HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/18/1980JUNE 18, 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 18, 1980,
AT 8:30 O'CLOCK A.M. PRESENT WERE WILLARD W. SIEBERT, JR., 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;
JEFFREY BARTON, FINANCE OFFICER; AND VIRGINIA HARGREAVES AND JANICE W.
CALDWELL, DEPUTY CLERKS.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER.
COMMISSIONER DEESON LED THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG,
AND REVEREND DAVID LORD, TRINITY EPISCOPAL CHURCH, GAVE THE INVOCATION.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO CONTINUE THE APPROVAL OF THE
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF MAY 21, 1980 AND JUNE 4, 1980
UNTIL THE FOLLOWING MEETING.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR A
PERMIT TO CARRY A CONCEALED FIREARM FOR FREDERICK KENDALL, JR.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE BUDGET AMENDMENT TO ALLOCATE
FUNDS FOR THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE SQUAD FOR THE
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM AND AN EMERGENCY GENERATOR FROM REVENUE SHARING,
AS FOLLOWS:
ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT No, INCREASE DECREASE
OTHER MACHINERY
AND EQUIPMENT 102-107-526-66.49 $15,300
RESERVE FOR
CONTINGENCIES 102-199-584-99.91 $15,300
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED STATE WITNESS PAY ROLLS, COUNTY
BOOK 43 PACE 737
JUN 181990 43 7,38
COURT, MAY -JUNE TERM, 1980; IN THE AMOUNTS OF $57.70, $160.20, AND
$155.64; AND CIRCUIT COURT, SPRING TERM, 1980, IN THE AMOUNTS OF
$84.20 AND $128.88.
THE FOLLOWING REPORTS WERE RECEIVED AND PLACED ON FILE IN
THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK:
TENTATIVE 5 YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN - ANNUAL
PROGRAM BUDGET - DOT
REPORT OF CONVICTIONS, MONTH OF MAY, 1980
TRAFFIC VIOLATION BUREAU - SPECIAL TRUST FUND.
MONTH OF MAY, 1980, $29,052.28
TRAFFIC VIOLATION FINES BY NAME, MAY, 1980
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS WANTED
TO ADD ANYTHING TO THE AGENDA.
COMMISSIONER LYONS SUGGESTED ADDING THE FOLLOWING UNDER
HIS ITEMS: REPORT ON INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD; REPORT ON REGIONAL
PLANNING COUNCIL LEGISLATION; PROGRESSIVE CIVIC LEAGUE LEASE; SHERIFF
DEPARTMENTS AUTOMOBILE EXPENSE; AND THE CITY OF VERO BEACH SEWER.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT SUGGESTED ADDING THE SOUTH COUNTY FIRE
DISTRICT TO THE AGENDA THIS AFTERNOON.
COMMISSIONER Loy SUGGESTED THE FOLLOWING ITEMS BE ADDED:
KIWANIS CLUB, FOR THEIR PART IN THE COMFORT STATION AT HOBART PARK;
AUTHORIZATION TO ATTEND THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MEETING ON JUNE 29TH; AND DISCUSSION FOR HOLDING A SPECIAL MEETING
ON JULY 9, 1980.
ATTORNEY COLLINS DISCUSSED THE MOSQUITO CONTROL EXEMPTION
ON THE 201 PROGRAM AND FELT IT SHOULD BE ADDED TO THE AGENDA.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMIS-
SIONER LOY, FOR THE BOARD TO AUTHORIZE OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR FOUR
COUNTY PERSONNEL FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO TRAVEL TO TALLAHASSEE
ON JULY 1, 1980 TO ATTEND THE MEETING REGARDING THE 201 PROGRAM;
STOPPING IN GAINESVILLE TO PICK UP THE ENGINEERS TO ACCOMPANY THEM
TO TALLAHASSEE.
COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT POSSIBLY, IF THERE IS ROOM,
HE WOULD LIKE TO GO ALONG WITH THE GROUP.
® ® 2 r
m m
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS SUGGESTED THE AGREEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE
OF THE FELLSMERE GRADE WITH OSCEOLA COUNTY BE ADDED TO THE AGENDA.
COMMISSIONER Loy SUGGESTED ADDING AN ITEM CONCERNING THE
SHERIFFS APPLICATION FOR THE STATE REVENUE SHARING.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN
ON THE ANNUAL STATE REVENUE SHARING APPLICATION, WHICH MUST BE PREPARED
BY THE SHERIFF.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED ADDING ALL THE PREVIOUSLY
MENTIONED ITEMS TO TODAY IS AGENDA.
ATTORNEY COLLINS NEXT DISCUSSED AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CHAIRMAN
TO SIGN TAX ANTICIPATION NOTES IN THE AMOUNT OF $450,000. HE CONTINUED
THAT THE PROCEEDS OF THE NOTES WOULD BE REINVESTED ON A SHORT TERM
BASIS; THIS MONEY TO BE USED FOR THE PURCHASE OF APPROXIMATELY 40 ACRES
OF LAND, AND THE TEST WELL PROGRAM FOR THE SOUTH COUNTY WATER TAXING
DISTRICT. THE ATTORNEY STATED IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT IT WILL BE RE—
FINANCED THE LATTER PART OF THIS YEAR BY ISSUING BOND ANTICIPATION
NOTES. HE ADDED THAT THIS IS A TAX ANTICIPATION NOTE WHERE THE
COMMISSIONER IS PLEDGING AD VALOREM TAXES FOR THE YEAR 1980-81 TO
SECURE THE TAX ANTICIPATION NOTE.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS REPORTED THAT HE HAD
MADE ARRANGEMENTS WITH FINANCE OFFICER BARTON TO INVEST THE FUNDS
IMMEDIATELY. THE CURRENT RATE ON THE TAX ANTICIPATION NOTES IS 6-3/4%
AND THE FUNDS WILL BE INVESTED AT APPROXIMATELY 7-3/4%.
ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-58 AUTHORIZING THE
CHAIRMAN TO IMMEDIATELY SIGN THE TAX ANTICIPATION NOTES IN THE AMOUNT
OF $450,000, IN ORDER TO TAKE IT TO THE BANK.
3
,JUN 18 1980
BOOK 4c7. PAGE 73P.
JUN 181990
BOOK 43 fxE 744
RESOLUTION NO. SO- 58
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUA14CE OF
REVENUE AND GENERAL OBLIGATION NOTES OF
I14DIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, NOT TO EXCEED
$450,000.00 TO PAY THE COST OF ADVANCING
FUNDS FOR LAND ACQUISITION EXPENSES FOR
A SOUTH COUNTY WATER SYSTEM; PLEDGING
REVENUES OF THE PROJECT AND AD VALOREM
TAXES FOR REPAYPIENT THEREOF AND CONTAINING
OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE NOTES;
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA (hereinafter called "Board") that:
SECTION 1. AUTHORITY FOR RESOLUTION. This resolution
is adopted pursuant to the provisions of Section 125.01, Florida
Statutes, Chapter 159, Part I, Florida Statutes, and other applicable
provisions of law.
SECTION 2. FINDINGS. It is hereby found, determined
and declared as follows, that:
A. It is necessary, desirable, and in the best interest
of Indian River County, Florida (hereinafter called "County"), and
its inhabitants that a revenue and general obligation note in an
amount of $450,000.00 be issued to advance funds for land acquisition
and the payment of expenses for the south county water system
(herein called "Project").
B. Such revenue and general obligation note together
with all other outstanding general obligation bonded indebtedness
of the County will not exceed any statutory debt limitation.
SECTION 3. RESOLUTION TO CONSTITUTE CONTRACT. In con-
sideration of the acceptance of the Note authorized to be issued
hereunder by those who shall hold the same from time to time, this
resolution shall be deemed to be and shall constitute a contract
between the County and such holder. The convenants and agreements
herein set forth to be performed by the County shall be for the
equal benefit, protection and security of the legal holder of such
Note.
M M _
SECTION 4. AUTHORIZATION OF NOTE. For the purpose of
advancing funds to finance the cost of the Project, there is hereby
authorized to be issued a Revenue and General Obligation Note of
the County (herein called "Note"), in the aggregate principal
amount of not exceeding Four Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars
($450,000.00). The Note shall be dated June 18, 1980. Said Note
shall mature on June 15, 1981 and shall bear interest, payable
at maturity, at the rate of six and seventy five hundredths per
centum (6.75%) per annum. Such Note shall be payable as to principal
and interest in lawful money of the United States of America at
The First Citrus Bank of Indian River County, Vero Beach, Florida
and shall be payable to bearer unless registered as hereinafter
provided.
SECTION 5. SALE OF NOTE. The Note is hereby awarded
and sold at private sale, at the price of the par plus accrued
interest, if any, to the date of delivery, to The First Citrus
Bank of Indian River County, Vero Beach, Florida.
The Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners is
hereby authorized to receive the purchase price of said Note and
to apply the proceeds thereof without further authority from this
Board.
SECTION 6. EXECUTION OF NOTE. The Note shall be executed
in the name of the County by the Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners and countersigned and attested by the Clerk of the
Board, and its corporate seal or a facsimile thereof shall be affixed
thereto or reproduced thereon. The facsimile signatures of the
Chairman or the Clerk may be imprinted or reproduced on the Note,
provided that at least one signature required to be placed thereon
shall be manually subscribed. In case any officer whose signature
shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of such Note,
such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient
for all purposes the same as if he had remained in off ice until
such delivery. The Note may be signed and sealed on behalf of the
County by such person who at the actual time of the execution of
such Note,shall hold the proper office with the County, although
-2-
JUN 181980
Ba 43 PAu 74
r
JUN
18 19 80
56ox
.43
wx 742
at the date
of such Note such person may not have held
such
office
or may not have been so authorized.
SECTION 7. NOTE MUTILATED, DESTROYED, STOLEN OR LOST.
In case the Note shall become mutilated, or be destroyed, stolen
or lost, the County may in its discretion issue and deliver a new
Note of like tenor as the Note so mutilated, destroyed, stolen or
lost, in exchange and substitution for such mutilated Note, upon
surrender and cancellation of such mutilated Note, if any, or in
lieu of and substitution for the Note, if any, destroyed, stolen
or lost, and upon the holder furnishing the County proof of his
ownership thereof and satisfactory indemnity and complying with
such other reasonable regulations and conditions as the County
may prescribe and paying such expenses as the County may incur.
The Note so surrendered shall be cancelled by the Clerk of the
Board. If such Note shall have matured or be about to mature,
instead of issuing a substitute Note, the County may pay the same,
upon being indemnified as aforesaid, and if such Note be lost,
stolen or destroyed without surrender thereof.
Such duplicate Note issued pursuant to this section shall
constitute original, additional contractual obligations on the
part of the County whether or not the lost, stolen or destroyed
Note be at any time found by anyone, and such duplicate Note shall
be entitled to equal and proportionate benefits and rights as to
lien on and source and security for payment from the funds, as
hereinafter pledged, to the same extent as all other obligations
issued hereunder.
SECTION 3. PRIOR REDEMPTION. The Note shall be redeemable
prior to its stated date of -maturity at the County's option without
penalty. . 4
SECTION 9. NEGOTIABILITY AND REGISTRATION. The Note
issued hereunder shall be and shall have all of the qualities and
incidents of negotiable instruments under the law merchant and the
Laws of the State of Florida, and each successive holder, in accepting
such Note shall be conclusively deemed to have agreed that such
Note shall be and have all of the qualities and incidents of
negotiable instruments under the law merchant and the Laws of the
State of Florida.
�I
M
The Note may be registered at the option of the holder
as to principal and interest at the office of the Clerk of the
Board, as Registrar, or such other Registrar as may be hereafter
duly appointed, such registration to be noted on the back of the
Note in the space provided therefor. After such registration as
to principal and interest, no transfer of the Note shall be valid
unless made at such office by written assignment of the registered
owner, or by his duly authorized attorney, in a form satisfactory
to the Registrar, and similarly noted on the Note, but the Note may
be discharged from registration by being in like manner transferred
to bearer form and thereupon transferability by delivery shall
be restored. At the option of the holder, the Note may thereafter
again from time to time be registered or transferred to bearer
form as before.
SECTION 10. FORM OF NOTE. The text of the Note shall
be in substantially the following form and tenor, with such variations,
omissions and insertions as may be necessary, --desirable and authorized
or permitted by this resolution or any subsequent resolution adopted
prior to the issuance thereof:
-4-
JUN 181980
4
h
�� 43 FACE 743'_'..
r
+JUN 181980 Boos 43 FnE 744
$450,000.00
U;,ITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF Ii1DIAN FIVER
REVE:NE AND GENERAL OBLIGATION NOTE
KNOUT ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that Indian Fiver County,
Florida (hereinafter referred to as "County"), for value received,
hereby promises to pay to the bearer, or if this Note be registered,
to the registered holder as herein provided, on June 15, 1981,
the principal sum of Four Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($450,000.00),
with interest thereon at the rate of six and seventy five per centum
(6.75%) per annum, payable at the maturity hereof or before at
County's option, upon presentation and surrender of this Note. Both
principal of and interest on this Note are payable in lawful money
of the United States of America at The First Citrus Bank of Indian
River County, Vero Beach, Florida. For the prompt payment of the
principal of and interest on this Note as the same shall become due,
the revenues of the project (hereinafter referred to), and, if
necessary, the ad valorem taxing power of the County for the fiscal
year 1980-81 at an annual rate not to exceed ten (10) mills on the
dollar of assessed value, are hereby irrevocably pledged.
This Note is in the aggregate principal amount of $450,000.00;
issued to advance funds to finance the cost for land acquisition and
payment of necessary expenses of the south county water system
(herein called the "project"), under the authority of and in full
compliance with the Constitution and Statutes of the State of
Florida, including Section 125.01, Florida Statutes, Chapter 159,
Part I, Florida Statutes, and other applicable provisions of law,
and pursuant to a resolution of the County duly adopted on the 18th
day of June, 1980 (hereinafter called "Resolution").4 This Note
is subject to all the terms and conditions of said Resolution.
It is certified and recited that all acts, conditions and
things required to happen, to exist and to be performed, -precedent
to and in the issuance of this Note, have happened, exist, and have
been performed in due time, form and manner as required by the
constitution and Laws of the State of Florida, applicable thereto;
that the total indebtedness of said County, including this Note,
M
-5-
0
L—�
M
does not exceed any constitutional, statutory, or other limitation;
and that, to the extent the revenues of the project are insufficient
therefor, provision has been rade for the levy and collection of a
direct annual tax for the fiscal year 1980-81, at an annual rate
not to exceed ten (10) mills on the dollar of assessed value, upon
all property subject to taxation by the County, sufficient to pay
the principal of and interest on this Note as the same shall become
due, which tax shall be levied and collected at the same time and
in the same manner as other ad valorem taxes of the County are
assessed, levied and collected.
This Note is redeemable prior to its stated date of
maturity at option of County without payment of premium or penalty.
This Note is and has all the qualities of a negotiable
instrument under the law merchant and the laws of the State of
Florida.
This Note may be registered as to both principal and
interest in accordance with the provisions endorsed hereon.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Indian River County, Florida, has
issued this Note and has caused the same to be executed by the
manual or facsimile signature of the Chairman of the Board of
County Commissioners and the corporate seal of said County or a
facsimile thereof to be affixed hereto or impressed, imprinted,
lithographed or reproduced hereon and attested and countersigned
by the manual or facsimile signature of the Clerk of the Board,
all as of the 18th day of June, 1980.
(SEAL),:.
s
ATTESTED AND COUNTERSIGNED:
Clerk, Boar ofOCounty
Commissioners p
JUN 1'8 1980
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
CHairman,Boar o County/
Commissioners 4%
Foot, 43 FulE 745:
I
'JUK 181980
aoox . 43 nu 746
PROVISION FOR REGISTRATION
This Note may be registered as to both principal and
interest in the name of the holder on the books to be kept by
the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners as Registrar, such
registration being noted hereon by such Registrar in the registration
blank below, after which no transfer shall be valid unless made
by written assignment on said books by the registered holder or
attorney duly authorized and similarly noted in the registration
blank below, but it may be discharged from registration by being
transferred to bearer, after which it shall be transferable by
delivery, but it may be again registered as before.
DATE OF IN WHOSE NAME SIGNATURE OF
REGISTRATION REGISTERED REGISTRAR
_ / n _
June 18, 1980 First Citrus Bank of Indian River Co.
4
SECTION 11. PLEDGE OF REVENUES AND AD VALOREM TAXES.
For the prompt payment of the principal of and interest on the
Note, the revenues derived from the operation of the project and,
to the extent such revenues are insufficient therefor, the ad
valorem taxing power of the County for the fiscal year 1980-81,
at an annual rate not to exceed ten (10) mills on the dollar of
assessed value, are irrevocably pledged.
SECTION 12. SINKING FUND, DEPOSIT OF REVENUES AND LEVY
OF AD VALOREM TAX. There is hereby created a Sinking Fund to be
held and administered by the County solely for the purpose of paying
the principal of and interest on the Note as it becomes due. All
of the revenues derived from the operation of the project shall be
deposited into said Sinking Fund. There shall also be levied and
collected a tax during the fiscal year 1980-81, at an annual rate
not to exceed ten (10) mills on the dollar of assessed value, on
all property subject to taxation by the County, sufficient in the
amount to pay the principal of and'interest on such Note as the
same shall become due, after deducting therefrom any revenues or
other funds which may be so applied. Such tax shall be assessed,
levied and collected in the same manner and at the same time as
other County taxes are assessed, levied and collected.
SECTION 13. NOTE HOLDERS NOT AFFECTED BY USE OF NOTE
PROCEEDS. The holder of the Note issued hereunder shall have no
responsibility for the use of the proceeds of said Note, and the
use of such Note proceeds by the County shall in no way affect the
rights of such Note holder.
SECTION 14. ARBITRAGE. No use will be made of the proceeds
of the Note which would cause the same to be "arbitrage bonds" within
the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code.
The County, at all times
while the Note and interest thereon are outstanding, will comply
with the requirements of Section 103(c) of the Internal Revenue
Code and any valid and applicable rules and regulations of the
Internal Revenue Service.
SECTION 15. MODIFICATION OR AMENDMENT. No material
modification or amendment of this resolution or of any resolution
amendatory hereof or supplemental hereto, may be made without the
consent in writing of the holder of the Note then outstanding,
JUN 181980 -s- '� ,
JUN 181980 ooK 4 FacF 748
provided, however, that no modification or amendment shall permit a
change in the maturity of such Note or the unconditional promise of
the County to pay the principal of and interest on the Note as the
same shall become due.
SECTION 16. SEVERABILITY OF INVALID PROVISIONS, If any
one or more of the convenants, agreements, or provisions of this
resolution should be held contrary to any express provisions of
law or contrary to the policy of express law, though not expressly
prohibited, or against public policy, or shall for any reason
whatsoever be held invalid, then such conver_ants, agreements or
provisions shall be null and void and shall be deemed separate
from the remaining covenants, agreements or provisions, and in
no way affect the validity of all the other provisions of this
resolution or of the Notes issued hereunder.
SECTION 17. EFFECTIVE DATE. This resolution shall take
effect immediately upon its adoption.
ATTEST:
"'M
�:- ler
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Chairman!
4
® v -7
ATTORNEY COLLINS NEXT DISCUSSED THE 20' BUFFER ON THE
WEST BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY ABUTTING THE ANSIN BROTHERS PROPERTY,
HE THEN ADVISED THAT THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION AS WRITTEN IS INCORRECT;
IT SHOULD BE THE It WEST" COUNTY LINE AND NOT "NORTH." ATTORNEY
COLLINS STATED THE 20' STRIP WILL BE LOCATED ON COUNTY PROPERTY ON
THE WEST 20' OF THE PROPERTY.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-59 REGARDING THE
PURCHASE OF THE ANSIN BROTHERS' PROPERTY.
13
43,749
JUN ,
�. 81980
JUN Is 1900 boox 43 Paf- 7;
RESOLUTION NO. 80- 59
WHEREAS, Indian river County has contracted to purchase
from Edmund N. Ansin and Ronald M. Ansin the following described
property:
and
All of Tract 9 leas the East 15 acres thereof
and the West 10 acres of Tract 16 and the North
5 acres of the East 8.48 acres of the West 18.48
acres of Tract 16, all in Section 23, Township
33 South, Range 39 East, according to the last
general plat of lands of Indian River Farms
Company as recorded in the office of the Clerk
of the Circuit Court, St. Lucie County, Florida,
and recorded in Plat Book 2, page 25, now being
located in Indian River County, Florida, less
and excepting all rights of way for Oslo Road
and drainage canals.
WHEREAS, under threat of condemnation, a negotiated purchase
price was arrived at between the parties; and
WHEREAS, Indian River County agreed, as part of the purchase
to create a twenty -foot (20 ft) buffer strip over the West twenty
(20) feet of the above described property, which strip shall
include fencing and appropriate hedging;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, That the Board
agrees, in conjunction with the purchase of the above described
property, to establish a buffer strip over the West twenty (20)
feet of the above described property for the purposes of fencing
and hedging the above described property creating a buffer
between the County purchased property and the remaining land
holdings of Edmund N. Ansin and Ronald M. Ansin.
Said Resolution shall become effective as of the 18th
day of June , 1980.
BOARD OF COUNTY C014MISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Willard W. • Siebert, J J_i', Chairman
Attest:
Freda Wright, Clerk 0r
C'
COMMISSIONER LYONS DISCUSSED THE EMERGENCY ITEM CONCERNING
A MEETING HELD WITH REYNOLDS, SMITH & HILLS, ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS,
AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ENGINEERS IN REGARD TO THE PERMITTING OF INDIAN RIVER
BOULEVARD. HE CONTINUED THAT THEY WERE INFORMED OF THE COST OF THE ROAD, WHICH
WOULD BE ABOUT TWO MILLION DOLLARS. COMMISSIONER LYONS REPORTED IT
WILL TAKE UNTIL THE END OF THE YEAR TO GET THE NECESSARY PERMITS.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF WE HAVE AN ALIGNMENT.
COMMISSIONER LYONS RESPONDED AFFIRMATIVELY, STATING IT WAS
THE PROPOSED ALIGNMENT FROM REYNOLDS, SMITH & HILLS. HE THOUGHT THAT
SOMETIME IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS, THEY WILL RECEIVE CONFIRMATION OF THIS
FACT IN A REPORT.
COMMISSIONER LYONS DISCUSSED THE NEXT EMERGENCY ITEM REGARDING
THE REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL LEGISLATION AND ADVISED IT WAS PASSED,
AND WAS CLOSE TO WHAT THE COUNTY HAD WANTED. HE CONTINUED THAT INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY RECEIVED A NUMBER OF ACCOLADES FOR THEIR HELP IN GETTING
THE LEGISLATION THROUGH, PARTICULARLY DUE TO THE EFFORTS OF DALE
PATCHETT.
COMMISSIONER LYONS BROUGHT UP THE NEXT EMERGENCY ITEM
CONCERNING THE LEASE WITH THE PROGRESSIVE CIVIC LEAGUE, AND HE WANTED
TO SUGGEST THEY NOT HAVE OVER 10 PERSONS AT A GATHERING AT THE LEASED
LOCATION. HE ADDED THAT THEY HAVE SPENT MONEY FIXING UP THE PLACE AND
HAVE REQUESTED ASSURANCE OF A LONGER TERM LEASE. COMMISSIONER LYONS
THEN SUGGESTED THE COUNTY LEASE IT TO THEM FOR A YEAR, THEN ON A
MONTH-TO-MONTH BASIS THEREAFTER.
ATTORNEY COLLINS SAID THERE IS A LEGAL PROBLEM IF COMMISSIONER
LYONS' SUGGESTION IS USED. HE CONTINUED THAT THEY HAD ENTERED INTO
A USE AGREEMENT TO AVOID THE NOTICE OF PUBLICATION PERFORMANCE REQUIRED
UNDER FLORIDA STATUTES.
COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT IF THE BOARD OR ATTORNEY
HAD NO OBJECTION, HE WOULD LIMIT THE PROGRESSIVE CIVIC LEAGUE MEETINGS
AT THAT PREMISES TO NO MORE THAN TEN PERSONS, AND CONTINUE AS
ORIGINALLY PLANNED ON A MONTH-TO-MONTH BASIS.
COMMISSIONER LYONS NEXT BROUGHT UP THE EMERGENCY ITEM
REGARDING THE SHERIFF DEPARTMENT'S AUTOMOBILE EXPENSES.
IV.1i.p'
HE FELT THE
43 pA ?51
JUN 181980
im 4- FAu 752
COUNTY SHOULD TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT MAKING SOME SUGGESTION FOR DECREASING
THIS EXPENSE — SUCH AS LEASING AUTOMOBILES.
BY ,JULY.
FINANCE OFFICER BARTON STATED THAT THIS MUST BE APPROVED
COMMISSIONER LYONS THOUGHT THEY SHOULD GET THE SHERIFF MORE
FUEL—EFFICIENT AUTOMOBILES.
COMMISSIONER LOY THOUGHT WE SHOULD HAVE A COUPLE OF MEETINGS
WITH THE SHERIFF, AND IF THIS ITEM CAN BE PUT ON OUR AGENDA FOR THE
NEXT MEETING, WE COULD GIVE THE SHERIFF A CHANCE TO WORK ON THIS
PROBLEM BEFORE THE END OF JULY. SHE THEN SUGGESTED PUTTING THE
SHERIFF ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING FOR A DISCUSSION.
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
in the matter of
in the
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
Court, was pub -
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, 'Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and su"crnbcd before no this, day of A. D.
-
LAVA (Business Manager)
iSEAL) (C!erk of the Circuit Court,)ndian River County, Floridc`
16
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 ar
substantially as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order
that the following described property situated
1/2 mile east of Clemanns Avenue on South
Gifford Road, in Indian River County, Florida,
to -wit:
The West 20 feet of the East 20 acres of Tract
11, Section 27, Township 32 South, Range 39
East; the NORTH 12 of the East 10 acres of
Tract 13; and the North 200 feet of the South 12
of the East 10 acres of Tract 13; and the North
1,2 of the West 20.05 acres and the North 200 feet
of the South 12 of the West 20.05 acres and the
North 866 feet of the West 20 feet of the East 12,
Tract 14; all of the above land being in Section
27, Township 32 South, Range 39 East, all
according to plat of lands of 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
lying and being . in Indian River County,
Florida.
Be changed from R-1 Single Family District
to M-1 Restricted Industrial 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 the
Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, in the City*Hall Council
Chambers, Indian River County Courthouse,
Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, June 18,
1980, at 9:00 A.M.
Board of County Commissioners,
Indian River County, Florida
By: Willard W. Siebert Jr., Chairman
Indian River County Planning
and Zoning Commission
By: Dick Bird, Chairman
May 11 8, 1980.
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING STAFF REPORT
CONCERNING THE REQUEST FOR REZONING FROM R-1 TO M-1 AS REQUESTED TO
ROBERT AND MARIAN RICE:
ZONING CHANGE - STAFF REPORT
Robert B. and Marian L. Rice
0wner
Joe Hall of James A. Doolittle & Assoc., Inc.
Agent
2010 6th Avenue
Address
Vero Beach, Fla. 32960
1-30-80
Date of Application
IRC-80-ZC=5 -
Application Number
Rezoning from R-1 to M-1
(District District
Preliminary Final X Hearing
PROPOSED USE AND LOCATION: Subject property, approximately 20 acres, is located
off South Gifford Road, approximately 1/2 mile east of Clemann Avenue. The
applicant requests a zoning change from R-1, Single Family to M-1, Restricted
Industrial in order to construct a warehouse building for assembling trusses.
