Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/6/1987Tuesday, January 6, 1987 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 Tuesday, January 6, 1987, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman, Vice Chairman; 1 Richard N. Bird; and Carolyn K. Eggert. Absent was Gary C. Wheeler, who was out in England on vacation. Also present were Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; Joseph Baird, OMB Director; and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order, and County Attorney Vitunac led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS Chairman Scurlock asked that Architect Charles Block's recommendation in regard to the re -bids on the golf cart storage building be added under the County Administrator's matters. He also requested that Bid #329 for Golf Course Equipment, which is being handled by Director Thomas, be added under the Adminis- trator's matters. Attorney Vitunac asked that a discussion of the Tourist Development Tax be added so that he can be authorized to attend the Vero Beach City Council meeting tonight and relate the feeling of the Board. ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Com- missioner Eggert, Commissioner Wheeler being absent, the Board unanimously (4-0) added the items described above to today's agenda. 6.199 JAN gooK ,- r- JAN 6 1997 BOOK 66 F'AU 803 7 APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc- tions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 9, 1986. Commissioner Bowman referred to the middle of Page 34 under Tri -County Council where it states "Commissioner Bowman recommended that a letter be written to the 'State'...." She asked that this be corrected to read that a letter be written to the Tri -County Council Chairman as the state has no interest in this matter. Commissioner Eggert wished to make a clarification and re- quested that the following wording be added to the end of line 19 on Page 42: "and Supervisor Robinson's policy of only using facilities willingly given might then change into forced use." ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 9, 1986, as corrected and amended. CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Bowman requested that Item H be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion, and Chairman Scurlock asked that Item A be removed also. A. Bid #327 - Hydraulic Ditch Cleaning Bucket The Board reviewed memo of Purchasing Manager Goodrich: 2 TO: DATE: Dec. 22 •Board of County Commissioners 1986 FELE: - �a ' THRU: Jose .. Baird SUBJECT: IRC BID #327 -One (1) New Director, Budget Office Hydraulic Tilting Ditch Cleaning Bucket FROM: -REFERENCES: Carolyn G odrich, Manager Purchasing Department 1. Description and Conditions Bids were received Thursday, December 18, 1986 at 11:00 A.M. for IRC #327 -One (1) New Hydraulic Tilting Ditch Cleaning Bucket for the Model 206 Caterpillar Excavator for Road and Bridge. 3 Bids were sent out. Of the 2 Bids received, 1 was a "No Bid." 2. Alternatives and Analysis Kelly Tractor, West Palm Beach, Fl. submitted 2 bids, 1 for a 59" Bucket with .46 cu. yd, capacity and 1 for a 79" Bucket with .63 cu, yd. capacity. Both bids -were the same amount, $7,500.00 less $2000.00, Total $5,500.00. The 79" Bucket is in stock and available within 5 days. 3. Recommendation and Funding Staff recommends the bid be awarded to Kelly Tractor for the 79" Bucket in the amount of $5,500.00. Fundingto come from Road & Bridge Department Transportation Fund. Chairman Scurlock had a question as to a sole bidder and one vendor; he noted there actually were three bids submitted, two of which were from the same vendor. OMB Director Baird explained that the bid is for a piece of Caterpillar equipment, and he understood the firms that handle this item are limited. Commissioner Eggert asked if the equipment has to be Cater- pillar, and Commissioner Bird believed that actually we are just buying the bucket for a piece of equipment which we already have. OMB Director Baird advised that we can rebid, but there is a time factor involved. JAN 6 1987 3 Booa 804 BOOK 66 PAGE 8U5 ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com- missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0) directed staff to research and determine whether other companies make a replacement bucket compatible with the Caterpillar Excavator, and if there are others that do, then rebid the item. If it is de- termined otherwise, then staff is directed to award the bid to Kelly Tractor for the 79" Bucket in the amount of $5,500 per the following bid tabulation: 1. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1840 25th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 BID TABULATION ° W Lmm km 44� o a 0. •� u u u BID NO. IRC B I D #327 DATE OF OPENING Dec. 18, 1986 BID TITLE One (1) New Hydraulic TiIting Ditch Cleanin Bucket ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE UNIT PR 1. One(1) New Hydraulic Tilting 59" 791' Ditch Cleaning"Bucket for I Bucket Bucket Caterpillar Model.206 Excavator. 1 Each NB 00 00 7500 00 2. Trade -In: One (1) Ditch Cleaning Bucket 1 Each 2000 00. 2000 00 Total N6 SSOO Oc SSOO 00 3. Days required for delivery after receipt of Purchase Order. In St ck Days 10 Later in the meeting OMB Director Baird informed the Board that Caterpillar is the only one who makes this bucket. 4 B. Appointment to Housing Finance Authority ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis- sioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the appointment of John C. Lee to the Housing Finance Authority. C. Final Plat Approval - Interstate Commercial Park Subdv. The Board reviewed memo of Staff Planner Boling: TO:The Honorable Members of DATE:December 22, 1986 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners DIVI-,S,ION HEAD CONCURRENCE; Robert M. Keating, AI SUBJECT: FINAL PLAT APPROVAL Director, Planning & velopment FOR INTERSTATE COMMERCIAL PARK SUBDIVISION THROUGH: Michael K. Miller mrm Chief, Current Development M FROM: Stan Boling �,pj, REFERENCES: interstate Staff Planner-----IBMIRD It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of January 6, 1987. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: Interstate Commercial Park is a ±20.88 acre subdivision containing 16 lots. The subdivision is located on the west side of 90th Avenue at 16th Street (extended). The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the preliminary plat on July 25, 1985. Since that time, all required subdivision improvements including public roads, water and wastewater utilities, have been constructed. The owners, Paul E. Koehler, John A. Wallace, and D.Q.H., Inc. are now requesting final plat approval and have submitted the following: 1. a final plat in conformance with the approved preliminary plat; 2. an executed warranty maintenance agreement; and 3. a letter of credit guaranteeing the agreement. ANALYSIS: Public Works and Utilities have inspected the subdivision and have found all improvements acceptable. The County Attorney's Office ..has approved the submitted warranty maintenance agreement and irrevocable letter of credit (which represents 250 of the cost of constructing the dedicated improvements). Thus, all applicable requirements regarding final plat approval for Interstate Commercial Park have been satisfied. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant final plat approval to Interstate Commercial Park and accept the subdivision warranty maintenance agreement and irrevocable letter of credit.', 5 KO F�GE AN 6 1987 rJAN 6197 BooK 66 PacE 807 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) granted final plat approval to Interstate Commercial Park and accepted the subdivision warranty maintenance agreement and irrevocable letter of credit. D._Supplemental Agreement #1 - Mayes, Suddereth & Etheridge The Board reviewed memo of Public Works Director Davis: TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: December 29, 1986 FILE: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator SUBJECT: Professional Services Supplemental Agreement # 1 — between the County and Mayes, Suddereth, and Etheredge, Inc. FROM: James W. Davis, P.E., REFERENCES: Public Works Director - DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Staff has prepared and negotiated the attached Supplemental Agreement # 1 for the following work Part 1 - Master Plan Development for the*Prcposed South County Regional .,Park/Library Site at Oslo Road and 20th Avenue. Part 2 - A "User Fee" Study of the County's Parks and Recreation Facilities. Part 3 - Master Plan Development for the County Fairground Site at the Hobart Park Complex. ALTERqATIVES AND ANALYSIS The Consultant has agreed to perform the work as follows: Part 1 - South County Park Master Plan - $10,027. Part 2 - User. Fee Study - $ 9,760 Part 3 - Fairgrounds Master Plan - $ 6,891 Each phase of the work will take approximately 60 days. The Parks and Recreation Committee has reviewed the scope of work. RECOWYEMATIONS AND FUNDING It is recommended that the Chair -man be authorized to execute the Supplemental Agreement and the Consultant be authorized to begin the work. Funding to be from Account 112-210-572-033.13. 6 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved Supplemental Agreement #1 with Mayes, Suddereth, and Etheridge, Inc., as recommended by staff, authorized the signature of the Chairman, and authorized the Consultant to begin work. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY OSLO ROAD/20TH AVENUE SITE MASTER PLAN AND PARK USER FEE STUDY AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS MASTER PLAN* SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENTA 1 -TO THE MASTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN MAYES, SUDDERETH, AND ETHEREDGE, INC., AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA Pursuant to 'the Professional Architectural/Planning services Agreement dated the 16th day. of September, 1986, by and between Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as the County, and Mayes, Suddereth, and Etheredge, Inc.' Orlando, Florida, hereinafter referred to as the Architect, this Supplemental Agreement #1 is an extension of and hereby becomes a part of the September 16, 1986 agreement (hereinafter referred to as the Master Agreement) as follows: Section I - Project Limits The project for which the Architect will provide supplemental services shall have limits of work generally defined as follows: Part 1 - The County is considering the acquisition of a 20-40 acre tract of land located at the northeast corner of Oslo Road and 20th Avenue. The' limits of the project include that portion of the aforementioned tract which is necessary for the construction of.a Regional South County Park facili- ty and an approximately 15,000 S.F; library which is intend- ed to provide limited library services to the .south county area. Part 2 -All County park land and facilities which are approved by the Indian River County Parks and Recreation Committee and the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners as appropriate for "user fee" application. Part3Design review of thb existing Indian River. County Fairgrounds pla: and design of a future expansion master plan. Basic Services required of .the Architect for the above locations are described in other appropriate sections of the Supplemental Agreement and Master Agreement. Section II - County Obligations In addition to the original County obligations, in the Master Agreement, the County agrees to provide the following informa- tion: Part 1 - a) 1" - 100' scale aerial photograph of the site including a 1"- 200' tax map showing the parcel's to be considered. JAN 6 1987 7 BOOK 6 b) Schedule meetings with the Indian River County Library Advisory Committee and Indian River County Parks and Recreation Committee to determine programs that will be provided in the new park facility. Part 2 - a) Provide the Architect with an inventory of all park facilities in the County. b) Schedule meetings with the Indian River County Parks and Recreation Committee to determine what parks and facilities- are appropriate for "user fee" applica- tion. Part 3 a)Provide the architect with a copy of existing Indian River County Fairgrounds plan. b)Sch'edule meetings with Indian Committee to determine what fairgrounds expansion. Section III - Scope of Services River County Parks and Recreation facilities are appropriate for The Architect agrees to perform all services identified in Section III - A. General, of the Master Agreement, in addition to all necessary professional planning services and financial feasibility studies in connectiuil .Yith the project as follows: Part 1 - Upon written authorization from the Director of the Public Works Department, the Architect will proceed with the work as follows: a) The Architect shall visit the proposed site located at 20th Ave and Oslo Road and become thoroughly familiar with all existing conditions. The U.S. Soil Conservation Service has performed a general soil survey of the site and a copy is on file with the County Public Works Department. If the Architect recommends additional soil' testing to determine site suitability for a park/library complex, the -County will arrange.for and pay the cost of soil borings and soils testing. b) The Architect shall meet with representatives of the South County area, the Indian River County Parks and Recre- ation Committee, the County Parks Department Director, the Library Advisory Committee, the County Utilities Department and interested parties to develop a facility needs program. c) Once a program for the land*is developed, the Architect shall prepare at least three alternatives for a Park/ Library Master Plan at an approved scale. The alternatives shall be submitted to the Public Works Director for dis- cussion at public meetings. The Consultant shall attend at least two review meetings in Indian River County. The Architect shall recommend an architectural theme compatible with the South County area. •A preliminary cost estimate, as well as a recommendation on the land area required to implement the Master Plan, shall be prepared for the County's review. d) The Architect shall consult with the Florida Department of Natural Resources and Department of Community Affairs to determine if grant funds are available to purchase and/or develop the land. e) After selection of the approved Master Plan, the Archi- tect shall prepare four final, color, Master Plan Drawings and transmit them to the Public Works Director. 8 Part 2 - Financial Feasibility Phase a) In addition to the Scope of Work included in Section III, C., found on Page 5 of the Master Agreement, the Archi- tect shall; upon notice to proceed as issued by the Public Works Director, become thoroughly familiar with the Indian River County Park and Recreation Programs and facilities. b) The Consultant shall meet with the Indian River County Parks and Recreation Committee., the County Planning Depart- ment, the County Parks Director, and individuals having an interest in -recreation in Indian River County. At least four meeting days shall• be attended by the Financial Consultant and Architect to develop a Recreation Program. The program shall consider recreation provided by the Private Sector, YMCA, City of Vero Beach, etc. so that duplication of services is avoided. c) From the park facility/land inventory, the Architect, Financial Consultant, and the County staff will identify a list of park sites and facilities that should be considered for "user fee" funding. This list shall be submitted to the Indian River County Parks and Recreation Committee and Board of County Commissioners for approval. d) After an approved program is prepared, the Financial Consultant and Architect shall prepare a Financial Report as described in the Master Agreement dated September 16, 1986. Part 3 - County Fairgrounds Plan, Upon written authorization from the Director of the Public Works Department, the Architect will proceed with the work as follows: a) The architect shall visit the site of the Indian River County Fairgrounds at Kings Highway, CR505A between 77 Street and 81 Street and become familiar with existing facilities and site conditions. b) The architect shall provide similar fairgrounds plans for comparison of facilities. The architect shall meet with the Indian River County Parks and Recreation Committee, the County Parks Director, the Public Works Director to develop a facility needed program. c) The architect shall review the existing Fairgrounds plan and develop an overall Master Plan showing the incorporation of future facilities. The architect shall prepare three (3) alternates for presentation to the Public Work Director. A preliminary cost estimate shall be prepared for each scheme. d) After selection of the approved Master Plan, the architect shall prepare a final Master Plan drawing and transmit it to the Public Works Director. e) The presentation material shall be reduced and incorporated in a handout brochure along with basic information. This brochure will be xerox quality. 9 BOOK €''',� JAN 6 1987 JAN 6 1987 BOOK 66 FACE 811 Section IV - Time for Completion ' Part 1 - All work shall be complete within sixty (60) calendar days of the commencement date established in the Notice - to -Proceed. Part 2 - All work shall be complete within one hundred twenty days (120) days of the commencement date established in the* Notice -to -Proceed. Parti All work shall be completed within•one hundred and eighty days (180) of the commencement date established in the Notice -to -Proceed. Section V - Compensation Part 1 - For services rendered pursuant to this Master Plan work, the lump sum fee of $ 10,027.00 0 Monthly payments less 10% retainage, shall be permitted. Final payment shall be issued within 30 days of the final Master Plan Drawings and Recommendation Report. Part 2 - For Services rendered pursuant to this Financial Report work, the lump sum fee of $ 9,760.00 Monthly payments, less 10% retainage, shall be"issued as approved by the County Public Works Director. Final payment shall be issued with 30 days of the receipt of the final report. Part3For services rendered pursuant to the Master Plan work, the lump sum fee of $ 6,891.00 monthly payments less 10% retainage shall be permitted. Final payment shall be issued within 30 days of final Master Plan Drawings and Recommendation Report. All conditions set forth in the Master Agreement entered into. between the County and Architect on September 16, 1986, unless otherwise included in this supplemental agreement, shall apply. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed these presents this 6th day of January , 1987. MAYES, SUDDERETH AND BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ETHEREDGE, INC. OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA 7575 Doctor Phillips Blvd. Orlando, Florida 32819 BY - Milton L.•Ha lman, Jr. Don C. Scur ock, Jr. President Chairman Attest: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY BY: Bruce Barkett Assistant County Attorney Attest: Fre a Wright . Clerk t Y 11 10 APPROVED: a es W. Davis,• .E., P lic Works Director E. Three Partial Releases SR60 Wastewater - Countryside South ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved three Partial Releases of SR60 Wastewater Reserva- tion and Assessment Liens: Lot No. 53S (Jolley), Lot No. 59S (Brooks), and Lot No. 72S (Carpenter), Countryside South, and authorized the signature of the Chairman. COPIES OF SAID RELEASES ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD. F. Release Two Assessment Liens SR60 Sewers (Map #9 6 #13) ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved two Release of Assessment Liens for SR60 Sewers - Map #9 and Map #13 (Edward J. DeBartolo Corporation). COPIES OF SAID RELEASES ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD. G. Resolution Naming Commissioner Wheeler to 19th Judicial Circuit Conflict Committee M _ ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Resolution 87-1 designating Commissioner Wheeler as the County's representative on the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit Conflict Committee. 1 1 BOOK JAN 1987 0�� BOOK 66 FAGE 813 RESOLUTION NO. 87- 1 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, DESIGNATING COMMISSIONER GARY C. WHEELER AS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY'S REPRESENTATIVE ON THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT CONFLICT COMMITTEE. WHEREAS, Chapter 86-167, Laws of Florida, establishes within each Judicial Circuit a Circuit Conflict Committee for the purpose of approving attorneys to be appointed in conflict cases where the Public Defender withdraws due to a conflict of interest; and WHEREAS, the establishment of such committee is required if the Counties comprising the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit are to receive money appropriated by the Legislature for payment of attorneys in conflict cases; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County hereby appoints Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler to serve as Indian River County's representati.ve on the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit Conflict Committee. The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner Eggert - and seconded by Commissioner Birdand, being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. -Aye Vice Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Aye Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye Commissioner. Carolyn K. Eggert _Aye Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Absent The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted this 6th day of January 1987. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY ITS BOARD -OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By �C___ �- Don cur ock, r. Chairman b 1.2 H. Grand Harbor Estuary System - Maintenance Agreement The Board reviewed memo from Assistant County Attorney Barkett: TO: The Board of County Commissioners DATE: December 29, 1986 SUBJECT: Maintenance Agreement Regarding Grand Harbor Estuary System FROM: Bruce Barkett I - -- Assistant County Attorney On October 23, 1985 the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County adopted Resolution 85-128 as the Development Order approving the Grand Harbor Development of Regional Impact. Condition Number 8 of the Development Order required the developer to submit a plan detailing the design of the estuarine waterway and basin system. On October 20, 1986 this Board approved the Estuarine Plan in accordance with Condition Number 8 of the Development Order, but a condition of said approval was that Grand Harbor submit an Operation Plan for future maintenance of the estuarine waterway and basin system. The developer has submitted the requisite Operation and Maintenance Plan and it has been approved by the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. One of the conditions of the Plan is that the Grand Harbor Property Owners Association and Grand Harbor, Inc., the developer, must agree together and separately that each will perform necessary maintenance and operation activities as may become necessary at no expense to the County. This provision is considered necessary to bind the property owners after the developer sells its interest in the project. This item is put before the Board for approval of the Operation Plan and -Maintenance Agreement. Commissioner Bowman expressed concern that, while the agree- ment looks great she saw no provision at ail that says what agency is going to permit this maintenance process; who is going to oversee the process; or who is responsible; and there is no provision for bonding. Attorney Barkett noted that there is nothing in the Development Order that requires anyone to oversee the process. It was simply a question of submitting a maintenance plan and naming a responsible entity to ensure continuation of that maintenance plan, and that's what this does. The Grand Harbor 13 JAN 6 1987 BOOK 66 u[)E81 JAN 6 98 - BOOK 66 Property Owners Association is to be responsible, and there is an agreement in here that is binding on them requiring them to comply with the maintenance plan. Commissioner Bowman was concerned about enforcement and did not feel that this agreement has any teeth in it. Planning Director Keating clarified that this is just a formalization of the agreement that is implementing all of the other specifics we have in place through the estuarine plan, the Development Order, etc., and staff will be much more specific on each phase when the land development permits are issued. Attorney Barkett further noted that this is a contract; we can enforce it in circuit court just as we can any other contract; and this agreement goes on for years into the future. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved the Maintenance Agreement for the Grand Harbor Estuary System. SAID AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD. I. New Firearms Permit The Board reviewed memo of Administrator Balczun: TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: December 23, 1986 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners SUBJECT. Pistol Permit - New FROM: Charles P. Balczun REFERENCES: County Administrator The following person has .applied through the Clerk's Office for a new pistol permit: Darryl Miller Conway All requirements of the ordinance have been met and are in order. 14 ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved issuance of a permit to carry a concealed firearm to Darryl Miller Conway. EMPLOYEE OF THE QUARTER Chairman Scurlock announced that Lorrie Post of the County Commission Office has been selected Employee of the Quarter. He called Miss Post forward, congratulated her for her efforts, and presented her with a plaque and check. -- ------------------------------------------------- -- - ijaiatt Ittlier Toutft FLORIDA ! ¢ aa= "r> Opts is to tertifq that 0 r � e o�� is herebg seterte� � Vii`;. -';`�� (Imiopee of the uarta � =_ for outstanhing serutre unb contributions on this G t buu of Tanuarp 193z— f : lairman,.�C../r tr'`µ - gy, 1 abin. 955t. t• ,, ,. . @ileAC9�s94C,3LL:IIC-4`Rf..fi,".H,2fl46Ji1t�QCII9R..^.;:4S4C.G��:u Cv^ss f.J;:.�4utiy.".. ss'.^�^..4r:`4'1,::L� �f. ,..� - TC•1, 7rf•t .v. ..�•c ... - .. �,� .. ._. ., �.�..... %.T .. .. .�,C .�� ..-moi ' i%.►l:u.'li�=.si:.�,:A�--s1:•r.•\�::ik:'vl��r•►i .r: .�e._.►`�..}�s._•►�'c.: Vin:-►A?.::�A�%.-►!`.��•'= 15 JAN � BOOP. Ff�.cE 816 BOOR66F'}s. JAN 6 1987 EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR Chairman Scurlock announced that Jimmie Mosely, Jr., has been recognized as Employee of the Year. He called Mr. Mosely forward, expressed the County's appreciation of the quality of his service, and presented him with a plaque and check. �``► i it • S ✓,: ;j i' tii --\1 '�� .a `�.w .e► � ;A ''�a a► � �.:� i•� m"� •cA4i'i1� .A',t''dai .: calhin in to certtfq tkat in herehU awarbrb this `f. Of tr ft for special recugnitiun anb excellence •�.9�6 1.6.Emplayee oft ear • �_ f1 � AirtnAn, � iitti5t�r r .•.,•, 16 DISCUSSION STOP SIGNS IN OSLO PARK Public Works Director Davis reviewed the following memo: TO: James W. Davis, P.E., DATE: December 18, 1986 Public Works Director OFC 4 o A 86 w SUBJECT: 19 Avenue sw; FROM: Michael L. Orr,0) REFERENCES: Traffic Engineer At 1638 on 12-17-86, this office was notified by J. Hollingshead of 1685 19 Avenue SW that the stop signs on the subject road were changed to stop 19 Avenue SW at 15 Street and 16 Street. This report was verified by John Butler at 1655. It should be noted that a resident of the street, David Myers of 1535 19 Avenue SW, has been requesting this action but was denied on two occa-, sions. • 4 The signs were restored to their original location at 0805 12-18-86. Director Davis informed the Board that about a month and a half ago staff did contact the Sheriff and request that he increase enforcement of the speed limit in Oslo Park Subdivi- sion. No other complaints have been received since that time, and staff does not recommend any changing of the signage in this area as it has been done.with continuity under an overall signage i plan which is in conformance with national standards. Commissioner Bird believed the plan was that we would leave the signage as it is, monitor it, and then revisit it. Commissioner Eggert inquired about the time period when the signs were changed and was advised that it was only for about 24 hours. David Myers informed the Board that he lives at 1535 19th Ave. SW, Oslo Park Subdivision and this street is a main street in Oslo Park and gets most of the traffic. There are only two stop signs between Vero Highlands and Oslo Road, and when his kids are playing in the yard, he is so concerned he puts traffic JAN 6 1987 17 8001( P3 6 JAN 6 1987 BOOK 66 ou cones out there. He confirmed the stop signs were switched, and stated that in his personal opinion, that is the answer to keeping the area safe for the children as the traffic passing his house then had to gear down. Mr. Myers noted that his parents live in Fellsmere, and he feels they have an ideal set up out there as you cannot go more than two blocks in any direction without coming to a complete stop. He would like to see the Board check into this and do the same for Oslo Park. Commissioner Bird asked if Mr. Myers has seen any change with the speeds and traffic flow in the area since we asked the Sheriff for some selective enforcement there. Mr. Myers felt that deputies have been very cooperative with him, but although he has asked them to come out on weekends and evenings, they mainly come out on weekdays when everyone is working and very few people are driving on the streets. He further pointed out that 19th Avenue S.W. is posted at 30 mph, and he felt that is far too high a speed limit for an unimproved dirt road, especially since.Old Dixie Highway, which is a paved state road, is only 40 mph. Commissioner Bird inquired if there are any "Children at Play" signs out there, and Mr. Myers advised that when he brought this problem to the Board's attention about a year ago, some "Slow" signs were put there. These have been stolen once since then and replaced, and he still felt strongly that relocating the stop signs was the answer. Director Davis commented that some studies have indicated that "Children at Play" signs actually may entice children to play in the street and there may be more liability. He empha- sized that Traffic Engineering is always analyzing their signage, and we do use established standards and try not to be arbitrary. Commissioner Eggert brought up the possibility of a four- way stop, and Director Davis stated that while this physically can be done, staff would not recommend it as it would not meet 18 the warrants in the manual for a four-way stop and some judges will throw any violations out because of that. County Attorney Vitunac did not believe there is a legal problem with putting the signs wherever we want to. Commissioner Eggert knew that the people in the area have a definite concern about traffic. She also was sure the Sheriff is patrolling the area the best he can, but he does have other priorities; so, if cars are forced to stop at a stop sign, whether it is good traffic planning or not, she felt it might serve to cut down the problem. Commissioner Bowman asked if the children have to walk down the side of the road from school buses, and Mr. Myers noted there is a school four blocks away and the children do walk on the side of the road and sometimes even down the middle of the road. Discussion continued at length as to where the best place would be to locate a four-way stop if one were to be put in this area. Director Davis continued to argue that if you are trying to slow traffic, enforcement is the best way to do it, but if the Board directs that a four-way stop be located in the area, he advised that 19th Ave. does connect to the north to a paved road that goes from 14th St. SW all the way through the Oslo Subdivi- sion past Thompson School to Oslo Road. It is probably used more than the other roads in the area and would be the most likely candidate for a four-way stop. He feared, however, that we then will have more requests for four-way stops and again emphasized that we have only received one complaint in this area. Commissioner Eggert believed there are more complaints out there, and Mr. Myers pointed out that he previously had presented the Board with a petition signed by many residents on 19th Ave. SW. and 15th St. SW. asking for stop signs because there are a lot of children in that area. &oar 66, F4.r® 19 r JAN 6 1987 BOOK 66 8?1 MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Bird, to create a four-way stop at the intersection of 15th St. SW and 19th Ave. SW. Commissioner Bird commented that he is not really in favor of a proliferation of four-way stops to slow traffic, but since Mr. Myers has demonstrated a very deep concern by coming to the Board on three different occasions, he would vote for the Motion. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0). SHERIFF'S ADMINISTRATION BLDG. 6 911 CENTER - CHANGE ORDER #2 General Services Director Dean reviewed the following memo: TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: December 23, 1986 FILE: the Board of County Commissioners THRU: Charles P. Balczun SUBJECT: Sheriff's Administration County Administrator Building and 911 Center Change Order, IRC3 - 2 H. T. De FROM: Director REFERENCES: General Services BACKGROUND At the time the subject general contract was advertised for bid, we had no idea what would be required or needed to complete the inside of the 911 center. In order to avoid holding up construction of the entire project, the contractors were requested to bid on construction of the Rgtside walls only of the center. A It was agreed that the Architect would come back to the Board with the change orders necessary for equipment and materials as dictated by the approved design of the facility. GENERAL Change Order No. IRC3 - 1, approved by the Board on 12/23/86, provided for conduit to be placed under the concrete floors of the two subject buildings. Change Order IRC3 - 1 was prepared and submitted earlier to avoid a delay to the general contractor in pouring the concrete in the floors. 20 REQUEST Change Order No. IRC3 - 2 provides for the extension of the conduit with associated cables to their termination points except for items C-4, C-5, D-6, C-7, and D-8. This work is related to the 911 Center and/or computer system and could not have been predicted as outlined in paragraph one above. RECOMMENDATION Staff feels that all items outlined with the exception of.D-8 are a necessary part of construction of the 911 center as presented to the Board by the architect. Sheriff Dobeck made a special request directly to the architect for the addition of Item D-8. Since I have not discussed this item with the Sher4iff, a recommendation as being a necessary part of construction cannot be determined. Director Dean noted that Change Order #2 is a continuation of the conduit out of the slab in Change Order #1 - some is in the Sheriff's Administration Building and some in the 911 Center, but it is all part of the communications system within that project. Staff would recommend approval of everything in the Change Order except Item (D)8 - a camera at the shop building exterior to monitor jail, activities - which has not been discussed with the architect yet. Chairman Scurlock expressed concern in regard to spending $25,000 for cameras all over the place when he was not sure any of them are even needed. Commissioner Eggert asked if we finally have found all the things we need to change to bring in the 911 Center and whether this is the sum total of the change orders, barring the unfore- seen, as far as the plans are concerned. Architect Charles Block believed that is doubtful since we are playing catch-up. This is just the accessory items necessary to get to the Center; the major change order for the 911 Center has not come to the Board as yet. Mr. Block stressed that he is trying to make the County aware of the costs as they are coming about, but it is very difficult as changes are being made daily in regard to computers, etc. He further noted that the super- vision cameras mentioned here are all standard equipment in any 911 Center that he has visited, and they are requested by the 21 BOOK U rnG _ S? JAI9of SAN `�t� BOOK 6 P,,f F 823 consultants as well as the Sheriff. He believed the one camera requested by the Sheriff might have been involved in the original program if the Sheriff had known he would be as much involved in the jail as he is now. Mr. Block noted that he would have a hard time arguing whether a camera is needed on a 911 door or not, but it seems they want it. Commissioner Eggert emphasized that her main concern was not the cameras, but whether, if, in fact, we do not have final plans for the 911 Center, we are including everything we need or, on the other hand, possibly including too much because we do not know what we are doing. Mr. Block advised that the 911 Center is designed and 99% ready to go to bid, and he does feel pretty comfortable about the numbers being all inclusive at this point; although, the innards of the actual building itself are very elaborate and specialized, and if there are more computer equipment changes, that definitely will affect the numbers. Commissioner Eggert continued to express her concern about moving ahead without a preset plan; although, she realized what brought this about. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved Change Order No. 2 - Sheriff's Administra- tion Building/911 Equipment Cost, including all items recommended by staff. 22 CHANGE OWNER ' C3 + ' ,� t ARCHITECT O ORDER CONTRACTOR [] FIELD A/A DOCUMENT G701 OTHER PROJECT: Sheriff's Administration Building CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: I. R. C.3 Two (name, address) TO (Contractor) F—P. W. R. Corporation P. 0. Box 249 Highland City, Florida 33846 ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 8528 CONTRACT FOR:One story Block office building L _j CONTRACT DATE: October 13, 1986 You are directed to make the. following changes in this Contract: Work outside of 911 operations room and not underslab. Add: $24,163.00 (See attached breakdown) The original Contract Sum was . . . .. . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,106,155. 00 Net change.by previous Change Orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 24,476.00 The Contract Sum prior to this Change Order was . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,130,631 00 The Contract Sum will be (increased) *X MXl)GiIiX�X0(ll�idXby this Change Order . . . $ A3, IZ I.75 Lam}, {73 -$etc'$ The new Contract Sum including this Change Order will be . . . . . . . . . . . $. 4)15 The Contract Time will be (iiiMMUNYM (unchanged) by ( 0 ) Days. '0 The l0X*'df)V4 W0)#f@Was of the date of this Change Order therefore is August 21 , 1987 Date of Completion: . Chai.rman Board of C. E. Block Architect, Inc. P. W. R. Corporation County Commissioners AMY'hth Avenue CONTRACTOR P. 0. Box 249 OINER1840 25th Street Address Address Vero Beach Florida 12960 Highland City, Florida 33846 Address Vero Beach, Florida 32960 BY BY BY DATE j/ �% JS% DATE ! 7 /e'3 7 - - DATE�7L.'�' EIPM-as'll-APT AIA DOCUMENT GM - CHANGE ORDER - APRIL 1970 EDITION - AIA® - ® 1970 - THE ONE PA AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVE., NW, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 mcs P. ilson cct (`ninti A+tnrnn.f - CHANGE ORDER NO.2 SMIFF'S ADMINISTRATION BUILDING/911 EQUIPMENT COST OUTSIDE OF 911 OPERATIONS ROOM AND NOT UNDERSLAB BEY (C) Indicates a 911 required piece of equipment or item of work. (D) Indicates a Sheriff's requested piece of equipment or item of work. (C) -1. Continue GRS conduit for 911 telephone from west edge of pavement to power pole as shown on revised pians. (Completes item 2 of underslab costs]. Cost: $3,131.00 (C) - 2. Provide 2 -way intercom from room 100 (lobby) to 911. (Completes item 6 of underslab costs). Allowance Not to Exceed S 500.00 23 In `1107 BOOK 6 �= r—IJAN v 'Jul BOOK ?� F": E �95 (C) - 3. Provide equipment and wiring for duplication of all monitoring equipment required for room 102 in 911 at supervisor booth location. Includes duplication of annunciator panel, emergency alert system, CCTV monitoring and switches, etc. Also provide for extension of wiring for CCTV cameras to 911 location as required. (Completes item 9 underslab costs). Cost $5,431.00 (C) - 4. Provide footings, block wall, stucco, waterproofing, paint, concrete pad, gates and hardware to duplicate A/C enclosure on south (west) side of sheriff's building on south (east) , for 911 A/C condensers. � 4 Z, 5oG Cost (C) - 5. Provide wiring and camera outside of 911 room for monitoring 911 entrance. Cost $2,533.00 (C) - 6. Provide 30' minimum grounding rods in triangular pattern a shown on revised drawings. Cost $1,340.00 � ��ro�ed, �y ��►d 96 teeabtwerldecl in '�hopoc�l , (C) - 7. Provide fixed camera in room 100 ( lobby) for monitoring of front door. Cost $2,533.00 (D) - 8. Provide camera at shop building exterior to monitor jail activities (completes item 18 of underslab costs). Cost $2,621.00 Subtotal (C) Items $MA49--W I�,9b9,00 Subtotal (D) Items 2.621.00 TOTAL COST (C) AND(D) $2.1;47,$ a0, STC1.00 Contractors Liability .5% .005 }9-7 88- _ I U : •9 `f SUBTOTAL $x:69 do, (091.94 Permit Cost .356 .003 ( gf}• &Q.07 SUBTOTAL $2+-,642-.80 ao, Is4.0 f Contractors OH & P l OX .10 2.164.00- ?, � SUBTOTAL $23,806.00 aa, g a9 , y- B and Cost 1.5 X. 015 -0 342. y y GRAND TOTAL (C) AND (D) *241 d3) i -11 • 85 COUNTY -INITIATED REZONING TO CL (TROPICAL VILLAGE ESTATES) The hour of 9:15 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: 24 VERO BEACH PRESS,JOURNAL Published Weekly Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being in the matter of in the > Court, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of A41i� / 67&/ Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed X fore a this ;day ofz Le�el�,'A.D. van-(-- '92 6 - ($Usiness Manager) NOTICE — PUBLIC HEARING Notice of hearing initiated by Indian River County to consider the adoption of a County or- dinance rezoning land from; RS -6. Single -Family Residential District to CL, Limited Commercial south side of Ct� The ounty property 5 2Is ! and�thenthe w�t side of 128th Court. The subject property is described as: Lots 2, , and 5 of Block 10, Troplcal Mi- lage, Estates Unit 2, as recorded In Plat Book 