HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/9/1991BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 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 - None
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Comm. Margaret C. Bowman
11. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
a. Corirnr. Bowman req. the addn.under her matters of authorization to represent
the Co. at the St.Johns River Water Mngmnt. Distr.Bd.meeting in Palatka.
NO OTHER ADDITIONS
5. PROCLAMATION AND PRESENTATIONS
None
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
None
7. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate
in the sum of $96.85, for Sam High
B. Approval of Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate
in the sum of $79.03, for Sam High
C. Approval of Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate
in the sum of $72.20, for Sam High
D. Approval of Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate
in the sum of $108.60, for Sam High
E. Approval of Duplicate Tax Sale Certificate
in the sum of $398.23, for Sam High
No. 1095,
No. 1096,
No. 1074,
No. 1427,
No. 969,
(See SWbb gooK Pot Jut► ► 314q i ‚e)
Wons(5tto(' s . l�Yier "io
E;UQK 8• Pt.,E )'.)1
J U L 91991
JUL 9 19 1
H _ A
BOOK 83 FM,E..
RCONSENT 'AGEIIDA :tcontinued) ,_
T
F. Received and placed on file in the office of Clerk to
the Board:
1991 Public Facilities Report for the Vero Lakes
Drainage District, a Florida Statute Chapter 298
District located within Indian River County, Florida
G. Release of County Assessment Lien
(memorandum dated July 2, 1991)
H. Request for signature on Section 8 Annual Contri-
butions Contract extension A -3409E
(memorandum dated June 26, 1991)
I. HRS request to lease space / IRC Health Clinic
(memorandum dated July 1, 1991)
J. Fire and Burglar Alarm Services
(memorandum dated June 26, 1991)
K. Request Authorization for County Attorney to Attend
Upcoming National Institute of Municipal Legal
Officers' Meeting (NIMLO)
(memorandum dated July 2, 1991)
8. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AND
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
None
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
None
D. LEISURE SERVICES
None
11. DEPARTMENTAL MATTERS (continued):
E. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Budget Hearing Schedule
(memorandum dated July 2, 1991)
F. PERSONNEL
None
G. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Program for Removal of Dead Australian Pine
Trees from Private Property in IRC
(memorandum dated June 25, 1991)
2. Request from contractor James Dupuis for a
License Agreement to allow a concrete driveway
within a county unpaved road right-of-way
(memorandum dated June 24, 1991)
(continued from 7/2/91 meeting)
3. IRC Bid #91-89 / 8th IR Blvd. North Phase 111
(memorandum dated July 2, 1991)
4. IR Blvd. Ph. 111 Construction Management and
Inspection Services
(memorandum dated July 2, 1991)
5. NPDES Group, Stormwater Application for
Industrial Facilities
(memorandum dated July 1, 1991)
H. UTILITIES
None
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY
Grand Harbor Development Order - Paragraphs 43, 44 & 45
Relating to Disaster Preparedness
(memorandum dated July 1, 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.
JUL 91991
BOOK 83 Oa
91991
14. SPECIAL DISTRICTS
A. NORTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
None
B. SOUTH COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT
None
C. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
IRC Bid #91-99 / Stationary Conveyor
(memorandum dated June 28, 1991)
15. ADJOURNMENT
BOOK 83 FAaE 834
ANYONE WHO MAY WISH TO APPEAL ANY DECISION WHICH MAY BE MADE
AT THIS MEETING WILL NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF
THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND
EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL WILL BE BASED.
Tuesday, July 9, 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, July
9, 1991, at 9:00 o'clock A.M. Present were Richard N. Bird,
Chairman; Gary C. Wheeler, Vice Chairman; Margaret C. Bowman;
Carolyn K. Eggert; and Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Also present were
James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac,
County Attorney; and Virginia Hargreaves, Deputy Clerk.
The Chairman called the meeting to order, and Commissioner
Bowman led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA/EMERGENCY ITEMS
Commissioner Bowman later in the meeting requested the
addition under her matters of authorization to represent the
County at the St. John's River Water Management District Board
meeting in Palatka tomorrow.
There were no other additions requested.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved
the above described addition to the Agenda as
requested by Comissioner Bowman.
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Scurlock requested that Item I be removed for
discussion.
A, B, C, D, & E - Approval of Duplicate Tax Sales Certificates
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously approved
the following Duplicate Tax Sale Certificates for Sam High:
Certificate No.
Certificate No.
Certificate No.
CertificateNo.
Certificate No.
JUL 9 1991
1095, in the sum of $96.85.
1096, in the sum of $79.03.
1074, in the sum of $72.20.
1427, in the sum of $108.60
969, in the sum of $398.23.
BOOK b tj
JUL 1199
BOOK 83 f],:i 83C
F. Report
Received and placed on file in the Office of the Clerk to
the Board:
1991 Public Facilities Report for the Vero Lakes
Drainage District, a Florida Statute Chapter 298
District located within Indian River County, Florida
G. Release of County Assessment Lien
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/2/91:
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Nancy H. Mossali - County Attorney's Officet,.rL
DATE: July 2, 1991
SUBJECT: RELEASE OF COUNTY ASSESSMENT LIEN
I have prepared the following routine release of assessment lien form in
connection with paving and drainage improvements to 87th Street in
Vero Lake Estates from 102nd Avenue to CR -510 (Project No. 8226),
and request that the Board authorize the Chairman to execute same:
Tax I.D. No. 28-31-38-00006-0130-00001.0
Lot 1, Block M, Vero Lake Estates, Unit I
In the names of: STUART GLOVER and LUCILLE
GLOVER
Back-up information for the above is on file in the County Attorney's
Office.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
approved the Release of Assessment Lien to
Stuart Glover and Lucille Glover for Lot 1, Block M,
Vero Lake Estates, Unit I, as recommended by staff.
