006 2/11/2009 54 I Resolution No. 2009- Budget Office Approval: ~ Budget Amendment 006 Jason E Brown Budget1-~£ Directer""" J Entry Fund/ Department/ '-../ Account Account Number Increase Decrease Number Name 14. Expenses General Fund/County Attorney/Regular 00110214-011120 $5,984 $0 Salaries General Fund/County Attorney/Social 00110214-012110 $371 $0 Securitv General Fund/County Attorney/Retirement 00110214-012120 $278 $0 General Fund/County Attorney/Medicare 00110214-012170 $87 $0 General Fund/Main Libi'ary/Regular Salaries 00110971-011120 $3,998 $0 General Fund/Main Library/Social Security 00110971-012110 $248 $0 General Fund/Main Library/Retirement 00110971-012120 $371 $0 General Fund/Main Library/Medicare 00110971-012170 $58 $0 General Fund/Administrator/Regular Salaries 00120112-011120 $3,555 $0 General Fund/Administrator/Social Security 00120112-012110 $220 $0 General Fund/Administrator/Retirement 00120112-012120 $479 $0 General Fund/Administrator/Medicare 00120112-012170 $52 $0 General Fund/Emergency 00120825-011120 $2,778 $0 Management/Regular Salaries General Fund/Emergency 00120825-012110 $172 $0 Management/Social Security General Fund/Emergency 00120825-012120 $597 $0 Management/Retirement General Fund/Emergency 00120825-012170 $40 $0 Management/Medicare General Fund/Parks/Regular Salaries 00121072-011120 $1,548 $0 General Fund/Parks/Social Security 00121072-012110 $96 $0 General Fund/Parks/Retirement 00121072-012120 $156 $0 General Fund/Parks/Medicare 00121012:012110 $22 $0 General Fund/Purchasing/Regular Salaries 00121613-011120 $6,736 $0 General Fund/Purchasing/Social Security 00121613-012110 $418 $0 General Fund/Purchasing/Retirement 00121613-012120 $451 $0 General Fund/Pur.chasing/Medicare 00121613-012170 $98 $0 General Fund/Facilities Management/Regular 00122019-011120 $17,480 $0 Salaries General Fund/Facilities Management/Social 00122019-012110 $1,084 $0 Securitv General Fund/Facilities 00122019-012120 $1,545 $0 ManaQement/Retirement General Fund/Facilities 00122019-012170 $309 $0 Manaaement/Medicare General Fund/Reserves/Reserve for 00119981-099910 $0 $49,231 Continqencv MSTU/Planning & Development/Regular 00420415-011120 $2,278 $0 Salaries MSTU/Planning & Development/Social 00420415-012110 $141 $0 Securitv F :\Budget\Jason\BudgetAmendments0809\BA 006 2/11/2009 55 ~~t"A" Resolution No, 2009- I - Budget Office Approval: (µ,K__/') Budget Amendment: 006 Jason E. Bro n, Budget Di ~or j Entry Fund/ Department/ Account \../ Account Number Increase Decrease Number Name MSTU/Planning & Development/Retirement 00420415-012120 $230 $0 MSTU/Planning & Development/Medicare 00420415-012170 $33 $0 MSTU/Reserves/Reserve for Contingency 00419981-099910 $0 $2,682 Transportation Fund/Road & Bridge!Regular 11121441-011120 $23,922 $0 Salaries Transportation Fund/Road & Bridge/Social 11121441-012110 $1,483 $0 Security Transportation Fund/Road & 11121441-012120 $1,607 $0 Bridge/Retirement Transportation Fund/Road & Bridge/Medicare 11121441-012170 $347 $0 Transportation Fund/Public Works/Regular 11124319-011120 $2,066 $0 Salaries Transportation Fund/Public Works/Social 11124319-012110 $128 $0 Securitv Transportation Fund!Public 11124319-012120 $208 $0 Works/Retirement Transportation Fund/Public Works/Medicare 11124319-012170 $30 $0 Transportation FundfTraffic 11124541-011120 $1,150 $0 EnQineerinQ/ReQular Salaries Transportation FundfTraffic 11124541-012110 $71 $0 Engineering/S6cial Security Transportation FundfTraffic 11124541-012120 $116 $0 Engineering/Retirement Transportation FundfTraffic 11124541-012170 $17 $0 EnQineering/Medicare Transportation Fund/Reserves/Reserve for 11119981-099910 $0 $31,145 Contingency Emergency District/Fire Rescue/Regular 11412022-011120 $24,151 $0 Salaries Emergency District/Fire Rescue/Social 11412022-012110 $1,497 $0 Securitv Emergency District!Fire Rescue/Retirement 11412022-012120 $2,528 $0 Emergency District/Fire Rescue/Medicare 11412022-012170 $350 $0 Emergency District/Reserves/Reserve for 11412022-099910 $0 $28,526 Contingency Sandridge Golf/Clubhouse/Regular Salaries 41823672-011120 $2,170 $0 Sandridge Golf/Clubhouse/Social Security 41823672-012110 $135 $0 Sandridge Golf/Clubhouse/Retirement 41823672-012120 $219 $0 Sandridge Golf/Clubhouse/Medicare 41823672-012170 $31 $0 Sandridge Golf/Reserve/Reserve for 41823672-099910 $0 $2,555 Continaency Utiilties/Customer Service/Regular Salaries 47126536-011120 $3,200 $0 Utiilties/Customer Service/Socia! Security 47126536-012110 $198 $0 Utiltities/Customer Service/Retirement 47126536-012120 $323 $0 Utilities/Customer Service/Medicare 47126536-012170 $46 $0 Utilities/Water Distribution/Regular Salaries 47126936-011120 $1,280 $0 Utilitiies/Water Distribution/Social Security 47126936-012110 $79 $0 F:\Budget\Jason\BudgetAmendments0809\BA 006 2/11/2009 56 INDIAN RNER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM TO: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Directo AND Christopher J. Kafer, Jr., P.E., County Eng in r ';;.,i,/ FROM: Michael O'Brien, P.S.M., C.F.M., County Surveyof/''}v SUBJECT: Work Order No. 1, ARCADIS U.S., Inc. Release of Retainage 43rd Avenue (Oslo Road to 8th Street) Right-of-Way Mapping project DATE: February 6, 2009 CONSENT AGENDA DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS On November 05, 2002, the Board of County Commissioners approved Work Order No. 1 with Lawson, Noble & Webb, Inc. (now Arcadis U.S., Inc.), for Right-of-Way mapping for 43"' Avenue from Oslo Road to 8th Street in the amount of $54,370.00. On September 5, 2006, an Addendum to Work Order No. 1 was approved by the Board of County Commissioners to add aerial photogrammetry and planimetric services to Work Order No. 1 in the amount of $11,690.00 for a total of $66,060.00. Arcadis U.S., Inc. has been paid $49,734.00 to date and we have held $5,526.00 in retainage. The tasks have been completed and Arcadis U.S., Inc. has submitted Invoice No. OR00B649.0001, dated February 5, 2009 requesting release of retainage in the amount of $5,526.00. RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING Staff recommends approving payment of Invoice No. ORO0B649.0001, dated February 5, 2009 in the amount of $5,526.00. Funding is approved and available from the following: A/C No. 109206000-03016 $3,088.30 Gas Tax Secondary Roads 43rd Avenue Right of Way Maps A/C No. 102206000-06055 $2,437.70 Traffic Impact Fees Construction Program 43rd Ave - 12th St to Oslo 4 Lane Release of Retainage ATTACHMENTS Arcadis U.S., Inc. Invoice No. OR00B649.0001, dated February 5, 2009 DISTRIBUTION lnd0ian River Coun Arcadis U.S., Inc. Administration APPROVED AGENDA ITEM Bud et Le at Public Works F; ngineering\Capital Projects\0138-Annual Survey Contract 2002-2003\0318 Addendum 43rd ave WO No. 1 Arcadis 9-5-06\0138 BCC 57 Agenda ARCADIS ADDENDUM to WO #1 Release of Retainage.doc February 5, 2009 faARCADIS Project No. OR000B649 Infrastructure, environment, faci/it/"5 Retainage Invoice Indian River County Board of Commission Attn: Mr. Christopher J. Kafer, Jr. P.E. 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 Project No. PS649021.0000 Retaina e Due Inv No Date Amount 0044086 12/31/02 $421.47 0044963 03/31/03 506.01 0045367 04/30/03 831.02 0046626 07/31/03 151.85 0047235 09/17/03 376.79 0047633 10/15/03 801.16 0164477 12/12/06 1,169.00 0229289 10/03/08 1,268.70 Total Amount Due $5,526.00 Please Remit to: ARCADIS U.S., Inc. Lockbox 90054 7 Dept 547 Denver, CO 80291 58 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Joseph A. Baird, County Administra r THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Directo"---__,,,,w-- FROM: Clifford Suthard, Project SUBJECT: Wabasso Beach Park Restoration; Project No. 0822 Bid Number 2008070 Change Order No. 3; Repairs to Lifeguard Station; Ocean Gate General Contractors Inc. DATE: February 9, 2009 CONSENT AGENDA DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The Board of County Commissioners has awarded the construction contract for the restoration of Wabasso Beach Park to Ocean Gate General Contractors based on bids received on April 9, 2008. The work is ongoing and is approximately 55% complete. Since the construction contract was bid and awarded, it has become necessary to include this additional work in the scope of the contract in order to property complete the project. Consequently, this Change Order amends the contract and compensates the contractor for the extra work. No additional time is added to the contract completion date with this change order. The work includes the relocation of the existing lifeguard stand from the original contracted location to another location, repairs to the station, the addition of access stairs, and connections to the electrical and phone service. The project was originally bid including the relocation of the existing lifeguard station to a position that was determined based upon permit conditions and design of the restored park facilities. With the first move the station needed repairs. Subsequently, the Recreation Department requested an alternate location. This second move resulted in the need for additional repairs. Consequently, the determination to relocate the station and the necessity to make the repairs was made after the contract was awarded, which, accordingly, requires this change order. This item has been reviewed by the appropriate consultant and recommended for implementation per his signature on the document. Further, County staff has reviewed applicable portions of this change order and agree with the proposal. The total cost for this change, together with bond, overhead, and profit cost, is $10,696.64. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING It is recommended that the attached Change Order No. 3 be approved and the Board's Chairman authorized to sign same, so the contractor can be directed to make the changes. F:\Public Works\Cllff Suthard\Wabasso Beach Park\CONSTRUCTION\CHANGE OROERS\CHANGE ORDER #3\Agenda Memo CHANGE 59 ORDER NO 3.doc This contract is being funded by FEMA grant reimbursement; however, this change order is not grant eligible. Funding for this change order will be from the MSTU reserve.for contingency. The expense will be paid out of the MSTU Fund/Parks/Other Improvements Except Buildings 00421072-066390. ATTACHMENT Change Order No. 3 & Attachments DISTRIBUTION Indian River Coun Jim Davis P.E. Director of Public Works Administration Jason Brown, Director of Management & Budget Cliff Crawford, Director of Recreation Ocean Gate General Contractors Inc. Division APPROVED AGENDA ITEM :,~&)"~ F:\Public Works\Cliff Suthard\Wabasso Beach Park\CONSTRUCTIONICHANGE ORDERS\CHANGE ORDER #3\Agenda Memo CHANGE 60 ORDER NO 3.doc CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 DATE OF ISSUANCE: ___ EFFECTIVE DATE: ___ OWNER: Indian River County CONTRACTOR: OCEAN GATE GENERAL CONTRACTORS INC. Project: WABASSO BEACH PARK RESTORATION OWNER's Bid No. 2008032 OWNER's Project No. 0612 ENGINEER: Indian River County You are directed to make the following changes in the Contract Documents: 1. Description: Relocate and Repair Existing Life Guard Station Including Stairs, Electrical, and Phone Service: Reason: The project was originally bid including the relocation of the existing lifeguard station to a position that was determined based upon permit conditions and design of the restored park facilities. With the first move the station needed repairs. Subsequently the Recreation Department requested an alternate location. This second move further resulted in the need for additional repairs. Consequently the determination to relocate the station and the necessity to make the repairs was made after the contract was awarded, which accordingly requires this change order. ADDITION to the Contract Price = $9,550.57 2. Description: Contractor's Bond, Overhead, and Profit Costs: ·Reason: To provide an amount for the contractor's overhead management and profit cost at 10% and bond premium cost of 2% ADDITION to the Contract Price = $1,146.07 The summary change in Contract Price is: Item 1 ...... $ 9,550.57 Item 2 ...... $ 1,146.07 NET ADDITION to the Contract Price ...... $10,696.64 Attachments: Contractor's Work Sheets for Above Items CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE Descrintion Amount Orininal Contract Price $858 200.44 Net Increase from previous Channe Order No. 1 & 2 $55,928.97 Contract Price orior to this Chanae Order: $914 129.41 Net increase of this Chance Order: $10,696.64 Contract Price with all approved Change $924,826.05 Orders: ··-·····---·· ...... -•--···----·--· ...... _·_ ...... -Wabasso-Beach.Rark.Restoration .. Change Order #3 - Page 1 of 2 F:\Public Works\Cliff Suthard\Wabasso Beach Park\CONSTRUCTIONICHANGE ORDERS\CHANGE ORDER #3\Change Order Form#3.doc 61 CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIME Descriotion Time Date OriQinal Contract Time for Final Completion: 210 calendar davs 4/20/2009 Net change from previous Chanoe Order No. 1 & No.2 30 calendar davs N/A Contract Time for Final Completion prior to this Chanoe Order: 240 calendar davs 5/20/2009 Net increase this Change Order for Final Completion: NONE ---- Contract Time for Final Completion with all annroved Chanae Orders: 240calendar davs 5/20/2009 ACCEPTED: (Name and Ti e) Date: Date: APPROVED: By: ENGINEER (Signature) OWNER (Signature) James Davis, P.E., Indian River Wesley S. Davis County Director, Public Works Chairman, Board of County Commissioners Date: o ;..- l l - ..2 o09 Date: Wabasso Beach Park Restoration Change Order #3 - Page 2 of 2 F:\Public Works\Cliff Suthard\Wabasso Beach Park\CONSTRUCTION\CHANGE ORDERS\CHANGE ORDER #3\Change Order Fann #3.doc 62 ~beriff DERYL LOAR • INDIAN RIVER COUN1Y MEMBER FLORIDA SHERIFFS' ASSOCIATION MEMBER OF NATIONAL SHERIFFS' ASSOCIATION 4055 41st AVENUE VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960-1808 PHONE (772) 569-6700 February 11, 2009 Mr. Joe Baird, County Administrator Indian River County 1840 25th St Vero Beach, Florida 32960 RE: Notice of Request to be placed on the February 17. 2009' Board of County Commission Agenda Dear Mr. Baird, Please allow this letter to serve as a request to be added to the Constitutional Officers and Governmental Agencies portion of the February 17, 2007 BCC agenda. Indian River County Sheriffs Office is applying for the Victims of Crime Act (YOCA) Grant. This grant, if approved, will provide funds to cover the salary for one Victim Advocate within the Victims Assistance Unit here at the Sheriff's Office. IRCSO has utilized this grant for several years in an effort to provide all crime victims within the county, no matter jurisdiction, assistance and guidance during their time of need. The total dollars earmarked for this year's grant is $54,935.00 ($43,948.00 VOCA funding and $10,987 local In-Kind match). The application, along with the Indian River County Finance Office grant fonn, is included with this request. Should you have any questions, please contact Planner, Kimberly Poole, at 772-978-6214. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, < Deryl Loar, Sheriff Indian River County DL/kmp Enclosure cc: file The 173rd Internationally Accredited Law Enforcement Agency Accredited by the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Incorporated 63 2009-2010 VOCA GRANT APPLICATION Part 1. APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of Agency Indian River County Sheriffs Office The Applicant agency is the legal name of the agency that is seeking VOCA funding. Enter the name as it should appear on a contract in the event the agency receives VOCA funding. '------' Name of Agency DlrectorlLD_e...:ryc.I_L_o_ar______.....1 Prefix (Mr., Ms., Dr., etc.).______..... Titlel Sheriff Area Code/Telephone NumberlL7_72:.•.:..56:..:9_-6:.7..cO..:..O ______, Fax Numberl772-589-8144 Mailing Addressl4055 41st Avenue (Street, Post Office Box or Drawer) '------' CitylVero Beach State I Florida Nine-Digit Zip Code ...I3_2_96_0_-1_8_0_2 ______, Contact Information: Person who can answer questions about this application: ContactPersonLIK_im__.;:.be.:..r~lyc.P_o.:..o:..le.:______, Contact Email Addressleko~o~ol~•@~1~·,cs~h~•~riff~.o:':1:!rg~------J Contact Telephone Number!L7_72=--.:..97:...8:...-6.:..:2:..:1_4 ______, Contact Fax Number.__17_72::.-..:.5.:..69:..-..:.8..:..144.:______..... I acknowledge that I have read, understand, and agree to the conditions set forth in the Victims of Crime Act Grant Application, Instructions and the Final Program Guidelines for the duration of the grant period. I certify that any VOCA grant funds that this Agency might receive will not be used to supplant any state and local funds that would otherwise be available for crime victim services. Further, I certify that the information contained in this application is true, complete and correct. Signature of Agency DirectoM = b /:'.:\, Date of Signature.______--' Page 1 64 PART 2. AGENCY ELIGIBILITY 1. Identify which of the following categories best describe the applicant agency: Public • Private nonprofit or a combination private nonprofit/public agency, must provide a photocopy of agency's 501 (C)3 ruling which verifies the agency's status as a registered nonprofit organization (required for new VOCA applicants ONLY). 2. Describe the type of implementing Agency (Choose only one category): 0 Criminal Justice - Government (choose one from the drop-down menu): ILaw Enforcement Describe Other:!.______~ D Noncriminal Justice - Government (choose one from the drop-down menu): I Describe Other:._! ______, D Private Non-Profit (choose one from the drop-down menu): I Describe Other.IL. ______, D Native American Tribe or Organization (choose one from the drop-down menu): I Describe Other:L.! ______. 3. Judicial Circuit to be served: (refer to list on page 9) 119 -Nineteenth 4. List Counties to be served: Indian River, St. Luice, Maritn, Okeechobee 5. List the Congressional District(s) served (*up to 5 allowed, statewide projects note "99") 15 6. Describe the purpose of the proposed VOCA project (choose one from the drop-down menu): Continue a VOCA funded victim project funded in a previous year 7. Funds will primarily be used to (choose one from the drop-down menu): Continue existing services to crime victims 8. Is the applicant organization faith-based? (choose one from the drop-down menu): NO Page 1 65 Part 3. FUNDING SOURCE CHART In the following table, provide the amount of funding that is allocated to victim services in your agency for the current fiscal year by funding source. Do not report the agency budget unless the entire budget is devoted to victim services. For example, if VOCA funds are awarded to support a victim advocate unit in a prosecutor's office, then report the budget for the victim advocate unit only. Round amounts to the nearest dollar. Include all expenses which are budgeted for your victim services program (i.e., personnel costs which include salaries for directors, clerical/support staff, victim advocates, counselors, etc.; training costs; equipment such as computers, fax machines, printers, copiers, telephones, and furnishings, etc.; operating costs such as utilities, postage, printing, office supplies, travel, counseling supplies, etc.). Contact your agency's finance or budget office for assistance in completing this information. Please note: Do not i.nclude in-kind match. Funding Source Current Fiscal Federal Funding (excluding VOCA) 'Describe below Current Year VOCA (excluding match), if applicable $ 38,214 State Funds Local, Public or Private Funds $ 78,985 Other: (Describe at right) $ 117,199 •• For the Judicial Circuit you are requesting funding with this application *If the applicant agency currently receives federal funding for victim services other than VOCA funds, indicate the source(s) and the use of those funds (Response is limited to 1000 characters): N/A Page 1 66 PART 4. VICTIMS SERVED AND TYPES OF SERVICES Indicate the number of victims projected to be served by type of victimization: Note: Indicate the number of victims served by VOCA-funded and matching funds though the grant period. Each victim should be counted only once, i.e., a victim of spouse abuse assaults should be counted more than once onlv as a result of a seoarate and unrelated crime. # of Victims to be # of Victims to be Type of Victim Type of Victim Served Served 5 Child Physical Abuse 10 Survivors of Homicide Victims 3 Child Sexual Abuse 50 Robbery 5 DUI/DWI Crashes 70 Assault 350 Domestic Violence 1 Child Victims of Cvbercrime 3 Adult Sexual Assault 3 Victims of Child Pornography 5 Elder Abuse 5 Innocent Victims of Gang Violence 3 Adults Molested as Children 1,877 Other (subtotal from section below) For other types of crimes, identify and list each separately ----- List other "•nes of crimes below at right. The subtotal of this section will appear above next to 11 other." 575 Bumlarv, Auto I Residential 300 Batteru 400 Stolen Vehicle / Theft 50 Stalkina 350 Criminal Mischief 200 Scams I Fraud 2 Kidnanning / Missina Indicate the number of victims who are projected to receive the following service (see Definitions on page 7 for description of each service). # of Victims to be # of Victims to be Type of Service Type of Service Served Served 300 Crisis Counseling 5 Criminal Justice Support/Advocacy 1,500 Follow-up Contacts 0 Emergency Financial Assistance 0 Therapy 2 Emergency Legal Advocacy Assistance Filing Compensation 0 Support Groups 2,000 Claims - Mandatorv Requirement 0 Crisis Hotline Counseling 250 Personal Advocacy 0 Shelter/Safehouse 500 Telephone Contacts Information and Referral 2,700 0 Other (subtotal from section below) (In-Person) For other types of service, identify and list each separately --**-* List other hones of services below at right. The subtotal of this section will appear above next to "other." TOTAL VICTIMS SERVED: 2.390 Page 1 67 Part 5. STATEMENT OF NEED Statement of Need: Please answer the following questions. Responses are limited to 1000 characters. Minimum 1O point font. 1. Using the information checked under Part 4 - Victims Served and Types of Services, briefly describe the specific need for VOCA funds or the deficiency of services to victims. The Indian River County Sheriffs Office Victim Assistance Program provides first responder crisis intervention and follow-up services 24 hours a day through the use of three (3) full-time position and Nine (9) volunteers. Currently, one of the three full-time positions is funded by VOCA; the other two positions are funded through the Sheriff's Office annual budget. The loss of this VOCA funding for the additional full-time position would create a tremendous hardship on the program and create a deficiency of service to victims. These victims suffer far more trauma than statistics can begin to show. Add to that the additional struggle of the financial hardship, an intimidating criminal justice system, and a confusing administrative process, and soon the emotional trauma is overwhelming. 2. Provide information on crime statistics for the service area. 2008 Crime Statistics - Murder 4, Forcible Sex Offenses 46, Robbery 64, Aggravated Assault 213, Burglary 1470, Larceny 2,069, Motor Vehicle Thefts 115, Domestic Violence 410. Total UCR Index Offenses - 3,240. Total Property Value Stolen - $5,403,749 3. Does a duplication of service exist? (choose one from the drop-down menu): I NO If yes, please explain. Page 1 68 4. Provide information on geographic characteristics of the proposed service area. --:-.,.,...-,,---,----,-.,..---,;---, Indian River County comprises of 543 square miles, 504 of which are within the unincorporated portion served by the Indian River County Sheriff's Office. Currently 28% of the county is considered Urban Service Area. Indian River County is located along the east coast of Florida approximately 80 miles east of Orlando Florida, approximately 11 O mile south of Daytona Beach Florida and approximately 75 mile North of West Palm Beach, Florida. 5. Describe the population of the proposed service area. State the population as a number. 2008 County population figures reached 142,919. These population figures do not include the part-time retirement residents or the ever increasing number of commuter that continue to visit our regional malls and commercial business district. Page2 69 PART 6. PROJECT PROPOSAL The information provided by the applicant under Part 6 - Project Proposal pertains only to the services related to the proposed Total VOCA Project (VOCA grant plus match). Respond to each question. Responses are limited to 1000 characters. Minimum 10 point font. 1. Project Summarv: Using the information marked under Part 4 - Victims Served and Types of Services, describe in detail how the services indicated will be provided to the victims indicated. The Indian River County Sheriffs Office (IRSCO) fully expects to provide the------,----. necessary direct services and referrals that are required of a first responding agency. Our Agency (IRCSO) will continue to provide victims assistance to all Law Enforcement agencies in the county. The Indian River County Victim Assistance Unit refers all Child Abuse (Physical and Sexual) to age appropriate counselors to ensure the best treatment possible. Victims of DUI are carefully guided through the legal process, transitioning to the State's Attorney Office Victims Advocates. The victims of Domestic Violence are carefully educated about power and control and transitioned to Safe Space Councilors. Elder Abuse, though the numbers are small, is a hidden problem. Homicide, Robbery and Assault vicitms/survivors are guided through counciling and the victim compensation process. 2. How many victim advocates/ direct service providers, does your agency staff? 3.00 Expressed in Full Time Equivalents (FTE) Of those, how many are you requesting from VOCA? 1.00 Expressed in Full Time Equivalents (FTE) Of those, how many are you reporting as matching expenses? 1.00 Expressed in Full Time Equivalents (FTE) Total Number of VOCA project staff (VOCA funded staff + Match staff) 2.00 3. Provide information about other agencies who will coordinate services with the applicant. Indian River County Sheriffs Office Victim Assistance Unit works closely with------~ a variety of service providers throughout the county, including the State Attorney's Office, SAFE SPACE, and the Mental Health Association, making referrals to appropriate services. SAFE SPACE provides domestic violence shelters and counselors for victims. The State Attorney's Office provides a smooth transition from first response through the court system. The Indian River County Victims' Rights Coalition provides victims awareness in legal rights for victims, as well as being a support system. Indian River County Council of Community Service is a strong network of all agencies working with victims of crime. The Council of Community Services also reviews available services and identify voids in those services. Page 1 70 4. Describe in detail how the coordination of services will be accomplished. Include a description of those services to all victims checked in Part 4. IRSCO Victim Assistance Unit works closely with the State Attorney's Office, SAFE SPACE, and the Mental Health Association, making referrals to appropriate services. SAFE SPACE provides domestic violence shelters and counselors for victims. The State Attorney's Office provides a smooth transition from first response through the court system. The Indian River County Victims' Rights Coalition provides victims awareness in legal rights for victims, as well as being a support system. Indian River County Council of Community Service is a strong network of all agencies working with victims of crime. The Council of Community Services also reviews available services and identify voids in those services. The Victim's Assistance Program has a strong network with all law enforcement agencies in the county working with victims of crimes. Local resources have made significant strides in addressing the needs of victims 5a. Victim Compensation Assistance: The Final Program Guidelines mandate that grant recipients provide assistance in filing victim compensation claims. Refer to the definition in the application instructions. Describe how the proposed project will meet this mandatory requirement. Each case is assessed for services needed including the possibility of eligibility for victim compensation. Contact is made with the victim in person, by telephone, or in written form, explaining the availability of victim compensation and discussion about making application of eligibility. When applicable, direct assistance in completing the application form and filling is done by the Victim's Assistant/Advocate. The original packet is completed (including a copy of the case report) and mailed directly to the Office of the Attorney General, a copy is given to the victim, and a copy is kept with the Victim's Assistant/Advocate for follow-up. The Victim's Assistant/Advocate will continue to follow-up and monitor the process of the application, as needed. Page2 71 Sb. If applicable, provide a justification for not billing Victim Compensation for services that may be funded through Victim Compensation. For example, therapy services. Many times we offer victim compensation to victims and we get no response. There are also times when we offer victim compensation to eligible victims and they are not interested. They will reply" I would rather leave those benefits for someone that really needs it". 6. Use of Volunteers: The Final Program Guidelines mandate that grant recipients use volunteers. Under this subheading describe how volunteers will be utilized. The Sheriff's Office is committed to the utilization of volunteers and considers it a significant part of this program and its success to date. This commitment has led to the development and implementation of a formal volunteer training academy. The Academy is held as needed to maintain a viable and effective volunteer force. The academy is a thirty (30) hour training course, complete with a manual of pertinent information and resources. Various levels of responsibility are given to volunteers based in their performance and progress. A portion of the training involves shadowing with a full-time staff advocate until proficiency reaches that of the advocate. Monthly meetings are held with volunteer staff for training, updates on service providers, problem solving and debriefing of past cases. These volunteers handle calls just as our paid advocates, just on lower priority cases. 7. Identify the number of volunteers currently utilized in the Victim Services Program. This number must be expressed in full time equivalent(s). 8.00 Volunteers provide 4,355 Hours of service annually 2.09 FTE equivalent (hours provided divided by 2080) Page3 72 8. Do the activities described in the application (Part 6. - Project Proposal) specifically serve ES child victims of Cybercrime, victims of child pornography, or innocent victims of gang • violence through therapeutic counseling services? If so, describe this component of the proposed VOCA project in detail. Please note the agency applying for funding must be the service provider. Indian River County Sheriff's Office Advocates will refer all victims of the above mentioned crimes to the Indian River County Mental Health Association for all therapeutic counseling services. Page4 73 PART 7. CERTIFICATION REGARDING DEBARMENT Instructions for Certification 1. By signing and submitting this proposal, the prospective lower tier participant is providing the certification set out below. 2. The certification in this clause is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was entered into. If it is later determined that the prospective lower tier participant knowingly rendered an erroneous certification, in addition to other remedies available to the Federal Government, the department or agency with this transaction originated may pursue available remedies, including suspension and/or debarment. 3. The prospective lower tier participant shall provide immediate written notice to the person to which this proposal is submitted if at any time the prospective lower tier participant learns that its certification was erroneous when submitted or has become erroneous by reason of changed circumstances. 4. The terms "covered transaction," "debarred," "suspended," "ineligible,' "lower tier covered transaction," "participant," "person,' "primary covered transaction," "principal," "proposal," and ''voluntarily excluded," as used in this clause, have the meanings set out in the Definitions and Coverage sections of rules implementing Executive Order 12549. 5. The prospective lower tier participant agrees by submitting this proposal that, should the proposed covered transaction be entered into, it shall not knowingly enter into any lower tier covered transaction with a person who is debarred, suspended, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this covered transaction, unless authorized by the department or agency with which this transaction originated. 6. The prospective lower tier participant further agrees by submitting this proposal that it will include the clause title "Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion-Lower Tier Covered Transactions," without modification, in all lower tier covered transactions and in all solicitations for lower tier covered transactions. 