HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/4/1991BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 1991
9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
1840 25TH STREET
VERO BEACH, FLORIDA
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Richard N. Bird, Chairman
Gary C. Wheeler, Vice Chairman
Margaret C. Bowman
Carolyn K. Eggert
Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
James E. Chandler, County Administrator
Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
9:00 A.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. INVOCATION -
3. PLEDGEE OF ALLEGIANCE - Comm. Richard N. Bird
4. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
a. Admin. Chandler requested following addns. to today's agenda:
1) Scheduling of workshop on recycl
ing.
Zedq.aofg•Crgstg�d
lEr..for Fu
b. tonmr Combined meeting
req•dan NACUitr.egaainVoer R gst.rgr. Tcks-
c. Commrr.EEt�ggeert r .1)ItemE on Consent Agenda,auth.for ltr.in support of
5I.RAit CLM1 I NrDe otgENTATIONS (cont 'd -see below)
None
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
None. .
7. CONSENT AGENDA
A. State Revenue Sharing Application for FY 1991-1992
(memorandum dated May 28, 1991)
B. Tax Free Exchange of Property
(memorandum dated May 23, 1991)
C. Request to Authorize Staff to Draw upon a Letter of
Credit for Dan Walton, Inc. (Treas. Coast Nissan)
(memorandum dated May 24, 1991)
D. Minor Amendment to Computer Programming Consultant
Contract
(memorandum dated May 28, 1991)
8. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AND
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
None
c. 2)Item 13,D,1, HRS Interim Planning Group.
LJUN 4W1
P0fl
i"
4
9:05 a.m. 9. PUBLIC ITEMS
A. . PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS
None
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None
10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS
None
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
None
B. EMERGENCY SERVICES
None
C. GENERAL SERVICES
Interior Design Contract - IRC Courthouse Project
(memorandum dated May 24, 1991)
D. LEISURE SERVICES
None
E. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
None
F. PERSONNEL
None
G. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Request from Vero Lake Estates Property Owners
Assoc. for Increase of Vero Lake Estates MSTU
Assessment to $50 per year
(memorandum dated May 28, 1991)
2. Final Payment for Professional Services
Treas. Shores Park
(memorandum dated May 24, 1991)
3. Petition to Pave 62nd Ave. So. of CR510 in Wabasso
(memorandum dated May 28, 1991)
H. UTILITIES
1. Update of Utilities Water & Wastewater Master
Plans
(memorandum dated May 21, 1991)
2. Final Assessment Roll for East US #1, North of
12th Street - Sewer
(memorandum dated May 21, 1991)
BOOK J F1uc 407
TUM 4 1991
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS (continued):
H. UTILITIES (continued):
3. Final Pay Request for the Sewer Force Main
Installation on the West Side of U.S. #1 between
10th and 4th Streets
(memorandum dated May 21, 1991)
4. Owner/Engineer Contract for Engineering Services
for the Study, Design, Permitting, Construction,
Administration, and Inspection of a Central
Region Alternate Effluent Disposal and Trans-
mission System
(memorandum dated May 1, 1991)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY
Addendum to Lease between the City of Vero Beach and South
Indian River County Fire District
(memorandum dated May 22, 1991)
13. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS
A. CHAIRMAN RICHARD N. BIRD
B. VICE CHAIRMAN GARY C. WHEELER
C. COMMISSIONER MARGARET C. BOWMAN
D. COMMISSIONER CAROLYN K. EGGERT
E. COMMISSIONER DON C. SCURLOCK, JR.
14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS
A. NORTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
None
B. SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
None
C. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
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.
41991
Poore
0C)
Tuesday, June 4, 1991
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, June 4, 1991 at
9:00 a.m. Present were Richard N. Bird, Chairman; Gary C. Wheeler,
Vice Chairman; Carolyn K. Eggert, Margaret C. Bowman and Don C.
Scurlock, Jr. Also present were James E. Chandler, County
Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; and Virginia
Hargreaves and Patricia Held, Deputy Clerks.
The Chairman called the meeting to order and led the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Administrator Chandler requested the following additions to
today's Agenda:
1) The scheduling of a workshop on -recycling.
2) A combined meeting of the North and South County Fire
Districts regarding Equipment for Fire Trucks,
Commissioner Wheeler requested the addition of a NACo letter
regarding Voter Registration Program.
Commissioner Eggert requested the following additions:
1) As Item E on the Consent Agenda, authorization for a
letter in support of Indian River Arts Council grant request.
2) As Item 13,D,1, HRS Interim Planning Group.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously added the
above items to today's Agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. State Revenue Sharing Application for FY 1991-1992
The Board reviewed memo from Finance Director Richard Watkins
dated May 28, 1991:
JUN 4 1991
Poor 83 w E 4 o
r �
BOOK ,0 PED[
JUN .4 199i
TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners
DATE: May 28, 1991
SUBJECT: State Revenue Sharing Application For Fiscal
Year 1991-92
FROM: Richard E. Watkins, Finance Director
The attached State Revenue Sharing Application for Fiscal Year
1991-92 needs the signature of the Chairman of the Board of
County Commissioners.
Recommend the Board of County Commissioners approve the
submission of this application to the State Department of
Revenue.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved
the State Revenue Sharing Application for Fiscal
Year 1991-1992, and authorized submission to the
State Department of Revenue, as recommended by
staff.
B. Tax Free Exchange of Property
The Board reviewed memo from Assistant County Attorney Terry
O'Brien dated May 23, 1991:
TO: Board of County Commissioners-�,J
FROM: Terrence P. O'Brien - Assistant County Attorney=-/ i-,r�/er
DATE: May 23, 1991
RE: TAX FREE EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY
Under the Courthouse Land Acquisition Program we have acquired
property from William C. Harshbarger. As part of the contract for
sale we agreed to participate in a tax free exchange, commonly
referred to as a 1031 exchange (this refers to section 1031 of the
Internal Revenue Code) . This is not necessary to effect a tax
deferral because the property was sold under threat of condemnation
and, therefore, subject to Section 1033, Internal Revenue Code,
which allows a tax deferral much like the residential roll-over rule.
Nonetheless, the County agreed to participate and Mr. Harshbarger
has pursued this course of action rather than the more flexible
approach of -1033. Therefore, it is requested that the Chairman be
authorized to execute the attached Contract for Sale and Purchase.
Title will not vest in the County, the County is a mere conduit and
has no liability whatsoever in this matter.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved
the Contract for Sale and Purchase with Addendum for
this exchange of property, and authorized the
Chairman's signature, as recommended by staff.
2
COPY OF CONTRACT AND ADDENDUM ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD
C. Authorization to Draw upon Letter of Credit for Dan Walton,
Inc. (Treasure Coast Nissan)
The Board reviewed memo from Current Development Staff Planner
Christopher Rison dated May 24, 1991:
TO: James E. Chandler
County Administrator
DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE:
1
ober M. K sting
Community Develo
THROUGH: Stan Boling;CP
Planning Director
FROM:
Staff Planner, Current Development
, AIC
ent irector
Christopher D. Rison
DATE: May 24, 1991
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO DRAW UPON A LETTER OF
CREDIT FOR DAN WALTON, INC. (TREASURE COAST NISSAN)
SP -MA -85-10-105
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular
meeting of June 4, 1991.