COPY OF SAID RELEASE OF ASSESSMENT LIEN IS ON FILE IN THE
OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD
2
H. Request for Signature on Section 8 Annual Contributions
Contract Extension A -3409E
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/26/91:
TO: The Honorable Members of the DATE:
Board of County Commissioners
June 26. 1991
FILE:
SUBJECT: Request for signature on Section
8 Annual Contributions Contract
extension A -3409E
FROM: Guy L. Decker, Jr. 'T REFERENCES:
Executive Director
Indian River Countv Housing Authority
It is recommended that the data presented be given formal consideration
by the County Commission.
The Department of Housing and Uban Development has forwarded four (4)
copies of the Annual Contributions Contract (ACC) which have been amended
to extend the term of the ACC and to provide additional budget authority.
The documentation required by HUD for their final approval and execution
of the contracts is submitted for consideration and approval of the Board of
County Commissioners.
(1) Four (4) copies of ACC Part I Number A3409E of the Annual Contri-
butions Contract for the Housing Certificate Program. Original
signatures are required on all copies of the Contract and no
change in its format is permitted.
We respectfully request the County Commission to authorize its Chairman
to execute these Contracts for transmittal to the Jacksonville Office of HUD.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
authorized the Chairman to execute the contracts
for transmittal to the Jacksonville office of HUD.
COPY OF SAID CONTRACT IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK TO THE BOARD
3
J U L 91991
BOOK 83 FA;E OJ q
JUL 9 199t
BOOKz C5.JU
I. HRS Request to Lease Space at IRC Health Clinic
The Board reviewed memo from General Services Director Dean:
DATE:
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
JULY 1, 1991
HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVI S
HRS REQUEST TO LEASE SPACE
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HEALTH CLINIC
BACKGROUND:
The District Office of Health Rehabilitative Services, District 9,
has requested to lease five offices in the new Health Clinic. This
is a total of 430 square feet. Dr. Berman has recommended the lease
and feels he will not need the space for the next two to three years.
ANALYSIS:
We are presently leasing space to other governmental entities at the
rate of $9.00 per square foot which includes all utilities with
telephones and cleaning service. I have proposed a rate of $8.75 per
square foot to them without telephone service. They are required to
use the HRS telephone system.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends leasing 430 square feet of office space to HRS,
District Nine, at a rate of $8.75 per square foot or $3,762.50
annually. The lease will be for two years and contain a sixty day
notice by either party to terminate.
Commissioner Scurlock was just concerned that we make it
absolutely clear that this is a temporary arrangement as these
things seem to tend to become permanent.
Administrator Chandler stated that we have made it emphatic-
ally clear that this
most. He noted that
space at no expense,
ing the money we had
is a short term situation - 2/3 years at the
they first approached us about using the
but we didn't think that was fair consider -
in that facility. There is a verbal
understanding about this being a temporary arrangement, but
perhaps we can put it in writing.
Commissioner Eggert noted that this lease has a 60 day
termination notice. She further noted that she is on the Interim
Task Force concerned with redistricting Mental Health District
No. IX, and by October 1st they have to present how they feel
social services should be handled for the four northern counties
4
- Palm Beach is being split off; so we may see some changes and
there should be more local control.
Chairman Bird asked if the services HRS plans to provide are
closely enough related to those provided in the County Health
Clinic to necessitate them being in that building. He is con-
cerned that we are leasing part of a county building to them at a
very attractive rate when he knows there is a lot of privately
owned vacant space out in the community that our taxpayers would
love to rent, and unless there is a service they offer that is
directly related and needs to be in close proximity, he would
just as soon they go out and rent space in the open market.
Commissioner Wheeler commented that he would just as soon
see us get market value for this space.
Director Dean advised that the HRS services are not directly
related to the services offered in the building now; this is
something Dr. Berman came to us with. This is part of the local
HRS that is now located in a building across from Scotty's on
27th Street, and they have run out of space.
Chairman Bird realized they have a space problem, but he
would just as soon they go to some privately owned space before
we start filling up our county building with them.
Commissioner Eggert pointed out that these offices are
standing empty, and she felt it is better for us to get something
for them than nothing.
Administrator Chandler confirmed the building was designed
so that this is growth space which would be sitting there vacant.
Commissioner Scurlock commented that he actually concurs
with what everyone has said, but he does have a concern as to
whether the approximate $9 per square foot proposed is a fair
market value, especially as it includes utilities and cleaning
service. He also felt if the rent was closer to market, it
would be more of an inducement for them to leave when the time
came-.
Discussion continued pro and con at some length with Commis-
sioner Eggert expressing her feeling that there is some value to
having people who are involved with fairly related needs all in
one building, and Chairman Bird stressing that we do not want to
undercut the private sector.
JUL 9
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Wheeler, the Board unanimously directed
staff to renegotiate the proposed lease with HRS to
reflect market conditions more adequately and bring
it back to the Board.
BOOK 83 F';:GE 8.3-
Pr-
JUL 9 199
J. Fire and Burglar Alarm Services
BOOK 83 F' GE
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 6/26/91:
DATE: JUNE 26, 1991
TO: HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THRU: JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
SUBJECT: FIRE AND BURGLAR ALARM SERVICES
BACKGROUND:
All County properties with the subject services have been installed,
maintained and monitored by Alarm Specialists of Vero Beach, Inc.
This company was purchased and now is operating as U.S. Protective
Services.
We are in the process of up -dating the various agreements with proper
information and name. There are not any changes in the terms or
service offered on the new agreements.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the new agreements and requests
authorization for the Board Chairman to execute the appropriate
documents.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board approved new
agreements for fire and burglar alarm services
for the Main Library, the new Health Building,
and Sandridge Golf Course, and authorized the
Chairman to execute the proper documents as
recommended by staff.
