Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
6/4/1980
Ln .JUNE 4, 1980 THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, MET IN REGULAR SESSION AT THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 1053 20TH PLACE, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, ON WEDNESDAY, ,JUNE 4, 1980, AT 8:30 O'CLOCK A,M. PRESENT WERE WILLARD W. SIEBERT, SJR., CHAIRMAN; ALMA LEE Loy, VICE CHAIRMAN; WILLIAM C. WODTKE, .JR.; R. DON DEESON; AND PATRICK B. LYONS. 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; BAILIFF DAN FLEISCHMANN; AND VIRGINIA HARGREAVES AND JANICE W. CALDWELL, DEPUTY CLERKS. .JEFFREY BARTON, FINANCE OFFICER, WAS ON VACATION. THE'CHAIRMAN CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER. COMMISSIONER LYONS LED THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, AND THE REVEREND JULIUS G. RICE, COMMUNITY CHURCH, UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST, GAVE THE INVOCATION. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS WANTED TO ADD ANYTHING TO THE AGENDA. COMMISSIONER LOY REQUESTED ADDING AN EMERGENCY ITEM CONCERNING THE VERO BEACH AMBULANCE SQUAD FOR THE NEW COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS, TO BE TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR 11:30 THIS MORNING, COMMISSIONER Loy SUGGESTED ADDING TWO EMERGENCY ITEMS TO THE CLERK `S AGENDA - TWO SETS OF RETROACTIVE APPROVAL FOR OUT-OF-TOWN TRAVEL FOR ATLANTA, AND TO TALLAHASSEE. COMMISSIONER LYONS REQUESTED AN EMERGENCY ITEM BE ADDED CONCERNING THE HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY COMMITTEE. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REQUESTED AN EMERGENCY ITEM CONCERNING THE SOUTH COUNTY WATER SUPPLY PROBLEM BE ADDED TO THE AGENDA. COMMISSIONER DEESON REQUESTED THE EMERGENCY ITEM REGARDING A DEDICATION OF A PARK IN ROSELAND BE ADDED TO THE AGENDA. SUN 4190 moK 4 43 oAGE W4 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED ADDING THE ABOVE-MENTIONED EMERGENCY ITEMS TO THE AGENDA. COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT UNDER HIS ITEMS, REGARDING A REPORT BY KELTON & ASSOCIATES ON THE FIRE DISTRICT, THIS IS BEING SUBMITTED TODAY SIMPLY FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED°IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 23, 1980. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 23, 1980, AS WRITTEN. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 7, 1980. COMMISSIONER Loy SUGGESTED ON PAGE 69, LINE 4, CHANGE 1.5% TO READ 2.5%.. THIS CORRECTION HAVING BEEN MADE, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MAY %, 1980 AS WRITTEN. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO CARRY A CONCEALED FIREARM FOR JOSEPH A. FARINACCI. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR RENOVATING THE RECREATION AREA AT THE COUNTY .JAIL, AS FOLLOWS: ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT NO. INCREASE DECREASLE OTHER IMPROVEMENTS EXCEPT BLDGS. 102-906-523-66.39 $300 RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCIES .102-199-584-99.91 $300 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR .JUDITH A. WAKEFIELD, COUNTY EXTENSION DIRECTOR, AND PETE SPYKE, AGRICULTURAL SPECIALIST, AS FOLLOWS: M. 2= .JUDITH WAKEFIELD: JUNE 2 RETROACTIVE PERMISSION REQUESTED. NOTIFICATION OF MEETING WAS RECEIVED MAY 21 - TOO LATE FOR PRIOR REQUEST. BELLE GLADE AREA ADMINISTRATIVE MEETING WITH DEAN JOHN WOESTE JUNE 4 FT. PIERCE CAMP PLANNING SESSION WITH (4 PM) 4-H CAMP COUNSELORS JUNE 16-20 4-H CAMP CLOVERLEAF 4-H CAMP. I.R.C., ST. LUCIE, MARTIN, OKEECHOBEE AND BROWARD COUNTIES CAMP TOGETHER. THIS YEAR DR. CALLOWAY DRAFTED ME TO BE CHAIRMAN. PETE SPYKE: JUNE 3 COCOA ST. JOHNS RIVER UPPER BASIN TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING. THIS COMMITTEE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DEVELOPING AND RECOMMENDING A SURFACE WATER MANAGE- MENT PLAN TO BE SJRWMD GOVERNING BOARD JUNE 26 LAKE ALFRED CITRUS EXTENSION AGENTS QUARTERLY MEETING ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy. THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED STATE WITNESS PAY ROLL, CIRCUIT COURT, SPRING TERM, 1980, IN THE AMOUNT OF $142.90. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY GAVE RETROACTIVE APPROVAL FOR THE PETITION FOR ADMISSION TO A. G. HOLLEY STATE HOSPITAL FOR JOSEPH RUTTER. THE FOLLOWING REPORTS WERE RECEIVED AND PLACED ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK: REPORT ON JUVENILES IN JAIL OR DELIVERED TO JAIL DURING THE MONTH"OF APRIL. 1980. RECEIPT FOR DEPOSIT OF COUNTY FUNDS, SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, N0. 1321, IN THE AMOUNT OF $991.70 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED RETROACTIVE OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR SENIOR PLANNER DAVID MARSH TO TALLAHASSEE MAY 28, 1980. REGARDING THE WABASSO BEACH PROJECT. BOOK ' 4 F PAG':605 JUN 4190 3 JUN 4190- c� Boa �t7 PAGE.606 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED RETROACTIVE OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR ATTORNEY COLLINS, COMMISSIONER LOY, AND PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER, TO ATLANTA, GEORGIA, MAY 29, 1980, TO SUBMIT THE APPLICATION FOR THE TRACKING STATION PROPERTY. COMMISSIONER DEESON STATED THAT HE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE ROSELAND PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION AND THE ROSELAND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT REGARDING A PARK TO BE DEDICATED TO HELEN HANSOM HE STATED THEY WOULD LIKE TO SURPRISE HER WITH THIS DEDICATION, AS MRS. HANSON GAVE THIS PROPERTY TO THE COUNTY YEARS AGO FOR USE AS A PARK. ATTORNEY COLLINS ADVISED THAT THIS ACTION SHOULD BE BY RESOLUTION. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON-, THE BOARD -UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION No. 80-50 TO CONCUR WITH THE WISHES OF THE TWO CLUBS IN DEDICATING THE PARK TO HELEN HANSON; AND THAT THIS PROPERTY WILL BE USED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSES OF A PARK. RESOLUTION NO. 80- 50 WHEREAS, on February 27, 1967, HELEN HANSON conveyed to INDIAN RIVER COUNTY all of Block 29, Townsite of Roseland, as per Plat Book 1, page 43, St. Lucie County Public Records; said lands now lying and being in Indian River County; and WHEREAS, since 1967 the residents of Roseland and North Indian River County have used the above described property for recreational purposes; and WHEREAS, the Roseland Property Owners Association, Inc. and the Roseland Volunteer Fire Department have.requested that the property be dedicated in the name of HELEN HANSON and used in the future for park purposes; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the property described as: All of Block 29, Townsite of Roseland, as per Plat Book 1, page 43, St. Lucie County Public Records; said land now lying and being in Indian River County is hereby dedicated and shall be named the "HELEN HANSON PARK" with the use of the property restricted to those uses as set out in the Warranty Deed recorded in Official Record Book 250, page 226 of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida as above referred. Said Resolution shall become effective as of the day of 1, 1980. 61/ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By Willard/W.'Sieb rt,Jr.-, P airman Attest: Freda Wright, Cleirk JUN 4 1980 �ooK 4 " -Id JUN 41980 MOK 43 PUE DISCUSSION THEN FOLLOWED ABOUT A REQUEST FROM THE COUNCIL ON AGING TO THE GOVERNORS CONFERENCE, AND IT WAS DECIDED TO WAIT UNTIL WILLIAM KOOLAGE ARRIVED AT THE MEETING, AS HE IS ON THIS PARTICULAR COMMITTEE. COMMISSIONER WODTKE PRESENTED THE FOLLOWING LETTER TO THE BOARD THAT HE RECEIVED REGARDING THE RESIGNATION OF E. J. NOTLEY FROM THE EOC OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF DIRECTORS: April 28, 1980 Board of Directors Economic ODnortunities Council of Indian River County, Inc. Vero Beach, FL 32960 Attention Mrs. Alberta Brant, Chairperson Dear N,t..rs. Brant: Please accent this indication of my wish to resign from the EOC of Indian River County Board of Directors, said resigna- tion to be effective at the conclusion of the regular board meeting of May 1980. As you know, I must be away from Vero Beach for extended periods, and cannot, therefore, effectively serve on the board. If there is anything I can do on a volunteer basis, during these periods I am in Vero Beach, I will be glad to so do. Sincerely, 'E.J. Notley EJNI� c v xc: Bill Wodtke, Indian River County Commission ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0. 80-51 ACCEPTING THE RESIGNATION OF E. J. NOTLEY FROM THE EOC OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF DIRECTORS. RESOLUTION N0. 80-51 WILL BECOME A PART OF THE MINUTES WHEN RECEIVED. 6 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY GAVE RETROACTIVE APPROVAL FOR OUT - OF -COUNTY TRAVEL TO S. LEE NUZIE WHO ATTENDED THE HAZARDOUS MATERIAL WORKSHOP IN WINTER PARK ON MAY 28 AND 29, 1980. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR S. LEE NUZIE AND JIM THOMPSON TO ATTEND THE HURRICANE SEMINAR IN BREVARD COUNTY ON JUNE 12, 1980. COMMISSIONER LYONS NEXT DISCUSSED AN APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION, AND THEN RECOMMENDED CAROLYN KYES EGGERT FOR THE POSITION. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER D'EESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION N0. 80-52 APPOINTING CAROLYN KYES EGGERT TO THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION EFFECTIVE JUNE 10, 1980 TO FILL THE UNEXPIRED TERM OF RALPH SEXTON. 0 JUN4 190 7 BOOK -.-FAGS �- r JUN 41980 r 43 . P k'�x'610 RESOLUTION NO. 80-52 WHEREAS, there now exists a vacancy on the Indian River County Planning and Zoning Commission from District 2 due to the resignation of RALPH SEXTON, effective as of the 10th day of June, 1980; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, That CAROLYN KYES EGGERT is hereby -appointed to fill the vacancy and complete the unexpired term of RALPH SEXTON to end on January 9, 1983. Said Resolution shall become effective as of the �C .�1 day of � 1980. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTX, FLORIDA BY W lar yd . iebert, Jr`. Chairman Attest: 'Aj Freda Wright, Cyrk THE HOUR OF 9:00 O'CLOCK A.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO -WIT: a VERO BEACH PRESS_,®URNAIM 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 7 , in the matter of x 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- tiserr.ent; 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. r Sworn to and subscribed before ff e this s` day of — A.D. =IVB (Business Manager) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, In an River County, Florida) (SEAL) 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 one mile south of Roseland Road on River Road or Old U.S. No. 1 in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: Lot 10, less the West 40 feet, Karrs Sub- division, Plat Book 7, Page 87, Public Records of Indian River County, Florida, plus an easement to water, plus a Mobile Home, 1971 Grayville, S.N. 13006. Boat and Dock rights included in this deed on the North one-half of the 20 -foot easement over the Southerly end of Lot 12 of Riverview Subdivision on the Indian River. Be changed from C-1 Commercial District to R-1 Residential 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, April 24, 1980, 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 Com- mission Room, Indian River County Cour- thouse, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, June 4,1980, at 9:00 A.M. Board of County Commissioners Indian River County By: William W. Siebert Jr. Chairman Indian River County Planning and Zoning Commission By: Dick Bird, Chairman Apr. l; 2,1980. VICKI RENNA, OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, ADVISED THE BOARD THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CONSISTS OF 1/5 OF AN ACRE -AND IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE SOUTH OF ROSELAND ROAD ON INDIAN RIVER ROAD, SHE CONTINUED THAT THE PARCEL IS C-1 AND CURRENTLY THERE IS A MOBILE HOME ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. MISS RENNA NOTED THE APPLICATION IS IN ORDER, AND THE REQUEST FROM C-1 TO R-1 IS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF; ALSO, STAFF IS FURTHER RECOMMENDING THIS AREA BE STUDIED FOR ADDITIONAL REZONING TO R-1 IN ORDER TO PROTECT EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN THE AREA. JAMES T. FITZGERALD, Box 421, INDIAN RIVER DRIVE, APPROACHED THE BOARD AND STATED THAT HE HAS ENOUGH LAND TO PUT UP A HOUSE, AS HIS TRAILER IS 9 YEARS OLD AND.DETERIORATING. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF THERE WAS ANYONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO SPEAK. THERE WERE NONE. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 80-26 AUTHORIZING THE CHANGE FROM C-1 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO R-1 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AS REQUESTED BY JAMES T. FITZGERALD. aC?OK 4 PAGE 611'. � JUN 41980 9 If 0 ORDINANCE NO. 80-26 goa ; PACE: 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: L-ot 10, less -the West 40 feet, Karrs Subdivision, Plat Book -7, Page 87, Public Records of Indian River County, Florida, plus an easement to water, plus a Mobile Home, 1971 Grayville, S.N. 13006 Boat and Dock rights included in this deed on the North one-half of the 20 -foot easement over the Southerly end of Lot 12 of Riverview Subdivision on the Indian River. Be changed from C-1 Commercial District to R-1 Residential District. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Zoning Regulations. This Ordinance shall take effect June 9, 1980. � � s THE HOUR OF 9:00 O'CLOCK A.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO—WIT: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Weekly Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian.,River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a / / 0 r in the matter of 5 1 in the Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of � `'<�' y `3 /',�V d 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- I 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 We this day of A. D. (Business Manager) (SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court' jI dian River County, Florida) 11 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 at the corner of State Route. No. 60 and Kings Highway, extending north to 26th Street (Walker Avenue) in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: The West 20 acres of Tract 4 in Section 4, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, subject to easement to Florida Power and Light Com- pany as recorded in Misc. Rec. 1, page 348, Indian River County, Florida, records; and The West 20 acres of Tract 5, in Section 4, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, being also described as the West 20 acres of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 4, Township 33 South, Range 39 East. Subject to Easement to the State of Florida for right-of-way for public road purposes as shown in Deed Book 32, page 340 and 341, Indian River County, Florida. ALL OF THE ABOVE LAND BEING ac- cording to the last general plat of lands filed by Indian River Farms Company in the office -of the Clerk of the -Circuit Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, in Plat Book 2, page 25; said land now lying and being In Indian River County. Be changed from A -Agricultural District to C-1 Commercial 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, April 10, 1980, 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 Com- mission Room, Indian River County Cour- thouse, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, June 4,1980, at 9:00 A.M. Board of County Commissioners Indian River County By: W. W. Siebert Jr., Chairman Indian River County Planning and Zoning Commission By: Dick Bird, Chairman Mar. 21, 23, 1980. 1 WK JUN 4 1980 8001 43 pw 614 ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THE LEGAL NOTICE IS IN ORDER AND DOES INCLUDE THE ENTIRE TRACT OWNED BY MR, BAILEY. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER THEN REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING STAFF REPORT: ZONIPNG CHANGE - STAFF REPORT Benjamin F. Bailey III Omer Theodore W. Herzog Esq. Attorney Arent P. 0. Box 2110 Address Vero Beach, Fla. 32960 4-4-80 Date of Application) IRC-80-ZC-6 Application PJumoer) A C-1 Rezoning from to (District District) Preliminary Final X Hearing PROPOSED USE AND LOCATION: Subject property, approximately 36.13 acres, is located at e corner of tate oad 60 and State Road 505A which extends all the way back to 26th Street. The property is bordered by roads on three sides. The applicant is proposing a neighborhood shopping center with a -savings and loan, super market and shops serving the needs of the neighborhood in the area. EXISTING SITUATION: The property is presently in citrus groves. The surrounding area immediately to the north is Walker Avenue; beyond that, land is vacant with some scattered residences. To the northeast, the land is vacant and beyond that is Eucalyptus Place Subdivision; to the northwest is Walker residence and Rivera Estates; to the southeast is Romana Park, Subdivision, Mortimer Parkway Subdivision and Vero Villa; to the southwest, the land is vacant. RECONiMEN DATION: The application is in order. Staff recognizes the need for a commercial node in the developing area along S.R. 60, however, staff feels that the extent of the proposed rezoning for the subject property is unnecessary. Therefore, staff recommends rezoning the first 1,500 feet from S.R. 60 to C-1, Commercial and maintain the existing surrounding land uses. David 14. 'Bever Planning & Zoning Director DMR: jt cc: Herzog PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER COMMENTED THAT HE WOULD BE DIVERTING SOMEWHAT FROM THE STAFF REPORT AS THIS PARTICULAR TRACT HAS CREATED A LOT OF DISCUSSION; NO DECISION WAS REACHED, AS IT HINGED AROUND THE AMOUNT OF LAND WHICH WAS TO BE REZONED. MR. REVER ADVISED THE APPLICANT WAS AMENABLE TO RESTRICTING THE PROPOSAL TO 1250 LINEAL FEET NORTH FROM THE PROPERTY LINE ON ROUTE 60 WHICH WOULD COINCIDE WITH TRACT S FROM THE WEST, SO THERE WOULD BE A CONTINUOUS LINE ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE OF KINGS HIGHWAY. HE REPORTED THAT THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD WAS NOT AGAINST THE REZONING, JUST DID NOT KNOW HOW MUCH TO REZONE. MR. REVER CONTINUED THAT STAFF NOW WANTS TO GO WITH 1250 LINEAL FEET, AND THEY FEEL THE PRESENT AND FUTURE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WILL INDICATE THAT THIS AREA IS ONE OF PRIME GROWTH; THIS AREA IS, IN FACT, THE PRIME AREA FOR THE MAJOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOP- MENT. HE ADDED THAT THE APPLICANT HAS SHOWN THE STAFF A PROPOSED USE WITH A SUBSTANTIAL BUFFER ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH; THERE IS A GREEN AREA ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH AND ALSO ALONG KINGS HIGHWAY AND RAMONA PARK. MR. REVER COMMENTED THAT WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS SHOWN HIM INDICATED A VERY FINE DEVELOPMENT TO DEAL WITH THE SERVICES THIS AREA WILL NEED NOW AND IN TWENTY YEARS, COMMISSIONER LYONS WONDERED WHY, IF THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO. BE SUCH A MAJOR GROWTH AREA, THEY WERE LIMITING THE SIZE OF THE PARCEL? PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER STATED THAT THE EXTENT OF LAND FROM ROUTE 60 TO 26TH STREET CONSTITUTES STRIP ZONING, AND THEY FELT IT WAS MORE COMPATIBLE TO RECOMMEND NODAL DEVELOPMENT RATHER THAN STRIP DEVELOPMENT. COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED WHETHER THEY ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO REZONING THE FOUR CORNERS.' PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER REPLIED AFFIRMATIVELY, AS THE ROADS ARE MAJOR ONES AND TRADE WOULD PRINCIPALLY COME FROM THE SURROUNDING AREAS, PARTICULARLY FROM THE NORTH WHERE SUBDIVISIONS ARE NOW UNDERWAY, HE CONTINUED THAT THE NEXT MAJOR SHOPPING CENTER IS ON ROUTE 1, WITH SEVERAL SMALL SHOPPING AREAS EN ROUTE. COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF THE PLANNER FELT THAT THE AGRICULTURAL LINE WILL DISAPPEAR. 13oaic s �c 6 JUN 41980' JUN 4190 8e0f43 - Pni 616 PLANNER REVER REPORTED THAT STAFF DID NOT FEEL IT IS ALIGNED IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA AND THIS INDICATES THAT THE GROWTH IS COMING AND IS IN THE AREA; THAT IS, TAKE IT OUT OF THE 43RD AVENUE AREA AND GENERATE IT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT HE WAS SURE THE MERCHANTS IN THE 43RD AVENUE AREA WOULD ENJOY THAT. BENJAMIN F. BAILEY, III,' APPROACHED THE BOARD AND NOTED THAT MR. REVER HAS GONE OVER THE GROWTH OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AND FELT THE BOARD WAS AWARE THAT THE COUNTY IS GROWING TO THE WEST. HE CONTINUED THAT THE BOARD DESIGNATED THIS AREA TO BE COMMERCIAL IN ITS MASTER PLAN. MR. BAILEY STATED THAT THE GROVE IN QUESTION HAS BEEN IN HIS FAMILY SINCE 1942 AND WAS PRODUCING AT THAT TIME,BUT NOW THE GROVE IS AT THE POINT WHERE IT IS ECONOMICALLY UNFEASIBLE TO REPLANT. HE ADVISED THAT RALPH SEXTON IS A PROPONENT OF AGRICULTURAL LANDS, AND HAD SAID'THI.S WAS NOT PRIME CITRUS AREA, MR. BAILEY REPORTED THAT THERE IS A POND AREA IN THE SOUTH PORTION THAT WOULD BE EXPENSIVE TO FILL IN, AND FOR THOSE REASONS WAS NOT WILLING TO REPLANT THIS GROVE. HE FELT HITS REQUEST WAS TIMELY, REASONABLE, AND THAT THE COUNTY HAS THE POPULATION OUT IN THAT AREA TO SUPPORT IT. MR. BAILEY STATED THAT WHAT HE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS PUT IN A NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING AREA IN THE SOUTH PORTION OF HIS PROPERTY; A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE WANTED TO BUY THIS PROPERTY BUT HE DID NOT WANT TO SELL IT AS HE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT IN THE FAMILY. HE COMMENTED THAT HE DOES NOT LIKE STRIP SHOPPING CENTERS, SUCH AS THE WINN-DIXIE/ECKERD APPROACH; HE WOULD LIKE TO DO A SHOPPING CENTER SUCH AS THE ONE IN WEST PALM BEACH ON PGA BOULEVARD WHICH HAS A WOOD AND STONE "LOOK" THAT BLENDS IN NICELY WITH THE SURROUNDINGS. MR. BAILEY REPORTED THERE ARE TWO BANKING INSTITUTIONS, TWO HIGH QUALITY FOOD CHAINS,AND ONE DRUG STORE CHAIN THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE IN THIS SHOPPING CENTER; AND HIS REQUEST IS FOR THE 620' ON ROUTE 60 AND 1250' NORTH ON KINGS HIGHWAY. HE THEN PROPOSED A 100' BUFFER ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH, A LANDSCAPED AREA AT RAMONA PARK, AND A BUFFER ON ROUTE 60. MR. BAILEY SAID HE UNDERSTOOD THE CONCERNS OF THE PEOPLE AND FELT STRONGLY THAT WHOEVER GOES OUT THERE IS GOING TO SET THE TONE OF DEVELOPMENT. HE ADDED THAT HE IS A LOCAL PERSON DOING THIS, RATHER THAN SOMEONE FROM OUT OF TOWN; AND HE IS HIS OWN CLOSEST NEIGHBOR, AND WOULD CERTAINLY NOT DO ANYTHING TO "MESS UP" THE COMMUNITY. MR. BAILEY COMMENTED THAT THIS LAND ADHERES TO THE MASTER FLAN, AND THE WESTERN PART OF THE COUNTY NEEDS A SERVICE AREA, THEREFORE, THE REQUEST FOR REZONING. TED HERZOG, ATTORNEY FOR MR. BAILEY, APPROACHED THE BOARD AND REVIEWED THE KEY ISSUES WHICH ARE TIMING, AND THE BEST USE OF THIS PROPERTY. HE URGED THE BOARD TO CONSIDER MR. BAILEY'S GOOD TRACK RECORD. MR. HERZOG ADVISED THAT RAMONA PARK AND SHADOWBROOK SUBDIVISION ARE SOLD OUT, AND VILLAGE GREEN IS A DENSELY POPULATED AREA, AND THIS WAS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR TO CONSIDER. HE FELT BY VIRTUE OF THE POPULATION IN PLACE, THERE WAS A NEED FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING IN THE AREA, BUT THEY WERE TRYING TO AVOID THE LEADING EDGE TYPE OF ZONING. ATTORNEY HERZOG REPORTED THE MASTER PLAN WAS ADOPTED IN 1976 AND CLEARLY ESTABLISHED COMMERCIAL ZONING AS BEING RECOMMENDED FOR MR. BAILEY'S PROPERTY. HE ADDED THAT AS FAR AS THE HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD, THEY WERE IN FAVOR OF THE ZONING BUT THERE WAS NO UNANIMITY AS TO THE LINEAL DEPTH. ATTORNEY HERZOG ADDED THAT REFERRING TO COMMISSIONER LYONS' COMMENT ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE DEVELOP- MENT, THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS MET EXTENSIVELY WITH THE PLANNING STAFF TO ARRIVE AT THE 1250' FIGURE, AND HAD HIRED -AN ARCHITECT -TO PLAN AN EXTENSIVE GREEN AREA WHICH WOULD HAVE A MODERN SHOPPING CENTER USING THE CONCEPT OF A CLUSTER OF SHOPS. HE THEN GAVE THE BOARD SEVERAL PETITIONS AND REQUESTED THEY BE MADE PART OF THE RECORD. THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WAS ANY ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO SPEAK. DAN KILBRIDE, ATTORNEY REPRESENTING A GROUP OF PROPERTY OWNERS WHO RESIDE IN THE VICINITY OF THIS PROPOSED REZONING, APPROACHED THE BOARD. HE THEN PRESENTED SOME PETITIONS TO THE BOARD AND REQUESTED THEY BE MADE A PART OF THE RECORD. ATTORNEY KILBRIDE CONTINUED THAT THE PEOPLE HE REPRESENTS DO NOT BELIEVE OR FEEL THAT THIS SHOULD BE REZONED TO COMMERCIAL - NOT HERE AND NOT NOW. HE REFERRED TO THE FINE SHOPPING CENTER THAT MR. BAILEY PLANS TO DEVELOP, AND HE WAS 15 JUN 41990 BOOK 4j `PAGE �� J JUN 41980 BodK 43 PAGE 618 AWARE OF HIS REPUTATION, BUT THE BOARD SHOULD REALIZE THEY ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT SITE PLAN DEVELOPMENT, BUT REZONING. ATTORNEY KILBRIDE FELT MR. BAILEY IS NOT MAKING A COMMITMENT AND CANNOT BE BOUND; AND THIS PROPERTY COULD BE SOLD AND DEVELOPED BY SOMEONE ELSE. HE SPOKE ABOUT WHETHER THIS CORNER AREA IS READY FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, AS INDICATED ON THE MASTER PLAN, AND FELT IT SHOULD BE HELD OFF UNTIL IT IS COMMERCIALLY READY, NOT WHEN'IT IS THE LEADING EDGE. ATTORNEY KILBRIDE STATED THAT SHADOWBROOK SUBDIVISION IS OVER A MILE NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY, AND THERE IS A MOBILE HOME PARK ABOUT TWO MILES WEST OF THIS PROPERTY; THERE IS NO SIGNIFICANT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT UNTIL 43RD AVENUE - THERE IS ALMOST NO DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA AND NOT SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. HE FELT IT WOULD TAKE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE TO SUPPORT A PROJECT OF THIS SORT, AND NOTED THAT THE 43RD AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA IS WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE PROPOSED SITE AND -SERVICES THIS AREA VERY WELL. ATTORNEY KILBRIDE NOTED IT WAS NOT DETERMINED THAT DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA HAS TAKEN PLACE. HE THEN REFERRED TO THE WALKER PROPERTY,CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 30 ACRES, WHICH WAS REZONED RECENTLY AND OBVIOUSLY WILL BE AN IMPOR- TANT FACTOR IN THE AREA IF AND WHEN IT IS DEVELOPED. ATTORNEY KILBRIDE COMMENTED THAT THIS SHOPPING CENTER WILL NOT BE DRAWING PEOPLE FROM THE CITY TO HELP SUPPORT AND MAINTAIN THE SHOPS. HE THEN SPOKE ABOUT THE CITRUS LINE AND WONDERED IF THERE IS PRESSURE FOR DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD INTERFERE WITH THE CITRUS LINE. ATTORNEY KILBRIDE POINTED OUT THE PROBLEMS THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE SUBJECT NARROW, LONG PARCEL WHICH HAS A RESIDENTIAL AREA TO THE EAST. HE CONTINUED THAT THERE IS NO WAY TO CUT OUT THE LIGHT, NOISE, DIRT AND DUST INTRUSION THAT IS GOING TO OCCUR; THE WEST PALM BEACH SHOPPING CENTER REFERRED TO IN MR. BAILEY'S PRESENTATION IS ATTRACTIVE FROM THE FRONT, BUT FROM THE REAR THERE ARE MAJOR SEMI -TRUCKS LOADING AND UNLOADING - THERE IS NO WAY TO CUT DOWN THAT NOISE, ESPECIALLY TO THE EAST. ATTORNEY KILBRIDE NOTED THE MAJOR LINE OF DEVELOPMENT HAS TO BE NORTH TO SOUTH WITH THE REAR OF THE STORES FACING RAMONA PARK, WHICH WOULD DEVALUATE THIS SUBDIVISION. HE STATED THAT THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD DID NOT RECOMMEND COMMERCIAL ZONING OF ANY TYPE, AND NO VOTE WAS TAKEN; THEREFORE, NOTHING IS ON THE RECORD EXCEPT SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FOOTAGE. ATTORNEY KILBRIDE SUMMARIZED BY SAYING THAT THIS IS NOT THE TIME OR THE PLACE FOR A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS AS NO TRAFFIC STUDY HAS BEEN DONE AT THIS DANGEROUS INTERSECTION, AND THE IMPACT ON KINGS HIGHWAY WILL BE MAJOR. HE STRESSED THE EFFECT ON THE NEIGHBORING DEVELOPMENT WILL BE VERY DETRIMENTAL, AND HE STRONGLY OPPOSED THE REZONING. A GENTLEMAN FROM THE AUDIENCE ASKED WHO ATTORNEY KILBRIDE REPRESENTED, AND THE ATTORNEY RESPONDED THAT MR. NIXON, MS. BRANNON AND MR. POTEAT, ALONG WITH OTHER NEIGHBORS, HAD RETAINED HIS SERVICES. PHIL NIXON, WHO RESIDES ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROPOSED REZONING SITE, APPROACHED THE BOARD AND COMMENTED THAT HE LIVES IN THE FORMER GOODRICH ESTATE, AND DOES NOT LIKE TO SEE THE AREA DESTROYED. HE ADDED THAT SINCE THERE ARE VERY FEW PIECES OF PROPERY SUCH AS HIS, AND VERY UNLIKELY THAT ANY WILL BE BUILT, HE IS;VERY INTERESTED IN MAINTAINING IT AS IT IS VERY DEAR TO HIM, IN ORDER TO LEAVE IT TO HIS FAMILY. MR. NIXON STRESSED THAT WITH THE GROWTH OF FLORIDA, AGRICULTURAL LANDS ARE BEING REZONED TO RESIDENTIAL — AND THIS MUST BE STOPPED AS WE WILL RUN OUT OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. HE ALSO DID NOT BELIEVE THAT MR. BAILEYS AGRICULTURAL LAND WAS NOT ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE TO REPLACE, AND EMPHASIZED THE IMPORTANCE OF MAINTAINING OUR AGRICULTURAL LAND AND NOT KILL THE GOLDEN GOOSE THAT IS SUPPORTING THE COUNTY. MR. NIXON THEN PRESENTED SOME PETITIONS TO THE BOARD AND REQUESTED THEY BE MADE A PART OF THE RECORD. HE CONCLUDED BY ADVISING HOW DESPERATELY HE, ALONG WITH THE PEOPLE LOCATED IN RIVERA ESTATES AND RAMONA PARK, AND OTHERS, DO NOT WANT COMMERCIAL ZONING AT THIS SITE. e VARIOUS PETITIONS RECEIVED FROM ATTORNEY HERZOG, ATTORNEY KILBRIDE AND PHIL NIXON WERE ACCEPTED AND WILL BE PLACED ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK. COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT HE DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE RELATIONSHIP MR. NIXON HAD WITH ATTORNEY KILBRIDE. JUN 4 19 0 17 8, ox _�P, F �� JUN 41980 Book . 