HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/18/1982Wednesday, August 18 1982
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, met, in Regular Session at the County
Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida,
on Wednesday, August 18, 1982, at 8:30 o'clock A.M. Present
were Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Alfred Grover Fletcher,
Vice Chairman; Dick Bird; Patrick B. Lyons; and William C.
Wodtke, Jr. Also present were Michael J. Wright,
Administrator; L. S. "Tommy" Thomas, Community Services
Director; Gary Brandenburg, Attorney to the Board of County
Commissioners; Jeffrey K. Barton, Finance Director; and
Janice Caldwell, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order.
The Reverend Kevin Strope, Community Church, gave the
invocation, and 'Chairman Scurlock led the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
The Chairman asked if there were any additions to the
Agenda.
Commissioner Fletcher requested adding an item to
discuss having a straw ballot regarding the hospital,- as
requested by an organization known as ACT.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, that the Board add an
emergency item concerning a request from the -ACT
organization to discuss placing the question of a
straw ballot, in the November election, regarding
the hospital.
Commissioner Bird noted that he planned to vote against
the Motion as it could be added to the Agenda in September;
he did not see the emergency nature.
AUG 181982 rOK Mr U� �,
AUG 181982FACE
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was
voted on and failed with a vote of 3 to 2,
with Commissioners Bird and Wodtke voting in
opposition; a unanimous vote is required
to add an emergency item to the Agenda.
Commissioner Wodtke suggested that this item be placed
on the Agenda for the September 1, 1982 meeting.
Frank Zorc approached the Board and requested that this~`
item be placed on the agenda next week, since the Board will
be having a Workshop on August 25, 1982.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
approved having a Special Meeting at 1:30 P.M.
on August 25, 1982 in the Commission Chambers
to discuss placing, in the November election,
the question of a straw ballot regarding the
hospital, as requested by the ACT organization.
Attorney Brandenburg requested adding an item
concerning a status report on the bond validation for the
water and sewer system at 3:00 p.m.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
agreed to add the emergency item to the Agenda,
as requested by the Attorney.
Attorney Brandenburg requested adding an item
concerning the receiver's fees in the DER vs. Treasure Coast
Utilities case.
0
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
agreed to add the emergency item to the Agenda,
as requested by the Attorney.
Attorney Brandenburg requested that Item 12-C,
concerning Lloyd & Associates, be heard at 9:30 A.M., and
that Item 12-B be deleted from the Agenda.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
agreed to.the requests made by the Attorney.
ADMINISTRATOR WELCOMED BY THE BOARD
Chairman Scurlock welcomed the new Administrator,
Michael J. Wright, to his first County Commission Meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
July 21, 1982.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
July 21, 1982, as written.
CLERK TO THE BOARD
A. Budget Amendment - Unemployment Compensation
The Board reviewed the following memorandum from the
Finance Director:
1000 51 PALE 03f
AUG 18 1982 3
AUG 18 1982
agox 51 04?"
To: Board of County Commissioners
�- August 2,1982
From: Jeffrey K. Barton, Finance Director
Re: Uemployment Compensation
The following budget amendment is necessary to allocate funds to pay the
unemployment compensation on the attached individuals, as there was no
budget established for this year.
I recommend the following budget amendment to be adopted as part of the
approval of funds.
Account title Account No. Increase Decrease
Unemployment Comp.
001-300-512-12-15
628
Unemployment Comp,
001-210-572-12-15
656
B.C.C. Contingencies
001-199-513-99-91
1284
Unemployment Comp.
004-209-534-12-15
107
Unemployment Comp.
004-214-541-12-15
38
B.C.C. Contigencies
004-199-513-99-91
145
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
approved the Unemployment Compensation Budget
Amendment, as recommended by Finance Director
Barton.
B. Budget Amendment - Emergency Radio Equipment
The Board reviewed the following memorandum dated
August 2, 1982:
�Q To: Board of County Commissioners
6 From: Jeffrey K. Barton, Finance Director
Subject: Service Contract on Emergency Radio Equiptment
August 2,1982
The following budget amndment is necessary because the motion of your
July 14,1982 minutes authorizes the signing of the contract, but not the
transfer of funds.
Account Title Account No. Increase Decrease
Other Communication Serv. 001-220-519-34.19 1,815
B.C.C. Contingencies 001-199-513-99.91 1,815
ON MOTION BY Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
approved the Budget Amendment as indicated in
the August 2, 1982 memo from Finance
Director Barton.
C. Budget Amendment — Postage
The Board next discussed the following:
To: Board of County. Commissioners
From: Jeffrey K. Barton, Finance Director
Re: Postage
August 3,1982
In reference to the memo attached, we recommend that the following budget
amendment be adopted.
Account Title Account No. Increase Decrease
S.C.C. Contigencies 001-199-513-99-91 $1,250.00
B.C.C. Contigencies 004-199-513-99-91 $1,250.00
Postage 001-201-512-34-21 $1,250.00
Postage 004-205-5 15-34-21 $10250.00
AUG 18 1982 5 eo 5 : PAu 05i.
AUG 18 1982
BQOK .L tAGC'
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
approved the Budget Amendment, as recommended
by Finance Director Barton in his memo dated
August 3, 1982.
D. Finance Advisory Committee Recommendation
The Chairman discussed the following memorandum:
TO: Board of County DATE: August 17, 1982 FILE:
Commis s ioners
SUBJECT: committee's Motion to Board of
County Commissioners for their
August 18, 1982 Meeting.
FROM: Finance Advisory REFERENCES:
Committee
ON MOTION by Mr, Minotty, SECONDED by Mr. Koch, the Finance Advisory
Committee unanimously recommended to the Board of'County Commissioners
that they engage the firm of May Zima & Co.,of Daytona Beach, Florida,
as their choice to perform the County's annual audit for fiscal years
1982, 1983 and 1984.
The Chairman commented that the dollars involved for
the three years of auditing would be $139,000.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Fletcher,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, to engage the
firm of May Zima & Co. to perform the County's
annual audit for fiscal years 1982', 1983, and
1984.
Discussion followed about the contract.
Finance Director Barton stated that the contract would
be prepared and brought back to the Board. He briefly
explained the bidding process..
Commissioner Fletcher noted that this audit firm also
does work for the City of Vero Beach, and the South County
Fire District.
Discussion followed about joint ventures with local
auditors.
THE.CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried unanimously.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Fletcher requested that Items D, E and F
be removed from the Consent Agenda.
A. Reports on File
The following reports are on file in the Office of the
Clerk:
Traffic Violation Bureau - Special Trust Fund,
Month of July, 1982 - $35,438.30.
Traffic Violation Fines by Name - July, 1982
B. Release of Maintenance Bond - Colonial Heights S/D
The Board next considered the following information:
AUG 181982
7
.990K 51 PAn 071,
i.
AUG 18 1992
TO: The HOn0rable Members of the
Board of County Commissioners
THRU: Dr. C.B. Hardin Jr., PhD
Acting County 'strator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. ,
Public Works Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
S
DATE: August 9, 1982 FI LE: Agenda
August 18, 1982
SUBJECT: Request for Release of Maintenance
Bond - Colonial Heights Subdivision
REFERENCES: Paul M. Trodglen to Board of
County Commissioners dated August 2,
1982
During the July 15, 1982, regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners,
Final Plat Approval was granted to Colonial Heights Subdivision subject to
the developer, Frank Zorc, posting an $8,780 maintenance bond to cover removing
of cleared material, installation of traffic control signs, and germination of
grass seed in the swales. Since that approval, the cleared material has been
removed, traffic control signs were installed, and in March, 1982, the Board
approved release of $5,780 to Mr. Zorc for these items.
Seeding germination had not yet been complete in March, 1982, and $3000
was retained by the County. At this time the owner, Frank Zorc, and contractor,
Trodglen Paving, Inc. are requesting release of the $3000 seeding maintenance
bond.
ALTERNATIVE AND ANALYSIS
Inspection of the subdivision on July 12, 1982, by the Public Works Depart-
ment staff revealed that seeding has substantially germinated. Minor problems
exist in the right-of-ways, including headwall construction, grading work, and
reseeding. On the referenced letter from Trodglen Paving, Mr. Zorc had stated
that he would be responsible for regrading and seeding as the lots are built
upon. The following alternatives are presented:
Alternative No. 1
Release to Trodglen Paving, Inc. the $3000 maintenance bond (Mr. Zorc has
assigned this money to Trodglen Paving via the statement.dated April 28, 1982).
By conditions of the subdivision ordinance, Mr. Zorc would be responsible for
maintaining swales and all improvements for a one (1) year period after this
release. Mr. Zorc has agreed to regrade swales, sod right-of-way, and main-
tain all right-of-ways until the lots are developed. The impact this alter-
native would have on County Road and Bridge Operations would be minimal. The
roads would not be eligible for acceptance by the County until August, 1983.
Alternative No. 2
Deny release of the $3000 bond. Trodglen Paving, Inc., would not be paid
the $3.000 amount for work which they have performed.
RECONAIENDATIONS AND FUNDING
It is recommended that a motion be made to release the $3000 bond for
Colonial Heights -Subdivision subject to the following:
1) The developer shall be required to maintain in good condition all
improvements required to be placied on the land pursuant to the Sub-
division Ordinance for a period of one(1) year from the date of the
,release of the subject $3000.
2.) Road maintenance acceptance by the County shall not be approved until
action by the Board of County Commissioners.
3) As the lots are developed, the entire width of right-of-way between
pavement and property line will be re -worked including proper grading,
sodding, etc.
Funding to be from the County's Escrow account.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
approved the Release of the Maintenance Bond
in Colonial Heights Subdivision, subject to
the'conditions outlined in the memo dated
August 9, 1982 from Public Works Director Davis.
C. County Jail Improvement - Bid No. 2
The Board reviewed the following memorandum from Public
Works Director Davis:
TO: The Honorable Members of the
Board of County Commissioners
THRU: Dr. C.B.Har`' , Jr., PhD
Acting Count Administrator
DATE: August 9, 1982 FILE:
SUBJECT: Final Payment - Project No. 8122 -
Indian River County Jail Improvements -
Bid Item No. 2 - Fire Escape - Barry's
Ornamental Iron, Inc.
�J
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E., REFERENCES:
Public Works Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On July 12, 1982, a notice -to -proceed was issued to Barry's Ornamental Iron,
Inc. for the above subject project. Inspection of the work on August 5, 1982,
by the Public Works Department and Capt. Bill Baird, Jail Administrator, revealed
that the work has been complete in accordance with the Contract dated July 12,
1982. At this time, the Contractor is requesting Final Payment in the amount
of $4,721 for the work performed.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The Contractor has submitted the necessary affidavits certifying that all pay-
rolls, material bills, and other indebtedness connected with the work have been
paid. Also, the subcontractor, Hedin Construction, has submitted the proper
affidavit.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
it is recommended that a motion be made to approve Final Payment in the amount
of $4,721.00 to Barry's Ornamental Iron, Inc. for Project No. 8122, Improve-
ments to Indian River County Jail, Bid Item No. 2, Fire Escape and to accept
the work.- Funding to be from account No. 001-906-523-34.61, Jail Maintenance
Account, unencumbered balance as of August 9, 1982 is $64,569.
AUG 1819929 .51x � Pw 09,.
AUG 181982 51 -K-t 10
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
approved final payment of $4,721 to Barry's
Ornamental Iron, Inc. for the fire escape at
the jail, as indicated in the August 9, 1982
memo from Public Works Director Davis.
G. RESOLUTION 82-80 - Agreement Restricting Use of
120 Acres
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 82-80 authorizing execution and
recordation of an Agreement restricting to
Agricultural the use of 120 acres of land in
conjunction with site plan approval for 24
mobile homes.
"On
RESOLUTION NO. 82- 80
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING
EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF AN AGREEMENT RESTRICTING
TO AGRICULTURAL THE USE OF 120 ACRES OF LAND IN
CONJUNCTION WITH SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR 24 MOBILE
HOMES.
WHEREAS, on June 24, 1982, the Indian River County
Planning & Zoning Commission approved a site plan for Graves
Brothers Company to allow placement of twenty-four (24) mobile
homes upon agriculturally zoned property, conditioned upon
execution by the owner of an agreement placing certain
restrictions upon contiguous property of the owner; and
WHEREAS, said agreement requires the owner to maintain
at least five (5) acres per mobile home in agricultural use in
order to meet the intent of Section 4(c)(6) of the County's Zoning
Code, while permitting an efficient use of land and resources
through clustering of the mobile homes as shown on the site plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY that the foregoing recitals
are affirmed, and the Chairman and Clerk are authorized to execute
the attached agreement. The County Attorney is further authorized
and 'requested to take steps necessary to have the agreement
recorded in the Official Record Books of Indian River County.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Fletcher who moved its adoption. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Bird and, upon being put to a
vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman A. Grover Fletcher Aye
Commissioner Patrick_B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Dick Bird Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 18th
Attest: ze')
FREDA WRIGHT, C1
day of August .1982.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By C, -
DON
DON C. SCUR OCK, JR.
Chairman
APPROVE ;TOFO AND- EGAL SUFFICIENCY
By
CHRISTOER J. AULL, Asst. County Attorney
51 PAC£ .:1
AUG 181982
August
$
r 1 mur ,,
A G R E E M E N T
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this 8th day of
1982, by and between GRAVES BROTHERS COMPANY, a Florida
Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Graves", and INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, -a political subdivision of the State of Florida, herein-
after referred to as "County".
-WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Indian River County Zoning Code
Agricultural District provides for the use of mobile homes as a
special exception use provided;
(a) They are located on land which has been classified
as agricultural land for purposes of ad valorem taxation.
(b) The mobile homes are owned by the owner or lessee
of the land.
(c) Mobile homes are occupied only by a full-time
employee of the owner or lessee of the land.
(d) That in the opinion of the Zoning Commission the
mobile homes are necessary for the operation of the agricultural
- use of the land.
(e) Mobile homes are placed on at least five (5) acres
of land per home.
WHEREAS, GRAVES BROTHERS COMPANY now desires to make use
of the provision to provide housing for full-time employees who
are employed to work in the citrus groves of the company by
retaining one hundred twenty (120) acres of land contiguous to the
site of the mobile homes for agricultural use.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS
AND CONDITIONS HEREIN CONTAINED, the parties agree as follows:
1. GRAVES agrees to maintain all of Section 1, Township
32 South, Range 38 East, in agricultural zoning and use as long as
the twenty-four (24) mobile home units are located in the south-
west corner of said Section. In the event said property is sold
so that there .is not remaining at least one 'hundred twenty (120)
acres contiguous to said project site, then GRAVES agrees to
remove said mobile homes immediately upon said sale, and also
agrees to remove said mobile homes in the event the zoning of said
property and use of said property is changed from agricultural.
2. GRAVES agrees that this instrument shall be recorded
in the Official Records of Indian River County and shall consti-
tute a covenant running with the land restricting the one hundred
twenty (120) acres described in Paragraph 1 above for use as
agricultural property so long as the mobile homes described in
Paragraph 1 above exist on said property and further that this
covenant shall be enforceable by Indian River County, its
successors or assigns.
3. GRAVES agrees that this agreement is executed volun-
tarily on the behalf of GRAVES to assure compliance with the Code
of Laws and Ordinances of Indian River County, Zoning, Section 4,
Agricultural District (c)(6).
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their
hands and seals the day and year first above written.
V1\C1 -V l� v 11L' X%%j l.vL•1C m" Z ,
Witnesses: a to i � rpo at' n.
J. ICHAR6 GRAVES,
resident
v
Attest:
( CORPORATE ,' S,EAL )
`,
STATE OF FLORIDA , �' , ,1
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an officer
duly authorized in this State and County to take acknowledgments,
personally appeared J. RICHARD GRAVES, JR., President of Graves
Brothers Company, to me known to be the person described in and
who executed the foregoing instrument and he acknowledged before
me that he executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and
State last aforesaid this da of , 1982.
Potary Public, C...,t.o of Flor!Ia of t ar7jX
MY comnflission e:<;�'res ;;lar. 2, 1983'
Notary Pu sic
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF IN IAN RIVER COUNTY
�- By �
DON C. SCUR OCR, JR.
Chairman
Attest:
• r
AUG 18 1982 -2- c 5 pE .
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an officer
duly authorized in this State and County to take acknowledgments,
personally appeared DON C. SCURLOCK, JR., Chairman of the Board of
County Commissioners of Indian River County, to me known to be the
person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and
he acknowledged before me that he executed the same.
I'M
WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and/
State last aforesaid this AL4% day of 1982. .
biota Public
APPROVED AS TO FORM ('
AND LEGA SUFF IE NOTARY RUILIC STATE OF FLORIDA AT LARG7; '
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG 13 1985 "
By iONDED THRU GENERAL INS, UNDERWR17EM
M
, County Attorney
-3-
r
H. Release of Easement - Moreland Subdivision
The Board next discussed the following memorandum:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 6, 1982 FILE: IRC -82 -ER -9 #13
The Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: C. B. Hardin, J�yph.D.
Acting County nistrator
SUBJECT: RELEASE OF EASEMENT REQUEST
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE BY MR. WILLIAM E. BARTSCH.
SUBJECT PROPERTY: LOT 1,
a!ABLOCK E, MORELAND SUBDIVISION
Patrick Bruce King
FROM:`�
Betty, avis REFERENCES:
Zoning Department Inspector
This is in response to a Release of Easement request by Mr. William E.
Bartsch, owner of subject property.
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given formal consideration
by the Board of County Commissioners.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The County has been petitioned by Mr. William E. Bartsch to release the rear
lot 10 foot easement and the side lot 5 foot easement of Lot 1, Block E,
Moreland Subdivision.
The request has been reviewed by Southern Bell, Florida Power & Light, Florida
Cablevision, and the Utility and Right -of -Way Departments. The Zoning staff's
analysis, which includes a site visit, showed that drainage would be adequately
handled by the existing front and rear swales.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
All reply forms have been received and reviewed, and all agencies indicated
approval. However, Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph's approval is contingent
upon releasing only the North 8 foot of the rear lot 10 foot easement and the
side lot 5 foot easement of Lot 1, Block E, Moreland Subdivision.
After site inspection by Zoning Inspector Betty Davis, it is the Zoning
Department's opinion that to release the North 8 foot of the rear lot 10 foot
easement and to release the side lot 5 foot easement of Lot 1, Block E, Moreland
Subdivision, would allow Mr. Bartsch to erect his fence as was granted after
his appeal to the Board or County Commissioners on June 16, 1982, by unanimous
vote.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the release of the North 8 foot of the rear lot 10 foot
easement and the release of the side lot 5 foot easement of Lot 1, Block
E, Moreland Subdivision.
AUG 18 1982
15
90K L51 PALE � �
A U G 1.8 1992
Ott
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
adopted Resolution 82-81 to release the North
8 feet of the rear lot 10 foot easement and
the release of the side lot 5 foot easement
of Lot 1, Block E, Moreland Subdivision, as
requested by William E. Bartsch.
RESOLUTION NO. 82-81
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, have been reqeusted to release the North 8 foot of the rear lot
10 foot easement and the side lot 5 foot easement of Lot 1, Block E,
Moreland Subdivision according to the plat of the same recorded in Plat
Book 4, page 12 of the Public records of Indian River County, Florida; and
WHEREAS, said lot line easements were dedicated on the Plat of the
Moreland Subdivision for public utility and drainage purposes, and
WHEREAS, the request for such release of easement has been submitted
in proper form;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following lot line easements in the Moreland
Subdivision shall be released, abandoned and vacated as follows:
The North 8 foot of the rear lot 10 foot easement and the side lot
5 foot easement of Lot 1, Block E, Moreland Subdivision according
the the Plat of the same filed in the office of the Clerk of the
Circuit Court of Indian River County, Florida, in Plat Book 4, Page
12.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners and the Clerk of the Circuit Court be and they hereby are
authorized and directed to execute a release of said lot line easements
hereinabove referred to in form proper for recording and placing in the
Public Records of Indian River County„ Florida.