SAID AGREEMENTS ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD
K. Out-of-state Travel Approval for County Attorney
The Board reviewed the following memo dated 7/2/91:
6
TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
e,E,6,u2;Nh
FROM: Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney
DATE: July 2, 1991
RE: REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR COUNTY ATTORNEY
TO ATTEND UPCOMING NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF
MUNICIPAL LEGAL OFFICERS' MEETING (NIMLO)
I respectfully request permission to attend the annual seminar of the
national organization for city and county attorneys from October 27
through 30, 1991, in San Diego. Funds for this trip are included in
our current budget.
NIMLO is the most important meeting for governmental lawyers in the
United States and the range of topics which will be discussed by the
counsel who personally argued the cases will be similar to those shown
on the attached sheet. I expect that this year the conference will pay
special attention to the new cable television regulation rights of counties
and cities and, as the attached announcement indicates, how cities and
counties can better provide services in periods of shrinking government
budgets.
REQUEST: The Board authorize the County Attorney to attend the
this conference.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by
Commissioner Scurlock, the Board unanimously
approved out-of-state travel for County Attorney
Vitunac to attend the National Institute of Municipal
Legal Officers' Meeting in San Diego from October
27-30, 1991.
BUDGET HEARING SCHEDULE
Administrator Chandler reviewed the following schedule:
TO: Members of the Board
of County Commissioners
DATE: July 2, 1991
SUBJECT: BUDGET HEARING SCHEDULE - AGENDA
FROM: Joseph A. Bair
OMB Director
Attached for your approval is the schedule of the 1991/92 budget hearings that will be held
in the County Commission Chambers on Wednesday, July 17, 1991 from 9:00 a.m. to 3:30
p.m.
L JUL 91991
7
BOOK 83 uu. J .
•
JUL 91991
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
1991/92 BUDGET HEARING SCHEDULE
WEDNESDAY - JULY 17, 1991
TIME
BOOK 83 F'Ard
9:00 A.M. GENERAL OVERVIEW SESSION
JAMES E. CHANDLER - COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
9:15 A.M. TO 9:45 A.M. AGENCIES
9:45 A.M. TO 10:15 A.M. CONSTITUTIONALS
10:15 A.M. TO 10:30 A.M. BREAK
10:30 A.M. TO 11:00 A.M. GENERAL FUND
11:00 A.M. TO 11:15 A.M. MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT (M.S.T:U.)
11:15 A.M. TO 11:30 A.M. TRANSPORTATION FUND
11:45 A.M. FIRE DISTRICTS
12:00 P.M. TO 1:30 P.M. LUNCH
1:30 P.M. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT (S.W.D.D.)
2:00 P.M. STREETLIGHTING DISTRICTS
2:15 P.M. VERO LAKES ESTATE
2:30 P.M. ENTERPRISE FUNDS
3:00 P.M. MISCELLANEOUS FUNDS
CAPITAL PROJECTS
3:30 P.M.
FINISH
Administrator Chandler noted that the above schedule is
similar to last years's, and he did realize that we may not be
able to accomplish it all in one day.
Commissioner Scurlock felt we should put everyone on notice
to that effect so they could plan to make themselves available if
we run late on our time schedule.
Board members had no problems with the proposed schedule.
8
PROGRAM FOR REMOVAL OF DEAD AUSTRALIAN PINES FROM PRIVATE PROP.
Board members reviewed memo from Public Works Director Davis
and from Ron Brooks, Manager of the SWDD, as follows:
TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator
FROM:' James W. Davis, P.E., , (
Public Works Director' 01"
SUBJECT: Program for Removal of Dead Australian Pine
Trees from Private Property in Indian River
County
DATE: June 25, 1991 FILE: trees.agn
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The Public Works Department, Risk Management Division, and
Solid Waste Disposal District has considered various
alternative programs to reduce the cost of dead tree removal
borne by private property owners due to the 1989/90 freeze.
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
There appears to be four stages to the program as follows:
STAGE 1 - Cutting Tree from Base and Cutting Remains in
Small Pieces (4'-5' lengths)
Neither County crews nor a County retained contractor
should perform this work on private property due to the
liability risks. Lack of OSHA required equipment,
Worker's Comp. exposure, fall protection requirements,
etc. are items that deter staff from recommending a
County in-house operation. The recommended
alternatives are:
1) Property owner remove tree and cut up into small
pieces;
2) Property owner contract to have tree cut down and
pieces sized.
STAGE 2 - Remove Tree from Property Owner's Site to County
Stockpile Site
Neither the SWDD nor Road and Bridge Div. can
comfortably provide pick-up and hauling services without
detracting from other programs. At the present time,
the Road and Bridge Division is projecting being over -
budget on the fuel line item by Sept. 30, 1991
($120,000 budgeted for year - $80,000 encumbered on
April 30, 1991). Hauling this material will compound
the overage. The recommended alternatives are:
1) Request the property owner to haul the material to
• a designated County disposal site;
2) Property owner contracts with independent hauler
to transport material to County disposal site.
STAGE 3 - Stockpile Material to Dry Prior to Ultimate
Disposal
The County could provide two sites as follows:
North County - Southeast corner or west section of
Fairgrounds property
South County - Marl Pit site at 74th Avenue and 4th
Street.
STAGE 4 - Ultimate Disposal
The options are burning, chipping, or landfilling the
dead tree material. If burning is considered, a trench
type air curtain incinerator is the most easily
permitted option. The air curtain can be rented for
..$2000.to $3000 per month. A Division of Forestry and
DER permit will be required. If burning is considered,
9
JUL 919
BOOKF'.1��t e.j43
r
JUL 91991
BOOK 83 P CE 844
it should be contracted out instead of the County
renting and operating a trench type air curtain for the
following reasons:
1) A contractor would probably be more efficient
since their personnel would be already trained.
2) Lack of current staffing to manage and supply
labor for the operation.
