HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/7/1987Tuesday, April 7, 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,
April 7, 1987, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Don C.
Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman, Vice Chairman;
Richard N. Bird; Carolyn K. Eggert; and Gary C. Wheeler. 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 Commissioner
Eggert led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Chairman Scurlock wished to add under his matters a report
of a meeting he and Administrator Balczun had with the Construc-
tion Industry Management Council (CIMC) re changes in the
Building Department.
Commissioner Eggert advised that under her matters she would
make a brief report on the search for a library site.
County Attorney Vitunac requested the addition of an item
dealing with the termination of an option agreement on some
beachfront property as we did not exercise our option; the
property is being sold; and the buyer wants the title cleared.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner by Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously
added the above described items to today's agenda.
Chairman Scurlock advised that he also had received a letter
from Joseph Dorsky, Town Manager of Indian River Shores,
APR 7 1987 Bou 6 fA,01 18
APR 71987 BOOK 67 PAGE 1 1
expressing concern re the Town's mutual aid agreement with the
South County Fire District.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously agreed to
call a meeting of the District Board of the South
County Fire District to address the concern of the
Town of Indian River Shores re mutual aid.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 10,
1987. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved the
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 10, 1987, as
written.
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of March 18,
1987. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman; the Board unanimously approved the
Minutes of the Special Meeting of March 18, 1987, as
written.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Bird asked that Items L and M be removed from
the Consent Agenda for discussion; Chairman Scurlock requested
the removal of Item N and Item T; County Attorney Vitunac
requested the removal of Item O.
2
r � r
A. Renewal Pistol Permit `
The Board reviewed memo from the County Administrator:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: March 17, 1987 FILE: -
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: PISTOL PERMIT - RENEWAL
FROM: Charles P. Balczun
County Administrator REFERENCES:
The following person has applied through the Clerk's Office for renewal
of a pistol permit:
David E. Luke
All requirements of the ordinance have been met and are in order.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
the application for renewal of a licence to carry
a concealed firearm for David E. Luke.
B. New Pistol Permit Application
The Board reviewed memo of the County Administrator:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: March 17, 1987 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:
John F. Daley
All requirements of the ordinance have been met and are in order.
BOOK �7 uuE 780
APR 7 1987
BOOK
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
the application for a licence to carry a concealed
firearm for John F. Daley.
C. Proclamation+ Amateur Radio Operators
P R O C L A M A T I O N
67 FACE 7si
WHEREAS, the FCC -licensed amateur radio operators of the
Treasure Coast Repeater Association and the Vero Beach Amateur
Radio Club have voluntarily registered their capabilities and
equipment to provide emergency communications as a public
service; and
WHEREAS, the Radio Amateur Communications Emergency Service
(RACES) members have, on numerous occasions, unselfishly
volunteered their time to provide emergency communications during
disaster drills and exercises and in actual emergencies:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS of Indian River County, Florida that the members of
the Treasure Coast Repeater Association, Vero Beach Amateur Radio
Club, and Radio Amateur Communications Emergency Service be
acknowledged and commended for their services to the people of
Indian River County, Florida; and
Dated this 7th day of April, 1987
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
i L
Don C. Scurlock, Jr.,%C irman
m
D. Out -of -County Travel _ Administrative Aide Forlani
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
out -of -County travel for County Commission Adminis-
trative Aide Liz Forlani to attend the Professional
Secretaries International Seminar, Orlando, Fl.,
April 16, 1987.
E. (L.S.Thomas)_- Rep_ Upper St. Johns Rec. Advisory_ Council
The Board reviewed memo from Director L.S."Tommy" Thomas:
TO: Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
7
FROM: L.S. "Tommy" Thomas
DATE: March 26, 1987
RE: Upper St. Johns Recreational Advisory Council
As you know I have served as one of Indian River County's
delegates on this very active Council. I am retiring April 30,
1987, however, I have always had a tremendous interest in this
project and the area it encompasses. If it meets with the
approval of the Board of County Commissioners, I would like to
continue serving the County in this capacity. There are a number
of projects of which I am vitally interested and I would like to
continue working towards their completion.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously agreed to
retain L.S. "Tommy" Thomas as one of the County's
representatives on the Upper St. John's Recrea-
tional Advisory Council.
F. Reports
The following was received and placed on file in the Office
of Clerk to the Board:
Fellsmere Water Control District Fiscal Year
Audit, 1985-86, and
APR 1 1997
5 BOOK � ru 78'
FF" -
APR 1 1997 Boobr
i67FAUrE � U
St. John's River Water Management District
Annual Report, 1985-86.
G._ Final _Payment_(Painting _Mid_Fla__ Elevated Water Storage Tank)
The Board reviewed memo of Asst. Utility Director Barton:
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: MARCH 23, 1987
THRU: CHARLES P. BALCZUN
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
VIA: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILITYR CES
FROM: JEFFREY K. BARTON
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: FINAL PAYMENT, PAINTING CONTRACT -
MID -FLORIDA ELEVATED WATER STORAGE TANK
BACKGROUND
Indian River County Division of Utility Services, after several
bidding attempts, finally entered into a contract on January 31, 1986
with Hi -Line Contractors to paint the 150,000 gallon elevated water
storage tank behind Ennessey-Cadillac.
The original contract for $39,978.00 had one change order bringing the
contract total to $42,503.00. We have -paid all invoices leaving only
the retainage of $4,250.30.
RECOMMENDATION
The Division of Utility Services staff recommends to the Board of
County Commissioners that they authorize the payment of the retainage
of $4,250.30 and accept the job as complete, based on the attached
recommendation of our engineers, Masteller & Moler Associates, Inc
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized
final payment of the retainage of $4,250.30 to
Hi -Line Contractors and accepted said painting job
as complete, as recommended by staff.
H. Work Authorization #13 - US#1 Potable Water Main -_10th St. to
South ReTie� Canal
The Board reviewed memo of Asst. Utility Director Barton:
6
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: CHARLES P. BALCZUN
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
VIA: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY S tCES
L_J
DATE: MARCH 23, 1987
FROM: JEFFREY K. BARTON
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
(-2zf
SUBJECT: WORK AUTHORIZATION #13
U.S. #1 POTABLE WATER MAIN 10TH STREET TO SOUTH RELIEF CANAL
BACKGROUND
The master plans by.Boyle Engineering recommends that a water line be
built on the west side of U. S. #1. The enclosed work order is to
build part of that 12" water line which should be done as an
assessment project. Along with the Work Authorization is the cost
estimate for the construction of the approximately 5,500 feet of 12"
line along U. S. #1.
RECOMMENDATION
The Division of Utility Services staff recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners.authorize the Chairman to sign Work Authorization
#13 for the U. S. #1. Potable Water Main and for the preparation of an
assessment roll to pay for the project.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
Work Authorization #13 with Masteller & Moler for
engineering services for the U.S.#1 Potable Water
Main and authorized preparation of an assessment
roll for,said project.
7
APR 7 19a7L___
BOOK D 4 Ft1Gr 7(1
BOOK 67 FnuE 785
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Work Authorization No. 13 for Consulting Services
Project No. 13 (County) (Masteller & Moler Associates, Inc.) (WATER)
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Title: U. S. Highway #1 Potable Water Main from 10th Street to South Relief Canal
Consulting engineering services relative to design services for construction of
approximately 5500 linear feet of 12" diameter water main along U. S. Highway #1
from 10th Street to the South Relief Canal. The project will also include con-
struction of fire hydrants, valves, laterals and appurtenances. Construction
cost estimate for the project, including 10% contingency is $235,000.00.
Service includes eighty (80) hours of "General Services During Constructin" per
"Agreement" Article 5, Paragraph 5a. and 5b.
II. SCOPE OF SERVICES AND LUMP SUM FEE FOR SERVICES
Reference is made to the "Agreement for Professional Services" dated'July 2, 1986
and specific Article numbers and paragraph numbers which are listed hereinafter
to describe the scope of services included on this project:
A. Project Design Services per Article 4, Paragraph 4a. and 4b.
B. General Services During Construction per Article 5, Paragraph 5a. and 5b.
Please note that eighty (80) hours bf these services are included in the
lump sum fee in "D" below.
C. Supplementary and Special Services Per Article 6, Paragraph 6c., 6d., 6e., 6f.,
and 6g. In addition, our services shall include field surveys necessary for design
and preparation of construction plans and assistance to the County in obtaining
various permits and approvals for construction (permit fees to be paid by the County).
D. Payment for Services per Article 8, the lump sum fee for Article 4, Paragraph 4a.
and 4b. and Article 5, Paragraph 5a. and 5b. above is $ 21,060.00 Payment
shall be per Article 8, Paragraph 8b. and 8d. Included in the $ 21,060.00 lump
sum fee is $ 3,200.00 for eighty (80) hours for periodic inspection services.
Any additional inspection services in excess of the eighty (80) hours will be in-
voiced as additional services at the hourly rate of $40.00. Payment for Article 6,
Paragraph 6c., 6d., 6e., 6f., and 6g. shall be per Article 8, Paragraph 8a(1).
APPROVED BY:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
B;y 2)m
Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
Date d, t 0!
`
SUBMITTED BY:
MASTELLER & MOLER ASSOCIATES, INC.
By
Earl H. Masteller, P.E.
President
Date _31 �, 1 FS -7
A6MhlrsVjib Ah " FaORM AND LHOAL SUP'P'ICTLNCY:
PAZ LEZti�
Char es itunac, County Attorney
8
,—Service lateral includes meter box for 1" diameter meter box.
I. Indian River Blvd. South Ext. - Change Orders #3 & #4
The Board reviewed memo of Public Works Director Davis:
Al,7 987 9 BOOK 9 ma 786
Unit
Prices Revised 2/87
WATER MAIN TAKE -OFF
ESTIMATES
PAGE 1
OF 1
DATE: March 6, 1987
JOB;
12" DIAMETER WATER MAIN ON U.S.
#1, SOUTH
OF 10TH STREET TO
CANAL NORTH OF VISTA/WHISPERING
PALMS
CLIENT: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ITEM
# ITEM DESCRIPTION
UNIT
UNIT PRICE
TOTAL PRICE
1.
MOBILIZATION
LS
LUMP SUM
$ 7,000.00
2.
12" DIA. PVC/DIP WM
5500
LF
22.00
121,000.00
3.
16" DIA. PVC WM
100
LF
9.00
900.00
4.
12" DIA. GATE VALVES
8
EA
11000.00
81000.00
5.
6" DIA. GATE VALVES
7
EA
350.00
2,450.00
6.
FIRE HYDRANTS
7
EA
1,300.00
91100.00
7.
PVD ROAD RESTOR.
120
LF
15.00
11800.00
8.
PAVED DRIVE RESTOR.
1475
LF
16.00
24,400.00
9.
NON -PAVED DR. RESTOR.
75
LF
7.00
525.00
10.
SEED & MULCH
3830
LF
0.50
11*915.00
11.
CANAL CROSSING
LS
LUMP SUM
12,000.00
12.*
1" DIA "SHORT" SERV LAT.
20
EA
200.00
4,000.00
13.
STH STREET BORE
LA
LUMP SUM
20,000.00
SUB -TOTAL:
8 213,090.00
10% CONTINGENCY:
S 21,309.00
TOTAL:
S 234,399.00
USE
$ 235,000.00
,—Service lateral includes meter box for 1" diameter meter box.
I. Indian River Blvd. South Ext. - Change Orders #3 & #4
The Board reviewed memo of Public Works Director Davis:
Al,7 987 9 BOOK 9 ma 786
BOOK 6 7 P,iur. S 7
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: March 31, 1987 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH:
Charles P. Balczun,
County Administrator
FROM:James W. Davis, P.E.(
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Indian River Boulevard south
Extension - Change Order #4 and #5
REFERENCES:
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Kimley-Horn and Associates has transmitted Change Order #4 and #5 for
approval. Change Order #4 provides for revising roadway superelevation at
the south end of Indian River Boulevard. The staff requested this change
for the following reasons:
1) If the road is widened to six lanes in the future, reducing the
superelevation at this time would save considerable cost by reducing
the future fill requirement and will also allow for greater drainage
capacity in the roadside swales.
2) A few citizens have observed the construction and have expressed that
the curve looks too banked.
3) After the road was designed, Walmart was constructed along the north
of the curve. The filling of the Walmart site has substantially
raised the elevation along the curve and transition grades are
excessive.
Change Order #5 is prepared to provide for increasing the size of the steel
water and sewer sleaves beneath the Boulevard for the Utilities Dept. This
item was previously approved by the Board on Jan. 20, 1987. Also, minor
drainage work and concrete driveway work is included.
Change Order #4 includes increasing the Time of Completion by 21 days.
ALTMUkTIVES AND ANALYSIS
The net cost of Change Order #4 and Change Order #5 will be an increase in
the contract price by $20,000 and $30,520 respectively. Of this amount,
$18,990 will be funded by the Utilities Dept. Impact Fee account. The
remainder will be funded by Gas Tax and Impact Fee Revenue.
The Change Orders are necessary to complete the work.
12ECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
It is recommended that Change Order #4 and #5 be approved. Funding to be
as follows:
Utility Dept. Impact Fees $18,990
Gas Tax & Road Impact Fees $31,530
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
Change Order #4 (Kimley-Horn/Dickerson) increasing
10
the contract price $20,000 and Change Order #5
(Kimley-Horn/Dickerson) increasing the contract
price $30,520 for regrading and roadway modifica-
tions as described above.
4 ---
CIiANGE ORDER No. ...... Dated ,March 24,, 1987.
OA NER's Project No... 8409 ................. ENGINEER's Project No. . A ,03 , , , , , , , , . , , , , ,
Project 12th, Street.Traffic & Pedestrian. Improvements
... ...... .. ........ . .
with Indian River Boulevard, southerly extension
CONTRACTOR ..,,Dickerson Florida, .Inc.
Contract For , ,road ,construction .......... , , Contract Date , , July .2:.1986. • . • • . - .... _ ... .
To: Dickerson. Florida : Inc. _ Post Box 719 ..Stuart,. Florida . 33495 _ - _ ... _ • ... .
.... ... .... . .. . .. . .. ....... ...... .... .. .....
CONTRACTOR
You are directed to make the changes noted below in the subject Contract:
The completion date, contract price and Indian River County
all other terms, covenants and conditions ......................
of the above referenced contract, except OWNER
as duly modified by this and previous
Change Orders, if any, remain in full By .... �;zy;G
force and effegt. 1/ --
Dated .......... ~�
Nature of the Changes
1. Regrade the roadway embankment on Indian River Boulevard between Station 208+00+
and Station 220+50+. —
FApproved as to form
al sufficiencyEnclosures:See attachment and letter dated March 4 1987 Barkett
These changes result in the folIow•ing adjustment of Contract Price and Contract Time:
Original Contract Price S 3 :973,809.36
Change Order 1 thru 3 21,904.00' - • * * ' - " -
Subtotal S ,3,995,713.36...........
This Change Order No. 4 201000;00'••-
.........
Adjusted Contract Price S 4 015,713. 36.... - . , .
Contract Time Prior to This Change Order ... 450 days, startinK AU ust, 1.,. 1986 , , , , .. ,
21 (Days or Date)
Net (increase) (Decrease) Resulting from This Change Order .......................•.............. .
(Days)
Current Contract Time Including This Change Order . , 471. days :starting. August, l t .1986. ,
• (Days or Date)
APR "119 '87 11 BOR FADE 788
BooK 67 Fmu,F.789 1
The Above Changes Are Approved:_ Kimley. Horn, and Associates,. Inc........ .
•••ENGINEER ••• ••••
z '
Date ...... ,19. C-1
The Above Changes Are Accepted: DickersonFlorida, Inc
. .••••
CONTRACTOR
By ... CAAA,-4
.. ..
— a—w",
Date . /a ................... .19.
ffa8MftB7bL QTM
ATTAC1A= TO
CHANGE ORDER NO. 4
for
12th STREET TRAFFIC & PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS
WITH INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD, SOUTHERLY MMSION
EXPLANATION AND COST
1. During construction of Indian River Boulevard the County Engineer
determinEd that the roadway profile grade and superelevation should be
modified between Station 208+00+ and Station 220+50+. This change is
reflected on the following revised drawings:
Sheet
No.
Title
Revision
No. and Date
5 of 179
Typical Sections
3
03/05/87
36 of
179
Plan Profile
3
03/05/87
37 of
179
Plan Profile
3
03/05/87
38 of
179
Plan Profile
3
03/05/87
65 of
179
Cross Sections
3
03/05/87
51A of
179
Plan Profile
--
03/05/87
104 of
179
Cross Sections
--
03/05/87
105 of
179
Cross Sections
--
03/05/87
106 of
179
Cross Sections
--
03/05/87
107 of
179
Cross Sections
--
03/05/87
Add New Bid Item - Regrade Roadwav Embankment
1 Job
Lump Sum
Total Cost Increase per this Change Order:
12
$20,000.00
$20,000.00
CHANGE ORDERNo, , 5.. , ,
Dated March 27.,, 1987,
OR'NER's Project No.. 8409 ............... ENGTNEER's Project No. , 4395.03, , ....... , .... .
Project , 12th • Street Traf f ic. &. Pedestrian .Improvements
.... ............. . ...........
with Indian River Boulevard, southerly extension
CONTRACTOR. Dickerson Florida,,Inc.,
Contract For.. ,Road Construction........ _ , _ , Contract Date -July 2y.. 1986 . . . . ... . .... . ... .
To: , Dickerson Florida,, Inc; , , Post ,Office Box, 719„ Stuart = ,Florida . 33495 .... . . . . .... . .
.. .. ...... ....
CONTRACTOR
You are directed to make the changes noted below in the subject Contract:
The completion date, contract price and
all other terms, covenants and conditions
of the above referenced contract, except
as duly modified by this and previous
Change Orders, if any, remain in full
force and effept.
._.Indian.River County
................
... ... .
OWNER
By.....- .........
Dated ............... Y: .....
Nature of the Changes
1. Miscellaneous roadway modifications — see attachment.
See attachment and letters.
These changes result in the following adjustment of Contract Price and Contract Time:
Original Contract Price $ ,3,973,809.36
Change Order 1 thru 4 41r904:00*
Subtotal 5 ,4,015,?lj.j6
This Change Order No. 5 •. ,.�4aJ?aQ....
..........
Adjusted Contract Price S 4,046,233;36,,,...,.,,.
Contract Time Prior to This Change Order. , 471, days .starting. August .1:.1986 .. - .. ...... , .. , , . �\
(Days or Date)
Net (Increase) (Decrease) Resulting from This Change Order. . —0—. daYs...............................
(Days)
Current Contract Time Including This Change Order. ,471 days starting. August .1:.1986.. _ . .
• (Days or Date)
The Above Changes Are Approved: . Kimle. Horn .and Associates, - • • • . - - Inc..........
ENGINEER
114,
By
Date ..... � .......... .19.
The Above Changes Are Accepted:
_DickersonFlorida, Inc.
•
CONTRACTOR
BY.... ... .....
13
/Dat..//�.y... ...may .19•�.
Boos 6LJ•fr��E ®tliJ
BOOK � f'�,E l P�
FF -
APR 7 1987
ATTAC11ME ]T TO
CHANGE ORDER NO. 5
FOR
12th STREET TRAFFIC & PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS
WITH INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD, SOUTHERLY EXTENSION
EXPLANATION AND COST
1. During construction of Indian River Boulevard, the County Public Works
Department determined that 10' - 6" diameter PVC drainage pipes beneath
the masonry wall along Vista Gardens Condominiums were to be installed
to prevent storm water from being trapped behind the wall.
1 Job Lump Sum $2,000.00
2. During construction of Indian River Boulevard the Indian River County
Engineering Operations Manager revised the schedule of steel casings
required for future expansion of the County's utilities systems.
1 Job Lump Sum $18,990.00
3. During construction of Indian River Boulevard Kimley-Horn & Associates
(KHA) instructed the contractor to install a 24" driveway pipe between
Station 222+00 and 222+40 rather than between Station 222+60 and 223+00
as shown on the plans. The installation of the pipe in a different
location than shown on the plans was in an effort to better suit
conditions found at the construction site. After the pipe and endwalls
were installed the County informed KHA that the location of the pipe was
to serve a future driveway for the adjacent property owners as shown on
the plans. As a result, the pipe will be relocated to the stations
shown in the plans.