This 18th day of August , 1982.
Attest:
OXL 40�r—k
Freda Wright,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RI ER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Don -T'. Scurlock, Jr., Chagftfin
as to tor.m
anti
E
G (ten r9
my Attcrn
90 ii nu J.7
AUG 181982 w, x 51 pnE 18 i
RELEASE OF EASEMENT
This Release of Easement, executed this 18th
day of Augers t , 1982, by the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of
Florida, first part; Mr. William E. Bartsch, whose mailing address is
1605 1st Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960, second party;
WITNESSETH:
That the said party of the first part for and in consideration of
the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration
in hand paid by the said second party, does hereby remise, release, abandon,
and quit claim unto the said second party forever, all the right, title,
interest, -claim and demand which the said first party has in and to the following
described easement, lying on land situated in the County of Indian River,
State of Florida, to -wit:
The North 8 foot of the rear lot 10 foot easement and the side lot 5
foot easement of Lot 1, Block E, the Moreland Subdivision, as recorded
in Plat Book 4, Page 12, public,records of Indian River County, Florida.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same with all singular the appurtenances
thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining and all estate, right, title,
interest, equity to the only proper use, benefit and behoof of the said second
party forever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said party has signed and sealed these presents
by the parties so authorized by the law and the day and year first above written.
Signed, sealed and
red in the presence of:
7-,Z
,� '
U
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
ATTEST:
Appmved as to ton i.1
antl legal
z� a^` ���
� r
M
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me an officer duly authorized
in the State and County aforesaid to take acknowledgements personally
Don C. Scurlock, Jr., as Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, and FREDA
WRIGHT, as Clerk of the Circuit Court,,to me known to be the persons duly author
by said County to execute the foregoing instrument and they acknowledged before
me that they executed the same for and on behalf of the said political subdivisi
WITNESS by hand and seal in the County and State last foresaid this
axq day of ^ 1982.
(Notary Seal)
A
W�611 [no
_ AofF1(2-ida
l,
a�ryp �icStaGte at Larye
My Commission Expires:
r10TARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA AT URGE
MY coMMISSION EXPIRES AUG 13 1985
SONDE® TI1RU GENERAL INS, UNDERWRITEM
x 5 r�E�,9
BOOK 51 Fina 20,
I. Site Plan Extension - Ed Schlitt Office Complex
The Board discussed the following request:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: July 29, 1982 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners IRC -8I -SD -67-651
THROUGH: C. B. Hard .Jr.iPh.D.
Acting Cot'
o Admnistrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN
EXTENSION FOR ED SCHLITT
Patrick'Bruce King 4X OFFICE COMPLEX
Community Development Director
FROM: Janis Johna�;� REFERENCES: Letter from John J.
Staff Planner
Schlitt dated July 23,
1982.
It is requested that the data herein be given formal consider-
ation by the Board of County Commissioners.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The site plan for the 10,400 square foot office building
was approved August 13, 1982. The proposed four -unit, office
complex is to be located on the north side of SR 60 between
the Ed Schlitt Real Estate Agency and the West Side Bank.
The-^pplicant has requested a one year site plan extension
because of difficulty in securing financing.
ANALYSIS:
Site plan approval terminates after one year if construction
of the approved plan has not.begun. Extensions may be granted
by the Board of County Commissioners at its discretion. The
site is zoned C-lA, Restricted Commercial and is a part of
the Commercial Node on SR 60.
RECO1*1ENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request -for a one year ex-
tension of site plan approval.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
approved the request for a one year extension
of site plan approval for the Ed Schlitt
Office Complex.
D. DER Permit Applications
The Board reviewed the following memorandum .from Public
Works Director Davis:
_ _20
TO: The Honorable Members of the
Board of County Commissioners
THRU: Dr: C.B. HarA, Jr. PhD
Acting County Administrator
DATE: August 11, 1982
FILE:
SUBJECT: DER Permit Applications - Request for
County Comment
/T U
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.' REFERENCES: Jeremy A. Craft, Administrator, DER
Public {Yorks Director, Permitting Section, to Indian River
County Board of County Commissioners
dated July 12, 1982
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Section 253.125, Florida Statutes, now requires the DER to request comments
on applications for fill in navigable waters from local governments within
10 days of receipt of an application. The local government, or county, then
has 60 days to comment or object to the application.
Attached to the above subject letter from the DER, three applications were
sent for County Comment. These applications are
1) Application to dredge the Sebastian Inlet Sand Trap and deposit
material on 2,400 feet of the Sebastian Inlet State Park Beach by
Sebastian Inlet District.
2) Application to excavate 900,000 c.y. of material in T31S, 834,35,
and 36E - Rollins Blue Cypress Ranch, located west and north of
Blue Cypress Lake, Osceola and Indian River Counties, for Citrus Grove
Production.
3) Application to replace approximately 602 l.f. of seawall along Marsh
Island including Floating Dock.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The County Public Works Department, Community Development Department, and
Urban Forester have reviewed the Applications. The following comments are
applicable:
Application No. 1 - Sebastian Inlet
As this work is for maintenance dredging, no adverse comments are noted.
Application No. 2 - Rollins Blue Cypress Ranch
A portion of existing citrus area is located in the St. John's Marsh
north of Blue Cypress Lake. An extensive drainage network and pumping
station is proposed on land to the west. This work will change the
natural characteristics of the environment in approximately 2,209 acres
from high muck land to citrus groves. Since the St. John's River Water
Management District is permitting water use, the County staff anticipates
no adverse effect beyond the change in natural topography. The Urban
Forester claims that the Cypress, Maple, Gum, and Beech trees forming
natural hammocks will be destroyed and loss of this natural area will be
a loss to the County.
Application No. 3 - Marsh Island
This project has been approved under the Site Plan Review Process. The
Urban Forester has commented that the mangrove transplanting shown is not
feasible and the attached guidelines should be sent to the applicant.
RECONVIENDATIONS AND FUNDING
It is recommended that staff' be authorized to indicate to the DER that Indian
River County approves the three applications listed above subject to the above
comments.
No Funding Considerations are applicable.
AUG 181982 21 iox 5.1 PACE . -;
AUG 181992 x 51 WE 2
Commissioner Fletcher suggested that we put this in a
hold category, but in the meantime, write a letter to the
DER expressing our position.
Commissioner Lyons asked the Attorney what would be the
best position the Board could take to indicate that it was
not prepared to evaluate the request until more information
was obtained.
Attorney Brandenburg stated the position would be that
the Board take no action, and request additional information
prior to any recommendation from the County.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
agreed that they take no action on Application
#2, for Rollins Blue Cypress Ranch; that the Board
so notify the DER; and ask for additional
information before it can take further action.
Discussion ensued about this item being- placed on the
agenda without having all of the necessary information.
Chairman Scurlock stated the staff had no direction as
to the Board's policy concerning matters of this nature.
Discussion followed, and it was determined to be very
important that a qualified person for the Planning
Department be found, as quickly as possible, to handle the
environmental aspects of the.County.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
approved Application #1 for the Sebastian Inlet
Sand Trap; that the Board take no action on
Application #3 for Marsh Island, that the Board
so notify the DER and ask for additional
information before taking further action.
Ray Fernald, President of the Pelican Audubon Society,
approached the Board and pointed out he was concerned that a
project could come into the County and their association
would never find out about it. He requested that as
projects such as these come into the County, word be passed
on to the Pelican Audubon Society.
140TION WAS MADE by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, that the Board send copies
of the new applications to the Pelican Audubon
Society as they come into the County.
Commissioner Lyons requested ADDING TO THE MOTION
that the County send a copy of new projects to
the Florida Game & Fresh Water Fish Commission.
Commissioner Fletcher AGREED TO THE ADDITION.
Commissioner Lyons felt that comments from the Game
Commission would be of extreme benefit to our County
Environmental person.
Discussion followed about the Regional Planning Council
and it was felt the projects involving dredging and filling
would go to that office.
Mr. Fernald affirmed that only the major projects would
go to the Regional Planning Council.
Commissioner Wodtke commented that the Board might want
to consider entering into a contract with the Regional
Planning Council to assist with the projects that concern
the County.
Commissioner Lyons suggested leaving this matter with
the Administrator.
Z'
AUG 1 192 2 3oK 51 r�L 3
AUG 181992
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried unanimously.
51
Mr. Fernald emphasized that the County needed to get an
environmentalist knowledgeable in ecological systems.
Commissioner Lyons pointed out that the Board must have
the ability to enforce the County environmental
requirements.
Discussion followed, and it was determined that theme
County needed a Code Enforcement Board. The Attorney noted
that he would follow up on this matter.
E. Resolution 82-82 - Terminating Treasure Coast Utilities
Franchise and Providing County Rates
ON MOTION By Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board, by a vote
of 4 to 1, with Commissioner Fletcher voting
in opposition, adopted Resolution 82-82
terminating the Treasure Coast Utilities, Inc.
Water and Sewer Franchise and authorizing the
imposition of standard County rates.
RESOLUTION NO. 82- 82
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, TERMINATING THE
TREASURE COAST UTILITIES, INC. WATER AND SEWER
FRANCHISE AND AUTHORIZING THE IMPOSITION OF
STANDARD COUNTY RATES.
WHEREAS, Indian River County on February 17, 1960,
issued a water and sewer franchise to Southern Gulf Utilities,
Inc., a Florida corporation, pursuant to the provisions of Special
Acts of Florida Chapter 59-1380, and
WHEREAS, through a series of assignments the franchise
was assigned to Treasure Coast Utilities, Inc., and
WHEREAS, Indian River County has now purchased all the
assets of Treasure Coast Utilities, Inc. and has merged the system
into the County's water and sewer system, and
WHEREAS, the County Commission on August 4, 1982, held a
duly advertised public hearing to consider the formal termination
of the franchise and imposition of standard County rates on cus-
tomers within the former franchise area, and
WHEREAS, during the public hearing there was no opposi-
tion from the public or customers.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that;
1. The water and sewer franchise originally issued on
February 17, 1960, to Southern Gulf Utilities, Inc. and subse-
quently through a series of assignments, assigned to Treasure
Coast Utilities, Inc. is hereby terminated, and
2. the Indian River County Utilities Department is
authorized to charge water and sewer customers within the former
Treasure Coast Utilities franchise territory standard County rates
beginning at such time as County provides improved water from a
reliable source.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Wodtke who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Lyons
vote was as follows:
and, upon being put to a vote, the
-1-
UOK 51 ?AcE
KU G 181992 Box FA �.
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman A. Grover Fletcher Nay
Commissioner Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Dick Bird Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 18th day of August , 1982.
Attest: "1 '
FREDA WRIGHT, C16rk
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LEG SUFFI IENCY
By
G Y BRANDENBUR
jq6unty Attorney
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By G
DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.
Chairman
PROCLAMATION - CONSTITUTION WEEK
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
approved the Proclamation designating the week
of September 17 through September 23, 1982 as
Constitution Week.
Chairman Scurlock read the following Proclamation and
presented it to his mother, a representative of Daughters of
the American Revolution:
AUG 18 1982 27
��X 51 PACE
t '�'
5't. ,a
s�
PR0CLAMATION''" r r 4
'QA
WHEREAS,. 5eptemoer 17, 1982,1marks..the one hundro
ninety-fifth anniversary of the drafting of the Constitution
���� �, '' m4� �.'-�-,� � ::: •�p..'.<: a3 �'*Y•�+�"�'°t,. �', d���
the United Stags of America- by the Constitutional convents
Ond T s� e w <t f c+ •..a Pi i '� roe .,�,.x ,a k�a-�%> `m v qx
F H�
�a
WHEREAS, To accord official recognition oto this
f ¢ * sr r ,.
memorable anniversary, and to the patrioticjexercise that wj
'-ii{�''.� 4 k i.,
form a noteworthy feature of the occasion, seems fitting ax
R 4 f F
pPer roand,
�AC"'c.Y,a
t ,�• -r.s :., v.ron .a;« ^.+ :'w�i i ni�""a..y. yw..,
z WHEREAS, Pub' icLaws Nta: 915 guarantees the issuing
`Ya-zK h ��-*'•F '�s:=r 3^3Y a" 'ca°'raVia...:§acr:k`�'
z S�} proclamation each year by the President'.of the Unit„�ed states
'087�-..t.—.° J'�:,
'`r America designating Septexnbe 17R through Septemberl: 23 asp
ter-
, z �� a S}�kr��;,;;., k�.n Y"_���?'.,���.�`�^� ,ti �' %" �' -i - e�p - .a. 's �� ' ��,iS" 1�`a+'r c�� ��Ms� Y r'+"�a- ri r� r u �`� �� y �`� �•s'
� -° � � a S.:rY r.t.� 7�S'"" ..<� -sa��.. � . µvi-,�� i o4"+u � b,P� ,�,-ir,�,sY :..,�£y •i" � Y q
�1,,. � -� {, _ .. �,. ..M :,.. a'� r -g s v. �, �.:i � �. e3 _ � � � : �r �'`,3'� yrs �."3a,. .•a
T.ATMFD BY THE BOARD OF CO
�. and urge all our citizens to pay
w't re;-
.a r r`s
a week to`° our Federal Constitution z
3,'ii,
� t• �r� a�, ` �'� ��b*'�'�,'*•u.�a., ��ss� �"�'�'� `„��, '"� x`54^,, �'
0
����s Vero Beac`�i ' Flor��a this i
C
a
Lgust, 198:
States of
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY'
a ro r `'R�'
Ar- r- �estrs — .
Freda Wright, C e
=APPROVED AS TO LEGAL'FORK A
"SUP
FZ
42x
Ga Bkandenb-
ufrfgj Attorn
ftS.Yr '>,x'Y,J.L,..,g,.fy'Z vnyY ,yC AJ'
.. ,jr.
ss� a'
"yam Z"!- `� F
SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT MEETING
The Board of County Commissioners recessed at 9:12
o'clock A.M. so that the South County Fire District Board
might convene. Those Minutes are being prepared separately.
NORTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT MEETING
The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 9:21
o'clock A.M. and immediately recessed so that the North
County Fire District Board might convene. Those Minutes are
being prepared separately.
The Board of County Commissioners reconvened at 9:52
o'clock A.M. with the same members present.
DISCUSSION REGARDING PESTICIDE "TEMIK"
Brian Combs, County Agriculture Agent, referred to the
following material and gave a presentation on the pesticide
"Temik:"
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
TWIN TOWERS OFFICE BUILDING
2600 BLAIR STONE ROAD
TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32301
March 1, 1982
Mr. Patrick B. Lyons, Commissioner
Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Commissioner Lyons:
BOB GRAHAM
GOVERNOR
VICTORIA J. TSCHINKEL
SECRETARY
Your letter of February 16th to Mr. Alex Senkevich, Orlando District
office has been referred to me for reply.
Temik (or Aldicarb) maufactured by Union Carbide Corporation has the
chemical name 2-methyl-2-(methylthio-propanal 0-1(methylamino) car-
bonyl)7(oxime) and is used as a systemic insecticide. The compound is
extremely toxic with an oralLD50 (lethal dose for 50% of an animal popu-
lation) value for rats. of 0.93 mg/kg. According to the manufacturer the
51 29 ,
AUG 1 1992 29ox PSE :
E1,1 , 6. I
BQDK 51 PACE 30,
chronic toxicity is not a major problem because of the rapid breakdown
of the compound in the environment. However, studies have shown that this
rapid breakdown only occurs under certain soil conditions, i.e., when the
soil is aerobic (oxygenated) and the pH is alkaline. Under these conditions
the reported half life (time for the existing concentration to be reduced
in half) of Temik varies from 6 weeks to 3 years. In acid soils and/or
anaerobic (oxygen free) conditions such as those commonly found in surficial
soils and aquifers of Florida, the compound is likely to be extremely
persistent.
Known ground water contamination cases due to Temik have been reported
in Long Island, New York, Wisconsin and Virginia. The ground water contam-
ination in Long Island was apparently severe enough to move State officials
to ban the use of Temik in the State and institute a drinking water stan-
dard of 7 parts per billion for the compound. Very little information
exists with respect to ground water contamination by Temik in Florida even
though approximately 300,000 acres of citrus groves are regularly sprayed
with the compound. Union Carbides' own experimental data from a study
conducted in Hillsborough County showed Temik concentrations in the soil
at 7 feet below land surface to be 80 parts per billion and at 8 feet
to be 70 parts per billion. No ground water samples were analyzed in
connection with this study, however, given the physical characteristics
of the compound it is likely to be present in ground water well in excess
of the New York standard.
To answer your questions: Should we be concerned about Temik? - Yes.
Actions that might be taken are 1) initiate ground water sampling and
analysis in selected areas of the State where the insecticide is used
2) restrict the over application of the pesticide. Dr. Herb Nigg of the
University of Florida Agricultural Research Center, Lake Alfred, Florida,
maintains that the compound is over applied in the State and that a much
more restricted application rate could be utilized without deleterious
effects on the control of nematode populations.
I trust that your concerns have been addressed in this letter, but
should you have any further questions, do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
L
Geoffrey Watts
Groundwater Section
Slides were also shown by Mr. Combs as he gave his
presentation. He reported that because of the CBS News and
other media reports on Temik concerning citrus, the
University of Florida, Department of Citrus, conducted
various tests and found no problem with the chemical. Mr.
Combs noted that as far as the County was concerned, it
would cost the citrus growers approximately $125 an acre to
use this product, which was very expensive. He added that
the chemical is applied into the ground by chiseling it in
1" or 2" below the surface; most of this work must be done
by custom applicators.
30
L�
Commissioner Lyons noted that the DER was not in step
with what Union Carbide had to say. He wanted to be sure
that the County did not have pesticides in the ground water
supplies.
Mr. Combs advised that all water was tested for
different chemicals in the water, and they must work with
acceptable levels of these chemicals.
Commissioner -Lyons commented that he did not feel
completely comfortable with the Environmental Protection
Agency, and hoped they could find some private means of
evaluating the water in the ground.
Commissioner Fletcher inquired if Mr. Combs' office was
made aware when Temik was used in the County.
Mr. Combs responded negatively, but noted that he
worked with every chemical representative and with almost
all of the growers in the County, as they are always looking
to see how the various products perform. As a result of
working with the growers, he was aware of the Temik users.
Lengthy discussion ensued regarding testing procedures
and the monitoring of the wells.
Mr. Combs summarized that this product was used in
every state and felt that the CBS News story was misleading,
with misrepresentation of the facts.
AGREEMENT WITH LLOYD & ASSOCIATES
Attorney Brandenburg reviewed several changes in the
proposed agreement to which all parties involved have
agreed, and he recommended approval of the Agreement by the
Board.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, that the Board approve
the Professional Engineering Services Agreement,
and that the Chairman be authorized to sign
the contract.
A 19 2 31 K 51` PA; c 3
AUG 181982
sa K5 1 bAGC 9
Lengthy discussion followed regarding additional work
which would depend on the extent of the utilities
relocation.
Darrell E. McQueen, of Lloyd and Associates, Inc.,
stated that as far as utilities relocation, that would not
be part of their inspection services.. This contract would
start with the Notice to Proceed.
Philip Lloyd, of Lloyd and Associates, Inc., affirmed
that their time would start up when the County's contract
commenced.
Jim Davis, Public Works Director, advised that the
County preferred to have the construction by DOT be
coordinated in with their construction; and Lloyd and
Associates would be working with DOT for a smooth
transition.
Commissioner Fletcher expressed concern about the court
appearances and conferences by the Engineer.
