HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/22/1988Tuesday, March 22, 1988
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,
March 22, 1988, at 9:00 o'clock A:M. Present were Don C.
Scurlock, Jr., Chairman; Gary C. Wheeler, Vice Chairman; Richard
N. Bird; Margaret C. Bowman; and Carolyn K. Eggert. Also present
were Charles P. Balczun, County Administrator; Charles P.
Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; Joseph
Baird, OMB Director; and Barbara Bonnah, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order, and Commissioner
Bird led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Administrator Balczun requested the following additions to
today's Agenda:
1) A discussion regarding an illegal water connection.
2] A discussion on the possibility of negotiating with
apparent low bidders on a certain capital project.
Administrator Balczun requested the deletion of Items 8A-2,
8A-3, and 8A-4, all of which pertain to Phase 11I of the Jail.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously added
and deleted the above items.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Eggert requested that Items 9 and 11 be removed
from the Consent Agenda for discussion.
MAR 2 2 1988
BOOK
. 1 iv:,F 29'
1. Approval of Appointment of Deputy Sheriff (Part-time)
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved
the Sheriff's appointment of Deputy Sheriff William H.
Roode (part-time).
2. Reports - Florida Inland Navigation District
The following reports re the Florida Inland Navigation
District were received and placed on file in the Office of the
Clerk to the Board:
a) Audit Report for Fiscal Year Ending Sept. 30, 1987
b) 1987 Annual Financial Report of Units of Local
Government
c) Statement of Condition - Sept. 30, 1987
3. Retroactive Approval of Out -of -State Travel
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously granted
retroactive approval for out-of-state travel for
Chairman and appropriate staff to attend Bond Council
Meeting in Baltimore, Maryland, March 15-17, 1988.
4. Approval for Out -of -County Travel
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved
out -of -county travel for Chairman and appropriate.
staff to attend Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment
Seminar in Orlando on April 14, 1988.
5. Reappointment to Board of District IX Health Council, Inc.
The Board reviewed the following letter dated 3/1/88:
2
MAR 2 2 1988
BOOK
PAGE 300
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
GARY S. NORDMARK. CHAIRMAN
JOHN GIBA. VICE CHAIRMAN
FAYE A. WILLIAMSON, SECYJTREAs.
VINCENT BONVENTO
EARL F. BROWN
REGINALD T. FLOYD
EARL E. GRIFFITH. PH.D.
LUIS R. GUERRERO. M.O.
STEPHEN L HOLMES
KENNETH M. MICHELS. PH.D.
CYNTHIA PLOCKELMAN
JOSEPH G. SNYDER
STAFF
EDWARD O. HOLLOWAY. M.S.P.H.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
HEALTH PLANNERS:
JEFFREY M. HAAS. M.B.A.. M.H.S.
JANICE M. SIMON, M.P.H.
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT:
CHARLOTTE FRIEND, B.S.
SECRETARY: •
KAY ROTHMAN. B.A.
1AR 22 1988
Distrkt IX J-(calth Coulldll, inc.
SERVING INDIAN RIVER. MARTIN. OKEECHOBEE. PALM BEACH AND ST. LUCIE COUNTIES
4.455 WESTROADS DRIVE • WEST P i : R1Q-1 ORIDA 33407 • TEL. (305) 845-6070
March 1, 1988
4 v,f \
MAR 1988 "�
RECEIVED
ROM eouttry
0 COMMISSIONERS
``" Cs?PzEzz2,\2
Mr. Don C. Scurlock, Chairman
Indian River County Board of Commissioners
1840 Twenty -Fifth Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Chairman Scurlock:
After 4/1/88: (407) 845-6070
SUBJECT: Appointment/Reappointment of Member of the
Board of District IX Health Council, Inc.
You will remember that, in 1986, you appointed Mr. Stephen L.
Holmes to serve as a Director on our Board for a. two-year
period. Mr. Holmes was appointed to fill the Provider category
and his term expires on 6/30/88.
The category for this appointment does not change for the next
two year period. At your pleasure, you may reappoint .Mr.
Holmes or appoint a new individual. In any case, the new term
begins on 7/1/88 and terminates on 6/30/90.
If you need any other information or have any questions, please
contact me.
Sincerely,
DISTRICT IX HEALTH COUNCIL, INC.
Edward O. Holloway, MSPH
Executive Director
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously reappointed
Stephen L. Holmes to the Board of District IX Health
Council, Inc. for another 2 -year term, which
terminates on 6/30/90.
3
BOOK .71 PACE 301
6. Community Services Block Grant Housing Rehabilitation Program
- Federal Fiscal Year 1988
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/15/88:
TO: The Honorable Members of the
Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: Charles P. Balczun
County Administrator
FROM: Guy L. Decker, Jr. � REFERENCES:
Executive Director
IRC Housing Authority
DATE: March 15, 1988
FILE:
SUBJECT: Connnmity Services Block Grant
Fusin .Rehabilitation Program
Fel Fiscal Year 1988
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the County Commission.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The State of Florida's Department of Community Affairs has once again
allocated $6,295 to Indian River County under their CSBG'Program, and the
Housing Authority would like to utilize this grant to provide rehabilita-
tion housing consulting services which activates rehabilitation funding
from governmental sources. This program will run from April 1, 1988 to
September 30, 1988.
The Farmers Home Administration Section 504 Program provides housing
rehabilitation loans and grants to low-income 'and elderly persons who. lack
the finances to make their homes decent, safe and sanitary and free of
health and safety defects.
This 1988 Program is targeted in the Gifford Area of the County and
15 low-income and elderly owners will have their homes brought up to safe
and sanitary standards. It's also targeted in Wabasso and Old Oslo Park
Areas.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
This is our sixth year of funding under legislation passed by the
Congress which consolidates various social programs into the block grant
categories.
RECOMMENDATION:
We respectfully request the County Commission to authorize its Chair-
man to execute the Award Agreement for submission to the Department of
Community Affairs for this CSBG grant.
This program will bring about improvements in safety and sanitation
for fifteen (15) homeowners with an average cost of $4,800 per unit. The
$6,295 Grant plus $2,695 in cash and in-kind contributions by the Housing
Authority will be supplemented with $48,000 in loans and grants from the
Farmers Home Administration.
This program requires no additional County funds.
4
MAR. 22 1988
8001( 71 FACE 302
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously authorized
the Chairman to execute the Award Agreement for
submission to the Dept. of Community Affairs for the
$6,295 grant, as recommended by staff.
AWARD AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD
7. Appointment to Environmental Control Hearing Board
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/2/88:
Mr. Don Scurlock, Jr. ,Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
Administration Building
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Mr. Scurlock:
363 Grove Isle Circle
Vero Peach, Florida 32962
March 2, 1988
---I—recently resigned from the Board of Adjustment of
the City of Vero Beach after nine years of service.
Now -that I live in the County, I would like to
volunteer to serve on one of the County boards.
Having lived in Indian River County for almost twenty
years, I am reasonably familiar with its governmental
functions. My service on the Indian River Volunteer
Ambulance Squad for nineteen years has also familiarized
me with the area.
My background, before retirement, was in sciences,
I taught biological and physical sciences for many
years in New Jersey as well as in the public schools
of Indian River County. In the business world, I
served for thirteen years as Senior Science Editor for
Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, one of the leading publishers
of school textbooks in the United States.
My activities include: Vero Beach Theatre Guild, Vero
Beach Barbershop Chorus,. Trinity Church choir, IRCC
conversational Spanish class, and IRCVAS.
5
MAR 2 2 1988
BOOK . 71. r E 303
As references I offer: Warren Winchester. Mike Wodtke,
Charles Vitunac, William Cochrane, Reverend Pete LaBarre,
and Don Scurlock. Sr., to name but a few.
If an opening should occur on any of the County boards, -
I hope you will keep in mind that I am available.
Sincerely,
V. ?,
Leonard S. Craven
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously appointed
Leonard S. Craven to the Environmental Control Hearing
Board to fill position vacated by Jack Pearce.
8. Release of County Utility Liens
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/14/88:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac
County Attorney
DATE: March 14, 1988
RE: CONSENT AGENDA - FOR BCC MEETING 3/22/88
RELEASE OF COUNTY UTILITY LIENS
This office has processed the following matters and requests
permission for the Chairman to execute the standard release
forms:
RELEASE of 1 water ERU paid by K1NGSWOOD
WEST, INC. for Lot No. 17, Phases 2 and 3.
(Map #C-4)
RELEASE of 1 sewer ERU paid by REALCOR-VERO BEACH
ASSOCIATES/COUNTRYSIDE SOUTH for Lot No. 254.
(Map #41)
RELEASE of 1 sewer ERU paid by REALCOR-VERO BEACH
ASSOCIATES/COUNTRYSIDE SOUTH for Lot No. 13
(Map #41)
RELEASE of 1 sewer ERU paid by REALCOR-VERO BEACH
ASSOCIATES/COUNTRYSIDE SOUTH for Lot No. 267s.
(Map #41)
6
MAR 2 2 1988
aQg P.i' E 304
RELEASE of 12 sewer ERUs paid by VISTA PROPERTIES
OF VERO BEACH, INC. for Building #37 (Map #22)
RELEASE of 12 water ERUs paid by VISTA PROPERTIES
OF VERO BEACH, INC. for Building #37 (Map #B)
The back-up information for the above is on file in the
County Attorney's office.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved
the Release of Assessments as set out in the above
memo.
RELEASE OF ASSESSMENT LIENS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
9. Final Plat Approval for Grand Harbor Phase I Plat
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/14/88:
TO: Charles Balczun
County Administrator
DATE: March 14, 1988 FILE:
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Roser M. Keat.ng,
Community Developme t Director
••+CP SUBJECT: FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR
THE GRAND HARBOR PHASE I
PLAT
THROUGH: Stan Boling 41 6
Chief, Current Development
FROM: BW
Robert E. Wiegers / REFERENCES: gh
Staff Planner phase I
IEG
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of March 22, 1988.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS:
Grand Harbor Phase I is a proposed 120 acre subdivision within the
overall Grand Harbor DRI. The plat extends from U.S. #1 to the
proposed estuarine system, and encompasses the central portion of
the entire Grand Harbor development.
22 19
7 BOOK • 71 PA E 305
The Phase I final plat area consists of POD H (Harmony Island),,
POD P (Wood Duck Island), as well as future recreational and
clubhouse area, rights-of-way, open areas and waterbodies. The
two PODS (H & P) consist of approximately 26 acres with 250
dwelling units which results in an overall density of 2.07 units
per acre.
The subject property is zoned RM -6 (Multi -Family Residential, up
to 6 units/acre) and has an MD -1 (Medium Density Residential, up
to 8 units/acre) land use designation. At its regular meeting of
October 9, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted
preliminary PRD plan approval for Phase I of the Grand Harbor
project.
The owners, Grand Harbor, Inc., are now requesting that final plat
approval be granted to the Grand Harbor Phase I plat with the
understanding that the developer, shall, prior to final plat
approval being given by the Board of County Commissioners at its
meeting of March 22, 1988:
1. submit an approved letter of credit guaranteeing the contract
for construction of required improvements; and
2. shall obtain a DOT permit for road improvements constructed
across a DOT drainage right-of-way.
As of March 14, 1988, the developer has submitted:
1. a final plat, substantially in conformance with the approved
preliminary PRD plan; and
2. a contract for construction of the remaining required
improvements.