Relocate 24" CMP $20/LF $ 800.00
Remove & relocate endwalls 3 cy @ $250/cy 750.00
$ 1$50.00
4. During construction along 6th Avenue it was determined that the cost of
construction of 6" concrete driveways had been omitted from the summary
of Estimate Quantities shown in the plans. The cost of concrete shall
include 10/10 wire mesh and control joints.
6" concrete pavement 360 SY @ $15.50/SY $ 50580.00
Driveway surveying, grading & cutting out of 16 driveways
@ $150.00/each $ 21400.00
Total increase per this change order:
14
$30,520.00
J. Resignation_and Reappointment_ to Tourist Development Council
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously accepted
the resignation of Bob Gourley of WTTB from the
Tourist Development Council and appointed Charles
Joyce, Jr., President of All Condo Management
Services, Inc., to the Tourist Development Council
to fill the vacancy created by Mr. Gourley's resig-
nation.
K._ Sheriff's _ Administration Building - Change Order IRC3-3
The Board reviewed staff memo:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE. March 19, 1987 FILE:
the Board of County
Commissioners
THRU: Charles P. Balczun SUBJECT: Sheriff's Administration
County Administrator Building - Change Order
I.R.C. 3 - 3
H. T. DeA
FROM: owner'sized REFERENCES:
Representative
This Change Order is submitted at the request of Sheriff Dobeck after
discussion with staff. The objective is to provide adequate
protection for confiscated property and evidence obtained by the
Sheriff's Department.
` Concrete is recommended to replace grassing. Maintaining any grassed
area that is primarily used for storage is always a problem. It is
impossible to keep grass and weeds under control due to the lack of
accessibility with maintenance equipment. Asphalt paving could be
supplemented, but fuel and lubricants leaking from stored autos,
boats, and machinery would cause asphalt to deteriorate. Jim Davis
has also recommended the use of concrete rather than asphalt for the
same reason.
Experience has indicated this area to be highly vulnerable to theft
which also creates a liability to the County. Staff feels the
additional fence height will be a deterrent to thieves, although it
may not completely eliminate the problem.
The Board approved budget included this recommended change. Staff
recommends Board approval of the subject change order for reasons so
stated.
15
BOOK u 7 FAGS 92
APR 7 1987 BOOK 67Ft1Gr. 7,93
I
ON h10TION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
Change Order IRC3-3 requested by Sheriff Dobeck as
recommended by staff.
CNANIG``'
Distribution to:
GP
OWNER
❑
AIA DOCUMENT 0701
ARCHITECT
CONTRACTOR
El l
p�
FIELD
❑
OTHER
❑
PROJECT: CHANGE ORDER NUMBER:
(name, address) Sheriffs Administration Building I. R. C.3 -Three
TO (Contractor):
INITIATION DATE: March 17,1987
ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 8528
P. W. R. Corporation CONTRACT FOR:
P. 0. Box 249 One story block
Highland City, Fl. 33846 office building
CONTRACT DATE: October 13,1986
You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract:
1. Delete sod inside area west of evidence storage
building
2. Change chainlink .fence from 6'-0" high to 10'-0"
high at area west of evidence storage building
3. Add6onc:rete paving inside fenced area west of
evidence storage building
(See attached break up information)
Deduct: $ 1,347.00
Add: $ 1,893.00
Add: $17,849.62
Total Add: $18,395.62
Not valid until signed by both the Owner and Architect.
Signature of the Contractor indicates his agreement herewith, including any adjustment in the Contract Sum or Contract Time.
The original (Contract Sum) was ........................... $ 2,106,155.00
Net change by previously authorized -Change Orders ................................... $ 47,647.85
The (Contract Sum)(ij(yiXlj�tj�rX1)�¢j�(,19��(prior to this Change Order was .......... $ 2,153,802.85
The (Contract Sum) 0QpXX*XqMW)l;(1XMDXt) will be (increased)X(XX"*XDQKWXX=gX
bythis Change Order.......................................................... $ 18,395:62
The new (Contract Sum) ('�7E') including this Change Order will be ... $ 2,172,198:47
The Contract Time will be (WX%Xt,4JXW3� 'X*4X �X 4Xby ( 0 ) Days.
The Date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is August 21 ,1987 .
"C. E, Block Architect, Inc
�CRCH ITECT
Address
Authorized:
P. W. R. Corporation Chairman of -County Commissioners
CONTRACTOR O R
�-
Address Address
VrP• ��
B BY BY
4DATE _ ,xj/� 94^ DATE DATE —
AIA DOMMENT Wal • CHANGE C APRIL 1978E TION ' AIAa • ® 1978
veer
16
L. Capital Purchases for Road & Bridge
The Board reviewed memo from OMB Director Baird:
TO: Honorable Members of DATE: March 27, 1987
the Board of County
Commissioners
THROUGH: Jim Davis C?
Public Works
FROM: Josep Baird
OMB Director
SUBJECT: CAPITAL PURCHASES
FOR ROAD AND BRIDGE
In the 1986/1987 budget hearings, the Board of County
Commissioners authorized $195,600 of Federal Revenue Sharing to
purchase the equivalent of a D-7 Dozer. The dozer and a bucket have
been purchased at a cost of $151,729 leaving an additional $43,871.
Road and Bridge Department would like permission to use the
remaining funds to replace two (2) existing half -ton pick-up trucks
and two (2) tractors which are becoming maintenance problems.
Items being replaced are:
Tractors - Two 1974 Massey Fergusons
Pick-up Trucks - 1971 Ford Pick-up with over 300,000 miles
1981 Datsun Pick-up with over 60,000 miles
(body extremely deteriorated)
The purchases will not require the appropriation of additional
funds. If the Board of County Commissioners approves, these items will
be purchased from State Contract.
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve the
purchase of above capital items.
Commissioner Bird commented that we are replacing a Datsun
that only has 60,000 miles on it, but it seems the body is
completely deteriorated. He believed we should be careful about
buying something more durable.
Chairman Scurlock noted that he does not like to see
justification for new equipment being based on the fact that
something came in under budget.
The OMB Director noted the equipment in Road 6 Bridqe is in
such bad shape that we have been spending a fortune on repairs,
and we, therefore, are trying to replace as much as possible.
17 BOOK 67 Fn 94
BOOK 6) 7 fA,F. 70 5
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously authorized
the Road & Bridge Department to purchase two tractors
and two half -ton pick-up trucks from State Contract
as recommended by staff.
M. Budget Amendment _ Copy Machine for_P&Z Department
The Board reviewed memo of the OMB Director:
TO: Honorable Members of
the Board of County
Commissioners
FROM: Jose A. Baird
OMB Director
ACCOUNT NUMBER
004-205-515-066.41
004-205-515-034.63
004-205-581-099.91
EXPLANATION
DATE: March 24, 1987
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
TO PURCHASE
ACCOUNT TITLE
Office Furn. & Equipment 4,095
Maint.-Off ice Equipment 954
Reserve for Contingency
DECREASE
5,049
The copy machine in the Planning and Zoning Department is beyond
repair and they are requesting permission to purchase a replacement.
Funds need to be transferred from contingencies since this was an
unanticipated capital purchase.
Commissioner Bird wanted to know who made the decision this
machine is beyond repair, and if it actually is, he would request
the Purchasing Department to do some real negotiating on this
item as the market for copy machines is very competitive.
Chairman Scurlock wished to know why we are taking the funds
from Reserve for Contingency instead of salary accounts since we
have had some turnover there.
OMB Director Baird noted that he is not allowed to transfer
money from salary accounts unless he brings it back to the Board.
He stated that he can do it either way, but would rather see it
out of contingencies.
18
Commissioner Eggert expressed her feeling that when we set
up a salary line, especially in a department where there is flux,
it just isn't good to attack the salaries. She felt this takes
decision making away from the departments in terms of hiring and
would rather see the funds taken from contingencies.
Chairman Scurlock pointed,out that the salary account builds
up when the positions are not filled, and he did not see how it
affects decision making.
Commissioner Eggert understood that, but continued to
emphasize that she just felt strongly about not attacking the
salary account.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved
the above budget amendment.
N. Budget Amendment - Veteran's Services Travel_ Allowance
The Board reviewed the following memo:
TO: Joe Baird, DATE: March 17, 1987 FILE:
Budget & Management Director
THROUGH:
Tammy `Phomas,
Intergovernmen Coordinator
SUBJECT: Request for Budget Increase
(Travel & Per Diem; Meetings
and Seminars)
.c0 .0
FROM., vincent ann REFERENCES:
Veteran Service Officer
In October, 1986, I was selected as the East Central Florida State
Representative of the County Veterans Association Executive Com[-Li.ttee. Due
to the additional responsibilities in working with this state organization,
my travel expenses will exceed the initial amount set forth in the 86-87
budget.
The upcoming seminars and meetings with projected costs are as follows:
County Service Officers
May - 1987 CVSO Conference, Daytona Beach
Estimated cost for three officers
$1,036.00
APR `l .1987 19 BOOK � f,,-�' '
APR 1 1987
Sept. 1987 VAMC Annual Meeting, Miami
Estimated cost for three officers
Sept. 1987 OPC Riviera Beach,
Estimated cost for one officer
BOOK 61 F'vuF 797
80.80
28.00
County Veteran Service Officer Association
Late Sept. - Early Oct. 1987 FAC Conference, Location Unknown
Estimated Cost for one Officer 365.00
It is anticipated that an additional $1000 will be needed to bring my
budget up to par, due to this extra travel.
035.43 Meetings & Seminars $300
034.02 All Travel $700
OMB Director Baird noted that the Veteran's budget is a very
small budget, and since Mr. McCann was selected as an Executive
Committeeman of the State Association of County Veteran Service
Officers, it will require more travel.
Chairman Scurlock just questioned the benefit of this travel
and whether it affects the county in a positive way.
After some discussion, it was suggested the matter be tabled
until Veterans Service Officer McCann can be present.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously tabled
discussion on the above item until later in the
meeting when Mr. McCann will be present.
O. Agreement with -Hawk's Nest Assoc. for Reclaimed Water
The Board reviewed memo of the Assistant Utility Director:
20
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: April 1, 1987
THRU: CHARLES P. BALCZUN
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
VIA: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY ICES
FROM: JEFFREY K. BARTON Q.�-'
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES ZJ
SUBJECT: AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AND HAWK'S NEST
ASSOCIATES, LTD. FOR DELIVERY AND USE OF RECLAIMED WATER
BACKGROUND
As part of the Gifford Sewer Project, the Division of Utilities
Service has been entering into agreements with golf courses within the
area for delivery and use of reclaimed water. The attached agreement
is the last agreement needed to complete the requirements of the
Department of Environmental Regulation for the issuance of our permits
for the Gifford Sewer Plant.
RECOMMENDATION
The Division of Utility Services recommends to the Board of County
Commissioners that they approve the agreement and authorize the
Chairman, on behalf of the County, to sign the agreement after its
execution by Hawk's Nest Associates, Ltd.
County Attorney Vitunac advised that he received a call
yesterday from Attorney Bill Caldwell representing the Hawk's
Nest in regard to a change in the agreement. Hawk's Nest had
agreed to a one million gpd right to dispose of effluent on the
golf course, and there would be no charge on that one million.
The agreement reached by Attorney Caldwell and Director Pinto was
that this figure would drop to 700,000 gpd maximum guaranteed,
and we may charge for anything over that, but-A-ey will accept
the excess only by mutual agreement.
This was confirmed by Attorney Caldwell.
On Motion by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved
the Agreement with Hawk's Nest Associates, Ltd.,
with the above modification.
(AGREEMENT WILL BE MADE A PART OF THE RECORD WHEN FULLY
EXECUTED AND RECEIVED.)
21
BOOP f��E�
r-
SPR 7 198
P. Lien Releases - SR60 Water and Sewer
Boos 67 DGE 799
The Board reviewed memo from County Attorney Vitunac:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
'� (.fir (;' U►,��i'�M��...
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: March 30, 1987
RE: CONSENT AGENDA - BCC MEETING 4/7/87
SEVERAL LIEN RELEASES
STATE ROAD 60 WATER 8 SEWER
At this time this office is processing the following matters
and requests permission for the Chairman to execute the
standard release forms:
(1) Full Satisfaction on Maps C-1 6 C -2 -
State Road 60 Wastewater
Paid by The Edward J. DeBartolo Corp.
215 ERUs reserved by John Sutherland
(2) Full Satisfaction on Map G
State Road 60 Wastewater
Paid by The Edward J. DeBartolo Corp.
59 ERUs reserved by Paul E. Austin
(3) Partial Release on Map #14
State Road 60 Water/Release of One ERU
Paid by Planned Development Corp.
LUNDMARK (1925 Sixty Oaks Lane)
(4) Partial Release on Map C-3
State Road 60 Wastewater/Release of One ERU
Paid by Planned Development Corp.
LUNDMARK (1925 Sixty Oaks Lane)
(5)
Partial Release on Map #14
State Road 60 Water/Release of One
ERU
Paid by Planned Development Corp.
LUNDMARK (1927 Sixty Oaks Lane)
(6)
Partial Release on Map C-3
State Road 60 Wastewater/Release of
One ERU
Paid by Planned Development Corp.
LUNDMARK (1927 Sixty Oaks Lane)
(7)
Partial Release of Map N
State Road 60 Water/Release of One
ERU
Paid by Sexton
Lot 34 of Old Sugar Mill Estates, Unit
III
(8)
Partial Release of Map #41
State Road 60 Wastewater/Release of
One ERU
Paid by REALCOR-VERO BEACH ASSOC.
Lot 273S of Countryside Mobile Home
Park
^Add itional
Office.
back-up is on file in the County Attorney's
22
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized
the Chairman to execute eight (8) Lien Releases for
SR60 Sewer 8 Water as listed above.
COPIES OF SAID RELEASES ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE
BOARD.
Q. Annexation of County Enclave (Pebble Bay Area) into Indian
Five r—SFU— e s — —
The Board reviewed memo of County Attorney Vitunac:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
e-,_ �� �3�-
FROM: Charles.P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: March 31, 1987
RE: CONSENT AGENDA - BCC MEETING 4/7/87
ANNEXATION OF COUNTY ENCLAVE ON BEACH
INTO TOWN OF INDIAN RIVER SHORES
Last January I was authorized by the Board to appear at the
Pebble Bay Home Owners' Association meeting at the Town of
Indian River Shores City Hall. At that meeting, Indian
River Shores and Vero Beach were represented respectively by
their City Managers, and the three of us answered questions
for an hour and one half concerning the relative advantages
or disadvantages of the Pebble Bay area remaining in the
unincorporated area or annexing into either one of the two
adjacent municipalities.
I am enclosing a letter from the Association which shows
that the county enclaves have voted to annex into the Town
of Indian River Shores.
23
BOOK 67 FAGE 800
APR 7 1987
Mr. Joe Dorsky
City Manager of Indian River Shores
6001 North AIA
Indian River Shores, FL 32963
Dear Mr. Dorsky:
BOOK f'AE
Pebble Bay Property Owners Assoc.
P. 0. Box 3073
Vero Beach, FL 32963
MAB 1987
March 20, 1987 XECr
.— 1'v
Thanks again for your personal efforts in coming to our January meeting and
spending your time answering questions from our members. Shortly after your
departure a straw vote was taken on the annexation question. I am happy to inform
you at this time, that the vast majority of voters was in favor of annexing into
Indian River Shores. I understand that the neighbors to our north have meanwhile
established similar mandates by their memberships, so that the road seems clear for
a swift and smooth squaring off of your town's city limits to the South.
The board of Pebble Bay Property Owners Association has authorized me to hereby
request initiation of annexation procedures by the town council of Indian River
Shores. We all hope, that the now following bureaucratic hurdles can be taken
without a hitch, and we are looking forward to a fruitful and enjoyable association
with the distinguished town of Indian River Shores. We can assure you that we will
work together with you in assuring a beautiful entrance to Indian River Shores from
the South as much as according to your statement you are committed to develop the
area on the town's southern end in an aesthetic manner once the boundaries are
squared off, Our association would appreciate if you could confirm to this in
writing.
Thanks again for all your help in opening up the proper lines of understanding and
any help you personally provide during the annexation procedures and in the years
to follow.
Sincerely,
Walter M. Zeck
Pres., Pebble Bay Property Owners Assoc.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously accepted
the above information for the record.
R. Permission to Advertise for Special Master for P.A.A.B.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized
advertisement for a Special Master for the Property
Appraisal Adjustment Board.
24
S. Rental of Voting Equipment - Policy re Special_ Elections
The Board reviewed memo from the Supervisor of Elections:
I
March 31., 1987;
TO: DON C. SCURLOCK, JR., CHAIRMAN, BCC
FROM: ANN ROBINSON, SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
RE: AGENDA ITEM, BCC MEETING OF APRIL 7, 1987
1. Rental of voting equipment
2. Policy regarding special elections
1'. I request your approval of the following charges for use of
the County's voting equipment:
Voting Booth $ 15.00 each
Transfer Case 3.00 each
Ballot Box 3.00 each
Card Reader 500.00 each
To Prepare Booths 20.00 hour
Transportation Costs as determined by Road & Bridge
2. I request your approval of the following policy regarding
special elections:
A. The governing body that wants to hold a special election
must receive approval from the Supervisor of Elections(SOE)
and the Board of County Commissioners(BCC) at a regularly
scheduled meeting of the BCC a minimum of three -months
before the special election is to be held.
B. The cost of the special election will be estimated by the
SOE at the time that a governing body requests a special
election. That amount will be stated as part of the approval
by the SOE and the BCC with the stipulation that a check for
the amount will be remitted to the SOE by the governing body
three months before the desired election or no election will
be held.
Because all funds received by the SOE are turned in to the
BCC General Fund, the approval by the BCC to hold the special
election would include the approval of a transfer of funds
from General Funds Contingency to --the elections account
001-700-519-036.74, Special Elections Expense, upon receipt
of the check from the governing body requesting the special
election. Any money not spent on the special election would
be returned to the governing body.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
charges for use of the County's voting equipment.
and the policy regarding special elections as set
out in the above memo.
T. Additional Costs of 3/10/87 Special Election
The Board reviewed memo of Supervisor Robinson:
25 BOOK 67 F,�GE 80E
rAPR. 7198T
'Vfl ERCP
DON C. SCURLOCK, JR., CHAIRMAN, BCC
FROM:
•
OF ELECTIONS
RE:
o .�
OF APRIL 7, 1987
COSTS OF MARCH 10 SPECIAL
ELECTION
I request
that the BCC reimburse
ANN ROBINSON
SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
1840 25TH STREET, SUITE N-109
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960-3394
TELEPHONES: (305) 567-8187 or 567-8000
March 31, 1987
BOOK 6
7
4"r
TO:
DON C. SCURLOCK, JR., CHAIRMAN, BCC
FROM:
ANN ROBINSON, SUPERVISOR
OF ELECTIONS
RE:
AGENDA ITEM, BCC MEETING
OF APRIL 7, 1987
COSTS OF MARCH 10 SPECIAL
ELECTION
I request
that the BCC reimburse
the Elections budget,
account
#001-700-519-036.74, an
additional $1,613
expended
for your Special Election
on March 10. This
amount
is in addition to the $15,000
that was estimated
in my
memo of November 21, 1986.
Additional expenses
were due
to the inclusion of the
North County Fire
District
Referendum item and moving
two polling places.
ACTUAL
EXPENSES CHARGED TO BCC:
11.13
Other Salaries & Wages-
$11,448
11.14
Overtime
204
12.11
Social Security Matching
99
33.19
Other Professional Services
7'50.
34.02
All Travel
84
34.21
Postage
449
34.42
Rent
120
34.72
Outside Printing
1,361
34.91
Legal Ads
881
35.11
All Office Supplies
263.
35.29
Other Operating Supplies
954
$16,613
36.74
Received from BCC
-15,000
36.74
Requested from BCC
$ 1,613
As per
discussion with Joe Baird,
Budget Director, the
difference
will have to be transferred
from General Fund
Contingencies.