EXISTING SITUATION: The property is presently vacant. The surrounding area
imme is e y o e north is vacant and is zoned R-1, Single Family. To the
northeast along South Gifford Road, and west of 35th Avenue, is a child develop-
ment center and some trailers; to the northwest of the proposed access road is
a citrus grove and some scattered residences. The remaining property to the
northeast, southeast and southwest is zoned Airport according to the City of Vero
Beach Zoning Department.
RECOMMENDATION: The application is in order, and staff could in the future
recommend the rezoning, with the exception of the 20' access strip which runs
north to South Gifford Road. This strip should be retained in R-1. It is felt,
however, that this rezoning should be continued until such time that the applicant
demonstrates that adequate access can be provided to the property.
David M. R ver
Planning and Zoning Director
DMR: j t
cc: Rice
Hall
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER THEN REFERRED TO THE FOLLOWING
LETTER RECEIVED BY CHET HOGAN, REPRESENTATIVE OF THE BUYERS IN THE
REAL ESTATE TRANSACTION:
u
JUN 18 19 90 43 PAGE' 155)3 -
J
OFFICE OF THE
CITY ATTORNEY
City of Vero Beach
P. 0. BOX 1389 - 1053 - 20th PLACE
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA - 32960
Telephone 567-5151
March 13, 1980
Mr. Chet Hogan
Associates Realty of
Indian River, I,. -Lc.
95 Royal Palm Boulevard
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Chet:
BOiNt 43 exf 754
This letter is to confirm our meeting of this date
wherein we discussed the road which is to be constructed
on the Rice property north of the 30' utility easement.
I have enclosed a sketch indicating the proposed placement
and measurement of the road as it affects the Rice property.,
I have discussed the possibility of a City easement/
license in your client's favor for the construction of a'
road to be located on City property connecting the Rice
property to 43rd Avenue. If the.City grants such an
easement to your client, the proposed road should comply
with the dimensions and measurements of the road in the
enclosed sketch. The granting of a City easement/license
to your client regarding the road must be approved by City
Council. I will keep you advised of the progress of the
necessary approval.
4z
I will be in contact with you to discuss this matter
further. If you have any questions in the meantime, please
feel free to give me a call.
Very/truly yours,
i
Wayne R. McDonough
Assistant City Attorney
Enclosure
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER STATED THAT STAFF FELT THEY WERE
NOT AGAINST REZONING, BUT WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE ASSOCIATED PROBLEM
WITH THE ROAD. HE CITED A "CHICKEN AND EGG PROCESS", AS THE CITY WAS
WAITING FOR AN ANSWER FROM THE COUNTY BEFORE MAKING THEIR DECISION.
MR. REVER COMMENTED THAT STAFF STILL HELD TO THEIR POINT, AND IF THERE
WAS SOME MEANS OF GETTING ADEQUATE ACCESS, THEN THEY COULD COME BACK
WITH A REASONABLE CHANCE OF GETTING APPROVAL.
HE ADDED THAT THE
L
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION VOTED IN THE END TO RECOMMEND THAT THE
REZONING BE GRANTED, AND THEN REFERRED TO THE FOLLOWING LETTER FROM
THE CITY OF VERO BEACH:
City of Vero Beach
P. 0. BOX 1389 - 1053 - 20th PLACE
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA - 32960
Telephone 567-5151
CF THE May 8, 1930
-Y ATTORNEY
Dick Bird, Chairman
,,arks, Planning & Zoning Commission
yndian River County
0. Drawer "C"
Truro Beach, Florida 32960
Re: Rezoning of "Rice" Property.
Dear Mr. Bird:
I have had several conversations with Mr. Chet Hogan,
agent for the buyer of the "Rice" property, regarding the
installation of an electrical transmission line across the
Tiorthern portion of that land. During our discussions, we
Piave considered the construction of an access road running
parallel with the proposed transmission line across the
Rice property and extending westward onto and across
City airport property connecting with 43rd Avenue. (Pro-
posed placement of the road is highlighted on the attached
sketch). The proposed road will provide convenient access
for the landowner and the City which will use the road for
maintenance purposes for the transmission line.
The City administration and the City's consulting
engineers have approved and recommend the placement of the
road as it affects both the "Rice" property and municipal
;iirport property. However, the granting of a road easement
is subject to City Council approval. In addition, the City
;administration does not object to rezoning of the land from
1Z-1 to M-2.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please
let me know.
Ver truly ou�rss
• 4y G
Wayn R. McDonough
Assi tant City Attorney
cc: Chet Hogan
"City of Beautiful Beaches"
IC
-I
SOUTH GIFFORD RD.
�� IN
II + ►-
I
i i 30+ WI;)F. EASEMENT RQ' v 1 �n
W i TRAGI I i TRACT IG
I I
ROBERT 8. RICE
2337 3RD AVE. S.E.
i
I
V. B CITY LIMITS
I' I
2§1?7
33134
wK 43 RAGE 756
ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT AS HE UNDERSTOOD IT, THE
PRESENT OWNER DOES NOT WANT TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE CITY OF VERO BEACH,
BUT THE PROSPECTIVE BUYER IS WILLING TO DO SO.
ROAD.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS ASKED WHO WAS GOING TO MAINTAIN THIS
PLANNER REVER STATED THE CITY WOULD MAINTAIN THIS ROAD;
IT WOULD BE AN EASEMENT ADJACENT TO THE RICE PROPERTY, BUT WOULD GIVE
ACCESS TO THE RICE PROPERTY, AND IT IS SURROUNDED BY THE AIRPORT.
.JOE HALL, REPRESENTING MR. AND MRS. RICE, APPROACHED THE
BOARD AND DISPLAYED A COPY OF THE SURVEY TO THEM. HE INFORMED THE
BOARD THAT THE RICES HAD PLANNED TO BUILD A HOME ON THIS R-1 PROPERTY,
BUT THE AIRPORT WOULD NOT LET THEM DO THAT - THEY ARE COMPLETELY
SURROUNDED BY M-1, AND THE ONLY LOGICAL USE IS FOR AN M-1 USE. HE
CONTINUED THAT THEY HAVE TALKED TO ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY MCDONOUGH,
AND TO EVERYONE THEY COULD TO WORK WITH THE BUYER ON THE ROAD. MR.
HALL REPORTED THAT ONE PROBLEM IS THAT WHEN THE CONTRACT WAS WRITTEN
BETWEEN THE RICES AND THE MILLS, THE MILLS ASKED THE BUYERS TO REZONE
THE PROPERTY AT THEIR EXPENSE; THE NEXT PROBLEM IS THAT THE CITY
WANTS TO PUT IN A POWER LINE.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THE CITY IS GOING TO HAVE TO
CROSS THE PROPERTY WITH THE POWER LINE.
MR. HALL STATED THAT THE SHORTEST AND LEAST EXPENSIVE WAY
TO COME IN WITH THE POWER LINE IS TO COME IN ON 43RD AVENUE, BUT THE
SELLER WON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT IT. HE ADDED THE CITY WANTS
TO GET THIS CONTRACT EXPEDITED AND THE CITY HAS INDICATED THEY HAVE
NO PROBLEMS WITH IT.
CIRCLES.
COMMISSIONER LYONS WONDERED HOW WE STOP GOING AROUND IN
MR. HALL FELT THE ONLY WAY TO EXPEDITE THIS IS TO CHANGE
THE ZONING TO M-1 AND LET THE BUYER, THE CITY AND THE UTILITY LINES
GET ON WITH IT.
CHET HOGAN, REPRESENTING THE BUYERS, APPROACHED THE BOARD
AND STATED THAT THE BUYERS' ATTORNEY AND THE CITY ATTORNEY ARE IN
AGREEMENT; AND THERE WILL BE A MARL ROAD WHICH WILL MEET THE SPECIFICA-
TIONS. HE ADDED THAT THERE IS A 60' EASEMENT ON THE NORTH PART
OF THE PROPERTY THAT THEY ARE NEGOTIATING TO GIVE TO THE CITY.
PLANNER REVER INDICATED THAT THIS 60' EASEMENT WILL BE OWNED
BY THE CITY BUT WILL BE IN THE COUNTY PROPER, AND IT WILL HAVE TO
BE PAVED. HE ADDED THAT THE CITY WILL MAINTAIN IT.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE MARL ROAD AS THE BOARD EXAMINED
THE SKETCH.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THE BUYER SHOULD BE MADE AWARE
THAT THAT PORTION MIGHT HAVE TO BE PAVED,
ATTORNEY COLLINS THEN DISCUSSED THE 20' EASEMENT COMING IN
FROM THE NORTH DOWN TO THE PROPERTY LINE. HE ADVISED THERE WAS A
MOTION MADE AT THE PLANNING $ ZONING MEETING FOR THE 20' EASEMENT NOT
TO BE INCLUDED, BUT THE FINAL MOTION THAT WAS PASSED DID INCLUDE IT.
THE ATTORNEY CONTINUED THAT HE HAD SOME RESERVATIONS ABOUT INCLUDING
IT NOW AS THERE IS NO REASON TO REZONE THE 20' EASEMENT FOR THE M-1
THAT THEY HAD IN MIND.
COMMISSIONER LYONS SUGGESTED REZONING THE PROPERTY AND LETTING
THE APPLICANT WORK OUT THE PROBLEM OF INGRESS AND EGRESS.
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER STATED HE AND HIS STAFF FELT THE 20'
STRIP DID NOT HAVE TO BE REZONED, AS THE ROAD COULD BE ZONED EITHER WAY.
,u
JUN 181980 - 43,Psa 7�7-
JUN 181990
Bo .43 PAGE 758
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WAS ANYONE PRESENT WHO 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 ABOUT THE 20' STRIP.
ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE 80-30 REZONING THE
PROPERTY, AS ADVERTISED, FROM R-1 TO M-1, EXCLUDING THE 20' ACCESS
STRIP.
ORDINANCE NO. 80-30
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone
the hereinafter described property and -pursuant thereto held a public
hearing in relation thereto, at which parties in interest and citizens
were heard; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, that the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River
County, Florida, and the accompanying Zoning Map, be amended as
follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in Indian River
County, Florida, to -wit:
The North 1/2 of the East 10 acres of Tract 13; and
the North 200 feet of the South 1/2 of the East 10
acres of Tract 13; and the North 1/2 of the West 20.05
acres and the North 200 feet of the South 1/2 of the
West 20.05 acres of Tract 14; all of the above land
being in Section 27, Township 32 South, Range 39 East,
all according to plat of lands of 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 lying and being in Indian River
County, Florida
Be changed from R-1 Single Family District to M-1 Restricted
Industrial District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Zoning Regulations.
This Ordinance shall take effect June 23, 1980.
COMMISSIONER LOY NEXT BROUGHT UP THE EMERGENCY ITEM REGARDING
THE KIWANIS CLUB.
CHAUNCEY HATCH, OF THE KIWANIS CLUB, APPROACHED THE BOARD
AND ADVISED THAT THEY HAD COMPLETED THE BATH AND TOILET FACILITIES
AT HOBART PARK, AND PRESENTED A CHECK FOR $3,300 FROM THE KIWANIS
CLUB TO THE BOARD, HE ADVISED THAT HE REVIEWED THE INSTALLATION, WHICH
IS VERY FUNCTIONAL; THE TOILETS AND OUTSIDE SHOWERS ARE AVAILABLE TO
ALL SWIMMERS.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT THEN THANKED MR. HATCH AND COMMENTED THAT
HE LOOKED FORWARD TO WORKING AGAIN WITH THE KIWANIS CLUB.
THE HOUR OF 9:30 O'CLOCK A.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY
CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED,
TO—WIT:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER:
STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that,he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of
:=
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of ���+ -Z ;2
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 Ccunty, 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 newspape"
Sworn to and subscribed before a this day of �%` A.D.
n n 7
(ITiisiness Manager)
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court(�dian River County, Florida)
U
JUN 18, 1980
NOTICE OF SALE
OF REAL ESTATE
Pursuant to Florida Statute 125.35, the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, will accept written bids to the
hour of 5:00 o'clock P.M., Tuesday, June 17,
1980, for the cash purchase of the following
described county property:
W 25 If of Lot 1 and E 20 It of Lot 2 Less Hwy
R -W as in R Bk 95 pp 43 BIk 3 Graves Addition
to Wabasso Shown on tax roll as 33-31-39-01-
0030-001-1.-
The
3-31-39-01-
0030-001.1:The Board of County Commissioners
reserves the right to reject any or all of the
bids and make awards in any manner which
the Board considers to be in the best interest of
Indian River County, Florida.
All bids shall be for a cash purchase, in
writing by legal description as listed above,
and shall include a check payable to Indian
River County for ten percent (10 percent) of
the bid price with the balance due five (5) days
after acceptance, submitted in an envelope
securely sealed and marked on the outside
"SEALED BID FOR COUNTY LAND TO BE
OPENED JUNE 18, 1980, AT 9:30 O'CLOCK
A.M."
Bids may be mailed or delivered to the office
of the Board of County Commissioners, Indian
River County Courthouse, 2145 14th Avenue,
Vero Beach, Florida 32960. Proposals received
after 5:00 o'clock P.M. June 17th, 1980, will be
returned unopened.
BOARD OF COUNTY COM-
MISSIONERS
OMMI551
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
By: Willard W. Siebert, Jr.
Chairman
May 27, June 3, 1980.
e0fi 41*E-7519
.JUN 18 1980 eoox 43 PAGE 760 r
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT OPENED THE BID FROM HAROLD & REBA WEIMER
OF MILLERSTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA FOR $200.
BOARD SECRETARY FORLANI INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE WEIMERS
OWN LOT 2 AND A LITTLE BIT OF LOT 1.
COMMISSIONER LOY FELT THIS WAS A NUISANCE STRIP FOR THE
COUNTY.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE BID OF HAROLD & REBA WEIMER
FOR THE W. 25 FT. OF LOT 1 AND E. 20 FT. OF LOT 2 LESS HIGHWAY R/W,
GRAVES ADDITION TO WABASSO, AS ADVERTISED, AS BEING THE
BEST BID, IN THE AMOUNT OF $200.
THE BOARD NEXT DISCUSSED RADIO EQUIPMENT FOR THE 1979
AMBULANCE AS MENTIONED IN THE FOLLOWING LETTER:
24
��i 'M3 A.
b,1 H,j :1"�,n�s$z�'II,
and , : u I a ri c2 -1; U
C.. __.5 9
1t_SAST ,VN, FL., -JCA - S3
SERVING ALL OF NORTH INOI,;N "11VZR COUNTY VOLUNTARILY
10 June 10.80
Indian River County Cormissioners
Indian River County Courthouse
Vero Beach, Florida 32950
Dear Commissioners:
I will get right to the point, I have a big problem - money problem.
All ambulances and hospitals have to go from VrIF to TJHF radios. At
the time funding for the radios frequency change over was taking
place, we had not purchased our 1979 Ford Ambulance. ;when we did
purchase Rig 5, the radios at that tire were suppose to cost from
41,800.00 to $2,000.00, therefore I kept X2,000.00 for the radio to
go into the new ambulance.
Now, the price of the Uri' radio is 45,829.00, which leave me short
a total of 43,829.00. I might add these radios were purchased
through the State Contract.
The radios at this time are in Vero -Peach, and installation will be-
gin 8 July and commence 15 July 1980, which is the date set for
change over.
On 9 June 1980, I went before the Sebastian City Council, and told
them of my dilemma, and they voted to give me X1,500.00, w"nich still
leaves me short ;32,329.00 - therefore I an requesting that amount
from the County Commissioners.
.lithout this radio in our new 1979 Ford Ambulance, we will not be
able to continue using it to help the people in our area of ambulance,.
coverage.
Voluntarily yours,
5�Lz C ----
Joy Snell, Captain
Ambulance Squad
JOY SNELL, CHIEF OF THE AMBULANCE SQUAD, CAME BEFORE THE
BOARD AND ADVISED THAT THEY HAD RECEIVED $10,000 FROM THE CITY, AS
WELL AS $10,000 FROM THE COUNTY, OUT OF WHICH $2,000 WAS SAVED FOR
RADIO EQUIPMENT. THE TOTAL PRICE FOR THE RADIO EQUIPMENT IS $3.846;
THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN HAS AGREED TO PAY ONE-THIRD, OR $615.33, AND
NOW $1,230.67 IS NEEDED FOR THE BALANCE - THIS PRICE IS $2,800 LESS
THAN THE ONE MENTIONED IN THE LETTER.
25
JUN 18 1980
eK. 43
,-,JUN 18 1980
Boo+c 43 PAGE 762
COMMISSIONER LOY AFFIRMED THAT THEY NEED $1,230.67 FOR
ONE RADIO AND NOTED THAT THE PRICES ARE LESS WHEN PURCHASED LOCALLY.
COMMISSIONER LYONS INQUIRED IF THEY ALSO HAVE THE DUAL SET-
UP,AND MS. SNELL REPLIED AFFIRMATIVELY.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY GRANTED THE REQUEST FROM THE SEBASTIAN
VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE SQUAD OF $1,230.67 FOR THE PURCHASE OF A NEW
RADIO, FUNDS TO BE DERIVED FROM REVENUE SHARING, AS FOLLOWS:
ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT NUMBER INCREASE DECREASE
SEBASTIAN AMBULANCE
SQUAD 102-107-562-88.26 $1,231
RESERVE FOR
CONTINGENCIES 102-199-584-99.91 $1,231
WILLIAM KOOLAGE, INTERESTED CITIZEN, APPROACHED THE BOARD
AND STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE THE FOLLOWING TO BE CONSIDERED, SINCE
BUDGET SESSIONS WILL BE COMING UP SOON:
26
</W%�e=IIS %//�— C.e�G/ti'% f`��(i�%-5 iGG�IL ✓���� C.vcaGtJ� Y
�2f �` �aC.►T'iI- CL�C.aS /�,J r�/2c� ���j� ®,�'i2= %� y
,vK /ate'
t, =� —yrs ,ter• — 7 /� &-=,v C2 �.�r.�� ��'e-.�r s�F 91 44 0 6 /Z
7Z. i`�f-,t-`,� %%r'�d % j,�z= lic�i�. `, /,��'/2/�/fir �/��'%/�%2 •��' �.S
42
Af
��/`.�/ Lai ✓ ;fir�.�d� f � > /r'
_A)
�-°�/2���,�if.'�r° rL � S i Boa" �2% i 5 rr��-�' r•�'�-�`- � T ,tel/® u1
UA
yc-
417
J
JUN 181990
Bom 43 PAGE
J
JUN 181980 ax 43 PAGE 78
4
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-JOURHAL
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
BEFORE THE BOARD OF
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published j
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being I
RIVERCOUNTY
OUN
�l ��"
In Re: Application Sanitation
I Service for
authority to increase its rates for
a �' //.�G L
garbage service in the unincorporated area of
Indian River County,
NOTICE OF HEARING
in the matter of _e".
The Board of County Commissioners' of
ndian River County will hold a hearing
on
June. 18, 1980 at 10:00 A.M. in its hearing room
d
in the . Council. Chambers, City Hall, Vero
Beach, Florida on the application of Indian
River Sanitation Service for authority to make
effective the following garbage service
increase:, rate
in the Court, was pub-
� Present Rate
_
$6.00 per month
lished in said newspaper in the issues of ��=—f - -- = �� '" '-`
Proposed Rate57.00 per month
NOTE: No rate increase is requested for
Commercial accounts at this time.
BOARD OF COUNTY COM-
MISSIONERS
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 has heretofore
OF INDIAN- RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA
said newspaper
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
By: Willard W. Siebert, Jr.
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
Chairman
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
June4,6,1980.
tiserrent; 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.
a er.
Sworn to and subscribed
(SEAL)
this( day of
V (business Manager)
(Clerk of the Circui urt, Indian River County, Florida)
C. REED KNIGHT, JR., OWNER -MANAGER OF INDIAN RIVER SANITATION
SERVICE, APPROACHED THE BOARD AND REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING MATERIAL
PERTAINING TO THE REQUEST FOR RATE INCREASE FROM $6.00 A MONTH TO
$7.00 A MONTH:
INDIAN RIVER SANITATION SERVICE
up we never get)
P.O. BOX 1356
.0622 Per Killowatt
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960
2},%
Phone. -569-1776
4427 Fuel Adjustment
RATE INCREASE'HEARING
COST OF BILLING
Asking for Increase from $6.00 per month to $7.00 per month, or an
increase of 16 2/3%.
Electromix 25.00 Per Case
COSTS
8%
Copy Paper 9.50 Per Roll
Copy Paper 13.00 Per Roll
1977 1980
INCREASE
LABOR
40�%
165.00 Driver Per Wk. 238.00 Driver Per Wk.
48k%
150.00 Helper Per Wk. 230.00 Helper Per Wk.
Sales Journals;l3.55 Per/C
315.00 TOTAL Per Wk. 468.00 TOTAL Per Wk.
20%
GAS
JULY
.60¢ Per Gallon 1.10 Per Gallon
'83%
OIL 30 W
100%
19.78 Per Case 26.71 Per Case
35%
AYIS. OIL
1.39 Per Gallon 1.9611 Per Gallon 41%
UCC
Figured on 4,200.00 Figured on 6,000.00 43%
INSURANCE
1,146.00 1,348.00 18%
UTILITIES City of Vero Beach (Plus $6.00 per mo. for trash pick
INDIAN RIVER SANITATION SERVICE
P.O. BOX 1356
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960
Phone: -569-1776
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SANITARY LASNDFILL CHARGES
MONTH
up we never get)
1979 .
.0622 Per Killowatt
.0636 Per Killowatt
2},%
27k7. Fuel Adjustment
4427 Fuel Adjustment
17;4%
COST OF BILLING
$1451.15
$1636.13
Electromix 25.00 Per Case
Electromix 27.00 Per Case
8%
Copy Paper 9.50 Per Roll
Copy Paper 13.00 Per Roll
37%
Envelopes 41.90 Per/M
Envelopes 58.90 Per/M
40�%
$tamps 13.00 Per/C
Stamps 15.00 Per/C
15%
Sales Journals;l3.55 Per/C
Sales Journals 16.30 Per/C
20%
TIRES
JULY
$1151.93
34.50 Recapped
69.54 Recapped
100%
193.44 Michelin - New
335.91 Michelin - New
74%
19.24 Tube
30.06 Tube
56%
INDIAN RIVER SANITATION SERVICE
P.O. BOX 1356
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960
Phone: -569-1776
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SANITARY LASNDFILL CHARGES
MONTH
1978
1979 .
1980
JANUARY
-
$1728.41
$1591.71
FEBRUARY
$1219.55
$1451.15
$1636.13
MARCH
$14.55.29
$1666.93
$2016.07
APRIL
$1203.23
$1537.38
$1686.69
MAY
$1198.04
$1626.88
$1591.69
JUNE
$i247.45
$1433.91
$8522,29
JULY
$1151.93
$1969.82
AUGUST
$1252.98
$1174.10
SEPTEMBER
$1152.65
$1629.36
OCTOBER
$1160.60
$1536.21
NOVEMBER
$1383.09
$1479.02
DECEMBER
$1439.19
$1633.82
TOTALS
$13,969.00
$18,866.99
INDIAN RIVER SANITATION SERVICE
P.O. BOX 1356
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960
Phone: -569-1776
RESPONSE TO RATE HEARING LETTERS
NAME
1. Loretta Coleman
2. Charles Searcy
3. Mrs. Royden Smith
ADDRESS CO RENTS
1205 - 11th Ave. For - Should get increase because
of gas costs, etc.
1035 - 22nd Ave. For - Understands need for increase
2051 - 44th Ave. For - Have to pay for good men &
high costs; should get increase
4. Mrs. Arthur Eichman 2715 - 53rd Ave. For - Realize have to raise rates
because of high costs of
th' 1 6 t
5. Bernita Cook
6. Weldon Turner
7. Lee Keech
every ing, gas, a or, a c. .
108 - 6th Ave. SW AGAINST - Understands heed for increase
but she cannot afford.
1730 - 6th Ave. For - Excellent service; hope we get
increase %
2625 - 51st Ave. Against - New customer. Rate seems
high compared to north.
Bfl01� 943 PAGE10
JUN 181980
I
Fr
JUN 18 1980
MR. KNIGHT STATED THAT THEIR FIRST RATE INCREASE IN 1977
WAS FROM $3.25 TO $4.25 AND IN 1978, DUE TO THE NEW COUNTY LANDFILL,
THERE WAS AN INCREASE OF $1.75 PER MONTH. HE EXPLAINED THAT HE HAS
100 NEW CUSTOMERS, AND CARRYING MORE TONNAGE, WHICH ADDS TO THE COST
OF THE LANDFILL. MR. KNIGHT STATED THAT UP TO THE PRESENT TIME, HE
HAS HAD TO WRITE OFF ABOUT $4,011 AS BAD DEBTS. HE ALSO POINTED OUT
THAT THE SUB -STATIONS ARE CAUSING MANY PEOPLE TO CARRY THEIR OWN
GARBAGE. MR. KNIGHT THEN CITED AN EXAMPLE OF LOSING A LARGE MOBILE
HOME PARK ACCOUNT TO A PERSON USING A PICK-UP TRUCK AND ONLY PAYING
$1.50 AT THE LANDFILL, AS OPPOSED TO MR, KNIGHT HAVING TO PAY $10-20
FOR THE SAME AMOUNT OF TONNAGE. HE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE DOES
NEED A RATE INCREASE TO OPERATE, AND REPORTED HAVING PROFITS IN 1978
AND 19791 BUT A LOSS IN 1977; THEY ANTICIPATE A VERY SMALL PROFIT
FOR THIS YEAR.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE MATERIAL THAT MR. KNIGHT
FURNISHED THE BOARD; HE ADVISED THEM THAT HE DID NOT HAVE A PROFIT
AND LOSS STATEMENT.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT THE INFORMATION THE BOARD HAS
RECEIVED IS A VERY MINIMAL AMOUNT, AND IN ORDER TO MAKE A DETERMINATION,
THE BOARD DOES REQUIRE STANDARD ACCOUNTING RECORDS. HE THEN INQUIRED
WHO PREPARED MR. KNIGHTS INCOME TAX RETURN, AND MR. KNIGHT STATED
IT WAS PREPARED BY A CPA.
COMMISSIONER LYONS SUGGESTED THAT PERHAPS HE COULD FURNISH
THIS INFORMATION TO MR. KNIGHT.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE ALSO AGREED IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO
HAVE AN ANALYSIS OF THE COMPANY IS FIGURES. HE CONTINUED THAT HE FELT
THE COUNTY IS BLESSED WITH HAVING LOCAL FRANCHISE PEOPLE,
DISCUSSION ENSUED ABOUT POSSIBLY CHANGING THE ORDINANCE TO
PREVENT A SITUATION FROM OCCURRING, SUCH AS THE PICK-UP TRUCK HAULING
THE GARBAGE TO THE LANDFILL, AND PAYING THE ESTABLISHED PRICE OF ONLY
$1.50.
MATTER.
THE CHAIRMAN THEN INSTRUCTED THE ATTORNEY TO LOOK INTO THIS
THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WAS ANY ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED
TO BE HEARD.