7. A participant in a covered transaction may rely upon a certification of a prospective participant in a lower tier covered transaction that it is not debarred, suspended, ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from the covered transaction, unless it knows that the certification is erroneous. A participant may decide the method and frequency by which it determines the eligibility of its principals. Each participant may check the Non-procurement List. 8. Nothing contained in the foregoing shall be construed to require establishment of a system of records in order to render in good faith the certification required by this clause. The knowledge and information of a participant is not required to exceed that which is normally possessed by a prudent person in the ordinary course of business dealings. 9. Except for transactions authorized under paragraph (5) of these instructions, if a participant in a covered transaction knowingly enters into a lower tier covered transaction with a person who is suspended, debarred, ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction, in addition to other remedies available to the Federal Government, the department or agency with which the transaction originated may pursue available remedies, including suspension and/or debarment. Page 1 74 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion Lower Tier Covered transactions (Sub-Recipient) This certification is required by the regulations implementing Executive Order 12549, Debarment and Suspension, 28 CFR Part 67.510. Participants' responsibilities. The regulations were published as Part VII of the May 26, 1988 Federal Register (pages 19160 B 19211). 1. The prospective lower tier participant certifies, by submission of the proposal, that neither it nor its principals are presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction by any Federal a department or agency. 2. Where the prospective lower tier participant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this proposal. IDeryl Loar, Sheriff I Name and Title of Authorized Representative I I~Signatu~ Zt - Date IIndian River County Sheriffs Office I I Name of Organization 4055 41st Avenue, Vero Beach, Florida 32960-1802 Address of Organization Page2 75 Part 8. VOCA BUDGET REQUEST The Budget section is an itemized description by budget" category of proposed costs for VOCA funding. The budget categories are: personnel, contractual services. equipment and operating. Provide a detailed (itemized) list and narrative for every budgeted item. See Final Program Guidelines for specific details regarding Allowable and Non-Allowable Costs. Attach additional pages as necessary. To maximize the availability of services to all crime victims, the OAG discourages the use of VOCA funding to provide services that are eligible for payment through the Victim Compensation Program. Justification that demonstrates the effectiveness of any such duplication is required as part of the budget narrative. Failure to submit a justification may result in removal of the budget request. Budget categories must be rounded to the nearest whole dollar (i.e., $8,081.43 = $8,081 or $8,081.78 = $8,082). Budget Summary By Category - Provide the subtotal for each budget TOTALVOCA category for the Total VOCA Budget Request. Amounts must be BUDGET rounded to the nearest whole dollar. REQUEST Personnel $ 43,948 Contractual Services Equipment Operating Expenses TOTAL $ 43,948 . REQUIRED MATCH (use this total amount in Part 9 •.Match Budget) $10,987 Page 1 76 Part 8. VOCA PERSONNEL BUDGET REQUEST Provide a job description for all proposed VOCA-funded staff and indicate the percentage of time by each job duty. The job description must reflect VOCA allowable activities that are equal to or greater than the percentage of the position that is VOCA funded. Personnel: Total Actual Cost Total Amount VOCA Funded Percentage VOCA Position Requested (from chart below) 2009-201 O Funded Victim Assistant/Advocate $ 43,948.00 $ 43,948.00 100.00% #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0I Subtotal $ 43,948 Pay schedule (choose one from the drop-down menu): ,._j___ .....;;b..;.i-..;.w;..;ee=k;.,.IY ___ __,I Complete the table below for each position requested (adding additional pages if necessary). In the explanation section indicate if the salary/benefit expenses listed include costs that are anticipated during the 12 month period. For example, raises and increases in benefit costs. RA TE: A percentage should be indicated for those benefits that are calculated by using a percentage of the gross salary, e.g., retirement is often calculated in this manner. FR (flat rate) should be indicated for those benefits that are calculated based on a flat rate regardless of salary, e.g., health insurance is often calculated in this manner. Position Requested: Victim Assistant/Advocate Position Re uested: Hours per week = 40 Employer Hours per week = Employer Hourly Rate= $ 15.20 Cost Hourly Rate = Cost Annual Gross Salary $ 31,616 $ 31,616 Annual Gross Salary $ FICA 2,419 FICA $ Retirement 3,130 Retirement $ Health Ins. 6,540 Health Ins. Life Ins. 0.004 $ 117 Life Ins. Dental Ins. Dental Ins. Workers Comp 0.004 $ 126 Workers Comp $ Unemployment (1st $7K) $ Unemployment (1ot $7K) $ Other (provide explanation Other (provide explanation below): below): 43,948 Page 1 77 Position Requested: Position Requested: Hours per week = Employer Hours per week = Employer Hourly Rate= Cost Hourly Rate = Cost Annual Gross Salary $ $ Annual Gross Salary $ $ FICA $ FICA $ Retirement $ Retirement $ Health Ins. Health Ins. Life Ins. Life Ins. Dental Ins. Dental Ins. Workers Comp $ Workers Comp $ Unemployment {1st $71<) $ Unemployment (1st $71<) $ Other (provide explanation Other (provide explanation below): below): TOTAL $ TOTAL $ Explanation (if apelicable): Exolanation (if applicable\: I Position Re uested: Position Requested: Hours per week = Employer Hours per week = Employer Hourly Rate= Cost Hourly Rate - Cost Annual Gross Salary $ $ Annual Gross Salary $ $ FICA $ FICA $ Retirement $ Retirement $ Health Ins. Health Ins. Life Ins. Life Ins. Dental Ins. Dental Ins. Workers Comp $ Workers Comp $ Unemployment (1st $7K} $ Unemployment {1st $7K) $ Other (provide explanation Other (provide explanation below): below): TOTAL $ TOTAL $ Explanation /if aoplicable): Exolanation (if applicable\: Page2 78 Part 8. VOCA CONTRACTUAL BUDGET REQUEST For each contractual service listed, include a description of the service to be provided, the business name of the contractor, the cost per unit of service, and the estimated units of service to be used. Indicate in the narrative section how the number of services requested was d(!!termined. Also, give a description of a unit of service, e.g., a 60 minute individual therapy session, a 90 minute group therapy session. Attach additional page if needed. EXAMPLE - Budget Narrative/Justification for not billing Victim Compensation: Therapy, Inc., will be utilized to provide therapy for adult survivors of incest. Typically adult survivors of incest are beyond the filing deadline for Victim Compensation. It is anticipated that this service will be used approximately 10 ti mes during the year. Contractual Services - Contracts for specialized services: Cost Per Unit of Estimated Units of Name of Business or Contractor Total Service Service 1 $ - 2 $ - 3 $ - 4 $ - 5 $ - Subtotal ...... $ - Budget Narrative: 1. N/A 2. 3. 4. 5. Page 1 79 Part 8. VOCA EQUIPMENT BUDGET REQUEST Items included in this section must be furniture and/or equipment costing $1,000 or more. If awarded funds in this category, prior approval is required before purchasing items. Provide a justification for the equipment purchase requests (refer to the Final Program Guidelines on 'Advanced Technologies"). Attach additional pages if needed. EXAMPLE - Narrative Response: The computer will increase the advocate's ability to reach and better serve crime victims. The cost listed above is for a complete computer package which includes the computer, monitor, software and printer. EauiDment: Description Number Cost Per Item Total 1 $ - 2 $ - 3 $ - 4 $· - 5 $ - Subtotal ...... $ - Budget Narrative: 1. N/A 2. 3. 4. 5. Page 1 80 Parts. voe A OPERATING BUDGET REQUEST Office suppli es such as paper, pencils, toner, printing, books, postage, transportation for victims; monthly service costs for telephone or utilities; staff travel (for direct service to crime victims only), etc. Furniture and equipmentcosting less than $1,000 should be requested from this budget category. In the narrative section, provide a bri ef description of the operating expenses and note if the cost is pro-rated. Indicate how the number and cost of services requested was determined. Attach additional page if needed. EXAMPLE- Narrative Response: The Victim Advocate will need monthly telephone service calculated at $20 per month which is the standard rate budgete d for new positions in this agency. Operating E xpenses; Description Number Cost Per Item Total 1 $ 2 $ 3 $ 4 $ 5 $ 6 $ 7 $ 8 $ Subtotal $ Budget Narrative; 1. N/A 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Page 1 81 Part 9. VOCA MATCH BUDGET Program Match: The Final Program Guidelines require that all proposals provide a 20 percent match of the total VOCA project. Total VOCA Project is defined as the VOCA Budget Request plus the Program Match. Match funds are subject to the same restrictions that govern VOCA grant funds, i.e., the source of program match must be a VOCA-allowable expenditure. To determine the amount of match required by the Final Program Guidelines for the proposed VOCA project, divide the total amount of the VOCA Budget Request by four. The result is the amount of the program match. For example, if the VOCA Budget Request is $30,000, then divide $30,000 by four which equals $7,500. In this case, the required match is $7,500 which equals 20 percent of the total VOCA project. The following further illustrates the program match requirement: $30,000 VOCA Budge Request + 7,500 Required Program Match ($7,500 equals 20% of the total VOCA Project) $37,500 Total VOCA Project Allowable match funds may include, but are not limited to, volunteers, staff salaries, rent, equipment, operating costs, etc. Federal funds from other sources cannot be used for VOCA match. Match used for the VOCA project cannot be used as match for any other grant. Do not over report match, i.e., do not provide match in excess of 20% of the total VOCA project. Match may be provided as either cash or in-kind or a combination of cash and in-kind as follows: Cash Match: A cash match is any cost component that is included in the agency's overall budget as it applies to the provision of direct services for victims of crime (i.e., staff providing direct victim services, travel related to the delivery of direct victim services, rent paid by the agency for the portion of the program providing direct victim services, etc.). If the agency pays for the expense, then it may be used as a cash match. In-Kind Match: An in-kind match includes donated items or services that benefit the program but which do not have a dollar value assigned for budgeted purposes. For example, programs may use volunteer hours as match. The value placed on donated services must be consistent with the rate of compensation paid for similar work in the applicant agency. If the required skills are not found in the applicant agency, the rate of compensation must be consistent with the labor market. Programs may use items donated by other programs or individuals as in-kind match (i.e., rent and utilities used for the provision of direct services to victims and donated by another source outside the agency). The Program match section is an itemized description by budget category of proposed matching contributions. The budget categories are personnel, contractual services, equipment and operating expenses. Provide a detailed (itemized) list and a budget narrative for each budgeted category. Indicate the funding source and indicate if it is a cash or in-kind match. Do not over report required match. Unless otherwise approved by the OAG, reported match must be consistent with the monthly reimbursement request. Match Narrative - Describe in detail the type of Maleh, whether cash or in-kind, the budget category, etc. Submit the same detailed information for match as provided for VOCA funded items (i.e., if match is in Personnel for paid staff complete the table below (attach additional pages if needed) and provide the total salary & benefits and percentage. Job descriptions are required for all paid staff and/or volunteers reported as a Match. Failure to provide VOCA allowable job descriptions may result in a reduction to your request. Page 1 82 EXAMPLES- Match Narrative: Our agency utilizes volunteers who provide direct services to crime victims such as intake clerks, clerical (types reports and calls victims) and victim advocates. The agency anticipates using volunteers at the equivalent of 20 - 23 hours per week x 52 weeks x $5.15 for a match of $5,698.* Only those agencies with an established volunteer component will be eligible to utilize volunteers as match. The agency rents office space from the Global Company at $14,400 annually and the agency's pro rated portion for office space for volunteers and supervisor of the victim advocate would be approximately 19% (or $234 per month) x 12 months= $2,807. Approximately 5% of the Victim Advocate Supervisor position will be utilized to provide supervision for the victim advocate position. The supervisor's total salary and benefits equal $32,000. Funding Source Cash or In- Budget Program Match Description May not be derived from Match Amount Category Federal Dollars kind 1 Victim Assistant/Advocate Local Funds CASH Personnel $ 10,989 2 3 . 4 5 TOTAL $ 10,989 Match Narrative: 1. Indian River County Sheriffs Office will utilize a non-VOCA funded victims assistant/advocate as its match in personnel. 2. VOCA Match= $43,94814 =$10,987 3. Job Description for Match postion labeled as MATCH POSITION 4. 5. Page2 83 Match Position: Victim Assistant/Advocate Match Position: Hours per week = 4 Reported Hours per week = Reported Employer Employer MATCH= RATE MATCH= Cost Cost 25.00% Hourly Rate = Annual Gross $ 31,616 $ 7,904 Annual Gross $ $ $ Salary Salary FICA 2,419 $ 605 FICA $ $ Retirement 3,130 $ 782 Retirement $ $ Health Ins. 6,540 $ 1,635 Health Ins. $ Life Ins. 0.004 $ 126 $ 32 Life Ins. $ Dental Ins. $ $ Dental Ins. $ Workers Comp 0.004 $ 126 $ 32 Workers Comp $ $ Unemployment $ $ Unemployment $ $ (1st $71<) (1st $7K) Other (provide $ Other (provide $ explanation explanation below): below): TOTAL $ 43,958 $ 10,989 $ - $ Exelanation (if aeelicable): Exolanation (if annlicablel: I Page3 84 JOB SPECIFICATION TITLE: Victim AssistanUAdvocate VOCA Position Victim Assistance Unit Criminal Investigations Division Indian River County Sheriff's Office FUNCTION: The primary job function is to provide approved direct services, and to provide infonnation on available services and referrals when appropriate to victims of crime in accordance with State Statutes, Grant Contracts, and IRCSO Policies and Procedures. To act as a liaison for victims with the criminal justice system and social service agencies available on a nationa~ state, and local level. The immediate supervisor is the Victim Assistance Coordinator of the Victim Assistance Program. CRITICAL TASKS: I. 60% Respond to crime scenes or other locations of victims in crisis situations to meet with the victims or victims' survivors to provide crisis intervention and referral to appropriate social service agencies. In non-crisis situations, make contact with victims by telephone, in person, or by mail as appropriate and in accordance with the IRCSO Victim Assistance Program. 2. 25% Provide the victim and/or other persons related to the victim with emotional and/or physical support in accordance with the Victim Assistance Program. 3 . .5% Inform and instruct crime victims when necessary on the workings of the criminal justice system and providing victims with information that will help them in understanding the course their case may be taking. 4. 10% Responsible for submitting data and crime victim reports detailing work activities. 5. 0% Perform victim assistance program assignments and special projects as assigned by immediate supervisor. 6. 0% Review cases as directed by immediate supervisor. 7. 0% Serve as IRCSO liaisons with local, state and national victim service organizations as directed and approved by immediate supervisor. 8. 0% Assist in recruiting and training volunteers to work in the victim assistance program, as directed by immediate supervisor. MAJOR WORK CHARACTERISTICS: 1. Must know applicable federal, state and local laws pertaining to victims' rights and the policies and procedures of the Indian River County Sheriff's Office and local Criminal Justice System. 2. Must be familiar with local services and alternative resources available to ensure victims receive assistance in recovering from the harm they have endured as a result of the crime. 3. Must know crisis intervention techniques to provide effective communication and support to victims who have suffered through traumatic experience. 4. Must complete and submit appropriate forms for compensation as required by applicable source. 85 5. Must demonstrate to victims a sincere attitude, genuine and concerned. 6. Must be self-directed and creative in assisting victims with solving problems, through suggestions and referrals, which were created or exacerbated by the related crime or by the events related to the case being investigated, prosecuted, or disposed. 7. Must be able to rotate on a 7 day/24hours call out schedule for responding to crisis situations. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: PREFERRED: I. Bachelors Degree in Criminal Justice or a related field. 2. Prior experience in Victim Assistance/Advocate field. 3. Experience working in the Criminal Justice System or one of the local, state, and/or federal social services agencies available to crime victims. REQUIRED: I. Associate Degree in Criminal Justice or a related field, or; a high school graduate or GED with two years work experience in providing direct victim services. 2. Must attend and complete Victim Assistance training course as administered by the IRCSO prior to or within six (6) months after appointment. 3. Possess a valid Florida Driver's license. KNOWLEDGE, ABILITIES and SKILLS: Knowledge of crisis intervention techniques. Knowledge of grieving process techniques. Ability to be proficient in active listening skills. Ability to communicate effectively verbally and in writing. (Case management) Ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with others. Ability to concentrate on projects. Ability to maintain a high level of motivation, and innovation. Willingness to work long and unusual hours. Ability to maintain high ethics. Ability to maintain high level of confidentiality. THE VOCA FUNDED Victim Assistant/Advocate position is 100% VOCA allowable. The MATCH Victim Assistant/Advocate position is being reported as 25%. 86 G RANT NAME: Victims of Crime Act (VOCA- Continuation grant) GRANT# AM OUNT OF GRANT: $43,948.00 DE PARTMENT RECEIVING GRANT: Indian River County Sheriff's Office coNTACT PERSON: _ _,K,,,i,.,m"'beaer!!l:x.v_,:P.,,o,,ol,ae~,P"'lwan!!!nwe I. How long is the grant for? __l,_,_Y.::e:::ar ______Starting Date: October I, 2009 2. Does the grant require you to fund this function after the grant is over? Yes X No 3. Does the grant require a match? Yes No If yes, does the grant allow the match to be In-Kind services? X Yes No 4. Percentage of match to grant _.,2"'5 ______.,,,% 5. Grant match amount required...;$>-LJIO.i.:,98<>.11..Qu,Q,______ 6. Where are the matching funds coming from (i.e. In-Kind Services; Reserve for Contingency)? In-Kind Services 7. Does the grant cover capital costs or start-up costs? ____Yes X No lfno, how much do you think will be needed in capital costs or start-up costs: $ 0.00 (Continuation Grant) (Attach a detail listing of costs) 8. Are you adding any additional positions utilizing the grant funds? ____Yes ~Xa...... _N,o If yes, please list. (If additional space is needed, please attach a schedule.) Acct. Description Position Position Position Position Position 0 11.12 Regular Salaries 31,616 0 11.13 Other Salaries & Wages (PT) . 0 12.11 Social Security 2,4 I 9 (FICA) 0 12.12 Retirement - Contributions 3,130 012.13 Insurance - Life & Health 6,657 0 12.14 Worker's Compensation 126 0 12.17 S/Sec. Medicare Matching TOTAL 43,948 9. What is the total cost of each position including benefits, capital, start-up, auto expense, travel and operating? Salary and Benefits Operating Costs Capital Total Costs 43,948 0.00 0.00 43,948 IO. What is the estimated cost of the grant to the county over five years? --,$.a.3.Ll1,.,,,.28 .. 0J.JOwQ,______ Other Match Costs Not Covered Match Total First Year $0 $ 10,987 $ 54,935 Second Year $0 $ 12,072 $ 58,627 Third Year $0 $ 12,796 $ 62,144 Fourth Year $0 $ 13,564 $ 65,873 Fifth Year $ 14,953 $ 70,401 Sig Date: February l 0, 2009 87 PUBLIC HEARING SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE (QUASI-JUDICIAL) INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM TO: Joseph A. Baird; County Administrator Development Director THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP; Planning Director FROM: Mark Zans; Senior Planner, Current Development DATE: January 27, 2009 SUBJECT: Hattie Roberts' Request for Special Exception Use Approval for a Child Care Facility to be known as Roberts Family Day Care [SP-SE-09-01-05 / 2001100060- 63106) It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of February 17, 2009. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS Coastal Technology Corporation has submitted an application for special exception use approval on behalf of Hattie Roberts for a child care facility at 865 23rd Place S.W. The site contains an existing single-family residence and a small child care operation, and is located on the south side of 23 rd Place S.W., south of Highlands Drive. The subject site is zoned RS-6, a zoning district in which special exception use approval is required for child care facilities. Currently, there is a single family residence totaling 1,076 square feet on the site. The applicant proposes to use 570 square feet of the single-family residence as the daycare center. In addition to the request for special exception use approval, the applicant has also submitted an application for site plan approval for proposed site improvements associated with the requested child care use. The site plan application has been approved by county staff, subject to Board of County Commissioners approval of the special exception use request. At its regular meeting of January 22, 2009, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve the special exception use with the conditions listed at the end of this report. At this time, the Board of County Commissioners is to make a finding that this application satisfies the general and specific criteria for the requested special exception use, and approve, approve with conditions, or deny the special exception use request for the daycare. Pursuant to Section 971.28(1) F:\Community Development\Users\MARKZ\Docs\P&Z\2009\RobertsHomeDaycare\bccstaffreport.rtf 1 88 of the Land Development Regulations (LDRs), the Board of County Commissioners is to consider the appropriateness and compatibility of the requested use for the subject site and surrounding area. The Board may recommend reasonable conditions and safeguards necessary to mitigate impacts and to ensure compatibility of the use with the surrounding area. ANALYSIS 1. Size of Site: 0.22 Acres ( consists of one platted lot) 2. Zoning Classification: RS-6, Residential Single-Family (up to 6 units/acre) 3. Land Use Designation: L-2, Low Density (up to 6 units/acre) 4. Building Area: 1,076 sq. ft. (570 square feet for daycare) Note: The applicant proposes to convert 570 square feet of an existing single-family residence into a child care center. 5. Impervious Area: Existing: 2787 sq. ft. Proposed: 808 sq. ft. Total: 3,595 sq. ft. Note: The proposed impervious area consists of a circular driveway off 23rd Place S.W. and two parking spaces. 6. Recreation Area: The rear yard of the existing residence will be used as an outdoor recreation area. Around the perimeter of the recreation area, a Type "C" buffer and 6 ft. opaque feature are to be provided. The opaque feature will consist of an existing 6 ft. high wooden fence. Since the existing fence is on the property line, the required buffer landscaping of trees and shrubs are to be planted inside of the fence. 7. Traffic Circulation: The site is proposed to access 23 rd Place S.W. via a one-way circular driveway. The child care facility will also use this driveway to access two parking spaces. The Traffic Engineering Division 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. 8. Off-Street Parking: Required: 3 spaces Proposed: 3 spaces Note: Two parking space& exist on the subject site. One space will be for handicapped use, while the other space will be for the daycare staff member living in the residence. An additional daycare staff space will be located on the adjacent site to the west, which has excess parking area. The owner of that site has provided a written authorization for the exclusive use of the excess space by the child care facility. 9. Concurrency: As required under the county's concurrency regulations, the applicant has applied for and obtained a conditional concurrency certificate for the project. The concurrency certificate was issued based upon a concurrency analysis and a determination F:\Community Development\Users\MARKZ\Docs\P&'lXl.009\RobertsHomeDaycare\bccstaffreport.rtf 2 89 that adequate capacity was available to serve this project at the time of the determination. In accordance with county concurrency regulations, the applicant will be required to obtain a final concurrency certificate prior to issuance of building permits. 10. Landscape Plan: The proposed landscape plan satisfies the LDR landscape requirements for child care facilities. Along the site's 23 rd Place S.W. frontage, a local road landscape strip is to be provided. In addition, Type "C" buffers with 6' opaque features will be provided around the portion of the site's perimeter which is considered to be adjacent to the child recreation area. 11. Utilities: The existing house is currently served by the County Utility Services Department for potable water and sewer. Those services will need to be upgraded by providing a sanitary sewer cleanout and a water line backflow preventer. Prior to C. 0. of the project, the sewer cleanout and water line backflow preventer must be installed. 12. Specific Land Use Criteria: Pursuant to LDR section 971.28(1), the following criteria for child care facilities apply to this project: I. 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: The site is located on 23 rd Place S.W., a paved local roadway with sufficient pavement width to accommodate traffic generated by the proposed use. The site is also located close to Highlands Drive, a collector roadway on the county's thoroughfare system. 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 passenger loading/unloading area will be included as part of the site's one way internal circulation system. No back-up movements for vehicles loading or unloading will be necessary. 3. All regulations ofthe State ofFlorida that pertain to the use as presently exists or may hereafter be amended shall be satisfied; Note: The facility operator will obtain the appropriate license from the State of Florida. 4. Child care facilities shall provide recreation area(s) and facilities that meet or exceed applicable state standards. The applicant shall supply to the planning division, prior to site plan approval, written acknowledgement from F:\Community Development\Users\MARKZ\Docs\P&Z\2009\RobertsHomeDaycare\bccstaffreport.rtf 3 90 the state that the proposed recreation area(s) andfacilities 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: As discussed above, an outdoor playground area is proposed in the rear yard of the existing single-family residence. Planning staff has verified that the proposed facility will meet applicable state standards for recreation. A 6' ft. opaque feature is to be provided along the site's east, south, and west boundaries to screen the proposed playground area from adjacent properties. As approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the 6 ft. opaque feature will consist of an existing wooden fence. A Type "C" landscape buffer is to be planted inside of the fence. The 6' wooden fence will stop at the front of the buildings and will not project into the site's front yard. 5. A Type "C" buffer will be required, acceptable to the planning department. Note: As discussed above, a Type "C" buffer and 6 ft. opaque feature are proposed along the site's east, south, and west perimeters. A local road landscape strip is proposed along the site's north perimeter, which abuts 23 rd Place S.W. This local road landscape strip is comparable to a Type "C" buffer. 13. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: 23 rd Place S.W., Single-family residences I RS-6 East: Single-family residences/ RS-6 South: Single-family residences I RS-6 West: Single-family residences/ RS-6 RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners find 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. 4. The conditions stated below are 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 child care use with the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall : F:\Community Development\Users\MARKZ\Docs\P&Z\2009\RobertsHomeDaycare\bccstaffreport.rtf 4 91 a. install all required buffers, and b. install the required sanitary sewer cleanout and waterline backflow preventer. 2. Prior to site plan release, the applicant shall pay all impact fees and associated S.R. 60 fee. Attachments: 1. Application 2. Location Map 3. Site Plan 4. Landscape Plan 5. Planning & Zoning minutes APPROVED AGENDA ITEM: Indian River Co, Admin. Legal Budget Dept. Risk Mgr. F:\Community Development\Users\MARKZ\Docs\P&Z'0.009\RobertsHomeDaycare\bccstaffreport.rtf 5 92 ('"""\ r·-~: ' "- ,-! ,/,>i_ bi 5 6 7)/ ·'\J .9/4'\ "-, O e:>-:;',0, SPECIAL EXCEPTION SITE PLAN ,{~t i , ~J APPLICATION FORM (SPSE) 1J~.1 >•· ,__, tv :'.:'. COMPUTERASSIGNEDPROJECT#: ZOO\ l Om'=,O -&,'3/0~}, ;ii~§ c;1 ASSIGNED FILE#: {9 -Z,t.{lRo 'ti>,, ', , ~;,· PROJECT NAME (PRINT): rurb fQ ,ti\:~ !,~ ' \½o O'\ie CORRESPONDING PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE PROJECT NAME AND IRC ASSIGNED FILE NUMBER (IF ANY): --SP-$ f o 9 - o t - GS cZ~r.;gimm ¼,_ill e ~beds ArENT:(P~ N~Es 23rd fL s\JJ g~~ttoi~ App_REss a ,nA .,,, V0rr>s B~ . :t=L ~XO IJ£(l():t l:'.1 , cm,. ct_Q t STATE 3 ett>ZrTEt~fu-_g-1"-·5=0-""'<;; __ ZIP PHONE FAXNUMBER &o~N SIGNATURE OF OWNER OR AGENT PRO~CT l;NGIN_EE!_l\· ~RINT) O C. PROJECT ARCHITECT:(PRINT) 1Qd1\ r ii: . ('.\?1 Z I J)o Y:'I t L' v, __-IJIJ--1,.UI--'---\ ______1-1(f'tlces6tveftlAME cf\q,l\ieefnv1 -~~ utet~ uc NAME AD~fE!S 1ll 5 5, t='"llb-i_W _AD_D_RE_S_S ______SeJ).Q01:H1)/\ f-L CITY STATE --~------ZIP PHONE Jf AX }{UMBER C\ ' l FAXNUMBER -\')Q ;;h I rs H,/ g\'{\Ql I (.OIY'i EMAIL E~-~ C ll Erl 41 ft Q·1 -z_ ~ !ba,s1 CONTACT PERSON CONTACT PERSON F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\APPS\spse packet.doc Revised September 2007 12 of 14 ATTACttM!tff ~ I I ' ' ' I CAROt.rNA, CIR SW I I 33393600012000000000.2 i/ TRACT A . I 333936QQOJ6QQQQ0....,u.J.L ! : HIGHLAN'ODRSW HIGHLAND DR SW I HIGHLAND DR. SW 'I I ! ,. ,. __ ?£ ___ 24 20 1' .,. 11 .,. --~------r------+------~------·-·-·· t-·------!------32 -- " " " I RS-6 ~!~· ' ?c / TR,14 ~, Sj 2 l ,. 15 • • 12 I ' ' " ' RS-6 ' " " " i , i I 23RDPL5W I 23RDPt.sw ! ,, I i i .,. 11 1' ,. ,. ,. 24 20 1' I " " " " I ' ,.,, ! I RS-6 i 2 l .,, 12 1' i ' • 14 ' " ' • ' " " ~ ~ s~ ' I 24TH ST SW i i RS-6 ' I " I ,. ,. 13 17 1' ,. 24 ,. ,. ! " " " " " I i ' i I INFORMATIONAL MAP - NOT A SURVEY ne l1tonn;,rl1J1 01 till' m;v, tt.n trcm relL'tl~ .w11Co1;. Location Map ~we~~r. ti; ;ioon;p,.- ~ 1ot91al.l1~t!I. I ~ ATTACH...-"'·. u.arNt ... i 94 ~ r 1 TTTTTTTTTTTTTTicnlnTnTTTrTTrTTTTTTTTTn------T,--~,"~•:)'"::a'~··-~•":0:0 -=:•:---nTn1T7 Wl9i'ON"'fi-"'IIOOJOOjJn>"O DpJJOl.:J Atuno:, Jal\!~ DU[pu1 •Ol'0--&111: ~ul "'J 1m-e1t11 {l:l.l.) 1'1 At[l!:'.ID.::J a..10:, Pl!4:) D(ijf KOU: 1,1 ""D"''P5 JJno:) ''''"I'"& ~I ii 9WOH lit!WD.:1 s:paqo~ Httttt-Httttt1Htttt1imtmrm1111 :nl •~Jl"oS iuµoou1~U3 SfU9W8AOJdw1 7Vl1N30/S3Y 9-SH i:H >ID018 'o;: 101 • ~--- I 7 i!l1 C '!!~~ } r. 1- "~ I! • i i -~'" 'I" ~~s~__ ., c51l:'.Z ·-~,J o">~ "~w • .,~ ~"' g 0 ~ lj "'0 .,z ! J 0 ,! ' -- 'i ~! 'i 71/l1N301S3Y 9-SY Ztl >r.J078 'U 101 I l . . . . . l I ll ... .. I ! I I l I i I I I I l i I ! I I I ''''' 100•'8 '-!IHllHI • 0 ~ e ! " ' • .i : ~ :1 " •• ~ I; '1 ' ;~,;h1111 ~ ~ l ~; "I ~' "'J ~ 0~ i w ,· 0 0 ~ ~!1 0 • z l 6 .,"z ., b i J I -,.