HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/6/1980FEBRUARY 6, 1980
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, MET IN REGULAR SESSION AT THE COURTHOUSE, VERO BEACH,
FLORIDA, ON WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1980, AT 8:30 O'CLOCK A.M. PRESENT
WERE WILLARD W. SIEBERT, JR., CHAIRMAN; ALMA LEE Loy, VICE CHAIRMAN;
WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR.; AND R. DON DEESON. PATRICK B. LYONS, WHO
WAS NOT PRESENT, WAS EN ROUTE FROM WASHINGTON, D.C. WHERE HE HAD
ATTENDED A MEETING. ALSO PRESENT WERE .JACK G. JENNINGS, COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR; L.S. "TOMMY" THOMAS, INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR;
GEORGE G. COLLINS, JR., ATTORNEY TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS;
JEFFREY BARTON, FINANCE OFFICER; VIRGINIA HARGREAVES AND JANICE
CALDWELL, DEPUTY CLERKS.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE MEETING TO.ORDER.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT LED THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG,
AND REVEREND J. C. GLENN, CHAPLAIN, INDIAN RIVER MEMORIAL HOSPITAL,
GAVE THE INVOCATION.
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS
TO THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 1980.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY'APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR
MEETING OF JANUARY 9, 1980, AS WRITTEN.
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS
TO THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1980.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR
MEETING OF JANUARY 231 1980, AS WRITTEN.
FINANCE OFFICER BARTON EXPLAINED THE BUDGET AMENDMENT ON
THE CLERK'S AGENDA REGARDING THE BRIDGE INSPECTION. HE STATED THAT
THEY DID A BUDGET AMENDMENT LAST YEAR ASSUMING ALL THE WORK WOULD BE
DONE BY THE END OF THE YEAR; SINCE IT WAS NOT, AND IT WAS NOT RE -
BUDGETED, THIS IS THE BALANCE OF THE BRIDGE INSPECTION.
EB 61980 Boa 42 eaa w .
F_
FEB 61980 -BOOK 44 PAC
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR A
PERMIT TO CARRY A CONCEALED FIREARM FOR THE FOLLOWING:
BERNARD PAZ, JR. HENRY A. FISCHER
FREDERICK C. ALLEN
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO
CARRY A CONCEALED FIREARM FOR FREDERICK OWEN WHITE.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE BUDGET AMENDMENT TO
ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL FUND FOR EXPENDITURES OF THE 201
WATER STUDY PERFORMED BY SVERDRUP & PARCEL, AS FOLLOWS:
ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT No. DEBIT CREDIT
CONTRACTUAL
SERVICES 001-110-515-33.49 $50,940
FEDERAL GRANT
ENVIRONMENT
PROTECTION 001-000-331-31.00 $50,940
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE BUDGET -AMENDMENT TO
ALLOCATE". FUNDS FROM THE TRANSPORTATION FUND FOR THE INSPECTION OF
THE COUNTY BRIDGES, AS FOLLOWS:
ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT No, INCREASE DECREASE
CONTRACTUAL
SERVICES 002-214-541-33.49 $57,225
RESERVE FOR
CONTINGENCIES 002-199-541-99.91 $57,225
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR
JUDITH A. WAKEFIELD, COUNTY EXTENSION DIRECTOR, AND PETE SPYKE,
AGRICULTURAL SPECIALIST, AS FOLLOWS:
.JUDITH A. WAKEFIELD:
FEB, 6
FEB. 13
FEB. 14
FEB. 25 - 29
FT. PIERCE AREA STAFF MEETING
FT. PIERCE JUDGE AT COUNTY FAIR
FT. PIERCE HOME EC. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT MTG.
GAINESVILLE CLOTHING TRAINING - TO RECEIVE TRAINING
THAT WILL BE OF HELP IN FITTING AND
PATTERN ALTERATIONS IN THE FUTURE.
2
PETE SPYKE:
FEB. 6 FT. PIERCE AREA STAFF MEETING
FEB. 26 - 27 OKEECHOBEE WATER QUALITY TRAINING MEETING. DER
WILL BE TRAINING EXTENSION AGENTS IN
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STATE 208
WATER QUALITY PLAN,
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED STATE WITNESS PAY ROLLS,
COUNTY COURT, .JANUARY, 1980 TERM, IN THE AMOUNTS OF $77.04 AND $181.08;
AND CIRCUIT COURT, FALL 1980 TERM, IN THE AMOUNTS OF $189.54, $30.72,
AND $78.46.
THE FOLLOWING REPORTS WERE RECEIVED AND PLACED ON FILE IN
THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK:
REPORT OF JUVENILES IN JAIL OR DELI VERED TO JAIL
DURING THE MONTH OF DECEMBER, 1979.
REPORT OF CONVICTIONS, CIRCUIT COURT, JANUARY, 1980.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED ADDING AN EMERGENCY ITEM TO THE.
AGENDA REGARDING RENOVATION OF THE COUNTY WAREHOUSE USED BY THE
SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS.
COMMISSIONER LOY THEN REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING MEMO AND
SPECIAL REPORT CONCERNING BICYCLE PATHS:
FEB 81980 3 We 42 PAG9.
8009
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WILLARD W. SIEBERT, JR., Chairman
ALMA LEE LOY, Vice Chairman
WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR.
R. DON DEESON
42 paGE1
PATRICK B. LYONS
JACK G. JENNINGS. Administrator 2145 14th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Bicycle Paths Committee
Commissioner Alma Lee Loy
Robert Marshbanks
Michael Wodtke
Councilman Terry Goff
Re: Project No. 1
DATE: February 1, 1980
Your Bicycle Paths Committee would like to present
the following recommendations for your concurrence and ap-
proval.
ALL:ef
1. Construct an 8 foot bicycle path-_ on the north
side of 12th Street from 27th Avenue, east to
21st Court. Path to be constructed within existing
right-of-way. Total cost of project estimated at
$20,000.00 using county crews to accomplish pro-
ject.
2. Committee recommends funds for construction will
be raised by Treasure Coast Kiwanis Club and other
interested civic organizations.
3. Committee request the Board of County Cormissioners'
endorse the project and approve the construction
by county crews as soon as funds are provided.
Treasure Coast Kiwanis Club and interested civic
organizations would like to request approximately
90 days to raise the funds.
4
February 1, 1980
SPECIAL REPORT TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Capsule of activities and goals of Bicycle Paths Committee
Since October of 1979, this Committee has met three times
to establish immediate goals and projects to implement bicycle
paths for Vero Beach and Indian River County.
Immediate goals include the following:
(1) All schools are priority areas; concentrating -on
a two mile area around each school
(2) 16th Street from 27th Avenue to U.S. No.l would be
our priority area, however, this project would not
be economically feasible until plans are completed
for widening of 16th Street, at which time, bicycle
paths should be included in the plans.
(3) The Master Plan will be constantly up -dated as traffic
patterns change. Proposed paths have been -added to
the extension of Indian River Blvd., from S.R.60 to
Barber Avenue.
The desire to complete an immediate project and to assess
public response, the Committee chose the area around Vero Beach
Elementary School, 12th Street from 20th Avenue to 27th Avenue,
as their immediate priority.
This proposed trail would involve construction of an 8 foot
path from 27th Avenue to 21st Court, on the north side of 12th
Street. At 21st Court, the designated bike path would turn north
on 21st Court, (County subdivision road) for about 3 blocks, then
turn east on 13th Street, (also a County subdivision road) to
20th Avenue. At 20th Avenue, the path would angle across 20th
to join the already built wooden bridge across the drainage canal
and join the existing bicycle paths running north and south
between 12th Street and 16th Street. The bridge is located
approximately 35 feet north of the intersection of 13th Street
and 20th Avenue. This intersection would necessitate some type
of law enforcement control during school hours, however, we feel
this could be coordinated with the school administration and
P.T.A. parents and would be better than a straight shot across
20th Avenue.
This designated bicycle path would take the bikes and riders
away from the intersection of 12th Street and 20th Avenue, which
is terribly limited at this time.
The Treasure Coast Kiwanis Club and interested -civic
organizations would like to accept the challenge to raise
the monies for the first -project. (If they cannot accomplish
this goal in 90 days, they would like to come back and request
more time). This is an excellent- opportunity to access public
support for this type project.
ALL:ef
5 aQo�
FEB 61990
}P.
r -
FEB 61980 Boa Puf
ROBERT MARSH BANKS, OF THE BICYCLE PATH COMMITTEE, NOTED
THAT THEIR FIRST PRIORITY IS IN HELPING THE SCHOOLS, AND THAT AN
ARTERY WILL BE CREATED FROM IXORA PARK TO THE OLD HOSPITAL. HE THEN
MENTIONED THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED A DONATION OF $500 FROM
ONE INDIVIDUAL.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMIS-
SIONER LOY, THAT THE COUNTY PARTICIPATE IN THE BICYCLE PATH PROGRAM,
USING THE GUIDELINES OUTLINED IN THE MEMO OF FEBRUARY 1, 1950, AND
THE COSTS WILL BE BORNE BY THE ROAD AND BRIDGE DEPARTMENT,
COMMISSIONER Loy COMMENTED THAT THEY ARE LOOKING FORWARD
TO $20,000 BEING RAISED AND FELT THE COMMUNITY WILL SUPPORT THIS
PROGRAM; IF THEY DO NOT, WE WILL CROSS THAT BRIDGE WHEN WE COME TO IT.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT HE ASSUMED THE PROJECT
WOULD NOT BE IMPLEMENTED UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE NECESSARY FUNDS WERE
RAISED OR ASSURED.
TERRY GOFF, OF THE CITY COUNCIL, INDICATED SUPPORT FROM
THE COUNCIL,AND MENTIONED THAT THERE WILL BE A SCENIC ROUTE THROUGH
MCANSH PARK.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED.ON
AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
THE BOARD NEXT DISCUSSED A REQUEST FROM RONALD L. RATHBUN
FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF THE COUNTY'S PORTION OF CASTAWAY COVE, WAVE III,
AS FOLLOWS:
EP
M E M 0
TO: Jack Jennings, County Administrator
FROM: The Idlewyld Corporation, Inc.
DATE: January 30, 1980
The Idlewyld Corporation, developers of Castaway Cove sub-
division on south AIA, would like to present to the county
commission for its approval the plat for Wave III of our
development. The reason for requesting county approval
for this plat, which is in the city limits of Vero Beach,
is a result of a small strip of land owned by the Idlewyld
Corporation, Inc. which lies in the county and is a part of
the plat of Wave III.
The property consists of a strip on the east side of. AIA,
36' wide and 530' long. As indicated on the attached plat
20' of this property would be used for future AIA widening,
and 16' would lie at the rear of the five lots abutting the
strip. A petition to annex the property has been presented
to the city for approval. A corrective legal description
of the limits of the city of Vero Beach has been prepared.
The plat of Wave III should be approved .for recording at
the Februay.5th city council meeting:. We therefore would
like to have approval by the county on the 6th of February,
their regular meeting; date.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
THE IDLEWYLD CORPORATION, INC.
Ronald L. Rathbun, Vice President
RLR:ewg
ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED THAT WHEN THE CITY OF VERO
U
BEACH ANNEXED THE PROPERTY, THEY USED AN OLD LEGAL DESCRIPTION THAT
HAD EXCLUDED THE SMALL STRIP OF LAND RUNNING ALONG AIA AS MENTIONED
ABOVE. HE CONTINUED THAT MR. RATHBUN APPLIED TO THE CITY OF VERO
BEACH FOR PLAT APPROVAL AND HAS RECEIVED IT.
MR. RATHBUN REPORTED THAT HE HAS APPLIED TO THE CITY FOR
ANNEXATION OF THAT SMALL STRIP.
ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THE CITY REQUIRED THAT THE PETITIONER
DEDICATE 20' NEXT TO AIA FOR UTILITY PURPOSES, NOT FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY,
AND IF THE DOT EVER REQUIRES THE CITY TO RELOCATE UTILITIES, THE CI"TY
WILL BE IN.A POSITION TO BARGAIN.
HE CONTINUED THAT THE ORIGINAL PLAT
r_ .
BOOK, ' v
ut
7
J
r -
FEB
61990
Boox
42 pw W5
DID
HAVE THE 20'
FOR ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY PURPOSES AND IT WAS
REJECTED;
IT WILL BE UP TO THE DOT AND THE CITY OF VERO BEACH IF AlA IS EVER
WIDENED.
COMMISSIONER LOY EXPRESSED CONCERN BECAUSE THE COUNTY SECURES
20' FROM EACH DEVELOPER SO IT IS THERE IN CASE IT IS NEEDED.
DISCUSSION ENSUED ALONG THOSE LINES.
ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT THE BOARD IS BEING ASKED TO
APPROVE THE PLAT AS PREPARED BECAUSE THERE IS STILL A SMALL UNANNEXED
PORTION IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; AND IT IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING
ANNEXED BY THE CITY RIGHT NOW.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT WHEN YOU WANT TO WIDEN
AlA, THE CITY OF VERO BEACH WILL WANT PAYMENT FOR THIS LAND THAT
THE DEVELOPER IS WILLING TO GIVE US NOW.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE PLAT FOR CASTAWAY COVE,
WAVE III, AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR.
THE BOARD THEN CONTINUED A DISCUSSION FROM THE MEETING OF
DECEMBER 19, 1979 IN REGARD TO ADVERTISING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO
ABANDON A ROAD IN INDIAN RIVER HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, AS REQUESTED BY
ROBERT GALE.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 19,
1979 INDICATE THAT WE CANNOT SELL IT.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS THEN PRESENTED THE
FOLLOWING APPRAISAL FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY:
FLOYD WILKES
Registered Real Estate Broker
REALTOR * Vero Isles Saks Office
A 0. Box /506 93 Royal Palm Blvd
Vero Beach, Florida 32960 January 10, 1980 Phone (305) 562-4098
Mr, Willaim C. Wodtke, Chairman
Board Of County Commissioners
Indian River County, Florida 32960,
Dear Mr. Ubdtke :
At the request of Mr. Thomas, I have prepared an evaluation of
an unimproved parcel of land located at the southwest corner of
the intersection of 14th, Avenue and 2nd. Street and being a part
of the right-of-way of 14th. Avenue and 2nd. Street.
Based on a personal inspection of the subject tract and a review
of sales of lots located in the vicinity of the subject tract,
it is my opinion that the subject tract warrants a fair market
value, as of January 10, 1980, of:
FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS. ($49000.00)
Respectfully submitted,
Floyd Wilkes
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AFTER INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR
THOMAS DISPLAYED A MAP OF THE SUBDIVISION TO THE BOARD.
ATTORNEY COLLINS SAID HIS FEELINGS HAVE NOT CHANGED CON-
CERNING THE ABANDONMENT, AS REFLECTED IN THE DECEMBER 191 1979
MINUTES. HE CONTINUED THAT WE MUST HAVE A LEGAL DESCRIPTION PREPARED
BY A SURVEYOR.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COM-
MISSIONER Loy, TO AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT OFA.PUBLIC HEARING FOR
THIS SPECIFIC PARCEL OF LAND, FOR WHICH IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THERE
IS NO COUNTY NEED NOW OR IN THE FUTURE, BASED UPON THE APPROVAL OF
THE $4,000 APPRAISAL FIGURE, AND.SUBSEQUENT TO RECEIPT OF A LEGAL
DESCRIPTION PREPARED BY A SURVEYOR, THE COST TO BE BORNE BY THE
PURCHASER.
FEB 0190 9 .4 B.
FEB 61980 eoGl4 42 60 7
ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED THAT HE COULD NOT TELL WHO
WOULD END UP WITH OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND ONCE THE ABANDONMENT TAKES
PLACE, BECAUSE OF THE WORDING OF THE STATUTE. HE CONTINUED THAT
WHOEVER PROCEEDS WITH THE ABANDONMENT IS NOT GOING TO RECEIVE ALL
OF IT, JUST A PORTION.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INTERJECTED THAT THE OWNER OF LOT I WOULD
BE WISE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE ABANDONMENT, SINCE LOTS 3 AND 9 HAVE
THE SAME OWNERS.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS INFORMED THE BOARD
THAT THEIR PROCEDURE IS TO NOTIFY THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF
THE ABANDONMENT IS AUTHORIZED.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON
AND CARRIED.
SENIOR PLANNER MARSH APPROACHED THE BOARD IN REGARD TO A
REQUEST FOR RELEASE OF TW0 5' SIDE EASEMENTS BETWEEN LOTS 4 AND 5,
BLOCK F, OSLO PARK, UNIT 2, FROM ROY PAUL. HE CONTINUED THAT IT
SHOULD GO ON RECORD THAT THE SIDE LOT LINE EASEMENT ON THE SOUTH
SIDE LOT LINE OF LOT 5 AND THE NORTH SIDE LOT LINE OF LOT 6, WHICH
ARE IN THE CENTER OF BLOCKS C & F, SHOULD BE RETAINED TO PROVIDE
CROSS DRAINAGE AND UTILITIES IN THE FUTURE,
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0. 80—17 APPROVING
RELEASE OF EASEMENTS BETWEEN LOTS 4 AND 5, BLOCK F, OSLO PARK, UNIT
2, AS REQUESTED BY ROY PAUL, AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE
CHAIRMAN; THESE DOCUMENTS TO BE PREPARED AT THE EXPENSE OF THE
APPLICANT.
IL_
RESOLUTION NO. 80-17
WHEREAS, there is drainage and utility easement on each side of the
lot lines of Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit 2, Block F, as filed in Plat Book 4,
Page 13, Indian River County, Florida, records, and
WHEREAS, Roy R. Paul and Suzanne M. Paul, owners of Lots 4 and 5,
Block F, Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit 2, Plat Book 4, Page 13, Indian River
County, F.lorida,
WHEREAS, said property is proposed to have a home constructed on said
lots, which said building will lie over said side lot line easements on the
parcel, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida as follows:
1. The Board does hereby release all 5 foot side lot line easements lying
between Lots 4 and 5, Block F, of said Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit 2, but it
is specifically understood that the side lot line easement on the south side
lot line of Lot 5 and the north side lot line of Lot 6, Blocks C and F will
remain in full force and effect for possible future utilization.
2. That the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners be authorized
to sign a Release of Easement as above set out, and to have said Release recorded
in the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida.
Dated this 6th day of February , 1980.
ATTEST:
�: e
CLERK O�JHE 'CIRCUIT` COURT
BY
FEB 61980
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN R VE COUNTY .FLO A
BY
W. W. ebert,'Jr., ChairnW
BOOK '42 608
i
F_
RELEASE OF EASEMENT
BOOK 42- PACE
This Release of Easement, executed this 6th day of February ,
1980, by the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a
political subdivision of the State of Florida, first party; to Roy R. Paul and
Suzanne M. Paul, whose mailing address is 4896 65th Street, Vero Beach, Indian
River County, Florida, second party:
WITNESSETH:
That the said party of the first part for and in consideration of the
sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration in hand paid
by the said second party, does hereby remise, release, abandon, and quit claim
unto the said second party forever, all the right, title, interest, claim and
demand which the said first party has in and to the following described easement,
lying on land situate in the County of Indian River County, State of Florida,
to -wit:
Those side lot easements lying between Lots 4 and 5, Block F,
Oslo Park, Unit 2, a subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 4,
page 13, public records of Indian River.County, Florida.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same with all and singular the appurtenances
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 behoof of the said second party
forever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said first party has signed and sealed 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:
0,zl
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
W. W. S4ebert; r., Chai
:j 1 'ZL't
Attest _ ���
Freda Wright, Clerk/
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me an officer duly
authorized in the State and'County aforesaid to take acknowledgements
personally appeared, W. W. SIEBERT, JR., as Chairman of the Board of
County Commissioners of Indian River County, 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 sub-
division.
WITNESS my hand and seal in the County and State last aforesaid
this day of - 1980.
(Notary Seal)
Notary Publ' , State of FlbrTda,,4t Large.
My comrni ssinA expires:
NOTARY PUBIC STaTr 07 rl^RIDA AT MM
MY Gc i� - ' ., . : 5 A47 $.M?.
RpUDED TNRU G"!' ' :'i5'.11DE2ViRIM'j
FEB 61980 BOOK .42 PACE U
r
Boos 41 PuE.611
SENIOR PLANNER MARSH NEXT DISCUSSED A REQUEST FROM YVONNE_
DOUGLAS FOR RELEASE OF EASEMENTS IN KING'S HIGHLANDS SUBDIVISION,
AND STATED THAT THE PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AS THE EXISTING
SWALES ARE ADEQUATE FOR DRAINAGE PROVISIONS.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0. 80-18 APPROVING
RELEASE OF EASEMENTS BETWEEN LOTS 15 AND 16, BLOCK 9, KING'S HIGHLANDS
SUBDIVISION, AS REQUESTED BY YVONNE DOUGLAS, AND AUTHORIZED THE
SIGNATURE OF THE_CHAIRMAN; THESE DOCUMENTS TO BE PREPARED AT THE
EXPENSE OF THE APPLICANT.
7-1
77
® � s
RESOLUTION NO. 80-18
WHEREAS, there is drainage and utility easement on each side of the
lot lines of Kings Highlands Subdivision, Block 9, as filed in Plat Book 4,
Page 90, Indian River County, Florida, records and
WHEREAS, Yvonne Douglas is the owner of Lots 15 and 16, Block 9, Kings
Highlands Subdivision, Plat Book 4; Page 90, Indian River County, Florida, and
WHEREAS, said property is proposed to have a home constructed on said
lots, which said building will lie over said side lot line easements on the
parcel, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida as follows:
1. The Board does hereby release all 3 foot side lot line easements
lying between Lots 15 and 16, Block 9 of Kings Highlands Subdivision.
2. That the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners be authorized
to sign a Release of Easement as set out above,.and to have said Release recorded
in the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida.
Dated this 6th day of February , 1980.
}
ATTEST:
CLERK OF TNE''CIRCU-IT COURT
BY:
0
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVE �COUN ,F I
BY
. S 'db ert, J hairm
800 fACE 61'
r
FEB 61980, B00% 42 PAGE
RELEASE OF EASEMENT
This Release of Easement, executed this 6th day of February ,
1980, by the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a
political subdivision of the State of Florida, first party; to Yvonne Douglas
whose mailing address is P. Q. Box 489, Wabasso, Indian River County, Florida,
second party:
WITNESSETH:
That the said party of the first part for and in consideration of the
sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration in hand paid
by the said second party, does hereby remise, release, abandon, and quit claim
unto the said second party forever, all the right, title, interest, claim and
demand which the said first party has in and to the following described easement,
lying on land situate in the County of Indian River County, State of Florida,
to -wit:
Those side lot easements lying between Lot 15 and 16, Block 9, Kings
Highlands Subdivision, a subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 4,
page 90, public records of Indian River County, Florida.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same with all and singular the appurtenances
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 behoof of the said second party
forever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said first party has signed and sealed these
presents by the parties so authorized by the law the day and -year first above
wri tten.
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presence of:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:/__ ze
. Sie erf "Jr" -Chairman
r
Attest:1��C��
Freda Wright, Clerk
_I
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me an officer duly
authorized in the State and County aforesaid to take acknowledgements
personally appeared, W. W. SIEBERT, JR., as Chairman of the Board of
County Commissioners of Indian River County, 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 sub-
division.
WITNESS
—� my hand and seal in the County and State last aforesaid
this day of — 1980.
(Notary Seal)
Notary Pu c, State of Flo da at Lam .
Nay commis on expires:
NOTARY PUBLIC S'^r= _). ' ''0' AT l
A+Y CL:.eep�SlW EX�dl�t�tly�IQ82
bO%,tDED �143u C -•t
FEB 61980 MMA 419 4A 4
r
FES 61980J) ,
scox 42 PA'cF6i5
ATTORNEY NORMAN A. GREEN APPROACHED THE BOARD TO DISCUSS
THE FOLLOWING REQUEST FOR RADAR UNITS:
NORMAN A. GREEN
ATTORNEY AND COUNSELOR AT LAW
1245 20TH STREET
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA
MAILING ADDRESS
POST OFFIcE Bcx 261,8
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 329E0
Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
Indian River County Courthouse
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Board Members:
TELEPHONE
569-1001
JanuaryAREA OD25, 1980 AREA
CODo2
E 305
I hereby request to appear before you for your meeting
scheduled Wednesday, February 6, 1980 in behalf of the following
Florida Highway Patrol Troopers currently assigned to Indian River
County, Florida: R. W. Harms, G. L. Morgan, J. 0. Player, B. D.
