HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/17/1989BOA R 1D ACT 1 ON & 1 MPLEMEN-rA-r 1 ON
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 17, 1989
9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
1840 25th STREET
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Gary C. Wheeler, Chairman
Carolyn K. Eggert, Vice Chairman
Richard N. Bird
Margaret C. Bowman
Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney •
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * =*:
9:00 AM 1. CALL TO ORDER
2. INVOCATION - Rev. James H. Franklin
Approved.
Approved.
South Side
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman
-ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Church of God
. Amendment to Contract with Blevins Electric, Inc., on
Phase II of.County Jail. (C.2)
5. .CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of Minutes of Tentative
Budget Hearing of 9/5/89
B. Approval of Minutes of Final
Budget hearing of 9/13/89
C. Graves Brothers Company's Request
for an Extension of Site Plan
Approval for an Employee Village
(Memorandum dated 10/2/89)
. Sale of IRC Owned Property
Children's Home Society of Fla.
(Memorandum dated 10/5/89)
E. IRC Bid# 89-97, Portable Sandblaster
(Memorandum dated 10/2/89)
Approved.
. IRC Bid# 89-99, Chemicals
(Memorandum dated 10/2/89)
G. Routine Release of County Liens
(Memorandum dated 10/11/89)
Approved.
Res. 89-132 adopted as
amended. • The following
condition added: Any im-
provements placed on
property will become pro-
perty of Co. If Home fails
to operate. Another
motion stated - subject to
option of leaving improve-
ments or removing the
Approved.
Approved.
6. CLERK TO THE BOARD
None
OCT 111989
BOOK
OCTPr"
1 i989
9:05 AM
Ord. 89-29.
BOOK 78 F E 14 7
7. A. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS
None
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1) ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 25(B)
YARD ENCROACHMENTS, MODIFYING AND
ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS AFFECTING
THE LOCATION OF SWIMMING POOLS AND
RELATED STRUCTURES: FURTHER
AMENDING SECTION 25(i), WALLS AND
FENCES, PERMITTING FENCES OF UP TO
SIX FEET IN HEIGHT ON CORNER LOTS
ADJACENT TO ARTERIAL ROADS, AND
PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING
PROVISIONS, CODIFICATION,
SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE
(Memorandum dated 9/8/89)
2) ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FOLLOWING
SECTIONS OF APPENDIX A OF THE CODE
OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA KNOWN AS THE
ZONING CODE IN REGARDS TO MODIFYING
AND ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS
RELATING TO UNENCLOSED COMMERCIAL
AMUSEMENTS: SECTION 4(A), A-1,
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT: SECTION 18(A),
CN, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT:
SECTION 19, CL, LIMITED COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT, SECTION 20, CG, GENERAL
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT: SECTION 20.1,
CH, HEAVY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT: ';
SECTION 21, IL,. LIGHT -INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICT: SECTION 22(A), IG,
GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTt+:•
SECTIONS 25.1(d) . AND 25.1(e)41t
COMMERCIAL -ENTERTAINMENT,
RECREATION AND AMUSEMENT SPECIFIC
LAND USE REGULATIONS: SECTION 25.1(o),
RECREATION USES SPECIFIC LAND USE
REGULATIONS: AND PROVIDING FOR REPEAL
OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS,
CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY, AND
EFFECTIVE DATE
(Memorandum dated 9/25/89)•
Ord. 89-30. Direct staff
to review "Driving Range in
a residential area as a special
exception."
8.
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS
None
9. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS
A.
Approved staff's
recommendation.
Directed staff to write letter
to Gov. and Cabinet.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Mike Kiefer Request that the
County Commission Adopt a
Resolution Concerning State/
County Coordination in Manatee
Protection
(Memorandum dated 10/9/89)
Approved.
Approved.
Approved,
9. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS - CONTINUED
B. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
1. Approval of 89-90 EMS County Award
Grant Application
(Memorandum dated 10/4/89)
2. First Amendment. to Lease Agreement
Between Sebastian and IRC for
Ambulance Station
(Memorandum dated 10/5/89)
3. Award of Bid, Phase III
IRC Jail
(Memorandum dated 9/29/89)
C. GENERAL SERVICES
1. IRC Health Department
(Memorandum dated 10/5/89)
2. Blevins Elect. Amendment to Contract, Jail, Ph 11
D. LEISURE SERVICES
None
Presentation made.
No action taken.
Approved.
Approved.
Approved grant and
use of funds.
Memo as amended.
Approved.
Approved.
Approved staff's
recommendation as
amended.
Approved.
Approved.
Approved.
10.
Approved.
OCT 1 fd i989
E. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
1) Annual HRS Contract
(Memorandum dated 10/11/89)
2) Governor's Drug Free Communities
_Grant Program
(Memorandum dated 10/11/89)
3) Recreation Equipment Request
Budget Amendment 004
(Memorandum dated 10/11/89)
F. PERSONNEL
1. Relocation Allowance, Utilities
New Hire
(Memorandum dated 10/2/89)
2. Insurance Program, 1989-90
(Memorandum dated 1010/89)
G. PUBLIC WORKS
Change Order No. 1 for Golden Sands
Dune Walkover Modification
(Memorandum dated 10/4/89)
H. UTILITIES
1. Proposed Water Service on 8th
Court South of 2nd Street
(Memorandum dated 10/9/89)
2. Proposed Water Service on 48th
Court South of 16th Street
(Memorandum dated 10/4/89)
COUNTY
ATTORNEY
Hawk's Nest Management, Inc., Developer's
Agreement
(Memorandum dated 10/11/89)
OCT
11.
Approved. Write letter
to SJRWMD asking
them to continue to
pledge money for the
lagoon and that we are
pleased with results
so far.
1
12.
BOOK 78 r c[ i49
COMMISSIONERS ITEMS
A. CHAIRMAN GARY C. WHEELER
Amendment to Agreement Between
IRC and SJRWMD to Investigate
and Reduce, in IRC, Pollution
Caused by On-site Sewage Disposal
Systems, Point Source Discharges,
and Poorly Maintained Water
Retention Areas
(Memorandum dated 10/6/89)
B. VICE CHAIRMAN CAROLYN K. EGGERT
C. COMMISSIONER RICHARD N. BIRD
D. COMMISSIONER MARGARET C. BOWMAN
E. COMMISSIONER DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.
SPECIAL DISTRICTS
r , •
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 EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL WILL
BE BASED.
Tuesday, October 17, 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,
October 17, 1989, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Gary C.
Wheeler, Chairman; Carolyn K. Eggert, Vice Chairman; Richard N.
Bird; and Margaret C. Bowman. Don C. Scurlock, Jr. was attending
a water pollution seminar in San Francisco. Also present were
James E. Chandler, County Administrator; William G. Collins Il,
Assistant County Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners;
Joseph Baird, OMB Director; and Barbara Bonnah, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order.
Rev. James H. Franklin of the South Side Church of God gave
the invocation, and Commissioner Bowman led the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Chairman Wheeler requested the addition to today's Agenda of
an amendment to the the contract with Blevins Electric, Inc. on
Phase 11 of the County Jail.
INT 17
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) added the
above item to today's Agenda.
BOOK
MG[ F C 'm'
�V 150
OCTAL j
J
BOOK �8 m[ 151
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Bird requested that Item D be removed from the
Consent Agenda for discussion.
A. Approval of Minutes of Tentative Budget Hearing of 9/5/89
The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or
additions to the Minutes of the Tentative Budget Hearing of
9/5/89. There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) approved the
Minutes of the Tentative Budget Hearing of 9/5/89, as
written.
B. Approval of Minutes of Final Budget Hearing of 9/13/89
The Chairman asked if there were any corrections or
additions to the Minutes of the Final Budget Hearing of 9/13/89.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) approved the
Minutes of the Final Budget Hearing of 9113/89, as
written.
C. Graves Brothers Company's Request for an Extension of
Site Plan
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/2/89:
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
James Chandler
County Administrator
DIVVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
a
Robert M. KeaingICP
Community Development Dorector
THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP
Chief, Current Developppent
Robert E. Wiegerg7
Staff Planner, Current
October 2, 1989
Development
GRAVES BROTHERS COMPANY'S REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF
THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR AN EMPLOYEE VILLAGE
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of October 17, 1989.
`..DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On October 13, 1988, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved a
site plan application submitted by Graves Brothers Company to con-
'struct an employee village (migrant worker housing) with associ-
.ated site improvements at 8100 69th Street.
`::The owner has stated that due to engineering constraints, he has
been unable to commence construction prior to the expiration of
the approved site plan. However, if no construction has begun by
;October 13, 1989, the site plan approval will lapse unless other -
'wise extended by the Board of County Commissioners. This petition
'was received by the Community Development Department prior to the
expiration of the approved plan, as required by the site plan
-ordinance.
`No regulations have changed since the time of site plan approval:
-that would affect the approved plan.
Pursuant to the provisions of Sections 23.2(G)(2) of the Zoning
Code, the owneris requesting a full 1 year extension of the
approved site plan. It has been the policy of the Board to grant
'extensions to projects which conform to current codes.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Graves Brothers Company's request
for a one year extension of the previously approved site plan; the
new expiration date to be October 13, 1990.
3
1001- 1 1989
78
POOKF'"„E 15
OCT1 8
BOOK . 7 8 F.1GE 15
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) granted a 1 -year
extension of site plan approval; the new expiration
date to be October 13, 1990.
D. Sale of Indian River County -Owned Property - Children's Home
Society of Florida
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/5/89:
DATE:
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
OCTOBER 5, 1989
HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
SALE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY
CHILDREN'S HOME SOCIETY OF FLORIDA
BACKGROUND:
On August 4, 1989 meeting, the Board approved sale of a parcel of
property located on Olso Road, to the Children's Home Society of
Florida for $25,000.
ANALYSIS:
Pursuant to Section 125.38, Florida Statues, the County Attorney has
prepared the required resolution and deed.
tECOMMENDATIONS:
.It is requested that the Board adopt the resolution
�...f'their Chairman to execute the required documents.
4
and authorize
Commissioner Bird suggested that the Legal Dept. clarify the
language in the reverter by saying that any improvements placed
on the sitebecome the property of the County if we see the need
to terminate this agreement. He felt that the County should take
the position that the County either accept the improvements or
insist that the improvements be removed if for some reason they
are a detriment to the property rather than an enhancement.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) authorized the
Legal Dept. to change the language in the reverter as
discussed above.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) adopted Resolution
89-132, acknowledging the application for private sale
of county property to The Children's Home Society of
Florida.
COPY OF COUNTY DEED IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK
TO THE BOARD
5
L tiOCT 1 '6'
PP"
BOOK I F'ALErob
RESOLUTION NO. 89-132
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, ACKNOWLEDGING THE APPLICATION
FOR PRIVATE SALE OF COUNTY PROPERTY TO
THE CHILDREN'S HOME SOCIETY OF FLORIDA;
RECOGNIZING THAT SUCH PROPERTY IS
TO BE USED FOR THE PUBLIC PURPOSE OF
PROVIDING SHELTER AND COUNSELING TO
RUNAWAY CHILDREN; AND SETTING A PRICE
FOR THE SALE OF SUCH PROPERTY AT
TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Section
125.38, Florida Statutes, The Children's Home Society of
Florida, an organization not-for-profit (hereinafter called
HOME), organized for the purposes of promoting community
interest and welfare.by providing shelter and counseling to
runaway children, has applied to the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida (hereinafter
called COUNTY), for a sale and conveyance of real property
located at:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION ATTACHED HERETO AND
INCORPORATED HEREIN AS "EXHIBIT A", and
WHEREAS, COUNTY is satisfied that such property is
required for such use and is not needed for COUNTY purposes,
and
WHEREAS, COUNTY has determined that it shall
convey the property by private sale to HOME for a
consideration of the sum of Twenty -Five Thousand Dollars
($25,000.00), conditioned upon HOME's operating a shelter
and counseling center for runaway children upon the property
.P .0
within one (1) year and so maintaining such shelter, or else
all title, use and interest in the property shall revert to
COUNTY, which shall then return Twenty -Five Thousand Dollars
to HOME.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
1. The above recitals are ratified in their entirety.
6
RESOLUTION NO. 89
2. The application for the sale and conveyance of
County property to HOME is hereby approved for the purpose
of providing shelter and counseling for runaway children.
