Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1/14/1981
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 14, 1981 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, .JANUARY 14, 1981, AT 8:30 O.'CLOC.K.A...M.. PRESENT WERE PATRICK B. LYONS, CHAIRMAN; WILLIAM C. WODTKE, .JR., VICE CHAIRMAN; DICK BIRD; AND DON C. SCURLOCK, JR. ALFRED GROVER FLETCHER ARRIVED AT THE MEETING AT 8:45 O'CLOCK A.M. ALSO PRESENT WERE NEIL A. NELSON, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR,' L.S. "TOMMY" THOMAS, INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR; GEORGE G, COLLINS, .JR., ATTORNEY TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; JEFFREY K. BARTON, FINANCE DIRECTOR; AND VIRGINIA HARGREAVES AND JANICE CALDWELL, DEPUTY CLERKS. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER. t 'COMMISSIONER WODTKE LED THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, AND REVEREND 0► R. FOSTER, PASTOR OF THE TABERNACLE BAPTIST CHURCH, GAVE THE INVOCATION. APPROVAL OF MINUTES THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 17, 1980. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 17, 1980, AS WRITTEN, ADDITIONS TO AGENDA THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA, FINANCE DIRECTOR BARTON REQUESTED ADDING AN ITEM CONCERNING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES; AND AN ITEM CONCERNING A RESOLUTION FOR A CHECK WRITER. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK REQUESTED ADDING APPROVAL OF TWO SURETY BONDS FOR THE MOSQUITO CONTROL DISTRICT. ` ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REQUESTED ADDING AN ITEM REGARDING DELIVERY OF MUCK TO THE SEBASTIAN RIVER SCHOOL SITE, JAN 141991 soon 45 579' r JAN 141981 Boa. 45 AGE 580 CHAIRMAN LYONS REQUESTED ADDING ITEMS 3, 4, 5 AND 15 LISTED IN THE INFORMATION MATERIAL. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED ADDING THE EMERGENCY ITEMS LISTED ABOVE. CLERKS AGENDA DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT ITEM 6 REGARDING THE DEPUTIES APPOINTED BY SHERIFF JOYCE; ITEM 2 REGARDING THE RADIO EQUIPMENT REQUESTED BY SHERIFF DOBECK; THE REPORT ON THE JAIL; AND THE DEPUTY SHERIFFS BLANKET SURETY BOND, INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS ADVISED THAT SHERIFF DOBECK WOULD BE AT THE MEETING SHORTLY, AND THE BOARD DECIDED TO DISCUSS THOSE MATTERS WHEN HE ARRIVED. DISCUSSION ENSUED ABOUT ITEM 4 REGARDING THE RENEWAL OF RESOLUTION 77-114 CONCERNING THE VARIOUS ACCOUNTS FOR WHICH THE CLERK IS RESPONSIBLE. FINANCE DIRECTOR BARTON EXPLAINED THAT WHEN THE CLERK S ACCOUNTS ARE AUDITED, THE AUDITORS WANT ALL OF HER ACCOUNTS TOGETHER. HE ADDED THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION IS A HOUSEKEEPING MATTER WHICH SHOULD BE RENEWED ANNUALLY TO REAFFIRM THE RESOLUTION. IT WAS J DETERMINED THAT IF THIS PROCEDURE WERE NOT APPROPRIATE, THE AUDITORS f WOULD HAVE ADVISED THE CLERK OF THE MATTER, ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED ABOUT THE PASSAGE OF A RECENT BILL WHERE COUNTIES HAVE THE RIGHT TO FILE LIENS AGAINST INDIGENT DEFENDANTS, AND IT WOULD BE THE CLERKS RESPONSIBILITY TO FILL OUT THE LIEN FORMS AND SEE THAT THE JUDGE SIGNS THEM, ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY. CLERK OF THE COURT FREDA WRIGHT STATED THAT SHE UNDERSTOOD THE PROCEDURE, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO CARRY A CONCEALED FIREARM FOR FRANK L. CLAVELIN. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED TAX SALE CERTIFICATE N0. 27 FOR SADIE GUNDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $10.12, AND N0, 804 FOR VIRGINIA M. LLOYD IN THE AMOUNT OF $26.65. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 8I-2 REGARDING THE CLERKS BUDGET. JAN 141981 F BODY, 3 5 FAcE581 Y JAN 14198,1 s. Resolution No. 81-2 WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian " River County, Florida, and the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida, desire to enter into an Agreement as provided by Florida Statute 145.022 (1975); and WHEREAS, an interpretation of Chapter 145 has been made by the Attorney General, State of Florida (AGO 161-151 dated September 25, 1961); and WHEREAS, the Clerk will turn over to the Board of County Commissioners without exception all fees and commissions earned in offices under her jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, the Board will in turn act upon a Clerk's budget establishing all reasonable and necessary expenses to be incurred by the Clerk in the operation of offices under her juris- diction, including the Clerk's salary as provided in Chapter 145, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the Board shall distribute to the Clerk ap- proved budgeted funds in such monthly installments as shall be mutually satisfactory to the parties. WHEREAS, the Clerk agrees to supply any and all infor- mation requested by the Board in the form requested by the Board, including all budgetary information and periodic reports as may be requested; and WHEREAS, all prior resolutions and agreements between the Clerk and the Board of County Commissioners based on Florida Statute 145.022 shall be deemed to be superseded by this Resolution; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS and the CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, That: 1. All prior Resolutions between the Clerk and the Board involving Florida Statute 145.022 are superseded by this Resolution. 2. The Clerk has prepared and submitted to the Board a budget for the office of the Clerk and the Board has approved that budget for the budget year 1980-81. 3. The Board hereby guarantees and appropriates a salary to the Clerk in an amount 4ow specified by law as is set forth in.the 4pproved budget. 1 4. The Clerk will turn over to the Board all fees collected by her office. 5. The Board will pay to the Clerk all budget approved , reasonable and necessary expenses incurred by the Clerk in per- forming the duties of that office. 6. The Board will pay the funds to the Clerk in monthly installments. 7. The Clerk will perform all of the duties,of the office of Clerk of the Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida, prescribed by the Constitution and Laws of the State of Florida, which duties presently include Clerk of the Court Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners, Auditor, Recorder and Custodian of all county funds, In the performance of these du- ties, the Clerk will furnish to the Board of County Commissioners all information requested in the form requested by the Board. 8. The Clerk shall keep two separate sets of books of accounts, one for the functions of the Board and another for all other functions of the office of the Clerk. 9. This Resolution shall terminate on the expiration of the budget year 1980-81. However, if the Clerk submits a budget to the Board and requests a guaranteed and appropriated salary and agrees to turn over all fees collected by the Clerk to the Board, the Board may, with the concurrence of the Clerk, con- tinue the terms of this Resolution for another budget year. -2- JAN 14 1981 Baas 45 WE JA1011419V BOX 45 PACE584. This Resolution shall become effective as of the 14th day of January 1981 W Attest: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF i INDIAN P,2 -WR COUNTY, FLORIDA LOA Freda Wright, C11 I CONCUR. Chairman Freda Wright, Clerk of the Circuit Court M THE FOLLOWING REPORTS WERE RECEIVED AND PLACED ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK: REPORT OF CONVICTIONS, MONTH OF DECEMBER,.1980 INSPECTION REPORT OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JAIL DATED NOVEMBER 19, 1980 THE'BOARD NEXT DISCUSSED THE SURETY BONDS FOR K. D. HEDIN AND HELEN M. GLENN OF THE MOSQUITO CONTROL DISTRICT. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE SURETY BONDS FOR K. D. HEDIN AND HELEN M. GLENN OF THE MOSQUITO CONTROL DISTRICT, AND AUTHORIZED THE APPROPRIATE SIGNATURES. 7 a �oo� 45: FAcE 585 .. JAN 141981 No�c 45. p4ri,586.. I IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THIS BOND BE EXECUTED AND OUALIFICATION PAPERS COMPLETED WITHIN SIXTY DAYS AFTER ELECTION STATE OF FLORIDA 1 - � LB 659394 Colintyof ................................................ } .• l V KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That We, � �i :`>.............. ............ ..._....._....................._.........._.::..._. Florida Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company asprincipal, and...............__..........................,................................................................................................................................................_..........w.............__...._......_.._..... .. .......................................................... ..... as stireties are held and firmly bound unto the Covernor of flic State of Florida, and his snceessors in office, 1, yp,Thous}ncl.;+nd C(1�1U(l------- Dol7,ars ill tile sllr,t of. ....`l..d®4...,.. ........................ ........................................ .....»........................................_.......... lawful money, for the payrnent whereof, well and trul;, to be Ina(le, �,%v do bind ourselves, our and each of our heirs, executors and administrators, jointly and ss,N c•rally, firmly by these presents. Sealed with our seals, and dated this _........ 121:.}l. day of ............................ 1_i3nuarY....... ................ _........................ ... ........ 19......$.1..... The condition of the above obligation is such, That whereas, the above bounden ... ............. _........ ,,.................................... ., j �.. , 1�: ,>. .......................................... was, on the day of November, A. D. 19_. x. elected ..1,!:_ ::a ....... fx .:.........�./....... .: ..........r 1...+'.i. ............ J.� .�. '�.`� h»..._. _ .......... .° .�:.F-._.. �: .. `?. "'.1. ....................... . �f . �. ......... ''..�:.L'..! .. C'J,'„..;' to hold his office for the terns of four years from the first Tuesday after the first Monday in January, A. D. 19.... 81.....and until his successor is qualified accordiuL� to the Constitution and laws of this State. Now, therefore, if the said _.._ . _ _ 1...'.... . �...r C: ! ` P.'::._...._..._ ._ .._.... - - .--..- . -..-. shall faithfully ... perform the duties of his said office, as provided by law, tl.cn this obligation to be void, else to be and remain in full force and virtue. Si,ned, sealed and delivered in presence of us: r 1 ±r..... ............ f.._ 4.�(a y� �e......... .....,..,,,/.. .._.............. t r t ' kr: Principal A71.A r��T..ii-�l'rsL/IUJJI��i�..�1.Stic�XiG.t....�51• _',,.,.,...,.......... ... ................... »............................................. J.l:. ........................................ Surety ......................... _.._...._.............. ...... _.... _.... _..... .......... _...._.......... _._............................... ../.._ The above bond is approved this ....... f . .... day of .............. ........................ :........ ..... _............................... 19......(.,J.... Chairman of the rd of Coun Commissioners. Tl,:, al •uve bond is approved this County Commissioners. dayof ....._.... _.:,r' ....._........:.::.........._._ .._.____ y,.._...-._.. 19._` ;,� .... _.. {, .._. C� t 14 f i �f`...'J� l .Y :Lr.:. c, '• ............... .. _ G)rnptroilcr. eiec-21 - 1_-:;-64- P. O. BOX 730 GAINESVILLE. FLORIDA 32602 :RTIFIED COPY ).65-100 POWER OF ATTORNEY Know aII Men by these Presents: That THE FLORIDA FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, a ,poretion duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, and having its pnncipai office in Tht City of —inessvill9, Florida, hath made, constituted and appointed, and does by these presents make and constitute and aptnoint ROYCE CHESSER and/or J. R. TAYLOR its true and lawful Attorney4n-Fact, to make, execute, seal and deliver for and on its behalf as suretyrany and all bonds o, undertakings required in amounts not exceeding TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($250,000,00) and to certify copies of this Power of Attorney under seal of said Company, and the execution of such bonds or undertakings in pursuance of these presents, shall be binding upon said Company as fully and amply, to all intents and purposes, as if such bonds were signed by the President, sealed with the common seal of the Company, and duly attested by its Secretary, hereby ratifying and confirming all the acts of said Attomey-in-Fact pursuant to the power herein given. This Power of Attorney is made and executed pursuant to and by authority of the following resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors of The FLORIDA FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY at a meeting duly called and held on the 16th day of June, 1965. Resolved: That the President, or any Vice President, may execute for and in behalf of the Company any and all bonds, reeognizances, contracts of indemnity, and all other writings obligatory in the nature thereof, the same to be attested when necessary and the seal of the Company affixed thereto by the Secretary, or any Assistant Secretary, and that the President, or any Vice President, may appoint and authorize an Attorney -in -Fact to execute on behalf of the Company any and all such instruments and to affix the seal of the Company thereto; and that the President, or any Vice Preside. -t. may at any time remove any such Attornayin-Fact and revoke all power and authority given to any such Attorney in -Fact. Resolved: That Attorneys -in -Fact may be given full power and authority to execute for and in the name and on behalf of the Company any and all bonds, recognizances, contracts of indemnity, and all other writings obligatory in the nature thereof, and any such instrument executed by any such Attorney -in -Fact shall be as binding upon the Company as if signed by the President and sealed and attested by the Secretary, and, further, Attorneys -in -Fact are hereby authorized to verify any affidavit required to be attached to bonds, focognnzances, contracts of indemnity, and all other writings obligatory in the nature thereof, and are, also, authorized and empowered to certify to a copy of any of the by of the Company as well as any resolution of the Directors having to do with the execution of bonds, recognizances, contracts of indemnity, and to certify copies of the Power of Attorney and all other writings obligatory in the nature thereof, or with regard to the powers of any of the officers of the Company or of Attorneys -in -Fact. In Witness Whereof, FLORIDA FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, has caused these presents to be signed by its President and its corporate seal to be hereto alf, iked, duly attested by its Secretary on this ! t1. THE FLORIDA FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY (SEAL) /v By %A;� )'d4ent *W— Attest Secretary 1.2.890 (REV.11i78) JAN 14 1981 aoax 45. PAct 58S, IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THIS BOND BE EXECUTED AND QUALIFICATION PAPERS COMPLETED WITHIN SIXTY DAYS AFTER ELECTION STATE OF FLORIDA Countyof . ....Indian . ...................Ri...........ver. . .... . .......... . . ............. . ...................... . ..... KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That N17e . ............ M. G.1.,e.n.n ...... . ... . ................ as principal, and .... . ........... Undnnktilnsuranc.c C.o. ............................ ............................ . ...................... . .......... as sureties art, held and firmly bound unto the Governor of the State of Florida, and his successors in office, in the stem of ..... . ............ Two Thousand & 00/100 -------------------------------------- ............................ . .. . . .................................. . .... .......................................... I ....................... ........................... . . .... .................... lawful money, for the payment whereof, well and truly to be made. we do bind ourselves, our and each of our heirs, executors and administrators, jointly and svvcrally, firmly by these presents. Scaled with our seals, and dated this 151h &IN, of Dec.!mbQ.r ...................................................................... 19.....$x....... The condition of the above obligation is such, That whereas, the bounden ......................................................... ......................... Helen M ......... G . 1 e . n .. n ......................................................... ..................................................... was, on the ..........4th... .......... day of November, soMember of the Board of Commissioners of Indian River A. 1). 19 ................... elected I .................................. I ................... I ................. .............................. 1 1. ............. .............. . ........................... MosQuito Control District .. ................... . ........ I ................ . .......... .... . ............... I ...................... . .. . ... . ............................................................................................ .................. . . ..................................... to hold his office for the term of four years from the first Tiiesday after the first Monday in January, A. D. F) 8! ., an(] until his siiccvssor is qualified according to the Constitution and laws of this State. Nov, therefore, if the said Helen M. Glenn . ........... shall faithfully ... . . ................................ . ................... . ......... . ... .... ...... perform the duties of his said office, as provided by law, then this obligation to be void, else to be and remain in full force and virtue. Signed, sealed and delivered in presence of us: .... . ..... .......... ........... ........ . ... A -t' ... . ............... Principal ........... ............................ ............ ........... . . ... . .. ....................................................... .... ........ ............................ .......... ... ........ .............. .................... Cincinnati Insurance Co. .......... ... I ........ . . .............. ....... ........ " ........................... . . Attorney in Fac Surety elec-21 11-5-64 The above bond is approvud this /!� day of 19...1'...f'..... Chairman of the Boar'' 'Vnty Commissioners. ,a ............ .......... County Commissioners. The above bond is approved thk . .. .......... . .......... day 014 ......... .............."/.........__........._...q........ . 19., ....... .. . ................ Comptroller. ctnc:nnatl. Uhio Power of-AI1uri:cy r M KNOW ALL NIEN BY THEM PRESENTS: Th.1t HIE CINCINNATI INSURANCE COMPANY, a cotpo,tatl"ll organized under the laws of the State of Ohio, and having its principal till -ice in the City of Cincinnati, Ohio, dors hereby constitute and appoint Warren T. Zetich, Jr. of Vero Beach, Florida its itue and iawfol Attorneys)-ut-Fact to sign, execute, seal and deliver un its behalf as Surety, and as It,. act and deed, any and all bunds, policies, undertakings, or other like instruments, as follows: Any such obligations in the United ��tZtes, up to One hundred fifty thousand and no/100 ($t50, 000. 