Engineer Lloyd commented that if they have to go to
court on behalf of the County, they want to be compensated.
Commissioner Fletcher next discussed the cost of
printing and reproduction of prints and felt 800 per print
was too high.
Mr. McQueen noted -that the cost of their sheets was 55C
each, but did not include the labor in the preparation of
the prints.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried unanimously.
`t ar
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this 18th day of August
1982, by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision
of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as the "County"
and LLOYD AND ASSOCIATES, INC., Vero Beach, Florida, hereinafter
referred to as the "Engineer."
WITNESSETH:
County and Engineer in consideration of their mutual
covenants herein agree with respect to the performance of
professional engineering services by Engineer and the payment for
those services by owner as set forth below.
Engineer shall provide professional engineering services
for owner in all phases of the project described as the Sixteenth
Street Traffic and Pedestrian Improvement Project including 20th
Avenue and connecting roadways, serve as County's professional
engineering representative for the project as set forth below and
shall give professional engineering consultation and advice to
County during the performance of the services to be rendered
hereunder.
SECTION I - COUNTY OBLIGATIONS
The County agrees to provide the following material,
data, or services as required in connection with the work to be
performed under this agreement;
A. Provide the Engineer with a copy of the preliminary
Engineering report titled "Sixteenth Street Traffic Improvement
Plan" prepared by the Indian River County/City of Vero Beach
Traffic Engineering Division. The County will make available to
Engineer all Board of County Commissioner and Transportation
Planning Committee meeting minutes for reference. ,
B. Provide the Engineer with all available traffic
data, and copies of any drainage reports, drawings, right-of-way
maps, and other documents in the possession of the County perti-
nent to the project.
C. The County shall be responsible for acquiring all
right-of-ways, easements and other rights in land as necessary to
-1- - PACE J r'
� UG 181992
A U G 181982 89OK 5 1 mu 21 4
complete the project. The Engineer will provide the County with
all property surveys, detailed and legal descriptions, maps, draw-
ings, and other necessary information to aid the County in acquir-
ing the necessary right-of-way.
D. The County shall be responsible for obtaining only
those permits required to perform the work to complete the project
if such permit requirements are established by regulatory agencies
after the date of this agreement. All permits required by regula-
tory agencies for the completion of this project which are
required by law as of the effective date of this agreement shall
be applied for and obtained by the Engineer and constitute a part
of basic services for which Engineer shall receive his lump sum
payment.
E. The County shall make all provisions for Engineer to
enter upon public or private property as required for Engineer to
perform his services.
F. The County will promptly execute all permit applica-
tions necessary to expedite the acquiring of any local, State or
Federal permits made necessary.by the project.
SECTION II - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
The Engineer agrees to perform all necessary profes-
sional engineering services and other services in connection with
the project as required to implement the recommendations of the
"Sixteenth Street Traffic Improvement Plan" as approved, amended,
and revised by the Indian River County Board of County
Commissioners and the Transportation Planning Committee as set
forth in the following;
A. Study and Report Phase
(1) Engineer recognizes that County forces have
completed.some preliminary engineering services with respect to
this project, contained within a report titled "Sixteenth Street
Traffic Improvement Plan" prepared by the Indian River County/City
of Vero Beach Traffic Engineering Division. Engineer will
endeavor not to duplicate the work done to date on the project.
After written authorization to proceed, the Engineer shall consult
with County to clarify and define County's requirements for the
M
project and review all available.data including Sixteenth Street
Traffic Improvement Plan.
(2) Engineer shall provide an analysis of County's
needs, planning surveys, site evaluations and comparative studies
of prospective sites and solutions and will meet with the Public
Works Department to discuss and clarify same.
B. Design Phase
(1) Upon receipt of written authorization to
proceed through the design phase from the Director of the Public
Works Department, the Engineer shall visit the site of the pro-
posed work, become thoroughly familiar with all conditions affect-
ing the work, and the scope of work as presented in the prelimi-
nary report approved by the Board of County Commissioners and the
Transportation Planning Committee.
(2) The Engineer, shall arrange for and obtain all
aerial photography, horizontal and vertical control, survey work,
soil survey investigations, including percolation testing if
required and perform such other services as are necessary or
desirable to advance the project. The Engineer shall obtain
approval of preliminary work from any local, State, or Federal
agency having an interest in the project. The Engineer shall pro-
vide preliminary engineering data, including sketches, drawings
and recommendations regarding type of roadway drainage systems,
FEC Railroad crossing details, and DOT project coordination.
(3) The Engineer shall prepare, at a scale approved
by the Public Works Director, a preliminary plan of the project
design showing the location of all pavement, drainage facilities,
structures, curb, pedestrian and bikeway facilities and related
improvements for approval by the Indian River County Public Works
Director prior to commencing with final design phase.
A preliminary cost estimate shall be prepared
by the Engineer to be submitted to the County Public Works
Director along with the preliminary plan. The preliminary plan
shall show the limits of all right-of-ways and easements to be
acquired by the County for the project. The plan shall indicate
the legal description of the property sought to be acquired
AUG 18 1982 -3- ! 51 PA;E 3
AUG 18 1982-
51
together with a property owners list for same. The preliminary
design shall show in plan view all existing utilities in the
right-of-ways and proposed relocation of same. The preliminary
plan and cost estimate shall be submitted to the Public Works
Director within sixty (60) days of the date of this agreement.
(4) After a preliminary plan (as in 3 above) has
been reviewed and approved by the County and the County directs
the Engineer to proceed, the Engineer will perform the necessary
detailed surveys, accomplish a complete detailed design of the
project, prepare all necessary local, State, and Federal permit
applications for signature by the County and provide all necessary
information to acquire all permits, prepare detailed drawings,
including plan view, profile view, cross sections at intervals not
to exceed fifty (50') feet and at all intersecting roads, drive-
ways, and at all other locations at which a special feature
warrants, detail drawings of all structures, curbs, etc., prepare
complete contract documents, including bid specifications, and
make a final cost estimate based on the final design for the
entire project, including 20th Avenue and related improvements.
Engineer will provide all percolation tests, subsurface explora-
tions such as borings, soil tests and the like as may be required
to determine dewatering operations, drainage conditions, founda-
tion conditions, suitable subgrade conditions, etc.. The Engineer
will arrange for all such explorations and tests as apart of
basic services without additional charge beyond the lump sum basic
fee; however, the actual cost of such explorations and tests shall
be treated as a direct cost to Engineer and paid for by the
County.
(5) The Engineer will attend all conferences with
the County and its representatives and other interested parties
upon request.
(6) Engineer shall provide County with a mainte-
nance of traffic plan designed to insure efficient flow of traffic
during the construction phase of the project.
(7) In.order to accomplish the work described under
this agreement under the time frames and conditions set forth in
M
this contract, Engineer will observe the following requirements;
(a) Engineer will strive to complete his work
on the project within the time allowed by maintaining an adequate
staff of engineers, draftsmen, and other employees on the work at
all times.
(b) Engineer will comply with all Federal,
State, and.local laws applicable to this project. Engineer will
design the project in such a manner as to be in conformance with
all applicable Federal, State and local laws.
(c) Engineer will prepare all necessary
sketches to accompany the County's applications for any required
State, local, or Federal permits.
(d) Engineer will cooperate fully with the
County in order that all phases of the work may be properly
scheduled and coordinated.
(e) Prior to final approval of the design by
the Director of the Public Works Department, Engineer will com-
plete a preliminary check of construction plans with any county,
city, state or federal regulatory agency from which a permit or
other approval is required.
(f) Engineer will contact all utility com-
panies having installations in the vicinity of the proposed work
and notify said companies of the -time schedule for construction of
the project and relocation of utilities, if any. Engineer will
provide County with all information relative to any required
utility adjustments or relocations and will show all relocated
utilities on the plans.
(g) Engineer shall report the status of this
project to the Director of the Public Works Department upon
request and hold all drawings, calculations and related work open
to the inspection of the Director or his authorized agent at any
time upon reasonable request.
(8) The Engineer shall submit to the Director of
the Public Works Department two final sets of check prints for the
project. The Public Works Department will expeditiously review
the final check prints and
indicate
thereon any revisions
AUG 181992
-5-
ox 51 PACE
G 1 1982
titU
requested.
The Engineer will make any revisions requested
by
the
County.
(9) The contract documents furnished by the
Engineer shall utilize standard construction contract documents,
including Supplemental and General Conditions, Contract Change
Orders and partial payment estimates. Florida DOT design
standards and Standard Specifications shall be used.
(10) Prior to the advertisement for bids. by County,
the Engineer, for each construction contract, will provide not to
exceed ten (10) copies of detailed drawings, specifications, and
contract documents for use of the County, and the appropriate
Federal, State and local agencies from whom approval of the pro-
ject must be obtained. The cost of such drawings, specifications
and contract documents are included in the basic compensation paid
to Engineer.
(11) The Engineer will furnish additional copies of
the drawings, specifications and contract documents as required by
prospective bidders, material suppliers, Federal, State and local
agencies from whom approval of the project must be obtained, and
other interested parties, but may charge only for the actual cost
of such copies. Upon award of each contract, the Engineer will
furnish to the County five (5) sets of the drawings, specifica-
tions and contract documents for execution. The cost of these
sets of contract documents are included in basic compensation paid
to Engineer. All original documents, survey notes, field books,
tracings, and the like including all items furnished to the
Engineer by the County pursuant to this agreement, are and shall
remain the property of the County.
(12) The drawings prepared by the Engineer shall be
of sufficient detail to permit the actual location of the proposed
improvements on the ground. The Engineer shall prepare and
furnish to the County at the time of preliminary plan review with-
out any additional compensation to Engineer, three (3) copies of a
map showing the needed construction easements and permanent ease-
ments and the land to be acquired for construction of the project.
Property surveys, property plats, and legal descriptions for such
_ M
easements and land to be acquired shall also be furnished by the
Engineer at no additional cost. Negotiation for all land rights
shall be accomplished by the County, unless the County requests
the Engineer to perform these services in a subsequent addendum to
this agreement. In the event the Engineer is requested to perform
these services, the Engineer shall be compensated for such addi-
tional services.
(13) The Engineer further agrees to obtain and main-
tain at the Engineer's expense, such insurance as will protect him
and the County from claims under the Workman's Compensation Act
and from all claims for bodily injury, death or property damage
which may arise from the negligent performance by the Engineer or
by the Engineer's employees of the'Engineer's functions and
services required under this agreement. The Engineer will obtain
and maintain, at the Engineer's expense, Errors and Omission
Insurance of $3,000,000.00 with a maximum of $10,000.00
deductible.
(14) The Engineer acknowledges that preparation and
submittal of all applicable permits through governmental regula-
tory agencies are included within the scope of basic compensation.
Any additional work required by regulatory agencies which estab-
lished such regulations after the date of this agreement shall be
an additional service and the County shall compensate the Engineer
in accorandance with Section V, Additional work, of this
agreement.
(15) The County proposes to construct the Sixteenth
Street Traffic Improvement in one phase. The Engineer will pre-
pare detailed construction drawings and contract documents for the
entire construction in one phase together with a maintenance of
traffic plan.
(16) The Engineer will attend all bid openings and
tabulate the bid proposals, make an analysis of the bids, and make
recommendations for awarding the contracts for construction.
(17) Compensation to the Engineer for basic services
and resident inspection shall be in accordance with Section B of
this agreement.
-7- 1 peF
AUG 181982
AUG 181992 . s51 Fru 4
C. General -Scope of Work
The general scope of work for the project includes all
work specifically set forth in this agreement including but not
limited to all work listed as follows;
-(1) Maintenance of Traffic as per FDOT standards
(2) Erosion Control as per FDOT and IRFWCD
standards
(3) Clearing and grubbing delineation
(4) Earthwork limits
(5) Base Coarse, surface coarses, etc.
(6) Subsoil investigation (including dewatering
operations)
(7) Structural design of all proposed structures
(8) Architectural Barrier (16th Street)
(9) Seeding, Sodding, Irrigation, Landscaping
(10) Pavement markings design and installation
(including 16th Street west to 43rd Avenue and
20th Avenue from 8th Street to SR 60)
(11) Signalization and School Beacons
1. Including, but not limited to:
A. Equipment design per FDOT Traffic
Operation Standards
B. Timing and Coordination
C. Location - Poles
2. Including the following intersections but
not limited to:
A. 17th Street/10th Avenue
B. 16th Street/Old Dixie
C. 16th Street/14th Avenue
D. 16th Street/20th Avenue
E. 16th Street/27th Avenue
F.- 12th Street/20th Avenue
G. (6 school beacons)
(12) Sidewalks
(13) Bikepaths (including FDOT liaison and
coordination)
(14) Roadway design
(15) Utility relocation
(16) Testing - materials including specifications
for testings
(17) FDOT coordination 17th Street/SR 5
(18) FEC Railroad coordination and crossing
construction
(19) Right-of-way acquisition drawings, legal
descriptions and property owners list
(20) Surveying .
(21) Driveway restoration
(22) All permitting
(23) Design access points into school.
(24) Design School "drop-off"
(25.)- Design/operations changes in Traffic
Improvement Plan must be approved by Public
Works Director prior to Engineer action.
D. Construction Phase
(1) The Engineer will check and approve any
necessary shop and working drawings furnished by contractors.
(2) Engineer will interpret the intent of the draw-
ings and specifications to protect the County against defects and
deficiencies in construction on the part of contractors. The
Engineer, however, shall not guarantee the performance of work by
any contractor.
(3) The Engineer will provide a horizontal and
vertical control in the form of bench mark circuit for vertical
control and two base lines to be used by the contractor in staking
the construction.
(4) The Engineer shall provide a full time on-site
resident project representative who will provide inspection of the
construction of the project. The resident project representative
shall be an agent of the Engineer and shall act by and under the
supervision of the Engineer. The Engineer shall provide all
necessary engineering supervision for the on-site representative.
The on-site project representative shall be chosen by mutual
agreement between the County and Engineer. The project represen-
tative shall perform as a minimum the following services;
(a) Review contractor's progress schedule and shop
drawings. Attend pre -construction conferences
and meetings and serve as Engineer's liaison
with contractors.
(b) Conduct on-site observations of the work in
progress by contractors to determine that the
project is proceeding in accordance with the
Contract Agreement between Contractor and
County, and that completed work will conform to
said Contract Agreement, and report to County
whenever any work is unsatisfactory or does not
conform to Contractor's obligations pursuant to
the agreement and shall report any time that it
appears a Contractor is not on schedule and
capable of completing the project within the
time allotted pursuant to the contract
AUG 18 1982 -9- sic 51, FACE 41.
AUG 18 1992
aoK 51 'PAGE -2
documents.
(c) Keep -daily reports which record hours on the
job site, weather conditions, data relative to
questions of extras or deductions, daily
activities, a daily progress of construction
and test procedures.
(d) Furnish County periodic reports of progress of
the work and of the Contractor's compliance
with the approved progress schedule, schedule
of shop drawing submissions and other
schedules.
(e) Shall review all requests for payments by each
Contractor and make a recommendation based upon
observations at the site and Engineer's opinion
as to whether work performed for which payment
is requested conforms to the contract
documents. It is not the parties' intention to
benefit third parties by the inclusion of this
section within the contract and Engineer's
undertakings hereunder shall not relieve any
Contractor of its obligation to perform the
work in conformity with the drawings and
specifications and in a workmanlike manner and
shall not make the Engineer an insurer of the
Contractor's performance and shall not impose
upon the Engineer any obligation to insure that
the work is performed by contractors in a safe
manner.
(5) The Engineer and the on-site representative
will cooperate and work closely with the County and its represen-
tatives.
(6) Upon receipt of the on-site representative's
recommendation, the Engineer will review and approve or disapprove
all estimates for progress and final payments.
(7) The Engineer will make final inspection of all
construction and will provide written certification of final
inspection when, in the opinion of the Engineer, the construction
work has been completed and conforms to the contract documents.
The Engineer will review and approve the results of all tests.
The Engineer will conduct an inspection to determine if the pro-
ject has been completed and if the contractor has fulfilled all
his obligations pursuant to the contract documents and will make a
written recommendation to County with respect to the final payment
for the project.
tor.
(8) Issue all instructions of County to contrac-
(9) The Engineer will provide the County with one
set of reproducible record drawings (as -built), and two sets of
M
prints at no additional cost to the County. Such drawings will be
based upon information provided by the Resident Project
Representative and contractors.
(10) The Engineer will provide notices and adver-
tisements of final payments if required by state statute.
(11) The Engineer will be available to furnish
engineering services and consultation necessary to correct all
P. *�,^
unforeseen project ape=ting di ficulties for a period of one year
after the date of.final inspection and acceptance of the project
by the County as a part of basic services hereunder. This service
will include instruction of the County in initial project opera-
tion and maintenance but will not include supervision of normal
operation of the system. Such consultation and advice shall be
considered an additional service only in the event the unforeseen
difficulty is not due to design defect or oversight of engineer in
rendering services under this agreement, in which event, compensa-
tion shall be paid to the Engineer in accordance with Section C of
this agreement.
SECTION III - TIME FOR COMPLETION
A. Design Phase
The services to be rendered by the Engineer under the
design phase of the project shall be commenced upon written notice
from the Director of the Public Works Department subsequent to the.
execution of this agreement and subsequent to the study and report
phase and shall be completed within the time stated in the Notice
to Proceed. Reasonable extension of the contract time will be
granted in the event there is delay on the part of the County in
fulfilling its part of the agreement, or should weather conditions
or acts of God render performance of engineer's duties impos-
sible.
B. Construction Phase
The services to be rendered by the Engineer under the
construction phase of the project shall begin at the time of the
award of the contract for construction. The construction phase
shall be considered complete upon final acceptance by the County
of the construction.
A U G 18 1982 -11- BOK 51 PACE 43
AUG 1x'992 Box. -44
SECTION IV - COMPENSATION
The County agrees to pay and the Engineer agrees to
accept for services rendered pursuant to this agreement fees in
accordance with the following;
1. Professional Services Fee
(a) Design Phase
For services rendered pursuant to the project in
accordance with the terms and the conditions of this agreement,
including complete design and preparation of construction plans
and specifications and all incidental work thereto, the lump sum
fee of ONE HUNDRED AND NINETEEN THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED AND
THIRTY-THREE and no/100 ($119,333.00) DOLLARS.
(b) Construction Phase
For services rendered pursuant to the construction
phase in accordance with the terms and conditions of this agree-
ment, including general supervision and consultation during con-
struction, full time on-site resident inspection, supervising
engineering, recommendations for progress and final payments,
production of record drawings and all incidental work thereto the
total lump sum fee of FORTY THOUSAND and no/100 ($40,000.00)
DOLLARS. This total lump sum fee consists of a lump sum fee of
THIRTY THOUSAND and 00/100 ($30,000.00) DOLLARS for full time
resident inspection and TEN THOUSAND and 00/100 ($10,000.00)
DOLLARS lump sum fee for engineering supervision of the full time
on-site resident inspector. This lump sum fee is based upon a one
year construction time. Construction time pursuant to this
section shall be considered to have commenced as of the date of
first work upon the project site and shall terminate upon the
Engineer's written certification of final inspection and recommen-
dation for final payment to County. In the event the construction
phase of this project should exceed one year, Engineer shall be
entitled to additional compensation as set forth in Section V
Additional Work.
2. Direct Payment forAdditional Services
The County agrees to pay on a direct cost basis for
services or goods provided by others working in conjunction with
the Engineer.
(a) Soil Survey
The County shall make direct payment to the approved
soil laboratory for soil survey work requested by.Engineer and
approved by County which is necessary in designing the project.
All required soil survey work for the project is estimated to cost
$4,000.00.
