HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/23/1990BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
A G E N D A
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 23, 1990
9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER
COUNTY 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. Bowman Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
Don C. Scurlock, Jr. `
Gary C. Wheeler Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board
9:00 A.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER
2. INVOCATION - None
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Comm. Carolyn K. Eggert
4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/ EMERGENCY ITEMS
a. Chai nan Eggert req.(2)emergency addns,both due to a date deadline & that we don't
have mtg. on Oct.30th. She added under her items or the Consent Agenda appts.
to the Alcohol,Drug Abuse & Mental Health Ping.Council & also the Treasure Coast
University Task Force request for support.
b. Admin.Chandler req.the addn to the Consent Agenda of a correction on
Ch%Te&6'l�.RtA M NTATIONS
Adoption and Presentation of Proclamation Designating
Nova 3 as Children's Art Festival Day
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes of Regular Meeting of 9/18/90
7. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate No. 90-3966,
in the sum of $971.75, for Cathy Tucker & Robert Ross
B. Cancellation of SLIAG Grant
( memorandum dated Oct. 12, 1990 )
C. FPBL Easement for Power Installation at No. Co. Waste-
water 'Treatment Plant
( memorandum dated Oct. 12, 1990 )
D. Computer Consultant Contract Amendment Request (B.A. #002)
(memorandum dated Oct. 16, 1990) -
E. IRC Bid #90-107 / 12" Water Main -on 43rd Ave. & 44th Ave.
( memorandum dated Oct. 9, 1990 )
OCT 2 31990
OCT 2 31990
boa FAGS '71
7.
CONSENT AGENDA CONTINUED
6th St.
F. IRC Bid #91-7 / Pest Control Services
b)
( memorandum dated Oct. 12, 1990 )
10th St.
G. IRC Bid #91-14 / Fire Extinguisher
c)
( memorandum dated Oct. 16, 1990 )
16th St.
H. Publication of the New Code
d)
( memorandum dated Oct. 17, 1990)
12th St.
I. Release of Escrowed Funds to Woodbridge
e)
Development Company
Ave.
( memorandum dated Oct. 16, 1990 )
( memorandum dated Oct. 16,
J. Filing of Statement LGF-3 with BCC by
Supervisor of Elections as required by State
and Transmi �resten of Unexpended Funds
8.
CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AND
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
None "
9:05 a. m. 9.
PUBLIC ITEMS
A. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS
Request From the Fla. East Coast RR Company
( memorandum dated Oct. 8, 1990 )
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Maria Stewart Request to Abandon A Portion
of 44th St., West of 35th Ave.
( memorandum dated Sept. 7, 1990 )
2. Susan Gierock's Request to Abandon A Portion
of 88th Court, South of 226d Street
( memorandum dated Sept. 7, 1990 )
3. Paving and Drainage
Improvements to:
a)
42nd Ave. from
6th St.
to 8th St.
b)
42nd Ave. from
10th St.
to 12th St.
c)
44th Ave. from
16th St.
to Pinewood Sub.
d)
13th Ave. from
12th St.
to 14th St.
e)
2nd St. from 23rd
Ave.
to 24th Ave.
( memorandum dated Oct. 16,
1990 )
10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS
None
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
1. Concurrency
(memorandum dated Oct. 15, 1990)
2. Fees for New LDR-Established Permits
( memorandum dated Oct. 17, 1990 )
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS CONTINUED
B.
EMERGENCY SERVICES
None
C.
GENERAL SERVICES
None
D.
LEISURE SERVICES
None
E.
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Annual HRS Contract
( memorandum dated Oct. 10, 19901
F.
PERSONNEL
Renewal of Annual Service Agreement with
Insurance Servicing 8 Adjusting Company
( memorandum dated Oct. 12, 1990 )
G.
PUBLIC WORKS
1. Bids for Petition Paving Contractors
( memorandum dated Oct. 16, 1990 )
2. Right -of -Way Acquisition 14th St. East
of U.S. 1
(memorandum dated Oct. 8, 1990)
H.
UTILITIES
1. Cathodic Protection Systems Repair and
Installation
(memorandum dated Oct. 8, 1990)
2. Request for Conceptual Approval of Water
Facilities Installation & Staff Level
Position to Coordinate Project
( memorandum dated Oct. 15, 1990 )
3. IRC Resolution Recycling Markets Resource
Task Force
(memorandum dated Oct. 5, 1990)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY
Winter Beach Cemetery/Hobart Park Conversion Proposal
( memorandum dated Oct. 12, 1990 )
13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS
A. CHAIRMAN CAROLYN K. EGGERT
B. VICE CHAIRMAN RICHARD N. BIRD
C. COMMISSIONER MARGARET C. BOWMAN
ROOK.
1 FADE'
toL-31990 BOOK 81 PAGE 716
13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS CONTINUED
D. COMMISSIONER DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.
E. COMMISSIONER GARY C. WHEELER
14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS
None
15. ADJOURNMENT
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.
w
Tuesday, October 23, 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,
October 23, 1990, at.9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Carolyn K.
Eggert, Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman; Don C. Scurlock, Jr.; and
Gary C. Wheeler. Absent was Richard N. Bird, Vice Chairman, who
was out of state on vacation. Also present were James E.
Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, Attorney to
the Board of County Commissioners; and Virginia Hargreaves,
Deputy Clerk.
Chairman Eggert called the meeting to order and led the
Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Chairman Eggert requested two emergency additions, both due
to a date deadline and the fact that we don't have a meeting on
October 30th. She wished to add either under her items or the
Consent Agenda appointments to the Alcohol, Drug Abuse & Mental
Health Planning Council and also the Treasure Coast University
Task Force request for support.
Administrator Chandler requested the addition to the Consent
Agenda of a correction regarding on Change Order #5 for the Main
Library.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0) added the above items to the
Consent Agenda as Items K, L and M.
V �aoE aU 199
i OT 1990 BOOK ' m G E `71 S.
PROCLAMATION AND PRESENTATIONS
Chairman Eggert read aloud the following Proclamation desig-
nating November 3, 1990, as Children's Art Festival Day and
presented it to Connie Pease.
P R O C L A M A T I O N
DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 3, 1990
AS
CHILDREN'S ART FESTIVAL DAY
IN
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
WHEREAS, on November 3, 1990, the Children's Art Festival,
sponsored by the Center for the Arts, will celebrate its 10th
anniversary; and
WHEREAS, the theme for this year's festival will be
creativity. This event provides the opportunity for hands-on art
experiences for young people of all ages, 'pre-schoolers through
teens. The entire family can enjoy the student art displays,
entertainment, music and food available throughout the day; and
WHEREAS, the reason the Children's Art Festival came into
existence was because there was a concern by those involved in
establishing a Center for the Arts that the youth of the area
were not exposed to or given enough opportunities to participate
in visual arts activities. Since the inception of the Children's
Art Festival ten years ago, art instruction in the school
systems, both public and private, has increased tremendously
making art and humanities awareness an enriching part of the
lives of the young people in our community:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIIJED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,. FLORIDA that November 3,
1990 be designated as
CHILDREN'S ART FESTIVAL DAY
in Indian River County, and the Board expresses its appreciation
to the many hard working volunteers for instituting and
continuing this fine program for the youth in our community.
Adopted -this 23rd day of October, 1990.
2
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Caroly Egger hairman
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Chairman asked if there were any additions or corrections
to the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 18, 1990.
Chairman Eggert asked that the Motion on Page 39 adopting Ordi-
nance 90-19 be corrected to read "adopted Ordinance 90-19, as
amended........."
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0) approved the Minutes of the
Regular Meeting of September 18, 1990, as corrected.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Scurlock requested that Items F and I be removed
from the Consent Agenda for discussion,.and Commissioner Bowman
requested the removal of Item B.
A. Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate (Tucker & Ross)
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0), approved the issuance of
Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate #90-3966 to Cathy Tucker
and Robert Ross in the amount of $971.75.
B. Cancellation of SLIAG Grant
The Board reviewed memo from Welfare Director Joyce Johnston:
3
BOOK 81 FAL 71 9
0T 2 3 1990
BOOK 2'0
TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: October 12, 1990 FILE:
THRIJ: James Chandler SUBJECT: CANCELLATION OF
County Administrator SLIAG GRANT
FROM: Director of welfar REFERENCES:
The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services have completed their
audits of the State Legalization Impact Assistance Grant for fiscal years
1987-88 and 1988-89. They issued a check for $1,244.82 to Indian River
County to reimburse County Welfare for expenditures made to residents who
were identified by the Immigration Office as eligible. There were only 38
people out of 8,225 applicants for whom our county received reimbursement.
I reviewed the cost for County employees' time which included the following:
budget preparation, and on site review in January 1990 where auditors spent
time with not only the Welfare Office but also Personnel, Purchasing, Budget
and Finance Directors. The second on site review in August was only in the
Welfare Office at which time we had to pull over 200 files for the auditor's
review; they checked 38 of the 200 files. The files then had to be refiled.
Other expenses were computer time, postage, etc.
Cost for the grant preparation, administration and audit far exceeded the
amount refunded to Indian River County. These issues have been discussed
with Mr. Joe Baird and he is in agreement the County withdraw from future
years in the SLIAG Grant. I have attached a letter for signature from the
Board of County Commissioners to be forwarded to HRS to complete the
withdrawal process.
Commissioner Bowman was concerned because she thought that
this Grant has helped some people.
Di.rector Johnston advised that most of the cases that come in
are just using the normal programs we have for migrants. This
looked like an excellent program, but it is just not being used.
We have contacted people to let them know these services are
available, but it seems that private agencies, churches, etc.,
are pretty well filling in on these areas, and it has become more
expensive to have this service than what the service actually
provides in benefits.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0), authorized the Chairman to
send the following letter withdrawing from the SLIAG
Grant.
4
Telephone: (407) 567-8000
October 23, 1990
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Mr. Robert Portera
Dept. of Health & Rehabilitative Services
1317 Winewood Boulevard
Building 1, Room 423
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0700
Dear Mr. Portera:
r
Suncom Telephone: 2241011
Due to the high cost of administration and low usage of the targeted
population in Indian River County, the Indian River County Board of County
Commissioners is withdrawing from the State Legalization Impact Assistance
Grant for Public Assistance.
Very truly yours,
Carolynl. Eggert,-'8rCirman
Board of County Commissioners
C. FP&L Easement (Power Installation at No.Co. WW Treatm't Plant)
The Board reviewed memo from Capital Projects Engineer
McCain:
DATE: OCTOBER 12, 1990
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY RVICES
STAFFED AND
PREPARED BY: WILLIAM F. c
CAPITAL PROEN INEER
DEPARTMENT E TY SERVICES
SUBJECT: FP&L EASEMENT FOR POWER INSTALLATION AT THE NORTH
COUNTY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT (WWTP)
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:
As part of the construction of the North County WWTP, Florida Power
and Light requires an easement off of Hobart Road. Attached please
find a copy of theaforementioned easement document and proposed
route layout.
5 BOOK 81 PAGE 721
OCT 2 31990 BOOK PAGE 722
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners approve the attached easement on the
consent agenda.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0), approved the above described
easement requested by FP&L.
RWO/SIO/TWO/ER 9173-1-460
This instrument was prepared by,
Sec. 33 ,Twp 31 S, Rge 39 E
Jaimie D. Wright
EASEMENT FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
Form 3722 (Stocked) Rev. 2/86 R0X 460. FT. PIERCE, FLORIDA
The undersigned, in consideration of the payment of $1.00 and other good and valuable considera-
tion, the adequacy and receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, grant and give to Florida Power &
Light Company, its licensees, agents, successors, and assigns, an easement forever for the construc-
tion, operation and maintenance of overhead and underground electric utility facilities (including
wires, poles, guys, cables, conduits and appurtenant equipment) to be installed from time to time;
with the right to reconstruct, improve, add to, enlarge, change Jhe voltage, as well as, the size of and
remove such facilities or any of them within an easement feet in width described as follows:
The Westerly 12 feet of the Easterly 72 feet of the Southerly
460 feet of the following described property:
The Southeast. 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 33, Township
31 South, Range 39 East, Indian River County, Florida. Less
and except all easement and/or rights-of-way of record.
See Exhibit A.on attached sheet.
Together with the right to permit any other person, firm or corporation to attach wires to any
facilities hereunder and lay cable and conduit within the easement and to operate the same for
communications purposes; the right of ingress and egress to said premises at all times; the right
to clear the land and keep it cleared of all trees, undergrowth and other obstructions within the
easement area; to trim and cut and keep trimmed and cut all dead, weak, leaning or dangerous
trees or limbs outside of the easement area which might interfere with or fall upon the lines or
systems of communications or power transmission or distribution; and further grants, to the full-
est extent the undersigned has the power to grant, if at all, the rights hereinabove granted on
the land heretofore described, over, along, under and across the roads, streets or highways ad-
joining or through said property.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed and sealed this instrument on
nctnher 23,1 9_qZ
r
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presence of: TWO WITNESSES
REpUIRED BY FLORIDA LAW
By:
P4� airman
Attest:
47
Arlt C l e r k
p �. C7 . (C
o�orp. Seal)
6
D. Computer Consultant Contract Amendment (Budg. Amendmt #002)
The Board reviewed memo from the Community Development
Director:
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
James Chandler
County Administrator
i
Robert M. Keating, AICP AMKI
Community Development Director
October 16, 1990
COMPUTER CONSULTANT CONTRACT AMENDMENT
REQUEST - (BUDGET AMENDMENT 4002)
It is requested that the data provided herein be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular
meeting of October 23, 1990.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
On March 27, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners approved a
contract between Indian River County and Tindale - Oliver,
Associates. This contract provided for design of a computerized
development review and concurrency management system.
As part of the contract, the consultant was required to link the
development review/ concurrency system to the county's automated
building permit system on the AS400. Instead, the consultant
offered for no additional cost to install and customize his
proprietary building permit system on the planning division's PC
based local area network. This change was approved by the board in
May, 1990, and additional computer equipment to support this change
was acquired by the building division.
Current plans call for the system to be operational by the first
part of November. By that time the staff must be trained on the
system and familiar with its operation.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
As of this time the consultant has initiated the training required
under the contract. Based upon progress made to this point and
given the number of building division staff to be trained, it now
appears that additional training will be necessary.
Without additional training, the staff will not have the capability
to operate the system to its potential when the system is made
operational. With an additional day and one-half, adequate
training can be given to ensure that the staff will be capable of
operating the system. The additional training will involve 12
hours of the consultant's time at a cost of $780. This amount
reflects a charge of $65 per hour, the amount referenced in the
approved contract far additional work.
While such additional services are provided for by the contract, an
amendment to the contract must be approved by the board. A copy of
the proposed amendment is attached to this item. Since this
training involves building division staff, the $780 would come from
a budget amendment reducing cash carried forward from the.FY89-90
budget by $780 and increasing other professional services in the
FY90-91 budget by $780.
�o�� 81 FADE 723
RECOMMENDATION
_I
BOOK 81 f'AGE 7�
ro.•
The staff recommends that the board approve the attached contract
amendment to the Indian River County/Tindale Oliver consultant
services contract and approve the attached building division budget
amendment.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0), approved contract amendment
to the Indian River County/Tindale Oliver consultant
services contract and approved Budget Amendment #002,
as follows:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director
o .I.I■ QVLa:
StIBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
NUMBER: 002
DATE: October 16. 1990.
SAID CONTRACT AMENDMENT W/TINDALE OLIVER IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE
OF CLERK TO THE BOARD.
E. Bid #90-107 -12" Water Main (43rd 8 44th Avenues)
eThe Board reviewed memo from CPM Manager Mascola:
8
DATE: October 9, 1990
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: James E. Chandler, County Admi 'strator
H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director
Department of General S v'
FROM: Dominick L. Mascola, CPO, CPM Manager
Division of Purchasing
SUBJ: IRC BID #90-107/12" Water Main on 43rd Ave & 44th Ave
BACKGROUND:
On request from the Utility Department, the bid for 12" Water Main
on 43rd Ave & 44th Ave was properly advertised and Twenty (20) In-
vitations to bid were sent out. On September 19, 1990, bids were
received. Nine (9) vendors submitted proposals for the commodity.
ANALYSIS:
Staff has reviewed the'submittal to ascertain adherence to specifi-
cations. Belvedere Construction was the lowest bidder that met all
requirements.
L+rT*mT*Tr .