43 FiGE,626 MR. NIXON RESPONDED THAT THERE ARE ABOUT TWENTY PEOPLE WHO CONTRIBUTED.TO RETAINING HIS SERVICES IN THIS MATTER. N JULIE LINDSTER, RAMONA PARK, NOTED THAT MR. BAILEY SAID HE WILL PUT UP A NICE SHOPPING CENTER, BUT THEY HAVE NO GUARANTEE THAT HE WILL CONTINUE TO KEEP IT. SHE THEN EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE CRIMINAL ELEMENT THAT THE COMMERCIAL ZONING WOULD ATTRACT, AND THE RESIDENTS WOULD NOT FEEL SAFE'IN THEIR HOMES. MS. LINDSTER FELT THERE WOULD BE A DEVALUATION OF THEIR PROPERTY IN RAMONA PARK, AND DID NOT.WANT TO HAVE THE NOISE AND CONFUSION IN THAT AREA. SAM MOON, WHO RESIDES ON 8 ACRES IN TRACT 12 JUST SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND WAS OF THE OPINION THAT ROUTE 60 AND KINGS HIGHWAY IS A MAJOR HIGHWAY INTERSECTION AND THEREFORE, IS NOT A DESIRABLE RESIDENTIAL AREA, HE ADDED THAT HE LOVES HIS OLD WOOD HOUSE, WISHED IT COULD BE THERE FOREVER, BUT TIME DOES GO BY -'THE ENERGY SITUATION PREVENTS THEM FROM HAVING AIR CONDITIONING IN THEIR HUGE HOME; THEREFORE, THE TRAFFIC NOISE IS TREMENDOUS. MR. MOON STATED HE HAD NO PARTICULAR OBJECTION TO A PROPERLY PLANNED AND REZONED DEVELOPMENT AS MR, BAILEY HAD DESCRIBED, AND SOME TIME IN THE FUTURE HE MAY BE ASKING FOR A REZONING ALSO, HE CONTINUED THAT THIS AREA IS THE ENTRANCE TO VERO BEACH AND SHOULD REMAIN IN GOOD APPEARANCE; THE PROOF OF THE PUDDING IS HOW WELL THE AREA IS MAINTAINED. MR. MOON ADVISED THE BOARD THAT HE HAS SPENT TIME AND MONEY REMODELING HIS HOME AND PROPERTY TO MAKE IT MORE ATTRACTIVE AND FELT THE OTHER CORNERS NOW ARE NOT ATTRACTIVE. HE COMMENTED THAT MR. POTEAT JUST LIVES IN VERO BEACH A FEW MONTHS OF THE YEAR AND HOPED THAT HE REMODELS HIS PROPERTY SO THAT IT WOULD ALSO BE AN ASSET. -MR. MOON THEN STATED HE HAD NO OBJECTION TO THE REZONING DIRECTLY NORTH OF HIS PROPERTY. ROBERT SNOW, 2356 16TH AVENUE, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND ASKED IF PROVISION HAD BEEN MADE FOR PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY AND PUBLIC SEWER SERVICE TO THIS AREA, ALSO PROVISION FOR SURFACE WATER RUN-OFF. PLANNER REVER COMMENTED THAT THERE IS NO PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER - IT WOULD BE HANDLED BY THE INDIVIDUAL, AND ALL THE WATER GENERATED BY THE NEW DEVELOPMENT, UNDER A 25 YEAR STORM CONDITION, WOULD BE TAKEN CARE OF, HE CONTINUED THAT THERE IS A PROVISION FOR DRAINAGE AS THE WATER WOULD BE HANDLED ON THE SITE. MR. SNOW THOUGHT THAT IN VIEW OF THESE ANSWERS, HE WOULD BE OPPOSED TO REZONING AS THE COUNTY IS NOT PREPARED TO HANDLE THAT TYPE OF LAND USE. HE CONTINUED THAT THE SEWAGE FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE GOING INTO THE WELLS OF THE RESIDENTS OF RAMONA PARK. MR. SNOW THEN PLEADED WITH THE BOARD TO CONSIDER WHETHER, IN THE ABSENCE OF PUBLIC UTILITIES, THIS LAND IS READY FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT THEN ASKED MR. SNOW IF HE OWNED PROPERTY IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY, AND HE REPLIED NEGATIVELY. HENRY MULLER, 1805 CUTLASS COVE DRIVE, APPROACHED THE BOARD AND ADVISED THAT HE WAS A DEVELOPER OF RESIDENCES AND IS NOW IN THE PROCESS OF PLANNING FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT NEAR THE SUBJECT AREA. HE THEN REFERRED TO ATTORNEY KILBRIDE'S COMMENTS: "NOT HERE, NOT NOW" BY STATING, "WHERE ELSE?" MR. MULLER ADDED THAT IT SEEMED TO HIM THAT HERE IS THE PLACE, NOT 15 MILES FURTHER WEST, AND THERE IS A NEED FOR COMPETITION IN THE AREA, AND HE DID NOT THINK IT WAS DETRIMENTAL TO HAVE COMPETITIVE INSTALLATIONS. HE CONTINUED THAT THERE IS PROBABLY A MISUNDERSTANDING AS TO THE LEAD-TIME TO GET A PROJECT LIKE THIS UNDER WAY, AND NO ONE WOULD SIGN A LEASE RIGHT AWAY UNLESS THEY KNEW IN THEIR OWN MINDS THAT THIS WOULD BE A PROFIT- ABLE THING TO DO. MR. MULLER FELT IT WOULD TAKE SOME TIME AFTER THE REZONING BEFORE IT GETS FULLY DEVELOPED AS A COMMERCIAL CENTER, AS IT TAKES A LONG TIME TO DEVE°LOP THE CONTRACTS. HE ADDED THAT THE GROWTH IN VERO BEACH IS GOING TO BE WEST OF 43RD AVENUE AND THE BEACH AREA IS GETTING DENSER. MR. MULLER ADVISED THAT HE IS A TENANT OF MR. BAILEY'S AND WAS ASKED TO RECOMMEND AN ARCHITECT; THAT IS HIS ONLY INTEREST IN THIS SITUATION, OTHER THAN THE GROWTH WEST OF TOWN. 19 mox 43 FSE 6 1 JUN 4 19 90 JUN 41980 Boa :431 PAGE 622 HE COMMENTED THAT WATER AND SEWER IS NEVER THERE WHEN YOU WANT THEM - AND NOBODY IS GOING TO BE PERMITTED TO POISON ANYBODY IS WELL. DR. BOB SMYTHE, VILLAGE GREEN #134, APPROACHED THE BOARD AND ADVISED THAT HE HAS BEEN A RESIDENT SINCE 1954 AND HAS PRACTICED DENTISTRY ON THE BEACH. HE STATED THAT HE PERSONALLY CANVASSED OVER 200 PEOPLE IN UNIT 1 IN VILLAGE GREEN, AND HE HAS FOUND NO ONE IN THE PARK AGAINST THIS SHOPPING CENTER - THEY ARE VERY GRATEFUL AND HOPEFUL THAT IT WILL PROCEED. DR. SMYTHE ADVISED THAT IN VILLAGE GREEN, PHASE 2 IS ALREADY SOLD OUT, PHASE 3 IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION, AND PHASE 4 WILL HAVE 600 OR MORE HOMES, HE NOTED THAT THEY WILL ALL BE COMPLETED BY THE TIME THIS SHOPPING CENTER WILL BE FINISHED. DR. SMYTHE COMMENTED THAT WINN DIXIE AT 43RD AVENUE IS DIRTY AND ILL -KEPT, AND THE_SPOT NEXT TO THE DRUG STORE LOOKS LIKE A TRASH PILE - HE FELT IT WAS NOT A GOOD SHOPPING CENTER. HE HAS SEEN SEVERAL BUILDINGS ON CARDINAL DRIVE AND IF THEY ARE AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT MR. BAILEY WILL BE PUTTING UP, HE WAS ALL FOR THE REZONING, A GENTLEMAN, FROM 24TH STREET IN RIVERA ESTATES, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND COMMENTED THAT HE WENT TO SEE EVERYONE ON HIS STREET AND NOBODY WANTS THE PROPOSED SHOPPING CENTER. HE ADDED THAT THEY ALL FEEL THEY HAVE SUFFICIENT SHOPPING FACILITIES ALREADY. WALTER HASSEY, RAMONA PARK, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE DRAINAGE, THE WATER AND SEWER, AND THOUGHT THERE WILL BE SOME BACTERIA COMING INTO THEIR WELLS. HE ADDED THAT THEY WILL HAVE THE NOISE AND LIGHT INTRUSION, AND THE NEIGHBORS IN RAMONA PARK WISHED THE BOARD WOULD RESPECT THEIR DESIRE TO HAVE A PEACEFUL AND SECURE NEIGHBORHOOD. MR. HASSEY COMPARED IT TO COUNTRY -LIVING BECAUSE IT IS NICE AND DARK, AND HE FELT THE 43RD AVENUE SHOPPING AREA SUFFICIENTLY SERVED THEIR NEEDS. DONNA NIXON, ROUTE 60, APPROACHED THE BOARD AND SPOKE IN DEFENSE OF MR. POTEAT, WHO IS A PART-TIME RESIDENT OF VERO BEACH. SHE ADDED THAT HE IS PLANNING TO REBUILD AND REDO HIS CITRUS LAND. MRS. NIXON NOTED THE OWNERS OF THE OTHER TWO CORNERS WERE VERY ADAMANT ABOUT MR. BAILEYS REZONING, AND SHE. DID NOT BELIEVE THIS INTERSECTION CAN TAKE THE COMMERCIAL ZONING AT THIS TIME AS THERE ARE TRAFFIC HAZARDS. SANDY NIXON, ROUTE 60, APPROACHED THE BOARD AND TEARFULLY STATED THAT IF THE PEOPLE IN VILLAGE GREEN WANTED A SHOPPING CENTER, THEY SHOULD BUILD IT IN THEIR BACK YARD AND NOT IN HERS. PHILIP NIXON, JR., ROUTE 60, ADVISED THE BOARD THAT HE WAS 19 YEARS OLD AND HAD LIVED IN HIS HOME FOR 14 YEARS AND WAS STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THE REZONING. MARK ASHTON, 1815 32ND AVENUE, AND WHO ALSO OWNS A LOT IN SHADOWBROOK, ADVISED THE BOARD THAT HE IS IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT - HE THINKS IT WOULD BE AN ASSET TO THE AREA, ATTORNEY HERZOG SPOKE TO THE BOARD AGAIN ABOUT THE ISSUE OF TIMING, AND THAT HE RELIED ON THE DEMOGRAPHIC STUDIES, PLUS THE VIEWS OF THE PROFESSIONALS IN THE PLANNING STAFF, WHO HAVE INDICATED THAT THERE IS A NEED FOR A SHOPPING CENTER AT THIS TIME. HE CONTINUED THAT THE NEXT ISSUE WAS THE QUALITY OF DEVELOPMENT THAT MR. BAILEY HAD PLANNED AND FELT THERE WAS NOT ONE NEGATIVE IMPACT IN THIS DESIGN. ATTORNEY HERZOG MENTIONED THE THIRD POINT WAS THE NOISE LEVEL AND DIRT MOVEMENT AND FELT THIS WAS A BIT OF A RED HERRING, AND AS FAR AS THE DEVALUATION OF PROPERTY IN RAMONA PARK, BASED ON HIS EXPERIENCE, THE PROPERTY VALUES WILL INCREASE AS A COMMERCIAL AREA IS INCREASED. ATTORNEY KILBRIDE CAME FORWARD AGAIN AND ASKED PLANNER REVER IF, IN HIS STUDY, HE FELT THERE IS SUFFICIENT POPULATION TO SUPPORT A SHOPPING CENTER AT THIS SITE. e PLANNER REVER STATED THAT HE COULD NOT ANSWER AS HE WAS NOT SURE OF THE CRITERIA AS TO WHAT IS ENOUGH; ALSO WAS NOT SURE IT WAS A VALID QUESTION AT THIS TIME UNLESS THEY COULD ESTABLISH ALL THE OTHER CRITERIA TO COME UP WITH AN ANSWER. THE PLANNER ADDED, FROM HIS POINT OF VIEW, THE IN-PLACE POPULATION IN THAT AREA COULD SUPPORT THE SHOPPING AREA. 21 ,DUN 4 Boor : 4� 1980 rp"- -7 JUN 4199p BOOK "' 41 PAGE 624 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED IT WOULD BE MOST BENEFICIAL IF THE ZONING MAPS, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND THE LAND USE MAP WERE AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME FOR REFERENCE. HE CONTINUED THAT IN READING THE MINUTES AND HEARI'NG ALL THE PRESENTATIONS, HE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT GRANTING AN APPROVAL FOR A SIGNIFICANTLY LARGE PIECE OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WITHOUT A RECOMMENDATION OF HOW MUCH COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY WILL BE NEEDED IN THE FUTURE. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ALSO EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE ROAD CHANGES AT THAT INTERSECTION AND WITH OTHER VACANT LAND IN THE AREA. HE CONTINUED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A DECISION BASED UPON SOME TYPE OF EVALUATION OF THAT AREA. COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT HE IS NOT PARTICULARLY OPPOSED TO COMMERCIAL AT THAT -INTERSECTION NOW OR IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE, THE BOARD JUST DOES NOT HAVE A COMPLETE STUDY OF THE ENTIRE AREA. COMMISSIONER Loy STATED THAT KINGS HIGHWAY HAS ALWAYS BEEN ONE OF THE COUNTY'S MAJOR INTERSECTIONS, AND IT TAKES A LONG TIME TO DEVELOP A PIECE OF PROPERTY. SHE ADDED THAT THEY MUST FIND THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE FOR THE PROPERTY, AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOME FAITH IN THE PEOPLE STANDING BEFORE THE BOARD. COMMISSIONER LOY THOUGHT ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL AREAS WERE NEEDED AND THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO SET THE TONE FOR DEVELOPMENT FOR THAT ENTIRE INTERSECTION. SHE CONTINUED THAT TRAFFIC LIGHTS HAVE BEEN APPROVED FOR THAT INTERSECTION, AND WOULD SUGGEST THAT IN ORDER FOR THIS TO BE A PROPER SHOPPING CENTER, THE APPLICANT MUST HAVE ENOUGH FOOTAGE TO CREATE A BUFFER ZONE , AND LEND ITSELF TO A NICE DEVELOPMENT. COMMISSIONER DEESON COMMENTED THAT IN WATCHING THE COUNTY GROW, THAT PARTICULAR INTERSECTION IS A MAJOR ONE; THE CITRUS LINE IS FURTHER WEST; AND HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE TONE SET BY SOMEONE OF MR. BAILEYS REPUTATION. COMMISSIONER LYONS ADVISED THE BOARD THAT HE AND MR. BAILEY HAD WORKED TOGETHER IN THE PAST AND KNEW HOW HE FELT ABOUT THINGS OF THIS SORT; MR. BAILEY MEANS WHAT HE SAYS ABOUT DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY AS HE SAID HE WOULD. HIS OPINION IS THAT HE SEES THIS DEVELOPMENT AS FURTHER PRESSURE ON AGRICULTURAL LANDS TO THE WEST. COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT GROWTH IS INEVITABLE, AND AT THIS TIME, HE IS NOT SURE THAT IT IS INEVITABLE TO USE AGRICULTURAL LANDS. HE STATED THERE IS PROPERTY EAST OF KINGS HIGHWAY THAT IS OPEN FOR DEVELOPMENT - HE DOESN'T WANT TO SEE PRESSURE MOVE TO THE WEST. COMMISSIONER LYONS FOUND THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE IN RESIDENCES IN THAT AREA AND A DEVELOP- MENT OF THAT CORNER IS NOT NECESSARILY NEEDED, AND ON THAT BASIS, HE WOULD CONSIDER IT UNTIMELY. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AND THE PLAN OF THIS INTERSECTION HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE FOR MANY YEARS AS COMMERCIAL. HE ADDED THAT THEY HAVE A STAFF REPORT SUPPORTING THIS, AND THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MAKE IT APPARENT TO HIM THAT IT IS NOT WHETHER OR NOT IT SHOULD BE COMMERCIAL, BUT HOW MUCH. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT DID NOT BELIEVE ANY INSTITUTION WOULD PUT THEIR MONEY INTO A SHOPPING CENTER THAT WOULD NOT SUPPORT IT, AND DID NOT THINK IT WAS SUFFICIENT TO SAY SOMEONE DOESN'T BELIEVE A PIECE OF PROPERTY CANNOT BE REPLANTED IN AGRICULTURE. HE NOTED THAT PEOPLE WHO LIVE WITH AGRICULTURE ON A DAILY BASIS KNOW THE PROBLEMS OF DEVELOPING LAND FOR AGRICULTURE PURPOSES, AND THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY WOULD HAVE TO BE REDEVELOPED. CHAIRMAN SEIBERT SAID THE SITE PLAN WILL FOLLOW - AND WATER AND SEWER, AND THE DEVELOPER WILL HAVE TO MEET THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS. HE ADDED THAT IN REGARD TO REPLANTING A GROVE, THE WELLS HAVE MORE OF A CHANCE OF BEING POISONED THAN HAVING A SHOPPING CENTER WITH A TREATMENT PLANT. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THE SHOPPING CENTER WILL SERVE THOSE PEOPLE TRAVELING NORTH AND SOUTH AS WELL, SINCE IT IS A MUCH BETTER ROUTE TO THE WESTERN PART OF INDIAN''RmIVER COUNTY THAN USING U.S. #1 AND THEREFORE, HE WOULD SUPPORT THE REZONING. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER DEESON, THAT THE BOARD ADOPT ORDINANCE N0. 80-27 APPROVING THE CHANGE FROM AGRICULTURAL TO COMMERCIAL FOR THE WEST 620' OF TRACT 5 AND LIMIT IT TO THE SOUTH 1250' OF TRACT 5, IT BEING THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE FOR THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAVING 23 JUN 41980 JUN 4 1900 BOOK 4 PAGE 626 SET THIS INTERSECTION AS COMMERCIAL MANY YEARS AGO; THIS CORNER WILL SET THE TONE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA; AND IT DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE CITRUS LINE AS EVIDENCED IN OUR MASTER PLAN. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND PASSED WITH C0A 41SSIONERS WODTKE AND LYONS VOTING IN OPPOSITION. ORDINANCE NO. 80-27 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, to -wit: The West 620 feet of the South 1250 feet of the West 20 acres of Tract 5, in Section 4, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, being also described as the West 620 feet of the South 1250 feet of the West 20 acres of the SW -1-4 of the NW -14 of Section 4, Township 33 South, Range 39 East. Subject to Easement to the State of Florida for right of way for public road purposes. as shown in Deed Book 32, page 340 and 341, Indian River County, Florida. ALL OF THE ABOVE LAND BEING according to the last general plat of lands filed by Indian River -Farms Company in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, in Plat Book 2, page 25; said land now lying and being in Indian River County. Be changed from A -Agricultural District to C-1 Commercial District. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Zoning Regulations. This Ordinance shall take effect June 9, 1980. a BOOK 4c� PAGE AZT JUN 41980 JUN 4190�• •860K � 43" PA.OE'V8 THE HOUR OF 10:00 O'CLOCK A.M. HAVING PASSED THE DEPUTY CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO -WIT: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published `meekly Vero Beach, Indian hider 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 in the matter of in the Court, was pub- fished in said newspaper in the issues of 4 :� 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 ciass 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. '9� Sworn to and subscribed before me this � day of A.D. o � (Clerk of the Circuit (SEAL) ness Manager) Indian River County, Florida) 26 _'NOTICE NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN that ROBERT 1 GALE has filed a petition with the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, requesting said Board to adopt a resolution closing, vacating and abolishing a portion of the public roads, streets and rights-of-way shown on the plat of I NDIAN RIVER HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, UNIT 4, as recorded in Plat Book 6, Page 86, Indian River County public records, as it pertains to the following described land situated in Indian River County, Florida. The platted right-of-way and traffic island located at the northeast corner of Block H as shown on said plat, at the intersection of 14th Avenue and 2nd Street, and contiguous to Lots 1, 8 and 9, being legally described as follows: Parcel No. 1: From the Southeast corner of Lot 8, Block H, Indian River Heights, Unit No. 4, as recorded in Plat Book 6, page 86, run North along the East line of said Lot 8 a distance of 15.15 feet to the point of beginning. Thence continue North a distance of 59.85 feet to a point, said point being the intersection of the Easterly projection of the North line of Lot 8 and Northerly extension of the East line of said Lot 8; Thence run West along said Easterly projection a distance of 7.14 feet to the intersection of the curved right-of-way of .14th Avenue; Thence run Southeasterly along the arc of said curve being concave to the 'Southwest, having a delta angle of 13 degrees 36' 11" and a radius of 254.42 feet, a distance of 60.40 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel No. 2: From the Southwest corner of Lot 9, Block H, Indian River Heights, Unit No. .4, as recorded in Plat Book 6, page 86, Indian River County Public Records, run East along the South line on said Lot 9 a distance of 122.89 feet to the West right-of-way of 14th Avenue and point of beginning; Thence continue along. the Easterly projection of the said South line of Lot 9 a distance of 7.14 feet; Thence run North along the Northerly projection of the West right-of-way of 14th Avenue a distance of 195.20 feet to the intersection of the Easterly projection of the South right-of-way of 2nd Street: Thence run West along said Easterly projection of 2nd Street a distance of 130.12 feet to a point, said point being the intersection of the South right-of-way of 2nd Street and the Northerly projection of the West line of said Lot 9; Thence run South along said Northerly projection a distance of 32.86 feet to the in- tersection of a curve; Thence run Southeasterly along the arc of said curve being concave to the Southwest, and having a delta of 47 degrees 08' 49" and a radius of 254.42, a distance of 209.35 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel No. 3: From the Southeast corner of Lot 1, Block H, Indian River Heights, Unit No. 4, as recorded in Plat Book 6, page 86, Indian River County .Public Records, run North along the East line of said Lot 1 a distance of 87.34 feet to the intersection of a curve and point of beginning; Thence continue along the Nor- therly projection of said East line a distance of 32.86 feet to a point, said point being on the intersection of the Easterly projection of the South right-of-way of 2nd Street; Thence run West along said Easterly projection of 2nd Street a distance of 124.3 feet to the point of tangency of a radial return and point of in- tersection of the following described curve; Thence run Southwest and having a delta angle of 29 degrees 20'40", and a radius of 254.42 feet, a distance of 130.30 feet to the point of begin- ning; and requesting said Board to renounce and disclaim any right of said County for the public in and to the above discribed public roads, streets and rights-of-way as delineated on said recorded plat. Said Board will hold a public hearing thereon at 10:00 A.M. on the 4th of June, 1980, in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, Vero Beach, Florida. Persons interested may appear and be heard at that time. Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida By: Freda Wright, Clerk May 21, 28, 1980. THE BOARD NEXT CONSIDERED THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ABANDONMENT ON 2ND STREET AND 14TH AVENUE IN INDIAN RIVER HEIGHTS AS REQUESTED BY ROBERT I. GALE. SENIOR PLANNER MARSH COMMENTED THAT THE PROCEDURAL GUIDE- LINES ARE IN ORDER AND SUGGESTED THE RESOLUTION BE APPROVED AND THAT IT BE PREDICATED ON REMUNERATION. HE REVIEWED THE SITUATION BY ADVISING THE REQUEST IS FOR ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF THE ROAD IN INDIAN RIVER HEIGHTS AND A TRAFFIC ISLAND AS WELL; THE PROPERTY ABUTS LOTS I AND 9 AND A SMALL PORTION OF LOT S. MR. MARSH ADVISED THAT NOTIFICATION WAS SENT OUT TO PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREA; PUBLICATION WAS PUT IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER; AND AN APPRAISAL HAS BEEN PROVIDED. ATTORNEY COLLINS ADVISED THAT THE COUNTY IS NOT TRANSFERRING PROPERTY, BUT IS RELEASING ANY INTEREST THE COUNTY MAY HAVE IN THE DEDICATION; THE COUNTY IS NOT REPRESENTING HOW THE PROPERTY WILL BE TRANSFERRED OR WHAT THE EFFECT OF THE RELEASE OF THE DEDICATION WILL BE. PROPERTY. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT COMMENTED THAT THE COUNTY CANNOT SELL THE ATTORNEY COLLINS ADVISED THAT THE STATUTE ENVISONS STRAIGHT STREETS; HALF TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE OTHER HALF TO THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNER, BUT IN THIS SITUATION THERE IS A CURVE, AND THERE ARE PROPERTIES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD. HE ADDED THE COUNTY HAS THE RIGHT TO RELEASE THE DEDICATION BUT IT IS NOT A FEE SIMPLE OWNERSHIP THAT THE COUNTY HAS; THEREFORE, HE DID NOT THINK THE COUNTY HAS THE RIGHT TO INDICATE WHO WILL BENEFIT FROM THE RELEASE. UNCLEAR. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT COMMENTED THAT IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS IS SENIOR PLANNER MARSH STATED HE UNDERSTOOD WHAT THE'ATTORNEY WAS SAYING - BASICALLY, THERE IS NO LEGAL MECHANISM TO SHOW OWNERSHIP. ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THE COMMISSION COULD CHARGE A DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR THE PROCEDURE BUT ADVISED AGAINST ANY COMPENSATION FOR CONVEYING A PARTICULAR TRACT OF PROPERTY TO A PARTICULAR PERSON, AS THE COUNTY CANNOT MAKE THIS REPRESENTATION. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT WHAT TYPE OF MOTION WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AND THE ATTORNEY ADVISED IT SHOULD BE TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION THAT APPEARS IN THE AGENDA MATERIAL, SUBJECT TO PAYMENT OF A FEE FOR THE COUNTY'S ACTIONS. A 27 ; 80ox -43 ..PAGE'629 j `I J U N 41990 $® -43 PA�fMO THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WAS ANY ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO BE HEARD. KENNETH MATUCHA, AGENT FOR ROBERT I. GALE, APPROACHED THE BOARD AND STATED THAT THE FACT THE CURVED ROAD AT THIS LOCATION HAS NOT BEEN IMPROVED MAKES IT A HANDICAP, RATHER THAN AN ASSET. HE CONTINUED THAT LOT 9 HAS NO STREET ACCESS; AND THEY WOULD BE VERY HAPPY TO PAY THE FEE NECESSARY TO'RELEASE THE DEDICATION. ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THE COUNTY FINDS ITSELF IN THE POSITION OF HAVING THE DEDICATION OF THAT NUISANCE AREA. HE ADDED THAT THE COUNTY IS GUIDED BY STATUTES AS TO HOW WE CAN RELEASE THIS SORT OF PROPERTY, AND THE COUNTY IS NOT IN A POSITION TO SELL THE PROPERTY IN RETURN FOR RECEIVING COMPENSATION; THE COUNTY CANNOT TELL YOU WHAT THE EFFECT OF THE RELEASE WILL BE. THE ATTORNEY ASSUMED THAT MR'. GALE WILL BENEFIT BY THE RELEASE BUT THE COUNTY IS NOT SAYI14G IT IS RELEASING THE DEDICATION FREE AND CLEAR. HE CONTINUED THAT THE COUNTY IS WILLING TO RELEASE, ACCORDING TO THE STATUTES, BUT CANNOT ASSURE WHAT FOLLOWS AFTER THAT, MR. MATUCHA COMMENTED THAT THE ATTORNEY IS TELLING HIM THAT IF A SO-CALLED TRANSFER OF PROPERTY IS MADE, THERE IS A CLOUD ON THE TITLE. THE ATTORNEY STATED THAT HE IS NOT SAYING THAT THERE WILL BE A CLOUD ON THE TITLE, HE IS SAYING THAT HE DOES NOT KNOW. THOMAS TABER, INTERESTED CITIZEN, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND COMMENTED THAT WHAT THE BOARD IS ADDRESSING IS A REAL PROBLEM. HE CONTINUED THAT THE BOARD IS BEING ASKED TO RELEASE A DEDICATION THAT THE COUNTY WILL FIND IT DID NOT PAY ANYTHING FOR ORIGINALLY. MR. TABER STATED THE COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO GIVE SOMETHING AWAY THAT IT DOES NOT OWN, AND ASKED THEM TO RELEASE THE DEDICATION WITHOUT REMUNERATION AT THIS POINT. HE CONTINUED THE BOARD IS ONLY RELEASING THE DEDICATION AND WHAT THEY WILL DO THEN, POSSIBLY WHEN THE DEDICATION IS MADE, IS GIVE HIM FEE SIMPLE TITLE. ATTORNEY COLLINS THOUGHT HE SAID THAT HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE EXACT EFFECTS OF THE RELEASE WILL BE - IT MAY WELL BE THAT SOMEBODY WILL HAVE FEE SIMPLE TITLE, THE PROBLEM IS WHO. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ALONG THOSE LINES AND IT WAS NOTED THAT IT COULD BE MORE THAN ONE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD RECEIVE THE BENEFIT OF THIS RELEASE. COMMISSIONER WODTKE FELT THE BOARD HAS MADE A DETERMINATION THAT THE CURVE IS NOT GOING TO BE UTILIZED IN THE ROAD; IT IS NOT NEEDED, AND THE ONLY ACTION THE BOARD CAN TAKE IS TO DECIDE TO RELEASE THE DEDICATION. HE ADDED THAT THE QUESTION IS GOING TO BE WHO IS WILLING TO PAY THE FEE FOR THIS TO BE ACCOMPLISHED, AND OBVIOUSLY IT WILL BE THE PROPERTY OWNER OF LOT 9. COMMISSIONER WODTKE REITERATED THAT A ROAD IS NOT GOING TO BE PUT IN AS THE COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE A USE FOR IT. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER LYONS THOUGHT THAT EITHER IT IS GOING TO BE WORTH $4,000 OR IT WILL BE WORTH NOTHING. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER WODTKE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION N0. 80-53 FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY ABANDON- MENT AT 2ND STREET & 14TH AVENUE. ATTORNEY COLLINS MENTIONED THAT SUBSEQUENT TO ADVERTISING THE RESOLUTION, IT SHOULD NOT BE FORMALLY EXECUTED UNTIL_COMPENSATION IS RECEIVED. HE SUGGESTED AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN, SUBSEQUENT TO RECEIPT OF $4,000. COMMISSIONER LYONS WONDERED WHETHER THE BOARD SHOULD EXCLUDE THAT PORTION OF THE DEDICATION THAT EXISTS ON LOTS I AND 8, AS THIS PROPERTY NOW WILL GO UP INTO THOSE LOTS. ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED THAT MR. GALEIWOULD BE ENTITLED TO A TITLE TO THAT PART OF THE DEDICATION THAT ABUTS HIS PROPERTY, AND THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS WILL BENEFIT BY THE ACTION. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THERE CAN BE NO GUARANTEE, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS ADVISED THAT IT WAS TRUE. MR. MATUCHA NOTED THAT MR. GALE OWNS LOTS S AND 9, MR. CUDNEY.OWNS LOT 1, AND THE $4,000 WOULD INVOLVE PROPERTY THAT ABUTS ON ALL THREE LOTS. 29 oQ F '6,4 JUN 4190 � r Boos 43 M U ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THE ONLY THING THAT THE COUNTY IS REPRESENTING TO HIM IS THAT THE BOARD'IS WILLING TO RELEASE THE DEDICATION. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT IT DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT MR. GALE WILL GET FEE SIMPLE TITLE OF THAT PROPERTY. MR. MATUCHA STATED THEY DID NOT WANT TO PAY $4,000 IF THEY CANNOT USE THE LAND. COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT THE $4,000 HAS NOT BEEN PAID YET WHICH WOULD GIVE HIM AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO MR. GALE. COMMISSIONER LOY THOUGHT THIS MATTER WOULD NOT BE EFFECTIVE UNTIL THE FEE IS PAID. ATTORNEY COLLINS SUGGESTED PUTTING A TIME LIMIT ON IT AS THE STATUTE REQUIRES THAT ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING BE HELD IN ANOTHER 30 DAYS, AND THE BURDEN SHOULD BE ON MR. GALE TO GIVE THE BOARD.AN ANSWER. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED THAT THE TERMS OF RESOLUTION NO. 80-53 ARE NOT EFFECTIVE IF THE APPLICANT DOES NOT COME BEFORE THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD WITH AN INDICATION THAT HE PLANS TO PROCEED WITH THE REQUEST FOR RELEASE OF THE DEDICATION, AND THE FEE. COMMISSIONER LOY NEXT BROUGHT UP BEFORE THE BOARD THE EMERGENCY ITEM CONCERNING THE NEW COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM FOR THE VERO BEACH AMBULANCE SQUAD. RICHARD TODD APPROACHED THE BOARD AND ADVISED THE FOLLOWING WERE IN ATTENDANCE: STUART CAMPBELL, PRESIDENT; TOM BUCHANAN, SECRETARY -TREASURER; DICK FOSTER, SQUAD CHIEF; AND PAUL WHITE, OF WHITE ELECTRIC COMPANY. HE STATED IT HAD BEEN THE INTENTION OF THE VERO BEACH AMBULANCE SQUAD TO PUT THE NEW ANTENNA ON THE LARGE TOWER IN BACK OF THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, AS THEY HAD UNDERSTOOD THAT THE LEASE WITH WGYL WOULD BE EXPIRED IN TIME FOR THEM TO DO S0. HOWEVER, MR. TODD REPORTED THAT AN AGREEMENT, MADE ON .JUNE 12, 1970 WITH RUDY HUBBARD FOR A PERIOD OF 20 YEARS, MEANT THAT THEY WOULD HAVE NO AVAILABILITY ON THE TOWER UNTIL 1900. HE ADDED THAT IN CONTACTING MR. STARK OF COMMUNICATIONS OF VERO BEACH, WHO INSPECTED THE EXISTING TOWER ATTACHED TO THE SHERIFF'S BUILDING, HE FOUND IT WAS IN VERY CRITICAL SHAPE AND SURPRISED THAT IT WITHSTOOD HURRICANE DAVID. MR. TODD COMMENTED THEY ARE NOW FACED WITH GETTING A REPLACEMENT TOWER FOR THEIR ANTENNA - A 155' HURRICANE -PROOF TOWER WOULD COST $6,200; AND TO DEMOLISH THE OLD TOWER, INSTALL A NEW TOWER AND THE TRANSFER OF ANTENNAS WOULD COST $1,430. HE REPORTED THAT THE RADIO EQUIPMENT IN THE SQUAD CHIEF'S CAR AND FOR THE FOUR ASSISTANTS WOULD HAVE TO BE CHANGED BECAUSE THE NEW COMMUNICATION IS UHF - THAT QUOTATION AMOUNTED TO $7,575. MR. TODD FELT THE AMOUNT FOR THE RADIO EQUIPMENT WAS TOO EXCESSIVE AND INSTEAD GOT A QUOTATION FOR FIVE PAGERS FOR $1,2101 WHICH THEY PLAN TO ABSORB THEMSELVES. HE NEXT TALKED ABOUT THE PRESENT GENERATOR WHICH DOES NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO COVER THEIR RESERVE, AS WELL AS THE CIVIL DEFENSE AND THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT; THE QUOTATION FOR A 15 KILOWATT GENERATOR WITH AN AUTOMATIC SWITCH IS $7,651. MR. TODD SAID THE TOTAL AMOUNT INVOLVED IS $15,281 IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THIS OPERATION. SWITCH. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE GENERATOR, AND THE AUTOMATIC COMMISSIONER WODTKE EXPRESSED CONCERN AND WONDERED WHY THE NEW GENERATOR JUST PURCHASED FOR THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT DOES. NOT SUFFICE. MR. TODD STATED THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT GENERATOR HAS 85 KILOWATTS AND CANNOT TAKE THE NEW LOAD. MR. WHITE APPROACHED THE BOARD AND STATED THAT THE GENERATOR 4 AT THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT WAS LOADED WHEN IT WAS INSTALLED, AND SOMETIMES WORKS IN EXCESS OF ITS CAPACITY NOW. HE THEN EXPLAINED HOW THE AUTOMATIC.SWITCH WOULD MAINTAIN ITSELF, AS THERE IS A BATTERY WITH A CHARGER. COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF THIS NEW EQUIPMENT COULD SUPPLY MINIMAL POWER FOR THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT FOR COMMUNICATIONS IF NECESSARY. 31 SUN 4 1980 BOOK' ` PAGE 61 - --- JuN '4 1980 180ox 43, PuE,634 MR. WHITE RESPONDED AFFIRMATIVELY,AND THAT IT IS POSSIBLE TO UTILIZE THE LINE COMING FROM THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT IF IT BECAME NECESSARY. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT THAT COMMUNICATION IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING WE HAVE IN AN EMERGENCY. HE THEN INQUIRED WHERE THE MONEY NEEDED FOR THIS WOULD COME FROM. COMMISSIONER Loy SUGGESTED THEY GET TOGETHER WITH FINANCE DIRECTOR BARTON, AND THEY COULD POSSIBLY USE REVENUE SHARING, IF NECESSARY. ATTORNEY COLLINS SUGGESTED THEY MIGHT WANT TO TAKE IT OUT OF CONTINGENCY. HE ADDED THAT THEY COULD APPROVE THIS REQUEST AND WORRY ABOUT GETTING APPROVAL FOR THE FUNDS LATER. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT SUGGESTED THAT THE BOARD APPROVE THE REQUEST'AND HAVE THE BUDGET AMENDMENT PERTAINING TO THIS ON THE CLERK'S AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER LOY, THAT THE BOARD APPROVE THE EMERGENCY REQUEST FROM THE AMBULANCE SQUAD FOR THE TOWER, REMOVAL AND TRANSFER OF THE OLD ANTENNA,AND GENERATOR WITH AN AUTOMATIC TRANSFER SWITCH, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $15,281, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PROPOSALS WERE OBTAINED AND ACTION TAKEN ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS, AND THAT THE MONEY WILL COME FROM THE CONTINGENCY FUND PENDING FURTHER STUDY AS TO WHETHER OR NOT IT SHOULD COME FROM ANOTHER SOURCE, AT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE FINANCE OFFICER. MR. WHITE EXPLAINED THAT THE CONCRETE PAD FOR THIS PROJECT HAS ALREADY BEEN TAKEN CARE OF. COMMISSIONER WODTKE HAD THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS WILL BE COUNTY EQUIPMENT, AND CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AFFIRMED THAT IT WOULD BE TAGGED AND INVENTORIED. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. THE HOUR OF 11:00 O'CLOCK A.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICES WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO -WIT: min �ERO 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, !r. who vn 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 cf adv, rtisement, being a the matter of in the j Court, \•,as 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 thi, adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. � Sworn to and subscribed before me this qday of A. D. /2�17 i\ A ness Manager) (SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Co4t„i(ndian River County, Florida) 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 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. 1 Sworn to and subscribed before Ine this_--,?- -�g—day of�A A.D. Zl -- ^ ` (Business Manager) (SEAL) JUN 4 1980 L (Clerk of the Circuit CourA',pidian River County, Florida) NOTICE IS HEREBYIGIVEN thatthe Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, will hold a public hearing on June 4, 1980, at 11:00 A.M. in the City Council Chambers in the Vero Beach City Hall to consider the adoption of an Ordinance Amending Indian River County Ordinance No. 71-3, Section 28 (d), Violations and Penalties by Providing for a New Sub. section for Violations and Penalties. Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida May 141980.Willard W. Siebert Jr. NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN thatthe Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, will hold a' public hearing on June 4, 1980, at 11:00 A.M. in the City Council Chambers in the Vero Beach City Hall to consider the adoption of an Ordinance providing for Penalties for Violations of Chapter 3, Indian River County Code of Ordinances, and Repealing Sections 3- 8, 3.27, 3-36, (d), Indian River County Code of Ordinances. Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida By: -s-Willard W. Siebert Jr. May 14,1980. Bou . , 43. FA6E� 635 q JUN 41980 BOOK f'43 PAGE 636 ANTHONY SOVIERO, ASSOCIATED WITH THE FIRM OF COLLINS, BROWN, CALDWELL & EVANS, APPROACHED THE BOARD TO DISCUSS THE AMENDMENTS TO ZONING ORDINANCE 71-3, SECTION 28D, AND CHAPTER 3, REGARDING VIOLATION AND PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF ANY ONE PRESENT WISHED TO BE HEARD. THERE WERE NONE. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. DISCUSSION ENSUED REGARDING SECTION 28D. COMMISSIONER LYONS THOUGHT THAT THE STATE LAWS IN CONNECTION WITH ENVIRONMENTAL INFRACTIONS IMPOSED A PENALTY FOR EACH DAY THAT IT WAS IN VIOLATION. MR. SOVIERO EXPLAINED THAT DESIGNATION WOULD STILL BE WITH THE JUDGE; THE COUNTY=IS JUST GIVING HIM THE AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE A $500 FINE. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER LOY, FOR THE BOARD TO ADOPT ORDINANCE N0. 80-28 FOR THE AMEND- MENT OF ZONING ORDINANCE 71-3, SECTION 28D, VIOLATION AND PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ON MOTION.MADE BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE N0. 80-29 FOR THE AMENDMENT OF ZONING ORDINANCE 71-3, CHAPTER 3, VIOLATION AND PENALTY PROVISIONS. I'NDi IAN RIVER COL':+TY OI'.DIi.A.,CE ;0. 80-28 AN ORDINANCE AMEN'DI:;G INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDIl7A1NCE NO. 71-3, SECTIOv' 23 (d) , VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES BY PROVIDING FOR A NEW SUBSECTION FOR VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, that Indian River County Ordinance No. 71-3, Section 28 (d), which previously read: Section 28, Legal Provisions (d) Violations and Penalties. "Any person, firm or corporation, or anyone in behalf thereof, who shall violate or fail to comply with any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable as provided by law. Each day after the first seven (7) days that a violation of this ordinance is continued or permitted to exist without correction shall constitute a separate offense. The Board of County Commissioners may enforce the provisions of this zoning ordinance by seeking injunctive relief or any other remedies provided by law." Indian River County Ordinance 71-3, Section 28 (d) is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 28, Legal Provisions (d) Violations and Penalties. "Any person, firm or corporation, or anyone acting in behalf thereof, who shall violate or fail to comply with any of the provisions of Ordinance No. 71-3, as amended, shall upon conviction be punished by a fine not to exceed $500.00. The Board of County Commissioners may enforce the provisions of this zoning ordinance by seeking injunctive relief, or any other remedies provided by law." This Ordinance shall take effect June 9, 1980. JUN 41900.0 BOOK %`Ac 63 7 r- -I JUN 41980 90t►K '43 PA�f ORDS,. --';CE .:0. 80-29 AIV ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR PEALTIES FOR VIOLr�TIONS OF CHAPTER 3, INDLA0 RIVER CC)LT%TY CODE OF ORDIN.AtiCES, A'VD REPEALING SECTIONS 3-8, 3-27, 3-36, (d), INDIAN RIVER COMITY CODE OF ORDINANCES. WHEREAS the Board of County Commissioners is authorized to provide penalties for violations of County Ordinances under authority of Florida Statutes 125.69; and, a WHEREAS it is the intention of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County to enact a uniform penalties provision for violations of Chapter 3 of the Indian River County Code of Ordinances, and to repeal existing penalty provisions within said Chapter. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAILlED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY CCHYlLSSIONERS OF of 0 111• �� • • That Chapter 3, Indian River County Code of Ordinances, entitled Animals and Fowl, is hereby amended by creating a penalties provision to read and provide as follows: SECI2Chd - Violations and Penalties Any person, firm or corporation or anyone acting in behalf thereof, who shall violate or fail to comply with any of the provisions of this Chapter, as amended, shall upon conviction be punished by a fine not to exceed $500.00. The Board of Cbunty Comntissioners may enforce provisions of this Chapter by seeking injunctive relief or any other remedies provided by law. SECTION - Savings Clause Any word, phrase, Clause, section or subsection of this Ordinance is for any reason held unconstitutional or invalid, the invalidity thereof shall not effect the validity of any remaining portions of this Ordinance. SECTION -.Repeal of Conflicting Ordinances That Sections 3-8, 3-27, 3-36, (d), all being a part of Chapter 3 of the Indian River County Code of Ordinances and all other Ordinances or parts of Ordinances, and all Resolutions or parts of Resolutions, in conflict heraaith, be, and the same are, hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. This Ordinance shall take effect June 9, 1980. THE CHAIRMAN THEN ANNOUNCED THAT ITEM 7 ON THE AGENDA CONCERNING FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF UNITS 3 AND 4, BENT PINE SUBDIVISION, HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 'THEREUPON RECESSED AT 12:15 O'CLOCK FOR LUNCH AND RECONVENED AT 2:00 O'CLOCK P.M. WITH THE SAME MEMBERS PRESENT. SENIOR PLANNER DAVID MARSH CAME BEFORE THE BOARD IN REGARD TO A REQUEST MADE BY .JAMES JOYCE FOR RELEASE OF EASEMENTS IN OSLO PARK AND STATED THAT THIS HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE VARIOUS AGENCIES CONCERNED AND IS IN ORDER AS PER THE FOLLOWING MEMO: May 9, 1980 MEMO TO: Jack Jennings, County Administrator FROM: David Marsh,.Senior Planner SUBJECT: Easement Release 'Request This request for the release of the utility and drainage easement lying on the common side lot lines of Lots 2, 3 and 4, Block A, Oslo Park has been reviewed.by the following.agencies: , s' Southern Bell Telephoner Fl ori da Power' &Light -! Uti I i ti es Dept. No objectionable responses+ were received.-�`Considering this, the Planning staff could recommend approval•providing a permanent easement is retained between Lots 4 and 5 -as well as Lots 15 and 16, Block A for cross drainage or future utility purposes. Front and rear swales should provide adequate drainage for the lots in question. DM: jt JUN 41980 3� w K 43 PA., 6:39 4 . aoIx 43 PAGE640 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-54 APPROVING THE RELEASE OF EASEMENT BETWEEN LOTS 2, 3 AND 4, BLOCK A, OSLO PARK SUBDIVISION AS REQUESTED BY .JAMES JOYCE; AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN'S SIGNATURE; AND AUTHORIZED THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO DESIGNATE THAT A PERMANENT EASEMENT IS TO BE RETAINED BETWEEN LOTS 4 AND 5, AS WELL AS LOTS 15 AND 16, BLOCK A, OSLO PARK SUBDIVISION, FOR CROSS DRAINAGE OR FUTURE UTILITY PURPOSES. L I RESOLUTION NO. 80-54 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, have been requested to release the lot line easements on the north two and one-half (2.5) feet of Lot 2, the south two and one-half (2.5) feet of Lot 3, the north two and one-half (2.5) feet of Lot 3, and the south two and one-half (2.5) feet of Lot 4, Block A, OSLO PARK SUBDIVISION, according to the Plat of same recorded in Plat Book 3, page 96, of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida; and WHEREAS, said lot Iine easements were dedicated -6n the Plat of OSLO PARK for public utility purposes; and WHEREAS, the request for such release of easement has been submitted in proper form; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY -THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following lot line easements in OSLO PARK, shall be released, abandoned and vacated as follows:' The north two and one-half (2.5) feet of Lot 2, the south two and one-half (2.5) feet of Lot 3, the north two and one-half (2.5) feet of Lot 3, and the south two and one-half (2.5) feet of Lot 4, Block A, OSLO PARK SUBDIVISION, according to the Plat of the same filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida, in Plat Book 3, page 96. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners and the Clerk of the Circuit Court be and they hereby are authorized and directed to execute a release of said lot line easements here- inabove referred to in form proper for recording and placing in the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida. This day of 1980. Attest: Freda Wright, Clerk JUN 4 1980 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By : . W. Sieper Jr., Chairn n n JUN 41980 k RELEASE OF EASEMENT A00K 43 ?AGE 642 This Release of Easement, executed this 4th. day of June , 1980, by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, first party, to James M. Joyce whose mailing address is P.O. Box 1085, 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, State of Florida, to -wit: Those side lot easements lying betaeer. Lots 2 and 3, and Lots 3 and 4, Block A, Oslo Park, a subdivision as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 96, 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: _'U s BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA - BY • fig . W. S'ebert,;dr.,,Cha r n Attest: Freda WrYght, Cle k SURVEYOR PETE MUSICK REQUESTED THAT THE BOARD CONTINUE ITEM 6 IN REGARD TO FINAL APPROVAL FOR MIRAFLORES, UNIT 2, FOR AT LEAST TWO WEEKS SO THAT HE AND THE ADMINISTRATOR CAN RESOLVE THE MINOR ITEMS THAT HAVE ARISEN. TOM MASON, CHAIRMAN OF THE AD HOC LIBRARY STUDY COMMITTEE, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD TO REVIEW THEIR PRELIMINARY REPORT, WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD IN BOOKLET FORM AND COPY OF WHICH IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK. HE EXPLAINED THAT THEY DID BACKGROUND STUDIES AS TO THE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION°S FUNCTION, RESEARCHED THE BOOKMOBILE OPERATION, PRESENTED STATISTICS REGARDING LIBRARY USAGE, SALARIES, LIBRARY MANAGEMENT, ETC., AND DID A COMPARISON WITH OTHER SIMILAR COUNTIES. MR. NASON INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THEY HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE LIBRARY RIGHT NOW IS AT THE POINT WHERE IT IS NO LONGER ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE FOR THEM TO CONTINUE AS A PRIVATE ORGANIZATION, AND THEIR FIRST RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT THE BOARD ASSUME FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE OPERATION OF THE LIBRARY. THIS WOULD REQUIRE DISSOLVING THE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION AND TRANSFER OF THEIR ASSETS TO THE COUNTY FOR THEIR STEWARDSHIP. HE WENT ON TO REVIEW THE PROPOSED MAKE-UP OF A BOARD OF ADVISORS AND THE PROPOSED CHAIN OF ADMINISTRATION. SECONDLY, THEY RECOMMEND THAT A CITIZENS GROUP SUCH AS THE FRIENDS'OF THE LIBRARY SHOULD BE REACTIVATED, AND ITS MAIN FUNCTION WOULD BE FUND RAISING ACTIVITIES. MR. NASON THEN DISCUSSED RECOMMENDED PERSONNEL, WHICH THEY FELT SHOULD CONSIST OF FIVE FULL TIME EMPLOYEES AND FIVE FULL TIME EQUIVALENT POSITIONS, OR A FULL TIME EQUIVALENT STAFF OF TEN PERSONS. THEY ARE RECOMMENDING THAT THE LIBRARIAN HAVE A DEGREE IN LIBRARY SCIENCE AND HAVE AT LEAST FIVE YEARS' EXPERIENCE, AND IT IS THEIR UNANIMOUS OPINION THAT THE EXISTING LIBRARIAN BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE AS HEAD LIBRARIAN AND BE ALLOWED UP TO FIVE YEARS TO COMPLETE THE REQUISITE COURSES TO OBTAIN HER MASTERS DEGREE. IN ADDITION, THEY ARE RECOMMENDING AN ON-THE-JOB TRAINING PROGRAM. MR. NASON REPORTED THAT ONE OF THE MAJOR COMPLAINTS WAS IN REGARD TO THE INCONSISTENT OPENING HOURS, AND THEY ARE, THEREFORE, RECOMMENDING THAT THE OPENING 41 a®QK 4 PAW 643 r JUN 41980 moi 43 PAF 644 HOUR BE 10:00 A.M. REGARDLESS OF THE DAY OF THE WEEK, WITH THE LIBRARY OPEN UNTIL 9:00 P.M. MONDAYS THRU THURSDAYS AND UNTIL 5:00 P.M. ON FRIDAYS AND SATURDAYS, WHICH WOULD INCREASE THE TOTAL HOURS OF OPERATION FROM 45 HOURS PER WEEK TO 58 HOURS PER WEEK. THE BOOKMOBILE CURRENTLY IS USED ONLY TWO DAYS A WEEK, AND IT WAS FELT THAT FOUR DAYS A WEEK WITH LONGER STOPS WOULD PROVIDE BETTER SERVICE. THEY ENVISIONED THAT LOCATIONS SUCH AS'SEBASTIAN OR FELLSMERE SHOULD BE ALLOTTED A HALF DAY EACH PER WEEK AND THAT THE DRIVER SHOULD BE AUGMENTED WITH A VOLUNTEER TO HELP HANDLE THE SHUT-INS, ETC. MR. NASON NEXT REVIEWED THE LIBRARY FINANCING, NOTING THAT IT IS PRACTICALLY A MIRACLE THAT THE LIBRARY HAS BEEN ABLE TO OPERATE UNDER THE FUNDING THAT HAS BEEN AVAILABLE FOR ITS OPERATION. HE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE 1980-81 BUDGET SUBMISSION OF THE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION APPEARS TO BE DEDICATED ONLY TO THE SURVIVAL OF THIS NEEDED SERVICE - THERE IS NO RESERVE FOR DEPRECIATION OR PROVISION FOR CAPITAL MAINTENANCE ON THE PHYSICAL PLANT; NO PROVISION FOR FRINGE BENEFITS, I.E., INSURANCE, RETIREMENT, ETC., FOR LIBRARY EMPLOYEES; AND THE NORMAL REPLACEMENT AND ADDITION OF BOOKS, ETC., HAS BEEN LIMITED FOR BUDGETARY REASONS. MR. NASON STATED THAT THEY HAVE PRE- PARED ADDITIONS TO THE PROPOSED BUDGET, INCLUDING AN ESTIMATE OF THE FRINGE BENEFITS COSTS, AN ADDED POSITION OF ASSISTANT LIBRARIAN, AND A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND, WHICH RESULTS IN A TOTAL BUDGET OF $182,352 WITH AN ANTICIPATED COUNTY CONTRIBUTION OF $143,972. THIS LEVEL OF FUNDING, HE FELT, WOULD PERPETUATE THE HIGH LEVEL OF SERVICE DEMANDED BY THE PUBLIC AND WOULD ENABLE LIBRARY EMPLOYEES TO CONSIDER THE OPERATION OF THE LIBRARY A VIABLE CAREER. MR. NASON NEXT DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF A BRANCH LIBRARY IN THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, BUT BELIEVED A MORE EFFECTIVE USE OF THE BOOKMOBILE WOULD ALLOW THE BUILDING OF SUCH A FACILITY TO BE PUT OFF A FEW YEARS LONGER. HE NOTED THAT WE MUST DEAL WITH THE PRESENT SITUATION BEFORE WE CAN THINK OF EXPANDING. MR. MASON CONCLUDED BY EMPHASIZING THAT THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THAT THE COUNTY CONSIDER ASSUMING FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR 42 �J THE LIBRARY AND FURTHER RECOMMENDS THAT A SECOND COMMITTEE BE ESTABLISHED WHEREIN PERSONS FROM THE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, REPRESENTA- TIVES FROM THE COUNTY COMMISSION,AND REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE ORIGINAL COMMITTEE PARTICIPATE, AT WHICH TIME ALL DETAILS CAN BE REFINED PRIOR TO ASSUMPTION BY THE COUNTY. COMMISSIONER LYONS THANKED THE COMMITTEE FOR THEIR FINE WORK. HE NOTED THAT THE FINAL REPORT WAS ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR THE SECOND MEETING IN JUNE, AND IT SEEMS WE ARE ONE MEETING BEHIND OUR ORIGINAL GOAL. HE WONDERED IF THE COMMISSION WOULD CONSIDER GIVING MR. MASON THEIR COMMENTS, WRITTEN OR VERBAL, IN ORDER THAT THE COMMITTEE MIGHT SPEND THE NEXT TWO TO FOUR WEEKS IN GETTING THE BOARDS QUESTIONS ANSWERED AND INCORPORATED IN THE FINAL REPORT. IT WAS GENERALLY AGREED THIS WAS A GOOD SUGGESTION. COMMISSIONER WODTKE AGREED THAT THE STUDY COMMITTEE SHOULD CONTINUE, BUT NOTED THAT THE STUDY COMMITTEE COULD NOT DETERMINE THE BUDGETARY REQUIREMENTS OF THE BOARD, AND THIS WILL HAVE TO BE LOOKED AT CLOSELY AT BUDGET TIME TO SEE IF WE CAN COME UP WITH THIS MUCH MONEY UNDER THE 5% CAP. HE CONTINUED THAT HE WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE TO HEAR COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT FROM THE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION AND THE LIBRARY BOARD. COMMISSIONER LYONS AGREED THAT WE NEED FURTHER -DISSEMINATION OF THE REPORT AND ALL THE INPUT WE CAN GET. HE NOTED THAT WHILE WE STILL HAVE THEM WORKING, IT MAKES IT THAT MUCH EASIER TO PUT IT TOGETHER, AND HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE COMMITTEE GO ON FOR ANOTHER MONTH. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE IS VERY IMPRESSED WITH THE DETAIL OF THE REPORT, AND HE AGREED THAT THE SECOND WEEK IN .JUNE IS UNREALISTIC FOR A FINAL REPORT. MR. NASON NOTED THAT HE WILL BE OUT OF TOWN FOR SOME TIME AND SUGGESTED THAT THE FIRST WEEK IN AUGUST WOULD BE A MORE REALISTIC DATE, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AGREED AND NOTED THAT IT WOULD BE HARD FOR THE BOARD TO MAKE ANY DECISION 'IN ANY.EVENT UNTIL WE KNOW MORE ABOUT THE BUDGET PACKAGE. 43 4a 'poq 545 r JUN 41900 ©aK 43 ..PAGE 646 COMMISSIONER LOY FELT STRONGLY THAT THIS COMMITTEE SHOULD MAKE SOME DIRECT CONTACT WITH THE PRESENT LIBRARY BOARD AND GET THEIR INPUT. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE AD HOC LIBRARY COMMITTEE'S PRELIMINARY REPORT FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES AND REQUESTED THAT SAID COMMITTEE CONTINUE WITH THEIR STUDY AND SPECIFICALLY CONTACT THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION OF THE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION AND INCORPORATE THEIR COMMENTS IN THE FINAL REPORT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT AT A PREVIOUS MEETING WE ASKED SOUTHERN KELTON TO UPDATE THEIR REPORT ON CREATION OF FIRE DISTRICTS AND TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ON ESTABLISHING A SOUTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT SERVING THE UNINCORPORATED AREA ONLY SO WE WOULD HAVE THAT INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO US ALONG WITH THE OTHER PARTS OF -THEIR REPORT- WHICH ADDRESSED A CONSOLIDATED DISTRICT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT THIS REPORT WAS COMPLETED YESTERDAY, AND HE BELIEVED THAT MR. KELTON HAS DELIVERED A COPY OF IT TO MR. LITTLE'S OFFICE. BASICALLY, THIS IS BEING PRESENTED AS AN INFORMATION TYPE OF ITEM TODAY, RICHARD KELTON, PRESIDENT OF SOUTHERN-KELTON OF DELAND,CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND REVIEWED IN DETAIL THEIR REPORT OF JUNE 41 19801 WHICH SETS OUT VARIOUS ALTERNATIVES AND MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS, AS FOLLOWS: 5 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE AND SERVICES SUITE 24 0 107 W. WISCONSIN AVE. 0 DELAND, FLORIDA 32720 904/736-6233 Administrative Systems & Procedures Animal Control June 4. 1980 Systems Budget Systems & Analysis Capital Honorable W. W. Siebert, Jr., Chairman Programming & and Members of the Board of County Budgeting Commissioners Charter Review Indian River County & Revision 2145 14th Avenue Cost Analysis &Reduction Vero Beach, Florida 33960 Double Taxation Analysis Dear Chairman Siebert and Commissioners: Executive Search & As you have requested, we have reviewed materials Selection presented in our March, 1979 report entitled "Indian Fire Service River County Fire District Study" and other avail - Operations able materials; in an effort to provide updated. Library feasibility and cost estimates regarding creation Operations Municipal of a South Indian River County Fire District for p Service Units the unincorporated areas of southern Indian River County and the North Beach areas. The following Operations material and information is resented in a Analysis & P Systems summarized format, and is intended to be neither Organization an exhaustive review, nor a rehash of earlier Analysis & studies. Structure Soioo & With creation of the North Indian River County Fire Troubleshooting District earlier this year, the necessity for Indian Services River County to develop an alternate funding mechanism Purchasing for south county fire protection was established. The systems& Ordinances basic options available to the Board of County Commis - Reorganization sioners, each of which has several variations, are Reviews & as follows: Reports Revenue Analysis I. Municipal Service Taxing Unit for &Improvement unincorporated areas only Special Studies & Reports A. MSTU continues payments to Vero State& Beach and Indian River Shores - Federal Grant no change in service Programs JUN 41980 BOOK C wk 647. _ t r JUN 41980 ...... � r....,,.. ..,'>''A'�bWya..�u..:.-�I+vG�.,.uP-.r^�':v sa e•N.....s i. � .A'r.. s_.. •. x.... .• .t.w.d,'v .wt Y.. � - ..�.'.5.�. S yi.U' :Z• `^ �...rw_ _.....Yiq:w, f�adM.'rt K7 "^0... .f n.•.t�1 r• 4J./ .2`K ... ,., :.r,,.:.v `�'Y. .. ....: ,a.�.w_.. ..:... ...... .'.. :.: r��r.:... �.. .....".................,.....aa,.u..:_..:,'.....'._f .�. ..0..u.uss ...... '4. __aw+�•.v.w...ru. tc...:ru2t7b.Lm.�.Y.w..�.as.y�.�...... .. ... ... __Z......i. .. 0 B. MSTU utilized to build a county fire department for unincorporated area 1. two stations with contracts 2. three stations with contracts 3. three stations without contracts 4. four stations without contracts II. Special Taxing District for unincorporated and incorporated areas A. Special District includes both Vero Beach and Indian River Shores - no change in service B. Special District with Vero Beach only with additional stations. The initial assignment presented to SKA was determination of the feasibility of option I -B, and the possibility of implementing fire service and protection under this option, by October 1,.1980. This assignment has been expanded, somewhat, by the recent initiatives of the City of Vero Beach along the lines of option II -B. Option I -A Under Option I -A, the County would create an MSTU for the South County and North Beach areas, which would be utilized to continue the present practice of making payments to the City of Vero Beach and Town of Indian River Shores. Based upon past County Commission policies, we estimate -total contract payments at approximately $445,000 for FY 1980-81, with tax collection fees, miscellaneous expenses, and contingencies bringing the net revenue requirement to approximately $485,000. Based upon an estimated assessed valuation for the MSTU of $400 million, the millage requirement for FY 1980-81 would be approximately 1.3 mills. It should be noted, Option I -A is the minimum action required'of the County Commission to continue funding of fire protection in the south county areas, without Page 2 of 10 "' +t....,�s J... ,_, r^ IY rk• w���+y'•x,a 9., ��r�awx'.G,•'riwa`�y,ri,'� <,�� �'Y :..�a:r., ''+',N;ee� "`xvn 1 taxing residents or properties in either the municipal- ities or the North County Fire District for South County, unincorporated area service. It should also be noted, this option provides no changes in the present level of service, nor in the maiagement of the fire protection delivery systema. Option I -B Under Option I -B, as in I -A, the County would create an MSTU for the South County and North Beach areas. Unlike Option I -A, however, the County would utilize ,funds generated by the MSTU to begin development of a County operated Fire De=partment for the included areas. Should the County pursue this option, initial entry would require a minimum of two fire stations, with appropriate equipment and staff. These stations should be located as follows: 1. Oslo Road near US-1/Dixie 2. North US -1 (Gifford) .The County presently owns, and we have looked at, several parcels in each area which would provide suitable station notation sites. With initial service entry by the County limited to two stations, it will be necessary to continue or negotiate contracts with Vero Beach and Indian River Shores for first response service to specific portions of the unin- corporated area, such as: North Beach, South beach including the Moorings, aid the west SR 60 area to I-95. ;Anticipated financial requirements, under this option, might be as follows: Operations 1 Fire Chief 1 Secretary 6 Fire Lieutenants 13 Firefighters with fringe benefits $325,000 Supplies and Services 35,030 Contracts 75,000 Contingencies and Tax Collection Total Operating Page 3 of 10 Jut4 19 80 40,000 $470,003 649 JUN 41900 1 _ ...