HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/26/1987Tuesday, May 26, 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, May
26, 1987, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Don C. Scurlock,
Jr., Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman, Vice Chairman; Richard N.
Bird; and Gary C. Wheeler. Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert was on
vacation. Also present were Charles P. Balczun, County
Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of
County Commissioners; Joseph Baird, OMB Director; and Barbara
Bonnah, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order, and Commissioner
Bowman led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Commissioner Bird requested the addition to the Consent
Agenda as Item N for out-of-state travel authorization to attend
a meeting of the NACo Agricultural and Rural Affairs Steering
Committee in Des Moines.
Chairman Scurlock requested the addition of the following
three items under Public Works:
1. Request for authorization to sell excess fill at Hobart
Road right-of-way.
2. Request for permission to purchase asphalt from
MacAsphalt Company.
3. Appraisals for the following properties:
a) North Tracking Station property;
b) South County Regional Park at Oslo Road.
c) Property along 43rd Avenue near 5th St. SW.
MAY 2 6 1987 BOOK : ,� c. '
� MAY 2 6 1987
BOOK
Chairman Scurlock also requested the following additions:
1) Request to advertise for underwriter on the $3.5
million capital improvement bonds.
2) Request to purchase used equipment for the golf
course.
3) Change orders #1 and #2 on the construction of
the golf cart storage building.
ON MOTION by Commission Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Eggert being on vacation) added the
above items to today's Agenda.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any changes or additions to
the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 5, 1987. There were
none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Eggert being on vacation) approved the
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of 5/5/87, as written.
CONSENT AGENDA
Chairman Scurlock asked that Item J be removed for
discussion.
A. Approval of Duplicate Tax Certificate
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Eggert being on vacation) approved
Duplicate Tax Certificate No. 1258, in the amount of
$76.67, to J. W. Dickson, Treasurer of St. Lucie
County.
DUPLICATE TAX CERTIFICATE IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK
TO THE BOARD
2
B. Report
Received and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk to
the Board:
Florida Dept. of Corrections Inspection Report -
County and Municipal Detention Facilities,
1st Annual Follow-up Inspection, Indian Rijver
County Jail, May 27, 1987
C. Acceptance of Report of Activities & Expenditures - IRC -
Public Health Unit
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/6/87':
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH UNIT
2525 14TH AVENUE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
VERO BEACH, FL 32960 164025TH STREET -SUITE N-118
TELEPHONE (305) 567-1101 VERO BEACH, FL 32960
SUN -COM 451.5302 May 6, 1987 TELEPHONE (305) 567.8000 ExT. 229
SUN -COM 424-1229
FROM: Indian River County Public Health Unit (%p&)0ARo
to VEDSUBJECT: Reportof Activities and Expenditures OUN.MTHROUGH: Charles P. Balczun, Indian River County Administrator ,�Joseph Baird, Office of Budget and Management 2 Q
TO: Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman of the Board
Indian River County Board of County Commissioners
As required by Chapter 154, Florida Statutes, and the contract betwe�n the
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services and Indian River County, the
attached report of the activities and expenditures of the Indian River County
Public Health Unit (CPHU) for the period ending March 31, 1987 is submitted.
This report is made up of the following sub -reports produced by the ¢PHU Con-
tract Management System:
1. DE140L1 - "CPHU Contract Management Report" which compares the actual
services and expenditures with the contract plan for the
second quarter of the contract;
2. DE235L1 - "Analysis of Fund Equities" which shows revenue for the re-
port period by source and the balance in the CPHU trust
fund;
3. DE25OL1 - "Statement of Budget and Actual Expenditures Per Revenue
Contribution Ratio":
4. "CPHU Program Service Area Variance Report" which explains variance
in actual expenditures for the report period which are greater or
less than 25 percent of the planned expenditure levels.
acque ine A. Chesney, R.N., M:N
Acting Administrative Director
3 BOOK �„
MAY 2 6 1987
�987 -7
BOOK f -AU, 404
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
accepted the IRC Public Health Unit Report of
Activities and Expenditures.
COPY OF REPORT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
D. Final Plat Approval for Little Harbour Subdivision
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/14/87:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: May 14, 1987 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE
FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR
_Robert M. Keats g, A SUBJECT: LITTLE HARBOUR SUBDIVISION
Planning & Development Director
FROM: Stan Boling .4. 5 • REFERENCES:. little harbour
Chief, Current Development STAN2 L,
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of May 26, 1987.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS:
Little Harbour is an 18 lot subdivision of a ±18.422 acre parcel
located on the west side of S.R. A -1-A immediately south of
Castaway Cove Wave II. On September 11, 1986 the Planning and
Zoning Commission approved the preliminary plat for the subdivi-
sion. On March 8, 1987 the Board of County Commissioners voted to
accept an $8,$00.00 donation to the park development fund in lieu
of requiring a 15' wide public access easement across the site to
the river. The applicant, Dale Sorenson, acting as the agent for
the owners, Ambrit Development Corp. and Blue Ridge Transporta-
tion, Inc., is now requesting final plat approval -and has submit-
ted the following:
1. a final plat in conformance with the approved preliminary
plat; --
2. a certified cost estimate for construction of all required
subdivision improvements;
3. a contract for construction of required improvements;
4. a letter of credit guaranteeing the construction contract;
and
5. a check in the amount of $8,800.00 to satisfy the public
access requirement.
4
ANALYSIS:
The County public works department and the City of Vero Beach
utilities department have verified that the submitted certified
cost estimate is adequate. The County Attorney's office has
approved the submitted construction contract and the submitted
letter sof credit. All applicable requirements regarding "bond-
ing -out for final plat approval have been satisfied.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant
final plat approval for Little Harbour Subdivision, accept the
submitted letter of credit, and authorize the Chairman to execute
the submitted contract for construction of required improvements.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
granted final plat approval for Little Harbour
Subdivision, accepted the submitted letter of credit,
and authorized the Chairman to execute the submitted
contract for construction of required improvements, as
recommended by staff.
E. Extension of Site Elan Approval__ Reliable Services
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 511317:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: May 13, 1987 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
0
Kober a g, P SUBJECT:
Planning & Dev lopm nt Director
THROUGH: Stan Boling ��•
Chief, Current Development
FROM: J.W. McCoyREFERENCES: reliable services
Staff Planner JOHN2
RELIABLE SERVICE'S REQUEST
FOR SITE PLAN EXTENSION
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of May 26, 1987.
5
1, MIN �; 0.
BOOK PkCE411)t
MAY 2 6 1997
BOOK fW) 406
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On March 13, 19863 the Planning and Zoning Commission approved a
major site plan application submitted by the Reliable Services.
Approval was given to construct a 3,190 sq. ft. light industrial
building at 2605 49th Street.
Due to financial constraints3the Reliable Services has been unable
to commence construction prior to the expiration of the approved
site plan. Prior to March 13, 1987 expiration date, the applicant
requested a one-year extension of the site plan approval.
Pursuant to section 23.1(G)(2) of the site plan ordinance, the
Board may grant an extension of the site plan approval. To date,
the Board's policy has been to grant such extension requests.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Reliable Service's request for a
1 year extension of their approved site plan; the new expiration
date to be March 13, 1988.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved Reliable Service's request for a 1 -year
extension of their approved site plan; the new
expiration date to be March 13, 1988, as recommended
by staff.
F. Extension of Site Plan Approval - REM Corp.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/13/87:
TO: The. Honorable Members of DATE: May 13, 1987 FILE:
the Board of County Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Ro et M. Reat ng, ICP SUBJECT: REM CORP' S REQUEST FOR
Planning & Dev lopment Director SITE PLAN EXTENSION
-THROUGH: Stan Boling �•/S
Chief, Current Development
FROM: J.W. McCoy /004 REFERENCES: REM Corp
Staff Planner JOHN2
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of May 26, 1987.
6
� � r
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On April 10, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved a
major site plan application submitted by the REM Corp. Approval
was given to construct 8 duplexes at 9th Court and 9th Avenue.
Due to financial constraints, the REM Corp. has been unable to
commence construction prior to the expiration of the approved site
plan. Prior to the April 10, 1987 expiration date, the applicant
requested a one-year extension of the site plan approval.
Pursuant to section 23.1(G)(2), of the site plan ordinance, the
Board may grant an extension of the site plan approvals To date,
the board's policy has been to grant such extension requests.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of REM Corp's request for'' a 1 year
extension of their approved site plan; the new expiration date to
be April 10, 1988.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved REM Corp's request for a 1 -year extension of
their approved site plan; the new expiration date to be
April 10, 1988, as recommended by staff.
G. Budget Amendment - Unemployment Compensation
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/8/87:
TO:* Honorable Members of DATE: May 8, 1987
the Board of County ,
Commissioners
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR UNEMPLOYMENT
THROUGH: Joseph A. Bair COMPENSATION
OMB, Director
FROM: Leila Miller.,,
Budget Analyst
ACCOUNT NUMBER
Planning
004-204-515-012.15
004-199-581-099.91
ACCOUNT TITLE INCREASE DECREASE
Unemployment Compensation $952.
Reserve for Contingency $952
7 �
Q� �$�a BOOK 6 D'iE � 6
r, MAY 2 6 1937
Building and Grounds
001-220-519-012.15 Unemployment Compensation
001-199-581-099.91 Reserve for Contingency
Explanation
BOOK PA F- 40
$ 23
$ 23
(1). The first budget amendment is necessary to pay unemployment
compensation to the State of Florida.
(2). The second budget amendment reflects a credit of $23 that the
State gave the County for an employee in the Building and Grounds
Department.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved the above budget amendment, as recommended
by OMB Director Baird.
H. Change Order #1 - Kings Highway & Route 60 Intersection
Improvements
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5118187:
TO: THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF DATE: May 18, 1987 FILE:
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THROUGH:
Charles P. Balczun
County Administrator `
_ SUBJECT: Change order #1
King's Highway & Route 60
Intersection Improvements
FROM: Ralph N. Brescia, P.E. REFERENCES:
County Engineer
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The above contract requires the modification of an inlet grate at
the northeast corner of Kings Highway and Route 60. Thais item was not
included in the bid documents but is necessary for proper drainage at
the intersection.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
Staff recommends that the inlet be modified as per the contractor's
request (attached) at a cost of $900.00.
The funding for this change order should be taken from 109-142-541.
8
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved Change Order #1 in the amount of $900
to Dickerson, Florida, Inc. for the modification
of an inlet grate on the Kings Highway & Route 60
intersection improvements, as recommended by
County Engineer Brescia.
b
CHANGE
QRDER
.., AIA DOCUMENT 0701
Okluhution to:
OWNLR
U
ARCHITECT
C7
CONTRACTOR
C]
FIELD
Ll
OTHER
U -
PROJECT: King's Highway (58th Ave.) at CHANCE ORDER NUMBER: One (1)
hume,address) S.R. 60 Road Widening
INITIAriO N DATE: 5/12/87
TO (Contractor):
COUNTY PROJECT NO: 8430
Dickerson Florida, Inc. CONTRACT FOR: Road Widening
P.O. Drawer 719
Stuart, Florida 33495
L J CONTRACT DATE: December 16, 1986
You are directed to make the following changes to this Conlrat t:
Bid Item #425-8
Modification of -a P-5 Inlet to a Gutter Type V Inlet
1 each @ $900.00 = $900.00
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) (Cma'tu7d7[t#teo]nlTnifaTEDtwas ........................... $392,457.80
Net change by previously authorized Change Orders ................................... $ ----------
The (Contract Sum) (Czt=> Arkt;LwxQXX prior to this Change Order was .......... $ 392, 457.80
The (Contract Sum) (CxirtaTtxEesdc6dx=iu=jcwf) will be (increased) tidxticR'utlxb xwIjd>i Mc&
by this Change Order ........................... ... ...... $
900.00
The new (Cantract Sum) (
FdalantecAiY}oxiamaW7f7vt7dToncluding this Change Order will be ... $393,357.80
i
The Contract Time will be (iRxWjt0dkkk3¢iEa Kk (unchanged) by ( ) Days.
