1994-08-16385
CITY OF OKEECHOBEE
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION
A. Call regular meeting to order on August 16, 1994 at 7:00 P.M.
B. Invocation offered by Reverend Ken McDuffie;
Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Kirk.
C. Mayor and Council attendance:
Mayor James E. Kirk
Councilmember Danny P. Entry
Councilmember Michael G. O'Connor
Councilmember Jerry E. Walker
Councilmember Dowling R. Watford, Jr.
Staff attendance:
Attorney John R. Cook
Administrator John J. Drago
City Clerk Bonnie S. Thomas
Deputy Clerk S. Lane Gamiotea
D. Motion to dispense with reading and approve the Summary of
Council Action for the Regular Meeting of July 19, 1994, for the
Recessed Meeting of July 25, 1994.
Mayor Kirk called the regular City Council meeting to order on August 16, 1994
at 7:00 p.m.
The invocation was offered by Reverend Ken McDuffie;
Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Kirk.
Clerk Thomas called the roll:
Present
X
Present
X
Present
X
Present
X
Present
X
Present
X
Present
X
Present
X
Present
X
Councilmember Entry made a motion to dispense with reading and approve the
Summary of Council Action for the Regular Meeting of July 19, 1994 and the
Recessed Meeting of July 25, 1994; seconded by Councilmember O'Connor.
KIRK
X
ENTRY
X
O'CONNOR
X
WALKER
X
WATFORD
X
MOTION CARRIED.
PAGE 1 OF 13
1400101
1
E. Motion to approve the Warrant Registers for July, 1994:
GENERAL FUND ......$358,794.52
PUBLIC UTILITIES ....$677,242.05
REQUEST FOR THE ADDITION, DEFERRAL OR WITHDRAWAL
OF ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA.
F. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING FOR REZONING AND ORDINANCE
ADOPTION
1. a. Motion to remove from the table petition 94-417R.
AUGUST 16, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 2 OF 13
Councilmember Watford made a motion to approve the Warrant Registers for
July, 1994 in the amounts, General Fund three hundred fifty-eight thousand,
seven hundred ninety-four dollars, fifty-two cents ($358,794.52) and Public
Utilities six hundred seventy-seven thousand, two hundred forty-two dollars, five
cents ($677,242.05); seconded by Councilmember Walker.
KIRK
ENTRY
O'CONNOR
WALKER
WATFORD
MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Kirk asked if there were any requests for the addition, deferral or
withdrawal of items on today's agenda. There were none.
Mayor Kirk opened the public hearing for a rezoning and ordinance adoption at
7:05 p.m.
Councilmember O'Connor made a motion to remove from the table petition 94-
417-R; seconded by Councilmember Watford.
KIRK
ENTRY
O'CONNOR
WALKER
WATFORD
MOTION CARRIED.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
M
F. PUBLIC HEARING FOR REZONING ADOPTION
1. b. Consider Petition 94-471-R for a rezoning request from
Residential Single Family to Commercial for property
located at 1903 S.W. 2nd Avenue - Mr. Bill Royce (E-1).
2. a. Motion to read by title only Ordinance 670 - City
Attorney (E-2).
AUGUST 16, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 3 OF 13
Mr. Bill Royce, Planning Director, appeared before the Council explaining this
petition is for a rezoning of land from residential single family to light commercial.
The property is located at 1903 S.W. 2nd Avenue (Lot 7 and North 1/2 of 8 of
Block 40; South Okeechobee) owned by Gary and Deborah Frazier. The
Frazier's plan to expand their Building Blocks Day Care Center into this area to
open a Pre -School. The Future Land Use Designation is consistent with this
request. The Planning Board unanimously recommends that the City Council
grant the petition. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals granted the variance
and special exception.
Mayor Kirk asked if there was any comments or questions from the public, there
were none.
Councilmember Entry commented he went to the day care center and looked at
the proposed site and talked with the property owners around the area and that
he did not have a problem with the rezoning or the pre-school.
Following brief discussion, Councilmember Walker moved to approve Petition 94-
417-R for rezoning from Residential Single Family to Light Commercial at 1903
S.W. 2nd Avenue; seconded by Councilmember Entry.
KIRK
ENTRY
O'CONNOR
WALKER
WATFORD
MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Entry made a motion to read by title only, (proposed) Ordinance
No. 670 (closing an alley in Block 29, City of Okeechobee); seconded by
Councilmember Watford.
X
X
X
X
X
F. PUBLIC HEARING FOR ORDINANCE ADOPTION
2. a. Read Ordinance 670 by title only continued:
2. b. Motion to adopt Ordinance 670.
AUGUST 16, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 4 OF 13
Vote on motion is as follows:
KIRK
ENTRY
O'CONNOR
WALKER
WATFORD
MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Cook read proposed Ordinance No. 670 by title only as follows:
"AN ORDINANCE CLOSING, VACATING AND ABANDONING THE ALLEY AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 10, PUBLIC RECORDS, OKEECHOBEE
COUNTY, FLORIDA, DESCRIBED AS THAT ALLEY IN BLOCK 29; TOWN OF
OKEECHOBEE, BY CLOSING SAID ALLEY IN BLOCK 29 BETWEEN LOTS
1-13 AND LOTS 14-26; ALL LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE,
AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO RECORD THE ORDINANCE IN THE
PUBLIC RECORDS OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR
OKEECHOBEE COUNTY, FLORIDA; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE."
Councilmember Entry made a motion to adopt Ordinance No. 670; seconded by
Councilmember Walker.
2. c. Public comment. 11 Mayor Kirk asked for any public comments. There were none.
Council discussed the area surrounding the alley to be closed and why the
property owners wanted to close the alley. After much discussion,, Council -
member O'Connor called the question.
F. PUBLIC HEARING FOR REZONING AND ORDINANCE
ADOPTION
2. d. Vote on motion.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
G. NEW BUSINESS
1. Motion to appoint Jessica Gore as a regular dispatcher -
Police Chief.
2. Motion to appoint Charles Jordan as a regular Utilities
Service Supervisor and Hubert Winters as a regular Utilities
Service Mechanic - Director of Public Utilities.
AUGUST 16, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 5 OF 13
Vote on motion is as follows:
KIRK
ENTRY
X
O'CONNOR
X
WALKER
X
WATFORD
MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Kirk closed the public hearing at 7:34 p.m.
Councilmember Watford made a motion to appoint Jessica Gore as a regular
dispatcher; seconded by Councilmember Entry.
KIRK
X
ENTRY
X
O'CONNOR
X
WALKER
X
WATFORD
X
MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember O'Connor made a motion to appoint Charles Jordan as a regular
Utilities Service Supervisor and Hubert Winters as a regular Utilities Service
Mechanic; seconded by Councilmember Watford.
KIR K
X
ENTRY
X
O'CONNOR
X
WALKER
X
WATFORD
X
MOTION CARRIED.
X
I*1
390
G. NEW BUSINESS
3. Motion to approve a partial pay request to CenState
Contractors, Inc. in the amount of $44,389.52 - Director of
Public Utilities (E-3).
4. Motion to approve a partial pay request to HCE Electric in
the amount of $18,963.30 - Director of Public Utilities (E-4).
AUGUST 16, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 6 OF 13
Councilmember Watford made a motion to approve pay request number five to
CenState Contractors, Inc. in the amount of forty-four thousand three hundred
eighty-nine dollars, fifty-two cents ($44,389.52); seconded by Councilmember
O'Connor (for the water distribution system improvements as recommended by
Engineer Reese of Reese, Macon and Associates).
Director Jones reported the minor problems discussed at the last meeting are
being addressed and they are doing a better job on the area they are working
in now.
KIR K
ENTRY
O'CONNOR
WALKER
WATFORD
MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Watford moved to approve partial pay request number six to
HCE Electric, Inc. in the amount of eighteen thousand, nine hundred sixty-three
dollars, thirty cents ($18,963.30); seconded by Councilmember Entry (for the
SCADA System as recommended by Engineer Reese of Reese, Macon and
Associates).
This is the final payment for the contract, they will begin the work for the change
order previously approved by Council. Director Jones also commented the
system is on line and has worked well; and he recommends this payment.
KIRK
ENTRY
O'CONNOR
WALKER
WATFORD
MOTION CARRIED.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
91
G. NEW BUSINESS
5. Motion to approve a partial pay request to Better Roads in
the amount of $13,743.36 - Director of Public Works (E-5).
6. Motion to approve an Annual Unit Price Contract to G.E.
French Construction in the amount of $345,097.10 -
Director of Public Utilities (E-6).
AUGUST 16, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 7 OF 13
Councilmember O'Connor moved to approve partial pay request (number one)
to Better Roads in the amount of thirteen thousand, seven hundred forty-three
dollars, thirty-six cents ($13,743.36); seconded by Councilmember Watford (for
the '94 Paving Improvements as recommended by Engineer Kafer of Lawson,
Noble & associates, Inc.).
Director Elders responded to Council's questions, this is for work done so far in
the Southwest section, and he supports this payment request.
KIR K X
ENTRY X
O'CONNOR X
WALKER X
WATFORD X
MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Watford moved to approve an Annual Unit Price Contract to
G.E. French Construction, Inc. in the amount of three hundred forty-five
thousand, ninety-seven dollars, ten cents ($345,097.10); seconded by
Councilmembers Entry and Walker.
Director Jones explained this is type of continual contract the City can have that
"locks" a contractor into certain prices for small jobs. The Council will still
approve each expenditure of this money, the total amount may or may not be
used by the end of the year.
KIRK X
ENTRY X
O'CONNOR X
WALKER X
WATFORD X
MOTION CARRIED.
392
G. NEW BUSINESS
7. Motion to approve a Water Distribution System Expansion
Contract to Speegle Construction, Inc. in the amount of
$145,319.75 - Director of Public Utilities (E-7)
B. Motion to approve a water line replacement project to G.E.
French Construction, Inc. in the amount of $19,907.50 -
Director of Public Utilities (E-8).
AUGUST 16, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 8 OF 13
Councilmember O'Connor moved to approve a Water Distribution System
Expansion Contract to Speegle Construction, Inc. in the amount of one hundred
forty-five thousand, three hundred nineteen dollars, seventy-five cents
($145,319.75); seconded by Councilmember Walker.
This is for the water line extension to South Florida Water Management Office
on State Road 70 East. The amount will be reimbursed to the City from
SFWMD.
KIRK
ENTRY
O'CONNOR
WALKER
WATFORD
MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember O'Connor moved to approve a water line replacement to project
to G.E. French in the amount of nineteen thousand, nine hundred seven dollars,
fifty cents ($19,907.50); seconded by Councilmembers Walker and Entry.
This project is to replace the existing 2" water line on Southwest 10th Avenue
as recommended by Engineer Reese of Reese, Macon and Associates.
KIRK
ENTRY
O'CONNOR
WALKER
WATFORD
MOTION CARRIED.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
393
G. NEW BUSINESS
9. a. Motion to read
1994 as a public
Attorney (E-9).
by title only, and set September 20,
hearing date, Ordinance 671 - City
AUGUST 16, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 9 OF 13
Councilmember Entry moved to read by title only, and set September 20, 1994
as a public hearing date, (proposed) Ordinance No. 671 (alley closing in Block
4 of Price Addition and N.E. 2nd Street); seconded by Councilmember Watford.
KIRK
ENTRY
O'CONNOR
WALKER
WATFORD
MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Cook read proposed Ordinance No. 671 by title only as follows:
"AN ORDINANCE CLOSING, VACATING AND ABANDONING THE ALLEY
AND STREET AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 17, PUBLIC
RECORDS, OKEECHOBEE COUNTY, FLORIDA; DESCRIBED AS THAT
ALLEY IN BLOCK 4, AND THAT STREET NORTHEAST 2ND STREET IN
BLOCK 4, PRICE ADDITION TO OKEECHOBEE CITY; CLOSING SAID ALLEY
BETWEEN LOTS 1-6 AND 7-12; AND CLOSING SAID STREET BETWEEN
NORTHEAST 12TH AVENUE AND 13TH AVENUE; ALL LOCATED WITHIN
THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE; AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO
RECORD THE ORDINANCE IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF CLERK OF THE
CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR OKEECHOBEE COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE."
This is for Street and Alley Closing Application No. 43 filed by Charles Farmer
and James Crowe.
9. b. Motion to approve the first reading of Ordinance 671. Councilmember O'Connor made a motion to approve the first reading of
11 (proposed) Ordinance No. 671; seconded by Councilmember Walker.
394
G. NEW BUSINESS
9. b. Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance 671 contin-
ued:
10. Consider application No. 44 from Hospice to close an alley
- City Clerk (E-10).
11. Discuss the Debt Service - Councilmembers Walker and
O'Connor (E-11).
AUGUST 16, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 10 OF 13
IVote on motion is as follows:
KIRK
ENTRY
O'CONNOR
WALKER
WATFORD
MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Watford made a motion to instruct Attorney Cook to draft an
ordinance closing the alley (in Government Lot 4; First Addition to the City of
Okeechobee and Block B; Central Park as filed in Application No. 44 by Hospice
of Okeechobee); seconded by Councilmember Walker.
KIRK
ENTRY
O'CONNOR
WALKER
WATFORD
MOTION CARRIED.
Upon the request of Councilmembers O'Connor and Walker, a new Resolution
amending the debt service fee amounts is included in Exhibit Eleven. At the last
meeting Resolution No. 94-15 was adopted increasing the debt service amount
(to $13.40 from $8.00 for the smallest meter within the City). After further review
of the finances in Public Utilities by Administrator Drago and Finance Director
Parker, it was discovered that the Council could transfer $200,000.00 from the
general utility operating fund to the debt service fund which would require the
raise in the debt service to only $10.00 (smallest meter in the City).
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
395
G. NEW BUSINESS
11. Discuss the Debt Service continued:
AUGUST 16, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 11 OF 13
Following much discussion between Council; Councilmember Walker made a
motion to adopt Resolution No. 94-16: seconded by Councilmember O'Connor.
Attorney Cook read Resolution No. 94-16 by title only as follows:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA AMENDING
SECTION C OF THE PUBLIC UTILITY RATE RESOLUTION 89-5; PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE."
Discussion ensued concerning whether or not the °debt service" had to be set
out on the utility bills since monies could be contributed into the debt service
fund. Administrator Drago explained all the bonds require the "debt service" be
set out on the bills and that the rate structure plus the $200,000. contribution
meets all the debt service requirements.
Upon the request of Councilmember Walker, Mayor Kirk instructed Attorney
Cook is to check out the legality of a reduced cost break for the elderly citizens.
Mayor Kirk interjected, while the Council was discussing utilities, he needs from
each Councilmember any concerns they have on the Utility Authority and state
them at the next meeting. These issues will be addressed in the working group's
negotiations for a Utility Authority because we are moving in a rapid pace right
now.
Councilmember O'Connor called the question, vote is as follows:
KIRK X
ENTRY X
O'CONNOR X
WALKER X
WATFORD X
MOTION CARRIED.
• ;I
G. NEW BUSINESS
12. Discuss not raising property taxes - Councilmember Walker
(E-12).
AUGUST 16, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 12 OF 13
Mayor Kirk advised the Council he and Administrator Drago had gone through
the budget review process with the Department Heads and that the City has a
balanced budget with no increases in taxes.
Councilmember Watford asked if the request of the pension board is included
in the budget. Mayor Kirk responded that it was not.
