HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/27/1990BOARD ACT'lON > IMPLEMENTATION
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Qr
ti
"AD A G E N D A
.4 03 REGULAR MEETING
to
MARCH 27, 1990
• 0�6�8L/ of cLv��'9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
1840 25th STREET
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Carolyn K. Eggert, Chairman James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Richard N. Bird, Vice Chairman
Margaret C. Bo%nnan Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Gary C. Wheeler Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board
9:00 AM 1.
2.
3.
John Allen accepted
Proclamation.
CALL TO ORDER
INVOCATION - none
A. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Gary C. -Wheeler
B. Presentation of Proclamation
Honoring Fire Chief John Allen
Michelle Carisen C. Presentation of Proclamation
Tara Cornelius g Desi natin Aril 7, 1990 as
Elizabeth Galanis g p
accepted Proclamation Vero Beach High School Chorus
Day in Indian River County
4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
WITHDRAWN - ITEM 6G (Previously handled)
(NO ADDITIONS)
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approved. Approval of Minutes of Regular
Meeting of 2/20/90
6. CONSENT AGENDA
Approved.
Approved.
A. Release of County Utility Liens
(►•lemorandum dated 3/21/90).
B. Approval of City of Vero Beach
Appointments to County Committees:
Kevin Doty - Transportation Planning
Committee
• Kevin Doty - Tourist -Development
Council
Devin Doty — RANIIAC
Jay Smith - Beach Restoration and
Preservation Committee
(Molly Beard and Mike Wodtke have
previously been appointed to the
Economic Development Committee and
the Parks and Recreation Committee)
BOOK'
MAR 2 71990
MAR 2-71994
BooK 7 9 FE 651
6.
CONSENT AGENDA - CONTINUED � ,,, ,
• •'. ..
C.
Appointment of Leesa LeClaire '
Approved.
to Tourist Development Council
Approve
Res. 90-39
D.
PA"bQm&WxiGM*B&YxxA&tglri&Mxx+xP
-)3ft
a Resolution Requiring
Constitutional Officers'
Tentative Budgets Be Submitted
by May 1
(Memorandl= dated 3/20/90)
E.
IRC Public Health Unit
Approved.
Additional Architectural
Services
(Memorandum dated 3/14/90)
Approved.
F.
Proclamation Designating
April 7, 1990 as Vero Beach
Dodgers Day
G.
IRC Bid 90-40, Parking Lot
Withdrawn by Chairman
Addition for Main Fire Station
(Memorandum dated 3/20/90)
Approved. H. IRC Bid 90-46, Care & Maintenance
of Grapefruit Grove
(Memorandum dated 3/14/90)
Approved. I. IRC Bid 90-49, Uniforms
(Memorandum dated 3/15/90)
J. Bond Reduction for Woodbridge
Approved. Estates Subdivision
(Memorandum dated 3/14/90)
Approved. K. Budget Amendment 040,
Reclassifying Risk Management
(Memorandum dated 3/21/90)
Approved. L. Budget Amendment 052, Miscellaneous
(Memorandum dated 3/21/90)
7. CLERK TO THE BOARD
No motion - Board Presentation of Comprehensive Annual
accepted for the record. Financial Report for 1988-89
(Memorandum dated 3/21/90)
9:05 AM 8. A. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS
Draft letter to Sheriff asking Traffic Problems on Rosewood Road
him to do selective enforcement &
authorize Mr. Davis to give this (Letter dated 3/20/90)
road a high priority in the future
planning of bike ways B . PUBLIC HEARINGS
;Iindsor's Inc.'s Request for
See back of second page. Conceptual PRD Approval
(The Original Polo Club)
(:demorandum dated 2/15/90)
9. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS
Auth. staff to look into county. Florida National Guard Site
surplus property & contact the
State for a possible swap of (Memorandum dated 3/19/90)
property and come back with
' report and recommendation.
ii
?proved.
pproved.
?proved.
10. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Computer Programming Consultant
Contract
(Memorandum dated 3/19/90)
B. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
C. GENERAL SERVICES
none
D. LEISURE SERVICES
none
E. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
none
F. PERSONNEL
none
G. PUBLIC WORKS.
none
H. UTILITIES
1) Construction of Water Facilities
to Service Heron Cay Development
(Memorandum dated 3/16/90)
2) Indian River Blvd. Sewer Force
Main Change Order No. 1
(Memorandum dated 3/15/90)
11. COUNTY ATTORNEY
as.. 90-40 Rockridge Bond Resolution
12. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS
ith. Chairman to write A. CHAIRMAN CAROLYN K. EGGERT
atter to municipalities requesting
list of priority property they Discussion of Vero Beach
ael would benefit from being Resolution Requesting Indian
laced in public trust along w/ River County to Acquire Islands
ieir. estimate of the cost to in the Indian River and Ad ' oinin
twe=e. An Ad Hoc Comm. will 7 g
a formed & Chairman will bring Wetlands
ick suggested members.
B. VICE CHAIR2-IA'4 RICHARD N. BIRD
C. COIMMISSIONER MARGARET C.' BOWMAN
D. COXMISSIONER DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.`
E. C014MISSIONER GARY C. WHEELER
NAR 2 71990 BOOK F ,,t'
MAR 2 71990
Approved.
13. SPECIAL DISTRICTS
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
Recycling Vendors, IRC Bid 90-42
(Memorandum dated 3/19/90)
Item 8B.
BOOK F'AGE� j
Accept staff's recommendation with the following amendments and
additions:
#7 (Page 10 of staff's memo) in terms of minimum Jungle Trail
r -o -w, allow Mr. McQueen's management plan and buffering concept
also the mitigation will be worked out with staff;
#9 make a provision that street names can be used;
"M" (page 8) approve and will relate to stairs and chimneys.
"G" cut and fill requirements subject to Public Works
Director's approval.
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, March 27, 1990
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County,
Florida, met in Regular Session at the County Commission
Chambers., 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday,
March 27, 1990, at 9:00 o'clock A. -M. Present were Carolyn K.
Eggert, Chairman; Richard N. Bird, Vice Chairman; Margaret C.
Bowman; Don C. Scurlock, Jr.; and Gary C. Wheeler. Also present
were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac,
Attorney to the Board of County Commissioners; Joseph Baird, OMB
Director; and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order and Commissioner
Wheeler led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
PROCLAMATION HONORING FIRE CHIEF JOHN ALLEN
Chairman Eggert read aloud the following Proclamation:
MAR 2 71990 BOOK
MAR 2 71WO
PROCLAMATION HONORING
FIRE CHIEF JOHN ALLEN
BOOP( .79 [,Ala
WHEREAS, Fire Chief John Allen is retiring March 31,
1990. after thirty-five and one-half years of local firefighting
service; and
,WHEREAS, Fire Chief John Allen started with the Vero
Beach Fire Department and continued with it when it grew into the
South Indian River County Fire District ten years ago; and
WHEREAS, Chief Allen was elevated to the rank of fire
chief January 8, 1986; and
WHEREAS, Chief Allen was instrumental in obtaining an
aerial ladder truck for.use in multi -story structures; and
WHEREAS, Fire Chief John Allen arranged for the fire
service to obtain the first crash fire rescue (CFR) truck for use
at the Vero Beach Airport; the apparatus is on order and will be
received in the next few months:
NOW, THEREFORE, on behalf of itself and all the
citizens of Indian River County, BE IT PROCLAIMED that the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River County hereby expresses
its sincere appreciation to Fire Chief John Allen for his years
of dedicated and exemplary service to his community, and wishes
him success in all his future endeavors.
Adopted this 27th day of March, 1990.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Carolyn/K. Eggert hairman
2
Chairman Eggert called Fire Chief Allen forward, presented
him with a plaque, and expressed her appreciation of his service
to the county over the years.
Fire Chief Allen thanked the County Commissioners, the
members of the Fire Department, and his family, for bearing with
him a-F1'this time. He then requested that the Board give serious
consideration to his retirement letter and recommendation of a
successor, stressing that he recommended someone who has 23 years
in the Department, which he felt is very important both for the
transition and the morale of the Department.
Commissioner Scurlock commented that it is awfully difficult
to express all the things someone has done over a 35 year career
on a small plaque. He felt one thing that stands out about John
Allen as an individual, and not just as a Fire Chief, is his
undying effort over 35 years to look after the men, and he
believed where Chief Allen really contributed was as a leader.
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING VERO BEACH HIGH SCHOOL CHORUS DAY
Chairman Eggert read aloud the following Proclamation
designating April 7, 1990, as VERO BEACH HIGH SCHOOL CHORUS DAY:
p-�.,' ya iia
BOOK / F GE 656
MAR 2 7 1990 3
A PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING
APRIL 7, 1990 AS
VERO BEACH HIGH SCHOOL CHORUS DAY IN
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BOOK
WHEREAS, the VERO BEACH HIGH SCHOOL CHORUS
maintained a tradition of excellence through the years;
79 F'r,.uF. 65 j
has
and
WHEREAS, the seventy-one member chorus has been invited
to represent Florida in the 19th Annual International Youth
and Music Festival in Vienna, Austria in July 1990; and
WHEREAS, the chorus is
says, "Teaching is my talent,
people are my passion."; and
directed by Gary Miller who
music is my love and young
WHEREAS, the chorus has been involved in a year long
attempt to raise $185,000 to finance the Austria trip and
each member of the chorus had to pay $500 themselves; and
WHEREAS, the chorus has raised approximately $125,000
with only a short -time to go before the final payment is
due; and
WHEREAS, the chorus will be conducting a "Just One
Dollar" campaign from April 1 - 7, 1990;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA THAT April 7,
1990 be designated as
VERO BEACH HIGH SCHOOL CHORUS DAY
in Indian River County. The Board of County Commissioners
further urges support for the efforts of this talented group
of young people and to wish them success in the fund raising
and in the competition in Austria.
Adopted this 27th day of March, 1990.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
4� e_ _��Zz_�
Carolyn K. Eggert hairman
Attending the presentation were Chorus members, Michelle
Carlsen, Tara Cornelius and Elizabeth Galanis. Miss Carlsen came
forward to accept the Proclamation and thanked the Commission for
their support.
4
_I
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Chairman Eggert advised that Item 6G (Bid #90-40 - Parking
Lot Addition for the Main Fire Station) should be withdrawn as
that already has been taken care of.
Commissioner Scurlock stated that, if time allows, he would
like to give a report on the NACO Meeting and would add this
under his items. (He later deferred this to another meeting.)
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously withdrew and
added items as described above.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or correc-
tions to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 20, 1990.
There were none.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved
the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 20,
1990, as written.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Bird requested that Items B and D be removed
from the Consent Agenda for discussion, and Commissioner Wheeler
requested that Item E be withdrawn also. Item G was withdrawn
earlier.
A. Release_ of County_ Utility Liens
The Board reviewed memo of Lea Keller of the County
Attorney's Office:
L�OGK. d�� F„�E���
MAR 2 7199A 5
k
BOOK 79 i -nu 659
TO: •Board of County Commissioners
7
FROM: Lea R. Keller - County Attorney's Office
DATE: 'March 21, 1990
SUBJECT: CONSENT AGENDA - BCC MEETING 3/27/90
RELEASE COUNTY UTILITY LIENS
I have prepared the following routine lien -related documents
and request the Board authorize the Chairman to execute
them:
Release of Special Assessment Lien
ROCKRIDGE SEWER PROJECT
in the name of GEORGE E. PLETCHER & VERDA E. PLETCHER
Release of Special Assessment Lien
ROCKRIDGE SEWER PROJECT
in the name of ALBERT BROWN & MARION H. BROWN
Release of Special Assessment Lien
ROCKRIDGE SEWER PROJECT
in the name of RUBY i. WOODRUFF
Release of Special Assessment Lien
ROCKRIDGE SEWER PROJECT
in the name of JOHN ANTANIES & JOSEPHINE M. PETERSEN
Release of Special Assessment Lien
ROCKR I DGE SENDER PROJECT
in the names of ROLSTON COLES 6 ESTELLE COLES
Release of Special Assessment Lien
ROCKRIDGE SEWER PROJECT
in the names of VERNA K. RAINES
Release of Special Assessment Lien
ROCKRIDGE SEWER PROJECT
in the name of LOUIS J. TRACY & JOSEPHINE TRACY
Release of Special Assessment Lien
ROCKRIDGE SEWER PROJECT
in the name of ROBERT P. FLEENER & MARY A. FLEENER
Release of Special Assessment Lien
ROCKRIDGE SEWER PROJECT
In the name of FRANK D. WALLACE, JR. & DOROTHY F.
WALLACE
Release of Special Assessment Lien
ROCKRIDCE SEINER PROJECT
in the name of HERBERT METCALFE
Release of Special Assessment Lien
ROCKRIDGE SEWER PROJECT
in the name of THOMAS F. FAUHABER & KATHRYN W.
FAU LHAB ER
Partial Release of Assessment Lien
STATE ROAD 60 WATER PROJECT
in the name of ROBERT SPAIN
6
Release of Assessment Lien
RIVER SHORES ESTATES WATER
in the names of BENJAMIN F. HESTER 6 JEANNE J. HESTER
Partial Release Assessment Lien
STATE ROAD 60 WATER PROJECT, LOT 6 S 116
in the name of REALCOR- VERO BEACH ASSOCIATES
Release of Special Assessment Lien
ROCKRIDGE SEWER PROJECT
in the name of ELLEN WILLIAMSON
Back-up infomation for the above documents is on file in the
County Attorney's Office.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized the
Chairman to execute the Release of Assessment Liens
as listed above.
COPIES OF SAID RELEASES ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE
:6
B. Approval of_City of Vero Beach Appts__to County Committees
The Board reviewed the following appointments made by the
City of Vero Beach, and it was noted that Molly Beard and Mike
Wodtke have previously been appointed to the Economic Development
Committee and the Parks and Recreation Committee:
Kevin Doty - Transportation Planning Committee
Kevin Doty - Tourist Development Council
Kevin Doty - MANWAC
Jay Smith - Beach Restoration 6 Preservation
Committee
Commissioner Bird just wished to know how often the Beach
Restoration and Preservation Committee meets now and where
Commissioner Wheeler, who chaired that Committee, sees it going.
Commissioner Wheeler advised that the Committee has not met
in over a year. The primary project was beach restoration, for
which the City of Vero Beach accepted the sponsorship. We have
got the Cubit study and have been looking at that; although, he
did not know the stage that is at right now.
7
As far as the long
A
Boor,,
MAR 2 71990 BOOK 9 F,�rL
range maintenance of the beach, etc., there are several things in
the works, but there really hasn't been much for the committee to
meet about in the past 11 years.
Commissioner Bird did not know how the City feels after the
defeat of the referendum, but he still has the feeling that we
must do something with the beaches and hoped that this Committee
will continue to keep the fires burning in this regard.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved the
City of Vero Beach appointments as listed above.
C. Appointment to Tourist Development Council
The Board reviewed the resume submitted by Leesa LeClaire,
General Manager, Guest Quarters Suite Hotel Chain.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously appointed
Leesa LeClaire to the Tourist Development Council.
D. Resolution requiring Constitutionals to submit budget by May 1
The Board reviewed memo from the OMB Director:
TO: Members of the Board
of County -,Commissioners
DATE: March 20, 1990
STWECT: AUTHORIZE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT
A RESOLUTION REQUIRING
CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS TENTATIVE
BUDGETS BE SUBMITTED BY MAY 1
CONSENT AGENDA
FROM: Joseph A. Bai
OMB Director
The attached resolution requires the Sheriff, Clerk of Circuit Court,
and Supervisor of Elections to submit a tentative budget by May 1 of
each year.
8
Commissioner Bird asked if we are now considering adopting.
the Resolution, and OMB Director Baird confirmed this, explaining
that the first time this came before the Board was just to get
permission for the Attorney to draft such a Resolution and then
bring it back. He explained that a change in the law would allow
certain Constitutionals to get their budgets in by June 1st
instead of May 1st unless the Board passes a Resolution. Staff
feels the sooner we get these budgets in, the better.