-I
WILLIAM KOOLAGE, INTERESTED CITIZEN, APPROACHED THE BOARD
AND NOTED THAT THE COUNTY HAS THREE SANITARY SERVICES AND FELT THE
COUNTY SHOULD LOOK INTO HAVING ONLY ONE SERVICE, AS HE COULD NOT SEE
A SMALL SERVICE BEING EFFICIENT.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT HE FELT IT WAS GOOD TO
HAVE COMPETITION, AND EACH SERVICE IS TRYING TO DO A GOOD JOB. HE
ADDED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MORE INFORMATION CONCERNING INCOME
AND EXPENSES FOR AT LEAST TWO OR THREE YEARS FOR REVIEW, AND SUGGESTED
CONTINUING THIS PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL A LATER DATE.
ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED HE DID NOT THINK A READVERTISEMENT
WOULD BE NECESSARY; SIMPLY DO NOT CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, AS THE BOARD
IS REQUESTING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
COMMISSIONER DEESON SUGGESTED THAT IN THE FUTURE, THE COUNTY
MIGHT REQUIRE THESE STATEMENTS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, IN ORDER TO TRACE
THE HISTORY FROM ONE RATE INCREASE TO THE NEXT -ONE.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AND THE BOARD DECIDED THAT INSTRUCTIONS
SHOULD BE GIVEN TO A FRANCHISE HOLDER AS TO WHAT IS REQUIRED AT THE
HEARING, SUCH AS A PROFIT AND LOSS STATEMENT, BALANCE SHEET AND
POSSIBLY A PROJECTION.
ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO CONTINUE THIS PUBLIC HEARING
UNTIL JULY 9, 1980 AT 10:00 O'CLOCK A.M.
COMMISSIONER LYONS SUGGESTED THAT ON ,JULY 9, 1980, IT WOULD
BE HELPFUL IF THE ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICE COULD HAVE A PROPOSED
INSTRUCTION SHEET FOR APPLICANTS FOR FRANCHISE RATE INCREASES FOR THE
BOARD TO REVIEW. HE THEN QUESTIONED IF THERE WAS ANYTHING TO BE GAINED
BY SOME SORT OF A GEOGRAPHICAL FRANCHISE IN THE COUNTY.
MR. KNIGHT FELT THAT WOULD ELIMINATE THE COMPETITION AND
HE COMMENTED THAT HAVING OPEN COMPETITION BREEDS BETTER SERVICE FOR
THE CONSUMER.
ENGINEER JAMES BEINDORF THEN APPROACHED THE BOARD AND
DISCUSSED THE FOLLOWING REQUEST:
31
JUN 18 1990
�oaK 43 PAGE 767
3.
rJLJAZA AL®JV VdWA• b.c.S6L -L A. Na ad%.R4J1t1JL8JtJ! 41St;.
JUN 181980
JAMES L. BEINDORF, P. E.
KENNETH W. DAMEROW
RICHARD B. VOTAPKA. P. E.
June 3, 1980
Mr. Jack Jennings
County Administrator
Indian River County
Room 115 County Courthouse
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Mr. Jennings:
I
BOOK 4a ParE
3885 - 20TH STREET
POST OFFICE BOX 849
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960
TELEPHONE 305/562-7981
Re: Village Green Mobile Home Park
Phase II
This letter is to certify that Village Green Mobile Home Park, Phase II, has
been completed in accordance with the applicable Florida D.E.R. permits for
water and sewer construction and with the plans and specifications except for
the following:
1) Completion of the 1" asphalt wearing surface adjacent to and around the
concrete curb for the entrance island.
2) Removal and replacement of concrete Miami curbs in the areas from Lots 411
to 414, 605 to 607, and 601 to 616 where the curb is lower than desion
grade.
3) Removal and replacement of a portion of the pavement along the south side
of Poinciana Circle in front of Lot 521.
These items listed above are to be done under the contractor's warranty period
after the majority of the mobilehomes are in place and the site work is com-
pleted. Then the pavement and curbs can be swept off to determine the extent of
curb and pavement replacement. A rough estimate of the work to be done under
warranty for the above items mentioned is $3,000. I suggest that a total of
$5,000 be withheld by Indian River County to cover the warranty work and that
the remainder of the $65,000.20 (or $60,000.20) in bond money be released to
Florida Atlantic Associates, owners of Village Green, Phase II.
I request that this matter be placed on the agenda for the next regularly
scheduled County Commission meeting on June 18 so the money can be released
at that time.
Very truly yours ,
BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
ames L. Beindorf, P.E.
cc: Mr. R. I. Sills, Florida Atlantic Associates
June 9, 1980
I recommend that Indian River County retain $10,000.00
until the above project is completed. This would release
$55,000.20 of the bond money to Florida Atlantic Asso.
N
I!'• �
'9
Re: Village Green Mobile Home Park
Phase II
This letter is to certify that Village Green Mobile Home Park, Phase II, has
been completed in accordance with the applicable Florida D.E.R. permits for
water and sewer construction and with the plans and specifications except for
the following:
1) Completion of the 1" asphalt wearing surface adjacent to and around the
concrete curb for the entrance island.
2) Removal and replacement of concrete Miami curbs in the areas from Lots 411
to 414, 605 to 607, and 601 to 616 where the curb is lower than desion
grade.
3) Removal and replacement of a portion of the pavement along the south side
of Poinciana Circle in front of Lot 521.
These items listed above are to be done under the contractor's warranty period
after the majority of the mobilehomes are in place and the site work is com-
pleted. Then the pavement and curbs can be swept off to determine the extent of
curb and pavement replacement. A rough estimate of the work to be done under
warranty for the above items mentioned is $3,000. I suggest that a total of
$5,000 be withheld by Indian River County to cover the warranty work and that
the remainder of the $65,000.20 (or $60,000.20) in bond money be released to
Florida Atlantic Associates, owners of Village Green, Phase II.
I request that this matter be placed on the agenda for the next regularly
scheduled County Commission meeting on June 18 so the money can be released
at that time.
Very truly yours ,
BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
ames L. Beindorf, P.E.
cc: Mr. R. I. Sills, Florida Atlantic Associates
June 9, 1980
I recommend that Indian River County retain $10,000.00
until the above project is completed. This would release
$55,000.20 of the bond money to Florida Atlantic Asso.
N
m
MR. BEINDORF EXPLAINED THAT THE SEWER AND WATER HAVE BEEN
COMPLETED AND ACCEPTED BY THE DER. HE THEN SUGGESTED THE COUNTY
WITHHOLD $5,000 OF THE $65,000.20 BOND MONEY UNTIL COMPLETION OF
THE THREE ITEMS MENTIONED IN THE LETTER.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF HE WAS AWARE THAT $10,000 IS
REQUIRED TO BE HELD BY THE COUNTY.
MR. BEINDORF REPLIED NEGATIVELY; HE ESTIMATED IT WOULD COST
ABOUT $3,000 TO COMPLETE THESE ITEMS, BUT WAS AGREEABLE IF THE COUNTY
WANTED TO HOLD $10,000.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS ADVISED THAT HE HAD HAD A MEETING
WITH THE PEOPLE OF VILLAGE GREEN AND IT WAS DECIDED THAT NOTHING WOULD
BE RELEASED UNTIL THE PROJECT WAS COMPLETED. HE ADDED IT SEEMS THEY
FORGOT THAT EVERYTHING HAD TO BE COMPLETED BEFORE THE MONEY WAS
RELEASED.AAND FELT MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE COUNTY HOLDING $10,000.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO RELEASE $55,000.20 OF THE BOND
MONEY, TO THE FLORIDA ATLANTIC ASSOCIATES, IN ASSOCIATION WITH VILLAGE
GREEN.
SENIOR PLANNER MARSH APPROACHED THE BOARD REGARDING A
RELEASE OF A 10' EASEMENT LYING BETWEEN LOTS 9 AND 10, BLOCK 3,
ROSELAND GARDENS SUBDIVISION, AS REQUESTED BY BALCOR, INC. HE STATED
THE APPLICATION IS TO CONSTRUCT A DUPLEX ON THE TWO LOTS, AND THEN
REFERRED TO THE FOLLOWING LETTER:
33
JUN 181980
spar. 43 PAGE 769
,
JUN 181980
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
June 2, 1980
MEMO
I
DEPARTMENT
43 PA E774
TO: Jack Jennings, County Administrator "111 1P
FROM: David Marsh, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Easement Release Request
This request for the release of the 10' public utility easement
lying between lot 9 and 10, Block 3, Roseland Gardens Subdivision
has been reviewed with no objections by the following agencies:
Florida Power & Light
Southern Bell Telephone �-
Utilities Department
A field check showed there is currently a front swale along Hotchkiss
Drive now handling drainage. .The relatively flat terrain would appear
to preempt any future drainage problems when considering the existing
swale in front and the prospect of a rear swale within the 12.5' back
lot line easement or in the Airport Drive right-of-way.
Offset property lines in Block 3 would make it difficult to provide
for cross drainage, and it seems this could be adequately handled along
the Mulberry Street extension and further north in Block 2,
Based on the responses and staff analysis, it'is, recommended that the
easement be released; however, consideration might be given to requiring
builders to put in rear swales in conjunction with zoning permit appli-
cations. IT
DM: jt
I have no objections to the release of subject easement.
J G. J nnings, C Administr
51
DAVID M REVER • DIRECTOR
212114TH AVE. VERO BEACH, FL 32960 • :
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE REAR SWALES AND THE DRAINAGE.
IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS NO DRAINAGE ON THE REAR SWALES AT
THIS LOCATION.
K
SENIOR PLANNER MARSH REPORTED THERE IS AN EXISTING FRONT
SWALE, AND FELT THE COUNTY SHOULD HAVE A MECHANISM, OR GIVE SOME
DIRECTION TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, FOR FUTURE DEVELOPERS TO PUT IN
REAR SWALES IN THE SUBDIVISION.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED HE THOUGHT THE DEVELOPERS
SHOULD PROVIDE THEIR OWN DRAINAGE.
ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED THAT IF THE COUNTY FELT HAVING
A REAR SWALE SHOULD BE A REQUIREMENT PRIOR TO RELEASING THE EASEMENT,
THEN IT SHOULD BE DONE. HE POINTED OUT WHAT HE THOUGHT WAS A PROBLEM:
THIS IS THE FIRST PRIVATE SUBDIVISION THAT HAS COME BEFORE THE BOARD
FOR RELEASE OF EASEMENT. HE DEFINED "PRIVATE SUBDIVISION" - WHERE
THE EASEMENTS AND ROADWAYS ARE NOT DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC. THE
ATTORNEY THOUGHT PROBABLY TO TOTALLY RELEASE THE EASEMENT, CONSENT
WILL HAVE TO BE OBTAINED FROM EACH OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE
SUBDIVISION; AND CONSENT FROM THE COUNTY ALSO. HE WANTED TO BE SURE
THE MINUTES REFLECT THAT TITLE MAY NOT BE SATISFACTORILY CLEARED
JUST BY THE COUNTY RELEASING ANY INTEREST IT MAY HAVE,
MR. MARSH COMMENTED THAT TO BE SURE IT IS CLEAR AND TOTALLY
LEGAL, THE OWNER WOULD HAVE TO INSURE THAT HE OBTAINED AN AGREEMENT
TO THIS FROM EVERYBODY IN THE SUBDIVISION.
ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY EVERY-
BODY IN THE PLATTED SUBDIVISION, OR ABOUT 100 PEOPLE.
COMMISSIONER LYONS THOUGHT THAT EVERYBODY OUGHT TO BE AWARE
OF THE FACT THAT NO PROVISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE FOR DRAINAGE.
MR. MARSH STATED THERE IS A VERY SLIGHT FRONT SWALE WHICH
DOES DRAIN.
COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT THAT BY ELIMINATING THE SIDE LOT
EASEMENT, THE COUNTY IS CONTRIBUTING TO THE DELINQUENCY OF THE DRAINAGE.
HE FELT EVERYBODY OUGHT TO BE WELL AWARE THAT SOONER OR LATER IT WILL
BE A PROBLEM THERE, AND IT IS NOT THE COUNTY'S PROBLEM.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT THE COUNTY IS NOT
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DRAINAGE OR THE ROADS AT THIS TIME.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED CONCERNING ERECTING ONE BUILDING ON TWO
LOTS.
JUN 18 19 80 35 Bm 43- poo 771
JUN 181990 43 PACE 772
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT THOUGHT THE BOARD WAS GETTING INTO AN AREA
WHERE THEY DO NOT BELONG. at'
ATTORNEY COLLINS SUGGESTED THE BOARD HOLD BACK MAKING A
DECISION UNTIL THE OTHER PARTIES HAVE RELEASED THE EASEMENT, AND THEN
LET THE BOARD PROCEED.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMIS—
SIONER WODTKE, THAT THE BOARD DELAY ACTION ON THIS RELEASE OF EASEMENT
UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE APPLICANT CAN SHOW US THAT THE REST OF THE LAND
OWNERS IN THIS PRIVATE SUBDIVISION HAVE AGREED TO THE EASEMENT RELEASE.
ATTORNEY COLLINS REPORTED IT IS CONFINED TO THE PEOPLE ON
THE PLAT AND IT APPEARS TO INCLUDE NINE BLOCKS.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT SUGGESTED THIS BE REFERRED TO STAFF SO THEY
CAN COME BACK TO THE BOARD WITH THEIR FINDINGS.
COMMISSIONER LYONS WITHDREW HIS MOTION, AND COMMISSIONER
WODTKE WITHDREW HIS SECOND.
COMMISSIONER DEESON INQUIRED IF THE BOARD DOES NOT RELEASE
THE EASEMENT, CAN THE BUILDING BE BUILT ON ONE LOT, AND MR. MARSH
ANSWERED AFFIRMATIVELY.
DISCUSSION CONTINUED CONCERNING THIS COMPLEX PROBLEM.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTkE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE
NEXT MEETING AND HAVE STAFF COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION.
THE BOARD NEXT CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING MEMORANDUM REGARDING
A REQUEST TO REMOVE RUMBLE STRIPS AT THE INTERSECTION OF 27TH AVENUE
AND OSLO ROAD;
36
E
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR., Chairman
ALMA LEE LOY, Vice Chairman
WILLIARD W. SIEBERT, JR.
R. DON DEESON
PATRICK B. LYONS
JACK G. JENNINGS, Administrator 2145 14th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960
MEMORANDUM `
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Neil Nelson
DATE: June 9, 1980
RE: Request to remove rumble strips at intersection of
S.W. 27th Avenue and Oslo Road
This is a State maintained Road. The rumble
strips were initially installed as a safety measure
when Oslo Road and 27th Avenue did not have a stop
light. The strips are not needed for that purpose
at this time, however, it is expensive to have them
removed and the D.O.T. is having financial, difficulties
at this time spending money where it is required.
The Board could forward this request to the D.O.T.
for appropriate action,
NAN:ef
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS SUGGESTED THE MATTER BE REFERRED TO
THE DOT FOR THEIR ACTION.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO REFER THIS MATTER TO DOT, AS
IT IS A STATE ROAD.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY GAVE RETROACTIVE APPROVAL FOR OUT -OF -
COUNTY APPROVAL FOR CIVIL DEFENSE DIRECTOR NUZIE TO ATTEND A NUCLEAR
POWER PLANT EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANNING MEETING ON JUNE 4, 1980 AT
1:30 P.M. AT THE MARTIN COUNTY EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER,
W
JUN 181980
Boa . 43 PApE7 3.
JUN 18 1990e�
BOOK
.43 PAGE
77,
COMMISSIONER WODTKE
NEXT POINTED OUT THAT WE ARE
IN THE
HURRICANE SEASON, AND DISCUSSED SOME MINOR CHANGES THAT WERE MADE
IN THE HURRICANE EVACUATION PLAN. HE RECOMMENDED THAT MEMBERS OF
THE BOARD TAKE TIME TO VISIT WITH CIVIL DEFENSE DIRECTOR NUZIE FOR
A BRIEFING REGARDING HURRICANES.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED THE REVISED HURRICANE EVACUATION
PLAN.
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER APPROACHED THE BOARD TO DISCUSS
THE URBAN'PLANNING SHORT COURSE, WHICH HE FELT IS VERY BENEFICIAL
AND INFORMATIVE. HE ADDED THAT MARY JANE GOETZFRIED COULD BE ELEVATED
TO A PLANNER POSITION LATER THIS YEAR, AS SHE IS DOING MORE AND MORE
WORK IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED REGISTRATION AND EXPENSES FOR
OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR MARY .JANE GOETZFRIED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF
SOUTH FLORIDA, TAMPA, FLORIDA, FROM JULY 28 TO AUGUST 1, 1980 FOR THE ,
URBAN PLANNING SHORT COURSE.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NEXT BROUGHT UP THE SUBJECT OF THE
MUNICIPALITIES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. HE STATED THAT HE MET WITH THE
MAYORS OF FELLSMERE AND SEBASTIAN THE DAY BEFORE, AND THE OUTCOME
WAS THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS AGREED TO COMPLETE FELLSMERE'S
PLAN UP TO THE DRAFT, BUT NOT THE PUBLIC HEARING; THEN FELLSMERE COULD
CONTINUE ON FROM THERE.
PLANNER REVER ADVISED THAT THIS WOULD REQUIRE TWO MORE
MEETINGS IN THE EVENING WITH PLANNING & ZONING IN FELLSMERE, AND
ANTICIPATED STAFF TIME DURING THE DAY WOULD BE ANOTHER 15 TO 20 HOURS.
COMMISSIONER LYONS NOTED THAT IT WOULD NOT BE OVER THREE
MAN DAYS OF WORK, AND PLANNER REVER AGREED.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMIS—
SIONER DEESON, THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROCEED WITH THE PREPARATION
OF THE DRAFT FOR FELLSMERE.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE SUGGESTED HAVING A TIME LIMITATION FOR
THIS PROJECT, SUCH AS It UP TO 25 HOURS."
m
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED THE COMMISSIONERS IF THEY WOULD MIND
HOLDING THE MOTION.
COMMISSIONER LYONS WITHDREW HIS MOTION, AND COMMISSIONER
DEESON WITHDREW HIS SECOND.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT COMMENTED THAT MAYOR FLOOD WAS UNDER THE
IMPRESSION THAT MR. MARSH WAS HIRED TO WORK EXCLUSIVELY ON THE
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN. THE CHAIRMAN, AFTER REVIEWING THE
MINUTES AND THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, HAS CHANGED HIS ORIGINAL OPINION,
AND NOW FEELS THAT MR. MARSH'S RESPONSIBILITY WAS TO HELP SEBASTIAN
AND FELLSMERE. HE THEN READ FROM THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, AND IT
STATED THAT INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COMPLETION
OF THE PLANS. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT FELT THE COUNTY PLAN MUST TAKE PRIORITY,
BUT WE SHOULD CONTINUE WORKING ON THE OTHER PLANS, AND THE UNINCORPORATED
AREAS SHOULD PAY FOR IT.
PAT FLOOD, MAYOR OF SEBASTIAN, APPROACHED THE BOARD AND
STATED THAT HE FEELS THE OBLIGATION WAS FOR THE COUNTY TO FINISH
SEBASTIAN'S PLAN. HE ADVISED THAT HE ASKED FOR A YEARS EXTENSION
TO COMPLETE THE PLAN, AS THE DEADLINE FOR COMPLETION WAS JULY 1, 1980.
DAN KILBRIDE, ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, CAME
BEFORE THE BOARD TO POINT OUT A FEW THINGS IN THE AGREEMENT. HE NOTED
THAT IN THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT DATED OCTOBER, 1978,BETWEEN THE CITY
OF SEBASTIAN,,THE CITY OF FELLSMERE, AND THE COUNTY, THE COUNTY PLANNING
& ZONING DEPARTMENT AGREED TO PROVIDE PLANNING SERVICES TO THE TWO
CITIES AND COMPLETE THEIR PLAN. ATTORNEY KILBRIDE THEN READ SECTION Z
OF THE AGREEMENT, WHICH REFERS TO THE FUNDS PROVIDED THROUGH THE
GRANT; ALSO READ APPENDIX A WHICH NAMED TEN ELEMENTS OF SERVICE WHICH
WOULD BE PROVIDED; AND REFERRED TO APPENDIX B CONCERNING THE WORK
PROGRAM. HE ADDED THAT THIS PLAN WAS TO BE COMPLETED IN SEPTEMBER
OF 1979, BUT THAT DEADLINE WAS NOT MET. ATTORNEY KILBRIDE FELT THAT
AS FAR AS THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN WAS CONCERNED, THEY HAD A CONTRACT
THROUGH THE BOARD WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WHO HAD AN OBLIGATION
TO COMPLETE THE ELEMENTS THEY HAVE BEEN PAID TO COMPLETE. HE THEN
RECOMMENDED WORKING OUT A TIME SCHEDULE FOR THIS WORK.
JUN 181980
39
BtrQK 43, P.ipE. '75
r -
JUN 18 1900
BOOK ; 43 PAGE 776
ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THE HURDLE WE MUST GET OVER IS
THE LACK OF FUNDING. HE CONTINUED THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS
SPENT THE AMOUNT OF TIME TO SATISFY THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS PROVIDED BY
THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, AND NOW THERE SHOULD BE SOME
NEGOTIATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS. THE ATTORNEY EMPHASIZED THAT IT
IS NOT THE ISSUE THAT THE COUNTY WILL NOT CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
CITIES. HE THEN ASKED ATTORNEY KILBRIDE TO POINT OUT IN THE CONTRACT
WHERE IT STATES THIS WORK IS FULLY FUNDED.
PLANNER REVER EXPLAINED THAT HE HAS WORKED WITH THE GRANT
SYSTEM BEFORE, AND IT MUST BE UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS IS AN ASSISTANCE
GRANT. HE ADDED THAT THE STATE ACCEPTS THE FACT THAT THE JOB CANNOT
BE FINISHED WITH THE KIND OF MONEY THAT WAS FURNISHED, WHICH IS NOWHERE
NEAR ENOUGH MONEY TO COMPLETE THE PLAN.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED IN ONE SECTION OF THE AGREEMENT THERE
IS AN EXPIRATION DATE, AND IN ANOTHER PLACE IT STATES THE PLAN SHOULD
BE COMPLETED.
ATTORNEY COLLINS INTERJECTED THAT IT WAS NOT NECESSARILY
TO BE COMPLETED FOR THAT AMOUNT OF GRANT MONEY.
ATTORNEY KILBRIDE DISAGREED. HE READ THE SCOPE OF SERVICES
AND THE MATCH REQUIREMENT OF DOLLARS ON PAGES I AND 4 OF THE AGREEMENT;
ALSO REFERRED TO A DRAW SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETING THE CONTRACT. HE
FELT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT A DEFINITE CONTRACT WITH A DEFINITE
AMOUNT OF DOLLARS FOR THE WORK TO BE COMPLETED - THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN
WAS ENTITLED TO HAVE THE PLAN COMPLETED FOR THE VALUE OF THE CONTRACT.
ATTORNEY COLLINS DISAGREED.
COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED HE DID NOT SEE ANYTHING IN THE
AGREEMENT WHERE THE JOB HAD TO BE COMPLETED FOR THE AMOUNT OF GRANT
MONEY,
MAYOR FLOOD REPORTED THAT HE ASKED THE OPINION OF THE PEOPLE
WHO WORKED ON THE PLAN FOR INDIAN RIVER SHORES, AND THEY ESTIMATED
IT WOULD TAKE $7,500 TO COMPLETE THE SEBASTIAN PLAN. HE ADDED THAT
THE ADMINISTRATOR ADVISED HE HAD A MAN TO WORK ON THE PLANS FOR THE
TWO CITIES, AND AFTER PUTTING HIS SALARY ON TOP OF THE GRANT FUNDS OF
$4,100, HE THOUGHT THAT IT WAS MORE THAN SUFFICIENT TO COMPLETE THE
WORK.
40
_I
PLANNER REVER DISAGREED WITH THE PERSON WHO SAID IT COULD
BE DONE FOR $7,500, BUT THAT WAS NOT THE ISSUE. HE ADDED THAT THE
STATE WAS SATISFIED ALL THE MONEYS COMING FROM THEM HAD BEEN PAID.
MAYOR FLOOD THOUGHT VERY LITTLE WORK HAD BEEN DONE ON THE
PLAN SINCE PLANNER REVER BEGAN TO WORK FOR THE COUNTY, AND HE HAD
SEEN MR. MARSH ONLY A FEW TIMES. MAYOR FLOOD THOUGHT THAT MR. MARSH,
ON HIS OWN TIME, DID WORK WITH THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN, BUT STRONGLY
DISAGREED WITH MR. REVERS STATEMENT THAT IT WAS GOING TO COST
$25,000 MORE TO COMPLETE THE PLAN.
COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT THEY SHOULD ALL TRY TO FIND A WAY
TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM AND WORK THINGS OUT THE BEST WAY POSSIBLE.
ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THERE IS A PROBLEM IN USING UNINCOR-
PORATED FUNDS TO DO THE PLAN FOR SEBASTIAN.
DISCUSSION ENSUED AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE PLAN FOR
SEBASTIAN IS APPROXIMATELY 60% COMPLETED.
COMMISSIONER LYONS THOUGHT THE COUNTY WAS MORALLY OBLIGATED
TO COMPLETE THE PLAN, BUT WAS UNCERTAIN HOW TO DO IT LEGALLY.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT MR. MARSH WAS HIRED FOR THIS
PURPOSE AND AT THE TIME, COMMISSIONER WODTKE WANTED IT SPECIFIED IN
THE AGREEMENT THAT IT WOULD BE FOR A CERTAIN NUMBER OF HOURS, BUT
UNFORTUNATELY, IT WAS NOT DONE THAT WAY.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE FELT THE CONTRACT HAD EXPIRED IN OCTOBER
OF 1979, AND THEREFORE, THE COUNTY HAD NO AGREEMENT WITH THE CITIES
AT THIS TIME.
ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THE TIME FRAME HAS EXPIRED BUT
THE CONTRACT HAS NEVER BEEN TERMINATED; HE THOUGHT THE CITY OF
SEBASTIAN OR THE COUNTY NEEDS TO TAKE SOME AFFIRMATIVE ACTION BEFORE
THE CONTRACTS COULD BE TERMINATED.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT IF THE COUNTY IS GOING TO
ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT, THERE SHOULD BE A TIME FRAME; THIS WOULD
ALSO ENABLE THE COUNTY TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR REGULAR WORK LOAD. HE
ADDED THAT THE CONTRACT SHOULD BE WRITTEN TO CONTAIN JUST THE ELEMENTS
41
Bflt►1( 43 PACE 77*
I
r
JUN 181980 0% A PAGE 778
NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE PLAN, AND NO OTHER ELEMENTS SHOULD ENTER
INTO IT BECAUSE IN THE PAST, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAD BEEN ASKED
TO DO OTHER THINGS BESIDE THE PLAN.
COMMISSIONER DEESON FELT THE COUNTY HAD A MORAL OBLIGATION
TO COMPLETE THE PLAN BUT STRESSED THAT THE COUNTY'S OWN COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN MUST TAKE PRIORITY.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE COUNTY GETTING INVOLVED WITH
SEBASTIAN'S PLANNING AND ZONING PROBLEMS.
COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT MISTAKES BETWEEN BOTH PARTIES
HAVE BEEN MADE ALONG THE WAY, AND SUGGESTED ALL PARTIES SIT DOWN AND
TRY TO ARRIVE AT A SOLUTION.
MAYOR FLOOD ALSO AGREED THAT ALL PARTIES SHOULD NEGOTIATE
AND START ANEW, AS HE DID NOT WANT TO BREAK UP THE WORKING RELATION-
SHIPS THEY NOW HAVE WITH THE COUNTY.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT THOUGHT IT WOULD BENEFIT ALL CONCERNED IF
A NEW CONTRACT WAS PREPARED.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS COMMENTED THAT WHEN MR. MARSH WAS
EMPLOYED, THERE WAS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF GRANT DOLLARS TO DO THE JOB,
AND THERE WAS AN UNDERSTANDING WHEN THAT MONEY WAS SPENT, THE WORK
ON THE PLAN WAS TO BE TERMINATED UNLESS MORE MONEY WAS FOUND.
MR. MARSH CONFIRMED THIS FACT.
COMMISSIONER LYONS SUGGESTED HAVING AN OUTSIDE SOURCE
DETERMINE WHAT AMOUNT OF HOURS MIGHT BE NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE PLAN,
AS THERE SHOULD BE NO DISSATISFACTION BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT SUGGESTED THAT MAYOR FLOOD TAKE THIS
MATTER UP WITH HIS CITY COUNCIL AND TRY TO COME UP WITH A NEW AGREE-
MENT THAT IS MORE SPECIFIC, AND MAYOR FLOOD AGREED.
42
h
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THEREUPON RECESSED AT
12:00 NOON FOR LUNCH AND TO VISIT THE VOCATIONAL TRAINING AND
SHELTERED WORKSHOP AND RECONVENED AT 1:30 O'CLOCK P.M. WITH THE
SAME MEMBERS PRESENT.
SENIOR PLANNER DAVID MARSH PRESENTED THE BOARD WITH THE
FOLLOWING MEMO IN REGARD TO THE ROAD SITUATION AT THE PROPOSED OSLO
SCHOOL SITE:
43
e K 4 fAu 779 ,-
JUN S 1980 • RIVER COUNTY11
emmmmPLANNING
& ZONING ^ G
OEPARTIVIENT
June 17, 1980
MEMO
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: David Rever, Planning and Zoning Director 14 f
SUBJECT: Oslo School Site - Road Situation
43 PAGE 780
As requested, this memo is an update on the status of the proposed align-
ment of an access road to the proposed Oslo Road - 18th Avenue school site.
Neil Nelson, David Marsh, Cliff Reuter and myself met on Friday, June 13,
1980 to discuss the possibility of obtaining sufficient right-of-way along
the proposed 20th Avenue corridor for the construction of a 24 ft. road to
serve the school and surrounding properties. Mr. Reuter,representing himself
and Mr. Hatala, did indicate that he would be favorably inclined to negoti-
ating the dedication of the needed right-of-way.
It should be noted that Mr. Reuter did inquire as to the possibility of a
density bonus or similar allowance, as well as an adjustment to the com-
mercially zoned property fronting along Oslo Road to compensate for the loss
of approximately 90 ft. (a 10' rear lot easement now exists) due to dedi-
cation. Since that time it has also been indicated that Mr. Rousseau,
located to the south, would also consider the possibility of a dedication.
In general it is the staff's feeling that the County should proceed with
negotiations to acquire and improve the 20th Avenue corridor in conjunction
with the development of the school site. The long range benefits are felt
to be substantial enough to outweigh the recognized shortcomings; such as
the slight jog required at the 20th Avenue - Oslo Road intersection; the
double frontage lots on the east; and the existence of established right-of-
ways. The two jogs can be compensated for through aiighment design for
future improvements, which will very likely be necessitated anyway, due to
increased traffic flows. Long-range needs will outweight the undesirable
situation of double frontage lots.
Finally, it is strongly felt that current and future short-term growth trends
will bear out the importance of the 20th Avenue corridor not only in this
immediate area but farther north and south as well. This is attributable to
many factors, but perhaps most importantly the impending development of the
County water system, the development plans being proposed or discussed by
G.D.C., and other large developers, and the anticipated expected increases
in development if in fact a school is sited in this vicinity.
DR:jt
OAVIO M. REVER • DIRECTOR I M3
212114TH AVE. VERO BEACH, FL 32960 . 305/567-5142
20 AVE.
80' R/ W
OSLO ROAD
` CANAL
` Y-Gru-t) vJ 2403.3 4:30,04!
70 ` R/�,'V 2195.3' x'27, 441
1874.5' 423,431
v - 3142.0 39, 275
Q IOWA ST L40 NOTE - 24 ROAD AT x112.50
`E PER LINEAL FOOT.
Q o 0)I N
�1 z_
U `e
O c�ja L
a_ a j. �
41 Q
'jjLo
U
ro
—' -NEBRASKA - — — c: -4"w
1
ST. 138.' cn 250.8'-
rn: `=
EL V
Lu
} Ld
VT O`
-- -- < N
Q
C) a '�
uwi 70
Q o
T.
r
Box 43 �A.0 781
JUN 81990 -
F_
JUN 18 19 90 BooK 43 ?AcE ,782
MR. MARSH COMMENTED THAT THEIR RECOMMENDATION IS BASED
NOT ONLY ON LONG TERM NEEDS, BUT ALSO SHORT TERM AND MID TERM NEEDS
AS WELL, AS STRESSED IN THE LAST PARAGRAPH OF MR. REVER'S MEMO.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF MR. REUTER HAD SAID HE WOULD
DEDICATE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND MR. MARSH FELT HE HAD JUST INDICATED
HE WOULD BE FAVORABLY INCLINED TO NEGOTIATE. MR. MARSH CONTINUED
THAT HE HAD INFORMED MR. REUTER THAT IT WOULD BE MARGINAL AS TO HOW
MUCH WE COULD DO AS FAR AS ADDITIONAL DENSITY WAS CONCERNED,
DENSITY.
THE BOARD STATED POSITIVELY THAT WE CANNOT NEGOTIATE AS TO
MR. MARSH DID NOT FEEL THAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD PARTICIPATE
IN THE COST OF THE ROAD.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE
COSTS SET OUT IN THE DRAWING ARE JUST BASIC COSTS FOR SOIL CEMENT
AND ASPHALT, AND THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY CULVERTS OR HEADWALLS
THAT MIGHT BE NEEDED.
DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AS TO CLEARING LAND AND OBTAINING
RIGHTS-OF-WAY. COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT AS A NORMAL PROCEDURE, WE
WOULD GET 50'.
MR. MARSH STATED THAT IT IS THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S
OPINION THAT WE COULD EXACT 50' FROM THE DEVELOPER BASED ON THE FACT
THAT IT IS A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE, BUT DID NOT BELIEVE WE COULD REQUIRE
HIM TO PAVE THE FULL ROAD BECAUSE THERE ALREADY IS A SUBDIVISION ON
THE EAST SIDE.
COMMISSIONER LYONS POINTED OUT THAT IN THE DRI PROCESS IF
IT IS FELT A ROAD NEEDS TO BE WIDENED, THAT IS WHAT IS REQUIRED. HE
FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE AN IMPORTANT PART OF
OUR FUTURE ROAD NETWORK AND 20TH AVENUE WILL BE A THROUGH ROAD WITH
A LOT OF TRAFFIC. HE, THEREFORE, DID NOT FEEL WE SHOULD HAVE A JOG AND
TURN WHEN WE COULD HAVE A REGULAR FOUR-WAY INTERSECTION WITH A MAIN
STREET.
DISCUSSION THEN ENSUED REGARDING THE FACT THAT THE BRIDGE
SYSTEM ON 19TH AVENUE IS NOT ADEQUATE TO PROPERLY ACCOMMODATE SCHOOL
BUS TRAFFIC, AND ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS CONFIRMED THAT THOSE CULVERTS
WHEN INSTALLED WERE NOT REQUIRED TO BE OF A SUFFICIENT WIDTH TO COPE
WITH SCHOOL BUS TRAFFIC.
HE FELT WHEREVER WE GO, THE CULVERTING
SHOULD BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH FULL WIDTH, EVEN THOUGH THIS
WOULD BE QUITE EXPENSIVE.
MR. MARSH BROUGHT UP THE FACT THAT A DEMAND UNDOUBTEDLY WILL
ARISE FOR PAVEMENT OF ROADS AROUND THE SCHOOL SITE OTHER THAN JUST
ACCESS ROADS,
COMMISSIONER LYONS EMPHASIZED THAT WE MUST FACE UP TO ALL
THESE CONSIDERATIONS NOW, INCLUDING BICYCLE PATHS, ETC. HE NOTED
THAT THE PROPOSED SCHOOL SITE, WHICH CONSISTS OF 15 ACRES, IS WORTH
BETWEEN $60,000-$70,000, AND IF THAT IS WHAT THE IMPROVEMENTS WILL
COST, THAT IS HOW MUCH WE SHOULD GET FOR THE PROPERTY.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT COMMENTED THAT WE HAVE GOT TO COME UP WITH
SOME KIND OF POLICY AS TO WHAT WE ARE GOING TO PAVE AND WHAT WE ARE
NOT GOING TO PAVE.
DISCUSSION THEN FOLLOWED AS TO WHETHER OR NOT 18TH AVENUE
IS A COUNTY ROAD SINCE IT APPEARS WE HAVE BEEN MAINTAINING IT, BUT
THAT WE DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE ADMINISTRATOR EXPLAINED
THAT THE OTHER STREETS IN THAT SUBDIVISION ARE COUNTY STREETS, AND HE
COULD ONLY SURMISE THAT THE DEVELOPER LAID THIS PARTICULAR STREET OUT
AND UPON TITLE EXAMINATION AND FINDING OUT HE DID NOT OWN IT, JUST
LEFT IT ALONE. HE CONTINUED THAT MAINTENANCE OF THAT ROAD IS STRICTLY
A MISTAKE ON THE COUNTY'S PART, BUT SINCE IT HAS BEEN MAINTAINED BY
THE COUNTY FOR OVER FOUR YEARS, WE COULD FILE A MAINTENANCE MAP ON IT,
IF THE BOARD SO DESIRES.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE
NEGOTIATE FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ON 20TH AVENUE, AND HE FELT WE OUGHT
TO PURSUE THAT, BUT THAT WE SHOULD LET MR. REUTER KNOW WE HAVE OTHER
ALTERNATIVES. HE ASKED WHETHER WE SHOULD TELL MR. REUTER HE HAS
TO GO AHEAD AND PAVE THE ROAD OR WHETHER WE SHOULD NEGOTIATE.
ATTORNEY COLLINS POINTED OUT THAT WE CAN'T VERY WELL TELL
ANYONE HE HAS GOT TO DEDICATE AND PAVE UNTIL HE COMES IN WITH A
SITE PLAN.
SENIOR PLANNER MARSH CONFIRMED THAT THERE IS NO WAY WE
CAN REQUIRE ANYTHING UNTIL THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS COMMENCES, AND
47
JUN x.81980
&OOIE:. 43 PAGEiM`
r
aiv.x 43 FAGS 7'84
IF THE BOARD WISHES TO PROCEED ON THE BASIS OF ACQUIRING 20TH AVENUE
RIGHT-OF-WAY, HE FELT THEY WILL HAVE TO AUTHORIZE REPRESENTATIVES
TO NEGOTIATE WITH MR. REUTER AND THE OTHER GENTLEMAN TO THE SOUTH.-
MR.
OUTH,MR. ROUSSEAU.
COORDINATOR THOMAS NOTED THAT IT IS A MATTER OF TIMING
MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE, AND HE QUESTIONED.WHETHER ONE PAVED ROAD
WILL BE SUFFICIENT FOR THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT WILL BE GENERATED
BY A SCHOOL, ESPECIALLY SINCE OSLO PARK IS GETTING BIG. HE POINTED
OUT THAT 18TH AVENUE IS ALREADY IN, NO MATTER WHOSE IT IS, AND IT
HAS BEEN MAINTAINED. HE FURTHER NOTED THAT IF THE BOARD WISHED
TO PROCEED ON 18TH, WE COULD WAIT UNTIL THEY WISH TO SUBDIVIDE, AND
THEN THEY WILL COME TO SEE US.
COMMISSIONER LYONS AGREED IT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA TO HOLD
OUR FIRE, BUT CONTINUED TO STRESS THE IMPORTANCE OF SETTING UP A
GOOD TRAFFIC PATTERN FOR THE FUTURE.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON COMMENTED THAT WE COULD PAVE
18TH AVENUE, AND THEN WHEN MR. REUTER DOES DEVELOP, WE COULD GO FOR
THE IOO',
COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED IF WE ARE GOING TO TELL HIM THAT
NOT ONLY IS HE GOING TO HAVE TO DONATE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, BUT BUILD
THE ROAD, TOO.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS NOTED THAT THE SUBDIVISION REGULA-
TIONS REQUIRE THAT HE BUILD PART OF IT. HE CONTINUED THAT GETTING
THE BUSES TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER AND THE TURN -AROUND IS JUST PART
OF THE PROBLEM. HE FELT THE ROADS SHOWN IN BLACK ON THE MAP, SURROUND-
ING THE SCHOOL SITE, SHOULD BE PAVED AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS PART
OF THE COUNTY PROJECT. WE ALREADY HAVE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND HE BE-
LIEVED IF THIS IS NOT DONE NOW, IT WILL HAVE TO BE DONE WITHIN A
VERY SHORT TIME. HE FURTHER FELT THAT WE MUST LOOK AT A ROAD SYSTEM
ALL THE WAY FROM OSLO ROAD TO NEBRASKA STREET. THE ADMINISTRATOR
SUGGESTED THAT THE ACREAGE BE APPRAISED AND A VALUE PLACED UPON IT:
THEN, IF THE BOARD WISHED TO REDUCE THAT AMOUNT SOMEWHAT TO COOPERATE
WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD, THEY COULD ASK THE SCHOOL BOARD TO PAY THE
REMAINING AMOUNT WITH THE UNDERSTANDING WE WOULD TAKE CARE OF A ROAD
SYSTEM SATISFACTORY TO MEET THE SCHOOLS NEEDS, I.E., THEY WOULD
PAY FOR THE LAND AND WE WOULD BUILD THE ROADS. ADMINISTRATOR
.JENNINGS NOTED THAT THERE IS ANOTHER SCHOOL ON THE HORIZON IN THE
SEBASTIAN AREA WHICH ALSO WILL REQUIRE EXTENSIVE ROADS.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT FELT WE SHOULD HAVE DR. BURNS MEET WITH
THE BOARD AND GET EVERYTHING IN REGARD TO ROADS, BICYCLE PATHS,
RECREATIONAL USE OF THE PROPERTY, ETC., RESOLVED. IN REGARD TO
SETTING A SCHOOL WAY OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE IN THE NORTH COUNTY,
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE BOARDS BUSINESS IS TO
MOVE TRAFFIC, NOT TO BUILD ACCESS ROADS, AND HE DID NOT BELIEVE THAT
THE SCHOOL BOARD SHOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD SCHOOLS JUST ANYWHERE AND
THEN TELL US TO BUILD THE ROADS.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS NOTED THAT UP TILL NOW THAT IS HOW
IT HAS BEEN: AT SEBASTIAN MIDDLE -.JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL, THE COUNTY HAD
TO SPEND ABOUT $90,000 TO WIDEN THE STATE ROAD TO GET THE BUSES IN
AND OUT.
COMMISSIONER LYONS BELIEVED THE COST OF WHATEVER IMPROVE-
MENTS ARE GOING TO BE MADE IN THE ROADS HAS TO BE PAID FOR OUT OF
THE TRANSACTION INVOLVING THE SCHOOL SITE.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT DID NOT BELIEVE THERE IS ANYTHING CLOSE
TO THAT AMOUNT INVOLVED IN THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS FELT IF YOU HAD THE TRUE VALUE OF
THE PROPERTY, IT WOULD GO A LONG WAY TOWARDS OFFSETTING THE COUNTY'S
OBLIGATION TO BUILD THE ROADS. HE DID NOT BELIEVE THE SCHOOL
SHOULD HAVE TO PAY THE WHOLE COST, BUT THAT THEY SHOULD PAY THE TRUE
VALUE OF THE LAND,
ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED THAT IF THE SCHOOL BOARD WERE
TO PAY THE TRUE VALUE OF THE LAND, THEY MIGHT BE BETTER OFF CON-
`DEMNING ONE OF THE CORNERS AT 20TH AND OSLO. THE BOARD AGREED.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT SUGGESTED GETTING DR. BURNS AND MEMBERS
OF THE SCHOOL BOARD HERE IN ,JULY TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER.
49
�BflQK 43 QAGE / 85
JUN 1 18 NO Bom 43 PACE786
AFTER FURTHER DISCUSSION, THE CHAIRMAN DIRECTED MRS.
FORLANI, BOARD SECRETARY, TO SCHEDULE A MEETING WITH DR. BURNS TO
DISCUSS PROBLEMS WITH ROADS IN RELATION TO SCHOOL SITES. HE ASKED
IF THE BOARD WISHED TO WAIT ON ANY DECISION ABOUT THE ROADS FOR THE
MOMENT.
IT WAS GENERALLY AGREED TO WAIT UNTIL WE SEE WHAT THE
SCHOOL BOARD DECIDES.
RALPH ENG, ENGINEER FOR THE ,JOINT VENTURE, CAME BEFORE THE
BOARD TO REVIEW THE ADDENDUM TO THE 201 FACILITIES PLAN. MR. ENG
NOTED THAT THE NEXT MAJOR TASK TOWARDS IMPLEMENTING THE 201 PLAN
IS SUBMITTING THE FINAL PLANS TO THE DER AND EPA FOR FINAL APPROVAL,
FINAL COMMENTS FROM THE DER AND THE CITY OF VERO BEACH NOW HAVE BEEN
RECEIVED AND UPDATED. THESE COMMENTS ARE INCORPORATED IN THE
ADDENDUM, WHICH MR. ENG THEN PROCEEDED TO REVIEW IN DETAIL. COPY
OF SAID ADDENDUM NO. 1 TO THE 201 FACILITIES PLAN IS AS FOLLOWS:
I I
L
Sverdrup & Parcel
rWA
/l and Associates, Inc.
2002 N.W. 13th Street
Suite 201
Gainesville, Florida 32601
T June 9, 1980 9041372-6338
Engineers
Architects
Planners
ADDENDUM NO. 1
TO THE
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY 201 FACILITIES PLAN
PREPARED FOR THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS L'`
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA ra`'
.✓ l ae a 4.. • '3
* i
ENGINEER'S JOB NO. 4887 JANUARY, 1979
The following shall be made a part of the Indian River County 201
Facilities Plan:
SECTION 1.1 PLANNING SUMMARY
Page 1-1: The last complete sentence at the bottom of the
page shall be amended to read:
"The alternatives which were under consideration included:
(1) seven transmission systems; (2) three treatment meth-
ods: secondary treatment, secondary treatment plus nu-
trient removal, and advanced waste treatment; and,. (3) six
disposal techniques: surface water discharge, spray irri-
gation, evaporation -seepage ponds, deep well injection,
ocean outfall, and discharge to mosquito impoundments.
SECTION 1.3 RECOMMENDATIONS
Page 1-2: Delete Recommendations 3 and 4 in their entirety
and substitute the following:
"3. The proposed effluent disposal system consists of
six mosquito control impoundments totaling approximately
300 acres, into which Plant B will discharge and one river
outfall discharging 4.5 MGD at the Vero Beach treatment
plant.
4. Wastewater service to Indian River Shores be handled
by the Vero Beach Plant in both Phase I and II, as pro-
posed in the interlocal agreement between Vero Beach and
Indian River Shores."
woK 43 ?g45'7
Sverdrup & Parcel and Associates,fvw-is a Sverdrup Corporation company
43. pacE-78
I , t
Addendum No. 1
Indian River County
201 Facilities Plan
January, 1979
Page -two-
L
SECTION 13.4 - CITY OF VERO BEACH - INDIAN RIVER COUNTY WATER
AND SEWER AGREEMENT
Page 13-5: Delete subparagraph b in its entirety and substi-
tute the following:
"b. All areas on the south beach portion of Indian River
County from the northern border of St. Lucie County north
to Indian River Shores and including that portion of Indian
River Shores south of Fred Tuerk.Drive. Those additional
areas in which Vero Beach will provide sewer service in
Indian River Shores are under negotiation and will be de-
termined by the interlocal agreement."
SECTION 16.2.3.d EFFLUENT REUSE
Page 16-10, Subsection d, eighth line: Delete the following sen-
tence in the first paragraph.
"There are also indications that the power plant may be
sold to Florida Power and Light Company, at which time
the City would discontinue pumping to the power plant."
and substitute the following:
"There are also indications that the power plant may be
sold, at which time the City may discontinue pumping to
the power plant."
SECTION 3.2.1 FLORIDA STANDARDS
Pages 3-2 through 3-4: It should be noted that since thep rint-
ing.of this report, Chapter 17-3 of the Florida Administrative Code
(
has been revised. The neer water quality standards should supersede
f,
the standards reprinted on these pages.
SECTION 3.2.3 INDIAN RIVER WASTELOAD ALLOCATIONS
�s
Page 3-9: Delete Table 3-2 and insert "Table -3-2: Wasteload
Allocations for Surface Water Discharge (Revised 8-9-79)."
SECTION 4.2.3 SURFACE WATER
Page 4-36: Insert the following paragraph -between the second
paragraph and Table 4-5. "The present water quality of the Indian
River meets state standards throughout the planning area. In per-
iods of high rainfall however, the DO has been found to increase
F,
above State standards near the South Relief Canal."
L
SECTION 13.4 - CITY OF VERO BEACH - INDIAN RIVER COUNTY WATER
AND SEWER AGREEMENT
Page 13-5: Delete subparagraph b in its entirety and substi-
tute the following:
"b. All areas on the south beach portion of Indian River
County from the northern border of St. Lucie County north
to Indian River Shores and including that portion of Indian
River Shores south of Fred Tuerk.Drive. Those additional
areas in which Vero Beach will provide sewer service in
Indian River Shores are under negotiation and will be de-
termined by the interlocal agreement."
SECTION 16.2.3.d EFFLUENT REUSE
Page 16-10, Subsection d, eighth line: Delete the following sen-
tence in the first paragraph.
"There are also indications that the power plant may be
sold to Florida Power and Light Company, at which time
the City would discontinue pumping to the power plant."
and substitute the following:
"There are also indications that the power plant may be
sold, at which time the City may discontinue pumping to
the power plant."
Addendum No. 1
Indian River County
201 Facilities Plan
January, 1979
Page -three-
SECTION 16.2.4 WASTE TREATMENT TECHNIQUES
Page 16-11, Fourth paragraph, second sentence: Delete this
sentence and substitute the following:
"The current wastewater allocations allow for a TN dis-
charge of 20.0 mg/1 at both the Vero Beach and North County
plants and a TP discharge of 7.0 mg/l at the Vero Beach
Plant and 10.0 mg/1 at the North County Plant."
�
JUN 181980 411Y
SECTION 20.2.2 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
Page 20-6: Delete second paragraph in its entirety and sub-
stitute the following paragraph:
"All wastewater flows generated in the unicorporated areas
north of the city limits of Vero Beach will be routed to
the proposed plant "B" in the first phase. The City of
Vero Beach will provide sewer services for the Indian
River County Hospital until such time as the County can
provide retail water services. At such time and upon the
approval of the Board of Trustees of the hospital, the
County will take on the responsibilities of providing
both water and sewer services to the hospital. If the
Board of Trustees do not wish to'be served by the County,
then it will be the responsibility of the City of Vero
Beach to provide both water and sewer services to the
hospital as set forth in their current agreement."
EXHIBIT 20-2
Page 20-7: Add a 10 -inch line from P.S. No. 24 going east
across the Wabasso Bridge (not shown) and through the Town of Orchid
and terminate the 10 -inch line with Pump Station No. 42 at the
intersection of State Route 510 and State Route A -1-A. A rLvised
copy of Exhibit 20-2 is attached to this addendum.
L..
TABLE 20-3 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES
Page 20-17: Replace Table 20-3 with Revised Table 20-3
(6-5-80) attached to this addendum. -
TABLE 20-6 SUMMARY OF CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES
`
Page 20-20: Replace Table 20-6 with Revised Table 20-6
(6-5-80) attached to this addendum.
L
�
JUN 181980 411Y
..�,� > r t•.�:.y ; -;•,`- ;.:. .." :. .. .. '. :., r• .-.>.;cT-. .. �:.u.;ti.:.•:+gY.'.�+/k'.. awn+aF5 fir.,-:
Addendum No. 1
Indian River County
201 Facilities Plan
January, 1979
Page -four-
SECTION 22.1 INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Page 22-1, Second Paragraph: Delete this paragraph in its en-
tirety and substitute the following paragraph in its place:
"The Board of County Commissioners will provide access
to the County Plant to the municipalities of Fellsmere,
Orchid and Sebastian via a major transmission system de-
scribed in Chapter 20 of this report. The County will be
responsible for the construction and maintenance of all
major transmission.systems within the incorporated areas
of the County. All pump stations and transmission lines
within the incorporated areas of the County which trans-
port wastewater to the County's receiving pump stations
are considered minor transmission systems and the muni-
cipalities involved are responsible for their construction
and maintenance:. The County will be responsible for the
construction and maintenance of all systems within the
unincorporated.areas of Indian River County. All trans-
mission lines shown in the 201 Facilities Plan are major
transmission systems and are the responsibility of the
County."
Page 22-1: Insert the following paragraph at the bottom of
the page:
"It is proposed that Indian River Shores be responsible
for constructing and maintaining any force mains and pump
stations required within their city limits to transport
waste to the Vero Beach transmission system and that the
City of Vero Beach provide wastewater treatment to the
City of Indian River Shores. However, this will have to
be worked out and finalized by the interlocal agreements."
TABLE 22-1 CALCULATION OF LOCAL SHARE OF COSTS
Page 22-3: Replace Table 22-1 with Revised Table 22-1 (6-5-80)
attached to this addendum.
TABLE 22-3 ESTIMATED IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Page 22-8 through 22-10: Replace Tables 22-3 with Revised
Table 22-3 (6-5=80) attached to this addendum.
M
4-
Addendum No. 1
Indian River County
201 Facilities Plan
January, 1979
Page -five-
APPENDIX E BASIS OF DESIGN FOR TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
Page E-5: Delete page in its entirety and replace with revised
page E-5 (6-5-80) attached to this addendum.
APPENDIX F PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING DESIGN FOR THE WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT "B"
Insert Exhibit F-1, entitled "Wastewater Flow Diagram", at
the end of Appendix F.
ra
JUN 1819 0 ,
---- r--�- �----------- rte'---- - --- ---•-'� .,� ,_•^•.'- .,_,_._, ,ra,N„q ,�,b�+,^ ,.,,r..,.+�
Plant
TABLE 3-2
Name
Receiving Wa
Vero Beach
Main Plant
Indian River
North County
DISCHARGE""
Plant:
Indian River
Outfall #1
;r
North County
Indian River
Plant:
Outfall #2
NOTES: (1) NA -not applicable ;}
(2) NC -not calculated
(3) ND -no discharge
(4) Effluent shall not cause violations of applicable Class III water quality:.