3) This activity is a high Worker's Compensation risk
and specialized clothing and equipment is needed.
A quotation was received from
Inc. for a contractor to supply
the material at a county site.
$4,275 per week or $17,100 per
and $2,000 per month for County
$19,100 per month.
Ross Meadows, Air Burners,
labor and equipment to burn
The cost is estimated to be
month for outside services
supervision for a total of
The Solid Waste Disposal District recommends that the
Australian pine trees be disposed of at the county landfill
at a cost of $20/ton. In March -May, 1990, the County
received dead tree material at a cost of $85,000. This
equates to approximately $30,000/month.
RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING
Staff does not recommend that the County participate in
cutting dead trees and/or vegetation on private property nor
hauling the material to a designated site. Staff prefers
that all dead Australian pine trees be accepted at the
county landfill at a cost of $20/ton. Funding at a
not -to -exceed cost of $80,000 shall be from MSTU•Contingency
Fund (approx. $400,000 available).
DATE:
TO:
THRU:
FROM: RONALD R. BROOKS, MANAGER
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRI
JUNE 4, 1991
JAMES E. CHANDLER, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR r9`??.
TERRANCE G. PINTO, DIRECTOR
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTR C
SUBJECT: -
REMOVAL OF DEAD AUSTRALIAN PINE
In addition to the proposals suggested by Jim Davis in his memo-
randum dated May 31, 1991, the SWDD staff has reviewed the land-
fill operations and may suggest that the SWDD will be able to
handle the disposal of the Australian pines if they are delivered
to the landfill. The material would, however, be subject to the
usual charge but that charge could be covered by funds similar to
the situation approved by the Board of County Commissioners last
year for the disposal of debris killed by the freeze. The mate-
rial would then be incinerated, or if the Board approved the pur-
chase of a large wood chipper, it could be chipped. Our current
chipper operations only provide for the chipping or mulching of
material less than 6 inches in diameter. Additional equipment
capable of chipping logs or branches greater than 6 inches in di-
ameter would be needed. The chipping operations could also be
contracted, however, the SWDD may ultimately need the more envi-
ronmentally approved chipper equipment instead of an incinerator,
and now is as good a time as any to transition to that type of
operation.
This recommendation is contingent upon Australian pine trees be-
ing the only items of concern. If you included Brazilian pepper
trees, the landfill would be inundated with land clearing debris
from undeveloped properties.
10
Commissioner Scurlock was not sure from the memo if staff is
suggesting negotiating a contract with Air Burners, Inc., or
bidding it out.
Administrator Chandler advised that staff is just recommend-
ing these trees go to the Landfill, and they only gave the Board
this information to try to get a gauge on what the expense might
be if we had it burned by an outside source.
Chairman Bird asked if $20.00 a ton represents any discount,
and was informed that it does not; it is the standard Landfill
rate.
Chairman Bird felt, in that case, we are not doing anything
to encourage people to bring in these dead trees, but Administra-
tor Chandler clarified that the incentive is that the fee would
be waived for those persons and we would be picking up that
expense.
Commissioner Scurlock noted that, in other words, apparently
the proposal is not to take this particular company and have them
set up a burner at the Landfill but just whatever came in, we
would handle ourselves with our burner, chipper, etc.
Director Davis agreed and explained that if we decide to go
to an outside source, we would go to a more formal bidding
process. This was just a quotation to give us an idea of the
cost involved in having a contractor come in and set up at one of
the county sites to do the burning.
Discussion continued as to what exactly was intended, and
Chairman Bird asked about the possibility of doing a combined
operation and opening up two locations to receive and burn this
material. Possibly one location could be the Fairgrounds, and we
still would have the ability to receive it at the Landfill also.
Director Davis advised that we anticipated having two sites
in the County if we were going to contract this out - one would
be the Fairgrounds and another possibility is the 74th Avenue/4th
Street site where the old marl pit used to be. He agreed that we
could have the South County material hauled to the Landfill and
the North County material to the Fairgrounds, but the big
question with all this is that we don't know how much material we
are going to receive.
Commissioner Scurlock believed there is an existing chipper
facility in the Gifford area.
Director Pinto did not know anything about that, but advised
that when the clearing was done in the area behind Marvin's
Gardens, the developer brought in a temporary air burner. He
felt what the Board may want to do if we are going to haul this
material to an area outside the Landfill is let it stockpile and
then bring the burner in later when we see how much we have.
11
JUL 91 , f
BOOK
JUL 9 `991
BOOK 83 FAGc
Discussion followed about using the old mud bogging pit at
the Fairgrounds for the burning, and Chairman Bird stated that he
had hoped that we would have encouraged people to do this before
this next winter season arrives.
It was again stressed that the County is paying the $20 a
ton Landfill fee and waiving it for the resident, and Adminis-
trator Chandler pointed out this is similar to what we did after
the last big freeze, except that we are limiting it to Australian
pines, and he believed we will need publicity to make the public
aware of this in order to accomplish anything.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if we could notify the people
who contacted us for assistance in some way or those who have
citations, and Administrator Chandler agreed that we can notify
those who have contacted us and Code Enforcement could do the
same.
Commissioner Wheeler asked if we couldn't have the whole
county dump this material at the Fairgrounds which is a pretty
central location. There is a lot of room to store there, and it
may save us paying the Landfill $20 a ton.
Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that you would end up with
having more dumped there than just Australian pines, and Adminis-
trator Chandler agreed that the Landfill would have better
control over what is brought in because we wouldn't have someone
at the Fairgrounds every day around the clock.
Discussion continued regarding sites, costs, stockpiling,
etc., and Commissioner Scurlock agreed with Commissioner
Wheeler's suggestion to set up a central site and stockpile and
then get someone to come in with an air curtain burner and do it
all at one time. He felt the Fairgrounds would be the most
appropriate location.
