HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/12/1986Wednesday, February 12, 1986
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,
February 12, 1986, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Don C.
Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Patrick B. Lyons, Vice Chairman; Richard
N. Bird; Margaret C. Bowman; and William C. Wodtke, Jr. Also
present were Michael J. Wright, County Administrator; Charles P.
Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; and
Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order, and Commissioner
Wodtke led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Chairman Scurlock informed the Board that he and the
Administrator have had discussions with Fellsmere Mayor Turner
relative to a cooperative effort both on animal control and road
paving. The Chairman requested that this item be added to today's
agenda and considered prior to the Consent Agenda so those who
have made the trip in from Fellsmere do not have to wait.
Chairman Scurlock advised that he will give a report on
North County wastewater under Committee Reports; Commissioner
Lyons stated that he planned to report on the Transportation
12 1966 Boa P":�F569-
FEBL- -- __
FEB 12 1966
BOOK 63 mur_ 570
Planning Committee meeting; and Commissioner Wodtke advised that
he also had some brief comments about the Economic Development
Council meeting.
Administrator Wright requested that Item 11 A. re Rockr.idge
Wastewater Improvements be expanded to include the Blue Cypress
Lake area.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously added
items to the agenda as described above.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc-
tions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 15, 1986.
There were none.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wodtke,
SECONDED by Commissioner Lyons, to approve
the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of Janu-
ary 15, 1986, as written.
Commissioner Bird noted that was the meeting where we
discussed the light at the intersection of Lundberg Road and
Kings Highway, and he wondered what has been done about it.
Administrator Wright reported that FP&L said it would cost
us $1,200 because they would have to extend service to that
structure. The City of Vero Beach has power there, but that is
2
not their service territory. He advised that he told Public
Works Director to proceed to have the light put in.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc-
tions to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of January 22, 1986.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
approved the Minutes of the Special Meeting
of January 22, 1986, as written.
DISCUSSION RE FELLSMERE ANIMAL CONTROL AND ROAD PAVING
Chairman Scurlock expressed his appreciation of the improve-
ment in our communications with the City of Fellsmere. He
informed the Board that Mayor Turner has requested that we
provide them some assistance with animal control, and Administra-
tor Wright has agreed that we can assist them over a short period
of time and try to clean up the area. The Fellsmere law
enforcement people will be the prime agencies, and Chairman
Scurlock believed the idea is to go in for about a two week
period to send a message to the community that violations of the
animal control ordinance will no longer be tolerated; then we
would probably continue to address this on a periodic basis.
3
FEB 12 1986 804 63 571
FEB 12 1986 BOOK 63 PnE 572
Administrator Wright advised we will be operating under the
Fellsmere ordinance, and County Attorney Vitunac assured the
Board that there is no problem with this.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED
by Commissioner Bowman,that we cooperate with the
City of Fellsmere re their animal control problem
as described by the Administrator.
Commissioner Wodtke inquired if any fees collected would
belong to the City of Fellsmere, and this was confirmed.
Chairman Scurlock noted that the County has only two Animal
Control Officers for the entire county, and they react on an
"as -call" basis. If the ordinance were strictly enforced all
over the county, the Humane Society would not have enough space.
Commissioner Bowman asked how the City and County ordinances
correspond, and Attorney Vitunac advised that the county ordi-
nance is effective in the city, but if there is an inconsistency
with the City's ordinance, the city ordinance would prevail. He
believed the ordinances are quite similar.
Commissioner Wodtke asked if county animal tags will be
accepted in Fellsmere, and Mayor Turner confirmed that while the
City does sell their own tags, they will honor a county tag. -
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
Chairman Scurlock next reported that Mayor Turner has come
up with an aggressive approach to pave streets in Fellsmere and
also put in some drainage. The County already has approved one
expenditure for about $19,000 for a culvert, and now the Mayor is
asking for assistance from our staff to come up with an assess-
ment approach for the proposed paving. The City also would like
4
to take advantage of our asphalt prices and to have some
assistance from our legal staff, etc., to reduce the overall
cost. There is an adjacent county area that may be involved and
there will be a presentation to the Commission. The Chairman
emphasized that the City is not looking for a free ride; they
just want to work together with us; and he did feel this is a
step forward.
Commissioner Wodtke stated he felt we would be glad to work
together with the City, but his only concern related to our
recent discussion about our engineering priorities.
Chairman Scurlock believed the Mayor understands we cannot
stress our staff, and he assured the Board that any funds
expended will be accounted for.
Administrator Wright confirmed that he would come back to
the Board before moving ahead on any of this.
Commissioner Wodtke complimented the Mayor and citizens of
Fellsmere for moving ahead with their proposed improvement
program.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of Pistol Permit
The Board reviewed memo from the Administrator, as follows:
L- FEB 12 1986
5
BOOK 63 P- 5 7P3
BOOK 63 F ->":1r 514
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: January 27, 1986 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT:
FROM: Michael Wright REFERENCES:
County Administrator
The following applicant has made application thru
the Clerk's office for a new pistol permit:
Wilfrid Hector
All requirements of the ordinance have been met.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
approved the application for a license to
carry a concealed firearm for Wilfrid Hector.
B. Release of Performance Bond - Colonial Hghts. Apts. (Mitchell)
The Board reviewed memo from Public Works Director Davis:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: January 31, 1986 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH:
Michael Wright
County Administrator SUBJECT'
Release of Performance Bond -
Colonial Heights Apartment Units -
Ron Mitchell/Visa Builders
FROM: I
REFERENCES:
James W. Davis, P.E.;
Public Works Director
�. . o' CO)
A performance bond was posted by Ron Mitchell/visa Builders on July 13,
1984, to cover completion of drainage iInprovements for townhouses located
in Colonial Heights Subdivision. At this time, the improvements have been
completed and Mr. Mitchell is requesting release of the $3,300 cash bond
now being held in the County's escrow account.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Staff has inspected the work and the drainage improvements have been
completed.
Staff recommends release of the $3300 bond to Mr. Ron Mitchell/Visa
Builders. Funding to be from the County's Escrow account.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
authorized release of the $3,300 cash per-
formance bond posted by Ron Mitchell/Visa-
Builders re Colonial Heights Apartment Units.
C. Extension of Site Plan Approval - (James West)
The Board reviewed memo of Staff Planner Karen Craver:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: January 27, 1986 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT: JAMES WEST'S REQUEST
Robert M. Keafikig, OCP FOR EXTENSION OF SITE
Planning & Developm nt Director PLAN APPROVAL
Through: Michael K. Miller MM
Chief, Current Development
FROM: REFERENCES:
Karen M. Craver ���\e
Staff Planner
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of February 12, 1986.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On February 28, 1985, the Planning and Zoning Commission
approved a major site plan application submitted by James West,
owner of D&J Sheet Metal, Heating & Air Conditioning. Approval
was given to construct a contractor's office and an associated
assembly and storage facility on the north side of 1st Street,
between U.S. Highway #1 and Old Dixie Highway.
As the result of delays due to health reasons, Mr. West will be
unable to begin construction prior to the expiration of site
plan approval. Therefore, pursuant to Section.23.1G, Appendix
A of the Zoning Code, Mr. West is requesting a 1 year extension
of his site plan approval. No ordinances have been adopted
since the February 25, 1985 approval which would alter the
approved site plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of James West's request for a 1 year
extension of site plan approval.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved a one
year extension of site plan approval for James West
(D&J Sheet Metal, Heating & Air Conditioning).
7
FEB 12 1966 BOOK
L_ ----
63-o-C.515
FEB 12 1996 BooK 63 pnc, 5 76
D. Extension of Site Plan Approval - (Sheraton, USA, Proctor &
floagesT- - - -�
The Board reviewed memo of Staff Planner Karen Craver:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: January 28, 1986 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT:
Robert M. Keat'ng, CP
Planning & Development Director
/p
Through: Michael K. Miller ho
Chief, Current Development
SHERATON, U.S.A:, DONALD
PROCTOR, & AUGUST HODGES'
REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF
SITE PLAN APPROVAL
FROM: Karen M. Craver REFERENCES:
Staff Planner --_
It is requested that the data herein presented by given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of February 12, 1986.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
On January 10, 1985, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved a
major site plan application submitted by Sheraton, U.S.A., Donald
Proctor, and August Hodges. Approval was given to construct
67,250 square feet of contractor's trades buildings and/or ware-
houses at the northwest corner of U.S. Highway #1 and Hobart Road.
On February 13, 1985, the Board of County Commissioners granted
the appeal of the Planning and Development Division and the Public
Works Division, to deny the site plan application. The Board then
made modifications to the site plan and approved the plan as
modified.
As the result of difficulties in obtaining financing, the corpo-
ration will be unable to begin construction prior to the ex-
piration of site plan approval. Therefore, a 1 year extension of
site plan approval is being requested. No ordinances have been
adopted since the February 13, 1985 approval which would alter the
approved site plan.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the request for a 1 year extension of
site plan approval.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
approved a one year extension of site plan
approval for Sheraton, USA, Donald Proctor
and August Hodges.
8
E. Final Plat Approval - Piney Oaks Subdivision
The Board reviewed memo of Staff Planner Boling, as follows:
TO: The Honorable Members
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
DATE: January 31, 1986 FILE:
Through: Michael K. Millerl,KM
Chief, Current Development
SUBJECT: FINAL PLAT APPROVAL
Robert M. Keati g, P FOR PINEY OAKS SUBDIVISION
Planning & Development Director
FROM: Stan Boling ,4J REFERENCES:
Staff Planner
It is requested that the data herein presented by given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of February 12, 1986.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Piney Oaks is a 6 lot subdivision of a ±3.08 acre parcel of land
located in the southwest portion of the Dixie Heights area,
between 4th Avenue S.W. and the Lateral "J" Canal. The subject
property is zoned RS -6 (Single -Family Residential up to 6
units/acre) and has a LD -2 (Low -Density Residential up to 6
units/acre) land use designation. The proposed building density
is ±1.95 units/acre.
This subdivision is being platted to legally establish a "metes
and bounds" subdivision, and will thereby rectify a violation of
the subdivision ordinance. The principal owners, Mr. and Mrs.
Robert (Dan) Powell received a variance from the Board of County
Commissioners on March 20, 1985, that waived road paving require-
ments. On October 10, 1985, the Planning & Zoning Commission
granted preliminary plat approval to Piney Oaks Subdivision. The
owners (Mr. & Mrs. Dan Powell, Ruth M. Powell, and James Van
Tuinen) are now requesting final plat approval.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS:
The owners have submitted a final plat that is in conformance with
the approved preliminary plat. Additional right-of-way is being
dedicated to the County via the plat dedication, to bring the 4th
Avenue S.W. and 16th Street S.W. right-of-way width up to County
standards. The Public Works Director has inspected and verified
that all required marl road and drainage improvements, in accord-
ance with the granted variance, have been constructed and are
acceptable to the County. The Environmental Health Director has
verified in writing that the future lot owners will be able to
obtain permits to utilize individual wells and septic tanks. All
applicable County regulations regarding final plat approval have
been satisfied.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant
final plat approval to the Piney Oaks Subdivision.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously granted final
plat approval to Piney Oaks Subdivision.
FEB 12 1986 BOOK 63 PAG.C-577
FEB
12
1986
BOOS
F.
Release of Easement
- Pine Lake Estates (Nelson
Ade)
The Board reviewed memo of Code Enforcement Officer Davis:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: February 3, 1986 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCli�UB JECT: RELEASE OF EASEMENT
J REQUEST BY NELSON H. ADE
SUBJECT PROPERTY: LOTS 10
11, 12, 13, 14, AND 15,
Robert M. Keati g, CP BLOCK H, UNIT #1, PINE
Planning & Development Director LAKE ESTATES SUBDIVISION
FROM: BeDavis REFERENCES: RE/Ade
Code Enforcement Officer DIS:REMS
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of February 12, 1986.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The County has been petitioned by Nelson H. Ade, owner of the
subject property, for release of the rear lot 10 foot easement
of lots 10, 11, and 12, Block H, Unit 1, Pine Lake Estates,
being the westerly 10 feet thereof. Further, the applicant is
requesting the release of the rear lot 10 foot easement of lots
13, 14, and 15, Block H, Unit #1, Pine Lake Estates, being the
easterly 10 feet thereof. These lots are 70 feet in width and
125 feet in depth. It is Mr. Ade's intention to consolidate
the lots into one large building site, meeting the criteria of
the RS -1, single family zoning district, to construct a
residence on the site.