---,--:;: ~ ., z N 0 0 0 '° 0 ~ "171 I I ,,;1, '11 1 8 ill !I i AT CHMENT 9ij Approval of Minutes (7:11 :34) ON MOTION BY Ms. Keys, SECONDED BY Mr. Weick, the members voted unanimously (6-0) to approve the minutes of the meeting of December 11, 2008, as presented. Items on Consent (7: 11 :50) Chairman Hamner read the following into the record: A. Dr. Dan's Animal Hospital: Request for Administrative Permit Use Approval for a Veterinary Clinic/Hospital in a Commercial Shopping Center to be known as Dr. Dan's Animal Hospital. CRF Panther IX LLC, Owner. Schlitt Builders, Inc., Agent. Located at 5971 20th Street in a tenant space within the Century Town Center shopping center. Zoning Classification: CG, General Commercial. Land Use Designation: C/1, Commercial/Industrial. (AA-09-03-23 / 2008120496-63413) [Quasi-Judicial] B. 53 rd Street US1 Commercial Subdivision: Request for preliminary plat approval for a commercial subdivision to be known as 53 rd Street/US1 commercial subdivision. Four Dev, LLC, Knight, McGuire & Associates, Inc., Agent. Located at the southwest corner of US Highway 1 and 53rd Street. Zoning Classification: CG, General Commercial. Land Use Designation: C/I, Commercial/Industrial. (SD-08-05- 05/2007090011-61272) [Quasi-Judicial] Chairman Hamner asked the members if anyone wanted to pull any of the above items for discussion and nobody did. 7:12:44 ON MOTION BY Ms. Keys, SECONDED BY Dr. Cox, the members voted unanimously (6-0) to approve the items on the Consent Agenda. Public Hearings (7:12:50) Chairman Hamner read the following into the record: PZC/Unapproved 2 January 22, 2009 F:/BCC/AII Committees/P&Z/2009 Ag&Minutes/P&Z ATTACHMENT $7 A. Roberts Family Day Care: Request for special exception use approval for a child care facility to be known as Roberts Family Day Care. Hattie Roberts, Owner. Coastal Technology Corp., Agent. Located on the south side of 23 rd Place S.W., south of Highlands Drive. Zoning Classification: RS-6, Residential Single-Family (up to 6 units/acre) Land Use Designation: L-2, Low Density (up to 6 units/acre(SP-SE-09-01-05 / 2001100060-63106) [Quasi-Judicial] The secretary administered the testimonial oath to those present who wished to speak at tonight's meeting on this quasi-judicial item. Mr. Stan Boling, IRC Planning Director (7:14:09), reviewed the information contained in his memorandum dated January 6, 2009, a copy of which is on file in the Commission Office. Ms. Keys noted one of the parking requirements was being met by the use of adjacent property, and wondered how this would be kept going in perpetuity if the neighbor sold the property and the school no longer had access to the parking spot. Mr. Boling responded the County could require an access easement or the applicant could make other arrangements at that time. Ms. Lois Edwards, Costa! Technology Corporation (7:24:32), explained the applicant had been running a day care center out of her home since 1995, and described how the operation was run and had expanded. Chairman Hamner opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m., and since no one wished to speak the public hearing was closed. 7:33:33 ON MOTION BY Ms. Keys, SECONDED BY Mr. Tripson, the members voted unanimously (6- 0) to approve the special exception use with staff recommendations. Chairman Hamner read the following into to record (7:34:36): B. Falcon Trace PD: Request for conceptual planned development (PD) special exception use approval for a project to be known as Falcon Trace Phase Ill. Indian River Associates, II LLLP, Owner. Knight, McGuire & Associates, PZC/Unapproved 3 January 22, 2009 F:/BCC/AII Committees/P&Z/2009 Ag&Minutes/P&Z 98 PUBLIC HEARING INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA (LEGISLATIVE) MEMORANDUM TO: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator TMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE: obert M. Keating, Community Development Director THROUGH: Stan BolintfrtP Planning Director FROM: John W. McCoy, AICP-:::(~ tJ\ Senior Planner, Current Development DATE: January 27, 2009 SUBJECT: Quail Ridge of Vero Beach, LLC's Request for PD Special Exception Use and Conceptual PD Plan Approval for an Agricultural PD to be Known as Quail Ridge [2004060408- 612 7 5/PD-08-05-02] It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of February 17, 2009. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: Knight McGuire & Associates, Inc. has submitted an application for conceptual PD (planned development) special exception use approval on behalf of Quail Ridge of Vero Beach, LLC to create a 40 lot agricultural planned development. The subject 203 acre parcel is located on the south side of69th Street,just west of Quail Valley Golf Course, is zoned A-1, Agricultural 1 (up to 1 unit/5 acres), is located outside the urban service boundary, and is designated AG-1 on the comprehensive land use plan. Previously, the site was approved for a conventional 40 - 5 acre lot subdivision. Subsequently, a land development permit was issued and construction commenced and then halted. The applicant is now seeking planned development approval for a modified development design. If approved, the proposed PD plan will supersede the previously approved preliminary plat. PDs in Agriculturally Designated Areas At its regular meeting of March 6, 2007, the Board of County Commissioners amended the text of Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Element Policy 5.8. The revisions to that policy changed the criteria for agricultural planned developments outside the urban service area. In this case, staff reviewed the application under the "new" Policy 5 .8 and found the proposal to be consistent with that policy. Planning and Zoning Commission Action At its regular meeting of January 22, 2009, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval, with the condition recommended by staff and listed at the end of this report. F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\BCC\2009 BCC\QUail Ridge staffreport.rtf Board of County Commissioners Consideration The Board of County Commissioners is now to consider the PD special exception use request, and is to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the use request and corresponding conceptual PD plan. PD Project Process The process involved in review and approval of this proposal is as follows: Approval Needed Reviewing Body 1. Conceptual Plan/Special Exception PZC&BCC 2. Preliminary PD PZC 3. Land Development Permits or Waiver Staff 4. Final PD (plat) BCC The applicant is now requesting approval of the first step. If the conceptual plan/special exception is approved by the Board of County Commissioners, the applicant will need to obtain preliminary PD approval and then obtain a land development permit or LDP waiver prior to constructing the required PD improvements. ANALYSIS: 1. Size of PD Area: 203.50 net acres 2. Zoning Classification: A-1, Agricultural (up to 1 unit per 5 gross acres) 3. Land Use Designation: AG-1, Agricultural (up to 1 unit per 5 gross acres) 4. Density: 0.19 units per acre (1 unit per 5.08 acres or 221,611 sq. ft.) 5. Minimum Lot Size: Allowed: 1 acre (minimum) Proposed: 1.5 acres (minimum) (range: 1.56 to 3.45 acres) 6. Minimum Open Space: Required: 60% Provided: 65% Note: Approximately 21 % (42.67 acres) of the project site will consist of open space within private yards on individual lots. The remainder of the project open space (44% or 89.5 acres) will be provided as common open space including created uplands, perimeter buffers, littoral zones, lake shore, and lake area. 7. Traffic Circulation: The site will be accessed from 69th Street via a paved internal road that will provide access to all of the individual lots. The internal roadway design will essentially be a 5,000' foot long cul-de-sac that serves a very low density subdivision. Traffic Engineering division has reviewed and approved the roadway layout and the traffic impact statement. Based on the approved traffic impact statement, no off-site improvements are required. F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\BCC\2009 BCC\Quail Ridge staffreport.rtf 1J)O 8. Stormwater Management: The public works department has reviewed and approved a conceptual stormwater plan. The stormwater system consists of two lakes that will be connected by two waterways that will provide water frontage for most of the lots. The treated stormwater from the lakes will outfall to a Sebastian River Water Control District canal at the north end of the site. A detailed engineering stormwater plan will be reviewed and approved in the future as part of the land development permit or permit waiver process. 9. Utilities: Through the AG planned development process, the applicant has the option to connect to county water and sewer services. While agricultural PD projects are not required to connect, public water service is allowed for AG PDs. In this case, the applicant is exploring the feasibility of connecting to County water, but using septic tanks for each lot. These utility provisions have been approved by the Utility Services and Environmental Health Departments. IO. Dedication & Improvements: • 59th Street Right-of-Way: Presently, 59th Street is a grove road that will serve local traffic between 74 th A venue and 90th Avenue. This existing grove road is located just south of the existing site. Future right-of-way for 59th Street will also be located south of the project site. Based on a review of surveys and field conditions, Public Works staff has determined that future right-of-way for 59th Street will need to come from south of this project, and that 60' ofright-of-way is needed. Therefore, this project is not subject to any right-of-way dedication for 59th Street. • 69th Street Right-of-Way: Presently, 70' ofright-of-way exists for 69th Street. While the county's thoroughfare plan requires 100' for 69th Street, all of the needed right-of-way must come from the north, since there is a canal along.the south side of the roadway. Therefore, no 69th Street right-of way dedication is required or proposed from this project site. • 61 st Street and 65th Street: While the projected alignment for these two streets runs through the project, no additional right-of-way is needed for these streets, since they have been removed from the thoroughfare plan in this area. 11. Concurrency: The applicant has obtained a conditional concurrency certificate. This satisfies concurrency requirements for the requested conceptual PD plan approval. 12. Environmental Issues: Uplands: Since the site is over 5 acres, the native upland set-aside requirements of section 929.05 potentially could apply. Based upon an inspection, the county's environmental planning staff has determined that no native upland habitat exists on the site. Therefore, no native upland habitat preservation requirements apply. Wetlands: Staff has verified that no jurisdictional wetlands exist on the subject site. Therefore, no wetlands regulations apply. Restoration: The site was previously a grove. As part of the development project, the applicant proposes to create 27.5 acres of native uplands and 7.5 acres oflittoral zone wetlands. The littoral zone area is slightly more than the 6.9 acres oflittoral zones required under current county regulations. F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\BCC\2009 BCC\Quail Ridge staffreport.rtf 13. Waivers: Through the PD process, the county may grant waivers from standard land development requirements. In this case, the applicant is requesting only one waiver. That is to reduce the minimum lot size from the A-1 district's standard of 5 acres (200,000 sq. ft.) to 1.5 acres (65,340 sq. ft.). 14. Buffers and Setbacks: Given that the vicinity of the project presently consists of agricultural and recreation uses, no Type "B" buffer is required, except where proposed lots will abut the project perimeter at the north and south ends of the subject site. A 25' wide Type "B" buffer is proposed at those two locations. For the remainder of the project, created uplands and wetlands will be adjacent to the project perimeter. 15. Caribbean Fruit Fly Host Plant: The County Comprehensive Plan requires that Caribbean fruit fly host plants be prohibited within PDs located in general areas that have active citrus groves. This project is located in such an area; therefore, the prohibition regulation applies. For this project, the applicant has indicated that he has no objection to creating a restriction that would prohibit host plants on the subject property. Such restriction must be included in the project's covenants and restrictions, which will be reviewed at the time of final plat application. 16. Policy 5.8: Future Land Use Policy 5.8 requires that all planned development projects in agriculturally designated areas meet the following criteria: • The density of the project shall not exceed the maximum density of the underlying land use designation; no density transfers from off-site lands, and no density bonuses shall be permitted within PD projects in agriculturally designated areas. Note: The density does not exceed the underlying land use. • Residential lots created through the PD process shall not be less than 1 acre, with the remainder of the area designated as open space. Note: The minimum lot size is 1.5 acres, with the remainder of the area used as open space. • The open space shall be in contiguous areas and must be under the control of an appropriate entity and maintained in perpetuity, through an open space, recreation, conservation and/or agricultural preservation easement(s), to be created through Deed Restrictions, with infill prohibited. Note: The project is designed to create open space in contiguous areas, and those areas will be placed under the control and maintenance of a POA (property owners association). A restriction acceptable to the County Attorney to implement this criterion will be placed on the final plat. • Agricultural PDs shall implement Best Management Practices submitted to and approved by staff. Note: BMPs will be used during project construction, in on-going project maintenance, during home construction, and in on-going home maintenance. The BMPs will be incorporated into the property owner documents, and will be provided and reviewed in more detail during review of the preliminary PD plan. • All recreational amenities shall be depicted on the PD plan; no recreational uses that could constitute a nuisance to adjacent properties shall be permitted. Note: The proposed recreation amenities are typical ofresidential development and include a tennis F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\BCC\2009 BCC\Quail Ridge staffreport.rtf 1j)2 court, pedestrian trails, and passive park. These recreational uses will not constitute a nuisance. Restrictions will be placed in the POA documents and on the final plat prohibiting nuisance recreational uses. Conclusion: Based on staffs review, the proposed PD meets the criteria of policy 5.8. 17. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: Canal,69th Street, Grove/ A-1 South: Canal, "59th Street", Grove/A-I East: Quail Valley Golf Course/ A-1 West: Grove/A-I RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant PD special exception use and conceptual PD plan approval, with the following conditions: I. Prior to preliminary PD approval, the applicant shall provide additional information on BMPs for subdivision operation and management, and home construction and operation. 2. Prior to or via the final plat, the applicant shall restrict the planting and maintenance of Caribbean Fruit Fly host plants on the subject acre overall site. 3. That the final plat or legal documents filed with the final plat shall: a. Provide a restriction against nuisance recreation uses. b. Reference the best management practices requirement, including home construction operation. c. Place the common open space under the control of the property owners association (POA), to be maintained as open space in perpetuity, in a manner acceptable to the County Attorney. ATTACHMENTS: I. Application 2. Location Map 3. Traffic Summary 4. Minutes from the January 22, 2009 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting 5. PD Plan 6. Aerial Indian River Co, APPROVED AGENDA ITEM: Admin. Legal Budget Dept. Risk Mgr. F:\Community Deve!opment\Users\CurDev\BCC\2009 BCC\Quail Ridge staffreport.rtf 1J)3 ( r .,,,_ - - / INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLI Please indicate the type of application being submitted: Conceptual PD Special Exception: _x_ Concurrent Special Exception & Preliminary PD: Preliminary Planned Development: Final Planned Development: Note: For a PD rezoning please use the appropriate rezoning form. PROJECTNAME: __Q~u_a_il_R_i~dg~e ______ APPLICANT: David Knight, PE ADDRESS: 80 Royal Palm Pointe Suite 401 PHONE~5=6=9-~5=5=0=5______FAX 569-1455 EMAIL [email protected] OWNER: ------=-=-.,__,=-,------ADDRESS: 1701 Highway A1A. Suite 309 PHONE 234-1770 TAX PARCEL NUMBER (S) OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: _3_2_-3_8_-1_2_-0_0_0_0_0_-3_0_0_0_-0_0_0_0_2_.0_-c----- C>.o G t PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION(S): ~ Land Use Designation Zoning District Acreage '::::1-. AG-1 A-1 203 acres <::, C) ~ TOTAL PROJECT ACREAGE: ~2=0~3~a=c=r=es~------ EXISTING SITE USE(S): ~a=b=a=nd=o=n=e=d~g~ro~v~e~------PROPOSED SITE USE(S) AND INTENSITY (e.g.# of units, square feet by use): ______40 single family estate lots Signature of Applicant PROJECT ENGINEER: (PRINT) AGENT: (PRINT) David Knight, PE NAME NAME 80 Royal Palm Pointe, Suite 401 ADDRESS ADDRESS Vero Beach FL CITY STATE CITY STATE 32960 (ll2J 569 -~5=5=05~---- ____(_J ______ZIP PHONE ZIP PHONE 772-569-1455 FAXNUMBER FAX NUMBER [email protected] EMAIL EMAIL C: \Documents and Settings\sjohnson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content. Outlook\OCJ 1QWGU\PD APP .doc Revised September 2007 Page 1 of 3 ATTACHM!IIT 104 "C"' C R W - """ 82ndAvenue " ~~-i;' -~· ! ,•. 10 ~H '• IU (ii (ii • ROIU &[U()I ~I n c:, < D 0 0 I» C I ····-····_L ~l ... C - : I» leaaa--==eal i----• -. "" CD -• I en '< - '• . ' CD ' . .... CANAL R/W '~,RAINAGE DISTRICT d·: 74thAv ------·-· <",..., !, ii ~ -~ ! !II I f (II I •, ll • i !II II i II ! i I I• (ii ~ !II i . (ii ll• ' Id il (ii !:! (ii IB !I• (ii IU. I! ' In ! 11 a • ' !II II -Ill--·----' !I• ! ~ ~, • ! ATTACHMENT Traffic Impact Study Quail Ridge EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Quail Ridge Planned Development I. Location: N Winter Beach Road (69th Street) and Pinnacle Drive. See Figure I. 2. Size: Proposed 40 Unit Single Family Agricultural Planned Development Subdivision. 3. Trip Generation: Total Trips, residential: 383 AM Peak Trips, residential: 30 PM Peak Trips, residential: 40 4. Credit: NONE 5. Net new P.M. Peak Hour Trips: 40 6. Area of influence: North-69th Street East-US#] South - 65" Street West-82ru1 Avenue 7. Significant Roads: 58th Avenue and 69"' Street 8. Significant intersections: 66" A venue and 69th Street. 9. Trip Distribntion: See Figure 2. 10. Internal Capture: 0% 1 I. Pass-by Capture: 0% 12. P.M. Peak Hour Directional% (ingress/egress): 64% ingress/ 37% egress 13. Traffic Count Factors Applied: (See Attachment "A".) ... inte.rsectio,v · 6~ Avenue and 69th Street 12/30/2008 1.00 14. Off-site lmprovements: None 15. Roadway Capacities (!RC Link Sheets) See Attachment "E". 16. Assumed roadway and/or intersection improvements: None 17. Significant Dates: a) Pre-study meeting: January 10, 2008 b) !RC meeting: April 10, 2008 b) Traffic counts: 1-16-08, 1-17-08, 11-18-08 and 11-19-08 c) Study approval: / /;;;;.. ~ / ;;:2.()0 '1 J I 18. The developer contribution will be the following: 0.05 Trips x $4,054.00 on S.R. 60 west of6~ Avenue. $4,054.00 x (0.31%) 0.05 P.M. Westbound trips= $202.70 r--AAPnP>JRtiOffiVErfilD5"i~~~~~/~~5?N7 INDIAN RIVER C NTY Neel-Schaffer, Inc. T~NGINEElUNGTan 21, 2009 Vero Beach, Florida 4 ~ 0/,-;;,.::,.-c,~ ASSISTANT PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ITACKMENT 1jl6 Quail Ridge Traffic Counts in lhe EXISTING column were coJJecled in 2008 Trips Indicated In the VESTI:D column are as or November 6, 2008 Links Maintenance Report t:DP.Jt!IOSS - I.inks Mai.nten.anc:o Rl!!pcrt Nlrs'slfnb&i• 6. 2006 Lil!IU. tTWi PK:iCBIPTIPH WI = PROJECT .M!AIWLB %Ceo. NEW%Caa lDlON s.a. A11tl{S. courrn LIIIS//S. VB CITl L = 950 244 = 22 266 0 ae4 2El.01% U.ai% lOlDS s.n. A1A/IS. cotntn' LJ.UE//5. VB ClTY L 950 -322 12 334 0 6'16 35.15% 35.15% 1020N s.A. AW/S. VB CITY L//l7TH SniUT 930 '39 13 -952 -2.2 1m?.s:rn 102.38% F.11ceads SD~ es-..ar.av 0 lD20S s.a. AW/S. w CIT¥ L//liTH S1'RE£'l' 930 1014 3 1017 0 -B1 100.4'il1:r:i 11l9.40% Ex~s 00% C.:£-eGil'I 1030N' s.a. A1AJ/li'.tH Sl'BEET//S.R. 6D 850 956 so 1006 0 -146 115 ~aii. 11&.98% ~s ~;r. ~.ht l030S s.11.. AW/lil'H S'flUiST/ls.a. 60 960 73' 4 739 0 122 (15.~1¾ 85.81% E.r..el?d!S OO't.• ~ot,,• 1D40N S.ll. Al.WIS.rt. 60//N. VB CI'l'Y L B60 912 29 941 0 -81 10:1.-42¾ 1119A%% E,"',0WUU, SWi: Qlv~r.iil't 104:DS S.R, AlAIJS.. k. 60/hl. VB CITY L B60 B25 16 B41 0 19 97.i'3% !17..7!1% EJ;~e:l:!~C.;t-atihi l.05{1N' s.a. ~lA/ /It. VB- CHY LI /FlUiD '?UEPJ. RD 960 7B2 20 B02 0 sa SJ.?. ::'6¥.. .93.26% ~~secs {",.a;1£=t-h• lDSOS s.R. AlA//ll.. VB Cii'Y Lf/FRED 'tUmU. RD 660 9Bl ,. 991 D -1a1 ·11s.~¾ 115.23% Excee.Js$%Ca~cit,: 10611N S.R. AIA//FmiD TUimK' RD//OLD wnm:l'. IICJf RD ••• .., 30 492 D 3GB 57.21% 57.21% 1-0GDS 5.,t. AW/FJ\Sll 'tU!WC ROI/OLD 9Ilrt:ER SOI 11D B60 514 52B D 332 61.40% IN.4D% l.D1llN s.Jl. Allt//O'!D WIHfEJt BCH Jm//ll. IRS L 860 "41 607 0 253 70,58% 7058% 101DS 5.Jt. AlA//OLD WIHTE!l BOI' RD//tr, IRS L •••469 20 499 J7l S6.l!6% 56.81% lDBON S,R. AlAJ/H. IRS L//C,L 51D •••B60 566 SJD •0 230 73.26% 73.26% lDBOS s.a. Altl//Jf.. IRS L//c.n.. ,$10 B60 469 " S43 317 63.14% 63.14% 1050N S .R,, AfA/ /C.R. 511)//N.. COUH'l'Y LDIE 99B 343 "u 404 •D ,.. 40.48% 40.48% llJ!IOS s.a. AIA//C.. R. 510//N. cmDITY LINE 99B 536 ,. 615 0 393 61.62% 61.62% lllOK IlfDUIJJ Rl\lfill BD.//t'DI Br @ US l//l2'm. 186D 789 26 B15 0 l.045 43,114% 43Jl4% 11105 IPDiAlr lllWR BD.//n.ff S'l' B us lf/12TH 166"0 1184 61 12.45 0 615 65.112% 16J12.% 1l20ff IllDU!N 1llV£R BD,//l2TH STmiST/1S, VB QTY 1860 1024 ll 1035 825 55.65% 55.65% 1120.S !HDW lL!"ISlt BD.//12'tll 5!1UiET//S.. VB CITY 1.&fiO 1541 51 1592 •0 26B JJS.00% 85,68% e A1TACHMENT \07 u.:.. ll/C.R. 512//H. SEB CITY L ..L'lUU!i' l.il(I 111!! .. l.243 0 467 72,68% 72.6B% 1405N IJ.S. 1/111. SEB Cl'l''i l./lJ\OSEt.NlD RD 18UO 10B9 l27 l21G 0 644 65.38% 65..3B%- Ul'.JSS U.S. 1/111. SEl3 CI'tY L//ROSEr.AND llO 1.860 112-'2 159 12Bl 0 577 68.98% 88.9B% U.S. ll/ROSE.LAllD RD//ff. COUUTY LINE 1410N 1860 ll50 96 1246 0 614 66.99% 611.!19% 141.0S U.S. l//kOSEI.AJID Rb/Ill. CDUnTY Ll!l"E 1860 ... l33 1071 0 7BJ 57.90% 51.9D% 1510N SCHUMAIIN DR//C.R. 510 D 66TH AVF.//S. SEB 1371 853 • 86% D 5l5 62.58% 62.S.11% lSlDS SOIUl-U1.tnr Dn//C.a. 510 ! Ci6'1'H AVEl/s. SES 1~77 477 l4 4Sl D BB6 35.67% 35.87",I 1520N sCiMWm Dltl/s. sEl:I CITl' L//u.s. 1 .,. 142 7 149 0 711 17..36% 17.3&% 1s2os SaitlMAfOl DR//S. SD CITY L//U.S. l .,. 138 19 157 0 TDJ 18.28% 111.28% 1610E l!OSELrultJ ltD//C.P.. 5121/Jl. SE!!. CITY L .,. 337 23 360 0 SOD 41.116% 41.B6% ROSBr.AJm RD//C.R. 512/111. SEB ctn L 161011 860 361 23 384 0 476 44.65% 44.55% R05XIJUm 'fW//H. S£B CI'l'Y L//U.S. 1 lli20E ... 389 42 431 0 429 50.12% 50.12% 1620W ROSELA!m RD//li. SEB CITl! L//U..s. l a,o 459 41 500 0 360 58.14% SB.14% c.L !iU//s.a. &0111-,s 17:l.OE 860 448 4l 489 0 371 56.67% 56.87% 1110W C.R. 51.21/s.a. 601/I-95 860 645 ll 656 D 204 76.28% 76.211% li2BE. C.,R. Sl2//I-95//C.JI.. 51D lBfiO 8%3 93 916 0 944 49.25% 49.25% C.JI.. S12//I-9S/lc.n. 510 l120ff I.960 ,.. 25 754 D 1106 40.54% 40.54% c.R. 5121/C.R.. 510/ /W". SEB CITY L J.1JIJE: 1850 737 ,o 797 0 1063 42.B7% 4U7% 173,0W SE!:> C.R. SlZf/C.lt• .510//ii. CITY L 1860 721 66 ,., D 1D73 42.31% 42.3f% 1140£ c. R. 51Z//W. SRB CITY t//P.OSELNID mt 186D 553 43 596 0 1264 32.04% 32.04% C.R. 512//W• .SR!I CITY L//ROSSLMID RD 1740W 1B60 542 49 591 D 1265 31.77% 31.77% 175-0£ C.R. 512//JlDSliliiWD JID/{U.S. l 1960 584 632 0 1228 33.98% 33.98% liSOW C.R.. :SlZ/fRDS:6LAND "BIJ//U.S. l 1B60 ... " ATTACHM£NT 1j)8 2JJ.:m m.D DI:!1:lE ffifl'/fn'B ST/l~H ST BlO ... 47 487 0 323 60.12% li0.12% 2Jl5S OLD IJIXIE HHYIIU'B ST//8TH ST 81D 54' 46 592 D 218 73.09% 73.09% 2320tl QUI DIXIE: H\il//Brff S'r//12'ra ST 810 535 25 560 D 250 69.14% 69.14% 2J20S OLD DIXIE llWY//BTR ST/ll2TR ST 810 683 27 710 0 100 ~l •.!JS% B7,65% Exz=ds 8t1% Ca:t~:h' 2J25ll 01.tl DIXIE HWY//l:?TB srl/s. VB ctn L 810 383 392 D '18 4BAD% 48AO% 232SS OLD llillE !N'i//l2TB 'Sf/IS. Vil CITY !. n10 391 13• 404 0 .,. 49.88% 49Jl8% 2J30N CLIJ 1tIXI£ fflfJ//S. VB CITY L//l&TH ST 850 383 • 352 0 458 46.12.% 48,12% 2J30S 01D llIXIE tuf'il/s. VB CIU L//lflffl ST 850 391 10 101 D ... 47.18% 47.18% 2335N OLD DIXIE HWY//16TB ST/IS.A. &O 850 286 17 303 D 547 35.60% 35.811'% 2JJ5S OLD DIXIE HWY//llil'lt ST//s.P.. 60 850 214 16 230 D 620 27.02% 27.02% 2345N Otn DIXIE' HHYI/UST ST//GSTR S1' 860 214 38 252 0 608 29.32% 29.32% 2345.!i OLtl DIXll: mfi//41.sT ST//;5TH ST 860 102 27 209 D 651 24.30% 24.30% 2350.N OLD DIXIE HWY//UTH ST//49'l'H Sr 860 128 52 180 D 680 20.88% 20.88% 2350S OLD DIXIE; JlllY//4.5TR ST//t!J'ffl S'l' 860 134 32 ,.. 694 19.25¾ 19.25% 2355N' oLIJ DIXIE' ffli'Y//UTH S't//65'1:H sr B60 162 BS 241 •D 613 2e.12,;. 28,72% 2355s OLD »n11!. liffl//lDTH STl/65'1'H ST B60 136 70 266 654 23.95% 23.!15% 2360!{ OLD DIXIE RRY//fiSTH ST//69TH sr 860 215 20 235 0• 625 27.33% 27.33% 23605 OLD !lIXIE IMYI/G5'ltt ST//69TH ST B60 96 13 10, 0 751 12.87% 12.117% 2365N' OLD DIXIE HWY//69ffl S'f//C• .''A, 510 860 205 20 22' 0 ATTACHMENT 1j9 2950N 43RD AVEIIDEl/-4STH ST// HITII ST 860 208 12• 328 532 38.11% 3B.11% 29SOS 43RD AVEtruE//45TH S'l'//4!11'1f ST 860 1'8 52 200 • 660 23.20% :tl.20% 3DOSN SB'l'lf AVEli!JB/ /OSLO RD// 4Tli S'1' 1860 lBl 13 454 • 1406 24.41% 24A1% 30(155 58TH AVEi!rUE//OSto- RD//4TH ST lB60 512 108 620 •0 1240 33.33% 33.U:% 30lON' 58'111 AVEIIUE//4TH S't//8'1'H S'l' 1710 672 57 729 0 '81 42.66% 42.66% 3D105 58Tll A'VEflUE//Uff ST//8TH ST 1110 752 B4 836 0 874 48.87% 48.&7% 3Dl.SN SB"L'H AVEHUE// 8tff S'l//12'I11 ST 1710 743 89 B32 0 878 48.68% 48.68% 30155 sera: AVElnm//BTli S'1//12TB ST liJ.O 952 69 1021 699 59.73% 59.73% J02DN SirrH AVEllUS//lZ'l'H ST//IE.'lll ST 1710 1229 13B 136'7 •0 343 7:!.!Wl& 7!t.S4% FR~~J= ao~ ca-...ar;il-.· 3020S 5Bnt AVEHUEl/l2l'S: ST//16l'H ST 1710 1055 113 1168 0 542 68,30% 68.30% 3025ll 58'1'1! AVEUUE//lfil'B ST/IS.R. H 1110 1139 211 1350 0 3'0 76.92% 71.92% 30255 sem AVEtruS//l&TR S'1//S.P.. 60 1710 981 194 1175 0 535 6'8,72% &B.72% 3D.30N SB'l'H AVEllUE/15.R. 60//UST ST 1B60 920 123 1043 0 817 55,09% 56.09% 30303 58TH AVEtnJB//S.R.. 60//UST S? 1860 663 960 0 900 51.52% 51,62% 3035:tf 5Bnt AVEfRJP:1/US'l' ST//IS'XH ST 860 545 176" 721 0 139 e.:;eaix. 83.83% E1'1;llld~ 80%- Q:.-:;~ft;1 3035s .S8tH AVEIIU.E//US'l ST//ISTB ST ••• 107 591 D 269 68.73% 68,73% JD4DN sern AVBfRJE//45TH ST//49TK ST ... '"489 ,00 689 D 171 SD.'17'% 80.17% t:llceP.ds. SO% CEltlt;ll'il'I 3D4DS 58'111 AVEIIUJS//CSTS ST//19TH ST ... 418 118 536 0 32< 62.34% 62.34% 3045N sem A\ll:;IRJt//OTIJ Si/lfiSTII ST 860 545 26' 810 D 50 ~?(II'.~ 94.20% ~"i!ds 80% Cr::!:iicih• 30455 sam: AVEIRJ&//OTH ST//65'fH S'I' 860 402 134 536 D 324 62.36% -62.36% 3050N 58TH AVEIIDii//65TH 5T//69TI! ST 860 412 105 517 0 343 60.16% 6D,16% 3D50S SBTH AVEIIDii//65TH 5T//Ei9TH ST B&o 330 117 441 413 52,00% 52.110% 3055H 5BTK AVElnJ1i//6!1TH ST//C.R.510 860 ,.. 1•0 501 • 359 58.27% SB.27% 30555 58TH AVEIWE//69ni ST//c.n.510 860 266 90 357 •0 503 41.57% 41.57% 3120N 66TH AVEIMi//S.R. 6D//2fi?ll ST 860 426 145 571 0 289 66.37% 116.37% 31205 66TH AVEllU.8//S.R.. 60//26l'll ST 860 529 .. 614 0 246 71.44% 71A4% 3130N 66TH AVEIRJE//%GTH S'1/IUST ST 660 ... 151 62• 0 240 72.14% 72.14% Jl.30S fifiTR AVBIIUE/126Tff S'r//tlS? Si' 39B 95 491 0 363 57.79% 57.75% 3140N 66TH AVEllUR//US'l' ST/115TH ST •••950 706 66 772 178 -81.,0% 81.30% E:<::eeds.00¾ c.:::::-ac1t\' 31405 66TH AVEIIUE//US'l' ST//t5'lll ST 950 441 55 496 •0 ... 52.20% 52.20% JlSDff 66ffl AVEIIUE//4STK ST//65'l'H ST 870 67a 71 749 D 121 !!5.05% 16,0&% Et.c-:-e::ls Et!% Cat,.;:;t;it.•1 3150S 66TH AVEHUEl/-!!iTB S'l'//65fll ST 810 376 S5 431 439 49.57% 49.57'/, Jl.60H 66'1'1! AV£HUE//fi5T'B ST//69'?11 ST 810 6Bl 725 •5 145 ~3.~% 83.92% E: ATTACHMENT 1kO 4430W 41S'l' ST//SBTH AV£f/UR.D AV£ 8<0 23' 41 21' 0 586 31.91% 31.!11% 4440E UST S'l'//~3RD ·AVF.//OLD DIXIE Hlff 860 21B 3Z 250 0 •1• 29.07% 29.07',I 4440W 41ST St//43!!0 AVF.//O'W lllXtt HWY' 860 22" 20 249 D •11 28.96% 28.!16% •U50E UST S't//OLll nJ:XIE HRY//IlliJIA!J RIV BD 860 151 5 162 0 69B 1B.87% 18.8?% •14.SDH us:r S'J://OLD DIX.IS BlN//WDIAR lt!V SD ... 160 18 118 682 20.72% 20.72% .0:460E 37TH S'l'//U.S.11//INDIAn R!V BLVD 860 361 370 • 490 43.03% 43.03% HliOH" 37'11l ST//U.S.U//nttJIAN RlV£R. BLW B60 667 16• 683 •0 171 79.43% 79A3% 47ZDE zom S't//66Tli Av:EHUX//SB'?H AWliUE ••o 2B4 332 528 38.63% 38.i3% 4l201i 26TH ST//66'16 AVENUV/58nt AVEINE 860 .,. ••49 528 • 332 61.:35% 61.35% 47JOE Z6rtl SU/58Tff AVEflUS//43JW .P.VEIIDS 860 375 29 (04 •D (56 47.01% 47,01% 41Jllli' 2Gn, ST//SH'H AVEJ:IUV/UlUl AV£UIJ6 ... 5<6 3B 584 0 276 67.86% 67..86% 4i40E 26TH 5't'//4311D AVE/IAVIA'J:IOH BLVll BGO '30 11 441. 0 51.22% 51.22% 4740lf 2G'm S'1'//C3llD AVSI/AVlATIOlt BLVD 860 60B 17 625 D "'235 72.7011 72,70% 4'JSOE 2&nl S'l//AVJA'tIOtl BLW//27'J'H AVE!Jtm 860 150 10 160 0 100 18.56% 18.56% 4750rl Z6l11 ST//AVlATIOH BLW//27TH AV£1lUE 860 280 15 295 D 565 34.33% 34.33% 4SJ,[J£ 81'1t S't//SBTH AVErlUEf/1.JRD AVBmlEi 860 216 18 234 D ... 27.18% 27.16% 4B30ff 8TH S'l'/158TR AVEflU!i//13RD AVBJJUE 860 215 22, ... 26.08% 2&.08% BTH ST//URO AV!lnllil/27'l'H AViitlU.Ei • 641 • 219 4a4DE: 860 595 .. D 74.58% 74.58% 4840H BTH S'r/1 UJID AVE!IUE/ /2'1'l'B AVEHUE 8<0 450 27 481 373 56,60% 5S.GD% 4850E DrH ST//27TH A'V£JntE//20'1'H AVEJJUE 960 573 11 58< •u 276 67.6&% 67.86% 4B50W llTH ST//21'11l AVSt1Ul!'//20'lH 1\.VeUIUE 860 543 9 552 309 64.22% 64.22% 4860E BTH STJ/20'1H AVEtnJ6//otD DIX.IE HWY 810 359 16 375 u• 435 46.2-4-% 46.24% 4S6DW flTH ST/ /ZO'l'H AV!.flUEl /OLD DIXIE HlfY 810 664 19 &83 127 SAJ3% 84.33% ~ et."-% C?.t!'aclt\' 48'JDE II-TR S'T/IOW PIX?£ lnfl'//U.S. l 810 346 19 365 • 445 45.12% 45.12% 4870N ere S't/lOUJ DIXIE Hlf'I//U.s. l 910 526 26 552 • 259 56,15% BB,15% • 569 4BBDE R'?H: ST//U.S. 11/INDllll UV£lt BLVD .. , 279 12 291 D 33.B4% 33.114% 4880W BTff ST//u.s. l//D1DI1Jl RIV.Ell. BLW 060 5<2 12 554 D 306 64.42% 64A2% 4910E 1TH STl/8211D AV&/ /SBTU AVS 97D 79 3 Bl D 789 9.31% 9.31% 4!Jl0W Hff .5T//82lltl A'Wf/58TJI. AVE 870 111 l 112 758 12.87% 12.!17% 4530E na .5'l'l/58'l'H AVE[/113:RD AVE. 860 202 11 213 • 647 24.74% 24.74% 4.JJJOW 4.'l'ff ST//.58TB AVEf/llJRD AVE 860 187 7 15' •D 666 22.60% 22Jlll% 4940E ~'!ft ST'//Ulm AW//27TH AW 960 286 20 306 D ... 35.64% 35,84% -4940W 4TH STl/43nP AW.f/27'tff AVE 860 <28 16 ... u 416 51.59% 51.59% OSDE 4TH ST//.27TH INS! /ZOTH AVE 860 59' 10 604 D 256 70.28% 70.28% , osow f!l'H S'1//27'lB. AVEl/20TH AVE 960 522 13 535 325 62.23% 112,23% 496DE UH S'l'//ZOTH AVE//OLb DIXIE HWY 960 352 37 399 Q• 411 45.21% 4U1% 4960W 4TH S'1/ /20TH AVEI/OLD DIXIE HIN 860 54' 52 596 D 264 69.35% 6ll,35% U70S 4TH ST/JOtD DIXIE HWY//U • .5. l 810 tD3 32 ,,. D 375 53.76% 53.76% 070W 4TH ST/JOUJ DIXIE !IW'i//U.S. 1 810 547 JD 585 D 225 72.20% 7Z2D% 50106 16TH S!l'l>.MT//7,f'rff AWNUB//B2HD 11,vmnm 860 0 46 D 81' 5.35% 5.35% 5010W l6TH S'l'REE'r//74TH AVlilRIE'//B.2Nll AV£mJE 960 "43 • 43 Q 817 5.00% 5.00% 56101:i FRED TUSRA rm, IAIAI Iii OF COCOIIIJT DR. ••• 129 0 129 731 15,00% 15.0D% Sal.OW FR.ED WBR1C DPJ/Al.N/H OF cocomrr bk 060 96 0 96 0• 16' 11.16% 11.11% 511DE un,nn BEACH RDI/AW/JUtJGLB. TRAIL 960 J9 47 0 913 5.47% 5A7% snow WIJ:ITEJl. DB11C1! RD//A1A/ / olUNGLE 'l'M.lL 960 1"0 4• 124 0 736 14.42% 14A2% 5BlOE A'l'L11U11C BLVD/ /27Tll AVEfl!JE:/ /20TR 1\VENUE 860 100 2 102 D 759 11.B5% 11.11% SBlOW ATLmlTIC BLVD//2'11'H J\VEHUE/120ffl AVEliUE 860 167 0 167 0 693 19.42% 19Al% 5820E ATLMl?IC BLVD//21lTH AVEIIEJE//U.S. l 860 .. l 41 D 919 4.77% 4.77% SB2.0W ATLAll'l'IC BLVD//20'1'11: AvamE//U.5. l 050 76 3 79 u 791 9.19% 9.19% S910E AVlATIOJI BLVD//21i'!H Sfl\E:61'//2.7ffl AVEmJi l.280 15' 3 162 lll.B 12.66% 12.66% AVIA'tlOJI BLVD//26'l"l{ S!IU!$l'//27TH AVEllUE • 5910W 1200 '47 20 167 • 1113 13.05% 13.05% 60lOE JlOYAL l'ALH BLVD//1tOYAI. PliLH Pl,//WDIJUI 880 270 • 270 D 610 30.6B% 3D.SS% 6010W i\OYJU. l'ALK BLVD//ROYAL PM,}( 1'1.//IffDI.Nt 090 116 125 755 14.20% 14.20% • 534 6llOE ROYAL Ii"~ PL/ /U.S- l/ /IlmIAtl JUVBR. BLW ... 341 5' 346 39.31% 39.31% 6110W noYJ!.L PALff PL/ /U.s.. 1//INDIA!f 1\rmll BLW 880 396 17 '13 •0 4-6'!' 