HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/8/1979s ® �
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 8, 1979
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, MET IN REGULAR SESSION AT THE COURTHOUSE, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA,
ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 8, 1979, AT 8:30 O'CLOCK A.M. PRESENT WERE WILLIAM
C. WODTKE, JR., CHAIRMAN; ALMA LEE LOY, VICE CHAIRMAN; WILLARD W.
SIEBERT, JR.; R. DON DEESON; AND PATRICK B. LYONS. ALSO PRESENT WERE
JACK G. JENNINGS, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR; L. S. "TOMMY" THOMAS, INTER-
GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR; GEORGE G. COLLINS, JR., ATTORNEY TO THE BOARD
OFCOUNTY COMMISSIONERS; JEFFREY K. BARTON, FINANCE OFFICER; BAILIFF
DAN FLEISCHMAN; AND VIRGINIA HARGREAVES AND JANICE CALDWELL, DEPUTY
CLERKS.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER.
COMMISSIONER DEESON LED THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG,
AND REVEREND GEORGE P. LABARRE, TRINITY EPISCOPAL CHURCH, GAVE THE
INVOCATION.
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS
TO THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF JULY 17, 1979.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING
OF JULY 17, 1979.
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS
TO THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 1979.
COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT ON PAGE 56, THIRD PARAGRAPH FROM
THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE, THE WORDS "AS IT NOW EXISTS ON THE RIGHT-OF-WAY."
BE ADDED AFTER "DITCH."
THIS ADDITION HAVING BEEN MADE, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED
THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 1979 AS WRITTEN.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED REGARDING PISTOL PERMITS, AND THE APPLICA-
TIONS FOR PETER SABONJOHN AND MARIE SABONJOHN WERE NOT APPROVED IN VIEW
OF THE FACT THAT ONE OF THE APPLICATIONS WAS INCOMPLETE.
TIONS WERE RETURNED TO THE SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT.
Mr.
THE APPLICA-
41 244
ROGK 41 1c,Ai,4 245
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO CARRY
A CONCEALED FIREARM FOR DOMINIC SARACINO AND TERRY D. SULLIVAN.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT
TO CARRY A CONCEALED FIREARM FOR THE FOLLOWING:
ROBERT R. HARRIS REV. DAVID MCCOLLUM
DR. JAMES E. COPELAND, .JR.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD
UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED A
BUDGET AMENDMENT
TO PROVIDE FUNDS
FOR THE OFFICE
SUPPLIES ACCOUNT FROM
THE GENERAL FUND,
AS FOLLOWS:
ACCOUNT TITLE
ACCOUNT No.
INCREASE
DECREASE
OFFICE SUPPLIES
01-5220-205.00
$300.00
RESERVE FOR
CONTINGENCIES
01-9990-701.00
$300.00
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO ALLOCATE
ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO THE COURTHOUSE & ANNEXES ACCOUNT FROM THE GENERAL
FUND, AS FOLLOWS:
ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT No. INCREASE DECREASE
MAINTENANCE
OF BUILDINGS 01-2670-337.00 $1,000.00
MAINTENANCE
OF EQUIPMENT 01-2670-338.00 $1,200.00
RESERVE FOR
CONTINGENCIES 01-9990-701.00 $2,200.00
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE FUNDS
TO THE EMPLOYEE INSURANCE ACCOUNT DUE TO AN ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEE HIRED
UNDER THIS ACCOUNT, AS FOLLOWS:
ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT No, INCREASE
EMPLOYEE INSURANCE 01-2104-106.00 $1,300.00
RESERVE FOR
CONTINGENCIES 01-9990-701.00
$1,300.00
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER
ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO THE SHERIFF DEPARTMENTS EQUIPMENT ACCOUNT FROM
THE FINE & FORFEITURE FUND, AS FOLLOWS:
ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT No. INCREASE DECREASE
SALARIES AND
WAGES - OTHER 03-3101-102.00 $6,000,00
RESERVE FOR
CONTINGENCIES 03-9990-709.00 $6,000,00
EQUIPMENT 03-3101-402.00 $12,000,00
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE FUNDS
TO THE PARKS DEPARTMENT ACCOUNT IN ORDER TO COVER OUTSTANDING AND
FUTURE CHARGES, AS FOLLOWS:
ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT No. INCREASE DECREASE
COMMUNICATIONS 01-6102-335.00 $150.00
MAINTENANCE
OF EQUIPMENT 01-6102-338.00 $100.00
RESERVE FOR
CONTINGENCIES 01-9990-701.00 $250.00
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE FUNDS
TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ACCOUNT IN THE PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT, AS
FOLLOWS:
ACCOUNT TITLE
PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES
RESERVE FOR
CONTINGENCIES
ACCOUNT N0.
01-2552-341.01
01-9990-701.00
INCREASE
$1, 650.00
DECREASE
$1,650.00
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED STATE WITNESS PAY ROLLS, CIRCUIT
COURT, SPRING TERM, 1979, IN THE AMOUNTS OF $139.06 AND $279.44; COUNTY
COURT, .JULY, 1979 TERM, IN THE AMOUNT OF $148.48.
AVG81979 3 BOOK 41 vAGC 246
AUG 81979 ROOK 41 PACE 247
THE FOLLOWING REPORTS WERE RECEIVED AND PLACED ON FILE IN
THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK:
REPORT OF TRAFFIC VIOLATION BUREAU - SPECIAL TRUST
FUND, JUNE, 1979.
REPORT OF CONVICTIONS, CIRCUIT COURT, JULY, 1979.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS APPROACHED THE BOARD
AND SUGGESTED BORROWING $125,000 FOR THE GIFFORD WATER EXPANSION PROJECT
AS A BOND ANTICIPATION NOTE TO BE PAID BACK WHEN THE BONDS ARE SOLD AND
TO BE BORROWED FROM A COMMERCIAL BANK THAT GIVES THE BEST INTEREST
RATE.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0, 79-65 AUTHORIZING THE
ISSUANCE OF A $125,000 BOND ANTICIPATION NOTE TO FINANCE THE EXPANSION
OF THE WATER SYSTEM IN THE GIFFORD AREA, AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURES
OF THE CHAIRMAN AND OTHER APPROPRIATE OFFICIALS.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED.BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED RETRO -ACTIVE OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL
FOR L. S. "TOMMY" THOMAS TO STUART ON JULY 30TH TO ATTEND A CETA MEETING,
DEAN F. LUETHJE, OF CARTER ASSOCIATES, INC., APPROACHED THE
BOARD REQUESTING FINAL APPROVAL OF WESTLAKE ESTATES SUBDIVISION, OWNED
BY WILMOTH & BERGAMINO. HE PRESENTED THE BOARD WITH THE FINAL PLAT
AND STATED THAT ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS ALSO INSPECTED THE PROPERTY AND
FELT IT WAS READY NOW FOR FINAL APPROVAL.
DISCUSSION ENSUED REGARDING DEED RESTRICTIONS.
ATTORNEY COLLINS SUGGESTED A NOTE BE PLACED ON THE ORIGINAL
PLAT THAT THERE ARE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY GRANTED FINAL APPROVAL OF WESTLAKE ESTATES
SUBDIVISION.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR LEE NUZIE
TO WILDWOOD TO DISCUSS BUDGETS, AUGUST 16 AND 17, 1979 AND OUT -OF -COUNTY
TRAVEL TO LAKE WORTH ON AUGUST 15, 1979 TO WORKSHOP ON DISASTER PLANNING
& RESPONSE.
JAMES BEINDORF, ENGINEER, APPROACHED THE BOARD REQUESTING
FINAL APPROVAL OF BENT PINE SUBDIVISION, UNIT 1 AND UNIT 2, OWNED BY
FLORIDA LAND COMPANY. HE PRESENTED THE PLANS TO THE BOARD AND EXPLAINED
THAT THE UNITS WERE GIVEN TENTATIVE APPROVAL EARLIER THIS YEAR, MR.
BEINDORF NOTED THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN COMPLETED, AND THE
BOND AND AGREEMENT TO CONSTRUCT ALL THE ROADS, AS PROPOSED BY THE
DEVELOPER, WERE STUDIED BY ATTORNEY COLLINS WITH ATTORNEY DAN WHITE.
MR. BEINDORF COMMENTED THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS WILL START AS SOON AS THE
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS ARE COMPLETED; THE GOLF COURSE IS NOW COMPLETED.
HE STATED THE WATER AND SEWER ARE BEING DESIGNED AND THEY SOON WILL BE
ASKING FOR A FRANCHISE IN THIS AREA. MR. BEINDORF STATED THAT THEY WILL
BE BUILDING A PRIVATE ROAD FROM KINGS HIGHWAY ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE
PROPERTY,AND IT WILL HAVE LIMITED ACCESS.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED IF IT WAS A CASH BOND.
ATTORNEY COLLINS ANSWERED THAT IT WAS NOT - THE DEVELOPER
WANTS TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH THE COUNTY, AND ATTORNEY WHITE HAS
DRAWN THE CONTRACT CONSISTENT TO THEIR DISCUSSION.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE NOTED THAT THE COUNTY HAS HAD PROBLEMS WITH
BONDING COMPANIES.
COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED HOW LONG IT HAD BEEN SINCE WE ACCEPTED
SURETY BONDS.
ATTORNEY COLLINS REPLIED THAT WITHIN THE LAST FOUR OR FIVE
MONTHS WE HAD ACCEPTED SURETY BONDS ON THE MINING OPERATIONS.
FACTOR.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT NOTED THAT THERE IS ONLY A 10% INFLATION
COMMISSIONER Loy WONDERED WHAT ASSURANCE THE COUNTY HAS THAT
THE POTENTIAL SALE OF FLORIDA GAS COMPANY AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES WILL HAVE
NO AFFECT ON THIS PROJECT.
ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THAT WAS A VERY BROAD QUESTION - FLORIDA
LAND COMPANY HAS A SIZABLE INVESTMENT, AND HE FELT THE RISK FROM THE
COUNTY'S POINT OF VIEW IS MINIMAL.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO THIS
MATTER, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THE ORDINANCE ALLOWS EITHER A
LETTER OF CREDIT OR SOME SUBSTITUTE ACCEPTABLE TO THE COMMISSION.
5 BOOK l F��
AUG 8 199
AUG 8 1979
ROOK 41 PA6E 249
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE ESTIMATED COST THAT ENGINEER
BEINDORF PRESENTED.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE SUGGESTED THAT WE REQUIRE A 20% CONTINGENCY
INSTEAD OF 10%, AS WE DONT KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN WITHIN A YEAR.
ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT THE CLOSEST COMPARISON IS THE
MOORINGS, AND IT WAS A PLEDGE FROM INDIAN RIVER FEDERAL.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS COMMENTED THAT, IN EFFECT,
IT WAS A CASH BOND.
ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED THAT THIS IS THE FIRST BOND
SITUATION WHERE THE COUNTY HAS REQUESTED THAT WE REQUIRE A CONTRACT;
THE CONTRACT WAS SUGGESTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUPPORTING THE OBLIGATIONS
OF THE PARTIES.
ENGINEER BEINDORF MENTIONED THAT THEY ARE STARTING ON THE NEXT
TWO UNITS - THE WHOLE PROJECT IS 500 ACRES, 180 ACRES IN GOLF COURSE.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT HE WOULD WANT TO GO OVER
THE FIGURES WITH ENGINEER BEINDORF.
ENGINEER BEINDORF EXPLAINED THAT THE FIGURES ARE VERY HIGH,
AND HE HAS USED THE STATE AVERAGES.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS THERE WAS
A DELAY AND THE PROJECT WERE NOT COMPLETED BY SEPTEMBER, 1980.
ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED THAT THE BOND IS GOOD FOR TWO YEARS
SO THERE IS A TIME FRAME AFTER THE DEFAULT TO ENFORCE YOUR RIGHT UNDER
1l;[ : 1 1I79
HIGHWAY.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED CONCERNING THE PRIVATE ROAD FROM KINGS
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT REITERATED THAT HE WOULD GO ALONG WITH
THE PERFORMANCE BOND THIS TIME, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE SHOULD
HAVE MORE SECURITY ON THE NEXT UNITS.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE COMMENTED HE WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH
A 20% CONTINGENCY, AND ENGINEER BEINDORF FELT THAT IT WOULD BE NO
PROBLEM.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS ASKED IF ENGINEER BEINDORF'S CLIENTS
WERE APPROACHED WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF A CASH BOND WITH PERIODIC DRAW
DOWNS.
ENGINEER BEINDORF COMMENTED THAT IT WAS MENTIONED TO THEM
BUT THIS IS THEIR PREFERRED PROCEDURE.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY GRANTED FINAL APPROVAL OF BENT PINE SUB-
DIVISION, UNIT 1 AND UNIT 2, SUBJECT TO A 20% CONTINGENCY FACTOR IN THE
PERFORMANCE BOND AND AGREEMENT, AND TO BE REVIEWED AND ACCEPTED BY THE
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AS TO THE COST, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE
HAVE A DIFFERENT PROCEDURE WHEN THE NEXT UNITS ARE PRESENTED.
THE BOARD NEXT TOOK UP A REQUEST FROM .JAMES A. BURNS, SUPER-
INTENDENT, SCHOOL DISTRICT OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, AS PER THE FOLLOWING
LETTER;
Telephone (305) 567-7165 •SUNCOM No. 465 - 1011
S V 19 I U'1 L IU W 19 IAC J 1,' l0 Cf- I ice} U IY Lam N G INV E P UC U N 18 Y
1426 19th Street - P. O. Box 2648 - Vero Beach, Florida 32960
August 2, 1979
JAMES A. BURNS, Superintendent
j Mr. Jack Jennings, Administrator
County Commissioners
I. R. County Courthouse
i Vero Beach, FL. 32960
- I -
Dear Mr. Jennings:
Please consider the Indian River County School Board as
a recipient of the F-600 truck which has been turned over to
the County government from the Sheriff's Department. The
School Board has a number of uses for which this vehicle
could be utilized, and we respectfully request your consider-
ation of this request in determining its disposition.
We will be willing to make whatever normal compensations
are required, in order to acquire this vehicle.
Thank you for your attention to this request.
Sincerely,
e
?..c�L, �� L v► -7,_2
.James A. Burns
Superintendent
V lm
AUG 8197 7
L
onun �. on w nn
JOE N. IDLETTE, JR.
Chairman
GARY W. LINDSEY
Vice -Chairman
RICHARD A. BOLINGER
RUTH R. BARNES
DOROTHY A.TALBERT
BOOK 41 PAGE 0
I
I
AUG 8 1979
FooK 41 PAU, 251
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS ADVISED THE BOARD THAT THE SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT RECEIVED TWO FORD TRUCKS BY COURT ORDER. THE COUNTY ROAD
& BRIDGE DEPARTMENT WOULD LIKE TO USE THE F -%OO TRUCK TO HAUL THE VOTING
MACHINES, AND THE SCHOOL BOARD WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE F-600 TRUCK. HE
EXPLAINED THAT THERE IS MONEY IN THE BUDGET TO ACQUIRE THIS TRUCK.
ATTORNEY COLLINS SUGGESTED USING THE PROCEDURE ESTABLISHED IN
THE STATUTE FOR ACQUIRING THE TRUCKS FROM THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, WHICH
WOULD BE THAT THE SHERIFF PUBLISHES AN ADVERTISEMENT, HOLDS AN AUCTION,
AND SELLS THE TRUCKS TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED
THAT IF THAT PROCEDURE IS FOLLOWED, THEN THE HIGH BIDDER OBTAINS THE
TITLE CERTIFICATE. HE FELT THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT OUGHT TO PUBLISH
AND GO TO BID, AS REQUIRED BY STATUTE. ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED THAT
THE STATUTE DOESN'T PROVIDE ANY SECURE REMEDY FOR THE COUNTY OBTAINING
TITLE.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, AND IT WAS SUGGESTED THE ATTORNEY WORK
OUT THE BEST PROCEDURE FOR THE COUNTY ROAD & BRIDGE DEPARTMENT TO OBTAIN
THE F -%OO TRUCK, AND THE SCHOOL BOARD TO GET THE F-600 TRUCK.
ASSISTANT PLANNER MARSH APPEARED IN REGARD TO A REQUEST FROM
WILLIAM L. AND MARY E. HAID FOR RELEASE OF EASEMENT IN WINTER BEACH
PARK SUBDIVISION. HE EXPLAINED THAT STAFF DID REVIEW THIS REQUEST AND
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. MR. MARSH CONTINUED THAT THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED
R-1 AND THE REQUEST IS FOR RELEASE OF 5' EASEMENTS BETWEEN LOTS 17 &
19. HE STATED THAT THERE ARE EASEMENTS ON THE REAR LOT LINES, AND THERE
IS A 60' RIGHT-OF-WAY WHICH ALLOWS FOR SWALE AND DRAINAGE.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED FOR CLARIFICATION ON HOW MANY HOUSES
WOULD BE BUILT ON THE TWO LOTS, AND PLANNER REVER STATED THE OWNERS ARE
PLANNING TO BUILD ONEHOUSE IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR TWO LOTS,
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0, 79-72 APPROVING
RELEASE OF EASEMENTS OF THE SOUTH SIDE LOT LINE OF LOT 17 AND THE NORTH
SIDE LOT LINE OF LOT 19, WINTER BEACH PARK SUBDIVISION, AND AUTHORIZED
THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN; DOCUMENTS TO BE PREPARED AT THE EXPENSE
OF THE APPLICANT.
RESOLUTION AND RELEASE OF EASEMENTS WILL BE MADE A PART OF
THE MINUTES WHEN RECEIVED.
ASSISTANT PLANNER MARSH APPROACHED THE BOARD IN REGARD TO A
REQUEST FROM C. .JOHN REXFORD FOR RELEASE OF EASEMENTS IN OSLO PARK,
UNIT 3. HE CONTINUED THAT THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED R-1, AND STAFF RECOM-
MENDS APPROVAL FOR RELEASE OF VARIOUS SIDE LOT EASEMENTS, AS THERE ARE
BACK LOT LINE EASEMENTS AND A 70' RIGHT-OF-WAY.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AND IT WAS DECIDED IT WOULD BE A GOOD
IDEA TO RETAIN THE NORTH SIDE LOT LINE ON LOT 16 FOR DRAINAGE SWALE.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0. 79-73 APPROVING
RELEASE OF EASEMENTS IN OSLO PARK SUBDIVISION, UNIT 3, AS REQUESTED BY
C. JOHN REXFORD, AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN; THESE
DOCUMENTS TO BE PREPARED AT THE EXPENSE OF THE APPLICANT. THE EASEMENTS
TO BE RELEASED ARE AS FOLLOWS:
SOUTH SIDE LOT EASEMENT ON LOT 16;
NORTH AND SOUTH SIDE LOT EASEMENTS ON LOT 15;
NORTH AND SOUTH SIDE LOT EASEMENTS ON LOT 14;
NORTH AND SOUTH SIDE LOT EASEMENTS ON LOT 13; AND
NORTH SIDE LOT EASEMENT ON LOT 12, BLOCK A, OSLO PARK
SUBDIVISION, UNIT 3, AND THE
SOUTH SIDE LOT EASEMENT ON LOT 1; AND THE
NORTH SIDE LOT EASEMENT ON LOT 2, BLOCK F, OSLO PARK
SUBDIVISION, UNIT 3.
BOOK 1 fra
AUG 81979 9
AUG 81979 Foow 41, FAGF 253
RESOLUTION NO. 79-73
WHEREAS, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, has been requested to release the following ease-
ments, to -wit:
and
Those certain public utility and drainage easements
lying on the side lot lines between Lots 12, 13, 14,
15 and 16, Block A, Oslo Park, Unit 3, according to
the plat recorded in Plat Book 4, Page 19, public re-
cords of Indian River County, Florida; and
That certain public utility and drainage easement ly-
ing on the side lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block
F, Oslo Park, Unit 3, according to the plat recorded
in Plat Book 4, Page 19, public records of Indian
River County, Florida;
WHEREAS, said side lot line easements were dedicated on the
Plat of OSLO PARK, UNIT 3 for public utility and drainge purposes;
and
WHEREAS, the request for such release of easements has been
submitted in proper form;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COM-
MISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following side
lot line easements in OSLO PARK, UNIT 3, shall be released, abandoned
and vacated as follows:
Those certain public utility and drainage easements
lying on the side lot lines between Lots 12, 13, 14,
15 and 16, Block A, Oslo Park, Unit 3, according to
the plat recorded in Plat Book 4, Page 19, public re-
cords of Indian River County, Florida; and
That certain public utility and drainage easement ly-
ing 6n the side lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block
F, Oslo Park, Unit 3, according to the plat recorded
in Plat Book 4, Page 19, public records of Indian
River County, Florida.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman of the Board of
County Commissioners and the Clerk of the Circuit Court be, and they
are hereby, authorized and directed to execute a release of said
lot line easements hereinabove referred to in a form proper for re-
cording and placing in the public records of Indian River County,
Florida.
This 8th day of August
ATTEST:
i
Freda Wright, Clp k
, 1979.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIA RIVER COUNTY, FLORID
BY c
William C. Wo t e, Jr.p hairman
August
RELEASE OF EASEMENT
THIS RELEASE OF EASEMENT, executed this 8th day of
, 1979, by the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State
of Florida, first party, to C. JOHN REXFORD, whose post office
address is 2201 -15th Court, Vero Beach, Florida, 32960, second party;
W I T N E S S E T H:
That the said party of the first part, for and in considera-
tion of the sum of ONE DOLLARS ($1.00) and other good and valuable
consideration in hand paid by the said second party, does hereby re-
mise, release, abandon and quitclaim unto the said second party for-
ever, all the right, title, interest, claim and demand which the said
first party has in and to the following described easements, lying
on land situate in the County of Indian River, State of Florida, to -wit:
Those certain public utility and drainage easements
lying on the side lot lines between Lots 12, 13, 14,
15 and 16, Block A, Oslo Park, Unit 3, according to
the plat recorded in Plat Book 4, Page 19, public re-
cords of Indian River County, Florida; and
That certain public utility and drainage easement ly-
ing on the side lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block
F, Oslo Park, Unit 3, according to the plat recorded
in Plat Book 4, Page 19, public records of Indian
River County, Florida.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same with all and singular the appur-
tenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining and all estate,
right, title, interest, equity and claim whatsoever of the said first
party either in law or equity to the only proper use, benefit and be-
hoof of the said second party forever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said first party has signed and seal-
ed these presents by the parties so authorized by the law the day and
year first above written.
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presence of:
PREPARED BY:
SAMUEL A. BLOCK, ESQ.,
Vocelle, Gallagher & Block
P. 0. Box 1900
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
AUG 81979
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORID
BY r �,
Wiiiiam C. Wo t e, Jr, airman
,)
ATTEST: ���� j
Freda Wright, rk
Boa PAG' 4
r s
AUG 81979
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
PooK 41 FACE 255
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me an officer duly
authorized in the State and County aforesaid to take acknowledgments,
personally appeared WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., as Chairman of the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, a political
subdivision of the State of Florida, and FREDA WRIGHT, as Clerk of
the Circuit Court, to me known to be the persons duly authorized by
said County to execute the foregoing instrument and they acknowledged
before me that they executed the same for and on behalf of the said
political subdivision.
WITNESS my hand and seal in the County and State last afore-
said this day of 1979.
,,lJ�tt9
Notary Pu ic. Stat Iof F ri a at
Large. My Commission Expires:
W)rpl�r CNP.":. 5: a' L•kU
(NOTARY SEAL)
THE BOARD NEXT TOOK UP A REQUEST FROM .JORGE GONZALEZ,
PRESIDENT OF THE MOORINGS, AS PER THE FOLLOWING LETTER:
dl, e��✓ 1 � tr"3a.�'� `�J*`:Y �: Li dnu,;,,,��_s'
The Board of County Commission June 27, 1979
2145 14th Avenue
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear'Commissioners:
The Moorings Development Company does hereby
respectfully request that the County of Indian River,
Florida, abandon the dedication of that segment of
Bowline Drive between Mooring Line Drive and Regatta
Drive in The Moorings subdivision (see attached) for
the f6llowing reasons:
1. The abandonment of this section of road would
in no way interfere with ingress to or egress
from existing homes and condominiums-.
2. The section will not be of any use to residents
of future projects on adjacent parcels of land.
3. Since most traffic flows east and west along
Mooring Line Drive and, to a somewhat lesser extent,
Regatta Drive, the intersection of the segment of
Bowline Drive with the two more important arteries
confuses drivers unfamiliar with The Moorings and
results in a potentially dangerous situation.
4. The cost to the County of maintaining this road
would be an unnecessary waste of the taxpayers'
money.
Consequently, we believe that the best interests of
Indian River County, its taxpayers and the residents
of The floorings -would be served by your favorable
response to our request.
JG/db
Enclosure
III thj. 1': 11):11.J . I.tt, L't1X fico, 11FACH NIA110N. VI W W ACII. ',III
AUG 1979 BOOK 1 FAvc 256
13
AUG 81979
NR 41 PAGE 2 !
PLANNER REVER STATED THAT HIS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDS THAT IT
WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST FOR THIS ABANDONMENT TO BE APPROVED - IT
WOULD PRESENT A SINGLE PARCEL OF C -1A, AS THE MOORINGS OWNS PARCEL A.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THAT THE APPLICANT BE AUTHORIZED TO ADVERTISE FOR ABANDONMENT OF
BOWLINE DRIVE BETWEEN MOORING LINE DRIVE AND REGATTA DRIVE IN THE
MOORINGS FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
DAVE CHAPPELL, PRESIDENT OF THE CHAPPELL AMBULANCE SERVICE,
INC., APPROACHED THE BOARD REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE
AND NECESSITY. HE STATED THAT THE SEBASTIAN RIVER MEDICAL CENTER HAS
OFFERED TO GIVE HIM SPACE TO KEEP A VEHICLE AND CREW FOR HIS NON -EMERGENCY
TYPE AMBULANCE SERVICE.
COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT THIS IS NOT A SHORTCOMING OF
THE SEBASTIAN VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE SQUAD AS THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO
PROVIDE NON -EMERGENCY SERVICE. HE CONTINUED THAT C & .J AMBULANCE OF
FT. PIERCE PROVIDES NON -EMERGENCY SERVICE, AND HE WAS NOT AWARE THEIR
SERVICE WAS INADEQUATE.
MR. CHAPPELL STATED THAT HIS MANAGER WAS IN CONTACT WITH
C & J AND ADVISED THEY DIDN'T HAVE THAT MUCH DESIRE TO SERVE THAT END
OF THE COUNTY; AND HE COULD NOT SAY ANYTHING BAD ABOUT THEIR SERVICE.
COMMISSIONER LYONS WAS CURIOUS AS TO WHY THE SEBASTIAN RIVER
MEDICAL CENTER WOULD PROVIDE MR. CHAPPELL WITH SPACE; ALSO, WHAT IS
THEIR MAIN TRAFFIC FROM SEBASTIAN.
MR. CHAPPELL REPORTED THAT THERE ARE ABOUT 12 CALLS A DAY
FROM THE SEBASTIAN AREA, 6 OF WHICH ARE NON -EMERGENCY CALLS. HE STATED
THAT ON A DAILY BASIS OVER A PERIOD OF A YEAR, THERE ARE ABOUT 2-1/2
CALLS A DAY PRIMARILY TAKING PATIENTS TO THE DOCTOR'S CLINIC AND THE
HOSPITAL TO USE THE CAT SCAN.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT MENTIONED THAT THEY HAVE EXPERIENCED
A PROBLEM WITH THE CAT SCAN WHEN INDIGENTS USE IT AND ARE UNABLE TO
PAY THEIR BILL.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED REGARDING THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICE.
ATTORNEY COLLINS INQUIRED ABOUT JUSTIFYING AN AMBULANCE AND
CREW ON 2-1/2 CALLS A DAY AT ONE LOCATION.
MR. CHAPPELL REPORTED THEY WOULD BE RUNNING OTHER CALLS FROM
THE SEBASTIAN RIVER MEDICAL CENTER.
COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED HE WOULD BE INTERESTED IN GETTING
SOME REACTION FROM C & J AND HOW THEY ARE COVERING THE COUNTY. HE
CONTINUED THAT SPEAKING AS A MEMBER OF THE VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE SQUAD,
PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS ASKING THEM ABOUT NON -EMERGENCY SERVICE, AND HE WOULD
FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE HAVING TWO NAMES OF SERVICES TO OFFER THEM,
MS. JOANNE CORRELL, OWNER OF C & .J AMBULANCE, APPROACHED THE
BOARD AND STATED THAT SHE HAD NOT HEARD ANY COMPLAINTS FROM THE SEBASTIAN
RIVER MEDICAL CENTER; HOWEVER, THERE IS A MISCONCEPTION IN HANDLING
SEBASTIAN. SHE STATED THAT IT IS FAR TO TRAVEL BUT THAT IS THE BUSINESS
THEY ARE IN, AND THEY ARE MORE THAN DELIGHTED TO HANDLE THE CALLS.
MS. CORRELL NOTED THEY HAVE 4 AMBULANCES ON THE ROAD WITH % PARAMEDICS
TO SERVE THE CITIZENS, AND HAVE NOT FELT THE STRAIN OF GOING TO SEBASTIAN.
SHE COMMENTED THAT SHE WONDERED HOW THE OTHER SERVICE WOULD MANAGE IF
HE WOULD BASE AN AMBULANCE IN SEBASTIAN.
DISCUSSION ENSUED REGARDING THE RATE SCHEDULES,
ATTORNEY COLLINS INTERJECTED THAT IF THE COMMISSION APPROVES
THE CERTIFICATE OF NEED BASED ON THE RATE SCHEDULE, THAT CERTIFICATE
WOULD BE SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE COMMISSION.
COMMISSIONER Loy INQUIRED WHAT KIND OF BUSINESS C & J HAD BEEN
DOING IN THE SEBASTIAN AREA, AND MS. CORRELL STATED THAT IT WAS AN
AVERAGE OF TWO CALLS A WEEK.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED IF SHE WAS OBJECTING TO A CERTIFI-
CATE OF NEED FOR CHAPPELL AMBULANCE SERVICE.
MS. CORRELL SAID SHE OBJECTED, ON A FINANCIAL BASIS, AS SHE
WOULD NOT LIKE TO LOSE SEBASTIAN.
COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT UNCOMFORTABLE TAKING ACTION ON THIS
NOW AS HE DIDNIT FEEL WE UNDERSTAND THE REAL NEED, AND IF THERE IS ONE,
MR. CHAPPELL SUGGESTED HAVING A WORKSHOP MEETING,
CHAIRMAN WODTKE FELT THAT COMPETITION IS VERY GOOD FOR BUSINESS
BUT IN HAVING TOO MANY IN OPERATION, THEY ALL WOULDNIT BE ABLE TO MAKE
A LIVING. HE COMMENTED THAT IT SHOULD BE CHECKED INTO FURTHER AS HE
DID NOT, IN ANY WAY, WANT TO TAKE AWAY FROM THE SERVICES OF C & J.
15 BOOK 41 ma 258
I
I
BOOK 41 FAcE 259
MR. BUCHANAN, CHIEF OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY VOLUNTEER
AMBULANCE SQUAD, APPROACHED THE BOARD AND STATED THAT THE CAT SCANNER
HAS CREATED THIS SITUATION AND MOST OF THE NON -EMERGENCY CALLS ARE FOR
THIS. HE CONTINUED THAT THEY HAVE REFUSED TO MAKE THE CAT SCANNER CALLS
AS THEY WOULD HAVE AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE TIED UP. MR. BUCHANAN FURTHER
STATED THAT THEY HAVE HAD NO COMPLAINTS WHATSOEVER REGARDING THE NON-
EMERGENCY SERVICE THAT THEY DO USE.
