HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/21/1989Tuesday, March 21, 1989
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,
Tuesday, March 21, 1989, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Gary
C. Wheeler, Chairman; Carolyn K. Eggert, Vice Chairman; Richard
N. Bird; Margaret C. Bowman; and Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Also
present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P.
Vitunac, Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; Joseph
Baird, OMB Director; and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk.
Chairman Wheeler called the meeting to order, and Adminis-
trator Chandler led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Chairman Wheeler asked that the following items be added to
the agenda:
1.) Discussion on Main Library as Item 8A.
2.) Schedule Joint City/County Meeting on Utilities as Item 8B.
3.) Discussion on RFP for Solid Waste Recycling Plan (CDM) as
Item 9G(4).
Commissioner Bowman wished to add under her matters a
discussion on the possibility of creating a manatee sanctuary by
county ordinance.
MR 2 11989
11
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously added the
above items to the agenda.
BOOK .76 ;-n.393
PP -
MAR 2 1 1989
6 ® A � 7
J�St
BOOK '76
P„CE •J
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Scurlock asked that Item E be removed from the
Consent Agenda for discussion, and Commissioner Bowman asked that
Item H be removed also.
A. Minutes of Regular Meeting of 2/28/89
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc-
tions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 28, 1989.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved the
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 28, 1989,
as written.
B. & C. Reports
The following reports were received and placed on file in
the Office of Clerk to the Board:
Traffic Violation Bureau, Special Trust Fund -
Month of February, 1989 - $43,782.85.
Inspection Report, County & Municipal Detention
Facilities, Annual Routine Inspection 2/1/89
D. Budget Amendment #060 - Special Law Enforcement Trust Fund
The Board reviewed memo from OMB Director Baird:
2
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: March 13, 1989
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT 060 -
SPECIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
TRUST FUND
CONSENT AGENDA
FROM: Joseph A. BairdR,
OMB Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
In the meeting of March 7, 1989,_ the Board of County Commissioners
approved the Sheriff's request to purchase capital from the Sheriff's
Confiscated Property fund. At the meeting there was some confusion
as to the prices and items to be purchased. Below is a summary to
help clarify the information.
Description Ouantity Unit Cost Total Cost
tVHF High Band Receiver 1 $3,425.00 $ 3,425.00
Portable Radios 6 $ 926.00 $ 5,556.00
Power Shredder 1 $ 830.45 $ 830.45
i_ Video Camera - Infra Red 1 $3,956.00 $ 3,956.00
'Computer 1 $5,870.00 $ 5,870.00
,,'Electronic Equipment 2 S 600.00 $ 1.200.00
TOTAL $20,837.45
•
'The attached budget amendment appropriates funding from "Confiscated
Property".
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve the
attached budget amendment.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
Budget Amendment #060 approving purchases from the
Confiscated Property fund as requested by the Sheriff
at the Regular Meeting of March 7, 1989.
3
MAR 2 1 1989
L.
BOOK
7
TACE 395
Pr-
MAR21
989
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
BOOK 76 FACE 396
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
NUMBER:
060
DATE: March 13. 1989
Entry
Number
Funds/Department/Account Name
Account Number
Increase
Decrease
1.
EXPENSE
SPECIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
Sheriff/Office Furn. & EauiD.
112-600-521-066.41
$20.838.00
S 0
SPECIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
Reserve for Contingencies
112-600-521-099.91
$ 0
$20.838.00
E. Budget Amendment #061 - Golf Course
The Board reviewed memo from OMB Director Baird:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: March 15, 1989
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT 061 -
GOLF COURSE
CONSENT AGENDA
(4
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The golf course staff has been considering several capital
improvements to enhance safety, .aesthetic appearance and possibly
increase the volume of play at Sandridge Golf Course. These capital
items are listed below, in order by priority:
Unit '
Oty• Cost Total
1. Rain Shelters 2 $18,000 $36,000
2.. . Pump house - 1 - $ 5,000 $ 5,000
3. Landscaping Front Entrance 1 $ 8,400 $ 8.400
$49,400
;•:Rain shelters are considered by staff to be a major priority because
they will increase sanitary and safety conditions for the golfers.
In addition, these structures should expedite movement around the
course by eliminating a return trip to the Clubhouse to use its
facilities. By minimizing delays in this manner more golfers can be
scheduled for play on any one day.
The next priority, a pump house, would help protect golf course
irrigation pumps from lightening strikes, and other forms of
inclement weather. We currently have an investment of over $25,000
in these pumps and feel that a pump house will extend their useful
life.
The third item, landscaping the front entrance, would improve the
aesthetics of the golf course, an important consideration in
attracting new business.
4
ANALYSIS
The annual debt service for the 1988/89 fiscal year is $201,360.
Staff has set aside $285,260 to pay for this debt service. The extra
funds represent an attempt to escrow an additional year's debt
service so that pledged revenue from the Jai -Alai Fronton (amounting
to $446,500) need- not be moved from the General Fund to the Golf
Course Fund.
At this time, golf course revenues are exceeding projections by over
$40,000. Staff feels that summer revenue will meet projection.
RECO14MENDATION
Staff would like the permission of the Board of County Commissioners
to apply any surplus golf course revenue to the purchase of the three
improvements listed in the Description.. Should there not be enough
revenue to cover the full costs of these improvements, staff would
also like permission to use up to $50,000 of the excess funds
escrowed in the debt service account to make up the difference.
Commissioner Scurlock did not have a problem with the budget
request, but just wanted to point out that we have made every
effort to make the golf course self-supporting. The actual
revenue that Is pledged to this issue is really the pari-mutuel
monies, and we have structured it all. along so that we have some
surplus. He did feel the improvements listed are needed, but
urged that we spend money out of the surplus slowly and avoid
having to go to the pari-mutuel money.
Golf Director Bob Komarinetz explained that the idea is that
they wilt proceed in order. On June 1st, they will look at the
numbers again. If they are still favorable, they will go ahead
as planned, but if there is a sharp decline, they will hold off.
Commissioner Bird agreed with the need to be cautious, but
stressed that the rain shelter/comfort stations are especially
needed and have been needed since the day the golf course opened
both as a safety and sanitary factor. He advised that actually
the golf course is running about $100,000 in revenue ahead of
last year, which is about $40,000 above what Director Komarinetz
projected, and he would hate to see us wait until June 1st to
start the process to build the rain shelters since we have a
really serious lightning problem on the course. He noted that we
already have detailed plans for these improvements.
5
WAR 21 1989
BOOK .76 FAGE39 397
MAR 21.6 9.'39
BOOK 76 Fa E.,98
Commissioner Scurlock commented that if we are actually
$100,000 ahead, this is still the peak season, and he believed
they, therefore, should have a pool of about $50,000 available
right now; so, he would suggest they immediately spend that
$50,000 on the most needed improvements.
The Administrator confirmed the improvements are to be done
in the order listed, with the rain shelters being first priority.
Commissioner Eggert asked if more rain shelters were needed
than shelters with bathrooms, and Commissioner Bird explained
they need one shelter complete with comfort facilities on both
nines.
OMB Director Baird reviewed the figures and reminded the
Board that the initial plan had been to move over $446,500 out of
the General Fund, but we have not had to do that because the
course has done so well.
Commissioner Scurlock believed Commissioner Bird has done an
absolutely outstanding job working with the committee in creating
and managing this course along with Director Komarinetz, and
although he personally was a doubter in the beginning, he has
already discussed with them the possibility of adding another
nine holes.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized
staff to apply any surplus golf course revenue to
purchase of the three improvements listed and also
gave permission to use up to $50,000 of the excess
funds escrowed in the debt service account, if
necessary, based on making these improvements
cautiously and in the order discussed above.
(NOTE: Budget Amendment #061, was not needed because we are using
cash which is classified as an asset and line transfers are done
only for revenue and expense items.)
6
F. Final Plat Approval - Garden Homes at Grove isle Unit Two
The Board reviewed memo from Staff Planner Wiegers:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
R. =a rt M. Kea in., AI:+,
Community Develofinen 'Director
THROUGH: Stan Boling ,AICP
Chief, Current Developmpnt
FROM: Robert E. Wiegers
Staff Planner, Cu rent Development
DATE:
SUBJECT: FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE GARDEN HOMES AT GROVE ISLE
UNIT TWO SUBDIVISION
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of March 21, 1989.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Garden Homes at Grove Isle Unit Two Subdivision is a 13 lot
subdivision of a ±4.4 acre parcel of land located in the northern
portion of the Grove Isle development (immediately south of River
Shores Unity 1 Subdivision and east of the Garden Homes at Grove
Isle Unit 1 Subdivision). The subject property is zoned RS -6,
Single Family Residential (up to 6 units/acre) and has an LD -2,
Low Density Residential (up to 6 units/acre) land use designation.
Garden Homes at Grove Isle Unit 2:
Project Area: ±4.4 acres
Number of Lots: 13
Lot Sizes: .21 to .38 acres
Project Density: 2.95 units/acre
At its regular meeting of July 28, 1988, the Planning and Zoning
Commission granted preliminary plat approval to the subdivision.
The owner, 1400 Development Corporation, is now requesting final
plat approval and has submitted:
1. a final plat in substantial conformance with the approved
preliminary plat;
2. an approved cost estimate of required improvements from the
project engineer;
3. a cash bond for 115% of the cost of the remaining required
subdivision improvements; and
4. a contract committing the developer to completing the
remaining required improvements.