ANALYSIS:
At the time this item was prepared for the March 22, 1988 Board of
County Commissioners meeting, two issues concerning final plat
approval remained unresolved. These two items are, as mentioned
above, the required submission of an approvable letter of credit,
guaranteeing the contract for construction of required improve-
ments and the issue of DOT right-of-way conflict. In order to
keep on schedule, the developers have requested that the Phase I
plat be allowed to remain on the March 22, 1988 Board meeting
provided that both of these outstanding items areresolved prior
to the meeting date [see attachment #1].
The required improvements within the Phase I plat boundaries have
been substantially finished. Several items do, however, remain
unfinished and the developers have submitted certified cost
estimates for the remaining improvements and a contract for
construction which binds them to complete these improvements in
the near future. Both the cost estimates and the contract for
future construction have been approved by the Public Works Depart-
ment and the county Attorney's office, respectively, and meet all
subdivision requirements.
All required utility improvements have been inspected and approved
by the County Utility Department for the water and sewer system
leading to the POD's. Completion of the utility system within
each POD will be controlled and approved at the time individual
unit C.O.'s are issued.
MAR 2 2 1988
BOOK 71 FACE 30G
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant
final plat approval to the Grand Harbor Phase I plat and authorize
the Chairman of the Board to execute a contract for construction
of required improvements provided that prior to March 22, 1988 the
developers have submitted an approvable letter of credit and a
copy of the necessary DOT permit.
Commissioner Eggert asked if the title evidence or a DOT
permit has been received, and Robert Keating, Director of
Planning & Development, advised that the DOT permit was delivered
to us yesterday and everything has been resolved.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously granted
final plat approval to the Grand Harbor Phase 1 plat
and authorized the Chairman to execute a contract for
construction of required improvements provided that
prior to March 11, 1988, the developers have submitted
an approvable letter of credit and a copy of the
necessary DOT permit, as recommended by staff in the
above memo.
9
WAR 2 2 1988
BOOK .71 PAGE 307
(Corporate, for use with
a letter of credit)
CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS
--ROT— 3194-429 --_
THIS CONTRACT, made and entered Into this /Oth day
of _March, 1988 , by and between GRAND HARBOR, INC.
, a corporation existing under the laws of
Th -e ----State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as
"Developer," and INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a political
subdivision of the State of Florida, by and through its
Board of County Commissioners, hereinafter referred to as
"County."
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, Developer is commencing proceedings to effect
a subdivision of land within Indian River County, Florida;
and
WHEREAS, a final plat of the subdivision within the
unincorporated area of Indian River County shall not be
recorded until the Developerhas installed the required
improvements or has guaranteed to the satisfaction of the
County that such improvements will be installed; and
WHEREAS, Developer requests the approval and
recordation of a certain plat to be known las VIWAV
GRAND HARBOR PLAT I ; a nd ?. Vito
WHEREAS, the required improvementsareto be installed
after recordation of this plat under guarantees posted with
the County.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEMUTUAL
COVENANTS AND PROMISES HEREIN CONTAINED, the parties agree
as follows:
9/39/0( o4 a�
1. Developer agrees to construct on or before 9•{14._,..
4
, In a good and workmanlike manner,
those improvements described a fol lows: curbing and street lighting,
and roadway improvements
or otherwise required by the Code of Laws.and Ordinances of
Indian River County in connection with the ,approval of said
plat. A copy of the plat shall be recorded in the Public
Records of Indian River County, Florida upon the final
approval of the Board of County Commissioners and made a
part hereof for all purposes.
2. Developer agrees to construct said improvements
strictly in accordance with the land development permit, the
most recent set of plans and specifications for this
subdivision approved by the County and on file in the
Planning and . Development Division,'- and all County
development regulations and standards, including conditions
and requirements of any applicable County right-of-way
permit, all of which are hereby incorporated by reference
and made a part hereof.
1
MAR 2 2 1988
Revised.2/16/88
Ka 71 P ;E 308
3. In order to guarantee performance of this contract,
Developer shall simultaneously herewith furnish an
irrevocable letter of credit, having an expiration date of
not Tess than ninety (90) days beyond the date set forth in
Paragraph 1, provided by a banking institution authorized to
transact such business in this state, in a form to be
approved by the County, naming Developer as customer and
CITY FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK as the
underwriting bank, In the amount of 3- o�oe.Oa Ninety Thousand Dollars
which amount is not less than one hunaed and fifteen (115%)
percent of the estimated total cost of improvements
remaining to be constructed, as determined in accordance
with the County's Subdivision and Platting Ordinance. It is
understood that the full amount of the letter of credit
shall remain available to the County andshall not be
reduced during the course of construction without an express
written modification thereof executed by all parties.
Requested reductions shall not be unreasonably withheld by
the County. Developer may at any time substitute
guarantees, subject to the approval as to form and amount by
the County.
4. Up to $1,000,000.00, or the limits of any
applicable underlying or excess insurance coverage carried
by Developer or to be obtained during the course of the
construction of the subdivision improvements, Developer
agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the County
against any and all claims, damages, losses, and expenses,
including attorney's fees, for property damage, personal or
bodily injury, or loss of life, arising from the negligent
acts or omissions of the Developer, its officers, employees,
agents, or contractors, subcontractors, laborers, or
suppliers, relating to the construction of the required
improvements, including all those improvements to be
constructed on existing publicly dedicated or County -owned
property, such as street„ sidewalk, bikepath, lighting,
signalization, traffic control, drainage, water, or sewer
improvements.
5. The County agrees to approve the plat for
recordation in the Public Records of Indian River County,
Florida upon a finding as to compliance with all applicable
provisions of the County's Subdivision and Platting
Ordinance and upon execution hereof. The County shall
accept those areas specifically dedicated to the County for
the purposes indicated on the plat at the time of plat
recordation. However, nothing herein shall be construed as
creating an obligation upon the County to perform any act of
construction or maintenance within such dedicated areas
until such time as the required improvements are
satisfactorily completed. Satisfactory completion in
accordance with the land development permit, plans,
specifications, andordinance requirements of Indian River
County shall be determined by the County and shall be
indicated by specific written approval of the Public Works
Director or his designated representative.
6. In the event the Developer shall fail or neglect to
fulfill its obligations under this contract and as required
by the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Indian River County,.
Florida, the Developer, as principal, and the guarantor or
surety shall be jointly and severally liable to pay for the
cost of construction and installment of the required
improvements to the final total cost, including but not
limited to engineering, construction, legal and contingent
costs, including reasonable attorney's fees incurred by the
County, together with any damages, either direct or
consequential, which the County may sustain as a result of
the failure of Developer to carry out and execute all
2
MAR 2 2 1988
BOOK 71 rA{E 0 9
•
provisions of this contract and applicable ordinances of the
County. In no event, however, shall the liability of the
guarantor or surety under this paragraph exceed the total
amount of the original obligation stated in the guaranty or
surety instrument, less any approved reductions thereto.
7. The parties agree that the County at its option
shall have the right, but not the obligation, to construct
'and install or, pursuant to receipt of competitive bids,
cause to be constructed and Installed the required
improvements in the event Developer shall fail or refuse to
do so in accordance with the terms of this contract.
Developer expressly agrees that the County may demand and
draw upon the existing guaranty or surety for the final
total cost of the improvements. Developer shall remain
wholly liable for any resulting deficiency, should the
guaranty or surety be exhausted prior to completion of the
required improvements. In no event shall the County be
obligated to expend public funds, or any funds other than
those provided by the Developer, the guarantor, or surety,
to construct the required improvements.
8. Any guaranty or surety provided to the County by
Developer with respect to this contract shall exist solely
for the use and benefit of the County and shall not be
construed or intended in any way, expressly or impliedly, to
benefit or secure payment to any subcontractor, laborer,
materialman or other party providing labor, material,
supplies, or services for construction of the required
improvements,. or to benefit any lot purchaser(s), unless the
County shall agree otherwise In writing.
9. This agreement is the full and complete
understanding of the parties and. shall not be construed or
amplified by reference to any other agreement, discussion,.
or understanding, whether, written or oral, except as
specifically mentioned herein. This agreement shall not be
assigned without the express written approval of the County.
Any amendment, deletion, modification, extension, or
revision hereof or hereto shall be in writing, executed by
authorized representatives of both parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their
hands and seals on the day and year first above written.
GRAND HARBOR_ a
corporation of the State of
FLORIDA
DEVELOPER
By:
3
AR 2 2 1988
O.H. Fielder, V.P.
(affix corporate seal)":
BOOK 71 F'A E J1O
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
By : (AjLODum----(-AP. e e
County ttorney
AR 2 2 1988
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
C
By:
C rmaan, o
County Commissioners
Approved by the County Commission
3/22/88
Attest:
FWR
4
BOOK 71 E' a 3II
Approved
Date
Admin.
��
6/L3/
Legal
„,P
"3-`:t.5
Budget
(�'
3-ay-
Dep�t
/7i k
3/ k
AR 2 2 1988
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
C
By:
C rmaan, o
County Commissioners
Approved by the County Commission
3/22/88
Attest:
FWR
4
BOOK 71 E' a 3II
4
The contract allows the developer to have the County staff release
a letter of credit, each of which represents 1/3 of the total
security or $300,000.00, upon:
1. submittal of a certified cost estimate from the engineer of
record for work completed under the letter of credit;
2. submittal of a certificate of completion from the engineer of
record for work completed that is covered by the letter of
credit to be released;
3. review and acceptance of the cost estimate and completion
certificate by the County Public Works Director; and
4. written authorization from the Public Works Director to the
Office of Management and Budget to release a letter of
credit.
The proposal meets all applicable D.O. requirements and normal
County requirements regarding contracting for completion of
required improvements.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners:
1. authorize the Chairman to execute the submitted contract for
construction; and
2. accept the three letters of credit from City Federal Savings
Bank (numbers 3186-421, 3187-422, and 3188-423)
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously authorized
the Chairman to execute the submitted contract for
construction and accept the three letters of credit
from City Federal Savings Bank (numbers 3186-421,
3187-422, and 3188-423), as recommended by staff.
14
L
MAR 2 2 1988
BOOK 71 FADE 312
10. Bonding -Out for Grand Harbor Estuarine System Improvements
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/14/88:
TO: Charles Balczun DATE: March 14, 1988
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
FILE:
40:1"
e4 BONDIN-OUT FOR ND
ng CP SUBJECT: HARBORGESTUARIINEGSYSTEM
Community Dev lopm nt Director IMPROVEMENTS
Robert M.
FROM: Stan Boling4 I REFERENCES: gh estuarine
Chief, Current Development STAN2
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of March 22, 1988.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
A major component of the Grand Harbor development order (D.O.),
which granted D.R.I. approval for the project, was the development
and improvement of created and altered estuarine wetlands along
the eastern one-third of the site (see attachment #1).
Originally, the D.O. required Grand Harbor to complete the
estuarine system prior to the issuance of any C.O.'s for any
portion of the project. Recently, the D.O. was amended by action
of the Board of County Commissioners (see attachment #2) to allow
for the issuance of C.O.'s for up to 600 units if:
1. the developer contracts with the County to complete required
estuarine system improvements by January 1, 1989; and
2. the developer posts acceptable surety with the County to
guarantee the construction contract.
The developer, Grand Harbor, Inc., is requesting approval of a
construction contract, and has now submitted:
a) a certified cost estimate specifying remaining improvements
and costs of such improvements;
b) a contract for constructing required improvements by
September 30, 1988; and
c) three letters of credit representing 115% of the total cost
of remaining improvements.
ANALYSIS:
The submitted contract and letters of credit meet all applicable
D.O. requirements. Thus, if approved by the Board, the "bonding -
out" for estuarine improvements will allow a limited number of
C.O.'s to be issued for units within Grand Harbor.