Monies for this project will come from Budget Impact Fee Funds.
Funds available $234,000.00.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Award of a Fixed Contract for $150,552.50 to
the low bidder, Belvedere Construction for the subject project, and
request to review the attached proposed contract and authorize the
Chairperson -to execute the document.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0), awarded Bid #90-107 for 12"
Water Main on 43rd & 44th Avenues to the low bidder,
Belvedere Construction, per the following Bid Tabula-
tion, and approved the award of a Fixed Contract in the
amount of $150,552.50 to same.
9
WK
1 FAG,,725
C CT- 2 3 1990
BOOK 81�. � '72E -
CONTRACT WITH BELVEDERE CONSTRUCTION IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD.
F. Bid #91-7 - Pest Control Services
The Board reviewed memo from the Purchasing Manager:
10
BOMW OF COUNTY COMMISSIONMSS
Dates 9/19/90
184025th Sd6ct, Vero Beads. Florida =960
PURCHASING DEPT.
�V�c
BID TABULATION
Tr.eww: 17061 6611000�%y
+
v l:•
fr�nw TN.enwwt ::41011
Submitted By Dominick L Mascola
•
? ���et��:�1„t...
PURCHASING MANAGER
Bid. No. 90/107 Date Of Opening 9/19/90
Recommended Award
��ORID°'
Bid. Title 1211 WATER MAIN ON 43rd a 44th AV
BELVEDERE CONSTRUCTION
0 ,552.50
BELVEDERE CONSTRUCTION
$150,552.50 tTTTTOR7:
GBSEXCAVATING CO
7200 WESTPORT PLACE
PO BOX 361177
7270 RATTLESNAKE RUN
WEST PALM BEACH FL 33413
Melbourne, FL 32936-1177
PALM CITY, FL
A.O.B. UNDERGROUND
$154,368.65 5. OWL 6 ASSOCIATES $186,040.00
; 8. BENNETT SITE DEVELOP MENT S7'17 nan nn
7876 BELVEDERE BLVD.
115 SPRING LINE DR
.1845•S JEN&INS RD
WEST PALM BEACH FL 33413
VERO BEACH, FL 32963
FORT PIERCE, FL 34947
UTILITY SYSTEMS OF AMERICAS168,116.70 6. JOBEAR INC $208,326.15
9. UNDERGROUND INDD $228,939.50
1725 SOUTH NOVA RD 1184
1950 DANA. DRIVE
179 N JOG RD
SOUTH DAYTONA FL 32019
PALM BAY FL 32905
WEST PALM BAACH, FL 33413
CONTRACT WITH BELVEDERE CONSTRUCTION IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD.
F. Bid #91-7 - Pest Control Services
The Board reviewed memo from the Purchasing Manager:
10
DATE: October 12, 1990
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Directo
Department of General S ?id
4
FROM: Dominick L. Mascola, CPO, CPM Manager
Division of Purchasing
SUBJ: IRC BID #91-7/Pest Control Services
BACKGROUND:
On request from the Buildings & Grounds Division, the subject bid
was properly advertised and Twelve (12) Invitations to Bid were
sent out. On September 12, 1990, bids were received with Two (2)
vendors submitting proposals for the commodity.
RATTT V0T0.
Staff has reviewed the submittal to ascertain adherence to specifi-
cations. Massey Service, Inc was the low bidder and met all require-
ments.
10MITITMI'_ .
Monies for this project will come from Budget Buildings & Grounds
Accounts for Other Contractural Services. Funds available $9,000.00.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Award of an Open End Contract to Massey Services,
Inc., with an estimated value of $5,000.00 per year. Also, authorize
the Purchasing Manager to renew the Contract subject to satisfactory
performance, zero cost increase, vendor acceptance, and determination
that renewal is in*the best interest of the County. The initial
contrdct period shall begin on the date of award.
Administrator Chandler informed the Board that he found out
just yesterday that there was a problem on notification to
bidders, and he would like authorization to reject all bids and
rebid.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0), rejected all bids received on
Bid #91-7 for Pest Control Services and authorized staff
to rebid same.
11 Baur 8 1 F,, JE 720 T
DCT 1g� eooK F�?U
G. Bid #91-14 - Fire Extinguisher Service
The Board reviewed memo from the Purchasing Manager:
DATE: October 16, 1990
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
H.T. "Sonny" Dean, Director
Department of General Se
FROM: Dominick L. Mascol CPO, CPM Manager
Division of Purchasing
SUBJ: IRC BID #91-14/Fire Extinguisher
BACKGROUND:
On request from the Buildings & Grounds Division, the subject bid
was properly advertised and Five (5) Invitations to Bid were sent
out. On September 12, 1990, bids were received with One (1) vendor
submitting proposals for the commodity.
ANALYSIS:
Staff has reviewed the submittal to ascertain adherence to specifi-
cations. All American Fire & Safety was the low bidder and met all
requirements.
FUNDING:
Monies for this project will come from Budget Buildings & Grounds _.
Accounts for Other Contractual Services. Funds available $162,077.00
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Award of an Open End Contract to American Fire &
Safety with an estimated value of $3,000.00 per year. Also, authorize
the Purchasing Manager to renew the Contract 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 Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0) awarded Bid #91-14 for Fire
Extinguisher Service to the low and only bidder,
All American Fire & Safety, as recommended by staff
and per the following Bid Tabulation, and also approved
award of an Open End Contract to same with an estimated
value of $3,000 per year.
12
BOARD OF CO UN" COMMISSIONERS i Date 1 9/12/90
Z840 25th S&M, Vero Beach. Florida =60 PURCHASING DEPT.
aV F BID TABULATION -
„`� Submitted By Dominick L Mascola
PURCHASING MANAGER
�j�`,�=✓ ' Bid No. 91-14 Date Of Opening 9/12/90 .
F
Recommended Award LORIV Bid Title Fire Extinguisher Service
1. All American Fire and Safety_ S400.(0I
(Estimated amount far
85 43rd Ave life of contract approx.
Vero Beach, F1 32968 ''
H. Publication of the New Code
The Board reviewed memo from County Attorney Vitunac:
TO: Board of-Cou Commissioners
FROM: Charles P. Vit mac- County Attorney
DATE: October 17, 1990
SUBJECT: PUBLICATION OF THE NEW CODE
The new Indian River County Code, which now contains Titles
1, Vill and IX, is entering its publication stage.
Municipal Code Corporation, which publishes the Code for the
County, has set forth its proposal by letter to Terry
O'Brien dated October 3, 1990. (copy attached)
We recommend that the County Commission accept this proposal
and (authorize the Chairman to execute the necessary
documents. A proposed letter to the Municipal Code
Corporation is attached for your consideration. In
addition, a proposed announcement and order form is included
for your information.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
.Board unanimously (4-0) authorized the Chairman to
execute the documents necessary to accept the proposal
of the Municipal Code Corporation and also approved the
proposed letter, announcement and order form.
13 PUU� FACE
OCT 2 3 1990 _
OCT 2 31990B00K 1 Pr1UE 730
Municipal
Code
Corporation
October 3, 1990
Mr. Terry O'Brien
Assistant County Attorney
Indian River County
__—C.ounty`Administration Building
1840 25th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960
Dear Mr. O'Brien:
>: o
4,:; cT
T
caste:;.. 990
Pursuant to our recent telephone conversation regarding the Indian River County
Code of Ordinances, we are pleased to submit the following updated information
for your review:
Publishine 150 conies of Code and Land Development Reeulations
I. Volume I - General Ordinances (Title I - first portion to be published) -
Volume LI - Land Development Regulations
Reformatting to 8-1/2 x 11 double column format and printing 150
copies:
A. Estimated 775 pages at $23.00
perpage, or.................................................................
$17,825
B. 200 3 -post expandable binders
(100 for Volume 1/100 for Volume
II) at $17.00 each, or ................................................
$ 3,400
C. 100 3 -ring vinyl binders
(50 for Volume 1/50 for Volume
II) at $12.00 each, or .................................................
$ 1,200
D. 150 sets divider tabs at
$7.00 per set, or ..........................................................
1050
Estimated total cost for 150 copies of Code ........».....„... $239475
Post Office Box 2235
1700 Capital Circle, S.W. . .
Tallahassee, FL 32316
(904) 576-3171 E. (Optional)
1 -800 -262 -CODE (National) 100 reprint pamphlets of Land
1 -800 -342 -CODE (Florida) I Development Regulations for separate
sale and distribution:
1) Estimated 650 double column
pages at $3.50 per page, or ........................ $ 2,275
2) 100 paper covers (with
appropriate stamping and
fasteners)......................................................... $ 80
14
s o r
H. Future Looseleaf Supplement Service - Additional titles to be added to
Volume I, as well as future changes to both Volumes, could be
incorporated into the Code by means of a future Supplement and would
be prepared at $23.00 per page for 150 copies.
III. Storage and Distribution - MCC offers to assist in the distribution, sale,
and storage of the newly reformatted Code, as outlined in our letter of
September 10, 1990 to Mr. Vitunac. As indicated in our letter, we could
prepare and print order cards and announcement letters, similar to the
enclosed, which may be mailed by the County to all potential subscribers
of the -new Code and Supplement Service. Solicitation of new orders will
help determine if there is a need to increase the printing run. The
enclosed samples may be rewritten to suit the County's requirements.
We suggest that the County use the local yellow pages to determine
potential subscribers, such as contractors, attorneys, financial institutions,
etc. The mailing list from the local Bar Association would be a primary
source of potential subscribers.
In order to offset a portion of the cost of reformatting, we recommend
charging from $150 to $175 per bound copy of the Code and $75 per
annum for a subscription to the Looseleaf Supplement Service.
Upon signing of the acceptance statement below, please return one signed copy
for our files.
We appreciate every opportunity to be of service to the County in the
maintenance of the Code and look forward to receiving authorization to proceed
with the above -outlined services. Please do not hesitate to contact us on our toll-
free number if we may be of assistance in any way.
Sincerely,
Gloria P. Jacobs
Marketing Director
GPJ/cs
Enclosures
Accepted this 23 day of October , 1990, by Indian. River
County, Florida.
Name/Tits. )
Carolyn '� Eggere,
hairman
OCT 31 ' S 'ROOK 1 Fna U.L
CT 2 3 1990
_I
BOOK
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
o 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960
- Telephone: (407) 567-8000
R vr� Suncom: 224-1424
Ms. Gloria P. Jacobs
Municipal Code Corporation
Post Office Box 2235
Tallahassee, Florida 32316
Dear Ms. Jacobs:
F�
81 � 73
CHARLES P. VITUNAC
County Attomey
WILLIAM G. COLLINS 11
Awl. County Attorney
SHARON PHILLIPS BRENNAN
Asst. County Attorney
The revised Information provided in your letter of October
3, 1990 to Terry O'Brien, Assistant County Attorney is
accepted. The acceptance form at the bottom of the October
3, 1990 letter has been executed by the Chairman of the
Board of County Commissioners and is enclosed.
With respect to distribution, your offer of assistance is
appreciated and accepted. A copy of the announcement and
order form is enclosed. There are approximately 180
attorneys in Indian River County; therefore, it would appear
that 200 copies of the announcement and order form would be
sufficient.
Under separate cover, the new Titles I, Vill and IX will be
transmitted to you for publication. Currently, It looks
like 150 copies will be sufficient unless the announcement
and order form generate a greater number of orders than
anticipated.
Sincerely,
CHARLE$ P. VITUNAC
COUNTY ATTORNEY
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT
Indian River County will soon republish its official County
Code. The republished Code is required by law and will
reflect the current laws of Indian River County. -.
Indian River County has contracted with the Municipal Code
Corporation of Tallahassee, Florida, to republish the Code,
which will be housed in two expandable, mechanical,
looseleaf binders accommodating 8-1 x 11 inch pages.
The Code will be supplemented periodically, generally on a
quarterly basis. The new laws and ordinances may be
incorporated into the looseleaf volumes on a page -for -page
substitution basis. The Tallahassee firm will also publish
the looseleaf supplements, which will be mailed directly to
each subscriber.
16
The growth of Indian River County during the last decade,
and its anticipated continual growth and diversity, will
require new laws, ordinances, and regulations to meet the
complex and challenging demands on our expanding County.
The republished code and looseleaf supplements will ensure
having current county law at your fingertips. Further, the
Land Development Regulations In their entirety will be
included in the Code.
The County contemplates completion of the first phase of the
Code in early 1991. Enclosed is an order form for your
return to the Municipal Code Corporation if you are
interested in purchasing a copy of the Code and ordering
supplements. The cost to you is $175.00 for the basic
volumes and $75.00 for a year's subscription to the
Looseleaf Supplement Service.
Please fill out the enclosed order form and send your check
In the amount of $250.00 payable to the Municipal Code
Corporation, to Municipal Code Corporation, P.O. Box 2235,
Tallahassee, FL 32316.
PLEASE ENTER MY ORDER FOR THE
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY CODE
(Make checks payable to Municipal Code Corporation)*
(All Payments In Advance)
[ ] One Looseleaf Code and One Year's Subscription to
Looseleaf Supplement Service ..................$250.00
Total ..........................................$250.00
Name: _
-'(pTease print or type]
Mailing Address:
City: State: Zip:
Signature: Y _
* Mail to: MUNICIPAL CODE CORP., P.O. BOX 2235, TALLAHASSEE,
FLORIDA 32316
Boor 1 Fact 7633
17
r
OCT 2 31990aooK E74
1_ Release of Escrowed Funds to Woodbridge Development Company
Asst. County Attorney Will Collins reviewed the following:
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM:.4j.., William G. Collins II - Assistant County Attorney
DATE: October 16, 1990
SUBJECT: Release of Escrowed Funds to Woodbridge
Development Company
The Woodbridge Development Company was owed certain monies
for utility construction work done at 8th Street and 43rd
Avenue. Woodbridge Development Company also was developing
a subdivision which required subdivision improvements to be
warranted for a period of one year. Both the County and
Woodbridge Development Company agreed to retain funds owed
to Woodbridge Development Company in an escrow account to
satisfy the security required to warranty subdivision
Improvements. The warranty period has expired, the
developer has requested disbursement of escrowed funds, and
the Utilities Director has recommended approval of the
disbursement.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the attached resolution and authorize the Budget
Department to .disburse escrowed funds in the amount of
$14,843.75 to Woodbridge Development Company, 1406 Second
Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32962.
Attorney Collins informed that Board that he has been
contacted by the receiver of the development company that the
money is owed to, and he provided papers indicating that he would
be appointed to handle the assets of the company. Attorney
Collins wished to go to the court hearing, which is tomorrow,
and get a direction from the Judge regarding whom the funds
should be disbursed to. The funds still will go to the
Woodbridge Development Company, but we need to know whether to
disburse to the receiver or one of the partners. He, therefore,
needs approval to change the address where we send the funds.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0) approved Resolution 90-157
authorizing the disbursement of escrowed funds in the
amount of $14,843.75 to Woodbridge Development Company
at the appropriate address as recommended by staff.
18
RESOLUTION NO. 90-_15Z
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AUTF40RIZING THE RELEASE FROM
ESCROW OF FUNDS HELD FOR THE WARRANTY OF
UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE
WOODBRIDGE ESTATES SUBDIVISION.
WHEREAS, by Agreement dated .lune 6, 1989, Indian
River County is to reimburse the Woodbridge Development
Company the -full' amount of $33,000.00 for the construction
of the water main in the intersection of 8th Street and 43rd
Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Woodbridge Development Company agreed
by virtue of a Cash Deposit and Escrow Agreement dated
February 13, 1990 to allow funds owed to the Woodbridge
Development Company'to be held in escrow as a warranty for
subdivision improvements within Woodbridge Estates
Subdivision; and
WHEREAS, on March 27, 1990 the Board of County
Commissioners authorized a reduction in security to
$14,843.75 and released that amount of the escrowed funds to
the Woodbridge Development Company as partial satisfaction
of the $33,000.00 owed Woodbridge Development Company for
the construction of a -water main in the intersection of 8th
Street and 43rd Avenue, and retained the balance in escrow
for warranty of utility improvements within the subdivision;
and
WHEREAS, that Cash Deposit and Escrow Agreement
dated, February 13, 1990 between Indian River County and
Woodbridge Development Company provided for the disbursement
of the remaining escrowed funds after the expiration of the
warranty period, i.e., October 1, 1990,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
1. The Developer has requested.a release of the
balance of the escrowed funds in the amount of $14,843.75.