7
fitAR 211999
BOOK 76 F,CL 39 9
MAR 21 1989
BOOK 76 PAGE 400
ANALYSIS:
1. Utilities: The subject property is to be provided with water
by Indian River County and will utilize the existing Grove
Isle wastewater treatment plant for sewer service.
2. Public Works: A Land Development permit has been issued by
the Public Works department and the certified cost estimate
has been approved by the Public Works director.
3. Attorney's Office: The County Attorney's office has approved
the cash bond and the contract for construction of required
improvements subject to it being signed by the Chairman of
the Board of County Commissioners.
The final plat is also in conformance with the approved prelimi-
nary plat. Thus, all County requirements concerning final plat
approval have been addressed.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant
final plat approval to Garden Homes at Grove Isle Unit 2 Sub-
division, authorize the Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners to sign a contract with the applicant committing the
applicant to completing the remaining required improvements, and
accept the cash bond guaranteeing the contract.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously granted Final
Plat Approval to Garden Homes, Grove Isle Unit 2,
authorized the Chairman to execute the Contract for
Construction of Required Improvements, and accepted
the cash bond.
COPY OF SAID CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE
BOARD.
G. Final Plat Approval - 9th Street Road Plat
The Board reviewed memo of Staff Planner Wiegers:
8
r... y .
TO:
James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Ro•ert M. Keating, A
Community Develo•menntt Director
THROUGH: Stan Bolin 1 AICP
Chief, Current Development
FROM: Robert E. Wiegers' t J
Staff Planner, Current Development
DATE: March 9, 1989
SUBJECT: FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE 9TH STREET ROAD PLAT
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of March 21, 1989.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The Board of County Commissioners previously approved the 9th
Street Road Plat at its regular meeting of November 1, 1988.
Subsequently, and prior to recording the approved plat, the owner
and his engineer modified the approved plat by shortening the
cul-de-sac length by five (5') feet (Attachment 3 and 4).
This minor modification has been reviewed and approved by all
applicable County departments, and the change does not require
reapproval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. However, the
Board of County Commissiners must approve the revised plat prior
to it being recorded.
The applicant, Keith McCully, acting on behalf of Worth Hamilton,
owner, is now requesting final plat approval for the revised 9th
Street Road plat, and has submitted:
1. a final plat substantially in conformance with the approved
preliminary plat.
ANALYSIS:
The road plat covers an existing east -west private road which
extends west of 20th Avenue and is aligned with 9th Street. The
road exists in the sense that it is currently paved, and is within
a 30' easement, that was originally established to provide road
access to lots created prior to the County's subdivision
ordinance.
The owner is platting this private road right-of-way in order to
establish the required amount of road frontage•for a parcel of
property to be created in the future. The private road will be
established in such a way that adjacent property owners, who
already have legal access to the existing paved road, may continue
to use it in the future. The road plat terminates in a cul-de-sac
becausethe future extension of the road is not desirable.
A private property owners' association has been formed to own and
maintain the road right-of-way, and the County Attorney's office
has approved it as to legal form and sufficiency. No subdivision
of property, as defined in the subdivision ordinance, is to occur.
9
MAR 21 1989
BOOK 76 F.4,401
MAR 21 1989
BOOK 76 F'AGE 402
All applicable County regulations have been satisfied in regards
to final plat approval
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners grant
final plat approval for the 9th Street road plat.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously granted Final
Plat Approval to 9th Street Road Plat as recommended
by staff.
H. Demolition of Unsafe Structure - 9380 US1, Sebastian (Carl
Renz)
Building Director Ester Rymer reviewed the following:
TO:
James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M. Kea ing, AICP
Director, Community Development Department
DATE: March 10, 1989
SUBJECT: Demolition of Unsafe Structure
9380 U.S.1, Sebastian, Florida
FROM: Ester L. Rymer, Directo
Building Division
It is requested that the information herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at the meeting of
March 21, 1989.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The above referenced structure (Parcel 21-31-39-00000-0060-00014.0)
is considered unsafe as defined in Indian River County Code of Laws
and Ordinances, Chapter 4, Article II, Section 4-16.
It is the opinion of the Building Inspector and the Building Official
that said structure is beyond practical repair and is considered a
public nuisance; therefore, the structure has been condemned.
The owners were initially notified on April 27, 1988, and again on
October 5, 1988, that they should proceed with repairs or demolish
the structure. To date they have failed to do anything.
10
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
The Indian River County Code, Chapter 4, Article II, Section 4-21,
gives the Board of County Commissioners the authority to cause such a
building or structure or portion thereof to be demolished, secured,
or required to remain vacant. Chapter 4, Article II, Section 4-22
gives the' Board of County Commissioners the authority to remove the
structure as stated in 4-21, and cause a lien to be filed of record
for the costs of removal against the owner of the building.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners declare said
structure a nuisance, and order the building to be demolished by the
County Road and Bridge Department.
After removal, in accordance with referenced Ordinance of Indian
River County, staff recommends a lien be filed of record for the
costs of removal against the owner or person in charge of said prop-
erty.
Commissioner Bowman informed the Board that the owner says
he doesn't have the $2,500 to go ahead and demolish the building.
If we demolish it, however, there will be a lien put on the
property that could be an impediment to a potential sale of that
property. She, therefore, suggested that we table this matter to
a time certain of 30 days from today.
Director Rymer commented that she would prefer the Board to
go ahead and do whatever is necessary to condemn the structure
and then let her staff wait the 30 days before they go in with
the county crews.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously declared the
said structure a nuisance and ordered the building to
be demolished by the County Road and Bridge Department
after a period of 30 days from today as recommended by
Building Director Rymer and a lien then to be filed for
costs of removal.
I. Demolition of Unsafe Structures corner of 45th St. & 33rd Ave.
Tfford (Gary Anthony)
The Board reviewed memo from Building Director Rymer:
11
MAR 21 1989
BOOK 76 FADE 403
2 1 1989
7� n
BOOK 6 FA,E 4O t
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE: J
qAdeA
Robert M. Keating, A rCP
Director, Community Development Department
DATE: March 10, 1989
SUBJECT: Demolition of Unsafe Structures
3280 45th Street and 4506 33rd Avenue
Lots 3 & 4, Block 3, Hargrove Subdivision
FROM:
Ester L. Rymer, Direct(:
o
Building Division
It is requested that the information herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at the meeting of
March 21, 1989.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The above referenced structures (Parcel 22-32-39-00008-0030-00003.0)
are considered unsafe as defined in Indian River County Code of Laws
and Ordinances, Chapter 4, Article II, Section 4-16.
It is the opinion of the Building. Inspector and the Building Official
that said structures are beyond practical repair and, according to
complaints filed with the Indian River County Sheriff's Office, are a
public nuisance; therefore, the structures have been condemned.
The owners were initially notified on November 22, 1988, that repairs
were required on the structures, and were given ten days to secure
the structures and make necessary repairs. The Building Official
received a letter from the owner's attorney on December 1, 1988. A
second notification letter was sent to the owners on December 12,
1988, giving them thirty days to obtain permits and make the repairs.
On February 29, 1989, The owners were notified that they had ten days
to obtain construction permits and commence with repairs. To date
the owners have not applied for the permits to make these repairs.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
The Indian River County Code, Chapter 4, Article II, Section 4-21,
gives the Board of County Commissioners the authority to cause such a
building or structure or portion thereof to be demolished, secured,
or required to remain vacant. Chapter 4, Article II, Section 4-22
gives the Board of County Commissioners the authority to remove the
structure as stated in 4-21, and cause a lien to be filed of record
for the costs of removal against the owner of the building.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners declare said
structures a nuisance, and order the buildings to be demolished by
the County Road and Bridge Department.
After removal, in accordance with referenced Ordinance of Indian
River County, staff recommends a lien be filed of record for the
costs of removal against the owner or person in charge of said
property.
12
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously declared the
above described structures a nuisance, ordered said
buildings to be demolished by the County Road and
Bridge Department, and a lien to be filed against the
owner for costs of removal.
J. Demolition of Unsafe Structure - 4825 32nd Ave., Smith Plaza
Subdv. (DancyfBryant)
The Board reviewed memo from BUilding Director Rymer:
----------------- -----------
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DEPARTMENT HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M. Keating, AICP
Director, Community Development Department
DATE: March 13, 1989
SUBJECT: Demolition of Unsafe Structure
4825 32nd Avenue
Lot 19, Block 4, Smith Plaza Subdivision
FROM: Ester L. Rymer, Directo
Building Division
It is requested that the information herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at the meeting of
March 21, 1989.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The above referenced structure (Parcel 22-32-39-00007-0040-00019.0)
is considered unsafe as defined in Indian River County Code of Laws
and Ordinances, Chapter 4, Article II, Section 4-16.
Itis the opinion of the Building Inspector and the Building Official
that said structures are beyond practical repair and are considered
a public nuisance; therefore, the structures have been condemned.