DON MOLITAR, OWNER OF A TELEPHONE ANSWERING SERVICE IN VERO
BEACH SINCE 1969, AND SINCE 1959 IN BREVARD COUNTY, SPOKE BEFORE THE
BOARD IN BEHALF OF MR. CHAPPELL, WHOM HE HAS KNOWN FOR 20 YEARS. HE
SAID HIS PURPOSE IN BEING HERE TODAY WAS TO INFORM THE BOARD HE IS
PREPARED TO PROVIDE A LOCAL NUMBER, AS WELL AS MOBILE DISPATCH SERVICE,
IF'THIS WOULD BE A BENEFIT TO THE NON -EMERGENCY CALLS,
COMMISSIONER Loy SUGGESTED WE CHECK FURTHER WITH THE SEBASTIAN
MEDICAL CENTER AND THE VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE SQUAD IN THAT AREA AND THAT
THIS ITEM BE RETURNED TO OUR AGENDA AT THE NEXT MEETING.
- CHAIRMAN WODTKE INFORMED MR. CHAPPELL THAT THERE WAS A GREAT
DEAL OF RESPONSIBILITY ON HIS PART TO RETURN WITH STATISTICAL DATA TO
BACK UP WHAT HE HAS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD, AND HE REQUESTED THAT HE
MAKE THIS AVAILABLE TO THE COMMISSIONERS' SECRETARY BEFORE THE MEETING
OF AUGUST 22, 1979.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AND IT WAS DECIDED THAT COMMISSIONER
LYONS WOULD CONTACT BOTH VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE SQUADS, AND CHAIRMAN WODTKE
WOULD. CONTACT THE SEBASTIAN RIVER MEDICAL CENTER TO OBTAIN MORE INFORMA-
TION.
THE HOUR OF 10:30 O'CLOCK A.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK
READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO -WIT:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
Vero Beach, Iridian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER:
STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of n n 11l `, a - l . 2,A , 2 ! "' < 3
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed befor me this day oP 1-06 A.D.— fTl
usiness Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Inclian River County, Florida)
(SEAL)
)they0C1jnty
NOTICE
TICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on the 8Th;
fAugust, 1979 at the hour of 10:30 a.m. in Commission Chambers in the In-
dian River County Courthouse, the Board of
County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, will consider the adoption of
an ordinance amending Indian River County
Ordinance No. 71.3 and amendments thereto
by redefining Section 2. Definitions: the words,
"nursing home or convalescent home" to in-
clude only the strict definition of a nursing
home or convalescent home as provided in the
licensing procedures for the State of Florida
and to develop a new definition for "Home for
Aged," which will appear in Section 2 between
the defined words of "Home Occupation and
Hotel," which definition shall be defined as a
home, institution, building or residence, public
or private, whether operated for profit or not,
which provides maintenance, personal care, or
nursing for a period exceeding twenty-four
hours to three or more ill, physically infirmed, l
convalescing, or aged persons who are not,
related by blood or marriage to the operator.
The definition shall also provide for ex -1
clusions.
Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida
By: -s -William C. Wodtke Jr.
':!uly 13,1979.
ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED THAT THIS AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE
71-3 HAS COME ABOUT BECAUSE OF THE AMENDMENT PASSED LAST MONTH PLACING
NURSING HOMES IN THE C -IA DISTRICT. THE DEFINITION OF A NURSING HOME
IN OUR EXISTING ORDINANCE IS A VERY BROAD DEFINITION THAT MEANS ANYTHING
FROM AN INSTITUTIONAL NURSING HOME TO A WIDOW TAKING IN THREE BOARDING
RESIDENTS, AND THE COMMISSION WAS CONCERNED ABOUT INFORMAL NURSING
FACILITIES SPRINGING UP IN THE C -1A AREAS; HENCE THE REDEFINITION OF
NURSING HOMES TYING THEM INTO FLORIDA STATUTE 400.062 AND CREATING A
NEW DEFINITION REFERRED TO AS "HOME FOR THE AGED."
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER STATED THAT HE HAS DISCUSSED THIS
WITH THE ATTORNEY AND IS IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE PROPOSAL.
17
BOOK 4i FADE 420r
AUG 81979 eou 41 FAGF261
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO BE HEARD.
THERE WERE NONE..
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE 79-20 AMENDING ORDINANCE
71-3 AND AMENDMENTS THERETO BY REDEFINING DEFINITIONS IN SECTION 2,
I.E., NURSING HOME OR CONVALESCENT HOME AND CREATING A DEFINITION FOR
HOME FOR AGED.
�
18 r
ORDINANCE NO. 79- 20
AN ORDINANCE A4ENDING INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE
71-3 AND AMENDMENTS THERETO BY REDEFINING DEFINITIONS
IN SECTION 2, i.e., NURSING HOME OR CONVALESCENT HOME
AND CREATING A DEFINITION FOR HOME FOR AGED
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
a. That the Definition for Nursing or Convalescent
Home described as:
Nursing or convalescent home: A home, institution,
building or residence, public or private, whether
operated for profit or not, which provides main-
tenance, personal care or nursing for a period
exceeding twenty-four hours to three or more ill,
physically infirm, convalescing, or aged persons
who are not related by blood or marriage to the
operator. The definition of nursing or convalescent
home does not include hospitals, clinics or similar
institutions which are devoted primarily to the
diagnosis and treatment of the sick or injured.
is hereby revoked and the following definition substituted in
in its place:
Nursing or convalescent home: A home, institution,
building or residence, public or private, whether
operated for profit or not, presently licensed
pursuant to Florida Statute 400.062, which provides
maintenance, personal care or nursing for a period
exceeding twenty-four hours to three or more ill,
physically infirm, convalescing, or aged persons
who are not related by blood or marriage to the
operator. The definition of nursing or convalescent
home does not include hospitals, clinics or similar
institutions which are devoted primarily to the
diagnosis and treatment of the sick or injured.
b. That a new definition of Home for aged be added
to Section 2 following the definition for Guest cottages,
which definition shall read as follows:
Home for aged: A home, institution, building or
residence, public or private, whether operated for
profit or not, which provides maintenance, personal
care or nursing for a period exceeding twenty-four
hours to three or more ill, physically infirm,
convalescing, or aged persons who are not related
by blood or marriage to the operator. The definition
of home for aged does not include hospitals, clinics,
or similar institutions which are devoted primarily
to the diagnosis and treatment of the sick or
injured.
C. This Ordinance shall become effective according to law.
This Ordinance shall take effect August 13, 1979.
AUG 81979 BOOK 41 FACE 26Z
AUG 81979 8m 41 PnUE 263
COMMISSIONER LOY DISCUSSED SELECTION OF A BOND COMPANY TO
HANDLE THE BOND ISSUE TO FINANCE THE RENOVATION OF THE COUNTY ADMINIS-
TRATIVE BUILDING. SHE NOTED THAT WE HAD A PROPOSAL FROM WILLIAM R.
HOUGH & CO. AND ANOTHER COMPANY, SOUTHEASTERN MUNICIPAL BONDING,IS VERY
INTERESTED AND HAS NOW SUBMITTED A PROPOSAL. COMMISSIONER Loy CONTINUED
THAT BASED ON PAST HISTORY AND THE EXTREME COOPERATION WE HAVE HAD WITH
THE COMPANY WE ARE DEALING WITH AND THE FACT THAT THIS IS A SERVICE
BUSINESS, SHE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE CONTINUE TO WORK WITH WILLIAM R.
HOUGH & CO.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS AGREED THAT DEALINGS
WITH HOUGH & CO. HAVE BEEN VERY SATISFACTORY.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF THERE IS ANY DIFFERENCE MONETARILY
IN THE PROPOSALS MADE BY THE BONDING COMPANIES.
COORDINATOR THOMAS POINTED OUT THAT ALL THESE COMPANIES ARE
BONDED UNDER THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND MUST FOLLOW THE STATE REGULATIONS.
HE CONTINUED THAT IN INVESTING, NOTHING CAN BE GUARANTEED AND YOU MUST
BANK ON REPUTATION AND EXPERIENCE. HE STATED THAT LAST YEAR WILLIAM R.
HOUGH & CO. WERE THE LARGEST IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOR MUNICIPAL BONDS
AND POSSIBLY THIRD OR FOURTH IN THE UNITED STATES.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ON THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF
WORKING WITH ONE COMPANY AND COORDINATOR THOMAS FELT WE SHOULD STAY
FLEXIBLE AND CERTAINLY GIVE CONSIDERATION TO MORE THAN ONE COMPANY, BUT
NOTED THAT IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO TRY TO WORK WITH T00 MANY COMPANIES.
GEORGE BLAND OF WILLIAM R. HOUGH & CO. INFORMED THE BOARD
THAT HIS COMPANY HAS CERTAIN BASIC INFORMATION DERIVED FROM THE PREVIOUS
ISSUE WHICH WILL BE OF USE IN THE NEW ISSUE. HE STATED HE FELT THAT THE
BONDS ISSUED FOR THE SANITARY LANDFILL WERE AN EXCELLENT ISSUE AND THAT
THEY GOT A VERY GOOD RATE. THEY ARE VERY HAPPY WORKING WITH INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY,
GARY AKERS OF SOUTHEASTERN MUNICIPAL BONDING CO. CAME BEFORE
THE BOARD. HE NOTED THAT HOUGH & COMPANY DID THE COUNTY'S LAST BOND
ISSUE AND THEY ARE PRESENTLY WORKING WITH THE COUNTY ON THE HOUSING
FINANCE AUTHORITY. MR. AKERS COMMENTED THAT WITHOUT COMPETITION YOU
DO NOT STAY ON YOUR TOES AND THIS CAN RESULT IN LESSER SERVICE. HE
FELT THE MOST APPARENT ADVANTAGE IN HAVING MORE THAN ONE COMPANY WORKING
WITH THE COUNTY ON THEIR GROWING NEEDS WOULD BE THE COST. HE STATED
THAT IF THEY WERE SELECTED TO WORK WITH THE COUNTY, THEY WOULD SUPPLY
A COMPARISON OF THEIR PURCHASE PROPOSAL TO THE PREVIOUS ISSUE AND A
COMPARISON OF THE DISCOUNT ON THE PREVIOUS ISSUE AND TOTAL EXPENSES.
HE NOTED THIS ISSUE IS LARGER AND THE COSTS WILL BE LARGER, BUT HE FELT,
PERCENTAGEWISE, THE COST COULD BE REDUCED IN ISSUING THE BONDS. HE
NOTED THE TIMING FOR HAVING TWO COMPANIES IS VERY APPROPRIATE BECAUSE
THE COUNTY HAS TWO PROGRAMS GOING AT THE SAME TIME - THE HOUSING PROGRAM
AND THE RENOVATION PROGRAM.
MR. BLAND COMMENTED THAT THE 1977 ISSUE WAS AN ISSUE HOUGH &
CO. IS VERY PROUD OF, AND POINTED OUT THAT THEY ACHIEVED AN "A" RATING.
HE STATED THAT THEY WOULD BE GLAD TO OPEN UP THEIR RECORDS FOR ANY
COMPARISON, BUT POINTED OUT THAT A COMPARISON OF 1977 FIGURES TO 1979
FIGURES WOULD NOT BE VERY VALID. HE FURTHER NOTED THAT INSOFAR AS THE
SCHEDULE IS CONCERNED, THEY ARE ATTUNED RIGHT NOW TO GET THIS PARTICULAR
BOND ISSUE TO MARKET IN THE MINIMUM LENGTH OF TIME, AND THERE IS A
BUILT-IN TIME FACTOR; HE FELT THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE THE MONEY IN HAND
IN 75-80 DAYS.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SIEBERT, TO ENGAGE THE FIRM OF WILLIAM R. HOUGH & CO. TO ASSIST AND
PREPARE AND WORK WITH THE COUNTY ON BONDS TO FINANCE THE RENOVATION OF
THE NEW COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT WISHED IT MADE CLEAR THAT HE SECONDED
THE MOTION WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IT IS NOT A CLOSED SHOP IN INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY. HE DID FEEL THAT IT IS A NECESSITY THAT WE DONT THROW
ALL OUR EGGS IN ONE BASKET, BUT STATED THAT HE WILL RELY VERY HEAVILY
ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF MR. THOMAS, MR. BARTON AND COMMISSIONER Loy.
COMMISSIONER DEESON AND COMMISSIONER LYONS AGREED THAT IT
MUST BE UNDERSTOOD THAT IT IS NOT A CLOSED SHOP IN THE COUNTY.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE (QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
AUG 81979 21 1am 41 Fact264 i
BOOK - 1 FAu- 6
CHAIRMAN WODTKE NOTED THAT AT THE JUNE 20TH MEETING THE
ATTORNEY WAS INSTRUCTED TO PROCEED WITH THE CONTRACT WITH THE HOSPITAL
RENOVATION CONSULTANTS, CONNELL, METCALF & EDDY, BASED ON THE WORKSHOP
MEETING HELD .JUNE 19TH. HE STATED THIS WAS DONE AND THE CONTRACT SENT
TO THE CONSULTANTS, BUT THEY RETURNED THE CONTRACT WITH INITIALED CHANGES
IN THE RATES. THE CHAIRMAN STATED THAT HE DID NOT FEEL, IN VIEW OF THE
CHANGES, THAT HE COULD SIGN THE CONTRACT WITHOUT FURTHER DISCUSSION.
THE BOARD AGREED. IT WAS FELT POSSIBLY A MEETING COULD BE CONVENED
DURING BUDGET SESSION TO TAKE THIS UP.
THE HOUR OF 11:00 O'CLOCK A.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK
READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO -WIT:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER:
STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a �
in the matter of �(, �-° t-' �- t `-'- 'i t fN
/_/ t > in the Court, was pub -
fished in said newspaper in the issues of
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper, t
r
Sworn to and subscribed before me his day of A.D.
usi ress Manager)
c—, G Jl t
(SEAL) R
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian er County, Florida)
NCE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that KEITH
R. MARTIN has filed a Petition with the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, requesting said Board to
adopt a resolution closing, vacating and
abolishing a portion of the public roads, streets
and rights of way shown on the plat of W EONA
PARK SUBDIVISION, as recorded in Plat
Book 2, page 17, Indian River County public
records, as it pertains to the following
described land situated in Indian River
County, Florida.
That part of Oleander Avenue, as shown on
said plat, lying between Poinsettia Boulevard
on the North and Orange Street on the South,
I together with that part of Orange Street lying
between U.S. Highway No. 1 and State Road
i
510.
and requesting said Board to renounce and
disclaim any right of said County for the public
in and to the above described public roads,
streets and rights of way as delineated on said
recorded plat.
Said Board will hold a public hearing thereon
at 11:00 o'clock A.M. on the Bth day of August,
1979, in the offices of said Board, Indian River
County Courthouse, Vero Beach, Florida.
j Persons interested may appear and be heard
at that time.
Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida
By: Freda Wright, Clerk
July 20, 1979.
L
ASSISTANT PLANNER DAVID MARSH NOTED THAT THE REQUEST IS FOR
ABANDONMENT OF THE SOUTHERN PART OF OLEANDER AVENUE BETWEEN POINSETTIA
BLVD. AND ORANGE STREET; IT DOES NOT COME DOWN AND TIE IN TO OLD DiXIE
HIGHWAY.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE DISCUSSED RETAINING A 15' EASEMENT, AND
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT HE'HAD FELT A 15' EASEMENT WOULD BE
MORE REALISTIC THAN A 10' ONE. MR. MARSH AGREED THAT IF THIS PORTION
IS ABANDONED, THE EASEMENT IS NEEDED FOR THE UTILITIES TO BE MAINTAINED.
ATTORNEY COLLINS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT IT APPEARED THERE
MAY BE A PROBLEM WITH THE LEGAL NOTICE. IT WAS ONLY PUBLISHED ONE TIME
AND THE STATUTE TALKS IN TERMS OF NOT LESS THAN TWO WEEKLY ISSUES OF
SAID PAPER, OR A REQUIREMENT OF TWO PUBLICATIONS.
ATTORNEY O'HAIRE, WHO IS REPRESENTING KEITH MARTIN, STATED
THAT HE WAS GOING UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 336 WHICH REQUIRES
ONLY ONE PUBLICATION.
ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT THERE ARE TWO STATUTES THAT APPLY
TO ABANDONMENT OF STREETS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND HE HAD BEEN GOING
BY CHAPTER 177. CHAPTER 336 IS IN THE ROADS AND TRANSPORTATION AREA.
HE LEFT THE MEETING TO CHECK THE STATUTES AND STATED THAT THE BOARD
COULD PROCEED WITH THE HEARING IN THE MEANTIME.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED IF THERE IS ANY PROBLEM WITH TAKING THE
15' EASEMENT OFF THE NORTH SIDE, AND ATTORNEY O'HAIRE FELT THERE WAS NOT.
COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED HOW MANY PROPERTY OWNERS ARE INVOLVED,
AND ATTORNEY O'HAIRE STATED THAT THERE ARE THREE AND THEY HAVE ALL
CONSENTED TO THE VACATION.
ATTORNEY COLLINS RETURNED TO THE MEETING AND INFORMED THE
BOARD THAT THE AD IS IN ORDER AND THE STATUTE DOES FIT THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
THE BOARD REVIEWED A MAP OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION, AND
CONTINUED TO DISCUSS LOCATION OF AN EASEMENT.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT A 10' EASEMENT DOESN'T
GIVE YOU ENOUGH LAND TO WORK ON AND HE WOULD RECOMMEND EITHER A 15' OR
20' EASEMENT HE NOTED THAT WHEN YOU ABANDON A ROAD, HALF OF THE
PROPERTY GOES TO `THE ADJACENT OWNERS, SO IF YOU TAKE A 20' EASEMENT OFF
THE WEST SIDE, IT HURTS ONE MORE THAN THE OTHERS.
AUG 81979 BOOK 41,1 FAu,
. 23 --
AUG $1999
Baa
41
FnE 26 '
ATTORNEY O'HAIRE SUGGESTED TAKING
THE EASEMENT
OUT
OF THE
MIDDLE, AND ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS SUGGESTED AN EASEMENT RUNNING 10'
ON EACH SIDE OF THE CENTER LINE, WHICH WOULD TAKE 10' -FROM THE OWNERS
ON EACH SIDE.
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER NOTED THAT MORE THAN ONE UTILITY MAY BE
ACCOMMODATED IN AN EASEMENT.
ATTORNEY O'HAIRE STATED THAT THEY ARE AGREEABLE TO GIVING THE
EASEMENT AND DID NOT FEEL UTILITIES ARE ANY PROBLEM.
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO BE HEARD.
THERE WERE NONE.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0. 79-66 ABANDONING
THAT PORTION OF OLEANDER AVENUE LYING BETWEEN THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY
OF POINSETTIA BLVD. AND THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY OF ORANGE STREET, AS
SHOWN ON THE PLAT OF WEONA PARK SUBDIVISION, PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 171
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS; SUBJECT TO INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
RETAINING A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT, BEING 20' WIDE AND LYING 10' ON
EITHER SIDE OF THE CENTER LINE OF SAID OLEANDER AVENUE; THE PAPERS TO
BE PREPARED AT THE EXPENSE OF THE APPLICANT; AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE
OF THE CHAIRMAN ON APPROVAL BY THE ATTORNEY.
ATTORNEY THOMAS THURLOW OF THURLOW & THURLOW OF STUART CAME
BEFORE THE BOARD ACCOMPANIED BY ROBERT BRADFORD, THE APPLICANT, REPRE-
SENTING THE ESTATE OF HILDA B. WASON, AND ED SCHLITT, REALTOR, TO VACATE
A PORTION OF THE PLAT OF ENOS AS PER NOTICE OF INTENT, AS FOLLOWS:
C ��
NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPLY
TO INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
COMMISSION FOR VACATION
OF A PORTION OF THE
PLAT OF ENOS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that ROBERT W. BRADFORD, as Personal
Representative of the Estate of HILDA B. WASON, deceased, by
and through his undersigned attorney intends to make application
to the Indian River County Commission pursuant to Section 177.101,
Florida Statutes for a resolution vacating a portion of the Plat
of Enos, which Plat was filed in the Public Records of Brevard
County, Florida, on June 27, 1889, and recorded in the Public
Records of St. Lucie County, Florida in Plat Book 2,page 11, on
July 16, 1913, said land now lying and being in Indian River
County, Florida, to the extent that said Plat of Enos affects
the following described property:
All of Government Lot 1, Section 36, Township 31
South, Range 39 East, in Indian River County, Florida,
except the North 15 feet thereof and one�dcre conveyed
to GEORGE E. DALES, by Deed recorded in Doed Book 34,
page 77, St. Lucie County records, and also.excepting
the right-of-way for State Road A -1-A.
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida will hold a public hearing thereon at 11:30 o'clock A.M.
on the 8th day of August, 1979 in the County Commission Chambers
in the Indian River County Courthouse.
THURLOW AND THURLOW
S
Attorneys for ROBERT W. BRADFORD, as Personal
Representative of the Estate of HILDA B.
WASON, Deceased
Thurlow & Thurlow
50 Kindred Street
P. 0. Box 106
Stuart, Florida 33494
Publish two times, namely:
July 22 and 29, 1979
AUG 81979 am 41 FAGE 268
ATTORNEY THURLOW INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THEY DID FILE A
LETTER SOME TIME AGO SAYING THEY WERE WITHDRAWING THEIR PORTION OF THE
PLAT OF ENOS FROM THE DEDICATION MADE IN 1889. HE NOTED THAT THE WASON
FAMILY HAS HAD TITLE TO THEIR PROPERTY SINCE 1944 AND IN THE WARRANTY
DEED RECORDED TO MR. WASON IN 19441 NO MENTION WAS MADE OF THE PLAT OF
ENOS, AND THE PROPERTY WAS SOLD AS A GOVERNMENT LOT, ATTORNEY THURLOW
CONTINUED THAT THEY FEEL SURE THAT THEIR TITLE IS 100% MARKETABLE UNDER
THE FLORIDA MARKETABLE TITLE ACT, BUT BY REASON OF THE FACT THAT THIS
OLD PLAT IS STILL ON THE RECORD BOOKS IN BREVARD COUNTY AND ALSO ST.
LUCIE COUNTY, IT CASTS A CLOUD ON THE TITLE. RATHER THAN GO TO A TIME
CONSUMING QUIET TITLE SUIT, THEY HAVE COME TO THE BOARD TO VACATE THE
PLAT. ATTORNEY THURLOW INFORMED THE BOARD THAT MR. SCHLITT, WHO IS THE
CONTRACT PURCHASER AND TRUSTEE FOR THE BUYER, IS WILLING TO DONATE TO
THE COUNTY A STRIP OF LAND 70' IN WIDTH EXTENDING FROM AIA TO THE OCEAN,
HIS CLIENTS ARE ASKING FOR A RESOLUTION OF ABANDONMENT AND WILL BE
WILLING TO CONDITION IT UPON THE GRANTING OF THE 70' TO THE COUNTY.
THIS WHOLE MATTER IS CONDITIONED UPON A DEAL CLOSING. IF THE RESOLUTION
IS ADOPTED, HIS CLIENTS WILL FULFILL THEIR CONTRACT WITH MR. SCHLITT
AND CONVEY THE PROPERTY TO HIM, AND MR. SCHLITT IMMEDIATELY WILL GIVE
A CONVEYANCE TO THE COUNTY.
MR. SCHLITT CONFIRMED ATTORNEY THURLOW'S STATEMENT.
ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKED WHAT THEIR CLIENT'S OBJECTION WAS TO
CONVEYING THE STRIP PRIOR TO THE CLOSING, AND ATTORNEY THURLOW STATED
THEY WANTED TO BE SURE THEY HAD A DEAL BEFORE THEY MADE A CONVEYANCE.
DISCUSSION AROSE ABOUT HAVING THE CONVEYANCE OF THE 70' STRIP
BEING MADE SIMULTANEOUSLY, AND IT WAS FELT THIS COULD BE RESOLVED.
ATTORNEY COLLINS QUESTIONED THE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF
THE 70' STRIP.
ATTORNEY THURLOW FELT IT WOULD BE PREFERABLE TO CONVEY THE
SOUTH 70' OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, AND MR, SCHLITT STATED THAT THE PURCHASERS
OF THE PROPERTY ARE HAVING SOME STUDIES MADE AND THE STRIP WOULD
DEFINITELY BE EITHER AT THE NORTH OR SOUTH END OF THE PROPERTY, RATHER
THAN IN THE MIDDLE. HE DID NOT FEEL IT MADE A GREAT DEAL OF DIFFERENCE
FROM THE COUNTY'S STANDPOINT.
COMMISSIONER LOY FELT IT WOULD BE SIMPLER TO HAVE IT ON THE
LOT LINE ON THE SOUTH, AND ASKED WHO WOULD DO THE SURVEY AND ESTABLISH
THE CORNERS,
ATTORNEY THURLOW STATED THAT THE SOUTH LINE HAS ALREADY BEEN
ESTABLISHED BY SURVEY DONE BY CARTER ASSOCIATES, INC., AND MR. SCHLITT
AGREED THAT THEY WILL PROVIDE THE SURVEY,
IN FURTHER DISCUSSION, THE BOARD FELT IT SHOULD BE SPECIFIED
THAT THE STRIP WILL BE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY, AND MR.
SCHLITT DID NOT FEEL THIS WOULD BE A PROBLEM,
ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO MORTGAGE ON
THE 70' STRIP, AND ATTORNEY THURLOW STATED THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO
EXCEPT THAT FROM THE MORTGAGE.
ASSISTANT PLANNER DAVID MARSH NOTED THAT THEY CAME IN ON THE
TAIL END OF THIS MATTER AND ARE PROBABLY NOT AWARE OF ALL THE DISCUSSIONS,
BUT HE FELT COMPELLED TO MAKE THE COMMENTS SET OUT IN HIS MEMO OF JULY
6TH AS FOLLOWS:
SUBJECT: Vacating Enos Subdivision'Plat
DATE; July 6, 1979
All right-of-ways located on the section line should.be retained as this aligns
with the proposed 81st Avenue collector on the mainland. Past practice of
providing for future roads along section lines should be continued whenever
possible.
Based on recent correspondence and actions taken by the Board, it would -appear
that the 15' strip and the one acre parcel were abandoned as per the recently
adopted Resolution No. 79-58, dated June 6, 1979. The staff would recommend'
in the future that all existing right-of-ways on section lines which will likely
become local streets or collectors be retained. Further, it is felt that any
publicly owned parcels which could possibly provide future public beaches should
not be vacated or abandoned unless another parcel of like value with comparable
ocean frontage access is provided as a suitable alternative.
David Marsh
Planning Dept.
BOOK 41 PAGE
27 1
'
_I
pov 41 FADE 271
MR. MARSH STATED THAT THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE VACATION
OF THAT ONE ACRE ON THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. HE UNDERSTOOD
THAT THERE ARE CONSIDERATIONS AS TO TITLE BUT CONTINUED THAT HE HAS
SEEN IN MANY CASES WHERE COURTS HAVE BEEN MUCH MORE LENIENT WITH WATER-
FRONT AS FAR AS DETERMINING THE TITLE IN FAVOR OF GOVERNMENTAL BODIES,
PARTICULARLY FOR BEACH ACCESS.
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER NOTED THAT IT IS GOOD TO PROVIDE
BEACH ACCESS AND THEY APPROVE, BUT HE POINTED OUT THAT JUST ACCESS MAY
PROVIDE PROBLEMS AS THERE IS NO PLACE TO GO WHEN YOU GET THERE AND
PEOPLE PARK ON THE ACCESS. IT WOULD BE MUCH BETTER IF WE HAD AN ACRE
OF GROUND.
LEAST.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE NOTED THAT IS WHY WE WANTED TO HAVE 70' AT
DISCUSSION CONTINUED ON PROPER WORDING OF A MOTION TO INCLUDE
THE NAME OF THE PURCHASER AND DEFINE THE STRIP AS RUNNING FROM EAST OF
AlA TO THE OCEAN.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON,
THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 79-67 APPROVING THE VACATION OF
THE PLAT OF ENOS AS DESCRIBED IN THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPLY FOR
VACATION PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTES 177.101, WHICH RESOLUTION WILL BE
CONDITIONED UPON AND NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE UNTIL THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED
A DEED OF CONVEYANCE FROM THE PURCHASER, ED SCHLITT, TRUSTEE, OR ASSIGNS,
FOR THE SOUTH 70' OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DETERMINED ON A NORTH -SOUTH
MEASUREMENT, BEING A PARCEL OF LAND LYING BETWEEN THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY
OF S.R. AIA AND THE ATLANTIC OCEAN ON A TANGENT LINE IMMEDIATELY NORTH
OF AND ABUTTING THE SOUTH BOUNDARY LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT I, SECTION
36, TOWNSHIP 31 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
RESOLUTION NO. 79- 67
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, resolve:
1. That a petition has been filed by ROBERT W.
BRADFORD, as Personal Representative of the Estate of HILDA
B. WASON, deceased, by and through his undersigned attorney,
with this Board requesting this Board to vacate a portion of
the Plat of Enos, which Plat was recorded in the Public Records
of Brevard County, Florida, on June 27, 1889, and recorded in
the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, in Plat Book
2, Page 11, on July 16, 1913, said land now lying and being
in Indian River County, Florida, and to renounce and disclaim
any interest of the County and the Public in and to the streets,
roads, and highways shown on said Plat within the boundaries
of the following described property:
All of Government Lot 1, Section 36, Township 31
South, Range 39 East.
EXCEPT one acre in the Northwest corner, thereof
described as follows: Begin on the bank of bluff
of the Atlantic Ocean on the north line of said
Government Lot 1, thence run West 209 feet; thence
South 209 feet; thence East 209 feet to the bank
or bluff of the Atlantic Ocean; thence run North-
erly along said bank or bluff to the point of
beginning;
ALSO EXCEPT the North 15 feet of said Government
Lot 1.
2. That at a hearing held on August 8, 1979,
this Board determined that the Petitioners had complied with
Florida Statute Chapter 177 by publishing notice of their
intent to apply for a vacation of said portion of said Plat
of Enos as will more fully appear by Proof of Publication
filed in the minutes of said meeting. The Board further
determined that the persons making application for said vaca-
tion are the owners in fee simple to the -above described
property and that the vacation of said portion of said Plat
will not -affect the ownership or right of convenient access
of persons opining other parcels located within the boundaries
of the Enos Plat. This Board has further determined that the
AUG 81979 VOK 41 FmF 4 l
FF__ __
AUG 81979 Bou 41 FnUE
above described property is not located within the limits
of any incorporated municipality.
3. Conditioned upon receipt of a satisfactory
deed of conveyance from the owner of the above described
property in Paragraph 1 of this Resolution conveying to
Indian River County the South 70 feet of Government Lot 1,
Section 36, Township 31 South, Range 39 East, lying East
of the right-of-way line for State Road A -1-A, which 70 feet
is determined by a North-South measurement perpendicular
to the South Boundary line of the above described Govern-
ment Lot 1, said land lying and being in Indian River County,
Florida, the Board of County Commissioners does herewith
vacate, upon satisfaction of the above condition, that portion
of the Plat of Eaos that lies within the boundaries of the
following described property:
All of Government Lot 1, Section 36, Township 31
South, Range 39 East.
EXCEPT one acre in the Northwest corner, thereof
described as follows: Begin on the bank or bluff
of the Atlantic Ocean on the North line of said
Government Lot 1, thence run West 209 feet; thence
South 209 feet; thence East 209 feet to the bank
or bluff of the Atlantic Ocean; thence run North-
erly along said bank or bluff to the point of
beginning;
ALSO EXCEPT the North 15 feet of said Government
Lot 1,
and does further renounce and disclaim any right of the County
and the Public in and to any of the streets, roads or high-
ways shown on the Plat of Enos located within the boundaries
of the above described property.
4. A*certified copy of this Resolution shall be filed
in the offices of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian
River County, Florida, and duly recorded in the Public Records.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Alma Lee Loy, Vice- firman
ATTEST -
Meda Wright, Clk -
y/
CHAIRMAN WODTKE NOTED THAT THIS 70' STRIP OF LAND IS A VERY
EXPENSIVE PIECE OF PROPERTY AND THE COUNTY IS VERY FORTUNATE TO ACQUIRE
IT.
THE CHAIRMAN ANNOUNCED THAT ITEM 10 ON THE AGENDA IN REGARD
ABANDONING A PORTION OF LOTH ST. IN SHADY ACRES SUBDIVISION WAS DENIED
AT A PREVIOUS MEETING AND INADVERTENTLY HAD BEEN INCLUDED ON TODAY'S
AGENDA.