The Date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is same
Authorized:
_Indian River County Dickerson Florida. Inc. Indian River Count
CON rRA( FOR (A MR
1A4n 25th Strept P-0— Drawer 719
Address Addr • Addre,s
Vero Beach. FL 32960 Stu rt FL 33495 Vero Beach,'FL 32960
Ralph N. Brescia, P.E. 'B tei. �.... .:' Do C Scurlo Jr.
DATE IrAt 5 lf;� _IsAtE
AIA DOCUMENT 6761 • CMANC.E ORUER Alt tl t•f;8 IUt11UN AIA- w pt'x
TNa ArMtlICAN INsnrun rs •vr.nrsrrs ens Nrw nYM •w NW wAaruNr.u.N u r ••.u. G701 — 1978
MAY1987 9 BOOK
2
MAY 2 6 1937 BOOK 68 410
ly Waiver of Floodplain Displacement Requirement - Little
Harbour Subdivision
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/14187:
TO THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF DATE: May 14, 1987 FILE:
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THROUGH:
Charles P. Balczun
County Administrator
James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Direct
.t
SUBJECT: Request for Waiver -Floodplain
Displacement Requirement
Ordinance 87-12
Little Harbour Subdivision
Letter from Richard B.
FROM: Dave, B. Cox4%c. REFERENCES: Votapka, - P. E. , Beindorf &
Drainage Engineer Assoc. to Jim Davis dated
April 13, 1987
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Beindorf & Associates on behalf of the developer of Little Harbour
Subdivision (on the West side of A -1-A abutting the south property line
of Castaway Cove) is requesting a waiver of the "cut and fill" balance
requirement as contained in the Stormwater Management and Flood
Protection Ordinance (87-12). The Engineer states that only 462 c.y. of
material will be placed in the 10 -year Flood Plain.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Since the Indian River in this area is an estuarine environment,
and the project meets all other requirements of Ordinance 87-12 and will
cause a minute water level rise in the river, staff has no objection.
RECOMMENDATION
--_ Staff recommends that a waiver to the flood plain displacement
requirement be'granted to Little Harbour Subdivision.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
granted a waiver to the floodplain displacement
requirement in Ordinance 87-12 to Little Harbour
Subdivision, as recommended by Public Works Director
Davis. -
J._ Local Option Sales Taxes/Gasoline Taxes
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/20/87:
10
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: May 20, 1987 FILE:
u
Charles P. Bal zun u
FROM. County Administrator
SUBJECT: LOCAL OPTION SALES TAXES/
GASOLINE TAXES
REFERENCES:
We have been requested by the Florida Counties Association to enact a resolution
supporting legislation which would authorize counties to impose local option
sales taxes and gaosline taxes by majority vote of the 'local elected body'.
Attached is such a resolution for your consideration. This is scheduled for
your May 26, 1987 meeting.
Chairman Scurlock explained that he asked this to be removed
from the Consent Agenda for discussion because he just wanted it
made clear that we are only supporting legislation which would
authorize counties to impose local option taxes for funding
infrastructure needs; we are not saying that we will impose the
t"axes .
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED Iby
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0)
adopted Resolution 87-47, urging the State Legislature
to adopt legislation granting counties the authority to
impose local option taxes for funding infrastructure
needs.
1 1 BOOK 1) PA S
MAY 2 6 1987
FF -
MAY 2 6 1987
BOOK
4 12-
RESOLUTION 87- 47
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, URGING THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO ADOPT
LEGISLATION GRANTING COUNTIES THE AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE LOCAL
OPTION TAXES FOR FUNDING INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS; PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the State of Florida has mandated that all local jurisdictions
comply with the provisions of Section 163.3161, Florida Statutes, the "Local
Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act"; and
WHEREAS, compliance by Indian River County will require additional expen-
ditures for infrastructure needs within the County; and,
WHEREAS, the County is faced with ever increasing demands for services
with limited or no new revenue sources,
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida:
1. The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida urges the State Legislature to enact legislation
granting Counties the authority to impose local option
sales taxes and gasoline taxes by a majority vote of the
local elected body.
2. The Board hereby directs staff to prepare a letter for-
mally transmitting intentions of the Board to this area's
Legislative Delegation, the President of the Senate, the
Speaker of the House, and the Governor, and that staff use
other available means to express the Board's intent.
3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its
adoption.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida on the 26th day of May 1987.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY: C.
TOR -C. S , J CHAIRMAN
ATTEST BY:
FREDA WRIGHT, CLEK(
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY K•
I
K. Contract with HRS re Reimbursement in Processing Child
Support Services
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/20/$7:
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
DATE: May 20, 1987
SUBJECT: Child Support Service of Process
Reimbursement Contract
FROM: Sharon Phillips Brennan
Assistant County Attorney '
Attached hereto are four original contracts to be executed
between the Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services, the Indian River County Sheriff's Department, and
the Board of County Commissioners regarding the
above -referenced subject. This agreement is essentially the
same agreement that has been renewed for the past three
years and requires the Department of Health and Rehabilitate
Services to reimburse 700 of the County's cost of service of
process from federal funds allocated for that purpose. This
amount was recently raised from 66.65% to 70%.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by !i
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved the contract with HRS re reimbursement of
700 of the County's cost in processing ChildlSupport
Services; and authorized the Chairman's signature.
COPY OF CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERKjTO THE
BOARD
L. Partial Assignment of SR -60 Water and Wastewater
Reservations - Total Care Systems, Inc. to Arthur A. Newton
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/15/87:
13 BOOK �C� �'A;E �U
MAY 2 6 1987
r,
MAY 2 6 19G7
BOOP( 68 F,Ap, 14
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: MAY 15, 1987
VIA: CHARLES P. BALCZUN
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY E ICE
FROM: JEFFREY K. BARTON
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: PARTIAL ASSIGNMENT OF WATER AND WASTEWATER RESERVATIONS
ROUTE 60
BACKGROUND
Total Care Systems and A.C.T.S., who operate Indian River Estates,
participated in the Route 60 assessment programs for both water and
wastewater. In the past, when a property was sold, the entitled
property plus the reservations for water and wastewater were assigned
to the new owner. In this case, only a portion of the property and 50
ERU's of reserved capacity are being assigned to the new owners.
Attached is a formal assignment of water and wastewater reservations
which the attorneys for the buyer and seller want the County to
acknowledge before it is placed on public records.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The staff of the Division of Utility Services recommends to the Board
of County Commissioners that the County formally acknowledge the
assignment and change our records as to the ownership of the 50 ERU's
of water and wastewater.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
acknowledged the assignment and change of records as
to the ownership of the 50 ERUs of water and wastewater
as set out in the above memo and as recommended by
staff.
COPY OF ASSIGNMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD
M. Various Department Budget Amendments
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/19/87:
14
01
TO: Honorable Members of the
Board of County Commissioners
DATE:
SUBJECT:
May 19, 1987
BUDGET AMENDMENT
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
ACCOUNT NUMBERCCOU
A NT TITLE INCREASE DECREASE
1. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Expense
001-101-511-033.21 Outside Auditors $8,100
001-199-581-099.91 Reserve for Contingency $8,100
SECTION 8 RENTAL ASSISTANCE
Revenue
108-000-331-074.00 Sec. 8 Rental $2,300
(Expense) Assistance Grant
108-226-554-033.21 Outside Auditor $2,300
NORTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
Expense
115-104-522-033.21 Outside Auditor $1,500
115-104-522-099.91 Reserve for Contingency
2. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Expense
001-201-512-033.49 Other Contractual Srvs. $4,127
001-100-581-099.91 Reserve for Contingency
3. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
-Expense
001-208-525-036.72 Expense -Prior Year $12,905
001-299-581-099.91 Reserve for Contingency
4. CIRCUIT COURT
Expense
001-901-516-033.19
001-199-581-099.91
5. RADIO TOWER
Revenue
001-000-362-011.00
Expense
001-105-519-034.31
001-105-519-034.69
6. SHELTER WORKSHOP
Revenue
001-000-334-060.00
Expense
001-106-564-088.37
$1,500
$4,127
$12,905
Other Prof. Services $24,000
Reserve for Contingency $24,000
Radio Tower Rent $5,000
Electric Services
.Maint.-Other Services
$2,500
$2,500
Human Services $3,234
Sheltered Workshop $3,234-
15
Boor 68 F,,A, r V51
r"__
MAY 2 6 1937
ACCOUNT NUMBER
7. COURT FACILITIES
106-901-516-066.41
106-901-516-099.91
ACCOUNT TITLE
BOOP(
Tnr�u�ac�
Office Furn.&Equip. $31,975
Reserve for Contingency
8. WEST COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
116-104-522-099.07 Bud Tran. -Tax Collector $500
116-104-522-099.91 Reserve for Contingency
9. SHERIFF AND COMMUNICATION CENTER
Revenue
301-000-361-010.00 Interest Investment $180,000
301-000-384-010.00 Debt Proceeds $1,500,000
301-000-389-040.00 Cash Forward -Oct. 1 $1,146,667
Expense
301-132-521-033.19
301-132-521-034.02
301-132-521-035.43
301-132-521-066.41
301-132-521-066.51
301-133-521-066.45
Other Professional $190,000
All Travel $2,000
Meetings & Seminars $2,000
Office Furn. & Equip. $118,130
Const. in Progress $1,600,000
Comm. Equipment -All $ 914,537
COUNTY HEALTH BUILDING
Revenue
305-000-384-010.00 Debt Proceeds $200,000
Expense
305-106-519-033.19 Other Professional Srvs.$100,000
305-106-519-034.97 License and Permits $1,000
305-106-519-066.11 All Land $99,000
Explanation:
68 FAa416
DECREASE
$31,975
$500
1. Board of County Commissioners authorized Arthur Young and Company
to increase the scope of the audit service. The additional cost
requires -$11,900 in funds be appropriated.
_2'. Moving expenses of $4,127 were incurred to relocate the County
Administrator to Vero Beach.
3. Florida Power and Light Nuclear Evacuate Grant Funds for*
prior year (1984/85 FY) in the amount of $12,905 had to be
returned.
4. The increase caseload in the Court has required an additional
$24,000 to be budgeted in professional services.
S. The Radio Tower expenses have increased due to additional usage.
Revenue from Radio Tower rent offsets the expense.