5, page 65, public records of In- dian River County, Florida: A public hearing at which parties in interest and citizens have an be heard, will be he dl by the Board of CourtunlntytCom- missioners of Indian River County, Florida. In the County Commission Chambers of the County Administration Building, located at 1840; 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida,on Tuesday, January 6,1987,819:15 A.M .The Board of bounty Commissioners may grant a less Intense zoning dlstrict than the dis- trict requested provided. it_ is within the .same general. use category. - Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which includes, testimony and evidence upon which the appeal Is based Indian River County Board of County Commissioners By: -s -Don C. Scurlock Jr., Chairman Dec.. 15.1986 Chief Planner Richard Shearer made the staff presentation as toIIows: TO: The Honorable Members DATE: December 18, 1986 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: t7�e_SUBJECT: ober'. M. Keati Planning & DevelDirector COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST TO REZONE 3/4 ACRES FROM RS -6, SINGLE-FAMILY RES- IDENTIAL DISTRICT, TO CL,• - LIMITED COMMERCIAL _ DISTRICT FROM: Richard M. Shearer, REFERENCES:Q (� Chief, Long -Range Planning It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of January 6, 1987. dye 25 JAN 1787 BOCK. rp,"JAN 6 i9�7 DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS BOOK 66 F'' ;F 8?'7 7 The Planning Department is initiating a request to rezone 3/4 acres made up of 3 lots in Tropical Village Estates Subdivision located on the south side of County Road 512 and the west side of 126th Court from RS -6, Single -Family Residential District, to CL, Limited Commercial District. The subject property was rezoned from C-1, Commercial District, to RS -6 in January of 1986 through the adoption of the Non -Residential Zoning Conversion Ordinance which rezoned all of the commercial, industrial and agriculturally -zoned properties in the County in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. On December 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7 -to -0 to recommend approval of this request. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli- cation will be presented. The analysis will include a descrip- tion of the current and future land uses of the site and sur- rounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environ- mental quality. Existing Land Use Pattern The subject property contains a two-story building. The second floor of the building is being used as a residence, while the first floor is currently vacant. At the time the Comprehensive Plan was adopted, the first floor was being used commercially as a television repair business. North of the subject property, across County Road 512, is undeveloped land zoned A-1, Agricultural District. East, west, and south of the subject property are vacant lots and single-family residences zoned RS -6. Future Land Use Pattern The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property and all of the land east, west and south—of it as LD -2, Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre). The land north of the subject property is designated as AG, Agricultural (up to 1 unit/5 acres). When this property was rezoned in January of 1986, the staff thought that this property was only being used for a residence. Subsequently, the owner of the property explained that the property previously contained a commercial use y and should be grandfathered in. The staff's position is that the property contained a lawfully conforming commercial use when the comprehensive plan was adopted and so should have retained its commercial zoning. Transportation System The subject property has frontage on County Road 512 (classified as an arterial street on the County's thoroughfare plan) and on 126th Court (classified as a local street). Environment The subject property is* not designated as environmentally sensitive nor is it in a flood -prone area. Utilities County water and wastewater facilities are not available for the subject property. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning Commission's- recommendation, staff recommends that the subject property be rezoned to CL. 26 Planner Shearer explained that when we adopted the Non- residential Conversion Ordinance, staff admitted that they inadvertently may have missed something, and the Board directed staff to initiate proceedings to correct the situation in the event it was found that something had been overlooked. Staff subsequently discovered the subject mixed-use structure had been in use about 20 years. Discussion ensued regarding Limited Commercial, and Commis- sioner Bowman wanted to know if OCR wouldn't be more appropriate. Planner Shearer felt it would but noted that staff was trying to restore the use as a TV repair business. CL was advertised, but we could downzone from that. Chairman Scurlock believed if the use has not been main- tained over a certain period of time, it cannot be reinstated or grandfathered in, but Planner Shearer explained that staff based the use on the date of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, which grandfathered in non -conforming uses then in existence. This property was in use as a television repair business at that time; although, it was not at the time of the conversion. He noted that OCR would allow an officetype use, and he believed the proposed use now is for real estate offices. Commissioner Bowman preferred OCR because this property is in the middle of a residential area, and the Chairman concurred. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. Anthony Walluk, a realtor who is interested in having an office on this property, confirmed that it was previously in use as a TV repair business and further advised that the lady who owns this property has a license to use it as a plant nursery also. It was explained that while offices would be allowed in OCR, a plant nursery would not, and Commissioner Bowman asked if the nursery is a viable business. Mrs. Erika Bomhard of State Road 512 informed the Board that her late husband was a TV repairman and that she has had a small 27 BOOK JAN 6 1987 BOOK 65 mUF 7 nursery and sold plants at this location for many years. She now has a chance to rent space to real estate men as offices. This property was rezoned without her knowledge, and she felt it was foolish to rezone property on a busy highway such as SR 512 to residential. Board members explained to Mrs. Bomhard that rezoning to OCR would allow her to rent office space, and that she could continue to sell her plants because she is grandfathered in. She could not, however, expand her nursery business or resume it again if she ever discontinued selling plants. It was determined that no one else wished to be heard. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Ordinance 87-1 rezoning the subject property to OCR, with the understanding that the plant nursery would be grandfathered in as a non -conforming use. 28 ORDINANCE NO. 87- 1 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP FOR THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the local planning agency on such matters, has held a public hearing and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this rezoning request; and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, -Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to rezone the hereinafter described property; and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has determined that this rezoning is in conformance with the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has held a public hearing pursuant to this rezoning request, at which parties in interest and citizens were heard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning of the following described property situated in Indian River County, Florida, to -wit: Lots 2, 3, and 5 of Block 10, Tropical Village Estates Unit 2, as recorded in Plat Book 5, page 65, public records of Indian River County, Florida. Be changed from RS -6, Single -Family Residential District, to OCR, Office Commercial and Residential District. All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and described in said Zoning Regulations. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 6th day of January, 1987. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BY c�i.�l a Don C. Scurlock, Jr., hairman 29 JAN 6 1987 BOOK 8"3 1987 "1 BOOK �� .E... PRD CONCEPTUAL PLAN SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVAL - TIMBER RIDGE The hour of 9:20 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 —.,y / , , a in the matter of in the (CCoourt, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of ��� / !b Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this XS day ot� d A.D. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Nonce of hearing • to consider granting Planned Residential Development (P..R.U) con- ceptual special exception plan approval for a 315 unit single and multi -family project The sub- ject property, located on the north side of Oslo Road along the east side of Lateral "J" Canal, is presently owned by Timber Ridge, Inc. The sub- ject property is described as: A POR ION OF- SECTION 24,- TOWN- SHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, IN- DIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA TO- GETHER WITH THE, PARK SITE AS DELINEATED ON THE PLAT OF DIXIE GARDENS SUBDIVISION UNIT 3, SEC= TION 3, LOTS 1 THRU 16 AND A POR-' TION OF THE PLATTED RIGHT OF ., WAY, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 6 AT ' PAGE 71 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICU- LARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT .THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24; THENCE NORTH 00° 30'00" WEST ALONG THE EAST UNE OF THE WEST 1h OF THE SOUTHEAST '/4 OF SAID SECTION 24. FOR.660.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89° 49' 40" WEST FOR 1085.44 FEET, THENCE NORTH 18' 31' 06" WEST ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUND- ARY OF LATERAL "J" CANAL FOR 7 ' .2072.66 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 89'. 