Commissioner Bird believed this is actually the same, time
these Constitutional Officers had their tentative budgets in
before, and this was confirmed.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously adopted Resolu-
tion 90-39, as described above.
RESOLUTION NO. 90- 39
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY
ITS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, PURSUANT TO
SECTION 129.03(2), FLORIDA STATUTES, REQUIRING
THAT CERTAIN CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS SUBMIT THEIR
ANNUAL BUDGETS BY MAY 1ST OF EACH YEAR RATHER THAN
JUNE 1ST.
WHEREAS, under Section 129.03(2), Florida Statutes,
Boards of County Commissioners In Florida are given the
option of requiring certain constitutional officers to
submit their budgets a month earlier than normal; and
WHEREAS, Indian River County needs this additional
month to help prepare its budget..documents,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that pursuant
to Section 129.03(2), Florida Statutes, constitutional
officers, who are required to submit budgets by June 1st of
each year, shall A nstead be required to submit their budgets
by May 1st of each year.
The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner
Scurlock and the motion was seconded by Commissioner
9 BOOK ( F.4,r
A 2 7 w90
I
I
LIAR 2 7990
BOOK A P�Sut
Wheeler and, upon being put to a vote, the vote
was as follows:
Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert A e
Vice Chairman Richard N. Bird Ayre
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly
passed and adopted this 27th day of _ March , 1990.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, -FLORIDA
By �C
Ot�ha°i>V an' Egger
E. Public Health Unit - Addtl. Architectural Services
The Board reviewed memo from the General Services Director:
DATE: MARCH 14, 1990
TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRECTOR.
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICNd*�
SUBJECT: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH UNIT
ADDITIONAL ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES
BACKGROUND:
After the construction plans were approved and completed, Dr. Berman
requested changes in the location of storage cabinets and sinks in
the examination rooms of the subject building, to allow better use of
the space provided. He also requested a change in locating the
environmental lab to the second floor of the structure. The lab
change was promulgated by the State in that the clinic lab and
environmental lab could not be combined.
It was also necessary to make changes in the original 1986 landscape
plans for this project as required by the City of Vero Beach. This
was promulgated by a change in the original ordinance.
ANALYSIS:
These changes resulted in additional services for, the architect and
his engineers to change the drawings to incorporate the required and
requested changes. This is covered in Section 1.7.6 and 1.7.12 of
the contract between the owner and architect.
10
These additional services resulted in the following cost:
Architect $1,700.00
Landscape Architect 312.50
Mechanical, Electrical
and HVAC Engineering 2.531.25
TOTAL $4,543.75
FUNDING:
Funds to cover these additional cost will come from the construction
budget for the subject project.
RECOMMENDATIONS•
Staff recommends Board approval of the additional service and payment
as stated above.
Commissioner Wheeler realized it is a state mandate, but he
just wished to know why the Environmental Lab and the Clinic Lab
had to be in different parts of the building.
Chairman Eggert noted that they test very different things,
and human blood, for instance, would not be compatible with some
of the environmental materials they test.
Environmental Health Director Michael Galanis agreed that
there is always the possibility of contamination, and although it
probably would have been possible to separate these materials
within one lab, it would have taken up so much of the lab space,
it wouldn't have been a good arrangement in any event.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved the
additional services and payments as described above.
F. Proclamation -Vero Beach Dodgers Day
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously designated
April 7, 1990, VERO BEACH DODGERS DAY.
MAR 2 71990 11
MAR 2 71990 BOOKl9 Frac665
-
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING
APRIL 7, 1990 AS
VERO BEACH DODGERS DAY
WHEREAS, the Vero Beach Dodgers will celebrate their 10th
Anniversary on April 7, 1990; and
WHEREAS, 45 former Vero Beach Dodgers have made it all the
way to the Major Leagues; and
WHEREAS, the Vero Beach Dodgers have attracted 822,361 fans
to its games over the past ten seasons; and
WHEREAS, the Vero Beach Dodgers won the title of Florida
State League Champions in 1983; and
WHEREAS, in 1984 the Vero Beach Dodgers hosted the Florida
State League All-Star game; and
WHEREAS, there have been three managers in the Vero Beach
Dodgers history; Stan Wasiak (1980-1986), John Shoemaker
(1987-1988), Joe Alvarez (1989) and two general managers, Terry
Reynolds and Tom Simmons:
WHEREAS, the Vero Beach Dodgers have attracted tourists to
Indian River County, thereby contributing to its economic
stability and to the enjoyment of its residents:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that April 7, 1990
be designated as
VERO BEACH DODGERS DAY
in Indian River County, and the Board urges all citizens of this
county to support the Vero Beach Dodgers team.
Adopted this 27th day of March, 1990.
12
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Zf4.4_
Carolyry
K. Egger Chairman
G. Bid 90-40 - Park Lot Addition (Main Fire Station)
This item was deleted from the Agenda as it was taken off at
an earlier meeting.
H. Bid 90-46 - Maintenance of Grapefruit Grove
The Board reviewed memo from CPO Manager Mascola:
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: March 14, 1990
THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director F
Department of General Servic
FROM: Dominick L. Mascola, CPO Manager
Division of Purchasing
SUBJ: IRC BIDI(90-46-CARE & MAINMWWCE OF GWE WIT GEUVE
BACKGROUND:
On request from the Utilities Division the subject bid was
properly advertised and Nine (9) invitations to bid were sent
out. On March 8, 1990 bids were received with One (1) vendor
submitting proposals for the commodity,,.
ANALYSIS:
Staff has reviewed the submittals to ascertain adherence to all
specifications. Arapaho Citrus Management was the law bidder that
met all specifications for Care & Maintenance of Grapefruit Grove.
FUNDING:
Monies for this purchase will come from Citrus Grove Utilities
General Accounts for Grove Maintenance 491-235-539-036.77.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recammnds the Award of a Open End Contract to Arapaho Citrus
Management with an estimated value of $40,160.00. Also, authorize
Purchasing to renew the contract for one additional year subject to
satisfactory performance, zero cost increase, vendor acceptance and
determination that renewal is in the best interest of the County.
The initial contract period shall begin on the date of award.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously awarded Bid 90-46
for care of the County grapefruit grove to the low and
only bidder, Arapaho Citrus Management; approved an open
end contract with same in the amount of $40,160; and
authorized renewal of contract for one additional year,
subject to satisfactory performance, as recommended.
13 BOOK
% F,! �E 65
MAR 2 71990
MAR 2 71990
BOOK
Bid 90-49 - Uniforms
The Board reviewed memo from Purchasing Manager Mascola:
1 MARCH 15, 1990
TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUN'T'Y COMMISSIONERS
TM: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRW
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL
LSERVI
Elm: DOMINICK L. MASCOLA, MANAGER
DIVISION OF PURCHASING
SUBJECT: UNIFORMS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BID #90-49
On request from the Emergency Management Service Division the subject bid was
properly advertised and Eight (8) invitations to bid were sent out. On
November 29, 1989 bids were received with Two (2) vendors submitting proposals
for the commodity.
ANALYSIS:
Staff has reviewed the submittals to ascertain adherence to specifications.
Martin Lamar was the low bidder in Group 1-4-5-6 and was the low responsive
bidder,;Ln Group 3 to meet specifications. R & R was the low bidder in
Group 2. To ensure continuity of uniform styles, colors, etc. versus order-
ing'just Group II (Trousers) from R & R Uniforms. To award the entire bid
to Martin Lamar Uniforms. (Attached Memo).
FUNDING:
Monies for this project will cane fran Emergency Management Service Account
(Attached Memo).
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recam ends the award of a one year OPEN END CONTRACT to Martin Lamar
Uniforms with an estimated value of $54,632.00. Also, authorize Purchasing
to renew the contract for one additional year subject to satisfactory per-
formance, zero cost increase, vendor acceptance and determination that
renewal is in the best interest of the County. The initial contract period
shall begin on the date of award.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously awarded Bid
90-49 for uniforms to Martin Lamar Uniforms in the
estimated value of $54,632; approved a one year open
end contract with same; and authorized renewal of the
contract for one additional year, subject to satisfactory
performance, all as recommended by staff per the follow-
ing Bid Tabulation:
14
� s �
J. Bond Reduction - Woodbridge Estates
The Board reviewed memo from Asst. County Attorney Collins:
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: William G. Collins II - Assistant County Attorney
DATE: March 14, 1990
SUBJECT: Bond Reduction for Woodbridge Estates Subdivision
The developers of Woodbridge Estates, Woodbridge Development
Company, are requesting a reduction in the bond posted to
warranty the required utility improvements for the recently
platted Woodbridge Estates Subdivision.
The posted bond warranties both internal subdivision
improvements and an off-site water line that was oversized
by the developer.
Our subdivision code requirements require bonding only of
the improvements required in the subdivision. Further,
Woodbridge Development Company has pointed out that
paragraph 3 of the agreement between Indian River County and
the developer dated June 6, 1989, provides for the County to
reimburse the developer for the construction of a water main
In the intersection of 8th Street and 43rd Avenue. The
$33,000.00 owed the developer for this water main work has
been held in escrow pursuant to a Cash Deposit and Escrow
Agreement with the developer of Woodbridge Estates to secure
the warranty of utilities installed.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize a reduction in security for Woodbridge Estates
Subdivision to $14,843.75 and release the balance of
escrowed funds in the amount of $18,156.25 to the Woodbridge
Development Company as partial satisfaction of the
$33,000.00 owed Woodbridge Development Company for
I*2 e
15 BOOK � � F'A L
LIAR 2 71990 -
Date 3 / 8 / 90
`.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
184023thStreet,VeroBeaeh.FbrUa32960
PURCHASING DEPT.
BID TABULATION
4305) eesa000
Submitted By Dominick L Mascota
PURCHASING MANAGER
T.I.Dh w
*
Bid No. 90-49 Date Of Opening3/7/90
Recommended Award Martin Lamai �1OR10P
Bid Title Uniforms
1. Martin Lamar
Gr
Group III
Grnim TV Group V Group VI
7230 N.W. 46th Street
$987.50 $1,119.50
$258.50
$872.50 $900.00
Miami, F1 33166
2. .R S R Uniforms
$1,042.50 $1,082.40
$240,0Q
50 N/B N/B
923 N. Mills Ave
Orlando, F1 32803
.
J. Bond Reduction - Woodbridge Estates
The Board reviewed memo from Asst. County Attorney Collins:
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: William G. Collins II - Assistant County Attorney
DATE: March 14, 1990
SUBJECT: Bond Reduction for Woodbridge Estates Subdivision
The developers of Woodbridge Estates, Woodbridge Development
Company, are requesting a reduction in the bond posted to
warranty the required utility improvements for the recently
platted Woodbridge Estates Subdivision.
The posted bond warranties both internal subdivision
improvements and an off-site water line that was oversized
by the developer.
Our subdivision code requirements require bonding only of
the improvements required in the subdivision. Further,
Woodbridge Development Company has pointed out that
paragraph 3 of the agreement between Indian River County and
the developer dated June 6, 1989, provides for the County to
reimburse the developer for the construction of a water main
In the intersection of 8th Street and 43rd Avenue. The
$33,000.00 owed the developer for this water main work has
been held in escrow pursuant to a Cash Deposit and Escrow
Agreement with the developer of Woodbridge Estates to secure
the warranty of utilities installed.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize a reduction in security for Woodbridge Estates
Subdivision to $14,843.75 and release the balance of
escrowed funds in the amount of $18,156.25 to the Woodbridge
Development Company as partial satisfaction of the
$33,000.00 owed Woodbridge Development Company for
I*2 e
15 BOOK � � F'A L
LIAR 2 71990 -
R 2 71990
MA BOOR.
construction of a water main in the intersection of 8th
Street and 43rd Avenue (see paragraph 3 of the June 6, 1989
agreement).
Retain the balance of $14,843.75 in escrow for the warranty
of the utility improvements within the subdivision. The
on-site utilities were tested and accepted by the County on
October 1, 1989, so this amount should be retained in escrow
for one year or until October 1, 1990.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously authorized a
reduction in security for Woodbridge Estates Subdivision
to $14,843.75; authorized release of the balance of
escrowed funds to Woodbridge Development Company; and
retained the balance of $14,843.75 in escrow for the
warranty of the utility improvements within the subdi-
vision until October 1, 1990, as recommended by staff.
K. Budget Amendment #040 - Reclassifying Risk Management
The Board reviewed memo from the OMB Director:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: March 21, 1990
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT 040 -
RECLASSIFYING RISK MANAGEMENT
CONSENT AGENDA
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
At the beginning of the fiscal year, the Risk Management function
was set up with the operating expenses in the General Fund and the
self insurance claim expenses in the Self Insurance Trust Fund. The
auditors, Coopers & Lybrand, feel that the Risk Management function
would be better represented if all the Risk Management operating
expenses and the self-insurance claims were in the same fund. In
the attached budget amendment, we are moving all Risk Management
operating expenses to the Self Insurance Trust Fund (502)
establishing a true internal service fund.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve the
attached budget amendment.
16
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved Budget
Amendment #040, as follows:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A. Baird, OMB Director
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
NUMBER: 040
DATE: March 21, 1990
17
NEAR 2 7 1990 60GK iJ'A t
Funds/Department/Account-Name
EXPENSE
GENERAL FUND/Rica :'fan :g=cnt
Re lar Salaries
Account Number
001-246-513-011.12
Increase
0
Decrease
84,064
Entry
Number
1.
Overtime
001-246-513-011.14
0
210
Social Security Matching
Retirement Contribution
Insurance -Life & Health
Worker's Compensation -
Unemployment Compensation
001-246-513-012.11
001-246-513-012.12
001-246-513-012.13
001-2.46-513-012.14
001-246-513-012.15
S 0
0
S 0
S 0
S 0
6.423
12.760
9.913
481
296
Other Professional Services
001-246-513-033.19
S 0
20.361
All Travel
Other Insurance
001-246-513-034.12
001-246-513-034.59
S
S 0
1,600
S150.000
Maintenance Office E i ment
Outside Printing
001-246-513-034.63
001-246-513-034.72
0
0
700
S 1.500
Other Promotional E2Wenses
001-246-513-034.82
S 0,S
5,000
All Office Supplies
Other O eratin Su lies
001-246-513-035.11
001-246-513-035.290
0
1,500
500
--
Books and Magazines
001-246-513-035.41
0
500
Dues and Memberships
001-246-513-035.42
0
400
Meetin s and seminars
001-246-513-035.43
0
500
Office Furniture and Eauipment
001-246-513-066.41
0
1,150
Other Machine and EcruiDment
001-246-513-066.49
0
350
Funds Transfer Out
001-199-581-099.21
298,208
SELF-INSURANCE TRUST FUND/
Risk Management
Recrular Salaries
502-246-513-011.12
84,064
0
Overtime
502-246-513-011.14210
0
Social Security Matching
502-246-513-012.11
6 423
0
17
NEAR 2 7 1990 60GK iJ'A t
BOOK
�� FAGS 6-,71
BUDGET AMENDMENT
040 -?A%60"' -
Entry
Number
Funds/Department/Account Name
Account Number
Increase
Decrease
Retirement Contribution
502-246-513-012.12
12.760
0
Insurance -Life & Health
502-246-513-012.13
9,913
0
Worker's Compensation
502-246-513-012.14
481
0
Unemployment Compensation
502-246-513-012.15
9 296
0
Other Professional Services
502-246-513-033.19
20,361
0
All Travel
502-246-513-034.12
1.600
0
Other Insurance
502-246-513-034.59
400,000
0
Maintenance Office Ecruipment
502-246-513-034.63
700
0
Outside Printing
502-246-513-034.72
1,500
0
Other Promotional ExRenses
502-246-513-034.82
5,000
0
All Office Su lies
502-246-513-035.11
1,500
0
Other Operating Supplies
502-246-513-035.29
S 500
0
Books and Magazines
502-246-513-035.41
500
0
Dues and Membershi s
502-246-513-035.42
400
0
Meetings and Seminars
502-246-513-035.43
500
0
Office Furniture and E i ment
502-246-513-066.41
1.150'$
0
Other Machinery and Eauipment
502-246-513-066.49
350
0
Reserve for Contingency
502-199-581-099.91
0
S125,000
ROAD AND BRIDGE
Road & Bridge/other Insurance
111-214-541-034.59
0
$125,000
Road & Brid a Transfers Out
111-199-581-099.21
S 125.000
S 0
REVENUE
SELF INSURANCE FUND
Self Insurance Fund Transfer In
502-000-381-020.001$
423,2081$
0
L. Budget Amendment #052 _ Miscellaneous
The Board reviewed memo from the OMB Director:
18
s � �
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: March 21, 1990
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT 052 -
MISCELLANEOUS
CONSENT AGENDA
FROM: Joseph A. Bair
OMB Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The attached budget amendment is to amend the budget to reflect the
-following:--
1.
following:- 1. - During- budget hearings --for the -----19 8 9/-90,- budget-# - staff. = -
had anticipated handling all the Property Appraisers
budget for Special Assessment Districts on the Board
of County Commissioner general ledger including
payroll, -operating- expenses,-- etc. The Property --
Appraiser decided to handle the accounting on his own
general ledger system. _.