OCT 2 3 1990 19 Bou 81 r,� jt :
OCT 2 3 1990
_I
BOOK 81 i,,i�E 7:36
2. The Indian River County Utilities Department
has caused an inspection of the work to be performed and the
work has been determined to be satisfactory.
3. The Utilities Director of Indian River County
has recommended the disbursement of $14,843.75, the balance
of funds held in escrow for the subdivision utility
Improvements.
4. The Clerk to the Board is directed to provide
a certified copy of this Resolution to the County Office of
Management and Budget, and upon receipt of said Resolution,
the Office of Management and Budget shall make the
disbursement of the escrowed balance of $14,843.75 to the
Woodbridge Development Company, c/o J. Thomas Schlitt, Receiver
pursuant to Order of Circuit Court Judge L.B. Vocelle, in Case
No. 90 -0212 -CA -17.
The foregoing Resolution was offered by
Commissioner Scurlock , and seconded by Commissioner
Wheeler , and upon being put to a vote, the vote was
as follows:
Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Vice Chairman Richard N. Bird Absent
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye_
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock Aye
Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye
Whereupon the Chairman declared the motion duly
passed this 23 day of October, 1990.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Ca roTyri K. Egg, ha i rman
ATTEST:
Byft�ey
_tones L. r
20
J. Supv. of Elections (Rev. Statement FY 89/90 & Return of Funds)
The Board reviewed memo from the Supervisor of Elections:
': ANN ROBINSON
�• �OE�Ven SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
• : c� • ARD COtiPfTl �...
,•s -.14840 25TH STREET, SUITE N-109
G•�� ,.1 HOZ► : y i v L��i�'y VERO BEACH, FLORIDA 32960-3394
�` •� •: �� TELEPHONES: (407) 567-8187 or 567-8000
_R0
October 15, 1990
Hon. Carolyn Eggert, Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
Indian River County
Dear Carolyn:
Attached is the statement (LGF-3) that I am required to
file with the Board of County Commissioners after the end
of the fiscal year.
Included is a check for $11,671.37 which covers income in
the amount of $7,022.13 earned from selling lists, labels,
copies, etc., and interest in the amount of $3,748.36 as
well as the balance of $900.88 in unexpended.funds in the
elections budget at the end of fiscal -year 1989-90.
Sincerely,
Ann Robinson
Supervisor of Elections.
Indian River County
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0) acknowledged receipt of the
above described statement and check in the amount of
$11,671.37.
SAID REVENUE STATEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE
pai,
CT 3 19
A 21 til �F�JC6 f
'P .
e00K 81 F�A,E `�.jp'
K. Appts. to Alcohol, Drug Abuse & Mental Health Planning Council
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0) approved the appointment of
Judge Wild and Kathy French to the Alcohol, Drug
Abuse & Mental Health Planning Council.
L. Resolution of Support for Proposed Treasure Coast University
The Board reviewed memo from Alto "Bud" Adams, Jr.:
Treasure Coast University Task Force
2200 Virgtnta Avenue, Fort Pierce, Fto+fda 34982 4071461-2700 Fax: 407/489.6026
lk Alio "Bud' Adams, Chatrmen
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0) approved Resolution 90-158
supporting the location of a university on the
Treasure Coast.
22
TO: 'Treasure Coast Governments,
av
OL
School Boards, Chambers of
Commerce, & Selected Organizations
FROM: Alto "Bud" Adams, Jr.
DATE: October 19, 1990
SUBJECT: Resolution of Support for
Proposed Treasure Coast University
As is illustrated in the letterhead above, a four county area task force has been formed
with the express purpose of securing a new university to serve the growing needs of the
Treasure Coast.
Enclosed is a proposed resolution of support for your consideration. PIease amend it as
you wish. We need your support as soon ag passible_ so that we may include your
resolution in our presentations at various public hearings, the first being October 31st.
Please send your adopted Resolution to: Treasure Coast University Task Force, 2200
Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierco, FL 34982. Your active support is vital. -
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0) approved Resolution 90-158
supporting the location of a university on the
Treasure Coast.
22
M M
RESOLUTION NO. 90-158
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE LOCATION OF A
UNIVERSITY ON THE TREASURE COAST
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commission wishes to facilitate
the growth of university educational facilities on the Treasure
Coast; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commission finds that having a
university located on the Treasure Coast would be favorable and
beneficial to the economic interests of Indian River County, the
Treasure Coast area, and the State of Florida as a whole; and
WHEREAS, the availability of university educational
facilities on the Treasure Coast beyond the community college
level is very limited; and
WHEREAS, the location of a university in the Treasure Coast
area would enhance the State University System by providing
educational opportunities to residents of the Treasure Coast who
are now denied access due to the remote- locations to existing
State University facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Treasure Coast is one of the fastest growing
areas in the State and the Board of County Commission recognizes
that in order to maintain the quality of life there is a great
need for a university to be located on the Treasure Coast; and
WHEREAS,• the economic element of the Comprehensive Plan of
1990 supports the location of a university educational facility
on the Treasure Coast; and
WHEREAS, .,the Board of County Commission actively supports
and joins the cities, counties, business/private sector,
educational and other community elements within the Treasure
Coast to wholeheartedly support and facilitate the location of a
university on the Treasure Coast; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commission as a measure of
concern has committed staff support to assist in bringing a
university to•the Treasure Coast.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida that they encourage
locating a university on the Treasure Coast area to meet the
needs of all its citizens and will work towards that goal.
The foregoing Resolution was offered by Commissioner
Scurlock, and seconded by Commissioner Wheeler and upon being put
to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye -
Vice Chairman Richard Bird Absent
Commissioner Maggy C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye
Whereupon the Chairman declared the motion duly passed this
2jnd day of October, 1990.
Board of County Commission
Indian River County, Florida
By —
Carol K. Eg;
Chai an
ERCT 199® 23 Room 1 r,tir,E 7,.: 11
_I
OCT 2 3 1990 BOOKFSU -
M. I.R.C. Main Library - (Correction of Change Order #5)
The Board reviewed memo from Superintendent Lynn Williams:
TO: Jim Chandler DATE: October 19, 1990 FILE:
County Administrator
THRU: Sonny Dean, Dir.
General Services
SUBJECT: CHANGE ORDER #5 -
I.R.C. MAIN LIBRARY
CFO�_Ljp�iilliams, Supt. REFERENCES:
Idings & Grounds
Change Order #5 for the Indian River County Main Library was approved at
the regular Board of County Commissioners meeting of September 18, 1990.
Included in the proposal requests covered by this Change Order was P.R.
#14. The amount of PR #14 was incorrectly listed as $3,202. The correct
amount should have been $3,302.
This will change the total of Change Order #5 to $12,546.
Staff requests this change be authorized.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0) authorized the correction of
Change Order #5 as described above.
CORRECTED CHANGE ORDER IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE
BOARD.
FEC REQUEST FOR RESCINDING OF WHISTLE BAN
Administrator Chandler reviewed the following, stressing that
staff does not see a need to modify our ordinance:
24
r � �
TO: DATE: FILE:
Board of County Commissioners October 8, 1990
F O 'James E. Chandler
County Administrator
BACKGROUND
SUBJECT: REQUEST FROM THE
FLORIDA EAST COAST
RAILWAY COMPANY
REFERENCES:
The Indian River County Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance
#86-45 which prohibits the sounding of railroad train horns and whistles
between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. at public railroad crossings protected by
gates, lights, and bells. This ordinance took effect on November 1, 1986 for
the 19 public crossings within the unincorporated area. The City of
Sebastian implemented a similar whistle ban during 1989 for the five public
crossings within its municipal boundaries. However, the City of Vero Beach
never implemented a whistle ban for the eight public crossings within its
municipal boundaries. All of the 32 public railroad crossings within the
County are equipped with gates, lights, and bells.
Between November 1, 1986 and the present. four public railroad crossing
accidents occurred within the County:
1) Date: November 6, 1987
Time: 2:00 p. m.
Location: 27th St. crossing within the Vero Beach
municipal boundaries
Accident Type: Vehicle drove around the lowered crossing gates
and sustained major damage
2) Date: May 25, 1989
Time: 2:00 a.m.
Location: Oslo Road crossing within the unincorporated area
Accident Type: Vehicle drove around the lowered crossing gates
and sustained major damage including two fatalities
3) Date: June 29, 1989
Time: 5:30 p.m.
Location: 12th St. crossing within the unincorporated area
Accident Type: Vehicle drove around the lowered crossing gates
and sustained major damage including a fatality
4) Date: September 1, 1989
Time: 1:00 a.m.
Location: 41st St. crossing within *the unincorporated area
Accident Type: -Vehicle drove around the lowered crossing gates
and sustained minor damage
25 BOOK -_ PAGE r
r
OCT 2 3 1990
CURRENT
BOOK'
The County received correspondence from the Florida East Coast Railway
Company ( FEC) dated September 10, 1990 requesting that the Board of
County Commissioners rescind Ordinance #86-45 based upon a report
entitled, "Florida's Train Whistle Ban" issued by the Federal Railroad
Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation. The federal report
released July 1990 reviewed and analyzed the FEC's accident experience
during the 65 months since the first 'nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.)
whistle ban ordinance took effect along the FEC's operating corridor in 1984.
A brief synopsis of the report indicates that since the whistle bans have been
imposed, FEC's nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.) accident experience at
511 ordinance impacted crossings has increased from 39 to 115 or 1950. By
contrast, FEC's daytime (6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) accident experience has
increased from 108 to 109 or less than 1% during the same time period. The
report concludes that nighttime accidents at railroad crossings affected by the
whistle bans have increased and that increase is attributable to whistle ban
ordinances.
Preliminary contact with other cities and counties that have whistle ban
ordinances such as Boca Raton and Brevard County indicate they will not
make any changes to their existing ordinances.
RECOMMENDATION
After studying the federal report and Indian River County's railroad crossing
accident history, staff does not recommend any changes to the County's
existing ordinance at this time. The County's Transportation Planning
Committee has expressed its concurrence with staff's recommendation.
Robert Abood of the Florida East Coast Railway Company came
before the Board and referred to the following letter from FEC
President R. W. Wyckoff:
ir
FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY
P. O. DRAWER 1048. ONE MALAGA STREET. ST. AUGUSTINE. FLORIDA 32M
VC
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
September 10, 1990
File: 79.12
CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED P 270 472 262
SEP 1990
Mr. James Chandler
County Manager -P010O CE VATOTS
Indian Rivet County f
1840 25th Street4�
Vero Beach, FL 32960 ` ` lrn.,___,.7c\
Dear Mr. Chandler:
On February 3, 1987, Mr. James P. Wilson, Assistant County Attorney, Indian
River County, wrote our Attorney Paul E. Risner, advising that Indian River
County had adopted Ordinance No. 86-45 at its regular meeting of November
18, 1986 prohibiting the sounding of train horns or whistles at public
crossings protected by gates, lights and bells between the hours of 10:00
p.m. and 6:00 a.m., said Ordinance becoming effective November 1, 1986.
26
_I
Since the 1984 State law allowed local governments to prohibit Florida
East Coast Railway Company trains that pass through cities, municipalities
and counties from blowing warning whistles between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00
a.m. at crossings protected by gates, lights and bells, a number of cities
and counties, such as Indian River County, have passed night-time whistle
bans.
On August 10, 1990, the Federal Railroad Administration, U. S. Department
of Transportation, Washington, D. C., addressed to the Indian River County,
among other municipal and county governments so involved, copy of a Federal
study released July 1990 reflecting that in the last six years, 19 people
were killed and 59 injured at railroad crossings between Miami and Jacksonville.
Night-time accidents at the affected crossings have increased 195% since
the statutory bans were enacted. By contrast, at 89 similar FEC crossings
where the bans have not been imposed, night-time accidents have increased
only 23%. By the same token, daylight accident rates for the 6 -year period
not involved in the night-time ban reflect that there were 108 accidents
for the 5 -year period pre -ordinance and 109 accidents for the 5 -year period
• post -ordinance. In other words, there was virtually no change in the accident
rates occurring during the day -time periods when whistle blowing -remained
permissible.
The study prepared by the Federal Railroad Administration has thus demonstrated
conclusively that night-time accidents at crossings affected by the whistle
blowing ban have increased. Therefore, in the interest of safety, I request
that the County Commissioners immediately rescind the actions which it took in
1986, thus permitting whistle blowing at crossings at all hours of the day or night
to enhance safety. In this regard, it is respectfully requested that you advise
me.in advance as to the time and date of the Commission meeting at which this matter
will be brought up so that I might have a representative of the Railway present
in regard to this matter.
For your convenient reference, I attach copy of the report of the Federal
Railroad Administration of July 1990 referred to herein.
Yours ver ruly,
et
�` —
R. W. Wyckoff --
President
Mr. Abood advised that the study on the train horn ban was
made by the federal railroad administration, and it covered 600
F.E.C. crossings from Jacksonville to Miami. According to Mr.
Abood, that study showed that accidents almost tripled at night-
time when the whistles were banned. and research done for the
period after the train horn ban revealed 3 accidents in this
county in those evening hours with 3 fatalities. Staff has said
that those accidents were caused by people driving around the
gates which were in a down position. Mr. Abood felt that is a
temptation, and that is why the railroad would like to have the
ordinance rescinded. In such a situation, a railroad crew has
basically two choices. He can either whistle to alert someone or
put the train on emergency stop, and as everyone is aware, trains
27
BOOK �I FAu '743,
r
OCT 2 3 1990
BOOK Si P,1,E _ �4
do not stop very quickly. When you remove the right for the crew
to blow the horn, they must put the train in emergency stop also
risking derailment and injury to the railroad crews.
County Attorney Vitunac pointed out that our ordinance does
not prohibit a train from blowing the horn if there is a car in
the way or someone on the track, but Mr. Abood stated that
Florida Statute No. 351.03 requires all train horn bans to be
unconditional, and it does not leave any discretion with the
crew.
Chairman Eggert expressed her belief that if someone is going
to run past the gates, the whistle is not going to stop them.
Mr. Abood cited an experience where the engineer saw that
happening, blew the horn, and the accident was averted. He
stressed that when the horn is blown, at least people are alerted
that a train is in the area, and it is the railroad's position
that is a benefit from a safety standpoint.
Commissioner Scurlock expressed his feeling that if the
railroad spent less time working on this whistle ban and more
time cooperating with the communities, they would be spending
their time to a better purpose.
Commissioner Wheeler felt that if the flashing lights and
bells don't stop the people from crossing the tracks, the horn
won't either.
Commissioner Bowman had trouble with the accident figures
presented by the railroad because they do not indicate how much
their total nighttime traffic is compared to daytime traffic.
She believed they have much heavier train traffic during the
nights than in the daytime and believed that tilts the figures
considerably.
Attorney Vitunac wished to know if Mr. Abood knew that our
ordinance allows the engineer to blow the horn if a car is on the
track, and Mr. Abood stated that he has the ordinance but does
not see where it says that, and if it does, the ordinance is in
violation of Statute 351.03.
28
_I
Attorney Vitunac asked if Mr. Abood or the railroad has
advised their engineers that in Indian River County, in the
County's opinion, it is not a violation of the law to blow the
horn if they see something or someone on the track, and
Commissioner Wheeler could not imagine that in an emergency
situation, the engineer would not blow the horn instinctively
Whether it was a violation of the ordinance or not.
Mr. Abood asked if he was suggesting that the railroad
violate the law. He pointed out that he is here to see about
changing the law so they wouldn't have to violate it.
Comment was made that possibly the answer would be to get the
state to change the statute.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) denied
the railroad's request and approved staff's recommenda-
tion that we not change our existing ordinance banning
the sounding of railroad train horns and whistles
between 10:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M.
REQUEST TO ABANDON PORTION OF 44TH ST. W OF 35TH AVE. (STEWART)
The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk
read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached,
to -wit:
29 l
OCT 2 091990
I
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach In Indian River County. Florida: that,the attached copy of advertisement, being
aJ
in the matter of
In the 1 Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the Issues of [� air.
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County. Florida. and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty. Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
or corporation any discount. rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper..
Sworn to and subscribed before me this a?% day"6fA.D. 19 2 -
(Bu. ess Manager)
44'44.-!2�- .L cLf�
(SEAL) (Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian Riv Countp' Florida)
*my-trMlc, Stan, of Florldo
/Mis4 in mbo?a ;rtulrea June 29,1993
BOOK 81 F't,ut 746
Notice Ofheearring f PUBLIC
a Petition for qt
closing, abandonment. and vacation of all of a
Portion of 44th Street west of 35th Avenue as
shown on the plat of the North Gftrd subdlvl.