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THEREUPON RECESSED FOR LUNCH
AT 12:00 NOON AND RECONVENED AT 1:30 O'CLOCK P.M. WITH THE SAME MEMBERS
PRESENT,
THE HOUR OF 1:30 O'CLOCK P.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK
READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICES WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO—WIT:
i.he Aliami l' eralb
A KNIGHT-RIDDER NEWSPAPER
PUBLISHED DAILY
MIAMI — DADE — FLORIDA
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF DADE:
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared
E. SUSAN KELLY
who on oath says that he/she is
CLASSIFIED OFFICE MANAGER
of The Miami Herald, a daily newspaper published at
Miami in Dade County, Florida; that the attached copy of
advertisement was published in said newspaper in the
issues of
July 12,13,14, 1979
P
Affiant further says that the said The Miami Herald is a
newspaper published at Miami, in the said Dade County,
Florida and that the said newspaper has heretofore been
continuously published in said Dade County, Florida,
each day and has been entered as second class mail mat-
ter at the post office in Miami, in said Dade County,
Florida, for a period of one year neat preceding the first
publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and
affiant further says that he has neither paid nor pro-
mised any person, firm or corporation any discount,
rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing
this
saadveerr advertisement fpoorr ublication in the said newspaper.
... Sa:..4.✓�
.............. 'S�rA(.../+w•••...........................,..........................
Sworn to and subscribe ore me tl s.......1 7th
b
day of .... ulYqu-!Y ................ 19....79 ::�Z.�oc:��
Mycommission expires. ...........................
AUG 81979
. P
obgal Notices I
NOTICE FOR BIDS
Sealed proposala for selling and
delivering all necessary materials,
equipment, and services for the
completion of work, Including i.,tal-
lafion of materials, supplies and
equipment sold and delivered to in.
dianRlver County for the construc-:
tion of Barber Avenue will be
received by the County Ad4",'tra–:
for until 1:30 P.M., Wednesday_
August 9, 1979, at which time'
Proposals will be publicly opened'
and read at the regularly scheduled
County Co nmisaion Meeting.
LOCATION: From U.S: #1 east for
a distance of approximately one
mile in Indian River County, Florida.
PRINCIPAL FEATURES OF THE
PROJECT ARE: The construction'
of roadway from U.S. #1 to the
east for approximately 1.0 mile.
Roadway construction will be a two
lane section with drainage ditch&,.
signing, pavement marking and
other related items as shown on the
construction plans and In the
specifications.
Drawings and Specifications may I
be reviewed at the Indian River
County Administrator's office or
may be obtained by prospective
bidders at the office of the Comult.
Ing Engineer, Kunde, Driver, Simp•
son and Associates, Inc., at 1164
East Oakland Park Boulevard, Suite
302 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33334,
for a charge of Fifty (550.00) Dol.
tars for each complete set, which
amount will be refunded upon re-.
I—, In good condition, within thirty �
(30) days after opening, Make4
checks payable to Kunde, Driver,
Simpson and Associates, Inc,
of the the a Perfo
guaranty
Percent
Bond and a Payment Bond at one
hundred (100%) percent of con-
tract amount will be required. .
The right Is reserved by the Board
Of County Commissioners to waive
technicalities or irregularities in
bids at Its discretion or to reject
any or all bids. No bidder may with.
draw his bid within thirty (30) days
after the actual date of opening
thereof. V g
Dated at Vero Beach, Florida this
22nd day of June, 1979,
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS 1
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA
BY: Jack G. Jennings, County
MY 12,13,14,1979 Administrator
Ad No. - 954.63R
A00K 41 ma -274
Matt of �IIariba SS.
COUNTY OF ORANGE
Before the undersigned authority personally. appeared
Marie M. Minner _ who on oath says that
she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Sentinel Star, a Daily newspaper
published at Orlando, in Orange County, Florida: that the attached copy of ac
vertisement, being a ___ ..Legal - Notice __ in the matter of_ .. (Jot 1 C_e _
f_o_r__Bid_ .re :..Const_ruction of Barber Avenue
-- - - ------ - - -- -- -. in the— -- --- Court,
was published in said newspaper in the issues of
---------
Affiant. further says that the said Sentinel Star is a newspaper published at Orlando
in said Orange County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been co
tinuously published in said Orange Countv, Florida, each Week Day and has been entere
as second-class mail matter at the post office in Orlando, in said Orange County, Florida, f
a period of one year next preceding the fast publication of the attached copy of a
vertisentent, or is a direct successor of a newspaper which together have been so publish
and affiant furthersays that he/she has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or co
potation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this ad
vertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this __.-17th - _ day
l..79_ .
Nicitary Pu lie.
ja d (1L�Larg �
8ondedl6y Amer'-caa Fim .Casualty Company
VER® BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER:
STATE OF FLORIDA
MOK
ADVERTISING CHARGE _
,
n -
d
or
d-
ad:
r -
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
f
the matter of Aa A I -Q 6'
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of 2C C -9r c{ &I'JT_
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this t^ day of,
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court,
A.D.Z,Z2
Manager)
RivWWI
Florida)
1 P,�GE 275
.6
NOTICE FOR BIDS
'Sealed proposals for selling and
delivering all necessary materials,
equipment, and services for the
completion of work, including in-
stallation of materials, supplies and
equipment sold and delivered to In-
dian River County for the construc-
tion of Barber Avenue will be re,
calved by the County Administrator
until 1:30 P.M., Wednesday, August
8, 1979, at which time proposals
will be publicly opened and read at
the regularly scheduled County
Commission Meeting,
LOCATION: From U.S. #1 east for
a distance of approximately one
mile in Indian River County, Florida
PRINCIPAL FEATURES OF THE
PROJECT ARE: The construction .
of roadway from U.S. #1 to the
east for approximately 1.0 mile.
Roadway construction will be a two
lane section with drainage ditches,
signing, pavement marking and
other related items as shown on
the construction plans and in the
specifications.
Drawings and Specifications may
be reviewed at the Indian River
County Administrator's office or
may be obtained by prospective
bidders at the office of the Consult- i
Ing Engineer, Knude, Driver, Simp- '
son and Associates, Inc., at 1164
East Oakland Park Boulevard,
Suite 302, Fort Lauderdale, Florida
33334, for a charge of Fifty t
($50.00) Dollars for each complete
set, which amount will be refunded ;
upon return, in good condition,
Within thirty (30) days after open-
ing. Make checks payable to r
Kunde, Driver, Simpson and Asso-
Bond and a Payment. Bond at one
hundred (100%) percent of con-
tract amount will be required.
The right is reserved by the Board
of County Commissioners to waive
technicalities or irregularities in
bids at its discretion or to reject
any or all bids. No bidder may with.
draw his bid within thirty (30) days i
after the actual date of opening
thereof.
Dated at Vero beach, Florida this `
22nd day of June, 1979.
BOARD OF COUNTY,
COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA '
BY: Jack G. Jerminge,
County Administrator
CL -680" July13,14,15,1979
I'
NOTICE FORBIDS
Sealed proposals for selling and delivering
all necessary materials, equipment, and
'services for the completion of work, including
'installation of materials, supplies and
equipment sold and delivered to Indian River
County for the construction of Barber Avenue
will be received by the Board of County
Commissioners until 1:30 P.M. Eastern
(Daylight Time, August 8,1979.
•
LOCATION: From U.S. No.' t east for a
distance of approximately one mile in Indian
River County, Florida.
PRINCIPAL. FEATURES OF THE
PROJECT ARE: The construction of roadway
from U.S. No. 1 to the east for approximately
1.0 mile. Roadway construction will be a two
lane section with drainage ditches, signing,
pavement marking and other related items as
shown on the construction plans and in the
specifications.
Drawings and Specifications may be
reviewed at the Indian River County Ad-
ministrator's office or may be obtained by
prospective bidders at the office of the Con-
! suiting Engineer, Kunde, Driver, Simpson and
Associates, Inc., at 1164 East Oakland Park
Boulevard, Suite 302, Fort Lauderdale, Florida
33334, for a charge of Fifty ($50.00) Dollars for
each complete set, which amount will be
refunded upon return, in good condition, within
thirty (30) days after opening. Make checks
payable to Kunde, Driver, Simpson and
Associates, Inc. '
Bid guaranty at five (5 percent) percent of
the bid amount, a Performance Bond and a
Payment Bond at one hundred (100 percent)
percent of contact amount will be required.
The right is reserved by the Board of County
-Commissioners to waive technicalities or
irregularities in bids at its discretion or to
reject any or all bids. No bidder may withdraw
his bid within thirty (30) days after the actual
date of opening thereof.
Dated at Vero Beach, Florida this 21st day of
June, 1979.-
Board
979:Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County, Florida
By: -s-Jack G. Jennings
County Administrator
June 22, 29, July 6, 1979. i
THE CHAIRMAN THEN ASKED FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE NOTICE, AND THE FOLLOWING SEALED BID WAS RECEIVED, OPENED AND
READ:
DICKERSON, INC.
$336,143.79
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE ABOVE BID BEING REFERRED TO
ENGINEERS, KUNDE, DRIVER, SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES, INC., FOR EVALUATION.
ADMINISTRATOR .JENNINGS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE ENGINEERS'
ESTIMATE ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF BARBER AVENUE WAS $470,000. HE NOTED
THAT IT IS NOT UNUSUAL ON A JOB OF THIS SIZE TO GET ONLY ONE BID WHEN
YOU HAVE A PRIME CONTRACTOR AS LARGE AS DICKERSON IN YOUR IMMEDIATE AREA.
ENGINEER SIMPSON ESTIMATED THAT THEY WOULD BE IN A POSITION
TO RECOMMEND A COURSE OF ACTION BY THE EARLY PART OF NEXT WEEK.
ATTORNEY COLLINS REVIEWED THE PROPOSED TRI -PARTY AGREEMENT
BETWEEN FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILROAD COMPANY, THE DOT AND THE COUNTY,
IN REGARD TO SIGNAL AND CROSSING WORK AT STORM GROVE ROAD AND STATED
THAT ALTHOUGH THESE AGREEMENTS SEEM TO BE GETTING MORE AND MORE ONE
SIDED, THEY WERE MAILED TO THE COUNTY THROUGH THE DOT; HE WOULD HAVE TO
ASSUME THE DOT APPROVED THEM;AND HE WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE TRI -PARTY AGREEMENT BETWEEN
FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AND THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION COVERING THE PROPOSED NEW CROSSING AT
F.E.C. MILEPOST 223 + 1941, SECTION 88508-6601 (STORM GROVE ROAD),
COPY OF SAID AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
ADMINISTRATOR.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF
THE GRANT FOR THE YOUTH GUIDANCE VOLUNTEER PROGRAM.
j
33
BOOK 41 PAGE 276
State of Florida
Department of Administration
Division of State Planning -
BUREAU OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE
PLANNING & ASSISTANCE
SUBGRANT APPLICATION
FOR
LEAA FUNDS
eooK 41 PA;E 277
ATTACHMENT I PAGE 1
Project No.
Date Received
FY PART B 4096 PART C LOCAL
JJDP PARTE PART C STATE
For BCJPA Use Only
PART I. GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION*
1. Project Title:
2. Funding Category: ❑Pan "B" Part "C" 0Part "E" ❑JJDP ❑Other
e
3. Program and Area and Title in which Application is Made: JD- 6 - - - -
4. Type of Application: ❑ Original ❑ Revision j0pontinuation of Grant No. 7841-06401
5. Anticipated Subgrant Period: _ October 1 197 $ through 'March 30, 1980
6. Date Application Submitted to RPC/MPU (local Projects Only) AuggI, t .8 s - 1979
9'0723 22,144 32,407
7. LEAA Support Sought: S e Matching Share: Local $1417—Total Budget: $
State $
B. Applicant:
S. Chief Financial Officer:
Board o£ County Commissioners
Jeff Barton
Indian River County
Finance Officer
Indian River County Court Ho se
Indian River County Court douse
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Vero Beach, Florida 32 60
<- _2
ig at fft� adn
igneture: t e
FFOroject
10. Implementing Agency:
11. Director: `
County Administrator
Commissioner R. Don Deeson
Indian River County Court House
Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
382 Schumann Drive
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Florida 32958
ffSe��bastian,
ignature and Telephone Number
'See Applicetion Instructions, Page b. Contact Person : Rita J. Sauerman
567-8033
This public document was promulgated at an annual cost of 5.50per copy for the purpose of informing prospective LEAA subgrentees
of actions and policies of the Bureau of Criminal Justice Planning and Assirtance, 620 South Meridian, Tallahassee, Florida 32344.
(Form BCJPA•A1)
(Rev. 6/77)
Zh4s is an extension of the present grant. The extension covers 6 month
period of next year and 12 month period of this year - total of 18 months.
October 1, 1978 -March 30, 1980 .
Budget breakdown for 18 month period -
County 12,267 22,144
United Way 9,87 Total local match.
LEAA 9,723
State 540
32,407
This is a tenative budget. Final approval will be made for next years
budget at time of county's budget hearings.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 79-68 AUTHORIZING THE
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS RE THE GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE VOCATIONAL TRAINING
AND SHELTERED WORKSHOP.
AUG 81979
L
35
aou 41fAGE t o
R E S O L U T I O N
Td 0. 79 -GR
nu 41 FAUGE 279 -
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CHAIRMAN OF
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COPIMISSIONERS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, TO SIGN AN AGREEPIENT WITII THE STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARnIENT OF COIRIUNITY AFFAIRS UNDER THE FLORIDA FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE FOR COMMUNITY SERVICES ACT.
IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER, FLORIDA
AS FOLLOWS:
Section I. That the Chairman is hereby authorized and
directed —tois gn in the name and on behalf of the Board of County
Commissioners an AGreement between the Florida Department of
Community Affairs and Indian River County, under the Florida
Financial Assistance for Community Services Act, as per copy
attached hereto and made part hereof.
Section II. That all funds necessary to meet the contract
obligationsthe County and its delegate agencies (if
applicable) with the Department have been appropriated
and said funds are unexpended and unencumbered and are avail-
able for payment as prescribed in the Contract. The County
shall be responsible for the funds for the local share not-
withstanding the fact that all or part of the local share is
to be met or contributed by other source, i.e., contributions
other agencies or organization funds.
PASSES AND ADOPTED THE 8th DAY OF AUGUST, 1979,
i
ATTEST: c
Freda Wright t
Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COIRMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVED. COUNTY, FLORIDA
r
By
William C. Wodtkef Jr
Chairman
IDA FINANCIAL ASSISTANCM COMMUNITY SERVICES ACTIW974
(COMMUNITY SERVICES TRUST FUND)
GRANT APPLICATION Page 1 of 7
REPLY -TO:
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
DIVISION OF COMMUNITY SERVICES
2571 EXECUTIVE CENTER CIRCLE, EAST
TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32301
1. Local Governmental Unit Applying for Grant:
Name:Vero Beach, Indian River Co
name of town, city or county)
* SUBMIT FOUR (4) COPIES
(ONE MUST BE ORIGINAL)
* PLEASE TYPE - ANSS-'ER ALL
QUESTIONS
Telephone: $05) 562-7927
Address: P.O. 1028 Vero Beach. Fla zip:32960
° County: Indian River
2. Delegate Agency (s) Vocational Training and 'Sheltered Workshop
3. Person with over-all responsibility of grant: (Our Department will
contact this person should questions arise)
Name: .john M. Rezanka Telephone: ?05) 562-•6854
Address: 1.385 16th Ave, :Vero Beacb , Fla 32960
Signature:
4.. Name and address of person ffuiorized to receive funds. If this ap-
plication is funded, checks will be mailed to this person. All checks
will be made payable to the local government.
Name: Kathleen Gavett (Finance Officer)
Address: P.O. Box, 1028 _ Courthouse Annex
.Vero Beach' Fla zip: 32.960
1 79 WK FA,6180
AUG G '.
AUG 81979 ,GRANT APPLICATION Page 2 of 7 moo 41 fi` u 281
(use attachment page if necessary)
1. Give a brief overview of the proposed program.
To provide formal and informal compensation and remedial education for
developmentally disabled adults, such as enriching learning experiences,
edult basic education and developmental training.
2. Identify the problem this program will address.
There is no other program in Indian River County to serve post -school
age retarded adults, to provide opportunities for each client'to
develop skills, attitudes and behaviours which will enable him to
function more sucessfully as a citizen.
3. Specify the target population in your program service area af-
fected by this problem. How large is the target population?
There are approximately.50 handicapped persons in Indian River County
who could benifit from our service. These are adults over 18 years
.of age, significantly impaired, and in need.of habilitative Services
4. What is the severity of the problem among the target population.
Provide quantifiable numbers/percentages, etc.
The degree of retardation ranges from mild-moderate to severe and
profound. 66% cf the target population are mild to moderately
involved, and 24a/. are severely to profoundly retarded.
5. How will this program address the problem?
Through -the use of individual educational plans, each client will
recieve training to develop maximum use of their abilities. Progress
is scrutinized on an ongoing basis. Program areas include self-help,
communication, Recreation, horticulture, Ceramics, daily living, ba3ic
6. W tcn Hfd!0 vfln t'FR93n �'a"c tt target population will be served?
50 to 60 percent of the target population can be served during the
1979.87 year. This amount will increase as our program expa cs and
grows.
7. Will this program provide direct access or availability of other
services? If yes, identify them. ' '
Clients r4re referred to supportive services during their program at
the Workshop. When a client develops the necessary pre -vocational
skills, he or she is referred to the State of Fla. Vocational Rehabilitati
Program for transition into employment.
8. Is the program operating now? If yes, explain what changes this
grant will provide for. Yes.
This grant will enable the Workshop to serve persons whose program
cannot be funded by a different source.
9. Will the grant funds be used as*match to obtain other funds?
If yes, what other funds? No.
10. What funds will sustain the program after this grant expires?
Dept of HRS Purchase of Sere-ce funding
11. Who will do the audit of the program?
Schecter- ];came Pfeiffer and Burstein
GRANT APPLICATION Page 3 of 7
Local Governmental Unit Applying Indian Rayer County.
(town, county or city)
A. Program Objectives
(Quantify all objectives)
To provide training activities to
25 to 30 handicappEd Gc:ults in India
River County, in si:ill areas of Self
Help, Socialization, Communication,
recreation, Motor coordination,
independent liv ing and pre -vocations
Clients will be exposes: to a variety
ofactivities to develcl? L"Aair indep-
endence and a healthy self-ccacept.
1
B. Major Activities and Substeps
Required to accomplish objectives
7
Vocational Training and ; _elteP'rcc:
Delegate Agency Vlorkshop In India- .-i •er Co. Inc.
Program Title Pehabilation and Training
0
. W
C. Planned Results. Show what nor-
tion of your objectives will be o
accom lished each quarter. ca
(Quan ify all accomplishments.)
1. Idem_i=ication, and the evaluation of
clients, v4—cn -referral for supportive
services.
2. Intake, assessment and Individualized
program plans for each client.
3. Habilitation and training with monitoring
of progress monthly.
4. Elimination of inappropriate behaviors-.
5. Training in proper adult , Social and
emotional attitude.
6. Referrc.l to a State Vocational Rehabite**
tion Program for competitive employment.
7. Transition'into work oriented program.
As of 12/31/79 25 clients will be evaluated,
screened and assessed, and provided v ith a
written Individual Program P]on for one year.
As of 3/31/80 25 clients will recieve
Habitilation and training with progress
monitored monthly. Areas will include blit
not be limited to Self -Help, P.ecreat-Lon,
Social, emotional, communication and
Vocational.
As of 6/30/80 25 clients will recieve "training
in all areas. Inappropriate behaviors
identified will be eliminated significant ..Co
C-0
. eC
As of 9/30/80 25 clients will recieve addition-
al Individualized Programming referral to
State Vocational Rehabilitation or transi-
tion into work oriented program.
AUG 81979 41 283
GRANT APPLICATION Page 4 of 7
Name of Applicant: Vocational Training and Sheltered Workshop
TOTAL BUDGET
I. Include figuros from all delegate agency budgets.
2. Explain by attachment all expenditures over $200 per line item.
REVENUE
1. State Grant
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2. Cash -Match -(no -federal -funds, except -revenue-sharing, allowed)
3. In -Kind Match
4. TOTAL REVENUE
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
GRANTEE ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE CASH IN-KIND
5923.00
2961.50
c�1oi..jv
11846.00
5.
Salaries
6.
Rental -Space- - - - - - - - - - - - -
_
7.
Travel
8.
Supplies
9.
Other (specify -on attachment) - _ _ -
10.
Total (lines -5 -through -9) - - - - - -
DELEGATE ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE
11.
Salaries - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
1776.00
12.
Rental Space
13.
Travel---_---_-----___
14.
Supplies
15.
Other (specify -on attachment) _ - _ _
16.
Total (lines through 16)
1776.00 _
*17.
-11 _ _ _ _ _
TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS ^(lines 10
1776.00
and 16)
18.
Salaries
19.
Rental _Space
-
2 0 .
Travel --
21.
Equipment - - - - - - - - - - - - --
---- _�-----
22.
Other (specify on attachment)
23.
Total (lines 18 through 22)
1776.00
DELEGATE PROGRAM EXPENSE
24.
Salaries
25.
Rental Space
2961.50 _
26.
Travel
27.
Equipment --------------
3108.50
28.
Other (.specify -on attachment) - - -
^4000.00
29.
Total (lines -24 through 28) - - _ - -
10070.00
30.
TOTAL PROGRAM EXPENSES (lines 23 -and -29)
11846-10-
31.
31.
TOTAL EXPENDITURES (cash -and -in-kind)
11.846.00
*Line
17 must not exceed 1571 of two times line
1.
U
1
I. Cash Match
Source
1. C olin y Commission
2.
3.
4.
II. In -Kind Salaries and Benefits
Position Title and Name of Person
1.
2.
3.
4.
IIa. Other In -Kind
Description
1, Building
2.
3.
4.
IV. TOTAL.IN-KIND _$2.961.50
(II. plus III.)
V. TOTAL MATCH 5923.00
( I. plus IV.)
GRANT APPLICATION Page 5 of 7
Local Governmental Unit Applying: Indian River County
(Town, County, or City)
Cash and In -Kind Match
Amount
1.
2. T
3. -'
4.
Hourlv Rate
1.
2.
3.
4.
Source Unit Cost
1. NLtto Construction 1.
2. Co.2.
3. 3.
4. _ 4.
Z 11 IN,
*
LIJ
EM
01
I. Total Cash Match 2961.50
Total (Hourly rate (X) number
To Be Worked
Number of Hours o .* -f hours to be worked)'
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.
2.
3.
4.
II. Total Salaries
Total (Unfit cost
No. of Units �X) number of ITnits)
1.
3000 -sq ft 1. 2961.50
2. 2.
3. 3.
4. 4.
III. Total Other 2961.50 Cz
s
p X00 PA16F-28
AUG8 ���� GRANT APPLICATION Page 6 of 7
Local Governmental Unit Applying: Indian River County
(Toon, County, or City)
Delegate Agency Budget - Complete one for each Delegate Agency
�'rogram. Name:
Name of Delegate agency: Vocational Training Mheltered Workshop In Indian Rive
Address: 1385 16th Ave Vero Beach. Fla. 32960 Co. In
Conti ct Person: John M. Rezanka
Telephone: (305 652-6854
Tal "Xcr.pt :lumber: _59-3.647746 _
(if none, attach a.copy of the certificate of
incorporation)
,%D:1I'NI3T :ATI`.1E EXPENSES
CASH
IN -.,:IND
1.
Salaries
1776.00
2.
Rental
3,
Travel '
4.
SuRplies_______________
5.
Other (specify—on attachment) — _ — —
6.
TOTAL (lines—l—through_5) _ — — — — _
1776.00
PROGRAM EXPENSES
7.
Salaries
8.
Rental --Space _____________
296%50
9.
Travel
10.
Equipment _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
3108.50
11,
Other (specify—on attachment) _ _ _ _
4000.00
12.
TOTAL (lines_ 7_through_11)_ _ _ _ _ _
10070.00
13.
TOTAL EXPENSES-(line-6—and—line 12)
11846.00
THE
DELEGATE AGENCY HEREBY APPROVES'THIS
APPLICATION AND ',ILL COMPLY
1T=L li
ALL PULES, REGULATIONS AND CONTRACTS
RELATING TIIE�IRE L0:
APPROVED B. Paul A Barbee
President of Board
(Signatur(-,) ,
:vrT::_'_^rD M.:
T� 1n r-1. Re- zo n k cN
Name
Y cr
itie
M
GRANT P.FPLICAITION Page 7 of 7
Local Governmental Unit Applying: Indian River County
14. THE APPLICANT CERTIFIES THAT THE DATA IN THIS APPLICATION AND
ITS VARIOUS SECTIONS INCLUDING BUDGET DATA, ARE TRUE AND CORRECT
TO THE BEST OF HIS OR HER KNOWLEDGE AND THAT THE FILING OF THIS
APPLICATION HAS BEEN DULY AUTHORIZED AND UNDERSTANDS THAT IT
WILL BECOME PART OF THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT AND THE
APPLICANT. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (OR THE CITY
COUNCIL) HAS PASSED RESOLUTION NUMBER WHICH
AUTHORIZES THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE SPECIFIED PROGRAMS.
IF FEES OR CONTRIBUTIONS ARE TO BE UTILIZED AS MATCHING FOR
THIS GRANT, OR IF A DELEGATE AGENCY IS TO PROVIDE THE MATCHING
SILNAE, AND THESE FUNDS ARE NOT FORTHCOMING, THIS RESOLUTION
ALSO SPECIFIES THAT THE CITY OR COUNTY WILL PROVIDE THE NECES-
SARY MATCH.
THIS APPLICANT FURTHER CERTIFIES, DUE TO NEW LEGISLATIVE INTENT
NOT TO DUPLICATE SERVICES AND THAT THESE PARTICULAR SERVICES ARE
NOT BEING PROVIDED NOR ARE THEY AVAILABLE FROM ANY OTHER STATE
AGENCY. ALTHOUGH SIMILAR SERVICES MAY BE AVAILABLE, THE APPLICANT
CERTIFIES THAT NO OTHER RESOURCE EXISTS TO PROVIDE THESE PARTI-
CULAR SERVICES TO THESE CLIENTS WITHOUT THE USE OF THIS MONEY.
William C. Wodtke, Jr. 2�/,AA4�4c
:dame typed Chairman Signature
Chairman, Board of County Commissioners
Title Mayor or Chairman of Board of County Commissioners)
Indian River County Courthouse
2145 14th Avenue, Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Address
( 305) 569-1940
Telephone
ATTESTED BY: Freda Wright
Name typed
Clerk
Title
1. 6
1.
Signature
I aI
:11 `'
AUG 81979 eoox 41 FAGE287
The following is a breakdown of line item expenses listed on page 4
and 6 of the grant application.
Salaries- $1776.00 - Director
Operating Expense - $4000.00 - As follows
1250.00 Phone
2250.00 Utilities
500.00 Maintenance of Equipment
Total 4000.00
Equipment - $3108.50 - As follows
700.00 Landscape -Horticulture equipment
600.00 Furniture
508.50 Teaching materials and supplies
300.00 Ceramic supplies and equipment
400.00 Recreation equipment
600.00 Typewriter
Total 3108.50
BETTY KHAIL OF THE SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT CAME BEFORE THE
BOARD IN REGARD TO A GRANT TO PROVIDE AN ORGANIZED PROGRAM OF IN-SERVICE
TRAINING FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS. SHE STATED THAT THE LOCAL MATCH
FOR THIS GRANT AMOUNTING TO $1,395.55 IS PROGRAMMED IN THE SHERIFF'S
x:11 we
COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THESE APPLI-
CATIONS, WE RAN MOST ALL OF THEM THROUGH THE ADMINISTRATORS STAFF, AND
SHE FELT THEY NOW SHOULD BE MORE PROPERLY PLACED UNDER THE FINANCE
DEPARTMENT.
THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR AGREED THAT THIS WOULD BE
MORE APPROPRIATE.
MRS. KHAIL STATED THAT THE "COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, OR HIS
DESIGNATE" COULD BE WRITTEN IN FUTURE APPLICATIONS, BUT THIS RESOLUTION
CANNOT BE CHANGED.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SIEBERT, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 79-69 APPROVING APPLI-
CATION FOR AN L.E.A.A. GRANT FOR IN-SERVICE TRAINING FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICERS.
AUG 81979 45 BOOK 41, wa28
AUG
8 1979
BOOK
289
RESOLUTION NO. 79-69
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, herein called the "Applicant", after thorough consideration
of the problem and available data, has hereby determined that the
project described below is in the best interests of the general public.
To provide an organized program of in-service training
for law enforcement officers in the service area, This
would be a joint venture between the Indian River Commun-
ity College and the Indian River County service area.
The IRCC will provide the video equipment to produce, edit,
and duplicate the training programs, along with production
personnel including professional trainers and technicians.
In-service training tapes will be available on a 24-hour
basis so that all personnel will have the full benefit
of each training program,
The express purpose of this program is to expose all shift
personnel to vital legal and -tactical information on a daily
basis. Within two years, the service area expects a 15%
reduction in officer assaults and a 20% increase in major
felony prosecutions involving violent crimes and smuggling
activity being resolved by jury verdict.
The Five (5) law enforcement agencies are: City of Vero Beach,
Indian River County Sheriff's Department, Indian River Shores
Police Department, Sebastian Police Department, Fellsmere Police
Department.
WHEREAS, under terms of Public Law 90-351, as amended, the United States
of America has authorized the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration,
through the Florida Bureau of Criminal Justice Planning and Assistance,
to make Federal Grants to assist local governments in the improvement of
criminal justice; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has examined and duly considered such Act and
the Applicant considers it to be in the public interest and to its
benefit to file an application under said act and to authorize other
action in connection therewith;
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, IN OPEN MEETING ASSEMBLED IN THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
COURTHOUSE, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, THE 8th DAY OF Augus t
AS FOLLOWS:
1979,
® e r
1. That the project generally described above is in the best in-
terests of the Applicant and the general public.
2. That Jack G. Jennings, County Administrator, be hereby authorized
to file in behalf of the Applicant an application in conformity with
said act, for a Grant to be made to the Applicant to assist in defraying
the cost of the project described above.
3. That if such grant be made, the Applicant shall provide or make
necessary arrangements to provide such funds and/or in-kind contribu-
tions in addition to the grant as may be required by the Act to defray
the cost of the project generally descH bed above.
4. That the Applicant is aware that at least fifty (50%2) per cent
of the minimum required non-federal cost of the project be appro-
priated cash and that such funds designated as local hard cash con-
tributions in all related project budget schedules that are to be
provided by the Applicant are hereby appropriated new funds for
Criminal Justice use for the express purpose of matching the LEGA
funds. Budget Summary as follows:
LEAA = 6,801,00 = 79%
State Match 378.00 = 05%
Local Match 1,395;55 = 16%
Total: 8,574.55 TO—WY
5. That said Jack G. Jennings, County Administrator, is hereby
authorized to furnish such information and take such other action
as may be necessary to enable the Applicant to qualify for said grant.
6. That the Official designated in the preceding paragraph is here-
by designated as the authorized representative of the Applicant for
the purpose of furnishing to the Florida Bureau of Criminal Justice
Planning and Assistance such information" data and documents pertaining
to the application for said grant as may be required and otherwise to
act as the authorized representative of the Applicant in connection
with this application.
7. That certified copies of this resolution be included as part of
the application for said grant to be submitted to the Florida Bureau
of Criminal Justice Planning and Assistance.
41
AUG 81979 �°°� $���
AUG 81979 BOOK
8. That if such grant be made, the Applicant or Official
designated in paragraph 5 above shall maintain such records_
as necessary and furnish such information, data and documents
as required by the Florida Bureau of Criminal Justice Planning
and Assistance to support the implementation of the project
generally described above.
9. That this resolution shall take effect immediately upon
its adoption,
DONE AND ORDERED in open meeting,
41 w 4ft
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
�
BY: �lG
Chairman
Commissioner Lyons offered the foregoing resolution and
moved its adoption, which was seconded by Commissioner Siebert
Upon roll call the vote was;
Ayes: Commissioners Lyons, Siebert, Loy, Deeson and Wodtke
Nays: None
Absent and/or Not voting; None
DATE: 8-8-79
ATTEST:
Clerk
� � r
MRS. KHAIL NEXT DISCUSSED A GRANT FOR THE YOUTH AID BUREAU.