-....._...�..- .._...... ^.� , y •�*�+aiw..,s..r.wa.'C'...>t-�=. sem° . �.2a.: �. ..r .. � F" .. �. Y•asn� ... ... .-'�"Y:.;�rai "'. ,;4�11�����8�d :i��:d'-.� . - _ - :.�.tiss<s=.r, . _ l._ _ :,. —...r•..:.,-.... �•:-.J- .u,, ...�c s,.a�a..:"`y' hn. w�. i-rg e:>44`°"` '-�. � '�"c.,w+sem"' i`q,�'�'•*"�c.r-�,,.<�'m+*r'7r.:-"yw..i..5`...v.+'�, 'w'�`in^x .v� M e Cal) itaI 2 s tatLoas is $100,003 $200)000 2 pumper -tankers 1255000 Hose and Equipment 50,000 Total Capital $315 QD-3 Total Expenditures $850203-3 -Millage requirements under this option are estimated, as -follows: Oaeratin�; 1.25 mills Capital (1 year only) 1.0.3 mills Total 2.25 mills Initial capital expenditures could be reduced by $100,000 to $1251000 by utilizing a "relocatable" fire station concept, with permanent station construction financed at a later date. The "relocatable" station concept would also facilitate more rapid county entry into fire service delivery, reducing both lead-time and construction time for station installation. The addition of a third station, in the west SR 60 area, would add the following initial expenditures: Oneratin_z Expenditures Personnel $145,000 Supplies and Services 173500 Contracts (35,000) Contingencies and Tax Collections 20,000 Total Operating $147,500 Capital 1 station $1005000 1 pumper -tanker 623,500 Hose and Equipment 25,000 Total Capital $187,500 Total $3351000 - Page 4 of 10 Millage impact: Operating .40 mills Capital (1 year only) _50 mills Total .90 mills Addition of the Moorings, or fourth, station, would have the following financial impact on the MSTU: Operating 1.25 Personnel $167,500 Supplies and Services 17,500 Contracts (30)000) Contingencies.and Tax Collections 25,000 Total Operating $180)000 Capital 1 station 1 pumper -tanker -$1502000 Hose and Equipment __62,500 30,000 Total Capital $242,503 Total $422,500 Millage impact: Operating .50 mills Capital (1 year only) .65 mills Total 1.15 mills Graphically, the millage im? act of the alternative station configurations would appear as follows: 2 Stations 3 Stations 4 Stations Operating 1.25 1.65 2.15 Capital 1.00 1.50 2.15 Total 2.25 3.15 4.30 Page 5 of 10 JUS 4 1980 43 PAc€ 651L y JUN 41900 t ..��iR-�-W.�. .• z �. .. ��' l .. ..Y�wsij' .p�,yGq. a -.J. a?4 '�• V ,� Y e. 'o:w+Y.vq�e-'b...K Y�. � .rtK. .4T_ _ �.�1'^RI�T � _ .hi.'�+.� ,.;.�.,.� :.. .d MP•v ♦a .: R..p• :.. �ri�7'«i. t' �P`,�ew r.ta,.-s +may,;-#� w��+:k'€�&yn s :I�;��.:� .': - .: .t.. a.L � _ .!GT "'-.- t' ...f"3 t� .. . Sys, el... -. � . R'N .. .riy �`} � Y, .. .. _ .. .. :..r..I.`--6.Ci'g_'°'d•..r+, _:.�-.u. . #.:. -}. �. ......:.:: . .,.: ..+..t..._.v.+•...�..-.. .� i....: .::..�...<: _.. - "u..�y...�-n.:3.irvA.:?Vme:�,�i�:+..ri..... ..�.�.u....... _...� ... ... .�r...>. . ...... "...... ... .. -. It should be noted, figures used to reflect the cost of contracts with Vero Beach and Indian River Shores are estimates only. They can be used for comparison of alternatives, but should not be taken .as representing actual anticipated costs. Our discussions with City of Vero Beach officials have addressed only the willing- ness of the -City of provide contractual services to the County, not the cost of those services. The actual cost of contractual servicewouldbe subject to negotiations with the City once more specific service objectives have been established. SKA believes it is possible for Indian River County to initiate County fire service on or about October 1, 1980, under the following guidelines: 1. Provide initial service utilizing two station concept, with contracts with Vero Beach and Indian River Shores for remote areas. 2. Amend existing County MSTU for Fire to create. South County Municipal Fire Service Taxing Unit. Page 6 of 10 3. Pursue relocatable station concept, utilizirn;; readily available components which could be moved to other sites (west SR 69) once construction of permanent stations is accomplished. 4. Immediately pursue fire apparatus acquisition, reviewing both available new and used equipment which could be obtained on short delivery time. 5. Immediately establish job classifications, job specifications, and pay scales necessary for fire positions, and begin recruitment process for Fire Chief and Fire Lieutenants; with firefighter recruitment to begin soon thereafter. 6. With creation of the MSTU for South County Fire. S6rvice,.authorize tax anticipation note or internal loan, so that equipment and supply acquisi- tion process ca:z begin, as well as .station installation. Page 7 of 10 43. . InL� BOOK �A ;E ..:.,..ter.. J.tix.o:--c - :..s.%�'•-_s _b.•.._-.a-r�-,m.X .iti.".`i;�fi,.��'TY r;m'a^�. �Y...![h�y4'�+°,�,';7''Rf'z .. ...] - .... ;� ._ . .. A,. JUN 198O'F65 .....�.»�.:es�-•c..�. .'-"� �-'"x •^!`k-...3 , `:.:�-.:f.4�+F^�F?#ilF"='�te Y'ix?�S1�S; %.* .. r .., w"`.: .t"'.»'4�`.s 4. _ _ r.. w -x+, '.' ,- am ��'�......s,.. . - .!,._,. a . . As one result of the County --Commission's authorizing SKA to prepare this review, the City of Vero Beach has begun preparation of a proposal which would create a South County Fire Taxing District. The "Preliminary Staff Report" was presented to the City Council on Tuesday, May 20, 1980. The final report is now scheduled for presentation to the Council on Tuesday, June 17, 1980. We have obtained and reviewed the "Preliminary Staff Report" and believe it represents a major step forward. However, there are a number of areas where specific details would need to be resolved prior to initiating implementation activities. Since the report will not be finalized for almost two weeks, and must then meet with City Council approval, any in-depth review at this time would be premature. We do, however, believe the apparent present direction of the City may lay the groundwork for a consolidated South Indian River County Fire District. At this time, we must point out the extremely tight time schedule facing the County. If the County is to be in a position to provide fire protection by October 1, 1980, Page 8 of 10 s. s�� � - -• :�- ��'me��Y"'.w x+... ,�`�i1.-�w�d:�}4�-. %::r-+,, =;n �e.,.. n--s.,�a Tsr �;� ..-.a,.n - - we believe that decision must be made no later than the first week of July. Accordingly, we recommend the County Connnission proceed as follows: 1. Request Co:xnty Attorney to prepare necessary ordinance/resolution to create the South Indiaa River County Municipal Fire Service Unit and present at next meeting. 2. Request County Attorney to begin preparation of ordinance creating South Indian River County Fire - District, including Vero Beach. 3, Authorize SKA to continue pursuit of MSTU implementation, including prep- aration of bid specification for equipment, review of available used equipment, site review, specification preparation .for stations in conjunc- tion -with the County's engineers. Page 9 of 10 J 1 4198a •..'ji. _ _?.�� r "1 -. ....nW..a......w•. .. •-.a+"svro�....-', fi.r,-. .;F',r!^"v. a, a�.,a...-., .r: .3.. BOO ���� .:•!, .... JUN 4 519 80 K FpA :.TMyc. � y s_ r+ ♦ C.,S �-.+n �r.+s�Jr.A��� •p'�. i•>.' �e � .Nab 5.*� t -.e �A.�h4+i ?C.a.".. w .�£wf�da.�+,��,�,y irt.... .... i J _ .. - rws:,.ti.{.t•• - �-'r;....+..;.4:, ... . .. .9 '; `!;�,. FV.� .N+�� �r4 J r:� �, �i� J �d J,n.�.r.uya\Y [' %'.11n. y., ♦ M �h '{.v^+'!++! J9.Y�'F i°�OKf.Y.;✓l'+. int ..:(; i.. ;i�. ..... .�..`+.a-mow.. 4. Authorize SKA to ,continue liaison caith City of Vero Beach re: South County Fire District, in conjunction with County Attorney Collins and Commissioner Wodtke; including review of final "Staff Report" and negotiations regarding the'"District," and/or contractual services for the MSTU. Should any additional information be desired, please advise. Very truly yours, Richard M. Kelton President _ I"e 10 of 10 MR. KELTON EMPHASIZED THE TIGHT TIME SCHEDULE AND THE NEED TO MAKE A DECISION NO LATER THAN .JULY IST. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT QUESTIONED CITY FINANCE DIRECTOR TOM MASON AS TO WHETHER THE FINAL REPORT WILL BE GOTTEN TO CITY COUNCIL IN ENOUGH TIME TO BE ON THE AGENDA OF THE .JUNE 27TH MEETING, AND MR. NASON STATED THAT HOPEFULLY IT WILL BE•READY THE FRIDAY BEFORE THE MEETING. COMMISSIONER LYONS INQUIRED WHETHER -THE AMENDED FINAL REPORT IS MATERIALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE INITIAL PROPOSAL MADE BY THE CITY. MR. NASON STATED THAT IT WAS NOT. HE CONTINUED THAT THERE ARE THREE MAJOR ELEMENTS THE CITY WISHES HIM TO LOOK AT. THEY FELT THE MOORINGS STATION SHOULD ULTIMATELY COME INTO BEING, AND THEY WISH HIM TO GO OVER THE IDEAS REGARDING THE FINANCES, WHICH HE HAS BEEN EXPLORING. THE ONLY OTHER THING WAS TO LOOK AT THE AIRPORT OPERATION AND SUM IT UP ON THE FINAL REPORT. MR. NASON BELIEVED THAT THE CITY WOULD PREFER TO GO CONSOLIDATED, AND THEY NEED A HORIZON FOR FINANCIAL PURPOSES TO PREDICATE FINANCING ON - THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH A TEN YEAR HORIZON IN MIND. MR. NASON STATED THAT HE AGREED WITH THE NORTH AND SOUTH STATIONS, AND HE IS RECOMMENDING THE MOORINGS STATION, BUT IT IS PURE CONJECTURE ON HIS PART RENOVATION IS NEEDED AT THE BEACH STATION. THE LAST AREA HE WAS ASKED TO -LOOK AT WAS -THE ITEMS THAT SHOULD GO INTO A MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT. HE NOTED THAT WE HAVE SUCH AN AGREEMENT RIGHT NOW, BUT THEY WANTED TO KNOW WHAT WOULD BE THE OPTIMUM. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT IF IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE A CON- SOLIDATED FIRE DISTRICT, IT WOULD BE BETTER IN THE LONG RUN. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT POINTED OUT THAT WHAT WE DO WITH OUR REPORT a WILL BE PREDICATED PARTIALLY ON THE CITY'S REPORT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE AGREED THAT HAVING THE COUNTY SET UP THEIR OWN DISTRICT FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA SHOULD BE A LAST RESORT, BUT IF WE ARE GOING TO CONSIDER IT AS AN ALTERNATIVE, WE HAVE GOT TO REALIZE THAT A DECISION MUST BE MADE NO LATER THAN JULY 1ST, AND WE SHOULD BE PREPARED TO HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING IF NECESSARY. 55 BOOK 43-' pxE 65.`? JUN 41980 Boos 'PAc5$ COMMISSIONER LYONS AGREED THAT THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT, AND COMMISSIONER L.OY FELT WE SHOULD AIM TOWARDS A .JUNE 25TH MEETING DATE. CHAIRMAN WODTKE COMMENTED THAT SOUTHERN—KELTON HAS NOT INCLUDED IN THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS A CRITIQUE OF THE CITY'S FINAL REPORT, AND HE FELT THIS MUST BE DONE EVEN THOUGH IT HAS TO.BE DONE BEFORE IT GOES TO THE CITY COUNCIL. HE DOUBTED THEY ARE GOING TO SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGE THEIR REPORT. ' COMMISSIONER LYONS AGREED THAT THIS REPORT MUST BE CRITIQUED SO WE CAN KEEP ON MOVING SINCE, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, WE ARE GOING TO GET INTO THE FIRE BUSINESS AS RAPIDLY AS POSSIBLE. MR. KELTON STATED THAT THE AREAS WHICH CAUSED HIM SOME CON— CERN IN THE CITY'S STAFF REPORT FALL INTO THREE CATEGORIES. ONE IS THE CAPITAL RECOMMENDATIONS WHERE THE BEACH STATION AND DOWNTOWN STATION STATION'WOULD BE REPLACED ALONG WITH CONSTRUCTION OF TWO STATIONS ALL IN ONE YEAR.- THE SECOND AREA IS THE PROPOSED MANAGEMENT OF THE DISTRICT. HE FELT THE CITY HAS INDICATED THAT IT IS SOMEWHAT OPEN TO NEGOTIATIONS, AND FROM OUR STANDPOINT, HE WOULD HOPE THAT THEY ARE. THE THIRD QUESTION WOULD BE WHETHER THE COUNTY WOULD GO WITH AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT OR WITH A FULLY CONSOLIDATED DISTRICT. MR. KELTON RECOMMENDED THAT WE PURSUE A CONSOLIDATED DISTRICT. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT DID NOT BELIEVE THOSE ARE MAJOR STUMBLING BLOCKS, BUT STATED THAT THEY WERE EXACTLY THE POINTS WITH WHICH HE ALSO WAS CONCERNED. HE STILL FELT THERE ARE MANY ADVANTAGES TO A CONSOLIDATED SYSTEM AND THAT WE SHOULD MAKE EVERY ATTEMPT POSSIBLE TO BRING IT ABOUT. COMMISSIONER LYONS NOTED THAT THE CITY IS TRYING TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING AND IS WILLING TO GET TOGETHER, AND HE FELT THE MORE WE SPEAK OUT LOUD ABOUT OUR RESERVATIONS, THE BETTER CHANCE THERE IS TO BRING THIS TO A HEAD AS RAPIDLY AS POSSIBLE. MR. KELTON STATED THAT IF IT SUITED THE BOARD, THEY WILL CONTINUE TO MEET WITH THE CITY AND WORK WITH THEM AND EXCHANGE INFORMATION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE BOARDS ATTORNEY OR WHOMEVER THE BOARD WISHED.TO DESIGNATE. 56 CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT THE BOARD HAD NO OBJECTION. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF THE BOARD WISHED TO TAKE ANY ACTION ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY SOUTHERN-KELTON, AND COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT THAT MIGHT BE PREMATURE. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THEM PROCEEDING WITH PREPARING SPECIFICATIONS FOR BIDDING, ETC., IN THE EVENT WE HAVE TO PROCEED WITH OUR OWN DISTRICT, MR. KELTON FELT THERE ARE SEVERAL THINGS THEY CAN KEEP WORKING ON IN TERMS OF GATHERING INFORMATION, BUT THE ONE AREA WHERE HE WOULD RECOMMEND THE BOARD TAKE SOME ACTION IS IN PREPARING AN ORDINANCE CREATING A CONSOLIDATED DISTRICT. THIS WOULD HAVE TO BE ON THE BALLOT FOR THE FIRST PRIMARY IN OCTOBER. ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THAT WE NEED TO GET THAT POINT RESOLVED WITH THE CITY FIRST. IT WAS NOTED THAT IT REQUIRES ABOUT 30 DAYS LEAD TIME TO GET SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT. MR. KELTON INQUIRED WHEN THE CITY'S DRAFT OF THE FINAL REPORT COULD BE READY SO THEY COULD CRITIQUE IT. MR. MASON STATED THAT HE WOULD TRY TO GET IT TO THEM A DAY OR TWO EARLY, IF POSSIBLE. COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT HE WOULD CONTACT CITY MANAGER LITTLE AND OFFER TO MEET WITH HIM ALONG WITH MR. KELTON AND GO OVER THE REPORT THAT WE HAVE JUST REVIEWED -1 THE BOARD AGREED THAT WE MUST KEEP THIS MATTER MOVING AS RAPIDLY AS POSSIBLE AND ENCOURAGE ESTABLISHING CONTACT BETWEEN SOUTHERN- KELTON AND THE CITY. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT REITERATED THAT HE WANTED TO SEE CONSOLI- DATED SERVICE FOR THE SOUTH COUNTY IF THERE IS ANY WAY POSSIBLE, AND MR. KELTON FELT THAT THE CITY"S REPORT IS A MAJOR STRIDE FROM WHERE 0 WE WERE A YEAR AGO. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS INTRODUCED EDWARD LYONS, JR., AND BILLY DOBBS OF SMITH BARNEY, HARRIS UPHAM & CO., WHO WISH TO MAKE A PROPOSAL IN REGARD TO THE ISSUANCE OF $5,825,840 OF BOND ANTICIPATION NOTES (BADS) FOR INTERIM FINANCING FOR THE SOUTH COUNTY WATER DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS. 57 t. 1 43 PAGE 659 . ;. r r. �.... ♦ e YV 660 ` BOQJ� . �� A MR. DOBBS GAVE A PRESENTATION ON THE BACKGROUND OF SMITH BARNEY, HARRIS UPHAM & CO., NOTING THAT THEY ARE NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE MEMBERS, THEY ARE BASED IN NEW YORK CITY, AND HAVE BEEN IN BUSINESS 107 YEARS. THEY HAVE CAPITAL OF AROUND 80 MILLION DOLLARS AND HAVE SI OFFICES IN THE UNITED STATES, TEN OF WHICH ARE IN FLORIDA. MR. DOBBS CONTINUED THAT THEY PARTICIPATED IN 1979 IN OVER HALF OF THE MUNICIPAL BOND ISSUES IN THE UNITED STATES AND THEY HAVE DONE THE TAMPA AIRPORT AUTHORITY, THE GREATER ORLANDO AIRPORT AUTHORITY, THE JACKSONVILLE EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY, ETC. MR. DOBBS STATED THAT HE AND MR. LYONS ARE LOCATED IN THE ATLANTA OFFICE AND JOINED WITH THIS FIRM WHEN THEY MERGED WITH W. DOBBS & CO. THEY HAVE ISSUED TAX FREE BONDS IN CONJUNCTION WITH HUD AND HAVE ACTED AS FINANCIAL ADVISORS TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA. EDWARD LYONS THEN TOOK THE FLOOR AND STATED THAT ONE OF FMHA'S REQUIREMENTS IS THAT THE COUNTY OBTAIN THEIR INTERIM FINANCING. HE NOTED THAT NORMALLY YOU WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT A CONVENTIONAL CONSTRUCTION LOAN, BUT THESE ARE NOT NORMAL TIMES AND CONDITIONS IN THE MARKET HAVE MADE CONVENTIONAL FINANCING IN THE CONSTRUCTION MARKET DIFFICULT, IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE. MR. LYONS WENT ON TO REVIEW THE PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL WHICH SMITH BARNEY SUBMITTED IN LATE MARCH ON THE ISSUANCE OF BOND ANTICIPATION NOTES FOR INTERIM FINANCING, AND REVISED FIGURES REFLECTING FIXED INCOME MARKET RATES, WHICH ARE AS FOLLOWS: SMITH BARNEY, HARRIS UPHAM & CO. INCORPORATED 2700 PEACHTREE HARRIS TOWER 233 PEACHTREE STREET, N. E. ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 (404) 588.3000 June 3, 1980 Mr. Willard -W. Siebert, Jr. Chairman Indian River County Board of Commissioners Indian River County Courthouse 2145 14th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960 RE: Interim Financing for $5,825,840 FmHA Loan for Water System Capital Improvements in South Indian River County Mr. Chairman: On March 27, 1980, we made a preliminary proposal regard- ing the issuance of $5,825,840 of Bond Anticipation Notes (BAN's) for the above referenced interim financing. Present at that meeting on behalf of the County were the following: 1. Mr. Jack Jennings 2. Mr. Jeff Barton 3. Mr. Neil Nelson 4. Mr. Ralph Eng - - A copy of that preliminary proposal is enclosed herewith for each of the commissioners as it is illustrative of the basic format and assumptions. Also enclosed, are revised figures which reflect fixed income market rates as of June 3, 1980. EGLjr/sg Enclosures /Pe C '0 C'v, Corm rr> - Sinc el , Edward G. -54 / 9 8 0 , M soon 43 PasE6. JUN 41980 BOOK 4J PG�UrG. . * Based on the following: Interest Expense BAN's @6% $ 583,749 Investment Income @8.758 579,131 Net Interest Income (Expense) INCOME - INVESTED BAN PROCEEDS August 1, 1980 Invest $5,825,840 @ 8.758 Outstanding Principal $5,825,840 Interest $5,825,840 SOUTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY $212,400 $5,525,840 FLORIDA 120,877 $5,194,840 Water System Facilities 37,879 $4,863,840 Capital Improvements Program 35,465 $4,532,840 Bond Anticipation Notes 33,051 I $4,035,840 COST COMPARISON 29,427 $3,538,840 Conventional Interim Financing 25,804 $3,041,840 vs 22,180 $2,379,840 Bond Anticipation Notes 17,352 $1,855,840 FmHA Loan Principal = $5,825,840 13,532 Conventional Construction Loan.Interest @ 88 $247,286 Net Interest Income (Expense) Bond Anticipa- ( 4,618) tion Notes* 0.083 6,641 Savings 0.083 $242,668 * Based on the following: Interest Expense BAN's @6% $ 583,749 Investment Income @8.758 579,131 Net Interest Income (Expense) INCOME - INVESTED BAN PROCEEDS August 1, 1980 Invest $5,825,840 @ 8.758 Outstanding Principal Months Factor Interest $5,825,840 0.417 $212,400 $5,525,840 0.250 120,877 $5,194,840 0.083 37,879 $4,863,840 0.083 35,465 $4,532,840 0.083 33,051 I $4,035,840 0.083 29,427 $3,538,840 0.083 25,804 $3,041,840 0.083 22,180 $2,379,840 0.083 17,352 $1,855,840 0.083 13,532 $1,540,840 0.083 11,235 $1,225,840 0.083 8,938 $ 910,840 0.083 6,641 $ 595,840 0.083 4,344 TOTAL $579,131 - 6; n Financing Costs Interest Earned Project Construction Costs FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION COMMUNITY FACILITIES LOAN PROGRAM INTERIM CONSTRUCTION FINANCING DIAGRAM Issuer Notes V1 $ Investment Banker Net Proceeds V1 Escrowed Con- struction Funds Account. (Held by Trustee) Permanent Bonds Issued Investor Note Holder Capitalized —$— Interest Acct. —$ (Interest During Construction) Principal Paid at Maturity Farmers Home Administration Permanent Loan. Funded Upon Sub- stantial comple- tion MR. LYONS EXPLAINED THAT VERY SIMPLY WHAT THEY HAVE PROPOSED TO DO IS TO REISSUE BANS UP FRONT AND INVEST THE PROCEEDS IN GOVERNMENT OR GOVERNMENT COLLATERALIZED SECURITIES IN SYNCHRONIZATION WITH THE COUNTY'S CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE, RATHER THAN TAKING THE CON— VENTIONAL CONSTRUCTION LOAN APPROACH, HE CONTINUED THAT --THE NET INTEREST COST, BASED ON WHAT THE COST WOULD HAVE BEEN TO ISSUE THE BANS VERSUS THE PROCEEDS ON THE INVESTED CAPITAL FOR THE VARYING PERIOD OF TIME IT WAS INVESTED, WOULD RESULT IN A NET CONSTRUCTION INTEREST EXPENSE OF $4,618 VERSUS IN TODAY'S MARKET $247,286 FOR THE INTERIM FINANCING. MR. LYONS COMMENTED THAT THERE IS NO MAGIC IN THIS; IT IS A FUNCTION OF THE. -FIXED INCOME MARKET AS THAT EXISTS TODAY, AND AT ANOTHER POINT IN TIME, IT WOULD BE MORE LOGICAL TO TAKE THE CONVENTIONAL CONSTRUCTION FINANCING APPROACH. MR. LYONS CONTINUED TO REVIEW THEIR PROPOSAL, EMPHASIZING THAT, AS STATED ON THEIR COVER LETTER, THE FIGURES INCLUDED THEREIN ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT A FIRM OFFER. THIS ALSO APPLIES TO THE FIGURES THEY ARE EMPLOYING TODAY. MR.' LYONS 61 460K:`c PAVE kJ3 r JUN 41980 BOOK 43' PAGE 664 THEN PROCEEDED TO UPDATE SOME OF THE FIGURES SET OUT IN THEIR PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL, POINTING OUT THAT THESE FIGURES WILL ILLUSTRATE HOW MARKEDLY THE MARKET HAS CHANGED IN THE PERIOD OF TIME SINCE THEIR PROPOSAL. HE THEN ASKED THE BOARD TO CHANGE THE INTEREST RATE SHOWN ON THE BAN AS 9-1/2% To 6% AND SPECULATED THAT AS OF TODAY, IT PROBABLY IS A LOT LOWER THAN THAT. ITEM 6, WHICH SHOWED AN AVERAGE INTEREST INCOME RATE ON THE NET BAN PROCEEDS AND CAPITALIZED INTEREST OF 14%, HE REQUESTED BE CHANGED TO°8.757., AND ITEM 7, -WHICH IS AN ASSUMPTION THAT THE ISSUER WOULD HAVE TO PAY A RATE OF 10.5% FOR CONVENTIONAL INTERIM FINANCING, WAS TO BE CHANGED TO 8%. ALSO THE DATE FOR ISSUANCE OF THE BAN IN ITEM 3 SHOULD BE CHANGED FROM JUNE 1, 1980 TO AUGUST 1, 1980. ALTHOUGH THAT DATE PROBABLY WOULD NOT ALLOW ENOUGH TIME FOR THE VALIDATION AND APPEAL PERIOD, HE FELT IT WOULD SUFFICE FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES. MR. LYONS STATED THE ASSUMPTIONS THEY ARE.LOOKING AT IS A RESOLUTION BY THE BOARD AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF THE BAN AND A STATEMENT FROM FMHA THAT THEY HAVE RESERVED THE MONEY AND, DEPENDING UPON COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THE LOAN, THEY WILL ISSUE THE PERMANENT TAKE-OUT COMMITMENT LETTER. HE THEN COMPLIMENTED MR, ENG HIGHLY FOR HIS EXTREME COOPERATION IN ASSISTING THEM. MR. LYONS RECAPPED THAT AS OF YESTERDAY, IT LOOKED TO THEM LIKE THE CONVENTIONAL CONSTRUCTION LOAN INTEREST AT 8%, ACCORDING TO THE CONSTRUCTION DRAW SCHEDULE THEY HAVE UTILIZED, WOULD RUN $247,286. THE NET INTEREST INCOME, OR EXPENSE, FROM THE BAN WOULD BE $4,618; SO, YOU HAVE GOT A SWING BETWEEN THE TWO OF $242,668, AND THAT IS JUST BASED ON THE INTEREST EXPENSE FOR THE BANS OVER THE LIFE OF THEM. COORDINATOR THOMAS COMMENTED THAT WHAT MR. LYONS IS SAYING IS THAT THE NET RESULT ON TODAY IS MARKET IS THAT YOU WOULD BE SHORT $4,600 - THAT'S NOT ASSUMING THAT YOU HAD BORROWED THE MONEY UNDER A STANDARD CONSTRUCTION LOAN BASIS. HE CONTINUED THAT, IF WE HAD PURSUED THIS WHEN MR. LYONS FIRST CALLED, THE INCOME WOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERABLY MORE. w MR. LYONS AGREED THAT THE NUMBERS THAT WERE IN EFFECT THEN LOOKED EVEN GREATER, EVEN THOUGH THE COST ON THE BANS WOULD HAVE BEEN WAY UP. HE NOTED THAT THE MARKETS ARE CHANGING SO QUICKLY TODAY THAT IT IS VERY HARD TO PREDICT. HE GUESSED THAT TODAY THE BAN COST WOULD BE CLOSE TO 5-1/2%. COORDINATOR THOMAS FELT ONE OTHER THING THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IS TO WHAT EXPENSE THE COUNTY WOULD BE PUT IF THEY WENT AHEAD, AND THEN WHEN WE GOT READY TO ISSUE, FOUND THAT THE MARKET WAS NOT ACCEPTABLE. MR. DOBBS STATED THAT IF NO NOTES WERE ISSUED, YOU WOULD HAVE NO UNDERWRITER S EXPENSES OR BOND COUNSEL EXPENSES. YOU WOULD HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF LEGAL EXPENSES WHICH YOU WOULD INCUR FOR YOUR OWN COUNSEL, BUT YOU WOULD HAVE THIS IN ANY EVENT. MR. DOBBS STATED THA'r THEY CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE SOME OUT-OF-POCKET EXPENSES, BUT IT WOULD NOT BE A GREAT AMOUNT OF MONEY - PROBABLY A FEW THOUSAND DOLLARS. COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED HOW DO WE KNOW WHO TO DEAL WITH TO GET THE BEST DEAL. MR. DOBBS EXPLAINED THAT YOU ARE DEALING WITH A NEW COMPLICATED TYPE OF FINANCING. IF YOU WERE ISSUING JUST INDIAN RIVER COUNTY GENERAL OBLIGATIONS BONDS, HE BELIEVED -THERE WOULD-BE NO MORE THAT SMITH BARNEY COULD DO FOR THE COUNTY THAN MANY OTHER FIRMS, BUT YOU ARE LOOKING AT A VERY COMPLICATED TYPE OF FINANCING AND IT TAKES SOME INNOVATIVE KNOW-HOW. SMITH BARNEY IS ONE OUT OF ONLY THREE OR FOUR FIRMS WHO HAVE DONE THIS. HE STATED THAT WHEN YOU GO INTO THIS TYPE OF FINANCING WITH A REVENUE SOURCE SUCH AS WE HAVE HERE, IT IS NOT THE KIND OF THING WHICH LENDS ITS€LF TO A COMPETITIVE s BID SITUATION. MR, DOBBS CONTINUED THAT THEY HAVE BEEN IN BUSINESS 107 YEARS; THEY ARE DOING BUSINESS ALL OVER THE STATE OF FLORIDA; AND THEY HAVE A FINE TRACK RECORD TO FALL BACK ON, HE STATED THAT HE COULD NOT SAY THAT SOMEONE ELSE MIGHT NOT SAY THEY COULD DO IT CHEAPER, BUT THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE THE KNOW-HOW TO DO IT. 63 JUN 4 1980 OO .43 pAtt 665 Boas 43 PA4 M, 6 MR. THOMAS NOTED THAT WE ARE NOT UNDER TREMENDOUS PRESSURE FROM OUR ENGINEERS TO MOVE TOMORROW, AND HE WOULD RECOMMEND SMITH BARNEY GIVE THE COMMISSIONERS A FEW WEEKS TO DIGEST THIS INFORMATION AND ALSO TO SEE WHAT THE MARKET DOES. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF THE DECISION IS MADE TO CONTINUE ON WITH SMITH BARNEY, WE BORROW 5 MILLION PLUS DOLLARS,AND SMITH BARNEY IS THE PURCHASER, DO THEY TELL US WHAT INTEREST RATES WE HAVE TO PAY AND ALSO WHAT INTEREST RATE`WE EARN OR IS IT OUR CHANCE? MR. DOBBS STATED THAT THEY WOULD GIVE THE COUNTY A GUARANTEED RATE OF REINVESTMENT AT THE TIME THEY MADE A PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR THE NOTES. COMMISSIONER WODTKE INQUIRED ABOUT ADDITIONAL COSTS, AND MR. LYONS STATED THAT WOULD BE LEGAL FEES, PRINTING COSTS, THE NORMAL TYPE THING. HE DID NOT FEEL THERE REALLY WERE A WHOLE LOT OF ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES'INVOLVED. MR. DOBBS STATED THAT FOR A BAN ISSUE, THIS IS A PRETTY SMALL ISSUE AND THE COST FOR PRINTING, ETC., WOULD BE MINIMAL. HE DOUBTED THE EXPENSES WOULD RUN $10,000 - MORE LIKELY HALF THAT. MR. LYONS ANTICIPATED THAT THE TOTAL SPREAD AND DISCOUNT WOULD BE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 6/10 AND 1 POINT, DEPENDING ON THE MARKET. HE FELT IT WOULD SERVE THE COUNTY WELL TO GET INTO THE RESOLUTION STAGE TO AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE OF THE BONDS BECAUSE THE SOONER YOU ACT, THE HIGHER THE RATE BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE YOUR MONEY INVESTED FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME. MR. THOMAS COMMENTED THAT IF WE WAIT THE 30 DAYS, THE SPREAD MIGHT BE LARGER, BUT IT COULD ALSO BE SMALLER. MR. DOBBS-STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE COMMISSION.) ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO MOVE FORWARD ON THE FINANCING, BUT DID NOT FEEL THAT NECESSARILY MEANS YOU HAVE GOT TO ISSUE IN 30 DAYS. THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN OVERNIGHT BECAUSE THERE IS A FAIR AMOUNT OF WORK THAT MUST GO INTO IT, AND WHILE HE DID NOT FEEL IT IS URGENT THAT THE BOARD ACT ON IT INSTANTLY, HE DID FEEL IT DOES NEED TO BE ACTED ON IN A TIMELY MANNER. COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT WE ALL TRY TO PLAY GUESSING GAMES WITHTHEINTEREST RATES,,AND HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE MECHANISM TO BE ABLE TO PROCEED SO THAT IF WE GET IN A SITUATION WHERE WE NEED TO GET IT DONE, WE MAY POSSIBLY BE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AHEAD OF SCHEDULE. HE STATED THAT HE WAS IMPRESSED WITH THE PRESENTATION AND THE FIRM S CAPABILITIES, AND WOULD LIKE TO'SEE THE BOARD ACCEPT SMITH BARNEY TO DO THE WORK. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AGREED. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN AND ATTORNEY AND STAFF TO WORK WITH SMITH BARNEY, HARRIS UPHAM & CO. WITH THE BOND ANTICIPATION NOTES FOR THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SOUTH WATER DISTRICT FACILITY PROGRAM AND OTHER RELATED ITEMS. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED ABOUT THE RESOLUTION, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT WOULD BE PREPARED,HE FELT, AT THE VERY EARLIEST BY THE NEXT MEETING BECAUSE HE WANTED TO CONTACT OUR BOND COUNSEL. HE NOTED THAT FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW HE WOULD RATHER COORDINATE WITH FMHA WITH RESPECT TO THE BAN WITH THE SAME BOND COUNSEL, MR. LYONS AND MR. DOBBS AGREED. COORDINATOR THOMAS NOTED THAT IN REGARD TO THE $450,000 TAX ANTICIPATION NOTES FOR THE TEST WELLS AND -LAND PURCHASE, ALL THE BOARD HAS TO DO IS AUTHORIZE ATTORNEY COLLINS TO PREPARE AND ISSUE THEM BECAUSE THE FUNDS HAVE ALREADY BEEN EXPENDED. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AND ISSUE THE $450,000 TAX ANTICIPATION NOTES FOR THE TEST WELLS AND LAND PURCHASE. PERSONNEL DIRECTOR DONLON INTRODUCED NICK PELLEGRINO OF COD's & ASSOCIATES, INC.,TO REVIEW THE PROPOSED RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN, AND THE SUPERVISORS PERFORMANCE REVIEW HANDBOOK. MR, PELLEGRINO NOTED THAT THESE DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED FOR THE BOARDS REVIEW. L HE EXPLAINED THAT THEY ARE BASED ON RULES 65 $fl01(. 40" 6 r, E-667 JUN 41990 c� X00 '43 ' RAf 668 THE COUNTY HAD AND HAVE BEEN REVIEWED WITH THE DEPARTMENT HEADS. THEIR OBJECTIVE IS TO ADHERE TO ALL THE CONSIDERATIONS, LAWS AND REGULATIONS THAT EXIST IN THE FIELD OF PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION AND TO HAVE A DOCUMENT WHICH WILL GUIDE THE COUNTY IN ITS PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION FROM HERE ON IN. MR. PELLEGRINO COMMENTED THAT MORE AND MORE THINGS ARE BECOMING LEGALISTIC — PEOPLE ARE CHALLENGING MANAGEMENT, AND HE BELIEVED WITHOUT A GOOD GUIDE, THE COUNTY COULD HAVE PROBLEMS. 14 COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF THE ADMINISTRATOR IS IN AGREE— MENT WITH THE PROPOSED RULES AND REGULATIONS, AND MR. JENNINGS STATED THAT HE HAS BEEN OVER THIS WITH MR. DONLON AND STAFF AND AGREES WITH IT IN GENERAL. HE FELT IT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE TO HAVE. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED ABOUT ITEM A 3, ON PAGE 1-1 WHICH STATES THAT AIDES TO -THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR OFFICE SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM THESE RULES. MR. PELLEGRINO EXPLAINED THAT THESE WOULD NOT BE CLERICAL OR SECRETARIAL TYPE AIDES. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF ANYONE OTHER THAN THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR WOULD BE CONSIDERED AN AIDE, AND MR. JENNINGS STATED NOT AT THIS TIME, BUT POSSIBLY IN THE FUTURE, CHAIRMAN SIEBERT INQUIRED ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF EXEMPTING ANYONE EXCEPT THE ADMINISTRATOR. MR. PELLEGRINO NOTED THAT YOU SOMETIMES HANDLE TOP LEVEL PEOPLE DIFFERENTLY. IT PROVIDES EASE IN SELECTION AND DISCHARGE AND TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION ANY SPECIAL TYPE OF ARRANGEMENTS THAT HAVE TO BE MADE WITH THESE PEOPLE — SOME ARE ON A CONTRACT BASIS, HE BELIEVED THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR SHOULD HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO CHOOSE AND SELECT HIS OWN STAFF. COMMISSIONER WODTKE FELT THIS WOULD BE COVERED BY ITEM A 7 — PERSONS UNDER CONTRACT. HE NOTED THAT IF SUCH A PERSON WANTED TO RUN FOR COUNTY OFFICE, HE WOULD NOT HAVE TO RESIGN. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT THERE ARE OTHER RULES COVERING THAT. :• ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS NOTED THAT AS THE COUNTY CHANGES, WE MAY SEE DIFFERENT ARRANGEMENTS WITH THE ADMINISTRATOR THAN WE HAVE HAD OVER THE PAST 14 YEARS. HIS THINKING WAS THAT THIS WOULD OFFER SOME BASE FOR FUTURE BOARDS RATHER THAN THE PRESENT BOARD. DISCUSSION CONTINUED, AND MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT THEY COULD ELIMINATE AIDES AND ASSISTANTS TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM PORTIONS OF THE HIRE AND DISCHARGE PART. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE COULD NOT PICTURE WHO WOULD FALL IN THAT CATEGORY AND HE WOULD JUST AS SOON STRIKE THAT NOTATION. COMMISSIONER WODTKE FELT IT SHOULD READ JUST THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND LEAVE EVERYONE ELSE OUT, AND THE CHAIRMAN AGREED. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS COMMENTED THAT HE WAS LOOKING AT THIS PROVISION IN A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT VIEW AND AT THIS POINT, IF THAT IS THE INTENT, HE WOULD SEE NO REASON WHY EVEN AN ADMINISTRATOR SHOULDNIT BE UNDER THOSE RULES AS THEY ALWAYS HAVE BEEN BEFORE. MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT MORE AND MORE ADMINISTRATORS ARE BECOMING CONTRACTUALLY ALIGNED WITH THEIR PARTICULAR JOBS, AND THE TOP PERSON USUALLY IS EXCLUDED. AFTER FURTHER DISCUSSION, IT WAS AGREED TO EXEMPT JUST THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND STRIKE ITEM 3 OUT ALTOGETHER. COMMISSIONER WODTKE NEXT INQUIRED ABOUT ITEM 10 ON PAGE 3-4, WHICH RELATES TO AN EMPLOYEE CAMPAIGNING FOR OFFICE, AND ASKED IF THIS IS A STANDARD TYPE CLAUSE INCLUDED IN MOST COUNTY PERSONNEL POLICY RULES. MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT THIS HAS BEEN TESTED LEGALLY. IF A COUNTY EMPLOYEE IS CAMPAIGNING FOR A COUNTY OFFICE, YOU CAN INSIST THAT THEY RESIGN. IF IT WERE FOR ANOTHER POLITICAL BODY, THEN YOU WOULD NOT.BE ON GOOD CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE DID NOT REALLY APPROVE OF DISSEMINATION OF POLITICAL MATERIAL BY COUNTY EMPLOYEES. HE NOTED THAT THEY CAN EXPRESS THEIR OPINION, BUT ASKED IF THEY CAN PASS OUT CAMPAIGN LITERATURE WHILE THEY ARE ON THE JOB. 67 JUN 4-1980 r- JUN 4 1980�? BOOK 43 PAGE 670 MR. PELLEGRINO FELT THAT IS COVERED. THEY CAN WEAR OR DISPLAY POLITICAL BADGES, BUT IF THEY SIT AT THEIR DESK AND PASS . OUT LEAFLETS, HE BELIEVED THEY ARE ACTIVELY PURSUING THIS, AND IT WOULD BE GROUNDS FOR BRINGING CHARGES FOR POLITICAL ACTIVITY WHILE IN THE EMPLOY OF THE COUNTY. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THEY MAY EXPRESS THEIR OPINION ABOUT CANDIDATES, AND MR. PELLEGRINO DID NOT FEEL YOU CAN STOP THAT. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF THEY CAN DO THIS DURING WORKING HOURS, AND MR. PELLEGRINO FELT YOU COULD SPECIFY DURING OFF DUTY HOURS. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT CONTINUED TO DISCUSS HANDING OUT POLITICAL MATERIAL, AND MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT PAGE I2-2, ITEM 91 COVERS HANDING OUT MATERIALS ON COUNTY TIME. COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT MOST OF THESE RULES AND REGULA- TIONS PERTAIN TO AN EMPLOYEE DOING THEIR OWN JOB - NOT THEIR SPARE TIME. SHE FELT THAT AN EMPLOYEE CAN DO ALL THESE THINGS, BUT NOT ON COUNTY TIME. MR. PELLEGRINO POINTED OUT THAT THE RULES ONLY COVER AN EMPLOYEE WHILE ENGAGED IN HIS EMPLOYMENT WITH THE COUNTY, HE FELT THERE COULD BE RESTRICTIONS - FOR INSTANCE, A PERSON COULD BE ON THEIR LUNCH HOUR AND DECIDE TO EAT IN THE OFFICE, BUT THEY STILL CAN `T VIOLATE THE RULES AS THOUGH THEY WERE SITTING IN A RESTAURANT OR THEIR CAR. HE DID NOT FEEL YOU CAN GET TO A POINT WHERE YOU ARE GOING TO EXCLUDE EVERY CIRCUMSTANCE. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT WE SHOULD LEAVE IT VAGUE AND INDICATE THAT EMPLOYMENT IN THE COUNTY DOES NOT PREVENT YOU FROM ENTERING THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES WHEN YOU ARE AWAY FROM WORK, AND FORGET ABOUT TRYING TO DEFINE WHAT THEY CAN DO AT WORK. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON AGREED THAT THIS MAY NEED TO BE REWORKED. MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT ORIGINALLY CITIES AND COUNTIES RESTRICTED EMPLOYEES FROM ENGAGING IN ANY TYPE OF POLITICAL ACTIVITY, AND THEN SOMEBODY CHALLENGED THAT IN THE COURTS. NUMEROUS CASES CAME OUT WITH CERTAIN THINGS EMPLOYEES COULD DO WITHOUT BEING IN •r• VIOLATION OF PERFORMING THEIR DUTIES, AND THESE ARE WHAT ARE ENUMERATED. WE ARE JUST SAYING THAT THESE THINGS CAN BE DONE, AND WE CANNOT SAY ANYTHING UNLESS IT INTERFERES WITH THE INTERNAL RULES, MR. NELSON FELT IT SHOULD STATE "WITHOUT INTERFERENCE WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR JOBS." MR. PELLEGRINO COMMENTED THAT ITEMS 1-9 UNDER POLITICAL ACTIVITY COULD BE DELETED, BUT WENT ON TO SAY THAT THE SUPERVISOR NEEDS SOMETHING TO REFER TO IN MAKING A DECISION, AND HE FELT WE WANT TO GIVE THE SUPERVISOR AS MANY TOOLS AS WE CAN IN THE MANUAL. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE DID NOT WISH ANYONE TO INTERPRET THE RULES SO THAT THEY COULD CAMPAIGN WHILE WORKING. COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED ON ITEM 3.05, PAGE 3-5, WHICH STATED NO RELATIVE OF ANY EMPLOYEE OF THE COUNTY WHO HAS SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY WILL BE HIRED WITHIN THE SAME DEPARTMENT, EXCEPT AS MAY BE DETERMINED IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE COUNTY. HE ASKED WHO WOULD MAKE THAT DETERMINATION, AND MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT IT WOULD BE THE ADMINISTRATOR. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF WE NEED THAT EXCEPTION, ,AND MR. PELLEGRINO FELT THERE ARE SITUATIONS THAT MAY OCCUR. HE STATED THAT THEY WERE QUOTING STATE LAW AND FELT YOU WANT AS MUCH FLEXIBILITY AS POSSIBLE SO YOU DON T PAINT YOURSELF INTO -A CORNER. --- CHAIRMAN - CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT PAGE 3-5, ITEM 3.06,DISCOURAGES BUT DOES NOT RESTRICT EMPLOYEES FROM OTHER EMPLOYMENT DURING OFF DUTY HOURS. HE ASKED IF, FOR INSTANCE, ONE OF OUR PLANNERS COULD GET A JOB AS A CONSULTANT. MR. PELLEGRINO GAVE THE EXAMPLE OF AN EMPLOYEE FOR WISHES TO DO CERTAIN JOBS FOR A CONTRACTOR OFF DUTY. HE STATED THAT AS LONG a AS THAT CONTRACTOR DOES NOT CONTRACT WITH THE COUNTY AND THERE IS NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST, WE CANNOT RESTRICT THAT INDIVIDUAL, THOUGH WE CAN DISCOURAGE HIM. MR. PELLEGRINO FELT WE COULD INSIST THAT THE COUNTY IS HIS PRIMARY EMPLOYMENT AND IF WE NEED HIS SERVICES ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS, HE HAS TO BE REASONABLY AVAILABLE. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON NOTED THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR SHALL DETERMINE WHETHER THERE IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. JUN 41980 69 ou 41.3`46x,871 JuN 41980 BOQK � 43 PAGE 672 CHAIRMAN SIEBERT POINTED OUT THAT THEY ARE USING AN EXAMPLE OF A TRADESMAN AND HE WISHED TO KNOW IF SOMEONE IN FINANCE OR PLANNING, FOR EXAMPLE, COULD GET A JOB AS A CONSULTANT. MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT AS LONG AS THIS DOESN'T INTERFERE WITH THEIR JOB FOR THE COUNTY, WE CANNOT PREVENT IT. IF OVER A TIME, IT MEANT DIMINISHED ACTIVITY ON THEIR PRIMARY JOB, THEN YOU COULD TAKE ACTION. COMMISSIONER WODTKE DISCUSSED THE HOLIDAY SCHEDULE WHICH IS INCLUDED ON PAGE 5-1. HE NOTED THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A MANUAL, AND HE DID NOT FEEL IT IS NECESSARY TO PRINT IN A MANUAL WHAT THE HOLIDAYS ARE WHEN THEY ARE GOING TO BE REVIEWED EVERY YEAR. HE FELT IT SHOULD JUST STATE THAT HOLIDAYS WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE BOARD ON A YEARLY BASIS. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT THIS IS INFORMATION THAT THE EMPLOYEES WOULD WANT -TO KNOW. MR. PELLEGRINO EXPLAINED THAT PART OF HIS FIRMS JOB IS TO GET TOGETHER A LITTLE EMPLOYEE HANDBOOK, WHICH WILL EXCERPT SOME OF THE MAJOR PARTS OF THESE RULES AND REGULATIONS. THIS BOOK THAT THE BOARD IS REVIEWING IS THE SUPERVISORS MANUAL; THE EMPLOYEE WILL GET EXCERPTS OF BENEFITS AND OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION. THE OTHER THINGS ARE ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT DID NOT FEEL THE EMPLOYEE HANDBOOKS NEED TO LIST THE HOLIDAYS. COMMISSIONER LYONS WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE EMPLOYEES SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THE HOLIDAYS EVEN IF THIS INFORMATION WAS GIVEN THEM ON A SEPARATE PIECE OF PAPER BECAUSE THE MORE YOU CAN GIVE THAT IS SOLID AND THE BETTER PEOPLE UNDERSTAND, THE BETTER OFF YOU ARE. HE BELIEVED THAT THE BOOK WILL NOT BE BOUND, AND PAGES COULD BE SUB- STITUTED YEARLY, THE ADMINISTRATOR FELT IT SHOULD JUST BE NOTED THAT THE HOLIDAYS ARE REVISED YEARLY BY THE BOARD. IN FURTHER DISCUSSION, COMMISSIONERS LOY AND WODTKE, AND CHAIRMAN SIEBERT,FELT THE HOLIDAY SCHEDULE SHOULD BE OMITTED, AND IT WAS GENERALLY AGREED TO LEAVE IT OUT. 0 � � r COMMISSIONER WODTKE NEXT DISCUSSED SECTION 6, VACATION LEAVE. HE NOTED THAT AFTER I YEAR AND UP TO 5 YEARS, AN EMPLOYEE GETS 10 DAYS VACATION LEAVE AND WISHED TO KNOW IF THAT IS TEN WORKING DAYS. MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT IT IS TEN WORKING DAYS, AND COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT HOLIDAYS DON'T COUNT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT, IN OTHER WORDS, THEY WOULD GET 10 VACATION DAYS AND 10 HOLIDAYS, AND MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT HE WOULD INSERT THE WORDS "WORKING DAYS" - UNDER VACATION LEAVE CREDIT. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT COMMENTED THAT IF AN EMPLOYEE SHOULD GET SICK ON VACATION AND CAN PROVE IT, IT WOULDN'T COUNT AGAINST THE VACATION LEAVE. COMMISSIONER DEESON ASKED IF THEY ARE SAYING UNDER 6.05 A -ACCRUAL, THAT A 15 -YEAR EMPLOYEE CANNOT CARRY OVER ANNUAL LEAVE, AND MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT WAS SO; AT THAT POINT, IT IS A "USE IT OR LOSE IT" SITUATION. COMMISSIONER WODTKE BROUGHT UP MEDICAL LEAVE, PAGE 7-1, AND ASKED IF IT WAS NORMAL TO CHARGE MEDICAL LEAVE IN 1/2 HOUR MINIMUM INCREMENTS. MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT IT WAS. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF MEDICAL LEAVE THAN CAN BE ACCUMULATED. MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF SICK LEAVE THAT CAN BE ACCUMULATED AT THE PRESENT TIME IS 60 DAYS, BUT THEY ARE RECOMMENDING THERE BE NO LIMIT ON MEDICAL LEAVE. WHEN YOU PUT A LIMIT ON A MEDICAL LEAVE, THIS ENCOURAGES PEOPLE TO TAKE IT AND USE IT WHEN THEY ARE COMING TO THE PERIOD WHERE THEY ARE GOING TO LOSE IT. WHEN THERE IS A NO-LIMIT`ACCUMULATION, THIS BENEFITS YOUR LONG 0 TERM PEOPLE BECAUSE AS A PERSON STAYS WITH YOU AND GETS ON IN THE ORGANIZATION AND AGE, THEY WOULD BE MORE SUSCEPTIBLE TO USING THE SICK LEAVEIAND WHAT YOU ACTUALLY DO BY LIMITING IT IS PENALIZE THE EMPLOYEE WHO DOESN'T USE IT. COMMISSIONER LOY FELT NOT LIMITING THE MEDICAL LEAVE WOULD BE A WAY OF REWARDING AN EMPLOYEE WHO DOESN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A SITUATION. 71 JUN 41980 BOOK " P��Fa JUN 41980 BOOK ', 43 PAGE -674 CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT IN THE DRAFT OF THE RULES, YOU COULD ACCUMULATE UP TO 60 DAYS AND THEN YOU COULD TRANSFER THE 60 DAYS AND GET TWO. HE ASKED WHY THIS WAS CHANGED. MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT BUY -BACKS ARE VERY COSTLY, AND IF THEY ARE USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRYING TO STOP PEOPLE FROM ABUSING SICK LEAVE, IT HAS BEEN PROVED THAT THIS DOESNIT WORK. AFTER DIS- CUSSING THIS WITH STAFF, THEY FELT THE UNLIMITED ACCUMULATION WOULD BE A BETTER BENEFIT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT IF A PERSON HAD NOT USED ANY OF THEIR MEDICAL LEAVE AND IF THEY HAD BEEN WITH THE COUNTY FOR A PERIOD OF TEN YEARS, THEY COULD RECEIVE 120 DAYS OF PAID MEDICAL LEAVE, WHICH WOULD AMOUNT TO 24 WEEKS OR SIX MONTHS. HE FELT THIS WAS TOO MUCH ACCUMULATION OF MEDICAL TIME. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT FELT YOU SHOULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION A PERSON -WHO -HAS GONE TEN YEARS AND NOT MISSED A DAY OF WORK, AND THEN GOT VERY SICK OR WAS IN AN ACCIDENT. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT SIX MONTHS WAS NOT TOO FAR OFF FROM WHAT THE BELL SYSTEM PAID. HE BELIEVED AFTER 10-15 YEARS, IT RAN UP TO 26 WEEKS, AND AFTER 20 YEARS, YOU COULD GET A YEAR. HE CONTINUED THAT THIS IS MEANT FOR SOMEBODY WHO HAS GIVEN YOU LONG SERVICE AND SUDDENLY IS FACED WITH A -CATASTROPHE; ACTUALLY, YOU HAVE ACCRUED OVER THAT PERIOD OF TIME FOR THIS CONTINGENCY. HE DID NOT FEEL IT IS TOO FAR OFF INDUSTRIAL PRACTICE. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS FELT IF YOU WILL REVIEW THE TOTAL EMPLOYMENT OF THE COUNTY FORCES, YOU WILL FIND VERY FEW PEOPLE ACCUMULATE SICK LEAVE IN THE TERMS YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. HE NOTED IN THE COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT, IT FREQUENTLY HAPPENS THAT PEOPLE JUST DON T SHOW UP ON MONDAY MORNING AFTER A BIG WEEKEND, AND SOME USE TEN DAYS SICK LEAVE JUST AS REGULAR AS THE YEARS ROLL AROUND. HE CONTINUED THAT HE HAS ALWAYS WANTED TO BE ABLE, AT THE END OF THE YEAR, TO GO TO EACH OF THESE MEN AND SAY - "YOU DIDN`T USE BUT FIVE DAYS OF YOUR SICK LEAVE, SO HERE IS A FIVE DAY BONUS, ETC.," OR "YOU USED IT ALL, SO YOU DON T GET ANY." HE BELIEVED IN THE LONG RUN THE COUNTY WOULD BE WAY AHEAD BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE BETTER PRODUCTION, BUT HE HAS BEEN TOLD HE CANNOT LEGALLY DO THIS. MR. PELLEGRINO INFORMED HIM THAT YOU CAN PAY PEOPLE IN CASH IF THEY DON T USE SICK LEAVE, DADE COUNTY DOES THIS. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AS TO WHETHER YOU HAVE TO HAVE CHARTER GOVERNMENT TO DO THIS, AND MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT ALL THE BOARD HAS TO DO IS MAKE THIS A POLICY AND IT CAN BE DONE RIGHT NOW. IF YOU WANT TO SET A POLICY THAT IF THEY DON'T USE SICK LEAVE, THEY ARE PAID FOR IT AT THE END OF THE YEAR, OR A PORTION OF IT - THIS CAN BE DONE, ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT HE WAS TOLD BY SEVERAL ATTORNEYS THAT THE STATE LAW SAYS YOU CANT PAY A PERSON FOR WORK THEY DID NOT D0, AND MR. PELLEGRINO FELT UNDER THAT CRITERIA, YOU COULDN°T PAY THEM FOR HOLIDAYS EITHER. HE CONTINUED THAT HALF OF THE CITIES AND COUNTIES IN FLORIDA ARE FOLLOWING THE POLICY OF PAYING PEOPLE A PORTION OF THEIR UNUSED SICK LEAVE. IT IS LEGAL. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT IF THERE IS A WAY SUCH A POLICY COULD BE INCLUDED, HE WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF IT. HE NOTED THAT UNDER OUR PRESENT SYSTEM, YOU ACTUALLY GIVE IO DAYS PAY TO SOME PEOPLE WHEN OTHERS ARE WORKING THOSE SAME 10 DAYS AND NOT GETTING ANYTHING FOR IT. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT COMMENTED THAT 7.06 A COULD BE CHANGED JUST TO READ THAT EMPLOYEES WITH TEN YEARS OR MORE SERVICE SHALL BE PAID HALF OF UNUSED MEDICAL LEAVE CREDIT TO A MAXIMUM OF 240 HOURS. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE THAT CHAPTER TO BE REVIEWED BECAUSE SICK LEAVE IS ONE OF THE MOST ABUSED POLICIES THE COUNTY HAS. HE SUGGESTED`-WE.MIGHT STATE THAT THE EMPLOYEE SHALL s BE PAID FOR UNUSED MEDICAL LEAVE TIME AFTER THEY HAVE ACCUMULATED 60 DAYS SICK LEAVE. COMMISSIONER LOY AGREED THAT THIS SECTION SHOULD BE EXPLORED AND REWORKED AS JUST DISCUSSED BECAUSE WE NEED TO CREATE AN INCENTIVE SO PEOPLE DO NOT MISUSE SICK LEAVE. L- 73 MOK . 43 JUN 4 1980 am 43 '67rE G76 COMMISSIONER DEESON ASKED ABOUT CONSIDERING AN OPTION.OF EITHER ACCEPTING SOME KIND OF COMPENSATION FOR THE UNUSED PORTION OR JUST LETTING IT ACCUMULATE. MR. PELLEGRINO REVIEWED THE SUGGESTION MADE BY THE ADMINIS- TRATOR - I.E., WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL ACCUMULATES UP TO 60 DAYS, EVERY YEAR THEREAFTER THE INDIVIDUAL WILL BE COMPENSATED AT THE END OF THAT YEAR FOR THE PORTION OF SICK'LEAVE HE DOES NOT USE IN EXCESS OF THAT 60 DAYS, I.E., IF HE USED ONLY.FIVE DAYS THAT YEAR, HE WOULD BE COMPENSATED FOR THE FIVE UNUSED DAYS. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF HE WOULD BE COMPENSATED FOR THE WHOLE FIVE DAYS OR JUST HALF, AND THE ADMINISTRATOR FELT HE SHOULD BE COMPENSATED FOR THE ENTIRE DAY SINCE THE ONES WHO DON'T SHOW UP GET PAID FOR THE WHOLE DAY, MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT HE WILL REWORK THIS SECTION, AND ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS AND MR. DONLON WILL WORK WITH HIM ON IT. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS THAT THE BOARD RECESS THE MEETING AT 5:00 O'CLOCK P.M. AND RECONVENE IN THE MORNING TO DEAL WITH THE REMAINING AGENDA ITEMS. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT SECTION 12.03 SHOULD BE CORRECTED TO STATE THAT THE SUPERVISOR SHALL COMPLETE A "VERBAL WARNING FORM." SHE FURTHER STATED THAT SECTION 16.07 B SHOULD SPECIFY OCTOBER IST INSTEAD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE PROMOTIONAL PROBATIONARY PERIOD. COMMISSIONER LOY THEN COMMENTED THAT WE HAD A PROBLEM THIS YEAR WHEN A BONA FIDE HOLIDAY WAS ACTUALLY A HURRICANE AND SOME OF OUR PEOPLE WERE CALLED TO WORK. SHE FELT THIS IS HANDLED UNDER SECTION 16.11 B, AND MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF IT. MR. PELLEGRINO NOTED THAT THERE ARE NOT TOO MANY CHANGES SUGGESTED IN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS, AND HE FELT HE CAN MAKE THEM FAIRLY RAPIDLY. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AGREED THAT HE SHOULD DO THIS, AND THE BOARD CAN ADOPT THEM AT THE NEXT MEETING. MR. PELLEGRINO NEXT REVIEWED THE SUPERVISOR°S PERFORMANCE REVIEW HANDBOOK. THIS IS BASICALLY A FORM THEY FEEL WOULD QUALIFY THE EMPLOYEE FOR THE MERIT TYPE INCREASE THE BOARD HAD ANTICIPATED GIVING. HE STATED THAT THIS FORM CAME ABOUT BECAUSE OF THE QUARTILE SYSTEM, AND IT IS WORKABLE, ALTHOUGH HE FELT THAT PEOPLE CAN MAKE NUMBERS COME OUT ANY WAY THEY WANT THEM TO, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON FELT THE FORM IS A BIT "BUSY," BUT WE NEED SOMETHING RIGHT NOW AND WE CAN WORK WITH IT THIS YEAR AND SEE HOW IT GOES. COMMISSIONER LYONS AGREED THAT IT IS KIND OF BUSY, BUT IT DOES GIVE PEOPLE SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT WHEN MAKING THEIR EVALUATIONS. IN FURTHER CONVERSATIONS, IT WAS NOTED THAT THESE FORMS WILL DEPEND ON THE EFFORTS OF THE SUPERVISORS IN FILLING THEM OUT. MR. PELLEGRINO CONTINUED THAT THE LAST DOCUMENT PRESENTED IS A BASIC AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN. HE STATED THAT IT WOULD SATISFY THE BASIC REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE LAWS RIGHT NOW; IT IS REQUIRED; AND IT IS THE MINIMUM TO BE ACCEPTABLE. ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED ANOTHER PLAN AND THIS IS AN AMENDMENT. MR. DONLON AGREED THAT IT IS TO REPLACE THAT PLAN. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED ABOUT PAGE 6, ITEM 6; -AND ASKED WHAT COLLEGE THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT. IT WAS FELT THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE WOULD APPLY. HE STATED THAT HE WOULD ASSUME THAT WHEN WE ADOPT THIS PLAN, WE WILL BE APPROVING A NEW POSITION IN THE COUNTY - AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COORDINATOR. MR. PELLEGRINO STATED THAT WAS NOT THE CASE. HE FELT IT WOULD BE A PERSON ALREADY ON THE PAYROLL, SUCH AS MR, DONLON; IT WOULD NOT BE A NEW ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-55 APPROVING THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN DATED .JUNE, 1980, AND RESCINDING ANY OTHER PLAN ADOPTED PREVIOUSLY. 75 BOOK,. 43 `*tt 7 r - BOOK 43 PAGE 670 RESOLUTION NO. 80-55 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA That that AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, dated June 4, 1980, is hereby adopted and supersedes all other Plans in effect as of June 4, 1980; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED That said AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN shall remain in effect until amended. Said Resolution shall become effective as of the _day of , 1980. Attest: JL`' Freda Wrig , lerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY lard(W.- Sie ert, J Chairman L - I ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE SUPERVISOR'S PERFORMANCE REVIEW HANDBOOK AS PRESENTED, (COPY IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK.) ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REVIEWED THE BID COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS ON BID #41 - WEEDKILLER,AND BID #42 - PARTS FOR TWO TRAFFIC SIGNALS. HE EXPLAINED THAT THE BID FOR THE GIFFORD LIGHT AT NORTH GIFFORD ROAD AND U.S. #1 IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT HAS BEEN DECIDED NOT TO PUT THE LIGHT IN AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME, BUT WE WANT TO HAVE THE INFORMATION FOR WHEN WE ARE READY TO GO. THEY ARE RECOMMENDING THAT SIGNAL CONSTRUCTION CO., WHO IS LOW BIDDER, BE AWARDED THE BID ON THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL PARTS, THIS IS FOR THE LIGHT AT ROUTE 60 AND KINGS HIGHWAY WHICH WAS APPROVED. THEY ARE ALSO RECOMMENDING THAT THE BID ON THE CHEMICAL DOW -PON C BE AWARDED TO HELENA CHEMICAL CO. AND THE BID ON STICKER BE AWARDED TO ASGROW FLORIDA CO. HE NOTED THAT THE 2-4D DURENE HAS BEEN TAKEN OFF THE MARKET. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BID COMMITTEE, AND ACCEPTED THE BID OF SIGNAL CONSTRUCTION CO_. ON THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT S.R. 60 AND KINGS HIGHWAY, :'l IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,918.51; THE BID OF HELENA CHEMICAL CO. ON DOW -PON C IN THE AMOUNT OF $1.55 PER LB.; AND THE BID OF ASGROW FLORIDA CO. ON STICKER AT $5.04 PER GAL., ALL AS BEING THE LOWEST AND BEST BIDS MEETING SPECIFICATIONS, 77 JUN 4 NO ��pIC 43 F - BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2145 -14th Avenue 1 BO Vero Beach, Florida 32950 JUS 4 19 BID TABULATION u ti PAE 68th BID NO. IRC 42 DATE OF OPENING May 27; 1980 TITLETraffic Signal Equip (part , c o w* a 4 a, 0 h� 0 �' �4" C,y *r�4 `�'�� ti r cme° do-"vBID may° ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PF 1. Traffic Signal- US #1 & 11 00 10,21 6 0,237 2L1 N/B 2. 2-4D Durene(67k gal) NIB * 8 25 al *7 50 al Gifford Rd. 3. Sticker 160 al NIB 5 04 al 8 00 al 2- 1n�1typry timm required after 60-90 da 60 daval 30 a s required after receipt receipt of Purchase order -a- * 2-41) D irene Has Deen disco itinuei Trnffir - B Certified true price Kings Highway recording Nei . Nelson C airma a after receipt of Purchase * Mijor Elect rc d not bid o. bLd vaelfor. " of jon- lice" for all i ems reque ted Certified a true price reco ding Nelsou Chairman, Bid Committee Bids sent out W) Bids reeld y BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2145 -14th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Go �N e e u ti BID TABULATION �°r, Ci u BID NO DATE # 41 DATM OF 27 19S� Y 0 OPENING ci" a°" b� a?e Q BID TITLE ° Weedkiller `0 3e a �0 w� ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE 1. Dow -Pon C (9750 Ib) NIB 1 70 lb.K 55 b 2. 2-4D Durene(67k gal) NIB * 8 25 al *7 50 al 3. Sticker 160 al NIB 5 04 al 8 00 al 4. Delivery time (in days) required after receipt LV -a- * 2-41) D irene Has Deen disco itinuei an is prohil,itc d for i ise Certified true price recording Nei . Nelson C airma Bids sent out (9) Bids rectd (3) ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED PAYMENT TO THE JOINT VENTURE OF AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $3,000.00 FOR PREPARING RESPONSE TO COMMENTS AN�ISIONS AS NECESSARY TO jKWO1 PLAN. - 7 ENGINEER JOHN ROBBINS CAME BEFORE THE BOARD TO REVIEW THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION WHICH SETS OUT THE ALTERNATIVE COST EVALUATIONS FOR THE VERA CRUZ PUMPING STATION: ALTERNATIVE COST EVALUATION FOR THE VERA CRUZ PUMPING STATION I SCOPE: The scope of this evaluation is to analyze the construction costs associated with each of the six alternatives considered for the Vera Cruz pump station. The six alternatives were outlined in a memorandum from Mr. Lynn E. Mueller of the Joint Venture to Mr. George Liner, County Utilities Director, dated April 1, 1980, copy attached. The costs presented in this evaluation are intended to provide the County Commission with data necessary to determine the appropriate fee(s) due the County by the Harbor Island Developers for County sewer service within the Pebble Bay sewerage area. It should be noted, the cost shown in this evaluation are based on engineering estimates which were determined by contacting various contractors who have the required experience for this type of work, evaluation of other project bids of similar scope and engineering judgement. II COST EVALUATION: Listed following in Table 1 are s -ix pump station -alterna- tives with applicable descriptions.. Also listed are the es- - timated construction costs associated with each alternative. Alternative No. 6 was used as the basis for cost determinations and the other alternative costs were adjusted up or down accordingly. Also shown with each alternative is an estimate of the pro rata share applicable to the Harbor Island Development. The formula used for determination of the pro rata share is given by: JUN Pro Rata Share = Number of Units in Harbor Island X Construction Total Units Connected to Vera Cruz Cost for each Pump Station for Each Alternative Alternative e 79 _ .. 4 80 BOOK 43?�°FAcE fib t JUK 41980 TABLE I - ALTERNATIVE COST SUMMARY FOR VERA CRUZ PUMP STATION AND PRO RATA SHARE t 682 DETERMINATION FOR HARBOR ISLAND CLUB Estimated Alternative Construction Harbor Island No. Alternative Description Cost Pro Rata Share 1. Reworking existing Vera Cruz $ 3,000 Not applicable - does pump station to provide added not consider Harbor pump, motor, electrical panel Island flow. and place in operation to D.E.R. compliance. Station to receive flow from Pebble Bay North and South and Vera Cruz Condominiums.