Listed in Exhibit Twelve are three options Administrator Drago gave in order for
the Council to grant the general employees pension request for an increase.
The three options in Exhibit Twelve are to raise property taxes 12 cents ($4.94
to $5.06); use monies from the employees longevity bonuses; or deny the
requ est.
Council then discussed whether or not the Department Heads were advised of
the administrator's memorandum to the Mayor and Council when the budget
process meetings were held with the Administrator and Mayor. Administrator
Drago responded they did not know of the memorandum (Exhibit Twelve).
Councilmembers Walker and Watford stated they would want a budget workshop
to go over the budget and see if there is some way the pension request could
be granted without having to raise taxes or use bonus monies.
Mayor Kirk and Administrator Drago stressed they felt the budget is a "bare
bones" budget and the request could not be granted other than the three options
given without jeopardizing the daily functions of the departments.
Councilmembers Watford, Walker and Entry were in favor of discussing this at
a budget workshop. Administrator Drago is to set the workshop up. (The
Finance Department's budget calendar indicate an August 30th workshop if
approved by Council).
397
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Kirk:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT IF ANY PERSON SHOULD
DECIDE TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE ATTHIS MEETING OF
THE CITY COUNCIL, SUCH PERSON WILL NEED TO INSURE
THAT VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING IS MADE
WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON
WHICH THE APPEAL IS BASED.
James E. Kirk, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Bonnie S. thorn.As, CMC
CITY CLERK
AUGUST 16, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 13 OF 13
There being no further items on the agenda, Mayor Kirk adjourned the meeting
at 8:33 p.m.
VERBATIVF ITEM G.11 'DISCUSS THE D* SERVICE'
MO- I, after last meeting, I got with Mr. Drago and Lydia through Lola Parker a d was wondering 9 there wasn't
something we could do to help reduce this debt service that were ..... goi g to have to go up on the other night.
And, I got some of the numbers back through Lola's office and through th administrator's office and toll him
what I was trying to do and if we didn't have some money some place el in the utilities since it was utilities
where all of this disaster originated several years ago, that we should try see what we could do to help these
citizens of Okeechobee In this delima that we're all in because of what hal pened back then. And the figures
that Mr. Drago came up with was we were at $8.50 and went to $13.40 last meeting that we was at and that
put us at $13.40 and then when Lola and Mr. Drago got on top of this thin and started working with It, ft got us
to where were back down to $10. so that's really only $1.50 over what we were paying before. And unbe-
knownst to me at the same time Commissioner Walker came in there to see Mr. Drago and was inquiring about
the same thing to see what we could do about this so It was something t t we were thinking about and this is
a way that we can do it and I think that we owe it to the citizenry to do this and we got the money to do It with.
JW- The only thing that, I think I discussed this with our administrator was the I ad that ff there was some way they
could add like, a scale in there for like, low income people....
JD- unfortunately our resolution isn't geared that way...
JW- we can't do that?....JD- right .... JW- legally we can't do that right?
JC- I haven't been asked to review that.
JW- would you? .... JC- yes.
MO- only thing I thought about that Councilman Walker when I had heard part of that was that was the fact It would
sound to me like, with the intent being well, it could be, some could classify It as discrimination.
JW- well, yea, but they do do It in other places for people that can't pay ft, IRS s it with your income tax.
MO- but I really think that were well off with this one were we only had to up It $1.50 rather than going all the way
up to $13.40 from $8.50...
JW-
I agree with you there, I'm just saying I'd like the other reviewed to see if it
know.
something we oouid look at, you
JK-
when did we raise the rates?
JD-
last meeting ... JK- last meeting?
MO-
yes sir they went from $8.50 Mayor to $13.40.
DW-
it's my understanding, cause I had talked with the administrator when I heard
my understanding that these did
that this may be discussed, frs
rates not go into effect, they should have gone
assume....JD- now .... DW- now and so the administrator said that he had
out in the billing that's being, I
the
until this meeting to see what happened, cause it would have been extremely
and then had to go back refund or something,
authority and could hold that off
bad N we had increased them
so he said he ..... JK- no one has
rates?...DW- nobody has been billed this new rate.
been billed the new
JK-
You're comfortable with the $200,000 Mr. Administrator? JD- yes.....JK- there's
satisfy all of our requirements?....JD-
not a going to
yes---JK- okay, then what do we needto
do at thispoint?...
JD-
you need to adopt Resolution 94-16.
JW-
Mr. Mayor I make a motion we adopt resolution number 94-16.
MO-
I second ft.
JC-
For the Clerk's records let me read the title. Resolution 94-16. A resolution of
amending section C of the public Utility Rate Resolution
the City of Okeechobee, FL
89-5, providing for an
effective date.
JK-
my only comment is that I'm glad we did this before we put it out,
DW_
Mr. Mayor I think we asked about this last meeting, I think it's unfortunate that
we adopted the other. I have a question, the way the bonds are structured,
we didn't think about this before
which
debt service on the billing .....JD- all of them ..... DW- well does this meet that
bonds is it that require the
requirement then?
JD-
all the bonds require the debt service and the rate structure that you've adopt
meets all the debt service requirements.
ed plus the $200,000 contribution
DW-
I had interpreted that to mean that the debt service portion of the bill had to be
that not correct?
sufficient to service the debt, is
JD-
That's correct and you are fulfilling an obligation by contributing $200,000 which
you have every authority to do.
DW-
Using that theory then we don't have to have the debt service on the bill, is that
rates such that we don't have to have the debt
correct? We could raise the
service on the bill.
11
JD- Now your dealing with a di fea funding mechanism and I would venturethat
service to the volume
ff
Y you tied the debt
metric g y
your going to sub'ed ourseff to fluctuat
have to set that rate sufficiently high enough for those people who go off
of revenues which you're going to
he service that the revenue will not
suffer, those that remain on the service in essence supplement those that
go off the service, the debt service
fee eliminates that because if you go off the service you still pay the debt
the property owner would not supplement those people that off the
service fee and it was set up so that
go system.
JK- I think we've discussed this a couple of times and I don't know if I can explain
but with debt service you do have a guarantee stream of X
this a way I understand it or not,
number of dol
amount of water we use that's going to be a fluctuating rate, and we're no
rs each time where If Ws on the
going to get as
bond...
good a rate on the
JD- and thats exactly why the system fell into the financial condition it did in 86 and 87 cause you tied the
debt service to the volume metric rates the minute you skim the debt se off there was not enough money
to operate the system and henceforth you had that $500,000 deficit, since that time and since the Council's
Initiated that debt service rate, you have not had a deficit, the system has unded itself and you're able to make
those necessary capital Improvement things that are needed plus the main enance.
JK- while we're In the middle of this I need to bring something out that fits in
u what 1 y one 0 at the nex"E mee m$Lan&Xh '
Item, a �..�.,. n council meeting f w�i need �m you any concerns 1
Item, at the next ; lieccause we are moving In p - rI!
the wo ng group or the
DW- what firm did they hire? is it the one that was here last time? remember,
us that we all liked.
JD- yes, Minton & Hartman.
the
to
now.
one that gave the presentation to
JK- we had a meeting to do so and I think those present was myself, Mr. Altobello, Mr. Abney and Twyla, that was
the only people in the building, so we had a small crew that night.
DW- but that is the firm that was selected.
JK- I don't think we selected that night, I think that was when we met again.
DW- can I ask another question? Back to what we were discussing about whether it does or doesn't, aren
't we
doing that to a certain extent by doing it this way?
JD- supplementing it? .... DW- yes .... JD- but the problem is your supplementing It with general
not singling out the rate payer to supplement the debt service. operating funds, your
DW- say that again I guess I didn't understand that, slower.
JD- your taking the surplus revenues in the operating fund from all operations to use it as a supplement
debt service, you're not directly taxing the rate payor to supplement the deb service. to pay the
DW- where did that money come from then ff the rate payor didn't pay it?
JD- it comes not only from the rate payor there's certain other fees and charges hat the utilities charges that goes
into the fund like any connection fees for new development goes into the op irating fund, fire hydrant fees go
into the operating fund, miscellaneous fees go into the operating fund, all the se fees combined with the rates
that you charged any surplus that's there is used to supplement this paymen , you're not directly subjectin people like Mr. Miniham to supplement the people that go off the system. g
JK- in essence your putting some money back into it, that's what your saying....) - sure .... JK- and to helping pay
the debt .... JD- and irs the same monies in the operating fund thats used to transfer into the iro
eme
replacement fund to buy the trucks, to buy the computers, lay your water lineand do those othheevednt and
services.
DW- to me your using a technicality to say well some of that money comes from re some of it comes from the rate
Payers....JD- absolutely .... DW- so I guess your going to say how much of it mes from the rate payor, does
10% or does 100% come from the rate payor?....
JD- I'm not, Mr. O'Connor asked me that same question and I told him I didn't care about Interest
didn't care about rate percentages the only thing I looked at Is the bottom line, what surplus was leftwghat the
utilities could afford to carry over what it needed to carry over to the Improverrient and replacement fund to take
care of projects that the Council has already approved, the $200,000 was the figure, now next
fund does well, ff the council want's to move 2-30, 2-40, 2-50 or 0 you can d that. fir' If the utility
DW- okay but ff -we move 0 then we would have to adjust the debt service....JD- thats correct ..... DW- so were back
in the same box, but my point is, what do you call all the money that the utilities dept. takes in? all of it, what
You pay for your water service, and what you pay for your connection, whars hat term you used, what's that
term you just used for that money, you called it ithe operating fund? ....JD- rating fund revenues ..... DW- the
operating fund revenues then we could use only operating fund revenues to y the debt service, couldn't we?
JD- ff you had enough surplus in the operating fund to the tune of $1 million a yea , ff the Council wanted to take
the $1 million and use it to pay for the debt service the answer is yes.
DW- thank you, thank you, so we could do it that way, okay, and then we wouldn't
service on the bill.... have to have the word debt
JD- you would still have to haveecause the bond resolution sets the
having 0 on the bill but it's still going to say debt service, 0 $1, $4 H
JK- I certainly hope in not the to far future that this conversation wont m
KT a
DW-
JK-
MO-
DW-
nism to have it, you may wind up
anyway, I certainly hope
that's true Mr. Mayor but it's just extremely frustrating because I don't kr
complaints about than anything else is that the word debt service,
Dw about ya'll but 1 get more
I don'
is, that's the one thing that we get the most complaints on and I guess
when we first did this we said we were
care what you
hat sort gets me Is If, we ftor all think h ft
back
putting It on there because we 9t
paid all the debt by using the term debt service and collecting It as such,
did those bonds ..... JK- that's correct DW-
a better bond rate, you know, If we
that's what we've been told
.... know were going back and s4
everything and the bond company says that we have to have that on the
way .... JK- he's surplanningDW- I
since we
tying well yea we got a better rate and
a but we're not going to do
.... don't care what you call it, su
but you know the point is, If that' s the case we don't have to have that
it that
or
we've been
and told that we have to have that debt service on there and last meeting
and I think we all anticipated this that you know to meet
way told, and told,
when we came here we were told
our debt service
debt service to these amounts now were coming back and were saying wall
way, but we don't have to and that just doesn't,
we were going to have to increase the
yea were suppose to do it that
I like the idea, but I'd rath
other charges, If that it what we have to do is just put 0 on t
but here, I'd like t
,just put 0 on there, but, and do it the other way, I
3r see it go to 0 and just raise all the
just take the whole words off there
and
guess that's ff we've been told, and told, and told we can't do It that way and I guess it's
passed this last meeting under that assumption
kid of frustratint, we ing do especially that way and
just..... and now we're well ma
we dons have to ay 8 e
Mr. Mayor if I had thought aboout it at the last meeting I would have certainly
have had to done this but I'm sure heck glad that I did happen to think
have brought It up so we wouldn't
about
so that we could bring this up to take care of it cause the bottom line is, Is
matter how we do It, we're getting it down for the citizenry,
It and so did Councilman Walker
that we're lowfering the rates no
that s what wig
should be interested in.
well we're still paying that money, some how or another were stilling paying
that money....
nobody doubts that....
I'm not saying that we're not doing that, I'm just saying that we don't have t
with the debt service and raising It, we're only having to raise It $1.50 inst
tax our citzens that much more
of $5.50....
I agree with the principle I just really object to that, cause I think we all
know the Mayor did for sure, have we got to do this and everybody didn't....
this questioned last meeting, I
says yes,
yes, we've got to do this, so why
MO- were still doing it It's just not as much.
DW- well, we're coming in the back door to do It and I guess, I think everybody
been told and told and told we've got to have that debt service on the bill.
MO- if that's what the bonding company say according to law then obviously we
DW- but we don' have to have It on there.
MO-
DW-
MO-
DW-
MO-
I dont' know what the big issue is if have to have It or we don't have to have
getting the price down lower for the citizenry and that's the main issue here.
we've still got to come up with how ever many million dollars we owe this ne)
with $1 million but whether that comes from debt service or other that comes
It comes from the rate that we pay for our water, the volume charges, we've a
missing the Point here. Weave
or...
it Councilman Watford, were
t year, we've still got to come up
from connection fees or whether
till got to pay that same amount.
the other side of the coin was, just like the Mayor said a minute ago, I didn't an to have to bring it up, but, if
the utility goes like were all hoping it will go this will eliminate that problem all together.
Yes sir and that's what everyone has been hauling about, that's why they wan
and as far as next year If the authority Is not in place yet and we have to go k
of the operating fund or the spare tire fund, I really don't care as long as we c
for it, we can get carried away with the way its worded and all that and not ac
think we're accomplishing something.
DW- I don't object to this, I'm going to vote for it, I guess Its a matter of principle, %
can't do that, that we've got to have enought, that we've got to charge enough
my main focus, have we got to charge enough debt service or not, the bond sr
enough debt service that's what we've been told and told and told, no were be
somewhere else we don't have to charge that much debt service, so do we hae
we not have to charge a debt service?
JK- I'll try to answer that as best as I understand it, yes we do, and what we are do
russfan rulRe here, we're lowering the rates after another year passes and thinc
us to do it.
k to the utilities and take it out
take ft out of something to pay
nplish anything, this way here I
'e been told and told that we
1bt service and I guess that's
were suppose to charge
l told well N we get funds from
to charge debt service or do
9 is Playing a little bit of
stay status quo then he's
a
going to have to come up Sout of
general fund or somewhere in
we can't always do that so we, I assume based on that we ooukl get ca
rats
g short in ng es anotherand
DW-
you'd have to come back and raise the debt service next year....
, Is that true?
JK-
we sure would, so we're using the $200,000 he's putting in here to lower
the debt service.
DW-
I understand that and I don't have any problem with that, I think it's a great
we do ft that way?
idea, my only concern is, legally can
JK-
I certainly hope so if thats what were doing....