The owners were initially notified in 1986 that the structure should
be demolished, and that it was not worth repairing. The owner in-
sisted on making repairs, but the repairs made were not according to
code. Several attempts to contact the owner by certified mail
failed, and in 1988 staff spoke to the owner on the phone and advised
MAR 2 1 1989
13
BOOK 76 FAGS 405
MAR 21 1989
BOOK 76 FACE 406
him to resolve the problem. On August 2, 1988, the owner obtained a
demolition permit and advised staff that he would remove the struc-
ture. To date, no work has been done to remove said structure.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
The Indian River County Code, Chapter 4, Article II, Section 4-21,
gives the Board of County Commissioners the authority to cause such a
building or structure or portion thereof to be demolished, secured,
or required to remain vacant. Chapter 4, Article II, Section 4-22
gives the Board of County Commissioners the authority to remove the
structure as stated in 4-21, and cause a lien to be filed of record
for the costs of removal against the owner of the building.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners declare said
structure a nuisance, and order the building to be demolished by the
County Road and Bridge Department.
After removal, in accordance with referenced Ordinance of Indian
River County, staff recommends a lien be filed of record for the
costs of removal against the owner or person in charge of said prop-
erty.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously declared the
above described structure a nuisance, ordered said
buildings to be demolished by the County Road and
Bridge Department, and a lien to be filed against the
owner for costs of removal.
K. Main Library Site Boundary Survey (Expanded) Work Order #4
The Board reviewed memo from Lynn Williams, Project Manager:
TO: James Chandler DATE: March 10, 1989 FILE:
County Administrator
Thru: H.T. "Sonny" Dean Consent Agenda
General Services it ctor
M:
L n Williams,
oject Manager
Indian River County Main Library
SUBJECT: Work Order #4 -
Main Library Site.
Boundary Survey (Expanded)
Description and Conditions:
The Board of County Commissioners approved a request for Boundary
and Topographical Survey work (Work Order #3) at the meeting of
January 10, 1989. Work Order #3 related to Block 37, the Grace
Lutheran Church site.
Property owned by the First Baptist Church and proposed for joint
use as parking by the library was not included. No agreement
between the church and the County existed.
14
Alternatives and Analysis:
Work Order #4 issued under the Master Agreement between Indian
River County and Lloyd and Associates includes Lots 4 through 8
of Block 28.
This is required to complete the Site Plan for the Main Library,
and is required by Dow, Howell, Gilmore, library architects.
Recommendation:
Staff remommends approval of Work Order #4 (in the amount of
$1375.00, previously signed by Lloyd) for survey and
topographical drawings as outlined in the agreement.
Funding is available in account # 322-109-571-033.13 in the
Main Library Construction Fund.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved Work
Order #4 to Master Agreement w/Lloyd & Assoc. as
described above.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
MAIN LIBRARY SITE BOUNDARY SURVEY
WORK ORDER NO. 4 TO THE PROFESSIONAL CIVIL
ENGINEERING/LAND SURVEYING SERVICES MASTER AGREEMENT
BETWEEN LLOYD AND ASSOCIATES, INC., DATED 6-21-88
AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
Pursuant to the Professional Civil Engineering/Land
Surveying Services agreement dated 6-21-88, by and between
Indian River County, a political subdivision of the State of
Florida, hereinafter referred to as the COUNTY, and Lloyd &
Associates, Inc., Vero Beach, Florida, hereinafter referred to as
ENGINEER, this Work Order No. 4 is an extension of and hereby
becomes a part of the master agreement (hereinafter referred to
as the MASTER AGREEMENT) as folloOs:
Section I - Project Limits
1) LOTS 4 through 8 BLOCK 28 ORIGINAL TOWN.
Section II - County Obligations
The COUNTY agrees to:
A. Provide the ENGINEER with all available drawings,
surveys, right-of-way maps, and other documents pertinent to the
project which are in the posession of the COUNTY; however, all
information requiring research shall be the responsibility of the
ENGINEER.
Section III - Scope of Work
A. ENGINEER shall provide boundary survey, above and
below grade as-builts including all buildings and utility lines
15
tiAR 21 089
BOOK76 fAGE 407
MAR 21 1989
EtooK 76 F .,E 408
and tree locations, topographic survey. In accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 21 HH -6 F.A.C., as per architects
instructions, Exhibit A.
B. The ENGINEER will strive to complete his work on the
project within t•he time allowed by maintaining an adequate staff
of registered surveyors, draftsmen and other employees on the
work at all times.
Section IV - Time for Completion
A. After issuance of written authorization to proceed,
fifteen (15) working days will be allowed to delivery of the
plans.
Section V - Compensation
A. The COUNTY 'agrees to pay, and the ENGINEER agrees to
accept for services rendered pursuant to this agreement, fees in
accordance with the following:
B. Survey and drawing costs as proposed within agreement
shall be a lump sum cost of 1,375.00 . This fee is based on
surveyors estimate and will be due upon completion.
C. Additional survey and drafting work which may be
required for off-site parking will be billed as additional
charges.
Section VI - Additional1Work
In the event changes are requested by the County or extra
work is imposed on the COUNTY by the demands of certain
regulatory agencies after the approval by the COUNTY of this
agreement, and upon the issuance of a subsequent work order, by
the Director of Public Works Department, said extra work may
commence in accordance with the following fee schedule:
LLOYD AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
RATE SCHEDULE
ENGINEER $45.00/hr.
ENGINEERING DESIGNER $35.00/hr.
SURVEY MEN (3 MEN) $60.00/hr.
DRAFTING $25.00/hr.
SECRETARY $25.00/hr.
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR $27.00/hr.
FEES Cost +10%
MATERIALS Cost
TRAVEL $per Florida
Statutes
The ENGINEER certifies that the following wage rates and other
factual unit costs supporting the compensation are accurate,
supporting, complete, and current at the time of contracting.
Section VII - Partial Payments
Due to the short-term nature of the work,.. only one payment
will be ,made according to the conditions stated in Section V.
16
Section VIII - Extra Work
See Section VI
Section IX - All conditions set forth in the MASTER AGREEMENT
shall control unless otherwise specified in this WORK ORDER.
This WORK ORDER, regardless of where executed, shall be
governed by and construed according to the laws of the State of
Florida.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed these
presents this 21st day of March., 1989.
LLOYD & ASSOCIATES, INC.
1830 20th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
By:
G. William Myers,Jr.
Vice President and
Chie , per in. Office -r
Attest: a _J, „�✓< I / _
Eliz:•eth M. Agosni
Assistant Secretary
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,FLORIDA
BY: Li
.44,
Chairman
L. Release of County Liens
The Board reviewed memo from the County Attorney's Office:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
R. Keller, County Attorney's Office
March 15, 1989
CONSENT AGENDA - BCC MEETING 3/21/89
RELEASE COUNTY LIENS
I have prepared the following lien releases and request the
Board authorize the Chairman to execute them:
Release of 12 ERUs Water and
of VISTA PLANATATION, in the
OF VERO BEACH INC.
Release of 1 ERUs Water and
of VISTA PLANATATION, in the
OF VERO BEACH INC.
Sewer of Building No. 43
name of VISTA PROPERTIES
Sewer of Building No. 46
name of VISTA PROPERTIES
Lot 6 of SEMINOLE SHORES SUBDIVISION, in the name of
ALLEN W. McCAIN (Trustee) AND LILLIAN W. FORD AND
ALEXANDER P. FORD JR.
Lot 7 of SEMINOLE SHORES SUBDIVISION, in the name of
SWEDISH INVESTMENTS OF FLORIDA INC.
17
MAR 2 1 1989
BOOK 76 [Au: 409
WAR 21 1689
BOOK 76 PAGE 410
Lot 242 of COUNTRYSIDE SOUTH, in the name of
REALCOR-VERO BEACH ASSOCIATES
.Lot 29 of COUNTRYSIDE SOUTH, in the name of
REALCOR-VERO BEACH ASSOCIATES
Lot 2 of RIVER SHORES ESTATES, UNIT #3, in the name of
PAUL K. MAYNARD AND SHIRLEEN MAYNARD
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized
the Chairman to execute the Release of Liens listed
above.
COPIES OF SAID RELEASE OF LIENS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD.
M. HUD - Administered Rental Rehab Program (Non Formula)
The Board reviewed memo from Guy Decker, Executive Director
of the Housing Authority:
TO: The Honorable Members of the
Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DATE:March 28, 1989
FILE:
SUBJECT: HUD - Administered
Rental Rehabilitation
Program for Small
Cities (Non Formula)
FROM: Guy L. Decker, Jr.' REFERENCES:
Executive Director
•
I.R.C. Housing Authority
It is recommended that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the
County Commission.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has announced a competition and
availability of funds for a HUD -administered Rental Rehabilitation Program for Small Cities,
pursuant to Section 17 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 USC 14370) which was
enacted by Section 301 of the Housing and Urban -Rural Recovery Act of 1938 (Public Law
98-81), approved November 30, 1983. A total of $1,660,000 in Rental Rehabilitation Program
grant funds and Section 8 Housing Vouchers are available for the Rental Rehabilitation
Program for Small Cities in the State of Florida. In HUD's Circular Letter No. 89-14 dated
March 1, 1989, Indian River County was included in the list of eligible cities and counties.
The deadline for submission is 4:00 P.M. April 14, 1989, and must be received on that date
in the DHUD Jacksonville office to be considered in this year's competition.