The current zoning classification is RS -1, Single Family
District. The land use designation is LD -1, Low Density
Residential, up to 3 units per acre.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
The request has been reviewed by Southern Bell, Florida Power &
Light Company, Jones Intercable, and the Utility and
Right-of-way Departments. Based upon their review, there were
no objections to release of the easements. Zoning staff
analysis, which included a site visit, indicates that drainage__
would be adequately handled on-site.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends to the Board, through adoption of a
resolution, the release of the rear lot 10' easement of Lots
10, 11, and 12, Block H, Unit 1, Pine Lake Estates, being the
westerly 10 feet thereof. Further, the staff recommends the
release of the rear lot 10 foot easement of lots 13, 14, and
15, Block H, Unit #1, Pine Lake Estates, being the easterly 10
feet thereof, recorded in Record Book 123, Page 141 of the
Public Records of Indian River County, Florida.
10
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
adopted Resolution 86-05 releasing rear lot
10' easements of Lots 13, 14, and 15, Block H,
Unit 1, Pine Lake Estates, as requested by
Nelson Ade.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-5
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, have been requested to release the
rear lot 10' easement of lots 10, 11, and 12, Block H, Unit 1,
Pine Lake Estates, being the westerly 10 feet thereof. Further
the rear lot 10 foot easement of Lots 13, 14, and 15, Block H,
Unit #1, Pine Lake Estates, being the easterly 10 feet thereof,
according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Official Record
Book 123, Page 141, of Indian River County, Florida.
WHEREAS, said lot line easements were dedicated on
the Plat of the Pine Lake Estates Subdivision, Unit #1 for
public utility purposes, and
WHEREAS, the request for such release of easements
have 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 Pine Lake Estates Subdivision,
Unit #1 shall be released, abandoned and vacated as follows:
The rear lot 10' easement of lots 10, 11, and 12, Block H,
Unit 1, Pine Lake Estates, being the westerly 10 feet
thereof. Further, the release of the rear lot 10 foot
easement of Lots 13, 14, and 15, Block H, Unit #1, Pine
Lake Estates Subdivision, being the easterly 10 feet
thereof, according to the Plat thereof as recorded in
Official Record Book 123, Page 141, of Indian River
County, Florida.
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
11
BOOR 63 IP". 5Md
FEB 12 1986
BOOK 63 PnH 5J0
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 12th day of February 1986.
_ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA
BY:C7/)M-G
Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
G. Release of Assessment Lien - Tamara Gardens (Hatala/Drake)
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
approved Release of Assessment Lien for one
ERU SR60 Water, Condominium Unit 3-13, Tamara
Gardens Condominium, Phase I, For Leonard
Hatala (Drake) and authorized the signature of
the Chairman,
12
(DRAKE)
State Road 60 Water Project
RELEASE OF ASSESSMENT LIEN
For and in consideration of the sum of $970.45
RECEIVED from LEONARD J. HATALA and CONSTANCE C. HATALA,
his wife, in •hand this day paid, the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, (the "County") hereby
releases the property hereinafter described from a certain special
assessment lien recorded by the County in its Official Records, Book
0691, Page 0077, for a special assessment in the amount of $970.45,
plus accrued interest at the rate of ten percent (100) per annum,
levied in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 83-46 of
the County, as amended, and Resolution No. 84-47 of the Board of
County Commissioners of the County; and hereby declares such special
assessment lien fully satisfied. The property, located in Indian
River County, is more fully described as follows:
Condominium Unit 3-B of TAMARA GARDENS CONDOMINIUM Phase I,
according to the Declaration of Condominium, recorded in O. R.
Book 667, Page 1183, of Indian River County records,' as
amended.
Executed by the. Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, and attested and
countersigned by the Clerk of such Board, all as of this 12th day
February 19 86.
Attested and countersigned: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Freda Wrrighl By
CK, Jr.
Chairman
Approved as to form and
legal sufficiency:
i I l fr
CHARLES P. VITUNAC,
County Attorney
13
FEB
BOOK 63 PA Gc 581
FEB 12 `988, BOOK 63 Fn, -c.582
H. Third Quarterly Payment - Sec. 8 Existing Housing Rental
77ss stance—P=rogram
The Board reviewed memo from Section 8 Program Manager
Robert Neeley:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: Feb. 4, 1986 FILE:
THRU: Michael Wright SUBJECT: Requisition for the Third
County Administrator Quarterly Payment FY 86 of
Annual Contributions Contract -
Section 8 Existing Housing
Rental Assistance Program
FROM. Robert Neeley REFERENCES:
Program Manager
Section 8
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the County Commission.
In order to requisition funds.quarterly from the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development to operate our Section 8 Housing Assistance
Program, we are required to submit three (3) executed copies of HUD Form
52663. This is consistent with our Annual Contributions Contract entered
into on December 30, 1978 and as amended August 3, 1982 and May 1, 1985.
I respectfully request the Board of County Commissioners authorize the
Chairman to execute the three copies of HUD Form 52663 for the Third Quar-
terly payment.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
approved the above Requisition and authorized
the Chairman to execute HUD Form 52663 for the
third quarterly payment.
14
� � i
1
Requisition for Martial Payment
of Annual Contributions
Note: See instructions in appropriate program handbooks
1 Program Type (Mark one) 2. Date of Requisition 3. For Quarter Ending:
Section 23;7 Section 8 2/3/86 _ 6/30/86
U.B. Depil►Inleni ut Nouaiq
and Urban Development
Section 8 and Section 23
Housing Assistance Payments Program
OMB No. 2502-0348 (exp. 10/31/86)
6 Public Housing Agency (Name and Address) 7. Depositary bank (Name and Address)
Indian River County Board of County Colmnission rs Southeast Bank; P.A.
1840 25th St., Suite S-319 Vero Beach Banking Center
Vero Beach, Fla. 32960-3394 Box 40
Vero Beach, Fla. 32960
- _- - 9. Depositary Bank Account No. ---•----- -
#107-453490
V. u11A Annual 1•urd,rbuhuno Conlgct NO •- _---
A=3409
10, Housing Program Type (Mark ones
(a) New Conatrucuon I 1 (b) Substantull Rebablliration �._ fel Moderate Rehabilitation XX (d) Existing Housing Certificates u (e) Housing 1louchers
t PMA Fiscal Year f:nding Date (Mark one box and complete year)
i—: IaI March 31. F -J (b) June 30, K.; (c) September 30, ❑ (d) December 31, 19:
Number of Units Under Lease to 13 Average Monthly Housing 14. Estimated Number of Units to '15. Unit Months Under Leas* 16 Average Monthly Housing
Eligible Famiiies as of Date Assistance Payment Par Unit be Under Lease at End of Year to Date Assistance Payment Per unit
Of kngL--.ion as of Date of Requishon Requested Quarter
Year to Oata
190 186 214 1792 186
Estimate of Required ( Total Coat Incurred Estimated Additional Cumulatlre Funds
Annual Contributions and Fees EarnedCost and Fees Earned Required
(a) Year to Dale to End of Requested 101
Ibl Ouen
X'
5 j a
,_:.'11•/:« _ 1!..11.1 02�01�86
17. Preliminary Administrative and General Expense 0
ta. Carr} Over of Preliminary Administrative and General
E-<vvnso Approved in Previous Fiscal Year � 0
19. PreGmUtary• Non -Expendable EyLlipmant Expense
0
20 Carry Over of Preliminary Non -Expendable Equipment
Eirpense Approved in Previous Fiscal Year
21. Estimated Housing Assistance Payments
IA1-7;aunt 4715) 588,564
22 E:.t^rated Ongnln,; Aaministrativr, Fee
_ __ 68,578
tin:aten Ha c)•t(: H ,;,se Fee (Existing
h..us`r,y Cc'rtlf+ i::cs and Hol.,sing Vouchers Only) 900
24. Tc;at Independent Public Accountant Audit Costs
(Section 8 Only! 2,5_00
25 7-:�Tal Ailowance Approved'or Security and Utility
=ncsas (Section 23 Only) 0
Amoun! of Requisition
2L•. it t,d C;v,sts Incultod it) D ite (;aunt of L iticrs 17
;•„ :h 251
27. T;: F -encs F+_•cuired to End of R( -quested Ou2rter
0! Liv -f- 1.7 through 251
29. Pi.r : c:Tts Recei':;::d to Date
r-, r;rien(s Previously Approved for Fiscal Year
tG i)..iB
30. Over or Underpayrnent to Date (Difterence of Line 28 /
r,r1d Liri i 25. Do not Usf, brackets:
. F rt; :i Pa;. -Tient Requirt;ment DUling Requested i
t l(:artrl (Line 27 minus Line 29) '
Ji7/lriii�l�h7�TTTlI�
U
32.
37.
34.
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0
175,667 157,542 333,209
26,604 .1 23,846 50,450
180 i 225 I 405
0 i 0 1
0
0 0 0
r
202,451 i
215,854
384,064
261,18
3.403
1
7
Aethod of Payment Fast MstsitaaeM Second InstsifinetM Third IrtstallmeM Total
'otei Esti mated Additional Funds Required to End (0) (1s) to 1411
11 Requested quarter by Installment (Line 31 plus
illy overpayment or minus any underpayment on 45,427 45,428 45,428... 136,283
.Ina 30 divided into three installments)
.ass Any Overpayment or Plus Any Underpayment
rim line 30. 3 4
? Guested Installment Payments (Sum of Lines 32 --
Ind 3-3)
I (:erti:y that (1) housing assistance payments have been or will be made only in accordance with Housing Assistance Payments
C:ortrtzcts or Housing Voucher Contracts in the form prescribed by HUD and in accordance with HUD regulations and requirements;
121 units have been inspected by the PHA in accordance with HUD regulations and requirements; and (3) this requisition for annual
c-,� tllrtbutions has been examined by me and to the best of my knowledge and belief is true, correct and complete.
`� _------
1,10 -me t•1 Hul:nc Ncu*Ing Agency signature and Title of Authorlre0 ONlclel land Oa+N
Board of County Commissioners Don C. Scurlock Jr firman 2-12-86
Indian River County, Florida
- ------------------
_ 32,024_
45,4213
-- 45,428
y 122,880
C
FEB 12 1986 -aoolc 63 PAGE 583
r FEB 12 1986
t
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION SCHEDULE
FOR HUD -52663
ROOK. 00 FAcr 584
RE UISITION FOR PARTIAL PAYMENT OF ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS (Basis for Lines 21 & 22)* •-
.Project No. FL29-E132-001/003 Quarter Ending: June 30, 1986
HAP PAYMENTS
Actual - Months of: October thru Februar
Actual HAP Payments: $175,667 (Line 21 col. b)
No. of Units: Oct. thru Feb. ( = 5
Average HAP/unit = 185.8 -(or) 186.00
Estimate for remainder of period --March 1 thru
Unit Months 847
Average HAP/Unit x 186
Total Estimated HAP (Line 21 col. c)
101AL ACTUAL AND ESTIMAILD HAI':
$ 333,209 (Line 21 col. d)
ADMINISTRATIVE FEES
Actual - Months of: October thru February
No. of Unit Months
2 BR Fair Market Rent (FMR) x 368
Applicable '' x .0765
Administrative Fees earned: ( = ) $26,604 (Line 22 col.b)
Estimated - Months of:
Month
Units
2BR
Applicable
_
FMR
Mar.
205
(X)
368
M.
.0765 (_)
Apr.