IT WAS NOTED THAT THE SHERIFF RECEIVED THIS APPLICATION TOO LATE TO
GET IT ON THE AGENDA, AND IT NEEDS TO BE FORWARDED PROMPTLY,
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO ADD AN EMERGENCY ITEM TO TODAY'S
AGENDA IN REGARD TO A GRANT FOR THE YOUTH AID BUREAU AS REQUESTED BY THE
SHERIFF.
MRS. KHAIL STATED THAT THIS GRANT WAS DUE IN LAST FRIDAY AND
THIS WILL BE THE LAST NINE MONTHS OF THIS GRANT. WE ARE IN A DIFFERENT
FUNDING RATIO AND NOW HAVE TO PROVIDE 30%. THIS ALSO WAS IN THE SHERIFF'S
BUDGET; IT RUNS INTO NEXT YEAR AND THEN IT WILL BE CLOSED OUT AS THERE
ARE NO MORE FEDERAL FUNDS.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT,
THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 79-70 APPROVING AN APPLICATION
FOR AN L.E.A.A. GRANT FOR THE YOUTH AID BUREAU.
Sl
BOOK 41 max '
_I
AUG 8 1979 Boor 41 AGF
RESOLUTION N0. 79-70
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, herein called the "Applicant", after thorough consideration
of the problem and available data, has hereby determined that the
continuation of the project described below in in the best interests
of the general public,
The continuance of the Youth Aid Bureau in order to deal more
efficiently and progressively with the juvenile offender, The
Bureau will continue to utilize the services of the two trained
law enforcement officers to work with other juvenile justice
and law enforcement agencies in the prevention and diversion of
juvenile delinquency, The Indian River County Sheriff's Depart-
ment has employed the officers, and will be directly responsible
for their administration of this project,
These officers are working six days a week from 9:00 a.m., until
6:00 p.m., with an on-call arrangement, with 24-hour counseling
and immediate response to problem situations, They are receiv-
ing agents for juvenile referrals to law enforcement throughout
the county. They are readily available to other community agencies
for advice in establishing youth programs, and conduct educational
programs concerning criminal ,justice in the schools and other
community agencies, They work closely with the Department of
Health and Rehabilitation Service intake counselors and youth
probation officers. Files are maintained on each child with whom
they come in contact, and officers are available to parents for
consultation concerning juvenile crime,
WHEREAS, under terms of Public Law 90-351, as amended, the United States
of America has authorized the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration,
through the Florida Bureau of Criminal Justice Planning and Assistance,
to make Federal Grants to assist local government in the improvement of
criminal justice; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has examined and duly considered such Act and
the Applicant considers it to be in the public interest and to its
benefit to file an application under said Act and to authorize other
action in connection therewith:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, IN OPEN MEETING ASSEMBLED IN THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
COURTHOUSE, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, THE __ 8th DAY OF August 0 19796
AS FOLLOWS:
1, That the continuance of the project generally described above is
in the best interests of the Applicant and the public.
Z. That Jack G, Jennings, County Administrator, be hereby authorized
to file in behalf of the Applicant an application in conformity with
said Act, for a Grant to be made to the Applicant to assist in defraying
the cost of the project described above.
3. That if such Grant be made, the Applicant shall provide or make
necessary arrangements to provide such funds and/or in-kind contribu-
tions in addition to the Grant as may be required by the Act to defray
the cost of the project generally described above.
4. That the Applicant is aware that at least fifty (50%) percent
of the minimum required non-federal costs of the project be appro-
priated cash and that such funds designated as local hard cash con-
tributions in all related project budget schedules that are to be
provided by the Applicant are hereby appropriated new funds for
Criminal Justice use for the express purpose of matching LEAA funds.
Budget Summary as follows:
LEAA =
STATE BUYrIN =
LOCAL HARD CASH =
Total:
17,550,00
= 65%
975,00
= 05%
8,475100 `_
30%
L1,0000
1
5. That said Jack G. Jennings, County Administrator, is hereby
authorized to furnish such information and take such other action
as may be necessary to enable the Applicant to qualify for said Grant.
6. That the Official designated in the preceding paragraph is here-
by designated as the authorized representative of the Applicant for
the purpose of furnishing to the Florida Bureau of Criminal Justice
Planning and Assistance such information, data and documents pertaining
to the application for said grant as may be required and otherwise to
act as the authorized representative of the Applicant in connection
with this application.
7. That certified copies of this resolution be included as part of
the application for said grant to be submitted to the Florida Bureau
of Criminal Justice Planning and Assistance.
AUG 81979 Boos 4f FAGE29t
_I
AUG 81979 MOK
8. That if such grant be made, the Applicant or Official
designated in Paragraph 5 above shall maintain such records
as necessary and furnish such information, data and documents
as required by the Florida Bureau of Criminal Justice Planning
and Assistance to support the implementation of the project
generally described above.
9. That this resolution shall take effect immediately upon
its adoption.
DONE AND ORDERED in open meeting.
411PAGE 29
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER. COUNTY, FLORIDA.
11 i
BY; �°�, r f Yvuell,
airman
Commissioner Deeson offered the foregoing resolution ands
moved its adoption, which was seconded by Commissioner','Lyons.-�
Upon roll call the vote was:
Ayes: Commissioners Loy, Siebert, Wodtke. Deeson and Lyons ,4 .
Nays:Commissioners None
Absent and/or not voting: None
DATE: 8-8-79
ATTEST:
Clerk
M M M
THE HOUR OF 2:00 O'CLOCK P.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK
READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO—WIT:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER:
STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
-r.
r
L 1;
in the matter of �',' ,% /i�"< �
If
1
J
in the Court, was pub -
lisped in said newspaper in the issues of C' f
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this -day of ----j 1 0- A.D.._ZG_ZL
(SEAL)
(Business Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit Cour(, I dian River County, Florida)
NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the
Planning and Zoning Commission of Indian
River County, Florida, has tentatively ap.
proved the following changes and additions to
the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River County,
Florida, which changes and additions are;
substantially as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order
that the following described property situated
in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit:
All of Government Lot 6, Section 18,
Township 33 South, Range 40 East, Indian
River County, Florida, LESS the West 10 acres
of said Government Lot 6;
Government Lots 1, 2 and 3, and Government
Lot 4, LESS those portions of said Government
Lot 4, having been heretofore conveyed to
Indian River Mosquito Control District on May
10, 1954, by Warranty Deed recorded in Deed
Book 88 upon Page 261 of the Public Records of
Indian River County, Florida, LESS that
portion of said Government Lot 4, heretofore
conveyed to E. J. Wood, J. L. Law, et at by,
Warranty Deed dated November 10, 1911, and'
recorded in Deed Book 12 upon Page 66 of the
Public Records of Indian River County,,
Florida; The• NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 LESS the
West 10 acres thereof; The East 10 acres of the
SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4; The NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4
LESS the West 675.6 feet of the North 916.8 feet
thereof; and the SW 1/4 of the SE 1,/4 LESS the
South 649 feet thereof all of said lands being
situated in Section 19, Township 33 South,
Range 40 East, Indian River County, Florida;
All of Government Lot 1, Section 20,
Township 33 South, Range 40 East, Indian
River County, Florida; together with all
riparian rights incident thereto;
ALSO, the North 102 feet of the following
described land;
All that part of the N % of the SW 1/4 of
Section 19, Township 33 South, Range 40 East,
lying East of the Easterly Right of Way line of
U.S. Highway No. 1 LESS the North 916.8 feet
thereof, all of said lands being situated in
Indian River County, Florida;
ALSO, a strip of land 100 feet in width ad-
joining on the West and on the North the
following described land:
The South 649 feet of the East 305 feet of the
SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 19, Township 33
South, Range 40 East, all of said lands being
situated in Indian River County, Florida.
Be changed from R4A Residential to R -2C i
Multiple Family District.
A public hearing in relation thereto at which
parties in interest and citizens shall have an
opportunity to be heard, will be held by said
Planning and Zoning Commission in the
County Commission Room, Indian River
County Courthouse, Vero Beach, Florida,
Thursday, June 14, 1979, at 7:30 P.M., after i
which said public hearing in relation thereto at
which parties in interest and citizens shall;
have an opportunity to be heard will be held by
the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, in the County Com-
mission Room, Indian River County Cour-
thouse, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday,
August 8, 1979, at 2:00 o'clock P.M.
Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County .
By: William C. WodtkeJr., Chairman
Indian River County Planning
and Zoning Commission
By: Dick Bird, Chairman
May 23, 25,1979.
THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WAS SENT TO PETER C. SMITH & ASSOCIATES
BY FREDA WRIGHT, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, AS REQUIRED BY FLORIDA
STATUTE 125,66,
AUG 81979 53 BOOK 41 ebcE90'
AUG 81979 EOGK 1 FuE 29 6
JACK G. JENNINGS. Administrator
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WILLIAM C. WODTKE, ,!R., Chairman
ALMA LEE LOY, Vice Chairman
WILLIARD W. SIEBERT, JR.
R. DON DEESON
PATRICK B. LYONS
2145 14th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960
June 21, 1979
Mr. Peter C. Smith
Peter C. Smith S Associates
P. 0. Box 4373
Fort Pierce, Florida 33450
Dear Mr. Smith:
In compliance with Florida Statute 125.66, the lolluwiI)g is
a Notice of Public Bearing for rezoning, as requested by you.
NOTICE
The Zoning Map will be changed in order that the following
descrih_d property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit:
All of Government Lot 6, Section 18, Township
33 South, Range 40 East, Indian River County,
Florida, LESS the West 10 acres of said Government
Lot 6;
Government LOLS I, 2 and 3; ;incl Government Lot 4,
LESS those portions of said Government Lot 4,
having been heretofore conveyed to Indian River
Mosquito Control District on May 10, 1954 by
Warranty Deed recorded in Deed Book 88 upon Page
261 of the Public Records of Indian Fiver County,
Florida, and LESS that portion of said Government
LoL 4, heretofore conveyed to E.J. Wood, J.L. L,iw,
et al, by Warranty Deed dated November 10, 1911
and recorded in Deed Book 12 upon Page 66 of the
Public Records of Indian River County, Florida;
The NW 14 of the NE 14 LESS t h c Wast 10 acres
thereof; The East 10 acres of the SW 14 of the
NE �; The NW '4 of the SE l4 LESS Lhe West 675.6
feat of the North 916.8 feet thereof; rind the SW
lu of the SE � LESS the South 649 feet thereof,
all of said lands being situated in Section 19,
Township 33 South, Range 40 East, Indian River
County, Florida;
Mr. Peter C. Smith
Page Two
June 21, 1979
All of Government Lot 1, Section 20, Township 33
South, Range 40 East, Indian River County, Florida;
together with all riparian rights incident thereto;
ALSO the North 102 feCL of Lille following described
land:
All that part of the N 12 of the SW 14 of Section
19, Township 33 South, Pingo 40 East lving Ear;t
of the Easterly Right of Way line of U.S. Highway
No. 1 LESS the North 916.8 Leet thereof, all of
said lands being situated in Indian River County,
Florida;
ALSO a strip of land 100 feet in width adjoining
on the West and on the North the following described
land:
The South 649 feet of the East 305 fret of the
SE � of the SW 14 of Section 19, Township 33 South,
Range 40 East,all of said lands being situated in
Indian River. County, Floridci.
Be changed from R -IA Residential to R -2C Multiple
Family District.
A public hearing in relation thereto will be held by the
Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida in elie
County Commission Room in the County Courthou-;e, VOro Reach, Florid:c
on Wednesday, August B, 1979, at 2:00 o'clock P.M.
Sincerely,
Freda Wright
Clerk
jwc
cc: Charles T. Connery
AUG 81979 GOOK 41 PAGE29
AUG 81979 BOOK 41 PAG, E290
WENDY LANCASTER OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT INFORMED THE
BOARD THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, WHICH CONTAINS 290 ACRES MORE OR LESS
AND IS UNDEVELOPED, LIES SOUTH AND EAST OF VISTA ROYALE AND IS BORDERED
ON THE EAST BY THE INDIAN RIVER. THE MOSQUITO CONTROL DISTRICT IS USING
THE FLOOD AND DIKE METHOD OF CONTROLLING MOSQUITOES ON THE EASTERN
PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AND MAINTAINS A LOW WETLAND AREA ALONG THE RIVER.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSED TO CONSTRUCT MULTI -FAMILY DWELLINGS. MISS
LANCASTER STATED THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS
PARCEL AS ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE ALONG THE RIVER AND SHOWS THE RE-
MAINING PORTION AS MEDIUM DENSITY. THIS PROPERTY IS CONTIGUOUS TO AREAS
PRESENTLY ZONED R-2 WHICH ALLOWS UP TO 15 UNITS PER ACRE; R -2C IS MORE
RESTRICTIVE AND WOULD ALLOW UP TO 12 UNITS PER ACRE. MISS LANCASTER
NOTED THAT THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THAT THE REQUESTED
ZONING OF R -2C BE CHANGED TO R-213 WHICH WOULD ALLOW ONLY 8 UNITS PER
ACRE; HOWEVER, THE PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE R -2C TO KEEP
IT MORE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE NEIGHBORING R-2 ZONING. SHE FURTHER NOTED
THAT IT WOULD BE UP TO THE DER AND VARIOUS OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
INVOLVED WITH ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS TO DETERMINE WHAT PORTION
OF THIS PARCEL WOULD BE USABLE, AND IT APPEARS ONLY ABOUT 64 ACRES OF
THE 290 WILL BE USABLE.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED WHAT WOULD BIND A PURCHASER TO
USING ONLY THE 64 ACRES IF THE PROPERTY WERE TO BE SOLD, AND PLANNING
DIRECTOR REVER EXPLAINED THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY PORTION OF THE PROPERTY
REZONED; THE REST WOULD REMAIN R -IA.
CHARLES CONNERY, DIRECTOR FOR PETER C. SMITH & ASSOCIATES,
CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND STATED THAT APPROXIMATELY ONE YEAR AGO THEY
TOOK UNDER CONTRACT AND HAVE SINCE CLOSED ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE
TOTAL ACREAGE IS 317 ACRES, APPROXIMATELY 20-22 ACRES FRONT ON U.S. 1
AND WILL BE USED FOR A 130,000 SQ. FT. SHOPPING CENTER ANCHORED BY
WINN DIXIE AND ECKERD DRUGS. THAT LEAVES 290 ACRES, AND OF THIS, APPROXI-
MATELY 200 ACRES IS ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE. THEY END UP WITH 70-75
ACRES WHICH ARE USABLE. MR. CONNERY NOTED THAT THE LAND USE PLAN
DESIGNATED COMMERCIAL ON U.S. 1 AND MEDIUM DENSITY UP TO THE SENSITIVE
AREA. THEY ARE REQUESTING A ZONING CHANGE OF THE AREA TO THE EAST
WHICH WILL GIVE THEM A DENSITY OF 12 TO THE ACRE AND PROPOSE TO BUILD
A 740 UNIT DEVELOPMENT, THE REASON FOR THIS NUMBER IS TO MAKE IT ECO-
NOMICALLY FEASIBLE AFTER CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROADS, DRAINAGE, LANDSCAPING,
ETC. THEY DO NOT EXPECT A TRANSFER OF THIS DENSITY TO THE SENSITIVE
LAND, AND WILL GO AS FAR TO THE EAST AS THE DER AND THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILL ALLOW. MR. CONNERY STATED THAT THEY ARE PLANNING A FAMILY DEVELOP-
MENT AIMED AT THE MIDDLE INCOME GROUP, THE UNITS TO COST $40,000-$45,000.
HE NOTED THAT THEIR ARCHITECT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, AND THEY
WOULD APPRECIATE THE BOARDS AFFIRMATIVE VOTE.
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO BE HEARD,
DR. HERBERT KALE OF THE PELICAN ISLAND AUDUBON SOCIETY STATED
THAT HE HAD FELT THAT AFTER A LONG DISCUSSION AT THE ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WAS RECOMMENDING R -2B, AND HE WAS SUR-
PRISED TO HEAR THEM RECOMMENDING R -2C. HE NOTED THAT THE R-2 ZONING TO
THE NORTH ACTUALLY ISN IT 15 UNITS PER ACRE DENSITY, BUT 5 OR 6, BECAUSE
OF THE AMOUNT OF LAND IN THE GOLF COURSE. HE DID NOT FEEL, THEREFORE,
THAT R -2C WOULD BE IN CONFORMITY. DR. KALE NOTED THAT HE BELIEVED THE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FELT THAT IT WAS STILL PREMATURE FOR DEVELOP-
MENT IN THAT AREA SINCE THERE STILL ARE WATER PROBLEMS. HE UNDERSTOOD
THAT THEY WILL HAVE WELLS ON SITE, BUT POINTED OUT THAT THIS IS VERY
CLOSE TO THE RIVER AND HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DATA FOR THE WELLS LOOKED
AT BY INDEPENDENT HYDROLOGISTS. DR. KALE REALIZED THAT THERE WILL BE
DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA, BUT FELT TO ALLOW THE DENSITY PERMITTED IN
R -2C IS PREMATURE. DR. KALE WENT ON TO DISCUSS THE ENTOMOLOGICAL LABO-
RATORY WHICH ABUTS THIS AREA AND STATED THAT THEIR INTERESTS AND NEEDS
ARE VERY IMPORTANT. HE FELT THE PROPOSED ZONING WOULD HAVE AN ADVERSE
IMPACT ON THE LAB.
WILLIAM BIDLINGMAYER NEXT TOOK THE FLOOR AND INFORMED THE
BOARD THAT HE WORKS AT THE ENTOMOLOGICAL LABORATORY AND ALSO OWNS PROPERTY
FURTHER SOUTH OF THIS AREA. HE POINTED THAT ANY KIND OF DEVELOPMENT
THAT HAS A HIGH DENSITY WILL HAVE A HIGH WATER CONSUMPTION. HE FELT
THAT ANY STATEMENT THAT THEY HAVE SUFFICIENT WATER IS BASED ON THE
AUG 81979 57 aou 41 LnE 00
mor 41
ASSUMPTION THAT THEIR NEIGHBORS WILL NOT BE NEEDING MORE IN THE FUTURE.
THIS AREA IS VERY NEAR TIDE WATER, THE FRONT IS COMMERCIAL AND AS YEARS
GO BY, THIS WILL DEVELOP AND PUT A HEAVY DEMAND ON THE WATER. WITH A
HIGH DENSITY TO THE EAST, MR. BIDLINGMAYER FELT YOU WILL BE FORCING
FUTURE COUNTY COMMISSIONS TO LOOK INTO SALT WATER INFILTRATION PROBLEMS
SUCH AS ENCOUNTERED IN THE SOUTH OF THE STATE. HE CONTINUED THAT THE
ZONING OF VISTA ROYALE IS ACTUALLY ONLY ABOUT 5-6 UNITS PER ACRE AND THE
PROPOSED ONE IS FOR 12 UNITS. HE FELT SUCH A ZONING WOULD SET A PRECE—
DENT AND BELIEVED THIS WOULD BE THE HIGHEST DENSITY SOUTH OF THE CITY
DOWN TO THE COUNTY LINE.
DR. KALE POINTED OUT THAT THERE IS R -IA ZONING EXISTING BETWEEN
THE REQUESTED ZONING AND VISTA ROYALE.
SAMUEL BREELAND, DIRECTOR OF THE FLORIDA MEDICAL ENTOMOLOGICAL
LABORATORY, INFORMED THOSE PRESENT THAT THIS LAB WAS PLACED IN ITS
PARTICULAR LOCATION FOR VERY DEFINITE REASONS, MR, BREELAND POINTED OUT
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE BASE LINE DATA ACCUMULATED IN THE NATURAL HAMMOCK
AND THE GROUNDS NEIGHBORING THE LABORATORY, WHICH IS APPLICABLE TO THE
WHOLE STATE OF FLORIDA AND IS IMPORTANT TO TOURISM AND THE GROWTH OF
THE STATE, MR. BREELAND DISCUSSED THE PREVENTION OF MOSQUITO BORNE
DISEASES, AND THE BASIC RESEARCH THEY DO AT THE LAB. HE NOTED THAT THE
IMPACT OF HIGH DENSITY IS WHAT THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT SINCE THEY HAVE
TO COMPARE ALL THEIR DATA TO THAT ACCUMULATED OVER THE PREVIOUS TIME,
AND A CHANGE IN CONDITIONS WOULD MAKE THIS DATA WORTHLESS. HE CONTINUED
THAT THIS IS A RESOURCE THAT BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE OF FLORIDA AS WELL
AS THE COUNTY,
CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED IF, IN THEIR RESEARCH, THEY ARE USING
AREAS WITHIN THE AREA PROPOSED FOR REZONING.
MR, BREELAND FELT THEY ARE NOT WORKING WITHIN THAT SPECIFIC
AREA SINCE THEY HAVE 36 ACRES, BUT THE SURROUNDING AREAS AFFECT THEIR
ACREAGE. HE DISCUSSED WORKING WITH A MOSQUITO LIGHT TRAP AND POINTED OUT
THAT THE LIGHTS GENERATED BY HIGH DENSITY COULD MAKE THEIR DATA MEANING—
LESS.
COMMISSIONER LYONS INQUIRED ABOUT THE LABORATORY POSSIBLY
ACQUIRING MORE PROPERTY THERE.
MR. BREELAND STATED THEY DEFINITELY SHOULD BUT HE DID NOT
KNOW IF THEY COULD. THEY HAVE REQUESTED FUNDS TO BUY ADDITIONAL LAND,
HE NOTED THAT THEY DO LEASE LAND, AND THEY WON'T BE PUT OUT OF BUSINESS,
BUT IT WILL HAVE A LARGE AFFECT.
HANK RIGLER, ARCHITECT FOR THE PROPOSED OSLO SQUARE PROJECT,
COMMENTED THAT THE DEVELOPER DOES NOT FEEL THE PROJECT IS PREMATURE
OBVIOUSLY SINCE HE IS BUILDING A SHOPPING CENTER. HE STATED THAT THEY
HAVE HAD THE WATER PROBLEMS LOOKED AT; THEY HAVE WELL LOCATIONS AND HAVE
HAD PRELIMINARY TESTS RUN. THIS WAS DONE BY VINCENT AMY, GEOLOGIST OF
GERAGHTY & MILLER. MR. RIGLER STATED THAT THE WATER SUPPLY IS THERE,
AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO TAX IT. HE POINTED OUT THAT THEY HAVE TO GO
BEFORE THE VARIOUS GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES TO GET THEIR PERMITS.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT INQUIRED ABOUT THE SALT WATER INTRUSION
FACTOR, AND MR. RIGLER STATED THAT THEY DO NOT FEEL THEY WILL HAVE ANY
PROBLEM WITH SALT WATER INTRUSION AS LONG AS THEY STAY WITHIN 1,000' OF
U.S. 1, AND THEY PLAN ON STAYING MUCH CLOSER THAN THAT, THE SAME WATER
TREATMENT FACILITY AND SEWER WOULD BE USED FOR THE SHOPPING CENTER AND
THE DEVELOPMENT.
MR. RIGLER NOTED WITH REGARD TO THE MOSQUITO CONTROL LABORATORY,
THAT A MAJORITY OF THE DEVELOPER'S PROPERTY IS IN AN ENVIRONMENTALLY
SENSITIVE AREA AND WILL NOT BE USED; S0, IN EFFECT, THE LABORATORY CAN
USE IT THE SAME WAY THEY HAVE BEEN, MR. RIGLER CONTINUED THAT THEIR
PROJECT WHEN COMPLETED WILL ADD ABOUT 31 MILLION DOLLARS TO THE TAX ROLL,
HE FURTHER STATED THAT THE REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL HAS RECOMMENDED
HIGHER DENSITY BECAUSE OF THE ENERGY CRISIS. MR, RIGLER STATED THAT THE
DRAINAGE WILL BE CONTAINED ON SITE AND WILL NOT ADD ANY DRAINAGE PROBLEMS
TO THE AREA; THEY WILL HAVE TO MEET THE CRITERIA OF ST. ,JOHN'S WATER
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, ETC. HE STATED THAT THEY HOPE TO DEVELOP THE
PROPERTY IN A FASHION THAT WILL BE PLEASING TO THE COMMISSIONERS AND
THE COUNTY AND HE BELIEVED EVERYTHING THIS DEVELOPER HAS DONE SO FAR HAS
BEEN AN ASSET.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED WHY THEY STOPPED THE NUMBER OF UNITS
JUST SHORT OF THE DRI (DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT) THRESHOLD AND
AUG 81979 59 BOOK . 41 PAG�102
_I
BOCK 41 PAGE 3Q3
FURTHER NOTED THAT THEY HAVE GONE A LONG WAY ON THE SHOPPING CENTER WITH
NO WATER AND SEWER FRANCHISE.
MR. RIGLER STATED THAT ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS THEY STOPPED
SHORT OF THE DRI THRESHOLD WAS BECAUSE OF THE COST INVOLVED IN A DRI
APPLICATION AND FELT 64 ACRES TO DEVELOP WOULD ALLOW AROUND 720 UNITS.
HE STATED THAT THEY HAVE TALKED TO THE ADMINISTRATOR ABOUT A WATER AND
SEWER FRANCHISE.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS COMMENTED THAT THEY WERE TOLD THEY HAD
TO HAVE A FRANCHISE.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED IN REGARD TO ON-SITE RETENTION, AND
COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF THEY WERE THE SAME GROUP CLEARING THE SHOP-
PING CENTER WHOSE PLAN DID NOT INCLUDE THE PRESERVING OF AN 150 YEAR
OLD OAK TREE.
MR. RIGLER STATED THAT THEY DID HAVE THE URBAN FORESTER COME
TO MARK THE TREES, HE FELT SOMETIMES THESE TREES COME DOWN BY ACCIDENT
WHEN YOU ARE USING HEAVY EQUIPMENT AND POSSIBLY THE TREE WAS DISEASED.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED IF THEY HAVE A COPY OF THE HYDROLO-
GIST S REPORT, AND MR. RIGLER STATED THAT THEY WOULD BE HAPPY TO FURNISH
ONE BUT HE DID NOT HAVE A COPY WITH HIM. HE NOTED THAT VISTA ROYALE
IS HITTING THE SAME STRATA THEY ARE AND HE BELIEVED THEY ARE NOT HAVING
ANY PROBLEMS.
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER AGREED THAT THE PLANNING & ZONING
COMMISSION SUGGESTED R -2B, BUT THE PLANNING STAFF STILL FEELS R -2C WOULD
BE REASONABLE. HE NOTED THAT IF YOU TAKE THE VISTA ROYALE REAL DENSITY,
EXCLUDING THE GOLF COURSE, IT DOES FALL AT 11. SECONDLY, ANY NEW
DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO IMPOSE ON THE ENTOMOLOGICAL LABORATORY. HE
FELT THE LABORATORY IS CONCERNED WITH DEVELOPMENT IN ANY FORM, AND
FURTHER THEY HAVE INDICATED THEY CAN AND WILL SEEK OTHER LANDS, MR.
REVER WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE DRI IS NOT SUPERSEDED; IT IS 750 AS
A NUMBER BUT IT HAS BEEN TESTED IN THE COURTS THAT THIS NUMBER IS FLEXIBLE.
HE FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT THIS PROJECT STILL HAS TO GO THROUGH SITE
PLAN APPROVAL AND BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT IT WILL MOST
PROBABLY GO BEFORE THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE BECAUSE OF THE NATURE
OF THE DEVELOPMENT SO THERE ARE SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES TO GET INTO THE
OTHER CRITERIA ON THE SITE, DRAINAGE, ETC.
POLLY SCHWEY SPOKE IN FAVOR OF THE REQUESTED REZONING TO R -2C
ON THE BASIS OF THE MEDIUM DENSITY DESIGNATED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FOR THIS AREA AND THE GREAT COMMUNITY NEED FOR MIDDLE INCOME MULTI-
FAMILY UNITS. SHE POINTED OUT THAT THE LOWER THE DENSITY, THE HIGHER
THE UNITS WILL BE PRICED.
DR. KALE POINTED OUT THAT YOU CAN BUILD THESE SAME TYPE UNITS
FOR A LOWER PRICE IF YOU PUT THEM ON HIGHER LAND RATHER THAN IN THESE
COASTAL HAMMOCKS, AND HE DID NOT FEEL MRS. SCHWEY HAD A VALID ARGUMENT.
THE LAND.
ARCHITECT RIGLER NOTED THEY CHOSE THE SITE BECAUSE THEY OWN
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT STATED THAT HE FEELS IT IS PREMATURE TO
HAVE THIS HIGH A DENSITY IN THE AREA IN QUESTION WITHOUT PUBLIC SERVICES
SUCH AS WATER AND SEWER AND HE INTENDS TO VOTE AGAINST THE REZONING.
COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT HE WILL TAKE THE SAME STAND.
HE NOTED THAT HE TOOK A TOUR AROUND THE COUNTY, AND THERE IS A TREMENDOUS
AMOUNT OF HIGH, DRY LAND THAT IS PERFECTLY FINE FOR DEVELOPMENT AND WHICH
WOULD CREATE NO PARTICULAR PROBLEM FOR THE COUNTY NOW -OR AT A LATER
DATE. HE ALSO FELT THE HIGH DENSITY REQUESTED IS PREMATURE BECAUSE
UTILITIES ARE NOT AVAILABLE AT THE PRESENT TIME.
COMMISSIONER DEESON CONCURRED THAT HE WOULD TAKE THE SAME
POSITION BECAUSE UTILITIES ARE NOT AVAILABLE AT THE PRESENT TIME.
COMMISSIONER Loy STATED THAT SHE HAD MANY PROBLEMS WITH THIS
REQUEST AND FELT THAT REZONING TO A HIGHER DENSITY IS NOT THE ANSWER.
SHE STATED THAT SHE WOULD NOT SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION.
THE CHAIRMAN FELT VERY STRONGLY THAT WITH THE COMMERCIAL THAT
IS ALREADY THERE, THIS AREA EVENTUALLY WILL BE UTILIZED IN MULTIPLE
FAMILY DEVELOPMENT PER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT STATED HE WOULD BE
MORE RECEPTIVE TO R -2B THAN R -2C.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT COMMENTED THAT HE IS NOT SAYING HE IS
PERPETUALLY IN FAVOR OF KEEPING THIS PROPERTY IN R-lA; HE JUST FEELS
AUG 81979 61 Boa 4f FAGUE 304
r
AUG 8 1979 41 FAcr 305
THE AREA NEEDS PUBLIC SERVICES AND DRAINAGE BEFORE THERE IS ANY PROLIF-
ERATION OF DEVELOPMENT AND THAT IT IS PREMATURE TO CHANGE TO A HIGH
DENSITY AT THIS TIME.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SIEBERT, TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR REZONING TO R -2C ON THE BASIS THAT IT
IS PREMATURE FOR THE REASONS GIVEN BY ALL THE COMMISSIONERS.
MR. CONNERY POINTED OUT THAT VISTA ROYALE IN THE LAST FEW
MONTHS HAS SOLD 450 UNITS, AND HE DOES NOT FEEL THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOP-
MENT IS IN ANY WAY PREMATURE. HE STATED THAT HE ALSO RESENTS BEING IN
COMPETITION WITH A STATE AGENCY. MR. CONNERY FELT THERE IS A DEFINITE
NEED FOR SUCH A DEVELOPMENT AND STATED THEY ARE WILLING TO BACK OFF TO
S UNITS PER ACRE, BUT TO REFUSE A DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE IT IS PREMATURE
THAT IS A JUDGMENT CALL. HE ASKED WHY THE BOARD IS GOING AGAINST THEIR
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT EXPLAINED THAT IS MEANT FOR THE FUTURE
OR LONG RANGE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COUNTY.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ATTORNEY SHERMAN SMITH, JR. NEXT CAME BEFORE THE BOARD TO
DISCUSS HIS REQUEST FOR ABANDONMENT OF A RIGHT-OF-WAY OBTAINED FROM
HOWARD CAIL WHERE 43RD AVENUE INTERSECTS STATE ROAD 5 (U.S. 1) IN THE
VICINITY OF HOBART LANDING. HE NOTED THAT THIS WAS OBTAINED FROM MR.