Sion Plat Book 3, Page 51 Indian River County.
Lying and being in Indian River County, Florida.
A public hearing at which parties in Interest
and citizens shall haw an opportunity to be
heard. will los held by the Board of County Com.
mlaaltoyners Of Indian River County. Florida In f tMy
a
AdnNnitratlonBuC4mnfldlq�ding of
840ngi
Street. Vero Beach. FlgNda. An-Tue,"y. OeW
bar 25,1990 819.0 .ay a.m.
OPPOW any decision
wArmmay bye mads of Orli mesyng Win n
eed to
enure that a verbatim record of the proteal.•
28 18 Ce ado which Includes on testimony and
which the appeal will be basea
IND AN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
October 2 lrwl� EggsM Chairman
727104
Planning Director Boling made the staff presentation, as
follows:
TO: James E. Chandler DATE: September 7, 1990
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Robert . Keati g, Ar'P
Community Development Director
_40THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP
Planning Director
FROM:" John W. McCoy 00,/Z-. �FGi �-
Staff Planner, Current Development
SUBJECT: MARIA STEWART REQUEST TO ABANDON A PORTION OF 44TH
STREET, WEST OF 35TH AVENUE
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of October 23, 1990.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Maria Stewart has submitted a petition for the abandonment of a
portion of 44th Street, west of 35th Avenue.
Per guidelines established by the Board of County Commissioners,
the petition was reviewed by all county divisions and utility
providers having jurisdiction within the right-of-way. All
reviewing agencies have recommended approval of the abandonment,
with the provision that a 40' drainage and utilities easement be
retained. The easement is to be centered in the abandoned right-
of-way.
ight-
of-way.
This portion of 44th Street is not part of the roadway system as
noted on the County Thoroughfare Plan, and is not needed for the
thoroughfare system. The right-of-way is currently maintained by
the applicant as a lawn. The abandonment will not.deny access to
any property owner.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the County abandon its rights to 44th Street
and that the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners be
authorized to execute the attached resolution (Attachment #3), with
the condition:
1. that a 40' drainage and utilities easement. be retained in
the center of the subject right-of-way.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
There were none, and she thereupon closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner SCUrlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Resolution 90-159 abandoning a portion of 44th St. west
35th Avenue as requested by Maria Stewart subject to the
condition recommended by staff.
31
L_T.
8009 FAc '/4,S
RESOLUTION NO. 90- 159
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE CLOSING,
ABANDONMENT, AND VACATION OF 44TH STREET WEST OF 35TH
AVENUE AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT OF NORTH GIFFORD HEIGHTS
SUBDIVISION, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 51 OF THE
PUBLIC RECORDS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY. SAID LAND LYING
IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
WHEREAS, on July 6, 1990 the County received a duly executed
and documented petition from Maria Stewart, 4401 35th Avenue, Vero
Beach, Florida, requesting the County to close, vacate, abandon,
And disclaim any right, title and interest of the County and the
public in and to 44th Street west of 35th Avenue, said lands lying
in Indian River County, Florida.
WHEREAS, in accordance with Florida Statutes 336.10, notice
of a public hearing to consider said petition has been duly
published; and
WHEREAS, after consideration of the petition, supporting
documents, staff investigation and report, and testimony of all
those interested and present, the Board finds that said right-of-
way is not a state of federal highway, nor -located within any
municipality, no.is said right-of-way necessary for continuity of
the County.!s street and thoroughfare network, nor access to any
given private property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that;
1. All right, title and interest of the County and the public in
and to that certain right-of-way being known more particularly
described as:
That portion of an unnamed street lying west of the west right-
of-way of McGriff Road, south of Lot 12 Block 2, north of Lot 1,
Block 4, as shown on the plat of North Gifford Heights, recorded
in Plat Book 3, Page 51 of the Public Records of Indian River
County, Florida. The unnamed street is now known as 44th Street.
McGriff Road is now known as 35th Avenpe.
Lying in.Indian River County, Florida.
is hereby forever closed, abandoned, vacated, surrendered,
discontinued, remissed and released, with the exception that a 40'
wide drainace and utilities easement centered in the richt-of-wav
is to be retained, and this easement is reserved in perpetuity unto
the County and the Public and shall not be deemed to have been
closed or abandoned in any way by this resolution.
2. Notice of the adoption of this resolution shall be forthwith
published once within thirty (30) days from the date of adoption
hereof; and
3. The Clerk is hereby directed to record this resolution
together with the proofs of publication required by Florida Statues
336.10 in the Official Record Books of Indian River County without
undue delay.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
criir10r.k who `moved its adoption. the motion was
seconded by Commissioner Wheeler , and upon being
put to a vote, the vote was as follows: -
Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Vice Chairman Richard N. Bird Absent
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 23 day of October , 1990.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDDIIJAN RAVER COUNTY, -F-LOORRIDA
BY:—
Carolyn/JK.
Y:
Carolyn . Egger ,4Chairman
Board o County C ssioners
REQUEST TO ABANDON PORTION OF 88TH COURT, S OF 22ND ST. (GIEROCK)
The hour of 9:05 o'clock A.M. having passed, the Deputy Clerk
read the following Notice with Proof of Publication attached,
to -wit:
VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL
Published Daily
Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -journal, a daily newspaper published
at Vero Beach to Indian River County. Florida: that,the attached copy of advertisement, being
a
in the -matter
In the __ Court, was pub-
lished in said newspaper in the issues of
,Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun-
ty. �'lorida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised ariy person, firm
or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Sworn to and subscribed before me this _ _iPr'i a d8ftf A&OL. 19
/ (Buslr*ss Manag[er)
(Clerk of the Circuit Court, Indian River County, Florida)
(SEAL)
NOTICE OF PU8IL1C NEARING
Notice of hearing b conaidw a petmon tar 0»
dosing, abandonment, and vacation of W of
SM Court south of 22nd street
weft
and toeing In Indian River County. Flor-
A public hearing at which pare" in Nltpest
and dwell b shad by an o Covnty Carr►•
ttaaro, will be new el+s a
missloners of Indian River County. Ficinsinths
ty commission �came mty
�rtlstrallo Building. ioatedt
140 2M
8treet, Vero Beach. Flarkhk on Tuesday, owo.
ben 23.1 tlg0 at 9-.05 a.m.Anyone ny
appeal
whicha mad."lshatt oft meso `vrin r
ensure that a verbatim remd of the proceed.
Ingo IS made which hndudes the tessmony and
evidence upon which the appe� wdl be basad.
INDIAN RI)WER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMIASSXN*M
Octobe82.1N0 olynK Eggert, Chalrman727103
Director Boling made the staff presentation, as follows:
33
�00K 0 1 F'.9E7� .I
i
OCT 2 31990aOK 61FN.ac `1a
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
James E. Chandler
Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
Obert M. Rea in , AI
Community Development irector
THROUGH: Stan Boling, AICP
Planning Director
John W. McCoy.
Staff Planner, Current Development
September 7, 1990
SUBJECT: SUSAN GIEROCK'S REQUEST TO ABANDON A PORTION OF 88TH
COURT, SOUTH OF 22ND STREET
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
Meeting of October 23, 1990.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
Susan Gierock has submitted a petition for the abandonment of a
portion of 88th Court, south of 22nd Street.
Per guidelines established by the Board of County Commissioners,
the petition was reviewed by all County divisions and utility
providers having jurisdiction within the right-of-way. All
reviewing agencies have recommended approval of the abandonment,
with the provision that the entire right-of-way be retained as a
drainage and utilities easement. While the County is retaining the
entire portion of the subject right-of-way as an easement, the
property owners will benefit by being able to build in the old
setbacks and use the easement (abandoned right-of-way) for setback
purposes.
This portion of 88th Court is not part of the roadway system as
noted on the County Thoroughfare Plan, and is not needed for the
thoroughfare system. The right-of-way is currently undeveloped and
stubs out to a right-of-way portion previously abandoned in 1972
(Please see attached graphic). The abandonment will not deny
access to any property owner.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the County abandon its rights to 88th Court
and that the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners be
authorized to execute the attached resolution (Attachment #3), with
the condition:
1. that drainage and utilities easement be retained over the
entire subject right-of-way.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
There were none; and she thereupon closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Resolution 90-160 abandoning a portion of 88th Court
south of 22nd Street as requested by Susan Gierock
subject to the condition recommended by staff.
RESOLUTION NO. 90- 160
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE CLOSING,
ABANDONMENT, AND VACATION OF 88TH COURT SOUTH OF 22ND
AVENUE, SAID LAND LYING IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
WHEREAS, on July 30, 1990 the County received a duly executed
and documented petition from Susan Gierock of 8865 22nd Street,
Vero Beach, Florida, requesting the County to close, vacate,
abandon, and -disclaim any right, title and interest of the County
and the public in and to 88th Court South of 22nd Street, said
lands lying in Indian River County, Florida.
WHEREAS; in accordance with Florida Statutes 336.10, notice
of a public hearing to consider said petition has been duly
published; and
WHEREAS, after consideration of the petition, supporting
documents, staff investigation and report, and testimony of all
those interested and present, the Board finds that said right-of-
way is not a state of federal highway, nor located within any
municipality, no is said right-of-way necessary for continuity of
the County's street and thoroughfare network, nor access to any
given private property.
NOW, 'THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that;
1. All right, title and interest of the County and the public in
and to that certain right-of-way being known more particularly
described as:
All of that part of 118th Avenue, now known as 88th Court, lying
South of 22nd Street, between Lot 1 Block R and Lot 4 Block W, and
the South* line of Paradise Park Unit 2, recorded in Plat Book 3
Page 77 of the Public Records of Indian River County, Florida.
Lying in Indian River County, Florida.
is hereby forever closed, abandoned, vacated, surrendered,
discontinued, remissed and released, with the exception --that the
entire right-of-way be retained as a drainage and utilities
easement, and this easement is reserved in perpetuity unto the
County and the Public and shall not be deemed -to have been closed
or abandoned in any way by this resolution.
2. Notice of the adoption of this resolution shall be forthwith
published once within thirty (30) days from the date of adoption
hereof; and
3. The Clerk is hereby directed to record this resolution
together with the proofs of publication required by Florida Statues
336.10 in the Official Record Books of Indian River County without
undue delay.
35
O f 0
n.�
ro..
BOOK 81
The foregoing resolution was offered by Commissioner
Scurlock who moved its adoption. the motion was
seconded by Commissioner Bowman , and upon being
put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Carolyn K. Eggert 'Aye
Vice Chairman Richard N. Bird Absent
Commissioner Don C. Scurilock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
.Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and
adopted this 23 day of October , 1990.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RI/V�ER COUNTY,, FLORIDA
BY: C
Carolyn . Eggert hairman
Board o County C ssioners
PUBLIC HEARING - PETITION PAVING (42nd AVE. 6th to 8th Sts; 42nd
AVE. 10th to 12th Sts; 44th AVE. 16th St. to Pinewood Subdv.;
13th AVE. 12th to 14th Sts.; and 2nd ST. 23rd to 24th AVE.)
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:
lot
_-- — RESOLUTION 00-193
VERO BEACH PRESS.JOURNAL
PUBIRINa
oncE
I NOTICE
r
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Board of
Cunty Commissioners of Indian River County,„
• Published Dafl y
Florida, will hold a Public Hearing at 9:05 AM on
Tuesday, October 23, 1090 In the Commission
'
Chambers located at 1540 25th Street, Vero
c Iatmount ida to
BeaVero asssesssments advisability,
Beach, Indian River Catinty, Florida
and he of the
each property for paving and drainage Improve•
manta, to:
d Avenue from 6th Street to 9th
COUNTY OF INDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA
Sheet
2) 42nd Avenue from 10th Street to 12th
Before the undersigned authority personalty appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath
Sheet
says that he is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published
3) 44th Avenue from 19th Street to Pine. ,
wood Subdivisionverufrom
at Vero Beach in Indian River Count Florida; that the attached co of advertisement, being
Y. , PY g
4) 13th Avenue Iram 12th Street to 14th
Street
•
55 2nd Sheet from 23rd Avenue to 24th
a
Avenue
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that at the
L + ���
Com -
same public hearing, the Board of County Com-
In the matter of
missioners shall also hear all Interested persons
regarding the proposed assessments contained i
In the preliminary assessment rolls for the im-
provements described above. The preliminary
assessment rolls are currently on Ole with the
•
Clerk to the Board.
If any person decides to appeal any decision
by the Commission with respect to any
In the _ Court, was pub-
made
mailer considered at this beer”. he will need a
d l LJ� 42W
recdrd of the proceedings, and that, for such
purpose, may nand to ensure theta batim
record
Iished In said newspaper in the Issues of � n9
the h
record of the proceedings N made, which record
•
Includes the testimony and evidence upon which
the appeal is to be based. -
yOW TFIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF IN-
DIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, the foregoing
Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal Is a newspaper published at
Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore
recitnls are affirmed and ratified in their entirety.
The foregoing resolution was offered by Com -
missloner Wheeler who moved Its adoption. The
been continuously published in said Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been
motion was seconded by Commisfoner Scurlock
entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Vero Beach, in said Indian River Coun•
snd, upo
follows:n befog put Io a vote, the vote was u
ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
Chairman Carolfm K. Ea9gart Aye
advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm
Vice -Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye
Commissioner Don C. Srurlock, Jr. Aye
or corporation an discount, rebate• commission or refund for the purpose of securing this
P Y P P 9
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
advertisement for publication In the said newspaper.
Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolu-
tion passed and adopted this 25 day of Septem-
$WOm f0 and Subscribed Belpre me chi /iS� dty�Of )� .D. 19
/y/�
bar, 1990.
OARDF COUNTY TIY,IFLORIDAS
f r j
� Vk_ I
OFINDIAN RIOVE COUNF
If -
By -s -Carolyn K. Eggert, Chal m m,
Allest:-.-Jell Barton, Clerk '
r
,y/! pfBusiness Manager)
by -s -A. Walarhouse
�'
Deputy Clerk
•-A/�.A'l f'iQ-r ^f
4
October S. 15, 1990 729293
(.Clerk 1-lndten FlIver-Couffty,-Florida)
(SEAL)
jir7tR r 14.hf1.:. ihrfw Of rft•rlda
f* Cominhalan Er4+irm Jima 29, ISil3
lot
The Board reviewed memo from Michelle Gentile, C.E.T.:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
and
Roger D. Cain, P.E. ,yw
County.Engineer
FROM: Mich lleA Gentile, Gen 'le . C.E.T.
Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for the Paving and Drainage Improvements
to:
September 25, 1990
the Board
of County Commissioners adopted
five
1)
42nd Avenue
from
6th Street to
8th Street
2)
42nd Avenue
from
10th Street to
12th Street
3)
44th Avenue
from
16th Street to
Pinewood
10th Street
Subdivision
3)
44th Avenue from
_
'
4)
13th Avenue
from
12th Street to
14th Street
5)
2nd Street from
23rd Avenue to
24th Avenue
DATE: October 16, 1990
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On
September 25, 1990
the Board
of County Commissioners adopted
five
Resolutions, Nos. 90-148,
90-149, 90-150, 90-151, and
90-152,
providing for
certain paving and drainage improvements
to:
1)
42nd Avenue from
6th Street
to 8th Street - * 67% in favor
2)
42nd Avenue from
10th Street
to 12th Street -* 61% in favor
3)
44th Avenue from
16th Street
to Pinewood Subdivision - * 73%
in favor
- 4)
13th Avenue from
12th Street
to 14th Street - * 73% in favor
5)
2nd Street from 23rd
Avenue
to 24th Avenue - * 75% in favor
* Percentage based on when petition was received by the
Engineering Division
On September 25, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners adopted
another Resolution No. 90-153 setting the date and time for a
Public Hearing to discuss the advisability, cost and amount of
the assessment against each property owner. This hearing is
scheduled for October 23, 1990.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners -approve
assessment rolls, and confirming resolutions with changes, if
any, made after input at the Public Hearing. Revised confirming
resolutions and assessment rolls will be forwarded to Chairman
of the Board for signature.
The Chairman announced that each project would be heard
separately.