Commissioner Bowman believed that it will be necessary to
have someone there to see that the dead pines are stockpiled
right, and Director Pinto agreed that the site will have to be
supervised or they will just dump all over the place.
Chairman Bird offered the idea that we could just open up a
window for 30-60 days to see how much we get.
Commissioner Scurlock suggested a Motion to contract this
out, but to set up an education program and stockpile before we
go to a contractor for a burner, the cost not to exceed $80,000,
and if it turns out that the amount stockpiled will exceed the
amount, then we can revisit this to consider future arrangements
with a contractor.
Chairman Bird pointed out that we will need someone to
monitor this so we know when we are about to reach our $80,000
12
limit, and Director Davis advised that the estimated budget
included $2,000 a month for supervision.
Commissioner Scurlock wondered if we can contract out to do
this for a lesser cost, why are we doing it any differently?
Administrator Chandler reported that in the proposed budget
we are looking at the acquisition of an air curtain incinerator
for Public Works to handle and dispose of some of the county
debris as opposed to taking it to the Landfill.
Commissioner Scurlock then questioned whether the Landfill
needs an air curtain burner.
Director Davis advised that we have used a portable burner
at the South County site, but it is a sensitive operation; you
need experienced people and special clothing and the Workmen's
Comp risk is quite high. He felt it is a safer operation at the
Landfill.
Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that if we contract out
for that service, we do not have all those concerns.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously directed staff
to set up an education program, go ahead and work out
the details and bid this out as discussed; the site to
be the Fairgrounds unless a better location can be found;
and funding at a not -to -exceed cost of $80,000 from the
MSTU Contingency Fund.
REQUEST TO ALLOW CONCRETE DRIVEWAY IN COUNTY UNPAVED R/W (DUPUIS)
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS MEETING
Public Works Director Davis recapped that this matter was
gone over in detail at the Board meeting of July 2nd, at which
time this matter was tabled until it could be determined just how
the driveway inspection was carried out. This now has been
researched and is explained in the following memo from Director
Keating:
JUL 91991
13
a, P�
EUOK. tj FuE �4 1
I
JUS 91991
BOOK 83 P '6E 848
TO: James Davis, Director
Public Works
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Robert M. Keating, AICP' 'K
Community Development Director
July 8, 1991
DUPUIS DRIVEWAY INSPECTION
Please be advised that I have discussed the Dupuis illegal driveway
case with Building Division staff. Based upon my inquiries, I 'have
found that the following occurred:
On December 21, 1990, a building permit was issued to Donald
Dupuis, as the general contractor, for James and Laura Dupuis as
owners of the subject property at 1265 32nd Avenue, S.W.
Construction then started, and various inspections were conducted
over the next several months.
On May, 16, 1991, the Building Division conducted a driveway
inspection of.the subject property. Since the building inspector
was sick on that date, this inspection was done by the mechanical
inspector. Records show that the driveway was approved during the
May 16th inspection;. however, as with all building division
inspections, that approval related to only the portion of the
structure on the property and not to any portion in the right-of-
way.
Because of the length of time since the inspection, the inspector
was unable to recall the circumstances of the inspection,
specifically whether or not the right-of-way portion of the
driveway was 'formed when he did his inspection. However, the
inspector has stated that no specific approval for the right-of-way
portion of the driveway was given.
Typically, building inspectors note on the inspection card that
driveways are approved only to the property line. Also, building
inspectors typically notify the engineering inspectors if driveways
are formed -up in the right-of-way on unpaved roads or if any other
unusual, and possibly illegal, construction .has occurred. For
those reasons and the inter -departmental coordination that has
occurred in.the past, county staff has been successful in ensuring
that only legal driveways are built.
Director Davis stressed that the sign off by the Building
Inspector was only for the portion of the driveway on the private
property.
Commissioner Wheeler pointed out that James Dupuis is not a
contractor but an owner/builder, and his father, who is a
contractor, was just helping with the house. He further noted
that Mr. Dupuis is not present today.
Commissioner Eggert believed the permit was issued to Donald
Dupuis, the father, and Director Keating confirmed that although
you can issue a permit to an owner/builder, in this case the.
building permit was issued to Donald Dupuis, who is a general
14
contractor, and the driveway permit also was issued to the elder
Mr. Dupuis.
Commissioner Wheeler did not see why this all could not be
taken care of if later the owners would agree to remove the
driveway at their expense. He did think this is a small
inconvenience to the County and a Targe inconvenience to the
property owners. He also believed the pictures Mr. Dupuis had
submitted showed that there was a considerable distance between
where this driveway ended and the grader route began, and he did
not believe we mostly keep up our R/Ws in any event.
Commissioner Scurlock felt the issue is that if you allow
someone to build off their property site, there is a problem in-
volved with administering and tracking this, and he believed we
have literally thousands of driveways in this situation. If this
is going to continue, possibly we should have a permit that
requires an expansion joint in the driveway in the event it later
has to be removed.
Commissioner Wheeler noted that he is sensitive to the
problems involved in living on a dirt road, and he continued to
express his support for allowing the concrete driveway to remain
in the R/W.
Commissioners Scurlock and Eggert stressed that our
limitation has been set; our policy was already established and
known; and the limitation is the property line; and Director
Davis advised that we do cut R/Ws - we have a mowing route
similar to a grading route.
Discussion then followed as to what the inspector should
have done, and Administrator Chandler advised that procedure is
pure black and white, and if the normal inspector had done the
inspection, he would have called attention to the fact that
something was formed up in the R/W.
Commissioner Wheeler continued to express his belief that
government should not be oppressive; that we err also and we
should be more forgiving.
Commissioner Eggert commented that if, as originally
presented, it was an owner/builder who had received the permit
instead of a general contractor, she would be more prone to
agree.