2. A ...portion -- of —the --Property - -Assessment budget - was -
accounted for in the Solid Waste Assessment District
and duplicated in- the- General- Fund. - -
3. The- supplies- and -maintenance costs for the mapping - -
machine are more than originally anticipated. The
Board of County Commissioners- receives revenue from
the map machines in the Property Appraiser's office
to,offset these expenses. -
4. Adjust the budget to the actual postage costs for
the Tax Colllector sending out tax bills (the Board
of County Commissioners must pay for the mailing of
tax bills).
5. Increase Property Appraiser's budget for the postage
expenses affailated with the mailing of TRIM notices.
(The Board of County Commissioners must pay for the
mailing of Property Appraiser's TRIM notices).
RECOmiMNDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
attached budget amendment.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously approved Budget
Amendment #052, as follows:
BAR 2'71990 � 9 eoo�
J
Fr,_ I
MAR 2 71990
BOOK m1a 67"
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A. Baird, OMB Director
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
NUMBER: 052
DATE: March 21, 1990
Entry
Number
Funds/Department/Account Name
Account Number
Increase
Decrease
1.
EXPENSE
GENERAL FUND/Property Appraiser
Re ular Salaries
001-500=513-011.12
0
$50,532,.Q_0
Social Security
001-500-513-012.11
9 0
3,796.00
Retirement Contribution
001-500-513-012.12
0
7,556.00
Insurance -Life & Health
001-500-513-012.13
0
9,000.00
Worker's Compensation
001-500-513-012.14
S 0
9,252.00
Posta a
001-500-513-034.21
4.000.00
0
maintenance Office Eguipment
001-500-513-034.63
4.000.00
S 0
All Office Su lies
001-500-513-035.11
000.00
S 0
Other Operating Supplies
001-500-513-035.29
S 2.000.00
0
GENERAL FUND/Tax Collector
Posta a
001-400-513-034.21
918-000-00
0
Cash Forward
001-199-581-099.92
$50,136.00
0
PRESENTATION OF COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT 1988/89
Clerk Jeffrey Barton came before the Board speaking as the
Office that coordinates the audit on behalf of the County and
presented Christine Hill and Daniel O'Keefe of Coopers & Lybrand.
Ms. Hill, who was in charge of the audit, informed the Board
that the audit was conducted in accordance with all the
government audit standards, and they also reviewed for compliance
with the terms and requirements of all state and federal grant
programs. The report includes the Board of County Commissioners
as well as all the Constitutional Officers.
Ms. Hill reported that their overall impression is that the
staff of the Board and the Constitutionals take their fiscal
responsibilities very seriously, and the auditors received
excellent cooperation. She noted that the report on the County's
financial statements appears in the front of the financial
20
section, and it is an unqualified opinion.
In the back of the
report are the various compliance requirements, and Ms. Hill
advised that those reports note no material weaknesses in the
internal control structure of the county. She then referred to
the transmittal letter, which gives an excellent overview of last
year's events, one of which is the implementation of the self-
insurance fund and the Risk Management Program. Excerpts from
said letter are as follows:
MAJOR INITIATIVES
During the 1989 fiscal year, the County completed the new minimum
security facility and started the third phase of the jail. The Golden
Sands Park was substantially completed and land was acquired in the
south part of the County to be used for a south County park. The
issuance of the Library Bonds provided funds to acquire the land to be
used as the sites for a new library in Vero Beach and in Sebastian.
The extension of Indian River Boulevard North was enhanced by the
acquisition of the right-of-way needed to build the Boulevard. Passage
of the one cent optional sales tax by referendum has provided the
County with a major source of funds to be used for future construction
projects, such as the new Courthouse facility, the new County Health
Building and expansion of the County Jail.
The County Community Development Department successfully completed the
Indian River County Comprehensive Plan. This Plan was prepared in
- accordance with Chapter 163, Florida.Statutes and Florida Administra-
tive Code rule 9J-5. The Comprehensive Plan serves as the guiding
document for future growth of the County and contains thirteen
sections, or elements, as follows:
1) Introductory Element
2) Land Use Element
3) Infrastructure Element
A. Sanitary Sewer Sub -Element
B. Potable Water Sub -Element
C. Solid Waste Sub -Element
D. Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub -Element
- E. Drainage Sub -Element
" 4) Traffic Circulation Element
.5) Mass Transit Element
6) Port, Aviation, and Related Facilities Element
7) Housing Element
8) Conservation Element
9) Coastal Management Element
10) Recreation and Open Space Element
11) Economic Development Element
12) Capital Improvement Element
13) Intergovernmental Coordination Element
Each element contains background data and an analysis of existing
conditions and a set of goals, objectives and policies; the Capital
Improvement Element identifies existing funding sources and potential
funding sources that can be used to accomplish the future needs of the
County. Robert M. Keating, ACIP, Director, Community Development, and
his staff are to be congratulated for the excellence of their work and
the dedication they had to completing the Comprehensive Plan.
During the 1989 fiscal year, the County established a self-insurance
fund to account for risk management. This fund provides coverage for
worker's compensation claims, general or auto liability claims,
property damage claims and errors or omissions claims. The County also
established an aggregate loss fund of $600,000 and purchased an
umbrella insurance policy for losses in excess of coverage provided by
the Fund. 21
MAR 2 71990 Boor. Ur 7
MAR 2 71990 7
Commissioner Scurlock believed Coopers & Lybrand have once
again done an outstanding job, and he felt this is an appropriate
time to reflect on what we do as County government and some of
the trends that are occurring.
Commissioner Scurlock referred to Page iv., noting that
reliance on ad valorem taxes has increased over the years to
where they now account for 60.8% of our total revenues. Even
though we have consistently tried to go to user fees and have
moved aggressively in that area, the reduction in state and
federal participation is very much evident in this statistic. He
particularly pointed out that Public Safety now accounts for
almost 400 of our General Fund, and this is a very significant
increase in terms of how we use our General Fund monies. Commis-
sioner Scurlock felt the County can be very proud of the savings
that have been generated by our good bond ratings. He continued
that on Page 105 can be seen the growth in the assets of the
Utilities Division. We are in the range of 16/20 million dollars
of new construction each year, that funding coming through impact
fees basically, and Commissioner Scurlock stated that he would
like to see some sort of table provided in the Statistical
Section demonstrating the contribution from the Utilities Divi-
sion into the General Fund by means of the franchise fees and any
other monies that come in. He believed the Utilities Division is
the largest single source of revenue other than ad valorem -taxes,
and on Page 109, he hoped that the Commission doesn't get too
concerned with the $97,000 loss shown in operating revenue over
operating expenses under Water and Sewer System. There is a
fully funded depreciation, and he advised that Administrator
Chandler was fully aware of this and, in fact, came to the Board
and requested the rate study, which CH2M Hill is doing.
Commissioner Scurlock next referred to Page 168 and noted
that this gives a good history of the years from 1979 to 1989.
Among other things, it shows that we now are fully funding Public
Safety to the tune of 10% more than in 1979, which budget has
22
grown from 2.7 million in 1979 to over 18 million dollars. Page
179 shows that the percentage of reliance on ad valorem taxes was
51% in 1979 and that in 1989, it is 61%, which he believed
stresses the need for us to continue to look at alternatives such
as the 1� Optional Sales Tax. He further noted that looking at
Page 173, you can see that our assessed value has not grown as is
generally believed; it has been in the range of about 7/71% per
year, not the 15, 20 or even 30% some would like to think.
Commissioner Scurlock again referred to Utilities. He noted
that we have a total of seven management comments on pages 218
and 219 relating to the Board of County Commissioners, and
although there are some comments on Utilities, the comment he got
personally from the auditor is that Utilities, in fact, is in
better shape than it has ever been in terms of their reporting
and tracking. With the fastest growing division of county
government, he believed you would expect some bumps along the
way. Commissioner Scurlock agreed these comments do provide us
with a management tool for improving ourselves, but he did not
want anyone to think those'comments are too significant.
Auditor Hill agreed.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if we should have a Motion to
accept this Report for the record, but Attorney Vitunac advised
it was not necessary.
COPY OF COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR
THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1989, IS ON FILE IN
THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD.
MAR 2 71990 23 BOOK
r
MAR 2 7 1990. BooK / 9 �,cE
TRAFFIC PROBLEMS ON ROSEWOOD ROAD
George Beuttell came before the Board to discuss the
problems set out in his letter:
March 20, 1990
Mrs. Carolyn 1-79gart, Cha rwoman
Indian River County Commission
1840 25th St.
Varc Boach. F'1. 32360
Re: Rosew000Road
Dear Carolyn,
GEORGE M. BEUTTELL
CITRUS, INC.
CITRUS GROVE MANAGEMENT
& CONSULTING
LICENSED CITRUS FRUIT DEALER
As you know the traffic on Rosewood Road has not been
alleviated by any action of the transpbrtation committee.
The result of wait --ng 9 months for the committee to address
the excessive speeding problem on Rusewood Read was
absolutely nothing. As a group of more than 100 residents
who signed a petit. -ion to have the commission wit.igdt.c traffic
conditions on Rosewrod Road, we appeal to the commission to
put forth our issue to the full board as requested by our
petition and numerous letters to you. At this tima we
realize that discontinuing the use of t. lv bridge at King's
Highway is not going to happen but there are otner
alternatives which the county can enact to help our real
problem.
Please notify me of the date of o, -,r wing on the agenda.
Sincere'y yours,
I
George M. Beuttell
Chairman Eggert requested that Mr. Beuttell proceed on the
assumption that everyone here has read all the detailed backup on
this item and has a feel for the situation.
Commissioner Scurlock believed Mr. Beuttell has been before
the Board and the TPC numerous times and must feel some frustra-
tion. He did not know how the other Board members felt, but he
personally did not feel that 16th Street is a major road to pass
traffic from east to west. Certainly it is a public road and
must remain open, but he felt we should come up with some vehicle
to mitigate the traffic concerns. Commissioner Scurlock noted
that we originally had no plans to pave that road, and he did not
believe in anyone's concept it was ever designed to be a major
arterial. He has driven there over and over, and felt it seems
24
to be more of a "peaking" problem than an average daily flow; so,
he would like to see the Board put something in effect
temporarily (6 months or so) to see if it doesn't help reduce the -
traffic volumes on that road.
Chairman Eggert believed we are in the process of putting up
more speed signs. What bothers her is that Route 60 was
supposed 'to be the main artery, but people are using this as a
bypass just to get off Route 60. Although, she knows staff
doesn't like the idea, what she personally favors is a No Left
Turn sign, which possibly would break the habit of this street
being used as a by-pass for Route 60.
Mr. Beuttell stated that people are traveling down that
street at 45 mph, which is breaking the law, and he felt possibly
there could be some stop signs such as have been placed on Club
Drive by the City of Vero Beach. He believed people use 16th
Street to avoid the traffic light on 43rd Avenue and Route 60.
Commissioner bird did not see what people would accomplish
by that because you still have to come to a full stop on 16th
Street before you cross 43rd Avenue and also at King's Highway.
Mr. Beuttell agreed, but contended that they are avoiding
one traffic light by using Rosewood Road.
Commissioner Wheeler pointed out that, for that one traffic
light, they are substituting a stop sign at a very bad intersec-
tion with a bridge going out onto 58th Avenue as occurs all the
way down to Oslo. Even though 16th Street is narrower than we
like, he believed it is functioning properly, and he asked the
Public Works Director if there is a problem with comparing 16th
with 12th, 8th and 4th Streets - are there significant differ-
ences in amount of traffic and the bridgehead?
Public Works Director Davis advised that we have found that
it is functioning very similarly to those roads. The traffic
count on the road is not excessive for a two lane roadway, and
the accident history does not reveal any problems with the
geometrics of the width of the roadway. We do have a curb and
BOOK /
25 F', ;c
MAR 2 71990
s �i
r-- I
MAR 2 ? 1990 �?
BOOK 79 PAGE 679
gutter drainage system which mitigated the confined R/W problems
we had when the road was designed. The reason we had problems in
designing the road was mainly involved with the preserving of an
oak tree.
Commissioner Wheeler inquired if he knew of anything that
could be done to give relief to the speeding problem - possibly
speed bumps, and Director Davis stated that staff did suggest a
pedestrian path on the north side of the roadway but that would
involve the cooperation of the abutting property owners because
we need additional R/W. Traffic Engineer Dudeck has looked at
speed bumps, etc., and this is mentioned in the Minutes of the
TPC meet -i ng .
Commissioner Scurlock inquired about a 4 -way stop.
Commissioner Bird commented that he hates those things, but
Commissioner Scurlock noted that it does slow the traffic down.
Commissioner Wheeler stated that what concerns him is that
if we do something like that,.then what prevents people on every
other street in the county with through traffic coming in and
requesting the same thing.
Commissioner Scurlock contended that this is not a major
arterial. It was not designed that way, and the fact is that
particular road is being used in a way it wasn't intended for -
as a by-pa,ss for SR 60 and as a principal arterial.
Commissioner Wheeler did not believe the traffic count
indicates that, and Commissioner Bird and Commissioner Bowman
also did not feel that it did.
Commissioner Bird noted that the pavement width actually is
approximately the same as on 12th Street and 8th Street and the
thing .that makes you feel the street is narrower is the curb. He
believed of all the arterial streets in the County, this is the
most attractive. Some of the most expensive homes on the west
side of the river have been built there, and he did not believe
they would have built there if there was a traffic problem.
26
Mr. Beuttell emphasized that there was no traffic problem
when he originally built there on a dirt road, but he would not
build there now.
Commissioner Bird pointed out that traffic will increase
over the whole county as we grow. He does not want to increase
traffic on Rosewood Road; he just wants it to carry its fair
share; and the traffic count does not indicate that it is
overburdened.
Mr. Beuttell did not agree that the traffic count was
correct. He felt they are carrying an extra burden, and he wants
to keep Vero Beach as close as possible to what it was in the
past.
Commissioner Bird did not feel you will enhance the beauty
of the road by putting in speed bumps.
Mr. Beuttell stated that the people who live there do not
agree with that, and he again emphasized that 4 -way stops were
put on Club Drive.
Commissioner Bowman believed that was done for a totally
different reason - young people were using it as a by-pass to get
to the beaches. She also objected to anyone calling this road an
arterial; it is a collector road.
Mr. Beuttell emphasized that is only a name; it is not a
collector road!