- Pump to existing S.T.P. Same as Alternative No. 1 but consider inclusion of flow from Harbor Island New Vera Cruz pump station receiving flow from Pebble By North and South and Vera Cruz Condominiums. Pumping to the existing S.T.P. Same at Alternative 3 but -consider inclusion of flow from Harbor Island New Vera Cruz pump station receiving flows from Pebble Bay North and South, Vera Cruz Condominiums, Sea Watch and Pebble Beach Villas Condominiums. Pumping to City of Vero Beach system. Includes 2,000 ft. of 6" force main at $6.25 per ft. Same as Alternative No. 5 but consider inclusion of flow from Harbor Island pumping to City of Vero Beach system. Includes 2,000 ft. of 6" force main at $6.25 per ft. $ 3,000 $35,000 $36,000 $55,800 $56,500 Not applicable - station cannot handle additional flow. Not applicable - does not consider Harbor Island flow. $10,000 Not applicable - does not consider Harbor Island flow. * NOTE: The pro rata share does not include any cost associated with the required wastewater treatment plant improvements. It is recom- mended a separate pro rata share determination be made for the treatment plant improvements. � ® r SVERDRUP & PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. AND BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (A JOINT VENTURE) Project No. 6765 MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. George Liner Utilities Director Indian River County, Florida FROM: Lynn E. Mueller SUBJECT: Vera Cruz Pump Station Evaluation and Alternatives DATE: April 1, 1980 This memo is intended to summarize the various pumping configurations for the Vera Cruz Pump Stat ion in reference to the Harbour Island Club. The following table lists the six (6) possible alternatives for the Vera Cruz Pump Station which will be evaluated on an economic, pro -rata share basis for the Harbour Island Club. VERA CRUZ PUMP STATION ALTERNATIVES Alternative No. Condition Effect Solution 1. Existing Vera Cruz Pump Station Marginal New Pump with modified Pebble Bay North Hydraulic Station Pump Sta., new Pebble Bay South Overload Pump Sta. and Vera Cruz Condo- miniums on line; pumping to Pebble Bay Wastewater Treat- ment Plant. 2. Existing Vera Cruz Pump Station Worse New Pump as described in Alt. No. 1, Hydraulic Station but with Harbour Island Club; Overload pumping to Pebble Bay Waste- than in water Treatment Plant. Alt. 1 - 3. New Vera Cruz Pump Station Need with modified Pebble Bay 135 6' -dia. North Pump Sta.-, new Pebble gpm Pumps wet well, Bay South Pump Sta., and 13' deep Vera Cruz Condominiums on line; pumping to Pebble Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant. 4. New Vera Cruz Pump Station as described in Alt. No. 3, Need Add 3" depth but with Harbour Island Club; 165 gpm to Alt. No. 3 Pumping to Pebble Bay Waste- pumps wet well; water Treatment Plant. larger pumps 81 , p �Q,r� S BOOK 43 " PAGE"683 JUN 4 1980 JUN 4 NO A Alternative No. VERA CRUZ PUMP STATION ALTERNATIVES (cont.) Condition :. Book ` 4 PAGEn684 Effect Solution 5• New Vera Cruz Pump Station 1J45dgpm 6' -dia. with modified -Pebble Bay North Pump Sta., new Pebble Bay South pumps, Higher Head 16' Pump Sta., Vera Cruz Condo- (TDH) and deep miniums, Seawatch Pump Sta., larger and Pebble Beach Villas Pump horsepower Sta. on line; pumping to the City of Vero Beach Wastewater (HP) pumps than Alt. System. Nos. 3&4 6• New Vera Cruz Pump Station as described in Alt. Na. 5, geed Add 3" depth but with Harbour Island Club; 175 gpm pumps to Alt. No. 5 wet well; pumping to City of Vero Beach wastewater system. larger pumps It is proposed to include the following bids in the "Wastewater Pumping Station Improvements for the Pebble Bay Sewerage Area" Plans and Specifications: Base Bid: Modify the existing Vera Cruz Pump Station control panel for a standby pump (to be supplied by the County). -Alternate Bid:- Furnish and install a new Vera Cruz Pump Station <-- with Alt. No. 6 sized wet well and Alt. No. 4 pumps. These two bid prices will enable us to determine the construction cost of all six alternatives and thereby evaluate Harbour Island Club's fair share, pro -rata cost of the Vera Cruz Pump Station. We are available to present these alternative construction costs and evaluation at the May 7, 1980 Indian River County Commission meeting. It is our recommendation that a new Vera Cruz pump station as described under the Alternate Bid be constructed initially. This would facilitate installing larger pumps and meet the required wet well size (6" dia.- 16'-3" deep) at the time the Pebble Bay Area ties into the City of Vero Beach's system. MR. ROBBINS NOTED THAT ALTERNATIVE #1 IS A KIND OF DO- NOTHING SITUATION. IT WOULD PUT THE STATION IN COMPLIANCE, BUT IT IS BORDERLINE RIGHT NOW. ALTERNATIVE #Z WOULD BE AN OVERLOAD SITUA- TION AND WOULD NOT BE GOOD ENGINEERING. ALTERNATIVE #3 WOULD BE A NEW STATION, BUT WOULD NOT INCLUDE HARBOR ISLAND. ALTERNATIVE #4 WOULD BE THE SAME AS #3 BUT WOULD INCLUDE THE FLOW FROM HARBOR ISLAND CLUB AND WOULD REQUIRE A LARGER PUMP AND DEEPENING THE WELL SLIGHTLY. THIS WOULD PUMP TO THE EXISTING TREATMENT PLANT. ALTERNATIVE #5 EVALUATES A NEW VERA CRUZ LIFT STATION SERVING PEBBLE BAY, SEA WATCH, ETC., BUT NOT HARBOR ISLAND, AND WOULD PUMP TO THE CITY OF VERO BEACH, AND ALTERNATIVE #6,CONSIDERS SERVING ALL THE VARIOUS STATIONS, PLUS HARBOR ISLAND, AND PUMPING TO THE CITY OF VERO BEACH. MR. ROBBINS STATED THAT THEIR RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT THE COUNTY PUT IN A PUMP STATION LARGE ENOUGH ULTIMATELY TO SERVICE THE ENTIRE AREA AND PUMP TO THE CITY. HE CONTINUED THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE A SPECIFIC TIE-IN POINT TO THE CITY SYSTEM, BUT HAVE BEEN ASSURED THAT 2,000' WILL BE WITHIN A SUFFICIENT RANGE. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH HARBOR ISLAND CLUB THAT WE CAN LIVE WITH. ATTORNEY COLLINS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT ATTORNEY O'HAIRE HAS MADE AN OFFER FOR HIS CLIENTS TO PAY $36,000, OR $900.00 PER TAP -IN; WHICH IS SET OUT IN THE FOLLOWING LETTER. THE PROBLEM THE COUNTY HAS IS HAVING TO FRONT THE MONEY PRIOR TO THE HOOK-UP, BUT ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT IF WE TALK IN TERMS OF THE DOLLARS THAT MR. O'HAIRE'S CLIENT IS WILLING TO PUT UP, WE WILL MOVE A LONG WAY TOWARDS RESOLVING THIS MATTER. 83 aoa 43 PAGE 68541. JUN 41980 I Box 43' PAGE 686 MICIIAWL O'11AIIBC Am-roiammy AT L.vsv May 13, 1980 George G. Collins, Jr., Esq. Collins, Brown, Caldwell & Evans 744 Beachland Boulevard Vero Beach, FL 32960 Re: Harbour Island Club/Island East Corporation/ Pebble Bay Sewer System Dear Joe: Following our latest conversation concerning the above, I have spoken further with my clients, as you requested. Preliminary to a statement of the position my clients will take, I think I should outline the situation: (1) As you know,'my clients acquired the riverfront property within the service area of the Pebble Bay system for several hundreds of thousands of dollars in reliance on an existing County commitment. (2) My clients then released the County from a position taken with previous owners to supply sewer collection and treatment service for $15,000.00. (3) Moreover, my clients in dealing with the Planning Commission, agreed to a density of 40 units -for the parcel instead of the maximum permitted in excess of 60, and were commended for the quality of their development plan. I attach excerpts from the minutes of the Commission establishing the history of the matter. This all occurred in the summer of last year. My discussion with my clients is based on your advice to me that the engineering estimate for rework of the system to accommodate my clients and make necessary repairs to the Vera Cruz lift station would total $45,000.00. Of that figure, $9,000.00 represents an amount which would have to be spent regardless of my clients' project, leaving a figure of $36,000. to bring the system to a point where it could accommodate not only the Harbour Island project but some 40 additional living units. In an effort to compromise and settle the matter finally, on the basis of the matters I have outlined, my clients, for their project, will pay, towards the cost of the renovation of the Pebble Bay system, $900.00 per unit (40 units times $900.00 = $36,000.00). You had expressed to me a concern of actual cost exceeding the estimate and, to cover such excess, my clients will agree, again in an effort to be fair, to a maximum contribution of $1,000.00 per unit (provided that it is clearly understood by the contractor and engineers that this is a contingency excess and is not to be used simply because it is there). of my clients' contribution, $5,000.00 will be paid immediately on permitting of the first five units (2 permits have been issued and 3 applications are pending). An addi- tional $10,000.00 will be paid upon issuance of the balance of permits for the first phase, or 8 additional units, which are ready for permit application or nine months from date, which- ever first occurs. If the matter is resolved in this fashion, to avoid further delay, the Commission should instruct the Building Department to issue permits for construction, pro- vided the plans comply with the requirements of the Building Code, at the meeting on the 21st of this month. ais � The remainder of my clients' financial contribution to renovation of the system will be paid on permitting of the balance of construction and the money is actually necessary for upgrading of the system. (In our discussion, I pointed out to you that we cannot control the timing of construction to be performed under the County's auspices and your response was that timing could be controlled by my client's construction schedule --accordingly, payment of the balance on permitting.) The engineers advise me that the sole bid received for work on the system is unacceptable and you have confirmed to me that the County Commission has rejected the bid. Accordingly, rebidding will be necessary. At this point in time, so much time having elapsed, my clients' construction contracts with general contractors are in jeopardy and the work commenced must be terminated until resolution of the matter. Momentum on the project having been lost and construction forces required to terminate as of May 12, I would like this matter and our pro- posal placed on the agenda for the meeting of the Commission on May 21 before all momentum is hopelessly lost. Given the loss of a favorable construction contract, the current money market and the probable need to renegotiate financing because of delay, the owners of the property have just about reached the point where litigation is as good or better an option as continued negotiation. Unless some sort of accord can be reached on the 21st, I have been instructed to file proceedings based on the commitments already made since, by that time, so much has been lost that there is no other feasible alternative. The supervisory and construction per- sonnell being laid off next week are being instructed to report back on the week following the meeting of the 21st in hopes that their work may proceed. ly, ATTORNEY O'HAIRE NOTED THAT IT IS NOW FIVE DAYS SHORT OF A YEAR TOWARDS TRYING TO RESOLVE THIS SITUATION. HE STATED THAT HIS CLIENTS ARE BUSINESSMEN AND HAVE GIVEN HIM AN ULTIMATUM, AND HE CANNOT CHANGE THE $36,000 OFFER. HE FELT THEY ARE PAYING 64% OF THE TOTAL COST, AND THAT HE HAS GONE AS FAR AS HE IS AUTHORIZED TO GO. COMMISSIONER WODTKE FELT THE TAP -IN FEE FIGURE SHOULD BE BACKED OUT OF THE $36,000 FIGURE. MR. O'HAIRE NOTED THAT THESE FIGURES WERE EVOLVED UNDER THE THEORY OF AN IMPACT FEE, AND IF THEY WERE TO PAY $36,000 PLUS TAP -IN CHARGES AS AN IMPACT FEE, THEY WOULD BE PAYING FOR THEIR IMPACT ON THE IMPACTION SOMEHOW. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT, AS HE SAW IT, THEY HAVE OFFERED SUFFICIENT MONEY TO PAY THEIR IMPACT ON THE SYSTEM. THE METHOD OF PAYMENT MAY OR MAY NOT BE A PROBLEM TO THE ENGINEERS. AS THEY BUILD, THEY PAY, AND THEY ANTICIPATE 40 TAP -INS. IT IS JUN4 190 85 BOB*—' PaGE' ) JUN 41988 BOOK 43 PAGE 688 NOT UNCUSTOMARY TO COLLECT THE MONIES THAT WAY, BUT IT IS UNUSUAL THAT YOU ARE MAKING THE IMPROVEMENTS NOW AND SPENDING THOSE DOLLARS NOW AND RECOVERING THEM OVER A PERIOD OF TWO TO TWO AND A HALF YEARS. ATTORNEY O'HAIRE FELT IT WOULD BE A LESSER PERIOD OF TIME THAN THAT SINCE TWO BUILDINGS ARE UP AND THE PROJECT IS MOVING RIGHT ALONG. HE URGED THAT THE BOARD ACCEPT HIS LETTER OF PROPOSAL TODAY SO HE COULD GET BACK TO HIS CLIENTS WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DELAY. t CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE REALLY DID NOT HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH IT AND BELIEVED WE ARE GETTING ALL WE NEEDED TO HAVE. ENGINEER .JOHN ROBBINS POINTED OUT THAT THE STATEMENT ON THE BOTTOM OF TABLE 1 SETS OUT THAT THE PRO RATA SHARE DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY COST ASSOCIATED WITH THE REQUIRED WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS. ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT THOSE IMPROVEMENTS HAD TO BE MADE IN' ANY EVENT, --AND THIS PROJECT DOES NOT DIRECTLY IMPACT THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. ENGINEERS ROBBINS AGREED THAT THERE WAS VERY LITTLE IMPACT. HE REITERATED THAT THE RECOMMENDATION THEY DID MAKE WOULD BE TO PUT IN A WET WELL LARGE ENOUGH ULTIMATELY TO GO TO THE CITY OF VERO BEACH. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE HAD NO PROBLEM WITH ALTER- NATE #6. ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKED UTILITY DIRECTOR LINER WHAT EXPENSE THE COUNTY WOULD INCUR TO HOOK UP EACH UNIT, AND MR. LINER STATED THAT WE WOULD NOT INCUR ANY. THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE PUTTING IN THE GRAVITY SYSTEM AND THE LINES. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A CONTRACT ON OUR STANDARD UTILITY CONTRACT FORM,CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPOSAL OUTLINED BY ATTORNEY O'HAIRE IN HIS LETTER OF MAY 13, 1980. ENGINEER ROBBINS NOTED THAT THE BID RECEIVED INITIALLY ON THE PUMPING STATION WAS EXCESSIVE, AND THEY HAVE SENT COPIES OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATION TO A CONTRACTOR WITH WHOM THEY HAVE HAD EXPERIENCE FOR REVIEW. HE BELIEVED IT IS THE BOARD'S INTENT TO PUT THIS PROJECT 86 OUT FOR BID AGAIN, AND HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A REVISED ENGINEERING ESTIMATE READY TO PRESENT TO THE BOARD AT THE NEXT MEETING AND POSSIBLY AT THAT TIME RECOMMEND THE ENTIRE PROJECT GO FOR REBID. HE NOTED THAT THE PLAN THEY HAVE PREPARED IS BASED ON ALTERNATE #6. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SOY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ENGINEERS TO PROCEED, USING ALTERNATE #6 AS OUTLINED IN THE JOINT VENTURE'S MEMO OF APRIL 1, 1980. RALPH ENG, ENGINEER WITH THE JOINT VENTURE, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD TO REVIEW THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS, WHICH PRESENT A COST EVALUATION ON THE PROPOSED ALTERNATE SITES FOR THE GIFFORD SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT. HE EXPLAINED THAT AN ADJUSTMENT IN FIGURES AND A MATHMATICAL ERROR RESULTED IN THE TOTAL COST OF THE TWO SITES BEING CHANGED AS FOLLOWS: ALTERNATE N0, 1 FROM $432,181,15 TO $433,681.25 ALTERNATE N0. 2 FROM $385,566.75 TO $380,566,75 JUN 4 1980 87 soon 4, Pacf 69a JUN 4198 BOOK SVERDRUP & PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. AND BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (A JOINT VENTURE) Project No. 5675C May 27, 1980 43 WAGE 690 Mr. Neil Nelson Assistant County Administrator Indian River County - 2145 14th Avenue , County Courthouse -- Vero Beach, Florida 32960 ' SUBJECT: Engineer's Job No. 5675C Gifford Sewage System Improvements Dear Mr. Nelson: We have completed the cost evaluation to construct the Gifford sewage treatment plant on the proposed Alternate oto. 2 site on Lindsey Road. Attached are several supporting documents. A summary -is -as follows -.-- A. Cost to Complete Gifford Sewage System Improvements @ Alternate No. 1 - Kings Highway Site - $" _"_4- - '� �c33.(,i�7•.2� @ Alternate No. 2 - Lindsey Road Site - $366, 566. FS - 4' &Ptd B. Funds Available (From Summary 1/15/80) 1. Total Project Funds Available $1,823,600 2. Funds Used to Date (5/27/80) $1,126,955 3. Other Requirements of Funds a. Pine View Park Water System 60,000 b.. Interest - Second Loan 91000 (1,195,955) Total Funds Available for Sewage System Improvements and Other Work (Approximately) $ 627,645 We trust that the above information and supporting documents are sufficient for the County's evaluation. We are available to present this evaluation at the next Commission meeting. Sincerely, _ James L. Beindorf For the Joint Venture cc: Ralph Eng s � � PROJECT COST ESTIMATES GIFFORD SEWAGE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS TREATMENT PLANT - ALTERNATIVES KINGS HIGHWAY - ALTERNATE NO. 1 (EXISTING DESIGN) LINDSEY ROAD - ALTERNATE NO. 2 (PROPOSED) JOB NOS. 5675C/5675G MAY 27, 1980 •• JUN 4 1980 6009 � PAGE 6 Kings Hwy. Lindsey Rd. . Alt. No. 1 Alt. No. 2 A. Construction $265,345.25(1) $221,310.75(2) B. Additional Engineering To Complete 1. Basic/Redesign $ 5,035 $-24 2. Add. Service -Permits 1,500(3} 8,000(4} 3. Resident Inspection 12,000 12,000 3 Se Od O. !!0 TOTAL44-1498--99 C. Land Cost 110,000.00 88,000.00 D. Contingency @ 15% of A. Construction for Inflation From 9/5/79 39,801.00 33,256.00 #Lf33,-IR (1) Based on Low Bid Received 9/5/79 (2) Includes a Add. 2640 L.F. Fence b� Add. Access Rd. & Site Preparation c) Move Trt. Plt. Units to Site d) Adjustment to Other Quantities See Attachment "A" (3) Re-Bid/Negotiations ' (4) Site Certifications & Permits ' •• JUN 4 1980 6009 � PAGE 6 1 s�Z7��70 LOct/E/OG�C�' .GG-c�.E'��i1.� Xld.2 IRC - PHASE I1 GIFFORD SEWAGE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ��n;GS 9 -xi CONTk,ACTOR COt:TXACTOR CON';,ACTOH CERTIFICATION: I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLnvINc 310 ENGINEER'S CHAPMAN CONSTRUCTION, DRIVEWAYS, Inc. TABULATION IS A TRUE AND ACCURATE AErRODUCTION ESTIMATE INC. 3300 South St, OF THE alnS RECEIVED 1714 Norton Drive Titusville, FL 32780 Orange Park, FL BY I , Item Eseiaraeed Unit Untt I Unit 1 �:T. ((/�7- Descrkptton OuantItIr Unit Price A.-nnoun Price Amount Price Azount I 1'7,Y Q.4/Cf f�iVYl'�U% 1. Furnish b install the proposed submersible pumping station and convert the existing pumping station to a manhole as shown on Drawing No, 5 and as specified L.S. 25,000.00 25,000.00 35,000.00 -� - � GLO.co 2. Furnish and install 6 PVC Force Main 8980 L.F. 5.25 47,145.00 4,00 35,920 6.15 55,227.00 3. Furnish and install 6" DIP Force Main 160 L.F. 7.50 1,200.00 8.00 1.280.00 21.40 3,424.00 /2D Z/.�O ?4-a'ee 4.Furnish and install CIP or IP fittings920 lbs. 1.50 1,380.00 1.00 920.00• 1.50 1,380.00 800/�ZLYJ.Od' 5.Furnish and install Pavement Repairs 20 L.F. 15.00 300.00 10.00 200.00 20.00 400.00 - - 6, Furnish and Install 30' of " PVC and 30' of 12" steel oring and jacking as shown on rawing No. 3 30 'L. F. 60.00 1.800.00 61.00 1,830.00 83.00 2,490.00 7. Furnish and Install Elliptical i'• 22" x 34" CMP 14 Ga., 8i- _ tuminous coated Drainage Pipe 645 L.F. ?6.00 16,770.00 28.95 18,672.75 25.65 16,544.25 R, urnish and Install concrete Irnp inlet box, flashboards +nd pipe and junction box as hown on Drawing No. 6 L.S. 2,500.00 2,000.00 11800,00 - -- -' 9. •urnish all material, labor and quipment to construct and place nto operation the treatment lant and spray irrigation ystem as shown on Drawing No.s ell) 13, inclusive, and as /�Z S �J pecified L.S., 95,000.00 163,800.00 137.000.00 10, onstruct Sewer repair of open Joint designated item "B" on xhibit 2F-1. L.S. 800.00 3,800.00 500.00 Qeindor Sverdrup b�Parcel�end f b Assoc. �!% �'Dp�7iotflC �O.t/57.t?G�GTiG.c,! %T�'•f!ri C_ opm C4 s. ��rn VJ I L C ;;71 u�u nCGC1Yeu Sept. 7. I�/7 Sverdrup b Parcel anJ 8eindorf b Assoc. 1 1 1 ���(�B�/�✓"G ��7��.(/��C �/ IRC - PIIASE 11 GIFrORO SEWAGE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ccttl71ACIUK CUNT KACIOR CONT!tAC'IOR CERT I r 1 CAT 10't I DO HEREBY CEP.TIrY THAT THE rOLLOVINC BID ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE - CHAPMAN CONSTRUCTION, INC. DRIVEWAYS, INC. 3300 South St. TABULATION IS A TR'IE AND ACCURATE REPRODUCTION 1714 Horton Drive Titusville, FL 32780 or TUE BIDS RECEIVED Orange Park, FL BY Item Estimated Unit I Unit I Unit EST Uti�% go,T Description QuantitSre UnSt Price A -+Dunt Pt ice Amount Price A_ -Dunt I Me/ Y 11. Construct sewer repair of borken bell designated item "C" on exhibit 2F -I L.S. 800.00 3,8A0.00 500.00 12, Construct sewer repair at location of cave in de- signated item "D" on ex- hibit 2F-1 L.S. 1,000.00 3,800.00 500.00 <jOO.Q O 13. Construct sewer repair of broken Bell designated item "E" on exhibit 2F-1 L.S. 800.00 3.,800.00 500.00 �lr,a0 14• Construct sewer repair of house lateral designated "F" rS exhibit 2F-1 L.S. 500.00 3,800.00 500.00 O L� 15. onstruct sewer repair of ouse lateral designated item "G" on exhibit 2r-1 L.S. 500.00 3,800.00 500.00 OO,G D 16. Construct sewer repair of ,roken bell designated item •'H" on exhibit 2F-1 L.S. 800.00 3,800.00 500.00 X00 0 0 17. onstruct sewer repair of ,ervice lateral designated 'I" on exhibit 2F.1 L.S. 500.00 3,800.00 500.00 p 18. _onstruct sewer repair of emoving debris from pipe esignated item "K" on ex- ibit 2F-1 L.S. 1,000.00 3,800.00 500.00 19, onstruct sewer repair of roken bell designated item L" on exhibit 2F -I i..S, 800.00 3,800.00 500.00 rDO CG 20, onstruct sewer repair of „ ouse lateral designated - tem "M" on exhibit 2r-1 L.S. 600.00 31800.00 500.00 ��i9•!�v I u�u nCGC1Yeu Sept. 7. I�/7 Sverdrup b Parcel anJ 8eindorf b Assoc. 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sverdrup d Parcel and Deindorf b Assoc. CW _I .lObt//3/O�t'.�' •c•GTe.°c".t."�(/.+•lTc ��•%>•e7 IRC - PHASE It GIFFORD SEWAGE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS // Cf R11 F I CAI I Ott CCti:RACIOk CONUACIOR CUti7n:,C70R I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOL LOVING 810 ENGINEER'S EST19ATE CHAPMAN•CONSTRUCTION, DRIVEWAYS, INC. TABULATION IS A TRUE ASD ACCURATE REPRODUCTION LNC . 1714'Horton Drive 3300 South SL. OF TUE BIDS RECEIVED Titusville, FL 32780 Orange Park, FL BY Item No. Description Estimated Quantities L'nit Unit Price A_�eunt L'n!t I. Price Amount Unit Price Annunt C`S.T I G1.ViT 4*�{r/'(f/y QTa'�/t.,.t 21. Furnish and construct new 8" VC sewer line and remove existing sewer designated item "N" on exhibit 2F-1 L.S. 10,000.00 12,580.00 +8.580.00 *Per letter 9/7/79 i t L• i TOTAL DID PRICE I $209,095,00 $304,002.75 $265,345.2 I 22/3/4.7 Did Received Snot_ 5. 1070 Sverdrup d Parcel and Deindorf b Assoc. CW _I � � r MR. ENG THEN POINTED OUT THE ALTERNATE SITES ON A MAP. ALTERNATE #1 IS ON KING`S HIGHWAY, AND IS THE SITE FOR WHICH THE DER HAS ISSUED A PERMIT. ALTERNATE #2 A 40 ACRE SITE, IS LOCATED ON L,INDSEY ROAD IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF WHERE WE WOULD COME OUT OF THE LIFT STATION. MR, ENG THEN REVIEWED THE ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS FOR ALTERNATES I AND 2. HE NOTED THAT AN APPRAISAL WAS MADE OF ALTERNATE I/ WHICH THE COUNTY ALREADY OWNS, AND A PRICE OF $5,500 PER ACRE, OR $110,000 WAS SET. THIS IS SHOWN AS A RELATIVE FIGURE IN ORDER TO COMPARE COSTS;. THEY INCLUDED A 15% CONTINGENCY FOR INFLATION. MR. ENG NEXT DISCUSSED THE AMOUNT OF FORCE MAIN THAT WOULD NOT BE NECES- SARY WITH ALTERNATE 2 AND INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THEY USED FIGURES FROM THE BID TABULATION AND ADJUSTED THEM TO DETERMINE THE CONSTRUC- TION COST FOR ALTERNATE 2. HE POINTED OUT THAT THE ALTERNATE 2 SITE WILL REQUIRE FENCE, WILL NECESSITATE BUILDING AN ACCESS ROAD, AND ALSO WILL NECESSITATE MOVING THE TREATMENT PLANT FROM ONE SITE TO ANOTHER. ALL THESE FACTORS ARE INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL COST. THE ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING WORK FOR THE NEW SITE WOULD BE AROUND $18,000; YOU HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCEDURE - HAVE THE SOIL ANALYSIS - MEET WITH THE DER, ETC. MR. ENG CONTINUED THAT THE CAPACITY OF THE PLANT AT EITHER SITE IS STILL 100,000 GPD. DER WILL ALLOW YOU TO DISCHARGE 50,000 GPD FOR THE FIRST YEAR: -THEN, AFTER -THE FIRST YEAR, THEY WILL ISSUE A LARGER EFFLUENT DISPOSAL PERMIT. HE STATED THAT THEY WOULD APPLY FOR THE 100,000 GPD AND LET THE DER APPLY THE RESTRICTION. THE BOARD CONTINUED TO DISCUSS COSTS, AND COMMISSIONER Loy NOTED THAT FOR $50,000 OR.SO, WE WOULD BE GETTING A.LOT MORE ROOM. ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKED ABOUT TIMING, AND ENGINEER ENG STATED THAT THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO SUBMIT THE PERMIT APPLICATION TO THE DER WITHIN ABOUT 60 DAYS. HE FELT THE DER WOULD PUT A PRIORITY ON THE REVIEW, WHICH WOULD TAKE AT LEAST 30 DAYS. ATTORNEY COLLINS INQUIRED AS TO WHO DID THE APPRAISAL, AND MR. BEINDORF STATED THAT IT WAS FLOYD WILKES. COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF WE DID DECIDE TO GO TO THE ALTERNATE SITE, IF WE WOULD RETAIN THE OTHER 20 ACRES, AND CHAIRMAN SEIBERT STATED THAT WAS NOT HIS FEELING. 93 bd 43 PAGE"01 JUN 4 1980 r X00K g X 4 3 ` 696 COMMISSIONER WODTKE WISHED TO KNOW IF WE USE FMHA FUNDS WHETHER WE WOULD BE FOREVER LOCKED INTO USING THIS SITE FOR SEWER AND WATER, ETC. HE DID NOT BELIEVE THAT IS OUR LONG RANGE PLAN AND WON- DERED WHAT SITUATION WE WOULD BE IN IF WE DECIDED TO DISPOSE OF THAT LAND OR USE IT FOR OTHER PURPOSES. HE FELT POSSIBLY WE SHOULD UTILIZE A DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCE TO PURCHASE THE LAND. MR. ENG STATED THAT PURCHASE OF THE LAND IS ELEGIBLE FOR GRANT PURPOSES, BUT AS TO THE QUESTION OF WHAT HAPPENS TO THE LAND DOWN THE ROAD, HE COULD NOT ANSWER 'THAT UNLESS HE APPROACHED FMHA, HE FELT IF THE LAND IS USED FOR ANYTHING RELATED TO THE UTILITY DEPARTMENT, THERE WOULD BE NO QUESTION, BUT IF THE COUNTY WERE TO SELL THE LAND, THERE MIGHT BE A QUESTION. ATTORNEY COLLINS WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE WORST CONDITION THAT WOULD EXIST WOULD BE THAT THE SALE PROCEEDS FROM THE 4O ACRES WOULD BE PUT BACK INTO THE SYSTEM, AND COMMISSIONER LYONS AGREED. COMMISSIONER WODTKE FELT WE SHOULD USE THE LOAN MONEY RATHER THAN THE GRANT MONIES, BECAUSE WE WILL BE REPAYING THE LOAN, MR. ENG NOTED THAT IF THE BOARD WISHED THEM TO CONSIDER USING THE LINDSEY ROAD SITE, PERMISSION WOULD BE NEEDED FOR THE SOIL CONSERVATION MAN TO ENTER THE LAND AND DO A SOIL SURVEY, AND WE SHOULD WRITE THE SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICT REQUESTING THAT THIS SURVEY BE MADE. COMMISSIONER WODTKE CONTINUED TO DISCUSS WHETHER WE WILL USE THIS PROPERTY IN OUR LONG RANGE PROGRAM, AND FELT PERHAPS WE COULD MAKE SOME TYPE OF ARRANGEMENT FOR UTILIZATION OF THE LAND FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE TO TEN YEARS AND THEN IT COULD REVERT BACK - POSSIBLY LEASE WITH AN OPTION TO PURCHASE, COMMISSIONER LYONS POINTED OUT THAT IF YOU ARE GOING TO USE THAT LAND, IT PROBABLY WILL ALTER CONSIDERABLY DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT HE WOULD BE SURPRISED IF THE LAND CAN BE PURCHASED FOR THE APPRAISAL PRICE, BUT FELT WE CAN CONTACT THE OWNERS AND DISCUSS THE LEASE ASPECT, HE POINTED OUT THAT WE DO NOT HAVE THE POWER TO CONDEMN FOR THE LEASE ASPECT, AND MR. ENG WAS NOT SURE THAT FMHA MONEY CAN BE USED FOR A LEASE. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT AGREED THAT THE APPRAISAL MIGHT BE LOW. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ATTORNEY TO MEET WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS OF ALTERNATE 2 SITE AND DISCUSS BOTH THE POSSIBILITY OF PURCHASE OR LEASE WITH OPTION TO PURCHASE AND ALSO TO OBTAIN PER- MISSION FOR THE SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICT AGENT TO GO ON THE PROPERTY TO DO A SOIL SURVEY: INSTRUCTED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO CONTACT THE SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICT IN THIS REGARD: AND AUTHORIZED THE ENGINEERS TO REVIEW THE SOIL SURVEY AND MEET WITH THE DER. PLANNING DIRECTOR DAVID REVER ANNOUNCED THAT A LETTER HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE GRANTS COORDINATOR OF THE DIVISION OF RECREATION AND PARKS CONFIRMING A PROGRAM GRANT FOR THE WABASSO BEACH PARK PROJECT OF $42,500, AND THE CHAIRMAN SHOULD BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE CONTRACT. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-56 ACCEPTING THE FLORIDA RECREATION DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM GRANT FOR WABASSO BEACH PARK AND AUTHORIZING THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN. SAID AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES WHEN COMPLETELY .EXECUTED AND RECEIVED. 95 rv� JUN 4 1980 mix ; ` 4 PAGE f 'JUN 41980 IBM.698 RESOLUTION NO. 80-56 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF A FLORIDA RECREATION DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM GRANT AND THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, DIVISION OF RECREATION AND PARKS, REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF WABASSO BEACH PARK. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of.County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the County accepts the Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program grant from the Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and Parks, in the amount of $42,500.00 and authorizes the County Administrator to execute all appropriate documents and serve as representative for the Board of County Commissioners in the acceptance and administration of the grant. -BE IT FURTHER -RESOLVED that this resolution become effective immediately. upon adoption. ADOPTED this 4th day of June, 1980 with the members of the County Commission voting as follows; ,6— Yes No INDIAN RI R COUNTY B ARD F UNT COMMISSIONERS BY , W. W. Si a ert, Jr. , Chai r Attest: a Wrig t,. er STiLTE OF FT.vRIDA DEPARTM'EN'T OF NA=RAL RESOURCES Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program Development Agreement This agreement made and entered into by and between the State of Florida Department of Natural Resources hereinafter called DEPARTMENT and Indian River County hereinafter called County in furtherance of an approved recreational program involving the parties hereto in pursuance of which the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. This agreement shall be performed pursuant to Section 375.021(3), Florida Statutes and Chapter 16D-5.02, Florida Administrative Code and with the program criteria prescribed by the Executive Board of the Department of Natural Resources under date of October 15, 1972. In the event a dispute should arise between the parties concerning the intent of the language herein contained, the same shall be resolved by the adoption of that meaning which furthers the intent and purpose of said actions of the Florida Legislature and the Executive Board of the Depart::ent of Natural Resources. No construction shall be contrary to the program criteria or the agreements contained herein.- It is the intention of the parties hereto that none of the provisions of Section 163.01, Florida Statutes, shall have application to this agreement. 2. The DEPARTMENT has found that recreation is the primary purpose of the project known as Wabasso Beach Park (Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program Project Plumber 10-41-7 ), and enters -into this agreement with the County for construction of recreational facilities on real property, the title to which is in the name of the County 41 the legal description of which is set forth in full in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3. The ,,,,t will construct, or cause to Page 1 of 5 DNR 42-004 Revised 8/1/79 43, JUN 41980 `BOOK 3 AAGE MO be constructed, certain recreational facilities upon such real property described in Exhibit "A", which facilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the project elements described herein substantially in accordance with conceptual project plans as shown and described in Exhibit "B" attached. The following shall be considered the project elements: Restrooms, walkways, landscaping and related site improvements. 4. The County agrees to operate and maintain Wabasso Beach Park , once developed pursuant to paragraph 3 and will pay all such expenses as a County expense. The County convenants that it has full legal authority and financial ability to so operate and maintain said park site. 5. The DEPARTMENT agrees to hold in account and trans- fer to the County such Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program monies, not to exceed $ 42,500.00 and will pay said program's share of the cost of the project. Any portion of these funds may be released in installments, at the discretion of the DEPARTMENT, upon the request of the County Commissioners or'the County's duly authorized agent, whose name and title shall be submitted to the DEPARTMENT prior to commencement of the project. Such requests shall be limited to three (3) in number and each request shall include all documentation required by the DEPARTMENT. The DEPARTMENT shall be notified forthwith of any change in the person or authority of the Page 2 of 5 DNR 42-004 Revised 8/1/79 z- designated agent. 0 6. The to agrees to contribute the sura of $ N/A to be expended for the development of recreational facilities pursuant to paragraph 3, such funds in the form of N/A contributions. The N/A further agrees to submit, at the discretion of the DEPARTMENT any and all accounting records pertaining to said N/A contributions. 7. The County agrees to develop subject property in the manner described in this agreement on or before May .6, 1982 Failure by the County to complete development of subject property by the aforementioned date shall be cause for the DEPARTMENT to demand refund of any contribution made from the Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program toward the development of Wabasso Beach Park 8. The C'nl,nt�z , through its dully authorized agent, shall submit to the DEPARTMENT project status reports every sixty (60) days from the date of the execution of this agreement until the project development is completed. 9. The Countv agrees to dedicate the land described in Exhibit "A" and by its acceptance of the provisions of this agreement does hereby dedicate the land described in Exhibit "A" to.the public in perpetuity as a recreation -area available to the general public for recreational purposes only. The County further agrees that the execution of this agreement by the Executive Director of the Depart-ment'of Natural Resources shall constitute an acceptance of the dedication on behalf of the general public of the state. Thereafter, should the _.S;el,nt�• for any reason convert all or any portion of the property described in Exhibit "A" to other than recreational purposes, the County agrees to provide at its sole expense without further contribution from the Florida Recreation Develop- ment Assistance Program a replacement project of comparable quality and size to,that which was converted to other purposes, which replacement shall be in close proximity to the project and Page 3 of5 DNR 42-004 Revised 8/1/79 43 JUN 4198U Fr'- . JUN 41980 960K `143. 'PACE 702 meet with the approval of the DEPA=IENT. In lieu of such. replacement, the County shall return to the DEPART:11ENT the entire contribution frcm the Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program. 10. Should the County elect to implement a user fee system for Wabasso Beach Park or for any recreational. facility within the boundaries of the project, the County shall impose such fees uniformly upon all users without regard to age, sex, race, other condition;;.or the political subdivision in which the user may reside. 11. The DEPARTMENT shall have the rights, through its agents, servants, and employees designated for that purpose, to inspect the site of the project and the facilities thereon. In addition to the project inspections, which shall be conducted at any reasonable time, the DEPARTMENT shall have access to all financial records relating to the project and the right to audit such records at any reasonable time which right shall be continuous until such audit is completed without unreasonable interference with the operation of any of the facilities thereon. 12. The County and the DEPARTMENT mutually agree to the following special terms and conditions incorporated as a part of this agreement: The County shall provide the Department with annual attendance reports after Wabasso Beach Park is opened for use by the general public. Said attendance reports shall be submitted to the Department during the month of July each year, and shall include the cumulative visitatit for a period of one year beginning the previous July 1 and ending June 30. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused Page 4 of 5 DNR 42-004 Revised 3/1/79 these presents to be executed by the officers or agents thereu^to lawfully authorized. STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Approved By: Dr. Elton J. Gissendanner Executive Director Its Agent for this Purpose Attest: Effective 'Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LF.GAUTY ggZORNE% . 0,1& v Page 5 of 5 DNR 32-004 Revised S/1/ -j9 -- JUN 4 t98Q Accepte By. Its :igen for this a pose Chairman Board of Counter Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida Title 7 Attest: Freda 'Wright,f Clerk NO' 4� PAGE 703 �U 43 PAGE 704 PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER PRESENTED THE FOLLOWING MEMO TO THE BOARD IN REGARD TO SELECTION OF A CONSULTANT TO ASSIST WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: DEPARTMENT June 4, 1980 MEMO TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: David M. Rever, Planning & Zoning Director SUBJECT: Selection of consultant for development of Comprehensive Plan and the ordinances for implementation Since your last meeting proposalshave-been received from all four of the consulting firms to whom..request-for...proposais.were sent, These proposals have been reviewed by..the Planning staff and_.the selection committee ap- pointed by the Board, consisting of Alma Lee Loy,.Commissioner, George Collins, County. Attorney, '.and myself... In the review consideration ^was given.to (1) the qualifications of the per- sons presented; (2) understanding the, scope to be performed 'as expressed through the detail, of material submitted for review; (3) -provision of the specific items requested in the RFP, such as a project schedule, an estimate of cost by task and a breakdown of task responsibilities between partici- pating parties; (4) the ability to meet the compressed time schedule as determined by discussion with presenters and assessment of the number of staff available for this job; and (5) costs, which were not 'easily comparable due to each firms approach or philosophy_ regarding this -matter, However, enough information was given to ascertain a general upset, -.limit for all tasks, This limitation would be approximately $35,000.,., The recommendation of the sel ection 'corram ttee is that: it be authorized to negotiate with the firm -of RMBR, Inc. in.association with Post, Buckly, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. These negotiations would include the restructuring of scope of services in terms the planning approach recently approved by the Board of County Commissioners and the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, as well as the fees to be charged and the timing of the project. The remaining proposals were ranked as follows: Reynolds, Smith and Hills Adley Associates Bair Abernathy Associates In the event that negotiations are stalled with the first firm selected, the committee asks that it further be authorized to negotiate with the other firms in order of their presentation here. DMR: j t 0AV10 PA REVER • DIRECTOR 2121 14TH AVE. VERO BEACH, EL 32960 • 305/567-5142 102 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LOY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING STAFF AND SELECTION COMMITTEE AS SET OUT IN MR. REVER'S MEMO DATED .JUNE 4, 1980. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NEIL NELSON INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE HAD RECEIVED A LETTER FROM MAYOR SUIT OF FELLSMERE IN REGARD TO MAKING A TEMPORARY DECELERATION LANE ON S.R. 512 INTO A PERMANENT ONE, AND HIS RECOMMENDATION ARE SET OUT IN THE FOLLOWING MEMO OF MAY 30TH. May 30, 1980 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Assistant County Administrator SUBJECT: Request from Mayor, City of Fellsmere to Convert Temporary De=acceleration Lane into a Permanent De -acceleration Lane, S.R. 512 ENCLOSURE: Mayor Suit's letter of May 22, 1980 A temporary widening of the north side of S.R. 512 intersecting Willow Street was installed by D.O.T. to assist in the flow of traffic during the renovation of this road. The Mayor of the City of Fellsmere Inas requested that this widening be made permanent in order to create another de - acceleration lane. This would assist the City in developing a truck by-pass. Thursday, May 29, 1980, Gene Hamilton, Road & Bridge Superin- tendent and I met with Ray Prescott, Project Cordinator, Allison Walker, Supervisor and Mr. J. E. Barrett, Resident Engineer of D.O.T. concerning this request. The following facts were established: 1. This is,a temporary structure not built to specifications. I 2. If converted, the storm sewer drainage inlet in that location would have to be moved approximately three feet requiring additional right of way. 3. Engineering adjustment for drainage would be required. 4. A change order would be required with attendant federal approval. 5. D.O.T. "Mr. J. E. Barrett" does not recommend this conversion. 103 y 3 �QgK 43 PAGE .`705" . JUN 4 1980 Bate 43 PAcE 706 This structure, if converted to a permanent de -acceleration lane, would benefit the City's truck by-pass plan. This advantage would not offset the major dis-advantage of the location of the storm drain inlet. Based upon the above information, it is recommended that this temporary structure riot be converted. The Planning & Zoning Department has been apprised of this recommendation and concurs. Neil "'k. Nelson, Assistant County Adm. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, AND IT WAS FELT THAT SINCE THE MAYOR'S LETTER WAS ADDRESSED TO THE ADMINISTRATOR, HE SHOULD ANSWER IT, EXPLAINING THE RECOMMENDATIONS SET OUT IN MR. NELSON'S MEMO. ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD FOR INFORMA- TION PURPOSES, A LETTER FROM REYNOLDS, SMITH' AND HILLS WHICH REPORTS ON THE STATUS OF THEIR PROGRESS IN CONTACTING THE AGENCIES INVOLVED IN THE INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD EXTENSION, WHICH LETTER IS AS FOLLOWS: REYNOLDS, SMITH AND I. I. III TLCTS LNGI NEEP':_ III ANN C 1$: _� 1 iu��r rarurenir � •!, �, .1 June 2, 1960 I10W RD to HOCHin,Rnv Mr. Jack Jennings E PRFS Df 4 CIF 4N[)iREt:l i`N nl. CFF'CE County Administrator Indian River County Courthouse 2145 14th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Re: Indian River Boulevard From State Road 60 to Barber Avenue Dear Mr. Jennings: Attached is a list of the agencies which have been contacted and the activities that have been accomplished and are planned for Indian River Boulevard extension in Vero Beach. A tentative time schedule is also attached. {)lease feel free to call me. Sincerely, John W. Deamud, P.E. Associ e Vice President 104 If you have any questions, Agencies contacted/Permits 1. U.S. Coast Guard/Bridge Permit 2. U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers/Dredge and Fill Permit 3. Florida Department of Eavironmental Regulation/Dredge and Fill Permit, Stormwater Drainage Permit, and Water Quality Certification 4. St. John's Water Management District/Works of the District Permit 5. Indian River County Planning Department 6. Indian River County Property Appraiser 7. Vero Beach Chamber of Commerce 8. City of Vero Beach Planning Department 9. City of Vero Beach City Clerk 10. City of Vero Beach Zoning Department 11. Mosquito Control Department 12. City of Vero Beach Water and Sewer Department 13. Florida Department of Transportation (Ft. Lauderdale) 14. Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council 15. Florida Division of Archives, History, and Records Management 16. Florida Department of Community Affairs Agencies Anticipated to be Contacted/Meetings (week of June 2-6) 1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2. National Marine Fisheries 3. U.S. Coast Guard (meeting to discuss environmental assessment) 4. Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission 5. St. John's Water Management District 6. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service Activities Completed 1. Vegetation/Wetland Survey (field work) 2. Land Use Survey (field work) 3. Initial phases of data collection Activities Anticipated to be Completed/Tentative Dates Data Collection/Throughout Project Draft Environment Assessment/June 18-20 R, S, and H and Indian River County Review of Draft Assessment/June 23-27 Make necessary changes to Environmental Assessment/June 27-29 Submit Environmental Assessment to U.S. Coast Guard/June 30 105 JUN 41980 900K 41�PAVE.71117 g00K - 41 PAGE " -708- Qp COMMISSIONER Loy INFORMED THE BOARD THAT ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN WHO HAS BEEN SERVING ON THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HOUSING AND FINANCE AUTHORITY, L. GENE HARRIS, WHO REPRESENTED LABOR, HAS MOVED OUT OF THE COUNTY, AND WE NEED TO APPOINT SOMEONE TO REPLACE HIM WHO IS KNOWLEDGEABLE RE THE LABOR SEGMENT. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON WILL RESEARCH THIS MATTER AND DETERMINE IF SUCH A PERSON I,S INTENDED TO REPRESENT ORGANIZED LABOR DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ON THE NEED TO HAVE ANOTHER MEETING BEFORE THE END OF THE MONTH BECAUSE OF THE NEED TO ACT ON SEVERAL IMPORTANT MATTERS AND THE FACT THAT SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS WILL BE OUT OF STATE ATTENDING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' ANNUAL CONVENTION ON JULY 2ND, WHICH IS SCHEDULED FOR A BOARD MEETING. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CANCELED THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD WHICH WAS SCHEDULED FOR .JULY 2, 1980, AND RESCHEDULED IT FOR JUNE 254- UTILITY 5, UTILITY DIRECTOR GEORGE LINER CAME BEFORE THE BOARD IN REGARD TO AN EMERGENCY SITUATION THAT HAS ARISEN WITH THE SOUTH COUNTY WATER SYSTEM, AND PRESENTED THE BOARD WITH A REPORT EXPLAINING THE PROBLEM, WHICH IS AS FOLLOWS: 1111014�::A1lul TO: Mr. Jack Jennings, County Administrator FROM: G. Liner, Utilities Director SUBJECT: Problem Report of South County Water System DATE: June 4, 1980 On 5/22/80 the Permutit Water Softening Unit failed in the old Mid -Florida Treatment Plant. The filter had allowed media particles to spread into the water mains and clog meters and faucets. This had to be flushed from the systema From that time we have been exclusively on Vero Beach water. The attached sheet shows the comparison of purchased water, produced water and totals starting with May 1. Previously, at meetings with Vero Beach and in discussions of the "Interlocal Agreement" we appealed to avoid the high cost of water, the penalty, and remove the moratorium as required by the presently existing agreement between Indian River County and Vero Beach. The climate of the discussions appeared to be that since we are on schedule to obtaining our new treatment system, the purpose of the penalty and moratorium as an incentive no longer applies. As d result, I forwarded a letter to the City Manager, dated 5/19/80, requesting to expedite this relief. Before they could do anything, our treatment plant failed and I sent the second letter indicating the urgency of the situation on 5/23/80. Last night, the item was on the Vero Beach agenda, but was flatly turned down. The discussion had three themes: 1. It should not have been me making this _request, but the .Board of Commissioners. 2. This request would void certain portions of the existing agreement. 3. Since the County has just recently raised the rates, the agreement charges of 80� per thousand for the first 200 thousand gallons and $1.40 per thousand for usage over 200 thousand will not be a problem! Furthermore, the County does not have the cost of water treatment. 4. If the economics were such that repair of the Permutit unit is not feasible, they will take that into consideration if we exceed 300 thousand gallons per day becuase of the emergency. Since we are on only city water, the complaints of the particles, the color and the quality have ceased. 107BOOK 4 `pcE 7 JUN 419 JUN 419 O aooK 43 PAGE 7i0 There are several alternatives open as to which way we head: 1. Repair the Permutit units again. This was done about a year ago at a cost of about $9,000.00. The result was still poor water and complaints and the eventual failure of the treatment units. At best, it is an antiquated treatment method that is no longer allowed for public water. I believe the cost of the lost media and refurbishment will be much more than it cost before. 2. Continue as we are now, but officially appealing that bulk rates averaging over double the North County bulk rates are excessive and discriminatory. I presume that rates on the order of 60 to 75 cents per thousand would probably cover the pumping costs to South County and pay the city for the added load on their treatment. This would have to be determined by the utility rate audit yet in process and have to be negotiated, retroactively. 3. We have the possibility of a Franchisee furnishing all the water the County requires on an emergency basis. We envision that this source would supply water that will reduce (or possibly avoid.completely) the water to be purchased from Vero Beach for South County. I cannot give all the details at the present time but should have further information as to how this can be accomplished in about a week. 4. Attempt to speed up the sequence for getting the new South County Water Plant installed and on line. The present failure problem emphasizes the need to get the system to avoid dependence on Vero Beach with its severe penalty. I recommend that we avoid repair of the Permutit units on such a temporary basis. Proceeding with all other alternatives together should not involve any large expense by the County but will relieve the problem the fastest way. GL/kh cc: Joe Collins John Robbins file Attachments: 1. 2. 3.' Letter, Liner to Little, dated 5/19/80 Letter, Liner to Little, dated 5/23/80 South County Water pumped into system before and after plant failure 108 M M - INDIAN FMCOUNTY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT P.O. Box 1750 2145 - 14th Avenue, Room 103 Vero Beach, Florida 32960 �i .+ V -;a '' shy'' 'x '" +E�T1 R v'+ i ;, x '�+. `l�T '�' a� �':' .,s �. w `•''3� May 19, 1980 Mr. John Little, City Manager City of Vero Beach P.O. Box 1389 Vero Beach, FL 32960 Re: Bulk Water service from Vero Beach to Mid -Florida (South County) Service Area. Dear John: Presently we are purchasing water in the south county area on an agreement that requires a moratorium, charges us $0.80 per 1000 gallons with 100,000 gallons per day minimum, and a premium for usage between 200,000 and 300,000 gallons per day. Because the motives for the high assessment and penalty are no longer a problem (we are on schedule for implementing our own South County water source) the above had been discussed ,at meetings with the idea of eliminating these limitations. We had asked for an arrangement to remove the moratorium, be charged for water up .to 400,000 gallons a day at a rate comparable with the rate we pay at the North County -interconnect. Provisions had been put into the new joint agreement -to this effect. However, I am wondering if there is.a way we can expedite this arrangement and put it into operation in about a month. Nowhere in the discussion has there been any objection or indicated problem associated with this request. It is my intention, if this is approved, to supply water produced only from Vero Beach, I will take our Zeolite treatment unit out of service except for emergencies or at the request of Vero Beach to supplement the flow. a Having only one water supply, instead of blending, will, reduce complaints and service maintenance requirements for flushing. This usage will continue until we are able to put our own new plant into service - anticipated to be early in 1982. At that time, any allocation borrowed from North County will be returned as is provided in the new joint agreement. Your help in expediting this arrangement soon as possible would be most appreciated. Sincerely, George Liner Utilities Director JUN 41980 109 8oax " 43Pace'° r �ry JUN 41980 aan . ��43 PAGE- 12 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT P.O. Box 1750 2145 - 14th Avenue, Room 103 Vero Beach, Florida 32960 May -23, 1980 Mr. John Little, City Manager, City of Vero Beach P.O. Box 1389 Vero Beach, FL 32960 Re: Bulk water service from Vero Beach to Mid -Florida (South County) service area. Dear John: Since I sent you the letter on 5/19/80 on the same subject, we have had a failure of our zeolite treatment unit which has forced us to take it out of service completely. As a result, we are now using some water purchased from Vero Beach and the balance is made up from water which is untreated except for chlorination. In our phone discussion of the possibilities open to us, I understand that it will be mid-June before you will get the results of rate studies, the response of your different depart- ments to my request, and be able to get it to the council for their review and consideration. Therefore, any purchase of water is according to the presently existing agreement. We both agreed that our demand, since it started raining should keep our usage below the 300,000 gallons per day. Therefore, we intend to use only Vero Beach produced water so that we will not be blending with untreated water. Until you can obtain council approval of the earlier requested arrange- ment I am hoping you can prevail, on an emergency basis, to avoid charging us a premium rate for usage over 100,000 and over 200,000 gallons per day. If there is anything we can do to help expedite this matter or the request of 5/19/80, please let me know. Sincerely, George /L'iner Utilities Director GL/kh cc: Jack Jennings Joe Collins file C SOUTH COUNTY WATER PUMPED INTO SYSTEM BEFORE & AFTER PLANT FAILURE ' Date County Plant Purchased From V.B. TOTAL Note Thous. Gal. Thous. Gal. Thous. Gal. e0 Th 5/1/80 168 100 268 F 5/2/80 181 100 281 S 5/3/80 267 100 367 S 5/4/80 221 120 341 M 5/5/80 233 100 333 T 5/6/80 246 100 346 W 5/7/80 277 100 377 Th 5/8/80 185 105 290 F 5/9/80 208 105 313 S 5/10/80 140 105 245 S 5/11/80 150 100 250 M 5/12/80 240 110 350 �—' T 5/13/80' 228 100 328 W 5/14/80 230 100 - 330 Th 5/15/80 205 100 305 F 5/16/80 234 100 334 S 5/17/80 278 100 378 f S 5/18/80 292 100 392 M 5/19/80 266 100 366 T 5/20/80 264 100 364 W 5/21/80 193 100 293 Th 5/22/80 60 105 165 (Rain) Plant Failed F 5/23/80 - 110 110 S 5/24/80 - 280 280 S 5/25/80 - 285 285 M 5/26/80 - 285 285 T 5%27/80 - 300 300 W 5/28/80 - 255 255 Th 5/29/80 - 295 295 F 5/30/80 - 220 220 S .5/31/80 - 270 270 S 6/1/80 - 290 290 M 6/2/80 - 420 420 T 6/3/80 - 300 300_ 303.7 Average SOOK A3 PAC*7 14 DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, AND MR. LINER EXPRESSED THE OPINION THAT THE CITY'S ATTITUDE IN REGARD TO THE RATES WILL NOT CHANGE. COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT HE MUST AGREE, AND HE FELT THAT IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO GET A LOWER RATE UNLESS WE HAVE SOMETHING TO OFFER THAT HE DID NOT KNOW OF. HE CONTINUED THAT HE WOULD GO ALONG WITH THE RECOMMENDATION IN MR. LINER'S MEMORANDUM OF .JUNE 4TH THAT WE JUST MOVE ALONG AS FAST AS WE CAN TO� GET OURSELVES OUT OF THIS SITUATION AND.NOT BOTHER WITH THE PERMUTIT UNITS. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMIS - SIGNER Loy, TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE UTILITY DIRECTOR IN REGARD TO THE SOUTH COUNTY WATER SYSTEM AS SET OUT IN HIS MEMORAN- DUM OF .JUNE 4, 1980. MR. LINER STATED THAT HE WILL PURSUE THE POSSIBLE ARRANGEMENT WITH THE FRANCHISEE THAT COULD SUPPLY US WITH WATER. -- COMMISSIONER LYONS QUESTIONED THE TREATMENT OF THE WATER FROM THE FRANCHISEE AND WHETHER IT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE IN THE CITY SYSTEM. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON AGREED THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF QUESTIONS. TO BE ANSWERED AND FELT THIS HAD NOT BECOME AN ADVISABLE ALTERNATIVE UNTIL THIS SITUATION AROSE. HE NOTED THAT MR. LINER WOULD LIKE PERMISSION TO LOOK INTO THIS AND SEE IF IT IS A GOOD ALTERNATIVE. HE COMMENTED THAT WE ARE OPERATING IN THE RED ON THIS SYSTEM RIGHT NOW. UTILITY DIRECTOR LINER SPOKE ABOUT THE CONSIDERABLE COST WHICH WOULD BE INVOLVED IN REPAIRING THE PERMUTIT UNITS AND, IN ADDITION, INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE DER WOULD LIKE TO SEE US DO AWAY WITH THESE UNITS WHICH INVOLVE SODIUM TREATMENT AND MAY AFFECT PEOPLE WITH HEART PROBLEMS. COMMISSIONER WODTKE POINTED OUT THAT IF WE USE WATER FROM THE CITY OF VERO BEACH, WE CANNOT ADD ANY NEW CUSTOMERS. MR. NELSON AGREED THAT SUBSTANTIALLY WE CANNOT, BUT WE CAN MAINTAIN OUR LEVEL OF CUSTOMERS. COMMISSIONER LYONS BROUGHT UP THE POSSIBILITY OF DIVIDING THE LINES AND HAVING PART OF THE SYSTEM ON THE OTHER WATER AND BEING ABLE TO ADD CUSTOMERS IN THAT MANNER. MR. LINER FELT THERE COULD BE A CONSIDERABLE SOURCE OF WATER AND WISHED TO HAVE PERMISSION TO EXPLORE IT. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COMMISSIONER WODTKE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT NO CENSUS FIGURES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FOR LOCAL REVIEW AS YET, AND ARRANGEMENTS SHOULD BE MADE TO REVIEW THESE FIGURES WHEN THEY DO COME IN. HE STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE PERMISSION TO HANDLE THIS MATTER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S ASSISTANCE AND REPORT BACK TO THE BOARD WHEN THE FIGURES ARE RECEIVED. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO AUTHOR- IZE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO ASSIST THE BOARD WITH THE LOCAL CENSUS REVIEW WHEN THE FIGURES ARE RECEIVED. COMMISSIONER WODTKE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT WE HAVE HAD A RESIGNATION FROM OUR RECENT APPOINTEE TO THE MENTAL HEALTH BOARD DISTRICT NO. 9, MR. BUCHANAN. COMMISSIONER WODTKE WENT ON TO EXPLAIN THAT THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF CONTROVERSY INVOLVED WITH THIS BOARD AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME. HE BELIEVED IT IS POSSIBLE THAT ST. LUCIE COUNTY MAY BE TAKEN TO COURT IN REGARD TO THEIR NOT FUNDING CERTAIN LEVELS OF THE MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAM, AND BECAUSE OF ALL_THIS, HE DID NOT FEEL HE COULD ASK ANYONE TO TAKE ON THE JOB BECAUSE OF THE ATMOS- PHERE AND THE PROBLEMS. HE FURTHER FELT THAT IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO HAVE THE COUNTY REPRESENTED BY A COMMISSIONER AND STATED THAT HE WOULD BE WILLING TO VOLUNTEER TO DO THIS FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-57 APPOINTING COMMISSIONER WODTKE AS THE COUNTY'S REPRESENTATIVE TO THE MENTAL HEALTH BOARD DISTRICT NO. 9 AND INSTRUCTED THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR FORWARD COPY OF SAID RESOLUTION TO THIS BOARD AND ALSO TO THE MENTAL HEALTH CENTER IN FORT PIERCE. 113 80ox 43 715 JUN 4 1980 r 1. BOOK 43 PAGE .76 RESOLUTION NO. 80-57 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR. is hereby appointed as its Representative to the Mental Health Board No. 9, Inc. Said Resolution shall become effective on the _054 day of 1980. Attest: Freda Wright, Cldrk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, F RIDA 17 BY���, Willard . Siebert, Jr „,Chairman COMMISSIONER LOY REPORTED THAT THE BOARD HAS RECEIVED A LUNCHEON INVITATION FROM THE VOCATIONAL TRAINING AND SHELTERED WORKSHOP FOR JUNE 18, 1980. THE LUNCHEON WILL INCLUDE A TOUR OF THEIR FACILITIES. THE BOARD INDICATED THEY WOULD BE DELIGHTED TO ACCEPT. DISCUSSION WAS HELD IN REGARD TO THE FOLLOWING LETTER RE- CEIVED FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL ON AGING: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING, INC. JUDITH N. WELCHEL Executive Director May 30, 1980 Board of County Commissioners Indian River County Courthouse Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Commissioners: 955 - 7th Avenue • P.O. Box 2102 Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Telephone: 305 - 569-0760 At a meeting on May 21 in Stuart, Florida, of the Gulfstream Areawide Council on Aging, it was announced that the Council on Aging Presidents from Martin County and Okeechobee County -have been selected by their respective County Board of Commissioners to represent their Counties at the Governor's Conference to be held in September. I was asked if our County Commissioners had contacted Mrs. Welchel or myself re- garding representation from the Indian River County Council bn Aging. I, of course, advised them that we were not aware of any contact by the County Commission regard- ing the Conference. I have been subsequently advised that action was taken by the Indian River County Commissioners and an appointment was made of two gentlemen, one of whom I under- stand is the President of AARP. This is an embarrassing situation for the Council, particularly because of the fact that I represent you Commissioners on the Council on Aging Board of Directors. Our organization represents over 5,200 senior citizens who are members and our or- ganization gives the greatest percentage of services to seniors of any service organ- ization in this County. Therefore, it is my feeling that we of all people should have representation to the Governor's Conference. I would like to hereby request that reconsideration be given to the persons who were appointed so that Indian River County Council on Aging is allowed representa- tion to the Governor's Conference. Sincerely, F. Eug Cragg (30% President - Board of Directors e 3 JUN 4 1980 115 BOOK 4T PAGE 7j. 7, BOOK 43 ' PAGERS ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SOY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO CONTACT THE GOVERNORS CONFERENCE ON AGING, AND IN THE EVENT THEY WILL ACCEPT A THIRD APPOINTEE FROM INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, AUTHORIZED THE APPOINTMENT OF F. EUGENE CRAGG AS A DELEGATE TO THE FLORIDA GOVERNORS CONFERENCE ON AGING. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THEREUPON RECESSED AT 6:50 O'CLOCK P.M. AND RECONVENED,AS-THE DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS OF THE NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT. =116 r JUNE 4, 1980 THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ACTING AS THE DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS OF THE NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT MET AT THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, AT 6:50 O'CLOCK P.M. PRESENT WERE R. DON DEESON, CHAIRMAN; ALMA LEE Loy; WILLARD W. SIEBERT, JR.; WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., AND PATRICK B. LYONS, ALSO PRESENT WERE JACK G. JENNINGS, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR; GEORGE G. COLLINS, JR., ATTORNEY TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; AND VIRGINIA HARGREAVES, DEPUTY CLERK. CHAIRMAN DEESON CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCED THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE MEETING IS TO ACCEPT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPOINTMENTS TO THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE. HE THEN READ A LIST OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH ARE AS FOLLOWS: June 31 19:0 co.:Lmissioner Don Deeson Til: 13nard of Colmi :`.' Co>;ultissi:,ncr:; The followill- appointmuna; are reconvuiwn�led !'or thc, ,�L)rth Indian River County ?'ire District Advl. ,or`; Committee: city of Sebastiall `iayor Pat Flood, d, Jr. S�ba-:ti:.:n Volunteer ...re Depart:aenr 'Orov Parkhurst, President „c,sut:snu i'roperty tti.ncrs _1.;s'oc:iaUoll, �lLc. t'oluatcor FLru Department Chief "::)l:b i'wsop i're:il.Cki.!llt `.',.co '•iayor Ricnai'cl :J��:�v: r, Presiiiutlt JUN 41990 117 soog 43 PACE 719\'= L_ JUN 41900 Bou - 43. FAcE 720 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-1 APPOINTING THOSE LISTED ABOVE TO THE NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE. NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 80-1 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT COMMISSION that the following appointments are made to the NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT Advisory Committee: PAT FLOOD, JR., Mayor R. N. ARAND, Chief LEROY PARKHURST, President ED WARD, President NORB RESOP, Chief A. GROVER FLETCHER, President AL PAYNE, Vice Mayor IVAN McGHEE, Chief RICHARD WEAVER, President City of Sebastian Sebastian Volunteer Fire Department Sebastian Volunteer Fire Department Roseland Property Owners Association, Inc. Roseland Volunteer Fire Department Roseland Volunteer Fire Department City of Fellsmere Fellsmere Volunteer Fire Department Fellsmere Volunteer Fire Department Said Resolution shall become effective as of the day of , 1980. NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT COMMISSION By R. Don Deeson, Chairman THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, ON MOTION MADE, SECONDED AND CARRIED, THE DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS OF THE NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT ADJOURNED AT 6;58 O'CLOCK P.M, ATTEST: CLERK 119 CHAIRMAN PAS$ Fr - Boa ,,43 PAG, E722 THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THEREUPON RECONVENED AT 6:58 O'CLOCK P.M. WITH THE SAME MEMBERS PRESENT. LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT IS HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES AS APPROVED AT THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 19, 1979. 120 LEASE AGREEMENT THIS LEASE, executed this t^ day of by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, as Lessor, and INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, hereinafter referred to as Lessee: W I T N E S S E T H: 1. Lessor has leased and does hereby lease to the Lessee that portion of the building described in Exhibit "A", which building is located on the real property described in Exhibit "B" for the purpose of Lessee to house its administrative and other school related activities for a term of thirty (30) years effective on the date of execution hereof with the thirty .(30) year term commencing on the date of occupancy of the demised premises, as hereinafter defined, at the monthly rate in the amount of 'Three Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty and no/100 Dollars ($3,750,00), payable in advance on the first day of the month following occupancy by Lessee and the first day of each month thereafter until the last month of the term of this Lease. In the event occupancy takes place on other than the first day of a month, the Lessee will at the time of making the first monthly payment also pay a pro -rata amount equal to the period of early occupancy. Within one (1) year of the expiration of the lease term, Lessee shall have. the option to renew the lease for an additional ten (10). years at a monthly rent to be determined when the option is exercised. Rent shall be paid to the Lessor at such address as shall be furnished by the Lessor to the Lessee. 2. Lessor agrees to renovate and make improvements to the premises as described in Exhibit "A" substantially in e accord with the plans and specifications attached as Exhibit "C", The quality of the improvements to be made by Lessor for Lessee will be of similar quality and detail as Lessor provides for itself in other areas of the building described in Exhibit "A". Lessor shall make available to Lessee those warranties provided BOOK , O!PnE`123 JUN 4 198 K.3 FacE %24 to Lessor. Until the improvements described in Exhibit "C" are completed, or at such earlier time as Lessee may elect to take possession of the premises, the term of this Lease shall not commence. Lessee shall, prior to the execution of this Lease approve the plans and specifications and obtain necessary approval from the Department of Education of the State of Florida within twenty-one (21) days after execution. 3. Lessor shall make available to Lessee designated parking areas as established in Exhibit "D". To the extent possible, Lessor will make the parking spaces available in close proximitiy to the demised premises. It is understood that some parking may be located on real property other than that described in Exhibit "B". If Lessor developes additional parking in the future to service the building, Exhibit "A", Lessor agrees to make available to Lessee to the extent possible a portion of such add- itional parking, with Lessee paying its proportionate share of the cost to improve such additional parking. 4. Lessor covenants with the Lessee that it has good right to lease said premises in the manner aforesaid and that it will suffer and permit the Lessee (he keeping all the covenants on his part as herein contained) to occupy, possess and enjoy said premises during the term aforesaid without hinderance or molestation from it or any person claiming by, from or under it. 5. Lessee covenants with Lessor to hire said premises and to pay the rent therefor as aforesaid; that he will commit no waste, nor suffer the same to be committed thereon, nor injure nor misuse the same, and also that he will not assign this Lease, nor sub -let a part of the whole of the said leased premises, nor use the same for any purpose other than school board administ- ration offices as herein authorized, without written permission from the Lessor. Permission as to use shall not be unreasonably withheld. This Lease is personal as to the Lessee and is granted under favorable terms. In the event Lessee decides to vacate the premises and assign or sub lease the subject premises, then this Lease shall be renegotiated and the assignment or sub letting - M M shall be conditioned on Lessor's approval of the renegotiated terms. Lessee will deliver up the same at the expiration or sooner, termination of his tenancv in as good condition as they are now in, ordinary wear, fire and other unavoidable casualties excepted. 6. In the event of a default by either party herein, the sole remedy for either party, except as set forth in Paragraph 1 of this Lease, shall be either for specific performance or for the money damages for breach. No suit for default shall be instituted by either party until the complaining party furnishes to the de- faulting party a sixty (60) day notice within which to cure the default. The prevailing party in any litigation commenced after the expiration of the sixty (60) days notice shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys fees and all court costs. 7. The Lessee shall make all interior and exterior repairs, both inside and outside the building, which are due or caused by the acts of negligence of the Lessee, its employees, invitees and guests as well as routine non-structural repairs arising in the course of ordinary wear and tear, including routine repairs to interior piping and electrical wiring. Except as specifically provided to the contrary in Paragraph #20, the Lessor shall promptly make all other casualty repairs and make all major repairs and replacements of electric, plumbing and air-conditioning systems. Roof repairs, exterior painting, parking lot maintenance and striping, and landscaping maintenance shall be the responsibility of the Lessor. The Lessee may make such non-structural interior improvements and alterations as it deems in its best interest with- out the necessity of the consent of the Lessor. 8. Structural alterations may be made only after approval by the Lessor, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Lessee agrees to 'maintain public liability insurance in amounts not less than Lessee customarily carries throughout the ,school system with respect to injuries to persons and property rights in or about the demised premises and the property described in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B", for the benefit of the Lessor and Lessee and to furnish certificates of such insurance to the Lessor. Lessor shall maintain fire and extended coverage a©K 4' PAGE JUN 41980 -3- . FF - JUN 41980. MY PAGE726 2U insurance covering the entire administrative complex insuring against direct physical loss and bodily injury and property damage comprehensive public liability insurance. In addition, Lessee agrees to indemnify and hold the Lessor harmless for injuries or accidents either to persons or property that accrue within the premises leased by the Lessee. 9. It is further agreed that if any property of the Lessee that may be on the leased premises during the term of this 0 Lease shall be injured or destroyed by water leakage, pipe or plumbing defects or other causes, no part of the resulting loss or damage shall be borne.by or chargeable to the Lessor unless such injury or destruction is due to negligence of the Lessor. The Lessee covenants to hold the Lessor harmless from any claims or damands made against the Lessor by reason of any damage suffered or claimed to be.suffered to any personal property situated or stored in said leased premises belonging to the Lessee, his servants, agents, customers, vendors, or consignor unless such damage is due to the negligence of the Lessor. 10. The Lessee shall pay for all electric, water, heat, air conditioning and other utility or public service provided to the demised premises. 11. The Lessor shall keep said premises fully and constantly insured against fire, including extended coverage, with such companies and in such amounts as it may determine. In the event the premises are wholly or partially destroyed by fire or other casualty, the Lessee shall not be liable for rent other than the pro rata rent of the tenantable space, until said premises have been restored to a tenantable condition. If said premises shall be destroyed by fire or other casualty to an extent of more than fifty (50) percent of their sound value, then, the Lessor shall determine the amount of any insurance proceeds available under its fire and extended coverage policies for reconstruction of the demised premises, and any other available insurance for such purpose, and report those findings as soon as practicable to the Lessee. The Lessee shall have up to One Hundred 4 - Twenty (120) days within which to make a decision to require the Lessor to reconstruct the demised premises. In the event the Lessee instructs the Lessor to reconstruct the demised premises, with the said available insurance proceeds, Lessee shall be responsible and pay over to the Lessor the difference between the amount of the insurance proceeds and the actual cost of reconstruct- ion. Such payments shall be made monthly on a prorata basis over the estimated amount of time for reconstruction. In the event a dispute arises between the parties as to the amount of insurance proceeds available for reconstruction of the demised premises, the parties agree that the dispute shall be determined by a panel of three arbiters in accord with the rules of arbitration of American Arbitration Association and in such event the time re- quirements for the Lessee to make its determination to proceed with reconstruction shall commence as of the date of the rendering of the arbitrators' award. In the event the Lessee elects not to reconstruct within the time frame set forth, then this Lease shall be null and void. At any time during the time of this Lease that the demised premises is wholly or partially untenantable, the Lessor shall, in addition to the other covenants herein, use its best efforts to make space available to the Lessee in which to conduct its business, whether within the building, Exhibit "A" or in other facilities of the Lessor which might be utilized for such purpose. 12. It is further agreed that the Lessor's failure to strictly enforce any of the terms or provisions hereof shall not be deemed to be a waiver as to any subsequent breach of any covenant, term, agreement .'or condition herein contained. 13. At the end of the term of this Lease, or in the event the option to renew is exercised, at the expiration of the term of the option, Lessee shall quietly and peaceably deliver up the said premises to the Lessor in the same repair and condition in which they were received, ordinary wear and tear excepted. 14. The obligations of the Lessee herein are subject to -5- BOOK `f3 PAi�E,.t 1. JUN 41980 S Boon 43 PAct 728 and conditioned upon approval of the terms hereof by the Department of Education of the State of Florida, pursuant to Chapter 230, Florida Statutes, which approval shall be obtained within twenty- one (21) days of the execution of this Lease. Thereafter, any changes required by the Department of Education shall be at the sole cost of Lessee. 15. Lessor agrees that, in the event it constructs and maintains a public meeting room in the building, Exhibit "A", Lessor will permit Lessee to utilize same for its public meetings and 0 such other meetings at such times as Lessor and Lessee shall from time to time agree at a nominal cost relating to direct expense. 16. The Lessee agrees that in part consideration of the terms and conditions of this Lease, that it does hereby waive and surrender any right it may now have under existing statutory or case law to entitlement to share in any race track funds distributed to Lessor by the State of Florida, or any of its subdivisions or agencies. This covenant shall expire on the expiration of the term of this Lease. Lessee acknowledges and understands that Lessor intends to rely on this covenant to sell revenue bonds pledging the above referenced race track fund revenue and will execute such further documents to clarify or verify the intent of this covenant as Lessor's bond counsel shall reasonably request. Notwithstanding the provisions of Paragraph 1 of this Lease, in the event the State of Florida enacts legislation which has the effect of diminishing Indian River County's share of race track funds below the level received in calendar year 1979, rent for the following calendar year and for any year there- after for so long as the race track funds remain below the 1979 level, shall be an amount equal to the following formula: $65,000. - Race track funds for the calendar year(s) in question X $20,000. _ Race track funds for the calendar year 1979 17. Lessor agrees to use its best efforts to complete the renovations required herein within fifteen (10) months of -6- the date of signing of this Lease by the parties. 18. There are no provisions for liquidated damages nor for prepayment of rent. 19. Lessee will provide its own custodial services. 20. In the event of damage to the roof to Lessee's portion of the demised premises which is not fully covered by insurance required to be carried by the parties, Lessee shall be responsible for cost of repairs to the roof not covered by in- surance. Similarly, if no insurance is required to cover the cost of such repairs, Lessee shall be responsible for such costs. In the event of damage of failure of the air-conditioning system serving the demised premises, to the extent repairs are not fully covered by insurance, guarantees or warrantees or maintenance agreements, Lessee and Lessor shall be responsible on a proportion- ate and equitable basis for the cost differential to complete the repairs. During the last ten (10) years of the initial term of this Lease, or in the event the option to renew is executed by both parties, in the event of any major repairs not covered by insurance to the roof or air-conditioning system which have an economic life which will extend beyond the initial term, or the option term if exercised, the parties agree to use their best efforts to reach an equitable adjustment as to the value to be attached to the, tenancy by Lessee and Lessee shall be responsible for its equit- able share for the cost of such repairs during the initial term or during the option term if the repairs are necessitated during the option term. The parties, at the time of negotiating the amount of rent to be paid pursuant to the terms of the option shall take into consideration the costpof repair during the initial term, all, or such part of the useful life that is anticipated for the demised premises during the option period,when the rent is established for the option period. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands and seals this i day of )z�4-7A-e-_ ,1980 . JUN 41980 -7- BOOK7 ca PAGF. � ` 3I • JUN Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: BOOM. 4J PAGE t sTU INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY ZI.i Wills d W. S ebert; Jr., C afrman ATTEST: Freda C. Wright, Clerk1) (Lessor) -INDI7.�Idlette,Jr., IVER COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD Bim:�.. Joe Chairman L AG. L ATTEST: �9�1 :s (Ao- James A.'Burns, Secretary (as to Lessee) (Lessee AMENDMENT TO LEASE WITH THE SUNSHINE REHABILITATION CENTER OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, INC., DATED FEBRUARY 20, 1980, MODI- FYING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION, IS HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES AS AUTHORIZED AT THE MEETING OF MAY 21, 1980. 129 JUN 41980 BOOK 43 `PAGE i 31.4 JUN 41980 690K :41- `A,E 732 AMENDMENT TO LEASE THIS AMENDMENT TO LEASE dated the 21st day of ,May , 1980, by and between the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, hereinafter referred to as "LESSOR", and the SUNSHINE REHABILITATION CENTER OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, INC., a corporation existing under the laws of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as the "LESSEE"; W I T N- E S S E T H: That on the 20th day of February, 1980, the LESSOR and the LESSEE entered into a Lease Agreement wherein the LESSEE leased to the LESSOR the following described property: Starting at the southwest corner of the South- east 1/4 of Section 2, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, as designated on the last general plat of lands of the Indian River Farms Company, filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County, Florida, in Plat Book 2, page 25; said land now lying and being in Indian River - County, Florida; run East along the North right of way line of 16th Street a distance of 943.19 feet; thence run North along the West right of way line of 17th Avenue a distance of 463.5 feet, to a point of beginning; thence run West parallel to the North right of way line of 16th Street a dis- tance of 250 feet; thence run North 245 feet; thence run East 251.25 feet; thence run South 245 feet to the point of beginning. LESSOR and LESSEE now agree to modify the legal description above described and to incorporate the following new legal description as the property which shall be the subject of the Lease dated February 20, 1980. For valuable consideration the parties agree that the amended legal description shall be as follows: From the Southwest corner of the Southeast quarter of Section 2, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, as designated on the last general plat of lands of the Indian River Farms Company filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County, Florida in Plat Book 2, page 25; said lands now lying and being in Indian River County, Florida; run North along the quarter section line 80 feet to a point on the North right-of-way line of 16th Street; thence run East along the North right-of-way line of 16th Street a distance of 943.19 feet, more or less to a point on the West right-of- way line of 17th Avenue; thence run North along said right- of-way line a distance of 463.5 feet to the Point of Beginning of the parcel to be herein described; thence run West parallel to the North right-of-way line of 16th Street a distance of 250 feet ; thence North 245 feet; thence East 251.25 feet, more or less to a point on the aforesaid West right-of-way line of 17th Avenue; thence run South along said right-of-way line 245 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 1.41 acres, more or less. All of the terms, covenants and agreements of that Lease between the parties, dated the 20th day of February, 1980, remain unchanged and in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment to Lease has been executed in duplicate in the name of and on behalf of the LESSOR by its Chairman and attested by its Clerk, who have been duly authorized by the action of the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, so to do, and on the part of the LESSEE by its President and Secretary who have been duly authorized by its Board of Directors so to do, on the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIANIVER OU TY F ORIDA Z J.L A By Y/ 11—ow Cnaifman Attest: jl L to Lessor Clerk LESSOR SUNSHINE j INDIAN,R By Attest: As to Lessee s.iaent f ecretary, LESSEE PION CENTER OF , INC. Box 43 pAG. X03-. JUN 4190 BOOK 43 PACE t34• RESOLUTION N0. 80-49 IS HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES AS APPROVED AT THE MEETING OF MAY 21, 1980. RESOLUTION NO. 80--49 WHEREAS, FLORIDA CABLEVISION CORPORATION has petitioned the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida for a rate increase; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners held a duly noticed public hearing on April 23, 1980; and WHEREAS, FLORIDA CABLEVISION CORPORATION submitted evidence showing an economic need for said increase; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following rate schedule for FLORIDA CABLEVISION CORPORATION is hereby adopted to become effective the lst day of June, 1980: New Installation New Installation Reconnect Extra Outlet Relocate Outlet One Outlet Second Outlet INSTALLATION (Residential and Commercial) ( Underground ) ( Overhead ) ( never previously active ) ( Previously active ) ( New ) MONTHLY SERVICE CHARGES (Residential and Commercial) Each Additional Outlet $35.00 25.00 10.00 15.00 10.00 7.25 2.00 2.00 This Resolution adopted the 21st day of May, 1980. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA By Wi lard ,W. iebert, Jr , a rman Attest: � ) k.l. Freda Wright, C rk Boux 43 PAGE 736 I; JUN 41980 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. 66028 - 66176 INCLUSIVE. SUCH BILLS AND ACCOUNTS BEING ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, THE WARRANTS SO ISSUED FROM THE RESPECTIVE FUNDS BEING LISTED IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL MINUTE BOOK AS PROVIDED BY THE RULES OF THE LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR, REFERENCE TO SUCH RECORD AND LIST SO RECORDED BEING MADE A PART OF THESE MINUTES. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, ON MOTION MADE, SECONDED AND CARRIED, THE BOARD ADJOURNED AT 7:00 O'CLOCK P.M. ATTEST: CLERK 4� 134 CHAIRMAN/