Chairman Bird believed that staff has made an attempt to be
consistent with this, even putting a red stamp on the building
permit to bring it to everyone's attention. It seems that we
have a lot of exceptions out there that never got caught, but he
believed we have been very consistent in how we deal with those
we do have knowledge of.
JUL 91991
15
BOOK 83 F'Ac 84
3U- 91991
BOOK 83 PAGE 850
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Bowman, Commissioner Wheeler voted in
opposition, the Board by a 4 to 1 vote denied the
issuance of a License Agreement to Mr. Dupuis and
requested him to remove the pavement within the R/W.
BID 91-89 - INDIAN RIVER BLVD. NORTH, PHASE III
The Board reviewed memo from General Services Director Dean:
DATE:
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
JULY 2, 1991
HONORABLE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
JAMES E. CHANDLER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
H.T. "SONNY" DEAN, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVI`C
IRC BID #91-89/8TH INDIAN RIVER BLVD.NORTH PHASE III
BACKGROUND:
Bid Opening Date:
Specifications mailed to:
Replies:
BID TABULATION
1. Sheltra & Sons
Indiantown
2. Belvedere Const.
Vero Beach
3. Martin Paving
Vero Beach
4. Ranger Const.
Ft. Pierce'
5. Dickerson
Stuart
TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID:
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
ESTIMATED BUDGET:
RECOMMENDATIONS:
May 29, 1991
Eleven (11) Vendors
Five (5)
BASE BID ,ADDITIVE TOTAL
BID ITEM
$2,713,070.15 $ 2,919.00 $2,715,989.15*
ALTERNATE A,
$3,342,498.02 $11,676.00 $3,354,174.02
$ 8,221.85 $3,396,059.89
$ 9,730.00 $3,485,174.56
$ 7,589.40 $3,537,600.62
$3,387,838.04
$3,475,444.56
$3,530,011.22
$2,715,989.15 *
Indian River Boulevard
Construction and Progress
$3,600,000
* The low bidder, Sheltra & Sons, did not use the revised bid form
included in Addendum I therefore, failed to submit prices for two
items. These being, tree removal and utility sleeves. The Company
was contacted after this error was detected by Staff during the
evaluation process. Sheltra acknowledge their omission and gave a
16
price of $3,500 for the removal and $24,320 for utility sleeves. If
these prices were added to the base bid, Sheltra is still $610,364.90
lower than the next bidder. In view of the above and in accordance
with Indian River Purchasing Manual Staff recommends the Board to
waive this "technicality and/or irregularity" and award this bid to
Sheltra and Son's for a amended total of $2,743,809.15.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously waived the
above described "technicality and/or irregularity" and
awarded Bid 91-89 for Indian River Boulevard North,
Phase III, to Sheltra & Sons in the amended amount of
$2,743,809.15.
I.R.BOULEVARD PHASE III - CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION
SERVICES
Public Works Director Davis reviewed the following:
TO: James E. Chandler,
County Administrator
THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E.,
Public Works Director W
FROM: Terry B. Thompson, P.E.
Capital Projects Manager
SUBJECT: Indian River Boulevard Phase III
Construction Management and Inspection Services
References: IRC Bid 91-89
DATE: July 2, 1991 •
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
Boyle Engineering Corporation is under contract with Indian
River County to provide Construction Administration Services
for the full twelve month construction period of Indian
River Boulevard Phase III and full-time on-site Resident
Inspection Services for the initial six months of
construction when concurrent activities are expected to be
intense.
The 1986 budget price for Construction Administration
Services, which provided for a Resident Inspector for the
full twelve month construction period, was $97,110. In
April 1991 -County Staff met with the Consultant to negotiate
the Construction Services and the Consultant proposed
compensation in the amount of $163,350. Staff was of the
opinion that inspection services during the last six months
of construction could be performed by County Staff and
prepared an agreement with Boyle Engineering which included
full-time on-site Resident Inspection Services for the
initial six months of construction and contract
administration services for the full twelve month
construction period at a cost not to exceed the 1986
budgeted cost of $97,110,
17
JUL 9199
c= F;
BOOK (3:
J U L 9 1991
BOOK 83PAGE 004
The references obtained (copy attached) on the low bidder for
this project, Sheltra & Son Construction Co. Inc.,
indicated that the County may need a full-time on-site
Resident Inspector for the full twelve month construction
period to insure a satisfactory project.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
If the Board of County Commissioners awards construction of
Indian River Boulevard Phase III to Sheltra & Son
Construction Co. Inc., staff request the Board's
authorization to prepare an amendment to Boyle Engineering's
contract for Construction Administration Services to
increase full-time on-site resident inspection from the -
initial six months of construction to the full twelve month
construction period. Funding is to be from Fund 309 -Indian
River Boulevard North.
Commissioner Scurlock asked if $97,110 is the figure, and
Director Davis noted that is the figure in the current contract;
the total for the full twelve month construction period would be
$163,350.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized
staff to prepare an amendment to Boyle Engineering's
contract for Construction Administration Services
to increase full-time on-site resident inspection
to the full twelve month construction period as
recommended by staff.
NPDES GROUP, STORMWATER APPLICATION FOR INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES
Director Davis reviewed the following, explaining how this
works:
18
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
RE:
DATE: July 1, 1991
James E. Chandler
County Administrator
James W. Davis, P.E.
Public Works Direct('
NPDES Group, Stormwater
Application for Industrial Facilities
Memo Jim Shipman, President of FACO, to
County Administrators dated June 14, 1991
DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS
The Environmental Protection Agency's new stormwater
regulations require owners of industrial facilities
(including open or closed landfills, vehicle maintenance and
repair shops, and sewage treatment plants over 1.0 MGD,) to
file a Stormwater Permit Application by September 30, 1991.