Steve Wild, resident of Rosewood Road, also stressed that it
is a nice residential street. He noted that there are 25
families who have lived there 20 years or more. That tells you
something about how nice that neighborhood was, but it is
deteriorating. Mr. Wild did know that speeds are excessive on
that road, and he personally saw a child on a bicycle the other
day with 3 cars behind him. He claimed that neighborhood is
different from other neighborhoods which run north and south and
have access to Route 60. People on Rosewood have no other access
to SR 60 but by that road. He explained that basically what the
residents would like to do with the 4 -way stops is make it a
7199 27 BON
,MAR 2 7 1990 BOOK"� Fr: E 681
little inconvenient for people to come through there. They feel
the traffic should be sent past the commercial areas, and Mr.
Wild advised that the residents see many cars with license plates
from Village Green, Heron Cay , all those mobile home type areas
out there, using their street. He personally has seen them, and
if they drive slowly, that is one thing, but when they are going
40 or 45 mph, it is a real hazard and you can't get out of your
driveway.
Commissioner Bird pointed out that those people are
taxpayers also, and they are entitled to use that public road.
They are not entitled to misuse it, however, and he would be in
favor of having as tough speed enforcement there as possible, but
he thought because of the curbing situation, it is a difficult
place for anyone to ride bicycles. He, therefore, believed that
we should proceed with working together with.the property owners,
especially on the north side of the street, to try to acquire the
R/W necessary to build a bicycle or pedestrian path.
Mr. Wild stressed that they just want the Board to do
something to make it a little bit of a hassle to drive down that
road so people will avoid it. He stated that it is not just
Heron Cay. people, it is anybody, and kids, too.
Commissioner Bird believed the Board has been told by Public
Works that the Green Book does not recommend 4 -way stops, and he
felt for the County to go in and artificially create a 4 -way stop
to slow traffic possibly could put us in a liable situation.
Public Works Director Davis explained the warrant criteria
we use for analyzing the need for 4 -way stops, 3 -way stops,
traffic signalization, etc., and advised that if we deviate from
that standard traffic engineer methodology or accepted practice,
staff feels the County is more open to having traffic laws either
thrown out of court or not upheld. Also from a liability
standpoint, being self-insured, he believed it is better to stick
to those adopted manuals. Director Davis advised that he would
put in 4 -way stops if directed to do so by the Board, but felt it
28
i s �
is staff's obligation to stick to the manual and be as totally
objective as they can in making their recommendations. He
emphasized that staff has looked at the traffic volumes here and
does not recommend 4 -way stops simply because they don't meet the
warrant criteria.
Chairman Eggert felt NACO said we weren't all that liable if
we put these up, and Commissioner Scurlock did not believe the
City of Vero Beach has incurred any losses from the 4 -way stops
they put on Club Drive 12 years ago.
Commissioner Bird asked how you put a price tag on the
inconvenience to everyone who travels that street and has to stop
at signs that are there simply to slow the traffic when it is not
really necessary.
Commissioner Scurlock felt the point is that the road was
not designed for through traffic and, therefore, you are not
inconveniencing anyone who instead should be using the road that
was designed for the through traffic.
Commissioner Bird believed the most expeditious way to move
traffic is to let it flow and, in fact, the reason the DOT is
very reluctant to grant more traffic signals on U.S.I. is because
when you interrupt that flow of traffic, you start creating
problems.
Traffic Engineer Dudeck agreed and further informed the
Board that studies have indicated once you put a 4 -way stop in
strictly for speed control, the speed between those signs is
greater than it was before.
Commissioner Wheeler believed we are only using the road at
35% of the capacity it was designed for. He also believed that
Public Works Director Davis used the word "objective;" and he
felt that is what we have to be; that we must look at this
countywide, not just for Rosewood.
Discussion continued at length with Mr. Beuttell presenting
his philosophy that spreading the impact over all streets is
simply "spreading the disease," and Commissioner Wheeler noted
29 BOOK 9 f. ,U1.685
M R 2 71990
r �
MAR 2-71990
BOOK 9 F,�GE 6 S3
that if every neighborhood took that attitude, we would get rid
of the disease completely and we would all walk because there
wouldn't be any roads open.
Mr. Beuttell expressed his belief that what we need is a
transportation plan that will take traffic out of these
desirable, nice neighborhoods.
Commissioner Wheeler asked if we should go with the criteria
that if you have a $300,000 house, that is a "nice neighborhood,"
and, therefore, we shouldn't use your street, and if you live in
a $50,000 house, we will send the traffic through your
neighborhood.
William Koolage, interested citizen, believed the speed
limit on 16th Street is 35 mph, and he felt that is very
reasonable; however, the policing of that is something else.
He also felt a very important point in this situation is that
this road leads to the 17th Street Bridge and the High School.
He further noted that he uses 27th Avenue nightly, and it seemed
to him that 12th Street has taken the flow off of 16th Street
because he sees a long standing line of cars at 12th. Mr.
Koolage continued that he is getting a little tired of hearing
about Rosewood and preferential treatment. This county is
growing; we are talking about diverting traffic into the 2 -way
pairs; he felt 16th Street must take their share of the burden;
and he guessed he is just getting fed up with having this same
thing come back to the Board time and time again.
At this point, County Attorney Vitunac advised that the
county has the legal power to put these stop signs wherever it
wants if they have a reasonable reason to do so, and he did not
believe the county would incur any additional liability by the
decision to put them in, but only if they actually are somehow
installed improperly so they can't be seen, etc.
Commissioner Wheeler noted staff said statistics show speed
increasing in between where you put the 4 -way stop signs, and
30
Traffic Engineer Dudeck confirmed that there are studies that
back that up.
Commissioner Scurlock suggested that we just put them in on
a temporary basis and see what happens.
Mr. Wild felt there should be 2 or 3 4 -way stops, not just
one. He reiterated that you are welcome on the road at 30 mph,
but the problem is the speeders and the Sheriff does not have the
manpower to sit next to a road like that.
Traffic Engineer Dudeck informed the Board that the Manual
for Uniform Control of Traffic Devices, which has been officially
adopted by the State of Florida, flatly says that stop signs are
not to be used for speed control measures.
Helen Russo, resident of the Rosewood Road area, contended
that the 4 -way stop signs on Club Drive and on the Fingers do act
as a deterrent no matter what the book says. She noted that it
is easy to say the residents should be objective, but the road is
a hazard to the children and her daughter has been heckled by
speedsters. Mrs. Russo found it amazing that you would put in a
sidewalk for thousands of dollars rather than first trying stop
signs, which are much less expensive.
Herndon Williams, 3554 Ocean Drive, found it astounding that
Commissioner Scurlock would propose to "hassle" people to keep
them from traveling on roads the public pays for. He felt that
is a sorry attitude for someone who is supposed to keep things
moving in this county. Also, he felt citing the fact that there
are 4 -way stops in the City of Vero Beach, doesn't mean they are
a good thing. He has found that generally where these stop signs
appear are within the very affluent communities, and he finds it
difficult to believe that is coincidental. Ocean Drive was
blocked at the southern end to keep people from driving through,
and he doesn't think that is a reason for saying let's try it
some place else. If people want this type of thing, let them
build enclaves such as John's Island and The Moorings where they
can have their private roads and do what they wish.
AJAR 1990 3 BUUK % PAGE 6NLI
MAR 2 71990 �. 5
BOOK ,l P,q.Gf�J
Mr. Wild pointed out that Mr. Williams is saying Rosewood
Road is a public road, but the home owners were assessed as if it
were a private road.
Board members advised that was not correct, and Public Works
Director Davis explained that a special formula was developed for
this road just because it was a collector roadway and the county
paid much more of the project cost than they normally would have.
The homeowners only paid 250, and also the reason that portion of
16th Street was paved was due to a voluntary petition received
from abutting property owners.
Commissioner Bird agreed that it was not the County's idea
to pave the road and further pointed out that special provisions
were made in the design of the road just to leave the trees and
to put the curb in.
Commissioner Scurlock wished to respond to Mr. Williams'
comments. First of all, he is not into harrassing people.
Secondly, he personally lives in an $86,000 home that is on the
tax rolls; so, he is not one of the rich millionaires who live on
16th; although, it happens to be in his District. He noted that
this Commission has been consistent in its site plan approvals in
trying to protect residential neighborhoods, and he does believe
this particular neighborhood is somewhat unique. It was an
unpaved road; it was not on any plan to be paved; and the road
does come to a dead end. Commissioner Scurlock stressed that he
has not suggested closing the road, but he does feel it is within
the realm of reasonableness to consider possibilities that would
enhance the quality of life for that neighborhood and not limit
it only to 16th Street residents. As to any special privileged
people having a special "in" with the Commission, that is bunk.
Mr. Williams noted that the 4 -way stops he was referring to
were in the City of Vero Beach on Club Drive in Riomar and on The
Fingers and they had nothing to do with the County Commission.
He did, however, believe the import of Commissioner Scurlock's
remark was to cause people enough trouble that they would take
32
another road, which he does not feel is part of the Commission's
job.
Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that the County also has
4 -way stops, for instance, one on 4th Street.
Mr. Beuttell continued to stress the deterioration of the
neighborhood's quality of life.
Traffic Engineer Dudeck noted that he has heard two con-
cerns, one of which is the safety of the children on bicycles,
and with the curbing and the 20 some feet of roadway, if you
don't put in sidewalks or a bike path, you are not going to cure
the situation no matter how many stop signs we put in there
because you are still going to have "x" number of cars and a
certain amount of footage for everyone to share. That is why
staff in the past suggested putting in sidewalks and a bike path
on the north side of the roadway to make it safer.
Commissioner Bird commented that he would support that 100%.
Mr. Beuttell asked why we don't discuss putting the bike
path on the south side of the roadway rather than the north and
get people way away from the road.
Director Davis felt it would be very difficult to access the
bike path on that side because of the ditch; however, it is a
possibility.
Chairman Eggert asked the Board what direction they wished
to proceed on this item.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bird, SECONDED by Commis-
sioner Wheeler, Commissioner Scurlock voting in
opposition, the Board by a 4-1 vote agreed that staff
has documented that there is speeding taking place,
and directed that a letter be sent to the Sheriff ask-
ing him to do whatever he can by selective enforcement
to crack down on speed violators and also directed Public
Works Director Davis to give this road a high priority
in our future planning for bike paths.
MAR 2 71990 33
BOOK. I j f:1GE ass
MAR 2I 1990 BOOK 79 PnL 68 m7
WINDSOR, INC. (POLO CLUB) REQUEST FOR CONCEPTUAL PRD APPROVAL
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 i
1
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority *personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
i NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice of Public Hearing .to consider t e
in the matter of.
granting of lgpecclal exceptionapprovalfor a
Planned -Resldeni s Development The subject
property ispresently under contract by the.
Windsor Polo and Beach Club, Inc., and Is Io-.
cated at 10755 A -1-A. The subject property Is Io-.
in the _ Court, was pub- cated in Sections 14, 15, 23, Township .31;
Range 39 E, and consists of 411 acres. The sub '
y %% / S (7� n ject proGertla Ile immediately north -of the Town .
1� i ( / I Orchiid and eAtends hom the Indian Rhrer.to
lashed in said newspaper in the issues of the Atlantic Ocean,
A public hearing at which parties In Interest {
and citizens shall have an opportunity to be
heard, will be held by the Board of County Com-
missioners of Indian River County, Florida In the
Commission Chambers -of the County Adminis-
tration Building,- located at 1840 .25th Street,
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper pubtished at Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday, March 27; i
Vero Beach, in sajd Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore 1990 at 8:05 A.M. • I • , • - 11"......
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been Anyone who may wish to appeal a� decision
which may be mese at this meeting will need to I
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun- ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed-
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of ings is made which Includes the testimony and
=upon n which the appal will be based.
advertisement; and affiant f-urther says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm IND RIVER COUNTY
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. .
advertisement for publication in the gaid newspaper. By -s -Carolyn Eggert, Chairman
—Jy 11' C' March 7. 1990 882510
Sworn to and subscribed before me thisotal � A j
lo: (Business Manager)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida)
(SEAL)
tion:
Planning Director Stan Boling made the following presenta-
34
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
S
Robert M. Keating AI
Community Develop enterector
THROUGH: Stan Boling;'A'iCP
Planning Di
recto
FROM: John W. McCo
Staff Plannr Current Development
DATE: February 15, 1990
SUBJECT: WINDSOR'S INC.'S. REQUEST FOR CONCEPTUAL PRD APPROVAL
(THE ORIGINAL POLO CLUB)
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of March 27, 1990.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND LOCATION:
Windsor Inc., owner, is requesting conceptual PRD plan special
exception approval for a 400 unit development. The subject
property is located approximately 11 miles north of the C.R.
510/S.R. A.1.A. intersection on A.1.A., and contains approximately
405 acres which extend from the Indian River to the Atlantic
Ocean. A portion of this property was covered in a 1988 PRD
application approved by the Board of County Commissioners as the
Windsor Polo Club.
Special exception uses are those types of uses that would not
generally be appropriate throughout a particular zoning district.
However, when special exception uses are carefully controlled as
to number, area, location, and/or relationship to the vicinity,
such uses would not adversely impact the public health, safety,
comfort, good order, appearance, convenience, morals and general
welfare and as such would be compatible with permitted uses within
the particular zoning district. In granting any special excep-
tion, the Board may prescribe appropriate special conditions and
safeguards to ensure that the use is compatible with surrounding
uses in the district.
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to approve
this project at its regular meeting of February 22, 1990. The
Planning and Zoning Commission did modify the staff recommendation
with its motion. The modified recommendation can be found in the
Planning and Zoning Commission's Recommendation (Attachment #4).
The staff has not substantively changed its original recommenda-
tion as specified at the end of this report.
Changes From Previously Approved Conceptual Plan:
The previously approved plan contained 280 acres and proposed 200
dwelling units comprised of detached single family homes and some
beach cottages, 3 polo fields, a Beach Club, and extensive
horse -related and other polo -related facilities (see attachment #6
"old plan").
This proposed new conceptual plan contains 405 acres and 400
dwelling units (See attachment #3 "new plan"). The type of
residential product has been changed and varied to include
35 BOOK ( f,AU �
MAR 2 71990
BOOK FAGE 680-
detached
80
detached single family homes and a variety of home types in a
compact single family "village concept". The polo and
horse -related facilities have been scaled-back. In addition to
the previously proposed Beach Club, a Golf and Country Club and
golf course have been added to the development on the west side of
S.R. A.l.A. Also, a polo museum and approximately 50,000 square
feet of internal accessory commercial area are proposed within the
project.
Phasing/Construction
-Phase I
The applicant proposes to construct the main compact, single
family "village" areas, a golf course, polo fields and related
infrastructure for some of the single family residential areas
within Phase I.
-Subsequent Phases
The subsequent two phases would include the Beach Club, Golf Club,
and additional single family residences and village homes, includ-
ing a polo museum in Phase II of the overall development. The
proposed accessory commercial would also be constructed near the
end of Phase II.
Beach Club/Golf and Country Club
The Beach Club site is a 4.64 acre parcel located immediately east
of the existing main access point onto S.R. A.1.A. The proposed
beach club will be approximately 8,000 to 10,000 square feet in
size, and will include accessory uses such as a swimming pool, a
dining facility and cabanas.
The golf and country club, located west of S.R. A.1.A. will be
approximately 14,000 square feet in size and will have an accesso-
ry dining facility.
Road and Name Appeal
Since the previous approval of the polo club conceptual plan,
Ordinance 87-62 was passed which requires all development to use
road numbers rather than road names. The applicant is appealing
the decision of the Technical Review Committee to use road numbers
as required by ordinance.
The reason for the ordinance road numbering requirement is to
ensure a rational and logical identification for the road system
in Indian River County. The road identification helps emergency
services respond to calls not only within the subject development
but also in surrounding areas. (e.g. Windsor's overall main entry
road is 107th Street, and as such the street sign would serve as a
road and block number reference point for persons driving along
S.R. A.1.A.).