18
The program is designed to assure an adequate. supply of standard housing affordable t�
-=.lower-income tenants as it increases the supply of private market rental housing available
s: to lower-income tenants by providing government funds to rehabilitate existing units and
provide rental assistance to lower-income persons to help them afford the rent of these
units..One Section 8 Certificate and/or Voucher can be provided for each $7,500 of grant
funds to help eligible lower-income tenaants.to pay the rent for rehabilitated units. In
order to leverage the maxiniui+ amount of private capital, rehabilitation subsidies are
generally limited to 50 per cent of the cost of rehabilitation, not to exceed $7,500 per
unit adjusted for high cost areas. Grant funds may only be used to correct substandard
conditions, make essential improvements, and repair major systems in danger of failure.
Units will be rented at market rents, and no special project rent controls or restrictions
will be used. Within the lower-income and neighborhood targeting requirements, the Rental
Rehabilitation Program leaves broad opportunities for local program design and flexibility.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
This is the fifth year Indian River County has been placed on the eligibility list to
enter the competition for finding, and this type of program parallels our existing
rehabilitation housing efforts.
RECONMENDATIONS :
We respectfully request the County Commission to authorize its Chairman to execute
the application for submission to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for
this grant.
This program will rehabilitate approximately twenty (20) substandard rental units in
the distressed neighborhoods within this jurisdiction and will make available additional
standard units to be utilized by the Indian River County Section 8 Rental Assistance
Program. Our total request for Federal assistance is One Hundred Thousand Dollars
($100,000.00).
This program requires no additional County funds.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board
the Chairman to execute the
for a grant from the Rental
as described above.
19
MAR 21 1989
unanimously authorized
application to the DHUD
Rehabilitation Program
BOOK
6 f'"r;% 411
AR 21 1989
BOOK 76 FAH 412
•
CLL . AJyVLn7 L VL\
_111" "...v.." 6 %a t r+t i1 s*
3/21/89
tN SUBMISSION:
App/canon
r$ Construction
❑ Non-Conatructwn
Proapplication
O Construction
O Non.Constructioet
S. DATE RECEIVED aY STATE
Stale Application Identifier
4. DATE RECEIVED EY FEDERAL AGENCY
Federal Identiliar
59-6000674
S. APPLICANT INFORMATION
Legal Name:
Indian River County
Address (give city. county state. and zip code):
2001 9th Avenue, Suite 302
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Organizational Unit:
Indian River County Housing Authority
Name and telephone number of the person to be contacted on matters mvoMng
this application (viva area code)
Guy L. Decker, Jr.
407-567-8000 Ext. 322
E. EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATON NUMBER (EINI:
N/A
L TYPE OF APPLICATION:
® New
0 Contmustion 0 Revision
1f Revision. enter appropriate tetter(s) in boetes):
A Increase Award B Decrease Award
O. Decrease Duration Other (specify):
C Increase Duration
LBJ
7. TYPE OF APPUCANT: (enter appropnale /alter m bog)
A. State H Independent School Oist.
B County I. State Controlled Institution of Higher Learning
C. Municipal • J Private University
D. Township K Indian Tribe
E. Interstate • L. Individual
F Intermunicipal Al Profit Organization
6 Special District N. Other (Specify)
IL NAME OF FEDERAL AGENCY:
Department of Housing and Urban Development
te. CATALOG Oc FEDERAL DOMESTIC
ASSISTANCE NUMBER:
42 USC
1
43
70
TITLE. Rental Rehabilitation Program
': 12. AREAS AFFECTED BY PROJECT (cases. counties. states. etc)
(
Indian River County
11. DESCRIPTIVE 1iTLE OF APPLICANT'S PROJECT:
To insure adequate supply of staidard housing
affordable to lower-income tenants by increas-
ing supply of private market rental housing
available to lower-income tenants and provide
rental assistance to qualified tenants.
13. PROPOSED PROJECT:
ta. CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS OF:
Start Date
5/1/89
Ending Oats
4/30/90
a. Applicant
Indian River County
b Protect
Rental Rehabilitation
1S. ESTIMATED FUNDING:
a Federal
s.
100,000.0°
b Applicant
$
:DO
c State
1
.00
d Local
$
.o0
• Other
1
.00
IE. IS APPLICATION SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY STATE EXECUTIVE ORDER Inn PROCESS,
a. YES THIS PREAPPUCATION/APPLICATION WAS MADE AVAILABLE TO THE
STATE EXECUTIVE ORDER 12772 PROCESS FOR REVIEW ON
DATE
b NO ® PROGRAAU IS NOT COVERED 8Y E 0 12372
0 OR PROGRAM HAS NOT BEEN SELECTED 8Y STATE FOR REVIEW
1 Program Income
1
.00
g TOTAL
1
100,0004°
17. IS THE APPLICANT DELINOUENT ON ANY FEDERAL DEBT?
0 Yes If 'Yes.' attach an explanation
ta. TO THE BEST OF MY KNONLEOOE AND BELIEF. ALL DATA IN THIS APPLICATION PREAPPUCATION ARE TRUE AND CORRECT. ME DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DULY
• : AUTHORIZED BV ME GOVERNING BOO! 01 THE APPLICANT AND ME APPLICANT will COMPLY WITH THE ATTACHED ASSURANCES IF THE ASSISTANCE 95 AwAROEO
Typed Name of Authorized Representative
Gary C. Wheeler
O Signature of Authorized Representative
PreviOfjsOtlWnS • USaoie
b Title
Chairman, County Commission
c Telephone number
367-8000
• Oslo S.gned
3/a F9
5ancard Foran 421 'QEV a ea:
PeesC•'02C by 01418 :.••r.14. A.r02
COPY OF SAID APPLICATION IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE
BOARD.
20
N. Ratification of City of Vero Beach Appointments to the
rT assure oast RegioonaT Planning Council
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously ratified the
appointment of Molly Beard to the Treasure Coast
Regional Planning Council as representative of the
City of Vero Beach and the appointment of Robert
Langdale as representative of Indian River Shores,
Alternate Municipality.
PUBLIC HEARING - SPECIAL ASSESSMENT & DRAINAGE (87th ST. FROM
102nd AVE. TO CR 510, VERO LAKE ESTATES)
The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy
Clerk read the following Notice with Proof of Publication
attached, to -wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
•
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
7/
in the matter ofeadd‘iti;1 O % ft a
in the Court, was pub -
dished in said newspaper in the issues of
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
"5.4 A.D. 19 fr
Sworn to and subscribed before me thisdpof
(SEAL)
(Rusin s
Once, •-mrilit,
21
MAR 2 1 1989
'11.9444n:; iESOLUTION 89 24.
PUBLIC HEARING 4 T t •
�, t �.. .•: a :• r NOTICE `
. e;
PLEAS TAKE NOTICE that the 01
County
mPurs csian River County;
Florida,a, will holdaliHenng at 9:05 AM on
Tuesday March 21. 1989 In the Commission
Chambers . loc•ated at • 1840 25th Street, Vero
Beach, Florida. to discuss the advisability, cost
and the amount of the assessments agalrmt
each property for paving and drains e improve-
ments, located on 87th Street from 102 Avenue
to C.R. 510 In Vero Lakes Estates:
• PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE -mat of the
same public hearing. the Board of County Com-
missioners shall also hear all Interested parsons
regarding the proposed assessments contained
in the preliminary assessment roll for the im-
provements described above. The preliminary
assessment roll is currently on 510 with the Clerk
If any person decides to appealdon
made by the Commission with respect to any
matter considered at this hearing, he will need a
record of the proceedings, and that, for such
purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings is made, which record
includes the testimony and evidence upon which
the appeal is to be based: .; • ; • : t r3 -
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, the forego-
ing recitals are affirmed and ratified in their en-
tirety. .-
foregoing resolution was offered by Com-
missioner Scuiock who moved Its adoption. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Biro
and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as
follows: ,,,; ;,;
Chairman Gary C. Wheeler • , Aye
Vice -Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert : ; Aye
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
• Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
n�s�an�eclared the resolu
topasedand adoptedb 28th day of Febru
ary,1989. •
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Bys rr ar i C. Wheeler ;.,.,
Attests -Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk •
By-s4A. Waterhouse •_ ,, . r
D.C.
March 8,13,1989 I`
EUOK 76
c r a1t�
Fn���
MAR 211
ROOK 76 F�,cE.414
Public Works Director Davis reviewed the following:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director CI
FROM: ,
Michelle A. Tarry, C.E.T.
Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Paving of 87th Street from
102nd Avenue to C.R. 510 in Vero Lakes Estates
DATE: March 16, 1989
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On January 31, 1989 the Board of County Commissioners adopted a
Resolution No. 89-13 providing for certain paving and drainage
improvements to 87th Street in Vero Lake Estates.
On February 28, 1989 the Board of County Commissioners adopted
another Resolution No. 89-24 setting the date and time for a
Public Hearing to discuss the advisability, cost and amount of
the assessment against each property owner. This hearing is
scheduled for March 21, 1989 at 9:05 A.M.
RECOMMENDATION
After hearing complaints and input at the Public Hearing and if
necessary, any adjustments to the assessment roll, it is
recommended that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
attached Resolution confirming the assessment roll. If
adjustments or changes are made a new resolution will be brought
before the Board of County Commissioners for approval.