Sick -man, K. D. Carlock, J. D. Shaw, L. T. Barninger. The purpose
of'our appearance before you is to request an allocation of County
funds in the amount of THREE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED EIGHTY DOLLARS
($3,980.00) to purchase four model P-55 moving traffic radar units
from MPH Industries, Inc. For the seven troopers currently assigned
to our County, the State of Florida has only been able to afford
and allocate three moving radar units. As you can see from the
attached information, the number of accidents and totals of injuries
and fatalities as well as property damage has been on the increase.
The experience of the troopers indicates that speed is a major factor
in the increase of accidents as well as the severity of accidents.
In order to properly combat the increase speeding violations, troopers
require additional moving radar units in order to be effective. Also
in the attached information, you will find a list of thirty counties
in the State of Florida that have taken it upon themselves to furnish
additional radar units to the troopers in their counties since the State
is inadequately funded and therefore the troopers in those counties
were inadequately supplied.
From the within information, you will also see that in the past
there were five Florida Highway Patrol troopers assigned to this county,
and the number has been increased this year to seven. In the past two
years there were a total of 10,800 traffic arrests made by the Florida
Highway Patrol accounting for approximately $140,000.00 in revenues
from fines paid to the County.
The units being requested at this time are priced at $995.00
each, and this includes training to the troopers from the manufacturer
and certification of the units to the State. The State of Florida has
agreed that it will assume all maintenance and repair responsibilities
Board of County Commissioners
January 25, 1980
Page two
for the units if purchased by the County. Additionally, the State
has stipulated that the units will only be assigned to troopers in
Indian River County, Florida.
I feel that all of the above information will show that
the troopers assigned to our County are extremely interested in
effective enforcement of the speed limits set by the legislature.
It is obvious from the statistics that as our County grows, additional
enforcement will be necessary and it would be appropriate for our
County to assist the troopers assigned to us in obtaining necessary
equipment in which to protect us all.
Enclosed for your information is a copy of the general
specifications of the model K-55 moving radar units. It is interesting
to note that these units have "anti -detector circuits" which will
permit the troopers to negate the effectiveness of "Fuzz -Buster"
units commonly in use at this time. If you have any further questions,
please be kind enough to notify me and I will supply any requested
information.
NAG/sec
Enclosures
Very ttrruull . yours,
NORMAN A. GREEN
INDIAN RIVER COUNTIY HIGHWAY PATROL STATISTICS
1978 1979
Accidents Investigated 955 993
Injuries 605 629
Fatalities 28 19
Property Damage $191399381 $1,279,034
1978 1979
Traffic Arrest 5414 5386
FEB. o 1980Y
ao�K PACE
19
Fines collected by Indian River County:
FISCAL YEAR of 1977-1978
$1990566.69
l
90DIc 42 .PAGE 1 i
FISCAL YEAR of 1978-1979
$205,982.61
NOTE: Those amounts represent fines collected from Florida Highway
Patrol and Indian River County Sheriff's Office only.
It is.estimated that Florida Highway Patrol initiated seventy
percent (70%) of the above cases.
Counties that have furnished RADAR to Florida Highway Patrol Troopers:
1 Martin -4
10
Osceola -5
19
Jefferson 28 Okaloosa-4
2 Okeechobee -1
'11
Lake -5
20
Franklin 29 Washington -3
3 Gulf
12
Brevard
21
Liberty 30 Walton -3
4 Calhoun
13
Seminole -2
22
Wakulla
5 Citrus*
14
Flagler-1
23
Madison
6 Sumter*
15
Nassau
24
Gadsden
7 Hernando*
16
Marion
25
Leon
8 Volusia*
17
Putnam -2
26
Taylor
9 Pinellas -10
18
St Johns
27
Levy -3
1. Asterisk (*) indicates radar furnished to each trooper in the
county by the respective Board of County Cannissioners
2. Where number of units have been provided by the county, it has
been indicated above.
ATTORNEY GREEN REPORTED THAT STATISTICS PROVE IF SPEED IS
KEPT DOWN, THE DEATH TOLL WILL ALSO BE KEPT DOWN. HE CONTINUED THAT
THE STATE TROOPERS ARE LIMITED TO DRIVING 75 MILES A DAY, AND IT
WOULD BE HELPFUL IF EACH TROOPER HAD A RADAR UNIT.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE RADAR UNITS, AND THE BOARD
WAS ADVISED THE EQUIPMENT HAS CIRCUITS FOR OVERRIDING THE FUZZ BUSTER
UNITS THE SPEEDERS HAVE IN THEIR CARS.
ATTORNEY GREEN COMMENTED THAT IF THE COUNTY MAINTAINED
AN INVENTORY, THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE TO LICENSE THE UNITS.
TROOPER MORGAN COMMENTED THAT THE RADAR UNITS WILL BE USED
ON ANY ROAD IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, AND THAT NORMALLY THEY DON'T
PATROL THE CITY OF VERO BEACH, BUT WOULD IF THEY WERE PASSING THROUGH.
COMMISSIONER DEESON FELT IT WAS UNFORTUNATE THAT THE STATE
DOES NOT PROVIDE THIS EQUIPMENT FOR THE TROOPERS BUT THOUGHT SAFETY
IN THE COUNTY WAS THE NUMBER ONE CONCERN. HE CONTINUED THAT THIS
WOULD ALSO BRING REVENUE INTO THE COUNTY, WHICH WOULD OFFSET THE COST
OF THE EQUIPMENT.
ATTORNEY GREEN COMMENTED THAT IF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WANTED
TO RETAIN THE TITLE TO THE EQUIPMENT FOR ANY REASON, A LETTER COULD
BE PREPARED GIVING THE EQUIPMENT TO THE HIGHWAY PATROL ON LOAN.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED HE HAD NO OBJECTION ASSIGNING
THE UNITS TO TROOPERS IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BUT HE WOULD LIKE FOR
THE UNITS TO REMAIN AS A PIECE OF COUNTY EQUIPMENT.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT WONDERED IF WE WOULD BE SUPPLYING THE
HIGHWAY PATROL AND NOT SUPPLYING OUR OWN SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT WITH
EQUIPMENT.
SHERIFF JOYCE RESPONDED THAT HIS DEPARTMENT NORMALLY DOES
NOT DO,THAT TYPE OF WORK; THE HIGHWAY PATROL DOES IT WITH THE ASSISTANCE
OF THE SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT WHEN NECESSARY.
ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKED ABOUT MAINTENANCE OF THE EQUIPMENT.
TROOPER MORGAN SAID IT COULD BE SENT TO TAMPA FOR REPAIRS
OR TO AN ELECTRONICS FIRM IN WEST PALM BEACH,
ATTORNEY GREEN SAID THAT FOR THE FIRST TWO YEARS OF THE
FIVE YEAR WARRANTY, THE UNIT WOULD BE REPAIRED BY THE MANUFACTURER.
COMMISSIONER Loy STATED SHE WAS APPALLED -AND ALARMED DAILY
BY THE ATTITUDE OF MANY DRIVERS AND FELT A CONCENTRATED EFFORT SHOULD
BE MADE TO STOP THESE PEOPLE; IT WOULD SAVE LIVES AND GASOLINE. SHE
CONTINUED THAT SHE WAS IN SUPPORT OF THE TROOPERS.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED AN AGREEMENT TO BE PREPARED BY
ATTORNEY GREEN, WHEREBY THE COUNTY WILL PURCHASE THE RADAR EQUIPMENT
OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND AND PUT IT ON LOAN TO THE FLORIDA HIGHWAY
FEB 61960 BOOK .. 42 PAGE Gig
21
FEB 61980 aooK 42- ,PAGE 619
PATROL, WHO WILL AGREE TO MAINTAIN IT; AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF
THE CHAIRMAN, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF ATTORNEY COLLINS; AND
APPROVED THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT AS FOLLOWS:
ACCOUNT No. CREDIT DEBIT
001-114-521-66,49 - $3,980
001-199-513-99,91 $3,980
WILLIAM KOOLAGE, INTERESTED CITIZEN, COMMENTED THAT THIS
WAS ONE OF THE BEST THINGS THAT THE BOARD COULD DO FOR THE COUNTY.
THE HOUR OF 9:30 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, 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 L l 1p )
in the matter of
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 be ore this —
(LAX
!2O
nyp �—day of A.D.
Business Manager)
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, I)6ian River County, Florida)
NOTICE.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN•thatthe Board
of county Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, will hold a public hearing do
February 6, 1980, at 9:30 A.M. in the County
Commission Chambers in the 'Indian River
County Courthouse to consider the adoption of:
An Ordinance Amending Indian River
County Ordinance 79-6 which is the Indian
River County Energy Code; by amending the
previously incorporated Code for Energy'
Conservation in New Building 'Construction
With Florida Amendments, specifically as to
Section 101.3 (a), Section 201.1 by adding a
! definition for "Heated Slab"; Section 502.5 (a)
(1) by adding." Equation 1-A may be used",- by'
adding a new subsection 502.2 (b) and 502.2
d (c); by replacing Table No. 5-1, Type Al and
A2 Residential Buildings; by adding a new
"Equation 1•A on a new page. of the energy
code to be numbered 5-6.1 and defining the
terms; by adding a new Table 5-2C after Table
5.28 'on page 5-8 of the energy code; by
amending Section 503.2 (a). "Calculation
! Procedures"; by adding a paragraph to 503.4
(b) (4); by amending Subparagraphs 1, 2 and 3
of Subsection 503.7 (a); by adding an ad-
ditional paragraph to 504.2 (a) 2; by adding an
additional sentence to 602.2 (a); by amending
subparagraphs 1 and 2 of subsection 603.3; by
adding a Chart 6-C.to be added to a new page 6-
10.1; by adding a sentenceunder the heading of
Chart b -C (includes mass factor of. 0.8); by
adding a Chart 6-D to the reverse side of said
new page 6-10.1 which page shall be numbered
6-10.2; and adding a heading under Chart 6-D
(includes mass factor of 0.8); by adding -a
sentence to the last paragraph of Section 802.1
immediately before Section 802.2, which reads
"Infiltration need not be calculated as part of .
the Design -Day Method"; by specifically not
adopting certain sections of the Energy Code;
.by amending Section 101.3 (a) 2. by deleting I.
i(any building with a heated or cooled area of
less than 1,500 square feet); by amending
Section 101.3 (b) 2 by deleting I. (buildings of
less than 1,500 square feet); by adopting an
li addendum to section 9 of the Energy Code; by
adopting the 100 -point system (Watt wise
Certification) — Florida Power 8 Light
Company as an alternative; by providing an
effective date.
Board of county Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida
By: -s -William C. WodtkeJr., Chairman
Jan. 8, 1980.
ESTER RYMER, BUILDING DEPARTMENT, STATED THAT THE MINOR
CHANGES TO THE ENERGY CODE, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE STATE ENERGY OFFICE,
HAVE BEEN REVIEWED AND ARE NOW RECOMMENDED TO THE BOARD FOR ADOPTION.
SHE CONTINUED THAT THE BIGGEST CHANGE WAS THE ELIMINATION OF EXEMPTING
BUILDINGS OF LESS THAN 1500 SQ. FT.
ATTORNEY COLLINS ADVISED THAT FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT HAS
DEVISED A 100 POINT AWARD SYSTEM, AND THAT HE HAD SOME DIFFICULTY
INCORPORATING THAT SYSTEM INTO LAW AS IT SEEMS IT IS MORE OF A
UTILITY COMPANY'S EFFORT TO SAVE POWER CHARGES.
DELBERT MANN, OF FP&L IN FT. PIERCE, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD
TO EXPLAIN THE 100 POINT AWARD SYSTEM. HE CONTINUED THAT THE BUILDER
FILLS OUT THE CERTIFICATION SHEET, AND MR. MANN THEN DOES THE CAL-
CULATIONS TO DETERMINE IF THE BUILDER HAS MADE THE MINIMUM OF 100
POINTS. MR. MANN STATED THAT IF THE BUILDER HAS MADE THE MINIMUM,
HE CAN TAKE THE CERTIFICATION TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND GET
HIS BUILDING PERMIT, THEREBY MEETING THE ENERGY CODE THROUGH THE
WATT -WISE PROGRAM. HE EXPLAINED THAT FP&L PERIODICALLY FOLLOWS UP
ON INSPECTIONS, BUT DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF THE INSPECTORS OF THE
BUILDING DEPARTMENT, MR. MANN COMMENTED THAT THIS PROGRAM IS TO
HELP THE CUSTOMER SAVE ENERGY, AND SOME CUSTOMERS SAVE AS MUCH AS 25%.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT FELT THIS WAS AN EXCELLENT PROGRAM.
MR. MANN SUGGESTED THE WORD "AWARDS" SHOULD BE USED IN
PLACE OF "AVERAGE" ON THE LAST PAGE IN FOUR PLACES; AND AFTER THE WORD
.APPLICATION. IN THE LAST PARAGRAPH, THE PHRASE SHOULD READ: It
MEETS OR EXCEEDS 100 POINTS...."
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WAS ANYONE FROM THE AUDIENCE
WHO WISHED TO SPEAK. THERE WERE NONE.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE No. 80-4, AS CORRECTED.
23
FEB 61980
BOOK
42 PDGF 62a&
4 -
FEB 6190 Box 42 FnE 621
ORDINANCE NO. 80- 4
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE
79-6 AND THEREBY AMENDING THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
"ENERGY CODE"; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
SECTION I
That Section 4-110 of Indian River County Ordinance 79-6 is
hereby amended to read as follows:
"Section 4-110. Energy -Efficiency Code for Building Con-
struction.
(a) On March 21, 1979, Indian River County adopted as an
additional building code for said County the "Indian
River County Energy Efficiency Building Code", also
known as "The Code For Energy Conservation In New
Building Construction With Florida Amendments", and
referred to herein as the "Energy Code", three (3)
copies of which are on file in the office of the Clerk
of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida,
all of which are hereby made a part of the Indian River
County Code of Ordinances as if herewith completely
incorporated herein subject only to specific additions,
deletions, and amendments as set forth in this Section
4-110. Any person, firm or corporation, violating or
convicted of a violation of any provisions of said Code
for which a penalty is or may be provided shall be in
that manner punished, otherwise, or in addition thereto,
shall be puhished as prescribed by law.
(b) Add the following sentence to the introductory paragraph
Of Section 101.3(a) at page 1-2 of the energy code--.-
"Only
ode:"Only those portions of the structure which are actually
renovated shall be required to meet this energy code."
(c) Replace Section 101.3(a) 2. at page 1-2 of the energy
Code, which as amended will read:
2. Exempt Buildings:
a. Any building or portion thereof whose peak
design rate of energy usage for all purposes
is less than 1 watt (3.4 British thermal units
per hour) per square foot of floor area for all
purposes.
b. Any building which is neither heated nor cooled.
c. Any mobile home.
d. Any building or portion thereof subject to
standards established by the United States.
e. Any historical building as described in s. 267.021
(6 ) (Florida Statutes) .
f. Any state building that must conform to the -more
stringent "Florida Energy Conservation Act of
1974" and amendments thereto."
Element
(d) Replace Section 101.3 (b) 2. at pages 1-3 and 1-4 of the
energy code which as amended will read:
"2. Exempted public buildings -means:
a. Any public building or portion thereof whose peak
design rated energy usage for all purposes is
less than 1 watt (3.4 Btu's per hour) per square
foot of floor area for all purposes.
b. Any public building which is neither heated or
cooled.
c. Any mobile home.
d. Any buildings or portion thereof subject to
standards established by the United States.
e. Any state building that must conform to the more
stringent "Florida Energy Conservation in
Buildings Act of 1974" and amendments thereto."
(e) Add the following definition to Section 201.1 on page
2-4 of the energy code:
"HEATED SLAB. A floor, usually constructed of concrete,
that has heat energy supplied into the slab to provide
heating to an interior space."
(f) Add the following sentence at page 5-2 of the energy code
immediately followinq the last sentence of paragraph
. Z (a) (l) :
"Equation I -A may be used."
(g) Add the following paragraphs at pag
code following. paragraph 502.2(a)3:
5-2 of the ener,
"502.2 (b) Insulating/Solar Glass Equivalence:
Table 5-2C in Section 502.3(c) shows shading
coefficients for solar glass which are
equivalent to insulating glass. This table
is applicable for residential buildings.
502.3 (c) Insulating/Solar Glass Equivalence:
Table 5-2C indicates the maximum shading
coefficients for single pane solar glass
which are equivalent to dual -pane insulating
glass with a U value of 0.65 or larger."
(h) Replace Table 5-1 at page 5-3 of the energy code with the
following Table and new Footnote 1 and amended Footnote 2:
"Table 5-1
Type Al and A2 Residential Buildings
Mode
Value
Walls Heating or Cooling Uo 0.30 Max.1
Roof/Ceiling Heating or Cooling U 0.05 Max.2
Floors Over Heating or Cooling Uo 0.30 Max.
Unheated Spaces
Heated Slab Heating R 3.4 Min
on Grade
FEB 61980
BOOK
F_
GOOK 44 PAGF V3
1. For A2 buildings UO = 0.38 Max. is permitted.
2. Roof/ceiling assemblies in which the finished
interior surface is the underside of2the roof deck,
a maximum value U is 0.09 BTU/h ft. F."
(i) Add the following EQUATION 1-A on a new page of the
energy code numbered 5-6.1:
"EQUATION 1-A
UO M x UwAw + UgAg + UdAd
A
WHERE:
UO = the average or combined thermal transmittance of the
gross exterior wall area.
A = the gross exterior wall area.
Uw
= the thermal
transmittance of the
opaque wall.
Aw
= opaque wall
area
Ug
= the thermal
transmittance of the
glazing.
Ag
= glazing area.
Ud
= the thermal
transmittance of the
doors.
Ad
= door area.
M
= correction
factor for mass based
on specific heat,
density and
climate."
(j) Add the following Table 5-2C after Table 5-2B at page
5-8 of the energy code:
"TABLE 5-2C
Insulating/Solar Glass Equivalence
Equivalent Shading Coefficients
Climatological Zones
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
0.55 0.55 0.58 0.64 0.63 0.66 0.68 0.70 0.70
After calculating compliance of U values, the designer
may substitute equal amounts of solar glass with the above
shading coefficients (or lower) for insulating glass with
U values,of 0.65 (or higher)."
(k) Paragra
herebv
503.2(a) at page 5-10 of the
nded as follows:
r. A e i c
"503.2 (a) Calculation Procedures. For purposes of sizing
HVAC systems, the procedures described in
Chapters 24, 25, or 26 of Std. RS -1 may be
used, or an equivalent computation procedure.
This code does not regulate.HVAC system sizing.
HVAC systems may be sized using weather criteria
not contained in this code. This code does not
stipulate designer safety factors, provisions
for future expansion, or other factors which
affect equipment sizing."
(1) Add the following paragraph 503.4(b) (4) following para-
graph 503.4(b) (3) (e) at page 5-14 of the energy code:
"503.4 (b) 4. Electric resistance comfort heating equipment
may be used separately or in conjunction with
straight air conditioning units or other HVAC
systems. The manufacturer of electric resis-
tance comfort heating equipment shall make
available to prospective purchasers, designers,
or contractors, full load energy input, over
the range of voltages at which the equipment
is intended to operate."
(m) Subparagraphs 1, 2 and 3 of Subsection 503.7(a) on page
5-18 of the energy code are hereby amended to read as
follows:
"l. Where used to control heating only, a maximum
temperature setting of 72 F.
2. Where used to control cooling only, a minimum
temperature of 79 F.
3. Where used to control both heating and cooling, it
shall have a maximum heating mode temperature
setting of 72 F and a minimum cooling mode
temperature setting of 78 F and shall be capable
of operating the system heating and cooling in
sequence. It shall be adjustable to provide a
temperature range of up to 10 F between full
heating and full cooling in sequence. It shall be
adjustable to provide a temperature range of up to
10 F between full heating and full cooling, except
as allowed in 503.3(c)4b."
(n) The introductory paragraph of Section 503.9 in the ener
code as adopted March 21, 1979, remains as follows:
"All duct work shall be constructed and erected in
accordance with Standards RS -15, RS -16, RS -18, RS -18,
RS -19, or RS -20, as applicable, which Standards super-
sede the Standards in Section 502 of the Standard
Mechanical Code now or hereafter in effect as adopted
by the County. The other provisions of Chapter V of
the said Mechanical Code apply to the extent the specific
criteria is not addressed in any applicable RS Standards.
If there is a conflict between any provisions of Chapter V
of the said Mechanical Code as amended now or hereafter
and the RS Standards, the RS Standards shall control.
Subparagraphs (a), (b), and (c) of Section 503.9 are not
amended. This amendment continues from the original
adoption of the energy code on March 21, 1979."
(o) Add the following paragraph 504.2(a)2 at page 5-26 of
the energy code between "when tested in accordance with
Standard RS -7" and 'EXCEPTION:--------:"
"All gas and oil fired water heaters having an input rate
over 75,000 Btu/h (22KW) but less than 4,000 Btu/h per
gallon (0.3 KW/liter) of self stored water shall also
have a standby loss not exceeding
X = 2.8 + p/002 Q/V
FEB 61980 42'%,E
\ J
r
BOON 42 FA;E625
Where Q = rated input in Btu/h V = rated volume in gallons
(S = 2.8 + 25/9 Q/V for V of 1.52 m3) or less, or 5=2.8+
41 Q/V for V exceeding 1.52 m3) when tested in accordance
with Section 2.8 of Standard RS -7. (For determining the
efficiency of oil fired units, CF = 1.0 Q = total gallons
of oil consumed and H = total heating value of the oil in
Btu/gallon)."
(p) The -italicized paragraph in paragraph (e) of Section 505.2
of the energy code remains deleted. Said deleted para-
graph reads as follows:
"A single meter for the building can be installed to
determine power company charges with sub -metering for
each tenant to pro -rate the charges between tenants."
(q) Add the following after the last sentence of paragraph
602.2(a) at page 6-1 of the energy code:
"Charts 6-C and 6-D shall be used for Group R. buildings.
Thermal mass factor M - 0.8."
(r) Subparagraphs 1 and 2 of Subsection 603.3 on page 6-5 of
the energy code are hereby amended to read as follows:
"l. Where used to control heating only, a maximum
temperature setting of 72 F.
2. Where used to control cooling only, a minimum
temperature setting of 78 F."
(s) Add Chart 6-C by an inserted new page numbered 6-10.1
following page 6-10 of the energy code. Add the following
sentence under the heading of said Chart 6-C:
"(Includes mass factor of 0.8) "
Also add Chart 6-D to the reverse side of said new page
6-10; number said reverse side page 6-10.2 and add
the following under the heading of said Chart 6-D:
"includes mass factor of 0.8)"
(t) Add the following sentence as a new paragraph followin
the last paragraph of Section 802.1 (following the para-
graph referring to Column F) and immediately before
Section 802.2 at page 8-2 of the energy code:
"Infiltration need not be calculated as part of the
Design -Day Method."
(u) Alternate pages 1-2A, 1-4A, 5-15A, 5-16A, 5-17A, 6-4A, and
6-5A are not adopted by the County. Appendix Tables 6-1A
at page 6-11, 6-1B at page 6-12, 6-1C at page 6-13, 6-2
and 6-3 both at page 6-14 as they existed on March 21,
1979 are deleted from the Indian River County Energy Code.
The State of Florida is now amending said Appendix
Tables. When each amended Appendix Table is adopted by
the State, each State adopted amendment shall automati-
cally become a part of the Energy Code as typical
assemblies, and which shall not be all inclusive.
Alternate Table 6-1B has been adopted by the State of
Florida and shall be inserted at page 6-12 of the
Energy Code as a typical assemblage.
(v) The Indian River County Board of Adjustments and
Appeals shall have jurisdiction over appeals from
decisions of the Building Official regarding the Indian
River County Energy Code and the standards therein.
(w) Add additional Section 9 Residential Point System Method
dated August 30, 1979 prepared by Brabham, Kuhns, DeBay,
and Dr. Roger Messenger and Dr. Jose Villanueva which
Addendum to the Florida Model Energy Efficiency Code for
Building Construction is incorporated into this
Ordinance with three (3) copies on file in the office
of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County,
said Addendum numbered 901.0 - 903.5.
(x) Add an additional Section 10 Florida Power & Light
Company Optional Energy -Saving features Point Awards
which shall read:
"1001 Limited solely to single family residential structures
where it is established that the Florida Power &
Light Company Optional Energy -Saving Features/Point
Awards system meets or exceed criteria established
in the energy code as amended by this Ordinance, the
Building Department shall be authorized to accept an
application that meets or exceeds 100 points over the
Florida Power & Light Company Optional Energy -Saving
Features/Point Awards in lieu of other methods of
computation as provided in the energy code. The
Florida Power & Light Company criteria designated
Optional Energy -Saving Features/Point Awards, is
hereby incorporated into this Ordinance with three
(3) copies on file in the office of the Clerk of
the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida.