MO-
it's utility money .... DW-thats not the point ..... MO_ it is the point we have
utility money and so were going to pay them with utility money,
to
tee debt
that's where
utilities no in the general fund.... DW- I agree with that 100%.
vales Inncurredlwas ins
JK-
I think where were getting off here gentlemen Is the fact that and Dowling
probably from the get go that we've involved
bear with me on this comment I think
gotten in debt service that some
much rather have put it on the water volume and let that take care of it, the
go to get the better price on the bond,
me embers s the Council would
problem is this k were
if I understand ft ht the said
fluctuate, we're going to set a rate over here and the on way way that rate would
more customers
we had to
would
c0m1A downuse
or for us to put dollars on it, anytime we put extra dollars
then you're setting yourself up for double high possible even the next ti
IsIsu o either Ve
on it, ft changes for that time, but
year.
around but this gives us relief for a
JC- the bond covenants require the city to maintain a debt service, but the amount of that debt service is subject to
change, I think what Mr. Drago is saying is to comply with those covens certain rate, chip in a contribution as long as we come out with the amountHof moneyes we y to coven set r it, Ws perfectly
permissible.
l
DW- that's your opinion or that's your Interpertation? JC- m rote
there, we could say we'll put debt service to 0 but if we have t raise volu on ,metetriiccf mates label nn�� fees
to cover paying the debt, you're getting it from here or from the customer, ur getting it from here regardless
of the label you put on ft.
MO- call the question.
JK- I need to may one comment before I honor that request, please remembm
leave this item eleven there is no where else I can discuss this
any concerns you have, because were
getting the point noW„that were, g4
HOW-6nd I need to address any of these concerns that you got because y
t�i^606uncilmgan and of the City are protected ad we d_ a wayMcf_g�
biessm for uite a while now I need somethingfrom you in
information. o thfs thing correct
JW- Mr. Mayor, you don't have any problem researching that to see ft we can
JK- I would consider that part of his job.
Vote: all aye. motion carried.
I oaks .vl1tR1. ,fft the nex Mpg
to start neotistiea sorrw them
Ve had me doing this with your full
�'Ir`make wsuret_of
please Wiring me back some
do someting...
E
+ Gnc�Q�
mag
NRuiiMIA
fin+
Looker
mo c I r
_U� AjDd ....
a,
we
14
KIRK n/a n/a
ENTRY ,/
O'CONNO
WALKER,
WATFORO
CARRIED,/ DENIED
�Ce .)k4y '9V
CARRIED / DENIED
•
�i.
d
KIRK n/a I n/a
ENTRY
O' CONNOR '
WALKER
WATFORD
i�
CARRIED) / DENIED
POA7floj licay
y�, 52
/ DENIED
• I�
I
b-) A (c. le
i
5' ! I"rk'*e-x
q�oaoUJ ui
A)OLt(u_,__ CL =.
w k>
-gyp i� S ki
Co : MC-4Te�) (�pplo_)U 0_)
(E- (P)
vI.C-u�
-
``-
7�
�y ::;fig:•.
KIRK n/a n/a
ENTRY
O'CONNOR
WALKER ;r
WATFORD
-CARRIED / DENIED
WATFORD
v
P CARRIED-' / DENIED
I
O'CONNOR
WALKER
WATFORD I I ✓
CARRIED)/ DENIED
s a�
AN ORDINANCE CLOSING, VACATING AND ABANDONING 'THE ALLEY AND
STREET AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 17, PUBLIC RECORDS,
OKEECHOBEE COUNTY, FLORIDA; DESCRIBED AS THAT ALLEY IN BLOCK
4, AND THAT STREET NORTHEAST 2ND STREET IN BLOCK 4, PRICE
ADDITION TO OKEECHOBEE CITY; CLOSING SAID ALLEY BETWEEN LOTS
1-6 AND 7-12; AND CLOSING SAID STREET BETWEEN NORTHEAST 12TH
AVENUE AND 13TII AVENUE; ALL LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF
OKEECHOBEE; AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO RECORD THE
ORDINANCE IN TIIE PUBLIC RECORDS OF T1IE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT
COURT IN AND FOR OKEECI-iOBEE COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
4l -die-rn� �(� � �
UCCU
E - rod
NQA
a9?
->
I -
�'�-------------
GhS a XL4q Cwtj
410.9 0 L
Q(�k a�r2 ��► Iq q- kv, ikt
4�u�Q,�� � C�k�r�Ci
Yu
2ria iziq
E ;
CB.RoV�
C - u gin _ _Q n ex - _ / /
n LL
2rd
Pfll
2 a. Macy. �
ejaqj *4 Cam- Cdnmov�s_ ��K29� 1
e
od wo `
AN ORUINANCis' CLOSING, VACA771VG AND ABANDONING THE ALLEY AS
RECORDED IN 1,LA7' MOOR 1, PAGE 10, PUBLIC RECORDS, OKEECUOPEE
COUNTY, FLORIDA, UESCRIBEU AS MAT' ALLEY IN PLUCK 29, 7Y)IYN OF
7YEEN LOTS 1-13
AND I LO7S 14 26; ALL CLERK LOCATED WITHIN RECORD THE C17TOF'rrC11OPEE, AND
OKEI"CIIOPEE PI CLOSING SAID ALLEY IN BLOCK 29 PE
I, DIRECTING TIIE CITORDINANCE, IN 711E PUBLIC
RECORDS OF HIE CLERK OF THE CIRCUI7' COURT IN AND I'OR OREECIIOIIIF
COUN7Y, FLORIDA; PROVIDING AN EFFCC7IVC UA7E.
--- —
----------w;----^mow
kc
' 26-
2,0►
kM�Y • .
----Gil -
slua
Uc) -ft
-- ---- ----- --
-Jnle
lcolo xv
C1rnoccnf $13, 7 3, 3l, Wko(Zlv,�5-
21-d
b.,�- ►.�s�ut o- �uP,o�3- koodo t � _
lqq
p'ul ►�a�l�.¢a�- - �� QQA ,S�n�s � Sc�
Can
d
*10
wfs
LW
Lot 1,0
A)u Ltj-
a.
Coo s+ik0 �cs�s.Q: �A � lu peon
OF. 0KE�c
v •
ORI�P
CITY OF OKEECHOBEE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OFFICIAL AGENDA
A. Call Meeting to order on August 16, 1994, at 7:00 p.m.
B. Invocation offered by Reverend Ken McDuffie; Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Kirk.
C. Mayor and Council Attendance:
Mayor James E. Kirk
Councilmember Danny P. Entry
Councilmember Michael G. O'Connor
Councilmember Jerry E. Walker
Councilmember Dowling R. Watford, Jr.
Staff Attendance:
City Attorney Cook
City Administrator Drago
City Clerk Thomas
Deputy Clerk Gamiotea
D. Motion to dispense with the reading and approve the Summary of Council Action for the regular
meeting of July 19, 1994 and the recessed meeting of July 25, 1994.
E. Motion to approve warrant Registers for July, 1994.
General Fund $ 358,794.52
Public Utilities $ 677,242.05
REQUEST FOR THE ADDITION, DEFERRAL OR WITHDRAWAL OF ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA
.�, Open Public Hearing for Rezoning and Ordinance Adoption
1. a. Motion to remove from the table petition 94-417-R.
b. Consider petition 94-417-R for a rezoning request from Residential Single Family to Commercial for
property located at 1903 S.W. 2nd Avenue - Mr. Bill Royce (E-1)
• 2. a. Motion to read by title only Ordinance 670 - City Attorney (E-2)
b. Motion to adopt Ordinance 670
c. Public comment
d. Vote in motion
L7. New Business
1. Motion to appoint Jessica Gore as a regular dispatcher - Police Chief
2. Motion to appoint Charles Jordan as a regular Utilities Service Supervisor and Hubert Winters as
a regular Utilities Service Mechanic - Director of Public Utilities
3. Motion to approve a partial pay request to CenState Contractors, Inc. in the amount of $44,389.52
Director of Public Utilities (E-3)
4. Motion to approve a partial pay request to HCE Electric in the amount of $18,963.30
Director of Public Utilities (E-4)
5. Motion to approve a partial pay request to Better Roads in the amount of $13,743.36
Director of Public Works (E-5)
6. Motion to approve an Annual Unit Price Contract to G.E. French Construction in the amount of
$345,097.10 - Director of Public Utilities (E-6)
7. Motion to approve a Water Distribution System Expansion Contract to Spee le Construction Inc. in
the amount of It1dA 110 Tr, - n,�er..... -4 o..►..c_ 1 �.�:.:__ .r- g '
8. Motion to approve a water line replacement project to G.E. French Construction, Inc. in the amount of
$19,907.50 - Director of Public Utilities (E-8)
9. a. Motion to read by title only, and set September 20, 1994 as a public hearing date, Ordinance
671 - City Attorney (E-9)
b. Motion to approve the first reading of Ordinance 671.
• 10. Consider application No. 44 from Hospice to close an alley - City Clerk (E-10)
11. Discuss the Debt Service - Councilmembers Walker and O'Connor (E-11)
12. Discuss not raising property taxes - Councilmember Walker (E-12)
ADJOURNMENT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT IF ANY PERSON SHOULD DECIDE TO APPEAL ANY
DECISION MADE AT THIS MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, SUCH PERSON WILL NEED TO
INSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE WHICH INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS BASED
• 0
Okeechobee City Council
August 16, 1994
Staff Report and Recommendation
Petition 94-417-R, Gary R. and Deborah A. Frazier. Property ac
Avenue in the City of Okeechobee. nest for a change in zoning
Family (RSF) to Light Commercial)•
NOTE: Following this staff report are the staff reports for the
Petition No. 94-414-S, a request for a special exception to allow i
center in a C-1 zoning district; and Petition No. 94-122-V, a req
required set backs. Petition Numbers 94-414-S and 94-122-V h
Board of Adjustments and Appeals with several conditions. The
City Council for consideration is Petition No. 94-417-R, a reque;
from Residential Single Family (RSF) to Light Commercial (C-1
Back_ ground
The subject parcel is located at 1903 S.W. 2nd Avenue, in the C
parcel consists of one and one-half lots, for a total size of about 11
east of the subject parcel, and facing South Parrott Avenue, is a c
west is residential development. To the north is Building Bloc
owned and operated by the applicant. The property to the east i
as is most property along South Parrott Avenue in this area. T
occupied by Building Blocks Daycare Center is zoned Light Cron
to the north of Building Blocks Daycare Center is zoned Comme:
west and south is zoned Residential Single Family (RSF). The cl
west and south is primarily residential, while to the north and east
Street, which separates the subject parcel from Building Blocks D;
street but has not been constructed.
Consistency with Land Development Re lu a_tions
The applicants desire to establish a pre-school at the subject parc
house for this use. The proposed pre-school is a permitted
Commercial (C-2) zoning, or is a use permissible by special except
(C-1). The Commercial (C) zoning district has been replaced by 1
Although land to the east, and facing South Parrott Avenue, is zon
suggests that it would be more appropriate to obtain Light Colo
along S.W. 2nd Avenue, rather than Heavy Commercial, as S.
is 1903 S.W. 2nd
Residential Single
,o associated petitions,
r a day care/pre-school
:st for a variance from
e been granted by the
my petition before the
for a change in zoning
y of Okeechobee. The
688 square feet. To the
urch. To the south and
s Daycare Center, also
zoned Commercial (C),
the north, the property
nercial (C-1). Property
ial (C). Property to the
racter of the land to the
commercial. S.W.19th
►care Center, is a platted
el, converting an existing
principal use in Heavy
ion in Light Commercial
ieavy Commercial (C-2).
ed Commercial (C), staff
unercial zoning for land
W. 2nd Avenue abuts a
1
Stec Repast and Reaa®endat3oa
Olmodwb a aq CMX9
Petidw 94-417-R
Aupot 16,1994
residential area. The more restrictive uses permissible by the Light Commercial zoning are
more compatible with the adjacent residential zoning and development than if Heavy
Commercial zoning were obtained in this area. The subject parcel is contiguous to a like
zoning district to the north, and to a more intense zoning district W the east.
Consistency with Comprehensive Plan
The subject parcel is located in the Commercial future land use cl ification of the adopted
City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan. The Commercial cl ification extends from
Parrott Avenue to S.W. 2nd Avenue. The proposed development d the proposed zoning
classification are consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan
Staff Recommendation
As the proposed zoning classification is consistent with the adopted
land development regulations, and as the proposed developmen
residential and commercial characteristics of surrounding areas, st
City Council grant the petition for a change in zoning from Residei
to Light Commercial (C-1).
Planning Board
The Planning Board, on July 26,1994, unanimously recommended
Council grant the petition for a change in zoning from Residentig
Light Commercial (C-1). The Board of Adjustments and A
associated petitions. The summary of that meeting follows.
William D. Royce
Planning Director
.omprehensive plan and
is compatible with the
ff recommends that the
ial Single Family (RSF)
iat the Okeechobee City
Single Family (RSF) to
peals also granted two
2
St& Repast and Remnowndadm
obeahabee aq cou�1
Fed" 9"17-R
AUOM 14 IM
0
Okeechobee County Planning Board
Summary of Meeting
July 26, 1994
The Okeechobee Planning Board/Board of Adjustments and Appeals met in regular session
on Tuesday, July 26, 1994 at 7:00 p.m. in the County Commission Meeting Room,
Okeechobee County Courthouse, 304 Northwest Second Street, Okeechobee, Florida.
Chairman Frank Marsocci opened the July meeting. Board mem rs present were Monica
Clark, John Smith and Keith Pearce. Members absent were Brenda O'Connor, Dan
Delagall and Jim Burke. Alternate Renee Hazellief was desipate I as a voting member for
this meeting. Also present were John Cassels, County Attornt y, Bill Royce, Planning
Director, Joseph Crum, Code Compliance Director; and Vikki Aaron, Secretary.
Agenda Item #2, Petition 94-122 V, Gary R. and Deborah A. Frazier, Property Owners and
Applicants. Request for a variance from required setbacks.
Frank Marsocci stated there are three (3) petitions regarding tlds property. One for a
rezoning from RSF to C-1, a request for a special exception to allow a daycare center in a
C-1 zoning district, and a variance from the required setbacks.
Mr. Royce stated the applicants wish to convert the existing hou
operated in association with Building Blocks Daycare Center. Suc
require commercial zoning. The future land use for the entire U
Avenue and Parrott Avenue is commercial. There is a reasonable i
that part of the city will develop into commercial. Currently, ther
development on Southwest Second Avenue. In order to accoi
commercial development a variance would also be required. 'I
property is set back 9.5 feet from the south property line. If the
Light Commercial, the required setback from the south property
the applicant is requesting a change in zoning from Residenti.,
Commercial, the applicant is also requesting a variance of
requirement of 20 feet. If the property were not rezoned the apI
a variance of .5 feet be granted. Mr. Royce stated he would rei
approved subject to a condition that there be a substitute buffer f
Also, the variance would only be for the footprint of the existinj
It also became apparent that there was a problem on the north
existing house is set back 4 feet from the property line and althoi
north of the property has not been built, it is still a public stre
corner lot from the north property line is increased to 18.75 feet
suer Repan and
Obdcbc m aW CMWCU
9N17.R
e into a preschool to be
� an establishment would
-k between S.W. Second
tpectation that over time
is very little commercial
modate the request for
ie house existing on the
iroperty were rezoned to
ue would be 20 feet. As
Single Family to Light
10.5 feet from setback
licant would request that
:)mmend the variance be
r that 20 foot separation.
building.
e of the property. The
the street immediately
The setbacks for this
75% of the required 25
3
0
foot front setback. If the property were rezoned, the existing ouse would therefore
encroach 11 feet into the required 15 foot setback. The applicait is also requesting a
variance from the north setback requirements. The site plan indicates there would be a
playground to the west but flush with the north side of the building and it would also be 4
feet from the north property line. The recommendation would be to allow the playground
within 4 feet of that right of way so long as that right of way remains undeveloped. If some
time in the future that road was put in the playground should a moved to meet the
setbacks.