6. The County received a pass through a grant in the amount of
$3,324 for the Sheltered Workshop Program.
7. An audio/video system for the Judges chambers was authorized by the
Board of County Commissioners in 1985/86 FY. There were
manufacturer delays and the equipment was not installed until the
1986/87 FY; therefore, the expense was incurred in the 1986/87 FY
requiring additional funds to be appropriated.
16
Explanation (continued):
8. The actual costs the Tax Collector charged the West County Fire
District for collecting taxes presently exceeds the budget by
$157.21. An additional $500 needs to be appropriated for the
1986/87 FY.
9. The Board of County Commissioners has approved the overall
estimated cost of the following projects:
1.» Sheriff Building and Communication Center
2. Jail Phase II
3. County Health Department Building
This budget amendment appropriats funds in the 1986/87 FY.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved the above budget amendments, as recommended
by OMB Director Baird.
N. Approval_of Out -of -State Travel
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved out-of-state travel for Commissioner Bird
to attend meeting of NACo Agricultural 6 Rural Affairs
Steering Committee in Des Moines, Iowa, on June 6-7,
1987.
PUBLIC HEARING - RURAL SANITATION_ REQUEST FOR RATE_INC�EASE
The hour of 9:05 o'clock having passed, the Deputy Clerk
read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to
wit.
WAY 26 1987
BOOK
17 .�.�
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Weekly
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER:
STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr, who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a weekly newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of
/d% /� <- L yo—F .
In the / Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of F
Affiant further says that the said Vero' Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, weekly and has been entered
as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida
for a period of one year next preceeding the first publication of the attached copy of adver-
tisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this adver-
tisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed beforem this day of A.D.
A f!n 0 ..
BOOK 68 r r.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is herebygiven that the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, will hold
a public hearing In the Commission Room, In-
dian River County Administration Building, 1840
25th Stmt, Vero Beach, FL 32960, on Tuesday,
May 26, 1987 at 9:05 AM, to consider the request
of Rural Sanitation, for a residential sanitation
rate increase.
All interested parties will be heard , r
Dated this 4th day of May, 1987. + 5
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,'FLORIDA
Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman
May 4, 5, 6, *1987
Of 1 I 1 iness Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida)
(SEAL)
Chairman Scurlock acknowledged the receipt of two hand -
delivered letters of objection to the rate increase. (Letters are
on file in the Office of the Clerk to the Board.)
Jeff Barton, Assistant Director of Utilities, presented the
following recommendation by staff dated 5/15/87:
18
S
DATE: MAY 15, 1987
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTOD
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SE - CES
FROM: LISA M. ABERNETHY��
FRANCHISE MANAGER
SUBJECT: RURAL SANITATION RESIDENTIAL RATE INCREASE
BACKGROUND
On May 19, 1982, Indian River Board of County Commissioners updated
Rural Sanitation franchise of 1961 to bring the franchise up to
County standards. Since that time Rural Sanitation has not requested
a rate increase in either the residential or commercial areas.
Recently, Rural Sanitation requested in writing, as required by
Resolution 82-51, Section 14, of a requested increase in its
residential rates and submitted justification. Rural'' Sanitation -
requested that the residential rates be increased as follows:
$7.90 - Present Residential Rate -
3.04 - Break Even
1.09 - 10% Profit
$12.03 NEW RATE REQUESTED
After careful consideration and review, the Utility staff recommends
the Break Even factor to prevent Rural Sanitation from being in a
Loss position. The Utility Staff also recommends a 5% profit
increase. Staff has taken into consideration that Rural Sanitation
has been under new management for a 5.5 month period and feels that
the quality of service has improved. However, staff only recommends
a 5% profit increase, due to this short period of time under the new
management. Staff agrees, if Rural Sanitation continues to operate
in a prudent and efficient manner, they may return in one year and
request the additional 5% profit. Consideration has been given, that
the customer has the right to choose his or her franchise hauler.
Should the Board of County Commissioners approve Staff's
recommendation, Rural Sanitation's residential rates would increase
as follows:
$7.90 - Present Residential Rate
3.04 - Break Even
0.54 - 5% Profit
$11.48 NEW RATES AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF
RECOMMENDATION
Utility Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners
authorize the residential rate increase of $3.58, as outlined above,
with the understanding that Rural Sanitation may return in one year
and request the additional 5% profit increase.
19
BOOK
,r 9
r,
MAY 2- 6 1987
BOOK
Mr. Barton distributed copies of the financial data supplied
by Rural Sanitation. (Material is on file in the Office of the
Clerk to the Board.)
Commissioner Bird asked who did the analysis, and Jeff
Barton, Assistant Director of Utilities, advised that he and OMB
Director Joe Baird walked Franchise Manager Lisa Abernethy
through the financial analysis.
Commissioner Bird asked if staff had a chance to go back and
analyze the projected expenses under the new ownership, as it
appeared to him from the following consolidated statement ending
September 15, 1986 that repairs are running considerably higher
than repairs done in the same months in the 1985-86 income tax
state. He also pointed out that salaries and wages under the new
ownership are considerably higher than in the entire previous
taxable corporate year. Commissioner Bird wondered if perhaps
under the new ownership, we were playing some games with figures
as far as padding some expenses.
20
SURAL SANITATIOhI StRVIGE, INC.
C INCOME. STATEMEN7
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT
PERIOD END1NGa SEPTEMBER � ;, 1966
CURREhIT % YEAS -TO -DATE
INCOME
INCOME 134, 9'6.81 99.9 372, 804.27
INTEREST INCOME 103.12 .1 21596.34
--------------_-t------
TOTAL INCOME 155, 02 ?. 9w 100.0 575.j40.61
EXPENSES
GAS & OIL
12, 022.81
7.8
38,557.04
ADVERTISING
.00
.0
288.30
LEGAL & ACCOUhITiNc
825.00
.5
69374.73
RADIO EXPENSE
365.65
.2
11405.31
DEI-"SECIATioN
(22, 457.25)
(14.5)
9, 634.00
DUES & SUBSCRIP•r om
.00
.0
73.00.
INSURANCE
(6, 990.75)
(4.5)
43, 606.17
DU14P FEE
31, 338.20
20.2
136, 886.98
EMPLOYEE MEDICAL
.00
.0
1, 827.34
CASUAL LABOR
40.00
.0
373.00
TAXES
6, 321.83
4.1
169015.53
FREIGH'r
.00
.0
403.70
RENT
900.00
.6
5, 4!00.00
SALARIES - OTHER
659 047.70
42.0
189, 353.70
SUPPLIES
11443.78
.9
7,51.80
OFFICE, PRINT & POSTAGE
1, 673.09
1.1
6.j:06.57
UTILITIES AND TELEPHONE
1, 164.79
.8
6, 109.46
REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE
740.2;
.5
1, 568.79
MAINTENANCE - OTHER
127.80
.1
51126.88
MAINTENANCE - TRUCES
32,354.05
20.9
119,798.53
FRANCHISE. FEES
1.0, 449.5;6
6.7
10, 49.56
OUTSIDE SERVICES
21331.20
1.5
11, 46.90
BAD DEBT EXPENSE
31527.62
2.3
39 527.62
TOTAL EXPENSES
-----______
141, 227.35
-----------
91.1
622, X2,89.11
-----------
OPERATING INCOME
13, 802.58
8.9
(46j@88.50)
OTHER INCOME
GAIN-REVALUATioN OF ASS
206,519-00
133.2
206, x;19.00
-----------
-------
TOTAL OTHER 1NGOME
206, ::;1.9.00
133.2
206, *19.00
!r._..»___
-----------
---- -
NG• T INCOME •
220, .321.58
142.1
159, 6, 0.50
Mr. Barton explained that there
is some
overhead that has
99.3
.5
100.0
6.7
.1
1.1
.2
1.7
.0
7.6
23.8
.3
.1
2.8
.1
.9
32.9
1.3
1.1
1. 1
■3
.9
20.8
1.8
2.0
.6
108.1
(8.1)
35.9
35.9
21.7
been distributed, which was never there before when it',was under
the single ownership. In addition, the firm has been ;trying to
bring their equipment up to standards by doing repairs,
maintenance, and cleaning.
Commissioner Bird pointed out that they are usingl, those
months to justify their rate increase, and wondered if those are
21
MAY 6 1987 BOOK O r'd';`r. �� _&
MAY 2 6 193
Ohl r �e"
800
really normal operating months, because there are some'big
expenses included for that period.
Mr. Barton pointed out that their year ending March 31, 1986
is the test year, and they have supplied us with supplemental
information for the 51 months from that date to September 30,
1986.
Commissioner Wheeler asked how this rate increase would
affect Harris Sanitation, and Mr. Barton explained that Harris
would have to come in with a separate request for a rate
increase, and staff would have to review their financial status
before making a recommendation to the Board. He emphasized that
Rural's request for a rate increase is for residential customers
only.
Commissioner Wheeler asked if other collection firms could
come in and request franchises for garbage pickup, and Mr. Barton
confirmed that they could.
Attorney Robert Jackson, representing Rural Sanitation,
recalled that the County first got into the franchise business
back in 1960-61 because there was a proliferation of
out -of -county haulers servicing Indian River County. The County
granted franchises to R or 5 of the existing collection firms,
and established that no others could come in. In 1982 when
Harris bought out Indian River Sanitation Service from C. Reed
Knight, Jr., the County redid its entire franchise agreement,
stating that Harris and Rural could handle the trash collection
in the County unless the Commission determined there was a need
for additional firms to service the area. The reason the County
sets the rates is to protect the public. Attorney Jackson felt
that Harris, being the largest company, believes that they are
going to ride piggyback on Rural's request for a rate increase.
Mr. Barton pointed out, however, that they will have to go
through a financial analysis and justify an increase.
Utilities Director Terry Pinto emphasized that if it is
found that a franchise does not operate prudently, the County can
22
penalize them by denying the rate increase. With respect to
Rural's request for a 10% increase, staff is recommending only a
5% increase because we don't have a sufficient period of
experience under the new owner to justify the 10% profit.
Director Pinto did not believe that the numbers we allowed to be
used to justify the rate increase included the new salaries and
wages and were not part of the test year.
Mr. Barton advised that part of it was included.
Peter Wright of Rural Sanitation explained that the test
year was taken off the September 15, 1986 tax return which was
done at the end of the previous ownership. That is thy: most
recent data, and it has nothing to do with the purchase by Hudson
Management Corporation effective September 15, 1986.
Commissioner Bird felt that if he bought a company that was
losing money to the tune of $103,406 in their last taxable
corporate year, he would not begin new management by increasing
monthly salaries to any great extent in the first 4-5 months.
Mr. Wright emphasized that all the information here was
during the prior ownership; it is not since they purchased the
company. Thus, the salaries are the same.
Commissioner Bird stated that if he was the previous owner,
and knew he had the company sold, he would not have increased
salaries or made that amount of repairs during those 5 months.
Utilities Director Terry Pinto felt it was a Catch 22
situation and they were concerned about the amount of repairs in
the long run situation. When you are looking at the difference
between profits and operating costs, the utility only passes
through their expense costs -- they have to pay for repairs.
Replacement of equipment becomes part of your investment and the
returns on that investment become part of the profit.