SECTION II
This Ordinance shall become effective according to law.
This Ordinance shall take effect February 11, 1980.
FEB 6 19 80 Bap. 42 JAalf 6
r
BOOK 42 Pact627
THE HOUR OF 9:45 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 W�/
/� 0 in the matter of
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. D n
Sworn to and subscribed before this '—Yary of A.D._
(Business Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court,kindian River County, Florida)
(SEAL) 1 -
NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN thatthe Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, will hold a public hearing on
February 6, 1980 at 9:45 A.M. in the County
Commission Chambers in the Indian River
County Courthouse to consider the adoption of: '
An Ordinance Creating the North Indian
River County Fire District through referen-
dum election; an independent Special District
within the definition of Article VII, Section 9
(b), Chapters 218 and 12S, Florida Statutes;
defining the boundaries thereof; authorizing
the said Fire District to assume certain fire .
prevention and control responsibilities at
present vested in the Board -of County Com-
missioners and in the municipalities situate
within the boundaries of the,said taxing unit;
providing for the appointment of a District
Board of Fire Commissioners to be comprised
of the Board of County Commissioners of In-
dian River County; specifying the rights and
duties of said District Board of Fire Com-
missioners; authorizing the levy and collection
of a tax by the said Fire District for the support
thereof and not to exceed one-half (1/2) mill of
the assessed valuation of all real and tangible
property within the boundaries thereof:
providing for the adoption of a budget and
assessment; and providing an effective date.
BOARD OF COUNTY COM-
MISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: -s -Willard W. Siebert, Jr;
Chairman
Jan. 15, 1980.,
ATTORNEY COLLINS SUMMARIZED THE BACKGROUND IN CREATING THE
NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT. HE CONTINUED THAT FOR WELL
OVER A YEAR THE COMMITTEE, APPOINTED BY THE VARIOUS MUNICIPALITIES
IN THE NORTH PART OF THE COUNTY, HAVE MET TO WORK TOWARDS A COMMON
GOAL OF ESTABLISHING A FIRE DISTRICT. THE ATTORNEY NOTED THAT THE
DRAFT, AS PRESENTED TODAY, REPRESENTS THE FINAL CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THAT COMMITTEE. THE STATUTES REQUIRE THAT THE
MUNICIPALITIES MUST PASS ORDINANCES APPROVING THIS ORDINANCE, AND
30
_I
THEN IT MUST GO TO A SPECIAL REFERENDUM VOTE.
HE THEN NOTED THAT
PAT FLOOD, GROVER FLETCHER AND HARRY WHITAKER, WHO WORKED ON THE
CREATION OF THE FIRE DISTRICT, WERE PRESENT TODAY.
TO SPEAK.
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WAS ANY ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED
PAT FLOOD, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, APPROACHED THE
BOARD AND STATED THAT AT THEIR PUBLIC HEARING THE NIGHT BEFORE, THE
CITIZENS FELT THIS FIRE DISTRICT WILL BE A BENEFIT, AND FELT THAT
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT, COMMISSIONER DEESON AND ATTORNEY COLLINS DID AN
EXCELLENT JOB PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER. HE THEN INQUIRED ABOUT AN
ITEM IN SECTION 21-36 CONCERNING A PREPARED BUDGET.
ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED THERE IS AN OBLIGATION OF THE
FIRE COMMISSIONERS FOR THE PREPARATION OF A BUDGET.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS INTERJECTED THAT HE
AND FINANCE OFFICER BARTON WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO HELP THEM IN THIS
RESPECT.
GROVER FLETCHER, OF ROSELAND, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND
COMMENTED THAT HE WAS -ON THE STUDY GROUP THAT LOOKED OVER THE FEASIBILITY
OF SETTING UP THE FIRE DISTRICT. HE FELT THAT THE BOARD SERVED AS A
GUIDE IN PROVIDING THIS INSTRUMENT, WHICH WILL HELP THEM MAINTAIN THEIR
INDEPENDENCE BY RETAINING THEIR BUILDINGS. HE THEN RECOMMENDED HAVING
AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, CONSISTING OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND CHIEF, TO INSURE THAT A LIAISON
WOULD BE PRESENT FOR VARIOUS POLICY-MAKING MEETINGS. MR. FLETCHER
RECOMMENDED THAT THE STUDY GROUP STAY TOGETHER A WHILE TO HELP SET
UP PROCEDURES OF THE FIRE DISTRICT.
COMMISSIONER LOY AGREED THAT AN ADVISORY GROUP WOULD BE
HELPFUL IN PUTTING TOGETHER THE THREE BUDGETS BEFORE EVER BEING
BROUGHT TO A HEARING; IT HAS MERIT, AND WOULD GIVE REPRESENTATION FOR
EACH GROUP.
HARRY WHITAKER, OF FELLSMERE, THEN THANKED THE BOARD FOR
THEIR HELP IN THIS FIRE DISTRICT. HE THEN SUGGESTED REWORDING A
PORTION OF -SECTION 21-36 TO SAY THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENTS WOULD
FEB 61980 31 B10X PAGg 6
FEB 6 �0 Boat 4 PA -E-629
PREPARE THEIR INDIVIDUAL BUDGETS, SUBMIT THEM TO THE ADVISORY BOARD
WHO WOULD THEN SUBMIT THEM TO THE FIRE COMMISSION.
COMMISSIONER Loy COMMENTED THAT THE ACTUAL GUIDELINES AND
METHODS OF OPERATION COULD BE CHANGED FROM TIME TO TIME DEPENDING
ON WHAT IS AUTHORIZED BY THE STATE. SHE SUGGESTED NOT WRITING IN TOO
MANY DETAILS INTO THIS DOCUMENT, AS THERE MUST BE SOME FLEXIBILITY
IN THE PROCEDURES, AND THOUGHT THE ADVISORY BOARD SHOULD CARRY A
LITTLE RESPONSIBILITY IN PUTTING THE BUDGET TOGETHER.
DISCUSSION ENSUED ALONG THOSE LINES, AND IT WAS DECIDED TO
ADD THE PHRASE "AFTER RECEIVING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE, SHALL PREPARE AND ADOPT" IN THE APPROPRIATE PLACE IN
SECTION 21-36.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMIS-
SIONER WODTKE, THAT THE BOARD ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 80-5, WITH AMENDMENTS.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE STRESSED THAT WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT
WE TALK ABOUT FIRE FIGHTING AND RESCUE FORCES; IT WILL BE THE RESPONSI-
BILITY OF THE BUDGET COMMITTEE TO SEPARATE THE VARIOUS AMBULANCE
GROUPS AS THEY DO NOT WANT TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DISTRICT.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON
AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COMMISSIONER Loy COMMENTED THAT THE COMMISSION WAS EXTREMELY
PROUD OF THE COMMITTEE THAT PUT THIS TOGETHER, AND THE PEOPLE IN THE
NORTH COUNTY SHOULD BE COMMENDED ALSO. SHE CONTINUED THAT THIS FIRE
DISTRICT WILL PROVIDE THE SERVICES THAT THEY NEED, AND THEY WILL BE
PAYING STRICTLY FOR WHAT THEY FEEL IS NECESSARY. COMMISSIONER Loy
THEN CONGRATULATED THE PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR UNDERTAKING SUCH A
TREMENDOUS JOB AND BRINGING IT TO A CONCLUSION.
ATTORNEY COLLINS INSTRUCTED THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
TO PUT THE FIRE DISTRICT ON THE BALLOT.
ORDINANCE NO. 80-5
AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE NORTH INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT THROUGH REFERENDUM ELECTION;
AN INDEPENDENT SPECIAL DISTRICT WITHIN THE DEFI-
NITION OF ARTICLE VTI, SECTION 9 (b), CHAPTERS
218 and 125, FLORIDA STATUTES; DEFINING THE
BOUNDARIES THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE SAID FIRE
DISTRICT TO ASSUME CERTAIN FIRE PREVENTION AND
CONTROL RESPONSIBILITIES AT PRESENT VESTED IN
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND IN THE
MUNICIPALITIES SITUATE WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES
OF THE SAID TAXING UNIT; PROVIDING FOR THE APPOINT-
MENT OF A DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS TO
BE COMPRISED OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; SPECIFYING THE RIGHTS AND
DUTIES OF THE SAID DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COM-
MISSIONERS; AUTHORIZING THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF
A TAX BY THE SAID FIRE DISTRICT FOR THE SUPPORT
THEREOF AND NOT TO EXCEED ONE-HALF (1/2) MILL OF
THE ASSESSED VALUATION OF ALL REAL AND TANGIBLE
PROPERTY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES THEREOF; PROVIDING
FOR THE ADOPTION OF A BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, It is the findings of the Board of County Com-
missioners of Indian River County that there exists a critical
need for a uniform and adequate plan of fire prevention and control ,
within the northern part of the said County, as such geographical
area is hereinafter defined; and
WHEREAS, Indian River County is creating a County -Wide Fire
Protection System of which this Special District shall be an
integral part along with rights accruing to Indian River County
from those agreements dated November 5, 1975 and January 5, 1977
between Indian River County and the Town of Indian River Shores;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fellsmere and the
City Council of the City of Sebastian, Indian River County, have
expressed their desire to this Board of County Commissioners to
join with it so as to create a special Fire District within the
northern part of the aforesaid County, and including the corporate
limits of the said municipalities, and have further agreed to
express their intent by ordinance that, if such a District should
be created, all fire related equipment owned by such municipalites
will be transferred to the Fire District without charge and any
owned fire stations would be leased to the District without charge;
and
FEB 61990 42 FyQ
800K
FEB 61980 PACE 631.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners finds that
such a special Fire District would do much to alleviate the
critical need for adequate fire prevention and protection of
unincorporated areas of the northern part of Indian River County,
while not reducing the current level of such prevention and
protection services available to residents of the municipalities
of Fellsmere and Sebastian; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 125.01 (5) (a), Florida
Statutes, the Board of County Commissioners is vested with the
power to create special districts for unincorporated areas of
the County and for incorporated municipalities within such areas,
provided that the affected municipal governing boards approve
such creation by ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the governing body of such a special district
may be comprised of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 9 (a) and (b), Article VII,
of the Florida Constitution of 1968, as amended, and Section 125.01
(5) (c), and 218, Florida Statutes, the Special District is
authorized, upon the approval of the voters within such a special
district in a referendum election to levy a millage assessment
upon real and tangible property within the boundaries of such a
special district for the support thereof;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
1. SECTION 1. A new Ordinance of the Code of Ordinances
of Indian River County, Florida, to be designated as Chapter 21,
Article IV, is hereby adopted as follows:
ARTICLE IV
SECTION 21-33. Special District Fire Protection. There
is hereby created the North Indian River County Fire District,
a special District, pursuant to the authority granted this Board
of County Commissioners under the provisions of Article VII,
Section 9 (a) and (b) of the Florida Constitution of 1968, as
amended, and Section 125.01 (5) (a), (b) and (c), Florida Statutes,
and within the meaning of Chapter 218, Florida Statutes. The
boundary of the said North Indian River County Fire District,
hereinafter referred to as "Fire District",.shall include the
Cities of Fellsmere and Sebastian and those unincorporated areas
of the northern part of Indian River County according to the
following description:
All of Township 30 South lying West of the
West Bank of the Indian River and that part
of Township 31 South lying East of the center
line of Lateral U and West of the West Bank of
the Indian River; said lands all located and
limited to Indian River County
SECTION 21-34. Referendum Election Required. Notwith-
standing any provision to the contrary herein, this Ordinance
shall not take effect until a referendum election shall have been
held wherein the voters resident within the said Fire District
have authorized the assessment of a millage levy not in excess of
one-half (1/2) mill by the governing board of the said District
upon all real and tangible property within the boundaries thereof
and for its support, pursuant to Section 9 (b), Article VII of the
Florida Constitution of 1968, as amended, and Section 125.01 (5) (c),
Florida Statutes. Such election shall be held on March 11, 1980.
SECTION 21-35. Board of Fire Commissioners; Method of
Appointment; Duties. Pursuant to Chapter 125.01 (5) (b),Florida
Statutes, the governing body of the special District shall be
comprised of the five (5) County Commissioners of Indian River
County who shall be referred to as the District Board of Fire
Commissioners. Annually, and concurrently with the organizational
meeting of the Board of County Commissioners, the District Board
shall meet and organize, electing a chairman and vice chairman.
The said District Board of Fire Commissioners shall have
the customary and reasonable powers of any governing board of a
special district vested with control of a fire department. In
accordance with applicable State Statutes and rules and with
applicable County ordinances and rules, the District Board of
Fire Commissioners shall enjoy the specific authority to establish
a uniform plan of fire protection and control, coordinating said
plan as an integral part of the County -Wide Fire Protection System
FEB 01980 roc 42: PAq 62;
of which this ordinance is a part.
BiIOK 42 FaGE`3
The Board of Fire Commissioners
shall establish standards and policies consistent with County
standards and policies, coordinate with local emergency ambulance
and rescue services, for paid and/or volunteer fire -fighting and
rescue forces, including the size and leadership thereof; purchase,
lease, accept by gift of otherwise, construct and dispose of facili-
ties and equipment; hire and fire personnel; procure applicable and
appropriate insurance protection for personnel, facilities and equi-
ment; establish personnel and operating policies, consistent with
that adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida; develop emergency and catastrophic plans of action;
develop training and fire prevention plans, employ professional
personnel; borrow and expend money and issue bonds, revenue certi-
ficates and other obligations of indebtedness as may be allowed by
law both now and in the future; coordinate activities with existing
volunteer organizations and promote the development and operation of
volunteer fire fighting organizations within the District through an
Advisory Committee, including but not limited to the President and
Chief of each volunteer organization, and other appropriate means,
and, otherwise provide for the safety and protection of the residents
of the said Fire District. The Fire District may joint venture
within the County for the purpose of improving overall fire
protection with the County -Wide System.
SECTION 21-36. Levy of Taxes, Budget Adoption. The Board
of County Commissioners is hereby authorized and empowered to levy
annually an ad valorem tax against all real and tangible property
included within the District not to exceed one-half (1/2) mill. For
the purpose of this tax levy the assessment roll as prepared by
the County Property Appraiser and equalized by the Property Appraisal
Adjustment Board, shall be adopted and used. As provided by law,
each year the Board of Fire Commissioners, after receiving the rec-
ommendations of the Advisory Committee, shall prepare and adopt a
budget and shall, by resolution, fix the rate of said tax and levy
same, forwarding to the Board of County Commissioners, the County
Appraiser and the County Tax Collector certified copies thereof
all as provided by law. The said tax shall be included upon the tax
M
� � s
notices issued by the Tax Collector and.the said Tax shall be
collected with the County taxes, in the same manner and wherever
practicable in the manner provided by law for the collection of
County ad valorem taxes, including sale of tax certificates for
which purpose the Special District tax shall be included with the
County tax. The County Tax Collector shall forward to the Board
of Fire Commissioners taxes collected at the same time and in the
same manner as provided for the payment of County taxes by the Tax
Collector to the Board of County Commissioners. The County
Property Appraiser and the County Tax Collector shall be entitled to
payment for their services in connection with the collection of said
taxes as provided by law. Said budget as above referred, shall con-
tain all of the estimated costs of providing fire protection and
control services within the boundaries of said Fire District, as
authorized by this Ordinance and as approved by the said Board of
fire Commissioners.
Monies obtained in a levy of a tax on all real and tangible
property within the boundary of said Fire District shall be main-
tained in special accounts in the name of said District by the
District Board of Fire Commissioners for the purpose of providing
fire protection and control services, as outlined herein, within
the boundaries of said Fire District.
SECTION 21-37. Transfer Provisios.
All property and
equipment held by the various volunteer organizations and
municipalities shall be deeded or transferred to the Fire District.
Any liens outstanding will be assumed by the Fire District, to be
paid from funds derived from the taxes collected pursuant to this
ordinance. In addition, the volunteer organizations and munici-
palities shall lease the various fire stations to the Fire District
upon mutually acceptable terms.
SECTION 21-38. Referendum. The Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida, does hereby authorize and
direct the holding of a Referendum Election in the Fire District
as described herein on the 11th day of March, 1980. Only those
who are qualified electors in said Fire District on the day of
the election shall be qualified to vote in the election. The
.r
FEB 61980 BOOK 42 Pa�E.4
Fr
FEB 6 wo aooK 42 PAGF 635
y.
o
question or matter to be determined by said electors at such
election shall be stated on the ballot used in said election
as follows:
Mark a cross (x) mark in the square at the
RIGHT for the Proposal or against the Proposal.
PROPOSAL
Shall there be created a North Indian River
County Fire District, which will be created
in:
All of Township 30 South lying West of the
West Bank of the Indian River and that part
of Township 31 South lying East of the center
line of Lateral U and West of the West Bank
of the Indian River; said lands all located
and limited to Indian River County,. Florida.
as provided by Ordinance No. 80-5 with authority
to levy an ad valorem tax not to exceed one-half
(1/2) mills per annum on each dollar valuation of
taxable property within said District to cover the
expenses of creation, maintenance and operation of
said District.
FOR FIRE TAXING DISTRICT AND TAX LEVY
AGAINST FIRE TAXING DISTRICT AND TAX LEVY
Should the majority of the electors at such election vote
for the creation of the Fire District and the tax levy and upon
the certification of such results, this ordinance shall immediately
become effective. Should the majority of the electors at such
election vote against the creation of the Fire District and the
tax levy and upon the certification of such results,this ordinance
shall become a nullity.
SECTION 21-39. Repeal. Any ordinances in conflict with
this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict.
SECTION 21-40. Severability. It is declared to be the
intent of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, that if any Section, Subsection, sentence, clause or
provision of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of the
ordinance shall be construed as not having contained said Section,
Subsection, sentence, clause or provision, and shall not be
affected by such holding.
SECTION 21-41. The Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County shall have the power to merge or abolish this Special
District.
SECTION 21-42.
by law.
This Ordinance may be amended as provided
SECTION 21-43. Effective Date. A certified copy of this
ordinance shall be filed in the office of the Secretary of State
by the Clerk to the Board within ten (10) days after adoption
of this ordinance, and shall take effect upon certification of
the referendum election results certifying that the majority of
the electors at such election voted for the creation of the
Fire Taxing District and the tax levy.
ADOPTED this 6th DAY OF February , 1980.
FEB 61980
P
90 42; PA4:36
FEB 61980 800K 42..PACE 637
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON APPROACHED THE BOARD AND
DISCUSSED THE RENOVATION OF THE COUNTY WAREHOUSE USED BY THE SUPERVISOR
OF ELECTIONS, AS FOLLOWS:
February 6, 1980
731uTilgW,VITII•ul
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Neil A. Nelson
Assistant County Administrator
RE: Renovation of Supervisor of Elections Warehouse
Four proposals weie requested concerning the renovation of the Supervisor
of Elections warehouse. On February 1, 1980, proposals were received The
Chapin Group and George Frederick Construction, Inc. The Chapin Group proposal
totaled $11,532.00, but did not include dehumidification equipment. George Frederick's
proposal was $11,680.00 and included two 25 gal. dehumidifiers and two 15 gal. dehu-
midifiers, and two concrete loading platforms.
Dehumidification cost was compared with air conditioning cost. For 72 tons
of air conditioning equipment and the required insulation, the estimated cost would
be $8,600.00. Dehumidification equipment cost is $950.00.
It is recommended that the renovation job be awarded to George Frederick
Construction, Inc., for the sum of $11,680.00. That the renovation will include:
1. Remove all jalousie windows, block up all openings - except (12) twelve
openings approximately 72" x 40" to replace with fixed a" plate glass set in aluminum
frames.
2. Install 2 drywall ceilings in complete building - tape joints only
(painting excluded).
3. Remove existing light wiring mounted to bottom chords of existing trusses
and replace with owner's fixtures after drywall ceiling is installed.
4. Install two double 6/0 x 8/0 flush steel doors and jambs in two of the
existing door openings and 3/0 x 6/8 steel door and jamb, block up all other door
openings.
5. Replace two 36" x 36" fan louvers.
6. Install two 25 gal. dehumidifiers and two 15 gal. dehumidifiers.
7. Install two concrete loading platforms at access doors approximate size
72" x 48" x24" high with 4" x 6" P.T, wood bumper bolted to masonry.
This has been discussed with Rosemary Richey and she concurs.
NAN/ss
MR. NELSON CONTINUED THAT SINCE MRS. RICHEY AND HER STAFF
OFTEN WORK AT THE WAREHOUSE, HE RECOMMENDED SEALING OFF THE SOUTH
PORTION OF THE BUILDING TO CREATE AN OFFICE SPACE AND PUTTING IN A
WINDOW AIR CONDITIONER TO BE USED AS NEEDED, WHICH HE FELT COULD BE
DONE ECONOMICALLY. MR. NELSON STATED THAT THE CARPENTER SHOP HAD
BEEN RELOCATED, AND NOW MRS. RICHEY WOULD HAVE THE ENTIRE BUILDING.
HE CONTINUED THAT THE COUNTY CREW COULD GET STARTED ON THE PROJECT
IN APPROXIMATELY 30 DAYS; AND THAT A BUDGET AMENDMENT WOULD BE NEEDED
FOR THE RENOVATION JOB, ALLOCATING $700 FOR THE CREATION OF THE
OFFICE, AND FOR THE SMALL AIR CONDITIONER.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE PROPOSAL OF FREDERICK CON-
STRUCTION COMPANY FOR RENOVATION OF THE WAREHOUSE FOR THE SUPER-
VISOR OF ELECTIONS AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN;
APPROVED AN EXPENDITURE OF $700 FOR CREATION OF THE OFFICE SPACE
AND INSTALLATION OF AN AIR CONDITIONER, AND APPROVED THE FOLLOWING
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO PAY FOR THE ABOVE OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND:
ACCOUNT No, DEB -IT CREDIT
001-220-519-66,29 $12,380
001-199-513-99.91 $12,380
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS DISCUSSED THE
FOLLOWING, CONCERNING A GAS TAX RELATING TO ROADS:
VEP,Y SPECIAL OUESTIONti
IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ESSENTIAL
Attorney General Jim Smith has issued his second opinion
(this time to the Auditor General) advising that proceeds
of the surplus of the second gas tax distributed to the
counties cannot be used except for construction and Right-
of-4lav�a_ cgui s ti on or a-roaC where no road ever before
existe is, of urse, must govern e nn ings-of the
audi o s and it means most of our road improvement programs
must immediately stop unless Smith's definition of "new road"
is reversed. Please read attached letter of January 18, 198.0
to Preston Everett, Marion County Attorney and AGO's 079-43
and 079=104 for background information.
A Constitutional Amendment will certainly be the final solution
to this unfortunate circumstance; however, this course of action
requires committee study, legislature approval for placement on
the ballot and voter approval, all of which are subject to delay
and the possibility of defeat. Marion County i s "W" I l 1 i ng. to
cooperate in whatever concerted -effort might tend to alleviate
the situation.
FEB 61980 41 ' V puz 3
� FEB 6190 _
�aoox 42 PA4 6:39
Return the form below to: 7
County Engineer
19 N.W. Pine Ave.
Ocala, Florida 32670
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My County of
supports Marion County
in this effort and will forward a Resolution in opposition
to AGO 79-104 requesting relief from the restrictive
definition given the word."construction" by the Attorney
General as well as the exclusion by him of attendant "over-
head" costs from lawful expenditures of the Surplus of the
Second Gas Tax.
YES
NO
DATE RESOLUTION CAN BE EXPECTED
SIGNATURE
District No. 1 Sandy P. Register
District No. 2 - Jim Martin
District N.
3 - Wayne Nettles
Diatrict No. 4 - Aldine Feagle
District No. S - James Montgomery
par.•_c.- vox-a+.n�.m.v�+�Cer�r-�ir;r �"'Y"�. rv� "F°'3: 3+y'^.." �+�e �P,°�'°•FC�i ms's.^. v^s*S' _ —•+yrc4n+-
na
...34s:1 amt - —„a.mm'44-..+—.�._-�tb..`�...5_hs.�a..w....n:'S,s'6EJ�w•�:w..,_.-:x,�- ,::a....a6aas!an..
BOARO�OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ® COLUMBIA COUNTY
January 23, 1980
BOARD OF COUNTY COIMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Gentlemen:
On behalf of the citizens of Columbia County, this Board believes
that an increased share of the fifth and sixth cent gas tax is
most deserving in order for the counties to continue maintenance
of our roadways. To further enhance our position, we unanimously
adopted a resolution to this effect.
We sincere!,,- trust that your county, too, will take a long an;2 a
serious look at this situation. Let us band together in order that
our Legislature may know how we feel.