Keith Pearce questioned the parldug as indicated on the site plan.
Mr. Royce stated that according to the regulations parking is allowed to be in the required
side yard. Mr. Royce also stated the site plan was submitted during last months meeting
and has not gone through Site Plan Review and has not been approved.
Frank Marsocci stated a child care center is a good transitional use for that area to begin
the transition from residential to commercial.
Jackie Flood was recognized by the Board. Ms. Flood presented a petition with six (6)
signatures to the Board opposing the child care facility.
Mr. Marsocci read the petition into the record.
John Smith moved to recommend to the City Council that the variance of 10.5 feet from the
required setback of 20 feet from the south property line be granted subject to the following
conditions:
1) The variance shall be for the footprint of the existir g structure only;
2) A six (6) foot privacy fence shall be provided between the subject property
and the residentially zoned property to the south; a id
3) If the petition for a change in zoning is not granted, a variance of .5 feet be
granted from the residential setback requirement o 10 feet, but only for the
footprint of the structure.
John Smith also moved to recommend to the City Council that a variance of 11 feet from
the required setback of 15 feet from the north property line b granted, subject to the
following conditions:
1) The variance shall be for the footprint of the
suet Rgwn .m a.�meaaation
Ob wdwbm MY Cbmdl
9"17.R
Auprt 16.19%
structure;
4
2) No additional permanent structures, other than p ermissible fences, shall
encroach on required setbacks so long as the street remains a publicly
dedicated right -of -war,
3) The proposed playground may be located no less than 4 feet from the north
property line so long as the publicly dedicated right-of-way remains unbuilt,
and therefore unlikely to be utilized by the general public. If the street is
built, the playground shall be moved such that it meets structural setback
requirements; and
4) If the petition for a change in zoning is not granted, a variance of 14.75 feet
be granted from the residential setback requirement f 18.75 feet, but only for
the footprint of the existing structure.
The motion was seconded by Monica Clark. The motion carried
Agenda Item #3, Petition 94-414-S, Gary and Deborah Frazier, Property Owners and
Applicants, Request for a special exception to allow a child care center/day care pre-school
in a Light Commercial (C-1) zoning district.
It was noted that discussion about this petition occurred during the discussion for Petition
No. 94-122-V, the request for a variance from required setbacks.
Monica Clark moved to grant the special exception with the following conditions:
1) Construction of the proposed facility shall begin within
twelve (12) months
of the date that the special exception is granted
and construction shall
continue in good faith, otherwise the special exception
shall be null and void;
2) The special exception shall be conditioned on continuous
use such that if the
use ceases for a period of more than six (6) consecutive
months or for more
than twelve (12) months during a twenty-four (24)
month period, the special
exception shall be null and void; and
3) Parking areas and all travelways shall be paved or otherwise
constructed and
maintained, including striping, according to the applicable
City regulations
and as directed by the Site Plan Technical Review
Committee; and
4) If the petition for a change in zoning for Residential
Single Family (RSF) to
Light Commercial (C-1) is denied by the Okeechobee
City Council, the special
exception shall immediately become null and void.
The motion was seconded by Keith Pearce. The motion carried
5
SaC R"M a-d R.oMMMdadm
obwbabe CRY Coimdl
A 11,-94d17R
ABOW 141994
L�
0
Agenda Item #5, Petition 94417-R, Gary and Deborah Frazier,
Applicants, Request for a change in zoning from Residential Single
Commercial (C-1).
It was noted that discussion about this petition occurred during tl
No. 94-122-V, the request for a variance from required setbacks.
John Smith moved to recommend to the City Council that a
Residential Single Family (RSF) to Light Commercial (C-1) be V
The motion was seconded by Monica Clark. The motion carried
suff Repw=
o m.bAh.. C y C=BW
P**Am 9"17-a
AUVO 141W
Property Owners and
Family (RSF) to Light
discussion for Petition
in zoning from
6
1
. DATE :•: J►►PL.1�AYlONNWA>iE1l,:...
COUNTY OF EE
tJliltli0i`C'�It5M
4.
•.COUNTY.::'••
V J
.,,RE
Me7itiQE 0.
4 ZONINGS .
'DpIN
O k bee ' Fkxid 8- 34 9
'A
t► .O t1`0.
63-5
uuA.
e �u NJ
.flR
. t:Ji1 �`US PUCj► �
NAME OF PROPERTY OWNERS) � K� (7 h
1 'MAILING ADDRESS 8 ) //
— �+
tRO►ERTY ADDRESS V (� �c1 !.� e-, L
AME OF APPLICANT IF OTHER THAN OWNER (must stab relationship):
ote; If not Owner or Attorney at Law. proof of authority must tie pro i "s d on Form' -Z
HOME TELEPHONE: (? '� WORK TELEPHONE: (,�� - UU V
DIRECTIONS TO PROPERTY �{ Lti �-a 1 0_j-4E! G ��'
WHAT IS CURRENT USE OF PROPER
DESCRIBE IM►ROVEMENT41 ON PROPERTY (If none. so state)
APROXIMATE NUMBER OF ACRES () IS PROPERTY PART OF PLATTED SUBDIVISION? .� S
ARE THERE ANY DWELLINGS ON THE PROPERTY. IF $0. STATE NUMBER AND I YPE (CONVENTIONAL. MOBILE HOMES ETC.)
AND WHETHER THEY ARE OCCUPIED 'e-rl6i vC • " 2
IS THERE ANY CURRENT OR RECENT USE OF THIS PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF COUNTY ORDINANCE?
IF 40. DESCRIBE (� 1
HAVE THERE BEEN ANY LAND USE APPLICATIONS CONCERNING ALL OR PART OF THIS PROPERTY IN THE LAST YEAR.
IF $O. DESCRIBE DATE. NATURE AND APPLICANT'S NAME n(�
IS A SALE SUBJECT TO THIS APPLICATION BEING GRANTED?
IS THE SUBJECT PARCEL YOUR TOTAL HOLDINGS AT THAT LOCATION? IF NOT, DESCRIBE THE REMAINING USE OR
OR INTENDED USE L r C -S C a
BRIEFLY DESCRIBE ADJOINING PROPERTY USE TO THE NORTH iA.
re
SOUTH �- EAST
WEST I'
r
NT ZONING CLASS aPROPOSED
ii YOUR DESIRED PERMITTED USE UNDER THE PROPOSED CLASS?
NTED. WILL THE NEW ZONE BE CONTIGUOUS WITH A LIKE ZONE?
PECIAL EXCEPTION NECESSARY FOR YOUR INTENDED USE?
::..:.;
I±..e SI�R�T
Ri S.4�i
..........
as
DESCRIBE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION SOUGHT: zk\/
PROVIDE SPECIFIC ZONING ORDINANCE CITATION (Ciao and exam-0/a number%:
ARE THERE OTHER SIMULAR USES IN THE AREA. IF 80 DESCRIBE:
WHY WOULD GRANTING YOUR REQUEST BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE AREA
AND RESIDENTS?
IF BUSINESS. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE NATURE INCLUDING UMBER FF EMPLOYEES.
ACTIVITIES TO BE CONDUCTED OUTSIDE OF A BUILDING:
HER
H OURS. NOISE GE ATION AND
Pf
00 12 0, e-si.
-
.4 v 7;;7A C
PAS /w e.A c
1A r
.............
DESCRIBE VARIANCE SOUGHT:
DESCRIBE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTIC OF PROPERTY THAT MAKES VARIANCE Neel
010 YOU CAUSE ON CONTRIBUTE TO THE CHARACTERISTIC?
WHAT IS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE HECESSAAY7 —
DESCRIBE RULING THAT YOU ARE APPEALING:AJ
WHO MADE DECISION YOU ARE APPEALING? ATE OF DECISION:
EXPLAIN WHY YOU FEEL DECISION 16 IN ERROR. BE SURE TO LIST ANY ORDINANCE REFERENCES YOU FEEL SUPPORT
YOUR POSITION:
•
•
•
•
•
•
DESCRIBEATIONYOUISTAKEN: WH ,
CITE SPECIFIC ORDINANCE AUTHORITY FOR YOUR REQUEST:
O
NOTE: All request* to Planning Board/ Board of Adjustments MUST he" speauke Cmy Ordinance Authority.
CONFIRMATION OF INFOAMAfi
hwvbyew*title the kdwnw*m in his qWfteden Is comeoL Pm kdmwmllmiar
M11jeft Fdwor iginiommilemmW bepunislubbbVe bw clupIDSIMOm
aw
H.
IN
vi
Is for too by dweslls1 CouNVIng - 'maw
simpinflidspesswAsefse u --I dmWdMk
t
77'
Lain
ua�a�ar�e��oo INS
111:15-1190a�oe�aa�s� �o�=� ;:s�a� �loom
�ea�m IM
�oease��e��r �a ea 1-111111
�:oo
000ma�o���IW raowe�ao��:
map pp� ice. ee�oo eMeo� �€ru e�.e
117� a 9��om esn a
0
} `�, 12, 14L3. 6
Ir 6 6 SOTH EIGHTEENTH STREET
i `is• 40��� 14:_
121.3'1 •R 7142.142.3' 171,2.o �' 4G g'. 2a 2 8 22 9sfl 0 u2ac39 3Z> 4 13 010 4
�°'2 IS 374 = 10 4 W (c
• 3 :. 14 ° �G 12° �. 6 •n ' 5 5 ~ l l 5 NRS
Its-
4 a 13� %7 R 6¢ ' 12t.3'6R R 12,4� 1+23' 6 " 1470
'6 ^1SOUTH `. NINETEENTH EET �225 12t16' a a2 1 120 lzfs 1 R R714z.3 14z.s'+zs'.,s6R I I9• 80 ^
3 g 3 31n 7^ 101zs � /9�C W^ 1�3 4117' 4 10 4 49A55 '
5 5 1
��R g 211 R 2 5 t 2142� 1, 6 Si R 12
SOUTH TWENTIETH STREET
_ .yy•
2 R 8 4 6 142.3 142.s 'O '27142.3 142 1
o
I107' 111.3'1 R R 7 i n
4 1o1.s • 1�
so 7' 6{• 4. 2 uo 2 8 2 g 2 E
R �4 �6 2. 3 113 43 3 g 3 9 4 3
�i. 11 4
w 10
4 a
7$ 41 4 10
3 0 5 •'' 133' 8 sd 5 5 _ • I I 5 I I 5 a
R SOUTH ,zfs 6 14 12 1+a 6 R ,
TWENTY - FIRST STREET 6
,I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 _ID 1z1 3 1 R r142.
714LS 142.3' 1 R 7,4zS°3s3d Q4' 72 828 39 3. 0 14z.d4 184zs.10 142 '14
121.3p
121.3' 1+2.3'8 142.3' I 142.s a 14s3' III-ri,
3 2 7 2 7 2
6 3 • ,
6 3 1
S� ° ^,zs5 1+:.3'q R �}.
AC SAC = 1 1.34
SOUTH TWENTY-SECOND STREET
121.3' 42.3 142.3' 142.3' 142.S ^ -`
I R R Ib I o IO
2 g 2 9 2
4 3 8 3 8 3 15
it
4 R
7 4 g 7 4 R
53Is ia23' 14 '
r
ITY sao IMIT �:d 121.3''. I
I I
I I I '� I I I I '•
i•.
Lr
. - •� • ! r . v 1 r rtT ly ~ 1 / / �`; %'i %�•' Sit' Ir�� ,1 1- I S - '
f , 1 � .1 1 I -•� 1 ,SS �• r t 1
1}�,Y} "��+,}x.4'i:•�?Ss; ,� r�, ° ` a < ' y�S :S,!��,1�' iVl et '�• 11�� �; 1 �;' +r",�};: fi ...•:,+, r ,
�yy/�I�.'.,,ti.�'". � �a..� } '•/�i •t t , k e�Y,ty i �jZ <l'h'." t � :.tlgll t ; �r .,ku I.
• ',r t,+�1'�I'1"l,u/.1'�� f I.i: ��y'1: it,�. `.t �� I1fi ro •{"7r1;4 !•3!�.�yt�S.r �{L.�� t 1. 1 ('. � � [)>,�� y I. 14t •• 11.• 11. ..
, .!� � h�i •. ' ' ; (� r j1 , r��;� t +tW1.'.y t.t�;• Z?xr� t�'� r `'r } tF 'b' ;.1>:f�_I, C.
a o'� 1, , :y' , Z • t _ '{4�- a `�' 71!.r t a FJ�`y�;'r �• .� la^ �{ � "1yy= 14;� •�%Y'�, �Y�.�,t� �ty,I `���r. `' .�;;{�•� ..N:.
, 1 � '� i {��" r`��ti� ,.1=�.i"� L�i��� }-�.�"•°'� {7 1 J �I• •d�'���.0 '�J-r"':111`.+t', •e — ..
�,� ' is , •��-? �,--•_':,: � ..C`• �` � ', ,. (� • , .
CZ
Z.
. � % (.,��-�--r---`�•.�-.ram :( ., ; •,�... y
ai
wui
1N
J '•JAY: - t•
I !;1NJ
(� J
—
' � � is "• i � —_ J, c
_•
I1-
' • 'ice :I� rY, 1. 1 'f } T1
I. l t
June 2111 1994
William D. Royce
Planning and Development Director
Okeechobee County, Florida
Dear Mr. Royce,
Re: Petition #94-414-s, #94-417-R
I am writing in regard to the letter which I received on Friday,
June 17. The letter was a notice concerning the proposed rezoning of the
property located at 1903 S.W. 2nd Ave. The owners, Mr. and Ira. Gary
Frazier, wish to have this property reclassified from
Family to Light Commercial. They wish to turn the rej
that property into a child case center/day care pre -a,
I reside at, and own, the property located at 191
I request that it be put into record that I strongly
I an concerned about the affect this will have on the
my hone. Who would wish to live so close to such a f
Having one day cage center on the street has
A second center woul simply compound
would neither i prove the area,
the existing problems. This rezonin
g
benefit its residents; several of which are elderly,
congestion, hazards, and noise.
extra confusion.
This proposal must NOT be approved.
Sincerely,
J
qub3yn L. F1
esidential Single
dence located on
Col.
S.W. 2nd Ave.
pose this action.
,roperty value of
;ility? Not I.
in to cause
nor
do not need the
`s
ti7
July 22, 1994
We, the undenaigned neaidenta os Okeechobee, FtoAi.da utiAh it to be
known .that we nequedt the den.i.a.Z os the pnopoza.Z to xezone the pnopenty
.located at 1903 S.W. 2nd Avenue in onden to' aZZow the exZst-i.ng home to
become an asters 6choo.Z day cake Sac c.P.ity. Non do we nee with having
S.W. 19th Stn"eet peAmanent,Zy etoaed.
NAME
1Z0
}��6cff,aL-�j�•�
S-uo . Pv--
a-R-, V:C
� - Qs'/ e'
sT ---
Okeechobee County
Board of Adjustments and Appeals
July 26, 1994
Staff Report and Recommendation
Agenda Item #2: Petition 94-122 V, Gary R. and. Deborah A. Fray
applicants. Property address is 1903 S.W. 2nd Avenue in the City
for a variance from setback requirements. This petition is associal
and Petition 94-417-R.