Staff has periodically inspected the project site and has accepted
the submitted certified cost estimate for remaining estuarine
work. The County Attorney's office and staff have accepted the
submitted contract and letters of credit. The contract specifies
that all required estuarine system improvements (pesticide soils
removal, earthwork and grading, and planting) will be completed by
September 30, 1988. It should be noted that estuarine system
monitoring requirements are covered by the D.E.R. permit issued
for the project (permit #311043029).
15
AR 2 2 1988
BOOK 71 FAH 313
(FOR USE WITH A
LETTER OF CREDIT)
CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS
NO.3186-421; 3187-422; 3188-423
THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into this 7th day of March, 1988,
by and between GRAND HARBOR, INC., a corporation existing under the laws of the
State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as the "Developer", and INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, by and through its Board of County Commissioners, hereinafter
referred to as "County".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer has received a Development Order (D.O.) and various
site plan and other approvals for the development of GRAND HARBOR; and
WHEREAS, Developer is required, as a condition of the D.O., to construct
a proposed estuarine waterway system; and
WHEREAS, County Resolution 86-89, amending the D.O., requires completion
of the proposed estuarine waterway system prior to the issuance of certificates
of occupancy for any structure; and
WHEREAS, Developer has requested modification of the D.O. to allow
issuance of not more than 600 certificates of occupancy prior to completion
of the proposed estuarine waterway system; and
WHEREAS, Developer is willing to provide assurance to the County that
the proposed estuarine waterway system will be completed prior to September 30,
1988.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS AND PROMISES
HEREIN CONTAINED, the parties agree as follows:
1. Developer agrees to construct on or before 30 September,1988, in
a good and workmanlike manner, those improvements described as follows:
Proposed estuarine waterway system as
specified in County Resolution 86-89.
2. Developer agrees to construct said improvements strictly in
accordance with the land development permit, the most recent set of plans and
specifications for this project approved by the County and on file in the
Planning and Development Division, and all County development. regulations
and standards, including conditions and requirements of any applicable County
right-of-way permit, all of which are hereby incorporated by reference and
made a part hereof.
3. In order to guarantee performance of this contract, Developer
shall simultaneously herewith furnish three irrevocable letters of credit,
having expiration dates of not less than ninety (90) days beyond the date
set forth in Paragraph 1, provided by a banking institution authorized to
transact such business in this state, in a form to be approved by the County,
naming Developer as customer CITY FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK
, as the underwriting bank, in the amount
of $300,000.00 each, which cumulative amount is not less than one hundred
and fifteen percent (115%) of the estimated total cost of improvements
remaining to be constructed. It is understood that the full amount of the
letters of credit shall remain available to the County and shall not be
reduced during the course of construction without express written modification
thereof executed, by all parties pursuant to Paragraph 4, below.
16
iliAR 2 2 1988
BOOK .71 PAGE 314
Developer may at any time substitute guarantees, subject to approval as to
form and amount by the County.
4. Developer may request the County to release letters of credit
when the cost to complete remaining work has been reduced to an amountwhich
is not greater then the total funds which would remain covered by letters(s)
of credit not previously released or for which release has not been requested
divided by 115%. Such request shall be accompained by an engineer's certificate
providing an estimate of the cost to complete remaining work. Such request
shall also be accompanied by a signed and sealed Certificate of Completion
from the Engineer of Record for the portion of the required improvements
covered by the Letter of Credit to be released. Satisfactory completion in
accordance with the land development permit, plans, specifications and
ordinance requirements of Indian River county shall be determined by the
County. After receipt of the certificates of cost and completion, and
determination of satisfactory completion as indicated by specific written
approval, the Public Works Director or his designated representative shall
provide written authorization for the Office of Management and Budget to
release a Letter of Credit.
5. Up to $1,000,000.00, or the limits of any applicable under-
lying or excess insurance coverage carried by Developer or to be obtained
during the course of the construction of the Estuarine System improvements,
Developer agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the County against
any and all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, bodily injury, or loss
of life, arising from the negligent acts or omissions of the Developer,
its officers, employees, agents, or contractors, subcontractors, laborers,
or suppliers, relating to the construction of the required improvements,
including all those improvements to be constructed on existing publicly
dedicated or County -owned property, such as street, sidewalk, bikepath,
lighting, signalization, traffic control, drainage, water, or sewer impro-
vements.
6. In theevent the Developer shall fail or neglect to fulfill
its obligations under this contract, and as required by the Code of Laws
and Ordinances of Indian River County, Florida, the Developer, as principal,
and the underwriting bank shall be jointly and severally liable to pay for
the cost of construction and installment of the required improvements to
the final total cost, including but not limited to engineering, construction,
legal and contingent costs, including reasonable attorney's fees incurred by
the County, together with any damages, either direct or consequential, which
the County may sustain as a result of the failure of Developer to carry out
and execute all provisions of this contract and applicable ordinances of the
County. In no event, however, shall the liability of the underwriting bank
under this paragraph exceed the total amount of the original obligation
stated in the Letter of Credit.
7. The parties agree that the County at its option shall have the.
right, but not the obligation, to construct and install or, pursuant to receipt
of competitive bids, cause to be constructed and installed the required improv-
ments in the event Developer shall fail or refuse to do so in accordance with
the terms of this contract. Developer expressly agrees that the County may
demand and draw upon the existing guaranty or surety for the final total cost
of the improvements. Developer shall remain wholly liable for any resulting
deficiency, should the Letter of Credit be exhausted prior to completion of the
required improvements. In no event shall the County be obligated to expend
public funds, or any funds other than those provided by the Developer, or the
Underwriting Bank to construct the required improvements.
17
R22 1988
BOOK 71 PAGE 315
8. Any Letters of Credit provided to the County by Developer
with respect to this contract shall exist solely for the use and benefit
of the County and shall not be construed or intended in any way, expressly
or impliedly, to benefit or secure payment to any subcontractor, laborer,
materialman or other party providing labor, material, supplies, or services
for construction of the required improvements, or to benefit any lot purchaser(s),
unless the County shall agree otherwise in writing.
9. This agreement is the full and complete understanding of the
parties and shall not be construed or amplified by reference to any other
agreement, discussion, or understanding, whether written or oral, except
as specifically mentioned herein. This agreement shall not be assigned
without the express written approval of the County. Any amendment, deletion,
modification, extension, or revision hereof or hereto shall be in writing,
executed by authorized representatives of both parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and
seals on the day and year first above written.
Attest: i - d -IL
Vice P( esident (Title)
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY n
By: C1=7)6 -.-r,- "% a -el ,�.Lr-,
County Attorney
APPROVED: March 22, 1988
MAR 2 2 1988
17a
GRAND HARBOR ,3:114c.
Developer
By: C. Al...1424A.&_
0.H. Fielder, V.P. (Title)
(affix corporate seal)
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
DON C. SCURL6CK, JR.
Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
Attest:,et_
FREDA WRIGHT,
EiLtA A.
BOOK 71 f,f,E316
11. Approval for Historic Preservation Planning Assistance
Grant Application
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/9/88:
TO:
Charles P. Balczun
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
teri2 r'
Robert M. K a{ ng, /k CP
Director, Plan ing Development
THRU: Gary M. Schindler /1
Chief, Long -Range Planning
DATENarch 9, 1988 FILE:
SUBJECT:
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
PLANNING ASSISTANCE
GRANT APPLICATION
FROM: David C. Nearing 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 March 22, 1988
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
The Florida Department of State is again soliciting applications
for state grants-in-aid for historic preservation projects. This
is the same type of program for which the County has previously
submitted on two different occasions. The first time was in
October 1987, for state funds, the second occurred in December
1987, for federal funds. The Bureau of Historic Preservation is
encouraging applications which propose to develop preservation
elements (or preservation components of coastal management,
future land use, and housing elements) of Local Government
Comprehensive Plans. The Bureau is also giving priority to
projects which cover relatively large, poorly surveyed
geographic areas, such as Indian River County.
The October submittal was ranked number 23 by the selection
committee; however, only the first 21 were funded. The State
Bureau staff had encouraged the County to resubmit for the
Federal program.
On March 8, 1988, the staff was informed by the Bureau staff that
Indian River County had been awarded $12,500 as a result of the
December submittal for federal funds. Though the federal money
will permit a survey to be conducted, the staff has found through
contact with historic survey consultants, that it generally
requires at least $15,000 in funds, with approximately that
amount in matching funds or in -kind -services to perform a
complete and proper survey. As a result, the staff feels that
the County should apply for an additional $2,500 from the state
program to complete the funding determined to be necessary.
As a result of the recent planning legislation enacted by the
State, Indian River County must incorporate historic and
archaeological concerns in its required comprehensive plan.
Chapter 9J-5 of the Florida Administrative Code, entitled
"Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive
Plans and Determination of Compliance," requires that the
County address identification, designation, and protection of
historically significant properties in various elements of the
Comprehensive Plan.
The funds available from the subject grant program would enable
the County to undertake required historic preservation
18
YAR 22 1988
BOOK 71 FADE 317
activities. As such, these funds would complement grant funds
being provided to the County from the Department of Community
Affairs for comprehensive planning -activities.
ANALYSIS & ALTERNATIVES
Indian River County has never had a formal historic sites
survey conducted, and only four sites in Indian River County
have been recorded on the Florida Master Site File.
In order to meet the requirements as outlined in Chapter 9J-5,
the Minimum Criteria Rule for Local Government Comprehensive
Plans, it will be necessary to conduct a cursory site survey of
the County in order to estimate the number of historical and
archaeological sites the County may have, and it will be
necessary to record the most readily identifiable sites on the
Florida Master Site File. Analysis of the identified sites may
also be utilized by. the Planning Department to develop goals,
objectives, and strategies addressing historic preservation in
the County's Comprehensive Plan.
Since the referenced grant program is competitive, there is no
assurance that the County will receive the required funds. The
staff, however, has developed a project consistent with the
grant program's primary objectives and consistent with the
County's planning requirements. As proposed, the project will
focus on developing preservation components within elements of
the Comprehensive Plan. This will involve an area survey of
the County and development of historic preservation policies as
part of several plan elements. To further complement this
undertaking, staff will compile a document of the study results
which will provide insight to the County's past.
The subject grant requires 50% matching funds which may ,be
provided in the form of in-kind services. To minimize direct
expenditure of County funds, the staff has structured the grant
application in such a manner as to provide all the match
through in-kind services. Grant funds would then be used to
retain a consultant to do the technical survey activities. In
addition to using planning staff time for calculating the
in-kind match, volunteer services have also been programmed as
part of the in-kind match. The Indian River County and
Sebastian Historical Societies have offered their services in
conducting the proposed historic sites survey and assisting in
recording these resources on the Florida Master Site File.
Attached to this item is a copy of the cost break -down utilized
in the first two applications for aid. As can be noted, this
cost breakdown demonstrates the County's ability to provide over
$15,000 in matching in -kind -services, not just the $2,500 which
is being requested. The staff feels that the County's ability to
demonstrate its readiness to provide the entire $15,000 in
matching funds will enhance the chance for approval of the
additional $2,500. The staff feels that this demonstration, when
combined with sufficient explanation concerning our need for the
additional funds due to the scope of our undertaking, will avoid
a situation where the grant selection committee may feel $12,500
is sufficient for our purposes.
19
WAR 2 2 1888
BOOT `�1 F..1{;E31S
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners authorize the submission of the appli=
cation for a $5,000 state grant-in-aid for the proposed historic
preservation project. Staff also recommends that the 50% match
($2,500) be in the form of in-kind services of the Planning and
Development Division and the Indian River County Historical
Society, and that the designated project supervisor be the
Director of the Community Development Department.