Yours for a more progressive County and State, I remain
Respectfully yours,
0.01
.'
Sandy P. fejister
Chairman of the Board
SPR•vgm
® 41
o
HE CONTINUED THAT THE GAS TAX IS BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF GASOLINE SOLD,
AND NOT ON THE PRICE OF GASOLINE; THEREFORE, WE ARE RECEIVING LESS
MONEY BUT OUR DEMANDS FOR ROADS ARE INCREASING. MR. THOMAS THEN
RECOMMENDED THAT WE SIGN THE PETITION, AND COMMISSIONER Loy CONCURRED.
ADMINISTRATOR .JENNINGS REFERRED TO THE UNDERLINED PORTION
OF THE PETITION AND COMMENTED THAT WE DO NOT NEED NEW ROADS BUT
WE MUST UPGRADE THOSE THAT WE HAVE.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE MATTER.
ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED THAT HE IS NOT SURE THAT WE
KNOW WHAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION IS, AND APPARENTLY THERE IS
A SURPLUS OF MONEY THAT CAN BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION. HE STATED HE
WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE TO KNOW WHAT DOLLARS THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT,
AND WHAT IS THE OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INTERJECTED THAT HE DID NOT THINK THE STATE
SHOULD TELL THE COUNTY HOW TO USE THE SURPLUS MONEY.
DIS;CUSSION.CONTINUED.AND IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT THE ATTORNEY,
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS AND FINANCE OFFICER BARTON
RESEARCH THIS MATTER FURTHER TO SEE WHAT POSITIVE APPROACH SHOULD BE
TAKEN, AND RESPOND BACK TO THE BOARD AT THE NEXT MEETING.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE REQUEST FOR OUT -OF -COUNTY
TRAVEL FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REGAN TO .JACKSONVILLE,
FLORIDA, FEBRUARY 12 AND 131 1980, TO ATTEND A NEW CONSTRUCTION
PREAPPLICATION MEETING.
ATTORNEY COLLINS NEXT DISCUSSED THE LEASE FOR THE GRANT
BUILDING, WHICH IS NOW OWNED BY DR. BARKETT AND MAX LOWING. HE
CONTINUED THAT MR. LOWING INDICATED TO HIM THAT THEY WOULD BE WILLING
TO RENT TO THE COUNTY, BASED ON AN 18 MONTH LEASE WITH THE RIGHT TO
CONTINUE ON A MONTH TO MONTH BASIS, FOR A RENTAL CHARGE OF $750 A
MONTH. THE ATTORNEY REPORTED THAT THE LANDLORD WOULD CONTINUE TO
BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE AIR CONDITIONING, AND OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES,
WHICH WILL BE SET OUT IN THE LEASE.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE LEASE FOR THE GRANT BUILDING
FEB 61980 43 Boa 42 E 64,Q
Fr -
Boo 42 -PnE 641
FOR $750 A MONTH, AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN. THE LEASE
WILL BE MADE PART OF THE MINUTES WHEN RECEIVED.
ADMINISTRATOR KENNINGS NEXT DISCUSSED THE RAILROAD CROSSING
AT STORM GROVE ROAD AND THE LETTER RECEIVED FROM JEFFREY L. DUBOIS
OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, AS FOLLOWS:
Florida
BOB GRAHAM
GOVERNOR
Department of Transportation
Division of Road Operations
780 Southwest 24th Street
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33315
January 21, 1980
1r. R. W. Fondren
Chief Engineer
Florida East Coast Railway
One Malaga Street
P.O. Drawer 1048
St. Augustine, Florida 32084
WILLIAM N. ROSE
SECRETARY
RE: Section 88508-6601, State Road Storm Gro -.e Road, Indian liver County,
Parcel 1 (X&S-D), Crossing No. - New Crossing, FEC HT 223+1941,
FAP No. SOS -0004(7)
Dear Mr. Fondren:
The Department is una`;Ale to fund the above Federal Aid Project and does not
foresee having funds for this until possibly 1988.
By copy of this letter I aim advising sir. Jack Jennings, County Administrator
for Indian River County, of the Departments position in this matter with
reference to the crossing and signal agreement executed on behalf of the
Department, the Railroad, and Indian River County. It will be appreciated
if Mr. Jennings could advise this office if the. County wishes to pursue
this project using County funds only. If this can be accomplished the
Department will have to terminate the existing Tri -party Agreement. Should
you have any further questions, please contact me.
Very truly yours.
J ffr � - is
DI!ptrict Railroad Coordinator
JLD:bh
cc: Mr. Linus Hernandez, Engineer of Railroads
fir: Jack Jennings, County Administrator
I ii
THE ADMINISTRATOR ADVISED THAT IF THE COUNTY WANTS TO
CONTINUE WITH THE STORM GROVE ROAD CROSSING, THE COUNTY IS GOING TO
HAVE TO STAND THE EXPENSE OF $40,000. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS
SUGGESTED GOING OVER THE MATTER WITH THE ATTORNEY AND WITH MR.
DUBOIS OF THE DOT TO SEE WHETHER THE COUNTY SHOULD ASSUME THE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT CROSSING. HE CONTINUED THAT IF THE STATE
DOES AWAY WITH IT, THEN IT BECOMES MORE OF A PROBLEM TO GET ANOTHER
CROSSING GRANTED, HE ADVISED THAT THE HOBART ROAD CROSSING IS IN
THE SAME CATEGORY AND SUGGESTED THAT WE GO AHEAD WITH THAT PROJECT.
ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT WE OUGHT TO CONTACT THE PEOPLE IN
THE AREA THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THE CROSSING.
COMMISSIONER Loy SUGGESTED AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATOR
AND THE ATTORNEY TO CONTACT THE DEVELOPER ON STORM GROVE ROAD AND
OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES, EXPLAIN THE SITUATION WE ARE IN, AND
AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATOR TO RESPOND TO THE DOT ADVISING THAT
THE COUNTY WILL DO THE HOBART ROAD CROSSING.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT UPIGRADING THE CROSSINGS IN ORDER
TO MAKE THE ROAD QUALIFY fOR STATE FUNDING.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS AND
ATTORNEY COLLINS TO SPEAK WITH THE DEVELOPER ON STORM GROVE ROAD,
AND AUTHORIZED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO CONTINUE NEGOTIATIONS REGARDING
THE HOBART ROAD CROSSING.
ATTORNEY COLLINS NEXT DISCUSSED THE NINETY-NINE YEARIEASE WITH
ST. FRANCIS MANOR, AND ADVISED THE BOARD THAT HE HAS RECEIVED A
LETTER FROM ATTORNEY .JAMES T. VOCELLE REGARDING A NEW LEGAL DESCRIPTION,
A PROPOSED RESOLUTION AND A PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND MODIFICATION OF
THE NINETY-NINE YEAR LEASE. HE CONTINUED THAT HE WOULD RELY ON
THE ADMINISTRATOR AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ARE
CORRECT, AND WHETHER HE RECOMMENDS THE LAND BE GRANTED FOR
THE PURPOSE SET OUT IN THE LEASE. THE ATTORNEY NOTED THAT STATUTE
MAKES IT MANDATORY THAT YOU PUBLISH FOR THE SALE OF PROPERTY)IBUT IT
DOES NOT MAKE IT CLEAR WHETHER OR NOT TO ADVERTISE FOR THE LEASING
OF PROPERTY. HE STATED THE ONLY CHANGE IN THE MODIFIED LEASE IS
THE ADDITION OF LANDS TO AN EXISTING LEASE.
FEB 61980 BOOK
45 2 wSl
FEB 6 1980 eooK pa0043
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT WILSON
WETHERINGTON, OF HIS STAFF, ADVISED THAT THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS
IN ORDER WITH THE MARKINGS ON THE GROUND.
FRANK ZORC APPROACHED THE BOARD AND COMMENTED THAT CAPTAIN
STROUD OF THE SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT CALLED HIM TO ADVISE THE SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT IS IN AGREEMENT WITH THE BOUNDARIES AND ARE PLEASED WITH
THE FENCE AROUND THE LAKE AREA.
DISCUSSION CONCERNING A RELEASE OF EASEMENT ENSUED.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0. 80-19 APPROVING
THE AMENDMENT AND MODIFICATION OF THE NINETY-NINE YEAR LEASE AND
AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE SHERIFF,
AND APPROVAL OF THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION; AND THE PREPARATION OF THE
RELEASE OF EASEMENT TO RETURN THE UNUSED PORTION OF LAND TO THE COUNTY
IS TO BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF MR. ZORC.
THE DOCUMENTS MENTIONED ABOVE WILL BECOME PART OF THE
MINUTES WHEN COMPLETED.
MR. ZORC PERSONALLY THANKED THE BOARD, AND PRESENTED THE
FOLLOWING LETTER OF APPRECIATION FROM THE MEMBERS OF ST. FRANCIS MANOR:
711111111, 111--;-1 iij;q
milvi
Of Vero Beach, Inc.
A Florida Non -Profit Corporation for the purpose of furnishing apartments to retired and elderly people with limited incomes.
Post Office Box 6250
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
February 6th, 1980 (305) 562.8575
SUBJECT: Indian River County -St. Francis Manor Lease revision.
In 1972 the County Commission took action on a request from
the promotors of St. Francis Manor, for a lease of land for
the proposed project. A long term lease was agreed upon and
the Manor was begun soon after, since being developed in
stages to it's present size consisting of 62 apartments and a
complete dining recreation facility.
On behalf of all directors, members, and residents of the Manor,
I wish to thank the County Commission again, today, for their
cooperation, and willingness to help make expansion possible
for our project- The additional land will be used for open green
space, which in turn will permit between 30 and 36 additional
units, increasing to near 100 the units we will have available
fo VW much needed housing. _
46
Plans call for construction of three additional 12 unit buildings,
one at a time. These plans will be finalized, hopefully, within
three or four weeks. We are still in need of our financing com-
mittment, but have good indications of receiving it soon:
The Manor is the only low-cost housing project in Vero Beach. It
was designed to meet the needs of housing for senior citizens
with low incomes. It is operated by local.residents who serve
as directors on the board of the Non Profit Corporation.
Our present average rent schedule is $110.00 per month. Due to
the rapid inflationary spiral of building costs, and interest
rates, project rents for the new apartments may reach $140-150
per month.
This project was built and operated with no Federal or State funds
for six years. 1000 occupancy is maintained. There is usually
a waiting list.
Present Officers and Directors attached:
OFFICERS DIRECTORS
1979 - 1980
FRANK L. ZORC----- PRESIDENT --- 1400 16TH ST. ----562-4646
TOM FITZGERALD---- VICE.PRES.--1060 US #1.------567-2838
BILL HAUSLER-----2ND.V.PRES.-1866 38TH AVE. ---567-1128
GWEN ZORC--------- TREASURER --1225 20th AVE. ---567-3122
JAMES T.VOCELLE---DIRECfDOR ---- 601 21st ST. -----567-3124
BILL BIESCHKE-----"----------866 20th PLACE ---567-5913
BOB ROLLINS------------------955 KINGS HWY---- 562-7578
CLARENCE TABER----" -- --------746 18th ST. -----569-0540
HELEN DIORIO-----------------2358 2nd AVE. ----562-6739
CHARLIE PARKS ------ ----------2266 14th AVE. ---567-2144
MARY SILVA-------"----------915 TULIP LANE ---567-1223
L. F. BARKER ------" ----------2345 14th ---562-4101
KAY FEDICK-------- " ----------1441 OCEAN DR. ---567-1224
GENE BYRNE-------------------660 HONEYSUCKLE --562-7718
REV. DON MILLER ---- ----------2219 19th AVE. ---569-4863
BERNICE INGRAM- OFFICE MGR --1750 20th AVE ----562-3575
JULIE DALLAND---- ACTING SEC --1400 16th ST. ----562-4646
Past Directors
PRESIDENT
VICE PRESIUENT
.SECRETARY
TREASURER
1979-1978 Bill Bieschke
Tom Fitzgerald
Mary Silva
Gwen Zorc
1978-1977 Louis Drees
Richard Hope
Mary Silva
Marion Boulay
1977-1976 Frank L. Zorc
Tom Fitzgerald
Louis,Drees
Richard Hope
1976-1975 Frank L. Zorc
Jack Young
Betty Rollins
Polly Fenn
1975-1974 Robert Deering
Frank L. Zorc
Bill Bieschke
Tom Fitzgerald
1974-1973 Frank L. Zorc
Robert Deering
Bill Bieschke
Tom Fitzgerald
1973-1972 Frank L. Zorc
Robert J. Geary
Bill Bieschke
Moses Panaccion
1972-1978 Manor Attorney - James T. Vocelle
Present Office Manager - Bernice Ingram
PRESENT DIRECTORS:
L.F. Barker
Louis Drees
Bill Hausler
Mary Silva
Bill Bieschke
Rev. R.E. Engle
Charlie Parks
Clarence Taber
Helen DiOrio
Tom Fitzgclald
Bob Rollins
James T.Vocelle
Fronk L. Zorc
Gwen Zorc
FEB 61980 47 BOOK 4 °--F9'E SRI
FEB 61980 soon '42 PAA45
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED ADDING AN EMERGENCY ITEM TO
THE AGENDA CONCERNING THE HOLIDAY SCHEDULE.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE RECEIVED NOTIFICATION THAT
THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS HAD DESIGNATED 10 HOLIDAYS FOR THEIR
EMPLOYEES RATHER THAN THE 9 SET OUT BY THE BOARD AND WAS NOW BRINGING
IT TO THE BOARDS ATTENTION SO THAT THEY MAY WANT TO RECONSIDER THE
ACTION. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT COMMENTED THAT ONE THING BOTHERED HIM -
ORIGINALLY, WHEN WE INTENDED TO GIVE 9 HOLIDAYS, WE RECEIVED NO COMMENTS.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON INTERJECTED THAT WE HAD RE-
CEIVED LETTERS FROM CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS ALSO REQUESTING GOOD FRIDAY.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT HE PERSONALLY THOUGHT
THEY SHOULD STAY WITH THE 9 HOLIDAYS. HE CONTINUED THAT THE BOARD
ASKED THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS TO CONCUR, AND THEY COULD RECOMMEND
ONE OF THE OTHER HOLIDAYS BEING LEFT OUT AND HAVE GOOD FRIDAY, RATHER
THAN ADDING A HOLIDAY.
MR. NELSON ADVISED THE BOARD THEY SENT THE ELECTED OFFICIALS
THE 9 HOLIDAY SCHEDULE AND ASKED THEM TO COMMENT, AND FREDA WRIGHT
AND ROSEMARY RICHEY REQUESTED AN ADDITIONAL HOLIDAY. HE CONTINUED
THAT OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS CAME IN WITH A LETTER TO THE BOARD
REQUESTING GOOD FRIDAY AS AN ADDITIONAL HOLIDAY.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS NOTED THAT IN THE PAST, THE BOARD
WOULD DECIDE ON THE HOLIDAYS, AND COPIES OF THE SCHEDULE WERE THEN
SENT TO THEM FOR THEIR COMMENTS; THIS TIME, HE WAS NOT SURE HOW THE
PROCEDURE WAS DONE, HE CONTINUED THAT AS FAR AS THE ADMINISTRATOR'S
OFFICE WAS CONCERNED, THEY GO BY WHAT THE BOARD SAYS. ADMINISTRATOR
JENNINGS ADDED THAT IN THEIR OFFICE ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO ATTEND
SERVICES ON GOOD FRIDAY ARE PERMITTED TO GO.
COMMISSIONER Loy STATED IT IS THE BOARDS JOB TO KEEP THE
COURTHOUSE OPEN SO THE GENERAL PUBLIC HAS IT AVAILABLE TO THEM, AND
THEY TRY TO DO IT IN A MANNER THAT IS PLEASING TO THE MAJORITY OF
THE PEOPLE. SHE CONTINUED THAT THE PUBLIC OFFICIALS HAVE A RIGHT TO
SAY WHETHER OR NOT THEIR OFFICES ARE GOING TO BE OPEN OR CLOSED, BUT
SHE FELT THEY SHOULD STAY OPEN AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. SHE NOTED..THAT_
TO GET SUCH A STATEMENT, ADDING GOOD FRIDAY AS A HOLIDAY, FROM PUBLIC
OFFICIALS,. F WHOM WE CONTROL THEIR BUDGETS, IS VERY DISCOURAGING.
COMMISSIONE LOY ADDED THAT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN, SHE IS NOT
IN FAVOR OF MAKING SOME PEOPLE PUT IN AN EXTRA DAY IF THE MAJORITY
OF THE COURTHOUSE IS CLOSED. SHE CONTINUED THAT AT CERTAIN TIMES WE
CALL ON EMPLOYEES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT DURING EMERGENCY SITUATIONS.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT COMMENTED THAT IT WAS OUR OWN STAFF'S
RECOMMENDATION THAT WE GIVE THE EXTRA DAY, AND HE CERTAINLY CANNOT SEE
OUR EMPLOYEES WORK THE EXTRA DAY WHILE THE OTHERS HAVE THE DAY OFF.
COMMISSIONER DEESON STATED THAT IF THE BOARD IS GOING TO
CONSIDER A TENTH DAY, IT SHOULD BE A BIRTHDAY; THEN THE COURTHOUSE
FACILITIES WOULD BE KEPT OPEN AND NOTHING WOULD BE DISRUPTED. HE
CONTINUED THAT IF THE BOARD CAN'T REACH A COMPROMISE, THE COURTHOUSE
SHOULD CLOSE ON GOOD FRIDAY.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE WONDERED WHY GOVERNMENT HAS TO BE SO
DIFFERENT FROM PRIVATE INDUSTRY WHEN TALKING ABOUT DAYS OFF AND
HOLIDAYS. HE STATED THAT WE HAVE TWO LONG WEEKENDS NOW, AND IF WE
GO FOR THE BIRTHDAY THIS YEAR, THEN IT WILL BE GOOD FRIDAY NEXT YEAR.,
COMMISSIONER WODTKE FELT 9 DAYS PAID HOLIDAYS ARE ENOUGH IN THE YEAR.
COMMISSIONER SOY SUGGESTED THE BOARD RESPOND TO THE
CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS THAT WE HAVE ESTABLISHED A HOLIDAY SCHEDULE
AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE THEIR COOPERATION IN ABIDING BY IT; AND IF
THEY FEEL AN ADDITIONAL DAY IS NECESSARY THEY MIGHT CONSIDER USING
THE EMPLOYEE'S BIRTHDAY AS A FLOATING HOLIDAY.
WILLIAM KOOLAGE, INTERESTED CITIZEN, EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT
WHAT THE EXTRA DAY WOULD COST THE TAXPAYER.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON ADVISED THAT ST. LUCIE,
MARTIN AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTIES HAVES HOLIDAYS; THE CITY OF VERO
BEACH HAS 11, PIPER HAS 11, AND THE DOT HAS 8 DAYS.
COMMISSIONER L.OY INTERJECTED THAT NOT TOO LONG AGO THE
COUNTY HAD 7 HOLIDAYS PER YEAR.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE AGREED WITH COMMISSIONER LOY'S
SUGGESTION THAT THE BOARD STAY WITH THE 9 DAYS; THAT IT WAS ADEQUATE
WITH THE SURROUNDING COUNTIES, AND ASK THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
TO DO THE.SAME AND COOPERATE WITH THE BOARD AND ABIDE BY THE SCHEDULE.
FEB 61980 49 Boas '�� . 4
pp -
FEB 6 i980 BOOK 42 FAZE647
a
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, COMMISSIONER LYONS NOT HAVING RETURNED FROM
WASHINGTON AT THIS TIME.
JOHN ROBBINS OF THE JOINT VENTURE CAME BEFORE THE BOARD
TO REPORT ON THE COUNTY BRIDGE INSPECTION PROGRAM AND STATED THAT
THEY FEEL THEY HAVE COMPLIED WITH THEIR CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS.
HE REVIEWED THE WORK THEY HAVE DONE, WHICH INCLUDES AN INVENTORY OF
ALL BRIDGES IN THE COUNTY, A PRELIMINARY INSPECTION FOR PURPOSES
OF CLASSIFICATION, AND A COMPREHENSIVE INSPECTION AND INDIVIDUAL RE-
PORT ON EACH OF THE BRIDGES THAT ARE THE COUNTY'S RESPONSIBILITY.
MR. ROBBINS NOTED THAT, IN ADDITION, THEY HAVE PREPARED A MAP SHOWING
THE LOCATION OF ALL THE BRIDGES AND INCORPORATED A CODING SYSTEM TO
INDICATE THE TYPE OF STRUCTURE, THE RESPONSIBLE AGENCY, AND THE
REQUIRED MAINTENANCE DATES. HE THEN INTRODUCED GREG.EDMONDS, WHO
WAS IN CHARGE OF EVALUATING THE DETAILED STRUCTURAL REPORTS,
MR. EDMONDS STATED THAT THE LAST STEP IN THIS PROCESS IS
TO SUBMIT THE STRUCTURAL INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL FORM, WHICH IS A
CODED COMPUTER CARD, TO THE DOT ON ALL SO BRIDGES SO THE DOT CAN IN-
CORPORATE THIS INFORMATION IN THEIR SYSTEM. MR. EDMONDS NOTED THAT
ALL THOSE STRUCTURES REQUIRING MAJOR AND IMMEDIATE ATTENTION SHOULD
BE RED FLAGGED WHEN SENT TO THE DOT SO THAT THEY WILL THEN SEND THEIR
OWN MEN UP TO MAKE AN INSPECTION, AND IF THEY DETERMINE A BRIDGE IS
CRITICAL, THEY WILL PLUG IT INTO THE FUNDING PROGRAM.
ADMINISTRATOR .JENNINGS AGREED THAT THOSE WHICH ARE CRITICAL
SHOULD BE RED FLAGGED. HE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAS READ OVER
THESE REPORTS AND ALREADY STARTED MAKING SOME OF THE CRITICAL REPAIRS.
THE ADMINISTRATOR CONTINUED THAT HE IS KEEPING A COST ACCOUNTING
OF ALL MATERIALS, LABOR, ETC., USED IN THE REPAIR OF THESE BRIDGES
AND WONDERED WHETHER WE CAN BE REIMBURSED. HE FELT THAT WHEN THESE
FORMS ARE SENT TO THE DOT, IT MAY BE NECESSARY TO GO DOWN PERSONALLY
AND TALK WITH THEM AND HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE AUTHORIZATION TO GO.
COMMISSIONER LOY FELT THAT THE FORMS AND ENTIRE PACKET
SHOULD BE HAND CARRIED TO THE DOT.
Lyl
MR. ROBBINS THEN REVIEWED THE LETTER OF JANUARY 29, 1980,
WRITTEN BY RALPH ENG OF THE .JOINT VENTURE, EXPLAINING THE VARIOUS
ATTACHMENTS IN DETAIL. HE NOTED THAT ANY BRIDGE NUMBER STARTING
WITH 8800.. WOULD INDICATE IT IS PART OF THE STATE SYSTEM, WHILE
8840.. WOULD INDICATE IT IS AN INDIAN.RIVER COUNTY BRIDGE. SAID
LETTER IS MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES AS FOLLOWS;
FEB 61980 51
aoox �2 FAcf S4$
r
W
REPLY TO:
'SI
SVERDRUP & PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
AND
BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
(A JOINT VENTURE)
January 29, 1980
Mr. Jack G. Jennings
County Administrator
Indian River County
Room 115
County Courthouse
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
BOOK 42 PkGf 649
Project No. 6475
Subject: County Bridge Inspection and Report Program
Dear Mr. Jennings:
The joint venture of Sverdrup & Parcel and Associates, Inc. and
Beindorf and Associates, Inc. is pleased to submit this summary
of the County Bridge Inspection and Report Program.
The Program was authorized by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, on June 20, 1979. It encompassed the
identification, inventory, and detailed inspection of the bridges
within Indian River County, Florida which are under County juris-
diction. Subsequent to the detailed inspection, a report containing
the bridge description and location, bridge condition, the structural
load capacity, and recommendations for each bridge was prepared and
submitted to the County. In addition, the Florida Department of
Transportation (DOT) Structural Inventory and Appraisal Form was
completed for each bridge and will be submitted to the DOT in ful-
fillment of the requirements of Florida Statutes, Section 338.071
(Attachment A).