Director Davis went over the history of setting up the MSTU
for this area, and noted that the assessment amount, which is
$2.00 a front foot, was agreed upon working with the MSTU
Advisory Committee. All advertisements have been properly made
and the people properly notified.
Chairman Wheeler asked if anyone wished to be heard.
Joseph McBride, 9225 87th Street, expressed his opposition
to the paving. He stressed that the street is nothing but a
racetrack as it is, and once it is paved, it will be even more of
a racetrack. As to the $100,000 that was supposed to have been
spent for drainage, Mr. McBride did not see that they have done
anything except dig deeper canals along 87th Street. He contin-
ued to state his opposition to the paving and the assessment.
Commissioner Bird inquired about the status of this peti-
tion, and Director Davis explained that this was not a voluntary
22
Petition Paving project. This is a funding source that was
recommended by the dvisory Committee of the Vero Lake Estates
Property Owners Association.
In discussion, it was noted that Association does not
represent everyone in the area, but Director Davis advised that
there were about 40 people at the last meeting he attended.
Commissioner =ird wished to know if the taxes that come into
that MSTU are mainly for drainage.
Director Davis stated that basically to date they have been
working on a drainage study. They have not spent $100,000. The
first draft of the
communicating with
of the other entiti
The drainage work t
associated with thil.
drainage as we do a
Commissioner B
is one of the main
study is now complete and they are
the Sebastian River Drainage District and some
es that have control over the watershed area.
hey have done out there primarily has been
s paving project; we are incorporating the
n improvement.
ird asked if the Advisory Committee feels this
thoroughfares out there and that paving it
will give people better access to more homesites.
Discussion ens
section is one of t
long; and it is bei
assessments, as wel
ued, and Director Davis confirmed that this
he main thoroughfares; it is about 11 miles
ng paid for by the MSTU plus the front footage
1 as about $10,000 from impact fees.
Commissioner Bowman commented that the MSTU previously
assessed themselves $15 per parcel/acre for road and drainage
improvements, and Mr. McBride stated that he was under the
impression it was for drainage only. He was informed that was
not the case.
In further discussion, it was noted that the original pro-
posal was aimed at paving roads, and then it was decided that
drainage for the whole area was a significant problem also.
Commissioner Bird pointed out that, if Mr. McBride's objec-
tion is to paving the road, as more and more people move out
there, it is very probably only a matter of time until most of
23
MAR 21 1989 euUK ib Fair 41b
MAR 21 1909
BOOK 76 F,GE 416
the roads get paved, and this is one of the main arteries. He
believed they have tried to spread the cost over as broad a base
as possible to make it fair.
Commissioner Scurlock further noted that there will be
appropriate speed limits, signs, etc., and Public Works Director
Davis confirmed that it will be signed according to state
statutes.
Mr. McBride commented that it is signed 30 mph now, and
even the police cars don't go that fast without their siren or
blue lights on. He wished to know when the $2.00 per front foot
assessment will become due.
Director Davis advised that when the project is complete, it
takes about a month for all the bills to come in, and after that,
the final assessment comes back to the Board for final approval.
He estimated it would probably be about 120 days from today, and
then there is an option as to the method of payment.
It was determined that no one further wished to be heard,
and the Chairman thereupon closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved
Resolution 89-30 confirming the assessment roll for
certain paving and drainage improvements to 87th
Street from 102nd AVenue to CR 510 in Vero Lakes
Estates.
RESOLUTION NO. 89-30
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL
FOR CERTAIN PAVING AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS TO 87TH STREET FROM 102ND
AVENUE .TO C.R. 510 IN VERO LAKES
ESTATES.
WHEREAS, on January 31, 1989 the Board of County
Commissioners adopted Resolution No. 89-13 providing for
certain paving and drainage:,improvements to 87th Street in
Vero Lakes Estates; and
24
WHEREAS, on February 28, 1989 the Board of County
Commissioners adopted Resolution No. 89-24 setting the date
and time for a public hearing to discuss the advisability,
costs and amount of the assessment against each property
owner; and
WHEREAS, this hearing was held on March 21, 1989
and any complaints having been heard at public hearing,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, as
follows:
1. The foregoing recitals are affirmed and
ratified in their entirety.
2. The attached assessment roll for certain
paving and drainage improvements to 87th Street from 102nd
Avenue to C.R. 510 in Vero Lakes Estates is approved,
pursuant to Section 11-47, Code of Laws and Ordinances of
Indian River County.
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:
0
Chairman Gary C. Wheeler Aye
Vice Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution
passed and adopted this 21st day of March, 1989.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By x..11.2 tt. C�G�t//ut.�..✓
niry
Cha i an
ee er
RES. 89-30 COMPLETE WITH ASSESSMENT ROLL IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE
OF CLERK TO THE BOARD.
25
Mk 2 1 1989 E00K 76 F',,cr 417
BOOK 76 FACE 418
MAIN LIBRARY PARKING (ABANDONMENT 22ND ST.)
Administrator Chandler informed the Board that this past
Sunday, church members voted to join with the County in filing
the application for the abandonment. The previous week they
voted to lease the lots to us for the parking; so, with a
combination of those two, we are ready to move forward. He
further reported that we have had meetings with the City staff on
these items and do not anticipate any problems at this point.
What is needed, if the Commission concurs, is a Motion on the
vacation of a portion of 22nd St. so staff can file it.
MOTION WAS MADE BY Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, to authorize staff to apply for
abandonment of 22nd Street as discussed.
Commissioner Bird asked if there are any costs that would be
incurred in the abandonment, such as agreeing to relocate
utilities, etc.
Administrator Chandler explained this would be a portion of
the parking lot, and with the abandonment, we pick up an addi-
tional 25 spaces that we would not have had. With the lease of
the lots and the abandonment, we will get 68 spaces. If 22nd
Street were not abandoned, it would be 43 spaces; so, the cost is
really for the construction of the parking lot, which is in the
budget. That cost is about $95,000.
Commissioner Bird asked what kind of assurance we have to
give the City that the parking in the church lot will remain
available so that we do not become short of parking spaces.
Administrator Chandler advised that the lease is not for a
specific period of time. If the church cancels within 10 years,
they have to repay the county for our expense on the construction
of the lot; they could give a 1 year notice of cancellation. The
City has indicated that when we submit for site plan approval, we
would have to guaranty that if the lease were ever canceled, we
26
would provide the parking elsewhere. Administrator Chandler
stressed that in talking with the church, he made it plain that
if they were talking a short term lease, we would change our
plans. They indicated they were looking at a long term relation-
ship as they need that parking themselves.
Commissioner Scurlock believed part of the assurance is that
the church is facing the same problem with parking requirements
as we are if they wish to expand in the future.
Commissioner Bird asked if both the county and the church
could utilize the same parking area in their site plans, and
Administrator Chandler advised that the City Code has a provision
allowing such joint use.
Commissioner Scurlock did not know if this is the time to
discuss it, but obviously we have made a substantial commitment
and are moving ahead with our plans for the library and also the
court facilities project in the downtown area, and it seems there
is some miscommunication about this in relation to the downtown
redevelopment effort. He has seen some things coming out in
regard to changing density to 45 upa and the height limitation to
87' that he personally opposes. Commissioner Scurlock still
believed we can do a redevelopment within a reasonable density
and reasonable height limitation, and he believed the Commission
has indicated we don't need to go to a height of 87' nor need
densities of 45 upa. He emphasized that he did not want the
redevelopment that's happening to indicate that the County
Commission is in favor of such increases because we want to build
our court complex.
Chairman Wheeler concurred. He noted that he is not a
member of the Redevelopment Committee, but he did mention that he
had some serious reservations about such increases when the
Motion was taken. He felt they did have some good arguments in
favor of raising density and heights for the downtown area, but
he personally is philosophically and totally opposed to going any
higher than 50' and also to raising density no matter how good
27
VAR 21 1989
ROOK 76 FAC[ 41 +
MAR 2 1 lad9
KOOK
i6 [ACE 20
their arguments are. He stressed that he has no intention of
looking at a design of the Courthouse to go above 50', and, in
fact, if the Commission desired to do that, he would probably
prefer someone else to have that project.
Commissioner Bowman also expressed her total opposition to
any such increases.
Administrator Chandler noted t -hat we have just completed our
RFP for the new Courthouse complex and none of what is being
discussed is part of it. Our main concern is the parking.
Chairman Wheeler noted that while he may not agree with the
direction the City is going, they certainly have that right. He
did not believe this has been to City Council yet in any event.
Commissioner Scurlock just wished to emphasize that any
proposal for increased height or density is not being
precipitated by the County's plans for the Courthouse complex.
William Koolage, interested citizen, wished to hear the
stand the other Commissioners take on this issue.
Commissioner Eggert stated that she agreed with the stand
expressed by the others, and Commissioner Bird noted that if he
had disagreed, he would have said something. He believed our
main goal is to redevelop the town with the same charm and
ambiance it had in the past.
Discussion returned to the proposed abandonment of 22nd
Street, and Commissioner Eggert believed the church is also
looking at possibly abandoning a portion of 16th Avenue and 22nd
Street as you approach the Courthouse, which would make it even
more parklike.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION on aban-
donment of a portion of 22nd Street.
It was
voted on and carried unanimously, with Commis-
sioner Bird indicating that he voted for it even
though he still does not like the location of
the library site.