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS:
On July 24, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted site
plan approval for Dan Walton (Treasure Coast Nissan) to construct
an automobile retail facility located at 956 South U.S. #1. The
project was subsequently constructed and has been in operation for
several years. A condition of site plan approval required that
funds for construction of a 4' wide sidewalk along the project's
U.S. #1 frontage be escrowed in a manner suitable to the County.
The applicant submitted a Letter of Credit for $2,347.00 to satisfy
this condition. The applicant has continued to maintain a
satisfactory Letter of Credit over the years. However, the
existing letter of credit is due to expire on June 16, 1991, and no
renewed letter of credit has yet been submitted.
ANALYSIS:
Via a letter dated April 30, 1991, the county planning staff
notified the applicant that the current Letter of Credit was due to
expire on June 16th and must be renewed, or a sidewalk must be
constructed. (Please see Attachment #2). As of this time, staff
has not received a renewed Letter of Credit or other suitable
security,and the sidewalk remains unconstructed. Because neither
a renewed Letter of Credit nor an alternate security .method.has
been submitted to the County and no sidewalk has been constructed,
staff requests that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the
staff to draw upon the Letter of Credit, prior to the actual
expiration date, to assure that construction of the project's
required sidewalk is funded by the applicant.
3
JUN 4 1991
BOOKPACE 5013 `�
BOOK 83 PAGE cb02
MO 41931
Unlike contracts for construction of required improvements for
subdivisions (eg. Copeland's Landing Subdivision), no formal
resolution is required of the Board to draw upon the subject letter
of credit. The Board needs only to approve a motion authorizing
staff to draw upon the existing letter of credit. Staff will draw
upon the existing letter of credit if no renewed letter of credit
is provided prior to the June 16th expiration date.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
staff to draw upon the Sun Bank Letter of Credit on the County's
behalf.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously
authorized staff to draw upon the Sun Bank Letter of
Credit on the County's behalf.
D. Minor Amendment to Computer Programming Consultant
The Board reviewed memo from Community Development Director
Bob Keating dated May 28, 1991:
TO: James Chandler
County Administrator
FROM: Robert M. Keating, AICP &I K'
Community Development Director
DATE: May 28, 1991
SUBJECT: MINOR AMENDMENT TO COMPUTER PROGRAMMING
CONSULTANT CONTRACT
It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal
consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at their regular -
meeting of June 4, 1991.
-DESCRIPTION & CONDITIONS:
On March 27, 1990, the board of county commissioners entered into
a contract with Tindale -Oliver & Associates, Inc. to develop an
automated development review/concurrency management system. The
total contract cost with amendments is $68,500.
While the consultants have substantially completed their contracted
work activities and the system is currently functioning, there are
several additional minor activities which need to be done by the
consultant and involve amending the contract. These activities
consist of. making minor changes to the county traffic model to
facilitate its use with the concurrency system and making minor
changes to the development review software to reflect modifications
necessary to accommodate system inefficiencies. A copy of the
proposed amendment is attached to this item.
4
ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS:
The proposed amendment to the contract involves activities which
are necessary to use the development review system to its full
capability. With respect to the traffic model changes, these will
not only affect the concurrency component of the automated
development review system, but will also facilitate use of the
model to assess county build -out conditions - an assessment
requested •by the board. As to the development review software
modifications, these are changes necessitated by conditions not
anticipated during system design. These involve screen and file
changes to enhance system performance and consequently allow staff'
to better serve customers.
As indicated in the attached amendment, the total cost of the
proposed activities is $1,440. Sufficient funds to accommodate
this cost are available in the Other Contractual Services line. item
of the county planning (004-205) budget....
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the board of county commissioners approve the
proposed amendment to the Indian River County/Tindale-Oliver &
Associates, Inc. computer programming services contract and
authorize the chairman to execute the amendment.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved
Amendment No. 3 to the contract with Tindale -Oliver
& Associates, Inc. for computer programming services
and authorized the Chairman to execute the
amendment, as recommended by staff.
AMENDMENT NO. 3 IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD
E. Letter Supporting Indian River Arts Council Grant Request from
Florida Arts Council
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously
authorized the Chairman to write a letter in support
of Indian River Arts Council's grant request of the
Florida Department of Cultural Affairs, as follows:
5
JUN 41991
it)
P
E�OOK 3 PAGE 3
Telephone: (407) 567-8000
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida. 32960
Dr. Cecily Delafield, Chairman
Indian River Arts Council
P.O. Box 3748
Vero Beach, Florida 32964
Dear Dr. Delafield:
BOOK 83 PAU:504
Suncom Telephone: 2244011
June 4, 1991
This letter is written in support of your grant request
to the Florida Arts Council.
The Board of County -.Commissioners, by
No.90-48, affirmed the Indian River Arts Council's
its designated Local Arts Agency.
The Indian River Arts Council and its support
cultural institutions and activities are needed
River County and its residents. The concerts,
art and humanities offerings, theatre presenta
other activities you support are looked upon
community as essential to the enrichment and educa
all. In addition, you have brought recreation and
through many of your offerings.
The economic health of the County improves
influx of tourists to our cultural activities and
support given by our residents.
Resolution
status as
of local
by Indian
festivals,
tions and
by this
tion of us
fun to us
with the
with. the
I hope the State of Florida and the Department of
Cultural Affairs will approve the grant you have requested.
Sincerely,
Richard N. Bird
Chairman
WORKSHOP ON RECYCLING ALTERNATIVES
Administrator Chandler explained we are following up on our
recycling program and in the process are developing three or four
alternatives for consideration. Each of the alternatives does have
implications and is of sufficient magnitude and depth to require a
workshop in advance of budget.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously approved
a workshop for recycling alternatives to be
scheduled for Wednesday, July 3, 1991 at 9:00
o'clock A. M.
INTERIOR DESIGN CONTRACT - IRC COURTHOUSE PROJECT
The Board reviewed memo from General Services Director Sonny
Dean dated May 24, 1991:
6
DATE: MAY 24, 1991
TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: JAMES E. CHANDLER -
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRECTOR`OV
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
SUBJECT: INTERIOR DESIGN CONTRACT
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE PROJECT
BACKGROUND:
On Wednesday, May 22, 1991, staff along with Gary Glenewinkel of
Centex Rooney, and Commissioner Wheeler met with Mrs. Beverly Lloyd
Lee of the American Society of Interior Designers. The purpose of
this meeting was to discuss the possibility of Mrs. Lee doing the
interior design for the subject project at no cost to the county
other than actual expenses incurred by her.