UOD= (1.43* BODS + 4.57* TKN) *8.34lbs/gal*FLOW(MGD) '
(5) Monthly or 30 -day average
x �#
r.
TABLE 3-2
-�
WASTELOAD ALLOCATIONS
FOR SURFACE WATER
DISCHARGE""
;r
(Revised.8-9-79)
Al locations (.5)
Design
UOD
BOD
5
SS
TKN TN
TP
DO
!rs Cap. MGD
lbs/day
mg/l
mg/l
a t.
4.5
'NC
17:0
90%
-ft- 20.0
7.0
NC
Removal
3.0
NC
17.0
90%
NC 20.0
10.0
NC
Removal
2.8
NC
17.0
901
NC 20.0
10.0
NC
Removal
"
NOTES: (1) NA -not applicable ;}
(2) NC -not calculated
(3) ND -no discharge
(4) Effluent shall not cause violations of applicable Class III water quality:.
UOD= (1.43* BODS + 4.57* TKN) *8.34lbs/gal*FLOW(MGD) '
(5) Monthly or 30 -day average
x �#
r.
r�,j k, ''i
N
O
V
TABLE 20-3
TRANSMISSION SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES
(Revised 6-5-80)
VERO BEACH PLANT '
PLANT B
SUBTOTAL - Phase I $2,172,400 11 $4,951,000
SUBTOTAL - Phase II
TOTAL - Phase I S 1I
GRAND TOTAL , . . . . . . . . . $9,633,700
(')Based on January 1979 prices
$1,749,000
$6,700,000
vnase 1
Phase I
Phase II
Description
Estimated
_QuantityUnit
Unit (1)
Cost
Amount
Estimated
QuantityUnit
Unit
Cost (1)
Amount
Estimated
Quantity
Unit
Unit
Cost (1)
Amount
4" PVC Pipe
25,020
L.F.
$ 8.70
$ 217,800
3,000
L.F.
S 8.70
S 26,100
10,000
L.F.
S 8.70
S 87,000
6" PVC Pipe
23,700
L.F.
10.40
246,500
14,120
L.F.
10.40
146,800
25,100
L.F.
10.40
261,000
8" PVC Pipe
11,200
L.F.
12.20
136,600
11,100
L.F.
12.20
135,400
36,100
L.F.
12.20
440,400
10" PVC Pipe
24,510
L.F.
13.90
340,700
3,900
L.F.
13.90
54,000
------
----•
-----
-------
12" PVC Pipe
8,000
L.F.
19.10
152,800
17,300
L.F.
19.10
330,400
------
----
-----
-------
14" DIP Pipe
-
----
----
-
15,800
L.F.
23.50
371.300
16" DIP Pipe
----- •
----
----
-------
14,250
L.F.
26.00
370,500
------
----
-----
-------
18" DIP Pipe
-----
----
----
-------
20,500
L.F.
33.00
676,500
20" DIP Pipe
-----
----
----
-------
2,900
L.F.
35.65
103,400
------
----
.....
-------
24" DIP Pipe
----
----
----
-------
28,400
L.F.
40.90
1,161,600
......
---.
-----
-------
10" Bridge Crossing
----
----
----
-------
......
---.
....
-------
1
L.S.
-----
300,800
Pavement Replacement
13,800
L.F.
15,00
207,000
19,600
L.F.
15.00
294,000
11,500
L.F.
.00
173,300
Cased Crossings
2,200
L.F.
100.00
220,000
2,000
L.F.
100.00
200,000
800
L.F.
,00
Lift Stations
16
L.S.
----
631,000
16
L.S.
.....
1,061,000
10
L.S.
-----
394,000
Station Sites
4
Ac.
5,000.00
20,000
4
Ac.
5,000.00
20,000
2.5
Ac.
5,000.00
12,500
SUBTOTAL - Phase I $2,172,400 11 $4,951,000
SUBTOTAL - Phase II
TOTAL - Phase I S 1I
GRAND TOTAL , . . . . . . . . . $9,633,700
(')Based on January 1979 prices
$1,749,000
$6,700,000
JUN 181980 BOOK 43 PAGE 7�
TABLE 20-6
SUMMARY OF CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES (')
(Revised 6-5-80)
VERO BEACH PLANT B
DESCRIPTION PHASE 1 PHASE 2
Transmission $2,172,000 $4,951,000 $1,749,000
Treatment System --- 4,282,000 3,170,000
Disposal System --- 410,000 ---
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $2,172,000 $9,643,000 $4,919,600
Land --- Qgn nnn ---
TOTAL PLUS LAND $2,172,000 $10,093,000 $4,919,600
(')Based on January, 1979 prices.
r 20-2=
L¢'- a
JUN 1.81980
STT.. .. ..,. _,..-� ..
TABLE 22-3
ESTIMATED IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Box 43 FAc
22-8
�� M M
Item
Implementation Date
1.
Submit Indian River 201
Facilities Plan
January, 1979
2.
Hold Public Hearing
January, 1980
3.
Initiate Negotiations of
Interlocal Agreements
Aiarch, 1980
4.
Finalize Negotiations of
Interlocal Agreements
July, 1981
5.
Town of Indian River Shores
to Submit Step 2 application
for federal assistance
August, 1981
6.
Receive State and USEPA approval
o the plan
August, 1981
7.
County to submit Step 2 application
for federal assistance for Phase I
October, 1981
8.
Town of Indian River Shores to receive
Step 2 grant offer
November, 1981
9.
County to receive Step grant offer for
Phase I
December, 1981
10.
Town of Indian River Shores to submit
completed engineering plans and
specifications to appropriate regu-
latory agencies along with all necessary
permit applications
April, 1982
11.
Receive State and USEPA approval of Indian
River Shore's construction contract
documents
July, 1982
12.
Town to submit Step 3 grant offer and to
advertise for construction bids
August, 1982
22-8
�� M M
DESCRIPTION
Construction:
Transmission
Treatment
Disposal
TOTAL
TABLE 22-1
CALCULATION OF LOCAL SHARE OF COSTS
(Revised 6-5-80)
PLANT "B"
VERO BEACH(1) PHASE I PHASE II
$2,172,000
$2,172,000
Land Acquisition &
Services
21,000
Technical Services
215,000
Administrative &
Legal Services
22,000
Interest During
Construction
26,000
Contingencies @ 5%
124,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST
$2,580,000
Federal Share
1,915,500
Local Share
638,500
$4,951,000
4,282,000
410,000
$9,643,000
450,000
750,000
98,000
112,000
564,000
$11,617,000
8,628,750
2,988,250
$1,749,.000
3,170,000
94,71y,000
14,000
415,000
50,000
58,000
277,000
$5,733,000
4,256,250
1,476,750
4
(1) Represents costs to install transmission lines through Vero
Beach, Florida and should not be construed to represent the
cost to the City of Vero Beach, but to Indian River County.
22-3
JUN 1980 �a 43 PAGE"15 , .
25. County to receive state and USEPA approval
of the Phase II construction contract
documents March, 1989
26. County to submit Step 3 application for
federal assistance for Phase II March, 1989
22-9
ISO exE -
JUN 18 1980 ..
Item
Implementation Date
13.
Town to receive Step 3 grant offer and to
advertise for construction bids
October, 1982
14.
County to submit completed Phase I engineering
plans and specifications to appropriate
regulatory agencies along with all necessary
permit applications
December, 1982
15.
Town to award contract and commence con-
struction
December, 1982
16.
Receive state and USEPA approval of the
County's Phase I construction contract
documents.
February, 1983
17.
County to submit. Step 3 grant application
for federal assistance for Phase I
March, 1983
18.
County to receive Step 3 grant offer for
Phase I and to advertise for construc-
tion bids.
May, 1983
19.
County to award contract and commence
construction
July, 1983
20.
Town to complete construction to begin
operation of its facilities
January, 1984
21.
County to complete construction and to begin
operation of its Phase I facilities
January, 1986
22.
County to submit Step 2 application for
Federal assistance for Phase II
June, 1988
23.
County to receive Step 2 grant offer
August, U88
24.
County to submit completed Phase II
engineering plans and specifications
to appropriate regulatory agencies
along with all necessary permit appli-
cations
January, 1989
25. County to receive state and USEPA approval
of the Phase II construction contract
documents March, 1989
26. County to submit Step 3 application for
federal assistance for Phase II March, 1989
22-9
ISO exE -
JUN 18 1980 ..
JUN 18 I990 _
-I
Item
Implementation Date
27. County to receive Step 3 grant offer and to
advertise for construction bids June, 1989
28. County to award contract and commence construc-
tion July, 1989
29. County to complete construction and to begin
operation of the Phase II facilities November, 1990
�4,
I
PLANT 6
l
PHASE II - TRANSMISSION
SYSTEM
Revised
6-5-80)
Average
Force
Peak
Peak
Station
Force
Main
Friction
Pipe
Flow
Flow
Capacity
Main
Length
Loss
TDH
Station
Annual
Unit
Pipe
Segment
PS
From
To
(gPd)
(apd)
(9pd)
Size
ft.
ft.
ft.
Cost
O&M
Cost
Cost
Cost
12
PS
12
PS
13
170,000
425,000
425,000
5"
25,100
193
233
$ 38,000
$ 1,660
$10.40
$ 261,000
$ 299,000
41
PS
41
PS
40
47,000
144,000
144,000
4"
5,500
41
211
----
490
----
----
----
40
PS
40
PS
39
94,000
288,000
144,000
6"
10,700
41
170
----
490
----
----
----
39
PS
39
PS
38
386,000
1,018,000
730,000
10"
7,800
25
129
----
3,040
----
----
----
38
PS
38
J
37
437,000
1,162,000
144,000
1011
1,400
6
104
----
530
----
----
----
37
PS
37
J
37
146,000
365,000
365,000
10'
4,000
24
122
----
1,520
----
----
----
M 36
PS
36
J
26S
226,000
565,000
565,000
8-1
36,100
119
224
45,000
2,300
12.20
440,400
485,400
CJ't 35
PS
35
J
34
85,000
214,000
214,000
4"
10,000
158
222
38,000
810
8.70
87,000
125,000
32
PS
32
PS
31
877,000
2,707,000
214,000
14--
2,200
8
153
38,000
810
----
----
38,000
31
PS
31
PS
30
962,200
2,793,000
214,000
14"
3,200
13
145
38,000
810
----
----
38,000
30
PS
30
PS
29
1,378,000
4,274,000
214,000
16--
2,300
11
132
38,000
810
----
----
38,000
29
PS
29
PS
28
1,463,000
4,487,000
214,000
181-
3,700
11
121
33,000
810
----
----
38,000
28
PS
28
PS
27
1,548,000
4,701,000
214,000
1811
4,000
,12
110
38,000
810
----
----
38,000
27
PS
27
J
26
1,634,000
4,915,000
214,000
181-
5,900
20
98
38,000
810
----
----
38,000
42
PS
42
J
26
500,000
1,250,000
1,250,000
10"
9,400
45
123
45,000
5,000
32.00
300,800
345,800
SUBTOTAL
131,300
$394,000
' $20,700
$1,089,200
$1,483,200
TOTAL
(PHASE
I AND
PHASE 1I)
$1,455,000
$48,110
During
$4,465,800
$5,920,800
Phase I
fi
$68,810
During
Phase I1
l
N
I R37,E I R38E s° I R39E I
[Y.wna
} F SeOaufbn fn/eI
0'
BREVARD COUNTY
wea„
l R.T cwsr w
R tAT K
• � R � �c 5 ® .
X14
v •�� �,�.� H GRAPHIC SCALE
, — \r
1w,s¢EBASTIAN'
S.
rN
' f
W.
`% F r� �•. ! o LES
r H
vERoPS'
WABASSO 7� FORCE MAIN B SIZE
I LAKE - . n, ORCHID
1FELLSMERE
-----+ ESTATES ^ ,jIl'�LY�BEACH PUMP STATION
• _ � WABASSO 11
TREATMENT PLANT
HOBART ROAD --
?S. N937 PHASE II FORCE MAIN 8 SIZE
LIMITS OF 201�'_•T-"—T1 �� ~INDIAN ® PUMP STATION
IjN
FACILITIES PLANNING MER 'BE>CH Ro
\Y/\S'' RIVER
AREA L\" %F.
SHORES
e WINTER Q}
V' a BEACH
INDIAN RIVER COUNTYPL
3 �S. N5 17e+ 6 ° GIFFORD , PS. NQ 23
F..�/N 'I U 20 ; ` t i yf' .S.. N° 22 ✓L•% c�.
2 ! V E R O �.
PS. N- 1 P.S. N° I - 'p '�jl�f I jlWACH t %�C i �:'/ i C.,�cJ .�� [_ .r (: % l� �!!i�✓�
1+ I 1 PS. N2 1 l
PS
I D A
NCi
r• :NT�
- _ -@ e" e' it PS y- PS. N° 15
PS. N°
S. N9 5 " \b y� 201 FACILITIES PLAN
I ="--Awwr P NV (,— PS. N° la INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
✓ems _ 4` 6• 9 FLORIDA
OA
L- Ps. - 2 OSLO " PROPOSED
"ER°BE" M '�• TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
—_ •• •. ••—•• .• _ ° r \ A JOINT VENTURE
21 SVERDRUP 8 PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES
••ENGINEERS -PLANNERS
Lur[s.a[[, rtDRoA ST. LUCIE COUNTY BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES.IDc.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
v[m elr+, rl DRu
' � u-- .� �- f� - (.^ ^ �, �' ;"1 o[a.r,rD [v. c"a.[D •"s [ w .n.,.n.roea•<an
��"'" ui[ FEB 1977 is n.B-7 M 7P-1 1
1
1
1
L
L
L
L
L
L
Plant
Influent
Mechanicals
Bar
Screen
Flow 1
Manual IEquiIil
zation
By -Pass I (Optiol
Screen i La u —i
L _
Mechanical
Bar Bar I
Screen
L___ _j
DenitrificationBOD Removal
RBC & Nitrification
Units RBC
Units
Grit
Removal
i Recycle
I Grit
LI Removalr Recycle Pumps
-�
I ��Denitrification
I_ rBOD Removal I
RBC 1---J& Nitrification)
Units I RB
Units
Filter Backwash I I_
Plant Drains In -Plant
Return Digester Supernatant
Building Sanitary Pump
Waste P.
Station Filter Press Filtrate
Recycle Pump
Belt Aerobic N
Filter Digester
Press
Dewatered
Sludge
Haul To
Landfill o
I I Belt I Aerobic '
LEGEND _ Filter- Digester _
Press
MAJOR PLANT FLOWS -PHASE 1 l — —'J
MAJOR PLANT FLOWS -PHASE 2 a I
PHASE 1 UNITS 0
El
L_
PHASE 2 UNITS NOTE: In -Plant Return Side Streams Are
Not Shown For Clarity
I
Final
Clarifier L
0 C
r Q
U
Filtration
Unit
Final
Clarifier I
I Filtration I c
�—T11 Unit
I Final
Clarifier I Parshall
Flume
s _ j Chlorine
SEINDORF .AND >s""d^'P`RINDIAN RIVER COUNTY 201 FACILITIES PLAN
r*I
ASSOCIATES, INC. s3velrc�raWs o='a._�"t.es,: WASTEWATER FLOW
`~ =
Cpt15U1.T1NG ENBWEERS VERO BEApf,FLORDDIAGRAM
MMFEH.I977 jog N948g7 rxmimT IIf F-1
�1
v
II t �t
O
00
3
Chlorine
C I rin i
Contact
I Contact
Tank
Tank
L
o
__7
+.t
w�
C) ro
1
i
M m
I\
I- L
W
N
tL-_
SEINDORF .AND >s""d^'P`RINDIAN RIVER COUNTY 201 FACILITIES PLAN
r*I
ASSOCIATES, INC. s3velrc�raWs o='a._�"t.es,: WASTEWATER FLOW
`~ =
Cpt15U1.T1NG ENBWEERS VERO BEApf,FLORDDIAGRAM
MMFEH.I977 jog N948g7 rxmimT IIf F-1
�1
v
II t �t
O
00
3
JUN 18 1990
Boos 43 PAcE 802
COMMISSIONER WODTKE INQUIRED ABOUT THE STATUS OF AN INTER-
LOCAL AGREEMENT WHEREBY THE TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES WOULD SOME-
TIME IN THE FUTURE REQUEST SOME ALLOCATION OUT OF THE PHASE 2 PLAN,
AND ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THE TOWN DID REQUEST THIS, BUT IT
WAS QUITE IMPRACTICAL UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND AS FAR AS HE
KNEW BOTH THE CITY OF VERO BEACH AND THE COUNTY REJECTED THE REQUEST.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED WHAT HAPPENS IF THE COUNTY DOES
NOT MEET THE DATES SET OUT IN THE IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE.
MR. ENG STATED THAT THESE DATES ARE PLACED IN THE PLAN
MERELY AS A GUIDELINE, AND THEY ADJUSTED THE DATES PERTINENT TO THE
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMIS-
SIONER DEESON, TO APPROVE ADDENDUM N0. 1 TO THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
201 FACILITIES PLAN.
ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKED IF THERE IS A SPECIFIC SCHEDULE
INCLUDED WHICH RELATES TO THE CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE AND RESPONSIBILITY
FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE, WHICH SETS OUT THAT THOSE ITEMS
ARE LIMITED BY THE AVAILABILITY OF FEDERAL FUNDS. HE WAS OF THE
OPINION THAT IF THERE IS NOT SUCH A SPECIFIC SCHEDULE, AND THE COUNTY
SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH CERTAIN STEPS BY THE PROPOSED DATES.-
THAT
ATES,THAT WE WOULD BE CREATING SOME LIABILITY TO THE COUNTY FOR NON-PERFORMANCE..
MR. ENG STATED THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE SUCH A SPECIFIC DISPLAY
IN THE PLAN ITSELF. HE FELT THAT THE PROPOSED SCHEDULE IS A GUIDELINE
AND NOT BINDING AND THAT IT IS UNDERSTOOD WE CANNOT PROCEED WITHOUT
THE GRANT, BUT HE BELIEVED THAT INCLUDING SUCH A DISCLAIMER WOULD
NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE PLAN ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT FELT THAT THE ATTORNEY HAD A GOOD POINT
AND THAT SUCH A DISCLAIMER COULD BE PLACED ON TOP OF TABLE 22-31
ESTIMATED IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE.
ATTORNEY COLLINS PREFERRED THAT A STATEMENT BE INCLUDED
IN THE MEAT OF THE AGREEMENT, I.E. "EVERYTHING CONTAINED HEREIN
IS SUBJECT TO...."
COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT THE IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
IS LABELED "ESTIMATED," BUT ATTORNEY COLLINS POINTED OUT THAT WE
SHOULD LIMIT OUR EXPOSURE TO LIABILITY.
MR. ENG NOTED THAT PAGE 22-5 REFERS TO THE IMPLEMENTA-
TION SCHEDULE AND STATES THAT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 201 PLAN IS
DEPENDENT UPON DEVELOPMENT AND SUCCESSFUL NEGOTIATION BETWEEN THE
INTERLOCAL AGENCIES AND IS CONTINGENT UPON THE FINANCIAL AND OTHER
ARRANGEMENTS TO BE NEGOTIATED.
ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT HIS COMMENTS REALLY APPLY TO
MUCH MORE THAN THE IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE, AND HE WONDERED IF
COMMISSIONER LYONS' MOTION COULD INCLUDE THAT SOMEWHERE A STATEMENT
WOULD APPEAR THAT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 201 PLAN IS SUBJECT TO THE
COUNTY RECEIVING SATISFACTORY GRANT AND LOAN FUNDS FROM FEDERAL
AGENCIES TO ACCOMPLISH THE ITEMS SET OUT IN THE PLAN.
COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED THAT HE WOULD INCLUDE ATTORNEY
COLLINS STATEMENT IN HIS MOTION, AND COMMISSIONER DEESON AGREED, AND
THE MOTION WAS REWORDED AS FOLLOWS:
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMIS-
SIONER DEESON, TO APPROVE ADDENDUM N0. 1 TO THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
201 FACILITIES PLAN SUBJECT TO A STATEMENT BEING INCORPORATED IN THE
PLAN SETTING OUT THAT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 201 PLAN IS SUBJECT
TO THE COUNTY RECEIVING SATISFACTORY GRANT AND LOAN FUNDS FROM
FEDERAL AGENCIES TO ACCOMPLISH THE ITEMS SET OUT IN THE PLAN.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE THEN DISCUSSED THE FIGURES ON TABLE 22-1,
CALCULATION OF LOCAL SHARE OF COSTS AS REVISED .JUNE 5, 1980, AND ASKED
IF THE FIGURES HAD CHANGED SUBSTANTIALLY.
MR. ENG REVIEWED THE FIGURES AND EXPLAINED THAT ESSENTIALLY
THE TOTAL PROJECT DROPPED ABOUT $200,000; SO, THE LOCAL SHARE ONLY
CHANGED A SMALL AMOUNT,
COMMISSIONER WODTKE CONTINUED THAT THE NOTE ON THE BOTTOM
STATED THAT THIS REPRESENTS COSTS TO INSTALL TRANSMISSION LINES
THROUGH VERO BEACH AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED TO REPRESENT THE COST
TO THE CITY OF VERO BEACH, BUT TO INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, HE WONDERED
HOW THIS MIGHT RELATE TO INDIAN RIVER SHORES.
MR. ENG STATED THAT THIS IS THE LINE THAT LOOPS AROUND
WEST OF TOWN AND GOES THROUGH THE CITY LIMITS OF VERO BEACH. THIS
67 43 X803
JUN 18 1980
AUK 18 1980 mox 43 PAGE 804
JUST CLARIFIES THAT IT IS NOT THE CITY OF VERO BEACH TRANSMISSION
LINE: IT BELONGS TO THE COUNTY.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS COMMENTED THAT THE
FEDERAL SHARE IS ALL GRANT MONEY, AND YOU CAN ISSUE REVENUE BONDS
IN ADDITION TO RAISE THE LOCAL SHARE.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ENGINEER ENG REQUESTED THAT ATTORNEY COLLINS WORK WITH HIM
IN REGARD TO INCLUDING A DISCLAIMER.
MR. ENG CONTINUED THAT THE NEXT STEP TO PROCEED WITH THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN WOULD BE TO PASS A RESOLUTION APPROVING
THE PLAN WITH THE ADDENDUM AS PRESENTED INCLUDING THE'COMMENTS BY
ATTORNEY COLLINS, AND THEN SUBMIT THE 201 PLAN TO DER AND EPA FOR
FINAL APPROVAL.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE INQUIRED WHETHER WE ARE SURE THERE IS
NOTHING IN THE ADDENDUM CONTRARY TO THE WISHES OF THE CITY OF VERO
BEACH, AND MR. ENG STATED THAT HE HAS REVIEWED THIS WITH CITY ATTORNEY
TOM PALMER AND MAYOR SCURLOCK, AND HE DID NOT KNOW OF ANY PROBLEM.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION -80-60 APPROVING THE
201 FACILITIES PLAN WITH ADDENDUM N0. 1 AS APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED
SUBMISSION TO THE DER AND EPA FOR FINAL APPROVAL.
RECEIVED.
SAID RESOLUTION WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES WHEN
MR. ENG CONTINUED THAT WE SHOULD HAVE THE PARTICIPATING
MUNICIPALITIES REVIEW THE ADDENDUM AND SHOULD REQUEST THEM TO APPROVE
THE PLAN BY RESOLUTION. HE NOTED THERE IS NO SET FORM: WE JUST
NEED A LETTER FROM THEM.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SEND A
LETTER AS DESCRIBED BY MR. ENG TO THE MUNICIPALITIES INVOLVED IN
THE 201 PLAN.
MR. ENG STATED THAT HE WILL PROVIDE WORDING FOR A SUGGESTED
RESOLUTION.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS DISCUSSED THE FOLLOWING LETTER FROM
FRANK ZORC, PRESIDENT OF ST. FRANCIS MANOR:
Mr. Jack Jennings, Administrator
Indian River County
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Mr. Jennings:
On behalf of the board of directors of St. Francis Manor,
I am requesting the county to offer an occasional service
to the Manor be grading the entrance road to the Manor.
The road referred to begins immediately east of the St.
Francis Manor bridge from 20th Avenue, and runs approximat-
ely 500 feet north to a parking area.
This road is located on land which is still owned by In-
dian River County. I have noticed the county grader
occasionally does other work within a few blocks, and
would appreciate very much that consideration be given of
an occasional grading of this roadway. Thank you in ad-
vance.
Very sincerely,
ran L. Zo
President
THE ADMINISTRATOR INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE AND THE ROAD
AND BRIDGE SUPERINTENDENT HAVE LOOKED OVER THIS ROAD. IT IS ON
COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY: APPARENTLY WAS PUT IN YEARS AGO: HAS A LIMEROCK
BASE; AND IS IN VERY POOR CONDITION. HE NOTED THAT THE PROBLEM IS
IF YOU GO IN THERE WITH THE GRADER, YOU WILL ROLL UP THE ASPHALT THAT
IS THERE; SO, YOU WILL EITHER TO GRADE IT OFF OR IMPROVE IT.
69 eooA 43. PAGE 805.
.JUN
'4-
{
Of Vero Beach, Inc.
-
Post Office Box 6250
.'IX�
Vero Beach Florida 32960
(305) 562.8575 or
(305) 567-8784
June. 9 , 1980
<T) " v'
d
� P M�
c -y If
LC `�
t1♦
''°��4 u� � •t r'1 � .Ltt
Mr. Jack Jennings, Administrator
Indian River County
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Mr. Jennings:
On behalf of the board of directors of St. Francis Manor,
I am requesting the county to offer an occasional service
to the Manor be grading the entrance road to the Manor.
The road referred to begins immediately east of the St.
Francis Manor bridge from 20th Avenue, and runs approximat-
ely 500 feet north to a parking area.
This road is located on land which is still owned by In-
dian River County. I have noticed the county grader
occasionally does other work within a few blocks, and
would appreciate very much that consideration be given of
an occasional grading of this roadway. Thank you in ad-
vance.
Very sincerely,
ran L. Zo
President
THE ADMINISTRATOR INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE AND THE ROAD
AND BRIDGE SUPERINTENDENT HAVE LOOKED OVER THIS ROAD. IT IS ON
COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY: APPARENTLY WAS PUT IN YEARS AGO: HAS A LIMEROCK
BASE; AND IS IN VERY POOR CONDITION. HE NOTED THAT THE PROBLEM IS
IF YOU GO IN THERE WITH THE GRADER, YOU WILL ROLL UP THE ASPHALT THAT
IS THERE; SO, YOU WILL EITHER TO GRADE IT OFF OR IMPROVE IT.
69 eooA 43. PAGE 805.
.JUN
Fp -
Bova 43 PAcF 806
COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT WE HAVE A LONG TERM LEASE WITH
ST. FRANCIS MANOR AND ASKED IF THIS ROAD IS PART OF THE LAND UNDER
THAT LEASE.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS DID NOT BELIEVE S0. HE FELT THE
COUNTY KEPT THIS PIECE BETWEEN ST. FRANCIS MANOR AND THE SCHOOL PROP-
ERTY. HE EXPLAINED THAT IT IS JUST A SHORT PIECE OF ROAD, PARALLEL
TO 20TH AVENUE, AND THEY GO OVER IT TO GET TO THEIR PARKING LOT.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE ASKED FOR A QUICK ESTIMATE OF WHAT IT
WOULD COST TO PATCH THIS UP, AND ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS GAVE A ROUGH
ESTIMATE OF $2,000.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE PROPOSED THAT WE PARTICIPATE WITH ST.