The road identification also helps the postal service deliver
mail. Emergency Management and the Postal Service played key
roles in the development of the road addressing ordinance and have
previously recommended that all projects conform to the coun-
ty -wide road numbering and addressing system. The staff does not
support this appeal; however, if the appeal is granted the appli-
cant must provide a road naming plan to be reviewed and approved
by the 911 planning technician to avoid duplication.
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted to approve the appli-
cant's appeal, allowing the use of road names. Staff's recommen-
dation is to deny the appeal and apply the standard road numbering
system as intended by the ordinance.
36
Jungle Trail
The Jungle Trail runs along the project's southern property line
(in two areas) providing a boundary between this development and
the Town of Orchid. The Jungle Trail turns north from there as it
nears and runs along the Indian River, splitting off a small piece
of the development. Thus, the project has significant Jungle
Trail frontage, and has frontage on the east and west side of the
Trail along the project's westernmost boundary (along the river).
Pelican Island Wildlife Refuge (PIWR)_
The project has 4,200 linear feet of frontage on the Indian River
and the Pelican Island Wildlife Refuge. The applicant has stated
there is a potential for 42 docks and that any docks that may be
built would need to be permitted at a later date. The applicant
is not seeking approval for any docks at this time. It is the
staff's position that the status of the PIWR could affect the
riparian rights of owners. As is normal county procedure, the -
staff will require documentation in the form of permits before any
building permit is issued for a structure which would affect the
Refuge. The staff will also enforce requirements that ensure that
any mangrove trimming performed to access possible future docks
would be the minimum necessary to construct any docks that may be
permitted.
ANALYSIS:
1. Size of Development Area: 405 acres
2. Zoning Classification:
RS -3; Residential Single Family (up to 3 units/acre)
292 acres
RS -6; Residential Single Family (up to 6 units/acre)
81 acres
RM -6; Residential Single Family (up to 6 units/acre
31 acres
3. Land Use Designation: L-1 Low Density Residential
up to 3 units/acre
L-2 Low Density Residential
up to 6 units/acre
4. Proposed Density: 400 units at 0.98 units per acre.
5. Surrounding Land Uses:
North: Vacant/Grove
South: Vacant/Town of Orchid, Orchid development
East: Atlantic Ocean
West: Indian River/Pelican Island Wildlife Refuge
6. Open Space Required: 73.0 acres
Provided: 215 acres
7. Recreation Space Required: 5.3 acres
Provided: 162 acres (includes golf course)
8. Proposed Utilities: The County Utilities department has
approved the conceptual water and sewer plans. The develop-
ment will use treated effluent for irrigation when available.
9. Traffic Circulation: The project's S.R. A.1.A. frontage has
almost doubled from the original PRD plan area. The appli-
cant now proposes 4 access points onto S.R. A.1.A. One
improved access point now exists. The developer will con-
struct deceleration and left turn lanes at 2 of the 3 new
access points.
The overall interior circulation plan consists essentially of
one major loop road which 'inter -connects the entire. develop -
37
MAR2 71990 L" " U
BOOK ( FA�c n
r -1 i I
MAR 2 71990
BOOK d FADE691
ment..Most of the interior roads are concentrated in the main
"village area". These roads, arranged in a functional
hierarchy, vary in right-of-way width from 14' for a common
drive to 48' for a "village boulevard". The traffic circu-
lation within the village areas will be somewhat restricted,
such as in a downtown area. Buildings and pedestrian areas
will be close to roadways; some structures (balconies) will
overhang into rights-of-way. The applicant has secured the
conditional .approval of the Public Works department, Fire
department and Emergency Management department for this type
of compact, village road design. Public Works has concep-
tually approved the entire roadway system layout.
-Thoroughfare.Road-
Along the northern border of the development is a subdivision
collector roadway designated on the Thoroughfare Plan. The
applicant has made provisions to accommodate this road
right-of-way which provides S.R. A.I.A. access for adjacent
parcels that otherwise have frontage only on Jungle' Trail.
The applicant has agreed to provide the necessary
right-of-way for this road, and is coordinating with an
adjacent property owner to share the right-of-way alignment.
Approval of this new conceptual plan, like the old one, will
need to be with the condition that the developer make ade-
quate provisions for the collector road right-of-way.
-Traffic Impact Analysis -
The applicant has prepared a traffic impact analysis which
the Traffic Engineer has reviewed but not yet approved.
Further revisions are needed. It appears there will be some
improvements (widening and signalization) required at the
S.R. A.1.A./C.R. 510 intersection, as well as other traffic
improvements. The developer will need to complete the
traffic impact analysis to the satisfaction of the Traffic
Engineer prior to the issuance of a land development permit,
and will need to commit to providing for traffic improvements
identified in the approved analysis.
10. Parking: Most uses within the project meet the normal
minimum parking standards set -forth in the parking ordinance.
In the PRD application the applicant is requesting the
ability to use shared parking at the Beach Club and Country
Club facilities, in order to reduce the normal amount of
spaces provided. Approval for such a reduction may be
granted only by Board of County Commissioners approval.
Preliminary indications via a use/time interval parking table
show that a reduction of about 20% of the normally required
parking is warranted at each club, given the types of uses at
each club and the differing time periods at which the uses
generate peak parking demand. The proposed amount of parking
will cover the highest peak parking demand of the total
facilities, according to the project engineer. Staff has no
objection to the parking reduction request for .the club
facilities, subject to final approval by the County Traffic
Engineer of a detailed parking study provided by the appli-
cant at the time of preliminary PRD plan review for each club
facility.
11. Landscape: The conceptual plan indicates that buffer plant-
ings will be provided in the 25' perimeter PRD buffer along
the north and south boundaries of the project. The northern
planting will be a "type B" buffer which consists of 3'
shrubs and a canopy tree every 40'. The buffer on the south
side will be a "type B+" buffer which will consist of 4'
shrubs and a canopy tree every 40'.
The staff also recommends that all trees used to meet the
county's landscape requirements be native (e.g. live oak, red
bay, cabbage palm, etc.). Any landscape trees used over and
38
I
above code requirements could be non-native when located out
of the Jungle Trail buffer area. Subsequent project land-
scape plans need to reflect these minimum native tree -re-
quirements.
12. Drainage: The conceptual drainage plan has been approved by
the Public Works department. This plan includes wet
stormwater retention and planted littoral zones which will be
more specifically addressed during preliminary PRD plan
review and land development permit review. All relevant
county requirements will be applied during those reviews.
13. Environmental Concerns: The applicant proposes the filling
and development of approximately 5 acres of wetlands, that
are impacted by exotics, located on the east side of Jungle
Trail. Such filling would be mitigated by restoration and
enhancement of some existing wetlands and the creation of new
wetlands. The concept of mitigation is allowed in the new
comprehensive plan and by the development code. However,
approval of this.conceptual PRD application will not author-
ize the applicant to fill any wetlands. Mitigation plans
will need to be proposed and meet County requirements and
receive County and other jurisdictional agency approval prior
to any alteration or filling of existing wetlands. The
mitigation plans will receive detailed review when the
preliminary PRD is submitted, and would be approved only if
all environmental concerns are adequately addressed pursuant
to County requirements as well as requirements of jurisdic-
tional agencies.
14. Accessory Uses: Besides the accessory beach and golf and
country club, the project will also have uses such as a
tennis club, polo museum, and town hall which will be acces-
sory to the project.
Since the PRD has more than 200 units, it is eligible for
special PRD accessory commercial uses. The maximum amount of
allowable accessory commercial area is calculated at 125
square feet per dwelling unit; this amounts to 50,000 square
feet of accessory commercial land area available to the
development at build -out. The commercial area is to be
located well within the project boundaries, ensuring that the
commercial area will not be exposed to the general public or
adjacent properties. The applicant is proposing such uses as
a real estate, and construction office, coffee shop and
general store for this area upon build -out of 400 units. The
conceptual proposal meets all PRD accessory commercial
requirements. [Note: by ordinance, no PRD accessory commer-
cial development can begin operation until 200 units are
C.O.'d.]
15. Dedication and Improvements: The applicant has agreed to the
following dedications and improvements:
1. The dedication of twenty feet (201) of property for
A.1.A. right-of-way (from both sites), prior to site
plan release, or in conjunction with final plat approval
for the appropriate phase(s).
2. The construction of an eight foot wide public bikeway
along the west side of the property's A.1.A. frontage,
prior to any C.O.
3.
4.
The construction of deceleration lanes and left -turn
lanes on A.1.A. at a given project entrance, prior to
any C.O. within a phase containing a given project
entrance.
The provision of adequate right-of-way for the subdivi-
sion collector designated along the northern boundary of
the subject property.
39 ® /� y ,�3j r
MAR 2 71990 UU �I �� Fr�Ui. J41
MAR 2 T 1990
BOOKFi0A �•�qJ
.79 The applicant will need to provide for any other improve-
ments identified in the approved traffic impact analysis,
such as the developer's fair share for signalization and
widening of the C.R. 510/S.R. A.1.A. intersection.
16. Special Exception Criteria:
A. - Country Clubs -
"Criteria for country clubs: —
1. The term "country club," as used in this section,
shall be defined as a land area and buildings
containing recreational facilities, clubhouse and
the usual uses accessory thereto, open only to
members and their guests for a membership fee.
Country clubs shall be interpreted to include
multi-purpose recreational clubs as well as golf
courses, tennis clubs and similar membership
recreational facilities.
2. Such facilities may include restaurants with
alcoholic beverage licenses provided that no such
establishment is located within one thousand
(1,000) feet of the front door of any church or all
property lines of any school. In addition, such
establishments shall not be open to the general
public.
3. No principal or accessory building shall be located
closer than forty-five (45) feet to any street line
or closer than one hundred (100) feet to any lot
line which abuts a single-family zoning district.
4. No off-street parking or loading area shall be
located closer than twenty-five (25) feet to any
residential zoning district.
5. Where such uses involve golf courses, tennis
courts, marinas or any other recreational use for
which standards are set forth in Section 25.1(e),
they shall also be subject to such standards and
procedures, unless a waiver is granted by the
decision making body because the standards are not
applicable to the type or intensity of use
proposed.
6. All multipurpose recreational clubs authorized
herein shall be located adjacent to a major thor-
oughfare.
7. All outdoor lighting shall be adequately shielded
in ,order to prevent reflection onto adjacent
properties.
8. A landscaped bufferyard utilizing screening, as
established in Section 23, shall be required
adjacent to all residentially zoned land."
Criteria 1, 2, 5, 7, and 8 are satisfied by the request.
Based upon the project design, the applicant is requesting
special waivers for criteria 3, 4, and 6 pursuant to the PRD
ordinance which allows for such waivers. Staff has no
objection to the proposed waivers (listed subsequent in this
report), since the proposed golf/country club is integrated
into the project and located well within the overall project
boundaries.
40
B. - Golf Courses -
"Golf courses and accessory facilities (Administrative
Permit and Special Exception).
a. Criteria for golf courses and accessory facilities:
1. Golf courses and accessory facilities shall
not be interpreted to include freestanding
commercial miniature golf courses and/or
driving ranges.
2. No major accessory use or principal building
or structure shall be located closer than one
hundred (100) feet to any lot line which abuts
a residential district.
3. Golf courses shall, to the most reasonable
extent, retain and preserve native vegetation
over at least thirty (30) per cent of th total
upland area of the course due to their charac-
teristically high water demand and heavy
nutrient loads.
4. The golf courses shall be designed so that any
lighting is shielded and directed away. from
residential areas.
5. Screening (reserved)."
All criteria except #2 are satisfied by the applicant. Based
upon the project design and proximity to the golf maintenance
facility of the adjacent (Orchid) project, the applicant is
requesting a special waiver from criterion #2. Staff has no
objection the the waiver (listed below).
17. - Special PRD Waivers -
The following waivers and PRD options are being requested by
the applicant:
A. Internal right-of-way requirements from 60' to a minimum
of 14' for common driveway entrances, 24' for common
driveways, 28' for one way alleys, 48' for two way
streets.
B. A lessening of the required parking for the Beach Club
and Golf Club via dual use parking, allowing up to a 20%
reduction in the total number of spaces pursuant to the
project engineer's analysis.
C. Attached single family and multi -family dwelling units,
-as shown in the conceptual plan, shall be allowed in the
RS -3 and RS -6 zoning district areas.
D. Building setbacks for single family and multi -family
dwelling units shall be as indicated on attachments #7 -
10. The minimum setbacks will go from 25' on the front
and rear and 15' on the side to 0'. for front, rear and
sides.
E. Minimum lot sizes and frontage requirements. The
minimum "village" lot will go from 12,000 and 7,000
square feet to 3,200 square feet. The minimum frontage
(width) will go from 80 and 70 feet to 32 feet for
village lots and 45' for beach cottage lots.
F. Minimum Pavement Widths. For two way common driveways
the minimum width will go from 24' to 121; for one way
alleys the minimum shall be 121; for two way streets,
the minimum width shall go from 22' to 181, pursuant to
the conceptual plan.
G. Cut and fill balance requirements within the 100 year
flood plain, (must be approved through the Public Works
Department) . �?
41 600f(
1990
B AR 2 71996 Boor t9 F,} 695
H. Fence and wall Height and setback waivers. Fences and
walls exceeding 42" in height shall be allowed to be
built with a "0" setback from all property lines. Fence
height will go from 42" in the frontyard to 10' above
finished grade.
I. The country club setback from single family zoned lots
(internal to the project) will go from a minimum of 100'
to a minimum of 251.
J. Off-street parking for non-residential uses shall be
allowed to abut the exterior walls of a residential use.
K. Common driveways may be constructed of a stabilized
non -paved surface as approved by Public Works.
L Swimming pool setback requirements. Pools shall be
allowed to be built with a "0" setback from property
lines.
M. Roof and balcony overhangs shall be permitted - to en-
croach over rights-of-way to within 7' of roadway
pavement for the main roads and up to the road pavement
for alley ways (except at intersections). Alley ways
are all restricted to passenger vehicles; no trucks will
be allowed.
N. Road radii around corners shall be reduced from 25' to
15'.
0. Detached bedrooms or outbuildings shall be allowed on a
single family lot (village areas).
P. The golf maintenance facility will go from a 100'
minimum to a minimum 25' setback_ from the adjacent
property line.
The Planning staff originally recommended that waivers E, L, O,
and P be restricted to development only on the Village Lots. .The
Planning and Zoning Commission further restricted the developer by
adding waivers A, D, F, H, K, M, and N to the list of waivers..
which could only be used on the Village Lots.
The developer did not react and address the restrictions of these
additional waivers at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Upon reflection, the developer has now indicated that waivers F,
H, L and O apply to the golf homes as well as to the beach
cottages.
The staff does not object to these waivers applying to the other
areas and has removed them from the list of restricted waivers in
the staff recommendation. However, it should be noted that these
waivers will not apply within any Jungle Trail setback area
required by the Board of County Commissioners.
Based upon the "old world village" design concept represented in
the conceptual plan, staff has no objection to the requested
waivers.
18. Jungle Trail Issues: The Board of County Commissioners
approved the concept of "temporarily" closing a portion of
the Jungle Trail to vehicular traffic and making a portion
into a walking trail, when the initial conceptual polo club
plan was approved. A condition of this approval was to
create a management plan which would implement the walking
trail, including provisions for public parking and county
parkland. Since that initial conditional conceptual approval
almost 2 years ago, the developer has failed to submit such a
management plan which would have required approval by the
Board of County Commissioners. Since the original approval,
the County has better studied the Trail and has adopted a
management plan for the entire Trail. In staff's opinion,
the conceptual approval for a walking trail segment will
42
M M M
lapse when the old Polo PRD plan is superceded by the _new
Polo PRD plan. It is also staff's opinion that no conceptual
approval should be given for a walking trail concept at this
time. If such a request is made, it should be considered
separately in public hearings.
Because the river lots are bisected by Jungle Trail, the
Trail will need to be crossed to access lot portions west of
the Trail. The number and extent of such crossings will
obviously impact the Trail buffer area. In staff's opinion
the number of Jungle Trail buffer crossing points should be
limited to no more than one per two single family lots and
one for the multi -family area.