37 BOOK G F'AvE �c
OCT 2 31890 J
_I
OCT 2 3 1990
BOOK & [AGE t
42nd Avenue from 6th Street to 8th Street
Mrs. Gentile informed the Board that 67% of the property
owners were in favor of the improvements planned for this
roadway.
The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard regarding the
proposed assessment. There were none, and she thereupon closed
the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Resolution 90-161 con-
firming the assessment roll for paving and drainage
improvements to 42nd Avenue from 6th Street to 8th
Street in Citrus Gardens Subdivision.
RESOLUTION NO. 90— 1�f 1
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL
FOR CERTAIN. PAVING AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS TO 42ND AVENUE FROM 6TH STREET
TO 8TH STREET IN CITRUS GARDENS SUBDIVISION
RESOLUTION 90-161 W/ASSESSMENT ROLL IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD IN ITS ENTIRETY.
42nd Avenue from 10th Street to 12th Street
Mrs. Gentile informed the Board that 610 of the property
owners were in favor of the proposed project.
The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard regarding the
proposed assessment.
Tom Wiseman, 1076 42nd Avenue, believed that in the near
future the County is planning on adding water and sewer service
for this area, and he wondered if paving first isn't putting the
cart before the horse.
Commissioner Scurlock explained that sleeves will be put in;
we will not do double work.
The Chairman determined that no one else wished to be heard
and thereupon closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Scurlock, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Resolution 90-162 con-
firming the assessment roll for paving and drainage
improvements to 42nd Avenue from 10th Street to 12th
Street in Malaluka Gardens Subdivision.
RESOLUTION NO. 90-162
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL
FOR CERTAIN PAVING AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS TO 42ND AVENUE PROM 10TH STREET
TO 12TH STREET IN MALALUKA GARDENS SUBDIVISION
RESOLUTION 90-162 W/ASSESSMENT ROLL IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD IN ITS ENTIRETY.
44th Avenue from 16th Street to Pinewood Subdivision
Chairman Eggert announced that we now have received 35
letters from people opposing this project, a sample of which
letter is as follows:
39
Boor,
a OT 2 3.1990 MOK
October: 12, 1990
Hoard ;.off}Coiinty-c ommissioners
iiidian .Fi e�ri CoUi�ty Administration Building
*ito
ib'40 25th
}"NErEl.6.. ida 32960
Re • c�P?YI{g; arifl Drainage Improvements to 44th
veriu�'from 16th Street to Pinewood Sub-
division
Dear Commissioners:
I am a part of the Vero Beach Alliance Church
and want to voice my opposition to the paving
of 44th Avenue because of the extreme financial
hardship this will cause on my church. Our
share of the cost is $12,233 for 690' which
is to be paid in two years with 12% interest.
81 PAPIE 756
This will cause a severe financial burden on an
already big mortgage payment that is taking every
penny of church contributions. This would prevent
us from being able to pay our weekly bills.
Some of the residents on 44th Avenue that
originally signed the petition for paving,
are now content with the road remaining unpaved
because it has been blocked off to thru traffic.
In addition, they sympathize with our church's
financial situation.
There -are so many other heavily travelled roads
that need to be paved, that it seems unnecessary
to pave 44th Avenue.
This topic is scheduled for October 23rd and
your understanding of our critical situation
would be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely yours,
Mrs. Gentile advised that we also have received a petition
from 10 people opposing the project, which petition is on file in
the Office of Clerk to the Board. When the project was
originally proposed, we had a petition with 73% favoring it, and
the improvement was approved on September 25th by the Board
of County Commissioners.
Chairman Eggert believed that the letters received in opposi-
tion to the project were all from members of the church located
in this neighborhood.
The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
wished to be heard.
40
M
Tom Haar, Pastor of Vero Beach Alliance Church, came before
the Board. He informed the Board that he has talked with all the
residents on 44th Avenue, a number of whom are here today, and he
believed that at this point, at least 850 of the property owners
are opposed to the paving. He further explained that when Pat
Patterson originally initiated the petition, the intent was just
to block off the road, not pave it. Pastor Haar expressed his
appreciation to the Board for blocking off the road which has cut
down the dust and the drag racing, and he continued to name
various property owners who have indicated their sympathy with
the church in this situation.
Pastor Haar stressed that his congregation has attempted to
build an attractive building for the sake of the community, but
they do have a very large mortgage. The proposed assessment
would add up to over $15,000 in 2 years, which would prevent them
from paying their weekly bills. He agreed there a few people in
the neighborhood who feel the paving would be an advantage, but
they are sympathetic and want to help the church.
Commissioner Wheeler felt the barrier has helped. The road
is still in very poor condition, and although the grading is a
problem for the county, it probably doesn't have to be done as
often as formerly. He asked Director Davis about the possibility
of making this a cut de sac with sod and shrubs.
Public Works Director Davis explained that the circumstances
where we have done that have all been on paved roads. He would,
however, encourage the neighborhood to get together and do some
landscaping at the end of the street, if they wish. Staff, of.
course, is in favor of paving the road and did proceed with the
engineering monies and the effort necessary to bring the project
to this point.
Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that we still have the
plans, which can be put on the shelf and then can be readdressed
as conditions change and the church grows.
41 �ooK PnE f d
OCT 2 31990 m
BOOK 81
James Hanson, 1771 44th Avenue, realized the county has put a
lot of time and troubl.e into laying out the roadway, etc., but
noted that when he purchased his property 3 years ago, he was
told paving would cost about $10.00 a foot. Now it is over
$17.00, and what will the price be some years from now when the
church feels it can participate?
Commissioner Scurlock noted that asphalt is a petroleum based
product so a lot depends on fuel prices; the price, of course,
will not be less.
Mr. Hanson pointed out that the church can pick up more
members and increase their income during that period, but the
other residents and retirees can't do that. He, therefore, felt
it would be more advantageous to do the paving now.
Frank Hoover, 4400 16th Street, advised that 220' of his
property is on 44th Avenue; their assessment is $4,000, and they
very seldom use that road. He stated that he did talk with
property owners Pat Patterson and John Sutherland about the
paving, and they are against it. He has been told there is a
possibility they could make this a private road and keep it
closed. This road is right behind Winn Dixie with a lot of
trucks using it, etc. He is against having it paved right now,
but certainly doesn't want a big assessment 10 years from now.
Mr. Hoover further noted that since the road has been blocked to
traffic, you are talking about only 6 houses using that road and
the road is not in such bad shape as it was.
Commissioner Scurlock explained that there is no assurance
that road will always remain closed, and to make it private, you
would have to have it abandoned and all responsibility for it'
would revert back to the property owners. It is the County's
goal to pave as many roads as we can and consolidate our grader
routes.
Timothy Poppell, 1775 44th Ave., stated that he would like to
have the road paved, but he doesn't like the high prices;
42
u
however, he feared higher prices down the road. In regard to
making the road private, he was concerned as to whether the
property owners would be responsible for the City water lines
that go through there.
Commissioner Scurlock assured Mr. Poppell that his monthly
bill pays for the maintenance of those lines. He further pointed
out that this Commission cannot predict what future Commissions
will do as far as this road is concerned or anything else. The
Board does try to listen to the majority view, but things change
based on conditions. If the people own the road, they have the
control, but they also have all the responsibility for paving,
maintenance, repairs, etc.
Commissioner Wheeler did not feel it would be to the
residents' advantage to have this a private road, and
Commissioner Scurlock noted that, other than the money situation,
there is no question in his mind that to have the road paved is a
value and benefit to the people's property.
Discussion continued at length about various possibilities,
including a cul de sac, about which doubt was expressed, and also
an extended 5 -year payment plan with several property owners
continuing to speak both for and against the proposed paving.
Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that the Commission
actually can vote to have this road paved whether there is a
petition for it or not if there is a definite benefit for the
grader route and we can conserve our resources, which is a
benefit for the public as a whole. He personally felt we should
table this matter and get a new valid petition.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0) agreed
to table the above matter and continue it over for
two weeks.
43
'ROOK 81 F'n,, E 75-9,
OCT 2 3 199.0 LkOOK �-d FAGE 160
13th Avenue from 12th Street to 14th Street
Mrs. Gentile informed the Board that this petition was 73% in
favor of the proposed project.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
Jean Borchers, owner of two houses in this area, expressed
her support for paving the road, but was concerned about paying
the assessments due to the fact that there are several renters on
the street and most of the rest are senior citizens on Social
Security. She asked if this has to be paid up front or if the
payments can be stretched over a period of time.
I
Commissioner Scurlock advised the payments are not totally
due for two years, and it actually works out longer than that.
We match 25% of the cost with county money. If we let everyone
take more time to pay, it does create a cash flow problem for us.
Mrs. Borchers again requested that the residents be allowed
to stretch these payments out over a longer period of time.
Public Works Director Davis noted that the lots in this
subdivision are typically 55' frontage; so, the assessment should
not be that great. In the previous hearing, their frontage was
200' and a much heavier assessment.
It was noted that almost everybody on the street has two lots
and their assessment would be $1,729.
Commissioner Wheeler felt that it all boils down to what you
can afford and what your income is. He didn't see why we can't
go 5 years on this assessment also.
Administrator Chandler advised that the county is picking up
$14,000 of the total expense on this project, and Commissioner
Scurlock continued to stress that we will need more seed money to
continue our petition paving program.
Discussion continued as to the financing and the fact that
although the road will be paved within a year, the bill is not
sent out for some time. Commissioner Wheeler noted that actually
the people will have almost 3 years on a 2 year financing.
44
It was further explained that the County charges 120, and if
you can go to the bank and get a better deal, the County would
encourage you to do so.
Frank Pribanic, 1310 13th Avenue, wished to know how soon the
paving could be done as he was concerned about the increase in
the cost of petroleum.
Director Davis advised that we are finishing up a very large
project in the South.County and have 5 other roads ahead of this
project, but he would anticipate being in this area within about
6 months. The prices quoted on the assessment were developed
prior to the Iraqi crisis.
Commissioner Scurlock explained that once we set the final
assessment, you cannot be charged more than that.
Director Davis advised that we did add something to compen-
sate for inflation, etc.; the estimate is conservative if County
crews do the work; and he felt comfortable with the price set out
at this time.
It was further explained that this billing is a separate
billing that does not appear on your property tax bill, and it
can be paid within 90 days with no interest at all or in two
annual installments with a 12% interest charge.
John Boudrot, 1306 12th Street, had questions about his
assessment because part of his property is on 12th Street which
is paved, and he did not feel his footage was correct. The
Chairman directed him to meet with Mrs. Gentile who would explain
how the footage figure was arrived at.
The Chairman determined that no one else wished to be heard
and thereupon closed the public hearing. She asked how the Board
felt about extending the payment plan to 5 years.
Commissioner Wheeler wished to offer a Motion approving the
project with the assessment to be extended to 5 years as he felt
one's home and income is relative to what they can afford to pay,
but Commissioner Scurlock believed we have had no evidence as to
the appraised value of any of the homes on this street. He was
45 PUUK PAGE 761
OCT 2 3 1990
0 C T 2 3 1990
BOOK 81 F'AAu 762
in favor of the paving project, but felt we must be consistent
and did not want to have to end up offering a 5 year plan to
everyone.
The Chairman suggested that there be two Motions - one
regarding the paving and one regarding the extended payment plan.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, Commissioner Bird being absent, the
Board unanimously (4-0) adopted Resolution 90-163 con-
firming the assessment roll for paving and drainage
improvements to 13th Avenue from 12th Street to 14th
Street in Rivenbark Subdivision.
RESOLUTION NO. 90-163
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL
FOR CERTAIN PAVING AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS TO 13TH AVENUE FROM 12TH STREET
TO 14TH STREET IN RIVENBARK SUBDIVISION
RESOLUTION 90-163 W/ASSESSMENT ROLL IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD IN ITS ENTIRETY.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, Commissioner Bird being absent and
-e
Commissioner Scurlock voting in opposition, the Board
by a 3 to 1 vote approved extending the payment of
the assessment for the above project to 5 years.
46
2nd Street from 23rd Avenue to 24th Avenue
Mrs. Gentile advised that the petition received on this
project was 75% in favor.
The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard.
There were none, and she thereupon closed the public hearing.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Resolution 90-164 confirming the assessment roll for
certain paving and drainage improvements to 2nd Street
from 23rd Avenue to 24th Avenue in Indian River Heights
Subdivision.
RESOLUTION NO. 90— 164
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL
FOR CERTAIN PAVING AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS TO 2ND STREET FROM 23RD
AVENUE TO 24TH AVENUE STREET IN INDIAN
RIVER HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION
RESOLUTION 90-164 W/ASSESSMENT ROLL IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD IN ITS ENTIRETY.
ANNUAL HRS CONTRACT
OMB Director Baird reviewed the following, noting that this
is the standard contract we enter into every year with HRS::
®T 2 3 1(100 47 I�OGK _ Pr1GE �i)
OCT 2 3 1990
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: October 10, 1990
SUBJECT: ANNUAL HRS CONTRACT
FROM: Joseph A. Baird(*
OMB Director
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITION
BOOK F�jIj
Attached is the Standard Contract between the Indian River County Board of County
Commissioners and the State of Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services for the
• 1990/91 fiscal year. In the agreement, Indian River County guarantees to fund $491,000 - as was
authorized at budget time.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the annual contract between
the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners and the Rehabilitative Services for
1990/91 fiscal year.
Dr. Berman informed the Board that the Health Department
budget is very tight this year. There are some increases which
they spoke about at budget sessions which are designated in the
contract, and essentially the biggest increase is the raise in
the charge for Birth and Death Certificates from $5 to $7. The
State HRS 3% decrease doesn't amount to a great deal, but every
dollar counts in a tight budget. Dr. Berman felt it will take a
good strong political action to get back our 1.5 million grant.
Chairman Eggert advised that she is pursuing this very
strongly in Tallahassee.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) auth-
orized the Chairman to execute the annual contract
with the State Department of Health & Rehabilitative
Services for FY 90/91.
COPY OF PARTIALLY SIGNED AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD.
48
CONCURRENCY
Community Development Director Keating made the following
presentation and explained the Concurrency Requirements Table
developed by staff:
TO:< James Chandler
County Administrator
-FROM: Robert M. Keating, AICP �M
Community -.Development Director
DATE: October 15, 1990
SUBJECT: CONCURRENCY
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the board of county commissioners at their regular -
meeting of October 23, 1990.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS
Probably the most far-reaching aspect of the 1985 growth management
act is the concurrency requirement. Mandating that adequate
facilities be provided to accommodate the impacts of development
projects at adopted levels of service, concurrency has produced
moratoriums in several local governments in the state.
With the recent adoption of its land development regulations,
Indian River County is now beginning to. formally implement
concurrency. Based upon state requirements, the Indian River
County concurrency ordinance (Chapter 910 of the land development
regulations) establishes procedures for implementing concurrency
and criteria for reviewing concurrency certificate requests. The
county's concurrency review criteria was structured to correspond
to state requirements. As such, the county can implement
concurrency by taking a strict approach or a more liberal approach.
The most restrictive approach to concurrency involves requiring
that facilities be in place prior to approving a development order
for a project. The least restrictive approach involves issuing
development orders when facilities are included in the County's
capital improvements program. The applicable state law, section
9J-5.0055, FAC, (a copy of which is attached) allows local
governments to implement concurrency using a range of approaches
between the two extremes.
Concurrency Requirements Table
To more clearly identify concurrency requirements and options,
staff has prepared the attached concurrency requirements table.
The table is structured to correspond to the three types of
concurrency certificates established in the Indian River County
concurrency management ordinance. These are listed in the first
column in the table and are as follows:
49
aUo� Pa E 7b 5
OGT 2 3 1990
HOK Fh� r `756
• Conditional Certificates - these are certificates required for
conceptual development orders; since no project approval is
given at this stage, capacity does not need to be reserved.
• Initial Certificates - these are certificates required for
project level approval; at this stage capacity must be
reserved.
• Final Certificates - these are certificates required to obtain
building permits; capacity must be reserved.
These certificates are discussed in more detail in the concurrency
management chapter (910) of the new land development regulations.
As structured, the table relates the six facilities (water, sewer,
traffic, solid waste, parks & recreation, drainage) subject to
concurrency review to the three certificate types. In viewing the
table, the last four columns on the right are extremely important;
these indicate the facility availability possibilities that an
applicant will confront when he applies for a certificate. For any
one or all six of the facilities, the capacity needed by an
applicant may: (1) be in place; (2) be under construction; (3) be
committed or guaranteed by agreements executed by others; or (4) be
not available. According to state requirements and allowed by the
county's ordinance, these categories can be further simplified by
considering capacity available if any of the first three conditions
(capacity in place or under construction or committed) exist.