Background
r, property owners and
'Okeechobee. Request
with Petition 92414-S
The subject parcel is located at 1903 S.W. 2nd Avenue, in the City of Okeechobee. The
parcel consists of one and one-half lots, for a total size of about 10,688 square feet. To the
east of the subject parcel, and facing South Parrott Avenue, is a church. To the south and
west is residential development. To the north is Building Blocks Daycare Center, also
owned and operated by the applicant. The property to the east is oned Commercial (C),
as is most property along South Parrott Avenue in this area. To the north, the property
occupied by Building Blocks Daycare Center is zoned Light Commercial (C-1). Property
to the north of Building Blocks Daycare Center is zoned Commercial (C). Property to the
west and south is zoned Residential Single Family (RSF). The character of the land to the
west and south is primarily residential, while to the north and east is commercial. S.W.19th
Street, which separates the subject parcel from Building Blocks Daycare Center, is a platted
street but has not been constructed.
The house existing on the property is set back 9.5 feet from the
the current Residential Single Family zoning, the required setbac
house therefore encroaches into the required setback by .5 fei
rezoned to Light Commercial, the required setback from the sou
20 feet, which is the required setback for commercial zoning di
abut a residentially zoned district. The property to the south is
Family. As the applicant is requesting a change in zoning from
to Light Commercial, the applicant is also requesting a variance
requirement of 20 feet.
On the north side of the property, the existing house is set back
line. Although the street immediately north of the subject prope
is still a public street. Accordingly, the setback for this corner lol
line, which normally would be 10 feet, is increased to 18.75 feet, c
foot front setback. The existing structure therefore encroaches 14
setback. For commercial zoning, the required side setback for
sea R"W" and x.mm�marm
0Mwbcbw CmMT Ho.a oc �,ejwmme .oa wpp..4
94_,Zt.V
J*26.IM
xth property line. With
is 10 feet. The existing
If the property were
property line would be
icts when such districts
:)ned Residential Single
.sidential Single Family
f 10.5 feet from setback
4 feet from the property
rty has not been built, it
from the north property
r 75 % of the required 25
.75 feet into the required
. corner lot is 15 feet, or
1
•
75% of the 20 foot front setback requirement. If the property were to be rezoned, the
existing house would therefore encroach 11 feet into that required 15 foot setback. The
applicant also requires a variance from the north setback requirements.
Consistency with Land Development Regulations
Section 13 of the City's zoning regulations states the following with respect to the granting
of a variance:
A variance from the terms of [the City's] zoning ordinance shall not be granted by the
Board of Adjustment unless and until:
a. Written Petition. A written petition for a variance is submitted demonstrating
that:
(1) Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land,
structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands,
structures, or buildings in the same zoning district;
(2) The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions
of the applicant;
(3) Literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning ordinance would
deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in
the same zoning district under the terms of this zoning ordinance and
would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant;
(4) The variance, if granted, is the minimum variance that will make possible
the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure;
(5) Granting the variance requested will not confer n the applicant any
special privilege that is denied by this zoning ordinance to other lands,
buildings, or structures in the same zoning district:
(6) The [granting] of the variance will be in harmony 'th the general intent
and purpose of this zoning ordinance, will not be injurious to the
neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the pub 'c welfare.
The subject property is located in the Commercial future land use classification of the City's
adopted Comprehensive Plan. This commercial classification generally includes all of the
land between S.W. 2nd Avenue and S. Parrott Avenue. Land on the east side of S.W. 2nd
Avenue is designated for future commercial development, while land on the west side of
S.W. 2nd Avenue is designated for future residential developme t. Much of the existing
FA
Saar R"= and neeommsnd.aon
abeo�ohes Camq Boca of A41UNMMU and capped.
POW= 94-U2-v
]*A IM
C�
•
development on the east side of S.W. 2nd Avenue is residential, as is much of the existing
zoning. Property immediately to the north is zoned Light Commercial.
Although there is existing residential development along the east si a of S.W. 2nd Avenue,
there is a reasonable expectation that, over time, the area will trans lion from residential to
commercial development. As this transition from residential to commercial occurs, it is
likely that where there are existing houses, these houses will be converted to commercial
use, rather than torn down and replaced with new structures. It is therefore likely that there
will be additional times where an existing house meets residential setbacks, but would
encroach on setbacks required for commercial development when abutting residentially
zoned property.
The purpose for an increased setback for commercial development when such development
is adjacent to residentially zoned property is to provide a greater separation, or buffer from
potentially incompatible uses. Such a buffer could also be provided in some other manner,
such as by a privacy fence or a vegetative buffer.
Staff determines that the petitions for a variance meets the condit
a variance. With respect to paragraph (1) above, special conditio:
parcel include the fact that this area is specifically designated
development, but includes existing buildings (houses) that do not a
when such property is abutting residentially zoned property. These
also apply to other transitioning property located along S.W. 2n
would not be applicable to the majority of commercially zone
development. With respect to paragraph (2) above, the situation
the applicants purchased the property, and therefore the applic
situation by their actions. With respect to paragraph (3) above,
would require the demolition of an existing building and the const
in order to meet setback requirements. If the building is si
commercial use, requiring demolition and then new construe
unnecessary hardship. With respect to paragraph (4) above, the
the minimum necessary variance in order to address the existing 1
paragraph (5) above, the applicant is requesting an opportunity 1
venture in an area of the city designated as appropriate for c
Provided that the existing building is suitable for the intended cc
privilege would be afforded the applicant by the granting of the re
similar circumstances, other properties may also be in need o
requirements as this area transitions into commercial develol
paragraph (6) above, the granting of a variance would be consistej
plan by implementing that portion of the plan that designates th
future commercial development. It would be consistent with
regulations, provided that a compensating buffer is placed pro%
buffering from the adjacent residential property. As setbacks for
are only 8 feet from a side property line, as opposed to 10 foe
Staff Report and Recoameodadon
Obsediobee canary Bona d Adjur®aaa and wppaar
Ped * 441ZZ-V
J* 26.1994
ions for consideration of
is relating to the subject
for future commercial
.eet commercial setbacks
special conditions could
d Avenue, but generally
;d areas or commercial
was existing at the time
:ants did not create this
denying of the variance
ruction of a new building
citable for the intended
tion could result in an
applicants are requesting
wilding. With respect to
o establish a commercial
ommercial development.
mmercial use, no special
quested variance. Under
f variances from setback
>ment. With respect to
it with the comprehensive
is area as appropriate for
the intent of the zoning
iding some separation or
commercial development
►t setbacks for residential
3
u
zoning, and 20 foot setbacks for commercial zoning when abutting sidential zoning, when
and if the property next door obtains commercial zoning, a variance would no longer be
required, as the existing house would then meet commercial setback requirements.
Staff determines that the petition meets the standard for the granting of a variance.
Consistency with Comprehensive Plan
The subject parcel is located in the Commercial future land use classification of the adopted
City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan. The proposed development is consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
Staff Recommendation
If the subject property is rezoned to Light Commercial, setback requirements would be 15
feet on the north side, and 20 feet on the south side. The existing house on the property
is set back 4 feet from the north side and 9.5 feet from the south side. To accommodate
the existing house, a variance of 11 feet from the north side set ack requirement, and a
variance of 10.5 feet from the south side setback requirement is ecessary.
The proposed use, a pre-school in association with the day care nter located next door,
is consistent with a light commercial zoning district, provided a pecial exception is also
approved, and is consistent with the adopted comprehensive pl . It is the intent of the
plan that this area will eventually become commercial. It is unlik ly that such a transition
will happen immediately, but that commercial development will occur on a lot -by -lot basis.
Accordingly, consideration of this specific petition should include consideration of the long
term development probabilities of this area.
Staff recommends that a variance of 10.5 feet from the required setback of 20 feet from the
south property line be granted, subject to the following conditions:
1. The variance shall be for the footprint of the existing structure only;
2. A buffer shall be provided between the subject property d the residentially zoned
property to the south. Such a buffer could be a privacy fence, a masonry wall, a thick
vegetative buffer, or some other alternative; and
3. If the petition for a change in zoning is not granted, staff r commends a variance of
.5 feet be granted from the residential setback requirement of 10 feet, but only for
the footprint of the existing structure.
The existing structure already encroaches significantly into the rE
side. Staff suggests that the applicants consider requesting that
perhaps replacing the existing public right-of-way with an easem
saa R.psc wd x.wmmem&dm
Oto..eboe» r 19 d ar Adjmt=M and Appea4
J* X ON
red setback on the north
city abandon the street,
Staff expresses concern
4
E
regarding the proposed location of a playground that would also be located 4 feet from the
north property line. Staff recommends that a variance of 11 feet from the required setback
of 15 feet from the north property line be granted, subject to the f ollowing conditions:
1. The variance shall be for the footprint of the existing structure;
2. No additional permanent structures, other than permissible fences, shall encroach on
required setbacks so long as the street remains a publicly dedicated right-of-way;
3. The proposed playground may be located no less than 4 feet from the north property
line so long as the publicly dedicated right-of-way remain unbuilt, and therefore
unlikely to be utilized by the general public. If the street is built, the playground
shall be moved such that it meets structural setback requirements; and
4. If the petition for a change in zoning is not granted, staff
14.75 feet be granted from the residential setback requires
for the footprint of the existing structure.
saa Rqm .m Re000m.odatioo
o .. c000h Bo a or Adjoamma -d cappe r
rwnm W-uz-v
1*24IM
amends a variance of
of 18.75 feet, but only
5
U�
..........
AT 10'
NAME OF PROPERTY OWNER(S): =1 A
A F
F r
MAILING LINO
MAILING ADORE@* 1611 v
O e e
PROPERTY ADDRESS 10
NAME OF APPLICANT IF OTHER THAN OWNER (must state relationship):
Note: If not Owner at Attorney at Law. pro*( of eutherity must be IN Id d on Forw L-2
H H TELEPHONE: WORK TELEPHONE:
OM 1
OMETEL 7- /7/
C7 C
DIRECTIONS TO PROPERTY 7-0
7-
ks r s T- Le 1= 0)0 T-) Al F
WA V 0--1 Z-ef=T--
WHAT IS CURRENT USE OF PROPERTY7 ,j -rA I
DESCRIBE IMPROVEMENTS ON PROPERTY (it none. so state) tv 0 /V -e—
APROXIMATE NUMBER OF ACRES ZI 18 PROPERTY PART OF MTTED
SUBDIVISION7
ARE THERE ANY DWELLINGS ON THE PROPERTY. IF go. STATE NUMBER AND TYPE
AND WHETHER THEY ARE OCCUPIED D occ- u, go
(CONVENTIONAL. u6stLE HOMES ETC.)
i e c4 ro
18 THERE ANY CURRENT OR RECENT USE OF THIS PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE A
IF 60, DESCRIBE
VIOLATION OF COUNTY ORDINANCE?
NAVE THERE BEEN ANY LAND USE APPLICATIONS CONCERNING ALL OR PART Of
IF $0. DESCRIBE DATE. MATURE AND APPLICANT'S NAME rJ o
THIS PROPERTY IN THE LAST YEAR,
IS A SALE OU84ECT TO THIS APPLICATION 3EIN4 GRANTED? AJ
14 THE SUBJECT PARCEL YOUR TOTAL HOLDINGS AT THAT LOCATION7 IF NOT. DESCRIBE
OR INTENDED USE <=,Yl 00 0 r- v 1 I
THE REMAINING USE OR
l y S /)A L/
BRIEFLY DESCRIBE ADJOINING PROPERTY USE TO THE NORTH 11
L2I d-
I e"A
oa lz
SOUTH TiA EAST
WEST C(eiv T'1 A) 44 0
CURRENT ZONINs cuss 2 S F PROPOSED
WHAT 14 YOUR DESIRED PERMITTED USE UNDER THE PROPOSED CLASS?
IF GRANTED. WILL THE NEW ZONE BE CONTIGUOUS WITH A LIKE ZONE?
19 A SPECIAL EXCEPTION NECESSARY FOR YOUR INTENDED USE?
0 A) 0
CLASS
d —5
VARIANCE? A,7 0
DESCRIBE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION SOUGHT: 0—
PROVIDE SPECIFIC ZONING ORDINANCE CITATION (Class and exception number):
ARE THERE OTHER SIMULAR USES IN THE AREA. IF 90 DESCRIBE:
WHY WOULD GRANTING YOUR REQUEST BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE AREA AND RESIDENTS?
IF BUSINESS. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE NATURE INCLUDING NUMBER �F EMPLOYEES. HOURS. NOISE GENERATION/SAND
ACTIVITIES TO BE CONDUCTED OUTSIDE OF A BUILDING: A
F
eL
-7-e.A cli PAS 15 /,-'U Z!f4 C
v cc) R
PIA
DESCRIBE VARIANCE SOUGHT:
eT iqck - qc-(? (.Jre-m 4",j
DESCRIBE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTIC OF PROPERTY THAT MAKES VARIANCE NECESSAR'Vk
010 YOU CAUSE OR CONTRIBUTE TO THE CHARACTERISTIC? he z5)(1
IV617' ► Y7e t 5e-r4 /9 V/ re", I
WHAT 18 THE MINIMUM VARIANCE NECESSARY?
DEscalng RULING THAT YOU ARE APPEALING:
WHO MADE DECISION YOU ARE APPEAUNG?
EXPLAIN WHY YOU FEEL DECISION IS IN ERROR. BE SURE TO LIST ANY 0
YOUR POSITION:
DESCRIBE ACTION YOU WISH TAKEN: d tv
R-s 1=
CITE SPECIFIC ORDINANCE AUTHORITY FOR YOUR REQUEST.
NOTE: All r0quooft to Planning Soord/ Board of Adjuslatents MUST have op"Iflos
E OF DECISION:
REFERENCES YOU FEEL SUPPORT
ev
Ordinance Authority. i
7A
d In liappitdon10 forum brOlsochobse County in wW
M*Am* FWWCrwddmmdhg w" wAy be ppaslsltsbie bye bw rrprorswnt
I
w1upb0dopeowdawthosumnmmy ''clohis
M111111ir low
0 •
Okeechobee County
Board of Adjustments and Appeals
July 26, 1994
Staff Report and Recommendation
Agenda Item #3: Petition 94-414-S, Gary R. and Deborah A. Frazier, property owners and
applicants. Property address is 1903 S.W. 2nd Avenue in the City or Okeechobee. Request
for a special exception to allow a child care center/day care re -school in a Light
Commercial (C-1) zoning district. This petition is associated with Petition 94-122 V and
Petition 94-417-R. This petition was tabled at the June 28, 1994 meeting.
Background
The subject parcel is located at 1903 S.W. 2nd Avenue, in the Ci of Okeechobee. The
parcel consists of one and one-half lots, for a total size of about 10, 88 square feet. To the
east of the subject parcel, and facing South Parrott Avenue, is a ch rch. To the south and
west is residential development. To the north is Building Bloc Daycare Center, also
owned and operated by the applicant. The property to the east is oned Commercial (C),
as is most property along South Parrott Avenue in this area. To the north, the property
occupied by Building Blocks Daycare Center is zoned Light Commercial (C-1). Property
to the north of Building Blocks Daycare Center is zoned Commer al (C). Property to the
west and south is zoned Residential Single Family (RSF). The ch acter of the land to the
west and south is primarily residential, while to the north and east is commercial. S.W.19th
Street, which separates the subject parcel from Building Blocks Daycare Center, is a platted
street but has not been constructed.