214
(X)
368
(X)
.0765 (_)
May
214
(X)
368
(X)
.0765 (_)
June
214
(X)
368
(X)
.0765 (_)
TOTAL ACTUAL AND ESTIMATED ADMINISTRATIVE FEES:
Estimated Adm.
Fee
5,771
6,025
6,025
6,025
23,846 (Line 22 col.c)
$ 50,450
*Column and Line numbers in parenthesis refer to line numbers of Form HUD -52663
FLORIDA GAME & FRESH WATER FISH COMMISSION PRESENTATION RE SPOIL
ISLAND MANAGEMENT AND RESTORATION
Biological Scientist Ray Fernald came before the Board to
make a presentation as set out in the following letter:
16
FLORIDA GAME AND FRESH WATER FISH COMMISSION
THOMAS L. HIRES, SR. WILLIAM G. BOSTICK, JR. C. TOM RAINEY, D.V.M. J.H. BAROCO MRS. GILBERT W. HUMPHREY
Chairman, Lake Wales Vice -Chairman, Winter Haven Miami Pensacola Miccosukee
FpOff
'mob '"`'•�• q�`^A
ROBERT M. BRANTLY, Executive Director a r L ° =
F.G. BANKS, Assistant Executive Director u R i
-; D , • February 1986
Iss�°�
Dear Commissioner Wodtke,
As discussed in our telephone conversation several weeks
ago, I request that I be permitted to address the Indian River
County Commission at their regular meeting on 12 February 1986 to
present a slide program describing our research activities on
spoil islands in the Indian River, and to explain our intent
regarding future projects. The following paragraphs briefly
describe our program of spoil island habitat restoration.
In September, 1983, the Vero Beach Office of the Florida
Game and Fresh Water -Fish Commission initiated a spoil island
habitat restoration project by planting 300 seedlings on a spoil
island in Indian River County (see attached abstract). The
remarkable success of this pilot project has encouraged us to
propose a large-scale demonstration project involving one or more
islands, 20 to 50 different species, and thousands of seedlings.
Planting locations, techniques, and whether to use volunteer
labor are just a few of the experimental variables to be
considered in the development of a detailed research proposal.
Our presentation is intended to inform the County Commission of
our past efforts, explain the purpose of such habitat creation or
restoration projects, and express our desire to work with the
County in pursuing this research.
To our knowledge, Indian River is the only county along
Florida's east coast to have commissioned a significant study of
its respective spoil islands which was expressly oriented toward
management of these uplands for their natural values. We intend
to further pursue that objective, and upon completion of a
demonstration project proposal, will submit that proposal for
consideration and endorsement by the County Commission.
Sincerely,
Rand T. Fernald
Biological Scientist III
Mr. Fernald reviewed slides showing their plantings and the
results in great detail, including charts showing the rate of
success of the various species planted; he noted that the species
which are natural to the county survived at a high rate but the
exotics did not last. A summary of his complete presentation is
set out in the following abstract.
17
BOOK 63 maL585
ABSTRACT
Boa 63 Pur 586
Spoil islands constructed during dredging of the Intracoastal '
Waterway and other navigable channels constitute a significant man-made
habitat type in east -central Florida, and offer unique opportunities for
upland habitat enhancement. To study the feasibility of native
vegetation establishment on these islands, nineteen native species and
one ornamental exotic species were planted on an upland portion of a
Spoil island in the Indian River near Vero Beach. Seedlings from 2 -inch
liners were planted beneath the Australian pine (Casuarina
equisetifolia) canopy, with no soil preparation, or subsequent
fertilization or watering.
After 19 months, species survival rates ranged from 100% for pigeon
plum (Coccoloba diversifolia) and Spanish stopper (Eugenia foetida) to
27% for scaevola (Scaevola frutescens) and West Indies mahogany
(Swietenia maha oni). Net survival was 74% (221 of 300 seedlings
planted). Extremely high tides during a severe fall storm inundated
portions of the planting area (37 seedlings) and buried 79 seedlings
beneath vegetative debris, dramatically increasing seedling mortality in
the affected areas. All species exhibited substantial growth ranging
from 74% (West Indies mahogany) to 933% (wild lime, Zanthoxylum fagar•a).
Disturbance of the Australian pine litter and soil surface
facilitated invasion by Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius),
which soon dominated an adjunct live oak acorn (Quercus virginiana)
planting site. Preservation of an intact soil and litter layer, and
retention of at least a moderate canopy of Australian pines appeared
vital to successful vegetative restoration on these spoil islands.
Commissioner Lyons asked if the types of seedlings planted
would provide food for birds, and Mr. Fernald stated they
specifically used tropical species because they do provide some
high qualify fruit for birds. In a larger project, they would
hope to include some more temperate species that also would
provide fruit.
18
Commissioner Wodtke believed it was mentioned that they
might try to take one of the islands, remove the australian
pines, and start from scratch to see what birds, etc., would be
attracted.
Mr. Fernald confirmed that they are interested in that as
well as in,trying to provide shore bird habitat.
Commissioner Wodtke asked how the county can help, and Mr.
Fernald advised that they are getting an actual proposal down in
writing; then they will have to look for suitable islands and
will appeal to other agencies for labor and materials. They
might try and pursue a grant or ask the county to provide some
raw materials or perhaps a developer could contribute some
material or time.
Commissioner Wodtke felt we should offer whatever assistance
we can, and noted that Intergovernmental Relations Director
Thomas has been very involved with the Spoil Islands over the
years.
Mr. Fernald advised that they have made use of the report
the county did a number of years ago to see what islands might be
suitable for different purposes.
Chairman Scurlock thanked Mr. Fernald for his presentation.
Commissioner Lyons informed the Board that Ray Fernald is
chairman of the County's Sea Grass Committee, and he would like
him to report on what the committee has done and plans to do.
Mr. Fernald noted that the Sea Grass Committee was started a
few years ago by Commissioner Lyons, and it is made up of a group
of .local people representing a diversity of interests - environ-
mental, government agencies, sport fisherman, commercial fisher-
men, scientists, etc. This group has completed the first phase
of their work reviewing literature of what has been done in other
areas in regard to determining what sea grasses need, where they
exist, etc., and they will come up with a document to present to
the county. Much of their knowledge of mapping of sea grass was
gained from the Florida Department of Natural Resources mapping
19
FEB 12 1986 Boa 63 FAG -0587
FEB 12 1986
BOOK 63 PnUF.588
project which is just being completed. The DNR allowed them to
use their data before it was published with the understanding
that the committee will not present its report to the Commission
until after the DNR publishes their data sometime in March. Mr.
Fernald emphasized that they now can document clearly that there
has been a significant decline in sea grasses in the last 30-40
years, and he did think they can document with pretty good .
certainty the major causes. However, all of this is just based
on what has been done by researchers to date, and they would like
to endorse and pursue additional research, particularly in Indian
River County.
Commissioner Lyons did not believe Mr. Fernald mentioned
that not only has the committee pretty well determined that we
are losing sea grass, but that we want to turn this around and go
the other direction. Sea grass is a very important habitat, and
the productivity of the river is primarily dependent on the size
of these beds.
Director Thomas agreed and noted that what makes the
research so difficult is that there are so many sources that have
to be investigated for the possible causes. There are two
particular types of losses in which they are interested - one is
a complete loss of the grass, and the other, which is even more
difficult to research as it requires very detailed physical
research, is loss of density of the beds; you cannot determine
this just through photography.
APPLICATION TO DER FOR GRANT FOR SEAGRASS AND WATER QUALITY STUDY
The Board reviewed the following memo, plus letter from
Dr. Virnstein presenting the proposed projects:
20
E
r � �
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: February 5, 19 8 6 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT' Department of Environmental
• Regulations Grant Appli-
cations for seagrass and
water quality study
John R. Montgomery W� REFERENCES:
FROM: Robert W. Virnstei
Tommy Thomas 1�
John R. Montgomery and Robert W. Virnstein wish to apply to
Department of Environmental Regulations for the following list*
of projects and would like to have the County act as agent.
Both men are qualified, and are former employees of Harbor
Branch. The state will put up the 25% match for these Federal
Funds. The County will not have to supply any matching funds.
In addition they would like to apply to the County for
projects 1 and 2 for a total of $20,000.
February 5, 1986
Board of County Commissioners
1840 25th St.
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Dear Commissioners:
We attach and present to Indian River County the following proposals
for research on the Indian River lagoon, primarily related to critically
threatened seagrasses:
(1)
Pollutant loads to the Indian River lagoon Proposed cost
in Indian River County . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 2,000
(2)
How much and where are seagrasses declining
in Indian River County.? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
18,000
(3)
Effects of nutrients on seagrass. . . . . . . . . . .
41,520
(4)
Light requirements for seagrass . . . . . . . . . . . .
40,880
(5)
Density, seasonality, and species composition
of seagrasses in the Indian River lagoon . . . . . . .
20,000
(6)
Long-term health of seagrass-associated communities
in the Indian River.lagoon . . . . . . . . . . .•.
20,000+
(7)
Analysis of 6 years of existing data on seagrass-associated
communities in the Indian River lagoon
?12,000
(8)
A seasonal habitat survey of invertebrates
in the Indian River lagoon . . . . . . . . . . . .
?20,000
(9)
Nutrient and suspended solid loadings and freshwater
inputs from major canals into the Indian River lagoon .
?67,000
We suggest that proposals (1) and (2) and perhaps a portion of
proposals (3) and (4) be funded by the County. The remainder we would like
to submit to the state for funding through the Office of Coastal Management,
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (DER), James W. Stoutamire,
Director. These proposals to the state must be submitted (by February 21)
• through a local government. We hope that'Indian River County will endorse
these proposals and administer the finances of the grants, if funded.
Perhaps the Mosquito Control District or the Seagrass Committee could serve
this function, acting as an agent of the County. If proposal (5) is funded
by the state, the cost of proposal (2) would be reduced by one third.
21
FEB 12 1986 aoa� 63 P":GE 539.
Koo 03 pm -)E590
We attach copies of the proposals and abstracts of each. We would like
to present these proposals to the Board on February 12 and to then answer
any questions the commissioners might have.
Thank you for any help you may be able to provide.
Sincerely,
Robert W. Virnstein, Ph.D.
Seagrass Ecosystems Analysts
WourC
R. Montgomery
es
Paul S. Mikkelsen
)-<a&. - D. a,"
Kalani D. Cairns
Director Thomas asked that Dr. Virnstein outline exactly
what he is asking for.
Dr. Virnstein stated that he was not prepared to make a
presentation, but he pointed out that two of the projects they
are proposing, #1 and #2, are specific to the county while the
rest are more generally associated with beds in the entire river.
He noted that the first they want to address directly to the
county is just what are the sources of pollutants and the fresh
water, primarily nutrients, coming into Indian River County,
i.e., are sewer treatment plants the main problem - are canals
the main problem, etc. - how much of a problem are they and where
do you attack the problem. The second proposal is to map the
grasses very carefully in certain specific areas.
Commissioner Lyons believed they would like the County to
approach the state re Projects #3 through #9 and agree to act as
the sponsor.
Dr. Virnstein agreed and noted the County might want to add
some administrative costs for that since those projects, while
they would benefit the county, they are for the whole river.
22
r � �
Commissioner Wodtke asked why we would not apply to the
state for #1 through #9; are #1 and #2 not eligible for funds?
Dr. Virnstein felt they probably are, but explained that
the state may limit projects to one per county, probably at a
maximum of $50,000 per project, and we may have to set
priorities.
Commissioner Wodtke felt between the federal match with the
state possibly we could get up to $70,000, but Dr. Virnstein
noted that the state doesn't match on a project by project basis.
Commissioner Lyons felt there is no doubt that this is a
question of a regional nature that involves the entire Indian
River lagoon, but he believed our particular situation is
somewhat unique in that we are situated in between two inlets and
have an above average problem as far as nutrients are concerned.