58' 41" EAST ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID LOTS 2, 3, 4: AND 5* FOR 403.88 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89° 5214" EAST ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF LOTS.1 AND 2 .FOR 100.20 FEET; .THENCE SOUTH 00" 15' 35" EAST FOR 418.57: FEET. THENCE. NORTH 89°, 1T 10" EAST, FOR 69.30 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00' 31120" WEST FOR 40.03 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89' 53' 42" EAST • FOR 1153.78 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0o° 34' 30" EAST FOR 916.91 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00° 30' 00" EAST FOR 668.71 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND CONTAINING 52.62 ACRES MORE OR LESS. :y A public hearing at which parties in Interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard, will be held by the Board of County Com- missioners of Indian River County, Florida, In the County Commission Chambers at the County Administration Building, located at 1840.25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday, Janu- ary6,1987, at 9:20 a m. • ' , : J:•"I Anyone whom may wish.1.to appeal any deci- sion, which may be made at this- meeting wilt Ineed to ensure that a verbatim record of the pro- ceedings Is made which includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appal Will ,be based. Indian River County ' r Board of Ciounty CommisslonerS Byy =s- Don.C. Scurlock Jr Chairman t°+ Dec. 15, 1988 ; Staff Planner Boling made the following presentation:. 30 TO- DATE- Honorable Members of ��TEVecember 22, 1986 FELE: the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: ' 4_401 - SUBJECT: PRD CONCEPTUAL PLAN Robert M. Ke ti g, A APPROVAL FOR TIMBER RIDGE Planning & Deve opme Director THROUGH: Michael K. Miller Chief, Current Development FROM: , (�_ REFERENCES: Stan Boling /� timber ridge Staff Planner-----STAN4 It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of January 6, 1987. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS: Under County P.R.D. (Planned Residential Development) regulations, PRD proposals must be granted the following approval steps: P&Z/ 1. Conceptual Plan (special exception) approval, BCC P&Z 2. Preliminary Plan (site plan & preliminary plat) approval, Staff 3. Land Development Permit (construction drawings), and BCC 4. Final Plan (plat) approval. The PRD ordinance encourages the concurrent review and consideration of steps one and two. At thier regular meeting of December 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted to recommend approval of the conceptual PRD plan. Also, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted conditional preliminary PRD plan approval to Phase 2 of the total project. Thus, upon Board approval of the conceptual plan, the Phase 2 preliminary plan approval will automatically take effect. The owner/applicant, Timber Ridge, Inc., Andrew Mustapick - President, is now requesting that the Board of County Commis- sioners grant conceptual PRD plan special exception approval for Timber Ridge. Phase 1 of the project, located on the north side of Oslo Road east of the Lateral "J" Canal, received site plan approval in 1982 for 48 multi -family units. To date, about half of these units have been constructed. This phase is being included in the PRD to tie-in the overall residential project. The approved site plan for phase one is valid and will continue to control the development of Phase I-.-- The : The entire PRD project will - consist of six phases that will include multi -family units, with some single family lots, and tennis facilities. Roads, drainage systems, and all common .facilities will be privately owned and maintained. ANALYSIS: Conceptual Plan The following is an analysis of the conceptual PRD plan which covers the entire six phase project area: I) Size of Property: 52.62 acres 31 i BOOK r .JAN BOOK 2) Zoning Classification: RM -6, Residential Multi -family up to 6 units/acre. 3) Land Use Designation: LD -2, Low Density Residential up to 6 units/acre. 4) Proposed Building Density: 5.99 units/acre 5) Surrounding Uses: North: Vacant/single family South:—Vacant/commercial East: Vacant/single family West: Lateral "J" Canal 6) Landscaping & Buffering: The required 25' perimeter setback will be provided along with a perimeter type "A" buffering. A majority of the type "A" buffer will consist of a 6' high masonry wall. 7) Open Space required: 26.31 acres provided: 30.96 acres 8) Recreational Space required: 3.79 acres provided: 5.36 acres 9) Utilities: The project will be served by County water and sewer utilities. The Utilities department has approved the conceptual utility plans: utilities construction plans will need approval prior to issuance of the land development permit. 10) Drainage: Public Works has approved the conceptual drainage plans: a stormwater management permit will be issued along with the land development permit. 11) Traffic Circulation: The Traffic Engineer has approved the conceptual internal road lay -out. Pursuant to previous agreements and approval conditions, construction or bonding -out of a left turn lane on Oslo road at the project entrance will be required prior to final PRD (plat) approval of phase two. This condition is incorporated into the submitted conceptual PRD plan. 12) Phasing: A total of six phases are proposed. The phasing is planned so that each phase will be able to stand on its own. Accumulations of phases will meet density, open space and recreational space requirements. In accordance with -the PRD ordinance, the following RM -6 zoning standards and subdivision standards will be waived upon approval of the conceptual PRD plan: a) the minimum sideyard setback will be reduced from 10' to 6' (single family lots). b) the minimum 25' frontyard setback on side street yards for corner lots will be reduced from 25' to 15' (single family lots). c) the minimum 30' chord frontage for cul-de-sac lots will be reduced to 221. d) the minimum 60' road right-of-way requirement will be replaced by a minimum, -5V --road easement. e) the minimum 20' building separation requirement will be reduced to what is permitted by the building department pursuant to the fire code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant conceptual PRD plan special exception approval to Timber Ridge. 32 Commissioner Eggert inquired about the building separation permitted by the Building Department pursuant to the Fire Code, and Planner Boling noted that it depends on the type of structure entirely. In this particular case, they do not have site plans in yet for the multi -family phases of the project. The reason for the building separation deals with open space. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. Mary Jane Goetzfried of CCL Consultants came before the Board representing Mr. Mustapick, owner and developer of Timber Ridge Tennis Ranch. Mrs. Goetzfried spoke of the quality community being developed, noted that the main point of the application was to allow flexibility to build some single family residences, and urged Board approval. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0) granted PRD Conceptual Plan Special Exception Approval to Timber Ridge. LOT SPLIT - PALM GARDEN SUBDIVISION (BRUMLEY The hour of 9:20 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: 33 JAN 6 1987 BOOK Pa E 834 ,JAN 6198? BOOK ' Fr.U" � VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Weekly Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being in the matter of/ in the Ifo p (�CCoourt, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of %i ` ! O� Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed before me this day d, i (Business Maiiagef y ' TICEOF PUBLIC HEARING N ice ofOhearing to consider approval of the division of a to in a platted subdivision. The subject property, located at.the comer of 42nd Street and 48th Avenue IS presently owned by Henry and Carol Brumley. Jr. The subject prop- erty Is described as: LOT 4; BLOCK 5, PALM GARDENS SUB DIVIS1N A&RDING TO THE PLAT.:. TTHERE& AS RECORDED IN PLAT.,, BOOK 4, PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA . n A public hearing at which parties In Interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be missio elll rs off Indian hold ythe Riiver Cournty f Florida, in the County Commission Chambers of the County Administration Building, located at 1540 25th Street, Vero Beach,. Florida; on Tuesday. Jantk- ary 8, 1987, at 9:20 a.m. i Anyone whom may wish to appeal any deci- sion which may be.made at this meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the pro - I ceedings Is made Which includes the testimony and evidence upon which- the appeal will be based. Indian River County Board of County Commissioners, By -s- Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Chairman Dec. 15, 1989 Staff Planner Boling reviewed staff's recommendation of approval: TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: December 22, 1986 FELE: the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: -'� BRUMLEY LOT SPLIT IN Robert M. Kestng, CP SUBJECT: PALM GARDEN SUBDIVISION Planning & Develop nt Director THROUGH: Michael K. Miller MIE-M Fv, �r�Chief, Current Development U�11 FROM: stare Boling 4-6- REFERENCES: palm garden) Staff Planner STAN4 { It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of January 6, 1987. 34 DESCRIPTION & .CONDITIONS: A recent amendment to the subdivision ordinance requires that requests to split lots in platted subdivisions be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission, as well as the Board of County. Commissioners, at public hearings. Mr. & Mrs. Henry Brumley have made such a request to split their lot in Palm Gardens Subdivision into two dwelling sites. At their regular meeting of December 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted to recommend approval of the request. The Palm Gardens subdivision, located on the north side of 41st Street between 43rd Avenue and King's Highway, is zoned RMH-8 (Residential Mobile Home up to 8 units/acre) and has an MXD (Mixed Use District) land use designation. The subdivision, platted in 1955, consists of 29 one acre lots and 2 half acre lots (pre- viously split). A majority of the lots have been developed with mobile homes. The roads are unpaved and are graded by the County. ANALYSIS: Several criteria have been established, via the recent subdivision ordinance amendment, --to evaluate lot split requests (see attach- ment #4). The request cannot be granted if the split would have a substantial negative impact on the neighborhood, roads and drain- age or if such splits are prohibited by recorded restrictions. Lots resulting from an approved request must meet zoning require- ments and be buildable under current regulations. Staff's analysis of the request is as follows: i) Based on positive.responses from subdivision property owners, there appears to -.-be no negative neighborhood impacts antici- pated by neighbors. - Because the lots in Palm Gardens are large (one acre), splits resulting in one-half acre lots would not result .in. a high density neighborhood. One lot in the subdivision was split into halves years ago and had no apparent adverse effect. 