Commissioner Eggert assumed that the $12,500 in matching
funds were in this year's budget, and Robert Keating, Director of
Planning & Development, explainedthat the matching funds would
be in the form of in-kind services. We originally requested a
grant for $15,000 and $15,000 for in-kind services, but last week
we were informed that they gave us a grant for $12,500 and this
is a request to apply for another $2,500 to bring it up to
$15,000. Both historical societies have agreed to work with us
and donate their time, and that can be used as part of the
in-kind services.
Commissioner Eggert was concerned about having some strings
attached if we want something on the National Register, but
Director Keating did not anticipate any historical registered
designations. He explained that this money was going to be used
primarily for a consultant to do an historic and archaeological
survey, which is something that is really necessary in order for
the County to do the Comp Plan work.
Commissioner Bowman stated she would like to work on the
project.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 88-20, authorizing the submittal of an
application for State grant-in-aid for an historic
preservation planning project; designating the Director
of the Community Development Department as the Project
Supervisor; and confirming that the required rriatching
funds shall be in the form of in-kind services.
20
MAR 2 21.988
BOOK .71 FAH 319
8/28/87
Jeff3
LR -Planning
DN/vh
RESOLUTION NO. 88- 20
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR STATE
GRANT-IN-AID FOR AN HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLANNING
PROJECT, DESIGNATING THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AS THE PROJECT SUPERVISOR, AND
CONFIRMING THAT THE REQUIRED MATCHING FUNDS SHALL BE IN
THE FORM OF IN-KIND SERVICES.
WHEREAS, Indian River County has never had a formal
historical sites survey conducted within its legal jurisdictional
borders; and
WHEREAS, Indian River County has very few, if any, historical
or archaeological sites recorded on the Florida Master Site File;
and
WHEREAS, CHAPTER 9J-5 of the Florida Administrative Code
requires that historical resources be addressed in the future land
use, housing and coastal management elements of local government
comprehensive plans; and
WHEREAS, The state grant-in-aid application for the proposed
historic preservation project requires that the Board of County
Commissioners designate a project supervisor; and
WHEREAS, said application requires that the Board of County
Commissioners confirm the amount specified as matching funds; .
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida that:
1. The foregoing recitals are adopted and ratified in their
entirety.
2. The submission of the application for state
grant-in-aid for an historic preservation survey and
planning project is hereby authorized.
3. The project supervisor is hereby designated to be the
Director of the Community Development Department.
4. The fifty percent ($2,500) matching funds are hereby
confirmed and shall be in the form of in-kind services.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Eggert
who moved its adoption. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Bowman and, upon being put to a
vote, the vote was as follows:
21
MAR 2 2 1988
BOOK 71 ME 320
RESOLUTION NO. 88- 20
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Vice -Chairman Gary C. Wheeler Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared Resolution No. 88- 20
adopted and duly passed this 22nd day of March , 1988.
APPROVED AS TO PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT MATTERS
BY: .//214.
GARY M. SCHINDLER
CHIEF, LONG-RANGE PLANNING
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY,/
WILLIAM G. COLLINS, ASSISTANT
COUNTY ATTORNEY
Grant Resolution
jeff3
MAR 2 2 1988
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
DON C. SCURLOCK
ATTEST:
22
AIRMAN
FREDA WRIGHT, CkERI
BOOK 71 FAGS 32I
12 Purchase of Heavy Duty 14 -Ft. Dump Truck for Utilities
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/2/88:
TO: Charles Balczun
County Administrator
THRU: P. J. Mattes
Asst County Administrator
DATE: March 2, 1988 FILE:
SUBJECT: PURCHASE OF HEAVY DUTY
14 FOOT DUMP TRUCK FOR
UTILITIES
FROM ,� �`'% � �' REFERENCES:
Gus Ambler, C.P.M.
Purchasing Manager
1. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
In December 1987, purchasing issued IRC BID #390 for a
Heavy Duty Dump Truck for Road & Bridge. The low bid
was for $31,709.00. Staff recommended that we purchase
an equal vehicle from State. Contract for. $30,858.00 and
the BCC approved. Utilities has nowrequested a similar
vehicle. _The State Contract price is $26,863.00.
2. ALTERNATIVES AND ANAYLSIS
Staff has no reason to believe that another bid would
result in price better then those available on State
Contract.
3. RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
Staff request authority to order direct from State
Contract without formal bids in accordance with procedure
2b la.
Budgetary funding has been confirmed for expenditure from
Utilities Services Account Number #47.1-218-536-066.42.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously authorized
staff to order 14 -ft. Dump Truck for Utilities direct
from the State Contract without formal bids in
accordance with procedure 2b la; budgetary funding from
Utilities Services Account #471-218-536-066.42, as
recommended by staff.
23
Milk 2 2 1988
BOOK 71 PAGE 32
TREASURE COAST PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL ANNUAL REPORT
Commissioner Bird introduced Executive Director Nan Griggs
of the Private Industry Council.
Mrs. Griggs presented the 1987 Program Year Annual Report
and reviewed the program achievements of the Treasure Coast Job
Training Center:
Treasure Coast Job Training Center
Program Achievements
O Job Training Programs placed 32 percent more people into jobs than in the
previous program year.
O Project Uplift, a computerized remediation program for potential dropouts,
served 362 students in the first four months of operation.
O The Summer Youth Program exceeded its goals by placing 832 youth into jobs or
vocational exploration.
O The School -To -Work Transition Program was used for the first time as a tool for
helping handicapped students get jobs.
O Private training companies through performance-based contracts taught job
skills to the unemployed giving them a more promising future.
O The St. Lucie Council of Social Agencies chose the Treasure Coast Job Training
Center as its "Outstanding Organization of the Year."
O In June, 1987, the Workshop -To -Work Transition Program received national
recognition when the National Association of Rehabilitation Facilities featured
the program in a segment of its 1987 National Rehabilitation Conference in
Seattle, Washington.
24
MAR 2 2 1988
BOOK
Nan
Griggs
"No agency can stand alone; only by
working with others can we achieve
success. Our accomplishments this
year can be attributed to one word -
partnership. "
Executive Director's Message
It is with great pleasure that I review the accomplishments of this year. An
"Outstanding Organization of the Year" award presented to us by the St. Lucie Council
of Social Agencies to acknowledge the success of the partnerships we formed with other
agencies to serve the economically disadvantaged started our year. We then received
national and state recognition for our Workshop -to Work Transition Program for
handicapped individuals.
Our pilot vocational exploration summer project for 14 and 15 -year olds has been
chosen by the State Job Training Coordinating Council to receive their "Distinguished
Performance Award for Youth Programs." This program presented in partnership with
Indian River Community College was so successful locally that for Summer, 1987, it was
given the name, "Expanding Horizons." Other partnerships also won recognition.
Our Treasure Coast Video produced in partnership with local economic development
agencies received acclaim locally and throughout the state but, even more important,
has received continued use from out local Chambers of Commerce. Job Training
Center billboards attracted many people to our program and the design won a MIDAS
Award for Display Advertising from the State Job Training Coordinating Council.
Werner Bols, our PIC Chairman, has been named "Business Volunteer of the Year"
and will receive statewide recognition at the next Governor's Coordinating Council
meeting. Also at that meeting, the Treasure Coast Job Training Center will be presented
with a check for $68,003, as an Incentive Award for Outstanding Achievement in 1986-
1987.
No agency can stand alone; only by working with others can we achieve success.
Our zccomplishments this year can be attributed to one word - partnership. My hat is
off to our partners - the Private Industry Council, schools, agencies and businesses on
the Treasure Coast.
Chairman Scurlock thanked Mrs. Griggs for giving the Board
the update on the PIC.
PUBLIC HEARING - PURCHASE OF PROPERTY ADJOINING BENT PINE UTILITY
SITE FOR PURPOSES OF EFFLUENT DISPOSAL FOR THE GIFFORD WASTEWATER
PROJ ECT
The hour of 9:05 o'clock having passed, the Deputy Clerk
read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached, to
wit:
25 pm( 71 PA Gr 324
Ak 2 2 1988
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
eari
in the matter of
in theCourt, was�pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of Ae/4 19, .2i. /�o�
/ - V/, qff
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person; firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me tty
(SEAL)
y offft4 /fiA 1
Ipa 69
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian Itiiyer County, Florida)
L
if
•
Manager)
PUBLIC NOTICE
A Notice is hereby given that the Department of
Utility Services -has been authorized by the
Board of County Commissioners to procure the
following property for purposes of effluent dis-
posal for the Gifford Wastewater Project. A Pub-
lic Hearing will be held on March 22, 1988 at
9:05 a.m. at the County AdmTm1stration Building,
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, FL. 32960, in the
County Commission Chambers. •
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The legal description is based on the
,1986 Tax Rolls.
. Part of the East 'h of the Southwest 'A
lying North of the North Relief Canal and
•West of Lateral "G" Canal (Official
• • Records: Book 462, Page 700) Tess the
'following described* parcel: Tract 3
(Water and Sewer Plant Site) Commenc-
ing at the Northwest comer of the North-
east'/. of the Southwest'/. of Section 15,
• Township 32, Range 39, then run South
02 degrees 05 minutes 40 seconds West
along the West line of the Northeast'' 'A of.
the Southwest 1/1 of Section 15, a dis-
• • tance of 30.00 feet to the South Right -of -
Way line of the 80.00 feet Right -of -Way
known as Storm Grove Road and Canal
Right -of -Way, being the Point of Begin-
ning, from the Point of Beginning run
South 02 degrees 04 minutes 40 sec-
onds West along the West line of the
Northeast 'b of the Southwest % a dis-
tance of 1275.61 feet to the North Right
of Way line on the North Relief Canal,
then South 85 degrees 50 minutes 23
seconds East along the North Right -of -
Way line of the North Relief Canal.
1329.25 feet to the East line of the
Southeast 'A of the Southwest 'b, then
North 00 degrees 25 minutes 37 seconds
East along the East line of the Southeast
'A of the Southwest 'A and Northeast '/,
of the Southwest '/4, 208.21 feet to the •
West Right -of -Way line Later "G" Canal,
:i:a.. North 20 degrees 15 minutes 38
seconds West along the West Right -of -
Way line of Lateral "G", 265.50 feet.
then North 85 degrees 58 minutes 23
seconds West and Parallel to the North
Right -of -Way line of the North Relief
Canal. 944.97 feet, then North 02 de-
grees 05 minutes 40 seconds East and
Parallel to the'West line of the Northeast
'b, 849.94 feet to the South line of afore-
said Storm Road and Canal Right -of -
Way, then South 89 degrees 10 minutes
12 seconds West along the South Line
of Storm Grove Road and Canal Right-
of-Way
ightof-Way 277.38 feet to the Point of Begin-
ning. Containing 13.47 acres more or
less.
For additional information, contact the Indian
River County Utilities Department at telephone
(305) 567-8000, extension 460. • •
Formal objections shall be submitted In writing
to the Department of Utility Services at 1840 25th
Street. Vero Beach, Florida 32960.
All interested parties will be heard, published the
16th day of February, 1988.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.
CHAIRMAN
'FEBRUARY 19, 26, MARCH 4, 1988
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 1/22/88:
TO:
CHARLES P. BALCZUN
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILI'1'LSB9ICES
FROM: WILLIAM F. McCAIN I�-
PROJECT ENGINEER CW\1
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICE
SUBJECT: PURCHASE OF A 13.47 + ACRE PARCEL
UTILITY SITE
DATE: JANU•• 1988
��►��1? 31415 ,
t O .';,•_r...1
*Al,
l�1 ,- 1'1G1v:
ADJOINING B'EI`I:I¢�PINE
3ACKGROUND
With the construction of the
(M.G.D.) wastewater treatment
MAR 2 2 1988
� _ J
one (1) million gallons per day
facility in Gifford which is
26
BOOK 71 PAGE 325
underway, the problem of effluent disposal and or storage arises.