Fishing is a very important tourist industry, and he felt we,
therefore, have a more than normal interest in the first two
projects. Commissioner Lyons stated that he would like to see us
come up with the money to fund Projects #1 and #2 and then
indicate our interest in Projects #3-#9. He noted that if we
don't come up with the money, we don't get the project and we can
always withdraw.
MOTION was made by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, to fund Projects #1 and #2 and indicate our
willingness to be sponsors for Projects #3 through #9.
Commissioner Wodtke believed that between the Regional
Planning Council and Harbor Branch there were some pretty
extensive studies done of sea grass.
Commissioner Lyons agreed that the Sea Grass Committee has
done considerable research. They have spent two years going over
everything, and while they have photographs of the conditions of
the beds, it is necessary to go out and prove them because what
shows up as sea grass in the photos actually may not be. We must
know what we have in order to have a plan to protect it, and he
felt this is very important to Indian River County.
23
FEBL- 12 196 BOOK
63 Pnu-L591
e
FEB 12 1986 BOOK p c -r 592
Chairman Scurlock had no problem with acting as sponsor for
Projects #3 through #9, but he did have a problem with lowering
the level of our Contingency Account to about $150,000 when we
have many things coming up:to deal with, i.e., the coming
insurance package, and September is quite far away.
Commissioner Lyons asked if there are any projects we might
want to substitute, and Commissioner Bowman inquired about
getting a grant from F.I.N.D.
Commissioner Wodtke felt if Projects #1 and #2 are the real
priorities, we should just emphasize them on the grant.
Mr. Montgomery agreed the state could fund nine projects,
but in reality they very probably will fund only one project, if
any are funded. Obviously a lot of entities will be submitting
proposals to Coastal Zone Management. Mr. Montgomery felt they
had been given a pretty good idea of what the state will be
funding, and he believed fresh water input, point source input
and sea grasses, will have the best chance. He emphasized that
they purposely picked two projects they felt could be accom-
plished at an actual dollar value which they did not consider
excessive at a county level. As a citizen and a scientist, Mr.
Montgomery felt the counties eventually will have to start
looking at some of these problems themselves, and that is why
they requested that Projects #1 and #2 be funded at the county
level and the county just give an indication they are willing to
act as agent for #3 through #9. Mr. Montgomery pointed out that
they cannot do any of these projects unless the local governing
bodies back them up.
Chairman Scurlock believed that we can study this to death,
but he felt the answer simply is that we just keep putting things
into -the river that should not be there.
Discussion continued re assigning priorities and the
necessity for the study, and Dr. Virnstein was asked if he would
concentrate on the sewer plant as the principal offender or on
better drainage.
24
Dr. Virnstein did not know that he could say which was the
bigger problem. He did feel we must find out which one is more
important, and if it turns out 800 of the problem is from fresh
water, we should concentrate on that first and then address the
other. We cannot disregard either problem, however.
Chairman Scurlock asked what the timetable would be for
accomplishing Projects #1 and #2, and Mr. Montgomery figured
about six months maximum on #1. He noted that it is not
generating new data that is the problem. Most of the information
is diverse and not published and is in obscure documents; the
problem is digging it out.
Chairman Scurlock asked if a Motion to sponsor would be a
help, and Dr. Virnstein agreed it would be. The Chairman stated
that he would like to defer on local funds available until we get
a better idea about what the insurance package will do to us.
Commissioners Lyons and Commissioner Bowman withdrew their
Motion.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, that the County agree to, act
as agents for Projects #1 through #9 and also to move
ahead to see if we can find a way to get some addi-
tional funding for Projects #1 and #2 .
Commissioner Bird raised a question as to what percentage of
these projects will generate new information and what will be
just a compilation of data that is already out there somewhere.
Mr. Montgomery advised that Project #1 will involve a
compilation of data, and #2 will be new research. He agreed the
data has been studied a great deal, but he did feel the end
result will be something that can be used.
Chairman Scurlock wondered if any of the monies received for
new docking facilities and making improvements to the river are
available for preserving the resource.
25
FEB 12 1981
BOOK 63 r� 590.E
FEB
12 1966
coax
63 F,,c! 5q4
Director Thomas stated that he will
be glad to
research and
see if there are any funds available for this.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
REPLACEMENT OF EMERGENCY ORDINANCE RE SIGNS, ADVERTISING
STRUCTURES, ETC.
The hour of 9:45 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER:
STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a Z4
in the matter of 11,6/W
in the �y Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of�°'•
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Swom to and subscribed byfore this day of A.D. 0' k
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO
CONSIDER ADOPTION OF COUNTY
ORDINANCE
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian
Iver County, Florida, will conduct a Public
Baring on Wednesday, February 12, 1988 at
45 a.m. in the Commission Chambers at the
ounty Administration Building, 1840 25th
treat, Vero Beach, Florida to consider the adop-
,n of an Ordiriance entitled:
PRODUCT; INCORPORATION IN CODE;
SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE. ,-...
any person decides to appeal a decision made
n the above matters record of the proceedings
rill be required for such purposes, and he or she
my need to ensure that a verbatim record of the
roceedings Is made, which record includes the
iistimony and evidence on which the appeal Is
ssed.Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman r u ti
an. 24.1988
Assistant County Attorney Bruce Barkett reviewed his memo,
as follows:
26
� � r
TO:DATE: FILE:
Board of County Commissioners February 4, 1986
of Indian River County
SUBJECT:
SIGN ORDINANCE
FROM: Bruce Barkett `Y REFERENCES:
Assistant County Attorney
The attached proposed ordinance is intended to repeal and replace
the Emergency Sign Ordinance amendments adopted January 22nd. The
substantive portions of this ordinance are exactly the same as
those previously approved. This ordinance is intended to allow
the Board to adopt by regular methods rather than by emergency
methods the sign ordinance amendments which solidify the Board's
position prohibiting oversized signs which also function as
buildings, such as buildings shaped like products for sale. This
ordinance was properly noticed in the newspaper, thereby allowing
comments by interested persons.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
adopted Ordinance 86-16, providing definition
of advertising structure, of sign, etc.
27
L- FEB 12 1981
11
BOOK 63 PnE 595
FEB 12 196 Boa fil Pnur 9
ORDINANCE N0. 86- 16
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AMENDING INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ORDINANCE SECTION 25(0)
[signs]; PROVIDING DEFINITION OF ADVERTISING STRUCTURE;
PROVIDING DEFINITION OF SIGN; PROHIBITING BUILDING
STRUCTURES WHICH RESEMBLE IN CONFIGURATION OR DESIGN A
PARTICULAR PRODUCT; INCORPORATION IN CODE; SEVERABILITY
AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County desires to enact amendments to the sign ordinance of
Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, it is the purpose and intent of these amend-
ments to promote and protect the public health, safety, welfare
and aesthetics of Indian River County by regulating and limiting
the public display of advertising structures, signs, billboards,
and other displays competing for public attention; and
WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Board to repeal and
replace emergency ordinance 86-13 with this ordinance;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS that:
C7rmTnM 1
Indian River County Ordinance Section 25(0)(1) Special
definitions is hereby amended to establish Section 25(o)(1)h. and
Section 25(o)(1)i. to read:
Advertising Structures: Any structure, with
or without any advertisement display
thereon, situated upon or attached to real
property, upon which any sign may be placed.
Anytime the word "sign" is used in this sign
ordinance [Section 25(0)], the same shall include
advertising structure.
Sign: Any writing; pictorial representation;
decoration; emblem (except a religious emblem);
flag (including banner or pennant); or any other
structure, figure, or character, or any part
thereof, on which such writing, pictorial
representation, emblem, flag, or other figure
or character is installed or placed which:
a. is used to inform, attract attention, or
advertise; and
b. is readily visible from any public place
off the premises upon which the writing,
pictorial representation, decoration,
emblem, flag, figure or character is located.
Whenever the word "sign" appears in this sign
ordinance [Section 25(0)] it shall include
"advertising structure." Whenever the word "sign"
is used in this sign ordinance [Section 25(0)] it
shall include buildings or other structures shaped
to resemble in configuration or design a product
for sale such as, but not limited to, hot dogs,
hamburgers ice cream cones, shoes, automobiles,
or fruit.
28
SECTION TWO
Indian River County Ordinance 25(o) Signs is hereby
amended to add section 25(0)(10) to read:
Buildings which resemble in configuration or
design a product for sale such as, but not
limited to, hot dogs, hamburgers, ice-cream
cones, shoes, automobiles or fruit are
prohibited in the unincorporated areas of
Indian River County.
INCORPORATION IN CODE
This ordinance shall be incorporated into the Code of
Ordinances of Indian River County and the word "ordinance" may be
changed to "section," "article," or other appropriate word and the
sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to
accomplish such purposes.
0VnmTnm A
SEVERABILITY
If any Section, or if any sentence, paragraph, phrase,
or word of this ordinance is for any reason held to be
unconstitutional, inoperative, or void, such holding shall not
affect the remaining portions of this ordinance; and it shall be
construed to have been the legislative intent to pass the
ordinance without such unconstitutional, invalid or inoperative
part.
OVOMTnM M
REPEAL PROVISION
Emergency Ordinance 86-13 is hereby repealed and replaced
by this ordinance.
SECTION 6
EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall become effective upon receipt from
the Secretary of State of the State of Florida of official
acknowledgment that this ordinance has been filed with the
Department of State.
29
BOOK 6 3 mu, 5917
FEB 12 1986 BOOK F "u'-.598
ORDINANCE 86-16
• Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida, on this 12th day of February
1986.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By, i G
DON C..SCURLOCK, JR., airman
AMENDING COUNTY MOBILE HOME ADVISORY BOARD ORDINANCE
The hour of 10:00 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
1
Vero Bach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER:
STATE OF FLORIDA I
Before the undersiglned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Ma ger of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian Rider County, Florida; that the attached copy 'af advertisement, being
a7
a
in the matter of
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florieia, 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-
tiserrent; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for th a purpose of securing this adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper. n
Sworn to and subscribed before
A.D._I All
30
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO'
CONSIDER ADOPTION OF COUNTY
ORDINANCE
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County Florida, will conduct a Public
Hearing on Wednesday, February 12; 1986 at
10:00 a.m. in the Commission Chambers at the
County Adminlstration. Building, 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida to consider the adop-
tion of an Ordinance entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AMENDING
SECTION 16.17 OF THE CODE OF
LAWS AND ORDINANCES OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING
FOR REMOVAL OF MEMBERS OF THE
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MOBILE HOME
ADVISORY BOARD; AMENDING SEC-
TION 16-18 OF THE .INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDI-
NANCES.TO PROVIDE, FOR THE OR
GANIZATION, QUORUM AND MEET-
INGS OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
MOBILE HOME ADVISORY BOARD;
' PROVIDING FOR INCORPORATION IN .
CODE; SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE
DATE.
If arty person decides to appeal a decision made
on the above matter, a record of the proceedings
will be required for such purposes, and he or she
may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the
proceedings Is made, which record includes the
testimony and evidence on which the appeal is
based. .,
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
Don C. Scurlock, Je, Chairman
Jan. 25, 1986
Sl
� r �
Commissioner Bird wished to know what we are really trying
to do.
Chairman Scurlock noted that some time ago we set up the
Mobile Home Advisory Board which has served a function for people
to voice their complaints, but he believed the committee itself
now has thought of more or less disbanding because a lot has been
accomplished and the activity has slowed down. They were
persuaded not to disband completely, but instead just to have
meetings much less frequently.
Commissioner Bowman believed another factor is that since
this committee was organized, the state organization has become
much more powerful.
Commissioner Bird expressed a problem with the wording which
states that "The Mobile Home Advisory Board may, by majority
vote, remove from office any member of the Board who fails to
attend a majority of the meetings......" He would like to see
just what constitutes a majority defined a little more clearly so
someone who is serving knows just what the requirements are in
regard to attending meetings.
County Attorney Vitunac advised that the definition of
majority is up to the members of the committee. He agreed it is
not that well defined, and they could say, for instance,
unexcused absences constitute a majority of the time that
particular member has been on the Board. However, if there had
been only one meeting since the member's appointment and he
missed that, it would constitute a majority of the meetings. He
not_ed.that on some other Boards if you miss two out of three in a
row, you are automatically off the Board.