(b) Aerial Photography
The County shall make direct payment to the approved
firm for aerial photographs requested by the Engineer and approved
by the County as is necessary in designing the project. All
required aerial photography for the project is expected to cost
$5,000.00.
(c) Printing and Reproduction
The County shall make direct payment to the Engineer
for the cost of printing project plan sheets required for utility
coordination. The maximum cost allowed per print for sheets
utilized for this purpose shall be.eighty ($0.80) cents and the
total cost to the County for this reproduction service shall not
exceed $8,000.00.
SECTION V - ADDITIONAL WORK
In the event changes are requested by the County to the
contract plans after said plans have been approved and accepted by
the County and upon the issuance of a work order for said addi-
tional work by the Director of the Public Works Department, said
additional work may commence in accordance with the following fee
schedule:
(1)
Project Manager -
$40.00 per hour
(2)
Project Engineer -
$30.00 per hour
(3)
Designer - $22.50
per hour
(4)
Draftsman - $17.50
per hour
(5)
Typist - $15.00 per
hour
(6)
Expenses, prints,
etc. at actual cost to
Engineer.
,
Should the construction phase of this contract exceed
one year in duration, the Engineer shall be compensated in an
AUG L81992 -13- c . 51 ME 45.
AUG 181982 sea 51 pm,E 6 \
amount equal to the percentage of a year of the time overrun times
$10,000.00 for engineering supervision plus the percentage of a
year of the time overrun times $30,000.00 for full time on-siteer
0
resident inspection. Additions to work will not increase fee for
resident inspection or engineering supervision if it does not
extend construction phase beyond one year.
SECTION VI - PARTIAL PAYMENTS
The County will make monthly partial payments to the
Engineer in accordance with the following schedule for all author-
ized work pertaining directly to this project performed during the
previous calendar month.
A. All Phases
(1) The Engineer shall submit duly certified
invoices in triplicate to the Director of the Public Works
Department.
(2) The amount of the invoices submitted shall be
the prorated amount due for all work performed to date under this
phase, determined by applying the percentage of the work completed
as certified by the Engineer to the total lump sum due for this
phase of the work.
(3) The amount of the partial payment due for the
work performed to date under these phases shall be an amount
calculated in accordance with Paragraph 2 above, less ten (10%)
percent of the amount thus determined which shall be withheld by
the County and less previous payments.
(4) The ten (10%) percent retainage withheld with
respect to the design phase shall be paid in full to the Engineer
upon award of a construction contract, but in no case shall the
amount be retained longer than four (4) months after the date of
final acceptance of the design phase by the Director of Public
Works.
(5) The ten (10%) percent retainage with respect to
the construction phase shall be paid in full to the Engineer upon
receipt of a Certificate of Completion and acceptance of the
construction by the County.
SECTION VII- EXTRA WORK
In the event extra work is necessary due to change in
scope of the project, such work shall be the subject of a
supplemental agreement approved by the Board of County
Commissioners.
SECTION VIII - RIGHT OF DECISIONS
All services shall be performed by the Engineer to the
satisfaction of the Director of the Public Works Department who
shall decide all questions, difficulties, and disputes of whatever
nature which may arise under or by reason of this agreement, the
prosecution and fulfillment of the services hereunder, and the
character, quality, amount and value thereof, and the Director's
decisions upon all claims, questions and disputes shall be final,
conclusive and binding upon the parties hereto unless such deter-
mination is clearly arbitrary or unreasonable. Adjustments of
compensation and contract time because of any major changes in the
work that might become necessary or be deemed desirable as the
work progresses shall be left to the absolute discretion of the
Director of the Public Works Department. In the event that the
Engineer does not concur in the judgment of the Director of the
Public Works Department as to any decisions made by him, he shall
present his written objections to the County Administrator; and
the Public Works -Director and the Engineer shall abide by the
decision of the County Administrator of Indian River County.
SECTION IX - OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
All reports, tracings, plans, specifications, field
books, survey information, maps, contract documents, and other
data developed by the Engineer for the purpose of this agreement
shall become the property of the County without restriction or
limitation upon their use and shall be made available by the
Engineer at any time upon request of the County. When all work
contemplated under this agreement is complete, all of the above
data shall be delivered to the Director of the Public Works
Department.
SECTION X - COURT APPEARANCES AND CONFERENCES
Nothing in this .contract shall obligate the Engineer to
prepare for or appear in litigation on behalf of the County except
in consideration of additional compensation. The amount of such
compensation shall be mutually agreed upon and be subject to a
supplemental agreement approved by the Board of County
AUG 1 1982 -15- 51 PACE 47.
uox 51 �A4r
AUG 181982 - �
Commissioners and upon receipt of written authorization from the
Director of the Public Works Department prior to performance of
court appearance and conferences.
The Engineer shall confer with the County at any time
during construction of the improvement herein contemplated as to
interpretation of plans, correction of errors and omissions and
preparation of any necessary plan thereof without added compensa-
tion.
SECTION XI - NOTICES
Any notices, reports or other written communications
from the Engineer to the County shall be considered delivered when
posted by certified mail or delivered in person to the Director of
the Public Works Department. Any notices, reports or other
communications from the County to the Engineer shall be considered
delivered when posted by certified mail to the Engineer at the
last address left on file with the County or delivered in person
to said Engineer or his authorized representative.
SECTION XII - ABANDONMENT
In the event the County causes abandonment, cancella-
tion, or suspension or the project or parts thereof, the Engineer
shall be compensated for all services rendered consistent with the
terms of this agreement up to the time the Engineer receives
notice in writing of such abandonment, cancellation or suspen-
sion.
This compensation shall be determined on the basis of a
percentage of the total services which have been performed at the
time the Engineer receives such notice.
SECTION XIII - AUDIT RIGHTS
The County reserves the right to audit the records of
the Engineer related to this agreement at any time during the pro-
secution of the work included herein and for a period of one year
after final payment is made.
SECTION XIV - SUBLETTING
The Engineer shall not sublet, assign, or transfer any
work under this agreement without the written consent of the
County. When applicable and upon receipt of such consent in
writing, the Engineer shall cause the names of the engineering
firms responsible for the major portions of each separate
specialty of the work to be inserted on the reports or other
data.
SECTION -XV - WARRANTY
The Engineer warrants that he has not employed or
retained any company or person other than a bona fide employee
working solely for the Engineer to solicit or secure this contract
and that he has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person
other than a bona fide employee working solely for the Engineer
any fee, commission, percentage fee, gifts or any other considera-
tions, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of
this contract. For breach or violation of this warranty, the
County shall have the right to annul this contract without
liability.
SECTION XVI - CANCELLATION OF AGREEMENT
It is expressly understood and agreed that the County
may terminate this agreement without penalty by declining to issue
work orders, as provided in Section II, in which event the
County's sole obligation to the Engineer shall be payment for
those units or sections of the work previously authorized in
accordance with the provisions of Section XII, such payment to be
determined on the basis of the hours of work performed by the
Engineer up to the time of termination. In the event of such
termination, the County may, without penalty or other obligation
to the Engineer, elect to employ other persons to perform the same
or similar services in connection with units or sections of the
work not previously authorized.
SECTION XVII - DURATION OF AGREEMENT
This agreement shall remain in full force and effect for
a period of two years after the date of execution thereof or until
completion of all project phases as specified by Section III -
Time for Completion, whichever occurs first, or unless otherwise
terminated by mutual consent of the parties hereto or pursuant to
Section XVI.
-17- &#i(J .1L ?bcE
AUG 18 1982
AUG 181982
SECTION XVIII - DEFAULT
In the event the Engineer fails to comply with the
provisions of this agreement, the County may declare the Engineer
in default and notify him in writing. In such event; the Engineer
will only be compensated for any completed professional services.
In the event partial payment has been made for such professional
services not completed, the Engineer shall return such sums to the
County within ten (10) days after notice that said sums are due.
The Engineer will not be compensated on a percentage of the
professional services which have been performed at the time the
County declares a default. In the event of litigation by the
County to enforce the provisions of this contract, the County will
be compensated by the Engineer for reasonable attorney's fees.
SECTION XIX - INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION
The Engineer shall not commence work on this contract
until he has obtained all insurance required under this paragraph
and such insurance has been approved by the County.
The Engineer shall indemnify and save the County harm-
less from any and all claims, liability, losses and causes of
actions arising out of any error, omission, or negligent act of
the Engineer incident to the performance of the Engineer's profes-
sional services under this agreement. The Engineer shall pay all
claims and losses of any nature whatsoever in connection herewith
and shall defend all suits in the name of the County, when appli-
cable, and shall pay all costs and judgments which may issue
thereon.
The Engineer shall maintain during the term of this
agreement the following insurance:
A. Automobile Liability Insurance covering all owned,
non -owned and hired vehicles in amounts not less than $100,000 per
person and $300,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and $50,000
per occurrence for property damage.
B. Professional Liability Insurance in the amount of
$3,000,000 with deductible per claim, if any, not to exceed
$10,000 providing for all sums which the Engineer shall become
legally obligated to pay as damages for claims arising out of the
M
services performed by the Engineer or any person employed by him
in connection with this agreement.
C. Public Liability Insurance in amounts not less than
$1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and $500,000 per
occurrence for property damage.
D. Workmen's Compensation Insurance in compliance with
Chapter.440, Florida Statutes, as presently written or hereafter
amended.
All insurance policies shall be issued in companies
authorized to do business under the laws of the State of Florida.
The Engineer shall furnish certificates of insurance to
the Public Works Division prior to the commencement of operations,
which certificate shall clearly indicate that the Engineer has
obtained insurance in the type, amount, and classification as
required for strict compliance with this section and that no
material change or cancellation of this insurance shall be
effective without thirty (30) days prior written notice to the
County.
Compliance with the foregoing requirements shall not
relieve the Engineer of his liability and obligations under this
section or under any other portion of this agreement.
SECTION XX - ENTIRETY OF AGREEMENT
This writing embodies the entire agreement and under-
standing between the parties hereto, and there are no other agree-
ments and understandings, oral or written with reference to the -
subject matter hereof that are not merged herein and superseded
hereby.
No alteration, change, or modification of the terms of
this agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by
both parties hereto.
This agreement, regardless of where executed, shall be
governed by and construed according to the laws of the State of
Florida.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed
AUG 18192 -19 51 PACE",51
-
AUG 181982
these presents this 18th
(Seal)
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LEGW SUF C
By
. BRA DENS RG
o nt Attorney
Bea � c
day of August , 1982.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By / G
DON C. SCURL CK, JR.
Chairman
Attest '-A , - I
FREDA WRIGHT, Clerk
LLOYD D /A�SSOCIATEES, INC.
By , :,2` C L�
Vice President
(Corporat,p., Seal)
■� MO- r
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE DISADVANTAGED PROGRAM
The Board reviewed the following information from
Community Development Director King:
TO: The Honorable Board of DATE: August 5, 1982 FILE:
County Commissioners Transportation
1 Disadvantaged
THROUGH: C. B. Hardin,�.fi,Ph.D.
Acting County -,-Administrator
L SUBJECT: TRANSPORTATION FOR THE
"DISADVANTAGED PROGRAM
'SX Coordination Summary - Transportation Disadvantaged
FROM: . Patrick Bruce King REFERENCES: Coordinated Transportation
Community Development Development Plan
Director
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given
formal•consideration by the Board of County Commissioners.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
In 1979, the Florida State Legislature enacted Chapter 427
Transportation Services. The intent of this legislation is
to foster the coordination of specialized transportation
services for the "transportation disadvantaged". The statute
defines transportation disadvantaged as:
"...individuals who because of physical or mental
disability, income status, or age are unable to
transport themselves or to purchase transportation
and are, therefore, dependent upon others to
obtain access to health care, employment, education,
shopping, social activities, or other life-sustaining
activities."
Section 427.012 provides for the formation of a statewide
Coordinating Council on the Transportation Disadvantaged.
The primary duties of the Coordinating Council are to develop
policies/procedures for coordination of funding and grants,
compile data on transportation needs, provide information,
and approve the appointment of Transportation Providers.
The objectives of Chapter 427 are implemented at the local
level by a Local Planning Organization (LPO). This LPO has
three major functions; drafting of a Transportation Develop-
ment Plan, a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the
appointment of a Transpor-=atiori Provider. Attachment 1
gives an overview of the organization and a summary of respon-
sibilities under Florida Statutes and includes Chapter 427.
On October 22, 1980, the Board of Couaty Commissioners accepted
responsibility for the Transportation for the Disadvantaged
Program and became the Local Planning Organization (LPO). At
the September 30, 1981, meeting, the Board authorized a Joint
Participation Agreement with the Florida Department of Trans-
portation (FDOT) to provide a Transportation Development Plan
as required in Section 427.015 (1). Kimley-Horn and Associates
was retained to develop that study. On May 19, 1982, the
Board of County Commissioners reviewed the preliminary section,
Inventory, Analysis and Alternatives and instructed Kimley-
Horn and Associates to complete the study including a five-
year development plan which specified implementation steps
AUG 181982 ' .51 pw 53
34
AUG 1 8 1992¢,1 .
in the transportation program. In addition, the Board requested
Commissioner Dick Bird to investigate and monitor the program's
progress.
Commissioner Bird held two subsequent workshops on June 8th
and July 8, 1982. Those attending included the social services
agencies which will participate in the program, a representative
from Florida Department of Transportation, and Community
Development staff. Discussions centered on the program's
possible impacts and the agency transportation needs.
On June 15, 1982, Kimley-Horn and Associates submitted the
draft of Coordinated Transportation Development Plan. Copies
were distributed to the social service agencies who would be
coordinating their transportation services. Copies of this
draft are included as Attachment 2.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS: -
The Board of County Commissioners acting as the Local Planning
Organization (LPO) has the following remaining tasks:
1) Review and adopt, a five-year Transportation
Development Plan (TDP) which includes a Transporta-
tion Improvement Program (TIP).
2) Annual updates of this Plan.
3) Designation of a Transportation Provider.
The Transportation Provider is a governmental entity, a non-
profit agency or a for-profit company which serves the trans-
portation disadvantaged population in a community and which,
to the fullest extent possible, reduces the fragmentation and
duplication of service provision among all the state or
federally funded agencies that provide services to transporta-
tion disadvantaged individuals.
The Transportation Provider may act in a number of capacities
while fullfilling the provision of Chapter 427, Rule 41. After
discussions at the July 30,1982, workshop. it was recommended
that the Council on Aging be appointed as the Transportation
Provider. Application will be made for any available grant
funds. In addition, the Council on Aging will utilize a
volunteer who will provide detailed inventory of routes,
vehicles, and client needs. This information will be utilized
to determine the Transportation Provider first year goals and
objectives. The Council on Aging will then act as the Trans-
portation Provider for one year after the signing of the
Memorandum of Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
In order to meet its contractual obligation as the Local Plan-
ning Organization (LPO) and to fulfill the requirement of
Chapter 427, staff recommends the following actions:
1) The Board of County Commissioners approve the Coordinated
Transportation Development Plan.
2) The Board of County Commissioners appoint the Council on
Aging as the Transportation Provider at a regular Com-
mission meeting on August 18, 1982.
� a �
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, that the Board approve
the recommendation of the staff, as indicated
in the August 5, 1982 memo from Patrick Bruce
King, Community Development Director.
Commissioner Fletcher stated he would like to offer an
alternative - that the County make Alison DeGenero, of
Neighbors Helping Neighbors, the provider. He suggested
that Mr. DeGenero be compensated at $5 a year and that he
create a transportation squad.
Commissioner Fletcher AMENDED THE MOTION,
SECONDED by Commissioner Wodtke, that the
provider be Alison DeGenero in lieu of the
Council on Aging.
Commissioner Wodtke commented he knew that Mr. DeGenero
had never been one to accept federal funds to run a program.
Commissioner Bird reviewed the background of how the
State requested the County to come up with a plan for
transporting the disadvantaged. He added that if the County
did not, it could have the problem of jeopardizing the
transportation segment as well as the funds for road
improvements. After much consideration, it was determined
that the Council on Aging was the most qualified with the
best staff to proceed. Commissioner Bird commented that to
ask Mr. DeGenero to take on the additional responsibility of
transporting people in wheelchairs and those who are
physically handicapped would be a tremendous shift of burden
to suddenly go to the volunteer segment. He further
explained that the DOT has made available $4,000, in the
AUG 18 1982 36 9VX 51 PACE 55
AUG 1.8 1982
PAUL
56.
form of a
grant, to assist in initially setting
up this
work. Commissioner Bird advised that Jamie Cochran, of the
DOT, was present to answer any questions. He noted that all
of the various agencies were willing to accept the Council
on Aging -as the provider, DOT was willing to extend the
grant to the County, and they were ready to get under way on
the project.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION ON THE
AMENDED MOTION. *It was voted on and failed,
with a vote of 1 to 4, with Commissioner
Fletcher voting in favor.
John Kirchner, Treasurer of the Council on Aging,
approached the Board and advised that their agency was not
competing for funds with the other agencies. He explained
each agency dealt with specific problems: one agency dealt
with children who were handicapped, one agency with mentally
disabled persons, etc. He added that the Council on Aging
does have the capabilities, but they also draw on a high
crop of volunteer help.
Commissioner Wodtke inquired if the DOT will be
documenting this activity.
Jamie Cochran responded that the burden would be on the
DOT, and they would be working with the Council on Aging.
She added that the DOT would enter into a contract on a
yearly basis.
Commissioner Bird interjected that the only funds to be
used would be the $4,000 from DOT, and it was understood
that this Board had not budgeted to help the Council on
Aging in this regard.
Jim Ross, of City Cab of Vero Beach, Inc., came before
the Board. He expressed his views on this matter, and he
felt using the private sector would be the best way to
implement this program.
Alison DeGenero approached the Board and stated that he
was not the person that accomplished things; it was the
community who accomplished them. He praised the existing
resources in the County and felt they far surpassed the
Council on Aging. Mr. DeGenero hoped the Board would let
the private sector get involved; he felt the provider would
just see to it that the resources would be used. He also
felt the resources were not being used efficiently and
correctly, and urged the Board to let him do the job and
show the community how to do this project themselves. Mr.
DeGenero commented that the law said transportation must be
provided; the law cannot be changed but he urged the Board
to give the private sector in the community a chance. He
then referred to a problem he had when he wanted to look at
the books of the Council on Aging, and was refused. Mr.
DeGenero concluded by urging the Board to use the existing
resources instead and not take the easy way, because it does
not work.
Polly Crowell, Council on Aging, came before the Board
and stated that she did not know why anyone was not allowed
to see the books, as they were dealing with public funds and
try to use them very carefully. She felt the Council on
Aging had done an excellent job in providing transportation.
Mrs. Crowell added that if they are the coordinating agency,
they would provide reports any time the Board would desire.
Don Mitchell came before the,Board and advised that his
firm provided transportation for the Council on Aging. He
pointed that Mr. DeGenero did indeed examine the books with
an employee of the Today newspaper. Mr. Mitchell felt
whoever the provider was would have the task of managing
the resources
and he did not think this
could be
done with
zero dollars.
He added that there was
going to
be some
AUG 181992
38
wx
51 pAut 57
AUG 181992 avx 1 FADE
technical assistance to help the Council on Aging and he
hoped the Board did not think it could be done without it
costing the County.
Mr. DeGenero stated that Mr. Mitchell was correct; he
did get to see some of the books, along with a Today
newspaper employee, but he would love to have a grand jury
investigation of the Council on Aging.
A brief discussion followed.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was
voted on and carried with a vote of 4 to 1,
with Commissioner Fletcher voting in opposition.
CHANGE ORDER - WATER PLANT CONTRACT
The Board discussed the memorandum of August 11, 1982
from George Liner, Utilities Manager, as follows:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: August 11, 1982 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
THRU: Dr. C.B. Hardin r., Ph.D.