An effluent transmission system is currently being constructed to
serve Grand Harbor golf course and green belt areas. A similar
transmission system is proposed to service both Hawks Nest and Bent
Pine golf courses in the near future.
When irrigation is used for effluent disposal the Department of
Environmental Regulations requires that an alternative disposal site
be available and or three (3) days of storage for the treatment
plants maximum daily flow.
ANALYSIS
The 13.47 + Acre parcel adjoining the Bent Pine Utility site
appears to be well suited for either of the aforementioned purposes.
The site is large enough (allowing for D.E.R. required set back) to
be used as a three (3) day plus storage facility for the entire
1 (M.G.D.) per day plant flow. Also, based on preliminary
investigation and computer analysis is appears that the site is more'
than adequate as an alternative percolation pond disposal site. A
percolation pond system at this site should be able to accept the
golf course flows in the event that conditions prevented effluent
application on the golf courses.
The property was appraised by Armfield-Wagner Appraisal and
Research, Inc. of Vero Beach. The appraisal company (using a market
approach) stated the Market Value of the fee simple interest to the
property on October 13, 1987 was $150,000.00.
RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners authorize the purchase of the 13.47 Acre
parcel of land adjoining- the Bent Pine utility site for the
afformentioned reasons.
Utilities Director Terry Pinto advised that he brought this
matter to the Commission some 30 days ago for approval of the
purchase, and the seller has agreed to sell the property at the
appraised. value of $150,000. However, recent legislation
requires that it be advertised and go through the public hearing
process. Based on the results of this public hearing, staff
recommends that we purchase the property at the appraised value
of $150,000.
Commissioner Eggert asked if the stump dump will have any
adverse effect, and Director Pinto advised that it will not. He
added that funds will be coming from wastewater impact fees.
Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing and asked if
anyone wished to be heard in this matter. There being none, he
declared the Public Hearing closed.
27
MAR 2 2 198E
BOOK 71 F'nE 326
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously authorized
the purchase of the 13.47± acre parcel of land
adjoining the Bent Pint utility site for the amount of
$150,000.
PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE AMENDING MINING AND EXCAVATION SECTION
OF ZONING IN THE COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES
The hour of 9:00 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Peach, 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
Gal
in the matter of 4i4.t) 25
X*
in the _ Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of L�`r.4LG lf'fa
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 pLblished in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate. commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed
(SEAL)
MAR 2 2 1988
j ;,} _ ;;L(Btlslness Manager)
i
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indo n River County, Florida)
28
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING -
TO CONSIDER THE
ADOPTION OF A COUNTY ORDINANCE
Notice is hereby given that the Board of
County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, shall hold a public hearing at which par-
ties in interest and citizens shall have an oppor-
tunity to be heard. in the County Commission
Chambers of the County Administration Build-
ing, located at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach.
Florida, on Tuesday, March 22. 1988. at 9:05
A.M. to consider the adoption of an Ordinance
entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY. FLORIDA, REPEALING SEC-
TION 25(r), MINING AND EXCAVATION,
APPENDIX A, ZONING, INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDI-
NANCES; CREATING A NEW SECTION
25 (r). EXCAVATION AND MINING;
PROVIDING FOR PURPOSE; PROVID-
ING FOR DEFINITIONS: PROVIDING
FOR PERMIT EXEMPTIONS; PROVID-
ING WATER MANAGEMENT REGULA-
TIONS FOR EXCAVATED LAKES;
PROVIDING MINING PERMIT REGULA-
TIONS; ESTABLISHING CRITERIA FOR
HAULING FILL ON PUBLIC AND PRI-
VATE ROADS: PROVIDING FOR FEES;
PROVIDING FOR DURATION AND COM-
PLETION OF PERMITS; PROVIDING
FOR INSPECTION AND REVOCATION
OF PERMITS: PROVIDING FOR AP-
PEAL; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES
AND ENFORCEMENT: AMENDING SEC-
TION 25.1(1) OF THE ZONING CODE;
AND PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION,
SEVERABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
A copy of the proposed ordinance is available
at the Planning Department office on the second
floor of the County Administration Budding.
Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision
which may be made at this meeting will need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings
is made which includes the testimony and evi-
dence upon which the appeal will be based.
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
By: -s -Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
March 2, 1988
REC IV D Mk 0 4 Mg
BOOK 11 PAGE 327
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/12/88:
TO: Charles Balczun
County Administrator
DATE: February 12, 1988 FI LE:
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Obert M. Keat. ng, CP UBJECT: Proposed Amendment to
Community Develop'ent Director Section 25(r) Mining
and Excavation
FROM: Michael K. Miller PO. REFERENCES: P&Z MEMO/MINING ORD.
Chief, Environmental Planning DISK: MIKE
& Code Enforcement
It is requested that the data presented herein be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of March 22, 1988.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Recently, the Board of County Commissioners directed the staff
to make a comprehensive revision to the mining ordinance. The
staff has examined issues relating to lake development and mine
restoration, and limited protection for the Coastal Sand Ridge,,
in addition to mining issues such as bonding, ground water
quality, exemptions, and the identification of hauling routes.
The financial impact of the proposed regulations has also been
analyzed, and the results of the analysis are presented in an
economic impact report that is attached to the agenda item.
During the last 6 months, 3 workshops were conducted by the
staff, and discussion focused primarily on the cost of meeting
littoral zone requirements and the establishment of hauling
fees to mitigate the damage to the haul routes due to sand
truck traffic. By the conclusion of the workshops, the littoral
zone requirements had been modified, and the concept' of hauling
fees had been deleted from the proposed ordinance. The hauling
fee issue was dropped with the understanding that public
discussion of the need for additional revenue to repair road
damage primarily caused by sand trucks will continue, and
methods for generating such road repair funds may be examined
in the future..
The Planning and Zoning Commission, at the January 28, 1988,
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting voted 5 to 1 in favor of
recommending adoption of the proposed ordinance to the Board of
County Commissioners.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
The proposed ordinance addresses three principal issues:
1. Zoning districts where mining is permitted;
2. Water management standards for lakes; and
3. Mining of the Coastal Sand Ridge.
Zoning Districts - The present mining ordinance restricts
mining activity to an Administrative Permit use in the A-1,
Agricultural Zoning District. The proposed ordinance retains
mining activity as an Administrative Permit use in the A-1,
Agricultural District and expands mining activity as a Special
Exception use in Residential, Commercial and Industrial Zoning
Districts. The proposed ordinance permits mining activity in
residential zoning districts for two reasons. First, the
29
AR 2 2 1988
_
BOOK 7 F', GE •J
Sandridge has been extensively mined and future mining activity
will inevitably move west of the ridge; and second, mining
activity is often considered a precursor to residential develop-
ment and, therefore, the activity should be permitted (through
the Special Exception review process) in residential districts.
If mining is not permitted in residential zoning districts,
either rezonings from residential to an agricultural zoning
district will be attempted and/or residential zonings will be
requested in agricultural districts after mining is completed.
Either of these situations tend to destabilize the planning
process and the validity of the comprehensive land use plan
map, and therefore cannot be considered to contribute to good
planning efforts.
Mining activity is proposed as a Special Exception use for
Commercial and Industrial Zoning Districts to enable the
removal of large quantities of material from the site of a
major development.
Water Management Standards - The proposed mining ordinance
proposes to establish water management standards that would,
apply to the creation or expansion of any waterbody. In the
last few years, the D.E.R. and St. Johns River Water Management
District have implemented requirements for certain types of
stormwater management tracts that include the establishment of
littoral zones. The intent of the proposed water management
standards is to provide for the construction of littoral zones
for waterbodies that are not of a size or type that require the
construction of littoral zones from other agencies. The value
of the littoral zone' for filtration of stormwater runoff,
nutrient and pesticide uptake and wildlife habitat has• been
well documented in the scientific literature.
The littoral zone standards were examined in detail, and
several alternatives were examined. Initially, the staff had
proposed that 30% of the lake surface be developed as littoral
zone which is consistent with St. Johns Water River Management
District requirements for certain wet detention systems. This
amount of littoral zone area was finally reduced in size since
analysis of the amount of sand volume lost to mining showed
that 23% of the sand currently mined (from a 20 acre site)
would be "locked -up" and unavailable to the sand mine operator.
The present littoral zone proposal reduces the minimum required
littoral zone area from 30% of the lake surface to 10% of the
lake surface area (for a 20 acre lake).
The littoral zone is defined as the area from 1 foot above
control elevation of the lake to 2} feet below control eleva-
tion. The amount or area of littoral zone shall be computed at
a rate of 15 square feet of littoral zone (below control
elevation) per linear foot of lake shoreline. The littoral
zone need. not be in a continuous band around the lake and shall
not be of a slope steeper than 1 foot vertical to 6 feet
horizontal. In addition, the littoral zone will need to be
planted or seeded in a way that will provide 80% plant coverage
within a two year time period, and wetland tree seedlings must
be planted around the perimeter of the lake.
Mining on the Coastal Sand Ridge - The proposed ordinance would
require that no mining on the Coastal Sand Ridge shall result
in an average elevation of less than 25 feet mean sea level for
that portion of a project site located on the sand ridge.
MAR 2 2 1988
30
BOOK 71. PAGE 329
The St. Johns River Water Management District, has determined
that 25 feet MSL is a minimum average elevation that should be
preserved on the Sand Ridge. Maintaining a minimum average
elevation of 25' MSL on the Ridge serves the function of
preserving soil overburden for filtration of potential ground-
water pollutants, and for preserving hydrostatic pressure which
in turn acts as a barrier against salt water intrusion from the
Indian River. In acknowledging that the Sand Ridge has been
impacted by previous development on the Ridge, preservation of
a minimum 25 foot MSL elevation is proposed to prevent further
degradation of Ridge overburden.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission forward
a recommendation of adoption of the revised mining ordinance to
the Board of County Commissioners.
Commissioner Bowman asked if they had worked out the
littoral zone problem, and Robert Keating, Director of Planning &
Development, advised that there were a number of issues that
arose during the workshops in the preparation of this ordinance,
One of the most controversial subjects was the littoral zone,
which is the creation of the habitat areas that are on the edge
of the water body. Staff started out with a pretty conservative
figure from the standpoint of creating quite a bit of littoral
zone and quite a bit of habitat. However, staff went back and
did some cost analysis to determine how much fill would be lost
if the littoral zone was extended and if the 6 to 1 ft. slopes
were extended further out. The Fish & Game Commission and some
others recommended that any lake that is created have 30% in a
littoral zone. Staff looked at a number of standards, and
instead of the recommended percentage figure, felt that the
standard should be 15 -ft. of littoral zone for every one foot of
shoreline. Further, it does not have to be consistent all the
way around the water .body, but can be clustered in a certain
area. Staff feels that is an acceptable compromise as it
provides the applicant with more fill from his pit and provides a
substantial amount of habitat creation.