The Program was accomplished in three phases. The first phase
entailed the assimilation of data collected in cooperation with the
County and the DOT to determine those bridges within Indian River
County which come under the jurisdiction of the County. A prelimi-
nary inspection and inventory was performed on each bridge identifying
and locating the bridge, classifying its type, and establishing its
number in accordance with the DOT Bridge Numbering Plan. A summary
listing these bridges by DOT bridge numbers and their location is
( ) 3885 20TH STREET
POST OFFICE BOX 849
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960
REPLY TO:
XX) 2002 N.W. 13TH STREET
SUITE 201
GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA 32601
Mr. Jack G. Jennings
January 29, 1980
Page -two-
attached (Attachment B). Work on this phase commenced June 25, 1979
and was completed July 27, 1979. In the second phase, a comprehen-
sive field inspection of each structure was performed. The inspection
determined the detailed physical characteristics of the bridge com-
ponents and their current condition, documented with photographs;
the condition of the watercourse beneath the bridge; and the charac-
teristics and the condition of the roadway approaches and their
effects on the bridge. The second phase commenced on July 30, 1979
and was essentially complete September 21, 1979. The compilation of
the field inspection data and the inventory information into the
inspection report was accomplished in the third phase. The reports
include a map of the County with the structure location and State
bridge number noted; a determination of the load capacity of the
structure; the field inspection data detailing the current condition
of the structure; sketches providing details of the structure type
and location of structural deficiencies, if any; pertinent bridge
elevations; and watercourse details. Based on the above information,
a bridge evaluation sheet was prepared and included in the report.
This sheet serves as a summary establishing the bridge location and
provides a description of the bridge type, commentary on the bridge
condition, and recommendations for maintenance and structural im-
provements. Photographs are included in each report for documenta-
tion of location and condition. The DOT Structural Inventory and
Appraisal Form is then completed with a copy included in the report
and a copy attached which will be sent to the DOT. In addition to
the reports, a comprehensive wall map showing the locations and
bridge numbers for bridges under the County's jursidiction has been
completed and will be submitted to the County.
The program resulted in the location, inventory, and inspection of
80 bridges within Indian River County which are presently under the
County jurisdiction. The majority of these structures are in fair
to good condition with no structural deficiencies. Recommendations
for these bridges include maintenances items which will extend the
useful life of the structure and enhance the bridge's safety from a
traffic standpoint. However, 16 of the bridges inspected will re-
quire some structural rehabilitation or replacement -to maintain their
sturctural integrity. A summary of these bridges and the corresponding
required improvements are listed in Attachment C. One of the more
critical bridges on this list, Bridge Number 884002, was discussed
with the County in a meeting between Mr. Neil Nelson and Ms. Alma Lee
Loy, representing the County, and Messrs. John Robbins and Greg
Edmonds representing the joint venture, on October 11, 1979. Sub-
sequent to this meeting, adequate rehabilitative work was performed
FEB 61980 BOOK 42 Pa�E65Q
r
FEB -61980
Box 42 -aw 651
Mr. Jack G. Jennings
January 29, 1980
Page -three-
to ifiprove the bridge's structural integrity. The remaining bridges
listed on Attachment C should be schedule for the appropriate reha-
bilitation or replacement as soon as possible.
In accordance with Paragraph (2) of Section 338.071 of the Florida
Statutes, the County is required to perform inspections on its
bridges at intervals not to exceed 2 years. The future inspection,
in most cases, need not be as detailed as the inspection performed
under the subject Program. A recommended schedule for future in-
spection has been established and is attached (Attachment D). This
schedule requires many of the bridges to be inspected within one
year from the inspection date under this Program. This is adviseable
considering no previous information or inspection reports where
available on any of the bridges now under the County's jurisdiction._.
In addition to the 80 bridges inventoried and inspected under this
Program, there are five bridges in Indian River County which are
presently maintained by the DOT. Whether these bridges will be
turned over to the County is not known at this time. These bridges
are the four bridges in the structure of Wabasso Road (C-510) over
Indian River and the bridge at 27th Avenue (C-607) over the South
Relief Canal. The current status on the Wabasso River bridges is
detailed in Mr. John Robbins' letter of September 5, 1979 to Mr.
Jack G. Jennings (Attachment E). The current status of the 27th
Avenue Bridge is detailed in a letter dated June 25, 1979 from
Mr. Ray G. L'Amoreaux, Director, Division of Transportation Planning,
DOT, to the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners, Indian
River County (Attachment F).
This submittal completes our
the subject Program, and we
on future bridge inspection
Very truly yours,
'Cq
Ralph /E. Eng /
For the Joint Venture
Attachments
responsibility under the contract for
look forward to working with the County
and report programs.
Attachment A
TEXT OF FLORIDA STATUTES, SECTION 338.071
338.071 Safety Inspection of Bridges
(1) For the purposes of this section, the word "bridge" means a
publicly owned structure, including supports erected over a depression
or an obstruction such as water or a highway or railway, having a track
or passageway for carrying traffic or other moving loads and having an
opening measured along the center of the roadway of more than 20 feet
between undercopings of abutments or spring lines of arches or extreme
ends of openings for multiple boxes; it may include multiple pipes where
the clear distance between openings is less than half of the smaller
contiguous opening.
(2) Prior to October 1, 1977, and at regular intervals thereafter
not to exceed 2 years, each bridge on a public highway, road, or street
shall be inspected as to the structural soundness and ,safety thereof for
the passage of traffic thereon. The thoroughness with which bridges are
to be inspected shall depend on such factors as age, traffic character-
istics, state of maintenance, and known deficiencies. The jurisdictional
authority or owner shall be responsible for having inspections performed
and reports prepared in accordance with the provisions contained herein.
(3a) Each structure defined as a bridge under subsection (1) and
being used by the public is required to be inspected by a qualified
bridge inspector as defined herein as to its safe load -carrying capacity
and traffic safety.
(3b) All inspections are to be reported on a format designated by
the Department of Transportation and forwarded to the department at
intervals pursuant to subsection (2). Data on newly completed structures,
or any modification of existing structures which would alter previously
recorded data on the inspection reports shall be submitted to the
department within 90 days by the jurisdictional authority or owner.
(3c) The Department of Transportation shall maintain inspection
reports and an inventory of bridges reported pursuant to this section.
(4a) Individuals inspecting bridges and completing reports
required by this section shall possess the following minimum
qualifications:
1. Be a registered professional engineer; or
2. Have a minimum of 5 years' experience in bridge inspec-
tion assignments in a responsible capacity and have
completed a comprehensive training course approved by the
department.
(4b) Individuals executing reports required by this section shall
be registered professional engineers.
(5) Within 6 months following the respective dates specified in
subsection (2), the department shall prepare a report of its findings
with respect to each such bridge or other structure whereon significant
structural deficiencies were discovered and file such report with the
Governor and the presiding officer of each house of the Legislature. A
copy of the report shall be furnished by the department to each member
of the Legislature requesting it.
FEB 61980 800A '4PAIcE 652;
FEB 61990 ®oma. PACE 653
� � r
Attachment B
Page I of 2
BRIDGES UNDER INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JURISDICTION
Bridge No.
Bridge Location
880006
66th Avenue (C-505) over North Relief Canal
880017
82nd Avenue (C-609) over Lateral "D"
880018
82nd Avenue (C-609) over Relief Canal (.25 mi. north of S.R. 60)
880019
82nd Avenue (C-609) over Relief Canal (.5 mi. north of S.R. 60)
880020
82nd Avenue (C-609) over Relief Canal (.75 mi. north of S.R. 60)
880021
Oslo Road (C-606) over Lateral "C"
880022
Oslo Road (C-606) over Lateral "B" -
880023
Oslo Road (C-606) over Lateral Canal along 43rd Ave. (C-611)
880024
Oslo Road (C-606) over Lateral "J"
880031
Old Dixie Highway (C-605) over South Relief Canal
880033
C-512 over Sebastian River
880039
Glendale Rd. (C-612) over Lateral "B"
880040
65th St. (C-632) over Lateral "G"
880041
C-512 over Ditch No. 46 (.1 mi. north of S.R. 60)
880042
C-512 over Ditch No. 34 (.4 mi. north of S.R. 60)
880043
Kings Highway (C -505A) over North Relief Canal
880044
Wabasso Road (C-510) over Relief Canal (1.3 mi. west of C-505)
880045
43rd Avenue (C-611) over South Relief Canal
880046
82nd Avenue (C-609) over Ditch C-2
880047
Wabasso Road (C-510) 3 miles west of C-505
880048
58th Avenue (C -505A) over Main Canal
880049
South Winter Beach Rd. (C-632) over Lateral "A"
880055
C-512 over Lateral"U"
880056
C-512 over Park Lateral
880062
Old Dixie Highway (C -5A) over North Relief Canal
880063
Wabasso Road (C-510) over Relief Canal (2 mi. west of C-505)
880064
Wabasso Road (C-510) over Relief Canal (1.2 mi. west of C-505)
880076
C-507 over Fellsmere Canal
884001
Blue Cypress Rd. (C-519) (.6 miles north of S.R. 60)
884002
Blue Cypress Rd. (C-519) (1.16 miles north of S.R. 60)
884003
Ditch No. 14 Road over Park Lateral
884004
West Extension of 101st St. over Park Lateral
884005
Ditch No. 8 Road over Park Lateral
884006
Ditch No. 1 Road over Park Lateral
884007
Willow St. over Ditch No. 13
884008
98th Avenue over Ditch C-1
884009
9th St. S.W. over Ditch D-5
884010
Rebel Road Extension over Ditch D-5
884010
Rebel Road Extension over Ditch D-5
884011
R. D. Carter Rd. Extension over Ditch D-5
884012
Citrus Rd. Extension over Ditch D-5
884013
9th St. over Ditch D-4
884014
Rebel Road Extension over Ditch D-4
884015
R. D. Carter Road Extension over Ditch D-4
884016
90th Avenue over Lateral "D"
884017
Trail Road North of Brookside Cemetery
884018
9th St. S. W. over Ditch D-3
884019
C-505 over Feeder Creek to Sabastian River
884020
82nd Avenue (C-609) over Relief Canal (2.04 mi. north of S.R. 60)
884021
74th Avenue over Canal C-2
884022
4th St. (Citrus Rd.) over Lateral "C"
� � r
Attachment B
Page 2 of 2
BRIDGES UNDER INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JURISDICTION
Bridge No. Bridge Location
884023
74th Avenue over Lateral "D"
884024
Glendale Road (C-612) over Lateral "C"
884025
Rosewood Road over Range Line Canal
884026
Walker Avenue (26th Street) over Range Line Canal
884027
North Winter Beach Road over Ditch .l mile west of Range Line Canal
884028
North Winter Beach Road over Range Line Canal
884029
Rosewood Road over Lateral "A"
884030
Walker Avenue over Lateral "A"
884031
Cherry Lane over Lateral "A"
884032
Barber Avenue over Lateral "A"
884033
South Gifford Road (C-630) over Lateral "A"
884034
North Gifford Road over Lateral "A"
884035
Lindsey Road over Lateral "A"
884036
Kings Berry Road over Lateral "A"
884037
Storm Grove Road over Lateral "A"
884038
Pecan Road over Lateral "A"
884039
North Winter Beach Road (C-508) over Lateral "A"
884040
Tripson Trail over Lateral "B" Canal
884041
Kelly Road over Lateral "B"
884042
R. D. Carter Road over Lateral "B"
884043
Citrus Road over Lateral "B"
884044
Rosedale Road over Lateral "B"
884045
Rosewood Road over Lateral "B"
884046
North Winter Beach Road (C-508) over Lateral "G"
884047
Tripson Trail over Lateral Canal Along 43rd Ave.. (C-611)
884048
Rebel Road over Lateral Canal Along 43rd Ave. (C-611)
884049
43rd Avenue (C-611) over Main Canal
884050
Citrus Road over Lateral Canal at 35th Avenue
884051
20th Avenue S.W. over South Relief Canal
884052
Country Club Drive over Main Canal
FEB 61980 aooK 42 pw 654
RRTnar Nn
an 42 MGE655
Attachment C
Paae 1 of 2
MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge 884011
Extensive damage due to decay. Replace bridge as soon
as possible.
Bridge 880063
Replace existing abutment at each end of the bridge.
Replace deck units in spans 1 and 6. Clean the spalls
on the bottom of the deck in spans 2, 3 and 4. Tie
all the slab units together in spans 2, 3 and 4"
Replace the damaged guardrail section at the
northeast end of the bridge.
Bridge 884002
Replace deteriorated deck planking and stringers
immediately. Post gross load limit is 6 tons.
Schedule bridge for future replacement.
Bridge 884028
Has erosion problems. On July 24, 1979, the east
bound land was closed while repairs where made to a
wash out at the southeast bridge end. The detailed
inspection on August 20, 1979 indicated the repair
work done to the wash out area as well as patching
areas adjacent to the east bridge end were failing.
On September 17, 1979 and December 18, 1979, visits
to the site showed the wash out progressing to a
critical stage, approaching the paved roadway.
Replace the eroded roadway embankment and the slope
at east bridge end and provide some means to channel
the water from the bridge and the roadway away from
the slope.
Bridge 884040
Post bridge for gross load limit of 6 tons.
Bridge 884010
Repair piling bent immediately. Post gross for load
limit of 6 tons.
Bridge 884014
Replace the exterior stringer in span 2 on the north
side of the bridge. Post gross load limit of 6 tons.
Bridge 884026
Replace bent cap No. 5 and deteriorated deck planking
and stringers immediately. Eliminate erosion of
embankment at bridge ends. Schedule bridge for future
replacement. Post gross load limit of 6 tons
immediately.
Bridge 880042
Post narrow bridge signs on each approach.
Bridge 880064
Spalls on the bottom of the deck exposing the rein-
forcing steel. The steel is beginning to corrode.
Patch spalls as soon as possible.
Bridge 884049 The piles show evidence of marine borer infestations
and collision damage, most extensive on the upstream
or the west side of the structure. Several piles
have lost as much as 20% of their section. Schedule
pile repair to arrest borer infestation as soon as
possible.
FEB 01980 800K. 4
Attachment C
Page 2 of 2
BRIDGE NO.
MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge 884006
Exterior pile on the south side of bent No. 4 is
sheared through below the mud line. Pile is no longer
functional. Replace the pile at bent No. 4.
Bridge 884016
Reinforcing steel exposed at the spalls on top and
bottom of deck. Evidence of mild corrosion of the
steel. Patch with the epoxy grout as soon as possible.
Bridge 884019
Piles A and B in the abutment at the north end of the
bridge have decayed with a 20% loss of section.
Repair the decaying piles in this abutment.
Bridge 884031
The exterior pile on the south side at bent No. 2 is
severely decayed and no longer structurally function-
al. Replace the pile.
Bridge 884043
Numerous spalled areas along the joints have occured
with the reinforcing steel exposed on the top of the
deck. Pile D of bent No. 5 shows decay at the water
line and 30% loss of section. Remaining piles are ,
beginning to decay in this bent. Repair pile D as
soon as possible.
Bridge 884049 The piles show evidence of marine borer infestations
and collision damage, most extensive on the upstream
or the west side of the structure. Several piles
have lost as much as 20% of their section. Schedule
pile repair to arrest borer infestation as soon as
possible.
FEB 01980 800K. 4
aooc 42 WE 65?
Attachment D
RECOMMENDED SCHEDULE FOR FUTURE INSPECTIONS
The following bridges
should be inspected
in 1980, 1981
and at two-year
intervals thereafter,
unless specific future conditions
warrant inspections
at more frequent intervals.
880021
880076
880017
880046
884012 .
884030
880018
880049
884014
884031
880020
880062
884015
884032
880023
880063
884016
884033
880024
880064
884018
884037
880031
884002
884019
884040
880039
884005
884025
884043
880040
884006
884026
884044
880043
884009
884028
884049
880044
884010
884029
884050
The following bridges should be inspected in 1981 and at two-year intervals
thereafter, unless specific future conditions warrant inspections at more
frequent internals.
880006
880055
884017
884038
880019
880056
884020
884039
880021
880076
884021
884041
880022
884001
884022
884042
880033
884003
884023
884045
880041
884004
884024
884046
880042
884007
884027
884047
880045
884008
884034
884048
880047
884011
884035
884051
880048
884013
884036
884052
r
MR. ROBBINS THEN INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THEY ORIGINALLY
STATED THEIR ENGINEERING FEES WOULD BE ABOUT $77,000, BUT NOW FIND
THEY WILL BE $4,000 TO $5,000 UNDER THAT AMOUNT. HE CONTINUED THAT
IF THERE IS ANYTHING FURTHER THE BOARD DESIRES, THEY WILL BE GLAD
TO DO IT UNDER THEIR BASIC SERVICES AGREEMENT. HE THEN ASKED IF
THE BOARD MIGHT WISH TO LEAVE THE CONTRACT AS IT IS AND HAVE THEM
PERFORM FUTURE SERVICES OF INSPECTION ON THIS BASIS.
ADMINISTRATOR .JENNINGS REQUESTED THAT THE BOARD CONSIDER
LETTING THE CONTRACT STAY IN EFFECT. HE POINTED OUT THAT THERE IS
GOING TO BE A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE ON THE BRIDGES ON A CONTINUING
BASIS, AND IF IT CAN BE WORKED IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE CONTRACT CAN
REMAIN IN EFFECT, THEN WE CAN CALL FOR THE ENGINEERS AS THEY ARE
NEEDED, THE ADMINISTRATOR COMPLIMENTED THE ENGINEERS ON DOING A
FINE JOB IN A VERY PROFESSIONAL MANNER AND STATED THAT THE COUNTY
WILL BE MAKING USE OF THE WORK DONE AND BENEFITING FROM THIS STUDY
FOR YEARS TO COME.
COMMISSIONER Loy COMMENTED THAT THE ENGINEERS REFERRED TO
80 BRIDGES, BUT THERE ARE 81 LISTED. MR. ROBBINS EXPLAINED THAT
THERE WAS A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR, AND BRIDGE #88010 WAS LISTED TWICE.
MRS._ ROBBINS THEN PROCEEDED TO GIVE AN UPDATE ON THE
WABASSO BRIDGE, THE STATUS OF WHICH HE HAD OUTLINED IN HIS LETTER
OF SEPTEMBER 5, 1979, AS FOLLOWS:
FEB 61980 61 a good: 42, -PACE 58..
September 5, 1979
aoo� 42 PacE 659
SVERDRUP &PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES, INC,
," 9 l•
AND rag
BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ��Cj``��►
(A JOINT VENTURE) �\
Project No.
The Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
c/o Mr. Jack G. Jennings
Room 115 County Courthouse
Voro Beach, Florida 32960
Re: Bridge Inspection Program
Wabasso Bridge
Engineers Project No. 6475
Dear Jack:
This letter is to -confirm the items discussed at our August 24, 1979, meeting with
Mr. Jim Chandler and Mr. Jim Allison of the Florida Department of Transportation
regarding the Wabasso Bridge.
Based on this meeting, it is our understanding the D.O.T. has issued the following
position:
1. The Wabasso Bridge consisting of three on grade structures and one high-level
structure has been deleted from the State's bridge system and now is the re-
sponsibility of Indian River County for maintenance and inspection.
2. The high-level structure has a deficiency in the design of some of the main
piers which has resulted in excessive joint openings.
y% 3. Although the County is now responsible for maintenance and inspection of the
high-level structure ,�iCh _ — a drMx:..,Allison, *rated is re �;y
�,`F
spans tale tg ;.the delficiency of the, design and any corrective action which
may .be.regiired`to-.return. the structure to proper conditions.
v' 4. fir. Chandler and Mr. Allison stated they,would.request;an in of the
high-level structure to. determine the status `of the problems 'related' to the__
design deficiency. "It should be noted, the D.O.T. had taken some corrective
action in 1978 to the structure which included the use of steel wedges to
force tl`-- structure back into place. Mr. Chandler and Mr. Allison stated
they didn't know if any follow-up had been made on prior corrective actions,
but an inspection by the original inspection team would determine if the cor-
rective action was effective. A full report would be prepared after the
follow-up inspection and a copy would be submitted to the County.
RE P'_ TO: REPLY TO:
3885 ?0TH STREET ( ) 2002 N.W. 13TH STREET
POST OFFICE BOX 849 SUITE 201
VERU BEACH, FLORIDA .32960 GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA 32601
� � s
The Board of County Commissioners
Page Two
September 5, 1979
5. Should prior corrective actions not be effective, the D.O.T. would have the re-
sponsibility of repairing the structure with other techniques.
6. The State had been inspecting this bridge on a two year frequency with the last
inspection having been completed in November of 1978. Mr. Chandler and Mr.
Allison stated the bridge would not require a comprehensive inspection until
November of 1980. The 1:980 inspectlbnould be the County's --responsibility.
7. The State will monitor the problems related to the design deficiency and trans-
mit copies of any reports on the structure to the County so the County can also
monitor the status of corrective action.
As you are aware, the Contract between the County and the Joint Venture treated the
;Iabasso Bridges separate from other County bridges for the purpose of inspection.
Since the State has now indicated the Wabasso Bridge will not require inspection
antiL November of 1980, we r6 nd;,the>comprehensive:inspibt ont €tir��°th'd Wabasso
BridF,e be•postponed'until November of 19$0:` Please be advised, we will be able to
perfor6'th se inspection6. in November of.1980 upon your authorization.
Should you have any questions, or if I may be of any assistance in this :..atter,
please do not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours,
John A. Robbins
JAR:mk
cc: Mr. Neil Nelson, Assistant County Administrator,
Indian River County, Florida
Mr. H. C. Chandler, Department of Transportation,
State of Florida
Mr. J. Allison, Department of Transportation,
State of Florida
f E B 61980 Book 42 FAG "66
63 .
I
FEB - 6 19 00
aoox
42
i*GE 661
MR.
ROBBINS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT ALTHOUGH THE
DOT
HAD
INDICATED THEY WOULD PERFORM AN ADDITIONAL INSPECTION OF THE WABASSO
BRIDGE TO DETERMINE IF THERE IS ANY DISCREPANCY, WHEN HE TALKED
WITH MR. CHANDLER YESTERDAY, HE WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY FUTURE ACTIVITY
ASSOCIATED WITH THAT BRIDGE. MR. ROBBINS CONTINUED THAT HE HAS A
CALL IN TO MR. ALLISON, WHO IS SPECIFICALLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE
WABASSO BRIDGE, AND HE INTENDS TO INDICATE TO MR. ALLISON THAT THE
COUNTY IS GOING TO PURSUE THIS MATTER FURTHER. HE FELT THAT IT
WOULD BE WORTHWHILE TO HAVE THIS INSPECTION REPORT MATERIAL HAND
DELIVERED TO THE DOT IN FORT LAUDERDALE, WHICH WOULD PRESENT AN
OPPORTUNITY TO SIT DOWN WITH THEM AND DISCUSS THIS MATTER,
COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT THE ENGINEERS RECOMMEND
POSTING A 6 -TON LOAD LIMIT ON SOME OF THESE BRIDGES, AND HE WAS
CONCERNED ABOUT OUR LEGAL LIABILITIES.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS INFORMED THE BOARD.THAT AS SOON AS
THE FIRST RED FLAG REPORTS WERE RECEIVED, HE HAD THE ROAD R BRIDGE
CREWS POST 5 -TON LOAD LIMITS ON THE SPECIFIED BRIDGES. HE THEN
SHOWED THE BOARD A SAMPLE OF THE INDIVIDUAL REPORTS AND DOCUMENTA-
TION ON EACH BRIDGE, WHICH CAN BE REFERRED TO IF THERE IS EVER A
NEED FOR FEDERAL FUNDING. HE CONTINUED THAT HE HAS COMPLETED REPAIRS
ON TWO OF THE BRIDGES AND STATED THAT IT IS HIS INTENTION TO CONTINUE
WORKING ON ALL THE BRIDGES THAT ARE RED FLAGGED. HE NOTED THIS WILL
RUN INTO MONEY AND THAT IS WHY WE NEED TO DETERMINE WHETHER WE CAN
KEEP A RECORD OF COSTS AND BE REIMBURSED.
COMMISSIONER LOY EXPRESSED THE HOPE THAT WE CAN BE REIM-
BURSED, BUT FELT WE MUST CONTINUE WITH THESE REPAIRS IN ANY EVENT.
IN FURTHER DISCUSSION IN REGARD TO THE CONTRACT WITH THE
ENGINEERS, IT WAS GENERALLY AGREED IT WOULD BE BETTER NOT TO TERMINATE
THE PRESENT CONTRACT.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTKE, COMMISSIONER DEESON AND CHAIRMAN SIEBERT VOTED IN FAVOR,
THE BOARD ACCEPTED THE BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT AS SUBMITTED BY THE
,JOINT VENTURE AS COMPLETE AND AGREED TO LET THE CONTRACT WITH THE
,JOINT VENTURE IN THIS REGARD CONTINUE IN ITS CURRENT STATUS.