Consistency with Land Development Regulations
The applicants desire to establish a pre-school at the subject parcel, converting an existing
house for this use. The proposed pre-school is a use permissible by special exception in a
Light Commercial (C-1) zoning district. The Light Commercial zoning district is established
by County Ordinance 87-1, which is still applicable within the incorporated Lity limits of
Okeechobee.
A special exception is a use that would not be appropriate gene y or without restriction
throughout a zoning division, district or County at large, but Which, if controlled as to
number, area, location, or relation to neighborhoods, would pro note the health, safety,
welfare, order, comfort, convenience, appearance, prosperity, or the general welfare of the
County and its residents. Such uses may be permissible in a zoning classification or district
as a special exception if specific provision for such a special exception is made in the
applicable zoning regulations.
1
SMff Report nd Rewmmm imdw
oaoeeenon» C�q Rona a A4uxt= a and Appoak
POW&M 9"1"
.1* A 19%
•
Ordinance 87-1 provides for a child care center, as well as schools,
in a C-1 zoning district. The proposed use is a pre-school facility,
with a child care facility located across S.W. 19th Terrace (an
proposed pre-school would be located adjacent to the child care f
is consistent with zoning regulations, and would be compatible wit
and commercial development in the area.
Consistency with Comprehensive Plan
The subject parcel is located in the Commercial future land use
City of Okeechobee Comprehensive Plan. The proposed develi
comprehensive plan.
Staff Recommendation
Alleges and universities
)perated in association
ibuilt street). As the
;ility, the proposed use
the existing residential
ration of the adopted
is consistent with the
As the proposed development is consistent with the City's land development regulations and
adopted comprehensive plan, staff recommends that the Planning Board grant a special
exception to allow a pre -schoolchild care facility in a Light Commercial (C-1) zoning
district, subject to the following conditions:
1. Construction of the proposed facility shall begin within twelve (12) months of the
date that the special exception is granted, and construction. shall continue in good
faith, otherwise the special exception shall be null and void;
2. The special exception shall be conditioned on continuous a such that if the use
ceases for a period of more than six (6) consecutive months or for more than twelve
(12) months during a twenty-four (24) month period, the special exception shall be
null and void;
3. Parking areas and all travelways shall be paved or o
maintained, including striping, according to applicable
directed by the Site Plan Technical Review Committee;
4. If the petition for a change in zoning from Residential Sn
Commercial (C-1) is denied by the Okeechobee City
exception shall immediately become null and void.
StWReportand R.ceom on
0b@dwbee Omm, Bo.a ec naj a �a wppeels
Pedd=9"I"
J* A SM
se constructed and
regulations and as
Family (RSF) to Light
mmission, the special
2
i
1
>COUNTY OFa;
T�
O YI N�
:� �•„•,,:,
•;,,:::.• :COUNTY;,;;..•.;.
E r
LIC O`: Q
N
-116
.......................................... ......... r e ice-- .
/]D
- -
rR0►ERTY ADDRESS /Tv 614z e
AUG OF APPLICANT IF OTHER THAN OWNER (must state relationship):
ete: If not Owner of Attorney at Law. proof of authority must be preon Foes'
-E
~ —
HOME TELEPHONE: (, 5 WORK TELEPHONE:
DIRECTIONS TO PROPERTY fit. (,` 1
oLjLoL. G
w.
WHAT IS CURRENT USE OF PROPERT470 re )
OESCRIBE IMPROVEMENT* ON PROPERTY (N none, so state)
APROXIMATE NUMBER OF ACRES a (� IS PROPERTY PART OF PLA
ED SUB011IISION? Q S
ARE THERE ANY DWELLINGS ON THE PROPERTY, IF 60. STATE NUMBER AND
AND WHETHER THEY ARE OCCUPIED wo 11 OC
PE (CONVENTIONAL. MOBILE HOMES ETC.)
, e
ii THERE ANY CURRENT OR RECENT USE OF THIS PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE
IF SO. DESCRIBE
A VIOLATION OF COUNTY ORDINANCE?
HAVE THERE BEEN ANY LAND USE APPLICATIONS CONCERNING ALL OR PART OF
IF $O. DESCRIBE DATE. NATURE AND APPLICANT'S NAME U
THIS PROPERTY IN THE LAST YEAR.
IS A BALE SU84ECT TO THIS APPLICATION BEING GRANTED? �
. -
ii THE SUBJECT PARCEL YOUR TOTAL HOLDINGS AT THAT LOCATION? IF NOT.
OR INTENDED USE L U , Y
DESCRIBE THE REMAINING USE OR
-S C
BRIEFLY DESCRIBE ADJOINING PROPERTY USE TO THE NORTH
(fe il
SOUTH EAST
WEST `. t,C,
[IS
ENT ZONING CLASS < PROPOSED ZON CLASS C ,
IS YOUR DESIRED PERMITTED USE UNDER THE PROPOSED CLASS?
Sc oa
NTED. WILL THE NEW ZONE BE CONTIGUOUS WITH A LIKE ZONE? S
PECIAL EXCEPTION NECESSARY FOR YOUR INTENDED U4E7 VARIANCE7
:=iiiii'eiEE��?ci�iiEiiii�6'=i'•2iEiiiE�iiEiiiEiei6iEi�iiiE i
0
DESCRIBE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION SOUGHT: Rim, � �` �,
c pp
PROVIDE SPECIFIC ZONING ORDINANCE CITATION (Class and exesptl n number):
ARE THERE OTHER SIMULAR USES IN THE AREA, IF SO DESCRIBE:
HY WOULD GRANTING YOUR REQUEST BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE AREA
AND RESIDENTS?
W
BUSINESS, BRIEFLY DESCRIBE NATURE INCLUDING NUMBER F EMPLOYEES.
ACTIVITIES TO BE CONDUCTED OUTSIDE OF A BUILDING: ,
OURS, NOISE GENERATION AND
S 7, 0
e Pr c
c c D i i
r9 v-t o �i/� �,� 2 PA
7-5
&"S /ry eAc h
1A cvN2y v P-5 d r-2
6
DESCRIBE VARIANCE SOUGHT: 1
DESCRIBE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTIC OF PROPERTY THAT MAKES VARIANCE NE
ESSAR-4
010 YOU CAUSE OR CONTRIBUTE TO THE CHARACTERISTIC?
WHAT IS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE NECESSARY?
.:.jDESCRIBE RULING THAT YOU ARE APPEALING:
WHO MADE DECISION YOU ARE APPEALING? DATE OF DECISION:
EXPLAIN WHY YOU FEEL DECISION 19 IN ERROR. BE SURE TO LIST ANY ORDINANCE REFERENCES YOU FEEL SUPPORT
YOUR POSITION:
DESCRIBE ACTION YOU WISH TAKEN: Tn
CITE SPECIFIC ORDINANCE AUTHORITY FOR YOUR REQUEST:
NOTE: A11 rNuesb to PlanMnS Board/ Board e1 AdJwfa�enb MUST Rave epeolfbe Ceu q Ordlnanee Authoriq.
i' i i is{i Fii E 3 E i::e:eie:.......i..::°:: :....:E:::::i:::i:':{:::C
;.•..•
::z:::::•:•:•:.:.:•:.:.;.:.::• :;:;••:•:;•...
. e• . s•.
CONFIHMA-11ON OF i
I hasbr eoy yy S1e Mamslian ti Sti appiedow i eoneet The f{*=udon bv*AW Im Sirappfodon foram y Ohsalwbee Coungr ti I q wq�wst Faisoroirsaiy}Im
dpn�p�mw bep rAd% febl{a Mo efupwoom 0andtiplioGsast uPdSSdgoaseaiasSrseuamwydenYdthfs
aP�Son. .
aMIMiL.fE r Aw
ORDINANCE NO. 67
AN ORDINANCE CLOSING, vACA7ING AND ABANDONING 711 ALLEY AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 10, PUBLIC RECORDS, O EECIIUIJEE
COUNTY, FLORIDA, DESCRIBED AS 771AT ALLEY IN BLOCK 25, 4Y11VN Of
OKEECHOBEE, BY CLOSING SAID ALLEY IN BLOCK 29 BE7IVEE V LOIS 1-13
AND LOTS 14-26, ALL LUCA7ED 1VITIIIN TILE CITY OF OKEECI OBEE, AND
U1RCC71NG THE CITY CLERK IV RECORD 7'l1E ORDINANCE IN TIE, PUBLIC
RECORDSorE 771CLERK OF TIIE CIRCUI7' COURT IN AND FUR O EECII UBCC
E
COUN7Y, FLORIDA; PROVIDING AN EFFEC77VE DATE.
LIE, IT ORDAINED BY'l'I IE CITY COUNCIL ORTI IL' Cl'I'Y OI- OKEEC IOBE,E,, FLORIDA,
AS FOLLOWS:
SE -PION ONE: The alley described hereafter is hereby closed, vllealed and abandoned by the
City of Okeechobee, I7I0lida, to -wit:
The alhcy ill Bluck 29, TOWN Oi" OKE,E,CHOBE,E,, as recorded in Ills t Book I, Page
10, Public Records, Okeechobee County, I7101-idn, between Lots I to 13.1111.1 LUIS 14
to 26.
SECTION TWO: The City Clerk shall cause n certified copy of the ordina Ice or be recorded in
the Public Itecords of Okeechobee County, Florida.
Secliun'i'lir This ordinance sI .111 be set for finnl public hearing the 16th clay of All Ie!sl , 199'l,
and shall take effect iluniedintely upon its adoption.
Introduced for first reading and set for finnl public Ilenrhlg this 19 h day of Jul , 199'1.
i-A-ME9 L. K11tK, MAYOR
A' 1' ES P
BONNIE S. 1'I-IOMAS, CMC
CITY CLERK
Passed and ndopled on second rending and finish public Ilenrhlg th s _._ clay of
1994.
J
N1' EST:
BONNIE S. THOMAS, CMC
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
J01-IN It. COOK
CITY A'I"I-ORNEY
L.-KIRK, MAYO
U
t1+1
H
to
O
m
u
13
w
m
to
to
m
I
a• 1-4qmm11-vvwtyn�►:•nnnnox jOOOzw
'0 pli m ti a N o 1'•
'd IA tt ti 4 t••t• N WpI N Ny 1. 8 rt N. H H rr a
x vn n• p p p p ptq • W m m l�-W
O m m m to tq In tq Iq 1'• n µp p n
n ppn tm mm m 10:01 P.0.to,hi
t rt rt ft o m 0 P a s m
d o NNpmOOool-"dPH" rlrrn
tt III In rt p ti It 11 It 110 o m
Inm m Ito WaP.Psnm 4 ntyd M•
O w m m a m a 0 rt m 0 N N to 4
0 n n ti Ii N Ii p V. P. a 1`4 14 ti m
oortrt o •'d•a1P. AO
0 o p O zxxx�i p rtP . .0
d'd'v OOOON 0art4-tm
1'1t�W my rtooto
m m o N rt N d t'• 0.
t'1 ft It a It ,t, W N H rt a O n N
zH� mmp.m �mtrtp0 o�
ft N
1..� t arNtm n
rr N m It O
N O VV
rt
1'
� p
P.$" h nnN 1-1V Vg•rt5ryn
O N. Ii m O O p N• N ro N v m to 0
n rr O� p p a m j to rt P. it
tr u. rt rt p m to m N 1
m rt. n to N W p• -A tS 0 1'• 1'• 14 rt b
p5'rtrtn n art0a to xn
rt m to rr rt rt o P. 1-' n o H
to Itt O Ii m to w m tt O
• :vo m tt tr a H rt 11 1'• w
IV tt d -N PO rt 1'•P.rt rtN
W a N 4 P rt 1'• rt m tt 1'• m N
m rr m wg Pt-'O rna
:rIto 'dmroml''mt4 n
H IP tY O' tr It tt rt 4 a W
n N 1- m m m rh to a tq ;v
III rtV.m4t' oNp�mH
►-+ m to p 1'• P. N it m a N p 1-1
m It tr IIt O to tj a rt rt 'tt
14•0rtNp00.N n 1-1
P.O Wd H n 1' O rtton
m P. i o d rt 1-' 1-1 It O o �+
rt 1 • p 1-'" O w 11 tt .3
m o t4 to P. a tt m I-h to r�tr 1-1
I rh m tt Ii N P n pr t o
t3 V It P. rt ry m rr rt ft m F x
1'• c t AS I'• 1'• m rt m'
:] r to I It rr N III N It V to tr
N V. m 1-1 O 11 tr It 1'• m rt to n
rt to to m rt m N Ii N to O
rt 1'• n a'd N P It rt p
N O m 'r1 rt N• IIl p N n m rt
N p H N m IA tC rt 0 m 0 O of
fir aro O rpM
ngp.W4 N tn
o 51 pu p H' m PV. rt 0 It
p N rt ii rt P. p H• 1-h t4 O
rt rt rt O to to m a 4 t4 O tt
n F in a it it
10 to Ii:3 O N rr rh
1'• F'• m N m tr rr O li
m It P0•11 n a -P.N o 8-
IOj a m Ii to in rr It M
m m MV•a Nd xm rt
1'• r'• 'd P 4 V. P. 'J rr P.:X
H d d 'd N I' to p m a A' 'd IQ m
a 1-' it 11 a In 0 to m m m
n rr N O rt rt m 11 It P
tsn14 N•Fill n 1 0m$0 p
to n m N 11 d rt rr O O p a
O m P P 11 :r ,7 d 9a m
n 11 to m N• m 1'• rt it
It
oaW 100Itmnwittowt4
p N o 11 m.� 1-h rrrt tr a 0.0 �IPq.
i n p ti CO. pr U.
p N rt a I'.
At p
Nmrt0VV,trP.11Opmm
n tYp m N. n Itti aMa
It 1'• rt to 1'•
to a
1-'
i{ N N
O to fA
G to to
rt II N
0ca
m O• p
HpN
N 10
a
m o
It m at,
v. p
0 rt
a 0
N N to
Iwl-
�Iwlo0''o
Ili
n
C
n
H H
n
n
H
w
M.
d
r
�i
m
In
tT
H
r
ppF � p
H
In
?mod
0
c
•,q
rt
0
e
rt
In
t_
r'
a
.o
r
ai
N to
.•�
'b.
10 N kn :u
IV 1-m
lFT' rt
rt m
t r tf
11 rr
'i''
o
1
F'wrvm
It 1- In
O 11
rt 1'•
1'• t'•
7d rt a.
lot
Pm
P11
p m
m N 0
to
ti O ato
�
C)it:
x In .. N
ram
inI
:r ]r n
0
0 0 m
01
O .^a 7
Ii
w p
ON
N 1'•
m
t7 rt
O
It 1•' N
a
m H rl
rr a
N <m
IIA
O•0 1
1'•
N
In
0 0-3
m
it
n
m
N I'•
1'• N
x
w 1 It
O
w
ro
44
CA
o
(I�'_•
I.II
�
V
-vn
n
broao� nr7ox o�oxw
O O N a� W o o o o wro N t~ ri M rr Q
�f M t o Ap o n H ri rl F40 0 (Drt
�p Ao ttrt� M � d o aKf N w o a,
o $g0to W ortR C
K �6'tf ° xxxx�o W rr't
0 0 0 0 w
c�or�oo�r�wwUPW- A,
W W0� +'wN f' a a is 0 G
rt
Iry amp
N 0ro
rWt
O
a�ro ►r 0n
I'll
am001-- I
t y�rr4
ft �a'oP1 rt
�IzN° yW,
n O
V ri W C 1-0 et
� �trrraW�• � �� l�O C �►� a
�pa f'W W N rom rt rt
W
aQ °Ft N'U Q � i7aM• O t+m
Ph IC�t K 5 {{ryyr ��pp r,,
tfW Mrt~w~rtrtrtN CJ
o �n 0 rot
p rt '� 0 .4 111 KJw
10
gov
W ro F+• a r rt K W Cf
to 0. a
wort~�eMi+O°Wrr
�0P, o°Pro
OW N►�WW�p
N 'O r'f ~ ~' o C! M
N.
co rf a ii ii
rt H.rtW.