Commissioner Bird remained concerned over the substantial
increase in salaries during that 5 -month period and asked Mr.
Wright for an explanation of the following Supplemental Statement
of Income -and Expenses for fiscal year ending September 15, 1986:
b
23 BOOK S
BOOK b f'�jGE 4?
RURAL SANITATION SERVICE, INC.
Statement of Income and Expenses -
And Residential Pro -ration
For the five and one half months ending September 15, 1986
TOTAL INDIAN INDIAN
APRIL 1,1986- RIVER RIVER
SEPT 15, 1986 COUNTY COUNTY
5.5 MONTHS PER MONTH
REVENUES
INCOME
$572,804
INTEREST INCOME
2,596
-------------
TOTAL INCOME
575,400
EXPENSES
ADVERTISING
289
BAD DEBTS
3,528
CASUAL LABOR
375
DEPRECIATION
9,634
DUMP FEES
136,887
EQUIPMENT'REPAIR
119,799
FRANCHISE FEES
10,450
GAS a OIL
38,557
INSURANCE
46,184
LEGAL a ACCOUNTING
6,375
OFFICE EXPENSE
6,251
OUTSIDE SERVICES
11,447
RADIO EXPENSE
1,405
RENTS
5,400
.REPAIRS
6,777
SALARIES a WAGES
189,354
SUPPLIES
7,452
TAXES
16, 016
UTILITIES a TELEPHONE
6,109
-------------
TOTAL EXPENSE 622,289
-------------
NET PROFIT/(LOSS) (#46,889)
CAPITAL GAIN
REVALUATION OF ASSETS
TAXABLE INCOME
(9/15/86 FED 1120)
$206, 519
$159,630
$160,765
N/A
-----------
160,765
61
986
375
3, 854
47,910
59,900
11608
19,279
18,474
2,550
2.580
4,579
562
2,160-
2,711
42,480,
3.726
6,406
2,444
222,583
061,818)
PRESENT RESIDENTIAL RATE
BREAK EVEN ($11,240 /3700 CUSTOMERS)
10% PROFIT
NEW RATE
$29,230
N/A
-----------
29,230
15
179
68
701
8, 71 1
10,891
292
3,505
31359
464
455
833
102
3.93
493
7,724
677
1,165
444
40, 470
011, 240)
$7.90
3.04
1.09
x612.03
SALARIES a WAGES - Salaries 8 wages were calculated using the
salaries of 3 drivers, 4 helpers, 1 office employee and
1/2 the manager's salary. This was allocated at 75% of
the total. (4.5 days of the.6 day work week).
Mr. Wright also reviewed the following Comparison Using
Proposed Mandatory System for the year ending 9/15/86:
24
RURAL SANITATION SEPVICE. INC.
Comparsion Using Proposed Mandatory System
For the five and one half months ending September 15, 19861
TOTAL
APRIL 1,1986 -
SEPT 15, 1986
REVENUES
INCOME $572,804
INTEREST INCOME 2,596
-------------
TOTAL INCOME 575,400
EXPENSES
ADVERTISING
289
BAD DEBTS
3,528
CASUAL LABOR
375
DEPRECIATION
9,634
DUMP FEES
136,887
EQUIPMENT REPAIR
119,799
FRANCHISE FEES
10,450
GAS 8 OIL
38,557
INSURANCE
46,184
LEGAL a ACCOUNTING
6,375
OFFICE EXPENSE
6,251
OUTSIDE SERVICES
11,447
RADIO EXPENSE
1,405
RENTS
5,400
REPAIRS
6,777
SALARIES 8 WAGES
189,354
SUPPLIES
7,452
TAXES
16,016
UTILITIES a TELEPHONE
6,109
TOTAL EXPENSE 622,289
-------------
NET PROFIT/(LOSS) ($46,889)
REVALUATION OF ASSETS $206,519
-------------
TAXABLE INCOME.
(9/15/86 FED 1120) $159,630
INDIAN
RIVER
COUNTY
5.5 MONTHS
$160.765
N/A
-----------
160,765
81
986
375
3,854
47,910
59,900
1,608
19,279
18,474
2,550
2,500
4,579
562
21160
2, 71 1
42,480
3,726
6,466
2,444
222,583
($61,818)
PRESENT RESIDENTIAL RATE
BREAK EVEN (LOSS/# of CUSTOMERS)
10% PROFIT
NEW RATE
INDI�N
RIV R
COUNTY
PER MONTH
$29,230
-------- i--
29,230
15
179
68
701
8, 71 1
10,891
292
3,505
3,359
464
455
8:3
1 2
303
• 493
7,724
677
11165
444
4B.47B
(511.2 0)
CURRENT
BILLING
SYSTEM
$7.90
3.04
1.09
----512.3
5000
CUSTOMERS
PROPOSED
SYSTEM
$39,500
N/A
39, 500
15 -
179
68
701
-11,772
-
10, 891
395
3,505
3,359
464
455
833
102
393
493
7,724
677
1,165
444
43,633
($4,133)
PROPOSED
MANDATORY
SYSTEM
Attorney Jackson noted that they also have had to add some
extra men because the County prohibited them from collecting
residential and commercial before 6:00 o'clock A.M.
Commissioner Bird asked if we have ever gone to an outside
financial consultant on these franchise analyses, and Director
25
SAY 2 6 1987 BOOK
$7.90
0.83
0.87
$9.60
MAY
2 6 1987
Boos
68 PAr-3t 4?6
and
Pinto said
that we usually go to consultants for water
and sewer
analysis, which are somewhat more complicated than garbage
collection. However, if we see something in these franchises
where the costs are out of line with the normal of the industry,
we would go to an outside firm for assistance. Director Pinto
believed that the proposed rates are well within line with
competition in other areas, and pointed out that the last time
Rural received an increase was back in 1986 when they received
permission to pass through only the County Landfill rate
increases to their customers. The only increase prior to that
was back in 1982 when their franchise was brought up to County
standards.
Commissioner Bird returned to the matter of salaries and
found it difficult to believe that the salaries and wages for 8
employees amount to approximately $35,000 a month, because that
is what it amounts to when you divide $189,354 by 5-1/2 months.
Mr. Wright explained that the total of salaries shown on the
Consolidated Statement of 9/15/86 is rather deceiving, because
the actual salaries and wages for employees involved in the
collection of residential in the unincorporated areas of the
county actually amount to approximately $7,724 a month.
Commissioner Bird wished that had been explained in the
beginning, but emphasized that he would prefer to have a
statement showing specific costs and salaries for each area of
collection, rather than having to formulate an estimate of the
costs from a consolidated statement.
Commissioner Wheeler emphasized that anyone in the county
who
decides
that
Rural's rates are too high can pick up the phone
and
switch
over
to the competitor.
Chairman Scurlock recalled that back in 1980 when we had 4-5
hauling companies serving the county, there was a tremendous fear
on the part of some members of the County Commission that the
large operators would force the smaller companies out of
business, and, without any competition, the rates would escalate.
26
� s �
There was a concern at that time that we would end up dealing
with only one provider of service.
Director Pinto felt that both collectors would have lower
operating costs, and therefore lower rates, if the county were
divided in half with only one company servicing each area. That
would eliminate the duplication of having Harris and Rural
collect on the same streets. He felt that is something that the
County should seriously consider in the near future.
Commissioner Wheeler had a serious problem with setting
rates for these firms, when people have the option of switching
to the competitor or taking their trash to the dump themselves._
Attorney Jackson pointed out that the County is only setting
the maximum rate that Rural may charge their customers. He also
pointed out that people have the option of dumping their trash.at
a transfer station.
Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked if
anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Bill Nelson, 230 14th Street, agreed that a solution to this
problem would be to designate the areas for each franchised
hauler to eliminate duplication of collection, because,,lower
operating costs for the haulers surely would result inl'lower
rates for the customers. He urged the County to move ahead on
this now.
Chairman Scurlock advised that this is being considered now
under the process of redoing the master plan with respect to our
entire approach to solid waste, and, hopefully, it will be
implemented in the next year or year and a half. In addition, we
will be manning all of the transfer stations because right now a
large part of our community is getting a free ride by dumping
their trash at an unmanned transfer station.
Commissioner Bird felt there was a lot of pros and cons on
designating separate collection areas, but felt it wound make it
easier to get actual accountings of the firms' expenses, profits,
etc., and thereby enable the County to govern their rates
MAY 2 6 1987 27 BOOKbbr''r°
MAY 2 6 1987
Boor; 19T
accordingly. On one hand, he felt the separate territories made
sense, but on the other hand, he believed competition was very
beneficial.
Director Pinto pointed out that there would be competition
among the commercial collectors. He emphasized that in the
future, we may have to require residents to have their trash
collected.
There being no others who wished to speak in this matter,
the Chairman closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, that the Board adopt Resolution
87-48, authorizing a residential rate increase for
Rural Sanitation, Inc. of $3.58 per month, effective
June 1, 1987.
Under discussion, Commissioner Bird stated that once again
he was putting a lot of faith in our Utilities Dept.'s assessment
of the company's financial status and integrity.
Director Pinto pointed out that Rural will have to come back
in 5 or 6 months to get the balance of the increase they
requested, and will undergo another complete financial analysis
at that time.
Commissioner Wheeler understood that at that time the County
has the option of going in and readjusting the rates downward,
and Director Pinto confirmed that the Board has that ability.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion
was voted on and carried unanimously, 4-0.
(COPY OF RURAL SANITATION SERVICE, INC. REQUEST TO INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY FOR A GARBAGE & TRASH RATE INCREASE — ON FILE IN OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD)
28
5/87(Resol)UTIL(Pa)
RESOLUTION NO. 87- 48
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING
RESOLUTION 82-51, AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTIONS
86-23, 86-31 AND 86-114, WHICH NEW AMENDMENT WILL
AUTHORIZE A RESIDENTIAL RATE INCREASE FOR RURAL
SANITATION, INC. OF $3.58 PER MONTH.
WHEREAS, Rural Sanitation notified the Utility Department
in writing, as required by Resolution 82-51, Section' 14, of a
requested increase in its residential rates andj submitted
justification; and
WHEREAS, the Utility Services Department has reviewed Rural
Sanitation's request and recommends that the requested breakeven
amount of $3.04 be allowed, with a 5% profit increase of $0.54,
instead of the requested 10% profit, with the understanding that
within one year Rural Sanitation may return, and, after showing that
they have operated in a prudent and efficient manner, request an
additional 5% profit increase;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that effective with
the next billing cycle, that Rural Sanitation Service isl authorized
to increase its rates by $3.58 per month per residential ,customer so
that the original residential charge per month will be increased as
follows:
$7.90 - Original Residential Charge Per Month
3.58 - Increase
$11.48 - TOTAL
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Bowman who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Wheeler and, upon being put to a vote, the
vote was as follows:
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Ave
Vice -Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Richard N. BirdAvp
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Ayp
Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler 4e
Bou
MAY 2 6 1987
py 2 6 `1937
BOOK 6
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed
and adopted this 26th day of May, 1987.