ANALYSIS:
The concept of these volunteer services is a good idea and would
allow community input to a project as well as cost savings to the
county. Mrs. Lee was very knowledgeable of the interior design
discipline as it relates to buildings other than public assembly
type. Since most all of her work had been done in the state of
Colorado, she was not very familiar with the Southern Building Code
and had no experience in courthouse interior design.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Based on the meeting and concerns staff has about accountability,
cost control, scheduling, insurance and the number of volunteer
personnel available to work on this size and type project, it is
recommended that the architectural firm of Pierce, Goodwin, Alexander
and Linville be awarded the contract for interior design services as
originally proposed at a price of $50,000.00.
The above recommendation in no way is intended to reflect on Mrs.
Lee, the ASID, or the volunteer concept in a negative aspect. A
project that is not so complicated and sensitive to scheduling would
be ideal to try this concept on.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously awarded
the contract for interior design services on the
Indian River County Courthouse project to the firm
of Pierce, Goodwin, Alexander and Linville at a price
of $50,000.00.
ADDENDUM NUMBER ONE TO CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES IS
ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD
7
JON 4 12 9
EOOK 83 FADE 5U5
BOOK 83 F'A�c 50r;
JUN 41991
REQUEST FROM VERO LAKE ESTATES PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR
INCREASE OF VERO LAKE ESTATES MSTU ASSESSMENT TO $50 PER YEAR
The Board reviewed memo from Public Works Director James Davis
dated May 28, 1991:
TO:. James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
r.•
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E., �,�
Public Works Director.!).
SUBJECT: Request from Vero Lake Estates Property Owners
Association for an Increase of the Vero Lake
Estates MSTU Assessment to $50 per year
REF. LETTER: Stanley Fronczek, VLEPOA President to
Jim Davis dated 5-20-91
DATE: .May 28, 1991 FILE: vle.agn
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The President of the Property Owners Association at Vero
Lakes Estates Subdivision has requested permission to appear
before the Board during the regularly scheduled June 4, 1991
meeting to present a proposal to increase the Vero Lake
Estates MSTU per parcel assessment from $15 per year to $50
per year, effective for the two year period Oct. 1, 1991
through Sept. 30, 1993. The purpose of this increase for a
two year period is to generate funds (approximately
$400,000) for the paving of the following roadways:
•
91st Ave. - 87th St. to 77th St.(1.0 mile)
79th St. - 91st Ave. to 101st Ave.(1.25 mile)
101st Ave. - 79th St. to 87th St. (1.0 mile)
With the addition of the above paved roads in the
subdivision, a paved loop roadway network would exist to
benefit the entire subdivision.
8
TO FEL LSMERE i FELLSMERE '
RD
et�►
A of
VERO LAKE
ESTATES
•
79611
177 w
Director Davis reported attending several meetings of the Vero
Lake Estates Property Owners' Association at which there had been
quite a bit of discussion on this subject. The purpose is to
generate a loop road system and accelerate the paving in Vero Lake
Estates. He had read in the paper that a petition in favor of
increasing the MSTU assessment had been signed by 80 of the
approximately 300 residents in the subdivision, representing about
25% of theproperty owners out there. Mr. Davis had not received
a copy of this petition but had read about it in the paper. A
second petition, against raising the MSTU assessment, and
containing 85 names was just handed to him, so there appears to be
divided interest in raising the assessment.
Commissioner Scurlock felt that a public hearing is needed
since there is this division, and Commissioner Bowman recommended
it should be in the evening at the Sebastian school.
Chairman Bird asked if additional staffing is needed to
prepare for this project and Director Davis responded that it is
not a complex project, simply a matter of generic costs per foot
for road paving. The residents seem to be interested in paving a
little more than two miles of roads.
9
JO 4 T91
PNQK 83 FAL,E 507
JUN 4 1991
BOOK . FA 508
3E
Commissioner Bowman asked for the figures on the MSTU and
Director Davis reported the MSTU was implemented in 1983 or '84 and
raised approximately $60,000 a year. The drainage study and aerial
photogrammetry and some soil testing, which had to be done, cost
about $90,000. We have paved about a mile and a quarter of 87th
Street which was about $130,000, and currently there is about
$100,000 in the fund for paving 101st Avenue from CR512 to 87th
Street.
Commissioner Bowman commented that this $15.00 per year
assessment does not seem to be paying for the costs of paving.
Commissioner Scurlock commented that while some residents who
have called him have expressed a desire for the current lifestyle
they have out in Vero Lake Estates, saying that is why they moved
out there and they are happy, there have been just as many calls
from residents who have the opposite view. We must also take into
consideration the fact that Vero Lake Estates is potentially a
dynamic area. It is an affordable housing area and the streets
need to be paved and drainage needs to be addressed. We cannot
make a decision based on comments from a few residents. Another
point is that there is an owner who owns a whole bunch of lots and
would be significantly affected by an increase in the assessment.
Commissioner Wheeler questioned whether this is the proper
forum for public input and would prefer to hear both sides.
County Administrator Chandler agreed.
The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard in this
matter.
John Coppola, Vice President of the Vero Lake Estates Property
Owners' Association, stated that his understanding is that the
association is incorporated and represents the property owners,
officers are elected and the association conducts meetings. The
treasurer reported 75 paid memberships currently.
Chairman Bird felt there seems to be enough interest and
question to call for a public hearing or workshop before the
budget.
Mr. Coppola understood the budget meeting is scheduled in July
when he will be out of town, which is why he is here today.
Chairman Bird suggested Mr. Coppola make his presentation.
Mr. Coppola related there are 300 homes, 5,208 lots, 4,022
acreage parcels and the assessments are on 3,066 tracts.
Director Davis advised that some more lots are in Pine Lake
Estates for a total of more than 5,000 platted lots, but some have
unity of title with one home on two lots. Some are five acre
10
tracts, one acre tracts; the eastern end has larger lots and the
western parts has smaller lots, 70 by 120, quarter acre lots.
Commissioner Wheeler brought up the point of how the
properties are assessed, by foot or what, and that some will
receive more benefit than others, and John Coppola explained that
people under an acre are paying $15.00 per parcel and over an acre
it is $60.00. There was further discussion about who is paying how
much.
John Coppola stated the residents want to increase the
assessment from $15.00 to $50.00 per parcel acre. They want the
increase to take place during the County fiscal years of 10-1-91
through 9-30-92 and 10-1-92 through 9-30-93 and revert back to
$15.00 on 10-1-93.
Mr. Coppola recounted the history of the ordinance and
demonstrated, with the aid of the enlarged map, the current parcel
acres in Vero Lake Estates and estimated, after penalties and
discounts, the MSTU brings in $58,000 per year. By paving these
roads in Vero Lake Estates everyone will be approximately one-half
mile from a paved road so for all those people who want the country
setting and do not want paved roads, they still can have a rural
setting. The paved roads will serve as main feeder roads for
residents and emergency services.