The sale price of the property is hereby established at
Twenty -Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), and such sale and
conveyance is conditioned upon the operation of the shelter
and counseling center for runaway children within one (1)
year and so maintaining such shelter upon the subject real
property, or else title, use and interest in the property
•
shall revert to COUNTY with all improvements becoming the
property of COUNTY, or, at the COUNTY's option, the HOME may
be required to remove all of the improvements and return the
property to the COUNTY in its present condition, -and the
COUNTY shall at that time return the Twenty -Five Thousand
Dollars to the HOME.
The ._;' -._foregoing Resolution was offered by
Commissioner -Bird and seconded by Commissioner Eggert; and
upon being put to a vote the vote was as follows:
Chairman Gary C. Wheeler Aye
Vice Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Conmissionec,Richard N. Bird Aye'
Commissioner Margaret Cl. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution
duly passed and adopted at public hearing held this 17th day
of October, 1989.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Gary heeler,—ffhairman
EXHIBIT "A"
That portion of the Southwest ? of the
Southeast * of Section 24, Township 33
South, Range 39 East. EXCEPT the North
975.7 feet, lying West of Lateral "J".
ALSO EXCEPT the South 95 feet for road
purposes.
Subject to a 15 -foot wide utility
easement on the East line of the said
parcel, the width being measured
perpendicular to the said East line.
7
CT 1`
BOOK d. f'.(,r.156
BOOK
E. IRC Bid #89-97 - Portable Sandblaster
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/2/89:
f$E 15`1
Gr
DATE: October 2, 1989
TO: BOARD OF COUN'T'Y COMMISSIONERS
T1 RU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director
Department of General ice
FROM: Dominick L. Mascola, CPO Manager
Division of Purchasing
SUBJ: IRC BID#89-97/PORTABLE SANDATASTER
BACKGROUND:
The Subject Bid for Portable Sandblaster was properly advertised
and Five (5) Invitations to bid were sent out. On Sept. 27, 1989
bids were received. Four (4) Vendors submitted proposals for
the c modity.
ANALYSIS:
Staff has reviewed. the submittal to ascertain adherence to
specifications. Blanchard Machinery was the low bidder that
44 " met all requirements.
repents.
;;
FUNDING:
Monies for this project will came from Budget Solid Waste Accounts.
EDATION:
Staff recommends the award of a Fixed Contract for $12,653.00
to the low biAii-, Blanchard Machinery, for the subject commodity.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) awarded IRC Bid
#89-97 on a fixed contract basis to Blanchard Machinery
for $12,653.
8
•
• BOARD
-
•
OF COUNTY
1840 25114Si:ed.
•
..,:e
tZ•.
*
COMMISSIONERS
Vele Beach. noel& 32960
swEii. t
. • . . • . ,
• •
Form td dakome =AMU;
.
I Dates 9/29/89 1.1
PURCHASING DEPT. .
BID TABULATION
.
. Submitted By Domelcit L Mescoie
PURCHASING MANAGER •
• . Bid Na. 69/87 • • Dem 0f opening 9/27/89
Big Tike PORTABLE SANDBLAST=
-
•
- *
Tamara I= N741110111
Recommended Award BLAND
• $ 3.2.653.90
• RION
I. nmonnImcmmma '
$ 12.653.00
4115 GEORGIA AVE
HES? PALM BEACH, Pf. 33405
.
. .
2. 24.8.. MOODY & SONS
.
$13.997:00
•
4000 20R211 ?CHERUBS RD
WEST PALM BEACH. PL 33073
•
3. MILLS COMPRESSOR
913.509.40
5602 CAUSEWAY BLVD.
TAMPA. n. 33619
•.
.
-
.
_
4. TOTAL am SUPPLY
$18.3.20.38
936 OW DIX= HOE
VERO BEACH. PL 32960
••
•
'
•
•
.
•
. -
.
.
F. IRC Bid #89-99 - Chemicals
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 102/89:
DATE: October 2, 1989
W: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
"Sonny" Dean, Director
Department of General yices
FROM: Daninick L. Mascola, CPO Manager
Division of Purchasing
SUBJ: IRC BID#89-99/CHEMICALS
BACKGROUND:
The Subject Bid for Chemicals was properly advertised
and Five (5) Invitations to bid were sent out. On Sept. 27, 1989
bids T.4ere received. Four (4) Vendors submitted proposals for
the cannodity.
ANALYSIS:
Staff has reviewed the submittal to ascertain adherence to
specifications. Group I, Sulfuric Acid to P B & S Chemical
and Group II Caustic Soda to Allied Universal Corporation
and Group III Calcium Hypochlorite to Allied Universal Corp.
the above were the lowest bidders to meet all reguiremnts.
9 BOOF. ,r. • .L.)
78 PV,159,
BOOK
FUNDING:
Monies for this project will come from Budget Utilities Accounts.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Award of a Open 1.d Contract. The initial
Contract period shall start with the date of the award and shall
terminate one (1) year from that date and to authorize the
Purchasing Manager to renew the contract for an additional one
year subject to satisfactory performance, vendor acceptance and
determination the renewal is in the best interest of the County.
78 IYJ
U C.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) awarded IRC Bid
#89-99 as set out in the above staff recommendation.
BOA&D OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th strew. Veto beach. Florida 82865
s.....n WM ries .
Recommended Award -`
•
S.... •r.r.. a»rrr
• Date. 9/28/98
PURCHASING DEPT.:
BID TABULATION
Submitted By Dmn rick L. Masada
PURCHASING MANAGER
Bid No. 89/99 Dote Of Opening 9/27/89
Bid Title =ERIC=
GROUP I GROUP 11 GROUP III
SULFURIC CAUSTIC SODA CALCIUM HYPOCHLORITE
I. P & 8 CHEMICAL $2520.00 52520.00 54392.00 593.00
f
2. ALLIED UNIV CORP 5-8/5 54320.00 • 588.90
3. APPERSON CHEMICAL 52628.00
54464.00 5130.00
A JrnrPc ruraTrar. R/AnA 40
S44:160 OD 6 8/8
S. 'BARD:ROES CHEMICAL $ 8/9
5 8/9 5 N/8
DMZ
10
G. Routine Release of County Liens
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/11/89:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
X?.
FROM: ar i es P. itunac, County ounty Attorney
DATE: October 11, 1989
RE: CONSENT AGENDA - BCC MEETING 10/17/89
ROUTINE RELEASE OF COUNTY LIENS
This office has processed the following matters and requests
permission for the Chairman to execute the standard release
forms:
(1) Release of Special Assessment Lien
Lot 4, Block A of SUNSHINE QUALITY HOMES
SUBDIVISION UNIT NO. 1, in the name of
Solveig Gaarn.
(2) Release of Special Assessment Lien
Lots 10 & 11 of ROCKRIDGE SUBDIVISION UNIT 9,
in the name of Gerald Paulo and Louise Kopeck.
(3) Partial Release of ERU Wastewater Reservation
and Assessment Lien
Map #8 - 28 ERUs Released
in the name of UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) authorized the
Chairman to execute the Release of Liens as listed
above.
COPIES OF RELEASE OF LIENS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK
TO THE BOARD
IDC T i
e� �ry€�`: 11
BOOK %C FAE.bU�
OCT
M. •
BOOK
78 F4„E1617
PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE AMENDING YARD ENCROACHMENTS MODIFYING
AND ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS AFFECTING THE LOCATION OF SWIMMING
POOLS AND RELATED STRUCTURES
The hour of 9:05 o'clock 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
in the matter of
lech;„
in the Court, was pub-
.. lished In said newspaper in the issues of
a� 17f1
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in sajd 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 this ' 1) .day,."o
,
•}r -
(SEAL)
9
• e (Business Manadet
(Cie;l{--ot-t jr ijj Qpurt Indian-Riy r-Cdt st�•+Flnrita)
,' 1 ''•> y��.a
1?, Vim.
C4t.t,1. % w:.c.,.+.
nal oncE�d Pusuc NEARI1
•: HEIR Y GIVEN the)of
nets 'ofctIA' County.
bli •Mari at which parr
ties in interest
County •••
Florida, sha
bhall have an oppor-
tunity. 10. be heard, In Commission
-Chambete• oT the' County Administratidri Bu
ing, located at • 1840 25th • Street.` Vero .
Florida on Tuesday,=:October 17.'_1888 at
a.m. to consider the adoption ,of an Ordinance
...'entitled:...,:,.:; ..,.•: •..�,��i :.•:y•11J.•.v+
AN ORDINANCE • ' OFT : INDIAN • RIVER ?•
.COUNTY, .FLORIDA AMENDING ' SEF•`
• ' '- TION' 25(B); YARD ENCROACHMENTS,'rlfi
••sMODIFYING' AND ESTABLISHING REG-t:'I
• GULATIONS -AFFECTING THE LOCA4%-
t 110N OF SWIMMING POOLS AND RE.; •
{ _: -cLATED �'. STRUCTURES: ,WFURTHER
, t'AMENDING SECTION 25(I) • WALLS AND it 1
. '• FENCES,'. PERMITTING FENCES OF UP 94
• " TO SIX FEET IN HEIGHT. ON CORNER',
LOTS ADJACENT TO "ARTERIAL .
..:..ROADS: AND PROVIDING FOR.
• OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS. CODI•
-
• . FlCATION, SEVERABILITY AND EFFEC- -
�TIVE DATE. '1r1.- , ; _.. - • .. `: ;`
• A copy of the proposed Ordinance is available
at the Planning Department office on the second.
. floor of the County Administration Building •,.,
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 testimony and evidence
upon which the appeal Is based. .. , .; • ., . .
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY •
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BY: -s -GARY WHEELER, CHAIRMAN
Sept. 28, 1889 - • , , 813570
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/8/89:
12
1
J
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
.
SUBJECT:
James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert
M. KeatingAI
Community Development director
4Stan Boling, �CP
Chief, Current Development
September 8, 1989
ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 25(b) and 25(i) RELATING TO
SETBACKS FOR POOLS AND RELATED STRUCTURES AND FENCE
HEIGHTS
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of October 17, 1989.
BACKGROUND AND CONDITIONS:
Recently, the Board of County Commissioners directed -staff to
initiate changes to existing zoning regulations relating to
setbacks for pools and related structures and fence heights in
yards abutting arterial roads. The Board's directive was based
upon a request by Attorney Bruce Barkett on behalf of his client
who owns a corner lot which fronts upon both S.R. A.I.A. and a
subdivision local street. Under current regulations, the yard
abutting S.R. A.I.A. could not be treated as a "rear" yard for
purposes of locating a pool and pool enclosure and a'six foot
fence. Staff has reviewed existing regulations and now proposes
an ordinance amendment that properly addresses such "problem
situations" as those arising with Attorney Barkett's client.
At its regular meeting of September 14, 1989 the Planning and
Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the Board
adopt the proposed ordinance (see attachement #1).
ANALYSIS:
The proposed ordinance addresses two areas of single family
.development as follows:
,Pools and Related Structures
For several years the zoning code has given special "waivers". to
-allowpools and related structures (decks
nclo-
sures)to encroach into rear yard setbacks. patios, These waivers sallow
pools and screened pool enclosures to within 10' of a rear proper-
ty line, and allow pool decks and patios to within 5' of the rear
property line. Swimming pool setbacks are also related to ease-
ment locations.
Section 1 of the proposed ordinance addresses three issues.
1. Pool setback from easements.
The existing 5' swimming pool setback from easements
requirement is now proposed to be necessary only in
relation to utilities, drainage, or access easements.
This change will still carry out the original intent of
the easement setback provision which is to reduce the
likelihood of pool excavation impacting infrastructure
13
iOCT 17
L
BUOK E EA'uL ib
IOU 1
BOOK 78 PAGE
improvements within easements. Specifying "utilities,
drainage or accessory" easements within the setback
regulation will allow greater flexibility where
bufferyard or planting easements exist. Pool excavation
adjacent to such planting easements should not create
any serious impacts.
2. Yards abutting arterial roads.
The existing regulations allow owners of double frontage
lots which abut major thoroughfare roads to treat the
yard abutting the major road as a rear yard in relation
to locating pools and related structures and six foot
high fences. However, owners of corner lots which also
abut a major road on one side do not currently have the
same opportunity. The proposed ordinance would allow
equal treatment of double frontage lots and corner lots.
3. Unusual lot configurations.
The existing pool and related structures regulations
apply only to rear yards and rear yard setbacks.