Commissioner Eggert asked about the compliance bonds, and
Director Keating explained that staff has gone back and looked at
31 BOOK
MAR 27 198
71 PA E330
the entire bonding procedures, and instead of one bond that.. is
kind of nebulous in our present ordinance, staff recommended and
the P & Z Commission approved 3 types of compliance bonds, which
give the applicant the impetus to comply with the regulations,
rather than a financial incentive not to. The restoration bond
insures that the site is going to be put back. The road bond
insures that if any road damage occurs within a quarter mile
radius, the damage will be corrected or the bond will be
forfeited. The compliance bond ensures that the applicant will
comply with the regulations during the mining process.
Commissioner Bowman noted that the ordinance does not
mention how long the survey stakes should be maintained, and she
felt the stakes should be maintained for the duration of the
permit because they often get lost. The Commissioners indicated
their agreement to the change on Page 7 -of the ordinance,
sub -section (d)(3).
Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing, and asked .if
anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Jim Gallagher, executive director for Sebastian General
Partnership, felt the proposed ordinance is flawed in the respect
that it lacks a definitive identification of property and surveys
or legal descriptions of the property that is going to be
affected. He referred specifically to Part I of the Ordinance,
Section 6, sub -section (c)(4) on page 6: "If the project site is
located (in whole or part) on the Atlantic Coastal Sand Ridge, no
excavation governed by a mining permit shall result in an average
elevation of less than twenty-five (25) feet mean sea level (MSL)
for that portion of the project site located on the Sand Ridge."
Mr. Gallagher felt there is a question of what constitutes
"average elevation", as he did not see it defined in the
ordinance as to how that will be determined.
Commissioner Bird understood that staff has a map
delineating what we consider to be the areas that qualify as the
32
ViAR 2 2 1988
BOOK
71 F,CE 331
Atlantic Coastal Sand Ridge, and Director Keating explained that
with respect to the "average elevation", staff could define it if
it is determined that it is necessary to do so. However,
"average" just would be the mean of all the elevations within the
defined mining site.
Chairman Scurlock asked if there is any provision to appeal
a decision, and Director Keating explained that all mines have to
be approved through the site plan ordinance, and any decision by
the P & Z Commission can be appealed to this Board. They would
not necessarily have to go through the whole site plan process,
however. They could come in and request the staff to give them
an interpretation of whether or not that site is on the sand
ridge. Zoning code interpretations are appealable to the Board
of Adjustments.
Chairman Scurlock just wanted to be assured that there is a
provision in there that if it is a unique situation and there is
a question, the Board has an opportunity to review it, and .
Commissioner Bird agreed because he felt they need to know up
front whether or not they are included before they spend a lot of
money and time on it.
Mr. Gallagher urged the Board to reject the proposed
ordinanceand repeated the two main objections of the owners: 1)
No exact boundaries or surveys of the sand ridge; and, 2) the
ordinance is not specific how the 25 -ft. "mean" would be measured
or determined.
Mr. Gallagher introduced Abe Krietman, a hydrologist in the
firm of Geraghty & Miller, Inc., of Palm Beach Gardens, who
presented at great length and in very technical terminology his
opinions regarding hydrostatic pressure, transviscosity,
torturousity, chlorides, and the causes of salt water intrusion
into deep and shallow wells.
Commissioner Bird always understood and has been told that
the weight of the sand on the sand ridge keeps the salt water
MAR 2 2 1988
33
BOOK 71 F'GE 332
intrusion out, and if that is not true, then he would like to
know about it.
Chairman Scurlock felt the St. Johns River Water Management
District is more concerned with the quantity of water whereas the
Dept. of Environmental Resources is more concerned with the
quality of water, but Director Keating noted that the Water
District seems to be changing its position and is becoming more
concerned with the quality of water. He advised that staff would
have to research their files for written statements on positions
taken by these agencies.
Director Keating suggested that Dr. James Frazee of the
Water District and other experts in the field be invited to give
their input.
Chairman Scurlock felt it would be a good idea to table this
until we have heard opinions from Dr. Frazee and other experts,
and he preferred to hold it as a special meeting to allow the
Board to give it the proper amount of time.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously tabled
the continuation of this Public Hearing to a time
certain Special Meeting to be scheduled at an
appropriate time.
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN IRC AND HRS
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/14/88:
34
MAR 2219
BOOK , I 1 FA GE 333
TO: Doug Scurlock, Chairman DATE: 3/14/88 FILE:
Indian River Board of County
Commissioners
THRU: Charles Balczun, County
Administrator
SUBJECT: Attached Contractual
Amendment
FROM: Mics'l J. Galanis, M. P. H.REFERENCE:
Act g Director, Indian
River County Public Health Unit
As required in the contract between the Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services and Indian River County, for health services,
we submit the attached contract amendment.
The amendment is necessary to reflect the fact that the Indian River
County Public Health Unit has just been "awarded" a decrease of approx-
imately three thousand ($3000) dollars in WIC funds.
We would appreciate this amendment being placed on the agenda of the
Board of County Commissioners at your earliest convenience.
If there are any further questions or we can be of further assistance,
please contact me.
Please note that there are six copies of the amendment.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved
Amendment II to the contract between Indian River
County and the Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative
Services.
AMENDMENT II IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
SOUTH COUNTY REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT IMPROVEMENTS
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 2/29/88:
MAR 2 2 1988
35
BOOK
. 1 PACE 334
TO: CHARLES P. BALCZUN DATE: FEBRUARY 29, 1988
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
FROM: WILLIAM F. McCAIN, PROJECTS ENGINEER
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: SOUTH COUNTY REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT IMPROVEMENTS
BACKGROUND
The Department of Utility Services has retained DSS Engineers under.
contract, Agreement for Professional Services for Continuing Services
for the Reverse Osmosis Plant, dated March 20, 1985, for work relating
to the Reverse Osmosis Plant Improvements Program. Currently, there
are three contracts to be awarded within the next few months, as
follows:
CONTRACT #1 - GENERAL CONSTRUCTION REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT IMPROVEMENTS
IRC PROJECT NO. UW -88 -01 -WC
CONTRACT #2 - WELL DRILLING - REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT IMPROVEMENTS
IRC PROJECT NO. UW -88 -02 -WC
CONTRACT #3 - DEGASIFIER - REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT IMPROVEMENTS
IRC PROJECT NO. UW -88 -03 -WC
Other services will be required of DSS Engineers, Inc.; i.e., bid
evaluation, and preparation and submittal to DER the application for a
Construction Permit. Additional services will also be required during
the construction period of these projects such as construction manage-
ment and coordination, as -built drawings, and the operation and
maintenance manuals for the improvements.
ANALYSIS
The work orders being recommended are as follows:
WORK ORDER NO. DESCRIPTION
06a Services during Bidding period at a cost of $8,000.00.
18 File Application for DER general construction Permit
at a cost of $2,500.00.
07a This work order will cover:
1) The as -built drawings at a cost of $3,424.00.
2) Operations and Maintenance Manuals at a cost of
$3,252.00.
3) Construction management and coordination over and
above the monies approved by W.O. #07 in the amount
of $14,960.00. These are:
A. $5,590.00 Initial Project Kick-off
B. $22,280.00 for resident site inspector and
associated backup.
The new total for #07a is as follows:
$ 3,424.00 - as -built drawings
3,252.00 - 0 & M Manuals
27,870.00 - Revised Inspection Total for
projects listed
(14,960.00)- W.O. #07, amount previously approved
for inspection services
MAR 2 2 1988
$19,586.00 - TOTAL WORK ORDER #07a
36
BOOK 71. Pa GE 335
RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners approve and authorize the attached Work
Authorization to DSS Engineers, Inc. to perform the aforementioned
work. The cost of each item is as follows:
1) W.O. #06a - $8,000.00
2) W.O. #18 - $2,500.00
3) W.O. #07a -$19,586.00.
WFM:h
Attachments
Chairman Scurlock realized that most of this is to rectify
some of the problems we had in the original design of that plant,
but noted that this does not address the storage capacity
problem.
Utilities Director Terry Pinto explained that part of the
scope of work was to look at elevating the elevated tank, which
was built almost 25 feet lower than it probably should have been
in the original design by Sverdrup & Parcel. He felt we can live
without doing that for almost 2 years because some time ago we
put in an altitude valve and found a way to do the necessary
circulation. In addition, we are going to modify a clear well
that is in the center of the 2.5 gpd storage tank. That is a
part of the general contracting work, and it will allow us to
pick up another410o to 15% storage in the original tank. One
other thing that may take place at some future time is the
upgrading of the high service pumps, because the present size of
these pumps does not allow them to fill, the tanks completely.
MAR 2 2 1988
37
BOOK • 71 EAGE3 6
Commissioner Eggert asked the amount of the projected
construction cost, and Projects Engineer Bill McCain estimated it
at $2.1 million for the general construction contract; somewhere
in the ballpark of $120,000 for the degasifier portion of it, and
somewhere in the neighborhood of $60,000-$70,000 for the extra
well that will be added. He felt we were looking at a rough
total of $2.6 million.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
Work Authorizations #06a, #18, and #07a with DSS
Engineers, Inc. as set out in the above memo, as
recommended by staff.
38
MAR 2 2 1988
BOOK 71 FACE 337
Date: February 9, 1988
Work Authorization:
Job Number:
1. Contract Reference
2. Present Title:
3. Scope of Services:
4. Budget Estimate:
Approved by:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
WORK AUTHORIZATION
06A (County)
130.06 (DSS)
Agreement for Professional Services for Continuing
Services, for the South County Reverse Osmosis
Plant dated March 20, 1985
South County RO Plant Improvements
Provide additional services during Bidding Period,
completion of specifications and bid documents in
accordance with estimate 2/9/88 attached
Date: 1��`a/F ge
MAR 2 2 1988
$8,000
Submitted by:
DSS ENGINEERS, INC.
(.2-1a - 8e
39
BOOK 71 FnE •33S
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
WORK AUTHORIZATION
Date: March 2, 1988
Work Authorization: 07A (County)
Job Number: 130.07 (DSS)
1. Contract Reference:
•
Agreement for Professional Services for Continuing
Services for The South County Reverse Osmosis
Plant Dated March 20, 1985.
Present Title: South County RO Plant Improvements
3. Scope of Services: Services during Construction
as per attachment
4. Budget Estimate: $ 19,586
Approved by: Submitted by:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY DSS ENGINEERS, INC.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Date:
40
SAAR 2 2 1988
B
•
Date:
C.D. Homburg
3 - -Fe
APPROVED FO CITILVY MATTERS
BY
T _RR CE PINTO
• DIRECTOR
DIV. OF UTILITY SERVICES.
ROOK 7
PA E339
Date: February 9, 1988
Work Authorization:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
WORK AUTHORIZATION
18 (County)
Job Number: 130.18 (DSS)
1. Contract Reference: Agreement for Professional Services for Continuing
Services for the South County Reverse Osmosis
Plant dated March 20, 1985
2. Present Title: South County RO Plant Improvements
3. Scone of Services: Prepare and submit Application for DER
Construction Permit -- Estimate 2/9/88 attached
4. Budget,Estimate: $2,500
Approved by:
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMIISSIONERS
/9cf-sc
Approved
Date
Admin.
• Legal
(-.1_''Y"k)
7)_,1
Budget
(,]...4i)
3.14
Dep't.
:MAR 2 2 1988
Submitted by:
DSS ENGINEERS, INC.
By:
Date: .? ` is —
41
APPROVED FOR U WI MATTERS
N
TER RA.:C i- �i N T 0
Oi> ,E. TOR
OtV. OF UTILITY SERVICES
BOOK 71 FA E 34O
PURCHASE OF VIDEO AND CAMERA EQUIPMENT - UTILITIES DEPT.