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
r
a //I?
in the matter of
Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of 21" . &, �/); j 7 7 9'
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 befora me this, ao day of A.D�
%-n' — 11,112 Business
1,11a(Business Manager)
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
approximately 1/2 mile south of S.R. 512 on the
west side of Old Dixie Highway in Indian River
County, Florida, to -wit:
That part of the South 1/2 of the South 1/2 of the
SE14 of the NEJ/a of Section 7, Township 31
South, Range 39 East, lying West of the Florida
East Coast Railroad and Old Dixie Highway,
said land lying and being in Indian River
County, Florida
Be changed from M-1 Restricted Industrial .
District to R1' -RM Residence -Mobile Home
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, on "
Thursday, December 13, 1979, at 7:30 p.m.,
after 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,,
Commission Room, Indian River County
Courthouse, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wed-
nesday, February 6th, 1980, at 2:00 p.m.
Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
By: William C. Wodtke, Jr.
Chairman
Indian River County Planning
and Zoning Commission
By: Dick Bird, Chairman
Nov. 18, 20, 1979.
(Clerk of the Circuit Court,Vian River County, Florida)
(SEAL)
NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS SENT TO JOSEPH E. AND
LEONA VINING BY THE CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT AS REQUIRED BY FLORIDA
STATUTE 125.66, AND COPY OF SAID NOTICE IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE
OF THE CLERK.
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY, CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 5-1/2 ACRES, IS
LOCATED WEST OF OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY AND SOUTH OF S.R. 512 IN SEBASTIAN.
THE APPLICANT REQUESTED REZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL AND M-1 TO R-1RM
IN ORDER TO EXPAND HIS NON -CONFORMING MOBILE HOME PARK, WHICH WAS -
ESTABLISHED IN 1971 PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF THE PRESENT ZONING CODE.
F E 0 619 80 65 BOOK ° o F'Ai.E 66Z .. ..
r
FEB 61980 BOOK 42 PAGE 863.
MR. REVER EXPLAINED THAT ABOUT 19,000 SQ. FT. IN A TRIANGULAR
CORNER OF THIS PROPERTY, WHICH IS ZONED AGRICULTURAL, IS NOT IN-
CLUDED IN THE ADVERTISEMENT BECAUSE THE AD WAS PUBLISHED PREVIOUS
TO THE HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION, AT WHICH
TIME IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT THE AGRIC-ULTURAL PORTION BE INCLUDED
IN THE REZONING. HE NOTED THAT THE PLANNING STAFF DOES NOT CONCUR
WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION.
MR. REVER CONTINUED THAT THE SITE PRESENTLY SUPPORTS A
CONVENTIONAL RESIDENCE AND S MOBILE HOMES. HE NOTED THAT THE
ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS FOR REZONING TO R-1MP, BUT THE R -IMP REQUIRES
A MINIMUM OF 20 ACRES, AND IT WOULD NOT BE LOGICAL TO GRANT THE
REZONING AND THEN HAVE TO PROCEED TO GET A VARIANCE. THE APPLICANT,
THEREFORE, AGREED TO R-1RM, WHICH WILL MAKE THE EXISTING UNITS
NON -CONFORMING IN A SMALL DEGREE, BUT IS MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE
AREA. MR. REVER EXPLAINED THAT AN ADDITIONAL 5 UNITS IS THE MAXI-
MUM ALLOWED BY THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, WHICH WILL ALLOW ONLY 14 WELLS
AND SEPTIC TANKS ON THIS PROPERTY - OR THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
PLUS 13 MOBILE HOMES. THE APPLICANT DID AGREE THAT THE NEW LOTS
WOULD BE IN KEEPING WITH THE REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE PRESENT R-1RM
STANDARDS, AND ON THAT BASIS, THE PLANNING STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND
THE REZONING BE APPROVED. MR. REVER REITERATED THAT THE PLANNING P,
ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR THE ENTIRE PARCEL, BUT
THE PLANNING STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND INCLUDING THE LITTLE TRIANGLE
OF AGRICULTURAL WHICH IS AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AND DOES NOT
ENTER INTO THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INQUIRED ABOUT SITE PLAN APPROVAL, AND
MR. VINING SUPPLIED THE SITE PLAN PROPOSED FOR THE ENTIRE PLOT.-
INCLUDING
LOT,
INCLUDING BOTH THE EXISTING LOTS AND THE NEW ONES.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF OLD DIXIE IS PAVED, AND
COMMISSIONER DEESON INFORMED HIM THAT IT IS PAVED IN THIS LOCATION,
AND IT ACTUALLY IS KNOWN AS "OLD BUTTERMILK ROAD.." HE NOTED THAT
THERE IS A ROAD TO THE SOUTH WHICH CROSSES THE RAILROAD TRACKS AND
PROVIDES ACCESS TO U.S.1, AND STATED THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR A
NEW RAILROAD CROSSING.
66
u
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT COMMENTED ON THE FACT THAT THE ZONING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDED REZONING FOR THE ENTIRE TRACT, BUT THE LEGAL
AD DOES NOT INCLUDE THE AGRICULTURAL PORTION.
ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THIS IS TWO TIER, AND AS TO
STATE STATUTES, IT IS CORRECT. AS TO OUR OWN ORDINANCE, THE AGRI-
CULTURAL IS LEFT OUT. HE FELT IF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDS
THERE IS NO NEED, THAT UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE BOARD SHOULD
LIMIT ITSELF TO THE M-1 AREA.
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO BE HEARD.
THERE WERE NONE.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, COMMISSIONER DEESON AND CHAIRMAN SIEBERT VOTED IN FAVOR, THE
BOARD CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ATTORNEY COLLINS POINTED OUT THAT SINCE THE BOARD IS' NOT
GOING TO CONSIDER THE PIECE OF AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY,WE DO NOT HAVE
THE PROPER LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY TO BE REZONED.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, COMMISSIONER WODTKE AND CHAIRMAN SIEBERT VOTED IN FAVOR, THE
BOARD ADOPTED ORDINANCE 80-6 APPROVING THE REZONING TO R -IPM FOR
THE PORTION OF MR. AND MRS. VINING'S PROPERTY ZONED M-1 AND REQUIRED
THE PETITIONER TO SUBMIT A PROPER LEGAL DESCRIPTION OMITTING THE
TRINAGULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY ZONED AGRICULTURAL.
ORDINANCE 80-6 WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES WHEN
CORRECTED AND RECEIVED.
FEB 61980
67
800v 4 FAGS .:=w
J
BOOK 42 p4qu 665
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 BLACH 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 �Cr/
in the matter of
- l/� S
.6o
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of CJ Cl r a� 7 r
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
(SEAL)
(Clerk of the Circuit
day of A. D. •
A U Musiness Manager)
River County, Florida)
NOTICE i
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
1/4 mile south of S.R. 60 on the west side of S.R.
609 (82nd Avenue), in Indian River County,
Florida, to -wit:
The South 595 ft. of Tract 11, Section 2,
Township 33 South, Range 38 East, Indian
River Farms Company Subdivision; as
recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 25, St. Lucie
County Public Records. Less a parcel in the
northwest corner as described in Official
Record Book 575, Page 1402, 'Indian River
County Public Records; AND .
Tracts 14, 15 and 16, Section 2, Township 33
South, Range 38 East, according to Indian ,
River Farms Company Subdivision recorded
in Plat Book 2, Page 2S, St. Lucie County
records.
Be changed from A-Agricultur81 and B.I.
Planned Business Districts to R -IMP Mobile
Home Park District.
A public hearing in relation thereto at which
parties in interest and citizens shall have an
opportunity to be heard, wilLbe held by said
Planning and Zoning Commission in the
County Commission Room, Indian River
County Courthouse, Vero Beach, Florida, on
Thursday, December 13, 1979, at 7:30 p.m.,
after 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
Commission Room, Indian River County
Courthouse, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wed-
nesday, February 6, 1980, at 2:00 P.M.
Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
William C. Wodtke, Jr.
Chairman
Indian River County Planning
and Zoning Commission
By: Dick Bird, Chairman
Nov. 18, 20,1979:
NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS SENT TO KENNETH E.
PADGETT LIMITED AND ROBERT W. DEACON, ET AL, BY THE CLERK OF THE
CIRCUIT COURT AS REQUIRED BY FLORIDA STATUTE 125.66. COPIES OF
SAID NOTICES ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK.
VICKIE RENNA, MEMBER OF THE PLANNING STAFF, GAVE THE
PRESENTATION AND INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.-
WHICH
ROPERTY,
WHICH CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 140 ACRES, IS LOCATED ABOUT 1/4 MILE
r
SOUTH OF STATE ROAD 60 WEST OF RANCH ROAD, AND THE APPLICANT PRO-
POSES TO DEVELOP A MOBILE HOME PARK. THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE
PROPERTY, WHICH IS PRESENTLY ZONED AGRICULTURAL WAS FORMERLY A
TOMATO FARM, AND THE REMAINING B-1 PORTION IS UNDEVELOPED. HOLIDAY
INN WEST, A TRUCK STOP, MOBILE HOMES, AND SOME SINGLE FAMILY RESI-
DENCES EXIST TO THE NORTH, AND THE REMAINING SURROUNDING AREA IS
MOSTLY UNDEVELOPED. THE MASTER PLAN CALLS FOR MEDIUM DENSITY, AND
THIS PROPERTY IS NOT LOCATED IN THE AREA DESIGNATED AS PRIMARY CITRUS.
MS. RENNA CONTINUED THAT THE REQUESTED REZONING, WHICH ALLOWS A
DENSITY OF 8.7, IS FOR MOBILE HOME SPACES WHICH ARE TO BE LEASED
OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. THERE ARE MOBILE HOMES IN THE SURROUND—
ING AREA, AND THE AREA IS WELL SUITED FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
SHE CONTINUED THAT THE PORTION ZONED FOR AGRICULTURE IS NOT USED FOR
CROP PRODUCTION, AND THOUGH THE STAFF FEELS FUTURE ENCROACHMENT INTO
AGRICULTURAL CLASSIFICATION SHOULD BE LIMITED, THEY DO RECOMMEND
APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED REZONING.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ENTERED THE MEETING AT 2:20 O'CLOCK P.M.
ATTORNEY GORDON .JOHNSTON APPEARED REPRESENTING THE APPLI—
CANTS. HE PRESENTED A DRAWING OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN AND INFORMED
THE BOARD THAT HE HAS MET WITH PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER AND HIS STAFF
AND WORKED OUT THE TRAFFIC FLOW, ETC. HE FELT THEY HAVE INCORPORATED
EVERYTHING SUGGESTED BY THE PLANNERS. ATTORNEY .JOHNSTON POINTED OUT
THAT THEY ARE PRESERVING APPROXIMATELY FIVE ACRES FOR A NATURE PRE—
SERVE, AND IT WILL HAVE A RAISED CATWALK. ALSO, THEIR PLAN CALLS
FOR A DENSITY OF 4.6, OR APPROXIMATELY HALF THE DENSITY THAT WOULD
BE ALLOWED. HE INDICATED THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE
SIMILAR TO THE VILLAGE GREEN DEVELOPMENT AND FELT IT WOULD BE A WEL—
COME ADDITION TO THE COUNTY. ATTORNEY JOHNSTON THEN REVIEWED THE
ENTRANCEWAYS AND ACCESS POINTS FOR TRAFFIC FLOW AND NOTED THAT BOTH
THE PLANNING STAFF AND THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND
APPROVAL OF THIS REZONING REQUEST.
ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKED IF THEY WERE PURCHASING THE ACCESS
TO ROUTE 60, AND ATTORNEY .JOHNSTON STATED THEY WERE AND NOTED THAT
THE PROPERTY HIS CLIENT HAS UNDER CONTRACT WITH MR. PADGETT IS AN
"L" SHAPED PIECE BEHIND HOLIDAY INN WEST, AND IT DOES NOT NEED RE—
ZONING FOR AN ENTRANCE ROAD.
Book" SC, 0ru 666 .
_I
FEB 61980 nox 42 PAGE 667
COMMISSIONER Loy COMMENTED THAT THE B-1 ZONING ON ROUTE
60 HAS A 75' SETBACK, BUT ATTORNEY JOHNSTON POINTED OUT THAT THEIR -
B -1 PROPERTY IS IMMEDIATELY BEHIND HOLIDAY INN WEST.
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO BE HEARD.
THERE WERE NONE.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE 80-7 GRANTING THE
REZONING TO R -IMP AS REQUESTED BY KENNETH E. PADGETT, LIMITED AND
ROBERT W. DEACON, ET AL.
ORDINANCE NO. '80-7
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property and pursuant thereto
held a public 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:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in Indian River
County, Florida, to -wit:
The South 595 ft. of Tract II, Section 2, Township 33
South, Range 38 East, Indian River Farms Company
Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 25, St.
Lucie County Public Records. Less a parcel in the
northwest corner as described in Official Record
Book 575, Page 1402, Indian River County Publ is
Records; AND
Tracts 14, 15 and 16, Section 2, Township 33 South,
Range 38 East, according to Indian River Farms Company
Subdivision recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 25, St.
Lucie County records.
Be changed from A -Agricultural and B-1 Planned Business
Districts to R -IMP Mobile Home•Park District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth
and described in said Zoning Regulations.
This Ordinance shall take effect February 11, 1980.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE REPORTED THAT HE HAS OBTAINED A PACKET
OF INFORMATION ON THE 1980 CENSUS, INCLUDING A COPY OF THE QUESTION-
NAIRES, BOTH THE LONG AND SHORT FORM. HE NOTED THAT THE LAST CENSUS
RELIED ON 60% OF THE HOUSEHOLDS TO REPORT BACK VOLUNTARILY, AND
CENSUS TAKERS ACTUALLY WENT OUT AND DID 40% THEMSELVES. THE 1980
CENSUS WILL RELY'ON 90% OF THE HOUSEHOLDS TO ANSWER VOLUNTARILY.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT, DUE TO THE COOPERATION OF THE U.S.
POSTAL SERVICE IN CHECKING ADDRESSES, ETC., THE FORMS WILL BE MAILED
TO SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS RATHER THAN JUST TO "BOXHOLDER." THESE SHOULD
BE RECEIVED IN THE MAIL ON MARCH 28TH. ONE OUT OF FIVE OR SIX WILL
RECEIVE THE LONG FORM, WHICH HAS 46 ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. THE INDI-
VIDUAL IS ASKED TO COMPLETE AND MAIL BACK THEIR FORMS BY APRIL 1ST.
THE FOLLOW-UP BEGINS APRIL 16TH. HE NOTED THAT THERE WILL BE A
SPECIAL NIGHT WHEN PEOPLE IN MOTELS, YMCAs, ETC., NURSING HOMES,
CONVALESCENT CENTERS, RETIREMENT HOMES, ETC., WILL BE CONTACTED.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT OUR DISTRICT HEADQUARTERS
IS IN LAKELAND, AND ED THOMAS IS DISTRICT MANAGER,
COMMISSIONER WODTKE CONTINUED THAT FOR EVERY 1% OF THE PEOPLE
WHO FILL OUT THESE FORMS AND RETURN THEM VOLUNTARILY, THE TAXPAYERS
WILL BE SAVED APPROXIMATELY $2,000,000 IN FOLLOW-UP COSTS. HE NOTED
THAT IT IS UP TO THE CHIEF OFFICE HOLDER IN EACH COUNTY TO DECIDE
WHETHER TO FORM A "COMPLETE COUNT" COMMITTEE TO WORK WITH PUBLICITY
AND ASSIST IN GETTING THE WORD OUT ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE CENSUS
COUNT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE THEN REVIEWED IN DETAIL THE FORMS THAT
WILL BE MAILED OUT AND THE TYPE OF QUESTIONS INVOLVED. HE EMPHA-
SIZED THAT THE PUBLIC MUST BE MADE AWARE OF THE -IMPORTANCE OF ALL
OF THIS BECAUSE OUR FUNDING WILL BE BASED ON THESE FIGURES.
COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT ALTHOUGH THE MEETING WITH
THE REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES REGARDING THE CENSUS
HAD NOT TAKEN PLACE AS ANTICIPATED, HE STILL HOPED'TO BE ABLE TO
COORDINATE WITH THEM. HE CONCURRED THAT PROMOTION IS OF PRIME
IMPORTANCE AND FELT WE SHOULD GET A SYNCHRONIZED SET OF RELEASES
FROM RADIO, TV AND THE NEWSPAPERS TO TARGET THE DATES AND TO EXPLAIN
THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING A COMPLETE COUNT.
THE MAKE-UP OF THE COMPLETE COUNT COMMITTEE.
HE THEN INQUIRED.ABOUT
FEB 61990 BOOK PAGE 668:
71
FEB 61990 Boot_ 4.2a?AGE6i9
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE.HAD
TALKED WITH THE DISTRICT MANAGER IN LAKELAND, AND HE WAS INFORMED
THAT THE MAKE-UP OF A.COMPLETE-000NT COMMITTEE IS LEFT UP TO EACH
COUNTY. HE NOTED THAT ST. LUCIE COUNTY DECIDED NOT TO GET INVOLVED
WITH SUCH A COMMITTEE, WHICH HE PERSONALLY FELT IS A GREAT MISTAKE.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF YOU ARE ALLOWED TO SPEND MONEY
ON ADVERTISING, AND MR. REVER STATED THAT YOU CAN DO ANYTHING YOU
WISH TO PROMOTE IT AND MR. THOMAS, THE DISTRICT MANAGER, WOULD BE
GLAD TO GO OVER THIS WITH THE BOARD.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED IN REGARD TO VARIOUS PROCEDURES THAT
COULD BE INSTITUTED SUCH AS GETTING REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE DIFFERENT
ETHNIC GROUPS TO CONTACT THE VARIOUS GROUPS IN THE COMMUNITY; CON-
TACTING THE VARIOUS PROGRESSIVE LEAGUES, HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION,
ETC., TO MAKE TALKS TO THEIR MEMBERS, AND REQUESTING THE SERVICE
CLUBS, CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, ETC., FOR THEIR COOPERATION.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE DISPLAYED A LIST OF THE FEDERAL PROGRAMS
DEPENDING UPON DIRECT INPUT FROM THE CENSUS, AND IT WAS AGREED THAT
WE DEFINITELY NEED SALES PROMOTION AND PUBLICITY.
COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT WE SHOULD TALK TO THE CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE AND CHECK OUT THE POSSIBILITY OF GETTING A REPRESENTATIVE
FROM EACH OF THE SERVICE CLUBS BECAUSE THIS IS A CIVIC MATTER THAT
AFFECTS EVERYONE IN THE.000NTY. HE FELT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT
COULD BE THE BACK UP.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT COMMENTED THAT THE MAIN NEED IS SOMEONE
WHO WILL ASSUME THE RESPONSIBILITY TO SUPERVISE AND SPEARHEAD THE
COMMITTEE AND COORDINATE EFFORTS.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON DISCUSSED THE INDIAN RIVER
BOULEVARD DESIGN PROPOSAL MADE BY REYNOLDS, SMITH AND HILLS AND
REPORTED THAT THEY CAME UP WITH A LUMP -SUM FIGURE OF $81,850. HE
NOTED THAT THEY, HOWEVER, ARE NOT SURE AS TO HOW MUCH PERMITTING
ACTUALLY WILL BE REQUIRED, AND IT SEEMS THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR
AND COMMISSIONER LYONS BOTH FEEL WE ARE FURTHER ALONG THAN REYNOLDS,
SMITH AND HILLS HAVE ESTIMATED. MR. NELSON STATED THAT IN ORDER TO
GET THIS REDESIGN UNDER WAY, HE WOULD LIKE TO ENTER INTO A COST
PLUS CONTRACT WITH REYNOLDS, SMITH AND HILLS, WHICH WILL ENABLE THEM
TO MORE ACCURATELY DEFINE THE SCOPE OF SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED
AND ACCORDINGLY, COME UP WITH A MORE ACCURATE LUMP SUM FIGURE. HE
NOTED THAT THEY HAVE SENT UP THEIR STANDARD CONTRACT AGREEMENT WITH
A MULTIPLIER OF 2.5. THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NOTED THAT WE
HAVE A MULTIPLIER OF 2.5 WITH GERAGHTY & MILLER; 1.87 WITH CONNELL,
METCALF & EDDY; AND 2.1 WITH BEINDORF & ASSOCIATES. HE STATED THAT
THE STAFF FEELS THAT REYNOLDS, SMITH & HILLS IS AN OUTSTANDING FIRM
WHICH HAS THE ABILITY TO WORK WITH THE DER AND OBTAIN THE PERMITS,
AND POINTED OUT THAT WHILE THEY ARE NOT AN INEXPENSIVE FIRM, THE
FIGURE IS NEGOTIABLE.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY THAT IF WE GO
AHEAD AND SAY PROCEED ON A COST PLUS BASIS, WE STILL MAY BE UNABLE
TO NEGOTIATE TO OUR SATISFACTION.
COMMISSIONER LYONS BELIEVED THAT THERE IS A 30 -DAY CANCELLA-
TION CLAUSE, AND ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON STATED THAT HE WOULD
RECOMMEND A TIME LIMIT.
COMMISSIONER LYONS WAS OF THE OPINION THAT REYNOLDS, SMITH
AND HILLS HAVE THE MOST ABILITY OF ANY FIRM THAT WE HAVE DEALT WITH
AND NOTED THEY ARE NOT ANY HIGHER THAN GERAGHTY & MILLER. HE
STRESSED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE US GET STARTED ON THIS PROJECT,
BUT DID NOT KNOW WHETHER THERE IS ANY WAY TO NEGOTIATE IN THE MEAN-
TIME OR NOT. -
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS ASKED IF THIS PROPOSAL COMPARES TO
THEIR NEGOTIATION WITH THE CITY OF VERO BEACH AND THE COUNTY ON THE
JOINT DRAINAGE STUDY, AND MR. NELSON STATED THAT IT IS ON THE EXACT
SAME BASIS. MR. NELSON POINTED OUT THAT THEIR PROPOSAL DOES NOT TIE
US IN - IT JUST IDENTIFIES THE SCOPE OF SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED
AND WE COULD GO BACK AND SAY WE PREFER A 2.1 MULTIPLIER.
ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THE MULTIPLIER COULD BE NEGOTIATED
RIGHT NOW.
FE 61990 73 soon 42 *E `'7
F E 0 61980 Boas 42 parE 671
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED WHETHER WE HAVE TO PAY REYNOLDS,
SMITH & HILLS TO DETERMINE THE SCOPE OF WORK.
COMMISSIONER -LYONS NOTED THAT THEY WILL HAVE TO REVIEW
THIS MATERIAL IN ANY EVENT,AND HE FELT THEY CAME UP WITH SUCH A HIGH
LUMP SUM FIGURE BECAUSE THEY HAD NO ACCURATE CONCEPT OF WHERE•WE
STOOD IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERMITTING SINCE THEY HAVE NOT HAD THE
BENEFIT OF SEEING ALL THE MATERIAL THAT IS AVAILABLE. HE, THEREFORE,
FELT WE SHOULD GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO REVIEW ALL THE PERTINENT INFORMA-
TION TO SEE IF THEY WILL COME UP WITH A LOWER LUMP SUM FIGURE. HE
EMPHASIZED THE IMPORTANCE OF KEEPING THINGS MOVING WHILE WE NEGOTIATE.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON CONCURRED THAT THE REASON
FOR THE 2.5 MULTIPLIER IS BECAUSE THE SCOPE OF THE CONTRACT CANNOT
BE IDENTIFIED ADEQUATELY.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS ALSO AGREED THAT REYNOLDS, SMITH
AND HILLS HAVE ESTIMATED THEIR LUMP SUM FIGURE BASED ON THE WORST
SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES THEY MIGHT POSSIBLY ENCOUNTER BECAUSE OF IN-
SUFFICIENT INFORMATION. HE THEN REPORTED THAT MID SOUTH ENGINEERING
HAS AGREED TO RELEASE ALL THE INFORMATION ON THE PERMITTING WORK
THEY HAVE DONE, FOR WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN PAID, AND IT IS IN THE MAILS
' AND SHOULD BE RECEIVED SHORTLY.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF THE PLAN IS TO PROCEED WITH THE
ACTUAL ENGINEERING ON A COST PLUS BASIS, AND ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS
STATED THAT THE MAIN PROBLEM IS THE PERMITTING; THERE IS A CERTAIN
AMOUNT OF ENGINEERING, BUT IT IS NOT THE MAJOR PART.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT THEN ASKED IF THEY WOULD BE WORKING ON
GETTING THE PERMITS ON A COST PLUS BASIS, AND THE ADMINISTRATOR STATED
THAT THEY WOULD,
COMMISSIONER Loy INQUIRED ABOUT THE TIME FRAME REQUIRED
FOR THE ENGINEERS TO GET A REAL IDEA OF WHAT IS INVOLVED.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON ESTIMATED APPROXIMATELY 30
DAYS; BUT NOTED THAT THE ATTORNEY HAD FELT IT WOULD ONLY BE TWO HOURS.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF WE CANT MAKE THE INFORMATION
FROM MID SOUTH ENGINEERING AVAILABLE TO THE ENGINEERS AND THEN GET
A NEW PROPOSAL AND TALK ABOUT THEIR FACTOR.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON DID NOT BELIEVE WE CAN ASK
THEM TO START WORK WITHOUT COMING UP WITH SOME KIND OF AN AGREEMENT.