00). This appuintntent is made und.r and by authun;} of the 101luwing tesulution passed by the fi,,aid of Du- ectois of said Company at a meeting Ireld in the titmet,,al notice of the Collip"lly- ,I tluorurm beim, present and voting, on the sixth day of December, 1958, which resuiution is still fn effect • "RESOLVED, that the President or any "ice -President be hereby authonred, and empowered to appoint Attorneys -in -Fact of the Company to execute any and all bunds, policies, undertakings, or other like instruments on behalf of the Corhorarlon, and may authorize any officer or any such Attorney -in -Fact to affix the corporate seal; and may with of without cause modify or revoke any such appointment or authority. Any such writim-,i so executed by such Attorneys -in -Fact shall be binding upon the Company as if they had been duly executed and acknowledged by the regulad,, elected officers of the company." This Power of Attorney is signed and sealed by l.icsinule under and by the authority of the tollu,vtng Resolution. adopted by the Board of Directors of the C'omp,uly ata nwetiu}'. duly cailvd and heli on the 7111 day of Ikcenitur, I'773: "RESOLVED, that the signature of the President or a Vice -President and the seal o4 the Company inav he affixed by facsimile on any power of attorney granted, and the si; natmo tit the Secretary and Twasttrer and the seal of tote Company may be affixed by facsimile to any certificate of any such power and any such power of certificate hearing, such facsinule signature and seal shall be valid and hindine, on the Company. Any such power so executed and sealed and certified by certificate so executed and scaled shall, with respect to any bond or undertaking to which it is attached, continue to be valid and binding on the Company." IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Till. CINCINNM'I INSURZANCE COMPANY has caused these presents to be sealed with its corporate seal, duly attested by its President this 15th day of august 1976. "loll'. CINCINNATI INSURANCE CONWANY CORPORATE *3 SEAL 3 f STATE OF 01110 ) l'residertt COUNTY OF HAMILTON) ss: On this 1SEIr day of At,,;u:.t 1976 , betote me cattle the above named President of THE,, CINCINNATI INsCOMPANY, to Inc poiNoti,div known to be the officer described herein, and acknowledged that the seal affixed to the preceding instrument is the corp,)iate seal of said Company and the coiporate seal and the signature of the ofllcei vete duly affixed and subscuhed ito•said•instrunie.nt by the authority and direction of salol colpotaholl. [G' ilk NHY G Lit RlLIN. Atlmnev At law Nol vu Pi,hhw S;Iate at Oh,u My wmn%i mit has no-P,iattun dale. »chnn 147 03 R. C 1, the undersigned Secretary and 'Treasurer of "Till: C'INC'INNATI INSURANCE COMPANY, hereby `certify that the above is a true and correct copy of the Uttginal Power of Attorney issued by said Company, and do hereby further certify that the said Power of Attorney is still in full force and effect. GIVEN udder my h lid and seal of said Company it Cincinnati, Ohio, this day of19 iWE3� a,K_ir M (8,78) JAN 14 Wd I Secretary and Treasurer45 , is r r JAN 141981 BOOK 45 PAGE 590 THE BOARD NEXT DISCUSSED A PROBLEM COiNCERNING INSURANCE COVERAGE, AS OUTLINED IN THE FOLLOWING MEMO: 0 January 14, 1980 - MEMO TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: C�..C� JEFFREY K. BARTON, FINANCE OFFICER RE': Reason for increase on Insurance Budget The insurance carrier renewed our policy and billed the Arden -Waddell Insurance Agency who paid the premium on our behalf a year in advance. Once the policy was received and we were asked for reimbursement, 1 refused to pay the amount for the Emergency verhicles. It is necessary for us to pay the premium to Arden -Waddell because the refund from the cmnpany will come to Indian River County. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE EMERGENCY VEHICLES INSURANCE PREMIUM, AS FOLLOWS: ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT N0. INCREASE DECREASE AUTOMOTIVE INS. 001-107-526-34.51 $10,500 RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCIES 001-199-513-99.91 $10,500 SHERIFF DOBECK ARRIVED AT THE MEETING AT 9:00 O'CLOCK A.M. AND THE BOARD RESUMED DISCUSSION OF HIS ITEMS ON THE CLERK'S AGENDA. CHAIRMAN LYONS STATED THAT IT WAS NOTED THE RADIO EQUIPMENT y WAS ORDERED PRIOR TO TRANSFER OF FUNDS. SHERIFF DOBECK STATED THAT THE REASON THE EQUIPMENT WAS ORDERED WAS THAT IT TAKES APPROXIMATELY 6 TO S WEEKS TO OBTAIN THE EQUIP- MENT. HE ADDED THAT AT THE PRESENT TIME THEY ARE OPERATING 2 WALKIE-TALKIES BETWEEN 5 MEN, WHICH IS PRESENTING A PROBLEM. THE RADIO EQUIPMENT IS NOT A BID ITEM, THE SHERIFF ADVISED, AND NOTED THAT IT IS A STATE PRICE THAT IS OFFERED TO ALL AGENCIES. SHERIFF DOBECK ADDED THAT THERE IS NO OBLIGATION AND THE ORDER COULD BE CANCELLED, COMMISSIONER WODTKE REPORTED THAT HE RECENTLY ATTENDED A MEETING IN TALLAHASSEE WHERE THE SUBJECT OF LIABILITY OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WAS STRESSED. HE ADDED THAT IT IS UNLAWFUL FOR THE BOARD TO EXCEED BUDGETARY FUNDS; IN THIS CASE, THE BOARD IS BEING ASKED TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM THE MUNICIPAL SERVICE FUND AND NOT FROM THE SHERIFF'S BUDGET - THAT IS THE PROBLEM. 12 -I COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK INTERJECTED THAT HE AGREED THAT THIS MATTER SHOULD HAVE COME BEFORE THE BOARD INITIALLY, PLUS HE FELT THERE IS A LACK OF MAINTENANCE OF THE PRESENT RADIO EQUIPMENT. HE NOTED THAT THE RADIOS ARE NEEDED AND HE WOULD VOTE FOR APPROVAL OF THEM, BUT FELT THAT THE MAINTENANCE SHOULD BE IMPROVED. SHERIFF DOBECK APOLOGIZED TO THE BOARD ADVISING THAT HE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE SITUATION AND THAT THIS PROCEDURE WOULD CAUSE LIABILITY TO THE BOARD. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR RADIO EQUIPMENT FOR THE SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT, AS FOLLOWS: ACCOUNT TITLE ACCOUNT No, INCREASE DECREASE COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT. - ALL 004-600-521-99.93 $9,421 RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCIES 004-199-513-99.91 $9,421 MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, FOR THE BOARD TO APPROVE THE DEPUTY SHERIFF`S BLANKET SURETY BOND, AND AUTHORIZED THE SIGNATURES OF ALL THE COMMISSIONERS. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ALONG THOSE LINES. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. JAN 141981 13 JA N "141981 Box 45 PAGE 592 DEPUTY SHERIFF'S BLANKET SURETY BOND State of Florida County of INDIAN RIVER KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That we, the Deputy Sheriffs of INDIAN RIVER County presently or hereafter appointed during the term of the bond, as principal, and American Southern Insurance Company, a company duly authorized to transact surety'business in the State of Florida, as surety, are held and firmly bound unto BOB GRAHAM Governor of the State of Florida, and his successors in office, in the sum of One Thousand Dollars, lawful money, for the payment whereof, well and truly to be made, we do bind ourselves, and each of our heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. Sealed with our seal and dated this 1ST. day of JANUARY 1981 THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, THAT, whereas the above bounden Deputy Sheriffs of INDIAN RIVER County have been presently or will be hereafter appointed to hold office from the day so appointed, until a successor is qualified, and according to the Constitution and Laws of this State. Now, therefore, if the said Deputy Sheriffs of INDIAN RIVER County presently or hereafter appointed shall faithfully perform the duties of said office, -as prescribed, then this obligation to be void, otherwise to be and remain in full force and virtue. Counter' idnp-d :b j V �- Licensed Resident '`.Agent The foregoing bond is approved. /1 AMERICAN SOUTHERN NSURANCE COMPANY ;(,Attorjney-}n;Fact AMERICAN SOUTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY 20:5 Peachtree Road Atlanta, Geor^ia 30309 GE2:ERAL PMER OF ATTOF.NEY Know all men by these Presents, That the American Southern Insurance Company has made, constituted and appointed, and by these presents does make, constitute and appoint John F. Hunt. Sr, or John E, Hunt, Jr. or Audrey Cox or Bruce Allair, all of Tallahassee, Florida -------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------ lori a------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ______________________ EACH its true and lawful attorney for it and its naifie, place,"and stead to execute on behalf of the said company, as surety, bonds, undertakings and contracts of suretyship to be given to all obligees provided that no bond or undertaking or contract of suretyship executed under this authority shall exceed in amount the sum of_ T%venty-Five Thousand Dollars ($25, 000. 00)----------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This Power of Attorney is granted and is signed and sealed by facsimile under and by the authority of the following Resolution adopted pursuant to due authorization by the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of the American Southern Insurance Company on the 28th Day of January, 1976: 'Resolved, that the President, an Executive Vice President or any Vice President of the Company, be, and that each or any of them hereby is, authorized to execute Powers of Attorney qualifying the attorney named in the given Power of Attorney to execute in behalf of the American Southern Insurance Company, bonds, undertakings and all contracts of suretyship; and that any Secretary or any Assistant Secretary be, and that each or any of; them hereby is, authorized to attest the execution of any such Power of Attorney, and to attach thereto the seal of the Company. Further Resolved, that the signature of such officers and the seal of the Company may be affixed to any such Power of Attorney or to any certificate relating thereto by facsimile, and any such Power of Attorney or certificate bearing such facsimile signatures or facsimile seal shall be valid and binding upon the Company when so affixed and in the future with respect to any bond, undertaking or contract of suretyship to which it is attached." In Witness Whereof, the American Southern Insurance Company has caused its Official seal to be hereto affixed, and these presents to be signed by its President and attested by its Secretary this 3rd day of November , 198800�� t est: Ame " an Sotuther Durance Company B' !/ y Virginia C. Sumerel, Secretary C ��ii'Z:�l+tall r`eside- a, , ent STATE OF GEORGIA SS: COUNTY OF FULTON On this 3rd day of November , 1980 , before me personally came Calvin L. Wall, to me known, who being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that he resides in Atlanta, in the County of Cobb, State of Georgia, at 4000 Winding Valley Drive; that he is President of American Southern Insurance Company, the corporation described in and which executed the above instrument; that he knows the seal of the said corporation; that the seal affixed to the said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so affixed and that he signed his name thereto pursuant to due authorization. STATE OF GEORGIA Barbara Wade SS: CERTIFICATE Notary Public, State of Georgia COUNTY OF FULTON Qualified in Dekalb County Commission Expires October 20, 1981 I,"'the undersigned, an Executive Vice President of American Southern Insurance Company, a Georgia Corporation, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing and attached Power of Attorney remains in full force and has not been revoked; and furthermore that the Resolution of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors, set forth in the Power of Attorney, is now in force. - Signed and sealed at the City of Atlanta, Dated thelST, day of JANUARY 19 80 Scott G'Yh ips'On Executive Vice President ;rt , JAN 141981 -1 JAN 141981 oox E594 THE BOARD NEXT DISCUSSED THE DEPUTIES APPOINTED BY SHERIFF JOYCE, AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT MICHAEL D. SHETLER AND THOMAS P. HERSHEY WERE TO BE DELETED FROM THE LIST. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER- SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE CHAIRMAN'S SIGNATURE, WITH THE DELETION OF MICHAEL D. SHETLER AND THOMAS P. HERSHEY, FOR THE FOLLOWING DEPUTIES APPOINTED BY SHERIFF .JOYCE: DONALD BROWN, JR. WILLIAM F. MORGAN MAX O. BRATTAIN BRIAN D. WOOD DAVID T. PATRICK ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE CHAIRMAN'S SIGNATURE FOR THE FOLLOWING DEPUTIES APPOINTED BY SHERIFF DOBECK: Thomas P. White James H. Attkisson Edward Glaser Perry M. Pisani Robert L. Veres Darlene Riherd Joseph Charles Fink Warren T. Zeuch, III Riley E. Welchance William Reichert, Jr. Glenn D. Fraser James E. Parsley Max 0. Brattain Gerald Fitzgerald William 0. Baird James W. Dixon, II Patrick Michael Sheldon Leon Foster Kenneth Hamilton William J. Brunner Roger Woods William H. McClure, Jr. Sidney J. DuBose Don Coleman Danny H. Quillen Michael F. Brandes Paul R. Fafeita Larry E. Tippins Galvin R. Jones Philip L. Redstone Ralph L. Latimer Richard W. Harper Roy H. Raymond Doyle R. Anthony John Chumley Frank Alber, Sr. Jerry Lynch Ronald Williams Kurt Kuehn Charles Gibbons Lee W. Setzer Frank J. Alber, Jr. Gerhard Bruns Glen M. Garfield David Patrick Mike McCullers Wallace Phillip Williams Charles Heath Dean Longo Dennis M. Cianciulli Paul D. Lekanides William F. Morgan Eddie Anderson Connie G. Bowling Hal Bridwell Mark S. W. Gibbons David Cuddie Clarence -C. Walker Lawrence E. Spencer John N. McPherson James H. Scharfschwerdt 16 DISCUSSION FOLLOWED REGARDING THE JAIL. CHAIRMAN LYONS STATED HE COULD NOT STRESS ENOUGH THE TREMENDOUS RESPONSIBILITY THAT THE BOARD HAS IN CONNECTION WITH THE JAIL. HE FELT THAT A PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION SHOULD BE FORMED, AS INPUT IS NEEDED IN ORDER TO DO A THOROUGH STUDY OF THE JAIL. SHERIFF DOBECK ADVISED THAT HE WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER. DISCUSSION THEN FOLLOWED CONCERNING A CHECK WRITER, AND FINANCE DIRECTOR BARTON REQUESTED THAT THE BOARD APPROVE A RESOLUTION THAT MUST BE SENT TO THE BANK. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COM- MISSIONER WODTKE, THAT THE BOARD INSTRUCT ATTORNEY COLLINS TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE CHECK WRITER, AND AUTHORIZE THE SIGNATURE OF THE CHAIRMAN. 1 COMMISSIONER FLETCHER STATED THAT HE HAD A PROBLEM APPROVING A RESOLUTION THAT HE HAD NOT SEEN. AFTER TAKING THIS INTO CONSIDERATION, IT WAS DECIDED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INDICATE THAT ATTORNEY COLLINS WOULD PREPARE A PROPOSED RESOLUTION. COMMISSIONERS SCURLOCK AND WODTKE AGREED TO REWORD THE MOTION AS FOLLOWS: MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COM- MISSIONER WODTKE, THAT THE BOARD INSTRUCT ATTORNEY COLLINS TO PREPARE A PROPOSED RESOLUTION REGARDING THE CHECK WRITER. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPOINTMENT TO THE TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL RESOLUTION 81-1 ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 81-1 APPOINTING COMMISSIONER BIRD AS REPRESENTATIVE AND CHAIRMAN LYONS AS HIS ALTERNATE; AND COMMISSIONER WODTKE AS REPRESENTATIVE AND COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK AS HIS ALTERNATE. JAN 141981 17 JAN 141991 RESOLUTION NO. 81-1 Booz 45 PACE 596 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following persons are recommended as Indian River County Representative or Alternate, as the case may be, to the TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL: 1. RICHARD "DICK" BIRD PATRICK B. LYONS 2. WILLIAM C. WODTKE, JR. DON C. SCURLOCK, JR. Representative Alternate Representative Alternate Said Resolution shall become effective as of the 14th day of January , 1981. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIA)T--I�IVER COUNTY, _FLORIDA B. Attest: l/ Freda Wrig t, Cl k APPOINTMENT TO THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL BOARD OF DIRECTORS (PUBLIC SECTOR MEMBER) THE CHAIRMAN STATED THAT THIS ITEM WILL BE CARRIED OVER TO THE NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED RESOLUTION 81-3 APPOINTING RITA THOMAS TO SERVE ON THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT FOR DISTRICT 1. RESOLUTION NO. 81-3 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, That RITA THOMAS is hereby reappointed to the Indian River County Board of Zoning Adjustment from District 1, for an additional term of two ( 2 ) years. Said Resolution shall become effective as of the 14th day of January ,1981. BOARD INDIX Freda Wr.ight,:Cltk COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF VER COUNTY, FLORIDA JAN 141991 19NO. I 45 fAGE 597 JAN 141981 BO�x 45 PAS 598 REAPPOINTMENT OF NEIL A. NELSON, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, FOR THE BOARD TO REAPPOINT NEIL A. NELSON AS COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK THOUGHT THAT AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO MAKE THIS APPOINTMENT WOULD BE AT BUDGET TIME. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER COMMENTED THAT HE WOULD LIKE THE COUNTY TO HAVE A STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR THE COUNTY ADMINIS- TRATOR. DISCUSSION ENSUED ALONG THOSE LINES. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ;REAPPOINTMENT OF GEORGE G. COLLINS, JR., COUNTY ATTORNEY MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMIS- SIONER SCURLOCK, TO REAPPOINT GEORGE G. COLLINS, SJR. AS COUNTY ATTORNEY, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN`S SIGNATURE FOR THE EXTENSION AGREEMENT. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK STATED HIS POSITION IS THAT THE COUNTY MOVE TOWARDS A FULL TIME STAFF WHICH, HE FELT, WOULD PROVIDE FOR A NUMBER OF'POSITIVES FOR THE COUNTY. HE SUGGESTED THAT WE APPROVE THIS APPOINTMENT UP TO OCTOBER 1ST AND THREE MONTHS PRIOR TO THE BUDGET SESSION, ADVERTISE FOR A FULL TIME COUNSEL - THIS COULD THEN BE DISCUSSED DURING THE BUDGET SESSION. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK NOTED THAT THE CITY, FOR $61,000 A YEAR, HAS COMPETENT LEGAL REPRESENTATION. HE STRESSED THAT HE WAS SATISFIED WITH ATTORNEY COLLINS' SERVICE, HE JUST DID NOT WANT THIS CONTRACT EXTENDED TO JANUARY. CHAIRMAN LYONS REPORTED THAT THIS MATTER HAD BEEN DISCUSSED ON PREVIOUS OCCASIONS AND IT HAD BEEN AGREED THAT AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME, THE TRANSITION WOULD BE MADE TO HAVE AN ON-SITE ATTORNEY. HE ADDED THAT ATTORNEY COLLINS HAD BEEN A PARTY TO THESE DISCUSSIONS. THE CHAIRMAN STRESSED THAT THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF HISTORY WITH ATTORNEY COLLINS AND IT WILL TAKE TIME TO MAKE A TRANSITION. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED REGARDING THE LENGTH OF TIME OF THE EXTENSION AGREEMENT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT HE HAD DONE EXTENSIVE RESEARCH OVER THE YEARS IN OTHER COUNTIES REGARDING FULL-TIME ATTORNEYS AND POINTED OUT THAT LAW LIBRARIES ARE VERY EXPENSIVE. HE STATED THAT THE COUNTY HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN LITIGATION, AND HE WAS CONCERNED WITH THE PROBLEMS WITH THE ADMINISTRATION COMPLEX AND THE COURTHOUSE RENOVATION PROJECT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE FELT THAT WE WILL NEED ATTORNEY COLLINS, AS WELL AS HIS ENTIRE FIRM, FOR THEIR KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERTISE DURING THIS CRITICAL PERIOD OF TIME, AND CERTAINLY WOULD SUPPORT THE EXTENSION AGREEMENT. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK POINTED OUT THAT DURING BUDGET SESSION THIS CONTRACT COULD BE EXTENDED. HE FELT THAT IF THIS APPOINTMENT IS DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY, THIS SAME DISCUSSION WILL GO ON YEAR AFTER YEAR - HE THOUGHT IT WAS TIME TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT THE SITUATION AND HAVE THE TRANSITION TAKE PLACE IN OCTOBER. CHAIRMAN LYONS REALIZED THE IMPORTANCE OF THE RENOVATION QUESTION, BUT FELT THAT JANUARY WAS SOON ENOUGH TO GET STARTED ON THIS MATTER, AND HE PLANNED TO VOTE FOR THE MOTION. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER BELIEVED THE BOARD HAD ALL DECIDED THE COUNTY WAS GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE ITS OWN LAW OFFICE FACILITIES - THE QUESTION WAS WHEN. HE COMMENTED THAT IF THE BOARD DECIDED TO HAVE THEIR OWN IN-HOUSE ATTORNEY, IT WILL HAVE TO PHASE IN THE NEW ATTORNEY WHICH WILL COST MORE MONEY. COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED HE ASSUMED FROM THE COMMENTS MADE THAT WE NEED TO GO TO A FULL-TIME ATTORNEY WITHOUT RESEARCH OR STUDY. HE AGAIN STRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE MATTERS COMING UP BEFORE THE BOARD WHERE WE WOULD NEED THE EXPERTISE OF THE PRESENT ATTORNEY. COMMISSIONER WODTKE COMMENTED THAT A STUDY SHOULD BE MADE, AND BE AWARE THAT THE BOARD IS NOT PAYING A RETIREMENT OR PENSION FUND FOR ATTORNEY COLLINS. HE THOUGHT THE TOTAL CONCEPT MUST BE STUDIED IN ORDER TO OPERATE EFFICIENTLY AS WELL AS HAVE PROPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION. JAN 141981 21 45 m599 JAN 141981 aaoK 45 FAGS uo COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK REPORTED THAT HE HAD TAKEN AN IN-DEPTH LOOK, PUT IN 25 HOURS WORTH OF RESEARCH, AND EXAMINED THE RECORDS I WITH THE FINANCE DIRECTOR. CHAIRMAN LYONS SUGGESTED THAT COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK BE PREPARED AT BUDGET SESSION TIME TO COME UP WITH A PROPOSAL AS TO THE ORDERLY TRANSITION FROM THE PRESENT ATTORNEY TO AN IN-HOUSE ATTORNEY, WITH FIGURES TO REFLECT THE TRANSITION. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER MADE A MOTION TO DEFER THE APPOINTMENT OF ATTORNEY COLLINS AND TABLE THE MATTER UNTIL JANUARY 28TH. IT WAS DETERMINED A SECOND WAS NOT NEEDED FOR THIS MOTION. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND DEFEATED 4 TO 1, WITH COMMISSIONER FLETCHER VOTING IN FAVOR, THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE EXTENSION AGREEMENT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE - AYE COMMISSIONER BIRD - AYE COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK - HAY - HE INDICATED THAT HE HAD SPENT A GREAT DEAL OF TIME IN RESEARCH WHICH GAVE HIM THE SUPPORT THAT THE BOARD SHOULD BE WORKING TOWARDS A FULL-TIME LEGAL STAFF, WITH A GREAT DEAL OF SAVINGS. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK COMMENTED THAT HE HAD NO PROBLEM WITH ATTORNEY COLLINS BUT FELT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO HAVE THIS EXTENSION AGREEMENT EFFECTIVE UP TO THE BUDGET SESSION. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER - NAY - HE COMMENTED THAT HE WAS NOT AGAINST ATTORNEY COLLINS, BUT AGAINST SIGNING THE EXTENTION AGREEMENT. HE WAS IN FAVOR OF GETTING IN-HOUSE LEGAL SERVICES. CHAIRMAN LYONS - AYE - HE THOUGHT THE BOARD SHOULD GO TO JANUARY WITH THE EXTENSION AGREEMENT. THE CHAIRMAN AGAIN ASKED COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK TO GET TOGETHER THE NECESSARY PLANS AND BUDGET FIGURES FOR AN ORDERLY TRANSITION FROM THE PRESENT ATTORNEY TO AN IN-HOUSE ATTORNEY. COMMISSIONER WODTKE INTERJECTED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO SIT IN ON THAT COMMITTEE. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK STATED THAT HE WOULD RATHER HAVE COMMISSIONER WODTKE TAKE THE JOB, BUT HE WOULD BE PREPARED WITH HIS FACTS AND FIGURES - COMMISSIONER WODTKE AGREED. THE CHAIRMAN STATED THAT THE MOTION CARRIED WITH A VOTE OF 3 TO 2, WITH COMMISSIONERS SCURLOCK AND FLETCHER VOTING IN OPPOSITION. JAN 141991 23 aw 45 it ;= Fr__ .JAN 141981 EXTENSION AGREEMENT saoK : 5 QAU G 2 THIS EXTENSION AGREEMENT, entered into the day of January, 1981, by and between GEORGE G. COLLINS, JR., hereinafter referred to as "ATTORNEY", and INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY", their successors and assigns. W I T N E S S .E T H: 1. The Agreement dated January 12, 1979 is hereby extended for an additional one-year term until January 14, 1982. 2. Paragraph 2 of the Agreement dated the 12th day of January 1979, is hereby amended to reflect a retainer of SIXTY NINE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED TWENTY SEVEN DOLLARS ($69,627.00), which retainer includes compensation and related expenses of the Assistant County Attorney. 3. All other terms of the January 12, 1979 Agreement shall remain in effect during the term of this Extension. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their h eals, the day and year first above written. Sig s le and delivered n re nce o q . uol.iins, jr. Vft 2�c-k' B . Lyoz��`;_a rman Boa County Coiwt , � ' u�10 s Attest:j Freda"Wrig`it, lerk PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING OF PROPERTY REQUESTED BY AUSTIN FORMAN THE CHAIRMAN NOTED THAT THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE REZONING OF PROPERTY IN SOUTHERN SHORES SUBDIVISION, REPLAT N0. 2, HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING OF PROPERTY REQUESTED BY VINCENT QUADE THE CHAIRMAN NOTED THAT THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE REZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF OSLO ROAD AND WEST OF 43RD AVENUE, REQUESTED BY VINCENT QUADE, HAS BEEN RESCHEDULED TO FEBRUARY 11, 1981. DISCUSSION OF QUAY DOCK ROAD THE BOARD REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING MATERIAL January 8, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: County Administrator SUBJECT: Amendment of Maintenance Map, Quay Dock Road e E14CLOSURES: #1 - Petition & Memo from W. E. Roddenberry Dated 12-3-80/1-6-81, Respectively #2 - County Commission Minutes of 12-5-79 #3 - Map of the Area Mr. W. E. Roddenberry has requested that Enclosure 1 be placed on the agenda. The Quay Dock Road issue was previously before the Commission on 12-5-79. Copy of minutes of this is. -at Enclosure 2. A meeting with Mr. Roddenberry, Jerry Kramer, Gene Hamilton, Dewey Walker, Ernestine Park and myself was held January 6, 1981. The issue was discussed but not resolved. Basically, they are asking for an amendment of the maintenance map to eliminate that portion of Quay Dock Road east of point A, which is designated on Enclosure 2. This point is the intersection of Quay Dock Road and the western line of Govermnent Lot 3. The road the County has maintained extends to point B, design- ated on the enclosure. The road at that point, curves to the right, crosses a drainage ditch and intersects Mr. Roddenberry's propert%. It is reconimended that the County Attorney review the petition and all material in the files regarding this issue and recommend a county position in this matter. NAN/ep Neil Nelson, County dministrator 25 JAN 141991 soon 45 wsf 603 JAN 141981 64604 -45 BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN AND FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY TO: The Board of County Commissioners P E T I T I O N PETITION FOR THE AMENDMENT AND COP,RECTION OF THAT CERTAIN "MAINTENANCE IIAP" RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 9, PAGE 12, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN i I"JER COUN'T'Y CONIES NOW the r,etitiorers, DOROTHY B. BROG^IN, LEROY T. TELKX,iP, Jk.',IES T. HOLMES through his undersigned attorney and W. E. RODDENBERRY who allege: 1. That they are all of the owners of certain real property which abutts or utilizes a private driveway which is an extension of a curtain road known as 67th Street or Quay Dock Road, located in Government Lot 3, Section 11, Township 32 South, Range 39 East. 2. That on or about April 24, 1975 a certain survey of the road was made for the County which appears to be erroneous. The pertinent portion of the survey attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is erroneous and inconsistent in that the survey shows the driveway as a 50 foot right of way extending to the shore of the Indian River when in fact no right of way has ever been deeded or otherwise dedicated to the Courity in Government Lot 3. 3. That on or about June 5, 1975 the County recorded a "maintenance map" at Plat Book 9, page 12 of the Public Records of Indian River County, which, incidently, was the first "maintenance map" ever recorded in the County, the pertinent portion of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" wherein the error was perpetuated and further compounded in that: (a) The County incorrectly claimed ownership of the "right of way" because it claimed to have constructed and maintained a 50 foot wide road extending from the Western line of Government Lot 3 to the shore of the river. (b) The County had neither constructed a road nor continuously and uniterruptedly maintained a road for four years prior to the recording of - the "maintenar p". I i 4. Petitorers would like the Commission to note that: (a) No portion of Government Lot 3 has ever been deeded or dedicated to this County or its predecessor counties. (b) The driveway is in fact some 9 feet wide, not 50 feet wide, as may be seen in Exhibit "F". i (c) The "road" set forth on the "maintenance map" has never been open to vehicular traffic down to the edge of the river and serves merely as a driveway for the Petitioners as noted on "Exhibit "A" and as may be seen in Exhibits "C", "D" and "E". (d) The Petitioners and their predecessors in title have always paid taxes on the entirety of Govern- ment Lot 3 including the said driveway. (e) The "maintenance map" creates confusion<as to the ownership of lands in Government Lot 3 to such an extent that Telkamp and Brown are being assessed for and are paying taxes on a portion of Holmes' property. WHEREFORE Petitioners request that the "maintenance map" be amended and corrected by removing therefrom that portion of the "roadway" in Lot 3 so that they may: (a) Confirm their titles. (b) Allow the property to remain on the ad valorem tax rolls. (c) Prevent any prescriptive rights from accruing. (d) Have peace and quiet. LeRoy �T. Telkamp r r- DorothyiB. Brown W. E. Roddenberry Attorney for James T. Holmes W. E. Rodden� berry,, a BOCK, 45 Pact 685 JAN 141981 u 5 5TA, ro 0,3.7d sEr c 41. w; 60-00 00 50' P4 Vl- Af NT• ENDS _ 18'N OF �_� �'-'"✓ � t S7A. 6.9 4 4,c SURVEr /?;E_ OF RIVER~ yon, `°- •{ is a u'rat;.� �: YOK CERTIFICATE pq, RF STATE OF FLORIDA t .z f COUNTY DF INDIAN RIVE l NERE-BY CERTIFY rHAr THE A8oVE s,�tmg Pt0k&tVrs 4". W,, -JL SURVEY OF IWE CENIE'•R/_ilvE OF PIGH =0r t4''AY FOR 0U/�Y �} {:Is' ROAD EXT«ENuINt� FROM WF. INrf-.ir,�E'CrION WIM STAiE' N,2 S, SOUT'NEASMPLY rO THE INDIAN PI.VER. ,q ,;T �'�.. , �• ,''•'.Yf!? 7-1//,7 ME `, rN DA CSF...: �.�it�"�L , I976. • � ,� ttl., I .y t7y /': �IVa�Ilill ••r T I l� ' 1, 1c fi j, • J a REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR r: > LC'WIDA CF'RrIFICArE N° I J 9 - vtRO BEACH, FL ORIDA - T f'� - Ei-c-)RDED IN THE PUBLIC 'Y, FLORIDA. THIS -5- -!!2X '5 IN RIGHT OF WAY ROAD A% RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA END SURVEY S�Tl 0 �+8 81 -EDGE E ��G E� Of WATER X- fA A- NON I rl G�Aij.t 101 fiLf JAN 14 1981 29 45 fAc'E*667 J AN 141981 ao� 45 PACE.608 MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PETITION REGARDING 67TH STREET OR QUAY DOCK ROAD HISTORY: At some time in the distant past a roadbed was laid out across the swamp in Government Lot 3 to a point where it intersected a portion of high ground approximately 100 feet wide which runs parallel to the river. It is not known when, or by whom this road- bed was originally constructed. Subsequent thereto, in the 1880's, John's Island was populated by farmers who grew various Vegetables which were shipped north by steamboat. In approximately 1898 the railroad came through the county, the steamboat traffic declined, and the farmers took their produce by boat to the mainland where it was carted by wagon to the railroad. In 1925, Winter Beach, then called Quay, and Vero Beach vied for the position of county seat for the soon to be created Indian River County. Quay lost the contest. In 1926 the Florida land bubble burst and Quay fell into obscurity. At about the same time, the farmers left John's Island since it was easier and more economical to grow their produce near the railroad. Consequently, the road, which was little more than a one lane potholed wagon trail fell into disuse except for access by the family that lived on and owned all of Government Lot 3. Periodically, the county would patch the potholes on the roadway. In the 1930's and 40's, Ben Babb, who was part of the family who owned Government Lot 3 and lived thereon since 1919 conducted an oyster business on the property,and, generally, drove people off the property, claiming it as his own. By 1959 both Ben Babb and his mother, Harriet Thompson, had both died and had left all of Government Lot 3 to Ben's sisters, Sarah Bullingame and Persis Stanley. During this period only desultory maintenance was performed on the roadway. In 1968 James Holmes pruchased Government Lot 3 from the sisters who conveyed to the "center of the road". At that time the roadway consisted of a narrow, potholed way which terminate approximately 139' east of the river and which merely provided access to the house located thereon. Mr. Holmes, having bought to the center of the road and finding nothing to evidence title in anyone other than himself, barricaded the roadway at the west line of Government hot 3, and told the people who periodically came fishing there that they were trespassing and drove them away as had Ben Babb. Certain persons protested to the then County Administration I claiming that Mr. Holmes was closing off a county road. The county in June of 1970 ordered a title search to determine ownership of the roadway. The search revealed that there was no deed to the county for any porion of Government Lot 3. In September of 1970 the county, over Mr. Holmes' protest, proceeded to enter onto Government Lot 3 and lay pavement 9 feet wide to within 139 feet of the river. There the issue remained until the early part of 1975 when Mr. Holmes once again barricaded the roadway and demanded to know by what basis the county claimed its ownership. In April of 1975 the county discovered Florida Statutes §5337.31 (1955) and 341.59 (1951) which relate to county maintained roads. On April 8, 1975, the county had a survey prepared (Exhibit "A" of the Petition) which shows: river, and (A) That the roadway terminates 139 feet east of the (B) a 50 foot right of way On April 14, 1975 Mr. Holmes removed his barricade after the county advised him that they would have it torn down. On June 4, 1975, the county filed a "maintenance map" whereon it is stated that the county had "continuously and uninterruptedly" maintained the road for the four (4) preceding years. The pertinent portion of the maintenance map, a copy of which is attached to the petition as Exhibit "B" shows: (A) That the road extends to the river, and (B) That there is a 50 foot wide right of way. Since that time, except for periodic protesting and letter writing the matter has lain dormant. The county periodically cuts the grass and sprays Daupon 2-4-D and Stickler in the witches and does nothing whatsoever within 139 feet of the river. The Boni ��5 �acE JAN.141981 JAN 141981 oaK .45'_PAE610 roadway -currently serves solely as access for the persons residing in Government Lot 3. LEGAL MATTERS: The questions for consideration is, "flow does a county obtain title to a road?" t 1. By Deed ---There is no Beed to any portion of Government Lot 3 in favor of the county or any other public body. 2. �y Dedication ---Por example where a person filed a plat map dedicating certain roads to the governmental body or tells the governmental body that it wishes to create a road and that govern- mental body does so. Nothing can be found indicating any dedication of any land in Government Lot 3. 3. P Maintenance ---as set forth in the statutes referred to in the maintenance map. DISCUSSION: The maintenance statutesare strictly construed by the courts because you have, in effect, a taking of property without compensation. The requirements of obtaining a road by "maintenance" are as follows: (A) The road must be "constructed by the county". In our situation no one knows who originally constructed the road. (B) It must be "continuously and uninterruptedly maintained" by the county. In our case, the road was barricaded less than two months prior' to the filing of the map. It further does not mean periodic filling in the potholes as was done for many years. (C) It is obtained only to the "extent in width" actually maintained and necessary for the maintenance of travel. In our situation we do not have a 50 foot right of way extending to the shore of the river, we have: (1) a nine (9) foot wide paved road and shoulders approximately five (5) feet wide, or a 20 foot wide road right of way. The ditches themselves were dug by the Mosquito Control District in the 1940's and have nothing to do with the maintenance of travel. (2) No maintenance on the north side of the pavement Within 200 feet of the river. M (3) No maintenance on the south side of the 1.avoment within 160 feet of the river. (4) No maintenance whatsoever within 139 feet of the river. 4. P Public Perscriptive Easement ---As set forth by the courts, is a means whereby the public may gain a right of passage across the lands of another. The requirements of obtaining this easement are as follows: (A) There must be actual continuous, uninterrupted use, by the claimant, of the lands of another for twenty (20) years and (B) It must be with: (1) The knowledge of the owner or (2) Adverse under claim of right or A (3) So open, notorious and visable that Xnpwledg, t to the owner is imputed and (C) The use or possession must be inconsistent, with, the owners use and enjoyment and (D) It must not be a permissive use. (E) In addition, you must show as to the way claimed: 1. Width e 2. A definiteroute 3, Termini DISCUSSION: (A) We know that both Babb and Holmes have clammed, th© land as theirs since the 1930's. It would seem therefore that any claim of perscription would have to date prior to that time. (B) Is open to conjecture. (C) If both the owner.and the public can use a property for the same purpose, as was done in our situation, the use is not inconsistent and cannot develope into an easement. Unless the oc-:ler loses something, the public gains nothing. The mere fact that your neighbor uses your road while in no way interfering with your use Of it does not give your neighbor any claim in it. SUMMARY: As can be seen from the facts set forth, the county has, at best, a tenuous claim to that portion of Government Lot 3 i JAN 141991 45 Fr JAN 141981 actually -maintained since 1975. BOOK 45 PACE iJ It does not, however, provide any access to the river but instead merely provides a driveway for the petitioners. The petitioners would prefer to have the map amended to show the roadway terminating at the western boundary of Government Lot 3. In this regard,it should be noted that i amending the maintenance map to reflect the actual area maintained will result in cul de sac in Government Lot 3 and a county maintained 1 driveway for the petitioners. As noted in Attorney General's Opinion 078-88, June 1978 "-•--unless expenditure of public funds for maintenance (of a county road) would serve public purposes, the Board of County Commissioners may not expend public funds for such purpose..." ATTORNEY W. E. RODDENBERRY, PETITIONER, APPROACHED THE BOARD AND GAVE A BRIEF SUMMARY ABOUT THE PROBLEM STATED ON THE PRECEDING PAGES. HE THEN REVIEWED THE HISTORY OF THE STATUTES IN TERMS OF MAINTENANCE OF COUNTY ROADS, AND THEN HE DISTRIBUTED PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE AREA TO THE BOARD. HE EXPLAINED THAT UNDER THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN, THE AREA WAS DESIGNATED AS ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AND THOUGHT THAT, AT MOST, ONE MORE HOUSE MIGHT BE BUILT IN THAT AREA. ATTORNEY RODDENBERRY THEN REQUESTED THE BOARD AMEND THE MAINTENANCE MAP IN GOVERNMENT LOT 3 TO HELP ALLEVIATE A THE PEOBLEMS THE PETITIONERS ARE EXPERIENCING. LENGTHY DISCUSSION FOLLOWED CONCERNING THE PROCEDURE FOR PAVING AND RESURFACING OF COUNTY ROADS. DEWEY WALKER, OF THE ZONING DEPARTMENT, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD AND SPOKE ABOUT THE HISTORY OF QUAY DOCK ROAD. HE RECALLED THAT IT WAS ONLY A TRAIL AT ONE TIME, BUT IN 1929 HE PERSONALLY OBSERVED THE COUNTY PUTTING IN THE ROAD. MR. WALKER SPOKE OF THE PROBLEMS VARIOUS PEOPLE ENCOUNTERED ON THE ROAD WITH MR. HOLMES, WHO CLAIMED THAT HE OWNED THE PROPERTY. HE ADVISED THAT THE COUNTY HAS ALSO MAINTAINED, TO SOME EXTENT, THE DITCH ON THAT ROAD. MR. WALKER COMMENTED THAT QUAY DOCK ROAD HAS ALWAYS BEEN OPEN, AND HE REQUESTED THE BOARD TO KEEP IT OPEN, AS IT IS A WAY TO GET TO THE RIVER. s 34 DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ALONG THOSE LINES. ATTORNEY COLLINS ADVISED THAT BACK IN 1941 A STATUTE WAS PASSED DESIGNATING QUAY DOCK ROAD AS A STATE ROAD. CHAIRMAN LYONS COMMENTED THAT THE BOARD COULD PURSUE THE COUNTY'S RIGHT TO KEEP THE ACCESS ROAD TO THE RIVER; THEN ASKED IF THE BOARD WAS INTERESTED IN SOMETHING DIFFERENT+ HE DID NOT THINK HE WANTED TO VOTE TODAY WITHOUT A SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION FROM THE ATTORNEY. THE CHAIRMAN THEN REQUESTED THAT THE LETTER JUST RECEIVED FROM GEORGE W. (RED) BLANTON BE MADE PART OF THE RECORD. JAN 14-.1981 u 35 BOO,45.