CAIL IN 1960 WHEN THEY WERE GOING TO FOUR -LANE U.S. 1, AND CURB AND
GUTTER CONSTRUCTION WAS CONTEMPLATED. THIS PROPERTY IS NOT ON U.S. 1;
THE CURB AND GUTTER CONSTRUCTION WAS NEVER DONE; AND THE PROPERTY SERVES
NO USEFUL PURPOSE. MR. GAIL, THEREFORE, WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT BACK,
ATTORNEY SMITH INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE WROTE THE DOT REQUESTING THAT
THIS BE DEEDED BACK TO MR. GAIL, AND THEY HAVE REFERRED THE MATTER TO THE
COUNTY BECAUSE THEY WILL ONLY ABANDON IF THE COUNTY HAS NO OBJECTION.
A ROAD.
ADMINISTRATOR UENNINGS STATED THAT WE DO NOT NEED THIS FOR
ASSISTANT PLANNER DAVID MARSH NOTED THAT WHEN HE REVIEWED
THIS AND RECOMMENDED DISAPPROVAL, HE WAS UNAWARE OF ALL THE FACTS AND
DID NOT KNOW THAT THE COUNTY DID NOT HAVE THE RIGHT—OF—WAY. HE DID
COMMENT ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 81ST ST. BEING A COLLECTOR ROAD AT SOME
TIME.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SIEBERT, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED THAT THEY HAVE NO OBJECTION TO
ABANDONMENT OF THE RIGHT—OF—WAY AS REQUESTED BY HOWARD GAIL.
THE HOUR OF 2:00 O'CLOCK P.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK
READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO—WIT:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
NOTICE
NOTICE .IS HEREBY GIVEN that the
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: Planning and Zoning Commission of Indian
STATE OF FLORIDA River County, Florida, has tentatively ap-
proved the following changes and additions to
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath . the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River County,
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published Florida, whi;h changes and additions are
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being substantialliasfollows.:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order
that the following described property situated
a (� in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit:
All of Tract 3, and the East 20 acres of Tract
6, all in Section 6, Township 33 South, Range 39
in the matter of LIC • 4 Lill-�� East; according to the last general plat of
lands of the Indian River Farms Company on j
file in Plat Book 2, page 25, of the Public
f iZJ. } Records of St. Lucie County, Florida; said land
now lying and being in Indian River County,
Florida.
in the Court, was pub- Be changed from A -Agricultural to R -IMP
District.
_ A public hearing in relation thereto at which
lisped in said newspaper in the issues of-`_ i 1972
parties in interest and citizens shall have an
opportunity to be heard, will be held by said;;
Planning and Zoning Commission in the
County Commission Room, Indian River
County Courthouse, Vero Beach, Florida,
Thursday, June 14, 1979, at 7:30 P.M., after:
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper which said public hearing in relation thereto at
ypublished at which, parties in interest and citizens shall
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore have an opportunity to be heard will be held by
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida River County, Florida, in the County Com
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- mission Room, Indian River County Cour-
tisernent; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or shouse, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday,
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- August 8, 1979, at 2:00 P.M. o'clock.
tisement for publication in the said newspaper. Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
yt, r% C% By: William C. Wodtke Jr., Chairman
Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of f-� A.D._L_T— Indian River County Planning
and Zoning Commission
R Dick Bird, Chairman
5,1979.
l (Business Manager) '
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Cour ndian River County, Florida)
THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WAS SENT TO JAMES L. ROGERS, III,
CARDINAL GROVE, INC., BY THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT PURSUANT TO
FLORIDA STATUTE 125.66.
AUG 81979 63 Boos 41 PAct 306
AUG
81979
JACK G. JENNINGS. Administrator
HOK 0 41 FgF,0.
307
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., Chairman
ALMA LEE LOY, Vice Chairman
WILLIARD W. SIEBERT, JR.
R. DON DEESON
PATRICK B. LYONS
Mr. James L. Rogers, III
Cardinal Grove, Inc.
P. 0. Box 365
Greenville, Kentucky 42345
Dear Mr. Rogers:
2145 14th Avenue
June 21, 1979
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Tn compliance with Florida Statute 125.66, the following is
a Notice of Public Hearing for rezoning, as requested by your Agent,
Gordon B. Johnston.
NOTICE
The Zoning Map will be changed in order that the following;
described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit:
All of Tract 3, and the East 20 acres of Tract 6,
all in Section 6, Township 33 South, Range 39
East; according to last General Plat of lands of
the Indian River Farms Company on file in Plat
Book 2, at Page 25, of the Public Records of
St. Lucie County, Florida; said land now lying
and being in Indian River County, Florida.
Less and except Rights -of -Way for public roads.
Be changed from A -Agricultural to R -1M1` District.
A public hearing in relation thereto will be held by the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida iu the County
Commission Room in the County Courthouse, Vero Beach, Florida on
Wednesday, August 8, 1979, at 2:00 o'clock P.M.
Sincerely,
Freda Wright
Clerk
j we
cc: Gordon B. Johnston
WENDY LANCASTER OF THE PLANNING STAFF STATED THAT THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 60 ACRES IN SIZE AND IS LOCATED NORTH OF S.R.
60 EAST OF 74TH AVENUE. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO EXTEND DEVELOPMENT
OF VILLAGE GREEN MOBILE HOME PARK TO THE WEST. THIS PROPERTY IS
PRESENTLY IN GROVES. THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUTHORIZED ADVER-
TISEMENT OF A 6' STRIP LYING BETWEEN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE PARK
TO BE INCLUDED FOR PUBLIC HEARING. THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN SHOWS
THIS AREA TO BE AGRICULTURAL BORDERING ON MEDIUM DENSITY. THIS PROPERTY
IS CONTIGUOUS WITH R -IMP, MISS LANCASTER CONTINUED THAT SITE PLAN
APPROVAL WAS GIVEN FOR AN ADDITIONAL 181 LOTS NOW UNDER CONSTRUCTION ON
THE 40 ACRES NORTH OF WALKER AVENUE. THE ALLOWED DENSITY IS 8.7 PER
ACRE. SHE STATED THAT THIS IS A WELL MAINTAINED QUALITY DEVELOPMENT;
THE APPLICATION IS IN ORDER; AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. SHE
FURTHER NOTED THAT THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CAME UP WITH A TIE
VOTE.
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER EXPLAINED THAT THE SPLIT WAS CAUSED
BY A DISCUSSION OVER THE USE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND.
ATTORNEY CORDON JOHNSTON MADE THE PRESENTATION FOR VILLAGE
GREEN NOTING THAT THIS PROPERTY WAS OWNED BY A. M. HILL AND IS NOW OWNED
BY CARDINAL GROVES. HE STATED THAT VILLAGE GREEN IS A VERY NICE MOBILE
HOME COMMUNITY, NOT A TRANSIENT TYPE DEVELOPMENT, AND THIS IS A REQUEST
FOR AN EXTENSION OF EXISTING ZONING. HE FURTHER NOTED THAT THE PLAN
USED IN THE INITIAL PHASE OF THE VILLAGE GREEN DEVELOPMENT CONTAINS MANY
AMENITIES THAT THE USUAL MOBILE HOME COMMUNITY DOES NOT HAVE, AS WILL
THE PROPOSED EXTENSION. ATTORNEY JOHNSTON CONTINUED THAT THEY DO NOT
HAVE SINGLE WIDE SALES IN THIS COMMUNITY, AND THE UNITS RANGE IN PRICE
FROM $28,000 TO $48,000. HE NOTED THAT THE NEED FOR THIS TYPE DEVELOP-
MENT IN THE COUNTY IS WELL KNOWN, ATTORNEY JOHNSTON CONTINUED THAT GOOD
ZONING DICTATES THAT REZONING SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH AREA AND CON-
TIGUOUS AND THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE HERE. HE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE
ONLY OBJECTION RAISED AT THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING WAS
THAT AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY SHOULD NOT BE CHANGED ANY MORE IN THIS
PARTICULAR PART OF THE COUNTY. ATTORNEY JOHNSTON POINTED OUT THAT THIS
GROVE IS PROBABLY 60 YEARS OLD OR MORE AND NON -PRODUCING.
AUG 8 1979 65 Bou 41 FAGUE 308.,1
AUG 81979 eou 41 PAGE 309
RIVERS ANDERSON, REALTOR, INFORMED THE BOARD THAT WHEN THE
INDIAN RIVER FARMS DRAINAGE DISTRICT WAS CREATED THAT PULLED THE PLUG ON
THE CITRUS ON THE RIDGE. THIS AREA WAS DEVELOPED PRIMARILY IN THE
1920S AND 1930s WHEN YOU HAD PLENTY OF WATER AND DRAINAGE AND REALLY
DEPENDABLE RAINFALL PATTERNS. SINCE THAT TIME A LOT OF THAT MARSH HAS
BEEN DRAINED. A HUGE DRAINAGE DISTRICT WAS DEVELOPED AND THEY CREATED
A RESERVOIR AND IN SO DOING DESTROYED A LOT OF THE SOURCE OF WATER.
THERE IS ANOTHER FACTOR THAT MADE ST. JOHNS DRAINAGE DISTRICT IN DEMAND
AND THAT WAS ONE OF ECONOMICS. SINCE THE WAR AND WITH THE NEW CITRUS
AREAS OPENING UP, THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF COMPETITION IN THE CITRUS
BUSINESS, AND IT IS NO LONGER A "MA AND PA" OPERATION, BUT LIKE THE BIG
FARMS IN THE MID WEST. A SMALL CITRUS BLOCK (10-20-40-60 ACRES) CANNOT
BE PROFITABLY FARMED IN CITRUS EVEN THOUGH THE LAND IS EXCELLENT. WATER,
T00, IS QUESTIONABLE. MR. ANDERSON STATED THAT THE VERY SIZE OF THE
PARCELS IN THIS AREA MAKES THEM ECONOMICALLY NOT FEASIBLE FOR AGRICULTURAL
PURPOSES.
DON FREEMAN, OWNER OF THE COMPANY DEVELOPING VILLAGE GREEN,
STATED THAT HE HAS BEEN IN THE BUSINESS OF DEVELOPING QUALITY MOBILE
HOME PARKS SINCE 1970 AND HE INTENDS TO DEVELOP THE PROPOSED ACREAGE IN
A MANNER ENTIRELY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED, MR. FREEMAN
STATED THAT THE TERM MOBILE HOME IS NOT REALLY APPROPRIATE; THEY SPEND
$8,000410,000 FOR ON SITE IMPROVEMENTS AND THE HOME IS NO LONGER MOVABLE.
HE FELT A MORE APPROPRIATE TERM IS A MANUFACTURED HOUSE, AND STATED
THEY AVERAGE $35,000 NOT INCLUDING THE LOT WHICH IS RENTED. MR. FREEMAN
STATED THAT MOST OF THEIR BUYERS PAY CASH AND NOTED THIS TYPE OF LIVING
IS BECOMING MORE SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE. THEY HAVE MIDDLE MANAGEMENT
EXECUTIVES - PROFESSIONAL PEOPLE - OWNERS OF SMALL BUSINESSES, WHO HAVE
AMPLE RETIREMENT INCOME. THEY REQUIRE VERY LITTLE IN GOVERNMENTAL
SERVICES BUT BRING A GREAT DEAL TO THE COMMUNITY BY PROVIDING AN ADDI-
TIONAL TAX BASE AND ENRICH THE LIFE OF THE COMMUNITY THEY ARE IN. HE
FELT THESE DEVELOPMENTS ARE AN ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY.
ATTORNEY JOHNSTON COMMENTED THAT EVEN THOUGH THE PRESENT
DENSITY AT THE EXISTING PARK ALLOWS 8 UNITS, THEY ONLY HAVE ABOUT 4
UNITS PER ACRE.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED ABOUT WATER AND SEWER, AND ENGINEER
BEINDORF STATED THAT THEY HAVE TO EXPAND BOTH PLANTS.
RETENTION.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED IF THE DRAINAGE WILL BE BY ON-SITE
ENGINEER BEINDORF EXPLAINED THAT AT THE PRESENT PARK, ALL THE
DRAINAGE GOES WITHIN THE INTERIOR LAKES AND WAS PERMITTED THROUGH THE
DEPARTMENT OF POLLUTION CONTROL. THE LAKES WERE ALSO USED TO OBTAIN
FILL FOR BUILDING THE AREA UP HIGHER. THE NEW PARK WILL BE DONE THE
SAME WAY SO ALL THE DRAINAGE WILL GO WITHIN THE INTERIOR LAKES AND THE
IMPACT FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES WILL BE NIL. MR. BEINDORF CONTINUED
THAT ALL THE PROCESSED WATER GOES INTO THE LAKES AND THEY HAVE AN
INDUSTRIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW THIS.
BIG HOLDING PONDS.
THE SEWAGE TREATMENT IS ALL WITHIN
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO BE HEARD.
RALPH SEXTON TOOK THE FLOOR TO SPEAK AGAINST THE PROPOSED
REZONING. HE STATED THAT THIS AREA ENCOMPASSES THE BEST AGRICULTURAL
LAND IN THIS END OF THE COUNTY. THIS WAS RECOGNIZED BY THE WAY THE
MASTER PLAN WAS SET UP, AND HE HAD FELT IT WAS GOING TO BE RESPECTED.
MR. SEXTON NOTED THAT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY IS THE HEART OF THE INDIAN
RIVER CITRUS DISTRICT. A LOT OF GROVES HAVE DIED, BUT THEY CAN BE RE-
PLANTED. MR. SEXTON STATED THAT IT IS HIS FEELING THAT WE NEED FARMS
AND WE NEED INDUSTRY MORE THAN WE NEED OLD FOLKS IN THIS COUNTY, HE
STATED THAT THE BOARD HAS A CHANCE HERE TO PROTECT AN INDUSTRY, YOUNG
FARMERS WHO WILL PROVIDE FOOD FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS. THEY ALSO HAVE A
CHANCE TO CUT DOWN ON DRAINAGE PROBLEMS, TO PROVIDE OPEN SPACE AND WATER
RETENTION, GREEN AREA, AND CUT DOWN ON THE DENSITY IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY.
HE FELT THE BOARD WOULD BE VERY FOOLISH TO GRANT THIS REQUEST OR ANY
SIMILAR ONES IN THE FUTURE, MR. SEXTON RECOMMENDED THAT THE BOARD PUT
THE PEOPLE ON THE HIGH, SANDY LAND AND SAVE THIS LAND FOR WHEN YOU WILL
NEED IT FOR FOOD.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED MR. SEXTON IF HE WOULD BUY THAT 60
ACRES, PLOW IT OUT, REBED IT, AND EXPECT TO MAKE ANY MONEY ON IT, AND
MR, SEXTON REPLIED THAT HE WOULD IF HE OWNED IT, BUT NOT IF HE HAD TO
PAY $7,000410,000 PER ACRE FOR IT.
67
Bao 41 FAG, Lu
AUG 81979
BOOK
41
CHAIRMAN WODTKE AGREED THAT WE
HAVE TO HAVE LAND
FOR
FARMS,
BUT POINTED OUT THAT THIS GROVE IS 60 YEARS OLD AND NO ONE HAS REPLANTED
IT.
MR. SEXTON STATED THAT THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE THE MONEY AND ARE
ABLE TO ARE REPLANTING. HE NOTED THAT THIS LAND WILL GROW VEGETABLES,
CORN, ETC., AS WELL AS CITRUS.
WILL BARKER, WHO IS IN THE CITRUS BUSINESS, NEXT CAME BEFORE
THE BOARD AND STATED THAT THIS IS THE BEST LAND THE COUNTY WILL EVER
SEE AND IT SHOULD NOT BE WASTED. HE STATED THAT HE HAD AN OLD GROVE,
BUT HE PUSHED IT OUT AND NOW HE HAS A GOOD GROVE. IN REGARD TO THE
STATEMENT THAT THE LITTLE MA AND PA OPERATIONS DON'T MAKE ANY MONEY, HE
STATED THAT HE KNOWS A LOT OF PEOPLE WITH 40 ACRE BLOCKS WHO DON'T WANT
TO SELL. HE BELIEVED WE SHOULD HAVE MOBILE HOME DEVELOPMENT, BUT IN THE
HIGHER PARTS OF THE COUNTY. MR. BARKER FELT IT WAS A MISTAKE TO PUT THE
TRAILER PARK IN THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE AND THAT WE SHOULD THINK TWICE
AND NOT EXPAND IT JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE ALREADY THERE.
DR. HERBERT KALE TALKED ABOUT THE "DOMINO" AFFECT OF ZONING AND
NOTED THAT WITH R-1MP CONTIGUOUS, THE AGRICULTURAL PERSON CANNOT WITH-
STAND ASSESSMENTS BECAUSE OF THE PRESSURES OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
DR. KALE FELT THE BOARD MUST LOOK,INTO THE FUTURE AND MAKE PLANS TO
PROTECT THE AGRICULTURAL LANDS AND DECIDE WHERE THEY ARE GOING TO DRAW
THE LINE.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED HOW YOU CAN FORCE SOMEONE TO PRODUCE
A CROP ON HIS LAND, AND DR. KALE AGREED THAT YOU CAN'T TELL A PERSON
WHAT HE IS GOING TO D0, BUT YOU CAN KEEP THE LAND AGRICULTURAL.
ATTORNEY .JOHNSTON STATED THAT HE HAS A GEODETIC SURVEY MAP TO
SHOW ELEVATIONS, AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS HIGHER THAN THE LAND MR.
SEXTON MENTIONED BETWEEN THE CITRUS BELT AND THE CITY OF VERO BEACH,
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON,
THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT HE WISHED TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT
HE THINKS THE DEVELOPMENT OF VILLAGE GREEN IS A VERY HIGH CLASS DEVELOP-
MENT AND WELL MAINTAINED, BUT HIS PROBLEM IS THE LOCATION.
HE NOTED THAT
p
WE HAVE A LARGE AMOUNT OF FINE DEVELOPABLE PROPERTY IN THIS COUNTY THAT
IS HIGH AND DRY AND DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH OUR FUTURE ASSETS AS FAR AS
OUR ABILITY TO PRODUCE FARM PRODUCE. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT THAT WE
DO HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY AND AS LONG AS WE HAVE LAND OTHER THAN PRIME
CITRUS LAND THAT IS AVAILABLE FOR DEVELOPING, WE SHOULD NOT REZONE THIS
PRIME CITRUS LAND FROM AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL IN SPITE OF THE FINE
DEVELOPMENT VILLAGE GREEN HAS,
CHAIRMAN WODTKE STATED THAT HE WILL NOT ARGUE THE VALUE OF
AGRICULTURAL LAND, BUT ASKED HOW FAR WE CAN GO IN PROTECTING IT. THIS
LAND IS IN THE CITRUS BELT, BUT WITH ROUTE 6O THERE AND THE VARIOUS
ARTERIES, HE WAS NOT CONVINCED IN ANY WAY THAT THIS LAND IS GOING TO BE
UTILIZED AS PRODUCTIVE AGRICULTURAL LAND)ESPECIALLY SINCE IT HAS NOT
BEEN OVER MANY YEARS. THE CHAIRMAN DID NOT FEEL THERE IS ANY WAY THIS
BOARD CAN FORCE THIS LAND TO BE PRODUCTIVE.
COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT THIS BOARD COULD HAVE AN AFFECT ON THE
WAY THAT LAND IS ASSESSED BY TAKING A CERTAIN STAND.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT DISAGREED AND STATED THAT ASSESSMENTS
ARE NOT BASED ON POTENTIAL FOR REZONING. HE.FELT THE WAY TO ATTACK THE
PROBLEM IS TO MAKE IT•ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE FOR THE FARMER TO FARM HIS
LAND, BY NOT ASSESSING THEM FOR WATER AND SEWER, ETC., THAT THEY DON'T
NEED.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED WHY THE•PRESENT OWNER DOESN'T REUSE THE
PROPERTY AS AGRICULTURAL LAND? MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC ANSWERED,
AND ARGUMENT CONTINUED ON THIS POINT.
ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THIS DISCUSSION IS IMPROPER BECAUSE
THE HEARING HAS BEEN CLOSED, AND ATTORNEY JOHNSTON AGREED THAT ONCE THE
PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED, ALL COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR SHOULD CEASE.
COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED IF ANYONE IS GOING TO PROTECT AGRICUL-
TURAL LAND, IT SHOULD BE THE COUNTY COMMISSION.
COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT ALL OF US ARE SYMPATHETIC AND
UNDERSTAND, BUT IT IS ALSO THIS BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY TO HELP DEVELOP
AN OVERALL COUNTY. SHE NOTED THAT WE PRUDENTLY DECIDED WE WERE NOT GOING
TO LET THE COUNTY BE PROLIFERATED WITH MOBILE HOME.PARKS. VILLAGE GREEN
AUG 81979 BooK 41 FAGE 312
69
AUG 81979 FooK 41 npF 13
IS AN OUTSTANDING PARK, AND COMMISSIONER Loy STATED THAT SHE WOULD
RATHER SEE THIS ONE EXPAND THAN ANOTHER ONE START IN ANOTHER AREA. SHE
POINTED OUT THAT WE HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN SAVING AGRICULTURAL LAND IN
OTHER AREAS. FURTHERMORE, THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN SITTING THERE FOR YEARS
AND HAS NOT BEEN MADE USE OF EVEN THOUGH AT ONE TIME IT WAS OWNED BY
PEOPLE WHO COULD AFFORD IT IF THEY HAD FELT IT WAS ECONOMICALLY WORTH-
WHILE. FOR THOSE REASONS, SHE STATED SHE WILL SUPPORT THE REZONING
;1001""t
COMMISSIONER DEESON CONCURRED THAT ALL OF US AGREE WE NEED TO
PROTECT AGRICULTURAL LANDS WHERE POSSIBLE, BUT IT IS OBVIOUS THE OWNERS
CHOSE NOT TO UTILIZE THIS LAND FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES SO HE, T00,
WILL SUPPORT THE REZONING.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, COMMISSIONER LYONS VOTED IN OPPOSITION, THE BOARD ADOPTED
ORDINANCE 79-21 GRANTING THE REZONING TO R-1MP AS REQUESTED BY CARDINAL
GROVES, INC.
ORDINANCE NO. 79-21
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Inuian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone
the hereinafter described property and pursuant thereto held a public
q hearing in relation thereto, at which parties in interest and citizens
were heard; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian.
River County, Florida, that the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River
County, Florida, and the accompanying Zoning Map, be amended as
follows:
I. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described! property situated in Indian River
County, Florida, to -wit:
All of Tract 3, and the East 20 acres of Tract 6, all
in Section 6, Township 33 South, Range 39 East; according
to the last general plat of lands of the Indian River
Farms Company on file in Plat Book 2, page 25, of the
public records of St. Lucie County, Florida; said land
now lying and being in Indian River County, Florida.
Be changed from A -Agricultural to R-IliP District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Zoning Regulations.
This Ordinance shall take effect August 13, 1979.
AUG 81979 BOOK 1 m"-314
AUG 81979 FAGE31
CHAIRMAN WODTKE DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF AMENDING OUR
CONTRACT ON EXPANSION OF THE GIFFORD WATER SYSTEM TO PROVIDE THE NECESSARY
FACILITIES TO MAKE WATER AVAILABLE TO CLEMANS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, WHICH
WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE EXPANSION PROGRAM, THE CHAIRMAN STATED THAT HE
RECEIVED A REQUEST FOR THIS SERVICE FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD; THE ENGINEERS
HAVE COME UP WITH AN ESTIMATED COST FOR THAT LINE; AND WE HAVE A COMMIT-
MENT FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD FOR FUNDS FOR THIS PROJECT AS PER THEIR LETTER
OF .JULY 25TH, AS FOLLOWS:
Telephone (305) 567-7165 SUNCOM No. 465 - 1011
5'010()1_ CIS-futc-f c3f INUMAN VIVIE-IC tC( UN-ry
1426 19th Street - P. 0. Box 2648 - Vero Beach, Florida 32960
JAMES A. BURNS, Superintendent
July 25, 1979
Mr. William Wodtke, Chairman
Indian River County Commissioners
Courthouse
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Mr. Wodtke:
JOE N. IDLETTE, JR.
Chairman
GARY W. LINDSEY
Vice -Chairman
RICHARD A. BOLINGER
RUTH R. BARNES
DOROTHY A.TALBERT
On Monday, July 23rd, the School Board approved reimburse-
ment to the County Commission of $5,500.00 for the provision
of a water supply from the county line to the front of Clemans
Elementary.School which would include a six inch line and a
fire hydrant.
I want to express the appreciation of the School Board,
the staff, and the parents in the Clemans School for the efforts
you and the County Commission have made to deliver water to
Clemans School. We appreciate this special effort that has
gone in to this project and the cooperation of the County
Commission in partially funding this six inch line and fire
hydrant. We also appreciate your efforts to complete this
task as•early as possible, including the possibility of getting
it done by the time school opens.
It certainly is a real pleasure to work with you and the
County Commission.
Sine rely,
James A. Burns
Superintendent
72
CHAIRMAN WODTKE EXPLAINED THAT BASICALLY THE OPTIONS WE HAVE
BEEN PRESENTED ARE FOR THE COUNTY TO RUN THE LINE WEST ON NORTH GIFFORD
ROAD UNDERNEATH 43RD AVENUE AND THEN TO EXTEND A 2" SERVICE LINE DOWN
TO THE AREA WHERE THE SCHOOL WOULD CONNECT. THE COST OF RUNNING A 2"
LINE FROM 43RD DOWN TO THE SCHOOL AMOUNTED TO $3,000. IT WAS THE
RECOMMENDATION OF THE CONSULTANTS AND'THE ADMINISTRATOR AND THE CHAIRMAN
THAT WE CONSIDER ENLARGING THE LINE TO A 6" LINE WHICH WOULD GIVE US THE
NECESSARY SIZE TO PUT IN A FIRE HYDRANT AT THAT LOCATION. THEY TOOK
THE COST OF THE OVERSIZING AND THE FIRE HYDRANT AND SPLIT IT WITH THE
SCHOOL BOARD, AND THE SCHOOL BOARD CAME UP WITH THEIR FIGURE OF $5,500.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE FELT THIS IS A SERVICE WE SHOULD PROVIDE, IF POSSIBLE,
AND THAT WE SHOULD AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY CHANGE ORDER.
ENGINEER RICHARD VOTAPKA STATED THAT THESE ARE EXISTING UNIT
PRICES AND HE WILL HAVE TO CHECK THIS WITH THE CONTRACTOR. HE INFORMED
THE BOARD THAT CHAPMAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY WILL FINISH EARLY IN SEPTEMBER
OR THE LAST WEEK IN AUGUST AND THEN THEY COULD GO RIGHT INTO THIS PROJECT
AND DO IT IN A REASONABLY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE NOTED THAT THE SCHOOL BOARD NEEDS THIS AS
SOON AS POSSIBLE, AND HE HAD HOPED IT COULD BE COMPLETED WITHIN THE NEXT
THREE WEEKS.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED CHANGE ORDER #2 AS RECOMMENDED BY
THE ADMINISTRATOR AND THE CONSULTING ENGINEER TO PROVIDE WATER TO
CLEMANS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, BY MEANS OF A 6" LINE AND INCLUDING A FIRE
HYDRANT, AND ACCEPTED THE PROPOSAL OF THE SCHOOL BOARD TO REIMBURSE THE
COUNTY APPROXIMATELY $5,500, I.E. HALF THE COST OF OVERSIZING THE LINE
AND PROVIDING THE FIRE HYDRANT.
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER CAME BEFORE THE BOARD IN REGARD TO THE
CONTRACTS FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES AND SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
STUDY OF THE SPOIL ISLANDS. THERE ARE TWO CONTRACTS - ONE FOR GRANT
GILMORE AS CONSULTANT AND ONE FOR TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
AS MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT. MR. REVER NOTED THAT THERE WERE SOME MINOR
CHANGES MADE. ON THE CONTRACT WITH GRANT GILMORE, ON THE FIRST PAGE,
AUG 81979 BOOK 41 PACE316
73
AUG 81979 Boor 41 FAct-317
PARAGRAPH B, THE DATE FOR THE FINAL DRAFT OF THE REPORT HAS BEEN CHANGED
FROM NOVEMBER 15TH TO OCTOBER 30TH, AND IN PARAGRAPH C, IT WILL NOT BE
THE FINAL DRAFT, BUT THE ANALYSIS AND COORDINATION INPUT. THE FINAL
DRAFT WILL BE SUBMITTED AS B RATHER THAN C. THERE IS THE SAME DATE
CHANGE I.N PARAGRAPH B ON THE SECOND PAGE AND THE WORDS "ASSOCIATED
GRAPHIC MATERIAL" HAVE BEEN ADDED. MR. REVER CONTINUED THAT THERE WILL
BE SIMILAR CHANGES IN THE CONTRACT WITH TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING
COUNCIL. THEIR PRELIMINARY DRAFT DATE IN PARAGRAPH B, PAGE 21 WOULD BE
CHANGED TO NOVEMBER 30TH RATHER THAN NOVEMBER 15TH. THE BIOLOGICAL STUDY
MUST BE COMPLETED IN SUFFICIENT TIME AHEAD OF THE MANAGEMENT STUDY TO
ALLOW USE OF THE MATERIAL GENERATED FROM ONE CONSULTANT TO ANOTHER. ALSO
IN THE COUNCILS CONTRACT THERE WERE TWO OTHER MINOR WORD CHANGES.
ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT HE HAS REVIEWED THESE CONTRACTS
AND HAS NO PROBLEM WITH THEM.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED CONTRACTS FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING
SERVICES IN REGARD TO A STUDY OF THE SPOIL ISLANDS WITH R. GRANT GILMORE
AND TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE
OF THE CHAIRMAN.
CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into by and between INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY,' and R. GRANT GILMORE,
hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT".
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, the State has provided a Grant to the COUNTY
to develop an inventory, analysis and management procedures.
It is in the interest of all levels of government to protect
and maintain the natural resources and State policies for
management of the coastal zone of Florida should be, to the
maximum extent possible, implemented by local governments.
These policies should be formulated with significant input
from local governments to accommodate the unique variations
of community needs, desires and natural resources. Significant
development limitation exists on spoil islands and this study
will formulate a plan and general framework for implementing
the optimal use or control of spoil islands not only in Indian
River County but in any coastal area with similar conditions;
and
WHEREAS, COUNTY agrees to employ CONSULTANT and CONSULTANT
agrees to perform all work described in the scope of services or
otherwise authorized, upon the following terms and conditions:
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. See Exhibit "A" attached hereto
and made a part hereof.
2. SCHEDULE OF iIORK:
The Contract shall take effect as of the date of
execution of this Agreement and shall be completed no later
than December 31, 1979. In addition progress reports and
work product will be submitted to the COUNTY as follows:
A. Progress Report and Preliminary Draft on
September 30, 1979.
B. Final draft of Report October 30, 1979.
C. Final draft analysis and coordination December 31,
1979.
AUG 8 1979
Bou 41 PA.GE318
AUG 8 1979
3. DOCUMENT AND MEETING REQUIREMENTS:
Boas 1 Fnu'19
A progress report shall be submitted by the date
indicated in the previous Section of this Agreement. The
Report should consist of a summary of work completed on the
project to date and draft copies of any material prepared
at this time. There shall also be an outline of the work
program yet to be initiated and or completed by the next sub-
mittal date.
Briefings and meetings between the parties of this
Contract and any other contractors, governmental bodies,
agencies or appointed bodies will be arranged and coordinated
as warranted or as directed by the COUNTY.
The final document will be submitted to the COUNTY
no later than December 31, 1979, consisting of five (5) copies
of the final drafts and graphic materials in reproducible form.
4. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE COUNTY:
The COUNTY shall provide coordination, assistance and
guidance to the extent deemed feasible and necessary. They shall
provide all reference materials and documents in their possession
which are pertinent to the study. Review of reports and drafts
will be done in a timely manner with comments, suggestions or
approvals provided as appropriate. Comments will be furnished
on the review of the final draft of the report within fifteen
(15) working days of its receipt by COUNTY.
5. COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT:
This is a lump sum Contract for EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS
($8,000.00). This amount will be disbursed in the following
manner:
A. Upon receipt and approval of the required progress
report and preliminary draft, on or before September 30,
1979, THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($3,000.00).
B. Receipt and approval of the final draft and associ-
ated graphic material due on or before October 30, 1979,
THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($3,000.00).
C. With completion and approval of the final draft
analysis and coordination on or before December 31, 1979,
TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00).
Provided progress is satisfactory to the COUNTY, COUNTY
shall make payment normally within twenty (20) days of receipt
and approval of the documents and services. Final payment shall
be withheld pending completion of all documents and services
required by this Agreement to the satisfaction of the COUNTY.
This project will be managed through the Indian River
County Planning and Zoning Department and all matters should be
directed to the Department Director or person designated by the
Director for proper disposition.
6. TERMINATION:
A. Termination for Convenience.
If this Contract is terminated by the COUNTY or by
mutual agreement, at any time prior to fulfillment, the
CONSULTANT shall be paid for services performed and/or costs
incurred based on an estimate of that portion of the work
that has been completed, as determined by the COUNTY.
B. Termination for Cause.
If, through any cause, CONSULTANT shall fail to fulfill
in timely and proper manner its obligations under this
Contract, or if CONSULTANT shall violate any of the
covenants, agreements, or stipulations of this Contract,
the COUNTY shall thereupon have the right to terminate
this Contract by giving written notice to the CONSULTANT
of such termination and specifying the effective date
thereof. In that event, all items or materials
furnished by the COUNTY and any finished or unfinished
reports, notes, or field data prepared by the CONSULTANT
shall immediately be delivered to a place designated by
the COUNTY,and the CONSULTANT shall be entitled to receive
just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory
work or services completed.
Notwithstanding the above, the CONSULTANT shall not be
relieved of liability to the COUNTY for damages sustained
by the COUNTY by virtue of any breach of the Contract by
-3-
AUG 81979 @00K 41 PAGE 320
AUG
81979
41 FAUF 321
the CONSULTANT,
and the COUNTY may withhold any
payments to
the CONSULTANT for the purpose of setoff until such time as
the exact amount of damage due the COUNTY is determined.
7. RIGHT OF DECISIONS:
All services performed by the CONSULTANT to the reasonable
satisfaction of the COUNTY or its designated representative,
who shall decide all questions, difficulties, and disputes
of whatever nature which may arise under or by reason of
the Agreement, the prosecution and fulfillment of the
services hereunder and the character, quality, amount and
value thereof. This section shall not preclude any party
from seeking relief by an appropriate court proceeding.
8. DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
The CONSULTANT hereby agrees to indemnify, defend, save,
hold harmless the COUNTY from all claims, demands, liabilities,
and suits of any nature whatsoever arising out of, or due to
any act or occurrence of omission or commission of the CONSULTANT
its agents, or employees to the extent permitted by Florida
law.
9. The CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no
interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect,
which would conflict in any manner or degree with the per-
formance of services required to be performed under this
Contract. The CONSULTANT further covenants that in the per-
formance of this Contract no person having any such interest
shall be employed.
10. SUBLETTING:
A. The CONSULTANT shall not sublet, assign or
transfer any work under this Agreement without the
written consent of the COUNTY. When applicable,
and upon receipt of such consent in writing, the
CONSULTANT shall cause the names of the firms re-
sponsible for such portions of the work to appear
on such work.
B. The CONSULTANT agrees to notify the COUNTY of all
subcontracts no less than ten (10) days prior to the
effective date of the subcontract for the purpose of
approval by the COUNTY.
C. The CONSULTANT agrees to be responsible for the
fulfillment of all work elements included in the sub-
contracts and agrees to be responsible for the payment
of all monies due under any subcontract and hold the
COUNTY harmless from any liabilities or damages
arising under or from any subcontract hereunder.
11. NOTICES:
A. Any notice or other written communication
from the CONSULTANT to the COUNTY shall be considered
delivered when posted by Certified Mail or delivered
in person to the Director of the Planning and Zoning
Department of Indian River County, or his designated
representative.
B. Any notice or other necessary formal com-
munications from the COUNTY to the CONSULTANT shall
be considered delivered when posted by CERTIFIED MAIL
or delivered in person to an authorized representative.
12. PERSONNEL:
A. To the extent required by law, the CONSULTANT
will secure and maintain such insurance as will pro-
tect it from claims under Workmen's Compensation
Acts and from claims for bodily injury, death, or
property damage which may arise from the performance
of its services under this Contract.
B. The CONSULTANT assures that the program sup-
ported by the grant will be conducted in compliance
with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(P.L. 88-352) as amended, (42 USC 2000d) and the
requirements imposed by the Regulations of the
Department of Commerce (15 CFR Part 8) issued
pursuant to that Title. In accordance therewith no
person in the United States shall, on the ground of
race, color or national origin, be excluded from
AUG 81979 -5- B00K 41 F4E 3224,.
AUG 81979 ROOK 41 FAGr 323
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be
otherwise subjected to discrimination under any
program or activity for which the CONSULTANT received
Federal financial assistance and will immediately
take any measures necessary to effectuate this
agreement.
C. The COUNTY and the CONSULTANT hereby agree to
comply with Chapter 112, Florida Statutes, Standards
of Conduct for Public Officers and Employees when
such Statute has direct application to the per-
formance of this Contract.
13. UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT:
A. This AGREEMENT is funded in part by a grant
from the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department
of Commerce. In exchange for Coastal Zone Management
funding, the COUNTY agrees to abide by and comply with
OMB Circular A-102 and FMC 74-4.
B. The CONSULTANT agrees that the COUNTY, the
Comptroller General of the United States or any of his
duly authorized representatives and the U. S. Secretary
of Commerce or any of his duly authorized representa-
tives shall, until the expiration of three (3) years
after expenditure of funds under this AGREEMENT, have
access to and the right to examine any directly
pertinent books, documents, papers and records of the
CONSULTANT involving transactions related to this
AGREEMENT. This CONSULTANT agrees to include the
substance of this paragraph into all subgrants and
contracts payable from funds received from this AGREE-
MENT in whole or in part. The CONSULTANT agrees that
payment (s) made under this AGREEMENT shall be subject
to reduction for amounts charged thereto which are
found on the basis of audit examination not to
constitute allowable costs under this AGREEMENT. The
U"M
CONSULTANT shall refund by check payable to the COUNTY
the amount of such reduction of payments. All
required records shall be maintained until an audit
is completed and all questions arising therefrom are
resolved, or three (3) years after completion of the
project and submission of a final "Financial Status
Report", whichever is.sooner. The records shall be
maintained in a manner that will permit determination
that the COUNTY has complied with the matching share
requirements.
14. DOCUMENTS AND NON -EXPENDABLE EQUIPMENT:
A. Ownership of Documents.
All reports produced and other data gathered by the
CONSULTANT for the purpose of this contract shall become
the mutual property of the Office of Coastal Zone
Management, the COUNTY, and the CONSULTANT without
restriction or limitation upon their use and shall
be made available by the CONSULTANT at any time
upon request of the COUNTY.
B. Copyrights.
No reports, maps or other documents produced in
whole or in part under this AGREEMENT shall be the
subject of an application for copyright on behalf of
the CONSULTANT.
C. Non -Expendable Equipment and Personal Property.
Purchase of non -expendable equipment or personal
property costing over FIFTY DOLLARS ($50.00) is not
authorized.
D. Documentation.
The cover or title page of all reports, studies or
other documents resulting from contracts supported in
whole or in part by this grant shall acknowledge the
financial assistance provided by the State, COUNTY and
by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended,
administered by the Office of Coastal Zone Management,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
-7- _
AUG �,9as BOOK 4� fi �� 24
AUG 81979aQaK 'AGE
15. OFFICIALS NOT TO BENEFIT:
No member of or delegate to Congress,or resident Commis-
sioner, shall be admitted to any share or part of this grant
or to any benefit that may arise therefrom.
16. CHANGES:
Either party may, from time to time, request changes in
the scope of the services of the CONSULTANT to be performed
hereunder, with concomitant adjustments in the consideration
to be paid. Such changes which are mutually agreed upon by
and between the COUNTY and the CONSULTANT shall be incorporated
in written amendments to the AGREEMENT and shall designate
the effective date of the change.
17. AGREEMENT AS INCLUDING ENTIRE AGREEMENT:
This instrument embodies the whole AGREEMENT of the Parties.
There are no provisions, terms, conditions,or obligations other
than those contained herein; and this AGREEMENT shall supersede
all previous communication, representation or agreements,
either verbal or written between the parties hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto
set their hands and seals as of the date by their signatures.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY_-�G(�
Attest:
Witnesses: Date: 7 �p
R. GRAN GILMOR
As to Gilmore
EXHIBIT "A"
SCOPE OF SERVICES
SECTION I
A. Project Objective
This project is intended to develop a program for the management
and protection of the spoil islands located in Indian River County.
B. Responsibilities of the CONSULTANT
The CONSULTANT has the responsibility of assisting Indian River County
in determining the current status of the flora and fauna of 43 spoil islands
in Indian River County and coordinating his efforts with those of the Treasure
Coast Regional Planning Council in order to produce a singular and compatible
document from the separate studies undertaken. Existing biological data,
available literature, aerial surveys and field examination of the spoil islands
will be utilized to aid in the cooperative classification of each spoil island
by the COUNTY, TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL and the CONSULTANT.
Currently the 43 spoil islands in Indian River County have been classified in
four categories: "Recreation" (11 islands), "Conservation" (18 islands),
"Research" (12 islands) and "Special Cases" (2 islands) in a report on the
spoil islands prepared by. an Environmental Study Committee of the Vero Beach -
Indian River County Planning Commission (Report on the Spoil Islands of Indian
River County, 1974). The CONSULTANT will make recommendations to the COUNTY and
COUNCIL regarding spoil island classification categories based on information
gained from specific tasks set forth below.
Task 1: Resource Inventory
The resource inventory shall include spoil island characteristics
over and above the minimum as specified in the contract between
the DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION and the COUNTY and shall
include the following:
A. A determination and acquisition of available background
literature and information on spoil island flora and fauna,
biological community development and successional tendencies
from all available sources including the DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRON-
MENTAL REGULATION, COUNTY and COUNCIL.
AUG 81979 BOOK 1 PACE 326
AUG 81979 Box 41 PA G E327
B. A determination of 16 representative spoil islands to be
thoroughly studied and chosen from the 43 spoil islands based
on location, physical and biological similarities to 27 spoil
islands not studied, and on preliminary observations made by
other agencies, scientists and the COUNTY.
C. Historical aerial photographs will be examined to determine
changes in spoil island topography and vegetation. Native
and non-native plant community succession will be determined.
Current aerial photographs will be used to produce vegetation
maps to be verified during island visits. These maps will
include submerged features such as seagrass beds and oyster
reefs.
D. Aerial photo maps will be verified with the determination
of native and non-native terrestrial, semiaquatic and
aquatic floral species percent coverage. Special attention
will be given to the potential development of native plant
communities and associated wildlife and removal of non-native
species. Native plant community succession when and where
observed will be reviewed for future research potential and
conservation. As plant community succession will be
dependent on a number of environmental factors including
substrate type, a classification of spoil island substrate
will be done for those islands studied. The proximity and
size of valuable submerged seagrass beds will be noted with
regard to boat traffic and other potential disturbances.
E. The species and relative numbers of terrestrial, semi -
terrestrial and aquatic spoil island faunal associates will
be determined. Threatened, rare or endangered species will
be noted as well as species of direct commercial and sport
value. The major groups to be treated are:
1) Molluscs (e.g. oysters, clams, etc.)
2) Crustaceans (e.g. crabs, shrimp, etc.)
3) Fishes
4) Reptiles (e.g. diamondback terrapin, etc.)
5) Birds (particularly nesting colonies)
6) Mammals (e.g. raccoons,otters, sea cows, etc.)
Task 2: Resource Analysis
The data obtained from the resource inventory, historical
records and photos, the literature and recommendations from
interested local, state, regional and federal groups and
agencies will be reviewed with the COUNTY and COUNCIL for a
cooperative determination of spoil island classifications.
Areas for limited development and passive recreation (e.g.
picnicking, hiking and/or camping and sanitary facilities) will
be identified. Areas where boating should be restricted
(e.g. seagrass beds or shoal waters) will be identified as
well as area where wildlife resources should be preserved.
Islands with potential and direct research interests will be
identified (e.g. those islands with native plant community
development and where community succession is taking place or
those with entomological research value). Areas where
replanting or specific native plants would be successful and
the species to be planted will be identified. In the event
that one or more islands cannot be classified in the categories
currently used, a special case classification may be necessary.
The spoil island resource inventory and analysis will be presented
to the COUNTY and COUNCIL in a report including any recommenda-
tions made by the CONSULTANT.
Task 3: Five (5) copies of the final draft document will be compiled and
submitted to the COUNTY, along with all graphic materials necessary
to present the information in a meaningful manner. The report will
incorporate all appropriate comments received from the COUNTY and
all other agencies identified by the COUNTY.
-3-
AUG 81979 Boas 41 PAGE 328
AUG 81979 BOOK 41 Fa -UF 329
CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into by and between INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY", and TREASURE
COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL, hereinafter referred to as
"COUNCIL
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, the State has provided a Grant to the COUNTY
to develop an inventory, analysis and management procedures.
It is in the interest of all levels of government to protect
and maintain the natural resources and State policies for
management of the coastal zone of Florida should be, to the
maximum extent possible, implemented by local governments.
These policies should be formulated with significant input
from local governments to accommodate the unique variations
of community needs, desires and natural resources, Significant
development limitation exists on spoil islands and this study
will formulate a plan and general framework for implementing
the optimal use or control of spoil islands not only in Indian
River County but in any coastal area with similar conditions;
and
WHEREAS, COUNTY agrees to employ COUNCIL and COUNCIL agrees
to perform all work described in the scope of services or
otherwise authorized, upon the following terms and conditions:
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. See Exhibit "A" attached hereto
and made a part hereof.
2. SCHEDULE OF WORK:
The Contract shall take effect as of the date of
execution of this Agreement and shall be completed no later
than December 31, 1979. In addition progress reports and
work product will be submitted to the COUNTY as follows:
A. Progress Report on September 30, 1979.
B. Preliminary draft of Report November 30, 1979.
C. Final draft of Report December 31,1979.
M ® M
3. DOCUMENT AND MEETING REQUIREMENTS:
A progress report shall be submitted by the date
indicated in the previous Section of this Agreement. The
Report should consist of a summary of work completed on the
project to date and draft copies of any material prepared
at this time. There shall also be an outline of the work
program yet to be initiated and or completed by the next sub-
mittal date.
Briefings and meetings between the parties of this
Contract and any other contractors, governmental bodies,
agencies or appointed bodies will be arranged and coordinated
as warranted or as directed by the COUNTY.
The final document will be submitted to the COUNTY
no later than December 31, 1979, consisting of five (5) copies
of the final drafts and graphic materials in reproducible form.
4. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE COUNTY:
The COUNTY shall provide coordination, assistance and
guidance to the extent deemed feasible and necessary. They shall
provide all reference materials and documents in their possession
which are pertinent to the study. Review of reports and drafts
will be done in a timely manner with comments , suggestions or
approvals provided as appropriate. Comments will be furnished
on the review of the final draft of the report within fifteen
(15) working days of its receipt by COUNTY.
5. COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT:
This is a lump sum Contract for EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS
($8,000.00). This amount will be disbursed in the following
manner:
A. Upon receipt and approval of the required progress
report, on or before September 30, 1979, THREE THOUSAND
FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($3,500.00).
B. Preliminary draft,on November 30, 1979, TWO THOUSAND
FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($2,500.00).
C. Final Draft and graphic material on December 31, 1979,
TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000-.00).
-2-
1 �.
800 1 PAGE 33
QODK 41 PA-- 331
Provided progress is satisfactory to the COUNTY, COUNTY
shall make payment normally within twenty (20) days of receipt
and approval of the documents and services. Final payment shall
be withheld pending completion of all documents and services
required by this Agreement to the satisfaction of the COUNTY.
This project will be managed through the Indian River
County Planning and Zoning Department and all matters should be
directed to the Department Director or person designated by the
Director for proper disposition.
6. TERMINATION:
A. Termination for Convenience.
If this Contract is terminated by the COUNTY or by
mutual agreement, at any time prior to fulfillment, the
COUNCIL shall be paid for services performed and/or costs
incurred based on an estimate of that portion of the work
that has been completed, as determined by the COUNTY.
B. Termination for Cause.
If, through any cause, the COUNCIL shall fail to fulfill
in timely and proper manner its obligations under this
Contract, or if the COUNCIL shall violate any of the
covenants, agreements, or stipulations of this Contract,
the COUNTY shall thereupon have the right to terminate
this Contract by giving written notice to the COUNCIL
of such termination and specifying the effective date
thereof. In that event, all items or materials
furnished by the COUNTY and any finished or unfinished
reports, notes, or field data prepared by the COUNCIL
shall immediately be delivered to a place designated by
the COUNTY,and the COUNCIL shall be entitled to receive
just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory
work or services completed.
Notwithstanding the above, the COUNCIL shall not be
relieved of liability to the COUNTY for damages sustained
by the COUNTY by virtue of any breach of the Contract by
-3-
the COUNCIL, and the COUNTY may withhold any payments to
the COUNCIL for the purpose of setoff until such time as
the exact amount of damage due the COUNTY is determined.
7. RIGHT OF DECISIONS:
All services performed by the COUNCIL to the reasonable
satisfaction of the COUNTY or its designated representative,
who shall decide all questions, difficulties, and disputes
of whatever nature which may arise under or by reason of
the Agreement, the prosecution and fulfillment of the
services hereunder and the character, quality, amount and
value thereof. This section shall not preclude any party
from seeking relief by an appropriate court proceeding.
8. DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
The COUNCIL hereby agrees to indemnify, defend, save, and
hold harmless the COUNTY from all claims,demands, liabilities,
and suits of any nature whatsoever arising out of, or due to
any act or occurrence of omission or commission of the COUNCIL
its agents, or employees in regard to the COUNCIL'S performance
under this Contract to the extent permitted by Florida law.
9. The COUNCIL covenants that it presently has no
interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect,
which would conflict in any manner or degree with the per-
formance of services required to be performed under this
Contract. The COUNCIL further covenants that in the per-
formance of this Contract no person having any such interest
shall be employed.
10. SUBLETTING:
A. The COUNCIL shall not sublet,assign or
transfer any work under this AGREEMENT without the
written consent of the COUNTY. When applicable, and
upon receipt of such consent in writing, the COUNCIL
shall cause the names of the firms responsible for
such portions of the work to appear on such work.
B. The COUNCIL agrees to notify the COUNTY of
all subcontracts no less than ten (10) days prior
-4-
AUG 81979 BOOK 41 �AcE 3 &90j
BOOK 41 PAGE AUG � 1979
to the effective date of the subcontract for the
purpose of approval by the COUNTY.
C. The COUNCIL agrees to be responsible for the
fulfillment of all work elements included in the
subcontracts and agrees to be responsible for the pay-
ment of all monies due under any subcontract and hold
the COUNTY harmless from any liabilities or damages
arising under or from any subcontract hereunder.
11. NOTICES:
A. Any notice or other written communication
from the COUNCIL to the COU14TY shall be considered
delivered when posted by Certified Mail or delivered
in person to the Director of the Planning and Zoning
Department of Indian River County,or his designated
representative.
B. Any notice or other necessary formal com-
munications from the COUNTY to the COUNCIL shall
be considered delivered when posted by CERTIFIED MAIL
or delivered in person to an authorized representative.
12. PERSONNEL:
A. To the extent required by law, the COUNCIL
will secure and maintain such insurance as will pro-
tect it from claims under Workmen's Compensation
Acts and from claims for bodily injury, death, or
property damage which may arise from the performance
of its services under this Contract.
B. The COUNCIL assures that the program sup-
ported by the grant will be conducted in compliance
with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(P.L. 88-352) as amended, (42 USC 2000d) and the
requirements imposed by the Regulations of the
Department of Commerce (15 CFR Part 8) issued
pursuant to that Title. In accordance therewith no
person in the United States shall, on the ground of
race, color or national origin,be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be
otherwise subjected to discrimination under any
program or activity for which the COUNCIL receives
Federal financial assistance and will immediately
take any measures necessary to effectuate this
agreement.
C. The COUNTY and the COUNCIL hereby agree to
comply with Chapter 112, Florida Statutes, Standards
of Conduct for Public Officers and Employees when
such Statute has direct application to the per-
formance of this Contract.
13. UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT:
A. This AGREEMENT is funded in part by a grant
from the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department
of Commerce. In exchange for Coastal Zone Management
funding, the COUNTY agrees to abide by and comply with
OMB Circular A-102 and FMC 74-4.
B. The COUNCIL agrees that the COUNTY, the
Comptroller General of the United States or any of his
duly authorized representatives and the U. S. Secretary
of Commerce or any of his duly authorized representa-
tives shall, until the expiration of three (3) years
after expenditure of funds under this AGREEMENT, have
access to and the right to examine any directly
pertinent books, documents, papers and records of the
COUNCIL involving transactions related to this
AGREEMENT. This COUNCIL agrees to include the
substance of this paragraph into all subgrants and
contracts payable from funds received from this AGREE-
MENT in whole or in part. The COUNCIL agrees that
payment (s) made under this AGREEMENT shall be subject
to reduction for amounts charged thereto which are
found on the basis of audit examination not to
constitute allowable costs under this AGREEMENT. The
-6-
AUG 81979 BOOK PAGE 334
_I
AUG
81979
Boor
41
PA -F336
COUNCIL shall refund by check payable to
the
COUNTY
the amount of such reduction of payments. All
required records shall be maintained until an audit
is completed and all questions arising therefrom are
resolved, or three (3) years after completion of the
project and submission of a final "Financial Status
Report", whichever is sooner. The records shall be
maintained in a manner that will permit determination
that the COUNTY has complied with the matching share
requirements.
14. DOCUMENTS AND NON -EXPENDABLE EQUIPMENT:
A. Ownership of Documents.
All reports produced and other data gathered by the
COUNCIL for the purpose of this contract shall become
the mutual property of the Office of Coastal Zone
Management, the COUNTY, and the COUNCIL without
restriction or limitation upon their use and shall
be made available by the COUNCIL at any time
upon request of the COUNTY.
B. Copyrights.
No reports, maps or other documents produced in
whole or in part under this AGREEMENT shall be the
subject of an application for copyright on behalf of
the COUNCIL.
C. Non -Expendable Equipment and Personal Property.
Purchase of non -expendable equipment or personal
property costing over FIFTY DOLLARS ($50.00) is not
authorized.
D. Documentation.
The cover or title page of all reports, studies or
other documents resulting from contracts supported in
whole or in part by this grant shall acknowledge the
financial assistance provided by the State, COUNTY and
by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended,
administered by the Office of Coastal Zone Management,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
-7-
15. OFFICIALS NOT TO BENEFIT:
No member of or delegate to Congress, or resident Commis-
sioner, shall be admitted to any share or part of this grant
or to any benefit that may arise therefrom.
16. CHANGES:
Either party may, from time to time, request changes in
the scope of the services of the .COUNCIL to be performed
hereunder, with concomitant adjustments in the consideration
to be paid. Such changes which are mutually agreed upon by
and between the COUNTY and the COUNCIL shall be incorporated
in written amendments to the AGREEMENT and shall designate
the effective date of the change.
17. AGREEMENT AS INCLUDING ENTIRE AGREEMENT:
This instrument embodies the whole AGREEMENT of the Parties.
There are no provisions, terms, conditions, or obligations other
than those contained herein; and this AGREEMENT shall supersede
all previous communication, representation or agreements,
eitherverbal or written between the parties hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto
set their hands and seals as of the date by their signatures.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING
COUNCIL
Attestr�-%.z!��� Attest
A
Date : �`�- �'- Date
AUG 81979 BOOK 41 ME=
AUG 81979
EXHIBIT "A"
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Section I
A. Project Objective
ROOK 41 PAuE 3
This project is intended to develop a program for the management and protection
of the spoil islands located in Indian River County.
B. Responsibilities of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (Consultant).
The COUNCIL has the responsibility of assisting Indian River County in the develop-
ment of a management program for 43 spoil islands in Indian River County and co-
ordinating their efforts with Mr. Grant Gilmore, the Biological Consultant, in
order to produce a singular and compatible document from the separate studies
undertaken. Details of specific tasks to be performed by the COUNCIL are set forth
below:
Task 1: Resource Inventory/Analysis Design
COUNCIL will work with Indian River County and the Biological Consultant to
determine the spoil island characteristics and study variables which will be
studied in the resource inventory and analysis of spoil islands to be con=
ducted by the COUNTY and its CONSULTANTS. As a minimum,the data collected in
the resource inventory and analysis will include those spoil island character-
istics specified by the DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION in its contract
with the COUNTY. The nature of the final product and study variables of the
spoil island resource inventory and analysis will be agreed upon by the par-
ticipating parties.
Task 2: Literature Search
An in-depth literature search will be conducted by the COUNCIL on the subject
of spoil island management. Literature to be reviewed by the COUNCIL will
include the Report on the Spoil Islands of Indian River County, 1974, prepared
by the Environmental Study Committee of the Vero Beach -Indian River County
Planning Commission. Available information on the subject will be collected
by the COUNCIL and sources utilized (e.g., governmental agencies) to compile
the necessary data, including other appropriate sources identified by the
COUNTY and the DEPARTMENT.
Task 3: Review and Development of Alternative Management Approaches
Based upon the information collected during Task 2, COUNCIL will develop
a set of alternative approaches for the management of spoil islands. The
r
alternative spoil island management approaches developed by the COUNCIL
will be submitted to the COUNTY for its review and comment as to their
appropriateness. Input received from the COUNTY will be utilized by the
COUNCIL in selecting a viable management approach for application to the
COUNTY'S spoil islands.
Task 4: Preliminary Management Report
After receipt of the final product of the resource inventory and analysis
work conducted by the COUNTY and the Biological Consultant, COUNCIL will
apply its selected management approach to the COUNTY'S spoil islands.
COUNCIL will consider the recommendations provided in the COUNTY report,
cited in Task 2, in applying the selected management approach to the spoil
islands. The draft report will contain a management program for the spoil
islands which will include, at a minimum, the following elements:
A. Ownership status for each of the 43 spoil islands;
B. Location of areas to be closed to public use and methods of reserving
environmentally sensitive lands;
C. Location of areas suitable for replanting and recommendation of species
to be removed and species to be included in island revegetation;
D. Location of all development areas, including specific uses for each area;
E. Approximate costs of all proposals and evaluation of possible methods of
funding;
F. Management techniques to be used in implementing the plans, including
proposals for policing the spoil islands area.
The draft management program report will be submitted to the COUNTY, the
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION, and all appropriate agencies iden-
tified by both, for their review and comment. Input requested from the
agencies will include an evaluation of the management approach utilized.
Task 5: Development of Final Report
Five (5) copies of the final draft document of spoil island management
report will be compiled and submitted to the COUNTY. The report will in-
corporate all appropriate comments received and will consist of : 1) the
recommended management program for the COUNTY'S spoil islands; 2) a description
of the step by step process utilized in devising the selected management approach;
3) an evaluation of the management approach utilized along -with recommendations
to enhance the use of the approach; and 4) any additional material necessary to
adequately present the above information.
AUG 81979 -2- aooK . ?AcE 38
AUG 81979 BOOK 1 PA;F33
PLANNING & ZONING DIRECTOR REVER NEXT REVIEWED HIS MEMO TO THE
BOARD IN REGARD TO CHANGE OF THE BOND PAPER COPYING MACHINE AS FOLLOWS:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., Chairman
<' ALMA LEE LOY, Vice Chairman
WILLIARD W. SIEBERT, JR.
R. DON DEESON
PATRICK B. LYONS
JACK G. JENNINCS, Administrator
July 16, 1979
MEMO
2145 14th Avenue
T0: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: David M. Rever, Planning & Zoning Director )6i�f
SUBJECT: Change of Bond Paper Copying Machine
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
1. We request authority to change from our present rental Xerox 7000 copier
to a IBM Model III copier. We are presently paying approximately $14,000.
a year to rent the Xerox 7000; in addition, the toner, paper, developer,
etc. costs approximately $4,900. per year for a total cost of $18,900.
We are making approximately 315,000 copies a year. This makes the cost
per copy approximately 6 cents each.
2. We attended a demonstration of the IBM Model III copier at the Lawnwood
Hospital in Fort Pierce. This machine is presently operating at about
the same capacity that our Xerox is operating.-
3.
perating.3. We found the IBM Model III to have more capabilities than our Xerox 7000.
One great advantage is we are not required to stop and change paper each
time we must go from "legal" to "letter" size. The IBM machine holds both
sizes. In addition, the IBM will copy on both sides of the paper at the
same time (this will save money), and also reduce and copy on both sides
at the same time.
4. The IBM copier will cost approximately $12,056. the first year (including
$2,801.90 down payment) and $10,305.60 the second year. Assuming we use
the same amount of supplies, this would reduce our cost per copy the first
year to .053, apd the second year to .048 per copy.
. This is a 60 month purchase plan. Should we decide to'purchase this IBM
machine, on the 25th month we will have accured approximately $12,000.
credit and could purchase for approximately $13,000. We would still have
to have a maintenance agreement; this cost would be approximately $4,000.
per year. We recommend the Board consider this approach.
6. 1 have listed "Pro's and Con's" for the two machines, and I will pass out
samples of copies using "half tones".,
7. This type of transaction is authorized by Florida State Contract 4-'600-38-71-1,
and I am enclosing a copy of General Services me►ilorandum ~3 (78/79) 2310
accepting the above purchase plan as being advantageous.'
1st copy speed
Warm up time
Copies per hour
Copies per minute
Dial - Push Button
Paper capacity
Holds letter and legal at same time
Push Button selection of paper size
Flat document feed glass
Document feed device
Automatic two sides duplex
Instant darker and lighter copies come
out after 30 sec. of non-use
Push Button quantity selector returns
to one after 30 sec.
Oumidity controlled paper drawers
Magnetic brush developer
All features time out after 30 seconds
of non use
Will copy computer printouts, 2 sided, and
collated with handling paper
Document feed will deed computer printouts
Permits feature combinations like reduce,
duplex, alternate paper, and collate to
be selected at the same time
Self -advancing photo conductor
Cartridge toner 80,000 copies each
Toner reclamation system
AUG 81979
W,
IBM MODEL III
4.5 sec.
5-10 min.
4500
75
1-999
2700
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes ,
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
XEROX 7000
7.5 sec.
5-10 min.
3600
60
1-999
2000
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No .
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
BOOK 41 PAGE t"F4O
r
AUG 81979
Operator Interventions
30,000 per month
IBM III
Add paper 214.8
Paper change letter
to legal 0
Add toner 4.5
TOTAL Intervention per year 219.3- year
Based on 10 o/o of all coping to be legal size.
SUPPLIES
Cut paper
Fuser oil
Developer
Toner
IBM Series III
yes
per copy no 0
no
yes .002
I
Xerox; 7000
162.0
3000.0
21.8
3183.8 -year
XEROX 7000
yes
yes
yes
yes
MR. REVER REPORTED THAT HE HAS OBSERVED THE IBM MODEL III
COPIER IN ACTION IN DAILY USE AND FEELS IT IS SIGNIFICANT THAT THE
MACHINE HAS MULTIPLE CAPABILITIES THAT ARE CONTROLLED BY PUSH BUTTON,
CHANGE OF PAPER, ETC., LETTER SIZE TO LEGAL SIZE. IT ALSO USES AN IN-
EXPENSIVE BRAND OF PAPER, MAKES TWO SIDED COPIES, COLLATES, AND MONITORS
HOW MUCH PAPER EACH DEPARTMENT USES. THE PLANNING DIRECTOR INFORMED THE
BOARD THAT ABOUT 39,000 UNAUTHORIZED COPIES ARE MADE EACH YEAR WHICH ARE
CHARGED BACK TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE INQUIRED ABOUT THE MAINTENANCE CONTRACT, AND
MR. REVER STATED THAT THE MAINTENANCE CONTRACT IS BUILT INTO YOUR PRICE
UNDER A RENTAL AGREEMENT, IF YOU PURCHASE THE MACHINE, THE MAINTENANCE
CONTRACT AMOUNTS TO ABOUT $4,000 A YEAR. HE FELT THIS MACHINE WOULD
SERVE US FOR A GOOD TIME TO COME.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A 60 MONTH
PURCHASE PLAN AND A RENTAL PLAN, BUT MR. REVER STATED HE WAS NOT PREPARED
WITH ALL THAT INFORMATION.