However, recently it has been brought to staff's atten-
tion that some lots exist which have little or no rear
yards, as defined in the zoning' code. Although such
situations are rare, there are instances, where a lot
has no "rear yard", rather, two front and two side
yards. Staff proposes an amendment whereby owners of
lots having either no rear yard or a small rear yard may
designate a side yard as a "rear yard" for purposes of
applying the pool and related structures setback waiver.
Fence Locations.
Section 2 of the proposed ordinance addresses fence heights.
As with pools and related structures, the existing regu-
lations allow owners of double frontage lots to treat a yard
abutting a major road as a "rear yard" in regards to the
special setback waivers, and in regards to fence height.
(Note: six foot fences are allowed in both rear and side
yards.] Thus, existing regulations allow under certain
circumstances a double frontage lot owner to erect a six foot
fence in a yard that abuts a major road.
However, under existing regulations owners of corner lots
under the same circumstances having one yard that abuts a
major road do not have the same opportunity to erect a six
foot fence. The proposed ordinance amendment would treat
corner lots the same as double frontage lots, allowing six
foot high fences under the same circumstances.
SUMMARY:
;4,A.;•The proposed regulations provide for equal treatment of yards
adjacent to major roadways by allowing such yards to be treated as
rear yards, under certain circumstances, in regards to fence
i `=i- _ .-height and pools and related structures.
Graphics will be presented at the meeting that will illustrate
normal and "problem" lot situations and the effects of the
proposed changes.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County. Commissioners adopt the
proposed ordinance amending sections 25(b) and 25(i) of the zoning
code.
Stan Boling, Chief of Current Development, showed some
overhead slides and graphics illustrating normal and "problem"
lot situations and the effects of the proposed changes.
Chairman Wheeler opened the Public Hearing, and asked if
anyone wished to be heard in this matter.
Bruce Barkett, local attorney, explained that the proposed
changes are the result of a request on behalf of his client who
wanted to put in a swimming pool on a corner lot which fronts
upon both A -1-A and a subdivision local street. They worked with
staff and solved the situation with the amendment as proposed.
Attorney James A. Taylor, I11, of the law firm of Polackwich
& Lauer, also supported the amendment because they too have a
client who has the same situation.
There being no others who wished to be heard, the Chairman
closed the Public Hearing.
001- 1
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner. Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) adopted Ordinance
89-29, amending Section 25(B), Yard Encroachments,
modifying and establishing regulations affecting the
Location of swimming pools and related structures.
15
-18
IUGI
ORDINANCE NO. 89- 29
o
BOOK 8 F'�.i.[ Iro
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING SECTION
25(B), YARD ENCROACHMENTS, MODIFYING AND ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS
AFFECTING THE LOCATION OF SWIMMING POOLS AND RELATED STRUCTURES;
FURTHER AMENDING SECTION 25(i), WALLS AND FENCES, PERMITTING
FENCES OF UP TO SIX FEET IN HEIGHT ON CORNER LOTS ADJACENT TO
ARTERIAL ROADS; AND PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PRO-
VISIONS, CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida that:
SECTION 1
Section 25(b)(6) be hereby amended as follows:
"(6) Swimming pools and related structures.
a. Swimming pools. No swimming pool shall be located
closer than ten (10) feet to any rear property line or
five (5) feet to any easement for utilities, drainage or
access, whichever distance is greater.
b. Special yard situations.
1. On corner lots with one yard which abuts a road
right-of-way classified as an arterial road on the
County's Thoroughfare Plan Map, no swimming pool
shall be located closer than 10 feet to the proper-
ty line abutting the arterial road, or five feet to
any easement for utilities, drainage, or access,
whichever distance is greater, provided that the
yard adjacent to the arterial road is not the yard
providing the main entrance to the lot.
2. On lots where no rear- yard, as defined in the
zoning code, exists having a width at least
one-half (i) the applicable minimum lot width, one
side yard or side yard area may be designated by
the property owner as a "rear -yard" for purposes of
applying the regulations contained within this
section: Section 25(b)(6).
[NOTE: seedefinitions section regarding double
frontage lots: "yard, rear".]
c. Pool decks and patios. No deck or patio constructed in.
conjunction with any swimming pool shall be located
within an easement or closer than 5 feet to any property
line.
d. Pool enclosures. No screen enclosures for swimming
pools shall be located within an easement or closer than
10 feet to the rear property line on interior or corner
lots. For purposes of this paragraph, yards which are
not adjacent to the main entrance of the lot, but which
abut a road classified as an arterial road on the
County's Thoroughfare Plan Map shall be considered rear
yards. Pool enclosures shall not encroach on the
required rear yard on either double frontage lots or
corner lots if the rear yard abuts or faces $ the front
yard providing the main entrance to another lot.
Coding: Words in Ottilt¢yffit,& type are deletions from the existing
law. Words underlined are additions.
1
ORDINANCE NO. 89-24
SECTION 2
Section 25(i)(2) be hereby_amended as follows:
"(2) Height of walls and fences.
a. Front yard. Fences not exceeding forty-two (42)
inches in height may be erected in the front yard
of any lot.
b. Side yard. Fences not exceeding six (6) feet in
height may be erected in the side yard of any lot
provided they do not extend beyond the front
setback line.
c. Rear yard. Fences not exceeding six (6) feet in
height may be erected in the rear yard of any lot
within a zoning district, provided that no fence
shall be erected in a utility easement.
d. Fences not exceeding 6 feet in height may be
erected in the front yard of any corner lot when
that yard does not provide the main entrance to the
lot but is adjacent to a road classified as an
arterial road in the County's Thoroughfare Plan
Map.
(NOTE: see definitions section regarding double frontage lots.]
SECTION 3
REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS
All previous ordinances, resolutions, or motions of the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida which
conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed
to the extent of such conflict. All Special Acts of the legisla-
ture applying only to_ the unincorporated portion of Indian River
County and which conflict with the provisions of this ordinance
are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. _
SECTION 4
CODIFICATION
The provisions- of this ordinance shall be incorporated into
the County Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "sec-
tion", "article", or other appropriate word, and the sections of
this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such
intentions.
SECTION 5
SEVERABILITY
If any section, part of a sentence, paragraph, phrase or word
of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional,
inoperative or void, such holdings shall not affect the remaining
portions hereof and it shall be construed to have been the legis-
lative intent to pass this ordinance without such unconstitution-
al, invalid or inoperative part.
Coding: Words in Ofivicatinit0 type are deletions from the existin
law. Words underlined are additions. g
OCT 1 i989
17
flOOK LP
OCTA.
ORDINANCE NO. 89— 29
BOOK 78 ['AGE6 f
SECTION 6
EFFECTIVE DATE
The provisions of this ordinance shall become effective upon
receipt from the Florida Secretary of State of official acknowl-
edgement that this ordinance has been filed with the Department of
State.
Approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of
Indian River County, Florida on this day of
1989.
This ordinance was advertised was advertised in the Vero Beach
Press -Journal on the26th day of September , 1989, for a public
hearing to be held on the 17th day of October , 1989, at
which time it was moved for adoption by Commissioner Eggert ,
seconded by Commissioner Bowmai , and adopted by the
following vote;
Chairman Gary C. Wheeler Aye
Vice Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye.
Chairman Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Absent
BOARD OF_COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ATTEST BY:
eeler, Chairman
Ard04te10,P-
Bart1Rn._G1k
Acknowledgement by the Department of State of the State of Florida
this 23rd day of October , 1989. --
Effective Date: Acknowledgement from the Department of State
received on this 27th day of October , 1989 at
2:00 A.M./P.M. and filed in the office of the Clerk of
the Board of County commissioners of Indian "River County, Florida.
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY.
//tr L (4'
=��`..
William G. Collins II, Assistant County Attorney
18
PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE MODIFYING AND ESTABLISHING ZONING
REGULATIONS RELATING TO LOCATION FOR UNENCLOSED AMUSEMENTS
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
,)y1Fgt�, 4?
.
";ti • rSEP7171989 u -
ti
r
DEVELOPraw; L:PT
in the matter of
in the Court, was pub-
/%7
ub-
/f ?
lashed 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.r.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this�J .day p
I a
fJ r tl• -•• y
(;-.1
- --•
(SEAL)
(C
191
Maw MN*. stave at ITFortda
• r t tettlalkSkon Expires Jw:.: 2 . ' '
N - r : GIVEN that eOBoardT
County Comm sslonera of Indian` River County,
Florida, shall hold a public hearing at which par-
ties In Interest and citizens shag ttave an.oppor.
tunity to be heard In :the Coup Commies
Chambers of the County ,Ad . dtIon Build -
Ing, located et !1840 25th' Street„VerO„Beach
Florida on. Tuesday.,October`17 1989 at•8;05
a.m. to consider recommending the adoption
an Ordinance entitled:
:140AN ORDINANCE ,FLORIDA FINDIAN . RIVER AMENDING THEE.; .:
COUNTY,
�, . FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF APPENDIX
•OF THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDM,I,,j(
NANCES-0P-INDIAN_ RIVER.:COUNTY.'
•
I,.FLORIDA KNOWN AS THE.. ZONING''
CODE IN REGARDS TO MODIFYING
ESTABLISHING 'REGULATIONS
• RELATING TO UNENCLOSED COM-
ECTION •
"”' L CA -
'4(A), 1;'AGRttCULTURAI`'`LiSEMENTS: 1STRICT:
SECTION 18(A), CN. NEIGHBORHOOD .;
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT; SECTION 19, ,;
CL, LIMITED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. ':;.
SECTION 20, CO, GENERAL COMMER-
CIAL DISTRICT; SECTION 20.1,` CH,
HEAVY COMMERCIAL. DISTRICT: SEC-
TION 21, 1L, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DIS- .
TRICT: SECTION 22(A), IG. GENERAL
INDUSTRIAL ' DISTRICT; SECTIONS
25.1(d) AND 25.1(e), COMMERCIAL EN-
AMUSEMENTSPECIFIC LAND USE
REGULATIONS: SECTION 25.1(0), •
RECREATION USES SPECIFIC LAN
t�
USE REGULATIONS; AND PROVIDING
FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVI-
SIONS, CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY.
AND EFFECTIVE DATE. • .
A copy of the proposed Ordinance Is available
• at the Planning Department office on th9 second
floor of the County Administration Building. 1,i,•
Anyone who may wish to apoeal any decision.
which may be made at this meeting will need to
ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings
Is made, which Includes testimony and **dance'
upon which the appeal Is based. ,:; :z
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
'BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BY: -s -GARY WHEELER, CHAIRMAN
Sept. 28.1989 ,... e:': r°r•
• 813542
Stan Boling, Chief of Current Development, presented staff's
recommendation to amend the regulations relating to unenclosed
commercial amusements.
19
F"'r,F.169
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert M. eati , AyP
men
Devel '£ Director
Community .41-&p
FROM: Stan Boling, AICP
Chief, Current Development
DATE: September 25, 1989
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE MODIFYING AND ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS
RELATING TO ZONING DISTRICT LOCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
CRITERIA FOR UNENCLOSED AMUSEMENTS
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
.consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of October 17, 1989.
BACKGROUND:
;The Board of County Commissioners recently directed staff to
Fie -address regulations relating to unenclosed commercial amuse-
ments. Unenclosed commercial amusements by Zoning Code definition
;include drive-ins, miniature golf courses, driving ranges, animal
:or vehicular race tracks, amusement parks and stadiums. Staff was
'directed to readdress those zoning districts where such uses are
or should be allowed (permitted use, administrative permit,
special exception use) and to draft development criteria.
The need to readdress existing regulations has been highlighted by
a court decision and subsequent Board of Adjustment action taken
earlier this year which effectively allows at least some unen-
closed commercial amusements in the CG district as permitted uses.
Staff has reviewed all existing code elements regulating unen-
closed commercial uses. The resulting proposed ordinance is
intended to clarify and establish two requirements: where and by
what review process certain unenclosed commercial amusements are
allowed, and what minimum development criteria shall apply to
certain unenclosed commercial amusements.
At its regular meeting of September 14, 1989 the Planning and
Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the Board of
County Commissioners adopt the proposed amendment as it appears at
the end of this report (see attachment #1).
ANALYSIS:
The proposed regulations specifically treat three types of unen-
closed commercial amusements separately from all other unenclosed
commercial amusements. Specific review processes and development
criteria are established for: miniature golf courses, driving'
ranges, and sports stadiums. All other unenclosed commercial
amusements are treated together as one general use type.
The following describes each section within the proposed ordi-
nance.