_ .K
r
vt
rt 4'0 c M
FA OR
W� O
N•�w
aH
444A m
A
W
C�
August 9, 1994
City of Okeechobee
55 S.E. 3rd Avenue
Okeechobee, Florida 34974
Attn: Mr. Chuck Elders, Director of Public Works
Re: CITY OF OKEECHOBEE DRAW REQUEST NO.1, FROM
LAKE PLACID 1994 ROAD IMPROVEMENTS.
L.N. & A. Project No. 93-174
Dear Mr. Elders:
LIB 0%
1, Noble & Associates, Inc.
f�- - 5---
BETTER ROADS OF
This letter is to certify that LAWSON, NOBLE & ASSOCIATES, INC. (L.N. & A.) has
reviewed the attached invoice Application No.1 dated July 31, 1994, from Better
Roads of Lake Placid for accuracy, and have approved such with no adjustments.
Also for your records is a copy of the testing for:
S.W. 4th Street from S.W. 10th Avenue to S.W. 11th Avenue
S.W. 5th Street from S.W. 10th Avenue to S.W. 11th Avenue
S.W. 10th Street from S.W. 10th Avenue to S.W. 12th Avenue
If further explanation is needed or if I can be of further assista
y►
hristop J. K
Project anager
CJK:zrp
cc: Dennis Horton - LNA
Enclosures: Invoices
RDWYIELDEM.808
, please call.
Engineers
Planners 420 Columbia Drive • West Palm Beach, FL 33409 • PH. (407 684-6686 • FAX (407) 684-1812
Surveyors 590 N.W. Peacock Blvd., Suite 10 • Port St. Lucie. FL 34986 • PH, 407) 878-1700 9 FAX (407) 878-1802
APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT
***********************
BILL TO: NAME
STREET
CITY
BETTER ROADS OF LAKE PLA
P.O. BOX 1908
LAKE PLACID, FLA. 33862
City of Okeechobee
55 S.E. Third Avenue
Okeechobee, Fla. 34974-2932
PROJECT 1994 Road Improvements
BROLPI JOB # 9460
A. ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT
B. NET CHANGE ORDERS
C. CURRENT CONTRACT AMOUNT (A+B)
D. VALUE OF WORK FROM PREVIOUS APPLICATION
E. VALUE OF WORK COMPLETED THIS PERIOD
F. TOTAL EARNED TO DATE
G. LESS RETAINAGE (10%)
H. BALANCE (F-G)
I. LESS PREVIOUS BILLINGS
J. CURRENT AMOUNT DUE
STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT:
K. LESS PREVIOUS PAID
L. TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
CONTRACTOR'S CERTIFICATION:
THE UNDERSIGNED CONTRACTOR CERTIFIES THAT (1) ALL PRE
RECEIVED FROM OWNER ON ACCOUNT OF WORK DONE UNDER THE
ABOVE HAVE BEEN APPLIED TO DISCHARGE IN FULL ALL OBLI
INCURRED IN CONNECTION WITH WORK COVERED BY PREVIOUS
UNDER THIS CONTRACT AND, (2) TITLE TO ALL MATERIALS
INCORPORATED IN SAID WORK OR OTHERWISE LISTED IN OR C
APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT WILL PASS TO OWNER AT TIME OF
OF ALL LIENS, CLAIMS, SECURITY INTEREST AND ENCUMBRAN
COVERED BY BOND ACCEPTABLE TO OWNER). 08:11
DATED %,I.t-�'
�:)
�q''i-
BETTER ROADS OF I
I
BY:
f
APPLICATION FOR PAYMEN'
PAY REQUEST # One (1)
DATE : July 31,
INVOICE # 7601
ACCOUNT # 377
189,561.26
0.00
189,561.26
0.00
15,270.40
15,270.40
1,527.04
13,743.36
0.00
13,743.36
13,743.36
OUS PROGRESS PAYMENTS
ONTRACT REFERRED TO
TIONS OF CONTRACTOR
PLICATION FOR PAYMENT
D EQUIPMENT
ERED BY THIS
AYMENT FREE AND CLEAR
S (EXCEPT SUCH AS
M 04-Aug-94
PLACID
•
CITY OF OKEECHOBEE
TO: John Drago
THRU:
FROM: Wayne Jones
*-
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 8, 1994
SUBJECT: PU-01-11-02-5
Annual Unit
Contract
Two (2) Bids were received on August 4, 1994, covering the Unit Price Contract for the
installation of Underground Utilities for Water and Wastewater Systems. The Bids are as
follows:
Censtate, Inc. - $414,286.00
G.E. French Construction, Inc. - $345,097.10
After reviewing the bids, I recommend the bid be awarded to G. . French Construction,
Inc. of Okeechobee, Florida. They were the lowest and best bid received for a total of
$345,097.10.
Please place this item on the Agenda for the August 16, 1994, City Council Meeting.
CITY OF OKEECHOBEE
TO: John Drago
THRU:
FROM: Wayne JoneS*
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 8, 1994
SUBJECT: PU 06-00-07-�
System Expa
4 Water Distribution
Four (4) Bids were received on August 4, 1994, covering the above
mentioned project. The
Bids are as follows:
Phase Censtate
Speegle
Sheltra
Stricker
1 $190,514.00
$145,319.75
$151,493.5
$164,936.00
2 $ 96,996.00
$ 86,435.00
$101,528.9
$ 98,774.00
3 $ 91,716.25
$ 81,415.50
$104,325.5
$101,099.00
4 $148,208.50
$123,829.75
$158,969.60
$150,966.00
Total Bid $527,434.75 $437,000.00 $516,317.59 $515,775.00
After reviewing the bids, I recommend the bid be awarded to Spee le Construction, Inc. of
Cocoa, Florida. They were the lowest and best bid received for a total of $437,000.00 for
the four (4) phases.
Please place this item on the Agenda for the August 16, 1994, Cit7 Council Meeting.
AUG 11 194 14:57 REE, MACON ASSOC. • j P.02
f 11
:.I
Macon and Associates. Inc.
August 10, 1994I
1
City of Okeechobee
55 S.E: Third Avenue
Okeechobee,' FL 34974
ATTN: Mr. John J. Drago
RE: Water Distribution System Extensions
Dear John:
On August 4, 1994 we conducted a bid opeuing for We
Four (4) bids on this project were received as outlined belo%,►-
CONTRACTOR
PHASE 1
PHASE 2
PHASE 3
P
Ei4
PROJ�CT
Speegle Comstr.
$145,319.75
$86,435.00
$81,415.50
$1
3;829i�5
S43?,'
:00f
Stricider Bros.
164,936.00
98,774.00
101,099.00
1
0,966 00
Sheltra & Son$
151,49350
101,528.90
104,325.50
1
8,969.t10
5.16,3
7.50t
CenState Contr.
190,514.00
96,996.00
91,716.25
1
8,2060
5•27,4
4.75':
The apparent low bidder for the total project was Speeglo
a bid of $437,000.00. Due to City budget constraints, only has+
this time which will be reimbursed to the City by the SFWMD.
SFWMD addresses their acceptance of this bid for the Phase 1,
Speegle Construction, Inc. qualifications and past performance I
be an acceptable contractor for this project.
We therefore recommend the City award Phase 1 of this
Construction} Inc. in the amount of $145,319.75 at the next City
If you. have questions or wish to discuss this further, plea
Very truly
William D.
1 wdr-194\93-159
9121 N. Military Trail - Suite 207 • Palm Beach GC,
ConOM6600; bic. with
1 will; be award d
The attached let r. ficdm
ork. Me have r6ie�ved
story r and find tJ eii to
roject46 Speeglf,
�ouned Meeting]
call. }
Florida 33410
'AUG 11 ' 94 {14: 59 REECON ASSOC. P. 01 I: 1
0.
ri ,.Tys
A da Water MaiSoiit Florim.,
3301 Odn Club Road, West Pstlrr>< Beach, Florida 33406 i (407) 684-8800 F L WATS I - .
CON 14-14
ADM City of'Okeechobee Water Main Ext.
August 8, 1994
Mr. Thomas C. Jensen, P.E."�'
Reese, Macon & Atsociatts, Inc.
9121 North Militar jr Trail, Suite 207 '
Palm Beach Garderisi FL 33410 '
Dear Mr. Jensen:
Subject: City 'of Okeechobee Water Main Extension - Contra
ct Nurntior
i
We are in receipt of your bid tabulation faxed to us on August 5, 1994. The appaft
4 was submitted by Speegle Construction, Inc. in the amount of $145, 19,75.
construction cost of $135,300.00 stipulated in our contract with the City of Okeic
desires to expedite 'the work and will
C5060
low
This
process a Contract Amendment in the amount of $1
hover the increased cost of the City's bid. i
,we appreciate your efforts to coordinate with us an
have any questions, please communicate with Jennifer eBarone, Projectedite Man g on of this project.
(6
Sincerely,
ruthFlorida
eputy Director
Water Management District
Y/car
C. Pam Smith, Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Susan Groover, City of Okeechobee
I
i
Go!vmitng oart�
Valeric Boyd, Chairman Williarn Hammond
Fronk Williamson, Jr., Vice Chairman Betsy Krant
Ar inic Betancotut Allan Millcdge
Lugme K. Pettis Telford C.
Nathaniel P. Reed Tlkornas K
Lcah G.Schad
C
J for Phase
xcbeo the
'ha District
);a19. 5 ,to
;houIa. you .
i7-6 it.
'.reel. Executive Du j ctor
Macricar. Deputy ExecutlVc Dircccot
CITY OF OKEECHOBEE
TO: John Drago
FROM: Wayne Jonesy��
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 9, 1994
SUBJECT: S.W. loth. A
Listed below is a estimated cost to replace the existing 2" PVC i
referenced Avenue. I have taken the prices from the Unit Price
received:
1 ea 6"X6" Tapping Assembly
1 ea. Fire Hydrant Assembly
1 ea. 2" Blow Off Assembly
7 ea. 3/4" Meter Services ®$600.00 ea.
1,050 L.F. 6" PVC Pipe @$10.25 L.F.
Estimated Engineering
$ 1,285.00
1,610.00
550.00
4,200.00
10,762.50
1,500.00
Total Cost $ 19,907
The Engineering estimate is required because of the required
road has sufficient right-of-way to install the line after paving is
line on the above
ract that we just
from D.E.P. The
ORDINANCE NO. 671
AN ORDINANCE CLOSING, VACATING AND ABANDONIf 4G THE ALLEY AND
STREET AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 29 PAGE 17, PUBLIC RECORDS,
OKEECHOBEE COUNTY, FLORIDA; DESCRIBED AS THAT ALLEY IN BLOCK
49 AND THAT STREET NORTHEAST 2ND STREET IN BLOCK 4, PRICE
ADDITION TO OKEECHOBEE CITY; CLOSING SAID ALLEY BETWEEN LOTS
1-6 AND 7-12; AND CLOSING SAID STREET BETWEEN NORTHEAST 12TH
AVENUE AND 13TH AVENUE; ALL LOCATED WITI- 1N THE CITY OF
OKEECHOBEE; AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO RECORD THE
ORDINANCE IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF THE CLER OF THE CIRCUIT
COURT IN AND FOR OKEECHOBEE COUNTY, FLORID ; AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA,
AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION ONE: Tlie alley and street described hereafter is hereby cl sed, vacated and abandoned
by the City of Okeechobee, Florida, to -wit:
The alley in Block 4, PRICE ADDITION TO OKEECHOBE CITY, as recorded
in Plat Book 2, Page 17, Public Records, Okeechobee County, lorida, between Lots
1-6 and 7-12.
The street known as Northeast 2nd Street as it run east from Northeast 12th Avenue
to Northeast 13th Avenue, particularly located North of Block 4, PRICE ADDITION
TO OKEECHOBEE CITY, according to Plat Book 2, Page 17, Public Records,
Okeechobee County, Florida.
SECTION TWO: The City clerk shall cause a certified copy of the or,
Public Records of Okeechobee County, Florida.
SECTION THREE: This ordinance shall be set for final public
September-, 1994 and shall take effect immediately upon its adoptic
Introduced for first reading and set for final public hearing this 16f
ATTEST:
BONNIE S. THOMAS, CMC
CITY CLERK
Passed and adopted on second reading and final public hearing this
J
ATTEST:
J)
BONNIE S. THOMAS, CMC
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
n-ance to be recorded in the
ring the 20th day of
day of August , 1994.
L. KIRK, MAYOR
day of , 1994
E. KIRK, MAYOR
JOHN R. COOK, CITY ATTORNEY
DO
produced _ as identification and who did (did not) lake an oath. "`"�&"I
(TYPE OF IDE TIFICATION) Knrin.re:.:.c,Ue�+rn j
NnmryPuSlic.SatcaPfGnalii Z
Cwnmision Nn,CCtSSItI
Nola Public, Commission M Cummi-,wnE, Ifi',il�11
aA&J�--Notary ne.a.�'�n, fl Hwrr
(SIGNATURE i"MNNIvornrsv
��Ul1lU�))lY>1)))N)»'1>';,{
_(Name of Notary typed, printed or stamped)
TYPED NAME & TITLE PHONE NO.
SFE �4TT�4CN��
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE DATE
TYPED NAME & TITLE PHONE NO.
(f VT NoTt Au V _I
• I
-T,V4 -„ter
TYPED AME & TITLE
Wayne Jones Director of Public Utilities
TYPED NAME & TITLE
Charles E. Elders, Public Works Director
8/4/94
AUT ORIZED SIG X URE DATE
Larry Mobley, Chief of Police
TYPED NAME & TITLE
No comments and/or requests for alley closing.
8/8/94
IZED S NATURE DATE
L. Keith Tomey, II, Fire Chief
TYPED NAME & TITLE
APPLICATION APPROVED BY:
BONNIE S. THOMAS, CMC, CITY CLERK DATE
1 } -b'
'' y
Instrument prepared by
and return to:
BUR (P C. CONNER, P.A.
30 rt est 5th Street
obee, Florida 34972
arcel I.D. No: R 3-21-37-35-0020-02100-0010
R 3-21-37-35-0020-02100-0020
Grantee's Social Security No:
Documentary Stamps paid in the arrwuat01
$ 0 *T _._--
ado I
, ark of Cir ul ourt date
(Recording information above)
QUIT -CLAIM DEED
8� 352 ,,c1-189
THIS INDENTURE made this 30 day of December,1993, between FREIDA E. HAMRICK, hereafter referred
to as "Grantor"*, and HOSPICE OF OKEECHOBEE, INC., hereafter referred to as "Grantee"*, whose address is
210 Northwest Park Street, Okeechobee, Florida 34972.
(* Wherever used herein the terms "Grantor" and "Grantee" shall include singular and plum; he' legal representatives, and assigns of
individuals, and the successors and assigns of corporations, wherever to context sc admits or requires:)
WITNESSETH, that Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of $10. 0 and other good and valuable
consideration given to Grantor, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does her by remise, release and quit -claim
unto Grantee forever, all the right, title, interest, claim and demand which G for has in and to the following
described real property located in Okeechobee County, Florida:
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block "B", CENTRAL PARK, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Plat
Book 2, page 39 of the Public Records of Okeechobee County, Florida.
