HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/13/1987Tuesday, October 13, 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,
October 13, 1987, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Don C.
Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman, Vice Chairman;
Richard N. Bird; Carolyn K. Eggert; and Gary C. Wheeler. Also
present were Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator; Charles P.
Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; and
Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order, and Commissioner
Wheeler led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc-
tions to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of September 2, 1987.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved the Minutes
of the Special Meeting of September 2, 1987, as written.
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc-
tions to the Minutes of the Special Meeting of September 9, 1987.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved the
Minutes of the Special Meeting of September 9, 1987,
as written.
BOOK 69 PACE 643
r-
iov 13 V987
BOOK 69 YALE 644
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc-
tions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 15,
1987. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved the
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 15, 1987,
as written.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDAIEMERGENCY ITEMS
The Administrator requested that Item 12 (Golf Course List
of Priorities) and Item 15 (Union Negotiations) be removed from
today's agenda.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bird, the Board unanimously removed Items 12
and 15 from the aaenda as requested by Administrator
Balczun.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Pistol Permit Renewals
The Board reviewed the following memos from Administrator
Balczun:
2
® a �
TO: ; , ,: . ;,,DATE: 9-30-87 FILE: -
Board of County Commissioners =
a
SUBJECT: GUN PERMITS - RENEWALS
�{
Charles B. Balczun
FROM: County Administrator REFERENCES:
The following individuals have applied through the Clerk's Office-
for
fficefor renewal of their gun permits:
Julian L. Davis -
Calvin B. Holland, Sr.
Gary D.Hudmon _
Jack C. Regan
Eileen Agnes Regan
George Keppel 1
Nathan B. McCollum
Requirements of the ordinance have been met and are in order.
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: October 1, 1987 _ FILE:
SUBJECT: PISTOL PERMITS - RENEWALS -
FROM: Charles P. Bal czun REFERENCES:
County Administrator
The following persons have applied through
Office for renewal of their pistol permits:
Linda Lee A. Rye
Margaret Madsen
John David Rogers
Requirements of the ordinance have been met
order.
the Clerk's
and f are in
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, unanimously approved renewal of pistol
permits for the following:
Julian L. Davis
Calvin B. Holland, Sr.
Gary D. Hudmon
Jack C. Regan
Eileen Agnes Regan
3
OCT 13 1987
George Keppell
Nathan B. McCollum
Linda Lee A. Rye
Margaret Madsen
John David Rogers
BOOK 69 FACE 645
r -
OCT 1319 7
BOOK 69 PA,E 646
B. & C. Reports
The following were received and placed on file in the Office
of Clerk to the Board:
Report of Convictions, Month of August, 1987
Certified Copies of Resolutions adopted by the Board
of Trustees of the Indian River County Hospital District
on September 24, 1987, regarding their 1987 millage levy.
D. Bid #365 - Typewriter Maintenance Contract
The Board reviewed memo from OMB Director Baird:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners '
DATE: October 7, 1987
SUBJECT: BID NUMBER 365
TYPEWRITER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
Description and Condition
. Bids were received Wednesday, August 26, 1987 at'2:00 p.m. for IRC
#365 -Typewriter Maintenance Contract for maintenance of all typewriters
under the Board of County Commissioners, Clerks Office, Property Appraiser,
Supervisor of Elections and Sheriff Department.
Ten (10) bid proposals were sent out, Your (4) bids were received. -
BIDS PER NQS
Number of Machines (102) (53) (6) (6) (167)
Remax--North -
Ft. Pierce. FL
$3,570.00 $3,445.00
4
$1,050.00 $1,200.00
$ 9,265.00
Electric
Electronic
Systel
Canon
vendor
Typewriter
Typewriter
Word Processor
Word Processor
Total
Business Machines, Inc.
$ 35.00
$ 95.00
$ 125.00
$ 125.00
$
- 380.00
West Palm Beach, FL
Remex--North
$ 35.00
$ 65.00..
$ 175.00
$ 200.00
$
475.00
Ft. Pierce, FL
_ Business Systems
$38.50
$49.00
$ 39.00
$ 396.00
$
879.00
Melbourne., FL
Executive Business
$ 47.00
$ 72.00
No Bid
No Bid
$
119.00
Ft. Pierce, FL
amLMA=
TOTAL (N kMER OF MACHINES X UNIT COST
TO ]REPAIR)
Business Machines, Inc.
$3,570.00
$5,035.00
$ 750.00
$ 750.00
$10,105.00
West Palm Beach, FL-
Remax--North -
Ft. Pierce. FL
$3,570.00 $3,445.00
4
$1,050.00 $1,200.00
$ 9,265.00
Kemper Business Systems
Melbourne, FL
Executive Business
Ft. Pierce, FL
$3.927.00 $2,597.00
$4,794.00 $3,816.00
*Bid did not include word processors.
$2,376.00
No Bid
- $2,376.00
No Bid
Funding
Funds were budgeted in the 1987/88 FY by each department under
Maintenance of Office Equipment.
Recommendation
$11,276.00
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners award the
Typewriter Maintenance Contract bid to Remex-North. Although Remex-North
is not a Canon authorized dealer, they have satisfactorily repaired the
Canon typewriters for the Sheriff's Department throughout the last year
and had previously been awarded the annual bid for the county.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously awarded Bid #365,
the Typewriter Maintenance Contract, to Remex-North,
as recommended by staff.
(COPY OF CONTRACT ON FILE IN OFFICE OF CLERK TO BOARD)
E. Computer Upgrade - Phase If - Jail
The Board reviewed memo of the OMB Director:
TO: Members of the Board of
County Commissioners
DATE: October 7, 1987
SUBJECT: COMPUTER UPGRADE
PHASE II - JAIL
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB, Director
Description/Analysis
The I.B.M. System 36 computer used to record prisoner
information needs to be upgraded at the jail.
This upgrade, estimated at $13,275, was not anticipated in
the original cost for Phase II. The $13,275 will have to be
taken from the Jail Phase II Construction Contingency, which
currently has a balance of $120,689.
Recommendation
Staff recommends $13,275 be transfered from contingencies to
upgrade the computer.
5
OCT 13198-1 69 PAGE647
/ OCT 13197
Boort 69 PA' 648
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously authorized the
transfer of $13,275 from Jail Phase II Construction
Contingency to upgrade the I.B.M. System 36 computer
to record prisoner information.
F. Community Services Trust Fund Award Agreement
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved the
contract with the Department of Community Affairs,
Community Services Trust Fund Award Agreement re
application of the Council on Aging and the
Retarded Workshop.
(COPY OF SAID CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO
THE BOARD..)
G. Change Order #1 & Final Payment Sewage Force Main 8th St. &
K—in—g-rs—Riy (GleendaaleSZhool Project)
The Board reviewed memo of the Assistant Utility Director:
TO:" BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: OCTOBER 5, 1987•
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTO''
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES ��
FROM: JEFFREY K. BARTON
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: CHANGE ORDER #1 & FINAL PAYMENT
SEWAGE FORCE MAIN
8TH STREET & KINGS HIGHWAY (GLENDALE SCHOOL PROJECT) -
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. US -87 -06 -CCS
BACKGROUND
Indian River County 'Project #US -87 -06 -CCS - 8TH STREET AND KINGS
HIGHWAY SEWER FORCE MAIN - was designed and bid, with Collee
Mechanical, Inc. being the low bidder,.at an original contract price of
$191,724.0,0.
6
Upon completion of the project, when quantity extensions are reviewed
as to materials used on the project, a change order is necessary to.
adjust the contract price.
Attached is Change Order- #1 for an increase in the contract price_ of
$504.75. -_
The new adjusted contract price is $192,228.75.
Staff recommends to the Board of County Commissioners the following:
1. Authorize Chairman to sign Change Order #1.
2. Authorize staff to pay final payment request.
3. Authorize staff to release retainage upon the completion of
the punch list items and upon the receipt of a one year
maintenance bond.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved Change
Order #1, authorized staff to pay final payment request,
and authorized release of retainage upon completion of
the punch list items and receipt of a one year mainte-
nance bond.
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER
HANGS ORDER NO. 1 ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE 519 1724_00
ATE: September 24, 1987_ REVISED CONTRACT PRICE $192,228.75
OB NAME Indian River County Project No. US87-06-CCS
Sewage Pumping Station/Force Main 8th Street and Kings Highway
WNER: Indian River County
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
PRICE
ORIGINAL
UNITS
ORIGINAL
TOTAL
PRICE
UNIT
CHANGE
PRICE
CHANGE
REVISED
TOTAL
PRICE
1
Mobilization
Lump Sum
Lump Sum
7,500.00
--
--
$ 7,500.00
2
Pumping Station
Lump Sum
Lump Sum
41,380.00
Lump Sum
--
41,380.00
3
8" Diam. Force Main
11.40
440OLF
50,160.00
(-256)
(-2,918.40
47,241.60
4
6" Diam. Force Main
6.75
7700 LF
51,975.00
(-885)
(-5,973.75
46,001.25.