45.92% 4SJI%% Indian River Ca~nty Printed an: 39758 I CO-P.lwr £01: WiJldaWs 95/JIT Paga B of B ATTACHMENT 131 Chairman Hamner read the following into to record (8:03:51 ): C. Quail Ridge PD: Request for PD special exception use and conceptual PD plan approval for an agricultural PD to be known as Quail Ridge. Quail Ridge of Vero Beach, LLC, Owner. Knight, McGuire & Associates, Inc., Agent. Located on the south side of 69th Street, just west of Quail Valley Golf Course. Zoning Classification: A-1, Agricultural (up to 1 unit per 5 gross acres). Land Use Designation: AG-1, Agricultural (up to 1 unit per 5 gross acres). Density: 19 units per acre (1 unit per 5.08 acres or 221,611 sq. ft.). (2004060408- 61275/PD-08-05-02) [Legislative] Mr. McCoy (8:04:16), reviewed the information contained in his memorandum dated January 12, 2009, a copy of which is on file in the Commission Office. Mr. McGuire (8:13:07) noted this site was previously approved under an affidavit of exemption with a five acre grid pattern, and the reduction in lot size opened up an opportunity to create lakes and native uplands on the site. Discussion ensued about what was planned for the uplands. Chairman Hamner opened the public hearing at 8:12 p.m. Mr. Joseph Paladin, Chairman of the IRC Growth Awareness Committee (8:23:28), explained the smallest lot was around 1.6 acres and the largest lot was approximately three acres and there would be a lot of variances as to where the houses would be built. Chairman Hamner closed the public hearing at 8:14 p.m. 8:25:04 ON MOTION BY Ms. Keys, SECONDED BY Mr. Weick, the members voted unanimously (6-0) to approve staff's recommendation. Commissioners Matters (8:25:22) Mr. Tripson briefly discussed an item regarding the citrus industry contained in the backup on file in the Commission Office. PZC/Unapproved 5 January 22, 2009 F:/BCC/AII Committees/P&Z/2009 Ag&Minutes/P&Z 111TACHM£NT 1~ 2 Planning Matters (8:26:05) Mr. Boling gave an update of what had transpired since the last P&Z meeting. Attorney's Matters (8:27:03) None. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:16 p.m. George Hamner, Chairman Date Reta Smith, Recording Secretary Date PZC/Unapproved 6 January 22, 2009 F:/BCC/AII Committees/P&Z/2009 Ag&Minutes/P&Z ATTACHMENT 4 13 I l ' I''' I; ;,! ~ di Ir ~ II!:hi I • I t:A -..... I• c.,=-= ;:s Ii uNorth -·-···= )OAt/ INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA PUBLIC HEARING MEMORANDUM (LEGISLATIVE) TO: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator MENT HEAD CONCURRENCE: Robert M. Keating, AICP /4 Community Developmen Directo ../111-i THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP; Planning Director 5\-lM FROM: John W. McCoy, AICP; Senior Planner, Current Development DATE: January 27, 2009 , SUBJECT: Indian River Associates, II, LLLP's Request for Conceptual Planned Development (PD) Special Exception Use Approval for a project to be known as Falcon Trace Phase III (PD-09-01-01) [2001050202-63120] It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of February 17, 2009. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS Knight, McGuire and Associates, Inc., on behalf of Indian River Associates, II, LLLP, is requesting conceptual planned development (PD) special exception use approval for a project located at the southeast comer of 27 th Avenue SW and 2 I st Street SW. The applicant is requesting PD approval to obtain waivers (reductions) in RS-6 lot size, lot width, and setback requirements in order to construct a development that is similar to the north half of the Falcon Trace project. The north half of the Falcon Trace project is an existing small lot subdivision. At its regular meeting of June 12, 2003, the Planning & Zoning Commission approved the overall Falcon Trace project as a 588 lot small lot subdivision. Subsequently, the applicant obtained a land development permit, constructed the infrastructure improvements, and obtained final plat approval for the north half of the subdivision. Currently, the applicant is completing single family home construction in the north half of the development. For the south half of the project, the applicant obtained a land development permit, but only partially completed infrastructure improvements prior to the preliminary plat expiration on June 12, 2008. The improvements remain only partially complete, and the applicant indicates that it may take IO years to completely develop the remainder of the project. Prior to the June 12th preliminary plat expiration, the applicant sought an extension of the small lot subdivision preliminary plat approval. At that time, staff explained to the applicant that staff could not support an extension of the preliminary plat approval on the south half of the project unless the developer were willing to meet the current small lot subdivision criteria. Those criteria now include a requirement that small lot subdivisions be affordable housing projects with price restrictions on the sale of housing units. Those criteria were not in place in 2003 when the Falcon Trace project was approved as a small lot subdivision. 116 F:\Community Deve!opment\Users\CurDev\BCC\2009 BCC\Falcon Trace PD conceptual pzc staffreport.rtf 1 Because the applicant wants to develop the south portion of the overall Falcon Trace project with the same general design as the north portion but does not want to meet the new affordable housing requirements of the small lot subdivision ordinance, the applicant is now seeking approval to develop the south half of the project through the PD process. As proposed, the PD reflects the same general lay-out as the original preliminary plat, including 258 single-family detached homes on 55' wide lots at an overall density of 1.91 units per acre. In addition, the project will contain perimeter buffers and recreation tracts, as originally proposed. • Planning and Zoning Commission Action At its regular meeting of January 22, 2009, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-1 to recommend approval, with the conditions recommended by staff and listed at the end of this report. PZC member Dr. David Cox voted in opposition to the project based on the applicant's proposal to waive the county's current littoral zone requirements from being applied to the project's partially constructed stormwater ponds. • Board of County Commissioners Consideration The Board of County Commissioners is now to consider the special exception use request, and is to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the use request. • PD Project Process The process involved in review and approval of the subject PD application is as follows: Approval Needed Reviewing Body 1. Conceptual Plan/Special Exception PZC&BCC 2. Preliminary PD Plan/Plat PZC 3. Land Development Permit (LDP) or Waiver Staff 4. Final PD (plat) BCC The applicant is now requesting approval of the first step. If the Board of County Commissioners approves the conceptual plan/special exception use, then the applicant will need to file for and obtain preliminary PD plan approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission. ANALYSIS 1. PD Area: 135.24 acres 2. Zoning Classifications: RS-6, Residential Single-Family (up to 6 units per acre) 3. Land Use Designation: L-2, Low Density Residential (up to 6 units per acre) 4. Residential Units: Single-Family Detached: 258 units 5. Density: Proposed: 1.91 units per acre Allowed: 6.0 units per acre (maximum) Note: Under conventional RS-6 development, densities typically range from 3.0 to 3.5 units per acre. 6. Open Space: Required: 40% Provided: 47% Note: Open space area consists of common open space, a portion of stormwater lakes, sidewalks, and private yards on individual lots. 117 F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\BCC\2009 BCC\Falcon Trace PD conceptual pzc staffreport.rtf ? 7. Recreation Area: Required for PD project: 3.09 acres Provided: 3.67 acres Note: The recreation area includes only the recreation improvements area; it does not include the sidewalk area, the upland conservation area or the wetland conservation area. There are 36.92 acres of common open space (recreation, and conservation areas). 8. Utilities: The project is required to connect to County water and sewer, and such connections are proposed. These utility provisions have been approved by the County Utilities Department and the Environmental Health Department. 9. Stormwater Management: The public works department has approved the conceptual stormwater management plan and will review the detailed stormwater management plan with the land development permit. The stormwater management system includes a modified miami curb street design and several inter-connected, wet stormwater management tracts to manage runoff generated from the project. The stormwater tracts will also serve as an aesthetic amenity. In addition to handling project run-off, the th stormwater plan provides easements and stormwater capacity to handle runoff from proposed 20 Avenue SW improvements. The developer has committed to providing this stormwater capacity as a public benefit. 10. Traffic Circulation: Access to the development will he provided by a single, gated, full movement driveway to 21 st Street SW. The entrance will provide access to the internal street system. That system consists of two loop roads and three short cul-de-sacs. Traffic Engineering has reviewed and approved st the internal circulation plan as well as the connection (entrance) to 21 Street SW. A traffic impact analysis (TIA) has been reviewed and approved by the Traffic Engineering Division. Based on the traffic volumes shown in that analysis, the following off-site improvements are required: • Southbound left-tum lane on 27'h Avenue SW at 21st Street SW; th • Westbound right-tum lane on 21 st Street SW at 27 Avenue SW; • Eastbound and westbound left-tum lanes on 21 st Street SW at the project's entrances; • Eastbound and westbound right-tum lanes on 21 st Street SW at the project's entrances; • Dual egress lanes on 21 st Street SW at the project's entrances; • Eastbound left-tum lane on 21st SW at 20th Avenue; and st • Southbound right-tum lane on 20th Avenue SW at 21 Street SW. th All of these improvements, with the exception of the dual egress lanes at the project entrance and the 20 Avenue SW improvements, were constructed with the existing Falcon Trace development. The dual th egress lanes will he constructed with the project. The 20 Avenue SW improvements are under construction by the County in accordance with an existing developer's agreement. st th 11. Thoroughfare Plan: The project has frontage on three thoroughfare plan roads: 21 Street SW, 20 Avenue SW, and 27th Avenue SW. The right-of-way dedications for these roads were addressed with the original approval. Therefore, no additional thoroughfare plan road right-of-way is required or proposed. 12. Project Phasing: The applicant has indicated a 10 year build-out on the conceptual plan for the overall development. More detailed information will he provided with the preliminary PD plan that will follow conceptual PD plan approval. The proposed conceptual PD plan will allow a build-out of 10 years or more. 118 F:\Community Deve\opment\Users\CurDev\BCC\2009 BCC\Falcon Trace PD conceptual pzc staffreport.rtf ' 13. Required Improvements: a. Perimeter (thoroughfare road) Sidewalks: Sidewalks are required and shown along the project's entire 20th Avenue SW and 27'11 Avenue SW frontages. The sidewalks will need to be depicted on the preliminary PD plan and constructed or bonded prior to a final plat. th b. Drainage Easement: The applicant will be accommodating run-off from future 20 Avenue SW improvements in the proposed stormwater system. The applicant has agreed to give the county an easement necessary for construction, conveyance and treatment of the stormwater. In addition, the applicant has agreed to grant the county the easement within 45 days of conceptual PD plan approval to facilitate the construction of the 20th Avenue SW in advance of the PD improvements. c. Internal Sidewalks: 4-foot wide internal sidewalks will be provided along both sides of the internal loop roadway. In addition, the applicant will provide a connection from the internal pedestrian system to the 21st Street SW sidewalk. The internal sidewalks will need to be incorporated into the preliminary PD plan and land development permit plan and constructed or bonded out prior to final plat approval. d. Streetlighting: Streetlighting is required, and locations will be shown on the land development permit plan. Maintaining the streetlights will be the responsibility of the property owners' association. 14. Waivers for Single-Family Lots: The property is zoned RS-6. For comparison, the proposed PD waivers have been compared to the RS-6 zoning district standards and the small lot criteria: Reouired RS-6 Required Small Lot (Interior) ProoosedPD Setbacks: Front 20' 20' 20' Rear 20' 15 20' Side 10' 7'/5'* 7'/5'* Min. Lot Size 7,000 sf 5,000 sf 8,242 sf Min. Lot Width 70' 50' 55' Max. Bld2: Covera2:e 30% 30% 40% Min. Open Snace 40% 40% 40% *5' setback at comer and cul-de-sac lots Requested Waivers: 1. Lake maintenance easements within lots. 2. Littoral zone and shoreline tree requirement. Instead of littoral zones, the applicant will provide a 9.61 acre wetland preserve, as approved under the previous subdivision design and permitted by the SJRWMD. 3. All encroachments allowed in section 911.15(2) will be allowed. Staff supports the waiver of the littoral zone in lieu of wetland preservation because the project stormwater areas are already designed, permitted, and partially constructed. Preservation of the existing wetland area will provide for a large contiguous area of wetlands that will be enhanced, and will provide some of the same benefits that would result from created littoral zones spread around the lake edges. The proposed PD design will avoid any additional wetland impacts. 119 F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\BCC\2009 BCC\Falcon Trace PD conceptual pzc staffreport.rtf 4 15. Landscaping & Bnffering: Buffering is required and proposed as follows: Perimeter Adjacent Use Buffer Type & Width Opaque Feature North 2 I st Street SW and Falcon Trace TypeB 6-foot combination 25 feet wide berm/landscape South IRFWCD Canal, St. Lucie east half TypeB 6-foot combination and Fish Farm west half 25 feet wide berm/landscape East 20th Avenue SW, Vero Beach TypeB 6-foot combination Highlands 25 feet wide berm/landscape West Fish Farm, 27tll Avenue SW, TypeB 6-foot combination Millstone PD 25 feet wide berm/landscaoe Final, detailed landscape plans for required buffers, common areas, and recreation/park tracts must be submitted to Planning Division staff and approved prior to land development permit issuance. Prior to issuance of a certificate of completion for the project, all landscape buffers must be installed. 16. Environmental Issues: A land development permit (LDP) was issued for this site based on approval of the project as a small lot subdivision. Land clearing and earthwork commenced prior to the expiration of the LDP. The proposed PD design is consistent with the previous environmental permits and design, conserving most of the remaining environmental features. a. Wetlands: Approximately 17.55 acres of wetlands existed on the site prior to development. Based on the previously approved permits and design, the applicant impacted approximately 7 .95 acres of wetlands with the construction activity, and proposed to preserve and enhance 9.60 acres of wetlands or 54.7% of the existing wetlands. Prior to or via the final plat, a wetland conservation easement will need to be established. b. Uplands: Since the site is over 5 acres, the native upland set aside criteria of section 929.05 applies. Prior to construction activities, the 135.24 acre site contained 29.17 acres of native uplands, with 7.30 acres (25 .0%) proposed for preservation. That 7 .30 acre area remains uncleared and will be preserved by the proposed plan. The native upland set aside area includes existing uplands adjacent to the wetlands, but does not include created native uplands next to the wetlands. Thus, there will be more native area at completion of construction than the applicant is being credited. Prior to or via the final plat, an upland conservation easement will need to be established. c. Tree Preservation: All specimen trees will be preserved. d. Littoral Zones: Through the PD process, the applicant is proposing to substitute the 9.6 acres of wetland preservation in lieu of the 6.27 acres of littoral zone area that would normally be required. The proposed substitution is acceptable to staff since the wetland areas, which are adjacent to wet stormwater areas, will provide the same functions as littoral zones. 17. Public Benefits: Many of the public benefits have occurred with the construction of the northern phase of the preliminary plat for the small lot subdivision. The public benefits are as follows: • Drainage for 20th Avenue SW provided by project (with this phase) • Drainage for 21 st Street SW provided by project (with previous phase) • Improvements to 20th Avenue SW paid for by developer (with previous phase) • All adjacent right-of-way provided (with previous phase) 120 F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\BCC\2009 BCC\Fa\con Trace PD conceptual pzc staffreport.rtf ~ • Upland conservation of7.30 acres (25% exceeds the 15% required) (with this phase) • Buffer on the south and east exceed the required 25' (with this phase) • Contribution of$20,000 to the south county initiative park fund (with previous phase) 18. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North: 21 st Street SW, Falcon Trace/ RS-6 South: IRFWCD canal, Lakewood Park, Fish Farm/ St. Lucie County, A-1 East: 20th Avenue S.W., Vero Beach Highlands/ RS-6 West: Fish Farm, 27th Avenue SW, Millstone Landing PD/ A-1, RS-3 19. Concurrency: The applicant has obtained a 5 year concurrency certificate for the overall project that expires in March 2010. This certificate is sufficient for conceptual plan approval. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, staff reconnnends that the Board of County Connnissioners grant conceptual PD special exception use approval with the following conditions: I. Within 45 days of conceptual PD approval, the applicant shall grant drainage and construction easements necessary to handle run-off from the 20th Avenue SW expansion. 2. Prior to or via the final plat, upland and wetland conservation easements shall be established as depicted on the conceptual PD plan. 3. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of completion: a. All required buffers shall be completed, and b. The 27th Avenue SW and 20th Avenue SW sidewalks shall be constructed or bonded. ATTACHMENTS I. Application 2. Location Map 3. Unapproved Minutes from the January 22, 2009 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting 4. Conceptual PD Plan 5. Aerial Indian River Co, APPROVED AGENDA ITEM: Admin. Legal Budget Dept. Risk Mgr. F:\Community Development\Users\CurDev\BCC\2009 BCC\Fa\con Trace PD conceptual pzc staffreport.rtf 121 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION Please indicate the type of application being submitted: Conceptual PD Special Exception: >--- ,·.. co f--- Concurrent Special Exception & Preliminary PD: 0 Preliminary Planned Development: E:l Final Planned Development: Note: For a PD rezoning please use the appropriate rezoning form. PROJECT NAME: Falcon Trace ~ D-o q _o f-0 I APPLICANT: Scott McGuire P.E. ADDRESS: 80 Royal Palm Pointe, Suite 401 PHONE,_l(.!...77,_,2=-.,)c.,5c..=6c,-9__,-5~5'--"0-"'5------FAX (772) 569-1455 EMAIL,,,_s""co"'t""t@=k,_,n,,.igL!..!h_.,_tm'--'c,.g..,u'-.!Jircse"'.c""o'-'-mCL--______OWNER: Indian River Associates 11, LLLP ADDRESS: 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway Suite 230 PHONE---'('--"9--"5_4~) _7_5_3_-1_7--'3--'0______Sunrise, FL 33323 TAX PARCEL NUMBER (S) OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: ______ 33-39-35-00001-0030-00001 .4, 1.5, 1.6 PROPERTY CLASSIFICA TION(S): Land Use Designation Zoning District Acreage L-2 RS-6 135.34 acres TOTAL PROJECT ACREAGE: ..:_1:::_35=-:·c:=3_..:_4-=a:..::ce..:re=-.,s'----_------ EXISTING SITE USE(S): none; partially constructed PROPOSED SITE USE(S) AND INTENSITY (e.g.# of units, square feet by use): 258 residential units Signature of Applicant PROJECT ENGINEER: (PRINT) AGENT: (PRINT) Scott McGuire P.E. NAME NAME 80 Royal Palm Pointe, Suite 401 ADDRESS ADDRESS Vero Beach FL CITY STATE CITY STATE 32960 LJ (772~569-5505 ____L_), __ ------ZIP PHONE ZIP PHONE (772 ) 569-1455 FAX NUMBER FAX NUMBER [email protected] EMAIL EMAIL C:\Documents and Settings\sjohnson\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\OCJlQWGU\PDAPP.doc Revised September 2007 Page 1 of 3 AffACHM!NT 1~2 ~ ~ !!j ; ij -,• ' !Ii' I' Q ' I•! l i•t:f lfi:~:l~~m~i~lM~I D. :z !!I i J.~:~efiJilft;fWll ATTACHMENT1 ~ A. oberts Family Day Care: Request for special exception use a roval for a child care facility to be known as Roberts Family Da Care. Hattie Roberts, Owner. Coastal Technology Corp., Age t. Located on the south side of 23 rd Place S.W., south of Highl nds Drive. Zoning Classification: RS-6, Residential Single- amily (up to 6 units/acre) Land Use Designation: L-2, Low nsity (up to 6 units/acre(SP-SE-09-01-05 / 2001100 0-63106) [Quasi-Judicial] The secretary ad inistered the testimonial oath to those present who wished to speak at to ight's meeting on this quasi-judicial item. Mr. Stan Boling, IRC Planning Director (7:14:09), reviewed the information contained in his m morandum dated January 6, 2009, a copy of which is on file in the Commi ion Office. Ms. Keys noted one of the arking requirements was being met by the use of adjacent property, and w ndered how this would be kept going in perpetuity if the neighbor sold the operty and the school no longer had access to the parking spot. Mr. Boling esponded the County could require an access easement or the applicant c uld make other arrangements at that time. Ms. Lois Edwards, Costal Techn logy Corporation (7:24:32), explained the applicant had been running a day care center out of her home since 1995, and described how the o eration was run and had expanded. Chairman Hamner opened the public hearing t 7:20 p.m., and since no one wished to speak the public hearing was close 7:33:33 ON MOTION BY Ms. Keys, SECONDED B Tripson, the members voted unanimous( (6- 0) to approve the special exception use w staff recommendations. Chairman Hamner read the following into to record (7:34:36): B. Falcon Trace PD: Request for conceptual planned development (PD) special exception use approval for a project to be known as Falcon Trace Phase Ill. Indian River Associates, II LLLP, Owner. Knight, McGuire & Associates, PZC/Unapproved 3 January 22, 2009 F:/BCC/AII Committees/P&Z/2009 Ag&Minutes/P&Z 'ATTACHMENT 3 12 4 Inc., Agent. Located at the southeast corner of the 2?1h Avenue SW and 21 st Street SW intersection. Zoning Classification: RS-6, Residential Single-Family (up to 6 units per acre). Land Use Designation: L-2, Low Density Residential (up to 6 units per acre). Density: 1.91 units per acre. (PD-09-01-01/2001050202-63120) [Legislative] Mr. John McCoy, IRC Senior Planner (7:34:59), reviewed the information contained in his memorandum dated January 12, 2009, a copy of which is on file in the Commission Office. Chairman Hamner expressed concern about the project having 55 foot wide lots with 40% coverage, adding one of the frequent complaints he heard was about allowing cookie-cutter homes to be crammed together. Mr. McCoy observed when you looked at a regular small-lot subdivision with a 5,000 square foot lot, the biggest house you would be able to build would be 1,500 square feet based on the 30% coverage; however as a PD this project would provide a larger lot with more common open space. Conservation easements were discussed. Mr. Scott McGuire, Knight McGuire & Associates (7:48:21 ), noted the project was previously approved as a small-lot subdivision, and when an ordinance changed the affordable housing criteria the applicant had moved on to the PD process. He pointed out the density was lower than any PD that had ever been looked at in the County. Dr. Cox acknowledged the offsite and onsite mitigation were good features, but thought the County should have its own littoral zone requirement in addition to the preservation required by the St. Johns River Water Management District as part of its permitting process. Mr. McGuire stated the project was previously approved without having to provide the littoral zones, and that ordinance had come into place after the original approval. Chairman Hamner opened the public hearing at 7:50 p.m., and since no one wished to speak the public hearing was closed. 8:03:25 ON MOTION BY Ms. Keys, SECONDED BY Mr. Weick, the members voted (5-1) to approve staff's recommendation. Dr. Cox opposed. PZC/Unapproved 4 January 22, 2009 F:/BCC/All Committees/P&Z/2009 Ag&Minutes/P&Z ATTACHM£NT }1 25 CORCRPUJIIVAIII P ~D~ FOR PAIIICOR UJIIRACR IIVBDIVIIIIOR :PRABEi 3 l'R('lf'III'.A ...'II, ~F.VG"E,) P.IA\T~'ll'-l•Y P:E. A\'19ll'lf'II .A =-=-!!I-Alli=-=-=-~"' .-,=- w i!:E!.1~11. ~v,v~ =- ==-, =- gv,~~ ~=--=- FOR India.a ;tt~v•• AliliJOCi&te>li 11... !!/ 111111111P LOCATION MAP - N.T.S. VICINITY MAP - N.T.S. y•~·-.l171~i;lln!J1.l&'I!,,. INDEX OF DRAWINGS @ No. DESCRIPTION North COVl'.R SIU!l!T Afl!D VICINITY MAP ' CONCEPTVALP.D. " CONCJ.!PTUAL EAJITftWORJc: PLAN ,~• CONCI.IPTUAL DRA!NAOl!l'I..AN CONCRITUAL UTILrrY PLAN "· AHRIAL OP SITE CONDmQNS •,. PAVINO, ORADINO Af'IDORAftfAOI! DETAU.S ,. TYPICAL LOTS & S!!CTIONS SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 33s, RANGE 39e PRIIPAIUID BT, --·~- KR:ll:OHT, M@l01nll'~ A:IID Afiil!iilOelA~lil!iil. ID!r@. COJlirllll'U"ll'l'l:ll!arQ BlllrClt.t!Ni"ID!IRilll A!M'D P~III ""'"'"" .,,\i;"::i'llu.'l,l,'m,ro~ "'· 80 RO'TAII PAIIM PDlll'Z'B,, IIU'l'll"II ..,,, 'VBRO :aa&CB,, .-.GRID.&.. a• aeo ••o••· (77• ) ··--••o• •:E"AZ1 ,,,., 889-11HIS !ma. SCOTT P, WcGtll!E !!BO. N~ 3917a _., ATTACHMENT 4 N) O') ).: r 1 1 !rT·1 : r1 ·r rr r r·TTl r 1 Ml . · .. ,;~i J! _L I • i ~"~;"-," _Llj_j-1,L Ilf ".· !! North , .t ~.••·.-1 ... · .. TTTT.1.1 ,11 /.-. 1 \ .. ; ... _,] _ - I 1- - . . · , - · .. ~ EXISTING . . ,•· ··•' I I !:: -~ ,, I:' .(~. ·· •. ):.t\ I,; .. ';: i ~ ; • ' LLLJ·.. ::_I • '·I ·'.·11···. ,•·11 SITE t~--, -<:{'. __ .·· 1i1 I ------___J -- if. ;' ., i ,.,..------r--.... I I NOT PART ~f :l;d-' ~L I OF THIS ,.--,,_, II ,7-.....i.~fl-p] ,=I I I APPLICATION I~=i:3 t~ l ' -:~~"LI : ;j S ' ElQl;\/ISl~N.-.·. I I I < t "--: .._---L-__,,... ~ ,.,1,1 I 1/ :~:t1__ _, 1 " / '-o~ -~7_J rt: , It>.JRT IP,/4\rtT 1\\- , • i . ; L,. OiF rnu1,cLl L_i_l __ " -.~-) r- !-- 1 :-1" ·· I --1 ..I ! ~ 1 ;,, 1-li I I : ' LI/: h I , . (_f~ . \j, (',.. ( •.J!f \J n it ·7 [ :i ~ J . . . . , • -; ·--1 L .. ··f i····! .. . l-:- - - F '--~ •• ( ··-· ·".• ~/ '; i,, ~ j\l -+ .. , .. - ' .._ _ __..-"' '-(<_-..:.~· I ] l It' (\ \ . '-·-. --.~.,- .., i- - , ·- I·.-,1rTj ~-- .~,-~- -~--1.-1 I ' I : ~-~~~ ' , l I ! : : : .. I_J h,~~ - o..,p~""'c,,.,,,•w - L_ --~~~- -·- ··/' ; · I I - :1-1~ - 7 TTTT 1!7 ,,--~~ 'i ~ _~=__! ____' I~ _::-~ -=-· ~- ;_Ji_l..i_ 'L!I--'- .. LJ l l!IA....,.,W -- 2(ITH AVENUE IMPRQVEMEms ctm!Wffl.Y BE1N~ CONSll!LrCIED 1'I I.R.C. 11 DESIGN THE DRAWINGS AR[ TKE PROPERTY 0~ TllE ENGINEER. WHE:f}jER THE PROJECT FOR WtllCH KNIGHT, McGUIRE & ASSOCIATES, INC.• DRAWN ""CRW Falcon Trace Subdivision Tl-!EY ARE MADE IS EXECUTED OR NOT. COPY OR CON:SULTING ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS Conceptual PD USE fOR OTl-lER PROJECl'S IS PERMITTEO ONlY 90 ROY AL PALM POINTE, SUITE 401 VERO BEACH, FL 3:t960 N.T.S. BY WRITT£N CONTRACT WITH THE ENGINEER SCALE Indian River County, Florida UNAUTKDRIZE;!J USE WILL BE PROSECUTED PHONE: (J7l) 56'-5505 FAJI: (77l)S61J.t4SS E-MAIL, [email protected] om 01/12/2009 PURSUANT TO lHE COPYRIGf-IT lAWS CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER. 00006335 · i!\\lTACHMeNT 4 -N> -.J THE DRAWINGS ME TI-JE PROPERTY OF THE ENGINEER. WHCTHER Tl-IE PROJ[CT fOR WHICH KNIGHT, McGUIRE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Falcon Trace Subdivision THEY /IRE MADE IS EXEClJfED OR NOT. COPY OR CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS Aerial of Site Conditions USE fOR OTHER PROJECTS IS PERMITTED ONLY SCALE N.T.S. BY WRITTEN CONTRA.CT WITH THE ENGINEER. 80 ROYAL PALM POINTE, SUITR 401 VERO REACII, l'L 32960 Indian River County, Flolida UNAlffi10RIZED USE WILL BE PROSECUTED PHONF.: (772) 569.SS0S FAX; (772) 569-1455 E-MAIi,: Civil@KnighlM Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator Michael C. Zito, Assistant County Administrator MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners FROM: Joseph A. Baird County Administrator DATE: February 5, 2009 SUBJECT: North County Aquatic Center INFORMATION: During discussion at the February 5, 2009 workshop, a recommendation was made to update the North County Aquatic Center to maintain our competitive status for hosting championship swim meets. The Recreation Department has recommended updating the existing timing system and installing a new permanent timing display system. The estimated cost is $54,024.47. FUNDING: Funding for this system is available from two sources. The first option is the $1 million payment received from Windsor for the Golden Sands beachfront park. The second alternative is to utilize One Cent Sales Tax contingencies. Currently, the balance in One Cent Sales Tax contingencies stands at $262,604 after accounting for other contingency expense authorizations. RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests direction. Should the upgrades be approved, staff requests a funding source be determined, and the necessary budget amendment be authorized. APPROVED AGENDA ITEM Indian River Co Approved Date Administrator ~ J) ,2./1,;,_ /(r) , BYro• r h cBiru,d ..... ~- ' FO : February 17, 2009 129 ){),11 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BOARD MEMORANDUM TO: Joseph Baird County Administrator THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. Gv-- ~Public Works Director FROM: Jonathan C. Gorham, Ph.D. -:J'CL::, Coastal Resource Manager SUBJECT: Work Order #15 Applied Technology and Management Inc. Sector 7 Beach Restoration Post-Construction Monitoring (Summer 2009) DATE: February 9, 2009 DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS The County has contracted with Applied Technology and Management Inc. (ATM) for professional coastal engineering services in Indian River County. The proposed Work Order #15 to this contract provides for services related to permit required post construction biological and physical monitoring of the Sector 7 beach restoration project. Work Order #15 is in the amount of $219,599.00. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING Staff recommends the Board approve Work Order #15 to the contract with Applied Technology and Management Inc. and authorize the Chairman to sign on behalf of the County. The county received state grants for the construction of Sector 7; however, post construction monitoring is not grant eligible. Therefore, local funding sources will be used. Local funding of beach restoration includes a portion of local option tourist tax revenue as well as allocations of the one-cent sales tax. Funding is available and budgeted in the Beach Restoration Fund - Sector 7 Monitoring - Account #12814472-033490-05079. ATTACHMENT Work Order #15 DISTRIBUTION Finance Department Pete Seidle, ATM Inc. 130 APPROVED AGENDA ITEM FOR Indian River Count Administration Bud et Le al Public Works Division 131 AGENDA COPY INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BEACH PRESERVATION PLAN WORK ORDER NO. 15 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN APPLIED TECHNOLOGY .A__ND MANAGEMENT, !NC. AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Pursuant to the Professional Services Agreement (MASIBR AGREEMENT) dated December 13, 2005 and amended December 13, 2008, by and between lNDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as the COUNTY, and APPLIED TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, INC., with a Florida office in WEST PALM BEACH, FL., hereinafter referred to as the CONSULTANT, this WORK ORDER No. 15 is an extension of and hereby becomes a part of the MASTER AGREEMENT as follows: SECTION I - PROJECT DESCRIPTION Services included in this Work Order are specified in the attached Scope of Work included as Exhibit "A" SECTION II- COUNTY OBLIGATIONS The COUNTY agrees to provide the CONSULTANT with the following material, data, or services as required in connection with the work to be performed under this Work Order: A. Currently available studies, survey drawings, plans, calculations, and other data pertinent to the Project. B. Review and comment on CONSULTANTS work in a timely fashion. SECTION III SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSULTANT will provide services as specified in the attached Scope of Work included as Exhibit "A" SECTION IV - TIME FOR COMPLETION After the COUNTY issues a written authorization to proceed, all work shall be completed on or before January 2010 as set forth in Exhibit "C" unless project delays extend the time of completion. I 132 SECTION V COMPENSATION The COUNTY agrees to pay, and the CONSULTANT agrees to accept fees for services rendered according to the attached Cost Proposal included as Exhibit "B". SECTION VI - PARTIAL PAYMENTS The COUNTY shall make monthly partial payments to the CONSULTANT for all authorized work pertaining directly to this project performed during the previous calendar month The CONSULTANT shall submit invoices monthly for services performed and expenses incurred pursuant to this Agreement during the prior month. The CONSULTANT shall submit duly certified invoices to the Director of the Public Works Department. For lump sum line items, the amount submitted shall be the prorated amount due for all work performed to date under this phase, detemrined by applying the percentage of the work completed as certified by the CONSULTANT, to the total due for this phase of the work. For each invoice, the CONSULTANT shall certify that the total invoice amount is correct. The amount of the partial payment due the CONSULTANT for the work performed to date under these phases shall be an amount calculated in accordance with the previous paragraph, less ten percent (I 0%) of the invoice amount thus detemrined, which shall be withheld by the COUNTY as retainage, and less previous payments. The ten percent (10%) retainage withheld shall be paid in full to the CONSULTANT by the COUNTY, within forty-five days after the date of final acceptance of the work by the Director of Public Works. Billings shall be payable in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Prompt Payment Act, Florida Statutes section 218. 