Mr. Coppola stated a County official explained at an
association meeting in April that after 101st Avenue is paved all
other roads would be done by petition paving and the MSTU money
should be used for the drainage that is being implemented now.
However, the members felt that is not what the MSTU is set up for
so somebody made a motion to increase the MSTU. It was passed and
the association members decided $50.00 would be a good fee so
notice was sent to the membership about a meeting to approve this
plan. At the meeting there was a positive outcome; there was only
one negative vote, but that was understandable. Mr. Coppola said
the residents wanted these improvements because of all the
construction going on in the subdivision and they feel, with the
high school, there will be an influx of people and traffic, which
will result in road deterioration. Some of the residents feel that
by paving the roads they will save wear and tear on their vehicles
and, of course, the paved roads will not have to be graded by the
County. The association members felt they did not want the $2.00
per front footage cost because $189,000 should make enough money to
pave the roads.
Commissioner Scurlock asked what percentage the County will
pay, and Director Davis explained the formula.
11
30 4 1991
BOOK 83 PA E 509
N 4X991
BOOK F'AGE 610
Mr. Coppola continued that in April he met with Mr. Davis and
at that time there was $235,208 in the MSTU budget. After the
paving of 101st Avenue there would be a balance of $90,000 in the
MSTU budget, and this current year we will collect another $58,000
for a total of $148,000 in the budget. After two years of
collecting the increased assessment, there would be $526,000 to
pave these three roads, and there would be money left for drainage
and implementing the clean water act.
Commissioner Eggert asked about the purpose of MSTU; it was
her understanding it was not just paving but rather paving and
drainage studies, and felt there is a continued need to spend time
and money on drainage as further paving is done.
Director Davis confirmed that has been staff's position.
Staff feels that the major emphasis of the MSTU concept was to
solve drainage problems, have a master drainage study project, and
begin to implement local improvement programs to solve some of the
drainage problems. After the project began, a spinoff of it was
some road paving but we still feel that the major emphasis should
be drainage -related and not paving -related.
Mr. Coppola handed out maps showing the paved roads and the
drainage system as well as the proposed road paving.
Director Davis asked the Board to keep in mind that there will
be some additional costs to complete the drainage study.
Director Davis explained, in our comprehensive land use plan,
we recommended the implementation of the stormwater utilities
throughout the County, not just Vero Lake Estates. If the
stormwater utility is implemented, it would provide for drainage
maintenance and operation and some element of capital improvements
in this subdivision. Then the MSTU either could be dissolved or it
could carry on and supplement the utility. In Florida there are
stormwater utilities being implemented and the monthly fee is
averaging about three dollars a month for stormwater utility.
Mr. Coppola summed up his presentation and explained they made
one mistake with the wording of the petition. They had a bunch of
signatures on the first petition, but had to destroy it, and
because people are on vacation now they have only 80 signatures.
Chairman Bird thanked him for the presentation and
complimented the association on their work and leadership.
Fred Markovitz, 8215 95th Avenue, spoke in opposition. He has
been a resident of Vero Lake Estates for 12 years and said the
association represents a very small portion of residents. He had
obtained a petition with 85 residents' signatures in just the last
four days and felt he could get many more signatures with more
time. He liked Mr. Scurlock's suggestion of a public meeting.
12
Commissioner Scurlock thought Mr. Coppola's program is an
excellent one and is a good starting point. However, we need more
input from the public. He also felt that Vero Lake Estates is a
unique area which the County has left on the back burner,
unattended, and believes the County might have a responsibility
above and beyond the main feeder roads in this community.
Commissioner Wheeler took exception because he said it is not
unlike Sebastian Highlands, Vero Beach Highlands and the other
General Development communities. It is a subdivision and, other
than living there or visiting a resident, there is no reason to go
in there.
Truman Patterson, 8856 101st Avenue, spoke in opposition. He
said he moved out to Vero Lake Estates 11 years ago to get away
from all the traffic. At that time there were eight houses on 87th
Street and no houses on 101st Avenue, and all dirt roads. He felt
if a resident wants his road paved, he should not ask everyone to
pay for it. He did not believe the proposed high school will bring
that much more traffic, just as the middle junior school did not.
He felt when people move to Vero Lake Estates they know they have
unpaved roads, bad drainage, low property and they still build
there. Mr. Patterson urged the Commission to hold a workshop so
that all the people from Vero Lake Estates can be heard.
Chairman Bird recognized John Bradley in the audience but Mr.
Bradley was willing to wait to speak at the public meeting.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously agreed to
hold a public meeting to discuss the increase of
Vero Lake Estates MSTU assessment on Tuesday, July
16 at 7:00 o'clock p.m. at the North County Public
Library.
FINAL PAYMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - TREASURE SHORES PARK AND
WORK ORDER #1
The Board reviewed memo from Capital Projects Manager Terry
Thompson dated May 24, 1991:
13
DUH 41991
BOOK 83 FREE 511
JO 4 199
FA el,
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. C
Public Works Director c
FROM: Terry B. Thompson, P.E.
Capital Projects Manager
SUBJECT: Final Payment for
Professional Services
Treasure Shores Park - Work Order No. 1
DATE: May 24, 1991
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
On August 14, 1990 the County entered into Work Order No. 1
with Brad Smith Associates, Inc. for professional services
to revise the Land Management Plan and FRDAP Grant for
Treasure Shores Park.
This project is now complete. Brad Smith Associates is
requesting final payment including retainage in the amount
of $3,564.07.
Work Order No. 1 called for the Consultant to be paid on an
hourly rate basis for -the actual cost of services rendered.
Attached is a change order to adjust the current contract
amount of $13,602.50 to a new contract amount of $13,590.75
which reflects the actual cost of services rendered.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Staff recommend that the Board authorize the Chairman to
sign the attached Work Order No. 1.
It is also recommended that the final payment including the
10o retainage be released. Funding is from account
001-210-572-033.13.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
authorized the Chairman to execute Work Order #1 and
release final payment for Treasure Shores Park, as
recommended by staff.
SAID DOCUMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD
PETITION TO PAVE 62ND AVENUE SOUTH OF CR510 IN WABASSO
The Board reviewed memo from Public Works Director James Davis
dated May 28, 1991:
14
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
FROM: James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Petition to Pave 62nd Avenue South of
CR510 in Wabasso
DATE: May 28, 1991 FILE: 62apet.agn
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
During the County Commission meeting of. June 5, 1990, the
Board approved the construction of an unpaved roadway along
62nd Avenue in Wabasso at a total estimated cost of $20,000.
To fund the cost, an assessment would apply to approximately
12 lots along the west of the road and undeveloped acreage
to the east. The cost per lot would be approximately $833.
Recently; the property owners have expressed a willingness
to fund a paved road special assessment project. Meetings
have been held with the property owners to discuss this
possibility.
A petition has been circulated and owners of 62% of the land
fronting the road have signed requesting the road be paved.