5
Main Relief Canal
Aerial Crossing
Lump Sum
Lump Sum
11,000.00
--
--
11,000.00 -
6
16th St. Canal
Aerial Crossing
Lump Sum
Lump Sum
7,000.00
--
--
7,000.00
7
16th St. Road Bore
Lump Sum
Lump Sum
3,500.00
--
--
3,500.00
8
6" Diam. Plug Valve
800.00
2
1,600.00
(-1)
(-800.00)
800.00-- -
9
8" Diam. Plug Valve
1,000.00
3
3,000.00
--
--
3,000.00
10
Paved Road Restor
23.50
.340 SY
7,990.00
(-220.00
(-5,170.00
2,820.00
it
Paved Drive Restor
40.00
50 LF
2,000.00
+14
+56o.00
2,560.00 •'
12
Non -paved Drive
Restoration
3.00
150 LF
450.00
(-18)
(- 54.00
396.00
13
Seed & Mulch
0.30
11600 LF
3,480.00
(-1,097)
(- 329.10
3,150.90
14
Sod
1.30
530 LF
689.00
--
--
689.00
15
Drop Manhole
2,500.00
--
--
+1 unit
+ 2,500.00
2,500.00
16
Water Service Line
4.00
--
--
+ 1475LF
+ 5,900.00
5,900.00
17
Landscaping & Pump
Station Site
Lump Sum
--
--
+ 1.0
+ 675.00
675.00
18
Add'l Rock at Pump
Station Site
Lump Sum
--
--
+ LS
+ 575.00
575.00
�T 13 1987
7
v Boor 69 rnUE 649
,DCT 13 1997 - BOOK 69 PaUCE650
19 12" Dia. D.I. Gravity ,
Sewer 42.00 -- -- + 20 LF + 840.00 840.00
20 Florida Sales Tax Lump Sum -- -- + 1.0 4,700.00 4,700.00
as applies to this
Contract
TOTAL 191,724.00 1 1 504.75 192,228.75
Amount of the Contract will be (DditW(Increased) by the sum of:
Five Hundred Four Dollars and 75/100. ($504.75)
The Contract Total including this and previous Change Orders will be:
One Hundred Ninety -Two Thousand Two Hundred Twenty -Eight Dollars and 85/100. ($192,228.85)
The Contract Period provided for completion will be ( i dgd) (dKIKKKKKK) (unchanged):
days.
This document will become a supplement to the Contract and all provisions will apply hereto.
Contractor: Date:
7777 `
Coll
r
Engineer: Date:
c,
Owner: Date:
Indian RYver County
H. Routine Release of County Utility Liens
The Board reviewed memo of County Attorney Vitunac:
TO: Board of County Commissioners _
FROM: Bruce Barketti Asst. County Attorney
for '
Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney = =
DATE: October 6, 1987 '
RE: CONSENT AGENDA - BCC MEETING 10/13/87
ROUTINE RELEASE OF COUNTY UTILITY LIENS
This office has processed the following matters and requests
permission for the Chairman to execute the standard release
forms:
'(1) Partial Release of Lien - Map 41
State Road 60 Sewers/Release 1 ERU
Paid by REALCOR OF VERO BEACH
Lot 270 of COUNTRYSIDE SOUTH
8
17—J
'(2) Partial Release of Lien - Map 41
State Road 60 Sewers/Release 1-ERU
Paid by REALCOR OF VERO BEACH
Lot 132 of COUNTRYSIDE SOUTH
(3) Partial Release of Lien - Map 41
State Road 60 Sewers/Release 1,ERU
Paid by REALCOR OF VERO BEACH
Lot 235 of COUNTRYSIDE SOUTH
(4) Partial Release of Lien - Map 41
State Road 60 Sewers/Release 1 ERU
Paid by REALCOR OF VERO BEACH
Lot 145 of COUNTRYSIDE SOUTH
(5) Satisfaction of Impact Fee Lien
Agreement - HAROLD WINKLER et ux
Lot 4, Block 5 of COLONIAL TERRACE,
UNIT 2
(6) Partial Release of Lien - Map N
State Road 60 Water - Release 1 ERU
Paid by RALPH W. SEXTON et al
Lot 25 of OLD SUGAR -MILL ESTATES,
Unit 3
(7) Partial Release of Lien - Map D
State Road 60 Water - Release 1 ERU
Paid by RICHARD E. MILLER et ux
Unit 204, PINE CREEK CONDO IV
(8) Partial Release of Lien - Map 15
State Road 60 Sewers - Release 1 ERU
Paid by RICHARD E. MILLER et ux
Unit 204, Pine Creek Condo IV
The back-up information for the above is on file in the
County Attorney's Office.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved Release
of County Utility Liens as listed on the above memo
and authorized the Chairman's signature.
PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE PROVIDING ROAD IDEN. GRID SYSTEM
The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
9
8001( 69 PAGE 651.
OCT 12 1987 BOOK 69 FACE 6152
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily LZ016
-`v/;Vero Beach, Indian River County, Flori7COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDAyBefore the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Sch rr3athsays that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daij§hedat Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy ofeing
a XJ& --
e
in the matter ofg4�
in the _ Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of �?'T C
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed1b%efor�me th� day of�A",9
(SEAL)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING r
TO CONSIDER THE '
ADOPTION OF A COUNTY ORDINANCE
Notice is. hereby given that the Board of
County Commissioners of Indian River County.
Floridashall hold a public hearing at which par-
ties in interest and citizens shall have an oppor-
tunity to be heard, in the County Commission
Chambers of the County Administration Build-
ing, located at 1840 25thSteet, Vero 987, Bach.
Florida; on Tuesday." Octo
a.at 9:05
m. to consider the adoption of an ,Ordinance
entitled*.
.A ... nonWANCE OF INDIAN_
CLE-., -
CLE N OF CHAPTER 18,
'ROAD ADDRESSING SYSTEM",. ES=
pa TABL•ISHING A UNIFORM ROAD AD",
DRESSING SYSTEM; PROVIDING FOR
ASSIGNMENT OF: BUILDING NUMBERS;'';
AND. ROAD DESIGNATIONS; PROVID•';�;0.,,,
ING i FOR A ROAD IDENTIFICATION '• ,
GRID" SYSTEM;:' PROVIDING .FOR A d
y-- BUILDING AND SITE NUMBERING SYS-
TEM; PROVIDING FOR THE. POSTING;,,':
OF OR. UA - NG CSG B OF ADDRESS".'
PROVIDING FOR AN APPEAL PROCE-
DUKE; PROVIDING FOR AN ENFORCE-
,
NFORCE ;
MENT PROVISION .AND PROVIDING
FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVI- i
....e i-nniriCATION. SEVERABILITY,;
AND EFFECTIVE DATE
Copies of the proposed' ordinance is available
at the Planning Department office on the second
floor of the County Administration Building
ecision
Anyone who may wish to appeal
which may be made at this meeting will need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings
is made which inctudes theI w�ba bany seded. and evi-
dence upon which the appea
Indian River CountyCommissioners '
r,. , Board of County om
By:-s-Don C. Scurlock. Jr,
Chairman,'
Sept. 23 1987 ;
Staff Planner Roland DeBlois made the staff presentation:
TO: The Honorable Members of DATE: October 1, 1987-_ FILE:
the Board of County -
Commissioners
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
53% 1�
�s SUBJECT:
Robert M. Kea ing,, SCP
Director of Planning
& Development •
PROPOSED ROAD ADDRESSING
SYSTEM ORDINANCE
THROUGH.: Michael K. Miller, Chief NVA
FROM: _ Environmental PIENCES:
Roland M. DeBlois
Staff Environmental Planner
It is requested that the data presented herein be given formal
consideration by the -Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of October 13, 1987.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS:
Indian River County's 911 emergency response system relies on
the assignment of numbered "emergency sectors" to communities -
10
within the county; the establishment of a uniform road.addressing
procedure based upon a logical grid system is also an important
factor for quick emeraencv service response.
Indian River County does not presently have an ordinance that
sets forth a uniform road addressing procedure. Road addresses
in the unincorporated County are presently issued by -the =
Planning and Development Division in coordination with the
developer, Southern Bell, the U.S. Postal Service, and Emergency
Services. Although addresses are issued in a logical fashion,
the absence of an ordinance increases the potential for inconsis-
tencies as development growth and county personnel changes
occur in coming years.
1
Accordingly, on December 2, 1986, at the regular meeting of the
Board of County Commissioners,
staff to initiate the process
numbering/911 ordinance.
the Board voted to authorize
of adopting a countywide house
Since that time, staff has consulted with representatives of
the various municipalities within the county, to determine the
possibilities of establishing a county -wide numbering system.
Staff also has met with representatives from Southern Bell, the
U.S. Postal Service, the Sheriff's Department, and Emergency
Services on several occasions to discuss the matter.
Research revealed that each of the municipalities has its own
unique method of issuing road names and building addresses. To
set forth an addressing system that would be used uniformly by
all the municipalities would result in extensive inconsistencies
with what has already been established. Therefore, it was
concluded for practical reasons that the application of a
road -addressing ordinance should be limited to the unincorpo-
rated portions of the county.
At the regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission
on August 27, 1987, a public hearing was held for the proposed
Road Addressing System Ordinance. The Planning and Zoning
Commission voted 6-0 to recommend to the Board of County
Commissioners that the proposed ordinance be approved, with
suggested modifications.
The proposed Road Addressing System Ordinance is presented
herein (modified based on Planning and Zoning Commission
recommendations) for adoption consideration to establish an
addressing system that would be logical and consistent as
development growth continues in the county.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS:
The proposed ordinance would set forth procedures in three main
categories: (1) the establishment of a grid numbering system;
(2) the issuance of road names/numbers and building addresses;
and (3) the procedure for building address changes.
Establishment of a grid numbering system:
The Road Addressing System Ordinance as proposed would require
all new roads to be numbered and designated in a manner consis-
tent with a logical grid pattern. The grid numbering system
would designate "Streets" as the basic grid roads running east
and west, and "Avenues" as the basic grid roads running north
and south. Additionally, the ordinance specifies designations
such as "Court" and "Drive" to be used in a consistent pattern
as a further division with the grid.
OCTL_ I � 1987
i 1 BOOK . 69 PAGF 653
OCT 13 1987
BOOK 69 M`E,654
The main function of the grid is to provide consistency in
designation; the road name, in itself, would then provide
information as to the road's orientation in the county, for
quick location reference.
Issuance of road names/numbers and building addresses:
It is acknowledged that road "name" designations are more
aesthetic -sounding than road "number" designations. However,
the numbering of roads serves an important function for 911
quick response purposes.
The proposed ordinance requires that all new roads established
in the unincorporated county have a "number" designation.
Private roads may also have a "name" designation, but only in
addition to a "number" designation. Private road signs for
roads with both a name and number shall indicate both designa-
tions; the cost of such signs to be borne by the developer
and/or home owners association. As recommended by the Planning
and Zoning Commission, the proposed ordinance provides that
public road names of historic significance shall be preserved
in addition to assigned number designations (paragraph (d)'(1),
on page 6 of the proposed ordinance). -
Road signs existing prior to the effective date of the ordinance,
without both designations, are to be considered nonconforming
and subject to "nonconformity" provisions of the County Zoning
Code (Section 15(j)).