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/3/88:
TO:
THRU: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTIL ERVICES
FROM:
CHARLES P. BALCZUN
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
JOHN FREDERICK LANG
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SEICES
SUBJECT: VIDEO AND CAMERA EQUIPMENT
DATE: MARCH 3, 1988
BACKGROUND
The Department of Utility Services is embarking on several large
wastewater treatment and sewer projects. There will be controversial
restoration work in the Rockridge Wastewater System project as there
has already been in the Gifford Wastewater System project.
To prevent discrepancies and controversy, the Department proposes to
purchase a VHS Camcorder, a VHS VCR, a 19" Color TV, an automatic 35mm
single lens reflex camera with built-in flash, a 35-70mm lenses, a
70-210mm lenses, and protective equipment to include protective lenses,
filters, and hard travel cases.
The Department currently possesses a library of sanitary sewer VHS
Millings. We do not, however, have the means to view them. The
Department is also responsible for franchising cable television and
viewing recordings of alleged poor service. The cost of obtaining the
equipment necessary to pictorially document controversial situations
would be less than $2,500.00.
RECOMMENDATION
The Department recommends purchasing these items of video• and camera
equipment to prevent the possibility of any disagreement about
conditions existing at easements or during inspections. We would like
the funding for this equipment to be charged to the following projects:
GIFFORD SEWER SYSTEM PROJECT
ROCKRIDGE SEWER SYSTEM PROJECT
NORTH COUNTY WASTEWATER SYSTEM PROJECT
DIVISION OF FRANCHISE ADMINISTRATION
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by.
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized
the purchase of video and camera equipment as
recommended by staff in the. above memo.
42
MAR 2 2 1988
BOOK 71 PACE 341.
INSURANCE AUDIT REPORT - SIVER INSURANCE MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/14/88:
TO: Charles P. Balczun DATE: March 14, 1988 FILE:
County Administrator
Perry J. Mattes
FROM: Asst. County Administrator REFERENCES:
di/
SUBJECT: INSURANCE AUDIT REPORT -
SIVER
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS;
In 1987 Siver Insurance Management Consultants was engaged to review Indian
River County's insurance program. The referenced report is the result of that
engagement to date.
The report is noted as "A Limited Audit" which requires a clarifying comment.
Mr. Lee Custer pointed out in a conversation with this author, that the goal of
an insurance audit is to point out in detail what is wrong with an insurance
program. It is the opinion of both the consultant and this author that the
needs of Indian River County would be far better served if the balance of the
time under the contract were spent correcting what is wrong rather than
describing it in detail...
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING;
Staff recommends the referenced report be accepted by the Board of County
Commissioners and further that the consultant be authorized to proceed with the
implementation of the recommendations of the report in lieu of a detailed audit.
Funding will be accomplished from the same source, account and budget authority
now existing.
Chairman Scurlock asked about the Risk Manager that we were
going to hire, and Administrator Balczun explained that we
advertised on a number of occasions and we have interviewed 3 or
4 candidates with less than satisfactory results. However, we
have advertised again, and 10-12 resumes are being reviewed at
this time.
Chairman Scurlock asked why OMB Director Joe Baird should be
the one to respond to the 70 discussion points, because it seemed
to him that the new Risk Manager would be the one to do that.
Administrator Balczun agreed, but felt we all recognize that
Mr. Baird is an enormously valuable resource concerning our risk
43
MAR 2 2 1988
BOOK 71 PATE 342
management program historically as he has been in charge of it
for quite some time, and obviously, Siver recognizes that he
knows more about it than anyone else.
Commissioner Eggert asked what department the Risk Manager
would be under, and Administrator Balczun advised that the Risk
Manager would be under the Assistant County Administrator.
Commissioner Eggert felt that Mr. Mattes should understand
all of the background of our insurance matters by now, but
Administrator Balczun, while certain that Mr. Mattes understands
the insurance nature, maintained that Mr. Baird has the most
knowledge of our program and how we got to where we are,
especially in the aggregate insurance.
Chairman Scurlock wondered if we could extend the existing
contract with Siver if we are happy with them, because it seems
inappropriate for a consultant to prepare a request for proposal
and then participate in submitting a resume, so to speak, to do
the work. He found that a little odd.
Administrator Balczun explained that what we are suggesting
to the Board is that we have a minor change of direction, which
they believe is within the original scope of the RFP (request for
proposal). All staff is asking the Board is for authorization to
redirect the consultant to prepare requests for proposals for
,insurance instead of doing more audit and analysis work.
Chairman Scurlock did not feel that was Siver's request. He
felt their recommendation is that they be authorized to prepare a
RFP for a fee; and then in addition to that, that they be allowed
to participate in applying, in essence, for the job. It seemed
to him that the recommendation should be that we are either happy
or unhappy with Siver, and if we are happy, and he assumed we
are, that we go ahead and extend the contract.
MAR 2 2 1988
44
BOOK 71 DLE 343
Commissioner Eggert wondered why they feel they should not
continue with the audit, and Administrator Balczun felt that they
really have gone far enough. To go further in the audit would •
give us things like why in such and such a year did someone
decide that there should be limited coverage, etc. He felt it is
more important to strengthen our risk management program than to
develop additional historical data.
Assistant County Administrator Perry Mattes felt there is
some confusion regarding Siver's first recommendation: "1)
Prepare written specifications (an RFP) to include necessary
underwriting data and a description of the model program(s)
desired by Indian River County." Mr. Mattes felt that what
Sivers is suggesting is to prepare the specs to take the
insurance renewal program to bid, and staff concurs that needs to
be done. We need to bid our insurance policies, which come up
for renewal October 1st.
Commissioner Eggert understood this would open it up to the
many insurance agencies that have been wanting to get into the
County, and Mr. Mattes confirmed that it would.
Administrator Balczun explained that Siver could have done
that under the original RFP we sent out for the purpose of having
a consultant. However, at our meeting in August or early
September of last year, the Board restricted their activities to
reporting and auditing until otherwise authorized. That language
is why we are here today.
Commissioner Bird asked how it would affect our contract
with Siver if we redirect them today, and Administrator Balczun
explained that they would continue under the payment schedule of
our existing contract. Their original RFP anticipated that they
would be doing all the work for between $20,000-$30,000, and they
agreed that they would advise us when they were around the
$20,000 figure. Right now, they are at approximately $20,200,
which is some $9700 less than the top of the range originally
proposed.
AR 2 2 1988
45 BOOK 71 PAGE 344
Commissioner Bird felt that maybe we do need some outside
expertise since all of these policies are coming up for renewal
in October and since we don't have a Risk Manager on board as
yet.
Chairman Scurlock asked what fee is anticipated for Siver to
handle this, and Administrator Balczun stated that we do not have
any ballpark numbers at this time, but felt that what we will
have to do, assuming the Board authorizes them to proceed, is to
list alt of our insurances and have Siver estimate upfront how he
is going to allocate his cost against them.
Commissioner Bird suggested that they come back with an
update as to what we owe him up to this point and what the
anticipated additional cost would be for us to redirect them.
Chairman Scurlock felt that when we see some of the
additional activities they plan on providing, perhaps we would
not need a Risk Manager.
Administrator Batczun stated that he did not agree with. all
the things they have suggested, and stressed that he would never
recommend that the Board approve some of the things they have
suggested as a matter of policy. His key interest in this issue
is that Siver is now in a position to provide us with a very
sound jumping off point from which to start a very good risk
management program.
Chairman Scurlock envisioned us having our own risk
management department which would include safety instruction,
toss control, etc., and believed that could reduce our experience
ratio significantly.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously directed
Siver (or staff) to go ahead and prepare a final scope
of services with a dollar amount and bring it back to
the Board for approval.
46
UR221988
BOOK 71 F$GE 345
AUTHORIZATION TO SEEK BIDS FOR DEMOLITION OF OLD JAIL
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/16/88:
TO: Charles P. Balczun DATE: March 16, 1988
County Administrator
FILE:
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO SEEK BIDS
FOR DEMOLITION OF OLD JAIL..
Perry J. Mattes /)`'
FROM: Asst. County Administrator REFERENCES:
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
At their regular meeting on March 15, 1988, the Board of County Commissioners
selected the old jail property as the site for the new library. In order to
proceed in a timely manner, staff needs to proceed with planning for the
demolition of the old jail.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff respectfully requests the Board of County Commissioners authorize the
removal of existing gas tanks by. the Public Works Department and letting of bids
for demolition of the old jail.
Administrator Balczun stated that the County has to begin
doing some things on the old jail site, such as moving the radio
tower, which involves the FCC, etc. That alone could amount to
$10,000, and technically, we don't have an approved budgetary
line item nor appropriated funds. He did not want to start to
incur costs without the Board's approval, after which Director
Baird would come back with an appropriate line item with which to
transfer monies.
Commissioner Eggert did not want to proceed to level the old
jail before having the rezoning in place for the new library, but
Chairman Scurlock felt there are things that have to be done even
if the library wasn't an issue, such as securing that facility
and incurring landfill charges.
Commissioner Bird wondered if there may be a use for some of
the old buildings, but Administrator Balczun emphasized that the
buildings were in too bad of shape and were actually hazardous.
47 BOOK 71 ME 346
MAR 2 2 1988
Commissioner Eggert recalled that when the drug rehab group
tried to see if they could renovate anything in that area, they
found that the cost was prohibitive.
OMB Director Joe Baird pointed out that under generally
accepted accounting principals, we are allowed to capitalize
demolition costs as a cost of putting a new asset in place. He
would have to check his work papers, but he believed we budgeted
$10,000 in Building & Grounds this year for demolition purposes
to try and clear up the area after the Sheriff vacated the
premises.
Commissioner Eggert stated that she had estimated the cost
of the demolition at $300,000, and Chairman Scurlock suggested
that the Board authorize up to $25,000 initially, and then do all
the bookkeeping and paper work with respect to what accounts it
will be charged to.
Director Baird asked if the Board wanted those costs charged
to the construction fund for the new Jail or out of the general
fund.
Chairman Scurlock felt the library was going to acquire the
land basically for whatever the demolition costs were, which we
believed would be around $300,000, and suggested that the actual
costs for demolition should not exceed $300,000.
Commissioner Wheeler felt that we would be throwing in
another $100,000 to the library since we have a liability value
of $400,000 on that site. He felt even though the County owns
that property, we should sell it for that value, and then if we
go over that figure or under that figure in demolition costs, the
County would absorb it out of the $400,000.
Director Baird explained that the property waspurchased
with general fund money back in 1920 by the Sheriff.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by.
Commissioner Bowman, that the Board authorize
demolition costs not to exceed $350,000.
48 BOOK 71 PAGE 347
MAR 2 2 1988
Under discussion, Commissioner Bird stated that because the
demolition is related to preparing the site for the new library,
he would not vote for the Motion because he is opposed to the old
jail site for the new library.
Administrator Balczun asked if the makers of the Motion
would consider including authorization to allow the transfer of
anything salvagable on that site, such as air conditioners,
generators, etc., to any of the County departments that might
have a need.
Commissioner Wheeler wanted to see the rubble from the jail
site and the fill coming from the hole for the new Library used
to build the 13 -ft. berm at the firing range.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION, with the
amendment for authorization for staff to salvage.
The Motion carried by a vote of 4-1, Commissioner Bird
dissenting.
Commissioner Bowman hoped the Public Works Department would
use due caution in moving the gas tanks, and Administrator
Balczun confirmed that would be done only under expert
supervision.
TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE FOR TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/16/88:
MAR 2 2 1988
49
BOOK I 1 P CE 348
TO : CHARLES P. BALCZUN
. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
SUBJECT : TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE FOR TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
DATE MARCH 16, 1988
Traffic Engineering Division employee George McAree experienced
and on-the-job injury on June 26, 1987. He attempted to return
to work immediately after the injury, but was able to do so only
for a short period. July 10, 1987.was his last day of work. He
suffered a herniated disc, and has had surgery to correct the
problem. Mr. McAree is currently being paid under the provisions
of our Worker's Compensation policy. He is not expected to be
able to return to work until June.
Division Head Mike Orr has requested that we hire a temporary
employee to alleviate the loss of Mr. McAree. The position would
a Maintenance Worker at an hourly rate of $4.77. The temporary
employee would be limited to a period of 3 months, 29 days, and
receive no County benefits other than the statutorily mandated
social security and worker's compensation coverage.
It is requested that this matter be brought before the Board to
secure their approval to create one temporary Maintenance Worker
position as stipulated above.
m. A./Blankenship, �Jr�. ,f AEP
Director of Personnel
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
a temporary Maintenance Worker position for Traffic
Engineering, as recommended by staff.
WATER THEFT - ILLEGAL CONNECTION TO COUNTY WATER
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/22/88:
TO:
CHARLES P. BALCZUN DATE: MARCH 22, 1988
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
THRU: TERRANCE G. PIN
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY
FROM: JOHN F. LANG
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
SUBJECT: WATER THEFT
ICES
BACKGROUND
Meter boxes for water services on individual lots were pin -locked in
Kingswood Estates in 1987. The Department of Utility Services
responded to a request to install a water meter at 1460 56th Square
MAR 2 2 088
50
BOOK 71 PAGE 349
oh -1-13-88. The request was phoned in, in the week prior co the
installation. The original application was filed 6-24-87 with a
tentative service date of 8-1-87.
The Department's employee, Norman Credit, •noticed an illegal tap on
the water service as well as the broken pin -lock beside the
disturbed meter box. The Sheriff's Department was notified and a
complaint was registered prior to the Deputy Sheriff's arrival.
Alan Schommer, the contractor, admitted that he had ordered Bobby's
Plumbing to break into the meter box and illegally tap into the
water service. He offered to pay "for the couple of thousand
gallons" of water that he feels the site used. He stated this
action occurred on January 11, 1988.
ANALYSIS
The water hookup was installed within a reasonable amount of time
from when Mr. Schommer requested service. If Mr. Schommer needed
water sooner the meter could have been installed in June of 1987.
There simply was not a reason to break into the meter box. The
costs incurred by the Department are five hundred and fifty dollars
($550.00).
RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Utility Services has spoken to the State
Attorney's office and they are ready to pursue prosecution in this
instance of vandalism and theft. The Department requests the
direction from the Board of County Commissioners whether to pursue
the prosecution of Mr. Schommer or allow restitution covering the
described damages.
John Lang, Environmental Specialist; stated that staff is
asking the Board whether to pursue the prosecution of Mr.
Schommer or allow restitution covering the described damages.
Apparently Mr. Schommer called in for the water service and
talked with one of the ladies in the Billing Office, but the
reason heave for the illegal connection is that he needed the
9
service.
Commissioner Bird asked what costs were included in the $550
figure, and Mr. Lang explained that cost includes only the
expense of sending out an investigator, work orders, secretarial
time, repairs of the damage that was done to the meter, etc. We
don't know how much water was used. The State Attorney's Office
has said that they would be wilting to file action.
Commissioner Bowman asked if this is a misdemeanor or a
felony, and Attorney Vitunac explained that would depend on the
value of the water.
51
ih._ MAR 2 2 1988
BOOK 71 Dr.,E350
Utilities Director Terry Pinto advised that there is a
specific State statute for tampering; it is not for the stealing
of the water. It is a very widely -used statute, which was
created for tampering with electric, water, wastewater, gas, and
cable TV.
Commissioner Wheeler asked if the person in question was
notified of this meeting today, and Director Pinto advised that
Mr. Schommer had not been notified. He explained that before
this came about, they had several meetings with the Sheriff's
Department and the State Attorney's Office about this type of
problem happening. The State Attorney's recommended several
steps to take if such a case came up, the first of which is to
notify the Sheriff's Department. That was done, and they went
out and did all the recording, and the State Attorney's Office
has said that they will prosecute if the County wanted them to go
ahead with that. We were proceeding with that, but yesterday the
person in question came in and said he was willing to make
restitution for whatever damage was done; and wanted the
Utilities Dept. to issue an order not to prosecute. Director
Pinto stated that he did not want the authority to make that type
of decision, and felt that the Board should make a policy
decision today on how to handle all such cases.
Commissioner Wheeler did not feel that this matter should be
before the Board today since a law. has been violated, and Commis-
sioner Bird agreed, because if someone broke into this building
and stole a typewriter and then wanted to make restitution, he
did not feel we would accept that. If a crime has been
committed, iit should be settled just like any other violation of
the law. He asked if we have the ability to ask that the State
Attorney's office go ahead and prosecute and at the same time
recover the County's loss.
Attorney Vitunac advised that when the matter is taken into
court by the State Attorney's Office, the County Judge would have
the power to recover our $550.
52
MAR 221988
BOOK 71 FGE 351
Director Pinto understood then that the Board's direction to
staff is to go through the legal process when a crime is
committed, and the Board indicated that their policy direction is
that when a crime has been committed, staff is to have the State
Attorney's Office file action against the property owner.
ADDED ITEM -- NEGOTIATIONS WITH LOW BIDDERS ON THE ROCKRIDGE
SEWER PROJECT
Utilities Director Terry Pinto explained that is is not
specifically for negotiating the low bid; it is to discuss with
the lower bidder the potential of issuing a change order which
would reduce the amount of this low bid. There are certain types
of negotiations that the EPA does not like to see, but they have
said that an issuance of a change order is well within their
ability to approve; they would have to give final approval
because it is a federally funded program. We have met with some
of the suppliers of material and with the engineers, and we think
we can reduce the costs of this project down to the area of the
original estimate. Director Pinto recommended that we go ahead
and do that.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized
staff to discuss with the lower bidder on the Rockridge
Sewer Project the possibility of a change order and
then come back to the Board with a recommendation
simultaneously with the award of bid and the change
order if we get an agreement.
Director Pinto reported that 275 people out of 413 have
signed the authorization form, and explained why the
authorization forms are so important. This is a federally funded
project and our estimates are that we would be looking at $4300
53
W M22 1988
•80015 • 71 PAGE 352
1
of cost per unit, which will include the County wastewater impact
fee. This actual system will not only have lines in the street,
there actually will be a little pumping system, which is a
conversion of their septic tank, that pumps into the main lines.
The EPA will not grant funds if we do not have the ability and
the responsibility of going in and maintaining that facility. It
cannot be one that is maintained by the homeowner; the people
must sign an authorization form in order to allow us to enter
their property. If the people do not sign a form, it doesn't
mean that the project will not get built. The way it looks now
is that we would bypass that property, and then, after the
project is completed, notify them that wastewater facilities are
available and that it will become their total responsibility to
build the facility on their property, make the connection and pay
100% of the cost. We still would assess them the portion of the
cost of thelines that go past their property. When you look at
the whole project, the per unit cost comes to almost $9,000 per
unit, of which 55% at this point is being picked up by the
federal government.
Director Pinto noted that he and Chairman Scurlock are going
to be talking with the EPA shortly, because there is a
possibility that we may be granted another 20%, which would
reduce the $4300 cost per unit. He stressed that is only a
possibility at this time.
NORTH COUNTY LIBRARY AMENDED SURVEY (Tabled from Meeting of
3/15/88)
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/15/88:
MAR 2 2 1988
54
BOOK 71 PAGE 353
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert
Chairman, Public Library Advisory Board
DATE: March 15, 1988
SUBJECT: North County Library
I recommend that the County Commission approve the amended
survey and the new purchase contract for the North County
Community Library. '
Attorney Vitunac advised that this item should be retabled,
but Chairman Scurlock noted that we have a request for conceptual
approval.
Commissioner Eggert showed the drawings of the original site
and drawings of the site as redefined, which includes a service
road from Roseland Road into Laconia. They were asked to square
off what is essentially the west side so that we would get a good
viewing side and a good building area. This takes us up to
136,000 square feet, which takes us from $78,000 to $81,600.
Commissioner Eggert felt the extra cost is well worth it. She
pointed out that the drawing shows that there are some pipes that
have to be moved, and this way we will be able to keep the
easements for those pipes out in the parking lot.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously gave
conceptual approval.
DISCUSSION RE ORDINANCE ON LATE NIGHT RETAIL STORES
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/8/88-:'
55
MAR 22 198E
Booz 71 FACE 354
nce
� g2NISZ., he Board of County Commissioners of0firdian River
County, Florida
THROUGH: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
FROM: Sharon Phillips Brennan, Assistant County Attorney SF
DATE: March 8, 1988
SUBJECT: Late Night Retail Stores Ordinance
This office was requested to notify the Board of any
action taken by the City of Vero Beach concerning the
referenced ordinance.
On March 1, 1988, the City adopted the attached
ordinance which, among other things, requires Late• Night
Retail Stores to either:
1. have a minimum of two (2) employees on the premises
from 11:00 p.m. until closing or 7:00 a.m.,
whichever occurs first; or
2. construct a self-contained pay booth meeting
standards contained in the ordinance for protection
of the cashier(s); or
3. install an audio visual monitoring system which
allows security personnel live access to the
operation 24 hours a day.
If the Board requires further information about this
type of ordinance, I will be happy to provide it.
Commissioner Eggert asked if anyone is interested in taking
this ordinance or a similar ordinance to Public Hearing.
Chairman Scurlock really had a problem with interfering with
private business, and Commissioner Bird felt that he would like
to observe how the various cities' ordinances work before we jump
into one.
Chairman Scurlock felt it is a labor/management problem, but
Commissioner Bowman pointed out that labor is not organized and
it is either take the risk or don't take the job.
Commissioner Wheeler felt that this is a bandaid effect and
in the long haul, it would be putting more people at risk, and he
would not be in support of it.
WAR 2 2 1988.
5 6 BOOK l 1 F''E 355
Chairman Scurlock believed the majority of the Board wants
to see how other cities' ordinances are doing.
MAIN LIBRARY BUILDING PROGRAM
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 3/15/88:
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert,
Chairman, Public Library Advisory Board
DATE: March 15, 1988
SUBJECT: Main Library Building Program
The Public Library Advisory Board recommends that you
approve the Main Library Building Program for a 35,000
square -foot one-story library building and requests that a RFP be
sent out for an architect.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, that the Board approve the
Main Library Building Program for a 35,000 sq. ft.
one-story library building and authorized that an RFP
be sent out for an architect to build it.
Under discussion, Commissioner Bird asked if this would be
for a facility that could be built on any site, and Commissioner
Eggert stated that the only site this could not go on is
someplace under 3.08 acres, and Chairman Scurlock noted that the
only place this could not go is on the Grace Lutheran site or the
Health Building site.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion
carried by a vote of 4-1, Commissioner Bird dissenting.
57 BOOK (1 FAGE 356
MAR 22, 19
VACANCY ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL
Commissioner Bird announced that we have received a copy of
resignation from Helen Wright from the Economic Opportunity
Council, creating an opening on the board of directors of this
council. Apparently,this would be his reappointment, and he
asked the Board and the media to take note and if anyone has any
suggestions for this appointment, he would appreciate them
letting him know.
Commissioner Wheeler announced that he has an opening to
fill on that council also.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 11:40 o'clock A.M.
ATTEST:
MAR 2 2 1988
Clerk Chairman
58 Book 7
ig,E357