Attest
Freda Wright,' Ckb
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency:
Charles P. Vituna
-64
County Attorney
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
Approved for Utility/ -Nat ers:
G
Terrance G. Pinto, erector
Div. of Utility Services
LANDCLEARING/TREE REMOVAL VIOLATION - ROBERT MOONEY
AND GUETTLER & SONS
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5112/87:
TO: The Honorable Members DATE: May 12, 1987 FILE:
of the Board of County
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
SUBJECT: LANDCLEARING/TREE REMOVAL
Robert M. Kea ng, •ICP VIOLATION: ROBERT MOONEY
Planning & De lot Director AND GUETTLER & SONS
-THROUGH: Michael K. Miller MP
Chief, Environmental Planning
FROM: Roland M. Deslois "D REFERENCES: MOONEY MEMO
Staff Planner Disk. ROLAND
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 May 26, 1987.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS:
On April 23, 1987, County staff observed that parcel numbers
10-32-39-00000-3000-00016.0 and 09-32-39-00000-1000-00003.0 had
been cleared, including the removal of three (3) protected
trees prior to the issuance of tree removal and landclearing
permits. The subject property is approximately 100 acres in
size, and is located on the north side of South Winter Beach
Road (65th Street), just east of Lateral "G" canal. The
property has recently been rezoned from RS -6 to RS -3, Single
Family Residential District.
30
The clearing observed was in association with 23 survey tran-
sects, running north -south on the subject property. The
transects range in width from 14 to 43 feet (averaging 15 to 17
feet in width), and are estimated to range from 600 to 1,700
feet in length.
The property is owned by Larue Equities LTD. CO., represented
by Mr. Robert Mooney, and was cleared by Guettler &iSons, Inc.
of Fort Pierce.
The clearing of the survey lines was performed on the property
to provide topographic data for submittal to the. County as
support information to the Sand Ridge Country Club Estates
preliminary plat application, submitted prior to the recent
rezoning of the property.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS:
Section 231-6(a) & (b), Tree Protection, of the Code of Laws
and Ordinances of Indian River County, Florida prohibits the
performance of.any tree removal, landclearing o grubbing
unless tree removal and landclearing permits have:first been
issued by the County. The ordinance further species that a
violation shall be -punishable upon conviction by a fine not to
exceed five hundred dollars ($500) per tree and landclealring
activity or by imprisonment in the County jail for up to sixty
(60) days, or both.
Section 231-7(a) of the Tree Protection Ordinance exempts from
permitting the clearing of a survey path not to exceed four (4)
feet in width for the preparation of subdivision plats, or the -
clearing of a path not to exceed ten (10) feet in width for the
°purpose of soil bore testing. In either case, the ordinance
specifies that no protected vegetation is to be clealred as part
of the exemption.
The clearing that occurred does not satisfy exemption criteria,
in that path width maximums have been substantially exceeded,
and protected trees have been removed.
Based on the illegal landclearing and number of protected trees
removed, the maximum fine in this case is $2,000.00.1 The owner
has submitted a check to staff to obtain an after -the -fact
landclearing permit, which is being held until the Commission
addresses the matter.
X_
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners consider
obtaining a.voluntary payment of $2,000 dollars, in addition to
the requirement of after -the -fact permits. In the event that
any said agreement is not forth -coming, staff recommends that y
the Board of County Commissioners grant staff the authorization
to pursue available remedies in County Court.
Planner Roland DeBiois explained that the path cleared for
survey transects averages between 15-79 ft. in width, but goes to
43 ft. at some points where equipment turned around. He pointed
out that Section 231-7A of the Tree Protection Ordinance provides
for 4 -ft. -wide paths for the preparation of subdivision plats and
31 BOOK
NAY 2 r:
MAY
2 6 1987
BOOK
f}� f 43
the clearing
is not to exceed 10 feet in width for the
purpose of
soil bore testing. In either case, the Ordinance specifies that
no protected vegetation is to be cleared as part of the process.
Chairman Scurlock wondered how one would turn a truck around
in a space only 10 -ft. wide, and Planner DeBlois explained that
the 10 ft. restriction was determined after substantial input was
received at workshops; however the ordinance really does not make
accommodations for turning around. In this particular case,
however, it seems that the 23 transects were beyond what was
necessary for just soil bore testings, and staff feels that the
primary purpose of the transects were for a topography survey.
Chairman Scurlock felt that perhaps we should provide them
adequate space for their equipment to turn around, but Mr.
DeBlois believed that the clearing was done in association with
the topography survey and did not believe they did it for any
other reason. He explained that this was brought to the Board
because of the Ordinance specifications, and felt that perhaps it
might be a good time to look at the 10 -ft. width maximum for soil
bore testing. He emphasized that staff still feels that a 4 -ft.
wide path is sufficient for topography surveys. In this
particular case they chose to use machinery for the job, instead
of clearing it by hand.
Commissioner Wheeler believed that to clear a path on that
large parcel by hand would have taken 3 good men an entire year.
However, he understood that 3 protected trees were removed during
the process.
Robert Keating, Director of Planning & Development,
emphasized that the 10 -ft. requirement was changed from 4 feet
this past year after the input at many workshops.
Tommy Guettler of Guettler i; Sons, Inc. stated that he had
never been cited before, and was not here to argue with the
County. He felt the problem with this area was due to the very
dense underbrush, and by using a track dozer, he was able to
clear this property in less than a week; it would have cost the
32
owner a great deal to have it cleared by hand. Mr. Guettler
admitted that he is aware of the County's Tree Protection
Ordinance, but emphasized that he did the clearing under the
supervision of a representative of the owner who kept trim in line
with the coordinates for the topography testing.
Planner DeBlois circulated colored photographs of',the path
that was cleared.
Mr. Guettler explained that the bulldozer they used had a
12 -ft.
blade on it,
but
pointed out that
in 4-5
months,
that path
would
be grown over
to
the extent that it
would
be only
8 feet
wide or so.
Chairman Scurlock asked if a smaller blade could have been
used, and Mr. Guettler believed he could have used a 5 -ft. blade,
but he chose the 12 -ft, blade because he believed it was the best
for the job. He explained that the brush is pushed tolthe sides
in order to get a straight line all the way through for the
survey.
Mr. DeBlois pointed out that a land clearing permit could
have been issued to allow for a wider lane of clearings but they
would not have received permission to remove the 3 trees at that
time.
Mr. Guettler advised that his contract with the owner was on
an hourly basis, and stated he was willing to pay whatiever the
Commission decides is his share of the violation. He stated
that the Commission would not have any trouble with him in the
future in these matters.
Commissioner Bowman did not understand why they had to cut a
width of 43 feet to run a transect, and Mr. DeBlois explained
that 43 -ft. was the maximum width of the path which apparently
happened when the dozer turned around. The average widths are
between 15 and 17 feet.
Mary Jane Goetzfried of CCL Consultants explained that they
were hired by the owner
to do the topography
survey
for the
,MAY
2 6
19EV
33
Boor
PA E P�
BOOK f',�GE 43
purpose of obtaining an application for the preliminary
subdivision plat for Sand Ridge Country Club Estates. She
emphasized that it was for that reason only those lines were
cleared for the entire length of the property and for no other
reasons. Mrs. Goetzfried pointed out that land clearing and
tree removal permits were submitted with their preliminary plat
application, but after the applicant requested a topography
survey, she contacted Mr. DeBlois and was told that the ordinance
did not pertain to topography surveys and there was no mention of
a 4 -ft. limit on the paths. She believed Mr. DeBlois will verify
that. When the owner and CCL became aware that there was a
problem with the size of the lanes that were cleared, she and Mr.
Mooney walked the property and took the photograph that was
before the Board this morning. She felt it was obvious that an
extreme effort was made to avoid quite a few trees. In fact, she
believed that to have removed only 3 threes in the entire 100
acres was a feat in itself. Mrs. Goetzfried felt this is a
unique piece of property and that there were extenuating
circumstances in that they were required to comply with an
ordinance that is not yet in place, that being the Sand Ridge
Protection Ordinance. She emphasized that they supplied staff
with detailed topography data, did a vegetation analysis, and
soil borings that normally would not be submitted for a
preliminary plat. She urged the Board to consider the
extenuating circumstances in this case, and emphasized that out
of the 61 miles of line, only 3 trees were knocked over.
Director Keating stated that they were applying the
Stormwater Management Ordinance which does not have a specific
definition of the sand ridge.
Lengthy discussion ensued regarding the reason behind using
the definition of the sand ridge that is included in the Sand
Ridge Protection Ordinance which is not yet in effect.
Commissioner Bowman wondered why they were even thinking
about digging retention ponds there, because she believed there
34
can be no question where the sand ridge is, if you use 'the
government's standard which is based upon a biological ,,survey.
She felt it was obvious that every one of the photographs showed
that land to be sand ridge, because if there is scrub pine, scrub
oak, or rosemary, it is sand ridge, regardless of the topography.
Planner DeBlois advised that the study showed the parcel to
be transitional. The southwest corner of the property',is not on
the sand ridge, and the remainder is on the ridge. He,disagreed
with Mrs. Goetzfried in that a soil bearing test was a',
requirement on all 23 transects, and Mrs. Goetzfried emphasized
that their client went to a great deal of expense in having these -
tests made and they have cooperated in working with staff to
determine the location of the sand ridge in order to be allowed
to build a lake on the parcel.
Robert Mooney, representing LaRue Equities LTD., Pointed out
that in some places there are 10 -ft. differences in elevation;
however, he did not feel that he paid for anything more than what
was required. All the clearing was done for the purpose of
getting the preliminary plat, not for the purpose of clearing the
property.
Commissioner Bird believed that the violation was
unintentional and that the property owner has paid dearly for the
services of having that clearing done and for all of the points
shot to get the elevations.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
required an after -the -fact permit for landcliearing at
triple the normal required amount.
Commissioner Bowman just felt that this is one of the
biggest messes that she has ever seen, and that it isltime to
review our requirements. If our Stormwater Management Ordinance
does not apply to the sand ridge, it is time that it cid.
35
AY 2 6 1987 BOOK
MAY 2 6 1987 BOOK, 436
Further, she could not see any necessity for requiring this owner
to do a topography survey to determine if it was sand ridge. If
there was a little corner that was in question, that is where the
study should have taken place.
DISCUSSION RE COMPUTERS AND CAD SYSTEM REQUESTED BY PROPERTY
APPRAISER
Property Appraiser David Nolte reported that his office is
in the final stages of preparing their budget for next year and
one of the things they are looking to do is get into a program
for computer-generated maps. He has received two proposals and
the total cost would be approximately $100,000 over a period of
1-2 years. One possible source of funding they would like the
Board to consider is the monies generated by selling copies of
the maps. At present those monies go directly into the
Commission's account, and sales have been running the
neighborhood of $12,000-$13,000 a year, and he believed that
figure would reach $15,000 this year. Mr. Nolte noted that other
counties have experienced continued growth in revenues from the
sales of these maps. He asked if the funds generated by the sale
of maps could be committed to fund the computer program.
Chairman Scurlock wanted to make sure that we could have a
fully integrated system with what we are doing in utilities and
planning. He believed these maps would be a tremendous asset to
the builders and developers in the community and would be highly
used for the site plan process. However, he felt that funding
from the general fund would have to be part of it.
Mr. Nolte believed there would be literally no end to what
we could put into this system once it is set up.