HE NOTED THAT IT WILL COST THE ENGINEERS MONEY TO REVIEW ALL THIS
INFORMATION AND THEY FEEL THAT GOING OVER THE OLD PERMITS FROM MID
SOUTH ENGINEERING IS PART OF THEIR SCOPE OF WORK.
COMMISSIONER LYONSSUGGESTED THAT WE SUPPLY REYNOLDS,
SMITH AND HILLS WITH THE PERMITTING INFORMATION TO REVIEW AS QUICKLY
AS POSSIBLE; LET THEM KNOW WE ARE UNHAPPY WITH THE 2.5 MULTIPLIER
AND DON'T LIKE COST PLUS AS A STARTER; AND THEN SEE WHAT WE CAN
NEGOTIATE.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE AGREED THAT THIS MUST BE DONE AT THE
EARLIEST POSSIBLE TIME AS EVERY DAY WE LOSE, IT IS GOING TO COST US
MORE TO BUILD THE ROAD. THE BOARD CONCURRED.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON STATED THAT HE WILL PROCEED
AS INSTRUCTED.
CHARLES SWALLOWS OF THE .JOINT VENTURE REPORTED ON THE
201 PLAN, NOTING THAT HE HAS BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT FIVE YEARS
AND FEELS THAT AFTER ALL THIS TIME, WE FINALLY HAVE A DIRECTION.
HE NOTED THAT LAST JANUARY WE SUBMITTED OUR 201 REPORT TO THE A-95
AGENCIES FOR THEIR REVIEW AND APPROVAL AND HAD SET UP A PUBLIC HEARING
FOR AROUND THE EARLY PART OF LAST .JUNE. AS A PART OF THAT PARTICULAR
SUBMITTAL, WE HAD A TWO -PLANT CONFIGURATION, WHICH PROVIDED FOR THE
DISPOSAL SYSTEM TO GO DIRECT INTO THE RIVER IN TWO PHASES. SINCE
THAT TIME, WE HAVE PROPOSED TO GO THROUGH THE MOSQUITO CONTROL
IMPOUNDMENTS FIRST INSTEAD OF PUTTING NUTRIENTS DIRECTLY INTO THE -
RIVER. MR. SWALLOWS NOTED THAT STUDIES DONE AT VISTA ROYALE SHOWED
A 80-90% REDUCTION OF NUTRIENTS BY THIS METHOD. HE CONTINUED TO
DISCUSS THE PROPOSED IMPOUNDMENT SYSTEM WHICH REQUIRES ABOUT 300
ACRES, NOTING THAT THIS ALL HAPPENED ABOUT APRIL OF LAST YEAR, AND
THE QUESTION THAT AROSE WAS WHETHER THIS METHOD WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE
TO THE REGULATORY AGENCIES. THE ANSWER WAS YES, BUT ONLY IF IT
MEETS CERTAIN CRITERIA, AND ONE CRITERIA IS THAT THIS AREA COULD NOT
BE WITHIN THE WATERS OF THE STATE. MR. SWALLOWS CONTINUED THAT IT
f E B 61980 BOOK 42 FA&E X72
75
FEB
61980
booK
42
cE 673
WAS
SUBSEQUENTLY
DETERMINED THAT THESE ARE STATE WATERS,
AND
WE
CANNOT DUMP INTO THEM, UNLESS WE MEET THEIR WASTELOAD STANDARDS,
WHICH ARE MUCH MORE STRINGENT. -THE RECOMMENDATION NOW IS TO GO TO
THE DER AND ASK FOR AN EXCEPTION. MR. SWALLOWS FELT THE DER WILL
GO ALONG WITH THIS AND THAT OTHER AGENCIES WILL SUPPORT THE CONCEPT.
MR. SWALLOWS STATED THAT THE SECOND PROBLEM IS THAT EPA
AND THE STATE ARE HAVING A PROBLEM IN TERMS OF LAND TREATMENT OF
SECONDARY EFFLUENT. THE LAND GIVES FURTHER TREATMENT AND IS CON-
SIDERED PART OF THE SYSTEM SO STANDARDS AT THE PLANT SHOULD BE
CHANGED SOMEWHAT. IN ANY CASE, THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT EPA WILL
NOT FUND THE COST OF THE LAND FOR THE IMPOUNDMENTS BECAUSE OF THEIR
REGULATIONS, AND THIS COST WILL HAVE TO BE BORNE BY THE LOCAL GOVERN-
MENTS. MR. SWALLOWS REPORTED THAT REGION 4 HAS RECENTLY SAID THEY
WILL SUPPORT US ON -THIS, AND THEY WOULD LIKE US TO GO TO WASHINGTON
AND ASK FOR AN EXCEPTION.
MR. SWALLOWS NEXT NOTED THAT A PROBLEM NOW HAS ARISEN WITH
THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES RELATING TO WHETHER THESE
PARTICULAR AREAS WOULD BE REOPENED FOR SHELLFISH HARVESTING. IF
THEY ARE REOPENED, THEN THERE IS NO WAY THE COUNTY WILL BE ABLE TO
DISCHARGE INTO THIS AREA IN ANY WAY. WE, THEREFORE, ASKED IF THEY
ARE GOING TO OPEN THE AREA FOR SHELLFISH HARVESTING, BUT HAVE BEEN
UNABLE TO GET A DIRECT ANSWER AS OF THIS DATE. MR, SWALLOWS STATED
THE CONSENSUS WE DID GET IS THAT THEY ARE MORE APT TO APPROVE THE
IMPOUNDMENT THAN THE DIRECT DISCHARGE BECAUSE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF
WABASSO BEACH, IT IS OPEN FOR SHELLFISH HARVESTING, AND THE LAW SAYS
THERE MUST BE A 24 HOUR TIME LAG BETWEEN A DISCHARGE POINT AND WHEN
A PARTICLE OF THE EFFLUENT CAN GO INTO THE SHELLFISH WATERS. OUR
NORTHERNMOST POINT IS RIGHT AROUND 12 HOURS, AND BECAUSE OF THAT IT
LOOKS LIKE DER WILL NOT APPROVE DIRECT DISCHARGE, THOUGH THEY HAVE
NOT COMMITTED THEMSELVES AT THIS TIME.
MR. SWALLOWS THEN RECOMMENDED THAT THE COMMISSION GO AHEAD
AND APPROVE THESE PARTICULAR ALTERNATIVES TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE
VARIOUS A-95 AGENCIES FOR THEIR REVIEW. HE NOTED THAT THEY HAVE 45
76
DAYS TO REVIEW THE 201 PLAN AND IF THEY HAVE ANY NEGATIVE COMMENTS,
THE EPA WILL HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT. MR. SWALLOWS NOTED THAT THIS
FORCES THE DER TO COME BACK AND SAY YES OR NO ON THE IMPOUNDMENTS.
HIS NEXT RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO GO AHEAD AND SET UP THE BOARD'S
PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PLAN IN A LITTLE OVER 60 DAYS. HE FURTHER
SUGGESTED THAT THE BOARD INVITE THE VARIOUS REGULATORY AGENCIES TO
COME IN AT THAT HEARING AND MAKE A STATEMENT TO THE PUBLIC AS TO
THEIR POSITION ON THE PLAN. ONCE THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OVER WITH
AND THE SPECIFIED NUMBER OF DAYS FOR THE PUBLIC TO MAKE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS TO IMPROVE THE PLAN HAVE PASSED, HE RECOMMENDED THE BOARD
GO RIGHT INTO REQUESTING THE EXCEPTION.
MR. SWALLOWS THEN DISCUSSED THE COST DIFFERENTIAL OF THE
TWO METHODS, NOTING THAT THE FIRST PROPOSED SCHEME WOULD COST
APPROXEMATEL.Y $300,000 OVER THE IMPOUNDMENT METHOD, BUT SINCE EPA HAS
SAID THEY WILL NOT FUND THE LAND INVOLVED, IT MAKES A NET INCREASE
TO THE COUNTY OF APPROXIMATELY $105,000 MORE IN CAPITAL COSTS. FOR
EVERY MONTH THAT IS BEING DELAYED ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, THE
COST IS INCREASING 1% A MONTH, OR ABOUT $100,000 A MONTH, BUT WE
HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE STEPS THAT MAY BE NECESSARY TO GET THE EXCEPTION.
MR. SWALLOWS NOTED THAT THE COST OF THAT MAY WELL BE BEYOND THE
$105,000 THAT IT WILL COST THE COUNTY, BUT MR. SWALLOWS STILL FELT
THE COUNTY SHOULD GO FOR THE EXCEPTION.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE CONCURRED WITH EVERYTHING MR. SWALLOWS
HAS REPORTED AND DID NOT FEEL WE HAVE ANY ALTERNATIVE BUT TO GO AHEAD
AND RELEASE THIS NEW IDEA FOR A-95 REVIEW AND FORCE THE DER TO MAKE
A DECISION. HE NOTED THAT BASICALLY THE STATEMENT MADE BY MR. POOLE
OF THE DER WAS THAT THEIR POLICY CAN ONLY BE BASED ON FIELD WORK
AND THEY CANNOT HAVE A POLICY ON SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT EXIST.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE FELT STRONGLY THAT THE TIME HAS COME FOR US TO
ADDRESS THIS MATTER AND GET THE PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED SINCE HE
FELT FROM THE MEETING IN TALLAHASSEE THAT MOST OF THE AGENCIES WERE
BEHIND US,AND HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A PLAN THAT HAS A CHANCE OF
BEING IMPLEMENTED.
FEB 61980 77 BOOK 42 PACE f 74
L
I
F E 0 01980 Bog 42 PAGE 675
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE WAS IN FAVOR OF GOING
AHEAD, AND HE LIKES THE ALTERNATIVE BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL.
HE CONTINUED THAT EVEN.IF WE HAVE TO BUY THE LAND OURSELVES FOR THE
IMPOUNDMENTS, WE MAY BE AHEAD IN THE LONG RUN TO PROTECT OUR COUNTY.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT WE DO NOT KNOW FOR SURE
THE VALUE OF THE MOSQUITO IMPOUNDMENT LAND, AND DISCUSSED POSSIBLE
COSTS RANGING FROM $500 TO $700 PER ACRE UP TO $2,000 PER ACRE. HE
POINTED OUT THAT WHEN WE GET TO THE IMPLEMENTATION AND THE EPA SAYS
THEY WILL NOT FUND, THAT IS THE TIME TO THINK ABOUT GETTING AN
EXCEPTION. HE NOTED THAT A LOT OF STEPS HAVE TO BE TAKEN TO GET TO
THAT POINT, AND CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AGREED THAT WE SHOULD PROCEED TO
TAKE THE FIRST STEP.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE ALTERNATIVE METHOD OF
TREATMENT PROPOSED FOR THE 201 PLAN AND AUTHORIZED THE CONSULTANTS
TO RELEASE IT IMMEDIATELY FOR A-95 REVIEW.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY SET A DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE
201 PLAN FOR WEDNESDAY, APRIL 16, 1980, AT 7:00 P.M. AND ALSO AGREED
` TO OFFICIALLY REQUEST ALL A-95 REVIEWING AGENCIES TO MAKE A WRITTEN
AND VERBAL COMMENT AS TO THEIR POSITION AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT DISCUSSED APPOINTING A HEARING OFFICER.
HE NOTED THAT COMMISSIONER WODTKE HAS DONE A LOT OF WORK ON THIS,
AND ADDITIONALLY NOTED THAT THREE MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD WILL NOT BE
CONTINUING IN OFFICE AFTER NOVEMBER; HE,THEREFORE, FELT COMMISSIONER
WODTKE SHOULD BE THE HEARING OFFICER BOTH BECAUSE OF HIS KNOWLEDGE
OF THE SUBJECT AND FOR PURPOSES OF CONTINUITY.
THE BOARD AGREED, AND THE CHAIRMAN APPOINTED COMMISSIONER
WODTKE HEARING OFFICER FOR THE 201 PUBLIC HEARING AND NOTED THAT
COMMISSIONER WODTKE WILL DECIDE ON THE LOCATION FOR THE HEARING.
COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT WHILE IN WASHINGTON, HE TALKED
WITH SENATOR STONE, SENATOR CHILES, AND REPRESENTATIVE BAFALIS AND
THEIR STAFFS ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND OUR PROBLEM WITH THE IMPOUNDMENTS,
AND THEY WERE ALL VERY ENTHUSIASTIC AND INDICATED THEY WOULD HELP
WITH THIS APPROACH. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT WE SHOULD THANK BRIAN
BARNETT OF THE FISH & GAME COMMISSION, WHO IS THE ORIGINATOR OF
THIS IDEA.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE AGREED THAT IT WAS ENLIGHTENING TO
SEE THE ATMOSPHERE IN TALLAHASSEE, AND HE FELT THERE IS A STRONG
DESIRE ON EVERYONE IS PART TO FINALIZE THIS. THE REMAINING HURDLES
ARE THE LEGALITIES AND POLICIES, AND HOPEFULLY, THEY CAN BE OVERCOME.
COMMISSIONER LOY REQUESTED THAT OUR CONSULTANTS HAVE PLENTY
OF COPIES OF THE PROPOSED PLAN AVAILABLE FOR THE HEARING, AND MR.
SWALLOWS STATED THAT HE WILL FOLLOW THROUGH ON THIS.
THE NEXT MATTER TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD RELATED TO GENERAL
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS PLANS FOR UPGRADING THEIR ENTRANCEWAY
AND THEIR PROPOSED USE OF COUNTY RIGHTS-OF-WAY FOR LANDSCAPING.
ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT WHEN GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
CAME BEFORE THE BOARD PREVIOUSLY ON THIS MATTER, THEY HAD A CONCEPTUAL
PLAN WITH NO SPECIFIC DETAILS, AND THEIR PROPOSAL WAS TO TURN OVER
THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE AND LIABILITY IN REGARD TO THE
LANDSCAPING IN THE COUNTY RIGHTS-OF-WAY TO A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
AFTER THREE YEARS AND RELIEVE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT OF ANY FURTHER
RESPONSIBILITY, WHICH WAS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO THE BOARD. THE ATTORNEY
INFORMED THE BOARD THAT G. PATRICK SETTLES, CORPORATE COUNSEL FOR
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, NOW HAS OUTLINED THEIR ALTERNATIVES
IN THE FOLLOWING LETTER:
FEB 61980 79 BOX
A . t%'PAE£tl��F
FEB 61980
General Development Corporation
January 14, 1980
Mr. George, G. Collins, Jr., Esq.
Indian River County Attorney
P. O. Box 3686
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Re: Vero Highlands Entrance Feature
Dear George:
moo 42 u 677
G. Patrick Settles
Corporate Counsel
I am in receipt of your January 3, 1980 letter regarding the draft agree-
ment between Indian River County and General DevelcpTent Corporation as
to General's landscaping of certain rights-of-way. As we discussed by
phone today, I have no problems with either deleting references to the
issuance of permits or providing legal descriptions of the portions of
rights-of-way to be landscaped.
However, with regard to points 2 and 3 of your letter, General Develop-
ment cannot ccmni.t itself to be secondarily liable in perpetuity upon the
maintenance and indemnification provisions.
As stated in the original draft agreement, we have already obligated our-
selves to maintain these landscaped areas for a period of three years or
until such responsibility is assumed by the property amers' association,
whichever canes first. In addition to this obligation, we are also pre-
pared to offer to post corporate bonds guaranteeing the maintenance of
the landscaping in the public rights-of-way for a period of ten years.
At the end of such time, our liability for maintenance would cease.
With regard to the indemnification provision, we will obtain a "hold
harmless" agreement from the property aoners' association, and we will
provide in the articles of the association that it must carry liability
insurance for actions arising from this landscaping.
Hopefully, these additional changes will adequately address the County's
concerns. If not, please advise at your earliest convenience.
Thank you very much for your cooperation in this matter.
GPS /lm
Sincerely,
AaSettles
Corporate Counsel
MR. SETTLES INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THEY CANNOT CARRY A
PERPETUAL LIABILITY ON THEIR BOOKS, BUT, AS A REMEDY, THEY HAVE
SUGGESTED THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION WILL RUN WITH THE
LAND AND WILL BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN MAXIMUM INSURANCE ON LIABILITY,
ETC. HE CONFIRMED THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO POST A CORPORATE BOND
EXTENDING THEIR RESPONSIBLITY FOR MAINTENANCE UP TO A TOTAL OF TEN
YEARS. MR. SETTLES NOTED THAT THE PRIMARY PLANTINGS WILL BE LAUREL
OAKS, BOTTLE BRUSH TREES, AND LUGUSTRUM HEDGE, WHICH ARE NOT HIGH
MAINTENANCE ITEMS. HE CONTINUED THAT THEY REQUESTED THIS MATTER
BE PUT ON TODAY 1.S AGENDA BECAUSE THE PLANTING SEASON FOR OAKS RUNS
OUT THE END OF FEBRUARY, AND IF THEY PLANT AFTER THAT, THEY WILL
LOSE A GREATER AMOUNT OF THE -TREES.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT MAINTENANCE
OF THE LANDSCAPING AFTER THE TEN YEAR PERIOD. HE NOTED THAT IN THE
EVENT THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION DECIDED TO DISSOLVE, HE DID
NOT WISH TO HAVE TO PLACE A LIEN ON 1,000 LOTS.
MR. SWENSEN INFORMED HIM THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIA-
TION RUNS WITH THE LAND AND THE COVENANTS TIE EACH PROPERTY, NOT
THE OWNER, BACK TO THE ASSOCIATION. THERE IS A LIENING MECHANISM.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT FELT THAT ANYTHING CAN BE REMOVED AND
DISSOLVED BY THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, AND MR. SWENSEN
POINTED OUT THAT GENERAL DEVELOPMENT MAY NOT EXIST IN PERPETUITY
EITHER. HE BELIEVED THAT AN ASSOCIATION CONSISTING OF OVER 1,000
LOTS WILL REMAIN, AND NOTED THAT THE COST FOR THIS SMALL AREA WILL
BE INFINITESIMAL SPREAD OUT OVER THAT MANY LOTS. MR. SETTLES FURTHER
NOTED THAT THEY HAVE PLANS FOR RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND OTHER
AMENITIES SO THE ASSOCIATION WOULD HAVE ADDITIONAL OBLIGATIONS.
COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT HE LIKED THE IDEA OF THE
TREES, BUT WISHED TO PROTECT THE COUNTY. HE ASKED IF THERE WAS ANY
WAY TO TIE INTO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS
ASSOCIATION COULDN'T SUDDENLY DECIDE ON A NEW CHARTER.
ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THERE COULD BE A SEPARATE PROVISION
INCLUDED STATING THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROVISION COULD NOT BE AMENDED.
COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED WHAT KIND OF PROVISION GDC HAD IN
THEIR ORIGINAL DEEDS, AND MR. SWENSEN STATED THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE
ANY BECAUSE THAT WAS A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND STRICTLY VOLUNTARY,
THE NEW BUYERS WILL BE LEGALLY TIED INTO THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION.
HE CONTINUED.THAT THEY ARE OFFERING THE EXISTING HOMEOWNERS AN
OPPORTUNITY TO JOIN THE NEW ORGANIZATION AND MAKING IT ATTRACTIVE
FINANCIALLY.
BOOK, . fAicE
FEB 61980 Box . 2 PACE 679
MR. MOREAU INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION HAS CHOSEN TO TRANSFER AN EXISTING PARK AREA OVER TO
THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT FELT IF WE HAVE SOME SAY-SO ABOUT THE
TYPE OF PLANTINGS AND A GUARANTEE THEY ARE GOING TO BE MAINTAINED
FOR TEN YEARS, THAT IS MUCH BETTER THAN THE PREVIOUS PROPOSAL;
COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT HE STILL IS BOTHERED
ABOUT TRAFFIC AND PLANTINGS AT THE ENTRANCEWAY.
MR. SWENSEN INFORMED HIM THAT THEY HAVE THEIR ENGINEERS
LOOKING CLOSELY AT THIS. HE NOTED THAT THE DECELERATION LANE WAS
INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL PLAN, AND WHILE THEY DO NOT PRESENTLY HAVE
PLANS FOR AN ACCELERATION LANE, THAT COULD BE INCORPORATED IF FELT
NECESSARY.
COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT HE WOULD FEEL HAPPIER ABOUT
APPROVING GDC's PROPOSAL IF THE BOARD HAD THEIR COMMITMENT ABOUT
THIS INTERSECTION.
MR. SWENSEN CONFIRMED THEY WILL INCLUDE THE ACCELERATION
LANE IF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FEEL IT IS NECESSARY.
ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT APPROPRIATE ACTION WOULD BE TO SAY
IN CONCEPT WE AGREE, AND HAVE MR. SETTLES DRAW A CONTRACT INCLUDING
BOTH ACCELERATION AND DECELERATION LANES.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMIS-
SIONER WODTKE, TO INDICATE THAT THE BOARD FAVORS THE CONCEPT PRE-
SENTED TODAY BY GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND ARE LOOKING FOR
SPECIFIC WORDS FOR FINAL APPROVAL, AND THE CONTRACT SUBMITTED BY.
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION SHALL INCLUDE PROVISIONS FOR
INSTALLATION OF ACCELERATION AND DECELERATION LANES.
ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT HE IS INTERESTED IN DEED
RESTRICTIONS GIVING THE COUNTY.SOME SORT OF REMEDY AND ALSO PRO-
VIDING THAT PARTICULAR PROVISION CANT BE AMENDED. HE FELT THE
BOARD IS ADOPTING MR. SETTLES' LETTER AS FAR AS THE BOND AND TEN
YEARS ARE CONCERNED.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
IT WAS VOTED ON
MR. SWENSEN ASKED IF GDC COULD PROCEED WITH THE ACTUAL
PLANTING PROCESS BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS DID NOT
FEEL THEY COULD. HE NOTED THAT IT ALL DEPENDS ON HOW FAST THEY CAN
DRAW UP THE CONTRACT,
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE
PROPOSED CONTRACT WITH GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AS DISCUSSED
ABOVE ON APPROVAL OF THE ATTORNEY.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ANNOUNCED THAT A TEMPORARY INJUNCTION HAS
BEEN REQUESTED TO HALT THE COUNTY'S WORK ON THEIR BEACH PROPERTY IN
THE TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES AND A HEARING WILL BE HELD FRIDAY,
FEBRUARY 8, 1980, AT 9:00 A.M. BEFORE JUDGE SHARP.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS REPORTED THAT HE RECEIVED A PHONE
CALL A FEW HOURS AGO FROM MAYOR NOLAN OF THE TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER
SHORES INFORMING HIM THAT THE MAYOR HAD SHUT DOWN THE COUNTY PROJECT
AND THE EQUIPMENT WORKING ON THAT JOB. THE ADMINISTRATOR CONTINUED
THAT HE TOLD THE MAYOR THAT HE FELT HE HAD GONE FAR BEYOND THE WAY
MOST PEOPLE WOULD HANDLE THINGS OF THIS NATURE, AND HE FELT THE
MAYOR SHOULD HAVE COME IN AND TALKED TO SOMEONE WHO HAS AUTHORITY
AND HAD THIS DONE IN A PROPER MANNER, THE ADMINISTRATOR FURTHER
NOTED THAT MAYOR NOLAN STATED THAT IF THE ADMINISTRATOR WERE TO GO
UP THERE AND START THAT JOB AGAIN, HE WOULD HAVE HIM ARRESTED. THE
ADMINISTRATOR STATED THAT HE IS NOT CONCERNED WITH THAT BECAUSE HE
DOES NOT TAKE INSTRUCTIONS FROM MAYOR NOLAN AND IS ONLY CONCERNED
WITH THE ACTION THE BOARD WISHES HIM TO TAKE. HE CONTINUED THAT THE
ONLY THING HIS CREW WAS DOING WAS UNDERBRUSHING COUNTY PROPERTY,
AND IF THERE IS ANY PERMIT TO UNDERBRUSH THAT IS REQUIRED THAT WE
DO NOT KNOW ABOUT, WE WILL TAKE ONE OUT.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT THE HEARING IS SET FOR FRIDAY
MORNING; OTHERWISE, HE WOULD GO START THE TRACTORS HIMSELF. HE FELT
IT IS EXTREMELY UNFORTUNATE THAT -THE SITUATION HAS COME TO THIS.