1. Section 1: "driving ranges" are added to the list of admin-
istrative permit uses in the A-1 district and would be
allowed only in A-1 districts having a non-residential land
use designation.
-1-
20
2. Section 2: "sportsstadiums, which are defined as an unen-
closed commercial amusement, are specifically included along
with "Major sports and recreation areas and facilities" uses
within the A-1 district as special exception uses.
3. Section 3: language in the CL district regulations is
clarified and made consistent with other changes; enclosed
commercial uses remain permitted in the CL district.
4. Section 4: the CG district language is clarified to exclude
any unenclosed commercial uses from the list of permitted
uses in the CG district.
5. Section 5: "driving ranges" are added to the list of admin-
istrative permit uses in the CG district.
6. Section 6: "miniature golf courses" are added to the list of
special exception uses in the CG district.
7. Section 7: "driving ranges" and "miniature golf courses" are
added to the list of administrative permit uses in the CH
district.
8. Section 8: all unspecified unenclosed commercial amusements
(uses other than sports stadiums, miniature golf courses, and
driving ranges) are added to the list of special exception
uses in the CH district.
9. Section 9: language in the IL district regulations is
clarified and made consistent with other changes; unenclosed
commercial uses remain permitted in the IL district.
10. Section 10: language in the IG district regulations is
clarified and made consistent with other changes; unenclosed
commercial uses remain permitted in the IG district.
11. Section 11: establishes development review criteria as
follows:
1. Unenclosed commercial amusements except miniature golf
courses and driving ranges.
339
- screening from roadways is required where needed to
prevent distractions to motorists
- exterior lighting is required to be screened from any
adjacent residential district or roadway
- the County's height requirements are referenced
- "images" used as part of an amusement attraction are
treated as signs unless screened from adjacent
roadways and residential districts
- mitigation of noise impacts on surrounding residential
districts is required
- special event traffic control measures are required
where applicable
- extra bufferyards are required where abutting
residential districts
21
1
EkooK IS FArF 1 lL
Pr"
O C d 1 kgs g�
2. Miniature golf courses.
r-••
EOOK �8 F'A,E 171
- extra bufferyards are required where abutting
residential districts
- exterior lighting is required to be screened from any
adjacent residential district or roadway
- hours of operation are restricted where the site is
near a residential district
- the County's height requirements are referenced
- "images"are treated as signs unless screened from
adjacent roadways and residential districts
- mitigation of noise impacts on surrounding residential
districts is required
3. Driving ranges.
- non -range (non -landing) areas are required to be
separated by 100' from residential districts
- no protected trees are to be removed from the range
area unless the applicant demonstrates removal is
necessary
- exterior lighting is required to be screened from any
adjacent residential district or roadway
- driving ranges are allowed in A-1 districts only where
the land use designation is non-residential
12. Section 12: language in the specific development criteria
section for health and exercise studios is clarified and made
consistent with other changes; health and exercise studios
are still allowed in the CN district by special exception.
13. Section 13: health and exercise studios were previously
inadvertently omitted from the special exception uses list of
the CN district; language is inserted adding health and
exercise studios to the list of special exception uses in the
CN district.
14. Section 14: "sports stadiums" are specifically added to the
development criteria section for "major sports and recreation
areas and facilities". Also, to 4 existing criteria, two
development criteria are added which:
- require mitigation of noise impacts where projects are near
residential districts
- require mitigation of traffic impacts from special events
15. Sections 15-18 are standard legal language sections applica-
ble to all ordinance amendments.
RECOMMENDATION: -•
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the
proposed ordinance amending regulations relating to unenclosed
commercial amusements.
22
Mr. Boling explained that as it stands now in the ordinance,
these unenclosed commercial amusements are allowed in industrial
districts and in heavy commercial districts. By a series of
decisions in the language, they are also allowed in general
commercial districts.
Commissioner Eggert asked if the zoning on the South County
'Park would accommodate a driving range or miniature golf course,
and Robert Keating, Director of Community Development, advised
that the park is in LD -2 and a driving range would be an
accessory use within the park.
Commissioner Bird believed we are being too restrictive
about where a golf driving range can be located. He felt that if
we restrict driving ranges to only the commercial districts or
the agricultural districts that are non-residential designations,
we would be prohibiting them almost from existing because they
cannot afford to go in commercial because of the costs of the
land. He sees a driving range, if it is done properly, as a good ,
wholesome way of holding onto land and keeping it in open green
space, while deriving some income out of it as the land around it
appreciates in value. With the golfing oriented community that
we have in Vero Beach, he felt we need to allow some areas where
a stand-alone driving range can be built other than very remote
agricultural areas.
Director Keating noted that staff struggled with this and
with the policy the Commission has had in the past of not
rezoning any currently designated agricultural land. What you
would have is a lot of agriculturally -owned parcels that are in
the middle of areas that are generally developing in residential,
and staff tried to determine if it is appropriate to allow a
driving range in any of these places. Staff feels a good
compromise would be to allow driving ranges whenever it is zoned
agricultural when that zoning is within a node so that the zoning
doesn't have to be changed, and a driving range could be a
23
OCT 1i?X 39
POOK �f C3 f,a f112
ci '689
BOOK
78 173
holding type of use without making any improvements. The
compromise also allows them in the agricultural land use
designation. Director Keating reiterated that staff struggled
with this and feels that this is an adequate compromise.
Commissioner Bird understood then that we are talking about
areas of agricultural that are way off the beaten path, and
Director Keating explained that a driving range could go into a
node where it hasn't really started to develop as commercial or
industrial and where you don't have to go back in and get it
rezoned.
Commissioner Bird couldn't think of many node areas where it
is still zoned agricultural, and felt that a driving range could
be a good holding use in future residential areas. He viewed a
miniature golf course as being more detrimental to a residential
neighborhood than a golf driving range, especially if you limit
it to daylight activities.
Commissioner Eggert pointed out that would involve
developing some stiffer criteria for buffering, lights, etc., and
Chairman Wheeler asked if the Board would like to direct staff to
go back and readdress the restrictions on golf driving ranges.
Attorney Collins advised that currently we handle golf
driving ranges as administrative permits, and it is possible to
put additional restrictions on them if they are going to be in
residential areas and make them special exceptions.
Chairman Wheeler agreed that the restrictions were too tight
and would like to see staff readdress it.
Commissioner Eggert didn't have any problem with it as a
special exception, and Attorney Collins advised that we can adopt
this as presented now and direct staff to address driving ranges
in residential districts as special exceptions and bring it back
to the Board at a later date.
Director Keating suggested that if the Board wanted to do
that today, we could remove #4 under Criteria for Driving Ranges
24
and give staff some discretion in removing some wording that is
scattered throughout the ordinance that says the same thing. That
way, they would be allowed in the agricultural areas with the
other criteria, and we could add the additional criteria note of
"limited to daylight hours, except in commercially -zoned areas."
Attorney Collins wasn't too comfortable with developing the
special exception criteria on the fly, and preferred to do it at a
later date, and Chairman Wheeler agreed that staff should
readdress the special exception and bring it back to the Board.
The Chairman opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard on this matter. There being none, he closed
the Public Hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved
staff's recommendation; directed staff to proceed
with the special exception and bring it back to the
Board; and adopted Ordinance 89-30, amending the Zoning
Code in regard to modifying and establishing regulations
relating to unenclosed commercial amusements, etc.
24-a
LOCI 171989
•
pooK IS MGe
ORDINANCE NO. 89- 30
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING THE
FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF APPENDIX A OF THE CODE OF LAWS AND
ORDINANCES OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA KNOWN AS THE
ZONING CODE IN REGARDS TO MODIFYING AND ESTABLISHING REGU-
LATIONS RELATING TO UNENCLOSED COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENTS: SECTION
4(A), A-1, AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT; SECTION 18(A), CN, NEIGH-
BORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT; SECTION 19, CL, LIMITED COMMER-
CIAL DISTRICT, SECTION 20, CG, GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT;
SECTION 20.1, CH, HEAVY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT: SECTION 21, IL,
•_ LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT; SECTION 22(A), IG, GENERAL INDUS-
TRIAL DISTRICT; SECTIONS 25.1(d) and 25.1(e), COMMERCIAL
ENTERTAINMENT, RECREATION AND AMUSEMENT SPECIFIC LAND USE
REGULATIONS; SECTION 25.1 (o), RECREATION USES SPECIFIC LAND
USE REGULATIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING
PROVISIONS, CODIFICATION, SEVERABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Board of County Commissioners
of Indian River County, Florida that:
SECTION 1
Section 4(A)(c) be hereby amended as follows:
"(c) Uses requiring administrative permits. The following
uses shall be permitted in the A-1 Agricultural Dis-
trict, subject to the specific use criteria established
in Section 25.1, regulations for specific land uses, and
review procedures established in Section 25.2, review of
uses requiring administrative permits.
1. Agricultural uses (section 25.1(a)).
Agricultural research facilities. _
Dairy farming.
Fruit and vegetable packing houses.
Kennels and animal boarding places, commercial.
Small animal specialty farms.
Tenant dwelling.
2. Residential uses (Section 25.1(b)).
Mobile homes.
Single-family docks on vacant lots.
3. Institutional uses (Section 25.1(c)).
Child care or adult care facilities.
4. Recreational uses (Section 25.1t0y (o)) .
Country clubs.
Golf courses.
5. Commercial uses (Section 25.1(f)).
Fruit and vegetable stands.
Veterinaryclinic or animal hospital.
ORDINANCE'89-30 IS ON FILE IN ITS ENTIRETY IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
25 BOOK
'OCT 1? 66
78 F°r1 P
r .
O C d 1'1 1989
r�
aOGK f'A,GE i a
REQUEST FOR ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION CONCERNING STATE/COUNTY
COORDINATION IN MANATEE PROTECTION
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/9/89:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
THROUGH: Department Head Concurrence:
-,4119- ,e
Ro ert M. Keating AIv:
Community Development i,irector
FROM: Roland M. DeBlois,�A CP
Chief, Environmental Planning
DATE: October 9, 1989
SUBJECT: MIKE KIEFER REQUEST THAT THE BCC ADOPT A
RESOLUTION CONCERNING STATE/COUNTY COORDI-
NATION IN MANATEE PROTECTION
It is requested that the data herein be given formal consideration
by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting on
October 17, 1989.
DESCRIPTION/CONDITIONS:
The Florida Department of Natural Resources (FDNR) is to make
recommendations to the Governor and Cabinet on October 24, 1989
for specific actions to protect the West Indian Manatee and to
improve waterway safety for the boating public. Indian River
County is_.one of twelve (12) counties that are the main focus of
manatee protection restrictions.
The FDNR has drafted recommendations that have been the subject of
regional public workshops held in August and September. The
topics covered include inland waters speed limits, interim boating
facility expansion regulations, increased enforcement and manatee
protection funds, and boating safety education. Two recommen-
dations presented in the workshops that would particularly affect
boating and boat facilities development in Indian River County
are:
- the creation of a manatee slow speed protection zone in the
Sebastian River; and
•
- the limitation of one powerboat slip per 100 linear feet of
developable shoreline for new or expanded boat facilities,
until the County implements an approved manatee protection
plan and boating facility siting policy.
Mr. Mike Kiefer, a county resident with boating interests and a
engineering background, has approached staff and proposed that the
Board of County Commissioners consider adopting a resolution that
would request the State Governor and Cabinet to direct the FDNR
not to proceed with proposed plans until FDNR coordinates closely
with local governments (Indian River County) before establishing
boating restrictions for boating safety and manatee protection.
26
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS:
On April 25, 1989, the Board of County Commissioners adopted a
resolution (No. 89-40) in support of FDNR's efforts to establish a
manatee protectionzone in the Sebastian River. Mr. Kiefer's
concern, while generally supporting the establishment of boating
safety and manatee protection measures, is that there needs to be
close coordination between state and local governments to derive
regulations that are effective, yet not overly restrictive. Local
participation in the creation of such regulations is important to
account for local concerns and issues. Based on his attendance at
FDNR workshops, Mr. Kiefer is of the position that there has not
been enough state/local interaction on the proposed recommen-
dations.