ATTORNEY COLLINS INQUIRED ABOUT A TERMINATION PENALTY ON
EXISTING CONTRACTS.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON NOTED THERE IS ALWAYS A TERMINA-
TION CLAUSE ON ANY ITEM SOLD US UNDER A STATE CONTRACT. HE STATED THE
COUNTY HAS THE RIGHT TO TERMINATE WHEN THEY DONT BUDGET FOR THE AMOUNT
OF MONEY TO BE PAID. IF WE DID NOT WANT TO CONTINUE, WE WOULD NOT BUDGET
AND COULD TERMINATE ON NOTICE WITHOUT PENALTY.
MR. REVER INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE PRESENT BUDGET FIGURES
WILL MORE THAN COVER THE ACQUISITION OF THIS MACHINE, AND IN ADDITION,
THE PURCHASE OF TONER WILL BE REDUCED.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED IF THEY HAVE COMPARED THE IBM MODEL
111 WITH THE NEWER MODEL XEROX, AND THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR STATED
THAT THEY HAVE.
ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THE STATE CONTRACTS MIGHT HAVE A PRO-
VISION THAT PROVIDES FOR A PENALTY IF YOU BUDGET FOR A COMPETITOR'S PIECE
OF EQUIPMENT AND ASKED THAT THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR VERIFY THIS.
AUG 81979 99 BOOK 41 PAGE 342
r
AUG 81979 41 FA;E 343
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED IF THIS HAS BEEN RUN THROUGH THE
PURCHASING DEPARTMENT AND MR. REVER STATED THAT IT HAS AND THEY RECOMMEND
IT.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO BE SURE THAT
THEY ARE COMPARING "APPLES WITH APPLES."
MR. REVER FELT THAT WE HAVE TO COMPARE IT WITH WHAT WE PRESENTLY
HAVE. HE CONTINUED THAT THEY DID COMPARE IT WITH THE NEW XEROX AND THE
DECISION WAS THAT IT WAS THE IBM THEY WANTED TO PURSUE. HE SUGGESTED
THAT THE BOARD HAVE MR, FLYNN EXPLAIN HOW THEY ARRIVED AT THIS DECISION.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE AGREED THAT IT SEEMS THE MACHINE HAS MORE
POTENTIAL, BUT WISHED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE 60 MONTH PURCHASE PLAN OR
RENTAL SITUATION.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT FELT THAT SOMETIMES WHEN YOU GO FROM RENTAL
TO PURCHASE, THE MAINTENANCE SERVICE BECOMES POOR, AND MR, REVER FELT
THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT RENTAL FOR THE FIRST TWO YEARS.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REPORTED THAT IF WE NOTIFY XEROX
IN WRITING 30 DAYS PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 30TH, THERE IS NO PENALTY. IF WE
DON T CANCEL, IT IS AUTOMATICALLY RENEWED AND THEN IF WE CANCEL, THERE IS
A $1,000 PENALTY. THE CONTRACT CAN BE BROKEN IF FUNDS ARE NOT AVAILABLE.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE AGAIN INQUIRED ABOUT RENTAL VERSUS RENTAL/
PURCHASE, AND MR. NELSON STATED THAT THE IBM IS ALMOST THE SAME AS XEROX
EXCEPT WITH XEROX WE ARE GETTING VERY LITTLE EQUITY.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT FELT THERE IS A XEROX THAT MIGHT OFFER
THE SAME CAPABILITIES.
COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT HE FELT THE BOARD SHOULD
ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT AND NOT TRY TO
SECOND GUESS THEM. HE FELT THE QUESTION IS WHETHER YOU RENT OR BUY.
DISCUSSION CONTINUED ON THE DIFFERENT RENTAL OR PURCHASE PLANS,
AND CHAIRMAN WODTKE STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE ATTORNEY READ
THE CONTRACT AND FINALIZE THIS MATTER AT THE NEXT MEETING. THE BOARD
AGREED.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ED REGAN CAME BEFORE THE BOARD
REQUESTING APPROVAL TO HIRE AN OUTSIDE AUDITING FIRM TO AUDIT THE FISCAL
YEAR 1976 BLOCK GRANT AS REQUIRED BY HUD, HE STATED THAT HE HAS CHECKED
WITH HAMILTON & BAKER, CPA, WHICH FIRM DID THEIR LAST AUDIT FOR $2,200.
BECAUSE OF THEIR PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE AND THE INFORMATION THEY GATHERED
ABOUT FEDERAL PROCEDURE IN THE PROCESS, HE BELIEVED THEY CAN NOW DO THE
AUDIT FOR $1,200. MR. REGAN DOUBTED THAT ANY OTHER FIRM CAN DO THIS
WORK WITHOUT FIRST DOING THE RESEARCH'AND FOR THAT REASON, HE WISHED TO
HAVE PERMISSION TO HIRE HAMILTON & BAKER.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, TO APPROVE EMPLOYING THE FIRM OF HAMILTON & BAKER, CPA, TO AUDIT
FISCAL YEAR 1976 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT N -o. 2,
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED IF WE SHOULD CONSIDER ANOTHER AUDITOR
SINCE WE HAVE TO HAVE LOTS OF GRANTS DONE AND LET THEM GAIN EXPERIENCE
SO WE CAN COMPARE.
FINANCE OFFICER BARTON NOTED THAT THE THIRD GRANT IS ABOUT
READY FOR AUDIT.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REGAN EXPLAINED THAT HUD HAS
MOVED ITS TIME SCHEDULE FOR THE PREAPPLICATION UP 60 DAYS AND THE DUE
DATE HAS MOVED UP TO THE IST OF OCTOBER THROUGH THE 15TH. IN ORDER TO
BE ELIGIBLE FOR THESE GRANTS, WE HAVE TO COMPLETE OUR AUDITS AND CLOSE
OUT THE FIRST TWO YEARS AND, IN ADDITION, HAVE TO HAVE ALL OUR MONEY
TAKEN OUT FOR THE THIRD YEAR.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REGAN REQUESTED APPROVAL FOR
OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND HIMSELF TO GO TO
JACKSONVILLE FOR HUD MEETINGS AUGUST 22ND.THROUGH AUGUST 24TH FOR THE
PURPOSE OF BECOMING ACQUAINTED WITH FEDERAL REGULATIONS AS AMENDED IN
JUNE OF THIS YEAR IN ORDER TO SUBMIT THE NEW BLOCK GRANT PREAPPLICATION.
HE STATED THAT WE HAVE THE IN-HOUSE CAPABILITY TO SUBMIT THIS APPLICATION
WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. MR, REGAN FURTHER
NOTED THAT THEY HAVE A VEHICLE AND CAN PAY FOR THIS TRIP OUT OF THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS,
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY GRANTED APPROVAL OF OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR
AUG 81979 101 Boa 41 PAf;E 4
AUG 81979 Bou 41 n;r 345
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER AND COMMUNITY :DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REGAN TO
ATTEND HUD MEETINGS IN JACKSONVILLE ON AUGUST 22, 23, AND 24, 1979 AS
ABOVE,
MR. REGAN INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THEY HAVE RECENTLY EMPLOYED
A PROGRAM MANAGER FOR THE SECTION 8 HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, TED REX,
AND WOULD LIKE TO HAVE APPROVAL OF OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR HIM AND/OR
MR. REGAN TO REVIEW SECTION 8 PROGRAMS IN ST. LUCIE AND BREVARD COUNTIES
TO SEE HOW THEY MIGHT APPLY TO OUR PROGRAM. MR. REGAN STATED THAT THIS
WOULD NOT INVOLVE OVERNIGHT TRAVEL, BUT RATHER PERMISSION TO USE THE
VEHICLE THEY HAVE AVAILABLE.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY GRANTED APPROVAL OF OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL
FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REGAN AND SECTION 8 PROGRAM MANAGER
TED REX AS REQUESTED ABOVE.
COMMISSIONER DEESON DISCUSSED THE IMPROVEMENTS PLANNED FOR
WABASSO BEACH PARK, NOTING THAT A GOOD DEAL OF OBJECTION HAS BEEN RAISED
TO THE FENCE THAT HAS BEEN ERECTED THERE. HE EXPLAINED THAT THE BOARD'S
INTENTION WAS TO PROTECT THE BEACH, NOT TO LOCK PEOPLE OUT. HE CONTINUED
THAT HE IS DISAPPOINTED THAT PEOPLE HAVE TAKEN THE LAW INTO THEIR OWN
HANDS AND TRIED TO DESTROY PUBLIC PROPERTY. COMMISSIONER DEESON STATED
THAT HIS ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION WOULD HAVE BEEN TO REMOVE THE FENCE,
BUT HE FINDS IT DIFFICULT TO FOLLOW THAT LINE OF THINKING BECAUSE OF THE
DAMAGE THAT HAS BEEN DONE TO THE BEACH ALREADY. HE DID NOT, HOWEVER,
BELIEVE THAT THE MAJORITY SHOULD BE PENALIZED FOR ACTIONS OF THE MINORITY,
BUT FELT THAT THIS DOES POINT OUT TO EVERYBODY THAT THE BOARD WAS RIGHT
TO TAKE THE ACTION THEY DID. COMMISSIONER DEESON STATED THAT HE CANNOT
SUPPORT ANY MAJOR IMPROVEMENT BEING MADE TO THE PARK UNTIL SUCH TIME
AS THE BOARD DECIDES TO PROVIDE 24 HOUR PROTECTION, BUT HE DID FEEL
THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT COULD BE DONE SUCH AS REMOVING THE PILINGS IN
THE OCEAN THAT ARE A DANGER, INSTALLING STEPS FROM THE BLUFF TO THE
BEACH AND PROTECTING THE BLUFF FROM THE VEHICLES.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT INFORMED THE BOARD THAT WE HAVE JUST
LEARNED THAT THE FENCE HAS BEEN KNOCKED DOWN AGAIN THIS AFTERNOON, WITH
THE EXCEPTION OF THE SOUTH SIDE.
1"2
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS REPORTED THAT HE HAD MET WITH SOME OF
THE PEOPLE PRESENT TODAY AT THE REQUEST OF THE BOARD; SHOWED THEM THE
PLANS MADE UP BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT; AND LISTENED TO THEIR OBJECTIONS.
THESE PEOPLE GAVE HIM A LETTER PRESENTING THEIR IDEAS AND THE ADMINIS-
TRATOR SAID THAT HE HAD UNDERSTOOD AT THAT MEETING THAT THEY WOULD ASSIST
THE COUNTY IN MAINTAINING THE FENCE UNTIL PROPER DECISIONS COULD BE
MADE. HE CONTINUED THAT HE MET WITH THE SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT, AND IT
WAS UNDERSTOOD THERE WOULD BE A 24 HOUR WATCH ON THE FENCE. THAT
APPARENTLY BROKE DOWN DURING THE INTERIM PERIOD WHERE OFFICERS LEFT TO
GET DINNER, ETC. THE ADMINISTRATOR PRESENTED A SERIES OF PHOTOGRAPHS
SHOWING THE CONDITION OF THE FENCE AT DIFFERENT DATES, AND NOTED THAT
ONE PERSON WAS ARRESTED AND CHARGED A WEEK AGO. THE ADMINISTRATOR
CONTINUED THAT HE FURNISHED THOSE PRESENT AT THE MEETING A COPY OF THE
BOUNDARY SURVEY AND ASKED THEM TO HAVE THEIR OWN MEETING AND SHOW ON
THE SURVEY WHAT THEY DESIRED AT THE PARK. WE NOW HAVE THEIR DRAWING AND
WHAT THEY HAVE ASKED FOR ARE VERY SIMPLE THINGS, NOTHING AT ALL SIMILAR
TO WHAT WAS PROPOSED OVER THE YEARS WHEN IT WAS DISCUSSED WITH THIS
BOARD BY OTHER GROUPS. THEY HAVE AGREED TO THE BOARDWALK AND THE TWO
ENVIRONMENTAL WALKWAYS THAT GO OVER THE DUNES, BUT DO NOT WANT ANY PAVE-
MENT. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT HE TRIED TO IMPRESS THE PEOPLE
THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS WE HAVE TO DO BECAUSE THEY ARE REGULATED
BY THE DER, AND OUR PLANNING OFFICE WILL HAVE TO PREPARE DRAWINGS TO
MAKE APPLICATION FOR PERMITS. THE ADMINISTRATOR NOTED THAT IT IS VERY
EXPENSIVE AND DIFFICULT TO MAINTAIN PROPER PUBLIC FACILITIES FOR USE OF
RESPECTABLE CITIZENS BECAUSE OF VANDALISM, AND WE HAVE FOUND THIS TO BE
A FACT AT ALL OF THE COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY. PREVIOUS FACILITIES AT
WABASSO BEACH PARK HAD TO BE BULLDOZED OUT BECAUSE OF THE DESTRUCTION
CAUSED BY VANDALS. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS THEN REVIEWED WHAT WAS SET
OUT IN THE DRAWING SUBMITTED - A BOARDWALK AND WALKWAYS OVER THE DUNES
AND POSSIBLY RESTROOM FACILITIES AND A FENCED -IN RESTROOM AREA. THE
ADMINISTRATOR INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE FENCE COULD BE REMOVED AND
THE PORTION THAT HAS NOT BEEN TOO SEVERELY DAMAGED CAN BE USED IN OTHER
AREAS.
103
aooK 41 Pact 346
_I
BOOK 41 PAUF.47
EDDIE DILLARD CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AS SPOKESMAN FOR THOSE
PRESENT. HE STATED THAT HE KNOWS IT WASN'T PUT UP TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT,
BUT A THREE SIDED FENCE WITH BARBED WIRE IS NOT WHAT PEOPLE WANT. HE
CONTINUED THAT EVERYONE HE CONTACTED DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THE FENCE BEFORE
IT WENT UP, AND THEY HAVE 900 SIGNATURES OF PEOPLE WHO DONT WANT THE
FENCE. THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE RESTROOMS AND BELIEVE THEY COULD BE
FENCED, BUT THEY WOULD RATHER HAVE NOTHING AT ALL THAN THE PRESENT
FENCE. HE STATED THAT HE HAS SEEN PEOPLE SITTING THERE DRINKING ALCOHOL
AND SMOKING POT, AND THE SHERIFF DIDN'T ARREST THEM.
A LADY RESIDENT OF THE AREA INFORMED THE BOARD THAT SHE HAS
HELPED TRY TO GUARD THE FENCE AS REQUESTED AND STATED SHE DID GIVE HER
NAME AS A WITNESS TO ONE MAN SHE SAW DAMAGE THE FENCE, BUT THE OTHER
DAMAGE WAS DONE WHEN THE BEACH WAS UNGUARDED.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED WHAT GOOD USE THE INTERIOR OF THE
PARK CAN BE PUT TO AT NIGHT.
MR. DILLARD STATED THAT THEY USE IT TO HAVE A PLACE TO PARK
WHERE THEY WON T BE VANDALIZED WHEN THEY GO ON THE BEACH TO WATCH TURTLES,
AND ANOTHER GENTLEMAN STATED THAT THEY USE IT TO GO OUT EARLY MORNING
FISHING. IT WAS ALSO NOTED THAT THERE IS VANDALISM ALL OVER THE COUNTY
AT MEMORIAL ISLAND AND THE NEW BRIDGE, ETC. - NOT JUST WABASSO BEACH,
ONE LADY COMMENTED THAT THE FIRST PLACE SHE BRINGS VISITORS
IS TO SEE THE OCEAN NO MATTER WHAT THE HOUR AND THE APPEARANCE OF THE
FENCE IS A DISGRACE.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE COMMENTED THAT THE BOARD HAS SPENT HOURS TALKING
ABOUT PLANS FOR THIS PARK FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS AND DID FIND $25,000
SO THEY COULD TRY TO MAKE A BETTER FACILITY FOR EVERYONE. IT WAS FELT
IF WE ARE GOING TO MAKE AN INVESTMENT OF $25,000, WE WANTED TO BE ASSURED
THE FACILITIES WOULD BE PROTECTED AND WE MADE THE DECISION TO PUT UP
THE FENCE. THE BOARD HAD NO INTENTIONS OF RESTRICTING ANYONE FROM USING
THE PARK. HE NOTED THAT IT SEEMS WE ARE DARNED IF WE DO AND DARNED IF
WE DON T, AND COMMENTED THAT THE BEACH BELONGS TO EVERYONE, BUT BOATS
AND CARS SHOULD NOT BE GOING OVER THE DUNES.
1 "0
KENNETH PANGBURN, A MEMBER OF THE WABASSO CITIZENS ASSOCIATION,
DISCUSSED A MEETING HELD WITH COUNTY OFFICIALS OVER TWO YEARS AGO, AND
STATED THAT TO THIS DAY THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN INFORMED ABOUT THE COUNTY'S
PLANS TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS AT THE PARK OR THAT A FENCE WAS GOING TO BE
ERECTED. MR. PANGBURN FURTHER STATED THAT THE WABASSO CITIZENS ASSOCIA-
TION IS A PARTY TO THE .JOHN'S ISLAND WATER SITUATION, AND THEY APPEARED
AT A COUNTY MEETING AND ASKED THAT THEIR ASSOCIATION BE NOTIFIED OF ANY
DISCUSSION ABOUT WATER IN THE COUNTY, HE DID NOT BELIEVE THEY HAVE EVER
RECEIVED ANY NOTIFICATION IN REGARD TO THE PROPOSED BEACH IMPROVEMENT
OR THE WABASSO ACQUIFER. HE CONTINUED THAT BEFORE THE FENCE WAS ERECTED
HE DID NOT FEEL THE PUBLIC KNEW WHAT AREA OF THE BEACH THE COUNTY OWNED,
AND NOW THAT IT IS CLEARLY INDICATED WHAT A SMALL AREA OF PUBLIC BEACH
THERE IS, HE FELT THE PUBLIC IS DISTURBED, ESPECIALLY SINCE THEY HAVE
BEEN USING THE ADDITIONAL PRIVATE LAND OVER THE YEARS AND NOW THEY CAN'T.
COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT HE HAD A POINT, BUT BELIEVED WE SHOULD
KNOW WHAT IS PUBLIC AND WHAT IS PRIVATE.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT ASKED MR. PANGBURN IF HE HAD VOTED ON THE
TOURIST TAX AND WHETHER HE KNEW THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS CONTEMPLATED FOR
WABASSO BEACH WERE A PART OF THAT TOURIST TAX. THIS WAS PUBLISHED IN
THE LOCAL PAPERS, AND HE COULD, THEREFORE, NOT UNDERSTAND WHY NO ONE
KNEW ABOUT IT.
MANY PRESENT SAID THEY KNEW NOTHING ABOUT THE PLANS FOR THE
PARK AND THAT NOTHING WAS PUBLISHED ABOUT IT.
A LADY IN THE AUDIENCE ASKED IF THE COUNTY HAD PERMITS TO
PUT UP THE FENCE AND STATED THAT SHE FELT THE $7,000 SPENT FOR THE FENCE
COULD HAVE BEEN BETTER SPENT FOR SALARY FOR ANOTHER SHERIFF'S DEPUTY.
THE ADMINISTRATOR STATED THAT WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING
PERMITS FOR THE BOARDWALK AND IT IS NOT REQUIRED THAT THE COUNTY GET
PERMITS TO ERECT A FENCE ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY. HE ALSO NOTED THAT THE
FENCE DID NOT COST $7,000 AND A SHERIFF'S DEPUTY SALARY AMOUNTS TO A
GOOD DEAL MORE THAN THAT. THOSE PRESENT CONTINUED TO OBJECT TO THE
APPEARANCE OF THE FENCE AND ASKED HOW A THREE -SIDED FENCE PREVENTS
FURTHER VANDALISM.
AUG 81979105 1 PAGF 48
AUG 81979 mu 41 uGE 49
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT POINTED OUT THAT IT WILL KEEP VEHICLES
OUT OF THE PARK AT NIGHT, AND FURTHER NOTED THAT THERE ISN IT A PUBLIC
BEACH IN THE CITY THAT ISN'T CLOSED AT NIGHT.
COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT THE FACT THAT THE FENCE HAS
BARBED WIRE SEEMS TO BE A MAJOR POINT. HE SUGGESTED REMOVING THE BARBED
WIRE AND PUTTING PLANTINGS ALONG THE FENCE AS HE FELT WE SHOULD KNOW
WHOSE PROPERTY ENDS WHERE, AND IN THIS WAY WE COULD STILL DEFINE THE
PROPERTY AND GET AWAY FROM THE STOCKADE ATMOSPHERE,
CHAIRMAN WODTKE FELT STRONGLY THAT WE WILL HAVE TO DEFINE THE
NORTH AND SOUTH BOUNDARIES OF THE PARK.
MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE STRESSED THAT THEY HAVE TRIED TO
PROTECT THE FENCE AS REQUESTED UNTIL THIS MATTER CAN BE DETERMINED, BUT
COMMENTED THAT THIS IS THE ONLY PARK IN THE COUNTY THAT IS FENCED.
THE BOARD INFORMED THEM THAT ALL OF HOBART PARK IS SURROUNDED
BY BARBED WIRE, AND IT WAS NECESSARY TO HIRE A FULL TIME SUPERVISOR TO
PROTECT THE IMPROVEMENTS MADE THERE.
COMMISSIONER LOY EXPLAINED THAT FIRST WE SECURE LAND AND THEN
WE DEVELOP, AND WITH DEVELOPMENT COMES SOME RESTRICTIONS TO PROTECT
WHAT WE DEVELOP. HOPEFULLY, SOME DAY WE CAN JUSTIFY HAVING SOMEBODY ON
DUTY ALL THE TIME. SHE POINTED OUT THAT THE ACTUAL PLAN WE CAME UP WITH
CAME FROM THE MEETING MR. PANGBURN SPOKE ABOUT THAT TOOK PLACE THREE
YEARS AGO, AND SHE REITERATED THAT THIS WAS INCLUDED IN THE TOURIST TAX
PROGRAM AND IS PART OF A LONG RANGE PLAN. SHE AGREED THAT THE BARBED
WIRE CAN BE TAKEN OFF AND THE FENCE COULD BE WELL LANDSCAPED. COMMIS-
SIONER Loy STATED THAT SHE IS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE CONVENIENCE STORE
NOW LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PARK. WE DONT WANT THEIR LITTER,
AND SHE DID NOT BELIEVE THAT ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES SHOULD BE ALLOWED IN
ANY COUNTY PARK. SHE NOTED THAT SHE HAS TALKED TO RESIDENTS IN THIS
AREA WHO NO LONGER USE THE BEACH BECAUSE OF THE PROBLEM PEOPLE.
MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE AGAIN FELT A THREE SIDED FENCE IS USE-
LESS AND PROTESTED ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO PARK ON THE PRIVATE PROPERTY
BECAUSE OF THE FENCE, THEY NOTED THAT THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS NEVER
OBJECTED TO THEM PARKING THERE.
106
EDDIE DILLARD FELT THE PARK IS NOT BIG ENOUGH AND THE COUNTY
SHOULD GET MORE PROPERTY. ANOTHER MAN IN THE AUDIENCE STATED THAT THE
PEOPLE DON T GO THERE TO USE IT AS A PARK, BUT JUST AS A MEANS OF GETTING
TO THE BEACH AND THE FEWER THE IMPROVEMENTS, THE MORE SPACE FOR THE PEOPLE.
THOSE PROTESTING STATED THAT IF THE FENCE IS LEFT, IT WILL BE COMPLETELY
DESTROYED.
COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT HE HAD REACHED A STATE OF
MIND WHERE HE WAS READY TO ROLL UP HIS FENCE AND STEAL AWAY.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE FELT IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT THE SITUATION
REQUIRES THAT WE FENCE THE AREA. HE ASKED THE ADMINISTRATOR HOW MANY
TIMES WE HAVE PUT RUNNING WATER AT WABASSO BEACH.
ADMINISTRATOR KENNINGS STATED THAT THE PEOPLE HERE ALREADY
KNOW THAT WE HAVE TRIED TO PUT IN VARIOUS FACILITIES SEVERAL TIMES OVER
THE YEARS, BUT THE RESTROOMS WERE TORN DOWN BECAUSE OF VANDALISM AND
EVERYTHING WE TRIED TO PUT IN THERE WAS EITHER STOLEN, DESTROYED OR MADE
UNFIT FOR USE, HE INFORMED THOSE PRESENT THAT A PREVIOUS BOARD CONTACTED
THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO THE SOUTH AND TRIED TO BUY ADDITIONAL LAND TO
EXTEND THE PARK BUT THE OWNERS WERE NOT INTERESTED IN SELLING. WE
WERE SUCCESSFUL IN GETTING ONE ADDITIONAL LOT TO THE NORTH.
MR. PANGBURN STATED THAT MR. MICHAEL HAD RAISED A QUESTION AS
TO OWNERSHIP OF THE PARK, AND THE ADMINISTRATOR REPLIED THAT IF ANYONE
FEELS THE BOARD DOES NOT OWN THE PARK, HE FELT THEY SHOULD GO TO COURT
AND TRY TO TAKE IT BACK.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMIS-
SIONER LYONS, TO REMOVE THE FENCE AT THIS TIME AND NOT MAKE ANY IMPROVE-
MENTS OTHER THAN REMOVING THE PILINGS IN THE OCEAN, IF POSSIBLE, PROVIDE
STEPS TO THE BEACH IN AN EFFORT TO PROTECT THE DUNES, AND ADD THE
BOARDWALK.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED WHY THE PLANS SUBMITTED BY THOSE PRO-
TESTING THE FENCE DID NOT SHOW A BOARDWALK GOING THE FULL WIDTH OF THE
BEACH.
MR, DILLARD STATED THAT THEY PLANNED TO HAVE SEA OATS AND SEA
GRAPES TO BUILD BACK THE BLUFF, AND IT WAS NOTED THEY EVEN CONSIDERED
PLANTING SPANISH BAYONETS TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM WALKING OVER THE BLUFF,
AUG 81979 Boox 41 �Acr 3JQ
L_ 107
AUG 81979 BooK 41 F},GE 351
COMMISSIONER LYONS POINTED OUT THAT THE BOARDWALK WOULD BE
BUILT HIGH ENOUGH THAT THE SEA OATS CAN GROW AROUND AND UNDERNEATH IT.
HE FELT IF THE BOARDWALK DOES NOT GO ALL THE WAY ACROS-S, IT LEAVES A
WAY TO GET THE BOATS OR THE DUNE BUGGIES OVER THE BLUFF. COMMISSIONER
LYONS FELT WE CAN PROVIDE A WAY FOR THE BOATS.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS DID NOT FEEL YOU SHOULD LAUNCH BOATS
THROUGH THAT PARTICULAR PARK WHERE YOU HAVE MANY PEOPLE AND CHILDREN
PLAYING. HE SUGGESTED THAT WE MIGHT TRY TO WORK OUT A LAUNCHING RAMP
AT AMBERSAND BEACH PARK.
MR. FULFORD FELT THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THAT IT IS T00
SHALLOW UP THERE, AND HE NOTED THAT THEY ARE JUST TALKING ABOUT SMALL
JOHN BOATS.
IN FURTHER DISCUSSION, THOSE PRESENT STATED THAT THEY DID NOT
MIND THE BOARDWALK BEING EXTENDED ALL THE WAY ACROSS.
EDDIE DILLARD POINTED OUT THAT PEOPLE GO AROUND BEHIND THE
BATHHOUSE AND DOWN THE BEACH.
ASSISTANT PLANNER DAVID MARSH FELT THAT THE PILINGS AND WIRE
CAN BE RELOCATED TO STOP PEOPLE FROM GOING THROUGH THERE.
COMMISSIONER LOY FELT THAT MR. DILLARD IS SAYING THAT WHEREVER
WE STOP, PEOPLE WILL GO AROUND, AND FELT THERE IS NOT MUCH WE CAN DO
ABOUT THAT UNLESS WE HAD A FENCE ON THE SOUTH AND JOINED THE FENCE AND
THE BOARDWALK TOGETHER.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT POINTED OUT THAT THE COUNTY CAN ONLY PUT
IMPROVEMENTS ON OUR OWN PROPERTY. HE ASKED IF WE ARE GOING TO GO WITH
THE PILINGS AND THE CABLE INSTEAD OF THE FENCE TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM
DRIVING THROUGH.
DISCUSSION AROSE ABOUT BEACH BUGGIES, AND THE STATEMENT WAS
MADE THAT UNDER STATE LAW YOU CANNOT DRIVE A VEHICLE PAST THE COASTAL
SETBACK LINE, WHICH IS ABOUT 50' FROM HIGH TIDE.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE NOTED THAT THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO REMOVE
THE FENCE, MAKE AN EFFORT TO REMOVE THE PILINGS IN THE WATER, AND PROVIDE
ACCESS STEPS TO THE BEACH AND BUILD A BOARDWALK,
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT STATED THAT HE WISHED EVERYONE TO UNDER-
STAND THAT HE IS RESPONDING TO THE RECOMMENDATION OF A FELLOW COMMISSIONER
AND TO HONEST LAW ABIDING CITIZENS.
HE DID NOT WANT THE VANDALS TO
FEEL THEY HAVE ACCOMPLISHED ANYTHING, AND IF IT WERE ONLY THE VANDALS
OBJECTING TO THE FENCE, HE WOULD HIRE FULL TIME SECURITY AND HAVE THEM
PUT IN JAIL.
DISCUSSION AROSE ABOUT OTHER THINGS THE PEOPLE WISHED DONE AT
THE BEACH, SUCH AS PAINTING, ETC.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A LADY IN THE AUDIENCE INQUIRED IF THEIR GROUP SHOULD COME UP
WITH ENOUGH MONEY TO BUILD BATH HOUSES, ETC., IF THE COUNTY WOULD LET
THEM DO IT, AND SHE WAS INFORMED THAT IS THE WAY MOST OF OUR PARKS ARE
DEVELOPED IN CONJUNCTION WITH LOCAL GROUPS.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS REPORTED ON THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS TO DATE
ON THE FLOODING IN THE SOUTH COUNTY AREA IN THE 6TH AVENUE VICINITY.
HE STATED THAT HE DID GET AN APPROVAL FOR THE CITY TO ENLARGE THE 30"
OPENING DOWN AT 3RD COURT ON THE STATE OUTFALL, AND MR. SCHINDLER OF THE
DOT HAS HAD THE TWO SCREENS THAT WERE THERE REMOVED, THE ADMINISTRATOR
SUGGESTED TO THE BOARD THAT THEY GRANT THE ROAD & BRIDGE DEPARTMENT
PERMISSION TO INSTALL A 48" CULVERT CONNECTING THE DOT DITCH INTO THE
CANAL THAT RUNS SOUTH AROUND THE ROCKRIDGE PROPERTY, IF EITHER ONE OF
THOSE DITCHES SHOULD BECOME STOPPED UP, AT LEAST'THIS WOULD LET THE
WATER GO THE OTHER WAY. HE NOTED THAT IT WILL TAKE SO' OF PIPE.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SIEBERT, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO HAVE THE
ROAD & BRIDGE DEPARTMENT INSTALL THE 48" CULVERT AS ABOVE.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT PROPERTY
APPRAISER LAW HAS SIX CARS BELONGING TO THE COUNTY AND WANTS PERMISSION
TO GAS THEM AT THE COUNTY GARAGE. HE NOTED THAT THE CARS CAN BE GIVEN
NUMBERS, AND THE PROPERTY APPRAISER WOULD BE BILLED FOR ALL THE GAS
THEY USE.
ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THERE HAS TO BE SOME CONTROL OVER THIS
AND THAT THE.PROPERTY APPRAISER SHOULD MAKE A REPRESENTATION THAT THE
GAS BEING SOLD TO HIM BY THE COUNTY IS FOR COUNTY PURPOSES.