2) The proposal is to split the existing one acre lot into two one-half acre lots. The resulting lots would meet all RMH-8 lot size requirements. 3) In accordance with Environmental Health well and septic tank requirements, both resulting lots would be buildable. The one time lot split, if approved, would conform to all appli- cable subdivision requirements. 4) There are no reported grading or drainage problems in the area, according to Public Works. If all lots were to be halved, the density and traffic generation would not exceed the County's threshold for required street paving. 5) There are no recorded private restrictions prohibiting the lot split. The result of granting the Brumley request would be to allow another mobile home on the north side of the Brumleys' lot. The• Brumleys existing mobile home is located on the south side of their lot. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant the requested lot split. The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard. There were none. 3 5 J 1987 BOOK JAN 6 `987 BOOB ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com - 66 P,1GF 6,3 7 missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) granted the lot split in Palm Gardens Subdivision as re- quested by Henry Brumley. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION QUORUM REDUCTION The hour of 9:30 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to -wit: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Weekly Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a in the Co�uurt, was pub- lished in said newspaper in the issues of � � Y/�'�� i -, /,qd(lt, Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver- tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver- tisement for publication in the said newspaper. Sworn to and subscribed beforewme thip day ofAA.D,AftZ (Business Manager) 36 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, shall hold a public hearing at which Par- ties in interest and citizens shall have an oppor-• tunity to be heard, in the County Commission Chambers of the County Administration Build- ing, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday. January 6, 1987, at 9:30 a.m. to consider the adoption of an Ordinance. entitled: AN ORDINANCE• OF INDIAN RIVER , COUNTY. FLORIDA, AMENDING SEC- TION 26 (b) PLANNING AND ZONING I COMMISSION, OF APPENDIX A OF THE ri CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, KNOWN .AS THE ZONING CODE, REDUCING THE. NUMBER OF MEMBERS CONSTITUT ING A QUORUM FROM FIVE TO FOUR MEMBERS; AND PROVIDING FOR EF FECTIVE DATE. A e Planning la of the e.ppo�eOrdinance ethe ssecond at the f the Co gepa floor of the County Administration Building. • Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may to made at this meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim.record of the proceeding _ is made which includes the testimony and, evi- dence upon which the appeal will be based, Indian River County Board of County Commissioners By -s- Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman Dec. is. 1986 _ Chief Planner Shearer reviewed the following memo: TO: The Honorable Members DATE: December 12, 1986 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: SUBJECT: PLANNING & ZONING COM- Robert-1Ni Kea 1 g, MISSION QUORUM REDUCTION Planning & De v lopme Director THROUGH:Richard M. Shearer RM5 Chief, Long -Range Planning„ FRONT: Cherylene J. BoudreauAREFERENCES: Staff Planner, Long -Range Planning It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting of January 6, 1987. DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS On July 16, 1986, the Board of County Commissioners adopted an ordinance increasing the number of members on the Planning and Zoning Commission from five to seven members and increasing the number of members making up a quorum from three to five members, effective September 1, 1986. Upon request by the Planning and Zoning Commission at its regular meeting of October 9, 1986, the planning staff forwarded a request to the Board of County Commissioners to reduce the required quorum of the Planning and. Zoning Commission from five (5) to four (4) voting members. On October 28, 1986, the Board of County Commissioners authorized the planning staff to proceed with processing an amendment to the zoning ordinance to reduce the number of Planning and Zoning Commission members required for a quorum from five to four. On December 11, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7 -to -0 to recommend approval of this request. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS In analyzing the Planning and Zoning Commission's proposed quorum reduction from five to four members, the planning staff recognizes that having a required quorum of five Planning and Zoning Commission members in certain circumstances can create problems. Specifically, a problem would arise if two members were absent and one member had a conflict of interest. Reducing the required quorum to four members would allow avoidance of this problem and would not adversely affect the Commission's effectiveness because it would still require three members to approve any request. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the required quorum be reduced to four members -.-- 37 BOOK 66 f',�GE 3 JAS 6 1987 BOOK 66 P,." Commissioner Bowman asked if staff is saying that if two of the seven members are absent and one must abstain because of a conflict of interest that the quorum shall be four. Chief Planner Shearer explained that the request of the ordinance is to reduce the quorum from five members to four members out of the seven. He felt in all other Boards the County has where there is an odd number such as seven, four would be a quorum. The Planning & Zoning Commission felt they should be treated like the other Boards and requested that staff be authorized to bring the proposed ordinance back. He continued that there has not been a problem getting five members there, but there have been occasions where it has been tight and there have been occasions where there are conflicts of interest and someone has to abstain. He stressed that it still will require three votes to approve anything. The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard. There were none. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) closed the public hearing. ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously adopted Ordinance 87-2 amending the Zoning Code by reducing the quorum required for the Planning & Zoning Com- mission to four. 38 ORDINANCE NO. 87-2 AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING SECTION 26 (b) PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, OF APPENDIX A OF THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, KNOWN AS THE ZONING CODE, REDUCING THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS CONSTITUTING A QUORUM FROM FIVE TO FOUR MEMBERS; AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County that: SECTION 1 Section 26 (b) (1) g is hereby amended as follows: Meetings shall be at the call of the chairman or vice-chairman or at such times as a majority of the members may determine. The chairman, vice-chairman or any acting chairman may administer oaths and compel the attendance of witnesses. All meeting shall be open to the public. r4#0_ X%y Four (4) voting members shall constitute a quorum, and a majority vote of those present shall determine any issue before the Planning and Zoning Commission. In no event shall any issue be decided by less than f4#0. A$y four (4) members voting. 9VrMTnM 7 EFFECTIVE DATE The provisions of this ordinance shall become effective upon receipt from the Florida Secretary of State of official acknowledgment that this ordinance has been filed with the Department of State. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 6th day of January, 1986. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: / G DON C. SCUR K, J.,'CHAIRMAN ATTEST Y: FREDA RIGHT, CLERK V CODING: Words injEyi¢}ffylgSytM type are deletions from existing law; words underlined are additions. 39 �GGK 840 JAN 6 1987 BOOK 66 r"" "J. -C841 REBIDS - GOLF CART STORAGE BUILDING Intergovernmental Coordinator Thomas reviewed letter from Charles BLock Architect, as follows: c,e, block architect, inc. December 30, 1986 -O 0 C3� W -O Mr. Tommy Thomas :7 Intergovernmental Coordinator Q Indian River County < CD Administration Building 1840 25th Street CD Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Dear Tommy, O We have received the re -bids on the Golf Cart Storage Building. I have 07 enclosed the originals for your review. xx The low bidder is Hill / Jones, Inc. who also met all requirements of the CD re -bid in that he has included a certified check for his bid bond. I believe 01 the other contractors did not include a bid bond because they already had a 0 bid bond with the county on the first bid which has not been released. < CD The re -bid required a bid bond as well per specifications. The low bid of C $184,600 minus $800 for $183,700 is compared to Walker's bid of $185,267. N Q n We recommend that the county award the contract to Hi i l / Jones, Inc. We have worked with Hill before and the company has performed in a 0 satisfactory manner on several past projects. The estimate of $177,000 O previously given to me by Hill changed as the site work sub -contractor Q would not hold his bid on the rebid. W N If you have any questions, please do not hestiate to call. 01 O1 Thank you. (V CD Sincerely, 01 7 � CDCn Charles E. Block C 4 President 0' 0 W 1J 40 -O 7_7 1LLIJONES �% '/ 7 C STATE CERTIFIED 855 21St St. General Contractors Suite 10 Lic. #CGC 011775 !ro Beach, Florida 32960 (305) 567-9154 C. E. Block Architect, Inc. 1995 39th Ave Vero Beach, F1 32960 Sandridge Golfcart Storage Building & Site Work For The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida December 30, 1986 emen: 'ollowing is the revised bid for the above referenced project: Bid One Hundred Eighty Four Thousand Five Hundred $184,500.00 Alternate #1 Masonry Stucture Deduct $(800.00) Patrick Hill resident ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com- missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously awarded the bid for the Sandridge Golf Cart Storage Building and site work to Hill/Jones, Inc., in the amount of $183,700. (CONTRACT ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD) BID #329 - GOLF COURSE EQUIPMENT (REJECT & REBID) The Board reviewed memo of Purchasing Manager Goodrich: 41 Bora 66 F -,,I L842 JAN6� � BOOK ��d PQ -. �43 TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: December 30, 1986 FILE: i<Tol�as� THRU: L. S. iiTommy SUBJECT: IRC BID #329 -Golf Course .. Intergovernmental Coordinator Equipment FROM: 1 �� REFERENCES: Carolyry Goodrich, Manager Purchasing Department Alternatives and Analysis Bids were received Monday, December 29, 1986 at 11:00 A.M. for IRC #329 -Golf Course Equipment for Sandridge Golf Course. 