Planning staff have recently contacted Mr. .Randy Lewis, FDNR
Director of Communications, and have learned that the recommenda-
tions have been modified based on input from the regional work-
shops. Changes include: a maximum 40 mph ;speed limit in marked
navigational channels and 30 mph allowances throughout inland
waters in evening hours vs. the previously proposed 30 and 20 mph
restrictions, respectively; and wording that would provide more
flexibility in FDNR's interim regulation of boating facilities
until local regulations are established for manatee protection and
boat facilities siting. Mr. Lewis assured staff that FDNR fully
supports state/local coordination and that the recommendations
promote shared, coordinated efforts in addressing boater safety
and manatee protection. Moreover, he explained that the recommen-
dations allow enough flexibility for counties to work with the
State to address local -specific concerns.
Planning staff concur that State coordination with Indian River
County is important, in determining the extent of local vs. state
responsibilities in implementing boating and manatee protection
regulations. In conferring with Mr. Lewis, it is apparent that
FDNR is aware of the need to coordinate locally and has taken 'that
into consideration in their modified recommendations. It is
planning staff's position that, rather than the resolution
proposed by Mr. Kiefer, a letter prepared for the County Commis-
sion Chairman's signature emphasizing local/state coordination
would be appropriate. Based on staff discussions and review of
FDNR's recommendations, staff feel that there is not a need to
request postponement of FDNR's plans/recommendations, and that a
reinforcement letter of coordination would serve to express the
County's concern that local interests/issues are not preempted.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
staff to draft a letter for the Chairman's signature to the
Governor and Cabinet emphasizing close coordination with the
County on the establishment of boating safety and manatee pro-
tection measures in Indian River County.
27
OCT 1 re A89
FOR.
176
pp -
BOOK
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
10
WHEREAS: The Florida Department of Natural Resources
recently unveiled plans for boat speed limits of 30 rnph and 20
mph in twelve key counties of the State including Indian River
County; including a plan for no more than one powerboat• slip per
100 feet of developable shoreline;
WHEREAS: The Florida Department of Natural Resources has
riot officially consulted with Indian River County regarding these
plans as would have been appropriate;
WHEREAS: The proposed plans and the de facto moratorium
would drastically impact the public's rights to recreation and
travel on the water of Indian River County and fisherman's
traditional ways of making a living;
WHEREAS: Indian River. County is already considering a
Marina siting plan of i1('� own including manatee protection
measures on a site specific asis.
WHEREAS: Indian River County has already incorporated
strong endangered species protection in its Comprehensive Growth
Management Plan;
IT IS RESOLVED that the Board of County Commissioners of Indian
River County requests that the Governor and Cabinet of the State
of Florida direct the Florida Department of Natural Resources
not to proceed with the proposed "State Wide" and Twelve Key
County" plans but rather to proceed to consult with Indian River
County and other Counties regarding their own plans for boating
safety and manatee protection.
Roland DeBlois, Chief of Environmental Planning, advised
that staff feels that the regulations as explained are sufficient
and that rather than adopt a resolution, the Board should send a
letter to the Governor and Cabinet emphasizing close coordination
with the County on the establishment of boating safety and
manatee protection measures in Indian River County.
Mike Kiefer, a county resident with boating interests and an
engineering background, felt the letter would be fine. They
thought the resolution was important back when we had the
original proposal that was so strict and tight.
Commissioner Eggert asked if the letter needs to comment on
the 1993 date, and Mr. DeBlois recommended that the date reflect
the time we have put in the Comp Plan, which is 1992.
Commissioner Bowman asked Mr. Kiefer what speed limit he
thought was appropriate, and Mr. Kiefer stated he was satisfied
with the DNR's proposal of 40 mph, but felt there are spots where
it should be less than that.
28
Commissioner Bowman suggested that we. request the State to
develop a system of different colored markers for different speed
limits, and areas for ski boats, manatee protection, etc. She
didn't feel it would be possible for the individual communities
to do this.
Mr. Kiefer advised that the original proposal required the
counties to prove that the exception area was necessary and that
the counties would have to mark it and maintain it.
Commissioner Bowman maintained that it should be uniform
throughout the state so there is no question in anybody's mind.
As far as enforcement is concerned, we are going to have to
depend on the Marine Patrol.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) authorized staff
to draft a letter for the Chairman's signature,
incorporating some of the suggestions discussed this
morning.
APPROVAL OF 1989-90 EMS COUNTY AWARD GRANT APPLICATION
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/4/89:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: October 4, 1989
THRU: James Chandler
County Administrator
SUBJECT: Approval of 89-90 EMS County Award
Grant Acualication
FROM: Doug Wright, Director
Emergency Management Services
REFERENCES Chapter 401,
Part II,
Florida Statutes
It is requested that the information contained herein be given
formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners during the
..next regular meeting.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, Office of
• ,Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is authorized by Chapter 401, Part
.11, Florida Statutes, to distribute county grant funds. The funds
29
� i4 CT 17 1989
•
•
EOOKFArJr. i7
ULT 1 '1 '3J89
BOOK FAGE 170
are
d 0
are then made available to eligible county governments to improve
and expand their pre -hospital emergency medical services. The grant
program is an innovative process which enables EMS agencies to
improve and expand EMS systems through their Board of County
Commissioners. On-going costs for EMS remain the responsibility of
the counties and EMS agencies and organizations.
A grant application has been prepared describing the needs and
proposing grant objectives and time frames in which the objectives
will be obtained. The application is now before the Board of County
Commissioners for discussion and approval.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The County grant funds are derived from surcharges on various
traffic violations. Funding in the amount of $34,144.79 has been
allocated to Indian River County for FY 89-90. The monies will be
utilized as indicated to improve and expand the ALS pre -hospital
system.
Funds have been allocated this year for the purchase of a multi-
purpose vehicle; radio equipment for ALS; medical equipment;
training equipment; payment for the used ambulance purchased from
the Fellsmere Volunteer Ambulance Service; and computer
hardware/software.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the 89-90 EMS County Award Grant
Application and requests the Chairman be authorized to execute the
necessary documents to obtain the funding allocation of $34,144.79
from the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services to improve
and expand the pre -hospital EMS system in Indian River County.
•
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent)adopted Resolution
89-132a authorizing the submittal of the 1989-90 EMS
County Award Grant Application and authorized staff to
execute the necessary documents to obtain the funding
allocation of $34,144.79, as set out in the above staff
recommendation.
COPY OF APPLICATION IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD
E
RESOLUTION NO. 89 - 132a
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AUTHORIZING THE
APPLICATION FOR FUNDING COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICES (EMS) AWARDS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHAB-
ILITATIVE SERVICES.
WHEREAS, The. Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services has announced that applications for funding County Emer-
gency Medical Services (EMs) Awards are now being accepted and
fund allocations have been identified for Indian River County;
and
WHEREAS, an application for funding has been prepared and
approved by the County EMS agencies; and
WHEREAS, Funds in the amount of $34,144.79 have been allo-
cated to Indian River County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COM-
MISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Chairman is
authorized to sign and execute the Application for funding certi-
fying that monies from the County EMS Award will improve and
expand the County's pre -hospital EMS system and that the funds
will not be used to supplant existing County EMS budget allo-
cations.
The foregoing Resolution was offered by Commissioner Dir
who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commiss ones
Eggert 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. Absent
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Richard N. Bird Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed
and adopted this 17th day of October , 1989.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY: ,g
Gary:- Wheeler, Chairman
ATTEST:
OCT 17 '089
31
BOOK
78
`'��. O
!OCT 1' 1989:..
BOOK , 10 f4E 181
AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH SEBASTIAN FOR AMBULANCE STATION
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/5/89:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: DougWright,Wri Director
Emergency Management Services
DATE: October 5, 1989
RE: FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN SEBASTIAN AND INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY FOR AMBULANCE STATION
The County is the lessee of the ambulance station in
Sebastian, which property is owned by the City of Sebastian.
The attached first amendment to lease would change the
insurance provisions of the lease to coincide with the
coverage provided through the Risk Management Department.
This change was requested by the County, and the City has
consented to the amendment.
Staff recommends the Board approved this amendment and
requests the Board authorize the Chairman to execute it on
behalf of the County.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) approved the first
amendment to the lease agreement between Sebastian and
Indian River County for the lease of the ambulance
station in Sebastian, and authorized the Chairman's
signature.
AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
32
oe
AWARD OF BID - PHASE 111 - INDIAN RIVER COUNTY JAIL
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 9/29/89:
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
The Members of the Board of County Commissioners
James Chandler
County Administrator
Doug WrigTit, Phase III
Project Manager
Indian River County Jail
September 29, 1989
Award of Bid - Phase III
Indian River County Jail
It is respectfully requested that the information contained -
herein be given formal consideration by the Board of County
Commissioners at the next scheduled meeting.
.DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On September 19, 1989, Indian River County received bids for
construction of Phase III of the Indian River County Jail after
proper advertisement and notification to potential bidders. The
following bids were received and opened:
'Contractor _Base Bid Alt #1 Alt #2
State Paving --- `$5,219,000
Milne & Nichols 5,190,000
Robert F. Wilson - 5,051,000
Speegle Construction No bid
Alternates:
No #1 - Civil Site Work
No #2 - Construct K-9 Kennel
$10,000 $31,000
59,900 30,400
22,000 30,000
No bid No bid
The apparent low bid was $5,103,000 submitted by Robert F.
Wilson Construction Company which includes Alternates #1 and #2.
In a letter received from Ron Sebring of Frizzell Architects
dated September 20, 1989, it was recommended that the County
accept the low bid and award the contract to Robert F. Wilson
Construction Company.
The Architect has included in their fee the same periodic site
observation as the previous Phases of the Indian River County
Jail. This service will average one (1) visit every two (2)
weeks as required by the status of construction. Staff feels
that this degree of on site representation is inadequate on this
type of project to protect Indian River County during construc-
tion. An example of the benefit to the County is that the delay
OCT 1 79
h.__
33
BoD 78 F!r,F.18
►tJCT1
989
BOOK id P,iE Jj)
claims of the Phase II contractor could not have been disputed
if a full time site representative had not been on site. The
Architect suggests that a similar arrangement to that of Phases
I and II, in which the Architect, with County approval will hire
a representative and bill the County as a simple additional
service to the existing contract.
It is staff's position that this matter requires further study
and consideration in terms of cost and scope of work. Staff
will conduct this review and return to the Board of County
Commissioners with a recommendation prior to the initiation of
construction.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS:
On December 6, 1989, the County Project Manager informed the
Board of County Commissioners of the potential escalation factor
of 0.30% for each month that the project was delayed beyond
August, 1989, mid -construction date. In a letter dated
September 26, 1989, Frizzell Architects provided data from Dodge
Cost Systems and Marshall Swift which was published in the July
issue of "Architectural Record" which indicates that inflation
on construction cost in the Southeast United States was 3.85%
for the year 4/88 to 4/89. This is an average of .32% per month
and when applied to the original estimate, the following is
reflected:
.32% x 9 months = 2.88%
$4,728,024 original construction bid
300,000 site work
$5,028.00 x 1.0288= $5,172,806.40
The Architect and staff are in agreement that the low bid
received from the Robert F. Wilson Construction Company is
within the range of projected costs when the site work and
escalation factor is included in calculations.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners award
the bid to the Robert F. Wilson Construction Company who
submitted the low bid of $5,103,000 which includes Alternates #1
and #2.
Frizzell Architects concurs in this recommendation as reflected
in a letter dated September 20, 1989, to the County Project
Manager.
Funding of the construction costs would be revenue from the one
cent sales tax for capital construction projects.
34
Doug Wright, Phase 111 Project Manager, advised that if the
Board awards the contract to the low bidder, Robert F. Wilson
Construction Company, they would like to change the detention
electronic subcontractor from Thorne Automation to Blevins
Electric who has just finished Phase 11 of the Jail. Our
documents require that the County Commission approve any change
to the subcontractors.
Commissioner Bird asked about having a project development
manager for all of these capital projects, and Administrator
Chandler felt that just the $12 -million worth of construction in
the next year warrants hiring a project manager, and advised that
he would be bringing back a recommendation on this in the next 2
or 3 weeks.
Chairman Wheeler wanted such a position to be one where that
individual would be solely responsible to the County, but someone
who also would work with the architect and contractor on these
projects.
Commissioner Eggert was very concerned about proper
supervision right from the start because of the problems we
experienced with the North County Library.