� �4+.� a 4�Ca 'TMi d.#' bc.,' a A e ler 1604 �°diIt; P4, Itec�` totted tide,etn,b��rr� fe`. is sc�ti dont h toleev hay, lob � so t o �ecd� n th 4tt � ectic+ oz tu�f ick �oPd to ' Inn3ver �s s s f'arss c:0s,F 'i c.t3ens of this-area`d t?�a s jlt roc lon;ei'or fid' rias ereatec ouTw ll, knoyq. nd.. it, served. the'`fari ers a :. and th,e �en�nsu�s�� who ;baud, :their �ror3uce.`by boat- C ; c lragonr to ;the ..rsili :st`tiora,ierr it ��,as st. '. gain :=# rear ets Je came o ;t?sir. S�Zc ':ih ,,1 0 : from i Vas only one; month old accord.% to iJJ5' 7 A_ I ' :, t vd "ic7 ,afe itssd. this road for, ',main" _ �*e;:'rS mt?id o'Glhers '. the T11e dcac ASre: 'ered t -bonded frmr the =ro-st * into the water far_ma b e undrod .(l�t�'}feetrod �t to *est `:Anr ':of the docl .Ther •r'� w a s cc 2_."I, " V,- OT t o z�a- on �ro�zr� � n. ' r� froom: ,' e3atn oant� t e, oa '��ry�in,�`�.. I road • .. 2 ..... Itd eq0 ,z- the :river : A t *r�. ^zould,ea�nt't cc3;2irapro #.and.,prcr� t�J C bn t czens a whole' 2 am for fut sire M z�Or�.t .on � Flo.,er p$ot�.e raver Iuso stisfy one or two iric'ividia dead:.crhie isfood--soy vrhy.rot.,honor,_tbose --blood :Van teams tta, try, t4_ make ; a: living who .helped quay ado l ; �:oad iaxzd , havelong: <siiico' .passed onxlI coup mention but : dont deem ait ne-cessaz!y however I . want to_ ' ment�.on -.once,: `3 oddenberry,the graZdlather of `P.W.E.l oddenberrp (fit lr.ST.S. Roddenberry was a honest upright man of ,the Tigitcsf i There was also €�Y, church on-, e north side .of Docroad ori' nor Inc3i n i'ger'enr ,man;r 'ch is finers user' _t39 a road'go; the church. I feel .that this letter reflects the sentiment of tithe major citizens; of ;this comianity' bs ref by rn-signature voters on uetitivns �rhach «*cru gen.tleMen are no doubt fanii a 7/.,nelas:n,.etthat �aJ'� the icrr'�erso` tPa #? sty end elected' :.b r tine ..Deonla Sao bes ofxoaxr rbi�it;� _;;,yid,, rpt► .. ,; p t: t o �, I►�:lns idem 1F v rtr 1 q ^.n a r f evfr' a 1c fOro� , ofi tik ; a tic►ri'. I reu aectf�a �r re ue's.t Ktk honterod s bgblic record µYx tE ,gyp on cruor^ G�nr;e _of ;Pe�i.s r LENGTHY DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED THAT HE WAS REALLY PERSUADED BY THE STATE ROAD SPECIAL ACT, AS FAR AS THE COUNTY HAVING ACCESS TO THE RIVER S EDGE. HE ADVISED THAT HE WILL RESEARCH•THE STATUTES THAT MIGHT HAVE EXISTED IN THE QUAY DOCK DISTRICT. ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED HE WAS"NOT GOING TO RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT ON THIS ROAD TO THE RIVER - HE FELT THE BURDEN NOW SHIFTS TO THE PETITIONERS TO PERFECT WHATEVER PRIVATE RIGHTS THEY HAVE. COMMISSIONER BIRD STATED THAT HE HAD NOT HAD A CHANCE TO VISIT THIS SITE AND WOULD LIKE VERY MUCH TO MAKE AN ON-SITE INSPECTION. LEON BLANTON, PROPERTY OWNER AND RESIDENT ON QUAY DOCK ROAD, APPROACHED THE BOARD. HE GAVE A BRIEF HISTORY OF HIS FAMILY USING THAT ROAD SINCE 1917 UP TO THE PRESENT TIME, AND URGED T -HE BOARD TO DO EVERYTHING WITHIN ITS POWER TO KEEP THIS ROAD OPEN, COMMISSIONER WODTKE SUMMARIZED THE POINTS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY AND WOULD BE WILLING TO STUDY SOME RECOMMENDATIONS, AND ALSO NOT TO MAKE THE ROAD A DEAD END ROAD - IT SHOULD BE MAINTAINED BY THE COUNTY. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK COMMENTED THAT THIS ROAD HAS BEEN MAINTAINED BY THE COUNTY TO SOME EXTENT, AND HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF THERE WOULD BE A WAY TO WORK OUT A SOLUTION THAT WOULD PLEASE EVERYONE CONCERNED. HE ADDED THAT THERE ARE SOME TAX PROBLEMS INVOLVED WITH THE PROPERTY THAT MUST BE STRAIGHTENED OUT. CHAIRMAN LYONS FELT THE BOARD WANTED TO MAINTAIN THE RIGHT- OF-WAY ON QUAY DOCK ROAD, PARTICULARLY TO THE RIVER, IF POSSIBLE, AND SUGGESTED TURNING THE MATTER OVER TO THE ATTORNEY FOR RESEARCH AND HIS OPINION ON THE MATTER. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED, AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT ATTORNEY COLLINS WOULD GET TOGETHER WITH ATTORNEY RODDENBERRY IN ORDER TO OUTLINE SOME SOLUTION, AND THE MATTER WILL BE LEFT WITH ATTORNEY COLLINS TO OFFER ADVICE TO THE BOARD AT A LATER DATE. 37 JAN 141981 Boot ` ` i' JAN 141981 ROW 4 Pa�E PUBLIC HEARING — ORDINANCE CREATING R—ZD MULTIPLE FAMILY DISTRICT — ORDINANCE 81-1 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 REACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Weekly Vero Reach, 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 2, in the matter of } ' ow-Ar/V ` 2 Z) in the Court, was pub - fished in said newspaper in the issues of AeP , a _ r / �70pr 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 continuous'y 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 prerreeding 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 anv discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said'newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed befo (SEAL) U/ WMAWIFF -4&-61-- fA` (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Iridian River County, Florida) NOTICE IS HEREBYICE GIVEN that the Board - of County Commissioners of Indian River., County, Florida, will hold a public hearing on January 14, 1981, at 9:30 A.M. in the City Council Chambers in the Vero Beach City Hall to consider the adoption of an Ordinance creating a new zoning district to be referred to as R-213 Multiple -Family District, providing for permitted uses, providing for special exceptions, providing for building height limits, providing for minimum lot and floor area requirements, providing for, -maximum Iot= coverage, providing for separation between principal buildings on the same lot, providing for front,`side and rear setbacks, providing for open spaces, providing for parking regulations, and providing for an effective date. Board of County Commisstonerg of Indian River County, Florida By: -s -Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman - Dec. 24, 19t1o. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER EXPLAINED THAT THIS ORDINANCE IS SIMPLY A UTILIZATION OF EXISTING MULTI—FAMILY CATEGORIES, MODIFIED ONLY TO REFLECT THE SIX UNITS PER ACRE QUANTITY THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE. HE THEN SPOKE ABOUT SOME MINOR CHANGES INVOLVED IN THE ORDINANCE AND REFERRED TO ITEM W ON THE SECOND PAGE, AND SUGGESTED ADDING THE FOLLOWING AFTER THE SECOND SENTENCE: , OR REQUIRED MINIMUM SETBACKS, OR SPACING FOR STRUCTURES OR BUILDINGS.�� DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE SECTION CONCERNING "OPEN SP� _ 38 21 THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WAS ANYONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO BE HEARD. RAY J. SCENT, INTERESTED CITIZEN, APPROACHED THE BOARD TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE. HE FELT THAT THIS ORDINANCE WILL GIVE MORE GREEN SPACE SINCE THE LAND AREA IS BEING REDUCED, AND THE PERSON DEVELOPING THE AREA CAN PUT IN THE SAME NUMBER OF UNITS BUT THEY NOW HAVE THE ABILITY TO GO MORE THAN ONE STORY HIGH. NORMAN BADENHOP, VERO BEACH CIVIC ASSOCIATION REPRESENTATIVE, COMMENTED THAT HIS ORGANIZATION IS IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE AND THEY FEEL IT WOULD ALLEVIATE MANY PROBLEMS. ASSISTANT ATTORNEY SOVIERO NOTED THE FOLLOWING CHANGES TO BE MADE IN THE ORDINANCE. IN SECTION (A), ITEM (3), THE WORD `SUBORDINATE" WAS MISSPELLED. IN SECTION (B), ITEM (5)," IT SHOULD READ AS FOLLOWS "GOLF COURSES WHICH ARE NOT LIGHTED FOR NIGHT USE EXCEPT FOR PUTTING COURSES, TENNIS COURTS, HORSE STABLES, AND AIRSTRIPS." ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE 81-1 ESTABLISHING THE R -ZD MULTI -FAMILY DISTRICT, WITH THE CHANGES TO BE MADE AS NOTED BY THE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY AND THE PLANNING DIRECTOR. JAN 1 39 wax,. � *A E .. 41981 pp� ' JAN 141981 BaaK 45 aa, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NOV" AN ORDINANCE CREATING A NEW ZONING DISTRICT TO BE REFERRED TO -AS R -2D MULTIPLE -FAMILY DISTRICT, PROVIDING FOR PERMITTED USES, PROVIDING FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, PROVIDING FOR BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITS, PROVIDING FOR MINIMUM LOT AND FLOOR AREA REQUIREMENTS, PROVIDING FOR MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE, PROVID- ING FOR SEPARATION BETWEEN PRINCIPAL BUILD- INGS ON THE SAME LOT, PROVIDING FOR FRONT, SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS, PROVIDING FOR OPEN SPACES, PROVIDING FOR PARKING REGULATIONS, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. SECTION 10D. R -2D Multiple -Family District. (a) Uses permitted. In this district a building or premises may be used only for the following purposes: (1) Single-family dwellings. (2) Parks and playgrounds owned or operated by the county, state or federal government, or by the property owners within a development or by civic associations or similar nonprofit groups or agencies. (3) Accessory uses and structures customarily asso- ciated with and subordinate to the above uses, subject to conditions expressed in Section 25, subparagraph (g). (b) Special exceptions. The following uses may be permitted by the county zoning commission after site plan approval according to Section 23: (1) Multiple -family dwellings. (2) Cultural and civic facilities. (3) Churches, schools and public buildings. (4) Country clubs, yacht clubs, and beach clubs. (5) Golf courses which are not lighted for night use except for putting courses, tennis courts, horse stables, and airstrips. (c) Building height limit. No building or structure shall exceed thirty-five (35) feet in height, exclu- sive of elevator shafts and/or air conditioning con- densing units and/or cooling towers and except as provided in Section 25, paragraphs (a) and (p) of this Ordinance. (d) Minimum lot and floor area required. For the following specific uses every lot or parcel of land on which living quarters are located shall provide a living quarters area and a land area of at least the amount indicated: Square feet area Square feet of Number of dwellings of living quarters land area required per (family) unit per (family) unit Single family One story: Two story: First floor Total Two family Three or more family 750 or more 7,200 750 or more 750 or more 750 or more 7,200 750 or more 7,200 f In computing the floor space as required above,the areas occupied by porches, patios, terraces, attached garages, carports, covered parking spaces or nonroofed areas shall be excluded. The minimum width of any lot used for a single-family dwelling shall be eighty-five (85) feet; for a two (2) or more family dwelling, one hundred (100) feet. (e) Lot coverage. No principal structure and its accessory buildings shall occupy more than twenty-five (25) percent of the lot area exclusive of swimming pools. (f) Separation between principal buildings on the same lot. Detached principal buildings on the same lot shall be located no closer together than twenty (20) feet plus one foot additional for each additional two (2) feet in height over twenty-five (25) feet in height. (g) Front yard. Every lot shall have a front yard or street yard of not less than twenty-five (25) feet in depth for a building or structure up to and including twenty-five (25) feet in height, provided that when the structure exceeds twenty-five (25) feet in height, the front yard shall be increased by one foot for each additional two (2) feet of height or portion thereof. (h) Rear yard. Same as front yard above. (i) Side yards. A side yard shall be provided on each side of every lot of not less than ten (10) feet for single-family dwellings. Multiple -family dwellings shall be required to provide a side yard on each side accord- ing to the following: Up to twenty-five (25) feet in height, fifteen (15) feet. Twenty-five (25) feet and over, fifteen (15) feet plus one foot additional for each ad- ditional two (2) feet in height. (j) Open space. Every lot in this district used for dwelling purposes shall have a minimum of forty (40) percent of the total area set aside for open recrea- tional or landscaped area. No part of any open area shall be used for driveways or parking area, or required minimum setbacks, or spacing for structures or buildings. All landscaped areas shall be planted and appropriately maintained in lawn, sod, natural foliage, gardens or ponds. (k) Parking regulations. Off-street parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with the requirements for specific uses set forth in Section 24 of this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall become effective according to law. Adopted January 14, 1981. This Ordinance shall take effect January 19, 1981. JAN 14 1 45 Fa�f "-" 9. JAN 141981 pro 5 >"820 PUBLIC HEARING — ORDINANCE REQUIRING A "BINDING LETTER OF INTERPRETATION" — ORDINANCE 81-2 THE HOUR OF 9:45 O'CLOCK A.M. HAVING PASSED, THE DEPUTY CLERK READ THE FOLLOWING NOTICE WITH PROOF OF PUBLICATION ATTACHED, TO—WIT: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Weekly Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being 1-191 , LIZ Liin the matter of 1 in the lished in said newspaper in the issues of _-.e_c r -> 4L , /' 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. J� Sworn to and subscribed befog me Iday of J/.� �9� A.D. (SEAL) (usiness Manager) (Clerk of the Circuit CourV,,{idian River County, Florida) NOTICE IS HERNOTICE EBY G VE*lhatthe Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, will hold a public hearing on JanuaCouncil Chamber14, s In the at Vero each City. Hall to consider the adoption of an Ordinance requiring a"Binding Letter of Interpretation" from the State Land Planning .Agency where a proposed development ex. ceeds .500 units;_ or. where two or' more developments by a common owner exceed 500 units; and providing for an effective date. - Board of County Commissioners _, -of Indian River County, Florida .: BY: -s- Patrick B. Lyons, Chairman` Dec. 24, 1980..:.... ASSISTANT ATTORNEY SOVIERO EXPLAINED THAT THIS ORDINANCE WOULD ACCOMPLISH REQUIRING A DEVELOPER TO SUBMIT A REQUEST FOR A BINDING LETTER OF INTERPRETATION, AND THE THRESHOLD HAS BEEN SET AT 500 UNITS. HE REFERRED TO PAGE 2, SECTION 2, AND RECOMMENDED THAT "FIVE YEARS" BE INSERTED IN THE BLANK SPACE. ATTORNEY SOVIERO THEN DISCUSSED ADDING A NEW "SECTION 3" WHICH IS AN ALTERNATE FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER REGARDING COMPLETED SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT. 42 MORE DISCUSSION TOOK PLACE ABOUT THE EFFECTS OF REQUIRING DEVELOPERS TO OBTAIN BINDING LETTERS. IT WAS NOTED THAT ANOTHER SEPARATE ORDINANCE IS IN THE PROPOSAL STAGE AT THIS TIME WHICH WOULD COVER A MAJOR SITE PLAN REVIEW - THIS WOULD SET CERTAIN THRESHOLDS AND BETTER ENABLE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO HIGHLIGHT THE IMPACTS THAT MIGHT BE CAUSED. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT FLORIDA LAND COMPANY, AND IT WAS THOUGHT THEY MIGHT COME BACK FOR A REZONING ON THEIR PROPERTY. SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS THOUGHT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE MIGHT BE PREMATURE. PLANNING DIRECTOR REVER ADVISED THAT THERE ARE TWO PROJECTS SIMILAR.TO FLORIDA LAND COMPANY COMING INTO THEIR DEPARTMENT SOON. ATTORNEY COLLINS RECOMMENDED INCLUDING SECTION 3 TO THE BOARD IN LIGHT OF WHAT HE UNDERSTOOD WAS THE ATTITUDE OF THE BOARD. THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF THERE WAS ANYONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO BE HEARD. WILLIAM KOOLAGE, INTERESTED CITIZEN, CAME BEFORE THE BOARD TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO PASS THIS ORDINANCE, AND HE FELT THEY NEEDED THE ORDINANCE AS FAST AS POSSIBLE. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT THE THRESHOLD OF 500 UNITS, AND ATTORNEY SOVIERG RECOMMENDED THAT THIS FIGURE WOULD BE THE STRONGEST TO SUPPORT. COMMISSIONER BIRD QUESTIONED THE USE OF THE WORDS "REASONABLE PROXIMITY" ON PAGE 2, PARAGRAPH ONE. ATTORNEY SOVIERO STATED THAT HE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND CHANGING THE WORDING AS THEY NEED THE FLEXIBILITY. MORE DISCUSSION FOLLOWED. JAN 141981 43 Bch 45 P�,E 621 JAN 141991 �ooK 45 R'A��2 MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COM- MISSIONER SCURLOCK, THAT THE BOARD ADOPT ORDINANCE 81-2, WITH THE CHANGE IN THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE OF SECTION,3; THE ADDITION OF FIVE YEARS" IN THE BLANK SPACE ON PAGE 2; AND THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ORDINANCE TO BE JANUARY 14, 1981. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION, IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED WITH A VOTE OF 4 TO 1, WITH COMMISSIONER BIRD VOTING IN OPPOSITION. � 44 �_ INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 81-2 AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING A "BINDING LETTER OF INTERPRETATION" FROM THE STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY WHERE A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT EXCEEDS 500 UNITS; OR WHERE TWO OR MORE INTERRELATED DEVELOPMENTS BY A COMMON OWNER EXCEED 500 UNITS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners has determined that certain large developments may raise the question of whether a development of regional impact (DRI) may be required because of the regional impact of said developments, taking into consideration (a) location; (b) whether the development unreasonably interferes with the achievement of the objectives of the adopted land development plan and proposed amendments if any applicable to the area; (c) whether the develop- ment is consistent with the local land development regulations; A (d) whether the development will have a favorable or unfavorable impact on the environment and natural resources of the region and the extent of the 'impact; (e) whether the development will have a favorable or unfavorable impact on the economy of the region and the extent of the impact; (f) whether the development will effi- ciently use or unduly burden water, sewer, or solid waste disposal, or other necessary public facilities; (g) whether the development will efficiently use or unduly burden public transportation facili- ties; (h) whether the development will favorably or adversely affect the ability of people to find adequate housing reasonably accessible to their places of employment; and (i) whether the development complies with such other criteria for determining regional impact as determined by the County Planning and Zoning Office, including, but not limited to, the extent to which the development would create an additional demand for, or additional use of, energy; and WHEREAS, the previous presumptory DRI threshold set for Indian River County, based upon its prior population of less than 50,000 people, was 500 living units; and WHEREAS, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners has determined that developments exceeding 500 units may pose the question of whether a DRI is applicable; and $A� 45 PK N . JA N1 4 1981 I JAN 141991 BOOK 45 WHEREAS, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners is aware that two separate interrelated developments by common owners within a reasonable proximity may pose the question of whether a DRI is applicable, when the number of proposed units for the additional developments aggregated exceeds 500 living units; and WHEREAS, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners is interested in requiring a binding letter of interpretation from the State Land Planning Agency as a part of site plan review, subdivision approval or other proposed land uses exceeding 500 living units whether in a single proposed development or several developments taken together where common, or interlock- ing, ownership, either legal or equitable, interests are shown; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY: SECTION 1. Any developer or builder or other individual or entity submitting an application to the County for site plan review, sub- division approval, or any other proposed land use involving the construction of living units exceeding 500 in number, shall submit to the County Planning and Zoning Office, together with any other information required or requested for the particular proposed use, a binding letter of interpretation from the State Land Planning Agency setting forth a statement whether a DRI is applicable to T the proposed use. SECTION 2. Where a common owner, owners, interlocking owners, or their heirs, successors or assigns of more than one development site holding either a legal or equitable interest submits a site plan application, subdivision application, or any other proposed use within five years of a prior application involving the con- struction of dwelling units which when aggregated exceeds 500 in number, and where such projects are located within a reasonable proximity of each other, then the developer, builder, owner, agent, or other entity must submit, together with any other additional information required or requested, a binding letter of interpreta- tion from the State Land Planning Agency setting forth whether a. DRI is applicable. SECTION 3. This Ordinance will not apply to projects which, as of the effective date of this Ordinance, have had substantially com- pleted site plan applications submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department, and the Planning and Zoning Director has certified that the subject site plans are substantially complete, and total devel- opment proposals which have been received by the Planning and Zoning Office and which have been certified by the Planning and Zoning Director as having been received prior to the effective date of this Ordinance. However, only those total development plans and completed site plans so certified by the Planning and Zoning Director as having been received prior to the effective date of this Ordinance shall be exempt from the provisions hereof. The certification of the total development plan as above described will not bind the County to the approval of the said Plan but will only serve as a means of identi- fying the physical boundaries of exempt projects for thefpurposes r herein set forth. SECTION 4. -SEVERABILITY If any part of this Ordinance is held to be unconstitutional, it shall be construed to have been the legisla- tive intent to pass this Ordinance without such unconstitutional part and the remainder of this Ordinance to the exclusion of such part shall be held to be valid as if such part had not been included herein. If this Ordinance or any provision hereof is held to be inapplicable to any person, group of persons, property, kind of property, circumstances or set of circumstances, such holding shall not affect the applicability hereof to any other person, property or circumstance. SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall not create liability on the part of Indian River County nor any officer nor employee thereof, for any damages that result from relaiance on this Ordinance or any administrative decisions lawfully made thereunder. SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall take effect according to law. Adopted January 14, 1981. This Ordinance shall take effect January 14, 1981. JAN 141991 45 pm' u& JAN 141991 �° BOOK. 45 PACE 626 THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THEREUPON RECESSED AT 12:50 O'CLOCK P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 2:15 P.M. WITH THE SAME MEMBERS PRESENT. DEPUTY CLERK VIRGINIA HARGREAVES TOOK OVER FOR DEPUTY CLERK JANICE CALDWELL FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE MEETING. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON COMMENTED THAT EVEN THOUGH, WITH THE DONATION OF PLANTS BEING MADE TO THE WABASSO BEACH PARK PROJECT, THEY MIGHT NOT REQUIRE THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF PLANTS BID ON, THEY WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO ACCEPT THE BID IN ITS FULL AMOUNT OF $6,500 TO ALLOW THEM SOME LATITUDE. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK WISHED TO BE ASSURED THAT THE UNIT PRICES WOULD HOLD FIRM AS WELL AS THE TOTAL AMOUNT, AND THE ADMINIS- TRATOR CONFIRMED THAT THEY WOULD. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, TO ACCEPT THE BID OF GLENN & MIKE'S LANDSCAPING FOR THE LANDSCAPING PLANTS FOR WABASSO BEACH PARK IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $6,565.18, THE FUNDING TO BE FROM ACCT. #302-000-169-15.00. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE PRESENT FREEZING WEATHER AND THE MARGINAL PROBABILITY OF SUCCESSFUL REPLANTING OF CERTAIN OF THESE PLANTS AT THIS TIME OF YEAR. HE FELT UNLESS THERE IS SOME SENSE OF URGENCY THAT WE SHOULD NOT MAKE THIS ACQUISTION Y AT THIS -POINT. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK POINTED OUT THAT HIS MOTION WAS MADE SPECIFICALLY ON A "NOT TO EXCEED" BASIS TO ALLOW FOR FLEXIBILITY, AND THE ADMINISTRATOR ASSURED THE BOARD THAT HIS STAFF IS WORKING ON THIS PROJECT WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE URBAN FORESTER AND THEY ARE ATTUNED TO THE PROBLEMS INVOLVED. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED 4 TO 1 WITH COMMISSIONER FLETCHER VOTING IN OPPOSITION. ' "m BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2145 -14th Avenue Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Page 1 BID TABULATION BID NO. DATE OF OPENING IRC 472 January'7 1981 BID TITLE Landscaping Plants/Wabasso Bch ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION z UNIT PRICE 1.Crinum Lill 18" 6 ea. 26 Q, 4� N 2.Carissa 3 gal, 166 ea. 6 75 �wIdr w� C� 2 ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE 1.Crinum Lill 18" 6 ea. 26 25 2.Carissa 3 gal, 166 ea. 6 75 3.Dwarf Carissa 1 gal. 436 ea. 2 63 4.Cabba e Palm W-241 19 ea. 60 00 5.Carrotwood V -8' 41 25 =I 6.01eander 51 7 ea. 26 25 7 Oleande 6 00 8 61-8f 2 9.Sea Grape 3 gal, 5 ea 6 75 10.India Hawthorne 3 gal. 14 ea. 9 75 11.Pampas Grass, 3 gal. 36 ea. 6 00 12.Pittos orum 3 gal. 44 ea. 6 00 13.Scaevola, 3 gal. 227 ea. 6 00 i Bids Sent Out 8 Bids Returned 1 JAN 14 198 1 49 roc 45 PA47'.. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE WAS FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA IN QUESTION AND SAW NO PROBLEM WITH THE ' ABANDONMENT AS REQUESTED. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, TO AUTHORIZE THE ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF ORR AVENUE AS REQUESTED BY MR. & MRS. DON ALLEN, CHAIRMAN LYONS STATED THAT HE PERSONALLY WOULD VOTE AGAINST SUCH AN ABANDONMENT BECAUSE WE CANNOT SEE FAR ENOUGH IN THE FUTURE TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE COUNTY MIGHT NOT HAVE A NEED FOR THIS PROPERTY AT SOME TIME. HE SAW NO PRESSING NEED, AS FAR AS THE COUNTY WAS CONCERNED, TO ABANDON THIS PROPERTY. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK AGREED THAT WE SHOULD BE EXTREMELY CAREFUL IN GIVING UP RIGHTS OF WAY, NOTING THAT HE HAS SEEN IT HAPPEN WHERE EASEMENTS HAVE BEEN RELEASED, THAT THE GOVERNING BODY HAS BEEN FACED LATER WITH PURCHASING THE PROPERTY BACK. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER SUGGESTED THAT EACH OF THE COMMIS- SIONERS GO TO ROSELAND AND INSPECT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PERSONALLY. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED 4 TO 1 WITH CHAIRMAN LYONS VOTING IN OPPOSITION. FIRE DISTRICTS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THEREUPON RECESSED AT 2:22 O'CLOCK P.M. IN ORDER THAT THE DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COMMIS- SIONERS OF THE NORTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT MIGHT CONVENE. MINUTES OF THE DISTRICT MEETING WILL BE PREPARED SEPARATELY. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER RECONVENED AT 2:32 O'CLOCK P.M. AND IMMEDIATELY RECESSED IN ORDER THAT THE DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS OF THE SOUTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT MIGHT CONVENE, SEPARATELY. MINUTES OF THE DISTRICT MEETING WILL BE PREPARED 510 m 1 I THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RECONVENED AT 2:35 O'CLOCK P.M. WITH THE SAME MEMBERS PRESENT. CONSTRUCTION PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE KONTOULAS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT CHANGE ORDER #7 IN REGARD TO THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE INCORPOR- ATES CHANGE PROPOSALS NOS, 18, 211 22, 25 AND 26 AS FOLLOWS: CHANGE PROPOSAL #18 INVOLVES RELOCATING A RAINWATER LEADER WHICH WOULD HAVE GONE INTO THE NEW ELEVATOR LOBBY. CHANGE PROPOSAL #21, WHICH WAS APPROVED AT THE LAST MEETING, RELATES TO THE WORK NECESSARY TO CENTRALLY AIR CONDITION THE JUDGES' OFFICES INCLUDING INSTALLATION OF DROPPED ACOUSTICAL CEILINGS. CHANGE PROPOSAL #22 RELATES TO A NEW OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL CONDUIT NECESSARY TO TIE THE TWO TELEPHONE ROOMS ON THE SECOND FLOOR INTO ONE CABLE LEADING INTO THE COURTHOUSE. f CHANGE #25 RELATES TO SOFFITS ON THE EXTERIOR DOORS OF THE NEW ELEVATOR LOBBY. CHANGE PROPOSAL #26 INVOLVES MINOR PATCHING AND REPAIRS REQUIRED FOR THE WALLS OF THE COURTROOM, WHICH ARE TO BE PAINTED AND NOT PANELED AT THIS TIME. MR. KONTOULAS STATED THAT ALL THIS TOTALS $25,642.31, AND HE RECOMMENDED THAT CHANGE ORDER #7 BE ACCEPTED. HE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE BOARD THE FOLLOWING LETTER FROM REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION IN REGARD TO EXTENSION OF TIME AND NOTED THAT THIS WOULD BE AT THE RATE OF $300 A DAY. JAN 1 51 1981 JAN 141981 Connell, Metcalf & Eddy, Inc. P. 0. Cox 341939 Coral Gables, Fl. 33134 Attn: Fir. F. Kirsch Re: I.R.C. Courthouse Renovations Gentlemen: :BOOK 4;u PAGE o-ju January 2, 1989. v a.. rte? cP� s tti�(■ L`:j tray vie call to your attention that Change Proposals No. 18, 229 25 and 26, as submitted by the Contractor, were valid for 15 days from the date of the proposal. This period has past for these proposals. The number obi days of Contract Time included in the proposals for accomplishing the proposed changes is based upon acceptance of the proposal within the period of validity. Therefore, it is hereby a condition of the above noted change proposals that the lapsed time between the end of the validity period and acceptance of the proposal shall be added to the time which maybe required for accomplishment of the changes. All other conditions of these proposals remain un- changed. Very truly yours, REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION, INC. L. A. Snodgrass Vice -President ATTORNEY COLLINS INQUIRED ABOUT THE COMPLETION DATE WHICH WAS SET OUT ON THE CHANGE ORDER AS OCTOBER 30, 1981, AND MR. KONTOULAS EXPLAINED THAT THE ANNEX AND THE COURTHOUSE ARE UNDER ONE CONTRACT; THAT DATE ACTUALLY RELATES TO THE COMPLETION OF THE ANNEX INTERIOR. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON ASKED IF IT IS STILL ANTICIPATED THAT THE WORK IN THE COURTHOUSE WILL BE COMPLETED IN FEBRUARY, AND MR. KONTOULAS STATED THAT HE DID NOT HAVE AN EXACT DATE, BUT IN DISCUSSIONS WITH MR, REINHOLD AND MR. SNODGRASS, THEY SEEMED TO FEEL THAT IT COULD BE COMPLETED NEAR THE END OF FEBRUARY, ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE DATE OF COMPLE— TION AND STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT CLARIFIED ON THE CHANGE ORDER THAT THE OCTOBER 30TH DATE APPLIES TO THE ANNEX INTERIOR. MR. KONTOULAS STATED THAT IS WHAT IT REALLY REFERS TO, ALTHOUGH IT DOES NOT ACTUALLY STATE THAT. HE NOTED THAT WE HAVE A CHANGE ORDER IPJ REGARD TO EXTENSION OF TIME WHICH IS A CHANGE ORDER BY ITSELF THAT DOES ADDRES THIS; HE BELIEVED IT WAS CHANGE ORDER #6. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER ASKED IF THE CONTRACTOR HAS ANY PROBLEM WITH THIS. MR, KONTOULAS NOTED THAT THERE IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE ARCHITECT AND THE CONTRACTOR RE THE PARAGRAPH THE BOARD IS READING ON THIS CHANGE ORDER. THE ARCHITECT SEEMS TO THINK THAT UNDER THE CRITICAL PATH OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SCHEDULE THAT HE IS NOT BEHIND BUT 13 DAYS SO FAR, AND OF COURSE, THE CONTRACTOR HAS PREVIOUSLY ASKED FOR 20 DAYS. THE ARCHITECT IS AGAINST THIS PARAGRAPH APPEARING ON ANY OTHER CHANGE ORDERS AFTER THIS ONE, COMMISSIONER FLETCHER REQUESTED THAT THE MINUTES REFLECT MR. KONTOULAS11 STATEMENT. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED CHANGE ORDER R, WHICH IN- CORPORATES CHANGE PROPOSALS NOS, 18, 21, 22, 25 AND 26, WITH SPECIFIC NOTICE IN REGARD TO THE COMPLETION DATE OF OCTOBER 301 1981, APPLYING ONLY TO THE ANNEX INTERIOR, AND INCLUDING OUR NORMAL STIPULATION THAT BY APPROVING THE CHANGE ORDER, THE COUNTY DOES NOT WAIVE ANY RIGHTS IT HAS TO CLAIM DAMAGES AGAINST THE CONTRACTOR OR THE ARCHITECT BECAUSE OF OMISSIONS OR OTHER REASONS THAT MAY ARISE. 0 53 4 JAN 14 19 7 x 3, JAN 14 1981 CHANGE OWNER ARCHITI CT (� ORDER CONTRACTOR FIELD AM DOCCJAILNT G701 OTHER PKOJECT- Indian River County (name, address) County Courthouse TO (Contractor) CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 5 p- 632 7 ( seven) Reinhold Construction ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 9364 � P.O. Box 666 CONTRACT FOR. Additions & Renovations Cocoa, FL L I CONTRACT DATE: 4-2-80 You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract: Change Proposal #18 — Rainwater Leader — 1,417.27 it of #21 - Air Condition Judges Offices 19,017.41 it 1° #22 - Elec. Conduit to Tel. Rooms 868.08 if #25 - Al. Door - Soffit, Ceil. 1,769.93 '° #26 - Judges Walls - Paint 2,569.62 Total 25,642.31 ne proposed changes in the work may result in additional time required* beyond the contract completion date. Additional time will be added to the contract that is directly related to this change order. The contractor will be paid for the additional required days at the rate or $300.00 (three hundred) per day for fixed overhead costs. The number of days requested are reflected in U-18, 21, 22, 25, and 26. (See attached change proposals) 1he original Contract Sum was . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 689, 000.00 Net change by precious Change Orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 101, 430.44 The Contract Sum prior to this Change Order was . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 790.430.44 The Contract Sum will be (increased) (dcereax�dl h� this Change Order . . . $ 25, 64 2.31 The new Contract Sum including this Change Order will be . . . . . . . . . . . $ 816, 072.75 The Contract Time will be (innrmted) fderrezlPci) hlRcfiangedi by ( 270 1 Days. The Date of Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore Is Oct. 30, 1981 Connell Metcalf & Eddy Reinhold Construction Inc. Indian River County Comm - ARCHITECT CONTRACIOR OWNER 1320 _S_--Dixie_11way -- P.O--Box GGG . . - ------ 145 -44th -Ave: — Address Address -Oral_-Gab es L.,_33134 - Cocoa,292 ! _Der e c1z,_I�---329bD BY --�.� 1���} j�1 gy l rr.� gY — [),T[_ -D Tf _1��`�./_�'�_..--------- E ✓—��l`--- —__ AIA U0CUM1%1 G701 • CHA%U ORDER • APRIL 1970 EDITIO'. • AIAi • 5 1970 • THF ','.fR ',AN 1\5111U1E Of ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW CORK MI., Nw, NASHIhGIi», D.0 I000o O%E PAGE SOUND SYSTEM FOR COURTROOMS ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REVIEWED HIS MEMO IN REGARD TO THE SOUND SYSTEM NEEDED FOR THE COURTROOMS: January 7, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: County Administrator SUBJECT: Sound/Recording System for Courtrooms Each County Courtroom is required to have amplification and recording capability. The recording capability in these courtrooms must be reliable. The architects have provided for amplification in the Circuit Courtrooms; however, certain additions will be required to provide reliable recording capability. F WGYL Representative, Dave Reuscher, has provided a proposal to install a recording sound system that will be compatable to the amplification system and will provide the required recording reliability. His proposal is attached. Rather than go through the change proposal -change order which would provide additional fees for the architects and the contractor, it is recommended that the County accept WGYL's proposal and authorize the installation of the recording sound system. Neil A. Nelson, County Administrator JAN 14191 55 r:: 5 et,33 . A� Board of County- Commissioners 2345 14th Avenue, Vero 'Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Mr. Nelson, K '45 PAGE 6:34' THE TREASURE COAST'S NUMBER ONE STATION 1500 20th Street - Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Telephone (305) 567-8366 December 30, 1980 The following proposal outlines the costs of material and labor for the two newly remodeled courtrooms in the Indian River County Court- house with regard to the Recording Sound System only. In this regard, WGYL will be glad to install the system and subsequently perform any required maintenance, either on a contract or as required basis. The proposed. installation consists of all new microphones. They are of a high quality type, particularly suited for recording. Electrovoice Model DO -56 Omni -directional microphones are used in the fixed mounted applications, (jury, witness, etc.) and Electrovoice Model 649B Omni- directional microphones are used in the suspended application. All cabling will be of the balanced, low impedance type, such as used in broadcast and professional systems. Short and long gooseneck mounts will be used' on the fixed microphones except that the Judges microphone will be mounted on a shock/vibration proof mount and will be movable. The Pause Control for the tape recorder will be located in a convenient location for use by the Judge. All microphone cables will be enclosed in the gooseneck mounts and not run externally. The three suspended microphones will be hung from suitable brackets on the suspended ceiling. These small microphones will have sufficient extra cable included to permit relocation if needed to optimize the system after a trial period. Windscreens will be installed on the microphones used by the Clerk and the Witness to reduce popping and breathing noise. The general arrangement of the proposed system is shown in Figure 1. Figure 2. lists the Bill of Material and Labor costs for the system. Instal- lation shall be in accordance with broadcast standards for sound systems and shall be of the highest quality workmanship. Accordingly, WGYL is pleased to submit this proposal in amount of $3342.06 for both courtrooms. Y Sincerely, Encls: Fig. 1 S 2 Chris Hubbard Copy to: Hercules Contulas Vice President and Manager ADMINISTRATOR NELSON STATED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO THIS WITHOUT GOING THROUGH CHANGE ORDERS AND CHANGE PROPOSALS BECAUSE THEY FEEL IT WOULD BE CHEAPER, HE NOTED THIS COULD BE PAID FOR OUT OF THE FUNDS SET ASIDE FOR FURNISHINGS, AND HE DID NOT FEEL WE COULD HOLD THE ARCHITECT RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS OMISSION BECAUSE THEY HAVE PROVIDED FOR AMPLIFICATION, BUT NOT IN THE DEGREE REQUIRED FOR RECORDING. DISCUSSION AROSE ABOUT GOING TO BID ON THIS ITEM, AND ADMINISTRATOR NELSON INFORMED THE BOARD THAT WGYL HAS FURNISHED ALL OUR RECORDING AND AMPLIFICATION IN THE COURTROOMS AND THE OLD COMMISSION ROOM; IT IS A SOLE SOURCE DEAL. HE NOTED THAT THEY COULD GO OUT AND BID, BUT DID NOT HAVE TO UNLESS THE BOARD DESIRED IT. DISCUSSION CONTINUED AS TO WHETHER TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE IN THIS REGARD, WHETHER WE WOULD BE SETTING A PRECEDENT IF WE DID NOT GO TO BID, AND WHETHER THE PRICES ARE COMPETITIVE. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON INFORMED THE BAORD THAT THE PRICES HAVE BEEN CHECKED OUT BY THE PURCHASING DEPARTMENT, AND THEY ARE VERY COMPETITIVE. HE EMPHASIZED THAT WE WOULD BE GETTING THE TECHNICIAN'S SERVICES AND HAVING THIS SYSTEM PROPERLY SET UP, AS WELL AS JUST PURCHASING THE EQUIPMENT. COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT HE ALWAYS HAS BELIEVED STRONGLY IN SUBSTANTIATING THAT WE ARE GETTING COMPETITIVE PRICES AND WOULD LIKE TO BE SURE THAT THIS HAS BEEN THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED, BUT HE ALSO FELT HAVING AN ADEQUATE AND RELIABLE SOUND SYSTEM IS OF GREAT IMPORTANCE AND THAT IT ALSO IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE SOMEONE AVAIL- ABLE LOCALLY TO WORK WITH THE SYSTEM, SET IT UP CORRECTLY AND KEEP IS RUNNING. MR. KONTOULAS CONFIRMED THAT THE WGYL ENGINEER HAS GIVEN US FREE ENGINEERING AND ALSO IS DOING THE LAYOUT FOR THE NEW COMMIS- SION ROOM. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK NOTED THAT HIS MAIN POINT IS THAT WE HAVE A PROCEDURE AND WHEN SPECIFICATIONS ARE DRAWN UP, ALL THE VARIOUS FACTORS CAN BE COVERED. THE CHAIRMAN POINTED OUT THAT WE ARE HERE EITHER TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL OR NOT TO ACCEPT IT. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COM- MISSIONER BIRD, TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL MADE BY WGYL FOR A RECORDING SOUND SYSTEM FOR THE REMODELED COURTROOMS. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER POINTED OUT A 10� ERROR IN THE PROPOSAL WHICH SHOULD BE CORRECTED. 57 JAN 141981 BOX JAN 141991 a�ox 45 . PAGE 636 CHAIRMAN LYONS'STATED THAT HE WOULD VOTE FOR THE MOTION BECAUSE HE FELT THE TOTAL AMOUNT FOR THE JOB IS EXCEEDINGLY REASONABLE, ESPECIALLY THE $520 CHARGE FOR PLANNING, PROCUREMENT, INSTALLATION AND CHECK—OUT. } COMMISSIONER WODTKE INQUIRED ABOUT YEARLY MAINTENANCE, AND THE ADMINISTRATOR REPORTED THAT WE HAVE A MAINTENANCE CONTRACT WITH.WGYL AT PRESENT ON THE COURTROOMS. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER STATED THAT HE WOULD VOTE IN FAVOR OF ACCEPTING THE PROPOSAL BECAUSE HE BELIEVES IT IS A VERY GOOD PRIQE, BUT WISHED TO HAVE IT NOTED THAT WE HAVE PROCEDURES FOR BIDDING AND HE WOULD HOPE THAT THEY ARE FOLLOWED. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. DISCUSSION — IMPLEMENTATION OF GIFFORD AREA SEWERAGE IMPROVEMENTS EGNINEER JOHN ROBBINS REVIEWED THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN HIS LETTER OF .JANUARY 8, 1981; AS FOLLOWS: SVERDRUP & PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. AND BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (A .JOINT VENTURE) January 8,, 1981 Indian River County Board of County Commissioners c/o Mr. Neil A. Nelson, County Adm. 2345 - 14th Avenue Lawyer's Title Building Vero Beach, FL 32960 Project No. 5675-G Re: Gifford Area Sewerage Improverr�nts Engineer's Project No. 5675-G Dear Neil: We have completed our review of the revised unit prices and complete bid schedule submitted by Driveways, Inc., contractors; for the above referenced project. Please note, the prices shown herein represent construction of the treatment facility at the revised location of Lindsey Road and also utilizing percolation ponds in lieu of spray irrigation for effluent disposal. For your information and review, please find enclosed: 1. Certified Bid Tabulation of the revised bid submitted by Driveways, Inc. and the Engineer's Estimate. 2. Project Cost Summary dated December 31, 1980 (previously submitted to the Board on December 31, 1980). 3. A copy of Change Order No. 1 which will adopt the revised Construction Drawings, revised Technical Specifications and revised Bid Schedule. Please note, the original bid received by Driveways, Inc., on September 5, 1979, was $265,345.25. Change Order No. 1 will increase the original contract amount by $103,390.85. 4. A copy of the Bid Tabulation for the original bids received on September 5, 1979. We have examined Driveways' revised bid. Their bid is approximately 7°0 higher than our Engineer's Estimate and we feel this is not excessive and, therefore, find Driveways' bid acceptable. It should be noted, Driveways' original bid bond for bids received September 5, 1979, is still in effect and we consider Driveways, Inc. to be capable of performing the work as described by the revised contract documents, technical plans and specifica- tions. Our recommendations for implementing this project are as follows: A. Issue the Notice of Award of the Contract for Phase II Gifford Area Sewage System Improvements to Driveways, Inc. based on the bids received September 5, 1979. B. Authorize the Chairman of the Board to execute the Contract Documents subject to the review and approval of the documents by the County Attorney. C. Authorize the Chairman of the Board to execute Change -Order No. 1 at the safie time the Contract Documents are executed. D. Authorize the.Chairman of the Board to issue the Notice to Proceed to the Contractor after approval of the Contract Documents by the Farmers Home Administration. Please note, the original Bid Tabulation of September 5, 1979 and the Project Cost Summary of December 31, 1980 are included for your information. We will make a recommendation on the water line renovation for Pine View Park Subdivision after construction of this project is under way. Should you require further information or clarification, please call. Very truly yours, q,Jl.hn A. Robbins For the Joint Venture MR. ROBBINS WENT INTO THE HISTORY OF THE GIFFORD PLANT SITE, EXPLAINING THAT WE HAD TO GO THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS, HAD TO SEEK A DIFFERENT SITE AND TO GO THROUGH REDESIGN. IN ORDER TO EXPEDITE THIS PROJECT, THEY APPROACHED FMHA FOR PERMISSION TO AWARD THE CONTRACT ON THE BASIS OF THE ORIGINAL BIDS RECEIVED, AND FMHA DID AUTHORIZE AWARDING THE CONTRACT IN THAT MANNER. THE JOINT VENTURE, THEREFORE, IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE CONTRACT ON THE REVISED SPECIFICA— TIONS BE AWARDED TO THE ORIGINAL LOW BIDDER, DRIVEWAYS, INC., WHO HAVE KEPT THEIR BID BOND IN EFFECT. IT IS FELT THAT DRIVEWAYS, INC., 7% INCREASE IS ACCEPTABLE. MR, ROBBINS THEN WENT OVER THE .JOINT VENTURES RECOMMENDATIONS AS SET OUT IN HIS LETTER. 59 4 AN 141981 BOOK r . F cE JAN 141991 BOOK 45 RAGE 38" MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, TO ISSUE THE NOTICE OF AWARD OF THE CONTRACT FOR PHASE II GIFFORD AREA SEWAGE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS TO DRIVEWAYS, INC., BASED ON THE BID RECEIVED SEPTEMBER 5, 1979, IN THE AMOUNT OF $265,345.25, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE ATTORNEY. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER QUESTIONED THE CHARGE FOR RESIDENT INSPECTION LISTED ON ENCLOSURE No. 2 UNDER ENGINEERING IN THE AMOUNT OF $37,205 AND ALSO LISTED UNDER ADDITIONAL WORK REQUIRED IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,000. JOHN ROBBINS EXPLAINED THAT THE FIRST THREE ITEMS LISTED UNDER ITEM 1 - CONSTRUCTION, I.E., PUMP STATION/ELEVATED TANK, WATER SYSTEM RENOVATION, AND WATER SYSTEM EXTENSION, HAVE BEEN COMPLETED, AND THE $37,208 CHARGE WAS ATTRIBUTED TO THE FIRST THREE CONTRACTS THAT WERE ADMINISTERED. THE $18,000 CHARGE IS APPLICABLE TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE GIFFORD SYSTEM GOING ON NOW. FMHA ALLOWS ENGIN- EERING FEES TO BE BROKEN UP INTO TWO PARTS, AND THE RESIDENT INSPEC- TION FEE IS CALCULATED ON A SEPARATE FEE CURVE. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER WISHED TO KNOW WHAT RESIDENT INSPEC- TION ACTUALLY INVOLVES IN FIELDWORK. MR. ROBBINS INFORMED HIM THAT WHEN THE JOB IS IN PROGRESS, THEY WILL HAVE A RESIDENT INSPECTOR ON THE JOBIFULL TIME, WHO WILL ADMINISTER ALL THE ENGINEERING IN THE FIELD, INTERPRET THE SPECIFICATIONS, MAKE SURE THE CONTRACTOR COM- PLIES WITH THE PLANS, AND CERTIFY' THE JOB WHEN IT IS COMPLETED. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION, IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 60 APPROVAL IE N PROCEED TO AFTER JO, NOTICE JHE..�CO TR so �N M4 121 T -DOCUMENTSBY. FM HA � ' " " F HA IS;COMMI S ONER..,-.SCURLOCK REQUESTE OBBINS Y FUND I W,;ACCOUNTI- NUMBERS,.., I N,'THE: ,,"F.UTIURE JAN 14 1981 Book DAEE 640 DISCUSSION RE PRELIMINARY PLAY APPROVAL OF COLONIAL HEIGHTS SUBDV.- (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS) ATTORNEY TOM PALMER SPOKE ON BEHALF OF FRANK ZORC, DEVELOPER OF COLONIAL HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION. HE EMPHASIZED THAT THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL HAS BEEN ROUTED THROUGH ALL THE APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENTS AND ALL HAVE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH ONE CONDITION REGARDING SOME LANDSCAPING TO WHICH MR. ZORC HAS AGREED. MR. PALMER UNDERSTOOD THAT SOME OBJECTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE BY COLONIAL TERRACE SUBDIVISION RESI- DENTS, BUT STATED IT IS HIS POSITION THAT ALL OF THE OBJECTIONS MADE RELATE TO MATTERS MORE PROPERLY ADDRESSED AT SITE PLAN APPROVAL, AND HE DID NOT FEEL THEY ARE PERTINENT FOR THE BOARD TO ADDRESS AT THIS TIME. ATTORNEY NORMAN GREEN SPOKE ON BEHALF OF THE COLONIAL TERRACE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION AND PRESENTED A LIST OF OVER 50 RESIDENTS OF COLONIAL TERRACE PRESENT AT TODAY'S MEETING TO OPPOSE APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF COLONIAL HEIGHTS. SAID LIST IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK. ATTORNEY GREEN CONTINUED THAT THERE ARE ALSO SIX RESIDENTS OF HICKORY SANDS PRESENT, WHICH IS LOCATED TO THE SOUTH OF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION, AND, IN ADDITION, HE IS AUTHORIZED TO REPRESENT DR. ROD LACEY, WHOSE HOME IS VIRTUALLY LOCATED IN THE PROPOSED ENTRANCEWAY TO THE SUBDIVISION. r ATTORNEY GREEN THEN MADE THE FOLLOWTNG PnTNTR! 1. IT WAS HIS OPINION THAT THE UTILITY DEPARTMENT AND SOME OTHERS WHO HAVE GIVEN THEIR APPROVAL TO THIS PLAT WERE LED TO BELIEVE 2, 3. 4. THAT THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION WAS TO BE FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES. THE R-2 ZONING WHICH IS COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY R-1 ZONING IS NEITHER IN CONFORMITY WITH THE MASTER PLAN CURRENTLY IN EXISTENCE NOR THE PROPOSED MASTER PLAN, WHICH CALLS FOR LOW DENSITY IN THIS AREA. COLONIAL TERRACE RESIDENTS, MANY OF WHOM USE THEIR OWN WELLS FOR DRINKING WATER ARE EXTREMELY CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROPOSAL TO HAVE FOUR UNITS PER 1/2 ACRE ON SEPTIC TANKS AND WELLS BECAUSE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF POLLUTION. THE IMPACT OF THE TRAFFIC THAT WOULD BE GENERATED WOULD CAUSE AN EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SITUATION. ATTORNEY GREEN THEN MADE THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS: 1, THAT THE COUNTY ENFORCE THEIR ORDINANCE WHICH CALLS FOR NO MORE THAN FOUR UNITS PER ACRE ON SEPTIC TANK AND WELLS, 2. THAT THE COUNTY REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO R-1 TO CONFORM WITH BOTH MASTER PLANS. 3, THAT THE COUNTY REQUIRE PAVED ACCESS TO OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY IN ORDER TO EASE THE AMOUNT O� TRAFFIC ON 8TH STREET. 4, THAT THE COUNTY REQUIRE A BUFFER ZONE WITH SOLID FENCE AND LAND- SCAPING ALONG THE WESTERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION. ATTORNEY PALMER DENIED THAT MR. ZORC MISLED ANYONE AS TO THE PROPOSED USE OF THE PROPERTY; HE STATED THAT THE OBJECTION RE POLLU- TION'IS PURE SPECULATION; HE DOUBTED THE COUNTY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE A FENCE AND FELT DISCUSSION OF BUFFER ZONE WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE AT TIME OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL; AND HE NOTEb THAT MR. ZORC HAS AGREED TO PAVE THE ACCESS TO OLD DIXIE AND WILL PUT THIS ON THE PLAT, CHAIRMAN LYONS WISHED TO LIMIT THE DISCUSSION TO THE PRE- LIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL BECAUSE WE ARE NOT IN A POSITION TO PREJUDGE THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL. HE POINTED OUT THAT THE QUESTION OF ACCESS DOES RELATE TO PLAT APPROVAL AND THE DEVELOPER HAS INDICATED HE WILL PAVE THE ACCESS TO OLD DIXIE. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK FELT IT IS MORE COMPLEX THAN THAT AND NOTED THAT THE ORDINANCE BOOK TALKS ABOUT LOOKING AT THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY, THE OVERALL PICTURE, DRAINAGE, ETC. HE AGREED THERE IS A TENDENCY TO CONFUSE ITEMS THAT PROPERLY SHOULD BE ADDRESSED AT SITE PLAN APPROVAL, BUT CONTINUED THAT HE HAS SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS WITH OUR PROCEDURES AND WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF CHANGING SOME OF THEM, HE FELT THE FACT, HOWEVER, IS THAT AT THIS POINT THE EXISTING PROCEDURES ALL SEEM TO HAVE BEEN MET AND THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY 'COMiMITTEE HAS GIVEN ITS STAMP OF APPROVAL. ATTORNEY GREEN AGAIN STRESSED THAT UTILITY DIRECTOR LINER - HAD BEEN LED TO BELIEVE THAT THIS WOULD BE SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, AND WAS VERY SURPRISED WHEN HE RECEIVED MR. ZORC`S LETTER OF DECEM- BER 9TH STATING THAT THEY INTENDED TO HAVE 28 HALF ACRE LOTS EACH ACCOMMODATING THREE OR FOUR APARTMENTS, EACH WITH TWO BEDROOMS. BASED ON THAT, ATTORNEY GREEN URGED THAT THE COMMISSION SEND THIS MATTER BACK TO THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE TO BE RECONSIDERED PRIOR TO APPROVAL. ATTORNEY GREEN FURTHER NOTED THAT MR. ZORC MADE. :'.. JAN 141991 63 45 p: E 641 J JAIL 141991 BOOK' 45 'PATE 642 CONFLICTING STATEMENTS IN A LETTER TO THE COLONIAL TERRACE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION IN WHICH HE STATED THAT THEY HAVE NOT MADE PLANS FOR BUILDING CONSTRUCTION AT THIS TIME. MR. ZORC EXPLAINED THAT HIS LETTER TO THE. PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION WAS IN ANSWER TO SOMEONE WHO WONDERED WHAT PARTICULAR TYPE OF BUILDING THEY WERE GOING TO PUT UP, AND HE DID NOT KNOW AT THAT POINT. HIS LETTER TO THE UTILITY DIRECTOR WAS FOR THE PURPOSE OF GETTING ON THE PRIORITY LIST FOR WATER ALLOCATION, AND IT, THEREFORE, HAD TO SET OUT THE MAXIMUM USAGE OF THE LAND. MR. ZORC NOTED THAT THIS DOES NOT MEAN THEY ARE NECESSARILY GOING TO BUILD TO THAT DENSITY; IN FACT, THEY MAY NOT EVEN USE WELLS, BUT HAVE THE ALTERNATIVE OF PUTTING IN A PACKAGE PLANT, AS WELL AS THE POSSIBILITY OF OBTAINING WATER FROM THE MITCHELL PROJECT OR THE COUNTY. HE CONTINUED THAT BEFORE THEY PURCHASED THE LAND, HE PERSONALLY WENT TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO CONFIRM THAT THE PROPERTY WAS ZONED FOR S UNITS PER ACRE AND ALSO CHECKED THIS OUT WITH THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT VERY CAREFULLY BEFORE COMMITTING THE FUNDS OF FOUR INVESTORS TO THIS PROPERTY. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED IN REGARD TO REZONING THIS PROPERTY. ATTORNEY GREEN STATED THAT THE EXISTING LAWS OF THE COUNTY ALLOW THE REZONING PROCEDURE TO BE INITIATED BY THE COMMISSION, AND THEY ARE REQUESTING THAT THE COMMISSION REZONE THIS PROPERTY TO COMPLY WITH THE MASTER PLAN, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT IS COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY R-1. ATTORNEY PALMER FELT THE DISCUSSION ABOUT ZONING WAS A RED HERRING. HE NOTED THAT THERE IS A STRIP OF LOTS ABUTTING, WHICH ALTHOUGH ZONED R-1, ARE NOT IN R-1 USAGE AND PROBABLY NEVER WILL BE. IN ADDITION, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ABUTS ON THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY WHICH, UNDER THE PLAN, WOULD BE ALLOWED UP TO 16 UNITS PER ACRE. HE STATED THAT THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION WOULD BE A GOOD BUFFER BETWEEN THE CAR REPAIR AND SIMILAR TYPE OF ACTIVITY AND THE HIGHER RESIDENTIAL USE TO THE WEST, ATTORNEY PALMER POINTED OUT THAT THE MASTER PLAN LINES ARE NOT SPECIFIC AND BELIEVED THAT S UNITS PER ACRE IS, IN FACT, THE BEST USE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK WISHED TO KNOW IF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR BELIEVED ALL THE FACTS WERE KNOWN WHEN THIS PLAT WAS REVIEWED, AND MR. REVER STATED THAT HE PERSONALLY HAD VISITED THE PROPERTY AND WAS 64 ® m m NEVER UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT IT WAS TO BE SINGLE FAMILY; ALTHOUGH, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT SOME MEMBER OF HIS STAFF MAY HAVE CONSTRUED IT TO BE. THE INFORMATION SUBMITTED TO HIS OFFICE, HOWEVER, NEVER INDICATED ANYTHING BUT SOME FORM OF MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT. DISCUSSION THEN ENSUED AS TO THE PURPOSE OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND A FINAL PLAT, AND MR. REVER EXPLAINED THAT THE PURPOSE OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT IS TO SUPPLY ALL THE TECHNICAL INFORMATION RE DRAINAGE, ROADS, ACCESS, LOT SIZE; ETC., SO THEY CAN MAKE RECOMMENDA- TIONS AS TO WHETHER THIS SHOULD BE ACCEPTED AS A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION, THE FINAL PLAT DISPLAYS WHAT IS THERE SO THE PROPERTY CAN BE RECORDED AND SOLD, THE FINAL PLAT WOULD INDICATE HOW WATER AND SEWER COULD BE PROVIDED, HE NOTED THAT SEVERAL METHODS OF SUPPLY WATER AND SEWER HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED AND THOSE COULD BE CHANGED - THEY ARE NOT BOUND, ATTORNEY COLLINS MADE THE POINT THAT THE MATTER BEFORE THE BOARD IS A QUESTION OF A SUBDIVISION, ZONING IS AN INDEPENDENT QUESTION WHICH SHOULD BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY, HE FELT THAT THE BOARD SHOULD VIEW THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AS A COMMITMENT ON THE PART OF THE COMMIS- SION TO ACCEPT THE FINAL PLAT IF IT CONFORMS TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAT; SO, IT IS NECESSARY TO COVER AS MANY FINE DETAILS AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE IT IS BOTH UNFAIR AND UNLAWFUL TO REQUIRE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS WHEN THE FINAL PLAT IS SUBMITTED. IN REGARD TO A BUFFER ZONE, ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT ALTHOUGH HE DID NOT FIND IN THE ORDINANCE WHERE THE COMMISSION HAS A SPECIFIC GRANT OF AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE A FENCE, HE DID FIND IN SITUATIONS SUCH AS ARTERIAL ROADS, THAT THEY HAVE THE POWER TO PROVIDE FOR BUFFERS TO SCREEN AN AREA. IN HIS OPINION, THAT COULD BE EXPANDED TO INCLUDE REASONABLE AND NECESSARY TRANSITIONS BETWEEN DIFFERENT ZONES, AND HE BELIEVED THE BOARD COULD REQUIRE WHAT THEY DEEM TO BE REASONABLE, IF THERE IS TO BE ACCESS TO OLD DIXIE, IT SHOULD BE MARKED PLAINLY ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SPECI- FIED THAT IT IS TO BE PAVED. -IN REGARD TO UTILITIES, THE ATTORNEY -NOTED THAT WE HAVE APPROVED OTHER PRELIMINARY PLATS WHERE UTILITIES ARE UP -IN THE AIR BASED ON A REPRESENTATION OF THE VARIOUS METHODS IN WHICH THEY MAY BE HANDLED, HE BELIEVED, IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE DEVELOPER DOES NOT KNOW HOW HE FINALLY WILL DEAL WITH UTILITIES. A p- 65 IB JAN 141981 JAN 14191 Box A5 pmt644 DISCUSSION FOLLOWED'ON DEFERRING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL UNTIL THE UTILITY QUESTION IS RESOLVED, AND COMMISSIONER FLETCHER FELT THAT JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT DONE THIS IN THE PAST DOES NOT MEAN WE SHOULD NOT START DOING IT NOW. CHAIRMAN LYONS FELT STRONGLY THAT YOU DO NOT CHANGE THE RULES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GAME. IF WE ARE GOING TO CHANGE THESE RULES, WE SHOULD DECIDE WHAT CHANGES ARE NEEDED, HAVE THE NECESSARY PUBLIC DIS- CUSSION, AND THEN INCORPORATE THOSE RULES IN THE LAWS SO THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND IN ADVANCE WHAT THE RULES ARE. DISCUSSION CONTINUED RE BUFFER, ZONING AND PAVED ACCESS - MR. ZORC STATED THAT HE WAS WILLING TO ACCEPT APPROVAL OF THE PLAT SUBJECT TO PAVING OF THE ROAD, IN REGARD TO BUFFERS, HE NOTED THAT THEY DO HAVE EXISTING BUFFERS AND A MANDATORY SETBACK WHICH ALLOWS FOR 50' - 25' EACH SIDE AND AN ADDITIONAL 15' STRIP, OR A TOTAL OF 65' SEPARATION, HE CONTINUED THAT HE WAS WILLING TO COMMIT TO PUTTING IN A LANDSCAPED SHRUBBERY STRIP ALONG THE WEST LINE AT THE DISCRETION AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. .JOHN COLLINS, INTERESTED CITIZEN, NOTED THAT LANDSCAPING CAN DIE VERY EASILY IF NOT PROPERLY MAINTAINED, AND WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED IS A SOLID WOODEN BUFFER FENCE THE WHOLE LENGTH OF THE PROPERTY, PLUS PROPERLY MAINTAINED LANDSCAPING, HE ALSO BELIEVED THE UTILITY DIRECTOR, WAS MISLED AND APPROVED THIS DEVELOPMENT ON THE BASIS OF SINGLE FAMILY WITH WELLS AND SEPTIC TANKS. MR, ZORC AGAIN REFUTED THAT HE GAVE ANYONE THE IMPRESSION THAT THEY WERE GOING TO SINGLE FAMILY. HE NOTED THERE ARE PROBABLY SEVEN AGENCIES INVOLVED IN THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, AND IT IS POSSIBLE ONE HAD AN ACCIDENTAL NOTION ABOUT THIS, BUT IT WAS NOT OBTAINED FROM HIM. CHAIRMAN LYONS BELIEVED ITIS IMPORTANT TO ASSURE THAT THE LANDSCAPING SURVIVES AND FELT WE MIGHT GIVE CONSIDERATION TO HOLDING FUNDS IN,ESCROW FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD TO ASSURE THIS► COMMISSIONER WODTKE ADDRESSED THE MATTER OF SERVICING THE WESTERLY LOTS WITH ELECTRICAL UTILITIES. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ON UTILITY EASEMENTS AND THE PROBLEMS INVOLVED WITH THE NEED TO HAVE SITE PLAN APPROVAL ON EACH INDIVIDUAL MULTI -FAMILY LOT AS IT IS DEVELOPED, 66 COMMISSIONER WODTKE THEN DISCUSSED THE DESIRABILITY OF ELIMINATING THE 10TH AVENUE ENTRANCE TO COLONIAL HEIGHTS, AND ATTORNEY GREEN URGED THAT THE COMMISSION DEMAND THE PLAT ONLY HAVE ACCESS IN AND OUT FROM OLD DIXIE, WHICH IS THE MAJOR HIGHWAY. MR. ZORC STATED THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS ON 10TH AVENUE; THAT ASTHETICALLY IT IS THEIR BEST ACCESS; IT IS A DEDICATED ROAD; AND THEY HAVE AGREED TO PAVE`IT. HE FELT IT WOULD BE UNFAIR TO SAY THEY ONLY CAN HAVE ACCESS ON OLD DIXIE, AND IT HAD BEEN INDICATED TO THEM THAT IT WAS DESIRABLE TO HAVE TWO ACCESSES. ANN BOLSON OF 666 COLONIAL TERRACE STATED HER STRONG OBJEC- TIONS TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND EMPHASIZED THE HAZARDOUS TRAFFIC SITUATION ON 8TH STREET. ROBERTA AUSTIN EXPRESSED GREAT CONCERN ABOUT POSSIBLE POLLUTION FROM SO MANY SEPTIC TANKS AND WISHED TO KNOW'WHAT REDRESS THE PEOPLE WITH WELLS HAVE IF THEIR BACTERIA COUNT GOES UP AS A RESULT, FRANCES LINDSEY ALSO STRESSED THEIR CONCERN ABOUT WATER AND STATED THAT SHE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOMETHING DONE ABOUT THE WATER SITUATION OR WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE COUNTY PROVIDE WATER. ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT THE WATER IS AVAILABLE AND THESE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO HOOK ONTO THE COUNTY SYSTEM, COMMISSIONER WODTKE AGREED, BUT NOTED THAT HE HAD RESEARCHED THIS AND THE PROBLEM IS THAT IT WOULD REQUIRE THE EXTENSION OF A SIZEABLE LINE. HE FELT WHEN WE GET INTO CONSTRUCTION, THIS SHOULD BE ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS TO BE DONE. CHAIRMAN LYONS URGED THAT THE BOARD BRING THIS MATTER TO A CONCLUSION AND REACH A DECISION. COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT HE WISHED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE TRANSITION FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO MULTIPLE AND ESTABLISH THE BEST BUFFER WE CAN WITHIN OUR LEGAL LIMITS. HE CONTINUED THAT HE WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF THE TENTATIVE PLAT IF THE ENTRANCE ON THE NORTH IS TO BE INCLUDED, AND WHILE HE RESPECTED THE RIGHT OF THE DEVELOPER TO -UTILIZE THIS LAND UNDER ITS PRESENT ZONING, HE BELIEVED THE BOARD HAS THE RIGHT TO ADDRESS THE INGRESS AND EGRESS AND ITS IMPACT. HE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE 15' RIGHT OF WAY TO THE EAST AND WISHED TO KNOW IF THE UTILITY EASEMENT IS .TO THE WEST OF THIS. J 1981 AN 14 67 Bnx. JAN 141991 mox 45 pm 646 MR. REVER COULD NOT'SAY DEFINITELY, HE STATED THAT IT WAS THEIR THINKING WHEN THIS WAS PRESENTED THAT, SINCE WE DID NOT REQUIRE A ROAD, THE 15' RIGHT OF WAY WOULD SERVE THE SAME PURPOSE AS A UTILITY EASEMENT RATHER THAN REQUEST AN ADDITIONAL EASEMENT FURTHER -WEST, ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT GENERALLY A ROAD RIGHT OF WAY IS JUST THAT AND NOT A UTILITY RIGHT OF WAY, BUT IT IS THE COUNTY'S RIGHT OF WAY AND HE FELT THEY COULD DETERMINE TO USE IT THAT WAY, ATTORNEY PALMER AND MR, ZORC BOTH EMPHASIZED THAT IT WAS THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT HAVE TWO ACCESS ROADS, CHAIRMAN LYONS ASKED FOR A MOTION APPROVING THE PLAT SUBJECT TO WHATEVER CONDITIONS THE BOARD WISHED TO INCLUDE. COMMISSIONER BIRD RECOMMENDED AN ADDITIONAL 35' OF BUFFER BE LEFT TO THE WEST OF THE PROPOSED PLAT AND THE FENCE BE PLACED AT THAT POINT. ATTORNEY PALMER REVIEWED THE PRESENT REQUIRED 25' SETBACKS, WHICH PLUS THE 15' STRIP EQUALS 65', AND HE DID NOT FEEL THE BOARD HAD THE AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL 35' OFF ALL THE WESTERN LOTS OR TO DENY ACCESS TO A PUBLIC ROAD. MS, CHARLOTTE.MITCHELL FELT THAT THE BOARD IN TALKING ABOUT BUFFERS WAS AVOIDING THE MAIN ISSUE, WHICH IS THAT THIS PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY ONE FAMILY DWELLINGS AND THERE WOULD BE A MASS OF PEOPLE IN THE MIDDLE OF A SINGLE FAMILY AREA, ATTORNEY GREEN AGAIN RECOMMENDED THAT THE COMMISSION REJECT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND HAVE IT RESUBMITTED INCORPORATING THE SUGGES- TIONS MADE TODAY, MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER FLETCHER, SECONDED BY COM- MISSIONER BIRD, TO REJECT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF COLONIAL HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION AS PRESENTED WITH RECOMMENDATION TO MR. ZORC TO COMPLY WITH THE SUGGESTIONS MADE TODAY - TO ELIMINATE ACCESS TO STH STREET; TO HAVE ONE ACCESS TO OLD DIXIE; TO INCLUDE THE SETBACKS AND EASEMENTS MENTIONED, INCLUDING SETBACKS FOR LANDSCAPING AND FENCING. ATTORNEY PALMER ASKED IF COMMISSIONER BIRD IN RECOMMENDING 35', ACTUALLY MEANT AN ADDITIONAL 10' SINCE THERE ALREADY WAS A 25' SETBACK. COMMISSIONER BIRD STATED THAT HE MEANT 35° ADDITIONAL, EVEN THOUGH HE REALIZED THAT THIS MEANT THEY WOULD HAVE TO REDESIGN AND POSSIBLY LOSE SOME LOTS, HE AGREED A FENCE IS HARD TO SPECIFY, BUT FELT IT WOULD BE DESIRABLE. CHAIRMAN LYONS POINTED OUT THAT IF MR. ZORC PUT A FENCE ON HIS PROPERTY AS SUGGESTED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, HE WOULD BE FENCING OUT 601 OF HIS PROPERTY TO BE USED BY PEOPLE IN THE OTHER SUBDIVISION, COMMISSIONER BIRD AGREED THE FENCE SHOULD BE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUFFER. MR. ZORC AGAIN REQUESTED THAT -THE BOARD CONSIDER THE FACT THAT THEY DID BUY THE PROPERTY IN GOOD FAITH FOR USE OF THAT ZONING, AND HE POINTED OUT THAT THE SETBACKS NOW BEING DISCUSSED WOULD MAKE IT SO THEY COULDN`T USE THOSE LOTS. HE CONTINUED THAT HIS INVESTORS f MIGHT CONSIDER A COMPROMISE TO RESTRICT THE WESTERLY LOTS OF THEIR SUBDIVISION TO HALF OF THE DENSITY OF THE REST OF THE SUBDIVISION, ADMINISTRATOR NELSON NOTED THAT HALF THE DENSITY WOULD BE ONE UNIT PER LOT, AND MR, ZORC STATED THEY WOULD GO TO ONE UNIT ON THOSE LOTS. ATTORNEY GREEN FELT MR, ZORC COULD HAVE A DEED RESTRICTION AND BELIEVED THE BOARD SHOULD REJECT THE PLAT AND LET MR. ZORC RESUBMIT. MR, ZORC ASKED THE BOARD TO CONSIDER THAT HE IS HERE FOR THE THIRD TIME. HE BELIEVED THE PROBLEM COULD BE SOLVED IF THEY CHANGED THESE LOTS TO SINGLE FAMILY, OR HALF THE DENSITY OF THE REST OF THE SUBDIVISION. HE NOTED THESE LOTS THEN WOULD BE AS BIG OR BIGGER THAN THOSE IN COLONIAL TERRACE. IT WAS NOTED THIS WOULD BE ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOMESITE ON EACH 1/2 ACRE LOT ABUTTING COLONIAL TERRACE, AND MR, ZORC STATED THAT WOULD BE IF THEY ARE ON SEPTIC TANK AND WELLS; IF THEY ARE ON A WATER SYSTEM, IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT, COMMISSION FLETCHER BELIEVED THAT IS A GOOD OFFER IF IT IS -NOT MADE CONTINGENT ON WATER AND SEWER. MR. ZORC.THEN AGREED THAT HE WOULD NOT MAKE HIS OFFER CON- TINGENT ON ANYTHING, AND HE WOULD AGREE TO NO MORE THAN ONE SINGLE .' JAN 141991 soak 45 FaGE 648 FAMILY UNIT PER 1/2 ACRE LOT ON THE WEST. HE NOTED THERE IS AN AVERAGE DEPTH OF ABOUT 200' ON LOTS 14 THROUGH 20, WHICH WOULD PROVIDE AN AVERAGE 200' BUFFER ZONE OF SINGLE FAMILY IDENTICAL TO COLONIAL TERRACE. COMMISSIONERS FLETCHER AND BIRD AGREED THIS IS A -CONSIDERABLE CONCESSION BY THE DEVELOPER AND WITHDREW THEIR MOTION AND SECOND BASED ON THE CONCESSION AS STATED ABOVE BY MR. ZORC. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED IN REGARD TO APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT BASED ON THE VARIOUS CONCESSIONS. MR. ZORC EMPHASIZED THAT HE HAD TO HAVE THE ACCESS FROM 8TH STREET, AND HE COULD NOT MAKE THE OTHER CONCESSIONS WITHOUT THIS. ATTORNEY COLLINS FELT THAT WITH LAND ABUTTING A PUBLIC ROAD, THE COMiMISSION WOULD HAVE TO HAVE SUBSTANTIAL REASONS TO DENY ACCESS AT THAT POINT, CHAIRMAN LYONS AGREED THAT TWO ACCESSES PROVIDE AN ESCAPE; ATTORNEY GREEN FELT THE COMMISSION SHOULD HAVE A TRAFFIC COUNT MADE. DISCUSSION CONTINUED IN REGARD TO TWO EXITS. MRS. FRANCES GROTH, WIFE OF THE DEVELOPER OF COLONIAL TERRACE, STATED IT WAS THEIR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE RIGHT OF WAY TO THE EAST WAS NOT A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. DISCUSSION CONTINUED AS TO WHETHER THE RIGHT OF WAY WAS A PUBLIC ONE OR NOT, AND MR. ZORC STATED THAT HE HAD RESEARCHED THIS AND BELIEVEDfTHAT IT IS COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY. ATTORNEY GREEN BROUGHT UP THE POINT THAT 10TH AVENUE SHOULD NOT BE OPEN AT THAT SUBDIVISION BECAUSE IT IS ONLY 126' TO THE ENTRANCE TO COLONIAL TERRACE; S0, THERE WOULD BE TWO FAIRLY HIGH DENSITY EN- TRANCES ONTO 8TH STREET LESS THAN 150' APART, WHICH WOULD CREATE AN EXTREME HAZARD. MR. ZORC NOTED THAT THEIR FIRST PLAT SHOWED ROADS CONNECTING, BUT THERE WAS A LOT OF PROBLEM ABOUT CQNNECTING ROADS BETWEEN THE SUBDIVISIONS, THEY, THEREFORE, AVOIDED THAT IN ORDER NOT TO CREATE TRAFFIC WITHIN COLONIAL TERRACE, HE CONTINUED THAT HE HAS BENT OVER BACKWARDS TO TRY TO DESIGN THE PLAT NOT TO AFFECT THE PEOPLE IN COLONIAL TERRACE, THEY ARE NOT GIVING UP ALMOST 1/4 OF THEIR LOTS FOR A BUFFER ZONE, AND HE DID NOT KNOW HOW THEY COULD ASK HIM TO DO ANY MORE. -I m JOAN CASANO NOTED THAT THE PROPOSED ENTRANCE WILL COME OUT ONTO GLENDALE WHERE THERE IS A KNOLL, WHICH MAKES IT VERY DANGEROUS, AND IN ADDITION, THERE IS A SCHOOL BUS STOP IN THAT AREA, MR. PIRANI OF COLONIAL TERRACE ALSO EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT TRAFFIC ON GLENDALE AND FELT MR. ZORC ONLY WANTED THAT ACCESS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ROUTING POSSIBLE PURCHASERS PAST COLONIAL TERRACE, ATTORNEY PLAMLR BELIEVED THAT THERE MUST BE A LOT OF EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO JUSTIFY CLOSING A PUBLIC ROAD FOR ACCESS TO A PIECE OF PROPERTY, HE POINTED OUT THAT WITH TWO ACCESSES, PEOPLE WILL BE USING BOTH ENTRANCES AND HE DID NOT FEEL THERE IS ANY .EVIDENCE TO FIND THAT MR, ZORC CANNOT HAVE ACCESS TO 10TH AVENUE. HE NOTED THAT IF IT SHOULD PROVIDE TO BE A PROBLEM THEN POSSIBLY SOME REMEDIAL ACTION COULD BE TAKEN, BUT THIS IS ALL PURE SPECULATION. CHAIRMAN LYONS FELT WE HAVE NOW HEARD ALL THE ARGUMENTS AND ASKED FOR A MOTION, HE ALSO WAS OF THE OPINION THAT IF IT SHOULD TURN OUT THAT THE ACCESS ON 8TH STREET BECAME A PROBLEM, SOME SORT OF TRAFFIC CONTROL COULD BE PUT IN THERE. HE NOTED THAT WE ARE TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO USE THE LAND WITH THE LEAST PROBLEM TO COLONIAL TERRACE AND ALSO BE FAIR TO THE PEOPLE OWNING THE LAND. MR. GIANNOTTI, RESIDENT OF THE AREA, COMMENTED THAT IT WAS FOUR MINUTES SINCE THE CHAIRMAN ASKED FOR A MOTION AND NO ONE HAS RESPONDED; OBVIOUSLY THERE IS GREAT DOUBT IN THE COMMISSIONS MINDS ABOUT THIS SITUATION, AND HE BELIEVED MORE HOMEWORK HAS TO BE DONE. COMMISSIONER BIRD ASKED THE PLANNING DIRECTOR IF THEY HAD DONE SOME STUDY ON THE TRAFFIC SITUATION AND WHAT THEIR OPINION WAS, MR. REVER STATED THAT IT IS THEIR FEELING THAT IF THE BOARD CONTINUES TO DENY ACCESS IN AND OUT OF SUBDIVISIONS BY MORE THAN ONE MEANS, WE ARE GOING TO BUILD SITUATIONS THAT ARE GOING TO BE UNTENABLE AS GROWTH TAKES PLACE, HE BELIEVED THE TRAFFIC SITUATION COULD WELL BE RELIEVED BY HAVING TWO ACCESSES AND FELT THE ENTRANCE ON OLD DIXIE WILL BE FOUND TO BE MUCH MORE CONVENIENT. THE FACT THAT THE ROADS WOULD BE CLOSE TOGETHER HE FELT IS ANOTHER GOOD REASON TO HAVE AN 'ADDITIONAL ACCESS. HE NOTED THAT YOU CANNOT ELIMINATE ALL PROBLEMS, BUT YOU CAN ATTEMPT TO REDUCE THEM AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. MR. REVER WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE ROADS AS THEY STAND ARE A GOOD POSSIBILITY FOR HANDLING THE TRAFFIC FLOW. JAN 14 1981 JAN 141981 Bau `45 DISCUSSION CONTINUED IN REGARD TO THE KNOLL IN THE ROAD AND THE POSSIBLE.NEED FOR ACCELERATION AND DECELERATION LANES. THE BOARD RECESSED BRIEFLY AT 5:05 P.M. FOR A NEW TAPE TO BE PUT ON THE RECORDER AND RECONVENED WITH THE SAME MEMBERS'PRESENT AT 5:10 P.M. DISCUSSION RESUMED AS TO WHAT CONDITIONS SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN A MOTION. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF COLONIAL HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. INGRESS AND EGRESS TO AND FROM OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY TO BE PAVED. 2. AN ADDITIONAL 10' NON -ACCESS DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT ON THE WESTERN BOUNDARY, 3. ALL LOTS (14 THROUGH 20 INCLUSIVE) ABUTTING COLONIAL TERRACE TO BE BUILT AS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - ONE UNIT PER LOT. 4. MONIES TO BE HELD IN ESCROW FOR ACCELERATION AND DECELERATION LANES ON 8TH ST., BASED ON NEED FOR SAME BEING DETERMINED BY A STUDY CONDUCTED BY INDEPENDENT COMPETENT TRAFFIC ENGINEERS. 5. PAVING OF 10TH AVENUE FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO 8TH STREET. 6. STATEMENT ON THE PLAT THAT THE LOTS CANNOT BE SEVERED OR SUB- DIVIDED. FINAL APPROVAL OF WEST MEADOWS SUBDIVISION THE BOARD REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING LETTER FROM SURVEYOR S.P. MUSICK REGARDING POSTING BOND ON THE REMAINING WORK NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE SUBDIVISION: _MUSINWO,1,14 Lahti Otter-ze7ing Compaq 1125 12th STREET, SUITE D P. O. BOX 1377 r VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960 TELEPHONE: 5G2-4741 .r January 8, 1981 Neil Nelson, County Administrator 231+5 14th Avenue Vero Beach, FL 32960 Dear Mr. Nelson: Q This letter is to confirm the meeting held between Mr. McCormick and D1r. Davis this date and based upon that meeting, I am revising our estimate of December 21+, 1980 as follows: Removal of two Pine trees from easement and re -shaping the Swale.......................................................$300.00 Seeding roadside swale and labor ...........................$410.00 Fill and labor to bring west rear lot ditch in conformance with design grades ... ......................................$700.00 Estimated Total ........................................... $1,1+40.00 Please be advised that Mr. Redish has on hand and/or on order two street signs and four stop signs and I have not included these items in the estimate since they can be erected as soon as they are received from the manufacturer. Please be advised that the filling of all the lots required on the preliminary plat approval has been accomplished in a satisfactory manner and other than those items listed above to be bonded, all items of work have been completed on this project. Would you please place this item on the agenda for final plat approval subject to the above for the January 14th meeting of the Board of County Commissioners. Very truly yours, S.P. Musick cc: Jack Redish Freda Wright I concur with the information as furnished in this letter and upon acceptance of the Subd. by the County Commission, recommend that the bond + of $1,440.00 be accepted for completion o Subd. re uirements. X ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REPORTED THAT THERE WAS QUITE A BIT OF FILL THAT HAD TO BE PUT IN, AND HE WAS HAPPY TO SAY THAT THE DEVELOPER 'HAS DONE THIS. THE ADMINISTRATOR CONFIRMED THAT WITH THE POSTING OF THE $1,400 BOND, WEST MEADOWS SUBDIVISION DOES MEET COUNTY REQUIREMENTS. 73 BOOK fmu. �. JAN141991 JAN 141981 R 45 FAGS 6-52 .JACK REDISH INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE SIGNS WHICH ARE ON ORDER SHOULD BE RECEIVED WITHIN TWO WEEKS. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER INQUIRED ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF FILL PUT IN, AND MR. REDISH STATED THAT THEY PUT IN A TOTAL OF 12,000 YARDS. ATTORNEY COLLINS COMMENTED THAT WE HAVE BEEN MAKING AN EFFORT TO HAVE INCLUDED IN THE DEDICATION THE RIGHT FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES TO HAVE THE USE OF THE ROADS. HE NOTED THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS PREPARED ANOTHER CERTIFICATE OF DEDICATION FOR THIS PURPOSE WHICH WILL BE RECORDED ALONG WITH THE PLAT, AND HE RECOMMENDED THE BOARD APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE EXECUTION OF THE CERTIFICATE OF DEDICATION. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY GRANTED FINAL APPROVAL OF WEST MEADOWS SUBDIVISION SUBJECT TO THE ABOVE DESCRIBED CERTIFICATE OF DEDICATION BEING EXECUTED AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE BOND FOR WORK TO BE COMPLETED AS SET OUT IN MR. MUSICK'S LETTER OF JANUARY 8, 1981. FINAL APPROVAL WEST LAKE PARK SUBDIVISION - WITHDRAWN ADMINISTRATOR NELSON INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE WOULD WITHDRAW FINAL APPROVAL OF WEST LAKE PARK SUBDIVISION FROM TODAY'S AGENDA. RETURN OF BOND - PINECREST SUBDIVISION a RETURN OF THE $5,000 BOND POSTED BY PINECREST SUBDIVISION WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE ADMINISTRATOR IN THE FOLLOWING MEMO: January 6, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: County Administrator SUBJECT: Pinecrest Subdivision Based upon the certification of Ed Schmucker, Total Development, Inc. dated December 23, 1980 and the subsequent inspection of Pinecrest Subdivision by the Assistant Adminis- trator, Harold McCormick, it is recommended that the $5000.00 bond posted to insure completion of this subdivision be returned. The developers will be required to maintain the streets, signs and ditches for one year priorto acceptance by the County. Neil A. I?elson, County Administrator ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REPORTED THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS COM- PLETED THE.GRADING AND SEEDING OF THE SWALES, BUT HE LEARNED TODAY THAT THE SHRUBBERY PLANTED IN PINECREST SUBDIVISION TO SCREEN THEIR WATER PLANT HAS DIED AND NEEDS TO BE REPLANTED. HE WONDERED IF WE COULD RELEASE THE $5,000 SUBJECT TO REPLANTING OF THIS SHRUBBERY, COMMISSIONER FLETCHER DID NOT FEEL THEY WOULD BE AS LIKELY TO DO THE REPLANTING IF THEY HAD ALREADY BEEN REIMBURSED THE $5,000, AND ADMINISTRATOR NELSON SUGGESTED THAT WE COULD RELEASE IT ONLY PARTLY AT THIS TIME, DISCUSSION ENSUED AS TO SOME KIND OF GUARANTY TO INSURE THAT PLANTINGS ARE ADEQUATE AND WILL SURVIVE. COMMISSIONER WODTKE FELT THERE SHOULD BE SOME PROVISION MADE IN THE FRANCHISE TO THIS EFFECT SO THAT IF THIS IS NOT PROPERLY DONE, THEY WOULD BE IN VIOLATION OF THEIR FRANCHISE. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT THIS IS IN THE FRANCHISE, BUT HE -STILL FELT THE BOARD IS IN A BETTER POSITION WITH THE MONEY IN HAND. JAN 141981 75 Bx! FAGE 6531 ` JAN 14 19814� �� Box E- 54 COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK ASKED IF WE HAVE ANY PROVISION FOR AN ANNUAL REVIEW OF FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS TO SEE IF THEY ARE IN COMPLIANCE. IN FURTHER DISCUSSION, IT WAS FELT THAT THE UTILITY DIRECTOR WOULD BE THE LOGICAL PERSON TO DESIGNATE TO CARRY THIS OUT. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON SAW NO PROBLEM WITH COMING UP WITH AN ANNUAL EVALUATION, AND CHAIRMAN LYONS DIRECTED THAT IN THE MONTH OF ,JUNE OF EACH YEAR, THE UTILITY DIRECTOR WILL MAKE AN ANNUAL REPORT TO THE BOARD ON EVALUATION OF FRANCHISES. THE BOARD CONTINUED TO DISCUSS THE REPLANTING DESIRED IN PINECREST SUBDIVISION AND THE NEED TO REMIND THE DEVELOPER OF HIS OBLIGATION UNDER THE FRANCHISE TO MAINTAIN THE SHRUBBERY, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO RETAIN THE $5,000 BOND POSTED BY PINECREST SUBDIVISION UNTIL THE DEVELOPER REPLANTS AS PER THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT; THE ADMINISTRATOR TO MAKE AN INSPECTION AT THE EXPIRATION OF 90 DAYS TO INSURE THAT THE PLANTS ARE DOING SATIS- FACTORILY; AND THE MONIES TO BE RETURNED AT THAT TIME UPON APPROVAL OF THE ADMINISTRATOR. JOHN COLLINS, RESIDENT OF THE AREA, INFORMED THE BOARD THAT THE INADEQUATE PLANTING IS NOT THE ONLY WAY IN WHICH THE BUILDER HAS VIOLATED THE TERMS OF HIS AGREEMENT WITH THE COMMISSION. HE CON- TINUED THAT ABOUT 1-1/2 YEARS AGO, THE COMMISSION VOTED THAT MITCHELL BUILDERS COULD NOT BREAK THROUGH AND USE THE ROADS OF COLONIAL TERRACE, AND THEY HAVE FLOUTED THIS REQUIREMENT OF THE COUNTY COMMISSION ALSO. MR. COLLINS, THEREFORE, ASKED THAT THE COMMISSION AMEND THEIR iMOTION OR MAKE ANOTHER ONE TO REQUIRE MITCHELL BUILDERS TO ERECT A BARRICADE AT THEIR EXPENSE COMPLETELY ACRESS THE END OF LOTH COURT, HE NOTED THAT THE BARRICADE ON 11TH COURT HAS WORKED WELL. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON FELT TtiE COUNTY MIGHT HAVE TO PUT SOME LARGE STOP SIGNS ON EACH SIDE OF THE BARRICADE TO ALLEVIATE OUR LIA- BILITY, BUT MR. COLLINS NOTED THAT THERE WILL BE A CUL DE SAC THERE AND HE DID NOT FEEL IT WILL PRESENT A PROBLEM. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO REQUIRE MITCHELL BUILDERS TO ERECT A BARRICADE EXTENDING A MINIMUM OF IO' ON EACH SIDE OF THE PAVING OF LOTH COURT. CHAIRMAN LYONS INSTRUCTED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO WRITE MITCHELL BUILDERS IN THIS REGARD. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON INFORMED THE COMMISSION THAT THE SCHOOL BOARD HAS 12 LOADS OF MUCK AND THEY ARE WILLING TO GIVE THE COUNTY SIX TRUCKLOADS TO USE AT WABASSO BEACH PARK IF WE AGREE TO TRUCK SIX LOADS TO THE SEBASTIAN RIVER MIDDLE -JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL. THE ADMINISTRATOR CONFIRMED THAT WE HAVE A USE FOR THE MUCK AND RECOMMENDED THAT WE ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD AS REQUESTED. HE STATED f THAT THEY WILL EXCAVATE THE MUCK, AND WE WILL HAVE'TO LOAD IT. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THE ADMINISTRATOR TO COOPERATE WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD AS REQUESTED; THE FIRST SIX TRUCKLOADS OF MUCK TO GO TO WABASSO BEACH PARK, AND THE SECOND SIX TRUCKLOADS TO BE DELIVERED TO SEBASTIAN RIVER MIDDLE -.JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL. n 77 Bic 45 puf 655 JAN 141981 JAN 14 A G R E E M E N T i I BooK .45 Puf X56 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this _! �k day i off` January, 1981, by and between THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SCHOOL I BOARD, hereinafter referred to as the "Board" and the INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COMMISSION, hereinafter referred to as the "County", i WITNESSES: I I It is agreed that the Board and the County will ex - change property and services which both parties consider of approximate equal value as follows: The Board will provide six truckloads of muck to the County for its use and the County will deliver a similar amount of School Board muck to Sebastian River Middle -Junior High !; School. li i' IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto executed this instrument for purposes herein expressed the day and year first above written. �I I INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COMMISSION BY:� V RESOLUTI ON :D VALOREM TAXESFOR-COUNTYfir►_ '► ATTORNEY COLLINS NOTED THAT UNDER THE STATUTE$ WHERE A PUBLIC BODY PURCHASES PROPERTY, THEY ARE TAX EXEMPT FROM THE TIME OF THE PURCHASE. HE, THEREFORE, HAD PREPARED A RESOLUTION EXEMPTING THE COUNTY FROM PAYING TAXES ON THE PROPERTY PURCHASED FROM THE ANSINS LAST .JULY AS A SITE FOR THE SOUTH COUNTY WATER PLANT, THIS RESOLUTION MUST BE GIVEN TO THE PROPERTY APPRAISER AND THE TAX ASSESSOR. MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 81-4 AS DESCRIBED ABOVE. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER DID NOT SEE WHY THE COUNTY SHOULD GET SPECIAL TREATMENT, AND COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK NOTED THAT WE ACTUALLY WOULD BE COLLECTING FROM OURSELVES, ATTORNEY COLLINS EXPLAINED THAT THIS STATUTE APPLIES NOT ONLY TO THE COUNTY, BUT ANY PUBLIC BODY, SUCH AS THE SCHOOL BOARD, THE HOSPITAL DISTRICT, DRAINAGE DISTRICTS, ETC. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED FOUR TO ONE WITH COMMISSIONER FLETCHER VOTING IN OPPOSITION. THE CHAIRMAN INQUIRED AS TO COMMISSIONER FLETCHER'S REASON FOR VOTING IN OPPOSITION, AND MR. FLETCHER STATED THAT HE DID NOT THINK THE COUNTY'S LAND IS ANY DIFFERENT THAN THE TAXPAYER'S LAND. 0 JAN 141991 79 JAN 14 1981 RESOLUTION NO. 81-4 'Max",45 p� '658 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that pursuant to Florida Statutes 196.28, the following described property was purchased by Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida: All of Tract 9 less 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. said purchase having been made for valid public purpose. Effective on July 8, 1980, and thereafter the lien for tangible, personal and real property taxes on said property are hereby cancelled and discharged, so long as the same are used for public purposes. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN 13. R COUNTY, FLORIDA ck B. Lyons, Attest: Freda: Wright, leek Adopted: January 14, 1981 RESOLUTION 81-5 - RE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCEDURES FOR ADOPTION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ATTORNEY COLLINS REPORTED THAT THE STATE HAS REQUESTED THAT THE COUNTIES EXECUTE A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THAT THEY ARE INSTITUTING THE NECESSARY PROCEDURES TO IMPLEMENT THE ADOPTION OF THE COMPRE- HENSIVE PLAN AND INSURE ADEQUATE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 81-5 AS DESCRIBED ABOVE, COMMISSIONER FLETCHER NOTED THAT IT HAS BEEN SAID THE DOCUMENTS WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AT $2.O0 APIECE, HE ASKED IF IT IS THE INTENT TO SELL THESE TO THE PUBLIC, ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT IT IS THE COUNTY'S INTENT TO FOLLOW POLICY; IT WOULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE TO DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL TO THE PUBLIC. HE POINTED OUT THAT ANYONE CAN COME TO i THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND REVIEW THE DOCUMENTS, COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK RECOMMENDED THAT ONE COPY BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC LIBRARY, AND COMMISSIONER FLETCHER CONCURRED. THE BOARD HAD NO OBJECTION. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION, IT WAS VOTED ON AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. JAN 141991 8 9 1 FVI Y JAN 141991 RESOLUTION NO. 81-5 A RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCEDURES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE COUNTY COMMISSION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY IN CONNECTION WITH ADOPTION OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTES CHAPTER 163.3161 ET. SEQ. max 0 WHEREAS, the County Commission of Indian River County intends to adopt proposed public participation procedures required by Florida Statutes Chapter 163.3161 et. seq. to accomplish effective public participation in the adoption of the Local Government Comprehensive Plan and elements thereof; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA: That the public participation procedures set out in Florida Statutes Chapter 163.3161 et. seq. are hereby adopted and will be complied with pursuant to law, and further That certain joint public workshops between the Local Planning Agency and the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County have been conducted in the past during the formulation of the various elements of the Local Government Comprehensive Plan, and such joint public workshops will be continued, as necessary, in the future, and further That documents and materials used in connection with the development and adoption of the Local Government Comprehensive 0 Plan and elements thereunder will be made available to interested citizens of Indian River County as these documents and materials become available for public dissemination. This Resolution shall become effective immediately. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA ATTEST Clerk Adopted: January 14, 1981 � � s COMMISSIONER FLETCHER REMINDED THE BOARD THAT AT THE MEETING OF THE NORTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT THIS MORNING, THE FINANCE DIRECTOR RECOMMENDED THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY CQiMMISSLONERS. LEND THE DISTRICT $6,500 TO COVER THE PURCHASE OF THE FIRE ENGINE FROM THE DIVISION OF FORESTRY UNTIL THE SECOND TAX BILLS GO OUT, AT WHICH TIME THE MONEY WILL BE GAINED FROM THE WEST COUNTY FIRE MUNICIPAL SERVICE FUND, COMMISSIONER FLETCHER EXPLAINED THAT A BUDGET AMENDMENT WILL BE NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH THIS, AND THE FINANCE DIRECTOR HAS PREPARED ONE, AS FOLLOWS: MEMO TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM:` -e') JEFFREY K. BARTON, FINANCE OFFICER RE: PURCHASE FIRE TRUCK - NORTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT ;" It is necessary to allocate funds for the purchase of the Fire Truck for North County Fire District,as there was no money budgeted for this purchase from the Division of Forestry. I reccomend the following budget amendment to be approved as part of the additional fund, adopted. ACCOUNT TITLE Automotive Reserve for contingencies Conunissions and Fees ACCOUNT NO. 751-104-522-66.112 751-104-581-99.91 751-104-522-99.94 INCREASE $6,325 DECREASE $5,000 $1,325 B.C.C. Genral Fund will lend $6,500.00 to the North County Fire District Fund THE SUBJECT OF WHETHER OR NOT TO CHARGE INTEREST AROSE, AND COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK BROUGHT UP THE POSSIBILITY OF THE SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT AT SOME TIME DESIRING TO BORROW A LARGE AMOUNT AT NO INTEREST. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS AGREED THAT THAT WAS A GOOD POINT WHICH NEVER HAS BEEN BROACHED BEFORE. IN FURTHER DISCUSSION, IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THIS IS AN EMERGENCY LOAN AND, AS SUCH, SHOULD NOT REQUIRE THE PAYMENT OF INTEREST, JAN 141981 83 45 mz 661 J JAN 141991 B00 . 5 PACE ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT TO THE ACCOUNTS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO EFFECT THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS TO THE NORTH COUNTY -FIRE DISTRICT AT NO INTEREST; THESE FUNDS TO BE REFUNDED IMMEDIATELY 'UPON RECEIPT OF FUNDS AS BUDGETED FROM THE WEST COUNTY FIRE MUNICIPAL SERVICE FUND. COMMISSIONER FLETCHER REPORTED THAT WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET VOLUNTEER GROUPS INTERESTED IN HELPING US WITH THE WABASSO BEACH PARK PROJECT, AND THE WABASSO WOMEN'S CLUB HAS INDICATED THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO TAKE ONE AREA AND MAKE IT PRETTY IF THEY CAN HAVE A PLAQUE THERE STATING: "THIS AREA IS BEING MAINTAINED BY THE WABASSO BEACH WOMEN'S CLUB." THE BOARD HAD NO OBJECTION TO SUCH A PLAQUE AND APPRECIATED THE OFFER, DISCUSSION RE COUNTY SAFETY MEASURES COMMISSIONER FLETCHER WISHED TO HAVE A SAFETY DATA SHEET ON THE CONTENTS OF THE CHEMICALS WE ARE SPRAYING ON O.UR ROADSIDES. HE STATED THAT THE OPERATORS WHO SPRAY THESE CHEMICALS, ALTHOUGH THEY HAVE CARDS STATING THEY ARE QUALIFIED TO SPRAY AQUATIC CHEMICALS, WERE e UNABLE TO SUPPLY HIM WITH THE INFORMATION HE DESIRED. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON NOTED THAT HE WOULD BE GLAD TO SUPPLY THIS INFORMATION. HE POINTED OUT THAT THESE MAINTENANCE PEOPLE ARE NOT CHEMISTS; THEY ARE SIMPLY SCHOOLED IPJ WHAT TO USE; AND WE ARE VERY STRICTLY CONTROLLED AS TO WHAT CHEMICALS WE CAN USE. DISCUSSION FOLLOWED AS TO UPDATING PERSONNEL HIRING PRACTICES, AND MORE THOROUGH SCREEN RE POSSIBLE EXISTING PHYSICAL DISABILITIES, ALONG WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF BETTER SAFETY MEASURES. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK REQUESTED THAT ADMINISTRATOR NELSON CONTINUED TO CHECK WITH VILLAGE GREEN AND FOLLOW UP ON THE PAVING OF A PORTION OF WALKER AVENUE AS DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS, FINANCE ADVISORY COMMISSION GUIDELINES COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK REQUESTED COMMENTS ON HIS PROPOSAL FOR A FINANCE ADVISORY COMMISSION, HE NOTED THAT ONE AREA OF CONCERN WAS IN REGARD TO SELECTION OF AN AUDITOR WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS, HE CONTINUED THAT FINANCE DIRECTOR BARTON HAD A COMMENT REGARDING THIS AND PERHAPS THESE SHOULD BE PUT IN WRITING AND GIVEN TO ATTORNEY COLLINS, COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT HE HAD QUITE A NUMBER OF COMMENTS, REGARDING CALLING THIS GROUP A FINANCE ADVISORY COMMISSION, HE STATED THAT HE HAD NO OBJECTION TO HAVING A FINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, BUT DID NOT THINK WE NEED THIS IN ORDINANCE FORM. HE ALSO BELIEVED THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NEEDS TO BE RESPONSIBLE AND DO THE INTERVIEWING FOR THE INDEPENDENT FIRM FOR THE ANNUAL AUDIT. HE HAD NO PROBLEM WITH THE FINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE BEING INVOLVED, BUT FELT THIS IS THE DIRECT RESPONSIBILITY OF THE BOARD AND THEY SHOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE SCREENING, COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK FELT THAT THE FINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE COULD HELP NARROW DOWN THE NUMBER TO BE INTERVIEWED; THEY COULD ACT AS A LIAISON. HE NOTED THEY DO NOT MAKE ANY SELECTION. COMMISSIONER WODTKE CONTINUED THAT AS FAR AS THIS GROUP CONDUCTING A CONTINUING REVIEW, HE WOULD HOPE THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE THEM TO BE IN THE OFFICES ON A DAILY BASIS INITIATING INQUIRIES, HE FURTHER DID NOT FEEL THAT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR NEEDS TO BE AN EX OFFICIO MEMBER. CHAIRMAN LYONS SUGGESTED THAT IT COULD BE THE ADMINISTRATOR OR H -IS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, COORDINATOR THOMAS, FOR INSTANCE. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATOR THOMAS COMMENTED THAT WITH THE COMPLICATIONS IN THE SHORT TERM BOND MARKET, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE JAN 141981 85 ; � ' JAN 14 1981 oox 45 P�* 0664 WHO WOULD BE A BIG HELP, BUT WE WANT TO AVOID GETTING SOMEONE YOU WOULD NEED TO TRAIN. HE FELT SUCH A COMMITTEE WOULD BE A PROTECTION FOR HIM AND THE FINANCE DIRECTOR, ESPECIALLY IN REGARD TO BONJ)S. COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT HE WOULD PUT HIS COMMENTS IN WRITING. HE MAINLY FELT THAT WE DONT NEED TO GET INTO AN ORDINANCE AND APPOINT PEOPLE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. HE DID FEEL THAT WE NEED TO SEEK UP-TO-DATE, QUALIFIED PEOPLE AND THAT WE WILL HAVE TO GO OUT AND SEEK THEM, BECAUSE GETTING THE BEST PEOPLE IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THIS TYPE OF COMMITTEE, CONSIDERABLE DISCUSSION ENSUED, AND COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK NOTED THAT EITHER THE BOARD WANTS A COMMITTEE OR THEY DON'T; HE WAS MERELY TRYING TO FORMALIZE SOME TYPE OF APPROACH. CHAIRMAN LYONS FELT THAT WE SHOULD ASK FOR RESUMES AND SET UP INTERVIEWS. COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT HE HAD NOT ENVISIONED THAT SUCH A GROUP WOULD BE SIMILAR TO THE BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE WHICH WE TRIED TO SET UP BEFORE. HE FELT IF IT IS INTENDED TO WORK IN THE BUDGET AREA AS WELL, AS WITH BONDS AND INVESTMENTS, THEN WE NEED DIVERSIFICATION. COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK STATED THAT HE HAD NOT ENVISIONED THIS GROUP GETTING INVOLVED ON THE LINE ITEMS OF THE VARIOUS DEPART- MENTS, BUT TRIED TO MAKE THE PARAMETERS BROAD ENOUGH SO THAT THEY WOULD HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO DO ASSIGNMENTS, COMMISSIONER BIRD SUGGESTED THAT ONE OF THE DUTIES OF SUCH A GROUP SHOULD BE TO INVESTIGATE FINANCING OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THE COUNTY ON MAJOR PROJECTS. HE ALSO FELT SOME METHOD OF TERMINATION OF THE APPOINTED MEMBERS SHOULD BE PROVIDED, AND COMMISSIONER WODTKE STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE MEMBERS SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD. IN FURTHER DISCUSSION, IT WAS AGREED THAT THIS SHOULD BE A COMMITTEE AND NOT A COMMISSION. IN REGARD TO THE MAKE-UP OF THE COMMITTEE, CHAIRMAN LYONS STATED THAT HE WOULD HAVE NO INTEREST IN SERVING ON IT, AND PERSONALLY DID NOT FEEL THAT THE ONE THEY ARE GOING 86 TO ADVISE SHOULD SIT ON THE ADVISORY BOARD. IT WAS GENERALLY AGREED THE TWO OFFICIAL MEMBERS SHOULD BE THE FINANCE DIRECTOR AND THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE. CHAIRMAN LYONS REQUESTED THAT COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK REDRAFT HIS PROPOSAL IN LIGHT OF TODAY IS COMMENTS. RESOLUTION 80-138 - AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR MOBILE HOME PARKS CHAIRMAN LYONS REPORTED THAT HE HAD READ RESOLUTION 80-138 RE AN AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR MOBILE HOME PARK RESIDENTS, AND HE DID NOT FEEL IT SET OUT WHAT WE HAD IN MIND, HE DID NOT WANT TO BE IN THE BUSINESS OF BEING A CONTINUAL SOUNDING BOARD, AND HAD BELIEVED THIS COMMITTEE WAS TO BE SET UP FOR THE PURPOSE OF REPORTING ON THE EXISTING LAWS GOVERNING MOBILE HOME PARKS AND TO MAKE SUGGESTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL LEGISLATION. HE DID NOT LIKE THE WORDING IN THE RESOLUTION REFERRING TO PUBLIC FORUMS, ETC. HE ALSO FELT THE COMMITTEE SHOULD HAVE A DEFINITE TERM OF LIFE. THE CHAIRMAN STATED THAT HE WILL BRING THIS BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING. SEQUENCE OF AGENDA MATTERS ATTORNEY COLLINS SUGGESTED THAT THE BOARD RECONSIDER THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY TAKE UP BUSINESS ON THE DAY S AGENDA, PARTICULARLY WITH REGARD TO PUBLISHED PUBLIC HEARINGS. HE SUGGESTED THAT THE PUBLIC HEARINGS SHOULD BE HELD AS CLOSE TO THE PUBLISHED TIME AS POSSIBLE. OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL COMMISSIONER WODTKE REPORTED THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS CALLED A MEETING OF REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCILS IN ORLANDO FOR .JANUARY 22ND AND HAS URGED THAT AS MANY MEMBERS AS POSSIBLE ATTEND THIS IMPORTANT CONFERENCE. ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WODTKE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BIRD, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED OUT -OF -COUNTY TRAVEL FOR BOTH MEMBERS AND ALTERNATES TO THE TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL TO ATTEND THE GOVERNORS CONFERENCE IN ORLANDO, .JANUARY 22, 1981. JAN 141981 s . 45 mu JAN 141981 Boa 4 ' pnt 66-6 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. 68248 - 69114 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 BONDS 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 6:45 O'CLOCK P.M. ATTEST: CLERK 88 r