Therefore, two principal conditions will exist when an applicant
applies for a concurrency certificate; on a facility by facility
basis, either capacity will be available or it will not be
available.
Given those circumstances, it is the county's responsibility as
part of a concurrency review to identify those actions required of
the applicant to reserve capacity that is presently available to
ensure that it will still be available when he needs it or to
provide additional capacity if capacity is not available for a
facility. The table identifies those actions by number, with the
numbers related to the actions shown at the bottom of the table.
As reflected in the table, actions required by the applicant are
specific and straightforward in those circumstances where capacity
is available; where capacity is not available there are generally
more options.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS
The required actions identified in the table are drawn from those
allowed by the state's concurrrency rule, as modified in some cases
by staff. The state rule, however, treats different facilities
differently; according to that rule there are four options for
water and sewer concurrency to be met, six for parks/recreation
concurrency to be met, and seven for traffic concurrency to be met.
These are reflected in the table.
Whether all the various options for meeting concurrency which are
allowed by state law should be allowed by the county is a decision
which must be made. For example, state rules provide for the
concurrency test to be met if the necessary capacity is under
construction at the time of development order approval; no
requirement exists for ensuring that the construction is completed.
The county may want to be more restrictive and require that the
facility is complete prior to issuing a certificate of occupancy
for a project needing the capacity in the facility under
construction.
50
M M M
Another consideration involves impact fees. While the state
concurrency rule does not reference impact fees, that is an
important action in the county table-. Because impact fees provide
the revenue to replace the capacity being reserved for a project,
payment of those fees allows for the necessary facility expansions
required to make concurrency work. While no new impact fees are
being proposed and no impact fee increases are being implemented
with the concurrency system, the timing of fee payments is changing
in some cases. With concurrency, impact fees must be paid when
capacity is reserved; the major implication of this change is that
fees must be paid when subdivision applications are submitted,
instead of at the building permit issuance stage as it was
previously.
As presented, the table reflects the staff's position on
implementing the concurrency requirement. It is the staff's
position that the actions required of applicants will allow
development to occur and ensure that the necessary facilities to
maintain the county's quality of life will be provided. The staff
will provide additional explanation of the table and concurrency
system implementation.at the October 23, 1990 meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the board of county commissioners review this
information and the concurrency requirements table.
CONCURRENCY REQUIREMENTS TABLE FOLLOWS:
OCT 2 3 1990 51 mor 81 P,�G�. 10
L�
1
1
U1
N)
CONCURRENCY REQUIREMENTS
TABLE
CATEGORIES INTO
WHICH ANY LAND
PLACEMENT OF ALL
ACTIONS REQUIRED OF DEVELOPERS TO OBTAIN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
CONCURRENCY DETERMINATION CERTIFICATION FOR LISTED FACILITIES
DEVELOPMENT
ACTIVITY CAN BE PUT &
TYPE OF CONCURRENCY
DEVELOPMENT
LAND DEVELOPMENT
PERMITS INTO
PROPER CATEGORY
REQUESTED CAPACITY TO BE
FACILITIES CAPACITY CAPACITY UNDER CONSTRUCTED
IN PLACE CONSTRUCTION BY OTHER
CAPACITY NOT
AVAILABLE
WATERISEWER
3 or 1&2
3 or 1&2
3 or 1&2
1&2
PlanningActivities Require
�
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
TRAFFIC
8
8
8 •
1,4,7or9
SOLID WASTE
5:<:><>:<::
:>.:<>:.:::>:::<:>::immemomm
CONDITIONAL CONCURRENCY
REVIEW
REZON11 GS
CONCEPTUAL PROJECT APPROVALS
PARKS & RECREATION
8
8
8
1
DRAINAGE 6 6 6
6 or 1
Project Approvals Require
SUBDIVISION PLATS (PRELIMINARY & FINAL)
SITE PLANS (COMMERCIAUMULTI-FAMILY)
WATERISEWER
3
3
3
3&1
TRAFFIC 3 3 3
1or4or(9&3)or(7&3)
SOLID WASTE
5
INITIAL CONCURRENCY--.`.; ':
REVIEW
PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS, DRI'S
COMP PLAN AMENDS & REZONINGS (OPTIONAL)
PARKS & RECREATION
8
8
8
1
DRAINAGE 6 6 6
6 or 1
WATER/SEWER
3
3
3
3&1
Construction Activities Require
BUILDING PERMITS
TRAFFIC
3
3
3
lor4or(9&3)or(7&3)
SOLID WASTE
5
>%'''777
FINAL CONCURRENCY :'
REVIEW
CHANGE IN USE OR INTENSITY
PARKS & RECREATION
8
8
8
1
DRAINAGE 6 6 6
6 or 1
1. DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THAT FACILITY IN PLACE WHEN IMPACTS OCCUR
2.5% OF IMPACT FEES PAID
3. IMPACT FEES PAID
4. BINDING CONTRACT REQUIRES THAT FACILITIES BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION WITHIN 1 YEAR OF DEVELOPMENT ORDER
5. PREAPPROVED THROUGH 1993 1.
6. DEVELOPER ORDER CONDITION/MAXIMUM DISCHARGE RATE
Z DEVELOPMENT ORDER CONDITION THAT CAPACITY IS IN PLACE WHEN IMPACTS OCCUR
8. NO ACTION REQUIRED
9. CAPACITYPROVIDED FOR /N f ROJECT INCLUDED /N FIRST THREE YEARS /N 5 YEAR TCIP
OR 5 YEAR FDOT (WITH CONDITIONS
w
0
0
Or+
V)
M M M
Director Keating felt it is important to note that probably
the most restrictive way concurrency can be implemented is
requiring that the necessary facilities actually be in place
before a Development Order is issued, and probably the most lib-
eral way is to put a capital improvement in the Capital Improve -
men ts~Program.
Commissioner Scurlock noted that apparently the State has
somewhat changed their position and allowed a less strict
interpretation; instead of requiring that the improvement
actually be in place, they allow the county to put something in
its 3 or 5 year plan. This, however, means that the county is on
the hook for that improvement, and he felt there may be reason
for us to be more restrictive than the state.
Chairman Eggert noted that she had a question about parks,
but was assured that they are adequate for the next few years.
Commissioner Scurlock referred to the Concurrency Require-
ments Table, and in particularaTraffic, which he believed is a
critical concern. He pointed out that in the top category (Comp
Plan Amendments - Rezonings - Conceptual Project Approvals), it
shows that no action is required for Traffic until the capacity
is not available. He personally did not see why we should not
require action similar to water/sewer and at least ask them to
enter into a developer's agreement to provide for capacity. He
felt we have less handle on transportation than any of these
things.
County Attorney did not feel there is a real need for any
agreement at that stage because we actually don't want them to.,do
anything, and Chairman Eggert pointed out that we don't have to
approve a rezoning; we have a policy choice.
Director Keating advised that staff looked at a good many
other concurrency ordinances, and based on that, came up with
this. He stressed that the applicant has to meet other concur-
rency tests before he
can get his
building permit.
OCT 3
1990
53
({o0a
OCT 2 3 J990
ROOK 61 v4GE 776
Commissioner Scurlock continued to liken the need for
providing for road improvements to planning for water and sewer
facilities. He believed we need a build -out analysis of all
roads leading into U.S.I, for instance, because we are approving
things today, and he is concerned that we have the physical or
financial ability to match our road infrastructure with the
zoning that already exists.
Public Works Director Davis could understand part of his
concern, but was not sure you can make water and sewer analagous
to the road system because we are caught between two aggressively
growing counties, St. Lucie and Brevard, and we are subject to
through traffic from them; so, we could still end up with a
problem even if we did our planning properly.
Commissioner Scurlock agreed there are outside traffic
influences that we can't control, but he was concerned about
getting gridlock such as in Palm Beach County. He noted that
down there, they have special zones they have identified where
those roads cannot be expanded, and then you are at moratorium
time. He is saying that we are still a young county and have
some ability to control that situation; so, we better match our
development potential with our ability to provide the needed
facilities. You can always expand water and sewer, but when it
comes to transportation, you can only build a road so wide and
you better match it with your ultimate Land Use Map. The
intensity of a development not only affects water and sewer but
also roads, and he felt it would be to the developer's interest
as a property owner to pay all the impact fees necessary to vest
his position and assure that he will have the required infra-
structure when he is ready to build.
Administrator Chandler agreed there is no question this is a
critical element but believed it gets into our 5-10-20 year
projections.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that at some time this may necess-
itate our addressing reducing some densities downward, but
54
M M
Director Keating noted there are other alternatives, such as
trying to get trips to occur other than within peak hours.
Commissioner Bowman felt, in that situation, you are talking
about a decrease in your quality of life, and she did not think
that is what we want.
Commissioner Scurlock continued to stress his concerns in
regard to keeping track of our transportation needs so that we
don't end up with gridlock.
Director Keating noted that is one of the reasons concur-
rency came about; we need to look long range; and that is one of
the things concurrency does for us. He pointed out that the way
the ordinance is structured, someone can get an initial concur-
rency certificate that does give him vesting, and it can last as
long as 5 years. In addition, we do have LOS limitations; so,
if we use the system, we will be identifying where the improve-
ments need to be made.
Commissioner Scurlock wished to know just where the need for
a certain improvement is triggered - what percentage of use indi-
cates that we should start designing a new facility?
Director Keating stated that we do not have a percent figure,
but we have been working on our capital improvements program.
Commissioner Wheeler did not think the science in transporta-
tion is the same as in utilities. When certain roads get over-
crowded, you can simply accustom yourself to going another route.
Commissioner Scurlock continued to stress the need for a
triggering mechanism indicating when to design and when to build.
Chairman Eggert pointed that with a triggering mechanism, we
could have started to design 43rd Avenue for 3 lanes, not 5.
Discussion continued along the same lines, and Administrator
Chandler advised that the mode we are in right now is that we are
doing more modeling of the system so we don't get into 95%
capacity situations, and we will do more work on the capital
improvements program. Both Traffic Engineering and Engineering
have picked up the gauntlet to monitor more.
55
Boos � F,g;t 1;11
i CT 2 31990 mu 81 P,auu 7
Traffic Engineer Michael Dudeck advised that while we don't
have a design trigger per se, when we hit 70o capacity, that
triggers a traffic analysis.
Commissioner Scurlock still wished to know if anyone sees any
reason why we couldn't have a developer's agreement at a very
early stage when a developer is doing rezoning so that he will be
on the hook just as he is for utilities to provide the money to
build the capacity for his project.
Director Keating pointed out that is referenced in the
Concurrency Requirements Table under "Capacity Not Available."
Administrator Chandler believed the question is, when you
already have LOS problems, do you hit the person at that early
stage when he may not develop for years. He will be hit with
this under the initial concurrency review when he gets serious
about developing his site.
Commissioner Scurlock noted that staff then apparently is
comfortable with the way -this is set up at the second stage. He
asked what action is required today and was informed that none is
required; this is just review.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that staff all have done an
excellent job and did not think the general public realizes what
a great staff we have.
FEES FOR NEW LDR-ESTABLISHED PERMITS
The Board reviewed memo from the Community Development
Director:
56
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
James Chandler
County Administrator
Robert M. Keating, AICP kwK
Community Development Director
October 17, 1990
FEES FOR NEW LDR-ESTABLISHED
PERMITS
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular
meeting of October 23, 1990.
DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS:
With the adoption of the county's land development regulations on
September 11, 1990, several permits and review processes were
established. These include conceptual, initial, and final
concurrency determinations, de -minimus variance requests, dune
vegetation maintenance permits, wetland resource permits, and
agricultural (cluster) planned development applications.
Each of these permits/review processes will involve staff time in
review, analysis, and permit issuance. To recoup that cost and
ensure that the cost is paid by those receiving the benefit, it is
necessary to establish fees for those reviews.
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS:
To determine the appropriate fee amount for each permit/review
process, the staff estimated the amount of time by staff position
involved, in each review process. Based upon this staff time
estimate, a review fee was established for each process. Those
fees are shown in the revised planning division fee schedule
(attached). Only those fees with the amount underlined are being
changed; all others.will remain the same.
Several alternatives exist regarding these proposed fees. The
board could adopt the fees as proposed or reduce them. To adopt
these fees, the board of county commissioners must approve a
resolution amending the planning division fee schedule._ The
proposed fee schedule attached to this item reflects the: fees
referenced above; however, it retains all other fees at their
present levels. .-
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends that the board of county commissioners adopt
the attached resolution revising the planning division fee
schedule.
"990 57 BOOK 4A Fk9Ct
OCT 2 31990
mu 81 PA.U�E 77
Chairman Eggert noted that on the second page of Attachment A
there are some little.asterisks, and she requested that, if
possible, staff make the asterisks bigger so they show more
clearly that the notation which is underlined and located further
down the page applies to all the different categories where the
stars are. Right now, she did not feel it is clear just where it
applies.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Resolution 90-165, establishing a revised Planning
Division fee schedule, with the above correction,
RESOLUTION NO. 90-165•
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
ESTABLISHING A REVISED PLANNING DIVISION FEE
SCHEDULE.
WHEREAS, the board of county commissioners has the authority
to establish fees pursuant to Chapter 125, F.S.; and
WHEREAS, the board of county commissioners desires to assess
the costs of project reviews to applicants requesting project or
permit approval; and
WHEREAS, an estimate of the staff time and cost to process
these reviews has been prepared.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
1) Attachment A, Planning Division Fee Schedule, is hereby
adopted.
THE RESOLUTION was moved for adoption by Commissioner �SritrI nrk ,
and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Wheeler _, and,
upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman, Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
Vice Chairman, Richard N. Bird Absent -
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman dye
Commissioner Gary Wheeler .. Aye
The Chairman' thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and
adopted this 23 day of October , 1990.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
aA_�-ik--, �z
Carolyn Eggert, airman
r+R
FEE SCHEDULE
Planning Division
(Effective Date October 23, 1990)
FEE CATEGORY
Rezoning
less than 5 acres
5-40 acres
over 40 up to 100 acres
over 100 acres
Land Use Plan Amendment
less than 5 acres
5 - 40 acres
over 40 up to 100 acres
over 100 acres
Combined Rezoning/Plan Amendment
FEE AMOUNT
$ 650.00
850.00
950.00
1,000.00 + 50.00 for each
add. 25 acres
$ 750.00
950.00
1,050.00
1,050.00 + 50.00 for each
add. 25 acres
less than 5 acres $950.00
5-40 acres 1,100.00
41-100 acres 11200.00
over 100 acres 1,350.00 + 50.00 for each
add. 25 acres
Amendment to Comprehensive Plan
Element Other Than Land Use $ 500.00
Amendment to Text of Land Development
Regulations $ 500.00
Site Plan Review
Minor
$ 325.00
Major
Less than 5 acres
600.00
5-10 acres
850.00
10 acres or more
1,000.00
Administrative Approvals
100.00
Major Modifications Same as
orig. fee
Appeal by Applicant
no charge
Appeal -by Affected Party
200.00
For Special Exception Request
(fees added to site plan fees)
add $200.00 less than 40 acres
add $300.00 40 - 100 acres
add $500.00 over 100 acres
+ 25.00 for each additional 25 acres
over 100 acres
Subdivision Review
Pre -Application Conference
Preliminary Plat.
10 acres or less
more than 10 acres
Final Plat
Administrative Approval
$ 150.00
450.00
550.00
425.00
100.00
! ej
� T 2 1990 59 BOOK C� FAUE �n
OCT 2 3 1990
BOOK 81 FADE 77C
Fee Schedule Effective Date October 23, 1990
FEE CATEGORY
PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS
Planned Development Rezoning/
Conceptual Plan Request -Ar
less than 20 acres
20-40 acres
over 40 acres
Planned Development
Conceptual Plan Special
Exception Request -Ar
less than 20 acres
20-40 acres
over 40 acres
Preliminary PD Plan �
FEE AMOUNT
$1,100.00
1,200.00
1,250.00 + 50.00 for each
additional 25 acres over
40 acres
$ 850.00
950.00
1,000.00 + 50.00 for each
additional 25 acres over
40 acres
less than 20 acres $ 950.00.