70 et. seq. at not less than monthly intervals. No payment shall be made unless the Public Works Director has received and approved the work products required under the "Scope of Services" herein. 2 133 SECTION VII - RELATIONSIDP TO MASTER AGREEMENT AND LAWS OF FLORIDA Pursuant to paragraph 1.4 of the Agreement, nothing contained in any WORK ORDER shall conflict with the terms of the Agreement and the terms of the Agreement shall be deemed to be incorporated in each individual WORK ORDER as if fully set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed these presents this __ day of ___~ 2009. APPLIED TECHNOLOGY INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND MANAGEMENT, INC. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 400 S. AUSTRALIAN AVE. WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 BY:~ BY: ------Michael Jenkins, Ph.D. Wesley S. Davis, Coastal Team Leader Chairman JEFFREY K BARTON, CLERK Attest.: ______ APPROVED strator )1ciApproved as to form and legal ~ Senior Assistant Counzy Attorney 3 134 EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF SERVICES 4 135 Exhibit A - Scope ofSeNices i=ebruary 2009 Work Order 15 Indian River County Beach Sector7 Year 2 Post-Project Monitoring (Summer 2009) INTRODUCTION The Sector 7 project was completed in May 2007, and requires post-project monitoring per FDEP and USACE issued permits. The project placed approximately 360,000 c.y. of sand from the offshore borrow site, and included a vegetated dune feature. The project permits require physical and biological monitoring for post-project and a minimum of four years following construction, which is annually until 2011. This scope of work includes tasks to perform the monitoring and reporting for the 2-Year Post Construction event. Task1 Biological Monitoring and Reporting The FDEP permit requires biological monitoring following the construction. Coastal Eco-Group, Inc. (CEG) will perform the biological monitoring, Continental Shelf Associates International (CSA) will perform required 2nd party quality assurance of the monitoring data, and ATM will perform necessary quality control on the reporting of the data per the DEP-approved Biological Monitoring Plan (August 18, 2006). Work will include surveying the twelve transects established under previous surveys (R-99, R-99.6, R-100.4, R-101.7, R-102.9, R-103.5, R-104.1, R-105.8, R-107.3, R-109.2, R-113 and R-115). The data collection will include collecting video transects, quadrat and sediment thickness data, and surveying the nearshore edge. A comparison of the data collected under this scope of services will be made to prior project datasets. If weather or visibility conditions prevent the collection of data, contingency monitoring will occur per protocol. ATM and CEG will coordinate with FDEP and USACE on nearshore conditions and efforts undertaken as part of this task. The consultants and the County will have weekly teleconferences to coordinate efforts. ATM and CEG will provide the County with regular updates via e-mail or teleconferences of the field efforts, and a report presenting the data and an analysis of the data. Task2 Nearshore Turtle Abundance Monitoring Surveys of sea turtle abundance will be conducted by In-Water Research Group (IRG) along a series of 3-kilometer alongshore transects previously established by Indian River County. There are 3 transects, 300, 600 and 1,200 feet offshore, in the project site extend from R-103 to R-116, and the three alongshore transects in the control site extend from R-62 to R-72. Study sites and survey methodology will be in accordance with the issued project permits. Data will be tabulated and transmitted to ATM and Indian River County (IRC) at the conclusion of the Spring 2009 (April-June) survey effort. IRG will provide ATM with an annual summary report including a statistical analysis of sea turtle abundances between seasons, sites, and distances 136 offshore. For seasonal comparisons and analyses, project site and control site will be pooled. The Spring 2009 event and final reporting will fulfill the required monitoring. Task3 Aerial Photography This task allows for the collection, rectification and gee-referencing of orthogonal aerial photography from R-94 through R-112 per the DEP-approved Physical Monitoring Plan (September 1, 2006). To provide the County with reduced costs, aerial photographs co!!ected under this work order are considered as an add-on to the DEP-required aerial photography for physical monitoring Sectors 1 & 2 (Work Order 11); thus, reconnaissance flights are not included in this scope. When the aerial photographs for Sectors 1 & 2 are collected, Sector 7 photographs will be subsequently acquired during the same flight. ATM will provide the County with a set of aerial photographs and digital copies (with world files) of the aerials in TIF and JPG format. Task4 Beach Tilling and Escarpment Leveling Sunshine Land Design will perform beach tilling and escarpment leveling. Based on the sand compaction measurements and escarpment formation observations provided by County staff (~ February 15'~. Sunshine Land Design will till the beach to a depth of 36 inches (Prior to March 1 ) th and level any escarpment as necessary (prior to April 15 ). This task is limited to a single effort. Task5 Beach Profile Survey Morgan & Eklund will perform the beach profile survey data collection and data reduction. Beach profiles will include R-94 through R-112 including half stations from R-99 to R-101 and from R-106 to R-108 and quarterly stations between R-101 and R-106. All data collected will be accordance with the DEP-approved Physical Monitoring Plan. ATM will review the provide necessary project coordination with the Morgan & Eklund, provide the County with beach profile data in ASCII file format , CAD drawings, and drawings (11x17 format) signed by the surveyor. Task6 Physical Monitoring Report ATM will analyze the data and prepare a physical monitoring report per the DEP-approved Physical Monitoring Plan. The report will include reporting of the pre-and post-construction surveys of the beach profiles and borrow site. ATM will analyze the data for placed sand, shoreline and volume changes and the post-project condition of the borrow site. ATM will provide the FDEP with aerial photography (rectified and gee-referenced under a separate work order). ATM will prepare the 2-Year Post-Construction Physical Monitoring Report as necessary. The County will provide ATM with comments to a draft version, and ATM will distribute the report as necessary. ATM will provide the County with one draft report for review, and distribute final copies to the County and regulatory agencies. Task? Agency Coordination and Project Administration Under this task, ATM will coordinate with federal and state regulatory agencies on key project issues and overall satisfaction of permit-required submittals. Quality control and quality assurance will ensure that all submitlals and agency coordination meet ATM's and the County's standards for reporting. All documents will be peer-reviewed internally by ATM staff, and provided to the County for comment. 137 Future Tasks The issued FDEP and USAGE permits require physical and biological monitoring of the project for a minimum of two additional years. It is assumed that the monitoring requirements will not change, and estimated fees are based on the relevant tasks of this Scope of Work with a 5% increase to account for estimated increases for labor and equipment rates. 138 EXHIBIT 'B' COST PROPOSAL 5 139 Attachment B Work Order 15 - Exhibit B Sector 7 Year 2 Post-Construction Monitoring (2009) ATM Total Labor Total Task Task Description and Breakdown Total Subcontractor and other Direct Budget Costs Task 1 Biological Monttoring $106,611 $11,125 $117,736 Task2 Nearshore Turtle Abundance $3,300 $2,074 $5,374 Task3 Aerial Photoaraphy $3,850 $2,447 $6,297 Task4 Beach Tilling and Escarpment Leveling $9,878 $3,176 $13,054 Task5 Beach Profile survey $25,080 $5,061 $30,141 Task6 Physical Monttorina Report $0 $39,585 $39,585 Task7 Agency Coard. And Project Ad min. $0 $7,413 $7,413 , otal I ask Order Costs ...... $148,719 .$70,880 $219,599 Future Tasks (For information purposes only, not part of this work order) Post-Construction Year-3 Monitoring $241,559.07 Post-Construction Year-4 Monitoring $174,953.49 ...... ,i::::.. C) EXHIBIT 'C' PROJECT SCHEDULE 6 141 Exhibit C ~.Schedule February 2009 Work Order 15 Indian River County Beach Sector7 Year 2 Post-Project Monitoring (Summer 2009) Date of Task . Comoletion/Deliverable 1 Biological Monitoring and Reporting December 2009 2 Nearshore Turtle Abundance Monitoring Seotember 2009 3 Aerial Photograohv Auaust 2009 4 Beach Tillino and Escarpment Leveling Aoril 2009 5 Beach Profile Survev Sentember 2009 6 Phvsical Monitoring Report December 2009 7 Agency Coordination and Project January 201 0 Administration 142 J~J l INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA ITEM DATE: FEBRUARY 11, 2009 TO: JOSEPH A. BAIRD, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: W. ERIK OLSON, DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICE~ PREPARED& MICHAEL C. HOTCHKISS, P.E., CAPITAL PROJECTS 111 //- STAFFED BY: MANAGER, GORDON SPARKS, P.E., ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER h f'. 5 SUBJECT: REPLACEMENT OF 24" FORCE MAIN ON 15TH AVENUE FROM OSLO ROAD TO MASTER IN-LINE PUMP STATION NO. 89 - UCP No. 3096 - APPROVAL FOR ADDITIONAL MATERIALS BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: On October 7, 2008 the Board of County Connnissioners approved a project to replace about 700 feet of 24-inch ductile iron force main in the amount of$229,972.15 for labor and materials and authorized the Chairman to execute Work Authorization No. 2007-018 with Derrico Construction Corporation (Derrico) for $127,869.28. The estimated cost for County purchased materials was $102,102.87. Invoices for materials purchased to date have totaled $101,894.05. There are additional materials in the amount of $77,132.36 still needed to complete the project, resulting in a net value of material in the amount of $179,026.41, which is $76,923.54 more than budgeted. The additional materials cost is the result of replacing above-ground piping in order to improve the hydraulic conveyance properties at the in-line pump station. RECOMMENDATION: The staff of the Department of Utility Services reconnnends that the Board of County Commissioners approve an increase in the amount of$76,923.54 for additional materials. FUNDING: Funding for additional materials is available in the 24" Force Main Replacement from 15"' Avenue to Oslo Road account in the Utilities Fund. ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT NAME AMOUNT 47123536-044699-09501 24" FM R lmt-15Ave to Oslo Rd $76,923.54 APPROVED FOR AGENDA: Indian River Co. FORG_il~ Date 143 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES AGENDA ITEM Date: February 6, 2009 To: Josf~k· B,~J!:,d, C~unty Administrator From: W. ~~;~r of Utility Services Prepared & Michael C. Hotchkiss, P.E. rlJ I+ Staffed By: Capital Projects Manager Subject: South County Reverse Osmosis Plant - Final Pay to ARCADIS RMA, Inc. for Work Order No. 4 to Determine County's Required Contribution to Participate in a Joint Project to Construct a Transmission Pipe and an Injection Well at the City of Vero Beach (COVB) Water Treatment Facility- UCP 3059 BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: On July 1, 2008 the Board of County Commission approved for the Utilities Department to enter into Work Order No. 4 with ARCADIS RMA, Inc. (ARCADIS) to perform a study to determine the County's demand associated with an injection well system that the City of Vero Beach is contemplating for disposal of reverse osmosis demineralization concentrate and the related infrastructure costs (both capital and operational). The study is now complete and the consultant has requested payment for performing consulting services in accordance with the work order. ARCADIS agreed to perform the study for a lump sum fee of $8,500.00. The study has been completed and a report submitted to the County in accordance with the work order. The consultant was previously paid $7,650.00 for 90% of the study. Final payment in the amount of $850.00 will complete the County's obligation to the consultant. Funding for final payment is budgeted and available in the Indian River County / City of Vero Beach Deep Injection Well account in the Utilities Capacity Charges Fund. RECOMMENDATION: It is Staff's recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve final payment of $850.00 to ARCADIS, as presented. ACCOUNT INFORMATION: South County RO Plant 472-169000-08511 $850.00 F:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering\WTP - South RO\Connect South County RO to COVB Injection Well - UCP 3059\Agenda Item for Final Pay Associated with WO No. 4 with Arcadis.doc 144 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: 1. Final Pay Request in the amount of $850.00 to ARCADIS RMA, Inc. APPROVED FOR AGENDA: Indian River Co. Administration Utilities Budget Legal Risk Manager 145 F:\Utilities\UTILITY - Engineering\WTP- South RO\Connect South County RO to COVB Injection Well - UCP 3059\Agendaltem for Final Pay Associated with WO No. 4 with Arcaclis.doc ~ ARCADIS RMA January 15, 2009 Project No: WF142000.0000 Invoice No: 0258838 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY RECEIVED ATTN: ERIC OLSON DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES JAN 2 9 2009 1840 25TH STREET VERO BEACH, FL 32960-3365 UTILITIES Professional engineering services concerning investigation of the feasibility of connecting the County reject line from the Oslo WTP to the City injection well. - FINAL INVOICE Professional services from November 24. 2008 to December 28. 2008 PERCENT PREVIOUS CURRENT BILLING PHASE FEE COMPLETE EARNED BILLING BILLING STUDY/REPORT 8,500.00 100.00 8,500.00 7,650.00 850.00 TOTAL THIS INVOICE $850.00 Bank: Wells Fargo Bank Wut NA ACH bank routing (ABA) nwnber: 102.000078 PluuS.nd To:ARCADISU.S.,Jn~ Account numl»r: 10181114751 Wl,.tnt-.t,rbankrouting (ASA) number: 121000248 0.pt, 547, O.IMlr, ColOR.do 80201-0547, 720.344.3500 Ai:count l>lnle: ARCADIS U.S., Inc. Lockbox Account TERMS: Net30daya 146 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDAITEM DATE: FEBRUARY 6, 2009 TO: JOSEPH A. BAIRD COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: W. ERIK OLSO~ · ,,,-,c-- DIRECTOR OF UTIL PREPARED ANDSTAFFED BY: SUBJECT: WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION PETITION WATER SERVICE (28TH & 29TH COURTS & 70TH PLACE, NORTH OF NORTH WINTER BEACH ROAD- 69TH STREET INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UCP-3013 RESOLUTION IV - FINAL ASSESSMENT BACKGROUND On March 4, 2008, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution ill No. 2008-010 and the preliminary assessment roll for the above-referenced project. Construction of the project has been completed. Property owners have begun connecting to the water system. Staff is requesting the Board's approval of the final assessment roll. ANALYSIS The preliminary assessment was for an estimated cost of$80,000.00, which equated to $0.127363 (Rounded) per square foot of property assessed. The final project cost and assessment (see attached Resolution N and the accompanying assessment roll EXHIBIT "A"), is in the amount of $64,951.23 which equates to a cost of $0.103404 (rounded) per square foot. The final assessment is approximately 18 .81 % less than the preliminary assessment. F:\Utilities\UTILITY - ENGINEERING\Projects - Assessment Projects\WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION WATER ASSESSMENT UCP #4002, fka UCP# 3013\FINAL ASSMT Agenda RES IV.doc 147 RECOMMENDATION The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve adoption of the attached Resolution IV, and authorize the Chairman to execute same. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: I-Resolution IV & Exhibit "A" Final Assessment Roll 2-Final Project Cost and Summary Final Assessment JDC/jdc Attachments Indian River Co. AppJ:J ved Date February 6, 2009 Administration ;\1 '\ ,27»-7?Fi Utilities / '> • - ' ""' l0 c. ,,. .... ,.re ,..,, APPROVED FOR AGENDA: Budget 7 'U , Legal V Iii 'it¥- 1 ,'·- ~ I ' , Risk Manager J "1;'seph A. rh Baird A&A :ty Administrator F:\Utilities\UTILITY - ENGINEERING\Projects - Assessment Projects\WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION WATER ASSESSMENT UCP #4002, fka UCP# 3013\FINAL ASSMT Agenda RES IV.doc 148 As Built (Final Reso.) RESOLUTION NO. 2009-__ A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CERTIFYING "AS-BUILT" COSTS FOR INSTALLATION OF WATER SERVICE TO WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION (28TH AND 29TH COURTS AND 70TH PLACE NORTH OF NORTH WINTER BEACH ROAD--69TH STREET} INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND SUCH OTHER CONSTRUCTION NECESSITATED BY SUCH PROJECT; PROVIDING FOR FORMAL COMPLETION DATE, AND DATE FOR PAYMENT WITHOUT PENALTY AND INTEREST. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County determined that water improvements for properties located in Winter Grove Subdivision (28th and 29th Courts and 70th Place, north of North Winter Beach Road, 69th Street) in Indian River County, Florida, are necessary to promote the public welfare of the county; and WHEREAS, on Tuesday, March 4, 2008, the Board held a public hearing at which time and place the owners of property to be assessed appeared before the Board to be heard as to the propriety and advisability of making such improvements; and WHEREAS, after such public hearing was held the County Commission adopted Resolution No. 2008-010, which confirmed the special assessment cost of the project to the property specially benefited by the project in the amounts listed in the attachment to that resolution; and WHEREAS, the Director of Utility Services has certified the actual "as-built" cost now that the project has been completed is the same as in confirming Resolution No. 2008- 010, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows: 1. Resolution No. 2008-010 payment may be made avoiding interest and penalty charges ninety days after passage of this resolution. 2. Payments bearing interest at the rate of 5.75% per annum may be made in ten annual installments, the first to be made twelve months from the due date. The due date is the date of passage of this resolution. 3. The final assessment roll for the project listed in Resolution No. 2008-010 shall be as shown on the attached Exhibit "A." 4. The assessments, as shown on the attached Exhibit "A," shall stand confirmed, and will remain legal, valid, and binding first liens against the property against which such assessments are made until paid. 5. The assessments shown on Exhibit "A," attached to Resolution No. 2008-010, were recorded by the County on the public records of Indian River County, and the lien shall remain prima facie evidence of its validity. 149 RESOLUTION NO. 2009-___ The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner ------~ and the motion was seconded by Commissioner ------~ and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Wesley S. Davis Commissioner Peter D. O'Bryan Commissioner Joseph E. Flescher Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Commissioner Bob Solari The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this __ day of February, 2009. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Attest: J. K. Barton, Clerk By______By ______Wesley S. Davis, Chairman Deputy Clerk Appr e for form and legal • suf"iec: ~ Marian E. Fell Senior Assistant County Attorney 150 ·1: . " . ll AII I FlNAL ASSESSMENT ~NTER GROVE SUBDM ! ~~y~~o~ T PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00001.0 SQ. FT 21,780 ASSESSMENT 2,252.15 OWNER VALENTINO, ANTHONY E & LINDA 6905 29TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 1 PBI 11 - 100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00002.0 SQ. FT 21,780 ASSESSMENT 2,252.15 OWNER CRAWFORD, STANLEY L 694529TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967-5753 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 2 PBI 11 - 100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00003.0 SQ.FT 21,780 ASSESSMENT 2,252.15 OWNER FORD, DAVID J & KIMM 696529TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967-5753 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 3 PBI 11 -100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00004.0 SQ. FT 21,780 ASSESSMENT 2,252.15 OWNER CALIFF, BRIAN KELLY & LUCINDA 698529TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 4 PBI 11 - 100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00005.0 SQ. FT 21,780 ASSESSMENT 2,252.15 OWNER SANDERS, STEVEN J & KAREN A 7005 29TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 5 PBI 11 - 100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00006.0 SQ. FT 21,780 ASSESSMENT 2,252.15 OWNER VAN EYK, BERNIE & PATRICIA 7025 29TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 6 PBI 11 - 100 151 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00007.0 SQ. FT 22,651 ASSESSMENT 2,342.21 OWNER CAVE, DERRICK B & LISA M 7035 29TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967-5754 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 7 PBI 11 - 100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00008.0 SQ. FT 22,651 ASSESSMENT 2,342.21 OWNER MARTIN, ROXANNE (ANDERSON) 7045 29TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967-5754 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 8 PSI 11 -100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00009.0 SQ. FT 22,651 ASSESSMENT 2,342.21 OWNER ZINK, DANIEL J & SHIRLEY L 7055 29TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 9 PSI 11 - 100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00010.0 SQ.FT 22,215 ASSESSMENT 2,297.13 OWNER LEWIS, MARTIN JOE & MAURA MCMAHON 7065 29TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 10 PSI 11 -100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00011 .0 SQ. FT 22,215 ASSESSMENT 2,297.13 OWNER HARP, BILLY W & KATHRYN A 7075 29TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 11 PSI 11 -100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001000000012.0 SQ. FT 22,215 ASSESSMENT 2,297.13 OWNER GELDERMANN, EDWARD S & TERRY M 7433 HAWKINS CREAMERY RD LAYTONSVILLE, MD 20882 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT12 PBl11-100 PROPERTY7076 29TH CT (VACANT) 2 152 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00013.0 SQ. FT 21,780 ASSESSMENT 2,252.15 OWNER FOULKS, RONALD H JR & THERESA A 7060 29TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 13 PBI 11 - 100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00014.0 SQ. FT 21,780 ASSESSMENT 2,252.15 OWNER POSADA, JUAN C PO BOX3583 VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 14 PBI 11 -100 PROPERTY 7040 29TH CT (VACANT) PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00015.0 SQ. FT 21,780 ASSESSMENT 2,342.21 OWNER MCCORMICK, ROGER DALE & CHERYL 2960 70TH PL VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 15 PBI 11 -100 PARCEL# 3239 03 00001000000016.0 SQ.FT 21,780 ASSESSMENT 2,252.15 OWNER BRIGHT, ROCKY W & NANCY 4901 S INDIAN RIVER DR FORT PIERCE, FL 34982 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 16 PBI 11 -100 PROPERTY 2940 70TH PL PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00017 .0 SQ. FT 23,086 ASSESSMENT 2,387.21 OWNER RILEY, BERNARD R & KAREN S 2920 70TH PL VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 17 PBI 11 - 100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00018.0 SQ. FT 25,700 ASSESSMENT 2,657.49 OWNER HIGGINS, JOHN R. & JUDITH 2925 70TH PL VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 18 PBI 11 -100 3 153 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00019.0 SQ.FT 22,215 ASSESSMENT 2,297.13 OWNER STONE, DENNIS A & PAMELA D 2945 70TH PL VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 19 PBI 11 - 100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00020.0 SQ.FT 23,958 ASSESSMENT 2,477.36 OWNER EISENMANN, GEORGE JR & CAROL J 6980 29TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967 WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LEGAL LOT 20 PBI 11 -100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00021.0 SQ. FT 21,780 ASSESSMENT 2,252.15 OWNER KAHN, MICHAEL & BRENDA J 696029TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 21 PBI 11 - 100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00022.0 SQ.FT 21,780 ASSESSMENT 2,252.15 OWNER MONTY, GAIL M (TR) 1076 W 13TH SQ VERO BEACH, FL 32960 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 22 PBI 11 - 100 PROPERTY6940 29TH CT (VACANT) PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00023.0 SQ. FT 21,780 ASSESSMENT 2,252.15 OWNER ROHACH, CHARLES E & VICKY J 3770 7TH LN VERO BEACH, FL 32968 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 23 PBI 11 - 100 PROPERTY 691 0 29TH CT (VACANT) PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00024.0 SQ. FT 22,651 ASSESSMENT 2,342.21 OWNER STAPLES, CHARLES W 270 NW 36TH ST BOCA RATON, FL 33431 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 24 PBI 11 - 100 PROPERTY 6904 28TH CT (VACANT) 4 154 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00025.0 SQ. FT 22,215 ASSESSMENT 2,297.13 OWNER HOYT, SHAWN J & CHERYL A 6915 28TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 25 PB! 11 - 100 PARCEL# 32 39 03 00001 0000 00026.0 SQ. FT 23,522 ASSESSMENT 2,432.28 OWNER HOWE, JEFFREY R & PEGGY S 6925 28TH CT VERO BEACH, FL 32967-5740 LEGAL WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOT 26 PB! 11 -100 PARCEL# 32 39 02 00000 5000 00004.0 SQ. FT 46,172 ASSESSMENT 4,774.39 OWNER HAMILTON, S THOMAS JR PO BOX 700189 WABASSO, FL 32970 LEGAL W 10 A OF SW 1/4 OF SW 1/4 OF SEC 2-32-39 & INC 1OA OF SE 1/4 OF SE 1/4 OF SEC 03-32-39 & ALSO WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION LOTS 27 & 28 PBI 11 -100. PROPERTY 6910 & 6920 28TH CT (VACANT) FINALSQ FOOTAGE ASSESSED 628,128 FINAL ASSESSMENT AMOUNT $64,951.23 JANUARY 28 2009 5 155 DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES FINAL ASSESSMENT/IN-HOUSE ENGINEERING COST CALCULATIONS Fund 473 Description Amount Project: Winter Grove Subdivision Account Number: 473-169000-08507 Construction Young's Communication Company $55,089 00 Costs: Contractor: Surveying: Permits: Florida Dept. of Environments Protection $250.00 Title Search: Other Administrative: Digital Technographics GIS Printing $730.75 Newspaper Publishing $493.98 Clerk of Court recording/releases $387.50 II Subtotal Total before In-House Costs $56,951.23 I In-House Engineering & Inspection Charges: Survevino Services Drawing & Design Services $2,500.00 Permitting Services $1,000.00 Biddino & Award Services $1,000.00 Services Durina Construction $2,500.00 Administration $1,000.00 I TOTAL PROJECT COST: $64,951.231 WIP Closure Forms 08.xls 473-08507 ATTACHMENT 2 156 WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION WATER SERVICE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UCP- 3013 FINAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY & SCHEDULE SIGNED PETITION - X SIGNED ADDENDUM - ADM X VACANT LOT VAC SIGNED SQUARE PARCEL NO. OWNER PETITION ACREAGE FOOTAGE ASSMT 32 39 03 00001 0000 00001.0 VALENTINO X 0.50 21,780 2,252.15 32 39 03 00001 0000 00002.0 CRAWFORD X 0.50 21,780 2,252.15 32 39 03 00001 0000 00003.0 FORD 0.50 21.780 2.252.15 32 39 03 00001 0000 00004.0 CALIFF X 0.50 21,780 2,252.15 32 39 03 00001 0000 00005.0 SANDERS X 0.50 21,780 2,252.15 32 39 03 00001 0000 00006.0 VAN EYK X 0.50 21,780 2,252.15 32 39 03 00001 0000 00007.0 CAVE X 0.52 22,651 2,342.21 32 39 03 00001 0000 00008.0 MARTIN X 0.52 22,651 2,342.21 32 39 03 00001 0000 00009.0 ZINK X 0.52 22,651 2,342.21 32 39 03 00001 0000 00010.0 LEWIS X 0.51 22,215 2,297.13 32 39 03 00001 0000 00011.0 HARP X 0.51 22,215 2,297.13 32 39 03 00001 0000 00012.0 GELDERMANN VAC 0.51 22,215 2,297.13 32 39 03 00001 0000 00013.0 FOULKS 0.50 21,780 2,252.15 32 39 03 00001 0000 00014.0 POSADA VAC 0.50 21,780 2,252.15 32 39 03 00001 0000 00015.0 MCCORMICK X 0.52 22,651 2,342.21 32 39 03 00001 0000 00016.0 BRIGHT X 0.50 21,780 2,252.15 32 39 03 00001 0000 00017.0 RILEY X 0.53 23,086 2,387.21 32 39 03 00001 0000 00018.0 HIGGINS X 0.59 25,700 2,657.49 32 39 03 00001 0000 00019.0 STONE X 0.51 22,215 2,297.13 32 39 03 00001 0000 00020.0 EISENMANN 0.55 23,958 2,477.36 32 39 03 00001 0000 00021.0 KAHN X 0.50 21,780 2,252.15 32 39 03 00001 0000 00022.0 MONTY VAC X 0.50 21,780 2,252.15 32 39 03 00001 0000 00023.0 ROHACH VAC. 0.50 21,780 2,252.15 32 39 03 00001 0000 00024.0 STAPLES VAC X 0.52 22,651 2,342.21 32 39 03 00001 0000 00025.0 HOYT X 0.51 22,215 2,297.13 32 39 03 00001 0000 00026.0 HOWE 0.54 23,522 2,432.28 LOTS 27 & 28 COMBINED WITH PARCEL TO THE EAST xx 32 39 02 00000 5000 00004.0 HAMILTON VAC 1.06 46,172 4,774.39 SQUARE FOOTAGE TO BE ASSESSED 628,128 21 HOMES 7 VACANT LOTS OWNERS OF 21 LOTS SIGNING (75%) FINAL PROJECT COST AND ASSESSMENT AMOUNT $ 64,951.23 FINAL COST PER SQUARE FOOT $0.10340444941 ROUNDED $0.103404 WINTER GROVE SUBDIVISION PETITION WATER SERVICE . JDC JANUARY 28, 2009 157 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES BOARD MEMORANDUM DATE: FEBRUARY 11, 2009 TO: JOSEPH A. BAIRD, ~~U~NTY j-D~~~TRATOR FROM: W. ERIK OLSON, DI~~TILITY SERVICES SUBJECT: PRESENTATION TO COMMISSION REGARDING PARTNERING WITH THE CITY OF VERO BEACH ON THE PROVISION OF WAS TEWATER TREATMENT SERVICES Per the request of the Board of County Commissioners, the Department of Utility Services will give a presentation to the Commission regarding partnering with the City of Vero Beach on the provision of Wastewater treatment services. APPROVED FOR THE AGENDA : 158 Legislative INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM TO: The Board of County Commissioners, Indian River County THROUGH~ollins, County Attorney FROM: J}2J, George Glenn, Assistant County Attorney DATE: February 9, 2009 RE: Proposed settlement regarding litigation between Double R&D and Indian River County It is requested that the following information be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of February 17, 2009. Description and Conditions On March 6, 2007, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners (Board) denied a request by Double R&D Inc. to change the land use designation for ±40.23 acres from R, Rural Residential (up to 1 unit/acre), to L-1, Low Density Residential-I (up to 3units/acre), and to rezone those 40.23 acres from A-1, Agricultural-I District (up to 1 unit/5 acres), to RS-3, Single Family Residential District-I (up to 3 units/acre). The subject property is located west of86th Avenue and south of the City of Sebastian. After the denial of the proposed land use change, Double R&D filed a lawsuit against the County in Circuit Court. The following is a summary of the action which led to the ongoing litigation, the alleged basis of the litigation, along with a proposed settlement supported by the County Attorney's Office. Background Prior to March 6, 2007 Public Hearing On September 14, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) voted 5-0 to recommend that the Board transmit to the state Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for review a request by Double R&D for a land use amendment on the subject property. The transmittal hearing took place on October 24, 2006, where the Board voted 4-1 against transmitting the proposed Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amendment to the DCA. After a short recess following the vote, the Applicant, through its attorney, offered the dedication of right-of-way without financial compensation in exchange for receiving mdian Niv,er Co. Admln. APPRovEo FOR A -11- oq Legal B.C.C. MEE:!