ACTUAL EXPENSES NOT CHARGED TO BCC:
Transportation Costs $1,608
Data Processing Costs 509
Staff Time & Benefits 7,997
$10,114
ESTIMATED INCOME FROM MUNICIPALITIES:
(Based on 25C per registered voter)
City of Vero Beach $2,573.50
City of Sebastian 1,000.75
City of Fellsmere 162.00
$3,736.25
There were 43,126 registered voters eligible to vote in
the Special Election. There were 8,147 who voted --19%.
Age 18-24, 85 voted, 1.0%
Age 25-34,. 393 voted, 4.8%
Age 35-44, 640 voted, 7.9%
Age 45-54. 785 voted, 9.6%
Age 55-64, 1875 voted, 23.0%
Age 65 -up, 4369 voted, 53.6%
Dr. Don Hylton wrote a program so that figures will be
available for future elections after we put the voter
history on the computer. This helps us in planning for
elections as well as making this information available
for those who are interested. 26
Chairman Scurlock's question was whether the expense due to
the inclusion of the North County Fire District Referendum should
be paid by the Commission or the North County Fire District.
OMB Director Baird stated that it should come from the
North County District, and he will transfer it if the Board
authorizes him to.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously authorized
reimbursement of the Elections budget as requested
with the above modification.
U. Community Services Block Grant Housing Rehab. ProgramFY87
The Board reviewed memo from Guy Decker, Executive Director
of the Housing Authority:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: March 31, 1987 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
Through: Charles P. Balczun
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Community Services Block Grant
Housing Rehabilitation Program
Federal Fiscal Year 1987
FROM: Guy L. Decker, Jr. REFERENCES:
Executive Director
IRC Housing Authority
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the County Commission.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The State of Florida's Department of Community Affairs has once again
allocated $6,295 to Indian River County under their CSBG Program, and the
Housing Authority would like to utilize this grant to provide rehabilita-
tion housing consulting services which activates rehabilitation funding
from governmental sources. This program will run from April 1, 1987 to
September 30, 1987.
The Farmers Home Administration Section 504 Program provides housing
rehabilitation loans and grants to low-income and elderly persons who lack
the finances to make their homes decent, safe and sanitary and free of
health and safety factors.
27
a00K U 7 1 F. 8;fJ 4,
r
APR 7 1987
BOOK 67 P3C� 5
This 1987 Program is targeted in the Gifford Area of the County and
16 low-income and elderly owners will have their homes brought up to safe
and sanitary standards. It's also targeted in Wabasso and Old Oslo Park Areas.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
This is our fifth year of funding under legislation passed by the
Congress which consolidates various social programs into the block grant
categories.
RECOMMENDATION:
We respectfully request the County Commission to authorize its Chairman
to execute the Award Agreement for submission to the Department of Community
Affairs for this CSBG grant.
This program will bring about improvements in safety and sanitation for
sixteen (16) homeowners with an average cost of $4,800 per unit. The $6,295
Grant plus $2,695 in cash and in-kind contributions by the Housing Authority
will be supplemented with $48,000 in loans and grants from the Farmers Home
Administration.
This program requires no additional County funds.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized
the Chairman to execute the Community Services
Block Grant Award Agreement for submission to the
DCA.
(COPY OF AWARD AGREEMENT ON FILE IN OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE
V. Utility Improvements - Oslo & US[ - 27th Ave. 8 8th St.
The Board reviewed memo from Engineer Jeffrey Boone:
28
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DATE: APRIL 1, 1987
THRU: CHARLES P. BALCZUN
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR /
VIA: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SEAS
FROM: JEFFREY A. BOONE n�
ENGINEERING OPERATIONS MANAGER (�
DIVISION OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS AT THE INTERSECTION OF OSLO ROAD
AND U.S. 1 AND 27TH AVENUE AND 8TH STREET
BACKGROUND AND INFORMATION
The Division of Public Works is preparing to construct major road
improvements at the subject intersections. Likewise, the Division of
Utility Services is planning expansions to the water distribution
system in the same areas. In particular, an 8 inch water line is
scheduled to be extended along the west side of U.S. 1 from Oslo Road
to the Grove Isle Development in the immediate future. In the more
distant future, a 12 inch water line along 8th Street and a 16 inch
water line along 27th Avenue will be required to meet the water system
master plan requirements. In order to develop the water distribution
system in an orderly fashion and to alleviate conflicts in
construction, the Division of Utility Services proposes to construct
dry water lines in the subject intersections to accommodate future
expansion of the system. The subject utility improvements have
therefore been included in the Public Works road improvement projects.
ANALYSIS
Attached for your review are copies of the bid tabulations for the
subject road improvements, along with bids for the utility
improvements. Dennis L. Smith, Inc., with Coastline Utilities, Inc.
as a subcontractor for utilities, submitted the low bid for the
roadway as well as the utility improvements.
Outlined below are costs for engineering by Lloyd and Associates,
Inc., as well as construction costs by Dennis -L. Smith, Inc. for the
utility improvements for the subject intersections.
PROJECT ENGINEERING
Oslo Road &
U.S. 1 $ 750.00 max.
27th Avenue & 10% of construction
8th Street not to exceed $2,500
TOTAL $3,250.00
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL
$ 6,200.00
47,709.50
$53,909.50
$ 6,950.00
50,209.50
$57,159.50
The subject utility improvements will be funded through the Division
of Utility Services Impact Fee Fund. The dry line extension at the
intersection of Oslo Road and U.S. #1 will ultimately be funded with
the upcoming assessment for the balance of the U.S. #1 project. It
is anticipated that the 8th Street and 27th Avenue improvements will
ultimately be funded in a similar fashion.
RECOMMENDATION
The Division of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County
Commissioners approve the subject utility improvements in conjunction
with the Division of Public Works road improvements projects, and
thereby authorize payment for engineering services to Lloyd and
Associates, Inc. in the amount of $3,250.00 maximum and construction
costs to Dennis L. Smith, Inc. in the amount of $53,909.50.
APR 1987 29 BOOK
1`7 PAGE 806
APR °gid 1981
Boos 6 7 F�v" 80
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
the above described utility improvements in conjunc-
tion with the Division of Public Works road improve-
ment projects and thereby authorized payment for
engineering services to Lloyd and Associates, Inc.,
in the amount of $3,250 maximum and for construction
costs to Dennis L. Smith, Inc., in the amount of
$53,909.50.
CONTRACT TSQST'E,N' H:E ok��'�GI� OF �'II;: C�I��K, 'I~0 'SHE: Bpm
W. Final Assessment Roll - 77th Court South of Roseland Road
The Board reviewed memo of Civil Engineer Michelle Terry:
TO:THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF DATE:March 30, 1987 FILE:
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THROUGH:
Charles P. Balczun
County Administrator Final Assessment Roll for
�!/'� /'�-�-2 ' t� SUBJECT: 77th Court south of Roseland
Rali Tl. Brescia, P.E. Road
County Engineer
: �), C' t �L c�/ , 0?.,.2 i
FROM: Michelle A. Terry
Civil Engineer REFERENCES.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The paving of 77th Court South of Roseland Road is.complete. The
final cost and preliminary estimate for the work was:
Final Cost/FF Prelim. Const/FF Final Cost Prelim. Est
77th Court $9.1909 $9.7008 $8,876.12 $9,375.51
All construction cost are under the original estimate. The Final
Assessment Roll has been prepared and is ready to be delivered to the
Clerk to the Board. Assessments are to be paid within 90 days or in
two equal installments, the first to be made twelve months from the due
date and the second to be made twenty-four months from the due date at
an interest rate of 12% established by the Board of County Commission-
ers. The due date is 90 days after the final determination of the
special assessments.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Since the final assessment to the benefited owners will be less
than -computed on the preliminary assessment rolls, the only alternative
presented is to approve the final assessment rolls.
30
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
It is recommended that the Final Assessment Rolls for the paving
of 77th Court be approved by the Board of County Commissioners and that
they be transferred to the Office of the Clerk to the .Board for
collection. -
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
Final Assessment Roll for the Paving of 77th Court
south of 105th Street and authorized transferral to
the Office of Clerk to the Board for collection at
an interest rate of 120.
X. Budget_ Amendment - Sheriff's Monthly Computer Service Charge
The Board reviewed memo of SHeriff Dobeck:
�fjeriff
P. O. BOX 608
PHONE 569-6700
March 17, 1987
R.T."T I NI' D O B E C K- INDIAN RIVER CO UN7Y
MEMBER FLORIDA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
MEMBER OF NATIONAL SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32961-0608
F.611011987
_o
cot
Jrs
Honorable Don C. Scurlock, Chairman fl�°N
Board of County Commissioners'.
Indian River County ��l tiEd�i
1840 25th Avenue
' Vero Beach, FL 32960,
RE: COMPUTER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
Dear Doug:
Several months ago the Board of County Commissioners directed
this office to establish a centralized consolidated dispatching
operation and the Data Processing Committee assigned a Data
General S-130 computer to my Department. The service agreement
for this computer has a monthly charge of $1,053. I am request-
ing the transfer of $10,530 from my current year budget contin-
gency into operating expense to cover this unanticipated expense.
Sin relf\
R. T. "Tim" Dobeck, Sheriff
Indian River County
0 f'A;E ��0
31 Boa
r
APR 1987
BOOK
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
the budget amendment requested by Sheriff Dobeck,
as follows:
ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT TITLE INCREASE DECREASE
001-600-581-099.04 Sheriff -Operations 10,530
001-600-581-099.91 Remove from Contingency 10,530
Y. Permission—to Obtain Temporary Financing - 9.2M Gifford Sewer
project----- ------- ---------------- --------
The Board reviewed memo of the OMB Director:
TO: Honorable Members of
the Board of County
Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
DATE: April 1, 1987
SUBJECT: PERMISSION TO OBTAIN
TEMPORARY FINANCING
FOR $9,200,000 GIFFORD
SEWER PROJECT
The Office of Management and Budget is requesting permission
to proceed in obtaining temporary financing for the $9,200,000
Gifford Bond Issue. The County has already gone through the
validation process and will award contracts in the near future to
obtain a Letter of Commitment from Farmers Home Administration.
M. G. Lewis will be underwriter for the Gifford Issue.
RECOMMENDATION
Board of County -Commissioners authorize staff to proceed in
obtaining temporary financing for the $9,200,000 Gifford Issue.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously granted
permission for staff to pursue temporary financing
for the$9.2 million Gifford Bond Issue.
Z. Permission to Obtain Financing.for Misc. Capital Projects
The Board reviewed memo of OMB Director Baird:
32
Vr
TO: Honorable Members of
the Board of County
Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
DATE: April 1, 1987
SUBJECT: PERMISSION TO PROCEED
IN OBTAINING FINANCING
The Office of Management and Budget is requesting permission
to proceed in obtaining financing for the following:
CAPITAL PROJECTS
$1,587,000 The shortfall in the construction
of the Sheriff's Building and
Communication Center.
$1,218,000 Shortfall in construction of Phase
II of Jail - Minimum Security
Facility.
$ 350,000 Property acquisition and design
costs for future office
requirements.
$3,155,000 PROJECT COSTS
THE AMOUNTS QUOTED DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST EXPENSE,
INSURANCE COSTS OR BOND DISCOUNT.
It is estimated the total bond issue will be approximately
$3,500,000. July 5, 1985 we validated the issuance of up to
$25,000,000 in bonds of which half -cent sales tax revenue was to
pay the debt service. The County has issued $9,855,000 in bonds
since the validation leaving sufficient funds to accommodate the
additional financing. M.G. Lewis will be the underwriter on the
bond issue (See attached agreement).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff would like authorization to proceed in obtaining
financing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously granted
permission for staff to pursue obtaining financing
for the capital projects listed above.
REQUEST TO RENT JET SINS ON WABASSO_CAUSEWAY (K_ HEALY)
Commissioner Bird reviewed the following memo:
APR 7 1987 33
BOOK U, 7 u""" 80,
BOOK 67
TO' County Commissioners DATE: March 13, 1987 FILE:
SUBJECT:
Request to rent jet
skis at Wabasso Causeway
FROM: Richard N. Bird REFERENCES:
Chairman
Parks and Recreation Committee
s
Kevin Healy, a science teacher at Vero Beach High School, has
requested permission to rent two jots skis from the northeast end
on the north side of the Wabasso Causeway.
There were only three members present at the March 12, 1987 Parks
and Recreation Committee meeting which did not represent a
quorum, however, the three members unanimously recommended that
Mr. Healy be allowed to rent the jet skis from the above -stated
location, and that an agreement be entered into between the
County and Mr. Healy. The Committee cautioned Mr. Healy, if
complaints are received because of the operation pf his business,
they will then recommend that the lease be revoked.
I respectfully request that the County Commission approve the
request, and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached lease.
Administrator Balczun emphasized that he has no objection to
the renting of the jet skis but just the liability arising from
the private operation, as set out in the following memo:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: April 6, 1987 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: KEVIN HEALY JET SKI RENTAL -
INSURANCE COVERAGE
Ar
_ ,C
FROM: Charles P. Balczun REFERENCES: o APR 1987
County Administrator RECEIVE®
%`J, BOARD EoUfM
` . muUtIMMurnn
On Tuesday, April 7, 1987 you will consider entering into an agreb nt with
Kevin Healy by which he would engage in rental of jet skis from Wabasso Cause-
way.
It is imperative that such a contract not be executed unless Kevin Healy retains
- _ all risks arising from this operation. As we are all aware, in the event of
liability arising as a result of injuries sustained from use of a jet ski, the
County certainly would be deemed to have the deepest pockets. Therefore, Kevin
Healy must indemnify and protect the County from all costs whatsoever.
I have spoken with Mr. Healy and informed him this would be my recommendation
to the Board of County Commissioners. I further informed him that the most _
acceptable attestation of this policy would be the original copy or a true certi-
fied copy of an insurance policy with such limits as well as the original copies
or certified true copies of all endorsements thereto.
I recognize that this requirement may place an onerous burden on Mr. Healy;
however, there is absolutely no reason the taxpayers of Indian River County
should be exposed to ptential catastrophic losses arising from litigation.
In fact, this philosophy should be applied with respect to all such agreements
the County may enter into.
Assistant County Attorney Barkett noted that the contract
calls for Mr. Healy to indemnify the county and provide
insurance.
Chairman Scurlock expressed concern about the Causeway
becoming a carnival - we have the sailboards there already, and
where do you. stop? He believed some of the adjacent residents
are impacted by the activity, and we have received letters
expressing concern about the noise that would be generated by the
jet skis.
Commissioner Bowman pointed out that the southern limit of
the Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge is right there at the
base of the island to the north (Preacher's Island.)
Kevin Healy, applicant, advised that he proposed to limit
the jet ski area. They do have a list of rules; they have only
three skis; and he felt he could control the operation within the
limited area. The hours he is requesting would be 11:00 A.M. to
4:00 P.M. only on weekends and holidays, and he has talked to a
marine biologist and would agree to suspend activity in the
spawning season for sea trout. Further, the skis have been
insulated for noise and have been throttled down.
Commissioner Bird questioned if the project would be econom-
ically viable operating only on weekends and holidays and not at
all in the months of spawning season between May and September.
Mr. Healy explained that this is not his sole means of
income; obviously it would affect it, but it is the seasonal
tourist he is looking for. He noted that this is the safest
X987 35
BOOK 67 f' ;t 812
APR 7 19 7 BOOK � �+ ;:a, r. '3
location he has found in the county as it has the least exposure
to power boats and is well away from the IntraCoastal Waterway
channel.
Roger Cooper, informed the Board that he lives in a small
subdivision a half mile south of the Wabasso Causeway. He
presented pictures taken the last week of March showing many
ducks in this area and objected to Mr. Healy's proposal based on
the following: (1) environmental concerns, i.e., jet skis going
through sea grass beds and scaring wildlife; (2) complete
incompatibility with other recreational activities on the
Causeway - fishing, in particular; and (3) lack of a comprehen-
sive policy for use of county parks. Mr. Cooper feared this
could lead to parasailing, hot dogs, roller coasters, and other
commercial activities. He felt Mr. Healy's self-imposed
restrictions are well intended but unenforceable, and that in any
event, a lease for $100 a year is not adequate.
Albert Pincus, Attorney for Seacrest Estates, Inc., the
developer of Orchid Island Estates and also one of the principles
of that corporation, advised that he was present to express their
objection to the application made by Mr. Healy and their
agreement with Mr. Cooper's statements. He noted that Seacrest
owns 350 acres of which they have developed only 72. They have
agreed to save the remainder of the acreage as a wildlife
preserve, and this will be endangered by the proposed operation.
Mr. Pincus saw no need for this type of operation and urged that
the Board reject the application.
Terry Parsons, owner and operator of the Wabasso Tackle
Shop, expressed his objections to the proposed operation based on
the fact that jet skies will -definitely have an adverse effect on
the fishing on the Causeway. He noted that he has fished in a
similar area where the jet skiers did not stay in their defined
area but ran across fishermen's lines.
Dan Preuss, Live Oak Drive, agreed with those opposing the
proposed jet ski operation.
He advised that several years ago he
36
had a jet ski business in Sebastian, and found the liability -to
be extreme - skiers were.cut by oyster shells, ran into each
other, and would not stay away from the Inlet as required. He
felt restricting them to a 114 mile area would be very hard to
control and that possibly a better place for this would be in the
commercial area. He brought up the possibility of working
something out with the Oyster Bay Condo people.
R. Grant Gilmore, Research Scientist, presented the
following:
R. Grant Gilmore
Research Scientist
Resident Indian River County
1815 Hedden Place, Vero Beach 32960
Commissioners:
Both Mr. Kevin Healy (of 1541 Shoreland Dr., Vero Beach) and Colonel Roger
Cooper (of 336 Live Oak Dr., Pine Island) have discussed with me the plans
for a jet ski concession on the north side of the Wabasso Causeway. One of
the primary reasons I have been quite interested in this development is that
this location was one of my majorA research sites from 1974 to 1981.
The results of this research demonstrated that there are two major
biological conditions that exist a this site that should be considered for
any increase in human use of the area and not just jet ski operations. These
are:
-More juvenile spotted seatrout, 2Znoscion nebulosus, were captured
at this site than at any other of 16 sites between Sebastian and St. Lucie
inlets.
2. The deeper waters throughout this area and extending northward to
the intracoastal waterway are principal spawning sites for the silver perch,
Bairdiella chrysoura, and the spotted seatrout. We have isolated these
areas for study using hydrophone recordings of male sound production and
have found the spawning location to be consistently occupied over multiple
annual cycles.
Mr. Healy has assured me that he would be operating no more than three jet
skis simultaneously within a certain marked course and would seek the sole
concession for jet ski operation at the Wabasso Causeway. He certainly has
good intentions and has shown concern for regional natural resources,
however, I do have reservations regarding any increase in human activity on
the water at this location as we now know through advanced technology and
research efforts that it has major resource value.
I just want those who must make judgements on all anthropomorphic impacts
that may take place at this location to be aware of these resource values.
Thank you.
37.
APR °d 1987 Boas
APP d 1987 7
BOOK F'AUE 815
Claude "Bud" Kleckner of Pelican Island Audubon Society
advised that at a meeting of the Friends of Florida Waterways a
year ago, one of the recommendations was the creation of a Marine
Advisory Board, which has since been established, and the other
was to consider a type of zoning or use plan for the river. He
felt this present proposal is an excellent example of what should
go before that Board and suggested it be sent to the Marine
Advisory Board for study and to determine and mark areas where
people can water ski and jet ski and where they cannot.
Mr. Healy pointed out that one reason he chose that location
is that the area is used by jet skiers already and whether he is
allowed to use the area or not, it still will be used by jet
skiers. He did like Mr. Kleckner's idea of desiunated areas.
Mr. Healy felt he had dealt with all the various concerns and
stated that if any of the skiers did get out of his designated
area, he would shut down himself.
Commissioner Bird informed the Board that when Mr. Healy
presented his proposal to the Parks & Recreation Committee, there
was no opposition and at that time he felt it was a recreational
activity that could be enjoyed. It seems, however, that we have
been presented with many other views and objections, and he now
does not feel the Wabasso site is the proper site for this opera-
tion. He would encourage Mr. Healy to find another location.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler; the Board unanimously denied
Mr. Healy's request to rent jet skis on Wabasso
Causeway.