Chairman Scurlock suggested that it be defined as failure to
attend three consecutive meetings, unexcused, and this was agreed
on.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
There were none.
31
FEB12 1986 9®olc �J
FEB 12 1986'
BOOK 6 3
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously closed
the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
adopted Ordinance 86-17 with the change in
wording agreed upon.
ORDINANCE NO. 86-17
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AMENDING SECTION
16-17 OF THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR REMOVAL OF
MEMBERS OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MOBILE HOME
ADVISORY BOARD; AMENDING SECTION 16-18 OF THE
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES
TO PROVIDE FOR THE ORGANIZATION, QUORUM AND MEETINGS
OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MOBILE HOME ADVISORY
BOARD; PROVIDING FOR INCORPORATION IN CODE;
SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
SECTION 1
The Indian River County Code of Laws and Ordinances
Section 16-17 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Removal of Members
Any member of the Board who ceases to be a qualified
elector or resident, or who becomes a candidate for
public office shall immediately forfeit his office. Any
member may be removed from office without cause by a
majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners.
Hxeegh-€er-exettseei-igea�hl�-er-wed€are-meas-eas; -agp-
me2nl�er-wl�e-€atla-ta-ahhead-ah-lease-ge�rerthy-€��re-f�5 )
pew-eerrh-a €-hke-tneeh �rtgs-a€-hl�e-Mebt�e-Heise-Ptei� �sary-
Bea�e�-eir�� �rtg-artp-twe ��e-martt)3-pess�ed-s><ra��-be-e�eemee�-to
>:ta�e-*�aeatee�-l��s-gas�h�ea-art-tYte-Mab��e-Heme-Ad�rrsarp-
Beard. The Mobile Home Advisory Board may, by majority
vote, remove from office any member of the Board who
fails to attend three consecutive meetin s, unless such
absence is excused for health or welfare reasons. A
vacancy so created shall be immediately reported to the
Board of County Commissioners by the Chairman of the
Mobile Home Advisory Board or, if there be no chairman
or the chairman has vacated his position, by any
remaining member of the Mobile Home Advisory Board.
SECTION 2
Indian River County Code of Laws' and Ordinances Section
16-18 is hereby amended to read as follows:
NOTE: Words in strldek-thPOugh-hype are deletions from
existing law; words underlined are additions.
KFA
Organization. ctuorum and meetings.
The Mobile Home Advisory Board shall initially
select a chairman and such other officers as deemed
necessary and desirable who shall serve at the pleasure
of the advisory board. The initially selected board
shall serve until the first meeting in January, 1983, at
which time new elections shall be held and continue to
be held annually and thereafter. The Board shall meet
at least gearterly once a year at any appropriate place
and shall may arrange a time for holding regular
meetings of the Board and for such other meetings as
shall be necessary. A majority of the members of the
Board shall constitute a quorum. A majority vote of
those members present and voting at any meeting shall be
sufficient to enable taking any action. The Board may
adopt such rules of procedure as it may deem necessary.
All meetings of the Board shall be open to the public
and shall be subject to the requirements of Section
286.011, Florida Statutes.
SECTION 3
INCORPORATION IN CODE
This ordinance shall be incorporated into the Code of
Ordinances of Indian River County and the word "ordinance" may be
changed to "section," "article," or other appropriate word and
sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to
accomplish such.purposes.
SECTION 4
SEVERABILITY
If any Section, or if any sentence, paragraph, phrase,
or word of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitu-
tional, inoperative, or void, such holding shall not affect the
remaining portions of this ordinance; and it shall be construed to
have been the legislative intent to pass the ordinance without such
unconstitutional, invalid or inoperative part.
SECTION 5
EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall become effective upon receipt from
Secretary of State of the State of Florida of official acknow-
legement that this ordinance has been filed with the Department of
I
1. State.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioner
of Indian River County, Florida, on this 12thday of February
1986. ,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By Z41 G
• DON C. SCU LOCK, JR. airman
BOOK 63 PAGE 601
FEB 12 1986 Bou 63 pn—,E602
LAND CLEARING VIOLATION - RABO CORP. (RYALL)
Commissioner Wodtke asked if all these violations are going
to come to the Commission now instead of the Code Enforcement
Board, and Director Keating explained that the Code Enforcement
Board can only structure some kind of mitigation, they cannot
impose a fine. The Commission, therefore, some time ago in-
structed staff to inform each applicant with a violation that
they have the option to pay a fine or staff will come to the
Commission and ask for permission to pursue this matter through
the courts.
Commissioner Wodtke inquired if the administrative level has
the ability to mitigate a fine, and Chief Environmental Planner
Challacombe stated that they do not have that discretion; they
must go for the maximum fine, which was the specific instruction
of the Commission.
Chief Planner Challacombe then reviewed the following memo:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
January 31, 1986 FILE:
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: LAND CLEARING VIOLATION
SUBJECT: RABO CORPORATION
c/o N.B. RYALL, JR.
obert M. Keat ng, ICP CV -86-01-275
Planning & Development Director
THROUGH: Art Challacombe
Chief, Environmental Planning
FROM: Roland M. DeBlois REFERENCES: Rabo Corp.
Staff Planner *4p DIS:ROLAND
It As requested that the data presented herein be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting on February 12, 1986.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On January 23, 1986, County personnel observed that parcel
number 28-31-39-06-0001-001.0, having a legal description of:
Lots 1, 2, and 3, Weona Park, according to the plat recorded in
Plat Book 2, Page 17 of the Public Records of Indian River
County, Florida, had been cleared prior to the issuance of a
landclearing permit. To staff's knowledge, no protected trees
have been removed.
The property is currently owned by RABO Corporation, repre-
sented by Mr. N. B. Ryall Jr., of 3526 Martha's Lane, Vero
Beach, Florida.
34
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
Section 231-6(a) & (b), Tree Protection, of the Code of Laws
and Ordinances of Indian River County, Florida prohibits the
performance of any tree removal, landclearing or grubbing
unless tree removal and landclearing permits have first been
issued by the County. The ordinance further specifies that a
violation shall be punishable upon conviction by a fine not to
exceed five hundred dollars ($500) per tree and land clearing
activity or by imprisonment in the County jail for up to sixty
(60) days, or both.
On January 24, 1986, staff requested that RABO Corporation
submit a voluntary payment of $500.00 and obtain an "after -the -
fact" permit.
Mr. N. B. Ryall Jr., representing RABO Corporation, indicated
that he felt the fine was excessive and that RABO Corporation
would not voluntarily comply with staff's request.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant
staff the authority to pursue available remedies in County
court.
Chief Planner Challacombe confirmed that since staff could
find no evidence of protected vegetation having been removed, the
fine would be for land clearing only.
N. B. Ryall informed the Board that he was born in this
county and he is a citrus grower. It was his position that RABO,
which is a family corporation, should not be subject to a fine
for underbrushing this property because he was not aware a permit
was necessary. In support of his argument that the fine was
unjustified, Mr. Ryall advised that he has been given permission
to use the name of three well-known citrusmen in this county, as
well as that of a former County Commissioner, all of whom said
they would have done the same thing without realizing a permit
was necessary. He stated that he was aware of the tree protec-
tion ordinance. Mr. Ryall further noted that he has access to
his own grove equipment, which he has used in the past for the
same kind of work; he is not a contractor and is not aware of
some of these things that have been passed.
Commissioner Bird asked how our ordinance re clearing land
applies to different type zoned properties, and Planner
Challacombe advised that everything other than single family
parcels under one acre and Agricultural parcels would require a
1 35
FEB 1 BOOK
1986 BOOK 63 F4 C 60. 3
r
FEB
12 1986
BOOK
6pnF604
land clearing and/or tree removal permit.
He noted
that
a land
clearing permit is $45.00, and the purpose of obtaining one is so
that staff can get on the site before it is cleared and determine
whether there are any protected trees on it.
Commissioner Lyons did believe there has been sufficient
publicity about this type of violation to make people aware, and
he further noted that another argument is that ignorance is no
defense.
Commissioner Wodtke felt that mainly violations which have
received publicity have been for tree removal. He did feel it is
necessary to follow our ordinance and believed we have got word
out to the contractors. The Ryall family, however, is a well
known, old county family, and he suggested consideration be given
to the fact that Mr. Ryall has applied for an after -the -fact
permit and that he be required to pay double, or $90.00.
Commissioner Lyons stated that he would settle for $250.00,
and Commissioner Bowman recommended $300.00.
Planner Challacombe advised that on at least one past
occasion with similar circumstances, a respondent was fined
$150.00.
Chairman Scurlock believed we have levied some significant
fines on some other well known citizens who have pleaded
ignorance; he, therefore, stated that he would support a fine of
$150.00 as being consistent with what we have done in the past.
Chairman Scurlock asked the cooperation of the Press to
perform a civic duty by doing some stories about what is and is
not covered under the ordinance.
Commissioner Bird felt the Ryalls are well informed people
and he did not believe they intentionally violated our ordinance.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously agreed on a
fine of $150.00 for RASO Corporation, this amount
to include the cost of the land clearing permit.
36
TREASURE COAST MANATEE PROTECTION RESOLUTION
Art Challacombe, Chief of Environmental Planning, reviewed
the following memo:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: February 4, 1986 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: TCRPC MANATEE PROTECTION
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION
Robert M. Keat'ng, CP
Planning & Development Director
FROM:
`-'REFERENCES:
Art Challacombe TCRPC
Chief, Environmental Planning DIS:ARTCHA
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of February 12, 1986.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS:
On January 30, 1986, Indian River County received a letter with
an attached resolution from the Treasure Coast Regional
Planning Council (TCRPC) regarding manatee protection from
boating activities. The resolution, adopted by the TCRPC at
their regular meeting of January 17, 1986, is intended to
emphasize to State officials that a statewide manatee pro-
tection program is urgently needed. Without some comprehensive
solution to this problem, continued growth in boating oppor-
tunities cannot occur in this region or elsewhere in Florida
without jeopardizing the survival of the manatee population.
The attached resolution has been transmitted to all governments
within and adjacent to the Treasure Coast region. Council
respectfully urges that the County adopt this or a similar
resolution and transmit it to the Governor and Cabinet.
Through County combined efforts, positive statewide actions to
protect the manatee may be forthcoming.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS:
The TCRPC resolution is a direct result of continued concern by
the Council over the rapid construction of boat docking facili-
ties in critical habitat in the Indian River as well as the
December 6, 1985 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service "jeopardy
opinion" regarding certain project impacts upon the Florida
manatee. This opinion recognized that full protection and the
continued existence of the manatee can only be achieved by a
multi -jurisdictional approach to boat traffic management.
County planning staff, in previous discussions with the TCRPC,
has emphasized the need for the `State of Florida to take the
lead in a comprehensive approach by requiring licensing of all
power boat operators and providing adequate enforcement of
boating violations. Adoption of the proposed resolution by all
local governments within the TCRPC and adjacent Counties will
provide a directive for the State to take action to reduce
manatee mortality rates.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt
the proposed resolution. 37
FEB 12 1986 BOOK 63 F'1uF_60
FEB
12
1986
Boa 63
r,l, 666
Chairman Scurlock advised
that he has been contacted
by a
number of individuals; he believed there is a great concern on
this whole issue and that the whole community wants some sort of
fair and reasonable approach to manatee protection, but also some"
assurance that our county is treated fairly re marina slips, etc.
Planner Challacombe believed the Manatee Resolution implies
that. We have recognized that there is very little one county
can do by itself, and the intent of the resolution is to
emphasize to -the state that they have the ultimate jurisdiction
and authority to put together a comprehensive program.