AND
A portion of Government Lot 4, Section 22, Township 37 South, Range 35 East, Okeechobee
County, Florida. Being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the West R/W line of S.E. 5th Ave. (F A Micanopee ST.) with
the South R/W Line of S.E. 3rd ST. (F/K/A Sixth ST.) as shown on that articular subdivision map
of "Blocks 252, 253 and 254", according to the plat thereof recorded in tat Book 2, page 4 of the
Public Records of said Okeechobee County, thence Westerly along said uth R/W line, a distance
of 300 feet to the intersection with the East R/W Line of S.E. 4th AVE. (F/K/A Hiwassee St.);
Thence Southerly along said East R/W Line, a distance of 142.5 feet to the intersection with the
Easterly extension of the North boundary line of that particular 15.00 f Dot wide alley lying within
Block 209, FIRST ADDITION TO OKEECHOBEE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat
Book 1, page 11, Aforesaid Public Records;
Thence East along said Easterly extension of the North line of that 15.00 foot wide alley to the
intersection with the HOPKINS MEANDER LINE, said point of intersection also being a point on
the Northwesterly boundary line of Block "B", CENTRAL PARK, according to the plat thereof
recorded in Plat Book 2, page 39, Aforesaid Public Records;
Thence Northeasterly along said HOPKINS MEANDER LINE and the Northwesterly line of Block
"B", CENTRAL PARK, to the Northernmost corner of said Block "B", s id corner being a point on
the aforesaid West R/W Line of S.E. 5th AVE.;
7 •
Thence Northerly along said West R/W Line to the Point Of Beginning. C�! t 352 ME1190
AND
A portion of Government Lot 4, Section 22, Township 37 South, Range 35 East, Okeechobee
County, Florida. Being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the West R/W Line of S.E. 5th Ave. (F A Mtcanopee St.) with
the South R/W line of S.E. 3rd St. (F/K/A Sixth ST.) as shown on that particular subdivision map
of "Blocks 252, 253 and 254, according to the plat thereof recorded in I tat Book 2, page 4 of the
Public Records of said Okeechobee County, thence Westerly along said South R/W line, a distance
of 300 feet to the intersection with the East R/W Line of S.E. 4th Ave. /K/A Htwassee ST.);
Thence Southerly along said East R/W line, a distance of 142.5 feet to the intersection with the
Easterly extension of the North boundary line of the particular 15.00 foot wide alley lying within
Block 209, FIRST ADDITION TO OKEECHOBEE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat
Book 1, page 11, Aforesaid Public Records;
Thence continue Southerly along said East R/W line, a distance of 15.00 feet for the Point Of
Beginning;
Thence continue Southerly along said East R/W Line, a distance of 142.5 feet to the intersection
with the North R/W Line of S.E. 4th St. (F/K/A Fifth Ave.);
Thence Easterly along said North R/W Line, a distance of 115.08 f eet, more or less, to the
intersection with the HOPKINS MEANDER LINE, said point of intersection also being the
Western most corner of Block "B", CENTRAL PARK, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat
Book 2, page 39, Aforesaid Public Records;
Thence Northeasterly along said HOPKIN'S MEANDER LINE and the Northwesterly boundary
line of said Block"B", CENTRAL PARK, to a point that measures 142.5 feet North of (at right
angles to) the aforesaid North R/W line of S.E. 4th St.;
Thence Westerly along a line that measures 1425 feet North of and Pa llel with said North R/W
of S.E. 4th St., a distance of 252.30 feet, more or less, to the Point Of Beginning.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD all the estate, right, title, interest, lien, and claim whatsoever of Grantor, either
in law or equity.
SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING RESTRICTIONS, WHICH CONSTITUTE COVENANTS RUNNING
WITH THE LAND UNTIL JANUARY 1, 2114:
1. The property must be used for purposes of operating a Hospice House (in -patient facility) after
January 1, 2000. Prior to January 1, 2000 the property may be used only for operating an administrative
office complex for Grantee. Grantee must construct an office complex on the property no later than one
year from the date Grantee obtains a building permit. Grantee must use diligent efforts to obtain a building
permit. The office complex must have a minimum of 2,000 square feet of space. If Grantee fails to have
the construction the office complex completed within one year after Graj itee obtains a building permit, then
Grantee shall deed the property back to Grantor, unless the delay in construction is not the fault of Grantee
or Grantee's contractor or subcontractors. After January 1, 2000, in addition to using the property for
operating a Hospice House, the property may be used for any other use hich directly supports the offering
of hospice services to the terminally ill, including operation of an admh 'strative office. The property may
not be used for any purpose during the period of these restrictions, exci pt as provided herein. In addition
2
NkK -62 PAGF 1191
to any other remedies Grantor may have, this restriction may be enforc d by injunction proceedings.
2. Grantee shall construct and begin operating a Hospice House (in- atient care facility) no later than
January 1, 2000. If Grantee can demonstrate that it is not economically feasible for Grantee to construct
and operate a Hospice House by January 1, 2000, then Grantor shall ext nd the deadline for construction
and operation of a Hospice House until January 1, 2004. If Grantee fails to construct and begun operating
a Hospice House by January 1, 2000, or by January 1, 2004, if the deadlir a is extended, then Grantee shall
pay liquidated damages to Grantor, her heirs, successors or assigns in the amount of $62,500.00. It is
Grantor's primary intention in making this conveyance, which is a gift, that a Hospice House be constructed
and operated on the property as soon as it is economically and practically feasible for Grantee to do so,
however, Grantor does not wish to impose an economic burden on Grantee which could jeopardize its ability
to provide services to the terminally ill.
3. Grantor must review the building plans for any office or Hospice
however, this provision shall not be deemed to require Grantor's appi
4. These restrictions may be enforced by Grantor or H. G.
This instrument was prepared without the benefit of title examination, and the
marketability of the title, accuracy of description or quantity of land describe
Signed and sealed in the presence of:
PAUL M. BUXTON
(Print name)
(Signature)
ERNESTINE MILLS
(Print name)
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF OKEECHOBEE
GRANTOR:
E.
315 Southeast Tl
Okeechobee, FL
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on February
who is personally known to me or produced a photo driver's license as ident
an oath.
COMMISSION EXPIRATION AND SEAL:
lanoa�onoaio� of 8313
11.11M 41 933 q6
080332NO� 03113
2(,� Q.
NOTARY PUBLIC,
5£68SZ 1 W
3
,e constructed on the property,
of the plans.
Jr.
does not guarantee either
Avenue
,1994, by FREIDA E. HAMRICK,
on and did/did not'(siiike one) take
AV
'ATEOF
UE ANN SRENNAN
Pub1b. suq o1 R&W
n. torn im 25, tine
No. CC200417
• •
V-cn _V -v
iYr1
_ d
the north"
1,aoo of l.nn�x���dd1d a d on the •
'vuT rO:IT10%. of a trtino �orrSixth 3tt;'eui
H +t cxtC ded= tht•
;ouch Street • •
r�rn y r the 1'.1:tt ;tTcot line of i�ii'r+Lhdoh�temtce, L 11:r a*t .
Y
• C. T. liorkino aeQnda>t' 1^ne form'�, Toxnoltip �'! d1tu� •�i�.;�G"..'1i3O�4' • '
Of .section 220
of Coverrv�ent Lot lat of r1l. CT ADPIT-1
F�^. t, oo i t nprenro on the P ,
tut thereof .racors�-•�1 n flat boo
aevordtn8 to the P
YlOxi�di. .
C};�C?iJD�• blic Racordo• of ft. Ut:cic Coun f .
2 , raCo 26, of the i'u►
slid :sore porticularly deaeritxd as follrn�et
N �M
' rt. cck 11 a of ., .. ,
.,ou th •�
CCU^,; IcS ht the internvction;or thr• waoueo vtti• vt, b";r•G 71
of thr Tm''1 '
;tr•;ot and tht' Foot 5trihtna�tiocortter of Block 2��� d in
Plat
feet F.,'tct �f of tho 1~or to the pinti. thcar'ol,f recorded
Cl' 71. "liOA�:F%t nccordinC ;t. Llei^ County,
.00k ?, paCti' �T, of the rublic ncaor8a of t
tti-ect 11110 -Of Ui�co-
r . thence run south alonC paid ant nrsllCl !tit the Esa
Flo tda, • ,
cce Str4otf 70 fast equidirtnnt frc.a .:�n 14,50 fc t for the ,
onid Block Mo for c. diatancsro th O�n; th E.•sct Strtet
lino 147
of ,1 p-►rV11n1
t}-,encQ .conf.inua
T,01:rr Of BF:CI;: tli�•C, uidia+„�ttt ltvm 1 1'cct to
:in of 13ieus-ocn 5t rcDlo k ���� for :► dtsttanco oC o d eor,•�er- .
+�itit the Eot l le o �>~o�t:rt; t� w1fdi tltvnca ;
olat that i� tltu ;ioxtlt..xattt and •pclrn 11., Doom ,hi with thR
cd to Denjnmin r. Dcant Jr. v 11�1 s
c on a lino 157.50 feet equidiritaLtnd 'from
n edict nod of 25f. 30
51.,; t ...,. ,►,. pFlt i•1.15►
sixth f,.trcet eX c
r,ou!h Street 1 ino of �►
� Li on �1 th tl,r 1'Ol':.X,,.....�.••
*fact to tt�e Point of lnlOno • corner f tint t � Block
' .. otter . a►�td l:opkins :tccn,l+tr 1. tie to L.
Llt^.tire liorth ca if n �fcotcrtucrPt corn ,CitLUF.�%� nee
.
h tl� . .
point. of int^rseCtton w� - � � of the
'"IOII TO TiiF, CITY
«B» ' of C AL PARK An ADDcox'dad in Tlat Zook 2, P cr 3% o t
I11G to the rint thoteeof r Tioridct, ooid Po
tti street line of 5ixt1 Vtreety South
publio ftvcords of thv•obea5ou Coon Yt fry the
South •
142.5 foot South o ;(Qot ,5 of tqu BDC Il�� the l Q
jje9t on it line 142.5 to the
Stroot mine of Sixth Strooto int�►n�1ed i'er use ao nn aller•
oonriyod 6i ealoy !.t► ]11"k "A"• Of
herein � hoY'ow bt thnt o�sxt�►ir+
beina ,oa exten•: 4rese►Ld�•x� ..
CUMAL r o .
•
_A`- United Telephone of Florida
--' A Sprint Company
813-763-1184
August 2, 1994
Hoover and Associates, Inc.
Jeffrey M. Sumner
421 NW 3rd Street
Okeechobee, FL 34972
Dear Mr. Sumner:
I have no objection to closing the alleys described as
899 N. W. Sixth Street
Okeechobee, Florida 34972-2522
follows:
ALLEY: East -west alley lying in the middle of
parcel of land bounded on the west by
SE 4th Avenue, on the north by SE 3rd
Street, on the south by SE 4th Street,
and on the east by SE 5th Avenue.
If I can be of any further help contact me at the
Sincerely,
Nealis, Engineer
JRN/erb
Enclosures
telephone number.
•
N
cu
" N
114
M
N rr r
r:lUC�-
Z p
W = .r Lo .
:W < o
10 .
Ln
CQ
,�5 W
aWL w " U W LO
ui`�
LL WOLU
-. 4
O W
Wax WO 0 0
a ' -:),+ w
E' W
_ : U. O
W CC
Uj
a ,gip.
I
OI
Z
0
0
w
8
Y
Q
W
J
V
i
�I
EA
CITY OF OKEECH
TO: Councilmembers DATE:
Walker and O'Connor
THRU: SUBJECT:
THRU:
FROM: John J. Drago, City Administrator
You asked me to see what can be done to offset the r
debt service fees. There are basically two options:
adjust the present schedule to have the larger meter
the smaller meters fees. Secondly, the utilities c
contribute funds into the debt service account to re
money that needs to be raised by the rate payer.
EE
August 10, 1994
Debt Service
ent increase in the
First, the City can
pay more and reduce
rating fund can
ce the amount of
Taking into consideration that Public Utilities is committed to complete
certain projects next fiscal year, the operating fund can comfortably
contribute $200,000 per year to the debt service fund. Attached is
Resolution 94-16 that reflects the $200,000 contribution. If the Council
is in agreement to this option, then Resolution 94-16 needs to be adopted.
I
RESOLUTION NO. 94-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA
C OF THE PUBLIC UTILITY RATE RESOLUTION 89-5; PROI
EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT RESOLVED THAT RESOLUTION 89-5 BE AMENDED i
1. Section C. is hereby amended as follows:
C. Capital Recovery Cost (Debt Service) Monthly Am,
Meter Size 1ft
DING SECTION
FOR AN
FOLLOWS:
5/811 X 3/4"
$ 43:49 10.00
$ a..6.qfi
.__
1°
A 1-- 25' 00
g
156.25
1 1 /2"
268,09 250.00
236:9A
312.50
2"
492:09 375.00
692-49
468.75
3"
894-99 750.00
a ;99"9
937.50
4"
W _1.2_ 50.00
-.W
1 562.50
6"
2.5_ 00.00
2;269 W
3 125.00
8"
4 A9 _4.5_ 62, 00
gg
703.12
10"
7;89A:gg 7.375.00
��t137
.75
12"
egg; gg 10, 750.00
—
�#4; 376:9A
.50
Fees for capital recovery costs for meters larger than 12 inches shF
total water requirements.
2. This resolution shall become effective August 16, 1994.
INTRODUCED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of August, 1994, by tl
the City of Okeechobee, Florida.
ATTEST:
Bonnie Thomas, CMC, City Clerk
Mayor James
be based upon
City Council of
CITY OF OKEECHOOEE
M 8 N O R A N D U N
TO: Councilmember Walker DATE:
THRU: SUBJECT:
THRU:
FROM: John J. Drago, City Administrator
12, 1994
roperty Tax
ncrease
You expressed a concern about raising property to es at the same
time that the City increased the debt service fee for Public
Utilities. You asked me to see if there were other ways to fund
the request from the General Fund pension board. The budget is
now in very rough draft and there is no additional monies to fund
the pension board's request. The funds that were available were
used to offset the increases in Worker's Compensa ion insurance
.and other fixed costs. Below are the options for the City to
consider:
1. Raise property taxes 12 cents ( 4.94 too $�) to
pay for the pension board's reques This increase
is only for one year and could be higher in later
years.
2. Fund the Pension Board's request by allocating part
of the bonus monies. The council wo 1d have to
allocate part of their expense movie to cover their
share. This would only effect the G neral Fund
Employees not the Fire or Police Emp ogees. The 1%
contribution that the City is requir d to contribute
now to the fund would be used to sup lement.those
employees that do not have enough bo us monies
accrued to pay for their contributio .
3. Deny the request.
The pension board also stated a wish of a $2,000
each employee into the pension fund. This can b
either raising property taxes or allocating all
monies (General, Fire and Police) to cover the c
if the Police or Fire Pension Boards were to apf
with a similar request for increase of benefits,
apply for them as stated for the General Fund.
ontribution for
accomplished by
the bonus
t.
oach the council
the same options