Acting County m nistrator
mo
II�' V
FROM: teorge Liner,
Utilities Manager
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Change Order #1 to Part III
SUBJECT: of Water Plant Contract (Gulf
Constructors International, Inc.)
REFERENCES:
Throughout the construction there were 21 item decisions made as
shown on the attached Change Order No. 1 to Part III of the contract
work. These are listed in the attached package showing the dollar
difference of each decision, whether additive or subtractive. Most of
the changes were from findings of regulation changes which caused minor
improvements of the design. The three major changes are:
#5 Change class 52 DIP to 51 DIP -$5,495.10
#18 Add FRP reducers for flowmeter installation +$5,083.00
39
#19 Revisions to electrical to accomodate instrumentation furnished
in contract Part II +$13,855.00
#20 Substitution of Detroit Diesel Generator -$2,470.00
All the changes had been reviewed with the Utilities Division
and were seen to be necessary for various reasons.
It should be noted that the cpn3truction work is in the final
stapes with only one further change anticipated. As pointed out in
the Sverdrup and Parcel attachments, these total changes of an added
$23,769.89 cost represents much less than a 1% change of their contract
(.69%, to be specific).
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In the field, in the course of construction, there were numerous
decisions made as to many of the changes. Most of the changes required on the
spot decisions in order not to deter the project from remaining on schedule.
As mentioned above, most of the changes were required by various regulations.
Information as to the major changes is as follows:
Item 5 - Reducing the class of ductile iron pipe reduced its thickness
and therefore cost - while remaining within acceptable specification for
pressure and water main acceptability. This resulted in a saving of
$5,495.10.
Item 18 - Add FRP reducers for flowmeter installation. These reducers
will improve the accuracy of the flowmeter, at initial flow conditions,
plus the use of these reducers will save a larger increase in cost when
the plants production capacity is increased in the future. The savings
are expected to be much larger than the $5,083.00 cost of this change.
Item 19 - Revisions to electrical to accomodate instrumentation furnished
in Contract Part II. This added cost of $13,855.00 is associated with
the changes required by Part II by Water Services of America. For some
of those changes there was either a Part II change of components or
instrumentation which represents an improvement in quality, safety or
reliability and/or a saving in cost to the Part II contract.
Item 20 - Substitution of Detroit Diesel (Allison) generator. Without
a loss of reliability this auxiliary generator was selected with a reduc-
tion in cost of $2,470.00.
RECOMMENDATION & FUNDING
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commission approve the attached
change order No. 1 to Part III contract. The chairman should be authorized
to sign the 5 original copies for the consulting engineer to process
through Farmers Home Administration to fund the change from the project
contingency of $95,000.
AUG 181982
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, that the Board approve
the Change Order as recommended by the Utilities
Manager in his August 11, 1982 memo, and
authorize the signature of the Chairman.
40
go 51 PACE9
AUG 18 1982
Bog 51 pn60
-
Community Services Director Thomas brought to the
Board's attention that under "Recommendation of Funding,"
they have
not
received the
grant money.
In
order to
facilitate
the
cash flow,
he requested
that
the Board
authorize the staff to prepare a document for an
anticipation note, based upon the grant receivable of
$780,000 to be paid on or before six months.
Commissioner Lyons AMENDED HIS MOTION, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, that funding be obtained
for the grant anticipation note not to exceed
six months, as needed.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION ON
THE MOTION AS AMENDED. It was voted on
and carried with a vote of 4 to 1, with
Commissioner Fletcher voting in opposition.
41
7
of the Contract will j e (MXAM) (Increased) Ey The Sum Of•
�gr
nd Sixty Nine Dollars and 89/1 Ofl
d
_
t Total including this and previous Change Orders Will Be- Three Million Four Hundred
�.
fight Thousand, Eight Hundred and Sixty Nine
'
"adv ti i•
'->�r
�' ,..�
t Per;od Provided for Completion Will Be ,� ai ilii +"1.� ) (Unchanged) � '0' Ooy
-
, ,,,
i'�s
4
�►/ /!'�� r (Ownor)
-
Gwner'a ArcAdruc4nr;;near)
(Dare}
. P oizr
JuI v 16, 1982
g�
(Dara)
^mFiA
-C' C
#
..
{*77t'_• -R -cia '.� i:: -L hair. i..1J ..r .r t+✓..... ......h ..vN w +.-.
` p CONTRAC & CHANGE ORDER
T � o�►A T �
p tJuly 15 1982
u
':Water System Improvements sT�re Florida
,CONTRACT FOR
Contract Part III - R.O.Equipment Su ort Facilities GOuNTYIndian River
� ;.
ks'QW N ER
rIndian River County, Florida
ria r��uTf Constructors...Internat onal., . Inc... � ...„...........«__
`.You are hereby requested to comply with the following changes from the contract plans and specifications.
d_
s; Description Qf Changes DECREASE
• (Supplemental Plans and Spvcifications Attached) in Contract Price
$ -
. YRequired revisions totheContract
'as a result of changes in construction
,and interfacing with Contract Part II"KK
{ Y t
S' hcK § j,�
R*
c �,4 "l- bd
INCREASE
in Contract Price
$
23,769.89
4•
C��tyu'{Rr=
�' rx F _ 232769
TOTALS $ . _
_E9
NET CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE $ .._ ......._. ` .......... _...2Z,769 .89
TIFICATION
titi
'e attachment �r
�k.,.
i �
tiilormation will bo use'i os record of any
g" t8', "-brighUi cons:ruc:ia- Gonttab't.
Number coplas raQuiroa: 4 i No further monks or otnor benefits maybe paid out andar this Y
Time to cGn�pa¢:1.: Join in. program unless this raport fs wmpietac ane :„ao as roquired oy
oxlat,ny saw ane reyutations i-1 C.F.A. ea 192+y.
a
of the Contract will j e (MXAM) (Increased) Ey The Sum Of•
-Twenty Three I housa�;in SE: en'
nd Sixty Nine Dollars and 89/1 Ofl
Dollars �$ 23,765. f39 },
_
t Total including this and previous Change Orders Will Be- Three Million Four Hundred
fight Thousand, Eight Hundred and Sixty Nine
89/1,Ila:s(53,478;869.59
t Per;od Provided for Completion Will Be ,� ai ilii +"1.� ) (Unchanged) � '0' Ooy
:nt iii become a supplement to the cotract and all provisions will apply hereto.
4 A
4
�►/ /!'�� r (Ownor)
(Dc to)
Gwner'a ArcAdruc4nr;;near)
(Dare}
. P oizr
JuI v 16, 1982
(Conrr�ctorl
(Dara)
^mFiA
� ..t n.':li';• N .I,c+ ..... , .,', -4 �TN.� ..- i, �., r •1:,_ a .
,'%;,rrrrr 4rrr1 Ti:Ic)
tiilormation will bo use'i os record of any
g" t8', "-brighUi cons:ruc:ia- Gonttab't.
Number coplas raQuiroa: 4 i No further monks or otnor benefits maybe paid out andar this Y
Time to cGn�pa¢:1.: Join in. program unless this raport fs wmpietac ane :„ao as roquired oy
oxlat,ny saw ane reyutations i-1 C.F.A. ea 192+y.
a
�urisx 424-7 (Rev. o -w! I -SQ';
�.r:r:oa
d
_
�'frll
�urisx 424-7 (Rev. o -w! I -SQ';
�.r:r:oa
ti
4 A
4
f
�A
�6�?, -
> :}' 1 ` �xbt s Y.t_,
� ..t n.':li';• N .I,c+ ..... , .,', -4 �TN.� ..- i, �., r •1:,_ a .
WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS]
CONTRACT PART III - REVERSE OSMOSIS EQUIPMENT
SUPPORT FACILITIES _ `5
SOUTH COUNTY WATER SYSTEM
�� b=
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
P
Attachment to Contract Change Order No.
The following items are revisions which are required to the Contract Documents_
and to Gulf Constructors International, Inc.'s original Contract, which have
resulted in the necessity of this Contract Change Order.
ITEM s AMOUNT
y a 4 .
1. Concrete cylinder test breaks + $
2. Additional clearing and grubbing of roadway3
-right of way 3 " + 2,125.00'`
4 V? f £ r
3. Additional roadway pavement (38 square yards
4. Additional site clearingre uired for the FP&L
., utility easement q «, + $ ^2,618.75 g�
Changed specified class 52 DIP to classy n
, 5 51 DIPS , 4 y f $ 5,495 10 ,
6.. Installed 26' of r4" steel sleeve and 2
conduit under roadway for telephones t ���� + $ 625.00
dye -'� 't
7.;, Filled CMU cells with concrete and rebar at g
140.55
r doorways t
fi 9,iL 4^N RJ fttlhi. v1L 'i
8 Increased size of reject meter vault to
accommodate flowmeter provided in Contract II,n + $+ Ta
276 70
r:«x
9.tl` Box out trench No. 5 for 30" wall sleeve r + $
233.60
.. .M .10. Delete doors #32 and #35 and widen doors
#31 and #36, change doors #4 and #17 to
- double doors, +a $ 1,875..:, -w
11., Change toilet partition to accommodate a
dk _
7 $; 934
wheelchair + r 387.50 ��
t tri?{
12 Construct handicapped parking spot wither
k + 57 504�'
p �1 $ �
_ram and sign.
13.' Add louver to Generator Building as requiredx
+ 607.05
by FP&L .
q�
+ 175.00
14 ' Add ceramic floor the An Jrooms #104 and #107.4 $
+ 195.00 fi "fit
15'4� Additional masonry to close window gaps,-
$:,thy
16` Addition of lintels at doors #15 #16 and #17 + $ 301.20 `$r
_ 17 Box out grating and trench No. 5 for flowmeter + $ 194.83
+ a
Mid Ff#P reducers for. flowmeta�r`irnsttT- at�oa� $ 5,0�.
19.... Revisions to. electrical to accommodate
;r+strumentation furnished in Contract;
t
Part II + $13,855.00' "
20. Substitution of )etroit Riese' Generator - $ 2,470.00 p"
21. Adb.tior► of CMJ" docks on high pressure
booster pump room + $ 78 00-,'i-,
h F
Ti Change Order No. 1 + $23,769
Z',-.,
x
BIKE PATH ON 20TH AVENUE
The Board reviewed the following letter from
R. Marshbanks:
Kiwanis Club of Vero -Treasure Coast
P. O. Box 6381
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Agust 8,1982
Indian River County Commissioners
1840 25th street
Vero Beach,Florida.
Commissioners:
The Vero Treasure Coast Kiwanis Club would like to approach the
Comission to -enlist your aid in.completing the 20th avenue Bike Path Project.
As you are all aware we have been sucessfull in raising funds to construct
a bike path on 20th avenue between 8th and 12th streets. We now have bids in
and are ready to start construction. We have raised over $10,000 and the
bid was $13,000. We would like to enlist your support and we will also
contact the School Board for their support.
We will have a plan ready for your approval at the next commission
meeting.
Est
4,
9
Sincerely
R.Marshbanks
Secretary
Bike Path Chairman
Vero Treasure Coast
Kiwanis.
AUG 181982 44 Bois 51 wt- F3
AUG 181982
gaox
1 -PAGE
64:
Attorney
Samuel Block approached the
Board
and
explained that the proposed project on 20th Avenue, between
8th and 12th Streets, would provide four more blocks of bike
_paths for the children. However, their organization was
$3,000 short of funds and were requesting this amount from
the Board.
A brief discussion followed along those lines.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
approved allocating $3,000 from the Road & Bridge
Materials Account for the Bike Path Project.
ADVERTISEMENT FOR COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN ORDINANCE
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
authorized the advertisement for a Public
Hearing to adopt the Comprehensive Land
Use Plan Ordinance at 2:00 o'clock P.M. on
Wednesday, September 15, 1982.
TREASURE COAST UTILITIES
Attorney Brandenburg explained that the Receiver, of
Treasure Coast Utilities, has yet to be paid, and recently
Judge Sharp ordered Indian River County to pay the Receiver
$7,000. He added that his office could then proceed to
obtain the $7,000 back from Mr. Salter. He recommended that
the Board authorize the payment of $7,000 to the Receiver
and .that his office be authorized to recover that amount
from Mr. Salter.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, that the Receiver be
paid $7,000, and that the Attorney's office
be authorized to make an attempt to recover
the $7,000 from Mr. Salter.
A brief discussion ensued.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was
was voted on and carried with a vote of 4 to 1,
with Commissioner Fletcher voting in opposition.
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL - SEAGROVE SOUTH
The Board reviewed the following memorandum from Staff
Planner, Janis Johnson, dated August 5, 1982:
TO: The Honorable Board of DATE: August 5, 1982 FILE:
County Commissioners IRC -82 -SD -4,#237
THROUGH: C. B. Hardin`linistrator
Ph.D.
Acting Count
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF
SEAGROVE SOUTH PRELIMINARY
PLAT
Patrick Bruce King
Letter from Pat Murray
FROM: Janis Johnson REFERENCES: dated 8/5/82.
Staff Planner
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On July 15, 1982, the Corporate Investment Company requested'
approval of a preliminary plat of Seagrove South Subdivision.
The proposed single-family subdivision contains 67 lots on
a 39 acre parcel (1.7 units/acre). The property is zoned
R1 -A Single -Family (4.3 units/acre) in the Land Use Element.
The proposed subdivision is located between A -1-A and the
Atlantic Ocean, approximately 3/4 mile south of the 17th
Street Causeway. Seagrove I is directly adjacent to the
subject property on the south and interconnects with the
proposed Seagrove South Subdivision. The parcel to the
south of the subject property is presently undeveloped.
Rivergrove Subdivision has received approval of its prelim-
inary plat which is valid until December 23, 1982. River -
grove is located across from the subject property on the
west side of A -1-A.
AUG 181982 46 So 51 PAq 65
AUG 18 1982. BOK 5. PAGE 6-s
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
Seagrove South shares a common entrance with Seagrove I onto
A -1-A and the internal circulation will connect with Seagrove
I through Eggret Lane and Ocean Way. Ocean Way extends south
to the most southern boundary of Seagrove South, allowing
future connection to the.ad_jacent parcel. All streets are
private with maintenance covered by a homeowner's association.
At the request of the Public Works Director, Note 7 on the
preliminary plat states that the roads are not designed ac-
cording to Florida Department of Transportation manual of
uniform standards.
A ten foot private beach access and dune walkover are located
at the end of Ocean Way on tr..e south side of Lot 12, Block K.
In compliance with the Major Thoroughfare, the applicant has
dedicated a.-10 foot strip along A -1-A to the County for future
road expansion. A 4,500 square foot parcel at the entrance
of the proposed subdivision is reserved for landscaping and
an entryway fence.
The applicant has entered into a joint agreement with the
City of Vero Beach for sewer services and has received author-
ization for water service from Indian River County Utilities.
The proposed subdivision would be served by the Beachland
Boulevard Fire Station. Their estimated response time is
eight minutes. This would be reduced upon completion of the
`ire Station to be located' -in the moorings. That facility is
scheduled to begin construction in 19821-1983. The 17th Street
Bridge would be utilized for emergency evacuation.
The proposed subdivision was reviewed by the Technical Review
Committee (TRC) on August 3, 1982. The applicant has conformed
to all TRC recommendations. The subdivision meets or exceeds
minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, the Zoning
Ordinance and the Land Use Element.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Based on the foregoing analysis, staff recommends approval of
the preliminary plat of Seagrove South.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
approved the recommendation of staff for
approval of the preliminary plat of Seagrove
South.
PERMIT FEE STRUCTURE WORKSHOP
The Board reviewed the following memorandum:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 6, 1982
the Board of County Commissioners,
FILE:
THRU: C. B. Hardin, Jr. Ph. D. SUBJECT: BUILDING PERMIT FEES
Acting County Administrator
FROM: Bruce King, Director piREFERENCES: Letter from Mr. T. R. Nason,
Community Development Division Director of Finance,
dated July 8 1982
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given formal considera-
tion by the Board of County Commissioners on August 18, 1982:
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The County has been requested by Mr. T. R. Nason, Director of Finance,
City of Vero Beach, to review the County's building permit fee structure
and consider increasing the County's building permit fees to equal those
charged by the City of Vero Beach. In Mr. Nason's letter, dated July 8,
1982, he requested that any increase in building department fees be imple-
mented, if possible, by October 1, 1982.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
On July 15, 1982 it was suggested by Dr. Hardin that a workshop be sche-
duled by the Board of County Commissioners to discuss this rate increase.
Should the Board establish a workshop concerning this matter, the Community
Development Division shall provide a detailed analysis and recommendation
for the Board's consideration prior to this workshop.
RECOIyIENDATION:
The staff recommends the scheduling of a workshop on August 2S, 1982, for
the Board of County Commissioners to discuss and consider the proposed
rate increases in the building department fees for the County.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
approved the scheduling of a workshop at
9:00 A.M. on August 25, 1982 to discuss the
proposed rate increases for the County Building
Department fees.
BEACH ACCESS & DEVELOPMENT PLAN
The Board reviewed the following memorandum from
Community Development Director King:
AUG 18 198 48 SO 51 PAGE 67
Z
AUG 181982
TO: The Honorable Members of
the Board of County
Commissioners
DATE: August 6, 1982
.�
THROUGH:. C. B. Hard.4 1 , Jr . , Ph . D SUBJ ECT:
Acting Cdunty� Administrator
FILE:
BEACH ACCESS AND DEVELOPME14T
PLAN
FROM:�l
Bruce King, Director EFERENCES:
Community Development
Division
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners
on August 18, 1982.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
As directed by the Board of County Commissioners on July
7, 1982, the Planning Department has formulated the attached
draft of the Beach Access and Development Plan for Indian
River County.
ANALYSIS:
The Beach Access and Development Plan presents an overview
of the physical and,environmental issues surrounding the
provision of beach access facilities. In addition, the
plan evaluates the existing beach access facilities in
relation to the current and future demand for such facil-
ities. The alternative methods of beach access acquisition,
as well as the potential funding sources, are presented in
Chapter 3. Chapter 4 of the Plan presents the specific
recommendations for the Beach Access and Development Plan.
Section 1 of this Chapter presents the proposed goal,
objectives and policies for the future development of a
beach access system in Indian River County. Sections 2 and
3 identify the current and long term needs of the county in
regard to beach access facilities. Section 4 contains a
five-year capital improvement program which begins in Fiscal
Year 1983-1984. The staff's recommended funding source is
presented in Section 5. Finally, Section 6 presents a
specific work program for the implementation of the Plan.
Based upon the objectives of the Plan and the proposed
capital improvement program, it is anticipated that a
$5,000,000 general obligation bond issue would be required
to completely implement the recommendations of the Plan.
Should the general populace approve the referendum for the
issuance of a general obligation bond issue, this approval would
serve as the County's financial commitment to the Florida
Department of Natural Resources for the County's participation
in their "Save -Our -Coast" Program. In addition, the revenue
generated through this bond issue would be utilized to seek
other State and Federal sources of funding for beach access
facilities, as proposed in the Plan.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is recommended that the following actions be taken:
1) That the Board of County Courmissioners adopt the Beach
Access and Development Plan for Indian River County.
2) That the County staff be directed to take the necessary
actions in order to have a referendum on the November
eneral election.ballot for the County's issuance of a
5,000,000 general obligation bond issue.
Mr. King stated that Dennis. Ragsdale, of his
department, was the primary author of the plan, and
commended him for his work.
Discussion followed concerning minor corrections to be
made in the plan; appropriate language for the question to
be put to the voters; and of working with bond counsel.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, that the Board approve
the Beach Access & Development Plan, authorize
the Attorney to draft the appropriate language
in Resolution form to be put to the voters,
work with bond counsel, consider a preliminary
plan, and place this item on the next Agenda.