Commissioner Wheeler recommended that Mr. Nolte take a look
at the maps produced by the new computer software in Emergency
Management with regard to hurricane warnings, etc. He believed
that streets could be added or deleted to the maps, along with
36
} III
the location of utility lines, water and sewer lines,lldump
stations, etc. It could save a lot of money if it is compatible
with what we want to do.
Mr. Nolte advised that he and his staff have done a lot of
research on this type of program, but he would be glad to look at
the maps used by Emergency Management.
Commissioner Wheeler asked how long it would take 'Ito work
this out with staff, and Mr. Nolte believed this is something
that should be worked out at budget time. He stated that his
office is willing to put a little bit of money into it, but asked
that the Board give conceptual approval today.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved -
the concept of the proposed program and authorized
Administrator Balczun and staff to work with the
Property Appraiser to prepare a more detailed
presentation to be made at budget time as to funding
alternatives and examples of how the program works.
Mr. Nolte advised that he would have the vendor who they
consider the best come in and give a detailed presentation to the
Board.
DISCUSSION RE MODIFICATION OF UTILITY DEPOSIT REQUIREMENTS
Chairman Scurlock explained that he placed this item on the
Agenda after talking with Mr. Deiters and several other
constituents, who object to the Utilities Dept.'s requirement for
an $80 deposit. People are questioning why it takes 30 months
to establish good credit and why their deposit is returned
without interest at the end of that time. He felt we need to
reevaluate our ordinance so that the County pays a minimum
interest fee.on the $80 deposits or have an earlier release of
37 BOOK C,.;cP�
MAY 2 6 IS87
1987 BOOK
the deposit once_a customer has established a good credit rating.
The Chairman believed it was unfair to keep someone's deposit for
30 months without paying any interest.
Commissioner Wheeler agreed with Chairman Scurlock, but
Director Pinto explained that when a government owns a utility,
the taxpayers end up paying for the deadbeats. He also pointed
out that recent legislation prohibits us from going after owners
of rental units and allows us only to go after the renters
themselves. Our only recourse is to go to court, and that
becomes a utility expense. Director Pinto argued that if the
County did pay interest, it would reduce the revenue in the
utility rate structure. The customers have to pay for any losses
incurred by this utility; it really is not a stockholders'
situation. Our current loss situation is less than 50.
Chairman Scurlock felt that the onus for establishing good
credit should be on the customer, and if he cannot, then he must
pay a deposit; however, if he is able to establish very good
credit, he should get his deposit back earlier.
Director Pinto argued that tracking the deposits would pose
some difficult, and felt that if we go ahead with that policy, we
must realize that we have to make up for any losses incurred by
deadbeats.
Commissioner Wheeler suggested a compromise of returning the
deposit earlier, and Chairman Scurlock emphasized that he just
wanted the Commission to explore the possibility, because this
requirement has been creating some bad public relations, and he
pointed out that public relations is an important part of the
utility business. He pointed out that the City of Vero Beach
pays interest on their deposits.
Commissioner Bird agreed with Director Pinto in that it
would be very difficult to track the deposits, and Commissioner
Bowman felt it was a question of whether the cost of tracking the
deposits would offset the cost of the public relations.
38
_ M
surrounding counties to see how they handle deposits and bring it
back to the Board.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously ('4-0)
authorized staff to survey the surrounding counties
to see how they handle utility deposits and bring it
back to the Board.
James Deiters., 2415 4th Place, questioned why he was not -
allowed to contact the utilities he used up north for 25 years to
establish good credit. He emphasized that his deposit with
Florida Power 8 Light was returned in 6 weeks. Mr. Deiters
realized that in some deadbeat situations, the County would have
to rob Peter to pay Paul, but he questioned the County's legal
right to use his money for 30 months without paying any interest.
He realized that the amount only represents a couple of rounds of
golf, but he maintained that it is the principle of the matter.
'LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - GRAND HARBOR DRI - PHASE II
EARTHWORK PLAN
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/18/87:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: May 18, 1987 FILE:
Board of County commissioners
THROUGH:
Charles P. Balczun,
County Administrator
James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Dir
SUBJECT: Land Development Permit -
Phase II Earthwork Plan
Grand Harbor DRI
FROM David B. Cox, REFERENCES:
Drainage Engineer
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
At their -regular meeting of April 14, 1987, the Board directed staff to
continue to provide the Board the opportunity to review the issuance of
39
MAX 2 6 1987 BOOK 4,'_ '9
V
Chairman Scurlock
just wanted to have
staff survey the
surrounding counties to see how they handle deposits and bring it
back to the Board.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously ('4-0)
authorized staff to survey the surrounding counties
to see how they handle utility deposits and bring it
back to the Board.
James Deiters., 2415 4th Place, questioned why he was not -
allowed to contact the utilities he used up north for 25 years to
establish good credit. He emphasized that his deposit with
Florida Power 8 Light was returned in 6 weeks. Mr. Deiters
realized that in some deadbeat situations, the County would have
to rob Peter to pay Paul, but he questioned the County's legal
right to use his money for 30 months without paying any interest.
He realized that the amount only represents a couple of rounds of
golf, but he maintained that it is the principle of the matter.
'LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT - GRAND HARBOR DRI - PHASE II
EARTHWORK PLAN
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/18/87:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: May 18, 1987 FILE:
Board of County commissioners
THROUGH:
Charles P. Balczun,
County Administrator
James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Dir
SUBJECT: Land Development Permit -
Phase II Earthwork Plan
Grand Harbor DRI
FROM David B. Cox, REFERENCES:
Drainage Engineer
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
At their -regular meeting of April 14, 1987, the Board directed staff to
continue to provide the Board the opportunity to review the issuance of
39
MAX 2 6 1987 BOOK 4,'_ '9
MY 2 6 1997
BOC1i( 68
-fid development permits for the Grand Harbor DRI. The Public Works
Department is now ready to issue a Land Develognent Permit for the Phase II
Earthwork plan, with the Board's concurrence.
Grand Harbor, Inc. has received it's DER Permit (#311043029), Army Corps of
Engineers Permit #851PK-20563), and it's St. Johns River Water Management
District Permits 04-061-0075M4 and #4-061-0075M5) to construct the Phase
II Earthwork Plan.
The Plan, upon which all the permits are based proposes construction in a
165 acre area including:
1. Excavation of seven lakes and completion of three other lakes
that were partially included in the Phase IA Land Development
Permit.
2. Clearing and rough grading of fifteen golf holes.
3. Up to twelve of the fairways will be utilized for pesticide laden
soil disposal area.
4. Clearing and rough grading of part of the loop road.
5. Construction of water control structures connecting the lakes to
the estuarine area.
Final grading of the Golf Course and construction of the Golf Course
drainage system will be addressed in a site plan that will be overlaid on
the Phase II Earthwork site. The Golf Course site plan will be reviewed
separately by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
ALTERNATIVES AMID ANALYSIS
The St. Johns River Water Management District permits include conditions
relating to the following issues:
1) Monitoring and protection of the saltwater - freshwater interface
prior to and during lake excavation.
2) Allowing dewatering during lake construction.
3) Allowing construction of the Aqua. Range lake only to a depth of
twenty feet. All other lakes are limited to maximum depth of ten
feet.
4) Submission of a Plan for deep lake detention with mechanical
mixing prior to excavating the Aqua Range lake beyond a depth of
ten feet.
5) Monitoring of stormwater treatment standards with provision for
taking corrective measures and submitting a revised treatment
plan in the event that the stormwater system does not provide the
necessary pollutant removal.
6) Obtaining consumptive use permits or exemptions for all wells on
site prior to lake construction.
Aside from state and federal inspections and monitoring, County Staff will
also make inspections. Field inspections will be made to ensure that 1)
erosion control and pesticide laden soils are properly handled, and 2) the
lake littoral zone vegetation is established.
REcpv2-MIDATIONS
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners allow Public Works
to issue the Land Development Permit for the Grand Harbor Phase II
Earthwork with the Permit conditions outlined in Attachment # 11. %
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0)
authorized Public Works to issue the Land Development
Permit for the Grand Harbor Phase 11 Earthwork with
the conditions outlined in Attachment #1.
40
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Telephone: (305) 587-8000
May 18, 1987
Grand Harbor, Inc.
c/o Schaub Communities
660 Beachland Blvd.
Vero Beach, F1 32963
Suncofn Telephone: 424-1011
ATTACHMENT #1
RE: Grand Harbor Phase II Earthwork, Land Development
Permit #031
Dear Sirs:
Enclosed is the Land Development Permit for the subject
project. Please be advised that the County shall inspect the
work as required and that the contractor shall request all
inspections as noted on the permit.
Below are the Land Development Permit conditions for Grand
Harbor Phase II Earthwork:
1) Grand Harbor will provide notification to the Public Works
Division to facilitate scheduling the following inspections
of pesticide laden soils operations:
a) Construction of the separation basins
b) Pumping or trucking from the estuarine area to the
separation basins
c) Pumping from the separation basins to spreader trucks
d) Deposition of material on fairways
e) Backfilling to a minimum cover of one foot on fairways
2) The applicant shall notify the Public Works and Planning
Departments immediately upon completion of Phase II earth-
work, which includes excavation of lakes. Upon notice, said
departments may perform inspections. Within 30 days of such
inspections the lake littoral zones shall be established.
The applicant shall arrange for a County inspection of the
littoral zones no later than 25 days from the time of the
County inspection of the Phase II earthwork.
3) Silt screens, hay bales and grasing shall be required to
control erosion during and after construction.
If it is determined that erosion on the site is not being
maintained properly to prevent significant amounts of
sediment discharge into the Indian River, the County will
stop work on the project until it is reduced to an
acceptable level. During the course of constuction, Public
Works will periodically inspect by boat provided by the
developer the depth and turbidity of the Indian River at the
locatA:on of the temporary outfalls permitted earlier for
Phase IA and the River Club.
41
MAY 2 6 1987 Bou 441
r__
mAY 2 6 1987
BOOK 8 f'AGE 12d
4) This permit recognizes that permits issued by the Florida
D.E.R., St. Johns River Water Management District, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, and Florida D.N.R. contain permit
conditions. These conditions shall be monitored for
compliance and the developer is subject to State, Federal
and Local (ordinance) requirements.
5)
The cut and fill waiver for the Grand Harbor D.R.I. is
limited to 646,000 cubic yards of fill and 320,000 cubic
yards of cut. Every six months from the date of issuance of
the Land Development Permit until the completion of the
^
Phase II earthwork a tabulation of cut and fill quantities
shall be submitted to the Public Works Department.
6)
Clearing of specific building sites shall not commence until
the developer is ready to build the building or buildings to
be located on the site. [D.O. Condition No. 51
7)
During land clearing and site preparation, wetting
operations or other soil treatment techniques appropriate
for controlling unconfined emissions, including seeding and
mulching of disturbed areas, shall be undertaken and
implemented by the developer to the satisfaction of the
Florida Department of Environmentl Regulation, and in
accordance with Indian River County's Tree Protection
Ordinance. [D.O. Condition No. 61
8)
In the event of discovery of any archaeological artifacts
during project construction, the developer shall stop
construction in that area and immediately notify the
Division of Archives, History and Records Management in the
Florida Department of Site. Proper protection of such
finding shall be provided by the applicant to the
satisfaction of the Division. [D.O. Condition No. 71
9)
During construction (including excavation) of the proposed
marina basins, estuary/waterways, or surface water
management system, soils contaminated with DDT or other
restricted agricultural compounds shall be removed and used
as fill for the golf course and/or building pads.