The numbering of individual buildings is also addressed in the
proposed ordinance. Essentially, the ordinance provides for
sequential numbering that would aid emergency services and
citizens in locating buildings by means of a logical building
numbering pattern.
Procedure for building address chances:
Section 18-62 of the proposed ordinance provides for the
changing of existing building addresses, only in the event that
a particular address does not conform with the overall grid
numbering system. The section affords the county the option to
correct inconsistencies that could result in possible emergency
response delays.
Admittedly, it is difficult to create a road addressing system
that is perfectly appropriate for all road patterns that
develop in the county. Factors of geography, meandering road
directions, and previously established designations come into
play. Even with the inadequacies, however, it is staff's
position that the recommended ordinance is important and
necessary for continued and improved service to the citizens of
Indian River County, in the interest of health, safety, and
welfare.
RECOMMENDATION:~ Y
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt -
the proposed Road Addressing System Ordinance, as revised
according -to Planning and Zoning Commission recommendations.
12
M M M
Commissioner Bird understood the need to aid our emergency
systems, but stated he would hate to see us lose the charm and
dignity of using a pretty name instead of something like East --
33rd Street. He did not want to see the unincorporated area of
the county get unattractive street names, especially when he did
not believe we can get the municipalities to change their street
-
names.
Director Keating confirmed that is the problem staff ran
into. He pointed out that the ordinance provides several
different options, and there can be street names as long as they
also provide a number on the street sign. The whole purpose is
to be able to find a street address logically through a grid
system.
Commissioner Eggert was concerned about the posting of
numbers on buildings and asked if there is any kind of time
requirements for people to do so.
Planner DeBlois noted that presently the lack of house
numbers only comes to staff's attention through complaints from
the Post Office, but this ordinance would provide us the
opportunity to require someone to have those numbers posted.
Commissioner Eggert did not want to have to wait for people
to be turned in for lack of house numbers. We have problems in
some of the unincorporated area; the ambulances are having a
terrible time; and she felt we must make an effort and pursue
this.
Director Keating stated that staff will work with Emergency
Management to remedy this problem.
Commissioner Bird inquired about areas such as Vista Royale
which have winding roads, and Director Keating noted that house
numbering seems such a simple concept until you start dealing
with circles and winding roads.
Discussion continued regarding the problems involved with
changing street numbers, the inconvenience caused, the expense of
reprinting stationery, the inconsistencies, etc., and Director
OCT 13 1987 13 SOCK. 69 PAGE 655
Q CT 1311987
BOOK. 69 F.1UE 656
Keating noted that our grid is very much off center now because
First St. is so far south in the county
Commissioner Eggert continued to stress the need for house
numbers. She pointed out that on Page 10, the proposed ordinance
says "where the existing house number does not conform," and she
asked if it shouldn't also say "if no number exists."
Director Keating agreed that wording could be included.
Commissioner Bird asked if the 911 system makes this grid
system more or less necessary as he had thought that system
pinpointed the location.
Commissioner Eggert agreed that it does to a certain extent,
but if there is no house number, they can't find it.
Planner DeBlois advised that the 911 system has an emergency
sector number, but there could be quite a few streets within that
sector.
Chairman Scurlock agreed the purpose is a good one, but he
had some concerns and inquired what it would take the analyze the
financial impact of such a change as he did not see that being
done.
Director Keating believed we would have to have staff go out
and take a general survey of whether numbers are generally
conforming.
Commissioner Eggert felt you must consider the other side,
i.e., what is the cost to us of not being able to get an
ambulance to a location in a timely fashion.
Commissioner Wheeler felt when the calls come in to the 911
system, the dispatcher should be able to handle directing someone
to the proper location. He did feel that numbers on the houses
_ should be mandatory, but he also had questions relating to
impact, cost, and the charm of street names instead of numbers.
Commissioner Bird was concerned about the time period within
which non -conformities must be addressed. He noted that some
areas have beautiful wood routed signs, as well as signs in iron
and aluminum.
14
Director Keating advised that there would be no requirement
for those signs to be changed until they either become obsolete,
are destroyed, or are to be replaced for some reason. --
Commissioner Eggert raised a question about subdivisions
having the responsibility to make sure the police, ambulances,
etc., can find their way around within that subdivision.
Director Keating noted that staff looks at a subdivision
when it comes in to be sure it conforms so that emergency
vehicles will be able to find addresses in a logical sequence.
Commissioner Eggert commented that there have been some that
calls came in to 911 from a location where they did not have a -
grid number, and she asked if that problem would that be
eliminated with central dispatch.
Emergency Management Director Doug Wright believed one of
the problems Commissioner Eggert is alluding to is that a truck
driver will observe an incident on 1-95 and then go to a truck
stop to make a call from a different location. We may still have
that problem, but this has been discussed and the dispatcher will
be instructed on how to handle that situation.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
Fred Mensing, resident of Roseland, wished to address two
things. His first point was that there are a number of homes in
the county that are far back off the road, and he felt the
ordinance should state that if the home is not located within a
certain distance of the road, the numbers should be displayed on
a sign at a certain distance from the street. Another thing that
distressed him is giving up all the traditional names of the
community. The Roseland area is 100 years old, and he did not
want the historic names lost because of a numbering system. Mr.
Mensing argued that the 911 system can work with names as well as
numbers and urged the Board not to eradicate history.
Planner DeBlois reiterated that this ordinance does not
eliminate the names; it simply requires numbers in addition to
the name.
OCT 13 M71 5 BOOK 69 FD:,r 657
BOOK 69, PAPA58
Chairman Scurlock believed he has heard the Commissioners
indicating that they want to keep the names as well as add the
street number.
It was determined that no one further wished to be heard,
and the Chairman declared the public hearing closed.
Commissioner Eggert favored keeping the street addresses
everywhere we can, but making sure everything is numbered.
Chairman Scurlock commented that he would also like to see a
study of the financial impact.
Commissioner Eggert asked if the Board wished to table until
we have such a study, and it was indicated that they did.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unani-
mously tabled consideration of the proposed road
identification ordinance until November 10th at
9:05 o'clock A.M.
REZONING - 50 ACRES IN 1-95/CR512 NODE TO CG (CARSON PLATT)
The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk
read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached,
to -wit:
16
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
I
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
+� at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
A
in the
Of
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
Court, was pub -
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscri P&
rem is0 a a& day of, _ `pl.®. 19 14 V_.
11 /yl. (BusirAs ger)
(SEAL)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian RiveQbunty, Florida)
Mots � Of �r g to con id consider
Me alptlig
ga
a County ordinance rezoning,' land. from:. A-1,
Agricultural District to CG, General Commercial
:Dflstrlct. The subject property Is presently -owned
blr the Fe"smere Development Corp. and Gerson
tl, and Is located wast of 1-95 and north of
C.R. 512 `'r - - - , _ p
The subject properly is described as n
A parcel . of land lying in..Section 20, +q
Township 31' South, Range 38 east, In-�'Wi
dlan Alver. County, Florida, said 'parcel' ��"
also' lying in the northwest quadrant of
the Intersection of Interstate Highway 95,,;,l f`
and State Road 512, and bung ,more
particulary:describedasfollam:
, Beginning at the intersection of the west
:right-of-way of interstate Highway 95;['
and the south right-of-way of the Trans
Florida Central Railroad 'right-of-way, "-
-Jun southerly along the limited access °?;a�,
right-of-way of Interstate Highway 95 as rp
follows: South 08033'14" west a distance.','.;;
of 682.13 feet;, thence . run souiri
10°47'15" west a distance of 610.27 feet`
thence south 42°2241" west a distance
;;, of , 201.07 feet; thence run north
89'15'23" west a distance of 474.42 feet; Y=
thence run south 88°35'19" west a die --e.
tance of 797.80 feet; thence south
00°47'02". west a distance of 45.90 feet
to the end of limited access right-of-way
on the north right-of-way of Stele Road -,
512; thence run north 89°18123" west .
along said north right-of-way a distance
-; of - 644.17 feet; -thence run north
' i)2°58'49" east a • distance of 2192.26'
feet; thence run south 89°18123" east a
,-distance of 2192.63 feet to the west
,'` :right-of-way of Interstate Highway 95;
thence run south 02158'49" west along
said right-of-way a distance of 662.25
feet to the point of intersection of the
west right-of-way of 1-95 and the north-
erly projection of the west right-of-way
of the limited access road; thence run
south 08°33'14" west along said limited
access right-of-way a distance of 27.56
feet to the point of beginning. Including
a strip of land 100 feet wide lying 50 feet
on each side of center line of Fellsmere
Railroad as described in deeds in Deed
book 24, page 27, deed book 92, page
487, deed book 69, page 468, and O.R.
Book 240, page 342.
LESS AND EXCEPT the following de=
scribed parcel contained within above
description:
Beginning at the intersection of the west x `-
right-of-way' of Interstate Highway 95 ,c;yi
and the south right-of-way, of the Trans' ' ,
Florida Central Railroad right-of-way,
run southerly along the limited access
right-of-way Interstate Highway 95 as
follows: South 08°33'14" west a distagce • j:l,
of 682.13; south 10047'15" west a dis-
tance of 610.27; south 42°22141" west a
distance . of 201.07; ; thence north
89°15123" west a distance of' 474.42;
thence south 88'35119" west a distance
Of 734.51 feet to the east easement line
of the Florida Gas Transmission Com-
pany easement per O.R. Book 269, page
409, Public Records Indian Oiver County .'
Florida, thence north 01-P611511 west
along said east easement II e a distance ,
'Of 1516.02 feet to the south Pjght-of-way a`'r
line of said Trans Central Florida Rail
way; thence south 87"05'00" east along
said south right-of-way a distance of
1595.12 feet back to said point of begin- .k
ing containing 49.022 acres more . or -•.
leas. f
A public hearing at which parties in Interest
and .citizens shall have an opportunity to be .
heard, will be held by the Board of County Com-,
missioners of Indian River County, Florida, in the
County Commission Chambers of the County
Administration Building, located at 1840 25th
Street, Vero Beach, Florida on Tuesday, October
13,1987, at 9:05 am..