Commissioner Bird was pleased to see the bids come in fairly
close to the estimate, but was shocked to see the estimated
operating costs that Director Baird worked up. Apparently, the
new 140 -bed Phase III of the Jail will mean hiring 49 correction
officers at between $2.3 million and $2.5 million a year. He
felt the public is going to be shocked also when these operating
expenses come into the tax bills after all we went through this
year at budget time. He asked if staff felt that the Jail has
been designed as effectively as possible with regard to operating
cost efficiency, and Director Wright stated that staff feels
satisfied. He noted that Frizzell Architects concur with staff's
recommendation for the award of this contract to Wilson
Construction for $5.1 million.
CT 1`t. 9
35
boa 78 f,i:
Pr—
OCT 17 1989
BOOK � FA c 185
Administrator Chandler said that construction will begin
sometime in November and completion should be in 18 months from
that date.
Major M.L. (Bob) Reese, Administrator of the County Jail,
didn't anticipate that we would have any problem with the DOC on
the number of corrections officers required as of this date and
the date the Jail is completed. He believed that the new phase
of the Jail should allow him to triple or quadruple the
15 -prisoner work crew that now cleans ditches, cuts grass, and
does other chores•on public property.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board awarded the contract
for construction of Phase 111 of the County Jail to the
low bidder, Robert F. Wilson Construction Company, in
the amount of $5,103,000, which includes Alternates No.
#1 and #2; and authorized the change in the electrical
subcontractor to Blevins Electric, as recommended by
staff.
CONTRACT WILL BE PLACED ON FILE WHEN FULLY EXECUTED AND RECEIVED
•
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Is+MRSA sa•et v..oa� tm.:aasBlso
Roe
�.... T.r.�. a
•
in,
pet'. 9/194739
PURCHASING DEPT.
BID TABULATION • ' -•
Submitted By Dotter** L Mascot'
P1AtCHAS9iG MANAGER
Bid No. 90/9 Dote Of Opening 9/19/90
Bid Titb DID= RIVER Comm JAIL PRASE 11L
1VI/r� rrwe
Rtcacmaided Arc"' ROBERT F. =us= 4ORIO1"
1 *empire r aTtser TWr gAcr am ec nni win en
PO BOX 24405 _.AIR RO 1 522.000:00
FT LAODERDALE, FL ALT 90 2 930,000.00
2. M1IINE i NICHOLiS INC BASE BID 95.190.000.00
701 SO. EAST 6th AVE ALT 90 1 859,900.00
'
DEI.RAY BEACH, FL Ata NO 2 830.400.00
3. STATE PAVING CORP ' BASE HID 95.219.000.00
-
JVE.V.1010 RD AEN NO 1
:100 jTlti^"oIo
rT TSTI^PYiISTV VT 11,! VII 1 911 eee .In
•
36
IRC HEALTH DEPARTMENT - PROGRESS UPDATE FROM LEE RAMOS, ARCHITECT
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/5/89:
DATE: OCTOBER 5, 1989
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERV
SUBJECT: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
PROJECT NUMBER - IRC 85-04
Lee Ramos, architect for the subject project met with me on
Wednesday and Thursday of this week to discuss how we were
progressing and if our time schedule was in tact. It is obvious
':to me, that we are within the last up -dated time frame.
A tentative cost estimate was provided to us by Ramos and he feels
we will be within his original estimated budget.
It is requested that you provide time on the October 17th, Board
of County Commissioners meeting for a presentation to up -date the
Board on progress of this project. Mr. Ramos will provide
drawings of the proposed building and answer any questions.
General Services Director Sonny Dean introduced Mr. Lee
Ramos, architect for the Public Health Dept.
Mr. Ramos gave an overall report of the progress that has
been made on the Health Building to be erected behind the County
Administration Building at 18th Avenue and 27th Street, showing
the site plan and floor plans for the 36,000 square foot, 2 -story
building. The building will have an elevator and a dumbwaiter
that will serve the Clinic's laboratory on the first floor and
the DER laboratory on the second floor. The first floor will
contain the Clinic itself, the Veterans Administration Office,
the County Welfare Dept., and an auditorium with a capacity of
over 100 people. The second floor will house the Dept. of
Environmental Health office and their laboratory, plus the
Clinic's administrative offices, vital statistics office, and a
nurses' conference room.
Mr. Ramos concluded his presentation after showing graphics
of the four elevations of the building and a colored perspective
37
CT 171999
1 OCT 1 89
BOOK
F,, E 18 7
drawing of the outside of the building. He explained that the
building is to be of stucco construction and is designed to be
energy efficient.
Commissioner Bird asked if the building has the capability
of adding another floor at sometime, and Mr. Ramos stated that it
did not. The building is designed to take you to the year 2010
or more.
Dr. Bernard Berman, Public Health Director, estimated that
staffing would be approximately 85 persons when we move in with
expansion capabilities of approximately 100-125 persons.
Extensive discussion ensued after Chairman Wheeler
questioned the taxpayers' responsibilities for the dental and
vision services to be added by the Health Department once the new
office is built, and Dr. Berman explained that no dental care is
available at the present time for indigents in the county and
that *they must go to the public health center in Fort Pierce.
State funds are available, but there is no office space for
dental care now. He noted that government has always been the
provider of last resort.
Commissioner Eggert felt there is little doubt that we are
going tobegetting increased pressure for treatment of AIDS.
Dr. Berman agreed, and pointed out that there are things on
the horizon that will be mandated for provision by the Public
Health Department.
Getting back to the building plans, Commissioner Eggert
understood that Mr. Ramos has figured that this building will
cost $3.2 million without furnishings, and Administrator Chandler
_-4
advised that amount includes a contingency of $100,000.
Commissioner Eggert assumed that $300,000-$400,000 would
definitely be enough for furnishings because we are looking to
bring this project in at $3.5 million.
Dr. Berman advised that they are developing a room by room
listing of all of the furnishings required for the clinic, and
will have that list completed in the near future.
38
Administrator Chandler explained that no action is required
today, and Mr. Ramos advised that they will be finished with
their work on December 24th and would be looking to have the bids
out by February.
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT WITH BLEVINS ELECTRIC ON PHASE II OF THE
COUNTY JAIL
Administrator Chandler advised that as of this morning, the
electronics work on Phase II is 98% complete. It is looking good
and is going to do just what we expected it to do. He explained
that staff is recommending a waiver of the performance bond for a
number of reasons:
1) We checked Blevins out thoroughly before we made a recommen-
dation to the Board, and they have performed well on other
projects and have an excellent record.
2) Our agreement with them is structured so that they would
receive the first payment or 50% upon completion and a sign -off
of acceptance by our engineer or architect. If it were not
acceptable at that point, we would not make that first payment.
The second and final payment would be in 60 days from completion
and a sign -off on satisfaction.
(3) They are under the warranty provisions of our original
specifications, and they have reaffirmed that in this agreement.
Administrator Chandler felt we are as protected as we can be
in a situation such as this, especially since the project is 98%
complete and it looks like it's going to work.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) approved the
Amendment to Contract between IRC and Blevins Electric,
Inc. for Phase II of the County Jail, and authorized
the Chairman's signature.
39
iCT 1
r
OCT 1`' `1989.
78 �, int
BOOK F E18S
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO
THE BOARD
ANNUAL HRS CONTRACT FOR FY -89/90
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/11/89:
TO:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
FROM:
Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
October 11, 1989
ANNUAL HRS CONTRACT
Joseph A. Bair
OMB Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITION
Attached is the Standard Contract between the Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners and the State of Florida Department of
Health and Rehabilitative Services for the 1989/90 fiscal year. In
the agreement, Indian River County guarantees to fund $410,561 as
was authorized at budget time.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
annual contract between the Indian River County Board of County
Commissioners and the Rehabilitative Services for 1989/90 fiscal
year.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) approved the
annual contract with HRS for FY -89/90, and authorized
the Chairman's signature.
COPY OF ANNUAL CONTRACT IS _ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO
THE BOARD
40
GOVERNOR'S DRUG FREE COMMUNITIES GRANT PROGRAM
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/11/89:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: October 11, 1989
SUBJECT: GOVERNOR'S DRUG FREE
COMMUNITIES GRANT PROGRAM
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The federal Drug Free Schools and Communities Act, at the discretion
of the Governor's Office, provides non-matching grant funds to local
communities and non-profit agencies for the purpose of developing
substance abuse prevention services targeted to high risk youths
(those under 21 and with high risk factors - such as school dropouts,
pregnant, children of abusers, etc.). Potential grantees are
required to submit a proposal to the Governor's Office outlining a
program objective that addresses:
a. The service to be provided with the funds, such
as referral or counseling.
1a
;Pat Callahan, Recreation Director, submitted an application a few
days ago for $50,000.00. The proposal involves creating an after
.' school program for Middle Six and Seven schools.
The outcome of the service to be provided.
c. Improvements within the overall system - i.e.
enhancement of existing services.
•
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board authorized the use of the grant for
programs at the Middle Six and Seven schools.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) authorized the
use of the subject grant for programs at the Middle
Six and Seven schools.
Commissioner Bird commended Pat Callahan for pursuing this
program.
oDCT
41
BOOK. 18 4:,F.1 0
UC 1,di 1989
GOOK 78 PAGE 191
BUDGET AMENDMENT 004 -- RECREATION EQUIPMENT
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/11/89:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: October 11, 1989
SUBJECT: RECREATION EQUIPMENT REQUEST
BUDGET AMENDMENT 004 - REVISED
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The Gifford Park Recreation Committee did not approve the purchase of
additional playground equipment in time for funds to be expended from
the 1988/89 Recreation budget; this resulted in $10,000 remaining
unspent last year. The Recreation Department would like to spend
these monies in the 1989/90 fiscal year.
Pat Callahan, Recreation Department Head, has informally received two
(2) bids from playground equipment manufacturers, Dominica Recreation
Products ($7,862.00) and Miracle Equipment ($8,625.78). Although
Dominica Recreation Products offers a playground system that is $800
less than Miracle Equipment, Mrs. Callahan prefers using the latter
company, for the following reasons:
1. The equipment in her experience requires._low maintenance and
there is a local service representative.
2. Miracle Equipment sells a play model of the space shuttle
Columbia, an important symbol to the community, given our
proximity to Cape Canaveral.
•
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the purchase of a playground system from Miracle
Equipment and a budget amendment in the amount of $8,616.00 be
approved.
Pat Callahan, Recreation Department Head, assured the Board
that this equipment is safe.
46
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (.4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) approved Budget
Amendment #004 in the amount of $8,616 as set out
in the above staff recommendation.
42
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A. Baird, OMB Directo
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
NUMBER: 004
DATE: 10/11189
Entry
Number
Funds/Department/Account Name
Account Number
Increase
Decrease
1.
RWENUE
GENERAL FUND
Cush Forward
00l-000-389-040.00
$ 8.616.00
EXPENSE
GENERAL FUND
Recreation/ Other Mach & Equipment
001-108-572-066.49
$ 8,616.00
RELOCATION ALLOWANCE FOR UTILITIES' NEW HIRE
The Board_ reviewed the following memo dated 10/2/89:
To: James Chandler, Date: October 2, 1989
County Administrate
From: Jack Pr'Personnel Sub: Relocation Allowance
Utilities new hire
Please review and recommend for the Board of County
.Commissioner's approval a relocation allowance for John G. Hugel,
who was selected for the open Environmental Engineer position in
the Utilities Department.
Mr. Hugel earned a BS in Civil Engineering in 1966 and a Masters
in Civil Engineering in 1976, both from the University of Notre
Dame. His major for the Masters program was Environmental Health
Engineering. His work experience includes water and sewer system
design and construction_ as well as environmental and sanitary
engineering design. He will obtain his Florida Professional
Engineers certification within his first year with Indian River
County.
'The requested allowance is for a maximum of $1,000. Mr. Hugel
will be reimbursed for his relocation expenses upon receipt of
acceptable documentation.
This cost will be charged to the Utilities Department.
43
OCT 171989
BOOK
EAU.
OCT e'
Bog 78 PAGE 19
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, that the Board approve a relocation
allowance for the new position in the Utilities
Department as set out in the above memo.
Under discussion, Commissioner Bird asked if we are going to
have some sort of policy on who we move and who we don't, and
Administrator Chandler advised that he would be bringing that
recommendation back to the Board in the near future. He
explained that this individual is moving from Lakeland, Florida,
and that $1000 would be the maximum expense allowed.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The
Motion passed by a vote of 4-0, Commissioner
Scurlock being absent.
PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE PROGRAM - 1989-90 ,
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/10/89:
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER DATE: OCTOBER 10, 1989 FILE:
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
THRU: JACK PRICE
PERSONNEL RECTOR
FROM: BETH JORDAN/
RISK MANAGER
SUBJECT: INSURANCE PROGRAM, 1989-90
REFERENCES:
It is requested that the following information be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their
regular meeting of October 17, 1989.