Deposition of contaminated material on the golf course shall
be deposited above the seasonal high water table and covered
-
with no less than one foot of clean fill -or topsoil. [D.O.
Condition No. 91
10)
The developer shall coordinate the timing of his construct-
ion schedule such that immediately prior to the period when
conection of waterways on-site to the existing basin or to
the Indian River Lagoon takes place, pumping of water to
lower the water table on-site shall cease. No pumping shall
take place after the connection is made. [D.O. Condition No.
12]
11) In the event that it is determined that any representative
of a plant or animal species designated as endangered or
threatened on Federal, State of Florida, or Florida
Committee on Rare and Endangered Plants and Animals lists is
resident on, or otherwise is significantly dependent upon
the Grand Harbor property, the developer shall cease all
42
activities
population
Freshwater
Service.
agencies,
Condition
which might negatively affect that individual or
and immediately notify both the Florida dame and
Fish Commission and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Proper protection, to the satisfaction of both
shall be provided by the developer. [D.O.
No. 19]
12) During land clearing operations, all Melaleuca, Brazilian
pepper and Australian pine which occur on the site of
development shall be removed. [D.O. Condition No. 2�1
13) The perimeter of the golf course shall be bermed and swaled
to prevent direct runoff from entry into the surface water
management system of lakes, the constructed marina basins, -
the estuary/waterway system, or the Indian River Lagoon.
[D.O. Condition No. 281
AUTHORIZATION TO SELL EXCESS FILL - HOBART ROAD RIGHT -6F -WAY
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/22/87:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: May 22, 1987 FILE:
Board of County Comnissioners
THI�ITGfi:
Charles P. Balczun, SUBJECT:
County Administrator Authorization to Sell Excess
Fill - Hobart Road ght-of-way
FROM: �ames w. Davis, P.E. , REFERENCES:
Public Works Director
The County Road and Bridge Division is scheduling the excavation of 30,000
cubic yards of sand from the Hobart Road right-of-way. After the road is
lowered, Saw Mill Ridge Co. will pave Hobart Road to the entrance to Hobart
Park. This paving is a requirement rement of the Saw Mill 'Ridge mining permit.
The County will than pave Hobart Road through the Hobart Park property to
Kings Highway.
Saw Mill Ridge is requesting permission to purchase the surplusi fill from
the County for $1 per cubic yard.
ALTEEWTIVES AND ANALYSIS
The County Road and Bridge Division has two options as follows:
Option # 1 - Sell the excess fill to Saw Mill Ridge for $1/¢.Y. This
revenue would offset the cost of paving Hobart Road to Kings Highway.
Option # 2 - Stockpile the fill for future county use. This involves
trucking the fill to a stockpile area.
It is recommended that staff be authorized to sell the excess fill to Saw
Mill Ridge for $1/C.Y.
43 BOOS
MAY z 6 1937 BOOK pma 444
Chairman Scurlock recalled that there had been some
discussion on how much fill would be needed by Grand Harbor, and
asked if staff had contacted them to see if they were interested
in buying fill from the County.
Public Works Director Jim Davis explained that he had not
contacted them because he understood that they intended to buy
their fill from a new mining outfit opening up just west of Kings
Highway which is closer to them. He stated he would check with
Grand Harbor to see if that is still their intention.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0)
authorized Director Davis to sell the excess fill to
the highest bidder.
PERMISSION) TO PURCHASE ASPHALT FROM MacASPHALT CO.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/22/87:
TO: The Honorable Members of the
Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH:
Charles Balczun,
County Administrator
®ATE: May 22, 1987 FILE:
SUBJECT: Request pemi.ssion to Purchase
Asphalt From MacAsphalt Co.
FROM' w. Davis, P.E., REFERENCES:
Public Works Director
MacAsphalt Co., a large asphalt paving company in South Brevard COUnty, has
open d a new asphalt plant in palm Bay which is approximately 6 miles north
of the north Indian River County line. Mr David Donofrio, Branch Manager
of the Melbourne office of MacAsphalt, has expressed an interest in
supplying asphalt to the County for the same price that the County now pays
under the annual bid from Dickerson, Florida, Inc. Recently, the County
has requested Dickerson to pave various roads, however, Dickerson is very
busy with the reconstruction of US 1 north of Vero Beach, and scheduling is
uncertain.
44
�114D � iu�� n •' i� u
It is recanrended that staff be authorized to purchase asphalt from
MacAsphalt Co. when Dickerson Inc., cannot meet our needs upon a one week
notice. Funding to be from Petition Paving Fund and Road and Bridge
Division operating funds. Proper insurance will be required.
Commissioner Bowman asked if there is any difference in the
quality of the asphalt, and Director Davis said there was not.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0)
authorized staff to purchase asphalt from Ma�Asphalt
Co. when Dickerson Inc., cannot meet our needs upon a
one-week notice, as recommended by staff.
AUTHORIZATION FOR OUTSIDE APPRAISALS OF VARIOUS PARCEL$ OF
PPnPFRTV
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/22/87:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: May 22, 1987 FI�E:
.Board of County Commissioners
THRWGi:
Charles P. Balczun,
County Administrator
FROMij.-mes W. Davis, p.j,
Public Works Diroctor
SUBJECT: Appraisals for
1) North Tracking Station Property
2) South'County Regional Park
Property on Oslo Road at 20th Av.
3) Property along 43rd Ave near
5th Street SW.i
REFERENCES:
Don Finney to James W. Davis
dated 5-21-87
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Staff has solicited estimates from five appraisal firms for' providing
appraisals of the above properties for the Parks Division.
CATION AND FUNDING
After confering with Mr. Ansi.nIs representative, .John Bradley, i,agent for
the property, staff recommends that the appraisal work be given to
Armfield-Wagner Appraisal and Research, Inc., for a not -to -exceed cost of
$5,100. Funding to be from 113-210-572=X33.19, Park Trust Fund,lbalance is
approx. $120,000.
IWAY 2 6 1987
45 BOOK 68 r,vuE 445
MAY
2 6
1937
Boox
68 F9UC 44
Commissioner Wheeler noted that Mr.
Snow's price
was $2,400,
and Public Works Director Jim Davis advised that they try to
spread the work out and not use one particular appraiser. The
feeling is that Armfield-Wagner will give a much more intensive
study and report, and Mr. Ansin's representative prefers to go to
an MAI. The County has used Mr. Snow in the past, but he is not
an MAI.
Commissioner Bird pointed out that all three of these
parcels are very large, particularly the Ansin property.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0)
authorized staff to retain the firm of Armfield-Wagner:
Appraisal and Research, Inc., at an amount not to
exceed $5,100 for appraisals for the properties listed
in the above memo, as recommended by staff.
DISCUSSION RE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF SOLID WASTE
BILLING SYSTEM(Tabled from 5/12 and 5/19 meetings)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 4/22/87:
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
VIA: CHARLES P. BALCZUN
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTO�PI
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
i
FROM: H. T. "SONNY" DEAN
MANAGER OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
- DIVISION OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION
OF SOLID WASTE BILLING SYSTEM
BACKGROUND
DATE: APRIL 22, 1987
In conjunction with the Indian River County Solid Waste Master Plan, a
rate study was made. The recommendation for financing the solid waste
activities was to be accomplished with a user charge carried on the
property tax bill.
46
L.
ANALIS
The Indian River County Division of Utilities Services requested our
consultants, Camp Dresser and mcKee, Inc., to submit a proposal to
perform the subject service. Attached information is the result of
that request. The scope of work is clearly defined along with
anticipated tasks. As you can see from the submitted information,
there is an enormous amount of work to be performed.
RECOMMENDATION
The Division of Utility Services recommends approval and 'requests the
Board of County Commissioners to authorize CDM to perform this work
under our existing agreement at a price not to exceed $159,000.00- as
per attached submittal.
Before she left on vacation, Commissioner Eggert submitted
the following memo listing her comments on the issue:
TO: Board of County ��1TE. May 21, 1987 FILE:
Commissioners
SUBJECT:
May 26, 1987 Agenda
Item 11-A
Solid Waste Billing
System
FROM: Carolyn K. Eggert &9W REFERENCES:
County Commissioner
In going over the Scope -of Work for the development and
implementation of the Solid Waste Billing System with three
representatives from CDM, I came away with the}Following
conclusions:
1. The description of some of the tasks has been
oversimplified.
2. The newness, sensitivity and potential for a court case
concerning this requires the involvement of the higher level
of management earlier than is required in many projects.
3. Tasks 408 and 409 could potentially take a lot of the time
of the top three men in handling the questions of the
community; however, there may be more hours here than
really needed and could be a place where a fee reduction
could be made.
47
MAY 2 6 1987 BOOK
MAY
� 6
1987"
BOOK
Chairman Scurlock reported
that he met with Utilities
Director Terry Pinto, but still did not agree with the $159,000
in consultants' fees. He agreed with Commissioner Eggert that
we could save some money by cutting down on the number of hours
the consultants spend attending public hearings during the
ordinance process.
Director Pinto advised that he talked with the consultants,
and they agreed that if we were to remove the 172 hours for
public hearings from the proposal and pay them on an hourly basis
as we need them, it could result in substantial savings. They
cautioned, however, that it could end up costing us more if the
public hearing process gets complicated. Director Pinto
recommended that the 172 hours be removed under Task 409.
Chairman Scurlock felt confident that if the Board and staff
prepared properly for the necessary public hearings, we would not
need 172 hours of consultants' time.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0)
accepted the contract from CDM for services in the
development and implementation of a solid waste billing
system with the removal of Task #409.
COPY OF WORK PROPOSAL IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO
THE BOARD (WORK AUTHORI ZATION #7)
PETITION FOR WATER SYSTEM EXPANSION ON 47TH AVENUE IN GLENDALE
LAKE ESTATES SUBDIVISION
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/15/87:
48
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: MAY 15, 1987
THRU: CHARLES P. BALCZUN
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
VIA: TERRANCE G. PINTO TP/W,,
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
FROM: JEFFREY A. BOONE
ENGINEERING OPERATIONS MANAGER
SUBJECT: PETITION FOR WATER SYSTEM EXPANSION ON 47TH AVENUE IN
GLENDALE LAKE ESTATES SUBDIVISION
BACKGROUND
The Division of Utility Services has received a petition to extend
the water system along 47th Avenue in the Glendale' Lake Estates
Subdivision. The original petition consisted of 7 of 131or 54 -percent
of the benefitted property owners in favor of the water line extension
on 47th Avenue to 9th Place. However, the Division of Utility Services
feels it necessary to continue the line extension west on 9th Place to
48th Avenue to connect into the line recently installed on 48th Avenue
by means of a similar petition project, thereby completing a -looped
system for the subject project.