The Board of County Commissioners may
grant a less intense zoning district than the dis. .
trict requested provided it is within the same
general use category.
Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision
which may fse made at this meeting will need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings
Is made, which includes testimony and evidence
upon which the appeal is based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By: -s -Don C. Scurlock, Chairman
Sept. 23, 1987 ?;
Staff Planner Nearing made the following presentation:
17
13 e1Poor '`69 FAC
OCT 1E 659
�7
QCT 13 1987
TO: The Honorable Members
of the Board of County
Commissioners
BOOK 69 P..cF 660'
DATE: September 29, 1987 FILE:
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
z2z"'O'5W /dY 'Ad SUBJECT:
Robert M. Keating, CP
Planning & Develophfent Director
FELLSMERE DEVELOPMENT
CORP./CARSON PLATT
REQUEST TO REZONE 50
ACRES FROM A-1, AGRI-
CULTURAL DISTRICT TO CG,
GENERAL COMMERCIAL
FROM: David C. Nearing oL°/4 REFERENCES:
Staff Planner, Long -Range Planning
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of October 13, 1987. -
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The Fellsmere Development Corp., for itself and on behalf of Mr.
Carson Platt, has requested the rezoning of two parcels of
property from A-1, Agricultural District (up to 1 unit/5 acres)
to CG, General Commercial District. The subject parcels consist
of a 45 acre tract of land and a 5 acre strip of the abandoned
Fellsmere Railroad right-of-way which bisects the larger tract.
The subject parcels are situated at the northwest corner of the
I-95/C.R. 512 Interchange. The 4*5 acre tract surrounds a 50 acre
parcel under the same ownership which is currently zoned CG, and
the strip of abandoned railroad right-of-way divides the majority
of these two parcels.
The applicants intend to develop the entire 100 acres for
commercial use.
On August 27, 1987, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0
to recommend approval of this request.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
In this section, an analysis of the reasonableness of the appli-
cation will be presented. The analysis will include a descrip-
tion of the current and future land uses of the site and sur-
rounding areas, potential impacts on the transportation and
utility systems, and any significant adverse impacts on environ-
mental quality.
Existing Land Use Pattern
The site is currently vacant. The property north and west of the
subject site is vacant and zoned A-1. The subject site surrounds
vacant property zoned CG. To the south and east of the subject
site is vacant property zoned A-1.
Future Land Use Pattern
The subject site lies within the I-95/C.R. 512
Commercial/Industrial node as does the parcel it surrounds. The
property north and west has a land use designation of AG,
Agriculture (allowing up to 1 unit/5 acres). The property east
across I-95 and south across C.R. 512 also lies within the node.
Transportation System
The site will have access only to C.R. 512. At the time of
development of this site in conjunction with the 50 acres
currently zoned CG, a substantial impact can be anticipated on
18
r
the Level of Service (LOS) for C.R. 512, which is currently at a
LOS "A". However, under the site plan ordinance, roadway. and
access improvements will be required during development.
Environment
The subject site is not considered to be environmentally
sensitive. A portion of the site does lie within the 100 year
flood plain and will require additional engineering for meeting - =-
the requirements of the County's Stormwater and Flood Protection
ordinance at the time it is developed.
Utilities
The site is not currently served by public Water or wastewater
systems. -
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis performed, staff recommends approval.
Commissioner Bowman expressed concern about our Thoroughfare
Plan and wished to know how much R/W we have reserved on the
north side of CR 512 and what our requirements actually are.
Planner Nearing believed there is now 80' of R/W in this
area, and Director Keating advised that this is an arterial road
and the requirement is 1201.
Commissioner Bowman felt when these applicants come in for
rezoning, we should get the R/W right then, but Director Keating
explained that our ordinances are such that the time we require
it is when they come in to develop.
Commissioner Bowman felt that is too late, and did not see
why we don't require it when we rezone along arterials and
collectors.
Attorney Vitunac pointed out that a rezoning is not a
development permit, and our whole theory has been that when they
ask for a permit, then we know how they are impacting our system.
In further discussion re R/W, Commissioner Eggert believed
another alternative is to file a Right of Way Map, and Director
Keating agreed, but noted that is primarily oriented to where you
are going to make improvements within a 5 year period.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
OCT 1 3.1987 19
_ 800K 69 FACE 661
r
OUT 13 197 _
BOOK 69 fKA62
Attorney "Joe" Collins came before the Board representing
the applicant and urged that the Board approve the rezoning as
recommended by staff.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously adopted
Ordinance 87-59 rezoning 50 acres to CG as re-
quested by Fellsmere Development Corp./ Carson
Platt.
ORDINANCE NO. 87- 59
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING
THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING MAP
FOR THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND PROVIDING..
FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the
local planning agency on such matters, has held a public hearing
and subsequently made a recommendation regarding this rezoning
request; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County, Florida, did publish and send its Notice of Intent to
rezone the hereinafter described property; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has determined -
that this rezoning is in conformance with the Land Use Element.of
the Comprehensive Plan of Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has held a public
y.:
hearing pursuant to this rezoning request,'at which parties in
interest and citizens were heard;
NOW,=THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the Zoning of
the following described property situated in Indian River County,
Florida, to -wit:
-_ A parcel of land lying in Section 20, Township 31 South,
Range 38 east, Indian River County, Florida, said parcel
also lying in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of
Interstate Highway 95 and State Road 512, and being more
particularly described as follows:
20
14
M
Beginning at the intersection of the west right-of-way of
Interstate Highway 95 and the south right-of-way of the
Trans Florida Central Railroad right-of-way, run southerly
along the limited access right-of-way of Interstate Highway
95 as follows: South 08033114" west a distance of 682.13
feet; thence run south 10047115" west a distance of 610.27
feet; thence south 42022141" west a distance of 201.07 feet;
thence run north 89015123" west a distance of 474.42 feet;
thence run south 88035119" west a distance of 797.80 feet;
thence south 00047102" west a distance of 45.90 feet to the
end of limited access right-of-way on the north right-of-way
of State Road 512; thence run north 89°18123" west along
said north right-of-way a distance of 644.17 feet; thence
" run north 02058'49" east a distance of 2192.26 feet; thence
run south 89°18123" east a distance of 2192.63 feet to the
west right-of-way of Interstate Highway 95; thence run south
02058.149" west along said right-of-way a distance of 662.25
feet to the point of intersection of the west right-of-way
of I-95 and the northerly projection of the west
right-of-way of the limited access road; thence run south
08033114" west along said limited access right-of-way a
distance of 27.56 feet to the point of beginning. Including
a strip of land 100 feet wide lying 50 feet on each side of
center line of Fellsmere Railroad as described in deeds in
Deed book 24, page 27, deed book 92, page 487, deed book 69,
page 468, and O.R. Book 240, page 342.
LESS AND EXCEPT the following described parcel contained
within above description:
Beginning at the intersection of the west right-of-way of
Interstate Highway 95 and the south right-of-way of the
Trans Florida Central Railroad right-of-way, run southerly
along the limited access right-of-way Interstate Highway 95
as follows: South 08033114" west a distance of 682.13; south
10°47115" west a distance of 610.27; south 42022141" west a
distance of 201.07; thence north 89015'23" west a distance
of 474.42; thence south 88°35'19" west a distance of 734.51
feet to the east easement line of the Florida Gas
Transmission Company easement per O.R. Book 269, page 409,
Public Records Indian River County Florida, thence north
01°15115" west along said east easement line a distance of
1516.02 feet to the south right-of-way line of said Trans
Central Florida Railway; thence south 87°05100" east along
said south right-of-way a distance of 1595.12 feet back to
said point -of beginning containing 49.022 acres more or
less.
Be changed from A-1, Agricultural Districj.-to CG, General
Commercial District.
All with the meaning and intent and as set forth and
described in said Zoning Regulations.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida on this 13th day
of October, 1987.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
By
Don C. Scurlock,,.Jr., Chairman
21 BOOK 69 Face 6fi3
U1 13 1
A
14 CT 13 ��� BOOK 69 FADE 664
REQUEST TO ESTABLISH SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE - ATLANTIC REFUSE
CORP., TROPICAL WASTE, INC., AND WASTE -A -WAY, INC.
The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County. Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the matter of
in the f'� Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of ' �/" '
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. P
Sworn to and subscribe bef jr met day o ,,A.D. 19
(B siness NI6na r)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River Cotfqtj, Florida)
(SEAL)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the Board of County
'ommissioners of Indian River County, will hold
a public hearing in the Commission Room, In-
iian River County Administration Building, 1840
25th Street, the 13th day of October, 1987, at
):05 AM, to consider the request of Atlantic
Refuse Corporation, Tropical Waste Inc., and
Naste-A-Way, Inc.,granting a solid waste resi-
iential and commercial franchise.,:::_'
411 Interested parties will be heard.
7ated this 23rd day of September, -1987:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chairman
Sept. 24. 1987 _...
Franchise Manager Lisa Abernethy reviewed the following:
ti
22
DATE: SEPTEMBER 22, 1987
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COM®RVICES
NERS _ t
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTO -_
DIRECTOR OF UTILI
FROM: LISA M. ABERNETHYc-:
FRANCHISE MANAGER \� `
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE FOR
ATLANTIC REFUSE CORP., TROPICAL WASTE INC, AND =
' WASTE -A -WAY, INC. -
BACKGROUND
Recently the Utilities Department received several requests from
outside solid waste haulers for the establishment of residential and
commercial franchises in Indian River County. Utility staff received
various financial statements and records from the above mentioned
haulers. After forwarding the information to selected County
managers and hearing their comments, the Utility staff offers the
following.