Commissioner Wodtke referred to the Committee for Beach
Preservation and wondered if they should.be involved in this
matter.
Commissioner Lyons felt that the purpose of the Beach
Preservation Committee was for beach restoration, and did
not really take into account the amount of beaches owned by
the County.
Commissioner Wodtke commented that he would advise the
Committee that they were not involved in this aspect.
Commissioner Bird inquired if there was a condemnation
process if an agreement could not be reached with an owner
of beachfront property.
Attorney Brandenburg stated that the County could use
condemnation but it must show some need. He explained that
they would go to the properties that were most suitable and
obtain options to buy properties after the bond issue was
approved - the options would have to be paid for "up front."
The Attorney stated he would look into this if the Board so
desired. On this type of a bond referendum, the Attorney
AUG 181982 so x 51 PkbE
AUG 18 1992x
51 FA. -F.
70:
noted that
there were notice requirements that
must be
published far in advance; he would like to get the bond
resolution and the wording settled as soon as possible.
Attorney Brandenburg pointed out that the special bond
counsel would only charge a fee if the referendum was
successful:
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried unanimously.
MENTAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION - REQUEST FOR SPACE
The Board reviewed the following memorandum from Lynn
Williams, Acting General Services Director:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 12, 1982 FILE: Agenda
the Board of County Commissioners August 18, 1982
THRU: C. B. Hardin, ., Ph.D.
Acting County inistrator SUBJECT: Mental Health Association of
Indian River County
FROM:Lynn Williams
Acting Genera
REFERENCES:
rvices Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITION
The Mental Health Association of Inidan River County offers sponsor-
ship of at least four programs which are administered in the field.
The programs are not tax supported and are for all economic and age
levels.
The Mental Health Association of Indian River County presently operates
the Director's office from a private home. The Director's office was
moved to a private home bacause of a lack of funds to rent an office.
The Crisis Line Program, one of the most important programs the associa-
tion has, is operated from the Records Office of the County Jail. The
space available in the Jail complex is large enough only for a table,
chair and telephone, which is basically all that is required. However,
the surroundings of the busy office are somewhat distracting to the
volunteer operators and a more private and quiet surrounding would
be much better suited for this program. The 911 emergency telephone
system will be implemented in October 1982. After this time the Sheriff's
Department will not have the room for the Crisis Line.
A letter of request for office space from Judith Knisely, President
of the Mental Health Association is attached for further explanation.
51
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The Mental Health Association of Indian River County has requested space
in the County Adminstration Building. Their space requirements are minimal
and funds are not available to pay the standard lease rate.
On the third floor of the Administration Building adjacent to the ofice
of State Representative Dale Patchett, a room is available of adequate
size to satisfy the needs of the Mental Health Association. The room
is approximatley 13 X 26 or 338 square feet. Normal lease rate for
this space is $8.72 per square foot. Monthly lease rate whould be
$245.62. Entrance is presently gained through the reception office
of Representative Patchett's suite. This space is presently unused and
would be best suited for a small office of one or two persons.
Mrs. Knisley has stated actual foot traffic to and from the Mental Health
Office is minimal. However, staff feels a doorway should be cut
directly into the main third floor hallway to reduce distraction
to Representative Patchett's office. This alteration would cost
approximately $400.00.
The Mental Health Association would not be connected to our telephone
system and would have a separate telephone billing, thus no cost to <
the County would be incurred for this service. Other normal building
services would be continued as with any office, i.e. custodial, eletric
lighting and air conditioning.
Alternative "A"
Authorize the Staff to negoitate a lease agreement with the Mental
Health Association of Indian River County for Room S-308 at the lease
rate of $245.62 monthly.
Alternative "B"
Denial of request for space in Administration Building. Continue
search for other appropriate space.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends the approval of Alternative "A" with the term
of the lease to be one year.
Hildy Tripson, of the Mental Health Association, came
before the Board and advised that they were affiliated with
the United Way. She added that they were more than willing
to pay something if the County could provide space for them.
Lengthy discussion followed about available space, and
it was determined the Board's preference was that the
Veterans' Office be used by the Mental Health Association.
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
authorized Lynn Williams to investigate the
possibilities of available space, and come
back to the Board with his recommendations.
52
x 51 PAG- .71
A U G 181982
CARPET BIDS - COURTROOM C
The Board discussed the following material:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 13, 1982
the Board of County Commissioners
THRU: C. B. Hardin,, Ph.D. SUBJECT: Asst. to the inistrator/ Carpet Bids.
Personnel Di ector
FROM:
Lynn Williams
Acting Gengrd
REFERENCES:
Services Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITION
51 w— 72,
FILE: Agenda
August 18, 1982
The Board approved at the August 4,1982 meeting authorization for
Staff to use emergency bid procedure to obtain proposals for
the carpet installation in Courtroom "C" and Judge Stikelethers'
office suite.
Requests for proposals were mailed to ten (10) local carpet
companies (see attached list). Three companies responded with
written proposals, they are:
The Carpetbaggers
Creative Floors
House of Carpets
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Sealed bids were opened in the General Services office by
Lynn Williams on August 13, 1982, at 1:30 P.M.
Companies and bids are listed below in order of ranking:
Creative Floors - $5642.95 _
Carpetbaggers - 5757.00
House of Carpets - 6076.54
Alternative "A"
Accept low bid from Creative Floors for carpet, pad and install-
ation as specified in letter dated August 5, 1982, (attached).
Amount to be transferred from Board of County Commission Contingency
Fund (001-199-513-99.91 ) to account #001-220-519-66.41.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends bid to be awarded to Creative Floors as low bidder.
Work to be completed as soon as possible.
Staff also recommends color #437, Brown Velvet or #876, Orange Spice
be substituted. The darker color will require less maintenance.
Commissioner Lyons commented that the County had a
great deal of service from the "Carpetbaggers" in the past
few months.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, that the bid be awarded
to the second low bidder, Carpetbaggers, in the
amount of $5,757, on the grounds that the small
difference between their bid and the lowest bid
more than compensated for the additional
service the County had received from the
Carpetbaggers; and that brown be selected as
the color of the carpeting.
Mr. Storms, of Carpetbaggers, advised that the
carpeting used in Judge Stikelether's office on a trial
basis could be utilized in the Jury Room.
Community Services Director Thomas suggested adding to
the Motion that the necessary funding would be charged
directly to the construction account #301-131-519-66.51.
Commissioner Lyons ADDED TO HIS MOTION that
funding would be from account #301-131-519-66.51.
Commissioner Bird seconded the ADDITION TO THE
MOTION.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. "It was
voted on and carried unanimously.
APPROVAL OF LICENSE AGREEMENT - WAXE
The Board reviewed the following memorandum from Lynn
Williams dated August 11, 1982:
AUG 18 199254 seas 51 PAGE '7
K 51fAuc 7
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 11, 1982 FILE: Agenda
the Board of County Commissioners August 18, 1982
THRU: C. B. Hardin, Jr., Ph.D.
Acting County Adw_2 SUBJECT: WAXE Radio License Agreement
FROM: Lynn Williams/
Acting General
W REFERENCES:
ervices Director
DESCRIPTION AND=NDITION
Proper Public Notice was submitted in the Vero Beach Press Journal
on February 17, 24, and March 3, 1982, for the sale or lease of a
parcel of County owned land located at the stump dump on Old Dixie
Highway. Two bids were received, one from WGYL Radio and one from
WAXE Radio. A License Agreement with WGYL, as best bidder, was
approved by the Board of County Commissioners at the May 5, 1982
meeting. This agreement allows for non-exclusive license to use
said property.for the purpose of constructing a radio tower.
Mr. Dick Crago WAXE Radio has attempted unsuccessfully to negotiate
a common use of the tower to be built by WGYL on the licensed property
in May 1982. Mr. Crago has approached the County with a request for
a similar -agreement for a parcel of land adjacent to and south of
the WGYL property. WAXE has requested a parcel 400 X 400 feet or
approximately 3.67 acres to be used for a 200 foot tower with
transmitter building. This property was not advertised.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Attached is a completed license agreement for the use of the property
located at the Old Dixie Transfer station. The agreement with WAXE
is essentially the same as the WGYL agreement with one exception;
the grace period for payment of the annual lease is extented to ten
days. WGYL agreement grace period was for three (3) days which Mr.
Crago felt was not enough time to correct a deficiency, in case of
an oversight whereby he was late with the annual payment.
The proposed annual lease rate is $900 for the first ten years with
an additional ten year option at a rate of $1200 annually.
The previously granted license agreement with WGYL was for the same
time frame with annual payments of $1200 for the first ten years
graduating to $1500 annually for the option years.
WARE has received FCC approval of the adjacent site and Mr. Crago has
stated he anticipates no difficulty obtaining the same approval for
his new site. This property has been put out for bid two times in
the last five (5) years with only two different bidders, WAXE and WGYL.
Alternative "A"
Authorize the Chairman to sign completed license agreement as attached.
Forward signed original agreement to Recording Secretary and copy to
Finance. Instruct Finance to make necessary arrangements for dispers-
ment of the lease payment.
Alternative "B"
Even though we have advertised adjacent property, authorize
staff to again advertise this parcel of land so as to meet
legal requirements.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
Staff recommends approval (Alternative "A") of license agreement
with WAXE as attached. No funding is required.
Attorney Brandenburg advised that this item must go out
for bid.
ON MOTION MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
agreed that this item, concerning the sale or
lease of a County -owned parcel located at the
Old Dixie Highway stump dump, be put out for bid.
The Board of County Commissioners recessed at
12:05 o'clock P.M. for lunch and reconvened at 1:30 o'clock
P.M. with all members present.
PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM 7-21-82 MEETING REGARDING
REZONING REQUEST BY IDA E. COOPER
Attorney Brandenburg reviewed the following memorandum
from Dennis Ragsdale, Staff Planner:
1 •6
56 WX
51 rAtE 75
_I
1.0: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 5, 1982 FILE:
the Board of County IRC-82-ZC-9, #459
Commissioners
THROUGH: C. B. in, Jr., Ph.D.
Actin ounty
Admini trator SUBJECT:
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Patrick Bruce King
FROM: Dennis lagsdal�2@ .
Staff Planner
IDA E. COOPER'S REQUEST TO
REZONE .77 ACRES FROM R-1
TO R -2A
REFERENCES:
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners
on August 18, 1982.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On July 21, 1982, a public hearing was held by the Board of
County Commissioners to consider the subject rezoning re-
quest. A decision was postponed pending a legal agreement
which would allow only two (2) single-family detached dwell-
ing units to be built on the subject property and would
provide a means of permanent access to both houses.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant requested this rezoning request in order to
allow construction of a new single-family dwelling to replace
a frame house attached to a mobile home. This structure is
presently situated in back of the applicant's home on the
same lot.
Staff's concern at the July 21, 1982, public hearing centered
around the potential for multi -family development, not compat-
ible with the neighborhood, to occur in the future. The
applicant has provided a "Declaration of Restriction" which
will only allow two single-family homes to be built on the
subject property and which provides a twenty (20) foot wide
easement for access to the second home.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the rezoning request be approved.
The Attorney stated that the legal agreement was in
proper form and recommended approval.
The Chairman asked if there was any one present who
wished to be heard. There were none.
ON MOTION MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
agreed to close the Public Hearing.
57
ON MOTION MADE :v Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
adopted Ordinar_ze 82-16 granting a rezoning from
R-1 to R -2A, as requested by Ida E. Cooper,, with
the understanding that the proper deed
restrictions wozld be recorded by the County
Attorney.
AUG 181982x 51 PSE " 7
58
AUG 18 1982. - ox.�ybE
ORDINANCE NO. 82-16
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone the hereinafter
described property and pursuant thereto held a public hearing in relation
thereto, at which parties in interest and citizens were heard; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indfan River
County, Florida, that the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River County, Florida,
and the accompanying Zoning Map be amended as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the following
described property situated in Indian River County, Florida,
to -wit:
Commencing at a concrete monument being the Northwest quarter corner
of the Southwest quarter Section 12. Township 33 S, Range 39 E, Indian
River County, Florida, and thence rain South on said Section line a
distance of 695 feet to a point, said point being the intersection of
the North right-of-way of 10th Place and said Section line.
Thence, run Easterly on the North Right -of -Way line a distance of
735 feet.to a point being the True Point of Beginning;'
Thence, run North 240 feet on a line parallel' and 735 feet distant
from the West boundary of Section 12;
Thence, run West 140 feet on a line parallel to and 240 feet distant
from the North Right -of -Way of 10th Place;
Thence, run South 240 feet on a line to a point on the said North Right -
of -Way line 140 feet West of the True Point of Beginning;
Thence, run East 140 feet on the North Right -of -Way to the True Point
of Beginning;
The True Point of Beginning also being defined as a point on the North Right -
of -Way line of 10th Place 503.36 feet West of a point, said point being the
intersection of the North Right -of -Way line and the centerline of Old Dixie
Highway.
Be changed from R-1, Single Family Residential to RSA Multiple Family
District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said
Zoning Regulations.
This Ordinance shall take effect August 24, 1982.
CONTROL OF FARMYARD ANIMALS
Chairman Scurlock reviewed the following memorandum
from Acting County Administrator Hardin dated August 12,
1982:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 12, 1982 FILE: Agenda
the Board of County Commissioners 8/18/82
SUBJECT: Pasture and Trailer for
Confinement of Large Animals
.
FROM. � C. B. Hardin, Jr. h. D. ' ► ° �� "` ' REFERENCES. Letter dated June 11 1982
Acting County Administrator from Office of the Sheriff
to Chairman of Bd. of C.C.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On June 11, 1982 Sergeant Manuel "Bob" Reese, Indian River County Sheriff's
Department, in a letter to the Chairman of the County Commission requested
the Board to consider providing a pasture and a four -horse trailer for
large animals such as horses, cows, etc. as -required by the provision of
F.S.S. 588.21.
The Animal Shelter does not have the facilities to house these large
animals thus as a result of this request, staff has inspected several
county owned parcels of property which could be used for this purpose.
The Sheriff's'Department has usually been able to find individuals to
contract for the safe keeping of these animals; however, none of them
want to enter into a continual agreement because they would not want to
mix their livestock with possibly contaminated livestock.
Land inspected is located in the 4600 block of South Gifford Road across
from the County barn on the NE corner of 4th and Rangeline and on 14th
Avenue just north of Oslo Road. Each of the areas would need to be fenced
at an estimated cost of $500. Two of the areas would not meet zoning re-
quirements for this use.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
A. F.S.S. allows a $10 fee and 14 cents per mile for transporting these
animals by private individuals. In addition the law provides for the
feeding and care of the impounded animals and such fee cannot exceed
$2.50 per day for each animal. Since it is difficult to get individuals
to enter into an agreement at these prices, staff would need authority
to negotiate satisfactory arrangements which would include transporting.
B. The land located in the NE corner of 4th and Rangeline has water and is
zoned but would reed to be, fenced. Estimated cost for fencing is $S00.
A four -horse trailer could be.purchased for $2,352.92; however, staff
understands that the Animal Control Officer feels a much stronger
trailer would be needed since the animals generally hauled have been
allowed to run wild and are very difficult to transport in this type
of trailer. The County would need to go out for bids on this item.
The Sheriff will furnish the vehicle to pull the trailer and will pro-
vide maintenance on the trailer.
AUG 181992 60 mwK 51. tAu 79
RECONMEVDATIONS AND FUNDING
Since there is only approximately twenty-five (25) animals per year that needs
to be quarantined, staff recommends Alternative W. The Board of County
Commissioners could direct that staff work closely with the Sheriff's Depart-
ment and reach a reasonable fee for "boarding" these animals.
There are.no funds available nor budgeted for this project. Recommend
Board of County Commissioners Contingency Fund.
Lengthy discussion followed about the State Statutes
and it was determined necessary to contact Representative
Dale Patchett in order for him to get this law brought up to
date.
Commissioner Bird felt somebody should be contacted to
handle the transporting of horses, as well as the feeding,
boarding, etc., and suggested Mr. Williams get in touch with
Chuck Dent.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, that the Board approve
the recommendation as indicated in the memo
dated August 12, 1982.
Commissioner Bird requested AMENDING THE MOTION
to indicate that staff could check into reasonable
fees for boarding and transporting the animals.
Commissioner Lyons AGREED TO THE AMENDMENT.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried unanimously.
ON MOTION MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
authorized the Attorney to communicate with
Representative Patchett regarding the State
Statutes and ask him to look into the possibility
of having the fees brought up to date.
Discussion followed about fines and it was suggested
this could be done by making an addendum to the animal
ordinance.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, that an'addendum be
made to the Animal Ordinance regarding fees.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was
voted on and carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING FROM A & R-1 TO R-lE - GOLIEN
The hour of 1:30 o'clock P.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER:
STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
k /1 A _ .
a
a� 1
in the matter of
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of - // g
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed befo:ye this% day A. D.
n
(SEAL)
4•.
(Clerk of the Circuit Court,
iness Manager)
River County, Florida)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, is reviewing the feasibility of
making the following changes.and additions tr, t
the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River County,
Florida, which changes and additions are {
substantially as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order !
that the following described property situated
on the south side of State Road 512, between
104th Avenue and 106th Avenue, in Indian
River County, Florida, to -wit:
The Southwest one-quarter of the Southwest
one-quarter of Section 21, Township 31 South,
Range 38 East, and the North one-half of the
Northwest one-quarter of the Northwest one-
quarter of Section 28, Township 31 South,
Range ,38 East, less however, the following
thirty-seven (37) lots which ate contained in
Pine Lakes Estates, Unit 1, an unrecorded
plat: Lots S, 6, 17, 18, 25, 27 and 28 in Black A; ;
Lot 20 in Block B; Lots 13,16,17 and 18 in Block
C; Lots 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21 and 22 In
Block D; Lots 2, 3, 4, 7,8,9,10,11,12, 15 and 16
in Block E; Lots 4, S and 6 in Block H and Lots 6
and 7 in Block F. .
Be changed from A -Agricultural District and
R-1, Single Family Residential to. R -TE,,,
Country Estate District.
.• 1
A public hearing in relation thereto at which i
parties In interest and citizens shall have an
opportunity to be heard, will be held by said
Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, in the County Com-
mission Chambers of the County Ad-
ministration Building located at 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday,
August 18, IM, at 1:30 P.M.
. If any person decides to appeal any decision l
made on the. above matter, he. will need a
record of thA►proceedings, and for such pur-
poses, he may need to insure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings, Is made, which in-
cludes testimony and evidence upon which the
appeal is based.
Indian River County -Board.
of County Commissioner
By: -s -Don C. Sc ►ri�ii Jr., Chairman.
July 26, Aug: 11,19"111.1) -
AUG 18198262 LAK 51 PA6 --8i
Staff recommendation is as follows:
-51 wu 82
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: August 2, 1982 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: C. B. Hard' Jr . , Ph . DSUBJ ECT:
Acting Cou Administrator
DEPAITMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE
Patrick Bruce King
MR. GREGORY GOLIEN'S REQUEST
TO REZONE 156 LOTS FROM
AGRICULTURAL AND R-1 TO
R-lE
FROM:Dennis Ragsdale'` REFERENCES:
Staff Planner
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners
in the form of a Public Hearing on August 18, 1982.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The applicant is requesting that 59 lots presently zoned
R-1, Single Family Residential (6.2 units/acre) and 97 lots
presently zoned Agricultural, be rezoned to R-lE, Country
Estate District (1 unit/acre). The 70' x 130' lots are in
Pine Lake Estates, an unrecorded plat, which is located on
the south side of Fellsmere Road (S.R. 512) immediately west
of 104th Avenue. The land use designation is LD -1 (up to
3 units/acre).