Since many of the property owners currently access their
property through private lands to the west, there is a
critical need to provide the residents of 62nd Avenue an
unpaved roadway prior to approval of special assessment
paving.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
The following alternatives are presented:
Alternative No. 1 •
Authorize the Public Works Department Road and Bridge
Division to clear the 62nd Avenue right-of-way and
construct an unpaved road this summer prior to Public
Hearings for Petition Paving. The cost for this work
will be recorded and included in the future assessment
as applicable.
Alternative No. 2
Commence work next year when the Public Hearing is
scheduled to construct 62nd Avenue.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Alternative No. 1 is recommended whereby the Road and Bridge
Division is authorized to proceed this summer with
construction of an unpaved road along 62nd Avenue.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously
authorized Road and Bridge to clear the 62nd Avenue
right-of-way and construct an unpaved road this
summer prior to Public Hearings for Petition Paving.
UPDATE OF UTILITIES WATER AND WASTEWATER AND REUSE MASTER PLANS
The Board reviewed memo from Capital Projects Engineer William
McCain dated May 21, 1991:
15
TLI N 41991
I.3
boc 83 FatE
JUN 4
BOOK FA[ e)14
-DATE:
TO:
FROM:
MAY 21, 1991
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
TERRANCE G. PINT
DIRECTOR OF UTI SERVICES
PREPARED WILLIAM
AND STAFFED CAPITA
BY: DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT:
cCAIN
JE T& -EN INEER
UTILITY SERVICES
UPDATE OF THE UTILITIES WATER AND WASTEWATER
MASTER PLANS
BACKGROUND
The Water and Wastewater Master Plans we are currently utilizing were
completed in November of 1987 and February of 1988 respectively. Due
to changes in County growth and planning, we feel that an update of
these plans is necessitated.
1NALYS I S
The following is a listing of items which warrant the update of these
plans:
1. The approval of the comprehensive plan has removed a great
deal of developable acreage (thus population shifts) and has
modified a great number of ultimate land uses designations.
2. Changes in population projections and differences in current
conditions in comparison with this time frame in the master
plans.
3. A redefining of the Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ's) by the
Planning Department. These zones define various population
dispersion areas and were the basis of the original master
plans.
4. With each master plan, a close investigation and coordination
must be accomplished with regard to line location (water,
wastewater, and reuse). As the County grows, road
rights-of-way, canal right-of-ways and easements become more
crowded with utilities.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners authorize Requests for Proposals to
update the -water and wastewater master plans, and negotiate with the
selected engineering firms.
Commissioner Eggert recalled the master plan was to be a 20 -
year plan and felt we are forever updating things.
Director Pinto explained our master plan represents 20 years
of planning but every master plan should be reviewed every three to
five years. Since the three master plans were made at three
different times by three different consultants and two of them were
prior to our comprehensive plan, staff thought there would be a
true benefit in hiring an independent firm to look at all three,
integrating the master plans in regard to routes of lines to
16
eliminate duplication and avoid oversized lines. He felt it is
very important for the County to proceed with one master plan to
combine water, sewer and reuse to assist Utilities in proper
development of the community for flow capacity.
Commissioner Scurlock felt there are different people with
different areas of expertise with each firm being skilled in one
particular area rather than one firm being expert in all three
disciplines.
Director Pinto stated the objective is a community -wide plan
for flow capacity and location of a plant, as opposed to the design
of the plant itself. The design of any plant would be addressed
specifically when it becomes an issue.
Commissioner Scurlock remarked when firms present proposals
they generally recommend departing from the master plan and, in
fact, when comparing the existing master plans with plans that are
in process there are deviations. Commissioner Eggert felt that is
an argument for updating the water and wastewater master plans.
Director Pinto confirmed the inconsistencies, but emphasized
that the master plan for water and wastewater did not get into
studying what type of disposal you would need for wastewater or
what type of water treatment you would need for water. He stressed
how important it is to keep that part independent because that can
change at any time. However, he felt the layout itself, the
routing of the water lines and what the demand is going to be has
been followed closely but we find conflict between three master
plans, particularly when it comes to line size and routes.
Commissioner Scurlock mentioned the conflict on north U.S.1
regarding not having enough flow and the question of building two
smaller lines to take care of a stagnation problem or building one
big one and finding some ways to address the problem.
Director Pinto noted, although the old master plan was a 20 -
year plan, a master planner must look at growth pattern and the
economics and timing of constructing lines.
Chairman Bird asked if there are firms that have a combined
expertise to do a combined master plan to bring all three entities
into consideration and Director Pinto said yes.
Chairman Bird was hopeful this would not be starting from
scratch or reinventing the wheel on three master plans.
Director Pinto wanted the project to involve studying our
growth pattern as it relates to line sizing. One example he gave
was Vero Lake Estates and whether it would be cost-effective to put
in a subsystem there for water treatment.
Commissioner Scurlock felt the only change is going to be in
effluent disposal.
17
J U N 41991.
NOOK 83 FA;E 5�e!
JUN 4 AO
BOOK
t` � c
3 FA 1G
E b
Director Pinto felt the routing of lines will change somewhat
along with the sizing of lines and when they should be built.
Director Pinto next addressed the possibility of limiting the
consultant's responsibility, that if he does the master plan he
would not be able to construct or design any of the construction
that he proposes in the master plan. This would give him more
independence and give us confidence that he is truly master
planning based on need and not lining up another job for himself.
Commissioner Eggert voiced her concern regarding affordable
housing and the fact that we may be forced into either designating
certain areas or setting up a demonstration area, and in this
respect the master plan may be premature.
Director Pinto noted we are not talking about any major zoning
changes.
Commissioner Eggert thought we could be; the details are
unknown and that is the whole problem. She felt by the end of this
year we might have a much better idea of where we might be going
and what we might be suggesting than we do now, and be able to get
an idea from the Commission what they are or are not willing to do.
Director Pinto felt if the timing is less than a year we
should start the selection process, choose the firm that you want
to do the project, and then set the timing for it.
Commissioner Scurlock felt master plans are not followed
because each newly hired firm comes up with a new plan that differs
from the master plan. Assistant County Attorney Terry O'Brien
suggested the following condition be included in the agreement with
a master planner: "In order to remove any potential conflict of
interest or possible appearance of conflict of interest, the entity
selected for this planning project shall be ineligible to bid or
perform any work on subsequent projects recommended or required by
the completed plan. Stated another way, it is the intention of the
County to separate the maker of the project plan from engineers and
contractors who actually do the project called for in the plan;
therefore, the entity selected to do the design may not be the
entity, or participate with any entity, in any engineering or
construction done under the design plan. This prohibition shall
exist until all work is completed under the design plan or a major
update of the design plan is made by another entity."
Commissioner Eggert suggested a five-year plan because most
plans do not last more than five years.