~~L,:,.RE~ AQENDA Budget 1 vV :.::i-- ~ I ...._ Dept COUNTY ATTORNEY • 159 ALc:.k Mor the Comprehensive Land Use Change and rezoning of its property. The Board held a new vote on the transmittal and that passed 3-2. On January 19, 2007, the county received a DCA Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report indicating that the state had no concerns with the proposed amendment and that the county may proceed with adoption of the amendment. The March 6, 2007 Hearing The Board denied adopting the proposed land use map amendment at its March 6, meeting. Concerns over the proposed adoption related mostly to traffic and enviromnental impacts. The Board appeared particularly troubled with the applicant's withdrawal of an earlier proposal to donate right-of-way without compensation. Ongoing Litigation Shortly after the denial of the proposed land use change, the applicant filed suit alleging the County violated the applicant's Due Process rights, committed a Taking in violation of Federal and State Constitutions, and acted contrary to state law, specifically FL Stat. 163.3164(33), the Agriculture Enclave Act. After spending much of the last two years in and out of Court, Double R&D and the County Attorney's Office proposes the following settlement. Proposed Settlement Double R&D will deed into escrow the right-of-way needed to eventually complete the future road improvements for 89th Street. Instructions associated with the escrow arrangement will require the escrow agent to transfer the deed over to the County if and when the property receives both the land use change and the rezoning. In addition, Double R&D requested a waiver of all fees associated with the comprehensive land use amendment process. Community Development assesses a $4,000 fee to process plan amendments. The County Attorney's Office along with the Community Development Director agreed to support lowering the fee to $1,500, which is the cost associated with advertising, etc, Double R&D has agreed to the reduced fee schedule if the Board signals approval. Double R&D also requested the ability to "recycle" its previous application. County Staff agreed to recommend that significant portions of the previous application could be utilized for the current application; however updated portions of the traffic study will be required. Double R&D is currently gathering information relating to the cost impact of the updated traffic study. County staff has participated in talks with the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) relating to the plan amendment. Despite not receiving any comments on the previously 2 160 issued ORC report, DCA is requiring the County to go back through the entire plan amendment process. Staff Recommendation While County Staff supports the proposed settlement, the Board is not in a legal position to grant approval of the settlement at this time. The settlement requires approval of a Comprehensive Land Use Amendment, and Due Process prevents the Board from entering into an agreement which would effectively contract away the police power. Rather, Double R&D and County Staff are looking to the Board for guidance as to whether the proposed settlement appears viable and addresses the concerns which resulted in the earlier denial of the land use change. Attachments A. March 6, 2007 Memorandum for the Double R&D Agenda Item B. Minutes from March 6, 2007 Public Hearing. 3 161 91- INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM TO: Joseph A. Baird, County Administrator Development Director THROUGH: Sasan Rohani, AICP; Chief, Long-Range Planning ~ ·le, FROM: Gale Carmoney; Senior Planner, Long-Range Planning 'j~ DATE: February 18, 2007 RE: Double R&D Inc. 's Request to Amend The Comprehensive Plan to Redesignate ±40.23 Acres From R to L-1, And to Rezone Those ±40.23 Acres From A-1 to RS-3 (LUDA 2005010298-52327; REZON 2005010298-52328) It is requested that the following information be given formal consideration by the Board of County Conunissioners at its regular meeting of March 6, 2007. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS This is a request by Double R&D Inc. to change the land use designation for ±40.23 acres from R, Rural Residential (up to I unit/acre), to L-1, Low Density Residential-1 (up to 3units/acre), and to rezone those 40.23 acres from A-1, Agricultural-I District (up to 1 unit/5 acres), to RS-3, Single Family Residential District-I (up to 3 units/acre). Depicted in the figure below, the subject property is located west of861h Avenue and south ofthe City of Sebastian. The purpose of this comprehensive plan land use amendment is to provide the land use designation and zoning necessary to develop the property with residential units at a density that is consistent with the land use plan densities of adjacent properties. Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning Review Procedures Although the number of plan amendments that a local government may consider is not limited, the frequency with which local governments may amend their comprehensive plans is regulated by state law. According to Florida Statutes, plan amendments are limited to twice per calendar year. For that I ATTACHMENT A reason, the county accepts general plan amendment applications only during the "window" months of Januazy and July. In this case, the subject application was submitted during the July 2006 window. The procedures for reviewing comprehensive plan amendments involve several steps. First, the Planning and Zoning Commission, as the Local Planning Agency, conducts a public hearing to review the request. The Commission has the option to recommend approval or denial of the Comprehensive Plan amendment request to the Board of County Commissioners. Ifthe amendment request is to change a land use designation on the Comprehensive Plan's Future Land Use Map (FLUM), the Planning and Zoning Commission may also recommend approval of or deny any associated rezoning request. Ifthe rezoning request is denied, only the land use amendment request is forwarded to the Board, unless the denial to rezone is appealed. Following Planning and Zoning Commission action, the Board of County Commissioners conducts two public hearings. The first of those hearings is for a preliminary decision on the amendment request. At that hearing, the Board determines whether or not the amendment warrants transmittal to the state Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for further consideration. In the case ofa FLUM amendment, a Board of County Commissioners decision not to transmit the land use amendment to DCA constitutes denial of both the land use amendment and rezoning requests. If the Comprehensive Plan amendment is transmitted, DCA conducts a review, which includes soliciting comments from the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, several state agencies, and neighboring local governments. After its review, DCA compiles- its comments in an Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report, and transmits that report to the county. Subsequent to staff addressing any issues that were raised in the ORC Report, the second and final Board of County Commissioners public hearing is conducted. At that time, the Board takes final action to approve or deny the land use amendment and any rezoning requests associated with the land use amendment. If the Board approves the request, the approved amendment is submitted to DCA for a compliance determination. The effective adoption date is when the amendment is found "in compliance" by DCA. This being the last of the three public meetings, the Board of County Commissioners must decide whether to approve or deny the proposed land use designation amendment and rezoning for the subject property. Past Actions On September 14, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 to Oto recommend that the Board of County Commissioners transmit this request to the state Department ofCommunity Affairs for review. Subsequently, the Board of County Commissioners voted 3 to 2 to transmit the proposed comprehensive plan future land use map amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for state review. On Januazy 19, 2007, the county received a DCA Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report indicating that the state had no concerns with the proposed amendment and that the county may proceed with adoption of the amendment. 2 Existing Land Use Pattern The subject property and the property to the east are zoned A-1 and contain citrus groves. Land to the south and southeast ofthe subject property is zoned RS-3, Single Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre). The land directly to the south is the site of Bluewater Bay PD, a 379 unit planned development project. Southeast of the subject property is another planned development, the Sebastian River Park PD, a 400 unit project. West and north of the subject property, land is within the city limits of the City of Sebastian. The land to the west is zoned RS-JO, Residential Single Family (I 0,000 square foot minimum lot size), on the City's zoning map and has been cleared for development. The City of Sebastian's RS-10 zoning district allows single-family residential uses with densities up to four units/acre. The land to the north is zoned PUD-R, Planned Unit Development-Residential, and is platted at 3 units/acre. Zoning of Subject Property and Surrounding Properties Future Land Use Pattern The subject property and the property to the east are designated R, Rural Residential, on the county's future land use map. The R designation permits residential development with densities up to I unit/ acre. Land to the south and southeast of the subject property is designated L-1, Low Density Residential-I, on the county's future land use map. This designation permits residential development with densities up to 3 units/acre. 3 The properties that are west and north of the subject property are in the City of Sebastian and are designated LDR, Low Density Residential, on the City's future land use map. The LDR designation permits residential uses with densities up to 5 units/acre. Environment The subject property is currently a citrus grove. According to Flood Insurance Rating Maps, the site is not within a flood hazard area. Aerial photos indicate that there are nominal native upland plant commnnities existing on the site. A remnant tributary to the St. Sebastian River exists on the property. Over time, this tributary has been modified into a drainage ditch associated with the grove. This drainage area may include wetland features. Although the subject property is not adjacent to the South Prong of the St. Sebastian River, the property is included with land identified on the conceptual map ofthe St. Sebastian River Greenway. The Board formally adopted this conceptual greenway plan on March 14, 2006. Land Use Designation of Subject Property and Surrounding Properties Proposed L-1 4 Utilities and Services The site is within the urban service area of the county. Wastewater service is available to the site from the North County Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant, while potable water service is available to the site from the North County Reverse Osmosis Plant. Transportation System Eighty-sixth Avenue borders the east side ofthe subject property. This segment of 86th Avenue is an unpaved local road that dead-ends at the northeast comer of the subject property. Currently, the county is working with developers to create a system of paved public roads in this area that will connect with C.R. 510 at two locations. · One roadway to be improved is the southern segment of 86th Avenue, from the southeast corner of the subject property south to 85th Street/C.R. 510. The other majorroadway improvement project is the construction of 89 th Street from 86th Avenue west to 90111 A venue/C.R. 5 I 0. Presently, no right of-way exists for 89th Street from 86th Avenue to 90th Avenue. This right-of-way will be dedicated by development projects located on land, including the subject property, abutting g9tl• Street. ANALYSIS In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of tl1e application will be presented. This section will include the following: • An analysis of the proposed amendment's impact on public facilities; • An analysis of the proposed amendment's compatibility with surrounding areas; An analysis of the proposed amendment's consistency with the comprehensive plan; and • An analysis of the proposed amendment's potential impact on environmental quality. Concurrency of Public Facilities This site is located within the County Urban Service Area (USA), an area deemed suited for urban scale development. The Comprehensive Plan establishes standards for: Transportation, Potable Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste, Drainage and Recreation (Future Land Use Policy 3.1). The adequate provision of these services is necessary to ensure the continued quality oflife enjoyed by the community. To ensure that the minimum acceptable standards for these services and facilities are maintained, the comprehensive plan requires that new development be reviewed. For la11d use designation amendment requests, this review is undertaken as part of the conditional concurrency determination application process. As per section 910.07 of the County's Land Development Regulations (LDRs), conditional concurrency review examines the available capacity of each facility wifu respect to a proposed project. Since land use amendment 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 5 requested land use designation. For this request, the most intense use (according to the County's LDRs) is the maximum number ofresidential units that could be built on the site, given the size of the property and the maximum density under the proposed land use designation amendment. The site information used for the concurrency analysis is as follows: 1. Size of Area to be Redesignated: ±40.23 acres 2. Existing Land Use Designation: R, Rural Residential (up to 1 unit/ acre) 3. Most Intense Use with Existing Land Use Designation: 40 units 4. Proposed Land Use Designation: L-1, Low Density Residential-I (up to 3 units/acre) 5. Proposed Zoning District: RS-3, Single Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre) 6. Most Intense Use with Proposed Land Use Designation: 120 Single Family Residential Units Transportation As part of the concurrency review process, the applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). A TIA 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 land use designation, and assigns those trips to impacted roads. Impacted roads are defined in section 910.09(4)(b)3 of the county's LDRs as roadway segments which receive five percent (5%) or more of the project traffic or fifty (50) or more project trips, whichever is less. According to the approved TIA, the existing level of service on impacted roads would not be lowered by the traffic generated by development of 120 units on the subject property. A summary of the Traffic Impact Analysis is provided in Attachment 4. With the proposed land use designation, the subject property could accommodate 120 residential units, resulting in water consumption at a rate of 120 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU), or 30,000 gallons/day. This is based upon a level of service of250 gallons/ERU/day. Development on the subject property would be served by the North County Reverse Osmosis Plant, which currently has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional demand generated by the proposed land use designation. 6 Wastewater Based upon the most intense use allowed under the proposed land use designation, development of the property will have a wastewater generation rate of approximately 120 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU), or 30,000 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 North County 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. The county's adopted level of service standard for landfill capacity is 3.67 cubic yards/person/year. With the county's average of approximately 2.25 persons/unit, a 120 unit residential development would be anticipated to house approximately 270 people (2.25 X 120). For the subject request to meet the county's adopted level of service standard of 3 .67 cubic yards/person/year, the landfill must have enough capacity to accommodate approximately 990.9 (120 X 3.67) cubic yards/year. A review of the solid waste capacity for the active segment of the county landfill indicates that the county landfill can accommodate the additional solid waste generated by the site under the proposed land use designation. Stonnwater Management All developments are reviewed for compliance with county stormwater regulations, which require on-site retention, preservation of floodplain storage and minimum finished floor elevations. In addition, development proposals must meet the discharge requirements of the county Storrnwater Management Ordinance. Since the subject property is located within the St. Sebastian Drainage Basin, development on the site 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. Both the on-site retention and discharge standards apply. The stormwater management level of service standard will be met by limiting off-site discharge to the predevelopment rate and maintaining on-site retention of the stormwater runoff for the most intense use of the property. Recreation A review of county recreation facilities and the projected demand that would result from the most intense development that could occur on the property under the proposed land use designation indicates that the adopted levels of service would be maintained. The table below illustrates the additional park demand associated with the proposed development of the property and the existing surplus acreage. 7 Park Information LOS (Acres per 1,000 Population) I Proiect Demand (Acres) I Surplus Acreage 6.61 I 1.78 I 64.92 Concurrency Summaiy Based upon the analysis conducted, staff determined that all concurrency-mandated facilities, including stormwater management, roads, solid waste, water, and wastewater, have adequate capacity to accommodate the most intense use of the subject property under the proposed comprehensive plan amendment. Therefore, the concurrency test has been satisfied for the subject request. As with all projects, a detailed concurrency analysis will be done in conjunction with site development. That concmTency analysis will address facility service levels and demand. Compatibility with the Surrounding Area It is staffs position that development under the requested land use designation and zoning district will be compatible with the surrounding area. Because the site is bounded on the south by L-1 designated land in the unincorporated county and on the west and north by land designated LDR in the City of Sebastian, the request is for the extension of an established land use designation and the continuation of the development pattern in this area. Other factors indicate that the subject property is an appropriate site for the L-1 land use designation. These factors include programmed infrastructure improvements in the area as well as the existence of complementary commercial and institutional land uses proximate to the subject property. In terms of infrastructure, there are several roadway projects under construction or under design that will ss,rve development on the subject property. These projects include the widening of both C.R. 512 and C.R. 510. Besides those projects, there is the developer funded 86th Avenue and 89th Street project that will directly serve development on the subject property. In addition, water and sewer lines are being extended to the subject property with development ofthe adjacentBiuewater Bay and Sebastian Park Projects. Another compatibility factor is the existence of nearby supportive land uses. Within close proximity to the subject property are several school facilities, including an elementary school and a high school. With the recent construction of a Publix and other neighborhood shopping facilities close to the subject property, the convenience commercial shopping facilities necessary to serve residential development now exist, Given the existence of the nearby school and shopping facilities, as well as the infrastructure improvements, changing the subject property's land use designation from R to L-1 will enhance the compatibility in the area and allow appropriate residential development on the subject property. 8 For these reasons, redesignating the subject property to L-1 and rezoning the property to RS-3 will be compatible with surrounding area. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Land use amendment and rezoning requests are reviewed for consistency with all policies of the comprehensive plan. As per section 800.07(1) of the land development regulations, the "comprehensive plan may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to Section 163 .3177(2), FS." Amendments must also show consistency with the overall designation of land uses as depicted on the Future Land Use Map, which includes agricultural, residential, recreational, conservation, and commercial and industrial land uses and their densities. The goals, objectives and policies are the most important parts of the comprehensive plan. Policies are statements in the plan which identify 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 including plan amendment and rezoning decisions. While all comprehensive plan objectives and policies are important, some have more applicability than others in reviewing plan amendment and rezoning requests. Of particular applicability for this request are the following policies and objectives. Future Land Use Element Policy 14.3 The most important policy to consider in evaluating a plan amendment request for consistency with the county's Comprehensive Plan is Future Land Use Element Policy 14.3. This policy requires that at least one of four criteria be met in order to approve a land use amendment request. These criteria are: • The proposed amendment will correct a mistake in the approved plan; • The proposed amendment will correct an oversight in the approved plan; • The proposed amendment involves a swap or reconfiguration of land uses at separate sites, and that swap or reconfiguration will not increase the overall land use density or intensity depicted on the Future Land Use Map; or • The proposed amendment is warranted based on a substantial change in circumstances affecting the subject property. Based on its analysis, staff feels that the proposed land use aniendment meets Policy 14.3 's fourth criterion. When the comprehensive plan was adopted in 1990, the area between 85th Street/CR 510 and the City of Sebastian was designated R from 90th Avenue to 66th Avenue. As a result, the subject 9 property was part of a larger contiguous area of R designated land. As part of the Comprehensive Plan's 1998 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR), all of the R designated land in this portion of the county was proposed to be redesignated to L-1, Low Density Residential-I (up to 3 units/acre). The EAR concluded that the L-1 land use designation would be more appropriate adjacent to land in the Vero Lake Estates Subdivision which had an L-1 designation and land in the City of Sebastian which had a land use designation that permitted residential development density similar to L-1. At that time, the Board decided not to change this area to L-1, but instead to review each land use amendment on a case-by-case basis. Since then, the adjacent 290 acres to the south of the site were redesignated to L-1 and rezoned to RS-3, while the 40 acre tract to the west was annexed into the City of Sebastian. These amendments and annexations affected the subject property in the following three ways. • The site is now adjacent to L-1 designated land to the south; • The site is now adjacent on two sides to Low Density Residential designated land in the City of Sebastian; and • The site is no longer part of a larger contiguous area of R designated land. While the redesignation of adjacent land is not always justification for a land use amendment, it is relevant in this case for the above reasons. Another change affecting the site involves public schools. Since the 1990 adoption of the comprehensive plan, two new schools have been built within one mile of the subject property. Located west ofthe subject property (across 90tl' Avenue), the Sebastian River High School was built in the mid-1990's, while the Treasure Coast Elementary School (formerly known as Liberty Magnet School) to the sou1h of the subject property (across 85th Street) was completed in 2002. Allowing a slightly denser land use designation near these schools makes sense for the following reasons. • These schools will attract families with children. Generally, housing at a density ofup to 3 units/acre is more affordable for families with children than the up to 1 uoit/acre density permitted under the cunent land use designation. • The entire subject property is within one mile of both school sites. That proximity allows residents on the subject property to walk or bike to the school sites, thus reducing automobile trips and student reliance on others for transportation. Therefore, the redesignation and annexation of adjacent lands and the proximity of both a high school and an elementary school constitute changes in circumstances affecting the subject property. 10 Since these actions constitute changes in circumstances, the fourth criterion of Future Land Use Element Policy 14.3 has been met, and the proposed amendment is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy 14.3. Future Land Use Element Objective 1 and Policies 2.2 and 4.1 This objective and these policies state that Indian River County will have an efficient and compact land use_ pattern which encourages infill development in the existing urban service area and maintains the county's overall low density character. By increasing the density of land currently within the urban service area, as opposed to expanding the urban service area, the county can efficiently support growth without creating urban sprawl or sacrificing compactness. Furthermore, the requested L-1 land use designation maintains the overall low density character ofthe county. For these reasons, the proposed amendment is consistent with Future Land Use Element Objective l and Policies 2.2 and 4.1. Future Land Use Element Policy 1.11 Future Land Use Element Policy 1.11 states that the L-1 land use designation is intended for areas which are: I. suitable for urban and suburban scale development; and 2. within the urban service area; and 3. located in proximity to existing urban centers. The site is now, as it was when the comprehensive plan was found "in compliance" by DCA, appropriate for low density residential development. Factors that demonstrate that the subject property meets each of Future Land Use Element Policy 1.11 's criteria include tl1e following. • The site is located within the urban service area; • The site is located near a major road; • Potable water service is available to the site; • Sanitary sewer lines are within a half mile of the site; • The site is located near an existing public high school, public middle school, and a public elementary school; • The site is bounded on two sides by the City of Sebastian; • The site is located near the CR 510/CR 512 commercial/industrial node; and • The site is adjacent to L-1 designated land to the south. For these reasons, the proposed amendment is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy I. 11 11 Comprehensive Plan Consistency Conclusion Besides the policies addressed above, staff reviewed the request with respect to all policies in the comprehensive plan. Based on the review, staffs position is that the proposed request is consistent the comprehensive plan. Potential Impact on Environmental Quality Environmental impacts of residential development on the subject property would be essentially the same under either the existing or the proposed land use designation. Currently a citrus grove, the site contains minimal upland plant habitat. Any wetlands that are located on the site and identified in an approved environmental survey are protected by federal, state, and county regulations. For these reasons, significant adverse environmental impacts associated with this request are not anticipated. CONCLUSION Based on the analysis, staff has determined that the requested land use designation and zoning district are compatible with surrounding areas, consistent with the comprehensive plan, meet all concurrency criteria, will have no negative impacts on environmental quality, and meet all applicable land use designation amendment and rezoning criteria. Most importantly, the subject property is located in an area deemed suited for low density residential uses. For these reasons, staff supports the request to amend the land use designation ofthe subject property from R to L-1 and to rezone the site from A-1 to RS-3. RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis performed, tl1e Planning and Zoning Commission and staff recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve this request to redesignate the subject 40.23 acres from R, Rural Residential (up to I unit/acre), to L-1, Low Density Residential (up to 3 units/acre), rezone those 40.23 acres from A-1, Agricultural-I District (up to 1 unit/5 acres), to RS-3, Single Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre), and direct staff to submit the adopted land use plan amendment to the state Department of Community Affairs for compliance review. ATTACHMENTS 1. Summary Page 2. Land Use Designation Amendment Application 3. Rezoning Application 4. Traffic Impact Summary 5. Excerpt from Approved Minutes of September 14, 2006, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 6. Excerpt from Approved Minutes from tlie October 24, 2006 Board of County Commissioners meeting 7. Department of Community Affairs Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report dated January 19, 2007 12 1~73 8. Land Use Designation Amendment Ordinance 9. Rezoning Ordinance F:\Community Developmen\Users\LONG RANGBCompPian Amendments.July 2006 CPPIDouble RD The Hammock!BCC Adoption Item.doc Indian River Co. Admin. Legal 13 SUMMARY PAGE GENERAL Applicant: Double R&D Inc. Location: West of 86th Ave. and south of the City of Sebastian Acreage: 40.23 Land Use Designation: R, Rural Residential (up to 1 unit/acre.) Existing Zoning: A-1, Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres.) Requested Land Use Designation: L-1, Low-Density Residential-I (up to 3 units/ac.) Requested Zoning: RS-3, Single-Family Residential District (up to 3 units/ac.) Existing Land Use: Citrus Grove ADJACENT LAND North: City of Sebastian; zoned PUD-R, residential subdivision South: Vacant land; zoned RS-3, Bluewater Bay PD East: Citrus grove; zoned A-1 West: City of Sebastian-Vacant Land; zoned RS-JO INFRASTRUCTURE Water from the North County Reverse Osmosis Plant; sewer is not currently available bnt could be provide by the Central Regional Wastewater Plant; access is from C.R. 510. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS None; flood Zone X PUBLIC NOTIFICATION PZC BCC BCC Transmittal Adontion Staff Contact: Gale Gale Gale Cannoney Carmoney Carmoney Date Advertised: August 30, October 9, Feb. 19, 2006 2006 2007 # Qf Surrounding 8 8 8 ProQe[!y Owner Notifications: Date Notification Sept. 1, October 9, Feb. 20, Mailed: 2006 2006 2007 Date Sign Pg~ted; Sept. 1, Octub~r 11, Fi.b. 20, 2006 2006 2007 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff supports the request Attachment 1 st they have to have it done by May I • AMENDMENT TO ILA IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD 8.A. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES - NONE 9. PUBLIC ITEMS - A.I DOUBLE R&D INC.'S REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO REDESIGNATE +40.23 ACRES FROM R TO L-1, AND TO REZONE THOSE +40.23 ACRES FROM A-1 TO RS-3 ;LEGISLATIVEi. PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR HEARING IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD (Clerk's Note: Court Reporter Debra McManus of American Reporting was present on behalfof Bruce Barkett, Esquire) Community Development Director Bob Keating informed the Board that the next four public hearings were Comprehensive Plan Amendments and requested permission to make presentations on each at the same time. Director Keating exp!, :nd outlined the step-by-step Comprehensive Plan Amendment pn µidum of February 18, 2007 and through a PowerPoint presentati \:, surrounding properties, and explained the purpose of the req1 re land use designation on March 6, 2007 ATTACHMENT B 176 the future land use map from R (rural designation - up to I unit per acre) to L-1 (low density residential-up to 3 units per acre). Director Keating reminded the Board of past actions on this matter and noted that the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) had looked at it and had no objections. Staff felt the amendment was compatible with surrounding uses, it met the concurrency requirements, there were no environmental impacts, and it was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommended approval and adoptions of the ordinances presented and asked for direction to submit the documents to DCA for compliance review. Commissioner O'Bryan was concerned that they were increasing the overall density and asked if there was anything in our ordinance that could require that. Director Keating said there were provisions relative to commercial/industrial whereby they set limits for nodes ( acreage amounts) and they do not allow an expansion of the node unless the development percent of the node is increased or unless there is a swap, which is in essence a no-net increase of commercial acreage. Chairman Wheeler read documentation that attested to Mr. Barkett' s promise to have the right-of-way dedicated, which had not been done. He was therefore not in favor of making a decision until he knew there were right-of-ways and roads could be built. There were no other questions from the Board and the Chairman opened the Public Hearing. Bruce Barkett, Esquire, 756 Beachland Boulevard and representing the Applicant, argued that there were two ways to take property from an individual, either by eminent domain and pay just compensation, or when a project comes in they could do an individualized assessment to determine the impact to that project and make a rough proportional determination March 6, 2007 20 177 of what the impact to that project is and thereby determine how much right-of-way could be taken from the individual. He further argued that his client has a constitutional right to compensation for his right-of-way and had not waived such right. Chairman Wheeler reminded Mr. Barkett of his promise to deliver the deed to escrow as soon as they get the legal description and to work out the terms with the County Attorney. He asked Mr. Barkett why that was not done. Mr. Barkett had done some research, on his client's behalf, and found out it was not legal. Chairman Wheeler engaged in further discussions with Mr. Barkett and could not support the request without the right-of-way. Michael O'Haire, Esquire, representing Double R&D Inc., also discussed eminent domain issues and his client's entitlement, under the law, to have the Comprehensive Plan change and rezoning granted. He hoped the Board would not deny the approval unless his client contributes right-of-way. Chairman Wheeler explained his position when the Board in the past voted on this. Commissioner Davis was concerned with interconnectivity issues, which he explained. He could not put taxpayers in a compromising position. Mr. O'Haire and Commissioner Davis engaged in discussion regarding denial of the rezoning. Commissioner Davis expressed strong opposition to the granting of an "up-zoning so they could buy it later." Joseph Paladin, Chairman, Growth Awareness Committee (a Private Sector Organization), commented that the policy mentioned earlier "more reflects on raw lands" and negotiated right-of-ways before we enter into development. He urged the Board to vote "no" on March 6, 2007 21 178 this project. Mr. Barkett presented two important points to consider before the Board takes a vote: (I) "they are projects", and that is what are negotiated for a right-of-way, and the Board did not have a project before them; and (2) they did not have the deeds yet. Therefore, Mr. Paladin's comments were irrelevant. Chairman Wheeler inquired about the PD Mr. Barkett's client said he would do. Discussion ensued between Mr. Barkett and Chairman Wheeler regarding planned development. Mr. Paladin asked staff if any of this was covered under our new County Code (Chapter 952). Director Keating said, "No, not at comp plan time or zoning either." Mr. Paladin and O'Haire debated further on the issues. Chairman Wheeler was still opposed to it. There were no additional speakers and the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. Attorney Collins provided detailed legal op1mon in the matter of "entitlement compensation". He remarked that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is a Legislative Act and determination as to whether it is appropriate is subject to a fairly debatable standard. He cited portions of Fl Statutes 163.3161(3), which talks about the intent and purpose of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act and based on those provisions was not convinced that it was totally inappropriate for the Board to be looking out for these transportation facilities ("the good order comfort") at the Comprehensive Plan stage. Mr. Barkett asked Attorney Collins whether he had found (of all cases researched) a single one where dedication was required at the Comprehensive Plan amendment or the rezoning stage. March 6, 2007 22 179 Attorney Collins had not done that research but he had heard a lot of commentary around the State of Florida that DCA is more and more expecting local governments to look at these issues at the Comp Plan stage. Mr. Barkett stated for the record that DCA did propose that and that rule was challenged by Tom Pelham who has since been made the head of the DCA. He suggested "Mr. Pelham's rule challenge" would be effective. Attorney Collins suggested that Mr. Pelham is not always right about everything. On MOTION by Commissioner Flescher, SECONDED by Commissioner O'Bryan, the Board by a vote 4-0 (Vice Chair Bowden absent) DENIED Double R&D's Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to redesignate the subject 40.23 acres from R, Rural Residential (up to 1 unit/acre), to L-1, Low Density Residential (up to 3 units/acre), rezone those 40.23 acres from A-1, Agricultural-I District (up to 1 unit/5 acres), to RS-3, Single-Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre), and direct staff to submit the adopted land use plan amendment to the State Department of Community Affairs for compliance review. The Chairman called a Break at 10:14 a.m. and reconvened the Meeting at 10: 31 a. m. with all members present. March 6, 2007 23 180 /38 Office ef Attorney's Matters 02/ 17I 09 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ATTORNEY William G. Collins II, County Attorney William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney Marian E. Fell, Assistant County Attorney George A. Glenn, Assistant County Attorney MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: u/-, William Collins, County Attorney vE-- FROM: William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney ~ DATE: February 4, 2009 SUBJECT: Unconditional Offer for Parcel of property owned by Evangelos and Ann Abazis, 6800 5ylh Street, Vero Beach Evangelos and Ann Abazis own a 9.8 acre parcel of property located at 6800 5ylh Street. This property is adjacent to the Abazis' homestead to the west and th consists of a citrus grove. The property lies west of 66 Avenue. This site is rectangular in shape with 331.43 feet of frontage along s?1h Street and is 1288 feet deep. The property is located outside the urban service boundary and is zoned A-1 Agricultural. The parcel contains a citrus grove in poor condition. There are no structures on the property. th In order to accommodate the planned improvements to 5yth Street and 66 Avenue, the County needs to acquire a 50' X 331.43' strip of property to be used as right-of-way from the Abazis. The total take is approximately 0.381 acres. A copy of the sketch of the parent parcel, the part taken, and remainder is attached to this memorandum. The proposed right-of-way line will involve site improvements consisting of a three board wooden fence, palm trees and a pecan tree that lie within the area of take. Dale tndi~ Riv« Co. ,~ved Admln. JI;;,_ It) o/ , -~a .)/f",',, ~ Legal ,,, n APPROVED FOR -M-17-09 Budge1 lat Oe;,I. r .... '...... ,j ;J..- (/ - •? B.C.C. ME~-w~NDA ,-- Risk Mgr. "-. COUNTY ATTORNEY 181 Evangelos and Ann Abazis grove parcel February 11, 2009 Page 2 A recent appraisal establishes the value of the partial taking at $24,400. The partial taking damages consist of severance damages in the amount of $9,250 and the value of the land and site improvements of $15,150. Due to the size and shape of the parcel, staff is not recommending offering to purchase the entire parcel. In order to recommence negotiations with Mr. and Mrs. Abazis, who are represented by David Holloway of the firm of Tileston, Simon & Holloway, the Board is required to make an unconditional offer to the Abazis and provide them with a copy of the appraisal on which it is based. In the past, the Board has extended offers of the appraised value plus 15% in order to encourage settlement and defray possible attorney's fees. In this case the appraised value of the right-of-way needed of $24,400 plus 15% would equal $28,060. Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board approve an unconditional offer to purchase the necessary right-of-way from Evangelos and Ann Abazis at a price of $28,060.00. Funding: Funding is budgeted and available from Traffic Impact Fees District II Account #10215241-066120-06040 and Optional Sales Tax Account #31521441- 066120-06040 Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. 182 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY DESCRIPTION. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY! LOCATION MAP: NOT TO SCALE 61st ,st. 0 "0 0::: OWNERS: EVANGELOS ABAZIS AND ANN ABAZIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCEL 134 A PARCEL OF LAND BEING THE NORTH 50.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 80.00 FEET OF THE EAST 10 ACRES OF TRACT 7, INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY PLAT OF LANDS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25, PUBLIC RECORDS, SAINT LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, ALL SAID LANDS LYING WITHIN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CONTAINING 0.381 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SAID PARCEL OF LAND LYING WITHIN THOSE LANDS AS DESCRIBED IN .OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 972, PAGE 2773, PUBLIC RECORDS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CERTIFICATION: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE DESCRIPTION AND ATTACHED SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION WERE PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SURVEYING STANDARDS, CHAPTER 61G17-6, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, AS SET FORTH BY THE FLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL SURVEYORS & MAPPERS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 472.027, FLORIDA STATUTES, AND IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. UNLESS IT BEARS THE SIGNATURE AND THE ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL .OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER, THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND SKETCH IS FOR INFORMATION URPOSES O Y AND IS NOT VALID. NOTE: THIS IS NOT A SKETCH OF SURVEY, BUT ONLY A GRAPHIC DEPICTION OF THE DESCRIPTION SHOWN HEREON. THERE HAS BEEN NO FIELD WORK, VIEWING OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, OR MONUMENTS SET IN CONNECTION C HITE WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE INFORMATION SHOWN PROFE8 IONAL LAND SURVEYOR AND MAPPER HEREON. NOTE: LANDS SHOWN HEREON WERE NOT LICENSE NO. 4213, STATE OF FLORIDA ABSTRACTED FOR RESTRICTIONS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND DATE: D3/26/07 EASEMENTS OF RECORD. PROJECT MANAGER DEPARJMOO MANAGER SCAI.£: CHECKED BY PCW PCW 1· = so· PCW '1° SHEIT Tm.E OAlE DRAWN BY I;! 03/26/07 JI[ l ~ARCADIS !!I ADDITTONAL R/W PROJECT NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER s ARCADIS U.S., INC. ~ 2081 Vista Parkway Tel: (561)007•7000 Fax: (561) 697-7751 WPD01053 1053S @ West Palm Beach, Florida 33411 www.arcadis-us.com SHEEr 1 OF 2 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY DESCRIPTION. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY! LEGEND: fl - BASELINE 0 IRFC - INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY co L - LEFT II O.R.B. - OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK P.B. - PLAT BOOK w PG. - PAGE --' R - RIGHT c5(/) R/W - RIGHT-OF-WAY STA - STATION S.L.C.R. - ST. LUCIE copNTY RECORDS I I I A PORTION OF I TRACT 7, IRFC P.B. 2, PG. 25 I ADDRESS: 57th STREET A PORTION OF I VERO BEACH, FL., 32967 TRACT 7, IRFC I PID-32391800001007000003.0 L------P.B. 2, PG. 25 I O.R.B. 972, PG. 2773 I I EAST 10 ACRES OF TRACT 7 I A PORTION OF TRACT 8, IRFC ~ P.B. 2, PG. 25 STA: 492+97.44 STA: 489+65.61 ~ . 0 OFFSET: 36.00 L OFFSET: 36.00 L OE 9c S00'1f04"W ~!a! 50.00 S89'01 '01 "E 331.83' Q @ 489+00 490+00~ f6 491+00 @ 492+00 ~ 494+00 N89'01'01"W 57th STREET 331.43 g __,___.,___' I! OF SURVEY STA: 492+98.12 ------:;;-7 OFFSET: 14.00 R 60' SUB-LATERAL "A-10" CAN~~j ~30' EASEMEMT INDIAN RIVER FARMS CO. PLAT OF LANDS D.B. 48, PG. 23 SOUTH LINE OF P.B. 2, PG. 25, S.L.C.R. TRACT 7 STA: 489+66.69 OFFSET: 14.00 R OWNERS: EVANGELOS ABAZIS AND ANN ABAZIS PROJECT MmAGER DEPARlMENf MAl/l,GER SCALE: CHECKED BY 0 pc;w pc;w 1• = BO' pc;w ,,"' OA]E, DRAWN BY ~ SHEEr TITLE t!l 03/26/07 J}i 00 0 ... PROJECT NUMBER ORAWING NUMBER fiARCADIS m ADDITIONAL R/W i ARCADIS U.S., INC. .J WP001053 2081 VISta Parkway Tel: (561) 697•7000 Fax: (561) 697-7751 10538D134 ~ www.arcadis-us.com SHEET 2 OF 2 @) West Palm Beach, Florida 33411 Office oj Attorney's Matters 02/17/09 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ATTORNEY William G. Collins II, County Attorney William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney Marian E. Fell, Assistant County Attorney George A. Glenn, Assistant County Attorney MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: (..UL-William Collins, County Attorney ,, /;(") FROM: William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney w~ DATE: February 11, 2009 SUBJECT: Unconditional Offer for a Parcel of Land on the corner of 66th Avenue and 5ih Street owned by Steven, William and Evan Abazis Steven, William and Evan Abazis as joint tenants with rights of survivorship own a parcel of property that will be impacted by the improvements to 66th Avenue. This memorandum addresses a vacant parcel that is needed for right-of-way and a retention pond. The Abazis family owns other parcels of property along 5ih Street that will be addressed separately. The Abazis' own a 9.81 acre parcel of ~roperty located at 5875 66th Avenue on northwest corner of 66th Avenue and 5i Street. This site is rectangular in shape with 1,298.42 feet of frontage along 66th Avenue and is 328.88 feet deep. The property is located outside the urban service boundary and is zoned A-1 Agricultural. The parcel contains a 4 bedroom, 2 bath, 1,308 sq. foot concrete block house built in 1979. The residence lies within the area of take. The parcel also has a garage building and an older single family mobile home but these structures lie outside the area of take on the remainder parcel. . Site improvements consisting of landscaping, a driveway and ornamental palm tree stock lie within the area of take. In order to accommodate the planned improvements to 66th Avenue, the County needs to acquire two parcels of property from the Abazis': a 3.841 acre parcel to be used as right-of-way and 2.201 acre parcel to be used as a retention pond necessary to treat stormwater runoff from the expanded 66th Avenue. ln~an Rlv,r Cn Admln. Legal Budge! Dept f'f\111\lTY A TTOR Risk Mgr. 185 Abazis pond and right-of-way parcel February 11, 2009 Page 2 The total area of take is 6.042 acres from the 9.81 acre parcel. A copy of the sketch of the parent parcel, the part taken, and remainder is attached to this memorandum. A recent appraisal establishes the value of the entire parcel at $473,000. The partial taking was valued at $329,400. The partial taking damages consist of severance damages in the amount of $15,000 and the value of the land, home improvements and ornamental palms of $314,400. Severance damages apply as the take will result in a 62% reduction to the size of the property. In order to recommence negotiations with the Abazis', who are represented by David Holloway of the firm of Tileston, Simon & Holloway, the Board is required to make an unconditional offer to the Abazis and provide them with a copy of the appraisal on which it is based. In the past, the Board has extended offers of the appraised value plus 15% in order to encourage settlement and defray possible attorney's fees. In this case the appraised value of $329,400 plus 15% would equal $378,810. The Board may also offer to purchase the entire property since we have an appraised value of $473,000. For the entire parcel, the appraised value plus 15% would equal $543,950. Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board approve an unconditional offer to purchase the necessary right-of-way and pond site property from the Abazis' at a price of $378,810 and an unconditional offer to purchase of the entire parcel for $543,950. Funding: Funding is budgeted and available from Traffic Impact Fees District II Account #10215241-066120-06040 and Optional Sales Tax Account #31521441- 066120-06040. Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. 186 I /&/ff SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY DESCRIPTION. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY! LOCATION MAP: NOT TO SCALE \§_19 ~~ : : 61 st 'St. I ! _ _1[]L L_g _ Site::.._ 17 =r,11 • ,,,._ .-,,, :13 u: 57th j :S.t. DQHHH 16 r,.; J ., j_~" -2._ f3_elief _: _f.911_al OWNERS: ~ J ~ ~ 1 ~ ~P l :§: 53rd ..:{,~,St. .. STEVEN WILLIAM ABAZIS ~p- - --:;;; - --a, --- WILLIAM GEORGE ABAZIS ..c:: f- --::i=-= I co > g , m : 49th co , St.20 -< 21 EVAN ACHILLES ABAZIS 0 I 0, 1 ==CC,·=lli:'~•==~~-""'I Cl'.: 124 C: I 19 .-...... · . .c:· , al, ~ :•:•:•:·············c5 ·············· ~" 45th S ·;.:::, !O LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCEL 102 A PARCEL OF LAND BEING THE EAST 126.00 FEET OF TRACT 8, IND/AN RIVER FARMS CO. PLAT OF LANDS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25, PUBUC RE~ORDS, SAINT LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, TOGETHER WITH: THE SOUTH BO.OD FEET OF THE EAST 20 ACRES LESS THE EAST 126.00 FEET OF TRACT 8. TOGETHER WITH:. THAT PORTION. OF TRACT 8 BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGIN AT A POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 126.00 FEET OF TRACT 8 AND THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 80,00 FEET .OF SAID JRACT 8; THENCE NORTH ss·o1'19"' WEST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, A DISTANCE OF 40.54 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45°35'33" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 56.95 -FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00"12'25" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 40.54 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL. LESS AND EXCEPT THE SOUTH 30.00 FEET OF THE EAST 20 ACRES OF SAID TRACT 8. ALL SAID LANDS LYING WITHIN SECTION 1B, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CONTAINING 3.841 ACRES, MORE OR LESS SAID PARCEL OF LAND LYING WITHIN THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED JN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 1052, PAGE 2038, PUBUC RECORDS, IND/AN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CERTIFICATION: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE DESCRIPTION AND ATTACHED SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION WERE PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SURVEYING STANDARDS, CHAPTER .61817-6, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, AS SET FORTH BY THE FLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL SURVEYORS & MAPPERS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 472.027, FLORIDA STATUTES, AND IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. UNLESS JT BEARS THE SIGNATURE AND THE ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED . SURVEYOR AND MAPPER, THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND SKETCH IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT VALID. NOTE: THIS IS NOT A SKETCH OF SURVEY, BUT ONLY A GRAPHIC DEPICTION OF THE DESCRIPTION SHOWN HEREON. THERE HAS BEEN NO FIELD WORK, VIEWING OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, OR MONUMENTS SET IN CONNECTION PERRY C. WHITE WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE INFORMATION SHOWN PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR AND MAPPER HEREON. NOTE: LANDS SHOWN HEREON WERE NOT LICENSE NO. 4213, STATE OF FLORIDA ABSTRACTED FOR RESTRICTIONS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND DATE: 03/23/07 EASEMENTS OF RECORD. . u REV: 4-5-07 PROJECT MANAGER I DEPARTMENT MANAGER SCALE: CHECKED BY " PCW PCW 1· ~ ao· PCW ~ N SHEET lTllE DATE: DRAWN 8Y ~ "',._0 03/23/07 BEJ l! fAARCADlS PROJECT NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER "' ARCADIS U.S., INC. ...,ll".l ADDITIONAL R/W ~ 2081 Vista Parkway Tel: (561) 697,)0DD Fa,c (561) 697-7751 WP001053 10535D1O2 © West Palm Baach, Florida 33411 www.arcadls-us.com SHEET. 1 OF 4 I 87 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY DESCRIPTION. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY 1 LEGEND: P.0.C. - POINT OF COMMENCEMENT P.O.B. - POINT OF BEGINNING P.B. - PLAT BOOK PG. - PAGE S.L.C.R. - ST. LUCIE COUNTY RECORDS T - TOTAL I I 0 I 0 TRACT 1, IRFC ..,,.+ P.B. 2, PG. 25 "'..., I ,.__..,.o•+---.,-,o· 30 .oo' ROAD R/W AS DETERMINED BY INDV\N RIVER COUNTY _ _,.. ___, D.B. 48, PG. 23 0 0 I + "' ' "' so' R/W PER STATE OF FLORIDA I STATE ROAD DEPARTMENT RIGHT-OF-WAY MAP SECTION NO. 88530, ROAD NO. 505 b 615, 66th I a:, COUNTY ROAD AVENUE sa9·01'23nE 0 s:~J,sk~6 j 126.01' ~ 0 11 0 05/f ~---,------~---- "' I • ~ I')>- I ..;- ~ I ,-..: a O": I N ro I TRACT 8, IRFC ~ gJ I P.B. 2, PG. 25 5875 66th AVENUE k'-.1 0 I VERO BEACH, FL., 32967 0 ~ _w + I PID-32391800001008000003.0 0 ~in U") I O.R.B. 1052, PG. 2038 ~ -"' "' I b"' b Oc:, 0 I Zo (/) z I 126' I _l, --·--·---·--·--·--·-MATCH LINE "A' - SEE ·--·SHEET 3 OF-· 4 -·--·- ~ PROJECT MANAGER DEPARTMENT MANAGER SCALE: CHECKED BY PCV/ PCW l" = 80' PCW "al ~ SHEH 1lTlE OATE: DRAWN BY 0,._ 03/!3/07 BEJ ~ '1ARCAD1S PROJECT NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER "' ARCADIS U.S., INC. 5 ADDITIONAL R/W ~ 2081 V/sla Pari MATCH LINE "A' - SEE SHEET 2 OF 4 - - . - - . r - . - - . - - . - - . - - . - - ·_;--- - ... - -,· _,.. - . - - . - I 5:- I I 126.00'- . ;l; ,- I I ADDITIONAL R/W I I I 0 0 I + l :o'-- b 0:, 00 I 1 I ~, II I I -~ I r-..: s 0 I ·" . Nb I - .....rri 0 m 0 I N ,...+ I I I I TRACT 8, IRFC >w P.8. 2, PG. 25 >o Cl:'. 0 5875 66th AVENUE ~ ..,.j;- VERO BEACH, FL., 32967 u...n PID-32391800001008000003.0 0 O.R.B. 1052, PG. 2038 ~ LEGEND: P.O.C. - POINT OF COMMENCEMENT P.0.8. - POINT OF BEGINNING P.B. - Pl.AT BOOK , PG. - PAGE 0.00 ROAD R/W I S.LC.R - ST. LUCIE COUNTY RECORDS DETERMINED BY_--t------,----f T - TOTAL N RIVER COUNTY I I D.B. 48, PG. 23 ,!,ro0-.. - Zf- I / 0 ::J5i j '.±- ui g: I ' i5 LI... I 50' R/W PER STATE OF FLORIDA ;;'; 0 I STATE ROAP DEPARTMENT RIGHT-OF-WAY MAP . qECTION NO. 88530, ROAD NO. 505 126' \ I I COUNTY ROAD 615, 66th AVENUE ----'---J---1 I ~ATC~ .!:!Ni.~~:.. ~EE SH~ET ~ ~~4-. _I_. __ .-- _. __ ..J. -- _. __ ~ PROJECT MANAGER ! DEPARTMENT MANAGER SCALE: CHECKED BY PCW PCW 1" = BO' PCY/ "'it ~ SHEET TfTL£ DATE: DRAWN BY ~ 0 03/23/D7 BEJ ~ fAARCADlS PROJECT NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER "' ADDfTIONAL R/W ~ ARCADIS U.S., INC. _,"' ij 2081 VJsfa Pari MATCH LINE •s• - SEE SHEET 3 OF 4 - ""."" · - - ·;1o·R?w PERsTATT'oTTCoRi5A- • - - • ;iw.cio -·-- STATE ROAD DEPARTMENT RIGHT-OF-WAY MAP 126' o· SBCTION NO. 88530, ROAD NO. 505 --'-• =====!==1 ICOUNTY ROAD 615, 66th AVENUE (/) Cl I z I :s 126.00' ~ 0"- I 0 ad ADDITIONAL R/W 0 I 0, :'.5 + N in' a. :;;! ~ I n _, . - i::, N89"01 '01''W · 328 88' I 57th STREET . --tt---,1--"' L ------L--30' EASEMENT ------S:f D.S. 48, PG. 23 o -21 60' SUB-LATERAL "A-1 O" CANAL J o:i ID•o N INDIAN RIVER FARMS CO. PLAT OF LANDS ~ N~ P.8. 2, PG. 25, S.L.C.R. ~o b IO STA: 502+ 16.30 SOUTHEAST CORNER OF OFFSET: 14.00 R STA: 338+65.14 9 OFFSET: 43.00 R THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER LEGEND: OF SECTION 18-32-39 SEE SHEET 3 OF 4 PROJECT MANAGER DEPARTMENT MANAGER SCALE: CHECKED BY PCW PCW 1" = BO' PCW ~ SHEIT TITLE DATE: DRAWN SY R 03/23/07 BS) i flARCADIS m ADDITIONAL R/W PROJECT NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER ARCADIS U.S., INC, _, § 2081 Vista Parkway Tel: (561) 697-7000 Fax: (561) 697-7751 WP001053 10535D102 .@) West Palm Beach, Florida 33411 www.arcadis-us.com SHEET40F4 0 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY DESCRIPTION. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY 1 LOCATION MAP: NOT TO SCALE 61 st :St. Site 57th 'O 0 0 0:: OWNERS: ----w STEVEN WILLIAM ABAZIS > WILLIAM GEORGE ABAZIS 49th ;g st.20 -o: 21 EVAN ACHILLES ABAZIS LEGAL DFSCRIPTION: PARCEL 401 A PARCEL OF LAND BEING THE WEST 202.85 FEET OF THE EAST 328.85 FEET OF THE NORTH 476.54 FEET OF THE SOUTH 556.12 FEET OF TRACT 8, INOIAN RIVER FARMS CO. PLAT OF LANDS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE. 25, PUBLIC RECORDS, SAINT LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS AND EXCEPT; THAT PORTION OF SAID TRACT 8, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGIN AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 126.00 FEET AND THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 80.00 FEET OF SAID TRACT 8; THENCE NORTH 89.01 '19" WEST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, A DISTANCE OF 40.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45•35•42" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 56.18 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00-12'25" WEST, ALONG SAID WEST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 40.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALL SAID LANDS LYING WITHIN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CONTAINING 2.201 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SAID PARCEL OF LAND LYING WITHIN THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 1052, PAGE 2038, PUBLIC RECORDS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CERTIFICATION: I HEREBY CERTlfif'Tl'iAT- THE. DESCRIPTION AND ATTACHED SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION WERE PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH mt s@\iE,t;iNG'stii:ii)oii:Ros,, CHAPTER s1G17-6, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE coDE, AS SET FORTH BY THE FLORIDA BOARD 'qf'i::PROFJESSIO~j~\:SURVEYORS & MAPPERS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 472.027, FLORIDA STATUTES, ANO IS TRUE ANff ·CGJR.f -~4'" V'LID t~~,~~:,g,J~h~~i~1i£~::~E~ . ·.· ]1£{iRfA:(;;itw81:rt;i}',.•\:c;'/;c> ;c; SUBJECT PROPERTY, OR MONUMENTS SET IN CONNECTION ; '}liiZGJiiiSSi@N'A(·;i,ANQJ'.SURVEYOR AND MAPPER WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE INFORMATION SHOWN 1 ... ,,0,~:'~,;' -.. ~:.N~ot~~, ~,~~I;f;.·oFFLORIDA :E!~~~ig2~~~~i~R7~~~~s.H~~g~~s-w5:~w~fTAND PROJECT MANAGER DEPARTMENT MANAGER SCALE, -CHECKED BY PCW PCW 1" = so· PCW OJ SHEET TITLE OATE, DRAWN BY 0"' 8/2/07 BEJ .. ::~\.;~J!CADIS PROJECT NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER " AR'Q'A(j.lS U.S., INC. 5 DRAINAGE PONO ,, 'g 208fVista Parkway_--· Tel: (561) 697-7000 Fax: (561) 697-n51 WPOOI053 @) West Palm Beatjl/FIOrida 33411 www.arc:adis-us.com SHEET 1 OF 2 1053Sf91 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY DESCRIPTION. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY 1 LEGEND: P.O.C. - POINT OF COMMENCEMENT P.O.B. -~ POINT OF BEGINNING P.B. - PLAT BOOK PG. - PAGE S.L.C.R. - ST. LUCIE COUNTY RECORDS 0 ~TA: !~¼116.1 7 I 0 OFFSET: 285.85'L. S89'01' 19WE 202.87' + ..,,. STA: 343+93.44 "' OFFSET: 83.00'L. 126' a-+-+-----202.85'-----.... l-+-l------328.85'------'~---' 50' R/W PER STATE OF FLORIDA 343+00 1----+;so'+----150• STATE ROAD DEPARTMENT R/W M P SECTION NO. 88530, ROAD NO. 50l55!;:=:;:------:---t--j_' COUNTY ROAD 615, 66th AVENUE "'Cl 5 126.00' u.. o· 0 0 f- ADDITIONAL R/W w· -l· 0 (/) w + :'.5. ou ..,,.N a. A PORTION OF Q_ CJ:: n TRACT 8, /RFC !'- ~a'.: LO Q_ P.8. 2, PG. 25 (ci 0 5875 66th AVENUE ":> ·,-... OJ VERO BEACH, FL., 32967 " William G. Collins II, County Attorney William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney Marian E. Fell, Assistant County Attorney George A Glenn, Assistant County Attorney MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: l-UC.Jlllilliam Collins, County Attorney ,/ r (J__ FROM: William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney jA/J!AP' DATE: February 4, 2009 SUBJECT: Unconditional Offer for Parcel of property owned by Evangelos and Ann Abazis, 6880 5ih Street, Vero Beach Evangelos and Ann Abazis own a 9.8 acre parcel of property located at 6880 5ih Street. This property is the Abazis' homestead and lies west of 66th Avenue. This site is rectangular in shape with 332.24feet of frontage along 5ih Street and is 1288 feet deep. The property is located outside the urban service boundary and is zoned A-1 Agricultural. The parcel contains a 3 bedroom, 3 bath, 3,506 square foot concrete block house built in 1982. The home includes a two car garage and an enclosed pool. The house and improvements are not materially affected by the take. In order to accommodate the planned improvements to 5ih Street and 66th Avenue, the County needs to acquire a 50' X 332.4' strip of property to be used as right-of-way from the Abazis. The total take is approximately 0.381 acres. A copy of the sketch of the parent parcel, the part taken, and remainder is attached to this memorandum. While none of the buildings lie within the area of take, the proposed right-of-way line will involve site improvements consisting of a three board wooden fence, landscaping and driveways that lie within the area of take. Indian Riv« Ca Admln. APPROVED FOR cti - / fJ-(Jq Legal B.c.c. MEETING ~EAR A • Budget --~~~:::::: - GENOA - ~ De~t. COUNTY ATTORNEY .....,, Risk Mgr. •• .,.,1.,.,_1,11..:1 193 Evangelos and Ann Abazis parcel February 11, 2009 Page 2 A recent appraisal establishes the value of the partial taking at $44,200. The partial taking damages consist of severance damages in the amount of $22,000 and the value of the land and site improvements of $22,200. Due to the size and shape of the parcel together with the location of the house and other structures being located on the northern portion of the property, staff is not recommending offering to purchase the entire parcel. In order to recommence negotiations with Mr. and Mrs. Abazis, who are represented by David Holloway of the firm of Tileston, Simon & Holloway, the Board is required to make an unconditional offer to the Abazis and provide them with a copy of the appraisal on which ii is based. In the past, the Board has extended offers of the appraised value plus 15% in order to encourage settlement and defray possible attorney's fees. In this case the appraised value of the right-of-way needed of $44,200 plus 15% would equal $50,830. Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board approve an unconditional offer to purchase the necessary right-of-way from Evangelos and Ann Abazis at a price of $50,830.00. Funding: Funding is budgeted and available from Traffic Impact Fees District II Account #10215241-066120-06040 and Optional Sales Tax Account #31521441- 066120-06040. Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. 194 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY DESCRIPTION. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY! LOCATION MAP: NOT TO SCALE OWNERS: ~ ----g; EVANGELOS ABAZIS AND ANN ABAZIS 49th :5 : st.20 ~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCa 135 A PARCEL OF LAND BEING THE NORTH 50.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 80.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH SIX AND lWO-THIRDS (6 2/3) ACRES OF THE WEST 10 ACRES OF THE EAST 20 ACRES OF TRACT 7, INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY PLAT OF LANDS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 25, PUBLIC RECORDS, SAINT LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, ALL SAID LANDS LYING WITHIN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 32 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CONTAINING 0.381 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SAID PARCEL OF LAND LYING WITHIN THOSE LANDS AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 937, PAGE 687, PUBLIC RECORDS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CERTIFICATION: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE DESCRIPTION AND ATTACHED SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION WERE PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SURVEYING STANDARDS, CHAPTER 61G17-6, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, AS SET FORTH BY THE FLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL SURVEYORS & MAPPERS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 472.027, FLORIDA STATUTES, AND IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. UNLESS IT BEARS THE SIGNATURE AND THE ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER, THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND SKETCH IS FOR INFORM~~ PURPOSES OJLY AND _IS NOT VALID. _-,1-_:---- NOTE: THIS IS NOT A SKETCH OF SURVEY, BUT ONLY A . ~// GRAPHIC DEPICTION OF THE DESCRIPTION SHOWN HEREON. (_,.,>(J THERE HAS BEEN NO FIELD WORK, VIEWING OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, OR MONUMENTS SET IN CONNECTION RY . WHITE WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE INFORMATION SHOWN PRO SIONAL LAND SURVEYOR AND MAPPER HEREON. NOTE: LANDS SHOWN HEREON WERE NOT LICENSE NO. 4213, STATE OF FLORIDA ABSTRACTED FOR RESTRICTIONS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND DATE: 03/27/07 EASEMENTS OF RECORD. PROJECT MANAGER OEPARTMENT MANAGER SCALE: CHECKED BY PCW PCW 1· = so· PCW ~ SHEET Tlil.E OATE: DRAWN BY 0... 