ANALYSIS:
Pine.Lake Estates comprises approximately 57 acres of land
including the roads and 37 lots which are not included in
the rezoning request. The applicant intends to replat those
lots included in the rezoning. proposal into one acre or
larger parcels. Approximately 23 lots which would conform
to the R-lE zoning requirements could be created.
Vero Lake Estates, Units H-2 and H-4 lie immediately to the
east and west of Pine -Lake Estates. Thousands of approxi-
mately 75' x 130' lots are situated to the east,west and
south of Pine Lake Estates. The acreage to the north, across
S.R. 512 is unplatted. Sparse development: has occurred since
the platting of Vero Lake Estates, which began in April of
1956.
P..portion of the subject property lies in a Strip R-1, Single
Family Residential (6.2 units/acre) District which extends
approximately 600 feet west and 2400 feet east for a depth of
.600 feet on the south side of S.R. 512. The remainder of the
site is zoned Agricultural. Much of Vero Lake Estates to the
south and southwest is also Agriculturally zoned.
63
Agricultural
R-1 Zoning
R-lE Zoning
Zoning Req.
Req
Req.
Min.
lot width
150'
70'
150'
Front
setback
30'
201.50'
Side
setback
30'
101.20-60'
maintaining 80'
between
structures
Rear
setback
30'
20'
30'
Land
area/home
5 acres
7000 sq. ft.
1
acre
63
M M -
The following statements are an assessment of the existing
situation:
1) R-lE, Country Estate zoning would be in compliance with
the density of up to 3 units/acre outlined for the area
in the Comprehensive Plan.
2)• The subject property and other surrounding platted acreage
has not been agriculturally developed but rather lies
partially cleared with unimproved roads and few single
family -homes. A large number of land owners, each holding
title to one or more 70' x 130'- lots, served by dirt or
marl roads, makes Agricultural use impractical and the
present zoning not appropriate.
3) The area is well suited for Country Estate living and
the rezoning would result in a substantial upgrading of
the existing situation.
4) There are 11 other landowners in Pine Lake Estates.
Their one or more lots, constitute one lot of record.
One single family residence could be constructed by each
of the landowners on their parcels of land. These parcels
range in size from one 70' x 130' lot to approximately
2 acres made by a combination of 9 lots. A rezoning of
the subject property would have little or.no effect on
the use of the lots in Pine Lake Estates which are not
included.
5) The applicant is the only land holder in Pine Lake Estates
who could conform to the zoning requirements of the
Agricultural district. This would result in any single
family residence constructed being a non -conforming use.
At least three other landowners could conform to the R-lE
zoning requirements.
6) Public water and sewer services are not presently available
in the vicinity of the proposed rezoning and it is unlikely
that these services will be offered in the near future.
Development on the small lots would result in numerous
wells and septic tanks being placed in close proximity
to one another. This could potentially create an unsafe
drinking water situation. Approval of the proposed re-
zoning will increase lot sizes to a minimum of one acre
and further separate wells from septic tanks.
7) Internal roads serving Pine Lake Estates are unimproved,
in poor condition and ownership is questionable. While
there is no indication of a formal right-of-way dedication,
there is an implied dedication to the public resulting
from the act of selling the lots and recording the plat
in official record Book 123, Page 141. The plat has no
official status as a County Subdivision. The applicant
has agreed to provide a "Declaration of Right-of-way" to
clarify any questions as to road ownership.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends the following action:
1) Approve the request to rezone the subject property from
R-1 and Agricultural to R -1E, County Estate District.
2) Initiation of action by the County resulting in rezoning
of the remainder of Pine Lake Estates from R-1 and Agri-
cultural to R-lE, in order to have consistent zoning and
bring Pine Lake Estates into conformity with the Compre-
hensive Plan.
A.0 G 18198264 K 51 FAu
-
UG 181982 so 511 nr;E 84
The first recommendation is made in conjunction with the second
and should not be approved if the County does not initiate
rezoning of the remainder of Pine Lake Estates.
The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular business
meeting of June 10, 1982, voted unanimously to recommend that
the County Commission approve the rezoning of the subject
property to R -1E, and that the County Commission initiate
action to rezone the remainder of Pine Lake Estates from R-1
and Agricultural to R-lE.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone present who
wished to be heard. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
closed the public hearing.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, that the Board adopt
Ordinance 82-17, rezoning the subject property
from Agricultural and R-1 to R -1E, as recommended
in the memo dated August 2, 1982 from Dennis
Ragsdale, Staff Planner.
After a brief discussion, it was determined that the
Motion should be divided into two parts.
Commissioner Fletcher WITHDREW HIS MOTION, and
Commissioner Bird WITHDREW HIS SECOND.
ON MOTION MADE by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
adopted Ordinance 82-17 granting the rezoning
from Agricultural &`R-1 to R -1E as requested by
Mr. Golien.
ORDINANCE NO. 82-17
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent
to rezone the hereinafter described property and pursuant thereto
held a public hearing in relation thereto, at which parties in
interest and citizens were heard; NOW,THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning Ordinance of Indian
River County, Florida, and the accompanying Zoning Map, be amended
as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the
following described property situated in Indian River County,
Florida, to -wit:
Southwest one-quarter of the Southwest one-quarter of
Section 21, Township 31 South, Range 38 East, and the
North one-half of the Northwest one-quarter of the North-
west one-quarter of Section 28, Township 31 South, Range
38 East, less however, the following thirty-seven (37)
lots which are contained in Pine Lake Estates, Unit 1,
an unrecorded plat: Lots 5, 6, 17, 18, 25, 27, and 28
in Block A; Lot 20 in Block B; Lots 15, 16, 17, and 18
in Block C; Lots 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, and 22
in Block D; Lots 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, and
16 in Block E; Lots 4, 5, and 6 in Block H and Lots 6 and
7 in Block F.
Be changed from A -Agricultural District and R-1, Single Family
Residential to R-lE, Country Estate District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Zoning Regulations.
This Ordinance shall take effect August 24, 1982.
AUG 181982 Asox 51 Fm 85
AUG 181982
5
Commissioner Fletcher asked Mr.
Golien if it
was
clear
in his mind that the County would not have responsibility as
to the roads.
Mr. Golien responded that he understood the County
would not maintain the roads.
ON MOTION MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
rezoned the remainder of Pine Lake Estates from
R-1 and Agricultural to R-lE, in order to have
consistent zoning and bring Pine Lake Estates
into conformity with the Comprehensive Plan, as
indicated in the memorandum of August 2, 1982
from Dennis Ragsdale, Staff Planner.
PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING FROM C-1 TO M-1 - MEISER
The hour of 1:30 o'clock P.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
67
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 Countv, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
in the matter of //vIi(_. d6 t r
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues o
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 Ri•:cr County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me thisT J day of A.D._Z49
A
!SEAL)
ess Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit CoV, Indian River County, Florida)
Staff recommendation is as follows:
- NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, Is reviewing the. feasibility of
making the following changes and additions to
the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River County,
Florida, which changes and additions are
substantially as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order
that the following described property situated
on the west side of 11th Avenue, S.W., north of
Oslo Road, In Indian River County, Florida, to -
wit:
Lots 17, 18 and 19, Block C., Oslo Park, Unit j
No. 1, according to the plat thereof recorded in
Plat Book 3, Page 96, public records of Indian
River County, Florida.
Be changed from C-1, Commercial District
to M-1, Restriced Industrial District.
A public hearing in relation thereto at which
parties in interest.and Citizens shall have an
opportunity to be heard, will be held by said
'Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, in the County Com-
mission Chambers of the County Ad.
ministration Building located at 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday,
August_ 18, 1982, at 1:30 P.M.
If any person decides to appeal any decision
made on the above matter, he will need a
record of the proceedings, and for such pur-
poses, he may need to insure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings Is made, which In-
cludes testimony and evidence upon which the '
appeal is based.
Indian River County Board
of County Commissioners
By:-s-DonC. Scurlock Jr., Chairman .
July 26, Aug. 11,1982.
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: July 28, 1982
the Board of County
Commissioners
THROUGH: C. B. Har,
Acting Cou ty
Administrator
Jr., Ph.D.
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
,Q r
Patrick Bruce King
FROM: Dennis Ragsdaleo�-
Staff Planner
FILE:
IRC-82-ZC-10,
#459
SUBJECT: MR. MARTIN MEISER'S REQUEST
TO REZONE 3 LOTS FROM C-1
TO M-1
REFERENCES:
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners in
the form of a Public Hearing on Aguust 18, 1982.
AUG 1 8 1982x 68 51 P 7..
AUG 18 1992��
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The applicant is requesting that Lots 17, 18, and 19, Block
C of Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit 1, be rezoned from C-1,
Commercial to M-1, Restricted Commercial. The subject
property is located on the west side of 11th Avenue, S.W.
approximately 175 feet north of Oslo Road (9th Street, S.W.).
ANALYSIS:
Land Use - The site lies within the MXD (Mixed Use District)
which —is situated between the Lateral "J" Canal and 22nd
Avenue and is 600 feet deep, north of Oslo Road. This entire
MXD area is presently zoned C-1, Commercial (see attachment #2).
A land use study (attachments #3 and #4) of Blocks A, B, C,
D, and E of Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit 1, and including the
property on the west side of 12th Avenue, S.W. revealed the
following findings:
Between Oslo Road (9th Street, S.W.) and 8th Street, S.W.
there are 19 parcels of land occupied by at least one structure,
including:
1) Ten (10) facilities which may best be categorized as
restricted industrial uses outlined in Appendix A,
Section 22. M-1, Restricted Industrial District of
the Indian River County Code of Laws and Ordinances.
2) Four (4) facilities which border between restricted
industrial and commercial use. These uses include
offices, storage, repair and reconditioning of auto-
mobile parts.
3) One (1) Commercial use (Pop Top Beverages).
4) Three (3) Single family homes.
5) One (1) mobile home.
The industrial and commercial uses occur in Blocks A, B,
and C, with the residential uses situated in Blocks D and
E.
Between 8th Street, S.W. and 7th Street, S.W., north of the
MXD (Mixed Use District) in Blocks, F, G, H. J, and K,
there are twelve single family homes and one mobile home.
This area is designated LD -2 (up to 6 units/acre) and
currently zoned R-1, Single Family Residential (6.2 units/
acre). Fourteen (14) of the existing nineteen (19) uses
in Blocks A, B, C, D, and E are non -conforming in the C-1,
Commercial District. Four other uses are questionable as
to conformance and one existing use is allowable in the C-1
zoning district.
The Comprehensive Plan indicates that the County shall en-
courage, where appropriate, redevelopment of mixed use area
in accordance with the dominant land uses and,the health,
safety and welfare of area residents.
General commercial development is not likely to occur in this
area even if it remains commercially zoned. This is due to
low traffic volumes on the unimproved internal roadways
and that a majority of the existing uses in the area are not
corapatible with general commercial development. In recent
months the Community Development Department has received
several requests for restricted industrial developments
in the vicinity of the proposed rezoning. While these re-
quests were for facilities similar to those presently exist-
ing in Oslo Park, the potential developer was informed that
the proposal did not comply with uses allowed in the C-1,
Commercial zoning district.
Urban Services:
Water - Oslo Park Subdivision lies in the number one priority
service area proposed in the Utilities Element of the -1982
Comprehensive Plan. Construction of Capital improvements
to provide water to this area has already begun and the South
County Water Plant should be on-line by November of 1982.
Water mains parallel to Oslo Road presently extend beyond the
Oslo Park Subdivision.
Based on the existing uses and anticipating similar uses to
be developed, if the rezoning request is approved, it is
expected that less water will be required if the area is
developed as restricted industrial rather than general com-
mercial.
Sewer- Public sewage service will not be readily available
in -Oslo Park. Individual septic tanks will be required as
development occurs. The County's Environmental Health Unit
reviews all septic tanks for industrial facilities and
refers the permit to the State Department of Environmental
Regulation, if determined necessary. These reviews will
limit the uses which may occur on the lots in Oslo Park and
will serve to eliminate the possibility of obnoxious wastes
affecting nearby residents.
Transportation - The roads within Oslo Park are presently .
unimproved. Restricted industrial development will generate
considerably less traffic than would general commercial
uses. While less traffic would be generated, trucks would
become more prevalent if the area Vere developed as re-
stricted industrial. Truck traffic, while less in numbers
of trips, may cause a greater impact on the roads and
create more noise than would automobile traffic.
Oslo Road is a major east/west corridor which provides access
to Oslo Park. This roadway is capable of handling both
automobile and truck traffic. It is designated as an arterial
road on the County's Thoroughfare Map. This designation
calls for 120 feet of right-of-way which is a substantial
increase from the existing 70 feet.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the proposed rezoning request and encourage
redevelopment of this area consistent with existing
land uses. This could be accomplished through initiating
rezoning action on Blocks A, B, and C from C-1 to M-1,
and on Blocks D and E from C-1 to R-1.
While this would allow a variety of restricted industrial
uses in close proximity to residential uses, through
site plan and County Health Unit review, many potentialy
adverse impacts will be eliminated.
Restricted Industrial zoning of Blocks A, B, and C and
Residential zoning of Blocks D and E will, for the short
term, allow similar uses to those presently existing to
be developed in Oslo Park. The effect of this would be
the creation of a mini -restricted industrial park in
close proximity to a residential neighborhood. As growth
of the area occurs, those who work at the restricted
industrial facilities will find nearby homesites available.
2. Approve only the proposed rezoning request.
This would result in a "spot" zoning and the County
would continue to be in the position where developers
question why their land cannot be put to a use similar
to their neighbors. This alternative may also lead
to slowing or eliminating development in the Oslo Park
Subdivision, Blocks A, B, and C of Unit 1.
AUG 181982 70 aw 51. PAGE 89
agog 181982
3. Deny the request and wait for possible general commercial
or residential redevelopment"of the area. This is un-
likely to occur in the near future since many structures
in the area were built in 1979-1980, and several since
1980.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends the following action be taken:
1) Approve the rezoning request.
2) Initiate similar rezoning action on all of Blocks A, B,
and C of Oslo Park Subdivision, Unit 1.
3) Initiate similar rezoning action for those parcels of
land abutting the west right-of-way line of 12th Avenue,
S.W. between Oslo Road and 8th Street, S.W.
4) Initiate rezoning action of Blocks D and E and from C-1,
Commercial to R-1, Single Family Residential (6.2 units/
acre).
The Planning and Zoning Commission at their regular business
meeting held on June 10, 1982, voted unanimously to recommend
that the Board of County Commissioners take action outlined
in the staff's recommendations.
0
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be
heard. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
adopted Ordinance 82-18 granting the rezoning
from C-1 to M-1, as requested by Mr. Meiser.
ORDINANCE NO. 82-18
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone the hereinafter
described property and pursuant thereto held a public hearing in relation
thereto, at which parties in interest and citizens were heard, NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, that the Zoning Ordinance of Indian River County, Florida, and the
accompanying Zoning Map be amended as follows:
1. That the Zoning Map be changed in order that the following described
property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit:
Lots 17, 18 and 19, Block C. Oslo Park, Unit #1, according to the plat
thereof recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 96, public records of Indian River
County, Florida.
Be changed from C-1, Commercial District to M-1, Restricted Industrial
District.
All with meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Zoning
Regulations.
This Ordinance shall take effect August 24, 1982.
ROK 51 PAGE 9
AUG 181982
1
A U G 181982
K bE 92'
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, that the Board accept
Recommendation 2: initiate similar rezoning action
on all of Blocks A, B, C of Oslo Park Subdivision,
Unit 1; Recommendation 3: initiate similar rezoning
action for those parcels of land abutting the west
right-of-way"line of 12th Avenue SW between Oslo
Road and 8th Street SW; and Recommendation 4:
initiate rezoning action of Blocks D and E from
C-1 to R-1, as indicated in the memo dated
July 28, 1982 from Dennis Ragsdale, Staff Planner.
Lawrence Elliott, commented from the audience that he
was concerned about the property he owns in the area under
discussion. He added that he had obtained releases of
easement and submitted plans to the Planning Department.
Mr. Ragsdale interjected that Mr. Elliott was inquiring
about a portion of Lots 21 and 22, Block E.
Discussion followed about the houses that were located
in the area.
Art Challacombe, Senior Planner, suggested holding off
on Recommendation #4 until staff worked on the
administrative rezoning.
Commissioner Lyons MODIFIED HIS MOTION to
include only Recommendations 2 and 3 (and
not 4) of the memorandum dated July 28, 1982.
Commissioner Fletcher AGREED TO THE MODIFICATION.
A brief discussion ensued.
Commissioner Bird suggested that Mr. Elliott get started
on his site plan process as soon as possible.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It
was voted on and carried unanimously.
BUILDING COMMITTEE
Commissioner Wodtke reviewed the following memo:
TO: Beard of County DATE: August 12, 1982 FILE: Agenda item
Commissioners 8/18/82
Meeting
SUBJECT: Building Commi ttee
FROM: William C. Wodtke, Jr. REFERENCES:
The Building Committee to study the future of the BuiA ding
Department is made up of the following entities. The names
that have already been submitted are as followst
Board of County Commissioners
Vero Beach City Council
City Building & Zoning Dept.
County Community Development Director
Contractor
At Large Member
Architect
William C. Wodtke, Jr.
Dorothy Cain
Ester Rymer
Bruce King
Paul Jacobi
John Calmes
We have received one resume for At Large member from Chester E.
Schmalz (copy attached).
We have also received a resume from Joseph C. Stark, retired
from the City of Vero Beach Building Department, and one from
John E. Gappa, who is a sub -contractor. (copies attached)
Commissioner Fletcher nominated Chester E. Schmalz to
fill the At -Large position.
Commissioner Bird nominated Bill Grizzell.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
closed the nomination.
AUG 18 1982 74
L
wx 51 FACE 93
AUG 181982 51 PAGE 94
The Chairman asked the Board for their votes:
Commissioner Bird = Bill Grizzell
Commissioner Fletcher - Chester E. Schmalz
Commissioner Lyons - Bill Grizzell
Chairman Scurlock - Chester E. Schmalz
Commissioner Wodtke - Bill Grizzell
ON MOTION MADE by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED
by Commissioner.Lyons, the Board unanimously
approved Resolution 82-83 appointing Bill
Grizzell as the At -Large Member of the
Building Committee.
The Resolution will be made a part of the Minutes when
received.
APPOINTMENT TO MENTAL HEALTH BOARD NO. 9
The Board next discussed the following memo:
TO: Board of County DATE: August 11, 1982 FILE: Agenda Item
Commissioners 8/18/82
Meeting
SUBJECT: Appointment to Mental
Health Board No. 9
FROM: Alice white REFERENCES:
The resignation of Daniel Richey as the Board of County Commissioner's.
representative to the Mental Health Board No. 9 creates the necessity -
of appointing someone else to this position.
The two applicants we have on file are Thelma.Fitzgerald, and Charles
Caldwell
Commissioner Lyons recommended Thelma Fitzgerald.
Commissioner Bird recommended Charles Caldwell.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Fletcher, SECONDED
by Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
closed the nominations.
The Chairman asked the Board for their vote:
Commissioner
Bird -
Charles
Caldwell
Commissioner
Fletcher -
Thelma
Fitzgerald
Commissioner
Lyons -
Thelma
Fitzgerald
Chairman Scurlock -
Thelma
Fitzgerald
Commissioner
Wodtke -
Thelma
Fitzgerald
The Chairman noted that the Appointment to Mental
Health Board No. 9 was Thelma Fitzgerald.