"Al
109
Boob 41 FHc-3Da
F,r-- 'I
AUG 8 1979 _ goo 41 F.,,^,F35
IN DISCUSSION IT WAS AGREED THAT THESE CARS ARE TO BE USED
STRICTLY FOR COUNTY PURPOSES DURING WORKING HOURS.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED -BY COMMISSIONER
LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO INFORM
PROPERTY APPRAISER LAW THAT THE CARS IN QUESTION ARE TO BE USED FOR
COUNTY PURPOSES ONLY AND THAT HE HAS PERMISSION TO PURCHASE GAS AT THE
COUNTY GARAGE AT THE COUNTY RATE AND WILL BE BILLED ACCORDINGLY.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE INSTRUCTED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO REQUEST A
LETTER FROM MR. LAW VERIFYING THAT THESE CARS WILL ONLY BE USED FOR
COUNTY PURPOSES.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS NEXT REPORTED THAT HE HAS BEEN MEETING_
WITH CITY PERSONNEL AND VARIOUS ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS IN THE COUNTY
TRYING TO COME UP WITH A PLAN TO CONTROL RUN-OFF AND SET UP REGULATIONS
FOR RUN-OFF IN THE CITY. HE NOTED THAT WE ARE TRYING TO LIFT THE MORA-
TORIUM ON BUILDING AND WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE SAME CRITERIA IN THE CITY
AND THE COUNTY.
COMMISSIONER SIEBERT STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THIS
MATTER PUT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED AN EXTENSION AGREEMENT EXTENDING
THE DUE DATE OF THE $50,000 ANTICIPATION NOTE TO FIRST CITRUS BANK FROM
JULY 61 19791 TO SEPTEMBER 61 19791 AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF
THE CHAIRMAN.
all
EXTENSION AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this 8th day of
August
1979, by and between the COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER and FIRST
CITRUS BANK OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a Florida Banking Cor-
poration:
WITNESSETH: that for good and valuable considerations
in hand paid, the parties agree between themselves as follows:
WHEREAS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY executed an Anticipation
Note to.FIRST CITRUS BANK OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY in the amount
of FIFTY THOUSAND AND NO/100 ($50,000.00), on August 15, 1978,
said Note to become due and payable on or before July 6, 1979;
and
WHEREAS, it is the intention of the parties to extend the
term of said Note to September 6, 1979;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises herein
contained the said INDIAN RIVER COUNTY and FIRST CITRUS BANK
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY hereby extend the term of said Antici-
pation Note to September 6, 1979.
A11 other terms of the original Note dated August 15, 1978
remain binding and enforceable between the parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto
set their hands and seals the day and year first above written.
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presenc of :'
J1
Acit G
As to ounty
c_
As to First Citrus
AUG 8 1979
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
By 2�c.� x!/11
illiam C. Wa tke, Jr', Chairman
Board of County Corcim'ssioners
FIRST CITRUS BANK.OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY
By
�o �41 PAGF
AUG 81979
mai 41 uu 355
ATTORNEY COLLINS DISCUSSED THE PROJECTION MADE BY THE FINANCE
OFFICER AS TO WHAT NON AD VALOREM FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE FOR THE MUNICIPAL
SERVICE TAXING FUND. HE STATED THAT AFTER TALKING TO.MR. BARTON, IT IS
HIS UNDERSTANDING THAT WE DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM AT THIS POINT - THE
MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING FUND CAN HANDLE THE CONTRIBUTION FOR FIRE
SERVICES THROUGH AD VALOREM TAXES AND THE BALANCE CAN BE PAID THROUGH
NON AD VALOREM SOURCES.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE ASKED THE ATTORNEY WHAT HE HAS LEARNED ABOUT
HAVING A HEARING OFFICER FOR THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD.
ATTORNEY COLLINS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT CHAPTER 194 PROVIDES
THAT THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD CAN HIRE A SPECIAL MASTER
TO HEAR CASES IN THE BOARDS STEAD; THE SPECIAL MASTER REPORTS BACK TO
THE BOARD WITH FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; AND THE BOARD
ACTS ON THAT. THE PURPOSE OF THE SPECIAL MASTER IS TO SAVE TIME FOR THE
BOARD. THE STATUTE REQUIRES THAT THE SPECIAL MASTER BE A RESIDENT OF
THE COUNTY IN WHICH THE BOARD SITS. THE ATTORNEY CONTINUED THAT HE HAS
CALLED TWO PEOPLE WITH GENERAL EXPERTISE IN APPRAISING - PHIL HOUK,
M.I.A., WHO IS STRONG IN AGRICULTURE, AND .JACK SHERMAN. THEY HAVE
INDICATED SOME INTEREST; THERE ARE OTHER CITIZENS WITH APPRAISAL BACK-
GROUND, HE NOTED THAT THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD ITSELF
IS THE BOARD WHICH MAKES THE DECISION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE A
SPECIAL MASTER, AND THE EXPENSE IS SHARED 3/5 BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AND 2/5 BY THE SCHOOL BOARD.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE NOTED THAT THE SPECIAL MASTER WOULD HEAR CASES
WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF THE BOARD AND ASKED IF THE BOARD WOULD HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR THE TESTIMONY.
ATTORNEY COLLINS ANSWERED THAT THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO, IF THEY
WISH, BUT GENERALLY THEY JUST REVIEW THE FINDINGS.
CHAIRMAN WODTKE INQUIRED ABOUT THE TIME FRAME INVOLVED FOR THE
HEARING OFFICER TO WRITE UP HIS OPINIONS AND THEN FOR THE BOARD TO REVIEW
THEM AND MAKE A DECISION.
ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THE SPECIAL MASTER WOULD HAVE TO BE
GEARED INTO GETTING THE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OUT PRETTY MUCH THE
112
SAME DAY OR THE NEXT DAY.
HE NOTED THAT THE BOARD CAN DESIGNATE CERTAIN
CASES FOR THE SPECIAL PIASTER TO HEAR, AND THEY CAN APPOINT AS MANY
SPECIAL MASTERS AS THEY WISH.
DISCUSSION CONTINUED ON THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF
HAVING A SPECIAL MASTER, AND COMMISSIONER SIEBERT FELT A GREAT DEAL OF
CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN BEFORE GOING TO A SPECIAL MASTER SINCE
THE BOARD WILL HAVE TO REACH A DECISION, BUT THE PEOPLE WILL NOT HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE THEM.
COMMISSIONER LOY ALSO EXPRESSED SOME CONCERN ABOUT THE PUBLIC
CONFIDENCE. SHE STATED THAT SHE HAD NOT REALIZED THE SPECIAL MASTER
WOULD HAVE TO BE A COUNTY RESIDENT, BUT HAD ASSUMED THAT WE COULD GET
SOMEONE FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE WHO IS TOTALLY IMPARTIAL. SHE FELT THE LOCAL
PEOPLE WOULD FEEL MUCH MORE SECURE WITH THEIR OWN BOARD SITTING THERE,
ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED THAT ALTHOUGH HE HAD SUGGESTED
SOMEONE WITH APPRAISING BACKGROUND TO BE A SPECIAL MASTER, IT COULD JUST
AS WELL BE AN ATTORNEY WHO HAS REAL ESTATE EXPERIENCE.
THIS WILL BE FURTHER DISCUSSED AT THE ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING
OF THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL ADJUSTMENT BOARD.
COMMISSIONER Loy INFORMED THE BOARD THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED A
LETTER FROM MRS. KATHERYN BEINDORF RESIGNING AS A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING
& ZONING COMMISSION.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT,
THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED MRS, BEINDORF'S RESIGNATION WITH REGRET
AND ADOPTED RESOLUTION 79-71 TO BE PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY HONORING
MRS. BEINDORF FOR HER SERVICE ON THIS BOARD,
CHAIRMAN WODTKE NOTED THAT ATTORNEY BROWN WAS GOING TO DO SOME
CHECKING ON THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCEDURES AND REQUESTED THAT ATTORNEY
COLLINS CONTACT HIM IN THIS REGARD,
CHAIRMAN WODTKE DISCUSSED SETTING UP A WORKSHOP WITH CONNELL,
METCALF'& EDDY AND NOTED THAT WE WILL NEED TO PREPARE AGREEMENTS FOR
THOSE WISHING TO RENT SPACE FROM THE COUNTY - THE SCHOOL BOARD, ETC.
HE INSTRUCTED THE ATTORNEY TO PROCEED WITH THIS, AND INFORMED THE BOARD
THAT HE AND THE ATTORNEY WILL MEET WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD TO DISCUSS SOME
AUG 81979 113 Rao 41 PAcrG
AUG 81979 sooK 41 FA-uE357
THOUGHTS THE BOARD HAS HAD IN REGARD TO MAKING SPACE AVAILABLE ON A COST
PLUS DEBT SERVICE FOR A 20 OR 30 YEAR TERM, THE SCHOOL BOARD TO PAY
FOR THEIR UTILITIES, JANITORIAL SERVICE, SECURITY, ETC,
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON GAVE A FURTHER REPORT ON THE
PROPOSED CANCELING OF THE XEROX MACHINE AND REPLACING OF SAME WITH AN
IBM MODEL, AND STRONGLY RECOMMENDED THAT THIS BE DONE.
THE CHAIRMAN STATED THAT THIS WILL BE DECIDED AT THE MEETING
OF AUGUST 22, 1979,
COMPLETELY EXECUTED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD AND CONNELL,
METCALF & EDDY, IN REGARD TO DESIGN OF MODIFICATIONS, COMPLETION OF
PLANS, PERIODIC INSPECTIONS AND SITE WORK FOR THE OLD INDIAN RIVER
MEMORIAL HOSPITAL BUILDING, AND COURTHOUSE, AND THE ANNEX, IS HEREBY
MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES AS APPROVED AT THE MEETING OF JULY 51 1979.
AGREEMENT
BETWEEN OWNER AND ARCHITECT
FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 5th day of
July , 1979, by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, hereinafter referred to as
"OWNER" and CONNELL, METCALF & EDDY, INC., hereinafter referred
to as "ARCHITECT".
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, t e OWNER proposes to do certain work consumating
three ps`f'
the last � p ases for remodeling of the old Indian River
Memorial Hospital and existing Courthouse structures; and
WHEREAS, the OWNER desires to engage the ARCHITECT to
perform certain professional services pertinent to such work
in accordance with this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the ARCHITECT desires to provide such professional
services in accordance with this Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the
mutual benefits which will accrue to the parties hereto in
carrying out the terms of this Agreement, it is mutually under-
stood and agreed as follows:
SCOPE OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES:
Design of modifications, completion of plans, periodic inspections
and site work for the following buildings:
A. Old Indian River Memorial Hospital Building,
Vero Beach, Florida.
B. Indian River County Courthouse Building,
Vero Beach, Florida.
C. Courthouse Annex Building, Vero Beach, Florida.
for use as Administrative and Court spaces by the County, and
other agencies including the County School Board.
Estimated Construction Cost = $2,916,300.00
Architect's Services and Responsibilities
Basic Services:
three
The Architect's Basic Services consist of the :Rkza pha es
described in Paragraph 1.1 through kXS and include normal 1.3
structural, mechanical and electrical engineering services.
AUG 81979 BOOK 41 PA X59
MOO ' 41 pair 359
1.1 Consolidated Design Development and Construction Document
Phase.
1.1.1 Based on the approved Schematic Design Documents and any
adjustments authorized by the Owner in the program or Project
budget, the Architect shall prepare, for approval by the Owner,
Design Development Documents consisting of drawings and other
documents to fix and describe the size and character of the entire
Project as to architectural, structural, mechanical and electrical
systems, materials and such other elements as may be appropriate.
1.1.2 The Architect shall submit to the Owner a further State-
ment of Probable Construction Costs upon 30% completion of
Paragraph 1.1.
1.1.3 Based on the approved Design Development Documents and
any further adjustments in the scope or quality of the Project
or in the Project budget authorized by the Owner, the Architect
shall prepare, for approval by the Owner, Construction Documents
consisting of Drawings and Specifications setting forth in detail
the requirements for the construction of the Project.
1.1.4 The Architect shall assist the Owner in the preparation
of the necessary bidding information, bidding forms, the
Conditions of the Contract, and the form of Agreement between
the Owner and the Contractor.
1.1.5 The Architect shall advise the Owner of any adjustments
to previous Statements of Probable Construction Cost indicated by
changes in requirements or general market conditions.
1.1.6 The Architect shall assist the Owner in connection with
the Owner's responsibility for filling documents required for
the approval of governmental authorities having jurisdiction
over the Project.
1.2 Bidding or Negotiation Phase
1.2.1 The Architect, following the Owner's approval of the
Construction Documents and of the latest Statement of Probable
Construction Cost, shall assist the Owner in obtaining bids or
negotiated proposals, and assist the awarding and preparing
contracts for construction.
1.3 Construction Phase -Administration of the Construction
Contract.
1.3.1 The Construction Phase will commence with the award of
the Contract for Construction and, together with the Architect's
obligation to provide Basic Services under this Agreement, will
terminate when final payment to the Contractor is due, or, in
the absence of a final Certificate for Payment or of such due
date, sixty days after the Date of Substantial Completion of
the Work, whichever occurs first, subject to the hold back
provision.
1.3.2 Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement and incorporated
in the Contract Documents, the Architect shall provide administration
of the Contract for Construction as set forth below and in the edition
of AIA Documents A201, General Conditions of the Contract for Con-
struction, current as of the date of this Agreement.
1.3.3 The Architect shall be a representative of the Owner during
the Construction Phase, and shall advise and consult with the Owner.
Instructions to the Contractor shall be forwarded through the
- 2 -
M
® � r
Architect. The Architect shall have authority to act on behalf
of the Owner only to the extent provided in the Contract Docu-
ments unless otherwise modified by written instrument in accord-
ance with Subparagraph 1.3.16.
1.3.4 The Architect shall make at least 2 manday site visits
or as many additional as the project requires a month appropriate
to the stage of construction to determine the progress and
quality of the work and to be sure the work is proceeding in
accordance with the Contract Documents. On the basis of such
on-site observations as an architect, the Architect shall keep
the Owner informed of the progress and quality of the work and
shall be responsible to the Owner insuring against design and
contract defects and deficiencies in the work of the Contractor.
1.3.5 The Architect shall not have control or charge of and
shall not be responsible for construction means, methods,
techniues, sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions
and programs in connection with the work, for the acts or
omissions of the Contractor, Sub -contractors or any other
persons performing any of the work, -or for the failure of any
of them to carry out the work in accordance with the Contract
Documents except the Architect shall be responsible to the
Owner that all Contractors comply with the design and contract
requirements.
1.3.6 The Architect shall at all times have access to the
work wherever it is in preparation or progress.
1.3.7 The Architect shall determine the amounts owing to
the Contractor based on observations at the site and on evalua-
tions of the Contractor's Applications for Payment and shall
issue Certificates for Payment in such amounts, as provided in
the Contract Documents.
1.3.8 The issuance of a Certificate for Payment shall
constitute a representation by the Architect to the Owner,
based on the Architect's observations at the site and on the
data comprising the Contractor's Application for Payment,
that the work has progressed to the point indicated; that,
to the best of the Architect's knowledge, information and
belief, based on personal inspection, the quality of the
work is in accordance with the Contract Documents. The Certi-
ficate shall not be a representation that the Architect has
made any examination to ascertain how and for what purpose the
Contractor has used the moneys paid on account of the Contract
Sum.
1.3.9 The Architect shall be the interpreter of the require-
ments of the Contract Documents and the judge of the performance
thereunder by both the Owner and Contractor. The Architect shall
render interpretations necessary for the proper execution or
progress of the work with reasonable promptness on written request
of either the Owner or the Contractor and shall render written
decisions, within a reasonable time, on all claims, disputes and
other matters in question between the Owner and the Contractor
relating to the execution or progress of the work or the inter-
pretation of the Contract Documents.
1.3.10 Interpretations and decisions of the Architect shall
be consistent with the intent of and reasonably inferable from
the Contract Doucments and shall be in written or graphic form.
In the capacity of interpreter and judge, the Architect shall
endeavor to secure faithful performance by both the Owner and
the Contractor, shall not show partiality to either, and shall
not be liable for the result of any interpretation or decision
rendered in good faith in such capacity.
3 -
Q K ^� �I
AUG 81979 m o . Fact 360
AUG 81979 41 PnUF 361
1.3.11 The Architect's decision in matters relating to artistic
effect shall be final if consistent with the intent of the Contract
Documents. The Architect's decisions on any other claims, disputes
or other matters, including those in question between the Owner and
the Contractor, shall be subject to arbitration as provided in this
Agreement and in the Contract Documents.
1.3.12 The Architect shall have authority to and shall reject
work which does not conform to the Contract Documents. Whenever,
in the Architect's reasonable opinion, it is necessary or advis-
able for the implementation of the intent of the Contract Docu-
ments, the Architect will have authority to require special
inspection or testing of the work in accordance with the provisions
of the Contract Documents, whether or not such work be then fabri-
cated, installed or completed.
1.3.13 The Architect shall review and approve or take other
appropriate action upon the Contractor's submittals such as Shop
Drawings, Product Data and Samples, but only for conformance
with the design concept of the work and compliance with the Contract
Documents. Such action shall be taken with reasonable promptness
so as to cause no delay. The Architect's approval of a specific
item shall not indicate approval of an assembly of which the item
is a component.
1.3.14 The Architect shall prepare Change Orders for the Owner's
approval and execution in accordance with the Contract Documents,
and shall have authority to order minor changes in the work not
involving an adjustment in the Contract Sum or an extension of
the Contract Time which are not inconsistent with the intent of
the Contract Documents.
1.3.15 The Architect shall conduct inspections to determine
the Dates of Substantial Completion and final completion as to
each phase and the project as a whole and shall receive and
forward to the Owner for the Owner's review written warranties
and related documents required by the Contract Documents and
assembled by the Contractor, and shall issue a final Certificate
for Payment based on completed phases and the total payment.
1.3.16 The extent of the duties, responsibilities and limitations
of authority of the Architect as the Owner's representative
during construction shall not be modified or extended without
written consent of the Owner, the Contractor and the Architect.
1.4 Additional Services: The following Services are not
included in Basic Services. They shall be provided if authorized
or confirmed in writing by the Owner, and they shall be paid for
by the Owner as provided in this Agreement, in addition to the
compensation for Basic Services.
1.4.1 Providing financial feasibility or other special studies.
1.4.2 Providing planning surveys, site evaluations, environmental
studies or comparative studies of prospective sites, and preparing
special surveys, studies and submissions required for approvals of
governmental authorities or others having jurisdiction over the
Project.
1.4.3 Providing services relative to future facilities, systems
and equipment which are not intended to be constructed during the
Construction Phase.
1.4.4 Preparing documents of alternate, separate or sequential
bids or providing extra services in connection with bidding,
negotiation or construction prior to the completion of the
Construction Documents Phase, when requested by the Owner, except
that both parties agree that the Scope of Professional Services
- 4 -
_ M
includes three phases and said phases may be handled without
additional charge either separately or together as the Owner
shall later determine.
1.4.5 Providing coordination of Work performed by separate
contractors or by the Owner's own forces.
1.4.6 Providing services in connection with the Work of a
construction manager or separate consultants retained by the
Owner.
1.4.7 Providing Detailed Estimates of Construction Cost
analyses of owning and operating costs, or detailed quantity
surveys or inventories of material, equipment and labor.
1.4.8 Providing interior design and other similar services
required for or in connection with the selection, procurement
or installation of furniture, furnishings and related equipment.
1.4.9 Making revisions in Drawings, Specifications or other
documents when such revisions are inconsistent with written
approvals or instructions previously given, are required by the
enactment or revision of codes, laws or regulations subsequent
to the preparation of such documents or are due to other causes
not solely within the control of the Architect.
1.4.10 Preparing Drawings, Specifications and supporting data
and providing other services in connection with Change Orders
to the extent that the adjustment in the Basic Compensation
commensurate with the services required of the Architect,
provided such Change Orders are required by causes not solely
within the control of the Architect.
1.4.11 Providing consultation concerning replacement of any
Work damaged by fire or other cause during construction, and
furnishing services as may be required in connection with the
replacement of such Work.
1.4.12. Providing services made necessary by the default of
the Contractor, or by major defects or deficiencies in the Work
of the Contractor or by failure of performance of either the
Owner or Contractor under the Contract for Construction.
1.4.13 Preparing a set of reproductible record drawings
showing significant changes in the Work made during construction
based on marked -up prints, drawings and other data furnished by
the Contractor to the Architect. There shall be no additional
charge for as build drawings provided to Owner upon completion
of the project.
1.4.14 Providing extensive assistance in the utilization of any
equipment or system such as initial start-up or testing, adjusting
and balancing, preparation of operation and maintenance manuals,
training personnel for operation and maintenance, and consultation
during operation.
1.4.15 Providing services after issuance to the Owner of the
Final Certificate For Payment, or in the absence of a final
Certificate for Payment, more than sixty days after the Date of
Substantial Completion of the entire three phase project or upon
completion of all contracts.
1.4.16 Preparing to serve or serving as an expert witness in
connection with any public hearing, arDi.tration proceeding or
legal proceeding.
- 5 -
AUG 81979 BOOK r t 6
AUG 81979 MOK 41 MAO
1.4.17 Providing services of consultants for other than the
normal architectural, structural, mechanical and electrical
engineering services for the Project.
1.4.18 Providing any other services not otherwise included in
this Agreement or not customarily furnished in accordance with
generally accepted architectural practice.
The Owner's Responsibilities:
2.1 The Owner shall provide full information regarding
requirements for the Project including a program, which shall
set forth the Owner's design objectives, constraints and
criteria, including space requirements and relationships,
flexibility and expandability, special equipment and systems
and site requirements.
2.2 If the Owner provides a budget for the Project, it
shall include contingencies for bidding, changes in the Work
during construction, and other costs which are the responsi-
bility of the Owner, including those described in Section 2
and in Subparagraph 3.1.2. The Owner shall, at the request of
the. Architect, provide a statement of funds available for the
Project, and their source.
2.3 The Owner shall designate, when necessary, a repre-
sentative authorized to act in the Owner's behalf with respect
to the Project. The Owner or such authorized representative
shall examine the documents submitted by the Architect and
shall render decisions pertaining thereto promptly, to avoid
unreasonable delay in the progress of the Architect's services.
2.4 The Owner shall furnish a legal description and a
certified land survey of the site, giving, as applicable,
grades and lines of streets, alleys, pavements and adjoining
property; rights-of-way, restrictions, easements, encroachments,
zoning, deed restrictions, boundaries and contours of the site;
locations, dimensions and complete data pertaining to existing
buildings, other improvements and trees; and full information
concerning available service and utility lines both public
and private, above and below grade, including inverts and depths.
2.5 The Owner shall furnish the services of soil engineers
or other consultants when such services are deemed necessary by
the Architect. Such services shall include test borings, test
pits, soil bearing values, percolation tests, air and water
pollution tests, ground corrosion and resistivity tests, includ-
ing necessary operations for determining subsoil, air and water
conditions, with reports and appropriate professional recommenda-
tions.
2.6 The Owner shall furnish structural, mechanical, chemical
and other laboratory tests, inspections and reports as required
by law or the Contract Doucments.
2.7 The Owner shall furnish all legal, accounting and
insurance counseling services as may be necessary at any time
for the Project, including such auditing services as the Owner
may require to verify the Contractor's Applications for Payment
or to ascertain how or for what purposes the Contractor uses
the moneys paid by or on behalf of the Owner.
M
2.8 The services, information, surveys and reports required
by Paragraph 2.4 through 2.7 inclusive shall be furnished at the
Owner's expense, and the Architect shall be entitled to rely upon
the accuracy and completeness thereof.
2.9 If the Owner observes or otherwise becomes aware of any
fault or defect in the Project or nonconformance with the Contract
Documents, prompt written notice thereof shall be given by the
Owner to the Architect.
2.10 The Owner shall furnish required information and
services and shall render approvals and decisions as
expeditiously as necessary for the orderly progress of the
Architect's services and of the Work.
Construction Costs.
3.1 Definition
3.1.1 The Construction Cost shall be the total cost or
estimated cost to the Owner of all elements of the Project
designed or specified by the Architect.
3.1.2 The Construction Cost shall include at current market
rates, including a reasonable allowance for overhead and profit,
the cost of labor and materials furnished by the Owner and any
equipment which has been designed, specified, selected or
specially provided for by the Architect.
3.1.3 Construction Cost does not include the compensation of
the Architect and the Architect's consultants, the cost of the
land, rights-of-way, or other costs which are the responsibility
of the Owner as provided in Article 2.
3.2 Responsibility for Construction Cost.
3.2.1 Evaluations of the Owner's Project budget, Statements
of Probable Construction Cost and Detailed Estimates of Con-
struction Cost, if any, prepared by the Architect, representing
the Architect's best judgment as a design professional familiar
with the construction industry. It is recognized, however, that
neither the Architect nor the Owner has control over the cost of
labor, materials or equipment, over the Contractor's methods of
determining bid prices, or over competitive bidding, market or
negotiating conditions. Accordingly, the Architect cannot and
does not warrant or represent that bids or negotiated prices
will not vary from the Project budget proposed, established, or
approved by the Owner, if any, or from any Statement of Probable
Construction Cost or other cost estimate or evaluation prepared by
the Architect.
3.2.2 No fixed limit of Construction Cost shall be established
as a condition of this Agreement by the furnishing, proposal or
establishment of a Project budget under Paragraph 2.2 or other-
wise, unless such fixed limit has been agreed upon in writing and
signed by the parties hereto. If such a fixed limit has been
established, the Architect shall be permitted to include contin-
gencies for design, bidding and price escalation, to determine
what materials, equipment, component systems and types of con-
struction are to be included in the Contract Documents, to make
reasonable adjustments in the scope of the Project and to include
in the Contract Documents alternate bids to adjust the Construction
Cost to the fixed limit. Any such fixed limit shall be increased
in the amount of any increase in the Contract Sum occurring after
execution of the Contract for Construction.
- 7 -
AUG 81979 Boa 1 pn-r 364
r
AUG 81979
Basic
800E 41 PAGE 365
3.2.3 If the Bidding or Negotiation Phase has not commenced
within three months after the Architect submits the Construction
Documents to the Owner, any Project budget or fixed limit of
Construction Cost shall be adjusted to reflect any change in
the general level of prices in the construction industry between
the date of submission of the Construction Documents to the
Owner and the date on which proposals are sought.
3.2.4 If a Project budget or fixed limit of Construction
Cost (adjusted as provided in Subparagraph 3.2.3) is exceeded
by the lowest bona fide bid or negotiated proposal, the Owner
shall (1) give written approval of an increase in such fixed
limit, (2) authorize rebidding or renegotiating of the Project
within a reasonable time, (3) if the Project is abandoned,
terminated or (4) cooperate in revising the Project scope and
quality as required to reduce the Construction Cost.
4.1 Period of Service.
4.1.1 The Architect will begin to work promptly after
receipt of a fully executed copy of this Agreement; such receipt
shall constitute written notice to proceed.
5.1 Method of Compensation.
5.1.1 Time Charges. The Owner agrees to compensate the
Architect for the professional services called for under this
Agreement by taking the direct salary expense of all those
persons engaged directly on the Owner's work and adding a
sur -charge of 187 per cent for overhead and profit for time
directly chargeable to the project. Average direct salary
expense shall not exceed the amounts shown on the following
schedule:
The first six principals
Project Manager, R. Singh
Department Heads
Architect or Engineer
Drafting
Clerkcal and Typing
5.1.2 Out -of -Pocket Expenses. The Owner shall reimburse the
Architect for all out-of-pocket expenses directly chargeable to
the project, at actual cost incurred, plus a service charge of
10 per cent. Such charges shall be itemized and included in the
monthly invoices for time charges and shall be submitted and
paid as provided for time charges. Typical reimbursable expenses
include travel, lodging, meals, and travel expenses when traveling
in the Owner's behalf, identifiable communication expenses,
identifiable reproduction costs, computer machine charges, survey
supplies, special accounting expenses not applicable to general
overhead.
i =1
5.1.3 Limit of Fee. Total compensation. to the Ar��j.hitec.t �u 1.3 of
Professional services and costs described 'gAg9A*eJem
shall not exceed One Hundred Ninety-five Thousand and no/100
Dollars ($195,000.00). Compensation to Architect may be substanti-
ally less than the amount reflected above depending on requirements
of County. This limit does not include compensation for any ad-
ditional services.
6.1 Invoicing Procedure.
- )$ARxZ6
pear
hour
$22.15
- IVIAXPISO
per
hour
$16.45
- cx-�5
per
hour
$14.65/
- �Jx
per
hour
$12.90 ?,10
- )$XRx,*)0
per
hour
$ -
- *x&xjN
per
hour
$ 5.75 `
5.1.2 Out -of -Pocket Expenses. The Owner shall reimburse the
Architect for all out-of-pocket expenses directly chargeable to
the project, at actual cost incurred, plus a service charge of
10 per cent. Such charges shall be itemized and included in the
monthly invoices for time charges and shall be submitted and
paid as provided for time charges. Typical reimbursable expenses
include travel, lodging, meals, and travel expenses when traveling
in the Owner's behalf, identifiable communication expenses,
identifiable reproduction costs, computer machine charges, survey
supplies, special accounting expenses not applicable to general
overhead.
i =1
5.1.3 Limit of Fee. Total compensation. to the Ar��j.hitec.t �u 1.3 of
Professional services and costs described 'gAg9A*eJem
shall not exceed One Hundred Ninety-five Thousand and no/100
Dollars ($195,000.00). Compensation to Architect may be substanti-
ally less than the amount reflected above depending on requirements
of County. This limit does not include compensation for any ad-
ditional services.
6.1 Invoicing Procedure.
6.1.1 The Architect shall submit invoices (and time and expense
records if requested) to the Owner for work accomplished during
the preceding two weeks. Such invoices shall be submitted by
the Architect monthly for the work accomplished and shall be due
and payable by the Owner upon receipt or by the next pay period.
Five (50) per cent of each invoice shall be retained for a period
of six (6) months after acceptance of this total payment by Owner.
7.1 Termination.
7.1.1 This Agreement may be terminated by either party by seven
(7) days' prior written notice. If this Agreement is terminated,
the Architect shall be paid in accordance with this Agreement for
all satisfactory work performed up to the date of termination.
8.1 In the event there is a conflict between the parties to
this Agreement or a breach of said Agreement so that it is necessary
that legal action be instituted, the parties agree that the Owner
shall be entitled to recover any attorneys fees and court costs,
including the cost of appeal, incurred by Owner to protect its
interests under this Agreement from Architect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
made and executed this Agreement
above stated on the day and year
Signed, sealed and delivered in
the
e presence of:
JI -JJ a
As to Architect.
parties hereto have accepted,
upon the terms and conditions
first above written.
ARCHITECT:
CONNELL, METCALF & EDDY, INC.
ey�B
'Thomas . Rooney, Yresident
(SEAL)
OWNER:
INDIAN R//I��VER COUNTY
By
William C. Wodtk �f' Jr. , Cha
Board of County C mm ssioner
Attest:
Freda Wright, C1e3
AUG 81979 — 9 — poor 41 FA,F-366
AUG 81979 eou 41 Pmu-367
1
THE SEVERAL -BILLS AND ACCOUNTS AGAINST THE COUNTY, HAVING BEEN
AUDITED, WERE EXAMINED AND FOUND TO BE CORRECT, WERE APPROVED AND
WARRANTS ISSUED IN SETTLEMENT OF SAME AS FOLLOWS: TREASURY FUND PHOS.
62673 — 62691 INCLUSIVE. SUCH BILLS AND ACCOUNTS BEING ON FILE IN THE
OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, THE WARRANTS SO ISSUED FROM
THE RESPECTIVE FUNDS BEING LISTED IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL MINUTE BOOK AS
PROVIDED BY THE RULES OF THE LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR, REFERENCE TO SUCH
RECORD AND LIST SO RECORDED BEING MADE A PART OF THESE MINUTES.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, ON MOTION MADE, SECONDED AND
CARRIED, THE BOARD ADJOURNED AT 7:01 O'CLOCK P.M.
ATTEST:
CLERK
v'
- (!, wl� A
CHAIRMAN