BACKGROUND
On August 11, 1989, the County issued through Siver Insurance
Management Consultants a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Property
and Casualty Insurance for the period beginning November 1, 1989.
Responses were due on September 27, 1989.
44
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The RFP was sent to: Arthur J. Gallagher 6 Company, the current
broker; Florida League of Cities; Florida Association of Counties
Trust (FACT); Arden -Waddell Insurance; Schlitt Insurance Services;
Sid Banack Insurance; and Acker -Hall Insurance. Subsequently, RFPs
were requested by Greenwich Risk Management and McCreary Corporation.
Responses were received from Gallagher, League of Cities, FACT and
Schlitt.
All responses were subjected to rigorous review both by Siver
Con-ultants and by the County's Risk Manager. Sixteen (16)
possible program options were reviewed, as we examined coverages,
costs and service capabilities. The options were reviewed with
Mr. Chandler, Mr. Baird, Mr. Price and the Risk Manager, and the
recommendation from Siver, with concurrence of the Risk Manager,
is attached for your consideration.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve
the recommendation of Siver Insurance Management Consultants.
October 11, 1989
Mr. James Chandler
County Administrator
Indian River County
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
RE:
Insurance
Management
SIVER Consultan
9400 Fourth Street North
P.O Box 21343
St. Petersburg, Florida 33742
Telephone: (813) 577-2780
Fax: (813) 579-8692
Marketing of Property & Liability Insurance
Policy Period: 11/1/89-11/1/90
Report &Recommendation
Dear Mr. Chandler:
We are pleased to provide Indian River County with our
report on the results of the marketing of the County's
property and casualty insurance program and our recom-
mendation of the coverages which will provide the County
with the best coverage/cost combination.
BACKGROUND
Our firm was retained by the County to draft a compre-
hensive Request For Proposals (RFP) to seek competitive
proposals for specified property and liability insurance
coverages. Copies of the RFP were distributed to
interested insurance agents/brokers and service
companies.
Proposals were received from four insurance agencies
representing a total of 19 insurance/service companies.
45 BOOK % f'GE.�.
OCT 1
BOOK 78 fi;E 195
RECOMMENDATION
As a result of our analysis, we offer the following
recommendations:
FLORIDA LEAGUE OF•CITIES PROPOSALS
We recommend that the County accept the following coverages
and services offered through the Florida League of Cities.
RECOMMENDATION
(Continued)
FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES PROPOSALS - (Continued)
Florida Municipal Property Self Insurers Program
We recommend that the Property Insurance Program
including Real and Personal Property, Extra
Expense, Mobile Equipment, Electronic Data
Processing Equipment, Automobile Physical Damage,
Watercraft Hull and Faithful Performance Bond
coverage be covered in the Florida Municipal
Property Self Insurers Program.
The combined annual premium for these coverages is
$144,591. In general, the recommended property
program provides All Risk coverage (subject to a
number of exclusions such as Flood and Earthquake).
The Real and Personal Property coverage is subject
to a $10,000 deductible.
Florida Municipal Liability Self Insurers Program
We recommend that the General Liability, Automobile
Liability, Public Officials Errors & Omissions and
EMT Liability be covered in the Florida Municipal
Liability Self Insurers Program for a combined
Annual cost of $43,652.
In general, the program will provide broad occurrence
type coverage with a limit of $1,000,000 subject to
a $500,000 self-insured retention.
Claim and Risk Management Services - We recommend
that the County engage the Insurance Servicing &
Adjusting Company (ISAC) for the purpose of pro-
viding claim and other risk management services for
the Workers' Compensation, General Liability
(including Public Officials Errors and Omissions)
and Auto Liability coverages.
The final cost of these services will depend on the
number of claims for the liability coverages and
the final audited standard Workers' Compensation
premiums for the Workers' Compensation services.
We estimate that the final cost will be approx-
imately $57,175.
46
SIVER INSURANCE MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS
Mr. James Chandler
October 11, 1989
Page Three
RECOMMENDATION
(Continued)
FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES PROPOSALS - (Continued)
Boiler & Machinery Insurance - We recommend that
the Boiler & Machinery insurance be placed with
Hartford Steam Boiler Insurance Company at an
annual premium of $9,931. In general, the recom-
mended program provides comprehensive coverage with
a $5,000,000 limit subject to a $1,000 deductible.
Liquor Liability Insurance - We recommend that the
Liquor Liability Insurance (for the Sandridge: -Golf
Course) be placed with the Acceptance Insurance
Company at an estimated annual premium of $4,096.
In general, the program will provide occurrence
type coverage with a limit of $1,000,000.
ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER PROPOSALS
Workers' Compensation Insurance.- We recommend that
the Excess Workers' Compensation Insurance be placed
with Safety Mutual Insurance Company at an esti-
mated annual premium of $79,340. The final premium
will depend on the audited payrolls.
In general the policy will provide statutory
coverage for Workers' Compensation and $1,000,000
for Employers' Liability subject to a $175,000 per
accident self insured retention.
Public Officials Errors & Omissions - The Public
Officials Errors & Omissions coverage in the
Florida Municipal Liability Self Insurers Program
will be on an occurrence basis. The expiring
coverage with International Surplus Lines Insurance
Company (ISLIC) is on a claims made basis. As a
result, we recommend that the County exercise the
extended discovery option (tail coverage) on the
ISLIC Policy for $33,466.
Run -Off Claims Services - Under our recommendation
claims services for future claims would be handled
by ISAC. The current services are provided by
Gallagher Bassett Service, Inc. The County will
need to negotiate the fee with Gallagher Bassett to
handle prior claims to conclusion. Alternatively,
the County could transfer these claims to ISAC.
47
CT 1
BOOK .78 PAGE
loci -1r �9
A i
SIVER INSURANCE MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS
Mr. James Chandler
October 11, 1989
Page Four
RECOMMENDATION
(Continued)
BOOK 16 PAGE i.9I
LOSS RESERVES
Under the recommended program the County would accept
a self insured retention on the Workers' Compensation
($175,000 per accident) and the Liability coverages
($500,000 per occurrence).
In anticipation of the County's assuming self insured
retentions, an actuarial study was performed by Coopers
& Lybrand to project the anticipated amount of losses
which the County would assume (pay itself) based on
various self insured retention combinations.
Based on the Coopers & Lybrand study, we recommend that
the County establish minimum loss reserves of $800,000
to fund the anticipated ultimate cost of losses under
the self insured retentions for accidents and occurrences
during the next year.
SUMMARY OF COSTS
Based on the exposure data (payrolls, property values,
etc.) provided to us by the County the following is
the estimated annual cost of the various coverages and
services:
Property Insurance Program
Liability Insurance Progam
Claim and Risk Manag. Svc.
Boiler & Machinery Insurance
Liquor Liability Insurance
Excess Workers' Compensation
Public Officials E&O Tail
Total Coverages & Services
Loss Reserves
Total Cost
$144,591
43,652
57,175
9,931
4,096
79,340
33,466
$372,251
$800,000
$1,172,251
This summary does not include the cost of run-off claims
services which are actually a cost resulting from the
expiring program. We estimate these services should cost
in the $15,000 to $20,000 range.
48
C 1
SIVFR INSURANCE MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS
Mr. James Chandler
October 11, 1989
Page Five
ANALYSIS PROCEDURE & COMMENTS
COMPUTER MODEL
In order to analyze the various proposal combinations,
we developed a computer model depicting the major ele-
ments of a comprehensive program. Our model (which is
attached Exhibit A) included all of the coverages and
services with the exception of the Boiler & Machinery,
Liquor Liability and Watercraft coverages and the run-
off claims services.
The model does not include some of the individual propo-
sals. Rather, where multiple proposals were received
for a single coverage, the model only includes the
better of the individual proposals submitted.
In addition, the model does not include a general liabi-
lity proposal from the Florida Association of Counties.
The Association proposal did not include any proposal
for automobile liability insurance and the only automo-
bile liability insurance proposals otherwise received
were in combination with the general liability coverage.
BEST COST/COVERAGE CONFIGURATION
During a meeting in Vero Beach on October 9, 1989, we
met with County staff (Jim Chandler, Jack Price, Joe
Baird and Beth Jordan) to review the various com-
binations and the benefits and shortcomings of each.
Aswe discussed during this meeting, column 1 of the
Exhibit A depicts the renewal offering from Gallagher &
Co. for their package program which is currently in
place at the County. Columns 2 through 6 are programs
which combine various coverages presented by Gallagher &
Co. and the Florida League of Cities.
Based on the loss projections provided by Coopers &
Lybrand, there was a consensus that the program we are
recommending (Option Q depicted in column 6) represented
the best cost/coverage combination.
CLOSING
In our opinion, the recommended program will provide the.
County with a cost effective program for its property
and liability insurance coverages.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to Indian
River County.
Very truly yours,
SIV INSURANCE MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS
Sven W. Cordes, CPCU, JD
6;
m Marshall, CPCU, ARM, JD
Enclosure:
4009
Exhibit A
49
BOOK. 78 FATE 198
BOOK
'8 ME 199
Risk Manager Beth Jordan gave a brief overview of the
recommendations made by Siver Insurance Management Consultants,
and advised that staff would like to make one small change which
would be to place the boiler and machinery coverage with the
local firm of Schlitt Insurance Services, Inc.
Jim Marshall of Siver Insurance Management Consultants
emphasized that Siver does not sell insurance and does not have
any interest in where the County places their insurance except to
see that it is in the best interests of the County's program. In
addition to their coverage proposals, they are recommending that
the County get an actuarial report from Coopers & Lybrand to
determine to the very best extent possible the County's ability
to self insure risk. With regard to property liability, Sivers
would never recommend that the County ever insure their own
county property on liability, and are recommending that county
property coverage be placed with the Florida League of Cities.
The proposal they are recommending will save $264,000 in overall
premium costs.
Administrator Chandler felt we made a very good step last
year when we went with a partially self-insured program and are
in a very good position of going to a second stage of assuming a
little more risk. He felt Mrs. Jordan did an excellent job in
putting this package together, and pointed out that this
recommendation is by no means a reflection on Gallagher -Bassett
who did a great job in our first year of self insurance.
Commissioner Bird asked if we will be hiring Siver to do
this analysis for us every year, but Administrator Chandler did
not expect that we would need to hire an outside firm to do a
study for the next couple of years. What we are aiming to do is
establish some stability, and that is why we agree that we should
have an actuarial update done every year.
Commissioner Bird asked what we saved last year by being
partially insured, and OMB Director Joe Baird explained that
50
$971,000 was estimated for a fully insured premium, and we went
with a $638,000 premium for a layer coverage, leaving $300,000
which was put in a trust fund for losses. Our losses for last
year are less than $100,000 at this point. If no other claims
are filed against this year, that $200,000 would remain in the
trust fund and continue to grow so that hopefully one day we will
?o longer have to contribute annual appropriations to the self-
-insurance fund.
Jim Granse, 36 Pine Arbor Lane, explained that being a
retiree from an insurance firm in Michigan, he is very familiar
with self insurance risk programs, but is very worried about the
risk coverage the County would need to carry on McKee Jungle
Gardens if the referendum passes in November and the County goes
ahead and purchases and operates those Gardens as a park. He
was also concerned about the two pieces of property where the
libraries are going in.
Commissioner Bird hoped that in any situation such as that
we would place the burden of insurance coverage on the leasee,
and that includes McKee Jungle Gardens Preservation Society.
Administrator Chandler pointed out that before any
negotiation reaches that stage and is brought to the Board, staff
will have analyzed all of the risk factors.
Mr. Granse just felt it should be on the record at this
point in time that some consideration should be given to the
liability insurance costs that will be paid by the taxpayers if
the County maintains and operates the park instead of the
Preservation Society.
Glen Toby of Arthur J. Gallagher &Company wished to make a
few comments on the proposal before the Board today. He wasn't
sure exactly what the consultant had recommended as he did not
have a copy of the written recommendation that was provided to
the Board. He did hear that there is an increased assumption of
risk in this proposal with the County moving to $500,000 of Auto
OCT 4
51
BOOK 16 FACE 200
BOOK 78 f { 201
Liability and General Liability, increasing the retention for
Workers' Compensation from $100,000 to $175,00, but reducing
County Property to $10,000. Mr. Toby cautioned about the impact
an early heavy loss would have on the retention fund.