Administrator Chandler cautioned there are pros and cons to
the type of approach suggested by Attorney O'Brien and it should be
studied very closely. In terms of a master plan itself, he agreed
we do not need another master plan created. He concurred with
18
Commissioner Eggert that a five-year plan should be good for five
years, but in our case there are major differences, concurrency as
well as many other things, that have impacted on the plan in the
past two years, as well as our growth pattern. He felt there is no
question we should update the master plan.
Commissioner Scurlock raised the point of the reuse master
plan, and Administrator Chandler saw it in terms of being
integrated with a total master plan. At present we have three
separate plans that have been developed, one in 1987, one in 1988
and the last one last year, and the water and wastewater would
require the major work. He added all three plans should be
combined to gain a sense of direction in utilities, and the
individual specialties would be planned within the master plan.
Commissioner Scurlock asked about the cost of the proposed
study, but Administrator Chandler did not believe that has been
determined yet. Director Pinto felt it should be less than
$100,000.
Commissioner Eggert asked how drainage will affect a master
plan like this, and Administrator Chandler saw it as a separate
entity altogether.
Director Pinto felt because there is interaction between all
the districts, we must look closely at available rights-of-way.
Commissioner Scurlock recalled a joint city -county drainage
study costing $385,000 which was subsequently dismissed, and
Chairman Bird said one of reasons was the final cost estimate to
implement it scared everybody to death.
Commissioner Scurlock felt more dialogue is needed because of
Commissioner Eggert's concern about timing, along with Chairman
Bird's concern about not completely rewriting the master plan, and
his own concern regarding the scope of services.
Chairman Bird suggested staff develop the scope of services
and bring it back to the Board so that we all understand it and
then go to negotiations.
Director Pinto felt it should be done before we advertise.
19
JUN 4 1991
BOOK 83. ME b17
Pr" -
JIB 199A
ROOK 83 F�,[,E 518
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously
authorized staff to proceed with defining the scope
of services to integrate the three existing master
plans, taking into consideration the timing of
commencement of services and ineligibility of the
selected firm to bid or perform work on any
projects, and reporting back to the Board for
further consideration; all this to be done prior to
advertising for services.
FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR EAST U.S.1 NORTH OF 12TH STREET - SEWER
The Board reviewed memo from Capital Projects Engineer William
McCain dated May 21, 1991:
DATE: MAY 21, 1991
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
PREPARED WILLIAM F. cCAIN
AND STAFFED CAPITAL PRO S ENGINEER
BY: DEPARTMENT LIT• ERVICES
SUBJECT:
FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR EAST U.S. 1, NORTH OF 12TH
STREET - SEWER
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. US -88 -10 -CCS
BACKGROUND •
The above -listed project is now complete, and all businesses
associated with the construction have been connected. This project
corrected potential health hazards due to the small lot size each
business is on; i.e., First Union Bank, Kentucky Fried Chicken, and
Mr. Submarine. The preliminary assessment for this project was
approved in April of 1990, with the assessment set at $75,050.00 for
engineering and construction. The bids for this project all came in
high (final construction cost of $64,872.00 due to change order for
a reduction of $1,692.50). This is $1,672.00 higher than the
estimated construction cost; also the engineering extras ran over
the preliminary estimate by $316.77. _.
ANALYSIS
The contract award was approved at $66,564.50 (which was high due to
many unknown conditions surrounding the construction) by the Board
of County Commissioners on July 10, 1990. Due to the above -listed
overages, the Department of Utility Services will be supplementing
the project by $1,988.77 from the Impact Fee Fund. The final
assessment will be the same as the preliminary assessment. (See the
attached final assessment roll for details.)
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners approve the attached final. assessment
for Indian River County Project No. US -88 -10 -CCS.
20
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
the final assessment roll for Indian River County
Project No. US -88 -10 -CCS.
COPY OF SAID FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD
FINAL PAY REOUEST FOR SEWER FORCE MAIN INSTALLATION ON THE WEST
SIDE OF U.S.1 BETWEEN 10TH AND 4TH STREETS AND CHANGE ORDER #1.
The Board reviewed memo from Capital Projects Engineer William
McCain dated May 21, 1991:
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
MAY 21, 1991
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
TERRANCE G. PINTO
DIRECTOR OF UTILIT DICES
PREPARED WILLIAM F. McC N
AND STAFFED CAPITAL PROJECT GINEER
BY: DEPARTMENT OF RVICES
SUBJECT:
FINAL PAY REQUEST FOR THE SEWER FORCE MAIN
INSTALLATION ON THE WEST SIDE OF U.S. 1
BETWEEN 10TH AND 4TH STREETS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. US -88 -22 -CCS
BACKGROUND.
In September 1990, the Board of County Commissioners approved the
preliminary assessment for this project. The construction of this
project is now complete, and potential users may begin connection.
This project will allow for the correction of potential health
hazards due to commercially -generated wastewater being disposed of
on very small sites. To this end, we now wish to have both Change
Order No. 1 (final change order) and the final pay request approved
for payment.
ANALYSIS
In the original assessment, an estimated construction cost of
$74,225.00 was used. However, the final construction cost has come
in at $48,444.88, or a 34.7 % reduction in cost. This cost
reduction will be reflected in the final assessment that will be
coming to the Board in early June. The details of Change Order No.
1 are outlined in the attached change order and represents an
increase of $1,388.54. The attached final pay request is in the
amount of $7,065.27.
RECOMMENDATION
The staff of the Department of Utility Services recommends that the
Board of County Commissioners approve Change Order No. 1 and the
final pay request to Ted Myers Construction.
21
JUN 41191
FOOK 83 PAIGE d1
,i6t1 4199 •
BOOK 0 PAIGE
4,U
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
Change Order #1 and the final pay request to Ted
Myers Construction/ as recommended by staff.
(CHANG ORDER IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD)
OWNER/ENGINEER CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE STUDY,
DESIGN, PERMITTING, CONSTRUCTION, ADMINISTRATION AND INSPECTION OF
A CENTRAL REGION ALTERNATE EFFLUENT DISPOSAL AND TRANSMISSION
SYSTEM
The Board reviewed memo from Environmental Engineer Robert
Wiseman dated May 1, 1991:
DATE: MAY 1, 1991
TO: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: TERRANCE G. PINTO Y r t�
DIRECTOR OF UTILITY SERVICES
PREPARED ROBERT O. WISEMEN, P.E.Q
AND STAFFED ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER �"'
BY: DEPARTMENT OF UTILITY SERVICES
SUBJECT:
OWNER/ENGINEER CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR
THE STUDY, DESIGN, PERMITTING, CONSTRUCTION,
ADMINISTRATION, AND INSPECTION OF A CENTRAL REGION
ALTERNATE EFFLUENT DISPOSAL AND TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PROJECT NO. US -90 -23 -ED
BACKGROUND
On February 19, 1991, the Board of County Commissioners authorized
the Department of Utility Services to conduct negotiations with the
selected firms and to proceed with an agreement based upon
negotiations.