Commissioner Lyons advised that he was, in effect, author of
this resolution through the Regional Planning Council, and this
actually is in response to what was debated re the slips in Grand
Harbor and who could lease them. He emphasized that the
resolution takes the stand that this is not a local issue and
also implies protection of sea grass beds and that this should be
a part of boater education. Commissioner Lyons felt that he has
been misquoted by a local organization in connection with his
stand on this matter and re the marina in Fort Pierce, which he
voted for because a lot of the larger boats now kept here in Vero
Beach will be kept down there next to the inlet and won't have to
make the trip down the river, which will afford greater protec-
tion to the manatee.
Chairman Scurlock stated one area he would like to see added
to the resolution is that we would like to be a part of the
development of the rules and regulations and involved in the
policy development.
Commissioner Lyons suggested that this be added as Item #6.
Commissioner Wodtke felt if the Fish and Wildlife Service
want to say new marinas should not be allowed, that is fine for
them, but he felt we should draft our own resolution.
Commissioner Lyons pointed out that is simply an expression
of their opinion and a statement of fact.
38
Commissioner Bird agreed with the basic philosophy of the
proposed resolution, but had a problem with Items #1 and #5. He
believed manatees exist year round all up and down the river and
that this, therefore, would involve the entire waterway. He
further felt designating only particular areas of the waterway as
greater than idle speed zones is extremely broad and would re-
quire much posting.
Commissioner Bowman believed that would exclude the
Intracoastal Waterway as manatees generally are killed only in
shallow waters.
Discussion ensued as to whether we have any control over the
speed at which boats go through the county in the Intracoastal
Waterway, and Attorney Vitunac stated the only control would be
through the Coast Guard.
Commissioner Wodtke continued to express his problem with
the first whereas clauses which he felt suggest a moratorium, and
he could not agree with that.
Chairman Scurlock believed we have an extremely high
concentration of manatees in our county, and, therefore, this
could cause a greater impact on our county.
Commissioner Bowman stated that the heaviest kills are in
Brevard County; the birth rate and death rate in this area are
about equal. Actually the manatees are quite close to
extinction.
Commissioner Bird stated that he had no problems with Items
2, 3 and 4, and would have no problem with #1 if it were reworded
to "expand slow and idle speed zone areas to include all areas
known to be frequent manatee habitat." He felt #5 is just too
broad to reword because, to him, it would include the entire
river from shoreline to shoreline.
Commissioner Lyons pointed out that the Resolution says it
recommends the following actions be considered and if warranted
be implemented. He, therefore, asked if we can't take care of
39
FEB 12 1986 • BOOK 6 Fa:c� 6'x`7
FEB 12 1996 BOOK 63. PnUF 608
this just by including Item #6 asking that local governments be
included in the consideration of all the rule making process.
Board members continued to suggest various alternatives for
designating areas of the river, and Commissioner Bowman felt we
are going to have to designate certain areas for water skiing as
they are one of the biggest offenders.
Chairman Scurlock believed we need to do an inventory from
County line to County line and designate an area to be used for
skiing, etc. -
Commissioner Bowman did not see, as a practical matter, how
you can place a sign at every shallow water area, but she felt
you can sign the deep water areas.
Commissioner Wodtke wished to know the difference in the
definitions of idle speed and slow speed, and Planner Challacombe
stated that idle speed is just enough speed to control the boat
for steerage, and he felt slow speed is no wake. He did feel,
however, the slow and idle are being used synonomously in the
resolution.
Commissioner Lyons suggested the following language for Item
#5; "Inventory distribution of manatee population and designate
only particular areas of the waterway as greater than idle speed
zones" and also the adding of Item #6; "Include local governments
in consideration of all policies."
Commissioner Wodkte asked if we can delete the one whereas
clause expressing the opinion of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
re not alowing construction of new marinas until existing mortal-
ity rates are reduced as he felt this amounts to a moratorium.
Administrator Wright agreed that if the Board adopted this
resolution, he would feel they were sending him a message not to
consider any more marinas.
Discussion continued at length as to whether the proposed
Resolution indicates support of a moratorium on the building of
marinas; the effect, if any, of the jeopardy letter produced by
40
M M
the Fish & Wildlife Service on the continued permitting of
marinas; the figures on manatee mortality in the county, etc.
Chairman Scurlock stated that, as one Commissioner, he would
like to see some additional controlled marina activity in our
community, but he did not know how you send a message to say find
reasonable control to protect the manatee, but still be
reasonable for boaters. He was afraid that those at a higher
level do not have the answers to this problem either and that
they, therefore, will just say build no more marinas until the
state can come up with a solution. This would put some local
individuals who are halfway through their projects in a very
difficult economic position.
Commissioner Wodtke pointed out that there is no control on
dry storage of boats and launching from those storage areas, and
Chairman Scurlock felt small boats very probably cause more of
the damage to the sea grass and the manatee than the larger
boats.
Commissioner Bowman agreed because the small boats go in the
shallow waters. She noted, however, that there are figures on
dry storage of boats, and it was found that 85% of such boats are
used very little.
Chairman Scurlock expressed his preference for language that
says be very cautious about expanding marinas but not just
absolutely stop everything.
Commissioner Bowman noted that actually we need enforcement
and we do not have the marine patrol necessary to do that
enforcement, but Commissioner Bird felt we have made great steps
in that direction.
In.the ensuing discussion, Commissioner Lyons suggested
leaving out the Whereas clauses, i.e., eliminate Page 1.
Commissioner Wodtke felt he could go along with this if Page
1 were eliminated and the Resolution drafted based on Page 2 with
the changes discussed today.
41
F 12 IZ986 BOOK 63 F!,;E 6�
BOOK 63 �.�: E610
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wodtke, the Board unanimously
adopted Resolution 86-06, as rewritten elimin-
ating Page 1 and including the following changes:
Item #1 - Slow and idle speeds to include all areas
known to be frequent manatee habitat.
Item #5 - Inventory distribution of manatee popula-
tion and designate only particular areas of
the waterway as greater than idle speed zones.
Item #6 - To be added - Include the local governments
in consideration of all policies.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-6
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA REQUESTING ACTION BY THE STATE
OF FLORIDA TO REDUCE MANATEE DEATHS
CAUSED BY BOATS IN THE INDIAN RIVER
LAGOON SYSTEM.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County that Indian River County requests the State of
Florida to take positive steps through legislation or rule adoption
to reduce and eliminate mortality in the manatee population caused
w
by collisions with boats in the Indian River Lagoon System.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following policies be
considered by the State for adoption:
1. Expand "slow" and "idle" speed zone areas to include all
areas known to he habitat areas within which this the manatee
frequently occurs.
2. Expand, to whatever extent is necessary, enforcement of
laws designed to protect the manatee from harm.
3. Require licensing and education of all powerboat
operators.
4. Require licensing fees of sufficient amount to fund
administrative costs to the State and costs of expanded enforcement
requirements .
5. Inventory all local manatee habitat areas and then
designate only particular areas as greater than idle speed zones.
42
6. Inform and include Indian River County and other local
governments when considering any changes in all State rule making
regarding manatee protection and boating regulations.
The foregoing resolution
was offered
by
Commissioner
Lyons
and seconded by Commissioner
Wodtke ,
and,
being put to
a vote,
the vote was as follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared Resolution No. 86-6 duly
passed and adopted this 19th day of february , 1986.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Don C. Scurlock, Jr
Chairman
TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING_ COUNCIL D_R.I .TRANSPORTATION
POL I CY
The Board reviewed staff memo, as follows:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: February 5, 1986 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT: TREASURE COAST REGIONAL
Robert M. Ke tin , AYM PLANNING COUNCIL D.R.I.
Planning & Developme t Director TRANSPORTATION POLICY
FROM: �S REFERENCES:
Richard Shearer Treasure Coast Memo
Chl of-, Long -Range Planning RTC=
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of February 12, 1986.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council has prepared a set
of Proposed Development of Regional Impact (D.R.I.) Transporta-
tion Review Policies and Standards to be used in analyzing the
traffic impacts of proposed D.R.I.s. These policies have been
43
FEB 12 1966 Boas'
L
FEB 12 1986 Boa 63
developed over several months with extensive input from local
governments. Treasure Coast has asked that any comments on these
policies be forwarded to them by February 14, 1986.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
The Planning and Development and Public Works divisions have
reviewed these policies throughout their formulation. These
policies include maintaining level -of -service C on an average
annual basis and level -of -service D during the peak season when
reviewing D.R.I.s. In addition, the policies include designating
a regional roadway network in each County to ensure that major
roads are not overburdened by D.R.I.s. The County staff has
reviewed these policies and standards and compared them to the
County's existing ordinances and policies. This review has
indicated that the proposed Treasure Coast policies and standards
are consistent with the County's existing ordinances and policies
relative to the review of traffic impacts of new developments.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners concur
with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council's Proposed
D.R.I. Transportation Review Policies and Standards.
Commissioner Lyons informed the Board that one of the things
that came up in Regional Planning Council in connection with
getting contributions from developers is that the big developer
is the only guy who gets hooked and the little guy gets by. It
was, therefore, felt a fairer way to assess the traffic impacts
for D.R.1.1s, would be to say that the fellow who comes in for a
D.R.I. is only going to be assessed for what his traffic does to
the existing level of service on that road. The matter of
getting it up to Level C lies then with the existing legislative
body. This is the recommendation of the committee set up by the
Regional Planning Council, and it will go before the Council
soon. Commissioner Lyons supported this recommendation as he
believed in some cases the large developer has been used to bring
the road to Level C even though it wasn't at that level when he
got there.
Commissioner Bird stated that he is relying on staff's
belief that this policy is consistent with our Comprehensive Plan
policies, and Chief Planner Shearer confirmed that staff does
feel comfortable with it.
44
M M r
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously
accepted the staff recommendation to concur
with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning
Council's Proposed D.R.I. Transportation
Review Policies and Standards.
DISCUSSION RE FUNDING FOR ROCKRIDGE_WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT STUDY
AND ALSO BLUE CYPRESS LAKE AREA
Utilities Director Pinto reviewed the following memo:
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
RE:
BACKGROUND
THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF
THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
MICHAEL WRIGHT
COUNTY COMMISSIONER
TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR.OF UTILITY SERVICES
JEFFREY A. BOONE
ENGINEERING OPERATIONS MANAGER
DATE: FEBRUARY 5, 1986
SUBJECT: ROCKRIDGE
WASTEWATER
IMPROVEMENTS
ENGINEERING
FEASIBILITY STUDY
DECEMBER 10, 1985, MEMO TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM
RON BROOKS
A meeting was held with the Rockridge Homeowners Association on February
3, 1986, where Terry Pinto, Director of Utilities Services, provided
those in attendance with information regarding the wastewater
improvements in the subject subdivision. Discussion of the costs to each
homeowner resulted in a postive response from the Homeowners Association
along with a desire to proceed with the project.
nNnT.VCTC
A proposal for the Engineering Feasibility Study has been submitted by
Masteller and Moler Associates, Incorporated. The study will provide
preliminary design and determine the flow requirements and costs involved
in providing wastewater service to the Rockridge subdivision.
The total cost of the Engineering Feasibility Study is $7000.00 of which
$3000.00 will be required for soil and subsurface testing and $600.00 for
surveying expenses.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that the Honorable Board of County Commissioners
authorize funding of the Engineering Feasibility Study for the Rockridge
subdivision. 45
NOK 63 FA;t.613
F/1-
E
Fr1Jt614
Director Pinto
advised that the meeting with the
Rockridge
residents was very well attended, and they were overwhelmingly in
support of moving along on this project. They have some very
serious problems, even more serious then he had realized, and he
recommended that we move along and do the feasibility study.
Chairman Scurlock noted this was more or less precipitated
by the City agreeing to go ahead and extend service and to pass
some capacity into the area. He felt we are entering a new area
of cooperation with the City.