20-40 acres 11050.00
over 40 acres 1,100.00 + 50.00 for each
add. 25 acres over 40
acres
Concurrent P.D. Rezoning/Conceptual
Plan and Preliminary Plan Combine above applicable
Request -Ar fees and subtract $200.00
Concurrent P.D. Conceptual Special
Exception and Preliminary Combine above applicable
Plan Request -Ar fees and subtract
200.00
PD Land Development Permit
$500.00
Final PD Plan
450.00
PD Plan Minor Modification
100.00
PD Plan Major Modification
500.00
-Ar Agricultural (cluster) P.D.
Proiects using these
applications: subtract $500.00 from the normal fee.
Development of Regional Impact Review
Residential
less than 40 acres
$1,100.00
40' acres or more ..___� _�._, . _
1,100.00 + 50.00 for each
add. 25 acres over 40
acres
Commercial/Mixed Use
less than 500,000 sq. ft. of
building area
500,000 sq. ft. or more
Substantial deviation
Minor amendment
$1,300.00
1,400.00 + $100 for each
add. 50,000 sq.over
500,000 sq. ft.
same formula as original fee
$500.00
60
� � r
Fee Schedule
FEE CATEGORY
Effective Date October 23, 1990
FEE AMOUNT
Misc. Permit/and Applications
Alcoholic Beverage
~Appeal of Staff Determination $
Base Maps
CCCL Review/Letter
Commercial/Industrial &
Development Guide
Complete Zoning Atlas
Covenant Agreement
De -Minimus Variance (staff approval)
Dune Vegetation/Maintenance Permit
Fence Administrative Approval
Home Occupation
Land Clearing
Land Development Regulations:
Entire Set:
Individual Chapters
Land Use Map
Mangrove Alteration
Mining
Misc. Ordinance 10 cents
Overall Economic Development Plan
Plat Vacation
Plat Vacation Concurrent with
Final Plat (added to final plat
fee)
Pond
Release of Easement
R.O.W. Abandonment
Sign Permit
Temporary Use
Tree Removal
Variance (Board of Adjustment
approval)
Wetlands Resource Permit
Written Zoning Confirmation
Zoning Atlas Page (map)
911 Map
Concurrency Determination
* Conceptual
less than 100 AADT*
101-999 AADT
more than 1000 AADT
* Initial
less than 100 AADT
101-999 AADT
more than 1000 AADT
* Final
* Concurrency Determination Appeal
* Vested Rights Appeal
35.00
500.00
4.00
25.00
10.00
150.00
70.00
25.00
40.00
45.00
25.00
40.00
30.00
varies
3.00
50.00
100.00
per page
2.50
500.00
200.00
70.00
90.00
500.00
30.00
45.00
40.00
500.00
75.00
25.00
2.00 per page
12.50
$40.00
120.00
200.00
40.00
120.00
200.00
25.00
100.00
200.00
*AADT - Average Annual Daily Vehicle Trips
61 80CiK f',1GE I �
CT 2 a isqu-
O C T 2 3 1990
REVIEW OF ANNUAL SERVICE AGREEMENT W/INSURANCE SERVICING &
ADJUSTING COMPANY
The Board reviewed memo from Risk Manager Beth Jordan:
TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
THRU:. Jack Price, Personnel Director 94_0-�
FROM: Beth Jordan, Risk Manager
DATE: 12 October 1990
SUBJECT: Request for Agenda Consideration; Renewal of Annual
Service Agreement with Insurance Servicing & Adjusting
Company
Please consider -the attached annual agreement at the October 23,
1990, Board meeting.
Background
Following a Request for Proposals prepared by Siver Insurance
Management Consultants, the County entered into an agreement with
Insurance Servicing & Adjusting Company (ISAC) effective November
1, 1989.
Analysis
To date, the contractual relationship between ISAC and the County
. has been beneficial. As third party claims administrator, ISAC has
efficiently and fairly adjusted workers' compensation, automobile
liability and general liability claims. Communication with County
Risk Management staff has been outstanding.
The proposed renewal's terms and conditions are identical to the
previous Service Agreement with the following exceptions:
1. Workers' compensation fees will be reduced from three
percent (3%) of earned standard premium to two and one-half percent
(2.5$). Despite increased payroll, the recently amended Florida
Workers' Compensation law with its twenty-five percent (25%) rate
reduction has resulted in a projected annual -cost of $42,073.00,
an increase of only $73.00 from 1989-90.
2. General liability fees will be increased from $200.00
per claim to $210.00, for a projected annual cost of $5,250.00.
1
3. Automobile liability fees- will be increased from
$225.00 per claim to $236.00, for a projected annual cost of
$7,080.00.
Despite some increase in fees, however, we project overall annual
savings over 1989-90 projected costs due to a decrease in claims.
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Board approve and the Chairman execute the
annual Service Agreement with ISAC at an estimated annual cost of
$54,403.00, or a savings of $2,772.00 over 1989-90 costs.
M.
L_ I
E77
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) author-
ized the Chairman to execute the annual Service Agree-
ment with ISAC at an estimated annual cost of $54,403.
COPY OF SAID SERVICE AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK
TO THE BOARD.
BID FOR PETITION PAVING CONTRACTORS
Public Works Director Davis reviewed the following:
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Bids for Petition Paving Contractors
DATE: October 16, 1990
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Bids were received on Sept. 26, 1990 for construction of the
following projects:
Pro ect Engineers Construction Estimate Bids Received cost FF
Dickerson
Florida
rA bilization Included in Project $ 9,720.00
Estimate below
8th Ave -
$ 15,400.00
$ 21,948.00
2nd St to S. Relief Canal
Cost per FF = $15.27
Cost per LF = $40.00
9th Ave -
$ 22,720.00
$ 38,561.05
2nd St to S. Relief Canal
Cost per FF = $15.97
Cost Per LF = $40.00
10th Ave -
$ 35,360.00
$ 45,050.90
2nd St to S. Relief Canal
Cost per FF = $17.23
Cost per LF = $40.00
13th Ave -
$ 50,000.00
$ 60,899.10
2nd St to 4th St
Cost per FF = $16.71
Cost per LF = $40.00
134th St -
$ 99,400.00
$114,112.00
Roseland Road to
Cost per Acre - $3,986.77
St. Sebastian Catholic Church
Cost per LF = $35.00
JoBear. Martin DelConte -
Inc. Paving Contracting.
Inc.
$ 7,500.00 $ 18,000.00 $ 26,355.50
$ 21,363.35 $ 21,755.50 $ 23,110.35 $22.10 FF
$ 32,722.66 $ 33,068.70 $ 37,712.51 $73.44 FF
$ 42,863.95 $ 42,413.90 $ 46,646.97 $19.98 FF
$ 68,329.65 $ 63,540.00 $ 65,392.70 $20.68 FF
$121,468.50 $129,363.70 $158,132.46 $4,597.64\Acre
TOTAL $222,880.00 $290,291.05 $294,248.11 $308,141.80 $357,350.49-
OCT
357,350.49
®CT 2 3 1990 63
or
OCT 2 31990 BOOK
All bids exceeded the Engineering Division's estimate, which was
prepared based upon the cost of the most recent projects
completed by the Road and Bridge Division plus 25%. Since
bidding occurred during the recent mid -east conflict which
reflects uncertainty in petroleum products, bids may be high.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The Road and Bridge Division is completing the Dixie Heights
Subdivision Petition Paving Project within the next three weeks.
That project included approximately six miles of paving at a cost
of- -approximately $1,019,460 or $32.18/LF. The assessment for
past -projects before Dixie Heights were as follows:
22nd Avenue - $ 9.66/FF
33rd Avenue - $ 10.40/FF
37th Avenue - $ 10.10/FF
Florida Ridge - $1,000/lot
Dixie Heights - $1,108.11/parcel
If the low bidders are awarded contracts for the above work, the
assessments will range from $20/FF to $25/FF. The 134th,Avenue
project in Roseland is being assessed on a parcel/acre basis and,
the cost would increase from the engineers estimated cost of
$3,986.77/acre to $4,597.65/acre. An approximately 25% increase
in costs over the preliminary assessment roll cost will result if
the work is performed under contract. Since the project bids
were received substantially over our estimate the following
alternatives are presented:
Alternative # 1
Reject all bids and not award contracts since the Public
Works Department's estimates have been substantially
exceeded. The Road and Bridge Division could begin
construction by Nov. 15, 1990 on one of the subject projects
(probably 134th St) and complete all projects within 12
weeks at a cost within the engineers cost estimate.
Alternative # 2
Award the contracts to the low bidders ( 3 projects to - -
JoBear, Inc and 2 projects to Dickerson Florida, Inc).
Revise the assessment rolls and notify all property owners
that the assessments will increase substantially.
Additional public hearings will be necessary.
Alternative # 3
Award the contracts to the low bidders as in Alternative No.
2 above and the County would assume the additional cost of
approximately $52,969. No additional public hearings nor
increased assessments would be necessary.
Alternative #4
Contact the low bidders to determine if they are willing to
reduce the bids as applicable. If the projects can be
constructed within budget, staff would recommend award of
contracts. If the project costs cannot be reduced; staff -
recommends Alternative No. 1. Staff has already
communicated with one of the low bidders, Dickerson Florida,
Inc. and they have -offered to reduce the cost by eliminating
the Mobilization' Charge (approximately $1,944.00 per
project.). -
Alternative #5
Rebid the projects.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommends
and the Road and
projects.
Alternative No. 1 whereby all bids are rejected
Bridge Division be instructed to construct the
Director Davis summarized that the bids came in substantially
higher than our estimate, and our estimate was greater than 250
above previous jobs. We are finding that our crews can do the
work at a lesser cost.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously D(4-0) approved
Alternative #1, rejecting all bids and instructing the
R&B Division to construct the projects.
Commissioner Scurlock believed that possibly we should make a
decision either to expand that Division or find a better way to -
contract this work out, and Administrator Chandler agreed that we
do want to accelerate those projects.
R/W ACQUISITION 14TH STREET EAST OF U.S..#1
The Board reviewed memo from R/W Agent Don Finney:
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Director Gtr
SUBJECT: Right -of -Way Acquisition
14th Street East of U.S. 1
RE: Memo From Don Finney to James W. Davis
Dated September 7, 1990
DATE: October 8, 1990
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
For the past several years, the County Public Works Department
has been communicating with the Grace LaCava Family to secure a
road right-of-way along 14th Street east of U.S. Highway 1. The
current 14th Street roadway, which serves as access to the
Council -on -Aging, commercial and residential land uses, and a
water and sewer corridor, is, in some cases, located on private
property. In the past, Mrs. LaCava has not been receptive to
donating or selling the needed right-of-way at an agreeable cost
in staff's opinion.
Recently, Mrs. LaCava passed away, and at this time, her heirs
are willing to sell two right-of-way parcels (parcels A and C, on
the attached map) to the County for $35,000. Appraisals were
2 1:99® 65 moK 6I
�UQK PAGE 732
performed by the County on October 30, 1987 and the assigned
value was:
35' x 110' Parcel A $ 13,359.00
35' x 300' Parcel C $1001000.00
Appraised Total Value $113,359.00
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The alternatives presented include the following:
Alternative No. 1
Purchase Parcels "A" and "C" for $35,000. Funding to
be from Secondary Road Trust Fund 109. The attached
budget amendment is proposed. -
Alternative No. 2
Respond to the heirs that the County is not receptive
to purchase of the right-of-way and leave the deficient
right-of-way condition as it currently exists.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Alternative No. 1 is recommended whereby the County agrees to
purchase the 14th Street right-of-way for $35,000. The attached
budget amendment is recommended.
ON MOTION By Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-0) approved
Alternative No. 1, authorizing the purchase of the 14th
Street r/w for $35,000 and approved Budget Amendment
No. 010 as follows:
DEED IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AS OF 5/11/93
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
FROM: Joseph A. Baird
OMB Director (�k
SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENT
NUMBER: 010
DATE: October 23, 1990
SECONDARY ROAD CONSTRUCTION ' '
1 V4 "h*_nf-Wav !109-214-541-066.121$ 35,000 !S 0
SECONDARY ROAD CONSTRUCTION
66
CATHODIC PROTECTION SYSTEMS REPAIR AND INSTALLATION
The Board reviewed memo from John Lang of Utilities:
DATE:
OCTOBER 8, 1990
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILIT'� SERVICES
STAFFED AND ��
PREPARED BY: JOHN F. LANG
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: CATHODIC PROTECTION SYSTEMS REPAIR AND INSTALLATION
BACKGROUND: _
The Department of Utility Services currently owns four steel
elevated water storage tanks. These tanks have cathodic protection
systems installed in the tanks to limit corrosion. Harco
Technologies Corporation has provided the •inspection services in
fiscal years 1989 and 1990, and will do so in fiscal year 1991.
The South County tank's system needs to be replaced, as the anode
system is 75% depleted, -the cabinet needs replacing and the unit is
not of the self-adjusting type, which is necessary for fluctuating
water levels.
The River Edge ground storage
sacrificial anode type system to
constructed improvements. -
ANALYSIS:
tank requires installation of a
limit corrosion of the recently
The Department of Utility Services has two standardized brands and
sources for this type of installation. Quotes were solicited from
the two firms and the results were as follows:
Harco Technologies Corporation $8,685.00
Cathodic Protection Services Co. 9,728.00
RECOMMENDATION:
The Department of Utility Services recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners authorize the purchase of the two cathodic
protection systems from Harco Technologies Corporation from budgeted
funds in Account No. 471-219-536-044.74.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously (4-) auth-
orized the purchase of the two cathodic protection
systems from Marco Technologies Corp. as recommended
by staff.
67
90
POOK Ft1GE yq-
we`
I
OCT 2 3 1990 POR 81 F',1GE 784,
CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF WATER FACILITIES INSTALLATION TO SERVE
SUBDVS W/UNDERSIZED LOTS 8 STAFF POSITION TO COORDINATE PROJECT
The Board reviewed memo from the Assistant Director of
Utility Services, as follows:
DATE: OCTOBER 15, 1990
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRAT
FROM: TERRANCE G. PIN
DIRECTOR OF UTILIW SERVICES
PREPARED AND HARRY E. ASHE
STAFFED BY: ASSISTANT DIREC OR OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF WATER FACILITIES
INSTALLATION AND STAFF LEVEL POSITION TO COORDINATE
PROJECT
BACKGROUND:
The Comprehensive Plan requirements set forth in Objective 2 of the
Water Sub -Element require the installation of water facilities to
serve the subdivisions having undersized lots. The Department of
Utility Services has developed a phased plan to meet the
comprehensive plan requirements.
Analysis:
The Department reviewed existing water plants and the water master
plan requirements in determining the facilities that will be
required to serve the various areas. The plan as proposed will be
constructed in phases over a five (5) year period. The total
capital construction required to provide water facilities to serve
the subdivisions with undersized lots is estimated at $9,286,000, to
be funded through the assessment program. The construction of the
facilities to serve within the subdivisions will require
construction of additional facilities (trunklines/mains) outside of
the subdivisions at a projected cost of $1,254,750, which will be
funded through impact fees. A copy of the phased plan is attached.
The Department, in planning to meet this schedule, has determined
its need for a staff level position to specifically address and work
toward compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The person in this
position would coordinate the Department"s efforts to address the
requirements set forth in the Comprehensive Plan; specifically,
Objective 2 of the Water and Sewer Sub -Element. The person would
promote the installation of the water and sewer facilities to serve
the subdivisions with undersized lots through the assessment
program, interface with the public to expedite the assessment
process, and perform any other duties as required to achieve these
objectives.
As set forth above, the Construction required to serve the
subdivisions having undersized lots will be financed through the
assessment process. The Department would propose the funding for
this position be recovered through assessment projects, which the
person will be completing to comply with the Comprehensive Plan.
The qualifications required for this position would be management,
financial, marketing, public relations, communication skills, and
business development. The proposed salary range for this position
would be $35,000.00 to 45,000.00 annually.
68
RECOMMENDATION:
The Staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends approval
of the following:
1. Conceptual approval of the phased plan for the
installation of water facilities as set forth in the
attached plan and authorizing design by staff.
2. Approval of a staff position with the salary range of
$35,000.00 to $45,000.00 annually to promote and
4` coordinate assessment projects for the installation of
water and sewer facilities.
Chairman Eggert noted that her only question was regarding
the salary range for the proposed staff position, which seemed
high.