It will be possible to serve three additional residences by
completing this loop. These three residences have expressed
interest in participating in the petitioned project and their
signatures on the petition are being solicited by the neighborhood
representative. At the time of this writing two additional signatures
have been added to the petition by residents on 9th Place between 47th
Avenue and 48th Avenue for a total of 9 of 16 or 56 percent of the
benefitted property owners in favor of the project.
ANALYSIS
The petition water extension project on 48th Avenue is' nearing
completion at this time, and with the current petition to extend
water service along 47th Avenue, approximately ones, -third of the
residents on the Glendale Lake Estates Subdivision will be served by
the County's water system.
It appears that due to similar water quality problems experienced
by the residents in the surrounding areas, the County may very well
expect subsequent petitions for water system expansion elsewhere in the
subdivision. As an alternate to proceeding with the current petition
for 47th Avenue, it may be prudent for the County to investigate the
feasibility of extending the water distribution system throughout the
subdivision. Such was one of the recommendations of Mr. Jack Pearce
who acted as the neighborhood representative for 47th Avenue petition.
RECOMMENDATION
The Division of Utility Services recommends that the Board of County
Commissioners authorize the preparation of detailed cost estimates
for engineering and construction as well as engineering design plans
and specifications for the water system expansion along 47th Avenue and
9th Place between 47th Avenue and 48th Avenue in the Glendale Lake
Estates Subdivision and to prepare a preliminary assessment roll based
on these estimates. Furthermore, the Division of utility Services
requests that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the
investigation of the feasibility of expanding the County's water system
throughout the Glendale Lake Estates Subdivision by developing
preliminary budget estimates for engineering.and construction costs.
l MAY 2 6 1981
49 _
BOOK
MAY 2 6 1987Boox 4 5?
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved staff's recommendation as set out in the
above memo.
AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR AN UNDERWRITER ON THE $3.5 MILLION
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BOND ISSUE
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/26/87:
TO: Honorable Members of DATE: May 26, 1987
the Board of County s
Commissioners
SUBJECT: UNDERWRITER -$3,500,000
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
BOND ISSUE
FROM: Josep A. Baird
OMB Director
M. G. Lewis and Company was accepted as underwriter for the
$3,500,000 capital improvement bond issue. Since they have been
chosen as financial advisor, they can no longer act in the
capacity of underwriter.
The Budget Staff is requesting permission to advertise to
receive bids for underwriter on the $3,500,000 capital
improvement bond issue.
Staff and M. G. Lewis, Financial Advisor, will review the
proposal and make a recommendation.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
authorized staff to advertise for an underwriter
on the $3.5 million capital improvement bond issue,
as recommended by staff.
AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE USED EQUIPMENT FOR SANDRIDGE GOLF CLUB
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5/26/87:
50
TO: Honorable Members of DATE: May 26, 1987
the Board of County
Commissioners ,t
2r
THROUGH: Joseph A. Bair
OMB Director SUBJECT: USED EQUIPMENT.
FOR GOLF COURSE
FROM: Bob Komarinetz 1'
Director of Golf
The Golf Course staff is requesting permission to purchase
used equipment in the amount of $10,000 from Bent Pine Golf
Course. If purchased new, this equipment would cost
approximately $52,400.
TO: Joe Baird DATE: May 21, 1987 FILE:
Budget Director
THI�J: CaSIle Goodrich
Purchasing
ECT: Equipment Purchased
MAY 2 6 1981 ; 1!
FROM: Bob Karain REFERENCES:
Directorof -------- ------------
Here is a list of equipment that we are purchasing frau Bent
Pine Golf Club. I have talked to purchasing and they will
attach the bid for the Aeriator.
YEAR DESCRIPTION OF EQUIPMENT'
1). 1979 Parkmaster 7Gang Fairway Unit, Rebuilt the Winter
of 1987. To be used as fairway backup & primary
rough mower.
2). 1984 Workmaster Runabout & Truckster
To be used to pull Aeriator.
3). 1982 Dedose Aeriator, 2 Drum Type
with Y" Tines. To be used to Aeriate T's & Greem
Total of equipment if purchased new -------------
PURCHASE
PRICE NEW
$43,000.00
7,200.00
2,200.00
$52,400.00
Actual purchase price ----------------------- ----- $10,000.00
51
BooK 8 PSE 4r
mAy
1987
OMB Director
Joe Baird explained that this was placed
on
today's agenda as an emergency item because staff would like to
take advantage of this offer from Bent Pines.
Bob Komarinetz, Director of Golf, explained that one of our
mechanics inspected the equipment and reported that it is in
almost perfect working order.
Commissioner Bowman asked why Bent Pines was selling their
equipment, and Mr. Komarinetz felt that as a private club, they
were in a better position to buy new, updated equipment.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0)
authorized staff to purchase used equipment in
the amount of $10,000 from Bent Pine Golf Course,
as recommended by staff.
CHANGE ORDERS #1 AND #2 - HILL JONES CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
GOLF CART STORAGE BUILDING
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 5126187:
TO: Honorable Members of
the Board of County
Commissioners
THROUGH: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
FROM: Bob Komarinetz
-Director of Golf
DATE: May 26, 1987
SUBJECT: GOLF COURSE CHANGE
ORDERS - HILL JONES
Pleae find attached two (2) requests for change orders affecting
the golf cart building:
Change Order Number One
The use of gas golf carts instead of electric carts requires
less electrical work in the golf cart storage building. The overall
cost,is $975.00 less.
52
Change Order Number Two
Increase Decrease
(1) Increase irrigation sleeves under drive $418
for future irrigation for parking lot
islands.
(2y Decrease cart paths around Clubhouse. $7000
Staff feels that they will be able to
complete cart paths in house at a future
date.
Net affect ($6,582.00)'decrease in contract price.
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve both
change orders as submitted.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0)
approved Change Orders #1 and #2 with Hill -Jones
for the construction of the golf cart storage
building at Sandridge Golf Club, as recommended
by Golf Director Komarinetz.
MAY 2 6 1987 53 BOOT( 6 8 ;L 3"J
C
CHANGE
ORDER
AIA DOCUMENT G701
Distribution to:
OWNER
0
ARCHITECT
O
CONTRACTOR
O
FIELD
0
OTHER
0
PROJECT: Sandridge Cart Storage Building CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: J
(name, address)
TO (Contractor):
F Hill/Jones, Inc.
855 21st Street
Suite 10
LVero Beach, Florida . 32960
INITIATION DATE: May 12, 1987
ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 8626
CONTRACT FOR: One story block cart
storage building
CONTRACT DATE:
You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract:
1. Delete hose bibbs on north and south walls and connect hose.bibbs on east and [est
walls to the water system before the water conditioning equipment-,,..:..:.•.••.:•:.•. No Dame
2. Run conduit from .future site lighting location to panel A in the golf cart storage
building.....................................................:....:...'...:...,......,.$360.00
3. Telephone conduit: stub up at -south side of building.................................No:�Charge
4. -*Delete half of circle drive increase remaining half to W width ...................!C$425.00)
5. Add -gate .......................... . . .••.
............... .,.. .. ._....,....... ,.....,,.. 195.00
6. Delete battery charger shelves......................:.......................•,.•,..,($405.00)
7. Delete all eTectr :.cal conduit, wire. and devices for the electrical cei'l i ng outlets
for the battery chargers. Provide circuit breakers in. panels and-contJEi't�i;tub:�ups�.to
facilitate future completion of deleted work .:.::................ ...'...::..:..,....:($700:09)
TOTAL ($975,00)
Not valid until signed by both the Owner and Architect
Signature of the Contractor indicates his agreement herewith, including any adjustment in the Contrag Sum or Contract rime.
The original (Contract Sum) ...................... $ 183,700 , 00
Net change by previously authorized Change Orders ................................. $ 0. 00
The (Contract Sum) ((X0WX&X0((XXMD(>y6XdS)Al D4 prior to this Change Order was .......... $ 183 700.00
The (Contract Sum) ( )t*XrKd t (�QcYr)61(D( OWD will be WIH (decreased)ANKaW 6 94
bythis Change Order::...:...:::::::..:....................................... $ 975. 00
The new (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Cost) including this Change Order will be ... $ 182,725 . 00
The -Contract Time will be XX;.(rXX*VXXJ%X%X%(P (unchanged) by ( Q. )Days.
The Date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is May 15, 1987 -
C.E. Block Architect, Inc_
ARCHITECT 1995 -39th Avenue
Address
Vero Beach, Florida
R v �
N-wn
DATE
Authorized:
Inc.Chairman of I.R C. Cogimj4sion
CONTRACTORg 5 -21st Street OWNER =
G
Address Address—
Vero Beach, FloridayQI�-0 ��ia-off
14
AIA DOCUMENT 6701 • ` CHANGE ORDER • APRIL 1978 EDITION • AIAD • a 1978
THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS. 173S NEW YORK AVE.. N.W.. WASHINGTON. D.C. 2MM
54
D
G701-1978
=-
CHANGE Distribution to: _
ODER OWNER Q
AIA DOCUMENT G701 ARCHITECT Q
CONTRACTOR Q
C FIELD Q
OTHER Q
PROJECT: Sandridge Cart Storage Building CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: 2
(name, address)
TO (Contractor):
INITIATION DATE: May 21 st..,1987
r— Hill/Jones Inc. ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 8626
855 21st. Street Suite 10
Vero Beach, Florida 32960 CONTRACT FOR:
One story block cart .
storage building
L J CONTRACT DATE:
1-6-87
You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract:
1. Per instructions from Bob Komarinetz, install irriga ion sleeves
under drives for future irrigation system. $418.00
2. Per instructions from Bob Komarinetz, delete all cart paths. ($7000.00)
Total ($6582.00)
,(V
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) , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,,,,,, ,, $ $183,700.00
Net change by previousl authorized Change Orders ... $ ($ 975.00)
The (Contract Sum) ( Ummm l�i#> axprior to this Change Order was . $ $182,725.00
The (Contract Sum) �P�1��iti t will be 9494 (decreased) K NX($ 6,582.00)
by this Change Order ....... $
The new (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Cost) including this Change Order will be ... $ $176,143.00 .
The Contract Time will be O4XWXA OQX�rSXMX (unchanged) by
The Date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is Mal ( I , 1 QQDays.
C.E. Block Architect, Inc.
A9LTECT39th A . nup
AddreesssJ
Vero Beach. E1nriria 12960
BY
Hill/Jones, Inc.
CONTRACTOR
1
Ad ress st Street
BY
•J
Authorized:
Chairman of I.R.C. Co missi(
OWNS
Are s
BY
DATE !E&a l� — — - - I1Tl �7?// / DATE �` �ieC /%
AIA DOCUMENT 6701 % EWAN& bAbilk - APRIL 1978 EDITION • AIA® 1978
tkfi AMMICAN iNStltUtr rift ANCHI•r@C", 1799 NEW YORK AVE., N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 G701
1978
MAY 26 1987-" 55 BOOK
F,"--
NAY 2 6 1987 �
Boo
SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT MEETING
The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment the
Board would reconvene as the District Board of Fire Commissioners
of the South County Fire District. Those Minutes are being
prepared separately.
There being no further business, upon Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 11:25 o'clock A.M.
ATTEST:
1
Clerk Chairman
55
BOOK 68 FAQ% 455A