28
PROPOSED DATE FOR CITY/COUNTY MEETING ON UTILITIES
Administrator Chandler advised the Board that he would like
to change the date for the proposed Joint City/County Meeting to
discuss Utilities from March 30th to the second or third week in
April. City Manager Little has indicated that if the Commission
would give him one or two dates, he would take them to the City
Council.
Some discussion ensued regarding various dates.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously agreed upon
the date of Thursday, April 20th at 9:00 A.M. for a
Joint City/County Meeting on Utilities.
PURCHASE OF ADDITIONAL A/C FOR HOBART TOWER EQUIPMENT BUILDING
The Board reviewed memo from the Director of Emergency
Management:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
DATE: March 13, 1989 FILE: V
SUBJECT: Approval of Purchase of
Additional Air Conditioner
for Hobart Tower Equipment
Building
FROM: Doug Wright, Director REFERENCES:
Emergency Management Services
It is respectfully requested that the information contained herein
be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners
at the next regular scheduled meeting.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The air conditioner utilized at Hobart Tower is in excess of four
years of age and has run around the clock for this period of time.
The air conditioner is required to maintain the level of humidity
and keep the electronic equipment associated with various radio systems
on Hobart Tower at a constant temperature to extend the life and
prevent maintenance expenses. The older air conditioner is in need
29
MAR 21 1989
1.___
BOO 76 fAill 4 1
MAR 21 1989
BOOK 76 Du 422
of replacement and a larger unit is needed due to the recent addition
of equipment related to the County owned trunking radio system.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The air conditioner can be replaced with a larger BTU capacity air
conditioner for approximately $600. An alternative would be to replace
the.. single unit air conditioner with a central system. This does
not appear feasible since the area required to be cooled is a single
equipment room.
The increased capacity air conditioner should satisfy the needs for
the Hobart Tower for another four years. The tower is generating
revenue and funds are available in the maintenance account for the
tower to purchase the air conditioner.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
the purchase of an air conditioner to replace the existing air condi-
tioner at Hobart Tower and approve a budget amendment to fund the
purchase from revenue generated by the tower.
Staff also recommends that the air conditioner being removed from
the tower be declared surplus and disposed of routinely through the
Purchasing Division of the Department of General Services.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized
the purchase of an air conditioner to replace the
existing air conditioner at Hobart Tower; declared
the existing ',A/C unit surplus to be disposed of
through the Purchasing Department; and approved
Budget Amendment #067 to fund the purchase:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
NUMBER:
067
DATE: March 21. 1989
Entry
Number
Funds/Department/Account Name
Account Number
Increase
Decrease
EXPENSES
GENERAL FUND/Radio Tower
Machinery and Equipment
001-105-519-066.49
$ 600
$ 0
Reserve for Contingency
001-199-581-099.91
$ 0
$ 600
30
■r 1
LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR FIELD ARCHERY RANGE AT COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS
The Board reviewed memo from Public Works Director Davis:
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: License Agreement For Field Archery Range
at the Indian River County Fairgrounds
DATE: March 14, 1989
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The Indian River Archery Club has requested a license agreement
to use 27 acres of land at the County Fairgrounds for a field
archery range to be used by members of the Archery Club and under
strict supervision, by the Club, if open to the public.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The Archery Club is obtaining the appropriate insurance to meet
the County's requirements. Attorney Brennen and Public Works
have prepared the attached License Agreement. The Parks and
Recreation Committee, the Risk Manager and County staff have all
reviewed the agreement. The Parks and Recreations Committee,
during its Jan. 12, 1989 meeting, unanimously recommended that
the County enter into a license agreement with the Archery Club
and that a time schedule when the range would be used, be posted
with the County.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
It is recommended that the License Agreement between Indian River
County and Indian River Archers, Inc. be approved subject to
receipt of appropriate insurance certificates and an approved
safety plan, and that the Chairman be authorized to execute the
Agreement.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, to approve the License Agreement
with Indian River Archers, Inc., and to authorize the
signature of the Chairman subject to receipt of
appropriate insurance certificates and an approved
safety plan.
Commissioner Bowman wished to know if they have to come in
with any kind of a site plan and whether there would be some
landscaping required around the port -o -lets and storage building
as she did not want it to look ugly.
31
MAR 21 1969
COOK 76 F'a E 423
Ada EQC�K76 [�4
Com.Bird confirmed that they would have a site plan. He
noted that it is a very heavily wooded site; they will be working
within what is there; and we will be sure that the structures are
hidden as much as possible.
Commissioner Bowman questioned the requirement that it is to
be open to the general public, and Commissioner Scurlock noted
that because it is in a public facility, it has to be made
available to the public, but it will be only under supervised
conditions.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
REQUEST TO CLOSE FOREST CAY STREET FOR ANNUAL SPRING BLOCK PARTY
The Board reviewed memo from the Public Works Director:
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.;
Public Works Director
FROM: David B. Cox,15)3C
Traffic Engineering Manager
SUBJECT: Request to Close Forest Cay Street for
Annual Spring Block Party
DATE: March 9, 1989
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Residents of Vista Royale's Forest Park Subdivision have
requested to close Forest Cay Street from 4:00 PM to 9:00 PM on
Friday, April 7, 1989 for the Forest Park Owner's Association
Annual Spring Block Party. The rain date is Friday, April 14.
-Staff has no objection to this request, provided that:
1) Proper barricades as permitted by the Traffic Engineering
Division are installed.
'.2) A block representative be designated as a contact person in
+'' charge of the event in case the road needs to be opened.
;:-3) Access to emergency vehicles be maintained.
32
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved the
closing of Forest Cay Street from 4:00 P.M. to 9:00
P.M. on Friday, April 7, 1989, for the Annual Spring
Block Party subject to the conditions listed above.
GLENDALE PARK LIFT STATION PROJECT
The Board reviewed memo from John Lang of the Utility staff:
DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 1989
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: TERRANCE G. PI
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY RVICES
SUBJECT: GLENDALE PARK LIFT STATION
PROJECT NO. US -87 -24 -CCS
PREPARED AND STAFFED BY: JOHN F. LANG
BACKGROUND
The Lift Station at the Glendale Park Subdivision has been upgraded
and connected to an existing force main on 13th Avenue. The
Wastewater Treatment Plant has been decommissioned and will be
removed shortly by Alien Environmental. The final inspection was
conducted November 29, 1988, by the County and was passed. A
partial payment for $25,997.40 was made November 21, 1988, and the
amount of $2,888.60 was held pending certification by the engineer
.of record. The Department of Utility Services received the
:. certification from Masteller & Moler Associates, Inc., on February
" 28, 1989.
',-;° ANALYSIS
The project has been satisfactorily completed by the contractor.
The Board of County Commissioners, on February 7, 1989, authorized a
4, change order utilizing this contractor for the Temporary Sludge
Facility. Purchase orders have been received by the contractor and
_the two (2) subcontractors.
RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Utility Services recommends releasing the
retainer of $2,888.60 for this project. The funding for this
project is from the impact fee account.
33
NiAR 2 1199
1.___
LOOK r,,
r6 F?,GE4 5
MAR 21 1989
BOOK 76 FACE 4 6
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, to release retainer in the amount
of $2,888.60 to Ted Myers Contracting Co., Inc., for
completion of the above project.
Commissioner Bowman wished to know if the decomissioned
wastewater treatment plant is a total loss or if it possibly
could be moved out to Blue Cypress Lake.
Commissioner Bird noted that we just got a master plan for
Blue Cypress, and Director Pinto advised that specific plant
would not be suitable, but we have our eye on a plant that may
become available shortly.
Commissioner Scurlock explained that the plant is not the
problem out there; the problem is the effluent disposal because
it is such low land.
Commissioner Bowman asked about tertiary treatment, and
Director Pinto advised that no matter what we do at Blue Cypress
Lake, it must be tertiary treatment.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
HYDROGEOLOGICAL WORK AT WEST REGIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
The Board reviewed memo from the Utility staff:
34
DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 1989
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED
AND STAFFED BY:
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILIT
HYDROGEOLOGICAL WORK AT WEST REGIONAL
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
JOHN FREDERICK LANG
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
BACKGROUND:
The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER) Operating
Permit for the West Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant as issued
requires that the County perform a hydrogeological analysis of the
percolation ponds when the average daily flows exceed 250,000
gallons per day:• This monthly figure was reached in December of
1988. A request fdr-proposals went to the short-listed consulting
firm of G & E Engineering for hydrogeologic services for the West
Regional Effluent Disposal Project and they submitted a proposal for
$40,000. We felt that the costs associated with this proposal were
too high. We then requested a proposal from Jammal & Associates,
Inc., who submitted a proposal for $5,575.00, which is less than the
.'-threshold amount for studies as required by the Florida Continuing
-_Consultant Negotiating Act.
:-.Jammal & Associates, Inc.'s work is highly respected by the FDER,
*.:..and they can provide a three-dimensional hydrogeological model of
the percolation ponds instead of the two-dimensional models which
have been previously provided. This information will aid the County
in determining whether there is a basis for a claim on previous
reports.
Jammal & Associates, Inc.'s proposal does not include regional
• geology, well and pollution source inventory, a groundwater
monitoring., program, or measurements of permeability within lower
transmissive units. This information was previously submitted to
obtain the current operating permit. If FDER requests such
information, additional testing and reevaluation reports have to be
generated at a cost not to exceed $500.