Commissioner Scurlock had the same question. He felt it was
important that we move ahead with this project, but felt the
salary range would be more in the $30/35,000 range; Chairman
Eggert suggested possibly starting at $28,000.
Administrator Chandler advised that any time a new position
is created, it goes through Personnel, and this hasn't gone that
step yet.
Director Pinto reported that Personnel is going through their
analysis right now, and he really believed that the Board will
find the range for this position will be in the area between
$35/45,000 annually.
Chairman Eggert asked why this is different than a Planner I,
for instance. She felt what is needed is someone who is
personable and patient and can explain things.
Director Pinto stressed this person will have to have some
knowledge of both the engineering and financial aspects involved.
Board members continued to indicate that they felt what is._
needed for the job is someone with basic intelligence, not
necessarily a Master's degree.
Commissioner Scurlock did not see them having to be an
engineer, but just someone %Nho can understand what an engineer
tells them, and Commissioner Wheeler felt that even a base range
of $30,000 is high.
69 BOCK P,1U, d O1
OT 2 3 1990 _
OCT 2 31990
E OOK 81 PAGE 78"C
Chairman Eggert had a question about the proposed growth
plan, which shows Paradise Park in the last stage. She assumed
the stages aren't set in cement at this time. and Director Pinto
assured her that they only want approval of the concept.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) gave
conceptual approval of the phased plan, which is
set out in the following memo dated September 11, 1990;
authorized design by staff; and approved the proposed
staff position with the thought of the ranges being
lower, and if this cannot be accomplished, bring it
back to the Board.
DATE: SEPTEMBER 11, 1990
TO: HARRY E. ASHER
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
FROM: JOHN FREDERICK LANG
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIA IST
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT: WATER MAIN EXTENSION GROWTH PLAN
The South County R.O. Plant is currently at capacity, if the maximum
output with blending is rated at 2.5 MGD. The plant expansion or
membrane addition project will bring output up to 5.5 MGD. -
This plan as envisioned will address South and Central County main
extensions. A North County Plant is not currently available and the
North Beach System is extending by petition and developers, therefore,
Phase I is assigned to South County, the area of greatest need. New
subdivisions, as per Ordinance 88-5, will install dry lines for water
mains. Existing subdivisions shall have distribution systems installed
! by petition; direction of the Environmental Control Officer, as
f authorized by the Board and by the specific provisions -in the County's
Comprehensive Plan. This plan calls for water services to subdivisions
having undersized lots; undersized as to separation capabilities of
septic drainfield(s) and potable water wellfield(s).
A figure of $2,000.00 per lot was utilized for cost estimating; this
includes an 80' 6" water main, the tap, service line, meter, meter box,
all necessary restorations and oversizing necessary to serve the
subdivision. Trunkline expansion would be paid for with impact fees
while subdivisions would.be assessed.
70
�J
L
Phase I: Subdivision Construction:
lots
-
Emerson Villas
Coachland Court Mobile Home Park
120
Franchise)
lots
ester system
Graves Annex
12 32
ts
lots
Clear View Terrace
31
lots
Pine Hill Park
28
lots
Sun Haven
Sun Villa West Addition
14
lots
Kirkwood
16
lots
Greenwood village
100
lots
Glenwood
12
lots
Indian River Heights
473
lots
209,500 GPD
838
lots
Subdivision costs:$2000 x 838 = $1,676,000
Phase I: Main Expansion would consist of the
following trunklines:
10,700' of 16" main on 27th Avenue from Oslo
Road to 8th Street
3,400' of 12" main on 8th Street from 27th
from 8th
Avenue to
Street to
43rd Avenue
State Road 60
8,000' of 12" main on 43rd Avenue
on 12th Street from 43rd
Avenue to existing 8"
1,700' of 8" main
main.
Main costs: $299,600 + $64,600 + $152,000 +
$27,200 =
$543,400
Phase II: Subdivision Construction:
Emerson Park
Bonny Vista Acres
Idlewild
Malaluka Gardens
Pinewood
152
lots
33
lots
86
lots
226
lots
26
lots
523 lots at 130,750 GPD
523 lots x $2,000 = $1,046,000
Phase II: Main Expansion would consist of the following pipelines:
13,500' of 12" main on 4th Street from 43rd Avenue to Old Dixie
400' of 10" main on 4th Street from Old Dixie to US #1
Main costs:
$256,500 + $70,000 + $7,000 = $333,500
Phase III: Main Expansion would consist of the following pipelines:
1,900' of 10" main on 5th Street SW west from 27th Avenue
500' of 8" main on 1st Street SW west from 27th Avenue
4,400' of 16" main on 27th Avenue north of 8th Street to 12th Street,
2,700' of 8" main on 1st Street from SW 27th Avenue to 20th -Avenue
400' of 8" main on 8th Street from US #1 to Old Dixie
Main costs:
$33,250 + $8,000 + $123,200 + $43,200 + $6,400 = $214,050
US #1 Proiect with DOT (12" m
900' of 8" main on 8th Street from US #1 to 6th Avenue
400' of 6" main on 9th Street from US #1 to 7th Avenue
600' of 6" main on 10th Street from US #1 to 7th Avenue
5,100' of 12" main on east US #1 from 6th Avenue to 12th Street
2,700' of 6" main on.east US #1 from 12th Street to 16th Street
1,300' of 6" main on 16th Street from US #1 to 6th Avenue
Main costs: -
$14,400 + $40200 + $6,300 + $96,900 + $28,350 + $13,650 = $163,800
71
rA
OCT z 3 1990 BOOK 81 Ft"E
La
T 2 3 199
Subdivision construction: none planned
No additional subdivisions are associated with this main expansion;
however, the services would require in excess of 25,000 GPD.
Phase IV: Subdivision Construction:
Moreland
Fresard Glendale
Hickory Sands
Reams Glen
Block Villa
Clemann Estates
Westwind
Rosedale Manor
478 lots x $2,000 = $956,000
Phase V: Subdivision Construction:
Stevens Park
Westlake Park
Tropicolony
635 x $2,000 = $1,270,000
Phase VI: Subdivision Construction:
Pinetree Park
Diana Park
66 lots
48 lots
16 lots
25 lots
12 lots
254 lots
29 lots
28 lots
478 lots at 119,500 GPD
437 lots
16 lots
182 lots
635 lots at 158,750 GPD
718 lots
3 lots
741 x $2,000 = $1,482,000 741 lots at 185,250 GPD.
Phase VII: Subdivision Construction: '
Verona Estates
Greenbrier
Paradise Park
Westgate Colony
Rivera Estates
Cherrywood Estates
Sunniland Homesites
Cherry Lane Manor
Lake Park
Kings Music Land
1,428 x $2,000 = $2,856,000.00
92
lots
60
lots
957
lots
20
lots
72
lots
15
lots
18
lots
22
lots
12
lots
160 lots
1,428 lots at 357,000 GPD
Total trunkline costs as paid from impact fees $1,254,750.
Total subdivision costs to be assessed $9,286,000.
Total expansion costs = $10,540,750 plus engineering costs.
72
RESOLUTION - RECYCLING MARKETS RESOURCE TASK FORCE
The Board reviewed memo from SWDD Manager Brooks:
DATE: OCTOBER 5, 1990
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
THRU:_ TERRANCE G. PINTO, DIRECTOR
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRIC
FROM: RONALD R. BROOKS, MANAGER
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRIC
;V�
SUBJECT: INDIAN RIVER COUNTY RESOLUTION
RECYCLING MARKETS RESOURCE TASK FORCE
BACKGROUND -
With the passage of the 1988 Solid Waste Management Act, local
governments are required to recycle 30% of their wastestream by
1994. In addition, the Federal Government is initiating legis-
lation to address and mandate recycling on a nation-wide basis.
It is well understood that one of the key factors in recycling
is to have a viable market. To that end it is extremely impor-
tant to identify and develop these markets.
PROPOSAL "
The Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners, in an effort
to initiate the identification and development of markets, has
approved a resolution encouraging the formation of a state "Re-
cycling Markets Resource Task Force." They have forwarded
copies of this resolution to all the Florida counties encourag-
ing and requesting that each county adopt a similar resolution.
District staff agrees with Pinellas County in that a task force
could be useful and beneficial in the development of Florida's
state-wide recycling program.
CONCLUSION
District staff has modified the Pinellas County Resolution for
Indian River County. Staff encourages the Board of County Com-
missioners to approve the resolution and execute same.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously (4-0) adopted
Resolution 90-166 urging the Governor and Legislature
to estat,lish a recycling markets resource task force.
OCT 19907 3 BOOK
I
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
RESOLUTION NO. 90-166
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF IN- -
DIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, URGING THE GOVERNOR AND.LEG-
ISLATIVE LEADERSHIP IN FLORIDA TO ESTABLISH A RECYCLING
MARKETS RESOURCE TASK FORCE.
WHEREAS, Indian River County generates approximately 155,000
tons of solid waste a year; and
WHEREAS, recycling is a valuable tool in prolonging the life of
our natural resources and in providing more efficient use of ex-
isting resources; and
WHEREAS, recycling is a method to prolong the life of land fills
throughout the state and country; and
WHEREAS, in 1988, the Florida State legislature mandated through
the Solid Waste Act that all counties recycle 30 percent of
their solid waste by 1994; and
WHEREAS, there is a growing momentum on the federal level to
legislate increased recycling; and
WHEREAS, recycling will only work if markets exist for recycla-
ble products.,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT:
The Governor and Legislative leadership in Florida are encour-
aged to establish a Recycling Markets Resource Task Force, whose
purpose shall be to determine what actions, if any, are needed
to facilitate the development and expansion of markets for re-
covered materials in the state of Florida.
This Task Force should include representation from the paper,
glass, aluminum, plastic, ferrous and non-ferrous metals indus-
tries and trade associations which are active in recycling.
Said Task Force should also include elected representatives of
county and municipal government.
The foregoing Resolution was offered by Commissioner Scurlock
who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner
Wheeler and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was
as follows:
Chairman, Carolyn Eggert Aye
Vice Chairman, Dick Bird Absent
,Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Doug Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and
adopted this 23 day of October, 1990.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Caroly Eggert
ChairmKn
74
Commissioner Scurlock asked if we have any idea of the total
number of indigents buried there in the last few years.
Attorney Collins felt Welfare Director Johnson might now, but
noted that we have been contracting with funeral homes because
they have run out of room.
Commissioner Scurlock expressed his opposition to this
proposal and stated that he cannot in good conscience support 15
acres of county land for a private church He has had some real
questions about this for a long time; although, he knew that
former Commissioner Wodtke supported this and he believed that
Commissioner Bird does also.
Attorney Collins advised that the indigent burials cost the
county about $800 apiece. He believed the original charter of
the church stated that they would bury members of pioneer
families or indigents.
Commissioner Wheeler noted that he would like to see it a
little broader than that if the county .is to supply the land.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that, in fairness, we should
postpone this discussion until Commissioner Bird is here to argue
this as he has been very supportive of it, and Attorney Vitunac
suggested we postpone this until both the lawyer for the
corporation and Commissioner Bird are present.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, the Board unanimously (4-0) agreed
,to' t -able: fu Ather discussion on the above matter for
two weeks.
DOCUMENTS TO BE MADE PART OF THE RECORD
Extension of Lease for space in Washington Plaza, Sebastian,
for the Sheriff has been received and put on file in the Office
of Clerk to the Board as approved at the Regular Meeting of
October 16, 1990.
77
BOOK 81 F,tir,E0,JS'
OCT 2 3 1990
NOOK 81 PAGE 70,
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 12 o'clock Noon.
ATTEST:
Clerk
78
•na r
_I
WINTER BEACH CEMETERY MOBART PARK CONVERSION PROPOSAL
Asst. County Attorney Collins reviewed the following:
TO: James E. Chandler - County Administrator
FR0M:t,Pir,,W1ll'iam G. Collins II - Assistant County Attorney
DATE: October 12, 1990
SUBJECT: Winter Beach Cemetery/Hobart Park Conversion
Proposal
The Winter Beach Cemetery is operated by a nonprofit
corporation at 73rd Street In the vicinity of 44th Avenue.
The cemetery association was set up to provide an
organization to maintain and provide burial services to
pioneer families and indigents. Over the years it has
performed that function and at the same time saved the
County considerable expense in indigent burials. Several
years ago the Board of Directors of the cemetery association
asked the Board of County Commissioners for permission to
expand the cemetery.westward Into an area which is a part of
Hobart Park. A portion of Hobart Park was purchased with
federal funds, and as a condition of obtaining those federal
funds, the whole park was placed under a recreational deed
restriction. The National Park Service of the federal
government will not allow a conversion of the park land from
a recreational use to some other use unless the recreational
estate in the County is maintained by substituting some
other land of equivalent utility, location and value for the
land which would be turned over to the Winter Beach Cemetery
group. _
In the late spring of 1988, the Board of County
Commissioners directed then County Administrator Balczun to
process the necessary applications to convert a 19# -acre
portion of the park property to cemetery use, substituting
an approximately 40± -acre parcel off Old Dixie and First
Street, which was used as an old landfill, as a new park
site. The Board further authorized the necessary appraisals
which were required by the National Park Service. Mr.
Balczun was terminated two to three months thereafter and 1
saw that the necessary environmental assessments, appraisals
and surveys were put together and submitted to the State
Department of Natural Resources for approval.
Last month the County was contacted by the Department of
Natural Resources and a representative of DNR and the
National Park Service visited each of the two sites (Winter
Beach and Old Dixie/First Street). Both DNR and the
National Park Service found the Old Dixie/First Street site
to be equivalent to the Winter Beach parcel in both location
and utility. The reasons for these conclusions are
essentially that the South County area is less favored by
park lands than the North County area and has a greater
population which needs park services. Therefore the state
and federal government have concluded that the proposed site
is of at least equal utility. The location is equal because
of its proximity to greater population centers. However,
the National Park Service appraisers and DNR appraisers
objected that the proposed park site to be substituted at
Old Dixie/First Street was not the equivalent In value to
the Winter Beach site. This, even though our appraisals
75 BOOK �%� piGE 01
T 223 1990 _
BOOK 81 P,qG[ 7,(---,,2
showed It to be of equivalent value. The state and federal
appraisers' main objection is that our local appraiser did
not adequately account for the fact that the County has
leased several radio towers at the Old Dixie/First Street
site for long terms (20 years).
The County was informed that the conversion proposal could
not go forward unless additional proposed park sites were
added in order to bring the value of the proposed sites to
the equivalent value of the Winter Beach land which would.be
lost from the recreational estate.
-i relayed all the above information recently to Gene
Rodenberry who is representing the Winter Beach Cemetery
group in this matter. Mr. Rodenberry wisely suggested that
rather than have the County go to the additional effort of
locating another proposed park site and go to the expense of
additional environmental assessments, surveys, and
appraisals on any new proposed site,- that the County simply
reduce the amount of acreage to be made available to Winter
Beach Cemetary to the point where the value of the property
turned over to the cemetery becomes equivalent to the
appraised value of the Old Dixie/First Street site as
determined by state and federal appraisers. By rough
proportions, this would mean reducing the portion of Hobart
Park to be turned over to the Winter Beach Cemetery group
from approximately 19 to approximately 15 acres.
I spoke yesterday afternoon with the conversion coordinator
at the Department of Natural Resources. He felt that this
would be an acceptable means of resolving the problem. He
did caution that any parcel to be left in the park must be
contiguous to the existing park. This should not present
any problem. He also Indicated -that the appraisals would
have to be revised to reflect the proper value of the Old
Dixie/First Street site taking into full account the
long-term antenna leases, and to reflect that the roughly 15
acres left for Winter Beach Cemetery would yield an
equivalent value to the Old Dixie/First Street site.
RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend that you place this matter before the Board,
both for update and to get the necessary authorization to
revise the appraisals as necessary to accomplish the end
resolution of this matter. We will then need to submit a
sketch of the proposed parcel to be turned over to Winter
Beach Cemetery along with the short narrative explaining the
approach and how the appraisals will be revised. DNR will
then attempt to get the National Park -Service's seal of
approval on this approach. Once we hear officially that
this is an acceptable means to resolve the matter, we can go
forward with the necessary appraisal revisions and a final
survey of the reduced Winter Beach Cemetery expansion site.
Attorney Collins explained that today staff is requesting the
funds necessary to update and revise the appraisals. He believed
the original authorization was $5,000 each; the updates probably
would be in the range of $1200/1500 each; and the final survey
can be done in-house with staff.
76
0
_I