FRANCIS MANOR ON A 50/50 BASIS, OR APPROXIMATELY $1,000. HE NOTED
THAT THE ROAD IS BASICALLY SERVING THAT HOME.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF HE WOULD CONSIDER HAVING THE
COUNTY PARTICIPATE UP TO $1,500.
DISCUSSION CONTINUED, AND COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT
THE ADMINISTRATOR'S ESTIMATE PROBABLY WILL END UP CLOSER TO $3,000.
THE COORDINATOR POINTED OUT THAT THE ROAD WOULD NOT HAVE TO BE A
FULL WIDTH ROAD NECESSARILY.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT FELT IT WOULD BE CLEANER IF WE GAVE
ST. FRANCIS MANOR A DOLLAR AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED. DISCUSSION CON-
TINUED AS TO THE WIDTH OF THE ROAD, PRIORITIES, ETC.
ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMIS-
SIONER Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO
PATCH THE ROAD DESCRIBED IN MR. ZORC'S LETTER OF .JUNE 91 1980,
AND PUT ON A SURFACE COAT OF 1/2" TYPE I ASPHALT AT A COST TO
ST. FRANCIS MANOR NOT TO EXCEED $1,000; THE WIDTH OF THE ROAD NOT
TO EXCEED 20'; PRIORITY TO BE ESTABLISHED UPON RECEIPT OF THE $1,000,
WTH A DEADLINE FOR ACCEPTANCE OF THIS PROPOSAL OF AUGUST 1, 1980.
ARTHUR MAYER, PRESIDENT OF THE SEBASTIAN RIVER AREA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, WAS PRESENT TO DISCUSS THEIR BUDGET PROBLEM
AS EXPLAINED IN THE FOLLOWING LETTER:
r
0
THE
I
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
0 ,,IN RIVER�R�.A
uuw
P
• � tar WLUT
EXECUTIVE OFFICE June 3rd, 1980
U. S. HIGHWAY #1 Board Of County Commissioners
SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 2145 14th Avenue
P. O. BOX 385
Vero Beach Florida
PHONE 589-5969 32960
SEBASTIAN
Dear Sirs or Madam:
ROSELAND
In reference to a letter I received from your
LITTLE HOLLYWOOD finance department dated May 30th 1980.
MICCO It seems theFinance Department says they made
GRANT a mistake which we in the Chamber of Commerce do not
understand.
WABASSO We submitted a budget for the fi ra.l year
1979-1980 for $1,000 Not receiving any letter telling
us it was disapproved we planned on this appropiation.
Then in October 1980 our checks began coming in in the
amount of $83.33 per month which led us to believe it was
approved. We budgeted our year accordingly planning on this
money.
On May 30,1980 we received the en,:losed
letter from your Finance Department stating that the
Finance Department made a mistake and we were only suppose
to get $ 330.00.for the year.The budget for the previous year
was for $330,00. For the fiscal year 1978-1979 we received
checks in the amount of $27.50 each month.
We are requesting at this time to appear before the
County Commission to discuss this matter.
The finance Department is requesting us to
return this money.
Hoping to hear from you at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
Arthur H. Mayer ( Pres)
FINANCE OFFICER BARTON INFORMED THE BOARD THAT BASICALLY
THE PROBLEM AROSE IN THAT HIS OFFICE DID NOT CONFIRM THAT THE
COMMISSION DID NOT GRANT THE BUDGET REQUEST AND ONLY GAVE THE SAME
AMOUNT AUTHORIZED THE YEAR BEFORE, OR A TOTAL BUDGET OF $330.00,
INADVERTENTLY, AN ERROR WAS MADE, AND THE FINANCE OFFICE COMPUTED
THE MONTHLY DISBURSEMENTS BASED ON A TOTAL BUDGET OF $1,000.00,
WHICH HAS RESULTED IN THE SEBASTIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BEING PAID
$664,64, OR $336,64 OVER THEIR APPROVED BUDGET.
JUN 18 1980 71 Boa 43 PacE SD 7
I
JUN 18 1980 mox 43, PAcE 808
MR. MAYER CONFIRMED THAT THEY NEVER RECEIVED -ANY NOTIFICATION
THAT THEIR REQUEST FOR $1,000 WASN'T APPROVED, AND WHEN THE MONTHLY
CHECK ARRIVED IN THE AMOUNT OF $83.30, THEY JUST ASSUMED THEIR REQUEST
HAD BEEN APPROVED, HE WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT IF THERE WAS ANY
REASON THEIR BUDGET REQUEST WOULDN'T BE APPROVED, THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN
ASKED TO APPEAR TO JUSTIFY WHY THEY SHOULD GET THE REQUESTED AMOUNT.
MR. MAYER CONTINUED THAT,ON THE ASSUMPTION THEY WERE GETTING THE
$1,000, THEY INSTALLED SOME AIR CONDITIONING, AND THEIR UTILITY
BILLS ARE HIGHER. HE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT MANY ORGANIZATIONS
MEET IN THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BUILDING, SUCH AS THE BOARD OF HEALTH,
THE VISITING NURSE, SOECIAL SECURITY, ETC., AND THEY DO NOT HAVE FEES
FOR USE OF THE CHAMBER.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMIS-
SIONER DEESON, TO APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT CHANGING THE BUDGET
OF THE SEBASTIAN RIVER AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO $664.64 FOR 1979-80;
THE OVERPAYMENT OF $337.00 TO BE PAID FROM CONTINGENCY FUNDS, SAID
BUDGET AMENDMENT BEING AS FOLLOWS:
ACCOUNT NAME ACCOUNT N0.NCI REASE DECREASE
SEBASTAN RIVER CHAMBER
OF �OMMERCE 004-110-515-88.22 $337.00
RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCY 004-199-513-99.91 $337.00
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT DID NOT KNOW IF THAT WOULD HELP BECAUSE
THEY MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO PAY THEIR UTILITY BILLS.
COMMISSIONER Loy WAS OF THE OPINION THAT IT IS THE BEST
SOLUTION. SHE FELT THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF TOO MUCH BEING LEFT UP TO
THIS BOARD BECAUSE THERE WAS NO FOLLOW-UP FROM THE ORGANIZATION THAT
MADE THE REQUEST. IN HER OPINION, THIS LEAVES SOMETHING TO BE DESIRED
FROM AN ORGANIZATION WHO ASKED FOR THREE TIMES WHAT THEY GOT BEFORE.
COMMISSIONER Loy CONTINUED THAT THIS POINTS OUT THE NEED FOR SOME
FOLLOW UP AT THE END OF OUR BUDGET SESSIONS TO BE SURE EVERYBODY
KNOWS WHAT THEY WILL GET.
FINANCE OFFICER BARTON STATED THAT THEY ARE PUTTING IN A
PROCEDURE TO CONFIRM TO EVERYBODY.
72
COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT THIS DECISION TO DENY THE
BUDGET REQUEST WAS MADE LAST YEAR BECAUSE WE WERE RUNNING AS TIGHT
AS WE WERE, AND WE TRY TO HANDLE LIKE ORGANIZATIONS IN A LIKE
MANNER: THIS ONE PARTICULAR ORGANIZATION WAS NOT SINGLED OUT. SHE
KNEW OF TWO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT DID CHECK ON THEIR BUDGETS
IMMEDIATELY. COMMISSIONER LOY AGREED THAT SHE COULD UNDERSTAND
HOW THEY FELT THE BUDGET HAD BEEN GRANTED WHEN THEY STARTED RECEIV-
ING THE CHECKS, BUT SHE WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF GRANTING ANY ADDITIONAL
COMPENSATION.
MR. MAYER REQUESTED THAT, IN THE FUTURE, THEY BE SENT A
LETTER TELLING THEM WHEN THEIR BUDGET WILL BE DISCUSSED, AND
FINANCE OFFICER BARTON NOTED THAT THEY TRY TO MAKE UP A TENTATIVE
CALENDAR.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON
AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT REPORTED TO THE BOARD ON THE DISCUSSION
AT THE VERO BEACH CITY COUNCIL MEETING LAST NIGHT IN REGARD TO THE
PROPOSED SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT. HE STATED THAT HE INFORMED
THEM THAT THERE WERE SEVERAL AREAS WHICH HE FELT CREATED PROBLEMS
IN REACHING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY. FIRST WAS THE PROPOSED
ORGANIZATION OF THE COMMITTEE, WHICH WAS TO BE MADE UP OF SEVEN
PEOPLE. FIVE VOTES WOULD BE REQUIRED ON ALL MAJOR ISSUES, AND HE
BELIEVED IT WAS UNDERSTOOD THE MAJOR ISSUES WERE CAPITAL ITEMS. IT
WAS FELT THIS MIGHT CREATE A PROBLEM INASMUCH AS IT WOULD GIVE EITHER
GOVERNMENTAL BODY BASICALLY VETO POWER OVER THE CAPITAL BUDGET, BUT
THE CHAIRMAN NOTED THERE WAS NO PROBLEM NEGOTIATING THAT. CHAIRMAN
SIEBERT CONTINUED THAT THE SECOND ITEM WAS WHETHER TO GO TO A
TAXING DISTRICT OR INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, AND HE TOLD THEM HE PRE-
FERRED THE TAXING DISTRICT. HE CONTINUED THAT HE ASKED IF WE DO
GO TO A FULL DISTRICT APPROACH WHETHER THIS COMMITTEE COULD SERVE
AS THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY, AND HE BELIEVED COUNCILMAN GREGG SAID
IF THAT COMMITTEE WERE THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY, THEN IT OUGHT TO BE
ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS.
73
JUN 181980
_,SUN 181990 43 810
ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THE IDEAL SITUATION WOULD BE TO HAVE
THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THEN HAVE THE COUNTY COMMISSION AS THE
DISTRICT BOARD, AND HE BELIEVED THIS WAS ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT COMMENTED THAT HE HAD NOT HEARD THAT THAT
WAS ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY.
MR. KELTON NOTED THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION SETS OUT
THE DISTRICT BOARD AS AN ADVISORY BOARD AND RECOMMENDS ALSO THAT
BOTH THE CITY AND THE COUNTY HAVE VETO OVER THE BUDGET.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF IT IS NECESSARY TO HAVE AN
ALL ELECTED BOARD IF IT IS A TAXING DISTRICT. HE STATED HE LIKED
THE MAKE-UP OF THE SEVEN MEMBER COMMITTEE AND FELT POSSIBLY JUST THE
MAJORITY COULD BE ELECTED.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE FELT IF WE ARE GOING TO GO TO REFEREN-
DUM THAT IT WOULD BE MUCH EASIER TO SELL IF THE BOARD WERE ALL ELECTED.
IF IT IS A FULL TAXING DISTRICT, HE PERSONALLY WOULD HOPE THAT IT
WOULD BE UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OR ELSE
UNDER THREE COMMISSIONERS AND TWO CITY COUNCILMEN. HE WOULD NOT FAVOR
HAVING SOMEONE RUN FOR ELECTION JUST TO SERVE IN THE FIRE DISTRICT.-
THOUGH
ISTRICT,THOUGH HE DID FEEL THEY SHOULD ALL BE CITY OR COUNTY ELECTED OFFICIALS.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF THEY COULD BE APPOINTED TO
THE FIRE DISTRICT.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT BELIEVED THEY SHOULD BE APPOINTED BY VIRTUE
OF THEIR OFFICE, I.E., CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNTY COMMISSION OR VICE
CHAIRMAN, ETC., RATHER THAN BY NAME. HE CONTINUED THAT THE UPSHOT
OF THE MEETING WAS THAT THESE ARE THE AREAS ON WHICH WE NEED TO HAVE
A JOINT MEETING. HE STATED THAT PERSONALLY THE MAKE-UP AS PROPOSED
NOW IS ALL RIGHT WITH HIM BECAUSE THE MAJORITY IS ELECTED AND ALSO
YOU HAVE THE CITY MANAGER AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT NOTED THAT THE ONE OTHER PROBLEM AREA
WAS IN THE ADMINISTRATION. THE CITY WANTS TO MAKE SURE THAT INITIALLY
THE ADMINISTRATION STARTS OFF WITH THE CITY: IT WAS HIS FEELING THAT
IT SHOULD REMAIN WITH THE CITY UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE COMMITTEE DE-
TERMINES THAT IT CAN BE ADMINISTERED BY THE COUNTY AS EFFICIENTLY
AND COST EFFECTIVELY AS BY THE CITY. THE CHAIRMAN BELIEVED THAT
MAYOR SCURLOCK AGREES WITH THAT, BUT COUNCILMAN GREGG DOES NOT.
COUNCILMAN GREGG SAID THAT WAS NOT SPECIFICALLY SO - HE
DID LEAN TOWARDS THE CONTRACT BECAUSE HE BELIEVED IT IS A MORE
EFFICIENT WAY TO DO IT, BUT HE WOULD ALSO SUPPORT A DISTRICT UNDER
ONE CONDITION - IF THERE WAS A CHANGE IN THE MANAGEMENT WHERE IT
WAS SHIFTED AWAY FROM THE CITY. HE NOTED THAT ALL THIS IS BUILT
INTO THE WAY THE CITY OPERATES, AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A LOT OF
MONEY OVER A PERIOD OF TIME.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT THESE ARE THE AREAS OF
POSSIBLE DISAGREEMENT, BUT HE DID NOT FEEL WE ARE VERY FAR APART. HE
HATED TO FEEL, HOWEVER, THAT THE CITY WOULD PULL OUT BEFORE THE COUNTY
WAS READY TO TAKE OVER MORE EFFICIENTLY.
COMMISSIONER LYONS FELT THAT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR
THEM TO D0,
MR. KELTON NOTED THAT THE CITY HAS SUGGESTED TWO PRIMARY
OPTIONS - CI) A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND THE CITY WHICH WOULD
HAVE SOME DEFINITE TIME PERIOD AND BE RENEWABLE AT THE END OF THAT
TIME, AND (2) A CONSOLIDATED CITY AND COUNTY DISTRICT. THE FIRST
WOULD TAKE SOME KIND OF FUNDING FORMULA TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH THE
COUNTY PEOPLE WOULD PAY THE CITY FOR FIRE PROTECTION: STATIONS WOULD
BE BUILT ON CERTAIN LOCATIONS BASED ON AN ASSUMPTION THERE WOULD BE
A CONSOLIDATED SERVICE REGARDLESS OF THE FUNDING. UNDER THE CONSOLI-
DATED DISTRICT, EVERYONE WOULD PAY THE SAME AND RECEIVE THE SAME
LEVEL OF SERVICE. THE BIG PROBLEM AS HE SAW IT WITH THE FIRST OPTION
IS THAT IF THE CONTRACT IS NOT RENEWED AND EACH ENTITY GOES ITS OWN
WAY, TWO OF THE STATIONS THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE BUILT WILL BE IN THE
WRONG PLACE FOR THE COUNTY AND THE COUNTY WOULD BE LEFT WITH TWO
STATIONS BASICALLY IN THE WRONG PLACES. HE RECOMMENDED THAT IF YOU
ARE GOING TO BUILD STATIONS, THE CLEANEST WAY TO DO IT IS WITH THE
CONSOLIDATED DISTRICT.
COMMISSIONER LYONS ASKED IF THIS COULD BE SOLVED WITH
PORTABLE STATIONS, AND MR. KELTON DID NOT BELIEVE YOU WOULD WANT TO
LOOK AT PORTABLE STATIONS FOR A TEN YEAR PERIOD - POSSIBLY FOR A
TWO OR THREE YEAR PERIOD.
75
mat 43 PAGE 81:2
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT HE WAS NOT SAYING AN INTER-
LOCAL AGREEMENT WOULD BE UNACCEPTABLE, BUT HE BELIEVED A.CONSOLIDATED
DISTRICT WOULD BE FAR BETTER.
MR. MELTON AGREED THAT THE CONSOLIDATED DISTRICT IS MORE
LASTING AND GIVES PERMANENCY TO THE SITUATION. HE CONTINUED THAT IN
REGARD TO THE OTHER PROBLEM AREA - ADMINISTRATION: FROM HIS DISCUS-
SION WITH THE CITY STAFF AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY STAFF, THERE IS
A GENERAL FEELING THAT THE CITY TODAY IS IN A BETTER POSITION TO
CONTINUE PROVIDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT FOR FIRE SERVICE.
THAT SITUATION MAY NOT ALWAYS EXIST AND THE TIME MAY COME WHEN THE
DISTRICT BOARD FEELS THE COUNTY IS IN A POSITION TO PROVIDE THE
ADMINISTRATIVE BACK UP MORE EFFICIENTLY AND AT A LESSER COST. HE
CONTINUED THAT ONE OPTION WOULD BE TO SAY THE CITY WOULD PROVIDE
THE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT FOR THE FIRST FIVE YEARS, AND AT THE
END OF THE FIVE YEARS, THE DISTRICT BOARD WOULD THEN DECIDE THE WAY
IT WANTED TO GO. MR. KELTON FELT THAT WHAT COUNCILMAN GREGG WAS
REFERRING TO WAS THAT THE CITY CARRIES WITHIN THEIR FIRE BUDGET
WHAT IS CALLED A G & A PAYMENT (GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE), WHICH
RIGHT NOW AMOUNTS TO ABOUT $71,000 PER YEAR. THAT IS MONEY THE
FIRE DEPARTMENT PAYS TO THE CITY THROUGH THEIR BUDGETARY TRANSFER
PROCESS FOR THE PURCHASING, THE FINANCE MANAGEMENT, COMPUTER TIME. -
ETC
IME,ETC., ALL THE GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. MR. GREGG IS CONCERNED
THAT IF THE COUNTY AT SOMETIME PROVIDES THESE SERVICES, THE CITY
WILL NOT GET THAT $71,000 AND THEY WILL HAVE TO MAKE IT UP FROM
SOME PLACE ELSE.
COMMISSIONER LYONS NOTED THAT, IN THAT EVENT, THE CITY
WOULD NOT HAVE TO SPEND IT EITHER.
MR. KELTON FELT THE OFFSETTING ARGUMENT IS THAT RIGHT NOW
THE COUNTY CONTRIBUTES $353,000 TO THE CITY FOR FIRE PROTECTION,
AND IF YOU WANT TO FOLLOW THAT ARGUMENT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME
UP WITH THAT FIGURE ALSO. MR. KELTON CONTINUED THAT HE BELIEVED WE
ARE CLOSE ENOUGH THAT WITH A WORKSHOP SESSION, IT SHOULD BE POSSIBLE
TO IRON OUT SOME OF THE DIFFICULTIES AND TAKE A SHOT AT PUTTING
SOME FORM OF AGREEMENT BEFORE THE PEOPLE BEFORE THE NEXT BUDGET YEAR.
DISCUSSION ENSUED AS TO A POSSIBLE DATE FOR A WORKSHOP
MEETING, AND IT WAS FINALLY AGREED TO SCHEDULE THE WORKSHOP FOR
2:00 O'CLOCK MONDAY AFTERNOON, .JUNE 23RD,
THE BOARD NEXT DISCUSSED THE FOLLOWING MEMO FROM THE
DIRECTOR OF MATERIALS MANAGEMENT REQUESTING ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL:
June 3, 1980
MEMORANDUM
TO: Assistant County Administrator
FROM: Director of Materials
SUBJECT: Additional Personnel
1. This department was formed in February of 1979, the purpose to consolidate
all purchasing within the county and to rectify deficiences as noted in previous
audit reports.
2. In addition to the normal purchasing requirments this department has the
responsibility of furnishing all repair parts for our vehicles and equipment, we
also take care of all bidding and property inventory control plus we have established
a "centralized" warehouse for all office supplies, institutional supplies and other
supplies used for minor repair and maintenance.
3. We are presently issuing approximately 4,000 purchase orders a year. I
have one clerical person handling this voluminous amount of paper work. I myself
am doing the auditing for this paper work prior to submission to the accounts
payable section for payment.
4. When this department was formed there was only one "new" position established
this position was the Director, all other employees or their position were transferred
from within Road & Bridge and the Clerk's department.
5. I find need now for one more clerical personnel, this person will divide
their working hours between two sections of this department the purchasing and the
parts section. This person will be in purchasing 15 hours a week and the balance
in the parts department. The primary responsibility in the parts department will be
recording issues on work orders, preparing requisitions and posting receipts and
issues on parts record cards.
6. Should funds be available, I request this position be established as soon
as possible. The starting salary would be $3.75 per hour or $7,800 annually.
7. We now have a person working part time possessing the necessary experience
to be placed in this position.
James Flynn
Director
77
JUN 1819 80 B00A 43 PAGE 814
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON CONFIRMED THAT THEY HAVE
EXPANDED OPERATIONS AND THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR CONCURS THERE IS THE
NEED FOR AN ADDITIONAL CLERK.
COMMISSIONER LYONS INQUIRED IF WE ARE SAVING ANY MONEY
BY HAVING THIS DEPARTMENT, AND MR. NELSON FELT WE CANT HELP BUT
SAVE MONEY WITH THIS OPERATION. HE POINTED OUT THAT $2,000 WAS
SAVED ON THE SEBASTIAN AMBULANCE RADIOS ALONE.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE
ADMINISTRATOR THAT THE DIRECTOR OF MATERIALS''MANAGEMENT BE ALLOWED
TO HIRE AN ADDITIONAL CLERK.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON NEXT REVIEWED THE REVISED
PAGES OF THE PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS WITH THE BOARD. THESE
INCORPORATED THE CHANGES SUGGESTED BY THE BOARD AT THE JUNE 4TH
MEETING.
COMMISSIONER LYONS COMMENTED THAT THE WAY THE RULES ARE
SET UP REGARDING POLITICAL ACTIVITY, AN EMPLOYEE REALLY CANNOT HOLD
AN ELECTIVE OFFICE. APPARENTLY THEY ARE ALLOWED TO RUN FOR OFFICE.-
BUT
FFICE,BUT IF THEY WIN AND ARE ELECTED, THEY GET DISCHARGED. HE WAS OF THE
OPINION THAT THIS IS TOO STRICT. HE GAVE AN EXAMPLE OF A COUNTY
EMPLOYEE WHO WANTS TO RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL AND ASKED IF WE WOULD
RULE THEM OUT COMPLETELY JUST BECAUSE THEY WORK FOR THE COUNTY.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATION NELSON FELT THERE WOULD BE A CON-
FLICT OF INTEREST, AND CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ALSO BELIEVED THERE WAS A
PROBLEM. HE DID NOT BELIEVE SOMEONE COULD BE, FOR INSTANCE, A
DRAGLINE OPERATOR AND A SHERIFF AT THE SAME TIME.
COMMISSIONER LYONS POINTED OUT THAT BEING SHERIFF IS A FULL
TIME JOB, AND COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT THERE ARE SOME ELECTED
OFFICES, SUCH AS THE HOSPITAL BOARD, MOSQUITO CONTROL BOARD, DRAINAGE
DISTRICT, ETC., THAT WOULD NOT CAUSE SUCH A PROBLEM.
DISCUSSION ENSUED AS TO INCLUDING A CONFLICT OF INTEREST
STATEMENT IN THIS PORTION OF THE PERSONNEL RULES AND ALSO AS TO THE
PERSON WHO WOULD DETERMINE THAT THERE WAS OR WAS NOT A CONFLICT OF
INTEREST.
78
COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THERE IS NO QUESTION ABOUT COUNTY
PERSONNEL RUNNING FOR A COUNTY OFFICE: THEY WOULD HAVE TO RESIGN.
WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING IS OTHER THAN COUNTY OFFICES.
ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THIS IS JUST A POLICY QUESTION.
DISCUSSION CONTINUED AS TO.VARIOUS SITUATIONS WHICH WOULD OR WOULD
NOT CONSTITUTE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
COMMISSIONER LYONS CONCURRED THAT IT IS A MATTER OF POLICY,
BUT HIS POINT OF VIEW WAS THAT WE SHOULD ENCOURAGE PEOPLE WHO WANT
TO BECOME INVOLVED WITH THEIR GOVERNMENT AND THAT WE SHOULD NOT
FIRE SOMEONE WHO WILL CREATE SOME INCONVENIENCE BECAUSE OF HIS
INTEREST IN COMMUNITY AFFAIRS.
DISCUSSION CONTINUED PRO AND CON, AND COMMISSIONER Loy
POINTED OUT THAT WE HIRED CONSULTANTS TO GIVE US THE BENEFIT OF
THEIR EXPERTISE. SHE BELIEVED THERE WAS A LOT OF BACKGROUND PUT
INTO INCLUDING THAT PARTICULAR STATEMENT ABOUT POLITICAL ACTIVITY.
MR. NELSON WAS OF THE OPINION WE COULD GET INTO A BIND
ON THIS SITUATION AND A PERSON COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEIR POSITION
AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, COMMISSIONER LYONS VOTED IN OPPOSITION, THE PERSONNEL RULES
AND REGULATIONS WERE APPROVED AS REVISED.
COPY OF SAID RULES AND REGULATIONS ARE ON FILE IN THE
OFFICE OF THE CLERK.
THE BOARD NEXT REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING MEMORANDUM IN REGARD
TO THE DUMPING OF SEPTIC TANK WASTES;
79
June 11, 1980
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Neil A. Nelson, Assistant County Administrator
soon 43 pacE 816
PROBLEM: Unable to adequately control septic tank drainings dumping
in the County
Background:
The Health Department issues permits to authorize firms to pump out
septic tanks. These septic tank drainings can be disposed of either by
pumping into a sewerage disposal facility or by field spreading in remote
areas. The City of Vero Beach Sewerage Treatment Plant at one time had
the capability to receive this material. The plant was modified and their
capability eliminated. We have requested that the plant be modified again
to allow the pumping firms to discharge into their plant. The City
considered our request but decided against the remodification.
It has come to our attention that certain firms have been illegally
discharging their drainings into canals, road ways, and other un -authorized
places. Upon consulting with Jack Allen of the Health Department, we felt
the illegal dumping could be better controlled if a central dumping area
was designated.
We have -found such an area at our landfill. Jack Allen has inspected
it and will approve it to receive septic tank drainings. The area is future
cell sites and will not interfer with our solid waste activities for a
number of years. A nominal charge of $5.00 per load will cover the costs
of our operation and will be attractive enough to the firms to make them
want to use this area:
41
Recommendation:
It is recommended that:
1. The Health Department issue an approval to allow septic tank
drainings to be deposited in the Sanitary Landfill.