Since the initial conceptual plan was approved, the County
has filed a maintenance map on the northern portion of Jungle
Trail (from 510 to S.R. A.1.A.). The map gives the county
the rights to the actual roadway which is 16' to 22' wide.
The county staff has also conducted research and has not been
able to establish the County's rights to anything more than
the area covered by the maintenance map. The developer
should be responsible for bringing the Jungle Trail
right-of-way up to a minimum standard of 50', which is the
amount the County now .possesses through the Town of Orchid.
This would be consistent with what was approved with the
previous conceptual plan [Note: the previous plan required a
40' right-of-way and established a Jungle Trail setback of
50' from the edge of the right-of-way. [Note: the County
has 40' of right-of-way for the Trail segment south of C.R.
510.]
The project's compatibility with the Trail is a major consid-
eration. Because the project design proposes a multi -family
area and a parallel roadway along portions of the Trail, an
increased buffer area should be provided along the Trail.
The staff recommends that the same Jungle Trail buffer and
setback schemes established through the Town of Orchid be
established with this conceptual plan along the south side of
the development (see attachment #7). The applicant is
agreeable to a 97' setback from the centerline of Jungle
Trail as long as portions of the buffer and setback area can
be used for some wetlands mitigation work that can be credit-
ed by the county for purposes of satisfying the county's
newly established 2:1 mitigation ratio (see attachment #8).
Currently, there is disagreement between the county staff and
the developer as to whether the jurisdictional agencies will
require a 1:1 or 2:1 mitigation ratio. Based upon the
developer's representations at the Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting, the Commission approved a less stringent
Jungle Trail setback. The setback approved is the minimum
required by the Jungle Trail Management Plan.
The lesser setback was requested by the developer to allow
more flexibility in meeting minimum mitigation requirements.
The developer would be agreeable to the 97' setback/buffer
recommended by staff if he was assured that he could estab-
lish recreated wetlands within this area to meet the mitiga-
tion requirements. Staff has no objection to the use of some
of the Trail setback/buffer area for mitigation; however, no
certain commitment regarding mitigation can be given at this
time, since detailed drawings and agency approvals have not
been completed.
Since the project's compatibility with the Jungle Trail is a
major issue, it is the staff's opinion that the 97' setback
is the best alternative for the Jungle Trail section
regardless of what type of mitigation is proposed or
approved.
43
BOOK PA f'AG; hlj
_MAR 2 71'S0
BOOK
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners terminate
the previously approved concept plan with all of its conditions
and grant conceptual PRD special exception approval for the
Windsor Polo Club (including the cited waivers and PRD option),
subject to the following conditions:
1. That the applicant fulfill all obligations as listed in the
Dedications and Improvements section (#15) of this report,
complete the traffic impact analysis to the satisfaction of
the County Traffic Engineer, and provide for any other
required improvements indicated in the approved traffic
impact analysis.
2. That no wetland filling and mitigation proposals are approved
at this time but may be approved concurrently with the
preliminary PRD application(s) for the affected phase(s).
3. That a legally enforceable developer's agreement be executed
between the applicant and the County to ensure that the
mangrove fringe along the site's river frontage is preserved
to visually buffer the Wildlife Refuge from the development
and to limit clearing (after obtaining all required permits)
needed for any dock or other recreation -related structures to
the least amount possible.
4. Crossing of the Jungle Trail buffer area be limited to one
crossing per two single family lots and one crossing point
for the multi -family area.
5. That no approval for any docks are given at this time and any
dock must receive all jurisdictional agency permits prior to
a County building permit being issued.
6. That all trees used to meet the minimum landscape and buffer-
ing requirements must be native to the Barrier Island.
*7. That the minimum Jungle Trail right-of-way, buffer and
setback shall be the same section that has been applied in
The Town of Orchid.
8. No accessory PRD commercial uses shall be permitted until 200
units are C.O.'d.
*9. That subsequent preliminary PRD's must conform to the Coun-
ty's road numbering system. (NOTE: if street names are
permitted the applicant must have the names approved by the
911 technician to avoid duplication.)
10. The amount of shared parking to be used and the overall
number of normally required spaces reduced must be approved
by the County's Traffic Engineer, based upon an approvable
and detailed parking study provided by the applicant, prior
to approval of any preliminary PRD plan for each club facili-
ty.
11. The waivers restricted to A, D, E, K, M, N and P apply only
to construction within the village lots and beach cottages.
No waivers shall apply to the Jungle Trail setback area
established by the Board of County Commissioners.
*NOTE: These two recommendations differ from what the Planning
and Zoning Commission has recommended. For condition #7 the
Planning and Commission recommends that the lesser standards of
the Jungle Trail Management Plan be required. On condition #9 the
Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that street names be
allowed (as approved by the 911 planning technician).
44
r � r
Commissioner Scurlock referred to the following statement in
#18 under the staff Analysis regarding Jungle Trail Issues:
"Currently, there is disagreement between the county staff and
the developer as to whether the jurisdictional agencies will
require a 1:1 or 2:1 mitigation ratio." He wished to know what
has been resolved about this ratio, and Planning Director Boling
advised that we have not come to an agreement with the developer
regarding what St. John's will or will not apply in this
particular case.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if we will recommend 1:1 or 2:1,
and Community Development Director Keating advised that we have
2:1 in the Comp Plan and that would be applicable. The applicant
claims the jurisdictional agencies have indicated they would only
require 1:1. In staff's discussion with those agencies, they
have indicated they haven't committed to a 1:1 mitigation ratio
and they also indicated the mitigation ratios we have are
comparable to what they apply.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if this then is an issue we will
not be involved in, but Director Keating pointed out that the
Comp Plan requires 2:1, and that is what we are requiring. It
was further noted that even if St. John's approved 1:1, the
applicant still would have to meet our 2:1 ratio.
Planning Director Boling continued that the other issue is
staff's recommendation to use standard road numbering instead of
names and have this project conform to the established network,
and staff also is recommending a more stringent buffer require-
ment. He wanted to stress that all the setbacks and waivers are
outside of whatever setback is established along Jung.le Trail and
outside of the PRD perimeter setback. There also is a waiver of
cut and fill requirements that will have to go through Public
Works and come back to the Board.
Commissioner Scurlock had another question about Waiver 17
"O" which indicated detached bedrooms or out buildings shall be
7 19�® 45 BOOK d� ;E
MAR r
� AR �► � ��'� � BOOK
M . '19� �� F.�EE
allowed on single family lots, and he asked how we do this
without setting a precedent elsewhere in the community.
Director Boling advised that you are only allowed to do this
through a PRD.
Commissioner Scurlock felt he could understand the philoso-
phy of our Planning staff and transportation people regarding the
street numbering and how that relates back to our 911 system, but
he asked if it isn't a different situation with a PRD that is
going to have 24 hour security. He would assume the guard at the
gate could direct an emergency vehicle better than any numbering
system, and did not see, in this particular type situation, why
staff is opposed to road names.
Planning Director Boling explained that the criteria in the
ordinance relate to the system that is set up countywide, and the
more individual developments that occur that aren't part of that
system, the more holes there are in there and it doesn't work as
a unified system.
Commissioner Bowman asked why not have a dual system, and
Chairman Eggert noted that is allowed now.
Director Keating advised the problem is that the Post Office
has told us they can't deal with a dual. system.
Discussion ensued about what the ordinance allows, and
Commissioner Bird commented that he had a problem with staff on
this when we put it in the ordinance, and he does think there are
certain situations in these PRDs and private communities where we
must allow some flexibility.
Commissioner Wheeler agreed. He felt there are certain
things in any community that are outstanding and almost to be
considered landmarks that people can relate to by name, such as
St. Edward's, John's Island, The Moorings, and Windsor Polo Club;
even though, it appears it is now known just as Windsor.
Board members agreed, and Commissioner- Bird asked that Mr.
McQueen be allowed to review just where staff is at odds with the
developer.
46
Commissioner Bowman wished to point out that the Pelican
Island Wildlife Refuge correctly should be referred to as the
Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge.
Engineer Darrell McQueen of McQueen Associates came before
the Board representing Windsor, Inc. He felt they are pretty
much in agreement with staff on most of the issues, and wished to
take up the debate about the numbering system first. He believed
when you ask someone where the County Park is, they will say
right across from Windsor; so, he felt using the names in Windsor
will be a lot better. He stressed that the P&Z Commission were
for allowing the names, and the developer has letters of
agreement from the 911 Emergency people that they can handle it.
Mr. McQueen confirmed that Windsor presently has 24 hour security
service at the guardhouse and it will continue to be manned with
24 hour security at the gatehouse.
Commissioner Bird felt possibly there should be some chart
at the gatehouse that they can supply to assist emergency
vehicles, and Mr. McQueen explained that there will be a guard
there who will act as an escort. He, therefore, asked that the
Board stay with the P&Z recommendation on Item 9 in staff's
recommendation and allow them to go with the road naming system.
Mr. McQueen felt there are a couple other items the Board
could approve subject to staff approval later on. In this town
concept, they would like to overhang some balconies over the
R/Ws. The chimneys, in some instances, would project 2' into the
R/W, and the steps -out of the unit would go 5' into the R/W, but
in all cases, these still would be underneath the overhanging
balcony area. He would like approval of these subject to
satisfying staff concerns.
Planning Director Boling believed that would be an amendment
to "M" under Waiver #17.
Mr. McQueen continued that they also would also like to have
Board approval of the waiver of the cut and fill balance require -
MAR 2 7 1990
47 ROOK -79 f'1GE 7UU
MAR 2 IM90
BOOK , _
9 PAGE 70 1
ments subject to later staff approval. This is addressed in Item
"G" under Waiver #17.
Planning Director Boling noted that this could be approved
subject to approval of the Public Works Director, and the Board
agreed.
Mr. McQueen then went on to discuss Waiver #18 which deals
with Jungle Trail issues. He noted that in Director Boling's
presentation relative to Jungle Trail - the 20' of R/W and the
50' setback - that condition was predicated on closing Jungle
Trail to driving traffic and creating a walking trail. He
informed the Board that he has had discussions with Millie
Bunnell of the Historical Society for the last year as to how
they can take that back to a drive-through trail. He confirmed
that the developer now has backed off from the walking trail
concept and is in agreement with having it a drive-through, but
would like to have no parking or stopping along that area, which
is about 1-3/4 miles of the Trail.
Commissioner Scurlock wanted to know what the developer is
asking in return for doing that.
Mr. McQueen explained that he had asked that we stay with
Jungle Trail as the Management Plan shows. Then in adopting the
Land Use Plan, the Board passed a Plan which required that a
mitigation of wetlands of 2 acres be created for each acre
destroyed. The developer had been working with St. John's for
the past 6 months, and a representative of St. John's has walked
this site with them and has looked at the viability of the
wetlands we are talking about. Mr. McQueen noted that these
wetlands have been, for all practical purposes, cut off from the
river and from flushing, and they have come up with a plan that
would allow them to replace any wetlands they fill on a 1:1
basis. Mr. McQueen noted this is not to say that St. John's will
stick with
the 1:1; they will not react until they go
for
the
permit. He
continued that they asked that staff give
them
credit
for one of those 1:1 mitigations for the work they were doing and
48
the additional uplands that they would dedicate to bring Jungle
Trail up to the standards of the Town of Orchid Jungle Trail.
Commissioner Scurlock noted that they, therefore, are
looking for 1:1 mitigation by going ahead and making vehicular
access to the Trail and for establishing the buffer zones
consistent with the Town of Orchid, and Mr. McQueen said exactly.
They want what has been established under the Jungle Trail
Management Plan. He referred to the charts of their current
proposal and pointed out that along the driving corridor a lot of
the Trail has citrus right beside it and very little, if any
buffer. They would propose to come in there and create a
waterway about 2-4' deep some 30/40' from the Trail, and on each
side of that waterway have a 15/25' wide wetlands planting strip.
This would be for the full length of that portion of the river
within their project. On the east side of the Trail a 23' wide
strip would be planted with wetland vegetation. He clarified
that they would do a 10' wide moat, so to speak, with a 15'
wetlands planting on the development side, and then a 30' setback
to the house. That total distance from the center of the Trail
is 97'.
Commissioner Bowman wished to know where the water in that
ditch will come from.
Mr. McQueen stated that it will come from the same place it
is now; it moves into and out of that ditch through the ground.
They would propose, subject to St. John's permitting, a cross
connection
to
the
river and
put
in 2/3
pipes
from that
ditch to
the river
to
have
flushing.
The
water
would
be river
water,
which is a little bit beyond brackish, and snook could go in
there, but it probably is too brackish for hatching. The storm
runoff on all lots will be directed from the back of the lots
back into the system and into the lakes. The golf course will be
irrigated through a combination of the Floridan aquifer water,
deep wells and reuse of effluent, the same as Orchid. They will
work closely with Utilities on this. The land they are talking
BOOK % PAGE«
A.R 2 7 1990 49
MAR 2 f 1990 BOOK p
.79
9 Nr 1 E703
about and probably additional lands that are uplands would be
scraped and put into wetlands. The total of those lands would
give them about 1:1 mitigation.for wetlands, and they believe
that will fly with St. John's, but based on the Comp Plan, they
must ask that the County back off to 1:1.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if they are requesting that they
be grandfathered in because we can't modify the Comp Plan, but
Mr. McQueen believed the Plan makes provisions for allowing
upland buffer to be attributable towards mitigation.
Community Development Director Keating agreed that is
allowed. He noted that staff has indicated in the backup that
they don't necessarily have any objection to Mr. McQueen's
concept. What we haven't been able to do is look at the detailed
plans and coordinate in detail with St. John's and look at it
from the perspective of the intent of the Jungle Trail Management
Plan.
Commissioner Scurlock believed staff, therefore, would be
looking for authority to work with the developer on this and it
could be agreed upon subject to staff approval the same as some
of the other waivers.
Commissioner Bowman felt that the trouble with 1:1 is that
mitigation is never 1000; so, really you need to mitigate at
least 2:1.
Mr. McQueen stressed that the Plan allows buffering to be
considered in that 2:1 mitigation.
Director Boling commented that staff's position is not to
commit to that 1:1 until we see more detail. Actually, staff is
asking the developer to commit, and the developer is asking staff
to commit.
Mr. McQueen stated that if they are 1:1, they would commit
to the Town of Orchid concept of 25' R/W dedication, 15' of
buffer, and a minimum of 30' setback to the first habitable
structure.
50
Chairman Eggert asked if she is hearing that if that doesn't
work out and they end up with 2:1, that they then want to stick
with the Jungle Trail Management Plan.
Mr. McQueen agreed that is what he would like the Board to
rule on. From a practical standpoint, however, he noted that the
more they buffer and set these developments back from Jungle
Trail, the more upscale this development will be. He could
assure the Board that this development will not do anything that
is not in the best interests of everyone, but he did ask that the
Board stay with the Jungle Trail Management Plan, which gives
them a little bit of a "chip" to get back to the 1:1, and they
were right at the 1:1 mitigation with the St. John's prior to the
Comprehensive Land Use Pian. Mr. McQueen further pointed out
that a lot of these wetlands today are covered with pepper trees,
most of which are dead, red mangroves, most of which are dead,
black mangroves which have all been killed off, and leather
ferns, which are just beginning to come back under the palm
trees. He explained that what St. John's looks at for wetlands
is governed by the Florida Statutes, but the County staff goes
above and beyond what the state statutes say.
Commissioner Bird believed the freeze this past winter did
create havoc with the wetland areas, and probably there are some
cases where you could go back in and revegetate artificially and
do better than what nature is trying to do itself.
Mr. McQueen believed that the DER will be looking at what
can be done to some of these impoundments and some of the areas
that have been wiped out as to whether they should leave the
trees in there or should they try to revegetate. He stated that
he has outlined his request, and if the Board has any further
questions, he would try to answer them.
Commissioner Bowman noted that she sees a lot of golf course
along the east side of Jungle Trail, and she certainly hopes that
it is not going to look as it does in the Town of Orchid where it
looks like there is no Jungle Trail - just pure golf course.