FEB 61980
N
BOOK'. UJAuuou
FEB 61980 Bom 42 PACE MI.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE AGREED THAT ATTENDING THE HEARING
FRIDAY MORNING IS THE SENSIBLE THING TO DO, BUT NOT BECAUSE HE
AGREES WITH THE ACTION -TAKEN BY -THE MAYOR OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES.
HE DID NOT BELIEVE THE ADMINISTRATOR OF -THIS COUNTY HAS VIOLATED
ANY RULES OR REGULATIONS BY HAVING HIS MEN UNDERBRUSH PROPERTY OWNED
BY THE COUNTY, AND COMMISSIONER WODTKE EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT HOLDING
UP THIS WORK, WHICH HE FELT NEEDS TO BE EXPEDITED. HE STATED THAT
IT WAS TOTALLY INEXCUSABLE FOR MAYOR NOLAN TO TAKE SUCH ACTION.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AGREED THAT IT WAS AN IRRESPONSIBLE ACTION.
ATTORNEY COLLINS ADVISED THE BOARD THAT HE COULD FIND NO
PROHIBITION TO A PROPERTY OWNER CLEARING HIS OWN PROPERTY, AND THERE
WAS NO CONSTRUCTION OF ANYTHING REQUIRING THE APPROVAL OF THE TOWN.
HE FELT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE A DECLARATION OF WHAT THE COUNTY'S
INTENT WAS TO PRESENT AT THE HEARING.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY STATED, IN ANSWER TO INJUNCTION FILED
BY MAYOR NOLAN OF THE TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES, THAT THE COUNTY
WAS MERELY UNDERBRUSHING PROPERTY THAT BELONGS TO THE COUNTY; THE
BOARD DOES NOT FEEL THEY ARE IN VIOLATION OF ANY RULES AND REGULATIONS
OF THE TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES; AND IT HAS BEEN THE INTENT OF
THE BOARD ALL ALONG TO GO THROUGH PROPER PROCEDURES WITH THE POLITICAL
BODIES IN ORDER TO GET APPROVAL BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION IS DONE ON
THIS PROPERTY.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT FELT IT SHOULD BE NOTED FOR THE RECORD
THAT WE DO HAVE AN AGREEMENT ON FILE WITH THE TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER
SHORES THAT WE WILL NOT DEVELOP THAT PROPERTY WITHOUT CONSULTING THE
TOWN PRIOR TO DEVELOPMENT AND FOLLOWING THEIR REGULATIONS.
COMMISSIONER Loy COMMENTED THAT WE HAD ALL HOPED FOR A
LONG TIME THAT PLANS WOULD BE READY AND WE COULD GO TO THE PLANNING
BOARD OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES WITH THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND
GO THROUGH THEIR REGULAR PROCEDURES. IT WOULD APPEAR AT THIS TIME
THAT THIS IS NOT TO BE ACCOMPLISHED IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE. COM-
MISSIONER Loy, THEREFORE, SUGGESTED THAT WE CONTACT THE TOWN COUNCIL
OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES AND ASK THEM TO MEET WITH US AS SOON AS
POSSIBLE TO WORK OUT SOME TYPE OF AGREEMENT TO ACCOMPLISH THE
PROJECT.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AGREED AND STATED THAT HE WOULD CONTACT
THE.PROPER OFFICIALS AND TRY TO SET UP SUCH A MEETING AT THE EARLIEST
POSSIBLE TIME.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ANNOUNCED THAT HE HAS BEEN ASKED BY THE
ADMINISTRATOR TO ADD AN EMERGENCY ITEM TO TODAY'S AGENDA IN REGARD
TO ROAD RESURFACING.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADDED THE EMERGENCY ITEM TO TODAY'S
AGENDA AS REQUESTED BY ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS,
ADMINISTRATOR KENNINGS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT IN LAST
YEAR'S RESURFACING PROGRAM, WE USED UP ALL THE ROADS SET OUT ON THAT
YEAR'S LIST. MOORINGLINE DRIVE IN THE MOORINGS IS IN LINE FOR A
RECAPPING. THE ADMINISTRATOR CONTINUED THAT DICKERSON IS DOWN AT
THE MOORINGS NOW BECAUSE THE MOORINGS PEOPLE ARE PAVING SPRINGLINE
DRIVE AND SOME OTHER ROADS, AND THEY HAVE ASKED IF THE COUNTY WOULD
CONSIDER DOING MOORINGLINE DRIVE WHILE DICKERSON IS IN THERE WITH
ALL THEIR EQUIPMENT RATHER THAN MOVING IT OUT AND THEN BACK IN
ANOTHER TIME. ADMINISTRATOR KENNINGS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAS
HAD HIS STAFF LOOK AT THIS ROAD, AND IT DOES NEED RECAPPING. HE
CONTINUED THAT IF WE DO THIS ROAD NOW, WE CAN DO IT UNDER OUR CURRENT
CONTRACT AGREEMENT WITH DICKERSON, WHILE IF WE WAIT TILL FRIDAY, WE
WILL HAVE A 40% INCREASE IN THE COST OF ASPHALT. TAKING IMMEDIATE
ACTION, THEREFORE, WOULD MEAN A SAVING OF APPROXIMATELY $12,000.
THE ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDED THAT IF WE DO ANY RECAPPING AT ALL,
WE DO THE ENTIRE ROAD.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT HE KNOWS THAT ROAD HAS
SOME BAD DEPRESSIONS ON THE NORTH SIDE AND FELT IT IS CAUSED BY THE
HEAVY TRUCKS USED FOR CONSTRUCTION. HE WONDERED IF THEY HAVE SOME
SPECIFIC PROBLEMS TO CAUSE THIS MAINLY ON -THE NORTH SIDE.
FEB 61980 85 BOOK , 42- PACE 602
FEB
0 1990
Boos
,42 pgE s$3
THE ADMINISTRATOR
NOTED THAT THIS ROAD WAS BUILT
ABOUT
SEVEN YEARS AGO ON PUMPED -IN FILL.
COMMISSIONER.LYONS ASKED IF THIS ROAD IS THE COUNTY'S
RESPONSIBILITY, AND THE ADMINISTRATOR CONFIRMED THAT IT IS. IN
FURTHER DISCUSSION, IT WAS NOTED THAT THIS ROAD WOULD VERY LIKELY
HAVE BEEN ON TOP OF THE LIST FOR THIS YEAR'S RESURFACING PROGRAM,
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO PROCEED
WITH THE RESURFACING OF MOORINGLINE DRIVE IN ITS ENTIRETY.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADDED TO TODAY'S AGENDA, AN EMERGENCY
ITEM IN REGARD TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF WABASSO BEACH PARK AS REQUESTED
BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
SENIOR PLANNER DAVID MARSH INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAS
OBTAINED SEVERAL PROPOSALS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A DUNE CROSSOVER AT
WABASSO BEACH PARK, AND HE WOULD LIKE THEIR DIRECTION.
THE BOARD REVIEWED THE VARIOUS PROPOSALS, AND DISCUSSION
FOLLOWED IN REGARD TO SUBSTITUTION OF SOME BUILDING MATERIALS AS
INDICATED ON THE PROPOSALS.
MR. MARSH STATED THAT ALL THOSE MAKING PROPOSALS INDICATED
THAT THEY WOULD WORK OUT THE SPECIFICATIONS TO MEET THE BUILDING
CODE. HE NOTED THAT WE ALREADY HAVE THE NECESSARY PERMITS.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE PROPOSAL MADE BY COMPASS
BUILDING SYSTEMS IN THE -AMOUNT OF $4,500.00 TO CONSTRUCT THE DUNE
CROSSOVER AT WABASSO BEACH PARK, AND AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN'S
SIGNATURE TO THE CONTRACT UPON APPROVAL OF THE ATTORNEY.
MR. MARSH INFORMED THE BOARD THAT IT WILL BE NECESSARY TO
DO SOME DRESSING OF THE BLUFF LINE IN ABOUT A 6' AREA BEFORE THE
CROSSOVER CAN BE CONSTRUCTED, AND HE ASKED IF THE COUNTY CREWS
COULD DO THIS WORK SINCE IT IS NOT A PART OF THE PROPOSALS. HE
FURTHER SUGGESTED THAT SIGNS BE PLACED AT THE BEACH REQUESTING THE
PEOPLE TO "SAVE OUR BEACHES AND USE THIS WALKWAY."
THE BOARD AGREED THAT COUNTY CREWS COULD DRESS UP THE
BLUFF LINE, AND THAT SIGNS WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA.
COMMISSIONER LYONS REPORTED THAT HE MET WITH THE TECHNICAL
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE JOINT DRAINAGE STUDY; THEY DID SURVEY SOME
AREAS TO SEE WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS, BUT HE HAS NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY -
TO GO OVER THIS WITH THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR AND WILL TAKE IT
UP AT THE NEXT MEETING.
COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO PUT ON
THE AGENDA FOR ONE OF THE NEXT MEETINGS A VERY SHORT PRESENTATION
BY THE TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY
TO SEE IF THERE IS SOMETHING WE CAN DO COUNTYWIDE TO GET MORE INTO
THIS PROBLEM.
THE BOARD AGREED THAT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA.
COMMISSIONER LYONS NOTED THAT THE TRAFFIC PATTERNS ARE
CHANGING, AND HE CAN SEE THE AFFECTS OF THE NEW BRIDGE AND NEW SHOPPING ,
CENTERS. HE FELT SOONER OR LATER WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO SIT DOWN
AND DO SOME TRAFFIC ENGINEERING WORK IN THE COUNTY, AND CERTAINLY
THE CITY HAS TO ALSO, AND POSSIBLY WE SHOULD WORK ON THIS TOGETHER.
HE STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO EXPLORE THIS FURTHER IF IT IS ALL
RIGHT WITH THE COMMISSION.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT WAS OF THE OPINION THAT EXPLORING THIS
MATTER WITH A VIEW TO FUTURE BUDGETS IS ALL RIGHT, BUT HE DID NOT
WISH TO SPEND ANY MONEY FROM THIS BUDGET FOR A TRAFFIC STUDY.
COMMISSIONER LOY AGREED, AND FELT WE MUST CONCENTRATE ON
DRAINAGE AT THIS POINT.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT SUGGESTED THAT COMMISSIONER LYONS CONTINUE
WITH THIS MATTER TO LAY THE GROUNDWORK FOR NEXT YEAR S BUDGET.
COMMISSIONER LOY BROUGHT UP THE MATTER OF THE COMPLAINT
FILED BY ONE OF THE EX-EMPLOYEES OF ALCO-HOPE AGAINST THAT ORGANIZA-
TION S USE OF FUNDS. SHE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT A GENTLEMAN DID
BRING HER THIS REPORT, WHICH SHE READ AND TOOK TO COORDINATOR THOMAS.
MR. THOMAS, IN TURN, TOOK IT TO ED SEARS OF THE MANPOWER PLANNING
COUNCIL. THEY CAME UP WITH THE CONCLUSION THAT THE CETA AUDITING
FEB 61980 Q
87 BOOK PACE 03
FEB 61900
a.00x
42
ME 685
PEOPLE SHOULD BE CONTACTED SINCE MOST OF
THE CHARGES HAVE
TO
DO
WITH MONIES OUT OF THE CETA FUNDS, AND MR. THOMAS HAS WRITTEN THEM
REQUESTING A REVIEW. COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT MENTAL HEALTH IN
FORT FIERCE CONDUCTED THEIR OWN INVESTIGATION AND FELT THERE WERE
NO MISUSES OF THEIR FUNDS. SHE FURTHER NOTED THAT SHE HAS NEVER
TALKED TO ANYONE FROM THE ALCO-HOPE BOARD ABOUT THIS, AND HAS ONLY
READ THAT THEY FEEL THERE IS NO VALIDITY TO THE CHARGES. COMMISSIONER
LOY STATED THAT HER QUESTION WAS WHETHER WE CAN KEEP MAKING OUR
REGULAR MONTHLY CONTRIBUTIONS TO ALCO-HOPE. SHE STATED THAT CO-
ORDINATOR THOMAS WAS GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT WE WITHHOLD FUNDS UNTIL
WE ARE SATISFIED THERE HAS BEEN NO MISUSES.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED WHETHER THIS ACTUALLY INVOLVES
THE MISUSE OF COUNTY FUNDS, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKED IF FINANCE
OFFICER BARTON COULD OVERSEE THIS CONTRIBUTION TO DETERMINE THAT THE
FUNDS ARE USED FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE.
COMMISSIONER LOY FELT OUR FUNDS WERE BASED ON SO MANY
DOLLARS PER DAY PER PATIENT, AND STATED THAT THE CHARGE IS THAT CETA
FUNDS WERE MISUSED, THOUGH WE, IN A SENSE, ARE RESPONSIBLE THROUGH
OUR MANPOWER BOARD. SHE FELT SURE THAT FINANCE OFFICER BARTON COULD
REQUIRE A MONTHLY RUNDOWN.
THE BOARD CONTINUED TO DISCUSS WITHHOLDING OUR MONTHLY
CONTRIBUTION, WHICH AMOUNTS TO $400.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT DID NOT BELIEVE THIS WOULD MAKE OR BREAK
ALCO-HOPE, BUT COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT IT MIGHT BECAUSE THEY ARE A
BORDERLINE OPERATION. HE NOTED THAT THIS MATTER IS ONLY BEING
INVESTIGATED, AND THEY ARE NOT PROVEN GUILTY. HE FELT UNTIL WE
HEAR SOMETHING DEFINITE, WE MUST ASSUME THIS IS JUST AN ALLEGATION.
COMMISSIONER LOY COMMENTED THAT UNITED FUND IS IN THE SAME
POSITION AS THE BOARD; WE BOTH CONTRIBUTE TO ALCO-HOPES GENERAL
OPERATING EXPENSES. SHE AGREED THAT AT THE MOMENT THERE IS NOTHING
DEFINITE, AND BELIEVED THIS HAS BEEN TURNED OVER TO THE STATE
ATTORNEYS OFFICE.
ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT HE DID NOT HAVE ANY PROBLEM
WITH THE COUNTY MAKING THE MONTHLY PAYMENTS.
88 m
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AGREED WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO MAKE THE
PAYMENTS, BUT REQUESTED THAT THE ATTORNEY KEEP US APPRISED OF ANY
DEVELOPMENTS FROM THE STATE ATTORNEYS OFFICE.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE WISHED TO APPOINT COMMIS-
SION LYONS AS THE BOARDS REPRESENTATIVE TO THE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-20 APPOINTING
COMMISSIONER LYONS TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY LIBRARY ASSOCIATION.
SAID RESOLUTION WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES WHEN
RECEIVED.
_DISCUSSION FOLLOWED IN REGARD TO APPOINTING MEMBERS TO
THE EOC BOARD. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE
THE SCHOOL BOARD RECOMMEND ONE MEMBER, AND HE WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER
APPOINTING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR -ED REGAN.
THE BOARD CONCURRED WITH HIS SUGGESTION.
RESOLUTION No. 80-15 ESTABLISHING A RATE INCREASE FOR
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES, INC., IS HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE
MINUTES AS APPROVED AT THE MEETING OF JANUARY 231 1980.
42 �:�6
RESOLUTION NO. 80-15
WHEREAS, on the 11th day of December
aooK4,2 P 687
" a
1979
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES, INC., pursuant to a properly
filed and noticed application for a rate increase, appeared
at a public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, hereinafter referred to as "Board",
received testimony and documentary exhibits as filed on behalf
of General Development Utilities, Inc., hereinafter referred to
as "Petitioner", and, in addition, heard testimony from
citizens of Indian River County residing within the franchise
area opposing the rate increase; and
WHEREAS, the Board, at the public hearing considered
testimony involving a moratorium on building construction during
1978 which affected the rate year of 1978 as presented by
Petitioner; and
WHEREAS, the Board considered certain improvements and
expenditures of the Petitioner and their weighted effect on
future customers; and
WHEREAS, in 1978 documentation failed to take into account
new areas that are being developed by Petitioner; and
WHEREAS, Petitioner received, after a public hearing,
tap -on fee increases based in part upon Petitioner's sworn
testimony that the higher connection charges would reduce rates;
and
WHEREAS, Petitioner's financial documentation includes
expenses that are not relevant to the Petitioner's system but
charged over the General Development system as a whole; and
WHEREAS, there appeared discrepancies in the used and
useful analysis to determine costs of replacement and other
in -use assets;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the
Resolution dated April 5, 1960 between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA and GENERAL DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES, INC., as subsequently
amended by Resolution No. 77-95, is hereby amended as to
Section 14 of the original Resolution as amended,to read
as follows:
SECTION 14
The rates charged by the Company for its service hereunder
shall be fair and reasonable and designed to meet all necessary costs
of the service, including a fair rate of return on the net valuation
of its properties devoted thereto under efficient and economical
management. The Company agrees that it shall be subject to all
authority now or hereafter possessed by the County or any other
regulatory body having competent jurisdiction to fix just, reasonable
and compensatory rates. When this franchise takes effect, the Company
shall have authority to charge and collect not to exceed the following
schedule of rates, which shall remain effective until changed or
modified as herein provided, to -wit:
WATER
RESIDENTIAL SERVICE RATE SCHEDULE
Availability - Available throughout the area served by the Company.
Applicability - For water service for all purposes in private
residences and individually -metered apartment units.
Limitations - Subject to all of the Rules and Regulations of this
Tariff. -
Monthly Rates
First 3,000 Gallons $5:00 Minimum per month
Over 3,000 Gallons $1.00 per 1,000 Gallons
Minimum Charge - $5.00 Per month.
Terms of Payment - Bills are due and payable when rendered and become
delinquent if not paid within twenty (20) days, and may, after five
(5) days written notice, be discontinued.
Billing - Bills shall be rendered monthly and the meter reading
dates shall coincide as near as practically possible, and bills
rendered as soon as possible thereafter. Bills rendered for less
than fifty per cent (500) of the normal billing period will be
billed in accordance with Rule 25-10.97 (2), Florida Administrative
Code: "Whenever, for any reason, the period of service for which a
bill is rendered is less than fifty percent (50%) of the normal
billing period, the charges applicable to such service, including
minimum charges, shall be prorated in the proportion that.the actual
number of service days bears to a thirty (30) day month; except that:
FEB 61980 eoox Fa�E 6$$
FEB Q 1980
@001( 4 'PAGE -689
(a) Opening bills need not be rendered but may be carried
over to and included in the next regular monthly billing.
(b) For service taken under flat rate schedules, fifty
percent (500) of the normal charges may be applied.
(c) The practices employed by the utility in this regard
shall have uniform application to all customers."
Reconnection Charges - On the initial turn -on of a new service or
account, there will be no charge. On reconnections there will be
a reconnection charge of $9.50 for each request during regular
working hours. After regular working hours, the charge will be
$13.00.
GENERAL SERVICE RATE SCHEDULE
Availability - Available throughout the area served by the Company.
Applicability - For water service to General Service Customers.
_Limitations - Subject to all of the Rules and Regulations of this
Tariff.
Monthly Rates
First 3,000 Gallons
Over 3,000 Gallons
Minimum Charge - $5.00 per month.
$5.00 Minimum per month
$1.00 per 1,000 Gallons
Terms of Payment - Bills are due and payable when rendered and
become delinquent if not paid within twenty (20) days, and may, after
five (5) days written notice, be discontinued.
Billing - Bills shall be rendered monthly and the meter reading dates
shall coincide as near as practically possible, and bills rendered
as soon as possible thereafter. Bills rendered for less than fifty
percent (50%) of the normal billing period will be billed in
accordance with Rule 25-10.97 (2), Florida Administrative Code:
"Whenever, for any reason, the period of service for which a bill
is rendered is less than fifty percent (500) of the normal billing
period, the charges applicable to such service, including minimum
charges, shall be prorated in the proportion that the actual
number of service days bears to a thirty (30) day month; except that:
(a) Opening bills need not be rendered but may be carried
over to and included in the next regular monthly billing.
(b) For service taken under flat rate schedules, fifty
percent (50%) of the normal charge may be applied.
(c) The practice employed by the utility in this regard shall
have uniform application to all customers."
Reconnection Charges On the initial turn -on of a new service or
account, there will be no charge. On reconnections there will be
a reconnection charge of $9.50 for each request during regular
working hours. After regular working hours, the charge will be
$13.00.
SEWER
RESIDENTIAL SERVICE RATE SCHEDULE
Availability - Available throughout the area served by the Company.
Applicability - For sewer service for all purposes in private
residences and individually -metered apartment units.
Limitations - Subject to all of the Rules and Regulations of this
Tariff.
M M M
Monthly Rates
Minimum Charge - $6.00 Flat rate per month.
Terms of Payment - Bills are due and payable when rendered and
become delinquent if not paid within twenty (20) days, and service
may, after five (5) days written notice, be discontinued.
Billing - The billing month dates shall coincide with the billing
month for sewer service. Bills rendered for less than fifty percent
(50%) of the normal billing period will be billed in accordance with
Rule 25-10.111 (2), Florida Administrative Code: "Whenever, for
any reason, the period of service for which a bill is rendered is less
than fifty percent (50%) of the normal billing period, the charges
applicable to such service, including minimum charges, shall be
prorated in the proportion that the actual number of service days
bears to a thirty (30) day month; except that:
(a) Opening bills need not be rendered but may be carried over
to and included in the next regular monthly billing.
(b) For service taken under flat rate schedules, fifty percent
(50%) of the normal charges may be applied.
(c) The practices employed by the utility in this regard shall
have uniform application to all customers."
Reconnection Charges - Sewer service discontinued at Consumer's
request or for non-payment of bills, will be resumed only upon payment
of all past -due bills and penalties, together with the total cost to
the Company of discontinuing and reconnecting sewer service lines.
GENERAL SERVICE RATE SCHEDULE
Availability - Available throughout the area served by the Company.
Applicability - For sewer service to General Service Customers.
Limitations - Subject to all of the Rules and Regulations of this
Tariff.
Monthly Rates
$6.00 flat rate per month or 75% of the water bill
whichever is greater.
Minimum Charge - $6.00 Flat rate per month.
Terms of Payment - The billing month dates shall coincide with the
filling month for sewer service. Bills rendered for less than fifty
percent (50%) of the normal billing period will be b-.11ed in
accordance with Rule 25-10.111 (2), Florida Administrative Code:
"Whenever, for any reason, the period of service for which a bill is
rendered is less than fifty percent (50%) of the normal billing
period, the charges applicable to such service, including minimum
charges, shall be prorated in the proportion that the actual number
of service days bears to a thirty (30) day month; except that:
(a) Opening bills need not be rendered but may be carried
over to and included in the next regular monthly billing.
(b) For service taken under flat rate schedules, fifty
percent (50%) of the normal charge may be applied.
(c) The practice employed by the utility in this regard
shall have uniform application to all customers."
Reconnection Charges --Sewer service discontinued at Consumer's
request or for non-payment of bills, will be resumed only upon
payment of all past -due bills and penalties, together with the total
cost to the Company of discontinuing and reconnecting sewer service
lines.
FEB 61980 BOOK `y 2 PAGE 690
F E 0 61980 Boo, 42 tuE 691
EXTENSION OR CONNECTION CHARGES
WATER
1. Main Extension Charge $2.19 times footage fronting
on main.
2. Plant Capacity Charge $.36/gallon of demand*
3. Water Meter Connection Charges
5/8" x 3/4" meter $ 75.00
1" meter $115.00
1-1/2" meter $190.00
2" meter $265.00
*Meters over 2" in size are charged upon the estimated actual cost
of installation. Where actual charges differ from estimates, the
difference will be refunded by the utility if the total cost is less
than the estimate, or paid by the contributor prior to the
initiation of water service if the actual cost exceeded the estimated
cost.
SEWER
1. Main Extension Charge $6.54 times footage fronting
on main.
2. Plant Capacity Charge $.36/gallon of demand*
*Plant Capacity Charges are computed by multiplying the daily rates
of demand by the above rates for the specified service. The daily
rated gallonage demand varies depending upon type of usage, for
example, apartments = 250 gpd; single family residence 3/4" x 5/8"
meter = 350 gpd; commercial units based upon projected actual demand.
**********
This Resolution shall become effective as of the 1st
day of February , 1980.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
�f
Y
W lar W Siebert, r . , C~ n
Attest:
A
Freda Wright; Clerk
L-A
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
NOS, 64567 - 64727 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
UDITOR,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 5:45 O'CLOCK P.M.
ATTEST:
CLERK iCHAIRMAN
FEB 61980
.600x :. 42 PA6EB92,
J