Director Pinto informed the Board that they also had a
meeting with the Homeowners Association at Blue Cypress Lake and
had the same response. He noted that this meeting was a day
prior to a fishing tournament; our campground was extremely busy;
and the toilet facilities were, to say the least, deplorable; in
fact, they were boarded up because of a septic problem. Director
Pinto stated that he would like to add an amount of $2,800 to
this study to look specifically at the septic problem at Blue
Cypress Lake and the overall wastewater facilities that would be
needed for that project. He emphasized that both areas -
Rockridge and Blue Cypress Lake - are in support of this, and
they want to move as quickly as possible. Funding would be out
of utilities and out of impact fees for expansion of the system.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, to authorize funding of the
Engineering Feasibility Studies for the Rockridge
Subdivision and Blue Cypress Lake area; to accept
the proposal of Masteller and Moler Associates, Inc.,
for consulting services as set out in Work Authori-
zation No. 3; and to authorize the signature of the
Chairman.
Commissioner Lyons commented that one of the main problems
with fishing and shellfish in the river is the problem of single
46
family septic tanks. He was glad to work toward the possibility
of removing that in the Rockridge area.
Director Pinto felt there is no question that the only way
that system works is that the septic raises into the drainage
ditch and heads directly to the river.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
Amended by County Commission
to include Blue Cypress Lake
Area - 2-12-86
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Date:
Work Authorization No. 3 For Consulting Services (Wastewater)
Project No. (County) (Masteller & Moler Associates,
Inc.)
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION - Title: Consulting engineering services relative to the
preparation of Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Studies and Reports covering the following areas
of Indian River County: A. Rockridge Area - The report will contain a plan of the study
area; review sewer alternatives; provide estimated connections and construction cost esti-
mates; and state recommendations. Included in the report will be spot elevations and soil
boring data within the study area. B. Blue Cypress Lake Area - The report will contain
�. a plan of the study area; show the recommended sewage collection system proposal; establish
the treatment plant size, suggested site and effluent disposal method; provide estimated
connections and construction cost estimates; and state recommendations. Included in the
report will be spot elevations and soil boring data within the study area.
II. SCOPE OF SERVICES AND LUMP SUM FEE FOR SERVICES
Reference is made to the "Agreement for Professional Services" dated
June 5, 1985 and specific Article numbers and paragraph numbers which
are listed hereinafter to describe the scope of services included on this
project;
A. Study and Report Services per Article 3.
B. Payment for Services per Article 8, paragraph 8c. for "A". above
shall be the lump sum fee as follows: A. Rockridge Area $7,000.00;
B. Blue Cypress Lake Area $2,800.00.
Payment shall be per paragraph 8d. The lump sum fee of $7000.00
includes $600.00 for spot elevations and $3000.00 for soil boring
data. The lump sum fee of $2800.00 'includes $400.00 for spot
elevations and $700.00 for soil boring data.
APPROVED BY: SUBMITTED BY:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY MASTELLER & MOLER ASSOCIATES, INC.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BY �G BY &,f
Don C. Scurlock Jr. Earl H. Masteller, P.E.
Chairman President
Date - _'96 Date ZI t g F?(.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
Charles Vitunac
County Attorney
47
12 1966 BOOK 63 rk� 615
FEB 12 1986 BOOK 63 Fr1,E 616
TRANSFER OF FUNDS TO PAY BOND HOLDERS - SR60 WATER ASSESSMENT
(WEST GATE SUBDIVISION)
Utilities Director Pinto reviewed the following memo:
TO: THE BOARD OF COUNTY DATE: FEBRUARY 5, 1986
COMMISSIONERS
THRU: TERRAN9�G:fPINwo/
FROM: JEFFREY K. ARTON
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
SUBJECT: TRANSFER OF FUNDS TO
PAY BOND HOLDERS
ON 27 ERU'S - ROUTE
60 WATER ASSESSMENT
WEST GATE SUBDIVISION
When the assessment roll was approved by the -County Commission on their
meeting of April 11, 1984, it included Item D-2 (copy attached) which
should not have been assessed. The 27 ERU's should be released and
become available to potential customers in the service area at the
current price per ERU. The monies to payoff the currently issued bonds
held by Florida National Bank should be transferred from the impact fee
account to pay the assessment roll on these 27 ERU's.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Utility staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
the release*of the 27 ERU's for this assessment roll along with the
execution of the Release of Assessment Lien. The Board should also
authorize the transfer of $30,365.55 from the Impact Fee Account to the
Assessment roll account.
Director Pinto asked if there were any questions, and Com-
missioner Lyons stated that he did not understand the memo.
Director Pinto explained that when we put together the water
assessment for SR60, there was a little subdivision where we
inadvertently put assessments against individual homes, 27 of
them, and we really had no authority or reason to do that other
than when the developer next door initially came in to build his
development in order to build a sewerage treatment plant, he
would have had to provide water to those homes. Our county
system eliminated the necessity for him to build a sewerage
treatment plant.
48
Chairman Scurlock further clarified that, in other words,
the developer was buying them water because the impact of his
wastewater system would have made their wells unusable.
Director Pinto continued to explain that there was a
description of those individual properties in our assessment; so,
we went ahead -and assessed those homes individually for a
connection fee. They don't want the water at this point, and we
are saying take it off the books. When water comes, they will
come in and pay us for it. We will take this money out of impact
fees and put it in the bond funds to cover the bonds.
Commissioner Lyons asked where the money is - he felt it
actually doesn't exist.
Director Pinto explained that we borrowed the money for
something that is not going to happen, and Chairman Scurlock
noted that we end up with 27 taps that are not used; we are
taking them back, and they are now available for someone else to
reserve - actually the money is fictitious at this point.
Director Pinto assured the Board that we will come out
ahead.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Lyons, the Board unanimously author-
ized the release of the 27 ERUs, execution of the
Release of Assessment Lien for Westgate Colony
Subdivision, and transfer of $30,365.55 from the
Impact Fee Account to the Assessment Roll Account
as recommended by staff.
49
RON
63 rm 617
State Road 60 Water Project
Release of 27 ERUs (Map #1)-2)
RELEASE OF ASSESSMENT LIEN
800k 63 FA% 61
2/12/86(A-3)LEG(Vk)
For and in consideration of the sum of $970.45 per
equivalent residential unit times 27 ERUs or $26,202.15 plus fees
and costs received in hand this day paid, the receipt of which is
hereby acknowledged, INDIAN RIDER COUNTY, FLORIDA, (the
"County") hereby releases GEORGE CHILDERS-WEST GATE COLONY,
a/k/a LYNN LEE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION from a certain special
assessment lien recorded by the County in its Official Records,
Book 0691, Page 0077, for a special assessment in the amount of
$970.45, plus accrued interest at the rate of ten percent (10%) per
annum, levied in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No.
83-46 of the County, as amended, and Resolution No. 84-47 of the
Board of County Commissioners of the County; and hereby declares
such spe-cial assessment lien fully satisfied. The property,
located in Indian River County, is more fully described as
follows:
All lots in WESTGATE COLONY SUBDIVISION,
according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat
Book 4, Page 94, of the public records of Indian
River County, Florida.
Executed by the Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, and attested and
countersigned by the Clerk of such Board, all as of this 12th day
of February, 1986.
Attested and countersigned: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSI014ERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Freda ht, erk By / C
G( Don C. Scurl .ek, Jr.
AD Chairman
Approved as to form and
legal sufficiency:
Charles P. Vitunac
County Attorney
Instrument prepared by and
should be returned to:
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
50
BALANCING OF HVAC SYSTEM FOR NEW JAIL
General Services Director Dean reviewed the following memo;
TO: The Honorable Members ofDATE: February 4 , 1986 FILE:
the Board of County
Commissioners
THRU: Michael Wright
County Administrator
H. T. "Son Dean
FROM: Director
General Servic s
SUBJECT: Balancing of HVAC System
for new jail
REFERENCES:
As recommended by W.R. Frizzell Architects, Inc., the subject work
was deleted from the original general contractors contract.
According to the architect we could get a better price and a quality
job by proceeding this way.
At the time this discussion took place, Mr. Tom Pinkerton estimated
the price to do this work would be in the neighborhood of $16,000'-
$18,000
16,000-
$18,000 for buildings A and B. In fact, the subcontractor gave en
add-on of $20,000 for this work. Since we were in the process of
constructing Phase II (Building C) of the jail project, it was
decided to include that portion in subbing proposals. Mr. Ben
DiPalma, Vice -President of W.R. Frizzell Architects, Inc. and Project
Director for the Indian River County Jail, was assigned to -seek -
proposals from reputable firms.
Mr. DiPalma's recommendation is to allow Future Controls, Inc. to
perform this work at a guaranteed price of $9,4P 60. According to him
this is a very reputable firm which does quality work.
It is recommended by staff to authorize W.R. Frizzell Architects,
Inc. to contract the subject work with Future Controls, Inc., and be
responsible for seeing the work is properly done since our County
personnel does not have expertise in this area.
This procedure has been approved by our legal staff.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, to authorize Frizzell Architects
to contract with Future Controls, Inc., for the work
described and for Frizzell Architects to be responsible
for seeing the work is properly done.
Commissioner Wodtke wished to be sure we get a job that will
work, and not a $9,000 job that won't work.
Commissioner Bowman noted it actually is $9,900.
51
BOOK 63 F{ 6A
e
FEB 12 1966 &ooK 63 r,{ -1E 1
Commissioner Bird agreed it is nice to save the money, but
he also hoped the system will work. He believed we have a
subcontractor that is installing the heating and air conditioning
system and asked if it isn't his responsibility to balance the
system.
Director Dean explained this item was pulled out because the
people who install it add on to their contract for doing .tha.t,
and then they go out and get a subcontractor to do it.
Commissioner Bird just hoped we are not letting somebody off
the hook and wished to know who we go back to if it doesn't work
the one who installed the system or the one who balanced it.
Director Dean stated we will rely on the architect and it
was noted that this was not particularly successful in the past.
Commissioner Lyons reported that up to this point he has had
two meetings with the architect and has found that where he has
made an error, he has issued a change order and taken care of it
at his expense. So far he felt quite comfortable about this.
Question arose as to why we couldn't have the HVAC balanced
at the County Administration Building, and Administrator Wright
stated that this has been tried before unsuccessfully;
works at the jail, we will try it here again.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
52
if it
013-86 Page No. Of Pages
//-- Fropwiat _X
rr
FUTURE CONTROLS, INC.
P. O. Box 132
FT. MYERS, FLORIDA 33902
(813) 656-1313
PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO
PHONE
DATE
W.R. Frizzell Architects, Inc.
1-23-86
STREET
JOB NAME
4440 PGA Blvd.
T than River Jall
CITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE
JOB LOCATION
Palm Beach Ga x e s, FL 33410
Vern 'Reqn'h
ARCHITECT
WR. Frizzell I
DATE OF PLANS
JOB PHONE
We hereby submit specifications and estimates for:
..... ........
... ... . ................................................. I ......................... .......... ... .... . ........ ......... ..... . .... ... ....
. . . ......................... .............................. The complete. test and balance of all HVAC systems at . . . ... ...........
....................._.....Indian River Jail . ...... ... ... . ... . ..... . .. ........ .... . ... ... . .. .. . ........... .. . ..............
.... .... .. ............... ............................ ....... ............... I .... ........... ....... ....... ................... ....................
. ........ ................. Encompassing. Areas "A", "Bit, "C". .. ... ..... ................ .
.. ...
......... ... ......... .. .... I ...... ....... .. ...... ..... ...... ... .. . . ... .. .......... .... I..".. ............... .... .... ......... .. ...... ... . .......................
.. .... .. ...... ... .. ................ .... .......Puture Controls. will ..provide.. inspections verifying .. ... . ..... ...... .......... . . . .... . .. ................
..... . .... ... .......... ins t allat.ion..c onf ormance...... ... .... ...... ... . . ..... . ........ ... 1- ............
.......... ..... ........... .. .......... .. .............. ... .. ....... . . ... .. ............
... .. ...... Test.,....adjust.and...balance..components verifying performance........ .... ... . ...... ....
...and,..capacity . . . ............ .. . . .. . . ....... ..... .. ... ... .... . . . .. . .. . ..... .. ...... .. ...... ................