2. Septic tank drainings be accepted in the Sanitary Landfill.
3. The fee of $5.00 per load be charged for septic tank drainings.
4. This will begin July 1, 1980.
Neil A. Nelson, Asst. County Administrator
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE RECOMMENDATION RE
DISPOSING OF SEPTIC TANK WASTES AS SET OUT IN THE ASSISTANT
ADMINISTRATORS MEMO OF .JUNE 11, 1980.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 80-61 AUTHORIZING THE
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A MASTER TRAFFIC SIGNAL AGREEMENT WITH THE DOT,
Boa43FAGS 8,�,7
JUN 1 � 19��
RESOLUTION No. 80-61
Box . 43 PAG 1.818
R1SOLINION Ai1111010"ING TIB' 1'XnirrION
01 A Al<1.STIM TIUF IC SICK^1111, AG10'.1111Wr
13MV['1]1 TI IE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPAR111EW
01.' TIMSPO11TAT1ON IVT) INDIAN RIVER MUNTY
'fi motion of Commissioner L ons seconded by
Commissioner Low -�-, the following, resolut ion was
adopted:
hi MWA.S INDIAN RIVER COUNTY decent; it ill the hurl is i n tore"t
to provide for the operation of certain traffic signals on the "tnt.e 11it'.111%ray
S�'stem within INDIAN RIVER COUNTY and to enter into the attached
agreement with the State of Florida Department of Transportation,
N(MI '111FREFORE, BE IT RTSOLVED:
1. '111:tt INDIAN RIVER COUNTY c.oncurS in the p1-o%7i:;i0ns of that
certain a;;recmcnt, attached hereto, pertaining, to the design, installation,
m0hitemnlce and operation of traffic '.ilmais on the .`;tate Iliajhwav `v.sl w V, nsly
he identified In approved Mrders," as provided .for luuler t.hc agrecment;
7 h:1 t INDIAN RIVER COUNTY author i zes
to acl•.nowledt'.c and to
approve for this Public Body lists of signalized Intersections and equipment
which arc contained in any "request orders" .from the Department of
Transportation, as provided for under the agreement;
3. Mat INDIAN RIVER COUNTY authorizes the said agreement to
bc, eXecnt(\l by a legally desihjlated officer of the Puhtic. V'ody.
S'1'A'n'. Ol: rL iron
COI.I\I Y OF Indian River
1 111'IDW (T.1ZT11Y ter f(,re1`oil�" �� , �(, ;111d Correct copy of a
1'.l `�11 �fl'TON nolo pted bld�l ver nrl
1 Y . _Coon y _Camra si n_er_s at t meet .i ili; held (m
tl+� 18th day ol. June , T.I1., 19 80 , ,feel recorded
_ _—_--
!N M INI'SS 1'011'10'OF, I heretulto set my hand mid official seal this
- -----� _ _�-
]ay of ---- ------June .--_--- A.U., i1)
(SFA 11,
Cler
r _^
TRAFFIC SINAL ACRETIENT
MIS AGREO ENT, made and entered into this
&IN. o f
, 19 , by and between the State of Flori(1:z DL-partment
of Transportation, an agency of the State of Florida, herein called the
"Department," and INDIAN RIVER COUNTY , Florida, herein called the "Public Bo(1v,"
WIMSSET11:
MUEE1S the construction, maintenance, and operation of a traffic signal, oz -
signals, are necessary for safe and efficient highway transportation at certain
locations along the State Highway System; and
WHEREAS the Department proposes that certain existing and proposed traffic
signals and signal systems are to be maintained and operated along the State
Highway System and shall maintain an approved list of such signals and systems; and
M EREAS the Public Body, by Resolution attached hereto and made a part hereof,
and the Department, by this agreement, have determined that it is in the public
interest for the Public Body to maintain and operate signal installations along
the State Highway System;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants
contained herein to be undertaken by the respective parties hereto, the parties
mutually agree and covenant as follows:
1. When the District Traffic ()aerations fingineer of the Department has served
a request order on the Public Body, and the designated officer of the Public Body
named in the Resolution to accompany this agreement has favorably acknowledged
the order, the Public Body shall undertake the maintenance and operation of such
signalized intersections and interconnected systems of signalized intersections
as are included in the order and in accord with the mutual covenants contained
in this agreement.
2. The traffic signal or signals, as described in the approved and acknowledged
order, will be so designed that the signal operation is as energy-efficient as
possible, and, in considermtion of a desilm review by the Rzblic 13o(ly, and, wlien
installation of the traffic signal(s) is to be performed by either the Public Bode
or under the supervision of the Department, the construction and/or installation
shall not endanger travel along the roadways involved and all operations shall he
conducted in accord with the Manual on Traffic Controls and Safe Practices (Part VI)
as published by the Department.
BOOK 43 PAc'E 819`
JUN 181990 7,;
SUN 1980 Box r 43, PAGf,W
3. 11pon the completion of the installation and, in the case of Const ru tion
contracts , its Condit ional acceptance, the Publ is Body steal l as` tuir Cont lnllolls
responsibility for the maintenance and continuous operation of said signal
installation (s), and the payment for all costs for electricity and elrrtrical
charges incurred in connection with the operation thereof.
4. The Public Body shall maintain the signal installation in accordance with
Department policies and to a level of maintenance that will provide minimlm
hazard to movement of traffic. In this regard, the Public Body shall record
maintenance activities relative to said traffic signal installation on a
Mepartment of Transportation Traffic Signal Maintenance Log" or an approved
equivalent log.
S. It is hereby understood and agreed by the parties hereto that the Public
Body may remove any component of the installed equipment for repair; however,
major permanent modifications and equipment replacements shall not be made by
either party without appropriate coordination with the other party.
6. It is expressly understood and agreed by the parties hereto that the
wiring of the cabinets and the timing of the signals will be such that traffic
will be properly handled at the time of the completion of the installation of
the signals. ';ecessary modifications in timing or minor circuitry n41y be made
by the Public Body to accommodate the changing needs of traffic, but the
Department reserves the right to examine the equipment at any time and, after
consultation with the parties hereto, the Department may specify timing and
phasing that will provide a safe and expeditious traffic flow in the State
Highway System. If modification in timing and the circuitry or phasing is
specified by the Department, implementation of such modifications shall be
coordinated through the Public Body.
7. The Public Body shall not modify the equipment to provide additional
phases or intervals without written permission from the Department, and the
Department shall not modify the equipment without written acknowledgement from
the Public Body.
S. It is understood and agreed by the parties hereto that this Agreement
shall remain in force during the life of the original installed equipment
and/or any replacement equipment installed with the mutual consent of the
1)arties hereto.
9. IAch party does hereby incknuiifv and 1101d 1ialmless each ether from
all liability, claim~
and
,judgement (including attorney's
fees)
,erisiT1.;
chit
of work undertaken by
any
such party pursikint to this
agreement,
car due
to
the negligent acts or omissions of such party, their contractors,
subcontractors, employees, agents or representatives, respectively, except
as otherwise covered by bonds or insurance.
IN WITNESS 1VEIT.REOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be
executed, the day and year first above written.
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTI,NT OF TRANSPORTATION
By:
Director of Administration
By; (Seal)
xecutive Secretan,
PUBLIC BODY
By:
ChAtxTRan
Board of Counter Comb ,Eia t,onexs
Title: Indian River- County. Florida
lttest: (Seal)
Approved: Approved as to form, legality and
execution:
11irector of Road Operations
Attorney
`mite
BOOK 43 PAA?l
?l
3UR i a 1980
`J
A.
JUN � � 1��0 >'ar,-.� 1 cif ---- ---
BOOK 43 PACE 822
St:ah, of Florida Department of TranFportation
S.T(.,',IA" 11'A1 N'i'.t?ti "ANCf: & 0i'F A'F [(.)N
0111)1'R NO. t-�o
D.O.T. r';1 'Tlt.TCT 1V tt1LINT1' INDIAN Rt�T,I: '
PUBLIC L'O!JY (:MAIPd'IAJIC:TN+';
B. 1. All sig'ia1 izt-: d :..ntorsoctions and signal systems covt!red
by this order are ref ..,-enced to an agreement of record
dated - between the Department and
Public I3uc.y and rnO SUpplumen'k.:al agree-ntent is required.
2. The 1-ii-A3.c Body is hereby authorized and requested to
undertake the mairtc:ncince and operation of 011e
signalize7 :.nt��rscc�t: inns on the State Highway System 3s
l i stec.i in pci rt C of t h.i s order.. The fol lowing previous-
ly nun;bf!re Ll and .Iate-1 orders sliall remain in effect and
are riot a ter< -d by c.rder.
C.
Identification ':'y���.� ;�f: I?duipn;ent and Inst..11.atiolis to
be Atai.ntainod.
(PAI:T i. lS ATTACHED)
D. Approvals
A('.KNnWI.,Fr')GFD
AND APPP:-')V.1D:
_._._ 1.7t►t.e
'I'raf f is i:rlyi IIt2CC/Aq(.-nt.
Public Lkcdv
APP MOVED :
Date -'--
i)Tstrict Traffic OporF-IW,731
I.nrlinec r
Copies :District_ '1.'r►ff.ik- Oi-,L. ra '- I oj,ls
State Traffic Oper,it.ion!; :,)f£.ico
Di:.tri.ct Of£ice
Local GooveT nment (0111Jl i ;- B(Id%-)
I% Vj. A1, 1-.' L ; I i o
JUN 181990
BooK 43 FACE 823
JUN 18 19 80 BOOK 43 PAGE 824
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON PRESENTED THE BOARD WITH
A TRAFFIC SIGNAL UPDATE AS FOLLOWS, NOTING THAT THE COSTS HAVE NOT
BEEN ACCURATELY IDENTIFIED AS YET. HE FELT THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT
EVEN THOUGH HE COULD ONLY PRESENT ESTIMATED FIGURES BECAUSE WE NEED
TO BE READY TO MOVE ON SOME OF THESE THINGS AS SOON AS WE RECEIVE
AUTHORIZATION FROM THE DOT, ESPECIALLY BARBER AVENUE.
TRAFFIC SIGNAL UPDATE
1. SR 60 and Kings Hwy.
Authoriziation for this signal will be given after the Maintenance
and Operation Agreement is si;ned. Approval should take approximately
60 days.
2. Pedestrian Traffic Control Signal, U.S. #1 and North Gifford Road.
This signal will be removed immediately.
Signal heads, poles and other reuseable items of equipment will be
salvaged and used at other locations.
3. Fully actuated signal, U.S. #1 and North Gifford Road.
The D.O.T. recommends that we install this signal. If decision is made
to install, authorization can be obtained within 60 days. If Board
decides not to install,D.O.T. will furnish us a letter indicating their
intention to authorize once we decide to install.
4. 37th Street. Barber Avenue.
Bruce Friedman, Traffic Engineer, D.O.T., made an on site inspection of 36th,
37th Streets, and Hospital complex. lie feels that traffic volumes would
not justify a signal at both 36th Street and 37th Street. A signal would
be authorized at either 36th Street or 37th Street.
He recommends that 37th Street, Barber Avenue, be designated the main
route to the Hospital. That the traffic signals be moved from 36th Street
to Barber Avenue. That a flasher replace the signals and signs indicating
Ambulance Entrances hung on overhead cable. We could receive authorization
to do this without an additional traffic study.
5. A D.O.T. team will be up in July to re-evaluate the turning signals at U.S. #1
and 12th Street. We pointed out the fact that motorists are detouring
through parking lots to avoid this intersection.
6. 16th Street and 20th Avenue.
A simple two phase actuated light is required.at this intersection. The
equipment taken from the "forth Gifford Road and U.S. #1 location could
be used in it's entirety. There are two poles located at the N.E. and
S.W. corners that would be appropriate to use and would require only
anchoring with guy wires for support. An easement may be required at the
S.W. corner for the anchor.
7. We have $51,429.67 remaining in our budget for traffic signals. The installation
of the SR 60 and Kings Hwy. is estimated to be _ The
cost of relocatina 36th St. to Barber Avenue is _ _ _ The cost
for new sianal at North Gifford Road and U.S. #1 is The
cost to relocate North Gifford pedestrian signal to 16th Street and 20th Avenue
is _
It is recommended that:
1. The traffic signals at 36th Street be moved on authorization from
D.O.T. to 37th Street, Barber Avenue. A flasher signal with appropriate
aerial signs indicating Ambulance Entrance be hung at 36th Street.
2. The Board approve installation of fully actuated signals at North
Gifford Road and U.S. #1.
3. The Board authorize the Administrator to take action to install a fully
actuated traffic signal at 16th Street and 20th Avenue.
MR. NELSON INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO RECEIVE
APPROVAL OF FULLY ACTUATED SIGNALS AT NORTH GIFFORD ROAD AND U.S.1
AND ALSO AUTHORIZATION TO LOOK INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF A TRAFFIC LIGHT
AT 16TH STREET AND 20TH AVENUE. HE FELT THE LATTER CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED
IF WE CAN GET AN EASEMENT FROM THE PERSON AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER.
HE CONTINUED THAT THEY CAN UTILIZE THE SIGNAL TAKEN DOWN AT NORTH
GIFFORD ROAD. THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR REPORTED THAT THEY HAVE
$51,000 LEFT IN THE BUDGET, AND HE WOULD ESTIMATE A TOTAL COST OF
ABOUT $22,000 FOR SIGNALS AT KINGS HIGHWAY AND S.R. 60. THE ONLY
COSTS INVOLVED IN THE RELOCATION OF LIGHTS FROM 36TH STREET TO
BARBER AVENUE WOULD BE LABAR COSTS. HE THEN DISCUSSED TAKING THE
LIGHTS DOWN AT NORTH GIFFORD ROAD AND USING THE POLES AT BARBER
AVENUE.
JUN1 8 1980 BOCK 43 P4E 825.
L
JUN 18 19 90
MOK
43
P E 826
CHAIRMAN
SIEBERT ASKED WHERE THEN WOULD WE GET
POLES
FOR
THE LIGHT AT NORTH GIFFORD ROAD, AND MR. NELSON EXPLAINED THAT THOSE
WOULD HAVE TO BE NEW POLES BECAUSE IT WILL BE A DIFFERENT TYPE TRAFFIC
S I GNAL,
MR. NELSON CONTINUED TO DISCUSS ESTIMATED FIGURES AND WAS
OF THE OPINION ALL THIS COULD BE DONE FOR LESS THAN THE $51,000 IN
THE BUDGET.
ATTORNEY COLLINS ASKED IF THIS WILL BE BID OUT, AND THE
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NOTED THAT THE LIGHTS AT NORTH GIFFORD AND
KINGS HIGHWAY ALREADY HAVE BEEN BID=, AND THE OTHERS DO NOT NEED TO
BE BID BECAUSE WE HAVE THE EQUIPMENT.
MR. NELSON FELT THE MOVEMENT OF LIGHTS FROM 36TH STREET TO BARBER AVENUE,
AND REPLACING IT WITH A BLINKER SYSTEM, SHOULD BE TOP PRIORITY. HE REPORTED THAT
NEW FIXTURES WILL BE INSTALLED AT KINGS HIGHWAY AND S.R. 601 AND THEY HAVE
BEEN BID AT ABOUT $9,000. FOR NORTH GIFFORD ROAD AND U.S. 1, WE HAVE
A BID OF AROUND $11,000. THE NEXT ORDER OF PRIORITY WOULD BE KINGS
HIGHWAY AND S.R. 60. AS SOON AS AUTHORIZATION IS RECEIVED FROM THE
DOT, WE WOULD MOVE THE 36TH STREET LIGHT TO BARBER AVENUE, AND THEN
MR. NELSON STATED HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE A SIMPLE LIGHT AT 16TH STREET
AND 20TH AVENUE, WHICH HE FELT IS AN EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS INTERSECTION.
HIS LAST PRIORITY WAS THE SIGNAL AT NORTH GIFFORD AND U.S. 1.
COMMISSIONER LOY NOTED THAT THE CHANGING OF THE NORTH
GIFFORD LIGHT SHOULD COINCIDE WITH OUR PAVING PROGRAM BECAUSE WE
HAVE TO PAVE TWO SIDES OF THE INTERSECTION.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMIS-
SIONER Loy, TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE ADMINISTRATOR AS
SET OUT IN THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL UPDATE FOR THREE TRAFFIC LIGHTS WITH
THE UNDERSTANDING THAT HE IS NOT TO EXCEED THE BUDGET FIGURE NOW
REMAINING OF $51,000 AND ALSO WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE MOVE-
MENT IS TO BE COORDINATED WITH PAVING AND OTHER ITEMS FOR MAXIMUM
EFFICIENCY.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE EXPRESSED THE HOPE, IN VIEW OF THE
RECENT REZONING IN THE VICINITY OF KINGS HIGHWAY AND S.R. 60, THAT
411
THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL THAT IS TO BE INSTALLED THERE WILL BE SUCH THAT IT
WILL NOT HAVE TO BE REDESIGNED WITHIN A FEW YEARS IN THE EVENT KINGS
HIGHWAY SHOULD HAVE TO BE WIDENED.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED WHETHER WE CAN REQUIRE THE DEVELOPER
TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY REDESIGN OF THE LIGHT, AND ATTORNEY COLLINS
STATED THAT COULD BE DONE.
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON BELIEVED THAT WHEN THE
SHOPPING CENTER IS THERE, IT WILL REQUIRE SOME REDESIGNING OF THE
TRAFFIC SIGNAL, AND HE FELT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WOULD PUT AN
IMPACT ON THE BUILDER JUST AS WE DID AT OSLO.
COMMISSIONER WODTKE NOTED THAT IF WE KNOW OF CHANGES THAT
MAY BE REQUIRED, POSSIBLY WE COULD SAVE THE DEVELOPER SOME MONEY IF
THE REDESIGN COULD BE DONE TO A CERTAIN EXTENT NOW.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS POINTED OUT THAT WE DO NOT HAVE THE
PLANS FOR THE SHOPPING CENTER NOW, AND MR. NELSON EXPLAINED THAT THE
DOT CAN ONLY DESIGN THE LIGHT BASED ON THE TRAFFIC NOW: THEY CANNOT
LOOK INTO THE FUTURE.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR DISCUSSED WITH THE BOARD
ENDORSING REYNOLDS, SMITH & HILLS' APPLICATION FOR RESEARCH FUNDS
AS EXPLAINED IN THE FOLLOWING MEMORANDUM:
91
BOOK 43 PAGE 82
JUN 18 1980
e
BQOX PAGE 828
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WILLARD W. SIEBERT, JR., Chairman
ALMA LEE LOY, Vice Chairman
WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR.
R. DON DEESON
PATRICK B. LYONS
JACK G. JENNINGS, Administrator 2145 14th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960
June 12, 1980
mpmnPAmnl IM
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Neil A. Nelson, Assistant County Administrator
SUBJECT: Application for research funds, Reynolds, Smith & Hill
Enclosed is a copy of Mr. R. Ghioto's 5-14-80 letter and a copy
of the suggested draft letter to the United States Department of Interior
from the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners.
Reynolds, Smith & Hill has asked the City and County to endorse their
application for a research grant. Mr. Ghioto lists the possible future
benefits to the City and the County which we agree are possible benefits,
however, any research grant received would not be applied to our project
in order to reduce the cost for the City or the County's study.
It is my understanding that the product developed, should Reynolds,
Smith & Hill receive the project, would be available to us and supplement
our study.
It is, therefore, recommended that the chairman sign a re -typed version
on the County's letterhead.
It
Neil Nelson, Asst. Co m�Admi�nistrator
REYNOLDS, SMITH AND HILLS
ARCHITECTS • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS
I NCO RPO RATE D
May 14, 1980
Mr. Cliff Suthard, P.E.
City Engineer
City of Vero Beach
1700 27th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Subject: Office of Water Research and Technology Proposal
Dear Cliff:
DIRECTORS
IVAN H. SMITH, F ALA
PAUL M. HUDDLESTON, A S. CE
JAMES F. SHIVLER, JR., N s P E
RALPH W. HEIM. I E F
WILLIAM J. WEBBER, AA A
ROBERT F. DARBY, A,IA
BOB ALLIGOOD, A.I.I E
.RICHARD A. MOE, A C.P.A.
BEN BUCALO, N s.P.E.
GEORGE M. BARSOM, sc.D..P.E
K N. HENDERSON. N.s.P.E
HOWARD S. BOCHIARDY, A.I.A
HENRY LUKE,A.s.C.E
HOWARD B. BOCHIARDY
VICE PRESIDENT
ORLANDO REGIONAL OFFICE
Attached is a copy of the draft letter that I promised. Please feel free to
modify it as you see fit.
The study that we made the proposal for will be an economic evaluation of
engineering design criteria as related to all of the regulatory criteria now
in effect in Florida. It is directed primarily at new development but would
be of use to the City and County in terms of:
o providing a sound engineering/economic basis for review of drainage
ordinances;
o potentially affecting State and regional criteria in the future; and,
o potentially reducing the long -run costs of 0 & M (i.e. taxes) on
primary water management facilities.
I am sorry to report that these funds may not be directly usable under our current
scope of work for the City and County. However, indirect benefits over the long
run could be substantial. Another benefit is associated with the fact that the
results of the study would be applicable directly to your geographic area, which
would provide the City/County with a head start if you wish to apply them.
Competition for these research funds is keen and the Universities usually get
priority. However, I feel that our chances would be improved by support from
local government.
I appreciate your interest and assistance in this matter and will be happy to
answer any questions that you or anyone else may have.
JUN 18 1980
Very truly yours,
REYNOLDS, SMITH AND HILLS
ARCHITECTS -ENGINEERS -PLANNERS, INC.
Rodney D. Ghioto, P.E.
Associate Vice President
Manager, Water Resources Division
Boa 43 - PAcE 829°
JUN 18 19 90 BOOK 43 ?AGE 83
.0
DRAFT
Office of Water Research and Technology
Attention: Research Proposal Center
U.S. Dpeartment of the Interior
18th and "C" Streets, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20240
Subject: Reynolds, Smith and Hills Proposal No. C 00046-2
dated December 28, 1979
Gentlemen:
Reynolds, Smith and Hills, AE&P, Inc. is under contract with Indian
River County to prepare a Master Drainage Plan geared toward solving
existing flooding problems, prevention of future problems, conservation
of our water resources, review of our water management ordinances,
and preservation of environmental quality. In doing so, RS&H has been
charged with coordination of its efforts with regulatory agencies to
insure that the end result is a plan which can be permitted and which
is cost-effective from an implementation standpoint.
We understand that the subject RS&H proposal before you now is a research
project that is directed toward evaluation of local, State and Federal
regulatory impacts on cost of Stormtirater Management Systems in Florida
for new developments. We are keenly interested in this subject because
we recognize the need to harness increasing housing costs and to reduce
operation and maintenance costs (i.e. taxes.) through well -do c'umented
regulation of these systems. The study which RS&H is currently doing
for the County will produce a large quantity of data, including aerial
photogrammetry,
which
can be used in
the work
proposed to you.
Therefore, we would
like
to express our
support
of Reynolds, Smith and
Hills on this proposal and ask that you look favorably upon it.
Very truly yours,
W.W. Siebert, Jr.
Chairman
Indian River County
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LYONS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DEESON, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE
LETTER TO THE OFFICE OF WATER RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY AS REQUESTED
BY REYNOLDS, SMITH AND HILLS.
ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS BROUGHT UP A PROPOSED AGREEMENT IN
REGARD TO MAINTENANCE OF THE FELLSMERE GRADE, WHICH WAS DISCUSSED AT
AN EARLIER MEETING, AND ABOUT WHICH THE BOARD HAD A FEW QUESTIONS.
HE REPORTED THAT BREVARD COUNTY DEFINITELY WILL JOIN IN THE AGREEMENT
AND A 30 DAY CANCELLATION CLAUSE WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE. IN REGARD TO
THE ESTIMATED COST, HE HAD A LETTER FROM THE OSCEOLA COUNTY ENGINEER,
AND LAST YEAR IT WAS $4,679. MATERIAL COSTS WOULD BE IN ADDITION TO
THIS AMOUNT. BREVARD COUNTY ALREADY HAS SIGNED THEIR AGREEMENT WITH
OSCEOLA COUNTY, AND THE SAME AGREEMENT HAS BEEN WRITTEN FOR INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY BY ATTORNEY SOVIERO OF ATTORNEY COLLINS' FIRM. THE
ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDED THAT THE BOARD SIGN THIS AGREEMENT. HE
NOTED THAT BREVARD COUNTY PAYS HALF OF THE COST OF THE ROAD IN THEIR
PART, AND WE PAY HALF OF THE COST OF MAINTAINING THE PORTION OF THE
ROAD THAT IS IN OUR COUNTY, AND THEN OSCEOLA, BREVARD AND INDIAN
RIVER PAY ONE THIRD EACH ON THE PART THAT IS IN OSCEOLA COUNTY. THE
CONTRACTS ARE THE SAME FOR ALL THREE COUNTIES.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE AGREEMENT WITH OSCEOLA
COUNTY RE MAINTENANCE OF FELLSMERE GRADE AS ABOVE AND AUTHORIZED
THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN.
95
JUK 18.198Q Boa 43 P-Xit, 1--
�. JUN 18 1900 BOOK
AGREEMENT
This Agreement entered into this 18th day of June
43- PQGi 832
0
1980, by and between the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida,
hereinafter referred to as "Indian River County"; and the BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF OSCEOLA COUNTY, a political subdivision
of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as "Osceola County"
WITNESSET1i:
WIiEREAS, Indian River County and Osceola County desire to
enter into an Agreement for the maintenance of certain roads
connecting said Counties; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County and Osceola County pursuant to the provisions of Florida
Statutes, Section 163.01 are empowered and authorized to enter into
contracts in the form of interlocal agreements to exercise any
power, privilege or authority which each Board might exercise
separately; and
WHEREAS, the provisions contained in this Agreement are
in the common interest of the residents of Indian River County,
Florida and Osceola County, Florida, respectively, and will contribute
to the maintenance and improvement of certain roads connecting said
Counties.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and
conditions hereinafter contained, it is mutually agreed between
the parties as follows:
1. That Indian River County hereby agrees to pay one-half
of the cost of maintenance, for material, labor, and equipment cost -
to maintain Fellsmere Grade from its junction with Six dile Road in
Section 28, Township 30 South, Range 34 East in Osceola County to
its terminus at both Brevard and Indian River Counties.
2. That Osceola County hereby agrees to pay one-half of the
cost of maintenance, for material, labor, and equipment cost to
maintain Fellsmere Grade from its junction with Six Nile Road in
Section 28, Township 30 South, Range 34 East in Osceola County to
its terminus at both Brevard and Indian River Counties.
M
L
3. That Indian Fiver County agrees to pay one-third of the
cost of maintenance, for material, labor, and equipment cost to
maintain the three and one-half (3 1/2) mile section of Fellsmere
Grade from its junction with Six rule Road to its terminius at
U.S. 441, immediately south of Kenansville.
4. That Osceola County agrees to pay one-third of the cost
of maintenance, for material, labor, and equipment cost to
maintain the three and one-half (3 1/2) mile section of Fellsmere
Grade from its junction with Six rule Road to its terminius at
U.S. 441, immediately south of Kenansville.
5. That Osceola County agrees that it will utilize its labor
for said equipment to maintain all of the above referenced roads in
a passable condition as per the present maintenance schedules.
Further, that Osceola County would not cause the existing roadway
elevations and cross-sections to be changed except as in the course
of routine maintenance.
6. That Osceola County shall be responsible for the work
performed under this Agreement and shall hold Indian River County
harmless and free from liability for any damages to same occurring
in the performance of this Agreement.
7. That within sixty (60) days following the execution of
this Agreement and on or before October 1 of this year and each
subsequent year, Osceola County will provide Indian River County with
a written maintenance schedule for the forthcoming year. Such
maintenance schedule shall contain an estimate of material, labor,
and equipment costs which is expected to be incurred by Osceola
County in maintaining the above referenced roads and said
schedule shall show the portion allocated to Indian River County.
In addition, said maintenance schedule shall show the frequency
of anticipated, expected and scheduled maintenance on the above
referenced roads.