51 BOOK f UE 70
MAR 2 7 1990
AR 2-7
1990
BOOK
FAGE
05
Mr. McQueen pointed out
that between Jungle Trail
and
the
golf course there is the 70' that was established under the
Management Plan.
Commissioner Bowman wished to know what they are going to do
in that 701, and Mr. McQueen stated that under the Plan, the R/W
and the 30' could remain as it is. He knew that is not what
anyone wants, and they have agreed to put up a Level "B" buffer,
which is a continuous hedge with trees on 40' centers.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
Millie Bunnell came before the Board representing the Indian
River County Historical Society in regard to Jungle Trail. Mrs.
Bunnell noted that it has been 2 years, 1 month and 4 days,
almost to the hour, since the Society stood here-, and there have
been storms and freezes and a lot of history has gone into this
Jungle Trail issue. She appreciated the work done by Mr. McQueen
and his cooperation towards their conceptual plan of keeping
Jungle Trail open for the entire 7 miles to vehicular traffic,
but she was a little confused with the numbers that keep being
batted around about R/W, setbacks, etc. Mrs. Bunnell stressed
what the Society was working for is that buffer of the Management
Plan, which was simply the 20' and the 30', which is the basic
and then we go from there. In some places that is all we have,
but in no event do we have less. She emphasized that they don't
want to interfere with any other part of the development, but if
we can secure more buffer for Jungle Trail without losing the
qualities that are there, they are very agreeable to that. She
noted they secured more buffer through the town of Orchid, but
she felt we lost a lot of quality. Mrs. Bunnell did agree that
the freeze wiped out a lot of things, but she has the patience to
work towards getting these things, such as the Level "B" buffer,
in place and wished to know if there is a time limit on this. As
far as the area through Windsor, she did not want to see us lose
what we have there. It is true the mangroves are mostly dead,
but they will come back and she wished to know if there is some
52
guaranty in the Plan that the things proposed will happen. In
regard to the golf course, through the Town of Windsor there is
one section where there is nothing but pine trees standing there
with a paved golf cart path way on the other side of the little
ditch. Is the ditch within the buffer, and will this look like
it does in the Town of Orchid?
Chairman Eggert asked that Mr. McQueen show everyone what
the Management Plan buffer would be first and then show their
current plans.
Mr. McQueen referred to the following charts showing how it
would be with what the Management Plan allows and then showing
what they currently propose:
RRW9N/I!GFIMS', �(AW
s c c i
J U M G L E T R A I L A T W I M D S 0 R
QORREA1 i iPRO POsA-.
1 10' 1 10 1 10' 4' 1 30'
4
S t t T 1 0 U- P R O P 0 S E D
JUN;LZ ?eAt! AT WIII, uS0Q
140'!
53 BOOK 79 P,- l u
WEAR 27199U
MAR 2 7 1990 BOOK PAff 70
�y���►% si�oW�Nc� aIPFeeew��
j p S dT $A09S
" -
p 4
�' ti.,t- !moi `-i w `► n .l ..;.a..►►►► ► I nEw �_�° _ .ilyrCi►tti.►e►►► u.y►►►a••"' F
10'Ile10 5 8 10 = 10 _ 110' 4' 90'
1 EL
%..t,►s. aaL—�
g ' � 140'!
S E C j 1 0 0-- P R 0 p O S E D 1. '( T d C A 6'
ALON4 0.1Y LA
J 11 14 1 LL ?@A1! A W1 V,D SOIL
Mr. McQueen did agree that the Orchid Golf Course is close
to Jungle Trail, and the Windsor Golf Course and Windsor develop-
ment will probably be close to Jungle Trail, but neither of them
will be as close as your Management Plan allows. Under the
Management Plan there could be a house 40' from the center line
of the Trail, and under their plan, it would be 97'.
Commissioner Wheeler asked if the "moat" will be of concrete
or natural, and Mr. McQueen confirmed that it would be natural.
Discussion ensued about the type "B" buffer and where it
would be located. Mrs. Bunnell wished -to know how this compares
to the Indian Trails development, and Mr. McQueen explained that
Indian Trails at 11' elevation would be 3' higher than what they
are proposing here, which is an elevation of 81; so, you would
not be able to look over the Trail.
Discussion continued at length comparing the Management Plan
to what the developer is proposing.
Mrs. Bunnell still expressed concern in regard to the way
Jungle Trail will be buffered and was worried about the height of
the plantings.
Commissioner Scurlock felt the bottom line is that we are
getting more than we had, and Commissioner Bird believed there
will be more people driving this Trail to look at the pretty
homes than ever did to look at the grapefruit trees.
54
_ r
Mrs. Bunnell advised that the Historical Society has a
vision of driving through a park. She did believe Windsor will
back up their plans, and emphasized that the Trail will be drive-
through and non-stop.
Commissioner Bird believed the Commission sincerely appreci-
ates Mrs. Bunnell's continued efforts to preserve the Trail.
John Dean, resident and architect, next came before the
Board. He emphasized that the Commission has a great deal of
power, especially since this is a Special Exception use, which
puts the Commission in the driver's seat. Windsor is in a very
delicate position in the middle of prime resources, and he feels
there are some areas that can be controlled a little better. He
asked that the Board give careful consideration to his
recommendations. Mr. Dean then reviewed his recommendations,
which are as follows, at length and in detail:
john h. dean architect & associates, p. a., a. i. a.
��. � • • ate
MARCH 27, 1990
RECO11ME24DATION REVISIONS
I would suggest the following staff recommendation revisions. The
revisions suggested are underlined. The revisions are meant to enhance
teh recommendations, avoid future confusion, assure the continuity of
the Jungle Trail Management Plan, and clarify issues of importance.
Page 9 .
Recommendation 2
That no wetland filling and mitigation proposals are approved at this
time but may be approved concurrently with the preliminary PRD applica.
tion(s) for the affected phase(s). That no wetland mitigation take
place within the Jungle Trail Right-of-fty or within the Jungle Trail
Management Plan protected area where wetlands now exist. That all
mitigation be consistant with the Comprehensive Plan.
Page 9
Reccamendation 3
That a legally enforceable developers agreement be executed between
the applicant and the county to ensure that the mangrove fringe along
the sites river frontage is preserved to visually buffer the wildlife
refuge from the development and to limit clearing (after obtaining all
required permits) needed for any dock. That no commercial, residential,
out buildings or recreational structures will be constructed west of
Jungle Trail. That dock access when and if dock permits are approved)
will be limited to one access point for the multiple family area and
one access point for each two single family lots, witri no parxing or
driveways on or off Jungle Trail.
55 BOOK
MAR 2 7199®
MAR � 1990 600K N rAH 70 -
Page 9
Recommendation 7
That the minimum Jungle Trail Right -of -Way, buffer and setback shall
be the s,-ume section that has been applied in the town of orchid. That
a full 50 foot Right -of -Way be dedicated along Jungle Trail to Indian
River County and that the 97 foot suggested setbacks from the center
line of and along Jungle Trail be implemented.
Page 9
Recommendation 8
No accessory PRD commercial uses shall be permitted until 200 units
are C.O.'d. No commercial uses shall take place along any Jungle Trail
frontage.
Page 9
Recommendation 11
The waivers restricted to A, D, E, F, H, L, K, M, N and O apply only
to construction within the interior village lots. Waiver P be restricted
only to non -perimeter and non -road frontage lots. No waivers shall
nTyn1v to the .MnLrle Trail setback area established by the Board of County
Commissioners.
Page 10
Add Recommendation Number 12
The developer is to provide
research clearly identifying
inaings on -
to be by a
All find
Indian River County with historical
and locating any possible historical
PRD property or attached Right -of -WAY
Page 10
Add Recommendation Number 13
All outdoor lighting is to be directed
with turtle nesting and
along Jungle Trail, the Pelican lslana n
areas be placed on time control devices.
Page 14
way and shielded from the Jungle
ed area and away from the Pelican
ng on the beach front areas
a manner as to not interfere
.s. That all outdoor lighting
'i ldlife Refuge and ocean front
There will be no accessory commercial uses or accessory structures permitted
west of Jungle Trail. All accessory uses east of Jungle Trail will _
meet all setback restrictions and be totally screened from public view
along. Jungle Trail
Page 7' #17 P
P could be written:
The golf maintenance facility will go from a 1001.minimum setback to
a minimum 25' setback from the adjacent property line only when said
property line is not a public road frontage or an out development boundary.
Mr. Dean contended that it is not made perfectly clear that
the various things he has expressed concern about are not to
happen along Jungle Trail or along the ocean.
56
Chairman Eggert and Planning Director Boling both pointed
out that Item 11 of the staff recommendation sets out very
plainly that the waivers restricted to A, D, E, K, M, N and P,
apply only to construction within the village lots and beach
cottages and that no waivers shall apply to the Jungle Trail
setback area established by the Board.
Commissioner Scurlock concurred. He noted he has looked at
all Mr. Dean's written comments and felt what Mr. Dean was
unclear about has been covered satisfactorily in staff's memo.
Mr. Dean continued to review staff's memo and his recommen-
dations at length, stressing, in regard to mitigation, that the
Board is not in a position where they have to give up what is
already protected. He expressed concern about the 100' setback
on the maintenance building, and Director Boling stated that the
maintenance building and the commercial area are both specifi-
cally located on the conceptual plan; so, if they were to move
those areas, they would have to come back through for approval.
The commercial area is shown well inside the project; the
maintenance building is shown in the corner in the same area
where the maintenance building for the Town of Orchid facility
is; and they are 100' from the Trail.
Mr. Dean also wished to add some language which would assure
none of the things proposed can happen west of Jungle Trail, and
he emphasized the importance of outdoor lighting restrictions and
requirements because of the fact that we are dealing with a
national wildlife refuge. He stressed the importance of this PRD
to our future and thanked the Board for bearing with him.
Mr. McQueen wished the Board to be aware that the mainte-
nance facility right at the corner where Polo and Orchid join is
70' from the center line of the Trail, not 100' as staff
originally thought and that falls within the Management Plan.
_,P
5 7 BOOK F'.a.�E 71
MAR 71999
MAR 2 7 1990
t o0K.79 FA,, 71
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
0
missioner Bird, the Board unanimously accepted staff's
recommendations, except for the following:
Recommendation #7 - re minimum Jungle Trail right-
of-way, we allow what Mr. McQueen presented as his
management plan and buffering concept, and as a part
of that, the mitigation ratio will be worked on with
staff to determine the final outcome.
Recommendation #9 - the recommendation not to allow
names is unacceptable, and we should have a provision
to allow names to be used.
Waiver #17 ("M") - which relates to stairs and balconies,
would be subject to staff review, and ("G"):- which
relates to cut and fill balance requirements would be
subject to the approval of the Public Works Director.
FLORIDA NATIONAL GUARD SITE
The Board reviewed memo from Administrator Chandler:
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: March 19, 1990 FILE:
James E. Chandler REFERENCES:
FROM: County Administrator
'The Florida National Guard is searching for property to construct an armory
for the air defense artillery unit located in Indian River County. The
present leased site on south U.S.#1 is inadequate to meet the unit'
os
requirements.
State funding is available for construction of the armory. However, there is
no funding for land acquisition. The State would consider an exchange of
surplus state owned property for an appropriate site.
The National Guard has expressed an interest in the former county "stump
dump" landfill site on South Gifford Road. Of the approximately 50 total
acres, 15-20 acres would be required. Soil tests would be necessary to
determine whether the site is suitable for construction. Before tl� State can
proceed, an expression of interest from the Commission is required.
58
® � r
A staff review has indicated no anticipated future need for the property. An
analysis of state owned land in the county reveals that there is none. that
could be considered for exchange.
The Guard has indicated, that as elsewhere in the state, when not in use the
facility could be used on occasion for other public purposes.
A representative of the National Guard will be at the March 27th meeting to
provide the Commission additional facts and information.
Commissioner Bird informed the Board that a few months ago,
he had the pleasure of meeting General Capps of the National
Guard and Executive Assistant Ramelle Petroglou. They indicated
their interest in having a permanent facility in Indian River
County and indicated that they were not in a position to buy
property, but if property were made available by donation, they
would proceed to build an armory here. He understood their unit
would employ a large number of full time employees and would be
an economic benefit to us. Commissioner Bird noted that, being a
former member of the National Guard, he can confirm that having
that type facility and unit here can provide a number of benefits
to the county, and he would hope we can be cooperative in finding
a piece of property they can build on.
Commissioner Bird further noted that there is a possibility,
being they are a state agency, that if the State of Florida found
they had a piece of property in Indian River County we found to
be suitable for trade purposes, they would consider trading a
piece of property to us for a piece of County -owned property.
With that thought in mind, he started looking around the County
and remembered the former Landfill site on South Gifford Road,
which is on a paved street with fairly easy access to King's
Highway and U.S.I and is in an area he believed would be
compatible to this use. The National Guard has indicated that
property might be desirable for their purposes, depending on
additional testing, and he has asked the County Administrator to
have the state provide us with a list of state owned properties
in the county that we could look at and possibly consider for a,
trade, if all the details can be worked out. He then introduced
Colonel O'Connor, State Quartermaster for the National Guard.
59 6001( i{ f'A�E 714"'w
MAR 71
MAR I' BOOK .79 PAGE U
Colonel O'Connor came before the Board and expressed their
appreciation for the opportunity to address the Board. He
introduced Mrs. Petroglou, who serves as Executive Assistant to
the Adjutant General, and Captain Bruce Cornelson.
Colonel O'Connor informed the Board that the Florida
National Guard is the fastest growing National Guard unit in the
nation today. They have 10 temporary sites, of which Vero Beach
is one, and they have been fortunate to obtain property in all
those areas except the Vero Beach, Melbourne/Palm Bay, and
Titusville areas. He advised that before they can expend any
federal or state monies, they must have some kind of agreement in
hand regarding a land site. He believed Commission Bird covered
the economic impact this facility could have, but he wanted to
further stress that the Guard not only deals with military
matters, but also helps out in natural disasters.
Commissioner Bird inquired about the size and cost of the
proposed Armory.
Colonel O'Connor advised that the Armory would be
approximately 24,000 sq. ft. and cost about 3 million dollars.
There are all kinds of things in it that can be used from the
community aspect. In it comes a rifle and pistol indoor range
that can be used for many things. They are building one right
now in St. John's County, and struck a mutual agreement with that
county to allow their Sheriff's Department and the City Policy
accessibility to that range 24 hours a day. The same type
agreements could be worked out here, and he felt this could be a
mutual benefit.
Commissioner Bird believed he had also discussed the possi-
bility of the Guard working with us on the construction of
outdoor range facilities. In addition, he believed the Armory is
normally made available to the public at a nominal fee.
Colonel O'Connor agreed it can be made available and that it
can serve as a community oriented type building, but, of course,
National Guard training requirements come first. 'In regard to
60
the rifle range aspect, he advised that they are constantly
seeking other areas for their folks to be able to train outside.
The Colonel continued to stress that they are very community -
oriented.
Commissioner Bird inquired approximately what size site they
need, and Colonel O'Connor advised that they would need at least
25 acres. This particular type operation with full time employ-
ment will have approximately 60 employees, who are soldiers, and
they have to exercise their very sophisticated type equipment
daily.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously authorized
Commissioner Bird and staff to look at available
surplus property that could be used by the National
Guard; identify any property that may be a potential
for a possible swap with the state; and come back
with a report.
(Commissioner Scurlock advised that,he had an appointment
and would give his report on the NACO meeting next week. He
thereupon left the meeting at 11:50 o'clock A.M.)
COMPUTER_ PROGRAMMING_ CONSULTANT CONTRACT
The Board reviewed memo from the Community Development
Director:
MAR 71990 61 Boos l
MAR 2 7 1990 _
BOOK �� PAGE 71,F
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
FROM: Robert M. Keating, AICP Rm K.