Chairman Scurlock and Commissioner Wheeler both indicated
that they felt the suggestion of referring this matter to the
Marine Advisory Committee was a good one.
38
COUNTY -INITIATED REZONING - RS -3 TO RS -2 (310 AC. ROSEWOOD RD.)
The hour of 9:05 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 Daily
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 daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
e
a
in the matter of /
In the / Court, was pu...-
fished in said newspaper in the issues of Ate/ LEP If (7d
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; 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
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed beforethis day of�A.D. 19 07
-0791 A
sin M er)
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River dunty, Florida)
NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING r ""
Notice of hearing Initiated by Indian River
County to consider the adoption of a County or-
dinance rezoningg land from: RS 3, Single Family
Residential DlstHct, to RS -2, Single Family Reai-
dential District. The properly is located along
16th Street east of 58th Avenue, south of the
main relief canal, west of 43rd Avenue, and one-
quarter mile north of 12th Street.
The subject property is described as:
All of tracts 11 and 13 lying south of the
Main Relief Canal, all of tracts 14 and
15, and the east 20 acres and the south
635 feet of the west 665 feet of tract 16,
In Section 4, Township 33 South, Range
39 East, as shown on the plat of Indian
River Farms Company Subdivision filed
in the office of the clerk of circuit court
of St. Lucie County, Florida in plat book
2, page 25; said Ind now lying and
--being in Indian River County, Florida.
Kingswood Estates Subdivision as re-
corded In plat book 11, page 86, public
records of Indian River County, Florida;
Sundowners Subdivision as recorded in
Indian n Riveat book r page Couty, Florida;irecords of
All of tract 4, Section 9, Township 33S,
Range 39E, less and except Kingswood
Estates Subdivision;
All of tract 3, Section 9, Township 33S,
Range 39E, less and except Sundown -
ars Subdivision;
Old Sugar Mill Estates Subdivision as re-
corded in plat book 9, page 82, public
records of Indian River County, Florida;
-All of tract 2. Section 9, Township 33S,
Range 39E, less and except Magnolia
Estates Subdivision and Old Sugar Mill
Estates Subdivision;
Magnolia Estates Subdivision as re-
corded in plat book 6, page 60, public
records of Indian River County, Florida;
Hampton Woods Subdivision as re-
corded in plat book 9, page 16, of the
public records of Indian River County,
Florida;
Tract 1, Section 9, Township 33S, Range
39E, less and except Orangewood Es-
tates Subdivision, Brianvood Subdivi-
slon, and Hampton Woods Subdivision;
Briarwood Subdivision as recorded in
plat book 9,' page 81, of the public
records of Indian River County, Florida;
Orangewood Estates Subdivision as re-
corded in plat took 8, page 32, of the
public records of Indian River County,
Florida.
T
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 of the County
Administration Building, located at 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday, April 7,
1987 at 9:05 a.m.
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 the testimony and evi-
dence upon which the appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By -s -Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman
March 18, 1987
Chief Planner Shearer made the following presentation
referring to the attached chart:
39 3 BOOK 7 F'Fi�c
A i 1987
BOOR 7 P, �r S1
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: March 27, 1987 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
if
®0. SUBJECT: COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST
Robert M. Keati g, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY
Planning & Dev opm t Director 310 ACRES FROM RS -3,
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENT-
IAL DISTRICT, TO RS -2,
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENT-
FROIg REFERENCE AL DISTRICT
ichard M. Shearer,
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 April 7, 1987.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The County is initiating a request to rezone approximately 310
acres located along 16th Street (Rosewood Road) and west of 43rd
Avenue, south of the Main Relief Canal, east of- 58th Avenue
(Kings Highway), and one-quarter mile north of 12th Street from
RS -3, Single -Family Residential District (up to 3 units/acre), to
RS -2, Single -Family Residential District (up to 2 units/acre).
On December 2, 1986, the Board of County Commissioners rezoned
122 acres, consisting of all but 28 acres of that part of the
subject property located north of 16th Street, from RS -6,
Single -Family Residential District (up to 6 units/acre), and A-1,
Agricultural District (up to .2 units/acre), to RS -3. The
remaining 28 acres was rezoned from A-1 to RS -3 by the Board on
September 2, 1986. However, at the December 2nd meeting, the
Board indicated that the RS -3 zoning allowed an inappropriately
high density for this area which is currently developed in
one-half acre and larger lots. Based on the existing density,
the Board directed the staff to -prepare a new zoning district to
be utilized in this and other areas which would limit development
to no more than two dwelling units per acre.
On February 3, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners adopted
the RS -2 zoning district which is designed to limit future
single-family residential developments to not more than two units
per acre.
On February 12, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
6 -to -1 to recommend approval of this request except that three
small areas were - deleted from the area proposed for rezoning.
These three areas are:
1) Four small lots located adjacent to Tropicolony
Subdivision;
2) The area north of 16th Street, west of 43rd Avenue and
east of 44th Avenue; and
3) Lots 1 thru 7 of Idlewild Addition.
The four lots adjacent to Tropicolony Subdivision and the lots in
Idlewild Addition were deleted because they would become
nonconforming lots under RS -2 zoning regulations. The- area
between 43rd and 44th Avenue was deleted because the Commission
felt that a higher residential density should be allowed for
properties fronting on 43rd Avenue.
The Community Development Division has appealed this decision in
order for the Board 'of County_ Commissioners to have the
discretion to rezone the entire 310 acres.
40
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 single-family residences, citrus
groves and vacant land. North of the subject property is
Tropicolony, a single-family subdivision zoned RS -6. Further
north, across the Main Relief Canal, is a power substation, a
restaurant and a single-family house zoned CG, General Commercial
District, and vacant land and three single-family residences
zoned CL, Limited Commercial District. East of the subject
property across 43rd Avenue are single-family and multiple -family
residences in the City of Vero Beach. South of the subject
property are single-family residences and citrus groves zoned
A-1. West of the subject property, across Kings Highway, are
citrus groves zoned A-1.
Future Land Use Pattern
The Comprehensive Plan designates the north half of the subject
property (all of the land north of 16th Street) as LD -2,
Low -Density Residential 2 (up to 6 units/acre). The south half
of the subject property (all of the land lying south of 16th
Street) is designated as LD -1, Low -Density Residential 1 (up to 3
units/acre). The maximum development of the subject property
could result in the following number of single-family residences
based on the existing and proposed zoning:
Zoning District Maximum Allowable Residences
RS -3 930
RS -2 620
The proposed RS -2 zoning would allow one-third fewer residences
than the RS -3 district. Based on the existing development
pattern in this area, especially the fact that the vast majority
of the lots are one-half acre or larger in size, the RS -2
district appears to be the more appropriate zoning district.
Transportation System
The subject property has direct or indirect access to Kings
Highway (classified as an arterial street on the County's
Thoroughfare Plan), 43rd Avenue (classified as a primary
collector street), 16th Street (classified as a secondary
collector street), and to several local streets.- The potential
maximum number of average annual daily trips (AADT) generated by
the subject property was calculated based on the existing and
proposed zoning resulting in the following:
Zoning District Maximum Trip Generation
RS -3 6,733 AADT
RS -2 4,489 AADT
The proposed RS -2 zoning would allow development generating
one-third fewer trips than the existing RS -3 zoning.
Environment
The subject property is not designated as
sensitive nor is it in a flood -prone area.
environmentally
41 APR 71987 BOOK U PAGE8 18
BOOK 67 W.R819
Utilities
County water is generally available for this area. County
wastewater facilities are not currently available.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning
Commission's recommendation, staff recommends approval of this
request as modified by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
`I • Ylll [S� -_
LI_I
. s
42
i�
6i
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
Attorney Bennett Rabin of Sam Block's office appeared on
behalf of Ralmar Associates who own the parcel on the northwest
corner of the entire tract being reviewed. He requested that
their parcel be deleted from the consideration today, emphasizing
that Ralmar is opposed to rezoning the entire area and particu-
larly to the rezoning of its parcel. Attorney Rabin stressed
that the Ralmar property is unique; no other parcel within the
area is bordered by two canals. Directly north is the main
relief canal; further north is the commercial area and the
electrical plant; directly west is King's Highway, a major
thoroughfare and the secondary relief canal; and to the south is
16th Street. Most importantly, Ralmar is opposed to the rezoning
to RS -2 because of the earlier rezoning to RS -3. Attorney Rabin
felt the law is clear that any citizen is entitled to rely on the
assurances and commitments of a zoning authority, and he de-
scribed how Ralmar worked with staff to develop the area in
accordance with the zoning designation, stressing the monies and
effort expended, all of which was done in good faith as a result
of this Board's actions in rezoning to RS -3. He, therefore,
asked that Ralmar's property be deleted from the proposed
rezoning to RS -2.
George Beuttell, resident of Rosewood Road, spoke in favor
of the rezoning to RS -2. He noted that the Ralmar people have
continued to come in and get zoning which is contrary to the
nature of the development along Rosewood Road and that they
bought the property even though they knew they would have a very
difficult time trying to rezone it. Mr. Beuttell emphasized that
Rosewood Road is developed mainly in estatesize parcels and
taking the Ralmar property out of the proposed rezoning would
lessen the value of the existing properties. He urged that the
Board rezone the 310 acres to what it should have been from the
beginning - RS -2.
43 BOOK PACE l�
APR 197
APP
7 1987
BOOK
F
FVJE821
Attorney Robin Lloyd came
before the Board on
behalf
of the
Ames family who own property adjacent to and across the street
from the Ralmar property. He noted this is the zoning they asked
for originally and have been asking for, and he believed the
residents of the area agree. Mr. Lloyd requested the Board
approve rezoning to RS -2.
Elmer Barker, Rosewood Road, noted that the residents of the
area have been through this many times before, and he agreed RS -2
would be best for all concerned because of the estatetype
development and that anything above RS -2 would take away from
what is there.
Attorney John Sutherland, resident of 44th Avenue, agreed
with what has been said by the Rosewood residents and advised
that he was appearing in behalf of his neighbors on 44th Avenue
and those who live on the east side of 44th Avenue, north of 16th
St., which area staff now is proposing should be deleted from the
proposed RS -2 rezoning. Attorney Sutherland stated that those on
44th Avenue feet it should be rezoned RS -2. He noted that the
Orths own the south half of the property proposed to be deleted,
and they have said they want it zoned RS -2. The north half
belongs to a church, and he did not believe it would make any
difference to the church whether it was RS -2 or RS -3. He was
just saying that the ones who live there and the ones who still
own it have asked that it be RS -2 and they would request that the
Board not delete their area from the rezoning to RS -2 as proposed
by staff.
It was determined that no one else wished to be heard, and
the Chairman declared the public hearing closed.
Commissioner Eggert inquired why staff felt RS -2 would not
be appropriate for the area discussed by Attorney Sutherland.
Chief Planner Shearer explained that 43rd Avenue is
primarily a collector street, and the property to the east of it
in the City of Vero Beach is currently designated much higher.
It is staff's feeling since Vero Beach is going to have
44
professional offices there, a higher density than RS -2 would"be
appropriate.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously adopted
Ordinance 87-34 rezoning the subject property to
RS -2 except for the following areas set out in
staff's memo of March 27, 1987: 1) Four small
lots located adjacent to Tropicolony Subdivision
and 3) Lots 1 thru 7 of Idlewild Addition. Item
2) regarding the 44th Avenue area is to be included
in the rezoning.
ORDINANCE NO. 87-34
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:
P� 7
�� ,E���� 45 BOOK � �
n
BOOK 9 PA;r (j e
All of tracts 11 and 13 lying south of the Main Relief
Canal, all of tracts 14 and 15, and the east 20 acres and
the south 635 feet of the west 665 feet of tract 16 less the
north 132 feet of the south 635 feet of the east 10 acres of
the west 20 acres, in Section 4, Township 33 South, Range 39
East, as shown on the plat of Indian River Farms Company
Subdivision filed in the office of the clerk of circuit
court of St. Lucie County, Florida in plat book 2, page 25;
said land now lying and being in Indian River County,
Florida.
Kingswood Estates Subdivision as recorded in plat book 11,
page 86, public records of Indian River County, Florida;
Sundowners Subdivision as recorded in plat book 8, page 87,
public records of Indian River County, Florida;
All of tract 4, Section 9, Township 33S, Range 39E, less and
except Kingswood Estates Subdivision;
All of tract 3, Section 9, Township 33S, Range 39 E, less
and except Sundowners Subdivision;
Old Sugar Mill Estates Subdivision as recorded
in plat book 9, page 82, public records of Indian
River County, Florida;
All of tract 2, Section 9, Township 33S, Range 39E, less and
except Magnolia Estates Subdivision and Old Sugar Mill
Estates Subdivision;
Magnolia Estates Subdivision as recorded in plat book 6,
page 60, public records of Indian River County, Florida;
Hampton Woods Subdivision as recorded in plat book 9, page
16, of the public records of Indian River County, Florida;
Tract 1, Section 9, Township 33S, Range 39E, less and except
Orangewood Estates Subdivision, Briarwood Subdivision,
Hampton Woods Subdivision, and Idlewild Addition Subdivi-
sion;
Briarwood Subdivision as recorded in plat book 9, page 81,
of the public records of Indian River County, Florida;
Orangewood Estates Subdivision as recorded in plat book 8,
page 32, of the public records of Indian River County,
Florida.
Be changed from RS -3, Single -Family Residential District, to
RS -2, Single -Family 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 7th day
of April, 1987.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By / G
Don C. Scur ock,r., firman
46
r � r
PUBLIC HEARING - GIFFORD SMALL AREA PLAN
The hour of 9:05 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 Daily
Vera 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 daily newspaper published
at Vero ��B!!ea--cch�h in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
In the matter of PW 41sL, v
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of - __ _ — /!� l_�/ .ry
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publical on of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor prornisad any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Ir
Sworn to and subscribed
(SEAL)
19
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO CONSIDER THE
4` .ADOPTION OF THE GIFFORD AREA ~
PRECISE LAND USE MAP
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 St., Vero Beach, Fior
Ida, on Tuesday, April 7, 1987, at 9:05 a.m. to
consider recommending the adoption of a Reso-
lution concerning the Gifford Area Precise Land
Use Map.
This Precise Land Use Map will cover all prop-
erty In the Gifford area. In some cases, this Map
may Influence the future zoning and develop-
ment allowed on various properties in this area.
A map of the proposed Gifford Area Precise
Land Use Map will be available at the Planning
Department office on the second floor of the
County Administration Building.
r Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision
which may be made at this meeting will need to j
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed-
ings 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 1
March 18,1987 I
Chief Planner Shearer made the staff presentation, noting
that they ended up with a detailed Precise Land Use Map; they
identified a number of issues in the Gifford community and feel
this will meet them.
47 BOOK 67
APR `� .i 7
BOOK 67 pi�-E �5
TO:The Honorable Members DATE: March 27, 1987 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT: THE GIFFORD SMALL AREA
o ert M. Ke t n , AI PLAN AND PRECISE LAND
Planning & Deveilopme& Director USE MAP
FROM: Richard Shearer AICP REFERENCES:
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 April 7, 1987.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The Planning Department has prepared a Small Area Plan and Precise
Land Use Map for the Gifford Area.
This plan was prepared after meeting with representatives of the
Gifford area over a period of twelve months in order to assess the
concerns of the area. During this time, staff also conducted a
detailed land use study of the Gifford area and identifed
conflicts between the existing land use, the existing zoning, and
the Comprehensive Plan policies for regulating the development of
lands in MXD areas, and developed a plan based on the detailed
analysis and the community's concerns.
On February 26, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
4 -to -0 to recommend approval of this plan.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
The analysis of the Gifford area includes a demographic profile of
the community; a descriptive analysis of existing land use; and an
identification of land use issues in the Gifford area.
A detailed land -use proposal and recommendation is made in the
form of a "Precise Land -Use Map" (PLUM) for the Gifford area.
This PLUM delineates all proposed land uses and related zoning
changes. The PLUM is accompanied by written descriptions of the
proposed changes and provides justification for the proposed
changes.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis of the existing zoning and land use in the
Gifford area, staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning
Commission recommend the Gifford Small Area Plan and Precise Land
Use Map to the Board of County Commissioners as a general guide
for future development in the Gifford area.
Commissioner Eggert commended the people of Gifford and
staff for the extraordinary effort they have put into this.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
48
Victor Hart, 34th Avenue, wished to speak in behalf of the
Small Area Plan recommended by the Planning Department. He
realized the Plan does not answer all of the questions or solve
all of the conditions in the area, but noted that staff worked
with the citizens of the community for over a year on this plan;
he felt it is one of the best things that has happened to the
Gifford community to enable them to improve their environment and
wished to commend staff. Mr. Hart recommended adoption of the
Gifford Small Area Plan but commented that he would like to see
the boundary possibly extended further west beyond King's Highway
in the future.
James Richardson, long time county resident, expressed his
gratitude for being able to improve the area, but also expressed
concern about extending the boundaries to the west so possibly
some industry could be developed there that could employ more
people, which would benefit both the Gifford residents and the
county.
It was determined that no one further wished to be heard,
and the Chairman declared the public hearing closed.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 87-34 approving the Gifford Small Area
Plan and Precise Land Use Map.
49
BOOK 67 FAGS p M
BOOK 67 FA,UE 8?7
RESOLUTION NO. 87- 34
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE
ADOPTION OF THE GIFFORD SMALL AREA PLAN AND PRECISE
LAND USE MAP WHICH PROVIDES A GENERAL GUIDELINE FOR
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN THE GIFFORD AREA; AND PROVIDING
FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioenrs of Indian River
County has adopted a Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Ordinance
#82-21, pursuant to Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes requires that
all future development be consistent with the County's adopted
Comprehensive Land Use Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department staff has worked with the
Gifford community during the past fourteen months to formulate a
small area plan for the Gifford area; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has held a public
hearing concerning the Gifford Small Area Plan and Precise Land
Use Map at which parties in interest and citizens were allowed to
speak; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously
to recommend approval of the Gifford Small Area Plan and Precise
Land Use Map; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has held a public
hearing concerning the Gifford Small Area Plan and Precise Land
Use Map at which parties in interest and citizens were allowed to
speak;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida:
1. That the foregoing recitals are adopted and ratified in
their entirety.
2. That the attached Small Area Plan and Precise Land Use Map
will be used as a general guide to future zoning and development
in the Gifford area.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Eggert who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by
Commissiondr Wheeler and, -upon being put to a vote, the
vote was as follows:
50
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner.Carolyn Eggert Aye
Commissioner Gary Wheeler Aye
The chairman there upon declared Resolution No.87- 34
adopted and duly passed this 7th day of April , 1987.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BY i
DON C. SCU OCK, JR AIRMAN
(GIFFORD SMALL AREA PLAN AND PRECISE LAND USE MAP ARE ON FILE IN
THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD.)
PUBLIC HEARING - COUNTY -INITIATED TO ADD RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT
CENTERS TO CL, CG and CH DISTRICTS AS SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE
The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
5 t BOOK / FADE ®k'?�S
APR 7 IR7
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vera 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 daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
A
in the matter
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues ofyzea �i lfr/?
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; 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
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. _ o
Sworn to and subscribed before me thistL�ay of /%`Z�A.D. 19
usine M er)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River difunty, Florida)
(SEAL)
BOOK FnF 829
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
LAND
CONSIDER RECOMMENDING THE
ADOPTION OF A COUNTY ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE COUNTYCOMPREHENSIVE
I PLAN
NOTICE of
Commissioners of V IndiaEN n RiverCooudnty
County
Florida, shall hold a public hearing at whPc Par -
80 OPPOr-
Florida.
in interest and citizens shall County have
unity to be heard, in the Administration Build -
Chambers of the County
ids, located u 184001 7 5987 et t Vero Beach.
to
I an e entitled'
consAiNr the ORD 16tSIE OF Ordina
INDIAN RIVER
w euPFNDING SEC -
19, CL: LIMITED GOP
_11nm 20. CG:
nc nom..
AND SECTION 25.1 REUL
FOR SPECIFIC LAND USES
DIX A OF THE CODE OF Lr
rRDIFLORID KNOWN AS
fY,
FLORIDA FOR
i OF CONFLICTING PROVI EFFEC-
FICATION, SEVERABILITY, AND
TIVE DATE.
I, Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision
which may be made at this meeting will needto
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedinand g
is made which includes the
b testibased.
dance upon which the appeal
1 Indian River Cou C,� missioners
Board of County
g : s Don C. Scurlock, Jt;
Chairman
March 18, 1987
Chief Planner Shearer made the staff presentation, as
follows:
52
TO: The Honorable Members DATE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
March 13, 1987 FILE:
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT:
Robert M. KeatitpAMt
, eAap
Planning & Deve Director
R�
5
FROM.. Richard M. Shearer,
Chief/Long-Range Planning
COUNTY -INITIATED REQUEST
TO ADD RESIDENTIAL TREAT-
MENT CENTERS TO THE CL,
CG, AND CH DISTRICTS AS A
SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of April 7, 1987.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The Planning Department has been approached about the appropriate
location for a drug rehabilitation treatment center. The staff's
original determination was that such a facility should be
classified as a group home and would be allowed as a special
exception use in the RM -6, RM -8, RM -10 and RM -14 zoning
districts.
On February 13, 1987, the staff held a meeting with several
individuals who are trying to establish a drug rehabilitation
treatment center in Indian River County. These individuals
indicated that they were having difficulty in locating suitable
f land in the County for a treatment center and inquired about
allowing these centers in commercial zoning districts. The staff
indicated that this would require an amendment to the zoning
ordinance.
On February 17, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners directed
the Planning staff to prepare a proposed amendment to the zoning
ordinance which would establish Residential Treatment Centers as
a special exception use in the CG, General Commercial District.
On March 12, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted
5 -to -0 to recommend approval of the attached ordinance which
would allow Residential Treatment Centers in the CL, CG and CH
zoning districts as a special exception use.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
Upon discussion with representatives of the mental health
program, it was determined that residential treatment centers
are different than group homes. Residential Treatment Centers
are basically secure treatment facilities treating in -patients,
and these facilities function more like a nursing home or
hospital. In reviewing this proposal, staff notes that it may be
more appropriate to locate such a facility in a commercial area
than in a residential area. This is because treatment facility
residents will not interact with the community, but instead will
be confined to the facility.
The staff has prepared an ordinance to allow Residential
Treatment Centers in the CL, CG and CH districts as a special
exception use which would require approval by the Board of County
Commissioners based on criteria in the ordinance. Staff feels
that while Residential Treatment Centers could be justified in
the CL district as easily as in the CG district, such facilities
would not be appropriate in the CH district which is not designed
for any type of residential use.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the
attached ordinance to allow residential treatment centers in the
CL, CG and CH districts. The staff recommends approval of the
attached ordinance with the exception that residential treatment
centers not be included in the CH district.
APR 7,1 987 53 BOOK 67 Pl r 830
r- -
APR 7 198
BOOK UY 831
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard:
John Turnbull, who has been doing consulting work for the
Mental Health Association, reported that they have looked from
one end of the county to the other for a location for a
residential treatment center and have not been able to find
anything in the way of proper zoning to allow it. They,
therefore, are looking for a way to get a building of some type
zoned in a commercial area. They would like to be able, if
possible, to find and ut.ilize some facility within the commercial
area, whether it be general commercial, heavy or whatever. They
are also looking at vacant land to build upon for the future but
would like to have the Board consider the alternatives for the
types of zoning they can utilize if they should be lucky enough
to find a building they can renovate at a reasonable cost and get
in operation.
It was determined that no one further wished to be heard,
and the Chairman thereupon declared the public hearing closed.
Commissioner Bowman wished to know if this sort of a
facility is permitted in an Agricultural District.
Planner Shearer did not think so because the full intent of
this type facility, i.e., group homes, is to get them in a
residentialtype environment.
Commissioner Eggert pointed out that this is a secure
residential drug treatment facility which is totally different
from a group home. It is more of a hospital and, of course, the
hospital zones are prohibitive. She felt it is a unique type of
facility and so difficult to place in the county that we have to
provide them with every possible option and we should include the
option of CH.
54
M M
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously adopted
Ordinance 87-35 establishing residential treatment
centers as Special Exception Uses in the CL, CG and
CH Districts.
ORDINANCE NO. 87- 35
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING
SECTION 19. CL: LIMITED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, SECTION
20. CG: GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, SECTION 20 (A) .1,
CH, - HEAVY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND SECTION 25.1
REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC LAND USES OF APPENDIX A OF THE
CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, KNOWN AS THE ZONING CODE; PROVIDING FOR
ESTABLISHING RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT CENTERS AS A SPECIAL
EXCEPTION USE IN THE CL, CG AND CH DISTRICTS; AND
PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS,
CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County, Florida, that:
ntar1M1r^" 9
Section 19 (d) (5) is hereby amended as follows:
Section 19. CL: Limited Commercial District
(d) Special Exception Uses
(5) Institutional Uses
- Nursing homes, resthomes, convalescent homes
and homes for the aged.
- Residential treatment centers
Section 20 (d) (3) is hereby amended as follows:
Section 20. CG: General Commercial District
(d) Special Exception Uses
(3) Institutional Uses
Nursing homes, rest homes, convalescent
homes and homes for the aged.
— Raci rlAnl-i al i-rcai-mcn�- i.oni-ori
SECTION 3
Section 20 ,(AY. 1 (d) (4) is hereby created and shall read as
follows:
Section 20 AAY. 1 CH: Heavy Commercial District
(d) Special Exception Uses
(4) Institutional Uses
- Residential Treatment Centers
Section 4
Section 25.1 Regulations for Specific Land Uses, is hereby
amended by creating paragraph 25.1 (f) (7) as follows:
r 55 p y p 9 Ate/ [ (/�}
APR. 11907 UoOr, Y I r1a VO4,
APR 7 `987
BOOK 6 7 FADE 8a3 3
Section 25.1 Regulations for Specific Land Uses
(f) Institutional Uses
(7) Residential treatment centers (Special Exception)
a. Districts requiring special exception:
Residential treatment centers may be allowed
in the CL, CG and CH Districts upon approval as a
special exception as provided in Section 25.3 and
after meeting the requirements defined below._
b. Additional information requirements:
1 The site plan shall denote the location of all
structures and parking facilities, for all
adjacent sites and meet all requirements of
Sections 23.1, 23.2, and 23.3.
2. A floor plan showing the location, size, and
space utilization of each room shall be sub-
mitted.
3 The applicant will identify any and all res-
idential treatment facilities located within
one mile of the site.
4 The applicant shall submit a signed affidavit
stating that all applicable regulations of
Indian River County and the State of Florida
as exist at the time of approval have been
satisfied and that the applicant will comply
with all future regulations.
d. Criteria for Residential treatment centers.
1. Residential treatment centers shall be defined
as a secure treatment facility treating in-
patients and providing a living environment
which includes the supervision and care
necessary to meet physical, emotional and/or
social needs of clients. Residential treatment
centers may house a number of unrelated
individuals undergoing treatment and staff
members responsible for treatment. Residential
treatment centers must meet all 'licensing
requirements of the Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services of the State of
Florida.
2. To avoid unsafe or unhealthy conditions that
may be produced by the overcrowding of persons
living in these facilities, a minimum floor
area per person sl!all be required. Floor area
requirements shall be measured from interior
walls of all rooms including closet space.
(i) Total interior living space. A minimum of
two hundred (200) square feet of interior
living space shall be provided per facility
resident. Interior living space shall in-
clude sleeping space and all other interior
space accessible on a regular basis to all
facility residents.
(ii) Minimum sleeping areas. A minimum of
eighty (80) square feet shall be provided
in each sleeping space for single occu-
pancy. A minimum of sixty (60) square
feet of sleeping space shall be provided
for each bed in a sleeping space for multi-
ple occupancy.
(iii) Bathroom facilities. A full bathroom with
toilet, sink and tub or shower shall be
provided for each five (5) residents. An
additional toilet and sink shall be pro-
vided for each additional group of four (4)
persons or less.
3. The facility shall provide parking at a rate
of one space per 500 square feet of gross
floor area and comply with all other aspects
56
SECTION 5
of the off-street parking requirements of
Section 24. The facility shall meet or exceed
all open space requirements for the respective
zoning district.
4. The maximum capacity of Residential Treatment
Centers shall not exceed the applicable number
permitted by the Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services.
5. No residential treatment center shall be loc-
cated within 1200 feet of any other resi-
dential treatment facility.
6. Residential treatment centers shall have paved
access.
7. Residential treatment centers shall have a
twenty foot buffer strip with Type A screening
at all points where they"abut residentially
zoned property.
REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS
All previous ordinances, resolutions, or motions of the Board
of County Commissioners or Indian River County, Florida which
conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed
to the extent of such conflict. All Special Acts of the
legislature applying only to the unincorporated portion of Indian
River County and which conflict with the provisions of this
ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict.
SECTION 6
CODIFICATION
The provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated into
the County Code 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 intentions.
SECTION 7
SEVERABILITY
If any Section, part of a sentence, paragraph, phrase or word
of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional,
inoperative or void, such holdings shall not affect the remaining
portions hereof and it shall be construed to have been the
legislative intent to pass this ordinance without such
unconstitutional, invalid or inoperative part.
CODING: Words in type are deletions from existing law.
Words underlined are additions.
57
BOOP( 67 Pn,,E 8'134
APR 1987
BOOK 6 7
SECTION 8
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 7th day of April , 1987.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY: / c.
DON C. SCURLOCK, J ;/ CHAIRMAN
LANDCLEARING/MANGROVE ALTERATION VIOLATION (STRAZZULLA - SMITH)
Staff Planner Roland DeBlois made the presentation,
referring to the graphic of the area:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: March 30, 1987 FILE:
Of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
LANDCLEARING/MANGROVE
SUBJECT: ALTERATION VIOLATION
Robert M. Keating, P STRAZZULLA BROS., INC./
Planning DENNIS SMITH INC.
vk�
CV -87-05-199 _
THROUGH: Michael K. Miller Mw
Chief, Environmental Planning
FROM: Roland M. DeBlois 9AD REFERENCES: LANDCLEARING
Staff Planner Disk. MISC1
Environmental Planning Section
It is requested that the data presented herein be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting on April 7, 1987.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITION:
On February 11, 1987, County staff observed that a portion of
parcel number 7-33-40-00000-0030-00001.0 had been cleared,
58
S
including the destruction of ten (10) white mangroves
(Laguncularia racemosa) prior to the issuance of mangrove
alteration and landclearing permits. The referenced cleared
area is approximately 1001X 200' (approx. } acre) in size, and
is located east of and adjacent to the Indian River Boulevard
southern extension project, just south of the 14th Street canal
and Fairlane Harbor mobile home development.
The property is currently owned by Strazzulla Brothers Inc.;
the landclearing was performed by Dennis L. Smith Inc., who is
also contracted by the County to do clearing for the Indian
River Boulevard project.
The Strazzullas own approximately 55 acres of contiguous
property in the referenced area just south of Rockridge subdi-
vision and Fairlane Harbor. Approximately 3 acres of their
property was donated to the County as right-of-way for the
Indian.River Boulevard now under construction. Of the remain-
ing 55+ acres owned by the Strazzullas, approximately 37 acres
are environmentally sensitive wetlands, as depicted on an
environmental survey of the property dated October, 1984 (see
attached). Although the survey indicates that an existing dike
is the western boundary of the environmentally sensitive area,
a field inspection revealed that there are small areas of
wetlands just west of the dike where white mangroves are
evident, mixed in with Brazilian pepper.
On January 27, 1987, A County land clearing permit was issued
to the Strazzullas to clear their property west of the Indian
River Boulevard project. The landclearing permit approved the
removal of Australian pines and Brazilian pepper, west of the
Boulevard project, with a condition that no protected trees
would be damaged or removed.
On February 10, 1987, the Strazzullas submitted an application
for another landclearing permit for the purpose of removing
Brazilian pepper and Australian pines east of the Boulevard
project. On February 11, 1987, a field inspection indicated
that approximately J acre had been cleared east of the Boule-
vard, prior to the issuance of the permit.
The cleared area was not within the environmentally sensitive
area as depicted on the October 1984 environmental survey, but
did include an area with standing water and a mixture of
Brazilian pepper and white mangroves.
On February 18, 1987, staff contacted Terry Cook, Project
Manager for the Indian River Boulevard project. He explained
that the referenced clearing was outside of the Boulevard
right-of-way, and therefore, was not authorized in association
with the project.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS:
Section 231-6 (a) and (b) , Tree Protection, of the Code of Laws
and Ordinances of Indian River County prohibits landclearing
and mangrove removal unless mangrove alteration and landclear-
ing 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 removal and landclearing activity, or by imprisonment
in the County jail for up to sixty (60) day, or both.
Staff met with Mr.
February 20, 1987.
area was to be use
Gene Bass from Dennis Smith, Inc. on site on
He indicated that the referenced cleared
d as a location to burn debris, and the site
59 BOOK a FA6E�P�
APR 7 1997 aooK FA.�P
was selected because it was away -from adjacent residences. He
also mentioned that he thought the landclearing permit issued
for the west side of the Boulevard also included the } acre
area in question. He was not aware that protected trees had
been damaged as a result of the clearing.
Based upon the illegal landclearing and number of protected
white mangroves removed, the maximum fine specified in the
ordinance would be $5,500.00. Mr. Joe Strazzulla indicated
that Strazzulla Brothers, Inc. has been very cooperative with
the County concerning the Indian River Boulevard project and
that any violation of County ordinances was unintentional.
Subsequently, he expressed the interest to bring the matter
before the County Commission for consideration rather than
submit a voluntary payment of the maximum fine.
.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners consid-
er obtaining a voluntary payment of up to $5,500.00, and
require the replanting of ten white mangroves at a suitable
i location on site. In the event that any said agreement is not
forthcoming, staff recommends that the Board of County Commis-
sioners grant staff the authorization to pursue available
remedies in County Court.
Commissioner Bird asked if our ordinance differentiates on
mangroves as to whether they are protected or not depending on
their location, and Planner DeBlois advised that it pretty much
protects mangroves regardless of location.
Joe Strazzulla, President of Strazzulla Bros., came before
the Board representing the land owners and stressed that they
have tried to cooperate in every way. They left what they
thought were sensitive trees and gave those instructions to the
contractor, and he was unaware there were any of these little
white mangroves. Apparently, however, 10 seedlings were
destroyed. It is their understanding replacement seedlings can
be bought for about $14.00 each, and they are willing to do that.
He emphasized that the mangroves in question were not anywhere
near tide water but were in a puddle practically in the middle of
the project. Mr. Strazzulla further noted that they went to the
expense of hiring a biologist who told them there no environmen-
tally sensitive species anywhere west of that environmentally
sensitive line, and they, therefore, did not tell the contractor
to be especially careful because they didn't know anything was
there. What was done was inadvertent.
60
Mr. Strazzulla pointed out that his firm has been
cooperative in donating land for the Indian River Boulevard
extension project, and they would not feel very good if they were
stuck with a very stiff fine for something that was certainly
unintentional.
Doug Flynn, of Dennis Smith, Inc., confirmed that they did
contract with the Strazzullas to do the clearing on the west of
the Boulevard and inadvertently did get some machinery on the
east side. They were not aware there were any mangroves in that
half acre of land, but apparently they did get approximately ten,
which Planner DeBlois has admitted were sparcely mixed. Mr.
Flynn advised that they have ordered 30 plants to replace the 10;
it was entirely an accident; and they are trying to make
restitution.
Chairman Scurlock noted that, in other words, a biologist
had been retained to help develop the site; there was no intent
to remove the mangroves deliberately; and they are trying to
mitigate.
Mr. Strazzulla agreed they will immediately mitigate
whatever is necessary, but noted in their plans to develop, they
may have to go back through the various agencies in regard to
removing more of those. He advised that he has a statement from
Reese Kessler, an environmental consultant, that those mangroves
have no environmental value and again stressed that they are not
in the tidal area but in puddles.
Commissioner Bowman informed Mr. Strazzulla that white
mangroves cannot usually grow in water; so whether or not they
were in water has nothing to do with it. She believed they
should have had their consultant go in and flag those plants and
noted that the state regulations are very lax and they should
abide by the county regulations. Commissioner Bowman also felt
we should monitor any plantings for three years to make sure they
survive.
APR 7.987 61 BOOK 67 Pa Gr �a��
APR ? 1997 BOOK
Commissioner Bird stated that he did feel the violation was
accidental and felt we should not be more punitive than requiring
the replanting.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, to accept the Strazzulla's
offer of planting 30 white mangroves as mitigation
for the violation.
Commissioner Bowman wished to add that the plants should be
monitored for three years, and Director Keating stated that staff
will definitely establish a monitoring program.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
HOUSING AUTHORITY - REQUEST ASSISTANCE RE PHASE 11 VICTORY PARK
The Board reviewed request made by Attorney George Collins
on behalf of the Housing Authority, as follows:
PAUL D. BURCH - 1934 - 1976
GEORGE G. COLLINS. JR.
CALVIN B. BROWN
WILLIAM W. CALDWELL
MARGARET E. MANN
Coui ns, Brown, Caldwell & Mann
CHARTERED
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
March 31, 1987
Hon. Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman, Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Re: Indian River County Housing Authority
Dear Commissioner Scurlock:
PLEASE REPLY TO:
POST OFFICE BOX 3666
744 BEACHLAND BOULEVARD
VERO BEACH. FLORIDA 329W
305-231-4343
As -you are aware, the Indian River County Housing Authority has a
mortgage payment due April 16, 1987, under a development loan
extended by the Department of Community Affairs.
62
By way of history, the Housing Authority negotiated the loan for
the purpose of acquiring land and developing a low-cost rental
housing program to meet the needs of the lower income families in
Indian River County. After the land was acquired, the Authority
hired engineers and architects to develop a plan that would be
approved by Farmers Home Administration. The original plans
submitted to Farmers Home Administration on the Victory Park
Project included one hundred units. Near the end of the review
process, the Housing Authority was advised that Federal funding
was available only for fifty units. Concurrently, the Farmers
Home Administration notified us that they would lend funds to
release property from the Department of Community Affairs' loan to
the extent of the land under the fifty units, road improvements,
and other related amenities. The Housing Authority had no
alternative other than to accept the limitation on funding and get
the Victory Park Project under way. All of you have now had an
opportunity to tour Victory Park, and, I am sure, you appreciate
that the Project.is one of quality and will be a substantial
benefit to Indian River County and the residents who will reside
therein.
Because of the limitation in funding resulting in the inability to
pay off the Department of Community Affairs in full, the Housing
Authority immediately applied with the Farmers Home Administration
for funding on Phase II of the Victory Park Project. We have been
advised by the Farmers Home Administration that Phase II is viable
and fundable including potential grant funds, but that no funding
will occur until completion of Phase I.
You are aware that the Department of Community Affairs, even
though they are fully knowledgeable on the points mentioned above,
have determined not to extend the loan with the Housing Authority
for another year.
You are also aware that a number of very positive benefits accrue
to Indian River County and its residents from the development and -
completion of the Victory Park Project. By way of example:
1- The Housing Authority has paid approximately $144,000.00 in
utility impact fees and will be paying a duplicate amount on
Phase II.
2- The Victory Park Project represents a means by which the
Housing Authority can become self-sufficient, thereby reducing
the funding requirements and dependency on the Board of County
Commissioners.
3- The Victory Park Project will not only provide excellent low-
cost housing to agriculturally related families in Indian
River County, but will also allow the Board of County
Commissioners to deal effectively with the substandard housing
where these future occupants of Victory Park now reside.
Historically, the Housing Authority on behalf of the Board of
County Commissioners has acted as an arm of the Board in promoting
the betterment of housing within the County. The Housing
Authority handles the Section 8 Program; prepared and applied for
Community Grant Programs; has administered a number of rehabilita-
tion programs bringing substandard housing up to a level complying
with the Southern Standard Building Codes. Treasure Coast Village
upon build -out will provide over seventy families the opportunity
to own a single family home. The accomplishments of the Housing
Authority are shared with the Board of County Commissioners.
Without the backing of the Board, the accomplishments, as cited
above, would not have occurred.