ANALYSIS
Indian River County presently is serviced by two franchise haulers,
Harris Sanitation and Rural Sanitation. Under their franchise the
following statements noted, "The County agrees that no additional
garbage service franchises shall be issued unless the applicant
submits an application under the -provision of the Utility Act of
Indian River County and affirmatively establishes to the County
Commission's satisfaction a need for the additional service".
Presently the commercial accounts out number the residential accounts
within the unincorporated areas of Indian River County. There are
approximately 12,000 potential residential accounts within the
unincorporated areas of Indian River County.
RECOMMENDATION
After careful review of each application submitted, staff agrees and
asksthe Board of County Commissioners to consider granting the
applicants a commercial franchise. However, before considering the
establishment of another residential franchise, staff agrees and asks
the Board of County Commissioners to request the applicants to
perform a needs study to help the Commission and staff decide if
another residential franchise is needed in Indian River County.
Should the Commission agree to grant a commercial franchise to the
applicants, staff offers the attached resolution for the Commissions
review and approval.
APPLICATIONS AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ON FILE IN BCC OFFICE FOR REVIEW
Commissioner Eggert believed that this all came about after
we started doing our study on per parcel fees for refuse, and she
wished to know why we are dealing with this at this time and why
a commercial needs study shouldn't be required also.
23
�� PA
0 CT 13.1987 BOOK UL 665
ST 1 tj
Book
69 FA VE 666
Chairman Scurlock believed
our consultant, Camp,
Dresser
McKee, has been working diligently on their per parcel analysis
which is almost complete. He concurred with staff's recommenda-
tion in terms of the commercial, but he felt, rather than require
the applicants to perform a needs study, it would be more
appropriate for us to direct Camp, Dresser & McKee, who is
already heavily involved in that process, to give us.a recommen-
dation re what we should do. The Chairman did feel the system we
presently have is antiquated and that possibly we should look
into districting the county as he did not want to have 5 or 6
trucks going up and down the same street.
Commissioner Eggert did not understand why it is necessary
to have a needs study for residential but not for commercial
since it seems the county should know what the needs are in both
categories.
Director Pinto advised that our two existing franchises are
non-exclusive; although they do have a clause that the county
will not issue another franchise unless there is a specific need
shown in a study, and this takes a lot of the non -exclusiveness
out of the franchises. The reason for franchising is to protect
the interests of the people when there is a monopolized type of
business, which this is. In this case, however, commercial is
unregulated, which is quite customary in this type business, the
reason being there is usually a negotiated fee that takes place
between the commercial establishment and the collector relating
to the level of service they desire,-i.e., they may want pickup
more frequently, may want a.larger container, etc. There are a
lot of variables, and there is a lot of competition. As to
districting, Director Pinto noted that because of zoning, you
- - might end up giving the "plum" to one district while another
might be strictly residential and not have the ability to
participate in the money maker, which is commercial.
Director Pinto emphasized that residential needs protection,
and it is. much more convenient to regulate. What we have to deal
24
with here is that we have existing franchises, and they are 20
year franchises. He noted that when you are going to embark on a
needs study, there are some important questions to be considered:
1) If we are going to stay as we are now and allow the franchises _ to collect as they wish throughout the county, and have a non-
mandated collection, there may not be a need.
IN 2) If we move to a point where we are going to require collec-
tion of garbage, and he felt we will be pushed into that as
growth continues to take place, that means that overnight the
customer base is going to be 1000 of what is out there and that
requires taking a look at whether the existing franchises can
take care of what is going to be needed to service the people in
the community.
Director Pinto personally was convinced that if you -do not
regulate commercial prices, then you should not limit the ability
to give out franchises because if you do, you are offering
protection to the vendor and not the customer. He informed the
Board that staff has been working with Camp, Dresser & McKee over
the last year and have come up with the solid waste master plan
and are now at the point of having public hearings on the new
rate structure. He explained that the hearings have nothing to
do with regulation, they will address the county having a charge
based on what we determine as the waste stream coming out of any
customer, and this charge is to cover the Landfill cost; it does
not have anything to do with transportation of the waste.
Commercial still would be unregulated, and he recommends that it
remain that way.
Chairman Scurlock believed there is still a question in some
of the Commissioner's minds as to why we would regulate residen-
tial and not commercial.
Director Pinto advised that what staff based their recommen-
dation on is the way the present franchise is written, which
requires a needs study and does not regulate commercial. If, in
fact, the Board takes the Chairman's suggestion and has our
25
iOCT 13 1987 aooK 69 F�E 667
OCT 13 1987 BOOK 69 PAGE 668
consultant look not only at the needs study that is asked for
under the franchise, but also look at our system of collection to
determine whether we should regulate commercial, whether we
should have districts, and whether or not we should have
mandatory collection, then staff would set their recommendation
aside and agree we should have that kind of study.
Commissioner Eggert noted that she is not speaking pro or
con in terms of the applicants; she just feels that right now the
picture is foggy and was not sure it is fair to anyone to do
anything now when we are within a month or six weeks of getting
some of these things straightened out. She felt possibly we
would be better off tabling these applications until we have had
the study.
Commissioner Wheeler understood we have two franchises
countywide at this time and asked if they specifically exclude
commercial or do they specifically point out that the franchise
is only for residential.
Director Pinto explained that the franchises specifically
say that the commercial rates are unregulated.
Commissioner Wheeler felt the needs study would need to be
done for either, and Director Pinto agreed if we are going to do
the study, we should do it 100%.
Chairman Scurlock noted that actually this is a very complex
subject. He was not even sure we have the unilateral ability to
set up districts; possibly we do, but he believed there might
have to be some negotiation with the two existing valid
franchises. He did believe it would be inappropriate for us to
direct each of these applicants to go out and do a needs study,
and ^felt the residential should stay status quo until we do a
study. He noted that Director Pinto obviously feels strongly
that commercial should be unregulated and doesn't have a problem
with additional franchises, and if the majority of the Board
feels that is all right, we could issue franchises for commercial
and leave the other in abeyance.
26
_ M M
v
44
Director Pinto stressed that the only protection the
commercial establishments have is competition, and to regulate
the rates for commercial is a very, very sophisticated process. -
Another thing that has become very obvious in reviewing this
situation is that the franchise fee now is 1% of gross revenues,
and he believed we should move immediately to make that 6%, equal
to those of the other utilities, because the garbage collection
in the county is going to become as controversial and hard to
regulate as any other utility, plus the wear and tear on our
roads from trucks running all over the place.
Commissioner Bird stated that when we ask Camp, Dresser E
McKee to do the additional study, he would like to have them
reflect on that since he believed the additional fee will just be
passed on to the customers, and we want county residents to have
the best service at the lowest possible price. He personally did
not know if we need all these applicants or just one and asked
Director Pinto if he were a Commissioner and needed all the
information to make an intelligent decision, would he want the
consultant to do a study on both residential and commercial and
also as to whether existing companies are adequate or if we
should expand.
Director Pinto stated that if the consultant is authorized
to do a review, his recommendation would be that they review them
all, but he felt the first question to be addressed should be
whether or not you are going to regulate the commercial area. If
the Board takes the position that they are not going to regulate
the rates for commercial, he felt that answers the question about
how many franchises you are going to have collecting commercial
because he did not feel then we should take a position to protect
anyone.
Chairman Scurlock commented that if you have too many, they
cut each other's throats and no one survives, but then if you
don't have enough, there is the problem of whether you are
getting the best price.
27 sooK 69 Fri 669
► 0"CT I e) W7AU
OCT
13
Book 69 :
PAGE 670
Director Pinto
advised that there is another aspect to
be
considered that is outside of franchising, and it has nothing to
do with the rates. This is that there is going to have to be a
permit established to collect anything in the county that is
going to come through the Landfill gates so we can identify where
the trash is coming from and also whether or not the vehicle
meets the criteria to run around the county collecting.
Commissioner Eggert suggested a Motion to table until we can
get a study on residential and commercial needs from Camp,
Dresser & McKee.
Chairman Scurlock asked Attorney Vitunac if it is in order
to table before we open the public hearing, and Attorney Vitunac
stated that if the Board is not going to grant any permits today,
it is not necessary to go through the public hearing if the Board
doesn't wish to.
Commissioner Wheeler felt the purpose of the public hearing
is to weigh both sides before we make a decision, and Commis-
sioner Eggert stated that her reason to table is that she feels
we need the other information in order to make a decision.
Commissioner Bird felt it would be premature for both the
applicants and the Board to have a presentation today before we
have more information.
Discussion continued in regard to the present franchise,
which Commissioner Eggert felt was very loosely written. She
stressed that she does want to be fair about this and would
prefer to table further consideration until we can have more
complete information from our consultant.
this.
Commissioner Bird agreed that we need an independent look at
Director Pinto suggested that he be allowed to talk with the
consultant and then come back to the Board next Tuesday with a
time schedule. He also felt another important aspect to be
considered at the same time is that we need a legal opinion from
28
� s r
41
the County Attorney on the position that we are in now with the
existing franchises and what obligation we have.
Chairman Scurlock agreed we need a written opinion from the
County Attorney.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously agreed to table
until Director Pinto can contact Camp, Dresser & McKee
and come back to the Board next Tuesday with a time
schedule, scope of work, proposed, cost, etc., for a
study on both residential and commercial needs as
discussed and also directed the County Attorney to
supply a written opinion re our obligation as re-
lated to the existing franchises..
Bill Koolage, interested citizen, believed this was a public
hearing and felt the public and applicants should be allowed to
speak so their questions could be incorporated in the proposed
study.
The Chairman informed him that the matter has been tabled
until next week's meeting, and any information anyone wishes to
present in the meantime may be given to the utility staff.
PUBLIC HEARING - BOND REFUNDING FLORIDA CONVALESCENT CENTERS
The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
29
�ool< 69 FArN 671
7
I OCT 131987
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
W,Am 21--_ 2-01 =10� I
in the Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newsLi paper.
Sworn to and subscribe befo me t day of A.D. 19
iw 4 ..