APPOINTMENT TO ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES COUNCIL
The Board next discussed the following memorandum dated
August 11, 1982:
TO: Board of County DATE: August 11, 1982Agenda Item
Commissioners FILE:8/18/82
Meeting
SUBJECT: Appointment to
Economic -Opportunities
Council
FROM: Alice White REFERENCES:
In February, 1982, the Economic Opportunities Council of Indian
River County, Inc. informed.the Board of County Commissioners
that Willie Adams had missed three consecutive meetings without
just cause. Under their By -Laws, this removes him as a member
of their Board.
Harry Johnstone, Personnel Director, City of Vero Beach, suggested
Mrs. Carolyn Hayslip as a candidate. At the March 3, 1982.meeting
of the Board of County Commissioners, it was decided that a resume
should be requested from Mrs. Hayslip.
Mrs. Hayslip submitted her resume, a copy of which is attached.
AUG 181982 76 -_-D� 51 PAGE 95
AUG 1 8.1992 96
ON MOTION MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
appointed Carolyn Hayslip to the Economic
Opportunities,Council.
COUNCIL ON AGING
The Board discussed the following letter from Polly
Crowell dated August 7, 1982:
ndian River County
Council On Aging, Inc.
955 - 7th AVENUE • P.O. BOX 2102
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32%0
TELEPHONE 305 - 569-0760
ON MOTION MADE by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
appointed Polly Crowell as representative to
the Executive Board of the Gulfstream Council
on.Aging.
August 7v 1982
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Polly Crowell
14r. Doug Scurlock, Chairman
President
Indian ;aver County Board of Commissioners
Hubert Poole
Vero Beach,, Florida
Vice President
John Kirchner
Dear Commissioner Seurlockp
Treasurer
Tony DiPietro
It came to my attention during a meeting of the
Secretary
Executive Board of the Gulfstream Council on Aging
recently that the Commissioners have never appointed
George Armstrong
Tom Buchanan
anyone to represent them on this Council., as a
Charles Cain
representative' of. the Indian River County Council
Gordon Carlile
on Aging. Mr. Cragg was the representative while
Bernard Cornell
he was president ofdour Boardv but I guess in the
Blayne Jennings
ensuing confusionmafter Mr. Cragg resignedq that
Rev. Bruce Levine
was one of the lesser things on our minds and we
Pat Lyons, Comm.
never asked you for an appointment.
Donald E. Nelson
Charles Parks
Thank you for .your consideration of this matter.
Sue Schlitt
Arlene Fletcher
Sincerely..
Executive Director
Polly well
ON MOTION MADE by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
appointed Polly Crowell as representative to
the Executive Board of the Gulfstream Council
on.Aging.
s � �
REDISTRICTING OF DER DISTRICTS - DISCUSSION
Representative Dale Patchett approached the Board and
talked about the DER swapping boundaries and districts; DER
will be transferring portions of the County to the Port St.
Lucie office on September 1, 1982. He explained that
anything east of I-95 would be handled by Port St. Lucie and
the remainder of the workload would be in Orlando.
Representative Patchett commented that they had established
such a good working relationship in the past with Alex
Senkevich of the DER office, and were reluctant for this
change to occur.
Chairman Scurlock expressed concern about splitting the
area and what would be the effect, as the County has had
such good service from the present office.
Commissioner Lyons commented that he was worried about
the business of fragmenting this County.
Alex Senkevich stated that the DER made a decision to
change the boundaries and districts because they must cut
down their expenses - they felt it would be in the best
interest to cut at least 15% of travel. He assured the
Board that they would still be involved in Indian River
County and would issue permits for agricultural interests.
The rest of the permitting would be handled by Roy Dukes in
the Port St. Lucie office.
Roy Dukes approached the Board and stated that in 1974,
the DER attempted to align DER Districts with the water
districts. He then explained the political boundaries all
across the State and the problems of regulating the
utilities by two different offices. Mr. Dukes commented
that Mr. Senkevich would be working with the pumping
stations, all domestic waste, and air pollution; solvent
waste would be administered through the Port St. Lucie
branch office.
AUG 181992 sooK 51 PAGE 97
78
_I
AUG 181992 BOOK 51 FA6,c 98
Representative Patchett did not think it would be very
convenient to go with two different offices.
Mr. Dukes stated that the same project would be handled
by one office only -,Mr. Senkevich would be the contact but
Mr. Dukes would do the work.
Dean Luethje, Engineer, discussed permits for dredging,
filling, and pumping stations.
Lengthy discussion followed and Mr. Dukes assured the
Board that he and Mr. Senkevich would coordinate their
efforts.
Commissioner Lyons stated that one reason the Regional
Planning Council was formed was to get away from the Dade
and Broward County interests. He felt the County's interest
to the environment was different and he would rather have
things remain the way they were at present.
Mr. Dukes stressed that they do coordinate closely with
the Regional Planning Council and he felt their philosophies
were very close.
Chairman Scurlock stated that his personal feeling was
to have things remain the way they were because the County
was used to the service, etc.
Representative Patchett thought that having a direct
line of communication was essential and now felt the
County's service would be gone. He then requested the use
of the conference room to discuss this further with Mr.
Dukes and Mr. Senkevich and would come back to the Board
later in the day.
BOND VALIDATION
Attorney Brandenburg stated that the County had
scheduled a meeting before Judge Vocelle next Tuesday for a
bond validation. He added that the consultants advised him
the County's rate structure would need more work and that
rate hearings might be needed; the new obligations were
M
not economically feasible with the County's current rate
structure. The Attorney felt he could not proceed when he
knew it was not economically feasible; therefore, he asked
the Judge for a postponement, which was granted
indefinitely. He explained that if the County charged
standard rates to all of its customers, the County would
still be $60,000 short, annually, of meeting its bond
covenants.
Commissioner Lyons commented that the water usage has
not been kept at what was previously estimated.
The Chairman wondered how we got to the eleventh hour
only to find ourselves faced with this question, and also
wondered why it was not discussed earlier. The Chairman
stated that there had never been any in-depth analysis done
in this regard.
John Robbins, Engineer, approached the Board with the
explanation to the various questions. The original concepts
for the County utility system became effective in 1978;
funds came from FmHA and the rate structure of $7.10 for
Gifford water system was developed. He continued that the
South County water system had a rate of $8.00. Later, the
County adopted a uniform rate structure, which was different
from the Gifford and the South County water rates. The
lower rate structure was adopted and the idea was to come
back to FmHA prior to closing and, if at all possible, go
with the lower rate. Mr. Robbins then elaborated on the
Treasure Coast and Ixora Utilities; the loan with FmHA; and
the Letter of Conditions that was entered into on February
7, 1982, utilizing the $7.10 rate in an effort to satisfy
FmHA. Mr. Robbins explained that the mandate St. Johns
River Water Management District had last year was very
effective concerning the number of living units per month.
It was necessary to take into consideration the entire
utility system and a 5 year projected revenue and expense
AUG 181992 80 So ,51 PAGE 99
4
Not 5.�1�
evaluation was prepared. Mr. Robbins stated they began
working on that evaluation on July 1st and it was submitted
on August 5th. The revenue totals that were projected were
low, and Mr. Robbins commented that he requested a meeting
with the financial consultants to advise them of this fact.
He continued that last Friday they had a meeting at the
Attorney's office and those facts were disclosed. Mr.
Robbins then referred to the following data and reviewed it
with the Board:
FIVE YEAR NET REVENUE TO DEBT SERVICE COMPARISON
AUGUST 18, 1982
YEAR
PROJECTED REVENUES OT
DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS(2)RATE
PROPOSED MASTER METER
NOW EXISTING RATE
PROPOSED RATE
1983
$262,000
$409,000
$704,000
$459,264
1984
278,000
423,000
707,000
459,390
1985
826,000
981 w
1,455,000
1,114,828
1986
820,000
975,000
1,456,000
1,605,132
1987
883,000
1,040,000
1,545,000
1,604,052
1. Revenues shown are net revenues with operation and maintenance considered and capital fund requirements con-
sidered.
2. Debt service requirements include 1.20 coverage and account for the two Gifford loans, $5.825 million for
South County Phase I, $2.75 million for South..County Phase II and the &7.0 million South Beach loan and
their schedules for completion.
1
1
u
1983 COMPARATIVE UTILITY REVENUE DATA
AUGUST 18, 1982
UTILITY
HISTORICAL USE
1983 PROJECTED MONTHLY BILL
1983 PROJECTED REVENUE 1)
1983
SYSTEM
PER LIVING UNIT
DEBT SERVICE
METER RATE RATE RATE
METER RATE RATE RATE
REQUIREMENTS(2)
1. GIFFORD
Water
6,500
$13.72
$13.72
$16.84
Wastewater
6,500
12.86
12.86
15.66
2. VISTA
.Water
3,000
5.35
8.10
9.34
$ 262,000
$ 409,000
704,000
$ 459,264
Wastewater
3,000
4.94
7.97
9.16
3.SOUTH COUNTY
Water
5,000
10.71
11.04
13.22
Wastewater
51000
10.16
10.53
12.54
Note: South Beach is not a consideration until 1985. However, the proposed rate will cover debt service requirements
1. Projected revenues are net revenues which include operation and maintenance expenses and capital improvement fund requirements.
2. 1983 debt service requirements include 1.20 coverage and takes into consideration the original Gifford loans, $5.825 million loan for South County
Phase I, $2.75 million loan for South County Phase II and approximately $7.0 million South Beach loan and their schedules for completion.
fl�
_I
AUG 181982 Box 51 PAA E'102
Administrator Wright discussed the historical years that
were taken into consideration in the Comparative Data and
pointed out that there were two unusual years. He noted
that there was a cut-back from the Water Management
District, as well as a very wet year; the data was very
sensitive.
Lengthy discussion followed, and it was felt that
perhaps the Finance Advisory Committee could get a good,
in-depth analysis and ultimately set a policy.
Mr. Robbins expressed concern about the Letter of
Conditions involved with the $2.7 million loan; as
approximately $426,000 was to be used to complete
construction of the South County water plant, as well as the
purchase of Treasure Coast Utilities & Ixora Utilities. He
felt it important to make sure there was a vehicle by which
the County could cover itself for the present construction
obligations.
Community Services Director Thomas thought that there
had been a lack of timing relative to the $2.7 million loan.
but the Board and the public, in that area, have indicated
they want a system on the South Beach; now the Board is
going from a FmHA type of bond to a public bond. He
discussed the bond requirements and advised that the bond
people have recommended a 1.2 coverage as opposed to a 1.1
coverage. Mr. Thomas stated that the County is in the water
business, so the people are going to be demanding water; the
County will be better off if it could take care of this now
and cover the same requirement under the $7 million issue.
Mr. Thomas continued that at the time that. Mr. Robbins' firm
presented the final contract, there was a cost overrun of
$426,000 and the Board did two things;" One was to
facilitate the sale through a technicality that Mr.
Livingood pointed out, by pledging funds temporarily to
issue the bond anticipation note. The other thing was that
FmHA invited the $2.7 million application because within
that $2.7 million would be the $426,000 cost overrun. Mr.
Thomas stated that he was concerned that the timing was
upset by changing it from a 1.1 coverage to a 1.2 coverage,
and making the rates non -conforming to the debt requirement.
He merely wanted to call to the Board's attention and, that
the Board be aware that some form of interim financing may
be required. Mr. Thomas noted he was concerned about
the matter, as this was unlike obtaining interim financing
to construct something that was not already in operation.
If the County does have to go to some interim financing, an
adjustment would be required of the rates and sales as the
County was already in the business and currently taking in
$7.10 on the FmHA part of the loan. Mr. Thomas stated he
was merely talking about a rate study and thought the County
should have a thorough one. Not only does it affect the
ability to meet the current debt structure, but if it is not
done properly, when it comes time to issue the bonds for the
South Beach, it may have an effect on the salability of
those bonds.
Lengthy discussion followed regarding a master meter
rate and impact fees.
Mr. Robbins stated that FmHA recommended having the
loan closing for $5.8 million on September 30, 1982 at 10:30
A.M. He added that the Board may want to consider only
borrowing from them the $426,000 necessary for completion of
the South County water system. Mr. Robbins commented that
he would.talk to Mr. Thomas and Mr. Livingood in this
regard.
Sian Livingood, of Arch W. Roberts Co., stated that in
order to close on the $5.8 million loan, it would be
necessary for FmHA to waive certain provisions in the Letter
of Conditions, in which the County was not in compliance.
He believed that FmHA would be willing to work with the
BQDK 51 PAE t"
AUG 18 1982 84
AUG 181982 Beer k X04
I
County concerning those
provisions. He then explained the
terms of the Letter of Conditions and that they had recently
discovered the County was not in compliance in regard to the
rate structure.
Commissioner Fletcher inquired if, by waiving those
provisions, would it cost the County more money.
Mr. Livingood responded that there would be no cost
involved to the County.
Attorney Brandenburg spoke about the Utility Department
having sufficient cash in hand to meet the terms of the
original bond, but did not know if they were meeting the
letter of the law as not enough revenue was produced last
year.
Mr. Livingood then discussed the timing involved in
discovering that the rates were not high enough to generate,
sufficient revenues.
Discussion ensued.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Wodtke, that the Board instruct
Administrator Wright to come back with a report
on the rate structure in less than 90 days.
Commissioner Lyons ADDED TO HIS MOTION that
the Administrator also be authorized to contact
various firms for a rate analysis, and bring
back the information to the Board.
Commissioner Wodtke AGREED TO THE ADDITION.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was
voted on and carried unanimously.
DER REDISTRICTING,- CONTINUED
Representative Patchett came before the Board after
conferring with Mr. Senkevich and Mr. Dukes and stated that
there was a philosophical problem, but they were willing to
try the new procedure.
Mr. Senkevich then asked for a chance for them to work
this out for a few months, and if the situation was not
acceptable to the County, they could inform the DER.
Air. Dukes explained that the Governor issued an
executive order for their offices to cut back 15% on
interstate travel. He also stated that they were short of
staff, even when fully manned.
After a brief discussion, Commissioner Lyons suggested
this new procedure be given a try.
Representative Patchett suggested.that Mr. Dukes have
his staff become acquainted with the County personnel in
order to establish a good working relationship.
Ann Robinson, interested citizen, stated she had
enjoyed working with Mr. Senkevich in the past. She
suggested sending Miss Tschinkel, of the DER, a copy of a
resolution outlining the fact that the County had
reservations in this matter and was not accepting'this
change whole-heartedly.
After some discussion, it.was determined that a letter,
instead of a resolution, would suffice.
ON MOTION MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Fletcher, the Board unanimously
authorized the Chairman to send a letter to Miss
Tschinkel outlining the Board's position in this
matter.
� AUG 181982
AM
�x 51 PAGE."
si -.d
AUG 181982
DOUGLAS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE - DISCUSSION
BOOK
Lynn Williams, Acting General Services Director,
explained the following utilization alternatives:
WEST WABASSO CIVIC LEAGUE - PROPOSAL
The West Wabasso Civic League presented a proposal for use
of Douglas School Site as a Community Resource Center
to the Indian River County School District in January 1982.
This program was also outlined in a presentation to the
Indian River County, Board of Commissioners after the School
District Board decided to offer the County the facility for
its use.
The Civil League proposal included programs and activities
for Wabasso area from a variety of agencies.
A. A public health facility operated by the Florida
Community Health Center.
B. Economics Opportunities Council of Indi-ark River
County requested three class rooms and the cafeteria -
kitchen for use as a Headstart facility for pre-
schoolers.
C. Adult Vocational Community Education Program.
D. Indian River Community College Program.
E. North County Recreation Program.
STAFF COMMENTS
In review of this proposal the following comments are submitted:
The West Wabasso Civic League proposal has included several
agencies who have approached County individually for space
allocation. --The Civic League's request does not specifically
outline how control of the facility will be maintained.
Individually each program has merit and several are
federally funded programs. Most have requested space for
one dollar a year lease fee. Although some have stated a
desire to pay a portion of the utilities there are still
administrative and maintenance costs which the County would
absorb. Basically the main staff concern is that of a
facility with many operational costs and no income to
offset those costs.
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS - DOUGLAS SCHOOL SITE - PROPOSAL
The Department of Corrections has forwarded a request to be
considered in the Douglas School Site plans. D.O.C. has
requested the school site for use as a satellite facility for
youthful offenders.
The facility would be converted into dormitories and a vocational
training center which would provide a community based program of
work release. The program would center around developing marketable
skills such as horticulture and small engine repairs.
The D.O.C. would make improvements and alterations 'to the school
site which would increase the value. D.O.C. would be responsible
for control and upkeep of the entire facility.
STAFF COMMENTS
The D.O.C. proposal would allow the entire facility to be
under the control of one agency.
D.O.C. would accept the facility, make the necessary alterations
and additions, and maintain the facility as a corrections center.
The facility would house approximately 65-75 male youthful
offenders, about 25% of which would be available for community
agency work release.
This work force could substantially complement our present work
force as well as that of the School District and other community
service organizations.
Staff has also considered the possibility of a north county Road
and Bridge vehicle equipment storage area as part of the facility.
The D.O.C. could provide some maintenance of equipment and also
provide natural security of the area.
m
sm 51 Pw.10 7
GENERAL COMMENTS
The Douglas facility with.approximately eight (8) acres of
property has potential for many uses. However, also involved
are many operational costs that require funding. The Maintenance
of Buildings account was increased with the Building Operations
Budget for fiscal 82-83. There were no reuests set forth for capital
funds to make alterations or additions to the school site.
Ideally, space allocations to each agency would be made through
leases and each individual agency would be required to maintain
their space and to pay a pro -rated share of the operational
costs, i.e. electric, water and sewer, insurance. Possibly
$2.00 to $3.00 per square foot annually. Actual operating
expenses will dictate lease rate.
Staff feels serious consideration should be given. --the D.O.C.
proposal for use of the entire facility. This would alleviate
the problems associated with several independent agencies located
within a County owned tax supported facility.
Staff also realizes the benefit a work release program could have
in regards to available manpower. A work force of twenty men
would equal over 40,000 man hours available to community services
on an annual basis.
At the rate of $5.00 per hour this force could be valued at
$200,000.
General overview of the use of Douglas facility shows the
Community Resource Center concept will require additional funds
for ;_upkeep and personnel. Fiscal 82-83 budgets for all General
Funds Divisions were closely reviewed during budget hearings and
the Commission stated a position of NO NEW programs.
The D.O.C. concept would turn the entire facility to the D.O.C.
for an indefinate period of time. Should the D.O.C. choose not
to fund the operating expenses of the proposed correction center
in the future, the facility would revert back to the County,
possibly at a time when we would be in a better position to fund
a Community Resource Center.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously
agreed.to extend the meeting to 5:30 P.M.
Mr. Williams then discussed the recent vandalism to the
Douglas Elementary School amounting to $50,000 worth of
damage.
Wilson Bell, Regional Manager of the Department of
Corrections, came before the Board and introduced his
associates, Mr. McMullen and Mr. McKenzie.
Mr. McKenzie displayed charts to the Board and
presented his proposal. He then reviewed the concept and
mission of the program, as well as the costs that would be
involved in the renovation project.
Mr. McMullen stated that they wanted to assure the
Board that the Indian River Correctional Institute would
continue to provide assistance to the County with community
service projects.
Daisy McCoy, representing the Florida Community Health
Center, came before the Board and advised that her organization
had previously submitted its proposal to Assistant Administrator
Greene and Dr. C. B. Hardin.
Lengthy discussion then followed and it was determined.
more information was needed and ,that perhaps staff could
come up with a plan for utilizing the buildings and
utilities at the Douglas Elementary School.
Commissioner Wodtke stated that he would delve into it
further and comeback to the Board.
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. 81344 - 81494 inclusive. Such
bills and accounts being on file in the Office of the Clerk
of the Circuit Court, the warrants so issued from the
AUG 18 1992 s9P 51 PA','E. 109
90
AUG 181982
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 5:45
o'clock P.M.
ATTEST:
i
Chairman
� � r