FACO is sponsoring a "Group Application" for local
governments in Florida. This group approach requires only
10% of the facilities to be sampled for stormwater
pollutants instead of 50-100% if a facility does not
participate in a group application. Indian River County has
three Fleet Management facilities (including the Sheriff's
facility and the landfill's shop), three landfills (one
open, two closed), and three Wastewater Treatment Plants
that will soon be over 1 MGD. The various cities, school
districts, and other governmental agencies may also want to
participate in the Group Application. A savings of as much
as $10,000. per facility could result by joining the
"Group".
ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS
Since there is a direct cost savings by participating in the
program, staff has identified the following alternatives.
Alternative No 1
Authorize the Public Works Director to be the
County contact person for all local governments in
the County. Also, the County would join the FACO
Group and include the nine facilities in the
"Group EPA Application". The estimated cost for
the Part 1 Application Phase would be $600.00 per
facility or $5,400.00 total. The estimated cost
for the Part 2 application is $1,000 -t3,000 per
facility or $21,000.00 for all nine facilities.
Funding would be from the responsible County
Department (three from Solid Waste, three from
Utilities, and three from the various Fleet
Maintenance Divisions).
Alternative No 2
Do not join the group. Estimated cost would be
$9,000.00 for Part 1 ($1,000.00 per facility) and
$20,000 - $25,000 per facility for Part 2
application.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING
Alternative No 1 is recommended. Since various Departments
are responsible, each individual Department would recommend
funding at a latter date.
19
JUL 91991
m --
BOOK. 83 FA.6E.
BOOK 83
FA uE
Commissioner Scurlock complimented Mr. Davis on this
suggestion as he felt it represents a pretty good savings to the
county, and he hoped the State Association will pursue other
endeavors such as this.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
Alternative No. 1 as set out in the above memo dated
July 1, 1991.
GRAND HARBOR DEVELOPMENT ORDER - RE DISASTER PREPAREDNESS
Asst. County Attorney Collins reviewed the following:
TO: The Board of County Commissioners
FROM: William G. Collins II - Assistant County Attorney
DATE: July 1, 1991
SUBJECT: Grand Harbor Development Order - Paragraphs 43, 44 and 45
Relating to Disaster Preparedness
The Development Order for Grand Harbor precludes certificates of occupancy
in excess of 300 until arrangements are made for emergency evacuation. The
attached agreement provides that River Harbor, Inc. make cash contributions
in lieu of the shelter requirements, subject to the approval of the
Department of Emergency Services. The agreement provides that River
Harbor, Inc. will donate 1.1 acres of land at the northwest corner of the
intersection of Indian River Boulevard North Extension and proposed 45th
Street Easterly Extension for a future fire station and emergency services
station. The County will have three years to construct the fire/EMS station,
or the land would revert to River Harbor, Inc. upon a payment of
$60,000.00. Additionally, River Harbor, Inc. will make a cash contribution
of $90,000.00 in lieu of construction of shelter space, $50,000.00 before the
301st certificate of occupancy is issued and the balance of $40,000.00 to be
paid prior to the 1,201st certificate of occupancy being issued, unless there
is inadequate emergency shelters for 19% of the then existing Grand Harbor
population two years from this date, in which case the final $40,000.00 would
be due in two years.
Attorney Collins confirmed that this agreement would satisfy
the requirements under the D.O., and the attorneys for River
Harbor, Inc. are holding a $50,000 cash payment in trust pending
our approval of this agreement.
Commissioner Eggert inquired where the people from Grand
Harbor go for shelter now, and Emergency Management Director
Wright advised that as of now they would go to a shelter south of
Grand Harbor in the Vero Beach area. We plan with these funds to
retrofit either Middle 6 or 7 School in this area and use that as
a shelter in cooperation with the School Board.
20
Commissioner Scurlock had no problem with the Developer's
Agreement but he was concerned that we track those improvements a
little better as time goes by because he wants to make sure the
cash amounts match with our plans.
Director Wright advised that they originally proposed a
lesser amount, and we negotiated with them to up that sum because
of the amount of money it takes to buy the generator.
Commissioner Scurlock noted that another concern he has is
whether those 2 schools will be adequate in the long range to
service both the surrounding community and Grand Harbor as it
builds out.
Director Wright informed the Board that we have had a model
done and looked at the whole area in terms of flooding, etc., and
we are satisfied we can provide for the public.
Chairman Bird asked if Emergency Management is also satis-
fied with the location proposed for the future facility, and
Director Wright confirmed that it is a prime location for a
station.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Eggert, the Board unanimously approved
Resolution 91-76 authorizing execution of a Developer's
Agreement with River Harbor, Inc., re disaster pre-
paredness as discussed above.
JUL 9 1991
21
BOOK 83 F'Avt
J U L 9199
BOOK 83 PA�:,E 8c
RESOLUTION NO. 91-76
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDIAN
RIVER COUNTY AND RIVER HARBOR, INC.
REGARDING DISASTER PREPAREDNESS IN
SATISFACTION OF DEVELOPMENT ORDER
(RESOLUTION NO. 85-128, PARAGRAPHS 43
THROUGH 45).
WHEREAS, the Development Order for Grand Harbor
requires certain disaster preparedness steps be taken and in
place prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy
beyond 300;
WHEREAS, the developer wishes to satisfy said
condition of the Development Order through the execution of
a Developer's Agreement with Indian River County; and
WHEREAS, Indian River County has reviewed the
proposed plan and it has been determined and accepted as
adequate by the Indian River County Department of Emergency
Services,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
1. The above recitals are true and ratified.
2. The Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners is authorized to execute the Developer's
Agreement attached as Exhibit "A" hereto.
The foregoing resolution was offered by
Commissioner Scurlock and seconded by Commissioner
Eggert , and, being put to a vote, the vote was as
follows:
Chairman Richard N. Bird Aye
Vice Chairman Gary C. Wheeler Aye
Commissioner Margaret C. Bowman Aye
Commissioner Don C. Scurlock, Jr. Aye
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert Aye
The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution
duly passed and adopted this 9th day of July , 1991.