,ANALYSIS
Negotiations with Professional Engineering Consultants, Inc. (PECI)
for the subject services has been completed, and a "Standard Form of
Agreement Between Owner and Engineer for Professional Services" has
been submitted to the County for approval. Phase I --Immediate
Effluent Reuse/Disposal System Improvements --consists of development
of disposal methodology and hydraulic loading rates at selected
sites (existing County's own 30 -acre site and Bent Pine Golf
Course), design of a stabilized access road to the property from
Kings Highway, and design of an instrumentation/control system,
including flowmetering, control, and telemetry to automatically
monitor and control future interconnections of all regions.
Phase II --Investigation concerning REWARD System --includes studying,
analyzing, and developing a proposal concerning effluent perimeter
well extraction located on the County's own 30 -acre site and
subsequent injection of recovered/reclaimed effluent for development
of a saltwater intrusion hydraulic barrier system.
22
The estimated lump -sum fee for the Phase I design services shall be
based on an FmHA percentage of total construction. Based on
percentage of the estimated contruction cost, the design service fee
will total $73,750.00. This fee will be adjusted when firm
construction costs are known. The estimated fee for resident
project services is $24,400.00. The estimated fee for a
geotechnical consultant for Phase I is $55,000.00. The estimated
cost for surveying is $10,000.00; the estimated additional general
services is $25,000.00. The estimated fee for structgral and soil
engineering is $3,000.00. For Phase II, the estimated fee for the
geotechnical consultant services in investigating REWARD system is
$15,000.00. All fees shall conform to FmHA guidelines.
RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Utility Services recommends approval of the
agreement with PECI for Phases I and II for design and other
services for the estimated fees as stated above.
Commissioner Scurlock clarified the scope of services had been
reduced back to what had been originally advertised. He felt
comfortable with that, but had one question regarding the
permittability of the reward system. We are proposing $40,000 to
study the reward system, and Commissioner Scurlock asked if any of
these have been permitted.
Dave Refling, principal and partner in charge of the
environmental department of Professional Engineering Consultants,
Inc. answered, "No," but the department of Environmental
Regulations and the Water Management District are both very much in
favor of the project. He could not make a commitment to the Board
that, yes, it is permittable, but it has been identified as a very
favorable system to use as a saltwater intrusion barrier in lieu of
putting it down a deep well. The cost estimates for a deep well
system are in the three, four million dollar range and our
estimates are half of that for a concept such as this. Also, it
would be easy to recover during peak demand periods for reuse.
Commissioner Scurlock assured him he is not opposed to it at
all, but is asking if they have ever permitted some reward system
for stormwater management.
Commissioner Bowman asked if there is a prototype anywhere.
Mr. Refling responded there have been aquifer recovery systems
for potable water that have been permitted. As to stormwater
management water, which is not potable -type water, some very small
systems have been approved in the Orlando area, in the range of,
maybe, a 20 -gallons -a -minute system.
Commissioner Scurlock related that down south of us one of
these system types was proposed for stormwater and was disallowed
and they were forced to reline the lake, et cetera. He commented
that the proposed $40,000 is not much, but we don't want to spend
it without a good chance of it being permitted.
23
41991
a,L1D 83 PAJE521
JUT 4 i99
LOOK 83 F"GE 542
Mr. Refling explained that on the 32 -acre site that is
involved the plan is for a standard type of percolation pond. He
described underneath that site, as in a lot of areas of Florida,
there are aquacludes, i.e., clays and things where the water does
not go down. In West Orange County, for example, they don't have
those aquacludes so we can put regular perc ponds in and it goes
about 200 feet of vertical distance into the ground. That is
approved by DER as a renovation concept. In this case we are
talking about, instead of vertical treatment, we are talking about
horizontal treatment, pulling the water out there and providing
that water for a saltwater intrusion barrier, so it will have
received treatment. We are just changing the concept around where
the effluent is being treated and then being replaced back into the
ground.
Commissioner Scurlock thought that ultimately it would be
necessary to punch a hole into the confining layer to get down into
the shallow aquifer.
Mr. Refling said in_the first phase we would not punch holes
through it but rather go to the sand ridge. The golf course is
along the whole sand ridge, where there are some wells already for
pulling out the water, and it can be recovered again in the future
and, so, there will be an evaluation of that treatment capability.
Commissioner Scurlock added, therefore, the hydrogeology and
geotechnical work would not be limited to the 32 -acre site.
Mr. Refling confirmed it would be the entire evaluation area.
Commissioner Scurlock asked what the $40,000 gets us.
Mr. Refling explained the water management district has a
conceptual permitting step where you can "master plan" the whole
project and get approval before you get into the individual phases
and he saw this agreement as coming up with a report that would be
ready to be submitted to get the conceptual approval of the
project.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously approved
the agreement with Professional Engineering
Consultants, Inc. (PECI) for Phases I and II for
design and other services for the estimated fees
stated above, as recommended by staff.
SAID AGREEMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD
24
ADDENDUM TO LEASE BETWEEN THE CITY OF VERO BEACH AND SOUTH INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
The Board reviewed memo from Assistant County Attorney Terry
O'Brien dated May 22, 1991:
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Terrence P. O'Brien - Assistant County Attorney1O
DATE:, May 22, 1991
RE: ADDENDUM TO LEASE BETWEEN THE CITY OF VERO BEACH
AND SOUTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
The attached addendum is needed to bring the Airport Lease into
compliance with F.A.A. requirements. The lease has been reviewed by
County staff and approval is recommended.
The City of Vero Beach has approved the addendum at its meeting of
May 7, 1991.
County Attorney Charles Vitunac explained there are federal
requirements that a non-discrimination clause must be added to all
leases.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
approved the Addendum to Lease between the City of
Vero Beach and the South Indian River County Fire
District, as recommended by Staff.
SAID DOCUMENT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF
CLERK TO THE BOARD
LETTER FROM NACo OPPOSING S.250. VOTER REGISTRATION ACT. AND
SUPPORTING S.921
The Board reviewed letter from Acting Executive Director
Edward Ferguson of the National Association of Counties dated May
23, 1991:
25
JUN 41991
130OK83 FACE
Fr -
in 4 1991
NACo
Alert
BOOK 3 F41 -,L 5
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES
440 First Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Tel. 202/393-6226
FAX 202/393-2630
• DISTRIBUTION LIST
Commissioners
AI.it IIH, ,L1 iJt
TO:
FROM:
SUBJ:
DATE:
Attorney
Personnel
Public Works
Community Dev.
Utilities
Finance
Other
taff Contact: Robert Fogel
State Association Executives
NACo Board of Directors
Intergovernmental Relations Steering Committee
Steering Committee members from selected states
County Clerks
Edward E. -Ferguson, Acting Executive Director
S.250 - National Voter Registration Act
May 23, 1991 -
== ==========
====!======t=========1====== a= as
ACTION NEEDED: S.250 is likely to be considered by the full
Senate in June. It would require state, county, and other units
of local government to implement and absorb much of the very
substantial costs of a new federally mandated voter registration
program.