............ I ......................... I ..................... ......... . .. . I . .. . ...... I - ........ .. I..... . . ..... .... ..... . .... ........ I
.... .................. . .................. .... All e),.haust and supply duct. systems will be tested as ..... .......
... .................................. well....as.....all other HVAC.eqipment. .............. . . - . ..... . ...........
... .............. . ............................................................................ .... ... .... .............. . .... .. ... ........ .... ............ ... . ... ... . ...................
. . . ..... ........... ................................... ... ..................................... . ..... . ... . .. ....... ..............
... .............. . .............. .. ... .. . .................. . ....... .................. ... . .. ..... ... .... .... .. . .. .....................
........... ............................................ ....... . .. ..... ...
TUP VrV;?11Sr hereby to furnish material and labor — complete in accordance with above specifications, for the sum of:
Jqjne Thousand Nine Hundred and 00/100 ----------------- dollars($ 9,900-00
Payment to be made as follows:
Progressive as billed.
All material is guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a workmanlike
Manner according to standard practices. Any alteration or deviation from above specifica- Authorized
tions involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders, and will become an Signature
extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes. accidents V1. S t e v n Broldy,' TAB P visor
or delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire, tornado and other necessary insurance. Note: This proposal may be
Our workers are fully covered by Workmen's Compensation Insurance. withdrawn by us if not accepted within 9() days.
Arreptana of propwid- The above prices, specifications
and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized
to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above.
Date of Acceptance:
53
Signature
Signature
FEB 12 1996 BOOK 63 D'u- .6 ?1
PP"_
FEB 12 19 6
BOOK 63 Pt)E P?
DISCUSSION RE NORTH COUNTY WASTEWATER SYSTEM
Chairman Scurlock reported that over the last few months,
interest has been evidenced in the North County area to see if
they couldn't pursue through the county Utility Department a
similar approach as we did on the SR60 water and.sewer projects.
Several meetings have been held, and the interested parties were
told that, if they actually were seriously interested, to come up
with $25.00 per ERU to provide seed money to do a study of the
economical feasibility of putting a wastewater system in the
area. At this point we are holding in escrow about $15,000 for
such a study and need about $22-24,000. Once we get the money,
this will be .brought to the Board for authorization to move ahead
with the study.
The Chairman noted that the City of Sebastian is in the
middle of an election so we have been getting mixed signals from
the candidates at times, but the Sebastian Taxpayers Association
have fully endorsed the concept, their chamber of commerce has
endorsed it, as well as the local builders and realtors, and we
have told the City of Sebastian that our Utility Department would
assist them if they chose to do this themselves.
Commissioner Bird asked what the proposed service area would 1
be, and Chairman Scurlock stated that this would be determined by
pins put in the map based on the interest. There are two
possible site locations - an 150 acre tract of land to the north
of the Sebastian Airport and we have an interested party out near
the 1-95 interchange, who might be willing to donate up to 200
acres, but this donation would have to be balanced versus the
collection system cost.
Commissioner Bird noted there is a big population in Gifford
and a big population in Sebastian, and in between, it is pretty
sparse. If Sebastian doesn't want to come in, he believed it
would be pretty hard to address that area.
Chairman Scurlock noted that one of the leaders in request-
ing the service is the Humana Hospital, which is under DER
54
M
citation. They have 176 ERUs in that alone. The Roseland
shopping center area has a need, and that was where a lot of the
impetus came from, plus the commercial areas. He believed there
are sufficient ERU's just there to build a system by itself. All
this will be determined by the feasibility study and the amount
of pins on the map.
Commissioner Bird asked if we are still talking about
expanding the Gifford plant to this area, and was informed that
we are not; that is a separate plan.
Commissioner Wodtke inquired if we are talking about water,
and Chairman Scurlock stated that at this point we are talking
about wastewater. They have the same interest being expressed in
water, and generally water is first, but the Chairman explained
that the commercial areas are being restricted because they can't
expand with just septic tanks and cannot develop to some of the
densities on the Master Plan based on septic tanks. He believed
all the local candidates are interested; in fact, it is about the
only thing they agree on. Everyone agrees it is important to get
rid of septic tanks. Chairman Scurlock emphasized that while
there is a lot of interest, it has been made plain that nothing
will happen if we have to subsidize it.
Administrator Wright believed we should have a report by the
second meeting in March to indicate how we should go.
REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE ACTIONS
Commissioner Lyons gave the following report:
55
FEB 12 1986 BOOK 63 FAUF 623
FEB 12 198
BOOK 6 3 f" �E 6 ?4
February 11, 1986
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE
1. Intersection Study - CR 512 at CR 510 (Project
T84-10-01)
Committee unanimously approved staff recommendation.to
maintain existing conditions at the intersection since
additional traffic control is not warranted at this
time.
2. Intersection Study - 27th Avenue at 8th Street
(Project T85-03-03)
Committee unanimously approved staff recommendation
to signalize the intersection as soon as possible and
to construct left -turn lanes on the 8th Street
approaches. Funding for the traffic signal is budgeted
for FY85-86. The left -turn lanes may be placed on
the Transportation Improvement Program.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wodtke, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously accepted
the recommendations of the Transportation Planning
Committee.
Discussion ensued regarding various traffic trouble spots
around the county, i.e., turning left at 8th Street and U.S.1,
the 23rd Street crossing of U.S.1, and the dogleg on CR 510 south
of the 510/512 intersection. The City project on 6th Avenue
which has been going on for a considerable length of time was
also mentioned.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
Commissioner Wodtke noted that at the meeting last week,
they heard the announcement of the recent layoff by Piper, and
they -are going to try to schedule, with Pipers concurrence, a
meeting of the EDC and Piper, the City of Vero Beach and the
Chamber of Commerce, to discuss various issues relating to their
situation. He just wished the Board to be aware that activity
will be taking place.
56
REAPPOINTMENTS TO HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
reappointed Joseph Minotty and Harold Putnam
to the Housing Finance Authority for four year
terms.
HEALTH PROVIDER TO DISTRICT IX HEALTH COUNCIL
Commissioner Wodtke noted that 1.2 people sit on that
Council, and Palm Beach County has 8 seats. He submitted a
resume from Stephen Holmes, Vice President of Operations at
Indian River Memorial Hospital, noting that Mr. Holmes has a
great deal of expertise; he fits the requirements of the
Provider; and he will be on board at the hospital in March.
Commissioner Wodtke did not believe the appointment takes effect
until July, but noted this is just a recommendation and the Board
could either take action now or wait on it, if desired.
Commissioner Lyons pointed out that people who are also
employees of the county would be eligible, and he wondered if Dr.
Tucker would be interested.
Commissioner Wodtke stated he certainly would have no
objection to Dr. Tucker, but this position does take a great deal
of time and requires some expertise.
Discussion continued, and Commissioner Bowman felt it would
be preferable to wait until Mr. Homes actually is here and
working at the hospital.
Commissioner Wodtke stated that he would arrange to have Mr.
Holmes meet with the Commission sometime in March.
INFRASTRUCTURE TASK FORCE COMMITTEE
The Board reviewed memo from Jim Read of The Associated
General Contractors of America, Inc., as follows:
57
FEB 12 1986 BOOK &
y
BOOK 6 3 PAG;
Florida East Coast Chapter
The Associated General Contractors of America, Inc.
2617 Australian Avenue
West Palm Beach, Florida 33407
Telephone: (305
Please reply to:
February 5,
MEMO
TO: ALL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: JIM READ, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT
RE: INFRASTRUCTURE TASK FORCE COMMITTEE
2770 North Indian giver Boulevard
Suite 324
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Telephone: (305) 778-1325
Recently I sent a letter to the Chairman of your county's Board
of Commissioners. This letter briefly described the plight of our nation's
infrastructure (i.e. road systems, mass transit, wastewater, water resources,
airports, etc.)
As County Commissioners, I wanted to supply you with copies of an
in—depth study of our nation's infrastructure. Many of the larger counties
within Florida (i.e. Palm Beach County) have established an infrastructure
task force committee which evaluates local infrastructure needs and proposes
possible solutions. This committee is appointed by the Board of County
Commissioners after receiving nominations from the public.
I would like to discuss in more detail the composition of this committee
and how it can help you. Please contact me at your earliest convenience.
Thank you.
Chairman Scurlock was not sure just how we want to approach
this. He noted that we have existing committees already
structured such as the Transportation Planning Committee, which
does have broad representation, and its meetings are open to the
public. We do not have a committee in the utilities area, but
the Chairman noted that he acts as liaison between utilities and
the Commission. He further noted that he did not want to insult
the people on the Transportation Planning Committee by having an
override on all their recommendations. He believed what they
actually are looking for is a heavily weighted real estate and
construction oriented group.
Commissioner Lyons wondered if the Economic Development
Council might not have a suggestion in this regard.
58
Commissioner Wodtke commented that what their letter
suggests as the core of a typical infrastructure task force
committee seems to include most of our staff.
After further discussion, wherein Commissioner Bird felt we
are.doing a good job re infrastructure already, but with a
combination of committees. Administrator Wright suggested the
matter be tabled until we can get our Master Plans done, review
everything that we are proceeding with at this time, and can get
more information together.
Chairman Scurlock agreed. He felt it is mainly a matter of
communications, and that possibly we could have a quarterly joint
meeting to review all our master plans and invite those
individuals.
The Administrator felt a quarterly meeting was a good idea.
Commissioner Lyons asked why the Economic Development
Council can't put this together, and Commissioner Wodtke advised
that he is going to bring some suggestions to the Council and
they will probably look at a lot of these concerns. He believed
they are saying they want to lobby the state to do more about
infrastructure, spend more money on bridges, etc.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ENGLISH AS FLORIDA'S OFFICIAL LANGUAGE
Commissioner Lyons explained that the purpose of the
proposed resolution is to emphasize that when you come to America
and want to do business with the government, we do business in
English. He, therefore, wanted the official language to be
recognized as English.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Lyons, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
adopted Resolution 86-07 adopted and recog-
nizing English as the official language of
Indian River County, the State of FLorida,
and the United States of America.
59
L_ FEB 12 1986 0 BOOK 63 F,,,r6�9,7
FV �
FEB 12 y
11
RESOLUTION NO. 86-7
BOOK 63 uuL 62S
WHEREAS, the United States of America has been and is the
land of promise for immigrants from many nations; and
WHEREAS, the United States of America has attained hope,
strength and pre-eminence in world affairs through the unified
effort of its diversified peoples; and
WHEREAS, unification of those diversified peoples offers
the most promise of success when accomplished within a cultural
fabric of one language which is spoken, written and understood by
all; and -
WHEREAS, there are immigrants from certain nations in
sufficient numbers that there are arguments in favor of creating
a bilingual society; and
WHEREAS, there are reasons to believe that a bilingual
society is not in keeping with the "melting pot", well
assimilated foundation of the United States of America; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of ENGLISH as the official language
will bring official recognition to the principle that a common
language is necessary to preserve the basic internal unity
required for political stability and cohesion; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of ENGLISH as the official language
will reaffirm that we are truly "ONE NATION.... INDIVISIBLE...
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that ENGLISH be
adopted as the official language of Indian River County, the
State of Florida and the United States of America.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution will
be sent to the State Chairman of the Florida ENGLISH Campaign.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Lyons who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Bowman, and upon being put to a vote, the vote was
as follows:
60
RESOLUTION NO. 86 - 7
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice Chairman Patrick B. Lyons Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner William C. Wodtke, Jr. Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared Resolution No. 86-7 duly
passed and adopted this 12th day of February, 1986
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY :/ C"Z' '46
DON C. SCURrOCK, JR
Chairman
1 I i
NORTH COUNTY FIRE
The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment,
the Board would reconvene acting as the District Board of Fire
Commissioners of the North Indian River County Fire District.
Those Minutes are being prepared separately.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 12:05 o'clock P.M.
ATTEST:
ME
X
I
Clerk
61
12 1986
C-) 011
FEBChairman
BOOK 63 699