03/27/07 JIF j fAARCADIS ADDITIONAL R/W PROJECT NUMBER DRAWlNG NUMBER 1:. ARCADIS U.S., INC. .J.. ~ 2081 Vista Parkway Tel: (561) 697-7000 Fax: (561)697-7751 WP001053 105350135 @) West Palm Beach, Florida 33411 www.arcadis-us.com SHm 1 OF 2 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY DESCRIPTION. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY! LEGEND: Ii_ - BASELINE IRFC - INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY 0 L - LEFT co 0.R.B. - OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK II P.B. - PLAT BOOK PG. - PAGE w R - RIGHT R/W - RIGHT-OF-WAY ~en STA. - STATION S.L.C.R. - ST. LUClf COUNTY RECORDS 1-I______EAST 20 ACRES _____,______----1 OF TRACT 7 w ,.._ I WEST 10 ACRES OF ,__------THE EAST 20 ACRES,------. I OF TRACT 7 sEJ~.(/)I-"" 1- ;::s "- I A PORTION OF 0 I TRACT 7, IRFC A PORTION OF I P.B. 2, PG. 25 A PORTION OF TRACT 7, IRFC I ADDRESS: 6880 57th STREET TRACT 7, IRFC P.B. 2, PG. 25 I VERO BEACH, FL., 32967 P.B. 2, PG. 25 PID-32391800001007000002.1 I O.R.B. 937, PG. 687 I I ,\-I.I I 331.80' fil 487+00 55 @488+00 489+00 490+00 @ 57th STREET 332·24' g - - I[ OF SURVEY ~g ------60' SUB-LATERAL "A-10" CANACT INDIAN RIVER FARMS CO. PLAT OF LANDSJ 30' EASEMENT P.B. 2, PG. 25, S.L.C.R. SOUTH LINE OF D.B. 48, PG. 23 STA: 486+34.46 TRACT 7 OFFSET: 14.00 R STA: 489+66.69 OFFSET: 14.00 R OWNERS: EVANGELOS ABAZIS AND ANN ABAZIS PROJECT MANAGER DEPAR!MfNT MANAGER SCAl£: CHECKED BY PCW PCW I" = BO' PCW tt SHEET TillE DATE: DRAWN BY 03/27/07 JAf ~ j fiARCADIS PROJECT NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER ,. ARCADIS U.S., INC. ...m ADDITIONAL R/W ., 2081 VIS!a Parkway Tel: (561) 697-7000 Fax: (561) 697-7751 WP001053 @ West Palm Beach, Florida 33411 www.arcadis-us.com SHEU 2 OF 2 1053SO135 ,.-, ATTORNEY'S MATTER: 2/17/09 /3/::'. CffeEof INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ATTORNEY William G. Collins II, County Attorney William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney Marian E. Fell, Senior Assistant County Attorney George A Glenn, Assistant County Attorney MEMORANDUM TO: The Board of County Commissioners FROM: ~William G. Collins II - County Attorney DATE: February 12, 2009 SUBJECT: Mensing Options On February 10, 2009 Fred Mensing appeared before the Board requesting repeal of Resolution No. 2008-043, by which the Board had accepted the implied dedication of a 60-foot strip of land in Section 30 shown on the Fleming Grant plat of 1988. On February 3, 2009 I had presented to the Board a proposal by Mensing to avoid litigation through a partial right-of-way abandonment. The Board took no action on either request, instead directing me to ascertain the positions of the Community Development and Public Works Departments on abandonment, and to present the Board with options. Mr. Kirrie had filed for abandonment of that strip of land in 2006. The Technical Review Committee letter dated June 13, 2006 showed that the only concern of the Planning and Public Works staff was that the abandonment not affect the right of convenient access to any properties. The City of Sebastian also wanted access to remain for all affected parties. At that time, I opposed abandonment because every property owner fronting on that strip has ah implied easement for access. An abandonment could give rise to takings claims based on County interference with implied access easement rights. Indian Riv« CG. A!lJWO"l'd Dale Admln. { \ NJ. .;J-id}.t.? I APPROVED FOR - r?i-/ 7-()q iFf:-('• Legal "'" - B.C.C. MEETING - ~AR A~HDA 1 Budget - ~ 0 ·::=7. Dept. -· - -,-... 197 COUNTY ATTORNEY Risk Mgr. - Options 1. Repeal Resolution No. 2008-043. Not recommended. The resolution attempts to clarify and assist access rights that have caused festering issues for decades. Repeal would be a step back into confusion. 2. Abandonment. Not recommended. Could give rise to takings claims against the County. 3. Declaratory Action. A circuit court action to determine the rights of the respective parties with respect to the strip of land. This would be a time consuming and expensive process, but would judicially resolve the current disputes. This course is favored by Mr. Kirrie. 4. Defend Litigation Threatened by Mensing. Mensing's claim of title is non meritorious. Takings allegations are also without merit as the County has taken no affirmative action to assert control over the 60-foot strip. II has merely asserted the basis for a legal claim to public access through Resolution No. 2008-043. 5. No Action. Mensing's property is currently in foreclosure for the third time in several years. There is the possibility that a purchaser at foreclosure sale would seek an amicable rather than an adversarial resolution to access issues. Recommended Action, in Order of Preference 1. No Action. 2. Defend litigation threatened by Mensing. 3. Declaratory action in Circuit Court. WGC/nhm Attachments: Resolution No. 2008-043 Memorandum to Board of County Commissioners of 1/26/09 Technical Review Committee letter of 6/13/06 cc (w/o attachments): Fred Mensing C.N. Kirrie 2 198 1919179 THIS DOCUMENT HAS BcEN • . RECORDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS RESOLUTION No. 2008 043 OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FL BK: 2260 PG:2393, Page'I of 2 04/28/2008 at 08:16 AM, JEFFREY K BARTON, CL2RK OF COURT A RESOLUTION OF THE .BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, FORMALLY ACCEPTING THE IMPLIED DEDICATION OF A 60-FOOT STRIP OF LAND IN SECTION 30 SHOWN ON THE FLEMING GRANT PLAT OF 1888 WHICH PREDATES STATUTORY LAWS OF PLATTING SET OUT IN CHAPTER 177, PART 1, FLORIDA STATUTES. WHEREAS, laws relating to the platting of land were not enacted by the Florida Legislature until 1971; and WHEREAS, plats filed of record prior to that date sometimes had no language of express dedication of rights-of-way, streets, alleys and easements to public use; and WHEREAS, by making a sale of platted lots, the owner of a tract manifests an intent to dedicate streets and rights-of-way necessary to access those lots; and WHEREAS, common law dedication requires (1) an intention by the owner to dedicate the property for public use; and (2) an acceptance by the public; and WHEREAS, Judge Scott Kenney rendered a Final Judgment in the case Driver v. Indian River County. in the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Indian River County, Florida (Case No. 00-0343 CA19) ruling that there must be clear, satisfactory and unequivocal evidence that the public has accepted such dedications, either formally, or by the improvement, maintenance or use of said streets and rights-of-way, 199 RESOLUTION NO. 2008-043 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that the dedication of a 60-foot strip of land in Section 30 shown on the Fleming Grant Plat of 1888, recorded in Brevard County by S. B. Carter, now lying and being in Indian River County and more particularly described as bounded by Lots 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 on the northwest, and by Lots 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 on the southeast is hereby expressly and formally accepted. The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner Wheeler , and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Davis , and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Sandra L. Bowden Aye Vice Chairman Wesley S. Davis Aye Commissioner Joseph E. Flescher Aye Commissioner Peter D. O'Bryan Aye Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this --22o.d day of April, 2008. ATTEST: Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk By: ~ '-"-- .,._ ~ ~._,__.__z Deputy Clerk 2 200 Cffo:e 1TORNEY'S MATTER: 2/3/09 /J(!_, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ATTORNEY William G. Collins ll, County Attorney William K. DeBraal, Deputy County Attorney Marian E. Fell, Senior Assistant County Attorney ·. Geo,:ge A. Glenn, Assistant County Attorney MEMORANDUM TO: The Board of County Commissioners FROM: t...TC.william G. Collins 11- County Attorney DATE: January 26, 2009 SUBJECT: Mensing Proposal to Avoid Litigation Through Partial Right-Of. Way Ab.andonment Since April 22, 2008 when the Board, by Resolution No. 2008-043, accepted the implied dedication of a 60-foot strip of land shown in the Fleming Grant Plat of 1888 (recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 72} I have been repeatedly contacted by Mr, Kirrie, requesting the County file a declaratory action for the circuit court to affirm the County's rights in the strip of land as a road; and by Mr. Mensing threatening suit for damages and takings. Last Friday Mr. Mensing met with me to discuss an approach which may avoid litigation. 1. Initiate an abandonment of the 60-foot strip north of Mensing's Lot 15, less the west 60 feet (to allow a potential connection from 129th Avenue to 130th Avenue in the future via Lot 14 (Holley property} to the north) .. 2. Retain the 60-foot strip north of Lot 16 (Kirrie} and initiate County maintenance so Kirrie does not block Mensing access. This allows Kirrie access to the east end of his lot 16, which he desires. It also allows Mensing to circumvent re-financing difficulties resulting from a setback encroaching 40' x 20' CBS building which he asserts has been on Indian Rlv-er Ca. Admln. Legal 1 Budget COUNTY ATTORNFY the tax rolls since 1964. Mensing estimates costs of replacement at $40 - 60,000 (depending on lands assertedly taken). RECOMMENDATION Authorize initiation of a right-of-way abandonment process as outlined above, culminating in an abandonment public hearing .. WGC/nhm cc: Fred Mensing Chris Kirrie Jim Harpring, Esq. 2 , -~: o· -,,, ;;.:;... -- , ::: ;.: '·· . : 7.- . i"• ..,,;-' ·:. ~-· ,·:~-- ~~gt?:::,,_, ·-·----~-.. ~--.-. ;'' .. -. •., ! \ ! i l \. ( .> ... 7 ,/ I . . .I .. •-,-, 'i I ·.~. ·:::-;_ \ ---'------______,__ . ·--~- ·:.":- " _, .. ,.•:,·· ..;}f~2i;j\ "• '., ...... L:,,,.• .·. __.,,(;:":-.'.·'.": ..- -_/ ._(;·,>_" .. -+·~--- ...... ~, . .,._ INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SW 1/4 Section 30 Flemirtg Grant TAXMAP '!.!!. ron· r10At1 f'/w J?l) '"Tu- ·-5r. · , .•.. ··-r·· ...... , .. ,___ ...... STPrn """I" /. u'f"""" •., David C. Nolte ~if· PROPERTY APPRAISER .,.~.-. ,tm, 3;'., 0 HI' ~• 1 ··~ ~. ~~ :1: 1$.ii, ,9' t· ~ .;mi:., 4, {, ,. ,. ... -~ g3· ,t;, # ·n·1 /JI -i'.' •• q ·" •t ' ,,•lni• l~ :'7•,t ., • • • \<.\Rl-\\111"t' ' .,,,. 1< .·:. 'fi\ETIS'Sttl&t,' ' • ,. '"" Telephone: (m) 567-llOOO 6/13/2006 CWNLLC PO BOX 144 ROSELAND, FL 32957 RE: Project Name: CWN,LLC/ROWA Project Description: Right of Way abandonment Project Number: 2006050200 Application Description: Request to abandoned 76th Ave Application Number: 54553 File Number: ROW-06-08-06 Tax ID#: 30-38-00-0000! -0300-00016.0 Dear Mr. Kirrie: . The above referenced application has been reviewed by the Technical Review Committee (TRC). The following application discrepancies have been identified: (PL3) - PLANNING: CURRENT DEVELOPMENT I. Please explain in writing why you believea right-of-way exists at this location and what documents substantiate the existence of the right-of-way. 2. Please explain in writing how access to Lot 16 for emergency and/or secondary access will continue to be available if the abandonment is approved. The staff and BCC needs to understand, if the proposed abandonment will affect the right of convenient access to any properties. Staff will continue to coordinate with the County's Office on the issue of convenient access. Staff does not generally support abandonment requests that adversely adversely affect convenient access. 3. Please provide a copy of the site plan for the facility on the adjacent property. 4. To date jlnvironmental Planning, EPL, BellSouth, and Road ~ .J3ridge have signed off.., The City of Sebastian has indicated that it has no objection, provided that adequate access remains for all affected parties. 205 5. Please be advf.__ , once additional information has be~i. ,Jtovided, planning staff can make its determination regarding its recommendation on the abandonment request. (PWI) - PUBLIC WORKS: PLAN/PLAT DRAINAGE 1. The following comments on the subject right-of-way abandonment application are based cin Public Works Department staff review of the application form stamped received May 11, 2006 and an undated partial copy of a survey: 2. At this time the County has not confirmed its ownership of the subject parcel. As such, engineering has no comments for the request. If however, it is later determined that the County does in fact have ownership, the county would re-review access requirements for all affected parcels. If access is needed then engineering would not likely support the request. If access is not needed for the· area, the parcel would be available for abandonment with the condition of retaining a drainage easement over the entire area. For further assistance in ownership determination, please contact County Attorney Will Collins at 226-1424. 3. The reviewing engineer for this project is David Hays. For discussion regarding the "Drainage" or "Right-Of-Way" comments herein, please contact him at (772) 226-1596. (PW2)- PUBLIC WORKS: PLAN/PLAT R-0-W 1. Engineering staff has no additional comments at this time. (PW3) - PUBLIC WORKS: PLAN/PLAT TRAFFIC 1. The reviewing traffic analyst for this project is Jeanne Bresett. For discussion regarding the traffic comments contained herein, contact her at (772) 226-1326. 2. The Public Works Director does not support the proposed abandonment. (UTl) - CO UTILITIES:PLAN/PLAT WATER & SEWER (FJRE) - FIRE DMSION DEVELOPMENT REVIEW A wtj.ttenresponse to every discrepancy comment, seven (7) copies of the revised plat, and a completed "Project Application Resubmittal Form" (copy attached) must be submitted to the Planning Division to continue the application review process. The discrepancies do not appear to be significant; therefore, no second TRC meeting win be required for reconsideration of the proposal. Once the response and resubmittal materials are submitted to the Planning Division, TRC 206 \ members will review fu_ resubmittal and determine its adequac, J staff determines 1hat another . TRC review is needed, then your application will be scheduled for.another round ofTRC review. If, however, staff determines that the resubmittal is adequate, then the application will be reviewed for scheduling on the next available Board of County Commissioners meeting. The resubmittal · must be turned into 1he Planning Division at least 15 days prior to the Board of County Commissioners meetin~ at which the applicant wishes the application to be considered. Please be advised that 1he Board generally meets on every Tuesday, except holidays and the last . Tuesday in a month. Finally, please be advised of the following restrictions oil "lobbying" activities that apply to all site plan, Non-PD special exception, administrative pennit applications and any appeals related thereto. Case law holds that lobbying of board members outside of regularly scheduled meetings may nullify most types of development approvals. You should have no contacts wi1h members of the Board of County Commissioners, Planning and Zoning Commission, Board of Adjustment, or Building Code Board of Adjustment and Appeals regarding the following: Special Exceptions (not including Planned Developments) Variances Site Plans Subdivision Plats Building Permits You are free to contact your representatives outside of the public hearing process regarding planned development proposals. This is due to the distinction that planned developments essentially involve changing the rules under which development occurs and are considered legislative in nature. The prohibited areas of lobbying involve applications for which the rules are established and the boards make findings as to whether or not the established rules are satisfied. Such application types are considered quasi-judicial in nature. If you have any questions regarding any of these matters, please do not hesitate to call me at (772) 567-8000, ext. 1242. S~ely, ~,W,N\~ JOHN W. MC't:tiY Senior Planner, Current Development cc: Robert M. Keating, AICP Stan Boling, AJCP Erik Olson, P.E. · Glenn Schuessler Chris Kafer, P.E. Chris Mora, P.E. John King 207 Ernie McCloud Lloyd L. & Rose Marie Wilson · Craig M. & Muriel Cobb Veda Cerise & Cleatues Heavrin Seibert Ralph Holley Frederick & Rita Mensing David Hays David Luethje, PSM Will Collins 208 ITEM 14.A.1 February 17, 2009 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: February 11, 2009 SUBJECT: Two Year Moratorium for Non-Residential Impact Fees FROM: Wesley S. Davis, Chairman A::l· District 1 V The County imposes nine separate impact fees. In addition, the county imposes water and sewer connect charges. All nine of the impact fees are charged to residential projects, while only six of the nine are charged to nonresidential projects. The three impact fee categories that don't apply to nonresidential projects are schools, libraries, and recreation. The reason that those fees don't apply to nonresidential projects is that there needs to be a nexus between the fee paid by the feepayer and the benefit that the feepayer receives from paying the fee. In the case of the three fee categories mentioned above, nonresidential projects dc:m't create demand and therefore cannot be charged fees. The impact fees that we impose are: *transportation * corrections *solid waste *public buildings *fire/ems *law enforcement *library *schools *park and recreation I request the Board's consideration in a two year moratorium for non-residential impact fees. WSD:mlp F:\BCC\Agenda ltems\2009\Agenda ltems\Davis - Impact fee moratorium.doc 209 ITEM 14.A2 FEBRUARY 17, 2009 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM To: Members of the Board of County Commissioners Date: February 11, 2009 Subject: Appointments to Committees without Commissioner Liaisons From: Wesley S. Davis, Chairman £1J District 1 Co/ Given the following committees do not have a Commissioner Liaison, I respectfully request discussion and vote for appointments to vacant positions. Applications for the interested candidates are on file with the Commission Office. Community Development Block Grant Citizen Advisory Task Force Vacant Positions: Director of Housing Authority*; (3) Indian River County Residents** Richard D. Cahoy ** Bradley A. Ward ** Teddy Floyd** Leroy E. Smith** My recommendation: Messrs. Ward, Floyd, Smith Metropolitan Planning Organization Citizen Advisory Committee Vacant Position: BCC Appointee Chuck Mechling Utility Advisory Committee Vacant Position: District 1 / Davis Keith J. Srinivasan Peter T. Sutherland My recommendation: Mr. Sutherland *Meets qualifications 210 BCCAGENDA February 17, 2009 14E -1 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: February 10, 2009 SUBJECT: Life Science Research and Technology Advancement FROM: Commission Bob Solari~ A. Approval of a resolution in support of Life Science Research and Technology Advancement in Indian River County. B. Approval of a resolution for the creation of an Indian River County Consortium for Life Science Research and Technology Advancement of which the Commission will partner along with other public and private entities in a research and technology economic development-focused consortium. Attachments: An exemplar of Summary and Accord from Martin County. 211 Feb 03 09 ll:22a p. 1 Martin County BOCC 2401 SE Monterey Road Stuart, FL 34996 Fax From: Pages: Phone: :3:::1·2-- 'Z 2. (,, _ J 'f- I.{-- + Date: Re: cc, • Urgent • For Review • Please Comment • Please Reply • Please Recycle • Comments: 212 Feb 03 09 ll:22a p.3 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY TITLE AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE MARTIN COUNTY CONSORTIUM FOR LIFE SCIENCE RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENT BACKGROUND/RELATED STRATEGIC GOAL An accord forming the Martin County Consortium for Life Science Research and Technology Advancement is attached for Board review. ISSUES Following is a list of expected participants in the Consortium: • Martin County Commission, • City of Stuart, • Town of Jupiter Island, • Martin County School Board, • Economic Council of Martin County, • Martin County Business Development Board, • Workforce Development Board, • Martin Memorial Health Systems, • Indian River College, • Florida Atlantic University. The potential exists for additional participants to be added to the list of signers of the accord. RECOMMENDED ACTION RECOMMENDATION Authorize the Chair to sign the accord forming the Martin County Consortium for Life Science Research and Technology Advancement. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Amend the accord. 2. Do not authorize participation in the consortium. FISCAL IMPACT RECOMMENDATION N/A ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS N/A 213 Feb 03 09 ll:23a p.4 an attorb Establishing the Martin County Consortium for Life Science Research and Technology Advancement a regional vision for technology, education. and innovation to enhance productivity and economic sustainability and achieve a superior quality of life for all of our citizens; and to be successful in such an endeavor a collaboration among governments, businesses, and academia is critical; and regions, as declared by the U.S. Department of Commerce• are defined by economic, rather than political boundaries; and are the building blocks of prosperity requiring synergistic relationships; and that economic competition is global, a commitment to creating a world class W{Jereas, infrastructure and environment must be evident and continually stimulated. Now, therefore, be it agreed to by those entities represented below, that The Martin County Consortium for Life Science Research and Technology Advancement is hereby formed. Further, the mission of the Martin County Consortium for Life Science Research and Technology Advancement shall: I. Promote and support the growth of existing key and emerging economic sectors; and II. Provide legislative and governmental policies to support economic development; and III. Make available physical infrastructure to support development, manufacturing; and commercialization of products; and IV. Provide and support emerging technologies; and V. Leverage our current K·12 "A:' rated schools with a focus on enhancing the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics·related foundation for education; and V[. Create a profusion of higher education opportunities within the targeted sectors to enhance our competitive opportunities: and VII. Provide entrepreneurial, management expertise, a well·trained, skilled, educated workforce; and VIII. Foster a synergy and interaction of venture capital, legal, scientists, entrepreneurs, and financers to create product development; and IX. Identify and increase investments needed to enhance a competitive advantage; and X. Provide the awareness, advocacy, and expressed will of stakeholders to support economic development. Entered mto Accord this _ Day of_ 2008 Doug Smith, Chairman Jeffery Krauskopf, Mayor Martin County Board of County Commissioners City of Stuart Charles Falcone, Mayor Laurie Gaylord, Chairman Town of Jupiter Island Martin County School Board Neil Subin, Mayor Dorothy Geeben, Mayor Town of Sewall's Point Town of Ocean Breeze Park Frank Brogan, President Dr. Edwin Massey, President Florida Atlantic University lndian :Etiver State College Catherine McKenzie, Chan-man Richmond Harman, President CEO Workforce Development Board Martin Memorial Health Systems Edward Weinberg, Chairman Peter Kemp, President Economic Council of Martin County Business Development Boa.rd of Martin County 214 BCCAGENDA February 17, 2009 14E-~ INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: February 10, 2009 SUBJECT: Impact Fees FROM: Commission Bob Solari~ Request approval of a resolution against Senate Bill 630. Attachments: 2/09/09 Press Journal Editorial , Summary of Senate Bill 630 215 Florida Senate - 2009 SB 630 By Senator Bennett 21-00812-09 2009630 1 A bill to be entitled 2 An act relating to impact fees; providing for a 3-year 3 moratorium on the imposition or collection of impact 4 fees by a county or municipality; providing for future 5 expiration of the moratorium; providing an effective 6 date. 7 8 Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida: 9 10 Section 1. (1) Notwithstanding any law, ordinance, or 11 resolution to the contrary, a county or municipality may not 12 impose or collect any impact fee for any purpose from October 1, 13 2009 through September 30, 2012. 14 (2) This section expires October 1, 2012. 15 Section 2. This act shall take effect July 1, 2009. Page 1 of 1 CODING: Words striolceR are deletions; words underlined are additions. 216 (Editorial from Vero Beach Press Journal) http:/lwww.tcpalm.com/news/2009/feb/09/a-mandated-moratorium-on-impact-fees-could/ Editorial: Mandated state moratorium on impact fees would damage governments, taxpayers Bennett's bill bogus Monday, February 9, 2009 Local governments already struggling financially could be put in even greater straits if a bill proposed by a Florida state legislator is adopted. The bill introduced by Sen. Mike Bennett, R-Bradenton, calls for a three-year moratorium on the imposition or collection of impact fees by counties or municipalities. Bennett has claimed the temporary elimination of impact fees in SB 630 would spur much-needed development and help to stimulate the economy. Others see the bill as a gift to developers and unlikely to have a positive effect on the economy. Moreover, it's an irresponsible effort by at least one state official to control local government. Impact fees are paid by builders to offset the government costs caused by new construction, such as for roads, schools, water and sewer service and law enforcement. In a recent guest column in the Naples Daily News, Collier County Commissioner Fred Coyle said, "If there are no impact fees, there will be no infrastructure - no development, no jobs and no economic recovery." The proposed legislation has also gotten the attention of Treasure Coast governments. On Tuesday, the St. Lucie County County Commission will consider a resolution opposing the Bennett bill. The resolution says the inability to impose or collect impact fees would shift the cost of development to local taxpayers and jeopardize: • Future economic development activities due to the lack of funds to build new schools and roads. • Repayment of loans made to fund existing capital projects. The resolution was initiated by Commissioner Doug Coward, who noted that St. Lucie already faces a reduction in impact fees due to the poor economy. Last year, the county collected nearly $5 million in impact fees. In the current budget year, the county has collected less than $1 million. Coward said the most significant impact of the Bennett bill on the Treasure Coast could be in Port St. Lucie, which has borrowed funds - to be repaid by impact fees - to build such projects as the Torrey Pines Institute for Molecular Studies. Freshman state Rep. Adam Fetterman, D-Port St. Lucie, is concerned with the proposal. 217 "My philosophy in general is it's not our job in Tallahassee to tell local governments how to operate," he said. "It's our responsibility to find ways to work together. The impact fee issue is a local government issue . ... "As Port St. Lucie City Manager Don Cooper indicated, if this bill passes, the city would default on its bonds. On this issue, I don't think it's good public policy for a city to default on its debt." Some Florida counties have waived some impact fees to encourage development. That could occur on the Treasure Coast, but must be carefully considered. With thousands of homes in foreclosure and built but vacant, there is no need for more. And, if more were to be built via elimination of impact fees, that would drive down the price of existing homes. That would further cripple local wealth and erode government revenue. Cragin Mosteller, a spokesperson for the Florida Association of Counties, said, "As a rule, we believe local government should be controlled at the local level. One size fits all may not work for every county." She said she is hopeful Bennett and his fellow legislators will take that into consideration. Florida often bends to assist developers. This proposed legislation may help them, but could cause major problems for local governments, hamper long,range economic growth and create additional financial hardships for taxpayers. As it exists, it's a bad bill. 218 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT BOARD MEMORANDUM Date: February 10, 2009 To: Joseph A. Bai rt, ~oin!Y/'-J.~tor Thru: W. Erik Olson, ~dfc;f-Utility Services From: Himanshu H. Mehta, P.E., Managing Director, Solid Waste Disposal District ]:/. ft\.. RFA No. 2009025 Waste Hauling Franchise - Unincorporated Enterprise Zone - Subject: Application Process Update & Notice of Public Meeting on March 3, 2009 BACKGROUND: On December 15, 2008, the Solid Waste Disposal District (SWDD) issued a Request for Applications (RFA#2009025) seeking companies that wish to apply for a Waste Hauling Franchise to serve the unincorporated portion of the Indian River County Enterprise Zone. The Waste Hauling services within the proposed new franchise area included residential recycling; residential waste hauling; commercial waste hauling; and commercial construction & demolition hauling. The goal of the RFA was to select the most qualified and experienced company in accordance with the evaluation process set for in County Code Section 204.11 and Section 204.12 whereby the selection is based on the sum total of points scored according to the criteria and points set forth below. Item Evaluation Criteria Points 1. Complete Application 10 2. Collection Vehicles and Equipment 15 3. Technical Experience 25 4. Financial Capability 30 5. Local Office in the Unincorporated Enterprise Zone at the Time of Application 10 Plan to Increase Community Usage & Mitigate Illegal Solid Waste Pick-Ups in 6. 10 the Unincorporated Enterprise Zone Total Points (out of 100 possible): 100 On January 26, 2009, the Indian River County Purchasing Department received responses to the RFA from the following three firms: 1) Capital Sanitation, Inc. (CSI), 2) Republic Services of Florida D/B/A Treasure Coast Refuse (TCR) and 3) Waste Management Inc. of Florida (WMIF). In order to evaluate the three applications, an evaluation committee was developed consisting of: 1) Jason Brown, County Budget Director, 2) Erik Olson, Utility Director, and 3) Himanshu Mehta, Solid Waste Managing Director. The selection committee held the first review meeting on February 9, 2009. The Selection Committee has elected to interview the three applicants prior to making any final recommendation to the SWDD Board. The Selection Committee has scheduled the interviews for February 13, 2009. SWDD Agenda - Waste Hauling Franchise Application Process Update & Notice of Public Meeting 219 Pa11e-l - DISCUSSION: During the RFA process, the SWDD issued .an addendum to provide responses to questions from several potential applicants. In particular, the response to the question on who retains the current existing commercial collection service customers of the existing franchise haulers has been protested by Capital Sanitation, Inc. The following is the response as provided by the Indian River County Legal Department: The existing Commercial Collection Service Customers of the existing current franchise haulers will be retained by the respective existing current franchise haulers until the end of the current existing contracts with such Commercial Collection Service Customers. Upon the completion or non-renewal of any such existing contracts with such Commercial Collection Service Customers, the new franchisee, if the SWDD creates the proposed new franchise area and selects an exclusive new franchise for such area, shall have the ability to offer Commercial Collection Service to the former Customers of the current existing franchise haulers. RECOMMENDATION: The Selection Committee is requesting the SWDD Board approve this notice to schedule a public meeting on March 3, 2009, meeting of the Solid Waste Disposal District Board of Commissioners, to approve or deny the applications for a third waste hauling franchise within the unincorporated portion of the enterprise zone. Indian River Co. Administration SWDD Director Budget Date Legal SWDD Agenda - Waste Hauling Franchise Application Process Update & Notice of Public Meeting 22 Q Page-2-