9 Bids were sent out, 3 partial bids were received. Of the eleven items bid, there were only 3 items where more than 1 bid was received. Recommendation Because of the lack of bids and the urgency of obtaining some of this equipment for mowing, it is recommended that IRC #329 be rejected and staff be authorized to re -bid. MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commissioner Bowman, to reject the bids received on the Golf Course Equipment and rebid same. Commissioner Bird could not understand, as competitive as the golf course equipment market is, that we wouldn't have had more bids; for instance, DeBra Company. Director Thomas advised that this took place during the holiday season; he did contact DeBra, and they apologized and said they simply forgot to send in the bid. This probably happened in some other cases also. Chairman Scurlock asked if there is a problem with delaying the bidding, and Commissioner Bird stated there is a timing prob- lem, but he did not feel we have any other choice as we undoubtedly will get a more competitive bid. He believed there 42 are some items we may have to consider renting in the meantime. THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. It was voted on and carried unanimously (4-0) DISCUSSION RE TOURIST TAX Attorney Vitunac noted that recently there have been some articles in the local paper setting out opposing views between the City of Vero Beach and the County over what the money generated from a Tourist Tax would be used for. He believed this problem may have been caused by misinformation from the state as it appears, from an article in the last issue of Florida Trend, that the state has been underestimating these revenues for all the counties in the state. Attorney Vitunac informed the Board that since Commissioner Wheeler, who is chairman of the Tourist Development Council, could not attend the City Council meeting tonight, he asked that Attorney Vitunac attend to relate his concerns and try to clear up any misunderstanding. Attorney Vitunac felt he needed author- ity and direction from the full Board as to what they want him to relate to the City tonight. He advised that it is Commissioner Wheeler's belief it is in the best interests of the City and County to pass this tax as there are a wealth of needs that can be funded by this money however small the pot is. He apparently is in favor of some sort of beach restoration but feels the county's or city's share of the tax would be so small that for the millions of dollars required for beach renourishment, it would not generate any support to pass the tax and that, there- fore, it would be better to use the tax for such things as parking lots, beach walkovers, etc., to open up the beaches we have or even acquire more beach property. He is not opposed to the City of Vero Beach getting its share of the money to use as they want; he is just opposed to using it for beach restoration because he feels that would kill the whole issue. 43 AQGK � F���� 84 JAN 6 198 JAIL 1987 Boor, 66'81-5 Commissioner Bird commented that he has been reading in the papers that the City feels since they will generate the majority of the money, they should have more say-so. Chairman Scurlock advised that the indication he got from City Manager John Little was that the City will push to have the money actually collected in the City used for beach renourish- ment, but they would not object to us setting our priorities and spending those monies generated within the unincorporated areas as we want to. The Chairman believed the projections are that 55% of the tax would be generated within the City of Vero Beach and the remaining 45% would be generated in the unincorporated area of the county, including the other municipalities. Chairman Scurlock reminded the Commission that Cubit Engineering and our Beach Preservation Committee have been moving ahead with the Coastal Management Plan, which would certainly incorporate beach nourishment as well as all the other management techniques which are available and give us an overall plan as well as a mechanism to fund.it, and that report is due sometime in January. He further noted that the tax requires development of a two-year budget, and there will be ample time to modify those budgets as to our approach each year. He felt the City probably has some good thought in this in wanting to use their money, at least in the initial stages, for beach nourishment, and as long as the other dollars are spent in the priority areas we establish, felt we probably should go along with it. The Chairman noted that when he served on the City Council and a Northeaster came rolling in, as they generally do annually, they would get the trucks moving and send in sand to protect the parking lots and beach structures, and he believed an emergency fund of that nature would be warranted. Commissioner Eggert agreed with some type of emergency fund, but did not want to see beach renourishment as the main priority of a Tourist Tax. She felt there are other things more pertinent 44 to a touristtype thing - whether it be protecting ourselves in an emergency or providing beach accesses, etc. Commissioner Bird did see justification for using some of those funds for restoration as the tourists use the beaches, and inquired.what the law says as to our ability to split the funds. Attorney Vitunac explained that the law sets out the composition of the Tourist Development Council, which calls for someone from every wing of the industry as well as from the cities and county. That Council sets up a specific plan for the spending of the funds, and that's what is voted on and brought back to this Board. Chairman Scurlock advised that City Manager Little expressed a strong desire on the City Council's part to have us pass this thing in a form that would allow their 55% to be spent on beach nourishment, and, in fact, indicated if that was not done, they would vigorously oppose the passage of the tax. Commissioner Eggert felt much progress had been made in recent years towards greater cooperation between the cities and County, and she was sorry to see any division occurring. Commissioner Bird concurred that, especially this year to get this off the ground and rolling, it is important for us to have as much unanimity as we can among the various govern- mental bodies involved. Chairman Scurlock commented that he reminded City Manager Little that the Corps of Engineers is once again asking for our financial commitment to the beach renourishment program, and since the county still has to be the sponsoring agency, it is very important that good cooperation exist because the tourist tax funds are a mere pittance compared to the overall Coastal Management Plan and renourishment project. Also, there are other municipalities in this county, and Sebastian, in particular, is growing very rapidly. The Chairman felt we need to send a message that we are willing to compromise and we would not object 45 JAN 63 1987 Boor. Fig: JAN 6 1987 BOOK 66 f} -C847 to them spending their portion on renourishment even if we do not think it is the best idea. Commissioner Bird agreed and suggested that Attorney Vitunac convey the position of the Board as being that we are willing to compromise to some extent. Commissioner Eggert stated that she just did not feel the tourist tax will pass on a beach renourishment note and that is what concerns her the most; thus she would not send a message saying it is fine for beach renourishment in general, but only if it means protection in an emergency. Debate continued at length, and Attorney Vitunac stated that he will explain that the consensus of the Board is that we do not think politically the referendum on the tax will pass based on beach renourishment. He asked in the event the City insists on designating beach renourishment for its full share, if the Board will recommend to the Tourist Development Council that they leave that in? Commissioner Bird favored giving the City that flexibility initially, but Commissioner Bowman felt we should be practical and consider how many votes the City of Vero Beach has on the Tourist Development Council. Attorney Barkett advised that the City has only two votes on the Tourist Development Council, and as to the City's propor- tionate share of 55%, he pointed out that the City does not contribute to it at all; it comes from the tourists. He further pointed out that the City doesn't have the power to impose this tax at all, and, therefore, if the County doesn't do it, they don't get anything. Commissioner Eggert's feeling was that if we can't do this cooperatively and try to find something that will help the tax pass, why bother with it at all. Commissioner Bowman agreed that is the point of view we should convey to the City Council, and Chairman Scurlock con- curred. He felt we should tell them in a nice way that we are 46 M M M going to rely heavily on the Tourist Development Council and their recommendation was duly noted with only two votes in favor of what the City seems to be proposing. Commissioner Bird wished it made clear that three out of four Commissioners were in favor of Commissioner Eggert's suggested approach. He personally believed beach renourishment is a logical use for the money. In discussion, it was noted that Commissioner Wheeler is not present, and of the four Commissioners present, three approve of Commissioner Eggert's approach. Commissioner Eggert again emphasized that she does not oppose storm emergency funds, but $200,000 is not going to do anything towards overall beach renourishment. DOCUMENTS TO BE MADE A PART OF THEMINUTES Approval of Petition for Admission of Norberto DeJesu to the A. G. Holley State Hospital, dated December 31, 1986, has been received and is on file in the Office of Clerk to the Board. Contract with the State of Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Medical Examiners Commission for Medical Examiner Funds as approved at the meeting of September 23, 1986, having been fully executed and received, has been placed on file in the Office of the Clerk. There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 10:15 o'clock A.M. ATTEST: Clerk - -r-� �- G. Y - --- Chairman JAIL 6 1987 47aoo� 84