(SEAL)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, orida)
BOOK 69 wu 672
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
FOR ISSUANCE OF
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONDS -
Public Notice is hereby given that on October
1987, at 9:o5 a.m., the Board of County Com-
ssioners of Indian River County, Florida, will
Bet at the Indian River County Administration
illding, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida,
consider approval of the issuance of not ex-
teding $4,800;000 of Industrial development
venue refunding bonds of Indian River county
be issued for the purpose of loaning the pro -
reds therefrom, or using such proceeds to refi-
ince the acquisition, construction and equip -
ng of a skilled and Intermediate care 91 bed
using home facility, located In Indian River
ounty, Florida, for Florida Convalescent Cen-
rs, Inc., a Florida corporation, which shall be
e principal user of said facility. The industrial
3velopment revenue refunding bonds shall be
'yable solely -from the revenues derived by In -
an River County from the financing agreement
shall enter into with Florida Convalescent Cen-
srs, Inc., or such other agreements as Indain
Iver County shall approve, except to the extent
isy are payable from refunding bonds pro -
weds. Such refunding bonds and the Interest
iereon shall not constitute an Indebtedness or
ledge of the general credit or taxing power of
idian River County or of the State of Florida. Is-
uance of the refunding bonds of Indian River
ounty shall be subject to several conditions, in-
luding satisfactory documentation, and ap-
roval by counsel as to the tax-exempt status of
to interest on the refunding bonds. The afore-
ientioned meeting shall be a public meeting
nd sill persons who may be interested will be
Ivan an opportunity to be heard concerning the
ame.
in one who may wish to appeal any decision
M ch may be made at this meeting will need to
nsure that a verbatim record of the proceed-
igs is made, which includes testimony and evi-
lance upon which the appeal Is, based.
Freda Wright, Clerk
Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County,
ieptember 29, 1987
County Attorney Vitunac reviewed the following memo:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Bruce Barkettt, Asst. County Attorney
for
Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE:- October 6, 1987
.RE: PUBLIC HEARING - BOND REFUNDING
FLORIDA CONVALESCENT CENTERS
B.C.C. MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1987
In connection with the referenced bond refunding, the
County's bond counsel has furnished us with two resolutions
which the Board needs to authorize the Chairman to execute.
30
� � r
N&
The first resolution authorizes the County to execute and
deliver a Letter of Intent and Inducment Agreement to
Florida Convalescent Centers.with respect to the issuance of
$4,800,000 of industrial development revenue refunding
bonds. Attached as an exhibit to this resolution Is the
Letter of Intent, which has to be signed by the County as
well as Florida Convalescent Centers. The second resolution
satisfies the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended, stating that the County has held a public
hearing which provided an opportunity for persons with
differing opinions to be heard in connection with the
issuance of these refunding bonds.
We respectfully request the Board authorize the Chairman to
execute both resolutions as well as the Letter of Intent on
behalf of the County in connection with this matter.
Attorney Vitunac noted that normally there would be someone
here from Florida Convalescent Centers and the bond lawyers, but
due to being shut down yesterday by the hurricane in Miami, they
called and said they could not be here, and if there are any
serious problems or questions, they would ask to reschedule this
to sometime in November. Attorney Vitunac felt since it was a
simple refunding we would be able to go ahead with the hearing
today.
Attorney Vitunac continued that last year the county
authorized issuance of 4.8 million industrial development bonds
to the only applicant we had. He believed all the questions
relevant to this issue were considered at that time, i.e., do we
need a nursing home and are we willing to use the taxing
advantages available to the county for a nursing home. There
was no problem with that a year ago, and the Convalescent Center
now wants to decrease their funding costs.
Commissioner Bird asked that this be further clarified, and
Chairman Scurlock explained that they are taking their existing
debt and refunding at a lower interest rate; it is an economic
advantage to them.
Attorney Vitunac advised that they are allowed to do that
one time under the new tax law, and what they are asking from us
is to issue a letter of inducement, which is Exhibit A with the
two Resolutions. They have one change in the letter - they would
like to do the closing on February 28th rather than December
OCT 1 19� 31 BOOK 69 PAGE 673
rOCT 13 1987
Bou 69 Fa;F674
31st. Attorney Vitunac advised that the change in date does not
make any difference to us, and further noted that we still don't
have any other applicants for our industrial development bond
money.
OMB Director Baird commented that the allocation ends in
December, and he has written Nylacarb two letters to let us know
what they are going to do, but they have not replied.
Discussion ensued regarding Nylacarb and Commissioner Eggert
noted that they are bringing in their site plan; so, they
obviously are doing something and she felt they should be
contacted by a personal phone call.
Further discussion was had regarding Nylacarb's allocation,
and OMB Director Baird felt they probably are going to have to
re -apply in the new year, but did not feel this would affect
their allocation as there is plenty of allocation left.
Chairman Scurlock directed staff to contact Nylacarb by
phone.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard in
regard to the proposed refunding. There were none, and he
thereupon declared the public hearing closed.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 87-125 authorizing a letter of intent
and Resolution 87-126 approving the issuance of
the refunding bonds as requested by Florida
Convalescent Centers, Inc.
0
32
.s � r
RESOLUTION 87 -
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY BY INDIAN
RIVER COMM, FLORIDA OF A LETTER OF INTENT AND INDUCEMENT
AGREEMENT TO FLORIDA CONVALESCENT CENTERS, INC. WITH RESPECT
TO THE COUNTY'S ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $4,800,000 IN
AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF ITS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS TO REFUND ITS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT =
REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1986 (FLORIDA CONVALESCENT CENTERS, _ -
INC. PROJECT) IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF
$4,800,000.
WHEREAS, Indian River County, Florida (the "County") has previously
issued its Industrial Development Revenue Bonds, Series 1986 (Florida
Convalescent Centers, Inc. Project) in the aggregate principal amount of
$4,800,000 (the "Refunded Bonds") to finance the cost of the acquisition,
construction and equipping of a skilled and intermediate care nursing home
facility in the County (the "Project") for the benefit of Florida Convalescent
Centers, Inc. (the "Company"); and-
WHEREAS,'the Company desires that the County issue industrial
development revenue refunding bonds (the "Refunding Bonds") to refund the
Refunded Bonds; and
WHEREAS, the County has determined that its issuance of the Refunding
Bonds to assist the Company will serve a public purpose by contributing to the
prosperity of the State and its people; and
WHEREAS, the Company has requested the County to indicate to the
Company its intentions in this respect in order to induce the Company to proceed
with such refunding and incur expenses in connection therewith.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows:
1. Both the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners are hereby authorized to execute, and the Clerk of the Board of the
County is hereby authorized to attest, the County's letter addressed to the
Company in substantially the form attached to this Resolution as Exhibit "A" and
incorporated herein, with respect to the issuance of not exceeding $4,800,000 in
aggregate principal amount of its Refunding Bonds on behalf of the Company, with
such changes therein as shall be approved by such officers, such approval to be
conclusively evidenced by their execution thereof.
2. Such officers and all other officers and employees of the County
are hereby authorized to execute such further agreements and take such further
33
vCUT 13-1987 BOOK 69 Face 675
OCT
151987 BOOK 69 F-AGE.676
action as shall be necessary to carry out the intent and purposes expressed in
the aforementioned letter, upon its becoming an agreement on its execution by
the County and the Company, and are further authorized to take such other steps
and actions as may be required and necessary in order to issue the Refunding
Bonds.
3. This Resolution is an affirmative action of the County toward the
issuance of its Refunding Bonds in accordance with the applicable laws and
Constitution of the State of Florida, including without limitation Chapter 159,
Florida Statutes, and the applicable federal income tax laws and the regulations
promulgated thereunder.
4. Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, this 13th day of October, 1987.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: re
Don C. Scurlock, Jr., 'rman
EXHIBIT "A"
Re: Proposed $4,800,000 Indian River County, Florida
Industrial Development Revenue Refunding Bonds,
Series 1987 (Florida Convalescent Centers Inc Project)
October 13, 1987
David Evans
Vice President
Florida Convalescent Centers, Inc.
Honeywell Center
Suite 1111
1111 Mockingbird Lane
Dallas, Texas 75247
Dear Mr. Evans:
Florida Convalescent Centers, Inc., (the "Company") has requested
Indian River County, Florida (the "County") to consider refunding its $4,800,000
Industrial Development Revenue Bonds, Series 1986 (Florida Convalescent Centers,
Inc. Project) (the "Bonds").
The Bonds were issued to finance the acquisition and construction of a
skilled and intermediate care nursing home facility in the County (the
-"Project") .
The County heretofore determined that its issuance of the Bonds to
assist the Company in acquiring and constructing the Project would result in a
substantial increase in employment in the County and that the issuance of the
Bonds would serve a public purpose by increasing the purchasing power and
improving the living conditions of the citizens and inhabitants of the County and
would contribute to the prosperity and welfare of the State and its inhabitants.
34
M M M
Accordingly, in order to assist the Company in refunding the Bonds, the
County hereby makes the following proposal:
1. The County will issue its industrial development revenue refunding
bonds (the "Refunding Bonds") in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed
$4,800,000.
2. The County and the Company will enter into a Loan Agreement. The
loan payments shall be pledged and applied pursuant to the Loan Agreement, and
shall be sufficient to make the payment of_the principal of, interest on and __
redemption premium, if any, applicable to the Refunding Bonds and such other fees
and costs as provided in the Loan Agreement.
IN
3. The County will cooperate in the prompt preparation of the
Indenture of Trust with regard to the Refunding Bonds , the Loan Agreement and
the necessary resolutions, documents and instruments for the authorization, sale
and issuance of the Refunding Bonds and, if requested, will promptly proceed with
validation of the Refunding Bonds in the Circuit Court for Indian River County,
pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 75, Florida Statutes.
4. Upon delivery of the Refunding Bonds, the provisions of this
proposal and the agreement resulting from its acceptance by the Company shall
have no further effect, and in the event of any inconsistency between the terms
of this proposal and the terms of the Loan Agreement, in the form in which it
shall be finally approved by resolution of the County, the provisions of the
Loan Agreement as so approved shall control.