63 BO
SPR �98� OK F�1E 8 4 0
APR 71987
BOOK 67 Fv�;F. 8
With the interests in mind of those residents of our County who
will take advantage of living units that will be constructed in
Phase II, the Housing Authority requests the Board of County
Commissioners to lend to the Housing Authority approximately
$83,000.00, i.e. $76,000.00 in principal, plus $7,000.00 in
accrued interest for a period of two years under terms deemed
reasonable by the Board. The Housing Authority will pledge the
5.6 acres which has an appraised value of at least $85,000.00 (see
Armfield appraisal included). In the event two years from now the
Farmers Home Administration or other appropriate funding agency
has not funded Phase II, then the 5.6 acres will be conveyed to
the County for County purposes.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter. I would
appreciate having this item placed on the Board of County
a Commission's agenda for April 7, 1987.
Sincerelyf
Georg G. , Jr.
Finance Director Ed Fry advised that Commissioner Wheeler
had requested information about funds that have been provided to
the Housing Authority, and he distributed the following showing
the funds that have been committed to the Housing Authority since
its inception:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: April 7, 1987 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Grants to Housing Authority -by
Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Edwin M. Fry, Jr. REFERENCES:
Finance Director
The following is a breakdown of the amounts given to the Indian River County
Housing Authority since their first year of operation through March 31, 1987:
1980-81 Fiscal Year
1981-82 Fiscal Year
1982-83 Fiscal Year
1983-84 Fiscal Year
1984-85 Fiscal Year
1985-86 Fiscal Year
1986-3/87
$36,199.37
58,458.98
67,245.72
76,522.34
87,879.24
70,966.91
31,425.79
Total 428,698.35
When the Housing Authority first started operations, the Board of County
Commissioners loaned the Housing Authority the money they needed for
64
their operating expenditures with the anticipation that the money would
be repaid. At the end of the 1983 Fiscal Year, the Board decided to grant
the money to the Housing Authority since the Housing Authority did not
appear to be able to repay the- Board, much less pay for their operating
expenditures. The Board also directed that the amounts lent to the Housing
Authority be recorded and a running total be available for the Board's
information.
I have also attached a copy of a memo presented to the Board on
September 21, 1983 for further information.
TO:Board of County Commissioners DATE: September 21, 1983 FILE:
SUBJECT: Indian River County Housing Authority
FROM: Jeffrey K. Barton, Director t" ERENCES:
Office of Management & Budge
The following is a breakdown by year of the actual and estimated loan balance on the above:
Loan Balance @ 9/30/81
36,199.37
Loan 81-82 FY
58,458.98
Loan Balance @ 9/30/82
94,658.35
82-83 FY Budget
70,000.00
Sub -total
164,658.35
Salary Adjustment
(4,176.00)
Unexpended Funds
(6,232.00)
Projected Loan Balance @ 9/30/83
154,250.35
Projected 83-84 Budget
68,652.00
Balance Forward Funds
6,232.00
Projected Loan Balance @ 9/30/84
229,134.35
This memo is to show the actual and estimated accumulation by year of the loan balance from
the Board of County Commissioners to the Indian River County Housing Authority. For the
accounting records, it is necessary to record the loans as expenditures. The purpose of
this memo is to provide you with the history of those expenditures with the understanding
that if the Indian River County Housing Authority generates any revenues in the future over
and above their expenditures, they will reimburse the Board of County Commissioners of Indil
River County for these loans.
Commissioner Eggert believed each year budgetwise money has
been given to the Housing Authority and asked if that isn't
different than the specific loan that was given to them.
Finance Director Fry explained that originally when the
Housing Authority started, the anticipation was that the revenues
generated from the first project would be enough to repay the
Board and to provide funds for the operation; so, this was
APR 7 1987 65
BOOK UP F -A ,,H 842
APP
7 1997
BOOK
67 8 13
started as a loan.
Towards the end of FY 1983, the Board
made a
decision that it did not appear the loan would be repaid and
decided to grant the money rather than calling it a loan. From
that point on the Board basically has agreed to fund the opera-
tions of the Housing Authority in terms of their personnel and
some of their office expenditures; there are no Board funds going
towards the projects the Housing Authority is working on.
Attorney Collins came before the Board representing the
Housing Authority. He noted that he was not aware these figures
were being compiled and did believe they will have a hard time
responding to them. However, he did not believe there is another
county in the state that does not commit itself to helping
underprivileged citizens obtain low cost housing. Therefore, he
felt in general, value has been received.
Attorney Collins wished to deal just with the particular
item on the agenda today. He emphasized that the Housing
Authority does not like being in this position, and he comes
before the Board today only because they need to pursue all their
alternatives in order to be able to continue the Victory Park
project. There has been some controversy in the press as to a
potential foreclosure suit in Victory Park Phase 1, and he wished
to make it absolutely clear that the DCA released all the acreage
in Phase I from the mortgage, and it is free and clear of all
encumbrances with no threat of foreclosure. Construction has
begun on Phase 1; it is on schedule; and it is a first class
project. The DCA -now is asking that they pay the balance of the
loan, and has indicated they will not grant an extension. The
Housing Authority is trying to find a way to pay them off and
hold the property for Phase 11.
Attorney Collins felt it is important that the Commission
know that four months ago, the Housing Authority applied for the
funding for Phase II. The architectural and engineering work was
done and the entire application completed, and it is ready for
review. Charles Hudnell of FHA accepted the application and then
66
M
advised them to go ahead and complete the 50 units and get them
filled and then they will process the Phase II application. This
puts them in a "Catch 22" situation since Phase I won't be
finished until August or thereabouts. Mr. Hudnell has every
expectation that Phase It will be funded but that avenue is not
available to them until after the time when the DCA is saying
they must be paid.
Chairman Scurlock wished to know why the County should
pursue this if the DCA and FHA have given up on it.
Attorney Collins did not believe that FHA has given up on
them. It was a national issue; they had to put the money
somewhere else; and as a result the Indian River County Housing
Authority got limited in their funding.
Chairman Scurlock did not want to get this tangled up with
Treasure Coast Village, but felt it appears we have done so
poorly on that that it has had a negative effect, and the DCA,
and even the FHA, is questioning rihether or not the agency has
the ability to produce.
Attorney Collins took issue with that as far as FHA is con-
cerned, noting that that they have not received any communication
stating that the FHA is unhappy with what has been happening
here. Actually, the Housing Authority is unhappy with the FHA.
For about two years the Housing Authority has had contracts on
every single lot in Treasure Coast Village subject to FHA
funding, and if the FHA would only process those loans quicker,
they could have closed out on Treasure Coast Village several
years ago. It is a very viable single family project, and they
can sell all the units. The problem is the ability of the people
to get the financing, and the problem also is dealing with the
federal agencies.
Attorney Collins advised the Board that Armfield-Wagner's
first appraisal of the remaining 5.49 acres estimated the market
value at $85,000, but after all the improvements that have been
put in place to serve Phase 1I were pointed out to them, i.e.,
APR 7 1987 67 BOOK 67 FADE 844
r -1
SPR d 1987 Boa 67 ul-JE 845
extension of roadway frontage, construction of the potable water
distribution line, as well as the sanitary collection system,
plus the drainage out -fall system, they submitted a second
appraisal estimating a market value of $110,000. He, therefore,
felt the Board would be well secured if they lent the Housing
Authority the money to pay the DCA.
Attorney Collins continued to stress that the Housing
Authority is making a very positive aggressive impact on solving
a problem that exists in this county. The time frame is about a
year to get this squared away, and if the Board will either take
a conveyance of the land and hold it for two years or will lend
the funds, the Housing Authority will give a mortgage so the
Board will be well secured under whatever terms the Board
desires.This would give them a chance to get Phase Il funded and
get it constructed, and the real benefit would be that the
Housing Authority then would be self-supporting.
Chairman Scurlock noted that while he has been an outspoken
critic against the Housing Authority, he must agree that he has a
favorable reaction to the Victory Park project and felt the
rental unit concept with a resident manager is viable. Treasure
Coast Village, however, with plywood over windows, coke machines
in the front yard, and garbage lying around, certainly does not
demonstrate pride in ownership, and he felt is a failure. He
further noted that you can buy lots elsewhere in the county for
the same amount.
Attorney Collins agreed, but pointed out that you can't get
FHA funding for them.
Chairman Scurlock felt for $400,000 we could have gone out
there and bought lots and given them away and been ahead of the
game.
Commissioner Eggert agreed and wished the private sector was
dealing with the single home project, but they aren't. She did
feel Victory Park is a whole different thing than Treasure Coast
Village, and pointed out that the Economic Development Element of
68
our Comprehensive Plan states that one of our goals is to provide
more low cost housing. The Victory Park project is one that is
doing well, and if there is some way we can take that land with
proper guaranties, she would be happy to make a Motion to grant
the loan of $83,000 with interest at 1% above prime and
contingent on us securing the land with free and clear title for
two years plus.
Commissioner Wheeler stated that if the Commission is going
to look seriously at lending the Housing Authority $83,000, he
needs to understand a lot more about this project and the loan -
their ability to repay and where they are financially - the
legalities of the federal or state government coming in and
attaching property we have a mortgage on, etc. He commented that
he has seen the rental apartments and was quite impressed with
them, but did not believe he has visited the single family
project. However, when he looks at the numbers, the lots, etc.,
it does not seem to reflect the $428,000.
It was pointed out that he is combining two different
projects and Commissioner Wheeler continued to stress that in
order to understand this and be able to support a Motion such as
proposed, he would like to have at least another week to look at
this and have staff work out an agreement we can all have time to
look over.
Discussion ensued regarding timetables, and OMB Director
Baird stated that staff would be comfortable with one week to
reevaluate.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously tabled further
discussion on the Housing Authority's request for one
week.
In the ensuing discussion, Administrator Balczun stated that
during the next week
for purposes of
the public record, he would
4no%-D
69
BOOK Fr1U 846
BOOK �FnC 84 7
APR 7 1987
need to know in writing whether the federal government has any
contingent or collateral interest in the 5 plus acre parcel.
Attorney Collins believed .the answer to that is no. He did
not feel he could get anything in writing to that effect from HUD
under at least three months, but stated they could provide a
title update.
County Attorney Vitunac felt title insurance would be fine.
R/W ACQUISITION - INTERSECTION 8TH STREET & 27TH AVENUE
Public Works Director Jim Davis reviewed the following memo:
TO: THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF DATE: March 6, 1987 FILE:
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THROUGH:
Charles P. Balczun
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Right -of -Way Acquisition
Intersection 8th Street & 27th
James W. Davis, P.E. Avenue
Public Works Director C;'
FROM: REFERENCES:
Donald G. Finney, SRA
Right -of -Way Acquisition Agent
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The County requires a 4 foot r/w and a 3 foot aerial easement upon
two properties. The property owners are represented by Attorney Ed
Halsey. The owners will consider selling the r/w to the county at the
FAIR MARKET VALUE determined by an appraisal.
The Largent parcel is basically unimproved except for landscaping.
The Daniels parcel will involve septic tank, large trees, access
driveway and corner of residence possibly taken by the proposed r/w.
Armfield's fee of $800.00 for the Largent parcel appraisal and
$1,500.00 for the Daniels parecl appraisal appear in line with previous
appraisal fees when considering the scope of the assignment and possible
severence damages attributable to the structure.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
' Staff requests authorization to hire Armfield to appraise the
parcels and authorize condemnation if the property owners are not
willing to sell at the market value.
Funding is to be from 109-141-541.
70
Director Davis noted that one of the next agenda item deals
with award of the bid for this project so they are anxious to get
the R/W.
Commissioner Bird questioned hiring an M.A.T. for the
appraisal as they are generally more expensive.
Director Davis stated that we try to stay competitive and
use as many appraisers as possible, but in this particular
project where a sensitive structure is in the way, they want to
make sure we have a high quality appraisal and would like to go
with the-M.A.I.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized
staff to hire Armfield to do the appraisal and author-
ized condemnation if the property owners are not
willing to sell at the market value.
BID ACCEPTANCE - ERCILDOUNE HEIGHTS SUBDV. CURBING
Public Works Director Davis reviewed the following memo:
TO: THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF DATE: March 5, 1987 FILE:
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THROUGH:
Charles P. Balczun
Count Administrator
SUBJECT:
alph N. Brescia, P.E.
County Engineer
Bid Acceptance-Ercildoune
Heights Subdivision Curbing
FROM:Michelle A. Terry REFERENCES:
Civil Engineer
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Property Owners of Ercildoune Heights Subdivision petitioned the
County to make paving and drainage improvements to the roads within this
subdivision. Curbing is essential in some portions of the subdivision
for proper drainage.
The Engineering Division prepared plans and specifications for this
curbing. Plans were made available to all interested contractors in
response to our advertisement for bids placed in the Press Journal
during the week of February 10, 1987.
71 BOOK FPAGE®48
APP 1W .1987
BOOR 67 F,,u 849
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
A pre-bid meeting was held on February 23, 1987 to answer any
specific questions on the plans and specifications.
Bids were received on March 4, 1987 as follows:
Company Base Bid
P.A.V.C.O. Concrete
Pumping and curbing $16,416.10
Staff Engineer's estimate for this project is approximately
$20,134.70.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends waiving the Performance Bond of $1,600.00 and
awarding the contract to P.A.V.C.O. (See attached bid proposal)
Funds to be appropriated in amount of $14,816.10 to cover the cost
of this project.
Funding is to be from Petition Paving Account #703-214-541-035.29.
Commissioner Eggert questioned why the performance bond
should be waived, and Director Davis stated that we do know the
quality of this contractor and staff feels confident we do not
need the bond; we will not pay him until the curbing is installed
and approved. Also, we have had to reduce some of curbing
because of requirements of the St. John's River Water Management
District, and with the smaller amount, staff feels it is a high
price to pay for a performance bond.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously awarded the
contract for Ercildoune Heights curbing to P.A.V.C.O.
in the amount of $16,416.10 and agreed to waive the
performance bond as recommended by staff.
(CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK)
BID ACCEPTANCE - ERCILDOUNE HEIGHTS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES
tion:
Public Works Director Davis made the following recommenda-
72
TO -THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF DATE: March 6, 1987 FILE:
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THROUGH: _
Charles P. Balczun
Coun Admin'trator
SUBJECT: Bid Acceptance-Ercildoune
Heights Subdivision Drainage
Ralph N. Brescia, P.E. Structures
County Engineer
FROM: Michelle A. Terry " REFERENCES:
Civil Engineer
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Property Owners of Ercildoune Heights Subdivision petitioned the
County to make paving and drainage improvements to the roads within this
subdivision. Drainage structures are required due to the contour of the -
land and are required by St. Johns River Water Management District.
The Engineering Division prepared plans and specifications for
these structures. Plans were made available to all interested
contractors in response to our advertisement for bids placed in the
Press Journal during the week of February 9, 1987.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Bids were received on February 25, 1987 as follows:
Company Base Bid
*Mitchell Concrete Products
Ft. Pierce, Florida $5,285.00
Staff's Engineer estimate for this project is approximately
$5,900.00.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends awarding the contract to Mitchell Concrete
Products. --
Funds to be appropriated in amount of $5,285.00 to cover the cost
of this project.
Funding is to be from Petition Paving Account #703-214-541-035.29.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously awarded the
contract for Ercildoune Heights drainage structures
to Mitchell Concrete Products in the amount of
$5,285 as recommended by staff.
73
BOOK 6 7 F,� G 850J,
APR V 1981 BOOK 67 F'A`
OF $5l
AWARD OF BIDS - MISCELLANEOUS INTERSECTIONS (U.S.1 & OSLO - 4TH
ST. & OLD DIXIE - 27TH AVE. & 8TH ST.)
Public Works Director Davis made the staff recommendation:
TO: The Honorable manbers of the DATE: March 27, 1987 FILE:
Board of County Ccamrissioners
TH =GH:
Charles P. Balczun,
County Administrator
FRT'James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Directc
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
SUBJECT: Award of Bids - Miscellaneous
Intersections Improvements
Project, Phase II:
US 1 at Oslo Road
4th Street at Old Dixie Hwy.
27th Avenue at 8th Street
REFERENCES:
Bids were received March 25, 1987 for improvements to the subject intersec-
tions, including signalization, pavement widening, drainage, Water line
piping for future expansion and pedestrian facilities. The Transportation
Planning Committee and Board of County Commissioners have both approved
these. projects. The Utilities Dept. has dry lines included in this
contract.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
A tabulation of the bids received is attached. Low bids for each of the
three intersections are as follows:
US1/Oslo Road: Road work & utilities $ 66,469.21 Dennis L. Smith, Inc.
Signalization $ 27,863.50 Signal Construction Co.
Sub -Total $ 94,332.71
4th Street/Old Dixie Hwy:
Road work
Signalization
Sub -total
27th Avenue/8th Street:
Road work & utilities
Signalization
Sub -total
$ 55,749.16 Dennis L. Smith, Inc.
$ 30,887.00 Signal Construction Co.
$ 86,636.16
$115,708.38 Dennis L. Smith, Inc.
$ 23,675.25 Signal Construction Co.
$139,383.63
The bids received were competitive and the total cost of the work is
$320,352.50. This is close to the Engineer's estimate of $301,472.55.
RECCVMMATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends the bids be awarded as follows:
Schedules A and C (Road Work) to Dennis L. Smith, Inc. in the amount of
$237,926.75.
Schedule B (Signalization) to Signal Construction Company in the amount of
$82,425.75.
Funding to be as follows:
1) Gas Tax Revenue (Fund 109-141-541-066.51) - $272,429.50
2) Utilities Dept. - $49,923 Impact Fee Fund
74
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously awarded
the bids as follows: Schedules A and C (Roadway and
Pavement Marking - Water Distribution System) to
Dennis L. Smith, Inc., in the amount of $237,926.75
and Schedule B (Signalization) to Signal Construction
Company in the amount of $82,425.75, as recommended
by staff.
Commissioner Eggert hoped that the improvements at Oslo
would be done quickly, and Director Davis confirmed that they
will be done first.
Commissioner Bird requested that as these projects are done,
the problems with movement of traffic be kept in mind as he is
really unhappy with the way Dickerson has handled this on the
U.S.[ project.
OSLO CONCERNED CITIZEN LEAGUE REQUESTS THE COUNTY ACCEPT THREE
ROADS FOR MAINTENANCE AND FUTURE PETITION PAVING
Director Davis reviewed the following:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: March 27, 1987 FILE:
Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH:
Charles Balczun,
County Administrator SUBJECT:
Request From Oslo Concerned
Citizen League For County To
Accept Three Roads In Oslo For
Maintenance and Future
Petition Paving
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. , REFERENCES: Joe Wiggins, President,
Public Works Director Oslo Concerned Citizens
ToeacpwP fn Rnard of (mint g
Commissioners
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The Oslo Concerned Citizen League is requesting that the County assume
maintenance, acquire right-of-way, and proceed with the paving improvements
to the following three roads:
1) 9th Avenue SW - South of Oslo Road
Length of Road - 1980 L.F.
ASR 7 19 7 75 BOOK 6 FAZE 852
r
900!( 67 FA 1r. 853
2) 9th Court SW - South of Oslo Road
Length of Road - 750 L.F.
3) 8th Court SW - North and South of Oslo Road
Length of Road = 1320 L.F.
The County does not have proper right-of-way along 9th Avenue Southwest nor
8th Court Southwest. A similar request was made last year for the County
to maintain and pave 10th Court Southwest. The County then accepted 10th
Court Southwest for maintenance and began a lengthy right-of-way acquisi-
tion process. The final parcel is being condemned.
ALTERNPiTIV M AND ANALYSIS
Staff has estimated the cost to pave the three roads at $113,400. Various
property owners along the roadways have signed consent forms to cooperate
in conveying right-of-way to the County. In the past, this procedure has
been lengthy due to the need for mortgage releases, title searches, prob-
lems with legal descriptions, etc. If the County elects to assume mainte-
nance of the roads, staff is of the opinion that the Road and Bridge
Division should first maintain the roads for a four-year period, after
which a "maintenance map" can be filed to establish legal right-of-way.
After this four-year period, petition paving could be scheduled.