8. On or before sixty (60) days prior to August 1, 1980 and
the 1st day of August of each year thereafter during the terms of
this Agreement, Indian River County will pay Osceola County, upon
-2-
JUN 18 1980
BOOK 43 PAGE834
completion of the maintenance contemplated by this Agreement and
the receipt by Indian River County of an itemized written statement
or invoice setting forth the actual material, labor and equipment
costs and allocation thereof to Indian River County, the amounts
agreed to above for maintaining the roads subject to this Agreement.
9. This Agreement shall become effective and commence when
proper notice of execution is given by the Parties hereto and the
initial term of this Agreement shall terminate September 30, 1980.
Upon expiration of the initial term or any renewal thereof, this
Agreement shall be automatically renewed for an additional period
of one (1) year commencing October 1 of the applicable year and
terminating September 30 of the following year. It is hereby
mutually Agreed and understood that either party to this Agreement
may terminate the same at any time, notwithstanding the one year
renewal periods, provided written notice of intention to terminate
this Agreement is given to the other party at least thirty (30) days
prior to the intended date of termination of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties herein have hereunto set
their hands and seals on the day and year first above written.
ATTEST:
Freda Wright--C.1e
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Ji ar W. , i )ert, G airman
OF OSCEOLA COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY;
Parris G. Daiel,-M—erk BillNewman, Criairman
(SEAL)
M i M
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
LYONS, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR
COMMISSIONERS LOY AND WODTKE TO ATTEND THE ANNUAL NATIONAL ASSOCIA-
TION OF COUNTIES CONFERENCE TO BE HELD AT LAS VEGAS, NEVADA, JUNE
29TH THROUGH JULY 3RD, 1980.
COMMISSIONER LYONS REPORTED THAT TOM MASON. CHAIRMAN OF
THE LIBRARY STUDY COMMITTEE, MADE A REPORT TO THE LIBRARY BOARD AT
THEIR LAST MEETING. THEIR REACTION WAS THAT THEY WOULD WANT A
COMMITTEE FORMED TO ADDRESS THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE LIBRARY
REPORT AND TO MAKE THEIR OWN REPORT AND THAT THERE WAS STATE MONEY
AVAILABLE FOR THIS PURPOSE, COMMISSIONER LYONS NOTED THAT THEY
ASKED HIM WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THE EVENT THE LIBRARY DOESN'T DO
ANYTHING AND THEY WANT ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR NEXT YEAR. HE STATED
THAT HE TOLD THEM HE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND ANY APPRECIABLE ADDITIONAL
FUNDING UNTIL THE TECHNOLOGICAL COMPETENCE OF THE LIBRARY WAS UP-
GRADED AS IN THE REPORT.
COMMISSIONER LYONS CONTINUED THAT, IN CONNECTION WITH
THE 911 COMMUNICATIONS PROGRAM, HE HAS SEEN A JOINT REPORT FROM THE
SHERIFF AND THE CHIEF OF POLICE, AND INTERESTINGLY, THE NEW AND
SOMEWHAT SOPHISTICATED 911 SYSTEM IS BY FAR THE CHEAPEST IN THAT
IT REQUIRES NO ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL IN ORDER FOR ANYONE TO CALL 911.
THE ADDRESS OF THE PERSON CALLING WOULD BE DISPLAYED ON THE SCREEN
BEFORE THE OPERATOR: THE PERSON CALLING COULD EVEN COLLAPSE AND THE
ADDRESS STILL WOULD BE THERE. HE COMMENTED THAT IT WAS LEFT TO HIM
TO SEE IF WE COULD OBTAIN ANY OF THE FUNDS ALLEGED TO BE AVAILABLE
FOR 911. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS HAS CHECKED AND HAS
FOUND THAT THE $163.000 AVAILABLE HAS BEEN COMMITTED. HOWEVER, IT
WAS SUGGESTED THAT SHOULD WE DECIDE WE WANT TO GET INTO THE 911
PROGRAM, THERE HAVE BEEN OCCASIONS WHEN THE STATE LEGISLATURE WAS
ABLE TO GET THE EQUIPMENT FUNDS THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE. THE MOST
SOPHISTICATED SYSTEM FIGURES OUT TO BE ABOUT $1.50 PER MONTH PER
PERSON SO THAT ANYONE COULD CALL FROM ANY TELEPHONE AND GET THE
EMERGENCY SERVICE. COMMISSIONER LYONS SUGGESTED THAT SOMETIME IN
THE NEXT MONTH WE ASK THE TELEPHONE COMPANY TO MAKE A PRESENTATION
&S
BOOK
43 PAGE 836
ON THE 911 SYSTEM WITH THEIR VIDEO TAPE, WHICH HE FELT WOULD BE
WORTHWHILE TO WATCH. HE NOTED THAT BOTH THE CITY POLICE AND THE
SHERIFF ARE VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN SEEING IF WE CANT GET THIS
SYSTEM SET UP AS IT WOULD GREATLY SIMPLIFY THEIR JOBS. THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT FEELS THE SAME WAY. HE REITERATED THAT IF IT IS ALL
RIGHT WITH THE BOARD, HE WOULD SCHEDULE THE PRESENTATION OF THE
VIDEO TAPE BY THE TELEPHONE COMPANY.
CHAIRMAN SIEBERT DIRECTED THAT HE GO AHEAD AND SCHEDULE THE
PRESENTATION, BUT EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT FINDING THE MONEY FOR ALL
THESE PROJECTS.
COMMISSIONER LYONS NEXT REPORTED THAT HE HAS HAD SEVERAL
MEETINGS WITH CITY COUNCILMAN GREGG IN CONNECTION WITH THE POSSI-
BILITY OF AN AGREEMENT PRIOR TO THE MAIN AGREEMENT IN REGARD TO
PROVIDING SEWER SERVICE TO INDIAN RIVER SHORES, THE NEW CONDOMINIUMS
THAT ARE BEING BUILT THERE, AND THEN ALSO TAKING OVER THE SEWAGE
FROM THE COUNTY PLANT, PLUS WHATEVER SEWAGE IS REQUIRED BETWEEN THE
SOUTH LIMITS OF THE TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES AND THE CITY OF
VERO BEACH. HE STATED THAT WHEN THEY WERE TALKING LAST FRIDAY, HE
FELT THEY HAD AN AGREEMENT FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES, NOT REALIZING
THAT IN THE MAIL THERE WAS ANOTHER LAWSUIT FROM INDIAN RIVER SHORES.
THE CITY COUNCIL APPARENTLY CONSIDERED THIS LAST NIGHT, AND THE
INDICATION RECEIVED FROM THE CITY CLERK AND MAYOR SCURLOCK TODAY
IS THAT THIS LAWSUIT PUTS A CLOUD ON THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION.
ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED -THAT THIS IS THE SAME LAWSUIT
THAT IS CONTINUING. IT IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPLAINT ALLOWED BY
THE COURT, BUT THE TIMING WAS NOT PROPITIOUS.
COMMISSIONER LYONS NOTED IN REGARD TO GETTING THE MAIN
AGREEMENT GOING, IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT THE COUNTY MIGHT WANT TO
CONSIDER A SPECIAL RATE FOR THE HOSPITAL, EQUAL TO THE CITY RATE THEY
NOW HAVE, AS A MEANS OF GETTING THE HOSPITAL TO COME TO THE COUNTY
WHEN THE TIME COMES. HE JUST PRESENTED THIS FOR THE BOARD TO BE
THINKING ABOUT AND NOTED THAT HE DID NOT BELIEVE THE HOSPITAL
100
PRESENTLY HAS AN INCENTIVE TO LEAVE THE CITY. WE ALSO NEED TO
KNOW WHAT THE ULTIMATE DISPOSAL OF THE MOORINGS PROBLEM IS, AND HE
DID NOT BELIEVE THIS HAS BEEN ADDRESSED IN ANY AGREEMENT.
ATTORNEY COLLINS BELIEVED THAT THIS HAS BEEN ADDRESSED
IN THE MANNER THAT, HOWEVER YOU LOOK AT IT, THERE IS NOT SUFFICIENT
CAPACITY: S0, THE MOORINGS WILL HAVE TO BE EXCLUDED BASICALLY ALONG
WITH THE INDIAN RIVER SHORES UTILITY COMPANY, WESTWARD UTILITY CO.
COMMISSIONER LYONS STATED HE JUST PRESENTED THIS FOR THE
BOARDS INFORMATION, AND HE WILL CONTINUE TO PURSUE THE MATTER.
COMMISSIONER DEESON REPORTED THAT HE HAD AN ITEM CONCERNING
THE SPEED LIMIT ON THE NORTHERN PORTION OF INDIAN RIVER DRIVE AS PER
THE FOLLOWING MEMO AND PETITION:
June 3, 1950
MEMORANDUM
FROM: Com-nissioner Don Deeson
TO: Board of County Commissioners
I am submitting the attached petition dated
March 15, 1980 along with other information and
will request that the commission consider reducing
the speed limit from its current 45 mph to 35 mph
on the northern portion of Indian River Drive which
involves 1.7 miles and also the southern portion
which is .6 mile.
You will note that the recommendation from the
Sheriff Department is that the speed limit remian
45 mph on the northern portion, izowever, I feel
quite strongly that for the safety and well being
of the residents along this road way, the speed
limit should be reduced to 35 mph.
101 a
JUN 1 � 190 ���c PA�'
1
SUN 181980: .
t
a�a 43 PAGES
March 15, 1980
We the residents and property owners along Indian River
Drive in Sebastian and Roseland, do here by petition the
Board of County Coiu dasioners to lower the speed limit on
the above mentioned highway to 35 MPH, for the distance from
J. T. Tho:agson's at the South end to Pete's Reel Inn at its
North end where this road variously known as, old U. S. N 1,
Old Dixie Highway, and more currently as Indian River Drive,,
merges with the "New' U. S. ,1, just below the Sebastian
...Kiver Bridge. f Also, we respectf4ly• request that "Speed +
Bumps" be added to the North end a6i they were recently �.
installed on the South end.'
e
' Signed,
M •
James T. Fitzgera - Indians River Drive, Box 421-M
SIL
OA -
left
%�I ..y h lir :..7q'4 'i4 i ?• S _3 t ,,-. ti-'
..� .., .•.. .. .. . ... .. 4. .. .v '•. r 9..a,-wV.1.1.V 1lw.l:G'Shh.:4'Ci�:.:...
,t
1.
t
a�a 43 PAGES
March 15, 1980
We the residents and property owners along Indian River
Drive in Sebastian and Roseland, do here by petition the
Board of County Coiu dasioners to lower the speed limit on
the above mentioned highway to 35 MPH, for the distance from
J. T. Tho:agson's at the South end to Pete's Reel Inn at its
North end where this road variously known as, old U. S. N 1,
Old Dixie Highway, and more currently as Indian River Drive,,
merges with the "New' U. S. ,1, just below the Sebastian
...Kiver Bridge. f Also, we respectf4ly• request that "Speed +
Bumps" be added to the North end a6i they were recently �.
installed on the South end.'
e
' Signed,
M •
James T. Fitzgera - Indians River Drive, Box 421-M
SIL
OA -
left
%�I ..y h lir :..7q'4 'i4 i ?• S _3 t ,,-. ti-'
..� .., .•.. .. .. . ... .. 4. .. .v '•. r 9..a,-wV.1.1.V 1lw.l:G'Shh.:4'Ci�:.:...
'7�. oIGP
MOK 43 PAGE 839
JUN 18 1980
JUN 18 19 80 wax ' 43PAGE 840
COMMISSIONER DEESON FELT IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE
PORTION OF INDIAN RIVER DRIVE, WHICH IS IN THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN,
IS CURRENTLY 35 MPH, THE SPEED LIMIT SHOULD BE LOWERED ON BOTH THE
NORTH AND SOUTH ENDS IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA SO THAT IT IS 35 MPH
ALL THE WAY, EVEN THOUGH THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT FELT THE PRESENT
LIMIT IS A SAFE SPEED. HE ALSO WENT ALONG WITH THE PETITIONERS'
RECOMMENDATION THAT RUMBLE STRIPS BE ADDED ON THE NORTH END.
COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED IF HE FELT BUMPER STRIPS WERE REALLY
NECESSARY. SHE NOTED THAT SHE HAD MIXED EMOTIONS ON THESE AND HAS
SEEN CARS ACTUALLY CROSS OVER INTO THE OTHER LANE TO AVOID THEM.
COMMISSIONER DEESON AGREED THAT HE PERSONALLY DOESN'T LIKE
THEM AND WOULD FEEL THE 35 MPH SPEED LIMIT SHOULD HELP ALLEVIATE THE
SITUATION.
ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEESON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
Loy, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO REDUCE THE SPEED LIMIT ON THE
NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN PORTIONS OF INDIAN RIVER DRIVE IN THE UNINCOR-
PORATED AREA AROUND THE CITY OF SEBASTIAN TO 35 MPH AS REQUESTED BY
THE PETITIONERS.
PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND STATED
THAT ATTORNEY COLLINS WOULD LIKE ASSISTANCE FROM THE COMMISSION AS
TO WHAT THEIR INTENT IS REGARDING THE SCOPE OF WORK IN THE AGREEMENT
FOR A CONSULTANT FOR THE MASTER PLAN, IS IT INTENDED THAT THE
CONSULTANT BE A DRAFTER TO BE INVOLVED IN PUTTING TOGETHER THE PLAN,
OR DOES THE BOARD ENVISION ALL THAT TO BE DONE BY THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ASKING THE CONSULTANTS
QUESTIONS THAT MAY ARISE AND THE CONSULTANT GIVING FEEDBACK TO THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT AFTER REVIEW?
MR. REVER CONTINUED THAT WHEN HE FIRST GOT INTO THIS, HE
ENVISIONED THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WOULD CONTINUE TO DO THE PLAN
BECAUSE THE SHIFT OF ALL THE KNOWLEDGE FROM OUR BODY TO THE CONSULTANT
WOULD TAKE A GOOD DEAL OF TIME, AND WE COULD CONTINUE WITH THEIR
COMMENT AND CRITICISM. THEIR PRIMARY FOCUS WOULD BE ON CREATING AND
ADVISING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TOTAL PACKAGE. MR. REVER STATED
104
THAT HE NOW SEES EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES - THEY HAVE NOT BEEN
ABLE TO ADD ANOTHER PERSON TO THEIR STAFF AS ANTICIPATED BECAUSE
THEY HAVE NOT FOUND QUALIFIED PEOPLE; SO,THEIR STAFF HAS NOT BEEN
RELIEVED ANY. SECONDLY, THE PROBLEM OF SPACE. HE HAS FOUND THAT
THE ATMOSPHERE IN WHICH THE STAFF WORKS RIGHT NOW IS NOT CONDUCIVE
TO COMPLETING THE PLAN - THERE ARE PEOPLE CONSTANTLY COMING THROUGH -
MEETINGS BEING HELD - IT IS DISRUPTIVE. THEREFORE, HE WOULD LIKE TO
REVISE THE SCOPE OF THE AGREEMENT WITH THE CONSULTANTS TO ENCOMPASS
MORE DIRECT ASSISTANCE, THOUGH HE FEELS IT IS THE STAFF WHO SHOULD
MAKE THE PRIMARY DEVELOPMENT.
COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED IF HE WAS SAYING THAT WE DONT HAVE
THE STAFF OR THE SPACE TO DO THIS JOB.
MR. REVER STATED THAT THEY DO HAVE THE STAFF, BUT BECAUSE
THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO HIRE ANOTHER PERSON AND BECAUSE OF THE
WORK ATMOSPHERE, IF THEY COULD GET A LITTLE MORE HELP ON DIRECT
SERVICES, IT WOULD HELP. HE FULLY BELIEVED THAT THEY CAN DEVELOP THE
PLAN, BUT IT IS JUST THAT IT HAS BEEN DECIDED WE WANT TO DO THE
WHOLE PACKAGE AT ONE TIME. HE FELT POSSIBLY THEY COULD REARRANGE
THEIR OFFICE SPACE TO FACILITATE A BETTER WORKING ATMOSPHERE.
COMMISSIONER Loy STATED THAT SHE WAS NOT ANXIOUS TO HIRE
THIS TYPE OF CONSULTANT TO DO THE NITTY GRITTY WORK, AND CHAIRMAN
SIEBERT NOTED THAT THE REASON HE QUESTIONED THE SCOPE OF SERVICE WAS
BECAUSE IT SEEMS AS IF IT IS MOSTLY TECHNICIAN S WORK.
MR. REVER STATED THAT HE MAINLY WANTED THE CONSULTANTS TO
WORK ON THE ORDINANCES TO FIT THE PLAN AND TO ANALYZE THE PLAN AS IT
TAKES SHAPE. HE FELT MOST OF THE WORK IS IN THE ORDINANCES. THE
TECHNICIAN S WORK WOULD BE GATHERING DATA, AND HE BELIEVED THEY ARE
AT THE HEART OF THAT NOW.
ATTORNEY COLLINS REMARKED THAT THE CHAIRMAN OR VICE CHAIRMAN
HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT, BUT THE QUESTION INVOLVES
THE SCOPE OF WORK AND WHETHER IT IS SATISFACTORY TO THE COMMISSION.
HE STATED THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THE AGREEMENT WITH
THE CONSULTANTS AND FEELS THAT IT IS LEGALLY SUFFICIENT.
105
JUN 181980 Fag 43 PAGE 841
1980 BOOK 43 PACE X42
COMMISSIONER Loy STATED THAT THE BOARD IS RELYING HEAVILY
ON THE PLANNING DIRECTOR`S RECOMMENDATIONS.
RESOLUTION N0. 80-19 AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LEASE
WITH ST. FRANCIS MANOR, SAID AMENDMENT, AND RELEASE OF EASEMENT FROM
ST. FRANCIS MANOR ARE HEREBY MADE A PART OF THE MINUTES AS APPROVED
AT THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 6, 1980.
LAW OFFICES
VOCELLE,
GALLAGHER
BLOCK
P. 0. 00Y I900
WIRD RIACK. FLORIDA
32960
M
RESOLU'T'ION 80-19
MUMS, the
Board of County
Commissioners
of Indian
River County, Florida,
did on the 8th
day of August,
1973,
execute a Ninety -Nine Year Lease to St. Francis Manor of Vero
Beach, Florida, Inc., a Florida non-profit corporation, covering
certain lands therein described at and for a rental of One
Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($1,000.00) per year for the duration
of said Lease, beginning on the 1st day of September, 1973, and
extending for a period of ninety-nine years thereafter; and
WHEREAS, St. Francis Manor of Vero Beach, Florida, Inc.'
in expanding its facilities for retired people with limited means
has found it advisable to acquire additional lands owned by
Indian River County, Florida, contiguous and adjacent to the
lands described in said original Lease; and
WIIEREAS, it appears to the Board of County Commissioner)
of Indian River County, Florida, that it is in the public
interest for said additional lands to he included in said Lease;
NOW, THERLFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Hoard of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the followinc
described lands located in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit:
PARCEL "A": From the Northwest corner of
Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter
of Section 2, Township 33 South, Range 39
East, run South 89° 05' 40" East 80 feet;
thence South 0° 36' 20" West 75 feet; thence
South 890 05' 40" East 375 feet to the point
of beginning of the parcel to he herein described;
from point of beginning continue South 890 05' 40"
East 50 feet; thence South 0° 26' 20" West 62.65
feet; thence South 68° 29' 40" East 20.92 feet;
thence 370 09' 40" East 48.30 feet; thence South
6' 42' 40" East 53.75 feet; thence South 220 04'
20" West 77.40 feet; thence South 58° 14' 20"
West 67.60 feet; thence South 79° 29' 20" West
20.33 feet; thence North 00 26' 20" East 274
feet to point of beginning. All in Section 2,
Township 33 South, Range 39 East, Indian River
County, Florida, containing 0.47 acres more or
less.
PARCEL "B": From the Northwest corner of
Sciut�►west Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of
Section 2, Township 33 South, Range 39 East,
run South 890 05' 40" East 80 feet; thence
South 00 26' 20" West 75 feet; thence South
3 'PAGE
I� JUN 18 1900 BOOK . 43 PACE 841
89° 05' 40" East 375 feet; thence South
00 26' 20" West 299 feet to point of beginning;,'
thence South 89° 22' 00" East 30 feet; thence
South 0° 26' 20" West 181 feet; thence North
89° 22' 00" West 30 feet; thence North 0° 26'
20"East. 181 feet to point of beginning. All in
Section 2, Township 33 South, Range 39 East,
Indian River County, Florida, containing 0.13
acres more or less;
be and the same are Hereby added to and shall become a part of
the premises leased to said St. Francis Manor of Vero Beach,
Florida, Inc., subject to all of the terms and conditions of
said original Lease and that said original Lease shall be
amended and modified by the addition of said above-described
lands as a part of the leased premises, and that the Chairman of
this Board is hereby authorized and empowered in the name of and
on behalf of this Board to execute to the said St. Francis Manor
of Vero Beach, Florida, Inc. an Amendment and Modification of
said original Lease in accordance with this Resolution.
Attest:h
Clerk
LAW OFFICES
VOCELLE,
GALLAGHER
b
BLOCK
►. 0. Box 11110
SW0 /EACH, FLORIDA
971&0
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
` 1
By:
-2-
LAW OFFICES
VOCELLE,
GALLAGHER
A
BLOCK
.. 0. •0z 11100
VERO BEACH. FLORIDA
31960
AMENDMENT AND MODIFICATION OF
NINETY-NINE YEAR LEASE
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this 4 day of
February,1980, by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a
political subdivision of the State of Florida, by and through
its Hoard of County Commissioners, hereinafter referred to as the
Lessor, and ST. FRANCIS MANOR OF VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, INC., a
Florida non-profit corporation, hereinafter referred to as the
Lessee;
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, on the 8th day of August, 1973, the Lessor
did execute a Ninety -Nine Year Lease to the Lessee covering
certain lands therein described, which Lease has been duly
recorded in the public records of Indian River County, Florida,
in Official Record Book 516, at page 305;' and
WHEREAS, the Lessor and the Lessee desire to execute
an amendment to and a modification of said Lease in the manner
hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, the execution of this Amendment and Modifica-
tion his been duly authorized by Resolution adopted by the
Lessor and accepted by the Lessee;
NOW, TIIEREFORE, upon the considerations set forth in
said original Lease, .said Le,lse is hereby al"t2i►ded and muaitied
so as to include within its provisions the following -described
lands situate in Indian River County, Florida, adjoining and
contiguous to the lands described in the original Lease, which
said additional lands are more fully described as follows:
PARCEL "A": From the Northwest coiner of
Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of
Section 2, Township 33 South, Range 39 East,
run South 89° 05' 40" East 80 feet; thence South
0° 36' 20" West 75 Feet; thence South 89° 05' 40"
East 375 feet to the point of beginning of the
parcel to be herein described; from point of
beginning continue South 89° 05' 40" East 50 feet;
thence South 0° 26' 20" West 62.65 feet; thence
South 680 29' 40" East 20.92 feet; thence South
37° 09' 40" East 48.30 feet; thence South 60 42' 40"
East 53.75 feet; thence South 22° 04' 20" West
BOOK 43 • PAA45
LAW OFFICES
VOCELLE,
GALLAGHER
BLOCK
r. 0. tax 1900
'E40 BEACH, FLORIDA
32960
mox 43 PAGE
77.40 feet; thence South 58° 14' 20" West 67.60
feet; thence South 790 29' 20" West 20.33 feet;
thence North 01 26' 20" East 274 feet to point
of beginning. All in Section 2, Township 33
South, Range 39 East, Indian River County,
Florida, containing 0.47 acres more or less.
PARCEL "B": From the Northwest corner of
Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of
Section 2, Township 33 South, Range 39 East, run
South 890 05' 40" East 80 feet; thence South
0° 26' 20" West 75 feet; thence South 89° 05' 40"
East 375 feet; thence South 0" 26' 20" West 299
feet to point of beginning; thence South 89° 22'
00" East 30 feet; thence South 0" 26' 20" West
181 feet; thence North 891 22' 00" West 30 feet;
thence North 00 26' 20" East 181 feet to point
of beginning. All in Section 2, Township 33 South,
Range 39 East, Indian River County, Florida,
containing 0.13 acres more or less..
This Amendment and Modification is subject to all of
the terms and conditions of the original Lease executed on
August 8, 1973, including the term of said Lease and the rentals
therein required to be paid as well as all,of the other condi-
tions therein contained, it being the sole purpose and intent
of this Amendment and Modification to include in the terms of
said original Lease the lands liereinabove described so that said
original Lease shall include the lands originally described therein
and the lands hereinabovc described, so that the same shall
constitute one Lease with all the terms and conditions as
contained in the original Lease dated August 8, 1973.
IN WITNESS'WHEREOF, the Lessor and the Lessee have
hereunto, by their respective authorized representatives, set
their hands and seals this - day of June 1980.
In the presence of:
I1 G_Z IA-Z.a N_
FXomto ard of County
oners of Indian
River County, Florida
L _44 :0 C -
As to .St. Francis Manor of
Vero Beach, Florida, Inc.
(Corporate Seal)
LESSOR:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER CO NT ,'l FLORI
i
By
ai rm:�ci
Attests -
LESSEE:
ST. FRANCIS MANOR OF VERO.-=BEACII
FLORIDAINC.
Frank L Zorc,---Pre ens
Attest '0(il
Mary S va ing Secretary
=2-
a
RELEASE OF EASEMENT
THIS RELEASE OF EASEMENT, executed this 23rd day
of June , 1980, by ST. FRANCIS MANOR OF VERO BEACH,
FLORIDA, INC., a Florida non-profit corporation, first party,
to INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of
the State of 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 party of the
second part, 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
r;
,.'in the County of Indian River, State of Florida, to -wit:
From the NW corner of the SWC of the SE4 of
Section 2, Township 33 South, Range 39 East,
run East a distance of 80 feet, thence South
a distance of 75 feet, thence East a distance
of 375 feet to the Point of Beginning, from
said Point of Beginning run East a distance of
100 feet, thence South a distance of 270 feet,
thence West a distance of 100 feet, thence
North to the Point of Beginning.
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 and
have affixed its corporate seal thereto on the date first above
written.
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presence of:
-
�CC'�:l?!
As to both parties ;
1
JUN 181980
ST. FRANCIS MANOR OF
BEACH, F;4RIDA, INC,,
By
Fr - . orc,
Attest
Mary Sily , Sec tary
(Corporate Seal)
Boo. 43 PAGE 847
STATE OF FLORIDA )
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER )
wog :43 wf' 848
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an
officer duly authorized in the State and County aforesaid
to take acknowledgments, personally appeared FRANK L. ZORC,
and MARY SILVA; well known to me to be the President and
Secretary, respectively, of the corporation named as the
party of the first part in the foregoing Release of Easement,
and they severally acknowledged executing the same in the
presence of two subscribing witnesses freely and voluntarily
under authority duly vested in them by said corporation, and
that the seal affixed thereto is the true corporate seal of
said corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and
State last aforesaid, this 23rd day of - June , 1980.
i �� cam. � � • .�'G�l �2��I .
Wo'ta* Public, State of -Florida
A Large. My Commission Expires:
January 2, 1981.
-2-
- M M
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. 66177 - 66308 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 4:50 O'CLOCK P.M.
ATTEST:
r t
CLERK CHA RMAN
113
JUN 181980
moK :- 43 ?'A� $4-9