5. The County shall keep open and outstanding this proposal and
inducement to the Company for a reasonable time so long as the Company shall be
proceeding with appropriate efforts toward conclusion of any arrangements
necessary to the refunding; provided, however, if for any reason the Refunded
Bonds are not issued on or before February 28, 1988, then the provisions of this
proposal and.the agreement resulting from its acceptance by the Company shall be
cancelled unless extended by mutual agreement of the County and the Company. In
such event, or in the event of its earlier termination by agreement between the
Company and the County, neither party shall have any rights against either party
except:
(a) The Company will pay to the County the amount of all expenses
which shall have been incurred by the County in connection with
the refunding and which were authorized by the Company; and
(b) the Company will pay the out-of-pocket expenses of officials and
representatives of the County and bond counsel and other counsel
for the County incurred in connection with the refunding.
6. The Company, in accepting this proposal, will thereby agree to
indemnify, defend and hold harmless the County against any loss or damage to
property or any injury to or death of any person or persons occurring in
connection with the Project and the refunding thereof. The Loan Agreement shall
contain indemnity provisions similar to those contained herein and, in the event
the Refunding Bonds are not delivered, this indemnity shall survive the
termination of the agreement resulting from the Company's acceptance of this
proposal.
following:
7. All the commitments of the County hereunder are subject to the
(a) the review and approval by the County Attorney of the Resolution
authorizing the issuance of the Refunding Bonds, and review and
approval of the Indenture, Loan Agreement and all other bond
closing documents and related legal opinions;
(b) investigation, review and approval by the County of matters as to
the finnancial condition of the Company and any guarantors; and
35
OCT 13 1987 BOOK 69 PauE 677
OCT 13199 ' _ Boa 69 FacF 678
(c) the use of bond counsel selected by the County.
If this proposal is satisfactory to the Company, please have the
acceptance statement which follows this proposal executed by the proper duly
authorized officers of the Company and return it to the County, whereupon this
proposal will constitute an agreement in principal with respect to the matters
herein contained. A counterpart hereof fully executed by the County is enclosed
herewith for the Company's records.
Very truly yours,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: s
Don C. Scurlock, Jr., Chai an
RESOLUTION NO. 87— 126
WHEREAS, Indian River County, Florida (the "County"),
heretofore adopted a Resolution on October 13, 1987 relating to
Florida Convalescent Centers, Inc. (the "Corporation"), wherein _
the County authorized the issuance of its revenue refunding bonds
for the purposes of refinancing the cost of acquisition,
construction and equipping of the Corporation's facility
consisting of certain land, buildings, structures and equipment
for use as a skilled and intermediate care nursing home facility
(the "Project") which is located in Indian River County, Florida;
and
WHEREAS, the County is authorized to issue its revenue
refunding bonds to refinance the Project pursuant to the
provisions of the Florida Industrial Development Financing Act,
Part II of Chapter 159, Florida Statues, as amended; and
WHEREAS, in order to satisfy the requirement of Section
147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, the
County held a public hearing on the proposed issuance of its
_ $4,800,000 Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1987 (Florida
Convalescent Centers, Inc. Project) (the "Refunding Bonds") on
the date of adoption hereof, more than 14 days following the
first publication of notice of such public hearing in a newspaper
36
M
M
of general circulation in Indian River County, Florida (a true
and accurate copy of the publication of notice is attached hereto
as Exhibit "A"), which public hearing was conducted in a manner.
that provided a reasonable opportunity for persons with differing _
views to be heard on both the issuance of the Refunding Bonds,
and the location and nature of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of "Indian River
County, Florida, is the elected legislative body of the County;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that the issuance
of the Refunding Bonds is hereby approved in compliance with the
requirements of Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended. The Clerk is authorized to make such
applications to the State of Florida, Department of General
Services, Division of Bond Finance as may be necessary to enable
the County to issue the Refunding Bonds.
L_
ADOPTED this 13th day of October. 1987.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: / L
!!fd
Chai a
EXHIBIT A
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vera Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County. Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
aA�
r
in the matter ol,�'"�/ • %r
_ in the Court, was pub
fished in said newspaper in the issues of � 4; j0 2
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal Is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Iridian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously pt,blished in said Indian River County, Floods. each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
adv.lisement: and alhant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
Or corporation any discount, rebate. commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn 10 and subscri bolo mB lli ., day of A.D. 19 l�
` If;ostrplss Managed •J
(Clink of IM Circuit Court. Imlwn River Counly, • onda)
ISEALI
37
BOOK 69 F'AU, 679
OCT 13 .1987 BOOK 69 FACE 680
PAVING OF 74TH AVE. BETWEEN SR60 AND WALKER AVENUE (26TH ST.)
The Board reviewed memo of the Public Works Director:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE: October 2, 1987 FILE:. _
Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH:
Charles Balczun,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis,
Public Works Director
9-28-87
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
SUBJECT: paving of 74th Avenue Between
SR60 and Walker Avenue
(26th St)
REFERENCES: Jeff Bieber, Raymond J.
Antonucci, General Contr.
The developers of Indian River Estates Total Care Facility located north of
SR60 west of 74th Avenue (Rangeline Road) agreed in 1984 to pave 74th
Avenue (an existing County maintained unpaved road) along the project
frontage Q mile). They previously deeded necessary right-of-way to the
County for the road. Originally, the paving was to include an 8" stabi-
lized subgrade, 6" limeroek base, and 1i" of asphalt. The developer has
entered into a contract with a contractor for this work.
Due to recent damage to County roads from mining operators transporting
fill over County roads, the Public Works Department staff is proposing that
all collector roads be constructed with a 12" thick subgrade and an 8"
base. Poor soil conditions in areas along major canals also justify the
thickening of the road's structural section. As a result of staff's posi-
tion, the developer was requested to request a proposal frau the contractor
to increase the base and subgrade thickness. The cost to amend the con-
tract is $24,137.68 or approximately $3.42/sy for the one-half mile long
project.
ALTERVd'IVES AND ANALYSIS
Staff has analyzed the $3.42/sy price and has determined that the price is
fair and competitive. By increasing the road section, future maintenance
would be reduced and the life of the road would be greatly enhanced.
RMCFD lADATIONS AND FUNDIM
It is recommended that the County ' fund the $24,137.68 additional cost to
increase the base and subgrade thickness. Funding to be frau Dist. 8
Impact Fee Account (balance as of 8-6-87 is $126,459.38).
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commis-sioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved the
funding of the $24,137.68 additional cost to increase
the base and subgrade thickness as described above.
38
M M M
Chairman Scurlock commented that he has been told by Lloyd E
Associates that the DOT had commissioned a study to engineer and
design an additional North/South route (possibly 74th Ave.) all -
the way from the county line to CR510, and if that is the case, _
and it has been paid for by state money, he felt we should track
it down and get a copy of it. He was not sure that we would want
to use it, but suggested that Director Davis contact City
Engineer "Flip" Lloyd to find out about it.
Commissioner Bowman asked if we have any way of collecting
funds from the heavy use haulers who do so much damage to the
road.
Public Works Director Davis reported that staff has been
looking into this; they are working on a surcharge for mining
operations and are looking at a charge of 10-154 per cubic yard
for dirt haulers.
Commissioner Bowman asked about citrus haulers, and Director
Davis was not sure how we could implement that. He noted that
they use the road infrequently, and what fatigues the road is the
continual repetitive use. He advised that we design a road based
on a 20 -year life and mining loads have reduced it to a 3-5 year
life.
Chairman Scurlock agreed that sand is easy to monitor, while
citrus would be almost impossible.
WINTER BEACH CEMETERY
Attorney Vitunac reviewed the following:
39
OCT 13 1987
BOOK 69 6.8
R
I
OCT 13.1 - BOOK. 69 FAGUE 682
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, Coun y Attorney
DATE: September 14, 1987
RE: WINTER BEACH CEMETERY
The attached memorandum written by Assistant County Attorney
Bruce Barkett accurately reflects the history of the
Kiwanis-Hobart Park land which was dedicated for cemetery
purposes at the request of the Winter Beach Cemetery
Associaton.
This matter is being brought before the Board of County
Commissioners for Board action concerning whether to proceed
with acquiring replacement property for the cemetery or to
initiate a revocation of the earlier dedication of the land
for cemetery purposes.
We respectfully request direction from the Board.
TO: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney -
DATE: September 9, 1987
SUBJECT: Winter Beach ccCemetery
FROM: Bruce Barketti, Assistant County Attorney
The Kiwanis-Hobart Park area was dedicated to the County by.
the State of Florida Department of Natural Resources which -
in turn had acquired the property with a grant of federal
funds. The dedication to the County restricted use of the
property for County park and public recreational purposes,
and contained a reverter clause effective at the option of
the Trustees in the event the area was used for other than
park and recreational purposes. (Trustees dedication
attached as Exhibit "A".)
In August, 1980, the Board of County Commissioners executed
a dedication of a portion of the Hobart tract for cemetery
purposes and cemetery -related services. (See Exhibit "B"
attached.)* This dedication of approximately 19.7 acres was
made by the County prior to authorization from the
Department of Natural Resources and prior to authorization
from the United States Department of Interior.
There is a process by which the Could could apply to have
the reverter clause currently encumbering .the 19.7 -acre
parcel transferred to another parcel of property which is
equally valuable and equally suitable for recreation
purposes. The process involves an application to the Land
and Water Conservation Fund Grant Program administered by
the National Park Service, United States Department of
Interior through the State of Florida Department of Natural
Resources. This process was initiated sometime prior to
1983 in an attempt to remove the reverter from the 19.7 -acre
parcel to give effect to the County's dedication to the
40
L7
Winter Beach Cemetery. A map attached as Exhibit "C"
depicts the 19.7 -acre parcel as well as the 38 -acre parcel
which the County was willing to encumber to- satisfy the
State and Federal requirements for converting the
encumbrance. That application process was never completed
by DNR in 1983. In mid -1986, this office began
investigating the matter and in fact completed and filed a -- _
new application to begin the conversion process again.