RECCMWATION AND FUNDING
It is recommended that the County begin maintenance of 9th Avenue South-
west, 9th Court Southwest, and 8th Court Southwest at this time. After a
four-year period, a maintenance map can be filed and petition paving be
implemented.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, to authorize county staff to begin
maintenance of 9th Avenue SW, 9th Court SW, and 8th
Court SW, at this time, so that a maintenance map may
be filed in four years and petition paving implemented.
County Attorney Vitunac pointed out that the county must
actually construct the road and then maintain it for four years
before getting title. He noted we would have to go in with a
grader and construct the road to the size we need in the future.
Director Davis understood that. He explained that what we
have existing is not a road, and we will go in, add material,
build a road, and maintain it for four years.
THE CHAIRMAN
CALLED
FOR THE
QUESTION.
It was voted
on and
carried
unanimously.
MISCELLANEOUS INTERSEC. IMPROVEMENTS PHASE I - CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
Director Davis reviewed the following memo:
76
ATO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: March 30, 1987 FILE:
Board of County Cam-nussioners
THROUGH: --
Charles Balczun,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.
4
Public Works Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
SUBJECT: Miscellaneous Intersection
Improvements Phase I -
Change Order No. 1
REFERENCES: Monte K. Falls, P.E.
to Jim Davis dated 3/25/87
Florida Power and Light Co. is requiring stainless steel connectors for the
traffic signal pole attachment at 4th Street and 27th Avenue. The original
design was to use galvanized steel. The cost to provide stainless steel is
$337.85.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends that Change Order No. 1 be approved to increase the
Contract with Signal Construction Co. by $337.85. Funding to be from Fund
109-141-541-066.51 - Gas Tax and Impact Fee Revenue.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved
Change Order No. 1, increasing the contract with
Signal Construction Co. by $337.85.
CHANGE ORDER No. 1
Dated April 20, 1987
Owner's Project No. 8621/8551 Engineer's Project No. 86-584/86-792
Project Improvements at 4th St. and 27th Ave. and 16th St, and 43rd Ave.
Owner indian River County
s
Contractor Signal Construction Co. Contract Date March 2, 1987
Contract For Signalization Improvements
Nature of the Change:
Change span wire bracket assemblies to stainless steel on
Pole # A-4 (joint use pole) per the requirement of
Florida Power & Light.
77 BOOK 67 o -U F
APS'''
Item # 634-4-113
Shall be increased:
BOOK
UNIT
UNIT PRICE
TOTAL AMT.
1 P.I.
$ 964.50
$ 964.50
1 P.I.
1,302.35
1,302 35
NET
INCREASE:
$337.85
'The changes result. in the following adjustment of Contract Price and Time:
Contract Price Prior to this Change Order $ 33,096:*00
Net (Increase) (Decrease) resulting from this Change Order $ 337.85
• r
Current Price Including This -Change Order $ 33,433.85
Contract Time Prior to this -Change Order 45 Calendar Days.
Net (Increase) (Decrease) resulting from this _
Change Order. Calendar Days
Current Contract.time including this Change
Order 45 Calendar Days
a
The above changes are approved:
---LLOYD & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Engineer
Date:
The above changes are accepted: Gc�
� Contractor
I � ACCEPTED BY:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By: / G
Date: '�� ' % g
� 3I3°fie'
STREET SWEEPING
By:
Date:
ACCEPTED BY:
z�,
Date:
Director Davis made the following presentation:
78
M M
TO: The Honorable mmbers of the DATE: March 30, 1987 FILE:
Board of County Caimissioners
TMMGH:SUBJECT:
Charles P. Balczun, Street Sweeping
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E. REFERENCES: Albert VanAuken to James
Public Works Di recto Davis dated 3-25-87
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On March 19, 1987, Commissioner Wheeler and staff met with the Vero Beach
Highlands Property Owners Assoc. to discuss street sweeping, drainage, and
road resurfacing issues. The Property Owners Assoc. has requested that the
County sweep the Miami curb roads in the Highlands (approx. 35 miles). In
the past, this work has been done by hand labor with brooms.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Last year, the County publicly advertized for bids for street sweeping. No
bids were received due to the unavailability of motorized street sweepers
in this area. Recently Florida Sweeping Co., Orlando, F1., contacted the
County and submitted the costs in the attached memo. Staff is of the
opinion that sweeping by hand is cost prohibitive and that contracting out
is the best alternative. In the future, the County should purchase a
sweeper and hire a full time employee to provide this service. The yearly
cost to perform this service in-house would be:
Operator salary including Fringe Benefits $25,000
Operating costs (gas, etc.) 8,000
Equipmtent (annualized) 12,000
Annual Cost (minimum) $45,000 _
RECOMN MATION AND FUNDING
It is recommended that the County contract with Florida Sweeping to perform
the services described in Albert VanAuken's March 25, 1987 memo at a cost
of $4,900. Funding to be from the Road and Bridge Division's FY 86/87
budget (fund 111-214) .
TO: James W. Davis DATE: March 25, 1987 FILE:
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Street Sweeper
Albert L. VanAuken, Supti.A. WORK IV -
FROM: Road & Bridge Division REFERENCES: Sweeper
On Monday, March 23, 1987, Mr. Larry Roberts of Specialized
Services and Equipment, Inc.; dba Florida Sweeping, met with
Dennis Gentile regarding street sweeping in various areas of
Indian River County. After visiting the sites marked for
sweeping, Mr. Roberts gave estimates for sweeping based on
service every three months. These estimates are all for the
first initial service, and the rates should decrease thereafter.
Vero Beach Highlands -- $4,000 for first time, and
approximately $3,000 thereafter.
17th Street from 20th -- $ 600 for the first time, and
Avenue to 17th St. Bridge approximately $500 thereafter.
Ixora Park Subdivision -- $ 300 for the first time, and
approximately $200 thereafter.
To cover the cost of maintaining these sites and any other
projects that may require sweeping, it is recommended that
$20,000 be budgeted for street sweeping for fiscal y 87- 8
APR 7-
79 BOOK PAGE �c��
r
APR 7 ,17
BOOK 67 F'A,F 857
Director Davis stated that he would like to contract and try
this on a one-time basis to see how it works and possibly
continue until we reach a time where it would pay to have our own
street sweeper.
Chairman Scurlock was concerned about setting a precedent
and having other subdivisions such as The Moorings come in with a
similar request.
Commissioner Bird agreed, but asked Director Davis, as a
Public Works Director and head of the Florida Association of
County Engineers, if it is fairly standard throughout the state
that the county accept this responsibility and whether we are
behind in adopting that policy.
Director Davis felt we are transitioning from a rural county
to a more urban county. Usually the reason for incorporating is
to provide better services to a particular area. He advised that
the Legislature has gone more towards an MSN to provide these
services for such things as street lights, etc., and believed
this could be approached that way and handled on a case by case
basis. As to The Moorings, he pointed out that there are more
private R/Ws there, and he believed we have been fairly
responsive to The Moorings and Pebble Bay. In Vero Highlands
there is on-going construction with trucks moving materials, and
we have more of a problem in a developing subdivision. .Also, the
Highlands is a very spread out subdivision. The Moorings and
Pebble Bay are much more compact.
Discussion ensued regarding the sweepers used by the City of
Vero Beach, the costs involved with the maintenance and operation
of street sweepers, etc., and Director Davis continued to argue
in favor of at least going in and trying the service out.
4 Chairman Scurlock inquired why it is limited to curb and
gutter roads, and Director Davis advised that on those roads the
dirt and debris that gathers tends to block drainage.
80
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, to contract on a trial basis _
with Florida Sweeping to perform the services set
out above in Mr. VanAuken's memo and then look at
this again in the future.
Commissioner Bowman wished to know whether the City of Vero
Beach uses their sweeper frequently and whether it might be
possible to work out an arrangement with them to use it
occasionally.
Director Davis stated that he has contacted the City in that
regard, but they use their equipment full time for their own
needs. He continued that his real concern is 16th and 17th
Streets because as soon as we sweep them, the movement of the
school buses fills the gutters back up with sand again. He would
really like to get the school bus parking lot paved before it
ruins our drainage.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried R to 1 with Commis-
sioner Bowman voting in opposition.
HUMANA HOSPITAL TREE VIOLATION - AGREEMENT
County Attorney Vitunac reviewed memo of former Assistant
County Attorney Wilson and noted that this is the agreement which
formalizes the action taken by the Board almost a year ago.
81 BOOT( '7 f'A E O
APR `�
r
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
DATE: March 27, 1987
SUBJECT: Hurna-n Hospital Tree Violation
FROM:. me P Wilson
ss ant County Attorney
BOOK 67 Pn'F.859
The document attached hereto is the final agreement between
Indian River County and the American Medical Development
Company to set forth the terms of settlement relating to a
tree violation which occurred at the Humana Hospital
Sebastian site. The agreement provides that American
Medical will pay a $13,500.00 fine and place $39,000.00 into
an escrow account. The fine was paid several months ago,
and the escrowed monies will be refundable if the property
is developed pursuant to approved site plans within seven
years. If the property upon which the tree violation
occurred is not fully developed within seven years of the
date th i s agreement i s s i fined, a I I or part of the escrowed
funds shall be retained by the County in accordance with the
terms stated therein.
Mike Miller, Chief of Environmental Planning, is familiar
with the terms of this agreement and the facts relating to
it and can answer any questions you may have.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved
Agreement with American Medicorp Development Co.
setting out the terms of the final settlement of
the tree removal violation.
82
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT (the "Agreement"), made as of the 1st day of March,
1987, by and between INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the
State of Florida, whose mailing address is 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, -
Florida 32960 ("County"), and AMERICAN MEDICORP DEVELOPMENT CO., a
Delaware corporation, whose mailing address is 500 West Main Street, Post
Office Box 1438, Louisville, Kentucky 40201-1438 ("Amdeco").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Amdeco obtained site plan approval from the Indian River
County Planning and Development Division on February 13, 1986, for the
construction of a medical office building on property located in Indian River
County, - a copy of said approved site plan being attached hereto as Exhibit A;
and
WHEREAS, the property upon which site plan approval was granted was
heavily forested with rare and valuable sand pine trees; and
WHEREAS, on February 7, 1986, the Indian River County Planning and
Development Division, pursuant to a tree survey prepared by agents of Amdeco,
a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B, issued a Tree Removal and
Landclearing Permit permitting Amdeco to remove only those sand pines
designated on the approved site plan, said permit being attached hereto as
Exhibit C; and
WHEREAS, sometime prior to March 26, 1986, Amdeco, acting through a
contractor, Michigan Properties, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "Michigan,"
removed all of the aforementioned protected sand pine trees located within the
area of development as depicted upon the approved site plan and removed all of
the sand pine trees located on the two (2) acres of adjacent property owned by
Amdeco, having a legal description of:
From the Southwest corner of Government Lot 2, Section 25, Township 30
South, Range 38 East, Indian River County, Florida, run South 00 00130"
West, 89.45 feet; thence North 350 10146" East, 742.74 feet; thence North
V 15145" East, 49.46 feet to a point on the West right-of-way of U.S.
Highway 1; thence South 15° 30142f1 East, 578.17 feet along said right-of-
way to the beginning of a tangent curve concave Northeasterly and' having
a radius of 11,459.20 feet; thence run Southeasterly 320.76 feet along the
arc of said curve and said right-of-way through a central angle of V
3611411 to a point of intersection with the Southerly right-of-way of Bay
Street as recorded in Official Record Book 430, Page 732, Public Records
of Indian River County, Florida; thenc&'South 73° 1910711 West, 295.81 feet
along said Southerly right-of-way to the beginning of a tangent curve
concave Southeasterly and having a radius of 165.0 feet; thence run
Southeasterly 139.21 feet along the arc of said curve and said right-of-
way through a central angle of 48° 20130"; thence South 24° 5813711 West
along said right-of-way 354.93 feet to the point of beginning. From ..the
point of beginning continue South 24° 58137" West along said right-of-way
161.47 feet; thence South 44° 0813111 East, 605.02 feet. thence North 10
2915911 West, 487.73 feet; thence South 880 30101" West a distance of "
173.63 feet to the point of beginning, said property lying and being in
Indian River County, Florida.
WHEREAS, said illegal tree removal occurred despite Amdecois
knowledge and understanding of the-* area covered by the permits and. the
AP �7 1987 83
BOOK FAuE � �
APR BOOK 67 Pr9,E01
conditions cited on the approved site plan and the Tree Removal and
Landclearing Permits; and
WHEREAS, a total of one hundred five (105) trees were removed in
.violation of Indian River County Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 23 1/2, the
"Indian River County Tree Protection Ordinance"; and
WHEREAS, twenty-seven (27) of the trees removed were located in areas
which would have been designated as non -buildable on any subsequent site plan
approval for the property; and
WHEREAS, seventy-eight (78) trees were located in an area which may in
the future be approved for development; and
WHEREAS, it has been the policy of the Indian River County Board of
County Commissioners that an administrative penalty shall be assessed against
persons or companies found in violation of the Indian River County Tree
Protection Ordinance or a criminal action shall be filed in the County Court to
impose sanctions against the violator; and
WHEREAS, Amdeco has agreed to pay an administrative penalty in
consideration of Indian River County's agreement not to pursue a criminal
action against the officers or employees of Amdeco and Michigan; and
WHEREAS, Amdeco has stated its intention to fully develop the subject
area within seven (7) years from the date stated herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, by and in consideration of these premises and other
good and valuable consideration, the County and Amdeco agree as- follows:
1. Amdeco agrees that the sum of Thirteen Thousand Five Hundred
Dollars ($13,500) shall be paid to County as an administrative penalty for the
destruction and removal of twenty-seven (27) trees which would have otherwise
remained at build -out of the entireproperty based upon Amdeco's conceptual
master plan for the area. This Thirteen Thousand Five Hundred Dollars -_
($13,500) shall not be refundable. Amdeco also agrees to establish with the
County an escrow account and deposit in this escrow account the sum of Thirty -
Nine Thousand Dollars ($39,000). This escrow account shall provide that if a
site plan or site plans are subsequently approved and development takes place
on any area upon which trees were illegally removed previously which was not
included on the approved site plan attached hereto as Exhibit C, then the
County shall approve release from the escrow account to Amdeco the sum of
Five Hundred Dollars ($500) for each tree depicted on the tree survey for that
area and eligible for removal under the provisions of the Indian River County
Tree Protection Ordinance. The refund shall not exceed the principal sum of
Thirty -Nine Thousand Dollars ($39,000).
2. If within seven (7) years of the date set forth herein Amdeco fails to
obtain Certificates of Occupancy for all structures delineated on approved site
plans covering all buildable areas from which trees were removed, Amdeco shall
be considered in default of this Agreement. In the event of ,r default, Amdeco
shall forfeit to the County all monies then remaining in the escrow account at
the time of default.
3. It is understood and agreed that no funds deposited in the escrow
_ account pursuant to this Agreement— shall be disbursed to Amdeco prior to
84
issuanme of Certificates of Occupancy by the Indian River County Building
Dep, rzment for all structures depicted on approved site plans for those
buildable areas from which trees were removed.
4. This Agreement shall be binding and enforceable against Amdeco,
its successors, heirs and assigns, .and may be assigned upon approval by the
Board of County Commissioners. However, in the event that Amdeco transfers
its interest In the subject property without obtaining the approval of the Board
of County Commissioners, the Board may consider such transfer to be a default
and all amounts then remaining in the escrow account may be forfeited to the
County.
5. Funds deposited in the escrow account hereunder shall not be
released or reduced in any way during the course of this Agreement, except in
strict accordance herewith or in such manner as may be otherwise agreed to in
writing by the Board of County Commissioners.
IN WITNESS IITHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement
in duplicate original effecitve as of the date stated above but actually on the
dates listed below.
AMERICAN MEDICORP
ATTEST: DEVELOPMENT CO.
BY: U. Kit BY• r�le
�'���
sistant Secre ary • Vice Pres!"t
DATE: Z - -� !--?
ATTEST:
INDL14 RIVER COUNTY BOARD
OF COUNTY COMPddMONERS
BY: BY: / C
Freda Wri _ Don C. Scurlock,
Clerk �e�''• �- ' Chairman
DATE:
Approved as tc�
County Attorney
Attachments: Exhibits A, B and C
ENTIRE AGREEMENT PLUS EXHIBITS IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK
TO THE BOARD.
85
Boa , 67 muc 862
GRAND HARBOR DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
BOOK 6 7 Nlur.
The Board reviewed memo of the County Attorney:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: April 1, 1987
RE: AGENDA - BCC 4/7/87
ATTORNEY'S MATTERS
GRAND HARBOR DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
In conjunction with the development of Grand Harbor it is
necessary for the developer to confirm the availability of
water and wastewater utility services for the project. The
attached two contracts, which toaether form a Developer's
Agreement, are recommended for approval by the County staff
and have been executed by the developer.
The agreements reserve 1,000 equivalent residential units
worth of water and wastewater capacity to Grand Harbor and
require that at least 250 ERUs be paid for in cash at the
time building permits are pulled or a higher number if the
number of building -permits requested exceeds 250. In
addition, simultaneously with the payment in cash, a letter
of credit must be issued in favor of the County for payment
of the remaining number of impact fees for which payment in
cash has not been made.
The developer will be responsible for constructing and
paying for water, wastewater, and effluent return lines from
his development to the County designated points of
connection. The Grand Harbor wastewater will be treated in,
the first one million gallons per day expansion of the
existing County wastewater plant. Ultimately a- second one
million gallons per day expansion will be constructed from
impact fees paid by Grand Harbor.
The second part of the Developer's Agreement is an effluent
return agreement which requires that all the effluent
generated from the wastewater treatment from Grand Harbor
will be returned to Grand Harbor for irrigation use on the
developer's golf courses..
These agreements have been reviewed and approved by the
County Administrator, the OMB Director, the Director of the
Division of Utility Services, and this office, and are
recommended for approval by the Board of County
Commissioners.
86
Commissioner Eggert stated that she has a lot of problems
with the changes in the replacement contracts given the Board,
especially with the 30 day delay between the payment for the 150
ERUs and the arrival of the Letter of Credit and also with the
fact that they refer to timetables for construction, which she
has not seen and could not get hold of, nor is their any cash
flow analysis. She just felt with these changes we are treating
this differently than we have treated others i -n the county.
Chairman Scurlock had some of the same questions, but he did
not feel we are necessarily treating them differently because he
did not feel we have had the same situation. He advised that he,
the County Attorney, and the County Administrator all signed off
on the agreement that appears in the agenda backup material, but
he believed there is some misunderstanding about Paragraph 1. (d)
because there was no discussion with Mr. Schaub in regard to a 30
day delay for presentation of the required irrevocable letter of
credit and also the entire letter of credit would be for the 1.8
million. There would be $600,000 put up in cash. He confirmed
that there was supposed to be a construction schedule that would
be in line with the need for the money, and he has not seen this
as yet.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously tabled
action on the Grand Harbor Developer's Agreement
for one week to be studied by staff and until we
get the timetables and the cash flow analysis.
Discussion continued, and Attorney Henderson representing
Grand Harbor stated that they can wait a week, but just barely.
Commissioner Eggert noted that under the agreement for
delivery and use of reclaimed irrigation water, there is an
addition after one million gpd "or lesser amount as may be
permitted by the DER," and she would like to know any
87
AP
. � BOOK. 60 864
��R
1 198?
BOOK
6 7
F',+;E
ramifications
that might relate to the effect of that
on
our
treatment plant, etc.
Some further questions arose, but Commissioner Wheeler
pointed out that the matter has been tabled and he did not
believe it should be discussed further at this time.
TERMINATION OF OPTION AGREEMENTS - GOLDEN SANDS INTERNAT'L.
County Attorney Vitunac noted that the County had options on
various pieces of beachfront property and only exercised some of
them. The other options have expired, but the land involved is
in the process of being sold and the buyers would like the County
to sign off to be sure the title is clear. There are three
termination agreements they would like the county to sign, and
they are all identical except for the legal description.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized the
Chairman to sign the three Notice of Termination of
Option Agreements with Golden Sands International, Inc.