Write, call or visit your Senator expressing your views on this,
legislation with particular attention to the fiscal and
administrative burdens on your county it this new mandate is
impose4. .Let your Senator know if you will have to raise taxes
or. cut services if required to implement this mandate and whether
you see potential problems with fraud.
Urge support for S.921, introduced by Senator Dole and Stevens,
as an alternative to S.250. It would provide $25 million over
three years.to state and local governments on a matching basis if
they wanted to implement, on a voluntary basis, voter
registration enhancement activities, including registration in
connection with driver's -license applications, mail -in, and
agency based registration.
Letters to Senators can be addressed to the U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC 20510. All Senators can be called at (202)224-
3121.
BACKGROUND: S.250 would require state, county and other units of
local government to implement and fund the following voter
registration procedures and, if they are already in place, to
change them to conform to federal law:
26
o Require registration in connection with driver's license
applications and renewals.
o Require mail -in registration.
o Require agency registration in state and local government
offices such as schools, libraries, government revenue
offices, public assistance offices., unemployment offices,
etc.
o Impose procedures and standards regarding maintenance and
confirmation of voter rolls.
Under this legislation, no consideration is given to whether
state and local governments are doing a good job presently in
registering people to vote or whether they have the resources to
fund such requirements. Given the fiscal problems many counties .
are facing, this new mandate could not come at a worse time.
Additionally, some county officials have expressed a concern that
S.250 would create an'environment for increased voter fraud.
Commissioner Wheeler felt the letter is self-explanatory and
commented that this act would cause additional expense and less
control over voter fraud, and requested a letter or resolution from
the Commission to support Senate Bill 250.
County Attorney Vitunac noted a resolution would have more
force.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by
Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously adopted
Resolution 91-65 opposing the National Voter
Registration Act, Senate Bill 250, and supporting
Senate Bill 921.
RESOLUTION NO. 91- 6 5
A RESOLUTION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, IN OPPOSITION TO THE NATIONAL
• VOTER REGISTRATION ACT, SENATE BILL 250
AND IN SUPPORT OF SENATE BILL 921.
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 250, the National Voter Registration Act, may be
considered by the full Senate in June, 1991; and
WHEREAS., this Act would require counties, among other governments,
to implement and absorb much of the substantial costs of a new
federally mandated voter registration program; and
WHEREAS, the Bill would mandate Indian River County to require voter
registration in connection with drivers' license applications and renewals,
mail -in registration, agency registration in state and local government
offices, such as schools, libraries, government revenue offices, public
assistance offices, unemployment offices, etc., and would impose procedures
and standards regarding maintenance and confirmation of voter rolls; and
27
MN "4 ' 501
r
BOOK 83 FAuE JL C
JAA 4 A99i
BOOK 83 F'AE 5'4.13
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 250 gives no consideration to whether Indian
River County is doing a good job presently in registering people to vote or
whether the County has the resources to fund these new requirements; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 250 may create an environment for increased
voter fraud; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 921, an alternate, is acceptable since it is
voluntary and funds part of the costs,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
1. Indian River County is opposed to adoption of Senate Bill 250, since the
Bill is an unwarranted, unnecessary, and expensive infringement upon
the rights of state and county governments, and since the adoption of
the Bill would increase voter registration fraud.
2. Copies of this resolution be provided to Senator Bob Graham and
Senator Connie Mack.
The resolution was moved for adoption by Commissioner peel e r
and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Eggert , and, upon being
put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Chairman Richard N. Bird
Vice Chairman Gary C. Wheeler
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr.
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert
Aye
Aye
Aye
Aye
Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and
adopted this 4 day of June , 1991.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
29
Richard N. Bird
Chairman
LETTER FROM HRS REQUESTING AN APPOINTMENT TO THE INTERIM PLANNING
GROUP
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES
111 GEORGIA AVENUE, WEST
Honorable Richard N. Bird
Indian River County Commissio
1840 - 25th Street
Vero Beach, FL. 32960
Dear Commissioner Bird:
the
PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33401
May 29, 1991
LIN
!'.11iY 1991 (321
RECEIVED c:g
N BOARD COUNTY
COMMIssIONERS
aaf
DISTRIBUTION LIST
Commissioners
Administrator
Attorney
Personnel
Public Works
Community Dev.
Utilities
Finance
Other
During the past session, legislation was passed with
interest of building stronger partnerships between the
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services and local
communities.
Senate Bill 2306 defines the measures necessary to
fulfill these legislative requirements. It charges the
district administrator with convening an Interim Planning
Group to,make recommendations regarding the boundaries and
governance of HRS District 9 and other significant
operational issues.
District 9 currently includes Palm Beach, Martin„
Okeechobee, St. Lucie and Indian River counties. I have
proposed two Interim Planning Groups for District 9. One
will make recommendations regarding Palm Beach County and
the other will make recommendations regarding Martin,
Okeechobee, St. Lucie and Indian River counties.
Each Interim Planning Group will be responsible for
developing specific recommendations to be reported to the
Secretary of the Department and to the President of the
Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
These recommendations are to be reported on or before
October 1, 1991.
Based on your position as a leader in the community and
your interest in and knowledge of social service issues
confronting the department, I invite you to become a member
of the Interim Planning Group.
In the event that you cannot commit the time required
to participate, you may appoint a designee or substitute
representative who is knowledgeable about the services
provided by the department. To assure total objectivity, we
are requesting that any designee not be a service provider
under contract with HRS.
I have attached a brief summary of the responsibilities
of the Interim Planning Group and the legislation which
established such groups statewide. The first meeting of the
Interim Planning Group representing Martin, Okeechobee, St.
Lucie and Indian River Counties is scheduled for Wednesday,
June 19 at 10:00 A.M. at Martin County School Board, 500
East Ocean Blvd, Stuart, Florida.
30
3Uti 41991
BOOK 83. P.16E
JUN 41991
BOOK 83 F' c 58
This is an excellent opportunity for our community
leaders to work hand-in-hand to create a department that is
more responsive to community needs and which will develop
programs with and for the community to maximize the health
and well being of our citizens.
Please do not hesitate to call me or Jim Hart, Deputy
District Administrator, at 837-5078 regarding your
participation in the Interim Planning Group and your
attendance at the June meeting.
The Department is most anxious for you to contribute to
this important task and I look forward to your
participation.
Sincerely,
cting District 9 Administrator
Commissioner Eggert indicated her wish to be part of the
Interim Planning Council.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by
Commissioner Bowman, the Board unanimously appointed
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert to be a member of the
Interim Planning Group for HRS representing the
County Commission of Indian River County.
NORTH COUNTY AND SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICTS
Chairman Bird announced that immediately upon adjournment the
Board of County Commissioners would reconvene sitting as the
District Board of Commissioners of the North and South County Fire
Districts simultaneously.
There being no further business to come before the Board, on
motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting adjourned
at 10:35 o'clock A. M.
ATTEST
Clerk Chairman
31