Unfortunately, the 38 -acre parcel which the County proposed`` --
to substitute for the 19.7 -acre parcel was already dedicated
to recreation and was in fact part of the County's new golf
course. The Department of Natural Resources has indicated
that since the 38 -acre parcel is already part of the park
and permanently dedicated 'to outdoor recreation, it is
unsuitable as replacement property for the 19.7 "acres. The _
replacement property must be an addition to the recreational -
property within the County since there would be a withdrawal
of the 19.7 acres from recreational use. (Correspondence
from Department of Natural Resources attached as Exhibit
rrDn�
On January 13 and_ again on February 17,- 1987 the-Boaid
discussed the Winter Beach Cemetery situation and the --
potential for transferring the reverter clause to a portion
of the proposed Oslo Road purchase.
The application for transfer of the reverter clause -must
contain a legal description of the specific property to be
encumbered, an appraisal of that property, and a -physical
description of the property, including topography,
geological features, and species diversity. Because this
information was not available on February 17, this Board
authorized staff to re -visit this issue when the information _
became available. - -
Mayes, Sudderth 6 Etheredge, Inc. has completed a master
plan of the 40 acres of the Oslo Road parcel*, -and Public
Works recently obtained an appraisal of $1.365 million for
the entire 76 -acre parcel, done by Armfieid, Wagner. Staff
is in the process of negotiating to purchase the parcel. _
Commissioner Bird felt we should follow through on our
commitment to the cemetery to allow them the use of this land,
but noted that he was not ready to go out and buy a piece of land
just for the purpose of replacement. He advised that he has a
situation working now where he has requested a donation of some
land that he felt would qualify as a replacement, and he would
like to see what happens on that before we run out and buy
anything.
Chairman Scurlock inquired if there was any language in the
conveyance when we turned the acreage over to them, requiring
that the cemetery be open and non-discriminatory.
Attorney Vitunac did not believe that language is in there;
it is just stated that it is for the cemetery purposes of the
Winter Beach Cemetery Association.
L_
41
BOOK 69 IFav 633
OCT 13
1987 -
BOOK
69
FACE 634 ..
Commissioner Wheeler noted the
impression he got
from
the
Cemetery Association was that was a lot of the purpose of that
cemetery; they have buried some indigents there.
Chairman Scurlock believed we should put them on notice not
to start burying on that portion. He stated that he also was
opposed to going out and buying replacement property.
Attorney Vitunac informed the Board that the Cemetery
Association is on notice because if the federal government
invokes the restriction, the land will go back to the federal
government. He confirmed that he will send them another letter
saying that property is still not available for burying while
Commissioner Bird works on possible alternative property.
Commissioner Bowman suggested that he include in his Letter
the restriction discussed about being open to the public and non-
discriminatory, and Board members agreed we should have that
provision somewhere in writing.
Attorney Vitunac felt that language would come in the
transfer of the land we are talking about.
PROCEDURE FOR PLACING ITEMS ON THE AGENDA
Chairman Scurlock referred to the following memo:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Liz Forlani, Administrative Aide to the Board
RE: SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO POLICY PROCEDURE
DATE: October 7, 1987
At the September 22, 1987 meeting the memo regarding
Procedures for Placing Items on the Agenda was tabled for further
discussion on October 13th when there would be a full Board
present. Input was received from Commissioners on suggestions to
the policy procedure and they are as follows:
1. Emergency items that require no funding or substantial
staffing may be placed on agenda by Commissioners without
staffing. Items directing staff may also be placed on an
agenda by Commissioners.
2. Within 10 working days the Administrator will put an item
that required staffing back on the agenda; if there is a
delay, the Board will be notified in writing.
42
3. Committee Reports will be presented by Commissioners for
acceptance and items in the report requiring direction to
staff can be given by the Board at that time.* The
Administrator will receive a copy of Committee Summary
Reports.
4. A Commissioners may put any item under their names with
the understanding that by consensus the item may be•approved ._
for staffing or voted down. An item requiring funding of
less than $2,500 that has been previously discussed or'- _
requires no staffing, or an itdm asking for Board action in
the form of conceptual approval, or any informational item,
may be included on an agenda at any time by a Commissioner.
5. Constitutional Officers should be included in Memo under
Paragraph 1.
The Chairman noted that a number of Commissioners, as well
as the Administrator, had some concern about the procedure for
placing items on the agenda and having them staffed. He and the
Administrator came up with a suggested procedure and have had
comments on it from each Commissioner. His suggestion would be
that it not be a static process, but that we at least have
something in writing, and then if we need to modify it from time
to time, that can be done. Chairman Scurlock noted that one of
his major concerns was that a lot of items were coming in through
the Board office and the Board secretaries sometimes identified
them as a Planning or a Road & Bridge item, and Mr. Balczun in
some cases was not being copied; so, he was not reacting from the
standpoint of having a recommendation ready. The intent of the
proposed procedure is not to keep items off the agenda but to
make sure the Administrator has sufficient notice so the matter
can be properly staffed. We have had an open policy in terms of
anyone wanting to appear before the Commission, but he felt in
fairness to Mr. Balczun, he should have an opportunity to be able
to have some answers before being confronted at a public meeting
with funding considerations and action.
Commissioner Eggert noted that the concern she expressed
before is that Board action was not defined. She considered that
even a conceptual agreement is Board action, and she felt it is
important to be able to bring something conceptual to the Board's
attention to see if they do want to proceed with it rather than
43
OCT 13 1987 - Bou 69 FacE 685
OCT 13 1987 BOOK 69 PaG- 6-86
immediately give it to staff and overload them with work that may
not be required.
Administrator Balczun did not have any problem with those
considerations; he noted that he just wants to know up front what
the ground rules are because they do not want to be in a position
whereby, for example, one Commissioner is strident about a
particular issue and another speaks up more or less in support,
and then three others sort of acquiesce or don't comment, and
frankly that is not a clear majority.
Commissioner Eggert believed if the Administrator is not
sure if he has a clear majority to do something, he should, the
same as anyone else, ask for clarification. She just felt the
public should have the right to go to an elected official and
should have a right to come on the agenda, with the understanding
that you could be totally voted down or told to go to staff, but
that a County Commissioner should never be denied the right to
reach an agenda without having to go through staff.
Commissioner Wheeler commented that his intent was simply to
make sure all parties involved know what is going on at the
earliest possible time. Board members need some time within the
timeframe for getting on the agenda to be able to ask questions
of staff, and staff needs enough notice to be able to gather the
information to answer those questions. He just wanted the lack
of communication to be done away with.
Chairman Scurlock believed emergency items were getting out
of hand, and it is hard to deny a fellow Commissioner even when
possibly it may not be a true emergency. He felt, however, the
whole process is geared so that we have public input.
Commissioner Eggert asked what happens if someone wants to
- = come in and insists on speaking to the Commission and will not
say what he wants to speak about.
Chairman Scurlock advised in that case the item will be on
the agenda in ten days' time whether it is staffed or not.
44
M
Administrator Balczun commented that staff is durrently
working on a potential problem for a lady that appeared on the
face of it to be very simple, but has turned out to be very
complex, and it is not the kind of thing you would just want to - -
pop onto an agenda.
Commissioner Wheeler did not believe that just because
someone wants to be on the agenda without stating a reason, they
should necessarily be allowed to go on the agenda.
The Chairman stated that under this policy, if they come in
and state in writing that they want to be on the agenda, that
will be the notice, and they can be on the agenda in ten days.
Commissioner Eggert felt strongly that anyone should be
allowed to speak to the County Commission, and Commissioner Bird
confirmed that this always has been the practice since he has
been on the Commission, but he felt some day the County is bound
to out grow this practice.
Commissioner Wheeler emphasized he certainly is not in favor
of providing anyone a public platform without knowing their
reason.
Commissioner Bird noted that this policy has never been
abused in the years he has been on the Board, but undoubtedly
some day it will be.
Administrator Balczun wished it made clear for the record
that when we use the term "ten days," that means the meeting of
the Board next following ten days.
Chairman Scurlock felt the desire or intent was that it be
not more than two meetings away, i.e., someone coming in would
not be delayed more than one meeting.
Administrator Balczun pointed out that per the memo, if an
item should turn out to be a more complex matter than anticipated
and there is a delay, the Board will be notified.
In further discussion, the Board generally agreed with the
procedure as amended.
45
OCT 13 197
BOCK 69 pnc 6-87
r
OCT 1S 1987 BOOK PAGE 688
APPOINTMENT TO CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
Commissioner Bowman informed the Board that Mr. Anthony
Walluk has agreed to serve on the Code Enforcement Board to fill
the unexpired term of Wayne Sommers, who recently resigned. She
advised that Mr. Walluk is a realtor from the North County.
Commissioner Wheeler noted that he has probably known
Mr. Walluk for 30 years, and he knows nothing bad about him.
Commissioner Bowman advised that Mr. Walluk comes highly
recommended.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved the
appointment of Anthony Walluk to the Code Enforcement
Board to fill the unexpired term of Wayne Sommers.
GRANT FOR MARION FELL LIBRARY
Commissioner Eggert advised that she would like the Board to
authorize Chairman Scurlock to send the following letter to the
Chief of the Bureau of Historical Preservation in Tallahassee to
encourage their giving of the grant to the Fellsmere Library
Association.
46
A
October 12, 1987
Mrs. Suzanne Walker
Chief, Bureau of Historical Preservation
E.A. Gray Building '
Tal IiII)an-soe, Florida 32399
Re: development Grant for Marion Fell Library
Dear Mrs. Walker:
The Board of County Commissioners voted to support the
Fellsmer.e Library Association in,obtaining a development grant
from the Bureau of Historical Preservation on:September 15, 1987,
In addition, the Board approved $2,000 in matching funds for the
library to restore and refurbish this building that has held a
small community library for the past 72 years.
We hope you will give this grant request every consideration
and will approve it. The County will be continuing its interest
in, and support- of, the Marion Fell Library.
Sincerely,
Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Chairman
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved
sending the above letter and authorized the signa-
ture of the Chairman.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board unanimously adjourned at 10:50
o'clock A.M.
ATTEST:
Clerk Chairman
OCT 13 087 47 1- Bou 6-9 FxUE 689