88
NOTICE OF TERMINATION
OF
OPTION AGREEMENT
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS THAT:
1. GOLDEN SANDS INTERNATIONAL, IK,; a Florida
corporation, owner of the real property described on Exhibit
"A" attached hereto and incorporated herein, togsther with
all easements and rights appurtenant thereto (the
"Property"), has for good and valuable consideration entered
into a contract for the sale and purchase of real property
dated the 9th day of June., 1983, between Golden Sands
International, Inc. as SELLER, and INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a
Political subdivision of the state of Florida, as BUYER,
("Contract") whereunder Indian River County has been granted
an option to purchase the Property, notice of said Contract
was evidenced in that certain Memorandum of Option to
Purchase recorded in 0. R. Book 666, Page 2896, of the
Public Records of Indian River County, Florida.
2. All persons dealing with the Property are hereby
afforded notice that the option rights of Indian River
County have expired in accordance with the terms of the
Contract and are terminated with respect to the Property
and, therefore, the Memorandum of Option to Purchase
described above is no longer of full force and effect.
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 this 7th day of
April, 1987.
Attest:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
I ND I AN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
CLERK� -- — `• � AHA
=r
A parcel of land being a portion of Government Lot 2,
Section 14, Township 31 South, Range 39 East, Indian
River County, Florida described as follows; all that
portion of Government Lot 2, Township 31 South, Range 39
East lying west of the west right-of-way of State Road
A -1-A and East of a lint 17 feet East of and parallel to
the hest line of said Government Lot 2 less however the
acres thereof
South S , together with that portion of
Govermnent Lot 1 lying west•of the West
line of State Road riyhL-of-way
A-1-1,.
P R
7 .1987 89
Boa 6 7 Pvu ®�b
L
NOTICE OF TERMINATION
OF
OPTION AGREEMENT
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS THAT:
BOOK l Ft aE 887
1. GOLDEN SANDS INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Florida
corporation, owner of the real property described on Exhibit
"A" attached hereto and incorporated herein, together with
all easements and rights appurtenant thereto (the
"Property"), has for good and valuable consideration entered
into a contract for the sale and purchase of real property
dated the 9th day of June, 1983, between Golden Sands
International, Inc. as SELLER, and INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a
political subdivision of the state of Florida, as BUYER,
("Contract") whereunder Indian River County has been granted
an option to purchase the'Property, notice of said Contract
was evidenced in that certain Memorandum of Option to
Purchase recorded in 0. R. Book 676, Page 2117, of the
Public Records of Indian River County, Florida.
2. All persons dealing with the Property are hereby
afforded notice that the option rights of Indian River
County have expired in accordance with the terms of the
Contract and are terminated with respect to the Property
and, therefore, the Memorandum of Option to Purchase
described above is no longer of full force and effect.
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 this 7th day of
April, 1987.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Attest: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
—-------"`� – y- By – –U- – –
EP
(OPTICS PAR= 080)
A parcel of land being a portion of Governsent Lot 2,
Section 14, Township 31 South, Range 39 East, Indian River
county, Ylorida, described as all that portion of Governbent
Lot 2, Township 31 South, Range 39 East, lying Mast of the
West right-of-way line of State Road A -1-A and East of a
line 1.7 feet East of and parallel to the West line of said
Government Lot 2.
90
S
NOTICE OF TERMINATION
OF
OPTION AGREEMENT
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS THAT:
1. GOLDEN SANDS INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Florida
corporation, owner of the real property described on Exhibit
"A" attached hereto and incorporated herein, together with
all easements and rights appurtenant thereto (the
"Property"), has for good and valuable consideration entered
into a contract for the sale and purchase of real property
dated the 9th day of June., 1983, between Golden Sands
International, Inc. as SELLER, and INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a
political subdivision of the state of Florida, as BUYER,
("Contract") whereunder Indian River County has been granted
an option to purchase the Property, notice of said Contract
was evidenced in that certain Memorandum of Option to
Purchase recorded in 0. R. Book 666, Page 2898, of the
Public Records of Indian River County, Florida.
2. All persons dealing with the Property are hereby
afforded notice that the option rights of Indian River
County have expired in accordance with the terms of the
Contract and are terminated with respect to the Property
and, therefore, the Memorandum of Option to Purchase
described above is no longer of full force and effect.
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 this 7th day of
April, 1987.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Attest: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
1 -- By---�--L"— c — -- —
CLERKC AIRMAN
R parcel of land being a portion of Government Lot 2,
Section i4, To`:sship 31 South, Range 39 ?.ast, indian
River County, Florida described as. follows; the South 4
acres of Goverr=ent Lot 2, lying Test o: the ::est
richt-cf-way line of State•Road A -1-A and last of a line
17 feet East of and parallel to the West line of said
Government Lot 2 less; the South 2.85 acres of
Goverr=ent Lot 2, lying hest of the West richt-of-way
line o: State Road A-1-1, and East of ai line 17 feet as:
Of and parallel to the West line o: said Goverrunent Lot
2.
Also Described as
Begin at the intersection of the Westerly Right-of-way line of State Road A -1-A
with the South line of Government Lot 2, Section 14 Township 31 South. Range 39
East, Indian River County, Florida; thence S 890 45147 " West, along the South
line of said Government lot 2,.a distance of 739.35 feet to a point on a line
parallel with the 17.00 feet East of, as measured at right angles to, the west
line of said Government -Lot 2. thence North 00 14' 30" West. along said parallel
line a distance of 177.48 feet; thence North 890.45' 47" East, parallel with
the South line of said Government Lot 2, a distance of 659.68 feet to a point on
the Westerly right-of-way line of State Road A -1-A thence South 240 24' 59" East
along said right -of -any line, a distance of 194,54 feet, to the Point of Beginning
Containing 124,146 square feet or 2.850 acres more or less.
d � ? 91 BOOK 6`7 FAcn 86
APR d 1981 BOOK 67 m S
Continuation of Consent Agenda Item N. - Veteran's Serv. Travel
Chairman Scurlock reiterated his question as to how an
increase in the Veteran's Service Travel Account would benefit
the county.
Veterans Service Officer Vince McCann noted that when he
made up his budget, he had no idea he would be asked to serve as
an Executive Committeeman on the Council of the State Association
of County Veteran Service Officers. The people he works with
felt it would be a benefit to the county for him to serve on this
and get a voice into the state on the Veteran's affairs.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
the following budget amendment increasing.travel
in Veteran's Services:
ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT TITLE INCREASE DECREASE
001-206-553-035.43 Meetings and Seminars 300
001-206-553-034.02 All Travel 700
001-199-581-099.91 Reserve for Contingency 1,000
REPORT - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
Commissioner Eggert informed the Board that the Economic
Development Council wished her to pass on to the Commission that
- .they passed a Motion expressing approval of the 17th Street
Promenade project in concept because of the jobs it would create
and the money it would bring into the community, as follows:
On MOTION by Ned Gartner, SECONDED
by Martin Wall, it was recommended
to the Board of County Commissioners
that the Economic Development Council
supports the 17th Street Promenade
concept as a cleaner form of
economic development because of the
estimated 400 new jobs; the payroll of four
million dollars annually with the multiplier
effect on the local economy; the tax
92
revenues and impact fees of the local
government; the 22 million dollar
f
construction project to enhance the
vitality of the community, be approved. -
Commissioner Eggert advised that George Metcalf is replacing
Lloyd Rondeau on the Council representing the City of Sebastian
and she would also like the Board to approve the appointment of
William Curtis of Florida National.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved the
appointment of George Metcalf and William Curtis to
the Economic Development Council as recommended by
the City of Sebastian and Commissioner Eggert.
BEACH PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION COMMITTEE REPORT
Commissioner Wheeler informed the Board that they did
receive the Cubit report and the Committee made two motions. The
first indicated that they feel it is imperative to make applica-
tion to the DNR for the state funding, and he believed Public
Works Director Davis has written a memo requesting authorization
to obtain the services of a consultant to help fill out the
applications. It is felt this would cost something less than
$2,000.
The second motion recommended that the City of Vero Beach
and Indian River County develop an ordinance assessing their
oceanfront property owners at the rate of $100 a front foot,
which funds would be utilized to cover the local share of the
proposed Corps of Engineers project, which is 31,900 feet
starting at the North Riomar Golf Course and running through the
Tracking Station. The City of Vero Beach will go to the City
Council to pass an ordinance to assess that $100 a front foot
within the City. There is about 1,400' involved in the county,
of which
the county owns the majority
with the Tracking Station
,� � �
93
BOOK 67 F} Uc 870,
IDR ++��. l
BOOK d* FA E O� 91
Park. The rest is mainly owned by the state and the federal
government.
Chairman Scurlock inquired how much this would cost the
county.
Commissioner Wheeler stated that we have around 1,100' of
beachfront property within this project, or about $140,000.
Chairman Scurlock asked if it was intended this would be
budgeted in next year's budget, and Commissioner Wheeler
explained that the commitment is only if the City of Vero Beach
is successful in passing their ordinance, and they are involved
in a lawsuit right now that has some bearing on this. What the
Committee is talking about would be simply a commitment that if
the ordinance is passed and the assessments approved for that
project within the City of Vero Beach, that we will go along with
the project and support it for the county property involved.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously agreed to
commit to support the project as discussed and also
approved the hiring of a consultant to assist with
filling out the application to the DNR.
Chairman Scurlock informed the Board that while he always
had been led to believe that you could only bond half of the
Tourist Tax, he was recently informed that you actually can bond
the entire amount for certain purposes; however, you can only
bond half of it for beach nourishment.
LIBRARY ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT
Commissioner Eggert informed the Board that four and
possibly five library sites have been chosen in Vero Beach, and
based on desirability without regard to cost, they are as
follows:
94
1.) The Catron property on SR60 between 25th & 27th
2.) The Center for the Arts Property
3.) The property behind the 2001 Building
4.) The property at 16th Street and 43rd Ave.
5.) The property south of the Postal Distribution Center on South
Indian River Boulevard extension.
Among the parcels ranked for Sebastian are two downtown by
the parks; a parcel that the City of Sebastian is also interested
in having a part of for a boat ramp; and Chesser Gap. Commis-
sioner Eggert stated she will send a memo around about these.
They are now going out to see about cost, and then they all will
be reranked.
RESOLUTION ENDORSING BILL ASKING STATE TO PAY FOR CONFLICT AND
OVERLOAD CASES FOR THE PUBLIC DEFENDER
The Board reviewed letter from the County Commissioner Maggy
Hurchalla of Martin County:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SO Kindred Street . Stuart, Florida 33497
ROBERT H. OLDLANO • County Administrator
March 27, 1987
CO -87 -MH -341
Donald C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Chairman Scurlock:
PHONE (305) 283.6760
V _{p ~ 1
"WAR I C;a7
We are asking our delegation to co-sponsor the enclosed bill
to assure that the state will pay for both conflict and over-
load cases for the public defender.
Do you think you could get your board to endorse the legislation
and get your delegation to co-sponsor it?
Sincerely,
�1.
Maggy,*Hurchalla
County -Commissioner
L2,
95
BOOK D7 F'';� 8 7
APR 7 1987
BOOK 67 PAGE 13
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 87-35 endorsing legislation as requested
by Martin County.
RESOLUTION NO. 87-35
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO THE LEGIS-
LATIVE DELEGATION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, IN
SUPPORT OF STATE FUNDING OF COMPENSATION AND COSTS
FOR ATTORNEYS APPOINTED FOR INDIGENT DEFENDANTS.
WHEREAS, the state court system is and ought to be an
obligation of the State of Florida;
WHEREAS, in spite of this state obligation, the
counties of Florida are required to fund certain significant
operational costs of the state court system; and
WHEREAS, a Bill has been drafted to correct this
situation:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
The local legislative delegation of Indian River County
is respectfully requested to lend its support to a Bili
similar to, the one attached, which would amend §925.035,
§925.036, and §27.53, Florida Statutes, by making the State,
rather than the counties, responsible for certain costs of
prosecution.
The foregoing resolution was offered by
Commissioner Wheeler who moved its adoption. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Eggert and,
upon 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 Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 7 day of April, 1987.
'IBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
;INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
96 By Don C. ScLrrlock
_ Chairman
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
1
2
3
4
5
61
- M M
A Bill to be entitled an Act
relating to compensation and
costs of attorneys for indigent
defendants, amending subsection
-(6) of Section 925.035, F. S.
to require the State, rather
than the Counties, to pay such
compensation and costs, and
creating subsection (3) of
Section 925.036 to provide
that the State shall pay the
compensation and costs of
counsel appointed pursuant to
Sections 27.53 and 925.035,
F. S. from funds appropriated
to the Supreme Court for that
purpose.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the
State of Florida:
Section 1: Subsection (6) of Section 925.033
F. S. is amended to read:
925.033(6) All compensation and costs provided
for in this section, except as provided in subsection f43 -
shall be paid by the county state in which the tr=ai is
geld unless the trial was moved to that county on the
ground that a fair and +mpartial trial c:u ? ncL
held in another county,- in which event the compensation
and coats small be paid by the original county from Which
the cause was removed.
Section 2: Subsection (3) of Section 925.036,
F. S. is created to read:
925.036(3). The state shall pay the compensation
and costs of attorneys appointed pursuant to s. 27.53 or
s.925.035 from funds appropriated to the Supreme Court
for that purpose.
Section 3: This Act shall take effect on July
1, 1987.
97 BOOK f't1.�r l4
J
r-
APR
7 19 7
BOOK b PAGE
8
DISCUSSION
OF MEETING WITH CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT INDUSTRIES
COUNCIL
Chairman Scurlock informed the Board that Cliff Reuter of
the building industry asked him to attend a meeting with Mr.
Balczun and our Planning staff in regard to the changes in the
Building Department. That meeting was held, and he tried to
explain the Commission's position, which was that Mr. Balczun was
paid a good amount of money to administer the county; he was
given a mandate to streamline the building -planning process so
the problems we have had would be corrected; and at this point
the Commission unanimously supported his attempt to do the
reorganization. Mr. Balczun then answered questions in terms of
what his reasonings were. Chairman Scurlock continued that at
that meeting there was a request to meet on a monthly basis
specifically with himself, Mr. Balczun and staff to go over what
improvements have been made, including such simple things as a
pay phone in the Building Department. The Chairman noted that he
does not particularly need another committee assignment, but Mr.
Reuter and Nancy Offutt and the group asked him to participate.
They came up with an indication to meet about every six weeks,
and Director Keating has set the first meeting with a published
agenda for Wednesday, May 13th with the CIMC, which is a coali-
tion of the construction industry, realtors, etc.
Commissioner Eggert wondered if this possibly wasn't
something that should be kept functioning at a staff level or
whether the Chairman truly wanted to keep it at a Commission
level.
Nancy Offutt advised that she is not the official spokesman
for the CIMC any more., but explained that the Construction
Industry Management Council is a coalition of the American
Institute of Architects, the Treasure Coast Home Builders
Association, the Board of Realtors, and associated general
contractors. They have had a real good rapport with Planning and
have attended all the workshops, which they feel makes for better
98
legislation and better ordinances so that there is little
confrontation at the public hearings. They would like to
continue along in the same way and just want to establish a
routine to see how the new organization shakes down. Mrs. Offutt
felt the Chairman is welcome if he wants to attend.
Commissioner Eggert just wondered if any member of the
Commission needs to be there. She felt that Planning & Zoning
has functioned well with their workshops and c.ame up with things
that were then to be presented to the County Commission. She
believed a part of her thought process was do we need to put any
member of the Commission into this formally.
Mrs. Offutt believed they invited the Chairman and Adminis-
trator Balczun because many had not even met Mr. Balczun. She
stated that actually she would like all the Commissioners to sit
in, but felt they mainly need an extension of the workshops to
continue with the already established rapport. It is not
necessary to have a member of the Commission.
Chairman Scurlock noted that he personally, as one Commis-
sioner, has never had a real feet for the economic impact of what
we do when we pass our ordinances, i.e., if you require a
sidewalk do you really get the benefit for the cost. So, he went
to Cliff Reuter and a group that was formed, and they were going
to take a site plan and try to associate costs with what we
require and give us specific numbers to relate to what is in our
ordinances. He believed that is why he was invited.
Commissioner Wheeler noted that he had a lot of phone calls
and believed all the Commissioners got letters expressing concern
about the changes in the Building Department, but he would like
to give this a chance and see how well it works out. He did
feel, however, that, as a Commissioner working with staff and
developing things like this, you can give more more direction
than possibly you should, even unintentionally.
Chairman Scurlock believed at the meeting he attended they
just wanted to know what was on the Commission's mind. He
APR d .� ? 99 �oo� "7
r
BOOK 67 PAGE 877
suggested he just attend the next couple of meetings, and if they
still need him fine and if they don't, they can continue on their
own.
Commissioner Eggert commented that one of the things she is
extraordinarily conscious of, having come up through the
committee situation, is that as Commissioners we should give
staff every opportunity to talk among themselves and not be
overly influenced by any one of us.
Chairman Scurlock felt all the Commissioners involves
themselves with their various committees and that it is naive to
think we sit on a committee and don't direct the action, but
Commissioners Eggert and Wheeler believed that is different than
working with staff on a workshop level.
Commissioner Eggert stated that unless invited, she would
not ever attend a staff meeting or a specific workshop. She
would just like to see the workshops continue and have them
invite a Commissioner if they need one. She felt they are saying
if they want you, they will invite you.
Nancy Offutt expressed her agreement with however the Board
wants to deal with it. She agreed there was a topic of concern
and they wanted someone to put it together for them.
Chairman Scurlock advised that he will attend the next
meeting, and if they don't invite him back, he won't go back.
APPOINTMENTS TO PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE
Commissioner -Bird referred to the following letters:
100
North Indian River County Recreation IN
P.O. Box 573 • Sebastian. Florida 32958 • (305) 589-1339 C.
Karen Ekonomou - Director
March 30, 1987 I
Board of County Commissioners
Attention: Doug Scurlock
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960-3394
Dear Mr. Scurlock,
At the last meeting of North County Recreation, March 18, 1987, new offi-
cers and directors were elected. The new board members are as follows:
President
Vice President
Secretary
Treasurer
Director
Director
Director
Director
Director
Leroy Hires
Tommy Ubanks
Bonnie Austin
Billy Minnis, Jr.
Marion Turner
Richard Weaver
Junior Knowles
Randy Cosner
Robert Lemley
Since Mr. Hires represents the City of Fellsmere on the N.C.R. Board,
he wishes to relieve Susan Wilson on the Indian River County Recreation
Committee, with the understanding he mould assume all responsibilities and
projects she had. Mrs. Wilson represented both N.C.R. and the City of Fells -
mere on the I.R.C. Recreation Committee.
Most Sinc'�e�ly,
Karen Ekonomou
Director
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
PHONE 571-0116
March 06, 1987
litg of Jfi�Il,�aterp
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
POST OFFICE BOX 38
FELLSMERE, FLORIDA - 32948
North County Recreation Department
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960-3394
Attn: Karen Ekonomou
POLICE DtPARTMENT
PHONE 571-1360
Dear Karen:
As per our telephone conversation on March 06, 1987.
This letter is to confirm the appointment of Leroy Hiers
to represent the City of Fellsmere, Indian River County,
Florida for the North County Recreation Board Meetings.
If you need any additional information, please feel free
to contact me at any time.
Respectfully,
/J
Marion A. Turner, Mayor
City of Fellsmere 101
BGG � � F��GE 8 7
APR ! 17
'R vi 1987 BOOK 67 FUE��
Commissioner Bird noted that we have not -received any
correspondence on the appointment of Leroy Hiers from Mayor
Herndon, who recently replaced Marion Turner as Mayor of
Fellsmere, but he would recommend that Mr. Hiers be appointed to
replace Susan Wilson on the Parks & Recreation Committee
representing both North County Recreation and the City of
Fellsmere. Mr. Hiers has been very active in the recreation
field.
Discussed followed as to whether Mayor Herndon has been
contacted, and Mr. Hiers advised that he was approved by the
Fellsmere City Council before election of the new Mayor.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously appointed
Leroy Hiers to the Parks & Recreation Committee replacing
Susan Wilson and representing both North County
Recreation and the City of Fellsmere until we re-
ceive any official representation to the contrary.
NORTH AND SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICTS
The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment the
Board would reconvene as the District Board of Fire Commissioners
and hold meetings of both the North and South County Fire
Districts.
There being no further business to come before the meeting,
upon Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned
at 12:20 o'clock P.M.
ATTEST:
CLERK
102