Community Development Director
DATE: March 19, 1990
SUBJECT: COMPUTER PROGRAMMING CONSULTANT CONTRACT
It is requested that the information presented herein be given
formal consideration by the board of county commissioners -at their
regular meeting of March 27, 1990.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS:
On March 13, 1990, the board of county commissioners approved the
selection committee's rankings of consultants for the, planning
division's computer programming project. Since then, the staff has
negotiatedd-a contract with the top ranked consultant, Tindale -
Oliver and Associates, Inc. A copy of that draft contract is
attached to this agenda item.
As specified in the request for proposal (RFP) and detailed in the
draft contract, the subject project involves development of a
computerized permit/project review processing/tracking system and
a computerized concurrency management system. These are necessary
components of a total concurrency management system.
The draft contract involves use of the consultant's proprietary
permit' tracking software and customizing of that software to
reflect the county's processes. This system will provide the
principal inputs to the concurrency management system. The
concurrency management program will also be based upon a system
already developed by the consultant.
As proposed, the draft contract amount exceeds the $49,000
allocated for the project. The $49,000 represents funds available
because of a state grant. There are, however, sufficient funds in
the planning division's budget, already allocated for consultant
services, to cover the additional $10,560 cost of the project.
These funds are available without the need for any budget amendment
or line item transfer.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS:
One reason that the project cost is higher than was anticipated is
that the project will involve coordination of the building permit
system (presently on the clerk's AS400) with the proposed
concurrency management system. This is necessary to ensure that
databases are constantly updated and that available capacity is
adequately monitored.
There is a lower cost alternative to the draft contract and
proposed scope of services. This alternative consists of a project
scope with a less comprehensive concurrency management system.
While the alternate scope would cost less than the $49,000
allocated for the project, it would not function as well as the
proposed scope of services.
62
Given the importance of concurrency management, it is staff's
position that the draft contract should be approved as presented.
Since the added cost relates primarily to enhancing the traffic
portion of the concurrency management system, approval of the
proposed project scope is recommended.
It should also be noted that some local governments are charging
fees for preparing concurrency determinations. If such fees are
implemented in conjunction with adoption of the new land
development regulations, the fees could provide a means to offset
staff time involved in preparing concurrency determinations as well
as recouping some of the computer programming expenditures. At the
same time the proposed computerized concurrency management system
program will reduce staff time and increase the reliability of
concurrency determinations.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the board of county commissioners approve the
attached computer programming consultant contract in the amount of
$59,560 and authorize the chairman to execute the contract.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bird, Commissioner Scurlock having left
the meeting, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
the computer programming consultant contract with
Tindale -Oliver and Associates, Inc., in the amount
of $59,560, and authorized the signature of the
Chairman.
COPY OF SAID CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO
THE BOARD.
CONSTRUCTION OF WATER FACILITIES TO SERVICE HERON CAY DEVEL.
The Board reviewed memo from Utilities Director Pinto:
-MAR 2 7 1999® 63
BOOK PAGE 71
.(MAR 211990 Boa9 F�,
�E 71
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER DATE: MARCH 16, 1990
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINh
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY ERVICES
PREPARED lee
AND STAFFED HARRY E. ASHER
BY: ASSISTANT DIRECT R OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: CONSTRUCTION OF WATER FACILITIES TO SERVICE
HERON CAY DEVELOPMENT
BACKGROUND:
Heron Cay (formerly Champion Home Communities, Inc.) was granted a
franchise under Resolution No. 82-122 by Indian River- County on
November 17, 1982, to construct and operate a water and wastewater
system to serve an approximate 632V site manufactured housing
community. Subsequently, in 1985, Indian River County began
construction to its West Regional Wastewater System, and entered
into a "Sewerage Treatment Facility Agreement and Lease," dated
April 26, 1985, with Heron Cay (Champion Home Communities, Inc.),
under which Heron Cay agreed for wastewater service to be- provided
by Indian River County.
Under the April 26, 1985, Sewerage Treatment Facility Agreement,
Section 5.10, "Water Connection," requires that Heron Cay (Champion)
will connect to the County water system if such system is available,
and pay such fees and charges as are then in effect on July 1, 1990.
No impact fees shall be payable (by Heron Cay) on the property with
respect to water until connected to the County wastewater system.
ANALYSIS:
The County's policy has been to provide service to such privately
held utilities to remove as many of the individual plants from
service as possible, and to service those facilities through its
regional and subregional plants. Providing service to this system
will assist the County in implementing this policy, in addition to
expanding the customer base of the County's water system. To
provide County water service will require the construction of
approximately 2,620 feet of 12 inch water main, with appurtenances,
at the estimated cost of $110,232. Engineering services are being
performed by staff personnel. The funds for this project will come
from Account No. 472-000-169-041.00.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners approve the construction of the
necessary facilities to connect Heron Cay Development to the Indian
River County water system.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Scurlock having left
the meeting, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
the construction of the necessary facilities to
connect Heron Cay Development to the county water
system.
64
I.R.BLVD. SEWER FORCE MAIN - CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 (OWL & ASSOC.)
The Board reviewed memo from the Utilities staff:
DATE: MARCH 15, 1990
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTIL SERVICES
SUBJECT: INDIAN RIVER BOULEVARD SEWER FORCE MAIN
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
IRC PROJECT NO. US -89 -01 -CCS
PREPARED AND STAFFED BY: WILLIAM CA
CAPITAL .Mc
PROJECT E EER
DEPARTMENT OF UT S ICES
BACKGROUND
On February 27, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners awarded the
aforementioned project to OWL and Associates, Inc., of Vero Beach.
The contract was awarded in the amount of $227,162.50. The original
struction cost, upon which the assessment
engineers' estimate of con
was based, is $386,358.62. This amount included approximately 5,000
linear feet of pipe, which the County was providing for installation
by the contractor. We now wish to have the contractor provide this
pipe and utilize our pipe on another project.
ANALYSIS
In the bid documents, the contractor was required to provide a cost
for installing owner -provided pipe ($8.50) and a cost for installing
his own pipe ($14.50). This makes the cost per foot of 12" PVC pipe
(provided by the contractor) $6.00 per foot. The going cost per
foot of 12" pipe is approximately $10.00 - $12.00. The staff of the
Utilities Department feels that such a substantial savingq on the
pipe warrants using the contractor's pipe instead of ours for the
entire job. Approval of this change order will raise the contract
bid amount to $257,162.50, which is still $1291196.12 less than the
original projected cost.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners approve Change Order No. 1 with OWL
and Associates, for the Indian River Boulevard Force Main Project.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, Commissioner Scurlock having left
the meeting, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
Change Order No. 1 with OWL and Associates for
the Indian River Boulevard Force Main Project.
MAR
�®
7 1 65 BOOK
-
I
•MAR V1990 800K 6 FqE 710,
CHANGE ORDER
(Instructions on reverse side)
No. 1
PROJECT: 12" Force Main on Indian River DATE OF ISSUANCE: March 1, 1990
Indian River Boulevard
OWNER: Indian River County
(Name, 1840 25th St.
Address) Vero Beach, FL 32960
CONTRACTOR: Owl & Associates, Inc.
115 Springline Dr.
Vero Beach, FL 32963
OWNER's Project No. US8901CCS
ENGINEER: Kimball/Lloyd & Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 650369
CONTRACT FOR: Furnish & Install Vero Beach, FL 32965-0369
Materials to Construct a 12" Force Main 89-059
fN
-from U.S. 1 North to City Sewer Plant ENGINEER'sProjecto,
You are directed to make the following changes in the Contract Documents.
Description: Decrease quantity for Item 2.a) I'PVC Force Main, Owner provided 12 -inch ii
from 5000 L.F. to 0 L.F.; Increase quantity for Item 2.b)4PVC Force Main,
12 -inch from 1900 L.F. to 6900 L.F.
oate
Purpose of Change Order: Indian River Co. APPrond
Eliminate the use of Owner provided pipe. Admin.
Attachments: (List documents supporting change)
CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE: I '
Original Contract Price
S 227,162.50
Previous Change Orders No. 0 to No. 0
0
S
Contract Price prior to this Change Order
S 227,162.50
Net Increase VINMWO of this Change Order
S 30,000.00
Contract Price with all approved Change Orders
S 257,162.50
Original Contract Time
�.>.c- -J
days or due
Net change from previous Change Orders
days
Contract Time Prior to this Change Order
days or date
Net Increase (decrease) of this Change Order
days
Contract Time with all approved Change Orders
days or date
RECOMMENDED: APPROVED: APPROVED:
b t " ""�"`�� b L [J by
Y Engineer Y Owner Contract
EJCDC No. 1910-8-B (1983 Edition) ` ` 5?v
..,A—Pri by The Ascneiated General Contractors of America.
66
ROCKRIDGE BOND RESOLUTION
County Attorney Vitunac explained that this new Resolution
is a routine matter. The County already has built this system in
Rockridge from its own internal funds. On the recommendation of
our financial advisors, and also OMB Director Baird and Utilities
Director Pinto, it was deemed advisable to get the money back and
have it out on bonds over time. The security for the bonds will
be special assessments against the property both for impact fees,
line extension charges and pumper charges. This is a very small
issue and strictly routine.
OMB Director Baird wished to point out that we are not going
to validate this bond issue because we have already done the
project. It will be very -similar to a private placement.
Commissioner Bird wished to be assured that the amended
Resolution has no financial impact nor would cause any change to
the assessments on the people of Rockridge.
This was confirmed, and he was assured it is strictly a
housekeeping procedure.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, Commissioner Scurlock having left
the meeting, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Resolution 90-40 authorizing the issuance of not
exceeding $1,315,000 Special Assessment Revenue Bonds,
relating to the Rockridge Wastewater System.
67 BOOK
MAR 2 7 ���� �� Fq;c a
Ll
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
RESOLUTION NO. 90 - 40
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF NOT EXCEEDING
$1,315,000 AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL` AMOUNT OF SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1990, OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, THE NET PROCEEDS OF WHICH WILL BE USED
TO REIMBURSE THE COUNTY FOR A PORTION OF THE COST OF
ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN SEWER LINE
EXTENSIONS AND A CERTAIN LOW PRESSURE GRINDER PUMP
SEWERAGE SYSTEM IN CONNECTION WITH THE ROCKRIDGE
WASTEWATER SYSTEM OF THE COUNTY AND TO MAKE A DEPOSIT
INTO THE IMPACT FEE TRUST FUND FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY SEWERAGE SYSTEM TO PAY FOR THE
EXPANSION OF THE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM OF THE COUNTY,
INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION THE ACQUISITION AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A SEWER SYSTEM TO BE KNOWN AS THE
"ROCKRIDGE WASTEWATER SYSTEM"; PROVIDING FOR THE RIGHTS
OF THE HOLDERS OF SUCH BONDS AND PLEDGING FOR THE
PAYMENT THEREOF CERTAIN SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED BY
THE COUNTY AND CERTAIN SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IN LIEU OF
IMPACT FEES LEVIED BY THE COUNTY AGAINST PROPERTIES THE
OWNERS OF WHICH HAVE CONSENTED THERETO AND, AT THE
OPTION OF THE COUNTY, FROM OTHER LEGALLY AVAILABLE NON
AD VALOREM TAX FUNDS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION 1. AUTHORITY FOR THIS RESOLUTION. This resolution is
adopted pursuant to applicable provisions of Article VIII,•Section 1, Florida
Constitution (1968), Chapter 125, Florida Statutes (1989), Ordinance No. 86-88
of the County (Sections 11-21 through 11-72 of the Code of Laws and Ordinances
of the County) 4nd other applicable provisions of law.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. Unless otherwise defined herein, the terms
used herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in Ordinance No. 86-88 of
the County. The following terms shall have the following meanings in this
Resolution unless the context otherwise clearly requires:
A. "Act" shall mean, collectively, applicable provisions of Article
VIII, Section 1, Florida Constitution (1968), Chapter 125, Florida Statutes
(1989), Ordinance No. 86-88 of the County (Sections 11-21 through 11-72 of the
Code of Laws and Ordinances of the County), and other applicable provisions of
law.
RESOLUTION 90-40 IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD
IN ITS ENTIRETY.
68
� s
DISCUSSION OF VERO BEACH RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE COUNTY TO
ACQUIRE ISLANDS IN THE INDIAN RIVER
The Board reviewed City of Vero Beach Resolution No. 90-09:
RESOLUTION NO. 90- 09
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF VERO BEAC
FLORIDA, ASKING THE COUNTY TO TAKE ACTI
TO ACQUIRE ISLANDS IN THE INDIAN RIV
AND ADJOINING WETLANDS.
WHEREAS, the great natural assets in Indian River County
include the Ocean, the Indian River, the Wetlands, and islands in
said river, and
WHEREAS, the County is entering a period of rapid population
increase, and
WHEREAS, undeveloped property adjacent to these natural
assets is rapidly diminishing.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF VERO BEACH, FLORIDA, THAT$
1. 'The City of Vero Beach through its Council urges Indian
River County through its Commission to acquire, by purchase,
donation, condemnation or otherwise, as much of the wetlands and
islands that is fiscally feasible. Said lands to be held in a
land conservation trust for the enjoyment of all, present and in
the future.
2. The City suggests that said lands be cataloged and be
given a priority. . Further, the Commission may wish to seek the
opinion of the electors through referendum at the November 1990
election. **,rrtt:•*•*•••**,t,r,rr,r**
This Resolution was moved for adoption by Councilman
/►[l�,ai�r , seconded by Councilman
��QGLuD , and adopted on the
(v ` day of 14'; �atA , 1990.
Mayor Macht C11�
Vice Mayor Krause &A0
Councilman Beard
Councilman Doty
Councilman Wodtke
ATTEST: CITY OF VERO BEACH, FLORIDA
OPV-4111� a-. Av 1,y/ -
afy C erk ayor
Approved as to form and Approved as to technical
legal aufficienuy$ requirements:
MAR 412l 1990 City Attorney 69 City Man r
BOOK
MAR 2 71990 BOOK ' � � F{- 7
Chairman Eggert advised that a similar resolution is coming
to the Board from Indian River Shores, and she would like the
Board's permission to do the following things. She would like to
ask all the cities to give us a list of the lands they wish
purchased with the legal descriptions in prioritized order plus
their best guesstimate as to price, and then we could put this
together with a list from the county. She noted that we are
required in our Conservation element to establish a land
acquisition guide by October, 1990; so, she would like to put
together and bring back to the Commission a suggested ad hoc
committee to help go over these lands and prioritize them for the
county as a whole and develop some kind of cost so we can
determine what we want to do about a referendum.
Commissioner Bird commented that along with that he would
like to see a map and inventory of all the islands in the river
from county line to county line and the ownership of them.
Commissioner Bowman advised that already has been published
and is available, and the Marine Resources Council has maps of
all this.
Chairman Eggert did feel that we would make a big mistake if
we hurried a referendum without looking at the whole overview of
what we want to do throughout the county.
MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bird, to authorize the Chairman to obtain
a list as described above from the cities, including
approximate costs, and come back to the Board with a
suggested ad hoc committee.
Commissioner Bowman asked if this will be limited to
endangered lands, and Commissioner Wheeler felt we should have a
list of everything desired and then set priorities.
Board members indicated they did not want to limit this.
70
r
Carol Johnson, representing Citizens for Progressive Action,
cautioned the Board against going with just wetlands or
endangered lands. She felt if you are going to prioritize,
everything possible should be considered.
Commissioner Wheeler concurred that his intent was to
include any property we may be interested in for whatever reason,
not necessarily just land in or near the river.
Commissioner Bird stated that his priority is to acquire
land that the public could use.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION.
It was voted on and carried unanimously
(4-0) Commissioner Scurlock being absent.
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment,
the Board would reconvene acting as the District Board of
Commissioners of the Solid Waste Disposal District. Those
Minutes are being prepared separately.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 12:06 o'clock P.M.
ATTEST:
MAR 2 7 990 71 BOOK I P,1�E C