ANALYSIS:
The pricing proposal of Jammal & Associates, Inc., reflects previous
site experience and additional work, if requested by the FDER, would
still not bring the price to 20% of the G & E Engineering proposal.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Department of Utility Services recommends
County Commissioners authorize utilizing the
Associates, Inc., for services at the West
Treatment Plant Percolation Ponds. The cost
$6,075. The funding would come from Account
Sewer Utilities Emergency Services account.
that the Board of
firm of Jammal &
Regional Wastewater
is not to exceed
# 471-218-033.13, a
Commissioner Scurlock concurred with the approach and
believed it looked like a significant cost saving, but noted that
originally we had Carter & Associates design this plant and then
had Dames & Moore do the actual model for effluent disposal on
35
MAR 21198`
bOOK 76 47DU
MAR 21 1989
EkooK 76 FACE 4,8
the site, and we had some conflicts as to whether those studies
were good or not. He hoped that what we are doing here is
getting to a point where we can sign off and either litigate
against Dames & Moore or get on with our business. He wished to
bring this to a conclusion.
Utilities Director Pinto stated that the reason for this
study is for the third and final opinion, and after the study is
completed, we then have to make our minds up as to how we are
going to proceed.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously authorized
utilizing the firm of Jammal & Associates, Inc., for
services at the West Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant
percolation ponds, the cost not to exceed $6,075, as
recommended by staff.
GIFFORD AREA SEWER PROJECT - CONTRACT #2, EFFLUENT DISPOSAL
SYSTEM (RELEASE OF FUNDS)
The Board reviewed memo from Ernestine Williams, Manager of
Project Administration:
36
DATE: MARCH 15, 1989
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED AND
STAFFED BY:
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATO
TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILITRVICES
GIFFORD AREA SEWER PROJECT - IRC PROJECT NO.
US -85 -08 -ED
CONTRACT #2 - EFFLUENT DISPOSAL SYSTEM
RELEASE OF FUNDS
ERNESTINE W. WILLIAMS .E0 -4A7
MANAGER OF PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
BACKGROUND:
On October 1, 1987, Indian River County contracted for the
construction of approximately 4,550 linear feet of 16" diameter
ductile iron pipe reclaimed water force main, approximately 1,700
linear feet of 8" diameter PVC reclaimed water force main, four (4)
water quality monitor wells, two (2) subaqueous canal crossings,
valves, appurtenances, complete restoration and general site work,
complete and ready for operation.
The work covered under Contract #2 is now substantially complete.
We need to release 80% of the retainage for this project, in the
amount of $19,953.30. The remaining 20%, or $5,088.33 ,retainage,
shall be retained until final completion of the project.
,ANALYSIS:
We have reviewed the figures and find them to be in, order. It is
necessary to pay this final payment and release some of the
retainage for Partial Pay Estimate #5, which is attached.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that
payment for substantial completion be made to the contractor,
releasing 80% of the retainage for this project, in the amount of
$19,953.30, for work under Contract #2.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
payment for substantial completion to A.O.B. Under-
ground, Inc., and release of 80% of the retainage
in the amount of $19,953.30.
37
jAR21 1989
BOOK76 [LE 4 S
ItPR 2 1 198
EOOK 6 fm.430
EMERGENCY ITEM - RFP FOR SOLID WASTE RECYCLING PLAN (CDM)
The Board reviewed letter from Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc.:
CD
environmental engineers. scientists.
planners. & management consultants
March 16, 1989
HAND DELIVERED
Mr. Terrance G. Pinto
Director of Utility Services
Indian River County
1840 - 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Re: Solid Waste Recycling Plan
Dear Mr. Pinto and Mr. Little:
CAMP DRESSER & W1cKEE INC.
660 Beachland Boulevard. Suite 202
Vero Beach. Florida 32963
407 231-4301 Fax: 407 231.4332
Mr. John V% Little
City Manager
City of Vero Beach
1053 - 20th Place
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. is pleased to present our revised proposal to
prepare a Solid Waste Recycling Plan for Indian River County and the
City of Vero Beach based on our discussions with you on February 23,
1989 and March 15, 1989. This proposal presents in detail the following
items:
o Exhibit A - Scope of Work
o . Exhibit B - Project Labor Breakdown
o Exhibits C-1 through C-4 - Project Budgets by Phase
We have estimated the duration of this project to be two months to
produce a draft recycling plan for submittal to the Florida Department
of Environmental Regulation. For the services under this proposal, our
fees are estimated at the following lump sum amounts:
Phase IA $27,700
Phase IB 14,500
Phase II 14,400
Phase III 4,600
Total $61,200
We will not exceed these amounts unless we have obtained prior approval.
We recommend that the City's share of the'fees be computed as 100
percent of the fee for Phase IB plus 20 percent of the fees for other
phases based on population. This method of cost division would result
in a total lump sum fee of $23,800 for the City and $37,400 for the
County.
If you should have any questions, please contact our office.
Very truly yours,
CAW DRESSER�r,McKEE. INC r
Donald G. Munksgaard, P.E.
Vice President
38
Commissioner Scurlock suggested a Motion of approval, but
Commissioner Eggert had a question. She noted that when we were
talking last time, it was her understanding that we were talking
about, for instance, going out this year for Phase 1A and then
another year continuing with the next and so on. She did not
have the feeling that is what we are doing, but feels this is
being set up without any chance of reviewing what is needed in
the future.
Chairman Wheeler asked if this has to be approved today or
if it can be held over, and Administrator Chandler believed we
could wait one more week. He noted that he had felt the essence
of it had been discussed at the last meeting and this was put on
the agenda because of some concern about the time element.
Commissioner Eggert noted that the Board only received this
proposal this morning, and she does not see where we are doing
Phase to this year and other parts of it other years.
Commissioner Scurlock agreed that he would like to see some
dates associated with Phase 1A, etc.
Utilities Director Pinto explained the reason they haven't
put dates in is because it will be very difficult to say just
when those specific tasks are going to be needed. He felt what
staff is saying, particularly regarding the market analysis, is
that we know it has to be done; it just is a matter of when it
has to be done. We are not in a position to say let's wait for
June, 1990, to do that.
Commissioner Scurlock believed when you say phases, it is
understood that you do one thing at a time, but that is really
not explicit here, and he believed there should be some statement
to indicate that these phases wili not be done all at the same
time. He realized you cannot say January 3, 1991, but he agreed
with Commissioner Eggert that it needed to be spelled out a
little more clearly.
Commissioner Eggert felt they had done some prioritizing.
She believed she had heard that it was urgent that we get Phase
39
MAR 2`11 1989
mcq 76 PU 431
miAk_219
BOOK 76 FAH 432
1A done, and by the time that was done, then we would know a lot
more about recycling than we did before. She agreed that phase
needs to be done quickly, but she was not sure that all the rest
of this needs to go out to a consultant.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if we can get a critical path,
and Director Pinto believed we can but asked why not approve this
based on going phase by phase and when one phase is completed,
staff will come back to the Board.
Commissioner Scurlock felt if we could get a critical path
and get a time frame to complete Phase 1; then staff could always
come back to the Board based on that critical path to get the
final okay to go to the next phase.
Administrator Chandler knew we are getting very concerned
about time because of the need to have the plan in by July 1st,
but because of all the questions being raised on the time
element, suggested that staff just resubmit it next week for
final approval.
Commissioner Eggert stressed that it was not just the time
element; she just was not sure that this needs to go out of house
on all of these phases.
Administrator Chandler was concerned that people are
oversimplifying what we need to get into and what that potential
impact may be. He believed there is no doubt that the markets
are going to dry up and that there will be a financial impact,
and we need to be sure that when we approve this particular plan
and submit it to the state that everyone is aware of the cost and
if there is going to be any impact on the manner in which we
collect in the unincorporated area.
Commissioner Eggert emphasized that she did not disagree
with any of that; she just did not feel the Board has been given
what they asked for last week.
Commissioner Scurlock suggested that we authorize staff's
recommendation and make it clear that the Administrator has the
ability to direct the phasing of the scope of work, and if he
40
determines some of these elements need not be done, then he would
bring that back to the Board.
Commissioner Eggert noted that did not answer any of her
questions.
Administrator Chandler felt the staff can bring the whole
thing back within a week and have it spelled out so we resolve it
next Tuesday. He noted that he does not like to do this type of
thing and give it to the Board on such short notice. He just got
it yesterday afternoon, and in view of the fact that there are
significant questions, he, therefore, would prefer to bring it
back next week with a time element.
MOTION MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, to table action on the above matter
for one week, was voted on and carried unanimously.
Director Pinto pointed out that it is imperative to get this
over to the City because a portion of it is directly related to
the City's needs.
Commissioner Eggert reiterated that she understands the
whole thing; she just does not feel what was discussed last week
has appeared in the document presented today.
APPOINTMENTS TO CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD (Tabled from Previous
Meeting
County Attorney Vitunac informed the Board that after the
discussion about these appointments last week, he had Board
Secretary Jan Masi research the history of these appointments,
and it was unusual. When the first appointments were made, there
were only 4 members of the Board of County Commissioners.