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
22
By
Rar ird
i chi , Chairman
JUL 9 1991'
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AND RIVER HARBOR, INC.
ON DISASTER PREPAREDNESS
WHEREAS, Indian River County approved a
Development Order for the Grand Harbor Development of
Regional Impact by Resolution No. 85-128 on
October 23 1985
WHEREAS,, paragraphs 43, 44, and 45 of that
Resolution No. 85-128 contained the disaster preparedness
portions of the Development Order;
WHEREAS, paragraph 43 of the Development Order
sets the standard for emergency shelter which must be
provided by the Grand Harbor development at build out;
WHEREAS, paragraph 44 of the Development Order
allows these shelter requirements to be provided through a
cash contribution in lieu of the equivalent cost of such
space if approved by the County;
WHEREAS, the Grand Harbor development cannot
proceed beyond 300 Certificates of Occupancy until the
disaster preparedness paragraphs of the Development Order
are satisfied;
• WHEREAS, River Harbor, Inc. has proposed an
equivalent cash contribution in lieu of provision of such
space, which proposal has been reviewed and approved by the
Indian River County Department of Emergency Services; and
WHEREAS, River Harbor, Inc. wishes to proceed in
its development beyond is 300th Certificate of Occupancy and
Indian River County wishes to ensure that the conditions of
the Development Order are satisfied:
IT IS HEREBY AGREED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES
THAT:
1. The above recitals are affirmed in their
entirety.
2. River Harbor, Inc. will donate to Indian River
County 1.1 acres of• land at the northwest corner of the
intersection of proposed Indian River Boulevard north
extension and proposed 45th Street easterly extension for a
future fire station and emergency services station. (See
attached Exhibit "A" - legal description and Exhibit "B" -
survey.)
3. Indian River County shall see to it that the
design of 45th Street and Indian River Boulevard have a
centerline elevation of not less than the 100 -year flood
plain elevation in order to guarantee compliance with
Development Order paragraph 45.
4. The 1.1 acre fire station/emergency services
station shall be conveyed to Indian River County by special
warranty deed.
5. An appraisal of the present value of the 1.1
acre shal•I be prepared by the MAI firm of Armfield-Wagner,
Inc. at kiver Harbor, Inc.'s expense to determine present
value at the time of conveyance.
6. If Indian River County does not commence
construction of a fire /EMS station within 3 years of the
time of conveyance and if River Harbor, Inc. or its
successor(s) in title pay to the County the value of the
property as established by the appraisal mentioned in the
23
BOOK CEJ FAuEE Jc d�
J U L 91991
BOOK 83 FAGE
paragraph above, Indian River County shall execute a special
warranty deed conveying the 1.1 -acre parcel back to River
Harbor, Inc., or such other entity as River Harbor, Inc.
shall designate.
7. In addition to the property dedicated pursuant
to paragraph 2 above, River Harbor, Inc. agrees to make a
cash contribution of $90,000.00 in lieu of construction of
shelter space required by paragraph 43 of the Development
Order (Resolution No. 85-128).
8. The first installment shall be of $50,000.00
and payable before Indian River County shall issue
Certificate of Occupancy No. 301 to the Grand Harbor
development.
9. Except as provided in paragraph 10 below, the
balance of $40,000.00 shall be paid to Indian River County
before the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy number
1,201 to the Grand Harbor development.
10. Indian River County shall utilize the cash
contribution for improving current shelter sites to
accommodate Grand Harbor residents. Upon a date which is
two (2) years following the date of the contribution
referred to in paragraph 8 above, the Director of Emergency
Services shall determine whether the capacity of the shelter
being retrofitted via cash contribution to Indian River
County is sufficient to shelter 19% of the then existing
Grand Harbor population based on a formula defining adequate
capacity as 40 square feet per person. In the event there
is not sufficient capacity to shelter 19% of the then
existing Grand Harbor population, the contribution referred
to in paragraph 9 above shall be due and payable to Indian
River County within sixty (60) days' written notice to River
Harbor, • Inc. from the Director of Emergency Services stating
that shelter capacity is insufficient. If the capacity of
such shelter is sufficient to shelter 19% of the then
existing Grand Harbor population at that time, paragraph 9
above shall apply to the payment due date of installment
number 2.
In consideration of the mutual promises and
covenants listed above, the parties to this agreement hereby
set their hand and seal this 9th day of July
1991.
ATTESTi- '
Jeffr
art a, Ci rk
ness
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY; FLORIDA
•
By G� —
Richard N. Bird.,` Chairman • ;
RIVER HARBOR, INC.
By
24
AUTHORIZATION TO REPRESENT COUNTY AT ST. JOHN'S (SJRWMD) MEETING
Commissioner Bowman informed the Board that she would like
permission to represent the County at the St. John's District
Board of Directors meeting tomorrow in Palatka when they are
going to be voting on the grant for the joint purchase of the
property behind the Entomological Lab at the east end of Oslo
Road.
ON MOTION by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by Com-
missioner Scurlock, the Board authorized Commissioner
Bowman to represent the County at the St. John's
District meeting described above.
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT
The Chairman announced that immediately upon adjournment,
the Board of County Commissioners will reconvene sitting as the
District Board of Commissioners of the Solid Waste Disposal
District.
The Chairman further announced that there will be a meeting
of the Solid Waste Disposal District during budget sessions on
Wednesday, July 17, 1991, at 1:30 P.M.
Minutes of the above meetings will be prepared separately.
There being no further business, on Motion duly made,
seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 9:50 o'clock A.M.
ATTEST:
JUL 9 99
Clerk Chairman
25
ROOK 8 .� FAGS 8as