In conclusion, Mr. Toby felt that Coopers & Lybrand is a
very reliable firm and was in support of their doing an actuarial
study, and although he feels Sivers is an excellent firm, he
disagrees with the rest of their recommendation today. He also
felt Mrs. Jordan is an excellent risk manager, but he just wished
to bring out some comments today because the Board is taking a
big step in accepting this recommendation.
Chairman Wheeler felt the Board fully realizes that when you
take a bigger step, you are taking on more risk, and
Administrator Chandler, putting it in its simplest terms, noted
that when you pay less premiums, you take on more risk.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) approved the
recommendation of Siver Insurance Management
Consultants, as set out in the above staff
recommendation.
GOLDEN SANDS DUNE WALKOVER MODIFICATION - CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/4/89:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
FROM: Michelle A. Gentile, CET 210 -
Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Change Order No. 1 for Golden Sands Dungy
Walkover Modification
DATE: October 4, 1989
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The contractor for the Golden Sands Dune Walkover Modifications
has started construction on this project. The proposed stairs
52
leading down to the ramp on the beachside would create an area of
congestion at the gazebo. The contractor has 'requested this
change to allow for a better viewing of the beach.
The total increase to the contract for change Order No. 1 will be
$495.00.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Staff has reviewed the requested change and concurs with the
change order as prepared.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Change Order No. 1 be approved and that the
Chairman be authorized to execute the Change Order. Funding to
be from Account #310-143-512-066.51, Golden Sands Park
Construction.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) approved
Change Order #1 as set out in the above staff
recommendation.
I GT 17
53
Boos �10 FXE tiles
CHANGE
ORDER
AIA DOCIJM(NT C701
(JWN(R
AkCHIT1C 1
('ON!R 1CIOR
111. )
()111(k
xl
L'1
xj
1!
IJ
BOOK % U PAGE�cJ)
PROJECT: Golden Sands Dune Walkover
(name. address) North A1A
TO (Contractor):
7 The
L
Masters Group
(Tt'1ANCif. ( )R1)1 k NUi1/41IIEit:
1
INII IAllt )N DATE October 3, 1989
ARCHITECT'S i'kOIE('T N()
(ONI RA(I F()R
( t)N1RA(1 1)A11
You are directed to make the following elianges ( „r,Ir.i, 1.
8920
9-15-89
3 additional posts 6 x 6 $115.00 each installed
Additional decking 6' x 6' including installation
TOTAL
$345.00
$150.00
$495.00
Not valid until signed ley both the Owner and Architect.
Signature of the Contractor indicates he agreement he, wnh. including any adtustment in the Contract Sum in Contract Tones.
The original (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Cost) was
Net change by previously authorised Change OrdersS 0.00
$ 8:475.00
The (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Cost) prior to this Change Order was $ 8,475.00
The (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Cost) will be (increased) Avfthie�lftGJfeh4l+46d)
by this Change Order
the new (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Coq) including this Change Order will be $ 8,970.00
S 495:00
Tt.e Contract .Time will be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged) by
The Die Of Substantial Completion as of the date cif 11.,s Change (.)rdt•r Ihere(oee i. ( 0 ) Da)
The Masters Group
(3 3AtS.,kIndianRiver Dr.
Ft. Pierce, FL 34982
By
Date ' Ger
Aurhorij e:d:
Indian River County
1840 25th__Street
Jelrvs$ .-
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Its
lA QO(e.:MeN1 (, di
Deammicwhimsw
'Alt
HAV(.t K •
54
nr•o.• Mr0
PROPOSED WATER SERVICE ON 8TH COURT SOUTH OF 2ND STREET
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/9/89:
DATE: OCTOBER 9, 1989
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
/r
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO ""'"/fi'
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SE ICES
STAFFED
BY:
WILLIAM F. MCCAIN ‘,7.""
CAPITAL PROJECTS ENGINEER
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: PROPOSED WATER SERVICE
ON 8TH COURT SOUTH OF 2ND STREET
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UW -89 -16 -DS
BACKGROUND
\The Department of Utility Services wishes to set up a voluntary
assessment district to supply water to 8th Court in the near future.
However, there is a potential customer on 8th Court south of 2nd
Street, which will be in the proposed assessment district, who
requires water service immediately. The Department wishes to enter
into a Developer's Agreement with this individual to provide him
with water service as soon as possible.
ANALYSIS
The property is located a distance of approximately 240 feet south
of the right-of-way line on 2nd Street. We are proposing to
construct a 6 -inch water line from the water line in 2nd Street
south for, approximately 100 feet, then 4" for approximately 300
feet, and finally, 2" for the last 100 feet of the project. The
property owner will reimburse the County for his portion of the
future assessment. The remaining cost of the line on 8th Court
will be added into the cost of the voluntary assessment district
(see attached agreement and map for details).
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approve the
attached Developer's Agreement.
55 8005 "th F` G�E 2U'
4 [i
BOOK
Fa,C 20 -
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) approved the
Developer's Agreement as set out in the above
staff recommendation.
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK
TO THE BOARD
PROPOSED WATER SERVICE ON 48TH COURT SOUTH OF 16TH STREET
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/4/89:
DATE: OCTOBER 4, 1989
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTOPP
DIRECTOR OF UTILITtSERVICES
STAFFED
BY:
WILLIAM F. MCCAIN
CAPITAL PROJECTS ENGINEER
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: PROPOSED WATER SERVICE
ON 48TH COURT SOUTH OF 16TH STREET
-•INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. UW -89 -15 -DS
BACKGROUND
The Department of Utility Services wishes to set up an assessment
district to supply water to 48th Court in the near future. However,
there is a potential customer on 48th Court south of 16th Street,
which will be in the proposed assessment district, who requires
water service immediately. The Department wishes to enter into a
Developer's Agreement with this individual to provide him with water
service as soon as possible.
ANALYSIS
The property is located a distance of approximately 367 feet south
of the right-of-way line on 16th Street. We are proposing to
construct a 6 -inch water line from the water line in 16th Street
south to the southern limits of the property. The property owner
will reimburse the County for the cost of the line for the full 223
feet of line in front of his property. The cost of the 367 feet of
6 -inch line north of the property will be added into the cost of the
future assessment district (see attached agreement and map for
details).
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Indian River County Board of County Commissioners approve the
attached Developer's Agreement.
56
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) approved
the Developer's Agreement as set out in the above
staff recommendation.
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO
THE BOARD
HAWK'S NEST MANAGEMENT, INC. - DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/11/89:
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM:'—William G. Collins 11 - Assistant County Attorney
DATE: October 11, 1989
SUBJECT: Hawk's Nest Management, Inc. - Developer's
Agreement
have received a request from Bruce Barkett representing
Hawk's Nest Management, Inc., requesting that the developer
be allowed to substitute a Letter of Credit in the amount of
$81,837.45 In exchange for a Release and Satisfaction of
Mortgage on the Hawk's Nest property in the same amount.
The security is posted to guarantee the developer's
construction of a 2 -lane, 24 -foot wide paved road within the
Storm Grove Road right-of-way.
The original 1985 agreement provided for security in the
form of a Letter of Credit, but provided that "developer
may, at any time, substitute guarantees subject to the
approval as to form and amount by the County." The right to
substitute guarantees, subject to approval by the County,
was carried over into subsequent amendments to the
Developer's Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve
the substitution of a Letter of Credit for the present
mortgage on the property. I further recommend that upon
presentation of a properly executed Letter of Credit, the
Chairman of the Board be authorized to sign the Satisfaction
of Mortgage releasing the Hawk's Nest property from the
$81,837.45 mortgage now running in favor of the County.
57
I tJT 1
eoar~ 78 FAH20C
0Odzi
BOOK 78 PAGE 20 7
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) approved
staff's recommendation as set out in the above memo.
COPIES OF LETTER OF CREDIT AND SATISFACTION OF MORTGAGE ARE ON
FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
AMENDMENT TO POLLUTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN IRC AND ST. JOHNS RIVER
WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 10/6/89:
STATE OF FLORIDA.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES
HRS - INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH UNIT
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
1111 38TH STREET
VERO BEACH, FL. 32960
October 6, 1989
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Gary Wheeler, Chairman
Indian River County
Board of County Commissioners
nis, M. P. H.
ronmental Control Officer
Attached Agreement
TELEPHONE (407) 7788317
(407) 7788318
SUN -COM 2888317
268-6318
Please find an original notice to proceed from the St. John's
River Water Management District (SJRWMD)to conduct the
S.W.I.M. activities for Phase III. This should be kept with
the official file.
Also attached are two (2) copies of amended pages for the
existing contract. These pages reflect changes made
necessary by a cut in the budget for Phase III. The SJRWMD-.
requests the BCC, acting as the Environmental Control Board,
sign and return for St. John's board action. I would
appreciate this item being placed on the agenda for board
action the next available meeting. Once accomplished, please
forward the document to this office to be sent to St. John's.
In addition, recently I spoke before the Watershed Action
committee about funding cut backs and you proposed BBC action
in support of the project. I would ask that you proceed with
a communication to St. John's similar to what you proposed at
the meeting.
Thank you in advance for your help and support.
58
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) approved the
Amendment to Agreement to Investigate and Reduce, in
Indian River County, Pollution Caused by On -Site Sewage
Disposal Systems, Point Source Discharges, and Poorly
Maintained Water Retention Areas.
AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO
THE BOARD
Chairman Wheeler wished, if the Commission agrees, to send a
letter to the St. Johns River Water Management District, who
controls the S.W.I.M. funds advising them that there have been
some positive results in the Indian River from efforts afforded
by the -grant money received by the Dept. of Environmental Health,
and ask them,that they continue to budget and do whatever they
can to alleviate some of the problems in the lagoon.,
Commissioner Bowman suggested telling them that we have been
very well pleased with the results so far.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously (4-0,
Commissioner Scurlock being absent) approved the
Chairman's request to send a letter to the Water
District.
Commissioner Eggert wondered if there is going to be any
problem in the name change of the Sebastian River to the Saint
Sebastian River, and Attorney Collins said that it is just a
matter of getting it into common usage.
Commissioner Eggert suggested that the County start using
the legal name in all references to the river.
59
OCT 1 ri 1989
EOOK. ' r
4 o
r=�
BOOK f , PALE a;
DOCUMENTS TO BE MADE PART OF THE RECORD
Lien approved at BCC Meeting of 3/21/89
LIEN
THIS LIEN, filed the 11th day of October , 1989
by INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, a politTcaT subdivision of tfii State
of Florida, pursuant to the authority of Indian River County
Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 4, Article II, Sections
4-16 through 4-24, for cost incurred by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, to remove
nuisance structures from property located within Indian
River County, and described as follows:
Lots 3 and 4, Block 3, Hargrove
Subdivision, said plat being recorded in
Plat Book 4, Page 18, of the Public
Records of Indian River County, Florida.
Parcel #22-32-39-00008-0030-00003.0
The names of the record owners
above-described property are:
GARY J. ANTHONY INC.
VINCENT J. ANTHONY
THIS LIEN is filed
Thousand One. Hundred Fifteen
against the owners by .the
demolition and removal of
property.
interest
until the
ATTEST:
of the
to secure the payment of Seven
and 75/100 Dollars ($7,115.75),
undersigned, for the cost of
the structures on the real
THIS LIEN shalt, from the date of filing, accrue
at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum,
total amount, Including interest, has been paid.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By
Gary co/Wheeler, Chairman
Approved: March 21. 1989
APPROVED AS TO FORMS 1.3
AND LEGAL SUFFICIENG
BY iv-ItT i?ent `:
WILLIAM G. COLLINS I1 %'
ASST. COUNTY ATTORNEY
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER
Before me personally appeared Gary C. Wheeler, as
'Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners, and Jeffrey
K. Barton, as Clerk of Circuit Court, to me well known and
known to me to be the persons described in and who executed
the foregoing instrument and they acknowledged before me
they executed same.
WITNESS my hand and official seal this /t7 l day of
. 1989.
My Commission Expires:
NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OT FLOMIOA
DT COMMISSION EXP. air u.rr^U
CONOCO TRU GENERAL INS. OND.
60
There being no others who wished to be heard, the Board on
Motion duly made, seconded and carried, adjourned at 11:35
o'clock A.M.
ATTEST:
OCT i7X99
Clerk ClYairman
61
Ys'f q
BOOK i 8 PAGE 210