Commissioner Fletcher had resigned about that time, and Commis-
sioner Bowman had not yet been appointed. There was a local
ordinance creating this Board that said that each Commissioner
got one pick, and then the 2 at large were picked by the whole
41
LIAR 21 '198
C"QQ 0 6 rr.i.:L
33
r-
I1V1AR 21 1939
9
BOOK ['AGE 434
Board. In the meantime, that ordinance has been replaced by the
new state law which simply says the whole Board appoints the
member. There are no individual appointments.
Commissioner Bird believed what was done formerly was divide
up the various job descriptions; each Commissioner picked someone
who qualified under that particular category; and it was then
voted on.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved the
appointment of Karl L. Zimmermann and Ralph J. Simeone
to the Code Enforcement Board for a three-year term
beginning April 24, 1989 (to replace Edna Craven and
Cal Streetman).
APPTS. TO MARINE ADVISORY NARROWS WATERSHED ACTION COM. (MANWAC)
The Board reviewed memo from Chairman Wheeler:
TO
• Board o County
• Commissioners
Gary C. Wheeler
FROM: Chairman
DATE: Marc . FILE:
SUBJECT:
Marine Advisory Narrows
Watershed Action
Committee
REFERENCES:
The following people have indicated a desire to serve on the
Marine Advisory Narrows Watershed Action Committee (MANWAC):
Gary C. Wheeler, County Commissioner
Brian Barnett, Florida Game & Freshwater Fish
Commission
John Amos, Indian River Farms Water Control
District
George Bunnell, Indian River Shores Councilman and
Director of Pelican Island Audubon
Society
42
Tim Adams, Commercial Fisherman
Peter O'Bryan, Indian River County Mosquito Control
District
John Jackson, Owner of Vero's Tackle
Robert Pennington, U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service
George Phreaner, Vero Beach Power Squadron, Vero
Beach Boat Club, Vero Beach Yacht
Club
R. Grant Gilmore, Harbor Branch Oceanographic
Institute
Kenneth Macht, City of Vero Beach
TO: Board of County
Commissioners
DATE: March 17, 1989 FILE:
SUBJECT: Marine Advisory Narrows
Watershed Action Committee
FROM: Alice E. White REFERENCES:
Administrative Secretary II
The following people have expressed a desire to serve on the
MANWAC:
Diane Barile, Marine Resources Council
(Christine Panico - Alternate)
Oren Deacon, formerly'with Fellsmere Farms
David Gunter, Indian River Farms Water Control District
Marvin Carter, Soil & Water Conservation
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, to approve the appointment of ail those
listed above to the Marine Advisory Narrows Watershed
Action Committee.
Commissioner Scurlock inquired about the total number of
people on this committee, and Board Administrative Assistant Liz
Forlani believed it is to be 25.
43
MAR 2 1 i J
nor 76 FACE 4.35
MAR 2
non
a
BOOK 76 P GE 436
Chairman Wheeler noted that there are 15 members currently
and wished to explain how we got to this situation. The
Committee started off as the Marine Advisory Board with 7
members. Then the Narrows Committee was formed through the
Marine Resources Council by the District, and he was selected as
chairman. Both committees were serving a dual function, and he
wasn't happy with sitting through two meetings that were going
over pretty much the same material; so, he asked if they could be
combined. They also had a problem with the Minutes with the
Narrows Committee, which sometimes were only a tape recording.
Chairman Wheeler noted that the objectives between the two
committees were the same, except probably some of the long term
effects of the Marine Advisory Committee may be a little more
involved and it had a wider scope than the Narrows Committee.
That is why he asked for the two committees to be merged.
Commissioner Scurlock had no problem with any of the
individuals named, but just wondered if the committee gets to 25
members whether it might not become very unwieldy.
Chairman Wheeler believed all the different people have
specific areas of expertise where they can make a definite
contribution and advised there has been no trouble with it so far
in getting things done.
Commissioner Scurlock agreed that if there has been no
problem with the way it is working, it should be left alone.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION RE STATE & FEDERAL POLICIES
Commissioner Bowman referred to a proposed Resolution which
Hoyt Howard, Chairman of the Tri -County Council of Local
Governments, is• asking the Commission to approve and return so it
can be sent to our State Delegation and Federal Representatives.
44
This Resolution addresses the problems caused in the Treasure
Coast area as a result of the state and federal policies on
immigration.
Commissioner Eggert advised that the TCRPC has talked about
getting a group together to discuss this.
Chairman Wheeler noted that the only question he had was
where it says the Treasure Coast area is shouldering the burden
in an unfairly disproportionate manner. He was not sure that
statement is totally accurate in Tight of what is happening
throughout the rest of the state with the agricultural regions,
etc. He did feel our impact is significant, however, and he is
in favor of the Resolution.
Commissioner Bowman agreed that we are probably not impacted
as severely as Dade County, for instance, but we are agricultural
and she believed the impact is especially severe in the St. Lucie
area.
Commissioner Bird did not see the Resolution as hurting
agriculture. We do have a lot of migrants here, and we are just
asking the federal government to give us some help. _
Commissioner Eggert noted that this area historically has
gotten less money than equivalent areas around the state.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 89-31, urging funding for local expenses
caused by immigration.
45
11989
nyoi, OLE 4$7
MAR 21
BOOK F GE 4.8
RESOLUTION NO. 89 - 31
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA URGING FUNDING FOR
LOCAL EXPENSES CAUSED BY IMMIGRATION
WHEREAS, the Treasure Coast area of Martin, St. Lucie,
Indian River and Okeechobee Counties and the municipalities
of Stuart, Ft. Pierce, Pt. St. Lucie, Vero Beach and
Okeechobee are experiencing a rapid influx of migrant farm
workers and political refugees from Central and South
American, Cuba and Haiti; and
WHEREAS, state and federal law permit entrance of these
workers into the Treasure Coast area; and
WHEREAS, federal policies on political asylum have
further encouraged the influx of immigrants into the
Treasure Coast area; and
WHEREAS, these overcrowded conditions, language
barriers and cultural differences make governmental
administration, policing and census taking impossible; and
WHEREAS, these large numbers of immigrants overtax the
local governmental, municipal, educational and
infrastructure capabilities and facilities; and
WHEREAS, the nine local governments of the treasure
coast area do not have the economic and/or legal means to
enforce compliance with local, state or federal standards;
and
WHEREAS, even if the economic means' existed to
enforce compliance with local, state or federal standards,
there is not sufficient housing available for those people
that are displaced; and
WHEREAS, the Treasure Coast area is shouldering the
burden of accommodating federal and state policies in an
unfairly disproportionate manner relative to other areas of
the state and country;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that
1. State and federal assistance is required and
requested to alleviate the problems caused by state and
federal policies on immigration.
2. This assistance should be in the form of financial
aid for housing and other infrastructure needs as well as
comprehensive state and federal enforcement of laws relating
to immigration, alien workers and employers of those
workers.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Scurlock who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Eggert and, upon being put to a vote, the vote
. was as follows:
46
Chairman Gary C. Wheeler Aye
Vice Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert' Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Aye
Aye
Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution passed
and adopted this 21st day of March, 1989.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
`INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Gary . Wheeler
Ch man
DISCUSSION ON CREATING A MANATEE PROTECTION AREA
Commissioner Bowman informed the Board that it has recently
come to her attention that the north fork of the Sebastian River
is heavily populated with manatees, and in the area where they
congregate east of the spillway, there is also a boat ramp.
There is no No Speeding zone there, no No Wake zone, and no
policing. She advised that she called the St. John's River Water
Management District, and it is not their jurisdiction. East of
the spillway is the jurisdiction of the Marine Patrol, but
unfortunately we have never had very much success with the Marine
Patrol. She believed the county line is right down the middle of
the river there.
County Attorney Vitunac advised that we have a proposal with
Brevard County to amend the County boundary, but it won't be
effective until June. The boundary will meander and follow the
deepest part of the river.
Commissioner Bowman noted that she had talked to Biologist
Diane Barile, who is trying to get an ordinance passed in Brevard
County for the protection of the manatees, and she would like to
have one here and then we can have a deputy enforce it.
OR 21 `iW9
47
TOOK
764'3�
F'.1�F
6iAR 21 98
BOOK 76 FACE 440
Chairman Wheeler asked if the state hasn't designated those
areas. In fact, he believed the state did designate them rather
indiscriminately in the past.
Commissioner Scurlock felt the proper approach would be to
authorize Commissioner Bowman to go to Chairman Wheeler's Marine
Advisory Committee with this and then it could come back to the
Board for action.
Commissioner Bowman believed all we need is a county
ordinance designating the area a manatee sanctuary.
Attorney Vitunac advised that there is a Marine Animal
Regulation in the state statutes, and the state designates right
down to canals and square footage what is protected and what
isn't. There are 3 pages of legal description of where they are
protected under the DNR, and it says if you find them anywhere
else to send them a map and they will have rules to protect that
area also.
Commissioner Bowman felt the situation is critical, and
Chairman Wheeler confirmed that he would put this on his
committee agenda to be discussed at their next meeting.
NORTH COUNTY FIRE
The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment,
the Board of County Commissioners would reconvene sitting as the
District Board of Fire Commissioners of the North Indian River
County Fire District. Those Minutes are being prepared
separately.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 10:05 o'clock A.M.
ATTEST:
Clerk - Chairman
48